KABUL – The death toll from a recent magnitude 6.0 earthquake in eastern Afghanistan has tragically surpassed 1,000, with thousands more injured. The high number of casualties is a direct result of several critical factors, primarily the region’s vulnerable building practices. While the magnitude of the quake was relatively low, its shallow epicenter—just 8 km underground produced intense shaking on the surface.
Buildings, Not Earthquakes, Kill People
The proverb “earthquakes don’t kill people, buildings do” has proven devastatingly true in this tragedy. Homes in the affected, remote rural communities are typically constructed using local materials like mud bricks, raw lumber, and stone masonry in a method known as monolithic construction. These structures lack the engineered design, reinforcement, and building codes that can withstand the strong side-to-side forces of a seismic event. As a result, they easily collapse, trapping and crushing residents, most of whom were sleeping at the time of the late-night tremor.
Lessons from Across the Region
The affected area is located in the seismically active Hindu Kush and Himalaya mountains, a region prone to frequent and powerful earthquakes due to the friction between the Eurasian and Indian tectonic plates. The contrast in outcomes is stark when compared to the 2011 Christchurch, New Zealand earthquake, which had a similar magnitude and depth but resulted in far fewer deaths (185) due to stricter building standards.
Experts emphasize that low-cost, effective solutions for earthquake-resistant building design exist and have been successfully implemented in other developing countries. Following the 2005 Kashmir earthquake, Pakistan established a program to help communities build safer houses with technical guidance. Nepal has also incorporated minimum standards into its National Building Code after the 2015 Gorkha earthquake. Simple techniques, such as adding continuous bands in walls and reinforcing corners, can significantly improve a building’s resilience and save lives, proving that with proper technical and institutional support, communities can build back better and be more prepared for future disasters.