Natural and man‐made disasters, which occur regularly and with increasing frequency, are known to have direct and indirect effects on demographic events. Until relatively recently, however, the demography of disasters has not received substantial attention from demographers. The 2021 collection entitled, The Demography of Disasters: Impacts for Population and Place, is an effort to contribute to the growing scholarly literature on this topic. The book represents a collaboration between the Geographical Institute of the Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences (Hungary), the Northern Institute of Charles Darwin University (Australia), and the Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences (University of Iceland). The collection “seeks to advance both practical and theoretical insights into our understanding of the role of demography in planning for and mitigating impacts from disasters in developed nations.” The editors lay out an explicit goal of providing policy‐relevant information, specifying that the aim of the collection is “to extend the nascent work to improve disaster policy and planning process through the growing knowledge about the demography–disaster nexus.”

Most of the authors of the 13 chapters are geographers and demographers, with historians, urban planners, economists, and environmental scientists also contributing. Given the specialties and locations of the authors, most of the papers focus on migration as a response to disaster (mortality and health are explicitly not the focus) and many describe events in Australia. Still, the topics are wide ranging, including the impacts of the nuclear disasters in Chernobyl and Fukushima, heat waves in Australia, and wildfires in California and Russia. The papers are uniformly readable and engaging; many provide vivid details of the human cost of the disasters described. One example is the bullying of resettled junior and high school students evacuated from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster (p. 38).

Chapter 1 provides a conceptual overview of the disaster–demography field, reviews its history of paradigm shifts, and considers the varying definitions of a “disaster.” An interesting tidbit offered in this chapter is that the first recognized disaster study was a Columbia University doctoral dissertation written by Samuel Prince in 1920 on the 1917 Halifax Explosion (when a cargo ship filled with explosives collided with another ship resulting in more than 1700 deaths). The field of disaster studies has evolved in many ways since that time. Disaster studies now examine the impact of a disaster according to its type, rapidity, and magnitude as well as the characteristics of the population both before and after. The authors provide a useful discussion of the idea that “hazards” become “disasters” only when they interact with humans; disasters can be predicted, prevented, and mitigated since their effects are rooted in social structures and vulnerabilities to those effects are influenced by social and demographic characteristics. Also, they note that the field has evolved to include ideas around social justice and inclusion in its consideration of the demographic consequences of disasters.

Chapters 2–8 comprise the heart of the collection, bringing quantitative (and occasional qualitative) data to bear on case studies that advance our understanding of the demographic consequences of disasters. The case studies consistently display a meticulous attention to detail, deep knowledge of the subject matter, and an ability to manipulate and use data creatively. The results mostly examine the magnitude and direction of post‐disaster migration and return but also address fertility, mortality, property loss, and other consequences.

Chapters 9–11 are more general reflections on designing cities that account for gender differences, the impact of the failure of critical infrastructure, and community participation in disaster recovery, respectively. Chapter 12, which is a bit of an outlier, is a personal account of conducting long‐term collaborative research in the disaster studies field. The final chapter (13) lays out seven “approaches” to the study of the disaster‐demography nexus which seems to reflect subtopics (such as measuring vulnerability, climate change) more than approaches.

The book accomplishes its goal of providing information that could be applied to planning and policy. Most of the chapters outline lessons learned and the policy decisions that mitigated or, in some cases, worsened the outcomes. Given the quantity and breadth of the material, as well as its ambition to be policy relevant, the book would have benefited from an executive summary. The volume is an open access publication available on the Springer Publishing website.

众所周知，自然灾害和人为灾害定期发生且频率越来越高，对人口事件具有直接和间接的影响。但是，直到最近，灾害人口统计才得到人口统计学家的广泛关注。2021年的收藏集，《灾害人口统计：对人口和地方的影响》，是为有关该主题的不断增长的学术文献做出的努力。这本书代表了天文学与地球科学研究中心地理研究所（匈牙利），查尔斯·达尔文大学北方研究所（澳大利亚）与生命与环境科学学院（冰岛大学）之间的合作。该合集“力求在实践和理论上加深我们对人口统计学在计划和减轻发达国家灾难影响中的作用的理解。” 编辑者提出了提供与政策相关的信息的明确目标，并指定该集合的目的是“通过增加对人口统计-灾难联系的了解，扩展新生工作，以改善灾害政策和计划过程。”

这13章的作者大多数是地理学家和人口统计学家，历史学家，城市规划者，经济学家和环境科学家也为之贡献。考虑到作者的特殊性和地理位置，大多数论文将重点放在移民作为对灾难的反应上（死亡率和健康显然不是重点），并且许多文献描述了澳大利亚的事件。尽管如此，主题仍然广泛，包括切尔诺贝利和福岛核灾难的影响，澳大利亚的热浪以及加利福尼亚和俄罗斯的野火。这些文件具有统一的可读性和吸引力。许多提供了所描述灾难的人为代价的生动细节。一个例子是欺凌从受福岛核灾难影响的地区撤离的重新安置的初中和高中学生（p。38）。

第1章从概念上概述了灾害人口统计领域，回顾了其范式转移的历史，并考虑了“灾害”的各种定义。本章提供的一个有趣的花絮是，第一个公认的灾难研究是塞缪尔·普林斯（Samuel Prince）在1920年写的关于1917年哈利法克斯爆炸的哥伦比亚大学博士学位论文（当时一艘装满炸药的货船与另一艘船相撞，导致1700多人死亡） 。自那时以来，灾难研究领域以多种方式发展。灾难研究现在根据灾难的类型，速度和程度以及灾民前后的特征来检查灾难的影响。作者对“危害”仅在与人类互动时才成为“灾难”的观点进行了有益的讨论。灾害是可以预测，预防和减轻的，因为其影响源于社会结构，而影响的脆弱性则受社会和人口特征的影响。他们还指出，该领域已经发展为在考虑灾害的人口后果时纳入了围绕社会正义和包容性的思想。

第2-8章构成了收集的核心，将定量（偶尔是定性）数据用于案例研究，以促进我们对灾难的人口后果的理解。案例研究始终表现出对细节的细致关注，对主题的深入了解以及创造性地操纵和使用数据的能力。结果主要考察了灾后迁移和返回的规模和方向，但也涉及了生育率，死亡率，财产损失和其他后果。

第9章至第11章分别更一般地反映了设计考虑性别差异，关键基础设施故障的影响以及社区参与灾难恢复的城市。第十二章有些离群点，是在灾难研究领域进行长期合作研究的个人经历。最后一章（13）列出了研究灾害人口统计学联系的七个“方法”，这些方法似乎比方法更能反映子主题（如衡量脆弱性，气候变化）。

这本书实现了提供可用于计划和政策的信息的目标。大多数章节都概述了经验教训以及减轻或在某些情况下使结果恶化的政策决策。考虑到材料的数量和广度，以及与政策相关的野心，该书本可以从执行摘要中受益。该卷是可在Springer Publishing网站上找到的开放获取出版物。