Tertiary students, not just working populations, might be experiencing feelings of burnout following the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. In the aftermath of a major disaster, the gap between the resources available to handle pressures (e.g., support) and the demands inherent in the pursuit of an academic degree (e.g., heavy workload) may lead to feelings of burnout among students. This study hypothesised that burnout dimensions (emotional exhaustion and disengagement) would be related to students’ perceptions of immediate institutional support, extended institutional support, peer support, family support, and work overload. Additionally, it was proposed that institutional and social support would moderate the relationship between work overload and burnout. Two hundred and seventy one third and fourth year students were sampled using an online questionnaire. These particular students were expected to be at greater risk of emotional exhaustion and academic disengagement because they were at the earliest stage of their tertiary education when the major earthquakes first hit. Family support and extended institutional support were found to be associated with decreased levels of emotional exhaustion and disengagement. Meanwhile, work overload was found to be related to increased levels of emotional exhaustion and disengagement. Furthermore, both peer support and immediate institutional support were found to have a moderating effect on the relationship between work overload and disengagement. This study has exposed unique findings which contribute to burnout research especially in a post-disaster context, and raises the importance of providing the right types of support for individuals who are particularly dealing with the consequences of a natural disaster.
The city of Ōtautahi/Christchurch experienced a series of earthquakes that began on September 4th, 2010. The most damaging event occurred on February 22nd, 2011 but significant earthquakes also occurred on June 13th and December 23rd with aftershocks still occurring well into 2012. The resulting disaster is the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history with 185 deaths. During 2011 the Canterbury earthquakes were one of the costliest disasters worldwide with an expected cost of up to $NZ30 billion. Hundreds of commercial buildings and thousands of houses have been destroyed or are to be demolished and extensive repairs are needed for infrastructure to over 100,000 homes. As many as 8,900 people simply abandoned their homes and left the city in the first few months after the February event (Newell, 2012), and as many as 50,000 may leave during 2012. In particular, young whānau and single young women comprised a disproportionate number of these migrants, with evidence of a general movement to the North Island. Te Puni Kōkiri sought a mix of quantitative and qualitative research to examine the social and economic impacts of the Christchurch earthquakes on Māori and their whānau. The result of this work will be a collection of evidence to inform policy to support and assist Māori and their whānau during the recovery/rebuild phases. To that end, this report triangulates available statistical and geographical information with qualitative data gathered over 2010 and 2011 by a series of interviews conducted with Māori who experienced the dramatic events associated with the earthquakes. A Māori research team at Lincoln University was commissioned to undertake the research as they were already engaged in transdisciplinary research (began in the May 2010), that focused on quickly gathering data from a range of Māori who experienced the disaster, including relevant economic, environmental, social and cultural factors in the response and recovery of Māori to these events. Participants for the qualitative research were drawn from Māori whānau who both stayed and left the city. Further data was available from ongoing projects and networks that the Lincoln research team was already involved in, including interviews with Māori first responders and managers operating in the CBD on the day of the February event. Some limited data is also available from younger members of affected whānau. Māori in Ōtautahi/Christchurch City have exhibited their own culturally-attuned collective responses to the disaster. However, it is difficult to ascertain Māori demographic changes due to a lack of robust statistical frameworks but Māori outward migration from the city is estimated to range between 560 and 1,100 people. The mobility displayed by Māori demonstrates an important but unquantified response by whānau to this disaster, with emigration to Australia presenting an attractive option for young Māori, an entrenched phenomenon that correlates to cyclical downturns and the long-term decline of the New Zealand economy. It is estimated that at least 315 Māori have emigrated from the Canterbury region to Australia post-quake, although the disaster itself may be only one of a series of events that has prompted such a decision. Māori children made up more than one in four of the net loss of children aged 6 to 15 years enrolled in schools in Greater Christchurch over the year to June 2011. Research literature identifies depression affecting a small but significant number of children one to two years post-disaster and points to increasing clinical and organisational demands for Māori and other residents of the city. For those residents in the eastern or coastal suburbs – home to many of the city’s Māori population - severe damage to housing, schools, shops, infrastructure, and streets has meant disruption to their lives, children’s schooling, employment, and community functioning. Ongoing abandonment of homes by many has meant a growing sense of unease and loss of security, exacerbated by arson, burglaries, increased drinking, a stalled local and national economy, and general confusion about the city’s future. Māori cultural resilience has enabled a considerable network of people, institutions, and resources being available to Māori , most noticeably through marae and their integral roles of housing, as a coordinating hub, and their arguing for the wider affected communities of Christchurch. Relevant disaster responses need to be discussed within whānau, kōhanga, kura, businesses, communities, and wider neighbourhoods. Comprehensive disaster management plans need to be drafted for all iwi in collaboration with central government, regional, and city or town councils. Overall, Māori are remarkably philosophical about the effects of the disaster, with many proudly relishing their roles in what is clearly a historic event of great significance to the city and country. Most believe that ‘being Māori’ has helped cope with the disaster, although for some this draws on a collective history of poverty and marginalisation, features that contribute to the vulnerability of Māori to such events. While the recovery and rebuild phases offer considerable options for Māori and iwi, with Ngāi Tahu set to play an important stakeholder in infrastructural, residential, and commercial developments, some risk and considerable unknowns are evident. Considerable numbers of Māori may migrate into the Canterbury region for employment in the rebuild, and trades training strategies have already been established. With many iwi now increasingly investing in property, the risks from significant earthquakes are now more transparent, not least to insurers and the reinsurance sector. Iwi authorities need to be appraised of insurance issues and ensure sufficient coverage exists and investments and developments are undertaken with a clear understanding of the risks from natural hazards and exposure to future disasters.
TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made with its economic programme in 2012? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his promise to New Zealanders that "I expect high standards from my Ministers … if they don't meet the standards I set then obviously I will take action if necessary"? DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements and have confidence in the statements of all his Ministers? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How is the Government delivering a strong and effective recovery for greater Christchurch following the earthquakes? CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: What are the specific "assumptions" based on "incorrect facts" demonstrating some "misunderstanding of New Zealand law" that she alleges are contained in the report of Justice Binnie concerning the application by Mr Bain for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment? Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress has the Government made on its national preventive health targets this year? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Why does he have confidence in the Minister for Whānau Ora? KRIS FAAFOI to the Minister of Police: Is she committed to all of her promises in regards to the New Zealand Police? TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Justice: What progress has been made towards achieving Better Public Services across the justice sector? HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister of Education: Does she accept the finding of the Children's Commissioner's Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty that a government funded food programme in low-decile schools is a simple, do-able, and low-cost solution to help children in poverty learn and achieve at school, and the recommendation that Government design and implement such a programme; if not, why not? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she believe that her consultation process around the possible closure of residential special schools provided all those affected with an opportunity to have a meaningful say and have that say properly considered; if so, why? MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What progress has the Government made in 2012 to shift the focus of our welfare system to one that is active, work focused and delivers better outcomes for New Zealanders?
TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made with its economic programme in 2012? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his promise to New Zealanders that "I expect high standards from my Ministers … if they don't meet the standards I set then obviously I will take action if necessary"? DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements and have confidence in the statements of all his Ministers? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How is the Government delivering a strong and effective recovery for greater Christchurch following the earthquakes? CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: What are the specific "assumptions" based on "incorrect facts" demonstrating some "misunderstanding of New Zealand law" that she alleges are contained in the report of Justice Binnie concerning the application by Mr Bain for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment? Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress has the Government made on its national preventive health targets this year? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Why does he have confidence in the Minister for Whānau Ora? KRIS FAAFOI to the Minister of Police: Is she committed to all of her promises in regards to the New Zealand Police? TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Justice: What progress has been made towards achieving Better Public Services across the justice sector? HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister of Education: Does she accept the finding of the Children's Commissioner's Expert Advisory Group on Solutions to Child Poverty that a government funded food programme in low-decile schools is a simple, do-able, and low-cost solution to help children in poverty learn and achieve at school, and the recommendation that Government design and implement such a programme; if not, why not? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she believe that her consultation process around the possible closure of residential special schools provided all those affected with an opportunity to have a meaningful say and have that say properly considered; if so, why? MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What progress has the Government made in 2012 to shift the focus of our welfare system to one that is active, work focused and delivers better outcomes for New Zealanders?
METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for the Environment: Ki Te Minita mō Te Taiao: Ka tukua e ngā paerewa e whakaarohia akehia nei mō te pai ake o te wai i roto i te pūhera Wai Mā, te kaha kē atu, te iti kē iho rānei o te uru atu o te tūkinotanga ki roto i ō tātou awa wai, e ngā mea whakakapi? Translation: Do the proposed standards for water quality in the Clean Water package allow more pollution or less to enter our waterways than the ones they will replace? BRETT HUDSON to the Minister of Finance: How much is the Government committing to spend on infrastructure over the next 4 years? ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Given his predecessor told the Pike River families, “I’m here to give you absolute reassurance we’re committed to getting the boys out, and nothing’s going to change that”, when, if ever, will he be announcing the re-entry of the drift? STUART SMITH to the Minister of Transport: What announcements has he made recently regarding the Government’s commitment to reinstate key transport links following the Kaikōura earthquake? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Children: When was she first notified that the Ministry for Vulnerable Children Oranga Tamariki, or its predecessor CYF, were placing children and younger persons in a hotel or motel for short-term care without a supervisor, and what was her first action, if any? MELISSA LEE to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that 55,000 care and support workers will share in the $2 billion pay equity settlement announced on 18 April 2017? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Dominion Post editorial that his Government has “singularly failed to answer the pressures of Auckland”; if not, why does he think they would write this? ANDREW BAYLY to the Minister for Building and Construction: How do the latest reports on the level of building activity in Auckland and nationwide for the month, quarter, and year compare with 2016? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, how? PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Transport: Why has the completion of the $2.4 billion Western Ring Route been delayed, and when can Aucklanders expect the new motorway to be open? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Conservation: Is it Government policy to increase the logging of native forests on West Coast conservation land? Dr MEGAN WOODS to the Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration: Does she agree that the first homes in the East Frame will be completed 5 months ahead of schedule? Questions to Members CLARE CURRAN to the Chairperson of the Commerce Committee: Does she intend to call for further submissions on the petition of Dame Fiona Kidman before it is reported back to the House, in light of the recently released footage shot inside the drift of the Pike River mine?
The Porters Pass fault (PPF) is a prominent element of the Porters Pass-Amberley Fault Zone (PPAFZ) which forms a broad zone of active earth deformation ca 100 km long, 60-90 km west and north of Christchurch. For a distance of ca 40 km the PPF is defined by a series of discontinuous Holocene active traces between the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers. The amount of slip/event and the timing of paleoearthquakes are crucial components needed to estimate the earthquake potential of a fault. Movement was assumed to be, coseismic and was quantified by measuring displaced geomorphic features using either tape measure or surveying equipment. Clustering of offset data suggests that four to five earthquakes occurred on the PPF during the Holocene and these range between ca 5-7 m/event. Timing information was obtained from four trenches excavated across the fault and an auger adjacent to the fault. Organic samples from these sites were radiocarbon dated and used in conjunction with data from previous studies to identify the occurrence of at least four earthquakes at 8500 ± 200, 5300 ± 700, 2500 ± 200 and 1000 ± 100 years B.P. Evidence suggests that an additional event is also possible at 6200 ± 500 years B.P. The ~1000, 5300 and 6200 years B.P. paleoearthquakes were previously unrecognised, while the 500 year event previously inferred from rock-avalanche data has been discarded. The present data set produces recurrence intervals of ~2000-2500 years for the Holocene. The identification of only one Holocene PPF rupture to the west of Red Lakes indicates the presence of a segment boundary that prevents the propagation of rupture beyond this point. This is consistent with displacement data and results in slip rates of 0.5-0.7 mm/yr and 2.5-3.4 mm/yr to the west and east of Red Lakes respectively. It is possible that the nearby extensional Red Hill Fault influences PPF rupture propagation. The combination of geometric, slip rate and timing data has enabled the magnitude of prehistoric earthquakes on the PPF to be estimated. These magnitudes range from an average of between 6.9 for a fault rupture from Waimakariri River to Red Lakes, to a maximum of 7.4 that ruptures the entire length of the PPAFZ, including the full length of the PPF. These estimates are approximately consistent with previous magnitude estimates along the full length of the PPAFZ of between 7.0 and 7.5.
“One of the most basic and fundamental questions in urban master planning and building regulations is ‘how to secure common access to sun, light and fresh air?” (Stromann-Andersen & Sattrup, 2011). Daylighting and natural ventilation can have significant benefits in office buildings. Both of these ‘passive’ strategies have been found to reduce artificial lighting and air-conditioning energy consumption by as much as 80% (Ministry for the Environment, 2008); (Brager, et al., 2007). Access to daylight and fresh air can also be credited with improved occupant comfort and health, which can lead to a reduction of employee absenteeism and an increase of productivity (Sustainability Victoria, 2008). In the rebuild of Christchurch central city, following the earthquakes of 2010 and 2011, Cantabrians have expressed a desire for a low-rise, sustainable city, with open spaces and high performance buildings (Christchurch City Council, 2011). With over 80% of the central city being demolished, a unique opportunity to readdress urban form and create a city that provides all buildings with access to daylight and fresh air exists. But a major barrier to wide-spread adoption of passive buildings in New Zealand is their dependence on void space to deliver daylight and fresh air – void space which could otherwise be valuable built floor space. Currently, urban planning regulations in Christchurch prioritize density, allowing and even encouraging low performance compact buildings. Considering this issue of density, this thesis aimed to determine which urban form and building design changes would have the greatest effect on building performance in Central City Christchurch. The research proposed and parametrically tested modifications of the current compact urban form model, as well as passive building design elements. Proposed changes were assessed in three areas: energy consumption, indoor comfort and density. Three computer programs were used: EnergyPlus was the primary tool, simulating energy consumption and thermal comfort. Radiance/Daysim was used to provide robust daylighting calculations and analysis. UrbaWind enabled detailed consideration of the urban wind environment for reliable natural ventilation predictions. Results found that, through a porous urban form and utilization of daylight and fresh air via simple windows, energy consumption could be reduced as much as 50% in buildings. With automatic modulation of windows and lighting, thermal and visual comfort could be maintained naturally for the majority of the occupied year. Separation of buildings by as little as 2m enabled significant energy improvements while having only minimal impact on individual property and city densities. Findings indicated that with minor alterations to current urban planning laws, all buildings could have common access to daylight and fresh air, enabling them to operate naturally, increasing energy efficiency and resilience.
This thesis presents the findings from an experimental programme to determine the performance and behaviour of an integrated building incorporating low damage structural and non-structural systems. The systems investigated included post-tensioned rocking concrete frames, articulated floor solutions, low damage claddings and low damage partition systems. As part of a more general aim to increase the resilience of society against earthquake hazards, more emphasis has been given to damage-control design approaches in research. Multiple low-damage earthquake resistant structural and non-structural systems have emerged that are able to withstand high levels of drift or deflections will little or negligible residual. Dry jointed connections, articulated floor solutions, low damage cladding systems and low damage drywall partitions have all been developed separately and successfully tested. In spite of the extensive research effort and the adoption in practice of the low damage systems, work was required to integrate the systems within one building and verify the constructibility, behaviour and performance of the integrated systems. The objectives of this research were to perform dynamic experimental testing of a building which incorporated the low damage systems and acquire data which could be used to dynamically validate numerical models for each of the systems. A three phase experimental programme was devised and performed to dynamically test a half-scale two storey reinforced concrete building on the University of Canterbury shaking table. The three phases of the programme investigated: The structural system only. The rocking connections were tested as Post-Tensioned only connections and Hybrid connections (including dissipators). Two different articulated floor connections were also investigated. Non-structural systems. The Hybrid building was tested with each non-structural system separately; including low damage claddings, low damage partitions and traditional partitions. The Complete building was tested with Hybrid connections, low damage claddings and low damage partitions all integrated within the test specimen. The building was designed based on a full scale prototype building following the direct displacement based design to reach a peak inter-storey drift of 1.6% in a 1/500 year ground motion for a Wellington site. For each test set up, the test specimen was subjected to a ground motion sequence of 39 single direction ground motions. Through the sequence, both the local and global behaviours of the building and integrated systems were recorded in real time. The test specimen was subjected to over 400 ground motions throughout the testing programme. It sustained no significant damage that required reparations other than crumbling of the grout pads. The average peak inter-storey drifts of the buildings were lower than the design value of 1.6%. The low damage non-structural elements were undamaged in the ground motion sequence. The data acquired from each of the phases was used to successfully validate numerical models for each of the low damage systems included in the research.