After a disaster, cities experience profound social and environmental upheaval. Current research on disasters describes this social disruption along with collective community action to provide support. Pre-existing social capital is recognised as fundamental to this observed support. This research examines the relationship between sense of place for neighbourhood, social connectedness and resilience. Canterbury residents experienced considerable and continued disruption following a large and protracted sequence of earthquakes starting in September 2010. A major aftershock on 22 February 2011 caused significant loss of life, destruction of buildings and infrastructure. Following this earthquake some suburbs of Christchurch showed strong collective action. This research examines the features of the built environment that helped to form this cooperative support. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 key informants followed by 38 participants from four case study suburbs. The objectives were to describe the community response of suburbs, to identify the key features of the built environment and the role of social infrastructure in fostering social connectedness. The last objective was to contribute to future planning for community resilience. The findings from this research indicated that social capital and community competence are significant resources to be called upon after a disaster. Features of the local environment facilitated the formation of neighbourhood connections that enabled participants to cope, manage and to collectively solve problems. These features also strengthened a sense of belonging and attachment to the home territory. Propinquity was important; the bumping and gathering places such as schools, small local shops and parks provided the common ground for meaningful pre-existing local interaction. Well-defined geography, intimate street typology, access to quality natural space and social infrastructure helped to build the local social connections and develop a sense of place. Resourceful individuals and groups were also a factor, and many are drawn to live near the inner city or more natural places. The features are the same well understood attributes that contribute to health and wellbeing. The policy and planning framework needs to consider broader social outcomes, including resilience in new and existing urban developments. The socio-political structures that provide access to secure and stable housing and local education should also be recognised and incorporated into local planning for resilience and the everyday.
SARAH DOWIE to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on New Zealand’s trade exports?
EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for Land Information: Has he asked Land Information New Zealand to withdraw the 997-hectare Riversdale Flats from the proposed sale of Mt White Station pastoral lease; if not, why not?
PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister for Social Housing: Will she confirm that as of 30 June the Government has only delivered 323 of the additional 1,400 emergency beds they promised at the start of November last year?
STUART SMITH to the Minister of Transport: What update can he provide on the reinstatement of State Highway 1 following the Kaikōura earthquakes?
STEFFAN BROWNING to the Minister for the Environment: Does he have confidence in the Environmental Protection Authority’s review of glyphosate?
Dr DAVID CLARK to the Minister of Health: Does he support the establishment of a cross-agency working group with Canterbury District Health Board on their finances, funding, and facilities?
DAVID SEYMOUR to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his answers to Oral Question No. 6 on 6 June regarding intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer?
BARBARA KURIGER to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has he made in relation to immigration settings?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: Does he believe that the signing of the Pare Hauraki Collective Settlement with the inclusion of redress disputed by Tauranga Moana iwi is a breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
CHRIS BISHOP to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements have the Government made on school property in the Wellington region?
PITA PARAONE to the Minister for Māori Development: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, why?
JENNY SALESA to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied that the Government is doing all that it can to ensure an adequate supply of teachers, particularly in Auckland?
Following the Canterbury earthquake sequence of 2010-11, a large and contiguous tract of vacated ‘red zoned’ land lies alongside the lower Ōtākaro / Avon River and is known as the Avon-Ōtākaro Red Zone (AORZ). This is the second report in the Ecological Regeneration Options (ERO) project that addresses future land uses in the AORZ. The purpose of this report is to present results from an assessment of restoration opportunities conducted in April 2017. The objectives of the assessment were to identify potential benefits of ecological restoration activities across both land and water systems in the AORZ and characterise the key options for their implementation. The focus of this report is not to provide specific advice on the methods for achieving specific restoration endpoints per se. This will vary at different sites and scales with a large number of combinations possible. Rather, the emphasis is on providing an overview of the many restoration and regeneration options in their totality across the AORZ. An additional objective is to support their adequate assessment in the identification of optimum land uses and adaptive management practices for the AORZ. Participatory processes may play a useful role in assessment and stakeholder engagement by providing opportunities for social learning and the co-creation of new knowledge. We used a facilitated local knowledge based approach that generated a large quantity of reliable and site specific data in a short period of time. By inviting participation from a wide knowledge-holder network inclusivity is improved in comparison to small-group expert panel approaches. Similar approaches could be applied to other information gathering and assessment needs in the regeneration planning process. Findings from this study represent the most comprehensive set of concepts available to date to address the potential benefits of ecological regeneration in the AORZ. This is a core topic for planning to avoid missed opportunities and opportunity costs. The results identify a wide range of activities that may be applied to generate benefits for Christchurch and beyond, all involving aspects of a potential new ecology in the AORZ. These may be combined at a range of scales to create scenarios, quantify benefits, and explore the potential for synergies between different land use options. A particular challenge is acquiring the information needed within relatively short time frames. Early attention to gathering baseline data, addressing technical knowledge gaps, and developing conceptual frameworks to account for the many spatio-temporal aspects are all key activities that will assist in delivering the best outcomes. Methodologies by which these many facets can be pulled together in quantitative and comparative assessments are the focus of the final report in the ERO series.
