Earthquake‐strengthening policy for commercial buildings in small‐town New Zealand

Abstract

New Zealand introduced a seismic retrofitting policy in the wake of the catastrophic Canterbury earthquakes of 2010-11. The aim was to enforce seismic strengthening of earthquake-prone commercial buildings throughout the country. This study focuses on regional urban centres and the economic obstacles to strengthening their aging building stock. In investigating one town, Whanganui, we describe conditions, analyse cases, and identify incentives that apply equally to many other towns in New Zealand. We argue that incentives that suit high-growth, highvalue major urban centres are a poor fit for the periphery. Around the world, many places need to upgrade their privately-owned building stock to protect it from disasters, while governments face similar challenges as they struggle to initiate the strengthening of commercial buildings. We analyse the current incentive schemes that aim to support the achievement of policy goals and suggest alternative incentive schemes that can be implemented to improve strengthening outcomes.

Comparing earthquake insurance programmes: how would Japan and California have fared after the 2010–11 earthquakes in New Zealand?

“…36 Except for some instances when it was compelled to assist by the courts (particularly for uninsured red zone properties). See Filippova and Noy (2020). 37 The take-up rate for earthquake insurance in Japan increased by 12 per cent immediately after the Kobe earthquake in 1995.…”

“…Except for some instances when it was compelled to assist by the courts (particularly for uninsured red zone properties). See Filippova and Noy (2020). …”

Review of Seismic Risk Mitigation Policies in Earthquake-Prone Countries: Lessons for Earthquake Resilience in the United States

“…Three risk categories (low, medium, and high) were adopted by the Act to set corresponding deadlines for assessment and seismic upgrade. The Act applied to the whole country, but implementation (e.g., mandatory or voluntary) is determined by local authorities (Filippova and Noy 2020). Table 2 summarizes the evolution of seismic retrofit policy in New Zealand.…”

“…Some local authorities, such as the Cities of Dunedin, Auckland, and Wellington, offer additional incentive funds to non-heritage buildings, but such assistance programs only exist in large cities where building owners are relatively wealthy and able to pay retrofit costs. This leads to a high retrofit rate in cities, but a low rate in small towns as they cannot afford strengthening costs (Filippova and Noy 2020). Thus, national incentives are crucial to enhancing the seismic resilience of small towns.…”

“…Moreover, buildings damaged in previous earthquakes may not be able to sustain additional damage caused by future earthquake events (Georgescu et al 2018). Thus, there is growing appreciation for pre-earthquake risk mitigation to address the existing building stock (Filippova and Noy 2020).…”