Abstract
PurposeThe Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 calls for a reduction in disaster mortality, yet measuring mortality remains a challenge due to varying definitions of disaster mortality, the quality, availability and diversity of data sources, generating mortality estimates, and how mortality data are interpreted.Design/methodology/approachThis paper uses five case studies to provide details around some of the complexities involved with measuring disaster mortality and to demonstrate the clear need for accurate disaster mortality data.FindingsThe findings highlight the benefits of combining multiple data sources for accurate mortality estimates, access to interoperable and readily available global, national, regional and local data sets, and creating standardized definitions for direct and indirect mortality for easier attribution of causes of death.Originality/valueCountries should find a method of measuring mortality that works for them and their resources, and for the hazards they face. Combining accurate mortality data and estimates and leadership at all levels can inform policy and actions to reduce disaster mortality, and ultimately strengthen disaster risk reduction in countries for all citizens.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
