中国自然灾害减灾救灾标准完备性评价

Complete Assessment of Disaster Reduction and Relief Standards in China

探讨中国减灾救灾标准的现状及其完备性对健全和完善减灾救灾标准体系意义重大。基于中美两国现有的自然灾害减灾救灾相关标准,分析了两国现有减灾救灾标准数量上的差异;同时采用故障树分析方法,从综合、灾害监测预警、救灾准备、灾害应急响应、灾后恢复重建和减灾6个方面构建了自然灾害减灾救灾标准的故障树,评价了中国自然灾害减灾救灾标准的完备性。结果表明:中美两国已颁布的自然灾害减灾救灾相关标准在数量上存在较大的差异,其中中国共有减灾救灾相关标准779条,美国共有263条;中国现有标准中国标、行标、地标和企标分别有180条、358条、233条和8条;中国现行自然灾害相关标准有664条,其中强制性标准150条、推荐性标准493条和指导性文件1条;中国自然灾害减灾救灾相关标准的完备度为77.9%;地震和生物灾害减灾救灾标准的完备度较高,分别为89.1%和88.2%,海洋灾害减灾救灾标准的完备性相对较低,完备度为51.0%。目前中国在自然灾害减灾救灾领域缺失需要完善的标准内容涉及应急预案的管理、社区综合减灾、灾情信息共享、防灾减灾能力评估、次生灾害防范和处置、生态系统恢复、灾区动物疫病监测与防治等。

Exploring the inadequate and completeness of disaster mitigation and relief standards in China is of great significance to the improvement of existing disaster mitigation and relief standard systems. The difference in disaster reduction and relief standards between China and the USA, in quantity, was analyzed. Standard fault tree analysis for natural disaster mitigation and relief standards was used to evaluate the completeness of China＇ s standards. The standard fault tree comprised comprehensive disasters, disaster monitoring and early warnings, disaster response preparedness, disaster emergency responses, disaster recovery and reconstruction, and disaster reduction. The results reveal a significant difference between China and the USA for existing disaster mitigation and relief standards. China has 779 related disaster standards and the USA has 263. In addition to the fire and marine disaster standards, China has done more research into floods and droughts, and meteorological, biological, earthquake and geological disasters than the USA. The number of national, industry, local and enterprise standards across China was 180, 358, 233 and 8 respectively. There had 664 currently valid standards in China： the number of mandatory, recommended standards and guidance documents is 150, 493, and 1, respectively. The completeness of standards was related to the number of existing standards and the total completeness of China＇ s disaster mitigation and relief relevant standards was 77.9%. The completeness of flood and drought standards was 67.9%, meteorological was 75.0%, biological was 88.2%, geological was 60.3% , earthquake was 89.1%, fire was 76.5% and marine disaster standards was 51.0%. These results suggest that the disaster mitigation and relief standards for earthquake and biological disasters are relatively complete, and relatively incomplete for marine disasters. As a major maritime country, China should strengthen its research and the development of marine disaster mitigation and relief standards. Improving and perfecting related fire standards should also be done. The current lack of natural disaster standards across China should be improved and will involve aspect of the management of the emergency plan, community disaster reduction, disaster information, disaster prevention and mitigation capability assessment, prevention and disposal of secondary disasters, ecosystem production order and the social restoration, monitoring and the prevention of animal disease, emergency broadcast and natural disaster risk zoning technology, disaster monitoring networks, and disaster insurance.