This paper identifies and analyses the networks of support for tangata whaiora (mental health clients) utilising a kaupapa Mäori health service following the Ötautahi/Christchurch earthquakes
in Aotearoa New Zealand from 2010 to 2012. Semi- structured interviews were undertaken with 39 participants, comprising clients (Mäori and Päkehä), staff, managers and board members of a kaupapa Mäori provider in the city. Selected quotes are presented alongside a social network analysis of the support accessed by all participants. Results show the signifi cant isolation of both Mäori and Päkehä mental health clients post- disaster and the complexity of individuals and collectives dealing with temporally and spatially overlapping hazards and disasters at personal, whänau and community level.
Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) play acrucial role in times of disasters. Therefore it is crucial to understand more thoroughly the communication roles and responsibilities of interagency team members and to examine how individual members communicate within a complex, evolving, and unstable environment. It is also important to understand how different organisational identities and their spatial geographies contribute to the interactional dynamics. Earthquakes hit the Canterbury region on September, 2010 and then on February 2011 a more devastating shallow earthquake struck resulting in severe damage to the Aged Residential Care (ARC) sector. Over 600 ARC beds were lost and 500 elderly and disabled people were displaced. Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) set up an interagency emergency response team to address the issues of vulnerable people with significant health and disability needs who were unable to access their normal supports due to the effects of the earthquake. The purpose of this qualitative interpretive study is to focus on the case study of the response and evacuation of vulnerable people by interagencies responding to the event. Staff within these agencies were interviewed with a focus on the critical incidents that either stabilised or negatively influenced the outcome of the response. The findings included the complexity of navigating multiple agencies communication channels; understanding the different hierarchies and communication methods within each agency; data communication challenges when infrastructures were severely damaged; the importance of having the right skills, personal attributes and understanding of the organisations in the response; and the significance of having a liaison in situ representing and communicating through to agencies geographically dispersed from Canterbury. It is hoped that this research will assist in determining a future framework for interagency communication best practice and policy.
