FRAMEWORK FOR CIVIL ENGINEERING

RESEARCH: ADDRESSING SAFETY AND

SUSTAINABILITY THROUGH DISASTER RISK
REDUCTION
Andres Winston C. Oreta1, Renan Ma. Tanhueco2 and Lessandro Estelito Garciano3
*
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, De La Salle, University, Manila, Philippines, Tel. 5244611,
Email: [email protected]
2
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, De La Salle, University, Manila, Philippines, Tel. 5244611,
Email: [email protected]
3
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, De La Salle, University, Manila, Philippines, Tel. 5244611,
Email: [email protected]

Abstract
“Civil Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and shall
strive to comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their
duties.” This is one of the fundamental canons of the Code of Ethics of Civil Engineers. The
task of a civil engineer includes provision of safe, reliable and comfortable infrastructures for
housing, transport, communication, water supply and sanitation, energy, commercial and
industrial activities to meet the needs of a growing population. Today, there is an increasing
demand for civil engineers to focus their efforts on the protection and preservation of the
environment. With the increase in severity and frequency of natural disasters that devastated
both developing and advanced countries, planning, design and construction of infrastructures
that are safe for people and at the same time reduce their impact on further deterioration of the
environment becomes a major challenge. Civil engineers who are experts in the various fields
of specialization in structural engineering, transportation engineering, water resources
engineering, geotechnical engineering and construction engineering must embed in their tasks
disaster risk reduction especially in hazard-prone regions – for when they do this, they not
only address safety but also sustainability – two important issues for maintaining the balance
and harmony between the built and natural environment. Keywords: Safety, Sustainability,
Infrastructure Development, Hazard, Disaster, Disaster Mitigation, Civil Engineering

1. INTRODUCTION
“Civil Engineers shall hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public and shall strive to
comply with the principles of sustainable development in the performance of their duties.” This is one
of the fundamental canons of the Code of Ethics of Civil Engineers. Two keywords in this canon are
‘safety’ and ‘sustainable development.’

Designing for safety. In every endeavour, civil engineers shall hold paramount the safety,
health and welfare of the public. Protection of properties and other assets are only secondary.
Houses and buildings are designed and built by structural and construction engineers against
environmental loads due to gravity, earthquakes, wind, temperature and other external forces to
safeguard life or limb, property and public welfare. Bridges are designed and constructed to
resist loads due to traffic and external forces to assure safe and comfortable travel of people
and vehicles. Geotechnical engineers analyze the soil and foundation to make sure that the
structures built on them or against them will remain sound and stable. A safe transportation is
planned and managed by transportation engineers to move people and goods safely without
accidents and efficiently from one location to another by land, water or air. Water resources
engineers design innovative ways of providing safe potable drinking water. Infrastructures are
designed and constructed to utilize water for irrigation and for producing safe energy. Flood
control structures are put in place to protect people and property from the harmful effects of
flooding.
Addressing Sustainability. Civil engineers shall strive to comply with the principles of
sustainable development in the performance of their duties. Sustainable development was first
defined in 1987 by the Brundtland Commission as “development that meets the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.” In the 1992, Earth Summit
in Rio de Janeiro, sustainable development was defined as an “economic process that can be
maintained long-term in line with the earth’s carrying capacity.” Today sustainability is seen
in three-dimensions, namely ecological, economic and socio-cultural (Maydl 2004). Ecological
sustainability is focused on three goals:
1) protection of human health deals with human toxicity of building materials, reduction of
pollutants, sick building syndrome among others
2) protection of the ecosystem includes waste avoidance, reduction of emissions and
pollutants and proper and efficient land use, and
3) Protection of natural resources deals with resource efficiency, energy use and recycling.
Ecological sustainability is related to infrastructure development. Civil engineers, being major
stakeholders in infrastructure development and the construction industry, must practice
activities in construction that contribute to ecological sustainability. Aside from increasing the
structure's serviceability, durability and reliability throughout its entire life, construction must
also address the following goals (Hajek 2002):
• Decrease exhausting of primary raw materials and energy,
• Regulate consumption of renewable resources, and
• Decrease the amount of harmful emissions and wastes.
These goals do not only apply in construction but also in the various projects and activities of
civil engineers.
Living in hazard-prone regions. HAZARD-PRONE REGIONS
Achieving safety and sustainability is a
NATURAL HAZARDS
major challenge in regions or countries
that are vulnerable to adverse natural
IMPACTS

IMPACTS

hazards like earthquakes, typhoons, Frequency & Intensity of Disaster

floods, volcanic eruptions, drought and
tsunamis (Figure 1). Infrastructures, if
VULNERABILITIES
vulnerable to these hazards, become
inoperable making them useless. Many
buildings and bridges have collapsed DEGREE OF
SUSTAINABILITY
in the past due to strong earthquakes SAFETY
FEATURES
PROVIDED
and tsunamis. Traffic leads to a
standstill when roads and highways
become flooded. Water infrastructures PEOPLE HUMAN HEALTH
become ineffective during water ASSETS RESOURCES
INFRASTRUCTURES ECOSYSTEM
shortages due to drought. When these
disasters occur, the quality of life and ELEMENTS AT RISK
safety of the people are affected. Figure 1. The problem of safety and sustainability
Safety from harm due to collapsed in hazard-prone regions
buildings, safety from accidents during
travel from office to homes and lack of safe drinking water are examples of the impact of
disasters on safety in hazard-prone regions. Disasters lead to wastage of resources and energy
and produces debris which contributes to environmental deterioration. Sustainability is also at
stake in hazard-prone regions.
Figure 1 present the problem in hazard-prone regions. The vulnerabilities of the built
environment to a hazard depend on the safety provided and sustainability features. The disaster
will have impacts on both the built and natural environment.

2. UNDERSTANDING HAZARDS AND DISASTERS.

2.1 Terminologies
We live in an environment where nature and infrastructures interact as shown in Figure 2. Our
built environment is a product of society’s utilization of resources and energy obtained from
nature. Infrastructure development, however, produces negative outputs like air pollution and
waste that have severe impact on human systems and the natural environment including
climate change. Nature, on the other hand, provides us with useful resources but at the same
time produces natural hazards that threaten the built environment. Disasters occur at the
interface between the natural and human systems. The interaction between the natural and
built environment may trigger a disaster that has impacts to the safety of man and sustainability
of our environment.
“A natural hazard is a natural process or phenomenon that may cause loss of life, injury or
other health impacts, property damage, loss of livelihoods and services, social and economic
disruption, or environmental damage” (UNISDR 2008). Natural hazards are classified as
follows: (a) Geophysical: earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions and tsunamis, (b)
Meteorological: tropical storm, winter storm, severe weather, hail, tornado, local storm, (c)
Hydrological: river flood, flash flood, storm surge, mass movement (wet landslide), and (d)
Climatological: heatwave, cold wave, wildfire, drought.

Natural SUSTAINABILITY:
Environment Wasted Energy
Extreme Depleted Resources
Climate Change Hazards Debris

Natural Disaster
Hazards Risk DISASTER Impact
Outputs of SAFETY:
Development Human losses
Vulnerabilities
Material Damage
Built
Environment

Figure 2. Interaction of the Built and Natural Environment

Geophysical Hazards. Strong earthquakes are not as frequent as a rainfall or a typhoon but
when they occur especially when followed by a large tsunami can cause great losses of life and
infrastructures especially when the earthquake’s epicenter occurs is in close proximity to a
densely populated area with poorly constructed structures. Earthquake occurrence is also
difficult to predict in spite of the advancement in research in seismology. Earthquakes are a
major threat worldwide not only to developing countries like the Philippines, Haiti and
Indonesia but even to advanced economies like Japan, US and New Zealand.
Hydro-meteorological Events and Climate Change. Hydro-meteorological events consist of
floods, tropical cyclones and landslides triggered by rain or floods. Climate change is related to
these hazards. Human emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and deforestation have been
linked to the changes in climate variables (such as temperature and precipitation) and resulted
to climate-related hazards such as greater precipitation linked to floods and storms, and
especially higher temperature linked to droughts and heat waves. Increased concentrations of
GHGs in the atmosphere trap more heat on Earth and lead to a gradual increase in global
average temperatures – 0.8 oC above its level in 1750’s, the pre-industrial age (UNF-Sigma XI
2007). As average temperatures rise, average rainfall would be expected to increase. There
have been ―statistically significant trends in the number of heavy or extreme precipitation
events in many regions (Vinod et al 2013).

Because of the effects of climate change, more hazards are expected to hit the country, which
in turn will affect the most vulnerable communities, exposing their lives and livelihoods to
more risks. Extreme hydro-meteorological events have become more frequent in many
countries even in regions (like Mindanao in the Philippines) where these hazards are extremely
rare because of climate change. In most cases, these regions have a high degree of vulnerability
to hydro-meteorological and climate-related hazards. ESCAP/UNISDR (2012) reported that in
“Asia and the Pacific, over the past four decades, the average number of people exposed to
annual flooding has increased from 29.5 to 63.8 million, while populations in cyclone-prone
areas have grown from 71.8 million to 120.7 million. The region also represents more than 85
per cent of global economic exposure to tropical cyclones - pointing to a pattern of economic
growth in typhoon prone coastlines and flood plains.”
Natural events are not hazards per se but when these events exceed some threshold
(magnitude and/or duration) beyond the ‘normal’ range that a community usually experiences
or can bear, the extreme event becomes a hazard. Rainfall is beneficial to man but a magnitude
which is very high or very low may create a flood or a drought, respectively. Normal rainfall
that occurs in a very long duration also becomes a hazard. Large magnitude earthquakes with
amplified acceleration at a site or tsunamis with large waves reaches the coastal areas usually
cause destruction to a community. A disaster, however, will only happen if society’s assets –
people and properties - are exposed and are ‘vulnerable’ to the hazard.
“Vulnerability refers to the characteristics and circumstances of a community, system or asset
that make it susceptible to the damaging effects of a hazard” (UNISDR 2008). The potential
disaster losses, in lives, health status, livelihoods, assets and services, which could occur to a
particular community or a society over some specified future time period is referred to as
disaster risk. The risk is the ‘likely consequence’ of a hazard and depends on the vulnerability
of a community to the hazard. Hence, ‘Hazard + Vulnerability = Disaster.’ A disaster is the
realization of hazard, hence the ‘actual consequence’ of a hazard (Smith and Petley 2009).
“A disaster is a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving
widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds
the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources” (UNISDR
2008). Disasters affect people (death, injury), property (damage, economic loss) and the
environment (loss of flora and fauna, pollution). Disasters are often classified according to
their speed of onset (sudden or slow), or according to their cause (natural or man-made). In this
paper, the term “disasters” refer to those caused by natural hazards only.
The linked between a disaster and development and their numerous interactions can be
compared to that of a DNA (Smith and Petley 2009). In a DNA (Figure 3), two strands are
joined and intertwined. “In a DNA disaster model, one strand represents the social system and
the other the natural system. Disasters arise not from one strand or the other, but from the
complex interactions between them.” The link between hazards and disasters is vulnerability.
Vulnerability is a function of physical, social, economic, environmental and political factors. A
disaster is triggered by natural hazards but is aggravated by how we build and design our way
of living. Rapid urbanization, uncontrolled infrastructure development, urban migration, a
growing population, poverty, pollution, misallocation of resources, poor governance and lack
of political will – all of these human actions and decisions contribute to the vulnerability of a
community and severity of the impact of a disaster. In most of the past disasters, the most
vulnerable people that have suffered immensely are the poor especially the informal settlers in
cities, women, children and the elderly.
3. INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN A HAZARD-PRONE ENVIRONMENT
Balancing safety and sustainability of infrastructures in a hazard-prone environment is a
challenge to civil engineers. Infrastructure development may create vulnerabilities to the
detrimental effects of hazards or develop capacities to minimize the effect of hazards.
Infrastructure development also requires energy and natural resources which may be depleted
if not used wisely. It can also produce outputs that contribute to the deterioration of the
environment and affect the climate.
3.1 Public Safety and Protection of Assets
Natural hazards which includes climate change has impacts on crucial social systems and
urban sectors within cities specifically on (a) urban infrastructure, (b) human health and safety,
(c) vulnerable communities/urban poor, (d) economic activity, and (e) agriculture and
ecosystem services. Shown in the Table 1 are the impacts to (a), (b) and (c) which are related
to the safety of people and sustainability of infrastructures.

Table 1. Impact of Hazards

GEOPHYSICAL HAZARDS
Hazards Urban infrastructure Human Health & Vulnerable Communities
& Built Environment Safety
Earthquakes • Damage & collapse • Death & injuries • Displacement of seismic-
of buildings, bridges prone communities
& lifelines
Landslides • Damage of • Death & injuries • Displacement of landslide-
infrastructures near prone communities
cliffs & slopes
Tsunamis • Losses to coastal • Flood, debris and • Displacement of coastal
infrastructures, drowning deaths communities
ports and piers
Volcanic eruptions • Damage to • Death & injuries • Displacement of
infrastructures near • Air quality: skin & communities near
volcanoes respiratory volcanoes
illnesses
HYDRO-METEOROLOGICAL & CLIMATE-RELATED HAZARDS
( Based on a Table in Otto-Zimmermann, K. Ed., 2011)
Hazards Urban infrastructure Human Health & Vulnerable Communities
& Built Environment Safety
Temperature change; • Pavement & track • Air quality: skin & •Heat fatalities in congested
heat/cold waves damage from respiratory slums due to poor air
extreme heat illnesses circulation
• Intensified urban • Thermal comfort
heat island effect • Heat stroke &
dehydration
• Water
contamination
Drought • Difficulties for inland • Malnutrition & •Rural migration to cities
 waterway dehydration •Scarce water in
transportation • Reduced water slums/informal settlements
• Ground water supply for drinking
subsidence & sanitation
Extreme precipitation • Overflowing • Spread of water •Flooding of urban poor
patterns & flooding drainage systems borne and airborne settlements in hazardous
and waste water diseases flood plains
treatment plants • Drowning deaths
• Disruption of
transportation
system / Traffic
• Flooding of airports,
roads, rails, tunnels
Storm surge • Damage to roads, • Flood, debris and •Displacement of informal
bridges, ports, wind casualties settlers
marine •Forced migration Relocation
infrastructure
Sea-level rise & • Losses to coastal • Saline intrusion: •Displacement of
coastal erosion and water effects on drinking communities in low lying
infrastructures water coastal areas and near
rivers

3.2 Sustainability Concerns

Impact of Construction. The environmental impact of infrastructure development with
respect to the depletion of our natural resources and production of waste is staggering.
Richardson (2002) provides a summary on the impact of infrastructure impact to the
environment. “It is said that 50% of the world population lives in cities today and this may
grow to 75% by 2030. Cities are said to cause 75% of the world’s pollution and consume 75%
of the world’s energy. Buildings are reported to produce 40% of the world’s CO2, consume
50% of the energy derived from fossil fuels, consume 3 billion tonnes of raw materials in
construction each year and consume 75% of all energy used through artificial lighting, heating
and cooling every day. Twenty five percent (25%) of all wood harvested is used in building
construction.”
Maydl (2004) emphasized that the construction sector is the most important contributor in
resource consumption and waste production. According to him, within the European Union
(EU), half of all materials that are taken from the earth’s surface are used in the construction
sector and more than one fourth of the amount of the total waste is construction waste. In
Austria, the share of the total waste from building sites including excavation material amounts
to 57% of the total waste per year (Maydl 2004).
The structural system can account for more than one-third of the material use and waste
generation and more than 10% of the energy use and green-house production over a building
lifespan of 50 years. In absolute terms, the greenhouse emissions caused by building structural
systems in the US for example is equivalent to the greenhouse emissions caused by 22 million
new cars driven 19,000 km per year (Webster 2004).
Disaster Debris. The large amount of disaster-caused waste and debris poses another
environmental problem. Debris removal is a major component of every disaster recovery
operation. Soil, building material, and green waste, such as trees and shrubs, make up most of
the volume of disaster debris. Disposal of hazardous materials complicates the problem. The
most severe natural disasters generate debris in quantities that can overwhelm existing solid
waste management facilities or force communities to use disposal options that otherwise would
not be acceptable. The volume of debris from past earthquakes are 15 million tonnes from the
Great Hanshin-Awaji (Kobe) earthquake, 20 million tonnes from the 2008 Sichuan earthquake,
and 10 million m3 found in Indonesia alone following the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami (Brown
et al 2011). The debris of 20 to 25 million tonnes from the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake is
said to be15 times the annual waste production of the three most affected prefectures -
Fukushima, Iwate and Miyagi. In the port town of Ishinomachi, the tsunami waste was
equivalent to 100 years of collection (Des Bois 2011). Managing the disaster debris following
disasters in a post disaster recovery effort takes times and is costly. For example, management
of the tsunami debris of 1.35 million tonnes at Sendai city costs 92.5 Billion Yen or US$ 1.15
Billion (UNEO 2012).
Impact of Traffic. Road motor vehicles cause urban air pollution, congest our cities with
traffic and produce noise and stress to our lives. Traffic congestion has grown in alarming rate
in developing countries and yet “vehicle ownership is growing geometrically in many cities in
the world without corresponding land use planning and sustainable transportation planning
strategies” (Tugbobo 2009).
In a study (Regidor 2012) conducted by the National Center for Transportation Studies in the
Philippines, the economic impact of traffic congestion in Metro Manila was estimated based
on the value of time of travellers or commuters. The study indicated that the cumulative cost of
congestion from 2000 to 2011 (a total of 11 years) is about 1.513 Trillion PhP or 35.179
Billion USD. Also, the average annual cost of congestion is 137,519 Billion PhP/year or 3.198
Billion USD/year. The amount of money if not lost could have been used for investment in
more infrastructures. For example, projects for Metro Manila like extension of the LRT lines,
construction of elevated highways and skyways total 188.734 Billion PhP, which is roughly
12.5% of the 1.513 Trillion PhP lost over the last 11 years!
The estimate of congestion costs considered only work trips and did not include fuel and other
operating expenses, external costs (e.g. excess air and noise pollution). In the same study by
Regidor (2012), considering only 12 of the busiest roads in Metro Manila which includes C-4
(EDSA) and C-5( C. P. Garcia to Katipunan Ave.) and R-1 (Roxas Blvd.), a rough estimate of
fuel savings for one year was computed assuming that 1 liter per day is saved due to the
reduction of congestion and weekdays travel only as equal to 4.212 Billion PhP. or 182
Million USD. This is equivalent to about 6,000 public school buildings. In the US, traffic
congestion costs drivers more than $100 billion annually in wasted fuel and lost time,
according to a Treasury Department report (USA Today 3/25/2012).
Climate Change. Zusman et al (2012) reported that according to the International Energy
Agency (IEA) data, the transportation sector accounts for 23 percent of the World’s CO2
emissions from fossil-fuel combustion where 75 percent is contributed by road transport.
Between 1970 and 2006, CO2 emissions coming from the transport sector doubled from about
3 billion tons to nearly 6.5 billion tons per year. In Asia, between 1980 and 2008, CO2
emissions increased fivefold from 200 million tons to close to 1 billion tons per year. Asia’s
future CO2 emissions are predicted to climb to 3.5 billion tons annually between 2010 and
2050 according to the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (Zusman et al
2012). CO2 emissions contribute mainly to global warming effects which is associated to
climate change. Climate change has altered precipitation patterns wherein extreme events like
heavy and intense rainfall have become more frequent. And when there are more frequent
intense rainfall and typhoons, traffic and transportation is affected. When traffic is at a
standstill, air pollution is aggravated.
Impact to Business. The major disasters that struck Japan and Thailand in 2011 revealed how
such catastrophes can impact businesses. Businesses suffer direct losses when they have
invested in locating factories, offices, plants, warehouses and other facilities in locations
exposed to hazards such as floods, cyclones, earthquakes or tsunamis and without adequate
investments to reduce risks. And they experience indirect losses, as production, distribution
and supply chains are interrupted; consequently, production, output and throughput are reduced.
GAR 2013 reports that “following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami, automobile and electrical
component production in Japan declined by 48 percent and 8 percent, respectively. But
automobile production also fell by 20 percent in Thailand, 18 percent in the Philippines and 6
percent in Indonesia. The 2011 floods in Thailand, inundated more than 1,000 factories of 804
companies were flooded for up to two months. Of these companies, 451 were Japanese.”
4. DISASTER RISK REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT
Disasters occur in both advanced and less developed countries. However, the impact is more
pronounced in the less developed and poor countries because of their lack of resilience. If we
want to prevent or mitigate the impact of disasters, we must reduce the risk and build the
resilience of the community. “Resilience refers to the capacity of an individual, household,
population group or system to anticipate, absorb, and recover from hazards and/or effects of
climate change and other shocks and stresses without compromising (and potentially
enhancing) long-term prospects” (UNISDR 2009). Disaster risk reduction (DRR) which
includes resilience building is the key towards sustainable development.

4.1 Role of DRR on Safety and Sustainability

Safety and sustainability issues are intertwined in the interaction between disaster and
development. Models to address risk reduction have been formulated relating hazard,
vulnerability and the ‘elements at risk.’ Risk is defined as:
Risk = Hazard x Elements at Risk x Vulnerability
This model simply says disaster risk increases with hazard and vulnerability. Hence, if we
want to reduce the risk of the ‘elements at risk’ to a hazard and prevent a disaster, then we
must reduce hazards and vulnerabilities. ‘Elements at risk’ includes people, property and
investments. Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is “the concept and practice of reducing disaster
risks through systematic efforts to analyse and manage the causal factors of disasters,
including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property,
wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events
“(UNISDR 2008). If DRR is embedded to infrastructure development, disaster risk is reduced
and both safety and sustainability are increased. Therefore, the key to ‘safe and sustainable
infrastructure development’ is ‘disaster risk reduction’ as shown in Figure 9. The framework
means that “Adressing safety and sustainability in hazard-prone regions through DRR means
planning, designing, constructing and managing civil engineering systems to increase system
resilience and reduce vulnerabilities to hazards so that social, economic and environmental
impacts and losses are minimize in times of disasters.”
There are three important phases in DRR that must be considered if we are to mainstream
DRR in infrastructure development:
1. Hazard Assessment. Know the DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
hazards that threaten the assets
+
REDUCE/AVOID REDUCE
(people, structures and HAZARDS VULNERABILITIES
investment) of a community.
2. Vulnerability Assessment.
Identify the ‘elements at risk’ or SAFETY REDUCED SUSTAINABILITY
‘asset’ and their vulnerabilities to IMPROVED DISASTER INCREASED
RISKS
the hazard that may trigger a
potential disaster.
PEOPLE HUMAN HEALTH
ASSETS RESOURCES
INFRASTRUCTURES ECOSYSTEM
PROTECTED ELEMENTS
Figure 9. Role of DRR on Safety & Sustainability
3. Risk Assessment and Risk Reduction. Assess the risk to the hazard and identify how the
risk can be reduced by implementing risk reduction strategies. The title of the United
Nations Foundation’ report on climate change (UNF-Sigma XI (2007), “avoiding the
unmanageable and managing the unavoidable” is an appropriate guide in DRR. Risk
reduction involves decisions and actions addressing the following strategies:
a. Prevention – Reduce or Avoid the hazard
b. Mitigation – Reduce the vulnerabilities to the hazard
c. Adaptation – Build capacity and resilience to the hazard
Depending on the hazard, various risk reduction measures – structural, non-structural, social-
can be implemented to mitigate the impact of a potential disaster. There are various DRR
strategies where civil engineers will be the key players. Here are some examples:
• Flood risk reduction – hazard maps, land use management, flood forecasting, early
warning systems, flood control structures, evacuations from lowlands, expanded flood
plain areas, emergency flood reservoirs, preserved areas for flash flood water, improved
construction techniques, upgrading and rehabilitation of waterways, declogging of
sewerage canals, proper disposal of garbage and waste
• Seismic risk reduction – hazard maps, land use planning, resistant designs and
construction, building regulations and permitting systems, enforcement of urban plans
and building codes, seismic assessment and retrofitting of existing structures, relocation
from hazard-prone areas (fault-zones, coastal areas, unstable slopes, cliffs, soft soil),
early warning from tsunami, awareness and preparedness education
• Landslide monitoring and mitigation – risk mapping, environmental management, GIS
mapping on morphology, hydrogeology, land use and soil type; and development of
alternative land-use plans, soil stabilization, awareness programs
Mainstreaming DRR in infrastructure development is the first step towards addressing safety
and sustainability in hazard-prone regions. Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
(DRRM) is a more comprehensive process consisting of pro-active disaster preparedness and
risk reduction strategies against hazards (pre-disaster phase) and re-active disaster response
and rehabilitation for managing disasters (post-disaster phase). Lessons from past disasters
must be use to improve the DRR strategies. The ultimate objective is the reduction of the
impact of future hazards so that similar disasters would not
occur or their impacts reduced. Infrastructure development
(ID) when infused with disaster risk reduction management DRRM
(DRRM) and when the ultimate goal is to preserve the • Hazard assessment
• Vulnerability assessment
environment leads to a safe and sustainable infrastructure • Risk reduction strategies
development (SSID) and can be represented by a simple • Disaster Management &
relationship ‘DRRM + ID = SSID’ as shown in Figure 10. Rehabilitation

When DRRM is embedded in the planning, design,

construction and management of infrastructures, we will
have ideally ‘safe’ and ‘sustainable’ infrastructures with the
following characteristics: Safe & Sustainable
Infrastructure Development
(a) Sustainable Transport System: A safe, efficient and
sustainable mass transport and traffic management
system that assures the safe and comfortable travel of
people and goods during normal and emergency
conditions will save peoples’ lives, travel time and INFRASTRUCTURE
reduce fuel consumption resulting to more income, DEVELOPMENT
• Safety features
• Sustainable Designs

Figure 10. DRRM + ID = SSID

 reduction of use of fossil fuel, less CO2 emission and reduction of green house gases.
(b) Integrated Flood Risk Management: An integrated flood risk reduction and management
program that incorporates land use planning and hazard assessment and involves improved
weather forecasting, installation of early-warning strategies on flooding, upgrading and
cleaning of sewerage canals, relocation of flood-prone communities and education of the
community on proper disposal of garbage and waste will reduce the losses of lives and
property and will upgrade the quality of living.
(c) Green and Robust Structures: Structures designed using updated codes that can
withstand severe loads due to earthquakes, wind and tsunami suffer minor damage and
will protect property and people, while strengthening and retrofitting of existing structures
will prolong their lifespan and contribute to the reduction of depletion and wastage of
materials and energy.
(d) Safe and Clean Water Supply System: Water infrastructures for safe drinking water,
industrial production and irrigation that utilizes river and rain water efficiently will
enhance the health of the people and increase the economic productivity of a region.
4.2 Framework for Action for Civil Engineers
Civil engineers have an enormous task towards realizing safe and sustainable infrastructure
development. The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015 which focuses on disaster
risk reduction (DRR) is an appropriate guide for civil engineers to attain this goal. The HFA
was formulated and adopted by 168 governments at the World Conference on Disaster
Reduction held in Kobe, Japan and aims to promote a strategic and systematic approach to
reducing vulnerabilities and risks to hazards. It underscored the need for, and identified ways
of, building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters through the five priorities for
action (Box 2, ISDR 2005). The HFA approach to disaster risk reduction encourages all
stakeholders to take into consideration the key activities listed under each of these five
priorities and should implement them, as appropriate, to their own circumstances and
capacities (ISDR 2005). “If you could actually tackle these five things, you will be a safer
nation and a safer world,” Margareta Wahlström, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-
General for Disaster Risk Reduction stated in one of her keynote speeches. Following the HFA,
engineers can contribute substantially in the implementation of the key activities especially on
those related to HFA2, HFA3 and HFA4. Among the key activities that civil engineers can
engage in are listed in Box 3.
 Box 3. Key Activities of the Hyogo Framework for Action related to Civil Engineering
(a) Developing and maintaining people-centered early warning systems (HFA2).
(b) Developing infrastructure, capacities and methods for risk assessment, forecasting hazards,
vulnerabilities, disaster impacts (HFA2).
(c) Strengthening networks among disaster experts, managers and planners across sectors and between
regions and promoting and improving dialogue and cooperation among scientific communities and
practitioners working on disaster risk reduction (HFA3).
(d) Promoting disaster risk reduction knowledge, local risk assessment and training programmes in schools
and in the community (HFA3).
(e) Promoting the sustainable use and management of ecosystems such as better land-use planning and
development activities to reduce risk and vulnerabilities (HFA4).
(f) Implementing integrated environmental and natural resource management approaches that incorporate
disaster risk reduction, including structural and non-structural measures, such as integrated flood
management and appropriate management of fragile ecosystems (HFA4).
(g) Protecting and strengthening critical public facilities and physical infrastructure, particularly schools,
clinics, hospitals, water and power plants, communications and transport lifelines, disaster warning and
management centres, and culturally important lands and structures through proper design, retrofitting
and re-building, in order to render them adequately resilient to hazards. (HFA4).
(h) Incorporating disaster risk assessments into the urban planning and management of disaster-prone
human settlements, in particular highly populated areas and quickly urbanizing settlements (HFA4).
Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters

A global campaign on “Making Cities Resilient-My City is Getting Ready!” was founded by
UNISDR in May 2010 to take steps to improve cities’ resilience to disasters (UNISDR 2012).
The campaign identified 29 role model cities that as exemplars in disaster risk management
and reduction. These cities share their knowledge of best practices on a wide range of
challenges, including flood management, early warning, earthquake reconstruction and
legislation. ‘Ten Essentials for Making Cities Resilient’ were developed by the Campaign as a
framework which has similar activities in the HFA (Box 4).. Although the main actors in the
campaign the city mayors and local government administrators, many items in the checklist of
ten essentials would require the services of the civil engineering community.

Box 4. Summary of Ten Essentials for Making Cities Resilient

1. Put in place organization and coordination to clarify everyone’s roles and responsibilities.
2. Assign a budget and provide incentives for homeowners, low-income families and the private sector
to invest in risk reduction.
3. Update data on hazards and vulnerabilities, prepare and share risk assessments.
4. Invest in and maintain risk reducing infrastructure, such as storm drainage.
5. Assess the safety of all schools and health facilities and upgrade these as necessary.
6. Enforce risk compliant building regulations and land use planning, identify safe land for low-income
citizens.
7. Ensure education programmes and training on DRR are in place in schools and communities.
8. Protect ecosystems and natural buffers to mitigate hazards, adapt to climate change.
9. Install early warning systems and emergency management capacities.
10. Ensure that the needs and participation of the affected population are at the centre of reconstruction.
- UNISDR Making Cities Resilient Report 2012

5. UNDERGRADUATE AND GRADUATE RESEARCHES

Undergraduate and graduate students at De La Salle University are required to submit a thesis
based on a research related to their field of specialization. A number of these researches
address the issue of safety and sustainability issues and concerns in hazard-prone countries.
Summarized below are abstracts of selected completed thesis where the authors serve as thesis
advisers.
5.1 PULL-OUT AND PULL-OVER FAILURE PROBABILITY OF RESIDENTIAL HOUSE
ROOFS DUE TO EXTREME WIND SPEEDS: A CASE STUDY IN MALATE, METRO
MANILA by I.P. Alvarez, J. Colobong, C. Decal, A. Tan and L. E. Garciano

This research investigated the probability of

pullout and pullover failures of roof panels in
low-rise residential structures subjected to
extreme wind speeds in Malate, Manila. Using
Monte Carlo simulation the pullout failure was
determined as the main mode of failure. A risk
curve was obtained using the annualized
expected loss and the average annual
exceedence probability of the wind speeds. A
GIS map was developed to help local
authorities identify house roofs vulnerable to
strong typhoons. This hazard map may also help
residents strengthen their roofs to lessen damage
during typhoons.

Figure: Alternative Wind Zone Map

5.2 DEVELOPMENT OF AN ALTERNATIVE (De Leoz et al, 2014)
REFERENCED WIND ZONE MAP OF THE
PHILIPPINES BY GEV MODELLING AND
KRIGING INTERPOLATION METHOD
by T. DeLeoz, E. Kaw, A. Quidilla& J. Valbuena and L. E. Garciano

The effects of climate change have brought several impacts in the country including the
recent super typhoon Haiyan. To help mitigate the risks due to extreme wind speeds caused
by climate change and changing weather patterns the researchers proposed a wind zone and
contour map. Contour and wind zone maps with 50, 75 and 100 – year return periods were
therefore developed. These maps showed a significant change in the basic wind speed of
the current National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2010). This map can be used
to help mitigate the effects of extreme winds in the future.

5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS OF

RESIDENTIAL HOUSING UNITS by N. Arcilla, J. Ong and A.W.C. Oreta

Structural engineers, aside from considering safety, serviceability and economy must also
address the sustainability of structures. The paper proposes a “Structural Sustainability
Index (SSI).” Five environmental impact parameters of structural systems of houses were
assessed using Life Cycle Assessment tools and a single score called as SSI was derived.
The SSI can be used for ranking houses based on environmental impact and can be used as
a parameter to guide structural engineers in comparing various design alternatives and
selecting “greener designs.”

5.4 A COMPUTER-AIDED SEMI-QUANTITATIVE SEISMIC RISK ASSESSMENT TOOL

TO PROMOTE SAFE SCHOOL BUILDINGS by K. Brizuela and A.W.C. Oreta

A computer-aided earthquake risk management tool that includes a checklist to assess

qualitatively the school building’s assets, seismic hazards and vulnerabilities to the various
 seismic hazards is developed. In the framework, a seismic risk index is utilized which is
defined as the product of hazard, vulnerability and asset. Depending on the index, the
school building may be classified at low, medium or high risk to a specific seismic hazard.
Based in the indices, the school buildings in a specific compound are ranked and prioritized
for further detailed inspections and possible repair or retrofitting.

Figure. Framework for Seismic Risk Analysis

(Brizuela and Oreta 2014)

6. CONCLUSION
Civil engineers must address the following safety and sustainability issues and concerns in
hazard-prone countries to realize ‘safe and sustainable infrastructure development.’
• Disaster risk increases when a growing population and increasing investments are exposed
or located in hazard-prone regions.
• Disaster risk reduction must be embedded in the planning, design, construction and
management of infrastructures to reduce the impact of disasters to people, property and
investments.
• The characteristics of hazards with respect to intensity, duration and frequency especially
those related to climate change have become more unpredictable and ‘non-normal’ such
that these may require higher performance levels in design of infrastructures and systems to
make them more robust and resilient to unexpected events.
• Civil engineers play a major role in disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM)
which is a key to achieve a safe and sustainable infrastructure development.
DRRM is an action that must be done today before the next occurrence of an extreme hazard.
The statement of the head of the UNISDR, Ms Margareta Wahlström during the 2013 Joint
Meeting of the Pacific Platform for Disaster Risk Management and Pacific Climate Change
Roundtable in Fiji is very timely. She said: “Neither disaster nor climate change is an issue for
the future; it’s an issue for today.”
Acknowledgement
The author expresses his appreciation to Dr. Renan Tanhueco (De La Salle University) and Dr. Jerry Velasquez
(UNIDSR) for their comments and inputs during the drafting of this paper.

References:
Banba et al. (2004). “Analysis of Land Use Management for Earthquake Disaster Reduction in the Asia Pacific Region,” 13th
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada, August 1-6, 2004, Paper No. 1337
Brown, C et al. (2011). “Disaster Waste Management: A Review Article.” Waste Management 31: 1085–98.
Cabacungan, Gil (2013). “90% of Malabon disaster funds unused,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sunday, July 7th, 2013,
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net
 Calunsod, R. (2013). “Manila air quality getting worse,” Kyodo News, 04/24/2013, http://www.abs-cbnnews.com
Dimartino, C. (1999) “Picking-up the pieces II,” http://sept11.wasteage.com/ar/waste_picking_pieces_part
DOST Project NOAH, http://www.gov.ph/about-project-noah/
EM-DAT/UNISDR - 2012 Disasters in Numbers, http://www.preventionweb.net/files/31685_factsheet2012.pdf
ESCAP/UNISDR (2012). Reducing Vulnerability and Exposure to Disasters: The Asia-Pacific Disaster Report 2012
Esplanada, J. (2010). “600 bridges to be ‘retrofitted’ for earthquakes,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, 03/02/2010
GAR (2013), Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2013, United Nations
Guillermo Balce, et al. (1994). An Overview of Flood Hazards in the Philippines. Proc. Natural Disaster Mitigation in the
Philippines, pp. 19-30. DOST-PHIVOLCS, QC, Philippines, 1994.
Hajek Petr (2002). “Sustainable Construction through Environment-Based Optimisation,” Proc. IABSE Symposium Melbourne
2002 towards a Better Built Environment
ISDR (2005). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters
Japan ODA. http://www.ph.emb-japan.go.jp/bilateral/oda/qa.htm
MMEIRS Report (2004). Earthquake Impact Reduction Study for Metropolitan Manila, JICA, MMDA, PHIVOLCS.
Kawashima, K. (2012). “Damage Bridges due to the 2011Great East Japan Earthquake,” Joint Conference Proc.
9CUEE/4ACEE, March 6-8, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Maydl, Peter (2004). “Sustainable Engineering: State-of-the-Art and Prospects,” Structural Engineering International, J. of the
IABSE, Vol. 14, No. 13, pp. 176-180.
Maydl, Peter (2002). “Planning Resource Efficient Office and Residential Buildings,” Proc. IABSE Symposium Melbourne
2002 towards a Better Built Environment
Miyamoto, et al. (2009). “The 2008 Sichuan Earthquake,” Structure, Jan, http://www.structuremag.org/article.aspx?articleID=831
NDRRMP (2011). The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan 2011-2028, Final Version, December 2011,
http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/resources/DILG-Resources-2012116-ab6ce90b0d.pdf
One Million Safe Schools and Hospitals Campaign, http://safe-schools-hospitals.net
Ortiz M. et al (2013). “Traffic nightmare: New Normal,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, July 7, 2013
Otto-Zimmermann, K. Ed. (2011). Resilient Cities. Proceedings of the Global Forum 2010, Springer
Preventionweb.net , Disaster Data and Statistics, http://www.preventionweb.net/english/professional/statistics/
Prevetionweb.net, 2012 Disasters in Numbers: http://www.preventionweb.net/files/31685_factsheet2012.pdf
Reed, Sheila (1997). Introduction to Hazards. UNDP Disaster Management Training Programme, 3rd Ed.
Regidor, Jose Regin (2012). “Revisiting the Costs of Traffic Congestion in Metro Manila and Their Implications,” Prof.
Lecture Paper, National Center for Transportation Studies, Institute of Civil Engineering, University of the Philippines
Richardson, John (2004). “The Realities of Sustainability,” Proc. IABSE Symposium, Melbourne
Robin des Bois (2011). “The waste from the Japanese earthquake and tsunami,” Progress Report, www.robindesbois.org
Smith, K. and Petley, D. (2009). Environmental Hazards – Assessing Risk and Reducing Disaster, 5th Ed., Routledge
Tugbobo, B (2009). “The Traffic Congestion Problem in Developing Countries Study of Lagos State, Nigeria: Causes,
Consequences, Costs, and What Can Be Done,?” Transportation Research Forum, 2009 Annual Proceeding, NYS DOT
Thomas, V. et al. (2013) Climate-Related Disasters in Asia and the Pacific. Working Paper, Asian Development Bank.
UNECE. “Climate Change and Sustainable Transport, http://www.unece.org/trans/theme_global_warm.html
UNEP (2012). Managing post-disaster debris: the Japan experience, United Nations Environment Programme
US EPA, “Planning for disaster debris” http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non-hw/muncpl/disaster/dstr-
pdf.pdf#search='disaster%20debris
UNISDR (2012). Making Cities Resilient Report 2012 - My City is Getting Ready! www.unisdr.org/campaign
UNISDR (2008). Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction.
UNF-Sigma XI (2007). Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable, United
Nations Foundation – Sigma XI, February 2007
Webster, Mark D. (2004). “Relevance of Structural Engineers to Sustainable Design of Buildings, “, Structural Engineering
International, J. of the IABSE, Vol. 14, No. 13, pp. 181-185.
Zusman, E. et al. (2012). Low Carbon Transport in Asia: Strategies for Optimizing C0-Benefits, Earthscan, NY

View publication stats