New Zealand quake could cost up to $4.5 billion, Market Watch, Sept. 7. Some interesting differences between NZ and US – there most residential structures have earthquake insurance. And their new construction requires consideration of seismic risk, but relatively few older masonry buildings were retrofitted for seismic safety. Sadly, the central business district of ChristChurch lost many of its historic masonry buildings.
Image by martinluff via Flickr
As noted two days ago in this blog, the contrast between the outcomes of the same-size earthquakes in NZ and Haiti is stark. Here is a discussion of one of the reasons for the difference. Building code saves NZ from serious destruction; Radio Australia, Sept. 6.
As we’ve heard in earlier reports, many New Zealanders are assessing the damage from the weekend’s earthquake. Jeff Crosier, is a structural and earthquake engineer from consulting firm Miyamoto International. While the New Zealand earthquake was larger than the one which devastated Haiti earlier this year, killing 200 thousand people, Mr Crosier says it is surprising how little damage has been caused in Christchurch.
On the downside, more than 100 aftershocks have occurred, some of which are sizable. It appears that the structure damage and the no. of badly damaged homes is growing. To call New Zealand seismically active is an understatement. According to a NY Times article on Sept. 6,
New Zealand sits above an area where two tectonic plates collide. The country records more than 14,000 earthquakes a year — but only about 150 are felt by residents. Fewer than 10 a year do any damage. New Zealand’s last major earthquake registered magnitude 7.8 and hit South Island’s Fiordland region on July 16, 2009, moving the southern tip of the country 12 inches (30 centimeters) closer to Australia.
Regarding the financial aspects of the recovery, the existence of insurance funds for residential reconstruction is an unusual feature. Nevertheless, the national government will have to assist public entities as is true in the U.S. system. See UPDATE: New Zealand Building Shares Rally After Quake; Bonds Weaken; Wall St. Journal, Sept. 7.
I recommend the interesting discussion , and useful comments, regarding resilience that is on the Homeland Security Watch blog for Sept. 5 and also Sept. 8th. Mark Chubb the author of the posting has extensive experience working in NZ.
By way of background, NZ has a very high risk of earthquake in most parts of the country. (For a listing of the major earthquakes in N.Z. in recent years, go to this site on GeoNet.) The leaders are aware of it and have taken many steps to deal with it, including the creation of special insurance, run by their Earthquake Commission. One surprise was that the fault that triggered the recent set of quakes was previously unknown.
One example of the foresight of the NZ government, which I am aware of — in 1995, the Commission was a sponsor of an international conference that dealt with recovery and rebuilding of a major city after an earthquake. I was privileged to participate in the conference, which was excellent, and a high quality report was issued. The report is titled “Wellington after the ‘Quake: The Challenge of Rebuilding Cities.” I hope the Commission makes the text available in digital form soon.
As noted earlier, the 7.0 earthquake in New Zealand miraculously did not result in any deaths. By contrast, the 7.0 earthquake that occurred in Haiti earlier this year resulted in about 225,000 deaths. The reasons for the differences would make an interesting research topic.
New Zealand braces for more destruction after quake, AP, Sept. 5.
New Zealand prepared for further destruction on Sunday as aftershocks and an approaching storm threatened an area hit by the most devastating earthquake in decades. Prime Minister John Key said it was “a miracle” no one had died when the major 7.0 magnitude quake wreaked more than a billion dollars of damage on the nation’s second-biggest city of Christchurch. Civil defence officials warned that ongoing aftershocks with magnitudes of up to 5.4, coupled with a ferocious storm blowing in, could threaten already-weakened buildings.
New Zealand region nervous after powerful quake; CNN, Sept. 5.
New Zealand’s Christchurch and Canterbury remained on edge Sunday as the quake-hit region entered its second night following a powerful tremor that left buildings in ruins and people scrambling for shelter heavy rains and gale-force winds forecast to hit Monday threaten to knock down frail, quake-weakened buildings.
Comments from NZ geologists about some of the unique features of this quake:
The powerful earthquake that smashed buildings, cracked roads and twisted rail lines around the New Zealand city of Christchurch also ripped a new fault line in the Earth’s surface, a geologist said Sunday. (CNN, Sept. 5) and
“The quake was probably the worst to hit New Zealand for 80 years because it was a “bull’s-eye on a major city,” Warwick Smith, from the Institute of Geological Nuclear Sciences.”
One of the unique features of the ChristChurch event is that the country acknowledges its high earthquake risk and has mandated insurance for residential structures. More about this feature follows. Also, it will be interesting to see to what extent their construction and building inspection standards, zoning, and land use requirements may have contributed to the outcome of no deaths and relatively few injuries.
New Zealand Quake Damage Could Cost $1.4 Billion; WSJ, Sept. 5.
The cost of the damage is still being assessed, with teams working through the central city to check on building soundness. The Earthquake Commission, which covers residential damage on properties insured for natural disasters, said it had received about 2,800 claims for damage to property but was expecting a significant increase in claims over the next couple of days.
Earthquake Commission Chief Executive Ian Simpson said the quake was going to result in hundreds of millions of dollars worth of claims, “but it could be up to a NZ$1 billion” with around 100,000 claims expected to come in over the next three months.
The commission is a government-owned crown entity funded by insurance premiums and pays out the first NZ$100,000 of a claim. The fund currently has around NZ$5.6 billion and is backed by reinsurance from overseas groups and a government guarantee. Mr. Simpson said this will be the single biggest claim on the fund since it was established in the 1940s.
Today, the news is relatively good regarding the amount of damaged caused by Hurricane Earl in the Atlantic seaboard. More details are coming in about the earthquakes ( 7.0 and lesser aftershocks) near Christ Church, NZ. Early damage photos on CNN make it seem like a miracle no one was killed.
As noted here many times, the recovery process is a complex one and one that is hard to accomplish in the U.S. When the U.S. participates in the international response to a major to catastrophic disaster in another sovereign nation – especially underdeveloped ones, such as Haiti or Pakistan — the problems grow almost at a logarythmic rate. Added to all of the elements of recovery are issues of morality, strategic significance, and existential concerns. An opinion piece in the Wash. Post highlights some of these added concerns. Pakistan flood relief is in America’s strategic interest, Sept. 1, 2010.
The challenge for the Obama administration and other governments is to develop new mechanisms — similar to those, perhaps, that the United Nations has devised for rebuilding Haiti after its earthquake in January — that would enable relief and reconstruction with maximum transparency and honesty. If this is done successfully, the Pakistani government and its international allies, the United States included, could gain prestige in the eyes of a skeptical people. The alternative is a vacuum that extreme Islamist groups are already attempting to fill. The American people must be there when the floodwaters recede. The moral justification is compelling enough. But the strategic rationale is real, too.
A related report, well written and compelling, was issued by the U.S. Institute of Peace, on August 17th, titled: Flooding Challenges Pakistan’s Government and the International Community. It makes a somewhat different case for the U.S. aid to Pakistan, highlighting the link between disaster recovery and peacebuilding. A notable observation in that report is:
Unfortunately, disaster management priorities are often focused on immediate visible results rather than the less tangible and long-term goals of stable peace, good governance, and sustainable development. Saving lives is undoubtedly essential. At the same time, how disasters are managed can have a long-term impact on the conflict context. Disaster managers must ensure that short-term interventions also carry positive long-term impacts on societies that have already experienced considerable suffering.
Additional article, posted on Sept. 2, is well worth reading. It deals primarily with the digital media and the mechanics of providing assistance to Pakistan, providing a very interesting contrast with the Haiti catastrophic earthquake earlier this year. See A Month In, Pakistan Flood Relief Efforts Stuck at 1.0, in Wired magazine .
Recovery Diva 