How different communities view building importance
Explore how different communities view different buildings; how important they are and how quickly they would ideally like to see them return to functionality after a major earthquake.
Resilient buildings
How important is seismic risk relative to all other aspects of the built environment?
Sesimic resilience is competing against a range of other demands in our built environment. In our recent EQC funded, NZSEE Resilient Buildings Project we explored the importance of seismic resilience relative to other building performance objectives.
What influences individuals’ and communities’ risk tolerance and willingness to reduce risk in the buildings they use and own?
To know how to effectively regulate and incentivise risk reduction, we need to understand what spurs people into action and what stops them.
Do communities have the same risk priorities? What impacts a community’s risk tolerance?
Communities have many competing priorities – of which seismic resilience is just one. Understanding a community’s risk tolerance is helpful when planning and prioritising risk mitigation.
What do New Zealanders want from their buildings?
Is keeping people safe (life safety) the only thing we require of our buildings following a major earthquake? Our current building code focuses on preserving life and making sure critical emergency response facilities are operational. But participants in our study indicated that while life safety remains the most important focus, having a building stock that can enable social and economic recovery is an increasing priority.
Which buildings do we want to be the most ‘life safe’?
Currently in New Zealand we require buildings with post earthquake functions (like hospitals), and large buildings (like stadiums) to be built stronger than others. But is that in line with current societal expectations? We explored this question with participants in our recent EQC funded, NZSEE Resilient Buildings Project.