Evaluating reliability and limitations of disaster loss accounting databases
(2023) VBRM15 20231Division of Risk Management and Societal Safety
- Abstract
- Disaster loss accounting is an essential tool for assessing the effects of disasters and creating policies for disaster risk reduction that are supported by data. This study compares disaster data for two of the most used disaster loss accounting databases, EM-DAT and DesInventar in the context of six Latin American countries, namely, Uruguay, Chile, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Venezuela. The analysis focuses on the quantitative reporting differences for corresponding indicators and disaster events. In their current state, disaster loss accounting databases have several flaws, including a limited use of Global Identifier Numbers (GLIDE), a general description of their sources, a large number of missing data, a lack of a common... (More)
- Disaster loss accounting is an essential tool for assessing the effects of disasters and creating policies for disaster risk reduction that are supported by data. This study compares disaster data for two of the most used disaster loss accounting databases, EM-DAT and DesInventar in the context of six Latin American countries, namely, Uruguay, Chile, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Venezuela. The analysis focuses on the quantitative reporting differences for corresponding indicators and disaster events. In their current state, disaster loss accounting databases have several flaws, including a limited use of Global Identifier Numbers (GLIDE), a general description of their sources, a large number of missing data, a lack of a common terminology, an underrepresentation of slow-onset hazards and low-intensity disasters, and insufficient reporting of secondary disasters. However, these restrictions should not be seen as a reason to cease utilizing the databases, but rather as a motivation to enhance them and use them at their full potential. (Less)
- Popular Abstract
- Can we trust databases measuring disaster impacts?
Measuring the impact of a disaster allows to plan for future risks and to be more prepared. Nevertheless, current reporting methods present several flaws.
In this study is an evaluation of reliability and limitations of the two most used disaster loss accounting databases, EM-DAT and DesInventar. After a disaster (ex. flood, earthquake, forest fire etc.), they collect information on how many people died, are injured, affected and much more. All these data are extremely important to plan and be more prepared for future events, conduct research and establish where projects and investments should be directed. These data are the base on which decisions will be taken, but what if they... (More) - Can we trust databases measuring disaster impacts?
Measuring the impact of a disaster allows to plan for future risks and to be more prepared. Nevertheless, current reporting methods present several flaws.
In this study is an evaluation of reliability and limitations of the two most used disaster loss accounting databases, EM-DAT and DesInventar. After a disaster (ex. flood, earthquake, forest fire etc.), they collect information on how many people died, are injured, affected and much more. All these data are extremely important to plan and be more prepared for future events, conduct research and establish where projects and investments should be directed. These data are the base on which decisions will be taken, but what if they are not as reliable as expected?
After hand matching common disasters across two databases, it emerged that they often report different information for the same event. For example, in 1998 Hurricane Mitch devastated Nicaragua. According to EM-DAT 3332 people have died, but DesInventar only reports 45 deaths. Why is that the case? And if analyses are only based on data coming from these two databases, how do we know which one to trust?
There is no direct answer, these big reporting differences are due to a combination of factors. First of all, EM-DAT and DesInventar have very high number of missing data, they make little or no use of disaster identification numbers, do not have a common terminology, and in general collecting data during and after a disaster is rarely prioritized.
Nevertheless, current limitations should not be considered as an incentive to stop using the databases, but as an encouragement to improve them and use them at their full potential. Several strategies such as, establishing shared disaster and indicator’s definitions, having common and transparent data collection procedures and monitoring over time performance are a first step in having more reliable disaster loss accounting databases. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9133062
- author
- Crisanti, Rebecca LU
- supervisor
-
- Misse Wester LU
- organization
- course
- VBRM15 20231
- year
- 2023
- type
- H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
- subject
- keywords
- Database, loss data, extreme event, natural hazards, measuring losses, Latin America, EM‐DAT, DesInventar.
- language
- English
- id
- 9133062
- date added to LUP
- 2023-08-16 12:13:56
- date last changed
- 2023-08-16 13:09:50
@misc{9133062,
abstract = {{Disaster loss accounting is an essential tool for assessing the effects of disasters and creating policies for disaster risk reduction that are supported by data. This study compares disaster data for two of the most used disaster loss accounting databases, EM-DAT and DesInventar in the context of six Latin American countries, namely, Uruguay, Chile, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Venezuela. The analysis focuses on the quantitative reporting differences for corresponding indicators and disaster events. In their current state, disaster loss accounting databases have several flaws, including a limited use of Global Identifier Numbers (GLIDE), a general description of their sources, a large number of missing data, a lack of a common terminology, an underrepresentation of slow-onset hazards and low-intensity disasters, and insufficient reporting of secondary disasters. However, these restrictions should not be seen as a reason to cease utilizing the databases, but rather as a motivation to enhance them and use them at their full potential.}},
author = {{Crisanti, Rebecca}},
language = {{eng}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Evaluating reliability and limitations of disaster loss accounting databases}},
year = {{2023}},
}