Rethinking the second life of post-disaster and post-conflict temporary housing

Providing temporary housing (TH) units after natural hazards and social conflicts is often an urgent necessity. Beyond their initial configuration, the second life of these units is crucial, given their temporary nature. Despite growing interest in second-life strategies, many TH units and associated infrastructure remain unused or inefficiently managed after their initial deployment. Second-life strategies are presented for post-disaster and post-conflict (PDPC) TH units and settlements in Türkiye, using two case studies—the 2011 Van earthquakes and Syrians under temporary protection—and expert insights from the Disaster and Emergency Management Presidency of Türkiye (Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı—AFAD). A three-step methodology was employed, including a literature review, semi-structured expert interviews and hybrid deductive–inductive thematic analysis. Findings reveal that second-life outcomes are largely shaped by policy gaps, operational conditions, tenure constraints, institutional decisions and user practices rather than by design-based circular approaches. The proposed framework provides practical guidance for policymakers and practitioners in Türkiye and other crisis-prone contexts to improve resource efficiency and integrate second-life planning into preparedness and recovery processes.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Policy gaps are a major barrier to implementing second-life strategies for TH and settlements in Türkiye. Strategies are proposed to address them. Housing, land and property rights—the rights to obtain and reside in housing that ensures safety, security and dignity—should form the foundation of any second-life policy, as tenure determines whether entire settlements or only individual units can be repurposed. A national take-back policy with clear guidelines and structured repair and decommissioning processes is essential to maintain unit quality and avoid the redeployment of unusable units. Neighbourhood dynamics and social considerations may also affect the feasibility of converting temporary settlements into permanent ones. The long-term concentration of affected populations in a single location may hinder social and psychological recovery. Integrating second-life planning into the preparedness phase can enhance the efficiency and sustainability of sheltering responses, optimise resource allocation, reduce waste, and mitigate environmental impacts.