This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Earthquake impact mitigation in poor urban areas
The case of Metropolitan Manila
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign, Champaign, Illinois, USA, and
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Florida Atlantic University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to show that the Philippines is often described as the melting pot of natural disasters (typhoons, ﬂoods and torrential rains). As part of the Paciﬁc ring of ﬁre, the Philippines is also prone to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. In the current disaster management scheme, the poor are likely to be put last. Conventional risk reduction mitigation methods (such as land use and building codes) are failing. A paradigm shift is needed – one that enables poor communities to maximize their limited resources and contribute to risk reduction. Design/methodology/approach – Interviews and ﬁeld investigations were conducted between 2001 and 2006 in three case study neighborhoods in Metro Manila to understand the risk components that exist and the resources (or lack of) for dealing with them. Findings – Field surveys highlighted three major risk components: liqueﬁed petroleum gas (LPG), illegal electrical connections, and residential buildings. Mitigation efforts need to be implemented by: developing hybrid community organizations; minimizing direct physical damage; developing neighborhood cooperatives through microﬁnance schemes; and developing an in-kind community insurance system. Originality/value – While this research focused on earthquake impact mitigation, the inquiry and ﬁndings with respect to the urban poor in high risk areas, have applicability to other localities in the developing world. Furthermore, Manila’s situation is not unique. Disaster threats, rapid substandard urban development, growth in the number of the poor, and degradation of social capital, are phenomena present in other parts of the developing world. In such settings, traditional mitigation approaches are difﬁcult to carry out effectively as well. Keywords Case studies, Earthquakes, Philippines, Risk assessment, Poverty Paper type Research paper
Background and introduction The Philippines is located in a region within the Paciﬁc Ring of ﬁre, a zone of frequent earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. Metro Manila, the capital of the Philippines, is
The ﬁeld work component of this research (initiated between 2001 and 2004) was funded by the Japanese overseas development assistantships and the World Bank. Follow-up work and research were completed at Cornell University, where Professors David Lewis and Thomas Vietorisz of Cornell University’s Department of City and Regional Planning provided timely and important advice and feedback. The Mario Einaudi Center for International Studies and the International Studies in Planning at Cornell University provided for travel to conduct ﬁeld surveys in Metro Manila in the summer of 2005.
Disaster Prevention and Management Vol. 17 No. 4, 2008 pp. 454-469 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0965-3562 DOI 10.1108/09653560810901700
faced with rapid urbanization, which has led to unequal income distributions and land ownership, and many households who are forced to migrate to marginal land with unsafe living and work conditions. The poorer segments of the population, those most vulnerable to a pending catastrophic earthquake event, make up at least 40 percent of the total population in Metro Manila. Overall, they are less resilient and have less capacity to prepare for and survive disasters. In the current disaster management scheme, the poor are likely to be put last, because the wealthier population who regularly pay taxes and have title to their land are given priority. Manila’s situation is not unique and needs to be considered in a broader international context. Population concentration, rapid substandard urban development, growth in the number of the poor, and degradation of social capital, are phenomena present in other parts of the developing world. In such settings, traditional mitigation approaches are difﬁcult to carry out effectively, due to factors such as violations of laws and regulations intended to regulate safe construction, and limited government resources. Furthermore, traditional mitigation strategies are not sufﬁcient in coping with major-scale earthquakes. The mitigation approach thus needs to be modiﬁed. The poor need to be the core actors in any redeﬁned mitigation strategy, because while lacking power, they are the most affected by disasters. A redeﬁned mitigation approach requires a deeper understanding of people’s risk perception, level of engagement in mitigation activities, risk components in the neighborhood, and economic limitations – which will lead to an understanding of preparedness levels and the possible impacts of immediate and long term post-disaster periods. An understanding of organizations, institutional and personal networks, and neighborhood actors, are also important. Research was conducted over several years to gain a new perspective on earthquake disaster risk reduction potential community-driven pre-disaster damage reduction strategies in Metro Manila’s poor areas. This paper summarizes research ﬁndings and begins with a background section on disasters and impacts on the urban poor, a summary of Metropolitan Manila’s disaster threats, and the limitations of using traditional/conventional approaches to mitigation and disaster management. It then proceeds with main ﬁndings and observations based on ﬁeld work and surveys conducted between 2001 and 2006. The paper ends with recommendations and suggestions for revised mitigation and disaster management strategies. Natural disasters and impacts on the urban poor The World Bank, more than a decade ago, estimated that urbanization was increasing at a rate three times faster in low and middle income countries than in high income countries (Clark, 2003). Rapid urbanization is often associated with a lack of appropriate and effective land use planning and building standards, deterioration of older, densely packed inner city areas (UNDP, 2004), as well as increased vulnerabilities to natural hazards. Comparisons of the impacts of extreme natural events and disasters on countries with high, medium, and low Human Development Indicators (HDI) have been made using information from the UNDP and the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (Wisner, 2003). Table I clearly reveals that countries with low HDI suffer more in terms of death toll; 86 percent of deaths occurred in countries with low HDI, while only two percent occurred in countries with high HDI.
Earthquake impact mitigation 455
Research by the UK Department for International Development (DFID, 2005) also shows a strong correlation between disaster and poverty – with the poor being the most affected. The reasons can be both physical and economic: (1) the poor are physically vulnerable because they tend to live in hazardous areas, such as gullies or shorelines that are prone to disaster; and (2) they are economically vulnerable because disasters destroy their households’ natural, physical, and social assets. In addition, injury, disability, and loss of life resulting from disasters affects their main asset – their labor. With decentralized local governments lacking basic resources (personnel, supplies and funds), the wealthy have power to control the recovery process. Wisner et al.’s (2004, p. 301) reference to the following statement by a ﬁeld survey participant in Gujarat further highlights this issue – that is, “with good political connections the powerful castes have even managed to attract infrastructure and investment, while the poor and the marginalized are now left as ‘abandoned hamlets’ devoid of even basic facilities”. Overall, this creates a situation where the poor are usually left behind, which sometimes bring their “coping strategies to breaking point, have long term effects on livelihoods and often tip the poorest into destitution” (DFID, 2005, p. 2). Metropolitan Manila: a disaster waiting to happen The Philippines is often described as the melting pot of natural disasters. Located in the tropics, it experiences major typhoons (approximately 20 per year), ﬂoods and torrential rains. As part of the “Paciﬁc ring of ﬁre”, the Philippines is also prone to earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. Particularly, the Luzon earthquake in July 1990, and volcanic eruption of Mount Pinatubo in June 1991, vividly show the geographic hazards of Luzon Island, where Metropolitan Manila is located (Figure 1). These disasters caused estimated losses of US$ 577 million and US$ 423 million respectively, ﬁgures that do not include the economic effects due to loss of lives and industries. Casualties from these disasters added up to 4,390 people (1,283 dead, 321 missing, and 2,786 injured) and 1,057 people (850 dead, 23 missing, and 184 injured), respectively, according to the National Disaster Coordinating Committee (NDCC) (2003). Although neither disaster directly damaged Metropolitan Manila, this area is facing an increasing risk from natural disasters, one of which is a possible rupture of the West Valley Fault (WVF) system that runs north-south in eastern part of the metropolis.
HDI Table I. Level of human development and impact of disasters Low Medium High
Deaths per disaster 1,052 145 23
Proportion (%) 86.23 11.89 1.89
Cost per disaster (US$m) 79 209 636
Source: Modiﬁed from Wisner (2003, p. 46) based on IFRC (2001, pp. 162, 164)
Earthquake impact mitigation 457
Figure 1. The Luzon Island and metropolitan Manila
Disaster threats to Metro Manila The possibility of a large scale earthquake generated from the WVF system is very real. Scientists have determined that at least three rupturing events have occurred within the last 1400 years along the WVF System, based on radiocarbon dates and soil development and that the last rupture occurred during the eighteenth or nineteenth century (Nelson et al. 1995). Use of recurrence intervals of 200 to 400 to estimate future large earthquakes along the WV Fault have been suggested by Nelson et al. (1996). Potential damage and casualties from a magnitude 7.2 rupture of the WV Fault system can also be signiﬁcant, based on a 2004 MMEIRS study by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). The study concluded that approximately 40 percent of total buildings would be heavily, moderately or partially damaged, with casualties of 147,100, and a death toll of 33,500 (0.3 percent of the total population). That study also estimates signiﬁcant ﬁre damage that can result in building collapse, casualties and deaths. Other infrastructure damage would include water pipe, electric power transmission and distribution line cutoffs, and public service buildings, including hospitals, schools, and ofﬁce buildings of Local Government Units (LGUs). The MMEIRS study clearly predicts that Metro Manila would be in a chaotic state if a WV Fault related earthquake occurs.
Metro Manila faces urbanization growth rates that increase vulnerability of the area, accompanied by population concentration, rapid substandard urban development, and increasing percentage of the population living in poverty. The population concentration of metro region has intensiﬁed since 1948, when the region was home to eight percent of the total national population. By 2000, this had increased to thirteen percent. During these years, the population rate increased by 3-5 percent in the Metro Manila area, while nationally, the rate was less than three 3 percent. Urban land expansion beyond the periphery of the metro region is also evident. By 1994, the city covered approximately 430 km2 compared to the 110 km2 covered in 1948. The urbanized area had grown three times larger in a half century than throughout the ﬁrst ﬁve centuries of Manila’s history. According to the Presidential Commission on the Urban Poor (PCUP), 3.45 million people were identiﬁed as poor in 1995, compared to 2.8 million in 1990 (Nakanishi et al., 2001). The conventional mitigation approach: conceptual functions and failures People in Metro Manila have a relatively high consciousness of possible disasters that could affect them. The Luzon earthquake and the Pinatubo eruption in the early 1990s has made it clear that such disasters can happen at any time. Additionally, daily exposure to ﬂoods and inundations has led to the development of some preparedness and coping strategies. Some city governments, such as Marikina City, are active in disaster management activities, owning storage buildings to stock basic needs and offer support during emergencies to the affected families. However, just as in other societies, Metro Manila’s capacity to cope with the impacts of catastrophic events is unknown. Mitigation approaches often rely on government-led regulation, advanced technology, and public emergency response. Many of these traditional approaches, however, tend to fail. First, regulation represented by building codes and zoning laws, are usually promulgated by public agencies and enforced through the legal system, with varying degrees of effectiveness (The World Bank, 1999). The conventional wisdom is that damage can be reduced by: (1) enforcing building codes that make newly constructed buildings resistant to earthquakes and existing buildings more durable; (2) implementing land use controls that direct people away from hazardous areas; and (3) utilizing advanced technologies such as quake-absorbing construction materials can minimize structural vulnerability. However, an earthquake in Kobe, Japan, in January 1995, destroyed the safety myth of many Japanese, by proving that such technologies cannot withstand a disaster whose force is signiﬁcantly greater than expected. Lastly, public emergency response is anticipated to function logistically, to initially assist people and save public assets from further losses. The Kobe earthquake showed that the public sector could not respond as planned, especially in the ﬁrst 72 hours (The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Memorial Research Institute, 2006).
Why conventional approaches are not effective in Metro Manila In the Philippines, building codes, under Presidential Decree (PD) 1096, speciﬁes the minimum requirements and standards of building design to protect against ﬁre and natural disasters (JICA, 2004). This system, however, is largely ineffective because people ignore regulations and construct buildings without building permits. Even permitted buildings under construction are not monitored beyond the formal approval process. Municipal land use controls with regulations that prohibit construction on river banks, public lands, and government lands, are not functioning either, as buildings are densely constructed in these hazardous areas. Besides, it is not only the people who do not follow rules and regulations, but also the governments. A revised comprehensive land use plan (CLUP), which included articles and sections related to disaster mitigation, was originally ordered to be prepared for ratiﬁcation, by the seventeen local governments comprising Metro Manila by the end of 2002. However, only seven local governments had completed compiling this plan by the end of 2003 (JICA, 2004). Public emergency response operations in Metro Manila are expected to function as a bottom-up procedure, primarily coordinated and supervised by LGUs and Barangays, called Disaster Coordinating Committees (DCCs). When local DCCs are overwhelmed by situations, the regional and provincial DCCs, and eventually national government are, in theory, to give their support (JICA, 2004). However, there is a lack of coordination between different levels of organizations. The content of the emergency response plans often completely ignores earthquakes, whether it is preventative or in response to the earthquake or related ﬁres. Furthermore, as lessons documented in earthquakes in Kobe and other regions show, these paper-based emergency response plans do not function as expected when a large earthquake hits. It is most likely that the initial actions to be taken by the governments will be delayed due to the many unexpected problems that arise. The fragmented and decentralized government structure, differences in the interests of government leaders, and in the differences in availability of funds, has led to further inequity in levels of mitigation preparedness and emergency response. The availability of calamity funds for each LGU in the metro region represents huge gaps. The LGU with the largest fund, the City of Manila, makes up 18.49 percent of the total, while the LGU with smallest fund, Pateros, only makes up 0.25 percent. Field research, ﬁndings and observations Case study neighborhoods Given the problems and limitations discussed above, a new approach is needed for reducing the potential impacts from earthquake disasters, for understanding the neighborhood variations, and for a more customized approach to mitigation planning in poor neighborhoods. In response to this need, surveys were conducted in three neighborhoods to more fully understand the risk components that exist in these and other poor communities, as well as the resources for dealing with them, including social capital and networks. The selection of the case study neighborhoods was based on characteristics such as densely packed buildings, deteriorating infrastructure, and large proportions of buildings that lack appropriate standards. The survey methodology focused mainly on neighborhood interviews, but also included ﬁeld investigations.
Earthquake impact mitigation 459
Risk perception and level of engagement Interview responses suggested that people in general are aware that earthquakes cause building damage and ﬁre, yet are not really engaged in mitigation and preparedness activities. On the other hand, the survey made it clear that poor neighborhood residents do not have complete information and knowledge about the earthquake risks that they are facing. For example, many people know that an earthquake generates building damage, yet have no idea how it could affect them, both short-term and long-term. Survey respondents in two of the three case study neighborhoods, where wooden buildings are built close together and thus occasionally suffer from ﬁre incidents, responded that they have in place some response measures for ﬁre, at the household level. Responses of women from the three neighborhoods revealed that they are very sensitive about the need to keep their immediate environs safe and livable, and their willingness to devote their utmost effort at the household level to mitigate possible risks based on their knowledge of disaster impacts. However, willingness of women is not yet systematically coordinated to comply with disaster mitigation efforts. Risk components Field surveys showed that the three major risk components found in the neighborhoods are liqueﬁed petroleum gas (LPG), illegal electrical connections, and residential buildings itself. Liqueﬁed petroleum gas (LPG) is commonly used in the households for cooking. The shape of the LPG tanks makes them prone to rollover during ground shaking, and because a tank’s connection to the stove is loose, there is a high probability that the connection could break and cause gas to leak out (Figure 2). Commonly, in very poor neighborhoods, buildings with ﬂoor space of less than 10 square meters are at least two or three stories high, constructed of wooden materials, and built adjacent to similar buildings. Because the living arrangement in these buildings is such that one household occupies one ﬂoor with a kitchen, there is a high concentration of LPGs found in each neighborhood. Any gas leaks would result in multiple explosions and ﬁres in multiple locations. The second element is illegal electrical connections that are prone to short-circuiting, even under normal circumstances (Figure 3). In the event of an earthquake, this could initiate ﬁre which would spread through ﬂammable building
Figure 2. Major components that cause ﬁre outbreaks. LPG tank largely used in households
Earthquake impact mitigation 461
Figure 3. Major components that cause ﬁre outbreaks. Illegal electricity connections
materials. Such illegal connections are very common and can be found throughout the poor communities. The other types of risk that people face are their residential buildings. The types of vulnerable residential buildings in impoverished neighborhoods can be classiﬁed into two basic types: wooden and masonry. The structure of the wooden buildings in these neighborhoods is very simple, with columns that are thin and roofs and walls that are un-reinforced (Figure 4). Even in masonry buildings where most of the pillars are reinforced, walls are not (Figure 5). From past earthquakes occurred in different places, researchers found that building collapse in both wooden and masonry buildings are caused by failure of walls and separation of walls from roofs and foundations. Thus, unless special measures are taken to strengthen the structure of these buildings, Metro Manila will also face large casualties from building collapse. Daily economic constraints Some of the poor in Metro Manila are fortunate to own houses. They often rent out rooms to supplement their income. The price of rent varies from P 1,000 to P 5,000 per room depending on the location and size. Others who do not have such retained capital
Figure 4. Structure of wooden and masonry buildings. Wooden buildings found in illegal settlements
Figure 5. Structure of wooden and masonry buildings. Masonry buildings found in illegal settlements
often face difﬁculties in surviving from day to day. Whenever households are in this situation, they borrow money from 5-6 or Bombay rather than from neighbors, friends or relatives. Most respondents who usually borrow money from these informal money lenders are fully aware of the high interest rate of 20 percent or more, but they prefer to avoid any possible conﬂicts about money matters that may arise between close relationships. On the other hand, there are formal cooperatives, which include a service of providing loans to members. Some residents, those who own their homes or run a business, responded that they usually borrow from the cooperatives because the interest rate is lower by ten percent. Yet, for most respondents, keeping up with payments of monthly membership dues is often difﬁcult and thus they end up borrowing from the 5-6 or the Bombay anyway. Some residents indicated forming a cooperative as a community undertaking, based on their understanding that such an organization could provide opportunities to generate incomes, and also allow investment in neighborhood improvements. Organization and networks In case study neighborhoods, there are neighborhood associations and the homeowners associations identiﬁed as active units for neighborhood activities. These two groups usually have strong mutual connection with the barangays. Often, these groups jointly extend livelihood programs or other social activities with barangays, according to the barangay leader and leaders of the homeowners’ association. Barangay leaders, Purok leaders, and neighborhood association leaders are perceived as the leaders by the people in the neighborhoods, and neighborhood residents usually follow the decisions that these leaders make to keep the neighborhood in order. Currently, there is no uniform rule about the information distribution networks at either barangay or LGU level. Women as the main actors for neighborhood disaster mitigation activities Field surveys suggest that the majority of men go out for work, while women stay home to take care of the children and do household chores. Some women run small home-based businesses or get side jobs that they could do from home. Many women in
such impoverished areas are willing to work, yet the fact of low educational attainments and work inexperience make it difﬁcult for them to do so. Daily activities of women in the neighborhood are strengths, because majority of women are aware of changes that occur in their neighborhood. Additionally, in many cases, they function as the hub of information in families and neighborhoods. Such engagement of women in neighborhoods and families highlight the important networking roles that they can play at the local level. As mentioned before, women did not show signiﬁcant interest in taking a leadership role in their neighborhood activities except in the case of working jointly with other mothers to protect their children. Recommendations for a revised approach to mitigation and disaster management Make community organizations hybrid People in the impoverished areas did not know the possible risks they may face, and additionally have large budget constraints to engage in activities that relate to reduce such risks. Thus, participating in risk minimizing activities, such as reducing building vulnerabilities, is often difﬁcult. Active participation in risk minimizing activities by the poor requires an organization that is operated independently at the neighborhood level, but one that would ﬁt into an information sharing and distribution framework as proposed in Figure 6. During the pre-disaster period, hybrid organizations would function for the well being of poor neighborhoods; and in case of a disaster, the organization can shift to respond to the situation immediately. The organization can oversee creation and development of active women’s organizations and business ventures. This serves the dual role of increasing ﬁnancial stability and exposure to information and knowledge. Although the governments and the public institutions are not capable of responding to all the needs of the poor, they are still in essential and critical positions to provide leadership and information to a variety of organizations and groups at different levels. Further, they have the responsibility to provide equal opportunities and support
Earthquake impact mitigation 463
Figure 6. Flow of information and knowledge to neighborhoods
neighborhoods that are falling behind, or at least encourage actions to unify neighborhoods as part of mitigation and disaster resiliency efforts. Minimize direct physical damages To minimize damages from building collapse, people in poor neighborhoods need to understand the speciﬁc risks by type, of their residences and neighborhoods. By knowing the risks and applying seismic resistance techniques they can largely decrease risk exposure. Since men in poor neighborhoods are quite adept at building houses, they would beneﬁt from improving their houses in inexpensive ways, using donations collected from construction suppliers. The causes of ﬁre, namely, the materials that develop ﬁre and are ﬂammable, need to be minimized. Four recommendations seem pertinent in this case: build common cooking spaces; minimize illegal electricity connections; reduce the use of ﬂammable materials in buildings; and promote ﬁre extinguishing and evacuation activities. Building communal cooking spaces is of the highest priority. Sharing a space will not only reduce the numbers of LPG-ﬁlled tanks, but can serve to enhance social capital, by daily gathering and sharing of information among women. This collective system will also give opportunities to government to participate in this proactive activity. Government could take part in subsidizing fuel for the neighborhoods – an inexpensive mitigation approach with huge beneﬁts toward risk reduction. Develop neighborhood cooperatives through microﬁnance schemes Development of neighborhood cooperatives is one way that the poor neighborhoods in Metro Manila can increase and improve their ﬁnancial and social capacities. The cooperative system would be based on three main funds: revolving fund, repayment, and disaster management related funds (See Figure 7). The revolving fund would be used for operational expenses such as worker salaries. Repayment funds will go back to the fund lending institutions, and the rest will be aimed to spend in mitigation activities. For the funds pooled for mitigation purposes, two types are
Figure 7. Funds for neighborhood cooperatives
proposed – a vulnerability reduction fund and a calamity fund. Vulnerability reduction funds can widely be used for a host of programs and activities that support any mitigation or other information sharing activities. Calamity funds can be saved for purchasing seismic resistant construction materials. Government could provide information on the “how-to”; for example, tips on approaching micro-ﬁnance institutions and running the community business. Overall, key issues for sustained operation of neighborhood cooperatives are transparency of ﬁnance, women being key actors, and open communication with administrative bodies and other existing organizations. The bonding that can develop through daily networking and interaction will enable a more efﬁcient ﬂow of information and increased neighborhood unity. Develop an in-kind community insurance system A community insurance system would focus on developing committed networks of the poor in the neighborhoods to participate and contribute through providing the labor, one of the most costly components during the recovery and reconstruction period. Such collective and voluntary provision of labor can provide an opportunity for quicker and less expensive recovery. This system could be further extended to work between government and communities, by aiming to exchange and utilize resources held by both parties during the post-disaster period. Government could provide basic survival food and supplies (such as rice), while community members contribute their labor. This system is constructive for both poor neighborhoods and government; especially since poor neighborhoods do not have access to private insurance options. The system can be operated by an advance agreement made between neighborhoods and government. This in-kind community insurance system offers other beneﬁts as well: . economic inﬂation that often develops in post-disaster would not affect this insurance system because it is developed in a non-monetary form; and . government could operate this system with minimum input, which will be a large incentive toward implementation. Final thoughts While this research focused on earthquake impact mitigation, the inquiry and ﬁndings with respect to the urban poor in high risk areas, has applicability to other localities in the developing world. The trend of urbanization and the vulnerability of the poor neighborhoods in hazardous urban areas require that communities maximize their limited resources and contribute to risk reduction. Governments at all levels should continuously improve and strengthen their capacities for implementing appropriate conventional practices: enforcing building codes and land use guidelines, and improving emergency response capacities. Application of advanced technologies to the mitigation practices may be further investigated as part of private-public partnership schemes. However, a paradigm shift in mitigation approaches is needed. The essential issues in redeﬁning disaster mitigation strategies can be summarized as follows:
Earthquake impact mitigation 465
the poor are most at risk to earthquake disaster and should be main actors in the mitigation process; qualitative ﬁeld work assessments are important for understanding the variety and variability of poverty and vulnerability characteristics in urban settings; mitigation plans need to be customized based on urban forms and structures, social systems and cultures; the role of organizations, networks and governments must be better coordinated; an independent organization of some form is required in each underprivileged neighborhood to integrate disaster mitigation activities with efforts toward economic efﬁciency; and women have a good sense of their neighborhood conditions and residents, and need to be active players in mitigation activities as well as resource persons in the organizations.
Notes 1. Metro Manila, the capital region of the Philippines, is made up of 17 local government units (LGUs). This comprises 13 cities and 4 municipalities, and functions as the political, economic, social, and cultural center of the country. It is one of the most populous areas in East Asia. 2. The Human Development Indicator “quantiﬁes available data to assess the state of human development across the globe and provide a critical analysis of a speciﬁc theme each year. It combines thematic policy analysis with detailed country data that focus on human well-being, not just economic trends” (UNDP, 2004). The main indicators are: Life expectancy at birth; Adult literacy rate; and Combined primary, secondary and tertiary gross school enrollment. “All countries are classiﬁed into three clusters by achievement in human development: high human development (with an HDI of 0.800 or above), medium human development (0.500-0.799) and low human development (under 0.500)” (UNDP, 2004). 3. It is important to note, however, that the cost per disaster is low in those developing countries, but the number of deaths per disaster is high compared to those in medium and high HDI countries. 4. The number is calculated based on information provided by National Disaster Coordinating Committee of the Philippines in 2003. 5. The National Disaster Coordinating Committee’s (NDCC) ofﬁcial ﬁgures indicate 31.176 Billion Pesos, based on the 2003 adjusted rate of 1 Philippine Peso ðPHPÞ ¼ 0:01851 US Dollar (USD) 6. The NDCC ofﬁcial ﬁgures indicate 22.8502 Billion Pesos, based on the 2003 adjusted rate. 7. The NDCC is the focal inter-institutional organization for disaster management at the national level. It is chaired by the Secretary of the Department of National Defense, and its members generally represent national government departments and the Philippine Red Cross (JICA, 2004). 8. Earthquake Impact Reduction Study for Metropolitan Manila, JICA, 2002-2004. 9. Local Government Units (LGUs) are the generic name used for cities and municipalities in Metro Manila. The LGUs are responsible for basic services and regulatory functions through Local Government Code (Republic Act No. 7160), which was enacted in 1991. LGUs are anticipated to enhance self-reliant communities and effective government (JICA, 2004).
10. The population growth rate of the metropolitan area between 1995 and 2000 was less than the national growth rate. Some social scientists perceive this phenomenon not as a setback of population agglomeration in the metropolis, but as a development of the greater metropolis, with people moving just outside the administratively deﬁned metro Manila. 11. The area of urban expansion shown was calculated using GIS. The ﬁgure is based on an urban expansion map from MMEIRS (2004), which was originally taken from the book “City of Man” published by the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA). 12. The Historical records of Manila can be found going back to the early 16th century. When a Spanish troop, dispatched by Miguel Lopez de Legazpi, landed at Maynila in 1570, the region was already developed as the center of regional trading under the inﬂuence of Islam. Maynila is thought to have been established around 1500. The Spanish colonized Manila by force, constructing Intramuros near Manila Bay, and established as the colonial capital city, Manila, (Insigne y siempre leal Ciudad de Manila) in June 26, 1571 (Nakanishi et al., 2001). 13. This committee was created in 1986 by President Aquino to deal with urban poverty issues. The ﬁrst president of this committee was a representative from squatter residents association and engaged to settle the problems on squatter clearance (Nakanishi et al., 2001). 14. Information obtained through site visit and an interview with Marikina Disaster Management Ofﬁcer, in October, 2002. 15. This earthquake is ofﬁcially called “Earthquake of Southern Hyogo Prefecture, 1995”. It occurred on January 17, 1995 with magnitude 7.3 and its aftermath saw 6,433 dead, 3 missing, 43,792 injured (as of December 26, 2002), and 219,000 buildings were heavily damaged. (The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Memorial Research Institute, 2006). 16. Presidential Decree 1096 is the National Building Code of the Philippines. 17. Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance for the National Capital Region, March 1981. This ordinance describes the type of zoning and procedures of implementation. Housing and Land use Regulatory Board (HLURB) is responsible for ratifying and adjusting the land use plan prepared by individual LGUs, while Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) is responsible for advising LGUs in developing plans. 18. The 13 cities and 4 municipalities comprising Metro Manila local governments are Kalookan, ˜ Las Pinas, Makati, Malabon, Mandaluyong, Manila, Marikina, Muntinlupa, Navotas, ˜aque, Pasay, Pasig, Pateros, Quezon, San Juan, Taguig, and Valenzuela. Paran 19. The barangays are the smallest local government unit in the Philippines, which was codiﬁed under the 1991 Local Government Code. The word barangay is a native Filipino term for a village, district or ward. Municipalities and cities are composed of barangays. Historically, a barangay is a relatively small community of around 50 to 100 families. So in metro Manila, one ﬁnds small barangays if the area was established a very long time ago, and larger barangays if the areas are newly established. 20. In Metro Manila, two laws, PD 1566 (1978) and Local Government Code (1991), Republic Act No. 7160, the Philippines, function as important components to the legal framework of disaster management. The former instructs Metro Manila to create a Regional Disaster Coordinating Committee (RDCC) and Local Disaster Coordinating Committees (LDCC), while the latter gives local and regional governments the power to implement disaster management provisions. 21. Normally, LGUs’ marginal viability comes from two sources, the ﬁve percent calamity fund from local budgets, and the 800 million Pesos provided as national calamity funding in the General Appropriation Act of 2003 (JICA, 2004). 22. Calculated based on the information provided by JICA, 2004, which originally refer to Department of Budget and Management Regional Ofﬁce, National Capital Region
Earthquake impact mitigation 467
23. Term describing the money lending system used by people in Metropolitan Manila. The term is derived for the concept that borrowing 5 pesos will be increased to 6 pesos when returning, which is a 20 percent interest rate. The term of loan is usually 1 month. 24. This is another money lending system that is usually operated by Indian investors who are called “Bombay” (old name of India’s capital Mumbai). Bombays travel by motorcycle and are easily recognizable throughout the region. They collect payments in small amounts. For example, if they lend 100 pesos, they will collect 20 pesos each time, yet more than 5 times. Therefore at the end, money borrowers pay back much more than they have borrowed. People perceive the numbers of Bombay are decreasing recently. 25. Cooperatives are self help organizations with several mandates that include credits, agriculture sector, marketing, services, etc. This organization is usually run by some neighborhood residents; their activities are not limited to their region but extend to near neighborhoods. 26. Barangay leaders include Barangay chairman, Kagawads and Tanods. Barangay Chairman is the equivalent of the City Mayor as chief executive of his barangay. There are usually seven Kagawads and they are the members of the Barangay Council. Tanods are responsible for the Barangay security. 27. Puroks are the quasi-ofﬁcial administrative body that exists under Barangays. Puroks are usually seen in the suburban areas, as this body signiﬁcantly existed in rural areas of the Philippines. References Clark, T. (2003), Urban World/Global City, 2nd ed., Routledge, London and New York, NY. DFID (Department for International Development, UK) (2005), Disaster Risk Reduction: A Development Concern, Publication No. 912, DFID, London. (The) Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake Memorial Research Institute (2006), Lessons Learned from Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake, available at: www.hanshin-awaji.or.jp/kyoukun/eng/ index.html (accessed April 4, 2006). JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) (2004), Metropolitan Manila Impact Reduction Study, Final Report, JR-04-04, JICA, Tokyo. Nakanishi, T., Kodama, T. and Aratsu, K. (2001), Mega-Cities of Asia : Manila (Asia no dai toshi  Manila), Nihon Hyo-ron Sha. National Disaster Coordinating Committee (NDCC) (2003), Major and Minor Natural Disaster Incidents: 1980-2003, NDCC, Manila. Nelson, A., Personius, S., Rimando, R., Punongbayan, R., Tungol, N., Mirabueno, H. and Rasdas, A. (1995), Four Large Earthquakes in the Past 1,400 Years on a Fault in Metropolitan Manila, The Philippines, Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, Quezon. Nelson, A., Personius, S., Rimando, R., Punongbayan, R., Tungol, N., Mirabueno, H. and Rasdas, A. (1996), Earthquake Recurrence on the Northern Part of the West Marikina Valley Fault – An Active Fault in the Metro Manila Area, US Geological Survey and Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology, Quezon. United Nations Development Programme (2004), Living with Risk: A Global Review of Disaster Reduction Initiatives, UNDP, New York, NY. Wisner, B. (2003), “Capitalism and shifts in vulnerability”, Natural Disasters and Development in a Globalizing World, Routledge, London and New York, NY, pp. 43-56. Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T. and Davis, I. (2004), At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability and Disasters, Routledge, London and New York, NY.
(The) World Bank (1999), Managing Disaster Risk in Mexico: Market Incentives for Mitigation Investment, The World Bank, Washington, DC. About the authors Kanako Iuchi is a PhD student at University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. Prior to joining UIUC, she was a master’s student in the Department of City and Regional Planning at Cornell University. Before embarking on graduate studies, Ms. Iuchi worked in a consulting ﬁrm for a decade, gaining ﬁeld experiences and insights of Japanese-funded projects overseas. Her interests include disaster management and improving plight of the urban poor upon disaster in developing countries. He is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: firstname.lastname@example.org Ann-Margaret Esnard is an Associate Professor and Director of the Visual Planning Technology Lab at Florida Atlantic University. Prior to joining FAU, she was a faculty member in the Department of City and Regional Planning at Cornell University. Dr. Esnard’s expertise encompasses GIS/spatial analysis, vulnerability assessment, land use planning, and disaster planning.
Earthquake impact mitigation 469
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: email@example.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.