CanCERN Newsletter 124, 2 May 2014
Articles, UC QuakeStudies
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 2 May 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 2 May 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 9 May 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 18 April 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 4 October 2013
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 6 August 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 13 August 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 14 January 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 6 July 2012
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 4 May 2012
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 16 December 2011
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 2 November 2012
A story submitted by Sue Hamer to the QuakeStories website.
A pdf transcript of Chris's second earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox Take 2 project. Interviewer: Joshua Black. Transcriber: Caleb Middendorf.
The M7.8 Kaikoura Earthquake in 2016 presented a number of challenges to science agencies and institutions throughout New Zealand. The earthquake was complex, with 21 faults rupturing throughout the North Canterbury and Marlborough landscape, generating a localised seven metre tsunami and triggering thousands of landslides. With many areas isolated as a result, it presented science teams with logistical challenges as well as the need to coordinate efforts across institutional and disciplinary boundaries. Many research disciplines, from engineering and geophysics to social science, were heavily involved in the response. Coordinating these disciplines and institutions required significant effort to assist New Zealand during its most complex earthquake yet recorded. This paper explores that effort and acknowledges the successes and lessons learned by the teams involved.
A story submitted by Lin to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Joan Curry to the QuakeStories website.
Summary of oral history interview with Nicky Wagner about her experiences of the Canterbury earthquakes.
Transcript of Tracey Adams's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 15 April 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 26 August 2011.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 26 March 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 19 March 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 20 December 2013
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 7 March 2014
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 31 January 2014
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 25 February 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The "Lyttelton Harbour Review" newsletter for 8 April 2013, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
This study analyses the success and limitations of the recovery process following the 2010–11 earthquake sequence in Christchurch, New Zealand. Data were obtained from in-depth interviews with 32 relocated households in Christchurch, and from a review of recovery policies implemented by the government. A top-down approach to disaster recovery was evident, with the creation of multiple government agencies and processes that made grassroots input into decision-making difficult. Although insurance proceeds enabled the repair and rebuilding of many dwellings, the complexity and adversarial nature of the claim procedures also impaired recovery. Householders’ perceptions of recovery reflected key aspects of their post-earthquake experiences (e.g. the housing offer they received, and the negotiations involved), and the outcomes of their relocation (including the value of the new home, their subjective well-being, and lifestyle after relocation). Protracted insurance negotiations, unfair offers and hardships in post-earthquake life were major challenges to recovery. Less-thanfavourable recovery experiences also transformed patterns of trust in local communities, as relocated householders came to doubt both the government and private insurance companies’ ability to successfully manage a disaster. At the same time, many relocated households expressed trust in their neighbours and communities. This study illuminates how government policies influence disaster recovery while also suggesting a need to reconsider centralised, top-down approaches to managing recovery.
A video of a presentation by Associate Professor John Vargo during the fifth plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Vargo is a senior researcher and co-leader of the Resilient Organisations Research Programme at the University of Canterbury. The presentation is titled, "Organisational Resilience is more than just Business Continuity".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: Business Continuity Management is well-established process in many larger organisations and a key element in their emergency planning. Research carried out by resilient organisations follow the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury Earthquakes show that most small organisations did not have a business continuity plan (BCP), yet many of these organisations did survive the massive disruptions following the earthquakes. They were resilient to these catastrophic events, but in the absence of a BCP. This research also found that many of the organisations with BCP's, struggled to use them effectively when facing real events that did not align with the BCP. Although the BCPs did a good job of preparing organisations to deal with technology and operational disruptions, there was virtually no coverage for the continuity of people. Issues surrounding staff welfare and engagement were amongst the most crucial issues faced by Canterbury organisations, yet impacts of societal and personal disruption did not feature in BCPs. Resilience is a systematic way of looking at how an organization can survive a crisis and thrive in an uncertain world. Business continuity is an important aspect for surviving the crisis, but it is only part of the bigger picture addressed by organisational resilience. This presentation will show how organizational experiences in the Canterbury earthquakes support the need to move to a 'Business Continuity' for the '21st Century', one that incorporates more aspects of resilience, especially the 'people' areas of leadership, culture, staff welfare, and engagement.
Earthquakes impacting on the built environment can generate significant volumes of waste, often overwhelming existing waste management capacities. Earthquake waste can pose a public and environmental health hazard and can become a road block on the road to recovery. Specific research has been developed at the University of Canterbury to go beyond the current perception of disaster waste as a logistical hurdle, to a realisation that disaster waste management is part of the overall recovery process and can be planned for effectively. Disaster waste decision-makers, often constrained by inappropriate institutional frameworks, are faced with conflicting social, economic and environmental drivers which all impact on the overall recovery. Framed around L’Aquila earthquake, Italy, 2009, this paper discusses the social, economic and environmental effects of earthquake waste management and the impact of existing institutional frameworks (legal, financial and organisational). The paper concludes by discussing how to plan for earthquake waste management.