Tectonic hazards: explain the different impacts

Connect plate movement to a hazard, then explain why similar events can produce different impacts.

From plate motion to shaking

Plates move across Earth’s surface. Where movement is resisted along a fault, elastic strain can build. Sudden slip releases energy as seismic waves. The focus lies within Earth; the epicentre is directly above it.

Subduction can produce earthquakes and volcanic activity. Conservative boundaries involve lateral motion and earthquakes; they do not normally generate magma. A boundary label needs a mechanism.

Worked example

In a fictional cross section the focus is 15 km deep and the epicentre is 40 km from a town horizontally. These distances describe different dimensions; neither is the earthquake magnitude.

Common mistake: Magnitude measures the event; experienced shaking varies by location.

Map scale and distance · Source evaluation

Explain an impact chain

Damage depends on the hazard reaching exposed people and buildings, and on their vulnerability. Building strength, slope stability, access and emergency capacity influence outcomes.

Primary effects arise directly from shaking. Landslides, interrupted supplies and disease risks can follow, though the classification needs the event’s evidence.

Worked example

In a fictional town 800 buildings are exposed; 120 become unusable. The proportion is 120 ÷ 800 × 100 = 15%. This measures affected buildings, not the proportion of residents injured.

Common mistake: A lower death toll does not prove the earthquake was weaker.

Percentage change · Choropleth maps

Compare responses fairly

Immediate rescue, shelter and supplies address urgent needs. Rebuilding infrastructure, restoring livelihoods and improving building standards extend over longer periods.

Compare contrasting events using the same outcome and timescale. Wealth can influence resources, but governance, isolation and the particular event also matter.

Worked example

Fictional response teams reach 70 of 100 villages in one area and 45 of 50 in another: 70% and 90%. The second coverage rate is higher even though fewer villages were reached.

Common mistake: Counts alone can reverse a comparison when denominators differ.

Percentage change · Source evaluation

Try a different resource

Hazard and exposure overlays

The occupied-home count represents exposure. Hazard and vulnerability categories are ordinal labels; multiplying them does not produce a probability of loss. A screening rule is supplied for this fictional exercise.

Scroll the diagram sideways to see the full resource.

Fictional hazard and exposure layersA: High hazard, 180 occupied homes, vulnerability index 1; B: Medium hazard, 70 occupied homes, vulnerability index 1; C: High hazard, 90 occupied homes, vulnerability index 2; D: Low hazard, 180 occupied homes, vulnerability index 3. The vulnerability index is ordinal, not a probability.District AHazard: High180 occupied homesDistrict BHazard: Medium70 occupied homesDistrict CHazard: High90 occupied homesDistrict DHazard: Low180 occupied homesHazard category describes the layer, not a probability.Exercise screening: high hazard and at least 100 occupied homes.
DistrictHazard categoryOccupied homesVulnerability index (ordinal 1–3)
AHigh1801
BMedium701
CHigh902
DLow1803
Fictional hazard and exposure layers. Original fictional resource; not an official map or real dataset.
Resource description

A: High hazard, 180 occupied homes, vulnerability index 1; B: Medium hazard, 70 occupied homes, vulnerability index 1; C: High hazard, 90 occupied homes, vulnerability index 2; D: Low hazard, 180 occupied homes, vulnerability index 3. The vulnerability index is ordinal, not a probability.

1. How many occupied homes are in high-hazard districts altogether?

2. How many districts meet the stated high-hazard and 100-home screening rule?

3. Can these ordinal labels establish a numerical probability of loss?

Choose an answer

The maps and data are fictional. These exercises do not count as required fieldwork.

Write an explanation

Check your answer
  • Name both events and establish comparable evidence.
  • Link a physical process to exposure and vulnerability.
  • Explain differences in immediate and longer-term responses.
  • Consider another cause alongside wealth.

Practise and review a written answer

Case studies

Nepal earthquake, 2015 · Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, 2011 · Haiti earthquake, 2010

These pages provide selected evidence. Check the whole case requirement with your teacher.

Read further

Plate motion and tectonic hazards · Hazard, exposure and vulnerability

Course links

AQA GCSE Geography · Pearson Edexcel GCSE Geography B · National 5 Geography · OCR GCSE Geography B · Eduqas GCSE Geography A

Next topics

Weather hazards and atmospheric circulation · Hazard systems: cascades, probability and resilience

Selected teaching sequence with fictional worked data. The linked case records supply bounded evidence; they do not satisfy every course case requirement.

Scottish links identify reusable parts of the topic. Scottish landforms, soil, weather and disease requirements need additional course-specific teaching.

Worked numerical examples are fictional unless explicitly attributed. These lessons cover selected parts of the topic; check your course requirements for the rest.