Globally, the maximum elevations at which treelines are observed to occur coincide with a 6.4 °C soil isotherm. However, when observed at finer scales, treelines display a considerable degree of spatial complexity in their patterns across the landscape and are often found occurring at lower elevations than expected relative to the global-scale pattern. There is still a lack of understanding of how the abiotic environment imposes constraints on treeline patterns, the scales at which different effects are acting, and how these effects vary over large spatial extents. In this thesis, I examined abrupt Nothofagus treelines across seven degrees of latitude in New Zealand in order to investigate two broad questions: (1) What is the nature and extent of spatial variability in Nothofagus treelines across the country? (2) How is this variation associated with abiotic variation at different spatial scales? A range of GIS, statistical, and atmospheric modelling methods were applied to address these two questions. First, I characterised Nothofagus treeline patterns at a 15x15km scale across New Zealand using a set of seven, GIS-derived, quantitative metrics that describe different aspects of treeline position, shape, spatial configuration, and relationships with adjacent vegetation. Multivariate clustering of these metrics revealed distinct treeline types that showed strong spatial aggregation across the country. This suggests a strong spatial structuring of the abiotic environment which, in turn, drives treeline patterns. About half of the multivariate treeline metric variation was explained by patterns of climate, substrate, topographic and disturbance variability; on the whole, climatic and disturbance factors were most influential. Second, I developed a conceptual model that describes how treeline elevation may vary at different scales according to three categories of effects: thermal modifying effects, physiological stressors, and disturbance effects. I tested the relevance of this model for Nothofagus treelines by investigating treeline elevation variation at five nested scales (regional to local) using a hierarchical design based on nested river catchments. Hierarchical linear modelling revealed that the majority of the variation in treeline elevation resided at the broadest, regional scale, which was best explained by the thermal modifying effects of solar radiation, mountain mass, and differences in the potential for cold air ponding. Nonetheless, at finer scales, physiological and disturbance effects were important and acted to modify the regional trend at these scales. These results suggest that variation in abrupt treeline elevations are due to both broad-scale temperature-based growth limitation processes and finer-scale stress- and disturbance-related effects on seedling establishment. Third, I explored the applicability of a meso-scale atmospheric model, The Air Pollution Model (TAPM), for generating 200 m resolution, hourly topoclimatic data for temperature, incoming and outgoing radiation, relative humidity, and wind speeds. Initial assessments of TAPM outputs against data from two climate station locations over seven years showed that the model could generate predictions with a consistent level of accuracy for both sites, and which agreed with other evaluations in the literature. TAPM was then used to generate data at 28, 7x7 km Nothofagus treeline zones across New Zealand for January (summer) and July (winter) 2002. Using mixed-effects linear models, I determined that both site-level factors (mean growing season temperature, mountain mass, precipitation, earthquake intensity) and local-level landform (slope and convexity) and topoclimatic factors (solar radiation, photoinhibition index, frost index, desiccation index) were influential in explaining variation in treeline elevation within and among these sites. Treelines were generally closer to their site-level maxima in regions with higher mean growing season temperatures, larger mountains, and lower levels of precipitation. Within sites, higher treelines were associated with higher solar radiation, and lower photoinhibition and desiccation index values, in January, and lower desiccation index values in July. Higher treelines were also significantly associated with steeper, more convex landforms. Overall, this thesis shows that investigating treelines across extensive areas at multiple study scales enables the development of a more comprehensive understanding of treeline variability and underlying environmental constraints. These results can be used to formulate new hypotheses regarding the mechanisms driving treeline formation and to guide the optimal choice of field sites at which to test these hypotheses.
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: In stating that "this Government introduced a balanced package of tax cuts" was he saying that his tax changes and the tax system are fair to all New Zealanders? 2. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Finance: What will be the main objectives of Budget 2011 tomorrow? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: When he said "in most cases the tax switch more than compensated people for the increase in GST", in which cases hadn't people been fully compensated? 4. JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by the statement he made in his post-Cabinet press conference on Monday that "Everyone needs to understand that what Don Brash is talking about is hardcore"; if so why? 5. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What is the total impact on the operating balance, over the forecast period, of the fiscal impact of the tax changes in Budget 2010 according to page 70 of the 2010 Budget and Economic Fiscal Update, and how does he reconcile that with the Prime Minister's statement in the House yesterday that "National's tax plan 2010…was fiscally neutral"? 6. ALLAN PEACHEY to the Minister of Corrections: What reports has she received about the first year of container units being used in New Zealand prisons? 7. RAHUI KATENE to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What was the motivation behind the decision to remove regulatory forbearance from the Telecommunications (TSO, Broadband, and Other Matters) Amendment Bill? 8. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by the Prime Minister's statement in relation to Christchurch that "it looks like the residential rebuild alone will require up to 12,500 full-time workers", if not, how many full-time workers does he believe will now be needed? 9. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What recent announcements has she made to support community social services? 10. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What is the best estimate of the additional cost to the Crown of the change he announced to the ultrafast broadband network this morning? 11. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcements has he made regarding the Government's Housing Innovation Fund? 12. GARETH HUGHES to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What is her response to the statement of leading scientist and NASA director Dr James Hansen, currently touring New Zealand, that "coal is the single greatest threat to civilisation and all life on our planet" and we should leave it in the ground?
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: What was the combined increase in the value of the Crown's equity in Meridian, Mighty River Power, Solid Energy, Genesis and Air New Zealand for each of the last five years? 2. SIMON BRIDGES to the Minister of Finance: How did Budget 2011 continue the Government's programme to build faster growth, higher incomes and more jobs? 3. Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Have all recent actions of New Zealand's diplomats been consistent with Government policy? 4. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister of Health: What reports has he received about improved access to dialysis for patients in Auckland and Waitemata? 5. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Will the Government have to borrow further to pay for the latest Christchurch earthquakes? 6. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the statement of the Auditor-General, "Despite the encouraging improvements made in the last 10 years, we do not yet have a system for scheduled services that can demonstrate national consistency and equitable treatment for all"? 7. AMY ADAMS to the Minister for the Environment: What steps has the Government taken to facilitate resource consents for work required at the Lyttelton Port to ensure it is able to recover quickly from earthquake damage? 8. JACINDA ARDERN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf that "this Government is focused on improvements within the economy in order to create the platform on which business and New Zealanders can invest and grow jobs"? 9. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Minister of Health: Does he agree that under section 118 of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003, the Medical Council has a responsibility to ensure the cultural competence of doctors, and what support has the Government provided to the health sector to ensure cultural competence is achieved across the health sector? 10. DAVID SHEARER to the Minister of Science and Innovation: Does he agree with Professor Sir Paul Callaghan's statement on science and innovation "it's clear that the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister have not really seen this as a top priority"? 11. CHESTER BORROWS to the Minister of Justice: What progress is being made on preparations for the referendum on the electoral system to be held in conjunction with this year's general election? 12. Hon RICK BARKER to the Minister of Veterans' Affairs: When can veterans expect to have a full response from the Government in response to the Law Commission's report "A New Support Scheme for Veterans"?
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Is he satisfied that actions to address the Christchurch earthquake are an adequate response; if not, what are his areas of concern? 2. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economic impact of the earthquake in Christchurch on 22 February 2011? 3. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with the level of support being offered to the people of Christchurch in the wake of the earthquake on 22 February 2011? 4. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What is the Government doing to support Canterbury businesses and employees through the earthquake recovery? 5. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Is she confident that the Ministry of Social Development has responded adequately to the Christchurch earthquake? 6. METIRIA TUREI to the Minister of Finance: Has he considered raising a temporary levy on income to help fund the rebuilding of Christchurch; if so, how much could it raise? 7. AARON GILMORE to the Minister for Tertiary Education: What work has been done to help the families of tertiary students and tertiary institutions affected by the 22 February 2011 earthquake in Christchurch? 8. Hon JIM ANDERTON to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Will he ensure that Christchurch homeowners and businesses are able to access insurance cover from existing policies or new cover they require since the 22 February 2011 earthquake? 9. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Attorney-General: Has he asked the Māori Party to agree to amendments to the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill that would make it explicitly clear that customary title holders would not be able to charge individuals for accessing a beach, and require any negotiated settlements to be referred back to Parliament for validation; if so, what response did he receive? 10. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: Does the Government intend to proceed this week with its legislation to replace the existing Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004? 11. RAHUI KATENE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Did he agree with his spokesman's response to the situation for residents in Christchurch East following the earthquake of 22 February 2011, that, "It is apparent, given the scale out there, that there just wasn't sufficient hardware out there, loos and the like", and what urgent actions have been taken to give priority to communities in the eastern suburbs? 12. COLIN KING to the Minister of Civil Defence: Why was a state of national emergency declared on 23 February 2011?
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?
1. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Has he had time to read and digest the judgement of Justice Miller regarding the Crafar farm deal; if so, does he stand by his comments made in the House yesterday? 2. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for Land Information: Does he believe he and the Government have conducted themselves competently and appropriately in relation to the decision to approve the purchase of the Crafar farms by a foreign buyer; if not, what did they do wrong? 3. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Finance: What reports has the Government issued on the economy? 4. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she have confidence that Work and Income meets their own "case management approach" expectations? 5. JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Does she have concerns that changes to the eligibility for the Training Incentive Allowance are causing single parent beneficiaries to consider working in the sex industry? 6. Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Health: What improvements have there been to services for patients as a result of greater collaboration between District Health Boards? 7. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he still intend to sell 49 per cent of the four State-owned energy companies? 8. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Local Government: What analysis has he received on rate increases across New Zealand's 78 councils following the enactment of new local government legislation in 2002? 9. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by the part of his statement of 27 January, announcing the extension of the red zone offer to retirement villages, that letters of offer would be sent to each resident and CERA would work with village owners as quickly as possible to ensure the residents are assisted; if not, why not? 10. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister for Land Information: Did Overseas Investment Office officials meet with Chinese political consul Cheng Lei late last year; if so, did they discuss Shanghai Pengxin's bid for the Crafar farms? 11. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Broadcasting: What is the name of the documentary which was withheld in the papers released publicly by NZ On Air titled "Records of decisions made at working group meeting"? 12. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Economic Development: What progress has he made declaring the Volvo Ocean Race Stopover a major event under the Major Events Management Act 2007?
In most design codes, infill walls are considered as non-structural elements and thus are typically neglected in the design process. The observations made after major earthquakes (Duzce 1999, L’Aquila 2009, Christchurch 2011) have shown that even though infill walls are considered to be non-structural elements, they interact with the structural system during seismic actions. In the case of heavy infill walls (i.e. clay brick infill walls), the whole behaviour of the structure may be affected by this interaction (i.e. local or global structural failures such as soft storey mechanism). In the case of light infill walls (i.e. non-structural drywalls), this may cause significant economical losses. To consider the interaction of the structural system with the ‘non-structural ’infill walls at design stage may not be a practical approach due to the complexity of the infill wall behaviour. Therefore, the purpose of the reported research is to develop innovative technological solutions and design recommendations for low damage non-structural wall systems for seismic actions by making use of alternative approaches. Light (steel/timber framed drywalls) and heavy (unreinforced clay brick) non-structural infill wall systems were studied by following an experimental/numerical research programme. Quasi-static reverse cyclic tests were carried out by utilizing a specially designed full scale reinforced concrete frame, which can be used as a re-usable bare frame. In this frame, two RC beams and two RC columns were connected by two un-bonded post tensioning bars, emulating a jointed ductile frame system (PRESSS technology). Due to the rocking behaviour at the beam-column joint interfaces, this frame was typically a low damage structural solution, with the post-tensioning guaranteeing a linear elastic behaviour. Therefore, this frame could be repeatedly used in all of the tests carried out by changing only the infill walls within this frame. Due to the linear elastic behaviour of this structural bare frame, it was possible to extract the exact behaviour of the infill walls from the global results. In other words, the only parameter that affected the global results was given by the infill walls. For the test specimens, the existing practice of construction (as built) for both light and heavy non-structural walls was implemented. In the light of the observations taken during these tests, modified low damage construction practices were proposed and tested. In total, seven tests were carried out: 1) Bare frame , in order to confirm its linear elastic behaviour. 2) As built steel framed drywall specimen FIF1-STFD (Light) 3) As built timber framed drywall specimen FIF2-TBFD (Light) 4) As built unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen FIF3-UCBI (Heavy) 5) Low damage steel framed drywall specimen MIF1-STFD (Light) 6) Low damage timber framed drywall specimen MIF2-TBFD (Light) 7) Low damage unreinforced clay brick infill wall specimen MIF5-UCBI (Heavy) The tests of the as built practices showed that both drywalls and unreinforced clay brick infill walls have a low serviceability inter-storey drift limit (0.2-0.3%). Based on the observations, simple modifications and details were proposed for the low damage specimens. The details proved to be working effectively in lowering the damage and increasing the serviceability drift limits. For drywalls, the proposed low damage solutions do not introduce additional cost, material or labour and they are easily applicable in real buildings. For unreinforced clay brick infill walls, a light steel sub-frame system was suggested that divides the infill panel zone into smaller individual panels, which requires additional labour and some cost. However, both systems can be engineered for seismic actions and their behaviour can be controlled by implementing the proposed details. The performance of the developed details were also confirmed by the numerical case study analyses carried out using Ruaumoko 2D on a reinforced concrete building model designed according to the NZ codes/standards. The results have confirmed that the implementation of the proposed low damage solutions is expected to significantly reduce the non-structural infill wall damage throughout a building.
Questions to Ministers 1. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Will he rule out making cuts to Working for Families payments this year; if not, why not? 3. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What changes is the Government making to Family Start to ensure a greater focus on protecting children from abuse and neglect? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Prime Minister that "anyone on a benefit actually has a lifestyle choice…some make poor choices, and they do not have money left"? 5. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Civil Defence: Did he meet with business leaders in Christchurch yesterday to discuss the Civil Defence state of national emergency operations; if so, what was the outcome of that meeting? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Who was right, the Prime Minster who predicted that the New Zealand economy would grow "reasonably aggressively" in 2010-11, or the last four quarterly NZIER consensus forecast updates for GDP, which have progressively declined from 3.2 percent to just 0.8 percent for the year to March 2011? 7. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Which response to the Christchurch earthquake carries a greater risk of a credit downgrade: increased government borrowing or a temporary earthquake levy? 8. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: When he said "Auckland's fragmented governance has meant a lack [of] leadership and vision, but soon its leaders will be able to think regionally, plan strategically and act decisively", did he mean only if they agree with the Government's plan for Auckland? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Education: What were the results of the Accelerating Learning in Mathematics Pilot Study? 10. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Minister for Biosecurity: Does he agree with the statements made by John Lancashire and Stew Wadey, President of Waikato Federated Farmers, in the Dominion Post yesterday that New Zealand is exposed to greater risk of incursions or exotic pests at our borders as a result of the "fast-tracking of tourists", the "attempts to abolish import restrictions", and his axing of 60 frontline border staff? 11. MICHAEL WOODHOUSE to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What reports has she received on levels of renewable electricity generation? 12. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister for ACC: Does he stand by his answer to question 4 on Thursday last week "that funding will be taken from either the earners account or the work account" and "that a higher proportion of claims than the overall average for ACC are actually in the work account"; if not, why not?
Questions to Ministers 1. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in the House yesterday, in answer to Oral Question No 2, that his Government is selling assets because "New Zealanders want less debt, more productive assets, and an economy that is going to function, not a load more debt"? 2. PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister for Economic Development: What progress is the Government making in implementing its economic growth agenda? 3. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Transport: Does the Government consider it important for its transport spending to be cost-effective and provide a good return on investment? 4. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: What, according to the Crown Ownership Monitoring Unit, was the average total shareholder return of Genesis, Meridian, Mighty River Power and Solid Energy over the last five years and how does that compare to the average cost of borrowing to the Government right now? 5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Local Government: What reports has he received on how much rates increased nationally in the decade since the Local Government Act 2002 and how does this compare to the previous decade? 6. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister for the Environment: Does he stand by his statement made in the House yesterday in relation to the grounding of the Rena that "the statute sets down very clearly that I as Minister for the Environment should not be encouraging or discouraging a proper, independent decision by Environment Bay of Plenty as to whether they should or should not take a prosecution"? 7. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Broadcasting: What recent announcements has the Government made on progress towards digital switchover? 8. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he still have confidence in all his Ministers? 9. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How many written comments were received on the draft Recovery Plan for the Christchurch CBD and is it his intention to consider them all before making a decision on the draft Recovery Plan for the CBD, in accordance with the process set out on the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority's website? 10. MELISSA LEE to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What recent steps have there been to promote New Zealand citizenship as a successful settlement pathway for migrants? 11. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Broadcasting: Does he stand by the Prime Minister's statement in relation to the appointment of the Prime Minister's electorate chairman Stephen McElrea to the NZ On Air board that "if you look at the vast array of appointments we make, I think the balance is about right"? 12. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: Will she rule out implementing Treasury's advice to increase class sizes in schools?
Following the 22nd February 2011, Mw 6.2 earthquake located along a previously unknown fault beneath the Port Hills of Christchurch, surface cracking was identified in contour parallel locations within fill material at Quarry Road on the lower slopes of Mount Pleasant. GNS Science, in the role of advisor to the Christchurch City Council, concluded that these cracks were a part of a potential rotational mass movement (named zone 11A) within the fill and airfall loess material present. However, a lack of field evidence for slope instability and an absence of laboratory geotechnical data on which slope stability analysis was based, suggested this conclusion is potentially incorrect. It was hypothesised that ground cracking was in fact due to earthquake shaking, and not mass movement within the slope, thus forming the basis of this study. Three soil units were identified during surface and subsurface investigations at Quarry Road: fill derived from quarry operations in the adjacent St. Andrews Quarry (between 1893 and 1913), a buried topsoil, and underlying in-situ airfall loess. The fill material was identified by the presence of organic-rich topsoil “clods” that were irregular in both size (∼10 – 200 mm) and shape, with variable thicknesses of 1 – 10 m. Maximum thickness, as indicated by drill holes and geophysical survey lines, was identified below 6 Quarry Road and 7 The Brae where it is thought to infill a pre-existing gully formed in the underlying airfall loess. Bearing strength of the fill consistently exceeded 300 kPa ultimate below ∼500 mm depth. The buried topsoil was 200 – 300 mm thick, and normally displayed a lower bearing strength when encountered, but not below 300 kPa ultimate (3 – 11 blows per 100mm or ≥100 kPa allowable). In-situ airfall loess stood vertically in outcrop due to its characteristic high dry strength and also showed Scala penetrometer values of 6 – 20+ blows per 100 mm (450 – ≥1000 kPa ultimate). All soils were described as being moist to dry during subsurface investigations, with no groundwater table identified during any investigation into volcanic bedrock. In-situ moisture contents were established using bulk disturbed samples from hand augers and test pitting. Average moisture contents were low at 9% within the fill, 11 % within the buried topsoil, and 8% within the airfall loess: all were below the associated average plastic limit of 17, 15, and 16, respectively, determined during Atterberg limit analysis. Particle size distributions, identified using the sieve and pipette method, were similar between the three soil units with 11 – 20 % clay, 62 – 78 % silt, and 11 – 20 % fine sand. Using these results and the NZGS soil classification, the loess derived fill and in-situ airfall loess are termed SILT with some clay and sand, and the buried topsoil is SILT with minor clay and sand. Dispersivity of the units was found using the Emerson crumb test, which established that the fill can be non- to completely dispersive (score 0 – 4). The buried topsoil was always non-dispersive (score 0), and airfall loess completely dispersive (score 4). Values for cohesion (c) and internal friction angle (φ) of the three soil units were established using the direct shear box at field moisture contents. Results showed all soil units had high shear strengths at the moisture contents tested (c = 18 – 24 kPa and φ = 42 – 50°), with samples behaving in a brittle fashion. Moisture content was artificially increased to 16% within the buried topsoil, which reduced the shear strength (c = 10 kPa, φ = 18°) and allowed it to behave plastically. Observational information indicating stability at Quarry Road included: shallow, discontinuous, cracks that do not display vertical offset; no scarp features or compressional zones typical of landsliding; no tilted or deformed structures; no movement in inclinometers; no basal shear zone identified in logged core to 20 m depth; low field moisture contents; no groundwater table; and high soil strength using Scala penetrometers. Limit equilibrium analysis of the slope was conducted using Rocscience software Slide 5.0 to verify the slope stability identified by observational methods. Friction, cohesion, and density values determined during laboratory were input into the two slope models investigated. Results gave minimum static factor of safety values for translational (along buried topsoil) and rotational (in the fill) slides of 2.4 – 4.2. Sensitivity of the slope to reduced shear strength parameters was analysed using c = 10 kPa and φ = 18° for the translational buried topsoil plane, and a cohesion of 0 kPa within the fill for the rotational plane. The only situation that gave a factor of safety <1.0 was in nonengineered fill at 0.5 m depth. Pseudostatic analysis based on previous peak ground acceleration (PGA) values for the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence, and predicted PGAs for future Alpine Fault and Hope Fault earthquakes established minimum factor of safety values between 1.2 and 3.3. Yield acceleration PGAs were computed to be between 0.8g and 1.6g. Based on all information gathered, the cracking at Quarry Road is considered to be shallow deformation in response to earthquake shaking, and not due to deep-seated landsliding. It is recommended that the currently bare site be managed by smoothing the land, installing contour drainage, and bioremediation of the surface soils to reduce surface water infiltration and runoff. Extensive earthworks, including removal of the fill, are considered unnecessary. Any future replacement of housing would be subject to site-specific investigations, and careful foundation design based on those results.
Questions to Ministers and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 1. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Is he satisfied that all systems set up pursuant to commitments he has given to assist residents following the Christchurch earthquake are appropriate and working? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 2. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: What do this morning's Reserve Bank economic forecasts show? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 3. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: By what amount has the Reserve Bank lowered the official cash rate today, and what reason has the Bank given for this action? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 4. GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Finance: What will be the impact of the recent fuel price rise on the New Zealand economy, including impacts on GDP, consumer spending and the current account? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 5. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Acting Minister for Economic Development: Has he been advised by the Prime Minister whether his appointment as Acting Minister for Economic Development is temporary or expected to carry on to the election? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 6. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Transport: What action is the Government taking to improve Wellington's train network? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 7. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Prime Minister: Can he assure the families of those killed in the Pike River Mine disaster that Government funding will be available for the recovery of bodies, given the mine is now in receiver's hands. and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 8. COLIN KING to the Minister of Civil Defence: Is the Government satisfied with the provision of replacement toilets for earthquake-affected Christchurch residents? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 9. CAROL BEAUMONT to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Can she outline a significant improvement for women initiated by the current Government? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 10. ALLAN PEACHEY to the Minister of Education: What provisions have been made to ensure continuity of early childhood education and schooling in the Christchurch region since the 22 February earthquake? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 11. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What advice did he receive on any perceived conflict of interest before he took part in the Cabinet decision that led to the deferral of the requirement for MediaWorks to pay its frequency licence to the Crown? and lt;br / and gt; and lt;br / and gt; 12. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What reports has he received on the progress of urban search and rescue and firefighter teams working in Christchurch following the 22 February earthquake?
Questions to Ministers 1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with 57 percent of New Zealanders who, according to a recent UMR poll, support the introduction of a temporary earthquake levy to pay for the rebuilding of Christchurch? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: What, according to the 2010 Investment Statement of the Government of New Zealand, was the average total shareholder return over the last five years from State-owned Enterprises and the average bond rate, and is that consistent with his statement that "it is the Government's intention to use the proceeds of those initial public offerings to actually invest in other assets that the Government would have to fund through the Government bond rate"? 3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister for Infrastructure: What progress has the Government made on its infrastructure programme? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "this Government is not prepared to turn its back on our most vulnerable citizens when they most need our help"? 5. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Is it government policy for New Zealand to become a "highly attractive global destination" for oil exploration, with expansion of the oil and coal sectors leading to a "step change" in the country's economic growth as set out in the document Developing Our Energy Potential; if not, why not? 6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Is the Government considering extending the business assistance package for employers and employees beyond the 14-week period currently signalled; if not, why not? 7. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Police: What reports has she received on the latest trends in the level of crime in New Zealand? 8. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Did he tell a meeting in Timaru last week "The entire time I've been Prime Minister I've had Treasury in my office week after week, month after month, telling me South Canterbury Finance was going bankrupt"? 9. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What advice has he received on major resource consents being considered under the Government's new national consenting policy? 10. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Does she agree that the joint scheme initiated by the Green Party and the Government, Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart, is the best initiative in the Draft New Zealand Energy Strategy because it is providing hundreds of thousands of New Zealand households with warm, dry, energy efficient homes, and creating thousands of clean green jobs? 11. Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Fisheries: Does he still have no major concerns about the way foreign boats were used by New Zealand companies as the Nelson Mail reports he said last year? 12. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcements has he made regarding the Government's Housing Innovation Fund?
Questions to Ministers 1. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy moving away from government spending, housing speculation and borrowing, and towards savings and exporting? 2. Hon PETE HODGSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to question No 11 yesterday that Sammy Wong did not accompany Pansy Wong on any ministerial trips to China? 3. HONE HARAWIRA to the Associate Minister of Health: What is the rationale behind the move to prohibit the display of tobacco products for sale in retail outlets? 4. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister of Transport: Has he received any feedback or information in support of lowering the adult blood alcohol concentration to 0.05 that has given him any doubt or cause for reflection this year about his decision to retain the level at 0.08? 5. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcement has he made about the direction of social housing in New Zealand? 6. BRENDON BURNS to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is the Government's response package, announced last week to assist Canterbury businesses affected by the 4 September earthquake, universally supported by the Government and its supporters? 7. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Alternative Welfare Working Group that welfare reform should be focused on "the relentless pursuit of well-being"? 8. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will the mining of lignite form part of his New Zealand Energy Strategy? 9. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Education: What were the results of the Programme for International Assessment (PISA), which looked at New Zealand students' achievement in reading, maths and scientific literacy? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Transport: How many emails has he received on the decision of the New Zealand Transport Agency to start charging CarJam and similar web-based information services for accessing the Agency's stored basic motor vehicle information? 11. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent steps has the Government taken to control bovine TB? 12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: Which Minister is to be responsible for the enforcement of the Education Act 1989 in relation to limited attendance early childhood centres following the passing of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2)? Questions to Members 1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Student Loan Scheme Bill? 2. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submitters on the Student Loan Scheme Bill have requested to be heard in person? 3. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill? 4. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill have requested to be heard in person? 5. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill? 6. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill have requested to be heard in person? 7. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill? 8. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submitters on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill have requested to be heard in person? 9. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill? 10. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submitters on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill have requested to be heard in person? 11. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: Has the Finance and Expenditure Committee conducted the 2009/10 financial review of the Office of the Retirement Commissioner? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill? 13. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submitters on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person? 14. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill? 15. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill? 16. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person? 17. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Legal Services Bill? 18. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Legal Services Bill have requested to be heard in person? 19. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill? 20. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill have requested to be heard in person? 21. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Food Bill? 22. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Food Bill have requested to be heard in person? 23. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill? 24. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person?
This report provides an initial overview and gap analysis of the multi-hazards interactions that might affect fluvial and pluvial flooding (FPF) hazard in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. As per the terms of reference, this report focuses on a one-way analysis of the potential effects of multi-hazards on FPF hazard, as opposed to a more complex multi-way analysis of interactions between all hazards. We examined the relationship between FPF hazard and hazards associated with the phenomena of tsunamis; coastal erosion; coastal inundation; groundwater; earthquakes; and mass movements. Tsunamis: Modelling research indicates the worst-case tsunami scenarios potentially affecting the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment are far field. Under low probability, high impact tsunami scenarios waves could travel into Pegasus Bay and the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai, reaching the mouth and lower reaches of the Heathcote catchment and river, potentially inundating and eroding shorelines in sub-catchments 1 to 5, and temporarily blocking fluvial drainage more extensively. Any flooding infrastructure or management actions implemented in the area of tsunami inundation would ideally be resilient to tsunami-induced inundation and erosion. Model results currently available are a first estimate of potential tsunami inundation under contemporary sea and land level conditions. In terms of future large tsunami events, these models likely underestimate effects in riverside sub-catchments, as well as effects under future sea level, shoreline and other conditions. Also of significance when considering different FPF management structures, it is important to be mindful that certain types of flood structures can ‘trap’ inundating water coming from ocean directions, leading to longer flood durations and salinization issues. Coastal erosion: Model predictions indicate that sub-catchments 1 to 3 could potentially be affected by coastal erosion by the timescale of 2065, with sub-catchments 1-6 predicted to be potentially affected by coastal erosion by the time scale of 2115. In addition, the predicted open coast effects of this hazard should not be ignored since any significant changes in the New Brighton Spit open coast would affect erosion rates and exposure of the landward estuary margins, including the shorelines of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. Any FPF flooding infrastructure or management activities planned for the potentially affected sub-catchments needs to recognise the possibility of coastal erosion, and to have a planned response to the predicted potential shoreline translation. Coastal inundation: Model predictions indicate coastal inundation hazards could potentially affect sub-catchments 1 to 8 by 2065, with a greater area and depth of inundation possible for these same sub-catchments by 2115. Low-lying areas of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment and river channel that discharge into the estuary are highly vulnerable to coastal inundation since elevated ocean and estuary water levels can block the drainage of inland systems, compounding FPF hazards. Coastal inundation can overwhelm stormwater and other drainage network components, and render river dredging options ineffective at best, flood enhancing at worst. A distinction can be made between coastal inundation and coastal erosion in terms of the potential impacts on affected land and assets, including flood infrastructure, and the implications for acceptance, adaptation, mitigation, and/or modification options. That is, responding to inundation could include structural and/or building elevation solutions, since unlike erosion, inundation does not necessarily mean the loss of land. Groundwater: Groundwater levels are of significant but variable concern when examining flooding hazards and management options in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment due to variability in soils, topographies, elevations and proximities to riverine and estuarine surface waterbodies. Much of the Canterbury Plains part of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment has a water table that is at a median depth of <1m from the surface (with actual depth below surface varying seasonally, inter-annually and during extreme meteorological events), though the water table depth rapidly shifts to >6m below the surface in the upper Plains part of the catchment (sub-catchments 13 to 15). Parts of Waltham/Linwood (sub-catchments 5 & 6) and Spreydon (sub-catchment 10) have extensive areas with a particularly high water table, as do sub-catchments 18, 19 and 20 south of the river. In all of the sub-catchments where groundwater depth below surface is shallow, it is necessary to be mindful of cascading effects on liquefaction hazard during earthquake events, including earthquake-induced drainage network and stormwater infrastructure damage. In turn, subsidence induced by liquefaction and other earthquake processes during the CES directly affected groundwater depth below surface across large parts of the central Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. The estuary margin of the catchment also faces increasing future challenges with sea level rise, which has the potential to elevate groundwater levels in these areas, compounding existing liquefaction and other earthquake associated multi-hazards. Any increases in subsurface runoff due to drainage system, development or climate changes are also of concern for the loess covered hill slopes due to the potential to enhance mass movement hazards. Earthquakes: Earthquake associated vertical ground displacement and liquefaction have historically affected, or are in future predicted to affect, all Ōpāwaho Heathcote sub-catchments. During the CES, these phenomena induced a significant cascades of changes in the city’s drainage systems, including: extensive vertical displacement and liquefaction induced damage to stormwater ‘greyware’, reducing functionality of the stormwater system; damage to the wastewater system which temporarily lowered groundwater levels and increased stormwater drainage via the wastewater network on the one hand, creating a pollution multi-hazard for FPF on the other hand; liquefaction and vertical displacement induced river channel changes affected drainage capacities; subsidence induced losses in soakage and infiltration capacities; changes occurred in topographic drainage conductivity; estuary subsidence (mainly around the Ōtākaro Avon rivermouth) increased both FPF and coastal inundation hazards; estuary bed uplift (severe around the Ōpāwaho Heathcote margins), reduced tidal prisms and increased bed friction, producing an overall reduction the waterbody’s capacity to efficiently flush catchment floodwaters to sea; and changes in estuarine and riverine ecosystems. All such possible effects need to be considered when evaluating present and future capacities of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment FPF management systems. These phenomena are particularly of concern in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment since stormwater networks must deal with constraints imposed by stream and river channels (past and present), estuarine shorelines and complex hill topography. Mass movements: Mass movements are primarily a risk in the Port Hills areas of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment (sub-catchments 1, 2, 7, 9, 11, 16, 21), though there are one or two small but susceptible areas on the banks of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote River. Mass movements in the form of rockfalls and debris flows occurred on the Port Hills during the CES, resulting in building damage, fatalities and evacuations. Evidence has also been found of earthquake-triggered tunnel gully collapsesin all Port Hill Valleys. Follow-on effects of these mass movements are likely to occur in major future FPF and other hazard events. Of note, elevated groundwater levels, coastal inundation, earthquakes (including liquefaction and other effects), and mass movement exhibit the most extensive levels of multi-hazard interaction with FPF hazard. Further, all of the analysed multi-hazard interactions except earthquakes were found to consistently produce increases in the FPF hazard. The implications of these analyses are that multihazard interactions generally enhance the FPF hazard in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. Hence, management plans which exclude adjustments for multi-hazard interactions are likely to underestimate the FPF hazard in numerous different ways. In conclusion, although only a one-way analysis of the potential effects of selected multi-hazards on FPF hazard, this review highlights that the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment is an inherently multi- hazard prone environment. The implications of the interactions and process linkages revealed in this report are that several significant multi-hazard influences and process interactions must be taken into account in order to design a resilient FPF hazard management strategy.
Mixed conifer, beech and hardwood forests are relatively common in Aotearoa/New Zealand, but are not well studied. This thesis investigates the coexistence, regeneration dynamics and disturbance history of a mixed species forest across an environmental gradient of drainage and soil development in north Westland. The aim was to investigate whether conifers, beech and non-beech hardwood species were able to coexist on surfaces that differed in their underlying edaphic conditions, and if so to understand the mechanisms that influenced their regeneration on both poorly drained and well drained soils. The site selected was an area of high tree species diversity on a lowland 0.8 km² post-glacial terrace at the base of Mount Harata in the Grey River Valley. My approach was to use forest stand history reconstruction at two spatial scales: an intensive within-plot study of stand dynamics (chapter 1) and a whole-landform approach (chapter 2) that examined whether the dynamics identified at the smaller within-plot scale reflected larger patterns across the terrace. In chapter 1, three large permanent plots (0.3-0.7 ha) were placed at different points along the drainage gradient, one plot situated in each of the mainly well-drained, poorly drained and very poorly drained areas along the terrace. Information was gathered on species age and size structures, spatial distributions of tree ages, species interactions, microsite establishment preferences, patterns of stand mortality, and disturbance history in each plot. There were differences in stand structure, composition and relative abundance of species found between the well drained plot and the two poorer drained plots. On the well drained site conifers were scarce, the beeches Nothofagus fusca and N. menziesii dominated the canopy, and in the subcanopy the hardwood species Weinmannia racemosa and Quintinia acutifolia were abundant. As drainage became progressively poorer, the conifers Dacrydium cupressinum and Dacrycarpus dacrydioides became more abundant and occupied the emergent tier over a beech canopy. The hardwoods W. racemosa and Q. acutifolia became gradually less abundant in the subcanopy, whereas the hardwood Elaeocarpus hookerianus became more so. In the well drained plot, gap partitioning for light between beeches and hardwoods enabled coexistence in response to a range of different sized openings resulting from disturbances of different extent. In the two more poorly drained plots, species also coexisted by partitioning microsite establishment sites according to drainage. There were several distinct periods where synchronous establishment of different species occurred in different plots, suggesting there were large disturbances: c. 100yrs, 190-200 yrs, 275-300 yrs and 375-425 yrs ago. Generally after the same disturbance, different species regenerated in different plots reflecting the underlying drainage gradient. However, at the same site after different disturbances, different sets of species regenerated, suggesting the type and extent of disturbances and the conditions left behind influenced species regeneration at some times but not others. The regeneration of some species (e.g., N. fusca in the well-drained plot, and Dacrydium in the poorer drained plots) was periodic and appeared to be closely linked to these events. In the intervals between these disturbances, less extensive disturbances resulted in the more frequent N. menziesii and especially hardwood regeneration. The type of tree death caused by different disturbances favoured different species, with dead standing tree death favouring the more shade-tolerant N. menziesii and hardwoods, whereas uprooting created a mosaic of microsite conditions and larger gap sizes that enabled Dacrycarpus, N. fusca and E. hookerianus to maintain themselves in the poorly drained areas. In chapter 2, 10 circular plots (c. 0.12 ha) were placed in well drained areas and 10 circular plots (c. 0.2 ha) in poorly drained plots to collect information on species population structures and microsite preferences. The aims were to reconstruct species' regeneration responses to a range of disturbances of different type and extent across the whole terrace, and to examine whether there were important differences in the effects of these disturbances. At this landform scale, the composition and relative abundances of species across the drainage gradient reflected those found in chapter 1. There were few scattered conifers in well drained areas, despite many potential regeneration opportunities created from a range of different stand destroying and smaller scale disturbances. Three of the four periods identified in chapter 1 reflected distinct terrace-wide periods of regeneration 75-100 yrs, 200-275 yrs and 350-450 yrs ago, providing strong evidence of periodic large, infrequent disturbances that occurred at intervals of 100-200 yrs. These large, infrequent disturbances have had a substantial influence in determining forest history, and have had long term effects on forest structure and successional processes. Different large, infrequent disturbances had different effects across the terrace, with the variability in conditions that resulted enabling different species to regenerate at different times. For example, the regeneration of distinct even-aged Dacrydium cohorts in poorly drained areas was linked to historical Alpine Fault earthquakes, but not to more recent storms. The variation in the intensity of different large, infrequent disturbances at different points along the environmental drainage gradient, was a key factor influencing the scale of impacts. In effect, the underlying edaphic conditions influenced species composition along the drainage gradient and disturbance history regulated the relative abundances of species. The results presented here further emphasise the importance of large scale disturbances as a mechanism that allows coexistence of different tree species in mixed forest, in particular for the conifers Dacrydium, Dacrycarpus and the beech N. fusca, by creating much of the environmental variation to which these species responded. This study adds to our understanding of the effects of historical earthquakes in the relatively complex forests of north Westland, and further illustrates their importance in the Westland forest landscape as the major influential disturbance on forest pattern and history. These results also further develop the 'two-component' model used to describe conifer/angiosperm dynamics, by identifying qualitative differences in the impacts of different large, infrequent disturbances across an environmental gradient that allowed for coexistence of different species. In poorer drained areas, these forests may even be thought of as 'three-component' systems with conifers, beeches and hardwoods exhibiting key differences in their regeneration patterns after disturbances of different type and extent, and in their microsite preferences.
Cats all over the world hunt wild animals and can contribute to the extinction of threatened species. In New Zealand, around half of all households have at least one cat. When cats live close to a natural area, such as a wetland, they may have impacts on native species. A previous study on the movements and hunting behaviour of domestic (house) cats around the Travis Wetland, Christchurch, New Zealand during 2000-2001 raised concerns about the effects of cats on the local skink population, as skinks were a frequent prey item. My study is a comparison to the prior study, to determine if impacts have changed alongside changes in human populations in the area post-earthquake. The domestic cat population in the area was estimated by a household survey in March-April 2018. For a 6 month period from March-September 2018, 26 households recorded prey brought home by their 41 cats. During April-July 2018, 14 cats wore Global Positioning System (GPS) devices for 7 days each to track their movements. Skink abundance was measured with pitfall trapping over 20 days in February 2018. There were more households in the area in 2018 than there were in 2000, but the numbers of cats had decreased. In the 196 ha study area around Travis Wetland, the domestic cat population was estimated at 429 cats, down from the previous 494. Most of the cats were free roaming, but the majority had been desexed and many were mostly seen at home. A total of 42 prey items were reported from 26 households and 41 cats over 6 months. Of these, 62% were rodents, 26% were exotic birds, and 12% were native birds. There were no native skinks, other mammals, or other vertebrates such as fish and amphibians (invertebrates were not included in this study). Eight male and six female cats were tracked by GPS. Home range sizes for the 100% minimum convex polygons (MCPs) ranged from 1.34 to 9.68 ha (mean 4.09 ha, median 3.54 ha). There were 9/14 (64%) cats that entered the edge of the wetland. Males had significantly larger home range areas at night and in general compared with females. However, age and distance of the cat’s household to the wetland did not have a significant effect on home range size and there was no significant correlation between home range size and prey retrieved. In 20 days of skink trapping, 11 Oligosoma polychroma were caught. The estimated catch rate was not significantly different from an earlier study on skink abundance in Travis Wetland. The apparently low abundance of skinks may have been the result of successful wetland restoration creating less suitable skink habitat, or of other predators other than cats. In the future, increased education should be provided to the public about ways to increase wildlife in their area. This includes creating lizard friendly habitat in their gardens and increasing management for cats. Generally, only a few cats bring home prey often, and these select cats should be identified in initial surveys and included in further studies. In New Zealand, until management programmes can target all predators in urban areas, domestic cats could stay out at night and inside during the day to help decrease the abundance of rodents at night and reduce the number of birds and lizards caught during the day.
The Canterbury earthquake sequence (2010-2011) was the most devastating catastrophe in New Zealand‘s modern history. Fortunately, in 2011 New Zealand had a high insurance penetration ratio, with more than 95% of residences being insured for these earthquakes. This dissertation sheds light on the functions of disaster insurance schemes and their role in economic recovery post-earthquakes. The first chapter describes the demand and supply for earthquake insurance and provides insights about different public-private partnership earthquake insurance schemes around the world. In the second chapter, we concentrate on three public earthquake insurance schemes in California, Japan, and New Zealand. The chapter examines what would have been the outcome had the system of insurance in Christchurch been different in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquake sequence (CES). We focus on the California Earthquake Authority insurance program, and the Japanese Earthquake Reinsurance scheme. Overall, the aggregate cost of the earthquake to the New Zealand public insurer (the Earthquake Commission) was USD 6.2 billion. If a similar-sized disaster event had occurred in Japan and California, homeowners would have received only around USD 1.6 billion and USD 0.7 billion from the Japanese and Californian schemes, respectively. We further describe the spatial and distributive aspects of these scenarios and discuss some of the policy questions that emerge from this comparison. The third chapter measures the longer-term effect of the CES on the local economy, using night-time light intensity measured from space, and focus on the role of insurance payments for damaged residential property during the local recovery process. Uniquely for this event, more than 95% of residential housing units were covered by insurance and almost all incurred some damage. However, insurance payments were staggered over 5 years, enabling us to identify their local impact. We find that night-time luminosity can capture the process of recovery; and that insurance payments contributed significantly to the process of local economic recovery after the earthquake. Yet, delayed payments were less affective in assisting recovery and cash settlement of claims were more effective than insurance-managed repairs. After the Christchurch earthquakes, the government declared about 8000 houses as Red Zoned, prohibiting further developments in these properties, and offering the owners to buy them out. The government provided two options for owners: the first was full payment for both land and dwelling at the 2007 property evaluation, the second was payment for land, and the rest to be paid by the owner‘s insurance. Most people chose the second option. Using data from LINZ combined with data from Stats NZ, the fourth chapter empirically investigates what led people to choose this second option, and how peer effect influenced the homeowners‘ choices. Due to climate change, public disclosure of coastal hazard information through maps and property reports have been used more frequently by local government. This is expected to raise awareness about disaster risks in local community and help potential property owners to make informed locational decision. However, media outlets and business sector argue that public hazard disclosure will cause a negative effect on property value. Despite this opposition, some district councils in New Zealand have attempted to implement improved disclosure. Kapiti Coast district in the Wellington region serves as a case study for this research. In the fifth chapter, we utilize the residential property sale data and coastal hazard maps from the local district council. This study employs a difference-in-difference hedonic property price approach to examine the effect of hazard disclosure on coastal property values. We also apply spatial hedonic regression methods, controlling for coastal amenities, as our robustness check. Our findings suggest that hazard designation has a statistically and economically insignificant impact on property values. Overall, the risk perception about coastal hazards should be more emphasized in communities.
In this thesis, focus is given to develop methodologies for rapidly estimating specific components of loss and downtime functions. The thesis proposes methodologies for deriving loss functions by (i) considering individual component performance; (ii) grouping them as per their performance characteristics; and (iii) applying them to similar building usage categories. The degree of variation in building stock and understanding their characteristics are important factors to be considered in the loss estimation methodology and the field surveys carried out to collect data add value to the study. To facilitate developing ‘downtime’ functions, this study investigates two key components of downtime: (i) time delay from post-event damage assessment of properties; and (ii) time delay in settling the insurance claims lodged. In these two areas, this research enables understanding of critical factors that influence certain aspects of downtime and suggests approaches to quantify those factors. By scrutinising the residential damage insurance claims data provided by the Earthquake Commission (EQC) for the 2010- 2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES), this work provides insights into various processes of claims settlement, the time taken to complete them and the EQC loss contributions to building stock in Christchurch city and Canterbury region. The study has shown diligence in investigating the EQC insurance claim data obtained from the CES to get new insights and build confidence in the models developed and the results generated. The first stage of this research develops contribution functions (probabilistic relationships between the expected losses for a wide range of building components and the building’s maximum response) for common types of claddings used in New Zealand buildings combining the probabilistic density functions (developed using the quantity of claddings measured from Christchurch buildings), fragility functions (obtained from the published literature) and cost functions (developed based on inputs from builders) through Monte Carlo simulations. From the developed contribution functions, glazing, masonry veneer, monolithic and precast concrete cladding systems are found to incur 50% loss at inter-storey drift levels equal to 0.027, 0.003, 0.005 and 0.011, respectively. Further, the maximum expected cladding loss for glazing, masonry veneer, monolithic, precast concrete cladding systems are found to be 368.2, 331.9, 365.0, and 136.2 NZD per square meter of floor area, respectively. In the second stage of this research, a detailed cost breakdown of typical buildings designed and built for different purposes is conducted. The contributions of structural and non- structural components to the total building cost are compared for buildings of different usages, and based on the similar ratios of non-structural performance group costs to the structural performance group cost, four-building groups are identified; (i) Structural components dominant group: outdoor sports, stadiums, parkings and long-span warehouses, (ii) non- structural drift-sensitive components dominant group: houses, single-storey suburban buildings (all usages), theatres/halls, workshops and clubhouses, (iii) non-structural acceleration- sensitive components dominant group: hospitals, research labs, museums and retail/cold stores, and (iv) apartments, hotels, offices, industrials, indoor sports, classrooms, devotionals and aquariums. By statistically analysing the cost breakdowns, performance group weighting factors are proposed for structural, and acceleration-sensitive and drift-sensitive non-structural components for all four building groups. Thus proposed building usage groupings and corresponding weighting factors facilitate rapid seismic loss estimation of any type of building given the EDPs at storey levels are known. A model for the quantification of post-earthquake inspection duration is developed in the third stage of this research. Herein, phase durations for the three assessment phases (one rapid impact and two rapid building) are computed using the number of buildings needing inspections, the number of engineers involved in inspections and a phase duration coefficient (which considers the median building inspection time, efficiency of engineer and the number of engineers involved in each assessment teams). The proposed model can be used: (i) by national/regional authorities to decide the length of the emergency period following a major earthquake, and estimate the number of engineers required to conduct a post-earthquake inspection within the desired emergency period, and (ii) to quantify the delay due to inspection for the downtime modelling framework. The final stage of this research investigates the repair costs and insurance claim settlement time for damaged residential buildings in the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence. Based on the EQC claim settlement process, claims are categorized into three groups; (i) Small Claims: claims less than NZD15,000 which were settled through cash payment, (ii) Medium Claims: claims less than NZD100,000 which were managed through Canterbury Home Repair Programme (CHRP), and (iii) Large Claims: claims above NZD100,000 which were managed by an insurance provider. The regional loss ratio (RLR) for greater Christchurch for three events inducing shakings of approximate seismic intensities 6, 7, and 8 are found to be 0.013, 0.066, and 0.171, respectively. Furthermore, the claim duration (time between an event and the claim lodgement date), assessment duration (time between the claim lodgement day and the most recent assessment day), and repair duration (time between the most recent assessment day and the repair completion day) for the insured residential buildings in the region affected by the Canterbury earthquake sequence is found to be in the range of 0.5-4 weeks, 1.5- 5 months, and 1-3 years, respectively. The results of this phase will provide useful information to earthquake engineering researchers working on seismic risk/loss and insurance modelling.