The rapid classification of building damage states or placards after an earthquake is vital for enabling an efficient emergency response and informed decision-making for rehabilitation and recovery purposes. Traditional methods rely heavily on inspector-led on-site surveys, which are often time-consuming, resource-intensive, and susceptible to human error. This study introduces a machine learning-supported surrogate model designed to streamline the assessment of building damage, focusing on the automated assignment of damage placards within the context of New Zealand's post-earthquake evaluation frameworks. The study evaluates two key safety evaluation protocols—Rapid Building Assessment (RBA) and Detailed Damage Evaluation (DDE)—and integrates corresponding databases derived from the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) in Christchurch. Six ML classifiers—Multilayer Perceptron (MLP), Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN), Gradient Boosting Classifier (GBC), and Gradient Bagging (GBag)—were rigorously tested across both databases. The results indicate that the RF-based surrogate model outperforms the other classifiers across both RBA and DDE protocols. Two distinct sets of critical predictors have been further identified for each protocol, allowing for the rapid retrieval of essential data for future on-site surveys, while retaining the RF model's predictive accuracy. The developed surrogate model provides a pragmatic tool for practising engineers to rapidly assign placards to damaged structures and for policymakers and building owners to make informed recovery decisions for earthquake-affected buildings
Under the framework of New Public Management, the government has decentralised the responsibility for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) to regional, local, and community levels in New Zealand. This decentralisation serves political agendas related to resource allocation and is supported by empirical evidence suggesting that involving communities in DRM during recovery decision-making enhances disaster resilience. Extensive evidence indicates that community participation in DRM, especially during recovery decision-making, can significantly improve recovery outcomes at the community level. However, there has been limited research into whether the legal framework in New Zealand effectively facilitates meaningful public engagement to empower the public in influencing disaster recovery decisions. To address this gap in the literature, this thesis aims to explore the extent to which legislative and governance arrangements transfer the responsibility, liability, and costs of managing disaster risks to local levels without enabling meaningful public contribution to and influence on recovery decisions affecting them. Situated within Public Law and Disaster Risk and Resilience disciplines and using a case study of Greater Christchurch, New Zealand, this interdisciplinary thesis examines both common law and statutory provisions in the legal framework impacting public engagement before and during recovery from the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. In particular, this thesis assesses how legislative, and governance frameworks influenced communities’ ability to influence recovery decision-making following the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). This thesis shows that before the CES, the New Zealand public engagement system closely adhered to the common law principle of the ‘duty to consult’, which remains the current legal standard. This principle required decision-makers to use the 'public notice and comment' approach as a minimum, limiting meaningful community participation in decision-making. After the earthquakes, reliance on this traditional approach caused growing frustration and division locally, as the public struggled to effectively engage in and influence recovery decisions, resulting in new community activism. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act (CER Act), introduced following the Christchurch Earthquake, included innovative provisions on public engagement. However, for various reasons, this Act appeared to have minimal impact on meaningful public engagement in recovery decision-making, which continued to align with the broader, existing public engagement system and associated norms. The empirical findings indicate that despite the novel legislative language, the traditional public engagement framework in New Zealand constrained effective engagement, leading to a broader erosion of trust between the public and the government. This was largely attributed to the default ‘public notice and comment’ approach at the local government level, with inadequate mechanisms for community engagement in central government decision-making shaping the expectations of recovery decision-makers still operating within this framework. Notable departures from this traditional approach were evident in the practices of the Waimakariri District Council and Christchurch City Council. Particularly noteworthy was the ‘Share an Idea’ public engagement campaign. Unlike conventional processes, it did not commence with a near-final or draft document. Instead, it utilised participatory mechanisms that fostered meaningful dialogue, enabling the public to significantly shape the content of the draft Christchurch Central Recovery Plan. The initial success of such participatory engagement underscores its potential effectiveness throughout the entire recovery planning process, an option that was not exercised by the central government. In conclusion, this thesis argues that New Zealand should move beyond the entrenched ‘public notice and comment’ approach and adopt more open and inclusive public participation mechanisms. It contends that supplementing this approach with proactive participatory methods before disasters could yield favorable outcomes during disaster recovery, thereby ensuring meaningful public involvement in future decisions that affect communities.
When researchers seek to understand community resilience, it often centres on individual agents and actors. They look at the traits individuals have in order to help recover from adverse events, as well as the decisionmaking processes required to plan and adapt. In Aotearoa New Zealand, Māori forms of organising can challenge these. This research was about uncovering Māori forms organising and practices in the context of resilience. The methodology I used was He Awa Whiria/Braided Rivers and storytelling analysis in kanohi ki te kanohi/semi-structured interviews to understand how Māori communities responded to and recovered from the 2010 Darfield (Canterbury), 2011 Ōtautahi/Christchurch, and 2016 Kaikōura earthquakes. Five themes emerged from the project: (i) the importance of marae as a powerful physical location, (ii) the value in building strong reciprocal connections and cultural relationships, (iii) the stronghold that kai/food has in helping to heal communities, (iv) the exchange and trading of resources, and (v) being practical when move forward after a disaster event. As a non-Māori researcher, I have been an outsider to te Ao Māori and to Aotearoa. In using this blended methodology, it became apparent that there are many socio-cultural and historical contentions from the effects of colonisation, assimilation, to grappling with Western norms. Notably, the findings pointed to more similarities than differences, such as taking care of family and communities, being community-driven, and ways of coping with adverse events. This revealed that there are similar ways of doing things regardless of having different customs. This research makes several contributions. It contributes to the field of management studies by addressing gaps in how the concept of resilience is viewed from a practical Māori perspective. The research presents emergency management professionals with similar blended and practical strategies to co-design approaches for collaborative readiness, response, and recovery plans and programmes. The study further demonstrates the localised and tangible benefits that can be gained from utilising a blended methodology and storying method. Ultimately, the purpose of the thesis was to start bridging the gap between agencies and communities, to shift to more Indigenous-led approaches, integrating local Indigenous practices and knowledges that lead to more prepared communities in managing, responding to, and recovering from earthquake hazard events.
In their everyday practice, social workers support those experiencing distress, poverty, oppression, and marginalisation in recovering from past and present crises and trauma. This expertise and knowledge is highly relevant in the aftermath of disasters, which disproportionately impact those on the margins of society. This research examines the experiences of social workers who responded to two major disaster events in Ōtautahi Christchurch, Aotearoa New Zealand: the Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011, and the Christchurch mosque attacks of 2019. This qualitative study was interpreted through a theoretical framework comprised of posttraumatic growth (PTG), ecological systems theory, the notion of ‘place’, and social capital. Data for this research was collected in two phases; individual interviews with 23 registered social workers who practised through both disaster sequences, and two focus groups which reviewed the findings of the interviews and contributed further reflections on their experiences. The data was analysed through a reflexive thematic analysis (RTA). Analysis of the data revealed three major themes from the individual interviews, and one overall theme from the focus groups. The first theme from the interviews explored participants’ feelings around the challenges associated with disaster practice and how these had enhanced their practice skills, expanded their knowledge, and aided in the development of new skills. The second theme investigated participants’ new understandings of trauma. This theme included a greater appreciation for the negative toll of trauma and how it can manifest, and the unexpected positive changes which can occur as a result of reflecting on traumatic experiences. The third theme from the individual interviews examined how participants felt their sense of resilience was connected to their experiences of support. Through the focus groups, participants contributed further data and knowledge. Participants in the focus groups identified and discussed principles that they felt were necessary for disaster practice, including being trauma attuned, culturally aware, and adaptable individually and organisationally to the changing needs of disaster. These findings have important implications for social work disaster practice and everyday work, both in Aotearoa New Zealand and internationally. The participants’ experiences and perspectives were analysed to develop a model for disaster practice.
