Fill out the form to keep watching
Having trouble viewing the video?
Some regions or networks may restrict Vimeo playback.
In Nepal, over 700,000 buildings were damaged in a single earthquake. In Venezuela, 58,000 buildings were affected in June 2026. The scale of loss in developing countries is not shrinking. Yet engineers have long been responsible for designing buildings that meet seismic codes, while most buildings in these regions are never touched by formal engineering systems at all.
It is time to rethink what seismic safety actually means at scale. Dr. Bothara shares a framework built from real-world observation across these contexts. By analyzing the coverage–design prescription trade-off, he presents Population-Calibrated Seismic Safety as a practical decision-making lens.
Your submission has been
successfully received
If you meet the certification criteria,
Your Certificate of Completion will be sent to your email.
If you need urgent support, contact us via
here.
We truly appreciate your participation!
Open Access Has Ended
The open access period has ended.
If you have a MIDAS account, sign in
and complete the access form to watch this session.
Full access is one step away 👀
Complete a short form to continue
Description
What is Population-Calibrated Seismic Safety?
A framework that shifts the measure of seismic safety from code compliance to population-level outcomes, how effectively safety reaches the buildings and people most at risk.
Why does this matter now?
From Turkey to Nepal, most recently Venezuela, earthquakes in developing countries have exposed the same pattern. Engineering knowledge advanced. Losses did not fall proportionally. The problem is not the design. It is whether that design reaches the building that actually gets constructed.
What if the way we have been improving seismic safety is part of the problem?
The more sophisticated the prescription, the narrower its reach. This is the trade-off that most seismic frameworks do not address. This is the starting point of this session.
Key Points
Why does more design prescription not always mean safer communities?
How does the coverage–design prescription trade-off determine whether seismic safety reaches the wider building stock?
What practical framework can engineers use to evaluate whether a seismic safety strategy is affordable, buildable, and scalable in real construction systems?
Benefit
→ Will receive email by submitting survey
→ Will receive email by submitting survey
Speaker