QuakeStory 651
Articles, UC QuakeStudies
A story submitted by Nicki Reece to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Nicki Reece to the QuakeStories website.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 5 July 2013
A story submitted by Lynne Ball to the QuakeStories website.
Transcript of Leonora (Lee) Bothma's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
Transcript of Dianne Wilson's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 30 August 2013
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 9 August 2013
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 26 July 2013
Transcript of participant number AP2500's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
Transcript of Adrienne Hunter's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
Transcript of Shaun's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
A copy of the CanCERN online newsletter published on 1 February 2013
An entry from Deb Robertson's blog for 17 July 2013 entitled, "ps, I love you too".
Transcript of participant number QB1602's earthquake story, captured by the UC QuakeBox project.
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.