This report forms part of a research project examining rural community resilience to natural hazard events, with a particular focus on transient population groups. A preliminary desktop and scoping exercise was undertaken to examine nine communities affected by the Kaikoura earthquake and to identify the variety of transient population groups that are commonly (and increasingly) found in rural New Zealand (see Wilson & Simmons, 2017). From this, four case study communities – Blenheim, Kaikoura, Waiau and St Arnaud – were selected to represent a range of settlement types. These communities varied in respect of social, economic and geographic features, including the presence of particular transient population groups, and earthquake impact. While the 2016 Kaikoura earthquake provided a natural hazard event on which to focus the research, the research interest was in long-term (and broad) community resilience, rather than short-term (and specific) response and recovery actions which occurred post-earthquake.
The Kaikoura earthquake in November 2016 highlighted the vulnerability of New Zealand’s rural communities to locally-specific hazard events, which generate regional and national scale impacts. Kaikoura was isolated with significant damage to both the east coast road (SH1) and rail corridor, and the Inland Road (Route 70). Sea bed uplift along the coast was significant – affecting marine resources and ocean access for marine operators engaged in tourism and harvesting, and recreational users. While communities closest to the earthquake epicentre (e.g., Kaikoura, Waiau, Rotherham and Cheviot) suffered the most immediate earthquake damage, the damage to the transport network, and the establishment of an alternative transport route between Christchurch and Picton, has significantly impacted on more distant communities (e.g., Murchison, St Arnaud and Blenheim). There was also considerable damage to vineyard infrastructure across the Marlborough region and damage to buildings and infrastructure in rural settlements in Southern Marlborough (e.g., Ward and Seddon).
At 4.35am on Saturday 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake struck near the township of Darfield in Canterbury leading to widespread damage in Christchurch and the wider central Canterbury region. Though it was reported no lives were lost, that was not entirely correct. Over 3,000 animals perished as a result of the earthquake and 99% of these deaths would have been avoidable if appropriate mitigation measures had been in place. Deaths were predominantly due to zoological vulnerability of birds in captive production farms. Other problems included lack of provision of animal welfare at evacuation centres, issues associated with multiple lost and found pet services, evacuation failure due to pet separation and stress impact on dairy herds and associated milk production. The Canterbury Earthquake has highlighted concerns over a lack of animal emergency welfare planning and capacity in New Zealand, an issue that is being progressed by the National Animal Welfare Emergency Management Group. As animal emergency management becomes better understood by emergency management and veterinary professionals, it is more likely that both sectors will have greater demands placed upon them by national guidelines and community expectations to ensure provisions are made to afford protection of animals in times of disaster. A subsequent and more devastating earthquake struck the region on Monday 22 February 2011; this article however is primarily focused on the events pertaining to the September 4 event.
Recognising that informal (also termed family, whānau, aiga or unpaid) caregivers/carers are a vital part of Aotearoa New Zealand’s health system, providing care and support for loved ones, whānau, friends and neighbours, this study aimed to explore the experiences of older informal caregivers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Priority research questions were: how did informal caregivers experience caregiving during the pandemic, and how might we support them during another pandemic, disaster, or national emergency? To our knowledge, this is the first exploration of such experiences in Aotearoa New Zealand. We wanted to understand the unprecedented challenges and barriers informal caregivers faced during the pandemic and highlight the resilience and mana (power, strength) of informal caregivers in overcoming them. To explore the lived experiences of informal caregiving during the pandemic, the research team travelled across New Zealand between May 2023 and February 2024 to conduct 81 in-depth interviews, with 73 completed face-to-face, four via Zoom and four by phone. A total of 34 male and 47 female informal caregivers were interviewed, including 35 Māori and 46 non-Māori. The mean age of participants was 66 years old. Thirty-nine rural and 42 urban-dwelling informal caregivers were interviewed, and the study covered both the North and South Islands. A Kaupapa Māori researcher and a Māori adviser oversaw appropriate tikanga (processes), kōrero (discussion) and manaakitanga (care and support) for all the Māori participants interviewed. The COVID-19 pandemic placed significant strain on older informal caregivers in Aotearoa New Zealand, exacerbating existing challenges and exposing critical gaps in support systems. Many participants experienced heightened emotional and psychological distress due to increased caregiving demands, social isolation, and the disruption of formal and informal support networks. The closure of essential services meant that informal caregivers in this study had to navigate complex healthcare systems with little guidance, often facing bureaucratic hurdles and limited access to respite care. Financial strain further compounded these difficulties, with some participants struggling to meet the rising costs associated with informal caregiving while experiencing reduced income or employment instability. For Māori participants, the inability to engage in kanohi ki te kanohi (face-to-face) interactions with whānau and communities disrupted cultural traditions such as whanaungatanga, tangihanga (funeral practices), and communal caregiving, intensifying feelings of isolation and distress. Despite these challenges, participants demonstrated remarkable resilience and adaptability, drawing on their life experiences (or "resilience in older people") and existing support systems to navigate the pandemic. Many participants relied on self-sufficiency, using strategies learned from past crises and disasters such as the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquakes and the 1940s/1950s polio epidemics to manage caregiving responsibilities and everyday challenges with limited external assistance. Strengthened relationships with care recipients and an increased sense of community support were positive outcomes for some participants, who found solace in tighter family bonds and mutual aid from neighbours and local groups. Māori participants, in particular, emphasised the importance of cultural and community-based networks, with iwi and extended whānau playing crucial roles in providing informal support. These findings underscore the need for policies that recognise and support the diverse needs of informal caregivers, including tailored caregiving assistance, clearer communication about available services, and culturally responsive caregiving frameworks that strengthen resilience in future health crises. Findings from this study highlight the need for: 1) tailored, context-specific support systems: Formal support services must be more flexible to accommodate the diverse needs of informal caregivers, particularly those in rural and Māori communities; 2) Improved access to information and services: Many participants were unaware of available support, pointing to the need for clearer, caregiver-specific communication and helplines; 3) Enhancing emotional and social support mechanisms: Regular check-ins from healthcare providers and community groups could alleviate the emotional burden of caregiving; and 4) Resilience-based and bicultural approaches to caregiving support: Policies should integrate Māori perspectives on informal caregiving and strengthen social capital among informal caregivers. It is clear from this research that no one-size-fits-all approach is appropriate for supporting informal caregivers. This research provides a critical evidence base for improving the support structures available to informal caregivers, ensuring they are better prepared for future pandemics, disasters, and national emergencies.
