Ruth Gardner's Blog 27/02/2011: Day 6, 3pm - inside the Christchurch cordon
Articles, UC QuakeStudies
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 27 February 2011 entitled, "Day 6, 3pm - inside the Christchurch cordon".
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 27 February 2011 entitled, "Day 6, 3pm - inside the Christchurch cordon".
A news item titled, "Parks and Reserves Update September 2011", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Friday, 23 September 2011.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 20 January 2011 entitled, "Another Earthquake".
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 7 November 2011, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
A letter written by Roz Johnson to family members overseas.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 10 March 2011 entitled, "Day 17, 6pm - inside the red zone".
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 24 October 2011, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 22 July 2011.
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 29 July 2011.
A news item titled, "Stop the Consultative Process", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Thursday, 13 October 2011.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 31 December 2011 entitled, "Awareness or Apprehension?".
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 5 March 2011 entitled, "Day 12. 7.50pm - inside the Christchurch cordon".
A news item titled, "Lyttelton Tunnel", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Thursday, 29 September 2011.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 25 February 2011 entitled, "Inside the Christchurch Cordon Day 4".
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 25 February 2011 entitled, "Day Four, 9pm - inside the Christchurch cordon".
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 24 June 2011.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 19 December 2011, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 12 August 2011.
A news item titled, "Council Rates Rebate", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Friday, 23 September 2011.
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 15 July 2011.
The Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's "Community Earthquake Update" bulletin, published on Friday 23 September 2011.
A news item titled, "Cool Store Relocation Causes Controversy", published on the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre's website on Thursday, 13 October 2011.
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.
Following the September 2010 earthquake and the closure of a number of campus libraries, library staff at the University of Canterbury was forced to rethink how they connected with their users. The established virtual reference service now meant library staff could be contacted regardless of their physical location. After the February earthquake, with University library closures ranging from 3 weeks to indefinite, this service came into its own as a vital communication tool. It facilitated contact between the library and both students and academics, as well as proving invaluable as a means for library staff to locate and communicate with each other. Transcripts from our post-earthquake interactions with users were analyzed using NVivo and will be presented in poster format showing the increase in usage of the service following the earthquakes, who used the service most, and the numbers and types of questions received. Our virtual reference tool was well used in the difficult post-earthquake periods and we can see this usage continuing as university life returns to normal.
The extent of liquefaction in the eastern suburbs of Christchurch (Aranui, Bexley, Avonside, Avonhead and Dallington) from the February 22 2011 Earthquake resulted in extensive damage to in-ground waste water pipe systems. This caused a huge demand for portable toilets (or port-a-loos) and companies were importing them from outside Canterbury and in some instances from Australia. However, because they were deemed “assets of importance” under legislation, their allocation had to be coordinated by Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM). Consequently, companies supplying them had to ignore requests from residents, businesses and rest homes; and commitments to large events outside of the city such as the Hamilton 400 V8 Supercars and the Pasifika Festival in Auckland were impacted. Frustrations started to show as neighbourhoods questioned the equity of the port-a-loos distribution. The Prime Minister was reported as reassuring citizens in the eastern suburbs in the first week of March that1 “a report about the distribution of port-a-loos and chemical toilets shows allocation has been fair. Key said he has asked Civil Defence about the distribution process and where the toilets been sent. He said there aren’t enough for the scale of the event but that is quickly being rectified and the need for toilets is being reassessed all the time.” Nonetheless, there still remained a deep sense of frustration and exclusion over the equity of the port-a-loos distribution. This study took the simple approach of mapping where those port-a-loos were on 11-12 March for several areas in the eastern suburbs and this suggested that their distribution was not equitable and was not well done. It reviews the predictive tools available for estimating damage to waste water pipes and asks the question could this situation have been better planned so that pot-a-loo locations could have been better prioritised? And finally it reviews the integral roles of communication and monitoring as part of disaster management strategy. The impression from this study is that other New Zealand urban centres could or would also be at risk and that work is need to developed more rational management approaches for disaster planning.