Disasters are a critical topic for practitioners of landscape architecture. A
fundamental role of the profession is disaster prevention or mitigation
through practitioners having a thorough understanding of known threats. Once we reach the ‘other side’ of a disaster – the aftermath – landscape architecture plays a central response in dealing with its consequences, rebuilding of settlements and infrastructure and gaining an enhanced understanding of the causes of any failures. Landscape architecture must respond not only to the physical dimensions of disaster landscapes but also to the social, psychological and spiritual aspects. Landscape’s experiential potency is heightened in disasters in ways that may challenge and extend the spectrum of emotions. Identity is rooted in landscape, and massive transformation through the impact of a disaster can lead to ongoing psychological devastation. Memory and landscape are tightly
intertwined as part of individual and collective identities, as connections to place and time. The ruptures caused by disasters present a challenge to remembering the lives lost and the prior condition of the landscape, the intimate attachments to places now gone and even the event itself.
During the 21st century, New Zealand has experienced increasing public concern over the quality of the design and appearance of new developments, and their effects on the urban environment. In response to this, a number of local authorities developed a range of tools to address this issue, including urban design panels to review proposals and provide independent advice. Following the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, the commitment to achieve high quality urban design within Christchurch was given further importance, with the city facing the unprecedented challenge of rebuilding a ‘vibrant and successful city’.
The rebuild and regeneration reinforced the need for independent design review, putting more focus and emphasis on the role and use of the urban design panel; first through collaboratively assisting applicants in achieving a better design outcome for their development by providing an independent set of eyes on their design; and secondly in assisting Council officers in forming their recommendations on resource consent decisions. However, there is a perception that urban design and the role of the urban design panel is not fully understood, with some stakeholders arguing that Council’s urban design requirements are adding cost and complexity to their developments.
The purpose of this research was to develop a better understanding on the role of the Christchurch urban design panel post-earthquake in the central city; its direct and indirect influence on the built environment; and the deficiencies in the broader planning framework and institutional settings that it might be addressing. Ultimately, the perceived role of the Panel is understood, and there is agreement that urban design is having a positive influence on the built environment, albeit viewed differently amongst the varying groups involved. What has become clear throughout this research is that the perceived tension between the development community and urban design well and truly exists, with the urban design panel contributing towards this. This tension is exacerbated further through the cost of urban design to developers, and the drive for financial return from their investments.
The panel, albeit promoting a positive experience, is simply a ‘tick box’ exercise for some, and as the research suggests, groups or professional are determining themselves what constitutes good urban design, based on their attitude, the context in which they sit and the financial constraints to incorporate good design elements. It is perhaps a bleak time for urban design, and more about building homes.
On 14 November 2016, a magnitude (Mw) 7.8 earthquake struck the small coastal settlement of Kaikōura, Aotearoa-New Zealand. With an economy based on tourism, agriculture, and fishing, Kaikōura was immediately faced with significant logistical, economic, and social challenges caused by damage to critical infrastructure and lifelines, essential to its main industries. Massive landslips cut offroad and rail access, stranding hundreds of tourists, and halting the collection, processing and distribution of agricultural products. At the coast, the seabed rose two metres, limiting harbour-access to high tide, with implications for whale watching tours and commercial fisheries. Throughout the region there was significant damage to homes, businesses, and farmland, leaving owners and residents facing an uncertain future. This paper uses qualitative case study analysis to explore post-quake transformations in a rural context. The aim is to gain insight into the distinctive dynamics of disaster response mechanisms, focusing on two initiatives that have emerged in direct response to the disaster. The first examines the ways in which agriculture, food harvesting, production and distribution are being reimagined with the potential to enhance regional food security. The second examines the rescaling of power in decision-making processes following the disaster, specifically examining the ways in which rural actors are leveraging networks to meet their needs and the consequences of that repositioning on rural (and national) governance arrangements. In these and other ways, the local economy is being revitalised, and regional resilience enhanced through diversification, capitalising not on the disaster but the region's natural, social, and cultural capital. Drawing on insights and experience of local stakeholders, policy- and decision-makers, and community representatives we highlight the diverse ways in which these endeavours are an attempt to create something new, revealing also the barriers which needed to be overcome to reshape local livelihoods. Results reveal that the process of transformation as part of rural recovery must be grounded in the lived reality of local residents and their understanding of place, incorporating and building on regional social, environmental, and economic characteristics. In this, the need to respond rapidly to realise opportunities must be balanced with the community-centric approach, with greater recognition given to the contested nature of the decisions to be made. Insights from the case examples can inform preparedness and recovery planning elsewhere, and provide a rich, real-time example of the ways in which disasters can create opportunities for reimagining resilient futures.
The September and February earthquakes were terrifying and devastating. In February, 185 people were killed (this number excludes post earthquake related deaths) and several thousand injured. Damage to infrastructure above and below ground in and around Christchurch was widespread and it will take many years and billions of dollars to rebuild.
The ongoing effects of the big quakes and aftershocks are numerous, with the deepest impact being on those who lost family and friends, their livelihoods and homes.
What did Cantabrians do during the days, weeks and months of uncertainty and how have we responded? Many grieved, some left, some stayed, some arrived, many shovelled (liquefaction left thousands of tons of silt to be removed from homes and streets), and some used their expertise or knowledge to help in the recovery.
This book highlights just some of the projects staff and students from The Faculty of Environment, Society and Design have been involved in from September 2010 to October 2012. The work is ongoing and the plan is to publish another book to document progress and new projects.
The paper examines community benefits provided by an established community garden following a major earthquake and discusses possible implications for community garden planning and design in disaster-prone cities. Recent studies show that following extreme storm events community gardens can supply food, enhance social empowerment, provide safe gathering spots, and restorative practices, to remind people of normality. However, the beneficial role played by community gardens following earthquakes is less well known. To fill this gap, the study examines the role played by a community garden in Christchurch, New Zealand, following the 2010/2011 Canterbury Earthquakes. The garden's role is evaluated based on a questionnaire-based survey and in-depth interviews with gardeners, as well as on data regarding the garden use before and after the earthquakes. Findings indicate the garden helped gardeners cope with the post-quake situation. The garden served as an important place to de-stress, share experiences, and gain community support. Garden features that reportedly supported disaster recovery include facilities that encourage social interaction and bonding such as central meeting and lunch places and communal working areas.
The magnitude 7.8 earthquake that struck North Canterbury, on the east coast of New Zealand’s South Island on 14 November 2016 had significant impacts and implications for the community of Kaikōura and surrounding settlements. The magnitude and scope of this event has resulted in extensive and ongoing geological and geophysical research into the event. The current paper complements this research by providing a review of existing social science research and offering new analysis of the impact of the earthquake and its aftermath on community resilience in Kaikōura over the past five years. Results demonstrate the significant economic implications for tourism, and primary industries. Recovery has been slow, and largely dependent on restoring transportation networks, which helped catalyse cooperation among local hospitality providers. Challenges remain, however, and not all sectors or households have benefited equally from post-quake opportunities, and long-term recovery trajectories continue to be hampered by COVID-19 pandemic. The multiple ongoing and future stressors faced by Kaikōura require integrated and equitable approaches in order to build capability and capacity for locally based development pathways to ensure long-term community resilience.
Prior to the devastating 2010 and 2011 earthquakes, parts of the CBD of Christchurch, New Zealand were undergoing revitalisation incorporating aspects of adaptive reuse and gentrification. Such areas were often characterised by a variety of bars, restaurants, and retail outlets of an “alternative” or “bohemian” style. These early 20th century buildings also exhibited relatively low rents and a somewhat chaotic and loosely planned property development approach by small scale developers. Almost all of these buildings were demolished following the earthquakes and a cordon placed around the CBD for several years. A paper presented at the ERES conference in 2013 presented preliminary results, from observation of post-earthquake public meetings and interviews with displaced CBD retailers. This paper highlighted a strongly held fear that the rebuild of the central city, then about to begin, would result in a very different style and cost structure from that which previously existed. As a result, permanent exclusion from the CBD of the types of businesses that previously characterised the successfully revitalised areas would occur. Five years further on, new CBD retail and office buildings have been constructed, but large areas of land between them remain vacant and the new buildings completed are often having difficulty attracting tenants. This paper reports on the further development of this long-term Christchurch case study and examines if the earlier predictions of the displaced retailers are coming true, in that a new CBD that largely mimics a suburban mall in style and tenancy mix, inherently loses some of its competitive advantage?
Geographically isolated communities around the world are dependent upon the limited assets in local subsistence economies to generate livelihoods. Locally available resources shape and give identity to unique cultural activities that guarantee individual, family and community livelihood sustainability. The social structure provides community relationship networks, which ensure access to, and availability of, resources over long periods. Resources are utilised in ways that reduces vulnerability, stresses and shocks while ensuring long-term resilience. Preparedness and adaptation are embedded into cultural memory, enabling communities to survive in isolated, remote and harsh conditions. Communities’ cultural memories, storytelling, traditional knowledge, interdependence and unwritten cultural norms that build resilience to sustain cultures that have limited interactions with the outside world.
This thesis aims to investigate the consequences of transport infrastructure development, mainly of roads, on livelihood strategies of isolated communities in a tourism context in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. The thesis incorporates a review of literature of transport infrastructure development and livelihood security in reference to vulnerability, resilience and sustainability. Research gaps are identified in terms of transport infrastructure development and tourism, the Sustainable Livelihood Approach, resilience and sustainability. The fieldwork was undertaken using qualitative research methods. Ninety-eight participants were interviewed using open-ended semi-structured interview questions to get an in-depth understanding of livelihood systems, livelihood activities and transport infrastructure development within the tourism context.
Gilgit-Baltistan is a disputed mountainous territory in the Asia Subcontinent whose ancient trade routes (silk routes) were severed during the geopolitical upheaval of the partition of the Indian Subcontinent in 1947. An alliance between Pakistan and China resulted in transport infrastructure development of the Karakorum Highway between 1958 and 1978, providing the only road access to the regions isolated communities. Karakoram Highway connects China with Pakistan through Gilgit-Baltistan. Gilgit-Baltistan is going through immense transport infrastructure development, including the China Pakistan Economic Corridor. The road infrastructure is expected to link China and other South Asian and Central Asian countries to the world and provide a direct link for Chinese goods to reach the Persian Gulf. China Pakistan Economic Corridor is part of China’s Belt and Road Initiative project, which aims to improve connectivity and cooperation between 69 Eurasian countries by investing in infrastructure development. Such an immense infrastructural development is expected to enhance the mobility of people, goods and services.
In order to understand the impacts of transport infrastructure development, this thesis has analysed livelihood capital status at macro, and micro levels are examined over two time periods (pre-road and post-road). Results show that sustainable farming practices provided long-term resilience to these geographically isolated communities. Transport infrastructure development has been a significant factor to ensure access and has resulted in changes to social inclusion, socio-political structures and livelihood opportunities with a subsequent dependence upon tourism, imported consumer goods and a monetary economy as people divert valuable farmland to building developments and cash crop monocultures. Gilgit-Baltistan is vulnerable to frequent manmade and natural disasters, such as terrorism, earthquakes and landslides. Shocks impact upon the livelihoods of those affiliated with tourism who are forced to revert to subsistence farming practices and alternative livelihood choices. The dependency on external resources and subsequent loss of the cultural memory and farming techniques has created a vulnerability to the unpredictable shocks and disasters that frequently close the singular access road.
The thesis finally presents the ‘Livelihood Framework for Transport Infrastructure Development and Tourism (LF-TIDT)’ a guiding tool to understand the impacts of transport infrastructure development at micro and macro levels for tourism planning, policy formulation and implementation and management. Attention is drawn to the newly introduced ‘Location: a Meta Capital’ and its importance in terms of geographically isolated communities. The research also highlights that livelihood capitals are not equally essential to achieve sustainable and resilient livelihood outcomes.
