Working in archaeology here in New Zealand we most often encounter the material remains of Māori settlement and colonisation by the British Empire in the 19th century. Groups such as the New Zealand Company and the Canterbury Association laid out … Continue reading →
A video of a press conference with Christchurch Mayor Lianne Dalziel and Raf Manji, Chair of the Christchurch City Council Finance Committee, about the KordaMentha report. KordaMentha is an independent auditing firm which specialises in insolvencies and corporate recovery. The report analysed the Christchurch City Council's three year budgeting plan and the financial strategies that lay behind it. Much of this budget dealt with the challenges in Christchurch caused by the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes. Dalziel talks about the cost of mending Christchurch's infrastructure, the Council's insurance settlement, and the need to address the findings in the report. Manji talks about the Council's financial options following the report.
Planning in New Zealand in 2014 has largely been dominated by housing and urban development, potential local government and legislative reforms, and water issues. This volume’s peer reviewed research, which combines Issues 1 and 2, focuses on these issues, but with perspectives and issues that are outside the mainstream. In our lead research article, John Ryks and his co-authors review the opportunities from Treaty settlements and legislative provisions and challenges for Māori participation in urban development, such as the balancing of matawaka and mana whenua perspectives. Water issues are picked up by Ronlyn Duncan and Phil Holland who each take constructively critical views toward some currently well-regarded approaches to resolutions. We have reflective and somewhat contrasting contributions from two highly respected semi-retired planners, Malcolm Douglass (FNZPI) and Derek Hall, that challenge aspects of New Zealand’s current approach to planning. In our outreach part of this Volume we include the response of some political parties to questions put to them about planning by LPR team member Nicole Read. Finally, Lincoln University appears to have turned a corner after the earthquakes, at least in the planning programmes.
Though generally considered “natural” disasters, cyclones and earthquakes are increasingly being associated with human activities, incubated through urban settlement patterns and the long-term redistribution of natural resources. As society is becoming more urbanized, the risk of human exposure to disasters is also rising. Architecture often reflects the state of society’s health: architectural damage is the first visible sign of emergency, and reconstruction is the final response in the process of recovery. An empirical assessment of architectural projects in post-disaster situations can lead to a deeper understanding of urban societies as they try to rebuild. This thesis offers an alternative perspective on urban disasters by looking at the actions and attitudes of disaster professionals through the lens of architecture, situated in recent events: the 2010 Christchurch earthquake, the 2010 Haiti earthquake, and the 2005 Hurricane Katrina. An empirical, multi-hazard, cross-sectional case study methodology was used, employing grounded theory method to build theory, and a critical constructivist strategy to inform the analysis. By taking an interdisciplinary approach to understanding disasters, this thesis positions architecture as a conduit between two divergent approaches to disaster research: the hazards approach, which studies the disaster cycles from a scientific perspective; and the sociological approach, which studies the socially constructed vulnerabilities that result from disasters, and the elements of social change that accompany such events. Few studies to date have attempted to integrate the multi-disciplinary perspectives that can advance our understanding of societal problems in urban disasters. To bridge this gap, this thesis develops what will be referred to as the “Rittelian framework”—based on the work of UC Berkeley’s architecture professor Horst Rittel (1930-1990). The Rittelian framework uses the language of design to transcend the multiple fields of human endeavor to address the “design problems” in disaster research. The processes by which societal problems are addressed following an urban disaster involve input by professionals from multiple fields—including economics, sociology, medicine, and engineering—but the contribution from architecture has been minimal to date. The main impetus for my doctoral thesis has been the assertion that most of the decisions related to reconstruction are made in the early emergency recovery stages where architects are not involved, but architects’ early contribution is vital to the long-term reconstruction of cities. This precipitated in the critical question: “How does the Rittelian framework contribute to the critical design decisions in modern urban disasters?” Comparative research was undertaken in three case studies of recent disasters in New Orleans (2005), Haiti (2010) and Christchurch (2010), by interviewing 51 individuals who were selected on the basis of employing the Rittelian framework in their humanitarian practice. Contextualizing natural disaster research within the robust methodological framework of architecture and the analytical processes of sociology is the basis for evaluating the research proposition that architectural problem solving is of value in addressing the ‘Wicked Problems’ of disasters. This thesis has found that (1) the nuances of the way disaster agents interpret the notion of “building back better” can influence the extent to which architectural professionals contribute in urban disaster recovery, (2) architectural design can be used to facilitate but also impede critical design decisions, and (3) framing disaster research in terms of design decisions can lead to innovation where least expected. This empirical research demonstrates how the Rittelian framework can inform a wider discussion about post-disaster human settlements, and improve our resilience through disaster research.
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Prime Minister: Is he still committed to "ensuring our schools are working for all students", and is he satisfied his Government has done enough to ensure that every child has equal access to a low-cost public education? CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister of Finance: What steps has the Government taken to turn around the Treasury's forecast net Government debt? METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with Infometrics that after the Canterbury rebuild peaks, the New Zealand economy will experience a "hangover" with slow income and GDP growth? SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Justice: What justice initiatives has she announced to address family violence in New Zealand? DAVID SHEARER to the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade: When did he first become aware of allegations that led to a Malaysian diplomat being charged with assault with the intent to commit rape and burglary, and what actions did he take? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Corrections: What recent announcements has she made on how technology can be used to better protect victims of domestic violence? JAN LOGIE to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Was he made aware of the wishes, if any, of the woman at the centre of the assault with intent to rape charges laid against a Malaysian diplomat, regarding his return to Malaysia; if so, when? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Health: What investments has the Government made in health services for Taranaki? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied that schools receive sufficient funding to deliver the New Zealand curriculum? KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Food Safety: What recent announcements has she made regarding food labelling? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Is he satisfied with the progress of the Earthquake Commission in the settlement or disposition of all claims in respect of multi-unit dwellings, arising from the Canterbury earthquake; if so, why?