Reflection and importance of user interventions in changes and or transformations in temporary housing after the earthquake

Abstract

Temporary housing is one of the most important elements in disaster recovery and reconstruction activities in emergency situations. This study predicts that post-disaster housing and social life needs can be improved through user satisfaction analyses and underlines that user experiences can guide the achievement of better design solutions in temporary housing. In this context, the case study is based on an evaluation of the changes and/or transformations that took place as a result of the Lagoon Hobby Houses campus, built in the Kahramanmaraş Expo area, being opened to the use of disaster victims as temporary housing after the 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake. The findings suggest that improvements can be made in evidence- and experience-based design and post-disaster temporary housing design criteria by creating reserve areas for residences, designing common areas that encourage socialization and interaction, and providing access to green areas to overcome post-earthquake traumas more easily.

Keywords

Kahramanmaraş earthquake / Temporary housing / User initiative transformations / Evidence based design / Experience based design

References

[1] Adriaanse, C. , 2007. Measuring residential satisfaction: a residential environmental satisfaction scale(RESS). J. Hous. Built Environ. 22 (3), 287.

[2] AFAD , 2018. Disaster Management and Natural Disaster Statistics in Turkey. Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlıǧ.

[3] Archer, D. , ve Boonyabancha, S. , 2011. Seeing a disaster as an opportunity-harnessing the energy of disaster survivors for change. Environ. Urbanization 23, 351- 364.

[4] Arslan, H. , ve Cosgun, N. , 2008. Reuse and recycle potentials of the temporary houses after occupancy: example of Duzce, Turkey. Build. Environ. 43 (5), 702- 709.

[5] Aysan, F.Y. , 1985. The Erzurum-Kars earthquake area revisited. Disasters 9 (1), 23- 31.

[6] Barakat, S. , 2003. Housing Reconstruction after Conflict and Disaster. Overseas Development Institute, London.

[7] Boelhouwer, P. , ve Heijden, H. , 2018. The effect of earthquakes on the housing market and the quality of life in the province of Groningen, The Netherlands. J. Hous. Built Environ. 33 (10), 429- 438.

[8] Bonanno, G.A. , Galea, S. , Bucciarelli, A. , Vlahov, D. , 2006. Psychological resilience after disaster. Psychol. Sci. 17 (3), 181- 186.

[9] Caia, G. , Ventimiglia, F. , Maass, A. , 2010. Container vs. dacha: the psychological effects of temporary housing characteristics on earthquake survivors. J. Environ. Psychol. 30 (1), 60- 66.

[10] Carballo, M. , Heal, B. , Horbaty, G. , 2006. Impact of the tsunami on psychosocial health and well-being. Int. Rev. Psychiatr. 18 (3), 217- 223.

[11] Carlier, I.V. , Gersons, B.P. , 1997. Stress reactions in disaster victims following the Bijlmermeer plane crash. J. Trauma Stress 10, 329- 335.

[12] Chohan, A.H. , Che-Ani, A.I. , Shar, B.K. , Awad, J. , Jawaid, A. , Tawil, N.M. , 2015. A model of housing quality determinants(HQD) for affordable housing. J. Constr. Dev. Ctries. (JCDC) 20 (1), 117.

[13] Davidson, C.H. , Johnson, C. , Lizarralde, G. , Dikmen, N. , Sliwinski, A. , 2007. Truths and myths about community participation in postdisaster housing projects. Habitat Int. 31 (1), 100- 115.

[14] Dikmen, N. , 2011. Comparative analysis of permanent post-disaster houses constructed in Çankırı and the Dinar. Disasters 35 (2), 404- 416.

[15] Dikmen, N. , ve Elias-Ozkan, S.T. , 2016. Housing after disaster: a post occupancy evaluation of a reconstruction Project. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 19, 167- 178.

[16] El-Masri, S. , Tipple, G. , 2002. Natural disaster, mitigation and sustainability: the case of developing countries. Int. Plan. Stud. 7 (2), 157- 175.

[17] Emel Ganapati, N. , ve Ganapati, S. , 2008. Enabling participatory planning after disasters: a case study of the World Bank's housing reconstruction in Turkey. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 75 (1), 41- 59.

[18] Enginoz, E. , 2004. A study in post-disaster home environments: a comparative case study betweenpeople living in villages and in the town center of Dinar, Turkey. 2006 International Conference and Student Competition on Post-Disaster Reconstruction Planning for Reconstruction.

[19] Félix, D. , Branco, J.M. , ve Feio, A.O. , 2013. Temporary housing after disasters: a state of the art survey. Habitat Int. 40, 136- 141.

[20] Félix, D. , Monteiro, D. , Branco, J.M. , Bologna, R. , Feio, A. , 2015. The role of temporary accommodation buildings for postdisaster housing reconstruction. J. Hous. Built Environ. 30 (4), 683- 699.

[21] Galea, S. , Nandi, A. , Vlahov, D. , 2005. The epidemiology of posttraumatic stress disorder after disasters. Epidemiol. Rev. 27, 78- 91.

[22] Gawlak, A. , Stankiewicz, M. , 2022. Specific needs of patients and staff reflected in the design of an orthopaedic and rehabilitation hospital-design recommendations based on a case study(Poland). Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 19 (22), 15388.

[23] Gulahane, K. , Gokhale, V.A. , 2010. Design criteria for temporary shelters for disaster mitigation in India. In: Participatory design and appropriate technology for disaster reconstruction. Conference proceedings.

[24] Haas, J.E. , 1977. Reconstruction following disaster. In: Haas J, E., Kates R, W., Bowden M, J. (Eds.), Environmental Studies Series, vol. 5. MIT Press.

[25] Hong, Y. , 2017. A study on the condition of temporary housing following disasters: focus on container housing. Frontiers of Architectural Research 6 (3), 374- 383.

[26] Hosseini, S.A. , De La Fuente, A. , ve Pons, O. , 2016. Multi-criteria decision-making method for assessing the sustainability of postdisaster temporary housing units technologies: a case study in Bam. Sustain. Cities Soc. 20, 38- 51.

[27] Joh, H. , 1997. Disaster stress of the 1995 Kobe earthquake psychologia. An International Journal of Psychology in the Orient 40, 192- 200.

[28] Johnson, C. , 2007a. Impacts of prefabricated temporary housing after disasters: 1999 earthquakes in Turkey. Habitat Int. 31, 36- 52.

[29] Johnson, C. , 2007b. Strategic planning for post-disaster temporary housing. Disasters 31 (4), 435- 458.

[30] Johnson, C. , 2008. Strategies for the reuse of temporary housing. In: Ruby, I.A. (Ed.), Urban transformation. Ruby Press. Berlim, pp. 323-331.

[31] Kahramanmaraş Onikişubat Municipality , 2022. https: //www.onikisubat.bel.tr/Icerik.aspx?icerikIdZ3195.

[32] Kamacı-Karahan, E. , ve Kemeç S. , 2022. Residents' satisfaction in post-disaster permanent housing: beneficiaries vs. non-beneficiaries. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 73.

[33] Keraminiyage, K. , ve Piyatadsananon, P. , 2013. Achieving success in post-disaster resettlementprogrammes through "better coordination between spatial and socio-economic/cultural factors. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 4 (3), 352- 372.

[34] Kowaltowski, D.C. , Muianga, E.A.D. , Granja, A.D. , Moreira, D.C. , Bernardini, S.P. , Castro, M.R. , 2019. A critical analysis of research of a mass-housing program. Build. Res. Inf. 47 (6), 716- 733.

[35] Kürüm Varolgüneş F. , 2021. Post-disaster permanent housing: the case of the 2003 Bingöl earthquake in Turkey. Disaster Prev. Manag. 30 (2), 77- 93.

[36] Lindell, M.K. , Perry, R.W. , 2000. Household adjustment to earthquake hazard: a review of research. Environ. Behav. 32, 461- 501.

[37] Ma, J. , Dong, G. , Chen, Y. , Zhang, W. , 2018. Does satisfactory neighbourhood environment lead to a satisfying life? An investigation of the association between neighbourhood environment and life satisfaction in Beijing. Cities 74, 229- 239.

[38] Mepa News , 2023. Harita: Kahramanmaraş depremi hangi bölgeleri etkiledi? Mepa News, 2023, February 7.

[39] Moghri, A. , Khalili, A. , 2022. Investigating the influential postdisaster factors in determining the optimal location of shelters: a case study in, Sarpol-e Zahab, Kermanshah province, Iran. Frontiers of Architectural Research 11 (5), 846- 864.

[40] Oliver-Smith, A. , 1991. Successes and failures in post-disaster resettlement. Disasters 15 (1), 12- 23.

[41] Paintmaps. (n.d.). Türkiye Haritası-Boş Dilsiz. Paintmaps.

[42] Peacock, W.G. , Dash, N. , Zhang, Y. , Van Zandt, S. , 2018. Post-disaster sheltering, temporary housing and permanent housing recovery. Handbook of Disaster Research, pp. 569- 594.

[43] Quarantelli, E.L. , 1982. General and particular observations on sheltering and housing in American disasters. Disasters 6 (4), 277- 281.

[44] Quarantelli, E.L. , 1995. Patterns of sheltering and housing in US disasters. Disaster Prev. Manag. 4 (3), 43- 53.

[45] Ritchie, L.A. , Tierney, K. , 2011. Temporary housing planning and early implementation in the 12 January 2010 Haiti earthquake. Earthq. Spectra 27 (1), 487- 507.

[46] Sanderson, D. , Sharma, A. , Kennedy, J. , Burnell, J. , 2014. Lost in transition: principles, practice and lessons from Haiti for urban post-disaster shelter recovery programs. Asian Journal of Environment and Disaster Management 6 (2), 131- 151.

[47] SBB (Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlıǧ Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlıǧı) , 2023. Report_Name: "2023 Kahramanmaraş Ve Hatay Depremleri Raporu".

[48] Şencan, H. , 2005. Güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik. Hüner Şencan.

[49] SKAT , 2007. After the Tsunami: Sustainable Building Guidelines for South-East Asia.

[50] Stender, M. , Walter, A. , 2019. The role of social sustainability in building assessment. Build. Res. Inf. 47 (5), 598- 610.

[51] Tafti, M.T. , Bashiri, M. , 2022. Navigating transition: post-disaster housing pathways of households. J. Hous. Built Environ. 37 (4), 1745- 1767.

[52] Taş N. , Cosgun, N. , Taş M. , 2007. A qualitative evaluation of the after earthquake permanenthousings in Turkey in terms of user satisfaction-Kocaeli, Gundogdu Permanent Housing model. Build. Environ. 42 (9), 3418- 3431.

[53] TDK , 2022. Türk Dil Kurumu Sözlükleri.

[54] Tran, T.A. , 2015. Post-disaster housing reconstruction as a significant opportunity to building disaster resilience: a case in Vietnam. Nat. Hazards 79, 61- 79.

[55] Ueda, Y. , Shaw, R. , 2016. Managing and bridging communities in temporary housing: case of the Great East Japan earthquake and tsunami in Kesennuma City, Japan. Nat. Hazards 80 (1), 567- 587.

[56] UNDRO , 2015. Shelter after Disaster: Guidelines for Assistance, United Nations. Office of the United Nations Disaster Relief Coordinator, New York.

[57] UNDRR , 2023. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction.

[58] Van Hoof, J. , Rutten, P.G. , Struck, C. , Huisman, E.R. , Kort, H.S. , 2015. The integrated and evidence-based design of healthcare environments. Architect. Eng. Des. Manag. 11 (4), 243- 263.

[59] Wagemann, E. , 2017. Need for adaptation: transformation of temporary houses. Disasters 41 (4), 828- 851.

[60] Wu, J.Y. , Lindell, M.K. , 2004. Housing reconstruction after two major earthquakes: the 1994 Northridge earthquake in the United States and the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan. Disasters 28 (1), 63- 81.

[61] Yuksel, B. , Hasirci, D. , 2012. Analysis of the Physical and Psychological Expectations of Earthquake Victims Temporary Shelters: A Design Proposal. Metu Journal of the Faculty of Archıtecture.

[62] Zhao, X. , Xu, W. , Ma, Y. , Hu, F. , 2015. Scenario-based multiobjective optimum allocation model for earthquake emergency shelters using a modified particle swarm optimization algorithm: a case study in Chaoyang District, Beijing, China. PLoS One 10 (12), 01444555.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

The Author(s). Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Higher Education Press and KeAi.