This report addresses the earthquake management and disaster preparedness strategies of Taiwan and Turkey, emphasizing the significant transformations in policies and practices in this field following the major earthquakes both countries experienced in 1999. Taiwan’s disaster management strategies, developed from lessons learned after the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake, have proven effective during the earthquake in 2024, achieving significant improvements in structural resilience, public awareness, and the response capabilities of local administrations. In contrast, Turkey, following the 1999 Marmara earthquake, has implemented various regulations in the field of disaster management and preparation. However, the effectiveness of these measures has shown inconsistency over time, resulting in substantial damage in the Çukurova region during the 2023 earthquake, with casualties reported in the hundreds of thousands. The experiences of both countries highlight the importance of a continuous learning and adaptation process in disaster management and preparation. This study emphasizes the need for countries to regularly review and enhance their strategies to better prepare for and respond to disasters.
PREWORD
Earthquakes pose inevitable and serious natural threats to communities living in seismically active regions like Taiwan and Turkey. Both nations endured the devastations of major earthquakes in 1999, triggering substantial changes in their disaster management and preparedness approaches. These events led both Taiwan and Turkey to reevaluate and strengthen their earthquake-related policies and infrastructure. However, the strategies for disaster response and preparedness in both countries have evolved over time, influenced by their experiences and the lessons learned.
Following the 1999 Ji-Ji (Chi-Chi) earthquake, Taiwan implemented comprehensive reforms in disaster management and preparedness, making significant strides towards reconstruction and creating a more resilient society. Measures included enhancing structural resilience, educating and informing the public, and bolstering the disaster response capabilities and authority of local governments. The effectiveness of these disaster management and resilience programs was retested during the major earthquake on April 3, 2024, yielding new lessons as the measures previously put in place significantly reduced the loss of life. This highlighted the importance of improvements in structural resilience, public awareness, and the response capabilities of local governments. Conversely, after the 1999 Marmara earthquake, Turkey made significant legal and structural reforms, but the application and effectiveness of these changes have varied over time. The challenges faced during the 2023 Çukurova earthquake have called for a reevaluation and adjustment of Turkey’s disaster management and preparedness strategies, particularly towards reducing disaster risks and enhancing the community’s resilience to disasters. The experiences of both countries emphasize the importance of a continual learning and development process in earthquake management and disaster preparedness. The approaches of Taiwan and Turkey offer valuable lessons for the international community in dealing with seismic hazards and contribute to the development of more effective policies and practices for future disasters. In this context, it is vital for both countries to continually review and improve their strategies for disaster preparedness and response to reduce
disaster risks and enhance the resilience of societies against earthquakes.
FOLLOWING THE 1999 Jİ-Jİ EARTHQUAKE
Following the 1999 Ji-Ji (Chi-Chi) earthquake, Taiwan implemented a comprehensive disaster management and resilience program aimed at enhancing resilience against seismic threats. This program included reforms such as the enforcement of strict building standards, conducting public awareness campaigns, and enhancing the disaster response capabilities of local governments. These reforms have laid the foundation for Taiwan’s disaster management strategies and have been recognized in the international disaster management literature.
Key elements of the disaster management and resilience program include modifications to construction regulations. Taiwan strengthened existing seismic design codes to ensure new buildings were constructed to higher standards, aiming to enhance buildings’ performance during earthquakes and thus minimize loss of life and property damage. Public information and education campaigns have also been a crucial part of Taiwan’s disaster management program. These campaigns focused on increasing disaster risk awareness, teaching first aid, and improving emergency response skills. Additionally, the Taiwanese government published guides on how the public should act during disasters and organized disaster drills to prepare the community for emergencies. Enhancing the competencies of local governments significantly improved Taiwan’s capacity for a quick and effective disaster response. Local administrations were prioritized for disaster risk assessment, emergency planning, and coordination of disaster response, ensuring they were well-prepared for emergencies. This approach aimed at localizing disaster response and building resilience at the community level. These reforms and practices have made Taiwan more resilient to disasters and established it as an international model in disaster management. The disaster management and resilience programs implemented by Taiwan following the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake offer important lessons and practices for other countries. These programs provide a comprehensive framework for reducing disaster risks, preparing communities for disasters, and enhancing effective response capacity during emergencies.
Results and Effects
The disaster management and resilience programs developed by Taiwan following the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake have offered measurable outcomes in subsequent earthquakes. Following the implementation of these programs, measures were taken to improve engineering and construction standards of structures, increase public awareness of disasters, and enhance the quick response capabilities of local governments. These improvements have played a critical role in making Taiwan, an island with a high earthquake risk, more prepared and resilient against disasters.
In terms of the outcomes and impacts of disaster management strategies, advancements in structural improvements and public readiness have been directly linked to lower loss of life and property in subsequent earthquakes. These enhancements had a significant effect in reducing damage and casualties in later earthquakes, including the most recent one on April 3, 2024. Structural reinforcements have increased the earthquake resilience of both new and existing buildings, while public information and training have improved the ability to act correctly in the event of a disaster.
Taiwan’s experiences offer valuable lessons for other countries within a framework of global cooperation and information exchange in disaster management and preparedness. The successes achieved through the implementation of Taiwan’s disaster management strategies are recognized as an international benchmark for creating more resilient societies against disasters and serve as a guide for other countries to develop similar strategies.
In this context, Taiwan’s disaster management and resilience programs, especially those focusing on structural improvements and enhancing public readiness for disasters, have set a model in the field of disaster management. The strategies implemented by Taiwan after 1999 provide a comprehensive framework for reducing disaster risks and enhancing effective response capabilities during disasters, thereby offering important lessons and practices for creating more resilient societies worldwide. These strategies and outcomes are prominent examples that encourage international cooperation and knowledge sharing in disaster management.
EARTHQUAKE MANAGEMENT AND DISASTER PREPAREDNESS IN TURKEY: AFTER THE 1999 MARMARA EARTHQUAKE
Turkey implemented significant legal reforms following the 1999 Marmara Earthquake. However, assessments of the application and effectiveness of these reforms, especially in light of the severe outcomes faced during the 2023 Çukurova earthquake, are contentious. The magnitude of the disaster following the 1999 earthquake highlighted the need for serious revisions in disaster management and preparedness in Turkey. The 1999 earthquake resulted in the loss of over 17,000 lives and caused extensive material damage. This catastrophe exposed deficiencies and inadequacies in Turkey’s disaster
management. In response, significant changes were made to disaster management and preparedness strategies, including the implementation of compulsory earthquake insurance and disaster awareness campaigns. Despite the measures and legal adjustments taken after the 1999 Marmara Earthquake, the challenges and failures encountered during the 2023 Çukurova earthquake have laid bare the shortcomings in disaster management and preparedness. Particularly, the performance of the Turkish Red Crescent during the Çukurova earthquake has drawn criticism regarding disaster readiness, management, and response capacity. The inability to provide a swift and effective response, along with issues in post-disaster coordination and aid distribution, has led to significant disappointment among the public and affected individuals. Consequences and Impacts This situation underscores the necessity of revising and improving disaster management and preparedness strategies in Turkey. Enhancing the capacity for disaster preparedness and response, strengthening coordination within disaster management processes, and developing comprehensive strategies to reduce disaster risks are urgently needed at both local and national levels. Moreover, there’s a pressing need to make communities more resilient to disasters and to improve the effectiveness of post-disaster interventions. In this context, the difficulties and failures experienced in disaster management and preparedness offer vital lessons for creating a more prepared and resilient society against future disasters. These lessons present an opportunity for continuous review, enhancement, and effective implementation of disaster management strategies.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This section offers an in-depth analysis of earthquake management and disaster preparedness strategies in Taiwan and Turkey, aiming to draw lessons from the experiences of both countries and propose future recommendations. The disaster management approaches of the two countries, their measures against seismic threats, and the challenges they have faced will be evaluated from a comparative perspective.
Enhancing Structural Resilience Taiwan’s implementation of strict construction standards and changes to building regulations after the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake has significantly increased the resilience of structures to earthquakes. This approach significantly reduced the loss of life and property in subsequent earthquakes, including the most recent one on April 3, 2024. Conversely, despite legislative changes following the 1999 Marmara Earthquake, Turkey has shown inadequacies in enhancing structural resilience, particularly highlighted by the severe outcomes of the 2023 Çukurova earthquake.
Recommendation: The most crucial lesson Turkey can learn from Taiwan is the necessity of effectively applying strict construction standards and inspection mechanisms to enhance structural resilience. Strengthening building inspection processes, improving the quality of construction materials, and reinforcing existing structures against earthquake risks are among the suggested measures.
Raising Public Awareness
Taiwan has organized widespread campaigns and training programs to raise disaster awareness and prepare the public for emergencies, thereby increasing the level of consciousness about how to act during disasters and strengthening societal resilience. In Turkey, however, efforts to enhance disaster awareness and education have fallen short, especially in engaging local communities and improving access to information. Recommendation: Turkey should learn from Taiwan’s strategies in preparing the public for
disasters and enhancing disaster awareness. Expanding disaster education programs, conducting regular disaster drills in schools and public institutions, and increasing public awareness campaigns about disaster risks are recommended. Strengthening Local Governments’ Earthquake Response Capabilities A crucial decision that minimized casualties in Taiwan’s recent earthquake was the significant steps taken to enhance local governments’ disaster management and response capabilities, thus gaining the ability to respond quickly and effectively in the event of a disaster. In Turkey, however, the powers of local governments in disaster preparedness and response are kept limited.
Recommendation: Turkey could draw inspiration from Taiwan’s practices to enhance the disaster management capacity of local governments. Providing local governments with increased powers and resources for disaster management and response, and implementing local-level disaster risk assessments should be prioritized. This comparative analysis and recommendations section clearly outlines the fundamental differences and similarities in the earthquake management and disaster preparedness strategies of Taiwan and Turkey. Both countries have developed different approaches to seismic threats and have learned important lessons in the process. Following the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake, Taiwan took significant steps in disaster management and resilience, improving structural durability, raising public awareness, and strengthening the capabilities of local governments. These strategies have made Taiwan more resilient to disasters, while the experiences of Turkey after the 1999 Marmara Earthquake and the 2023 Çukurova Earthquake indicate the need for improvements in disaster management and preparedness processes.
The lessons drawn from both countries’ experiences lead to significant global recommendations in disaster management and preparedness. Specifically, steps to enhance structural durability, better inform the public about disasters, and strengthen the capacities of local governments are critical for reducing disaster risks and making communities more resilient.
In conclusion, the continuous review, improvement, and implementation of disaster management and preparedness strategies are emphasized for both Taiwan and Turkey. For more effective outcomes against disasters, it’s crucial for both nations to consider recommendations on increasing structural durability, raising public awareness, and enhancing local governments’ capacities. Taiwan’s successful strategies and Turkey’s challenges offer valuable lessons for other countries, promoting international cooperation and knowledge sharing in disaster management and preparedness. This process requires ongoing development and improvement, demanding coordination and collaboration not just nationally, but internationally.
CONCLUSION
This comparative analysis of earthquake management and disaster preparedness strategies in Taiwan and Turkey shows that both countries have learned significant lessons in this field, though the outcomes of their implementations differ. Taiwan has achieved notable success in creating a resilient society against disasters through effective disaster management and resilience programs initiated after the 1999 Ji-Ji earthquake. These successes have been facilitated by various measures such as enhancing structural resilience, raising public awareness, and strengthening the authority and capacities of local governments. On the other hand, despite significant advancements in disaster management and preparedness since the 1999 Marmara Earthquake, the challenges faced during the 2023 Çukurova earthquake have highlighted deficiencies in the current system and areas needing improvement in Turkey. The inadequacies in the Turkish Red Crescent’s disaster response and flaws in disaster management strategies particularly point out the need to strengthen disaster management authority and capacity at the local level. This analysis suggests that lessons from Taiwan’s disaster management and preparedness strategies could be utilized to enhance Turkey’s disaster management system.
In conclusion, the experiences of Taiwan and Turkey in disaster management and preparedness offer valuable lessons for the international community in coping with seismic hazards. It is crucial for both countries to continue their efforts in this area and to enhance collaboration to build a more resilient world against disasters.