Search

found 34 results

Images for frustration; more images...

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

Finance Minister Bill English scratches his head with frustration as he stands up to his chest in earthquake rubble that represents the 'economy'. Allan Bollard the Governor of the Reserve Bank appears in gumboots asking if he can 'help with rebuilding..? by making an 'OCR cut'; he holds a collection box labeled 'OCR cut'. Context - Two earthquakes and hundreds of aftershocks have hit Christchurch, the first on 4 September 2010 and a second more devastating one on 22 February 2011. The Reserve Bank has made a relatively large 50-point cut in its benchmark interest rate, the Official Cash Rate (from 3% to 2.5 per cent). Critics say that inflation is already running unacceptably high and there is a threat of much higher inflation in a year or two when the rebuilding of Christchurch begins to put pressure on limited resources. The Reserve Bank acknowledged these factors, but it has chosen instead to focus on the immediate impact of the earthquake on the economy and particularly on all-important business and consumer sentiment. (Press editorial 12 March 2011) Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of the keynote presentation by Sir John Holmes, during the first plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Holmes is the former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, the current Director of Ditchley Foundation, and the chair of the Board of the International Rescue Committee in the UK. The presentation is titled, "The Politics of Humanity: Reflections on international aid in disasters".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: As United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinate from 2007-2010, Sir John Holmes was heavily involved in the coordination of air provision to countries struck by natural and man-made disasters, raising the necessary funds, and the elaboration of humanitarian policy. The international humanitarian system is fragmented and struggling to cope with rising demands from both conflicts such as that in Syria, and the growing effects of climate change. Sir John will talk about what humanitarian aid can and cannot achieve, the frustrations of getting aid through when access may be difficult or denied, and the need to ensure that assistance encompasses protection of civilians and efforts to get them back on their feet, as well as the delivery of essential short term items such as food, water, medical care and shelter. He will discuss the challenges involved in trying to make the different agencies - UN United Nations, non-government organisations and the International Red Cross/Crescent movement - work together effectively. He will reveal some of the problems in dealing with donor and recipient governments who often have their own political and security agendas, and may be little interested in the necessary neutrality and independence of humanitarian aid. He will illustrate these points by practical examples of political and other dilemmas from aid provision in natural disasters such as Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar in 2009, and the Haiti earthquake of 2010, and in conflict situations such as Darfur, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka in the past, and Syria today. He will also draw conclusions and make recommendations about how humanitarian aid might work better, and why politicians and others need to understand more clearly the impartial space required by humanitarian agencies to operate properly.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This thesis examines the opportunities for young citizens in Christchurch to be engaged in city planning post-disaster. This qualitative study was conducted eight years after the 2010-2011 earthquakes and employed interviews with 18 young people aged between 12-24 years old, 14 of whom were already actively engaged in volunteering or participating in a youth council. It finds that despite having sought out opportunities for youth leadership and advocacy roles post-disaster, young people report frustration that they are excluded from decision-making and public life. These feelings of exclusion were described by young people as political, physical and social. Young people felt politically excluded from decision-making in the city, with some youth reporting that they did not feel listened to by decision-makers or able to make a difference. Physical exclusion was also experienced by the young people I interviewed, who reported that they felt excluded from their city and neighbourhood. This ranged from feeling unwelcome in certain parts of the city due to perceived social stratification, to actual exclusion from newly privatised areas in a post-quake recovery city. Social exclusion was reported by young people in the study in regard to their sense of marginalisation from the wider community, due to structural and social barriers. Among these, they observed a sense of prejudice towards them and other youth due to their age, class and/or ethnicity. The barriers to their participation and inclusion, and their aspirations for Christchurch post-disaster are discussed, as well as the implications of exclusion for young people’s wellbeing and sense of belonging. Results of this study contribute to the literature that challenges the sole focus on children and young peoples’ vulnerability post-disaster, reinforcing their capacity and desire to contribute to the recovery of their city and community (Peek, 2008). This research also challenges the narrative that young people are politically apathetic (Norris, 2004; Nissen, 2017), and adds to our understandings of the way that disasters can concentrate power amongst certain groups, in this case excluding young people generally from decision-making and public life. I conclude with some recommendations for a more robust post-disaster recovery in Christchurch, in ways that are more inclusive of young people and supportive of their wellbeing.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Under the framework of New Public Management, the government has decentralised the responsibility for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) to regional, local, and community levels in New Zealand. This decentralisation serves political agendas related to resource allocation and is supported by empirical evidence suggesting that involving communities in DRM during recovery decision-making enhances disaster resilience. Extensive evidence indicates that community participation in DRM, especially during recovery decision-making, can significantly improve recovery outcomes at the community level. However, there has been limited research into whether the legal framework in New Zealand effectively facilitates meaningful public engagement to empower the public in influencing disaster recovery decisions. To address this gap in the literature, this thesis aims to explore the extent to which legislative and governance arrangements transfer the responsibility, liability, and costs of managing disaster risks to local levels without enabling meaningful public contribution to and influence on recovery decisions affecting them. Situated within Public Law and Disaster Risk and Resilience disciplines and using a case study of Greater Christchurch, New Zealand, this interdisciplinary thesis examines both common law and statutory provisions in the legal framework impacting public engagement before and during recovery from the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. In particular, this thesis assesses how legislative, and governance frameworks influenced communities’ ability to influence recovery decision-making following the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). This thesis shows that before the CES, the New Zealand public engagement system closely adhered to the common law principle of the ‘duty to consult’, which remains the current legal standard. This principle required decision-makers to use the 'public notice and comment' approach as a minimum, limiting meaningful community participation in decision-making. After the earthquakes, reliance on this traditional approach caused growing frustration and division locally, as the public struggled to effectively engage in and influence recovery decisions, resulting in new community activism. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act (CER Act), introduced following the Christchurch Earthquake, included innovative provisions on public engagement. However, for various reasons, this Act appeared to have minimal impact on meaningful public engagement in recovery decision-making, which continued to align with the broader, existing public engagement system and associated norms. The empirical findings indicate that despite the novel legislative language, the traditional public engagement framework in New Zealand constrained effective engagement, leading to a broader erosion of trust between the public and the government. This was largely attributed to the default ‘public notice and comment’ approach at the local government level, with inadequate mechanisms for community engagement in central government decision-making shaping the expectations of recovery decision-makers still operating within this framework. Notable departures from this traditional approach were evident in the practices of the Waimakariri District Council and Christchurch City Council. Particularly noteworthy was the ‘Share an Idea’ public engagement campaign. Unlike conventional processes, it did not commence with a near-final or draft document. Instead, it utilised participatory mechanisms that fostered meaningful dialogue, enabling the public to significantly shape the content of the draft Christchurch Central Recovery Plan. The initial success of such participatory engagement underscores its potential effectiveness throughout the entire recovery planning process, an option that was not exercised by the central government. In conclusion, this thesis argues that New Zealand should move beyond the entrenched ‘public notice and comment’ approach and adopt more open and inclusive public participation mechanisms. It contends that supplementing this approach with proactive participatory methods before disasters could yield favorable outcomes during disaster recovery, thereby ensuring meaningful public involvement in future decisions that affect communities.