Difference Between Earthquakes in LEDCs and MEDCs

1244 Words3 Pages

Why are earthquake impacts different in LEDCs and MEDCs?

Any disaster either caused by humans or Mother Nature will make an impact but this depends where it hits. Obviously, if a disaster, or an earthquake in this case occurs somewhere densely populated rather an isolated area it will have a greater impact as life could be lost, buildings destroyed and as a result, high prices to pay.
We will be looking at the impacts of earthquakes in Lower Economically Developed Countries and More Economically Developed Countries, spotting the differences.

There are many earthquakes to study but we have chosen some of the most devastating ones that have occurs somewhere in the near past.

San Francisco
San Francisco, in 1985 one of Americas largest and most populated cities at the time, far ahead of other cities its size when it came to technology. San Francisco was modern as ever with large and long bridges and bays, and plenty rural areas. There were also skyscrapers and tall buildings, which towered over the population.
San Francisco was never peaceful as it lies on the fault line and earthquakes usually tend to occur there, so San Francisco is usually prepared for an earthquake with police, fire fighters and rescue teams and even volunteers if needed, this is all done before the actual disaster if predicted, if it isn’t they are still very quick to get to the scene.
Even if San Francisco has the technology and all the measurements are taken to predict an earthquake or any other disaster, some disasters can happen anytime and very suddenly. Such a disaster was the 1985 earthquake, which read a strikingly high 7.2 on the Richter scale.
This earthquake, in the highly populated San Francisco might have killed only 63 and injured many more but the economic impacts were great as buildings were destroyed, bridges collapsed and fires blazed through the city destroying anything in their path. This caused a great financial problem for the cities inhabitants, as the taxes would have to rise and also the government because large amounts of money would be needed to rebuild.
Even though many of the buildings, possibly the newer ones, were earthquake proof or could withstand a great deal of shock they were also destroyed. This because the older buildings that were not able to withstand the shock were destroyed and collapsed on top of the other buildings, which also collapsed, o...

... middle of paper ...

...ke was deeper in the earth, then it wouldn’t be as strongly felt on the surface. Then again this depends on the plates and which way they move, or which plate is faster or slower, or which plate will push the other under itself. This all matters as it will tell us the strength of the earthquake, but this is not the answer to the question.
Theoretically speaking, if the earthquake hit at the exact time, at the exact depth and at the exact speed and keeping all the other variables the same in a LEDC and a MEDC I would say that it would have a greater economic impact in the MEDC rather than the LEDC in which more lives may be lost. This because of the way their buildings and homes are built, earthquake proof or not? In MEDCs, fewer lives would be lost because their homes are built so that they would withstand earthquakes but the financial problems would be fairly large as office building and employees that might make a very large difference to the world could die during this disaster resulting in the fall to their business or even the stock market which may even affect the world.
The death toll would be higher in LEDCs than MEDCs but the financial problems would be greater in MEDCs.

Open Document