7 Hazard and risk management

7.1 Introduction

The risk management methodology framework presented in section 3.4.1 outlines the stages required for comprehensive hazard and risk management. Preceding sections of this report discuss the prerequisite steps for effective management. These are:

• identification of natural hazards (section 4);
• calculation or estimation of risk (section 5); and
• risk assessment and prioritisation (section 6).

This section discusses approaches (also referred to as treatment options) for hazard and risk management, and is structured according to the "4R's" commonly used in emergency management - Reduction, Readiness, Response and Recovery. 'Reduction' refers to the reduction of risk, and this incorporates various elimination or mitigation measures generally undertaken before a natural hazard event occurs. 'Readiness' is also undertaken before a natural hazard event occurs; 'Response' immediately before, during or directly after the event; and 'Recovery' following an event occurrence.

Note: items in italics throughout the report are those for which further definition and / or information can be found in the glossary section.

7.2 Principles for hazard and risk management

The following key principles apply to hazard and risk management in New Zealand, and help determine acceptable treatment options.

Reduction

Reduction is "identifying and analysing long-term risks to human life and property from natural or non-natural hazards; taking steps to eliminate these risks if practicable, and, if not, reducing the magnitude of their impact and the likelihood of their occurring" (Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, 2005).

Methods of risk reduction include:

• land use planning
• building and safety codes
• national initiatives
• lifeline engineering projects
• insurance incentives
• 'readiness' methods such as public education and forecast / warning systems

Risk reduction methods are based on the principles of acceptance, avoidance, and mitigation. Mitigation encompasses methods of reducing the likelihood of a natural hazard event occurring, or reducing the consequences resulting from such an event.

Acceptance

Generally, management approaches accept some level of risk and do not seek the total elimination or avoidance of adverse effects from natural hazards. Examples of situations where a certain level of risk may be accepted include:

• where benefits can be gained from using hazard-prone land, which are seen to out-weigh the potential risk
• where a hazard cannot be avoided, e.g. where an active fault is discovered after significant development has taken place

Consideration of acceptable levels of risk should take into account the benefits and costs associated with use of the land, and any risk reduction measures. Public input is required to determine the level of acceptable risk. Mitigation measures are then likely to be used to attempt to achieve the acceptable level of risk.

See also section 6: "Risk assessment and prioritisation".

Avoidance

Some risks may be determined to be unacceptable and may also not respond to mitigation measures. These risks are therefore best avoided (or prevented). For example, the risk resulting from tsunami can be avoided by preventing building close to the coast. Similarly, rockfall hazards on a highway might be avoided by using tunnels or by selecting an alternative route.

Mitigation

Where natural hazards cannot be avoided and / or where perception of the potential risks determines that some form of management of the hazard is required, mitigation measures to reduce hazard risk will be considered. Mitigation involves taking steps to reduce the likelihood of a natural hazard occurring or the consequence of its impact.

The aim of reducing the likelihood of a natural hazard occurring is not usually to prevent the hazard or consequences, but to reduce the frequency of occurrence of the hazard. Measures will usually be aimed at modifying the hazard itself and can be structural or non-structural in form. For example, reforestation of a hill slope is a non-structural measure to modify a landslide hazard, while building stopbanks is a structural measure to modify a flood hazard.

Reducing the consequences of a natural hazard event is achieved by lowering vulnerability to natural hazards and / or reducing the number of elements at risk. Measures will usually be aimed at modifying behaviour. For example, vulnerability to flooding can be reduced by requiring raised floor levels in buildings located in a floodplain. Elements at risk of landslide can be reduced by not allowing houses to locate on a landslip-prone slope.

Readiness

Readiness is "developing operational systems and capabilities before a civil defence emergency happens, including self-help and response programmes for the general public, and specific programmes for emergency services, lifeline utilities, and other agencies" (Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, 2005).

In many situations it will not be possible to avoid or mitigate a risk. In these situations the best and most cost-effective approach is to be ready / prepared for the hazards.

These methods can be used to ready and prepare the general public, as well as specifically to ready and prepare emergency services, utilities and other agencies.

Response

Response is "actions taken immediately before, during, or directly after a civil defence emergency to save lives and property, and to help communities recover" (Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, 2005).

Response involves agencies and individuals activating their plans and coordinating their activities in order to manage the impact of the occurrence of a natural hazard on the community.

Objectives of emergency response include:

• preservation of life
• prevention of escalation of the emergency
• maintenance of law and order
• care of sick, injured, and dependent people
• provision of essential services e.g. lifeline utilities, food and shelter
• preservation of governance
• preservation of economic activity

 

Recovery

Recovery is "the co-ordinated efforts and processes used to bring about the immediate, medium-term, and long-term holistic regeneration of a community following a civil defence emergency" (Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management, 2005).

Assistance from central government may be provided when the event is beyond the capability of the region to cope. Foreign aid may be required following an event that has a national impact that is beyond the capability of the nation to cope.

7.3 Treatment options for 'reduction'

This section provides an overview of generic treatment options for risk reduction and highlights, where possible, the situations that they may be most applicable to.

7.3.1 Summary by hazard type

Table 13 gives an overview of the options which may be suitable for some key hazard types. A discussion of each treatment option listed in this table follows in the rest of this section.

Note that section 8 discusses in more detail the planning approaches undertaken in New Zealand by hazard type.

Table 13. Summary of treatment options for risk reduction by hazard type (large table - click to view)

7.3.2 Zoning

For areas that are yet undeveloped, zoning can be used to prohibit, or place conditions on, development in hazard-prone areas. This reduces the consequences of a hazard by reducing elements at risk and vulnerability.

This option would work well for hazards that have specifically defined areas of effects. For example, fault rupture zones, coastal erosion areas, tsunami run-up areas, or lahar flow paths could be zoned to exclude, or place conditions on, development within them.

Placing conditions on development is appropriate for situations where the area affected by a hazard is potentially large and / or the hazard occurs infrequently, and some level of development is considered desirable. For example, within a flood-prone area or a tsunami hazard area, zoning may allow only low-density development.

Similarly, zoning can require that essential facilities and lifelines such as fire stations, power stations, hospitals, and sewage treatment facilities, be located outside of hazard-prone areas. This may be more appropriate in hazard-prone areas that are already developed, or for hazards that would affect a wide area, e.g. flooding or amplified seismic shaking.

7.3.3 Policies

Policy documents (under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) or non-statutory) are used to provide guidance for development in hazard-prone areas, and to set out the methods to be used to mitigate hazards. Such documents may be aimed at reducing the consequences of a hazard by reducing elements at risk and vulnerability, or by modifying the hazard itself. Policy documents can apply to any type of hazard.

Examples include:

• An urban renewal policy that includes upgrade of existing buildings to revised standards as a way of reducing vulnerability to earthquake shaking. This may require regulatory policy through district plans and/or Regional Policy Statements (RPS), and financial and asset management backing through Long Term Council Community Plans (LTCCP's), annual plans, and asset management plans. Note that amendments to the Building Act now require all territorial authorities to prepare an Earthquake Prone Building Policy, which can require the upgrading of buildings at risk of earthquake hazards.
• District plan policies and rules that encourage in-fill development to avoid development spreading to a nearby landside-prone area and therefore reducing elements at risk.
• Policies in regional plans, regional LTCCPs, annual plans and floodplain management plans that set down the basis for a flood protection works programme that includes building stopbanks to reduce the frequency of flooding (hazard modification).
• Policy in RPS or non-statutory documents that sets down the basis for a water augmentation scheme to mitigate drought (hazard modification).

7.3.4 Rules

District and regional plan rules can be used to control various aspects of new development in hazard-prone areas, including design, construction, location, configuration and density. Note that the origin and policy justification for rules may come from the RPS in some circumstances.

Rules generally aim to reduce the number of elements at risk and vulnerability to natural hazards.

Examples include:

• Design and construction: District plan rules requiring minimum floor levels in flood-prone or tsunami-prone areas to reduce vulnerability, or specific wind-resistant design requirements in areas susceptible to cyclones or severe gale force winds.
• Location: Rules in regional coastal plans or district plans (depending on exact location) requiring setbacks, to ensure space is left between buildings and a shoreline to protect property against damage caused by coastal erosion or flooding.
• Configuration: District plan rules for clustering of activities on sites in lowest risk areas to minimise losses, or the use of esplanade strips or esplanade reserves to ensure buildings are located away from stream bank or coastal erosion. Regional plan rules for setbacks may be used as a way of assisting water quality and reducing exposure to erosion risk.
• Density: District plan rules requiring large-lot developments for subdivision to reduce the elements at risk in a hazard-prone area.

Rules can be used to mitigate, to some degree, the effects of most hazards that are predictable and area-specific.

7.3.5 Requiring specific approval to develop

If district and regional plan rules require it, applications must be made for resource consents before development can take place on hazard-prone land. This provides further opportunity for control and allows an assessment of the application against potential adverse effects from natural hazards. If the proposed development is found to insufficiently mitigate effects from natural hazards, and the risk is considered to be unacceptable, resource consent applications can be declined.

Requiring a resource consent application to be submitted for approval also promotes and allows the developer to suggest mitigation measures. For example, a developer wanting to create a new subdivision adjacent to a river where there is a flooding hazard may suggest building a stopbank along the river, creating a recreational area where the land is most prone to flooding, or developing buildings with floor levels above advised flood level.

Council approval is also required under the Building Act for building work on land subject to natural hazards. This process allows the Council to decline an application in certain circumstances, or grant approval subject to conditions that will protect the land. There is less scope under the Building Act for the applicant to suggest protection measures than under the RMA.

If a development is to be approved in a hazard-prone area, conditions can be placed on the development to mitigate the effects of hazards on that development. Rules for controlled activities or restricted discretionary activities would have to specifically state mitigation of natural hazard effects as a matter that councils want to retain control or discretion over. The exception to this is for subdivision consents, where under section 106 of the RMA, conditions can be placed on the consent if the land is likely to be subject to natural hazards. Full discretionary activities allow any matter, including mitigation of natural hazard effects, to be considered.

Example conditions include:

• minimum separation distances between buildings, minimum floor levels, or requirements for relocatable buildings (territorial authority jurisdiction)
• esplanade reserves on subdivisions adjacent to rivers or the coast (territorial authority jurisdiction)
• requirements for the execution of bonds and financial contributions to ensure that hazard mitigation work is undertaken (territorial authority and regional council jurisdiction, subject to this option being included in the relevant district / regional or other plan)
• the use of structural and/or non-structural measures to mitigate erosion of river banks or soil erosion (regional council jurisdiction)
• "no build" areas on a site, or identified specific building platforms

This method may include options to reduce elements at risk and/or vulnerability, or may involve mitigation of the hazard itself. This option would be suitable for hazards that are known in the location of the development and that can be suitably mitigated.

7.3.6 Building standards and controls

Building standards and controls can be used to mitigate hazard risk by ensuring that buildings located in certain hazard areas are built to withstand a certain degree of hazard. This option aims to reduce vulnerability. It is useful for hazards that occur over a wide area, such as ground shaking in an earthquake, or strong winds.

The use of building standards and controls falls primarily under the Building Act 2004 (including the Building Code). Note that the Building Code is currently under review, and it is possible that extra standards may be applied under the new code. Some types of building standards / controls can also be imposed as consent conditions under the RMA.

Examples of building standards / controls:

• specifying building materials
• requiring specific engineering designed foundations
• building standards for resisting earthquake shaking or withstanding wind

As regional and district plan rules do not apply retrospectively, they will only apply to building modifications or new buildings. Building Code and other standards may apply retrospectively in some cases. An example of this is with earthquake-prone buildings where territorial authorities can serve notice for buildings to be upgraded in order to reduce or remove the danger.

7.3.7 Acquiring / purchasing land

New development in hazard-prone areas can be avoided by local or central government acquiring or purchasing hazard-prone areas. This land can then be used for open-space purposes e.g. parks and recreational areas. Similar to zoning, this reduces the consequences of a hazard by reducing elements at risk and vulnerability.

This option would be most suitable for hazards that have specifically defined areas of effects. For example, fault rupture zones, coastal erosion areas, tsunami run-up areas, or lahar flow paths. Local authority acquisition of land is recommended to mitigate tsunami risk by the USA National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program, 2001).

This option could be used in both developed and undeveloped areas, but may be subject to political and financial constraints.

7.3.8 Asset and infrastructure management

Important assets (e.g. public buildings such as hospitals or museums) and important infrastructure (e.g. water mains, arterial roads) should be located away from hazard-prone areas where possible. This option mitigates risk by reducing the elements at risk. It helps to ensure that these important facilities can continue to operate in the event of a natural hazard occurring. This option can be used to mitigate the effects from any hazard that is known to occur in a particular location.

If a hazard is discovered after development of assets or infrastructure has occurred, the option of re-locating can be considered. This option will likely have political and financial constraints.

7.3.9 Non-structural hazard modification

Natural systems can be used to mitigate the adverse effects of natural hazards. These are non-structural options that aim to reduce the frequency of occurrence of a hazard by modifying the hazard itself through the use/enhancement of natural processes. Such measures will be appropriate for known hazards that are capable of modification (not appropriate for hazard types such as seismic or volcanic).

Examples include:

• replacing pasture with forests to reduce run-off to waterways during rain events and decrease the frequency of flooding
• planting trees on a steep slope to increase slope stability and reduce the frequency of landslides
• reinstating dune systems on the coast to provide a buffer to wave action and reduce coastal erosion

7.3.10 Structural hazard modification

Structural hazard control options aim to reduce the frequency of occurrence of a hazard by modifying the hazard itself through structural or built measures. As for non-structural measures, structural measures will be appropriate for known hazards that are capable of modification (not appropriate for hazard types such as seismic).

Examples include:

• building stopbanks to reduce the frequency of flooding of adjacent land
• building sea walls or offshore breakwaters to reduce coastal erosion
• building retaining walls to increase bank stability and reduce the occurrence of landslides

Structural hazard modification can cause adverse environmental effects, and / or shift problems for one area to another. For example, coastal erosion barriers can cause increased erosion further along the coast. There are also potential visual effects of structural works which should be considered.

Structural hazard modification can have financial and political constraints. For the private land owner or developer, undertaking structural works will add to the costs of buying and using a property. Stopbanks, flood gates, seawalls, breakwaters and other large structures also have considerable costs for local authorities which are already under pressure to use funds for other local projects.

7.3.11 Relocate existing developments

Often, development will have already taken place in locations prone to hazards. Development in coastal areas and on floodplains is common. Specific New Zealand examples include Wellington City, which has developed over a fault line, and Auckland City, which has developed over a volcanic field.

Relocation of existing development to non- or less hazard-prone areas is an option for hazard risk mitigation that aims to reduce the elements at risk. It is an option that requires careful consideration and is constrained by political, financial and other factors. For this option to be considered appropriate, either the hazard risk will be perceived to outweigh the cost of relocation, or the adverse effects of current structural hazard control works will be perceived to be greater than the adverse effects of relocation.

Managed retreat is a relocation approach for reducing the effects of coastal hazards. It is a process by which assets and activities are shifted away from the coastal processes threatening them, thereby removing the hazard. Managed retreat can be undertaken as a phased removal (for example as buildings and assets require renewal) or a complete removal at more or less the same time. Internationally, managed retreat is becoming an accepted method of dealing with coastal erosion. However, because of pressure to build houses close to the sea, this approach has not yet been widely accepted or used in New Zealand.

An alternative option is to relocate only essential public facilities, such as fire stations, power stations, hospitals, or sewage treatment facilities. This option may be considered appropriate where the risk is considered acceptable for the general public and facilities, but is not considered acceptable for essential facilities.

7.3.12 Charges / financial contributions

If a developer wishes to develop hazard-prone land, or an individual wishes to live on hazard-prone land, financial charges can encourage the developer or individual to take steps to avoid or mitigate the adverse effects of the natural hazard.

The ability to take financial contributions needs to be set out in the relevant plan (regional, district, other) for the council to be able to impose them. For example, financial contributions can be added as a condition on a resource consent under a district or regional plan. Many councils have moved to requiring development contributions under the LGA.

This option will generally only be useful for site-specific hazards that a developer or individual has the ability to mitigate. For example, an individual section comprising a steep slope that has the potential to slip: the local authority may require a financial charge for building on the land as it is, but not require the charge if appropriate measures are taken to mitigate the hazard.

For example, Porirua City Council has an earthworks contribution policy with the purpose of ensuring (among other matters) land stability to safeguard people, property and the environment. The contribution may be imposed as a condition of a subdivision consent or a land use consent for any development.

7.3.13 Lifelines engineering

Lifelines refer to essential infrastructure that allow society to function i.e. services, utilities and linkages. Lifelines engineering focuses on pre-event planning, with key objectives being to reduce damage following a major disaster, and reduce the time lifeline utilities will take to restore their usual level of service after such an event.

Lifeline engineering projects assess the vulnerability of lifelines (particularly transport, water distribution, wastewater, communication and electrical supply systems) to damage from natural hazards. Studies generally assess the risk, identify cost effective mitigation / remedial works and develop contingency and response plans.

7.3.14 Specific hazard strategies

Strategies can be developed for specific hazards. These can cover a wide range of the mitigation and avoidance measures discussed above. For example, a floodplain management plan for a particular catchment could examine strategies for the implementation of a range of hazard modification measures such as river training and flood protection works, as well as behaviour modification measures such as purchase of properties adjacent to the river for creation of a park.

7.3.15 Integrated hazard strategies

Strategies can also be developed for all the hazards that occur in a particular area/region that also cover a wide range of mitigation and avoidance measures. This is an integrated or 'all hazard' approach. For example, a particular region may be susceptible to coastal hazards, seismic hazards, flooding hazard and meteorological hazards, and it may be considered preferable to develop one overall strategy for risk management of these hazards.

7.4 Treatment options for 'readiness'

Methods for achieving readiness include:

• promoting readiness within local communities through public education
• developing guidelines, procedures and action plans
• interagency planning and liaison arrangements
• professional training and exercises
• hazard monitoring

 

Public education

Public education has been recognised as playing an important role in improving levels of community readiness and encouraging public involvement in reducing the adverse effects of natural hazards.

Public education programmes should develop and improve understanding of:

• extreme natural events that may occur and the potential consequences
• what to do to prepare for such an event
• what to do during an event e.g. how to respond to a warning
• the need to be involved in recovery activities after the event

Education programmes can be run at national, regional or local levels. National level programmes will cover general advice, with regional and local programmes providing more specific education about local hazards and readiness steps.

Readiness planning

Preparing plans to assist with the effective management of a natural hazard event is an essential method for achieving readiness. Such plans are aimed at reducing the consequences of the occurrence of an event by planning for all threats and impacts of the event on the community.

Readiness planning can be undertaken by central, regional or local government, and also by industry groups and individuals. Legislation may guide the type of planning to be undertaken at each level. With many agencies involved, integrated planning that includes liaison and coordination between agencies is essential to ensure effective and efficient planning.

Readiness plans can focus on an individual hazard, or on all the hazards that occur in a particular area/region. This second option is an 'all hazard' approach and allows integration between hazards as well as integration between agencies.

Examples of types of readiness plans and guidelines include:

• Codes of practice or industry guidelines, prepared by industries such as insurance, banking, construction, forestry, farming, mining, to promote measures to avoid or reduce the potential for loss or damage from natural hazards.
• Contingency plans prepared by relevant agencies to ensure that essential services and assets can continue to operate in the event of a natural hazard occurring.
• Civil Defence Emergency Management plans prepared by relevant agencies, which can provide the basis for an integrated and coordinated approach to reduction, readiness, response and recovery. In order to create integration and coordination, such plans will use teamwork, use common terminology and operating structures, and make provision for integrated communication.
• Individual or family plans that outline what will be done during and after the occurrence of a natural hazard event.

Professional training and exercises

Professionals within the civil defence emergency management sector need to be properly trained so that they can perform appropriately together under potentially high levels of stress when an emergency arises. Capability and capacity to respond to emergencies comes from the level of training of the professionals involved.

Undertaking emergency exercise programmes is a core tool for developing readiness. Such exercises help to train staff and also identify areas that require improvement. Plans and procedures can then be updated to improve future response.

Hazard monitoring

Monitoring of potential natural hazards provides a better understanding of, and available information on, hazards. This understanding and information forms the basis for improved readiness, as it can be used to inform appropriate response actions as part of readiness planning. Monitoring information can also assist with deciding appropriate risk reduction methods, and with response and recovery when an event actually occurs.

Hazard monitoring in New Zealand includes the GeoNet project's seismic and volcanic monitoring programmes, and regional councils' monitoring and recording of rainfall and water levels in their regions.

7.5 Treatment options for 'response'

Response involves agencies and individuals activating their plans and coordinating their activities in order to manage the impact of the occurrence of a natural hazard on the community.

Response methods include:

• warnings
• coordination of response
• evacuation
• government and international assistance

Warnings

Warnings alert agencies and communities to potential hazard events, enabling them to take effective steps to prepare for and respond to the event. Warnings should therefore be advised as quickly as possible to allow for the maximum amount of time for preparing and responding.

There will likely be various agencies at various levels responsible for monitoring and assessing hazards and receiving hazard warnings from outside sources. Documentation that defines an agency's responsibility for participating in the dissemination of, and response to, warnings is essential.

Communities need to be aware of warnings and how to respond to them, therefore public education campaigns are essential (refer to 'Public education' under section 7.5.2).

Coordination of response

Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Groups (composed of local authorities, emergency services, lifeline utilities, and others) integrate and co-ordinate civil defence emergency management planning and activity, and respond to and manage the adverse effects of emergencies in their areas.

Emergency Operations Centres (EOCs) provide the means for centralised emergency management during an emergency or incident. Local EOC operate at the district level, and Group EOC operate at the regional level. Their primary role involves the collection, analysis and dissemination of information, and the coordination of resources to support incidents.

If an emergency is considered to be beyond the resources of the CDEM Group(s) affected, the Minister can declare a state of national emergency. The Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) is the agency in central government that co-ordinates the civil defence emergency management necessary during states of national emergency or civil defence emergencies of national significance.

The National Crisis Management Centre (NCMC) facilitates central government crisis management arrangements. The NCMC is managed and maintained in a continued state of readiness by the Readiness Unit of MCDEM. The NCMC provides a secure, centralised facility for information gathering and management, strategic level decision making and oversight, and overall coordination.

Evacuation

Generally, the preference will be to support people in their normal place of residence. However, there will be situations when this is not possible and evacuation is necessary. Evacuation procedures need to be well planned to minimise the impact on people and to ensure people are kept informed and supported during the process.

Government and international assistance

If response to an emergency requires more resources than are available to a region, central government will be required to provide support and coordination. This will usually involve providing assistance with rescue operations, and coordinating with other central government agencies to supply resources, medical care, emergency food, housing and transport.

International assistance may be requested if response requirements are beyond the capability of central government.

7.6 Treatment options for 'recovery'

Recovery methods have a more long-term focus. They are aimed at relieving the burden of loss for individuals and the community and recovering the quality of life of the community. This is achieved through such means as recovery assistance, task groups, recovery action plans, exit strategies, relief funds, and insurance.

Recovery assistance

Central government will often be required to provide financial support throughout the recovery stage. The aim of this support will generally be to provide the minimum level of support required to restore community capacity for self help. Likewise, international aid may be required for emergencies that are beyond the capabilities of central government.

Task groups

Task groups are set up to coordinate recovery tasks, and cover the four elements of a generic recovery structure - social, economic, natural and built environments. The four task groups address all the elements of recovery. Separate subtask groups may also be set up depending on the scale of the emergency. Tasks are undertaken in parallel at local, CDEM Group and national level.

Recovery action plans

A key component of the transition from response to recovery is a Recovery Action Plan. These are developed following an emergency, and document the actions to be taken to facilitate recovery. The Plans are prepared in consultation with members of the recovery task groups. Recovery Action Plans will vary according to the type of emergency, its scope, and the ability of local authorities and CDEM Groups to manage events in their area.

Exit strategies

Following any disaster, it is important to establish an exit strategy (from recovery processes and actions) which should include information on:

• assistance required in the long term
• a transition to business as usual so as to manage long-term recovery
• planning and reporting in the long term
• management of public information and communications
• opportunities for communities to discuss unresolved issues and to continue to participate in their recovery
• changes to organisational arrangements including the need for task groups
• debriefing and reviewing

 

Relief funds

Contingency funds can assist in emergency relief and recovery efforts. Such funds can be set up by central, regional or local government, or could be established by private sector groups.

Insurance

Insurance also assists in emergency relief and recovery. It provides direct financial assistance to individuals or groups to assist with recovery after an emergency. Often, regional and local government will have essential assets covered by insurance to ensure that they can continue to operate, or be repaired as soon as possible after an emergency.

7.7 Deciding which treatment option(s) to use

Decisions on which natural hazard treatment option(s) to use in specific circumstances will depend upon a range of behavioural, technical, political, economic, social and institutional factors.

Section 6.4 of this report outlines consideration of risk as a basis for deciding appropriate management approaches and treatment options, largely based on assessment of the risk / benefit ratio.

There are advantages and disadvantages in using different methods. For example, regulatory methods use rules in regional and district plans to require the modification of human use and behaviour within hazard prone areas, and help to provide for certainty and consistency of decision-making. Non-regulatory methods (e.g. education, campaigns) provide a useful and flexible additional means of formalising actions to reduce susceptibility to natural hazards.

There are also other factors involved in deciding on which treatment option to use. The type of hazard will influence what methods are most appropriate (refer to section 7.3.1 for a guide of treatment options by hazard type). Also, it should be considered that management approaches aimed at mitigating one type of hazard may be counter to those for other hazards - for example, buildings designed to limit potential damage from tsunami inundation by providing open free space on ground floors, may be less resistant to earthquake shaking (Tonkin & Taylor Ltd, 2002a).

7.8 Sources of information

The sources of information listed below have been used in the preparation of this section. Please refer to the 'References and bibliography' section of the report for full references.

www.building.govt.nz - Department of Building and Housing (Building Act 2004) website

www.civildefence.govt.nz - Ministry for Civil Defence and Emergency Management website

www.dbh.govt.nz - Department of Building and Housing website

www.legislation.co.nz - Public Access to Legislation Project website

www.mfe.govt.nz - Ministry for the Environment website

Andrew Stewart Limited (2006)

Ministry for the Environment, Climate Change Guidance Note

Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (2004a)

Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (2006)

New Zealand Climate Change Office (2004a)

Taranaki Regional Council (1992b)

Taranaki Regional Council (1994)

Taranaki Regional Council (2004a)

Tonkin & Taylor Ltd (2002a)

Wellington Regional Council (1995)