Research Article

Evaluation of Distribution Location Criteria in Disaster Logistics using MCDM Methods

Volume: 8 Number: 2 January 3, 2026
EN TR

Evaluation of Distribution Location Criteria in Disaster Logistics using MCDM Methods

Abstract

The rapid and effective delivery of relief supplies to people in need after a disaster depends on the accurate selection of distribution sites in disaster logistics. In this study, the criteria used for determining distribution site locations within the scope of disaster logistics were examined and compared. The comparisons were conducted using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Fuzzy AHP methods, which are among the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques. The AHP method was chosen because it is one of the most frequently used techniques in MCDM due to its advantages in calculating the weights of main and sub-criteria. The Fuzzy AHP method, on the other hand, was used to address the uncertainties inherent in the traditional AHP and to enable comparison between the two approaches. A literature review was conducted, and expert opinions were gathered to determine four main criteria and eighteen sub-criteria for distribution site selection in disaster logistics. The identified criteria were weighted based on the comparisons made by decision-makers, and the analyses were carried out using both methods. Studies combining AHP and Fuzzy AHP methods are limited in the literature. Therefore, this study aimed to reveal the effects of these two methods on the decision-making process under uncertainty by comparing their results. The findings showed that the fuzzy approach better represents uncertainties; however, it did not produce significantly different results in determining the criteria for distribution site selection in disaster logistics.

Keywords

References

  1. Aczél, J., & Saaty, T. L. (1983). Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgements. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 27(1), 93-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2496(83)90028-7
  2. Büyüközkan, G., Havle, C. A. ve Feyzioğlu, O. (2020). A new digital service quality model and its strategic analysis in aviation industry using interval- valued intuitionistic fuzzy AHP, Journal of Air Transport Management, 86.
  3. Denizhan, B., Yalçıner, A. Y., ve Berber, Ş. (2017). Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses ve Bulanık Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses yöntemleri kullanılarak yeşil tedarikçi seçimi uygulaması, Nevşehir Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 6(1), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.17100/nevbiltek.288003
  4. Duman, Y. (2023). Afet Lojistiği Yönetim Sistemleri Kapsamında PTT A.Ş. ve AFAD Koordinasyonu: Erzurum ili Palandöken İlçesinde Bir Uygulama. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi)i Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü/Giresun Üniversitesi.
  5. Er Çakmaktepe, N., Ulutaş, A., ve Keleş, M. K., (2022). Bulanık AHP ve Bulanık Swara yöntemleriyle personel seçim kriterlerinin değerlendirilmesi: bir süt işletmesinde uygulama, Disiplinlerarası Yaklaşımlarla Uygulamalı Sosyal Bilimler (pp.199-223), Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
  6. Ergin, C. (2016). Afet Lojistiğinde Depo Yeri Seçim Probleminin Optimizasyon ve Kümeleme Teknikleri ile Çözülmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Endüstri Mühendisliği Anabilim Dalı, Sakarya.
  7. 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
  8. Gökgöz, B. İ., İlerisoy, Z. Y. ve Soyluk, A. (2020). Acil durum toplanma alanlarının AHP yöntemi ile değerlendirilmesi, Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi, (19), 935-945.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Disaster and Emergency Management

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

January 3, 2026

Submission Date

October 28, 2025

Acceptance Date

December 29, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 8 Number: 2

APA
Er Çakmaktepe, N. (2026). Afet Lojistiğinde Dağıtım Yeri Kriterlerinin ÇKKV Yöntemleri ile Değerlendirilmesi. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science, 8(2), 234-243. https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1812480

ISSN: 2667-4491

Dear Authors,
According to the February 25, 2020 dated ULAKBIM decision, all kinds of researches conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment, interview techniques, and the use of humans and animals (including materials/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes require an Ethics Committee certificate.

The ethics committee approvals obtained in accordance with the “publication policy” of the articles submitted to the Turkish Academic Social Sciences Research Journal must be specified in the METHOD section of the article and uploaded to the system. Publications with plagiarism report over 20% and studies without ethics committee approval will not be evaluated for publication in our journal.
Thank you for your attention and understanding.

20120

This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License 

20119