Relocating High-Risk Earthquake Cities; Difficult but Possible

Earthquakes are among the most deadly and destructive of natural hazards, killing approximately 1.5 million people between 1900 and 1990. As we know urban seismic risk is rapidly increasing, particularly in developing countries. This means that all countries id earthquake hazardous area had been warned. They must do something to minimize the damage in their high risk cities, as an example is relocate their cities to safer area. But, I think it’s the last option that I recommended. Relocating cities will be necessary in two conditions that will be studying in this essay.

I say that relocating a city is difficult but possible to do. Because relocation is a complex option of earthquakes hazard prevention. As we know a city is the socio-economic center in all countries over the world. It will be so wise, if before relocating a city the governments had been did a deep research about all possible options. They have to know the effect on their populations in socio-economical and historical aspects very well and have prepared the solutions.

Relocation will be necessary in two conditions, in prevention condition and after earthquake response. I think both conditions are in the different urgency. In order to prevent the damage, relocation is not urgent. But, relocation will be great option in the future. In this case, government still having chances to mitigate the risk factor to find the best solutions. Because I believe that there is no one can be able to predict an earthquake when will happen. So, they can develop some mitigation policies, earthquake predictor technologies, and educating people about the earthquake risks in their city. For examples, they can developing some policies that prohibited people move and built new building in their high-risk cities, release safer building design for the area, and build community participation to avoid socio-economical and historical problem.

Relocation is a great option to prevent the next earthquake damage as a response to the major earthquake disaster. In this case, cities have learned about their city risk to seismic disasters after they meet with it. This is the same condition with that very few in our lifetime knew it until the Asian Tsunami in some years ago. So, economical and historical factor won’t be a serious problems if the government has prepared it well before and having enough budget. But, the most important thing is the government readiness to provide new area, covering population’s basic needs, and prepare new city development plan. If there are all factors describe before, the relocation is better than reconstruct the whole city.

Finally, while disasters will always be with us, progress can be achieved in minimizing their effects upon cities by empowering communities through information. In this way they can become full participants in hazard reduction strategies as opposed to victims of circum-stance. Disaster reduction can and must be coupled with policies that serve wider city development goals. In this way, our cities can be built to withstand environmental hazards in a more sustainable manner. (<>.<>)

by Ibnu Purniawan (10205039)