Nepal earthquake, 2015
Setting
The earthquake struck central Nepal on 25 April 2015. Nepal lies where the India plate pushes beneath Eurasia, building the Himalayas.
Sources: earthquake.usgs.gov
Earthquake process
Thrust faulting released stored strain at the plate boundary. USGS records magnitude 7.8; the later magnitude 7.3 earthquake added to the emergency.
Sources: earthquake.usgs.gov 1 · worldbank.org 2
Impacts beyond shaking
Satellite mapping identified at least 25,000 landslides from the earthquake sequence. Debris entering rivers created further hazards, including landslide dams and possible outburst floods.
Sources: usgs.gov
Human impacts and damaged hospitals
WHO's 1 May report relayed 6,200 recorded deaths and approximately 14,000 injuries. These were early counts, not final totals. A WHO–Nepal ministry assessment visited 21 hospitals in 12 severely affected districts; 17 remained operational and four were unable to function.
Sources: who.int
Immediate medical relief
On 26 April, WHO reported deploying eight additional emergency health kits, designed to cover 80,000 people's health needs for three months. Medicines and equipment can support care while hospitals replenish stocks; this capacity does not count patients actually treated.
Sources: who.int
Rebuilding homes
The housing reconstruction project combined grants with technical support. Engineers checked construction before later grant payments, linking financial help to safer building.
Sources: worldbank.org
Judging recovery
By September 2020, 211,985 houses had been reconstructed with full or partial IDA grant support. This records progress within one programme; it does not measure all Nepalese housing recovery.
Sources: worldbank.org
Using this case in an answer
Explain the plate process, separate shaking from landslide hazards, and connect damaged services to immediate relief and longer-term rebuilding. Use the selected hospital and reconstruction evidence at their stated scales.
- The casualty snapshot is dated 1 May, before the 12 May earthquake. It is not a final death toll.
- Hospital assessment and reconstruction counts cover selected sites or one programme.
Saved on this browser. An example’s listed role does not certify that it covers every specification dimension.
Evidence and its scope
| Claim | Period and scope | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Main earthquake magnitude 7.8 Mw | 25 April 2015 | Open source |
| Thrust faulting occurred at or near the India–Eurasia plate interface | 25 April 2015 | Open source |
| At least 25,000 landslides were mapped | 2015 earthquake and aftershock sequence; study published 2018 | Open source |
| More than half of landslide debris was deposited in direct connection with stream channels | 2015 earthquake sequence; study published 2018 | Open source |
| Housing grants were paid in three instalments, with later payments dependent on certified construction | Programme described September 2020 | Open source |
| 211,985 resilient houses reconstructed with full or partial IDA grant support | As of September 2020 | Open source |
| WHO relayed official figures of 6,200 recorded deaths and approximately 14,000 injuries. | Official figures received and reported 1 May 2015 | Open source |
| Four of 21 assessed hospitals could not function; 17 remained operational. 4 non-functioning assessed hospitals | Rapid assessment reported 1 May 2015 | Open source |
| WHO reported deploying eight additional emergency health kits with capacity for 80,000 people's needs for three months. 8 additional emergency health kits deployed | 26 April 2015 report, one day after mainshock | Open source |
Possible requirement roles
- A tectonic hazard eventName and date the event.; Separate the tectonic process from exposure and vulnerability.; Use contrasting examples where your specification requires them.
Recall the evidence
Case-recall questions load here. The sourced evidence remains available below.
Practise using the evidence
Apply a related skill
Source evaluation · Contours and relief
Compare with Japan earthquake and tsunami, 2011
Compare secondary hazards and access for emergency response. Magnitude alone cannot explain the difference in impacts.
Japan earthquake and tsunami, 2011
Check the comparison
Use a shared criterion, explain the geographical process and keep each source’s period and boundary. Different totals may reflect different definitions or populations. A comparison needs more than two separate descriptions.
Related lessons
Tectonic hazards: explain the different impacts · Hazard systems: cascades, probability and resilience
Use this case in a different answer
Worked question: Recall one plate process that caused the Nepal earthquake.
India pushes beneath Eurasia. Sudden slip on a thrust fault released stored strain and produced seismic waves.
Keep the evidence precise: Main earthquake magnitude This refers to USGS mainshock, 25 April 2015. Check the source
Try it yourself
Explain why two settlements affected by the same earthquake might receive relief at different times. Use the landslide mechanism without claiming that every road was blocked.
One possible answer
Shaking can destabilise steep slopes. Where a landslide blocks a road, relief vehicles may be delayed or need another route. A settlement with an open road may be reached sooner. The event magnitude alone does not show which routes remained usable.
Check your answer: did you address the question, use accurate evidence and explain the link?
Build a better answer
Use a fresh resource to practise selecting evidence and explaining its significance.