journal article·2026-05-22Open access

Assessing the Spatial Suitability and Adequacy of Emergency Assembly Areas for Urban Disaster Resilience Using GIS and the Best–Worst Method (BWM): The Case of Malatya, Türkiye

Aşır Yüksel Kaya, Erol Imren, Cafer Giyik, Enes Karadeniz, Fatih Adıgüzel, Halil Barış Özel, Yusuf Bulucu

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 11

Abstract

The 6 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquakes highlighted the importance of emergency assembly areas for disaster response, evacuation safety, and urban resilience in earthquake-prone cities. Although GIS-based multi-criteria decision-making approaches are widely used to assess spatial suitability, relatively few studies integrate suitability, capacity adequacy, and accessibility within a single framework, particularly in cities directly affected by the 2023 earthquakes. This study evaluates emergency assembly areas in Malatya, Türkiye, using an integrated GIS–Best–Worst Method (BWM) framework. Nine criteria—geology, population density, building density, elevation, slope, distance to roads, distance to rivers, distance to fault lines, and distance to buildings—were weighted based on the judgements of 15 experts involved in Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction Plan (İRAP) processes. The BWM results show that geology and distance to fault lines received the highest weights, whereas distance to roads had the lowest weight. The spatial analysis indicates that highly suitable areas are concentrated mainly in the city centre, while several peripheral neighbourhoods are constrained by geological, topographical, and accessibility-related factors. Existing official emergency assembly areas cover only 27.9% of the population and are located in 13 of 88 neighbourhoods. Estimated access times range from 0 to 5 min in central areas to 10–15 min, or beyond effective service coverage, in peripheral neighbourhoods. Although integrating parks and green spaces substantially increases potential capacity, it does not fully eliminate neighbourhood-level inequalities. The findings provide a spatial decision-support framework for emergency planning in earthquake-prone cities.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Facility Location and Emergency Management · Disaster Management and Resilience · Infrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Geography, Faculty of Human and Social Sciences, Firat University, Elazığ 23200, Türkiye

Department of Forest Industrial Engineering, Bartın University, Barti 74100, Türkiye

Elazığ Provincial Disaster and Emergency Management Directorate–AFAD, Elazığ 23040, Türkiye

Department of Transportation Services, Vocational School of Technical Sciences, Bitlis Eren University, Bitlis 13100, Türkiye

Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts and Science, Inonu University, Malatya 44910, Türkiye

Department of Forest Engineering, Faculty of Forestry, Bartin University, Bartin 74110, Türkiye

References (65)

Show source-provided references
1. Zandi, I., Jafari, A., Pahlavani, P., Alesheikh, A.A., and Lotfata, A. (2025). A four-stage GIS-Integrated multi-criteria decision analysis for post-earthquake shelter site selection: A case study in Tehran. Sustain. Resilient Infrastruct., 1–21.10.1080/23789689.2025.2534234 ↗
2. Li, T., Sun, J., and Fei, L. (2025). Application of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Technology in Emergency Decision-Making: Uncertainty, Heterogeneity, Dynamicity, and Interaction. Mathematics, 13.10.3390/math13050731 ↗
3. UNDRR (2025). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2025: Resilience Pays: Financing and Investing for Our Future, Stylus Publishing, LLC.
4. Earthquake-based multi-hazard resilience assessment: A case study of Istanbul, Turkey (neighborhood level)10.1038/s44304-025-00065-8 ↗
5. Post-disaster temporary shelter site location determination with BWM and GIS: A case study of Tokat, Turkey10.1080/23789689.2024.2404797 ↗
6. Wang, Z., Cheng, J., and Xu, C. (2024). Earthquake scenario-specific framework for spatial accessibility analysis (SAA) of emergency shelters: A case study in Xichang City, Sichuan Province, China. Front. Earth Sci., 12.10.3389/feart.2024.1376900 ↗
7. Downscaling Urban Disaster Resilience: Toward Building-Scale Geo-Information Modeling and Machine Learning-Assisted Resilience Knowledge Systems10.1111/tgis.70153 ↗
8. Vale, L.J., and Campanella, T.J. (2005). The Resilient City: How Modern Cities Recover from Disaster, Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195175844.001.0001 ↗
9. Population predictions for the world’s largest cities in the 21st century10.1177/0956247816663557 ↗
10. Urban growth modelling and social vulnerability assessment for a hazardous Kathmandu Valley10.1038/s41598-022-09347-x ↗
11. Fu, Y., Liu, L., and Yuan, D. (2024). What Leads to Effective Emergency Management? A Configurational Analysis of Empirical Cases of Local Chinese Governments. Land, 13.10.3390/land13040469 ↗
12. Global trend and epidemiological profiles of climate-related disasters from 2000 to 202110.1111/tmi.14029 ↗
13. Barsamian, A. (2026, April 15). The Clock Starts Now for Recovery–Assessing the Impacts of Hurricane Ian Part 1. Available online: https://urbanfootprint.com/blog/blog-post/hurricane-ian-impacts-part-1/.
14. Disaster Risk Resilience: Conceptual Evolution, Key Issues, and Opportunities10.1007/s13753-022-00419-0 ↗
15. The geographies of community disaster resilience10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.08.005 ↗
16. How does resilience matter? An empirical verification of the relationships between resilience and vulnerability10.1007/s11069-017-2916-1 ↗
17. Defining urban resilience: A review10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011 ↗
18. The problem of community resilience in two flooded cities: Dhaka 1998 and Brisbane 201110.1016/j.habitatint.2015.08.004 ↗
19. Rethinking disaster resilience in high-density cities: Towards an urban resilience knowledge system10.1016/j.scs.2021.102850 ↗
20. Locating temporary shelter areas after an earthquake: A case for Turkey10.1016/j.ejor.2014.11.035 ↗
21. AFAD (2026, March 22). Earthquake Catalogue, Available online: https://deprem.afad.gov.tr/event-catalog.
22. Afet sonrası acil toplanma ve geçici barınma alanlarının planlanmasındaki faktörlerin incelenmesi: İzmir-Karşıyaka örneği
23. (2026, May 10). General Command of Mapping. Türkiye Administrative Boundaries, Available online: https://www.harita.gov.tr/urun/turkiye-mulki-idare-sinirlari/232.
24. Duman, T.Y., Emre, Ö., Karakaya Gülmez, F., Özalp, S., Elmacı, H., Olgun, Ş., Çörekçioğlu, Ş., Çan, T., and Şaroğlu, F. (2013, January 11–13). Türkiye Diri Fayları Veri Tabanı. Proceedings of the TMMOB Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri Kongresi 2013, Ankara, Türkiye. Available online: https://obs.hkmo.org.tr/show-media/resimler/ekler/510e4c76a84cb6e_ek.pdf?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
25. (2026, April 15). ArcGIS Online World Imagery Basemap; Data Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap Contributors, and the GIS User Community. Available online: https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=10df2279f9684e4a9f6a7f08febac2a9.
26. Comparative evaluation of GIS-based best–worst method (BWM) for emergency facility planning: Perspectives from two decision-maker groups10.1007/s11069-020-04348-3 ↗
27. Site selection and prediction of urban emergency shelter based on VGAE-RF model10.1038/s41598-024-64031-6 ↗
28. Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods for the evaluation of solar farms locations: Case study in south-eastern Spain10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.019 ↗
29. Combining GIS with fuzzy multicriteria decision-making for landfill siting in a fast-growing urban region10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.011 ↗
30. Efficient Crisis Management by Selection and Analysis of Relief Centers in Disaster Integrating GIS and Multicriteria Decision Methods: A Case Study of Tehran
31. Malczewski, J., and Rinner, C. (2015). GIScience, Spatial Analysis, and Decision Support, Springer.10.1007/978-3-540-74757-4_1 ↗
32. Deploying a GIS-based decision model for disaster management support bases (DMSBs) siting in urban environments based on ordered weighted average (OWA) procedure10.1016/j.pdisas.2025.100434 ↗
33. GIS-multicriteria decision analysis for landslide susceptibility mapping: Comparing three methods for the Urmia lake basin, Iran10.1007/s11069-012-0463-3 ↗
34. Multi-hazard assessment modeling via multi-criteria analysis and GIS: A case study10.1007/s12665-018-8003-4 ↗
35. Atmaca, E., Aktaş, E., and Öztürk, H.N. (2023). Evaluated Post-Disaster and Emergency Assembly Areas Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques: A Case Study of Turkey. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su15108350 ↗
36. Yildirim, R.E., and Sisman, A. (2025). Spatial Decision Support for Determining Suitable Emergency Assembly Places Using GIS and MCDM Techniques. Sustainability, 17.10.3390/su17052144 ↗
37. Selection of emergency logistics facility locations considering major natural disasters in mountainous cities based on GIS-MCDM10.1038/s41598-026-43065-y ↗
38. An assessment on size and site selection of emergency assembly points and temporary shelter areas in Düzce10.1007/s11069-020-04367-0 ↗
39. Assessment of emergency gathering points and temporary shelter areas for disaster resilience in Elazıg, Turkey10.1007/s11069-023-06271-9 ↗
40. Examination of emergency assembly areas based on planning criteria after the two major earthquakes on 6 February, 2023: A case study from Turkey10.24294/jipd.v8i7.3917 ↗
41. Detection of Structural Damage After an Earthquake Using GIS and Remote Sensing Methods
42. AFAD (AFAD) (2023). 06 Şubat 2023 Pazarcık (Kahramanmaraş) Mw 7.7 ve Elbistan (Kahramanmaraş) Mw 7.6 Depremlerine İlişkin Ön Değerlendirme Raporu, AFAD.
43. Mertol, H.C., Tunç, G., Akış, T., Kantekin, Y., and Aydın, İ.C. (2023). Investigation of RC Buildings after 6 February 2023, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye Earthquakes. Buildings, 13.10.3390/buildings13071789 ↗
44. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Environment, Urbanisation and Climate Change (2026, April 15). Damage Assessment Results [Hasar Tespit Sonuçları], Available online: https://hasartespit.csb.gov.tr/.
45. Environmental justice in the context of urban green space availability, accessibility, and attractiveness in postsocialist cities10.1016/j.cities.2020.102862 ↗
46. Measuring the accessibility of emergency shelters based on an improved two-step floating catchment area model10.1080/17538947.2025.2479864 ↗
47. Spatial accessibility analysis and location optimization of emergency shelters in Deyang10.1080/19475705.2023.2213809 ↗
48. The green walk—An analysis for evaluating the accessibility of urban green spaces10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127685 ↗
49. Kentsel Yeşil Alanların Yeterliliği ve Erişilebilirliğinin Değerlendirilmesi: Tarsus (Mersin) Örneği10.48123/rsgis.1512435 ↗
50. (2026, April 15). Types of Network Analysis Layers. Available online: https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/latest/extensions/network-analyst/types-of-network-analyses.htm.
51. Yi, F., Jia, H., Liang, C., Zhang, Q., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., and Zhang, H. (2026). Analyzing Emergency Service Performance and Fastest Rescue Routes to Vulnerable Population Places Under Compound Pluvial Flooding and Traffic Congestion. Water, 18.10.3390/w18060736 ↗
52. Analysis of emergency assembly points for post-earthquake disaster management: A case study of Erzincan, Türkiye10.1007/s11069-024-06661-7 ↗
53. Evaluation of Qualifications of Assembly Points For Disasters and Emergency: Example of Kocaeli, İzmit10.31198/idealkent.514077 ↗
54. AFAD (2026, March 16). Toplanma Alanına Erişim, Available online: https://ankara.afad.gov.tr/toplanma-alanina-erisim.
55. Earthquake vulnerability and seismic risk assessment of urban areas in high seismic regions: Application to Chania City, Crete Island, Greece10.1007/s11069-009-9475-z ↗
56. Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards10.1111/1540-6237.8402002 ↗
57. The Resilience to Emergencies and Disasters Index: Applying big data to benchmark and validate neighborhood resilience capacity10.1016/j.scs.2017.10.025 ↗
58. The role of urban configuration during disasters. A scenario-based methodology for the post-earthquake emergency management of Italian historic centres10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104700 ↗
59. Urban Earthquake Vulnerability Assessment and Mapping at the Microscale Based on the Catastrophe Progression Method10.1007/s13753-023-00512-y ↗
60. Ma, Y., Xu, W., Qin, L., and Zhao, X. (2019). Site Selection Models in Natural Disaster Shelters: A Review. Sustainability, 11.10.3390/su11020399 ↗
61. Integrating GIS and spatial data analysis: Problems and possibilities10.1080/02693799208901923 ↗
62. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method10.1016/j.omega.2014.11.009 ↗
63. Wang, X., Guan, M., Dong, C., Wang, J., Fan, Y., Xin, F., and Lian, G. (2022). A Multi-Indicator Evaluation Method for Spatial Distribution of Urban Emergency Shelters. Remote Sens., 14.10.3390/rs14184649 ↗
64. Lee, Y.H., Lee, J.S., Baek, S.C., and Hong, W.H. (2020). Spatial Equity with Census Population Data vs. Floating Population Data: The Distribution of Earthquake Evacuation Shelters in Daegu, South Korea. Sustainability, 12.10.3390/su12198046 ↗
65. A Research on Increasing the Possibility of Using Green Areas as Post-Disaster Assembly Areas in Turkey