Hello, my name is Mr. March, and I'm here today to teach you all about examples of management of earthquake hazards.

So grab everything that you need for today's lesson and let's get going.

By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to describe how earthquakes are managed differently at contrasting locations.

There is just one key term for today's lesson.

That is management.

Now, management refers to techniques used to reduce hazard risk, including short-term relief and long-term planning, preparation, and prediction.

There are two learning cycles for today's lesson.

I'm gonna start with learning cycle one, which is managing an earthquake hazard in Japan.

Now, in March, 2011, a 9.

0 magnitude earthquake hit the Japanese island of Honshu.

It is one of the main islands of Japan, as you can see on the map in front of you.

Now, this earthquake triggered a tsunami with waves well over nine metres tall and there were 18,500 deaths, 500,000 people were injured, and a million buildings were damaged in the process.

91% of the deaths in the disaster and 98% of the buildings damaged were caused by the tsunami itself.

And we can get an idea as to the location of the damage and the deaths caused by the tsunami looking at the map in front of you, and we can see that areas such as Fukushima, Miyagi and Iwate were significantly areas of damage from this earthquake and tsunami.

Japan is one of the most economically developed countries in the world, and actually it ranks as the fourth richest country anywhere in the world.

And this is exemplified by that piece of data that you can see at the top, that GDP per capita, the average amount of money that somebody earns in Japan per year.

We can see that number at 33,800 US dollars.

We can also see that 75% of Japan's workers are in the service sector.

Now, this is an indication of a very well-developed economy, rather than working in the fields in a primary sector, in agriculture, 75% of Japan's workers are actually working in the service sector.

Japan has an ageing and declining population.

We can see that 29.

5% of Japan's people are aged 65 and over, yet only 12% are aged under 14.

So we can see that Japan is increasingly having this ageing population.

In fact, the life expectancy at birth is at 85.

2 years.

It has a very high life expectancy, as I mentioned just a moment ago, and a very low infant mortality, again indicating very well developed healthcare.

And finally, Japan is 24th highest in the world for HDI, which refers to the Human Development Index, and having such a high score refers to Japan's high score in terms of its education, its economy, and its healthcare.

It's the time now for a learning check and it says, using what you have learned about Japan's developed country status, which of the following do you think are correct? Now, on the screen you can see you've got four options.

And what I'd like you to do that is pause video here whilst you read through those four options and then select all answers you believe to be correct.

And the correct answers were A, Japan's ageing population added challenges to evacuating people from coastal areas, and D, Japan's high GDP per person reduced the need for international disaster relief.

Really, really well done if you're able to select A and D as the correct answers.

So in terms of management of hazard risks, then, we need to understand that there can be short-term relief.

These are those sort of life saving supplies and emergency relief.

So shelter and supplies.

Then we need to think more broadly in terms of longer-term planning.

So for example, trained and funded emergency services, those people who go search and rescue for people who need saving in those critical hours after the natural hazard event.

Then there's preparation as well, warning and evacuation, building design, so perhaps building earthquake-resistant buildings, building evacuation shelters, and also drilling people on what to do during and after a tectonic or natural hazard event.

And then finally, prediction, using data to actually forecast perhaps where or when a tectonic hazard will occur.

So time now for a learning check.

It says, match the management action to the correct category.

And on the right-hand side, you can see you've got those different management actions whilst on the left-hand side you've got the categories.

Now, what you need to do then is pause the video here whilst you try to match the management actions with the correct category.

Best of luck.

And these were the answers.

So short-term relief can be things such as temporary housing, be it shelters such as tents or something more substantial.

Long-term planning then is ensuring that the emergency response teams are properly trained and equipped to respond quickly and effectively to a natural hazard, such as a tectonic hazard.

Preparation then can be in terms of hazard mapping, being able to understand which areas are at high risk and which areas are at low risk.

And then finally, prediction matches with the earthquake monitoring.

Really, really well done if you were able to match those correctly.

So how did Japan manage the earthquake hazards? Well, let's first look at the short-term relief, because Japan's government organised an extremely fast and well-coordinated response.

Emergency services, the military, and charities, including international charities, provided aid and support, including medical, food, water, and shelter, extremely rapidly.

More than 2,400 evacuee shelters were set up and over 1 million meals were provided every day after the disaster.

Two weeks after the earthquake, 250,000 people were living in temporary shelters.

Key infrastructure such as roads and railways were repaired and services including electricity and water restored as quickly as possible.

For the long-term planning, the Japanese government mobilised 100,000 troops to help with the immediate search and rescue operations.

Disaster management training is provided at all government levels in Japan and for medical staff, volunteers, and charity workers.

The government also integrates charities and NGOs into the training it provides for its emergency services so that all different organisations can work together effectively.

For the preparation, since 1981, all new buildings in Japan have to be earthquake-resistant with really important infrastructure such as bridges, nuclear power stations, and hospitals all being designed to survive major earthquakes.

Every 1st of September is National Earthquake Drill Day, when everyone takes part in earthquake and tsunami drills.

Most homes also have emergency kits with food, water, radios, and torches.

Japan has an earthquake early warning system, or EEW.

TV, radio, and mobile phone alerts warn people that a strong earthquake is imminent.

A signal is used that automatically turns on TVs and radios and mobile phones automatically play the warning.

In 2011, the EEW provided up to 40 seconds of warning before the stronger S wave hit, though areas closer to the epicentre only had a few seconds of warning.

Trains, lifts, and factory machinery automatically stop when the warning is issued.

Three minutes after the earthquake in 2011, the tsunami warning system activated and over 400,000 people evacuated from low-lying coastal areas before the tsunami struck to over 2,000 shelters.

Another 164,000 residents in a 20-kilometer zone around Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station were also evacuated following a nuclear accident caused by the earthquake and tsunami.

With regards to prediction, it is not possible to predict earthquakes.

It is possible that increases in seismic activity can sometimes signal a larger earthquake being imminent, but that is often not the case.

Japan's EEW system is based on a network of 4,200 seismometers installed throughout the country.

This is real-time earthquake detection rather than prediction.

Scientists also use previous earthquake patterns and information about plate movement and strain measurements in the crust to forecast the level of risk of earthquakes.

By looking at the map in front of you, we can get a better idea about where most of the evacuation took place, and it's a no surprise perhaps that the majority evacuations occurred nearer the earthquake and perhaps even that Fukushima nuclear plant disaster that you can see on the screen in front of you because the Japan Meteorological Agency, or the JMA, issued a tsunami warning three minutes after the earthquake took place.

That gave a maximum of 30 minutes to evacuate at-risk areas.

Now, the height of the waves was not accurately predicted, unfortunately, and people who thought they were safe actually died in the disaster.

Some elderly people, and as we know, Japan has a very ageing population, some elderly people could not move fast enough to escape those waves.

So a quick learning check, it says true or false? Japan's tsunami evacuation failed because it had not invested in a tsunami warning system.

So what I'd like you to do then is pause the video here whilst you select your answer.

And the correct answer was false.

Now, once again, I'd like you to pause the video here whilst you consider as to why this statement is false.

And the reason it's false is because Japan had invested in a tsunami warning system which activated just three minutes after the earthquake.

However, due to how close the epicentre was, there were only 30 minutes between the earthquake and the tsunami waves actually arriving at the coast, which did mean that not everyone was evacuated safely.

Also, the height of the tsunami was not accurately predicted.

Really, really well done if you were able to identify those two correct answers.

In terms of preparation, then, as we keep saying, Japan is a really well economically developed country and Japan has around 1,500 earthquakes per year, some big, some small.

Now, it knows that it needs to invest then in earthquake-resistant design buildings and it has invested massively in them to try to reduce deaths and damage.

And this is exactly what happened in 2011.

For example, the Yokohama Landmark tower in Yokohama, as we can see on the image in front of you, which is south of Tokyo, is designed to be earthquake-resistant.

Its sloping pyramid shape is based on Japanese pagodas which have survived centuries of earthquakes, and the impact of ground movement is actually reduced by 40% by adopting or implementing shock absorbers and shock dampeners in the base of the structure, as well as including a 170-ton pendulum, as you can see towards the top of the building there, to try and counteract any swaying or moving of the building and thereby limit the amount of damage and even collapse of any of these buildings.

The building's frame is made of very strong steel tubes.

And finally, it is made of a five-meter thick slab of concrete overlaying stable bedrock geology, again, just to try and anchor it securely in the ground and try to ensure that it doesn't collapse or have any damage caused during the earthquake event.

Because Japan has such a long history dealing with earthquakes and tsunamis, Japan's coast was actually really, really well protected with seawalls, but the 2011 tsunami flooded over many of them, as the rolling series of satellite images that we can see on the screen in front of you do a great job in actually showing.

Now, 80% of the settlement, known as Rikuzentakata, was destroyed in 2011 and 1,700 people died as a result.

The original seawall was eight metres high, the new one is 12.

5 metres high.

So we can see how Japan is learning from its mistakes, but more importantly, it has the financial ability to be able to learn from these mistakes and then implement those improvements.

So a quick learning check, it says, which statement is most accurate? You can see you have a statement from Sofia and you have a statement from Sam.

What you need to do then is pause the video here whilst you read through those two statements and decide who is most accurate.

And the correct answer was Sam, and Sam, she says that in 2011, Japan faced a bigger earthquake and tsunami than it was prepared for, but its warning system and well-funded systems meant hundreds of thousands were evacuated safely.

Really, really well done if you too were able to identify Sam as the most accurate statement.

So we're on now to our one and only practise task for the first learning cycle, and it says, describe two ways in which Japan's status as a developed country affected its management of the 2011 earthquake and tsunami.

Features of a developed country can include the money or wealth available to spend on planning and relief, well-built and planned infrastructure and housing, investment in disaster preparedness, for example, buildings, evacuation planning, and practises, as well as a stable political system.

So what I'd like you to do then is pause the video whilst you attempt this practise task.

Best of luck.

Now, your answer may have included two points from these following answers.

Since 1981, all new buildings in Japan have to be earthquake-resistant, which is expensive but effective, because only 10% of building damage in 2011 was directly from the earthquake.

Japan has also invested in a sophisticated earthquake early warning system using a network of 4,200 seismometers across the country.

The warnings automatically appear on TVs, radios, and phones and also automatically stop trains, lifts, and factory machinery.

People had up to 40 seconds to prepare.

Your answer may have also include the fact that Japan organises regular earthquake drills in schools and businesses, which means people know what to do when they receive an earthquake warning or where to go when ordered to evacuate.

This requires a high level of economic development and a stable political system that people can actually trust.

Despite it being a developed country, there were problems with Japan's management.

The damage to the Fukushima nuclear power station and the seawalls not being high enough.

Because of its wealth, however, these are areas where Japan has now improved its hazard management.

Really, really well done if you we able to include anything like that in your own answer.

So on now to our second and final learning cycle, and this is all about managing an earthquake hazard in Haiti.

In January, 2010, then, a 7.

0 magnitude earthquake struck the island of Haiti in the Caribbean.

The epicentre was close to Haiti's capital, which is known as Port-au-Prince.

220,000 people were killed and 300,000 people were injured, mostly by collapsing buildings.

About 300,000 homes, 4,000 schools, and 60% of government buildings were destroyed.

Now, if we turn our attention to the map that you can see on the right-hand side, you can see the epicentre of that earthquake event and you can see the proximity of Port-au-Prince, the capital city of Haiti, and just how close it was to that epicentre, perhaps as a result, the great death and destruction which was caused as a result.

Haiti is a developing country, not a developed country like Japan.

Now, I want you to start thinking about how might that have affected its management of its 2010 earthquake.

Now, before the earthquake, which happened on the 12th of January, 2010, Haiti was a really, really poor country and is still a very, very poor country.

Let me give you some facts to back that up, because 70% of Haitians lived on less than $1.

90 cents a day.

80% of people in Port-au-Prince, which is the capital city, lived in slum conditions.

50% of people in Port-au-Prince had absolutely no access to toilet facilities.

And finally, 33% of people in Port-au-Prince had no access to tap water.

So you have an understanding now about the conditions that the people of Haiti were living in prior to the earthquake.

Now, I want you to return to that question.

How might those conditions and Haiti's economic development have affected its management of the 2010 earthquake? You may like to pause the video here whilst you consider your own answer to that question or perhaps even have a discussion with someone near you.

So let's delve deeper on some of those statistics and data that we looked at just a moment ago, just to try to understand Haiti's level of economic development.

We need to understand that Haiti is the poorest country in the western hemisphere.

Look at its GDP per capita, which, remember, refers to the average amount of money that someone earns in a year, and you can see that it is down at $1,700 US dollars.

And just remember, compare that to Japan, which was up at around $33,000 US dollars per year per person.

Also, have a look at the number of people that are working in agriculture.

18% are working in agriculture.

This is a great indicator of its economic development, and so many people being involved in farming, a primary industry, suggests that they're not making that much money.

Haiti has a very youthful and growing population.

We can see that by the 30.

5% of people who are aged under 14.

And also, we need to understand that the global average for life expectancy is 73.

3 years.

Yet in Haiti, it's down at 65.

6 years.

So life expectancy in Haiti is very, very low and speaks volumes about the level of healthcare available to people on the island.

Finally, Haiti is ranked 158th out of 191 countries for the Human Development Index.

Again, that speaks volumes about the level of social and economic development, since the HDI is based on indicators such as wealth, healthcare, as well as literacy and education rates.

So a quick learning check, it says true or false? Japan is a developed country while Haiti is a developing country.

So pause the video here whilst you select your answer.

And the correct answer is true.

Now, the follow up question, which I'd like you to pause the video whilst you consider, is how do you know this? So pause the video here whilst you try to think of ways in which you can show your understanding and knowledge of this.

And well, we know this because a range of indicators show this.

For example, Haiti has a low GDP of just $1,700 per person per capita, while Japan has a GDP of $33,800 per capita.

Also Haiti's HDI is very low.

It is ranked at 158 out of 191 countries, while Japan has a much higher HDI, it is ranked 24th highest globally.

So really, really well done if you were able to identify those two correct answers.

So how did Haiti manage the earthquake hazards? Well, in terms of the short-term relief such as shelter and supplies, the government was severely affected by the earthquake, with 25% of government officials in Port-au-Prince killed and 60% of government offices destroyed.

With the Haiti government unable to function effectively, short-term relief was coordinated by the United Nations.

Search and rescue teams from around the world, including the USAID Urban Search and Rescue Team, assisted local people to locate and rescue survivors from collapsed buildings.

Charities such as the Red Cross and CAFOD provided emergency supplies including bottled water, purification tablets, and medical aid.

Temporary hospitals were established by the UN Population Fund and UNICEF.

The International Organisation for Migration provided temporary shelters for homeless people.

Massive amounts of aid were promised by other countries, but hundreds of different non-governmental organisations were involved in its collection.

And that meant aid provision was sometimes disorganised, arrived late, or did not arrive at all.

Due to delays in getting supplies of clean water, food, and shelter to Haiti, people were desperate when the aid did arrive and there was looting of supplies, which meant not everyone got what they needed.

Because of a breakdown in government control, armed gangs took over control of the streets and this created security issues that slowed down distribution of aid.

With regards to long-term planning, Haiti had very few ambulances, fire services, or trained rescue workers in 2010.

And the police and army were poorly equipped, struggled to respond to the disaster.

Until the arrival, within days, of international search and rescue teams, people were left to try and rescue people from collapsed buildings themselves using their hands and basic tools.

Port-au-Prince's dense population and poorly built housing made search and rescue very difficult.

A million people lived in the city in 2010 and much of the housing was unplanned, built by residents themselves.

With regards to preparation, Haiti had no earthquake early warning systems, so people were just completely unprepared when the earthquake struck at 4:43 in the afternoon.

Many were inside buildings.

Haiti had not experienced a major earthquake for many years.

The last one was in 1984 and there were no evacuation plans for earthquakes.

Haiti had no building codes to require buildings to be earthquake-resistant, and with no internal reinforcement, the concrete buildings crumbled and collapsed, including 30 out of Port-au-Prince's 49 medical facilities.

Areas at higher risk from earthquakes and landslides were not mapped, and building in these higher risk zones was not prohibited.

Haiti's infrastructure was already unreliable before the earthquake and the failure of the electrical system.

The collapse of much of the port of Port-au-Prince and the clogging of the road network with rubble delayed short-term relief efforts.

With regards to prediction, well, Haiti had no national seismic monitoring network in 2010, so earthquake detection was not available.

International research on the plate boundaries in the region had not suggested any earthquake was actually imminent.

Time now for a learning check.

And it says to complete the three missing types of management.

So what you need to do then is pause the video here whilst you read through all the information on the screen in front of you and do your best to recall that piece of information to fill in those three gaps.

Best of luck.

And the correct answers were short-term relief, long-term planning, and preparation.

Really, really well done if you were able to recall those pieces of information.

Our second learning check says, who do you agree with more? Now, you can see you've got statements from Laura and from Jun.

What you need to do then is pause the video here whilst you read through those statements and decide who you agree with more.

And the correct answer was Laura.

Laura says that one of the main problems with management of the Haiti earthquake in 2010 was that buildings were made from weak materials and built in areas of high hazard risk.

And she is absolutely correct, so really, really well done if you were able to identify Laura as the correct answer.

We're on now to our practise tasks for the final learning cycle.

And it says, the following sentence start are about management of the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, a developed country.

Complete them to compare management of the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

And here are your three sentence starters.

The second practise task says, to what extent were differences in management of the earthquake hazards of Haiti in 2010 and Japan in 2011 to do with differences in their level of development? Alex says, "Should I start by saying what management means and give a few examples of differences between Haiti and Japan?" Absolutely, you should.

Aisha says, "I think to what extent means I need to consider ways in which economic development is the main reason, but also ways in which it might not be.

Is that right?" And again, Aisha is absolutely correct.

So what you need to do then is pause video here whilst you attempt these two practise tasks.

Best of luck.

In terms of feedback then for the first practise task, your answer may have included the following.

Well, in Japan in 2011, earthquake-resistant buildings and strict building codes saved many lives, while in Haiti in 2010, there just were no building codes to require buildings to be earthquake-resistant, and with no reinforcement, the concrete building sadly crumbled and collapsed.

Well-funded emergency services responded quickly and effectively in Japan, while in Haiti, people had to try and rescue survivors themselves until international search and rescue teams arrived, because the government was severely damaged and not able to organise a response themselves.

Plus, Haiti had very few emergency services and its military and police were poorly equipped.

Furthermore, in Japan, an earthquake early warning system gave people up to 40 seconds to prepare, while in Haiti, there was no earthquake warning system, and so people were just completely unprepared when the earthquake struck.

Many were inside buildings, if they had even just a few seconds of warning, they could have gone outside and been safer.

For the second practise task, then, your answer may have included some of the following.

In terms of what management means then, well, management means techniques used to reduce earthquake hazard risk, including short-term relief and long-term planning, preparation, and prediction.

Examples of different management techniques, then, short-term relief, Haiti's government was unable to organise this themselves.

Instead, international short-term relief was needed.

Japan's government, on the other hand, was able to respond rapidly.

100,000 troops, 2,400 shelters were all organised by the government themselves.

Haiti received massive aid, but it proved difficult to organise.

With regards to preparation, while Japan had an effective earthquake warning system, Haiti had no such thing.

Same for evacuation plans and earthquake drills.

While Japan had strict building codes, Haiti did not.

In terms of the differences due to development, the short-term relief, then, Japan's political system is stable and it has the wealth to train and equip emergency services and the military.

Haiti, on the other hand, does not have this same level of wealth and stable political system since it is a developing country.

So further ways in which differences could be due to development, we must look at preparation.

Warning system, building codes, and earthquake-resistant buildings are all very expensive, but something Japan has the money to be able to prioritise.

And it was a really important reason why it was so well prepared for earthquakes and why Haiti unfortunately was not.

It also takes strong government to organise and control where people build and what they build with.

In terms of ways in which differences could be due to something else, well, let's look at experience.

Japan has many more earthquakes than Haiti, and so its people are more used to them and earthquake preparedness is more of a priority for Japan than it is for Haiti.

Further ways in which it could be related to something else, we must look at the impacts in Haiti.

The earthquake killed 25% of government officials and 60% of government buildings were actually destroyed.

This wasn't directly due to development.

Any country whose government has been impacted like this would also likely struggle in the same way.

Japan's failures, well, while Haiti's management was not effective, being highly developed such as Japan did not actually prevent Japan from having seawalls that were too low for the exceptionally high tsunami waves, or having a nuclear power station accident, or underestimating wave heights so that people died who thought they were safe.

It's a time now for our learning summary, and what do we need to know from today's lesson? Well, management of earthquake hazard includes short-term relief, long-term planning, preparation, and prediction.

Earthquake hazards may be managed differently in different places.

While lots of things may affect differences in earthquake hazard management, the level of economic development can be a really significant factor.

So really, really well done during today's lesson.

It was a pleasure teaching you, and I will see you again on the next lesson.

Goodbye.