Though generally considered “natural” disasters, cyclones and earthquakes are increasingly being associated with human activities, incubated through urban settlement patterns and the long-term redistribution of natural resources. As society is becoming more urbanized, the risk of human exposure to disasters is also rising. Architecture often reflects the state of society’s health: architectural damage is the first visible sign of emergency, and reconstruction is the final response in the process of recovery. An empirical assessment of architectural projects in post-disaster situations can lead to a deeper understanding of urban societies as they try to rebuild. This thesis offers an alternative perspective on urban disasters by looking at the actions and attitudes of disaster professionals through the lens of architecture, situated in recent events: the 2010 Christchurch earthquake, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina. An empirical, multi-hazard, cross-sectional case study methodology was used, employing grounded theory method to build theory, and a critical constructivist strategy to inform the analysis. By taking an interdisciplinary approach to understanding disasters, this thesis positions architecture as a conduit between two divergent approaches to disaster research: the hazards approach, which studies the disaster cycles from a scientific perspective; and the sociological approach, which studies the socially constructed vulnerabilities that result from disasters, and the elements of social change that accompany such events. Few studies to date have attempted to integrate the multi-disciplinary perspectives that can advance our understanding of societal problems in urban disasters. To bridge this gap, this thesis develops what will be referred to as the “Rittelian framework”—based on the work of UC Berkeley’s architecture professor Horst Rittel (1930-1990). The Rittelian framework uses the language of design to transcend the multiple fields of human endeavor to address the “design problems” in disaster research. The processes by which societal problems are addressed following an urban disaster involve input by professionals from multiple fields—including economics, sociology, medicine, and engineering—but the contribution from architecture has been minimal to date. The main impetus for my doctoral thesis has been the assertion that most of the decisions related to reconstruction are made in the early emergency recovery stages where architects are not involved, but architects’ early contribution is vital to the long-term reconstruction of cities. This precipitated in the critical question: “How does the Rittelian framework contribute to the critical design decisions in modern urban disasters?” Comparative research was undertaken in three case studies of recent disasters in New Orleans (2005), Haiti (2010) and Christchurch (2010), by interviewing 51 individuals who were selected on the basis of employing the Rittelian framework in their humanitarian practice. Contextualizing natural disaster research within the robust methodological framework of architecture and the analytical processes of sociology is the basis for evaluating the research proposition that architectural problem solving is of value in addressing the ‘Wicked Problems’ of disasters. This thesis has found that (1) the nuances of the way disaster agents interpret the notion of “building back better” can influence the extent to which architectural professionals contribute in urban disaster recovery, (2) architectural design can be used to facilitate but also impede critical design decisions, and (3) framing disaster research in terms of design decisions can lead to innovation where least expected. This empirical research demonstrates how the Rittelian framework can inform a wider discussion about post-disaster human settlements, and improve our resilience through disaster research.
Millions of urban residents around the world in the coming century will experience severe landscape change – including increased frequencies of flooding due to intensifying storm events and impacts from sea level rise. For cities, collisions of environmental change with mismatched cultural systems present a major threat to infrastructure systems that support urban living. Landscape architects who address these issues express a need to realign infrastructure with underlying natural systems, criticizing the lack of social and environmental considerations in engineering works. Our ability to manage both society and the landscapes we live in to better adapt to unpredictable events and landscape changes is essential if we are to sustain the health and safety of our families, neighbourhoods, and wider community networks. When extreme events like earthquakes or flooding occur in developed areas, the feasibility of returning the land to pre-disturbance use can be questioned. In Christchurch for example, a large expanse of land (630 hectares) within the city was severely damaged by the earthquakes and judged too impractical to repair in the short term. The central government now owns the land and is currently in the process of demolishing the mostly residential houses that formed the predominant land use. Furthermore, cascading impacts from the earthquakes have resulted in a general land subsidence of .5m over much of eastern Christchurch, causing disruptive and damaging flooding. Yet, although disasters can cause severe social and environmental distress, they also hold great potential as a catalyst to increasing adaption. But how might landscape architecture be better positioned to respond to the potential for transformation after disaster? This research asks two core questions: what roles can the discipline of landscape architecture play in improving the resilience of communities so they become more able to adapt to change? And what imaginative concepts could be designed for alternative forms of residential development that better empower residents to understand and adapt the infrastructure that supports them? Through design-directed inquiry, the research found landscape architecture theory to be well positioned to contribute to goals of social-ecological systems resilience. The discipline of landscape architecture could become influential in resilience-oriented multi disciplinary collaborations, with our particular strengths lying in six key areas: the integration of ecological and social processes, improving social capital, engaging with temporality, design-led innovation potential, increasing diversity and our ability to work across multiple scales. Furthermore, several innovative ideas were developed, through a site-based design exploration located within the residential red zone, that attempt to challenge conventional modes of urban living – concepts such as time-based land use, understanding roads as urban waterways, and landscape design and management strategies that increase community participation and awareness of the temporality in landscapes.
“much of what we know about leadership is today redundant because it is literally designed for a different operating model, a different context, a different time” (Pascale, Sternin, & Sternin, p. 4). This thesis describes a project that was designed with a focus on exploring ways to enhance leadership capacity in non-government organisations operating in Christchurch, New Zealand. It included 20 CEOs, directors and managers from organisations that cover a range of settings, including education, recreation, and residential and community therapeutic support; all working with adolescents. The project involved the creation of a peer-supported professional learning community that operated for 14 months; the design and facilitation of which was informed by the Appreciative Inquiry principles of positive focus and collaboration. At the completion of the research project in February 2010, the leaders decided to continue their collective processes as a self-managing and sustaining professional network that has grown and in 2014 is still flourishing under the title LYNGO (Leaders of Youth focussed NGOs). Two compelling findings emerged from this research project. The first of these relates to efficacy of a complexity thinking framework to inform the actions of these leaders. The leaders in this project described the complexity thinking framework as the most relevant, resonant and dynamic approach that they encountered throughout the research project. As such this thesis explores this complexity thinking informed leadership in detail as the leaders participating in this project believed it offers an opportune alternative to more traditional forms of positional leadership and organisational approaches. This exploration is more than simply a rationale for complexity thinking but an iterative in-depth exploration of ‘complexity leadership in action’ which in Chapter 6 elaborates on detailed leadership tools and frameworks for creating the conditions for self-organisation and emergence. The second compelling finding relates to efficacy of Appreciative Inquiry as an emergent research and development process for leadership learning. In particular the adoption of two key principles; positive focus and inclusivity were beneficial in guiding the responsive leadership learning process that resulted in a professional learning community that exhibited high engagement and sustainability. Additionally, the findings suggest that complexity thinking not only acts as a contemporary framework for adaptive leadership of organisations as stated above; but that complexity thinking has much to offer as a framework for understanding leadership development processes through the application of Appreciative Inquiry (AI)-based principles. A consideration of the components associated with complexity thinking has promise for innovation and creativity in the development of leaders and also in the creation of networks of learning. This thesis concludes by suggesting that leaders focus on creating hybrid organisations, ones which leverage the strengths (and minimise the limitations) of self-organising complexity-informed organisational processes, while at the same time retaining many of the strengths of more traditional organisational management structures. This approach is applied anecdotally to the place where this study was situated: the post-earthquake recovery of Christchurch, New Zealand.
