Atlanta driver, caution with such statistics, the interesting number is the hull losses versus total number of flown revenue hours divided by the number of aircraft the company has.
Going back as far as 1945 is also totally misleading, as in the years 1945-1955 various odd ex military machines in large numbers were used on routes that were not suited, and airlines such as AF ( as you mention it ) operated in very drastic conditions in Asia and Africa ( already !).
Airlines such as Finnair ( since you mention it ) never had such aircraft numbers and such routes...
If you apply the formula above , and restrict your survey to the last 25 years ( so after 1980 ) you will find that most large airlines in the world have now very similar results with some notable exceptions , ( e.g, Africa , Korea ) and if one takes out hull losses due to terrorist actions, one will find that some of the poorest countries can have very safe airlines operations ( e. Bangladesh biman, Sri Lanka, Ethiopian, etc..) So third world = unsafe is a totally wrong concept.