Keynote to HImalaya Karakorum Tibet Workshop

1. The Mw7.8 Gorkha Earthquake:
A Watershed in Nepal’s History of Disaster Risk Management Efforts
35 HKT, Pokhara, Nepal
Amod M. DIXIT, President, NSET
Chair, ADRRN; Chair, CMC/Universal Engineering $ Science College;
Visiting Professor, Ehime University;
Board Member/ Coordinator, ELEWWG/SAADRI
Advisor, IHRR/Durham University
Rita THAKURI, Executive Secretary, NSET
Network Coordinator, ADRRN

2. The Gorkha Earthquake
• Saturday, April 25, 2015: 11:55 am (GMT 06:11 am) (schools closed)
• Magnitude Mw=7.8 Main Shock, Epicenter Barpak
• Focal Depth ~ 15 km
• Two Aftershocks Mw 6.6 & 6.7 within a day
• May 12, 2015 aftershock Mw 7.3, Epicenter Sunkhani, ~150 km toward
east
• 14 districts severely affected, 17 more affected (government classification)
• Death ~9,000 (99% due to building collapse)
• Numerous landslides (200 years worth of mass movement) triggered, more
than 700 villages affected directly!
• ~ a million buildings damaged: half a million destroyed, rest badly
affected

3. The Gorkha EarthquakeBackground (continued . . 2)
1. Nepal battered by the massive earthquake and a series of serious aftershocks
and coseismic landslides
2. 2015 Nepal blockade by India
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Nepal_blockade) SEP 2015 – March 2016
3. Background: a decade of civil strife + a decade of political instability
and turmoil
• Nepal Civil War : protracted armed insurgency from 1996 to 2006
• Country was in political chaos in writing constitution – till Sep 2015
4. Nepal: “Japan-like Hazard and Haiti-like Vulnerability” – colloquial
statement exchanged among international development partners in KV

4. •1934 Bihar-
Nepal EQ

5. Expected Earthquake, Unexpected Consequences!
The Earthquake was expected, consequences
were unexpected
• Very little damage for the 7.8 Magnitude in KV
• Tall Structures affected because of long period of
shaking
• Very poorly constructed or maintained structures
damaged in Kathmandu

6. SAR, Early Relief Handled rather Well..
• Nepal handled the SAR operations with confidence
• Prime Minister’s Disaster Relief Fund operational same day
• Government’s Cluster mechanisms, comprising 11 sectors, were instantly activated, All clusters
worked efficiently
• 134 international SAR teams from 34 countries well coordinated
• Community galvanized into action
• 20 June 2015 : PDNA was published
• All GON, Academic, NGO, UN Agencies, Development Partner agencies worked together flawlessly (ideal collaboration
under GON / NPC leadership) https://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/nepal-earthquake-2015-post-disaster-needs-
assessment-executive-summary Nepal Civil War : protracted armed conflict from 1996 to 2006
• Accepted Principles for Reconstruction: BBB, ODA, Local materials, Reconstruction grants based on
damage assessment, New Institution responsible for reconstruction
• NRA established
• Hiccups, reconstruction support started only in June 2016

7. Extricated Victims and Recovered Dead Bodies: Gorkha Earthquake 2015
Courtesy: EERI Housner Fellow Team to Gorkha Earthquake, 2015
•I 1:N200:L10000

8. Reconstruction Done/ being done Successfully
Reconstruction
Update for
2021-08-04,
Source NRA website
997k
84%
415
95%
7553
82%
753
66%
1197
66%
383
54%
3212
45%

9. 8,263
Events
166,563
Participants
13,474
Trained Engineers
Community People
Oriented
3,202
2,554 146,559
Government
Officials Trained
Trained Masons
Trained
Instructors
139
Trained
Social Mobilizers
NSET’s Efforts in Enhancing local and National Capacity in Safer Construction
635
61% 39%
85% 15% 57% 43%
81% 19%
73% 27%
44% 56%
86% 14%

10. Appropriate Technologies used
• Research in-built
• Technically Feasible
• Economically Affordable
• Culturally Acceptable
• Locally Available
• Sustainable

11. WHAT MADE NEPAL FACE THE EARTHQUAKE
BOLDLY? EARTHQUAKE PREPAREDNESS PAID!
• Learning from 1988 ML 6.6 Udaypur Earthquake and Development of
National Building Code based on ground Reality
• Consideration of vernacular non-engineered building construction practices
• Understanding of Earthquake Hazards of the country
• Learning from 1993 Floods in Southcentral Nepal:
• Emergency response management needs
• Need and campaign to update 1982 Natural Calamity (relief) Act
• Ownership and Active Engagement in IDNDR, Time for Action (1994),
HFA (2005-2015), & Preparation for SFDRR
• NAP 1996 (updated version of NAP 1994 / Yokohama 1994)

12. EARTHQUAKE LEARNINGS & PREPAREDNESS PAID!
• Learnings from
• M-6.6 Chamoli earthquake (1999): Understanding Earthquake hazards and Earthquake Response,
damage to non-engineered buildings (similar to Nepal),
• M = 7.7 Gujarat earthquake (2001): Rural-Urban, Importance of Technical Assistance, Owner-
driven approaches vs other forms of Reconstruction
• M-6.6 Bam earthquake (2003): Confidence build-up
• 2004 M=9.1 Sumatra-Andaman earthquake: Confidence build-up
• M=7.6 Pakistan (2005) Earthquakes: . O-D reconstruction works
• Painful learning from M = 6.9 Sikkim Earthquake (2011)
• Only initial SAR, and Relief
• Foreign assistance denied for relief and recovery (pers. experience)
• Informal damage assessment, no reconstruction program officially launched
• Huge work in ERM done prior to the Gorkha earthquake of 2015

13. Several DRM Programs Implemented at
National Scale Prior to Gorkha EQ
• National Building Code Implementation (BCI)
• Disaster/Climate Awareness, Earthquake Safety Days, UN DDR Days, SDG,
CCA etc
• Capacity Building (e.g.; Masons Trained = 13 k)
• Many work done by DEPECHO series, UNDP, USAID, DU, UKAID, AUSAID
• Nepal National Strategy for DRR (NSDRR) ~ Nepal version of HFA 2005-2015
• 4 +1 Flagship Programs
• Policy Research and Formulation: e.g., SAR/NDRF

14. Coverage of Cost-effective DRM Initiatives
14 Projects
48 DRMCs
49 LDRMP
40 HR on DRR
By ONE CSO : NSET!

15. UCCESSFUL
ERM
PROGS
Engineers
Trained
Teachers
Trained
Masons
Trained

16. 1. Understanding Risk; Interpreting Risk – Internalizing Risk
Hazard Risk

17. 2. People at Risk Should Know / Understand Risks
& Be Involved in Risk Management
INVOLVE ALL!
DISASTER AWARENESS NEEDED AT ALL LEVELS!

18. 3. Address Ground Realities:
Who Constructs Buildings and Who is Trained?

19. 4. Do what makes sense, what appeals!
What people accept is more important than what
scientists conclude!

20. 5. LOOK AT BIG PICTURE TO PLAN AND EXECUTE
Example: Possible damage to schools, need for intervention
and training
Total # School
Building
83,000
Structural
Intervention
Needed (75%)
62,750
Retrofit Rqd
(60%)
49,800
Demolish &
Reconstruct
(15%)
8,300
Need of Masons
@5 per building
83,000
# Mason TRNG
8,300
Trained
Teachers’
Trained in DRM
@2/building
99,600
# Teachers’
Training Events
3,320

21. Specific Game Changing Strategies!
• Differential Safety Approach for Different Building Categories in
the National Building Code
• Mandatory Rules of Thumb (MRT) for Non-engineered buildings
• Prevalence in Developing Countries (Nepal >90%)
• Capacity Building of Local Masons and Petty Contractors through
Mason Training for earthquake resistant Construction
• School Earthquake Safety Program (SESP)
• Organized Implementation of the National Building Code
• Exchange, Partnership and Sharing
• Kobe-Kathmandu, Nepal Gujarat Mason Exchange Programs, ADRRN-MM-NSET for
Banda Aceh Recovery
• Young Scientists Forums
• Advocacy for Policy Updating and Implementation

22. Success in Building Code Implementation in Nepal
5%
14%
47%
53%
14%
25%
30%
44%
81%
61%
23%
3%
2012 2014 2016 2018
Building Code Compliance (Average of 50 municipalities)
53+44 =97%
5+14 =19%
No Compliance
Partial (non-
fatal non-
Compliance
Compliance
(>90 NBC
stipulations)

23. NO PREPAREDNESS LASHED!
• Urban Reconstruction: No prior Policy, Strategy, Technology
• Lack of understanding of legal, financial, social, cultural complexities in a 1356 yr-old
urban conglomerate
• No prior work/effort to anticipate problems despite know risk (Most at risk city
globally with respect to potential death due to earthquake)
• Efforts in urban regeneration in Daicha Galli: failed measurably due to political conflict of
opinion
• The problem of reconstruction persists till date
• Reconstruction Cultural Heritage : No prior Strategy
• Lack of understanding of legal, financial, social, cultural complexities in a 1356 yr-old
urban conglomerate
• No prior work/effort to anticipate problems despite known risk despite well known
rhetoric of KV being most at risk city wrt potential death due to earthquake)
• Complexity of Local practices, Guthi, intricate relation between physical, cultural,
religious, emotional, financial aspects not understood by the measurably indifferent
bureaucracy
• US, Chinese contractors commissioned for reconstruction of Gaddi Baithak at Durbar
Square and structures at Hanuman Dhoka!

24. BBB IS EASIER SAID THAN DONE!
• Heath institution – High costs!
• Building Back Better : standards of pre-earthquake structure vs
need to compliance to contemporary standards
• Financial, Policy, Capacity, Deficits : Reconstruction cost `8 billion
USD, pledged much less, actually supported (mostly loan – way
less) even less
• Lack of Research, Research Institutions, Academic / Curricula
Philosophy, Procedure, Methodology etc

25. Fundamental Changes Post Gorkha Earthquake
1. Far – reaching Policies:
• Promulgation and updating of a series of allied Acts, Policies, Procedures
• DRR through EW, Preparedness, SAR, Rehabilitation enshrined in the directive principles of Constitution
• DRR & M made responsibility of Federal, State and local governance
• National National DRR & Management Act replaced Natural Calamity (Relief) Act
• DRR NBC made legally mandatory nation wide - URBAN and RURAL
• National Policy and National Strategy for DRM
2. Institutional Arrangements
• National DRR & Management Authority (NDRRMA) established, operational
• Provincial and Municipal DRR&M Committee set up, operational
• Deputy Mayor is made Responsible
• Municipal DRM Plan being formulated, Experience gathered
• National Disaster Portal : National Database : Open Access
• NatL Platform for DRR (NPDRR) energized, DPNet made Secretariat
• Provincial and Municipal DRR&M Committee set up, operational
• Deputy Mayor is made Responsible
• Municipal DRM Plan being formulated, Experience gathered

26. Consequently, Numerous Programs
Formulated and Being Implemented at
Federal, Provincial and Municipality levels

27. Significant Efforts in EWS Capabilities
HAZARD EWS STATUS SIGNAL/WARNING USED & NOTES
Floods
Available for selected river basins. Based on flow gauges and met-
forecasts, communication to NEOCs & DEOCs. Flood hazard information
populated in Bipad Portal.
Website. Mass SMS (using polygons) by DHM. Occasional
press note & releases. Interaction with journalists.
Telephone & mobile.
Landslides
Piloting of impact- based forecasting started 2021 monsoon. Joint work
between NDRRMA & DHM with tech. support from UK Met
Mass SMS (using polygons) by DHM. Telephone calls to
respective districts EOCs and municipal staff.
Lightning
No EWS. Observation system dysfunctional. Currently being
maintained. To be functional for the 2021 lightning season.
Interests on including the lightning detection for EWS
Earthquakes
No EWS. Around 40 monitoring sensors have been set up by NAST.
More being added. Nation-wide EW hazard info hosted in Bipad Portal
Pilot EWS to commence 2022 fall.
Wind storms No EWS. Observation system managed by DHM. Interests on including windstorms for EWS
Forest fires
No EWS. MODIS satellite imageries to detect forest fires maintained by
Department of Forests and ICIMOD.
Occasional telephone calls to respective forest offices or
local police office.
Air pollution
No EWS. Observation system exists. Managed by Department of
Environment.
Strong interest on integrating air pollution for EWS.
Courtesy: Rajendra Sharma, NDRRMA

28. Communication: Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) for early action
• a digital format for exchanging emergency alerts, to be disseminated
simultaneously over multiple communications pathways
• All Hazard- All media
• NDRRMA working with RIMES (Thailand) to establish CAP in Nepal
Response : People in Action after getting Early Warning
Courtesy: Rajendra Sharma, NDRRMA

29. Opportunities of Disaster Resilience Building
• World Knowledge Much Better Now: Fatalism fading away!
• Increasing subscription to the Idea - “Hazards are natural, Disasters
are Man-made”!
• Improved Policies and Legislation towards risk-informed decision-
making: mainstreaming DRR into Governance
• Capitalizing on digital technology to capture and manage big data:
Space Technology, Internet Technology and various APPs in wider
use, especially by Young Practitioners
• Age-old philosophy of Pancha Sheela, Traditional Indigenous
Knowledge: DRR is ages old in the Asia-Pacific Region

30. Challenges Remain THOUGH!
• Climate change and environmental degradation add complexities
• Unmanaged Urban Population, Urban Poverty, Inequality add further
Complexities
• Increasing disaster magnitudes and frequencies, triggering of consequential
cascading impacts from natural hazards
• Continuing "reactive" mindset & conservative approaches of governments
& IFIs, and even the humanitarian agencies.
• Relief/Reconstruction NOT DRR in Political Priority