Located on the edge of two tectonic plates, New Zealand has numerous fault lines and seismic risk across the whole country. The way this risk is communicated affects whether people prepare effectively or at all. Research has shown that perceptions of risk are affected by slight changes in wording, and that probabilities commonly reported by experts and media are often interpreted subjectively based on context. In the context of volcanoes, research has found that given a certain probability of a volcano in a specific time window, people perceive risk as higher in later time intervals within that window. The present study examines this pattern with regard to earthquakes and aftershocks in the New Zealand context. Participants in both Wellington (N = 102) and Christchurch (N = 98) were presented an expert statement of earthquake risk within a given time window in Wellington and aftershock risk in Christchurch, and asked to rate their perception of risk in specific intervals across the time window. For a Wellington earthquake, participants perceived risk as incrementally higher toward the end of the 50 year time window whereas for a Christchurch aftershock, risk perception increased slightly for the first three intervals of the 12 month time window. Likelihood of preparing was constant over the time windows, with Wellington citizens rating themselves more likely than Christchurch citizens to prepare for either an earthquake or aftershock, irrespective of current level of preparedness. These findings suggest that people view earthquakes as more likely later toward the end of a given time window and that they view aftershocks very differently to scientific predictions.
Detail of the TimeZone window on Colombo Street. On it are posters from pre-quake, and damage is evident by the faded pink batts seen through the window. Damage to buildings across the street are also reflected in the window.
A crane topples over on Victoria Street while taking glass up to some windows. No one was hurt and the glass never broke. Victoria Street was closed from 7:30am to later in the evening. This all happen on the Knox Plaza building site. Christchurch October 13, 2014 New Zealand.
Detail of the Christchurch Anglicain Cathedral viewed from a path between the new Cashel Mall shopping area and Cathedral Square which was opened two weekends ago. This is the first time this section of the city has been open to the public since the 22 February 2011 earthquake. It will be closed off again after 11 December 2011 for the demolitio...
The entrance to TimeZone on Colombo Street with the door on the left boarded up, and damage to buildings across the street reflected in the window.
Damage to buildings on the corner of Victoria and Bealey Street with a pile of brick on the side. Two front windows have been spray-painted with the words 'No Go' and the time the building was checked.
The damaged TimeZone games arcade on Colombo Street. The roof has collapsed, batts from the ceiling are piled in the window, and the door is boarded up. Taken on a day when a walkway was opened up between Re:Start Mall and Cathedral Square to allow temporary public access.
The damaged TimeZone games arcade on Colombo Street. The roof has collapsed, batts from the ceiling are piled in the window, and the door is boarded up. Taken on a day when a walkway was opened up between Re:Start Mall and Cathedral Square to allow temporary public access.
This article explores the scope of small-scale radio to create an auditory geography of place. It focuses on the short-term art radio project The Stadium Broadcast, which was staged in November 2014 in an earthquake-damaged sports stadium in Christchurch, New Zealand. Thousands of buildings and homes in Christchurch have been demolished since the February 22, 2011, earthquake, and by the time of the broadcast the stadium at Lancaster Park had been unused for three years and nine months, and its future was uncertain. The Stadium Broadcast constructed a radio memorial to the Park’s 130-year history through archival recordings, the memories of local people, observation of its current state, and a performed site-specificity. The Stadium Broadcast reflected on the spatiality of radio sounds and transmissions, memory, postdisaster transitionality, and the impermanence of place.
Land cover change information in urban areas supports decision makers in dealing with public policy planning and resource management. Remote sensing has been demonstrated as an efficient and accurate way to monitor land cover change over large extents. The Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) caused massive damage in Christchurch, New Zealand and resulted in significant land cover change over a short time period. This study combined two types of remote sensing data, aerial imagery (RGB) and LiDAR, as the basis for quantifying land cover change in Christchurch between 2011 – 2015, a period corresponding to the five years immediately following the 22 February 2011 earthquake, which was part of the CES. An object based image analysis (OBIA) approach was adopted to classify the aerial imagery and LiDAR data into seven land cover types (bare land, building, grass, shadow, tree and water). The OBIA approach consisted of two steps, image segmentation and object classification. For the first step, this study used multi-level segmentation to better segment objects. For the second step, the random forest (RF) classifier was used to assign a land cover type to each object defined by the segmentation. Overall classification accuracies for 2011 and 2015 were 94.0% and 94.32%, respectively. Based on the classification result, land cover changes between 2011 and 2015 were then analysed. Significant increases were found in road and tree cover, while the land cover types that decreased were bare land, grass, roof, water. To better understand the reasons for those changes, land cover transitions were calculated. Canopy growth, seasonal differences and forest plantation establishment were the main reasons for tree cover increase. Redevelopment after the earthquake was the main reason for road area growth. By comparing the spatial distribution of these transitions, this study also identified Halswell and Wigram as the fastest developing suburbs in Christchurch. These results provided quantitative information for the effects of CES, with respect to land cover change. They allow for a better understanding for the current land cover status of Christchurch. Among those land cover changes, the significant increase in tree cover aroused particularly interest as urban forests benefit citizens via ecosystem services, including health, social, economic, and environmental benefits. Therefore, this study firstly calculated the percentages of tree cover in Christchurch’s fifteen wards in order to provide a general idea of tree cover change in the city extent. Following this, an automatic individual tree detection and crown delineation (ITCD) was undertaken to determine the feasibility of automated tree counting. The accuracies of the proposed approach ranged between 56.47% and 92.11% in thirty different sample plots, with an overall accuracy of 75.60%. Such varied accuracies were later found to be caused by the fixed tree detection window size and misclassifications from the land cover classification that affected the boundary of the CHM. Due to the large variability in accuracy, tree counting was not undertaken city-wide for both time periods. However, directions for further study for ITCD in Christchurch could be exploring ITCD approaches with variable window size or optimizing the classification approach to focus more on producing highly accurate CHMs.
In the last century, seismic design has undergone significant advancements. Starting from the initial concept of designing structures to perform elastically during an earthquake, the modern seismic design philosophy allows structures to respond to ground excitations in an inelastic manner, thereby allowing damage in earthquakes that are significantly less intense than the largest possible ground motion at the site of the structure. Current performance-based multi-objective seismic design methods aim to ensure life-safety in large and rare earthquakes, and to limit structural damage in frequent and moderate earthquakes. As a result, not many recently built buildings have collapsed and very few people have been killed in 21st century buildings even in large earthquakes. Nevertheless, the financial losses to the community arising from damage and downtime in these earthquakes have been unacceptably high (for example; reported to be in excess of 40 billion dollars in the recent Canterbury earthquakes). In the aftermath of the huge financial losses incurred in recent earthquakes, public has unabashedly shown their dissatisfaction over the seismic performance of the built infrastructure. As the current capacity design based seismic design approach relies on inelastic response (i.e. ductility) in pre-identified plastic hinges, it encourages structures to damage (and inadvertently to incur loss in the form of repair and downtime). It has now been widely accepted that while designing ductile structural systems according to the modern seismic design concept can largely ensure life-safety during earthquakes, this also causes buildings to undergo substantial damage (and significant financial loss) in moderate earthquakes. In a quest to match the seismic design objectives with public expectations, researchers are exploring how financial loss can be brought into the decision making process of seismic design. This has facilitated conceptual development of loss optimisation seismic design (LOSD), which involves estimating likely financial losses in design level earthquakes and comparing against acceptable levels of loss to make design decisions (Dhakal 2010a). Adoption of loss based approach in seismic design standards will be a big paradigm shift in earthquake engineering, but it is still a long term dream as the quantification of the interrelationships between earthquake intensity, engineering demand parameters, damage measures, and different forms of losses for different types of buildings (and more importantly the simplification of the interrelationship into design friendly forms) will require a long time. Dissecting the cost of modern buildings suggests that the structural components constitute only a minor portion of the total building cost (Taghavi and Miranda 2003). Moreover, recent research on seismic loss assessment has shown that the damage to non-structural elements and building contents contribute dominantly to the total building loss (Bradley et. al. 2009). In an earthquake, buildings can incur losses of three different forms (damage, downtime, and death/injury commonly referred as 3Ds); but all three forms of seismic loss can be expressed in terms of dollars. It is also obvious that the latter two loss forms (i.e. downtime and death/injury) are related to the extent of damage; which, in a building, will not just be constrained to the load bearing (i.e. structural) elements. As observed in recent earthquakes, even the secondary building components (such as ceilings, partitions, facades, windows parapets, chimneys, canopies) and contents can undergo substantial damage, which can lead to all three forms of loss (Dhakal 2010b). Hence, if financial losses are to be minimised during earthquakes, not only the structural systems, but also the non-structural elements (such as partitions, ceilings, glazing, windows etc.) should be designed for earthquake resistance, and valuable contents should be protected against damage during earthquakes. Several innovative building technologies have been (and are being) developed to reduce building damage during earthquakes (Buchanan et. al. 2011). Most of these developments are aimed at reducing damage to the buildings’ structural systems without due attention to their effects on non-structural systems and building contents. For example, the PRESSS system or Damage Avoidance Design concept aims to enable a building’s structural system to meet the required displacement demand by rocking without the structural elements having to deform inelastically; thereby avoiding damage to these elements. However, as this concept does not necessarily reduce the interstory drift or floor acceleration demands, the damage to non-structural elements and contents can still be high. Similarly, the concept of externally bracing/damping building frames reduces the drift demand (and consequently reduces the structural damage and drift sensitive non-structural damage). Nevertheless, the acceleration sensitive non-structural elements and contents will still be very vulnerable to damage as the floor accelerations are not reduced (arguably increased). Therefore, these concepts may not be able to substantially reduce the total financial losses in all types of buildings. Among the emerging building technologies, base isolation looks very promising as it seems to reduce both inter-storey drifts and floor accelerations, thereby reducing the damage to the structural/non-structural components of a building and its contents. Undoubtedly, a base isolated building will incur substantially reduced loss of all three forms (dollars, downtime, death/injury), even during severe earthquakes. However, base isolating a building or applying any other beneficial technology may incur additional initial costs. In order to provide incentives for builders/owners to adopt these loss-minimising technologies, real-estate and insurance industries will have to acknowledge the reduced risk posed by (and enhanced resilience of) such buildings in setting their rental/sale prices and insurance premiums.