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
The Manchester Courts building was a heritage building located in central Christchurch (New Zealand) that was damaged in the Mw 7.1 Darfield earthquake on 4 September 2010 and subsequently demolished as a risk reduction exercise. Because the building was heritage listed, the decision to demolish the building resulted in strong objections from heritage supporters who were of the opinion that the building had sufficient residual strength to survive possible aftershock earthquakes. On 22 February 2011 Christchurch was struck by a severe aftershock, leading to the question of whether building demolition had proven to be the correct risk reduction strategy. Finite element analysis was used to undertake a performance-based assessment, validating the accuracy of the model using the damage observed in the building before its collapse. In addition, soil-structure interaction was introduced into the research due to the comparatively low shear wave velocity of the soil. The demolition of a landmark heritage building was a tragedy that Christchurch will never recover from, but the decision was made considering safety, societal, economic and psychological aspects in order to protect the city and its citizens. The analytical results suggest that the Manchester Courts building would have collapsed during the 2011 Christchurch earthquake, and that the collapse of the building would have resulted in significant fatalities
Mechanistic and scientific approaches to resilience assume that there is a “tipping point” at which a system can no longer absorb adversity; after this point, it is liable to collapse. Some of these perspectives, particularly those stemming from ecology and psychology, recognise that individuals and communities cannot be perpetually resilient without limits. While the resilience paradigm has been imported into the social sciences, the limits to resilience have often been disregarded. This leads to an overestimation of “human resourcefulness” within the resilience paradigm. In policy discourse, practice, and research, resilience seems to be treated as a “limitless” and human quality in which individuals and communities can effectively cope with any hazard at any time, for as long as they want and with any people. We critique these assumptions with reference to the recovery case in Ōtautahi Christchurch, Aotearoa New Zealand following the 2010-11 Canterbury earthquake sequence. We discuss the limits to resilience and reconceptualise resilience thinking for disaster risk reduction and sustainable recovery and development
Disasters, either man-made or natural, are characterised by a multiplicity of factors including loss of property, life, environmental degradation, and psychosocial malfunction of the affected community. Although much research has been undertaken on proactive disaster management to help reduce the impacts of natural and man-made disasters, many challenges still remain. In particular, the desire to re-house the affected as quickly as possible can affect long-term recovery if a considered approach is not adopted. Promoting recovery activities, coordination, and information sharing at national and international levels are crucial to avoid duplication. Mannakkara and Wilkinson’s (2014) modified “Build Back Better” (BBB) concept aims for better resilience by incorporating key resilience elements in post-disaster restoration. This research conducted an investigation into the effectiveness of BBB in the recovery process after the 2010–2011 earthquakes in greater Christchurch, New Zealand. The BBB’s impact was assessed in terms of its five key components: built environment, natural environment, social environment, economic environment, and implementation process. This research identified how the modified BBB propositions can assist in disaster risk reduction in the future, and used both qualitative and quantitative data from both the Christchurch and Waimakariri recovery processes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key officials from the Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Authority, and city councils, and supplemented by reviewing of the relevant literature. Collecting data from both qualitative and quantitative sources enabled triangulation of the data. The interviewees had directly participated in all phases of the recovery, which helped the researcher gain a clear understanding of the recovery process. The findings led to the identification of best practices from the Christchurch and Waimakariri recovery processes and underlined the effectiveness of the BBB approach for all recovery efforts. This study contributed an assessment tool to aid the measurement of resilience achieved through BBB indicators. This tool provides systematic and structured approach to measure the performance of ongoing recovery
The devastating consequences of past events, such as the 2004 Indian Ocean and 2011 Tōhoku tsunamis, emphasise the need for continued improvement in resilience measures. Given that 80% of magnitude 8+ earthquakes occur on the Pacific Rim, New Zealand's tsunami risk is significant. This research develops a novel tsunami inundation model. The proposed model applies equations based on hydraulic principles, including energy conservation (friction loss). While it does not fully replicate hydrodynamic models, it maintains a two-dimensional approach and offers significant improvements over currently implemented simplified methods. It retains excellent computational efficiency (seconds to minutes) while achieving a significant increase in accuracy that is comparable to traditional hydrodynamic models, which typically take hours to days. Calibration of the roughness input variables to hydrodynamic modelling at Gisborne and Christchurch, New Zealand, optimised the model to achieve similarity index values of above 84% for inundation extent, while 77% of inundation depths were within ±1 m and over 93% within ±2 m. This research then produces the first nationally consistent tsunami exposure assessment for New Zealand using a physics-based modelling method. Using probabilistic shoreline wave amplitude data, the study generates high-resolution (10 m) inundation maps for seven return periods (50th and 84th percentiles). These maps are integrated with land cover and infrastructure data to quantify exposure and identify the most vulnerable locations. The results highlight exposure not only to the commonly studied cities but also to several provincial areas. The identification of exposure is the foremost step towards practical resilience efforts; however, understanding specific infrastructure impacts ensures that countermeasures and risk reduction practices are implemented. Therefore, a detailed evaluation of the NZTA Bridge Manual is conducted. Comparisons are made between the NZTA methodology and the rapid model developed in this research. The results reveal a significant overestimation of bridge and culvert exposure by NZTA methods. The study further highlights critical exposure locations for bridge and culvert assets. Flow depths calculated at bridge locations are significantly overestimated using the NZTA method compared to results derived from hydrodynamic modelling and the rapid model. This research then conducts component-level modelling of culvert assets, due to their identified vulnerability in the transportation network. At a 1:15 geometrical scale, laboratory experiments evaluated the response of different culvert set-ups to tsunami bores. The findings provide a detailed description into overtopping, flow regimes and pressure distributions and give laboratory experiments as validation studies for future numerical modelling and design improvements. Overall, this research performs a multi-modal tsunami inundation assessment, uniting macro-level exposure modelling with micro-level component responses by integrating modelling, exposure analysis, and experimental validation. The findings support refining current tsunami guidelines, improving infrastructure planning, and enhancing community preparedness. Overall, the study’s multi-model approach strengthens many elements of New Zealand’s ability to mitigate and respond to future tsunami events
