8th International i-Rec Conference
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method Applied for
the Sustainable Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Analysing
S. M. Amin Hosseinia, Oriol Ponsb, Albert de la Fuentea
a Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UPC, Barcelona, Spain
b Department of Architectural Technology, UPC, Barcelona, Spain
S. M. Amin Hosseini
Postdoctoral researcher at UPC
Oriol Pons
Lecturer Professor at UPC
Tacloban city, Leyte province, Philippines-12/25/2013 - Source: AFP/ Ted Aljibe
Toronto, June 2017
Albert de La Fuente
Associate Professor at UPC
Natural Disaster
Statistics
8th International i-Rec Conference
ate of the Art
Number of people reported affected
Number of disasters reported
Number of people reported killed
Natural Disaster Summery 1900-2011
March 12, 2011 after Friday’s catastrophic earthquake and
tsunami.AP Photo/ Asahi Shimbun
Natural Hazards
Human Actions
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Man-Made impacts
Natural Disaster
Source: http://www.emdat.be
According to Global Estimates 2014,
22 million people lost their homes to
natural disasters in 2013.
According to UNHCR (2015), total
displaced population reached almost
sixty million by 2014, eight million
more than last year.
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
2
Temporary Housing
8th International i-Rec Conference
In these areas TH is the first priority phase for the
government (Hidayat 2010). because TH offers security
and safety to Displaced People (DP) so they can return
the pre-disaster conditions (Collins et al. 2010; Johnson
2007).
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
3
8th International i-Rec Conference
Displaced Population
Protracted displacement following disasters worldwide in 2014/2015
16,000
230,000
39,200
13,000
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
4
Temporary Housing
Units
8th International i-Rec Conference
Why were decision-makers forced to choose temporary housing units?
Available Accommodations
USA
2005
Not Available
China
2008
Turkey
1999, 2011
Japan
1995, 2011
Sustainability
What are the main problems
of Post-disaster housing?
Mexico
1985
Economic
Iran
2003, 2012
Social
New Zealand
2011
Indonesia
2004
Environmental
High Demand
Displaced Population Pressure
Lack of Other Options
Climate Condition
Avoiding the Mass Exodus of Population
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
5
Temporary Housing
Units
8th International i-Rec Conference
Why were decision-makers forced to choose temporary housing units?
USA
2005
China
2008
Turkey
1999, 2011
Japan
1995, 2011
Mexico
1985
Iran
2003, 2012
New Zealand
2011
Indonesia
2004
Natural hazards cannot be eliminated.
Temporary housing is required.
Temporary Housing Assessment
Introduction Case study
Temporary housing has negative impacts.
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
6
Temporary Housing
Characteristics
8th International i-Rec Conference
What is the strategy of emergency managers to deal with the mentioned problems?
Rejection
Or
Other
Alternatives
Acceptance
Yes
Available
Minimize
Negative Effects
Forced
Negative Effects
Perfect
Results
(It should be assessed)
Reality
No
?
Real Cases
Nothing
What happens if displaced population does not
receive suitable temporary housing?
Introduction Case study
Displaced population provide low-quality
shelters for themselves as temporary housing
(e.g., the Colombian recovery program after the
Armenia earthquake, 1999 (Johnson et al. 2006)).
Source : http://saint-germains-children.org
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
7
Temporary Housing
Assessment
8th International i-Rec Conference
What is the problem of decision-making processes?
Simon (1996) stated that dealing with complex emergency situations cannot
rely only on decision-makers due to the bounded rationality.
Lizarralde & Davidson (2006) stated that PDH strategies often fail to address the
displaced poeple expectations.
A suitable strategy embraces intertwined interior and exterior factors that
could have antithetical impacts on each particular case (Hall, 1962).
Kapucu & Garayev (2011) stated that traditional decision-making approaches
cannot be used in emergencies, which need flexible tools.
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Thus, to determine a suitable strategy needs a
decision-making model with the capacity to deal
with this complicated multifaceted process.
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
8
8th International i-Rec Conference
Objective
The main objective of this research is to present a
suitable decision-making tool to deal with PDHs
by defining the features of decision-making of
PDH and considering the tools, which could be
applied in this case.
Questions
Which are the main requirements for the decision-making process to
deal with post-disaster temporary housing?
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Which tool is the most suitable one for choosing the post-disaster
temporary housing stratrgy focusing on the aforementioned main
requirements?
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
9
8th International i-Rec Conference
Methodology
DecisionMaking
Models
DecisionMaking
Models
Features
Literature Review
Problem
Definition
Emergency
Management
Characteristics
Emergency
Management
Requirement
Dividing Problem
Case Study
Suitable
DecisionMaking Tool
Experts
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Solution
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
10
Case Study
8th International i-Rec Conference
Turkey-1999
Iran-2003
Indonesia-2004
USA-2005
Italy-2009
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
11
Case Study
8th International i-Rec Conference
Turkey-1999
Iran-2003
Indonesia-2004
USA-2005
Italy-2009
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
12
8th International i-Rec Conference
Case Study
Turkey-1999
The main common problems of the five cases
Late Delivery
Mismatching with
Local Culture
Inappropriate
Organization Strategy
Dealing with
Tenants
Displaced People
Dissatisfaction
Displaced People
Characteristics
Natural Hazards
Impacts
Local Conditions
Local Potentials
Long-term
Consideration
Iran-2003
Indonesia-2004
USA-2005
Italy-2009
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
13
8th International i-Rec Conference
Case Study
Turkey-1999
Properties group, which embraces
all material and immaterial things
that have formed characteristics of
the affected area, such as financial
powers, technology, facilities,
features of population, climate
conditions, etc.
Iran-2003
Fig. Three main factors of decision-making process
Belongings
Attributes
Environmental
Technical
Requirements vertex, which consists of many diverse physical
and psychological aspects, takes into account all essentials for
returning the post-disaster situations to the pre-disaster or better
situations, especially in terms of displaced people.
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Limitations group, which embraces all factors that
cause difficulties and restrict to arrive to the solutions
and achieve suitable requirements, such as timing,
number of DP, natural hazard types and effects, etc.
Indonesia-2004
USA-2005
Italy-2009
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
14
Case Study
8th International i-Rec Conference
Turkey-1999
Different indicators with diverse interactions were involved in
the studied cases. Furthermore, the importance of indicators can
vary from case to case based on natural disasters types and
scales, local characteristics, and resiliency.
It is difficult to guarantee that the PDH program that has been
useful for one case will be suitable for another case with
different conditions.
The recovery program of five cases varied based on the local
characteristics and resiliency. Additionally, it is required to
consider short- and long-terms indicators for each case.
Iran-2003
Indonesia-2004
USA-2005
Italy-2009
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
15
Decision-Making
Model
8th International i-Rec Conference
A generic decision model for PDH (Peng et al. 2014), a decision process for secure site location (Hale & Moberg,
2005), selection of fixed seismic shelters by the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution
(TOPSIS) (Chua & Su 2012), considering earthquake evacuation capacity by Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Ma
at al. 2011), settlement suitability by geographical information system (GIS) (Alparslan at al. 2008), earthquake
refugee shelters by combination of GIS and entropy methods (Li et al. 2013), analysing the sustainable site selection
and decision-making methods by GIS and multi-attribute decision making (MADM) (Omidvar et al. 2013), urban
shelter locations based on covering models (Wei et al. 2012), selecting suitable site location of TH by the MIVES
(Hosseini et al. 2016b), TH technology aftermath of Bam earthquake by the MIVES (Hosseini et al. 2016a),
hierarchical location models for earthquake-shelter planning (Chen et al. 2013), selecting site of temporary sheltering
using Fuzzy algorithms (Nojavan & Omidvar 2013), optimizing PDH allocation (El-Anwar et al. 2009a), and
optimizing TH assignments to minimize displacement distance (El-Anwar & Chen 2012).
TOPSIS
Fuzzy
Site Selection
AHP
SAW
Temporary Housing Selection
GIS
MIVES
Previous Studies
Introduction Case study
ELECTRE
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
16
Decision-Making
Model
Method
AHP
TOPSIS
MIVES
ELECTRE
SAW
Fuzzy
Theory
8th International i-Rec Conference
Main Characteristic
experts’ knowledge, priority theory, hierarchical structure analysis,
flexible, ranking irregularities, pairwise comparison, rank reversal
tendency of monotonically increasing or decreasing utility, shortest
distance from the positive ideal and farthest from negative one, alternative
ranking method, widely applied method, difficult to weight
value function based on the utility theory, experts’ knowledge, alternative
ranking and selection method, sustainability assessment tool, easy to
understand, a combination of techniques, requirements tree
alternative selection method, time consuming, outranking relations,
coordination indices, alternatives pairwise comparison, different outputs
from other methods
almost simplest and oldest method, popular to practitioners, intuitive,
sometimes illogical results
widely applied method, ability of imprecise input and insufficient
information, difficult, time consuming
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
17
Decision-Making
Model
8th International i-Rec Conference
The characteristics of post-disaster temporary housing decision-making processes
Customizable
Approach
Two Diverse
Systems
Multifaceted
issue
Life
Cycle
Diverse
Stakeholders
Quality
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
18
Decision-Making
Model
8th International i-Rec Conference
Which is the most suitable method to assess the post-disaster housing
sustainability focusing on the aforementioned main requirements?
Analysis of Case Studies
AHP
TOPSIS
SAW
Fuzzy
MIVES
ELECTRE
Almost all compensation methods could be risky for decision-making on recovery
program issues because it is possible to choose an alternative with ineligible features.
Indicator-Weighting
System
Utility Theory
Introduction Case study
MIVES Method
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
19
8th International i-Rec Conference
MIVES
S-Shape
The integrated value Model for Sustainable Assessment from the Spanish
Concave
(MIVES) consists of a multi-criteria decision-making method that
V(Xi)
incorporates the concept of value function.
1
Lineal
Convex
0
Indicator
Xmin
%
Xmax
Indicator
Criterion
Requirement
AHP
Introduction Case study
DecisionMaking
Discussion
Conclusion
Shannon’s Entropy
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
20
8th International i-Rec Conference
Conclusions
The assessment of the cases with
diverse characteristics in terms of
financial power, social levels, and
natural hazards confirms that
almost all decision process had
considerable problems to arrive
the solutions.
To make a proper decision it is
required to detect problems,
define
possible
responses,
determine all characteristics of
responses based on different
conditions without prejudice.
Case Study
Decision
Decision
MIVES
The assigned weights by different
techniques
had
considerable
impacts on choosing optimal
alternatives for TH. it is required to
consider stakeholders concerns about
priorities of indicators by involving all
experts in this process.
MIVES , which includes the value
function concept based on the
utilities
theory,
permits
all
stakeholders to participate in the
decision-making process.
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method for the Sustainable Temporary Housing
21
Thanks for Your Attentions
Suitability of Different Decision-Making Method Applied for
the Sustainable Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Analysing
S. M. Amin Hosseini, Oriol Pons, Albert de la Fuente
Toronto, June 2017
[email protected]
Integrated Approach
Fig 3.4. The choice phases of PDA
including the elements and connections
Choice Phases
23
Integrated Approach
Main Vertexes
Local Characteristics
Post-disaster
Housing Properties
Natural Disaster
Findings
The temporary housing stage
cannot be concealed.
The
elements
can
lead
to
antithetical effects.
Choice
Phases
Decision-making
Algorithm
24
Conclusions
Future Perspective
Ongoing Research
Combination of MIVES and GIS to
determine initial stages site locations.
Combination of MIVES and knapsack to
consider suitable distribution of displaced
population in rental units.
Continuous Research Line
Analysing the
Analysing the decision- Analysing the
suitability of
making models,
impacts of shape,
conventional
especially weight
form, and area of
residential buildings
assignment system to
temporary housing
based on the core-
increase adaptability
units on
housing concept
of models to this issue.
sustainability index.
25
Annex
26
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Integrated Approach
Post-disaster Housing Properties
This section presents post-disaster accommodation arrangement, which includes: the timescale, provision, and second life of temporary housing.
Time-Scale
Provision Styles
Second Life
Emergency Shelter
Time-Scale
Some accommodations
have the ability to be
used
for
different
housing
recovery
stages, such as: tents or
winterized tents, which
can be applied for
emergency
shelter,
temporary shelter, and
TH phases.
Temporary Shelter
Time-Scale
Temporary Housing
Permanent Housing
PDA
Arrangement
Provision
Second Life
Integrated Approach
Post-disaster Housing Properties
Introduction
Provision
Location
Time-Scale
Not Available
(Need to be constructed)
Case Study
PDA
Arrangement
Provision
Available
Descriptive
(Does not need to be
constructed)
State of the
ArtMIVES
State of the
ArtMain Chapters
Conclusion
Construction
Second Life
Location
Privacy
Site Location
The social problems due to an unsuitable
location normally happen when the displaced
population is forced to move to other areas,
because according to (Davis 1978; Johnson 2002),
displaced population prefers to live close to the
previous properties, communities, and activities
(Aquilino 2011; Johnson 2002).
Site selection is a process that
involves many steps from planning to
construction, consisting of an initial
inventory,
alternative
analysis,
assessment, detailed design, and
construction procedures and services
(Kelly 2010).
28
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Integrated Approach
Post-disaster Housing Properties
Dispersed
Settlement
Provision
Site
Location
Mass
Settlement
Ready-Made
Location
Site
Arrangement
Construction
System
Prefabricated
Supply Kit
On-site
CommunityBuilt
Participation
Self-Built
Third party
Contractor
Not Available
(Need to be constructed)
Labour
Construction
Provision
Available
(Does not need to be
constructed)
This method is
highly significant
for the construction
delivery time and
quality.
The
participation
method
embraces
construction approaches when displaced
population only (self-built) or displaced
population with community (semi self-built)
undertakes to provide the accommodations.
The third-party labour method considers the
construction approaches to provide displaced
population s´ accommodations by other people
without the participation of the displaced
population in the construction process.
Integrated Approach
Post-disaster Housing Properties
Dispersed
Settlement
Provision
Site
Location
Mass
Settlement
Ready-Made
Location
Site
Arrangement
Construction
System
Prefabricated
Supply Kit
On-site
CommunityBuilt
Participation
Self-Built
Third party
Contractor
Not Available
(Need to be constructed)
Labour
Construction
Conventional
Material
Nonconventional
Provision
Shape
Available
(Does not need to be
constructed)
Form
Storey
30
Integrated Approach
Post-disaster Housing Properties
Second Life
Same
Time-Scale
PDA
Arrangement
Location
Others
Property Condition
Same
Provision
Storage
Second Life
Complete
Reuse
Others
Landfill
Components
Function
Dining hall formed from four housing Units, Duzce,
Source: Hakan Arslana,, Nilay Cosgun, 2008
31
Integrated Approach
Post-disaster Housing Properties
Second Life
Same
Time-Scale
PDA
Arrangement
Location
Others
Property Condition
Same
Provision
Storage
Second Life
Complete
Reuse
Others
Landfill
Components
Function
Turkey, 1999, UMCOR,
Cassidy Johnson, 2007
32
Decision-Making
Model
Introduction
Decision-making Process of Post-disaster Housing Approaches
Case Study
Choosing suitable options among diverse limited alternatives
Descriptive
For example, choosing a suitable site location
of THUs between initial chosen site.
State of the
ArtMIVES
State of the
ArtMain Chapters
Alt. 3
Alt. 1
Conclusion
Alt. 2
Determining suitable possible alternatives without having initial alternatives
For instance, a model is
used for choosing a proper
settlement by considering
all areas (see (Alparslan et al.
2008)).
33
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Site Location
Selection
Introduction
𝑗
𝑗
𝑉𝑠 =
𝑖=1
𝑉𝑅𝑘 =
𝜆𝑅𝑖 . 𝑉𝑅𝑖
𝑖=1
𝑗
𝜆𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘
𝑉=
𝑖=1
𝜆𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝑖,𝑘 (𝑥𝑖𝑛𝑑 )
Case Study
Site Preparation
Descriptive
State of the
ArtMIVES
State of the
ArtMain Chapters
I1. Land Price
R1. Economic
δ
C1. Invest Capital
I2. Cost of Site Preparation
Utilities Quality
I3. Access
C2. User Safety
Conclusion
Sustainability Indexes
of Alternatives
I4. Population Covering
I5. Distance from Source of Danger
R2. Social
I6. Property and Land Use Zoning
C3. Flexibility
I7. Neighbourhood Acceptability
C4. Land use
I8. Landscape Respect
C5. Emissions
I9. CO2 Emission
R3. Environmental
II/I
34
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Site Location
Selection
Introduction
𝑗
𝑗
𝑉𝑠 =
𝑖=1
𝑉𝑅𝑘 =
𝜆𝑅𝑖 . 𝑉𝑅𝑖
𝑖=1
𝑗
𝜆𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘
𝑉=
𝑖=1
𝜆𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝑖,𝑘 (𝑥𝑖𝑛𝑑 )
Case Study
Descriptive
State of the
ArtMIVES
State of the
ArtMain Chapters
Population
Covering
I1. Land Price
R1. Economic
C1. Invest Capital
I2. Cost of Site Preparation
Maximize
Coverage DP
I3. Access
Distribute Sites
C2. User Safety
Conclusion
Sustainability Indexes
of Alternatives
I4. Population Covering
I5. Distance from Source of Danger
R2. Social
I6. Property and Land Use Zoning
C3. Flexibility
I7. Neighbourhood Acceptability
C4. Land use
I8. Landscape Respect
C5. Emissions
I9. CO2 Emission
R3. Environmental
II/I
35
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Site Location
Selection
Introduction
𝑗
𝑗
𝑉𝑠 =
𝑖=1
𝑉𝑅𝑘 =
𝜆𝑅𝑖 . 𝑉𝑅𝑖
𝑖=1
𝑗
𝜆𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘
𝑉=
𝑖=1
𝜆𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝑖,𝑘 (𝑥𝑖𝑛𝑑 )
Case Study
Descriptive
State of the
ArtMIVES
State of the
ArtMain Chapters
Distance from
Source of Danger
I1. Land Price
R1. Economic
C1. Invest Capital
I2. Cost of Site Preparation
γ
I3. Access
Danger Level
C2. User Safety
Conclusion
Sustainability Indexes
of Alternatives
I4. Population Covering
I5. Distance from Source of Danger
R2. Social
I6. Property and Land Use Zoning
C3. Flexibility
I7. Neighbourhood Acceptability
C4. Land use
I8. Landscape Respect
C5. Emissions
I9. CO2 Emission
R3. Environmental
II/I
36
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Site Location
Selection
Introduction
𝑗
𝑗
𝑉𝑠 =
𝑖=1
𝑉𝑅𝑘 =
𝜆𝑅𝑖 . 𝑉𝑅𝑖
𝑖=1
𝑗
𝜆𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝐶𝑅𝑖,𝑘
𝑉=
𝑖=1
𝜆𝑖,𝑘 . 𝑉𝑖,𝑘 (𝑥𝑖𝑛𝑑 )
Case Study
I1. Land Price
CO2 Emissions
Descriptive
State of the
ArtMIVES
State of the
ArtMain Chapters
R1. Economic
C1. Invest Capital
I2. Cost of Site Preparation
Preparation
Activities
I3. Access
Transportation
C2. User Safety
Conclusion
Sustainability Indexes
of Alternatives
I4. Population Covering
I5. Distance from Source of Danger
R2. Social
I6. Property and Land Use Zoning
LCA
C3. Flexibility
I7. Neighbourhood Acceptability
C4. Land use
I8. Landscape Respect
C5. Emissions
I9. CO2 Emission
R3. Environmental
II/I
37
Sustainability in the Post-Disaster Temporary Housing Management for Urban Areas
Site Location
Selection (Annex)
I1. Land Price
I3. Access
I5. Distance from Source of Danger
I2. Cost of Site Preparation
I4. Population Covering
I6. Property and Land Use Zoning
38
Site Location
Selection (Annex)
I7. Neighbourhood Acceptability
I8. Landscape Respect
I9. CO2 Emission
39
Site Location
Selection (Annex)
SubI7-1. Density
SubI7-2. Hospital
SubI7-3. School
SubI7-4. Green Area
SubI7-5. Police Station
SubI7-6. Fire Station
40
Temporary Housing
Units(Annex)
I1. Building Cost
I3. Construction Time
I5. Comfort
I2. Reusability Cost
I4. Risk Resistance
I6. Compatibility
41
Temporary Housing
Units(Annex)
I7. Energy Consumption
I9. Waste Material
I8. Water Consumption
I10. CO2 Emissions
42
Temporary Housing
Units(Annex)
Sub I4-1. Natural Disaster Risk
Sub I5-1. Acoustic
Sub I4-2. Fire Resistance
Sub I5-2. Thermal Resistance
43
Temporary Housing
Units(Annex)
Sub I6-1. Cultural Acceptance
Sub I6-2. Flexibility
Sub I6-3. Skilled Labour
44