Promoting Seismic Safety: Guidance for Advocates 

FEMA 474 / September 2005 


Sponsored by FEMA

Developed by 
Daniel Alesch
Peter May
Robert Olshansky
William Petak
Kathleen Tierney

Associated with 
The Mid-America Earthquake Center
The Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research
The Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center


Preface

This project represents a collaboration among social science and policy 
researchers at the three Earthquake Engineering Research Centers: 
--Mid-America Earthquake Center (MAE) 
--Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (MCEER) 
--Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER)

FEMA asked researchers at the three centers to distill the findings of previous 
social science and policy research in order to provide guidance to seismic 
safety advocates. Our hope is that the lessons of prior research will help 
advocates be more effective at promoting seismic safety actions.

To reach potential advocates, FEMA will provide these materials to partner 
organizations. Such organizations can then adapt the materials and deliver the 
content in a relevant format to appropriate members. This is not intended to be 
a static document for one-time publication and distribution by FEMA.

The full version of Promoting Seismic Safety: Guidance for Advocates is a 200-
plus page report that consists of two parts: Part One is a guidance document for 
advocates; Part Two is a set of background papers developed by the authors as 
part of the project. This abridged version of the publication includes the 
guidance document but not the background papers.

Adobe® Portable Document Format (PDF) files for both the guidance document and 
background papers can be downloaded from the website of the Multidisciplinary 
Center for Earthquake Engineering Research at http://mceer.buffalo.edu. To 
access the PDF files, click on the Publications tab at the top of the page or in 
the left margin. On the Publications page, click on Online Catalog link in the 
left margin, which will take you to the Searching and Ordering Publications 
page. Follow the instructions on this page and a series of links will take you a 
page that allows downloading the document and background papers in PDF form or 
ordering a printed copy of the full publication. PDF files for the guidance 
document are also available on the FEMA website. Go to www.fema.gov and enter 
“Promoting Seismic Safety” in the search blank.

GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR ADVOCATES 
This is a collection of concise tips for advocates, organized into the following 
topics: 
--Successful seismic safety advocacy 
--Earthquake basics 
--The ABCs of seismic building codes 
--Policies and legislation 
--Appearing before committees 
--Informing and persuading 
--Partnerships for seismic safety 
--Working with experts 
--Effective risk communication 
--Using the media 
--Further reading

[Sidebar]
Note: sidebars appear throughout this document to explain terms or concepts 
readers may not have encountered before. 
[End of sidebar]

BACKGROUND PAPERS 
Six papers were developed by the project authors to support and amplify the 
advice to advocates in the guidance document. 

--Partnership Plan (Peter May). In order to reach an audience of potential 
seismic safety advocates, FEMA needs to work with partner organizations to 
deliver the information in ways appropriate to their members. This paper 
describes a plan for accomplishing such partnerships. 
 
--Examples of Successful Seismic Safety Advocacy (Robert Olshansky). This paper 
describes—and draws lessons from—advocacy successes in Arkansas, California, 
Missouri, New York, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. It includes personal stories 
of the advocates involved in these successful actions. 
 
--Formulating and Evaluating Policy Alternatives (Daniel Alesch and William 
Petak). Drawing on two detailed cases—abatement of unreinforced masonry 
buildings in Los Angeles and Long Beach, California, and the 994 amendment to 
the California Hospital Facilities Seismic Safety Act (SB 953)—this paper 
presents a number of lessons on making and implementing policies. It concludes 
with strategies for devising effective policies and programs. 

--Gaining Attention (Daniel Alesch and William Petak). Summarizing relevant 
public policy literature, this paper explores ways to identify appropriate 
decision-makers relevant to the problem. It provides advice on gaining the 
attention of persons, organizations, and institutions that can make a difference 
in reducing the risks to life and property from earthquakes. 

--Communicating Risk (Kathleen Tierney). This paper provides guidance that will 
enable advocates to craft effective risk communication messages and campaigns, 
deal with issues that are unique to earthquake risk communication, and avoid 
mistakes in communicating clearly about the need for seismic safety. 

--Mobilizing Support (Kathleen Tierney). Picking up where the previous paper 
left off, this one gives advocates a better understanding of how to motivate 
action in support of loss reduction efforts. Presented here are concepts and 
strategies needed to persuade others to engage in mitigation activities. 

The five authors developed the materials through a series of meetings from 
February 2002 through February 2003. We also acknowledge the active 
participation of our FEMA project sponsor, Elizabeth Lemersal. Sarah Nathe 
edited the final version of the guidance document. Finally, we thank the 
following seismic safety advocates who joined us at some of our meetings and/or 
provided helpful comments along the way: Mark Benthien, Lind Gee, Marjorie 
Greene, Bill Holmes, Sarah Nathe, Tom O’Rourke, Chris Poland, Richard Roths, 
Susan Tubbesing, and Maria Vorel. 


Introduction 

Promoting seismic safety can be challenging because people seem indifferent to 
its benefits or decision-makers dismiss good ideas about ways to make buildings 
and communities more resistant to the damaging effects of earthquakes. Advocates 
work hard and care deeply, yet often feel that their efforts are ignored. Given 
these frustrations, advocates sometimes give up, or wait for another day. This 
resource kit is meant to inspire all advocates to keep working toward their 
goal. The briefs assembled here distill what we have learned—through research 
and experience over the last 40 years—about promoting seismic safety in the 
United States.

We have used a very broad definition of “advocate.” Advocates can be almost 
anyone: people whose jobs involve public safety; design professionals who want 
to make a difference; those who work in organizations with missions to increase 
seismic safety; and citizen-activists who have a personal stake in earthquake 
safety. Many potential advocates do not think of themselves as such because they 
are not trying to change seismic safety policy. But seismic safety can be 
increased at levels as various as design and building professional practices, 
planning commission and special district procedures, and implementation of 
public safety programs. People who try to increase the adoption and enforcement 
of seismic building codes or assess the earthquake safety of schools are in fact 
seismic safety advocates.

Across the United States, advocates have improved seismic safety in areas with 
moderate to very high degrees of seismic risk by arguing for reduction of future 
losses in damaging earthquakes, and by calling attention to the economic and 
social vulnerability of their community to the losses an earthquake could 
inflict. Especially important to consider are buildings that are built to out-
of-date and inferior codes, where people nonetheless live and work.

Successful advocates point out another rationale for seismic safety—more 
earthquake resilience in highways, power and utility systems, buildings, and 
communities means increased resilience to other types of damaging events, both 
natural and human-caused. Talking about seismic issues often has the benefit of 
raising questions about the condition of facilities or the readiness to respond 
to any extreme event.

[Sidebar]
What Is Seismic Safety? 
Earthquakes damage structures--buildings, roads and bridges, utility and 
communications systems—and those damaged structures kill and injure people and 
cost a great deal to fix. And while the structures are not functioning, the 
businesses that rely on them either fail or face great financial hardship. 
Seismic safety advocates attempt to reduce all earthquake losses in various 
ways. Structures can be strengthened to resist shaking, either when they are 
built or later in their lives, or they can be sited in areas less subject to 
violent shaking. But increasing seismic safety requires knowledge of the 
earthquake hazard in a community or area, an understanding of how to reduce 
structural damages, and a willingness to spend the money and time necessary to 
do so. Decisions to invest in seismic safety are made by individuals, private 
and public sector organizations, and governments, so the goal of seismic safety 
is served by risk education, community activism, and political activism. 
[End of Sidebar]

[Graphic description of three different photos]
Loma Prieta Earthquake, CA, October 18, 1989 (left to right) – The first story 
of this three-story apartment building located in the Marina District of San 
Francisco failed when ground shaking caused liquefaction of the soil on which 
the structure was built. (D. Perkins, U.S. Geological survey) Fifty-one spans of 
this double-decker freeway collapsed in Oakland, killing 41 motorists. (E.V. 
Leyendecker, U.S. Geological survey) Northridge Earthquake, CA, January 17, 1994 
– A broken gas line on Balboa Boulevard in Los Angeles caused this fire. (M. 
Rymer, U.S. Geological Survey) 
[end of graphic description]

[Sidebar]
The Seismic Safety Hit Parade 
Seismic safety projects are as various as the communities at risk to earthquake 
damage, but some projects are common to all areas in the United States because 
they are critical steps in improving understanding of earthquake risk and 
inspiring a commitment to loss reduction. You can’t undertake all of these at 
once, and may not need to invest the same level of energy in each one, but 
sooner or later your journey to increased seismic safety will require you to 
develop projects in each of the 10 areas below. 

1. Improved understanding of earthquakes—learn about quakes from local, 
regional, state, or Federal earth scientists. 
2. Comprehensive analysis of local risk—learn about how quakes damage the built 
environment from local engineers, emergency managers, academics, state and 
Federal government experts, and risk analysis firms. 
3. Wide familiarity with the many ways to reduce risk—structural engineers, 
geotechnical engineers, academic researchers, engineering associations, and 
governmental agencies can explain and recommend the best earthquake-resistant 
design and construction techniques. 
4. Clarified costs and benefits of reducing risk, who pays, and who benefits 
before the quake and after it. 
5. Broad communication of elements in items 1 through 4, above, to the 
community. 
6. Campaigns to persuade specific audiences that something can and should be 
done. 
7. Wide cooperation among individuals and groups to decide which losses are most 
important to reduce and how best to do so. 
8. Proposal of new practices, procedures, or policies to various groups. 
9. Strategies for achieving official adoption by governments and organizations 
of new policies and procedures that reduce risk. 
10. After adoption, it is still necessary to promote, monitor, and enforce 
actual implementation of policies and procedures because real people in actual 
situations may not understand why it is important to comply. 
[End of Sidebar]

The premise underlying the following suggestions is that seismic safety 
advocates come in many forms and with many levels of knowledge and experience. 
Each of the following briefs may be more relevant for some advocates than for 
others. The first three briefs present concepts to know before starting to talk 
about seismic safety. The second three discuss groups to target in working to 
improve seismic safety. And the final four briefs describe tools available to 
seismic safety advocates. 
--Successful Seismic Safety Advocacy 
--Informing and Persuading 
--Earthquake Basics 
--Partnerships for Seismic Safety 
--The ABCs of Seismic Building Codes 
--Working With Experts 
--Policies and Legislation 
--Effective Risk Communication 
--Appearing Before Committees 
--Using the Media 

[Graphic description]Damage to older woodframe houses has been widespread in 
recent U.S. earthquakes. Newer woodframe houses built to seismic building codes 
usually do not have such damage. 
[End of graphic description]


Successful Seismic Safety Advocacy 

Though seismic safety advocates are a diverse group, there is much similarity in 
the steps they take to succeed in their work. Aspiring advocates can distill a 
few basic lessons from their tried and true strategies. The most important 
lesson is that individuals can make a difference. The second is that collectives 
can leverage the power of individuals. Four additional golden rules complement 
the first two. 

BE PERSISTENT, YET PATIENT 

Persistence. It takes time to introduce the importance of seismic safety to the 
public and to decision-makers. Repeated efforts are necessary to make the case 
that earthquakes are a threat and that cost-effective actions can be taken to 
reduce the threat. Those interested in ensuring that their community takes steps 
before an earthquake must convince skeptics that a serious problem exists, that 
something can be done about it, and that the solution is affordable. All this 
requires persistence. 

Patience. Try to take the long view, and remember that earthquakes are a long-
term issue. All successful seismic safety initiatives have had their ups and 
downs in the process of public debate. Each step, no matter how small, brings 
you closer to the goal, even if it takes a while to get there. Be incremental. 

HAVE A CLEAR MESSAGE 

Identify the problem and its solution. In plain language tell your audience what 
the problem is and how your initiative will solve it. If they do not understand 
the problem, they will take no interest in the solution. 

Propose specific solutions. Propose actions that your audience can endorse and 
accomplish. Specific solutions are more likely to be adopted and carried out. If 
the solution is clear, detailed, and specific, decision-makers can readily adopt 
it when the opportunity arises. 

Have a message that is clear and consistent. The message must be easily 
comprehended and remembered. If it is too complicated, your audience will 
neither remember it nor act on it. 

[Sidebar]
Who Is the Public?
There is no such thing as “the public.” There are many publics within a 
community—individuals, small groups, and large institutions, each with self-
identity and self interest. Depending on the outcome you’re working for, various
audiences must be educated and persuaded. The media can help you reach many 
groups and individuals, but at the same time, the media are themselves a group 
in need of education. At community meetings you will meet other audiences. Just 
as the public is not one thing, it is not static. The groups and individuals who 
can support your project will change over time, but a successful advocate will 
change also to ensure that the seismic safety project and goals remain viable.
[End of Sidebar]

[Sidebar]
Who Is a Decision-Maker? 

Anyone who decides to do something that will reduce future earthquake losses is 
a decision-maker of interest to you. There are decision-makers in governments—
local, county, state, and Federal. They may be elected officials or career civil 
servants. In private companies (small and large), decisions are made by owners, 
executives, or boards of directors. In public organizations such as schools and 
community service agencies, there may be decision-makers at many levels. In 
schools, for example, seismic safety decisions can be made by teachers, PTA 
members, principals, and superintendents. It may not be evident in every case 
who the critical decision-maker is, so you may have to look higher, lower,
or sideways in order to find the person who will help you. Leaders of families 
make decisions for or against seismic safety, as do single people living alone.
[End of Sidebar]

Repeat the message. Find multiple opportunities to present your message to both 
the narrow and broader audiences you seek to influence—in print, in public 
presentations, at public meetings, and to the media. Each time you repeat the 
message, more people will remember it. It is especially effective to present the 
message after significant earthquakes in your own region or even in other parts 
of the world because then people are more aware of the actual damages 
earthquakes can inflict. 

UNDERSTAND THE BIG PICTURE

Appreciate the audience’s point of view. For most people, earthquakes are not an 
important concern. Understand your audience’s current knowledge and perception 
of the risk. Explain the importance of seismic safety in a way that is 
meaningful to them. Remember that citizens and elected officials must be 
convinced that reasonable steps can be taken to protect against the earthquake 
threat at reasonable cost or they will not act.

Identify a good audience for your effort. Rather than trying to reach all the 
people all the time, focus your energy on a small set of people inside or 
outside of government who can understand the earthquake risk and commit 
themselves to action. They will then influence larger groups to reduce future 
losses. 

Link seismic safety to other issues. Point out how seismic safety also addresses 
other community issues, such as the safety of schoolchildren, protection against 
other hazards, fiscal health of the local government, and long-term 
sustainability of the local economy. In particular, show how seismic safety can 
preserve businesses and public sector organizations, and thereby stabilize the 
tax base or ensure the continuity of government and educational institutions. 
Those are important day-to-day public issues. Similarly, proposals for enhanced 
earthquake safety will be more acceptable if they are part of a multi-hazard 
protection package. It is possible to design and implement precautions that 
protect against many perils: high winds, storms and storm surges, willful acts 
of destruction, and industrial accidents. 

Identify potential opponents. Various groups will come forward with arguments 
against seismic safety actions. Identify these opponents early on, meet with 
them, and try to understand their perspective. At least be familiar with their 
arguments. Chances for success will increase if you can involve them, develop 
consensus solutions, and gain their support. 

The media are your friends, but use them wisely. The media have the power to 
communicate your message widely. They can also gain the attention of decision 
makers. Before approaching the media, be sure that you have a clear message as 
well as broad support from local seismic safety professionals. 

WORK WITH OTHERS 

Create partnerships and build coalitions. Identify potential allies and partners 
who can gain from promoting seismic safety. The support of other organizations 
and individuals can be the critical difference between success and failure. 
Start with your own networks, and then reach out to other relevant professionals 
and community organizations. Be sure that partners gain appropriate recognition 
and praise. 

Personal contacts are vital. Develop friendly, trusting relationships among the 
people you must work with, including your allies, potential opponents, and 
decision-makers. Make yourself known as reasonable, credible, and responsible. 
Know whom to call, and when to call them. Organizations are important, but they 
consist of individuals who make decisions about whether or not to take action. 

Make seismic safety efforts permanent. Try to develop organizations, procedures, 
statutes, or regulations that institutionalize seismic safety. These can range 
from state seismic safety advisory committees, to city building code commissions 
or professional organizations. Seismic safety advisory committees are 
particularly valuable, because they can extend your efforts, maintain public 
awareness of seismic safety, increase credibility of the message, develop and 
promote solutions, and build on previous successes. Formal groups frequently 
bring with them some financial resources, and even modest funding for a new 
organization or process can provide powerful leverage. 


Earthquake Basics 

There are characteristics of earthquakes and their risks that you must be clear 
about yourself before you start talking about them to others. Over the years, 
earth scientists, engineers, and others who spend much of their time studying 
earthquakes have developed a set of terms relating to earthquakes that have very 
precise meanings, but that are often confusing or meaningless to those outside 
the field. This brief highlights some of the key concepts that commonly arise in 
discussions about seismic safety. 

EVERY EARTHQUAKE IS UNIQUE 

Each earthquake is a unique combination of characteristics: location, magnitude, 
depth, type of fault, mechanism of fault rupture, and direction of rupture. In 
addition, the soils in the area determine how fast seismic waves move, how 
quickly their energy dissipates, and whether or not they focus on particular 
sites. Thus, although we like to draw lessons by comparing one earthquake to 
another, these comparisons can only go so far. 

MAGNITUDE IS THE USUAL MEASURE OF AN EARTHQUAKE 

The magnitude of an earthquake describes the absolute size of the event. It is a 
measure of the energy released by the earthquake. Generally, higher magnitude 
earthquakes have greater shaking intensities at the epicenter, shake for a 
longer time, and affect a larger area. Several magnitude scales are currently in 
use, and they are all different, especially for larger earthquakes. The well-
known Richter scale is one magnitude scale, but seismologists have increasingly 
begun to favor the moment magnitude scale because it gives more reliable results 
for larger earthquakes and those more distant from recording devices. 

INTENSITY IS ANOTHER WAY TO DESCRIBE AN EARTHQUAKE’S SIZE 

Earthquake intensity scales qualitatively describe the effects of ground shaking 
rather than the energy released. While an earthquake is described by a single 
magnitude, it will produce a range of shaking intensities across an area. 
Because the intensities describe what the shaking feels like and how it affects 
different types of structures, they are terms that most people understand. In 
the United States, we use a scale that ranges from Intensity I (“Not felt except 
by a very few under especially favorable conditions”) to Intensity XII (“Damage 
total”). Intensity is usually greatest near the earthquake epicenter, and less 
away from the epicenter, but it can increase in certain areas of poor soil. 

EARTHQUAKES OF SIMILAR MAGNITUDES MAY HAVE DIFFERENT EFFECTS 

Two earthquakes of magnitude 6.5 can cause dramatically different levels of 
ground shaking because they may differ in depth or mechanism of fault rupture. 
The 2001 magnitude 6.8 Nisqually earthquake, for example, shook a wide area near 
Seattle but caused much less damage than the 1994 magnitude 6.7. Northridge 
earthquake in Los Angeles because the Nisqually earthquake was extremely deep 
and did not cause severe shaking at the earth’s surface. Earthquakes of similar 
magnitude can also cause differing levels of damage according to their proximity 
to populated areas. The 1995 magnitude 6.9 earthquake in Kobe, Japan, was much 
more devastating than the Northridge quake because the strongest shaking was in 
the most densely populated areas of Kobe, whereas the strongest shaking in the 
Northridge quake was under the mountains north of Los Angeles. 

[Graphic description]
Northridge Earthquake, CA, January 17, 1994 --Buildings and personal property 
were all destroyed when the earthquake struck. 
[End of graphic description]

[Graphic description]
Kobe Earthquake, Japan, January 17, 1995 --A relatively tall, reinforced-
concrete shear wall building completely tipped over into the street. The roof of 
this building cut through the building across the street. (copyright 1997 by 
earthquake engineering research institute) 
[End of graphic description]
 
SMALLER EARTHQUAKES CAN CAUSE DAMAGE AND INJURIES 

Earthquake damage at any given point depends on magnitude, distance to the 
rupture, the local soil conditions, and the building types, so even smaller 
magnitude earthquakes (between 5 and 6) can cause considerable damage and 
injuries in particular localities. 

SOFTER SOILS ARE USUALLY LESS SAFE THAN FIRM GROUND 

Generally speaking, softer soils shake more than firmer soils. Sandy and water-
saturated soils can also experience liquefaction, in which the ground turns to 
mush during the shaking and loses its ability to support structures. 

IT’S NOT ONLY ABOUT THE FAULT LINE 

Everyone in a seismically active region should be concerned, not just those 
located “on the fault line.” Because earthquake waves radiate out from faults 
and cause damages over large areas, seismic safety precautions are important 
region-wide. It is more important to worry about overall seismicity of an area 
than to know only the location of faults. The most current U.S. Geological 
Survey seismic hazard maps of the United States are at 
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazmaps.


[Graphic description]
Earthquake hazards in the United States. This map is based on seismicity and 
fault-slip rates and takes into account the frequency of occurrence of 
earthquakes of various magnitudes. Locally, the hazard may be greater than that 
shown, because site geology may amplify ground motions. Based on U.S. Geological 
Survey National Seismic Hazard Map for the Coterminous United States 
(http://eqhazmaps.usgs.gov/html/map_graphic.html). Source: U.S. Geological 
Survey. 
[End of graphic description]


[Graphic description]
Aerial view of the San Andreas fault in an undeveloped area of the Central 
Valley in California. (source: NOAA National Geophysical Data Center) 
[End of graphic description]

UNKNOWN FAULTS OFTEN CAUSE EARTHQUAKES 

Earthquakes can strike on faults that were previously unrecognized. Many such 
earthquakes, for example the 1994 Northridge quake, have been extremely 
damaging. Because, by definition, earthquakes on unknown faults can’t be 
anticipated, it is more prudent to focus on an area’s overall seismicity in 
determining its earthquake risks. 

SEISMOLOGISTS CAN ESTIMATE LONGTERM EARTHQUAKE PROBABILITIES 

Based on historic earthquakes and evidence of prehistoric earthquakes, 
seismologists are able to estimate the long-term probabilities of earthquakes in 
seismically active areas. These estimates, however, are only approximate, 
because we do not have enough years of records to make statistically reliable 
estimates. The estimates are useful as a basis for seismic building codes, as 
well as for comparing hazards between regions, and do give some indication of 
the likelihood of future damaging earthquakes. 

We know where large earthquakes have occurred in the United States in the past 
few hundred years. We know that similarly large earthquakes will occur again, 
and in some places more probably than in others. We do not know precisely where 
or when they will happen or how strong they will be. When speaking with a lay 
audience, it is generally better to avoid technical terms like “expected return 
period,” and to say something like, “From historical evidence, we expect an 
earthquake on this fault about every 180 years, and it has been 179 years since 
the last one.” Earth scientists also say, “An earthquake of this magnitude in 
this area has about a 50-percent chance of happening sometime in the next 30 
years.” 

SHORT-TERM EARTHQUAKE PREDICTION IS NOT POSSIBLE 

Seismologists are not able to predict imminent earthquakes, as a weather 
forecaster can predict a hurricane. Due to the physical characteristics of fault 
rupture, such predictions may never be possible. Because earthquakes occur 
without warning, increased seismic safety is vital. 

An Earthquake Can Occur at Any Time 

If seismologists say that a damaging earthquake has a 50-percent chance of 
occurring in your region during the next 30 years, that can be translated to 
mean that it has approximately a 2-percent chance of occurring in any given 
year. The probability is the same this year as it will be next year or 2 years 
from now. People often speak of earthquakes occurring sometime in the future, 
but the truth is that they can happen right now. Because earthquakes occur 
without warning, communities must be prepared in advance. There are many options 
for a community. They can take steps to reduce the number of unsafe old 
buildings or move people out of them. They can adopt codes that ensure new 
buildings will be earthquake-resistant. They can strengthen vulnerable 
buildings. They can modernize their infrastructure and make it more damage-
resistant. Or they can reduce the financial consequences of damages through 
insurance. 

[Graphic description]
Northridge Earthquake, CA, January 17, 1994 -– Many roads, including bridges and 
elevated highways, were damaged by the 6.7 magnitude earthquake. 
[End of graphic description]

[Sidebar]
What Is Infrastructure? 
A community is served by many networks, utilities, transportation routes and 
systems, and communications systems that support the daily flow of life and 
commerce. These infrastructure elements are frequently damaged in earthquakes 
and, when they are, can threaten lives and property, and seriously disrupt the 
routines of community life. Fires can result from downed electrical wires or 
ruptured gas mains. Interruptions to water, sewer, electrical power, or gas 
service will affect the lives of everyone, very negatively over time. 
Interruptions to communications will quickly have large personal and business 
impacts. Broken transportation links make it difficult or impossible for life or 
commerce to flow anywhere. Damage to one or two infrastructure elements poses a 
problem that most communities can work around, but damage to all or most of the 
elements is a disaster that will cause everything to grind to a halt. Protecting 
infrastructure against earthquake damage is very important and can be 
accomplished either through retrofit or replacement. 
[End of sidebar]

[Graphic description]
Northridge Earthquake, CA, January 17, 1994 -– Broken gas and water mains on 
Balboa Boulevard in Granada Hills created this scene of fire and flood. The fire 
burned five homes. (copyright 1997 by Earthquake Engineering Research Institute) 
[End of graphic description]

[Graphic description]
Kobe Earthquake, Japan, January 17, 1995 -- A bus filled with holiday skiers 
stopped just short of disaster on a damaged section of the Hanshin expressway. 
(copyright 1997 by Earthquake Engineering Research Institute) 
[End of graphic description]


The ABCs of Seismic Building Codes

Seismic building codes are one of the most obvious ways to increase building 
integrity and ensure the future safety of communities. Codes are not a panacea 
for all problems, so it’s helpful to know how they work and what they can do. 
Incorporating new or additional seismic safety provisions in codes for new 
buildings has been easier than designing, enacting, and implementing 
requirements for retrofitting existing buildings, but even if all new buildings 
are built well, older buildings remain hazardous. Where huge stocks of old 
buildings are very vulnerable to earthquakes, as in the East and Midwest, net 
improvements in seismic safety will be marginal if seismic elements in codes 
apply only to new buildings. 

WHAT SEISMIC BUILDING CODES CAN DO 

Seismic building codes result in earthquake-resistant buildings, but not 
earthquake-proof buildings. Seismic codes are intended to protect people inside 
buildings by preventing collapse and allowing for safe evacuation. Structures 
built according to code should resist minor earthquakes undamaged, resist 
moderate earthquakes without significant structural damage, and resist severe 
earthquakes without collapse. Codes only recently began to address mitigation of 
nonstructural, or content, hazards in buildings, which can cause casualties and 
expensive damage. 

BUILDING COLLAPSE IS NOT THE ONLY PROBLEM 

Even if a building does not collapse in an earthquake, it can still seriously 
hurt or kill people. Buildings are full of nonstructural components such as 
light fixtures, heating ducts, windows, and suspended ceilings that can fall on 
people or block escape routes. Finally, plaster, falling bricks, parapets, 
window glass, or the facades of buildings can seriously injure people walking by 
or exiting. 

EVEN CODE-COMPLIANT BUILDINGS CAN BE DAMAGED 

The contents and interiors of code-compliant buildings may be extensively 
damaged in an earthquake and the building may not be functional until repairs 
and clean-up are completed. Therefore, damages to code-compliant buildings can 
be costly. Comprehensive safety and loss reduction programs include properly 
designing and bracing nonstructural elements. 

NEWER BUILDINGS ARE GENERALLY SAFER THAN OLDER BUILDINGS 

Because they are built under more advanced codes, newer buildings are usually 
(but not always) safer than older buildings. Steel-frame high-rises and newer 
woodframe low-rises are usually (but not always) the safest structure types. 
Exceptions to those generalizations are due to variables such as the 
configuration of the building, the quality of the construction, the design of 
the joints, and the manner in which seismic waves strike a particular site. 

[Sidebar]
Model Building Codes 

When a municipality decides to adopt or revise a building code, it generally 
chooses a model construction code and amends it in various ways into its codes 
and ordinances. In 1994, the International Code Council (ICC) was established to 
develop a single set of comprehensive and coordinated national model 
construction codes, among which is the International Building Code (IBC). The 
founders of the ICC are the Building Officials and Code Administrators 
International, Inc. (BOCA), the International Conference of Building Officials 
(ICBO), and the Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc. (SBCCI). 
These three organizations previously administered three different codes: the 
National Building Code (NBC), the Standard Building Code (SBC), and the Uniform 
Building Code (UBC). The presence of three model building codes had the 
disadvantage of allowing widely divergent code standards across the country 
Recently the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) developed a national 
model code, the NFPA 5000. States and localities that currently write their own 
codes or amend the model codes have begun adopting the international codes and 
the NFPA 5000. Both the IBC and NFPA 5000 contain up-to-date seismic provisions; 
adoption and enforcement of either of these codes will lead to higher quality 
construction and consistent code enforcement in earthquake-prone areas. 
[End of sidebar]

OLDER BUILDINGS ARE FREQUENTLY NOT SEISMICALLY SAFE 

Generally speaking, seismic codes did not come into wide use in the eastern 
United States until the early or mid 990s. In the western United States, seismic 
codes made substantial improvements in construction as early as the mid 1990s. 
Buildings constructed prior to these respective dates in each area are probably 
not seismically safe. Retrofitting buildings to achieve seismic resistance is 
possible, but often costly, so choices must be made about which buildings are 
most important to fix. It makes economic sense to target the most dangerous 
structures or the most dangerous features of those structures, such as flimsy 
parapets. 


SEISMIC CODES VARY ACROSS THE UNITED STATES 

The seismic provisions of building codes are based on earthquake hazard maps 
that show the probabilities of certain levels of earthquake shaking in 
particular areas. The code requirements reflect the fact that some places are 
more likely than others to have strong earthquakes. The entire country is not 
required to meet the same seismic design standards as the state with the 
greatest risk: California. Places that have less severe and less frequent 
earthquakes have less stringent design requirements. For example, seismic codes 
require less in Boston than in Los Angeles. Conversely, seismic code 
requirements in southern Illinois, near the New Madrid seismic zone, are much 
stricter than in Chicago, which is less likely to have a strong earthquake. 

ADHERENCE TO SEISMIC CODES IS NOT AS EXPENSIVE AS MANY THINK 

Complying with a seismic code adds relatively little to the costs of a 
structure. The most recent study estimates that it adds less than percent to the 
purchase price of a home, and from 1 to 2 percent to the total cost of new 
commercial and industrial buildings. (See Promoting the Adoption and Enforcement 
of Building Codes, in the Further Reading section.) 

SOME STRUCTURES ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN OTHERS 

Buildings with high occupancy, critical response services (fire, police, 
hospitals), and vulnerable populations (schools, nursing homes) should be built 
to code, or above it. It is also important to protect utilities and 
infrastructure. Damages to critical structures lead to more life loss, larger 
economic loss, and greater social disruption, and they slow community response 
to earthquakes. 

BUILDING CODE ADOPTION IS A STATE OR LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY 

All states have a legal right to regulate building safety as a matter of public 
welfare. In most states, the day-to-day aspects of this rest with local 
governments. Some states require local adoption and enforcement of building 
codes; others do not. Just because codes are required, it does not guarantee 
that all localities comply. And in states that do not require codes, localities 
are free to do as they wish. In fact, many earthquake-prone communities in the 
United States do not have up-to-date building codes with seismic provisions. 

CODES CHANGE OVER TIME 

The model building codes and the seismic provisions are revised every 3 years to 
incorporate new knowledge. In order to have a code that reflects the current 
state of the art in seismic design, state and local governments need to 
incorporate the latest seismic details into their codes. 

[Graphic description]
Counties in the United States and their probabilities of earthquakes of varying 
magnitude. Source: U.S. Geological survey. 
[End of graphic description]

BUILDING CODES VERSUS SEISMIC PROVISIONS 

Localities can adopt a model building code, but leave out the seismic 
requirements; or they may have an older version of the code, written prior to 
inclusion of seismic provisions. It is important to verify that the locally 
adopted code contains the most recent seismic provisions. 

A BUILDING CODE MUST BE ENFORCED IN ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE 

Building plan review, construction inspection, and a qualified and trained 
building department staff are necessary for code enforcement. 


Policies and Legislation

In many cases, it will be most effective to make the primary case for earthquake 
safety to a few key decision-makers in the public sector. Policy-making 
processes are complex, but not hopelessly so, and policy-makers are accessible, 
if you “know where they live.” New policies and laws are proposed and enacted 
almost every day. Once enacted, policies must be implemented, and that is often 
more complicated than policy adoption. With foreknowledge of the ins and outs, 
however, you will have a much better chance of success. 

LEARN HOW “THINGS WORK” IN THE LEGISLATIVE OR EXECUTIVE AGENCY 

High school civics classes teach that policy processes follow an ordered 
procession, involving, for example, 3 steps for a bill to become a law. In 
reality, public policy-making is anything but linear and predictable. Although 
they share many rules and procedures in common, each legislative and executive 
policy-making body has unique characteristics. Typically, you can learn what the 
formal rules are directly from agency personnel, but it is more difficult to 
learn informal processes and hidden agendas. If your own elected representative 
shares an interest in seismic safety, he or she may be of great help. 

HAVE PUBLIC POLICY PROPOSALS READY WHEN THE TIME IS RIPE 

Usually elected officials create policies to solve problems after a crisis has 
occurred. For example, a policy decision to raise the level of a causeway or a 
levee usually comes shortly after the flood. Most earthquake-related legislation 
is enacted in the immediate aftermath of a damaging earthquake – in what is 
called the “window of opportunity” – but not all of it is well conceived. The 
old adage is that we “legislate in haste and repent at leisure.” Advocates 
seeking to influence policy should be prepared with proposals that are thought 
through and ready for consideration and adoption during the rush of concern that 
follows a damaging earthquake. 

GAIN ACCESS TO POLICY-MAKERS WHO WILL CHAMPION SEISMIC SAFETY 

Policy agendas are crowded and it is difficult to gain the attention of policy-
makers. The effective earthquake safety advocate must get access to policy-
makers and their staff to make the case for seismic safety policies. Access is 
easiest in the immediate aftermath of a damaging earthquake, especially if 
advocates have coherent and effective proposals in hand. This is because concern 
for earthquake safety is on everyone’s mind then, demanding attention to 
possible solutions from policy-makers. 

Being a member of public or quasi-public organizations charged with helping to 
develop seismic and building safety policies provides continual, 
institutionalized access to policymakers. Several states have boards or 
commissions charged with making recommendations about seismic safety. Similarly, 
non-governmental groups draft building code updates for consideration and 
adoption by governments. 

GET A CRITICAL MASS OF POLICY-MAKERS TO AGREE ABOUT THE PROBLEM 

A problem is not a problem unless a critical mass of policy-makers sees it and 
agrees that something can be done about it. Advocates may view the potential for 
major losses from earthquakes as a problem that demands immediate attention by 
public policy-makers, but not everyone will agree. Policy-makers must concur 
that there are potential unacceptable consequences from an earthquake within a 
relevant timeframe, and that they are willing to do something to reduce the 
consequences. 

[Sidebar]
National Seismic Safety Policy 

The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) was established in 
1977, under the authority of the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, 
enacted as Public Law 101-614. The purpose of NEHRP is to reduce the risks to 
life and property from future earthquakes. The NEHRP research and mitigation 
activities are funded by four primary Federal partners—FEMA, the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Science Foundation, and the 
U.S. Geological Survey. NEHRP funds basic and applied research into earth 
science, building and infrastructure performance and design, and information 
dissemination by governmental and non-profit agencies working on many aspects of 
earthquakes and seismic safety. These Advocacy Briefs were developed with funds 
from NEHRP. Learn more about NEHRP at 
Http://www.fema.gov/hazards/earthquakes/eqmit.shtm. 
[End of sidebar]


POLICY-MAKING IS LARGELY POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC, NOT TECHNICAL 

Enhancing seismic safety policy requires political and economic understanding as 
well as geologic and engineering knowledge. Having solutions that meet 
political, social, and economic criteria is as important as having solutions 
that are technically effective. Have on hand not only examples of what can be 
done, but also evidence of how those steps have been effective in other places, 
and information about how much each solution costs. You must convince the 
Already overburdened that doing something provides benefits at costs that are 
generally tolerable. 

PROPOSE WORKABLE SOLUTIONS 

A workable solution must have an acceptable price tag, sufficient backing to 
overcome opposition from credible opponents, and evidence of having worked 
somewhere else. Legislators rarely invent solutions – they get them from 
experts, other advocates, and other jurisdictions that have addressed the issue. 
The savvy policy advocate works to gain support from others who have an interest 
in the problem or who might be affected by implementation of the proposed 
solution. Most elected officials do not like to have proponents and opponents of 
a particular policy proposal besieging them; they are happy when all the 
involved parties come to them with a policy proposal in hand and generally agree 
that it is the best way to move ahead. 
NOT ALL POLICIES ARE REGULATORY 

Policies may be designed to focus attention, as is the case with the official 
establishment of April as Earthquake Awareness Month in California or May as 
Tornado Awareness Month in Wisconsin. Policies may also force action, either 
directly or indirectly. For example, California has an Earthquake Hazards 
Mapping Program that directs the Geological Survey to map earthquake hazards all 
over California, and requires public and private parties to use the maps in 
assessing the potential hazards to any proposed development. If the risk 
is high in a certain location, the developers must incorporate appropriate 
mitigation into the project or they must relocate. Policies may call for public 
investment, provide for more effective system management, or authorize direct 
action by public agencies to reduce earthquake risks; for example, increased 
seismic safety in federally owned buildings was mandated by Presidential 
Executive Order 12941 in 1994. 

Self-policing policies are more cost-effective than those that require extensive 
monitoring and control. Such policies provide strong incentives for individuals 
and organizations to engage in the desired behavior either by lowering the costs 
(monetary and non-monetary) of doing what is hoped for, or by raising the costs 
of engaging in undesired behaviors. The former case is exemplified by a number 
of city programs in California that waive many fees normally associated with 
residential construction and shorten the permit process in order to encourage 
homeowners to strengthen their houses against earthquakes. Obvious instances of 
the latter case are the state governments that heavily tax tobacco products and 
use the generated funds to conduct public education campaigns about the dangers 
of smoking. 

POLICY ENACTMENT IS JUST THE BEGINNING 

Policies adopted by legislative or executive bodies are formal statements that 
put forth what the policy-makers want the general rule to be. Policy is modified 
through the layers and sets of actors that deal with it, right down to the 
person in the field who does the work directed by the policy. As implementation 
proceeds, it may trigger new or additional opposition to the policy, with 
threats of modification or repeal. 

To stand the test of time, policies must strike a balance among various parties 
interested in the problem being addressed. Frequently, policies that were 
devised and supported by seismic safety advocates are subsequently challenged by 
groups whose interests are adversely affected by those policies. In the case of 
ordinances requiring seismic strengthening of old buildings, the challenges are 
often effective, at least until the next earthquake. Advocates can be successful 
in getting what is needed if they are prudent and thoughtful about what they 
propose, particularly if they keep a few points in mind. 

DESIGN POLICY TO MEET THE LEGITIMATE NEEDS OF LIKELY OPPONENTS 

The community of seismic safety proponents is small and, in most locations, 
without much political clout. There are usually many interests likely to oppose 
the costs associated with enhanced seismic safety. Look at the problem in the 
broad context to identify legitimate interests that will be positively and 
negatively affected by any proposal. The greater the burden perceived by the 
opposition, the more fiercely they will fight the advocate’s proposal. 

Devise solutions to the problem that meet the fundamental, legitimate needs of 
those who would otherwise be opposed. This requires willingness to compromise 
and a creative, non-dogmatic approach to policy design. A policy enacted into 
law is more likely to remain in place over the long term if it is supported 
broadly by those it affects than if it was enacted over the opposition of groups 
with an important stake in the outcome. 

REMEMBER THAT NOTHING LASTS FOREVER 

A policy that was effective and appropriate at one time may become ineffective 
and inappropriate as conditions and circumstances change. Problems “morph” out 
from under solutions. The challenge for those interested in seismic safety is to 
adjust strategies and policies as circumstances change. The challenge is made 
more difficult by the nature of legislation; only rarely can it be written to 
provide sufficient flexibility to deal with both a wide range of initial 
circumstances and underlying shifts in the context. 


Appearing Before Committees

At some point in his or her career, a seismic safety advocate may be invited to 
appear before legislative or advisory committees that have roles in shaping 
seismic safety policies. These bodies may include school boards, municipal 
councils, state legislatures, Congressional committees, advisory committees like 
city and county planning commissions, or code committees. The suggestions below 
will help make the experience comfortable and productive. 

DO YOUR HOMEWORK ABOUT THE COMMITTEE AND THE PURPOSE OF THE MEETING 

Before scheduling meetings with committee staff or agreeing to testify, 
establish the relevance of the committee to the issues that you want to address. 
Be clear about the purpose of the hearing you will be attending and your 
testimony’s fit with that purpose. It makes little sense to appear before a 
committee that is neither the correct forum for the topic nor concerned with the 
specific issues you are going to raise. 

BE CLEAR ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE ADVOCATING 

In crafting suggestions to the committee, be clear about your facts, the 
problem, and the solutions you wish to advocate. Focus on two or three key 
points to get across. A sea of facts about a problem or heart-wrenching stories 
about harms do little to help a committee understand what you want them to do to 
address the problem. 

PREPARE A SIMPLE AND DIRECT MESSAGE 

Committee members are not likely to be experts on seismic safety so your 
testimony should educate committee members in an informative manner. Detailed or 
technical points can be submitted in written testimony for the record or as 
background materials for interested staff and committee members. Usually, only a 
short time is available for testimony, so fill it only with critical 
information. 

ESTABLISH YOUR CREDENTIALS 

Introduction to written and oral testimony should clearly establish who you are 
and, most importantly, whom you represent. Establish the type of expertise you 
have and the breadth and depth of the group that you represent. The logic for 
this is that elected officials, in particular, respond to groups rather than to 
individuals. It is important to mention that the group you represent endorses 
your comments. 

CONVEY CREDIBILITY THROUGH DELIVERY 

Present your information in a convincing manner. Use charts that display 
relevant information (as handouts or displays). List sources for your 
information. Acknowledge counter claims and point out why they are not accurate. 
Maintaining eye contact with committee members is an important way of subtly 
establishing credibility. 

ANTICIPATE THE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE HEARING 

Many who testify are tripped up by not having the proper equipment available, 
not realizing that the committee is running behind (or ahead), not being able to 
adjust testimony to a shortened timeframe, being thrown off by other testimony, 
and not being prepared for any media that might be present. Anticipate potential 
hiccups by checking ahead on arrangements, knowing who else is involved and the 
format for the session, being prepared for all media personnel, and being ready 
to adjust the length of your testimony. 

PRACTICE YOUR REMARKS AND RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 

Practice to gain comfort with the material you are presenting. A rehearsal will 
allow you to assess how clearly you can communicate with your audience. It helps 
if the practice sessions are in front of some individuals familiar with the 
perspectives of the actual committee audience. An important part of such 
practice sessions is anticipating questions that may come up. 

BE PREPARED FOR QUESTIONS 

Not all questions can be anticipated, but many can and should be. Like the 
testimony itself, responses to questions should be succinct, accurate, and 
credible. Resist the temptation to guess if you do not know the answer. It is 
better to respond that you will find out the answer and respond later in 
writing. Saying “I don’t know” is acceptable as long as it is not the only 
response you can offer to each question. 

FOLLOW UP 

As committee procedures allow, edit your comments for the record to correct any 
mistakes in your own or others’ testimony. Promptly send in written responses to 
questions you could not answer at the time. The written record of any testimony 
is often more important than the testimony itself. It has a longer shelf life 
and reaches many more people. 

WORK WITH STAFF 

Committee staff members are more than gatekeepers; they are also information 
conduits and repositories of knowledge for committees. It is as important as the 
testimony itself to help them by making written materials available in advance, 
providing timely follow-up to questions, and responding to their concerns. A 
good relationship with the staff can result in repeated invitations to appear 
before committees. 


Informing and Persuading 

Some people think that the only way to improve seismic safety is to get a policy 
enacted or changed at the local, state, or Federal level, but there are actually 
many other effective ways to do it, most of which are easier or quicker than new 
policies or amended legislation. There are various interventions that can 
improve seismic safety. 

PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE EARTHQUAKE RISK 

No individuals or organizations will take action to reduce risk unless they know 
it exists, they think it may affect them, and they know they can do something 
about it. Before proceeding to any of the steps outlined below, develop messages 
for key decision-makers and those who influence them. Tailor all information to 
each audience’s sophistication. To make the messages believable, have them 
delivered by people who are specialists and/or are thought of as credible by the 
target audience.

[Graphic description]
Presentations of earthquake risk information can be made more effective through 
the use of maps and other visual aids designed to address the specific needs and 
interests of individual decision-makers. 
[End of graphic description]

INFLUENCE GOVERNMENT AGENCY PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES WITHIN EXISTING POLICIES 

It is not necessary to change laws to influence what government does. Even 
without new laws, governments can choose to increase the seismic safety of the 
facilities within their purview and improve community services. Local public 
utilities rarely need to change ordinances to design and build more resistant 
structures. Community building departments can encourage and enforce seismic 
safety practices. Training can affect field practice within the letter and 
spirit of existing ordinances to focus more attention on seismic safety 
provisions. Building and planning departments, emergency management offices, and 
housing agencies can provide seismic safety information to their constituencies. 
Governments can choose to rent only facilities that incorporate seismic safety 
design elements. School boards can choose to reduce the nonstructural hazards in 
their classrooms. Universities can add natural hazards risk management to 
business and public administration curricula. 

INFLUENCE CHOICES MADE BY PRIVATE ORGANIZATIONS 

Ultimately, seismic safety is enhanced when structures are located, designed, 
and constructed appropriately. Sometimes, it makes sense to work directly with 
individuals and organizations that build and use the structures, rather than to 
try to change the legal or regulatory environment. Seismic safety can sometimes 
be sold to individual organizations if it is incorporated at tolerable costs 
when structures are being built or changed to realize other, unrelated benefits, 
such as increased organizational efficiency or more structural compatibility 
with new processes. 

Direct communication by shareholders, managers, employees, or third parties may 
induce a corporation’s leaders to promote seismic safety in their own operations 
and structures. Rate payers can influence utilities to better protect water, 
gas, electric power, and wastewater systems against earthquakes. Organizations 
already committed to seismic safety can influence other businesses and not-for-
profit organizations. Trade and business associations, such as Chambers of 
Commerce, can be reached through groups focused on earthquake risk reduction, 
such as the Building and Industry Council on Emergency Preparedness Planning in 
the Los Angeles area, or through organizations dedicated to bringing an 
earthquake safety message to the community. 

INFLUENCE PROFESSIONALS WHO CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE 

In states where there are frequent earthquakes, many design professionals have 
adjusted their practices to reflect the risk. In areas where earthquakes occur 
only rarely, design professionals may focus more of their attention on snow and 
wind loads. National and international professional associations can influence 
their member engineers, architects, and builders to pay more attention to 
seismic safety issues. Regulators like building inspectors can direct more 
attention to seismic safety considerations. Those who participate in code 
development organizations can be reached by official spokespersons. Urban land 
use planners can take seismic hazards and risks into account when creating 
community plans or participating in decisions about transportation or housing 
projects, or other development initiatives. 

Risk management professionals for public and private organizations can consider 
seismic safety in the decisions they make. Traditionally, risk managers have not 
focused much of their attention on reducing threats posed by natural hazard 
events, but professional practice appears to be changing. There is increased 
attention to reducing organizational losses from earthquakes, as well as from 
other natural events and willful acts. Insurers and market intermediaries, for 
example, financiers, can play critical roles in improving seismic safety. If 
insurers and lenders provided improved rates for buildings that are built to 
withstand greater seismic forces, owners would have greater incentive to design 
and build their structures that way. 

Professional certification and licensing education and training programs can be 
modified to include appropriate material, whether offered through universities 
or professional associations. Professional associations can emphasize seismic 
safety practices in their regular conferences and workshops. Standards for peer 
review can incorporate attention to seismic safety. 


Partnerships for Seismic Safety

Do not try to “go it alone.” Successful seismic safety advocacy garners the 
support of other constituencies within the community. Emphasize the benefits 
from enacting seismic safety measures while building coalitions and networks 
capable of sustaining interest and action. 

UNDERSTAND HOW DIFFERENT STAKEHOLDERS VIEW SEISMIC SAFETY 

Some stakeholders are active proponents of earthquake safety, but others are 
indifferent or actively oppose enhanced safety measures. Understand what 
motivates both supporters and opponents. Devise strategies for keeping 
supporters on board over the long run, neutralizing opposition to earthquake 
safety, and motivating those who are indifferent. Be willing to compromise and 
engage in political tradeoffs. Rather than holding out for ideal programs that 
have little chance of gaining support, gauge which seismic safety options have 
the best chance of being adopted and implemented under different circumstances. 

PROVIDE INCENTIVES 

Carrots and sticks make things happen. Incentives can include direct economic 
rewards, relief from regulation, subsidies of various kinds, low-interest loans, 
technical assistance, tax breaks, transfers of development rights, and public 
recognition and awards for those who support seismic safety. Worries about legal 
liability may also be a powerful motivating force for some stakeholders. Stress 
how measures taken to enhance earthquake safety help reduce other risks or 
provide secondary benefits. Champions and partners are important for moving 
policies and programs forward, but they also like to receive rewards and 
recognition for their support. 

LINK SEISMIC SAFETY TO ISSUES PEOPLE ALREADY CARE ABOUT 

Earthquake safety shouldn’t be only about earthquakes. Link it to other issues 
such as homeland security, economic sustainability, environmental protection, 
quality of life, livability, school safety, and historic preservation. Many of 
these issues already have organized constituencies that can be “co-opted” into 
supporting earthquake loss reduction. Sell earthquake safety to these groups by 
showing how seismic loss reduction yields benefits such as more open space, a 
charming historic downtown, or better preparedness for terrorism and 
bioterrorism. 

BUILD NETWORKS THAT CAN LAST 

Strategies for enhancing earthquake safety must go beyond one-time educational 
campaigns and single ballot efforts to create long-term networks of seismic 
safety supporters. Build on existing networks—consisting both of the “already 
converted” and of groups that can be persuaded to put seismic safety on their 
agendas. Many groups have already identified themselves as advocates. Other 
potential candidates for membership in earthquake safety coalitions include 
structural engineers’ associations; groups representing the design professions; 
building and safety officials; citizens’ emergency preparedness groups; 
neighborhood watch groups; coalitions focused on neighborhood safety, 
improvement, and quality-of-life issues; victim advocacy groups formed in the 
aftermath of other disasters; community colleges; and colleges and universities. 

GET EXPERTS IN YOUR GROUP 

Get to know university-based experts in the earth sciences, the social sciences, 
and engineering, as well as your local emergency management agency, other key 
governmental agencies, and important non-profit organizations like the American 
Red Cross. These ongoing partnerships will help bolster your case for enhancing 
seismic safety and lend credibility to your efforts. 

[Graphic description]
Moderated workshops and presentations can be an effective means of involving, 
informing, motivating, and maintaining the interest of stakeholders with varying 
positions on seismic safety measures. 
[End of graphic description]

USE OTHER COMMUNITIES AS EXAMPLES 

Learn about and publicize what other communities are doing to address earthquake 
risks, and use their success stories to obtain support for the measures you are 
advocating. Get to know the champions in those communities; they can teach you 
about what to do and what not to do. Frequently, a mayor, city manager, or 
council member from a community that has adopted seismic safety measures can 
influence counterparts in a community that has yet to commit to seismic safety. 
Arrange talks or lunches during which the already converted officials can share 
their experiences. 


Working With Experts

Every seismic safety advocate needs to draw upon experts from other fields. Some 
citizen activists may need lots of expert assistance. The advice below will help 
you find and use experts. 

DRAW ON A VARIETY OF FIELDS 

One expert alone cannot possibly address all concerns regarding seismic safety. 
Useful experts may include geologists, seismologists, geotechnical engineers, 
structural engineers, lifeline engineers, urban planners, building officials, 
economists, lawyers, and emergency managers. Learn the differences in these 
fields of expertise in order to best match the expert to the issue at hand. 

FIND CREDIBLE EXPERTS THROUGH CREDIBLE SOURCES 

Because it might be hard to tell who is an “expert,” you will need to do some 
investigating. To seek an appropriate expert, begin with credible sources: state 
geological surveys, local universities, or professional associations and their 
local or state chapters. Use experts who are respected in their profession and 
have proven to be credible to other audiences. 

QUESTION YOUR EXPERTS 

Do not hesitate to ask for explanations and clarifications from the experts you 
work with. If you cannot understand their points, neither will most audiences. 

USE ENTHUSIASTIC EXPERTS THAT CAN PERSUADE OTHERS 

Because you need the support of key professional groups, it is helpful to find 
experts who have the enthusiasm to mobilize the support of those groups. A 
network of experts can advance your issue more successfully than just one 
expert. 

DON’T BE SURPRISED WHEN EXPERTS DISAGREE 

Experts often have opposing viewpoints on particular issues. What if another 
expert disagrees with your expert? If the experts you rely upon have good 
reputations and draw support from their professional networks, your chances 
improve of weathering controversy and convincing decision-makers, the media, and 
the public. Acknowledge differences and then arrange a meeting among experts. A 
compromise position may be possible. The other experts may have valuable points, 
and incorporating them in your argument will only improve it. 


AN OPPOSING EXPERT CAN UNDERMINE YOUR CASE 

Experience shows that just one opposing expert, no matter how discredited his or 
her claims, can undermine a technically well-founded position. It is important 
to anticipate opposing arguments, and to vigorously and persistently stay with 
your course of action. However, stick to the facts and do not ridicule an 
opposing expert, as that will reflect badly on you or your expert’s credibility. 

OPPOSING NON-EXPERTS CAN BE TROUBLE, TOO 

When confronted with the claims of unqualified “experts,” you need to marshal 
your professional experts to counter the claims quickly, clearly, and 
comprehensively. Develop a convincing explanation and repeat it. Many self-
proclaimed “experts” are not experts at all. Expertise in one discipline does 
not carry over to other subjects. Misrepresentation of expertise is particularly 
common in earthquake prediction. 

DISAGREEMENT AMONG YOUR EXPERTS LOOKS BAD 

Your own experts may have points of disagreement, given the complexities of the 
disciplines relevant to seismic safety. But airing those disagreements in public 
can undermine your case. Prior to making public statements, your experts should 
identify points of agreement upon which to base your position, and be willing to 
acknowledge points of disagreement, if necessary. 

[Graphic description]
It may be helpful to arrange formal meetings with your experts to ensure that 
their knowledge, communications skills, and enthusiasm are adequate to help you 
obtain the support of key professional groups. Also, opposing views among 
experts can be discussed and evaluated so that disagreements can be resolved or 
at least clearly explained. 
[End of graphic description]

REPORTS WRITTEN BY EXPERTS CAN HELP SUPPORT YOUR CASE 

Although it is very helpful to have experts who will advocate publicly, you may 
not find willing participants at first. In the absence of living, breathing 
experts, cite credible reports. These come from government agencies, reputable 
consultants, or university professors. Reports on websites are easy to find, and 
sometimes useful, but Internet information is not necessarily reliable. Experts 
unwilling to become spokespersons may still give advice on the most appropriate 
and credible documents. 


Effective Risk Communication

With the exception of some residents of California and a few other western 
states, most Americans have never been in a damaging earthquake, don’t expect 
to, and see little or no reason to protect themselves against one. Even in areas 
where there has been extensive experience with earthquakes, seismic safety 
messages must be continually reinforced. As with any risk, people must be 
regularly encouraged to improve their safety. Well-crafted communications 
campaigns can help seismic safety advocates achieve those goals. 

BEFORE GOING PUBLIC, DEVELOP AN OVERALL STRATEGY 

When communicating with the public, policy-makers, decision-makers, or any other 
audience about earthquake hazards, it isn’t enough to focus only on the 
scientific information you want to convey. It is important to think about the 
following: 
 
--the audience or audiences you want to reach, 
--the distinctive characteristics and needs of those audiences, 
--how to be seen as credible and trustworthy by those audiences, 
--the best form for communicating scientific information on the earthquake 
threat (how the content of risk messages should be organized), and 
--which media (print, electronic, face-to-face communication) and vehicles (news 
conferences, brochures, mass mailings, public meetings) will be most effective 
in reaching target audiences. 

KNOW YOUR AUDIENCES 

“The public” is very diverse, consisting of many different groups with different 
informational needs and retention capacities. A one-size-fits-all approach to 
communicating with them is almost sure to fail. Legislators, policy-makers, 
private-sector decision-makers, and the general public differ in their 
information requirements. Be prepared to express the same general point—that 
there is a significant earthquake risk—in many different ways for your various 
audiences. Consider what each audience needs to know to make good decisions 
about the earthquake threat. This will be based both on what you think they 
require and what they themselves may have expressed. 

BE CREDIBLE 

People will not act on information given to them by individuals and 
organizations they do not believe or trust, so analyze who would be the best 
spokespersons to communicate with different groups. Sometimes these 
spokespersons are well-respected earthquake experts, and they have gained the 
respect by adapting their message and delivery to various audiences. Do not 
assume that all experts can communicate clearly; many have trouble “speaking the 
language” of non-scientific audiences. When you do not have access to earthquake 
experts who can communicate well, find people or organizations that are credible 
to your audiences and ask them to serve as spokespersons for your earthquake-
related messages. 

The credibility of organizations and individuals can be harmed if they: 
--take positions that appear to audiences to be unjustified, based on what those 
audiences already know, 
--make statements that contradict what was said previously or that are 
inconsistent with information the audiences obtained from other sources, 
--communicate about the earthquake threat in ways that appear to be self-
serving, or 
--gain a reputation for deceit, misrepresentation, or lack of full disclosure. 

Once lost, credibility is difficult to regain. 

ORGANIZE YOUR INFORMATION TO BE UNDERSTANDABLE AND MEMORABLE 

Scientists are comfortable handling complex technical information, appreciating 
the implications of probabilistic statements, and retaining large amounts of 
data, but many other people are not familiar with such concepts. To make 
complicated ideas relevant, understandable, and interesting to non-experts, 
simple statements and good visuals are essential. Printed materials and 
brochures are appropriate for non-experts because they can be referred to as 
needed. In campaigns that rely heavily on radio and television, simple 
statements and repetition are especially important. 

TELL PEOPLE WHAT TO DO 

Once you have people’s attention about the earthquake risk, it is very important 
to explain to them what they can do to reduce the possible damages. Include in 
your messages not only information on concrete steps they can take to protect 
themselves, but also where they can go for more information – both on the 
earthquake risk and on the various loss reduction measures you are recommending. 

USE MULTIPLE MEDIA 

Effective communications campaigns use mass media and person-to-person contact. 
They employ all types of media and a variety of information “vehicles” (press 
conferences, radio and television public service announcements, newspaper and TV 
feature stories, public meetings). Generally, people process information slowly. 
They base decisions on what they learn from the media after they have discussed 
it with their families, co-workers, and neighbors. Reinforce media messages 
through more personalized ways of delivering information, such as neighborhood 
meetings and school and workplace preparedness programs. 

[Sidebar]
Communication Tools 

Various computer-based resources can be used to improve risk communication. By 
graphically demonstrating the potential losses from an earthquake in a local 
area, they can help people “see” the problems they may need to cope with. 
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are convenient places to store basic data 
about the local environment—natural as well as built—and the local or regional 
infrastructure. Loss Estimation Models go a step further and allow for those 
data to be manipulated to show probable damages from earthquakes of specific 
location and magnitude. HAZUS-MH is such a loss estimation tool developed by the 
federal emergency Management Agency. Using GIS technology, the HAZUS-MH software 
allows users to project earthquake damages and losses to many structures: 
highways and bridges, schools, hospitals, and residences, as well as to estimate 
resultant deaths and injuries and potential medical care and shelter needs. 
Local groups can enrich the basic HAZUS-MH data with locally specific data, 
thereby making the tool more precise in its projections. For more information on 
how to acquire and use HAZUS-MH, visit FEMA’s website: www.fema.gov/hazus. 

BE CONSISTENT 

Always keep messages consistent across different media and vehicles, and among 
diverse groups. Risk communicators have learned that, when people get 
contradictory pieces of information about what to do, they do nothing. They do 
not pick a favorite and get on with it. Consistency will require that you work 
closely and carefully with all your partners—individuals and organizations—but 
it is worth your while to do so. 


Using the Media

Good relations with the media are essential for effective seismic safety 
advocacy. The public looks to the media as significant sources of information on 
earthquakes, earthquake preparedness, and earthquake policy. Media sources—
newspapers, radio, TV, Internet—have the ability to influence public opinion and 
to place seismic safety on the policy agenda. This brief offers suggestions to 
those responsible for developing media strategies, as well as to those who may 
become spokespersons with the media. 

Advice for Media Strategists 

BEFORE CONTACTING ANY MASS MEDIA SOURCE, DEVELOP A COMMUNICATIONS PLAN 

Establish a timeframe reasonable for different media initiatives, taking into 
consideration both the time needed to develop media messages and important 
dates, such as earthquake anniversaries. Divide the labor, assigning 
responsibility for writing, speaking, arranging media contacts, and other tasks 
associated with a campaign. Select one or more spokespersons who will 
communicate directly with the media, making sure that they are both credible and 
comfortable interacting with the media. Your plan should cover approaches and 
messages during routine times before a disaster and the messages and strategies 
you may use after an actual earthquake event in your area or nearby. In advance, 
think about what you want to communicate, and when you want to do so. 

[Graphic description]
Be prepared to take advantage of opportunities afforded by the media, especially 
in post-event situations, to present earthquake hazard information and promote 
seismic safety programs and risk reduction activities that will lessen the 
affects of future earthquakes. 
[End of graphic description]

MEDIA SOURCES MAY FIND YOU BEFORE YOU FIND THEM 

If media representatives contact you before you are ready, say something. At the 
very least, thank them for their interest. Don’t make things up. Don’t let them 
pressure you because they have a deadline. If they ask you a question you can’t 
answer, say you will check facts and get back to them. Do your homework quickly 
and then get back to them. Or recommend an expert who can answer their 
questions. Never say anything that would damage your cause or hurt your allies 
if it showed up in print. 

THE MEDIA ARE DIZZYINGLY DIVERSE 

There are more media outlets now than ever before, appealing to very diverse 
audiences. New media such as cable television and the Internet coexist with more 
traditional print and electronic media. Media usage is highly segmented, with 
different age, ethnic, and other social groups getting specialized information 
from various media sources. This variety makes launching public media campaigns 
extremely challenging, and potentially very expensive. 

MEDIA HAVE DIFFERENT STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES 

Mass media differ in terms of what kinds of and how much information can be 
conveyed, the impression the information is likely to make on audiences, and how 
easy it is for audiences to access and refer back to that information. They also 
differ in terms of “market share,” in that some media (network television) reach 
a larger proportion of the public than others on a typical day. Additionally, 
media outlets differ in terms of the costs associated with delivering 
information. In crafting media campaigns, think through these differences 
carefully. 

UNDERSTAND THE NEEDS OF DIFFERENT MASS MEDIA OUTLETS 

Establish long-term relationships with people who work in media organizations so 
that they will assist you in your work. View the media as collaborators in your 
advocacy efforts and work with media representatives in ways that make their 
jobs easier. Give the media representatives what they need and they will cover 
what you want them to. Many media work on very tight deadlines. Be flexible 
enough to handle the very short timeframes associated with breaking news, as 
well as the longer timeframes permitted by in-depth and feature stories. 
Television requires good visuals—always have some or be able to suggest great 
images. Local television news typically consists of short spots with short 
messages. More substance can be communicated in print than through electronic 
media. 


Advice for Spokespersons 

DEVELOP SKILLS THAT ENABLE YOU TO WORK WELL WITH THE MEDIA 

--Don’t use scientific jargon. Learn to talk in plain and simple language. 
--Don’t be afraid to say that you don’t know something, and don’t feel pressured 
to respond immediately to difficult and complex questions that require more 
thought. If more information is needed in order to address a question, say so, 
and then get that information. 
--Keep your message consistent, and remember what your audience needs to know. 
--Don’t let anyone divert you from conveying your message. 

ADOPT A STYLE THAT ENABLES YOU TO RELATE TO YOUR AUDIENCES 

--Be honest, but also speak and carry yourself in a way that conveys 
trustworthiness. 
--Be genuinely responsive to concerns that are raised, even when those concerns 
seem outlandish or unfounded. 
--Never treat the media or members of the public dismissively or convey the 
impression that you think their questions are trivial or silly. 
--Allow yourself to act easygoing and approachable. Avoid appearing arrogant to 
audiences. 
--Recognize and address the emotional dimensions of issues that are being 
discussed, especially in situations that involve controversy. 


Advice for Both 

MANUALS AND COURSES CAN HELP YOU DEAL WITH THE MEDIA 

Developing good relationships with the media is hard work, but there is 
information available to help with a range of communications challenges, from 
speaking with reporters after an earthquake to formulating effective letters to 
the editor and opinion pieces for newspapers. You don’t have to wing it. FEMA 
has training courses for media relations, as may your state office of emergency 
services. Local non-profits may be another source of training, along with 
university extensions and professional trainers. There are books, too. 



Further Reading 

ABOUT EARTHQUAKES 

Earthquakes, Fourth Edition, by Bruce A. Bolt. W.H. Freeman and Company, 1999: 
http://www.whfreeman.com/bolt

U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Hazards Program website: 
http://earthquakes.usgs.gov

U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project website: 
http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov/eq/

ABOUT EARTHQUAKE LOSS REDUCTION 

Association of Bay Area Governments Earthquake Preparedness website: 
http://quake.abag.ca.gov

Earthquake Engineering Research Institute website: 
http://www.eeri.org 

Federal Emergency Management Agency website: 
http://www.fema.gov/hazards/earthquakes 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Developing the Mitigation Plan: Identifying 
Mitigation Actions and Implementing Strategies, How-To Guide #3: 
http://www.fema.gov/fima/planning_howto3.shtm 

ABOUT BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES IN EARTHQUAKES 

Mid-America Earthquake Center website: http://mae.ce.uiuc.edu/ 

Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research website: 
http://mceer.buffalo.edu 

Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center and National Information Service 
for Earthquake Engineering website: http://nisee.berkeley.edu 

ABOUT BUILDING CODES 

International Code Council website: 
http://www.iccsafe.org 

National Fire Protection Association, 
NFPA 5000: http://www.nfpa.org/index.asp 

Promoting the Adoption and Enforcement of Building Codes, by Robert B. 
Olshansky. Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 313, 1998. Available from 
FEMA Publications: 1-800-480-2520. 

Seismic Considerations for Communities at Risk, Revised Edition. Building 
Seismic Safety Council, FEMA 83. Available from FEMA Publications: 1-800-480-
2520. http://www.fema.gov/hazards/earthquakes/nehrp/fema-83.shtm 

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Understanding Your Risks: Identifying 
Hazards and Estimating Losses: http://www.fema.gov/fima/howto2.shtm 

ABOUT SEISMIC SAFETY POLICY 

California Earthquakes: Science, Risk, and the Politics of Hazard Mitigation, by 
Carl-Henry Geschwind. Johns Hopkins University Press, 2001 

California Seismic Safety Commission website: 
http://www.seismic.ca.gov 

Natural Hazard Mitigation: Recasting Disaster Policy and Planning, by David R. 
Godschalk and others. Island Press, 1999. 

Western States Seismic Policy Council website: 
http://www.wsspc.org 

ABOUT PUBLIC EDUCATION 

Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware website: 
http://www.udel.edu/DRC 

University of Colorado Natural Hazards Center website: 
http://www.colorado.edu/hazards 

“Public Education for Earthquake Hazards,” by Sarah Nathe and others. Natural 
Hazards Informer, November 1999: 
http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/informer/infrmr2/infrm2wb.htm 

[End of FEMA 424]