The question of whether forced relocation is beneficial or detrimental to the displaced households is a controversial and important policy question. After the 2011 earthquake in Christchurch, the government designated some of the worst affected areas as Residential Red Zones. Around 20,000 people were forced to move out of these Residential Red Zone areas, and were compensated for that. The objective of this paper is twofold. First, we aim to estimate the impact of relocation on the displaced households in terms of their income, employment, and their mental and physical health. Second, we evaluate whether the impact of relocation varies by the timing of to move, the destination (remaining within the Canterbury region or moving out of it) and demographic factors (gender, age, ethnicity). StatisticsNZ’s Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) from 2008 to 2017, which includes data on all households in Canterbury, and a difference-in-difference (DID) technique is used to answer these questions. We find that relocation has a negative impact on the income of the displaced household group. This adverse impact is more severe for later movers. Compared to the control group (that was not relocated), the income of relocated households was reduced by 3% for people who moved immediately after the earthquake in 2011, and 14% for people who moved much later in 2015.
Disaster recovery involves the restoration, repair and rejuvenation of both hard and soft infrastructure. In this report we present observationsfrom seven case studies of collaborative planning from post-earthquake Canterbury, each of which was selected as a means of better understanding ‘soft infrastructure for hard times’. Though our investigation is located within a disaster recovery context, we argue that the lessons learned are widely applicable. Our seven case studies highlighted that the nature of the planning process or journey is as important as the planning objective or destination. A focus on the journey can promote positive outcomes in and of itself through building enduring relationships, fostering diverse leaders, developing new skills and capabilities, and supporting translation and navigation. Collaborative planning depends as much upon emotional intelligence as it does technical competence, and we argue that having a collaborative attitude is more important than following prescriptive collaborative planning formulae. Being present and allowing plenty of time are also key. Although deliberation is often seen as an improvement on technocratic and expertdominated decision-making models, we suggest that the focus in the academic literature on communicative rationality and discursive democracy has led us to overlook other more active forms of planning that occur in various sites and settings. Instead, we offer an expanded understanding of what planning is, where it happens and who is involved. We also suggest more attention be given to values, particularly in terms of their role as a compass for navigating the terrain of decision-making in the collaborative planning process. We conclude with a revised model of a (collaborative) decision-making cycle that we suggest may be more appropriate when (re)building better homes, towns and cities.
As the future of the world’s oil reserves becomes progressively more uncertain, it is becoming increasingly important that steps are taken to ensure that there are viable, attractive alternatives to travel by private motor vehicle. As with many of New Zealand’s major urban centres, Christchurch is still exceptionally reliant on private motor vehicles; although a significant proportion of the population indicate that they would like to cycle more, cycling is still an underutilised mode of transport. Following a series of fatal earthquakes that struck the city in 2010 and 2011, there has been the need to significantly redevelop much of the city’s horizontal infrastructure – subsequently providing the perfect platform for significant changes to be made to the road network. Many of the key planning frameworks governing the rebuild process have identified the need to improve Christchurch’s cycling facilities in order to boost cycling numbers and cyclist safety. The importance of considering future growth and travel patterns when planning for transport infrastructure has been highlighted extensively throughout literature. Accordingly, this study sought to identify areas where future cycle infrastructure development would be advantageous based on a number of population and employment projections, and likely future travel patterns throughout the city. Through the use of extensive GIS analysis, future population growth, employment and travel patterns for Christchurch city were examined in order to attain an understanding of where the current proposed major cycleways network could be improved, or extended. A range of data and network analysis were used to derive likely travel patterns throughout Christchurch in 2041. Trips were derived twice, once with a focus on simply finding the shortest route between each origin and destination, and then again with a focus on cyclist safety and areas where cyclists were unlikely to travel. It was found that although the proposed major cycleways network represents a significant step towards improving the cycling environment in Christchurch, there are areas of the city that will not be well serviced by the current proposed network in 2041. These include a number of key residential growth areas such as Halswell, Belfast and Prestons, along with a number of noteworthy key travel zones, particularly in areas close to the central city and key employment areas. Using network analysis, areas where improvements or extensions to the proposed network would be most beneficial were identified, and a number of potential extensions in a variety of areas throughout the city were added to the network of cycle ways. Although it has been found that filling small gaps in the network can have considerable positive outcomes, results from the prioritisation analysis suggested that initially in Christchurch demand is likely to be for more substantial extensions to the proposed major cycleways network.
