Objective: 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.
Methods: 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.
Results: 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.
Conclusions: 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.
Keywords: disaster; disaster data; disaster database; disaster measurement; risk reduction.