Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Survey Report on the Reconstruction Following
the Earthquake in Marmara, Turkey on August 17, 1999
Tetsushi Kurita
Senior Researcher, Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Overview of the Earthquake
The earthquake which occurred in the north-western part of the Republic ofTurkey on August 17, 1999 (magnitude: 7.8) was a major disaster, claiming
over 17,000 lives and leaving approximately 32,000 injured in and around Izmit
in the Marmara region (as of November 1999; figures issued by theGovernment of Turkey). An overview of the damage is shown in Table 1.
Damage to buildings is known to have occurred on a particularly large scale,and it can be confirmed that many of the fatalities are attributable to this cause.
Due to damage to bridges (see Figure 1), buildings (see Figure 2) and otherstructures, the adverse effect on the daily life and economic activities of thelocal community was also particularly severe.

Figure 1 Bridge damaged by the earthquake of August 17, 1999

Figure 2 Building damaged by the earthquake of August 17, 1999

1Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Table 1 Overview of the damage caused by the Marmara Earthquake
Category ofdamage

Humancasualties

Damage tobuildings (asofSeptember30, 1999)

Socialinfrastructure

Breakdown ofdamage
Dead (as ofNovember 16,1999)
Injured (as of
October 14,1999)
Totally or largely
destroyed(residential)(commercial)
Partiallydestroyed(residential)(commercial)
Sustained minor
damage(residential)(commercial)

Extent of damage

Remarks

17,26990% of the fatalities occurred in Kocaeli, Sakarya andYalova.

32,43085% of the injuries were sustained in Kocaeli,
Istanbul, Sakarya and Yalova.

77,342 units
66,441 homes
10,901 offices

Mostly reinforced concrete structures of medium
height77,169 units
67,242 homes
9,927 offices
89,872 units
80,160 homes
9,712 offices

Expressways

Most roads
remainedpassable

Railways

Out of use forseveral days

Ports

Some damage

Airports

Major damage toIzmit military
airfield

Water supply

Water supply
interrupted

SewersBreakdowns

Electricity

Power cuts

Gas

Slight damage

Telecommunicati
ons

Some damage

OtherGasoline tankfires

・An overpass collapsed, roadbeds and substructuressubsided, tollgates collapsed, and other damage
was seen, but in areas where roads were blocked,
diversions were set up.
・Railway facilities were reinstated in 2 days.
・ Trains were out of action due to the fire at theTurpas refinery.
・An embankment was permanently deformed by 50cm.
・One crane was destroyed by the effects ofliquefaction.
・Izmit military airfield’s control tower almostcollapsed.
・Istanbul Airport was undamaged.
・Water purification plants were swiftly restored.
・In some areas, water supplies were interrupted forseveral months, due to cracks in supply pipes andother damage.
・Breakdowns were caused by damage to concrete
sewer pipes.
・Immediately after the earthquake, the whole ofwestern Turkey was without power for 2 or 3 hours.
・Some areas were without power for several weeks.
・Propane gas is widely used, so damage was slight.
・The telecommunications system was congested
and paralyzed immediately after the earthquake.
・Telephone systems were reinstated in 2 to 5 days.
・Caused by sloshing due to seismic ground motion
・Continued to burn for several days
・6 floating-roof cylindrical tanks caught fire, and theliquid they contained was completely burned up in 5cases.
・Spherical tanks were undamaged.

Source: Survey Report on the Collection of Data on the Earthquakes in Turkey and Taiwan, and on
the Verification of Japan’s Earthquake Countermeasures, Asian Disaster Reduction Center, 2000

2Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Economic damage, according to the World Bank’s preliminary assessment
report (dated September 14, 1999), is set between US$3.1 and 6.5 billion. Of
this, between US$1.1 and 3 billion is damage to housing, between US$1.1 and2.6 billion is damage to enterprise, and about US$500 million is damage toessential services. The remainder consists of damage to roads, ports, railways
and municipal infrastructure.

Table 2 World Bank’s preliminary assessment of damage caused by theMarmara Earthquake
SectorHousing
Municipal infrastructure
Environment
Roads, bridges andhighways
Ports
Railways
Telecommunications
Electricity
Oil and gas
Enterprise
Education
HealthTotalDamage assessment (US$ million)
Lower boundUpper bound
1,100
3,000
70
70
N/A
N/A
7878

1272
3882387
1,100
100
37
3,076

1272
3882
387
2,600
100
376,476

Source: Turkey: Marmara Earthquake Assessment, September 14, 1999, The World Bank

3

Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Overview of Earthquake Response Activities
Search and Rescue Activities 5)
Immediately after the earthquake struck, search and rescue activities werecarried out by local residents themselves. Within 24 hours of the earthquake,several tens of members of AKUT, Turkey’s national civilian voluntary searchand rescue organization, began search and rescue activities, and about athousand personnel from overseas aid teams (from 24 countries) joined inwithin 48 hours. By the 20th (the third day after the disaster), 50,000 Turkisharmy troops had begun their search and rescue activities.
Due to traffic restrictions, trunk roads were extremely congested on the first andsecond days. From the third day onwards, heavy machinery was brought in tostart clearing away rubble. The central government deployed heavy machinery
according to damage estimates by the governors of the provinces affected.
Although the heavy machinery was procured mainly from the stricken northwestern region, some was brought in from as far as 600 km away.
Emergency Response5)
Although the Prime Minister’s national crisis action centre reportedly launched
its emergency response activities a few hours after the earthquake, on-the-spot
response by central or regional official bodies was extremely slow (reportedly
taking between 1 and 4 days). Due to the lack of a systematic plan, distributionof water and food was slow, and as a result, large quantities of spoiled food(bread and other items) piled up uneaten, creating mounds of garbage.
The Government of Turkey requested help from the international community inthe form of emergency aid, fire-fighting troops, recovery & reconstruction
assistance, and so forth.
ProblemsMitchell5) makes the following points:
・ For several days immediately following the earthquake, crisis control andsearch & rescue activities by the government seem to have been extremely
slow and inefficient.
・ On the day of the earthquake, command and control was extremely limited
at all levels. Also, it was reported that, for a four-hour period, neither thePresident nor the Prime Minister could be contacted, because there was nobackup facility for the telecommunications lines between Ankara andIstanbul.
・ The huge extent of the stricken area, inadequate planning, lack ofexperience, lack of resources, lack of effective leadership and other factors
militated against the smooth initial launching of an emergency response in
the form of search and rescue activities.

4Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

According to the International Federation of Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties 6), following the Marmara Earthquake, 50,000 people were rescued
from beneath rubble, but 98% of these were rescued by local residents, andthere is obviously is a limit to what the government could do in terms of searchand rescue activities in the event of a disaster on so large a scale as this.

5Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Recovery and Reconstruction Activities
Reconstruction ProgramsAlthough the Government of Turkey itself has no official overarchingreconstruction program with regard to the aftermath of the Marmara Earthquake,it has worked with external bodies, chiefly the World Bank, to draft
reconstruction programs. These reconstruction programs are the two shown in
Table 3: although they are referred to in World Bank reports, they do not exist
as discrete documents. The bulk of these two reconstruction programs isconstituted by World Bank projects -- the Emergency Earthquake Recovery
Loan (EERL) and the Marmara Earthquake Emergency Reconstruction Project(MEER) -- mentioned below.
Because the “Turkish government’s earthquake reconstruction program”
requires an immense amount of money, assistance is being provided by otherfinancial institutions and aid organizations besides the World Bank.
A comprehensive Framework Program has been drafted by the World Bank, theUnited Nations Development Program (UNDP), the EU and other internationalorganizations and donors, and is being financed by the European Investment
Bank as well as the World Bank.

Table 3 Turkey’s reconstruction programs
Total amount(US$ million )Program
Turkish government’s earthquake reconstruction program
World Bank’s comprehensive Framework Program

62,6291,795.75

Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Table 4 Cost breakdown of Turkish government’s earthquake reconstruction
program
Total cost(trillion Turkish Lire)(US$ million)
108
198

Program

Housing support
Support for rebuilding and51
108
repair
1. Social aid
Cash lump-sum
1838
payments
Subtotal
177344
2. Social security benefits1324
3. Other social projects
1529
Tax deferments
105233
Assistance for small-scale1123
4. Businessenterpriserehabilitation
Credit program
24
Subtotal118260
Housing576
1,103
Land management and1936
building standards
5. Reconstruction
and disaster
Infrastructure
235
450
damageDisaster insurance
143273
mitigation
Emergency response
57110
systemSubtotal
1,030
1,972
Total
1,353
2,629
Source: Technical Annex for an Emergency Earthquake Recovery Loan in the amount of
US$252.53 Million to the Republic of Turkey, October 27, 1999, The World Bank

7

Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Table 5

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Cost breakdown of World Bank’s comprehensive Framework
ProgramCost(US$ million)

Component

DisasterResponse
System andRisk Reduction
StrategyA

A1 National
Emergency
Management
System
A2 Disaster
Insurance
SchemeA3 Land Use
Planning andEnforcement ofConstruction
Codes
A4 Cadastre
Renovation andLand
Management
Subtotal

110.17

World Bank, Governmentof Turkey

273.00World Bank, Governmentof Turkey

11.78

World Bank, Governmentof Turkey

24.21

World Bank, Governmentof Turkey

419.16

B

Trauma Program for adults

CConstruction of Permanent Housing in
Bolu, Kocaeli and Yalova

293.32

DProject Management

12.69

E

Business Rehabilitation

109.72FGH

6.89

Construction of Permanent Housing in
Bolu, Sakarya, Yalova, Istanbul, Bursa
and Eskisehir
Repair of Existing Housing Stock andHealthcare Facilities
Rebuilding and Repair of Roads, Water
Supply Systems, Wastewater Systems
and Power Distribution Networks
Front-end Fee

Source of funding

World Bank, Governmentof Turkey
World Bank, Governmentof Turkey
World Bank, Governmentof Turkey
World Bank, Governmentof Turkey
European Investment
Bank177.07

European Investment
Bank632.12

European Investment
Bank139.73

European Investment
Bank5.05

Of which US$505 million
1,795.75 to be loaned by the WorldBank
Source: MEER Project Information Document, The World Bank
Total Program Cost

World Bank Reconstruction Programs
The reconstruction programs whose drafting was spearheaded by the WorldBank are the EERL (US$252.53 million) and the MEER (US$737.11 million (ofwhich the World Bank is to loan US$505 million). The EERL was used for shortterm purposes, while the MEER was used for short-term and medium-term
projects. In the Turkish government’s earthquake reconstruction program shown8Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Centerin Table 4, item 5 (reconstruction and disaster damage mitigation) was coveredby the MEER, as were items A to D in the World Bank’s comprehensiveFramework Program shown in Table 5, while the remaining parts of the Turkish
government’s earthquake reconstruction program were covered by the EERL.
At the request of the Government of Turkey, the World Bank dispatched a teamof experts immediately after the earthquake: they drew up a damage
assessment report in about three weeks. This report led to the aforementioned
comprehensive reconstruction programs and to the World Bank projects (EERLand MEER).
Relative Size of Contributions by Donors
In terms of the size of contributions made by donors to the recovery after theMarmara Earthquake, the World Bank provided by far the largest sum of money.
Other bodies contributing money included the European Investment Bank, theCounsil of Europe Development Bank (CEB), and the Japan Bank forInternational Cooperation.

9Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction Center

Reconstruction Achievements and Challenges Remaining
Under the reconstruction projects spearheaded by the World Bank, the buildingof permanent housing and the provision of infrastructure is proceeding smoothly,and on the whole, it is fair to say that this work is yielding good results. However,on the urban regeneration front, a number of tasks remain outstanding, chiefly
those listed below.7)
1) The tradition of gecekondus -- poorly-constructed housing erected without
planning permission -- is entrenched in Turkish society, making it difficult toconvince householders of the need to replace their homes with earthquakeresistant structures.
2) Various schemes linked to the earthquake reconstruction -- such as thesystem for state compensation for damaged buildings under the Disaster
Law, and the scheme for partial ownership of real-estate, which give theowners very powerful rights -- are beset by major problems, and reform islikely to be needed in the future.
3) Home-owners are able to acquire new houses using long-term low-interest
loans (due to high inflation, these are effectively almost free handouts).
However, it is not clear what measures are being adopted to help renters(temporary rent assistance is being provided, but this is not a permanentmeasure).

10

Survey Report on the Reconstruction
Following the Earthquake in Marmara

Asian Disaster Reduction CenterReferences
1) The World Bank, Turkey: Marmara Earthquake Assessment, September 14,1999.
2) The World Bank, Project Appraisal Document on A Proposed Loan in theAmount of US 505 Million to the Republic of Turkey for A Marmara
Earthquake Emergency Reconstruction Project.
3) Riken Earthquake Disaster Mitigation Research Center, Report on theKocaeli, Turkey Earthquake of August 17, 1999, The 1999 Turkey
Earthquake Report, Volume 1, August 2000.
4) Urban Disaster Research Institute, Asian Disaster Reduction Center, Survey
Report on the Collection of Data on the Earthquakes in Turkey and Taiwan,and on the Verification of Japan’s Earthquake Countermeasures, March2000.
5) William A. Mitchell, Emergency Response and Social Impacts, EarthquakeSpectra, Kocaeli, Turkey, Earthquake of August 17, 1999 Reconnaissance
Report, Supplement A to Vol. 16, pp.439-452, March 2000.
6) International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, World
Disasters Report: Focus on Reducing Risk, March 2002.
7) Itsuki Nakabayashi, The 1999 Kocaeli Earthquake in Turkey and Issue ofUrban Reconstruction, City Planning Review, 223, February 25, 2000.

11