QuakeCoRE...earthquake- resilient New Zealand. Our Outcomes Our Vision Our activities contribute to six outcomes as part of our funding agreement with TEC: QuakeCoRE has a vision to

QuakeCoRENZ Centre for Earthquake Resilience

Annual Meeting4-6 September 2017

Find sign-up information and previous issues on our website: www.quakecore.nz/publications/

www.facebook.com/quakecore.nz/

www.quakecore.nz/

Join the conversation by going to Slido.com and using #QUAKECORE

5:00pm

8:30am9:30

1:30

6:00

11:00

11:30

3:00

7:30

8:30

12:30pm

Welcome Reception

Welcome Session: State of QuakeCoRE

Morning Tea

Poster Session

Plenary Session 2: Earthquake Risk Mitigation vs Transfer

Welcome and Distinguished Lecture

Plenary Session 1: Hazard-to-Impact Scenarios for Preparedness Planning and Post-Event Decision Making

Afternoon Tea

Dinner

Poster Session

Lunch

Monday, 4 September

Tuesday, 5 September

8:30am

10:00

2:00

2:30

10:30

11:30

12:30pm

Keynote Presentation

Morning Tea

Close

Lunch

Plenary Session 4: What Does the Kaikoura Earthquake Mean for Future Policy and Practice in New Zealand and the Role of Research?

Plenary Session 5: Assessing Interdependencies and Tipping Points

Looking Forward and Concluding Remarks

3:30 Lightning Talks

6:00

7:00

8:30

Pre-Dinner Reception

QuakeCoRE Dinner

Poster Session

Wednesday, 6 September

Agenda

Slido

Website

Facebook

Newsletter

QuakeCoRE 2017 Annual Meeting / 1

Ken Elwood Director

Brendon BradleyDeputy Director

Welcome to the 2017 QuakeCoRE Annual Meeting!

Our Annual Meeting provides a unique opportunity for the QuakeCoRE community to come together to share ideas and experiences; an important step toward our collective vision of an earthquake-resilient New Zealand, realised through innovative world-class research, human capability development, and deep national and international collaborations. With all of the interest in QuakeCoRE activities this year, we hit our limit of 200 registrants more than two months before the Annual Meeting. We thank you for your enthusiasm and are confident you will be engaged and inspired by this year’s programme. Monday’s workshops will explore cross-cutting themes of financial tools and simulation for earthquake resilience. Monday evening, Professor Masayoshi Nakashima of Kyoto University will kick off the Annual Meeting as our Distinguished Lecturer.

The agenda features plenary speakers on thought-provoking subjects that feed into discussions of future research directions for QuakeCoRE and the New Zealand earthquake resilience community, and poster sessions on ongoing research. On Wednesday morning we are honoured to be joined by Tā Mark Solomon who will be giving our Keynote Presentation. The overall goal of the Annual Meeting is to share recent research accomplishments, enhance our national and international collaborations, and discuss plans for the year ahead. With the success of last year’s meeting, we have largely kept the same format. The action is still centered around the poster sessions; with posters staying up for the entire meeting to allow more face-to-face interactions on the important nuances of on-going QuakeCoRE research. As always, we will be looking for ways to improve the meeting, so give us your feedback on any and all aspects of the meeting. We hope you are inspired by the research, social interactions and connections you make, and that you take a moment to contemplate the beautiful landscape of Wairakei.Thank you for your collaboration!

2 / QuakeCoRE 2017 Annual Meeting

About Us

Improved Earthquake Resilience We are contributing to a step-change improvement in the earthquake resilience of the nation’s infrastructure from research-informed national and local policies, implementation standards and disaster planning.

International Recognition We are a focal point for international earthquake resilience, attracting the best talent and business alongside national and international research collaborations.

Improved Economic and Commercial OutcomesWe are supporting New Zealand’s long-term economic benefit through significantly improved seismic performance of New Zealand infrastructure, rapid business recovery after future earthquakes and the growth of engineering resilience innovation and business in the New Zealand construction sector driving international competitiveness.

Improved Societal Outcomes We are enabling communities to recover rapidly after major earthquakes through mitigation and pre-disaster preparation, informed by research and public outreach.

Highly Skilled and Diverse WorkforceOur graduates are sought after for their knowledge of earthquake resilience and work-ready professional skills.

Growing Mātauranga Māori We are growing Mātauranga Māori by building engagement with Māori and seeking opportunities for Māori capacity building. We are recognising the distinctive contribution that Māori indigenous knowledge of earthquake resilience can make to enhance social, economic and environmental outcomes for New Zealand.

QuakeCoRE is transforming the earthquake resilience of communities and societies, through innovative world-class research, human capability development and deep national and international collaborations. As a Centre of Research Excellence funded by the New Zealand Tertiary Education Commission (TEC), QuakeCoRE is a national network of leading New Zealand earthquake resilience researchers. QuakeCoRE is hosted by the University of Canterbury and has seven formal partners.

We enhance earthquake resilience across the country and internationally, by working collaboratively on integrated, multi-disciplinary programmes of world-leading research. Our research supports the development of an earthquake- resilient New Zealand.

Our Outcomes

Our Vision

Our activities contribute to six outcomes as part of our funding agreement with TEC:

QuakeCoRE has a vision to create an earthquake-resilient New Zealand where thriving communities have the capacity to recover rapidly after major earthquakes through mitigation and pre-disaster preparation informed by research excellence.

1

2

3

4

5

6


Contents

4

6

7

8

16

22

Programme

Distinguished Lecture


Plenary Sessions

Posters

Meeting Participants

Proud to support the QuakeCoRE 2017 Annual Meeting


Programme

5:00pm

8:30am

9:30am

1:30pm

6:00pm

11:00am

11:30am

3:00pm

7:30pm

8:30pm

12:30pm

Welcome Reception

Welcome Session: State of QuakeCoREKen Elwood (University of Auckland), Brendon Bradley (University of Canterbury)

Morning Tea

Poster Session

Plenary Session 2: Earthquake Risk Mitigation vs Transfer Chair: Mary Comerio (University of California, Berkeley), Jason Ingham (University of Auckland)

Henry Burton (University of California, Los Angeles), A Multi-Scale Process-Based Model for Simulating Post-Earthquake Housing Recovery

Ilan Noy (Victoria University of Wellington), A Sceptical Economist’s View of Earthquake Risk Mitigation Policy Decisions

Welcome and Distinguished Lecture Chair: Ken Elwood (University of Auckland)

Professor Masayoshi Nakashima (Kyoto University), Twenty Two Years after Kobe and Six Years after Tohoku – A Japanese Way toward Establishment of Resilient Cities

Plenary Session 1: Hazard-to-Impact Scenarios for Preparedness Planning and Post-Event Decision MakingChair: Brendon Bradley (University of Canterbury), Caroline Orchiston (University of Otago)

Dave Wald (USGS, Colorado), Near-real-time and Scenario Loss Estimates: Science and Applications

Nick Horspool (GNS Science), How Earthquake Scenario Impact Models can Inform Pre- and Post-Event Decision Making

Afternoon Tea

Dinner

Poster Session

Lunch

Monday, 4 September

Tuesday, 5 September


8:30am

10:00am

2:00pm

2:30pm

10:30am

11:30am

12:30pm

Keynote Presentation: Tā Mark Solomon, Tangata Whenua and Earthquake Resilience

Morning Tea

Close

Lunch

Plenary Session 4: What Does the Kaikoura Earthquake Mean for Future Policy and Practice in New Zealand and the Role of Research?Chair: Ken Elwood (University of Auckland), Dave Brunsdon (Kestrel Group)

Mike Mendonça (Wellington City Council), As Wellington Changes, Everyone Here Will Survive and Thrive

Misko Cubrinovski (University of Canterbury), Earthquake Impacts on Critical Infrastructure: The Wellington Port Case Study

Plenary Session 5: Assessing Interdependencies and Tipping PointsChair: David Johnston (GNS Science/Massey University), Roger Fairclough (New Zealand Lifelines Council)

Rachel Davidson (University of Delaware), Tipping Points and Nonlinearities in Earthquake Disasters: Challenges and Implications for Modelling

Erica Seville (Resilient Organisations), A Seismic Odyssey– Challenges for Modelling Potential Outcomes and Futures We Can Only Imagine

Looking Forward and Concluding RemarksKen Elwood (University of Auckland), Brendon Bradley (University of Canterbury)

3:30pm Lightning Talks

Shannon Abeling: Benchmarking the Resilience of Earthquake-prone URM Buildings

Mujaddad Afzal: Assessing the Resilience of the Auckland Transportation Network

Alistair Davies: Increasing Resilience for Potentially Isolated Communities Through Distributed Infrastructure

Kevin Foster: A Vs30 Map for New Zealand

Royce Liu: Improving the Seismic Structural Redundancy of Low Damage Reinforced Concrete Bridge Piers

Lisa McLaren: The Science Behind Extreme Citizen Science

Rebecca McMahon: Nelson-Tasman Site Characterisation Study

Andrew Sherson: The Impact of Local and Contextual Influences on Waterpipe Repair Times in Wellington

Marion Tan: Usability of Disaster Apps

6:00pm

7:00pm

8:30pm

Pre-Dinner Reception

QuakeCoRE Dinner

Poster Session

Wednesday, 6 September


Masayoshi Nakashima is Professor Emeritus at Kyoto University, Japan. His fields of research include seismic analysis and design of steel building structures, and large-scale experimental techniques for the simulation of earthquake responses. Nakashima gained his masters degree from Kyoto University, his Ph.D. from Lehigh University (US), then started working for the Building Research Institute of Japan and Kobe University before joining the Disaster Prevention Research Institute, Kyoto University. Nakashima and his students have published about four hundred technical papers, nearly two hundred of them appearing in archived journals. He has earned various national and international awards, including; Best Paper Prize from the Architectural Institute of Japan, Best Paper Prize from the Japanese Society for Steel Construction, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Moisseiff Award, Special Achievement Award of the American Institute for Steel Construction, ASCE Ernest E. Howard Award, and the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute George W. Housner Medal, among others. He is Member of the Engineering Academy of Japan and was inducted in 2015 as a Foreign Member of the National Academy of Engineering of the United States. Nakashima serves as President of the Architectural Institute of Japan and President-Elect of International Association for Earthquake Engineering, as well as Editor of the International Journal of Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. In April 2017 he joined Kajima Corporation and its affiliated research institution, Kobori Research Complex, as a special counselor.

DISTINGUISHED LECTURE:

Twenty Two Years after Kobe and Six Years after Tohoku –A Japanese Way toward Establishment of Resilient Cities

It was 1995 when Japan was hit by the devastating ‘Kobe earthquake’. A scenery of collapses after collapses revealed that Japan’s cities were vulnerable with much existing building stock not constructed with the most recent design and construction. Various efforts in both the public and private sectors were implemented after the earthquake to upgrade old infrastructures and buildings, as well as to advance construction technologies for the creation of stronger and more durable societies. A notable effort along this line was the construction and operation of a very large shaking table nicknamed E-Defense. Nakashima served as the inaugurating director of E-Defense and supervised over forty full-scale and large-scale tests. A few representative tests will be introducedin this distinguished lecture, with context and difficultiesassociated with large-scale testing.

Sixteen years had passed since 1995 Kobe, then Japan was severely hit again in 2011 by a huge tsunami and earthquake named ‘Tohoku Earthquake’. Thanks to the advancement of seismic design and construction, performance of buildings and infrastructural systems was generally satisfactory, but a huge rupture of faults generated an unprecedented tsunami disaster. The damage which extended into a huge region also caused a new problem regarding overall recovery of society.

The word, resilience, has become a norm to overcome the Tohoku damage to prepare for the future. Among various efforts to this end, a national project that deals with quantification of “collapse margin” was conducted, in which Nakashima served as the principal investigator. The project included collapse tests of a steel high-rise office building and a RC mid-rise apartment building. The tests also looked into the effectiveness of structural health monitoring, in terms of the identification of damage location and severity. The outline and major results of the tests are summarised, and major findings are presented particularly in light of the importance of quantification of collapse margin before the earthquake and prompt assessment of damage immediately after the earthquake.

Professor Masayoshi Nakashima


Tā Mark Solomon is committed to the betterment of his iwi, kotahitanga for Māori and the wider well-being of people and the environment. He is a strong advocate for the Māori economy and was instrumental in setting up the Iwi Chairs Forum (2005). He was the elected Kaiwhakahaere (Chair) of Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu from 1998 to December 2016 and represented his local Papatipu Rūnanga, Te Rūnanga o Kaikōura from 1995 to December 2016. Of Ngāi Tahu and Ngāti Kurī descent, Tā Mark’s contribution to his community has been diverse and significant, ranging from roles as a school board trustee, to a past board member of the Museum of New Zealand (Te Papa Tongarewa). Tā Mark attributes his wider whānau (family) for early guidance and it is this experience that has driven his passion for encouraging educational opportunities for young Māori. He is a patron of He Toki Ki Te Rika, a Christchurch-based Māori pre-trade training programme, and the related He Toki Ki Te Mahi, an apprenticeship initiative both born from the Christchurch earthquake rebuild. He believes young Māori should strive for formal training to maximize their talents and to be the best they can be. In 2013 he was awarded Knight Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit for services to Māori and Business. In April 2015 he received an Honorary Doctorate from Lincoln University as Doctor of Natural Resources, recognising his enduring interest and concern for our natural environment. Tā Mark was recently appointed to the National Science Challenge Governance Boards for Sustainable Seas and Deep South which relate to both ensuring our marine environment is understood and cared for and understanding the role of the Antarctic in determining our climate and future environment. Tā Mark’s current directorships include Te Ohu Kaimoana, National Science Challenge Governance Boards for the Deep South and Sustainable Seas, Te Tapuae o Rehua and a trustee of Pure Advantage. He was an originalmember of the Minister for Māori Affairs Māori EconomicTaskforce, established in 2009. Tā Mark believes a truerangatira is a servant of the people, a fact underpinned byhis core philosophy of ‘strength with humility’. Whilst thecommercial success of Ngāi Tahu is acknowledged, Tā Markis especially proud of the tribe’s achievements in educationand the development of the Iwi’s savings scheme Whai Rawa.Tā Mark is a committed advocate for the sanctity of whānauand takes a strong stance against whānau violence. He ispassionate about his people and is determined to facilitateboth iwi and wider Māori success by unlocking the potentialof the Māori economy for the good of all.

KEYNOTE PRESENTATION:

Tangata Whenua and Earthquake Resilience

The Māori Earthquake Recovery Network’s actions during the Christchurch earthquakes as well as Takahanga marae’s response to the 2016 Kaikoura earthquake, have demonstrated the willingness of tangata whenua to draw on cultural assets and mobilise resources in order to secure community well-being in disaster contexts. However, key resources such as marae, lands and economic assets are risk sensitive in the context of increased seismic activity. This keynote touches upon Māori environmental, economic and social concerns pertaining to earthquake resilience and potential research interests. Māori aspirations in regards to engagement in tertiary education and workforce development to ensure thriving and sustainable communities are also highlighted, and suggestions for enhancing QuakeCoRE engagement with the broader Māori community in Aotearoa, proposed.

Tā Mark Solomon


Dr Wald is a Seismologist with the USGS in Golden, Colorado, and is on the Geophysics Faculty at the School of Mines (CSM). Wald is involved in research, development and operations of real-time information systems at the USGS National Earthquake Information Center. He developed and manages “ShakeMap”, “Did You Feel it?”, and is responsible for developing other systems for post-earthquake response and pre-earthquake mitigation, including ShakeCast and PAGER. Wald earned his B.S. in Physics and Geology at St. Lawrence University, an M.S. in Geophysics at the University of Arizona, and his Ph.D. in Geophysics at Caltech. Previously at Caltech, and now at the CSM, Wald has advised dozens of post-doctoral, graduate, and undergraduate students’ research projects. His own scientific interests include the characterization of rupture processes from complex earthquakes; analysis of ground motions and site effects; and modeling earthquake-induced landslides, liquefaction, and shaking-based losses. Wald has been the Seismological Society of America (SSA) Distinguished Lecturer a BSSA’s Associate Editor, and served on the Society’s Board of Directors. He served on the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute’s (EERI) Board of Directors, as Associate Editor for Earthquake Spectra, and was EERI’s 2014 Distinguished Lecturer. He was awarded SSA’s 2009 Frank Press Public Service Award, the Department of the Interior Superior Service Award in 2010, and their Meritorious Service Award in 2016.

Dave Wald

PLENARY SESSION 1:

Near-real-time and Scenario Loss Estimates: Science andApplications

Earthquake scenarios can be used for a multitude of mitigation and planning purposes. The utility of scenarios depend, in part, on the extent to which the scenario hazard and impact science is state-of-the-art, and to the degree that the format and manner in which they are presented matches the intended audience. We review some of the successful scenario efforts to date, and present ongoing efforts aimed at improving scenario product generation, delivery, and communication.

A challenge in communicating scenario hazard and loss-model results is managing the expectations of the end-users and clearly expressing the limitations of the estimates, since both depend heavily on the resolution of the underlying datasets. For scenarios, source parameters and shaking are assumed to be known, while in the post-event timeframe, further uncertainty associated with the hazard must be quantified; in both cases, loss estimates must be delivered in a statistical fashion, corresponding with the modeling uncertainties. Likewise, both real-time and scenario-based hazard and loss projections produced by Global ShakeMap and PAGER have uncertainties commensurate with the empirical model assumptions and country-scale inventories and vulnerability functions.

Recently, we generated a suite of a dozen M8+ scenario ShakeMaps for the entire Himalayan Arc and estimated extraordinary losses therein. Though approximate, the astonishing losses make the purpose of the scenarios clear. Alternatively, city or regional-scale scenarios can be expected to employ more detailed inventories, 3D ground motion estimates, and mechanistic building fragility models. Domestically in the US, excellent advances include multiple, 3D simulations for the M9 Cascadia subduction earthquake, and a collection of over 900 scenario earthquakes for the all of the Building Seismic Safety Commission (BSSC) deterministic events that comprise the US National Seismic Hazard Map (NSHM) deterministic fault sources. These off-the-shelf scenario collections can be readily used for most planning exercises and other uses without additional effort on the part of the ShakeMap team. In this presentation, example users and uses among the critical sectors employing scenario and real-time hazard and loss estimates are exemplified for financial decision-making (cat bonds and contingency loans), critical facility and utilities evaluations, and aid and response organizations.


Nick Horspool is a member of the QuakeCoRE Leadership Team. He is a Natural Hazard Risk Scientist with GNS Science and is leader of the RiskScape programme which is a joint project with NIWA to develop a multi-hazard risk tool for New Zealand. His works focuses on developing and applying natural hazard risk models for a range of applications from emergency management planning to the insurance industry, with a particular focus on earthquake and tsunami hazards. Prior to joining GNS Science in 2014, Nick worked for Geoscience Australia, an Australian Government research agency. The majority of his work was through the Australia-Indonesia Facility for Disaster Reduction, a joint Government of Australia and Government of Indonesia collaboration aimed at reducing the impact of natural disasters in Indonesia through development of hazard and risk models for risk reduction decision making.

Nick Hoorspool

PLENARY SESSION 1:

How Earthquake Scenario Impact Models can Inform Pre- and Post-Event Decision Making

Earthquake scenarios that quantify the hazard and impact of specific earthquake events are useful tools that can underpin a wide range of pre- and post-event decision making. Scenarios are favoured amongst many end-users as they allow a narrative to be developed around the earthquake scenario and align with many existing organisational planning frameworks. Pre-event earthquake impact scenarios can be used for civil defence and emergency management contingency planning, informing land-use planning, insurance decision making, and underpinning resilience investment options. Immediately after an event, rapid estimates of an event's impact can be used to prioritise response resources and understand scale of the event.

The development of earthquake impact scenarios is a truly multi-disciplinary endeavor and requires input from earthquake scientists, seismologists, engineers, and socio-economic researchers. Critical to the development of earthquake scenarios is the translation of scientific research into quantitative models, the development of a flexible scenario modelling frameworks and the translation of model outputs into a form suitable to inform end-users decision making.

This presentation will provide insight on how earthquake scenarios are developed and used within the New Zealand context to inform decision making by a range of stakeholders. This will be via a selection of exemplar scenario case studies, including the Wellington Lifeline Regional Resilience Business Case, urban growth planning in Hutt City, and the Smart Seismic Cities project in Wellington CBD.


Dr Henry Burton is an Assistant Professor and the Englekirk Presidential Chair in Structural Engineering in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of California, Los Angeles. His research is directed towards understanding and modeling the relationship between the performance of infrastructure systems within the built environment, and the ability of communities to minimize the extent of socioeconomic disruption following extreme events such as major earthquakes. Dr Burton is a registered structural engineer in the State of California. Prior to obtaining his PhD in Civil and Environmental Engineering at Stanford University, he spent six years in practice at Degenkolb Engineers, where he worked on numerous large scale projects involving design of new buildings and seismic evaluation and retrofit of existing buildings. Current projects include (1) utilizing remote sensing to assess the implication of tall building performance on the resilience of urban centers, (2) stochastic characterization of building aftershock collapse risk and (3) developing design and assessment methods for resilient and sustainable buildings. Henry is a recipient of the National Science Foundation Next Generation of Disaster Researchers Fellowship (2014) and the National Science Foundation CAREER Award (2016).

Henry Burton

PLENARY SESSION 2:

A Multi-Scale Process-Based Model for Simulating Post-Earthquake Housing Recovery

The housing sector is a primary driver of the economic and social development of a nation and makes up most of the building stock in any community. The efficacy of various types of intervention measures (e.g. increasing structural robustness of building stock, facilitating post-earthquake reconstruction) aimed at enhancing the seismic resilience of residential communities can be evaluated ahead of time by using simulation models to quantify their benefits and tradeoffs. Towards this end, this presentation will describe a methodology for modeling post-earthquake recovery of residential communities. The “rupture-to-recovery” modeling framework starts with a characterization of the spatial distribution of ground shaking for a given seismic event, followed by probabilistic assessment of building-level damage, which is described using limit states that inform post-earthquake functionality, inhabitability and repairability. These recovery-based limit states serve as the primary attribute in two alternative types of utility-based models, which are used to account for the effect of household decision-making on the progression of housing recovery over time. Stochastic simulation models are used to probabilistically quantify building-level recovery trajectories and discrete event simulation is used to represent the effect of building states, lifeline damage and restoration, available resources and the decisions and actions of households and other social actors on jurisdictional-scale recovery.

A validation study will be presented, whereby building damage, permitting and repair data from the 2014 South Napa Earthquake are used to evaluate the ability of the proposed model to capture the recovery trajectory of the impacted building inventory. The model is also used to quantitatively evaluate the effect of the recently enacted Los Angeles Soft-Story Retrofit Ordinance on the seismic resilience of the city’s residential communities.


Ilan is a Professor of Economics at Victoria University and the Chair in the Economics of Disasters, a position supported by the New Zealand Earthquake Commission and the Ministry of Primary Industries. His research and teaching focuses on the economic aspects of natural hazards and disasters, and other related topics in environmental and development economics. He is also the founding Editor-in-Chief of 'Economics of Disasters and Climate Change', a journal published by SpringerNature. He previously worked at the University of Hawaii, and consulted for the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, UNISDR, the International Monetary Fund, ASEAN, the Japanese Government, and the Chilean Central Bank.

Ilan Noy

PLENARY SESSION 2:

A Sceptical Economist’s Viewof Earthquake Risk Mitigation Policy Decisions

The theory of the second-best posits that sometimes the ideal solution to a problem is infeasible. If there are two obstacles to reaching the ideal solution, fixing only one of them may make things worse. More specifically, it implies that prescriptions based on imperfect models are fundamentally wrong. If modelling earthquake recovery perfectly is impossible, what are the alternatives? A second-best approach places constraints on what is advisable, but does not take on the third-best conservative view that “if there is not enough known to determine what to do, nothing should be done.” This lecture aims to explore these second-best possibilities, by focussing on the specifics of earthquake insurance and other financial risk transfer instruments.


Misko Cubrinovski is a Professor of Geotechnical and Earthquake Engineering at the University of Canterbury. He holds a BSc degree in Civil Engineering, an MSc degree in Earthquake Engineering, and received his Ph.D. (Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering) from the University of Tokyo in 1993. His career involves over 30 years of work in academia and the profession including seven years in Macedonia, 15 years in Japan, and twelve years in New Zealand. Misko joined the University of Canterbury in 2005. His research interests and expertise are in geotechnical earthquake engineering and in particular problems associated with liquefaction, seismic response of earth structures and soil-structure interaction. Misko has authored or co-authored over 350 publications, and has worked as a geotechnical specialist and advisor on over 40 significant engineering projects. In recognition of his scholarly work and research he has received prestigious fellowships and awards including the Norman Medal (2016, ASCE), 2014 Outstanding Paper Award (EERI), 2014 Outstanding Paper Award (JPCF, ASCE), Ivan Skinner Award (2007, NZSEE-EQC), NZGS Geomechanics Award (2008), Director’s Award of the Technology Division, Taisei Corporation, Japan (1997), and best paper awards at national and international conferences. He is a Faculty Member of the ROSE School, IUSS, Pavia, Italy, and Fellow of the University of Tokyo, Japan. Misko is on the Leadership Team of QuakeCoRE, and leads its flagship research programme on Liquefaction Impacts on Infrastructure.

Misko Cubrinovski

PLENARY SESSION 4:

Earthquake Impacts on Critical Infrastructure: The WellingtonPort Case Study

While earthquakes generally manifest many common features in physical processes and impacts on communities, each of the past strong earthquakes has been remembered by specific impacts that were the most profound and difficult to deal with. In this context, the goal of achieving an earthquake resilient society calls for a clear understanding, assessment and mitigation of likely critical impacts that earthquakes can produce for a given city, region or a country. The 2016 Kaikoura Earthquake, for example, was characterized by surface fault ruptures and landslides affecting townships, rural areas and horizontal infrastructure over the large source zone in the South Island of New Zealand, and also by substantial impacts in Wellington where damage to multistory CBD buildings and liquefaction-induced damage to the Wellington port were the most prominent. In this talk, the Wellington port is used as a case study to illustrate some important considerations in the assessment of critical impacts and infrastructure.


Mike is Wellington’s Chief Resilience Officer based at Wellington City Council. This is an appointment funded by the Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities initiative, which looks to build city resilience to the shocks and stresses of the 21st Century. Mike is a graduate of Canterbury and Massey Universities. He has variously worked for Deloitte, Local Government, Central Government and the NZ Army. In his spare time Mike can be found fishing with his wife Stacey off Wellington’s west coast, or following the exploits of his two teenage sons.

Mike Mendonça

PLENARY SESSION 4:

As Wellington Changes, Everyone Here Will Survive and Thrive

Wellington’s resilience challenges originate from three big systems on the move. Our society is transforming, the earth is moving and the sea is rising. This presentation will focus on what the Kaikoura Earthquake has meant for the policy and practice of resilience in Wellington. It will look beyond the life safety aspects and into the social and economic consequences if the robustness and integration of knowledge planning and governance aren’t improved. Mike will also offer some views on future research needs from a city perspective.


Rachel Davidson is a Professor in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, a core faculty member in the Disaster Research Center, and Associate Dean for Diversity for the College of Engineering at the University of Delaware. She is a Past-President and Fellow of the Society for Risk Analysis, and past-Chair of the Executive Committee of the ASCE Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering (TCLEE). Davidson conducts research on natural disaster risk modeling and civil infrastructure systems. Her work involves developing new engineering models to better characterize the impact of future natural disasters, and use that understanding to support decisions to help reduce future losses. It focuses particularly on lifelines (e.g., electric power, water supply) and risk from a regional perspective; on earthquakes and hurricanes. She was a Visiting Professor and Erskine Fellow at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand for the 2013-14 academic year.

Rachel Davidson

PLENARY SESSION 5:

Tipping Points and Nonlinearities in Earthquake Disasters: Challenges andImplications for Modelling

The goal of earthquake risk analysis is not to predict exactly what will happen in the event of an earthquake but rather to describe the uncertainties involved and support decision-making given those uncertainties. But what if we cannot even adequately characterize the uncertainty? Particularly as we look farther into the recovery period, it can become difficult to even identify the range of possible hazards and consequences, and to describe the probabilities of consequences under different possible actions, all of which are requirements of conventional risk analysis. In August 2010, could anyone have predicted how events of the next seven years would unfold in Christchurch? Should we have anticipated and planned for the complex combination of earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear incident in Tohoku, Japan?

In this talk, we first introduce concepts from a wide literature that can help think about the challenge of earthquake events and recoveries in their full complexity. These concepts, which include tipping points, the butterfly effect, self-organization and emergent behavior, feedback loops, black swans, and perfect storms, can help understand the limits of predictability and conventional modeling. We then discuss ideas for how to plan, given those limits. We discuss how we might extend or complement our existing models to support decision-making that acknowledges the inherent unpredictability of city’s trajectory following a major earthquake using, for example, robust or adaptive decision-making. Finally, we conclude with thoughts on the implications of these ideas for New Zealand and possible next steps for the community of earthquake researchers and practitioners.


Erica is a Flagship Leader within QuakeCoRE. Erica also is Managing Director of Resilient Organisations, a social enterprise dedicated to helping organisations, industries and economies thrive in any environment. Resilient Organisations undertakes robust and original research to understand and advance the ability of organisations to anticipate, prepare for, and proactively respond and recover from disruption of all kinds. We also provide direct support for organisations on their resilience journey. Erica is author of the book 'Resilient Organizations: How to survive, thrive and create opportunities through crisis and change'; she has authored over 100 research articles and is a regular international speaker on resilience. Erica is an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the University of Canterbury. She is also a member of the Resilience Expert Advisory Group (REAG), providing advice and support to the Australian Federal Government on organisational resilience issues.

Erica Seville

PLENARY SESSION 5:

A Seismic Odyssey–Challenges for Modelling Potential Outcomes and Futures We Can Only Imagine

As we stretch ourselves to model from hazard source to societal impact, we are increasingly faced with fundamental challenges, including technology, population and environmental changes. Increasingly we need to model long term uncertain futures and this requires us to develop new paradigms, approaches and techniques to ensure that our assumptions reflect the future and not the past. This presentation will draw on experiences modelling Wellington’s recovery following a major earthquake, to look forward. How do our modelling practices need to evolve if we are to robustly inform future long-term resilience investments? Key challenges include 1) finding ways to cope with tipping points, inherent unpredictability and emergence that can occur within complex adaptive systems; 2) shifting the tempo and style of our modelling approaches to integrate rapid prototyping, with the needs and wants of the ‘customer’ at the heart of the modelling process; 3) successfully reaching across disciplinary boundaries to integrate the strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches to tell more compelling stories; and 4) explicitly modelling unquantifiable uncertainty and focussing on decision dynamics, rather than discrete outcomes in time, to support decision makers to confidently make robust decisions with a long-term perspective.


Posters

3D Earthquake Ground Motion Simulations for the Christchurch Area Including the Effects of the Surface Topography, Khurram Aslam, Ricardo Taborda

Response History Analyses of Structural and Geotechnical Systems Using Simulated and Recorded Ground Motions, Brendon Bradley, Didier Pettinga, Jeff Fraser, Karim Tarbali

Modeling Nonlinear Site Effects in Physics-Based Ground Motion Simulation, Chris de la Torre, Brendon Bradley

Using Physics-Based Models to Forecast Future Earthquakes at the Groningen Gas Field, The Netherlands, David Dempsey

Site-Specific Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Maps of New Zealand for 475 Years and 2,475 Return Period, Usama Fauzi

Effects of Partial Saturation on Liquefaction Triggering, Abdul Baki, Misko Cubrinovski, Mark Stringer

001

002

003

004

005

016

A Vs30 Map for New Zealand Based on Surficial Geology, Topography and Direct Measurements, Kevin Foster, Brendon Bradley, Liam Wotherspoon, Chris McGann

A Preliminary Study About the Influence of Building Clusters on the Variability of the Ground Motion During Earthquakes, Yigit Isbiliroglu, Ricardo Taborda

Investigation of Systematic Ground Motion Effects Through Ground Motion Simulation of Small-to-Moderate Magnitude Earthquakes in the Canterbury, New Zealand Region, Robin Lee, Brendon Bradley, Robert Graves, Adrian Rodriguez-Marek, Peter Stafford

Nelson Tasman Site Characterisation Study, Rebecca McMahon, Liam Wotherspoon

Simulation and Validation of Topographic Effects on Mt Pleasant, Christchurch, New Zealand, Kami Mohammadi, Seokho Jeong, Domniki Asimaki, Brendon Bradley

Characterization and Interpretation of Lateral Spreading Observations from the 2010-2011 Christchurch Earthquakes, Sarah Bastin, Misko Cubrinovski, Sjoerd Van Ballegooy, James Russell

006

007

008

009

010

017

Development of Vs30 Profiles in Regions with Sparse Site-Specific Data: Examples from South Island of New Zealand, Manesh Malla, Clark Fenton, Tim Davies

Insights on the Effects of the 2010 Mw 7.1 Darfield Source Uncertainty on Ground Motion Simulations, Hoby Razafindrakoto, Brendon Bradley

Ground Motion Simulations for Hauraki Rift Earthquakes, Jeremy Riffault, David Dempsey

Simulation-Based PSHA (Cybershake) for the Canterbury Region, Karim Tarbali, Brendon Bradley, Viktor Polak

Generalised Parametric Functions and Spatial Correlations for Seismic Velocities in the Canterbury Region Based on Dynamic Site Characterisation, Ethan Thomson, Brendon Bradley, Brady Cox, Liam Wotherspoon, Clinton Wood

Predicting Liquefaction in Real-Time: An Assessment of Geospatial Models During the Canterbury Earthquakes, Brett Maurer, Brendon Bradley, Sjoerd van Ballegooy

011

012

013

014

015

018

FP1: Ground Motion Simulation and Validation— Posters 001-015

FP2: Liquefaction Impacts on Infrastructure— Posters 016-023


Seismic Vulnerability Assessment of New Zealand Church Inventory, Shannon Abeling, Stacy Vallis, Francisco Galvez, Dmytro Dizhur, Jason Ingham

Improving the Input of Earthquake Science and Engineering Information into Decision-Making: Results of a Workshop, Julia Becker, Lucy Carter, Ann Brower, Sara McBride, Sarah Beaven, Marion Schoenfeld, David Johnston, Wendy Saunders

Improving Earthquake Resilience in Provincial Towns – A Town-centre Regeneration Approach, Temitope Egbelakin, Esther Yakubu, Jason Ingham, Bruce Glovic

Seismic Performance of Reinforced Concrete Frame with Masonry Infill Buildings in the 2010/2011 Canterbury, New Zealand Earthquakes, Rijalul Fikri, Dmytro Dizhur, Kevin Walsh, Jason Ingham

024

025

026

027

028

029

030

031

032

033

034

035

036

FP3: Heritage, Safety and Economics: Addressing Earthquake-prone Buildings— Posters 024-36

Liquefaction Performance and Characterization of 55 Christchurch Sites, Nikolaos Ntritsos, Misko Cubrinovski, Aimee Rhodes

Scrutiny of the Simplified Liquefaction Assessment Frameworks based on Historical New Zealand Case Histories, Matt Ogden, Liam Wotherspoon, Sjoerd Van Ballegooy

019

020

Liquefaction Evaluation in Stratified Soils, Aimee Rhodes, Misko Cubrinovski, Nikolaos Ntritsos

Undisturbed Sampling of Pumiceous Soils in New Zealand, Mark Stringer, Rolando Orense, Michael Pender, Misko Cubrinovski, Sadeq Asadi

Seismic Response of Liquefiable Sloping Ground: Numerical Predictions of the LEAP Centrifuge Model Responses, Katerina Ziotopoulou

021

022

023

Increasing Earthquake Resilience: Internalising Externalities Through Regulation and Financial Risk Transfer Tools, Ilan Noy, Olga Filippova

Using the Macroelement Method to Seismically Assess Complex URM Buildings, Francisco Galvez, Jason Ingham, Dmytro Dizhur

Seismic Performance of Corroded NZ Buildings, Lucas Hogan, Allan Scott, Sunil Nataraj, Dmytro Dizhur, Jason Ingham

Safe As? The Impact of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 on New Zealand’s Existing Building Stock, John Hopkins, Leonie Thompson

Characterizing Human Behaviour in Earthquakes: the 2010-2016 Sequence in New Zealand, David Johnston, Michael Ardagh, Joanne Deely, Carol MacDonald, Emily Lambie, Emma Doyle, Julia Becker, Shannon Abeling, Shirley Feldmann-Jensen, Steven Jensen, Michael Lindell

Earthquake Awareness and Preparedness in Low(er) Seismic Hazards in New Zealand: Challenges for Preparedness and Risk Communication, David Johnston, Caroline Orchiston, Julia Becker, Bridgette Sullivan-Taylor, Tami Egbelakin, Jason Ingham, Mary-Ann Thompson, Barnaby Pace, Douglas Paton, John McClure, Maureen Coomer, Sara McBride

A Case Study of Heritage Hotel: Performance after 2010/2011 Canterbury Earthquake, Aina Misnon, Shannon Abeling, John Hare, Jason Ingham, Dmytro Dizhur

Unreinforced Masonry Churches in New Zealand: Towards a Holistic Framework for the Identification of Optimal Seismic Retrofit Intervention, Stacy Vallis, Paco Galvez, Sonia Giovinazzi, Shannon Abeling, Jason Ingham

Economics of Strengthening & Redeveloping Buildings for Adaptive Reuse Purposes, Esther Yakubu, Temitope Egbelakin, Jason Ingham, Bruce Glavovic


Nonlinear Seismic Behavior of Perforated Steel Plate Shear Walls with Curved Corrugated Infill Plates, Milad Bahrebar, James Lim

Experimental Evaluation of Various Low Damage Solutions for Concrete Shear Walls, Stephen Blount, Rick Henry, Keri Ryan, Yiqiu Lu, Zhibin Li, Kenneth Elwood

Incorporating Ground Motion Duration in Structural Performance Assessment and Design Guidelines, Reagan Chandramohan, Jack Baker, Gregory Deierlein

Development of Cladding Loss Contribution Functions for use in Loss Optimization Seismic Design, Frankie Chen, Zam Wang, Rajesh Dhakal, Shreedhar Khakurel, Trevor Yeow

Seismic Resilient Structures using Rocking Walls Coupled with Innovative Resilient Slip Friction Joints (RSFJs), Ashkan Hashemi, Pouyan Zarnani, Pierre Quenneville

037

038

039

040

041

042

043

044

045

046

047

048

049

050

051

FP4: Next-generation Infrastructure— Low-damage and Repairable Solutions— Posters 037-051

The Performance of Friction Connections with Large Grip Length Bolts, Mahdi Hatami, Gregory MacRae, Geoff Rodgers, Charles Clifton

Shake Table Testing of Low Damage Steel Building with 2-4 Direction DisplacementDependent (D3) Damper, NikooHazaveh, Ali Rad, GeoffreyRodgers, J. Geoffrey Chase,Stefano Pampanin, Quincy Ma

Modeling of a Full-Scale Experimental Base-Isolated Building, Erik Johnson, Tianhao Yu, Patrick Brewick, Richard Christenson

Shake Table Testing of Low Damage Steel Building with Asymmetric Friction Connections, Ali Rad, Gregory MacRae, Nikoo Hazaveh, Quincy Ma

Self-Centering Capability of the Seismic Friction Dampers: A Conceptual Study on the Static and Dynamic Self-Centering Requirements for the Single Degree of Freedom (SDOF) Asymmetric and Symmetric Friction Connections (AFC and SFC), Shahab Ramhormozian, Charles Clifton, Yoshie Takayama, Julie Lam, Greg MacRae

The 2016 IDEERS Seismic Design World Conference and Competition: A Report by New Zealand Postgraduate Team from the University of Auckland (UoA), Shahab Ramhormozian, Shannon Abeling, Mehdi Sarrafzadeh, Harold Aquino, Charles Clifton

Key Parameters in Pre-event Data Collection for Emergency Response and Loss Estimation in Buildings, Samuel Roeslin, Quincy Ma, Ken Elwood

A Novel Cold-formed Section for Mid to Long Span Portal Frame Buildings, Amir Shahmohammadi, Charles Clifton, James Lim

Would Loss Estimation Help Motivate the Use of Low-damage Steel Building Design Solutions?, Tim Sullivan, Gregory MacRae, Charles Clifton, Ken Elwood, Amir Orumiyehei

Component Damage Fragility Functions for Use in New Zealand, Trevor Yeow, Timothy Sullivan, Ken Elwood

Building Disaster Resilience within the Hotel Sector, Nancy Brown, David Johnston, Jane Rovins, Caroline Orchiston, Shirley Feldmann-Jensen

052 Defining the Value of Built Infrastructure, Robert Cardwell, Suzanne Wilkinson, Nicky Smith, Charlotte Brown

053 Probabilistic Framework for Quantifying Resilience Performance Objectives, Luis Ceferino, Maryia Markhvida, Gemma Cremen, Pablo Heresi, Anne Husley, Mariano Balbi, Jack Baker, Anne Kiremidjian, Greg Deierlein

054

FP5: Pathways to Improved Resilience— Posters 052-62


Tsunami Loading Characteristics on Utility Poles, Jonathan Andrew, Charles Tucker, Colin Whittaker

Fragility Functions for Buried Pipelines in Liquefiable Soils Based on New Zealand Data, Xavier Bellagamba, Brendon Bradley, Liam Wotherspoon, Matthew Hughes

Characterisation of New Zealand Stopbank (Flood Protection) Infrastructure, Kaley Crawford-Flett, Matthew Wilson, Asaad Shamseldin

Assessment of Post-disaster Distributed Infrastructure Level-of-service Expectations by Stakeholders and Isolated Settlement Communities, Alistair Davies

063

064

065

066

067

068

069

070

055

056

057

FP6: Spatially-distributed Infrastructure— Posters 063-70

Defining and Quantifying the Resilience of Electric Power Systems to Natural Disasters, Leo Yang Liu

Landslides Triggered by the 14 November 2016, MW 7.8 Earthquake, Kaikoura, New Zealand, Chris Massey, Dougal Townsend, Ellen Rathje, Yoshi Kaneko, Biljana Lukovic, Nick Horspool, Brendon Bradley, Ian Hamling, Joseph Wartman, Jon Carey, Simon Cox, Jonathan Davidson, Sally Dellow, Caroline Holden, Katie Jones, Anna Kaiser, Barbara Lyndsell, Sam McColl, Regina Morgenstern, Brenda Rosser, Delia Strong, Corinne Singeisen, Marlene Villeneuve

‘End to End’ Linkage Structure for Integrated Impact Assessment of Infrastructure Networks Under Natural Hazards, Yasir Imtiaz Syed, S R Uma, Raj Prasanna, Nick Horspool, Garry McDonald

Vulnerability of Interdependent Infrastructures to Spatially Localised Hazards, Conrad Zorn, Scott Thacker, Raghav Pant, Asaad Shamseldin

A System Dynamics Model of Post-earthquake Reconstruction Pathways, Alice Yan Chang-Richards, Charlotte Brown, Nicky Smith

Risk Modelling as a Tool to Support Natural Hazard Risk Management in New Zealand local government, Miles Crawford, David Johnston, Wendy Saunders, Emma Hudson-Doyle, Graham Leonard

Interdisciplinary Options for Improving the Seismic Resilience of New Zealand, Tracy Hatton, Saree Lawler, Erica Seville

Post-earthquake Decision-making: Modelling a Commercial Building Owner’s Decision to Repair or Replace a Property using Real Estate Investment Analysis, Maryia Markhvida, Jack Baker

Tourism and the Oamaru Victorian Heritage Precinct: Decision-making for Resilient Solutions Associated with Heritage, Earthquake-prone Buildings, Caroline Orchiston, Jason Ingham, Will Stovall, Stacy Vallis

The Christchurch Recovery: an Example of Resilience and Sustainability, Wendy Saunders, Julia Becker

Exploring NZ’s Historical Heritage Risks and the Policy Implications. Linking Risk Mitigation, Cultural Values and Sustainable Communities.In the Context of a Highly Dynamic Seismic Environment, how does NZ Deal Strategically with these Ongoing Challenges?, Bridgette Sullivan-Taylor, Sarah Livschitz, David Johnston

Usability of Disaster Apps: Insight from the App Markets, Marion Lara Tan, Raj Prasanna, Kristin Stock, Graham Leonard, Emma Hudson-Doyle, David Johnston

058

059

060

061

062


ILEE-QuakeCoRE Proposed Shake-Table Test of a Low-Damage Concrete Wall Building, Yiqiu Lu, Richard Henry, Ken Elwood, Geoff Rodgers, Anqi Gu, Yi Xiao, Ying Zhou, Tony Yang

Recent Research Activities of QuakeCoRE Tech Platform 2, Seokho Jeong, Liam Wotherspoon, Quincy Ma

071

072

TP1: Large-scale Laboratory Facilities— Poster 071

TP2: Field-testing and Monitoring— Poster 072

Smart Seismic Cities: Informing Pre-Earthquake Planning and Post-Event Response with Near Real-Time Impact Tools (NRITs), Tyler Best, Max Stephens, Ken Elwood, Nick Horspool

073 Earthquake Impact on Geodetic and Topographic Infrastructure in New Zealand, Graeme Blick, Anna de Raadt, Bjorn Johns, Ian Reese

074 SeisFinder: A web Application for Extraction of Data From Computationally-intensive Earthquake Resilience Calculations, Sharmila Savarimuthu, Daniel Lagrava, Brendon Bradley, Jonney Huang, Jason Motha, Viktor Polak, Sung Bae

075

TP3: Multi-disciplinary Community Databases— Posters 073-075

Visualisation for Scientific Discovery and Communication: Kaikoura Earthquake as a Case Study, Sung Bae, Daniel Lagrava, Melody Zhu, Brendon Bradley, Chris McGann, David Robinson, Yun Ni

076 QuakeCoRE SW workshops and training, Sung Bae, Daniel Lagrava, Chris McGann, Reagan Chandramohan, Jason Motha, Brendon Bradley

077 Coupling Ground Motion Simulation with Regional Modelling for Rapid Impact Assessment, Brendon Bradley, Jason Motha, Viktor Polak, Eric Thompson, David Wald, Brett Maurer, Sjoerd van Ballegooy

078

TP4: Computational Simulation and Visualisation— Posters 076-081


East Coast LAB (Life at the Boundary), Kate Boersen

082

Outreach— Poster 082

OpenSLAT Software for Estimating Seismic Risks, Michael Gauland, Brendon Bradley, Masoud Moghaddasi

079 Real-time Ground Motion Simulation Workflow, Jonney Huang, Sung Eun Bae, Viktor Polak, Brendon Bradley, Hoby Razafindrakoto, Ethan Thopmson, Robin Lee, Ahsan Nazer, Daniel Lagrava, Jason Motha

QuakeCoRE and OpenSees (Year 2): Optimisation of Source Code, Pre- and Post-Processing Tools, and Community Development, Christopher R. McGann, Brendon A. Bradley, Seokho Jeong, Daniel Lagrava

080 081


Meeting Participants

ABELING Shannon, UA; 024, 032, 034, 035, 047AFJAL Mujaddad, UAALGER Brandy, QuakeCoRE/Quake CentreALTAF Omer, UAANDREW Jonathan, UA; 063ARDALAN Nazanin, UAASADI Baqer, UAASADI Sadeq, UA; 022ASIMAKI Domniki, California Institute of Technology (Caltech), USA; 010AYROM Shabnam, Eastern Mediterranean University, CyprusBAE Sung, QuakeCoRE; 076, 077, 078, 081BAGHERI NESAMI Maryam, UABAHREBAR Milad, UA; 037BAKI Abdul, UC; 016BALACHANDRA Ananth, Tonkin + TaylorBASTIN Sarah, QuakeCoRE; 017BAXTER Derek, Wellington City CouncilBEATSON Abi, Joint Centre for Disaster ResearchBECKER Julia, GNS; 025, 032, 033, 060BELLAGAMBA Xavier, UC; 064BENNETT Adrian, MBIEBEST Tyler, UA; 074BLAKE Daniel, UCBOERSEN Kate, East Coast LAB; 071BRABHAHARAN Pathmanathan, OpusBRACKLEY Hannah, GNSBRADLEY Brendon, UC; 002,003, 006, 008, 010, 012, 014, 015, 018, 064, 068, 076, 077, 078, 079, 080, 081, 082

BRANDENBERG Scott, University of California, Los Angeles, USABROWN Nancy, Massey; 052BRUERE Paul, MBIEBRUNSDON Dave, Kestrel GroupBURTON Henry, University of California, Los Angeles, USACARDWELL Robert, UA; 053CEFERINO Luis, Stanford University, USA; 054CHANDRAMOHAN Reagan, UC; 039, 078CHANG-RICHARDS Alice, UA; 055CHIARO Gabriele, UCCHIGULLAPALLY Pavan, UACOMERIO Mary, University of California, Berkeley, USACORNEY Samuel, UACRAWFORD Miles, Joint Centre for Disaster Research; 056CRAWFORD-FETT Kaley, Quake Centre; 065CROWE Signy, UACUBRINOVSKI Misko, UC; 016, 017, 019, 021, 022CUMMUSKEY Patrick DAVIDSON Rachel, University of Delaware, Newark, USADAVIES Alistair, UC; 066DE LA TORRE Chris, UC; 003DE RAADT Anna, CRCSI/Land Information New Zealand; 075DEAM Bruce, MBIEDEMPSEY David, UA; 004, 013DHAKAL Rajesh, UC; 040DISMUKE James, GolderDIZHUR Dmytro, UA; 024, 027, 029, 030, 034DRAYTON Michael, Risk Management SolutionsEGBELAKIN Temitope, Massey; 026, 033, 036

ELWOOD Ken, UA; 038, 048, 050, 051, 072, 074FAIRCLOUGH Roger, New Zealand Lifelines CouncilFIKRI Rijalul, UA; 027FILIPPOVA Olga, UA; 028FINCH Robert, Quake CentreFOSTER Kevin, UC; 006FREW Mike, Ministry for Culture and HeritageGALVEZ Francisco, UA; 029, 035GARCÍA Martín, MasseyGAULAND Michael, Quake Centre; 080GIARETTON Marta, UAGIOVINAZZI Sonia, UC; 035HARRIS Nigel, UCHARRISON Ian, Tailrisk EconomicsHARTSHORN Ruth, QuakeCoREHASHEMI Ashkan, UA; 041HATAMI Mahdi, UC; 042HATTON Tracy, ResOrgs; 057HAYDEN Connor, UAHAZAVEH Nikoo, UC; 043, 045HENRY Rick, UA; 038, 072HOGAN Lucas, UA; 030HOPKINS John, UC; 031HORSPOOL Nick, GNS; 068, 069, 074HORTACSU Ayse, Applied Technology Council, USAHUANG Jonney, UC; 076, 081HUGHES Matthew, UC; 064INGHAM Jason, UA; 024, 026, 027, 029, 030, 033, 034, 035, 036, 059ISMAIL Najif, Wellington Institute of TechnologyJANKŮ Lukáš JEONG Seokho, QuakeCoRE; 010, 073, 082JOHNSON Erik, University of Southern California, USA; 044


JOHNSTON David, Massey/GNS; 025, 032, 033, 052, 056, 061, 062KAM Weng Yuen, BecaKENNEY Christine, Joint Centre for Disaster ResearchKHAKUREL Shreedhar, UC; 040KING Andrew, GNSLAGRAVA Daniel, UC; 076, 077, 078, 081, 082LAMBIE Emily, GeoNet; 032LARCROSSE Virginie, Tonkin + TaylorLAWLER Saree, ResOrgs; 057LEE Robin, UC; 008, 081LIU Royce, UCLIU Yang (Leo), UA; 067LU Yiqiu, UA; 072MA Quincy, UA; 043, 045, 048, 073MACRAE Gregory, UC; 042, 045, 046, 050MALLA Manesh, UC; 011MARKHVIDA Maryia, Stanford University, USA; 054, 058MASSEY Chris, GNS; 068MAURER Brett, University of Washington, USA; 018, 079MCDONALD Garry, ME Research; 069MCGANN Christopher, UC; 006, 077, 078, 082MCLAREN Lisa, Joint Centre for Disaster ResearchMCMAHON Rebecca, Beca; 009MEADE Susie, QuakeCoREMENDONÇA Mike, Wellington City CouncilMIRJAFARI Seyed Yasin, UAMISNON Aina, UA; 034MORRIS Hugh, UAMOTAMED Ramin, University of Nevada, Reno, USAMOTHA Jason, UC; 076, 078, 079, 081NAIR Nirmal, UANAKASHIMA Masayoshi, Kobori Research Complex, JapanNATARAJ Sunil, UA; 030NAYYERLOO Mostafa, GNSNEL Danica, QuakeCoRENGUYEN NHU Cuong, VictoriaNOY Ilan, Victoria; 028NTRITSOS Nikolaos, UC; 019, 021OGDEN Matt, Tonkin + Taylor; 020OPABOLA Eyitayo, UAORCHISTON Caroline, Centre for Sustainability, Otago; 033, 052, 059

ORENSE Rolando, UA; 022ORUMIYEHEI Amirhossein, UC; 050PAMPANIN Stefano, UC; 043PARDO TOBAR Gislaine, UAPASTOR Jacob, VictoriaPETTINGA Didier, Holmes; 002PIR Arash, UAPLETZER Alexander, NeSIPOLAK Viktor, QuakeCoRE; 014, 076, 079, 081POULADI Pouya, UAPRASANNA Raj, Joint Centre for Disaster Research; 062, 069QUENNEVILLE Pierre, UA; 041RAD Ali, UC; 043, 045RAMHORMOZIAN Shahab, UA; 046, 047RAZAFINDRAKOTO Hoby, UC; 012, 081REES Sean, Tonkin + TaylorREPIA Harmony, MasseyRHODES Aimee, Opus; 019, 021RIFFAULT Jeremy, UA; 013ROBERTS Ross, Auckland CouncilRODGERS Geoff, UC; 042, 043, 072ROESLIN Samuel, UA; 048RUSSELL James, Tonkin + Taylor; 017RYAN Keri, University of Nevada, Reno, USA; 038SATTAR Siamak, National Institute of Standards and Technology, USASAUNDERS Wendy, GNS; 025, 056, 060SAVARIMUTHU Sharmila, QuakeCoRE; 076SCOTT Allan, UC; 030SEVILLE Erica, ResOrgs; 057SHAHMOHAMMADI Amir, UA; 049SHERSON Andrew, Joint Centre for Disaster ResearchSMITH Nicola, ME Research; 053, 055SMITH Richard, EQCSOLOMON Tā Mark SOMERVILLE Paul, AECOM, USASTOVALL Will, Otago; 059STRINGER Mark, UC; 016, 022SULLIVAN Tim, UC; 050, 051SULLIVAN-TAYLOR Bridgette, UA; 033, 061SYED Yasir Imtiaz, Massey; 069TABORDA Ricardo, University of Memphis, USA; 001, 007TAN Haozhi, UA

TAN Marion, Joint Centre for Disaster Research; 062TARBALI Karim, UC; 002, 014THOMPSON Leonie, UC; 031THOMSON Ethan, UCTUCKER Charles, UA; 063UMA S. R., GNS; 069VALADBEIGI Armin, UAVALLIS Stacy, UA; 024, 035, 059VAN BALLEGOOY Sjoerd, Tonkin + Taylor; 017, 018, 020, 079VAN DER VELDE Melanie, GNS/Joint Centre for Disaster ResearchVARIAVA Rushaina, UAWALD David, USGS, USA; 079WANG Qi, UAWENTZ Rick, Wentz Pacific LtdWHITTAKER Colin, UA; 063WHITTAKER David, BecaWILSON Thomas, UCWOOD Peter, SRLN LtdWOTHERSPOON Liam, UA; 006, 009, 015, 064, 073YAKUBU Esther, Massey; 026, 036YANG Tony, International Joint Research Laboratory of Earthquake Engineering, China; 072YEOW Trevor, UC; 040, 051YING Fei, AUTZARINKAMAR Shermineh, UAZHANG Tongyue, UAZIOTOPOULOU Katerina, University of California, Davis, USA; 023


QuakeCoRE Associate Investigators & Industry Affiliates

Join the QuakeCoRE community as an Associate Investigator (AI) or Industry Affiliate (IA). More information and applications are available at www.quakecore.nz/opportunities/

QuakeCoRE RfP

The next RfP Round for QuakeCoRE projects will be opening in late September. More information and application forms are available at www.quakecore.nz/opportunities/

SeisFinder: A Portal for Earthquake Resilience Simulation Outputs

QuakeCoRE has launched the first iteration of SeisFinder, a web application that extracts high-fidelity outputs from computationally-intensive earthquake resilience calculations. Information available at present includes ground motion intensity measures and/or the full ground motion acceleration time series (for use in dynamic response history analyses).

You can access the public version of the site at https://quakecoresoft.canterbury.ac.nz/seisfinder/

Welcome Session: State of QuakeCoRE

Plenary Session 2: Earthquake Risk Mitigation vs Transfer

Welcome and Distinguished Lecture


Morning Tea

Close

Lunch

Plenary Session 5: Assessing Interdependencies and Tipping Points

Looking Forward and Concluding Remarks

Lightning Talks

Directors

Board

Leadership Team

Technology Platform Leaders

Flagship Programme Leaders

Ken Elwood – DirectorUniversity of Auckland

Brendon Bradley – Deputy DirectorUniversity of Canterbury

Dean Kimpton – ChairAuckland Council

John HareHolmes Consulting Group

John ReidNgāi Tahu Research Centre

Margaret HylandUniversity of Auckland & MBIE

Mary ComerioUniversity of California, Berkeley

Nick MillerFulton Hogan

Rod CarrUniversity of Canterbury

Sulo ShanmuganathanHolmes Consulting Group

Ken ElwoodNick HorspoolErica Seville

Brendon Bradley Jason InghamLiam Wotherspoon

Misko Cubrinovski David Johnston

TP1: Large-scale Laboratory Facilities Ken Elwood

TP2: Field-testing and MonitoringLiam Wotherspoon

TP3: Multi-disciplinary Community DatabasesNick Horspool

TP4: Computational Simulation and VisualisationBrendon Bradley

FP1: Ground Motion Simulation and ValidationLeader: Brendon Bradley

FP2: Liquefaction Impacts on InfrastructureLeader: Misko Cubrinovski

FP3: Heritage, Safety and Economics: Addressing Earthquake-prone Buildings Leader (2017): Jason InghamLeader (2018): Ken Elwood

FP4: Next-generation Infrastructure: Low- damage and Repairable Solutions Leader (2017): Ken ElwoodLeader (2018): Tim Sullivan

FP5: Pathways to Improved ResilienceLeader (2017): Erica SevilleLeader (2018): David Johnston

FP6: Spatially-distributed InfrastructureLeader: Liam Wotherspoon

For a full list of Technology Platform and Flagship Programme Leaders and deputies, please visit our website: www.quakecore.nz/our-work/

Documents

QuakeCoRE...earthquake- resilient New Zealand. Our Outcomes Our Vision Our activities contribute to six outcomes as part of our funding agreement with TEC: QuakeCoRE has a vision to