On Feb. 12, a magnitude 4 earthquake hit northern Taiwan. Since the quake’s epicenter was in Taipei’s Shilin District (士林), a rare occurrence, and occurred after midnight, it caused much public panic. The Ministry of the Interior therefore re-emphasized that 66,000 old buildings in the city have poor earthquake resistance, taking this opportunity to promote urban renewal for the sake of disaster prevention.
The problem is that since the Geology Act (地質法) was passed in late 2010, the government has used the excuse that it is trying to stabilize the real-estate market and avoid creating public panic to ignore Article 5 of the act, which states: “The central competent authority shall publicly announce areas with special geologic scenery, special geological environments, or potential geological hazards to be geologically sensitive areas.”
Why is the government only promoting urban renewal focused on disaster prevention? Is it helping construction companies to profit through urban renewal of old buildings with a low floor-area ratio?
There were many explanations as to the cause of the earthquake. Although the Central Weather Bureau immediately said that the quake was a stress adjustment that occurred as a result of lava cooling, most academics and experts disagreed, because the bureau did not provide concrete data to back up its statement. Disaster prevention is crucial to the safety of Taiwanese lives and wealth, and it is therefore a matter of great significance. However, it is necessary to clarify the causes of disasters so that the government can adapt its response correctly.
Whenever an earthquake has occurred in recent years, the government has tried to promote urban renewal to improve disaster prevention, targeting old buildings with a low floor-area ratio.
Looking back at the magnitude 7.3 921 Earthquake on Sept. 21, 1999, and the magnitude 6.8 earthquake on March 31, 2002, they both caused serious damage across the nation. Further examination of the types of buildings that collapsed or were damaged in the earthquakes, especially old buildings in Taipei and New Taipei City, found that most damaged buildings were 10 to 20 years old, with 10 to 14 stories. On the contrary, the ministry claimed that 30-to-50-year-old buildings were in most need of urban renewal to improve disaster prevention, but such buildings actually had better earthquake resistance since they were lower and usually built side-by-side. As a result, the damage to such buildings was insignificant.
Urban renewal to improve disaster prevention should be supported. As Article 7 of the Urban Renewal Act (都市更新條例) clearly states, to prevent major disasters, “The municipal, county [city] authority should designate the renewal area based on the existing situation to draw or revise the urban renewal plan.”
The act serves as the legal basis for urban renewal for disaster prevention. The problem is that we do not know in which areas natural disasters are more likely to strike.
Obviously, the basis for evaluating this issue lies in the geographic conditions of an area, instead of the age of a building. Take the Taipei 101 building for example: If we move the building to the top of the Chelungpu (車籠埔) fault in central Taiwan, even a strong building like that would be unable to withstand a big earthquake capable of moving a mountain. For example, the almost century-old Presidential Office Building withstood both earthquakes better than all the 10-to-20-year-old buildings. It is thus evident that the age of a building is not the problem.
It could be a problem if a building is poorly constructed with inferior materials, but the real problem still lies in the geographic conditions of the area.
Under such circumstances, if the government truly and sincerely wants to protect lives and wealth rather than enrich construction companies, the Cabinet should first urge the Ministry of Economic Affairs to publicly announce geologically sensitive areas promptly in accordance with Article 5 of the Geology Act. Next, local governments should designate renewal areas in accordance with Article 7 of the Urban Renewal Act — especially geologically sensitive areas with larger concentrations of buildings. The government should also take the lead in planning for large-scale public urban renewal projects to win public trust. By doing so, it would be able to avoid criticism.
Chan Shun-kuei is a lawyer.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US