Search

found 335 results

Images for south island; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The Christchurch earthquake sequence has been on-going since September 4th 2010. The largest two earthquakes, magnitude (M) 7.1 on September 4th and the M 6.3 on February 22nd 2011 caused immediate and significant damage to the city of Christchurch. As a consequence of the earthquakes, the tourism sector in the Canterbury region has been heavily impacted, with broader impacts being felt throughout the South Island. Resilient Organisations and the University of Canterbury began a series of quantitative investigations into the recovery and response of key business sectors to the earthquakes. The purpose of this study was to build on this work by exploring the outcomes of the earthquakes on the tourism sector, a critical economic driver in the region. Two postal surveys were sent to 719 tourism business managers; the first to businesses in the ‘Impact Zone’ defined as areas that experienced Modified Mercalli intensities greater than 6. The second survey was sent to the remaining businesses throughout the Canterbury region (‘Rest of Canterbury’). Response rates were 46% response for the Impact Zone, and 29% for the Rest of Canterbury. Key findings:

Research Papers, Lincoln University

4th September 2010 a 7.1 magnitude earthquake strikes near Christchurch, New Zealand’s second largest city of approximately 370,000 people. This is followed by a 6.3 magnitude quake on 22nd February 2011 and a 6.4 on 13th June. In February 181 people died and a state of national emergency was declared from 23 February to 30th April. Urban Search and Rescue teams with 150 personnel from New Zealand and 429 from overseas worked tirelessly in addition to Army, Police and Fire services. Within the central business district 1,000 buildings (of 4,000) are expected to be demolished. An estimated 10,000 houses require demolition and over 100,000 were damaged. Meanwhile the over 7,000 aftershocks have become part of the “new normal” for us all. During this time how have libraries supported their staff? What changes have been made to services? What are the resourcing opportunities? This presentation will provide a personal view from Lincoln University, Te Whare Wanaka o Aoraki, Library Teaching and Learning. Lincoln is New Zealand's third oldest university having been founded in 1878. Publicly owned and operated it is New Zealand's specialist land-based university. Lincoln is based on the Canterbury Plains, 22 kilometres south of Christchurch. On campus there was mostly minor damage to buildings while in the Library 200,000 volumes were thrown from the shelves. I will focus on the experiences of the Disaster Team and on our experiences with hosting temporarily displaced staff and students from the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology, Library, Learning & Information Services. Experiences from two other institutions will be highlighted: Christchurch City Libraries, Ngā Kete Wānanga-o-Ōtautahi. Focusing on the Māori Services Team and the Ngā Pounamu Māori and Ngāi Tahu collections. The Central library located within the red zone cordon has been closed since February, the Central library held the Ngā Pounamu Māori and Ngai Tahu collections, the largest Māori collections in the Christchurch public library network. The lack of access to these collections changed the way the Māori Services Team, part of the larger Programmes, Events and Learning Team at Christchurch City Libraries were able to provide services to their community resulting in new innovative outreach programmes and a focus on promotion of online resources. On 19th December the “temporary” new and smaller Central library Peterborough opened. The retrieved Ngā Pounamu Māori and Ngai Tahu collections "Ngā rakau teitei e iwa”, have since been re-housed and are once again available for use by the public. Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu. This organisation, established by the Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu Act 1996, services the statutory rights for the people of Ngāi Tahu descent and ensures that the benefits of their Treaty Claim Settlement are enjoyed by Ngāi Tahu now and in the future. Ngāi Tahu are the indigenous Māori people of the southern islands of New Zealand - Te Waipounamu. The iwi (people) hold the rangatiratanga or tribal authority to over 80 per cent of the South Island. With their headquarters based in the central business they have also had to be relocated to temporary facilities. This included their library/archive collection of print resources, art works and taonga (cultural treasures).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The Canterbury earthquake sequence in New Zealand’s South Island induced widespread liquefaction phenomena across the Christchurch urban area on four occasions (4 Sept 2010; 22 Feb; 13 June; 23 Dec 2011), that resulted in widespread ejection of silt and fine sand. This impacted transport networks as well as infiltrated and contaminated the damaged storm water system, making rapid clean-up an immediate post-earthquake priority. In some places the ejecta was contaminated by raw sewage and was readily remobilised in dry windy conditions, creating a long-term health risk to the population. Thousands of residential properties were inundated with liquefaction ejecta, however residents typically lacked the capacity (time or resources) to clean-up without external assistance. The liquefaction silt clean-up response was co-ordinated by the Christchurch City Council and executed by a network of contractors and volunteer groups, including the ‘Farmy-Army’ and the ‘Student-Army’. The duration of clean-up time of residential properties and the road network was approximately 2 months for each of the 3 main liquefaction inducing earthquakes; despite each event producing different volumes of ejecta. Preliminary cost estimates indicate total clean-up costs will be over NZ$25 million. Over 500,000 tonnes of ejecta has been stockpiled at Burwood landfill since the beginning of the Canterbury earthquakes sequence. The liquefaction clean-up experience in Christchurch following the 2010-2011 earthquake sequence has emerged as a valuable case study to support further analysis and research on the coordination, management and costs of large volume deposition of fine grained sediment in urban areas.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Small, tight-knit communities, are complex to manage from outside during a disaster. The township of Lyttelton, New Zealand, and the communities of Corsair Bay, Cass Bay, and Rapaki to the east, are especially more so difficult due to the terrain that encloses them, which caused them to be cut-off from Christchurch, the largest city in the South Island, barely 10 km away, after the Mw 7.1 Darfield Earthquake and subsequent Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. Lyttelton has a very strong and deep-rooted community spirit that draws people to want to be a part of Lyttelton life. It is predominantly residential on the slopes, with retail space, service and light industry nestled near the harbour. It has heritage buildings stretching back to the very foundation of Canterbury yet hosts the largest, modern deep-water port for the region. This study contains two surveys: one circulated shortly before the Darfield Earthquake and one circulated in July 2011, after the Christchurch and Sumner Earthquakes. An analytical comparison of the participants’ household preparedness for disaster before the Darfield Earthquake and after the Christchurch and Sumner Earthquakes was performed. A population spatiotemporal distribution map was produced that shows the population in three-hourly increments over a week to inform exposure to vulnerability to natural hazards. The study went on to analyse the responses of the participants in the immediate period following the Chrsitchurch and Sumner Earthquakes, including their homeward and subsequent journeys, and the decision to evacuate or stay in their homes. Possible predictors to a decision to evacuate some or all members of the household were tested. The study also asked participants’ views on the events since September 2010 for analysis.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on progress in building a faster-growing economy? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Ministers; if so, why? Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress can he report on the numbers of patients receiving elective surgery? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by her answer to oral questions on Tuesday that "There is in New Zealand no actual poverty line" and "I do not see the measurement as a priority"? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he agree with the statement made by the Hon Bill English, in relation to the release of Natasha Fuller's private details by his Social Development Minister, that, "People who enter into public debate are welcome to do so … and should provide their full information to the public"? CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Broadcasting: What percentage of households in Hawkes Bay and on the West Coast of the South Island have gone digital ahead of the digital switchover in these regions on 30 September? CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: What assistance will be available to families unable to afford the fee of over $900 she proposes to introduce in order to access the new Family Dispute Resolution Service? JOHN HAYES to the Minister for Courts: In light of the opening of the temporary courthouse in Masterton last week, what is the range of services that courts can now offer in Masterton? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Was restoration of the Christchurch Cathedral included in the Christchurch Central City Recovery Plan; if not, why not? SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Is she satisfied with the action this Government has taken to improve the lives of women in New Zealand? JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Is she concerned that Wellington Rape Crisis is shutting its doors one day a week because of funding shortfalls? IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Minister of Transport: Which commuter rail services, if any, do not receive funding from the New Zealand Transport Agency?