Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Applying robust optimization to the shelter location–allocation problem: a case study for Istanbul

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we consider the shelter location and allocation problem under demand uncertainty. In particular, we seek to improve the disaster preparedness level of Turkey by developing a robust optimization approach for locating shelter areas required after a disastrous earthquake in Istanbul. Our robust modelling framework implements a demand prediction methodology which generates a number of ground shaking scenarios by incorporating the effect of uncertainties in seismic parameters as well as the exposure level of the urban vulnerability. We reformulate the deterministic mixed integer linear programming version of the problem as a robust model. This model leverages the robust nature of the model to account for the uncertainties of parameters within each individual scenario. Our numerical results for the small-scale Kartal district of Istanbul and the large-scale Anatolian side of Istanbul case studies show that the proposed formulation yields solutions that are socially more acceptable and preferable than those obtained by their deterministic and stochastic counterparts. Aiming to produce stable and proper solutions that perform consistently well for any possible occurrence of uncertain parameters, the recommended robust solutions lead to better results by reducing possible regret which cannot be compensated after an earthquake.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AFAD. (2018). Interactive web application for Turkey earthquake hazard maps (Türkiye deprem tehlike haritaları İnteraktif web uygulaması-TDTH). https://tdth.afad.gov.tr/TDTH/main.xhtml. Retrieved December 2, 2019.

  • Alçada-Almeida, L., Tralhao, L., Santos, L., & Coutinho-Rodrigues, J. (2009). A multiobjective approach to locate emergency shelters and identify evacuation routes in urban areas. Geographical Analysis, 41(1), 9–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansal, A., Akinci, A., Cultrera, G., Erdik, M., Pessina, V., Tönük, G., & Ameri, G. (2009). Loss estimation in Istanbul based on deterministic earthquake scenarios of the Marmara Sea region (Turkey). Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 29(4), 699–709.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayram, V., & Yaman, H. (2018). Shelter location and evacuation route assignment under uncertainty: A benders decomposition approach. Transportation Science, 52(2), 416–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayram, V., & Yaman, H. (2018). A stochastic programming approach for shelter location and evacuation planning. RAIRO-Operations Research, 52(3), 779–805.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayram, V., Tansel, B. Ç., & Yaman, H. (2015). Compromising system and user interests in shelter location and evacuation planning. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 72, 146–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Tal, A., Do Chung, B., Mandala, S. R., & Yao, T. (2011). Robust optimization for emergency logistics planning: Risk mitigation in humanitarian relief supply chains. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 45(8), 1177–1189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendimerad, F., Johnson, L., Coburn, A., Rahnama, M., & Morrow, G. (2000). Event report, Kocaeli, Turkey earthquake. RMS reconnaissance team.

  • Berman, O., Drezner, Z., Tamir, A., & Wesolowsky, G. O. (2009). Optimal location with equitable loads. Annals of Operations Research, 167(1), 307–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2003). Robust discrete optimization and network flows. Mathematical Programming, 98(1–3), 49–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertsimas, D., & Sim, M. (2004). The price of robustness. Operations Research, 52(1), 35–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertsimas, D., & Thiele, A. (2006). Robust and data-driven optimization: modern decision making under uncertainty. In: Models, methods, and applications for innovative decision making, INFORMS (pp. 95–122).

  • Boonmee, C., Naotaka, I., Takumi, A., & Mikiharu, A. (2016). Multi-model optimization for shelter-site selection: A case study in Banta municipality, Thailand. Proc of Infrastructure Planning in Japan Society of Civil Engineers, 53, 2175–2181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chanta, S., & Sangsawang, O. (2012). Shelter-site selection during flood disaster. Lecture Notes in Management Science, 4, 282–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Z., Chen, X., Li, Q., & Chen, J. (2013). The temporal hierarchy of shelters: A hierarchical location model for earthquake-shelter planning. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 27(8), 1612–1630.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coutinho-Rodrigues, J., Tralhão, L., & Alçada-Almeida, L. (2012). Solving a location-routing problem with a multiobjective approach: The design of urban evacuation plans. Journal of Transport Geography, 22, 206–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Haen, H., & Hemrich, G. (2007). The economics of natural disasters: Implications and challenges for food security. Agricultural Economics, 37, 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dembo, R. S. (1991). Scenario optimization. Annals of Operations Research, 30(1), 63–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, J., Ji, Y., Qu, D., Wu, X., & Yang, D. (2020). Three-stage mixed integer robust optimization model applied to humanitarian emergency logistics by considering secondary disasters. IEEE Access, 8, 223255–223270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdik, M., & Eren, K. (1983). Attenuation of intensities for earthquake associated with the North Anatolian fault. Technical Report: Middle East Technical University Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Ankara.

  • Ergun, O., Karakus, G., Keskinocak, P., Swann, J., & Villarreal, M. (2010). Operations research to improve disaster supply chain management. Wiley encyclopedia of operations research and management science.

  • Erişkin, L. (2021). Point coverage with heterogeneous sensor networks: A robust optimization approach under target location uncertainty. Computer Networks, 198, 108416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espejo, I., Marín, A., & Rodríguez-Chía, A. M. (2012). Closest assignment constraints in discrete location problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 219(1), 49–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farahani, R. Z., Lotfi, M., Baghaian, A., Ruiz, R., & Rezapour, S. (2020). Mass casualty management in disaster scene: A systematic review of or & MS research in humanitarian operations. European Journal of Operational Research.

  • Fritz,. (2005). Logistics and the effective delivery of humanitarian relief. http://www.fritzinstitute.org/PDFs/Programs/tsunamiLogistics0605.pdf. Retrieved December 6, 2019.

  • GAMS. (2012). Release 24.0.1. GAMS Development Corporation, Washington, DC, USA.

  • Garnder, J., & Knopoff, L. (1974). Bulletin of the seismological society of America. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 64(5), 1271–1302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haghi, M., Ghomi, S. M. T. F., & Jolai, F. (2017). Developing a robust multi-objective model for pre/post disaster times under uncertainty in demand and resource. Journal of Cleaner Production, 154, 188–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • IMM. (2003). Earthquake Master Plan for Istanbul. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM), Directorate of Soil and Earthquake.

  • IMM. (2009a). Possible Earthquake Lost Predictions for Istanbul. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM), Directorate of Soil and Earthquake.

  • IMM. (2009). An update on the Possible Earthquake Lost Predictions for Istanbul (Istanbul Earthquake Scenario). Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM), Directorate of Soil and Earthquake: Executive Summary.

  • JICA. (2002). The Study on A Disaster Prevention/Mitigation Basic Plan in Istanbul including Seismic Micronization in the Republic of Turkey. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) and Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).

  • Jonkman, S. N., Lentz, A., & Vrijling, J. (2010). A general approach for the estimation of loss of life due to natural and technological disasters. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 95(11), 1123–1133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalkan, E., Gülkan, P., Öztürk, N. Y., & Çelebı, M. (2008). Seismic hazard in the Istanbul metropolitan area: A preliminary re-evaluation. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 12(S2), 151–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamyabniya, A., Noormohammadzadeh, Z., Sauré, A., & Patrick, J. (2021). A robust integrated logistics model for age-based multi-group platelets in disaster relief operations. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 152, 102371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kılcı, F., Kara, B. Y., & Bozkaya, B. (2015). Locating temporary shelter areas after an earthquake: A case for tTurkey. European Journal of Operational Research, 243(1), 323–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kınay, Ö. B., Kara, B. Y., Saldanha-da Gama, F., & Correia, I. (2018). Modeling the shelter site location problem using chance constraints: A case study for Istanbul. European Journal of Operational Research, 270(1), 132–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kınay, Ö. B., Saldanha-da Gama, F., & Kara, B. Y. (2019). On multi-criteria chance-constrained capacitated single-source discrete facility location problems. Omega, 83, 107–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kongsomsaksakul, S., Yang, C., & Chen, A. (2005). Shelter location-allocation model for flood evacuation planning. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 6, 4237–4252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koramaz, E. K., Koramaz, T. K., & Özer, Ö. (2018). Urban transformation through property-led regeneration: A case of building renewals in Istanbul.

  • Kovács, G., & Spens, K. M. (2007). Humanitarian logistics in disaster relief operations. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(2), 99–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulshrestha, A., Wu, D., Lou, Y., & Yin, Y. (2011). Robust shelter locations for evacuation planning with demand uncertainty. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 3(4), 272–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laguna, M. (1998). Applying robust optimization to capacity expansion of one location in telecommunications with demand uncertainty. Management Science, 44(11–part–2), S101–S110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, A. C., Nozick, L., Xu, N., & Davidson, R. (2012). Shelter location and transportation planning under hurricane conditions. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 48(4), 715–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, L., Jin, M., & Zhang, L. (2011). Sheltering network planning and management with a case in the gulf coast region. International Journal of Production Economics, 131(2), 431–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Zhang, J., & Yu, G. (2020). A scenario-based hybrid robust and stochastic approach for joint planning of relief logistics and casualty distribution considering secondary disasters. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 141, 102029.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Q., Ruan, X., & Shi, P. (2011). Selection of emergency shelter sites for seismic disasters in mountainous regions: Lessons from the 2008 Wenchuan MS 8.0 earthquake, China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 40(4), 926–934.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y., Lei, H., Zhang, D., & Wu, Z. (2018). Robust optimization for relief logistics planning under uncertainties in demand and transportation time. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 55, 262–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, C. C. (2013). Robust weighted vertex p-center model considering uncertain data: An application to emergency management. European Journal of Operational Research, 230(1), 113–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medvedev, S., & Sponheuer, W. (1969). Scale of seismic intensity. In Proceedings of IV World conference of the earthquake engineering, Santiago, Chile, A-2 (pp 143–153).

  • Mulvey, J. M., Vanderbei, R. J., & Zenios, S. A. (1995). Robust optimization of large-scale systems. Operations Research, 43(2), 264–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murru, M., Akinci, A., Falcone, G., Pucci, S., Console, R., & Parsons, T. (2016). \(\text{ M }\ge 7\) earthquake rupture forecast and time-dependent probability for the sea of Marmara region, Turkey. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 121(4), 2679–2707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Najafi, M., Eshghi, K., & Dullaert, W. (2013). A multi-objective robust optimization model for logistics planning in the earthquake response phase. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 49(1), 217–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Najafi, M., Eshghi, S., & Eshghi, K. (2020). A framework for earthquake emergency response in Iran. Scientia Iranica, 27(5), 2604–2620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neal, D. M. (1997). Reconsidering the phases of disasters. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 15(2), 239–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozbay, E., Çavuş, Ö., & Kara, B. Y. (2019). Shelter site location under multi-hazard scenarios. Computers & Operations Research, 106, 102–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özmen, B. (2000). 17 Ağustos 1999 İzmit Körfezi Depreminin Hasar Durumu (rakamsal verilerle), TDV/DR 010-53.

  • Özmen, B. (2002). Istanbul ili için deprem senaryosu (Earthquake scenario for Istanbul). Türkiye Mühendislik Haberleri, 427, 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan, A. (2010). The applications of maximal covering model in typhoon emergency shelter location problem. In 2010 IEEE international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management, IEEE (pp. 1727–1731).

  • Parsons, T. (2004). Recalculated probability of \(\text{ m }\ge 7\) earthquakes beneath the sea of marmara, turkey. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth 109(B5).

  • Paul, J. A., & Wang, X. J. (2019). Robust location–allocation network design for earthquake preparedness. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 119, 139–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, S. J., Beresford, A. K. C., Whiting, M., & Banomyong, R. (2011). The 2004 Thailand tsunami reviewed: lessons learned. Meeting the challenge of preparing for and responding to disasters. In M. C. P. Tatham (Ed.), Humanitarian logistics (pp. 103–119). Kogan Page, London.

  • Pyper Griffiths, J. H., Irfanoglu, A., & Pujol, S. (2007). Istanbul at the threshold: An evaluation of the seismic risk in Istanbul. Earthquake Spectra, 23(1), 63–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2017). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.

  • Revelle, C., Marks, D., & Liebman, J. C. (1970). An analysis of private and public sector location models. Management Science, 16(11), 692–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, C. F. (1935). An instrumental earthquake magnitude scale. Bulletin of the seismological society of America, 25(1), 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockafellar, R. T., & Wets, R. J. B. (1991). Scenarios and policy aggregation in optimization under uncertainty. Mathematics of Operations Research, 16(1), 119–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rojeski, P., & ReVelle, C. (1970). Central facilities location under an investment constraint. Geographical Analysis, 2(4), 343–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Song, S., Zhou, H., & Song, W. (2019). Sustainable shelter-site selection under uncertainty: A rough qualiflex method. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 128, 371–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatham, P., & Christopher, M. (2018). Humanitarian logistics: Meeting the challenge of preparing for and responding to disasters. Kogan Page Publishers.

  • Thomas, A. S., & Kopczak, L. R. (2005). From logistics to supply chain management: The path forward in the humanitarian sector. Fritz Institute, 15, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivedi, A., & Singh, A. (2017). A hybrid multi-objective decision model for emergency shelter location-relocation projects using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process and goal programming approach. International Journal of Project Management, 35(5), 827–840.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivedi, A., & Singh, A. (2019). Shelter planning for uncertain seismic hazards using multicriteria decision approach: A case of Nepal earthquake. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, 26(3–4), 99–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trivedi, A., & Singh, A. (2020). A multi-objective approach for locating temporary shelters under damage uncertainty. International Journal of Operational Research, 38(1), 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unal, G. (2010). A mathematical model based decision support system for emergency operations. Ph.D. thesis, Turkish Military Academy Defense Sciences Institutes.

  • Wagner, J., & Falkson, L. (1975). The optimal nodal location of public facilities with price-sensitive demand. Geographical Analysis, 7(1), 69–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei, L., Li, W., Li, K., Liu, H., & Cheng, L. (2012). Decision support for urban shelter locations based on covering model. Procedia Engineering, 43, 59–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, J., Yin, X., Chen, D., An, J., & Nie, G. (2016). Multi-criteria location model of earthquake evacuation shelters to aid in urban planning. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 20, 51–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yahyaei, M., & Bozorgi-Amiri, A. (2019). Robust reliable humanitarian relief network design: An integration of shelter and supply facility location. Annals of Operations Research, 283(1), 897–916.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK), Grant #: 121M850.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering, National Defence University, Turkish Naval Academy, 34940, Tuzla, Istanbul, Turkey

    Levent Eriskin & Mumtaz Karatas

Authors
  1. Levent Eriskin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mumtaz Karatas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Levent Eriskin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer

The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of any affiliated organization or government.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eriskin, L., Karatas, M. Applying robust optimization to the shelter location–allocation problem: a case study for Istanbul. Ann Oper Res 339, 1589–1635 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04627-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04627-1

Keywords