Search

found 425 results

Images for recovery NOT animals; more images...

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

Shift to quake recovery operation devastating for survivor;Brother of missing woman speaks out;Police say end of rescue effort sad day for all concerned;Other families trying to come to grips with rescue's end;Hundreds struggle on with life inside Christchurch cordon;Christ's College spared from large scale damage;Gang patches can return - Hells Angels lawyer;Botany to elect new MP tomorrow;Earthquake Minister on shift to recovery operation.

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

Minister for Christchurch Recovery, Gerry Brownlee drives a huge tractor among debris that spells out 'Due Process' and says 'In order to get Christchurch back on its feet again we have to bring parliament to its knees. Context - The minister says he is happy with the speed of the work being done, as he wants tomake sure those involved in the rebuild portion of the recovery effort are well prepared. The bill establishes the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) and empowers it to lead reconstruction efforts in Christchurch. It gives Cera specific powers to get information from any source, to requisition and build on land and to carry out demolitions. It can also take over local authorities if they are not working effectively on recovery work. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

Text reads 'What??... Is it another quake?.. No, it's just Gerry Brownlee rushing the CERA bill through'. The cartoon shows the huge back of Minister for Christchurch Recovery Gerry Brownlee moving energetically and forcefully to get the CERA bill past its third reading. Context - The bill establishes the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) and empowers it to lead reconstruction efforts in Christchurch. It gives Cera specific powers to get information from any source, to requisition and build on land and to carry out demolitions. It can also take over local authorities if they are not working effectively on recovery work. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

published as USB.The timeliness and quality of recovery activities are impacted by the organisation and human resourcing of the physical works. This research addresses the suitability of different resourcing strategies on post-disaster demolition and debris management programmes. This qualitative analysis primarily draws on five international case studies including 2010 Canterbury earthquake, 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, 2009 Samoan Tsunami, 2009 Victorian Bushfires and 2005 Hurricane Katrina. The implementation strategies are divided into two categories: collectively and individually facilitated works. The impacts of the implementation strategies chosen are assessed for all disaster waste management activities including demolition, waste collection, transportation, treatment and waste disposal. The impacts assessed include: timeliness, completeness of projects; and environmental, economic and social impacts. Generally, the case studies demonstrate that detritus waste removal and debris from major repair work is managed at an individual property level. Debris collection, demolition and disposal are generally and most effectively carried out as a collective activity. However, implementation strategies are affected by contextual factors (such as funding and legal constraints) and the nature of the disaster waste (degree of hazardous waste, geographical spread of waste etc.) and need to be designed accordingly. Community involvement in recovery activities such as demolition and debris removal is shown to contribute positively to psychosocial recovery.