prev next front |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22 |23 |24 |25 |26 |27 |28 |29 |30 |31 |32 |33 |34 |35 |36 |37 |38 |39 |40 |41 |42 |43 |44 |45 |46 |47 |48 |49 |50 |51 |52 |53 |54 |55 |56 |57 |58| review
! Determine the risk of toxic releases and other nontraditional hazards following earthquakes.
! Identify the cultural and socioeconomic determinants of earthquake injury.  For example, despite the potential hazards associated with unreinforced masonry buildings, such buildings frequently offer the only affordable shelter for economically and socially disadvantaged residents and marginal minority businesses.  Therefore, we should direct research at developing architectural, administrative, and managerial hazard-reduction techniques that are tailored to reduce the risks of different ethnic minorities in earthquake-prone areas of the country.
 
! Attempt to determine worldwide and by country or disaster-prone area 1) the proportion of people who are effectively protected at that moment by aseismic buildings, both at home and in the workplace and 2) the cost of providing complete protection for the population in question (137).