Natural hazard reviews reveal increases in disaster impacts nowhere more pronounced than in coastal settlements. Despite efforts to enhance hazard resilience, the common trend remains to keep producing disaster prone places. This paper explicitly explores hazard versus multi-hazard concepts to illustrate how different conceptualizations can enhance or reduce settlement resilience. Understandings gained were combined with onthe-ground lessons from earthquake and flooding experiences to develop of a novel ‘first cut’ approach for analyzing key multi-hazard interconnections, and to evaluate resilience enhancing opportunities. Traditional disaster resilience efforts often consider different hazard types discretely. However, recent events in Christchurch, a New Zealand city that is part of the 100 Resilient Cities network, highlight the need to analyze the interrelated nature of different hazards, especially for enhancing lifelines system resilience. Our overview of the Christchurch case study demonstrates that seismic, hydrological, shallow-earth, and coastal hazards can be fundamentally interconnected, with catastrophic results where such interconnections go unrecognized. In response, we have begun to develop a simple approach for use by different stakeholders to support resilience planning, pre and post disaster, by: drawing attention to natural and built environment multi-hazard links in general; illustrating a ‘first cut’ tool for uncovering earthquake-flooding multi-hazard links in particular; and providing a basis for reviewing resilience strategy effectiveness in multi-hazard prone environments. This framework has particular application to tectonically active areas exposed to climate-change issues.
Field trips are one of the most critical pieces of learning for students in sciences like geology, biology, and geography. Virtual field trips (VFT) are being increasingly considered as sophisticated and effective forms of teaching, especially with the rise of new technologies and the growing demand for more inclusive classroom environments. This research developed a virtual field trip for Tertiary students in an introductory-level geology course (GEOL 113: Environmental Geohazards) at the University of Canterbury. This initiative was in partnership with LEARNZ – a highly esteemed virtual fieldtrip team run by CORE Education that creates successful VFTs for Primary and Secondary students in New Zealand. Key components of the Tertiary VFT include a student acting as the virtual field trip teacher interviewing experts and leading the field trip, web-based background material, online assessment, and photos. In two successive academic years, students participated in the VFT during lectures and as pre class assignments prior to a one-day earthquake hazards workshop. In 2016, the virtual field trip used the LEARNZ web platform and occurred synchronously with the class; in 2017 the virtual fieldtrip reused the video, images and word documents from the previous year with the addition of a Google Earth component and with no reliance on the LEARNZ web platform. The goals of the trip were designed to prepare students for the earthquake hazards workshop, in which students analysed earthquake impacts over varying timescales and then applied that knowledge to develop strategies for the recovery of three crucial industries (dairy, mining, or tourism) on the West Coast of New Zealand’s South Island. In both years, number of clicks data showed that students interacted with online material far more during this week of the course than any other. Following the synchronous version in 2016, the students who were surveyed reported (1) they enjoyed the trip, (2) they found background material useful for preparation for the trip and the workshop, and (3) the additional work was at the appropriate level. Despite predominantly positive responses from the students, we experienced some negative feedback from participating staff mainly associated with stress and technical difficulties in running the synchronous VFT. With the asynchronous trip in 2017, staff reported a highly positive overall experience, with a perceived enhanced interaction with class during lecture time, and an increased and enhanced engagement with course material outside of class. The student survey again showed that the majority of students surveyed enjoyed the virtual fieldtrip, and that it was useful preparation for the workshop. Additionally, they reported an improved link between earth processes and society, which was a key overarching aim for the course. We propose that the synchronous version poses more excitement and immersion in the field environment, whereas the reuse of the asynchronous version increases the utility (and hence value for money) of the trip, and minimises technical difficulties and lecturer stress. Additionally, re-using the material in the asynchronous version offered opportunities to improve and supplement the past content, such as the incorporation of following an annotated trip path in Google Earth. As recommendations for others interested in developing virtual fieldtrips, we report that the design of a virtual fieldtrip should include (1) Goal-aligned content and assessment for both practice and marks, (2) a student and instructor experience that is authentic and flexible to both the people and the place. We suggest that these aims can be achieved whatever the budget or timeframe and make our material freely available at https://serc.carleton.edu/index.html.
