SUPPLY-DEMAND BALANCE

ELAZIG GUNISIGI NEWSPAPER – December 2011   SUPPLY-DEMAND BALANCE   I often try to express that we are not very sensitive about the earthquake…

ELAZIG GUNISIGI NEWSPAPER – December 2011

 

SUPPLY-DEMAND BALANCE

 

I often try to express that we are not very sensitive about the earthquake resistance of our buildings. It’s possible to prove our indifference by the way we only show interest in the issue after earthquakes. Recently, when I reviewed the campaign promises of the political parties during the last general elections, I noticed that, except for some comments related to large cities, none of the parties had any policies regarding urban transformation or the renewal of buildings.

Looking back at Elazığ's election process, it’s clear that our situation is not much different from the rest of the country. At this point, when we consider the supply-demand balance, aren't there situations where the politicians are actually right? Elections are fought to win, not to lose. Promises are made for the issues that citizens demand the most, and projects are developed. However, issues that are not demanded or raised are naturally ignored.

The earthquake surveys conducted by A&G Research Company actually confirm what I am saying. The results of a survey they conducted in 2005 are quite striking. Let’s carefully review the questions and answers from this survey.

QUESTION: After the Düzce earthquake, scientists have made various statements about the possibility of an earthquake affecting Istanbul in the Marmara Sea. How did these statements affect you?

RESULT: When this survey was conducted in 1999, 43.4% of the respondents marked the option “I am uneasy, scared, can’t sleep, my mental health has deteriorated.” When the same survey was repeated in 2005, this number had halved to 21.2%. So, as years pass, even though the issue is very important—indeed, even vital—it seems to be doomed to be forgotten.

A&G Research Company's survey conducted in 44 provinces of Turkey with 3,267 households revealed the public’s approach to earthquakes. According to the survey, 80% of participants stated that they do not check the earthquake safety of a building when buying or renting a house. When asked, "Do you think your building is earthquake-resistant?" only 40% of respondents answered, "Yes, it is resistant." If 40% of buildings in our country are earthquake-resistant, then what is the situation in Van today? If the earthquake resistance of the building stock is this inadequate, why do we remain so relaxed?

The survey also revealed that the average age of buildings in Turkey is 22 years. When participants were asked, "How old is your building?" 22.3% said they lived in buildings constructed after the 1999 earthquake. 19.5% lived in buildings that were 13-19 years old, 25.8% in 20-29-year-old buildings, 19.3% in 30-39-year-old buildings, and 13.1% in buildings 40 years or older. In metropolitan areas, the average age of the buildings people live in was found to be 24 years, and in Istanbul, it was 26.3 years.

It seems that people believe they are safe in buildings constructed after 1999. But were the concrete quality, labor, and inspection of buildings fixed by the 17th of August 1999 after the collapse of buildings in the Düzce earthquake? The start of the application of the earthquake regulations, not the introduction of the regulations themselves, marks the real turning point. This date varies in each city, and unfortunately, for many places, it could only be 2011.

If the press follows issues like construction, labor safety, and earthquakes with high awareness, we will feel the necessity of taking precautions in our very bones.

Tragic Incidents: