SavedAdd your journal

Journals / İşletme Bilimi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3

Disaster Logistics Depot Site Selection Using Set Coverage and P-Median Methods: A Hybrid Multi-Objective Model Proposal

Küme Kapsama ve P Medyan Yöntemleriyle Afet Lojistik Depo Yer Seçimi: Hibrit Çok Amaçlı Bir Model Önerisi

Ömür Demirer(HITIT UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT, INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND LOGISTICS MANAGEMENT PR.)0000-0002-9502-9935
Mustafa Erkul0009-0003-7119-9694
Pages
754–781
Publication Date
2026-09-25
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

This study presents original contributions to the literature in terms of integrating scientific microzonation data into optimization models and applying hybrid approaches to disaster logistics.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study develops a hybrid multi-objective optimization model to determine optimal locations for temporary logistics warehouses in central districts of Çorum province within the scope of disaster logistics.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Using microzonation data obtained from 521 drilling points by Çorum Municipality, the criteria of settlement suitability, soil amplification factor, soil bearing capacity, and liquefaction potential were weighted using the ENTROPY method, and neighborhood-based risk scores were calculated using the TOPSIS method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This study presents original contributions to the literature in terms of integrating scientific microzonation data into optimization models and applying hybrid approaches to disaster logistics.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Afet Lojistiği · Depo Yer Seçimi · Küme Kapsama

Abstract

This study develops a hybrid multi-objective optimization model to determine optimal locations for temporary logistics warehouses in central districts of Çorum province within the scope of disaster logistics. The model presents a four-stage approach that evaluates risk factors and operational efficiency together through the integration of set covering and p-median methods. Using microzonation data obtained from 521 drilling points by Çorum Municipality, the criteria of settlement suitability, soil amplification factor, soil bearing capacity, and liquefaction potential were weighted using the ENTROPY method, and neighborhood-based risk scores were calculated using the TOPSIS method. These scores were combined with population data to create composite scores. The model was tested in three different scenarios: security-focused, balanced, and service-focused. Obtaining the same results in all scenarios demonstrates the robust nature of the solution. As a result of the analysis, 7 warehouse locations were determined in Bahçelievler, Buharaevler, Gülabibey, Kale, Mimarsinan, Ulukavak, and Üçtutlar neighborhoods with an optimal coverage distance of 2,0 km. The model achieved 100% coverage ratio, 0,3 km average service distance, and 60,1% capacity utilization rate. This study presents original contributions to the literature in terms of integrating scientific microzonation data into optimization models and applying hybrid approaches to disaster logistics.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, afet lojistiği kapsamında Çorum ili merkez mahallelerinde geçici lojistik depoların optimal yerlerini belirlemek amacıyla hibrit çok amaçlı bir optimizasyon modeli geliştirilmiştir. Model, küme kapsama ve p-medyan yöntemlerinin entegrasyonu ile risk faktörlerini ve operasyonel verimliliği birlikte değerlendiren dört aşamalı bir yaklaşım sunmaktadır. Çorum Belediyesi’nin 521 sondaj noktasından elde edilen mikrobölgeleme verileri kullanılarak, yerleşime uygunluk, zemin büyütme faktörü, zemin dayanım kapasitesi ve sıvılaşma potansiyeli kriterleri ENTROPY yöntemi ile ağırlıklandırılmış, TOPSIS yöntemi ile mahalle bazlı risk skorları hesaplanmıştır. Bu skorlar nüfus verileri ile birleştirilerek kompozit skorlar oluşturulmuştur. Model, güvenlik odaklı, dengeli ve hizmet odaklı olmak üzere üç farklı senaryoda test edilmiştir. Tüm senaryolarda aynı sonuçların elde edilmesi, çözümün dayanıklı nitelikte olduğunu göstermektedir. Analiz sonucunda 2,0 km optimal kapsama mesafesi ile Bahçelievler, Buharaevler, Gülabibey, Kale, Mimarsinan, Ulukavak ve Üçtutlar mahallelerinde 7 depo lokasyonu belirlenmiştir. Model %100 kapsama oranı, 0,3 km ortalama hizmet mesafesi ve %60,1 kapasite kullanım oranı sağlamıştır. Bu çalışma, bilimsel mikrobölgeleme verilerinin optimizasyon modeline entegre edilmesi ve hibrit yaklaşımın afet lojistiği alanına uygulanması açısından literatüre özgün katkılar sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Demirer, Ö., Erkul, M. (2026). Disaster Logistics Depot Site Selection Using Set Coverage and P-Median Methods: A Hybrid Multi-Objective Model Proposal. İşletme Bilimi Dergisi, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 3, 754–781. https://doi.org/10.22139/jobs.1773126

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (80)

  1. AFAD Planlama ve Risk Azaltma Dairesi. (2021). Çorum il afet risk azaltma planı. https://corum.afad.gov.tr/kurumlar/corum.afad/Haberler/2021/Corum_I%CC%87RAP_SON.pdf
  2. AFAD. (2022). Türkiye afet müdahale planı (TAMP). https://www.afad.gov.tr/kurumlar/afad.gov.tr/e_Kutuphane/Planlar/TAMP.pdf
  3. Altan, M. F. ve Hastürk, O. (2023). Depremin ardından kentsel dönüşüm, şehir planlaması. Avrasya Dosyası Dergisi, 14(1), 158-182.
  4. Aydın, H., Ayvaz, B. ve Küçükaşçi, E. Ş. (2017). Afet yönetiminde lojistik depo seçimi problemi: Maltepe ilçesi örneği. Journal of Yasar University, 12 (Özel Sayı), 1–13.
  5. Balcik, B. ve Beamon, B. M. (2008). Facility location in humanitarian relief. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 11(2), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675560701561789
  6. Bayram, B. ve Eren, T. (2023). Çok kriterli karar verme yöntemleriyle afet sonrası geçici depo yeri seçimi. Aid and Disaster Science, (2), 22–30.
  7. Boonmee, C. ve Tanpruttianunt, N. (2025). A fuzzy multi-criteria decision framework for community isolation center site selection to enhance public health resilience. Journal of Safety Science and Resilience, 100227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnlssr.2025.100227
  8. Boonmee, C., Arimura, M. ve Asada, T. (2017). Facility location optimization model for emergency humanitarian logistics. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 24, 485-498.
  9. Bozkurt, M. ve Duran, S. (2012). Effects of natural disaster trends: A case study for expanding the pre-positioning network of care international. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 9(8), 2863–2874. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph9082863
  10. Bozorgi-Amiri, A., Jabalameli, M. S. ve Mirzapour Al-E-Hashem, S. M. J. (2011). A multi-objective robust stochastic programming model for disaster relief logistics under uncertainty. OR Spectrum, 35(4), 905–933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-011-0268-x
  11. Chen, C.-H. (2020). A novel multi-criteria decision-making model for building material supplier selection based on entropy-ahp weighted topsis. Entropy, 22(2), 259. https://doi.org/10.3390/e22020259
  12. Chen, C.-H. (2021). A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making approach based on anp-entropy topsis for building materials supplier selection. Entropy, 23(12), 1597. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23121597
  13. Chen, T., Yang, J., Cong, G. ve Wu, S. (2019). Risk propagation model and its simulation of emergency logistics network based on material reliability. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(23), 4677. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234677
  14. Chunlin, D. ve Liu, Y. (2012). Sample average approximation method for chance constrained stochastic programming in transportation model of emergency management. Systems Engineering Procedia, 5, 137–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sepro.2012.04.022
  15. Church, R. L. ve ReVelle, C. S. (1976). Theoretical and computational links between the p‐median, location set‐covering, and the maximal covering location problem. Geographical Analysis, 8(4), 406–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1976.tb00547.x
  16. Çorum Belediyesi. (2025). Çorum nüfusu. https://www.corum.bel.tr/corum/corum-nufusu
  17. Demirel, T., Demirel, N. Ç. ve Kahraman, C. (2009). Multi-criteria warehouse location selection using Choquet integral. Expert Systems with Applications, 37(5), 3943–3952.
  18. Derse, O. (2022). Dematel tabanlı topsis yöntemi ve küme kapsama modeli ile afet lojistiği için depo yeri seçimi: Ege bölgesi örneği. KSU J Eng Sci, 25(4), 702–713
  19. Döyen, A., Aras, N. ve Barbarosoğlu, G. (2012). A two-echelon stochastic facility location model for humanitarian relief logistics. Optimization Letters, 6(6), 1123–1145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11590-011-0421-0
  20. Duran-Mateluna, C., Ales, Z. ve Elloumi, S. (2023). An efficient benders decomposition for the p-median problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 308(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2022.11.033
  21. Eberhardt, K., Fuchß, P., Kaiser, F. K., Rosenberg, S. ve Schultmann, F. (2025). Stochastic network optimization for strategic resource pre-positioning and allocation. International Journal of Production Economics, 287 (November 2024), 109679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2025.109679
  22. EM-DAT. (2025). The international disaster database. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED). https://public.emdat.be
  23. Ergün, M., Korucuk, S. ve Memiş, S. (2020). Sürdürülebilir afet lojistiğine yönelik ideal afet depo yeri seçimi: Giresun ili örneği. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 6(1), 144–165. https://doi.org/10.28979/comufbed.686301
  24. Ergün, S., Weber, G. W., Alparslan Gök, S. Z. ve Usta, P. (2021). A game theoretical approach to emergency logistics planning in natural disasters. Annals of Operations Research, 324(1–2), 855–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04099-9
  25. Feng, Z., Li, G., Wang, W., Zhang, L., Xiang, W., He, X., Zhang, M. ve Wei, N. (2023). Emergency logistics centers site selection by multi-criteria decision-making and gis. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 96, 103921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.103921
  26. Fleszar, K. ve Hindi, K. S. (2008). An effective VNS for the capacitated p-median problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 191(3), 612-622.
  27. Gao, Y., Ding, X. ve Yu, W. (2024). Distributional robustness based on Wasserstein-metric approach for humanitarian logistics problem under road disruptions. Operations
  28. Research Perspectives, 13(April), 100317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orp.2024.100317
  29. Gök, M., Toklu, R., Güven, E. ve Eren, T. (2024). Afet lojistiğinde depo yer seçimi. Resilience, 8(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.32569/resilience.1473880
  30. Görmez, N., Köksalan, M. ve Salman, F. S. (2011). Locating disaster response facilities in Istanbul. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 62(7), 1239–1252. https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2010.67
  31. Gözaydın, O. ve Can, T. (2013). Deprem yardım istasyonları için lojistik merkezi seçimi: Türkiye örneği. Havacılık ve Uzay Teknolojileri Dergisi, 6(2), 17–31.
  32. Gözükızıl, C., A. ve Tezcan, S., (2023), Cumhuriyet’in yüzüncü yılında Türkiye’de afetler: 06 Şubat 2023 Kahramanmaraş depremleri. Kent Akademisi Dergisi 16(Special Issue for the 100th Anniversary of the Republic of Turkey), 97-114. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.1353445
  33. Guan, X., Zhou, H., Li, M., Zhou, L. ve Chen, H. (2021). Multilevel coverage location model of earthquake relief material storage repository considering distribution time sequence characteristics. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition), 8(2), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2020.12.004
  34. Guo, Y. ve Matsuda, T. (2023). Study on the multi-criteria location decision of wide-area distribution centers in pre-disaster: Case of an earthquake in the Kanto district of Japan. Asian Transport Studies, 9(December 2022), 100107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eastsj.2023.100107
  35. Hale, T. ve Moberg, C. R. (2005). Improving supply chain disaster preparedness: A decision process for secure site location. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 35(3), 195-207.
  36. Hong, X., Lejeune, M. A. ve Noyan, N. (2015). Stochastic network design for disaster preparedness. IIE Transactions (Institute of Industrial Engineers), 47(4), 329–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/0740817X.2014.919044
  37. Huang, M., Smilowitz, K. ve Balcik, B. (2011). Models for relief routing: Equity, efficiency and efficacy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 17, 416–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.525
  38. İller Bankası Anonim Şirketi Mekânsal Planlama Dairesi Başkanlığı. (2017). Çorum (merkez) belediyesi 31.093 hektarlık alanın imar planına esas mikrobölgeleme etüt raporu.
  39. Jankowski, P. (1995). Integrating geographical information systems and multiple criteria decision-making methods. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 9(3), 251–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/02693799508902036
  40. Jeevan, J., Md Hanafiah, R., Mohd Salleh, N. H. ve Ngah, A. H. (2020). Emergence of emergency logistics centre (ELC): Humanitarian logistics operations at the Straits of Malacca. Transactions on Maritime Science, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.7225/toms.v09.n02.011
  41. Jia, H., Ordóñez, F. ve Dessouky, M. M. (2007). Solution approaches for facility location of medical supplies for large-scale emergencies. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 52(2), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2006.12.007
  42. Kaur, H. ve Singh, S. P. (2016). Sustainable procurement and logistics for disaster resilient supply chain. Annals of Operations Research, 283(1–2), 309–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-016-2374-2
  43. Khalilpoor, S., Kamran, M. A. ve Solimanpur, M. (2025). Resilient COVID-19 vaccine supply chain: An optimization and simulation approach for multi-objective management. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 201(September 2024), 104168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2025.104168
  44. Li, T., Fei, L. ve Sun, J. (2025). Application of multiple-criteria decision-making technology in emergency decision-making: Uncertainty, heterogeneity, dynamicity, and interaction. Mathematics, 13(5), 731. https://doi.org/10.3390/math13050731
  45. Liu, C., Chen, Z. H. ve Gong, Y. Y. (2013). Site selection of emergency material warehouse under fuzzy environment. Journal of Central South University, 20(6), 1610–1615. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-013-1653-1
  46. Maden Tetkik ve Arama Genel Müdürlüğü. (2013). Yenilenmiş Türkiye diri fay haritaları. https://www.mta.gov.tr/v3.0/hizmetler/yenilenmis-diri-fay-haritalari
  47. Maharjan, R. ve Hanaoka, S. (2017). Warehouse location determination for humanitarian relief distribution in Nepal. Transportation Research Procedia, 25, 1151–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.128
  48. McCoy, J. (2008). Humanitarian response: Improving logistics to save lives. American Journal of Disaster Medicine, 3(5).
  49. Mete, H. O. ve Zabinsky, Z. B. (2010). Stochastic optimization of medical supply location and distribution in disaster management. International Journal of Production Economics, 126(1), 76–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.10.004
  50. Mittal, R. ve Obaid, A. (2023). Sustainable warehouse location selection in humanitarian supply chain: Multi-criteria decision-making approach. International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences, 8(2), 316–335. https://doi.org/10.33889/ijmems.2023.8.2.019
  51. Mohammadi, R., Ghomi, S. M. T. F. ve Jolai, F. (2016). Prepositioning emergency earthquake response supplies: A new multi-objective particle swarm optimization algorithm. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 40(9–10), 5183–5199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2015.10.022
  52. Mukhametzyanov, I. (2021). Specific character of objective methods for determining weights of criteria in MCDM problems: Entropy, critic and sd. Decision Making: Applications in Management and Engineering, 4(2), 76–105. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame210402076i
  53. Nong, T. N. M. (2022). A hybrid model for distribution center location selection. Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 38(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2021.10.003
  54. Ofluoğlu, A., Baki, B. ve Ar, İ. M. (2017). Multi-criteria decision analysis model for warehouse location in disaster logistics. Journal of Management, Marketing and Logistics, 4(2), 89–106. https://izlik.org/JA97CR58WC
  55. Peker, İ., Korucuk, S., Ulutaş, Ş., Sayın Okatan, B. ve Yaşar, F. (2016). Afet lojistiği kapsamında en uygun dağıtım merkez yerinin ahs-vikor bütünleşik yöntemi ile belirlenmesi: Erzincan ili örneği. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(1), 82–103. https://izlik.org/JA73SB83XE
  56. Qezelbash-Chamak, J., Badamchizadeh, S. ve Seifi, A. (2023). A fast-response mathematical programming approach for delivering disaster relief goods: An earthquake case study. Transportation Letters, 16(9), 1091–1114. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2023.2270238
  57. Rath, S. ve Gutjahr, W. J. (2014). A math-heuristic for the warehouse location-routing problem in disaster relief. Computers and Operations Research, 42, 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2011.07.016
  58. Rawls, C. G. ve Turnquist, M. A. (2011). Pre-positioning planning for emergency response with service quality constraints. OR Spectrum, 33(3), 481–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-011-0248-1
  59. Rennemo, S. J., Rø, K. F., Hvattum, L. M. ve Tirado, G. (2014). A three-stage stochastic facility routing model for disaster response planning. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 62, 116–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2013.12.006
  60. Rodríguez-Espíndola, O., Ahmadi, H., Gastélum-Chavira, D., Ahumada-Valenzuela, O., Chowdhury, S., Dey, P. K. ve Albores, P. (2023). Humanitarian logistics optimization models: an investigation of decision-maker involvement and directions to promote implementation. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 89, 101669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101669
  61. Roh, S. Y., Shin, Y. R. ve Seo, Y. J. (2018). The Pre-positioned warehouse location selection for international humanitarian relief logistics. Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 34(4), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2018.12.003
  62. Roh, S.-Y., Jang, H.-M. ve Han, C.-H. (2013). Warehouse location decision factors in humanitarian relief logistics. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 29(1), 103–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2013.05.006
  63. Salman, F. S. ve Yücel, E. (2015). Emergency facility location under random network damage: Insights from the Istanbul case. Computers and Operations Research, 62, 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2014.07.015
  64. Sheu, J.-B. (2007). An emergency logistics distribution approach for quick response to urgent relief demand in disasters. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 43(6), 687–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2006.04.004
  65. Soto, R., Lizama, S., Crawford, B., Galleguillos, C., Vilches, J., Muñoz, A., Misra, S., Barraza, J. ve Paredes, F. (2015). Comparing cuckoo search, bee colony, firefly optimization, and electromagnetism-like algorithms for solving the set covering problem. Computational Science and Its Applications—ICCSA 2015 içinde (ss. 187–202). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21404-7_14
  66. Tarantilis, C. D., Spinellis, D. ve Gendreau, M. (2005). Guest editors’ introduction: Advanced heuristics in transportation and logistics. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(4), 16–18. https://doi.org/10.1109/mis.2005.71
  67. T.C. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı. (2023, Mart). 2023 Kahramanmaraş ve Hatay Depremleri raporu. https://www.sbb.gov.tr/2023-kahramanmaras-ve-hatay-depremleri-raporu/
  68. Tezcan, B., Alakaş, H. M., Özcan, E. ve Eren, T. (2023). Afet sonrası geçici depo yeri seçimi ve çok araçlı araç rotalama uygulaması: Kırıkkale ilinde bir uygulama. Politeknik Dergisi, 26(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.906704
  69. Tovia, F. (2007). An emergency logistics response system for natural disasters. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 10(3), 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675560701467177
  70. Tuğba Turgut, B., Vayvay, O., Herekoğlu, A., Taş, G. ve Tozan, H. (2011). A fuzzy ahp based decision support system for disaster center location selection and a case study for Istanbul. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 20(5), 499–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653561111178943
  71. Türk Mühendis ve Mimar Odaları Birliği. (2023). TMMOB Kahramanmaraş depremleri raporu. https://www.tmmob.org.tr/sites/default/files/tmmob_deprem_raporu_son_4agustos-part-2-2.pdf
  72. Tzeng, G.-H. ve Huang, J.-J. (2011). Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/b11032
  73. Wang, D., Peng, J., Yang, H., Cheng, T. C. E. ve Yang, Y. (2023). Distributionally robust location-allocation with demand and facility disruption uncertainties in emergency logistics. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 184, 109617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2023.109617
  74. Wang, Y., Xu, G., Zhang, W. ve Zhou, Z. (2020). Location analysis of earthquake relief warehouses: Evaluating the efficiency of location combinations by dea. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 56(8), 1752–1764. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2019.1663167
  75. Xiong Wei, Qiuyan, S. ve Jinlong, L. (2012). The group decision-making rules based on rough sets on large scale engineering emergency. Systems Engineering Procedia, 4(90924010), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sepro.2011.11.083
  76. Xu, W., Lu, Y. ve Proverbs, D. (2023). An evaluation of factors influencing the vulnerability of emergency logistics supply chains. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 27(10), 1891–1924. https://doi.org/10.1080/13675567.2023.2209030
  77. Yakici, E. ve Karatas, M. (2025). Ant Colony Optimization for solving large-scale bi-level network design problems. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 204(April), 111077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2025.111077
  78. Yi, W. ve Özdamar, L. (2007). A dynamic logistics coordination model for evacuation and support in disaster response activities. European Journal of Operational Research, 179(3), 1177–1193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.03.077
  79. Zhao, X., Chen, J., Xu, W., Du, P. ve Yuan, H. (2019). A three-stage hierarchical model for an earthquake shelter location-allocation problem: Case study of Shanghai, China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 10(2), 236-249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-019-0215-9
  80. Zhu, Y., Tian, D. ve Yan, F. (2020). Effectiveness of entropy weight method in decision-making. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020, 3564835. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3564835