Dergiler / Journal of International Health Sciences and Management / 2021 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 13

The Assessment of Turkey’s Lack of Resilience to Disasters and Hazards with IDB Indicator System

Sayfa
61–72
Yayın Tarihi
2021-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️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)

As a result, it was seen that our provinces had deficiencies regarding lack of resilience, especially the average and expected schooling years, per capita national income, insurance rates of buildings and houses and the number of hospital beds.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In recent years, resilience has emerged as a guiding principle for urban development and disaster risk management.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Although the study covers 2015-2017 periods, it was applied to all provinces of our country.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:As a result, it was seen that our provinces had deficiencies regarding lack of resilience, especially the average and expected schooling years, per capita national income, insurance rates of buildings and houses and the number of hospital beds.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2015-2017 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Disaster · Dİsaster Management · Risk

Abstract

In recent years, resilience has emerged as a guiding principle for urban development and disaster risk management. The aim of this study, human development, economic recovery and the factors that influence to reach a high level of security at every level, Turkey is to determine the level of resistance against disasters at the national and international areas of the province. The study was prepared with a semi-numerical method and the scope of the study was all provinces of our country. Although the study covers 2015-2017 periods, it was applied to all provinces of our country. LRI (Lack of Resilience Index) consists of 8 sub-factors and the index value is between 0 and 1. Classification of index values was done according to international standards as follows; between 0-0.20 as low, between 0.20-0.40 as medium, between 0.40-0.80 as high and between 0,80-1,00 as very high. Ağrı (0.71), Şırnak (0.66), Muş (0.66) and Hakkâri (0.65) provinces were the first four provinces with the highest value according to the 2015-2017 average value of LRI and Isparta (0.38), Bolu (0.38), Izmir (0.36) and Ankara (0.32) were the lowest. Moreover, while 93.83% of our provinces were in the high index category, it was seen that 6.17% is in the middle index category and we had no provinces in the low index category. As a result, it was seen that our provinces had deficiencies regarding lack of resilience, especially the average and expected schooling years, per capita national income, insurance rates of buildings and houses and the number of hospital beds.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

YAPRAK, Ü., ŞAHİNÖZ, T., ŞAHİNÖZ, S. (2021). The Assessment of Turkey’s Lack of Resilience to Disasters and Hazards with IDB Indicator System. Journal of International Health Sciences and Management, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 13, 61–72. https://ajindex.com/articles/777384

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (2)

  1. Adger,W.N., (2000). Social and ecological resilience: are they related. Progress in Human Geography 24, 3: 347-364. AFAD (Disaster and Emergency Management), (2018). Afete Dirençli Toplum: Uygulama örnekleri (Disaster Resistant Society: Application examples). Ankara: AFAD Publications. AFAD (Disaster and Emergency Management), (2018). Disaster Resistant Society: Application examples. Ankara:
  2. AFAD Publications. Beccari, B., (2016). A Comparative Analysis of Disaster Risk, Vulnerability and Resilience Composite Indicators. San Francisco: Public Library of Science (PLOS) Currents Disasters. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2010a). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Argentina). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2010b). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Bolivia). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2010c). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Costa Rica). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2010d). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Ecuador). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2010e). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (República Domicana). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2015a). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Chile). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2015b). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (México). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2015c). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Nicaragua). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2015d). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Panamá). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. BID (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo), (2015e). Indicadores de Riesgo de Desastre y de Gestión de Riesgos (Perú). Washington: Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo. Birkmann, J., Cardona, O.D., Carreno, M.L., Barbat, A.H., Pelling, M., Schneiderbauer, S., Kienberger, S., Kelier, M., Alexander, D., Zeil, P. and Welle, T., (2013). Framing vulnerability, risk and societal respon