Abstract
Disaster impact databases are important resources for informing research, policy, and decision making. Therefore, understanding the underpinning methodology of data collection used by the databases, how they differ, and quality indicators of the data recorded is essential in ensuring that their use as reference points is valid. The Australian Disaster Resilience Knowledge Hub (AIDRKH) is an open-source platform supported by government to inform disaster management practice. A comparative descriptive review of the Disaster Mapper (hosted at AIDRKH) and the international Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) was undertaken to identify differences in how Australian disasters are captured and measured. The results show substantial variation in identification and classification of disasters across hazard impacts and hazard types and a lack of data structure for the systematic reporting of contextual and impact variables. These differences may have implications for reporting, academic analysis, and thus knowledge management informing disaster prevention and response policy or plans. Consistency in reporting methods based on international classification standards is recommended to improve the validity and usefulness of this Australian database.
Highlights
The frequency and severity of natural disasters is increasing, the effects of which are spread over greater geographical and increasingly populated areas
Consistency in reporting methods based on international classification standards is recommended to improve the validity and usefulness of this Australian database
The databases used in the comparative review were the Australian Disaster Mapper based at the AIDRKH14 and the Emergency Events Database (EM-DAT) database of the Belgium-based Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED; Brussels, Belgium).[15]
Summary
The frequency and severity of natural disasters is increasing, the effects of which are spread over greater geographical and increasingly populated areas. In the Australian context, the increasing risk to the built and natural environments related to increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events is described by the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience.[1] Such risks have been realized by vast bushfires which swept across multiple states causing widespread destruction on the east coast of Australia over the summer of 2019/2020. To empower principles of “building back better,” resiliency, and supporting future disaster risk reduction (DRR) efforts and policy interventions in this context, an accurate understanding of hazards, threats, risks, and vulnerabilities is required. Measurement and understanding of the impacts caused by disaster informs policy makers and operational decision makers on investment strategies related to disaster. Previous studies in Australia measuring heatwave, a common Australian hazard, have demonstrated challenges in standardization of terminology and definitions, as well as data collection.[2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
