This study explored the effects of the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 on different areas of quality of life (QOL) for children and adolescents with disabilities. Using a survey developed from the Quality of Life Instrument for People with Developmental Disabilities – Short Version (QOL-PDD-SV) (Brown, Raphael & Renwick, 1997) and The World Health Organisation Quality of Life - (WHOQOL)-BREF, parents or caregivers were asked to identify what level of importance and satisfaction their child or adolescent placed on areas of QOL including physical health, psychological health - stress levels and coping ability, attachment to their neighbourhood, friends, family, leisure activities, community access and schooling. They were also asked to determine what level of impact the earthquakes had had on each area of their child or adolescent’s life and overall quality of life in the aftermath of the earthquakes. A total of 31 parents of 22 males and 9 females between the ages of 2.5 years to 19 years of age (mean age: 12.6 years) responded. The results were collated and analysis was run to measure for the effect of age, gender and geographical location. The results found that the earthquakes affected nearly every area of QOL for the children and adolescents. The biggest impact on the children’s psychological health and their ability to cope It was observed that younger children (<13) were more likely to record improved or lessened effects from the earthquakes in psychological health areas. However, the areas of social belonging and friendships were the least affected by the earthquakes. Female children were more likely to indicate higher scores for social belonging after the earthquakes. Many parents observed that their children developed improved coping skills over the earthquake period. The findings in this study offer a better understanding of how earthquakes can affect the quality of life children and adolescents 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.
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.
Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) play acrucial role in times of disasters. Therefore it is crucial to understand more thoroughly the communication roles and responsibilities of interagency team members and to examine how individual members communicate within a complex, evolving, and unstable environment. It is also important to understand how different organisational identities and their spatial geographies contribute to the interactional dynamics. Earthquakes hit the Canterbury region on September, 2010 and then on February 2011 a more devastating shallow earthquake struck resulting in severe damage to the Aged Residential Care (ARC) sector. Over 600 ARC beds were lost and 500 elderly and disabled people were displaced. Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) set up an interagency emergency response team to address the issues of vulnerable people with significant health and disability needs who were unable to access their normal supports due to the effects of the earthquake. The purpose of this qualitative interpretive study is to focus on the case study of the response and evacuation of vulnerable people by interagencies responding to the event. Staff within these agencies were interviewed with a focus on the critical incidents that either stabilised or negatively influenced the outcome of the response. The findings included the complexity of navigating multiple agencies communication channels; understanding the different hierarchies and communication methods within each agency; data communication challenges when infrastructures were severely damaged; the importance of having the right skills, personal attributes and understanding of the organisations in the response; and the significance of having a liaison in situ representing and communicating through to agencies geographically dispersed from Canterbury. It is hoped that this research will assist in determining a future framework for interagency communication best practice and policy.
Background The 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes and aftershocks in New Zealand caused unprecedented destruction to the physical, social, economic, and community fabric of Christchurch city. The recovery phase in Christchurch is on going, six years following the initial earthquake. Research exploring how disabled populations experience community inclusion in the longer-term recovery following natural disasters is scant. Yet such information is vital to ensure that recovering communities are inclusive for all members of the affected population. This thesis specifically examined how people who use wheelchairs experienced community inclusion four years following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes. Aims The primary research aim was to understand how one section of the disability community – people who use wheelchairs – experienced community inclusion over the four years following the 2010/2011 Canterbury earthquakes and aftershocks. A secondary aim was to test a novel sampling approach, Respondent Driven Sampling, which had the potential to enable unbiased population-based estimates. This was motivated by the lack of an available sampling frame for the target population, which would inhibit recruitment of a representative sample. Methodology and methods An exploratory sequential mixed methods design was used, beginning with a qualitative phase (Phase One), which informed a second quantitative phase (Phase Two). The qualitative phase had two stages. First, a small sample of people who use wheelchairs participated in an individual, semi-structured interview. In the second stage, these participants were then invited to a group interview to clarify and prioritise themes identified in the individual interviews. The quantitative phase was a cross-sectional survey developed from the findings from Phase One. Initially, Respondent Driven Sampling was employed to conduct a national, electronic cross-sectional survey that aimed to recruit a sample that may provide unbiased population-based estimates. Following the unsuccessful application of Respondent Driven Sampling, a region-specific convenience sampling approach was used. The datasets from the qualitative and quantitative phases were integrated to address the primary aim of the research. Results In Phase One 13 participants completed the individual interviews, and five of them contributed to the group interview. Thematic analysis of individual and group interview data suggested that participants felt the 2010/11 earthquakes magnified many pre-existing barriers to community inclusion, and also created an exciting opportunity for change. This finding was encapsulated in five themes: 1) earthquakes magnified barriers, 2) community inclusion requires energy, 3) social connections are important, 4) an opportunity lost, and 5) an opportunity found. The findings from Phase One informed the development of a survey instrument to investigate how these findings generalised to a larger sample of individuals who use wheelchairs. In Phase Two, the Respondent Driven Sampling approach failed to recruit enough participants to satisfy the statistical requirements needed to reach equilibrium, thereby enabling the calculation of unbiased population estimates. The subsequent convenience sampling approach recruited 49 participants who, combined with the 15 participants from the Respondent Driven Sampling approach that remained eligible for the region-specific sample, resulted in the total of 64 individuals who used wheelchairs and were residents of Christchurch. Participants reported their level of community inclusion at three time periods: the six months prior to the first earthquake in September 2010 (time one), the six months following the first earthquake in September 2010 (time two), and the six months prior to survey completion (between October 2015 and March 2016, (time three)). Survey data provided some precision regarding the timing in which the magnified barriers developed. Difficulty with community inclusion rose significantly between time one and time two, and while reducing slightly, was still present during time three, and had not returned to the time one baseline. The integrated findings from Phase One and Phase Two suggested that magnified barriers to community inclusion had been sustained four years post-earthquake, and community access had not returned to pre-earthquake levels, let alone improved beyond pre-earthquake levels. Conclusion Findings from this mixed methods study suggest that four years following the initial earthquake, participants were still experiencing multiple magnified barriers, which contributed to physical and social exclusion, as well as fatigue, as participants relied on individual agency to negotiate such barriers. Participants also highlighted the exciting opportunity to create an accessible city. However because they were still experiencing barriers four years following the initial event, and were concerned that this opportunity might be lost if the recovery proceeds without commitment and awareness from the numerous stakeholders involved in guiding the recovery. To truly realise the opportunity to create an accessible city following a disaster, the transition from the response phase to a sustainable longer-term recovery must adopt a new model of community engagement where decision-makers partner with people living with disability to co-produce a vision and strategy for creating an inclusive community. Furthermore, despite the unsuccessful use of Respondent Driven Sampling in this study, future research exploring the application of RDS with wheelchair users is recommended before discounting this sampling approach in this population.
Smart cities utilise new and innovative technology to improve the function of the city for governments, citizens and businesses. This thesis offers an in-depth discussion on the concept of the smart city and sets the context of smart cities internationally. It also examines how to improve a smart city through public engagement, as well as, how to implement participatory research in a smart city project to improve the level of engagement of citizens in the planning and implementation of smart projects. This thesis shows how to incentivise behaviour change with smart city technology and projects, through increasing participation in the planning and implementation of smart technology in a city. Meaningful data is created through this process of participation for citizens in the city, by engaging the citizens in the creation of the data, therefore the information created through a smart city project is created by and for the citizens themselves. To improve engagement, a city must understand its specific context and its residents. Using Christchurch, New Zealand, and the Christchurch City Council (CCC) Smart City Project as a case study, this research engages CCC stakeholders in the Smart City Project through a series of interviews, and citizens in Christchurch through a survey and focus groups. A thorough literature review has been conducted, to illuminate the different definitions of the smart city in academia, business and governments respectively, and how these definitions vary from one another. It provides details of a carefully selected set of relevant smart cities internationally and will discuss how the Christchurch Earthquake Sequence of 2010 and 2011 has affected the CCC Smart City Project. The research process, alongside the literature review, shows diverse groups of citizens in the city should be acknowledged in this process. The concept of the smart city is redefined to incorporate the context of Christchurch, its citizens and communities. Community perceptions of smart cities in Christchurch consider the post-disaster environment and this event and subsequent rebuild process should be a focus of the smart city project. The research identified that the CCC needs to focus on participatory approaches in the planning and implementation of smart projects, and community organisations in Christchurch offer an opportunity to understand community perspectives on new smart technology and that projects internationally should consider how the context of the city will affect the participation of its residents. This project offers ideas to influence the behaviour change of citizens through a smart city project. Further research should consider other stakeholders, for instance, innovation and technology-focused business in the city, and to fully engage citizens, future research must continue the process of participatory engagement, and target diverse groups in the city, including but not limited to minority groups, older and younger generations, and those with physical and mental disabilities.
