Nepal earthquake 2015 case study for GCSE Geography
The Nepal earthquake of 25 April 2015 was a magnitude 7.8 event that killed around 9,000 people and injured around 22,000 more. It happened where the Indian and Eurasian plates collide along a collision (convergent continental) plate boundary. AQA does not prescribe specific case studies, but Nepal is a commonly taught example of an earthquake in a lower-income country (LIC) because the contrast with a high-income country event illustrates how development affects impact.
This guide covers the cause, the primary and secondary effects, the immediate and long-term responses, and the comparison points examiners want you to draw between an LIC event like Nepal and a high-income country event like the 2011 Tohoku earthquake in Japan.
A collision plate boundary
The Indian plate is pushed into the Eurasian plate at around 45 mm per year. The pressure built up over time was released as the 7.8 magnitude quake.
Around 9,000 deaths
Nepal is an LIC with weak building codes and limited rescue resources. The death toll shows how level of development shapes impact.
Common LIC comparison case
Pair Nepal with the 2011 Japan earthquake or the 2010 Haiti earthquake to show how development changes the impact of a similar hazard.
Where and when did it happen?
The earthquake struck on 25 April 2015 at 11:56 local time. The epicentre was in Gorkha district, around 80 km northwest of the capital Kathmandu. The focus was relatively shallow at about 8 km, which made the shaking far more destructive at the surface.
A major aftershock of magnitude 7.3 hit on 12 May 2015, killing further hundreds of people and collapsing buildings already weakened by the main quake.
Key statistics to learn Magnitude 7.8. Around 9,000 deaths. Around 22,000 injuries. Around 8 million people affected (roughly a quarter of Nepal's population). Estimated economic cost of US$5 billion, equal to around 25 percent of Nepal's GDP. Memorising one number from each category gives your answer authority.
What caused the earthquake?
Nepal sits on a collision (convergent continental) plate boundary. The Indian plate is moving northwards into the Eurasian plate at around 45 millimetres per year. Because both plates are continental and have similar density, neither subducts cleanly. Instead, they crumple together, building up huge pressure along fault lines.
In April 2015, that built-up pressure was released along a fault around 80 km northwest of Kathmandu. The energy radiated outwards as seismic waves, shaking the ground and triggering the disaster.
Primary effects
Primary effects are the direct, immediate impacts caused by the shaking itself. In Nepal, the primary effects were severe because of the shallow focus, the dense population in Kathmandu, and the poor quality of older buildings.
| Category | Primary effect | Number or detail |
|---|---|---|
| People | Deaths | Around 9,000 |
| People | Injuries | Around 22,000 |
| Buildings | Homes destroyed | Around 500,000 |
| Buildings | Homes damaged | Around 270,000 |
| Infrastructure | Hospitals damaged or destroyed | Around 50 percent in worst-hit districts |
| Heritage | Historic sites destroyed | Dharahara Tower in Kathmandu collapsed, killing around 180 people |
Secondary effects
Secondary effects are the knock-on impacts that follow in the hours, days, and weeks afterwards. In Nepal these were arguably more damaging than the primary effects, especially in remote mountain regions.
| Category | Secondary effect | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Avalanches | Mount Everest avalanche | At least 19 climbers killed at base camp, the deadliest day in Everest's history |
| Landslides | Langtang Valley landslide | Buried a village, killing around 250 people |
| Disease | Risk of cholera and other infections | Lack of clean water in tent cities raised the risk for months |
| Economy | Tourism collapsed | Trekking and Everest expeditions were cancelled, hitting a key income source |
| Education | Around 9,000 schools destroyed or damaged | Long-term disruption to children's learning |
| Food | Crops and livestock lost | Farmers in remote villages lost food security and income |
Immediate responses
Immediate responses are the actions taken in the first hours and days after the earthquake. They focus on saving lives, getting medical care to the injured, and stopping further deaths from exposure, hunger, or disease.
In Nepal, international aid was critical. The country did not have the resources or trained personnel to manage a disaster on this scale, so search-and-rescue teams from India, China, the UK, and the US arrived within 48 hours.
Key immediate responses India launched Operation Maitri, sending around 1,000 rescue workers within 24 hours. The UK sent a 60-person search team and £15 million in aid. The UN released around US$15 million from its emergency fund. Helicopters reached cut-off mountain villages. Field hospitals treated thousands of injured. Half a million tents were distributed to people made homeless.
Long-term responses
Long-term responses focus on rebuilding infrastructure, restoring economies, and reducing the risk of future disasters. In Nepal, long-term recovery has been slow because of political instability, mountainous terrain, and the sheer scale of the damage.
The Nepalese government set up the National Reconstruction Authority in late 2015 to manage recovery. By 2020 around 80 percent of damaged homes had been rebuilt, often using earthquake-resistant designs. Stricter building codes have been introduced, but enforcement remains patchy.
Why were the impacts so severe?
AQA examiners reward students who connect the level of development to the impact of the hazard. Nepal is a lower-income country with GDP per capita of around US$1,200 at the time. This meant fewer resources for planning, building, and responding.
Key reasons the impact was so severe: Poor-quality housing, especially in rural villages. Weak enforcement of building codes in Kathmandu. Mountainous terrain that blocked rescue access. Limited number of trained emergency personnel. A reliance on international aid that took days to arrive.
Comparing Nepal with a high-income country
AQA often asks you to compare a tectonic hazard in an LIC with one in an HIC. The most common comparison is with the 2011 Tohoku earthquake in Japan, which was much stronger (magnitude 9.0) but caused fewer earthquake-related deaths because of strict building codes, early warning systems, and rapid emergency response.
| Factor | Nepal 2015 (LIC) | Japan 2011 (HIC) |
|---|---|---|
| Magnitude | 7.8 | 9.0 |
| Deaths | Around 9,000 (from quake) | Around 18,500 (mostly from the tsunami, not the quake) |
| Building codes | Weak and poorly enforced | Strict and widely enforced |
| Early warning | None | Tsunami warning system in place |
| Response speed | Reliant on international aid | Self-sufficient in first days |
| Economic cost as percent of GDP | Around 25 percent | Around 4 percent |
Common mistakes that cost easy marks Forgetting to give specific numbers for deaths, injuries, or cost. Mixing up primary and secondary effects. Treating immediate and long-term responses as the same thing. Not linking the impact to Nepal's level of development. Writing about "Nepal" without mentioning Kathmandu, Gorkha, or the Langtang Valley.
Key facts to memorise for the exam
- Date: 25 April 2015. Magnitude 7.8. Focus depth around 8 km
- Location: Epicentre in Gorkha district, around 80 km northwest of Kathmandu
- Cause: Indian plate moving north into Eurasian plate at around 45 mm per year
- Primary effects: Around 9,000 deaths, 22,000 injuries, 500,000 homes destroyed
- Secondary effects: Everest avalanche, Langtang Valley landslide, tourism collapse, schools destroyed
- Immediate responses: International rescue teams, field hospitals, half a million tents
- Long-term responses: National Reconstruction Authority, stricter building codes, slow rebuilding
- Comparison: Lower magnitude than Japan 2011 but more direct deaths because Nepal is an LIC
