The Auckland Volcanic Field (AVF) in New Zealand is monitored by a network of five telemetered, verticalcomponent, short-period seismographs. Between 1995 and 2005, 24 earthquakes were located in the Auckland region. Ten of these were located reasonably reliably (position and depth uncertainty 10 km) and all of these were <15 km deep. Only one of these earthquakes occurred within the AVF. Magnitudes ranged from M L 1.6 to 3.3, and five earthquakes of M L 2.4 were felt. There were few reliably located earthquakes because most were not recorded by the whole network owing to their relatively low magnitude and a high level of background noise. The Auckland earthquakes are believed to represent normal background seismicity and are not thought to be eruption precursors. All earthquakes were of high-frequency, tectonic type; no low-frequency, volcanic earthquakes were recorded. Based on seismic precursors to eruptions from historically active volcanic fields, we estimate that precursory earthquakes could occur as little as 2 weeks before an Auckland eruption and they could be as large as M L 4.5-5.5. Based on the depth of the background seismicity in Auckland, and previous estimates of the ascent rate and source depth of AVF magmas, we calculate a precursory period as short as a few days. Our best estimate of the length of preeruption seismicity is therefore a few days to a few weeks. The largest precursory earthquakes could be large enough to be felt by most of the population who live in Auckland City. During a magmatic intrusion, deep long-period earthquakes might occur at c. 30 km as magma ascends into the crust. Earthquakes would probably have to be a lot shallower, perhaps only 5 km, before their epicentres might be useful for estimating the location of any eruption. Geodetic monitoring methods (GPS and InSAR) might perform as well as seismic monitoring for identifying unrest, but they have significant limitations. To better monitor and interpret precursory seismicity from the AVF, an increase in the number of seismographs and an improvement in our understanding of the local crustal structure are needed.

Roberts | Brown | Olsen INTRODUCTIONWhistleblowing is the 'disclosure by organisation members (former or current) of illegal, immoral or illegitimate practices under the control of their employers, to persons or organisations that may be able to effect action ' (Miceli and Near 1984). Roberts | Brown | Olsen WHISTLING WHILE THEY WORK 9 PURPOSE OF THE GUIDEThis guide sets out results from four years of research into how public sector organisations can better fulfil their missions, maintain their integrity and value their employees by adopting a current best-practice approach to the management of whistleblowing.Whistleblowing is the 'disclosure by organisation members (former or current) of illegal, immoral or illegitimate practices under the control of their employers, to persons or organisations that may be able to effect action ' (Miceli and Near 1984). This guide focuses especially on• the processes needed for public employees and employees of public contractors to be able to report concerns about wrongdoing in public agencies and programs• managerial responsibilities for the support, protection and management of those who make disclosures about wrongdoing, as part of an integrated management approach.The guide is designed to assist with the special systems needed for managing 'public interest' whistleblowing-where the suspected or alleged wrongdoing affects more than the personal or private interests of the person making the disclosure. As the guide explains, however, an integrated approach requires having good systems for managing all types of reported wrongdoing-including personal, employment and workplace grievances-not least because these might often be interrelated with 'public interest' matters.There are four reasons why it is important for public sector managers to recognise, and properly manage, the role of whistleblowing in their organisation• it is increasingly accepted that employee reporting is often the most effective and fastest way for senior management of organisations to become aware of problems in their organisation• if organisations do not manage whistleblowing effectively, it is now well known that complaints are more likely to be taken outside the organisation, including into the public domain, leading to greater conflict, embarrassment and cost• organisations that support employees in fulfilling their duty to report concerns are more likely to become known as good workplaces and employers of choice, while organisations who do not are more likely to become liable for failing to provide employees with a safe, healthy and professional working environment• public sector agencies are increasingly subject to specific statutory obligations to manage whistleblowing to a high standard, as part of their jurisdiction's public integrity systems.In Australia, requirements for improved internal disclosure procedures (IDPs), including better provision for employee protection and support, are set out in (Cwlth). Like public sector provisions, these are subject to review and are likely to be upgraded. W...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract