This report reviews the literature on regeneration requirements of main canopy tree species in Westland. Forests managed for production purposes have to be harvested in an ecologically sustainable way; to maintain their natural character, harvesting should facilitate regeneration of target species and ensure that their recruitment is in proportion to the extent of extraction. The reasons for species establishing at any point in time are unclear; however, they are probably related to the availability of suitable microsites for establishment, the size of the canopy openings formed by disturbance, and whether or not seeds are available at or around the time of the disturbance. Age structures from throughout Westland show that extensive, similar-aged, post-earthquake cohorts of trees are a feature of the region. This suggests that infrequent, massive earthquakes are the dominant coarse-scale disturbance agent, triggering episodes of major erosion and sedimentation and leaving a strong imprint in the forest structure. In other forests, flooding and catastrophic windthrow are major forms of disturbance. The findings suggest that, in general, large disturbances are required for conifer regeneration. This has implications for any sustained yield management of these forests if conifers are to remain an important component. Any harvesting should recognise the importance for tree establishment of: forest floor microsites, such as fallen logs and tree tip-up mounds; and the variable way in which canopy gaps are formed. Harvesting should maintain the 'patchy' nature of the natural forest—large patches of dense conifers interspersed with more heterogeneous patches of mixed species.This is a client report commissioned by West Coast Conservancy and funded from the Unprogrammed Science Advice fund.
INTRODUCTION: Connections between environmental factors and mental health issues have been postulated in many different countries around the world. Previously undertaken research has shown many possible connections between these fields, especially in relation to air quality and extreme weather events. However, research on this subject is lacking in New Zealand, which is difficult to analyse as an overall nation due to its many micro-climates and regional differences.OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study and subsequent analysis is to explore the associations between environmental factors and poor mental health outcomes in New Zealand by region and predict the number of people with mental health-related illnesses corresponding to the environmental influence.METHODS: Data are collected from various public-available sources, e.g., Stats NZ and Coronial services of New Zealand, which comprised four environmental factors of our interest and two mental health indicators data ranging from 2016 up until 2020. The four environmental factors are air pollution, earthquakes, rainfall and temperature. Two mental health indicators include the number of people seen by District Health Boards (DHBs) for mental health reasons and the statistics on suicide deaths. The initial analysis is carried out on which regions were most affected by the chosen environmental factors. Further analysis using Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average(ARIMA) creates a model based on time series of environmental data to generate estimation for the next two years and mental health projected from the ridge regression.RESULTS: In our initial analysis, the environmental data was graphed along with mental health outcomes in regional charts to identify possible associations. Different regions of New Zealand demonstrate quite different relationships between the environmental data and mental health outcomes. The result of later analysis predicts that the suicide rate and DHB mental health visits may increase in Wellington, drop-in Hawke's Bay and slightly increase in Canterbury for the year 2021 and 2022 with different environmental factors considered.CONCLUSION: It is evident that the relationship between environmental and mental health factors is regional and not national due to the many micro-climates that exist around the nation. However, it was observed that not all factors displayed a good relationship between the regions. We conclude that our hypotheses were partially correct, in that increased air pollution was found to correlate to increased mental health-related DHB visits. Rainfall was also highly correlated to some mental health outcomes. Higher levels of rainfall reduced DHB visits and suicide rates in some areas of the country.
Saltwater Forest is a Dacrydium cupressinum-dominated lowland forest covering 9000 ha in south Westland, South Island, New Zealand. Four thousand hectares is managed for sustainable production of indigenous timber. The aim of this study was to provide an integrated analysis of soils, soil-landform relationships, and soil-vegetation relationships at broad and detailed scales. The broad scale understandings provide a framework in which existing or future studies can be placed and the detailed studies elucidate sources of soil and forest variability. Glacial landforms dominate. They include late Pleistocene lateral, terminal and ablation moraines, and outwash aggradation and degradation terraces. Deposits and landforms from six glacial advances have been recognised ranging from latest Last (Otira) Glaciation to Penultimate (Waimea) Glaciation. The absolute ages of landforms were established by analysis of the thickness and soil stratigraphy of loess coverbeds, augmented with radiocarbon dating and phytolith and pollen analysis. In the prevailing high rainfall of Westland soil formation is rapid. The rate of loess accretion in Saltwater Forest (ca. 30 mm ka⁻¹) has been low enough that soil formation and loess accretion took place contemporaneously. Soils formed in this manner are known as upbuilding soils. The significant difference between upbuilding pedogenesis and pedogenesis in a topdown sense into an existing sediment body is that each subsoil increment of an upbuilding soil has experienced processes of all horizons above. In Saltwater Forest subsoils of upbuilding soils are strongly altered because they have experienced the extremely acid environment of the soil surface at some earlier time. Some soil chronosequence studies in Westland have included upbuilding soils formed in loess as the older members of the sequence. Rates and types of processes inferred from these soils should be reviewed because upbuilding is a different pedogenic pathway to topdown pedogenesis. Landform age and morphology were used as a primary stratification for a study of the soil pattern and nature of soil variability in the 4000 ha production area of Saltwater Forest. The age of landforms (> 14 ka) and rapid soil formation mean that soils are uniformly strongly weathered and leached. Soils include Humic Organic Soils, Perch-gley Podzols, Acid Gley Soils, Allophanic Brown Soils, and Orthic or Pan Podzols. The major influence on the nature of soils is site hydrology which is determined by macroscale features of landforms (slope, relief, drainage density), mesoscale effects related to position on landforms, and microscale influences determined by microtopography and individual tree effects. Much of the soil variability arises at microscales so that it is not possible to map areas of uniform soils at practical map scales. The distribution of soil variability across spatial scales, in relation to the intensity of forest management, dictates that it is most appropriate to map soil complexes with boundaries coinciding with landforms. Disturbance of canopy trees is an important agent in forest dynamics. The frequency of forest disturbance in the production area of Saltwater Forest varies in a systematic way among landforms in accord with changes in abundance of different soils. The frequency of forest turnover is highest on landforms with the greatest abundance of extremely poorly-drained Organic Soils. As the abundance of better-drained soils increases the frequency of forest turnover declines. Changes in turnover frequency are reflected in the mean size and density of canopy trees (Dacrydium cupressinum) among landforms. Terrace and ablation moraine landforms with the greatest abundance of extremely poorly-drained soils have on average the smallest trees growing most densely. The steep lateral moraines, characterised by well drained soils, have fewer, larger trees. The changes manifested at the landform scale are an integration of processes operating over much shorter range as a result of short-range soil variability. The systematic changes in forest structure and turnover frequency among landforms and soils have important implications for sustainable forest management.
The potential for a gastroenteritis outbreak in a post-earthquake environment may increase because of compromised infrastructure services, contaminated liquefaction (lateral spreading and surface ejecta), and the presence of gastroenteritis agents in the drinking water network. A population in a post-earthquake environment might be seriously affected by gastroenteritis because it has a short incubation period (about 10 hours). The potential for a gastroenteritis outbreak in a post-earthquake environment may increase because of compromised infrastructure services, contaminated liquefaction (lateral spreading and surface ejecta), and the presence of gastroenteritis agents in the drinking water network. A population in a post-earthquake environment might be seriously affected by gastroenteritis because it has a short incubation period (about 10 hours). The aim of this multidisciplinary research was to retrospectively analyse the gastroenteritis prevalence following the February 22, 2011 earthquake in Christchurch. The first focus was to assess whether earthquake-induced infrastructure damage, liquefaction, and gastroenteritis agents spatially explained the recorded gastroenteritis cases over the period of 35 days following the February 22, 2011 earthquake in Christchurch. The gastroenteritis agents considered in this study were Escherichia coli found in the drinking water supply (MPN/100mL) and Non-Compliant Free Associated Chlorine (FAC-NC) (less than <0.02mg/L). The second focus was the protocols that averted a gastroenteritis outbreak at three Emergency Centres (ECs): Burnside High School Emergency Centre (BEC); Cowles Stadium Emergency Centre (CEC); and Linwood High School Emergency Centre (LEC). Using a mixed-method approach, gastroenteritis point prevalence and the considered factors were quantitatively analysed. The qualitative analysis involved interviewing 30 EC staff members. The data was evaluated by adopting the Grounded Theory (GT) approach. Spatial analysis of considered factors showed that highly damaged CAUs were statistically clustered as demonstrated by Moran’s I statistic and hot spot analysis. Further modelling showed that gastroenteritis point prevalence clustering could not be fully explained by infrastructure damage alone, and other factors influenced the recorded gastroenteritis point prevalence. However, the results of this research suggest that there was a tenuous, indirect relationship between recorded gastroenteritis point prevalence and the considered factors: earthquake-induced infrastructure damage, liquefaction and FAC-NC. Two ECs were opened as part of the post-earthquake response in areas with severe infrastructure damage and liquefaction (BEC and CEC). The third EC (CEC) provided important lessons that were learnt from the previous September 4, 2010 earthquake, and implemented after the February 22, 2011 earthquake. Two types of interwoven themes identified: direct and indirect. The direct themes were preventive protocols and indirect themes included type of EC building (school or a sports stadium), and EC staff. The main limitations of the research were Modifiable Areal Units (MAUP), data detection, and memory loss. This research provides a practical method that can be adapted to assess gastroenteritis risk in a post-earthquake environment. Thus, this mixed method approach can be used in other disaster contexts to study gastroenteritis prevalence, and can serve as an appendage to the existing framework for assessing infectious diseases. Furthermore, the lessons learnt from qualitative analysis can inform the current infectious disease management plans, designed for a post-disaster response in New Zealand and internationally Using a mixed-method approach, gastroenteritis point prevalence and the considered factors were quantitatively analysed. A damage profile was created by amalgamating different types of damage for the considered factors for each Census Area Unit (CAU) in Christchurch. The damage profile enabled the application of a variety of statistical methods which included Moran’s I , Hot Spot (HS) analysis, Spearman’s Rho, and Besag–York–Mollié Model using a range of software. The qualitative analysis involved interviewing 30 EC staff members. The data was evaluated by adopting the Grounded Theory (GT) approach. Spatial analysis of considered factors showed that highly damaged CAUs were statistically clustered as demonstrated by Moran’s I statistic and hot spot analysis. Further modelling showed that gastroenteritis point prevalence clustering could not be fully explained by infrastructure damage alone, and other factors influenced the recorded gastroenteritis point prevalence. However, the results of this research suggest that there was a tenuous, indirect relationship between recorded gastroenteritis point prevalence and the considered factors: earthquake-induced infrastructure damage, liquefaction and FAC-NC. Two ECs were opened as part of the post-earthquake response in areas with severe infrastructure damage and liquefaction (BEC and CEC). The third EC (CEC) provided important lessons that were learnt from the previous September 4, 2010 earthquake, and implemented after the February 22, 2011 earthquake. The ECs were selected to represent the Christchurch area, and were situated where potential for gastroenteritis was high. BEC represented the western side of Christchurch; whilst, CEC and LEC represented the eastern side, where the potential for gastroenteritis was high according to the outputs of the quantitative spatial modelling. Qualitative analysis from the interviews at the ECs revealed that evacuees were arriving at the ECs with gastroenteritis-like symptoms. Participants believed that those symptoms did not originate at the ECs. Two types of interwoven themes identified: direct and indirect. The direct themes were preventive protocols that included prolific use of hand sanitisers; surveillance; and the services offered. Indirect themes included the EC layout, type of EC building (school or a sports stadium), and EC staff. Indirect themes governed the quality and sustainability of the direct themes implemented, which in turn averted gastroenteritis outbreaks at the ECs. The main limitations of the research were Modifiable Areal Units (MAUP), data detection, and memory loss. It was concluded that gastroenteritis point prevalence following the February 22, 2011 earthquake could not be solely explained by earthquake-induced infrastructure damage, liquefaction, and gastroenteritis causative agents alone. However, this research provides a practical method that can be adapted to assess gastroenteritis risk in a post-earthquake environment. Creating a damage profile for each CAU and using spatial data analysis can isolate vulnerable areas, and qualitative data analysis provides localised information. Thus, this mixed method approach can be used in other disaster contexts to study gastroenteritis prevalence, and can serve as an appendage to the existing framework for assessing infectious diseases. Furthermore, the lessons learnt from qualitative analysis can inform the current infectious disease management plans, designed for a post-disaster response in New Zealand and internationally.
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements in relation to Kim Dotcom and the inquiry into the actions of the Government Communications Security Bureau? METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Social Development: Does she have confidence that the Ministry of Social Development can keep private information it holds confidential? KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Finance: What are the main features of the Government's plan to build a more competitive economy based on more savings, higher exports and less debt? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Has the Ministry of Social Development competently managed the private information in its charge? Peseta SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister for Social Development: What children will the White Paper for Vulnerable Children be targeting? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: What specific criteria were used to determine whether a school in Christchurch was identified for restoration, consolidation or rejuvenation? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister responsible for the GCSB: What were the dates of the three cases that the Government Communications Security Bureau audit highlighted, because they could not assure him "that the legal position is totally clear", as referred to in his statement of 3 October 2012? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to my Question for Written Answer 3326 (2012)? Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister of Civil Defence: Why did he reject the independent Civil Defence Emergency Management earthquake review's recommendation, which was made in response to the finding that duplication of control was "not only inefficient but put people and property at risk", and that "the same situation could arise in a number of different parts of New Zealand"? MIKE SABIN to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs: What is the Government doing to improve the support and recognition given to veterans? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in Hon John Banks; if so, why? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: What is the objective of the Government review of the EQC?
MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Māori Affairs: Is he satisfied with the financial management of the Whānau Integration, Innovation and Engagement Fund, administered by Te Puni Kōkiri? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: What is the projected growth, if any, of New Zealand’s international liabilities under this Government’s policies, and what are the components of those liabilities? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for the Environment: Is water quality in New Zealand being negatively affected by livestock in rivers and lakes? Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Corrections: What progress has been made on the proposal to build a public-private prison at Wiri? Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Will proposed changes to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade undermine its ability to carry out its role in promoting New Zealand’s trade, security and consular interests? LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Women's Affairs: What commitment is the Government willing to make to increase the number of women on State sector boards? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with the rate of progress of the Christchurch earthquake recovery? Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Did New Zealand meet the 28 February deadline for its submission to the United Nations on increasing the level of ambition in global greenhouse gas mitigation, as agreed by parties in the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action; if not, why not? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her answer to Written Question No 00916 (2012) that “the Government is focused on building a more competitive economy, which will lead to more jobs and higher wages”? JOHN HAYES to the Minister of Defence: What updates can he give on new Defence Force capability? CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Broadcasting: Is he confident that current Government broadcasting policy upholds the standards of an independent and free press; if so, why?
Courage has remained an elusive concept to define despite having been in the English lexicon for hundreds of years. The Canterbury earthquake sequence that began in 2010 provided a unique context in which to undertake research that would contribute to further conceptualisation of courage. This qualitative study was undertaken in Christchurch, New Zealand, with adults over the age of 70 who experienced the Canterbury earthquakes and continued to live in the Canterbury region. The population group was chosen because it is an under researched group in post-disaster environments, and one that offers valuable insights because of members' length and breadth of life experiences, and likely reminiscent and reflective life stage. A constructivist grounded theory approach was utilised, with data collected through semi-structured focus groups and individual key informant interviews. The common adverse experience of the participants initially discussed was the earthquakes, which was followed by exploration of courage in their other lived experiences. Through an inductive process of data analysis, conceptual categories were identified, which when further analysed and integrated, contributed to a definition of courage. The definition was subsequently discussed with social work professionals who had remained working in the Canterbury region after experiencing the earthquakes. From the examples and the actions described within these, a process model was developed to support the application of courage. The model includes five steps: recognising an adverse situation, making a conscious decision to act, accessing sources of motivation, mastering emotion and taking action. Defining and utilising courage can help people to face adversity associated with everyday life and ultimately supports self-actualisation and self-development. Recommendations from the study include teaching about courage within social work education, utilising the process model within supervision, intentionally involving older adults in emergency management planning and developing specific social work tasks in hospital settings following a disaster.
Worldwide, the numbers of people living with chronic conditions are rapidly on the rise. Chronic illnesses are enduring and often cannot be cured, requiring a strategy for long term management and intervention to prevent further exacerbation. Globally, there has been an increase in interventions using telecommunications technologies to aid patients in their home setting to manage chronic illnesses. Such interventions have often been delivered by nurses. The purpose of this research was to assess whether a particular intervention that had been successfully implemented in the United Kingdom could also be implemented in Canterbury. In particular, this research assessed the perspectives of Canterbury based practice nurses and district nurses. The findings suggest that a majority of both district and practice nurses did not view the service as compatible with their current work situation. Existing workload and concerns over funding of the proposed service were identified as potential barriers. However, the service was perceived as potentially beneficial for some, with the elderly based in rural areas, or patients with chronic mental health needs identified as more likely to benefit than others. Practice nurses expressed strong views on who should deliver such services. Given that it was identified that practice nurses already have in-depth knowledge of their patients’ health, while valuing the strong relationships established with their communities, it was suggested that patients would most benefit from locally based nurses to deliver any community based health services in the future. It was also found that teletriaging is currently widely used by practice nurses across Canterbury to meet a range of health needs, including chronic mental health needs. This suggests that the scope of teletriaging in community health and its potential and full implications are currently not well understood in New Zealand. Significant events, such as the Christchurch earthquakes indicate the potential role of teletriaging in addressing mental health issues, thereby reducing the chronic health burden in the community.
Coastal and river environments are exposed to a number of natural hazards that have the potential to negatively affect both human and natural environments. The purpose of this research is to explain that significant vulnerabilities to seismic hazards exist within coastal and river environments and that coasts and rivers, past and present, have played as significant a role as seismic, engineering or socio-economic factors in determining the impacts and recovery patterns of a city following a seismic hazard event. An interdisciplinary approach was used to investigate the vulnerability of coastal and river areas in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, following the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, which began on the 4th of September 2010. This information was used to identify the characteristics of coasts and rivers that make them more susceptible to earthquake induced hazards including liquefaction, lateral spreading, flooding, landslides and rock falls. The findings of this research are applicable to similar coastal and river environments elsewhere in the world where seismic hazards are also of significant concern. An interdisciplinary approach was used to document and analyse the coastal and river related effects of the Canterbury earthquake sequence on Christchurch city in order to derive transferable lessons that can be used to design less vulnerable urban communities and help to predict seismic vulnerabilities in other New Zealand and international urban coastal and river environments for the future. Methods used to document past and present features and earthquake impacts on coasts and rivers in Christchurch included using maps derived from Geographical Information Systems (GIS), photographs, analysis of interviews from coastal, river and engineering experts, and analysis of secondary data on seismicity, liquefaction potential, geology, and planning statutes. The Canterbury earthquake sequence had a significant effect on Christchurch, particularly around rivers and the coast. This was due to the susceptibility of rivers to lateral spreading and the susceptibility of the eastern Christchurch and estuarine environments to liquefaction. The collapse of river banks and the extensive cracking, tilting and subsidence that accompanied liquefaction, lateral spreading and rock falls caused damage to homes, roads, bridges and lifelines. This consequently blocked transportation routes, interrupted electricity and water lines, and damaged structures built in their path. This study found that there are a number of physical features of coastal and river environments from the past and the present that have induced vulnerabilities to earthquake hazards. The types of sediments found beneath eastern Christchurch are unconsolidated fine sands, silts, peats and gravels. Together with the high water tables located beneath the city, these deposits made the area particularly susceptible to liquefaction and liquefaction-induced lateral spreading, when an earthquake of sufficient size shook the ground. It was both past and present coastal and river processes that deposited the types of sediments that are easily liquefied during an earthquake. Eastern Christchurch was once a coastal and marine environment 6000 years ago when the shoreline reached about 6 km inland of its present day location, which deposited fine sand and silts over this area. The region was also exposed to large braided rivers and smaller spring fed rivers, both of which have laid down further fine sediments over the following thousands of years. A significant finding of this study is the recognition that the Canterbury earthquake sequence has exacerbated existing coastal and river hazards and that assessments and monitoring of these changes will be an important component of Christchurch’s future resilience to natural hazards. In addition, patterns of recovery following the Canterbury earthquakes are highlighted to show that coasts and rivers are again vulnerable to earthquakes through their ability to recovery. This city’s capacity to incorporate resilience into the recovery efforts is also highlighted in this study. Coastal and river areas have underlying physical characteristics that make them increasingly vulnerable to the effects of earthquake hazards, which have not typically been perceived as a ‘coastal’ or ‘river’ hazard. These findings enhance scientific and management understanding of the effects that earthquakes can have on coastal and river environments, an area of research that has had modest consideration to date. This understanding is important from a coastal and river hazard management perspective as concerns for increased human development around coastlines and river margins, with a high seismic risk, continue to grow.
Recent surface-rupturing earthquakes in New Zealand have highlighted significant exposure and vulnerability of the road network to fault displacement. Understanding fault displacement hazard and its impact on roads is crucial for mitigating risks and enhancing resilience. There is a need for regional-scale assessments of fault displacement to identify vulnerable areas within the road network for the purposes of planning and prioritising site-specific investigations. This thesis employs updated analysis of data from three historical surface-rupturing earthquakes (Edgecumbe 1987, Darfield 2010, and Kaikoūra 2016) to develop an empirical model that addresses the gap in regional fault displacement hazard analysis. The findings contribute to understanding of • How to use seismic hazard model inputs for regional fault displacement hazard analysis • How faulting type and sediment cover affects the magnitude and spatial distribution of fault displacement • How the distribution of displacement and regional fault displacement hazard is impacted by secondary faulting • The inherent uncertainties and limitations associated with employing an empirical approach at a regional scale • Which sections of New Zealand’s roading network are most susceptible to fault displacement hazard and warrant site-specific investigations • Which regions should prioritise updating emergency management plans to account for post-event disruptions to roading. I used displacement data from the aforementioned historical ruptures to generate displacement versus distance-to-fault curves for various displacement components, fault types, and geological characteristics. Using those relationships and established relationships for along-strike displacement, displacement contours were generated surrounding active faults within the NZ Community Fault Model. Next, I calculated a new measure of 1D strain along roads as well as relative hazard, which integrated 1D strain and normalised slip rate data. Summing these values at the regional level identified areas of heightened relative hazard across New Zealand, and permits an assessment of the susceptibility of road networks using geomorphon land classes as proxies for vulnerability. The results reveal that fault-parallel displacements tend to localise near the fault plane, while vertical and fault-perpendicular displacements sustain over extended distances. Notably, no significant disparities were observed in off-fault displacement between the hanging wall and footwall sides of the fault, or among different surface geology types, potentially attributed to dataset biases. The presence of secondary faulting in the dataset contributes to increased levels of tectonic displacement farther from the fault, highlighting its significance in hazard assessments. Furthermore, fault displacement contours delineate broader zones around dip-slip faults compared to strike-slip faults, with correlations identified between fault length and displacement width. Road ‘strain’ values are higher around dip-slip faults, with notable examples observed in the Westland and Buller Districts. As expected, relative hazard analysis revealed elevated values along faults with high slip rates, notably along the Alpine Fault. A regional-scale analysis of hazard and exposure reveals heightened relative hazard in specific regions, including Wellington, Southern Hawke’s Bay, Central Bay of Plenty, Central West Coast, inland Canterbury, and the Wairau Valley of Marlborough. Notably, the Central West Coast exhibits the highest summed relative hazard value, attributed to the fast-slipping Alpine Fault. The South Island generally experiences greater relative hazard due to larger and faster-slipping faults compared to the North Island, despite having fewer roads. Central regions of New Zealand face heightened risk compared to Southern or Northern regions. Critical road links intersecting high-slipping faults, such as State Highways 6, 73, 1, and 2, necessitate prioritisation for site-specific assessments, emergency management planning and targeted mitigation strategies. Roads intersecting with the Alpine Fault are prone to large parallel displacements, requiring post-quake repair efforts. Mitigation strategies include future road avoidance of nearby faults, modification of road fill and surface material, and acknowledgement of inherent risk, leading to prioritised repair efforts of critical roads post-quake. Implementing these strategies enhances emergency response efforts by improving accessibility to isolated regions following a major surface-rupturing event, facilitating faster supply delivery and evacuation assistance. This thesis contributes to the advancement of understanding fault displacement hazard by introducing a novel regional, empirical approach. The methods and findings highlight the importance of further developing such analyses and extending them to other critical infrastructure types exposed to fault displacement hazard in New Zealand. Enhancing our comprehension of the risks associated with fault displacement hazard offers valuable insights into various mitigation strategies for roading infrastructure and informs emergency response planning, thereby enhancing both national and global infrastructure resilience against geological hazards.
NUK KORAKO to the Minister of Finance: How does New Zealand’s growing economy and the Government’s commitment to responsible fiscal management mean New Zealand is well-placed to respond to the Kaikōura earthquake? ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Has he spoken to relevant Ministers about the lessons learned from the Canterbury earthquakes to ensure people affected by the recent earthquakes have an easier and faster recovery? STUART SMITH to the Minister of Civil Defence: What update can he provide about the Government’s response to the Kaikōura earthquake? RON MARK to the Prime Minister: Can he update the House on the situation in quake-affected areas in the South Island? JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Is he committed to all his Government’s policies? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statement that following the Valentine’s Day earthquake this year in Canterbury, “it was timely to review whether any additional mental health and wellbeing support was needed”; if so, will he consider reviewing whether any additional support is needed for Canterbury and Nelson-Marlborough district health boards as a result of the recent earthquakes? JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Transport: What updates has he received on damage to transport infrastructure following the Kaikōura earthquake? JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: What is his response to yesterday’s call from members of the Joint Working Group on Pay Equity Principles for the Government to “immediately right this historic wrong and implement the JWG principles”? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Economic Development: When is he likely to announce a recovery or support package for small businesses in earthquake-affected areas? KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Police: What are New Zealand Police doing to support the Kaikōura community? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: When did she first discuss the potential impact of Monday’s 7.5 earthquake on NCEA and Scholarship exams with the New Zealand Qualifications Authority? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent reports has he received on the impact of the recent earthquakes on the primary sector?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the performance of the public service? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement about asset sales that it was the Governments intention that “every New Zealander who wants shares gets them”? SIMON O'CONNOR to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What progress has been made in expanding the Youth Guarantee Scheme to provide more 16 and 17 year-olds with fees-free tertiary training this year? Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by his statement that “the global financial crisis and the Canterbury earthquakes were not projected in any of those forecasts”? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Local Government: Has he been in communication with the Auckland Council over financial management issues, and if so, on what occasions this year? MIKE SABIN to the Minister for Social Development: How will the Government’s recently announced changes target young people not in education, employment or training? DENISE ROCHE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his comment that the Government has a “sinking lid policy” for pokie machines? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf in answer to Oral Question No 1 on 1 March 2012, that “I do know what is in the coalition agreement” and, if so, does he agree that the United Future-National confidence and supply agreement does not require United Future to vote for the Government’s asset sales legislation? TODD McCLAY to the Associate Minister of Conservation: What benefits will the Game Animal Council Bill bring for recreational hunters? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: What response has he received to the “Smarter. Faster. Fairer” tenancy service which provides an 0800 phone customer service centre response to people with housing needs? JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister for ACC: What initiatives are underway to help raise awareness about falls in the home?
Lincoln University was commissioned by the Avon-Otakaro Network (AvON) to estimate the value of the benefits of a ‘recreation reserve’ or ‘river park’ in the Avon River Residential Red Zone (ARRRZ). This research has demonstrated significant public desire and support for the development of a recreation reserve in the Avon River Residential Red Zone. Support is strongest for a unique natural environment with native fauna and flora, healthy wetlands and rivers, and recreational opportunities that align with this vision, such as walking, cycling and water-based sporting and leisure activities. The research also showed support for a reserve that promotes and enables community interaction and wellbeing, and is evident in respondents’ desires for community gardens, regular festivals and markets, and the physical linking of the CBD with eastern suburbs through a green corridor. There is less support for children’s playgrounds, sports fields or open grassed areas, all of which could be considered as more typical of an urban park development. Benefits (willing to pay) to Christchurch residents (excluding tourists) of a recreation reserve could be as high as $35 million each year. Savings to public health costs could be as high as $50.3 million each year. The incorporation or restoration of various ecosystems services, including water quality improvements, flood mitigation and storm water management could yield a further $8.8 million ($19, 600) per hectare/year at 450 ha). Combined annual benefits of a recreational reserve in the ARRRZ are approximately $94.1 million per annum but this figure does not include potentially significant benefits from, for example, tourism, property equity gains in areas adjacent to the reserve, or the effects of economic rejuvenation in the East. Although we were not able to provide costing estimates for park attributes, this study does make available the value of benefits, which can be used as a guide to the scope of expenditure on development of each park attribute.
There is strong consensus in the civil defence and emergency management literature that public participation is essential for a 'good' recovery. However, there is a paucity of research detailing how this community-led planning should be carried out in the real world. There are few processes or timelines for communities to follow when wanting to plan for themselves, nor is there a great deal of advice for communities who want to plan for their own recovery. In short, despite this consensus that community involvement is desireable, there is very little information available as to the nature of this involvement or how communities might facilitate this. It is simply assumed that communities are willing and able to participate in the recovery process and that recovery authorities will welcome, encourage, and enable this participation. This is not always the case, and the result is that community groups can be left feeling lost and ineffective when trying to plan for their own recovery. In attempting to address this gap, my study contributes to a better understanding of community involvement in recovery planning, based on research with on particular a community group (SPRIG), who has undertaken their own form of community-led planning in a post-disaster environment. Through group observations and in-depth interviews with members of SPRIG, I was able to identify various roles for such groups in the post-disaster recovery process. My research also contributes to an enhanced understanding of the process a community group might follow to implement their own form of post-disaster recovery planning, with the main point being that any planning should be done side by side with local authorities. Finally, I discovered that a community group will face organisational, community and institutional challenges when trying to plan for their area; however, despite these challenges, opportunities exist, such as the chance to build a better future.
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his answer on Tuesday regarding jobs "I think that the number of 170,000 may come from the initial Budget forecast for 2009, perhaps. I cannot remember the year exactly."? Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Given the recent loss of Māori Party support for his Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, will he consider working with opposition parties on amendments to improve it? LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government's infrastructure programme contributing to building a more competitive economy? Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he agree with the NZIER shadow board that "the growth outlook for the second half of 2012 looks weak and unemployment remains stubbornly high."? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made to review Child Youth and Family's complaints process? Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: What progress has been made in the delivery of the Prime Minister's Youth Mental Health Project announced in April of this year with an extra $11.3 million provided to support it? JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has she received on the time taken for decisions on notified consents issued under the Resource Management Act 1991? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Why did New Zealand pull out of a joint proposal with the United States to create a marine reserve in Antarctica's Ross Sea? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by the answers he gave yesterday to supplementary question 5 on Oral Question No 7 and supplementary question 3 on Oral Question No 12? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What progress has the Government made to support repairing damaged houses and infrastructure following the Canterbury earthquakes? SUE MORONEY to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement on 3News last night, on the subject of Business New Zealand's assertion that women need retraining when returning to employment after extended parental leave that "no. It wouldn't be my view"? JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Immigration: What is the Government doing to ensure that New Zealanders have first priority for jobs in the Canterbury rebuild?
Questions to Ministers 1. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Finance: What advice has he received about factors that lie behind the current turmoil we are witnessing on world financial markets, and what are the implications for New Zealand? 2. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: Does she still agree, as she did on 13 July 2011, with the comment made by Rt Hon John Key on 22 November 2010 that "I have no reason to believe that New Zealand safety standards are any less than Australia's and in fact our safety record for the most part has been very good"? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answers to Oral Question No 1 yesterday when he said that the Leader of the Opposition is "just plain wrong" in relation to skills training? 4. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister for the Environment: How have Government reforms to the Resource Management Act helped increase competition in the grocery business? 5. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Attorney-General: Will he meet with earthquake victims' families to hear directly why they need independent legal representation; if not, why not? 6. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that "I think the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research is referring to some longer-term issues around demographic change and healthcare costs, and we share the chief executive's concern"? 7. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: What is the timeline of the ministerial inquiry into the treatment of foreign fishing crews in New Zealand waters? 8. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What progress is being made on the Government's goal of delivering fast broadband to rural areas? 9. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he agree that an appropriate part of the "red zone" area along the Avon River through Christchurch should be transformed into a "green space" for memorial and recreational public purposes? 10. STUART NASH to the Minister of Finance: Does he believe the tax system is fair for all New Zealanders? 11. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What steps has the Government taken to manage gateways between benefits? 12. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all of her answers to Oral Question No 8 yesterday?
Whole document is available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland until Feb. 2014. The increasing scale of losses from earthquake disasters has reinforced the need for property owners to become proactive in seismic risk reduction programs. However, despite advancement in seismic design methods and legislative frameworks, building owners are often reluctant to adopt mitigation measures required to reduce earthquake losses. The magnitude of building collapses from the recent Christchurch earthquakes in New Zealand shows that owners of earthquake prone buildings (EPBs) are not adopting appropriate risk mitigation measures in their buildings. Owners of EPBs are found unwilling or lack motivation to adopt adequate mitigation measures that will reduce their vulnerability to seismic risks. This research investigates how to increase the likelihood of building owners undertaking appropriate mitigation actions that will reduce their vulnerability to earthquake disaster. A sequential two-phase mixed methods approach was adopted for the research investigation. Multiple case studies approach was adopted in the first qualitative phase, followed by the second quantitative research phase that includes the development and testing of a framework. The research findings reveal four categories of critical obstacles to building owners‘ decision to adopt earthquake loss prevention measures. These obstacles include perception, sociological, economic and institutional impediments. Intrinsic and extrinsic interventions are proposed as incentives for overcoming these barriers. The intrinsic motivators include using information communication networks such as mass media, policy entrepreneurs and community engagement in risk mitigation. Extrinsic motivators comprise the use of four groups of incentives namely; financial, regulatory, technological and property market incentives. These intrinsic and extrinsic interventions are essential for enhancing property owners‘ decisions to voluntarily adopt appropriate earthquake mitigation measures. The study concludes by providing specific recommendations that earthquake risk mitigation managers, city councils and stakeholders involved in risk mitigation in New Zealand and other seismic risk vulnerable countries could consider in earthquake risk management. Local authorities could adopt the framework developed in this study to demonstrate a combination of incentives and motivators that yield best-valued outcomes. Consequently, actions can be more specific and outcomes more effective. The implementation of these recommendations could offer greater reasons for the stakeholders and public to invest in building New Zealand‘s built environment resilience to earthquake disasters.
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence that his Ministers are ethical and competent? DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on building momentum in the New Zealand economy and how this is supporting jobs? METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Has he checked his files yet regarding whether Hon John Banks declared a potential conflict of interest in relation to the New Zealand International Convention Centre Bill while still a Minister; if so, was any conflict declared? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied with the performance of Health Benefits Ltd; if so, why? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What recent progress has been made on the anchor projects in the Christchurch Central recovery plan? ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Conservation: Has he received any reports on the environmental impact of seismic surveying in the New Zealand Exclusive Economic Zone? Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of State Services: Has he asked the State Services Commissioner for reports on recent failures of state sector agencies to carry out their functions according to the law; if not, why not? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Primary Industries: What progress can he report on boosting innovation in the primary sector through the Primary Growth Partnership? Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Minister for Primary Industries: What reports, if any, has he received on the state of the New Zealand kiwifruit industry? PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Police: What recent announcements has she made to support the victims of serious financial crime? Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Conservation: Why did he tell the House on 24 September "the first I knew of the issue of the submission was just 5 days before" when as he stated on 17 October "The first full briefing on Tukituki was on 5 March and it confirmed the department's role in the process and mentioned nitrogen and phosphorous management"? Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Will he explain, given the latest projection of New Zealand's net greenhouse gas emissions is around 90 million tonnes in 2040, how the Government can conceivably reach its own emissions reduction target of 30 million tonnes by 2050?
Though rare and unpredictable, earthquakes can and do cause catastrophic destruction when they impact unprepared and vulnerable communities. Extensive damage and failure of vulnerable buildings is a key factor which contributes to seismic-related disasters, making the proactive management of these buildings a necessity to reduce the risk of future disasters arising. The devastating Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 brought the urgency of this issue to national importance in New Zealand. The national earthquake-prone building framework came into effect in 2017, obligating authorities to identify existing buildings with the greatest risk of collapse in strong earthquakes and for building owners to strengthen or demolish these buildings within a designated period of time. Though this framework is unique to New Zealand, the challenge of managing the seismic risk of such buildings is common amongst all seismically-active countries. Therefore, looking outward to examine how other jurisdictions legally manage this challenge is useful for reflecting on the approaches taken in New Zealand and understand potential lessons which could be adopted. This research compares the legal framework used to reduce the seismic risk of existing buildings in New Zealand with that of the similarly earthquake-prone countries of Japan and Italy. These legal frameworks are examined with a particular focus on the proactive goal of reducing risk and improving resilience, as is the goal of the international Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. The Sendai Framework, which each of the case study countries have committed to and thus have obligations under, forms the legal basis of the need for states to reduce disaster risk in their jurisdictions. In particular, the states’ legal frameworks for existing building risk reduction are examined in the context of the Sendai priorities of understanding disaster risk, strengthening disaster risk governance, and investing in resilience. While this research illustrates that the case study countries have each adopted more proactive risk reduction frameworks in recent years in anticipation of future earthquakes, the frameworks currently focus on a very narrow range of existing buildings and thus are not currently sufficient for promoting the long-term resilience of building stocks. In order to improve resilience, it is argued, legal frameworks need to include a broader range of buildings subject to seismic risk reduction obligations and also to broaden the focus on long-term monitoring of potential risk to buildings.
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he agree with the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce chief executive Peter Townsend that the reconstruction of Canterbury following the earthquake requires someone "to co-ordinate and oversee" reconstruction? 2. COLIN KING to the Minister of Finance: What steps is the Government taking to ensure the Earthquake Commission can meet claims arising from the Canterbury earthquake? 3. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What was the earliest date that Treasury formed the conclusion that South Canterbury Finance could fail, and when and by whom was that first raised with him? 4. DAVID GARRETT to the Attorney-General: Does he agree that "tikanga" as it is described in the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill will differ in meaning from iwi to iwi and hapū to hapū? 5. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Health: Are doctors and nurses having more say in how the health system is run? 6. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has he received on responses to the Canterbury earthquake, particularly with respect to the region's flood and waste management systems? 7. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Attorney-General: What is the burden of proof under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill in relation to applications for customary interests, and what type of evidence would the Crown be required to produce to prove that a customary interest had been extinguished? 8. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: When he answered yesterday that "hopefully" the new foreshore and seabed bill "will settle the protracted controversy around the issues of the foreshore and seabed", was he aware that the Government's confidence and supply partner Hon Pita Sharples told TV3 that he was "not entirely happy" with the new bill? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How have Government social services been supporting the people of Canterbury? 10. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: Why did the Auckland Transition Agency award the $53.8 million contract for the Auckland Council's Enterprise Resource Planning computer system without a competitive tender? 11. Dr JACKIE BLUE to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Why is the Ministry of Women's Affairs celebrating Suffrage Day? 12. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Women's Affairs: How will New Zealand's forthcoming report to the UN under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women explain the Government's decision to axe the Pay and Employment Equity Unit?
1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Finance? 2. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: How much does the Government expect to spend over the next few years to help rebuild Christchurch in the aftermath of the two earthquakes? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her statement in regard to hardship assistance that "…I think it proves that the help is there when people need it,"; if so, why? 4. RAHUI KATENE to the Minister of Health: What action, if any, has been taken in light of the study Ethnicity and Management of Colon Cancer in New Zealand: Do Indigenous Patients Get a Worse Deal?, which concluded that Māori New Zealanders with colon cancer were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and experienced a lower quality of care compared with non-Māori patients? 5. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What steps is the Government taking to increase renewable electricity generation in light of reports that greenhouse gas emissions from this sector have increased by 120 percent, which is more than any other sector since 1990? 6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: Excluding the banks and non-bank financial institutions covered by the deposit guarantee scheme, are there any other companies that might be provided with a government guarantee while the Rt Hon John Key is Prime Minister? 7. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What is Petrobras able to do under the permit granted to it in the Raukumara Basin? 8. DAVID CLENDON to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What environmental protection provisions, if any, did the Government include in the permit granted to Petrobras to explore for oil and drill off the East Cape? 9. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all Ministers involved in the Mediaworks frequency payment arrangement? 10. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Revenue: What has Inland Revenue done to assist the people in Christchurch after the February earthquake? 11. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services: Does he stand by his statements in relation to the purchase of 34 BMWs by Ministerial Services, including one with heated seats, that "Yeah I don't know what's in Dunedin" and "It's beyond me, it's not my car anyway"? 12. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture: What has been the result of enforcement action taken by the Ministry of Fisheries under Operation Paid and Taskforce Webb?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement: “I’m not going to go and relitigate every comment I’ve made prior to this point because I don’t think that would actually be helpful”? TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: How has the Government balanced the need for responsible fiscal management with its continued support for New Zealand families? METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Ka whakatau a ia i te kōrero i whakaputaina māna, arā, “I do not accept the view that we are a deeply unequal country. I do not think the evidence suggests that, and people drawing that conclusion are wrong”? Translation: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf, “I do not accept the view that we are a deeply unequal country. I do not think the evidence suggests that, and people drawing that conclusion are wrong”? JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What recent announcements has the Government made around the rebuild of the Christchurch city centre? Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Minister of Māori Affairs: Does he stand by all his statements? MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Health: Has any progress been made on the Zero Fees for Under Sixes scheme taking coverage over and above the 70 percent of children covered in 2008 achieved by the previous Government? Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Associate Minister of Education: What progress has been made on the charter schools policy? ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made on the release of the White Paper for Vulnerable Children? CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement in his press release of 24 May 2012 that “KiwiRail has successfully undertaken a significant investment programme over the previous two years, including: New locomotives and wagons, and refurbishment of the current locomotive fleet”? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf that there are no plans to sell KiwiRail? MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Ethnic Affairs: What reports has she received about the Office of Ethnic Affairs working with the Red Cross? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: What alternatives did the Government investigate before committing itself to the Road of National Significance between Puhoi and Wellsford, which is now projected to cost $1.76 billion up from $1.69 billion two years ago?
The National Science Challenge ‘Building Better Homes, Towns and Cities’ is currently undertaking work that, in part, identifies and analyses the Waimakariri District Council’s (WMK/Council) organisational practices and process tools. The focus is on determining the processes that made the Residential Red Zone Recovery Plan, 2016 (RRZRP) collaboration process so effective and compares it to the processes used to inform the current Kaiapoi Town Centre Plan - 2028 and Beyond (KTC Plan). This research aims to explore ‘what travelled’ in terms of values, principles, methods, processes and personnel from the RRZRP to the KTC planning process. My research will add depth to this research by examining more closely the KTC Plan’s hearings process, reviewing submissions made, analysing background documents and by conducting five semi-structured interviews with a selection of people who made submissions on the KTC Plan. The link between community involvement and best recovery outcomes has been acknowledged in literature as well as by humanitarian agencies (Lawther, 2009; Sullivan, 2003). My research has documented WMK’s post-quake community engagement strategy by focusing on their initial response to the earthquake of 2010 and the two-formal plan (RRZRP and KTC Plan) making procedures that succeeded this response. My research has led me to conclude that WMK was committed to collaborating with their constituents right through the extended post-quake sequence. Iterative face to face or ‘think communications’ combined with the accessibility of all levels of Council staff – including senior management and elected members - gave interested community members the opportunity to discuss and deliberate the proposed plans with the people tasked with preparing them. WMK’s commitment to collaborate is illustrated by the methods they employed to inform their post-quake efforts and plans and by the logic behind the selected methods. Combined the Council’s logic and methods best describe the ‘Waimakariri Way’. My research suggests that collaborative planning is iterative in nature. It is therefore difficult to establish a specific starting point where collaboration begins as the relationships needed for the collaborative process constantly (re)emerge out of pre-existing relationships. Collaboration seems to be based on an attitude, which means there is no starting ‘point’ as such, rather an amplification for a time of a basic attitude towards the public.
Hon PHIL HEATLEY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy – and especially on further signs of economic momentum in the regions and among manufacturers? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: How much did the Government's share sales in Mighty River Power, Meridian, and Air New Zealand raise, given that the Supplement to the 2010 Investment Statement of the Government of New Zealand projected that those sales would raise $5.18 billion? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for ACC: How much did ACC invest in Pike River Coal Limited and in New Zealand Oil and Gas Limited over the last eight years, and how much has it made or lost in total on its investment in each company, taking into account share purchases, subscriptions and sales, dividends, and current share prices? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Māori Affairs: Does he stand by his statement "I know Māori want to talk about the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in our constitution, and how our legal and political systems can reflect tikanga Māori."; if so, why? Hon SHANE JONES to the Associate Minister of Finance: Is he satisfied with his performance in regard to his delegations as Associate Minister of Finance? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister for Building and Construction: What reports has he received regarding the state of the building and construction sector? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister for the Environment: Did the Environmental Protection Authority assess the full version of Anadarko's Discharge Management Plan and Emergency Response Plan as part of its evaluation of the company's Environmental Impact Assessment for the Deepwater Taranaki Well; if not, why not? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: When, if at all, did Cabinet approve the timing of the Air New Zealand sell-down and what directions did Cabinet give the shareholding Ministers? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Housing: What steps is the Government taking to rebuild Christchurch's housing stock damaged or destroyed by the earthquakes? Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Minister for Primary Industries: Does he stand by his statement "The opportunity, and challenge, for our meat producers now is to add value to different cuts of meat and continue to sell the New Zealand story"; if so, why? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Local Government: How is the Government improving councils' financial reporting? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does he stand by his statement that "I am especially keen to hear what affected parties have to say on the Part 6A proposals in the Bill, and will carefully consider their submissions and the recommendations of the select committee"?
Museums around the world are often affected by major catastrophes, and yet planning for these disasters is an often neglected aspect of museum practice. New Zealand is not immune from these events, as can be seen in the recent series of serious earthquakes in Christchurch in 2010 and 2011. This dissertation considers how prepared the New Zealand museum sector is to handle unexpected events that negatively affect its buildings, staff, operations and treasured collections. The central research question was: What is the overall state of emergency planning in the New Zealand museum sector? There was a significant gap in the literature, especially in the local context, as there has been only one other comparable study conducted in Britain, and nothing locally. This dissertation makes a valuable contribution to the field of museum studies by drawing on theory from relevant areas such as crises management literature and by conducting original empirical research on a topic which has received little attention hitherto. The research employed a number of methods, including a review of background secondary sources, a survey and interviews. After contextualising the study with a number of local examples, Ian online survey was then developed an which enabled precise understanding of the nature of current museum practices and policies around emergency planning. Following this I conducted several interviews with museum professionals from a variety of institutional backgrounds which explored their thoughts and feelings behind the existing practices within the industry. The findings of the research were significant and somewhat alarming: almost 40% of the museum and galleries in New Zealand do not have any emergency plan at all, and only 11% have what they considered ‘complete’ plans. The research revealed a clear picture of the current width and depth of planning, as well as practices around updating the plans and training related to them. Within the industry there is awareness that planning for emergencies is important, but museum staff typically lack the knowledge and guidance needed to conduct effective emergency planning. As a result of the analysis, several practical suggestions are presented aimed at improving emergency planning practices in New Zealand museums. However this study has implications for museum studies and for current museum practice everywhere, as many of the recommendations for resolving the current obstacles and problems are applicable anywhere in the world, suggesting that New Zealand museums could become leaders in this important area.
Collective identity construction in organisations engaged in an inter-organisational collaboration (IOC), especially temporary IOCs set up in disaster situations, has received scant attention in the organisational studies literature yet collective identity is considered to be important in fostering effective IOC operations. This doctoral study was designed to add to our understanding about how collective identity is constituted throughout the entire lifespan of a particular temporary coopetitive (i.e., simultaneously collaborative and competitive) IOC formed in a post-disaster environment. To achieve this purpose, a qualitative case study of the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team (SCIRT), a time-bound coopetition formed to repair the horizontal infrastructure in Christchurch, New Zealand after the devastating 2011 Canterbury earthquakes, was undertaken. Using data from semi-structured interviews, field observations, and organisational documents and other artefacts, an inductive analytic method was employed to explore how internal stakeholders engaged with and co- constructed a collective SCIRT identity and reconciled this with their home organization identity. The analysis revealed that the SCIRT collective identity was an ongoing process, involving the interweaving of social, temporal, material and geospatial dimensions constructed through intersecting cycles of senior managers’ sensegiving and employees’ sensemaking across SCIRT’s five and a half years of existence. Senior management deliberately undertook identity work campaigns that used organisational rituals, artefacts, and spatial design to disseminate and encourage a sense of “we are all SCIRT”. However, there was no common sense of “we-ness”. Identification with SCIRT was experienced differently among different groups of employees and across time. Employees’ differing senses of collective identity were accounted for by their past, present, and anticipated future relationships with their home organisation, and also (re)shaped by the geosocial environments in which they worked. The study supports previous research claiming that collective identity is a process of recursive sensegiving and sensemaking between senior managers and employees. However, it extends the literature by revealing the imbricated nature of collective identity, how members’ sense of “who we are” can change across the entire lifetime of a temporary IOC, and how sociomateriality, temporality, and geosocial effects strongly intervene in employees’ emerging senses of collective identity. Moreover, the study demonstrates how the ongoing identity work can be embedded in a time-space frame that further accentuates the influence of temporality, especially the anticipated future, organisational rituals, artefacts, and the geosocial environment. The study’s primary contribution to theory is a processual model of collective identity that applies specifically to a temporary IOC involving coopetition. In doing so, it represents a more finely nuanced and situational model than existing models. At a practical level, this model suggests that managers need to appreciate that organisational artefacts, rituals, and the prevailing organisational geosocial environment are inextricably linked in processes that can be manipulated to enhance the construction of collective identity.
Exploring women’s experiences of entering, working in, or leaving the Christchurch construction industry between 2010 and 2018 led to the creation of the theory of “deferential tailoring.” Deferential tailoring explains how women shape their responses to industry conditions as an intentional behavioural adjustment process. Most importantly, this theory provides insight into women’s unseen efforts to build positive workplace relationships, their capability to advance, and challenges to existing views of gender roles in this context. Research on women in construction focusses primarily on identifying and explaining barriers that impact on women’s entry, progression, and retention in the industry. There is an absence of process studies that explain the actions women take to manage industry conditions in business-as-usual, let alone post-disaster contexts. In the eight years following the 2010 Canterbury (New Zealand) earthquakes, rapid changes to the construction industry meant women had unprecedented access and new opportunities in this historically male-dominated domain. This setting provided a unique context within which to investigate how women respond to industry opportunities and challenges. The aim of this interpretive research was to construct a response theory, particular to women working in the Christchurch construction industry. Applying a constructivist grounded theory approach, theoretical sampling, coding and memo writing allowed for the collection and comparative analysis of 36 semi-structured interviews conducted with women working in a cross-section of industry occupations. Three inter- related categories were built: capitalising on opportunity, building capability and token tolerance, which together constitute the deferential tailoring process. Akin to building an invisible glass scaffold, women intentionally regulate their behaviours to successfully seize opportunities and manage social challenges. In building this scaffold, women draw heavily on personal values and positive, proactive attributes as a response to industry conditions. In contrast to previous research, which suggests that women conform to the male-dominated norms of the industry, the theory of deferential tailoring proposes that women are prepared to regulate their behaviour to address the gendered norms that impact on their work experiences. This research contributes towards an evolving body of knowledge that aims to understand how women’s entry into the construction industry, retention, and workplace relationships can be improved. By expanding the view of how women respond to industry conditions over time, this research has generated knowledge that addresses gaps in construction industry literature relating to the management of coping strategies, capitalising on opportunities, and building positive workplace relationships. Knowledge and concepts generated from this research could be integrated into recruitment and training programmes to enhance women’s professional development, shift perceptions of women’s work, and address cultural norms that impact on women’s retention in the construction industry.
TRACEY MARTIN to the Minister responsible for Novopay: Does he stand by his statement of 11 February 2014, "education payroll is the most complex in New Zealand and more work remains to be done to simplify the business processes to ensure it runs as smoothly as possible each year"? Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "the true builders of that future are the millions of New Zealanders working in the homes, the businesses, the industries of our country"? MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: What progress is the Government making with its share offer programme, which is freeing up money for reinvestment in new public assets without having to increase Government debt? ANDREW LITTLE to the Attorney-General: Will he release all correspondence between the Christchurch Crown Solicitor or any other solicitor acting for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and counsel for Peter Whittall on the decision not to proceed with the prosecution of Mr Whittall under the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 relating to conditions at the Pike River Mine that lead to the deaths of 29 miners; if not, why not? KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Health: When were Ministry of Health officials first informed that the dispute between the Southern District Health Board and South Link Health involved allegations of the misuse of public funding, and when were they first informed that this alleged misuse was suspected to involve elements that could be fraud? Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What announcements has the Government made on the Tertiary Education Strategy for New Zealand? Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Does he stand by his statement made yesterday in the House with regard to Canterbury Labour Members of Parliament that they "have made no more than five requests for assistance through the Earthquake Commission"; if not, when will he be correcting his statement and apologising? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: How is the Government's Information and Communication Technology programme improving New Zealanders' access to improved technology and better connectivity? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Justice: On what date did she receive an invitation to visit the Shanghai office of Oravida Ltd during her Ministerial visit to China in October 2013, and what actions did she take to ensure this visit met her obligations under the Cabinet Manual? CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Associate Minister of Education: Did the communities in Christchurch, Auckland and Queenstown, where four schools are to be built using a public-private partnership (PPP) model, ask the Government for private sector management of their school buildings? PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Health: What investment is the Government making in improving nutrition and exercise for pre-schoolers? JOANNE HAYES to the Minister of Corrections: What steps has the Government taken to improve access to alcohol and drug treatment for prisoners?
Rising disaster losses, growth in global migration, migrant labour trends, and increasingly diverse populations have serious implications for disaster resilience around the world. These issues are of particular concern in New Zealand, which is highly exposed to disaster risk and has the highest proportion of migrant workers to national population in the OECD. Since there has been no research conducted into this issue in New Zealand to date, greater understanding of the social capital used by migrant workers in specific New Zealand contexts is needed to inform more targeted and inclusive disaster risk management approaches. A New Zealand case study is used to investigate the extent and types of social capital and levels of disaster risk awareness reported by members of three Filipino migrant workers organisations catering to dairy farm, construction and aged care workers in different urban and rural Canterbury districts. Findings from (3) semi-structured interviews and (3) focus groups include consistently high reliance on bonding capital and low levels of bridging capital across all three organisations and industry sectors, and in both urban and rural contexts. The transitory, precarious residential status conveyed by temporary work visas, and the difficulty of building bridging capital with host communities has contributed to this heavy reliance on bonding capital. Social media was essential to connect workers with family and friends in other countries, while Filipino migrant workers organisations provided members with valuable access to industry and district-specific networks of other Filipino migrant workers. Linking capital varied between the three organisations, with members of the organisation set up to advocate for dairy farm workers reporting the highest levels of linking capital. Factors influencing the capacity of workers organisations to develop linking capital appeared to include motivation (establishment objectives), length of time since establishment, support from government and industry groups, urban-rural context, income levels and gender. Although aware of publicity around earthquake and tsunami risk in the Canterbury region, participants were less aware of flood risk, and expressed fatalistic attitudes to disaster risk. Workers organisations offer a valuable potential interface between CDEM Group activities and migrant worker communities, since organisation leaders were interested in accessing government support to participate (with and on behalf of members) in disaster risk planning at district and regional level. With the potential to increase disaster resilience among these vulnerable, hard to reach communities, such participation could also help to build capacity across workers organisations (within Canterbury and across the country) to develop linking capital at national, as well as regional level. However, these links will also depend on greater government and industry commitment to providing more targeted and appropriate support for migrant workers, including consideration of the cultural qualifications of staff tasked with liaising with this community.
Millions of urban residents around the world in the coming century will experience severe landscape change – including increased frequencies of flooding due to intensifying storm events and impacts from sea level rise. For cities, collisions of environmental change with mismatched cultural systems present a major threat to infrastructure systems that support urban living. Landscape architects who address these issues express a need to realign infrastructure with underlying natural systems, criticizing the lack of social and environmental considerations in engineering works. Our ability to manage both society and the landscapes we live in to better adapt to unpredictable events and landscape changes is essential if we are to sustain the health and safety of our families, neighbourhoods, and wider community networks. When extreme events like earthquakes or flooding occur in developed areas, the feasibility of returning the land to pre-disturbance use can be questioned. In Christchurch for example, a large expanse of land (630 hectares) within the city was severely damaged by the earthquakes and judged too impractical to repair in the short term. The central government now owns the land and is currently in the process of demolishing the mostly residential houses that formed the predominant land use. Furthermore, cascading impacts from the earthquakes have resulted in a general land subsidence of .5m over much of eastern Christchurch, causing disruptive and damaging flooding. Yet, although disasters can cause severe social and environmental distress, they also hold great potential as a catalyst to increasing adaption. But how might landscape architecture be better positioned to respond to the potential for transformation after disaster? This research asks two core questions: what roles can the discipline of landscape architecture play in improving the resilience of communities so they become more able to adapt to change? And what imaginative concepts could be designed for alternative forms of residential development that better empower residents to understand and adapt the infrastructure that supports them? Through design-directed inquiry, the research found landscape architecture theory to be well positioned to contribute to goals of social-ecological systems resilience. The discipline of landscape architecture could become influential in resilience-oriented multi disciplinary collaborations, with our particular strengths lying in six key areas: the integration of ecological and social processes, improving social capital, engaging with temporality, design-led innovation potential, increasing diversity and our ability to work across multiple scales. Furthermore, several innovative ideas were developed, through a site-based design exploration located within the residential red zone, that attempt to challenge conventional modes of urban living – concepts such as time-based land use, understanding roads as urban waterways, and landscape design and management strategies that increase community participation and awareness of the temporality in landscapes.