Bradt David A, Bartley Bruce, Hibble Belinda A, Varshney Kavita
Field Studies Section, Disaster Medical Coordination International Society, Washington, DC, USA.
Emerg Med Australas. 2015 Apr;27(2):132-8. doi: 10.1111/1742-6723.12357. Epub 2015 Feb 5.
A regional epidemiological analysis of Australasian disasters in the 20th century to present was undertaken to examine trends in disaster epidemiology; to characterise the impacts on civil society through disaster policy, practice and legislation; and to consider future potential limitations in national disaster resilience.
A surveillance definition of disaster was developed conforming to the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) criteria (≥10 deaths, ≥100 affected, or declaration of state emergency or appeal for international assistance). The authors then applied economic and legislative inclusion criteria to identify additional disasters of national significance.
The surveillance definition yielded 165 disasters in the period, from which 65 emerged as disasters of national significance. There were 38 natural disasters, 22 technological disasters, three offshore terrorist attacks and two domestic mass shootings. Geographic analysis revealed that states with major population centres experienced the vast majority of disasters of national significance. Timeline analysis revealed an increasing incidence of disasters since the 1980s, which peaked in the period 2005-2009. Recent seasonal bushfires and floods have incurred the highest death toll and economic losses in Australasian history. Reactive hazard-specific legislation emerged after all terrorist acts and after most disasters of national significance.
Timeline analysis reveals an increasing incidence in natural disasters over the past 15 years, with the most lethal and costly disasters occurring in the past 3 years. Vulnerability to disaster in Australasia appears to be increasing. Reactive legislation is a recurrent feature of Australasian disaster response that suggests legislative shortsightedness and a need for comprehensive all-hazards model legislation in the future.
对20世纪至今澳大拉西亚地区灾害进行了区域流行病学分析，以研究灾害流行病学趋势；通过灾害政策、实践和立法来描述对公民社会的影响；并考虑国家灾害恢复力未来可能存在的局限性。
制定了符合灾害流行病学研究中心（CRED）标准（≥10人死亡、≥100人受影响，或宣布进入紧急状态或呼吁国际援助）的灾害监测定义。作者随后应用经济和立法纳入标准来确定具有国家意义的其他灾害。
该监测定义在此期间产生了165起灾害，其中65起被认定为具有国家意义的灾害。有38起自然灾害、22起技术灾害、3起海上恐怖袭击和2起国内大规模枪击事件。地理分析表明，拥有主要人口中心的州经历了绝大多数具有国家意义的灾害。时间线分析显示，自20世纪80年代以来灾害发生率不断上升，在2005 - 2009年期间达到峰值。近期的季节性丛林大火和洪水造成了澳大拉西亚历史上最高的死亡人数和经济损失。在所有恐怖袭击以及大多数具有国家意义的灾害之后，出台了针对特定灾害的应对性立法。
时间线分析显示，过去15年自然灾害发生率不断上升，最致命且代价最高的灾害发生在过去3年。澳大拉西亚地区对灾害的脆弱性似乎在增加。应对性立法是澳大拉西亚灾害应对的一个反复出现的特征，这表明立法存在短视性，未来需要全面的全灾种模式立法。
