title: Metabarcoding inventory of an arctic tundra soil ecosystem reveals highly heterogeneous communities at a small scale

authors: Jorna, Jesse

abstract: Biodiversity surveys of Arctic soil ecosystems are limited. Here, we provide a sequence-based inventory of soil fauna from an Arctic tundra ecosystem near the Canadian High Arctic Research Station in Cambridge Bay, Nunavut. Invertebrate communities were extracted at a vegetated and non-vegetated site in three replicates and inventoried using 18S metabarcode sequencing. A total of 361 amplicon sequence variants (ASV) were identified and assigned to the closest matching taxonomic orders, most of which belonged to the Nematoda and Arthropoda. Vegetated soils showed no significantly higher ASV richness relative to non-vegetated soils although they contained a significantly higher diversity of arthropod taxa including insects, mites, and springtails. Most taxa were found only at a single location and even samples from the same site displayed distinct communities, suggesting that belowground species richness in Arctic tundra habitats is highly heterogeneous. Preserving soil biodiversity in a changing Arctic is essential for Inuit communities who rely on intact tundra ecosystems for their health and wellbeing.

text: Metabarcoding inventory of an arctic tundra soil ecosystem reveals highly heterogeneous communities at a small scale Biodiversity surveys of Arctic soil ecosystems are limited. Here, we provide a sequence-based inventory of soil fauna from an Arctic tundra ecosystem near the Canadian High Arctic Research Station in Cambridge Bay, Nunavut. Invertebrate communities were extracted at a vegetated and non-vegetated site in three replicates and inventoried using 18S metabarcode sequencing. A total of 361 amplicon sequence variants (ASV) were identified and assigned to the closest matching taxonomic orders, most of which belonged to the Nematoda and Arthropoda. Vegetated soils showed no significantly higher ASV richness relative to non-vegetated soils although they contained a significantly higher diversity of arthropod taxa including insects, mites, and springtails. Most taxa were found only at a single location and even samples from the same site displayed distinct communities, suggesting that belowground species richness in Arctic tundra habitats is highly heterogeneous. Preserving soil biodiversity in a changing Arctic is essential for Inuit communities who rely on intact tundra ecosystems for their health and wellbeing.

year: 2023-05-01

title: Assessing the viability of foldable-expandable container homes for post-disaster housing in New Zealand

authors: Babu, Gayathry

subjects: container homes

abstract: Natural disasters frequently demolish New Zealand, with its diverse landscapes. It is particularly susceptible to various natural disasters due to its unique geological position on the edge of the Pacific Ring of Fire (McKinnon, Scott, and Margaret Cook, 2020). This makes it prone to earthquakes, volcanic activity, tsunamis, and extreme weather events. A notable example of such a disaster is Cyclone Gabrielle, which struck the Hawke's Bay region in New Zealand. It creates wide damage in housing properties, leaving damaged bridges and culverts, buried roads, significant dropouts, and isolated communities in its wake. One of the major difficulties for government authorities and policymakers is to build houses for the victims of such natural disasters within as short a period as possible. The rapid provision of safe, durable, and affordable shelters is essential to restore a sense of normalcy for affected populations. Traditional reconstruction methods are often slow, expensive, and complex, particularly in regions with limited resources or logistical challenges. This has led to the exploration of alternative housing solutions, such as the use of modified shipping containers.

In New Zealand, as it is a reality, expeditious and resilient housing options are crucial for recovery after a natural disaster. Therefore, strategic solutions should be introduced to assist the responsible entities and agencies in providing shelters to the disaster victims within a short duration.

Container homes offer a unique combination of structural integrity, portability, and affordability, making them an attractive option for post-disaster housing. Their inherent durability allows them to withstand harsh environmental conditions, and their modular nature facilitates quick assembly and scalability. Additionally, container homes can be prefabricated and easily transported to disaster sites, reducing the time required for construction and enabling immediate relief efforts. This thesis explores the feasibility of using double-wing expandable foldable container homes as an innovative post-disaster housing solution in New Zealand, focusing on the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle in Hawke's Bay.

Findings indicate that container homes offer significant advantages, including reduced construction timelines, cost savings, and the adaptability needed for fast recovery in disaster-affected regions. However, challenges remain in achieving compliance with New Zealand’s stringent building codes and in adapting the homes to withstand several factors such as seismic/ wind resistance, waterproofing, etc. which are prevalent in many disaster-prone areas. Regulatory requirements, such as PS1 and PS4 design approvals and local council consents, emerge as pivotal considerations that can delay deployment if not streamlined.

text: Assessing the viability of foldable-expandable container homes for post-disaster housing in New Zealand Natural disasters frequently demolish New Zealand, with its diverse landscapes. It is particularly susceptible to various natural disasters due to its unique geological position on the edge of the Pacific Ring of Fire (McKinnon, Scott, and Margaret Cook, 2020). This makes it prone to earthquakes, volcanic activity, tsunamis, and extreme weather events. A notable example of such a disaster is Cyclone Gabrielle, which struck the Hawke's Bay region in New Zealand. It creates wide damage in housing properties, leaving damaged bridges and culverts, buried roads, significant dropouts, and isolated communities in its wake. One of the major difficulties for government authorities and policymakers is to build houses for the victims of such natural disasters within as short a period as possible. The rapid provision of safe, durable, and affordable shelters is essential to restore a sense of normalcy for affected populations. Traditional reconstruction methods are often slow, expensive, and complex, particularly in regions with limited resources or logistical challenges. This has led to the exploration of alternative housing solutions, such as the use of modified shipping containers.

In New Zealand, as it is a reality, expeditious and resilient housing options are crucial for recovery after a natural disaster. Therefore, strategic solutions should be introduced to assist the responsible entities and agencies in providing shelters to the disaster victims within a short duration.

Container homes offer a unique combination of structural integrity, portability, and affordability, making them an attractive option for post-disaster housing. Their inherent durability allows them to withstand harsh environmental conditions, and their modular nature facilitates quick assembly and scalability. Additionally, container homes can be prefabricated and easily transported to disaster sites, reducing the time required for construction and enabling immediate relief efforts. This thesis explores the feasibility of using double-wing expandable foldable container homes as an innovative post-disaster housing solution in New Zealand, focusing on the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle in Hawke's Bay.

Findings indicate that container homes offer significant advantages, including reduced construction timelines, cost savings, and the adaptability needed for fast recovery in disaster-affected regions. However, challenges remain in achieving compliance with New Zealand’s stringent building codes and in adapting the homes to withstand several factors such as seismic/ wind resistance, waterproofing, etc. which are prevalent in many disaster-prone areas. Regulatory requirements, such as PS1 and PS4 design approvals and local council consents, emerge as pivotal considerations that can delay deployment if not streamlined.

year: 2025-06-13

title: Maori and goldfields revenue

authors: Hart, Philip

abstract: When gold was first discovered, the Crown accepted that it needed Maori consent to open their land for mining and had to assuage fears of losing their land. Accordingly, officials devised agreements to protect Maori interests and to provide a financial return. Because of what had occurred in other countries after goldfields opened, both Maori and the government agreed that these must be well controlled. Over time, the regulations increasingly favoured the mining industry rather than the original landowners, who were not informed about the true value of their land, auriferous or otherwise. Maori were confused about their financial entitlement because of changes made by the government to the fees payable to them. 
Some rangatira, most notably Wirope Hoterene Taipari of Ngati Maru, saw a chance to obtain unexpected (and unearned) wealth, as shown by his insistence on opening Thames to miners despite the opposition of most of his hapu. Later, other rangatira wanted to open Ohinemuri and other potential fields because of the money they were promised by impatient miners and by more patient officials. For a brief time, some Maori considered controlling the potential Ohinemuri goldfield themselves. The main incentive to opening land was the wealth received by landowners during the early days of the Thames goldfield, but as mining faded later so did goldfields revenue. Changes to mining regulations diminished the amount distributed to Maori in ways that some Pakeha considered unfair, and these provoked complaints from Maori.
A continuing problem for officials was to ensure that revenue was allocated to the right owners. The system was complex, resulting in delays in paying money and in some Maori obtaining too much and others too little (or none at all), an outcome often resulting from rangatira distributing it as they chose rather than caused by government officials, who did their best to ensure fairness. Over time, the government unilaterally made changes to the system. For their part, miners complained about being required to pay for the right to mine, and encouraged the government to acquire the freehold of goldfield land because miners’ rights on Crown land were one-quarter the cost of those on Maori land. 
The revenue received by the landowners soon slipped through their fingers, sometimes in traditionally competitive gatherings such as tangi. It can be argued that Taipari, who very shrewdly adapted to the new economy (and experienced its perils, becoming bankrupt in 1870), used his income not just to give himself a luxurious lifestyle but also to boost the mana of his hapu. The government has been blamed for not insisting that revenue be protected for the use of future generations, a concept that occurred to only a few Pakeha at the time and to no Maori; far from considering the interests of their descendents, cultivating the land decreased while this revenue was received. But due to the nature of mining, by the twentieth century the landowners were lamenting the serious decline in their income from this source; despite having sold so much of their goldfield lands, some complained at not receiving any more revenue. 
Evaluating the outcome, the Waitangi Tribunal indulged in some counter-factual history by suggesting that the government should have encouraged rangatira to set up trusts to protect the income for future generations, but no rangatira had suggested this idea, nor did they ask that they should manage goldfields jointly with the Crown. After imagining that Maori in partnership with Pakeha capitalists could have developed the goldfields without the involvement of the Crown, the Tribunal had to accept that the outcome would have been the same: loss of money (because apart from anything else mining could not remain payable indefinitely) combined with the loss of much of their land.

text: Maori and goldfields revenue When gold was first discovered, the Crown accepted that it needed Maori consent to open their land for mining and had to assuage fears of losing their land. Accordingly, officials devised agreements to protect Maori interests and to provide a financial return. Because of what had occurred in other countries after goldfields opened, both Maori and the government agreed that these must be well controlled. Over time, the regulations increasingly favoured the mining industry rather than the original landowners, who were not informed about the true value of their land, auriferous or otherwise. Maori were confused about their financial entitlement because of changes made by the government to the fees payable to them. 
Some rangatira, most notably Wirope Hoterene Taipari of Ngati Maru, saw a chance to obtain unexpected (and unearned) wealth, as shown by his insistence on opening Thames to miners despite the opposition of most of his hapu. Later, other rangatira wanted to open Ohinemuri and other potential fields because of the money they were promised by impatient miners and by more patient officials. For a brief time, some Maori considered controlling the potential Ohinemuri goldfield themselves. The main incentive to opening land was the wealth received by landowners during the early days of the Thames goldfield, but as mining faded later so did goldfields revenue. Changes to mining regulations diminished the amount distributed to Maori in ways that some Pakeha considered unfair, and these provoked complaints from Maori.
A continuing problem for officials was to ensure that revenue was allocated to the right owners. The system was complex, resulting in delays in paying money and in some Maori obtaining too much and others too little (or none at all), an outcome often resulting from rangatira distributing it as they chose rather than caused by government officials, who did their best to ensure fairness. Over time, the government unilaterally made changes to the system. For their part, miners complained about being required to pay for the right to mine, and encouraged the government to acquire the freehold of goldfield land because miners’ rights on Crown land were one-quarter the cost of those on Maori land. 
The revenue received by the landowners soon slipped through their fingers, sometimes in traditionally competitive gatherings such as tangi. It can be argued that Taipari, who very shrewdly adapted to the new economy (and experienced its perils, becoming bankrupt in 1870), used his income not just to give himself a luxurious lifestyle but also to boost the mana of his hapu. The government has been blamed for not insisting that revenue be protected for the use of future generations, a concept that occurred to only a few Pakeha at the time and to no Maori; far from considering the interests of their descendents, cultivating the land decreased while this revenue was received. But due to the nature of mining, by the twentieth century the landowners were lamenting the serious decline in their income from this source; despite having sold so much of their goldfield lands, some complained at not receiving any more revenue. 
Evaluating the outcome, the Waitangi Tribunal indulged in some counter-factual history by suggesting that the government should have encouraged rangatira to set up trusts to protect the income for future generations, but no rangatira had suggested this idea, nor did they ask that they should manage goldfields jointly with the Crown. After imagining that Maori in partnership with Pakeha capitalists could have developed the goldfields without the involvement of the Crown, the Tribunal had to accept that the outcome would have been the same: loss of money (because apart from anything else mining could not remain payable indefinitely) combined with the loss of much of their land.

year: 2016