Advertisement

Tsunami impact assessment: development of vulnerability matrix for critical infrastructure and application to Christchurch, New Zealand

  • James H. WilliamsEmail author
  • Thomas M. Wilson
  • Nick Horspool
  • Emily M. Lane
  • Matthew W. Hughes
  • Tim Davies
  • Lina Le
  • Finn Scheele
Original Paper

Abstract

Tsunamis can have severe impacts on society. In addition to casualties and damage to buildings, they can also damage and disrupt critical infrastructure. To support effective risk management, it is important to understand the possible extent, severity and duration of these impacts. While impacts on buildings and casualty estimations are relatively well developed for tsunamis, critical infrastructure impact models are either not available or lack accurate vulnerability information. This paper addresses these issues by reviewing global tsunami impacts to critical infrastructure to develop a semi-quantitative tsunami damage matrix for critical infrastructure components and systems. One potential application of the damage matrix is demonstrated within an impact assessment process for Christchurch, New Zealand. The impact assessment determines asset damage likelihood for energy, water, telecommunication and transportation assets from a large tsunami inundation scenario. Consistent with observations from previous international tsunamis, above-ground assets and buried storm water pipe networks in Christchurch were found to perform poorly, while buried potable and waste water pipe networks were less impacted. This process provides a simple, but widely applicable, impact assessment approach which further studies can build on. Future research should focus on developing quantitative probabilistic tsunami vulnerability models for critical infrastructure that implement multiple asset standards and hazard intensity measures, and better account for uncertainty.

Keywords

Tsunami Tsunami impacts Infrastructure vulnerability Impact assessment Christchurch 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the Christchurch infrastructure lifeline organisations who made spatial asset data available for this project, as well as funding contributions from GNS Science; the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA Taihoro Nukurangi) through Strategic Science Investment Funding, Project CARW1703; Natural Hazard Research Platform contract C05X0804 (TW); Earthquake Commission capacity fund to Geological Sciences, University of Canterbury; the Mason Trust Fund; and Environment Canterbury.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Akiyama M, Frangopol DM, Arai M, Koshimura S (2013) Reliability of bridges under tsunami hazards: emphasis on the 2011 Tohoku-oki earthquake. Earthq Spectra 29(S1):S295–S314.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.4000112 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alam MS, Barbosa AR, Scott MH, Cox DT, van de Lindt JW (2018) Development of physics-based tsunami fragility functions considering structural member failures. J Struct Eng 144(3):04017221.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0001953 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Auckland Engineering Lifelines Group (2014) Auckland engineering lifelines project stage 2. Auckland engineering lifelines group report, vol 1.1, AucklandGoogle Scholar
  4. Basco A, Salzano E (2017) The vulnerability of industrial equipment to tsunami. J Loss Prev Process Ind 50:301–307.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2016.11.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell R, King A (2009) RiskScape project: 2004–2008, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  6. Bell R, Cowan H, Dalziell E, Evans N, O’Leary M, Rush B, Yule L (2005) Survey of impacts on the Andaman coast, Southern Thailand following the great Sumatra–Andaman earthquake and tsunami of December 26, 2004. Bull N Z Soc Earthq Eng 38(3):123–148Google Scholar
  7. Birkmann J, Wenzel F, Greiving S, Garschagen M, Vallée D, Nowak W, Mitchell JK et al (2016) Extreme events, critical infrastructures, human vulnerability and strategic planning: emerging research issues. J Extreme Events 03(04):1650017.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S2345737616500172 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Borrero JC, Goring DG (2015) South American tsunamis in Lyttelton harbor, New Zealand. Pure Appl Geophys 172(3–4):757–772.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-014-1026-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borrero JC, Lynett PJ, Kalligeris N (2015) Tsunami currents in ports. Philos Trans R Soc.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2014.0372 Google Scholar
  10. Centre for Advanced Engineering (1997) In: Hendtlass C, O’Grady U (eds) Risk and realities: a multi-disciplinary approach to the vulnerability of lifelines to natural hazards. University of Canterbury, ChristchurchGoogle Scholar
  11. Chandrasekar N, Ramesh R (2007) Tsunami damage to the south eastern coast of India. In: Murty TS, Aswathanarayana U, Nirupama N (eds) The Indian Ocean Tsunami: Balkema—proceedings and monographs in engineering, water and earth sciences. Indian Ocean Tsunami. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 351–363Google Scholar
  12. Charvet I, Ioannou I, Rossetto T, Suppasri A, Imamura F (2014) Empirical fragility assessment of buildings affected by the 2011 Great East Japan tsunami using improved statistical models. Nat Hazards 73(2):951–973.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1118-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Charvet I, Suppasri A, Kimura H, Sugawara D, Imamura F (2015) A multivariate generalized linear tsunami fragility model for Kesennuma City based on maximum flow depths, velocities and debris impact, with evaluation of predictive accuracy. Nat Hazards 79(3):2073–2099.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-015-1947-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Charvet I, Macabuag J, Rossetto T (2017) Estimating tsunami-induced building damage through fragility functions: critical review and research needs. Front Built Environ.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2017.00036 Google Scholar
  15. Chen C, Melville BW (2015) Experimental study of uplift pressures on wharf decks due to tsunami bores. In: 36th IAHR World Congress, The Hague, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  16. Cruz AM, Franchello G, Krausmann E (2009) Assessment of tsunami risk to an oil refinery in southern Italy. JRC scientific and technical reportsGoogle Scholar
  17. Cubrinovski M, Hughes MW, Bradley BA, Noonan J, Hopkins R, McNeill S, English G (2014) Performance of horizontal infrastructure in Christchurch City through the 2010–2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. Civil & natural resources engineering report 2014-02. ISSN 1172-9511. University of Canterbury, March, p 129Google Scholar
  18. Daly M, Johnston D (2015) The genesis of volcanic risk assessment for the Auckland engineering lifelines project: 1996–2000. J Appl Volcanol.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13617-015-0027-9 Google Scholar
  19. De Risi R, Goda K, Yasuda T, Mori N (2017) Is flow velocity important in tsunami empirical fragility modeling? Earth Sci Rev 166:64–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.12.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dominey-Howes D, Dengler L, Dunbar P, Kong L, Fritz H, Imamura F, Borrero J et al (2012) International Tsunami Survey Team (ITST) post-tsunami survey field guide, vol 2Google Scholar
  21. Donahue J, Olsen M, Thio HK, Somerville P (2009) American Samoa tsunami reconnaissance report. GEER association report no. GEER-019Google Scholar
  22. Edwards C (2006) Thailand lifelines after the December 2004 Great Sumatra earthquake and Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthq Spectra 22(SUPPL. 3):S641–S659.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2204931 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Edwards C, Tang A, Edinger J, Kwasinski A, Pyrch A, Kempner L, Konagai K et al (2012) Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering (TCLEE) Report of the 11 March Mw 9.0 Tohoku, Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. In: Tang A, Edwards C (eds) The Great East Japan earthquake, 11 March 2011Google Scholar
  24. Eguchi RT, Eguchi MT, Bouabid J, Koshimura S, Graf WP (2013) HAZUS tsunami benchmarking, validation and calibration. Prepared for the Federal Emergency Management Agency through a contract with the AtkinsGoogle Scholar
  25. Eidinger J, Tang A, O’Rourke T (2010) Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering (TCLEE) Report of the 4 September 2010 Mw 7.1 Canterbury (Darfield), New Zealand Earthquake. American Society of Civil Engineers, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  26. Evans NL, McGhie C (2011) The performance of lifeline utilities following the 27 th February 2010 Maule Earthquake Chile. In: 9th Pacific conference on earthquake engineering, building an earthquake-resilient society, Auckland, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  27. Francis MJ (2006) Tsunami inundation scour of roadways, bridges and foundations: observations and technical guidance from the Great Sumatra Andaman Tsunami. EERI/FEMA NEHRP 2006 professional fellowship reportGoogle Scholar
  28. Frangopol DM, Bocchini P (2012) Bridge network performance, maintenance and optimisation under uncertainty: accomplishments and challenges. Struct Infrastruct Eng Maint Manag Life Cycle Des Perform 8(4):341–356.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2011.563089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Fritz HM, Petroff CM, Catalán PA, Cienfuegos R, Winckler P, Kalligeris N, Synolakis CE et al (2011) Field survey of the 27 February 2010 Chile tsunami. Pure Appl Geophys 168(11):1989–2010.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-011-0283-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fritz HM, Phillips DA, Okayasu A, Shimozono T, Liu H, Mohammed F, Takahashi T et al (2012) The 2011 Japan tsunami current velocity measurements from survivor videos at Kesennuma Bay using LiDAR. Geophys Res Lett.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2011GL050686 Google Scholar
  31. Ghobarah A, Saatcioglu M, Nistor I (2006) The impact of the 26 December 2004 earthquake and tsunami on structures and infrastructure. Eng Struct 28(2):312–326.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2005.09.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gill D, Clough P, Webb T (2015) Tsunami risk facing New Zealand. NZIER report to Earthquake Commission, WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  33. Goff J, Chagué-Goff C (2012) A review of palaeo-tsunamis for the Christchurch region, New Zealand. Quat Sci Rev 57:136–156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2012.10.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goff J, Liu PLF, Higman B, Morton R, Jaffe BE, Fernando H, Fernandoj S et al (2006) Sri Lanka field survey after the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthq Spectra 22(SUPPL. 3):155–172.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2205897 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Graf WP, Lee Y, Eguchi RT (2014) New lifelines damage and loss functions for tsunami. In: 10th U.S. National conference on earthquake engineering, frontiers of earthquake engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Anchorage, USAGoogle Scholar
  36. Hart DE, Knight GA (2009) Geographic information system assessment of tsunami vulnerability on a dune coast. J Coast Res 25(1):131–141.  https://doi.org/10.2112/07-0960.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hatayama K (2014) Damage to oil storage tanks due to tsunami of the Mw9. 0 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku, Japan. In: 10th U.S. National conference on earthquake engineering, frontiers of earthquake engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Anchorage, USA.  https://doi.org/10.4231/D3VX0639C
  38. Horspool NA, Fraser S (2016) An analysis of tsunami impacts to lifelines. GNS science consultancy report 2016/22Google Scholar
  39. Iemura H, Harris M, Yoshikazu P (2005) Report on the tsunami damage of bridges in Banda Aceh and some possible countermeasures. In 28th JSCE earthquake engineering symposiumGoogle Scholar
  40. Impact Forecasting LLC (2011) Tohoku earthquake & tsunami event recap report, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  41. Jin D, Lin J (2011) Managing tsunamis through early warning systems: a multidisciplinary approach. Ocean Coast Manag 54(2):189–199.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.10.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kappes MS, Papathoma-Köhle M, Keiler M (2012) Assessing physical vulnerability for multi-hazards using an indicator-based methodology. Appl Geogr 32(2):577–590.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.07.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kazama M, Noda T (2012) Damage statistics (summary of the 2011 off the Pacific Coast of Tohoku earthquake damage). Soils Found 52(5):780–792.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2012.11.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kim YJ, Marshall W, Pal I (2014) Assessment of infrastructure devastated by extreme floods: a case study from Colorado, USA. Civ Eng 167(CE4):186–191Google Scholar
  45. King DN (2015) Tsunami hazard, assessment and risk in Aotearoa–New Zealand: a systematic review AD 1868–2012. Earth Sci Rev 145:25–42.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2015.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. King A, Bell R (2006) RiskScape New Zealand—a multihazard loss modeling tool. In: 2006 NZSEE conference, Napier, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  47. Kircher CA, Bouabid J (2014) New building damage and loss functions for tsunami. In: 10th U.S. National conference on earthquake engineering, frontiers of earthquake engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Anchorage, USAGoogle Scholar
  48. Kongar I, Esposito S, Giovinazzi S (2017) Post-earthquake assessment and management for infrastructure systems: learning from the Canterbury (New Zealand) and L’Aquila (Italy) earthquakes. Bull Earthq Eng 15(2):589–620.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-015-9761-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kosa K (2012) Damage analysis of bridges affected by tsunami due to the great east Japan earthquake. In: International symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, Tokyo, Japan, pp 1386–1397.  https://doi.org/10.5610/jaee.12.4_319
  50. Koshimura S, Namegaya Y, Yanagisawa H (2009a) Tsunami fragility: a new measure to identify tsunami damage. J Disaster Res 4(6):479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Koshimura S, Oie T, Yanagisawa H, Imamura F (2009b) Developing fragility functions for tsunami damage estimation using numerical model and post-tsunami data from Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Coast Eng J 51(03):243–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kurian NP, Prakash TN, Baba M (2007) Field observations on the tsunami impact along the Kerala coast, southwest India. In: Murty TS, Aswathanarayana U, Nirupama N (eds) The Indian Ocean Tsunami: Balkema—proceedings and monographs in engineering, water and earth sciences. Taylor and Francis Group, London, pp 323–337Google Scholar
  53. Kwasinski A (2013) Lessons from field damage assessments about communication networks power supply and infrastructure performance during natural disasters with a focus on hurricane sandy. In: FCC workshop on network resiliency, New York City, USAGoogle Scholar
  54. Kwasinski A, Tang AK (2012) Telecommunications performance in the M = 9.0 off-shore east coast of Japan earthquake and Tsunami, March 11, 2011. In: International symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, Tokyo, Japan, pp 1514–1525Google Scholar
  55. Lane E, Arnold J, Sykes J, Roulston H (2012) Modelling coastal inundation in Christchurch and Kaiapoi from a South American tsunami using topography from after the 2011 February earthquake. Environment Canterbury report R12/38Google Scholar
  56. Lane EM, Gillibrand PA, Wang X, Power W (2013) A probabilistic tsunami hazard study of the Auckland region, part II: inundation modelling and hazard assessment. Pure Appl Geophys 170(9–10):1635–1646.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0538-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lane E, Kohout A, Chiaverini A, Arnold J (2014) Updated inundation modelling in Canterbury from a South American Tsunami. Environment Canterbury report R14/78Google Scholar
  58. Lekkas E, Andreadakis E, Alexoudi V, Kapourani E, Kostaki I (2011) The Mw = 9.0 Tohoku Japan earthquake (March 11, 2011) tsunami impact on structures and infrastructure. In: Environmental geosciences and engineering survey for territory protection and population safety (EngeoPro) international conference, Moscow, Russia, pp 97–103Google Scholar
  59. Leone F, Lavigne F, Paris R, Denain J-C, Vinet F (2011) A spatial analysis of the December 26th, 2004 tsunami-induced damages: lessons learned for a better risk assessment integrating buildings vulnerability. Appl Geogr 31(1):363–375.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.07.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Løvholt F, Setiadi NJ, Birkmann J, Harbitz CB, Bach C, Fernando N, Nadim F et al (2014) Tsunami risk reduction—are we better prepared today than in 2004? Int J Disaster Risk Reduct 10:127–142.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2014.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lynett PJ, Borrero J, Son S, Wilson R, Miller K (2014) Assessment of the tsunami-induced current hazard. Geophys Res Lett 41(6):2048–2055.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013GL058680 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Macabuag J, Rossetto T, Ioannou I (2016a) Investigation of the effect of debris-induced damage for constructing tsunami fragility curves for buildings. In: 1st international conference on natural hazards & infrastructure, Chania, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  63. Macabuag J, Rossetto T, Ioannou I (2016b) Investigation of the effect of debris-induced damage for constructing tsunami fragility curves for buildings. In: 1st international conference on natural hazards & infrastructure, pp 1–16.  https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences8040117
  64. Marchand M, Buurman J, Pribadi A, Kurniawan A (2009) Damage and casualties modelling as part of a vulnerability assessment for tsunami hazards: a case study from Aceh, Indonesia. J Flood Risk Manag 2(2):120–131.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-318X.2009.01027.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. MARCOM Working Group 53 (2009) Mitigation of tsunami disasters in ports. PIANC report, vol III, no 4Google Scholar
  66. Matsuhashi M, Fukatani W, Yokota T, Ozaki M, Horie N (2012) The damage of sewage treatment systems caused by the Great East Japan. In: International symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake, Tokyo, Japan, pp 1496–1507Google Scholar
  67. McClelland S (2011) Japan: surviving a tsunami, rebuilding communications. Intermedia 39(5):11–22Google Scholar
  68. Mebarki A, Jerez S, Prodhomme G, Reimeringer M (2016) Natural hazards, vulnerability and structural resilience: tsunamis and industrial tanks. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk 7:5–17.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2016.1181458 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Miyajima M (2014) Performance of earthquake resistant drinking water pipeline during the 2011 Tohoku earthquake in Japan. In: 10th U.S. National conference on earthquake engineering, frontiers of earthquake engineering, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Anchorage, USAGoogle Scholar
  70. Nagayama T (2011) The NTT group’s response to the great east Japan earthquake. NTT Group CSR report, special report, pp 5–12Google Scholar
  71. Naito C, Cercone C, Riggs HR, Cox D (2014) Procedure for site assessment of the potential for tsunami debris impact. J Waterw Port Coast Ocean Eng 140(2):223–232.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WW.1943-5460.0000222 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Nakanishi H, Black J, Matsuo K (2014) Disaster resilience in transportation: Japan earthquake and tsunami 2011. Int J Disaster Resil Built Environ 5(4):341–361.  https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-12-2012-0039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. New Zealand Lifelines Council (2017) New Zealand infrastructure vulnerability assessment: stage 1, September, pp 1–64Google Scholar
  74. NIWA (2014) RiskScape tsunami fragility projectGoogle Scholar
  75. Nojima N (2012) Restorations and system interactions of lifelines in the great east Japan earthquake disaster, 2011. In: 15th world conference on earthquake engineering, Lisbon, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  76. Okal EA, Fritz HM, Raad PE, Synolakis C, Al-Shijbi Y, Al-Saifi M (2006a) Oman field survey after the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthq Spectra 22(SUPPL. 3):S203–S218.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2202647 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Okal EA, Fritz HM, Raveloson R, Joelson G, Pančošková P, Rambolamanana G (2006b) Madagascar field survey after the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthq Spectra 22(SUPPL. 3):S263–S283.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2202646 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Okal EA, Sladen A, Okal EA-S (2006c) Rodrigues, Mauritius, and Reunion Islands field survey after the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Earthq Spectra 22(SUPPL. 3):S241–S261.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2209190 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Okal EA, Fritz HM, Synolakis CE, Borrero JC, Weiss R, Lynett PJ, Chan I-C et al (2010) Field survey of the Samoa tsunami of 29 September 2009. Seismol Res Lett 81(4):577–591.  https://doi.org/10.1785/gssrl.81.4.577 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Park H, Cox DT, Barbosa AR (2017) Comparison of inundation depth and momentum flux based fragilities for probabilistic tsunami damage assessment and uncertainty analysis. Coast Eng 122(February):10–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2017.01.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Pitilakis KD, Argyroudis SA, Fotopoulou SD, Karafagka SV, Kakderi KG (2016) Risk assessment of critical facilities to moderate and extreme seismic events including tsunami: the case of the harbor of Thessaloniki. In: 1st international conference on natural hazards & infrastructureGoogle Scholar
  82. Power WL (2013) Review of tsunami hazard in New Zealand (2013 update). GNS science consultancy report 2013/131Google Scholar
  83. Power W, Downes G, Stirling M (2007) Estimation of tsunami hazard in New Zealand due to South American earthquakes. Pure Appl Geophys 164(2–3):547–564.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-006-0166-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Power W, Wang X, Lane E, Gillibrand P (2013) A probabilistic tsunami hazard study of the auckland region, part I: propagation modelling and tsunami hazard assessment at the shoreline. Pure Appl Geophys 170(9–10):1621–1634.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0543-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Power W, Clark K, King DN, Borrero J, Howarth J, Lane EM, Benson A et al (2017) Tsunami runup and tide-gauge observations from the 14 November 2016 M7.8 Kaikōura earthquake, New Zealand. Pure Appl Geophys 174(7):2457–2473.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-017-1566-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Reese S, Bradley BA, Bind J, Smart G, Power W, Sturman J (2011) Empirical building fragilities from observed damage in the 2009 South Pacific tsunami. Earth Sci Rev 107(1–2):156–173.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2011.01.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Rossetto T, Ioannou I, Grant D, Maqsood T (2014) Guidelines for the empirical vulnerability assessment. GEM technical report, 08, 140.  https://doi.org/10.13117/GEM.VULN-MOD.TR2014.11
  88. Saatcioglu M (2007) Performance of structures affected by the 2004 Sumatra Tsunami in Thailand and Indonesia. In: Murty TS, Aswathanarayana U, Nirupama N (eds) The Indian Ocean Tsunami: Balkema—proceedings and monographs in engineering, water and earth sciences. Taylor & Francis, London, pp 297–321Google Scholar
  89. Sagara J, Ishiwatari M (2012) Infrastructure rehabilitation. Knowledge Note, vol 4Google Scholar
  90. Sankaran J (2000) Frieght logistics in the New Zealand context. Int J Phys Distrib Logist Manag Bradf 30(2):145–164.  https://doi.org/10.1108/17506200710779521 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Scawthorn C, Ono Y, Iemura H, Ridha M, Purwanto B (2006) Performance of lifelines in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, during the December 2004 Great Sumatra earthquake and tsunami. Earthq Spectra 22(SUPPL. 3):511–544.  https://doi.org/10.1193/1.2206807 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Schmidt J, Matcham I, Reese S, King A, Bell R, Henderson R, Heron D et al (2011) Quantitative multi-risk analysis for natural hazards: a framework for multi-risk modelling. Nat Hazards 58(3):1169–1192.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9721-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Shoji G, Moriyama T (2007) Evaluation of the structural fragility of a bridge structure subjected to a tsunami wave load. J Nat Disaster Sci 29(2):73–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Strand C, Masek J (2007) Sumatra–Andaman islands earthquake and tsunami of december 26, 2004 lifeline performance. American Society of Civil Engineers, RestonGoogle Scholar
  95. Suppasri A, Mas E, Imamura F (2013) Field guide of tsunami damage and reconstruction site visit in Miyagi prefecture, Onagawa–Ishinomaki–Sendai–Natori–Iwanuma, 11 May 2013Google Scholar
  96. Tomita T, Yeom G, Tatsumi D, Okamoto O, Kawai H (2011) Port damage from tsunami of the great east Japan earthquake. In: 21st international offshore and polar engineering conference, Maui, Hawaii, pp 179–183Google Scholar
  97. Turnbull J, Hughes M (2017) Anticipating tsunami impacts in Port Marlborough: implications for port operation and harbour navigability. Civil & natural resources engineering research report, 04 April. https://www.marlborough.govt.nz/repository/libraries/id:1w1mps0ir17q9sgxanf9/hierarchy/Documents/Services/EM-EngineeringLifelinesList/Anticipating_Tsunami_Impacts_In_Port_Marlborugh.pdf
  98. UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction) (2015) Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. http://www.wcdrr.org/uploads/Sendai_Framework_for_Disaster_Risk_Reduction_2015-2030.pdf. Accessed Apr 2019
  99. Unjoh S (2012) Tsunami damage to bridge structures in Rikuzen–Takada City and the emergency road network. In: International symposium on engineering lessons learned from the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake, Tokyo, Japan, pp 1429–1438Google Scholar
  100. Villholth K, Neupane B (2011) Tsunamis as long-term hazards to coastal groundwater resources and associated water supplies. In: Mokhtari M (ed) Tsunami—a growing disaster, Intech, Shanghai, China, pp 87–104. http://www.intechopen.com/books/tsunami-a-growing-disaster/tsunamis-as-long-term-hazards-to-coastal-groundwater-resources-and-associated-water-supplies
  101. Wegscheider S, Post J, Zosseder K, Mück M, Strunz G, Riedlinger T, Anwar HZ et al (2011) Generating tsunami risk knowledge at community level as a base for planning and implementation of risk reduction strategies. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 11(2):249–258.  https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-11-249-2011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. West Coast CDEM Group (2017) West coast lifelines vulnerability and interdependency assessment, AugustGoogle Scholar
  103. Wilson T, Daly M, Johnston J (2009) Review of impacts of volcanic ash on electricity distribution systems, broadcasting and communication networks. Auckland Regional Council technical report, Auckland, New Zealand, vol 051Google Scholar
  104. Wilson G, Wilson TM, Deligne NI, Cole JW (2014) Volcanic hazard impacts to critical infrastructure: a review. J Volcanol Geotherm Res 286:148–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2014.08.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Yeh H, Sato S, Tajima Y (2013) The 11 March 2011 East Japan earthquake and Tsunami: tsunami effects on coastal infrastructure and buildings. Pure Appl Geophys 170(6–8):1019–1031.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024-012-0489-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geological SciencesUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  2. 2.GNS ScienceLower HuttNew Zealand
  3. 3.National Institute of Water and Atmospheric ResearchChristchurchNew Zealand
  4. 4.Department of Civil and Natural Resources EngineeringUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations