On November 14, 2016 an earthquake struck the rural districts of Kaikōura and Hurunui on New Zealand’s South Island. The region—characterized by small dispersed communities, a local economy based on tourism and agriculture, and limited transportation connections—was severely impacted. Following the quake, road and rail networks essential to maintaining steady flows of goods, visitors, and services were extensively damaged, leaving agrifood producers with significant logistical challenges, resulting in reduced productivity and problematic market access. Regional tourism destinations also suffered with changes to the number, characteristics, and travel patterns of visitors. As the region recovers, there is renewed interest in the development and promotion of agrifood tourism and trails as a pathway for enhancing rural resilience, and a growing awareness of the importance of local networks. Drawing on empirical evidence and insights from a range of affected stakeholders, including food producers, tourism operators, and local government, we explore the significance of emerging agrifood tourism initiatives for fostering diversity, enhancing connectivity, and building resilience in the context of rural recovery. We highlight the motivation to diversify distribution channels for agrifood producers, and strengthen the region’s tourism place identity. Enhancing product offerings and establishing better links between different destinations within the region are seen as essential. While such trends are common in rural regions globally, we suggest that stakeholders’ shared experience with the earthquake and its aftermath has opened up new opportunities for regeneration and reimagination, and has influenced current agrifood tourism trajectories. In particular, additional funding for tourism recovery marketing and product development after the earthquake, and an emphasis on greater connectivity between the residents and communities through strengthening rural networks and building social capital within and between regions, is enabling more resilient and sustainable futures.
New Zealand is one of the most highly urbanised countries in the world with well over 87 per cent of us living in 138 recognised urban centres, yet the number of people residing in inner city areas is proportionally very low. Householders have been exercising their preference for suburban or rural areas by opting for low density suburban environments. It is widely agreed that productivity and sustainability increase when people aggregate in the inner city, however there is a perceived trade-off between the density and liveability of an area. Achieving liveability in the inner city is concerned with reducing the pressures which emerge from higher population densities. Promoting inclusive societies, revitalising underutilised cityscapes, ensuring accessibility and fostering sense of place, are all elements essential to achieving liveable communities. The rebuild following the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes provides Christchurch with an opportunity to shape a more environmentally sustainable, economically vibrant and liveable city. This research involves undertaking a case study of current inner city liveability measures and those provided for through the rebuild. A cross-case analysis with two of the world’s most liveable cities, Melbourne and Vancouver, exposes Christchurch’s potential shortcomings and reveals practical measures the city could implement in order to promote liveability.
Peri-urban environments are critical to the connections between urban and rural ecosystems and their respective communities. Lowland floodplains are important examples that are attractive for urbanisation and often associated with the loss of rural lands and resources. In Christchurch, New Zealand, damage from major earthquakes led to the large-scale abandonment of urban residential properties in former floodplain areas creating a rare opportunity to re-imagine the future of these lands. This has posed a unique governance challenge involving the reassessment of land-use options and a renewed focus on disaster risk and climate change adaptation. Urban-rural tensions have emerged through decisions on relocating residential development, alternative proposals for land uses, and an unprecedented opportunity for redress of degraded traditional values for indigenous (Māori) people. Immediately following the earthquakes, existing statutory arrangements applied to many recovery needs and identified institutional responsibilities. Bespoke legislation was also created to address the scale of impacts. Characteristics of the approach have included attention to information acquisition, iterative assessment of land - use options, and a wide variety of opportunities for community participation. Challenges have included a protracted decision-making process with accompanying transaction costs, and a high requirement for coordination. The case typifies the challenges of achieving ecosystem governance where both urban and rural stakeholders have strong desires and an opportunity to exert influence. It presents a unique context for applying the latest thinking on ecosystem management, adaptation, and resilience, and offers transferable learning for the governance of peri-urban floodplains worldwide.
Natural hazards continue to have adverse effects on communities and households worldwide, accelerating research on proactively identifying and enhancing characteristics associated with resilience. Although resilience is often characterized as a return to normal, recent studies of postdisaster recovery have highlighted the ways in which new opportunities can emerge following disruption, challenging the status quo. Conversely, recovery and reconstruction may serve to reinforce preexisting social, institutional, and development pathways. Our understanding of these dynamics is limited however by the small number of practice examples, particularly for rural communities in developed nations. This study uses a social–ecological inventory to document the drivers, pathways, and mechanisms of resilience following a large-magnitude earthquake in Kaikōura, a coastal community in Aotearoa New Zealand. As part of the planning and implementation phase of a multiyear project, we used the tool as the basis for indepth and contextually sensitive analysis of rural resilience. Moreover, the deliberate application of social–ecological inventory was the first step in the research team reengaging with the community following the event. The inventory process provided an opportunity for research partners to share their stories and experiences and develop a shared understanding of changes that had taken place in the community. Results provide empirical insight into reactions to disruptive change associated with disasters. The inventory also informed the design of targeted research collaborations, established a platform for longer-term community engagement, and provides a baseline for assessing longitudinal changes in key resilience-related characteristics and community capacities. Findings suggest the utility of social–ecological inventory goes beyond natural resource management, and that it may be appropriate in a range of contexts where institutional, social, and economic restructuring have developed out of necessity in response to felt or anticipated external stressors.
The Covid-19 pandemic has brought to the foreground the importance of social connectedness for wellbeing, at the individual, community and societal level. Within the context of the local community, pro-connection facilities are fundamental to foster community development, resilience and public health. Through identifying the gap in social connectedness literature for Māori, this has created space for new opportunities and to reflect on what is already occurring in Ōtautahi. It is well documented that Māori experience unequal societal impacts across all health outcomes. Therefore, narrowing the inequities between Māori and non-Māori across a spectrum of dimensions is a priority. Evaluating the #WellconnectedNZ project, which explores the intersections between social connection and wellbeing is one way to trigger these conversations. This was achieved by curating a dissimilar set of community pro-connection facilities and organizing them into a Geographic Information System (GIS). Which firstly involved, the collecting and processing of raw data, followed by spatial analysis through creating maps, this highlighted the alignment between the distribution of places, population and social data. Secondly, statistical analysis focusing on the relationship between deprivation and accessibility. Finally, semi-structured interviews providing perceptions of community experience. This study describes findings following a kaupapa Māori research approach. Results demonstrated that, in general some meshblocks in Ōtautahi benefit from a high level of accessibility to pro-connection facilities; but with an urban-rural gradient (as is expected, further from the central business district (CBD) are less facilities). Additionally, more-deprived meshblocks in the Southern and Eastern suburbs of Christchurch have poorer accessibility, suggesting underlying social and spatial inequalities, likely exacerbated by Covid-19 and the Christchurch earthquakes. In this context, it is timely to (re)consider pro-connection places and their role in the development of social infrastructure for connected communities, in the community facility planning space. ‘We are all interwoven, we just need to make better connections’.
An emerging water crisis is on the horizon and is poised to converge with several other impending problems in the 21st century. Future uncertainties such as climate change, peak oil and peak water are shifting the international focus from a business as usual approach to an emphasis on sustainable and resilient strategies that better meet these challenges. Cities are being reimagined in new ways that take a multidisciplinary approach, decompartmentalising functions and exploring ways in which urban systems can share resources and operate more like natural organisms. This study tested the landscape design implications of wastewater wetlands in the urban environment and evaluated their contribution to environmental sustainability, urban resilience and social development. Black and grey water streams were the central focus of this study and two types of wastewater wetlands, tidal flow (staged planning) and horizontal subsurface flow wetlands were tested through design investigations in the earthquake-affected city of Christchurch, New Zealand. These investigations found that the large area requirements of wastewater wetlands can be mitigated through landscape designs that enhance a matrix of open spaces and corridors in the city.
Wastewater wetlands when combined with other urban and rural services such as food production, energy generation and irrigation can aid in making communities more resilient. Landscape theory suggests that the design of wastewater wetlands must meet cultural thresholds of beauty and that the inclusion of waste and ecologies in creatively designed landscapes can deepen our emotional connection to nature and ourselves.
Questions to Ministers
1. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Commerce: What legislative and regulatory steps has he taken to help restore investor confidence in the financial markets?
2. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her reported statement that it would be pre-emptive to rule anything out because the Government was still working its way through extensive recommendations by the Welfare Working Group?
3. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Minister of Transport: Ka aha ia ki te whakapaipai ake i te āhua o ngā rori i te tuawhenua, he hapori Māori nei te nuinga o ngā tāngata ki reira, ā, e kiia nei e ētahi, he pērā aua rori ki ngā mea o ngā ao pōhara rawa atu?
* Translation: What will he do to improve the conditions of roads in rural, predominately Māori communities, some of which have been described as of third world status?
4. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to Oral Question No 1 yesterday in relation to unemployed 15 to 19-year-olds, "If we look at the household labour force survey, we see that there are 26,700 people in the 15 to 19-year-old category"?
5. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Health: What progress are district health boards making in providing faster cancer radiation treatment for patients?
6. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Are district health boards being funded sufficiently to maintain the level of services they provided in 2010/11?
7. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: When will the new chief inspector for mining and additional inspectors in the planned High Hazards Unit become operational?
8. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: Does he agree with the Chief Justice that the scheme for disclosure by the defence in criminal cases contained in the Criminal Procedure (Reform and Modernisation) Bill is "inconsistent with the defendant's right to have the prosecution prove its case beyond reasonable doubt" and with the late Chief District Court Judge that punishment at sentencing for procedural non-compliance "is conceptually incoherent and therefore arbitrary"?
9. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What is the Government doing to help teen parents get ahead?
10. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How many letters of offer from the Crown will be sent to insured residential red zone property owners this week?
11. NIKKI KAYE to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What announcements has he made today on improving flexibility for community groups receiving grants from gaming societies?
12. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement about making changes to mine safety that "until the royal commission of inquiry makes its findings, we will wait accordingly"?
Questions to Ministers
1. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Finance: What steps are the Government and the Earthquake Commission taking to streamline the Canterbury earthquake claims process?
2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "the vast majority" of people will be "better off" as a result of his tax switch on 1 October 2010?
3. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Conservation: Does she agree with Forest and Bird that "many endangered species will meet a watery death, or be rudely shunted from their homes", if the Mōkihinui dam is given the green light?
4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for ACC: Is he satisfied with the performance of ACC?
5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Economic Development: What steps will the Government take to aid the recovery of the Canterbury region from the recent major earthquake?
6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What advice, if any, did Treasury receive from KordaMentha in relation to South Canterbury Finance's financial condition prior to approving the extension of the Crown Retail Deposit Guarantee Scheme, and did this advice question whether such an extension was appropriate?
7. COLIN KING to the Minister of Transport: What is the Government doing to address challenges in delivering supplies into the area affected by the Canterbury earthquake?
8. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Health: When will all the District Health Board Annual Plans for 2010/11 be publicly available?
9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Education: How were Canterbury schools affected by last Saturday's earthquake, and what is the current situation for schools in the region?
10. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: Is his objective under the new foreshore and seabed bill to settle the protracted controversy around foreshore and seabed?
11. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Agriculture: What is the Government doing to support the rural Canterbury community through the earthquake recovery?
12. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by all of the statements made on her behalf in response to question for oral answer No. 11 on 9 September 2010?
Questions to Members
1. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions were received on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No. 2) as at 5pm Monday, 13 September 2010?
