English (pdf)
Article in xml format
Article references
Automatic translation
Send this article by e-mail
Cited by SciELO 
Similars in
SciELO 
Permalink
1. Introduction
Earthquakes are one of the most powerful natural phenomena on Earth, causing significant human and economic losses. In recent decades, developing countries have experienced substantial growth. However, unplanned urbanization and poor land management contribute to the risk of disasters (UNDRR and WMO, 2023). This leads to an accumulation of losses in human lives and real estate assets in areas prone to earthquakes, resulting in settlements at risk of disaster from this natural event (León et al., 2022). Latin America and the Caribbean are the second most prone regions to natural hazards such as earthquakes in the world. Studies show that cities are the most affected areas due to their high population density and inequality (Caruso, 2017). Latin America is a region with high seismic activity due to the interaction of several continental and oceanic tectonic plates with subduction and transform limits such as North American, Cocos, Nazca, Caribbean, or South American. Additionally, it is located in the Pacific Ring of Fire, where various tectonic plates such as the Pacific, Philippine, Juan de Fuca, Cocos, and Nazca, including maritime plates, converge (DeMets et al., 2010). Furthermore, Central America is also prone to earthquakes due to its location at the convergence of the Caribbean and Cocos tectonic plates. The region is susceptible to subduction earthquakes and significant magnitude earthquakes originating in the center of the continent, as the isthmus is situated over numerous geological faults. Recent examples are 7.7 Mw during 2001 in El Salvador, or 7.4 Mw during 2012 in Guatemala. The main seismic sources in the area include the Mesoamerican Trench and the Motagua Fault, along with all borders with the Caribbean and Cocos Plates, North America and Nazca, the Panama Block, and the South American Plate (Alvarado et al., 2017).
Costa Rica has experienced three significant earthquakes in its recent history (Hidalgo-Leiva et al., 2023): Limón with a 7.7 Mw in 1991, causing catastrophic damage; Cinchona in 2009 with a 6.2 Mw, resulting in fatalities and significant regional economic losses; and the most recent one in Sámara in 2012, measuring a 7.6 Mw and leading to substantial regional economic losses. It is crucial to understand how numerous factors influence losses in certain economic sectors caused by earthquakes, which can vary significantly based on the earthquake’s intensity and location (Quesada-Román, 2021b). Earthquakes are unpredictable phenomena, but it is essential to consider strategies for loss recovery in any location where they may occur (Fan et al., 2019). Furthermore, providing information to the entire population is crucial for effective risk management (McBride et al., 2022).
This research paper does not explicitly state a hypothesis, but its research questions aim to investigate the economic impacts of major earthquakes in Costa Rica, the vulnerabilities of specific municipalities and sectors, and the significance of preparedness and risk reduction strategies. The study also aims to identify severely affected sectors, such as electricity, housing, and agriculture, underlining their critical role in economic resilience. Furthermore, it provides valuable implications for disaster risk reduction by offering insights for targeted mitigation strategies, policy formulation, and resource allocation in Costa Rica and similar seismic-prone regions. Additionally, the study offers a global perspective, providing a roadmap for sustainable development and resilience building in earthquakeprone areas.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Geographical setting
Costa Rica is located in a tectonically active zone characterized primarily by the subduction process, where the Cocos plate subducts beneath the Caribbean plate along the Mesoamerican Trench at a speed of 83-89 mm/year (Alvarado et al., 2017). The boundary between the Caribbean plate and Panama microplate occurs in the so-called Deformed Belt of Central Costa Rica, and the complex interaction among these tectonic elements results in high seismicity (Arroyo et al., 2020).
The country is tectonically conditioned by the subduction process between the Cocos and Caribbean plates, as well as interactions with other plates such as Nazca and Panama. The country can be classified into three morphotectonic regions: forearc, plutonic/volcanic arc, and backarc. Each of these regions responds to various regional and local fault systems that generate seismic hazards (Arroyo-Solórzano and Quesada-Román, 2024). The geology of Costa Rica is quite diverse, including Quaternary sediments, Quaternary volcanic rocks, Miocene-Pliocene intrusive rocks, Mesozoic-Cenozoic sedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous-Eocene igneous rocks (Denyer and Alvarado, 2007).
The country’s geomorphology features a virtually continuous mountainous system divided by volcanic cordilleras, both active and inactive, resulting in a plethora of varied landforms, including mountains, piedmonts, valleys, and plains covering the country’s expanse (Quesada-Román et al., 2022; Cortés and Quesada-Román, 2024; Granados-Bolaños et al., 2024). This topographic dynamic is influenced by rainfall patterns, with the Caribbean slope being rainier, receiving over 3000 mm annually, and the Pacific slope being drier, with rainfall generally below 2500 mm (Veas-Ayala et al., 2023).
The vegetation, largely shaped by the climate, is diverse, encompassing ecosystems such as paramos, deciduous forests, evergreen forests, savannas, mangroves, cloud forests, and wetlands (Quesada-Román et al., 2020; Madrigal-González et al., 2023; Veas-Ayala et al., 2023). Land use, influenced significantly by human activity, is mainly urban, agricultural, and pastureland (Alvarado and Quesada-Román, 2024). Costa Rica has 84 municipalities in 7 provinces. The country’s population is just over 5 million, but it is concentrated in the Greater Metropolitan Area, a region that covers only 14% of Costa Rica’s continental territory but is home to nearly 3 million people (Garro-Quesada et al., 2023; Quesada-Román, 2022, 2023).
2.2. Recent main earthquakes in Costa Rican history
2.2.1. Description of the Limón Earthquake 1991
On April 22, 1991, one of the most significant earthquakes recorded in Costa Rica occurred in the Caribbean region. This event had a magnitude of Mw 7.7 and occurred 36 km from the city of Limón, near the Limón Basin, at a depth of 10 km (Quesada-Román, 2016; Campos-Durán et al., 2021; Rojas-Quesada and Montero, 2021). According to Montero (2021), the Limón earthquake in 1991 resulted from the rupture along a reverse fault with a left-lateral component and a southeastward direction at the northwest end of the Northern Panama Deformed Belt (Suárez et al., 1995).
Prior to this major earthquake, the country experienced two considerable interplate earthquakes with significant geological effects, such as the uplift of the Osa and Burica Peninsulas caused by the 1983 Osa earthquake (Mw 7.3) (Morales and Montero, 1984). This event also led to an uplift along the Longitudinal Fault and the elevation of the Talamanca Range along the Pacific and Caribbean fronts. Additionally, the Cóbano Earthquake with a magnitude of Mw 7.0 occurred in 1990. This earthquake marked the beginning of a seismic activity cycle in Costa Rica in the following months, with the Limón earthquake being part of this cycle but having a greater magnitude and socio-economic impact (Montero, 2021).
The Limón earthquake in 1991 caused severe damage in a large region, where tectonic effects were distributed in the southeast of Costa Rica and northeast of Panama (Campos et al., 2021). Most of the destruction was caused by liquefaction, landslides, and differential settlement. Additionally, a co-seismic uplift of the Caribbean coast and discontinuous areas of our country was observed (Denyer et al., 1994; Barrantes et al., 2021; Quesada-Román, 2021a ).
2.2.2. Description of the Cinchona Earthquake 2009
Alajuela, one kilometer south of Cinchona. This earthquake had a magnitude of Mw 6.2 and a depth of 4.6 kilometers (Red Sismológica Nacional, 2009). The origin of this event is associated with a shallow oblique fault known as Ángel-Vara Blanca, located on the eastern flank of the Poás Volcano. It exhibited approximately 12 km of horizontal rupture and a 6 km dip towards depth, with a Northwest-Southeast orientation. The fault demonstrated a dextral and normal component (Alvarado, 2010; Barrantes et al., 2011; Quesada-Román & Barrantes, 2017). This event commenced on January 7 with a foreshock earthquake with a magnitude of Mw 4.6. Following this, 39 more foreshock earthquakes occurred before the main earthquake on January 8, with magnitudes of Mw 2.5 and 4.6. Subsequently, after the main earthquake on January 8, more than 1500 aftershocks were recorded (Quesada-Román & Barrantes, 2016).
Due to the shallowness of the earthquake, thousands of slope movements were triggered, adding to the type of terrain in the area, whose substrate is highly weathered (Barrantes et al., 2013; Arroyo-Solórzano et al., 2022). Dating has been conducted indicating that there are paleosols over 50 ka in the La Paz Andesite Unit. This led to the formation of walls containing a large amount of clay and a deep B horizon, all of which facilitated the movement of debris masses on the mountain slopes, which generally exceed 25° (Ruiz et al., 2019). The density of the present forest was not a determining factor in stabilizing the slopes. Instead, the magnitude of the earthquake, the type of soil, and the rainfall regime were the factors that caused the large number of landslides, responsible for most of the damage in this area (Arroyo-Solórzano et al., 2021; Quesada-Román, 2024).
2.2.3. Description of Sámara 2012 earthquake
The Sámara earthquake, which occurred on September 5, 2012, at 8:42 am, could be classified as the second-largest earthquake recorded in Costa Rica. The magnitude of this earthquake was Mw 7.6, with a location 15 kilometers south-southwest of Sámara in the Nicoya Peninsula region, at a depth of 9.4 kilometers (Protti et al., 2014). Its origin is attributed to the subduction process of the Cocos Plate in the seismogenic zone or interplate boundary. The focal mechanism of the event was a pure thrust, with a rupture area of 2200 km², and 920 aftershocks were recorded over a month (Linkimer et al., 2014).
The rupture of this earthquake appears to be limited by two lateral edges in the northeast direction, which acted as boundaries or lateral ramps during the displacement process in the interplate seismogenic zone (Yao et al., 2017; Malservisi et al., 2015). The estimated total rupture area is 2200 km², equivalent to 40% of the seismic area. The energy released in the earthquake is equivalent to a power of 3.16 megatons, which could be likened to 158 atomic bombs like those detonated in Hiroshima (Linkimer et al., 2013).
This earthquake had effects such as the uplift of the coastline by 1.45 meters in Carrillo Beach, Sámara, and Buena Vista, and by 0.75 meters in Pelada Beach. Additionally, in other beaches, there were observable instances of differential settlement and liquefaction, which are formations in the sand and less rigid soils (Yue et al., 2013). Deformations in the land were also observed in areas like Sarchí and Naranjo, where cracking and landslides occurred in areas with poorly consolidated soils, consisting of lahars deposits and sequences of clays and silts (Linkimer et al., 2013).
2.3. Earthquake economic data acquisition and processing
This research leveraged authoritative data sourced from MIDEPLAN (Ministry of National Planning and Economic Policy, 2019): https://www.mideplan.go.cr/perdidas-ocasionadas-fenomenos-naturales to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the economic repercussions stemming from seismic events (Figure 2). Specifically, we focused on three notable earthquakes -Limón 1991, Cinchona 2009, and Sámara 2012- extracting and recalibrating municipal economic loss data to 2015 US Dollars for effective cross-event comparisons. The identification of the most severely impacted municipalities was predicated on the magnitude of losses incurred, considering multiple factors such as geographical location, subpar infrastructure, and constrained resources earmarked for disaster preparedness and response. This holistic approach allowed for a nuanced understanding of the heightened vulnerability of these municipalities to seismic events, ultimately resulting in substantial economic setbacks.
Recognizing the multifaceted nature of these vulnerabilities, we scrutinized various economic sectors to discern the breadth of impact on vital facets of community life. The sectors under investigation encompassed aqueducts and sewage, airports, agriculture, environment, emergency care, education, energy, railways, road infrastructure, ports, rivers and streams, the health sector, electrical systems, telecommunications, and housing. The assimilation of data from these sectors provided a comprehensive overview of the far-reaching consequences across diverse aspects of municipal life.
To visually represent the cumulative economic losses by municipality, we employed ArcGIS 10.3 to create detailed maps. This spatial analysis not only facilitated the identification of specific geographic regions facing heightened economic vulnerabilities but also served as a crucial tool for policymakers and stakeholders (Figure 1). By elucidating the economic aftermath of earthquakes at the municipal level, this research aims to empower decision-makers in formulating targeted disaster risk reduction and preparedness strategies. These strategies, informed by a nuanced understanding of the economic dynamics at play, aspire to mitigate the potential ramifications of seismic events in the future, fostering more resilient and disaster-resilient communities.
3. Results
3.1. Main economic sectors affected by the earthquakes in Limón, Cinchona, and Sámara.
The three earthquakes that occurred in Costa Rica with the highest recorded magnitudes in recent decades have caused millions in losses across various socioeconomic sectors of the country. The primary economic areas affected include the electrical sector, housing, agriculture, road networks, and the environment (Figure 2). According to the data used in this study, the sector with the highest quantified economic losses is the electrical system, representing 40.72% of the total losses caused by these earthquakes in the country, as shown in Table 1. These losses could be attributed to the high magnitudes recorded in these earthquakes, as well as to certain vulnerabilities that conventional electrical transmission poles and other systems in the country, such as transmission lines and substations, may exhibit.
The electrical system is the sector that records the highest number of losses due to the earthquakes in Cinchona and Limón. This can be quantified in economic losses within this sector, as shown in Table 2, with this data being the highest recorded for the Cinchona earthquake in the entire table. These losses from this earthquake are also attributed to its impact on municipalities with higher population density, such as Alajuela and Heredia with more than 2000 inh/km2 in their urban areas. This contrasts with municipalities affected by the Limón earthquake, which reported losses for this sector. Additionally, it is essential to consider the timing of these events, with approximately 18 years between them, during which many changes occurred, including population growth (3.1 million in 1991 and 4.6 million in 2012) and increased coverage of the electrical service (95% in 1991 and 99.5% in 2012).
Source: Prepared by the authors
Figure 2 Main economic sectors affected by earthquakes in Costa Rica summing an 83.37% of the total losses between 1990 and 2012.
The second socioeconomic sector that experienced the highest losses caused by earthquakes is the Housing sector, accounting for 16.19% of the total damages generated by seismic activity in Costa Rica. This sector is affected by all three earthquakes, with its highest record attributed to the earthquake in Limón in 1991, followed by the data recorded for the earthquake in Sámara in 2012. These significant losses could be primarily due to the high magnitudes of these earthquakes, ranging between 7.6 Mw and 7.7 Mw. Additionally, factors such as poor land use planning, landslides, limited or nonexistent comprehensive risk management, and inadequate construction materials and planning contribute to these multimillion-dollar losses (Acosta-Quesada and Quesada-Román, 2025).
The agricultural sector, accounting for a percentage of 12.96% of the total damage. It is important to note that these earthquakes primarily affected municipalities belonging to socioeconomic regions located on the periphery of the country that will be detailed later, where the primary sector of the economy, agriculture, predominates. The most significant damages or economic losses occurred following the Limón earthquake, as this region is characterized by its agricultural activity (MIDEPLAN, 2019).
The economic sectors of port facilities (3.21%), railways (1.73%), energy (0.65%), and airports (0.12%) only show damages after the Limón earthquake. This is primarily due to its magnitude, as this event has the highest magnitude recorded in the country in recent decades. Additionally, other ports (Caldera or Puntarenas), railways (in the GAM), and airports (Juan Santamaría or Liberia) in the country located in different areas were not directly affected by other earthquakes due to factors such as distance, magnitude, and the quality of infrastructure.
The health sector accounted for 3.15% of economic losses, with losses recorded in hospitals, clinics, and basic care equipment. The earthquakes in Sámara and Limón presented the highest losses, respectively, that will be soon explained. This occurred due to exposure to sewage, coupled with a lack of drinking water and their respective recorded magnitudes. Another sector affected by these same causes is water supply and sanitation, with a percentage of total losses of 2.84%. On the other hand, the Education sector, with a total loss percentage of 2.28%, shows greater damage or figures mainly after the Sámara earthquake.
Emergency care incurred the highest losses after the Limón earthquake, with a percentage of 0.94%, due to the high magnitude of the earthquake, which affected the most sectors of the three. Rivers and streams were affected by landslides during the Limón and Cinchona events, with this sector presenting a damage percentage of 0.68%. Finally, the telecommunications sector suffered greater damage after the Limón earthquake, possibly due to its high magnitude. This information can be observed in the figures in Table 1, depicting the total losses from the three earthquakes, and in Table 2, showing the affected sectors separated by earthquake.
Table 1 Total Losses by Economic Sector in the three earthquakes.
| Socioeconomic Sector | Losses USD | Porcentaje |
|---|---|---|
| Electrical System | 499,523,861.44 | 40.72% |
| Living Places | 198,596,289.50 | 16.19% |
| Agriculture | 158,937,637.23 | 12.96% |
| Road Infrastructure | 89,554,771.78 | 7.30% |
| Environment | 77,257,113.00 | 6.30% |
| Port Facilities | 39,325,418.74 | 3.21% |
| Health | 38,667,483.72 | 3.15% |
| Water Supply and Sewerage | 34,843,594.99 | 2.84% |
| Education | 27,920,483.61 | 2.28% |
| Railways | 21,256,073.49 | 1.73% |
| Emergency Care | 11,551,550.03 | 0.94% |
| Public and Private Buildings | 10,36,1892.50 | 0.84% |
| Rivers and Streams | 8,325,461.66 | 0.68% |
| Energy | 8,023,412.42 | 0.65% |
| Airport | 1,497,703.65 | 0.12% |
| Telecommunications | 1,165,529.00 | 0.10% |
| Total losses from earthquakes | 1,226,808,276.76 | 100% |
Source: Prepared by the authors
Table 2 Losses by economic sector for each earthquake.
| Sector | Losses USD Limón (1991) | Losses USD Cinchona (2009) | Losses USD Sámara (2012) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Water Supply and Sewerage | 31,955,622.20 | 1,725,533.34 | 1,162,439.46 |
| Airport | 1,497,703.652 | 0 | 0 |
| Agriculture | 143,456,488.55 | 15,020,409.92 | 46,738.75 |
| Environment | 0 | 77,257,113 | 0 |
| Emergency Care | 10,162,989.07 | 1,093,860.13 | 294,700 |
| Public and Private Buildings | 827,66574 | 170,239.72 | 9,363,987,03 |
| Education | 4,260,966.89 | 6,879,659.25 | 16,779,857.47 |
| Energy | 8,023,412.42 | 0 | 0 |
| Railways | 21,256,073.49 | 0 | 0 |
| Road Infrastructure | 40,004,734.33 | 26,452,991.81 | 23,097,045,64 |
| Port Facilities | 39,325,418.74 | 0,00 | 0,00 |
| Rivers and Streams | 8,230,951.35 | 94,510.31 | 0,00 |
| Health | 11,643,790.06 | 1,004,081.15 | 26,019,612.51 |
| Electrical System | 1,702,156.12 | 497,821,705.32 | 0 |
| Telecommunications | 947,011.71 | 218,517.29 | 0 |
| Living place | 120,244,207.5 | 49,767,867.97 | 28,584,214.06 |
| Total | 443,539,191.80 | 677,506,489.21 | 105,762,595.75 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
3.2. Main Municipalities Affected by the Earthquakes in Limón, Cinchona, and Sámara.
In recent years, Costa Rica has experienced a series of significant earthquakes that have shaken not only the ground but also the economy at the municipal level. Studying the economic impacts of the strongest earthquakes in the last three decades determine the hotspot municipalities for national and local authorities (Figure 3). These disasters have left a deep impact on the infrastructure and economic fabric of the affected municipalities, posing significant challenges in terms of reconstruction, public investment, and sustainable development. Understanding these impacts is crucial for making informed decisions and developing preparedness and mitigation strategies that enhance the resilience of local communities to future seismic events. Alajuela, Sarchí, and Limón stand out with three quarters of the total economic impacts by recent earthquakes in Costa Rica (Table 3).
Table 3 Total losses in each canton for each earthquake.
| Municipality | Limón 1991 | Sámara 2012 | Cinchona 2009 | Total | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alajuela | 0,00 | 0,00 | 489 677 410,76 | 489 677 410,76 | 52,39 |
| Sarchí | 0,00 | 4 815 069,80 | 103 994 932,19 | 108 810 002,00 | 11,64 |
| Limón | 104 818 826,53 | 0,00 | 0,00 | 104 818 826,53 | 11,21 |
| Heredia | 0,00 | 0,00 | 52 122 016,98 | 52 122 016,98 | 5,58 |
| Puntarenas | 0,00 | 40 616 166,87 | 0,00 | 40 616 166,87 | 4,35 |
| Jiménez | 24 913 054,95 | 24 913 054,95 | 2,67 | ||
| Turrialba | 24 170 168,21 | 0,00 | 0,00 | 24 170 168,21 | 2,59 |
| Poás | 0,00 | 0,00 | 11 655 966,40 | 11 655 966,40 | 1,25 |
| Santa Cruz | 0,00 | 10 170 436,32 | 0,00 | 10 170 436,32 | 1,09 |
| Nicoya | 0,00 | 9 985 484,24 | 0,00 | 9 985 484,24 | 1,07 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
Source: Prepared by the authors
Figure 3 Municipalities economically affected by the three earthquakes studied in Costa Rica. It is evident how Alajuela stands out as the municipality with the highest economic losses from earthquakes in the country.
3.2.1. Limón 1991 earthquake
Following the Limón earthquake in 1991, the municipality most affected was Limón itself, primarily due to its proximity to the earthquake’s epicenter (Figure 4). This earthquake holds the highest magnitude recorded in Costa Rica in recent decades and had significant repercussions across various socioeconomic sectors. Additionally, Limón stands out compared to other municipalities as it possesses an airport, railway, and port, all of which were considerably affected (Figure 5). The municipality most affected by economic losses was the earthquake’s epicenter, Limón (104 US million), reflecting significant multimillion-dollar losses across different economic sectors, particularly due to its status as a port region. Other significantly affected municipalities were Jiménez (29 US million) and Turrialba (24 US million), both experiencing roughly equivalent losses, attributed to their proximity to the epicenter. Similarly affected were Matina (almost 9 million USD) and Siquirres (6.8 USD million USD), both within the province of Limón (Table 4).
Source: Prepared by the authors
Figure 4 Municipalities affected by the Limón earthquake in 1991. The most affected areas are concentrated along the South Caribbean.
Table 4 Total losses by Municipality in the Limón earthquake of 1991.
| Municipality | Losses in USD |
|---|---|
| Limón | 104,818,826.5 |
| Jiménez | 24,913,054.95 |
| Turrialba | 24,170,168.21 |
| Matina | 8,985,760.479 |
| Siquirres | 6,876,945.039 |
| Talamanca | 4,011,979.427 |
| Paraíso | 150,305.25 |
| Tibás | 150,305.25 |
| Pococí | 17,116.61 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
3.2.2. Cinchona 2009 earthquake
Among the thirty-nine municipalities affected by the Cinchona earthquake, Alajuela (487 million USD) stands out, as shown in Figure 6 and Table 5. This could be attributed to several reasons, firstly, the high magnitude of the Cinchona earthquake, and additionally, Alajuela had a higher population density and a denser road network, as seen in Table 2. The second most affected municipality by this earthquake is Sarchí (103 million USD), which is close to the impact zone. Likewise, Heredia (52 million USD) has a significant sum of economic losses recorded by this earthquake in 2009, with higher population and road density, along with its proximity to the event area especially in Vara Blanca district (Figure 7). On the other hand, as observed in Table 3, another highly affected municipality was Poás, due to its proximity to the massifs of the Poás Volcano. Other municipalities affected to a lesser extent but still incurring losses include Grecia, Río Cuarto, Santa Barbara, Barva, and Sarapiquí.
Source: Prepared by the authors
Figure 6 Municipalities affected by the Cinchona earthquake in 2009. A greater impact is evident in areas of the provinces of Alajuela and Heredia.
Table 5 Total losses by municipality in the Cinchona earthquake of 2009.
| Municipality | Losses USD |
|---|---|
| Alajuela | 489,677,410 |
| Sarchí | 103,994,932 |
| Heredia | 52,122,016 |
| Poás | 11,655,966 |
| Grecia | 3,756,081 |
| Río Cuarto | 1,230,892 |
| Santa Barbara | 750,653 |
| Barva | 458,617 |
| Sarapiquí | 86,690 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
3.2.3. Sámara 2012 earthquake
The municipality most affected by the Sámara earthquake in 2012 was Puntarenas, despite its distance from this municipality, particularly in the economic sectors of Health, Education, Housing, Road Infrastructure, and Public and Private Buildings (Figure 8, Table 6). The second most affected municipality by this earthquake is Santa Cruz, with losses in the sectors of road infrastructure, housing, health, education, and public and private buildings. Subsequently, Nicoya and Hojancha experienced approximately similar economic losses. Nandayure, Cañas, Abangares, and Bagaces also suffered significant economic losses during this earthquake. It can be said that those most affected are those in the Nicoya Peninsula (Figure 9). However, municipalities in the province of Puntarenas were seriously affected with significant economic losses, such as Montes de Oro and Esparza. Also, other municipalities in the central part of the country, such as Sarchí, Naranjo, Zarcero, and Heredia, despite being quite far from the epicentral zone, experienced economic losses.
Source: Prepared by the authors
Figure 8 Municipalities affected by the Sámara earthquake in 2012. Note that the municipalities on the Nicoya Peninsula were the most affected.
Table 6 Total losses by Municipality in the Sámara earthquake in 2012.
| Municipality | Losses in USD |
|---|---|
| Puntarenas | 40,616,166.87 |
| Santa Cruz | 10,170,436.32 |
| Nicoya | 9,985,484.23 |
| Hojancha | 8,397,358.10 |
| Sarchí | 4,815,069.80 |
| Nandayure | 3,673,804.06 |
| Cañas | 2,924,062.23 |
| Carrillo | 2,799,988.94 |
| Naranjo | 2,607,038.59 |
| Montes de Oro | 2,159,226.439 |
| Zarcero | 1,712,784.89 |
| Tilarán | 1,616,085.03 |
| San Ramón | 1,584,697.79 |
| Abangares | 819,317.98 |
| Sarapiquí | 512,137.81 |
| Garabito | 512,137.81 |
| Esparza | 481,860.22 |
| Grecia | 471,389.31 |
Source: Prepared by the authors
Source: Prepared by the authors
Figure 9 Effects of the Sámara earthquake in 2012: a and b) Liquefaction on the Pacific coast after the Nicoya earthquake and housing damage. c) Blockage of the Avellanas beach mangrove outlet, leading to the death of its vegetation in the following years; currently, it is recovering. d) Homes destroyed by the earthquake. Sources: National Seismological Network (2012), Nosara Informa (2012), Tamarindo Real Estate (2023), La Vanguardia (2012).
4. Discussion
4.1 Localized impacts and economic losses
The most affected economic sectors by recent earthquakes in Costa Rica were electricity, housing, agriculture, road infrastructure, and the environment, accounting for 83.37% of the total losses. These outcomes align with other regions worldwide where similar economic sectors have suffered impacts from earthquakes in the past (Rose et al., 2002). Costa Rica ranks among the countries experiencing substantial economic losses due to earthquakes in the 20th and early 21st centuries (Daniell et al., 2012). The electricity sector, prominently affected, has consistently experienced repercussions in seismic events in Chile (Espinoza et al., 2020), China (Wu et al., 2012), Japan (Kajitani et al., 2013), Russia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan (Iakubovskii et al., 2019). Housing is another sector widely affected globally, reported across different regions worldwide (Fekrazad, 2019; Ao et al., 2021; Rawal et al., 2021). Agricultural and rural regions are significantly impacted by earthquakes, affecting croplands, livestock, and the livelihoods of communities globally (Bradley et al., 2019; Mendoza and Jara, 2022). While road infrastructure is generally vulnerable to natural hazards, earthquakes impose particularly high economic losses due to the expenses associated not only with rehabilitation but also with reconstruction efforts (Gajanayake et al., 2020).
Alajuela, Limón, and Sarchí emerged as the most profoundly impacted municipalities in Costa Rica, registering economic losses of 526 million US dollars, 192 million US dollars, and 110 million US dollars, respectively. Strikingly, these three municipalities collectively accounted for a staggering 75% of the total losses incurred by the country in the wake of recent seismic activities. The correlation between these outcomes and areas characterized by dense urban or periurban/rural populations with lower social development levels (Quesada-Román et al., 2021a; Orozco Montoya et al., 2022). A significant trend identified is the persistent urban expansion in mountainous landscapes, exemplified by municipalities such as Alajuela, Sarchí, Heredia, Poás, and Turrialba (Hidalgo-Leiva et al., 2023; Arroyo-Solórzano, 2023). This ongoing urban growth in topographically challenging terrains amplifies vulnerability, contributing to the manifestation of cascading disasters (Calderón and Silva, 2021; Quesada-Román et al., 2021). The escalating susceptibility within Costa Rica is intricately linked to deficiencies in territorial management, emphasizing the imperative need for strategic interventions to enhance resilience and mitigate the socio-economic repercussions of seismic events (Avendaño-Leadem and Cedeño-Montoya, 2020; Quesada-Román, 2023; Acosta Quesada and Quesada-Román, 2024).
The disproportionate impact of recent earthquakes in Costa Rica on critical sectors, namely electricity, housing, and agriculture, collectively constituting nearly 70% of the overall economic losses, carries profound implications for both local and national economic stability. The extensive damage to the electricity sector disrupts the backbone of essential services and hinders industrial operations, potentially leading to prolonged power shortages (Escalante-Pérez, 2023). Simultaneously, the significant losses in the housing sector exacerbate the strain on communities, fostering displacement and impeding the revival of residential areas (Calderón and Silva, 2019; Quesada-Román and Campos-Durán, 2023). In agriculture, the repercussions extend beyond immediate production setbacks, impacting food security, livelihoods, and the broader economic supply chain (Calderón et al., 2021; Cortés-Granados et al., 2024). These interlinked challenges pose formidable hurdles to local economic resurgence and, in the aggregate, threaten the national economic stability of Costa Rica, necessitating targeted recovery measures and long-term resilience strategies to mitigate the far-reaching socio-economic consequences.
4.2 Preparedness, policy, and recommendations
The imperative for preparedness and proactive risk reduction strategies looms larger than ever in mitigating the economic disruptions wrought by earthquakes, particularly in the context of developing countries (Shaffril et al., 2021; Tekin et al., 2024; Ruiz-Álvarez et al., 2025). The disproportionately severe impact on crucial sectors such as electricity, housing, and agriculture underscores the urgency for comprehensive preparedness measures that go beyond mere response mechanisms (Nievas et al., 2020). Investing in resilient infrastructure, early warning systems, and community education can substantially reduce the vulnerability of these sectors, fostering a more adaptive response to seismic events (Sufri et al., 2020). In developing countries, where socio-economic disparities and limited resources intensify the repercussions of disasters, prioritizing risk reduction becomes an ethical and pragmatic imperative. By bolstering preparedness initiatives, these nations can not only minimize the economic fallout of earthquakes but also lay the groundwork for sustainable recovery, ensuring the long-term stability and well-being of their communities (Pribadi et al., 2021).
Effective earthquake preparedness demands a comprehensive strategy integrating early warning systems, resilient infrastructure, community education, and stringent policy frameworks (Kiani et al., 2022). While existing measures such as early warning systems and building codes are crucial, their efficacy hinges on comprehensive implementation and public engagement (Cook et al., 2022). To strengthen disaster preparedness, targeted policies are imperative, encompassing financial incentives for infrastructure retrofitting, strict enforcement of building codes, and inclusive community engagement (Carrasco et al., 2023). Robust public education campaigns, international collaboration for knowledge-sharing, and investment in advanced earthquake prediction technologies further fortify resilience (Yeon et al., 2020). By fostering a multidimensional approach, governments can create a resilient foundation, ensuring that communities, especially in developing countries, are equipped to face seismic challenges with resilience and agility.
Striking a judicious balance in the allocation of resources for earthquake preparedness necessitates a nuanced approach that navigates between sector-specific and overarching strategies (Paul and Wang, 2019). While sector-specific measures such as resilient infrastructure and targeted community education are indispensable, allocating resources solely to individual sectors may inadvertently neglect the interconnectedness of vulnerabilities. Therefore, a holistic, overarching strategy is paramount, encompassing the development of early warning systems, robust policy frameworks, and comprehensive public education initiatives. These overarching approaches can serve as force multipliers, fortifying multiple sectors simultaneously. Striking this balance is particularly critical in resourceconstrained environments, ensuring that investments yield broad-reaching benefits across various sectors. Moreover, the integration of cross-sectoral collaboration and information-sharing platforms is essential to optimize resource allocation, fostering a synergistic and adaptive preparedness framework capable of effectively mitigating the complex challenges posed by earthquakes (Kachali et al., 2018).
4.3 Global implications and sustainable resilience
The insights gleaned from the seismic, geomorphological, and climatological conditions in Costa Rica hold substantial relevance for regions sharing similar geological challenges. Areas confronted with analogous seismic activity and topographical features can leverage the lessons learned to bolster their earthquake preparedness. The identified economic losses in sectors such as electricity, housing, and agriculture resonate with regions facing comparable challenges. The call for a balanced approach, addressing both sector-specific and overarching strategies, is particularly pertinent for countries with limited resources and developing economies. The overarching principles of resilient infrastructure, effective early warning systems, and community education stand as universally applicable pillars for earthquake preparedness. By adapting and applying the experiences from Costa Rica, regions with similar environmental conditions can enhance their resilience and mitigate the potential socio-economic ramifications of seismic events.
Global disaster risk reduction stakeholders focused on earthquakes can chart a transformative roadmap for sustainable development and resilience building by prioritizing a multifaceted approach. Firstly, fostering international collaboration and knowledge-sharing platforms is essential to disseminate the best practices, innovative technologies, and lessons learned from seismic events worldwide. Establishing a global framework that integrates resilient urban planning, stringent building codes, and early warning systems is paramount (Ben-Zion et al., 2022). Moreover, stakeholders should advocate for increased investment in research and development, aiming for advanced earthquake prediction technologies. Sustainable development goals should be aligned with disaster risk reduction efforts, emphasizing the importance of resilient infrastructure, community empowerment, and robust policy frameworks. Engaging local communities in decision-making processes, enhancing public awareness through education, and developing cross-sectoral collaboration mechanisms can further strengthen earthquake resilience. The integration of risk reduction measures into national and international development agendas ensures a unified, comprehensive approach that not only responds to seismic challenges but actively works towards building a sustainable and resilient future on a global scale (Fan et al. 2020).
The study’s findings bear far-reaching implications, particularly increased exposure on a global scale (Nohrstedt et al., 2021). The identified vulnerabilities in specific sectors, such as electricity, housing, and agriculture, underscore the pressing need for proactive earthquake preparedness strategies. As seismic events continue occurring and populations continue to concentrate in vulnerable areas, the socio-economic repercussions are poised to intensify (Dollet and Guéguen, 2022). The study emphasizes the importance of a holistic approach, balancing sector-specific and overarching strategies, to enhance resilience. In the face of these challenges, the study advocates international collaboration, knowledge-sharing, and the adoption of sustainable development practices to build resilience against the complex and interconnected hazards posed by seismic activity worldwide.
5. Conclusions
The study’s comprehensive analysis of the economic impact of earthquakes in Costa Rica has illuminated critical economic losses in sectors such as electricity, housing, and agriculture, underscoring the urgency for robust earthquake preparedness strategies. These findings carry profound implications in the context of the escalating global seismic activity, increasing exposure of populations in hazardous areas. The identified challenges necessitate a holistic approach that combines sector-specific measures with overarching strategies to foster resilience. The study emphasizes the imperative for international collaboration, knowledge-sharing into seismic risk reduction efforts. As seismic disasters intensify worldwide, the insights from this study provide a foundation for informed decision-making aimed at building more resilient communities and mitigating the socio-economic impacts of seismic events on a global scale.
Building upon the study’s insights, several recommendations emerge for stakeholders in disaster risk reduction and sustainable development. Firstly, there is an urgent need for international collaboration to establish a global framework that integrates resilient urban planning, stringent building codes, and advanced early warning systems. Increased investment in research and development for earthquake prediction technologies is paramount. Stakeholders should advocate for the alignment of sustainable development goals with disaster risk reduction efforts, emphasizing the importance of resilient infrastructure, community empowerment, and adaptable policy frameworks. The engagement of local communities in decision-making processes, coupled with comprehensive public awareness campaigns, will strengthen earthquake resilience. By implementing these recommendations, stakeholders can contribute to a global effort to confront the complex challenges posed by seismic activity, fostering a more resilient and sustainable future.
