| Summary: | Although Indonesia is situated on an earthquake-prone area, most of the
people are considered lay about earthquake. Ternate Island is one of earthquakeprone
areas in Indonesia but with minimum earthquake awareness shown by the
people, especially the people in Kelurahan Mangga Dua. Physical, social and
environmental vulnerability leads the people of Kelurahan Mangga Dua Utara in
risky situation when earthquake occurs. In order to reduce the risk and to cope
with the worst possibility, it is required to study the people�s understanding in
anticipating earthquake hazard.
Efforts to teach and give comprehension to the people were carried out in
the form of socialization. In taking the study, it was required to obtain data and
information about the characteristics of the local people in order to have
participants who reflected the people�s existing condition. Measuring the
understanding was carried out through questionnaires. Inspecting the people�s
houses was an effort to identify the house risks in earthquake hazard. Obtained
data were then related to existing mitigation concept and evaluated to have a
brief description on earthquake hazard comprehension.
Results of this research showed that people in Kelurahan Mangga Dua
Utara were still lack of understanding and comprehension about earthquake
hazard anticipation. The people have not been aware with the potential hazard
contained in their area, the cause, the mechanism, the impacts and mitigation
efforts of earthquake hazard. Either people or builders have not understood how
to make earthquake resistant buildings. The builders understanding and
comprehension were merely based on experience, not on awareness or structural
comprehension about earthquake retention as anticipation of the hazard. This was
proved by inspection results that in overall, houses were in risk to rumble when
earthquake occurred. Success level was categorized as poor that the hazard threat
in Kelurahan Mangga Dua Utara was still high. Dominant causing factors to this
were indiscipline behavior of the participants, uneven representation, absence
participants and incompetent mentors.
|
|---|