Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
On 6 February 2023, the Eastern Anatolia experienced significant devastation due to two major seismic events, leading to the collapse of hundreds of thousands of structures and causing tens of thousands of human casualties, injuries, and homeless people. The substantial magnitude of these impacts is attributed to the extensive occurrence of heavy and very heavy structural damage, categorized as damage grades 4 and 5 according to the European Macroseismic Scale EMS-98, within the earthquake-affected area. The discernible factors contributing to the disaster encompassed the substantial magnitude of the earthquakes, the occurrence of the initial seismic event during nighttime, thereby locating a considerable portion of the population within their residences, and the demographic attributes of the region characterized by densely constructed and populated zones, coupled with the close proximity of numerous residential areas to the ruptured faults. Additionally, the confluence of significant factors, closely associated with the seismotectonic context of the region, the effects of earthquake environmental effects, and the characteristics of the impacted structures, culminated in one of the most extensive earthquake disasters in the recent history of Turkey. This study aims to highlight the factors controlling associated with building properties and the manifestation of earthquake environmental effects that govern the severity and spatial dispersion of structural damage within the earthquake-affected regions under study in the southeastern Turkey. The findings presented herein derive from field surveys undertaken by the authors in the immediate aftermath of the seismic events (7th to 11th February) and subsequently, almost two months later (31st March to 6th April). The field surveys included conventional techniques of geological mapping alongside innovative methodologies, including the deployment of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS). With regard to building construction characteristics, insufficient adherence to building codes, arbitrary urban planning solutions, and substandard construction practices constitute primary deficiencies contributed to the disaster.Concerning geological factors, the generation of both primary and secondary earthquake environmental effects significantly influenced the intensity and distribution of damage. Locations where coseismic surface ruptures intersected with built-up areas exhibited heavy to very heavy structural damage, as evidenced along the ruptured segments of the East Anatolian Fault Zone. Liquefaction proximal to water bodies resulted in damage indicative of building foundation load-bearing capacity. Earthquake-triggered landslides predominantly impacted mountainous and semi-mountainous villages and areas characterized by pre-existing susceptibility. The substantial susceptibility to EEEs generation was extensively corroborated in numerous cases, leading to widespread damage.The presented information highlights the pivotal role of such studies in informing hazard mitigation and facilitating disaster risk reduction measures.
Mavroulis et al. (Fri,) studied this question.