Home Contact us Gallery Site Map Resource Centre Search About us People News Publications Education & Training Events Publications | Education and Training | Current & Recent Projects | Events | Research Opportunities

Download issue (989KB PDF) Cover Page Executive Summary Introduction Data Sources Deaths Due to Natural Hazards A Building Damage Index 20th Century Building Damage Alternative Perspectives on Damage Spatial Variation in Damage A More Refined View Discussion Conclusion Further Reading Acknowledgements

Issues in Risk Science Natural Hazards Risk Assessment: An Australian Perspective - Russell Blong Conclusion A lengthy expensive effort would be required to significantly improve the meticulous record of natural hazard impacts and consequences in the Risk Frontiers’ database. Furthermore, it is doubtful that the additional effort would place the answers to the questions raised in the Introduction on a much firmer footing. Floods and cyclones will remain the country’s most deadly natural hazards for decades to come – unless we count deaths in heatwaves. We can be less certain of the rank order of floods, cyclones, thunderstorms and bushfires in producing building damage – and the order could be changed by a single event before this publication appears. Earthquake, or even tsunami, could be promoted into the big league – the historical evidence suggests otherwise, but the record is short and we shouldn’t be overconfident. In terms of building damage (house equivalents destroyed), NSW is the most hazardous state in the country, but if we rephrase the questions slightly the answer could be ACT or the Northern Territory. We could refine the question and produce the answers to the question based on local government areas, or postcodes, or 4 km2 cells, but we need to ask whether the data would really support the answers. The same set of questions, but focused on the future, are much tougher. The past and the present might provide pointers to the future, but we can’t be too confident. The myriad of impacts is dominated by a few extreme events. And, the population of Australia is ageing, drifting to the coast, and migrating toward the winterless north, all under the aegis of climate change that may, or may not, see a greater domination by the El Niño regime. The flaws, or potential flaws, in Risk Frontiers’ efforts at integrated natural hazards risk assessment have not been hidden here. The focus is relatively narrow – just deaths and building damage. We don’t yet understand the past impact of natural hazards on infrastructure or agriculture. It is clear that hazards such as drought and heatwaves should have been (and should be) considered more carefully. Nonetheless, the emphasis on integrated risk assessment is an important one. Very few, if any, other countries have such a sound assessment of the impacts of natural hazards, integrated into a single database. We might not have all the answers, but we do have a sound platform from which to pose even tougher questions. «back to top«