How Do Countries Prepare and Adapt to Earthquakes
Explore how different nations fight and protect themselves against the most terrifying natural disasters.
Introduction
What is being researched and why is it significant?
Earthquakes are one of the most devastating natural disasters, capable of prolonged economic challenges, loss of life, and a wide range of destruction. As urbanization increases and populations cluster into high-risk areas, the consequence of incompetent preparation can be substantial. Preventing this seismic catastrophe can ensure the safety of civilians and reduce the overall destruction that earthquakes can have. Throughout this StoryMap, you will learn about how different countries adopt diverse strategies to prepare and prevent earthquakes, and the other seismic activities that can occur afterwards. Understanding these strategies highlights the importance of earthquake prevention and how they can minimize the human and economic toll of earthquakes.
Why is this topic important to me?
I heavily relate to this topic as I am from Japan, a country that faces one of the most earthquakes annually. My interest stems from a desire to know how science and technology can be used to prevent these catastrophic events. Furthermore, learning and understanding the diverse ways countries from various parts of the world prepare for earthquakes has sparked my curiosity. Having knowledge in this topic allows me to further appreciate the versatile nature of disaster management, which integrates engineering, sciences, and environmental studies to create solutions.
How does the use of geospatial inquiry help in answering this question?
Geospatial inquiry plays a pivotal role in this topic as it can be used as a tool to analyze seismic activity patterns and provide data that could go unnoticed. Additionally, having geographical information can help us further understand the reason some countries are more prepared compared to others. With the help of geospatial tools, fault lines, tectonic plate boundaries, and regions with historical seismic activities can be identified.
What was your approach to and process for inquiry?
The process began by brainstorming a central question: How do countries adapt and prepare for earthquakes, and what factors influence their preparedness? This question provided something for me to focus on for my research, encouraging me to explore the strategies used by different countries, identify the challenges they encounter, and understand the geospatial trends related to the question.
To gather relevant information, I used a variety of credible sources. These included government reports, and websites of organizations like the US Geological Survey (USGS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I also reviewed case studies of major earthquakes in countries such as Japan, Indonesia, Haiti, and the United States. Additionally, I sought data on building codes, early warning systems, public education initiatives, and recovery efforts to understand the nature of preparedness.
Once I had collected sufficient information, I organized it into their countries. This way, I was able to compare the different countries and what sets them apart from each other. I then analyzed the organized data to identify trends and relationships. This step helped clarify the factors influencing a nation’s ability to adapt and prepare.
To share my work, I created a detailed report and visual presentations, including maps that show global seismic risk zones and comparisons of preparedness strategies. These materials emphasized best practices, such as Japan’s advanced building codes and Indonesia’s focus on tsunami readiness, while also highlighting areas for improvement in less-prepared regions. By communicating these awarenesses, I aimed to contribute to a broader understanding of earthquake adaptation.
Body
What are major themes/issues in what you found from your research?
Earthquakes are among the most powerful and destructive natural disasters, occurring when a sudden burst of energy is released due to the movement of the earth’s lithosphere causing the ground to shake violently. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), there are approximately 20,000 earthquakes around the world every year and every country deals with this problem differently.
A theme that I have picked up is that the countries that are prone to more earthquakes are more prepared and are willing to spend more money. For example, Japan experiences about 1500 earthquakes annually and about 20% of the world’s strong earthquakes, driving the need for tough buildings and improved safety. (JRailPass, 2020) Japan has invested about 1 billion dollars in developing its seismic alert system, which can detect earthquakes 80 seconds before they happen, which plays a crucial role in the safety of the people. (Japan: Total Disaster Risk Management Budget 2024 | Statista, 2024)
On the other hand, a country like Sweden, which experiences little seismic activity, does not focus on earthquake preparedness as much. Sweden experiences zero earthquakes that have a magnitude of over 4.0 making it the country that experiences the least number of earthquakes annually. Unlike Japan, Sweden does not have a budget exclusively for earthquake prevention and preparedness; instead, it adopts an all-hazard approach to civil defense and crisis prevention. Still, the amount that the Swedish government has put into this only adds up to approximately $21,000,000, one-fiftieth of what Japan spends on just their seismic alert system. (The Complete Sweden Earthquake Report (Up-To-Date 2025)., 2025)
A common issue is the economic disparity in preparedness between developed and developing countries. Wealthier countries often have access to advanced technologies, improved infrastructure, and disaster management plans.
Haiti is one of the least developed countries and is facing significant economic challenges with 60-75% of the population living in poverty. (UNICEF, 2023) According to the United Nations Development Programme, Haiti is ranked 170th out of 191 countries on the 2022 Human Development Index, which puts them in the “low human development” category. (Nations, 2023) In 2010, a 7.0 magnitude earthquake hit Haiti which lasted 35 seconds. This earthquake took the lives of 220,000-300,000 people and injured more than 300,000 people. (Pallardy, 2010) Approximately 1.5 million people were displaced with almost 300,000 homes being destroyed.
In comparison, the United States, one of the world’s most developed countries, had different outcomes when it faced a similar earthquake. In 1989, the United States experienced a 6.9 magnitude on the central coast of California. This earthquake only took the lives of 63 people and injured 3,757 people, a fraction of that of Haiti. Approximately 15,000 homes/buildings were destroyed, a twentieth of the number in Haiti. (The 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake, 2025)
Comparing the two countries’ preparedness, the reason they had different outcomes is obvious. California has been working on earthquake preparedness, improving building codes, and public awareness for many years. Many bridges and buildings along with older buildings have been retrofitted to withstand major earthquakes
A notable example to show how much earthquake preparedness has improved in some countries is by comparing two earthquakes that happened in Japan. In 1995, a 7.2 magnitude earthquake occurred known as the Great Hanshin Earthquake. This earthquake killed around 6,434 people and injured 43,000 people. Furthermore, 400,000 buildings were damaged with 22% of offices in Kobe’s central business district being rendered unusable. The earthquake caused over $100 billion in damage. (Britannica, 2008)
In contrast, an earthquake in 2011 showed improved results. Japan experienced a 9.1 magnitude earthquake offshore of Tohoku. This claimed the lives of approximately 18,000 people and destroyed around 123,000 houses, only a quarter of the Great Hanshin Earthquake. (Britannica, 2011)
Although the number of buildings destroyed had decreased, the incident caused over $200 billion in damage and the casualties had tripled. This is because the Tohoku earthquake had a factor that the Great Hanshin Earthquake did not. The Tohoku earthquake occurred close to the sea, which generated tsunamis reaching over 40 meters high. These destructive tsunami waves overwhelmed many defenses with one wave reaching over 10 kilometers inland. To learn from this tragic event, researchers have collected over 6,200 tsunami wave measurements and have worked on improving their communication and mitigation systems.
What are the geospatial trends with your topic and what are causing these trends?
A noticeable geospatial trend is the location of where earthquakes are most likely to occur. The earth’s crust consists of 7 major and 8 minor tectonic plates. Because earthquakes occur when tectonic plates buckle, most earthquakes happen where the tectonic plates meet.
comparison of where Earthquakes have happened and tectonic plates
Within the tectonic plates, is a horseshoe-shaped region called the ring of fire that is over 40,000 km and spans 15 different countries. This region experiences about 90% of the world’s earthquakes and has 452 volcanoes, making up 75% of the world’s volcanoes. This is because the pacific plate, the largest tectonic plate, constantly collides with the surrounding plates. (Britannica, 2011)
Now let us look at how these countries in the ring of fire prepare and adapt to seismic events.
Japan
Located in the intersection of four different tectonic plates, Japan is a hotspot for seismic activities. Before Japan began building towering skyscrapers and advanced technology, they created simple houses made of lightweight and flexible materials like wood. The flexibility of wood allowed the houses to withstand seismic forces better than anything made from stone or concrete. These traditional houses could be rebuilt quickly and cheaply due to the abundance of wood in the mountainous terrain of Japan. A more recent example of how earthquake-proof Japan has become is the Tokyo Skytree. Known as one of the most earthquake-resistant buildings, this radio tower has had many upgrades over the years. Firstly, it uses a shinbashira design inspired by traditional Japanese pagodas. This design includes a central reinforced concrete pillar that runs through the tower, acting as a counterweight, which can reduce the swaying by up to 50%. Additionally, it has a flexible steel framework on the exterior, allowing it to bend without breaking. Shapes also play a crucial role in the stability of the Tokyo Skytree. Standing at 634 meters, this tower is the tallest structure in Japan, but its wide, triangular base helps with its stability. Furthermore, the tower’s gradual tapering from the wide base to the narrow top reduces its center of gravity.
Chile
Like Japan, Chile has suffered major losses in the past, but now consistently succeeds in saving lives. Chile has an extremely strict building code and according to Dr. Sergio Barrientos, a director of the national seismological center, “the code has been updated every time there has been a large earthquake because we have learned new things, new aspects, that we could do better.” (Cengiz Özbek, 2020) A building that highlights the strict building code is the earthquake resistant cathedral. This building was constructed in the shape of a parabola, which is known to be able to withstand lots of pressure and distribute it evenly throughout the structure. During the 8.8 magnitude earthquake on February 27th, 2010, the only damage caused was broken windows. Not only are the structure well built, but the people of Chile are well prepared for these seismic events. For many years, local groups around the country have familiarized themselves with disaster preparedness plans, practiced innumerable earthquake drills, and have memorized the evacuation routes.
USA (California)
As mentioned before, the United States, more specifically California, experiences numerous earthquakes annually. California also follows a strict building code called the California Building Code (CBC), which requires buildings to meet stringent seismic safety standards. This includes the requirement for earthquake-resistant designs using flexible materials like steel and reinforced concrete. Older buildings, primarily unreinforced masonry structures, are being retrofitted to meet the new standards with the financial assistance of the California Earthquake Authority. 181 Fremont is a prime example of California’s resilient architecture. The structural engineers of the 181 Fremont building created a steel exoskeleton support system around the building, behaving as a shock absorber. The exoskeleton consists of cross bracings, known to improve the structure's rigidity and stability. Additionally, the building features 42 reinforced concrete caissons (box-like structures), each extending more than 200 feet below the ground.
Indonesia
Indonesia, an archipelago of over 17,000 islands, experiences significant earthquake and tsunami risks because it is located on multiple tectonic plate boundaries. As one of the most seismically active nations, it has made strides in preparedness, such as reenforcing buildings, but what makes them unique is the establishment of a tsunami early warning system managed by BMKG, which includes over 170 seismic monitoring stations and tsunami detection buoys. However, due to its geographic complexity and economic disparities, Indonesia faces significant challenges. Many rural and remote communities cannot access resources for earthquake-resistant construction, leaving them vulnerable to seismic events. Public education initiatives, such as the "Tsunami Safe Villages" program, aim to build disaster resilience, while evacuation structures have been constructed in high-risk coastal areas. Despite limited resources and the economic difficulties, Indonesia continues to adapt, with urban planning and community-based programs as cornerstones of its earthquake preparedness strategy.
New Zealand
One unique feature in New Zealand’s earthquake preparedness is its base isolation technology. Pioneered by New Zealand scientist William Robinson, in the 1970’s, this technology takes the weight of the building, dissipates any seismic force, and allows the foundation to slide around horizontally. Similar to a car’s suspension, base isolation uses rubber bearings, friction bearings, ball bearings and spring systems. The Te Papa museum located in Wellington, is a six-story, 50,000-ton building that uses base isolation. On November 14th, 2016, this museum survived a 7.8 magnitude earthquake without any damage caused to the structure.
What is controversial about this topic?
Although earthquake preparation and adaptation are critical for reducing casualties and destruction, these efforts are often surrounded with controversy. The debates popularly focus on the budgeting of resources and urban-rural equity.
One major controversy focuses on the expenses of earthquake preparation and who bears the financial burden. Governments and taxpayers often fund extensive projects such as early warning systems, earthquake resistant buildings, and disaster response plans. Some argue that investing in preparation and adaptation saves lives and diminishes long-term economic challenges, alluding to Japan’s multibillion-dollar investments in earthquake resistant architecture as a model. Opposingly, however, many believe that such spending is excessive, specifically in places with minimal seismic activity, where resources could be used for more immediate issues like healthcare or education. For instance, in the United States, debates over federal funding for earthquake retrofitting in California have raised questions about whether taxpayers around the nation should be partaking in the costs of protecting a specific region.
Earthquake preparedness usually benefits urban areas, where resources, investments and people are clustered. Cities like Tokyo and San Francisco have up to date early warning systems, progressive infrastructure, and large-scale public education programs. Meanwhile, rural or remote areas frequently have insufficient resources, leaving them more vulnerable to seismic activities. Critics highlight the dilemma of prioritizing economic hubs over marginalized regions. For instance, in Chile, urban areas like Santiago have seen significant investments in seismic upgrades, while smaller towns in the Atacama region remain underprepared. Advocates of urban prioritization argue that protecting cities is critical for national economic stability, while others demand a more fair-minded distribution of resources.
What does the future of my topic look like?
As earthquakes remain one of the most destructive natural disasters, the demand for robust mitigation and preparation will never end. Countries are increasingly investing in advanced technologies, resilient architecture, and community education programs. These efforts focus on minimizing casualties, reducing economic losses, and bringing awareness about the danger of seismic events.
Early warning systems are a key feature of future earthquake mitigation. Current systems, like Japan's Earthquake Early Warning system and California’s ShakeAlert, send alerts seconds before the seismic waves reach populated areas. With these warnings, individuals can seek shelter and enable automated systems to stop trains, shut down gas pipelines, and protect critical infrastructure. Over 1,000 seismic sensors back Japan’s system, and they have saved thousands of lives, particularly during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake.
In the future, the aim is to enhance the efficiency of these systems through artificial intelligence and machine learning. Analyzing seismic data within milliseconds, AI could provide warnings faster and with greater precision. Additionally, the expansion of early warning systems into underserved regions is crucial. The World Bank estimates that global investments of $1 billion annually in early warning technologies could reduce earthquake-related fatalities by up to 60% in high-risk areas.
Another crucial component of future mitigation is infrastructure made to withstand seismic activities. Technologies like base isolation, seismic dampers, and energy-absorbing materials are becoming necessities in new construction. The Tokyo Skytree represents this trend, utilizing a central column designed to absorb up to 50% of seismic forces, which makes it one of the most earthquake-resistant buildings in the world.
Retrofitting older buildings is equally critical, especially in countries that experience more earthquakes. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the estimated cost of retrofitting high-risk structures is $13 billion, but the savings from reduced damage could exceed $50 billion during a major quake. Meanwhile, developing countries face financial limitations that hold back infrastructure improvements. Initiatives like the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery provide funding to help these countries retrofit schools, hospitals, and public buildings with cost-effective, earthquake-resistant materials.
When talking about earthquakes, it is hard not to mention “The Big One,” which refers to the massive earthquake expected to strike the Pacific Northwest of the United States and Canada due to the subduction of the Juan de Fuca plate beneath the North American Plate. This intersection is called the Cascadia Subduction Zone, capable of generating an 8.0-9.0 magnitude earthquake. Camille Brillon, a seismologist at Natural Resources Canada, says "So, sometime in the next 200-or-so years, there likely will be a (magnitude) 9+ Cascadia earthquake." The region's vulnerability stems from a combination of factors, including densely populated cities like Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver, aging infrastructure, and a lack of retrofitting in many areas. According to the Insurance Bureau of Canada, if a 9.0 earthquake were to occur 75 kilometers off the coast of Vancouver, the economic losses could total to $95.6 billion.
Here is a video showing what could happen when "the big one" happens.
The Really Big One; The Feared Cascadia 9.0 Earthquake
What are some geoinquiry questions for future research for your topic?
How does the interaction between population density and seismic risk shape disaster outcomes?
How are advancements in building technology transforming the way we approach earthquake safety?
In what ways can emerging technologies, such as AI or satellites, enhance earthquake preparedness and response?
How does the global response to earthquakes differ for low-income versus high-income regions?
How do earthquakes alter landscapes and ecosystems over time?
What lessons can modern societies learn from how ancient civilizations managed earthquake risks?
Conclusion
Through my research on how different countries adapt and prepare for earthquakes, I gained a deeper understanding of the challenges and strategies involved in addressing this geospatial problem. Earthquakes are universal phenomena, yet their impacts vary widely depending on a country’s location, resources, and preparedness. High-risk countries like Japan, Chile, and the United States have made remarkable strides in developing early warning systems, earthquake-resistant infrastructure, and public education initiatives. In contrast, developing nations such as Haiti and Indonesia face significant obstacles, including limited resources, that hinder their ability to implement similar measures. This disparity highlights the importance of equitable access to technology, funding, and international cooperation to ensure all regions can effectively mitigate seismic risks.
Among the five themes of human geography—place, region, scale, space, and connection—the theme of region has been most influential in shaping my understanding of this topic. Earthquake preparedness and adaptation strategies are often influenced by regional tectonic activity and shared vulnerabilities. For instance, countries within the Pacific Ring of Fire, such as Japan, Indonesia, and Chile, face frequent and intense earthquakes due to the active tectonic plate boundaries in the region. This shared geographic reality has led to regional advancements, such as Japan’s Earthquake Early Warning System, which serves as a model for other nations. However, it also underscores disparities; while some regions have the resources to develop robust mitigation strategies, others remain underprepared, exacerbating the consequences of seismic events.
Another critical theme is connection, which illustrates how global collaboration plays a vital role in advancing earthquake resilience. International partnerships, such as those facilitated by the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), have provided funding, knowledge, and technical expertise to vulnerable countries. This interconnectedness demonstrates that addressing earthquakes is not just a local or regional issue but a global responsibility. For example, Japan’s contributions to early warning systems and earthquake engineering have influenced earthquake-prone regions worldwide, improving preparedness and saving lives far beyond its borders.
One key claim I can make after completing this project is that earthquake preparedness is a dynamic and evolving process that requires both local and global efforts to succeed. Effective mitigation strategies are shaped by geography, economics, and culture, but they also benefit from the exchange of knowledge and resources across nations. While high-income countries have made substantial progress in reducing the risks and impacts of earthquakes, there remains an urgent need to bridge the preparedness gap for low-income regions. International cooperation, innovative technologies, and culturally sensitive education programs are essential to achieving this goal.
Ultimately, my research has shown that while earthquakes are natural phenomena, their impacts are deeply influenced by human actions and decisions. By understanding the unique challenges and opportunities within different regions, we can work toward a future where every community is better prepared to face the threat of earthquakes, regardless of location or resources. This requires sustained commitment and collaboration, as well as a recognition of the interconnected nature of our world.
Thank you for reading. I hoped you enjoyed learning about how countries prepare and adapt to earthquakes.
