Recovery from disasters is a significant issue faced by all countries in the world at various times. Governments, including central and local governments, are the key actors regarding post-disaster recovery because they have the authority and responsibility to rescue affected people and recover affected areas (Yang, 2010). Planning is a critical step in the recovery process and provides the basis for defining a shared vision for recovery, clear objectives and intended results. Subsequently, the concept of collaborative planning and ‘build back better’ are highly desirable in recovery planning. However, in practice, these concepts are difficult to achieve. A brief description of the recovery planning in Christchurch City following the Canterbury earthquakes 2011 is provided as an example and comparison. This research aims to analyse the planning process to develop a post-disaster recovery plan in Indonesia using Mataram City’s recovery plan following the Lombok Earthquakes 2018 as the case study. It will emphasise on the roles of the central and local governments and whether they collaborate or not, and the implications of decentralisation for recovery planning. The methodology comprised a combination of legislation analysis and semi-structure interviews with the representatives of the central and local governments who were involved in the planning process. The results indicate that there was no collaboration between the central and local governments when developing the recovery plan, with the former tend to dominate and control the planning process. It is because there are regulatory and institutional problems concerning disaster management in Indonesia. In order to improve the implementation of disaster management and develop a better recovery plan, some recommendations are proposed. These include amendments the disaster management law and regulations to provide a clear guideline regarding the roles and responsibilities of both the central and local governments. It is also imperative to improve the capacity and capability of the local governments in managing disaster.
This research investigates creativity in a post-disaster setting. The data explore creativity at the intersection of the affected community of Christchurch, New Zealand and the social processes that followed the earthquakes of 2010 - 2012. Personal and contextual influences on creative ideas implemented for community or commercial benefit are also examined.
Viewed as creative, unique approaches to post-disaster problem solving were celebrated locally, nationally and internationally (Bergman, 2014; Wesener, 2015; Cloke & Conradson, 2018). Much has been written about creativity, particularly creativity in organisations and in business. However, little is known with regards to who creates after a disaster, why individuals choose to do so and what impact the post-disaster context has on their creative activity. This exploratory study draws on the literature from the fields of creativity, disasters, psychology, sociology and entrepreneurship to interpret first-hand accounts of people who acted on creative ideas in a physically and socially altered environment.
A mixed method - albeit predominantly qualitative - approach to data gathering was adopted that included interviews (n=45) with participants who had been the primary drivers of creative ideas implemented in Christchurch after September 2010 – the first major (7.1 magnitude) earthquake in a prolonged sequence of thousands of aftershocks.
Key findings include that a specific type of creativity results from the ‘collision’ between individuals and social processes activated by a disaster situation. This type of creativity could be best categorised as ‘little c’ or socially adaptive and emerges through a prosocial filter. There is wide consensus amongst creativity researchers - principally social psychologists - that for output to be considered creative it must be both novel and useful (Runco & Jaegar, 2012). There is greater tolerance for the novelty component after a disaster as novelty itself has greater utility, either as a distraction or because alternatives are few. Existing creativity models show context as input – an additional component of the creative process – but after a disaster the event itself becomes the catalyst for social processes that result in the creativity seen. Most participants demonstrated characteristics commonly associated with creativity and could be categorised as either a ‘free thinker’ and/or an ‘opportunist’. Some appear preadapted to create and thrive in unstable circumstances.
Findings from participants’ completion of a Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) showed an apparent reduced need for extraversion in relation to implementing creative ventures in society. This factor, along with higher levels of agreeableness may indicate a potentially detrimental effect on the success of creative ideas established after a disaster, despite earnest intentions.
Three new models are presented to illustrate the key findings of this study. The models imply that disasters enhance both the perceived value of creativity and the desire to act creatively for prosocial ends. The models also indicate that these disaster influenced changes are likely to be temporary.
On 4 September 2010, a 7.1 magnitude earthquake struck near Darfield, 40 kilometres west of Christchurch, New Zealand. The quake caused significant damage to land and buildings nearby, with damage extending to Christchurch city. On 22 February 2011, a 6.3 magnitude earthquake struck Christchurch, causing extensive and significant damage across the city and with the loss of 185 lives. Years on from these events, occasional large aftershocks continue to shake the region.
Two main entomological collections were situated within close proximity to the 2010/11 Canterbury earthquakes. The Lincoln University Entomology Research Collection, which is housed on the 5th floor of a 7 storey building, was 27.5 km from the 2010 Darfield earthquake epicentre. The Canterbury Museum Entomology Collection, which is housed in the basement of a multi-storeyed heritage building, was 10 km from the 2011 Christchurch earthquake epicentre. We discuss the impacts of the earthquakes on these collections, the causes of the damage to the specimens and facilities, and subsequent efforts that were made to prevent further damage in the event of future seismic events. We also discuss the wider need for preparedness against the risks posed by natural disasters and other catastrophic events.
