Depending on their nature and severity, disasters can create large volumes of debris and waste. Waste volumes from a single event can be the equivalent of many times the annual waste generation rate of the affected community. These volumes can overwhelm existing solid waste management facilities and personnel. Mismanagement of disaster waste can affect both the response and long term recovery of a disaster affected area. Previous research into disaster waste management has been either context specific or event specific, making it difficult to transfer lessons from one disaster event to another. The aim of this research is to develop a systems understanding of disaster waste management and in turn develop context- and disaster-transferrable decision-making guidance for emergency and waste managers. To research this complex and multi-disciplinary problem, a multi-hazard, multi-context, multi-case study approach was adopted. The research focussed on five major disaster events: 2011 Christchurch earthquake, 2009 Victorian Bushfires, 2009 Samoan tsunami, 2009 L’Aquila earthquake and 2005 Hurricane Katrina. The first stage of the analysis involved the development of a set of ‘disaster & disaster waste’ impact indicators. The indicators demonstrate a method by which disaster managers, planners and researchers can simplify the very large spectra of possible disaster impacts, into some key decision-drivers which will likely influence post-disaster management requirements. The second stage of the research was to develop a set of criteria to represent the desirable environmental, economic, social and recovery effects of a successful disaster waste management system. These criteria were used to assess the effectiveness of the disaster waste management approaches for the case studies. The third stage of the research was the cross-case analysis. Six main elements of disaster waste management systems were identified and analysed. These were: strategic management, funding mechanisms, operational management, environmental and human health risk management, and legislation and regulation. Within each of these system elements, key decision-making guidance (linked to the ‘disaster & disaster waste’ indicators) and management principles were developed. The ‘disaster & disaster waste’ impact indicators, the effects assessment criteria and management principles have all been developed so that they can be practically applied to disaster waste management planning and response in the future.
As part of the ‘Project Masonry’ Recovery Project funded by the New Zealand Natural Hazards Research Platform, commencing in March 2011, an international team of researchers was deployed to document and interpret the observed earthquake damage to masonry buildings and to churches as a result of the 22nd February 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The study focused on investigating commonly encountered failure patterns and collapse mechanisms. A brief summary of activities undertaken is presented, detailing the observations that were made on the performance of and the deficiencies that contributed to the damage to approximately 650 inspected unreinforced clay brick masonry (URM) buildings, to 90 unreinforced stone masonry buildings, to 342 reinforced concrete masonry (RCM) buildings, to 112 churches in the Canterbury region, and to just under 1100 residential dwellings having external masonry veneer cladding. Also, details are provided of retrofit techniques that were implemented within relevant Christchurch URM buildings prior to the 22nd February earthquake. In addition to presenting a summary of Project Masonry, the broader research activity at the University of Auckland pertaining to the seismic assessment and improvement of unreinforced masonry buildings is outlined. The purpose of this outline is to provide an overview and bibliography of published literature and to communicate on-going research activity that has not yet been reported in a complete form. http://sesoc.org.nz/conference/programme.pdf
During many years the analysis of some geophysical results of Charles Darwin was being carried out in Department. Darwin has connected almost 200 years ago results of catastrophic earthquakes with vertical movement of a surface of the Earth. Usually this movement less horizontal movement and its influence on destruction of cities is not considered. Earthquake hazard assessment studies were focused usually on the horizontal ground motion. Effects of the strong vertical motion were not, practically, discussed. The margins of safety against gravity-induced static vertical forces in constructed buildings usually provide adequate resistance to dynamic forces induced by the vertical acceleration during an earthquake. However, the earthquake in Christchurch is an example of the vertical seismic shock . The earthquake magnitude was rather small - nearby 6.3. However, the result was catastrophic. The same took place in 1835. It allowed to Darwin to formulate a few great ideas. Charles Darwin has explained qualitatively results of an interaction of huge seismic waves with volcanoes and the nature of volcanism and seismicity of our planet. These important data of Charles Darwin became very actual recently. It is possible to tell also the same about tsunami and extreme ocean waves described by Charles Darwin. Therefore this data were analyzed using modern mechanics, mathematics and physics in Department. In particular, the theory of catastrophic waves was developed based on Darwin's data. The theory tried to explain occurrence, evolution and distribution the catastrophic waves in various natural systems, since atoms, oceans, surfaces of the Earth and up to the very early Universe. Some results of the research were published in prestigious magazines. Later they were presented in two books devoted to Charles Darwin's anniversary (2009). Last from them was published in Russian (2011). We give here key ideas of this research which is a part of interdisciplinary researches of Department. Some ideas are discussed. Not less important purpose is very short historical review of some researches of Darwin. In particular, we underline Darwin' priority in the formulation of the bases of Dynamics Earth.
