The problem is that the numbers are misleading. Not only has our civilization spread to almost every area of Earth, so has our scientific abilities. We are able to sense Earthquakes from further away, or using satelites, and we have monitoring stations set up nearly everywhere. 100 years ago, we merely had the accounts of those who survived an earthquake, if any, to report that such a thing happened.
What am I saying? I'm saying that if there were 747 quakes from 1990 to 1994, I'd wager that at least half were in completely unpopulated areas (does god have a grudge against trees and nature?), another quarter in remote areas, underwater, or at the poles. If there had been 700-something quakes in heavily populated areas in that 4 year period, there would've been an earthquake on the news (on average) once every 2 days. Since that hasn't been the case as far as I know, that leads to the conclusion that the only thing that's changed is our ability to sense earthquakes, not their magnitude nor amount.