chapter 4 - DRK

Strictly under embargo until Wednesday 22 September at 00:01 GMT (02:01 Geneva time)However, the incentive for owners to retrofit isvery low for an earthquake that may or maynot happen over the next 50 years. The costfor retrofitting is high and amounts to little financialreturn in terms of increased propertyvalue or rental value; furthermore, multipleowners must agree and the building must bevacated for several months.The Greater Municipality of Istanbulhas also started to earmark gecekonduareas for rehabilitation, under the GreaterMunicipalities Law (Law No. 5216, 2004),which gives authority for the “vacating anddemolishing of dangerous buildings and allother ‘non-conforming’ structures”. This hasled to forced evictions and massive threatsof eviction across the city, where gecekonduareas will be bulldozed and rebuilt by theMass Housing Adminstration, leading to thelikely displacement of poor urban dwellers.While relocation into new earthquake-safeareas is planned, the new houses – even thoughsubsidized – are too far away from jobs formost people to afford, so people are left homeless.Thus rehabilitation may physically reducethe vulnerability of the built environment of thecity, yet it is dramatically increasing people’slevel of poverty and exclusion. ConclusionUrban vulnerability is generated differently at the scales of the individual, household,community and city. City-scale investments, for example, in flood drainage may succeedin protecting core functions but can also generate vulnerability for the poor. InDelhi, a lack of foresight has led to the construction of storm drains during a housingcrisis and, not surprisingly, the colonization of drains by landless informal settlers. Thedrains now generate flood risk among the poor while helping protect the wider cityfrom flooding. Identifying and reducing vulnerability is no easy task in an era of rapidurbanization.Historically, the focus at city level has always been on physical over social infrastructure.This is beginning to change as city authorities recognize the importance of socialsafety nets (including support for the elderly and homeless), access to good-qualityhealth and education, and implementation of building standards.The commoditization of urban life means that, in contrast to more rural contexts,money is required to meet even the most basic of needs – water, food and shelter.This restricts the ability of the vulnerable poor to accumulate assets and to protectthemselves from hazard. It also makes it difficult to recover from disaster, magnifyingimpact where the loss of accumulated assets, such as a dwelling, can set back householddevelopment irretrievably.However, looking at the trends for the future, we see that increasing urbanization alsobrings the potential to reduce the losses from disasters in the long term even though itmay increase disaster losses in the short term. Rapid urbanization, of the kind that ishappening in parts of Asia and Africa, will, in the short run, most likely increase lossesWorld Disasters Report 2010 – Focus on urban risk47