Mark W. Stirling

National Seismic Hazard Model for New Zealand: 2010 Update

A team of earthquake geologists, seismologists, and engineering seis- mologists has collectively produced an update of the national probabilistic seismic hazard (PSH) model for New Zealand (National Seismic Hazard Model, or NSHM). The new NSHM supersedes the earlier NSHM published in 2002 and used as the hazard basis for the New Zealand Loadings Standard and numerous other end-user applica- tions. The new NSHM incorporates a fault source model that has been updated with over 200 new onshore and offshore fault sources and utilizes new New Zealand-based and international scaling relationships for the parameterization of the faults. The dis- tributed seismicity model has also been updated to include post-1997 seismicity data, a new seismicity regionalization, and improved methodology for calculation of the seismicity parameters. Probabilistic seismic hazard maps produced from the new NSHM show a similar pattern of hazard to the earlier model at the national scale, but there are some significant reductions and increases in hazard at the regional scale. The national-scale differences between the new and earlier NSHM appear less than those seen between much earlier national models, indicating that some degree of consis- tency has been achieved in the national-scale pattern of hazard estimates, at least for return periods of 475 years and greater. Online Material: Table of fault source parameters for the 2010 national seismic- hazard model.

A New Seismic Hazard Model for New Zealand

We present a new probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) for New Zealand. An important feature of the analysis is the application of a new method for the treatment of historical (distributed) seismicity data in PSHA. The PSHA uses the seismicity recorded across and beneath the country to define a three-dimensional grid of a -values (i.e., parameter a of a Gutenberg-Richter distribution log N/yr = a - bM , in which N /yr is the number of earthquakes per year recorded inside each grid cell equal to or greater than magnitude M ); parameter b and the limiting maximum cutoff magnitude of the Gutenberg-Richter distribution are defined from the surrounding region (14 crustal and 23 subcrustal seismotectonic zones are defined for the country) and then smoothed across the boundaries of the zones. The methodology therefore combines the modern method of defining continuous distributions of seismicity parameters (Frankel, 1995; Frankel et al. , 1996) with the traditional method of defining large area sources and the associated seismicity parameters (e.g., Algermissen et al. , 1990). The methodology provides a means of including deep (subduction zone) seismicity in a PSHA, preserves the finer-scale spatial variations of seismicity rates across a region, avoids the undesirable edge effects produced in the traditional method when adjacent area sources enclose areas of significantly different seismicity rates, and also enables parameters most reliably defined at a regional scale (parameter b and maximum cutoff magnitude of a Gutenberg-Richter distribution, and slip type) to be incorporated into the PSHA. The PSHA combines the modeled seismicity data with geological data describing the location and earthquake recurrence behavior of 305 active faults and new attenuation relationships for peak ground acceleration and spectral acceleration developed specifically for New Zealand. Different attenuation expressions are used for crustal and subduction zone earthquakes. The resulting PSH maps for a 150-year return period show the highest hazard to occur in the center and southwest of the country, in the areas of highest historical crustal and deep subduction zone seismicity. In contrast, the longer return-period maps (475 and 1000 year return period) show the highest hazard to occur from the southwest to northeast ends of the country, along the faults that accommodate the majority of the motion between the Pacific and Australian plates. The maps are currently being used to revise New Zealands building code, which has previously been based on PSHAs that did not explicitly include individual faults as earthquake sources. Manuscript received 10 April 2001.

Comparison of Earthquake Scaling Relations Derived from Data of the Instrumental and Preinstrumental Era

Estimates of surface rupture displacement and magnitude for crustal earthquakes from the preinstrumental era (pre-1900) tend to be greater than the corresponding estimates derived from modern scaling relations. We investigate this tendency using an expanded and updated version of the earthquake dataset of Wells and Coppersmith (1994) to fit regression relations of moment magnitude on surface rupture length and rupture area and average surface displacement on surface rupture length. Separate relations are fitted to preinstrumental and instrumental data and the results compared to the equivalent relations of Wells and Coppersmith. We find that our relations for instrumental data remove some, but not all, of the differences between the preinstrumental data and the relations of Wells and Coppersmith. We attribute the remaining differences largely to natural censoring of surface displacements less than about 1 m and surface rupture lengths less than about 5 km from the dataset for the preinstrumental era because regressions constructed from similarly censored instrumental data are indistinguishable from the preinstrumental regressions. Since the regressions for our censored instrumental data (i.e., restricted to moderate to large earthquakes) are different from regressions for our complete dataset of instrumental earthquakes and from the regressions of Wells and Coppersmith (both with a larger proportion of small-to-moderate earthquakes), the results may indicate that large earthquakes have different scaling relationships from those of smaller earthquakes.

Complex multifault rupture during the 2016 Mw 7.8 Kaikōura earthquake, New Zealand

An earthquake with a dozen faults The 2016 moment magnitude (Mw) 7.8 Kaikōura earthquake was one of the largest ever to hit New Zealand. Hamling et al. show with a new slip model that it was an incredibly complex event. Unlike most earthquakes, multiple faults ruptured to generate the ground shaking. A remarkable 12 faults ruptured overall, with the rupture jumping between faults located up to 15 km away from each other. The earthquake should motivate rethinking of certain seismic hazard models, which do not presently allow for this unusual complex rupture pattern. Science, this issue p. eaam7194 At least 12 faults spaced up to 15 kilometers apart ruptured during the magnitude 7.8 Kaikōura earthquake. INTRODUCTION On 14 November 2016 (local time), northeastern South Island of New Zealand was struck by a major moment magnitude (Mw) 7.8 earthquake. The Kaikōura earthquake was the most powerful experienced in the region in more than 150 years. The whole of New Zealand reported shaking, with widespread damage across much of northern South Island and in the capital city, Wellington. The earthquake straddled two distinct seismotectonic domains, breaking multiple faults in the contractional North Canterbury fault zone and the dominantly strike-slip Marlborough fault system. RATIONALE Earthquakes are conceptually thought to occur along a single fault. Although this is often the case, the need to account for multiple segment ruptures challenges seismic hazard assessments and potential maximum earthquake magnitudes. Field observations from many past earthquakes and numerical models suggest that a rupture will halt if it has to step over a distance as small as 5 km to continue on a different fault. The Kaikōura earthquake’s complexity defies many conventional assumptions about the degree to which earthquake ruptures are controlled by fault segmentation and provides additional motivation to rethink these issues in seismic hazard models. RESULTS Field observations, in conjunction with interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR), Global Positioning System (GPS), and seismology data, reveal the Kaikōura earthquake to be one of the most complex earthquakes ever recorded with modern instrumental techniques. The rupture propagated northward for more than 170 km along both mapped and unmapped faults before continuing offshore at the island’s northeastern extent. A tsunami of up to 3 m in height was detected at Kaikōura and at three other tide gauges along the east coast of both the North and South Islands. Geodetic and geological field observations reveal surface ruptures along at least 12 major crustal faults and extensive uplift along much of the coastline. Surface displacements measured by GPS and satellite radar data show horizontal offsets of ~6 m. In addition, a fault-bounded block (the Papatea block) was uplifted by up to 8 m and translated south by 4 to 5 m. Modeling suggests that some of the faults slipped by more than 20 m, at depths of 10 to 15 km, with surface slip of ~10 m consistent with field observations of offset roads and fences. Although we can explain most of the deformation by crustal faulting alone, global moment tensors show a larger thrust component, indicating that the earthquake also involved some slip along the southern end of the Hikurangi subduction interface, which lies ~20 km beneath Kaikōura. Including this as a fault source in the inversion suggests that up to 4 m of predominantly reverse slip may have occurred on the subduction zone beneath the crustal faults, contributing ~10 to 30% of the total moment. CONCLUSION Although the unusual multifault rupture observed in the Kaikōura earthquake may be partly related to the geometrically complex nature of the faults in this region, this event emphasizes the importance of reevaluating how rupture scenarios are defined for seismic hazard models in plate boundary zones worldwide. Observed ground deformation from the 2016 Kaikōura, New Zealand, earthquake. (A and B) Photos showing the coastal uplift of 2 to 3 m associated with the Papatea block [labeled in (C)]. The inset in (A) shows an aerial view of New Zealand. Red lines denote the location of known active faults. The black box indicates the Marlborough fault system

The Mw 6.2 Christchurch earthquake of February 2011: preliminary report

Abstract A moment magnitude (Mw) 6.2 earthquake struck beneath the outer suburbs of Christchurch, New Zealands second largest city, on 22 February 2011 local time. The Christchurch earthquake was the deadliest in New Zealand since the 1931 Mw 7.8 Hawkes Bay earthquake and the most expensive in New Zealands recorded history. The effects of the earthquake on the regions population and infrastructure were severe including 181 fatalities, widespread building damage, liquefaction and landslides. The Christchurch earthquake was an aftershock of the Mw 7.1 Darfield Earthquake of September 2010, occurring towards the eastern edge of the aftershock zone. This was a low recurrence earthquake for New Zealand and occurred on a fault unrecognised prior to the Darfield event. Geodetic and seismological source models show that oblique-reverse slip occurred along a northeast–southwest-striking fault dipping southeast at c. 69°, with maximum slip at 3–4 km depth. Ground motions during the earthquake were unusually large at near-source distances for an earthquake of its size, registering up to 2.2 g (vertical) and 1.7 g (horizontal) near the epicentre and up to 0.8 g (vertical) and 0.7 g (horizontal) in the city centre. Acceleration response spectra exceeded 2500 yr building design codes and estimates based on standard New Zealand models. The earthquake was associated with high apparent stress indicative of a strong fault. Furthermore, rupture in an updip direction towards Christchurch likely led to strong directivity effects in the city. Site effects including long period amplification and near-surface effects also contributed to the severity of ground motions.

A model of active faulting in New Zealand

Active fault traces are a surface expression of permanent deformation that accommodates the motion within and between adjacent tectonic plates. We present an updated national-scale model for active faulting in New Zealand, summarize the current understanding of fault kinematics in 15 tectonic domains, and undertake some brief kinematic analysis including comparison of fault slip rates with GPS velocities. The model contains 635 simplified faults with tabulated parameters of their attitude (dip and dip-direction) and kinematics (sense of movement and rake of slip vector), net slip rate and a quality code. Fault density and slip rates are, as expected, highest along the central plate boundary zone, but the model is undoubtedly incomplete, particularly in rapidly eroding mountainous areas and submarine areas with limited data. The active fault data presented are of value to a range of kinematic, active fault and seismic hazard studies.

Selection of Earthquake Scaling Relationships for Seismic‐Hazard Analysis

A fundamentally important but typically abbreviated component of seismic‐hazard analysis is the selection of earthquake scaling relationships. These are typically regressions of historical earthquake datasets, in which magnitude is estimated from parameters such as fault rupture length and area. The mix of historical data from different tectonic environments and the different forms of the regression equations can result in large differences in magnitude estimates for a given fault rupture length or area. We compile a worldwide set of regressions and make a first‐order shortlisting of regressions according to their relevance to a range of tectonic regimes (plate tectonic setting and fault slip type) in existence around the world. Regression relevance is based largely on the geographical distribution, age, and quantity/quality of earthquake data used to develop them. Our compilation is limited to regressions of magnitude (or seismic moment) on fault rupture area or length, and our shortlisted regressions show a large magnitude range (up to a full magnitude unit) for a given rupture length or area across the various tectonic regimes. These large differences in magnitude estimates underline the importance of choosing regressions carefully for seismic‐hazard application in different tectonic environments.

Comparison of the Historical Record of Earthquake Hazard with Seismic- Hazard Models for New Zealand and the Continental United States

We compare the historical record of earthquake hazard experienced at 78 towns and cities (sites) distributed across New Zealand and the continental United States with the hazard estimated from the national probabilistic seismic-hazard (psh) models for the two countries. The two psh models are constructed with similar methodologies and data. Our comparisons show a tendency for the psh models to slightly exceed the historical hazard in New Zealand and westernmost continental United States interplate regions, but show lower hazard than that of the historical record in the continental United States intraplate region. Factors such as non- Poissonian behavior, parameterization of active fault data in the psh calculations, and uncertainties in estimation of ground-motion levels from historical felt intensity data for the interplate regions may have led to the higher-than-historical levels of hazard at the interplate sites. In contrast, the less-than-historical hazard for the remaining continental United States (intraplate) sites may be largely due to site conditions not having been considered at the intraplate sites, and uncertainties in correlating ground-motion levels to historical felt intensities. The study also highlights the importance of evaluating psh models at more than one region, because the conclusions reached on the basis of a solely interplate or intraplate study would be very different.

The New Zealand Active Faults Database

ABSTRACT The New Zealand Active Faults Database (NZAFD) is a national geospatial database of active faults – including their locations, names and degrees of activity – that have deformed the ground surface of New Zealand within the last 125,000 years. The NZAFD is used for geological research, hazard modelling and infrastructure planning and is an underlying dataset for other nationally significant hazard applications such as the National Seismic Hazard Model. Recent refinements to the data structure have improved the accuracy of active fault locations and characteristics. A subset of active fault information from the NZAFD, generalised for portrayal and use at a scale of 1:250,000 (and referred to as NZAFD250), is freely available online and can be downloaded in several different formats to suit the needs of a range of users including scientists, governmental authorities and the general public. To achieve a uniform spatial scale of 1:250,000 a simplification of detailed fault locational data was required in some areas, while in other areas new mapping was necessary to provide a consistent level of coverage. Future improvements to the NZAFD will include the incorporation of data on active folds and offshore active faults.

Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis of New Zealand

Abstract We construct probabilistic seismic hazard (PSH) maps for New Zealand that are based on the distribution and long‐term recurrence behaviour of active faults and the spatial distribution of earthquakes observed in historic time. Slip rate, single‐event displacement, and return time data for 154 active faults (including segments of the Hikurangi and Fiordland subduction zones) are combined with observations of the magnitudes and rupture lengths of large New Zealand earthquakes since 1843 and the instrumental record of seismicity since 1964 to predict the future ground motions that will occur across the country. Maps of the peak ground accelerations and 0.5 s response spectral accelerations expected at 10% probability in 50 yr on “rock” show the highest accelerations (>0.2g and locally over 0.6g) in a belt that extends from the southwestern end of the country to the northeastern end, along the faults that accommodate essentially all of the relative plate motion between the Australian and Pacific plat...