UPSC DAW Mains Answer Writing 17th July 2025

UPSC DAW Mains Answer Writing 17th July 2025

Question

In the backdrop of increasing seismic activity in and around the Indian subcontinent, examine the gaps in India’s current approach to seismic resilience. What structural, institutional, and policy-level measures are required to mitigate the risks posed by earthquakes, especially in high-risk urban and Himalayan regions? (15 marks, 250 words) 

Model Answer

Introduction:  

  • India lies at the confluence of the Indian and Eurasian tectonic plates, making it highly vulnerable to earthquakes. Around 59% of Indian landmass is prone to moderate to severe seismic hazard (NDMA, 2023). The recent Delhi tremor (July 10, 2025, M 4.4) and the 7.7 magnitude Myanmar quake (March 2025) reaffirm the urgent need for seismic resilience, especially in densely populated and urbanised regions like the Indo-Gangetic Plain and the Himalayas. 

 Gaps in India’s Seismic Resilience Approach: 

  • Structural Gaps:  

  • Non-compliance with seismic codes: Over 80% of buildings in Delhi were built without following IS 1893:2016. 

  • Outdated infrastructure: High-rise buildings in Delhi and Guwahati lack ductile detailing, shear walls, or base isolation systems. 

  • Liquefaction-prone soils (e.g., East Delhi, Brahmaputra plains) are often ignored in foundation design. 

  • Institutional Gaps: 

  • Weak enforcement mechanisms: DDA and ULBs often do not ensure code compliance, especially in informal housing. 

  • Limited coordination: Disaster management remains fragmented between NDMA, NCS, BIS, and state DMAs. 

  • Insufficient retrofitting incentives: Lack of fiscal or regulatory support for retrofitting old buildings. 

  • Policy-Level Gaps: 

  • Inadequate zoning clarity: Seismic zoning maps are outdated; last revised in 2002 by BIS. 

  • Neglect of Himalayan seismic gap: No comprehensive strategy to address the build-up of tectonic strain in the central Himalayas. 

  • Reactive approach: Most measures are post-disaster relief-oriented rather than pre-disaster mitigation-focused. 

 Measures to Enhance Seismic Resilience:  

  • A. Structural Solutions: 

  • Mandatory compliance with IS 1893:2016 & IS 13920 for new constructions. 

  • Retrofitting using steel jacketing, FRP wrapping, or base isolators in old buildings (NDMA Guidelines, 2007). 

  • Use of deep pile foundations in soft soil zones (e.g., East Delhi, Guwahati). 

  • Avoiding construction in floodplains or known liquefaction zones. 

  • B. Institutional Strengthening: 

  • Empower local bodies with trained structural engineers and third-party inspection systems. 

  • Real-time early warning systems via IndiaQuake app and seismic instrumentation in critical zones. 

  • Expand community-based disaster preparedness (e.g., Gujarat’s post-Bhuj community response model). 

  • C. Policy-Level Interventions: 

  • Update seismic microzonation maps (NCS, 2021 recommends 1:10,000 scale for urban centres). 

  • Include seismic resilience in urban planning laws, building bye-laws, and smart city missions. 

  • NITI Aayog should create a National Retrofitting Fund (~₹50,000 crore/year as estimated by IIT-Roorkee). 

  • Incentivise seismic-resilient construction via property tax rebates or interest subvention. 

 Case Studies:  

  • Bhuj Earthquake (2001): Over 20,000 deaths due to poor construction practices and non-engineered housing. 

  • Nepal Earthquake (2015): Magnitude 7.8 event exposed Kathmandu's unreinforced masonry risks, echoed in Delhi. 

  • Bangkok (2025): Adopted high-strength concrete (30–40 MPa) and revised codes post-2007, limiting collapse in 2025 tremors. 

  • Japan: Tokyo’s use of base isolation and building dampers in residential complexes offers a global model. 

Conclusion:  

  • India stands at a seismic crossroads, both geographically and institutionally. With tectonic pressures building in the Himalayas and rapid urbanisation amplifying vulnerabilities, seismic resilience is no longer optional. A paradigm shift from reactive to proactive disaster governance, underpinned by strict code enforcement, resilient urban design, and community participation, is imperative to protect lives and livelihoods.