What's in a code?

THE EDITOR: The 6.9 magnitude earthquake which shook Trinidad on Tuesday offers an excellent opportunity to apply cost-benefit analysis to a policy issue. This is especially so given the calls to institute building codes and the assertion that Trinidad is overdue for a “big one.”

Mandating building codes is not a cost-free exercise. Such regulations would increase the expenses for private sector contractors and property owners and, in respect to state buildings, such costs would be borne by the taxpayer, to the tune of billions of dollars.

Such a decision can only be taken in the context of a risk assessment. But the UWI seismologists have not quantified their prediction of a severe earthquake. Is there a 50 per cent probability of this occurring in the next 10 years? A 75 per cent probability in the next 20? A 99 per cent probability in the next century? And, even if buildings are retrofitted according to highest standards, does this provide protection in the case of magnitude 8 or 9 earthquake? If not, then that would be money wasted.

Without knowing these factors, neither property owners nor Government can calculate how much they should spend on such improvements. But the fact that our island experienced a 6.9 magnitude event with no loss of life and damage mainly to State-owned buildings (most of which were constructed under non-competitive bids) suggests that private sector owners have made an accurate cost-benefit analysis on their building standards in respect to earthquakes.

Elton Singh, Couva