Search

found 187 results

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Cities need places that contribute to quality of life, places that support social interaction. Wellbeing, specifically, community wellbeing, is influenced by where people live, the quality of place is important and who they connect with socially. Social interaction and connection can come from the routine involvement with others, the behavioural acts of seeing and being with others. This research consisted of 38 interviews of residents of Christchurch, New Zealand, in the years following the 2010-12 earthquakes. Residents were asked about the place they lived and their interactions within their community. The aim was to examine the role of neighbourhood in contributing to local social connections and networks that contribute to living well. Specifically, it focused on the role and importance of social infrastructure in facilitating less formal social interactions in local neighbourhoods. It found that neighbourhood gathering places and bumping spaces can provide benefit for living well. Social infrastructure, like libraries, parks, primary schools, and pubs are some of the places of neighbourhood that contributed to how well people can encounter others for social interaction. In addition, unplanned interactions were facilitated by the existence of bumping places, such as street furniture. The wellbeing value of such spaces needs to be acknowledged and factored into planning decisions, and local rules and regulations need to allow the development of such spaces.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This research attempts to understand whether community resilience and perceived livability are influenced by housing typologies in Christchurch, New Zealand. Using recent resident surveys undertaken by the Christchurch City Council, two indexes were created to reflect livability and community resilience. Indicators used to create both indexes included (1) enjoyment living in neighbourhood (2) satisfaction with local facilities (3) safety walking and (4) safety using public transport, (5) sense of community (6) neighbour interactions, (7) home ownership and (8) civic engagement. Scores were attributed to 72 neighbourhoods across Christchurch –and each neighbourhood was classified in one of the following housing typologies; (1) earthquake damaged, (2) relatively undamaged, (3) medium density and (4) greenfield developments. Spatial analysis of index scores and housing classifications suggest housing typologies do influence resident’s perceived livability and community bonds to an extent. It was found that deprivation also had a considerable influence on these indexes as well as residential stability. These additional influences help explain why neighbourhoods within the same housing classification differ in their index scores. Based on these results, several recommendations have been made to the CCC in relation to future research, urban development strategies and suburb specific renewal projects. Of chief importance, medium density neighbourhoods and deprived neighbourhoods require conscious efforts to foster community resilience. Results indicate that community resilience might be more important than livability in having a positive influence on the lived experience of residents. While thoughtful design and planning are important, this research suggests geospatial research tools could enable better community engagement outcomes and planning outcomes, and this could be interwoven into proactive and inclusive planning approaches like placemaking.

Images, eqnz.chch.2010

On a walk around the neighbourhood, December 3, 2013, Christchurch New Zealand. www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/christchurch-life/avenues/featu...

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

This research attempts to understand how the Christchurch rebuild is promoting urban liveability in the Central City, focussing on the influence of communities and neighbourhoods in this area. To do this, gathering the perceptions of Christchurch residents through surveys, a focus group and semi-structured interviews was carried out to see what aspects they believe contribute to creating more liveable places. These methods revealed that there are pockets of neighbourhoods and communities in the inner-city, but no overall sense of community. Results from the semi-structured interviews reinforced this; the current buyers of inner-city property are in the financial position to be able to do this, and they seem to be purchasing in this area due to convenience and investment rather than to join the existing communities in the area. Analysing the survey responses from Central City residents revealed contrasting results. Those currently living in the area felt there is a sense of community in the inner-city, but these are found in pockets of neighbourhoods around the Central City rather than in the overall area. The focus group revealed that community is further prioritised later in life, and that many of the community groups in the inner-city predominantly consist of those who have lived there since before the Christchurch Earthquake Series. However, participants of all three methods believed that the Central City is slowly becoming a lively and vibrant place. To improve urban liveability in the inner-city, it seems that prioritisation of the needs of current inner-city residents is required. Improving these neighbourhoods, whether it be through the implementation of services or providing more communal spaces, is needed to create stronger communities. The feelings of place, connectedness, and belonging that arise from being part of a community or well-connected neighbourhood can improve mental health and wellbeing, ultimately enhancing the overall health of the population as well as the perceived urban liveability of the area.