Introduction
Nowadays, epidemiology is an interdisciplinary science that studies the “occurrence and distribution of health-related events” and applies the gained knowledge to manage related issues (Porta, 2014, p. 76). Disaster epidemiology uses epidemiologic tools to gain knowledge that can help to control disasters (Bissell, 2013; Guha-Sapir, Santos, & Borde, 2013). The present paper discusses the disaster epidemiology of Australia and three countries that are located in the Asian region (Saudi Arabia, Turkmenistan, and Israel).
According to Subanthore (2011), the region is prone to natural disasters, but the specifics differ for its diverse areas due to their “varied landscape and human geography” (p. 22). Therefore, it appears improbable that the epidemiology of Australia can be compared to that of the whole region. For this paper, the Asian countries were chosen randomly in an attempt to represent different areas. The data was retrieved from the CRED (2016) database (the Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters).
Australia
Australia has been very prone to cases of natural disasters, and CRED (2016) provides the data on 228 of them that happened between 1990 and 2016 (see Table 1). The deadliest of the disasters include droughts, heatwaves, wildfires, and floods; apart from that, floods were occurring most often and caused the greatest total damage.
The second most “common” disaster was storm followed by wildfire and drought. The cases of extreme temperatures were relatively rare, but they affected great numbers of people and caused many deaths; earthquakes caused relatively few deaths but result in significant damage. The relatively “safe” disasters included the epidemic and two infestations: none of them resulted in deaths, but the infestation caused noticeable damage. The landslides resulted in deaths.
Saudi Arabia
The information that CRED (2016) offers concerning Saudi Arabia includes a total of 26 natural disasters with two of them being epidemics. While the latter did not result in any financial damage, they led to the deaths of four people; the rest of the disasters were floods that took over 2,000 lives and were extremely costly for the country (see Table 2).
Israel
As can be seen from Israel’s example, the countries of the Asian region may have a more diverse history of natural disasters than Saudi Arabia. CRED (2016) reports fourteen natural disasters in Israel, including a drought, an epidemic, a case of extreme temperatures (a cold wave), two floods, a case of a landslide, five storms, and three forest fires (see Table 4). The latter has resulted in the greatest total number of deaths (forty people), but it is noteworthy that one landslide caused almost half as many deaths as three wildfires (twenty people). The wildfires were also very costly, but the cold wave resulted in greater damages.
Turkmenistan
CRED (2016) reports only two disaster cases that took place in Turkmenistan: an earthquake that cost eleven lives, which made it the most deadly event of the two, and a flood, which affected over 400 people and resulted in significant damage but, fortunately, did not cause any deaths (see Table 3).
Comparison
The four countries differ in the total number of disaster cases with Australia having the biggest number followed by Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Turkmenistan. The data was available for the years 1900-2016, and it is noteworthy that Australia was founded in the year 1901 while Saudi Arabia was formed in 1932, Israel in 1948, and Turkmenistan was a part of the USSR until 1991 (Dalal, 2012).
The comparative “age” of the countries corresponds to the decreasing number of their total disaster count, but other factors (especially the geography) must also be taken into account when attempting to explain the difference. In general, the presented paper along with the CRED (2016) database demonstrates that the epidemiology of different countries represents their unique history of being prone to particular natural disasters, which does not allow finding meaningful similarities between them. Even the countries located in the same region (Asia) do not exhibit the same or similar patterns.
As stated earlier, this phenomenon is explained by the size of the region that encompasses diverse landscapes, climates, and countries (Subanthore, 2011). Despite these dissimilarities, all the data has one similar characteristic: since the information represents the specific, unique history of disasters of a particular country, it can help to make conclusions on disaster proneness, which is of interest for disaster management.
Conclusion
The presented paper used CRED (2016) data to analyse the epidemiology of four countries: three Asian region countries and Australia. The results of the comparison demonstrate notable diversity, which implies that the disaster history of particular countries and regions is unique to a certain extent. It can be concluded that the analysis of the data that is similar to that of CRED (2016), but which is more detailed and region-specific is likely to inform predictions and decisions in disaster preparedness and management.
References
Bissell, R. (2013). Preparedness and response for catastrophic disasters. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis.
Commonwealth of Australia. (2011). National Strategy for Disaster Resilience.
CRED. (2016). Country Profile.
Dalal, R. (2012). The illustrated timeline of the history of the world. New York: Rosen.
Guha-Sapir, D., Santos, I., & Borde, A. (2013). The economic impacts of natural disasters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hart, P. & Sundelius, B. (2013). Crisis management revisited: A new agenda for research, training and capacity building within Europe. Cooperation And Conflict, 48(3), 444-461. Web.
Mpofu, E. (2014). Community-oriented health services. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.
Norman, S. (2006). New Zealand’s holistic framework for disaster recovery. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 21(4), 16-20. Web.
Ostadtaghizadeh, A., Ardalan, A., Paton, D., Jabbari, H., & Khankeh, H. R. (2015). Community disaster resilience: a systematic review of assessment models and tools.PLoS currents, 7, 1-24. Web.
Porta, M. (2014). A dictionary of epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Queensland Government. (2016). The PPRR risk management model.
Rogers, P. (2011). Development of Resilient Australia: enhancing the PPRR approach with anticipation, assessment and registration of risks. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 26(1), 54-58. Web.
Subanthore, A. (2011). Asia, West, Central, and South. In K. Penuel & M. Statler (Eds.), Encyclopedia of disaster relief (pp. 22-24). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Templeman, D., & Bergin, A. (2008). Taking a punch: Building a more resilient Australia.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. (2013). Disaster Risk Reduction in the United Nations. Web.