Emergency and Disaster Assembly Areas (EDAA) are designated safe zones where basic needs can be met until temporary shelters are established following natural or man-made disasters like floods, fires, earthquakes, explosions, or chemical incidents. Promptly relocating disaster victims to these areas is crucial for minimizing loss of life and facilitating effective search and rescue operations by maintaining an uninterrupted flow of information. To prepare for disasters like earthquakes, which cause significant material and emotional damage to large populations, sustainable disaster management must be ensured to evaluate site suitability, correct deficiencies, and avoid inappropriate locations. This study will examine the evaluation criteria for EDAAs established by the Tunceli Provincial Disaster and Emergency Management Authority (AFAD) in terms of area, structure, security, and accessibility, taking into account the region’s specific characteristics. Based on a literature review, eleven criteria have been proposed and ranked using the Besson mean ranking method. Areas have been classified into four categories (e.g., adequate, not suitable) using the optimistic, pessimistic, and comprise approaches of the Assignment Rule Driven by Attitudes (ARDA) and the ORESTE-Sort method. The examination of 19 EDAA provides two perspectives: an optimistic view that recommends classifying eleven areas as first class and using all areas as they are, and a pessimistic view that calls for urgent improvements in three areas and states that one area (EDAA 1) is deemed unsuitable due to its assignment to class K4. It is also advised that the second area should not be used, despite being rated as class K3, due to its proximity to the river and its slope characteristics. The study also performs a sensitivity analysis of the method and provides recommendations for future research.
Ozdemir et al. (Tue,) studied this question.