This paper identifies and analyses the networks of support for tangata whaiora (mental health clients) utilising a kaupapa Mäori health service following the Ötautahi/Christchurch earthquakes
in Aotearoa New Zealand from 2010 to 2012. Semi- structured interviews were undertaken with 39 participants, comprising clients (Mäori and Päkehä), staff, managers and board members of a kaupapa Mäori provider in the city. Selected quotes are presented alongside a social network analysis of the support accessed by all participants. Results show the signifi cant isolation of both Mäori and Päkehä mental health clients post- disaster and the complexity of individuals and collectives dealing with temporally and spatially overlapping hazards and disasters at personal, whänau and community level.
The Canterbury region of New Zealand was shaken by major earthquakes on the 4th September 2010 and 22nd February 2011. The quakes caused 185 fatalities and extensive land, infrastructure and building damage, particularly in the Eastern suburbs of Christchurch city. Almost 450 ha of residential and public land was designated as a ‘Red Zone’ unsuitable for residential redevelopment because land damage was so significant, engineering solutions were uncertain, and repairs would be protracted. Subsequent demolition of all housing and infrastructure in the area has left a blank canvas of land stretching along the Avon River corridor from the CBD to the sea.
Initially the Government’s official – but enormously controversial – position was that this land would be cleared and lie fallow until engineering solutions could be found that enabled residential redevelopment. This paper presents an application of a choice experiment (CE) that identified and assessed Christchurch residents’ preferences for different land use options of this Red Zone. Results demonstrated strong public support for the development of a recreational reserve comprising a unique natural environment with native fauna and flora, healthy wetlands and rivers, and recreational opportunities that align with this vision. By highlighting the value of a range of alternatives, the CE provided a platform for public participation and expanded the conversational terrain upon which redevelopment policy took place. We conclude the method has value for land use decision-making beyond the disaster recovery context.
