Current status of disaster management system in Turkey and strategic improvement suggestions

Disasters are defined as natural, technological, or human-induced events that result in various societal losses, completely or partially disrupt the flow of life, and exceed the coping capacity of affected societies. Consequently, disasters are not solely limited to earthquakes, floods, and avalanches, but rather encompass the comprehensive losses and consequences that accompany them. A plethora of international frameworks have been instituted throughout history with the objective of enhancing disaster management systems and mitigating losses. It is evident that the Yokohama Strategy and Action Plan, the Hyogo Framework for Action and the Sendai Framework for Action are distinguished by their comprehensiveness, clarity, targeted nature and multi-participation. The extant literature highlights the fact that these frameworks were prepared as a continuation of each other. The most recent Sendai Framework Action Plan was agreed to be valid between 2015 and 2030 and is therefore still in effect today. An examination of disaster management systems globally reveals a classification into four primary categories: traditional disaster management systems, modern disaster management systems, community-based disaster management systems, and integrated disaster management systems. Conventional disaster management strategies are predicated on the assumption that the focus should be on the aftermath of a disaster. It is asserted that this system is crisis management oriented. Conversely, Modern Disaster Management posits that each stage of mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery/reconstruction should be approached in a distinct manner. The system is characterised by a technologically oriented approach. Community-Based Disaster Management emphasises the importance of societal inclusion at each of the aforementioned stages. Finally, Integrated Disaster Management, a system also employed in our country, posits that the aforementioned stages are interconnected and that studies should be conducted for each stage. A retrospective analysis of past disasters reveals that earthquakes have been the most prevalent cause of loss of life and property in Türkiye. In this sense, the earthquakes of 1939 and 1992 in Erzincan, 1999 in Marmara, 2011 in Van, 2020 in Izmir, and finally on February 6, 2023 in Kahramanmaraş are shown as examples. In the case of these seismic events, a significant number of losses were attributed to the efficacy of the disaster management system. A notable similarity can be observed between the 1999 Marmara and the recent February 6, 2023 Kahramanmaras earthquakes with respect to the losses, consequences and the size of the affected area. It is evident that all phases of the disaster management system ought to be approached in a holistic manner in order to minimise losses incurred. However, an examination of the extant literature reveals a predominant focus on specific parameters or phases, including coordination, cooperation, volunteerism, meeting basic needs, or preparedness, mitigation, response, recovery/reconstruction. Consequently, these studies do not embody the desired holistic approach. Consequently, the objective of this study is twofold: firstly, to evaluate the multiple parameters affecting the disaster management system in accordance with the major earthquakes experienced in the past; and secondly, to present suggestions for improvement. For the purposes of this study, the existing literature on past earthquakes in Türkiye and disaster management approaches worldwide was examined in order to obtain information about the current system in Türkiye. The present study employed qualitative research methodologies in order to obtain in-depth information. For the same purpose, the phenomenological method, which is among the qualitative research designs, was adopted. Following a comprehensive review of the extant literature to identify a suitable measurement tool for the study, a form was developed by adapting questions from semi-structured interview forms used in two theses. It is important to note that a number of questions were excluded on the grounds that they were deemed to be unsuitable for the purpose of the study. The semi-structured interview comprised a total of ten questions. The application of the forms was determined by the purposeful sampling method, with participants selected from those who had experience of the 1999 Marmara earthquake or the 6 February 2023 Kahramanmaraş earthquake, or from individuals in possession of a graduate education. Twenty-four subjects who satisfied the specified criteria were invited to participate in the study via electronic mail or telephone. Following this invitation, semi-structured interview forms were administered to 17 participants who consented to participate, and in-depth interviews were subsequently conducted. In accordance with the consent of the participants, the interviews were audio-recorded for transcription at a later point, and in the absence of consent, the researcher immediately transcribed the interviews. Following the conduction of interviews with a total of 17 participants, the data were analysed. In the initial phase of data analysis, the voice recordings were transcribed, resulting in a 62-page data set comprising information from 17 participants. Subsequent to this, preliminary codes were developed through repeated readings of the data. Sub-themes were formed by evaluating the harmony between the codes, and main themes were formed by evaluating the harmony between the sub-themes. The analysis yielded a total of 10 main themes, 42 sub-themes and hundreds of codes. In accordance with the findings, it has been determined that there are various parameters affecting the disaster management system and that they are related. The findings indicate that deficiencies in coordination and cooperation result in delays to the response process. Inadequacies in supervision and the presence of inappropriate building designs contribute to the occurrence of unprepared buildings. The absence of disaster awareness and training has a detrimental effect on societal consciousness, while a lack of awareness regarding the current situation engenders inadequate coping capacity within society. Local administrations have been excluded from the system, thus giving rise to various difficulties in times of crisis. Technology and early warning systems have not been utilised to their full potential, and erroneous practices in the employment sector engender inadequacy at every stage of disaster management. The inadequate level of knowledge and equipment possessed by personnel results in selectivity in intervention, and so forth. etc. (et cetera). In accordance with the aforementioned findings, it is recommended that a multi-stakeholder structure be adopted with a view to enhancing the functionality of the disaster management system and mitigating losses. It is further advised that studies be conducted to address the prevailing issues pertaining to inspection and building practices. Moreover, it is recommended that training be initiated at an early age in order to cultivate disaster awareness in society and that specific training content be developed for designated groups. The integration of Geographical Information Systems (GIS)-based technologies into disaster management was identified as a key recommendation, along with the augmentation of investments in this domain. The recommendations further emphasised the necessity of enhancing the involvement of technology and early warning systems in disaster management, ensuring the deployment of qualified human resources and the provision of equitable equipment support to all institutions. Furthermore, a number of interviews revealed a negative sentiment towards the volunteering system. In this regard, it is recommended that the training of volunteer individuals be augmented and their incorporation into the disaster management system be assured. In particular, it was determined that each phase of disaster management necessitates a distinct area of expertise. Consequently, the involvement of specialised personnel in this domain is deemed to be a pivotal factor in the development of effective solutions to the problem. It is hypothesised that scientific studies provide significant results for the development of the system, and that the disaster management system should be organised in accordance with these studies. The research findings reveal that although disaster management is a very important and comprehensive field, not enough progress has been made in our country. In this direction, it is concluded that the current system can be improved by implementing the suggestions presented for the problems. Furthermore, it is anticipated that the findings obtained from this study will contribute to future research in this field. Keywords: Disaster management, Earthquake, Geographic Information Systems, Türkiye.