Search

found 49 results

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which defines the procurement activities to be applied to SCIRT and explains how those activities are to be undertaken to meet SCIRT objectives and requirements. The first version of this plan was produced on 14 September 2011.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A document that defines the requirements and objectives of design activities for SCIRT's reconstruction of the city's horizontal infrastructure and describes how these activities should be implemented.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which outlines how timely and accurate information relating to estimating, actual project costs, future commitments and total forecast cost will be managed and reported for each project phase in the programme. The first version of this plan was produced on 24 June 2011.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which provides SCIRT with clear direction and guidelines regarding communication in the event of a crisis. The first version of this plan was produced on 1 December 2013. Note that personal details of key personnel have been removed from this document.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which defines the framework for performance measurement to align SCIRT with the objectives from the Alliance Agreement objectives. The first version of this plan was produced on 20 August 2011.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which describes how SCIRT will manage the coordination of utility authority liaison and utility relocation or protection during the design and construction phases of the rebuild schedule. The first version of this plan was produced on 15 November 2011.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which identifies items that will define value for the programme of work and explain processes that will measure the achievement of value outcomes. The first version of this plan was produced on 6 September 2011.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which defines the risk and opportunity management activities to be applied by SCIRT to meet SCIRT objectives. The first version of this plan was produced on 12 September 2011.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

In this dissertation it is argued that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority were both necessary and inevitable given the trends and traditions of civil defence emergency management (CDEM) in New Zealand. The trends and traditions of civil defence are such that principles come before practice, form before function, and change is primarily brought about through crisis and criticism. The guiding question of the research was why were a new governance system and law made after the Canterbury earthquakes in 2010 and 2011? Why did this outcome occur despite the establishment of a modern emergency management system in 2002 which included a recovery framework that had been praised by international scholars as leading edge and a model for other countries? The official reason was the unprecedented scale and demands of the recovery – but a disaster of such scale is the principle reason for having a national emergency management system. Another explanation is the lack of cooperation among local authorities – but that raises the question of whether the CDEM recovery framework would have been successful in another locality. Consequentially, the focus of this dissertation is on the CDEM recovery framework and how New Zealand came to find itself making disaster law during a disaster. Recommendations include a review of emergency powers for recovery, a review of the capabilities needed to fulfil the mandate of Recovery Managers, and the establishment of a National Recovery Office with a cadre of Recovery Managers that attend every recovery to observe, advise, or assume control as needed. CDEM Group Recovery Managers would be seconded to the National Recovery Office which would allow for experience in recovery management to be developed and institutionalised through regular practice.

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A plan which outlines the processes and IT applications and services required to manage the SCIRT programme. The first version of this plan was produced on 9 August 2011.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

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.