Indigenous Peoples retain traditional coping strategies for disasters despite the marginalisation of many Indigenous communities. This article describes the response of Māori to the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010 and 2012 through analyses of available statistical data and reports, and interviews done three months
and one year after the most damaging event. A significant difference between Māori and ‘mainstream’ New Zealand was the greater mobility enacted by Māori
throughout this period, with organisations having roles beyond their traditional catchments throughout the disaster, including important support for non-Māori.
Informed engagement with Indigenous communities, acknowledging their internal diversity and culturally nuanced support networks, would enable more efficient
disaster responses in many countries.
On September the 4th 2010 and February 22nd 2011
the Canterbury region of New Zealand was shaken by
two massive earthquakes. This paper is set broadly
within the civil defence and emergency management
literature and informed by recent work on community
participation and social capital in the building of resilient
cities. Work in this area indicates a need to recognise
both the formal institutional response to the earthquakes
as well as the substantive role communities play in their
own recovery. The range of factors that facilitate or
hinder community involvement also needs to be better
understood. This paper interrogates the assumption
that recovery agencies and officials are both willing
and able to engage communities who are themselves
willing and able to be engaged in accordance with
recovery best practice. Case studies of three community
groups – CanCERN, Greening the Rubble and Gap
Filler – illustrate some of the difficulties associated
with becoming a community during the disaster
recovery phase. Based on my own observations and
experiences, combined with data from approximately
50 in-depth interviews with Christchurch residents
and representatives from community groups, the
Christchurch City Council, the Earthquake Commission
and so on, this paper outlines some practical strategies
emerging communities may use in the early disaster
recovery phase that then strengthens their ability to
‘participate’ in the recovery process.
Memorial design in the West has been explored in depth (Stevens and Franck, 2016; Williams, 2007), and for landscape architects it presents opportunities and challenges. However, there is little in the English language literature about memorial design in China. How have Chinese designers responded to the commemorative settings of war and disaster? This study will adopt the method of case study to analyse two of the most representative memorials in China: Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall (war) and Tangshan Earthquake Memorial Hall (disaster). Both landscapes have undergone three or four renovations and extensions in the last four decades, demonstrating the practical effects of the Chinese landscape theory. These examples of responses to trauma through memorial landscape interventions are testimonies to the witnesses, victims, abusers, ordinary people, youth and the place where the tragedy took place. This study will explore the reconstruction and expansion of the two memorials under the background of China's policies on memorial landscapes in different periods, as well as their functions of each stage. The research will examine how existing Chinese memorial theories exhibit unique responses at different times in response to the sadness and needs experienced by different users.
Key Words：memorial landscape; memorial language; victims; descriptive; architecture; experence; disaster; memorial hall; landscape development; Chinese memorial; war.
