Vivienne BRYNER1,2, Richard NORRIS2, Jean FLEMING1 1The Centre for Science Communication, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; 2Geology Department, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand

1. The Greater Christchurch
earthquakes of 2010 and 2011: a
case study in the Communication of
Science for DRR
Vivienne Bryner
Travel & Conference attendance supported by:
NZ Federation of Graduate Women, Otago branch; and
University of Otago Division of Sciences, Geology Dept & Centre for Science Communication

2. NEW ZEALAND SETTING – Earthquake & DRR
• Earthquake drills in schools
• Household insurance levy - national natural disaster fund
• Academic & government funded eq monitoring & research
M 6.8
M 7.9 • Engineering research - materials & construction
Gisborne
Fiordland
Dec 2007 • Building codes
July 2009
• Programme of seismic strengthening of old, ‘earthquake-
prone’ buildings overseen by local authorities
• Ad campaigns -Get Ready Get Thru / Drop Cover & Hold
base figures courtesy of Russ Van Dissen, GNS
Ministry of Civil Defence
& Emergency Management
Promotes approaches that are:
- participatory
- in keeping with HFA
- holistic, eg all hazards, 4Rs
- collaborative/interdisciplinary
- scientifically robust

3. Christchurch, NZ earthquake swarm
• Damaged NZ’s 2nd largest city
land, homes, historic buildings,
CBD, and infrastructure
• 186 deaths
• Cost US$16-20billion - 8% NZ GDP
• Lives on hold - affected most Nzers
• Aftershock sequence that moved
toward city – 58 > M5 to date
• Widespread liquefaction
• Cliff collapse & rockfall
base figure courtesy of Russ Van Dissen, GNS

4. DRR – a wicked problem, solutions to which are informed by science
What is in mass media both
creates and reflects DRR-Science culture
“In an earthquake the ground will not swallow you up.”
Photo: NZPA
Photo: http://myapplenewton.blogspot.com
How mass media communications are framed creates
and anchors expectations & influences actions
Belief in self-efficacy positively influences risk reduction behaviours
Communication needs to be participatory & scientifically robust

5. An Integrative & Holistic Approach to
Analysis of Media Communication of Science for DRR
Goal – best practice DRR communication
empowering citizens with evidence-based information
to support understanding, decision-making & actions
from Smith, 2009
Media Analysis
looking for DRR mentions and empowering solutions

6. 4R focus Readiness Response
Recovery Reduction
Sep 4- Sep 3 Online print media articles (ODT) 95 161
2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/201143 bm_Readiness
14 42 Readiness
5 bm_ReadinessResponse
ReadinessResponse
bm_Response
n=182 n=362 n=4199 Response
bm_ResponseRecovery
ResponseRecovery
Television items (TV1)
4 40 22 bm_Recovery
4 11
4 Recovery
bm_RecoveryReduction
RecoveryReduction
bm_Reduction
n=28 n=73 n=1347 Reduction
ReductionReadiness
• Focus on crisis/Response – consequences, harms and problems bm_other
• Recovery barely mentioned before earthquake swarm (bm = brief mention)
• Rare discussion of Reduction – avoidance & mitigation
• Readiness - survival kits rather than business or EM planning

7. BEFORE the first earthquake on Sep 4 2010
Geoscience - Mentions of
Primary Earthquake Hazard Effects
Liquefaction
4 mentions
Tsunami
(image coutesy of Russ van Dissen, GNS taken by Tonkin & Taylor)
Landslide
Seiche
Rockfall
Shaking
Lateral Spreading n = 856 “earthquake” articles from http://www.stuff.co.nz/
April 04 2009 – Sep 3 2010
(Fairfax media website - articles from Christchurch-based “The Press”)

8. Sciences of DRR
Geoscience focus section brief mention
100%
90%
Multiple (Geosci + other) 80%
70%
60%
Geotech Engineering 50%
40%
30%
20%
n =1347 TV1 items Structural Engineering 10%
0%
Sep 4 2010 – Dec 3 2011
Health Science
Other
No Science
Health detail
Science Topic focus
Geoscience detail
Tectonic processes/seismology
Public health_disease & other Geomorphology and hazard effects
Psychosocial effects
Geosci - aftershock consequence
Emergency medicine
Likelihood/probability incl a/shock
Pathology, cause of death & DVI process
Pseudoscience/prediction

9. Science & Liquefaction, Lateral spreading,
Land damage, Land remediation and Land use
• Told volumes of silt removed
• Info-graphics to explain what was publically unknown phenomenon
• Lateral spreading cracks – not explained as distinct from surface
rupture
(imges courtesy of Russ van Dissen, GNS)
Land
zonation, remediation &
future use
• Primary sources Recovery Minister and the Mayor of Christchurch City
• ‘Science takes time’
• Imply science basis of well-informed decision-making, but never explain science
• No discussion of relative cost of various land remediation or structural engineering
solutions

10. Metanarrative Summary - AFTERSHOCK STORIES
• Most items record occurrence and damage
• Aftershock damage warnings in media briefings
• Classification as separate insurance events
• Expectations and forecasting & pseudoscientific predictions
• Aftershock sequence well recorded and close to major city, not rare
• Psychological effects of aftershock
• Late June 2011 civic insurance lapsed
• Recovery Minister & scientists to Lloyds & reinsurers
• Little transparency in media around effect of aftershock on rebuild decision-making
- time-frames and decisions to abandon areas after multiple liquefaction events
In summary – aftershock warnings and roll of dice chance
given, argument about whether prediction possible but little
about the subjective cost-benefit trade-offs being made on the
basis of GNS Science-derived probabilities. Science focus <5%
items.

11. Summary
• Focus on Geoscience - sense-making of earthquake processes and effects
• Few explanations of cause of disaster, vulnerabilities of built communities
• Focus on probability and consequence rather risk exposure
• Absence of articles explaining hazard and risk assessment processes
• Few lessons learnt articles
• Reference to learning from previous eqs/disasters local or international rare
• Little detail on possibilities in avoidance and mitigation
• Responsibility for reducing exposure to seismic risk – household preparation,
govt & experts make decisions based on science not explained in media
• Rare application of science to DRR solutions

12. A different kind of story
Mara Apse - Port Hills resident – concerned about hillside cracks, spoke
with “scientists scouring the Port Hills and the residents whose fate these
experts would determine” and asked what locals could do to help.
Three experts “advising Civil Defence and EQC on land stability and
remediation issues” - Mark Yetton (consultant geologist), James Molloy
(principal geotechnical engineer GHD) and Dave Bell (University of
Canterbury's Natural Hazards Research Centre) who “believed there was an
immediate temporary solution available for this neighbourhood's hillside
crack: bentonite.”
Other Port Hills residents - concerned about hillside cracks – “prepared to
do what it takes” to stay in the neighbourhood, including barrowing 7
tonnes of bentonite and 23 tonnes of gravel up through 40 properties to fill
cracks.
“Christchurch three months on” – Cate Brett, Stuff (Sunday Star Times), 22/05/2011)
Images courtesy of Russ Van Dissen, GNS

13. “For Mara and her community, the project restored a sense of
purposefulness and some small measure of control, countering the
sometimes overwhelming sense of powerlessness that most have
experienced in the wake of the quake.”
“Christchurch three months on” – Cate Brett, Stuff (Sunday Star Times), 22/05/2011)
Story tells of:
• successful dialogical communication between geoscience
experts and public
• far more than recognition of a problem
• a scientifically robust solution
• scientists working with community to find solutions
• more than household preparedness and survival actions
• an empowered community – involved in disaster risk reduction

14. The Greater Christchurch
earthquakes of 2010 and 2011: a
case study in the Communication of
Science for DRR
Vivienne Bryner
Travel & Conference attendance supported by:
NZ Federation of Graduate Women, Otago branch; and
University of Otago Division of Sciences, Geology Dept & Centre for Science Communication