The Mw 7.1 Darfield earthquake generated a ~30 km long surface rupture on the Greendale Fault and significant surface deformation related to related blind faults on a previously unrecognized fault system beneath the Canterbury Plains. This earthquake provided the opportunity for research into the patterns and mechanisms of co-seismic and post-seismic crustal deformation. In this thesis I use multiple across-fault EDM surveys, logic trees, surface investigations and deformation feature mapping, seismic reflection surveying, and survey mark (cadastral) re-occupation using GPS to quantify surface displacements at a variety of temporal and spatial scales. My field mapping investigations identified shaking and crustal displacement-induced surface deformation features south and southwest of Christchurch and in the vicinity of the projected surface traces of the Hororata Blind and Charing Cross Faults. The data are consistent with the high peak ground accelerations and broad surface warping due to underlying reverse faulting on the Hororata Blind Fault and Charing Cross Fault. I measured varying amounts of post-seismic displacement at four of five locations that crossed the Greendale Fault. None of the data showed evidence for localized dextral creep on the Greendale Fault surface trace, consistent with other studies showing only minimal regional post-seismic deformation. Instead, the post-seismic deformation field suggests an apparent westward translation of northern parts of the across-fault surveys relative to the southern parts of the surveys that I attribute to post-mainshock creep on blind thrusts and/or other unidentified structures. The seismic surveys identified a deformation zone in the gravels that we attribute to the Hororata Blind Fault but the Charing Cross fault was not able to be identified on the survey. Cadastral re-surveys indicate a deformation field consistent with previously published geodetic data. We use this deformation with regional strain rates to estimate earthquake recurrence intervals of ~7000 to > 14,000 yrs on the Hororata Blind and Charing Cross Faults.
Depending on their nature and severity, disasters can create large volumes of debris and waste. Waste volumes from a single event can be the equivalent of many times the annual waste generation rate of the affected community. These volumes can overwhelm existing solid waste management facilities and personnel. Mismanagement of disaster waste can affect both the response and long term recovery of a disaster affected area. Previous research into disaster waste management has been either context specific or event specific, making it difficult to transfer lessons from one disaster event to another. The aim of this research is to develop a systems understanding of disaster waste management and in turn develop context- and disaster-transferrable decision-making guidance for emergency and waste managers. To research this complex and multi-disciplinary problem, a multi-hazard, multi-context, multi-case study approach was adopted. The research focussed on five major disaster events: 2011 Christchurch earthquake, 2009 Victorian Bushfires, 2009 Samoan tsunami, 2009 L’Aquila earthquake and 2005 Hurricane Katrina. The first stage of the analysis involved the development of a set of ‘disaster & disaster waste’ impact indicators. The indicators demonstrate a method by which disaster managers, planners and researchers can simplify the very large spectra of possible disaster impacts, into some key decision-drivers which will likely influence post-disaster management requirements. The second stage of the research was to develop a set of criteria to represent the desirable environmental, economic, social and recovery effects of a successful disaster waste management system. These criteria were used to assess the effectiveness of the disaster waste management approaches for the case studies. The third stage of the research was the cross-case analysis. Six main elements of disaster waste management systems were identified and analysed. These were: strategic management, funding mechanisms, operational management, environmental and human health risk management, and legislation and regulation. Within each of these system elements, key decision-making guidance (linked to the ‘disaster & disaster waste’ indicators) and management principles were developed. The ‘disaster & disaster waste’ impact indicators, the effects assessment criteria and management principles have all been developed so that they can be practically applied to disaster waste management planning and response in the future.
