Spatial Analysis of Environmental Hazards

Spatial Analysis of Environmental Hazards

Spatial analysis resiliency City Earthquake Model Integration Case study: ten districts of the region one of Tehran

Authors
Ali Eshghei
Hossein nazmfar
Ata Gafari
University of Mohaghegh Ardabil
10.29252/jsaeh.7.2.81
Abstract
Spatial analysis physical resiliency City Earthquake Model Condorcet
Case study: ten districts of the region one of Tehran

Abstract
Earthquake as one of the most devastating and destructive natural hazards; especially in developing countries, it has been a long time ago With the collapse of buildings and urban infrastructure, Imports a lot of damage to property and assets in urban areas and around them. In response to this, international organizations' strategies to mitigate disasters have made their societies resilient to natural disasters. And considers it within the framework of the Higgo for the years 2005-2015. In fact, the goal of this approach is to reduce the vulnerability of cities and to strengthen citizens' abilities to deal with the dangers of threats such as natural disasters. Considering that the area of ​​a Tehran city due to its proximity to faults such as Mashaa fault, North Tehran fault Also, the effects of faults in and around the region such as Niavaran fault, Mahmoodieh fault and Darabad fault (Banamieh) are located in a region with a high seismic hazard. Assessment of resilience of the region to earthquake risk and resilience of the region In order to reduce the risks of earthquakes in this area is very important. Accordingly, the present study was conducted with the aim of assessing the resilience situation of the 10th district of Tehran municipality district against earthquake.
The method of this research is descriptive-analytical with a purposeful purpose. The research area of ​​the 10th Region is a municipality of Tehran. The raw data used by the Tehran Municipality Information Technology Organization has been obtained. To determine the relative importance of each component used in research According to experts from the Urban Planning Area, the Network Analysis Process (ANP) has been used in the form of Super Decisions software. Then, to rank 10 areas of a Tehran municipality district against earthquake, Multi-criteria decision making models (MCDMs) including TOPSIS, VIKOR, HAW and SAW models have been used. Considering that different methods have been used to rank the areas Different results have been achieved, to overcome the contradictions between the various ratings of the regions in each of the models,
and a single result has been used to rank the areas of the congregation's integrated model.
Finally, in order to speak, the results of the model used in the ArcGIS environment were mapped.
In this research, for the spatial analysis of the resilience of the 10 district areas of a Tehran municipality from the results four models (TOPSIS, VIKOR, HAW and SAW) were used. Based on the results of the TOPSIS technique, areas 8, 3 and 2 of resilience are large, areas 7 and 4 of the moderate resilience, Areas 5, 1, 6 and 10 have low resilience and area 9 has very little resilience against the earthquake. Based on the results of the VIKOR model, areas 3 and 4 of the resilience, regions 2, 7, 5, 9, 8, 6 and 10 of the moderate resilience Medium and area one have low resilience against earthquake. Based on the results of the HAW model, area 3 of the high resilience, regions 2, 7, 8 and 4 of the moderate resilience and areas 10, 1, 6 and 9 are of low resilience. In this model, no area has been found to be very resilient. Based on the results of the SAW model, regions 3, 2, 8, and 7 are in the range of many resiliences, regions 5 and 4 in the moderate resilience range, Area 9 is in the low resilience range and areas 10, 6 and 1 are in the low resilience range against earthquakes.

In this study, we evaluated the resilience situation in the districts of Tehran municipality district in an earthquake Multi-criteria decision-making methods including TOPSIS, VIKOR, HAW and SAW were used, Then a CONDORCET integrated model was used to achieve a single result of these analyzes. The results of the Canadian model, which is the result of a combination of the final results of the models (Tapis, VIKOR, HAW and SAW), show that Areas 2, 4, 5, and 3 are of high resilience, areas 7, 8 and 1 of the moderate resilience, 10 and 6 of the resilience, and area 9 of the resilience is very low against earthquakes. Which should be prioritized in future plans. Although it is possible to assess the vulnerability of urban areas by using different models and mapping them in the region's resilience to the earthquake crisis, a significant part of post-crisis casualties fell but this will not be achieved until the authorities are seriously determined.

Keywords: Resilience, Earthquake, Multi-criteria Decision Making Methods, Tehran Municipality Area
Keywords
Resilience
TOPSIS
VIKOR
HAW
SAW
Kandrst
18- Adger, W.N. 2000. Social and Ecological Resilience: are they related?. Progress in Human Geography. 3: 347-364.
19- Ainuddin, S., Routray, Jayant Kumar. 2012. Community resilience framework for an earthquake prone area in Baluchistan. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2: 25-36.
20- Al-Nammari, Fatima; Alzaghal, Mohamad. 2014. towards local disaster risk reduction in developing countries: Challenges from Jordan. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction: 1-8.
21- Bastaminia, A., Rezaie, MR., Tazesh, Y., Dastoorpoor, M. 2016. Evaluation of Urban Resilience to Earthquake A Case Study: Dehdasht City. International Journal of Ecology & Development. Volume 31, Issue Number4
22- Berke, P., Smith, G., and Lyles, W. 2012. Planning for Resiliency: Evaluation of State Hazard Mitigation Plans under the Disaster Mitigation Act. Nat. Hazards Rev: 139-149.
23- Berke, Ph., `Godschalk, D and Edward, K. 2006. Urban landuse planning. 5th Edition. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
24- Bonati, Sara, Martinho P. Mendes. 2014. Building participation to reduce vulnerability: how can local educational strategies promote global resilience? A case study in Funchal – Madeira Island. Procedia Economics and Finance 18: 165- 172.
25- Cutter, Susan L., Kevin D. Ash, Christopher T. Emrich. 2014. the geographies of community disaster resilience. Global Environmental Change. 29: 65-77.
26- Dong, Laigen, Jie Shan. 2013. A comprehensive review of earthquake induced building damage detection with remote sensing techniques. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 84: 85–99.
27- Godschalk, D. 2003). “Urban hazard mitigation: Creating resilient cities”. Natural Hazards Review, 4, 136–143.
28- Mayunga, J. S. (2007. "Understanding and applying the concept of community disaster resilience: A capital-based approach", A Draft Working Paper Prepared for the Summer Academy for Social Vulnerability and Resilience Building. 22- 28 July 2007, Munich, 2007.
29- Meerow, Sara, Joshua P. Newell, Melissa Stults. 2016. Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban Planning. 147: 38–49
30- Min Xu, C., Hao Zhang, J., Kaneyuki N., Qisheng He, J., Chaoyi Chang, Y., and Mengxu
Gao, X. 2010. Change Detection of an Earthquake Induced Barrier Lake Based on
Remote Sensing Image Classification. International Journal of Remote Sensing. 31: 3521-3534.
31- Mitchell, T., Harris, K. 2012. Resilience: a risk management approach. background note. ODI.
32- UN/ISDR. 2004. Living with Risk –A global review of disaster reduction initiatives. Inter-Agency Secretariat of the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction.
33- Usamah‚ M., Handmer‚ J., Mitchell‚ D., Ahmed‚ I. 2014. Can the vulnerable be resilient? Co-existence of vulnerability and disaster resilience: Informal settlements in the Philippines. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 10: 178–189.
34- Zhou, Hongjian; Jing’ai Wang; Jinhong Wan; Huicong Jia. 2010. Resilience to natural hazards: a geographic perspective. Natural Hazards. 59: 4-21.