Search

found 18 results

Articles, UC QuakeStudies

An example of the five year rebuild schedule map created as part of the prioritisation process detailing where and when construction would start. The data behind this map was updated every quarter.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, and the resulting extensive data sets on damaged buildings that have been collected, provide a unique opportunity to exercise and evaluate previously published seismic performance assessment procedures. This poster provides an overview of the authors’ methodology to perform evaluations with two such assessment procedures, namely the P-58 guidelines and the REDi Rating System. P-58, produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the United States, aims to facilitate risk assessment and decision-making by quantifying earthquake ground shaking, structural demands, component damage and resulting consequences in a logical framework. The REDi framework, developed by the engineering firm ARUP, aids stakeholders in implementing resilience-based earthquake design. Preliminary results from the evaluations are presented. These have the potential to provide insights on the ability of the assessment procedures to predict impacts using “real-world” data. However, further work remains to critically analyse these results and to broaden the scope of buildings studied and of impacts predicted.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Dr Sarah Beaven during the Social Recovery Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Leading and Coordinating Social Recovery: Lessons from a central recovery agency".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: This presentation provides an overview of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority's Social Recovery Lessons and Legacy project. This project was commissioned in 2014 and completed in December 2015. It had three main aims: to capture Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority's role in social recovery after the Canterbury earthquakes, to identify lessons learned, and to disseminate these lessons to future recovery practitioners. The project scope spanned four Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority work programmes: The Residential Red Zone, the Social and Cultural Outcomes, the Housing Programme, and the Community Resilience Programme. Participants included both Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority employees, people from within a range of regional and national agencies, and community and public sector organisations who worked with Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority over time. The presentation will outline the origin and design of the project, and present some key findings.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Jane Morgan and Annabel Begg during the Social Recovery Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Monitoring Social Recovery in Greater Christchurch".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: This presentation provides an overview of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority's Social Recovery Lessons and Legacy project. This project was commissioned in 2014 and completed in December 2015. It had three main aims: to capture Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority's role in social recovery after the Canterbury earthquakes, to identify lessons learned, and to disseminate these lessons to future recovery practitioners. The project scope spanned four Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority work programmes: The Residential Red Zone, the Social and Cultural Outcomes, the Housing Programme, and the Community Resilience Programme. Participants included both Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority employees, people from within a range of regional and national agencies, and community and public sector organisations who worked with Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority over time. The presentation will outline the origin and design of the project, and present some key findings.

Videos, UC QuakeStudies

A video of a presentation by Dr Erin Smith during the Community Resilience Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "A Qualitative Study of Paramedic Duty to Treat During Disaster Response".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: Disasters place unprecedented demands on emergency medical services and test paramedic personal commitment to the health care profession. Despite this challenge, legal guidelines, professional codes of ethics and ambulance service management guidelines are largely silent on the issue of professional obligations during disasters. They provide little to no guidance on what is expected of paramedics or how they ought to approach their duty to treat in the face of risk. This research explores how paramedics view their duty to treat during disasters. Reasons that may limit or override such a duty are examined. Understanding these issues is important in enabling paramedics to make informed and defensible decisions during disasters. The authors employed qualitative methods to gather Australian paramedic perspectives. Participants' views were analysed and organised according to three emerging themes: the scope of individual paramedic obligations, the role and obligations of ambulance services, and the broader ethical context. Our findings suggest that paramedic decisions around duty to treat will largely depend on their individual perception of risk and competing obligations. A reciprocal obligation is expected of paramedic employers. Ambulance services need to provide their employees with the best current information about risks in order to assist paramedics in making defensible decisions in difficult circumstances. Education plays a key role in providing paramedics with an understanding and appreciation of fundamental professional obligations by focusing attention on both the medical and ethical challenges involved with disaster response. Finally, codes of ethics might be useful, but ultimately paramedic decisions around professional obligations will largely depend on their individual risk assessment, perception of risk, and personal value systems.