The concept of geoparks was first introduced in the first international conference on geoparks held in China in 2004. Here in New Zealand, Kiwis are accustomed to national parks, land reserves, marine reserves, and urban cities and regional parks. The concept of these protected areas has been long-standing in the country, whereas the UNESCO concept of geoparks is still novel and yet to be established in New Zealand.
In this dissertation, I explored the geopark concept for better understanding of its merits and examined the benefits of geotourism attractions as a sustainable economic development strategy to retrieve a declining rural economy. This research is focused on Kaikoura as a case study with geological significance, and emphasizes pre-earthquake existing geological heritages and new existing geological heritages post-earthquake to determine whether the geopark concept is appropriate and what planning framework is available to process this concept proposal should Kaikoura be interested in future.
SARAH DOWIE to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on New Zealand’s trade exports?
EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for Land Information: Has he asked Land Information New Zealand to withdraw the 997-hectare Riversdale Flats from the proposed sale of Mt White Station pastoral lease; if not, why not?
PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister for Social Housing: Will she confirm that as of 30 June the Government has only delivered 323 of the additional 1,400 emergency beds they promised at the start of November last year?
STUART SMITH to the Minister of Transport: What update can he provide on the reinstatement of State Highway 1 following the Kaikōura earthquakes?
STEFFAN BROWNING to the Minister for the Environment: Does he have confidence in the Environmental Protection Authority’s review of glyphosate?
Dr DAVID CLARK to the Minister of Health: Does he support the establishment of a cross-agency working group with Canterbury District Health Board on their finances, funding, and facilities?
DAVID SEYMOUR to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his answers to Oral Question No. 6 on 6 June regarding intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer?
BARBARA KURIGER to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has he made in relation to immigration settings?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: Does he believe that the signing of the Pare Hauraki Collective Settlement with the inclusion of redress disputed by Tauranga Moana iwi is a breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
CHRIS BISHOP to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements have the Government made on school property in the Wellington region?
PITA PARAONE to the Minister for Māori Development: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, why?
JENNY SALESA to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied that the Government is doing all that it can to ensure an adequate supply of teachers, particularly in Auckland?
Christchurch City Council (Council) is undertaking the Land Drainage Recovery Programme in order to assess the effects of the earthquakes on flood risk to Christchurch. In the course of these investigations it has become better understood that floodplain management should be considered in a multi natural hazards context. Council have therefore engaged the Jacobs, Beca, University of Canterbury, and HR Wallingford project team to investigate the multihazards in eastern areas of Christchurch and develop flood management options which also consider other natural hazards in that context (i.e. how other hazards contribute to flooding both through temporal and spatial coincidence). The study has three stages: Stage 1 Gap Analysis – assessment of information known, identification of gaps and studies required to fill the gaps. Stage 2 Hazard Studies – a gap filling stage with the studies identified in Stage 1. Stage 3 Collating, Optioneering and Reporting – development of options to manage flood risk. This present report is to document findings of Stage 1 and recommends the studies that should be completed for Stage 2. It has also been important to consider how Stage 3 would be delivered and the gaps are prioritised to provide for this. The level of information available and hazards to consider is extensive; requiring this report to be made up of five parts each identifying individual gaps. A process of identifying information for individual hazards in Christchurch has been undertaken and documented (Part 1) followed by assessing the spatial co-location (Part 2) and probabilistic presence of multi hazards using available information. Part 3 considers multi hazard presence both as a temporal coincidence (e.g. an earthquake and flood occurring at one time) and as a cascade sequence (e.g. earthquake followed by a flood at some point in the future). Council have already undertaken a number of options studies for managing flood risk and these are documented in Part 4. Finally Part 5 provides the Gap Analysis Summary and Recommendations to Council. The key findings of Stage 1 gap analysis are: - The spatial analysis showed eastern Christchurch has a large number of hazards present with only 20% of the study area not being affected by any of the hazards mapped. Over 20% of the study area is exposed to four or more hazards at the frequencies and data available. - The majority of the Residential Red Zone is strongly exposed to multiple hazards, with 86% of the area being exposed to 4 or more hazards, and 24% being exposed to 6 or more hazards. - A wide number of gaps are present; however, prioritisation needs to consider the level of benefit and risks associated with not undertaking the studies. In light of this 10 studies ranging in scale are recommended to be done for the project team to complete the present scope of Stage 3. - Stage 3 will need to consider a number of engineering options to address hazards and compare with policy options; however, Council have not established a consistent policy on managed retreat that can be applied for equal comparison; without which substantial assumptions are required. We recommend Council undertake a study to define a managed retreat framework as an option for the city. - In undertaking Stage 1 with floodplain management as the focal point in a multi hazards context we have identified that Stage 3 requires consideration of options in the context of economics, implementation and residual risk. Presently the scope of work will provide a level of definition for floodplain options; however, this will not be at equal levels of detail for other hazard management options. Therefore, we recommend Council considers undertaking other studies with those key hazards (e.g. Coastal Hazards) as a focal point and identifies the engineering options to address such hazards. Doing so will provide equal levels of information for Council to make an informed and defendable decision on which options are progressed following Stage 3.
