Consistent with previous research findings (Annang et al., 2006), this study identified vacancies as having affected their community following a disaster. For instance, under the theme of “Banks & Businesses”, it was evident that Goderich suffered both residential and business vacancies. Similarly, participants captured the importance of this particular theme and community losses, using images of empty lots. It was not noted in their study whether most businesses and homes were restored or bounced back, whereas in Goderich most business were able to re-open within months/years. Relocating each of the banks, to their identical locations downtown prior to the tornado, was another concern. It was suggested that since these banks are situated in the same location where they had been previously damaged, they are susceptible to similar damages in the future. As most participants suggested, it is better to have related critical infrastructure more dispersed, so that not all will be damaged when located in close proximity to one another. Based on the photovoice findings, one can propose that results from this study can help determine where to focus disaster response efforts, both immediately and during the long-term recovery period.
This research also contributes to the recognition and importance of environmental restoration in disaster recovery (Silver & Grek-Martin, 2015) and the importance of recognizing natural features as critical infrastructure essential to the health, safety, security and economic wellbeing of Canadians (Public Safety Canada, 2015b). Notably, that replanting trees and enhancing the community with public art (i.e. tree carvings and sculptures, restoring historic
landmarks) became a huge aspect of the rebuild and recovery process. In the theme of “Trees as Critical Infrastructure”, each participant had a story to tell regarding the trees in their
community, whether it was about the volunteer groups that came together to replant lost trees, to the health benefits and how residents had lost the protection trees provided against wind and sun. While trees are not typically seen as being critical infrastructure, this was not the case in
Goderich following the 2011 tornado. To the participants in Goderich, the trees signify survival and resilience - representing a new form of critical infrastructure and necessary for the healthy function of Goderich. Following similar findings, focusing on restoring these significant aspects of the community (e.g. trees, history), and can assist in promoting growth and thereby resilience in communities (Silver & Grek-Martin, 2015).
5.5.1 Differing Perspectives
The findings also illustrate the differences in perspectives regarding the recovery process
following a disaster. Similar to other studies, it has been recognized that residents will inevitably experience positive and negative outcomes of a disaster, ultimately shaping their perspective on the response and recovery (Silver & Grek-Martin, 2015). Residents within Goderich are still impacted from the F3 tornado five years later and continue to identify its effects, as observed from the themes of “Damages & Things Lost” and “Memories & Recovery”. Notably, “Damages & Things Lost” was one of the top three salient and strongest themes amongst participants. Within this theme, perceptions differed amongst participants in the types of photographs they chose to take and the kinds of stories they chose to tell. Ultimately, previous experience with the tornado and personal background shaped these perceptions, mirroring a similar study (Baldwin & Chandler, 2010).
5.5.2 Emerging Controversy and Contentious Issues
Related to the notion of differing perspectives regarding disaster recovery, is the idea of controversy and differences of opinion. In the study by Laycock et al. (2014) regarding the impacts of the Goderich tornado on community engagement and connection, it was found that the tornado strengthened community engagement temporarily yet did not lead to long-term enhancement of social networks and connection. Similarly, some authors have documented that the impact of a disaster may cause tensions among social groups and result in political
complications in communities (Kapucu, Hawkins, & Rivera, 2014). This was demonstrated by the theme “Opportunities and Controversy”, which captured some of the community tension and differences of opinion during the rebuild and recovery process. All participants noted that the community experienced a surge of support during the response period of the event, yet there are several instances where differences of opinion came out in the recovery process. It was
highlighted that the tornado resulted in many opportunities to improve buildings and landscapes, yet some aspects of the rebuild were contentious – especially where practicality and aesthetic had to be balanced.
One notable example of a contentious issue that developed during the recovery process is the new bandstand, which one participant described was likely the most ‘hated’ piece of rebuild in the town square. It was made explicit that not all residents appreciated its modern aesthetic nor its practical use in the square, whereas others who had supported its development had differing views. Participants also discussed some of the debates regarding historical homes and the inability for some to be restored in the same way - if at all (e.g. United Church). As such, the challenge in rebuilding following a natural disaster (i.e. social tension), including the challenge of making spaces – and buildings – useable while also being in line with the community’s vision
became pertinent. Although it was not possible to restore every historical building/structure that was damaged in Goderich, there was the opportunity to have the newer buildings constructed to retain some of the historical “feeling”, as seen in the downtown.