Search

found 183 results

Images for urban; more images...

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Members of USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) being briefed after their early-morning arrival from Los Angeles. The 80-person DART team arrived in Christchurch to assist local authorities after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Al Dwyer, and members of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside their headquarters in Latimer Square. Latimer Square was set up as a temporary headquarters for emergency management personnel after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of members of the Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team walking through Latimer Square. In the background there are members from other emergency management teams including the China USAR team, the Tauranga Response Team, and the Red Cross.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of members of the Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team in Latimer Square. There are members of other emergency management teams in the background including the Tauranga Response Team, the Taupo Response Team, and the New South Wales USAR team.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Al Dwyer, leader of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. Members of DART can be seen behind him. Latimer Square was set up as a temporary headquarters for emergency management personnel after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, the leader of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, and members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Deputy Administrator for Protection and National Preparedness at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Tim Manning, briefing members of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) upon their arrival in Christchurch to assist with search and rescue efforts.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Deputy Administrator for Protection and National Preparedness at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Tim Manning, briefing members of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) upon their arrival in Christchurch to assist with search and rescue efforts.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, the leader of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, and members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, and members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key shaking the hand of the Al Dwyer, the leader of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Canterbury Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee is standing behind him.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, the leader of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team Leader (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Canterbury Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee is standing beside him.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key preparing for a photograph with Al Dwyer, leader of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), and members of DART, outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. Latimer Square was set up as a temporary headquarters for emergency managements personnel after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A member of the Los Angeles County Fire Department Search and Rescue Team, talking to a New Zealand Police Officer in Latimer Square. In the background is a wire fence with Search and Rescue Team equipment tied to it. After the 22 February 2011 earthquake, emergency service agencies set up their headquarters in Latimer Square.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A member of the Los Angeles County Fire Department Search and Rescue Team, talking to a New Zealand Police Officer in Latimer Square. In the background is a wire fence with Search and Rescue Team equipment tied to it. After the 22 February 2011 earthquake, emergency service agencies set up their headquarters in Latimer Square.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer and members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Canterbury Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee is standing behind him.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Prime Minister John Key preparing for a photograph with Al Dwyer, leader of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), and members of DART, outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. Latimer Square was set up as a temporary headquarters for emergency managements personnel after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

Earthquakes and other major disasters present communities and their authorities with an extraordinary challenge. While a lot can be done to prepare a city’s response in the event of a disaster, few cities are truly prepared for the initial impact, devastation, grief, and the seemingly formidable challenge of recovery. Many people find themselves overwhelmed with facing critical problems; ones which they have often never had experience with before. While the simple part is agreeing on a desired outcome for recovery, it appears the argument that exists between stakeholders is the conflicting ideas of How To effectively achieve the main objective. What I have identified as an important step toward collaborating on the How To of recovery is to identify the ways in which each discipline can most effectively contribute to the recovery. Landscape architecture is just one of the many disciplines (that should be) invovled in the How To of earthquake recovery. Canterbury has an incredible opportunity to set the benchmark for good practice in earthquake recovery. To make the most of this opportuntiy, it is critical that landscape architects are more effectively engaged in roles of recovery across a much broader spectrum of recovery activities. The overarching purpose of this research is to explore and provide insight to the current and potential of landscape architects in the earthquake recovery period in Canterbury, using international good practice as a benchmark. The research is aimed at stimulating and guiding landscape architects dealing with the earthquake recovery in Canterbury, while informing stakeholders: emergency managers, authorities, other disciplines and the wider community of themost effective role(s) for landscape architects in the recovery period.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

On September the 4th 2010 and February 22nd 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was shaken by two massive earthquakes. This paper is set broadly within the civil defence and emergency management literature and informed by recent work on community participation and social capital in the building of resilient cities. Work in this area indicates a need to recognise both the formal institutional response to the earthquakes as well as the substantive role communities play in their own recovery. The range of factors that facilitate or hinder community involvement also needs to be better understood. This paper interrogates the assumption that recovery agencies and officials are both willing and able to engage communities who are themselves willing and able to be engaged in accordance with recovery best practice. Case studies of three community groups – CanCERN, Greening the Rubble and Gap Filler – illustrate some of the difficulties associated with becoming a community during the disaster recovery phase. Based on my own observations and experiences, combined with data from approximately 50 in-depth interviews with Christchurch residents and representatives from community groups, the Christchurch City Council, the Earthquake Commission and so on, this paper outlines some practical strategies emerging communities may use in the early disaster recovery phase that then strengthens their ability to ‘participate’ in the recovery process.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

The New Zealand Kellogg Rural Leaders Programme develops emerging agribusiness leaders to help shape the future of New Zealand agribusiness and rural affairs. Lincoln University has been involved with this leaders programme since 1979 when it was launched with a grant from the Kellogg Foundation, USA.At 4.35am on 4th September 2010, Canterbury was hit by an earthquake measuring 7.1 on the Richter scale. On 22nd February 2011 and 13th June 2011 a separate fault line approximately 35km from the first, ruptured to inflict two further earthquakes measuring 6.3 and 6.0 respectively. As a direct result of the February earthquake, 181 people lost their lives. Some commentators have described this series of earthquakes as the most expensive global insurance event of all time. These earthquakes and the more than 7000 associated aftershocks have had a significant physical impact on parts of Canterbury and virtually none on others. The economic, social and emotional impacts of these quakes spread across Canterbury and beyond. Waimakariri district, north of Christchurch, has reflected a similar pattern, with over 1400 houses requiring rebuild or substantial repair, millions of dollars of damage to infrastructure, and significant social issues as a result. The physical damage in Waimakiriri District was predominately in parts of Kaiapoi, and two small beach settlements, The Pines and Kairaki Beach with pockets elsewhere in the district. While the balance of the district is largely physically untouched, the economic, social, and emotional shockwaves have spread across the district. Waimakariri district consists of two main towns, Rangiora and Kaiapoi, a number of smaller urban areas and a larger rural area. It is considered mid-size in the New Zealand local government landscape. This paper will explore the actions and plans of Waimakiriri District Council (WDC) in the Emergency Management Recovery programme to provide context to allow a more detailed examination of the planning processes prior to, and subsequent to the earthquakes. This study looked at documentation produced by WDC, applicable legislation and New Zealand Emergency Management resources and other sources. Key managers and elected representatives in the WOC were interviewed, along with a selection of governmental and nongovernmental agency representatives. The interview responses enable understanding of how central Government and other local authorities can benefit from these lessons and apply them to their own planning. It is intended that this paper will assist local government organisations in New Zealand to evaluate their planning processes in light of the events of 2010/11 in Canterbury and the lessons from WDC.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

At 4.35am on Saturday 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake struck near the township of Darfield in Canterbury leading to widespread damage in Christchurch and the wider central Canterbury region. Though it was reported no lives were lost, that was not entirely correct. Over 3,000 animals perished as a result of the earthquake and 99% of these deaths would have been avoidable if appropriate mitigation measures had been in place. Deaths were predominantly due to zoological vulnerability of birds in captive production farms. Other problems included lack of provision of animal welfare at evacuation centres, issues associated with multiple lost and found pet services, evacuation failure due to pet separation and stress impact on dairy herds and associated milk production. The Canterbury Earthquake has highlighted concerns over a lack of animal emergency welfare planning and capacity in New Zealand, an issue that is being progressed by the National Animal Welfare Emergency Management Group. As animal emergency management becomes better understood by emergency management and veterinary professionals, it is more likely that both sectors will have greater demands placed upon them by national guidelines and community expectations to ensure provisions are made to afford protection of animals in times of disaster. A subsequent and more devastating earthquake struck the region on Monday 22 February 2011; this article however is primarily focused on the events pertaining to the September 4 event.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

A magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck the city of Christchurch at 12:51pm on Tuesday 22 February 2011. The earthquake caused 182 fatalities, a large number of injuries, and resulted in widespread damage to the built environment, including significant disruption to the lifelines. The event created the largest lifeline disruption in a New Zealand city in 80 years, with much of the damage resulting from extensive and severe liquefaction in the Christchurch urban area. The Christchurch earthquake occurred when the Canterbury region and its lifelines systems were at the early stage of recovering from the 4 September 2010 Darfield (Canterbury) magnitude 7.1 earthquake. This paper describes the impact of the Christchurch earthquake on lifelines by briefly summarising the physical damage to the networks, the system performance and the operational response during the emergency management and the recovery phase. Special focus is given to the performance and management of the gas, electric and road networks and to the liquefaction ejecta clean-up operations that contributed to the rapid reinstatement of the functionality of many of the lifelines. The water and wastewater system performances are also summarized. Elements of resilience that contributed to good network performance or to efficient emergency and recovery management are highlighted in the paper.

Research Papers, Lincoln University

There is a critical strand of literature suggesting that there are no ‘natural’ disasters (Abramovitz, 2001; Anderson and Woodrow, 1998; Clarke, 2008; Hinchliffe, 2004). There are only those that leave us – the people - more or less shaken and disturbed. There may be some substance to this; for example, how many readers recall the 7.8 magnitude earthquake centred in Fiordland in July 2009? Because it was so far away from a major centre and very few people suffered any consequences, the number is likely to be far fewer than those who remember (all too vividly) the relatively smaller 7.1 magnitude Canterbury quake of September 4th 2010 and the more recent 6.3 magnitude February 22nd 2011 event. One implication of this construction of disasters is that seismic events, like those in Canterbury, are as much socio-political as they are geological. Yet, as this paper shows, the temptation in recovery is to tick boxes and rebuild rather than recover, and to focus on hard infrastructure rather than civic expertise and community involvement. In this paper I draw upon different models of community engagement and use Putnam’s (1995) notion of ‘social capital’ to frame the argument that ‘building bridges’ after a disaster is a complex blend of engineering, communication and collaboration. I then present the results of a qualitative research project undertaken after the September 4th earthquake. This research helps to illustrate the important connections between technical rebuilding, social capital, recovery processes and overall urban resilience.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

Questions to Ministers 1. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: How many claims does the Earthquake Commission expect to receive as a result of the earthquakes in Canterbury since 4 September 2010? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "rebuilding Christchurch is a key priority for the Government this year"; if so, what rebuilding plans are currently in place? 3. METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her statement that state support is for "people to fall back on when they really need it"? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that New Zealanders were "more than compensated" for last year's increase in GST? 5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How is her Ministry responding to support the Christchurch recovery following last month's earthquake? 6. JACINDA ARDERN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answers to Oral Question number one on 8 March 2011; if not, why not? 7. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Corrections: What support has the Department of Corrections provided to the people of Christchurch following last month's earthquake? 8. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister of Finance: How much has he budgeted to raise from the Christchurch Earthquake Appeal and has this figure been revised in light of the Japanese earthquake? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What work will the New Zealand Urban Search and Rescue team be carrying out in Japan? 10. Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement that the $300 million bill for restoring the Christchurch road network won't be causing any "dramatic issues" and what is his timeframe for the completion of this work? 11. COLIN KING to the Minister of Transport: What work has been done to repair and reopen Christchurch's roads and highways following the 22 February earthquake? 12. Hon STEVE CHADWICK to the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: Has he had any discussions with the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery about heritage buildings or recovering cultural artefacts from buildings damaged by the earthquake on 22 February; if so, what did he say to the Minister?