Hello, my name is Mr. March, and I'm here today to teach you all about an example of effects and responses to a tectonic hazard in an LIC.

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

So by the end of today's lesson, you will be able to use a named example to discuss the effects and responses to a tectonic hazard in an LIC.

There are two key learning terms for today's lesson, and those are magnitude and epicentre.

Magnitude refers to a measure of the energy released by an earthquake, and epicentre refers to the point on Earth's surface that is directly above where an earthquake happens underground.

There are two learning cycles for today's lesson, and we're gonna start with the first learning cycle, which is primary and secondary effects.

Now this photo shows a street in Port-au-Prince, which is the capital city of Haiti, after a 7.

0 magnitude earthquake hit the Caribbean country in January, 2010.

Now you may like to pause the video here whilst you study that photograph in front of you to try to find or identify the impacts from the earthquake that you can see.

You may even like to pause the video whilst you discuss this with a person near you.

Well, in terms of impacts then, what can we actually see? We can, first of all, see fallen power cables.

We can see collapsed buildings.

We can see, unfortunately, a dead body lying in the street.

We can see crushed cars due to collapsed buildings.

We can see rubble in the street, again, for the same reason.

We can also see people wearing face masks because of the, well, possibly the smell of decay or is it to do with the dust in the air.

Now, in January, 2010, a 7.

0 magnitude earthquake struck Haiti in the Caribbean, one of the world's poorest countries.

The epicentre was just 25 kilometres southwest of the country's capital city, Port-au-Prince.

The cause of the earthquake was slippage along faults at the conservative, or transform boundary, between the Caribbean plate and the North American plate.

The earthquake was extremely shallow, just 13 kilometres below the surface, which explains the powerful ground shaking and the extensive damage.

So a quick learning check.

I would like you to try to connect the details.

On the left, you have the facts that we're looking for, and on the right we have those facts.

So what I'd like you to do then is pause the video whilst you attempt to connect those details.

And the correct answers were, the date of the earthquake was in January, 2010.

The country affected was Haiti, one of the most poor countries in the world.

The type of plate margin was a conservative plate margin, where those two plates are sliding past each other or in the same direction but at different speeds.

The location of the epicentre was 25 kilometres southwest of the capital city, Port-au-Prince.

And the tectonic plates involved were the Caribbean and the North American plate.

So really, really well done if you're able to connect those details in front of you.

Let's now consider what are primary and secondary effects of a tectonic hazard.

Well, primary effects are immediate and caused directly by the tectonic hazard itself.

For example, the building collapsed as soon as the ground shook.

These are examples of a primary effect.

A secondary effect are indirect impacts or like a knock-on impact of the primary effect.

And they tend to occur in the hours day, days, and weeks after the hazard.

For example, survivors were homeless for many months after the earthquake.

This is an example of a secondary effect because it is a knock-on effect of the primary effect, which was that buildings collapsed due to the earthquake.

Therefore, people became homeless.

And this is an example then of a secondary effect.

Now, what were the primary effects then of the 2010 Haiti earthquake? Well, an estimated 220,000 people unfortunately killed and over 300,000 people were injured, most of whom were killed as intense ground shaking caused buildings to collapse.

The total damage was estimated at 8 billion US dollars.

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

Most people, an estimated 86%, lived in densely-packed, poorly-built concrete housing that collapsed during the earthquake, as the image in front of you really does well to show.

In the affected area, 30 of the 49 medical facilities were destroyed.

And thereby, as we'll look at later with the secondary impacts, this meant that people weren't able to access healthcare as easily.

Infrastructure was severely affected.

Roads were blocked and damaged, electricity and water supplies cut off as cables and pipes were damaged.

But I wonder how this earthquake in Haiti in 2010 compares to other notable earthquakes around the world.

The 2010 Haiti earthquake had a magnitude of 7.

0, and 220,000 people were killed mostly by collapsing buildings, which as we know is a primary effect.

In 2011, an earthquake with a magnitude of 9.

0 hit Japan, yet only 18,500 people died.

And of these, only 10% died as a result of primary effects.

Most were actually killed by a secondary effect, the tsunami.

So we can see a huge difference between the numbers of people that died in Haiti versus the number of people that died in Japan, despite the fact that Haiti's earthquake had a lower magnitude than that in Japan.

So why did the primary effects of a less powerful earthquake kill so many more people in Haiti? You may like to pause the video at this point whilst you consider your own answer to that question or perhaps discuss it with someone near you.

Well, time for a learning check.

Who do you think is right? We have Alex, Jun, Izzy, and Lucas, and they all have different statements.

What I'd like you to do then is pause the video whilst you read through those statements and consider who you think is right.

So pause the video here, and best of luck.

Now the answer was Izzy.

Now Izzy says that Japan is a high income country.

It's a HIC.

And I think Japan had lots of buildings that were earthquake-resistant.

Izzy is absolutely correct in that statement.

But also, Jun is correct as well.

The photos suggest the houses in Port-au-Prince were not very strong, and some were built on steep slopes.

And again, Jun is absolutely correct.

And this contributes to a reason why so many buildings collapsed and unfortunately killed so many people during this earthquake disaster.

In terms of the secondary impacts, those impacts resulting from the knock-on effects of ground shaking, which as we know is a primary effect, well, about 1.

5 million people were left homeless, 2 million people were left with no access to clean water or food, diseases, including cholera, broke out in the temporary encampments due to overcrowding, poor sanitation, and lack of medical care.

In fact, by July, 2011, cholera had killed almost 6,000 people.

Furthermore, thousands of landslides were triggered in the hills surrounding Port-au-Prince, destroying many properties.

Furthermore, some 600,000 people left Port-au-Prince to stay with friends and relatives, increasing social pressures elsewhere in Haiti.

19 million cubic metres of rubble and debris in the streets slowed recovery and prevented supplies being transported through the city, while severe destruction of the harbour delayed emergency supplies from entering the country by sea from other surrounding countries.

So a quick learning check.

True or false.

Landslides are secondary effects of earthquakes.

What I'd like you to do then is pause the video whilst you consider as to whether the statement is true or false.

Best of luck.

And the correct answer is true.

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

And the reason it's true is because landslides, well, they are secondary effects because they happen as an indirect result of an earthquake, which is a primary effect.

The earthquake shakes the soil and rocks on a slope, which destabilises them.

This makes it more likely for a landslide to occur, especially if there's been heavy rain.

So really well done if you're able to identify those two correct answers.

Time now for another learning check, and it says to tick the correct answers to the following about Haiti's earthquakes.

We're looking for facts about Haiti's earthquake.

What I'd like you to do then is read through the different pieces of information on the left-hand side.

And remember, you've got a 50/50 option there to try and tick the correct answer for each statement.

So pause the video here whilst you attempt this learning check.

So the city which was worst affected was the capital city of Haiti, Port-au-Prince.

In terms of deaths, Haiti's earthquake caused 220,000 deaths.

The one in Japan caused 18,500.

In terms of the numbers of people that were left homeless, well, Haiti unfortunately caused 1.

5 million people to go homeless.

In terms of the percentage of people living in densely packed, poorly-built housing, well, 86% is the correct answer for Haiti.

The cost to Haiti of the disaster was estimated at 8 billion US dollars.

So really well done if you're able to identify those correct facts about Haiti's earthquake.

Time now for our two practise questions for our first learning cycle, and it says this, to complete this table comparing the primary and secondary effect of the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan with the Haiti earthquake in 2010.

The second practise question says, using the images to help you, suggest two factors that increased the impact of the 2010 Haiti earthquake's primary effects.

So what I'd like you to do right now then is pause the video whilst you attempt these two practise questions.

Best of luck.

So in terms of feedback then, this is what your table should look like.

In terms of the magnitude, Haiti's was significantly lower, just at 7.

0, even though this is still a major earthquake.

In terms of the number of deaths though, Haiti ranks a lot higher.

220,000 people died in Haiti's earthquake.

It also had more homes destroyed.

300,000 homes were destroyed, whilst the number of people left without clean water was 2 million people.

And the number of people who became homeless was unfortunately 1.

5 million.

Now, in terms of the feedback for the second question, this is what you may have included.

It says the Haiti earthquake in 2010 was a 7.

0 magnitude earthquake with an epicentre 25 kilometres from Haiti's Capital City, Port-au-Prince.

One reason why the primary effect of ground shaking had such a huge impact, 220,000 people killed and 300,000 homes destroyed, was because Port-au-Prince was very close to the epicentre, which I'm sure would've made its impact stronger than if it had been located much further away.

Also, a city means a lot more people to be impacted by the earthquake than if it had been a rural area.

So population density is another factor as well.

Also, the image shows how houses in Port-au-Prince were built on the hillside.

The houses are constructed of concrete.

And I know 86% of people in the city in 2010 lived in poorly-built concrete houses like these.

And they weren't strong enough for the earthquake and collapsed on people inside.

Another factor is that these houses on hillsides would be more vulnerable to collapse if the ground shaking made the slopes unstable.

We know this did happen because there were also secondary effect landslides after the quake.

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

We're on now to our second and final learning cycle, and this is all to do with the immediate and long-term responses.

Haiti is a lower income country, or LIC.

How do you think that might have affect responses to its 2010 earthquake? You may like to pause the video here whilst you consider your own answer to that question or even discuss that with someone near you.

Well, the answer to that question is that, remember, before the earthquake, 12th of January, 2010, 70% of Haitians lived on less than $1.

90 a day.

So we're really talking about some of the poorest people in the world here.

80% of people in Port-au-Prince lived in slum conditions.

They were living in very poor quality housing.

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

So that really gives an indication about the level of wealth of people that were talking about here.

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

So once again, we're getting a real visual of the severity of the poverty that is experienced or was experienced in Haiti before the earthquake.

And if we dig deeper into those numbers about Haiti's level of development and level of wealth, we can see that Haiti is the poorest country in the Western hemisphere.

Its GDP per capita is only 1,700 US dollars.

This is how much, on average, one person earns in Haiti per year.

We can also see that Haiti has a very youthful and also a growing population.

It has a population right now of 6 million people, but 30% of that, 1/3 of its total population, is aged 14 and under.

The global average for life expectancy is 73.

3 years.

And for infant mortality, it's 28.

2 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Let's see how that compares to Haiti.

Well, in terms of life expectancy, Haiti unfortunately scores a lot lower than that.

It's just 65.

6 years average life expectancy.

And unfortunately, the rate of infant mortality is much higher at 36.

8 deaths for every 1,000 births.

Finally, Haiti is ranked 158 out of 193 countries for its human development index, scoring a very low score of 0.

552.

And the HDI takes into account many different indicators of development and wealth, such as GDP per capita, indicators regarding healthcare and education.

So what we can glean from this then is that Haiti is significantly low on the HDI, as well as its level of development.

So a quick learning check.

Which of the following statements are accurate? You have four statements in front of you.

What I'd like you to do is pause the video here whilst you read through the four options and decide which of the following statements are accurate.

Best of luck.

And the answers are a and d.

So a, Haiti has a youthful population, with 30% of the population aged 14 or younger, and d, Haiti has poor healthcare, as evidenced by low life expectancy and high infant mortality rates.

Really, really well done if you're able to identify those two as the correct answer.

So what are immediate and long-term responses? Well, immediate responses to tectonic hazards focus on surviving the hazard itself and providing short-term relief.

Meanwhile, long-term responses focus on real reconstruction and rebuilding after the tectonic hazard and reducing risk from future hazards happening again.

So a learning check.

True or false.

LICs always require international assistance with both immediate and long-term responses to natural hazards.

So pause the video here whilst you consider and then select your answer.

And the correct answer was false.

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

And the reason it's false is that LICs do not always require international assistance with their responses, especially where countries have long experience with dealing with hazards.

HICs also often requires some international assistance after natural disasters.

So really well done if you're able to identify those two correct answers.

So what were the immediate responses following Haiti's earthquake? Well, with the Haiti government unable to function effectively, responses to the earthquake were coordinated by the United Nations.

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

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

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

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

And a further 250,000 people were relocated away from Port-au-Prince.

However, many challenges existed for implementing those immediate responses.

13 billion US dollars was raised in aid for Haiti, 1/4 from private donations, but delivery of emergency aid was delayed due to many factors, which included the fact that Port-au-Prince's roads, airport, and seaport were badly damaged, which slowed the arrival of aid and caused organisational problems when aid had actually arrived.

The government just couldn't organise the response because so many of its officials were dead or injured.

25% of civil servants in Port-au-Prince were killed.

And because many government offices had collapsed, these included the parliament building, the headquarters of the United Nations, and the National Palace, which you can see in front of you, which was actually the residence of the president of Haiti.

Also, many medical centres had collapsed, and the remaining hospitals were overwhelmed, with medical supplies quickly running out.

Dead bodies remained uncollected in the streets, increasing disease risks.

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 and even built by the residents themselves.

Massive amounts of aid was 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 that not everyone got what they needed.

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

So a learning check, and it says, how much international aid was raised to help Haiti's immediate and long-term responses after the 2010 earthquake? Pause the video here whilst you try to recall that piece of information.

And the answer was 13.

5 billion US dollars.

Really well done if you're able to recall that piece of information.

So what were the longer term responses? And this involved of course rebuilding and future-proofing over several months and years.

So from 2011 to 2021, Haiti received 13 billion US dollars in foreign aid.

In the UK, the Disasters Emergency Committee raised over 100 million pounds.

But what did this lead to? Well, first of all, the International Development Association, supported by the World Bank, enabled Haiti to rebuild administrative institutions such as the parliament and ministry buildings, clear vast amounts of debris, and rebuild damaged infrastructure, including 100 kilometres of roads.

International organisations also improved water supplies for 340,000 people, medical teams provided care for 39,000 people, and five cholera treatment centres were set up, which treated 18,000 people.

Six months after the earthquake, the government published a needs assessment.

An estimated 1.

5 US billion dollars were required for social services such as housing, health, education, and food security.

An additional $500 million would support agriculture, industry, and repairing infrastructure.

1.

5 million Haitians were homeless after the earthquake.

And the long-term response was to move these people from living in tents and temporary shelters and camps back into permanent homes.

Next, the disaster preparedness was improved with help from international organisations, including education for 116,000 people.

Finally, job creation schemes were set up by the United Nations because so many jobs were lost as a result of earthquake damage.

Within six months, 160,000 jobs had been created through the UN schemes.

23,000 farming households received tools and seeds to help them recover their livelihoods.

So in terms of the challenges for implementing these long-term responses, unfortunately, tens of thousands of people still remained homeless by 2020.

Even despite the aid, living conditions for many people remain poor, largely due to continue political instability and institutional failings.

For example, by 2015, five years after the earthquake, much of Port-au-Prince still lay in ruins.

Roads, ports, and government buildings took years to repair.

By 2020, tens of thousands of displaced people were still homeless as permanent housing construction was slow.

Much of the $13 billion in aid ended up being spent on temporary housing, not on rebuilding Haiti's housing and infrastructure.

Furthermore, disputes over land ownership was part of the reason why it was difficult to rebuild permanent homes, plus corruption, and also because building materials were mostly imported, which took time.

While some new earthquake-resistant buildings were constructed, most were not built to be earthquake resistant due to lack of regulation and, again, corruption.

While job creation schemes did certainly help people back into work, many of these were temporary jobs rather than permanent ones.

Haiti's weak infrastructure slowed down economic recovery in farming and industry.

Many people remained dependent on foreign aid.

The cholera outbreak of October, 2010 was eventually controlled by vaccination programmes and improvements to sanitation.

But unfortunately, this took years.

Haiti's weak and disorganised government was ineffective at long-term planning.

A large amount of international aid never reached those in need due to corruption and inefficiency.

Many foreign-led projects failed because they didn't involve local communities in decision making.

And finally, disaster preparedness was tested again in 2021 when Haiti was struck by yet another powerful earthquake, this time 7.

2 magnitude.

Over 2,000 people were killed, and 12,000 were injured, and over 26,000 people were displaced.

So a learning check.

True or false, disaster preparedness was successful in protecting Haiti's population from the effects of an earthquake in 2021.

What I'd like you to do is pause the video here whilst you consider your own answer to this question.

And the correct answer was false.

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

And the reason it's false is because while fewer people were certainly killed, injured, and displaced by the more powerful 2021 earthquake, there were still 2,000 deaths, 12,000 injured, and 26,000 people displaced, which cannot count as truly successful protection.

Few earthquake-resistant buildings were built after 2010, which goes some way to explaining why there were still so many deaths and destruction.

Really well done if you're able to identify those two correct answers.

So time now for our two practise questions for learning cycle three.

And the first one says to complete this table for Haiti.

So you can see that you've got the indicators on the left.

You've got the information for Japan.

What you need to do is try to recall some of that information regarding Haiti and try your best to complete the table in front of you.

For the second practise question, it says the following sentence starters are about responses to the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan, a HIC.

Complete them to compare the responses to the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.

So we have in Japan earthquake-resistant buildings and strict building codes save lives, while in Haiti.

Well-funded emergency services responded quickly and effectively in Japan, while in Haiti.

Japan spent nearly $300 billion on rebuilding after 2011, Haiti in comparison.

And finally, warning systems have been upgraded in Japan since 2011 at a cost of $20 million per year, while in Haiti.

So what I'd like you to do right now is pause the video whilst you attempt these two practise questions.

Best of luck.

In terms of feedback then, this is what the complete table should have looked like.

The GDP per capita for Haiti is $1,700.

Population is 6 million.

Of that population, there is 30.

5% under the age of 14.

4.

2% is aged 65 and over.

60% live in urban areas.

The life expectancy is 65.

6 years.

Infant mortality rate is 36.

8 deaths per 1,000 births.

And finally, the human development index score is 0.

552.

For the second practise question, this is what you may have answered with.

It says that in Japan, earthquake-resistant buildings and strict building codes saved lives, while in Haiti, 86% of people in Port-au-Prince lived in densely-packed, poorly-built concrete housing, 80% of it in slum conditions, that collapsed during the earthquake, directly causing most of the 220,000 deaths and 300,000 injuries and leading to around 1.

5 million people becoming homeless.

Well-funded emergency services responded quickly and effectively in Japan, while in Haiti, people had to wait for international search and rescue support because the government was unable to organise a response due to 25% of its officials being killed and many government offices being destroyed.

You may also have answered with the following.

It says that Japan spent nearly $300 billion on rebuilding after 2011.

Haiti, in comparison, received $13 billion in foreign aid, but a lack of coordination and planning meant that some of this did not reach its targets.

Much of the $13 billion ended up being spent on temporary housing.

And 10 years later, tens of thousands of displaced people still did not have a permanent home.

Finally, warning systems have been upgraded in Japan since 2011 at a cost of $20 million per year, while in Haiti, another earthquake in 2021 showed that not enough had been done to reduce hazard risk, for example, very few earthquake-resistant buildings, as 2,000 people were killed, 12,000 people injured, and 26,000 people displaced.

So really, really well done if you're able to include anything like that in your own answer.

And now a learning summary.

So the 2010 Haiti 7.

0 magnitude earthquake hit Haiti, which is one of the world's poorest countries.

With an epicentre only 25 kilometres from the densely-populated capital of Port-au-Prince, the primary and secondary effects of the of the disaster killed more than 220,000 people.

Port-au-Prince's housing in 2010 was poorly constructed and overcrowded.

This contributed to the high number of death.

And finally, immediate and long-term responses were funded by a huge international aid effort, but delays in disorganisation hindered effectiveness.

Disease and homelessness persisted for many years.

So really well done during today's lesson.

It was a pleasure teaching you.

And I will see you again on the next lesson.

Goodbye.