H ow Istanbul has Prepared Itself in Response to the Threat of Earthquakes

1. How Istanbul has Prepared Itself in Response to the Threat of Earthquakes NilgünOkay okayn@itu.edu.tr Istanbul Technical University Disaster Management Center

2. Outline • Vulnerability of a mega-city • Lessons learned from the recent disaster • Countermeasures • Progress in mitigation • Challenging issues

3. ISTANBUL:a high-risk megacity • 13-14 million people • Increase rate 35% • High annual internal migration: 500.000 • High annual growth rate: 3.5% • High concentration of informal settlements: 60% • High population density: • 1750 persons/km2 vs Turkey: 81 persons/km2 • 20% of Turkey’s population lives in Istanbul

4. Legistation:a Dual Organization An appointed Governor • Conducts pro-active role in managing emergency situations and response (Disaster Law) • Civil protection, public safety, schools, hospitals, and telecommunication etc. An elected Mayor and District Mayors • With city council and municipal organizations • Under the authority of the governor in the emergency • Administrate land-use planning and building constructions, mitigation (Development Law) • Municipality-owned entreprises: • Including gas, water, transportation companies

5. 1999 Marmara Earthquakes • More than 17,000 dead • 70,000 injured • 600,000made homeless • 113,000 buildings collapsed • 254,000 various damages • 10-15 billion US$ loss

6. Lessons From the Recent Disaster • Delay of first response • Weaknesses in Turkish DMS • Losses and damages • Resource gap • Lack of knowledge: assessment of needs • Lack of preparedness and mitigation

7. Lesson 1Delay of First Response Communication • Communication failed, mobiles did not function • Telephone lines were out of order in first 48 hours First Aid & Rescue • Lack of organization + coordination in search & rescue activities • Emergency services failed • Almost entire traffic system destroyed • Chaotic situation • Bureaucracy inhibiting efficiency and effectiveness • Insufficient logistic support • Voluntary personnel were not trained and organized Government and Municipality not prepared for a major disaster • Coordination among sectoral institutions • Participation, partnerships and communication

8. Countermeasure 1 • Establishment of Istanbul Disaster Coordination Center and Istanbul Disaster Management Center • Communication, coordination and cooperation • Build, train and prepare search & rescue teams • Update rescue vehicle, equipment, network • Continously determine, observe, monitor risks and collect and update geological and geophysical data and report

9. Lesson 2Considerable Weaknesses in Turkish DMS • Legal insufficiency for management • Lack of implementation for sustainable disaster management activities • Lack of coordination, cooperation and communication • Duplication of efforts and responsibilities of various agencies • No national mitigation strategy and mitigation planning • Short & long-term

10. Countermeasure 2 • Prime Ministry Turkey Emergency Management General Directorate(TEMAD) • Regulates nationwide all relations between governmental& non-governmental, military, and civil organizations • Organizes Crisis Management Centers • Coordinates • Response and rescue operations • Donation management • Activities of local Civil Defense branches and NGOs • Crisis Management Center of Prime Ministry • Regulates preparation and response activities

11. National Council of Earthquake • Links between governmental and non-governmental institutions • Planning for mitigation strategies • Five-year Development Plan of Turkey (2001-2005) • Disaster risk reduction • Establishment of appropriate legal, social, institutional and technical structures w/effective measures for disaster mitigation

12. Legislative Changes for Mitigation Activities 1- Legislation for building design and construction supervision (2000): • Mandatory design checking and construction inspection of all buildings in ıstanbul by government-licensed private “supervision firms” • Public buildings are excluded • Supervision firms must be owned by a majority of expert professionals • The law holds the supervision firms responsible for any losses

13. 2- Compulsory Earthquake Insurance (1999) • Turkey’s government-mandated CatastrophicInsurance Pool (TCIP) Coordinates insurance companies in the country for mitigation activities • National Disasters Insurance Organization (DASK) The TCIP supported through a $100 million loan facility and funded to • Reduce country’s financial vulnerability to earthquakes • Government exposure to earthquake damages • Transfer catastrophic risk to int’l insurance markets • Encourage risk mitigation • Practice safer construction through the insurance mechanism

14. 3- The Law of “Greater City Municipalities” (2004) • Drawing up city master plans • Approving and supervising their implementation • Vacating and demolishing dangerous buildings • Partnering with local municipalities and private firms • İnstituting financial organizations and undertaking many forms of partnerships in comprehensive urban regeneration projects • Building and operating the major infrastructure installations such as • Water and sewage system • Waste treatment plants, gas

15. Lesson 3Losses and Damages • Loss of lives • İmportance of local community and volunteers • Lack of awareness • Sensitivity for disaster issues • Building damages • İndustrial damage • Damage to environmental • Financial losses

16. Countermeasure 3After the ‘99 disasters Turkey showed some progress Increase in sensitivity of public and private sectors, and NGOs for disaster issues • Community education, training and raising awareness • Providing DM skills, training volunteers • Networking and participation of local community in DM • Education, DM training programs and projects for government & municipality officials, private sector, NGOs by the universities and international institutions

17. Lesson 4Financial Losses and Resource Gap

18. Public resources İnstitutional resources Private property owners saving/debt capacities Extending TCIP Budget allocations Local authority allocations Allocation of resources for mitigation New methods Tourism/art-culture/sports/ Recreational sector contributions Transit traffic Large-scale project development External resources International funding EU resources Donations/credits Procurement of Resources

19. Countermeasure 4Improving of Knowledge for Istanbul No local knowledge on risk, hazard identification, vulnerability assessment The need for better knowledge was urgent: • Istanbul Microzonation and Seismic Risk Assessment Project, Case scenarios • Earthquake Master Plan for Istanbul

20. Scenario studies helpful in understanding the risk and damage assessment: Loss of lives Damage to buildings Homeless and shelterneeds Business losses and interruption Financial losses Establish: Disaster prevention + mitigation program Seismic microzonation Technology transfer Include: Earthquake analysis Scenario studies DM issues Damages and causalties Urban vulnerability Preparedness 1- Istanbul Microzonation and Seismic Risk Assessment Study (2002)

21. I E M P components • RISK SECTORS • Infrastructural • systems • Building stock • Dangerous uses • Emergency uses • Special areas • LOCAL ACTION • PROGRAMS • Physical transformation • Density reduction • Retrofitting of buildings • Community organization • Investment Programs • SUPPORT - RESEARCH • Public relations • Financial resources • Legal arrangements • Administrative alternatives • Info engineering • Scientific/technical • research 2- Istanbul Earthquake Master Plan

22. Lesson 5Lack of Mitigation/Preparedness • No local/district-level risk analysis, mitigation planning and emergency-operation planning • Weak public awareness about mitigation activities • No local debris management strategy • No local donation management • Lack of training and exercising in DM issues

23. Countermeasures 5Mitigation Projects for Istanbul • Imm-zeytinburnu pilot project • Seismic retrofit of viaducts and bridges • Wb-supported mitigation projects • Erl, meer, ısmep • Istanbul seismic risk mitigation and emergency prepredress project

24. Imm-zetinburnu Pilot Project2003-2010 • Identify buildings under the high risk • Develop strategies for seismic hazard reduction • Focus is on a joint development platform where public and private actors can work together • Istanbul Metropolitan Planning and Urban Design Center. • Several stages that encompass: • Demolishing the buildings at risk • Widening streets, opening evacuation corridors and gathering areas • Establishment of community centers • Strengthening public infrastructure • Regeneration of housing areas in high priority risk areas, • Removal of the industries from the district and/or transformation of industry into trade and service

25. The Vulnerability of the Istanbul Buildings • Much higher than in most developed countries • Absence of a public housing program • Poor building material and construction resulted from illegal housing-ringed with settlements: ”gecekondu” • Large-scale development and industrialization • High rate of urbanization which created the demand for inexpensive housing • Ineffective control of design and construction • poor inspection contributes to the problem • Modern buildings, research laboratories, hospitals and offices, museums and art galleries • Damage to the unbolted expensive equipment, furniture and exhibited pieces

26. Investigating Risk Mitigationin Istanbul-ısmep Project (2005) Under the Governorship of Istanbul Istanbul Special Provincial Administration/ Istanbul Project Coordination Unit • Increasing emergency preparedness • Emergency communication systems • Emergency management information system • Upgrading emergency response capacity • Public awareness: Support to community volunteer groups • Seismic risk mitigation/retrofitting of critical public facilities • Strengthening/reconstruction of hospitals, schools, dormitories, public administration buildings • Lifelines and vital infrastructure • Cultural heritage buildings • Enforcement of building codes and land-use plans • Public awareness campaigns • Development of regulatory framework • Accreditation program for engineers • Improvements in building permits issuance

27. Challengıng Issues • Regulatory Issues: • Disaster Law • Construction Law (Building Design Code) • Retrofitting Regulation • Building Inspection Law • Laws and Regulations concerning finance • Enlarging the risk insurance base • Finalizing reorganization of disaster management functions: • Between Prime Ministry and Ministries • At central-local government levels • Awareness raising • Capacity building in all organizations • Public/private/citizen partnerships • District-level public preparedness • Retrofitting of existing buildings • Implementing city rehabilitation projects technically feasible, financially affordable, economically justifiable, socially acceptable

28. Risk mitigation is not only a technical issue but mostly a legal and socio-political issue The reduction of disaster risk is an endless challenge: It raises difficult legal, institutional, social and financial issues Legal and institutional issues need to be clarified Better understanding of the gaps and needs Better understanding of the resource needs Better understanding of the role of the stakeholders An overall plan that adresses all the issues The ultimate goal is to build a disaster-resilient community in Istanbul by creating a culture of prevention Conclusions