Karki, T K (2019) What did the 2015 earthquake tell us about what the state of earthquake resilience in Kathmandu metropolitan city was? International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 10(2-3), pp. 188-202. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: This paper asks what was the state of building-code enforcement and citizen – government collaboration in disaster preparedness when an earthquake hit Kathmandu metropolitan city (KMC) in 2015? It reviewed government documents, analyzed media reports, interviewed building-code monitoring officers and carried out a detailed case study of the earthquake-damaged Park View Horizon Housing Apartment (PVHA) Complex. The research found several earthquake-resilience issues. They were enforcement-vulnerability (Building bylaws, planning permit and building code); institutional-coordination vulnerability; Apartment-regulation vulnerability; technological vulnerability; and citizen-government-collaboration vulnerability. Design/methodology/approach: The study area of this research is KMC, and this research is based on content analysis, field observation and interview. It has reviewed all the newspapers and media reports that had covered earthquake issues during and after the 2015 disaster, as well as the articles published in Nepal, South Asia, the USA, New Zealand and Haiti. The literature on Nepal’s building code, seismic history and institutional arrangements for governing earthquake-related issues were reviewed. After field observation of some of the damaged apartments, a detailed case study of PVHA Complex was carried out. Findings: The research found several earthquake-resilience issues. They were enforcement-vulnerability (Building bylaws, planning permit and building code); institutional-coordination vulnerability; Apartment-regulation vulnerability; technological vulnerability; and citizen-government-collaboration vulnerability Research limitations/implications: A limitation of this study was its heavy reliance on content analysis, one case study and a few interviews and discussions with affected residents, local governments and developers. Practical implications: This study would help enhance disaster governance in developing nations. Social implications: The citizen–government collaborative approach to earthquake resilience would enhance human resilience to disaster at individual and community levels. Originality/value: Since this is the first research carried out on the state of building code and institutional resilience at the time of the 2015 earthquake in Nepal, it is original and provides policy insights for earthquake resilience in Nepal.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building code governance; building failure; built environment; collaborative earthquake resilience; earthquake resilience; governance |
| Index terms: | case study, New Zealand, governance, newspaper, monitoring, earthquake, Nepal, media, built environment, enforcement, coordination, local government, disaster preparedness, interview, Haiti, content analysis, developing nation, methodology, Asia, collaboration, regulation, documents, vulnerability, building code, history, building failure, housing |
| Subjects: | health safety and environment, Geography, development economics, professional development, management, safety engineering, research methods, regulatory law, infrastructure and transport systems, administrative law, political science, environmental hazards, sociology, control systems, reliability engineering, construction type, data collection methods, business, data analysis and analytics, regions and continents, architectural and construction history |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Information Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Governance, Sustainability, Construction Technology, Urban Studies, Legal Issues, International Construction, Organizational Design, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here