Prioritization of Post-Disaster Needs Using the Fuzzy AHP Method: Example of Pazarcik and Elbistan Earthquakes

Öz

The purpose of this study is to prioritize post-disaster needs with the Fuzzy AHP method. Thus, it is aimed to help use the limited resources available after the disaster in the most effective and efficient way in the crisis environment. In order to determine the post-disaster needs, opinions were taken from 5 experts in 5 provinces (Kahramanmaraş, Gaziantep, Şanlıurfa, Hatay, Malatya) where the effects of the earthquakes that took place in Kahramanmaraş (Pazarcık and Elbistan) on February 6, 2023 were seen, regarding the important needs in the first 30 days. Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used as the research method. As a result of the evaluations of experts, it was determined that the most important need after the disaster is human security. It has been determined that the most important sub-needs after the disaster are search and rescue operations, food and water supply, and medical care.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disaster
• Need
• Search and Rescue
• Prioritizing needs
• Fuzzy AHP

Bulanık AHP Yöntemi ile Afet Sonrası İhtiyaçların Önceliklendirilmesi: Pazarcık ve Elbistan Depremleri Örneği

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Bulanık AHP yöntemi ile afet sonrası ihtiyaçların önceliklendirilmesini sağlamaktır. Böylelikle afet sonrasında elde bulunan sınırlı kaynakların kriz ortamında en etkin ve verimli şekilde kullanılmasına yardımcı olmak hedeflenmiştir. Afet sonrası ihtiyaçların belirlenmesi için 6 Şubat 2023 tarihinde Kahramanmaraş (Pazarcık ve Elbistan)’da gerçekleşen depremlerin etkisinin görüldüğü 5 ildeki (Kahramanmaraş, Gaziantep, Şanlıurfa, Hatay, Malatya) 5 uzman tarafından ilk 30 günde önemli olan ihtiyaçları konu alacak şekilde görüş alınmıştır. Araştırma yöntemi olarak Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Prosesi (AHP) kullanılmıştır. Uzmanların değerlendirmeleri sonucu afet sonrası en önemli ana ihtiyacın insan güvenliği olduğu belirlenmiştir. Afet sonrası en önemli alt ihtiyaçların arama kurtarma operasyonları, gıda ve su temini, tıbbi bakım olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Afet
• İhtiyaç
• Arama Kurtarma
• İhtiyaçların önceliklendirilmesi
• Bulanık AHP

Kaynakça

1. Ali K., Nguyen H.X., Vien Q.T., Shah P., 2015. Disaster management communication networks: Challenges and architecture design. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communication Workshops (PerCom Workshops) (pp. 537-542). IEEE, St.Louis, USA, Erişim adresi: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7134094
2. Biswas A., 2019. Exploring Indian post-disaster temporary housing strategy through a comparative review. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 10(1), 14-35.
3. Boin A., McConnell A., 2007. Preparing for critical infrastructure breakdowns: the limits of crisis management and the need for resilience. Journal of contingencies and crisis management, 15(1), 50-59.
4. Bonato M., Sambo B., Sperotto A., Lambert J.H., Linkov I., Critto A., Torresan S., Marcomini A., 2022. Prioritization of resilience initiatives for climate‐related disasters in the Metropolitan City of Venice. Risk Analysis, 42(5), 931-952.
5. Cardoso B.D.F.O., Fontainha T.C., Leiras A., 2023. Looking back and forward to disaster readiness of supply chains: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 1-27.
6. Chan T.C., Killeen J., Griswold W., Lenert L., 2004. Information technology and emergency medical care during disasters. Academic emergency medicine, 11(11), 1229-1236.
7. Chen Z., Chen X., Li Q., Chen J., 2013. The temporal hierarchy of shelters: a hierarchical location model for earthquake-shelter planning. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 27(8), 1612-1630.
8. Chun H., Choi E., Chi S., Song J., Jung M., 2016. A Clustering Approach to Supporting GIS-based Urban Disaster Resilience Assessment, Proc. of the 33rd CIB W78 Conference 2016, Oct. 31st – Nov. 2nd 2016, Brisbane, Australia, Erişim adresi: https://itc.scix.net/paper/w78-2016-paper-032

9. Çoban H., 2019. Afet sonrası iyileştirme planı hazırlanması, Resilience, 3(2), 239-246.
10. Félix D., Branco J.M., Feio A., 2013. Temporary housing after disasters: A state of the art survey, Habitat International, 40, 136-141.
11. Francis T.R., Wilkinson S., Mannakkara S., Chang-Richards A., 2018. Post-disaster reconstruction in Christchurch: a “build back better” perspective. International journal of disaster resilience in the built environment, 9(3), 239-248.
12. Guo A., Liu Z., Li S., Li H., 2017. Seismic performance assessment of highway bridge networks considering post-disaster traffic demand of a transportation system in emergency conditions. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering, 13(12), 1523-1537.
13. Harahap G.Y., 2020. Instilling Participatory Planning in Disaster Resilience Measures: Recovery of Tsunami-affected Communities in Banda Aceh, Indonesia, Budapest International Research in Exact Sciences (BirEx) Journal, 2(3), 394-404.
14. He L., 2019. Identifying local needs for post-disaster recovery in Nepal, World Development, 118, 52-62.
15. Holecek P., Talašová J., 2016. A free software tool implementing the fuzzy AHP method. In Proceedings of the 34th international conference on mathematical methods in economics (pp. 266-271), Liberec, Czech Republic, Erişim adresi: http://mme2016.tul.cz/conferenceproceedings/mme2016_conference_proceedings.pdf.
16. Jigyasu R., 2016. Reducing disaster risks to urban cultural heritage: global challenges and opportunities. Journal of Heritage Management, 1(1), 59-67.
17. Kuriansky J., 2012. Our communities: Healing after environmental disasters. Living in an environmentally traumatized world: Healing ourselves and our planet, 141-167.
18. Lee J., 2018. Rapid needs assessment: an evidence-based model, European Journal of Training and Development, 43(1/2), 61-75.
19. Lillibridge S.R., Noji E.K., Burkle Jr F.M., 1993. Disaster assessment: the emergency health evaluation of a population affected by a disaster. Annals of emergency medicine, 22(11), 1715-1720.
20. Mangada L.L., Su Y., 2019. Achieving human security after a disaster: the case of the Haiyan widows. Philippine Political Science Journal, 40(1-2), 153-181.
21. Malilay J., Flanders W.D., Brogan D., 1996. A modified cluster-sampling method for post-disaster rapid assessment of needs, Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 74(4), 399.
22. Mavrouli M., Mavroulis S., Lekkas E., Tsakris A., 2023. The impact of earthquakes on public health: A narrative review of infectious diseases in the post-disaster period aiming to disaster risk reduction, Microorganisms, 11(2), 419.
23. Memiş L., Babaoğlu C., 2020. Acil Durum ve Afet Yönetiminde Süreç Yaklaşımı ve Teknoloji, Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(4), 776-791.
24. Mohammadnazari Z., Mousapour Mamoudan M., Alipour-Vaezi M., Aghsami A., Jolai F., Yazdani M., 2022. Prioritizing post-disaster reconstruction projects using an integrated multi-criteria decision-making approach: A case study, Buildings, 12(2), 136.
25. Narayanan R.G.L., Ibe O.C., 2012. A joint network for disaster recovery and search and rescue operations. Computer Networks, 56(14), 3347-3373.
26. Noji E.K., 2000. The public health consequences of disasters. Prehospital and disaster medicine, 15(4), 21-31.
27. Quinn P., Gibbs L., Blake D., Campbell E., Johnston D., Richardson J., Coghlan A., 2022. Recovery capitals: A collaborative approach to post-disaster guidance, TheAustralian Journal of Emergency Management, 37(2), 52-62.
28. Palinkas L.A., Springgate B.F., Sugarman O.K., Hancock J., Wennerstrom A., Haywood C., Meyers D., Johnson A., Polk M., Pesson C.L., Seay J.E., Stallard C., Wells K.B., 2021. A rapid assessment of disaster preparedness needs and resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(2), 425.
29. Perry M., 2007. Natural disaster management planning: A study of logistics managers responding to the tsunami. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(5), 409-433.
30. Pourhosseini S.S., Ardalan A., Mehrolhassani M.H., 2015. Key aspects of providing healthcare services in disaster response stage. Iranian journal of public health, 44(1), 111.
31. Ramík J., Korviny P., 2010. Inconsistency of pair-wise comparison matrix with fuzzy elements based on geometric mean. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 161(11), 1604-1613.
32. Rodriguez S.R., Tocco J.S., Mallonee S., Smithee L., Cathey T., Bradley K., 2006. Rapid needs assessment of Hurricane Katrina evacuees—Oklahoma, September 2005, Prehospital and disaster medicine, 21(6), 390-395.
33. Saaty T.L., 1980. The analytic process: planning, priority setting, resources allocation. McGraw, New York.
34. Safapour E., Kermanshachi S., Pamidimukkala A., 2021. Post-disaster recovery in urban and rural communities: Challenges and strategies. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 64, 102535.
35. Silove D., Steel Z., Psychol M., 2006. Understanding community psychosocial needs after disasters: Implications for mental health services. Journal of postgraduate medicine, 52(2), 121.
36. Sylves R.T., 2019. Disaster policy and politics: Emergency management and homeland security. SAGE Edition.
37. Toland J.C., Wein A.M., Wu A.M., Spearing L.A., 2023. A conceptual framework for estimation of initial emergency food and water resource requirements in disasters. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 90, 103661.
38. Uğural M.N., 2023. Risk Assessment for International Construction Projects. International Journal of Innovative Engineering Applications, 7(1), 44-51.
39. Varol N., Kaya Ç.M., 2018. Afet Risk Yönetiminde Transdisipliner Yaklaşım, Afet ve Risk Dergisi, 1(1), 1-8.
40. Wilson G., Wilson T.M., Deligne N.I., Cole J.W., 2014. Volcanic hazard impacts to critical infrastructure: A review. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 286, 148-182.
41. Zhao L., Li H., Sun Y., Huang R., Hu Q., Wang J., Gao F., 2017. Planning emergency shelters for urban disaster resilience: An integrated location-allocation modeling approach. Sustainability, 9(11), 2098.