The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 24 October 2011, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
Earthquakes are insured only with public sector involvement in high-income countries where the risk of earthquakes is perceived to be high. The proto-typical examples of this public sector involvement are the public earthquake insurance schemes in California, Japan, and New Zealand (NZ). Each of these insurance programs is structured differently, and the purpose of this paper is to examine these differences using a concrete case-study, the sequence of earthquakes that occurred in the Christchurch, New Zealand, in 2011. This event turned out to have been the most heavily insured earthquake event in history. We examine what would have been the outcome of the earthquakes had the system of insurance in NZ been different. In particular, we focus on the public earthquake insurance programs in California (the California Earthquake Authority - CEA), and in Japan (Japanese Earthquake Reinsurance - JER). Overall, the aggregate cost to the public insurer in NZ was $NZ 11.1 billion in its response to the earthquakes. If a similar-sized disaster event had occurred in Japan and California, homeowners would have received $NZ 2.5 billion and $NZ 1.4 billion from the JER and CEA, respectively. We further describe the spatial and distributive patterns of these different scenarios.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 21 June 2013
When the 2011 Canterbury earthquakes struck, the region was hit with disaster on an unprecedented scale and the health system was challenged like never before. The injured needed immediate treatment, buildings and equipment were badly damaged, and yet those working in health system rallied to keep it going. Emergency Medicine specialist Dr Mike Ardagh and independent science writer Dr Joanne Deely have written a book, Rising from the Rubble, which tells the stories of those who were part of the health system response, and a record of the long-term issues that have been caused by it.
In this paper, the characteristics of near-fault ground motions recorded during the Mw7.1 Darfield and Mw 6.2 Christchurch earthquakes are examined and compared with existing empirical models. The characteristics of forward-directivity effects are first examined using a wavelet-based pulse-classification algorithm. This is followed by an assessment of the adequacy of empirical models which aim to capture the effect of directivity effects on amplifying the acceleration response spectra; and the period and peak velocity of the forward-directivity pulse. It is illustrated that broadband directivity models developed by Somerville et al. (1997) and Abrahamson (2000) generally under-predict the observed amplification of response spectral ordinates at longer vibration periods. In contrast, a recently developed narrowband model by Shahi and Baker (2011) provides significantly improved predictions by amplifying the response spectra within a small range of periods surrounding the directivity pulse period. Although the empirical predictions of the pulse period are generally favourable for the Christchurch earthquake, the observations from the Darfield earthquake are significantly under-predicted. The elongation in observed pulse periods is inferred as being a result of the soft sedimentary soils of the Canterbury basin. However, empirical predictions of the observed peak velocity associated with the directivity pulse are generally adequate for both events.
This paper presents site-specific and spatially-distributed ground-motion intensity estimates which have been utilized in the aftermath of the 2010-2011 Canterbury, New Zealand earthquakes. The methodology underpinning the ground motion intensity estimation makes use of both prediction models for ground motion intensity and its within-event spatial correlation. A key benefit of the methodology is that the estimated ground motion intensity at a given location is not a single value but a distribution of values. The distribution is comprised of both a mean and standard deviation, with the standard deviation being a function of the distance to nearby observations at strong motion stations. The methodology is illustrated for two applications. Firstly, maps of conditional peak ground acceleration (PGA) have been developed for the major events in the Canterbury earthquake sequence, which among other things, have been utilized for assessing liquefaction triggering susceptibility of land in residential areas. Secondly, the conditional distribution of response spectral ordinates is obtained at the location of the Canterbury Television building (CTV), which catastrophically collapsed in the 22 February 2011 earthquake. The conditional response spectra provide insight for the selection of ground motion records for use in forensic seismic response analyses of important structures at locations where direct recordings are absent.
ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: What are the priorities for the Government in assisting communities affected by yesterday’s earthquake? MATT DOOCEY to the Minister of Finance: What advice has he received about the economic impact of the Kaikōura earthquake? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Transport: What updates can he give on the transport sector’s response to earthquake damage to State Highway 1 and the rail line between Seddon and Cheviot? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: What is his initial assessment of the fiscal impact of yesterday morning’s earthquake and what, if any, new or changed Budget allocations is he considering in response to the earthquake? PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Civil Defence: How is the Government supporting people affected by the Kaikōura earthquake? RON MARK to the Minister of Civil Defence: Can the Government assure New Zealanders on our level of preparedness for all natural disasters? SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Transport: What roads and public transport services are currently not operational following damage from the earthquake yesterday and when is it expected access and services will be restored? BRETT HUDSON to the Minister of Transport: What action is the Government taking to repair damaged transport infrastructure following the Kaikōura earthquake? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Broadcasting: Will she join with me to acknowledge the work of all media in New Zealand, which is so important in times of natural disaster and crisis; if so, will she consider increasing our public broadcaster Radio New Zealand’s funding in Budget 2017? CLAYTON MITCHELL to the Minister of Civil Defence: What progress has been made, if any, on new civil defence legislation which focuses on large and significant events such as the Christchurch and Kaikōura earthquakes? ALASTAIR SCOTT to the Minister of Health: What updates has he received on the Government’s health response to the Kaikōura earthquake? CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Civil Defence: What actions have been taken by Civil Defence to ensure those people in the areas worst hit by the earthquake have enough food, clothing, water, and shelter?
A photograph of members of the Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team standing on the corner of Lichfield and Manchester Streets. In the background an excavator has been parked on the street. In the background is a large pile of rubble from several earthquake-damaged buildings.
The scale of damage from a series of earthquakes across Christchurch Otautahi in 2010 and 2011 challenged all networks in the city at a time when many individuals and communities were under severe economic pressure. Historically, Maori have drawn on traditional institutions such as whanau, marae, hapu and iwi in their endurance of past crises. This paper presents research in progress to describe how these Maori-centric networks supported both Maori and non-Maori through massive urban dislocation. Resilience to any disaster can be explained by configurations of economic, social and cultural factors. Knowing what has contributed to Maori resilience is fundamental to the strategic enhancement of future urban communities - Maori and non-Maori.
Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, the leader of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, the leader of the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 17 February 2012 entitled, "Approaching Anniversary".
Disaster officials warn that no amount of planning can prepare the country for the reality of a large-scale earthquake. The South Island Alpine Fault Earthquake Response Forum is in Nelson as part of its awareness-raising road-show, as the region is vulnerable to large quakes in both the south and north islands. Tracy Neal reports.
What are the lessons from the Christchurch earthquakes? The Government was slow in their quake response, but does that mean we should give more property market power to the private sector?
A video of a presentation by Dr Duncan Webb, Partner at Lane Neave, during the third plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Loss of Trust and other Earthquake Damage".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: It was predictable that the earthquakes which hit the Canterbury region in 2010 and 2011 caused trauma. However, it was assumed that recovery would be significantly assisted by governmental agencies and private insurers. The expectation was that these organisations would relieve the financial pressures and associated anxiety caused by damage to property. Some initiatives did exactly that. However, there are many instances where difficulties with insurance and related issues have exacerbated the adverse effects of the earthquakes on people's wellness. In some cases, stresses around property issues have become and independent source of extreme anxiety and have had significant impacts on the quality of people's lives. Underlying this problem is a breakdown in trust between citizen and state, and insurer and insured. This has led to a pervading concern that entitlements are being denied. While such concerns are sometimes well founded, an approach which is premised on mistrust is frequently highly conflicted, costly, and often leads to worse outcomes. Professor Webb will discuss the nature and causes of these difficulties including: the complexity of insurance and repair issues, the organisational ethos of the relevant agencies, the hopes of homeowners and the practical gap which commonly arises between homeowner expectation and agency response. Observations will be offered on how the adverse effects of these issues can be overcome in dealing with claimants, and how such matters can be managed in a way which promotes the wellness of individuals.
Previous earthquakes demonstrated destructive effects of soil-structure interaction on structural response. For example, in the 1970 Gediz earthquake in Turkey, part of a factory was demolished in a town 135 km from the epicentre, while no other buildings in the town were damaged. Subsequent investigations revealed that the fundamental period of vibration of the factory was approximately equal to that of the underlying soil. This alignment provided a resonance effect and led to collapse of the structure. Another dramatic example took place in Adapazari, during the 1999 Kocaeli earthquake where several foundations failed due to either bearing capacity exceedance or foundation uplifting, consequently, damaging the structure. Finally, the Christchurch 2012 earthquakes have shown that significant nonlinear action in the soil and soil-foundation interface can be expected due to high levels of seismic excitation and spectral acceleration. This nonlinearity, in turn, significantly influenced the response of the structure interacting with the soil-foundation underneath. Extensive research over more than 35 years has focused on the subject of seismic soil-structure interaction. However, since the response of soil-structure systems to seismic forces is extremely complex, burdened by uncertainties in system parameters and variability in ground motions, the role of soil-structure interaction on the structural response is still controversial. Conventional design procedures suggest that soil-structure interaction effects on the structural response can be conservatively ignored. However, more recent studies show that soil-structure interaction can be either beneficial or detrimental, depending on the soil-structure-earthquake scenarios considered. In view of the above mentioned issues, this research aims to utilise a comprehensive and systematic probabilistic methodology, as the most rational way, to quantify the effects of soil-structure interaction on the structural response considering both aleatory and epistemic uncertainties. The goal is achieved by examining the response of established rheological single-degree-of-freedom systems located on shallow-foundation and excited by ground motions with different spectral characteristics. In this regard, four main phases are followed. First, the effects of seismic soil-structure interaction on the response of structures with linear behaviour are investigated using a robust stochastic approach. Herein, the soil-foundation interface is modelled by an equivalent linear cone model. This phase is mainly considered to examine the influence of soil-structure interaction on the approach that has been adopted in the building codes for developing design spectrum and defining the seismic forces acting on the structure. Second, the effects of structural nonlinearity on the role of soil-structure interaction in modifying seismic structural response are studied. The same stochastic approach as phase 1 is followed, while three different types of structural force-deflection behaviour are examined. Third, a systematic fashion is carried out to look for any possible correlation between soil, structural, and system parameters and the degree of soil-structure interaction effects on the structural response. An attempt is made to identify the key parameters whose variation significantly affects the structural response. In addition, it is tried to define the critical range of variation of parameters of consequent. Finally, the impact of soil-foundation interface nonlinearity on the soil-structure interaction analysis is examined. In this regard, a newly developed macro-element covering both material and geometrical soil-foundation interface nonlinearity is implemented in a finite-element program Raumoko 3D. This model is then used in an extensive probabilistic simulation to compare the effects of linear and nonlinear soil-structure interaction on the structural response. This research is concluded by reviewing the current design guidelines incorporating soil-structure interaction effects in their design procedures. A discussion is then followed on the inadequacies of current procedures based on the outcomes of this study.
A photograph of an excavator clearing the rubble from earthquake-damaged buildings on Lichfield Street. The rubble has been gathered from the street and piled up beside the Majestic Theatre. In the foreground a member of the Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team is crossing the street.
A photograph of a member of the Wellington Emergency Management Office Emergency Response Team pointing to an earthquake-damaged house in central Christchurch. A large section of the house has collapsed, the rubble spilling onto the driveway. Emergency tape has been draped across the driveway as a cordon.
Natural disasters are increasingly disruptive events that affect livelihoods, organisations, and economies worldwide. Research has identified the impacts and responses of organisations to different types of natural disasters, and have outlined factors, such as industry sector, that are important to organisational vulnerability and resilience. One of the most costly types of natural disasters in recent years has been earthquakes, and yet to date, the majority of studies have focussed on the effects of earthquakes in urban areas, while rural organisational impact studies have primarily focused on the effects of meteorological and climatic driven hazards. As a result, the likely impacts of an earthquake on rural organisations in a developed context is unconstrained in the literature. In countries like New Zealand, which have major earthquakes and agricultural sectors that are significant contributors to the economy, it is important to know what impacts an earthquake event would have on the rural industries, and how these impacts compare to that of a more commonly analysed, high-frequency event. In September of 2010, rural organisations in Canterbury experienced the 4 September 2010 Mw 7.1 `Darfield' earthquake and the associated aftershocks, which came to be known as the Canterbury earth- quake sequence. The earthquake sequence caused intense ground shaking, creating widespread critical service outages, structural and non-structural damage to built infrastructure, as well as ground surface damage from ooding, liquefaction and surface rupture. Concurrently on September 18 2010, rural organisations in Southland experienced an unseasonably late snowstorm and cold weather snap that brought prolonged sub-zero temperatures, high winds and freezing rain, damaging structures in the City of Invercargill and causing widespread livestock losses and production decreases across the region. This thesis documents the effects of the Canterbury earthquake sequence and Southland snowstorm on farming and rural non-farming organisations, utilizing comparable methodologies to analyse rural organisational impacts, responses and recovery strategies to natural disasters. From the results, a short- term impact assessment methodology is developed for multiple disasters. Additionally, a regional asset repair cost estimation model is proposed for farming organisations following a major earthquake event, and the use of social capital in rural organisational recovery strategies following natural disasters is analysed.
An entry from Jennifer Middendorf's blog for 7 July 2013 entitled, "Winter weekends".
A story submitted by Mary Browne to the QuakeStories website.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 25 January 2013 entitled, "Preservation Project".
A story submitted by Leanne to the QuakeStories website.
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 27 August 2012, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
The 22nd February 2011, Mw 6.3 Christchurch earthquake in New Zealand caused major damage to critical infrastructure, including the healthcare system. The Natural Hazard Platform of NZ funded a short-term project called “Hospital Functions and Services” to support the Canterbury District Health Board’s (CDHB) efforts in capturing standardized data that describe the effects of the earthquake on the Canterbury region’s main hospital system. The project utilised a survey tool originally developed by researchers at Johns Hopkins University (JHU) to assess the loss of function of hospitals in the Maule and Bío-Bío regions following the 27th February 2010, Mw 8.8 Maule earthquake in Chile. This paper describes the application of the JHU tool for surveying the impact of Christchurch earthquake on the CDHB Hospital System, including the system’s residual capacity to deliver emergency response and health care. A short summary of the impact of the Christchurch earthquake on other CDHB public and private hospitals is also provided. This study demonstrates that, as was observed in other earthquakes around the world, the effects of damage to non-structural building components, equipment, utility lifelines, and transportation were far more disruptive than the minor structural damage observed in buildings (FEMA 2007). Earthquake related complications with re-supply and other organizational aspects also impacted the emergency response and the healthcare facilities’ residual capacity to deliver services in the short and long terms.
At 00:02 on 14th November 2016, a Mw 7.8 earthquake occurred in and offshore of the northeast of the South Island of New Zealand. Fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, and co-seismic landslides caused severe damage to distributed infrastructure, and particularly transportation networks; large segments of the country’s main highway, State Highway 1 (SH1), and the Main North Line (MNL) railway line, were damaged between Picton and Christchurch. The damage caused direct local impacts, including isolation of communities, and wider regional impacts, including disruption of supply chains. Adaptive measures have ensured immediate continued regional transport of goods and people. Air and sea transport increased quickly, both for emergency response and to ensure routine transport of goods. Road diversions have also allowed critical connections to remain operable. This effective response to regional transport challenges allowed Civil Defence Emergency Management to quickly prioritise access to isolated settlements, all of which had road access 23 days after the earthquake. However, 100 days after the earthquake, critical segments of SH1 and the MNL remain closed and their ongoing repairs are a serious national strategic, as well as local, concern. This paper presents the impacts on South Island transport infrastructure, and subsequent management through the emergency response and early recovery phases, during the first 100 days following the initial earthquake, and highlights lessons for transportation system resilience.
At 00:02 on 14th November 2016, a Mw 7.8 earthquake occurred in and offshore of the northeast of the South Island of New Zealand. Fault rupture, ground shaking, liquefaction, and co-seismic landslides caused severe damage to distributed infrastructure, and particularly transportation networks; large segments of the country’s main highway, State Highway 1 (SH1), and the Main North Line (MNL) railway line, were damaged between Picton and Christchurch. The damage caused direct local impacts, including isolation of communities, and wider regional impacts, including disruption of supply chains. Adaptive measures have ensured immediate continued regional transport of goods and people. Air and sea transport increased quickly, both for emergency response and to ensure routine transport of goods. Road diversions have also allowed critical connections to remain operable. This effective response to regional transport challenges allowed Civil Defence Emergency Management to quickly prioritise access to isolated settlements, all of which had road access 23 days after the earthquake. However, 100 days after the earthquake, critical segments of SH1 and the MNL remain closed and their ongoing repairs are a serious national strategic, as well as local, concern. This paper presents the impacts on South Island transport infrastructure, and subsequent management through the emergency response and early recovery phases, during the first 100 days following the initial earthquake, and highlights lessons for transportation system resilience.
Al Dwyer, leader of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART), outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. Members of DART can be seen behind him. Latimer Square was set up as a temporary headquarters for emergency management personnel after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, and members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
Prime Minister John Key talking to Al Dwyer, and members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) outside the US headquarters in Latimer Square. John Key is visiting to thank DART for their efforts in the aftermath of the 22 February 2011 earthquake.