New Zealand's devastating Canterbury earthquakes provided an opportunity to examine the efficacy of existing regulations and policies relevant to seismic strengthening of vulnerable buildings. The mixed-methods approach adopted, comprising both qualitative and quantitative approaches, revealed that some of the provisions in these regulations pose as constraints to appropriate strengthening of earthquake-prone buildings. Those provisions include the current seismic design philosophy, lack of mandatory disclosure of seismic risks and ineffective timeframes for strengthening vulnerable buildings. Recommendations arising from these research findings and implications for pre-disaster mitigation for future earthquake and Canterbury's post-disaster reconstruction suggest: (1) a reappraisal of the requirements for earthquake engineering design and construction, (2) a review and realignment of all regulatory frameworks relevant to earthquake risk mitigation, and (3) the need to develop a national programme necessary to achieve consistent mitigation efforts across the country. These recommendations are important in order to present a robust framework where New Zealand communities such as Christchurch can gradually recover after a major earthquake disaster, while planning for pre-disaster mitigation against future earthquakes. AM - Accepted Manuscript
Canterbury Earthquakes Symposium - Social Recovery 101 – Waimakariri District Council's social recovery framework and lessons learnt from the Greater Christchurch earthquakes This panel discussion was presented by Sandra James, Director (Connecting People) The Canterbury Earthquakes Symposium, jointly hosted by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Christchurch City Council, was held on 29-30 November 2018 at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch. The purpose of the event was to share lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes so that New Zealand as a whole can be better prepared in future for any similar natural disasters. Speakers and presenters included Greater Christchurch Regeneration Minister, Hon Dr Megan Woods, Christchurch Mayor, Lianne Dalziel, Ngāi Tahu chief executive, Arihia Bennett, head of the public inquiry into EQC, Dame Sylvia Cartwright, urban planner specialising in disaster recovery and castrophe risk management, Dr Laurie Johnson; Christchurch NZ chief executive and former Press editor, Joanna Norris; academic researcher and designer, Barnaby Bennett; and filmmaker, Gerard Smyth. About 300 local and national participants from the public, private, voluntary sectors and academia attended the Symposium. They represented those involved in the Canterbury recovery effort, and also leaders of organisations that may be impacted by future disasters or involved in recovery efforts. The focus of the Symposium was on ensuring that we learn from the Canterbury experience and that we can apply those learnings.
Canterbury Earthquakes Symposium - Ōtautahi creative spaces: Strengthening the recovery context through a collective arts-based approach This panel discussion was presented by Dr Catherine Savage, Director (Ihi Research) and Kim Morton, Director (Ihi Research) The Canterbury Earthquakes Symposium, jointly hosted by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Christchurch City Council, was held on 29-30 November 2018 at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch. The purpose of the event was to share lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes so that New Zealand as a whole can be better prepared in future for any similar natural disasters. Speakers and presenters included Greater Christchurch Regeneration Minister, Hon Dr Megan Woods, Christchurch Mayor, Lianne Dalziel, Ngāi Tahu chief executive, Arihia Bennett, head of the public inquiry into EQC, Dame Sylvia Cartwright, urban planner specialising in disaster recovery and castrophe risk management, Dr Laurie Johnson; Christchurch NZ chief executive and former Press editor, Joanna Norris; academic researcher and designer, Barnaby Bennett; and filmmaker, Gerard Smyth. About 300 local and national participants from the public, private, voluntary sectors and academia attended the Symposium. They represented those involved in the Canterbury recovery effort, and also leaders of organisations that may be impacted by future disasters or involved in recovery efforts. The focus of the Symposium was on ensuring that we learn from the Canterbury experience and that we can apply those learnings.
The increase in urban population has required cities to rethink their strategies for minimising greenhouse gas impacts and adapting to climate change. While urban design and planning policy have been guided by principles such as walkability (to reduce the dependence on cars) and green infrastructure (to enhance the quality of open spaces to support conservation and human values), there have been conflicting views on what spatial strategies will best prepare cities for a challenging future. Researchers supporting compact cities based upon public Transit Oriented Development have claimed that walkability, higher density and mixed-uses make cities more sustainable (Owen, 2009) and that, while green spaces in cities are necessary, they are dull in comparison with shopfronts and street vendors (Speck, 2012, p 250). Other researchers claim that green infrastructure is fundamental to improving urban sustainability and attracting public space users with improved urban comfort, consequently encouraging walkability (Pitman and Ely, 2013). Landscape architects tend to assume that ‘the greener the better’; however, the efficiency of urban greenery in relation to urban comfort and urbanity depends on its density, distribution and the services provided. Green infrastructure can take many forms (from urban forests to street trees) and provide varied services (amended microclimate, aesthetics, ecology and so forth). In this paper, we evaluate the relevance of current policy in Christchurch regarding both best practice in green infrastructure and urban comfort (Tavares, 2015). We focus on the Christchurch Blueprint for rebuilding the central city, and critically examine the post-earthquake paths the city is following regarding its green and grey infrastructures and the resulting urban environment. We discuss the performance and appropriateness of the current Blueprint in post-earthquake Christchurch, particularly as it relates to the challenges that climate change is creating for cities worldwide.
This panel discussion was presented by Sati Ravichandiren, President (Student Volunteer Army) The Canterbury Earthquakes Symposium, jointly hosted by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Christchurch City Council, was held on 29-30 November 2018 at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch. The purpose of the event was to share lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes so that New Zealand as a whole can be better prepared in future for any similar natural disasters. Speakers and presenters included Greater Christchurch Regeneration Minister, Hon Dr Megan Woods, Christchurch Mayor, Lianne Dalziel, Ngāi Tahu chief executive, Arihia Bennett, head of the public inquiry into EQC, Dame Sylvia Cartwright, urban planner specialising in disaster recovery and castrophe risk management, Dr Laurie Johnson; Christchurch NZ chief executive and former Press editor, Joanna Norris; academic researcher and designer, Barnaby Bennett; and filmmaker, Gerard Smyth. About 300 local and national participants from the public, private, voluntary sectors and academia attended the Symposium. They represented those involved in the Canterbury recovery effort, and also leaders of organisations that may be impacted by future disasters or involved in recovery efforts. The focus of the Symposium was on ensuring that we learn from the Canterbury experience and that we can apply those learnings.
Five years on since the first major earthquake struck the Canterbury region, the reconstruction is well advanced. Christchurch is a city in transition. This report considers trends in resourcing and employment practice of Canterbury construction organisations in response to the projected market changes (2015-2016). The report draws on the interviews with 18 personnel from 16 construction organisations and recovery agencies in October 2015. It provides a summary of perceived changes in the construction market in Canterbury, evidence of what steps construction businesses have been taking, how they have prepared for likely changes in the reconstruction sector, as well as the perceived alignment of public policies with the industry response.
At 00:02 on 14 November, 2016 a destructive 7.8 Mw earthquake struck the North Canterbury region of New Zealand’s South Island. Prior to and following the earthquake, natural and social scientists conducted a significant amount of research on the resilience processes and recovery efforts in North Canterbury. This thesis examines community resilience in Kaikōura, a small town and district greatly impacted by the earthquake. Community resilience has been widely used in disaster risk reduction research, policy, and practice to describe how a group of individuals within a boundary respond to events, hazards, and shifts in their everyday life. Using exploratory inquiry, this thesis adopts qualitative research methods including document analysis, 24 semi-structured interviews, and participant observation to explore the idea that the recent scholarly emphasis on resilience has come at the expense of critical engagement with the complexities of communities. I draw on the idea of ‘collectives’ (comprising community-based organisations or less formal social networks with a shared purpose) as a lens to consider how, when unexpected life events happen, collectives can be regarded as a resource for change or constancy. The examination of collectives following a disaster can lend insight into the many elements of community as they bring people together in collaboration or drive them apart in conflict. This thesis therefore contributes to an enhanced practical and theoretical understanding of both community and resilience.
Whole document is available to authenticated members of The University of Auckland until Feb. 2014. The increasing scale of losses from earthquake disasters has reinforced the need for property owners to become proactive in seismic risk reduction programs. However, despite advancement in seismic design methods and legislative frameworks, building owners are often reluctant to adopt mitigation measures required to reduce earthquake losses. The magnitude of building collapses from the recent Christchurch earthquakes in New Zealand shows that owners of earthquake prone buildings (EPBs) are not adopting appropriate risk mitigation measures in their buildings. Owners of EPBs are found unwilling or lack motivation to adopt adequate mitigation measures that will reduce their vulnerability to seismic risks. This research investigates how to increase the likelihood of building owners undertaking appropriate mitigation actions that will reduce their vulnerability to earthquake disaster. A sequential two-phase mixed methods approach was adopted for the research investigation. Multiple case studies approach was adopted in the first qualitative phase, followed by the second quantitative research phase that includes the development and testing of a framework. The research findings reveal four categories of critical obstacles to building owners‘ decision to adopt earthquake loss prevention measures. These obstacles include perception, sociological, economic and institutional impediments. Intrinsic and extrinsic interventions are proposed as incentives for overcoming these barriers. The intrinsic motivators include using information communication networks such as mass media, policy entrepreneurs and community engagement in risk mitigation. Extrinsic motivators comprise the use of four groups of incentives namely; financial, regulatory, technological and property market incentives. These intrinsic and extrinsic interventions are essential for enhancing property owners‘ decisions to voluntarily adopt appropriate earthquake mitigation measures. The study concludes by providing specific recommendations that earthquake risk mitigation managers, city councils and stakeholders involved in risk mitigation in New Zealand and other seismic risk vulnerable countries could consider in earthquake risk management. Local authorities could adopt the framework developed in this study to demonstrate a combination of incentives and motivators that yield best-valued outcomes. Consequently, actions can be more specific and outcomes more effective. The implementation of these recommendations could offer greater reasons for the stakeholders and public to invest in building New Zealand‘s built environment resilience to earthquake disasters.
In September 2010 and February 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was struck by two powerful earthquakes, registering magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively on the Richter scale. The second earthquake was centred 10 kilometres south-east of the centre of Christchurch (the region’s capital and New Zealand’s third most populous urban area, with approximately 360,000 residents) at a depth of five kilometres. 185 people were killed, making it the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history. (66 people were killed in the collapse of one building alone, the six-storey Canterbury Television building.) The earthquake occurred during the lunch hour, increasing the number of people killed on footpaths and in buses and cars by falling debris. In addition to the loss of life, the earthquake caused catastrophic damage to both land and buildings in Christchurch, particularly in the central business district. Many commercial and residential buildings collapsed in the tremors; others were damaged through soil liquefaction and surface flooding. Over 1,000 buildings in the central business district were eventually demolished because of safety concerns, and an estimated 70,000 people had to leave the city after the earthquakes because their homes were uninhabitable. The New Zealand Government declared a state of national emergency, which stayed in force for ten weeks. In 2014 the Government estimated that the rebuild process would cost NZ$40 billion (approximately US$27.3 billion, a cost equivalent to 17% of New Zealand’s annual GDP). Economists now estimate it could take the New Zealand economy between 50 and 100 years to recover. The earthquakes generated tens of thousands of insurance claims, both against private home insurance companies and against the New Zealand Earthquake Commission, a government-owned statutory body which provides primary natural disaster insurance to residential property owners in New Zealand. These ranged from claims for hundreds of millions of dollars concerning the local port and university to much smaller claims in respect of the thousands of residential homes damaged. Many of these insurance claims resulted in civil proceedings, caused by disputes about policy cover, the extent of the damage and the cost and/or methodology of repairs, as well as failures in communication and delays caused by the overwhelming number of claims. Disputes were complicated by the fact that the Earthquake Commission provides primary insurance cover up to a monetary cap, with any additional costs to be met by the property owner’s private insurer. Litigation funders and non-lawyer claims advocates who took a percentage of any insurance proceeds also soon became involved. These two factors increased the number of parties involved in any given claim and introduced further obstacles to resolution. Resolving these disputes both efficiently and fairly was (and remains) central to the rebuild process. This created an unprecedented challenge for the justice system in Christchurch (and New Zealand), exacerbated by the fact that the Christchurch High Court building was itself damaged in the earthquakes, with the Court having to relocate to temporary premises. (The High Court hears civil claims exceeding NZ$200,000 in value (approximately US$140,000) or those involving particularly complex issues. Most of the claims fell into this category.) This paper will examine the response of the Christchurch High Court to this extraordinary situation as a case study in innovative judging practices and from a jurisprudential perspective. In 2011, following the earthquakes, the High Court made a commitment that earthquake-related civil claims would be dealt with as swiftly as the Court's resources permitted. In May 2012, it commenced a special “Earthquake List” to manage these cases. The list (which is ongoing) seeks to streamline the trial process, resolve quickly claims with precedent value or involving acute personal hardship or large numbers of people, facilitate settlement and generally work proactively and innovatively with local lawyers, technical experts and other stakeholders. For example, the Court maintains a public list (in spreadsheet format, available online) with details of all active cases before the Court, listing the parties and their lawyers, summarising the facts and identifying the legal issues raised. It identifies cases in which issues of general importance have been or will be decided, with the expressed purpose being to assist earthquake litigants and those contemplating litigation and to facilitate communication among parties and lawyers. This paper will posit the Earthquake List as an attempt to implement innovative judging techniques to provide efficient yet just legal processes, and which can be examined from a variety of jurisprudential perspectives. One of these is as a case study in the well-established debate about the dialogic relationship between public decisions and private settlement in the rule of law. Drawing on the work of scholars such as Hazel Genn, Owen Fiss, David Luban, Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Judith Resnik, it will explore the tension between the need to develop the law through the doctrine of precedent and the need to resolve civil disputes fairly, affordably and expeditiously. It will also be informed by the presenter’s personal experience of the interplay between reported decisions and private settlement in post-earthquake Christchurch through her work mediating insurance disputes. From a methodological perspective, this research project itself gives rise to issues suitable for discussion at the Law and Society Annual Meeting. These include the challenges in empirical study of judges, working with data collected by the courts and statistical analysis of the legal process in reference to settlement. September 2015 marked the five-year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. There remains widespread dissatisfaction amongst Christchurch residents with the ongoing delays in resolving claims, particularly insurers, and the rebuild process. There will continue to be challenges in Christchurch for years to come, both from as-yet unresolved claims but also because of the possibility of a new wave of claims arising from poor quality repairs. Thus, a final purpose of presenting this paper at the 2016 Meeting is to gain the benefit of other scholarly perspectives and experiences of innovative judging best practice, with a view to strengthening and improving the judicial processes in Christchurch. This Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association in New Orleans is a particularly appropriate forum for this paper, given the recent ten year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the plenary session theme of “Natural and Unnatural Disasters – human crises and law’s response.” The presenter has a personal connection with this theme, as she was a Fulbright scholar from New Zealand at New York University in 2005/2006 and participated in the student volunteer cleanup effort in New Orleans following Katrina. http://www.lawandsociety.org/NewOrleans2016/docs/2016_Program.pdf
