Effects of and responses to earthquakes

Effects and responses

The effects of an earthquake are the harm it does:

are caused directly by the ground shaking: buildings and bridges collapse, people are killed and injured.
happen as a result: tsunamis, landslides, fires, disease, homelessness, job losses and the cost of rebuilding.

The responses are what people do about it:

, in the hours and days after: search and rescue, medical care, emergency shelter, food and water.
, over months and years: rebuilding homes and infrastructure, restoring jobs, and reducing the risk next time.

The two case studies here, in areas of contrasting wealth, show how effects and responses vary.

Key terms

Chile, 2010: the earthquake

Where and when: off the coast of the Maule region of central Chile, at 3:34 am on 27 February 2010. It had a magnitude of 8.8, one of the most powerful earthquakes ever recorded.

Why: at the where the Nazca plate sinks beneath the South American plate.

The country: Chile is one of South America's richest countries. It has a long history of earthquakes, strict building codes for earthquake-resistant buildings, and well-organised emergency services.

Key terms

Nepal, 2015: the earthquake

Where and when: centred near Barpak in the Gorkha district, about 76 km north-west of the capital, Kathmandu, at 11:56 am on Saturday 25 April 2015. It had a magnitude of 7.8 (Nepal's own seismological centre recorded 7.6).

Why: where the Indian plate pushes into the Eurasian plate, building the Himalayas.

The country: Nepal was one of the poorest countries in Asia. Many homes, especially in rural areas, were built of brick or stone without earthquake-resistant features. Steep mountain valleys and few roads made places hard to reach.

Key terms

The effects compared

	Chile, 2010	Nepal, 2015
Primary	About 520 deaths. Around 220,000 homes had to be repaired or rebuilt. Roads, bridges and buildings damaged, in Concepción and elsewhere	Over 8,790 deaths and 22,300 injuries. Over half a million houses destroyed. Nearly 7,000 schools damaged. Hundreds of historic monuments destroyed or badly damaged
Secondary	A hit coastal towns such as Constitución and the port of Talcahuano. Damage cost about US$30 billion. Looting in Concepción	, which swept away villages in the Langtang valley. A strong aftershock 17 days later. About 8 million people affected; at least 700,000 pushed into poverty. Damage and losses of about US$7 billion

Exam tip

Use specific figures, and say whether each effect is primary or secondary, social, economic or environmental.

The responses compared

	Chile, 2010	Nepal, 2015
Immediate	The government declared a state of catastrophe and sent troops, 14,000 within days, to restore order and deliver aid. A night-time curfew in Concepción	The government asked for international help within hours. India's rescue teams arrived first; 134 search and rescue teams came from 34 countries. Helicopters rescued 7,558 people. The UN appealed for US$422 million
Long-term	A national reconstruction plan, paid for partly by tax rises, including a US$2.5 billion housing plan announced in March 2010	A National Reconstruction Authority, set up in December 2015. Families received housing grants of 300,000 rupees, paid in stages, if they rebuilt to earthquake-resistant standards. Rebuilding was slow

Why were they so different?

Chile's earthquake was much stronger, yet Nepal's killed about 17 times as many people. Why?

Wealth: Chile could afford strict building codes, trained emergency services and its own rebuilding. Nepal relied on international aid, and many families couldn't afford to rebuild safely.
Buildings: most of Chile's buildings were designed to withstand shaking; many of Nepal's rural homes were not.
Landscape: Nepal's mountains caused landslides and made it hard to reach villages.
Timing: Chile's struck at night; Nepal's was on a Saturday, when schools were closed, which saved many children's lives.

Judgement: wealth mattered most, because it shaped how buildings were made and how quickly people could be reached and rehoused. But the size, depth and timing of an earthquake also affect its toll.

Exam practice

Plan your own answer first, then open the model answers to see what each level looks like.

9 marks · about 12 minutes · +3 SPaG

To what extent do the effects of earthquakes depend on a country's wealth? Use examples.

To what extent means: Weigh up how far something is true, with evidence on both sides, then give a clear judgement.

Link it

Use the facts from:

Chile 2010 and Nepal 2015 earthquakes (Maule, Chile, and Gorkha, Nepal, 27 February 2010 and 25 April 2015)

Level 1 (Basic)· 3/9 marks (band 1–3)

Rich countries can afford better buildings so fewer people die. In poor countries more people die. Nepal had a big earthquake and lots of people died.

Why this level: A simple point about wealth with a vague example and no figures. There is no judgement, and other factors aren't considered. To reach Level 2: compare two named earthquakes with facts, and explain how wealth made the difference.

Level 2 (Clear)· 5/9 marks (band 4–6)

Wealth matters a lot. Chile is richer than Nepal and has strict building codes, so its magnitude 8.8 earthquake in 2010 killed about 520 people. Nepal's 2015 earthquake was smaller, magnitude 7.8, but killed over 8,790 people, because many homes were not built to resist earthquakes. Chile also sent 14,000 troops within days. So the effects of earthquakes depend on wealth.

Why this level: Clear, accurate use of both case studies to explain how wealth shaped the effects. But it only argues one side, so the judgement isn't weighed. To reach Level 3: consider other factors, such as landscape and timing, then judge how far wealth matters.

Level 3 (Detailed)· 8/9 marks (band 7–9)

Wealth matters a great deal. Chile could afford strict building codes, so its magnitude 8.8 earthquake in 2010 killed about 520 people, while Nepal's smaller magnitude 7.8 earthquake in 2015 killed over 8,790, many in rural homes that weren't built to resist earthquakes. Wealth also shapes responses: Chile sent 14,000 troops within days and announced a US$2.5 billion housing plan, while Nepal relied on 134 rescue teams from 34 countries. However, wealth isn't the only factor. Nepal's mountains caused landslides that buried villages in the Langtang valley and made remote areas hard to reach. Timing mattered too: Nepal's earthquake struck on a Saturday, when schools were closed, which probably saved many children. Wealth can even raise some effects: Chile's damage cost about US$30 billion, far more than Nepal's, because its buildings were worth more. Overall, wealth is the most important factor in how many people die, because it decides how well buildings are built and how fast help arrives, but landscape and timing change the effects too.

Why this level: Detailed, accurate evidence from both earthquakes; other factors are weighed against wealth, and the conclusion explains how far wealth matters. A small extra point, such as the strength of the tsunami in Chile, could secure 9.

Take the quiz