Vision
A decision-making environment for Aotearoa New Zealand that acknowledges that acting on science is sometimes difficult and many resilience decisions present significant political, professional, or institutional risks.
Project description
Currently, decision-makers have to mediate considerable institutional, professional, and political risks that arise from mitigating natural hazards, such as how sure are we? How much will it cost? Who pays? What should we prioritise?
Some of these risks can be addressed by better science, or more accurate data, but where situations are complex, uncertain, and value-laden, action is difficult and natural hazard risks may be transferred to the state and private sector, or to people, places, and future generations.
We are working to build understanding of the real-world ‘risks’ of decision making and so increase the potential of resilience science, tools, and policies from multiple areas across the challenge to have real-world impact. Our research is being conducted in two workstreams:
Our goal is to help enable more difficult decisions to be taken, particularly those that bring considerable institutional, professional, economic and political risks for those making them.
Noy I, De Alwis D, Ferrarini B, Park D. 2020. Defining build-back-better after disasters with an example: Sri Lanka's recovery after the 2004 Tsunami. International…
Nissen S, Cretney R. Retrofitting an emergency approach to the climate crisis: A study of two climate emergency declarations in Aotearoa New Zealand. Environment and…
Christina Hanna, Iain White, Bruce C. Glavovic, Managed retreats by whom and how? Identifying and delineating governance modalities, Climate Risk Management, Volume 31, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100278
Hoang T, Noy I. 2020. Wellbeing after a managed retreat: Observations from a large New Zealand program. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 48:101589. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101589.
Squires G, White I. 2019. Resilience and housing markets: who is it really for? Land Use Policy. 81:167-174. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.10.018.
Sovacool BK, Tan-Mullins M, Abrahamse W. 2018. Bloated bodies and broken bricks: power, ecology, and inequality in the political economy of natural disaster recovery. World…
Owen S, Noy I. 2019. Regressivity in public natural hazard insurance: a quantitative analysis of the New Zealand case. Economics of Disasters and Climate Change.…
Yonson R, Noy I, Ivory VC, Bowie C. 2020. Earthquake-induced transportation disruption and economic performance: the experience of Christchurch, New Zealand. Journal of Transport Geography.…
Poontirakul P, Brown C, Seville E, Vargo J, Noy I. 2017. Insurance as a double-edged sword: quantitative evidence from the 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The Geneva…
Filippova O, Noy I. 2020. Earthquake-strengthening policy for commercial buildings in small-town New Zealand. Disasters. 44(1):179-204. doi:10.1111/disa.12360.
Filippova O, Nguyen C, Noy I, Rehm M. 2020. Who cares? Future sea level rise and house prices. Land Economics. 96(2):207-224. doi:10.3368/le.96.2.207
Noy I, Doan N, Ferrarini B, Park D. 2020. The economic risk of COVID-19 in developing countries: where is it highest? In: Djankov S, Panizza…