JDR Vol.7 No.6 pp. 803-809
doi: 10.20965/jdr.2012.p0803

Survey Report:

Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment Anticipating the Earthquake Hazard from Lembang Fault: A Case Study of Bandung Institute of Technology, West Java, Indonesia

Farica Edgina Yosafat*, Arif Rohman**, Didik Wahju Widjaja***,
and Irwan Meilano**,***

*Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology, Physical Oceanography Research Group, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia

**Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology, Geodesy Research Group, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia

***Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology, Graduate on Earthquake and Active Tectonic, Bandung Institute of Technology, Indonesia

July 7, 2012
October 9, 2012
December 1, 2012
assessment, preparedness, awareness, response, capacity, Lembang fault

Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB) campus is located in Bandung and has seismic hazard from active Lembang fault. In this study, one aspect of vulnerability of the campus was evaluated. It appears that in the campus there are enough spaces for evacuation during the emergency time. To determine the capacity of ITB members to face earthquakes, a survey was conducted and the result was analyzed. Generally, ITB members have medium level of awareness but very low level of preparedness. The capacity index of the ITB members is 0.39 of scale 1, which indicates that the level of ITB members’ capacity to deal with earthquake hazards is still low. The indexes were also analyzed based on faculty, occupation, and gender.

  1. [1] Daniel Rodríguez Velázquez, “Social Resilience, Disaster Prevention, and Climate Change: Challenges from Mexico,” Journal of Disaster Research Vol.5 No.2, 2010.
  2. [2] International Strategy to Disaster Reduction, “2009 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Risk and Poverty in Changing Climate,” United Nations, Geneve, Switzerland, 2009.
  3. [3] Yoshimi Nishi and Hiroyuki Yamamoto, “Social Flux and Disaster Management: An Essay on the Construction of an Indonesian Model for Disaster Management and Reconstruction,” Journal of Disaster Research, Vol.7, No.1, 2012.
  4. [4] California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, “2007 State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan,” 2007.
  5. [5] J. Oyane et al. (Eds.), “Sociology of Disaster,” Men and Society in Disaster Series 1, 2007.
  6. [6] Tim Revisi Peta Gempa Indonesia, “Ringkasan Hasil Studi Tim Revisi Peta Gempa Indonesia 2010,” Table 3, 2010.
  7. [7] Deny Hidayati, “Striving to Reduce Disaster Risk: Vulnerable Communities with Low Levels of Preparedness in Indonesia,” Journal of Disaster Research, Vol.7, No.1, 2012.
  8. [8] Irina Rafliana, “Disaster Education in Indonesia: Learning How It Works from Six Years of Experience After Indian Ocean Tsunami in 2004,” Journal of Disaster Research Vol.7 No.1, 2012.
  9. [9] G. K. Jimee, Cees VanWesten, and Veronica Botero, “Seismic Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment: A Case Study of Lalitpur Sub-Metropolitan City, Nepal,” Proceedings 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, 2008.
  10. [10] Institut Teknologi Bandung, “Fakta dan Angka Institut Teknologi Bandung,” retrieved 10 December 2011, from Institut Teknologi Bandung: [access possible at Nov. 17, 2012]
  11. [11] Institut Teknologi Bandung, “Siskumdang – ITB,” retrieved 10 December 2012, from Institut Teknologi Bandung: [access possible at Nov. 17, 2012]

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, IE9,10,11, Opera.

Last updated on Apr. 19, 2018