Category Archives: New Zealand

Personal Account of the Christchurch, NZ recovery

Posted on by
2

Christchurch, NZ experienced two major earthquakes in Sept. of 2010 and in Feb. of 2011  as well as thousands of aftershocks since then. Details of the many quakes are here. Here is a personal account of the recovery from an experienced U.S. disaster professional who was visiting in Christchurch this past month. She shared her observations with the Diva, but prefers to remain anonymous.
___________________________________________________________

Christchurch was very interesting, but heartbreaking. From what I heard from talking to residents and even tourists from England, most are disappointed in the Recovery. Some say it’s too slow, some want it back how it was, and others say there is a shortage of construction workers, as Australia pays more, and NZ cost of living makes it hard to live there.

From speaking to people on the street, they become tearful of what used to be. They don’t like the “big glass boxes” that are replacing the damaged buildings.

I did go by the Office of Emergency Management, and spoke with one of the Team Leads and one who is in charge of “welfare”, but of course, not the meaning we use for welfare. They’d like that terminology changed. They can’t rebuild the old stone and cement buildings, no matter how beautiful they were. I’m sure you know this, but they said they didn’t even know there was a fault or the liquefaction in the geology of the area.

Emergency Management is trying to make it a “happier place”. They have built a temporary shopping area in the City Centre out of train containers, where there is not only shopping, but events and concerts.

The Museum offers bus tours of the damage, and there is something called “Quake City”, I suppose a simulation and information on what it is like to have experienced the earthquake. I did not take the tours, nor go to the display. I saw enough damage just driving through. I suppose I’m a little odd in that I don’t take pictures of disasters. Somehow it feels intrusive.

Their biggest project now is infrastructure. The whole sewer system needs to be replaced before much building can continue. Roads in the city are a mess. I got the feeling at the temporary building of the Office of Emergency Management of frustration. However, their priorities seem to be  for social and crisis issues, and infrastructure. That may be because that is whom I spoke with.  They work with the different Ministries, probably as we do with our Recovery Support Functions.

I was surprised, no validation of who I was, no security guards, offered a cup of tea and a chair to sit and chat. What a different culture! We discussed the differences in our countries. Their law enforcement doesn’t even carry guns, and need permission to use them. No school shootings, very little violence, but of course, worries about the instability of the island, earthquakes, tsunami’s, and volcanoes. 

I didn’t see anything about the Mayor-Elect at all. In fact, I didn’t see much about politics. What a relief that has been.

 I’m sure you know more than I, but it was an interesting first hand experience. If there is anything else I can answer for you, or I think of something, I will pass it on. Did I tell you they loved our expression “The new normal”, and are going to use it?  Funny, how things get started.

Review of Alberta Province’s Role in Recovery of Calgary

Posted on by
Reply

 

As it often the case, the people affected by a major disaster who are not happy with the response and/or recovery efforts of the public sector want to see an independent review. A major review occurred in Christchurch N.Z  after the 2011 earthquake there — see the NZ page of this blog for the full text of the Assessment report. And in the U.S. there were independent studies after Hurricane Katrina (there were several national level reports) and after  Superstorm Sandy — a major report on recovery strategy is due out in a couple of weeks.

Now, the liberals in Calgary and elsewhere in Canada are calling for an independent study of the role and responsibilities of Alberta province with regard to response and flood policies. See: Liberal Leader Calling for Federal Flood Review.

Another article appeared today re covering the costs of recovery. Seems to me the issue of who pays for what is a matter that should have been  decided long ago. Granted there will be special cases and exceptions for Calgary, but where was the plan for a major disaster and its aftermath? As the old saying goes, The aftermath of a disaster is not the time to exchange business cards.

Leadership During Recovery- a Kiwi perspective

Posted on by
Reply

The Diva just learned about an interesting paper, written by Ms Elizabeth McNaughton of NZ, with the title Leadership, Wisdom and the Post-Disaster Recovery Process.  This link will take you to the full text of her report (40 pp.) and some biographical information.

She clearly has walked the walk and talked the talk of long-term recovery. Plus she is an excellent writer. I highly recommend this paper.

Those folks down under have quite a unique sense of humor. Here is a sample:

“So leaders in recovery – when your tutu falls off you need to be sure your frilly knickers are enough. We need to plan for times when we are not at our peak, because no one can be at peak performance all the time. So, what are your plan B’s? How prepared are your understudies? And what are your resilience building strategies? Can you access the wisdom; yours and that of others?”

______________________________________________________

McNaughton was the National Recovery Manager at New Zealand Red Cross after the Christchurch Earthquake of 2011,and since then has traveled internationally to research recovery experiences in other countries.

Why Is Recovery So Hard To Do? – some observations and suggestions

Posted on by
3

Time after time, my blog postings document (and lament) the difficulties that various countries, states (prefectures, provinces), and localities are having working through an effective and efficient recovery. You name the country and the recent disaster event, and it will be on the list of places struggling with recovery.

First a brief account of why we need to do a better job with recovery, soon and worldwide. In short, the costs are too high to go unchecked.  It’s a global necessity that we need get better at recovering from disasters. See this article from HS Wired, March 15: 2012 economic losses from disasters set new record at $138 billion.  The lead paragraph says:

The UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) reported that for the first time in history, the world has experienced three consecutive years in which annual economic losses have exceeded $100 billion. The losses are the result of an enormous increase in exposure of industrial assets and private property to extreme disaster events. brief account of why we need to do a better job with recovery:

In reviewing some of the recent examples of recovery from major disasters in 3 countries, as covered in this blog, some common concerns can be seen. After reading the Bosner article about Japan, and Ian McLean’s article about Christchurch, and some of my recent posts about the Hurricane Sandy (US), I the nations currently dealing with recovery from major to catastrophic events have several features in common.  I will note just two, because this is a topic that warrants a dissertation or two and not just a blog posting.

Pace: In the first two years of effort, generally recovery is proceeding more slowly than anyone imagined or hoped for.  Typically, neither public officials or citizens are satisfied Some of the problems are lack of knowledge and experience, some are public policy and management  deficiencies, and others have to do with political will.

Organizations– in all cases the organizations in place were not adequate, so new ones had to be created after the disaster occurred.

·       In Japan, they created a national Reconstruction Agency. See earlier postings on this blog for more details.

·       In the Christchurch area, they created a new regional organization – CERA.  Here is the link to the Recovery Strategy developed by CERA.

·      And in the U.S., HUD assumed responsibility at the federal level for recovery and created the Hurricane Sandy Recovery Task Force. The organization, functions, and responsibilities are still being sorted out at the present time.

My concern is that organizational problems, many of which could be anticipated, are preventing effective leadership during  the recovery period.  I think more help is needed from the public administration community on recovery organization and management matters. And I would like to see the executive agencies better utilize the existing talent – researchers, consultants, and practitioners. Several excellent mechanisms exist, such as the National Academy of Public Administration and the National Academy of Science. Think about using them!

And I would like to see more groups like the American Society for Public Administration, NEMA, and IAEM get more pro active and make recommendations to the executive agencies.

Presently,  the spotlight is on the new role of HUD and specifically on the new organization –  the Sandy Rebuilding Task Force. In my view, until the needs of the recovery process are dealt with. making progress with “resilience” is not realistic.

As always, comments and additions are welcome.

 

Do Poorer Countries Recover Faster than Wealthier Ones?

Posted on by
Reply

 

The debate has been ongoing about which countries more efficiently deal with long-term recovery from disaster. Most recently, an article titled  Christchurch highlights how rich can lag at rebuilding,  Japan Times FEB 23, 2013, generated a lot of attention and controversy.

I am pleased to feature this reply, which has not been published anywhere else.  Did Bureacracy Delay the Christchurch Recovery? by Ian McLean.  The paper is short (4 pages) so I will not attempt to summarize it.

I think the paper underscores the point that the pace of recovery is not the only factor to consider. In my experience, recovery has at least three essential attributes: efficiency, effectiveness, and equity.  And of course there is a cost factor.

______________________________________

Mr. McLean is the principal of Ian McLean Consultancy Services, Ltd. in Rotorua, NZ. He was the lead author of the report titled  “Review of the CDEM Response to 22 Feb Christchurch Earthquake,” which was done under contract to the Director of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, NZ. Details about that report and related articles are on the NZ page of this blog.

Disaster Aftermath – changes in personal behavior, more “short fuses”

Posted on by
Reply

This article about Christchurch, NZ highlights some of the results of stress and anxiety from a major destructive earthquake and thousands of aftershocks. As you might expect, those conditions do affect people’s behavior.

And if you read some of the descriptive information, or see some of the post-quake videos, you will understand why people are so stressed. [Some of these articles are listed on the NZ page of this blog.]

See: Christchurch Fuses Shorter in Wake of Quakes. October 13.

Aftermath of September 4th Earthquake in Chris...

Related articles

Assessment of Earthquake Response in Christchurch, NZ – new report

Posted on by
Reply

 

A new, in-depth report on the response to the major earthquake in Christchurch, NZ is now available. The circumstances and issues noted should be of interest to other countries with seismic risk.

Titled  Review of the Civil Defense Emergency Management Response to the 22 February Christchurch Earthquake, it was produced by Ian McLean Consultancy Services Ltd., under a contract from the Director of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, NZ.

Completed in June 2012 and released to the public on October 4, this 243 report provides a detailed account of the 2011 earthquake event and its impacts, focusing on the response phase. (There is an 8 page Executive Summary in the report.)

The assessment was done by a team of experienced, independent experts: three team members are from N.Z., one from Australia, and one from the U.S. (Disclosure, Claire Rubin is the American member of the team.)

Because I think the issues are important and should be of interest to other countries, I have mounted a new page, named NZ (see top right-hand button on this homepage)  to this blog site to provide additional commentary.

Related articles

Governance and Disaster Management – an update

Posted on by
1

I remain intrigued with governance matters with regard to recovery.  Today I ran across a short (7 page) cogent paper on that topic, issued by the UN’s Knowledge for Recovery Series; the title is Why Governance Issues Are  Important in Recovery?  I recommend the Series site as well as the short paper.

A week or so ago, I provided a link to three interesting papers from the  Australia and New Zealand School of Government, which is supported by several universities, government agencies, and other organizations. I especially liked the paper titled “Governing the Recovery from the Canterbury Earthquake 2010-2011: the debate over Institutional Design” by Rachel Brookie.

I would like to see more research done on governance regarding the U.S. and Canadian systems. I am especially interested in any analyses of the Canadian EM governance system; any suggestions from readers would be appreciated.

Note to graduate students: this topic is wide open for original research!