KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences / 2026 / Volume: 10 Issue: 2

Decadal evolution of GIS in disaster management and risk assessment

Yusuf Eminoğlu(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0005-6000-2934
Çiğdem Tarhan(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5891-0635
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2025-07-15
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

This bibliometric perspective provides valuable insights into the maturation of GIS as an indispensable tool in disaster management and offers a roadmap for future research and technological innovation aimed at mitigating disaster risks and building resilient communities

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study conducts a bibliometric analysis of the evolution of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in disaster risk management and assessment over a 25-year period, from 2000 to 2024.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Our findings reveal a significant increase in the volume of GIS-related research in disaster management, underscored by a shift from foundational applications toward the integration of cutting-edge computational techniques.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:This bibliometric perspective provides valuable insights into the maturation of GIS as an indispensable tool in disaster management and offers a roadmap for future research and technological innovation aimed at mitigating disaster risks and building resilient communities
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:2000 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:GIS · Disaster Risk Management · Technological Advancements

Abstract

This study conducts a bibliometric analysis of the evolution of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in disaster risk management and assessment over a 25-year period, from 2000 to 2024. Utilizing a dataset derived from academic publications indexed in prominent scientific databases, we examine the growth trajectory, thematic evolution, scholarly collaboration, and technological advancements within the field. Our findings reveal a significant increase in the volume of GIS-related research in disaster management, underscored by a shift from foundational applications toward the integration of cutting-edge computational techniques. Analysis of collaboration networks highlights the global nature of research efforts, demonstrating extensive international cooperation that transcends geographical and disciplinary boundaries. Thematic analysis indicates a progressive focus on vulnerability assessments, climate change impacts, and the incorporation of remote sensing and machine learning technologies, reflecting the field's response to emerging challenges and the dynamic landscape of disaster risk management. The study not only charts the historical development of GIS applications in this domain but also identifies key research trends, influential works, and potential future directions, underscoring the critical role of GIS in enhancing disaster resilience. This bibliometric perspective provides valuable insights into the maturation of GIS as an indispensable tool in disaster management and offers a roadmap for future research and technological innovation aimed at mitigating disaster risks and building resilient communities

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Eminoğlu, Y., Tarhan, Ç. (2025). Decadal evolution of GIS in disaster management and risk assessment. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, Volume: 10 Issue: 2. https://doi.org/10.26833/ijeg.1544048

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (76)

  1. Kwan, M. P., & Ransberger, D. M. (2010). LiDAR assisted emergency response: Detection of transport network obstructions caused by major disasters. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 34(3), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2010.02.001
  2. McEntire, D. A. (2005). Why vulnerability matters: Exploring the merit of an inclusive disaster reduction concept. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 14(2), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653560510595209/full/html
  3. Cutter, S. L. (2012). Hazards, vulnerability and environmental justice. Hazards, Vulnerability and Environmental Justice, 1–418. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849771542
  4. Coşkun, M., & Toprak, F. (2023). Coğrafi bilgi sistemleri (CBS) tabanlı orman yangını risk analizi: Bartın İli örneği. Geomatik, 8(3), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.29128/geomatik.1192219
  5. Perry, R. W. (2007). What is a disaster?. In Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research (pp. 1–15). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-32353-4_1
  6. Zerger, A., & Smith, D. I. (2003). Impediments to using GIS for real-time disaster decision support. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 27(2), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0198-9715(01)00021-7
  7. Sui, D. Z., & Sui, D. Z. (2008). The wikification of GIS and its consequences: Or Angelina Jolie’s new tattoo and the future of GIS. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2007.12.001
  8. Zanuttigh, B., et al. (2014). THESEUS decision support system for coastal risk management. Coastal Engineering, 87, 218–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2013.11.013
  9. Napieralski, J., Barr, I., Kamp, U., & Kervyn, M. (2013). Remote sensing and GIScience in geomorphological mapping. In Treatise on Geomorphology: Volume 1-14, 1–14, 187–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374739-6.00050-6
  10. Elwood, S. (2010). Mixed methods: Thinking, doing, and asking in multiple ways. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Geography, 1, 94–114. Retrieved March 23, 2024, from https://www.torrossa.com/gs/resourceProxy?an=4913729&publisher=FZ7200#page=107
  11. Cova, T. J. (1999). GIS in emergency management. Retrieved March 23, 2024, from https://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/~gisteac/gis_book_abridged/files/ch60.pdf
  12. Miller, H. J., & Goodchild, M. F. (2015). Data-driven geography. GeoJournal, 80(4), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10708-014-9602-6
  13. Al Kalbanı, K., & Rahman, A. A. (2022). 3D city model for monitoring flash flood risks in Salalah, Oman. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 7(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.26833/ijeg.857971
  14. Morsy, S., & Hadi, M. (2022). Impact of land use/land cover on land surface temperature and its relationship with spectral indices in Dakahlia Governorate, Egypt. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 7(3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.26833/ijeg.978961
  15. Yuan, M., & Nara, A. (2015). Space-Time Analytics of Tracks for the Understanding of Patterns of Life. In Space-Time Integration in Geography and GIScience (pp. 373–398). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9205-9_20
  16. Tomaszewski, B. (2020). Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for Disaster Management. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for Disaster Management. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351034869/geographic-information-systems-gis-disaster-management-brian-tomaszewski
  17. Cutter, S. L., Ash, K. D., & Emrich, C. T. (2014). The geographies of community disaster resilience. Global Environmental Change, 29, 65–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.08.005
  18. Tate, E. (2013). Uncertainty Analysis for a Social Vulnerability Index. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(3), 526–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2012.700616
  19. Batty, M. (2013). The New Science of Cities. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9399.001.0001
  20. Goodchild, M. F., & Glennon, J. A. (2010). Crowdsourcing geographic information for disaster response: a research frontier. International Journal of Digital Earth, 3(3), 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538941003759255
  21. Kulkarni, A. V., Aziz, B., Shams, I., & Busse, J. W. (2009). Comparisons of Citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Articles Published in General Medical Journals. JAMA, 302(10), 1092–1096. https://doi.org/10.1001/JAMA.2009.1307
  22. Harzing, A. W., & Alakangas, S. (2016). Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, 106(2), 787–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-015-1798-9/tables/4
  23. Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories. SAGE Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019829575
  24. Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  25. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Measuring Scholarly Impact (pp. 285–320). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13
  26. van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2009). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-009-0146-3
  27. Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
  28. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382–1402. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
  29. Ellegaard, O., & Wallin, J. A. (2015). The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?. Scientometrics, 105(3), 1809–1831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z
  30. Dai, F. C., Lee, C. F., & Ngai, Y. Y. (2002). Landslide risk assessment and management: an overview. Engineering Geology, 64(1), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(01)00093-X
  31. Martínez, J., Vega-Garcia, C., & Chuvieco, E. (2009). Human-caused wildfire risk rating for prevention planning in Spain. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(2), 1241–1252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.07.005
  32. Guan, Q., et al. (2018). Source apportionment of heavy metals in agricultural soil based on PMF: A case study in Hexi Corridor, northwest China. Chemosphere, 193, 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.10.151
  33. Huang, Y., et al. (2018). Heavy metal pollution and health risk assessment of agricultural soils in a typical peri-urban area in southeast China. Journal of Environmental Management, 207, 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.10.072
  34. Chuvieco, E., et al. (2010). Development of a framework for fire risk assessment using remote sensing and geographic information system technologies. Ecological Modelling, 221(1), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.11.017
  35. Alcántara-Ayala, I. (2002). Geomorphology, natural hazards, vulnerability and prevention of natural disasters in developing countries. Geomorphology, 47(2–4), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(02)00083-1
  36. Babiker, I. S., Mohamed, M. A. A., Hiyama, T., & Kato, K. (2005). A GIS-based DRASTIC model for assessing aquifer vulnerability in Kakamigahara Heights, Gifu Prefecture, central Japan. Science of The Total Environment, 345(1–3), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.11.005
  37. Benz, U. C., Hofmann, P., Willhauck, G., Lingenfelder, I., & Heynen, M. (2004). Multi-resolution, object-oriented fuzzy analysis of remote sensing data for GIS-ready information. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 58(3–4), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2003.10.002
  38. Devkota, K. C., et al. (2013). Landslide susceptibility mapping using certainty factor, index of entropy and logistic regression models in GIS and their comparison at Mugling–Narayanghat road section in Nepal Himalaya. Natural Hazards, 65(1), 135–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-012-0347-6
  39. Maanan, M., Saddik, M., Maanan, M., Chaibi, M., Assobhei, O., & Zourarah, B. (2015). Environmental and ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in sediments of Nador lagoon, Morocco. Ecological Indicators, 48, 616–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.034
  40. Regmi, N. R., Giardino, J. R., & Vitek, J. D. (2010). Modeling susceptibility to landslides using the weight of evidence approach: Western Colorado, USA. Geomorphology, 115(1–2), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.10.002
  41. Saha, A. K., Gupta, R. P., Sarkar, I., Arora, M. K., & Csaplovics, E. (2005). An approach for GIS-based statistical landslide susceptibility zonation?with a case study in the Himalayas. Landslides, 2(1), 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-004-0039-8
  42. Tran, P., Shaw, R., Chantry, G., & Norton, J. (2009). GIS and local knowledge in disaster management: a case study of flood risk mapping in Viet Nam. Disasters, 33(1), 152–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.2008.01067.x
  43. Ullah, K., & Zhang, J. (2020). GIS-based flood hazard mapping using relative frequency ratio method: A case study of Panjkora River Basin, eastern Hindu Kush, Pakistan. PLoS One, 15(3), e0229153. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229153
  44. Remondo, J., Bonachea, J., & Cendrero, A. (2008). Quantitative landslide risk assessment and mapping on the basis of recent occurrences. Geomorphology, 94(3–4), 496–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.10.041
  45. Kusak, L., Unel, F. B., Alptekin, A., Celik, M. O., & Yakar, M. (2021). Apriori association rule and K-means clustering algorithms for interpretation of pre-event landslide areas and landslide inventory mapping. Open Geosciences, 13(1), 1226-1244
  46. Dahal, R. K., Hasegawa, S., Nonomura, A., Yamanaka, M., Dhakal, S., & Paudyal, P. (2008). Predictive modelling of rainfall-induced landslide hazard in the Lesser Himalaya of Nepal based on weights-of-evidence. Geomorphology, 102(3–4), 496–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.05.041
  47. Umar, Z., Pradhan, B., Ahmad, A., Jebur, M. N., & Tehrany, M. S. (2014). Earthquake induced landslide susceptibility mapping using an integrated ensemble frequency ratio and logistic regression models in West Sumatera Province, Indonesia. Catena (Amst), 118, 124–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2014.02.005
  48. Mishra, K., & Sinha, R. (2020). Flood risk assessment in the Kosi megafan using multi-criteria decision analysis: A hydro-geomorphic approach. Geomorphology, 350, 106861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.106861
  49. Abdulwahid, W. M., & Pradhan, B. (2017). Landslide vulnerability and risk assessment for multi-hazard scenarios using airborne laser scanning data (LiDAR). Landslides, 14(3), 1057–1076. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-016-0744-0
  50. Remondo, J., Bonachea, J., & Cendrero, A. (2005). A statistical approach to landslide risk modelling at basin scale: from landslide susceptibility to quantitative risk assessment. Landslides, 2(4), 321–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10346-005-0016-x
  51. Yakar, M., Yılmaz, H. M., & Mutluoǧlu, Ö. (2010). Comparative evaluation of excavation volume by TLS and total topographic station based methods
  52. Bou Kheir, R., Cerdan, O., & Abdallah, C. (2006). Regional soil erosion risk mapping in Lebanon. Geomorphology, 82(3–4), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.05.012
  53. Thiery, Y., Malet, J.-P., Sterlacchini, S., Puissant, A., & Maquaire, O. (2007). Landslide susceptibility assessment by bivariate methods at large scales: Application to a complex mountainous environment. Geomorphology, 92(1–2), 38–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.02.020
  54. Shahabi, H., Khezri, S., Bin Ahmad, B., & Hashim, M. (2014). RETRACTED: Landslide susceptibility mapping at central Zab basin, Iran: A comparison between analytical hierarchy process, frequency ratio and logistic regression models. Catena (Amst), 115, 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2013.11.014
  55. Zou, Q., Cui, P., He, J., Lei, Y., & Li, S. (2019). Regional risk assessment of debris flows in China—An HRU-based approach. Geomorphology, 340, 84–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.04.027
  56. Erkal, T., & Yildirim, U. (2012). Soil Erosion Risk Assessment in the Sincanlı Sub-Watershed of the Akarçay Basin (Afyonkarahisar, Turkey) Using the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE). Ekoloji, 21(84), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.5053/ekoloji.2012.843
  57. Ünel, F. B., Kuşak, L., Yakar, M., & Doğan, H. Coğrafi bilgi sistemleri ve analitik hiyerarşi prosesi kullanarak Mersin ilinde otomatik meteoroloji gözlem istasyonu yer seçimi. Geomatik, 8(2), 107-123
  58. Abbasnia, A., et al. (2018). Groundwater quality assessment for irrigation purposes based on irrigation water quality index and its zoning with GIS in the villages of Chabahar, Sistan and Baluchistan, Iran. Data Brief, 19, 623–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.05.061
  59. Shalyari, N., Alinejad, A., Hashemi, A. H. G., RadFard, M., & Dehghani, M. (2019). Health risk assessment of nitrate in groundwater resources of Iranshahr using Monte Carlo simulation and geographic information system (GIS). MethodsX, 6, 1812–1821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2019.07.024
  60. Goodchild, M. F., Anselin, L., & Deichmann, U. (1993). A Framework for the Areal Interpolation of Socioeconomic Data. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 25(3), 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1068/a250383
  61. Cutter, S. L. (2006). Hazards Vulnerability and Environmental Justice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849771542
  62. Demir, M., & Altaş, N. T. (2024). Kars kentinde deprem hasar risk potansiyeli taşıyan alanların CBS tabanlı AHP analizlerine dayalı olarak belirlenmesi. Geomatik, 9(1), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.29128/geomatik.1375650
  63. Hamilton, J. D. (2003). Exploring Technical and Cultural Appeals in Strategic Risk Communication: The Fernald Radium Case. Risk Analysis, 23(2), 291–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/1539-6924.00309
  64. . Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2013 – The Physical Science Basis. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
  65. Yilmaz, H. M., Yakar, M., Mutluoglu, O., Kavurmaci, M. M., & Yurt, K. (2012). Monitoring of soil erosion in Cappadocia region (Selime-Aksaray-Turkey). Environmental Earth Sciences, 66, 75-81.
  66. Barton, S., & Pineo, R. (2023). Human Benefits of Green Spaces | Cooperative Extension | University of Delaware. Retrieved September 24, 2023, from https://www.udel.edu/academics/colleges/canr/cooperative-extension/fact-sheets/human-benefits-of-green-spaces/
  67. Cooper, R. (2022). Coronavirus: Scientists reveal reduction in global air pollution and nitrogen dioxide levels. Retrieved April 5, 2022, from https://www.climateaction.org/news/coronavirus-scientists-reveal-reduction-in-global-air-pollution-and-nitrogen-dioxide-levels
  68. Partigöç, N. S., & Dinçer, C. (2024). The Multi–Disaster risk assessment: A-GIS based approach for Izmir City. International Journal of Engineering and Geosciences, 9(1), 61-76. https://doi.org/10.26833/ijeg.1295657
  69. Polat, Z. A., Kırtıloğlu, O. S., & Kayalık, M. (2023). Evolution and future trends in global research on geographic information system (GIS): a bibliometric analysis. Advanced GIS, 3(1), 22–30. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/agis/article/view/886
  70. Şahin, M. A., & Yakar, M. (2021). WebGIS technology and architectures. Advanced GIS, 1(1), 22–26. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/agis/article/view/63
  71. Partigöç, N. S., & Dinçer, C. (2024). Coğrafi bilgi sistemleri (CBS) tabanlı afet risk analizi: Denizli ili örneği. Geomatik, 9(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.29128/geomatik.1261051 Adesina E., Ajayi O, Odumosu J & Illah A (2023). GIS-based soil loss estimation using revised universal soil loss equation (RUSLE). Intercontinental Geoinformation Days (IGD), 7, 44-48, Peshawar, Pakistan
  72. Kankanamge, H. P. N. K., & Mahmood, S. (2024). Post-Flood Disaster Management Challenges and Issues in the Bulathsinghala Divisional Secretariat Division, Sri Lanka: A Comprehensive Analysis and Strategic Framework for Resilience and Recovery. Advanced Geomatics, 4(1), 09–16. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/geomatics/article/view/1092
  73. Noor, S., Mahmood, S., & Habib, W. (2024). Risk Assessment of Attabad lake Outburst Flooding using integrated Hydrological and Geo-spatial Approach. Advanced Geomatics, 4(1), 57–67. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/geomatics/article/view/1322
  74. Gull, A., Liaqut, A., & Mahmood, S. (2023). Landslide Risk Assessment using Geo-spatial Technique: A study of District Abbottabad, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Advanced Geomatics, 3(2), 47–55. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/geomatics/article/view/983
  75. Şahin, M. A., & Yakar, M. (2021). WebGIS technology and architectures. Advanced GIS, 1(1), 22–26. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/agis/article/view/63
  76. Kankanamge, H. P. N. K., & Mahmood, S. (2024). Post-Flood Disaster Management Challenges and Issues in the Bulathsinghala Divisional Secretariat Division, Sri Lanka: A Comprehensive Analysis and Strategic Framework for Resilience and Recovery. Advanced Geomatics, 4(1), 09–16. Retrieved from https://publish.mersin.edu.tr/index.php/geomatics/article/view/1092