In response to the February 2011 earthquake, Parliament enacted the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act. This emergency legislation provided the executive with extreme powers that extended well beyond the initial emergency response and into the recovery phase. Although New Zealand has the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002, it was unable to cope with the scale and intensity of the Canterbury earthquake sequence. Considering the well-known geological risk facing the Wellington region, this paper will consider whether a standalone “Disaster Recovery Act” should be established to separate an emergency and its response from the recovery phase. Currently, Government policy is to respond reactively to a disaster rather than proactively. In a major event, this typically involves the executive being given the ability to make rules, regulations and policy without the delay or oversight of normal legislative process. In the first part of this paper, I will canvas what a “Disaster Recovery Act” could prescribe and why there is a need to separate recovery from emergency. Secondly, I will consider the shortfalls in the current civil defence recovery framework which necessitates this kind of heavy governmental response after a disaster. In the final section, I will examine how
In major seismic events, a number of plan-asymmetric buildings which experienced element failure or structural collapse had twisted significantly about their vertical axis during the earthquake shaking. This twist, known as “building torsion”, results in greater demands on one side of a structure than on the other side. The Canterbury Earthquakes Royal Commission’s reports describe the response of a number of buildings in the February 2011 Christchurch earthquakes. As a result of the catastrophic collapse of one multi-storey building with significant torsional irregularity, and significant torsional effects also in other buildings, the Royal Commission recommended that further studies be undertaken to develop improved simple and effective guides to consider torsional effects in buildings which respond inelastically during earthquake shaking. Separately from this, as building owners, the government, and other stakeholders, are planning for possible earthquake scenarios, they need good estimates of the likely performance of both new and existing buildings. These estimates, often made using performance based earthquake engineering considerations and loss estimation techniques, inform decision making. Since all buildings may experience torsion to some extent, and torsional effects can influence demands on building structural and non-structural elements, it is crucial that demand estimates consider torsion. Building seismic response considering torsion can be evaluated with nonlinear time history analysis. However, such analysis involves significant computational effort, expertise and cost. Therefore, from an engineers’ point of view, simpler analysis methods, with reasonable accuracy, are beneficial. The consideration of torsion in simple analysis methods has been investigated by many researchers. However, many studies are theoretical without direct relevance to structural design/assessment. Some existing methods also have limited applicability, or they are difficult to use in routine design office practice. In addition, there has been no consensus about which method is best. As a result, there is a notable lack of recommendations in current building design codes for torsion of buildings that respond inelastically. There is a need for building torsion to be considered in yielding structures, and for simple guidance to be developed and adopted into building design standards. This study aims to undertaken to address this need for plan-asymmetric structures which are regular over their height. Time history analyses are first conducted to quantify the effects of building plan irregularity, that lead to torsional response, on the seismic response of building structures. Effects of some key structural and ground motion characteristics (e.g. hysteretic model, ground motion duration, etc.) are considered. Mass eccentricity is found to result in rather smaller torsional response compared to stiffness/strength eccentricity. Mass rotational inertia generally decreases the torsional response; however, the trend is not clearly defined for torsionally restrained systems (i.e. large λty). Systems with EPP and bilinear models have close displacements and systems with Takeda, SINA, and flag-shaped models yield almost the same displacements. Damping has no specific effect on the torsional response for the single-storey systems with the unidirectional eccentricity and excitation. Displacements of the single-storey systems subject to long duration ground motion records are smaller than those for short duration records. A method to consider torsional response of ductile building structures under earthquake shaking is then developed based on structural dynamics for a wide range of structural systems and configurations, including those with low and high torsional restraint. The method is then simplified for use in engineering practice. A novel method is also proposed to simply account for the effects of strength eccentricity on response of highly inelastic systems. A comparison of the accuracy of some existing methods (including code-base equivalent static method and model response spectrum analysis method), and the proposed method, is conducted for single-storey structures. It is shown that the proposed method generally provides better accuracy over a wide range of parameters. In general, the equivalent static method is not adequate in capturing the torsional effects and the elastic modal response spectrum analysis method is generally adequate for some common parameters. Record-to-record variation in maximum displacement demand on the structures with different degrees of torsional response is considered in a simple way. Bidirectional torsional response is then considered. Bidirectional eccentricity and excitation has varying effects on the torsional response; however, it generally increases the weak and strong edges displacements. The proposed method is then generalized to consider the bidirectional torsion due to bidirectional stiffness/strength eccentricity and bidirectional seismic excitation. The method is shown to predict displacements conservatively; however, the conservatism decreases slightly for cases with bidirectional excitation compared to those subject to unidirectional excitation. In is shown that the roof displacement of multi-storey structures with torsional response can be predicted by considering the first mode of vibration. The method is then further generalized to estimate torsional effects on multi-storey structure displacement demands. The proposed procedure is tested multi-storey structures and shown to predict the displacements with a good accuracy and conservatively. For buildings which twist in plan during earthquake shaking, the effect of P-Δλ action is evaluated and recommendations for design are made. P-Δλ has more significant effects on systems with small post- yield stiffness. Therefore, system stability coefficient is shown not to be the best indicator of the importance of P-Δλ and it is recommended to use post-yield stiffness of system computed with allowance for P-Δλ effects. For systems with torsional response, the global system stability coefficient and post- yield stiffness ration do not reflect the significance of P-Δλ effects properly. Therefore, for torsional systems individual seismic force resisting systems should be considered. Accuracy of MRSA is investigated and it is found that the MRSA is not always conservative for estimating the centre of mass and strong edge displacements as well as displacements of ductile systems with strength eccentricity larger than stiffness eccentricity. Some modifications are proposed to get the MRSA yields a conservative estimation of displacement demands for all cases.
Abstract. Natural (e.g., earthquake, flood, wildfires) and human-made (e.g., terrorism, civil strife) disasters are inevitable, can cause extensive disruption, and produce chronic and disabling psychological injuries leading to formal diagnoses (e.g., post-traumatic stress disorder [PTSD]). Following natural disasters of earthquake (Christchurch, Aotearoa/New Zealand, 2010–11) and flood (Calgary, Canada, 2013), controlled research showed statistically and clinically significant reductions in psychological distress for survivors who consumed minerals and vitamins (micronutrients) in the following months. Following a mass shooting in Christchurch (March 15, 2019), where a gunman entered mosques during Friday prayers and killed and injured many people, micronutrients were offered to survivors as a clinical service based on translational science principles and adapted to be culturally appropriate. In this first translational science study in the area of nutrition and disasters, clinical results were reported for 24 clients who completed the Impact of Event Scale – Revised (IES-R), the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS), and the Modified-Clinical Global Impression (M-CGI-I). The findings clearly replicated prior controlled research. The IES-R Cohen’s d ESs were 1.1 (earthquake), 1.2 (flood), and 1.13 (massacre). Effect sizes (ESs) for the DASS subscales were also consistently positive across all three events. The M-CGI-I identified 58% of the survivors as “responders” (i.e., self-reported as “much” to “very much” improved), in line with those reported in the earthquake (42%) and flood (57%) randomized controlled trials, and PTSD risk reduced from 75% to 17%. Given ease of use and large ESs, this evidence supports the routine use of micronutrients by disaster survivors as part of governmental response.
