Picture this, you are relaxing at home enjoying the afternoon sun. It is another beautiful Christchurch day in late 2017. There is a knock at the door, you’ve been expecting it. It is a member of the Christchurch Health and Development Study, here to conduct your prearranged interview. The interview request did not come as a surprise of course, you have been participating in these interviews yourself sporadically throughout your adult life, and prior to that you attended many alongside your parents. In fact, you have been answering the studies interview your whole life. Transcripts of these interviews sit in the studies database alongside copies of school reports, health records and a wealth of other information. It has been this way since birth, since your mother was approached back in 1977, not long after you had arrived in this world, and asked if she would consent to participating in the study. She, along with many other Cantabrian new mothers from that year, agreed and the Christchurch Health and Development Study was born. Since then, these interviews have become a matter of routine for you. As life went on many things changed, but one thing that was constant was the sporadic visit from an interviewer of the study. The current interview is a little different from most of the others, however. Last time an interviewer visited in 2012, you were asked if you would like to conduct an earthquake-specific interview, you agreed. This time, the same question was asked. Why? Well because you were there that day of course. The day of the 22nd February 2011 when a major earthquake struck Canterbury. You were there in the centre of the city as buildings came crashing down and people ran for safety. You were there for the chaos. Your knee dully aches, it never did quite heal properly and strangely seems to flare up whenever you think back to that day. A lasting reminder. It is a difficult subject, but you agree to the second earthquake-specific interview. You understand the purpose of the study, and the value of the data collected. You take a sip of the cup of tea politely made upon the interviewer’s arrival, lean back into the comfort of your couch and cast your mind back to that fateful day. So, what does this study mean? Why still participate, all these years later? Over time it has become more apparent as to how valuable this information could be, considering all the experiences through the life course, and to think of the experiences that others in the cohort have had too. How differently have events affected people from all walks of life, who just so happened to be born within the same few months. We can use the data from this study to better understand situations when using life course characteristics which can hopefully influence decision making and population health within New Zealand.
Abstract The original intention for the Partnership Community Worker (PCW) project in 2006 was for it to be an extension of the Pegasus Health General Practice and furthermore to be a bridge between the community and primary healthcare. It was believed that a close working relationship between the Practice Nurse and the PCW would help the target population of Māori, Pacifica and low income people to address and overcome their perceived barriers to healthcare which included: finance, transport, anxiety, cultural issues, communication, or lack of knowledge. Seven years later although the PCW project has been deemed a success in the Canterbury District Health Board annual reports (2013-14) and community and government agencies, including the Christchurch Resettlement Service (2012), many of the Pegasus Health General Practices have not utilised the project to its full extent, hence the need for this research. I was interested in finding out in the first instance if the model had changed and, if so why, and in the second instance if the promotional material currently distributed by Pegasus Health Primary Health Organisation reflected the daily practice of the PCW. A combination of methods were used including: surveys to the Pegasus Health General Practices, interviews with PCWs, interviews with managers of both the PCW host organisations and referring agencies to the PCW project. All the questions asked of all the participants in this research were focussed on their own perception of the role of the PCW. Results showed that the model has changed and although the publications were not reflecting the original intention of the project they did reflect the daily practice of the PCWs who are now struggling to meet much wider community expectations and needs. Key Results: Partnership Community Worker (PCW) interviews: Seventeen PCWs of the 19 employed were interviewed face to face. A number expressed interest in more culturally specific training and some are pursuing qualifications in social work; for many pay parity is an issue. In addition, many felt overwhelmed by the expectations around clients with mental health issues and housing issues now, post-earthquakes. Medical Practice surveys: Surveys were sent to eighty-two Pegasus Health medical practices and of these twenty five were completed. Results showed the full capacity of the PCW role was not clearly understood by all with many believing it was mostly a transport service. Those who did understand the full complexity of the role were very satisfied with the outcomes. PCW Host Community Manager Interviews: Of the ten out of twelve managers interviewed, some wished for more communication with Pegasus Health management because they felt aspects of both the PCW role and their own role as managers had become blurred over time. Referring organisations: Fifteen of the fifty referring community or government organisations participated. The overall satisfaction of the service was high and some acknowledged the continuing need for PCWs to be placed in communities where they were well known and trusted. Moreover results also showed that both the Canterbury earthquakes 2010-2011 and the amalgamation of Partnership Health PHO and Pegasus Health Charitable Limited in 2013 have contributed to the change of the model. Further future research may also be needed to examine the long term effects on the people of Canterbury involved in community work during the 2011-2014 years.
While it is well known that challenging and distressing events can negatively impact people’s psychological and physical state, increasingly researchers have investigated how challenging or stressful life circumstances can lead to the phenomenon of posttraumatic growth: positive psychological or life changes that can emerge from potentially traumatic events. Posttraumatic growth has been investigated primarily with people displaying varying levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms and other psychopathology due to theories suggesting that resilience would prohibit posttraumatic growth. Few studies have examined growth amongst resilient people. The current study examined posttraumatic growth in a sample of sixty psychologically healthy people who experienced the Canterbury earthquake sequence of 2010-2011. The current study is a follow-up study that used thematic analysis to explore: (1) Whether posttraumatic growth is evident nine years after the Canterbury earthquake sequence and approximately six years after baseline assessment; and (2) What themes may facilitate the posttraumatic growth process in psychologically healthy people. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis revealed four themes describing participants’ experiences of growth: New possibilities, reappraisal of life and priorities, positive changes in self-perception and closer more meaningful relationships. Themes describing posttraumatic growth provide evidence for research question one. Thematic analysis revealed three main themes and multiple subthemes that may facilitate the process of growth in psychologically healthy people: Hardship, optimistic positive appraisal and people helping people. Themes describing processes that may lead to growth provide evidence for research question two. Results of the current study provide insights about the experience of growth in psychologically healthy people and cognitive and psychosocial factors that may facilitate growth in resilient individuals.
This research examines the connection between accessibility and resilience in post-earthquake Christchurch. This research will provide my community partner with a useful evidence base to help show that increased accessibility does create a more resilient environment. This research uses an in-depth literature review along with qualitative interview approach discussing current levels of accessibility and resilience in Christchurch and whether or not the interview participants believe that increased accessibility in Christchurch will make our city more resilient to future disasters. This research is important because it helps to bridge the connection between accessibility and resilience by showing how accessibility is an important aspect of making a city resilient. In Christchurch specifically, it is a great time to create an accessible and inclusive environment in the post-earthquake rebuild state the city is currently in. Showing that an accessible environment will lead to a more resilient city is important will potentially lead to accessible design being included in the rebuild of places and spaces in Christchurch. In theory, the results of this research show that having an accessible environment leads to universal inclusiveness which in turn, leads to a resilient city. An overarching theme that arose during this research is that accessibility is a means to inclusion and without inclusion a society cannot be resilient. In practice, the results show that for Christchurch to become more accessible and inclusive for people with disabilities, there needs to not only be an increase the accessibility of places and spaces but accessibility to the community as well. Having accessible infrastructure and communities will lead to increased social and urban resilience, especially for individuals with disabilities. This research is beneficial because it helps to bridge the connection between accessibility and resilience. Resilience is important because it help cities prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters and this research helps to show that accessibility is an important part of creating resilience. Some questions still remain unresolved mainly looking into normalising accessibility and deciphering how to prove that accessibility is an issue that effects everybody, not just individuals with disabilities.
This research examines the connection between accessibility and resilience in post-earthquake Christchurch. This research will provide my community partner with a useful evidence base to help show that increased accessibility does create a more resilient environment. This research uses an in-depth literature review along with qualitative interview approach discussing current levels of accessibility and resilience in Christchurch and whether or not the interview participants believe that increased accessibility in Christchurch will make our city more resilient to future disasters. This research is important because it helps to bridge the connection between accessibility and resilience by showing how accessibility is an important aspect of making a city resilient. In Christchurch specifically, it is a great time to create an accessible and inclusive environment in the post-earthquake rebuild state the city is currently in. Showing that an accessible environment will lead to a more resilient city is important will potentially lead to accessible design being included in the rebuild of places and spaces in Christchurch. In theory, the results of this research show that having an accessible environment leads to universal inclusiveness which in turn, leads to a resilient city. An overarching theme that arose during this research is that accessibility is a means to inclusion and without inclusion a society cannot be resilient. In practice, the results show that for Christchurch to become more accessible and inclusive for people with disabilities, there needs to not only be an increase the accessibility of places and spaces but accessibility to the community as well. Having accessible infrastructure and communities will lead to increased social and urban resilience, especially for individuals with disabilities. This research is beneficial because it helps to bridge the connection between accessibility and resilience. Resilience is important because it help cities prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters and this research helps to show that accessibility is an important part of creating resilience. Some questions still remain unresolved mainly looking into normalising accessibility and deciphering how to prove that accessibility is an issue that effects everybody, not just individuals with disabilities.
Copyright 2014. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. This article may be downloaded for personal use only. Any other use requires prior permission of the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.The Canterbury earthquakes, which involved widespread damage in the February 2011 event and ongoing aftershocks near the Christchurch central business district (CBD), presented decision-makers with many recovery challenges. This paper identifies major government decisions, challenges, and lessons in the early recovery of Christchurch based on 23 key-informant interviews conducted 15 months after the February 2011 earthquake. It then focuses on one of the most important decisions – maintaining the cordon around the heavily damaged CBD – and investigates its impacts. The cordon displaced 50,000 central city jobs, raised questions about (and provided new opportunities for) the long-term viability of downtown, influenced the number and practice of building demolitions, and affected debris management; despite being associated with substantial losses, the cordon was commonly viewed as necessary, and provided some benefits in facilitating recovery. Management of the cordon poses important lessons for planning for catastrophic urban earthquakes around the world.
Researchers have begun to explore the opportunity presented by blue-green infrastructure(a subset of nature-based solutions that provide blue and green space in urban infrastructure)as a response to the pressures of climate change. The 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence created a unique landscape within which there is opportunity to experiment with and invest in new solutions to climate change adaptation in urban centres. Constructed wetlands are an example of blue-green infrastructure that can potentially support resilience in urban communities. This research explores interactions between communities and constructed wetlands to understand how this may influence perceptions of community resilience. The regeneration of the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor (OARC) provides a space to investigate these relationships. Seven stakeholders from the community, industry, and academia, each with experience in blue-green infrastructure in the OARC, participated in a series of semi-structured interviews. Each participant was given the opportunity to reflect on their perspectives of community, community resilience, and constructed wetlands and their interconnections. Interview questions aligned with the overarching research objectives to (1) understand perceptions around the role of wetlands in urban communities, (2) develop a definition for community resilience in the context of the Ōtākaro Avon community, and (3) reflect on how wetlands can contribute to (or detract from) community resilience. This study found that constructed wetlands can facilitate learning about the challenges and solutions needed to adapt to climate change. From the perspective of the community representatives, community resilience is linked to social capital. Strong social networks and a relationship with nature were emphasised as core components of a community’s ability to adapt to disruption. Constructed wetlands are therefore recognised as potentially contributing to community resilience by providing spaces for people to engage with each other and nature. Investment in constructed wetlands can support a wider response to climate change impacts. This research was undertaken with the support of the Ōtākaro Living Laboratory Trust, who are invested in the future of the OARC. The outcomes of this study suggest that there is an opportunity to use wetland spaces to establish programmes that explore the perceptions of constructed wetlands from a broader community definition, at each stage of the wetland life cycle, and at wider scales(e.g., at a city scale or beyond).
Recycling is often employed as part of a disaster waste management system. However, the feasibility, method and effectiveness of recycling varies between disaster events. This qualitative study is based on literature reviews, expert interviews and active participatory research of five international disaster events in developed countries (2009 Victorian Bushfires, Australia; 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, Italy; 2005 Hurricane Katrina, United States; 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes, New Zealand; 2011 Great East Japan earthquake) to answer three questions: What are the main factors that affect the feasibility of recycling post-disaster? When is on-site or off-site separation more effective? What management approaches improve recycling effectiveness? Seven disaster-specific factors need to be assessed to determine the feasibility of disaster waste recycling programmes: volume of waste; degree of mixing of waste; human and environmental health hazards; areal extent of the waste; community priorities; funding mechanisms; and existing and disaster-specific regulations. The appropriateness of on or off-site waste separation depends on four factors: time constraints; resource availability; degree of mixing of waste and human and public health hazards. Successful recycling programmes require good management including clear and well enforced policies (through good contracts or regulations) and pre-event planning. Further research into post-disaster recycling markets, funding mechanisms and recycling in developing countries is recommended.
Recognising that informal (also termed family, whānau, aiga or unpaid) caregivers/carers are a vital part of Aotearoa New Zealand’s health system, providing care and support for loved ones, whānau, friends and neighbours, this study aimed to explore the experiences of older informal caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Priority research questions were: how did informal caregivers experience caregiving during the pandemic, and how might we support them during another pandemic, disaster, or national emergency? To our knowledge, this is the first exploration of such experiences in Aotearoa New Zealand. We wanted to understand the unprecedented challenges and barriers informal caregivers faced during the pandemic and highlight the resilience and mana (power, strength) of informal caregivers in overcoming them. To explore the lived experiences of informal caregiving during the pandemic, the research team travelled across New Zealand between May 2023 and February 2024 to conduct 81 in-depth interviews, with 73 completed face-to-face, four via Zoom and four by phone. A total of 34 male and 47 female informal caregivers were interviewed, including 35 Māori and 46 non-Māori. The mean age of participants was 66 years old. Thirty-nine rural and 42 urban-dwelling informal caregivers were interviewed, and the study covered both the North and South Islands. A Kaupapa Māori researcher and a Māori adviser oversaw appropriate tikanga (processes), kōrero (discussion) and manaakitanga (care and support) for all the Māori participants interviewed. The COVID-19 pandemic placed significant strain on older informal caregivers in Aotearoa New Zealand, exacerbating existing challenges and exposing critical gaps in support systems. Many participants experienced heightened emotional and psychological distress due to increased caregiving demands, social isolation, and the disruption of formal and informal support networks. The closure of essential services meant that informal caregivers in this study had to navigate complex healthcare systems with little guidance, often facing bureaucratic hurdles and limited access to respite care. Financial strain further compounded these difficulties, with some participants struggling to meet the rising costs associated with informal caregiving while experiencing reduced income or employment instability. For Māori participants, the inability to engage in kanohi ki te kanohi (face-to-face) interactions with whānau and communities disrupted cultural traditions such as whanaungatanga, tangihanga (funeral practices), and communal caregiving, intensifying feelings of isolation and distress. Despite these challenges, participants demonstrated remarkable resilience and adaptability, drawing on their life experiences (or "resilience in older people") and existing support systems to navigate the pandemic. Many participants relied on self-sufficiency, using strategies learned from past crises and disasters such as the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes and the 1940s/1950s polio epidemics to manage caregiving responsibilities and everyday challenges with limited external assistance. Strengthened relationships with care recipients and an increased sense of community support were positive outcomes for some participants, who found solace in tighter family bonds and mutual aid from neighbours and local groups. Māori participants, in particular, emphasised the importance of cultural and community-based networks, with iwi and extended whānau playing crucial roles in providing informal support. These findings underscore the need for policies that recognise and support the diverse needs of informal caregivers, including tailored caregiving assistance, clearer communication about available services, and culturally responsive caregiving frameworks that strengthen resilience in future health crises. Findings from this study highlight the need for: 1) tailored, context-specific support systems: Formal support services must be more flexible to accommodate the diverse needs of informal caregivers, particularly those in rural and Māori communities; 2) Improved access to information and services: Many participants were unaware of available support, pointing to the need for clearer, caregiver-specific communication and helplines; 3) Enhancing emotional and social support mechanisms: Regular check-ins from healthcare providers and community groups could alleviate the emotional burden of caregiving; and 4) Resilience-based and bicultural approaches to caregiving support: Policies should integrate Māori perspectives on informal caregiving and strengthen social capital among informal caregivers. It is clear from this research that no one-size-fits-all approach is appropriate for supporting informal caregivers. This research provides a critical evidence base for improving the support structures available to informal caregivers, ensuring they are better prepared for future pandemics, disasters, and national emergencies.
