Search

found 338 results

Images for emergency response; more images...

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of members of the Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team examining the path between two houses in Christchurch. The path is covered in rubble from the collapsed house to the right. A dog is standing on top of the fence.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

The On-Site Operations Coordination Centre (OSOCC) in Latimer Square. After the 22 February 2011 earthquake, emergency service agencies set up their headquarters in Latimer Square. The OSOCC is set up by the United Nations Emergency Relief Coordinator. It helps to coordinate the local emergency response as well as advocate for humanitarian issue in political bodies such as the United National Security Council.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Members of the Disaster Assistance Response Team outside the US 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 down Lichfield Street towards the intersection of Madras Street. There is rubble from several earthquake-damaged buildings on both sides of the road. Plastic fences and road cones have been placed on the street as cordons.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of a media briefing on the Christchurch earthquake response. The briefing was held in the in the Christchurch Art Gallery, which served as the temporary Civil Defence headquarters after the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Mayor Bob Parker is about to speak.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of an information sheet used by the Civil Defence during the Christchurch Earthquake Response. The information sheet consists of a map of the original cordon set up in central Christchurch after the 22 February 2011 earthquake and a map of the cordon on Sunday 27 March 2011.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Case study analysis of the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES), which particularly impacted Christchurch City, New Zealand, has highlighted the value of practical, standardised and coordinated post-earthquake geotechnical response guidelines for earthquake-induced landslides in urban areas. The 22nd February 2011 earthquake, the second largest magnitude event in the CES, initiated a series of rockfall, cliff collapse and loess failures around the Port Hills which severely impacted the south-eastern part of Christchurch. The extensive slope failure induced by the 22nd February 200 earthquake was unprecedented; and ground motions experienced significantly exceeded the probabilistic seismic hazard model for Canterbury. Earthquake-induced landslides initiated by the 22nd February 2011 earthquake posed risk to life safety, and caused widespread damage to dwellings and critical infrastructure. In the immediate aftermath of the 22nd February 2011 earthquake, the geotechnical community responded by deploying into the Port Hills to conduct assessment of slope failure hazards and life safety risk. Coordination within the voluntary geotechnical response group evolved rapidly within the first week post-earthquake. The lack of pre-event planning to guide coordinated geotechnical response hindered the execution of timely and transparent management of life safety risk from coseismic landslides in the initial week after the earthquake. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with municipal, management and operational organisations involved in the geotechnical response during the CES. Analysis of interview dialogue highlighted the temporal evolution of priorities and tasks during emergency response to coseismic slope failure, which was further developed into a phased conceptual model to inform future geotechnical response. Review of geotechnical responses to selected historical earthquakes (Northridge, 1994; Chi-Chi, 1999; Wenchuan, 2008) has enabled comparison between international practice and local response strategies, and has emphasised the value of pre-earthquake preparation, indicating the importance of integration of geotechnical response within national emergency management plans. Furthermore, analysis of the CES and international earthquakes has informed pragmatic recommendations for future response to coseismic slope failure. Recommendations for future response to earthquake-induced landslides presented in this thesis include: the integration of post-earthquake geotechnical response with national Civil Defence and Emergency Management; pre-earthquake development of an adaptive management structure and standard slope assessment format for geotechnical response; and emergency management training for geotechnical professionals. Post-earthquake response recommendations include the development of geographic sectors within the area impacted by coseismic slope failure, and the development of a GIS database for analysis and management of data collected during ground reconnaissance. Recommendations provided in this thesis aim to inform development of national guidelines for geotechnical response to earthquake-induced landslides in New Zealand, and prompt debate concerning international best practice.

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 Celia Wade-Brown, Mayor of Wellington, speaking at a graduation ceremony for more than 40 new civil defence volunteers in the Wellington Town Hall. Members of the Wellington Emergency Management Office team were presented certificates of appreciation during this event. The certificates were presented to the members to honour their involvement in the emergency response to the 22 February 2011 earthquakes in Christchurch.

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.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Background: We are in a period of history where natural disasters are increasing in both frequency and severity. They are having widespread impacts on communities, especially on vulnerable communities, those most affected who have the least ability to prepare or respond to a disaster. The ability to assemble and effectively manage Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) is critical to navigating the complexity and chaos found immediately following disasters. These teams play a crucial role in the multi-sectoral, multi-agency, multi-disciplinary, and inter-organisational response and are vital to ensuring the safety and well-being of vulnerable populations such as the young, aged, and socially and medically disadvantaged in disasters. Communication is key to the smooth operation of these teams. Most studies of the communication in IERTs during a disaster have been focussed at a macro-level of examining larger scale patterns and trends within organisations. Rarely found are micro-level analyses of interpersonal communication at the critical interfaces between collaborating agencies. This study set out to understand the experiences of those working at the interagency interfaces in an IERT set up by the Canterbury District Health Board to respond to the needs of the vulnerable people in the aftermath of the destructive earthquakes that hit Canterbury, New Zealand, in 2010-11. The aim of the study was to gain insights about the complexities of interpersonal communication (micro-level) involved in interagency response coordination and to generate an improved understanding into what stabilises the interagency communication interfaces between those agencies responding to a major disaster. Methods: A qualitative case study research design was employed to investigate how interagency communication interfaces were stabilised at the micro-level (“the case”) in the aftermath of the destructive earthquakes that hit Canterbury in 2010-11 (“the context”). Participant recruitment was undertaken by mapping which agencies were involved within the IERT and approaching representatives from each of these agencies. Data was collected via individual interviews using a semi-structured interview guide and was based on the “Critical Incident Technique”. Subsequently, data was transcribed verbatim and subjected to inductive analysis. This was underpinned theoretically by Weick’s “Interpretive Approach” and supported by Nvivo qualitative data analysis software. Results: 19 participants were interviewed in this study. Out of the inductive analysis emerged two primary themes, each with several sub-factors. The first major theme was destabilising/disruptive factors of interagency communication with five sub-factors, a) conflicting role mandates, b) rigid command structures, c) disruption of established communication structures, d) lack of shared language and understanding, and e) situational awareness disruption. The second major theme stabilising/steadying factors in interagency communication had four sub-factors, a) the establishment of the IERT, b) emergent novel communication strategies, c) establishment of a liaison role and d) pre-existing networks and relationships. Finally, there was a third sub-level identified during inductive analysis, where sub-factors from both primary themes were noted to be uniquely interconnected by emergent “consequences” arising out of the disaster context. Finally, findings were synthesised into a conceptual “Model of Interagency Communication at the Micro-level” based on this case study of the Canterbury earthquake disaster response. Discussion: The three key dimensions of The People, The Connections and The Improvisations served as a framework for the discussion of what stabilises interagency communication interfaces in a major disaster. The People were key to stabilising the interagency interfaces through functioning as a flexible conduit, guiding and navigating communication at the interagency interfaces and improving situational awareness. The Connections provided the collective competence, shared decision-making and prior established relationships that stabilised the micro-level communication at interagency interfaces. And finally, The Improvisations i.e., novel ideas and inventiveness that emerge out of rapidly changing post-disaster environments, also contributed to stabilisation of micro-level communication flows across interagency interfaces in the disaster response. “Command and control” hierarchical structures do provide clear processes and structures for teams working in disasters to follow. However, improvisations and novel solutions are also needed and often emerge from first responders (who are best placed to assess the evolving needs in a disaster where there is a high degree of uncertainty). Conclusion: This study highlights the value of incorporating an interface perspective into any study that seeks to understand the processes of IERTs during disaster responses. It also strengthens the requirement for disaster management frameworks to formally plan for and to allow for the adaptive responsiveness of local teams on the ground, and legitimise and recognise the improvisations of those in the role of emergent boundary spanners in a disaster response. This needs to be in addition to existing formal disaster response mechanisms. This study provides a new conceptual model that can be used to guide future case studies exploring stability at the interfaces of other IERTs and highlights the centrality of communication in the experiences of members of teams in the aftermath of a disaster. Utilising these new perspectives on stabilising communication at the interagency interfaces in disaster responses will have practical implications in the future to better serve the needs of vulnerable people who are at greatest risk of adverse outcomes in a disaster.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

Members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) setting up a tent in Latimer Square after their early-morning arrival in Christchurch. Latimer Square was set up as a temporary headquarters for emergency management personnel after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) play acrucial role in times of disasters. Therefore it is crucial to understand more thoroughly the communication roles and responsibilities of interagency team members and to examine how individual members communicate within a complex, evolving, and unstable environment. It is also important to understand how different organisational identities and their spatial geographies contribute to the interactional dynamics. Earthquakes hit the Canterbury region on September, 2010 and then on February 2011 a more devastating shallow earthquake struck resulting in severe damage to the Aged Residential Care (ARC) sector. Over 600 ARC beds were lost and 500 elderly and disabled people were displaced. Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) set up an interagency emergency response team to address the issues of vulnerable people with significant health and disability needs who were unable to access their normal supports due to the effects of the earthquake. The purpose of this qualitative interpretive study is to focus on the case study of the response and evacuation of vulnerable people by interagencies responding to the event. Staff within these agencies were interviewed with a focus on the critical incidents that either stabilised or negatively influenced the outcome of the response. The findings included the complexity of navigating multiple agencies communication channels; understanding the different hierarchies and communication methods within each agency; data communication challenges when infrastructures were severely damaged; the importance of having the right skills, personal attributes and understanding of the organisations in the response; and the significance of having a liaison in situ representing and communicating through to agencies geographically dispersed from Canterbury. It is hoped that this research will assist in determining a future framework for interagency communication best practice and policy.

Images, UC QuakeStudies

A photograph of a Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team member talking to a member of the Professional Building Services on Gloucester Street. In the background is the Press House building with many cracks in the façade. Bits of bricks and other debris are scattered across the footpath. Some of the windows above the facade have broken. USAR codes have been spray-painted on one of the bottom-storey windows.