A video of an interview with Toni Burnside, the Principal of Central New Brighton School, about the proposed merger of her school with South New Brighton School. Burnside talks about her belief that the government's rationale for the merger exaggerated the earthquake damage to the site.
Transcript of Fiona Robertson's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
A video of a play produced and performed by students from Avonside Girls' High School. The play was created for the Theater Federation One Act Play Festival, on the topic of the Christchurch rebuild. The students modeled the play on the epic theatre style, aiming to emotionally affect and enact change in their audience.
A video of an interview with John Laurenson, Principal at Shirley Boys' High School, about the Government announcement of a possible merger of Shirley Boys' and Christchurch Boys' High Schools. Laurenson explains that the government has retracted this statement and that Shirley Boys' will be rebuilt. He also talks about how the announcement has upset the Shirley community.
The Youth Shop, parth of the emerging Youth Hub on Barbadoes Street. The Youth Hub aims to be a one-stop-shop for youth to address their health, education, employment, volunteering, justice and welfare needs. On the front is a sign that says ' Canterbury Youth Shop, 294 Barbadoes Street, CHCH. 10am-4pm. Come mee the crew. Job Searching. Study Options. Youth Employment Advisors' and 'Hire me' in the background.
A sign on a fence on Marine Parade in North New Brighton reads "We need your support. We say yes to a new local high school. Northeast Secondary Education Committee." The photographer comments, "A bike ride to New Brighton and the beach 3 weeks after the Feb 22 quake. Roads were still very rough and under reconstruction. I think this issue may be shelved for a while. Unless Shirley Boys High and Avonside Girls High can't be rebuilt, of course".
A video of a protest at the Hagley Park netball courts against the Canterbury school reforms. 57 schools will be affected by the reforms, with 13 set to close and 25 undergoing some form of merger. The video includes speeches from Reverend Mike Coleman, Richard Chambers (Principal at Manning Intermediate), Jelena (a student at Greenpark School), Jennifer O'Lerry (Principal at Branston Intermediate), Eugenie Sage (Green Party MP), and Mia Harrison.
Following the February 2011 earthquake, the Canterbury Branch of the TEU surveyed members to determine the psychological and physical impact of the earthquakes on members, in particular on their working conditions and ability to participate in consultation processes. 90 members responded, and this report gives a summary of the responses to short-answer questions and overall themes.
Following the February 2011 earthquake, the Canterbury Branch of the TEU surveyed members to determine the psychological and physical impact of the earthquakes on members, in particular on their working conditions and ability to participate in consultation processes. 90 members responded, and this report gives a summary of the percentage of responses received for each survey question.
A video of a presentation by Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The presentation is titled, "Working Together Strengthens Understanding".The abstract for the presentation reads, "Hear how EQC led a collaborative research project in Canterbury that involved diverse stakeholders from government, council officials and insurers to homeowners, and why collaboration means that Canterbury's geotechnical data is now helping to inform research locally, nationally and around the world."
A video of a presentation by Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
Stage IV of the Christchurch liquefaction study updated the Stage II liquefaction hazard and ground damage maps with further data collected from other organisations, and included two additional maps indicating liquefaction sensitivity to groundwater levels. Stage IVa of the Christchurch liquefaction study used revised groundwater levels and adjustments to the liquefaction prediction algorithm. The outputs of the report were liquefaction hazard and ground damage maps for both average summer (low) and average winter (high) groundwater levels. The maps produced as part of Stage IVa of the report were subsequently included in an Environment Canterbury public education poster The Solid Facts on Christchurch Liquefaction which also contained information on how liquefaction occurs and what can be done to mitigate the liquefaction hazard. Stage IV of the Christchurch liquefaction study contained a number of recommendations to improve the liquefaction potential and ground damage maps for Christchurch. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
A video of André Lovatt, Chair of Regenerate Christchurch, Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, and developer Antony Gough responding to questions from the floor during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
A video of a presentation by Professor David Johnston during the fourth plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Johnston is a Senior Scientist at GNS Science and Director of the Joint Centre for Disaster Research in the School of Psychology at Massey University. The presentation is titled, "Understanding Immediate Human Behaviour to the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, Implications for injury prevention and risk communication".The abstract for the presentation reads as follows: The 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquake sequences have given us a unique opportunity to better understand human behaviour during and immediately after an earthquake. On 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake occurred near Darfield in the Canterbury region of New Zealand. There were no deaths, but several thousand people sustained injuries and sought medical assistance. Less than 6 months later, a magnitude 6.2 earthquake occurred under Christchurch City at 12:51 p.m. on 22 February 2011. A total of 182 people were killed in the first 24 hours and over 7,000 people injured overall. To reduce earthquake casualties in future events, it is important to understand how people behaved during and immediately after the shaking, and how their behaviour exposed them to risk of death or injury. Most previous studies have relied on an analysis of medical records and/or reflective interviews and questionnaire studies. In Canterbury we were able to combine a range of methods to explore earthquake shaking behaviours and the causes of injuries. In New Zealand, the Accident Compensation Corporation (a national health payment scheme run by the government) allowed researchers to access injury data from over 9,500 people from the Darfield (4 September 2010) and Christchurch (22 February 2011 ) earthquakes. The total injury burden was analysed for demography, context of injury, causes of injury, and injury type. From the injury data inferences into human behaviour were derived. We were able to classify the injury context as direct (immediate shaking of the primary earthquake or aftershocks causing unavoidable injuries), and secondary (cause of injury after shaking ceased). A second study examined people's immediate responses to earthquakes in Christchurch New Zealand and compared responses to the 2011 earthquake in Hitachi, Japan. A further study has developed a systematic process and coding scheme to analyse earthquake video footage of human behaviour during strong earthquake shaking. From these studies a number of recommendations for injury prevention and risk communication can be made. In general, improved building codes, strengthening buildings, and securing fittings will reduce future earthquake deaths and injuries. However, the high rate of injuries incurred from undertaking an inappropriate action (e.g. moving around) during or immediately after an earthquake suggests that further education is needed to promote appropriate actions during and after earthquakes. In New Zealand - as in US and worldwide - public education efforts such as the 'Shakeout' exercise are trying to address the behavioural aspects of injury prevention.
A video of a presentation by Dr Erin Smith during the Community Resilience Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "A Qualitative Study of Paramedic Duty to Treat During Disaster Response".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: Disasters place unprecedented demands on emergency medical services and test paramedic personal commitment to the health care profession. Despite this challenge, legal guidelines, professional codes of ethics and ambulance service management guidelines are largely silent on the issue of professional obligations during disasters. They provide little to no guidance on what is expected of paramedics or how they ought to approach their duty to treat in the face of risk. This research explores how paramedics view their duty to treat during disasters. Reasons that may limit or override such a duty are examined. Understanding these issues is important in enabling paramedics to make informed and defensible decisions during disasters. The authors employed qualitative methods to gather Australian paramedic perspectives. Participants' views were analysed and organised according to three emerging themes: the scope of individual paramedic obligations, the role and obligations of ambulance services, and the broader ethical context. Our findings suggest that paramedic decisions around duty to treat will largely depend on their individual perception of risk and competing obligations. A reciprocal obligation is expected of paramedic employers. Ambulance services need to provide their employees with the best current information about risks in order to assist paramedics in making defensible decisions in difficult circumstances. Education plays a key role in providing paramedics with an understanding and appreciation of fundamental professional obligations by focusing attention on both the medical and ethical challenges involved with disaster response. Finally, codes of ethics might be useful, but ultimately paramedic decisions around professional obligations will largely depend on their individual risk assessment, perception of risk, and personal value systems.