1. INTRODUCTION. Earthquakes and geohazards, such as liquefaction, landslides and rock falls, constitute a major risk for New Zealand communities and can have devastating impacts as the Canterbury 2010/2011 experience shows. Development patterns expose communities to an array of natural hazards, including tsunamis, floods, droughts, and sea level rise amongst others. Fostering community resilience is therefore vitally important. As the rhetoric of resilience is mainstreamed into the statutory framework, a major challenge emerges: how can New Zealand operationalize this complex and sometimes contested concept and build ‘community capitals’? This research seeks to provide insights to this question by critically evaluating how community capitals are conceptualized and how they can contribute to community resilience in the context of the Waimakariri District earthquake recovery and regeneration process.
Farming and urban regions are impacted by earthquake disasters in different ways, and feature a range of often different recovery requirements. In New Zealand, and elsewhere, most earthquake impact and recovery research is urban focused. This creates a research deficit that can lead to the application of well-researched urban recovery strategies in rural areas to suboptimal effect. To begin to reduce this deficit, in-depth case studies of the earthquake impacts and recovery of three New Zealand farms severely impacted by the 14th November 2016, M7.8 Hurunui-Kaikōura earthquake were conducted. The initial earthquake, its aftershocks and coseismic hazards (e.g., landslides, liquefaction, surface rupture) affected much of North Canterbury, Marlborough and the Wellington area. The three case study farms were chosen to broadly represent the main types of farming and topography in the Hurunui District in North Canterbury. The farms were directly and indirectly impacted by earthquakes and related hazards. On-farm infrastructure (e.g., woolsheds, homesteads) and essential services (e.g., water, power), frequently sourced from distributed networks, were severely impacted. The earthquake occurred after two years of regional drought had already stressed farm systems and farmers to restructuring or breaking point. Cascading interlinked hazards stemming from the earthquakes and coseismic hazards continued to disrupt earthquake recovery over a year after the initial earthquake. Semi-structured interviews with the farmers were conducted nine and fourteen months after the initial earthquake to capture the timeline of on-going impacts and recovery. Analysis of both geological hazard data and interview data resulted in the identification of key factors influencing farm level earthquake impact and recovery. These include pre-existing conditions (e.g., drought); farm-specific variations in recovery timelines; and resilience strategies for farm recovery resources. The earthquake recovery process presented all three farms with opportunities to change their business plans and adapt to mitigate on-going and future risk.
The Canterbury Region is susceptible to a variety of natural hazards, including earthquakes, landslides and climate hazards. Increasing population and tourism within the region is driving development pressures and as more and more development occurs, the risk from natural hazards increases. In order to avoid development occurring in unacceptably vulnerable locations, natural hazard assessments are required. This study is a reconnaissance natural hazard assessment of Lakes Lyndon, Coleridge and Tekapo. There is restricted potential for development at Lake Lyndon, because the land surrounding the lake is owned by the Crown and has a number of development restrictions. However, there is the potential for conservation or recreation-linked development to occur. There is more potential for development at Lake Coleridge. Most of the land surrounding the lake is privately owned and has less development restrictions. The majority of land surrounding Lake Tekapo is divided into Crown-owned pastoral leases, which are protected from development, such as subdivision. However, there are substantial areas around the lake, which are privately owned and, therefore, have potential for development. Earthquake, landslide and climate hazards are the main natural hazards threatening Lakes Lyndon, Coleridge and Tekapo. The lakes are situated in a zone of active earth deformation in which large and relatively frequent earthquakes are produced. A large number of active faults lie within 15 km of each lake, which are capable of producing M7 or larger earthquakes. Ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, tsunami and seiches are among the consequences of earthquakes, all of which have the potential to cause severe damage to lives, lifelines and infrastructure. Landslides are also common in the landscape surrounding the lakes. The majority of slopes surrounding the lakes are at significant risk from earthquake-induced failure under moderate to strong earthquake shaking. This level of shaking is expected to occur in any 50 year period around Lakes Lyndon and Coleridge, and in any 150 year period around Lake Tekapo. Injuries, fatalities and property damage can occur directly from landslide impact or from indirect effects such as flooding from landslide-generated tsunami or from landslide dam outbreaks. Lakes Lyndon, Coleridge and Tekapo are also susceptible to climate hazards, such as high winds, drought, heavy snowfall and heavy rainfall, which can lead to landslides and flooding. Future climate change due to global warming is most likely going to affect patterns of frequency and magnitudes of extreme weather events, leading to an increase in climate hazards. Before development is permitted around the lakes, it is essential that each of these hazards is considered so that unacceptably vulnerable areas can be avoided.
