Earthquakes impacting on the built environment can generate significant volumes of waste, often overwhelming existing waste management capacities. Earthquake waste can pose a public and environmental health hazard and can become a road block on the road to recovery. Specific research has been developed at the University of Canterbury to go beyond the current perception of disaster waste as a logistical hurdle, to a realisation that disaster waste management is part of the overall recovery process and can be planned for effectively. Disaster waste decision-makers, often constrained by inappropriate institutional frameworks, are faced with conflicting social, economic and environmental drivers which all impact on the overall recovery. Framed around L’Aquila earthquake, Italy, 2009, this paper discusses the social, economic and environmental effects of earthquake waste management and the impact of existing institutional frameworks (legal, financial and organisational). The paper concludes by discussing how to plan for earthquake waste management.
Photograph captioned by Fairfax, "Gareth James, general manager of the South Island Transpacific Waste Management. Spoiled food being dumped at the Parkhouse Road transfer station".
Questions to Ministers
1. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he agree with the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce chief executive Peter Townsend that the reconstruction of Canterbury following the earthquake requires someone "to co-ordinate and oversee" reconstruction?
2. COLIN KING to the Minister of Finance: What steps is the Government taking to ensure the Earthquake Commission can meet claims arising from the Canterbury earthquake?
3. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What was the earliest date that Treasury formed the conclusion that South Canterbury Finance could fail, and when and by whom was that first raised with him?
4. DAVID GARRETT to the Attorney-General: Does he agree that "tikanga" as it is described in the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill will differ in meaning from iwi to iwi and hapū to hapū?
5. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Health: Are doctors and nurses having more say in how the health system is run?
6. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has he received on responses to the Canterbury earthquake, particularly with respect to the region's flood and waste management systems?
7. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Attorney-General: What is the burden of proof under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill in relation to applications for customary interests, and what type of evidence would the Crown be required to produce to prove that a customary interest had been extinguished?
8. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: When he answered yesterday that "hopefully" the new foreshore and seabed bill "will settle the protracted controversy around the issues of the foreshore and seabed", was he aware that the Government's confidence and supply partner Hon Pita Sharples told TV3 that he was "not entirely happy" with the new bill?
9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How have Government social services been supporting the people of Canterbury?
10. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: Why did the Auckland Transition Agency award the $53.8 million contract for the Auckland Council's Enterprise Resource Planning computer system without a competitive tender?
11. Dr JACKIE BLUE to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Why is the Ministry of Women's Affairs celebrating Suffrage Day?
12. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Women's Affairs: How will New Zealand's forthcoming report to the UN under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women explain the Government's decision to axe the Pay and Employment Equity Unit?
