Abstract
The Jordan Rift Valley is a high-risk low-occurrence zone for earthquakes, with documented incidences within the last millennium causing widespread destruction. This research examines the implications of the immediate risks for earthquake readiness. Due to data availability, we focus on Israel’s readiness for earthquakes and compare our findings with a cursory review of readiness in the proximate countries. Readiness refers to mitigation and preparedness (before), response (during) and recovery (after). The immediate and palpable threats in the region are wars and terrorism, and our hypothesis is that governance culture in this volatile region is geared toward capacities and expertise which have been developed to address national security threats, characterized by emphasis on quick response. We expect to see a bias toward immediate response with regard to earthquake readiness as well, with attention also paid to preparedness. Accordingly, we hypothesize that other aspects of readiness, such as retrofitting of buildings and infrastructure in the mitigation category, lag behind in countries surrounding the Jordan Rift. To test this, we develop and apply a regulatory system scan and assessment methodology to the Israeli case. The methodology includes structured mapping and evaluation of the relevant regulatory system as well as actual policy outputs. The process includes inputs from policy makers, experts, and stakeholders. Findings show that the country’s earthquake readiness regime is indeed heavily biased toward immediate response which is continually advancing and improving, managed by security-related bodies. In contrast, mitigation efforts are deficient and little is being done to improve the situation. A survey of readiness efforts of other countries along the Jordan Rift points to a similar situation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Shmueli et al. (2018, p. 83) provide the following definitions: disruptive friction occurs de jure when more than one governmental unit has the legal power to control a particular matter pursuant to purposes that may be in tension with the other, and de facto when one governmental unit uses its power (as a regulator or an actor) in ways that do not align with the regulation or action of another governmental unit (or of itself). From the perspective of those subject to regulation, disruptive friction occurs when the state legal apparatus or its actions generate diverging instructions, criteria or procedures to be followed. Such friction among governmental agencies may lead to vague or unclear regulation (as general standards may be resorted to in order to address the concerns of the various state agencies involved), leading to sub-optimal or 'checkered' regulation, addressing some matters but not others as a result of ad hoc compromises among the various governmental entities.
Gaps exist when a social challenge is not within the legal purview of any governmental unit, when the legal framework is incomplete, or when the regulatory powers are not used, or used in a manner that falls significantly short of achieving the purpose for which the governmental units were granted legal powers.
The map (in Hebrew) is available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5dLxu7Spgj1cXFVdHNBZ2tBaGM/view?usp=sharing.
The Yemini civil war broke out in 2015 and since then there is no effective government.
References
Akyuz HS, Altunel E, Karabacak V, Yalciner CC (2006) Historical earthquake activity of the northern part of the Dead Sea Fault Zone, southern Turkey. Tectonophysics 426(3):281–293
Allen RM, Baer G, Clinton J, Hamiel Y, Hofstetter R, Pinsky V, Ziv A, Zollo A (2012) Earthquake early warning for Israel: recommended implementation strategy. Israel geological survey report. GSI/26/2012. The Geophysical Institute, Lod, Israel, rep. 500/676/12
Alquis AE (2007) Alfred E. Alquis seismic safety commission: annual report. https://ssc.ca.gov/forms_pubs/cssc_2008-01_annual_report.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Amiran DHK, Arieh E, Turcotte T (1994) Earthquakes in Israel and adjacent areas: macroseismic observations since 100 B.C.E. Israel Explor J 44:260–305
Arieh E (1985) Catalog of significant earthquakes in Israel and adjacent areas (31BC-19OOCE). Israel, Institute of Petroleum Research and Geophysics, rep., Z2/
Atlan M (2015) regulatory impact assessment: governmental handbook. Jerusalem, Israel: Prime Minister’s Office. http://regulation.gov.il/uploads/reports/7/RIAGUIDE_opt.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Ben Menahem A (1979) Earthquake catalogue for the Middle East, 92 BC–1980 AD. Boll Geofis Teor Appl 21:245–310
Brown AC, Stern J, Tenenbaum BW, Gencer D (2006) Handbook for evaluating infrastructure regulatory systems. World Bank Publications, Washington
Carroll P (2010) Does regulatory impact assessment lead to better policy? Policy Soc 29(2):113–122
De Francesco F (2012) Diffusion of regulatory impact analysis in OECD and EU member states. Comp Polit Stud 45(10):1277–1305
EMI (Earthquake Megacities Initiative) (2009) Amman disaster risk management master plan framework. http://www.preventionweb.net/files/17553_ammandrmmpfinal.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
FEMA (Federal Emergency Response Agency) (2002) State and local mitigation planning: getting started (VER 1.0) how-to guide. https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1521-20490-3966/howto1.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Hertin J, Jacob K, Pesch U, Pacchi C (2009) The production and use of knowledge in regulatory impact assessment–an empirical analysis. For Policy Econ 11(5):413–421
HFA (Hyogo Framework for Action) (2015) National progress report on the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (2013–2015)
IBRD (The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank) (2014) Natural disasters in the Middle East and North Africa: a regional overview. Washington, DC
Kurzon I, Wetzler N (2015) Defining and mapping capable tectonic sources for seismic hazard estimation in Israel: general analysis and specific focus for nuclear power plants in Israel. http://www.gsi.gov.il/_uploads/ftp/GsiReport/2015/Kurzon-I-GSI-21-2015.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Levi-Faur D (2005) The global diffusion of regulatory capitalism. Ann Am Acad Polit Sci 598:12–32
Levi-Faur D (2011) Regulatory networks and regulatory agencification: towards a single European regulatory space. J Eur Public Policy 18(6):808–827
Lobel O (2004) The renew deal: the fall of regulation and the rise in governance in contemporary legal thought. Minn Law Rev 89:342–470
Lobel O (2012) New governance as regulatory governance. In: Levi-Faur D (ed) The Oxford handbook on governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 65–82
Lundin M, Öberg P (2014) Expert knowledge use and deliberation in local policy making. Policy Sci 47(1):25–49
Melhem A (2017) Palestinian task force seeks to improve disaster management. Al-Monitor (31.3.2017). http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2017/03/palestine-disaster-risk-management-center.html. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Montpetit É (2008) Policy design for legitimacy: expert knowledge, citizens, time and inclusion in the United Kingdom’s biotechnology sector. Public Adm 86(1):259–277
National Academies, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (2012). Disaster resilience: a national imperative. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
NRC (National Research Council) (2003) National earthquake hazard reduction program at twenty-five years: accomplishments and challenges, a summary of a workshop. National Academies Press, Washington
NSCEP (National Steering Committee for Earthquake Preparedness—Prime Minister’s Office) (2011) A framework for preparedness for destructive earthquakes in Israel. Jerusalem
NSW (New South Wales Government) (2016) NSW Guide to Better Regulation. Department of Finance, Services and Innovation, Sydney. http://productivity.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-05/Guide_to_Better_Regulation-October_2016.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2005) Guiding Principles for Regulatory and Quality Performance https://www.oecd.org/regreform/sectors/37318586.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2010) Methodology for assessing procurement systems (MAPS) http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/45181522.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2011) OECD regulatory indicators questionnaire (2009). 4th meeting of regulatory policy committee. The OECD conference centre, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/47829549.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
OIRA (Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs) (The White House) (2016) Circular A-4, regulatory impact analysis: a primer. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/inforeg/inforeg/regpol/circular-a-4_regulatory-impact-analysis-a-primer.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Ouchi F (2004) A literature review on the use of expert opinion in probabilistic risk analysis. World bank policy research working paper 3201. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2004/04/15/000009486_20040415130301/additional/115515322_20041117173031.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Press VS (2017) Israeli-Palestinian-Jordanian earthquake training underway. Israel 21c. https://www.israel21c.org/israeli-palestinian-jordanian-earthquake-training-underway/. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Radaelli C, Fritsch O (2012) Measuring regulatory performance: evaluating regulatory management tools and programmes. OECD (expert paper no. 2). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=A04430CE910B38C37EA4AD37F53F33D5?doi=10.1.1.398.2411&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Rittel HWJ, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–159
Rodrigo D (2005) Regulatory impact assessment in OECD countries, challenges from developing countries. South Asian third high level investment roundtable, Dhaka, Bangladesh. http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/35258511.pdf
SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) (2012) A strategic framework for the scientific advisory group for emergencies. Cabinet Office Part of Emergency planning, UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/scientific-advisory-group-for-emergencies-sage. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Segal E, Negev M, Feitelson E, Zaychik D (2017) Policy packages for retrofitting buildings in Israel against earthquakes. Nat Hazards 89:497–519
Sheikh K, Saligram P, Prasad L (2013) Mapping the regulatory architecture for health care delivery in mixed health systems in low-and middle-income countries. Health policy and finance knowledge hub, working paper series (26)
Shmueli D, Ben Gal M, Segal E, Reichman A, Feitelson E (2018) How can regulatory systems be assessed? The case of earthquake preparedness in Israel. Evaluation 25(1):80–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389018803235
SPUR (San Francisco Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association) (2012) Safe enough to stay. San Francisco. http://www.spur.org/publications/spur-report/2012-02-01/safe-enough-stay. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
SSC (Seismic Safety Commission) (2007) California earthquake loss reduction plan, 2006–2011
TRI (Torens Reslience Institute) (2012) Developing a model and tool to measure community disaster resilience: final report and community disaster resilience scorecard toolkit http://www.flinders.edu.au/centres-files/TRI/pdfs/trireport.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
UNDP & IFRC (United Nations Development Programme and International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent) (2014) Effective law and regulation for disaster risk reduction: a multi-country report
UNISDR (United Nation’s Office for Disaster Risk Reduction) (2005) Hyogo. Framework for action 2005–2015: building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters
UNISDR (United Nation’s Office for Disaster Risk Reduction) (2014) Arab region synthesis report: consultations on the post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/42736. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
UNISDR (United Nation’s Office for Disaster Risk Reduction) (2015) Implementing the hyogo framework for action in the Arab region—regional synthesis report 2005–2015. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/42725. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
United Kingdom Treasury (2003) The green book appraisal and evaluation in central government: treasury guidance. TSO, Norwich
Wiener JB (2007) Better regulation in Europe. Curr Legal Probl 59:447–518
World Bank (2016) Financial sector assessment program (FSAP). http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/financial-sector-assessment-program#1. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2015) Bulgaria: financial sector assessment program detailed assessment of observance. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2015/10/26/090224b08316e83e/3_0/Rendered/PDF/Bulgaria000Det00banking0supervision.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Zohar M (2016) A city hit by an earthquake: an HGIS approach to reconstructing the damage in Tiberias (Israel) in 1837. Int J Inf Syst. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2016.1188933. Accessed 7 Aug 2019
Zohar M, Salamon A, Rubin R (2016) Reappraised list of historical earthquakes in Israel and its close surroundings. J Seismol 20(3):971–985
Acknowledgements
This research was undertaken at the Minerva Center for the Rule of Law under Extreme Conditions and funded by the Israeli Ministry of Science and Technology.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shmueli, D.F., Segal, E., Ben Gal, M. et al. Earthquake readiness in volatile regions: the case of Israel. Nat Hazards 98, 405–423 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03698-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-019-03698-x