The Covid-19 pandemic has brought to the foreground the importance of social connectedness for wellbeing, at the individual, community and societal level. Within the context of the local community, pro-connection facilities are fundamental to foster community development, resilience and public health. Through identifying the gap in social connectedness literature for Māori, this has created space for new opportunities and to reflect on what is already occurring in Ōtautahi. It is well documented that Māori experience unequal societal impacts across all health outcomes. Therefore, narrowing the inequities between Māori and non-Māori across a spectrum of dimensions is a priority. Evaluating the #WellconnectedNZ project, which explores the intersections between social connection and wellbeing is one way to trigger these conversations. This was achieved by curating a dissimilar set of community pro-connection facilities and organizing them into a Geographic Information System (GIS). Which firstly involved, the collecting and processing of raw data, followed by spatial analysis through creating maps, this highlighted the alignment between the distribution of places, population and social data. Secondly, statistical analysis focusing on the relationship between deprivation and accessibility. Finally, semi-structured interviews providing perceptions of community experience. This study describes findings following a kaupapa Māori research approach. Results demonstrated that, in general some meshblocks in Ōtautahi benefit from a high level of accessibility to pro-connection facilities; but with an urban-rural gradient (as is expected, further from the central business district (CBD) are less facilities). Additionally, more-deprived meshblocks in the Southern and Eastern suburbs of Christchurch have poorer accessibility, suggesting underlying social and spatial inequalities, likely exacerbated by Covid-19 and the Christchurch earthquakes. In this context, it is timely to (re)consider pro-connection places and their role in the development of social infrastructure for connected communities, in the community facility planning space. ‘We are all interwoven, we just need to make better connections’.
Mechanistic and scientific approaches to resilience assume that there is a “tipping point” at which a system can no longer absorb adversity; after this point, it is liable to collapse. Some of these perspectives, particularly those stemming from ecology and psychology, recognise that individuals and communities cannot be perpetually resilient without limits. While the resilience paradigm has been imported into the social sciences, the limits to resilience have often been disregarded. This leads to an overestimation of “human resourcefulness” within the resilience paradigm. In policy discourse, practice, and research, resilience seems to be treated as a “limitless” and human quality in which individuals and communities can effectively cope with any hazard at any time, for as long as they want and with any people. We critique these assumptions with reference to the recovery case in Ōtautahi Christchurch, Aotearoa New Zealand following the 2010-11 Canterbury earthquake sequence. We discuss the limits to resilience and reconceptualise resilience thinking for disaster risk reduction and sustainable recovery and development.
This analysis employs both qualitative and quantitative approaches to identify how young adults in New Zealand aged 18-25 years old have engaged with All Right? campaign material. A survey targeting young adults returned 51 viable out of 117 responses due to participation prerequisites. From the survey, five participants elaborated on their thoughts in an in-depth interview voluntarily. Interviews were conducted with key personnel from All Right? to craft broader understanding of the initiative whilst enhancing knowledge of mental health frameworks and their application. Ciaran Fox, Lucy Daeth and Sara Epperson, who have been imperative to the success of the campaign, shared their working experience in the community and public health sector and how this intertwines to their current roles at All Right?. Discussions of key frameworks, community conversations, the development of communication strategies and how All Right? approached Canterbury publics in a post-earthquake setting provided insight to the importance of understanding community circumstance in initial crisis and the correlated secondary stressors.
Cities need places that contribute to quality of life, places that support social interaction. Wellbeing, specifically, community wellbeing, is influenced by where people live, the quality of place is important and who they connect with socially. Social interaction and connection can come from the routine involvement with others, the behavioural acts of seeing and being with others. This research consisted of 38 interviews of residents of Christchurch, New Zealand, in the years following the 2010-12 earthquakes. Residents were asked about the place they lived and their interactions within their community. The aim was to examine the role of neighbourhood in contributing to local social connections and networks that contribute to living well. Specifically, it focused on the role and importance of social infrastructure in facilitating less formal social interactions in local neighbourhoods. It found that neighbourhood gathering places and bumping spaces can provide benefit for living well. Social infrastructure, like libraries, parks, primary schools, and pubs are some of the places of neighbourhood that contributed to how well people can encounter others for social interaction. In addition, unplanned interactions were facilitated by the existence of bumping places, such as street furniture. The wellbeing value of such spaces needs to be acknowledged and factored into planning decisions, and local rules and regulations need to allow the development of such spaces.
