Ian Town speaks at the Community Engagement Awards.
Ian Town speaks at the Community Engagement Awards.
Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr speaks at the Community Engagement Awards.
Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr speaks at the Community Engagement Awards.
Members of the Senior Management team outside the Community Engagement Awards.
Prime Minister John Key speaks at the Community Engagement Awards 2011.
John Key arriving at the University for the Community Engagement Awards.
Prime Minister John Key speaks at the Community Engagement Awards 2011.
The recent Christchurch earthquakes provide a unique opportunity to better understand the relationship between pre-disaster social fault-lines and post-disaster community fracture. As a resident of Christchurch, this paper presents some of my reflections on the social structures and systems, activities, attitudes and decisions that have helped different Canterbury ‘communities’ along their road to recovery, and highlights some issues that have, unfortunately, held us back. These reflections help answer the most crucial question asked of disaster scholarship: what can recovery agencies (including local authorities) do - both before and after disaster - to promote resilience and facilitate recovery. This paper – based on three different definitions of resilience - presents a thematic account of the social recovery landscape. I argue that ‘coping’ might best be associated with adaptive capacity, however ‘thriving’ or ‘bounce forward’ versions of resilience are a function of a community’s participative capacity.
Staff and students in the NZI3 building for the Community Engagement Awards.
Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr shaking hands with John Key before the Community Engagement Awards.
Staff of CHCH101, a new course created about community engagement after the earthquakes.
Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr talking to Prime Minister John Key before the Community Engagement Awards.
While there are varying definitions of the term ‘social cohesion’, a number of common themes regularly surface to describe what cohesive societies look like. Previous studies using known indicators of social cohesion have often been conducted at the international level for cross-country comparison, while there has been less focus on social cohesion within countries. The purpose of this research is to identify if indicators of social cohesion can be used to map trends at the city level in order to draw meaningful conclusions, particularly in the aftermath of a natural disaster. Using known indicators of social cohesion and Christchurch City as the basis for this study, variations in social cohesion have been found within the city wards, that preceded but were affected by the events of the Canterbury earthquakes during 2010/11. These findings have significant policy implications for the future of Christchurch, as city leaders work towards the recovery of and subsequent rebuilding of communities.
Leader of the Student Volunteer Army, Sam Johnson, in the audience at the Community Engagement Awards.
Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr, Prime Minister John Key and Ian Town walking to the Community Engagement Awards.
Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr, Prime Minister John Key and Ian Town walking to the Community Engagement Awards.
Earthquake Recovery Minister Jerry Brownlee, Prime Minister John Key, and Vice-Chancellor Rod Carr at the Community Engagement Awards 2011.
With sea level rise (SLR) fast becoming one of the most pressing matters for governments worldwide, there has been mass amounts of research done on the impacts of SLR. However, these studies have largely focussed on the ways that SLR will impact both the natural and built environment, along with how the risk to low-lying coastal communities can be mitigated, while the inevitable impacts that this will have on mental well-being has been understudied. This research has attempted to determine the ways in which SLR can impact the mental well-being of those living in a low-lying coastal community, along with how these impacts could be mitigated while remaining adaptable to future environmental change. This was done through conducting an in-depth literature review to understand current SLR projections, the key components of mental well-being and how SLR can influence changes to mental well-being. This literature review then shaped a questionnaire which was distributed to residents of the New Brighton coastline. This questionnaire asked respondents how they interact with the local environment, how much they know about SLR and its associated hazards, whether SLR causes any level of stress or worry along with how respondents feel that these impacts could be mitigated. This research found that SLR impacts the mental well-being of those living in low-lying coastal communities through various methods: firstly, the respondents perceived risk to SLR and its associated hazards, which was found to be influenced by the suburbs that respondents live in, their knowledge of SLR, their main sources of information and the prior experience of the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). Secondly, the financial aspects of SLR were also found to be drivers of stress or worry, with depreciating property values and rising insurance premiums being frequently noted by respondents. It was found that the majority of respondents agreed that being involved in and informed of the protection process, having more readable and accurate information, and an increased engagement with community events and greenspaces would help to reduce the stress or worry caused by SLR, while remaining adaptable to future environmental change.
Geological research in the immediate aftermath of the 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake, New Zealand, was necessary due to the importance and perishability of field data. It also reflects a real desire on the part of researchers to contribute not only to immediate scientific understanding but also to the societal recovery effort by enhancing knowledge of the event for the benefit of affected communities, civil defence organizations and regional and national decision makers. This commitment to outreach and engagement is consistent with the recent IAPG statement of Geoethics. More immediately, it was informed by experience of the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake sequence. After that earlier disaster, intense interactions between researchers and various response agencies as well as local communities informed the development and dissemination of a set of ethical guidelines for researchers immediately following the Mw7.8 14 November 2016 Kaikōura Earthquake. In this presentation, I argue that ethical engagement of this kind is the key to gathering high quality research data immediately after the event. Creating trusting and mutually respectful, mutually beneficial relationships is also vital to ongoing engagement to facilitate further “in depth” research in collaboration with communities.
There is a critical strand of literature suggesting that there are no ‘natural’ disasters (Abramovitz, 2001; Anderson and Woodrow, 1998; Clarke, 2008; Hinchliffe, 2004). There are only those that leave us – the people - more or less shaken and disturbed. There may be some substance to this; for example, how many readers recall the 7.8 magnitude earthquake centred in Fiordland in July 2009? Because it was so far away from a major centre and very few people suffered any consequences, the number is likely to be far fewer than those who remember (all too vividly) the relatively smaller 7.1 magnitude Canterbury quake of September 4th 2010 and the more recent 6.3 magnitude February 22nd 2011 event. One implication of this construction of disasters is that seismic events, like those in Canterbury, are as much socio-political as they are geological. Yet, as this paper shows, the temptation in recovery is to tick boxes and rebuild rather than recover, and to focus on hard infrastructure rather than civic expertise and community involvement. In this paper I draw upon different models of community engagement and use Putnam’s (1995) notion of ‘social capital’ to frame the argument that ‘building bridges’ after a disaster is a complex blend of engineering, communication and collaboration. I then present the results of a qualitative research project undertaken after the September 4th earthquake. This research helps to illustrate the important connections between technical rebuilding, social capital, recovery processes and overall urban resilience.
The Foundation facilitates community engagement and communication through their website, providing service delivery, volunteer co-ordination and service to assist with the rebuild of Christchurch and Canterbury following the earthquakes of 2010 and 2011.
Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Gerry Brownlee, Deputy Vice-Chancellor Ian Town, Vice-Chancellor Dr Rod Carr, Prime Minister John Key, Mayor Bob Parker and and Roger Sutton from CERA at the Community Engagement Awards 2011.
Eve Welch (UC Photographic Services), Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Gerry Brownlee, Deputy Vice-Chancellor Ian Town, Vice-Chancellor Dr Rod Carr, Prime Minister John Key, Mayor Bob Parker and and Roger Sutton from CERA at the Community Engagement Awards 2011.
The National Science Challenge ‘Building Better Homes, Towns and Cities’ is currently undertaking work that, in part, identifies and analyses the Waimakariri District Council’s (WMK/Council) organisational practices and process tools. The focus is on determining the processes that made the Residential Red Zone Recovery Plan, 2016 (RRZRP) collaboration process so effective and compares it to the processes used to inform the current Kaiapoi Town Centre Plan - 2028 and Beyond (KTC Plan). This research aims to explore ‘what travelled’ in terms of values, principles, methods, processes and personnel from the RRZRP to the KTC planning process. My research will add depth to this research by examining more closely the KTC Plan’s hearings process, reviewing submissions made, analysing background documents and by conducting five semi-structured interviews with a selection of people who made submissions on the KTC Plan. The link between community involvement and best recovery outcomes has been acknowledged in literature as well as by humanitarian agencies (Lawther, 2009; Sullivan, 2003). My research has documented WMK’s post-quake community engagement strategy by focusing on their initial response to the earthquake of 2010 and the two-formal plan (RRZRP and KTC Plan) making procedures that succeeded this response. My research has led me to conclude that WMK was committed to collaborating with their constituents right through the extended post-quake sequence. Iterative face to face or ‘think communications’ combined with the accessibility of all levels of Council staff – including senior management and elected members - gave interested community members the opportunity to discuss and deliberate the proposed plans with the people tasked with preparing them. WMK’s commitment to collaborate is illustrated by the methods they employed to inform their post-quake efforts and plans and by the logic behind the selected methods. Combined the Council’s logic and methods best describe the ‘Waimakariri Way’. My research suggests that collaborative planning is iterative in nature. It is therefore difficult to establish a specific starting point where collaboration begins as the relationships needed for the collaborative process constantly (re)emerge out of pre-existing relationships. Collaboration seems to be based on an attitude, which means there is no starting ‘point’ as such, rather an amplification for a time of a basic attitude towards the public.
Disaster recovery involves the restoration, repair and rejuvenation of both hard and soft infrastructure. In this report we present observationsfrom seven case studies of collaborative planning from post-earthquake Canterbury, each of which was selected as a means of better understanding ‘soft infrastructure for hard times’. Though our investigation is located within a disaster recovery context, we argue that the lessons learned are widely applicable. Our seven case studies highlighted that the nature of the planning process or journey is as important as the planning objective or destination. A focus on the journey can promote positive outcomes in and of itself through building enduring relationships, fostering diverse leaders, developing new skills and capabilities, and supporting translation and navigation. Collaborative planning depends as much upon emotional intelligence as it does technical competence, and we argue that having a collaborative attitude is more important than following prescriptive collaborative planning formulae. Being present and allowing plenty of time are also key. Although deliberation is often seen as an improvement on technocratic and expertdominated decision-making models, we suggest that the focus in the academic literature on communicative rationality and discursive democracy has led us to overlook other more active forms of planning that occur in various sites and settings. Instead, we offer an expanded understanding of what planning is, where it happens and who is involved. We also suggest more attention be given to values, particularly in terms of their role as a compass for navigating the terrain of decision-making in the collaborative planning process. We conclude with a revised model of a (collaborative) decision-making cycle that we suggest may be more appropriate when (re)building better homes, towns and cities.
This analysis employs both qualitative and quantitative approaches to identify how young adults in New Zealand aged 18-25 years old have engaged with All Right? campaign material. A survey targeting young adults returned 51 viable out of 117 responses due to participation prerequisites. From the survey, five participants elaborated on their thoughts in an in-depth interview voluntarily. Interviews were conducted with key personnel from All Right? to craft broader understanding of the initiative whilst enhancing knowledge of mental health frameworks and their application. Ciaran Fox, Lucy Daeth and Sara Epperson, who have been imperative to the success of the campaign, shared their working experience in the community and public health sector and how this intertwines to their current roles at All Right?. Discussions of key frameworks, community conversations, the development of communication strategies and how All Right? approached Canterbury publics in a post-earthquake setting provided insight to the importance of understanding community circumstance in initial crisis and the correlated secondary stressors.
This research attempts to understand whether community resilience and perceived livability are influenced by housing typologies in Christchurch, New Zealand. Using recent resident surveys undertaken by the Christchurch City Council, two indexes were created to reflect livability and community resilience. Indicators used to create both indexes included (1) enjoyment living in neighbourhood (2) satisfaction with local facilities (3) safety walking and (4) safety using public transport, (5) sense of community (6) neighbour interactions, (7) home ownership and (8) civic engagement. Scores were attributed to 72 neighbourhoods across Christchurch –and each neighbourhood was classified in one of the following housing typologies; (1) earthquake damaged, (2) relatively undamaged, (3) medium density and (4) greenfield developments. Spatial analysis of index scores and housing classifications suggest housing typologies do influence resident’s perceived livability and community bonds to an extent. It was found that deprivation also had a considerable influence on these indexes as well as residential stability. These additional influences help explain why neighbourhoods within the same housing classification differ in their index scores. Based on these results, several recommendations have been made to the CCC in relation to future research, urban development strategies and suburb specific renewal projects. Of chief importance, medium density neighbourhoods and deprived neighbourhoods require conscious efforts to foster community resilience. Results indicate that community resilience might be more important than livability in having a positive influence on the lived experience of residents. While thoughtful design and planning are important, this research suggests geospatial research tools could enable better community engagement outcomes and planning outcomes, and this could be interwoven into proactive and inclusive planning approaches like placemaking.
This paper reports on a service-learning public journalism project in which postgraduate journalism students explore ways to engage with and report on diverse communities. Media scholars have argued that news media, and local newspapers in particular, must re-engage with their communities. Likewise, journalism studies scholars have urged educators to give journalism students greater opportunities to reflect on their work by getting out among journalism’s critics, often consumers or citizens concerned about content and the preparation of future journalists. The challenge for journalism educators is to prepare students for working in partnership with communities while also developing their ability to operate reflectively and critically within the expectations of the news media industry and wider society. The aim of this project has been to help students find ways to both listen and lead in a community, and also reflect on the challenges and critiques of community journalism practices. The project began in 2013 with stories about residents’ recovery following the devastating 2011 Canterbury earthquakes, and aimed to create stories that could contribute to community connection and engagement, and thereby resilience and recovery. The idea was inspired by research about post-disaster renewal that indicated that communities with strong social capital and social networks were more resilient and recovered more quickly and strongly. The project’s longer-term aim has been to explore community journalism practices that give greater power to citizens and communities by prioritising listening and processes of engagement. Over several months, students network with a community group to identify subjects with whom they will co-create a story, and then complete a story on which they must seek the feedback of their subject. Community leaders have described the project as a key example of how to do things “with people not to people”, and an outstanding contribution to the community-led component of Canterbury’s recovery. Analysis of student reflections, which are a key part of each year’s project, reveals the process of engaging with communities has helped students to map community dynamics, think more critically about source relationships, editorial choices and objectivity norms, and to develop a perspective on the diverse ways they can go about their journalism in the future. Each year, students partner with different groups and organisations, addressing different themes each time the project runs. For 2016, the programme proposes to develop the project in a new way, by not just exploring a community’s stories but also exploring its media needs and it aims to work with Christchurch’s new migrant Filipino community to develop the groundwork for a community media and/or communication platform, which Filipino community leaders say is a pressing need. For this iteration, journalism students will be set further research tasks aimed at deepening their ‘public listening’: they will conduct a survey of community members’ media use and needs as well as qualitative research interviews. It is hoped that the data collected will strengthen students’ understanding of their own journalism practice, as well as form the basis for work on developing media tools for minority groups who are generally poorly represented in mainstream media. In 2015, the journalism programme surveyed its community partners and held follow-up interviews with 13 of 18 story subjects to elicit further feedback on its news content and thereby deepen understanding of different community viewpoints. The survey and interview data revealed the project affected story subjects in a number of positive and interesting ways. Subjects said they appreciated the way student reporters took their time to build relationships and understand the context of the community groups with which they were involved, and contrasted this with their experience of professional journalists who had held pre-conceived assumptions about stories and/or rushed into interviews. As a direct consequence of the students’ approach, participants said they better trusted the student journalists to portray them accurately and fairly. Most were also encouraged by the positive recognition stories brought and several said the engagement process had helped their personal development, all of which had spin-offs for their community efforts. The presentation night that wraps up each year’s project, where community groups, story subjects and students come together to network and share the final stories, was cited as a significant positive aspect of the project and a great opportunity for community partners to connect with others doing similar work. Community feedback will be sought in future projects to inform and improve successive iterations.
Smart cities utilise new and innovative technology to improve the function of the city for governments, citizens and businesses. This thesis offers an in-depth discussion on the concept of the smart city and sets the context of smart cities internationally. It also examines how to improve a smart city through public engagement, as well as, how to implement participatory research in a smart city project to improve the level of engagement of citizens in the planning and implementation of smart projects. This thesis shows how to incentivise behaviour change with smart city technology and projects, through increasing participation in the planning and implementation of smart technology in a city. Meaningful data is created through this process of participation for citizens in the city, by engaging the citizens in the creation of the data, therefore the information created through a smart city project is created by and for the citizens themselves. To improve engagement, a city must understand its specific context and its residents. Using Christchurch, New Zealand, and the Christchurch City Council (CCC) Smart City Project as a case study, this research engages CCC stakeholders in the Smart City Project through a series of interviews, and citizens in Christchurch through a survey and focus groups. A thorough literature review has been conducted, to illuminate the different definitions of the smart city in academia, business and governments respectively, and how these definitions vary from one another. It provides details of a carefully selected set of relevant smart cities internationally and will discuss how the Christchurch Earthquake Sequence of 2010 and 2011 has affected the CCC Smart City Project. The research process, alongside the literature review, shows diverse groups of citizens in the city should be acknowledged in this process. The concept of the smart city is redefined to incorporate the context of Christchurch, its citizens and communities. Community perceptions of smart cities in Christchurch consider the post-disaster environment and this event and subsequent rebuild process should be a focus of the smart city project. The research identified that the CCC needs to focus on participatory approaches in the planning and implementation of smart projects, and community organisations in Christchurch offer an opportunity to understand community perspectives on new smart technology and that projects internationally should consider how the context of the city will affect the participation of its residents. This project offers ideas to influence the behaviour change of citizens through a smart city project. Further research should consider other stakeholders, for instance, innovation and technology-focused business in the city, and to fully engage citizens, future research must continue the process of participatory engagement, and target diverse groups in the city, including but not limited to minority groups, older and younger generations, and those with physical and mental disabilities.