This study explores the role and value of urban community gardens following a major crisis: the 2010/11 earthquakes in Christchurch, New Zealand.
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.
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.