Object overview of "Earthquake risk assessment study Part 1 - Review of risk assessment methodologies and development of a draft risk assessment methodology for Christchurch".
This study evaluated and recommended a methodology for undertaking an earthquake risk assessment for Christchurch, incorporating hazard analysis, inventory collection, damage modelling and loss estimation. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
Environment Canterbury's overview of their Regional Earthquake Hazard and Risk Assessment Studies.
Object Overview of 'Earthquake hazard and risk assessment study Stage 1 Part B: Probabilistics seismic hazard assessment and earthquake scenarios for the Canterbury region, and historic earthquakes in Christchurch (Stirling et al, 1999).'
Object Overview of 'Earthquake hazard and risk assessment study Stage 1 Part A: Earthquake source identification and characterisation'.
This report assesses issues and options for preparing an earthquake hazard and risk assessment programme for Canterbury. It outlines investigation options and associated costs in order to better understand Canterbury's earthquake hazard and risk. Although earthquake hazard and risk information needs and investigation priorities within Canterbury have changed over the past 15 years, the majority of the report’s recommended components have been undertaken to some degree either by Environment Canterbury or other organisations. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
This study updated the 1999 Earthquake hazard and risk assessment study Stage 1 Part B: Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment and Earthquake scenarios for the Canterbury region, and historic earthquakes in Christchurch report. It incorporated new fault data, a new distributed seismicity model and new methods for estimating Modified Mercalli intensities. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
This study updated the 1999 Earthquake hazard and risk assessment study Stage 1 Part B: Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment and Earthquake scenarios for the Canterbury region, and historic earthquakes in Christchurch report. It incorporated new fault data, a new distributed seismicity model and new methods for estimating Modified Mercalli intensities. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
This study led on from Earthquake hazard and risk assessment study Stage 1 Part A: Earthquake source identification and characterisation (Pettinga et al, 1998). It used the location and characteristics of active faults in the Canterbury region, and the historic record of earthquakes to estimate levels of ground shaking (MM intensity, peak ground acceleration and spectral accelerations) across Canterbury for different return periods. The study also provided earthquake scenarios for selected towns and cities in Canterbury, and undertook detailed investigations into the largest historic earthquakes in Christchurch and parts of the Canterbury region. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
This study compiled and tabulated all relevant available information on earthquake sources (active faults) in Canterbury and mapped the fault locations onto 1:50,000 or 1:250,000 overlays on topographic maps (later digitised into the Environment Canterbury active faults database). The study also reviewed information on historic earthquakes, instrumental seismicity and paleoseismic studies and identified information gaps. It recommended an approach for a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis and development of earthquake scenarios. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
This study updated and superseded Earthquake hazard and risk assessment study Stage 1 Part A: Earthquake source identification and characterisation (Pettinga et al, 1998). It compiled and tabulated all relevant available information on earthquake sources in Canterbury and updated the active faults database with new fault locations and information. See Object Overview for background and usage information.
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.
A faded yellow sticker stuck to the window of a house on Avonside Drive. It has been issued by the Christchurch City Council and reads, "Restricted Use. No entry except on essential business. Warning: This building has been damaged and its structural safety is questionable. Enter only at own risk. Subsequent aftershocks or other events may result in increased damage and danger, changing this assessment. Re-inspection may be required. The damage observed from external inspection is as described below." It goes on to set out the conditions for entry to the building and information about the inspector. The sign is so faded that the handwritten information is almost illegible.
A yellow sticker on the door of a house in Worcester Street reading, "Restricted use. No entry except on essential business. Warning: This building has been damaged and its structural safety is questionable. Earthquake aftershocks present danger. Enter only at own risk. Subsequent events may result in increased damage and danger, changing this assessment. Reinspection may be required. The damage is as described below: partial collapse of longitudinal walls". Following on from this are the specific conditions that must be complied with to enable entry into the property, the inspector's identification details, and the date and time the building was inspected. At the bottom the form reads, "Do not remove this placard. Placed by order of the territorial authority Christchurch City Council".