Application of boolean logic and GIS for determining suitable locations for Temporary Disaster Waste Management Sites

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.10.011Get rights and content

Highlights

  • The summary of the criteria and methods used in related research.

  • Utilizing Modelbuilder function in ArcGIS to build land suitability analysis model.

  • Analysed the sensitive of the criteria that chosen in this paper.

  • Identified precise TWMS candidates for disaster waste management in the case study area.

Abstract

Temporary Disaster Waste Management Sites (TDWMS) play a very important role in post disaster waste management. The selection of candidate TDWMS can be regarded as a land suitability analysis problem. This article reviews literature related to waste management treatment facilities to identify the common processes and methods. Previous studies indicate that identifying and determining weighting criteria as well as mapping and overlapping standardised layers are the four main steps in this process. In this study, ArcGIS was used to conduct the land suitability analysis and the Modelbuilder function was applied to build the analysis model. In addition, Boolean logic was used to standardise the criteria map layers. A total of 45 candidate sites were selected within the case study area. According to the analysis, the distance from ground water, drinking water resources, and public water supplies are the most sensitive criteria.

Introduction

The frequency and severity of disasters have increased recently because of climate change and the sharp rise in population levels [1], [2]. Every year, hundreds of natural disasters occur throughout the world and cause billions of dollar's damage. During the last 10 years, there were 3906 disasters in total, resulting in 0.75 million lives being lost and 1.68 billion people were affected (Data source: EM-DAT1). The damage cost from these events was estimated to be 1284.9 US$ billion scaled to 2014 (Data source: EM-DAT). Improved disaster management can reduce losses from disasters and shorten recovery time [3].

Waste management is one of the most important activities in disaster management. A substantial amount of waste is typically generated from disasters [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. The waste generated from affected communities can be as high as 5–15 times the normal annual rate [5]. In addition, the clearance, removal and disposal of waste from disasters is difficult, time-consuming, and expensive [10]. In some cases, the disposal of disaster waste can last up to 5 years [5]. Furthermore, waste treatment can account for around 27% of disaster management costs [11]. Therefore, disaster waste management plans are essential for disaster response and recovery.

A primary objective of disaster waste management is to clean-up waste from original sites as soon as possible. In order to achieve this goal, FEMA [11] recommended having Temporary Disaster Waste Management Sites (TDWMS) between waste generation sites and final disposal sites. TDWMS play multiple roles within the whole system. Firstly, they can provide a buffer and space by hauling waste from the disaster affected community to the TDWMS. Secondly, operations such as chipping, burning, and sorting can be done at the TDWMS to reduce the amount of waste as well as preparing for recycling and reuse. Finally, they can act as temporary storage places before the final disposal of waste [12]. In 2005 Hurricane Katrina [13], 2009 L’Aquila Earthquake [14], and 2010 Canterbury and 2011 Christchurch Earthquakes [15], TDWMS provided storage and separation services. However, in the 2003 Cedar and Paradise fire [16], TDWMS only served as temporary storage sites. The benefits of TDWMS include speeding up the cleaning of waste from original sites, improving the flow of disaster recovery activities, and providing a buffer for appropriately sorting, burning, and recycling waste [12]. As a result, the selection of TDWMSs is a necessary part of disaster planning and preparation [17].

Selecting TDWMS is a difficult process that contains a large number of constraints and is usually conducted during the post-disaster response and recovery phases which are generally when resources are seriously stressed. Thus, developing a pre-disaster method to identify TDWMS candidates under necessary constraints would make an important contribution to disaster waste management planning [17]. In addition, pre-disaster identification of candidate TDWMS is significant for all phases of disaster management. For example, it can ensure that respective advanced readiness contracts are in place during the preparedness phase. Furthermore, pre-disaster identification of candidate TDWMS can help to model, test, and evaluate disaster waste management scenarios which are aimed at modifying identified shortfalls [18]. Last but not least, having candidate TDWMS available in advance provides jurisdictions with additional time to develop diversion strategies and programs to handle disaster waste [19].

The most important element in the process of selecting candidate TDWMS is to identify the criteria that should be considered. Table 1 summarises the criteria for selecting candidate TDWMS from the disaster waste management guidelines in different regions. According to this summary, criteria can be classified into three categories: ownership, size, and location. For the ownership criterion, it is suggested that it is better to use public land which costs less to rent. However, when it is not available, private land can be taken into consideration with some defined criteria. In terms of size, it is important to choose sites that are large enough for waste treatment and storage. Thus, factors such as waste generation, site operations, and length of storage should be considered in this criterion. When it comes to location, a number of factors should be included. For instance, the location of candidate TDWMS cannot impede the flow of traffic along major transportation corridors, disrupt local business operations, or cause dangerous conditions in residential neighbourhoods or schools. Also, if possible, candidate TDWMS should not be located near residential areas, schools, churches, hospitals, and other such sensitive areas. In addition, sites should have good ingress/egress and have access to major routes as well.

Section snippets

Literature review

Determining the location of waste management facilities using land suitability assessment has been the focus of almost 50 published articles. According to these articles, criteria identification, criteria weighting, criteria map layers standardisation, and criteria map layers overlaying are the four main steps. Typically the first step is to identify criteria included in the assessment. A wide range of criteria have been considered in previous studies. Fig. 1 presents a frequency analysis of

Case study area

This section showcases the processes of identifying suitable sites for locating candidate TDWMS for bushfires in Victoria, Australia. The type of disaster was chosen because Victoria has had a long history of catastrophic bushfires, and there have been about 30 serious bushfires in the State's history that either taken people's lives or burned a significant amount of land. In the past 35 years, there have been two extremely damaging bushfire events in Victoria, the ‘Ash Wednesday’ fires of

Euclidean distance analysis

Fig. 7 shows criteria analysis maps after applying the Euclidean Distance and Mask tools. The map layers of criteria C1–C4 and C5–C8 are based on distance analysis while the layer of C5 is based on the original layer. The results layers can act as input for factor standardisation using either fuzzy logic or Boolean logic.

Reclass analysis

Fig. 8 presents the results of reclassification of different criteria which indicate the suitability of land under each criterion. A value of 1 means that the land is suitable

Conclusion

The present study summarized literature related to land suitability assessment for waste management facilities siting. Four major steps were identified as the routine processes to conduct the assessment, namely, criteria identification, criteria weighting, criteria map layers standardisation, and criteria map layers overlay. In addition, AHP, ANP, fuzzy logic, Boolean logic, and GIS are tools frequently used to facilitate the assessment.

This study is different from related ones in a several

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge support from the Centre for Disaster Management and Public Safety (CDMPS) at The University of Melbourne.

References (67)

  • L.E. Marín

    Identifying suitable sanitary landfill locations in the state of Morelos, México, using a Geographic Information System

    Phys. Chem. Earth

    (2012)
  • Y.W. Zhao

    GIS-based optimization for the locations of sewage treatment plants and sewage outfalls – A case study of Nansha District in Guangzhou City, China

    Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul.

    (2009)
  • M. Moeinaddini

    Siting MSW landfill using weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchy process (AHP) methodology in GIS environment (case study: karaj)

    Waste Manag.

    (2010)
  • V.R. Sumathi et al.

    GIS-based approach for optimized siting of municipal solid waste landfill

    Waste Manag.

    (2008)
  • J. Malczewski

    GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview

    Prog. Plan.

    (2004)
  • R. Hasanzadeh Nafari et al.

    Calibration and validation of FLFArs – a new flood loss function for Australian residential structures

    Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci.

    (2016)
  • R. Hasanzadeh Nafari et al.

    An assessment of the effectiveness of tree-based models for multi-variate flood damage assessment in Australia

    Water

    (2016)
  • F. Baycan, Emergency planning for disaster waste: a proposal based on the experience of the marmara earthquake in...
  • Y. Ishimura, K. Takeuchi, F. Carlsson, NIMBY or YIMBY? Municipalities' reaction to disaster waste from the Great East...
  • K. Kawamoto et al.

    Social capital and efficiency of earthquake waste management in Japan

    Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct.

    (2015)
  • R.C. Swan

    Debris management planning for the 21st century

    Nat. Hazards Rev.

    (2000)
  • FEMA, US FEMA, Public assistance: debris management guide. 2007: Washington, D.C., U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security,...
  • J.D. Kim Abhijeet Hastak Makarand Selecting a Temporary Debris Management Site for Effective Debris Removal, 10th...
  • C.Brown, M.Milke, Case Study Report: Hurricane Katrina – Disaster Waste Management,...
  • C.Brown, et al., Case Study Report: L′Aquila Earthquake – Disaster Waste Management,...
  • C.Brown, M.Milke, Case Study Report: 2010 Canterbury and 2011 Christchurch Earthquakes – Demolition and Disaster Waste...
  • Diego, C.o.S., D.o.P. Works, S.W.P.a., Recycling, County of San Diego Debris Removal and Recycling Programs for the...
  • S. Grzeda et al.

    Temporary disaster debris management site identification using binomial cluster analysis and GIS

    Disasters

    (2014)
  • L.Luther, Managing Disaster Debris: Overview of Regulatory Requirements, Agency Roles, and Selected Challenges DTIC...
  • P.Wilson, J.M.Strock, Integrated Waste Management Disaster Plan, S.o. California, Editor,...
  • UNEP/OCHA, Disaster Waste Management Guidelines, Joint UNEP/OCHA Environment Unit: Switzerland,...
  • H.-Y. Lin et al.

    Grid-based heuristic method for multifactor landfill siting

    J. Comput. Civ. Eng.

    (2005)
  • S. Sadek et al.

    Compliance factors within a GIS‐based framework for landfill siting

    Int. J. Environ. Stud.

    (2006)
  • Cited by (57)

    • Conceptualizing disaster waste governance using network governance perspectives

      2023, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
    • An integrated multi-objective model for disaster waste clean-up systems optimization

      2022, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text