BUILDING REGULATIONFOR RESILIENCEManaging Risks for Safer Cities

BackgroundIn the last decade, low- and middle-income countries have

The world—and the developing world in particular—is embarking

experienced 53 percent of all disasters globally—but haveon a major urban development boom, a trend that makes safe andaccounted for 93 percent of disaster-related fatalities. This

regulated building practices all the more crucial. Currently, moredisproportionate impact stems in large part from unsafe andthan 50 percent of the global population is urban, and by 2050,unregulated urban development. According to the 2015 Global

this share is expected to rise to 66 percent. Some 90 percent ofAssessment Report (UNISDR), the future expected annual

this growth is expected in Africa and Asia,3 while in South Asia

losses in the built environment resulting from disasters such as

and Sub-Saharan Africa, urban development is expected to attract

earthquakes, tsunamis, cyclones and flooding are expected tomajor capital investment. By 2050, 1 billion new dwelling units willrise from roughly USD 300 billion to USD 415 billion by 2030.

2

be required to house the world’s growing population.4 But mostOften, such disaster events disproportionately impact poor andof this growth is expected to occur in cities with weak capacity

marginalized populations living in unsafe buildings and areas

to ensure risk-sensitive development and construction, and will

exposed to natural hazards – with hazard frequency and severity

take place as weather-related hazards become more frequent andlikely to increase in the future.

intense.

1

Objective
The proposed program aims to initiate a new building policy and regulatory strategy for the World Bank
Group. Specifically, it seeks to develop and promote a new stream of activities to increase regulatory
capacity and in turn promote a healthier and safer built environment. By leveraging good practice inbuilding regulation as part of a strategy to reduce both chronic risk and disaster risk, it will set
developing countries on the path to effective reform and long-term resilience.

A Window of Opportunity
In high-income countries, building codes and regulatory frameworks
have been incrementally improved over the course of the past century
in response to a combination of hazard impacts, structural failures andpublic health disasters. These mature systems have proven remarkably
powerful tools for increasing people’s safety and resilience and limiting
the risks that they face. For instance, Japan proves that an improved
building code can make a significant diﬀerence in the rate of building
collapses. When the 1995 Kobe earthquake struck, 97% of collapsedbuildings had been built under old building codes, while those thatcomplied with the most updated codes accounted for only 3% of thetotal number of collapsed buildings.5 In low- and middle-income
countries, however, regulatory systems have not developed in the sameway (if at all) and do not aﬀord the same protection. What we propose
for these countries is an accelerated path to regulatory maturity thatavoids a protracted evolution based on tragedy and failure. Instead,by adapting the lessons learned in high-income countries to the local
context, low- and middle-income countries can “leapfrog” toward
appropriate and eﬀective regulation.
The precise benefits of strong and effective building regulatory
frameworks are elaborated in the World Bank–Global Facility for
Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) report Building Regulation
for Resilience: Managing Risks for Safer Cities (April 2016) and aresummarized below. This report is a resource to assist policy makers,
governments, and donor entities as well as key private sector players
in leveraging good-practice building regulation to underpin eﬀective
risk reduction. By focusing on the role of building regulation inprotecting lives and property from both chronic and acute events,
the report supports a shift from disaster response toreduction of underlying risks.

Enhanced regulatory implementation in low- and middle income
countries has several important benefits:
Building code compliance saves lives.

While code

compliance may add to initial construction costs, the reduction
in loss of life and property in future hazard events more thancompensates for this increase. Consider the impact of two
diﬀerent earthquakes, one in Bam, Iran, and one in Paso Robles,
California, in 2003. The earthquakes were of similar magnitude,
but the death toll in Bam was more than 40,000—nearly half thecity’s population—while only two people died in Paso Robles. InBam, the 989 earthquake design codes were poorly implemented,and buildings were primarily unregulated, unreinforced masonrystructures. In Paso Robles, by contrast, earthquake design codes
had been in place since the 1930s, and the two deaths were due tothe failure of a pre-code, unreinforced masonry structure.

BUILDING REGULATION FOR RESILIENCE

Building code compliance is cost-effective. NewSafe buildings protect critical assets of the poorconstruction with appropriate design can be made disaster-and vulnerable. In developing countries where currencies

resilient for a small percentage of construction costs, on the orderfluctuate and banking systems are unstable, poor householdsof 5 to 10 percent, whereas ex post retrofits of existing vulnerable

often invest their savings in incremental housing construction.

structures may require expenditure in the range of 10 to 50 percent

Thus a single structural failure or natural disaster can destroyof the building value. In general, well-designed building and land
use regulations are eﬃcient and cost-eﬀective tools for limiting
chronic stresses (i.e. fire, spontaneous collapse, and unhealthfulconditions) as well as the shocks of natural catastrophes.

not only a building, but also a household’s entire savings. Safe
construction safeguards households’ assets, particularly amongpoor and vulnerable households. In addition, other contributing
institutions and regulatory instruments – all of which are part of aStrong regulatory frameworks encourage investment

larger regulatory ecosystem – can play an equally important role,in safe structures. Effective implementation of building

including tenure security, accountability mechanisms for building

regulations assures developers, investors, and insurers that built

and planning departments as well as clear rules on the liability ofstructures will withstand both chronic stresses and disasters.
Demonstrating an ability to ensure and enforce safe buildingbuilding practitioners.

practices can therefore create confidence that buildings are safe
and constitute sound investments.

Alignment with Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030)
In accord with Priority 3 of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk

• Developing building standards that are accessible, aﬀordable,Reduction (2015–2030),6 the program responds to and reinforces

and implementable by the poor and vulnerable, while also

the growing international consensus on the importance ofimproving tenure security and reducing the cost of entry to legalbuilding and land use regulation. The program aims to implement

land and housing markets

a vigorous building regulatory reform agenda by means of thefollowing actions:• Promoting innovation for eﬀective building control, including
simplifying administrative procedures and reducing regulatory• Ensuring the safety of new construction and reducing the risk ofexisting vulnerable settlements through regulatory reformcompliance costs• Leveraging private sector technical resources to expand the• Orienting regulatory and governance reforms toward compliancequalified workforce for regulatory implementation.

advice and support rather than just enforcement• Developing the capacity of national and subnational institutions
to implement building regulations that address chronic healthand safety issues as well as disaster risk (i.e., ensuring suﬃcientfunding, staﬃng, and training at the local level)

1

Munich Re, Geo Risks Research, Natcatservice, 2013, in United Nations Integrated Strategy for Disaster Reduction,Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (Geneva: UNISDR, 2015).

2

United Nations Integrated Strategy for Disaster Reduction, Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015
(Geneva: UNISDR, 2015).

3

United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, World Urbanization Prospects: The
2014 Revision (New York: United Nations, 2014).

4

R. Bilham, “The Seismic Future of Cities,” Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering 7 (2009): 839.

5https://media.worldbank.org/secure/learning_from_megadisasters/full_report_learningfrommegadisasters.pdf(page 34)

6

The Sendai Framework was adopted at the Third United Nations World Conference in Sendai, Japan, in March2015. Priority 3, “Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience,” seeks to “encourage the revision of existing or
the development of new building codes and standards . . . with the aim of making them more applicable within
the local context, . . . and reinforce the capacity to implement, survey and enforce such codes . . . with a view offostering disaster-resistance structures.”Call for Action: Building Regulation for Resilience ProgramThe program aims to bridge the implementation gap that arises
when concepts from mature regulatory systems are transferred todeveloping countries without specific adaptation to local cultural,economic, social and institutional factors aﬀecting compliance.
It considers a localized and calibrated approach, along withawareness of the wider socioeconomic and development context,
to be essential. With a specific focus on vulnerable settlements inlow- and middle-income countries, the program aims to develop
the larger regulatory “ecology” of institutions that support eﬀective
building code implementation. These institutions provide the legal
and financial mechanisms as well as certified technical competence
required to achieve regulatory compliance. Special eﬀorts will bemade to engage and galvanize a wide range of relevant partners;
maximizing their comparative strengths and experiences will makeit possible to address all types of construction.
The program includes four broad components:
National level legislation. This component establishes orimproves the national legislative framework responsible formandating the construction of safe buildings and enables theconstruction process to proceed efficiently. Activities will bebased on nationally defined priorities. In addition, future financialinvestments (by governments, donors, and/or multilateralinstitutions) will fund national hazard mapping programs.

Building code development and maintenance. This
component supports the development of national model codes
based on local context and consensus. It establishes the basic
institutional capacity to develop, adapt, and update appropriate
standards of construction through participatory and transparent
processes at the national level. It will pay particular attention
to the safe utilization of indigenous materials and to criteria forevaluating and strengthening vulnerable existing buildings.
Local implementation. This component focuses on the practicaladministration of local building departments. It includes managing
the core functions of building technical assistance, plan review,
site inspection, permitting, and enforcement, with the goal of
facilitating voluntary compliance. Advisory activities will prioritize
outreach services for informal sector builders in order to expand
access to the benefits of the building safety and regulatory
processes.
Knowledge sharing and measurement. The component buildsa collaborative knowledge platform for exchange of experienceand innovation related to building regulatory implementation.
It develops and maintains common core methodologies andresources for the assessment of regulatory capacity, eﬀectiveness,and efficiency. It also carries out diagnostics, risk audits, andevaluations of regulatory system capacity and develops specialized
and standardized tools for assessment and rating purposes.

Partners
The Building Regulation for Resilience program will be apartnership of governments, international development
institutions, and key public, private and non-governmental actorsin the building sector—specifically professional associations andsocieties related to codes of practice; leading academic institutions
in engineering, architecture, urban planning, construction,and building technology; accredited training institutions forthe construction labor force; bodies responsible for licensing
procedures for building professionals; and implementers of quality
control processes for building materials.

The program will seek to maximize the respective strengthsof the public, private and nongovernmental sectors to create acomprehensive building regulatory regime. In particular, partners
will be sought to help develop and enforce modern compliancetools for improved information and communications systems
aimed at risk management, building practitioners’ certification,
private third-party accreditation to provide review and inspections,and the use of insurance mechanisms to augment building control.

CONTACTS
Thomas Moullier
Senior Regulatory Specialist
The World Bank
tmoullier@worldbank.org+1 (202) 473-6149

Niels Holm-Nielsen
Global Lead for Disaster Risk
Management
The World Bank
nholmnielsen@worldbank.org+1 (202) 458-1709

Francis GhesquiereManager
Global Facility for Disaster Reduction
and Recovery (GFDRR)
fghesquiere@worldbank.org+1 (202) 458-1964