6th International Young Scientist Congress (IYSC-2020) will be Postponed to 8th and 9th May 2021 Due to COVID-19. 10th International Science Congress (ISC-2020).  International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

Seismic risk vulnerability assessment of buildings in Kohima, Nagaland, India

Author Affiliations

  • 1Department of Geography, Nagaland University, Lumami- 798627, Nagaland, India
  • 2Department of Geography, Tripura University, India

Int. Res. J. Environment Sci., Volume 7, Issue (9), Pages 36-38, September,22 (2018)


Earthquakes occurrences posed a serious threat to man as they are unpredictable and destructive. The entire states of Northeast, India falls under seismic zone V- the region most susceptible to destructive seismic activity. With this background, it is of utmost importance to study the impact of seismic event on anthropogenic assets. The present study was carried out in Kohima, the capital of Nagaland, India. Estimation of seismic event was calculated based on five time periods for deriving the response spectra. The buildings were classed into four classes (W1, C3L, C3M and C3H) based on parameter such as- material used, number of floor etc. The technique adopted for the study was based on HAZUS model developed by FEMA. The damage probability was further classified into no damage, slight damage, moderate damage, extensive damage and complete damage. The significance of the study lies in the application of HAZUS model for estimating the building responses to an earthquake event.


  1. Kayal J.R., Arefiev S.S., Barua S., Hazarika D., Gogoi N. Kumar A., Chowdhury S.N. and Kalita S. (2006)., Shillong Plateau earthquakes in Northeast India region: complex tectonic model., Curr. Sci., 91(1), 109-114.
  2. Cees J. Van Westen, Enrique Castellanos and Sekhar L. Kuriakose (2008)., Spatial data for landslide susceptibility, hazard, and vulnerability assessment: An overview., Eng. Geol., 102, 112-131.
  3. Rashed T. and Weeks J. (2003)., Assessing vulnerability to earthquake hazards through spatial multicriteria analysis of urban areas., Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci., 17(6), 547-576.
  4. Mohan K., Joshi A. and Patel R.C. (2008)., The assessment of seismic hazard in two seismically active regions in Himalayas using deterministic approach., J. Ind. Geophys. Un., 12(3), 97-107.
  5. Calvi G.M., Pinho R., Magenes G., Bommer J.J., Restrepo-Vélez L.F. and Crowley H. (2006)., Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years., ISET J. Eart. Tech., 43(3), 75-104.
  6. Bhandari R.K. (2013)., Challenges of the Devastating Indian Landslides., Cur. Sci., 105(5), 563-564.
  7. Ahmed M.M., Jahan I. and Alam M.J. (2014)., Earthquake vulnerability assessment of existing buildings in Cox-Bazar using field survey and GIS., Int. J. Eng. Res. Tech., 3(8), 1147-1156.
  8. FEMA (2003)., Multi-hazard Loss estimation methodology, Earthquake Model., HAZUS MR4 Technical Manual, 1-712.
  9. Ebert A. and Kerle N. (2008)., Urban social vulnerability assessment using object oriented analysis of remote sensing and GIS data. A case study for Tegucigalpa, Honduras., The Int. Arch. Photogramm., Remote Sens. and Spat. Info. Sci., 36(7), 1307-1312.
  10. Das S., Gupta I.D. and Gupta V.K. (2006)., A probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of Northeast India., Eart. Spect., 22(1), 1-27.