Introduction
In the early hours of 26th December 2003, one of the largest earthquakes in Iran’s recent history hit Bam County. The earthquake measured 6.6 on the Richter scale, and reduced the city of Bam to rubble, killing over 26,000 people and displacing a further 45,000 [1]. In 12 minutes, the seismic event destroyed nearly 90% of the city’s infrastructure [2], including educational and medical facilities, causing logistical challenges in the following days. The local culture and history were also impacted as Bam is home to one of the oldest adobe structures in the world, Arg-e Bam [3], a huge citadel located in the heart of the city, which suffered devastating damage and has since been declared as a world heritage site. Such an influential event unmasked key vulnerabilities in Iran’s Urban planning, building regulations and, disaster resilience and preparedness.
Infographic summarising location and key statistics of the 2003 earthquake including magnitude, death toll and cost of damages.
Vulnerabilities
But what are vulnerabilities to natural hazards? The UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) define it as “conditions determined by physical, social, economic and environmental factors or processes which increase the susceptibility of an individual, a community, assets or systems to the impacts of hazards” [4], with some also specifically including class, and how that impacts an individual’s risk susceptibility [5].
Physical factors: Iran’s seismicity is determined by its tectonic setting. It is located on the Arabian plate which is converging with the Eurasian plate [6], creating zones of crustal shortening and thickening which are known for having seismic events. This type of deformation has created a network of active local faults, such as the Arg-e Bam fault, a newly recognized blind strike-slip fault located immediately south of the City and extending beneath it [7]. This type of fault is a key factor in the increased vulnerability of Bam during this earthquake, as they are hidden beneath the Earth’s surface and cause no surface displacement, therefore making seismic activity harder to predict.
Along with proximity, the shallow hypocenter (sub-terranean origin of the earthquake) and soft regional sediments exacerbated ground motion and intensity [8], meaning most of the shaking was condensed in the city center, providing a foundation for destruction of infrastructure.
Seismic intensity map of Bam and surrounding areas during the 2003 earthquake. The map highlights the area of maximum seismic intensity centered on Bam, correlating with the severe destruction of infrastructure and cultural landmarks. The proximity to the Arg-e-Bam fault is shown contributing to the catastrophic impact on the city. Source: USGS.
Social and cultural factors: Large numbers of Bam’s population were acutely vulnerable to the impacts of the earthquake due to a number of social, cultural and economic factors. A common building technique is to use adobe, which is a type of mud-brick made with local sediments [9], almost all residential buildings were made using this method, along with the citadel. As this is a traditional building method, the materials often don’t have the flexibility or strength of modern building materials, and so are likely to collapse during a seismic event [10]. At the time of the event Iran did have some construction seismic regulations, but many of these buildings were also not structurally sound enough to with stand earthquake tremors [11]. Economic disparities in areas can leave some groups unable to comply with seismic codes, meaning proportions of the population were living in vulnerable housing that didn’t comply with Iran’s seismic codes. On top of the physical structure of the buildings, the sheer density of Bam’s infrastructure and housing meant that during the event falling debris damaged and blocked off parts of the city, resulting in delays in rescue efforts.
As with most things, timing is everything, the same can be said for the Bam earthquake. Shaking began at approximately 5:26 am, when most residents would be indoors asleep and unprepared for an earthquake evacuation, meaning time to get to safety was limited.
A community’s level of resilience and vulnerability is also influenced by the level of education. In Bam, education about earthquakes, seismic risk and how to manage them was minimal. There was little to no ‘earthquake culture’ in Bam, meaning earthquake preparedness wasn’t integrated into everyday life, and residents were unaware of safety drills, contributing to the community’s vulnerability [12].
Arg-e Bam Citadel. Left [13]: Damage caused by the earthquake. Right [14]: After the citadel had been reconstructed using traditional building methods, helping to maintain society’s link to their history and culture despite the disaster they faced, aiding in strengthening hazard resilience.
Moving Forward and Reducing Vulnerability
Following events as devastating as the Bam earthquake, hazard preparedness reducing vulnerability and improving community hazard resilience becomes a top priority. This can often be a huge task and requires a multifaceted approach involving policy reform, increasing education and awareness and introducing early warning systems and dedicated monitoring systems.
Policy reform: Rebuilding housing to a safe standard was a key focus after the earthquake. This meant that there were stricter building codes ensuring permanent housing was built using earthquake-resistant techniques. Issues with this quickly arose as the ‘one-policy-fits-all’ structure failed to consider the socio-economic disparities in the city leaving some disadvantaged, particularly those who rent [15] and wealthier homeowners able to rebuild quickly and safely [16].
Economic policy reform also had varied success, transitional housing programs and aid packaged were established, however many of them benefited wealthier individuals and left more vulnerable communities struggling to rebuild their livelihoods [17]. The coordination of aid distribution was also poorly handled and often experienced delays and miscommunication between local and national organisations.
Education: Gaps in education and awareness were highlighted by this event; this catalysed the introduction of education initiatives aimed to teach locals basic practices in earthquake preparedness and evacuation techniques. Schools played a key role in the distribution of this information as not only did it ensure a whole generation would be more hazard resilient, it also encouraged children to go home and spread the information to other family members [18]. Local media was also utilised to distribute information about seismic safety both at home and at work, with an aim to introduce ‘earthquake culture’ into every day life [19].
Seismic monitoring: One of the best ways of reducing vulnerability is having the ability to monitor and predict hazards. Since 2003, Iran has expanded its seismic monitoring and early warning system (EWS) infrastructure. The Iranian Seismological centre currently has 108 digital seismic stations spread across 20 different networks that span the areas with the highest levels of seismicity and enable comprehensive modelling and data collection [20]. Even though there are promising advancements in these systems, issues in funding, technological constraints and the requirement of expertise could present considerable challenges.
Subsequent Events and Lessons
It has now been over 20 years since the 6.6 magnitude earthquake hit Bam, and the city has not experienced a seismic event on that scale since. However, the influence it had on building regulations meant that when a 7.3 magnitude earthquake hit Kermanshah, western Iran in 2017 there was significantly less damage done. Conversely, management of aid mirrored the poor organisation of 2003 with rural and vulnerable communities being disproportionality affected [21].
Most would agree that the expansion of EWS and seismic monitoring has aided in reducing vulnerability to earthquake hazards in Iran, but more needs to be done to ensure rural and remote communities receive equal access to education about preparedness and aid should another earthquake of this scale occur. This is a key step to ensure widespread hazard resilience and reduced hazard vulnerability.
References
[1] EM-DAT, CRED / UCLouvain. (2024). Brussels, Belgium. Available at: www.emdat.be.
[2] Aflatoonian, M. R., Sharifi, I., Aflatoonian, B., Shirzadi, M. R., Gouya, M. M. & Kermanizadeh, A. (2016). A Review of Impact of Bam Earthquake on Cutaneous Leishmaniasis and Status: Epidemic of Old Foci, Emergence of New Foci and Changes in Features of the Disease. Journal of Arthropod-Borne Diseases, 10(3), 271-280. Available at: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4906734/.
[3] Jalali, E. (2019). Bam Citadel; World’s Largest Adobe Building. IMNA. Available at: https://en.imna.ir/news/389349/Bam-Citadel-World-s-Largest-Adobe-Building.
[4] UNDRR. (2015). Vulnerability. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/terminology/vulnerability.
[5] Susman, P., O’Keefe, P. & Wisner, B. (2019). Global disasters, a radical interpretation. In: Hewitt, K. (ed) Interpretations of Calamity. Routledge, London, pp. 263-283. doi.org/10.4324/9780429329579-14.
[6] Ghorbani, M. (2021). Geological Setting and Crustal Structure of Iran. In: The Geology of Iran: Tectonic, Magmatism and Metamorphism. Earth and Environmental Sciences Library. Springer, Cham, 1-22. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71109-2_1.
[7] Talebian, M., Fielding, E. J., Funning, G. J., Ghorashi, M., Jackson, J., Nazari, H., Parsons, B., Priestley, K., Rosen, P. A., Walker, R. & Wright, T. J. (2004). The 2003 Bam (Iran) earthquake: Rupture of a blind strike-slip fault. Geophysical Research Letters, 31(11). doi.org/10.1029/2004gl020058.
[8] Yang, J., Sato, T. & Li, X. S. (2000). Seismic Amplification at a Soft Soil Site with Liquefiable Layer. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 4(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1363246900000023.
[9] Park, M. Y. (2024). Adobe House: Everything You Need to Know. Architectural Digest. Available at: https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/what-is-an-adobe-house.
[10] Sanada, Y., Maeda, M., Niousha, A. & Ghayamghamian, M. R. (2004). Reconnaissance Report on Building Damage Due to Bam Earthquake of 26 December 2003. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 5(4), 91-100. Available at: https://www.jsee.ir/article_240505.html.
[11] Sanada, Y., Ali, N., Maeda, M., Toshimi, K. & Mohammad, R. G. (2005). Building Damage around Bam Seismological Observatory following the Bam, Iran, Earthquake of Dec.26, 2003. Bulletin of Earthquake Research Institute, University of Tokyo, 79, 95-105. Available at: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Building-Damage-around-Bam-Seismological-Following-Sanada-Ali/3c145dd548252e6e2b1ca278ff4e1a82aa0b39f3.
[12] Parsizadeh, F., Ibrion, M., Mokhtari, M., Lein, H. & Nadim, F. (2015). Bam 2003 Earthquake disaster: On the earthquake risk perception, resilience and earthquake culture – Cultural beliefs and cultural landscape of Qanats, gardens of Khorma trees and Argh-e Bam. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 457–469. doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.09.011.
[13] Ninara (2010). IMG_2390 Bam, Iran. Flickr. Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ninara/4350390231.
[14] Pizzini, N (2017). Arg e Bam. Flickr. Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/deus77/26238297839.
[15] Tafti, M. T. & Tomlinson, R. (2013). The Role of post-disaster Public Policy Responses in Housing Recovery of Tenants. Habitat International, 40, 218-224. doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.05.004.
[16] Fayazi, M. & Lizarralde, G. (2019). The Impact of Post-disaster Housing Reconstruction Policies on Different Beneficiary Groups: The Case of Bam, Iran. In: Asgary, A. (eds) Resettlement Challenges for Displaced Populations and Refugees. Sustainable Development Goals Series. Springer, Cham, 123–140. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92498-4_9.
[17] Tierney, K., Tobin, T., Khazai, B., Krimgold, F. & Parsizadeh, F. (2004). Reconnaissance Report on Bam Earthquake Social and Public Policy Issues. Journal of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, 5(4), 209-215. Available at: https://www.jsee.ir/article_240496.html.
[18] Ibrion, M., Mokhtari, M., Parsizadeh, F., Lein, H. & Nadim, F. (2015). Towards a Culture of Resilience and Earthquake Disaster Risk Reduction in Iran-‘Lessons-Learned’ from Earthquake Disasters. 7th International Conference on Seismology & Earthquake Engineering (SEE7), 18-21 May 2015, Tehran, Iran. doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3504.5280/1.
[19] Parsizadeh, F. & Ghafory‐Ashtiany, M. (2010). Iran Public Education and Awareness Program and Its Achievements. Disaster Prevention and Management, 19(1), 32-47. doi.org/10.1108/09653561011022126.
[20] Institute of Geophysics: University of Tehran and Iranian Seismological Center. (2024). Iranian Seismological Center (IRSC). Available at: https://geophysics.ut.ac.ir/en/%D9%85%D8%B1%DA%A9%D8%B2-%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%B2%D9%87-%D9%86%DA%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C-%DA%A9%D8%B4%D9%88%D8%B1%DB%8C.
[21] Safarpour, H., Fooladlou, S., Safi-Keykaleh, M., Mousavipour, S., Pirani, D., Sahebi, A., Ghodsi, H., Farahi-Ashtiani, I. & Dehghani, A. (2020). Challenges and Barriers of Humanitarian Aid Management in 2017 Kermanshah earthquake: A Qualitative Study. BMC Public Health, 20, 563. doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08722-5.