In order to assess the accuracy of the statement “The wealth of a country influences the nature of the earthquake event experienced there,” we will conduct a comparison between the Kobe earthquake (1995) and the Sichuan earthquake (2008).
The claim can be confirmed by studying the stronger infrastructures of more economically developed countries (MEDCs), designed to withstand major earthquakes. In contrast, less economically developed countries (LEDCs) often have fragile housing, particularly in slum areas, which is susceptible to destruction. Consequently, a greater number of people are displaced in impacted regions. To illustrate this concept, we will analyze two specific earthquakes: the Kobe earthquake in Japan and the Sichuan earthquake in China.
Kobe Earthquake
On 17 January 1995 at 5:46am, there was an earthquake caused by the shift of the Philippines Plate beneath the Eurasian Plate along the Nojima fault line near Kobe. This particular earthquake, known as an ‘inland shallow earthquake’, is common at active faults. Such earthquakes can be highly destructive even at low magnitudes due to their occurrence in densely populated areas. The Richter scale measured this earthquake at 7.2, with certain tremors lasting for 20 seconds.
The earthquake had devastating primary effects, causing the death of 6,500 people, with 4,600 fatalities in Kobe. Around 40,000 individuals suffered serious injuries. The impact on infrastructure was equally significant as many buildings and bridges collapsed. One of the destroyed structures was the Great Hanshin Expressway, an essential transportation network connecting Kobe to neighboring areas. The earthquake also caused extensive damage to the city itself, leaving approximately 150,000 buildings in ruins and completely destroying 120 out of 150 docks at the port of Kobe.
In addition to these immediate consequences, the secondary effects were even more catastrophic. The earthquake ruptured gas mains resulting in widespread gas leaks. Water pipes fractured leading to disruptions in water supply. Railway lines also experienced severe damage and buckled under the force of the seismic activity.
As a result, fires ravaged the entire city, destroying wooden structures. The damage to the water supply and roads prevented efforts to extinguish the fires. Additionally, the disruption of electricity left approximately 2 million homes without power. This resulted in 300,000 people being homeless and refugees being relocated to temporary housing. Fear of aftershocks kept some residents from returning home for several days. Moreover, one million residents had to manage without water for a few days. The cost of the damage amounted to $220 billion, leading even major companies like Panasonic to temporarily shut down.
Some immediate actions taken included providing emergency rations to affected individuals and organizing evacuations. Additionally, rescue teams diligently searched through the debris for survivors for the following 10 days. Major companies like Motorola ensured free telephone connections, while 7-Eleven contributed essential supplies. In the long term, many residents opted to permanently relocate from the area. However, the reconstruction efforts created numerous job opportunities in the construction industry. Furthermore, during the rebuilding process, changes were implemented to adhere to a more recent building code, rather than the outdated 1981 code. Among these changes was the construction of buildings at greater distances from each other to mitigate the domino effect.
Instead of wood, high-rise buildings now have flexible steel frames. Additionally, rubber blocks were used to absorb shocks. As a result of this innovative strategy, Kobe has successfully recovered and remains one of the busiest container ports.
Sichuan Earthquake
The earthquake took place at 2:28pm on 12 May 2008 beneath Sichuan along the Longmenshan fault line. It was triggered by the release of pressure caused by the collision between the Indian Plate and the Eurasian Plate. The magnitude of this earthquake was 7.9, with some tremors lasting for 120 seconds. According to reports, the energy released during this earthquake was estimated to be 30 times more powerful than that of the Kobe earthquake.
The Sichuan earthquake resulted in a tragic loss of approximately 9000 lives. Within 11 days, this number tragically increased to 55000, with an additional 20000 individuals reported as missing. Around 35000 injuries were also caused by the earthquake and approximately 8 million people were left without homes. Additionally, the disaster led to the collapse of 5 million buildings, including numerous schools. The long-term impact on China’s economy was significant, with estimates placing the cost at up to $75 million.
In addition to these primary effects, secondary consequences were experienced as well. Most forms of communication were disrupted, specifically in Wenchuan where mobile phones ceased to function. Impassable roads became a problem due to blockages and concerns about flooding arose from landslides obstructing rivers.
Immediate responses were implemented after the earthquake to address the needs of the affected area. Due to inaccessibility, helicopters were deployed for rescue and relief efforts, along with troops parachuting in to assess the situation. Additional troops were dispatched by the army, and volunteers searched for survivors amidst collapsed buildings. Clean water, food supplies, and tents were provided to those affected, although there was a demand for an increase in tent numbers to around 3 million.
Long term response involved international aid from neighboring countries like Russia, South Korea, and Japan. These countries responded to China’s request for assistance. The majority of received funding was allocated towards running camps created for displaced individuals. The Red Cross received donations exceeding £100 million within two weeks. Temporary shelters were established for homeless individuals, and new job opportunities emerged as part of the reconstruction effort. The government aimed to complete the rebuilding program within three years. Sichuan has now recovered with earthquake-resistant structures ensuring safety against future earthquakes. China has also pledged to improve survivors’ quality of life.
Both physical and human geography contribute to the nature of an earthquake, as observed in the earthquakes in Kobe and Sichuan. The magnitude of the earthquake, a key aspect of physical geography, plays a crucial role. However, additional factors like tsunamis can also impact the level of destruction caused. On the other hand, variables associated with human geography such as a nation’s economic prosperity or population density in the affected region influence earthquake characteristics. Consequently, it is evident that a blend of physical and human geography influenced how earthquakes manifested in Kobe and Sichuan.
Despite the high GDPs of both Japan and China, which indicate their wealth, there is a notable difference in earthquake occurrence between the two countries. I argue that this claim does not hold true for these specific case studies as the contrast in earthquakes was not influenced by economic prosperity. The differences in physical geography and a particular aspect of human geography unrelated to wealth were responsible for the difference in earthquake impact. In terms of human geography, only the population size of affected areas played a role in determining the severity of an earthquake. Kobe had approximately 1.5 million residents, while Sichuan had a staggering population of 80 million. This single fact alone explains why Sichuan experienced significantly more casualties compared to Kobe, with ten times as many fatalities.
The greater damage caused in Sichuan compared to Kobe can be attributed to the difference in magnitude between their earthquakes. The Sichuan earthquake was 7 times stronger than the Kobe earthquake, resulting in worse consequences for Sichuan. However, I do not agree with the suggestion that the wealth of Japan and China influenced the nature of these earthquakes. Both countries have strong economies, so it is unlikely that economic status affected the severity of the earthquakes. The main factors causing these discrepancies were variations in magnitude and other aforementioned reasons.
