A framework for studying mortality arising from critical infrastructure loss
A framework for studying mortality arising from critical infrastructure loss
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ijcip.2014.04.002
复制
发表时间：
2014-06-01
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Yates, Athol
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Yates, Athol
全球关键基础设施保护政策的一个关键理由是，必须保护关键基础设施，因为其损失可能导致死亡，据称在某些情况下会造成大量人员伤亡。然而，学术界很少关注了解关键基础设施损失与死亡率之间的联系，这意味着这一原理的有效性尚不确定。对关键基础设施损失的死亡率影响的研究有限，与对关键基础设施损失的经济影响的大量研究形成鲜明对比。本文对这一被忽视的领域进行了分析。它确定了与保护美国、加拿大和英国人类健康相关的关键基础设施保护政策的基本原理。它提出了一个概念性的死亡链模型，将关键基础设施的损失与死亡联系起来。该模型有四个阶段：（i）起始环境； (ii) 实际/预期的关键基础设施损失事件； (iii) 危险； (iv) 死亡原因。本文还提出了关键基础设施死亡的概念和操作定义，这对于进行关键基础设施死亡率比较分析至关重要。关键基础设施死亡的概念定义是实际或预期的关键基础设施损失事件导致过早死亡。关键基础设施损失事件是指导致以下情况的事件： (i) 关键基础设施被摧毁、损坏或受到影响，从而产生物理力； (ii) 关键基础设施服务连续性丧失。检查预期的关键基础设施损失事件以及实际事件非常重要，因为当人们为预期的关键基础设施损失做准备时，有时会发生死亡。操作定义用于识别符合概念定义的关键基础设施死亡实例，有四个标准。首先，需要存在一个完整的死亡链，将关键基础设施损失事件与根本死亡原因联系起来，其中死亡链的每个阶段都与前一个阶段相关。第二，死亡链的每个阶段在时间上必须先于下一个阶段。第三，关键基础设施损失事件必须是一个必要因素，如果没有它，死亡事件就不会发生。第四个标准是死亡需要发生在实际/预期关键基础设施损失事件发生前两天至关键基础设施损失事件急性期结束后一年内的特定时期内。然而，关键基础设施损失事件发生前两天到事件发生后十四天期间是关键基础设施死亡事件最受关注的时期，因为这是大多数死亡发生的时间段。上述定义与概念性死亡链模型一起构成了关键基础设施死亡率框架，可用于研究关键基础设施损失造成的死亡率。通过将其应用于 2012 年新泽西州桑迪飓风的 40 名受害者，证明了该框架的应用和实用性。该框架为开展比较死亡率研究奠定了基础，以确定人们如何、何时以及为何死于关键基础设施损失事件。这些信息对于能够进行基于证据的风险分析和改进决策至关重要，重点是防止实际和预期的关键基础设施损失事件造成的死亡。 (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. 保留所有权利。
A key rationale for critical infrastructure protection policy around the world is that the critical infrastructure must be protected because its loss can lead to fatalities, and it is claimed, a large loss of life in some cases. However, little academic attention has been given to understanding the link between critical infrastructure loss and mortality, meaning that the validity of this rationale is uncertain. The limited study of the mortality impacts of critical infrastructure losses stands in contrast to the significant volume of research on the economic impacts of a critical infrastructure loss.This paper conducts an analysis of this neglected area. It identifies critical infrastructure protection policy rationales related to protecting human health in the United States, Canada and United Kingdom. It proposes a conceptual mortality chain model that links the loss of a critical infrastructure to a death. The model has four stages: (i) initiating circumstance; (ii) actual/anticipated critical infrastructure loss event; (iii) hazards; and (iv) cause of death.The paper also proposes conceptual and operational definitions of critical infrastructure death, which are essential to undertaking comparative critical infrastructure mortality analyses. The conceptual definition of a critical infrastructure death is one in which an actual or anticipated critical infrastructure loss event results in a premature death. A critical infrastructure loss event is an event resulting in: (i) a critical infrastructure being destroyed, damaged or affected so that it generates physical forces; or (ii) a loss of critical infrastructure service continuity. Examining anticipated critical infrastructure loss events, as well as actual ones, are important because deaths sometimes occur as people prepare for an anticipated critical infrastructure loss.The operational definition, which is used to identify instances of critical infrastructure deaths fitting the conceptual definition, has four criteria. The first is that a complete mortality chain needs to exist linking a critical infrastructure loss event to an underlying cause of death, where each stage of the mortality chain is related to the previous one. The second is that each stage of the mortality chain must precede the following stage in time. The third is that the critical infrastructure loss event needs to be a necessary element and that, without it, the death would not have occurred when it did. The fourth criterion is that the death needs to occur within a specific period from two days prior to the actual/ anticipated critical infrastructure loss event to one year from the end of the acute phase of the critical infrastructure loss event. However, the period from two days before to fourteen days after the critical infrastructure loss event is the period of greatest interest for critical infrastructure deaths, because this is the time period when the majority of deaths occur.The definitions given above along with the conceptual mortality chain model form the critical infrastructure mortality framework that can be used to study the mortality arising from a loss of a critical infrastructure. The application and utility of the framework are demonstrated by applying it to the 40 victims of the 2012 Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey. The framework provides the foundation upon which comparative mortality studies can be undertaken to determine how, when and why people die from critical infrastructure loss events. This information is essential to being able to undertake evidence-based risk analysis and improve decision making focused on preventing deaths from actual and anticipated critical infrastructure loss events. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.