Michael James Crozier

Charles Cotton was New Zealand's foremost advocate for geomorphology. His publications were recognised nationally and internationally, informing educational curricula and captivating the wider public. His approach to landform study was strongly influenced by The Geographical Cycle espoused by William Morris Davis of Harvard University. For the first half of the 20th century, The Cycle constituted the dominant paradigm of landform studies, but it was ultimately severely criticised and abandoned as unrealistic. While Cotton lost credence among some academics for his reluctance to abandon The Cycle, his elegantly illustrated written work made a lasting contribution to many branches of earth science.

Approach The focus in this chapter is on the client – what is it that hazard and risk managers want from geomorphologists and what do geomorphologists believe that their science can constructively offer hazard and risk management? However, communicating skills and requirements can be difficult because scientists and practitioners come from different backgrounds and work within different constraints. On the one hand, the geomorphologist primarily needs to satisfy the research community, while the manager, on the other hand, has to deal with their client base and the public in general, often within a strict statutory, regulatory, policy and financial framework. Clearly, the basic information demands of hazard assessment, of where (location), what (type of event), when (how often) are fundamental to reducing risk but the manager might also legitimately ask ‘which areas are free from hazard?’, ‘what type of mitigation might be appropriate?’, ‘what sort of monitoring should be undertaken?’, ‘what changes can we expect in the future?’ and ‘what is the cost effectiveness of different management options?’. In post-event situations, geomorphologists may also be required for forensic investigation. In many cases this will be to establish the cause, apportion weight to the causative factors, and to determine the relative importance of human versus natural factors in creating both cause and consequences. By understanding the geomorphic system, not only in space but also through time, the geomorphologist should be capable of predicting or at least indicating the hazardous characteristics of processes and places within the system, at a range of spatiotemporal scales.

This study investigates the extent to which people's views on the causes and preventability of earthquake damage might be influenced by their degree of exposure to hazard as well as what information they have been given about the hazard. The results show that the provision of hazard zoning information influences judgements on preventability and causes of damage, but this effect depends on the degree of hazard faced by residents. In low hazard zones, information leads to the view that causes are manageable, whereas in high hazard zones information may induce a degree of fatalism. The use of public information in risk management needs to take into account the degree of risk faced by the recipients.