Earthquake Case Study: Chile 2010

Chile earthquake 2010.

A shallow focused earthquake of magnitude 8.8 affected Chile in February 2010. Chile is a middle-income country.

Illustrative background for What happened in the earthquake?

What happened in the earthquake?

  • E.g. foreign aid wasn’t needed to enable Chile to recover.
  • The earthquake was caused by the subduction of the Nazca Plate under the South American Plate.
  • The epicentre of the earthquake was just off the coast of Chile.

Illustrative background for Primary effects

Primary effects

  • 500 people were killed.
  • US$30 billion of damage.

Illustrative background for Secondary effects

Secondary effects

  • Coastal areas were flooded by a tsunami.
  • Landslides blocked some roads.

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

Responses to the earthquake

  • A rapid response by emergency services.
  • Main roads were repaired within a day.
  • 30,000 emergency shelters were built.
  • A reconstruction plan to help 200,000 households.

1 The Challenge of Natural Hazards

1.1 Natural Hazards

1.1.1 Types of Natural Hazards

1.1.2 Hazard Risk

1.1.3 Consequences of Natural Hazards

1.1.4 End of Topic Test - Natural Hazards

1.1.5 Exam-Style Questions - Natural Hazards

1.2 Tectonic Hazards

1.2.1 Tectonic Plates

1.2.2 Tectonic Plates & Convection Currents

1.2.3 Plate Margins & Volcanoes

1.2.4 Effects of Volcanoes

1.2.5 Responses to Volcanic Eruptions

1.2.6 Earthquakes

1.2.7 Earthquakes 2

1.2.8 Responses to Earthquakes

1.2.9 Case Studies: The L'Aquila & Kashmir Earthquakes

1.2.10 Earthquake Case Study: Chile 2010

1.2.11 Earthquake Case Study: Nepal 2015

1.2.12 Living with Tectonic Hazards

1.2.13 End of Topic Test - Tectonic Hazards

1.2.14 Exam-Style Questions - Tectonic Hazards

1.2.15 Tectonic Hazards - Statistical Skills

1.3 Weather Hazards

1.3.1 Global Atmospheric Circulation

1.3.2 UK Weather Hazards

1.3.3 Tropical Storms

1.3.4 Features of Tropical Storms

1.3.5 Impact of Tropical Storms

1.3.6 Tropical Storms Case Study: Katrina

1.3.7 Tropical Storms Case Study: Haiyan

1.3.8 UK Weather Hazards Case Study: Somerset 2014

1.3.9 End of Topic Test - Weather Hazards

1.3.10 Exam-Style Questions - Weather Hazards

1.3.11 Weather Hazards - Statistical Skills

1.4 Climate Change

1.4.1 Evidence for Climate Change

1.4.2 Causes of Climate Change

1.4.3 Effects of Climate Change

1.4.4 Managing Climate Change

1.4.5 End of Topic Test - Climate Change

1.4.6 Exam-Style Questions - Climate Change

1.4.7 Climate Change - Statistical Skills

2 The Living World

2.1 Ecosystems

2.1.1 Ecosystems

2.1.2 Ecosystem Cascades & Global Ecosystems

2.1.3 Ecosystem Case Study: Freshwater Ponds

2.2 Tropical Rainforests

2.2.1 Tropical Rainforests - Intro & Interdependence

2.2.2 Adaptations & Biodiversity of Tropical Rainforests

2.2.3 Deforestation

2.2.4 Case Study: Deforestation in the Amazon Rainforest

2.2.5 Sustainable Management of Rainforests

2.2.6 Case Study: Malaysian Rainforest

2.2.7 End of Topic Test - Tropical Rainforests

2.2.8 Exam-Style Questions - Tropical Rainforests

2.2.9 Deforestation - Statistical Skills

2.3 Hot Deserts

2.3.1 Overview of Hot Deserts

2.3.2 Biodiversity & Adaptation to Hot Deserts

2.3.3 Case Study: Sahara Desert

2.3.4 Desertification

2.3.5 Case Study: Thar Desert

2.3.6 End of Topic Test - Hot Deserts

2.3.7 Exam-Style Questions - Hot Deserts

2.4 Tundra & Polar Environments

2.4.1 Overview of Cold Environments

2.4.2 Biodiversity in Cold Environments

2.4.3 Case Study: Alaska

2.4.4 Sustainable Management

2.4.5 Case Study: Svalbard

2.4.6 End of Topic Test - Tundra & Polar Environments

2.4.7 Exam-Style Questions - Cold Environments

3 Physical Landscapes in the UK

3.1 The UK Physical Landscape

3.1.1 The UK Physical Landscape

3.2 Coastal Landscapes in the UK

3.2.1 Types of Wave, Weathering & Mass Movement

3.2.2 Processes of Erosion & Wave-Cut Platforms

3.2.3 Headlands, Bays, Caves, Arches & Stacks

3.2.4 Transportation & Deposition

3.2.5 Spits, Bars & Sand Dunes

3.2.6 Case Study: Landforms on the Dorset Coast

3.2.7 Types of Coastal Management

3.2.8 Coastal Management Case Study - Holderness

3.2.9 Coastal Management Case Study: Swanage

3.2.10 Coastal Management Case Study - Lyme Regis

3.2.11 End of Topic Test - Coastal Landscapes in the UK

3.2.12 Exam-Style Questions - Coasts

3.3 River Landscapes in the UK

3.3.1 The River Valley

3.3.2 River Valley Case Study - River Tees

3.3.3 Erosion, Transportation & Deposition

3.3.4 Waterfalls, Gorges & Interlocking Spurs

3.3.5 Meanders & Oxbow Lakes

3.3.6 Floodplains & Levees

3.3.7 Estuaries

3.3.8 Case Study: The River Clyde

3.3.9 River Management

3.3.10 Hard & Soft Flood Defences

3.3.11 River Management Case Study - Boscastle

3.3.12 River Management Case Study - Banbury

3.3.13 End of Topic Test - River Landscapes in the UK

3.3.14 Exam-Style Questions - Rivers

3.4 Glacial Landscapes in the UK

3.4.1 Erosion

3.4.2 Landforms Caused by Erosion

3.4.3 Landforms Caused by Transportation & Deposition

3.4.4 Land Use in Glaciated Areas

3.4.5 Tourism in Glacial Landscapes

3.4.6 Case Study - Lake District

3.4.7 End of Topic Test - Glacial Landscapes in the UK

3.4.8 Exam-Style Questions - Glacial Landscapes

4 Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1 Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1.1 Urbanisation

4.1.2 Urbanisation Case Study: Lagos

4.1.3 Urbanisation Case Study: Rio de Janeiro

4.1.4 UK Cities

4.1.5 Case Study: Urban Regen Projects - Manchester

4.1.6 Case Study: Urban Change in Liverpool

4.1.7 Case Study: Urban Change in Bristol

4.1.8 Sustainable Urban Life

4.1.9 End of Topic Test - Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1.10 Exam-Style Questions - Urban Issues & Challenges

4.1.11 Urban Issues -Statistical Skills

5 The Changing Economic World

5.1 The Changing Economic World

5.1.1 Measuring Development

5.1.2 The Demographic Transition Model

5.1.3 Physical & Historical Causes of Uneven Development

5.1.4 Economic Causes of Uneven Development

5.1.5 How Can We Reduce the Global Development Gap?

5.1.6 Case Study: Tourism in Kenya

5.1.7 Case Study: Tourism in Jamaica

5.1.8 Case Study: Economic Development in India

5.1.9 Case Study: Aid & Development in India

5.1.10 Case Study: Economic Development in Nigeria

5.1.11 Case Study: Aid & Development in Nigeria

5.1.12 Economic Development in the UK

5.1.13 Economic Development UK: Industry & Rural

5.1.14 Economic Development UK: Transport & North-South

5.1.15 Economic Development UK: Regional & Global

5.1.16 End of Topic Test - The Changing Economic World

5.1.17 Exam-Style Questions - The Changing Economic World

5.1.18 Changing Economic World - Statistical Skills

6 The Challenge of Resource Management

6.1 Resource Management

6.1.1 Global Distribution of Resources

6.1.2 Food in the UK

6.1.3 Water in the UK

6.1.4 Energy in the UK

6.1.5 Resource Management - Statistical Skills

6.2.1 Areas of Food Surplus & Food Deficit

6.2.2 Food Supply & Food Insecurity

6.2.3 Increasing Food Supply

6.2.4 Case Study: Thanet Earth

6.2.5 Creating a Sustainable Food Supply

6.2.6 Case Study: Agroforestry in Mali

6.2.7 End of Topic Test - Food

6.2.8 Exam-Style Questions - Food

6.2.9 Food - Statistical Skills

6.3.1 The Global Demand for Water

6.3.2 What Affects the Availability of Water?

6.3.3 Increasing Water Supplies

6.3.4 Case Study: Water Transfer in China

6.3.5 Sustainable Water Supply

6.3.6 Case Study: Kenya's Sand Dams

6.3.7 Case Study: Lesotho Highland Water Project

6.3.8 Case Study: Wakel River Basin Project

6.3.9 Exam-Style Questions - Water

6.3.10 Water - Statistical Skills

6.4.1 Global Demand for Energy

6.4.2 Factors Affecting Energy Supply

6.4.3 Increasing Energy Supply: Renewables

6.4.4 Increasing Energy Supply: Non-Renewables

6.4.5 Carbon Footprints & Energy Conservation

6.4.6 Case Study: Rice Husks in Bihar

6.4.7 Exam-Style Questions - Energy

6.4.8 Energy - Statistical Skills

Jump to other topics

Go student ad image

Unlock your full potential with GoStudent tutoring

Affordable 1:1 tutoring from the comfort of your home

Tutors are matched to your specific learning needs

30+ school subjects covered

Case Studies: The L'Aquila & Kashmir Earthquakes

Earthquake Case Study: Nepal 2015

A business journal from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania

The Social, Political and Economic Aftershocks of the Chilean Earthquake

March 10, 2010 • 11 min read.

The recent earthquake in Chile -- and the subsequent tsunami -- tested the government of President Michelle Bachelet in terms of how well it could manage a large-scale crisis, just when Bachelet was about to hand over her office to the country’s newly elected leader, Sebastian Piñera. Clearly, the Piñera administration has a titanic task ahead of it. The disaster left Chile with hundreds of people dead or missing, and it has affected the infrastructure of the country as well as its quality of life. Property and sources of employment have been lost. What consequences will the earthquake have for Chile’s economy? And what steps will the Piñera administration need to take in order to help get the country back on its feet?

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

  • Public Policy

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

On February 27, a large number of ports, towns and large cities along Chile’s south-central coast were devastated by an earthquake measuring 8.8 on the Richter scale, and the tsunami that followed it. The disaster has left a toll of more than 479 people dead and 497 missing, according to the latest official figures.

The day after the catastrophe, the government of President Michelle Bachelet acknowledged in public that it had committed a mistake by not providing timely information to warn of a possible tsunami following the quake. Proper warnings were not provided to maritime authorities, and hundreds of lives were lost. This was a serious reversal for Chile’s first female president, who was about to leave office. On March 11, Sebastian Piñera became the country’s president, putting an end to 20 years of leadership by the so-called Concertacion Party, a coalition of centrist and leftist parties.

The devastating quake and the force of gigantic waves, which in some localities were about 20 meters in height, wiped out service for water, light and gas in the center and south of the country for several days. The survivors in the most heavily hit regions had to wait days for the arrival of teams of rescue and medical workers who brought water, food, and clothing.

Mistakes in Management

These chaotic conditions generated a flood of criticism about the government’s performance from a wide range of social groups, who argued that the response to the national emergency had come too late. “We Chileans were thinking that institutions were better prepared than what we could see,” said Juan Sebastián Montes, professor of strategy and economic sociology at the business school of the Adolfo Ibáñez University. “The way the crisis was managed was worse than what we should have anticipated.”

Montes notes that although no country is truly prepared to deal with an earthquake of a magnitude of eight on the Richter scale, “there are some countries that are better prepared than others, as shown by the enormous destruction in Haiti, which recently experienced an earthquake of a lower magnitude than that of Chile.” The Haitian quake had an intensity of seven on the Richter scale, according to the U.S. Geological Service.

Although Chilean specialists say that structural damage to the country was not as extensive as the damage in Haiti, Chile still has a lot of room for improvement when it comes to taking measures to mitigate these sorts of incidents in the future. “There is no sure system for prevention against tsunamis,” notes Hans Niemeyer, professor of geological sciences at the Universidad Católica del Norte in Chile. It turned out, he adds, that “it was more valuable …for the people in the coastal regions to know how to leave quickly for the hills, once the earthquake occurred.”

The Task of Reconstruction

Experts say that there is no reason why the recent change in the Chilean government should affect the way this crisis is managed in coming weeks. Piñera has already held several working meetings with Bachelet, who has named new managers — regional officials whose backgrounds are more technical than political — in those areas that were most affected by the earthquake. Clearly, the Piñera administration has a titanic task ahead of it. It must transform itself into a government of “national reconstruction,” as Niemeyer notes.

He adds, “Because it is a country with a large territory, the new country’s political leadership will have to strengthen its north-south connectivity through our vertebral column, Highway 5 South, which suffered serious damage. No doubt, the government will have to emphasize anti-earthquake construction projects. We can’t have Chile go without air traffic because the international airport in Santiago collapses. These situations cannot happen again in the future; not with highways, hospitals or airports.”

According to experts, Piñera will have to forget the economic promises he made during the election campaign – higher salaries and lower crime, among others – and deal with more urgent priorities such as the large number of people who remain homeless, especially in those areas most damaged by the catastrophe. “Since many people lost their housing, this is going to produce a significant amount of overcrowding, which has to be dealt with over the short term,” notes Rodrigo Morrás, professor of organizational service management at the Adolfo Ibáñez University’s business school.

The earthquake has not only had a significant economic impact on the country’s infrastructure but it also has had significant social repercussions, such as in the loss of the quality of life of the population because of the destruction of property and material goods. People are now talking about a “social earthquake” in Chile. According to Morrás, “The damage that has been done to possessions and physical assets, particularly those that belong to people who live in the coastal areas that suffered the most damage, will be hard to recover, especially if you consider that these social groups have modest means, fewer [financial] resources, and less access to influential networks for rebuilding their assets.”

In addition, in those coastal locations – the southern regions of O’Higgins, El Maule, and Bío Bío – there were many micro-enterprises that will now have to start from zero, adds Morrás. “We are talking about fishermen, transport workers and merchants who lost their boats, trucks, hotels, restaurants, etc. In other words, the progress they had achieved after years of developing a region with interesting tourist attractions has been wiped out. It is going to take these micro-enterprises time to recover; at least two or three years.”

Nevertheless, Morrás does not rule out the possibility that in the short term, these regions will attract more efficient and larger-scale investments because of their attractiveness to tourists.

Economic Effects

Some analysts have predicted that the earthquake could prevent Chile’s economy from growing during 2010. Initially, economists had been forecasting growth of 5.5% this year, and Piñera had promised to accelerate growth through a forceful governmental program.

For Montes, an earthquake with a magnitude of eight on the Richter scale means a loss of capital, inventory and productivity. It is “a net loss; although it is still too early to quantify the impact, it will certainly be reflected in the quarterly figures. In addition, it is very likely that fiscal spending will increase, so it will be very hard to predict the impact of the catastrophe on the indicators of economic growth.” Early estimates indicate that the damages caused by the earthquake could cost Chile about US$30 billion, the equivalent of 15% of its GDP, but in Montes’ opinion, that figure could wind up being even higher.

In contrast, Mat ías Braun, professor of financial markets and economic development at the Adolfo Ibáñez University’s business school, has a less alarmist view of the financial cost of the quake. “Although the losses generated by the catastrophe are quite significant, generally speaking, people are exaggerating the toll,” he says. “I would estimate a maximum of between US$4 billion and US$8 billon. My estimates could be divided the following way: US$2.5 billion in housing construction – equivalent to the destruction of 20% of the homes in the zones that are most affected; US$1.5 billion in commercial and industrial construction; US$2 billion in road and port construction; US$500 million in machinery and equipment; and another US$500 million in lost inventory.”

Braun asserts that the earthquake could even have a positive impact on job growth – because of [the subsequent] reconstruction efforts – and on the growth of the country “because it will lead to a higher percentage of GDP growth of between 1% and 1.5% for two years, and because of the net effect of the loss of capital and subsequent reconstruction.” Although there would have to be a temporary increase in prices of about 2% in coming months, “the repercussions on the [Chilean] exchange rate should be significantly lower.”

Rafael Romero, professor of corporate finance and business valuation at the Adolfo Ibáñez University’s business school, agrees with Braun’s projections. Romero notes that “rebuilding is necessary, which means that economic activity should soar, leading to growth in construction activity and investments in public works. Financial markets have already reacted by showing increases in the prices of companies involved in construction and inputs for construction, such as cement producers.” The best examples of that upward trend in prices include Cementós Melon, which experienced a gain of 251% in its share price on the Santiago stock exchange in recent days, and Grupo Polpaico (which rose 44%), one of the country’s leading manufacturers of cement and concrete.

Real Estate and Construction Collapse

The shares that plummeted after the earthquake were in real estate and construction firms, following analysts’ observations about the destruction of new buildings and structural damage in other buildings that were no more than three years old but had to be evacuated because of the risk of collapse.

Some experts have been surprised by the collapse of modern buildings, and have questioned the controls of Chile’s anti-seismic regulations. According to the Chilean Chamber of Construction, the country’s industry trade group, buildings must be built to withstand a grade-eight earthquake. “Some companies are managing to avoid those controls,” says Felipe Aguilera, professor of geology at the University of Atacama in northern Chile. “On the other hand, this doesn’t explain the degree of destruction in new buildings, unlike others that are in excellent shape after the earthquake.” The most emblematic case is the 30-floor Millennium Building, in the heart of the Santiago business district, which escaped any damage from the quake.

Insurance companies will have to pay out considerable sums of money to compensate for the damages. Recently, Mikel Uriarte, president of the Chilean insurance association, told the Chilean daily newspaper El Mercurio that the total amount will approach US$4 billion.

Chile’s leading export industry, copper production, should emerge untouched by the quake, which lasted almost three minutes. A few days after the quake occurred, the price of copper reached US$3.32 per pound – 4% higher than the US$3.20 registered before the quake – because of rumors that Chile was not going to be able to comply with its export commitments. However, experts don’t believe that will be the case.

“Copper production will not be affected, because the principal mines for this metal are in the north of the country, where they have not been affected by the earthquake,” says Niemeyer. “Chile is in perfect shape to comply with its export obligations.” Although several ports in the south of the country have suffered structural damages, the port complex in Valparaíso – from which copper exports are shipped – is operating without any problems, the local press reported.

In contrast, Montes notes that other exporting sectors have suffered serious damage to their production capabilities, including agribusiness and fisheries, where crops and fishing fleets have been destroyed.

Lessons Left by the Earthquake

Chile can learn various lessons from this unfortunate episode, which has had so many different repercussions. According to Morrás, one of the key lessons is the importance of speed when it comes to detecting a tsunami and providing warnings. Another lesson is the importance of educating the population about how to behave during an earthquake, “whether you are in your house, inside a car, on the street, along the coast or in a high-rise apartment,” he says. “You also need to improve social and community networks, such as groups of neighbors in communities, buildings and neighborhoods, with the goal of being able to construct a communications and containment network. This is because our country covers such a large territory, and it is very likely that numerous localities will remain isolated [for quite a while] after any quake of great magnitude.”

Morrás adds: “It’s worth emphasizing that the earthquake produced a moral deterioration of the population resulting from the belated response of the authorities to the catastrophe. The slow pace of response created disorder and chaos, which favored such behavior as robberies and lootings in supermarkets and shopping malls. This behavior, in turn, became legitimated by the need for food, water and other basic products. As a result, the [importance of] rapid and effective responsiveness by institutions is another major lesson that you have to derive [from the crisis].”

More recently, the country’s largest companies have joined together with governmental institutions, banks, non-governmental organizations, the communications media, artists and ordinary citizens in a national solidarity campaign called “Chile Helps Chile,” which includes the participation of former President Bachelet and newly elected President Piñera. Over the first 25 hours of the campaign, it managed to collect some US$58 million, to be spent on the construction of emergency housing and schools — to many, a sign of hope that the nation can pull itself together more rapidly than people ever imagined.

More From Knowledge at Wharton

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

Why Breakups Aren’t the Best Way to Curb Tech Monopolies

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

How Corporations Are Taking the Lead on Environmental Governance

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

How Mobile Money Fosters Financial Inclusion

Looking for more insights.

Sign up to stay informed about our latest article releases.

USGS - science for a changing world

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1053, version 1.1

In cooperation with The American Red Cross

Report on the 2010 chilean earthquake and tsunami response, by the american red cross multidisciplinary team, suggested citation:.

American Red Cross Multi-Disciplinary Team, 2011, Report on the 2010 Chilean earthquake and tsunami response: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011-1053, v. 1.1, 68 p., available at

1.0 Executive Summary

2.0 Introduction

3.0 Science and Technology

4.0 Emergency Management

5.0 Health Services

6.0 Volunteer Management

7.0 Executive Management

8.0 Recommendations for California

9.0 Recommendations for the American Red Cross

10.0 Sources and Acknowledgments

11.0 Appendices

12.0 Glossary of Terms including Acronyms

Accessibility FOIA Privacy Policies and Notices

Take Pride in America logo

  • Reference Manager
  • Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Original research article, losses associated with secondary effects in earthquakes.


  • Geophysical Institute, Center for Disaster Management and Risk Reduction Technology, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe, Germany

The number of earthquakes with high damage and high losses has been limited to around 100 events since 1900. Looking at historical losses from 1900 onward, we see that around 100 key earthquakes (or around 1% of damaging earthquakes) have caused around 93% of fatalities globally. What is indeed interesting about this statistic is that within these events, secondary effects have played a major role, causing around 40% of economic losses and fatalities as compared to shaking effects. Disaggregation of secondary effect economic losses and fatalities demonstrating the relative influence of historical losses from direct earthquake shaking in comparison to tsunami, fire, landslides, liquefaction, fault rupture, and other type losses is important if we are to understand the key causes post-earthquake. The trends and major event impacts of secondary effects are explored in terms of their historic impact as well as looking to improved ways to disaggregate them through two case studies of the Tohoku 2011 event for earthquake, tsunami, liquefaction, fire, and the nuclear impact; as well as the Chilean 1960 earthquake and tsunami event.


Disaggregation of secondary effect economic losses and fatalities demonstrating the relative influence of historical losses from direct earthquake shaking in comparison to tsunami, fire, landslides, liquefactions, fault rupture, and other type losses is important if we are to understand the key causes post-earthquake.

Existing studies have attempted to examine the key causes without putting dollar values to the losses, e.g., Bird and Bommer (2004) studied 50 earthquakes between 1980 and 2003 for all secondary effect types, Keefer (1984) and Rodrıguez et al. (1999) for landslide losses, and NGDC/NOAA (2010) for tsunami losses. Although most historical losses have been earthquake shaking related, the influence of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake has changed the historical percentages significantly for tsunami, just as the 1995 Kobe and 2011 Christchurch earthquakes have with regard to liquefaction. Liquefaction has occurred in many earthquakes but this is also difficult to disaggregate for older historical earthquakes. Fire in 1906 San Francisco and 1923 Great Kanto caused significant losses, but since then, important losses have also occurred in many earthquakes. Landslide losses in Haiyuan 1920, Ancash 1970, El Salvador 2001, Kashmir 2005, and Sichuan 2008 were dominant in the database, with many other incidents causing minor damages. Quite often for smaller events, landslides deliver a great amount of the clean-up cost, and indeed sectoral losses. Infrastructure, such as roads, is particularly vulnerable to landslides and secondary effects, often causing much of the damage (i.e., Kaikoura 2016).

This paper sets out to examine the percentage of socioeconomic losses of the secondary effects as compared to primary effects of earthquakes. It also sets out to examine the way in which secondary losses have been counted in past disasters by examining Tohoku 2011 and Chile 1960 in a fact-finding approach.


The methodology to derive the losses due to secondary effects consists of a couple of steps:

(1) To define the different types of secondary effects

(2) To collect the data associated with the defined secondary effects types in past disasters.

Defining Secondary Effects

The primary effects of earthquakes are caused by the surface rupture along the fault and by the ground shaking via the earthquake energy release. The secondary effects are the effects that occur directly as a result of this earthquake shaking and energy release, i.e., the onset of a tsunami wave, or a landslide. Tertiary effects could include cascading effects such as the primary effect of an earthquake causing a secondary effect in the form of a tsunami which damages a nuclear power plant, and then a nuclear disaster develops. Another such tertiary effect is an epidemic or starvation due to the effects of the earthquake. The process of primary, secondary, and tertiary effects is shown in Table 1 . It is very difficult to correctly differentiate between secondary and tertiary effects, and the whole sequence can sometimes simply be described as a cascading effect. The Tohoku earthquake of 2011 is a key example.

Table 1. The process of primary, secondary, and tertiary effects of earthquakes .

For the purposes of better defining the terms in this manuscript, the term “effects” refers to the changes to the earth’s surface as a result of the earthquake (hazard-related); “losses” refer to the socioeconomic changes post-disaster be they deaths, or economic losses.

Collection of Data for Earthquake Fatalities and Economic Losses from Secondary Effects

There are many main sources of secondary effects due to earthquakes which have been collected in the literature of which will be explained via the individual parts of the definitions given above.

Landslides are induced by earthquakes where slopes lose stability as consequence of shaking, causing soil and rock masses to move downhill. This can be accentuated by rainfall and vegetation and mainly occurs in mountainous or steep sloping regions. Key factors are detailed in Khazai and Sitar (2004) examining the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake. A study by Nadim et al. (2006) showed global landslide hotspots. In addition, a similar study has been undertaken as part of secondary effects analysis, using a combination of soil moisture indices and slopes for earthquakes worldwide to create a landslide hazard index. Godt et al. (2008) have developed a rapid loss estimation methodology for landslides worldwide as part of the PAGER project, using a PGA-slope relationship based on Newmark’s method via the equations of Jibson (2007) . Small-scale models to examine susceptibility to earthquake-triggered slope instability have been put forward by Jibson (2007) and Miles and Keefer (2009) . In addition, great work during the COGEAR project was undertaken to examine historical landslide events and others even infer earthquake intensities ( Beck, 2009 ). Parker (2013) continues to create relationships of the earthquake magnitude and ground motions vs. landslide density. A detailed study of earthquake-induced landslide losses has been undertaken by Bommer and Rodriguez (2002) and Keefer (1984 , 2002 ) (Table 2 ).

Table 2. The effect of larger landslide events since 1900 .

The largest death tolls in the last 117 years from landslides have come in the Chinese 1920 Haiyuan event, where many people living in cave like buildings, and villages close to slopes, were buried with the M8.6 mainshock and resulting aftershocks via loess landslides.

In the study below, the slope was taken from global use of the SRTM250 1 dataset, the soil moisture index over a year from the global USDA, and the GSHAP map with historical landslides from earthquakes to calculate the landslide potential index. A landslide risk map can also be produced in conjunction with historical data and exposure. This, along with historical landslide losses, simply produces a flag system with the potential landslide susceptible areas. An example of a landslide analysis using a similar methodology is shown for Germany, Austria, and Switzerland and was calculated in Daniell et al. (2013) but with extension to estimated losses. Figure 1 shows the worldwide landslide hazard analysis produced in this study.

Figure 1. Worldwide landslide hazard analysis based on the model produced in this study .

We will refer to quake lakes and flooding in a subsequent paragraph.

Liquefaction occurs where saturated soil (usually not too fine-grained sand) layers are turned from solid to liquid, causing rapid failure. This generally only occurs in earthquakes with the shaking inducing a loss of shear strength. One of the first studies to calculate the potential for liquefaction was the study of Seed and Idriss (1971) . Generally, the problem has been tackled via empirical methods, using soil properties [Standard Penetration Test ( via blowcounts)] and water table level, in order to determine the liquefaction potential. For large-scale assessment, Vs,30 (average shear wave velocity in the first 30 m) has been used as a proxy to develop an equation for simplified liquefaction susceptibility ( Dismuke and Mote, 2012 ). These can then be further classified into deterministic ( Goh and Goh, 2007 ) and probabilistic ( Cetin et al., 2002 ) approaches as well as into flow liquefaction and cyclic mobility ( Kramer, 1996 ). For Japan, a good review of countermeasures stemming from some of the below locations has been made by Yasuda and Harada (2014) . Currently, an expansion of the PAGER rapid loss system of the USGS is also considering liquefaction susceptibility following the work of Allstadt et al. (2017) . Significant losses have not be seen for liquefaction globally in the form of fatalities, (except for loess liquefaction) however significant economic losses have been seen as shown in Table 3 .

Table 3. The effect of larger liquefaction events since 1900 .

Tsunamis occurs where fault movement from an offshore subduction earthquake causes a large volume of water to be displaced either directly by fault displacement of in consequence of a triggered large subsurface landslide or a combination of both effects. The long-wavelength distortion of the water surface, typically with amplitudes in the meter range, travels at about 800 km/h in open seas with little attenuation to large distances. Eventually, the water waves travel from deeper waters to shallow waters at the coastline, slowing the wave, increasing the amplitude, and resulting in large, destructive waves.

In recent years, the number of fatalities (Table 4 ) has been dominated by two large events, namely, the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and the 2011 Tohoku earthquake, both causing major losses due to tsunami effects. Using historical earthquakes, the tsunami risk can be evaluated qualitatively, given the advent of a new earthquake, by using the magnitude and historical earthquakes that have occurred in that location. Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System (2011) and various tsunami warning centers also provide potential runup heights post-earthquake based on analysis; hence, these results can be used to potentially map the inundated areas and by using population, capital stock, and gross domestic product estimates, work out the affected exposure. InaSAFE (2013) and TsuDAT (2013) are two software packages reviewed that can calculate the exposed metrics and the associated losses. An example of maximum tsunami water height runup from historical tsunamis is shown with much data derived from National Geophysical Data Center (USA) as seen below in Figure 2 with the historical tsunami runups.

Table 4. The effect of larger tsunami events since 1900 .

Figure 2. Maximum tsunami water height runup (in meters) from the last 400 years from a combination of modeling and National Geophysical Data Center, including a 1700 Cascadia EQ Model .

As computation speeds have increased in the past few years, the ability to undertake probabilistic tsunami hazard modeling on a personal computer has become possible ( Schaefer et al., 2015 ).

Fire is a result of earthquake shaking, influencing electricity, gas, or fire sources to ignite in and around infrastructure that is in the shaking area. In the past, this has been the greatest contributor to damage in many earthquakes, including 1906 San Francisco and 1923 Great Kanto (Table 5 ). At present, the influence of fire is still major in earthquakes; however, with better fire management practices in effect, and less buildings built of flammable materials, this is a reducing element in total loss statistics, with the recent Tohoku earthquake only having around 150 people dying due to fire. Many earthquakes in the US, Japan, and NZ have the chance for fires due to the wooden housing typologies often used. Scawthorn et al. (2005) details various case studies in his book as one of the better fire following earthquake references. In many countries in the world, wooden frames are used including California, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia as shown by the proportion of brown color (wooden stock) in Figure 3 of each nation globally.

Table 5. The effect of larger fire events since 1900 .

Figure 3. The percentage of population in wood-frame buildings globally for each country as created as part of Daniell et al. (2011c) .

Flooding in terms of dam breaks and reservoir failures can cause major damage and also be a huge hazard to populations. Generally, large dams have been built to withstand earthquake forces, but the simple lateral shaking can sometimes cause massive failures of natural or man-made systems, such as seen in the 1933 Diexi earthquake ( Shi-zhong, 2010 ) (Table 6 ). Landslides can also sometimes cause blockages to rivers, forming quake lakes which can then, if unstabilized, unleash huge flooding on settlements downstream. Although there have not been many instances, flow-on disasters such as a flood where an earthquake occurs simultaneously can have major cascading impacts. In Figure 4 , 623 of the 6,862 dams are expected to have a shaking hazard of 0.3 g within 475 years (shown in orange and red). Of these, over half (333 out of 623) are over 45 years old, indicating the need for reassessment of these dams. Flooding also caused many fatalities in the 1949 Ambato/Pelileo earthquake in Ecuador. Figure 4 depicts the earthquake hazard of 6,800+ dams and reservoirs worldwide.

Table 6. The effect of larger dam/blockage failures since 1900 .

Figure 4. The earthquake hazard of the 6,800+ dams and reservoirs worldwide from the GRanD database [in comparison to the GSHAP (10% exceedance in 50 years)] .

Surface rupture is simply the visible displacement along the fault which causes surface cracks or surface slip to appear. This was seen visually in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake, where much damage was due to fault rupture. General laws have been that fault rupture occurs in earthquakes with a magnitude greater than 6. Surface fault rupture zones have not caused much damage historically, however, as the known fault zones are generally not built upon in locations such as the Western USA, and also the rupture surface is generally not very wide, thus minimizing the chance for damage. In the recent Kaikoura 2016 event, a 10-m displacement occurred through an existing house causing major damage but no fatalities.

Despite Hollywood film attempts to pitch fault rupture as a major cause of destruction in earthquakes, fault rupture has not recorded many observed fatalities.

Aggregated Losses Due to Secondary Effects

A review of earthquake fatalities over time gives the first insight into the fatality risk of earthquakes. Using the CATDAT Damaging Earthquakes Database ( Daniell et al., 2011a ) which contains ca. 16,000 damaging earthquake events through time, the earthquake fatalities are examined and trends built. For this paper, we focus on 1900 onward. The reader is instructed to examine Daniell et al. (2011a) and Slingsby et al. (2011) for details as to the structure and collection of the database.

Over the period from 2003 to 2016, the CATDAT Damaging Earthquakes Database has been collected from many sources globally. In-depth analysis has been undertaken to disaggregate fatalities from earthquakes into the different causes of the fatality, whether it be from direct structural collapse or secondary effects such as tsunami, landslide or otherwise from 1900 to 2016, and 9,900+ damaging earthquakes with economic losses since 1900. Earthquakes have caused over 2.3 million fatalities since 1900 in 2,233 fatal events, with many of these coming through large, infrequent events. In fact, since 1900, 59% of these fatalities have occurred in just 10 events. In fact, the top 100 events account for 93.25% of fatalities as seen in Figure 5 .

Figure 5. No. of fatalities (cumulative) globally ranked in descending order from largest to smallest event .

A list of the top 10 fatal earthquakes since 1900 are included with the approximate breakdown of secondary and primary effects as well as an attempt as to the number of fatalities due to all engineered structures, showing the need for sensitive design for not only shaking but also for secondary effects in Table 7 .

Table 7. The top 10 earthquakes in terms of fatalities .

Many of these fatalities were as a result of secondary effects such as tsunami, fire, and landslide as can be seen in the above table. However, most were due to non-engineered collapse of masonry buildings (the % of engineered estimated structures is shown in the table of top 10 earthquakes). It has been found that over 57% of deaths have occurred in masonry buildings either by falling structural members, roof collapse, or falling debris. An additional 8.5% have died in concrete buildings and 3% in timber buildings. In total, approximately 71% of fatalities have occurred due to direct earthquake shaking and 29% to other earthquake secondary effects as shown in Figure 6 . The database is a dynamic entity and continues to change as further reanalysis of past events takes place, including separating heart attack deaths and non-structural deaths.

Figure 6. The upper and lower bound death toll estimate of earthquakes in global literature compared to the median CATDAT death toll, current as of December 31, 2016 .

A detailed study of all 9,920 damaging earthquakes from 1 January 1900 to 31 December 2016 has been undertaken by examining the original sources, descriptions, and expert opinion (where experts from various entities are asked as to their opinions post-disaster and their estimates weighted) where exact dollar amount losses with regard to disaggregation have been calculated. Figure 7 shows results for direct losses and total economic losses from earthquakes. Approximately 70% of direct economic losses have come from direct earthquake effects, whereas 30% have occurred due to secondary effects of earthquakes. For total economic losses, taking into account the indirect losses, this percentage increases to 38%. This has many implications for our earthquake research. The focus on just shaking losses should be changed to one of holistic strategies for shaking and secondary effects losses.

Figure 7. Disaggregation of shaking and secondary effects economic costs from 9,920 earthquakes from 1900 to 2016—left: direct economic costs; right: total economic costs .

Landslides can be seen to cause over 5% of economic losses, and this has only been low due to the relatively low populations living worldwide in mountainous areas exposed to earthquakes since 1900. China has experienced major losses through the 1920 Haiyuan and 2008 Sichuan earthquakes. 1949 Khait and 1970 Ancash were also major landslide-bearing earthquakes causing major economic losses to their respective countries. The 2011 Tohoku and 2004 Indian Ocean earthquakes have both brought about much of the economic losses due to tsunami in recent years; however, many tsunami-bearing earthquakes have caused much damage, such as 1960 Chile and 1964 Alaska with over 10% of total losses due to tsunami, and additional NaTech losses via the power plant disaster in Tohoku.

Case Studies

Two case studies are discussed to examine the disaggregation process, values, and uncertainties associated with the estimates of secondary effect losses.

Case Study 1: Tohoku Earthquake—Disaggregating the Fatalities

Within 50 separate articles produced after Tohoku ( Daniell and Vervaeck, 2011 ), each spanning a few days, and associated situation reports in conjunction with , a detailed update of damage data, economic losses, and social impacts (homelessness, injuries, deaths) of the Fukushima disaster, including translations of the FDMA 2 reports, GIS data, and collated statistical data, was given to the public and many companies. Much work was also done to analyze the sectoral losses and to disaggregate the tsunami, earthquake, and power plant losses using information from each municipality to create non-coastal vs. coastal losses. In addition, historical Japanese damage ratio data and tsunami inundation maps were used to further disaggregate losses in the coastal municipalities and plot the 1.2 million buildings damaged.

The inundation map vs. the number of buildings in each municipality allowed the number of destroyed buildings to be calculated, as shown in Figure 8 , showing that the impact in Sendai itself was less than first expected via the tsunami but there was a higher percentage loss due to the earthquake (Table 8 ). The functions of were used to produce the damage functions that were then utilized. The normalization of various parameters of historical earthquakes to 2011 conditions, using population and dwelling changes, vulnerability changes, and community wealth changes as per Daniell and Love (2010) , were also checked.

Figure 8. The disaggregated earthquake versus tsunami damage in each municipality (dark red = 100% damage caused by earthquake, dark blue = 100% damage caused by tsunami, and yellow = 50% damage via earthquake, 50% via tsunami) .

Table 8. Building damage statistics for the 2011 Tohoku EQ disaggregated for tsunami and earthquake .

An additional 35,466 buildings were in the towns and cities within the exclusion zone of the Fukushima I and II nuclear sites. The best estimate of damage to buildings from Daniell and Vervaeck (2011) and then Khazai et al. (2011) from each of the three events was the earthquake (49%), tsunami (39%), and nuclear disaster (12%). With total direct losses, this reduced to earthquake (44%), tsunami (38%), and nuclear disaster (18%).

There were around 30,000 shaking deaths in the CATDAT Damaging Earthquakes Database from 1900 to 2010 before the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake in Japan. Of these, most occurred in 1923 Great Kanto (11,000 shaking deaths), 1927 Tango (3,110), 1943 Tottori (1,325), 1945 Mikawa (2,306), 1948 Fukui (4,618), and 1995 Kobe (4,823).

The use of the seismic code index, other social vulnerability and building practice indicators, and other normalization strategies ensured that the casualty model was calibrated to today’s conditions. It would be inaccurate to simply use casualties from a 1970 earthquake, as 80% of the Japanese building stock has been built since; thus, the Human Development Index shift in the fatality function calculates better the fatality change over time.

A comparison of results from various empirical Japanese casualty estimation models is shown in Table 9 for the M9 earthquake, using a basis of 13,000–26,000 destroyed buildings and 74,000–126,000 half-destroyed buildings as a result of the earthquake. This is in comparison to the 92,000+ buildings destroyed and 78,000+ houses partially destroyed by the tsunami. MMI >7–7.5 townships were used for the regression methods of Ye and Okada (2001) .

Table 9. Casualty range loss estimates from selected casualty models for the 2011 Tohoku EQ for earthquake shaking deaths .

It is still unknown how many victims have died directly due to the earthquake action. A total of 14,308 were reported in March 2012 to have drowned, 667 were crushed or died of internal injuries (mainly tsunami), and 145 perished via burns. It will never be known how many died due to the earthquake, as separated from the tsunami; however, the autopsies give us an indication that we can expect that about 1.0% of the 4.4% crushed were probably in earthquake collapsed houses.

In addition, we can assume a proportion of the remaining 2% that were unknown were also earthquake-related (a high value of 10% could be assumed). This would leave about 1.2% or about 158. When extrapolating for the final 3,000 deaths that were not stress or chronic disease related, then the total is approximately 220. This value corresponded quite well to the 137 non-tsunami impacted deaths that were recorded in the non-coastal areas when splitting the fatalities between coastal and non-coastal municipalities. Some of the non-coastal deaths, however, were due to heart attack, fire, or landslide. Thus, only around 110 can be certain as due to shaking. It is likely that there are exact numbers available.

As of December 2016, the FDMA reported that 19,475 were killed and 2,587 were missing from the 11 March 2011 event with at least 3,440 deaths of these due to indirect causes. These values differ from the Fire Disaster Management Agency Japan (2011) , given the inclusion of “additional related deaths” which have totaled around 2,400 as of 2013, and 600 at the time of the diagram in March 2012, as shown in Figure 9 , slightly less than the percentage reported in the Kobe earthquake. With the removal of these, the total deaths from FDMA are also about 18,500. Around 110–220 deaths would be earthquake-collapse related. About 250 would be related to other causes such as fire, landslides, etc. Around 94% of deaths were tsunami related.

Figure 9. Left: deaths in municipalities as collected from FDMA, National Police Agency Japan (NPA) (2011) , and additional Japanese sources; right: the disaggregated deaths as of 11 March 2016 (5 years after) . Of the 230 shaking deaths, only around 110 have been confirmed.

This means that the most reasonable estimates were derived from Ye et al. (2001) . PAGER, QLARM, and this study (EQLIPSE-Q and R) all performed reasonably well, given the uncertainty of the number of shaking deaths 5 months after the event. The Tohoku earthquake in 2011 provided a situation where the size of the event was outside the expected values. Historical GMPEs and IPEs used for historical Japanese earthquakes were outside the magnitude range (Mw = 9.0). This made difficulties for the modeling of intensities and damage. The quality of data in terms of intensities and ground motion measurements made it possible to create loss estimates in the correct order of magnitude.

Case Study 2: 1960 Chile Tsunami

The 1960 Chile earthquake and tsunami sequence on 21 and 22 of May, 1960 caused shaking damage as well as tsunami and landslide effects. By far, the most devastating component was the shaking damage; however, the earthquake and tsunami are interesting for the fact of the range of uncertainties in the literature and the fact that the tsunami likely caused more fatalities than shaking.

The 1960 Chile earthquake caused somewhere between 1,600 and 3,500 deaths, with 1,655 or 2,000 or 2,500 the most accepted number. Of these, at least 1,000 deaths were tsunami-based, if not in the order of 1,500. The tsunami to earthquake death ratio was likely 2 to 1. The following shows the uncertainties within numbers in literature.

Estimates of up to 7,231 deaths exist in literature (Table 10 ), possibly being an error (EM-DAT) and as low as 490, with economic losses split in a ratio of $550mn for shaking vs. $50m for tsunami, with 6,000 deaths attributable to the earthquake, and 1,231 to tsunami originally. This has since been changed to just the earthquake shaking losses. Talley Jr. and Cloud (1962) gave an estimate of 2,000 deaths due to earthquake and 231 due to tsunami, whereas Saint-Amand (1961) gives 1,000 due to tsunami and 500 due to earthquake. Interestingly, Flores (1960) gives a value for the foreshock of 500 deaths on the 21st May and attributes then 5,000 deaths to the earthquake on the 22nd May. Preferred estimates for disasters are generally local, but even these differ from 500 to 5,700 deaths.

Table 10. Casualty and economic loss information for the 1960 earthquake and tsunami event in Chile from various sources .

From the tsunami, these estimates from the entire Peru-Chile coastline ranged from 330 to 2,000 people with somewhere between 200 and 800 deaths on Isla Chiloe (which was the hardest hit location). The work of Mancilla and Mardones (2010) also mimics the uncertainty in numbers of deaths due to the tsunami and earthquake.

For exploratory reasons, the 1960 Chile tsunami, also called Valdivia tsunami has been selected. It occurred on the southern tip on of the most seismically active regions in the world, the Andean subduction zone of the Nazca plate offshore Chile ( Schaefer et al., 2015 ). With a moment magnitude of about 9.5, it is the strongest earthquake ever recorded. Unfortunately, in 1960, the record of the tsunami is limited both for wave propagation and inundation; thus, reconstruction of this event is ambiguous.

For numerical modeling, the tsupy methodology of Schaefer and Wenzel (2017) is used. Here, the non-linear shallow water wave equations are used in a parallelized framework to compute propagation and inundation patterns on a moderate resolution. The tsunami source is modeled using a slip distribution considering the methodologies of Mai and Beroza (2002) and ( Goda et al., 2014 ) representing the 3D distribution of movement along the fault plane of an earthquake rupture, which is afterward projected to a surface deformation using the equations of Okada (1985) . It has been shown that the tsunami impact and inundation pattern along coastlines close to the epicenter is highly dependent on the slip distribution. Differences in inundation heights can reach well beyond a factor of two just by a variation of the slip distribution.

For this test case, the slip distribution of Fuji and Satake (2013) is considered, which has been resolved inversely from geodetic and observed tsunami data. As for recent event, inversely resolved distributions are not unique, e.g., for Japan where a tenfold of possible results could be considered. The tsunami is simulated numerically using two regular grids with resolutions of 1 km and 90 m as shown in Figure 10 . The 1-km grid is used to calculate the long-distance travel of the tsunami, while the 90-m grid, which consists of the region between Concepcion and Valdivia, is used to compute the inundation. It is hoped that a reanalysis using this type of methodology, mimicking the historical observed tsunami inundations at various points; as well as adding the 1960 capital stock and building typologies at the time of the event may allow for better information on this event to be gained to better split the “estimated” secondary effect deaths and economic losses.

Figure 10. The modeling of the reanalyzed 1960 tsunami event and the effects on Chile as well as Hawaii .

Discussion and Concluding Remarks

The role of secondary effects of earthquakes for damage and loss has been shown as highly relevant through history. Although somewhere between 60 and 75% of economic losses as well as deaths have been due to shaking effects, between 25 and 40% of these impacts have been due to secondary effects in the form of tsunamis, landslides, liquefaction, fire, and other less common types.

For fatalities, this study agrees well with the original work of Coburn and Spence (1992) that showed for 1,100 fatal earthquakes from 1900 to 1990 around 76% of fatalities were from shaking and 24% from secondary effects. Marano et al. (2010) in PAGER on 749 fatal earthquakes from September 1968 to June 2008 demonstrated that 25% of fatalities from earthquakes were due to secondary effects of earthquakes (tsunami, landslide, fire, liquefaction). A total of 913 fatal earthquakes were recorded in the CATDAT database in the same time period from 1968 to 2008. Both studies are much lower than the study of Bird and Bommer (2004) on 50 earthquakes from 1980 to 2003, showing that 90% of earthquake deaths are due to shaking. It should be noted that deaths due to volcanic effects have simply been removed from the earthquake records. The 2010 version of the CATDAT Damaging Volcanoes Database shows the various effects of volcano related earthquakes such as the 2002 eruption episode of Lake Kivu, and the 1914 Sakurajima earthquakes ( Daniell, 2011 ).

It has been seen that there is much uncertainty in numbers post-disaster and depending on the source used there are many different opinions as to the influence of secondary effects in terms of the absolute numbers of their impact as seen by the number of sources in the Chile 1960 earthquake. In newer events, better reporting within countries with the advent of Desinventar 3 and formal loss collection mechanisms within governments, and thus the breakdown of secondary effects losses seen in the literature, has improved.

A few larger events such as Haiyuan 1920, Sumatra 2004, Great Kanto 1923, and Christchurch 2011 dominate the secondary effects seen since 1900; over 3,000 events of the almost 10,000 events have recorded secondary effects showing the additional importance of increased research in this field. As improved models for secondary effects of earthquakes continue to be created and better collection of loss statistics occur, the reanalysis of historic events should allow for scenario-based current and future effects of potential earthquake secondary effect cascading events to be analyzed, but also a potential check of the historical impacts. As more data sources become digitized, the historical event reanalysis is also being improved by better amalgamation of older reports on the events. The CATDAT database represents a step to disaggregate such events and continued collection of the data in the future will continue to improve the past disaster disaggregation of secondary effect losses.

Author Contributions

JD—the data analysis from CATDAT, studies into historical event losses, and secondary effect analysis. AS—tsunami analysis and general checking. FW—methodological changes, checks of analysis, editing and proofing diagrams and text, and secondary effect analysis. All authors have contributed to, read, modified, and approved the final manuscript.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.


We acknowledge the support by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft and Open Access Publishing Fund of Karlsruhe Institute of Technology.

  • ^ .
  • ^ .
  • ^ .

Allstadt, K., Hearne, M., Nowicki, M. A., Thompson, A., Wald, E. M., and Zhu, D. J. J. (2017). Integrating Landslide and Liquefaction Hazard and Loss Estimates with Existing USGS Real-Time Earthquake Information Products, 16th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering . Santiago, Chile.

Google Scholar

Barrientos, S. E., and Ward, S. N. (1990). The 1960 Chile earthquake: inversion for slip distribution from surface deformation. Geophys. J. Int. 103, 589–598. doi:10.1111/j.1365-246X.1990.tb05673.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Beck, C. (2009). Late quaternary lacustrine paleo-seismic archives in North-Western Alps: examples of earthquake-origin assessment of sedimentary disturbances. Earth Sci. Rev. 96, 327–344. doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2009.07.005

Berz, G. (1988). List of major natural disasters, 1960–1987. Nat. Hazards 1, 97–99. doi:10.1007/BF00168223

Bird, J. F., and Bommer, J. J. (2004). Earthquake losses due to ground failure. Eng. Geol. 75, 147–179. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2004.05.006

Bommer, J. J., and Rodriguez, C. E. (2002). Earthquake-induced landslides in Central America. Eng. Geol. 63, 189–220. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00081-3

Cetin, K. O., Der Kiureghian, A., and Seed, R. B. (2002). Probabilistic models for the initiation of seismic soil liquefaction. Struct. Saf. 24, 67–82. doi:10.1016/S0167-4730(02)00036-X

Coburn, A. W., and Spence, R. J. S. (1992). Earthquake Protection . Wiley. Available at:

Daniell, J. E. (2011). Damaging Volcanoes Database 2010 – The Year in Review: CEDIM Research Report 2011-02 . Available at:

Daniell, J. E., Khazai, B., Wenzel, F., and Vervaeck, A. (2011a). The CATDAT damaging earthquakes database. Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 11, 2235–2251. doi:10.5194/nhess-11-2235-2011

Daniell, J. E., Vervaeck, A., and Wenzel, F. (2011b). “A timeline of the socio-economic effects of the 2011 Tohoku earthquake with emphasis on the development of a new worldwide rapid earthquake loss estimation procedure,” in Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2011 Conference (Barossa Valley, Australia).

Daniell, J. E., Wenzel, F., Khazai, B., and Vervaeck, A. (2011c). “A country-by-country building inventory and vulnerability index for earthquakes in comparison to historical CATDAT damaging earthquakes database losses,” in Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2011 Conference (Barossa Valley, Australia).

Daniell, J. E., and Love, D. (2010). “The socio-economic impact of historic Australian earthquakes,” in Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2010 Conference (Perth, WA), 8.

Daniell, J. E., Schäfer, A., Wenzel, F., and Khazai, B. (2013). “Worldwide Losses from earthquake induced secondary effects and their implications for D-A-CH and insurance (in German), beitragsnr. 138, 13,” in D-A-CH Tagung für Erdbebeningenieurwesen und Baudynamik (D-A-CH 2013) , eds C. Adam, R. Heuer, W. Lenhardt, and C. Schranz (Wien, Österreich), 29–30.

Daniell, J. E., and Vervaeck, A. (2011). The 2011 Tohoku Earthquake – CATDAT Situation Reports 1-52 . Available at:

Daniell, J. E., and Wenzel, F. (2014). “The production and implementation of socioeconomic fragility functions for use in rapid worldwide earthquake loss estimation,” in Paper No. 490, 15th ECEE European Conference of Earthquake Engineering (Istanbul, Turkey).

Disaster Prevention Council, Tokyo Metropolitan Government. (1985). Report on Earthquake Damage Estimation in Tama District . Tokyo, Japan: Disaster Prevention Council Report.

Dismuke, J. N., and Mote, T. I. (2012). “Approximate deaggregation method for determination of design earthquake magnitudes for Australia,” in Proceedings of the 15th World Conference of Earthquake Engineering (Lisbon, Portugal).

Fire Disaster Management Agency Japan (FDMA). (2011). 2011 Tohoku Earthquake – Update of Damages – 1st-148th Version – 11th March 2011 to 9th September 2013 (in Japanese) . Available at:

Flores, R. A. (1960). “Engineering aspects of Chilean earthquakes of May 21 and 22, 1960,” in Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference of Earthquake Engineering (Japan).

Fuji, Y., and Satake, K. (2013). Slip distribution and seismic moment of the 2010 and 1960 Chilean earthquakes inferred from Tsunami waveforms and coastal geodetic data. Pure Appl. Geophys. 170, 1493–1509. doi:10.1007/s00024-012-0524-2

Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System (GDACS). (2011). GDACS Alert for the Tohoku Earthquake . Available at:

Goda, K., Mai, P., Yasuda, T., and Mori, N. (2014). Sensitivity of tsunami wave profiles and inundation simulations to earthquake slip and fault geometry for the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. Earth Planets Space 66, 1–20.

Godt, J., Sener, B., Verdin, K., Wald, D. J., Earle, P. S., Harp, E., et al. (2008). “Rapid assessment of earthquake-induced landsliding,” in Proceedings of the First World Landslide Forum (Tokyo, Japan: United Nations University).

Goh, A. T. C., and Goh, S. H. (2007). Support vector machines: their use in geotechnical engineering as illustrated using seismic liquefaction data. Comput. Geotech. 34, 410–421. doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2007.06.001

Iida, K., Cox, D. C., and Pararas-Carayannis, G. (1967). Preliminary Catalog of Tsunamis Occurring in the Pacific Ocean, HIG-67-10 . Honolulu, Hawaii: Hawaii Institute of Geophysics, University of Hawaii, 275.

Ikeda, T., and Nakabayashi, K. (1996). “Relevant analysis of human casualties and building damage of the earthquake disaster (in Japanese),” in Social Safety Society Proceedings . Shizuoka, Japan, 163–166.

InaSAFE. (2013). InaSAFE Documentation – Release 1.2.0 . Available at:

Instituto Hidrografico de la Armada. (1982). Maremotos en la costa de Chile. Instituto Hidrografico de la Armada, IHA Pub 3016 . Valparaiso, Chile: Instituto Hidrografico de la Armada, 48.

Jibson, R. W. (2007). Regression models for estimating coseismic landslide displacement. Eng. Geol. 91, 209–218. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2007.01.013

Kawasumi, H. (1954). Intensity and magnitude of shallow earthquakes. Publ. Du Bur. Cent. Séismol. Int. A Trav. Sci. 19, 99–114.

Keefer, D. K. (1984). Landslides caused by earthquakes. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 95, 406–421. doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1984)95<406:LCBE>2.0.CO;2

Keefer, D. K. (2002). Investigating landslides caused by earthquakes – a historical review. Surv. Geophys. 23, 473–510. doi:10.1023/A:1021274710840

Khazai, B., Daniell, J. E., and Wenzel, F. (2011). The March 2011 Japan earthquake – analysis of losses, impacts, and implications for the understanding of risks posed by extreme events. Technikfolgenabschätzung Theorie Prax. 20, 22–33. Available at:

Khazai, B., and Sitar, N. (2004). Evaluation of factors controlling earthquake-induced landslides caused by Chi-Chi earthquake and comparison with the Northridge and Loma Prieta events. Eng. Geol. 71, 79–95. doi:10.1016/S0013-7952(03)00127-3

Kramer, S. L. (1996). Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Lander, J. F., Lockridge, P. A., and Kozuch, M. J. (1993). Tsunamis Affecting the West Coast of the United States, 1806–1992, KGRD no. 29, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration . Boulder, CO: National Geophysical Data Center, 242.

Lazo Hinrichs, R. G. (2008). Estudio de los Daños de los Terremotos del 21 y 22 de Mayo de 1960 . Masters thesis.

Lockridge, P. (1985). Tsunamis in Peru-Chile . Boulder, CO: National Geophysical Data Center (NOAA).

Mai, M., and Beroza, G. (2002). A spatial random field model to characterize complexity in earthquake slip. J. Geophys. Res. Solid Earth 107, ESE 10-1–ESE 10-21. doi:10.1029/2001JB000588

Mancilla, L., and Mardones, L. (2010). El terremoto de 1960 en Castro, Imprenta Austral . Chile: Imprenta Austral de Temaco.

Marano, K. D., Wald, D. J., and Allen, T. I. (2010). Global earthquake casualties due to secondary effects: a quantitative analysis for improving rapid loss analyses. Nat. Hazards 52, 319–328. doi:10.1007/s11069-009-9372-5

Miles, S. B., and Keefer, D. K. (2009). Evaluation of CAMEL – comprehensive areal model of earthquake induced landslides. Eng. Geol. 104, 1–15. doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.08.004

MunichRe. (1998). World Map of Natural Hazards . Munich Reinsurance Company.

Nadim, F., Kjekstad, O., Peduzzi, P., Herold, C., and Jaedicke, C. (2006). Global landslide and avalanche hotspots. Landslides 3, 159–173. doi:10.1007/s10346-006-0036-1

National Police Agency Japan (NPA). (2011). Damage Situation and Police Countermeasures Associated with 2011 Tohoku District – Off the Pacific Ocean Earthquake . Available at:

NGDC/NOAA. (2010). Significant Earthquakes Database & Significant Tsunami Database . Available at:

Ohta, H., and Goto, N. (1985). Earthquake Loss Estimation Model: Vulnerability Analysis on a Household Level (in Japanese). Working Paper . Tokyo, Japan: Scientific Foundation.

Ohta, Y., Goto, N., and Ohashi, H. (1983). An empirical construction of equations for estimating number of victims by earthquakes. Zisin II 36, 463–466. doi:10.4294/zisin1948.36.3_463

Okada, Y. (1985). Surface deformation due to shear and tensile faults in a half-space. Bull. Seismol. Soc. Am. 752, 1135–1154.

Osaka Prefecture. (1997). Osaka Earthquake Damage Estimation: Survey Report (in Japanese) . Osaka, Japan: Osaka Prefectural Government.

Parker, R. (2013). Hillslope Memory and Spatial and Temporal Distributions of Earthquake-Induced Landslides . Doctoral dissertation, Durham University.

Rodrıguez, C. E., Bommer, J. J., and Chandler, R. J. (1999). Earthquake-induced landslides: 1980–1997. Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 18, 325–346.

Rothe, J. P. (1969). The Seismicity of the Earth 1953-1965, United National Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) . Paris, France: UNESCO, 312.

Saint-Amand, P. (1961). Los Terremotos de Mayo, Chile 1960 . China Lake, CA: Michelson Laboratories, US Naval Ordinance Test Station, 40. Technical Article 14, NOTS TP 2701.

Saitama Prefecture. (1982). Earthquake Damage Estimation: Research Report (in Japanese) . Japan: Saitama Government Report, Saitama Prefecture, 1–356.

Scawthorn, C., Eidinger, J. M., and Schiff, A. (eds) (2005). Fire Following Earthquake , Vol. 26. USA: American Society of Civil Engineers.

Schaefer, A., Daniell, J., and Wenzel, F. (2015). M9 Returns – Towards a Pan-Pacific Tsunami Hazard Risk Model . Sydney: Australian Earthquake Engineering Society.

Schäfer, A. M., and Wenzel, F. (2017). Tsupy: computational robustness in Tsunami hazard modelling. Comput. Geosci. 102, 148–57. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2017.02.016

Seed, H. B., and Idriss, I. (1971). Simplified procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential. J. Soil Mech. Found. Div. 97, 1249–1273.

Shi-zhong, H. (2010). Newly collected report on the 1933 Diexi Earthquake published in Jialingjiang Daily. Earthquake Res. Sichuan 3, 7.

Slingsby, A., Daniell, J. E., Dykes, J., and Wood, J. (2011). “Sharing insights on the impact of natural disasters using Twitter,” in European Geosciences Union (EGU) (Ed.), Geophysical Research Abstracts , Vol. 13 (Göttingen, Germany: Copernicus Publications), EGU2011–9171. Available at:

Soloviev, S. L., and Go, C. N. (1975). A Catalogue of Tsunamis on the Eastern Shore of the Pacific Ocean [Dates Include 1513–1968] . Moscow: Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Nauka Publishing House, 204. (Canadian Translation of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences no. 5078, 1984).

Talley, H. C. Jr., and Cloud, W. K. (1962). United States Earthquakes 1960. US Department of Commerce & Coast and Geodetic Survey, U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington.

Tazieff, H. (1962). Quand la terre tremble (When the Earth Shakes) . Paris: Edition Fayard, 11–100.

Tokyo Metropolitan Government. (1978). Report on Earthquake Damage Estimation in the Ward Districts of Tokyo: Disaster Prevention Council Report . Tokyo, Japan.

TsuDAT. (2013). Tsunami Data Access and Modelling Tool (TsuDAT) . Available at:

U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey. (1962). Earthquakes in the United States in 1960 . Technical Report.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). (2011, 2013). PAGER – Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response . Available at:

World Agency of Planetary Monitoring and Earthquake Risk Reduction. (2013). QLARM . Available at:

Yasuda, S., and Harada, K. (2014). “Measures developed in Japan after the 1964 Niigata earthquake to counter the liquefaction of soil,” in 10NCEE, Paper No. 1778, Frontiers of Earthquake Engineering , July 21–25, 2014, Anchorage, Alaska.

Ye, Y., and Okada, N. (2001). “Improving management of urban earthquake disaster risks,” in Earthquake Engineering Frontiers in the New Millennium , eds B. F. Spencer Jr. and Y. X. Hu (Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger), 113–118.

Keywords: tsunami, earthquake effects, socioeconomic losses, landslides, liquefaction, fatalities, economic losses, earthquake

Citation: Daniell JE, Schaefer AM and Wenzel F (2017) Losses Associated with Secondary Effects in Earthquakes. Front. Built Environ. 3:30. doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2017.00030

Received: 06 February 2017; Accepted: 04 May 2017; Published: 13 June 2017

Reviewed by:

Copyright: © 2017 Daniell, Schaefer and Wenzel. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: James E. Daniell,

This article is part of the Research Topic

Mega Quakes: Cascading Earthquake Hazards and Compounding Risks

Content Search

Chile: earthquake - sep 2015, disaster description.

On 16 Sep 2015, a catastrophic earthquake hit the coast of Chile, causing some damage to buildings, but much of the impact due to 4.5m waves affecting Coquimbo. A tsunami will extend over the Pacific in the coming hours causing minor issues for some locations. ( CEDIM, 17 Sep 2015 )

About 1 million people were evacuated following the tsunami warning and authorities declared a disaster area in the Provinces of Choapa and Coquimbo, Region of Coquimbo. In Coquimbo around 96,700 people were left without power and 3,100 people without drinking water. ( OCHA, 17 Sep 2015 )

According to the latest figures, at least 12 people were killed and more than 600 were left homeless. The earthquake also destroyed around 60 houses and damaged nearly 200, mostly in the Region of Coquimbo. ( Gov. of Chile, 18 Aug 2015 )

The IFRC approved use of the Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF), which will provide humanitarian aid to 450 families affected by the recent earthquake and tsunami throughout the provinces of Choapa, Elqui, and Limari, communities of Canela, Illapel, Coquimbo, and Monte Patria, and the towns of Canela Baja, Illapel, Gabriela, Baquedano, Peñuela, and Tulahuen. ( IFRC, 30 Sep 2015 )

Affected Countries

Latest updates, región de coquimbo: a dos años del terremoto la reconstrucción llega al 60%, chile: disaster management reference handbook may 2017, la educación transforma vidas y trae estabilidad en chile: unesco, maps and infographics, m 8.3 coastal chile earthquake of 16 september 2015.

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

Pichidangui - Chile - Earthquake - 16/09/2015, Reference Map

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

Quintero - Chile Earthquake - 16/09/2015, Reference Map

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

What Chile did right

Earthquake and tsunami in chile: massive evacuation and building codes help to reduce loss of life, tzu chi’s distribution after the illapel earthquake, other disasters affecting the country, chile: wild fires - jan 2024, useful links.

  • ONEMI - Ministerio del Interior y Seguridad Pública
  • 0 Shopping Cart

Internet Geography

Case Study – The 2011 Japan Earthquake

Cambridge iGCSE Geography > The Natural Environment > Earthquakes and Volcanoes > Case Study – The 2011 Japan Earthquake

Background Information

Location : The earthquake struck 250 miles off the northeastern coast of Japan’s Honshu Island at 2:46 pm (local time) on March 11, 2011.

Japan 2011 Earthquake map

Japan 2011 Earthquake map

Magnitude : It measured 9.1 on the Moment Magnitude scale, making it one of the most powerful earthquakes ever recorded.

Japan is a highly developed country with advanced infrastructure, technology, and a robust economy. The nation has a high GDP, an efficient healthcare system, and extensive education. However, it’s also located in the Pacific Ring of Fire, making it prone to earthquakes.

What caused the 2011 Japan earthquake?

Japan is located on the eastern edge of the Eurasian Plate. The Eurasian plate, which is continental, is subducted by the Pacific Plate, an oceanic plate forming a subduction zone to the east of Japan. This type of plate margin is known as a destructive plate margin . The process of subduction is not smooth. Friction causes the Pacific Plate to stick. Pressure builds and is released as an earthquake.

Friction has built up over time, and when released, this caused a massive ‘megathrust’ earthquake. The enormous tension released as the plates shifted caused the seafloor to uplift, triggering the earthquake and subsequent tsunami .

The amount of energy released in this single earthquake was 600 million times the energy of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb.

Scientists drilled into the subduction zone soon after the earthquake and discovered a thin, slippery clay layer lining the fault. The researchers think this clay layer allowed the two plates to slide an incredible distance, some 164 feet (50 metres), facilitating the enormous earthquake and tsunami.

The earthquake occurred at a relatively shallow depth of 20 miles below the surface of the Pacific Ocean. This, combined with the high magnitude, caused a tsunami (find out more about  how a tsunami is formed  on the BBC website).

What were the primary effects of the 2011 Japan earthquake?

  • Ground Shaking : Extensive damage to buildings and infrastructure.
  • Landfall: Some coastal areas experienced land subsidence as the earthquake dropped the beachfront in some places by more than 50 cm.

What were the secondary effects of the 2011 Japan earthquake?

  • Tsunami : A giant tsunami wave resulted in widespread destruction along the coast.
  • Fatalities : Around 16,000 deaths were reported, mainly resulting from the tsunami.
  • Injuries : 26,152 were injured, mainly as a result of the tsunami.
  • Nuclear Crisis : The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant was damaged, leading to radiation leaks.
  • Economic Loss : Estimated at over $235 billion.
  • Displacement : Around 340,000 people were displaced from their homes.
  • Damage: The tsunami destroyed or damaged 332,395 buildings, 2,126 roads, 56 bridges, and 26 railways. Three hundred hospitals were damaged, and 11 were destroyed.
  • Environmental Damage : Coastal ecosystems were heavily impacted.
  • Blackouts: Over 4.4 million households were left without electricity in North-East Japan.
  • Transport: Rural areas remained isolated for a long time because the tsunami destroyed major roads and local trains and buses. Sections of the Tohoku Expressway were damaged. Railway lines were damaged, and some trains were derailed.

What were the immediate responses to the 2011 Japan earthquake?

Tsunami Warnings and Prediction :

  • The Japan Meteorological Agency issued tsunami warnings three minutes after the earthquake.
  • Scientists predicted where the tsunami would hit using modelling and forecasting technology.

Search and Rescue Operations:

  • Rescue workers and 100,000 members of the Japan Self-Defence Force were dispatched within hours.
  • Some individuals were rescued from beneath rubble with the aid of sniffer dogs.

Radiation Protection Measures:

  • The government declared a 20 km evacuation zone around the Fukushima nuclear power plant.
  • Evacuees from the area around the nuclear power plant were given iodine tablets to reduce radiation poisoning risk.

International Assistance:

  • Japan received help from the US military.
  • Search and rescue teams from New Zealand, India, South Korea, China, and Australia were sent.

Access and Evacuation :

  • Access was restricted to affected areas due to debris and mud, complicating immediate support.
  • Hundreds of thousands were evacuated to temporary shelters or relocated.

Health Monitoring :

  • Those near the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear meltdown had radiation levels checked and their health monitored.
  • Measures were taken to ensure individuals did not receive dangerous exposure to radiation.

What were the long-term responses to the 2011 Japan earthquake?

Reconstruction Policy and Budget:

  • Establishment of the Reconstruction Policy Council in April 2011.
  • Approval of a budget of 23 trillion yen (£190 billion) for recovery over ten years.
  • Creation of ‘Special Zones for Reconstruction’ to attract investment in the Tohoku region.

Coastal Protection Measures:

  • Implementing coastal protection policies like seawalls and breakwaters designed for a 150-year recurrence interval of tsunamis.

Legislation for Tsunami-Resilient Communities:

  • Enactment of the ‘Act on the Development of Tsunami-resilient Communities’ in December 2011.
  • Emphasis on human life, combining infrastructure development with measures for the largest class tsunami.

Economic Challenges and Recovery:

  • Japan’s economy wiped 5–10% off the value of stock markets post-earthquake.
  • Long-term response priority: rebuild infrastructure, restore and improve the economy’s health.

Transportation and Infrastructure Repair:

  • Repair and reopening of 375 km of the Tohoku Expressway by the 24th of March 2011.
  • Restoration of the runway at Sendai Airport by the 29th of March, a joint effort by the Japanese Defence Force and the US Army.

Utility Reconstruction:

  • Energy, water supply, and telecommunications infrastructure reconstruction.
  • As of November 2011: 96% of electricity, 98% of water, and 99% of the landline network had been restored.

How does Japan prepare for earthquakes, and what was its impact?

Japan has a comprehensive earthquake preparedness program, including:

  • Strict Building Codes : Buildings are constructed to withstand seismic activity.
  • Early Warning Systems : Advanced technology provides early warnings to citizens.
  • Education and Drills : Regular earthquake drills in schools, offices, and public places.

Impact of the 2011 Earthquake

The extensive preparation in Japan likely saved lives and reduced damage during the 2011 earthquake. However, the unprecedented magnitude of the event still led to significant destruction, particularly with the tsunami and nuclear crisis.

The 2011 Japan earthquake illustrates the complexity of managing natural disasters in even the most developed and prepared nations. The event prompted further refinements in disaster preparedness and response in Japan and globally, highlighting the need for continuous assessment and adaptation to seismic risks.

The 2011 earthquake occurred off Japan’s Honshu Island, measuring 9.1 on the Moment Magnitude scale, one of the strongest ever recorded.

Triggered by a ‘megathrust’ in a destructive plate margin, the Pacific Plate subducted the Eurasian Plate, releasing energy equivalent to 600 million Hiroshima bombs.

Primary effects included extensive ground shaking and significant land subsidence in coastal areas.

Secondary effects included a massive tsunami, around 16,000 deaths, 26,152 injuries, a nuclear crisis at Fukushima, over $235 billion in economic loss, displacement of 340,000 people, and widespread damage to infrastructure and the environment.

Immediate responses included rapid tsunami warnings, extensive search and rescue operations, radiation protection measures, international assistance, and evacuation strategies.

Long-term responses focused on reconstruction policies, coastal protection, tsunami-resilient community development, economic recovery, and transportation and utility restoration.

Japan’s extensive earthquake preparedness, including strict building codes and early warning systems, likely reduced damage, but the magnitude still caused significant destruction.

Check Your Knowledge

Coming soon

Test Yourself

The natural environment, share this:.

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)

Please Support Internet Geography

If you've found the resources on this site useful please consider making a secure donation via PayPal to support the development of the site. The site is self-funded and your support is really appreciated.

Search Internet Geography

Top posts and pages.


Latest Blog Entries

Statistical Techniques in Geography Poster

Pin It on Pinterest

  • Click to share
  • Print Friendly
  • International
  • Schools directory
  • Resources Jobs Schools directory News Search

Earthquake theory & case studies Sumatra and Chile

Earthquake theory & case studies Sumatra and Chile

Victoria Bennett's Shop

Last updated

28 August 2023

  • Share through email
  • Share through twitter
  • Share through linkedin
  • Share through facebook
  • Share through pinterest

Resources included (4)

GCSE Geography Earthquake formation at tectonic plate boundaries

GCSE Geography Earthquake formation at tectonic plate boundaries

GCSE Impacts of the Sumatra Earthquake 2005 case study

GCSE Impacts of the Sumatra Earthquake 2005 case study

Comparing earthquakes LIC/ HIC  Chile vs Sumatra

Comparing earthquakes LIC/ HIC Chile vs Sumatra

Measuring earthquake intensity

Measuring earthquake intensity

This 3 lesson bundle covers the reasons why earthquakes occur at plate boundaries, with map skills developed. Then 2 lessons comparing the primary and secondary effects earthquakes at 2 contrasting levels of development: Chile in South America and Sumatra Indonesia. These case studies complement the ones in the popular Oxford GCSE course textbooks.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects

Skip to content

Get Revising

Join get revising, already a member, chile earthquake case study (hic) primary and secondary effects.

  • Created by: Lars1066
  • Created on: 31-10-20 13:04

Primary Effects:

  • 800,000 people in total were affected
  • 12,000 injuries
  • 53 ports were destroyed
  • 56 hospitals were destroyed
  • 4,500 schools were destroyed
  • 220,000 homes were destroyed
  • Santiago airport…
  • Natural hazards

No comments have yet been made

Similar Geography resources:

GCSE Geography Chile Earthquake Case study 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating Teacher recommended

Tectonic Case Study 0.0 / 5

Tectonic Hazards Case Studies Effects: Nepal (2015) & Chile (2010) 0.0 / 5

Case Study Comparison- Nepal VS New Zealand 0.0 / 5

Natural Hazards 5 0.0 / 5

Chile Earthquake 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating

What to revise on Hazards - Geography AQA GCSE 0.0 / 5

Geography Challenge of Natural Hazars 0.0 / 5

earthquakes 5.0 / 5 based on 1 rating

Geography 0.0 / 5

Related discussions on The Student Room

  • geography natural hazards »
  • AQA GCSE Geography Paper 1 8035/1 - 23 May 2022 [Exam Chat] »
  • Edexcel A-Level Geography Paper 1 | [17th May 2023] Exam Chat »
  • OCR A-Level Geography Geographical Debates | [12th June 2023] Exam Chat »
  • AQA A Level Geography Paper 1 (7037/1) - 17th May 2023 [Exam Chat] »
  • OCR A Level Geography Geographical debates H481/03 - 17 Jun 2022 [Exam Chat] »
  • AQA A Level Geography Paper 1 7037/1 - 27 May 2022 [Exam Chat] »
  • geography »
  • Geography 6 mark HELP »
  • Geography help »

chile earthquake case study primary and secondary effects


  1. 6.6 Magnitude Earthquake Chile’

  2. What causes Earthquakes? #shorts

  3. Last news! 6.2 magnitude earthquake shakes Chile! Epicenter in the Coquimbo region

  4. Big Earthquake Today In Chile Magnitude 5.4 Update February 14,2024

  5. Classification of Earthquake

  6. Chile earthquake today || 9.5 Magnitude hits Chile's || Volcano news today


  1. Chile Earthquake 2010

    At 3.34 am on 27th February 2010, a powerful magnitude 8.8 earthquake occurred just off the coast of central Chile. The earthquake occurred at the destructive plate margin where the South American plate is subducted by the Nazca Plate. The earthquake was followed by a series of smaller aftershocks.

  2. PDF The Challenge of Natural Hazards: Chile and Nepal in the

    2010 Chile Earthquake On the 27 th February 2010 , a huge earthquake ... Chile Primary effects Around 500 killed and 12,000 injured . 800,000 people affected overall. Many buildings were destroyed, including 22,000 homes, ... Case Study Notes - Earthquakes in Chile and Nepal - AQA Geography GCSE Author:

  3. 2010 Maule, Chile Earthquake

    To conclude, the 2010 Maule earthquake served as an important case study to better understand how the characteristics of megathrust earthquakes lead to expected primary and secondary effects and long-term environmental and societal damages.

  4. Chile earthquake of 2010

    Maule. Chile earthquake of 2010, severe earthquake that occurred on February 27, 2010, off the coast of south-central Chile, causing widespread damage on land and initiating a tsunami that devastated some coastal areas of the country. Together, the earthquake and tsunami were responsible for more than 500 deaths.

  5. Earthquake Case Study: Chile 2010

    The primary effects of the earthquake were: 500 people were killed. US$30 billion of damage. Secondary effects . Secondary effects of the earthquake included: Coastal areas were flooded by a tsunami. Landslides blocked some roads. Responses to the earthquake. ... 1.2.10 Earthquake Case Study: Chile 2010. 1.2.11 Earthquake Case Study: Nepal 2015.

  6. The Social, Political and Economic Aftershocks of the Chilean Earthquake

    Knowledge at Wharton Staff. On February 27, a large number of ports, towns and large cities along Chile's south-central coast were devastated by an earthquake measuring 8.8 on the Richter scale ...

  7. Chile earthquake of 1960

    Chile earthquake of 1960, the largest earthquake recorded in the 20th century. Originating off the coast of southern Chile on May 22, 1960, the temblor caused substantial damage and loss of life both in that country and—as a result of the tsunamis that it generated—in distant Pacific coastal areas. Chile earthquake of 1960.

  8. Report on the 2010 Chilean Earthquake and Tsunami Response

    In July 2010, in an effort to reduce future catastrophic natural disaster losses for California, the American Red Cross coordinated and sent a delegation of 20 multidisciplinary experts on earthquake response and recovery to Chile. The primary goal was to understand how the Chilean society and relevant organizations responded to the magnitude 8.8 Maule earthquake that struck the region on ...

  9. Rebuild Fast but Rebuild Better: Chile's Initial Recovery following the

    The M w 8.8 Chile Earthquake of February 27, 2010, ... 7 February 2011, Ministry General Secretariat of the Presidency of Chile, Studies Division, Santiago. Google Scholar. Government of Chile, 2011b. Plan Región del Bío-Bío 2010-2014 ... Geological Effects of the Earthquake of 27 February 2010: Preliminary Assessment, Proposal for ...

  10. Losses Associated with Secondary Effects in Earthquakes

    Tertiary effects could include cascading effects such as the primary effect of an earthquake causing a secondary effect in the form of a tsunami which damages a nuclear power plant, and then a nuclear disaster develops. ... and uncertainties associated with the estimates of secondary effect losses. Case Study 1: Tohoku Earthquake ...

  11. Case study: Chile (2010) and Nepal (2015) Earthquake

    Chile: Primary Effects. Click the card to flip 👆. •Occured on the coast. •Magnitude was 8.8. •5th largest earthquake ever to be recorded by a seismograph. •500 people lost their lives and 12,000 injured and 800,000 poeole affected. •GDP in 2010 (12681.77) •56 hospitals, 220,000 houses, 4,500 schools, 53 ports.

  12. Nepal Earthquake 2015

    A map to show the location of Nepal in Asia. At 11.26 am on Saturday, 25th of April 2015, a magnitude 7.9 earthquake struck Nepal. The focus was only eight kilometres deep, and the epicentre was just 60 kilometres northwest of Kathmandu, the capital city of Nepal. At the time of the earthquake, Kathmandu had 800,000+ inhabitants.

  13. Earthquakes

    Case study - Haiti Earthquake, 2021; Case study - Namie Earthquake, 2022 ... primary effects - things that happen immediately as a result of an earthquake; secondary effects - things that ...

  14. Case Study: CHILE EARTHQUAKE Flashcards

    Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like (Primary effects) How many homes were destroyed?, (Primary effects) How many schools were destroyed?, (Primary effects) How many ports were destroyed? and more.

  15. Chile: Earthquake

    On 16 Sep 2015, a catastrophic earthquake hit the coast of Chile, causing some damage to buildings, but much of the impact due to 4.5m waves affecting Coquimbo. A tsunami will extend over the ...

  16. Chile vs Nepal Case study- primary and secondary effects of ...

    Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like What are primary effects?, What are secondary effects?, What was the Chile earthquake? and more.

  17. The Primary and Secondary Impacts of the Chile Earthquake 2010

    This lesson looks at the primary and secondary impacts of the Chilean Earthquake in 2010 with an 8 mark EDEXCEL question at the end. International; Resources; Jobs; Schools directory ... The Primary and Secondary Impacts of the Chile Earthquake 2010. Subject: Geography. Age range: 14-16. Resource type: Lesson (complete) Ms Rogers' Shop. 4.91 ...

  18. Case Study

    Location: The earthquake struck 250 miles off the northeastern coast of Japan's Honshu Island at 2:46 pm (local time) on March 11, 2011. Magnitude: It measured 9.1 on the Moment Magnitude scale, making it one of the most powerful earthquakes ever recorded. Japan is a highly developed country with advanced infrastructure, technology, and a ...

  19. CASE STUDY: Chile earthquake Flashcards

    Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like What is a primary effect?, What is a secondary effect?, What was the magnitude of the Chile earthquake 2010? and more. Try Magic Notes and save time.

  20. Earthquake theory & case studies Sumatra and Chile

    Measuring earthquake intensity. This 3 lesson bundle covers the reasons why earthquakes occur at plate boundaries, with map skills developed. Then 2 lessons comparing the primary and secondary effects earthquakes at 2 contrasting levels of development: Chile in South America and Sumatra Indonesia. These case studies complement the ones in the ...

  21. Chile Earthquake Case Study (HIC) Primary and Secondary Effects

    Home > GCSE > Geography > Chile Earthquake Case Study (HIC) Primary and Secondary Effects. Chile Earthquake Case Study (HIC) Primary and Secondary Effects. 0.0 / 5? Created by: Lars1066; Created on: 31-10-20 13:04; Fullscreen. Primary Effects: 800,000 people in total were affected; 500 deaths;

  22. Case study

    Start studying Case study - Chile Earthquake. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. ... (Primary effect) 4,500 schools. How many schools were destroyed? ... (Airport) Much of Chile lost power. Other primary effects? (Power) 1500km. How many km of roads were destroyed? (Secondary effects) Evacuation ...

  23. Chile and Nepal case study, earthquakes Flashcards

    Chile: primary effects (caused by groundshaking) - around 500 people killed. - 12 000 injured, 800 000 people affected. - 220 000 homes, 4500 schools, 53 ports, 56 hospitals and public building were destroyed. - port Talcahuanao and Santiago airport badly damaged. - much of chiles power, water supplies and communications lost.