Search

found 84 results

Images for Natural disasters; more images...

Research papers, The University of Auckland Library

Though generally considered “natural” disasters, cyclones and earthquakes are increasingly being associated with human activities, incubated through urban settlement patterns and the long-term redistribution of natural resources. As society is becoming more urbanized, the risk of human exposure to disasters is also rising. Architecture often reflects the state of society’s health: architectural damage is the first visible sign of emergency, and reconstruction is the final response in the process of recovery. An empirical assessment of architectural projects in post-disaster situations can lead to a deeper understanding of urban societies as they try to rebuild. This thesis offers an alternative perspective on urban disasters by looking at the actions and attitudes of disaster professionals through the lens of architecture, situated in recent events: the 2010 Christchurch earthquake, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina. An empirical, multi-hazard, cross-sectional case study methodology was used, employing grounded theory method to build theory, and a critical constructivist strategy to inform the analysis. By taking an interdisciplinary approach to understanding disasters, this thesis positions architecture as a conduit between two divergent approaches to disaster research: the hazards approach, which studies the disaster cycles from a scientific perspective; and the sociological approach, which studies the socially constructed vulnerabilities that result from disasters, and the elements of social change that accompany such events. Few studies to date have attempted to integrate the multi-disciplinary perspectives that can advance our understanding of societal problems in urban disasters. To bridge this gap, this thesis develops what will be referred to as the “Rittelian framework”—based on the work of UC Berkeley’s architecture professor Horst Rittel (1930-1990). The Rittelian framework uses the language of design to transcend the multiple fields of human endeavor to address the “design problems” in disaster research. The processes by which societal problems are addressed following an urban disaster involve input by professionals from multiple fields—including economics, sociology, medicine, and engineering—but the contribution from architecture has been minimal to date. The main impetus for my doctoral thesis has been the assertion that most of the decisions related to reconstruction are made in the early emergency recovery stages where architects are not involved, but architects’ early contribution is vital to the long-term reconstruction of cities. This precipitated in the critical question: “How does the Rittelian framework contribute to the critical design decisions in modern urban disasters?” Comparative research was undertaken in three case studies of recent disasters in New Orleans (2005), Haiti (2010) and Christchurch (2010), by interviewing 51 individuals who were selected on the basis of employing the Rittelian framework in their humanitarian practice. Contextualizing natural disaster research within the robust methodological framework of architecture and the analytical processes of sociology is the basis for evaluating the research proposition that architectural problem solving is of value in addressing the ‘Wicked Problems’ of disasters. This thesis has found that (1) the nuances of the way disaster agents interpret the notion of “building back better” can influence the extent to which architectural professionals contribute in urban disaster recovery, (2) architectural design can be used to facilitate but also impede critical design decisions, and (3) framing disaster research in terms of design decisions can lead to innovation where least expected. This empirical research demonstrates how the Rittelian framework can inform a wider discussion about post-disaster human settlements, and improve our resilience through disaster research.

Research papers, Victoria University of Wellington

The standard way in which disaster damages are measured involves examining separately the number of fatalities, of injuries, of people otherwise affected, and the financial damage that natural disasters cause. Here, we implement a novel way to aggregate these separate measures of disaster impact and apply it to two catastrophic events from 2011: the Christchurch (New Zealand) earthquakes and the Greater Bangkok (Thailand) flood. This new measure, which is similar to the World Health Organization's calculation of Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) lost due to the burden of diseases and injuries, is described in detail in Noy [7]. It allows us to conclude that New Zealand lost 180 thousand lifeyears as a result of the 2011 events, and Thailand lost 2644 thousand lifeyears. In per capita terms, the loss is similar, with both countries losing about 15 days per person due to the 2011 catastrophic events in these two countries. © This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

A PDF copy of a document produced by Rob Gordon for All Right?, titled The Fourth Year. The document outlines expectations about the mental health and wellbeing of people during the fourth year following a natural disaster.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

These research papers explore the concept of vulnerability in international human rights law. In the wake of the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010-2011, this research focuses on how "vulnerability" has been used and developed within the wider human rights discourse. They also examine jurisprudence of international human rights bodies, and how the concept of "vulnerability" has been applied. The research also includes a brief investigation into the experiences of vulnerable populations in disaster contexts, focusing primarily on the experiences of "vulnerable persons" in the Christchurch earthquakes and their aftermath.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Thomas Petschner during the Resilience and Response Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Medical Clowning in Disaster Zones".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: To be in a crisis caused by different kinds of natural disasters (as well as a man made incidents), dealing with ongoing increase of problems and frequent confrontation with very bad news isn't something that many people can easily cope with. This applies obviously to affected people but also to the members of SAR teams, doctors in the field and the experienced humanitarians too. The appropriate use of humour in crisis situations and dis-functional environments is a great tool to make those difficult moments more bearable for everyone. It helps injured and traumatised people cope with what they're facing, and can help them to recover more quickly too. At the same time humorous thinking can help to solve some of the complex problems emergency responders face. This is in addition to emergency and medical only reactions - allowing for a more holistic human perspective, which can provide a positive lasting effect. The ability to laugh is hardwired into our systems bringing a huge variety of physical, mental and social benefits. Even a simple smile can cultivate optimism and hope, while laughter can boost a hormone cocktail - which helps to cope with pain, enhance the immune system, reduce stress, re-focus, connect and unite people during difficult times. Humour as an element of psychological response in crisis situations is increasingly understood in a much wider sense: as the human capacity to plan and achieve desired outcomes with less stress, thus resulting in more 'predictable' work in unpredictable situations. So, if we approach certain problems in the same way Medical Clowns do, we may find a more positive solution. Everyone knows that laughter is an essential component of a healthy, happy life. The delivery of 'permission to laugh' into disaster zones makes a big difference to the quality of life for everyone, even if it's for a very short, but important period of time. And it's crucial to get it right as there is no second chance for the first response.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

On 14 November 2016, a magnitude (Mw) 7.8 earthquake struck the small coastal settlement of Kaikōura, Aotearoa-New Zealand. With an economy based on tourism, agriculture, and fishing, Kaikōura was immediately faced with significant logistical, economic, and social challenges caused by damage to critical infrastructure and lifelines, essential to its main industries. Massive landslips cut offroad and rail access, stranding hundreds of tourists, and halting the collection, processing and distribution of agricultural products. At the coast, the seabed rose two metres, limiting harbour-access to high tide, with implications for whale watching tours and commercial fisheries. Throughout the region there was significant damage to homes, businesses, and farmland, leaving owners and residents facing an uncertain future. This paper uses qualitative case study analysis to explore post-quake transformations in a rural context. The aim is to gain insight into the distinctive dynamics of disaster response mechanisms, focusing on two initiatives that have emerged in direct response to the disaster. The first examines the ways in which agriculture, food harvesting, production and distribution are being reimagined with the potential to enhance regional food security. The second examines the rescaling of power in decision-making processes following the disaster, specifically examining the ways in which rural actors are leveraging networks to meet their needs and the consequences of that repositioning on rural (and national) governance arrangements. In these and other ways, the local economy is being revitalised, and regional resilience enhanced through diversification, capitalising not on the disaster but the region's natural, social, and cultural capital. Drawing on insights and experience of local stakeholders, policy- and decision-makers, and community representatives we highlight the diverse ways in which these endeavours are an attempt to create something new, revealing also the barriers which needed to be overcome to reshape local livelihoods. Results reveal that the process of transformation as part of rural recovery must be grounded in the lived reality of local residents and their understanding of place, incorporating and building on regional social, environmental, and economic characteristics. In this, the need to respond rapidly to realise opportunities must be balanced with the community-centric approach, with greater recognition given to the contested nature of the decisions to be made. Insights from the case examples can inform preparedness and recovery planning elsewhere, and provide a rich, real-time example of the ways in which disasters can create opportunities for reimagining resilient futures.