Government's Seismic Code Rollback Sparks Concerns Over India's Earthquake Preparedness

The Union government's recent decision to roll back India's newly introduced seismic zonation map and revised earthquake design code has triggered significant concern among seismologists and geologists across the nation. Many experts have expressed that this move could potentially weaken the country's preparedness for a future major earthquake, posing serious risks to public safety and infrastructure.

Revised Framework and Its Withdrawal

The revised framework, which was introduced in November 2025 by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), proposed substantial updates to India's seismic design norms. A key change included placing the entire Himalayan arc under a new Zone VI, which represents the highest seismic risk category. This update aimed to reflect the latest scientific understanding of earthquake hazards in the region.

However, the government's withdrawal of this code has been described by several experts as "a missed opportunity to strengthen India's disaster resilience". This is particularly alarming for regions that scientists have long warned could experience a devastating earthquake, such as the Himalayan belt.

Expert Reactions and Warnings

Senior geoscientist CP Rajendran termed the rollback a "bad step". He stated, "We do not know what triggered the government to roll back such a bold policy. The new seismic code was based on the knowledge the scientific community had accumulated about earthquakes and their possible impact on India." Rajendran further emphasized that scientists have repeatedly warned that the Himalayan region could witness a magnitude eight or larger quake in the future, making the new code a crucial reflection of the real earthquake risks the country faces.

Geologists have pointed out that India's seismic risk is far from marginal. According to expert assessments, nearly 59% of the country's landmass and approximately 80% of the population fall under moderate to very high seismic hazard zones. This highlights the widespread vulnerability to earthquake events.

Piyoosh Rautela, a geologist and former executive director of the Uttarakhand State Disaster Management Authority, noted that the proposed revisions to the code represented a major step forward in improving the country's preparedness. He explained, "The proposed revisions marked a major step in strengthening India's seismic design framework to better protect the country's built environment from future earthquakes." Rautela added that the newly-proposed Zone VI covering the Himalayan arc acknowledged the persistent tectonic threat along the Indo-Eurasian plate boundary, similar to the earthquakes seen during the 2001 Bhuj and 2015 Nepal events.

Technical Upgrades and Safety Measures

The revised code introduced stronger safety measures designed to enhance building resilience. These included:

Improved design spectra for better structural analysis.
A 10-30% increase in base shear requirements to withstand greater seismic forces.
Stricter rules for structural irregularities to prevent weak points in buildings.
More rigorous geotechnical and dynamic analyses for comprehensive risk assessment.

These changes aimed to promote performance-based engineering, ensuring buildings were designed not only to survive shaking but also to minimize collapse risks and economic losses during large quakes. Another senior seismologist associated with a premier government institution warned that the rollback could directly affect preparedness, stating, "Preparedness will also go down if the earthquake hazard is downgraded." This expert emphasized that scientific hazard assessments should ideally guide infrastructure planning and urban development to mitigate risks effectively.

Practical Implications and Concerns

Experts acknowledged that the revised code had major implications for construction practices and ongoing infrastructure projects across the country. According to estimates shared by specialists, implementing the new norms could increase construction costs for multi-storey buildings significantly. For structures ranging from 4 storeys to over 20 storeys, costs could rise by Rs 100 to more than Rs 600 per square foot, potentially raising overall project costs by 20% to 80%.

The revised code itself introduced several technical changes aimed at aligning India with global seismic design practices. These included:

Shifting hazard assessment from a deterministic approach to probabilistic seismic hazard assessment, using detailed datasets on active faults and ground motion behavior.
Extending the design spectral range to 10 seconds to better account for tall structures.
Introducing response-history analysis using real ground-motion records for more accurate simulations.
Adding provisions to account for soil flexibility, revised liquefaction assessment methods, and new guidelines for buildings on slopes and the protection of architectural elements and utilities.

Reasons for Rollback and Government Correspondence

Despite these technical upgrades, they were also among the reasons cited for the rollback. A senior expert associated with the BIS committee that oversees seismic safety codes noted that the revised 2025 document, though scientifically robust, was extremely technical. This expert explained, "The code was scientific, but very complex. Many practising structural engineers responsible for implementing it on the ground may not be able to easily interpret or apply it, causing more confusion."

Government correspondence further reflected practical concerns. On February 25, the secretary of housing and urban affairs wrote to the cabinet secretary, warning that the revised code could adversely affect existing and ongoing infrastructure projects. It was also noted that it might potentially trigger litigation in projects already awarded under earlier standards. Subsequently, the cabinet secretariat called for the rollback on March 3, leading to the current situation.

This decision has left many in the scientific community worried about the future of India's earthquake preparedness, urging a reconsideration to balance scientific advancements with practical implementation challenges.