Analysis of the Effect of AFAD Management Cycle on Reducing Risks by Adapting to Earthquake with ANP Method and Interpretation of its Effect on Health and Safety

Öz

Türkiye is located between the Eurasian plate in the north and the Arabian and African plates in the south, which move northwest and north. Many earthquakes caused by active intraplate faults occur in our country. Earthquakes that can cause damage and loss of life are those with magnitudes five and greater. This study was carried out with the aim of not preventing earthquakes, which are the most harmful and disastrous natural events among natural disasters, but to be effective in ensuring the health and safety of employees and other parts of society by taking a proactive approach. ANP method was used in the study. The interconnected activities of reduction, preparation, intervention and recovery in the disaster management cycle were determined as criteria and the relationships between these criteria and the sub-criteria were taken into account and their importance weights were determined in line with expert opinions. Risk assessment had the highest weight of 0.186417. The study will contribute to reducing or preventing the effects of health, security, social, economic and environmental losses and damage caused by the earthquake by determining the priorities in the implementation of the disaster management plan.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Health and safety
• earthquake
• ANP

AFAD Yönetim Döngüsünün Depreme Uyarlanarak Riskleri Azaltmadaki Etkisinin ANP Yöntemi ile Analizinin Yapılması, Sağlık ve Güvenliğe Etkisinin Yorumlanması

Öz

Türkiye, kuzeyde Avrasya levhası ile güneyde kuzeybatı ve kuzeye hareket eden Arabistan ve Afrika levhaları arasında yer almaktadır. Ülkemizde levha içi aktif fayların sebep olduğu çok sayıda deprem meydana gelmektedir. Hasara ve can kayıplarına neden olabilen depremlerin büyüklükleri ise beş ve daha büyük olanlardır. Yapılan bu çalışma da doğal afetler arasında en zararlı ve felaketli doğa olayı olan depremlerin önlenmesine engel olunmasa da proaktif yaklaşım sergileyerek çalışanların ve toplumun diğer kesiminin sağlık ve güvenliklerini sağlamada etkili olması amacıyla yapılmıştır. Çalışmada ANP yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Afet yönetim döngüsünde yer alan azaltma, hazırlık, müdahale ve iyileştirmeden oluşan birbirine bağlı faaliyetleri kriter olarak belirlenerek bu kriterlerin birbiri ve alt kriterler içerisindeki ilişkileri dikkate alınarak uzman görüşleri doğrultusunda önem ağırlıkları belirlenmiştir. En yüksek ağırlığı 0,186417 ile risk değerlendirme oluşturmuştur. Yapılan çalışma afet yönetim planının uygulanmasında önceliklerin belirlenmesiyle depremin neden olduğu sağlık, güvenlik, sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel kayıp ve zararların etkilerini azaltmaya veya önlemeye katkı sağlayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sağlık ve güvenlik
• deprem
• ANP

Kaynakça

1. Cassidy JF. Earthquake. In Encyclopedia of natural hazards 2013;208-223). Springer, Dordrecht.
2. Wyss M, Speiser M, and Tolis S. Earthquake fatalities and potency. Nat Hazard 2023;119(2):1091-1106.
3. Çalışkan C, ve Özcebe H. Afetlerde Enfeksiyon Hastalıkları Salgınları ve Kontrol Önlemleri. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin 2013; 12(5).
4. Coetzee C, and Van Niekerk D. Tracking the evolution of the disaster management cycle: A general system theory approach. Jàmbá: J. Disaster Risk Studies 2012; 4(1):1-9.
5. İskender H. Establishment of modern disaster management in Turkey: operational improvements. Karadeniz Uluslararası Bilimsel Dergi 2021; (52):243-255.
6. Demir DÇ. Depreme ilişkin iş sağlığı ve güvenliği anlamında işveren yükümlülükleri. Ankara Barosu Dergisi 81(Özel Sayı), 197-232.
7. Caymaz E, Akyon FV, and Erenel F. A model proposal for efficient disaster management: the Turkish sample. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 2013; 99:609-618.
8. Wang CC, and Wei GH. A Low-cost Design of Earthquake Detector with Rescue Message Deliver using Mobile Device. Proc of Eng and Technol. Innovation 2016; 2: 04-05.

9. Zhang D, Shiguematsu YM, Lin JY, Ma YH, Al Maamari MS, and Takanishi A. Development of a hybrid locomotion robot for earthquake search and rescue in partially collapsed building. In 2019 IEEE Int. Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA) 2019, August; (pp. 2559-2564). IEEE.
10. Auclair S, Gehl P, and Delatre M. Needs and opportunities for seismic early warning prior to aftershocks for search and rescue teams: An in-depth analysis of practitioners’ perceptions. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2021; 65:102545.
11. Kasnesis P, Doulgerakis V, Uzunidis D, Kogias DG, Funcia SI, González MB, and Patrikakis CZ. Deep learning empowered wearable-based behavior recognition for search and rescue dogs. Sensors 2022;22(3): 993.
12. Ahmadi G, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Baboli A, and Najafi M. A decision support model for robust allocation and routing of search and rescue resources after earthquake: a case study. Oper Res. 2022; 1-43.
13. Huu PN, Thi QN, Nam VTN, Nguyen TD, and Minh QT. Design of Robotic Arm Control Model for Rescue Applications. In 2022 Int. Conference on Advanced Computing and Analytics (ACOMPA) 2022, November; (pp. 72-79). IEEE.
14. Adıgüzel S. Afet durumlarinda yapay zeka teknolojisi ile lojistik yönetimi örnekleri. Akademik İzdüşüm Dergisi 2022;7(1): 47-70.
15. De Donato MC, Corradini F, Fornari F, and Re B. SAFE: An ICT platform for supporting monitoring, localization and rescue operations in case of earthquake. Internet Things 2024;27: 101273.
16. Zaker M, Alsan HF, and Arsan T. Building Damage Assessment to Facilitate Post-Earthquake Search and Rescue Missions by Leveraging a Machine Learning Algorithm. In 2024 Innovations in Intelligent Systems and Applications Conference (ASYU) 2024 October ; (1-5). IEEE.
17. Li L, and Zhao Z. Comprehensive Performance Evaluation of Earthquake Search and Rescue Robots Based on Improved FAHP and Radar Chart. Appl Sci 2024;14(7):3099.
18. Aydın NS. A seismic-risk-based bi-objective stochastic optimization framework for the pre-disaster allocation of earthquake search and rescue units. Math. Modell. and Numer. Simul. with Appl. 2024;4(3): 370-394.
19. Akdaş E, ve Eren T. A sample application for scheduling search and rescue teams in an earthquake disaster. Sigma J. Eng Nat Sci. 2024; 42(5):1555-1562.
20. Farajkhah SK, and Coban E. International Search And Rescue Teams In Kahramanmaraş Earthquake. In 2024 Int. Congress on Human-Computer Interaction, Optimization and Robotic Applications (HORA) (2024, May) ; 1-5). IEEE.
21. Öztürk MH, and Kuday AD. Psychometric evaluation of the Turkish version of the Work-Related Stress Scale: A study among search and rescue workers responding to the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes. J. of Health Psychology 2024; 13591053241287675.
22. Yousefi MH, Behnam B, and Farahani S. An auxiliary framework to facilitate earthquake search and rescue operations in urban regions. Nat Hazard. 2024;120(12): 11107-11131.
23. Contini M S, and Martins LEG. Wearable device sensing technologies: a systematic literature review: Analysis of sensors applicable to wearable devices. Res Biomed Eng. 2024; 40(1):69-84.
24. Ding X, and Pei Z. Post-Natural Disasters Emergency Response Scheme Selection: An Integrated Application of Probabilistic T-Spherical Hesitant Fuzzy Set, Penalty-Incentive Dynamic Attribute Weights, and Non-Compensation Approach. Information 2024; 15(12): 775.
25. Saaty TL. Fundamentals of the analytic network process—Dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network. J Syst Sci Syst Eng. 2004; 13: 129-157.
26. Meade LM, and Sarkis JJIJ. Analyzing organizational project alternatives for agile manufacturing processes: an analytical network approach. Int J Prod Res. 1999; 37(2): 241-261.
27. Saaty TL. Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process 1996; (4922,2). Pittsburgh, PA, USA: RWS Publ..
28. Khorram-Manesh A, Goniewicz K., Hertelendy A, and Dulebenets M. (Eds.). Handbook of disaster and emergency management. Kompendiet. 2021 ISBN: 978-91-527-0705-0.
29. Coppola D. Introduction to international disaster management. Elsevier 2006.ISBN: 0-7506-7961-1.
30. Khan H, Vasilescu LG, and Khan A. Disaster management cycle-a theoretical approach. J. Management and Marketing 2008; 6(1): 43-50.
31. Saaty TL.Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sciences 2008;1(1): 83-98.
32. URL1, Depremden korunmak için kullanılabilecek teknolojiler, Erişim Tarihi: 3.5.2025: https://mediatrend.mediamarkt.com.tr/depremden-korunmak-icin-kullanilabilecek-teknolojiler/
33. Hossain MS, Chaitanya K, Bhattacharya Y, Numada M, Kamal ASM M, and Meguro K.. Integration of smart watch and geographic information system (GIS) to identify post-earthquake critical rescue area part. II. Analytical evaluation of the system. Prog Disaster Sci. 2021; 9:100132.
34. Kuday AD, Özcan T, Çalışkan C, ve Kınık K. Challenges faced by medical rescue teams during disaster response: a systematic review study. Disaster medicine and public health preparedness 2023; 17: e548.
35. Mohamadi A, Yaghoubi S, and Pishvaee MS. Fuzzy multi-objective stochastic programming model for disaster relief logistics considering telecommunication infrastructures: a case study. Operational Research 2019;19:59-99.
36. URL2, Deprem: Afet yönetiminde kullanılan önemli teknolojiler, Erişim Tarihi 1.1.2025: https://www.ekonomim.com/cozum-arenasi/deprem-afet-yonetiminde-kullanilan-onemli-teknolojiler-haberi-691327,
37. Türkiye Afet Sonrası İyileştirme Planı. 9889 Sayılı Resmi Gazete, 2025.
38. Dağdeviren M., Dönmez N, ve Kurt M. Bir İşletmede Tedarikçi Değerlendirme Süreci İçin Yeni Bir Model Tasarimi ve Uygulamasi. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 2006;21(2): 247-255.
39. Türkiye Afet Risk Azaltma Planı, 31890 sayılı Resmi gazete, 2022.