Search

found 5045 results

Images for communities; more images...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

With sea level rise (SLR) fast becoming one of the most pressing matters for governments worldwide, there has been mass amounts of research done on the impacts of SLR. However, these studies have largely focussed on the ways that SLR will impact both the natural and built environment, along with how the risk to low-lying coastal communities can be mitigated, while the inevitable impacts that this will have on mental well-being has been understudied. This research has attempted to determine the ways in which SLR can impact the mental well-being of those living in a low-lying coastal community, along with how these impacts could be mitigated while remaining adaptable to future environmental change. This was done through conducting an in-depth literature review to understand current SLR projections, the key components of mental well-being and how SLR can influence changes to mental well-being. This literature review then shaped a questionnaire which was distributed to residents of the New Brighton coastline. This questionnaire asked respondents how they interact with the local environment, how much they know about SLR and its associated hazards, whether SLR causes any level of stress or worry along with how respondents feel that these impacts could be mitigated. This research found that SLR impacts the mental well-being of those living in low-lying coastal communities through various methods: firstly, the respondents perceived risk to SLR and its associated hazards, which was found to be influenced by the suburbs that respondents live in, their knowledge of SLR, their main sources of information and the prior experience of the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). Secondly, the financial aspects of SLR were also found to be drivers of stress or worry, with depreciating property values and rising insurance premiums being frequently noted by respondents. It was found that the majority of respondents agreed that being involved in and informed of the protection process, having more readable and accurate information, and an increased engagement with community events and greenspaces would help to reduce the stress or worry caused by SLR, while remaining adaptable to future environmental change.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

An Ashburton couple who cooked barbecues for earthquake-weary Christchurch residents for nine months following the February quake have been named the joint winners of the Trustpower Community Awards.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Many contemporary urban communities are challenged by increased flood risks and rising temperatures, declining water quality and biodiversity, and reduced mental, physical, cultural and social wellbeing. The development of urban blue-green infrastructure (BGI), defined as networks of natural and semi-natural blue-green spaces which enable healthy ecosystem processes, has been identified as one approach to mitigate these challenges and enable more liveable cities. Multiple benefits associated with urban BGI have been identified, including reduced flood risk and temperatures, improved water quality and biodiversity, enhanced mental and physical wellbeing, strengthened social cohesion and sense of place, and the facilitation of cultural connections and practices. However, socio-cultural benefits have tended to be neglected in BGI research and design, resulting in a lack of awareness of how they may be maximised in BGI design. As such, this research sought to understand how BGI can best be designed to enable liveable cities. Four questions were considered: (i) what benefits are associated with urban BGI, (ii) how does the design process influence the benefits achieved by BGI, (iii) what challenges are encountered during BGI design, and (iv) how might the incorporation of communities and Indigenous knowledge into BGI research and design enhance current understandings and applications of urban BGI? To address these questions, a mixed methods case study approach was employed in Ōtautahi Christchurch and Kaiapoi. The four selected case studies were Te Oranga Waikura, Wigram Basin, Te Kuru and the Kaiapoi Honda Forest. The cases are all council owned urban wetlands which were primarily designed or retrofitted to reduce urban flood risks following the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. To investigate BGI design processes in each case, as well as how communities interact with, value and benefit from these spaces. BGI projects were found to be designed by interdisciplinary design teams driven by stormwater engineers, landscape architects and ecologists which prioritised bio-physical outcomes. Further, community and Indigenous engagement approaches closely resembled consultation, with the exception of Te Kuru which employed a co-design approach between councils and Indigenous and community groups. This co-design approach was found to enhance current understandings and applications of urban BGI, while uncovering multiple socio-cultural values to be incorporated into design, such as access to cultural healing resources, increased community connections to water, and facilitating cultural monitoring methodologies and citizen science initiatives. Communities frequently identified the opportunity to connect with natural environments and enhanced mental and physical wellbeing as key benefits of BGI. Conversely, strengthened social cohesion, sense of place and cultural connections were infrequently identified as benefits, if at all. This finding indicates a disconnect between the bio-physical benefits which drive BGI design and the outcomes which communities value. As such, there is a need for future BGI design to more fully consider and design for socio- cultural outcomes to better enable liveable cities. To better design BGI to enhance urban liveability, this research makes three key contributions. First, there is a need to advance current approaches to transdisciplinary design to better account for the full scope of perspectives and values associated with BGI. Second, there is a need to transition towards relational co-design with Indigenous and community groups and knowledge. Third, it is important to continue to monitor, reflect on and share both positive and negative BGI design experiences to continually improve outcomes. The incorporation of social and cultural researchers, knowledges and perspectives into open and collaborative transdisciplinary design teams is identified as a key method to achieve these opportunities.