4.6 Article

Integrating multi-agent evacuation simulation and multi-criteria evaluation for spatial allocation of urban emergency shelters

Journal

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2018.1463442

Keywords

Multi-agent system; emergency shelter; multi-criteria evaluation; evacuation simulation; GIS

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41201548, 5161101688, 71603168]
  2. National Social Science Foundation of China [13CGL083]
  3. Open Research Funding Program of KLGIS [KLGIS2016A02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The timely and secure evacuation of residents to nearby urban emergency shelters is of great importance during unexpected disaster events. However, evacuation and allocation of shelters are seldom examined as a whole, even though they are usually closely related tasks in disaster management. To conduct better spatial allocation of emergency shelters in cities, this study proposes a new method which integrates techniques of multi-agent system and multi-criteria evaluation for spatial allocation of urban emergency shelters. Compared with the traditional emergency shelter allocation methods, the proposed method highlights the importance of dynamic emergency evacuation simulations for spatial allocation suitability analysis. Three kinds of agents involved in evacuation and sheltering procedures are designed: government agents, shelter agents, and resident agents. Emergency evacuations are simulated based on the interactions of these agents to find potential problems, for example, time-consuming evacuation processes and road congestion. A case study in Jing'an District, Shanghai, China was conducted to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed method. After three rounds of simulation and optimization, new shelters were spatially allocated and a detailed recommended plan of shelters and related facilities was generated. The optimized spatial allocation of shelters may help local residents to be evacuated more quickly and securely.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available