Country Focus: Democratic Republic of Congo

This month, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are holding general elections for only the second time in around forty years. This huge country, around two thirds the size of western Europe, has been in the news for many reasons in recent years - mainly as a result of the conflict and civil war. It borders with several other countries, including Rwanda. Much of the tensions, fighting and genocide in this country have spilled over into the DRC, making increasing and contributing to their problems. The country's significant mineral resources have contributed to this conflict - with groups of militia fighting for control over resources such as diamonds, coltan, copper and gold. 

The inability of the government to establish law and order and fight corruption means they have not harnessed the wealth of the country's vast resources for the benefit of the nation - improving healthcare, education and infrastructure. This has contributed to the country having a life expectancy more than 20 years below the world's average, infant mortality more than two and half times greater than the rest of the world and an adult literacy rate well above the global average.

Source: Cai Tjeenk Willink

Adding to the problems of the country are the natural hazards that the country face. In 2002, for example, a volcanic eruption close to the town of Goma killed dozens of people and associated earthquakes caused further damage. Floods, droughts and landslides are also relevant hazards.

The BBC News have a very helpful article discussing the DRC on their website. One quote within the article that stands out particularly, and which is worth reflecting on:

"While DR Congo is clearly a failed state, Congolese society has not failed. On the contrary it is strong, vibrant, dynamic, tolerant and generous. People have a sense of taking charge of their own destinies."

Case Study: A Tale of Two Cities...

How can two earthquakes of the same magnitude hit two different countries, resulting in two very different situations? Although no two earthquakes are identical - with some parameters differing and thus making them difficult to contrast - this case study highlights a crucial reminder of the vulnerability to natural hazards in the developing world:

Case Study 1: Northridge, California, United States of America 

Sitting adjacent to the San Andreas Fault, a location on the earth where two tectonic plates are sliding past each other, the state of California is prone to earthquakes. However, there are also a number of other faults, including reverse and thrust faults, in this area which have caused significant earthquakes throughout recent history. 

On the 17th January 1994, an earthquake with Moment Magnitude 6.7 struck the Southern Coast of California, close to Los Angeles. The Northridge earthquake occurred in the early hours of the morning meaning that many people were still asleep and indoors. The earthquake caused an unusually strong ground acceleration which resulted in significant damage and became one of the costliest disasters in the history of the USA. The earthquake resulted in 57 people killed, and over 5000 injured. The earthquake occurred relatively close to densely populated areas (compared to the 2003 San Simeon Earthquake, for example, which killed 2 people). Although California had strict building codes some buildings and roads collapsed. Landslides also occurred, fires broke out and there was also an outbreak of the disease Valley Fever. 

Case Study 2: Bam, Iran  

The city of Bam, in the Islamic Republic of Iran suffered a devastating earthquake in 2003. Iran is part of the Arabian Plate, which moves northwards into the Eurasian Plate. This tectonic activity means Iran is prone to large earthquakes.

On the 26th December 2003, an earthquake with Moment Magnitude 6.6 occurred at a depth of around 10km. This earthquake also occurred in the early hours of the morning, meaning many people were indoors and asleep. Fatalities of this earthquake totaled 26,271 and casualties around 30,000. The city, primarily composed of mud-brick building, was devastated in the earthquake. Large amounts of the city did not comply with earthquake regulations set out in the country, which meant that many buildings failed. 

DISCUSSION

The differences between the two earthquakes are stark, they were similar in size and other factors and yet the Bam earthquake killed 460 times more people than the Northridge earthquake. There were a number of factors which led to this contrast, and the immense vulnerability of the people in Iran.

(1) Adherence to Building Standards

As mentioned above, there are strict building codes in place in California. These were reviewed and updated following the earthquake in Northridge. In Bam, however, the building codes existed but were not adhered to in many cases. Poverty meant that many people built their own houses, or used local builders. This resulted in little notice of national regulations and hence buildings collapsing and many people being buried beneath rubble. It was estimated that around 75% of all buildings in Bam were completely destroyed, and 85-90% of all buildings and infrastructure being damaged or destroyed.  

(2) Urban Planning

Urban planning is also linked to vulnerability. Southern California was developed in a methodical and structured way, whereas Bam did not have this methodical urban planning. Lack of urban planning increases vulnerability as the infrastructure can not be designed to withstand earthquakes, escape routes can not be put into place, and detailed geotechnical analyses of soil types can not be undertaken to ensure areas of ground that are particular vulnerable are avoided.

(3) Education

Even though both California and Iran are prone to earthquakes, the differences in education about earthquakes again contrast hugely. In California people were much more aware of what was happening and how to respond. In Bam, there was very little education with many people holding traditional religious views about earthquakes - views described as poisonous by one Tehran based Geophysics Professor. A lack of understanding about the dynamics of earthquakes and how to respond can significantly increase vulnerability to a hazard.

CONCLUSION

According to the CIA figures for 2003 Iran is ranked 97th in a list of countries of GDP per Capita, compared to the USA at 2nd. This differences in their economic development meant there was less money to invest in infrastructure, development and education.    

Vulnerability existed in both Iran and the USA, leading to tragic disasters that impacted people in both countries. In Iran however, the human cost of the disaster was 460 times higher than California as a result of increased vulnerability. The impacts of good urban planning, good structural and earthquake engineering and good education are evident. 

Case Study: Building Institutional Capacity in Afghanistan

Afghanistan is regularly in the news as a result of the ongoing conflict in the region. It is also a major beneficiary of development aid, as countries and international organisations aim to help redevelopment and reduce poverty in the region after years of oppression and conflict. Geologists are playing a significant role in this development, and have the potential to bring real hope and development to the people of that nation. Both the British Geological Survey (BGS) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) have been involved in supporting development in Afghanistan, working with their respective national aid agencies (DFID, USAID respectively). 

The BGS has supported the development of the Afghan Geological Survey with a focus on its mineral resources. Afghanistan has a rich and diverse mineral potential - ranging from energy resources to base metals, precious metals and stones. Many of these mineral resources are undeveloped, meaning they offer a good revenue to support the development of the country. The BGS has been working to strengthen the Afghan Geological Survey, empowering them to identify these resources and plan the sustainable exploitation of their own natural resources. The work of the BGS has included improving their staff's english speaking and computer literacy, helping them develop laboratories and databases, and  training staff in the skills of geological analysis. 

Source: Wikipedia

The USGS has undertaken a range of projects, including building institutional capacity, developing energy and mineral resources, developing water resources, and examining geohazards in the region. Their work on geohazards has included analysing the seismicity of the region, and producing seismic hazard maps for Afghanistan. These are fundamental to ensuring construction and redevelopment is done to an adequate standard - ensuring the risk of serious structural failure is minimised. There is a significant risk of medium to large earthquakes in the east of Afghanistan. From 1980-2008, the cost of earthquake (and related disasters) damage was around 144million dollars, and the number of deaths was in the region of 13,500 (USGS). As urbanisation grows and development occurs, this must be done in a way in which the seismic risk is recognised and incorporated into design. If this is not the case then the figures stated earlier could be significantly greater. 

Geologists from both of these organisations have played a significant role in the development of Afghanistan, and empowerment of geologists in this country. It is likely that both Afghan national geologists and international geologists will play a major role in the continual development of this nation. 

Applying Technologies from Developed to Developing Countries

While there is a significant need for geologists to engage with international development, there's also a tremendous importance in developing tools, skills and technology in developed countries. In many situations, businesses, universities and governments of developed countries are willing to invest significant amounts of money in developing technologies and tools. This investment can often not be matched by many developing countries, but the technologies developed could eventually have a global use and be of benefit to millions in poverty. 

For example, the intrusion of saltwater into freshwater aquifers is a global problem, and a problem likely to increase if and when sea-levels rise, and coastal cities grow. Developing the technology to monitor and control this influx will require investment, research and development - and yet the outcome could be a relatively cheap technology that can be used globally. Coastal aquifers in the UK and Tanzania could equally benefit from similar technology.

Typical Coastal Aquifer (From: USGS)

A further example was published in the New York Times today, analysing the most and least safe cities affected by a number of natural hazards (including weather events such as tornadoes, hurricanes, hail and storms, floods and droughts, and earthquakes). The study gives an 'overall risk' map combining these events, and separate maps for hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes. Little information is given on how the 'overall risk' map was generated... the individual maps were generated using historical data and assessments from the USGS. The lack of description and methodology means it is hard to critically analyse the data within this multi-hazard risk assessment, and how it has been compiled. The development of software tools and methodologies for developed countries with a high risk of damage by multi-hazards (e.g. Japan, USA, China etc) could be extremely useful for developing countries which also suffer from a range of natural disasters such as landslides, floods, droughts, earthquakes (e.g. Nepal, Uganda etc).

Source: New York Times

Case Study: Disaster Risk Reduction - Nepal

The Guardian 'Poverty Matters' blog, focusing on global development, published an article by Alan Duncan today (Minister of State for International Development, UK) in which he highlights the importance of Disaster Risk Reduction in the Asian country of Nepal.

A) GEOLOGICAL & HAZARD CONTEXT

Nepal, situated north of India - in the Himalayas, is located in the collision zone of the Indian Plate with the  Eurasian Plate (right centre in diagram below). This results in a very high risk of earthquakes, with an estimated 10,000 people killed as a result of seismic activity between 1900 and 2008 (NSET-Nepal, 2010). The last major earthquake was in 1934, and palaeoseismology suggests that they occur every 70 years - meaning a major earthquake is due in the region.

In addition to earthquake hazards, Nepal also suffers serious problems from flooding and landslides - both of them resulting in more deaths than earthquakes in the period 1971-2008 (Landslides = 3987, Floods = 2936, Earthquakes = 873, as stated by NSET-Nepal, 2010). 

B) VULNERABILITY

Nepal is very vulnerable to natural hazards, rapid urbanisation - especially in the large city of Kathmandu, with poor spatial planning and disaster management means that communities are very vulnerable to a large earthquake, with a conservative estimate of 40,000 being killed, and many more injured (Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre). The range of hazards that could strike Nepal also complicate the situation. Communities are vulnerable to seismic-induced landslides, water-induced landslides, flooding and other hazards (wildfires etc), with the varied topography being a key factor in this. Poverty in this country increases the vulnerability to disasters. Building to resist earthquakes is expensive, and preparing communities requires investment. 

C) DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

As Alan Duncan states, there is a real need for action to reduce the risk in Nepal, by supporting the Nepalese government to develop their disaster management plans, investing in community education, urban planning resources and other risk reduction methods. As the Nepal Risk Reduction Consortium established by the UN work to support the Nepalese in preparing for disaster, and reducing the impacts of that - it is important to:

1) Ensure excellent communication between all stakeholders, including scientists, engineers, social scientists, town planners, politicians and community representative. 

2) Ensure a sustainable programme is put in place - drawing on community participatory methods to ensure that risk reduction is in place at all levels.

3) Develop multi-hazard risk assessments in order to better understand the complex nature of the hazards 

1. Communication

In order to develop detailed and thorough disaster management plans, and a disaster risk reduction plan, there must be good and detailed communication between stakeholders. Geologists and engineers must communicate with social scientists and urban planners in order to ensure the science is accurate and detailed, and incorporated into their plans and procedures. Communities must be consulted and their experiences and knowledge drawn upon to ensure a sustainable programme and policies (see below). 

2. Sustainability
In order to make disaster risk reduction sustainable there must also be substantial community involvement at every level - from identifying hazards, to educating communities, to determining how communities can build resilience and in writing disaster management plans. My experiences in water & sanitation work show that simply pouring finance and building institutional knowledge will not guarantee success or sustainability - without working with the community, drawing on community knowledge and involving them in the decision making. Community participation builds ownership, a sense of responsibility and community knowledge. In a similar way, if DRR is going to be successful in Nepal it must engage people from all aspects of the community and not be a 'top-down' exercise.


3. Multi Hazard Risk Assessments

There is a real need to develop multi-hazard risk analyses for this area. Single hazard risk assessments (i.e. one for flooding, one for landslides, and one for earthquakes) have the potential to result in increased vulnerability to other hazards - they fail to incorporate the complex interaction of hazards, triggering mechanisms, or the increased vulnerability to one hazard if it follows another hazard. Disaster Management Plans also need to examine wide-ranging factors such as water & sanitation, in order to determine how that will work in a disaster, hopefully preventing epidemics of diseases such as cholera.

Further information on multi-hazard risk assessments (in the context of Japan) can be found in this post.

D) CONCLUSION

As stated in this blog's analysis of the Humanitarian Emergency Response Review by Lord Ashdown, there is a definite need for investment in disaster risk reduction, and it is welcomed that DFID is taking this seriously. However, as outlined above it must be ensured that there is communication at all levels, and that it is sustainable, with community involvement and knowledge being fed into the process. A move to multi-hazard risk assessments is also suggested in order to better understand the complex interactions between hazards, and so improve the response in Nepal to future disasters.

Japan: A Multi-Hazard Disaster

Our screens and newspapers have been filled with shocking images of the disaster in Japan over the past few days. In the age of 24 hour news, the world watched the disaster unfold as north-east Japan was struck by a major earthquake - 8000 times bigger than the one that struck Christchurch, New Zealand - followed by a tsunami causing widespread damage and destruction. The earthquake also triggered fires, landslides and now a possible nuclear disaster. In the coming weeks and months the full extent of the damage and loss of life will become clear.

The disaster in Japan demonstrates the complex nature of natural hazards, and the importance of forming a multi-hazard approach to preparing for and mitigating against natural hazards. The earthquake in Japan caused significant damage as buildings shook, roads cracked and structures collapsed. However it also triggered a number of other hazards. It had its epicenter under the sea, triggering the devastating tsunami that caused further damage and destruction. It caused slopes to become unstable, and landslides to occur. It caused gas leaks and subsequent explosions and fires. It has also potentially caused radioactive leaks, bringing a state of nuclear emergency.

Any of these hazards occurring on their own could cause significant damage - all of them occurring at one time is significantly worse than the sum of the damage that could have occurred if they'd been stand-alone disasters. For example, the damage to infrastructure from the earthquake would have increased people's vulnerability to the tsunami... making it more difficult to escape as roads were blocked etc. 

Landslide Blocked Roads:
http://nationaljournal.com/pictures-earthquake-in-japan-20110311

The hazards will also have increased human vulnerability to other possible disasters, such as disease and aftershocks. Since Friday aftershocks have struck the region, and they are likely to continue for many more weeks to come. The biggest aftershock is normally around a magnitude less than the main earthquake, meaning a large earthquake of approximately M7.5 could hit the area in the near future. It is possible and likely that this will cause further damage. Some of the damage this will do as an aftershock (after a major earthquake) will be greater than the damage it would have done if had just occurred as the main event itself. Slopes that were brought to a level dangerously close to instability by the M8.9 earthquake could fail. Damage done to infrastructure such as dams that has not yet been repaired could be exacerbated and failure occur. A risk assessment done for a M7.5 earthquake following the damage and destruction of a M8.9 earthquake and tsunami will be different to a risk assessment from a M7.5 earthquake. 

Japan M8.9 Earthquake & Aftershocks: www2.demis.nl/quakes/

The complexity of the situation in Japan, and the interconnectedness of the natural hazards must be reflected in how we approach disaster risk reduction and risk assessments for urban areas. Treating hazards as discrete events is far from the reality, and can lead to increased vulnerability. This said, most of the existing work into multi-hazard risk assessments (with rare exceptions) still view hazards as discrete events and fail to take into account (i) a hazard triggering another hazard, (ii) synergistic hazards bringing a greater risk than the sum of the individual hazards, (iii) one hazard increasing the probability of other hazards occurring. There is a growing need for further work and research to be done in this important area in order to develop and improve disaster risk reduction programmes.

Case Study: Bududa Landslide, Uganda - March 2010

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA), have stated (October 2010) that one of their key concerns in Eastern Uganda is flooding and landslides as a result of environmental degradation.

Eastern Uganda is generally a flat plateau, with the border between Kenya and Uganda dominated by the beautiful hills and slopes associated with Mount Elgon, an extinct shield volcano. These slopes are home to a number of communities. The higher elevation provides a more moderate climate than the plateau below, and the fertile soils are used by communities to grow crops, especially coffee. The slopes are also home to a wide variety of plants and forest – although a deforestation programme has been taking place in recent years.

Foothills of Mount Elgon

The slopes of Mount Elgon have been prone to a number of landslide events, as can be seen on aerial photographs. One of the biggest was this time last year (March 1^st 2010) in Bududa. This landslide was preceded by significant rains. The slopes of Mount Elgon are the catchment area for a number of streams and rivers. The heavy rain caused a significant swell of these, and groundwater levels to rise. As groundwater levels rose, the instability of the slope increased due to the decrease in effective stress. This was likely exacerbated by the deforestation, with the soil losing anchorage and surface erosion more likely.

The total impact and effects of this landslide are unknown. Estimates of those who died are currently about 388, and significant numbers were left displaced as soil, mud and boulders submerged three villages. A number of school pupils took shelter in a health centre, which was tragically then destroyed.

From: http://www.afronline.org/?p=3835

As Uganda is entering a new rainy season one year on – there is a possibility that old landslides will be reactivated and new landslides occur. So what can be done to help reduce the tragic loss of life and economic costs of these disasters? In many ways it is hard to answer this question without fully understanding the landslide mechanisms and causes.

The Government of Uganda has criticised the communities for living in these high-vulnerability places, and advised that people move off the landslide prone slopes. This is, however, around half a million people – most of whom are subsistence or crop farmers. Relocating this amount of people, and finding the land for them to make a living, is no easy task. A review of vulnerability in the area could give more specific advice on which communities to relocate – but if crop yields (coffee etc) are less productive than their original plots, it may be difficult to persuade people not to return.

Research published this year in the African Journal of Agricultural Research suggests that farmers have a reasonably good knowledge of where landslides might hit, and some things they avoid (such as terracing) that can trigger landslides. The research suggests that possible interventions could be done using participatory methods. This would aim to help farmers better recognise causes and effects of landslides, and reduce activities that lead to instability - such as undercutting slopes for house construction. The research did not, however, discuss the effects of deforestation with the farmers. It is also unlikely that the threat could be removed simply by getting the farmers to change some practices. A bigger scale intervention, reseeding degraded land, planning and organising the slope-sided farming and improving drainage on the slopes would also be required.

Foothills of Mount Elgon: Concave Slopes identified by farmers as areas more vulnerable to landslides

It is likely that the best way to help reduce the effects of landslides in this area is a combination of a number of things:

• Relocation in some areas of very high risk
• Working with farmers to ensure their farming is more sustainable and avoids environmental degradation. Offering alternative housing styles to prevent the need for undercutting slopes.
• Some possible engineering solutions - improving drainage and increasing toe weights to prevent instability.

It is hoped that the Ugandan Government and their development partners will act strongly to reduce the possibility of future disaster in this area.