![]() Dynes (Eds.), Handbook of Disaster Research (pp. ![]() “Managing societal uncertainty in volcanic hazards: a multidisciplinary approach”. Ronan KR, Paton D, Johnston DM and Houghton BF (2000). Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering, 50(2): 85-93. “Strong ground motion observations of engineering interest from the 14 November 2016 Mw7.8 Kaikōura, New Zealand earthquake”. “The Kaikōura (New Zealand) earthquake: preliminary seismological report”. Kaiser A, Balfour N, Fry B, Holden C, Litchfield N, Gerstenberger M, D’Anastasio E, Horspool N, McVerry G, Ristau J, Bannister S, Christophersen A, Clark K, Power W, Rhoades D, Massey C, Hamling I, Wallace L, Mountjoy J, Kaneko Y, Benites R, Van Houtte C, Dellow S, Wotherspoon L, Elwood K and Gledhill K (2017). “Complex multifault rupture during the 2016, 7.8 Kaikōura earthquake, New Zealand”. ![]() Hamling IJ, Hreinsdóttir S, Clark K, Elliott J, Liang C, Fielding E, Litchfield N, Villamor P, Wallace L, Wright TJ, D’Anastasio E, Bannister S, Burbidge D, Denys P, Gentle P, Howarth J, Mueller C, Palmer N, Pearson C, Power W, Barnes P, Barrell DJA, Van Dissen R, Langridge R, Little T, Nicol A, Pettinga J, Rowland J and Stirling M, (2017). This paper explores that effort and acknowledges the successes and lessons learned by the teams involved. Coordinating these disciplines and institutions required significant effort to assist New Zealand during its most complex earthquake yet recorded. Many research disciplines, from engineering and geophysics to social science, were heavily involved in the response. With many areas isolated as a result, it presented science teams with logistical challenges as well as the need to coordinate efforts across institutional and disciplinary boundaries. The earthquake was complex, with 21 faults rupturing throughout the North Canterbury and Marlborough landscape, generating a localised seven metre tsunami and triggering thousands of landslides. The M7.8 Kaikōura Earthquake in 2016 presented a number of challenges to science agencies and institutions throughout New Zealand. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand The most important precursor was a foreshock sequence, but other anomalies such as geodetic deformation, changes in groundwater level, color, and chemistry, and peculiar animal behavior also played a role.University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Evacuation was extremely uneven across the disaster region, and critical decisions were often made at very local levels. These efforts saved thousands of lives, but the local construction style and time of the earthquake also contributed to minimizing fatalities. On the day of the earthquake, a county government issued a specific evacuation order, and actual actions taken by provincial scientists and government officials also effectively constituted an imminent prediction. Our findings indicate that there were two official middle-term predictions but no official short- term prediction. In the present work, study of declassified Chinese documents and interviews of key witnesses have allowed us to reconstruct this important history. Yet the prediction process has remained mysterious because of lack of reports on real-time documentation and details of how warnings were issued. The publicized four-stage (long-term, middle-term, short-term, and imminent) prediction of the M 7.3 1975 Haicheng, China, earthquake once generated worldwide fascination.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |