The seismic tremor that shook Christchurch on February 22, 2011, not only shattered buildings but also the spirit of the city’s residents. Amidst the ruins, this design-focused thesis unravels two intertwining narratives, each essential to the city’s resurrection. At its core, this thesis probes the preservation of Christchurch’s memory and character, meticulously chronicling the lost heritage architecture and the subsequent urban metamorphosis. Beyond bricks and mortar, it also confronts the silent aftershocks - the pervasive mental health challenges stemming from personal losses and the disfigured cityscape. As a native of Christchurch, intimately connected to its fabric, my lens reflects not just on the architectural reconstruction but also on the emotional reconstruction. My experience as an autistic individual, a recently discovered facet of my identity, infuses this design journey with a distinct prism through which I perceive and interact with the world. The colourful sketches that drive the design process aren’t mere illustrations but manifestations of my interpretation of spaces and concepts, evoking joy and vitality—a testament to embracing diversity in design. Drawing parallels between healing my own traumas with my colourful and joyful neurodivergent worldview, I’ve woven this concept into proposals aimed at healing the city through whimsy, joy, and vibrant colours. Personal experiences during and post-earthquakes profoundly shape my design proposals. Having navigated the labyrinth of my own mental health amid the altered cityscape, I seek avenues for reconciliation, both personal and communal. The vibrant sketches and designs presented in this thesis encapsulate this vision—a fusion of vivid, unconventional interpretations and a dedication to preserving the essence of the original cityscape while still encouraging movement into the future
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
Since the mid 1990s, the Christchurch inventory of substation buildings was seismically retrofitted as part of the Risk and Realities improvement programme. • The substation buildings were retrofitted using a system of simple and cost-effective steel elements. • The 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes caused significant immediate disruption to power distribution network in Christchurch. • It took a single day in September 2010 and ten days in February 2011 to restore power to 90% customers. Tostudytheseismicperformanceofmasonrysubstationbuildingsfromamulti-disciplinary perspective on structural,economic and social aspects.
Though generally considered “natural” disasters, cyclones and earthquakes are increasingly being associated with human activities, incubated through urban settlement patterns and the long-term redistribution of natural resources. As society is becoming more urbanized, the risk of human exposure to disasters is also rising. Architecture often reflects the state of society’s health: architectural damage is the first visible sign of emergency, and reconstruction is the final response in the process of recovery. An empirical assessment of architectural projects in post-disaster situations can lead to a deeper understanding of urban societies as they try to rebuild. This thesis offers an alternative perspective on urban disasters by looking at the actions and attitudes of disaster professionals through the lens of architecture, situated in recent events: the 2010 Christchurch earthquake, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina. An empirical, multi-hazard, cross-sectional case study methodology was used, employing grounded theory method to build theory, and a critical constructivist strategy to inform the analysis. By taking an interdisciplinary approach to understanding disasters, this thesis positions architecture as a conduit between two divergent approaches to disaster research: the hazards approach, which studies the disaster cycles from a scientific perspective; and the sociological approach, which studies the socially constructed vulnerabilities that result from disasters, and the elements of social change that accompany such events. Few studies to date have attempted to integrate the multi-disciplinary perspectives that can advance our understanding of societal problems in urban disasters. To bridge this gap, this thesis develops what will be referred to as the “Rittelian framework”—based on the work of UC Berkeley’s architecture professor Horst Rittel (1930-1990). The Rittelian framework uses the language of design to transcend the multiple fields of human endeavor to address the “design problems” in disaster research. The processes by which societal problems are addressed following an urban disaster involve input by professionals from multiple fields—including economics, sociology, medicine, and engineering—but the contribution from architecture has been minimal to date. The main impetus for my doctoral thesis has been the assertion that most of the decisions related to reconstruction are made in the early emergency recovery stages where architects are not involved, but architects’ early contribution is vital to the long-term reconstruction of cities. This precipitated in the critical question: “How does the Rittelian framework contribute to the critical design decisions in modern urban disasters?” Comparative research was undertaken in three case studies of recent disasters in New Orleans (2005), Haiti (2010) and Christchurch (2010), by interviewing 51 individuals who were selected on the basis of employing the Rittelian framework in their humanitarian practice. Contextualizing natural disaster research within the robust methodological framework of architecture and the analytical processes of sociology is the basis for evaluating the research proposition that architectural problem solving is of value in addressing the ‘Wicked Problems’ of disasters. This thesis has found that (1) the nuances of the way disaster agents interpret the notion of “building back better” can influence the extent to which architectural professionals contribute in urban disaster recovery, (2) architectural design can be used to facilitate but also impede critical design decisions, and (3) framing disaster research in terms of design decisions can lead to innovation where least expected. This empirical research demonstrates how the Rittelian framework can inform a wider discussion about post-disaster human settlements, and improve our resilience through disaster research
Past earthquakes have consistently highlighted the vulnerabilities of the built environment. Current building codes, which focus primarily on life safety, fail to address the need for buildings to remain functional after a seismic event. The emerging concept of post-earthquake functional recovery aims to integrate recovery-based objectives into building codes. However, literature reveals a predominant focus on engineering parameters, with limited attention given to the perspectives of building users; a critical gap in understanding a building’s comprehensive functionality and path to functional recovery. Whilst structural integrity is essential, functionality following a disaster is not determined by physical stability alone. Thus, this study addresses this gap by exploring the perceptions and expectations of office building users (both tenants and property owners) regarding building functionality and post-earthquake functional recovery in New Zealand’s major urban centres: Wellington, Auckland, and Christchurch. A qualitative research strategy was employed, utilising interpretative phenomenological and grounded theory methods to develop insights from the lived experiences of twenty-six (26) participants. The study applied a systems thinking approach using a socio-technical systems (STS) framework to develop micro (single construct) and macro (multiple constructs) models of building-system functionality. The findings demonstrate that a building’s functionality is nuanced, multifaceted, and context dependent. It encompasses physical, economic, social, organisational, technical, regulatory, and environmental elements, and is ultimately determined by users’ specific needs and priorities. A key divergence emerged: whilst property owners prioritise economic and environmental factors, tenants focus on the socio-organisational aspect, viewing the physical workspace as an embodiment of corporate identity, culture, and values. Regarding expectations for post-earthquake functional recovery, the post-pandemic era has drastically reshaped outlooks. Unlike previous earthquakes, where tenants scrambled for any available space, there is now increased demand for flexibility due to the hybrid work model. The immediate return to an office following a major earthquake is now expected to support critical business functions, with essential services including power or a standby generator, technology to access files, water, as well as operations of air conditioning and elevators. By advancing socio-technical systems theory and elucidating building users’ perspectives for a building’s functionality and post-disaster functional recovery, this research provides evidence-based, social science insights to inform more holistic and effective risk governance in property and disaster risk management
Knowing how to rapidly rebuild disaster-damaged infrastructure, while deciding appropriate recovery strategies and catering for future investment is a matter of core interest to government decision makers, utility providers, and business sectors. The purpose of this research is to explore the effects of decisions and outcomes for physical reconstruction on the overall recovery process of horizontal infrastructure in New Zealand using the Canterbury and Kaikoura earthquakes as cases. A mixed approach including a systematic review, questionnaire survey and semi-structured interviews is used to capture perspectives of those involved in reconstruction process and gain insights into the effect of critical elements on infrastructure downtime. Findings from this research will contribute towards advancements of a systems dynamics model considering critical decision-making variables across phases of the reconstruction process to assess how these variables affect the rebuild process and the corresponding downtime. This project will improve the ability to explore alternative resilience improvement pathways and test the efficacy of alternative means for facilitating a faster and better reconstruction process.
PurposeThe purpose of this research is to highlight the role of not-for-profit (NFP) organisations in enhancing disaster preparedness. The authors set out to understand their perspectives and practices in regard to disaster preparedness activities to support people who live precarious lives, especially those who live as single parents who are the least prepared for disasters.Design/methodology/approachThe research draws on in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 12 staff members, either in a group setting or individually, from seven NFP organisations, who were located in Ōtautahi (Christchurch) and Kaiapoi in Aotearoa New Zealand. These participants were interviewed eight years after the 2011 Christchurch earthquake.FindingsFour key narrative tropes or elements were drawn from across the interviews and were used to structure the research results. These included: “essential” support services for people living precarious lives; assisting people to be prepared; potential to support preparedness with the right materials and relationships; resourcing to supply emergency goods.Originality/valueThis research contributes to disaster risk reduction practices by advocating for ongoing resourcing of NFP groups due to their ability to build a sense of community and trust while working with precarious communities, such as single parents.
Creativity that is driven by a need for physical or economic survival, which disasters are likely to inspire, raises the question of whether such creativity fits with conventional theories and perspectives of creativity. In this paper we use the opportunity afforded by the 2010-2013 Christchurch, New Zealand earthquakes to follow and assess the creative practices and responses of a number of groups and individuals. We use in-depth interviews to tease out motivations and read these against a range of theoretical propositions about creativity. In particular, we focus on the construct of “elite panic” and the degree to which this appeared to be evident in the Christchurch earthquakes context. Bureaucratic attempts to control or limit creativity were present but they did not produce a completely blanket dampening effect. Certain individuals and groups seemed to be pre-equipped to navigate or ignore potential blocks to creativity. We argue, using Geir Kaufmann’s novelty-creativity matrix and aspects of Teresa Amabile’s and Michael G. Pratt’s revised componential theory of creativity that a special form of disaster creativity does exist.
This dissertation explores the advocacy for the Christchurch Town Hall that occurred in 2012-2015 after the Canterbury Earthquakes. It frames this advocacy as an instance of collective-action community participation in a heritage decision, and explores the types of heritage values it expressed, particularly social values. The analysis contextualises the advocacy in post-quake Christchurch, and considers its relationship with other developments in local politics, heritage advocacy, and urban activism. In doing so, this dissertation considers how collective action operates as a form of public participation, and the practical implications for understanding and recognising social value. This research draws on studies of practices that underpin social value recognition in formal heritage management. Social value is held by communities outside institutions. Engaging with communities enables institutions to explore the values of specific places, and to realise the potential of activating local connections with heritage places. Such projects can be seen as participatory practices. However, these processes require skills and resources, and may not be appropriate for all places, communities and institutions. However, literature has understudied collective action as a form of community participation in heritage management. All participation processes have nuances of communities, processes, and context, and this dissertation analyses these in one case. The research specifically asked what heritage values (especially social values) were expressed through collective action, what the relationship was with the participation processes, communities, and wider situation that produced them, and the impact on institutional rhetoric and decisions. The research analysed values expressed in representations made to council in support of the Town Hall. It also used documentary sources and interviews with key informants to analyse the advocacy and decision-making processes and their relationships with the wider context and other grassroots activities. The analysis concluded that the values expressed intertwined social and professional values. They were related to the communities and circumstance that produced them, as an advocacy campaign for a civic heritage building from a Western architectural tradition. The advocacy value arguments were one of several factors that impacted the decision. They have had a lasting impact on rhetoric around the Town Hall, as was a heritage-making practice in its own right. This dissertation makes a number of contributions to the discussion of social value and community in heritage. It suggests connections between advocacy and participation perspectives in heritage. It recommends consideration of nuances of communities, context, and place meanings when using heritage advocacy campaigns as evidence of social value. It adds to the literature on heritage advocacy, and offers a focused analysis of one of many heritage debates that occurred in post-quake Christchurch. Ultimately, it encourages practice to actively integrate social and community values and to develop self-reflexive engagement and valuation processes. Despite inherent challenges, participatory processes offer opportunities to diversify understandings of value, co-produce heritage meanings with communities, and empower citizens in democratic processes around the places they live with and love.
