1
The urban planning of Istanbul and the provision of
green resilient zones in an earthquake-hit metropolitan
area
A case study of Istanbul & Avcılar
Author
Melissa Högberg Yilmaz
Bachelor's thesis human geography 2020 Örebro University
Supervisor Eva Gustavsson
School of Humanities, Education and Social Sciences Örebro University
2 Foreword
This bachelor's thesis is the final part of a three-year study at Örebro University´s programme in Urban and Regional Planning. With the preface, I would like to extend a heartfelt thank you to teachers and classmates who have supported my studies at the university. I also would
like to dedicate extra gratitude to my supervisor Eva Gustavsson for her guiding support and valuable knowledge.
Finally, I want to thank my parents for their incredible support and love.
Thanks!
Örebro University, September 2020 Melissa Högberg Yilmaz
3
Abstract
This paper examines how green areas may be used as strategic recovery zones in the event of an earthquake and how these zones may strengthen the resilience for future quakes in Istanbul. The paper also refers to investigating why the planning system in Turkey can pose a threat for the provision of green areas.
Green areas have proven to be an important feature in natural disaster stricken cities for coping with disasters by strengthening the city’s resilience. However due to rapid population growth and high demand for housing and infrastructure, green areas risk disappearing when the city expands. This problem is evident all major cities of turkey and particularly in the country’s largest city Istanbul, where green areas are benign exploited instead of preserved; leaving larger city’s such as Istanbul vulnerable for future earthquake disasters. The high demand for new housing and functioning infrastructure in conjunction with a complicated planning system in Turkey leads to a vaguely regulated planning system, which creates a threat to green areas. This creates an uncertain situation for the city's ability and resilience to withstand a future earthquake disaster.
The study will be based on a qualitative method. The empirical material will be presented through a previous research overview and a case study, which is also based on previous research on the subject. Essay analysis will be performed based on a quantitative text analysis based on concepts; urban disaster resilience, green infrastructure, land use planning and governance, presented in the essays theoretical framework.
The general conclusions of the study are that there is a lack of good governance in the planning system in Turkey, which creates restrictions for a sustainable and resilient urban planning in the city of Istanbul. Green areas are resilience and capacity building areas in the city to handle future earthquake disaster, by providing open recovery zones in a densely built city. It is therefore important to plan for a long-term land use and to regard the green areas in the city to uphold strong urban disaster resilience for future earthquakes in Istanbul.
Keywords: Earthquake, Turkey, Istanbul, Avcilar, disaster risk reduction, urban disaster
resilience, green areas, green infrastructure, regional planning, governance, planning hierarchy.
4
Innehållsförteckning
INTRODUCTION ... 5
BACKGROUND ...5
PROBLEM FORMULATION ...8
PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS ...9
DISPOSITION ...9
DELIMITATION ...9
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ... 10
URBAN DISASTER RESILIENCE AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE ... 10
LAND USE PLANNING AND GOVERNANCE ... 13
METHOD ... 14
RESEARCH STRATEGY ... 14
CASE STUDY ... 15
QUALITATIVE TEXT ANALYSIS AS A METHOD ... 16
SELECTION OF DOCUMENTS ... 17
PREVIOUS RESEARCH ... 18
REGIONAL PLANNING IN TURKEY ... 18
Challenges to regional planning in Turkey ... 19
Planning hierarchy in Turkey ... 19
High planning council decisions ... 22
Plans for “Risky” and “Reserve” Areas ... 23
Special Purpose Plans ... 24
How the challenges of regional planning in turkey affects the urban development in Istanbul ... 24
GREEN STRUCTURE IN THE CITY ... 25
Ecological significance ... 26
Cultural significance ... 27
Social significant... 27
Green areas in natural disaster affected cities ... 28
URBAN GREEN AREAS IN ISTANBUL ... 31
CASE STUDY AVCILAR DISTRICT ... 34
DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA ... 34
CURRENT SITUATION ... 37
DISCUSSION ... 39
CONCLUSION ... 42
WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES TO REGIONAL PLANNING IN TURKEY ... 43
THREATS TO GREEN AREAS IN ISTANBUL ... 43
GREEN AREAS RESILIENT CAPACITY AND STRATEGIC FUNCTION AS DISASTER RECOVERY ZONES IN ISTANBUL ... 44
5
Introduction
The first chapter will introduce the essay's background, problem formulation, purpose, question, disposition and delimitation in order to create an understanding of the thesis' research area.
Background
Cities are growing, and the rapid migration from the countryside and rural areas into the city is creating a high demand for functioning infrastructure and housing to meet the needs of the growing population. To reduce urban sprawl and meet the people’s interests the city is densified at a rapid rate, leaving strategic green areas at great risk of being exploited instead of preserved (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14, Allan & Bryant 2010, pp.4-5).
Green areas are an important element in an evermore-growing city, where large green areas provide social, cultural, ecological benefits for the quality of life within the city, but also helps strengthen the city's resilience to natural disasters. Green areas in an evermore growing city is an important element for resilient community planning, however rapid expansion and need for infrastructural development has come to affect the availability of green areas in the city (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp.4-9, Dodd 1969).
The urbanization from smaller towns and rural areas is a phenomenon that has increased since the industrialization of the 19th century where the city's economic opportunities and developed life standard has come to attract more people to the thriving city life then ever before (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14, Allan & Bryant 2010, pp.3-5). Turkey's major cities offer
several economic opportunities, which attracts people from all over the country and from abroad. As the city grows, the need to make room for people, public transport and infrastructure has become a prominent issue in urban development (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14). A problem that has occurred in urban development is urban sprawl, where the city area spreads out in a larger area, making the need for cars and functioning transportation even more important. In order to reduce this inefficient development, densification has become a planning ideal and sustainable strategy to create less distance between the urban locations (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14, Gezici & Kerimoglu 2010, pp. 252-265)
In Turkey's major cities, urban sprawl has become a problem in the suburbs, which is constantly growing larger, but in order to reduce the areas and make the city less divided, densification has become a planning method (Baycan-Levent 2003,pp.7-9).
6 However the densification of Turkey's cities has come to prove a great risk for the population's safety due to the country's geographical vulnerability to earthquakes. The need for housing and infrastructure has become a priority issue in urban planning, but the development has taken place at the expense of the cities' green areas (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139). These open green areas, located in prime locations in the city, are viewed as a valuable resource to leave undeveloped. This leads to green areas being used for development instead of being preserved, which creates problems for the city's risk management for emerging earthquakes (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp.4-6, Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166).
Istanbul is one of the world’s megacities and the largest in Turkey based on population and built-up area, with a population figure of 15,190, 336 million people (Istanbul population 2020) and a daily in moving of 672,000 people to the city (Baycan 2003 pp.12-14). Istanbul is regarded as Turkey's economic centre with a diverse business community that attracts labour from smaller cities and the countryside. The constant need for new housing and functioning infrastructure have come to pressure the urban development and thus lead to an interest-bound and complex planning system in Turkey (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002,pp. 269-276, Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166).
The complex planning system in Turkey makes the planning process difficult in identifying planning priority at a local, regional and national level. The unclear relationship between different actors creates restrictions and obscurity for how the city should develop, which is a threat to important recreational areas and leads to densification of the city (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp. 4-6, Dodd 1969).
The complexity of the planning system thus makes planning in Turkish cities complicated and minor effective for sustainable urban development. This further puts the population’s health and safety at risk when the urban planning goes on without regarding the geographical threats for earthquakes.
The Istanbul district and other districts close to the Marmara Sea face a high risk for future exposure to earthquakes due to the close location to the North Anatolian line, which is the continental plate border between the Anatolian and the Euro-Asian Plate (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276). In order to gain perspective on the impact of the earthquake
7 on the Marmara region, figures on the proportion of deceased, injured and demolished properties to be presented below.
The devastation that came to paralyse the Marmara regions occurred in the early hours of August 17th 1999 when an earthquake with a measured 7,4 on the Richter scale immobilized
the Marmara region of Turkey and created great damages in the populated region, where nearly 23 percent of Turkey's total population lived. The quake started in the city of Izmit, located 90 km from Istanbul and affected Turkey's industrial heartland which created huge economic losses, estimating 3 to 6 billion US dollar, a number representing almost 7 percent of Turkey's total GDP.
The Izmit earthquake resulted in 17, 000 deceased victims whose death was largely caused by building collapse, another 40,000 injured and nearly 100,000 households and 16,000 businesses destroyed, leaving nearly a quarter million of people homeless and economically insecure (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276). The earthquake also destroyed large infrastructural areas in the region, such as industrial buildings, highways, bridges and telecommunication. This affected the rescue work following the disaster where there were no functioning roads and telecommunication in the most affected areas, leaving the population to fend for itself after the disaster (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp. 4-6). On November 12th the same
year another earthquake struck Düzce located 100 km East of Izmit earthquake with a magnitude of 7.2 on the Richter scale, resulting in almost 700 deaths in Istanbul.
Following the Izmit earthquake 1999 new the government to theoretically improve the development plan, by presenting new building regulations. However, the regulations are not a guarantee for safe housing and according to critics of the new earthquake safe development plans the new regulations are no more than a glorified gentrification project. But the densification of Istanbul and other large cities in the Marmara region is facing a great risk for future earthquakes and the disappearance of green open space within the city, will affect the city's security should a new earthquake occur. Green areas are an important feature in the city for coping with natural disaster by strengthen the city’s disaster resilience (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139)
Researchers believe that cities with green areas are better equipped to handle natural disasters such as floods, tsunamis and earthquakes, and so on. Through the green areas' ability to absorb water creates open recovery zones in the city where people can seek shelter during a
8 disaster and after. In other disaster-stricken mega-cities such as Tokyo and Jakarta that are continually affected by earthquakes, green areas have been vital strategic zones in the city where people can recover and seek protection as a result of the catastrophe, which further highlights the need for long term land use in disaster stricken city’s and the value of green areas (Barka & Jacques 2000, Bryant & 2010). In Istanbul’s case the investment interest and complex planning system becomes a threat to the city's green areas and the sustainability for urban development, which affects the city’s resilience and thus leaves the city vulnerable for future earthquakes.
Problem formulation
Istanbul is undergoing a rapid population growth and the city faces a high demand for functioning infrastructure and housing to meet the needs of the population. To reduce urban sprawl and meet the people’s interests the city is deifying at a rapid rate, leaving strategic and green areas at great risk at being exploited instead of preserved. As researchers point out, green areas in major cities are strategic zones to strengthen the city’s resilience in dealing with earthquake catastrophes and other natural disasters, where green areas create open recovery zones in the city providing people with shelter and other supplies in the event of a disaster. If green areas disappear in disaster-stricken metropolitan cities like Istanbul, it will have fatal consequences for the city's recovery capacity and population safety. Densification therefore poses a great threat to urban green areas (Barka & Jacques 2000).
With rapid population growth and high demand for housing and infrastructure, the needs have become a threat to strategic and vital green areas in the city, where the need for more free land has become a danger to the population's safety and health. Instead of following researchers advice, Istanbul and other larger cities in Turkey are planning without major development restrictions, which has come to pose a threat to greenery in the city, where this resourceful area is seen as a strategic territory for expansion (Bryant & Allan 2010).
The complicated planning system has come to pose a threat to the city's green areas, which on one hand, favours the development of the city by providing the population with more housing and transport options, but on the other hand, puts the populations safety at risk by densifying the city and reduce it´s green space, which becomes problematic for the city's resilience if an earthquake were to occur (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
9 Purpose and Questions
This paper examines how green areas may be used as strategic recovery zones in the event of an earthquake and how these zones may strengthen the resilience for future quakes in Istanbul. The paper also refers to investigate why the planning system in Turkey can pose a threat for the provision of green areas in Istanbul.
To narrow down the essay and to fully understand the complexity of the Turkish planning system and how it affects the urban development of Istanbul, regional planning will be used as a tool to explain why urban planning becomes challenging and how this affects the provision of green areas in Istanbul.
The thesis therefore intends to answer the following questions; - What are the challenges to regional planning in Turkey?
- How may the challenges to regional planning in Turkey restrict the provision for green areas in the city of Istanbul?
- How may green areas be used as strategic recovery zones in the event of an earthquake in Istanbul and how may these zones strengthen the city’s resilience for future earthquakes?
Disposition
The first chapter of the essay will introduce the subject through a background, problem formulation, purpose, issues, disposition and delimitation. In the second chapter the theoretical framework of the thesis will be presented. The third chapter will present the method of the essay. In the fourth chapter of the essay, previous research on the subject is presented. Chapter five deals with the case study of Avcilar. The sixth chapter will also lead to a short discussion that leads to the study's conclusions and answers to the questions. Finally, a reference list is presented.
Delimitation
The essay deals with two districts in the Marmara region, Istanbul and Avcilar. The areas have been selected on the basis of their geographical exposure to earthquakes and their rapid Population growth. As the thesis aims to demonstrate the green areas' resilient ability in an earthquake-stricken city, the survey has chosen to focus on Turkey's largest city Istanbul and the neighbouring municipality Avcilar in order to get a clear picture of the planning's character and priorities.
10
Theoretical framework
The theoretical framework aims to present the essay's theoretical approach that will form the basis for the essay's purpose and analysis. The theoretical starting point of the thesis has been based on the concepts of urban disaster resilience, green infrastructure, land-use planning and governance, to further discuss how these concepts may give a deeper understanding to Turkey's planning system and how it affects the urban provision of disaster resilient green areas in the city of Istanbul. The concepts have within the theoretical framework been further presented, developed and explained in relation to the essays issues and purpose.
Urban disaster resilience and green infrastructure
Resilience has become increasingly associated with the framework for sustainable development, disaster risk management (DRM) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) and is a concept employed in the climate adaptation literature (Boin, & ´t Hart 2007, pp. 23-38, Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166). Resilience has traditionally been understood as the measurable ability of an urban system and its inhabitants to maintain continuity through shocks and stress moments and at the same time in a positive way adopt and transform towards sustainability (Boin, & ´t Hart 2007, pp. 23-38). The academic discussion of urban resilience has come to focus mainly on three distinct threats; climate change, natural disasters and terrorism. Based on the thesis' issues, urban resilience will be discussed based on the threat of natural disasters (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166).
The resilience in a vast growing city like Istanbul is important to enable the city's ability to maintain the main functions through an earthquake and furthermore be able to reduce the negative effects of the disaster; by positively adopting it’s the disaster. However the densely developed city of Istanbul faces a greater risk for future earthquake disasters by reducing the city's resilient green areas, which affects the city's ability to cope with a disaster (Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
Research also points to green areas' resilient capabilities to better equip the city to handle natural disasters such as floods, tsunamis and earthquakes, and so on. Through the green areas' ability to absorb water creates open recovery zones in the city where people can seek shelter during a disaster and after. Furthermore a resilient community is one that can absorb disturbance, change, reorganize and still retain the basic structure and provide the same services. This ability to return to a previous state is referred to as ”bounce back” (Alexander 2013, pp. 2707-2716, Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
11 In recent years, there has also been talk of the ability for a positive development after an event, which is described as the ability to “bounce forward” and thus undergo a positive transformation (Manyena 2006, pp. 434–450). In the case of the Izmit and Duraz Earthquakes 1999 the ability to “bounce back” to the previous state was limited since the risks were known but not planned for in the urban development, which made it very difficult to “bounce forward” after the disaster. A resilient system can thus be seen as a system that has the opportunity to take advantage of disruptions to be further developed in a more sustainable way, this is expressed in literature as ”window of opportunity” and ”build back better” (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276).
As can be seen in Izmit and Durza after the earthquakes of 1999 a resilient city is one that has access to plans and acts to prepare for and respond to hazards, natural and human-made, expected and unexpected. The thesis' focus on urban resilience as a basis for understanding how a city's preparedness creates conditions for a safer city development by enhancing people's lives, secure development, foster an investable environment and conduct a positive development (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
Disaster resilience can be seen as a public good that encourages communities to plan for dealing with disruptions. Addressing disaster risk in the context of resilience encourages urban planners to look at the many impacts of disaster and plan for a long-term capacity to both adapt and cope with unforeseen events (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166). The goal with planning for urban disaster resilience is for the community to be prepared for unseen events, such as an earthquake. In Istanbul the need for resiliency zones in the city improves the urban disaster resilience by providing a planning element to enable “bounce back” in the event of an earthquake.
Normally urban disaster resilience decomposes into four components, economies, institutional, social and infrastructure, but based on the purpose and issues of the essay, the focus will only be on resilience within infrastructural aspects (Hubert-Ferrari 1999, pp. 404, 269–273, Barka & Jacques 1999, pp.404, 269–273). By exclusively focusing on infrastructural resilience the intention to delimit the work and problematize the need for long term planning in the urban development. Of course there are economies, institutional and social aspects that affect the development of Istanbul as well, but by focusing on infrastructure resilience the aim is to highlight the importance of green areas in a disaster stricken city, such as Istanbul.
12 Infrastructural resilience refers to the vulnerability of built structures including buildings, property and transportation systems, and refers to sheltering capacity of important functions such as health care facilities, vulnerability building and infrastructures that may pose a risk for upcoming natural disasters. Infrastructural resilience also refers to a community’s capacity to respond and recover after a natural disaster has occurred (Benedict 2002, pp.12-17, Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166).
To understand the concept of infrastructure, the concept will differentiate between grey infrastructure and green infrastructure. Grey infrastructure includes areas that do not consist of nature but are built of man-made materials such as concrete and asphalt, these areas also have a clear function such as roads, car parks and so on (Benedict 2002, pp. 12-17). Green infrastructure is described as a green area with multifunction, which contributes to ecological, social and economic sustainability (Barrows 1923, pp.1-4)
Areas defined, as green infrastructure can be both natural areas, semi-natural or man-made. In the essay however green infrastructure will be based on gardens, parks and other open green areas that are created by humans, not natural areas such as nature parks and nature reserves (Benedict 2002, pp. 12-17). By focusing on green areas that are developed by humans, the purpose is to demonstrate how green infrastructure is an important planning element to achieve urban disaster resilience. Green infrastructure is an important part of urban disaster resilience's ability to deal with natural disasters and is therefore an important element in the city for it to be developed in a long-term resilient way. In Istanbul's case, green areas are an important long-term planned element to strengthen the city’s ability to handle future earthquake disasters (Benedict 2002, pp. 12-17).
According to researchers, green infrastructure is a capacity-building way for the state to handle natural disasters through open green areas, such as floods and earthquakes, but green infrastructure also has an important long-term function for supporters' ability to handle natural disasters due to global warming (Baris 2010, pp. 1657-1664, Benedict 2002, pp. 12-17). Green infrastructure has an important function in managing the city's exposure to future natural disasters that may occur due to the city’s risky geographical location or future unforeseen risks that may result from global warming.
It’s important to understand the differences between green infrastructure and green areas. The concept of green infrastructure will be used as a way of defining the city's multifunctional
13 areas that, with a small spruce, have pure recreational or outdoor goals. Green areas as a general term are used for all types of green land in built environments that are not covered by buildings or other hard coverings. Areas that can be counted as green areas are nature areas, plantations, cut lawns or parks. Since green areas can be both a natural environment and a man-made environment, the concept of green area and green infrastructure will in the essay be treated as man made green environment (Allan & Bryant 2010,pp.2-3, Barrows 1923, pp.1-14, Benedict 2002, pp. 12-17).
Land use planning and governance
Land use planning is currently one of the most effective ways to improve disaster risk reduction and increase the resilience of the urban areas exposed to natural disasters. With a Land use planning policy, a community can consider disaster risks and operate their spatial land distribution accordingly to reduce the urban areas exposure to risks posed by natural disasters (Boin, & ´t Hart 2007, pp. 23-38). Land use planning in the case of Istanbul is important to increase the sustainable urban development by strategically developing the land development in the city to enable urban disaster resilience to cope with earthquakes
The general meaning of governance refers to a collaboration of greater extent between several actors, creating new forms of power structures and changes in the distribution of responsibilities between the state and other societal actors (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276, Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229). In the Turkish planning system there is a lack of good governance, where the planning system has limited restrictions in the regional- and urban development, leaving the planning firmly without implemented regulations. This will further be discussed in the essays previous research. The thesis has chosen to describe land use planning on the basis of governance to understand how land is developed and how winning interest’s affects the land use planning at a top-down level, where decisions are made from above (Özkan & Özçevik 2015, pp. 221-241).
Land use planning and how governance operates is an important approach to understand the distribution of land in Turkey and what controls land development in the country. Therefore, the land-use planning and governance approach is relevant for the theoretical framework. Land- use governance involves a procedure; policies, processes and institutions by which land and property are managed (Özkan & Özçevik 2015, pp. 221-241). This includes decisions regarding access to land, land rights and land development. In recent years, a large number of governments and international agencies have adapted a land governance approach to urban
14 policy development and land-use planning. Land governance in this essay refers to the process by which decisions are made regarding the access to use of land and how conflicting interests for land are reconciled (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276).
Since there may be several profit interests in land-use planning, this can have an effect on urban disaster resilience where the city’s development isn’t conducted in a sustainable and resilient way to cope with natural disasters. This thus affects the urban disaster resilience due to the short-term profit-driven land use planning, which affects the city’s safety by not planning for a long-term capacity building way (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276, Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229). As mentioned above in the previous part of the theoretical framework, a resilient city is a city that access plans and acts to prepare for and respond to unseen events and risks. They're important for the city to develop in a long-term and disaster resilient way to be able to cope with unseen events, such as natural disasters.
Method
The method chapter is initially provided with an account of the study's research strategy, followed by methods used in data collection and a representative selection process of collected material.
Research strategy
The research strategy describes the action plan to achieve the purpose of the study and answer the questions. The choice of research strategy has been made in relation to the thesis' time frame where the choice to carry out a case study is relatively predictable in time and therefore suitable for this study. A case study focuses on a delimited area to deeper understanding events, relationships, experiences and processes (Denscombe 2018, pp. 22–24).
Based on the essay's issues a case study becomes handy to point out the difficulties in regional planning and further understand how regional planning affects land use planning in urban development. The case study has been an important tool to give the reader a deeper understanding of how development are taking place in Turkey at a regional and urban level, in order to further indicate the urgent need for available urban green areas and the importance they have for the urban disaster resilience (Denscombe 2018, pp. 22–24, Yin 2007).
The two cities located in the Marmara region, which will be examined in the essays case study, are Istanbul and Avcilar. Under the application case study, the essay will further
15 explain the choice of areas, why these areas were chosen to be investigated and how the knowledge of these areas contributes to a better understanding of the planning system in Turkey and the effect it has on accessibility to green areas in the city.
The study has chosen a qualitative text analysis as a method to analyse the essays empirical material. The study's qualitative approach has been chosen based on its suitability for investigation and interpretation as well as generalizability to grasp the overall picture of how green areas in Istanbul and Avcilar creates resilience and thus a sustainable development (Denscombe 2018, pp. 22–24). Furthermore, the choice of a qualitative approach has been important to conduct a flexible case study which would not have been possible if the study had been quantitative and therefore characterized by a more structured approach (Kirsti 2001, pp. 483-488.) Using a qualitative approach during the study has meant that the study has been more receptive and flexible to changes based on experiences and information gained during the data collection phase. Thanks to this variability, the study has been able to more easily retain relevance and answer the questions more effectively (Denscombe 2018, pp. 22–24). Case study
The case study intends to investigate an already identified problem in larger cities; the rapid disappearance of green areas and the lack of capacity-building zones in a natural disaster stricken area. The case study focuses on the green areas' resilient and capacity-building function in a natural disaster-stricken city and how these strategic areas contribute to a sustainable development. This is a well-documented subject and is relevant due to the future earthquake risks that Turkey´s cities face.
The focus has been on the urban development of Istanbul, based on the city's geographical exposure to earthquakes, the rapid population growth and the city's need for continuous expansion. The essay has further problematized the disappearance of green areas and how the regional planning in Turkey makes it more difficult to maintain a sustainable urban planning by preserving the city's green areas.
To further illustrate the effects of the regional planning in Turkey and the effects it has on urban development and provision of green areas, the study has used Istanbul's neighbouring district Avcilar. Since the cities are in close proximity to each other and face the same earthquake threat, the need for capacity-building and sustainable solutions is an important element of planning for both Istanbul and Avcilar. There are also many similarities in their population development, which creates a constant need for new infrastructure to meet the
16 needs of the population. Furthermore, the purpose of the case study is not to compare these two cities with each other, but rather to illustrate the direct effect Turkey's regional planning system has on urban planning and the cities ability to provide green areas (Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139). By choosing Avcilar, the city is used as an example to demonstrate how regional planning in Turkey creates difficulties for planning on an urban level and furthermore illustrate how this may inflict the provision for green areas in the evermore-growing city. By using Avcilar, it is in the thesis intention to point out that this is a problem in several major cities in Turkey and not exclusively in Istanbul.
Case studies are effective when conducting studies on a smaller scale, making it easier to detect information, which makes it easier to describe phenomena in detail as well as to compare alternatives or account for certain aspects of a situation (Denscombe 2018, pp. 22– 24). In this case study, the study was not of a comparative nature but more as a way to account for certain aspects in the situation regarding the Turkish community planning pattern which affects the cities' sustainability and resilient development.
Qualitative text analysis as a method
The essay has used previous research as a primary source for the essay's empirical material. Furthermore, the previous research has been used as the basis for the case study of Avcilar. The previous researchin the thesis has been used to demonstrate the complications in Turkish regional planning and the impact that regional planning has on urban development and the availability of resilient green areas in Istanbul and Avcilar. Furthermore, the importance of green areas in natural disaster stricken city is a capacity building element to strengthening the city’s resilience to natural disaster, which in this essay is based on earthquake disaster.
Qualitative text analysis will be used as a tool to analyse the empirical material based on the concepts presented in the theoretical framework to further present the material in a discussion, discussion that will be used to arrive at the conclusions of the essay and answer the questions. The qualitative literature analysis will be used as a method to analyse the empirical material presented in the previous research and case study (Bergström & Boréus 2012). Because the empirical material contains several different studies, research, reports and laws, the qualitative text analysis is a good method for understanding and interpreting the content of the texts. By using qualitative text analysis to study the empirical material the study will be more open to observing what is between the lines. Since the material is taken from different countries and studies with different views, interpretations and conclusions on the same subject, it is
17 important to critically examine what has been written in the text in order to get as accurate a picture as possible of the text's content (Denscombe 2018, Malterud 2001, pp. 483-488). Text analysis briefly relates to different texts and their content in speech as well as writing and thus creating a knowledge image of the meanings of texts based on a well-defined problem area (Widén 2019, pp. 193).
The common view of qualitative content analysis as a method is that the observer needs to systematically go through the material and thermalize, code and find patterns (Bergström & Boréus 2012). The problem with content analysis as a method is that the approach is best suited for documents with simple, direct and tangible communication rather than subtle and complicated texts. Therefore, the study has used international research to find support in several forums in order to contribute with a more confidential knowledge picture (Denscombe 2018, pp. 403).
Selection of documents
The purpose of the study has been to investigate how an earthquake-affected metropolis can strengthen its resilience by preserving and maintaining its central green areas, documents chosen as study material have therefore been of a subject's illustrative character.
Keywords used in the study to facilitate the search of documents: green areas, resilience, earthquake, capacity building, sustainable development, Turkeys regional planning, earthquake in Istanbul and Avcilar, Green infrastructure, Urban disaster resilience, Land use planning, and governance. The documents have been retrieved from DIVA, which is a portal, a joint search service for research publications and student essays produced at 49 higher education institutions as well as the university library.
The study has also used older research such as Dodd (1969) whose publications are almost four decades old. The reason why the study used varied sources between different years is to demonstrate a very small change in the way Turkish regional- and urban planning is carried out and planned. There is state power that identifies the planning and despite newer regional ideals influenced by Europe, the planning is relatively unchanged since Dodd's studies were conducted in 1969. His study has been further supplemented by newly produced research in
18
Previous research
The chapter will discuss the essays empirical material and further analyse the material based on the concepts presented in the theoretical framework.
Regional planning in Turkey
As a response to contemporary globalization and urbanisation issues, the regional approach has in many countries become a supportive tool for regional development policies. The strong need for regulations governing regional planning have come to the attention in most countries and has led to stronger implementation policies and laws to regulate and facilitate regional planning. In Turkey there has been an increased interest for regional planning which have come to reflect in the administrative and institutional changes as well as in the planning legislation. However, there are still complex deficiencies regarding the regional planning in Turkey (Başoğlu, Şalcıoğlu & Livanou 2002, pp. 269-276).
The regional approach has increased the importance in terms of urban planning and new law and policies have been presented to further regulate the regional planning and development in Turkey. Regional planning has come to be associated with urban development due to urbanization, population growth and urban expansion, where the need to solve and control local problems requires a more regulated approach and clear goals for the implementation and decision making of local decisions for urban development. Regional planning has proven to be a useful planning tool for balancing the development among different regions of the country (Jalali 2002, pp.120-139).
The regional development in Turkey has been influenced by the European countries and gradually adopted by the social and economical needs of the nation. Regional planning in Turkey has been given more importance in recent years. The new regulations regarding regional planning have issued several regulations for policies and laws in regional planning, but the new regulations have also come to further complicate the already complex planning system in Turkey (Eren, & Özçevik 2015).
Since the founding of the Turkish republic 1923 and the urban development period in the 1960's known as the planning period, the new planning era began with Turkey's desire to join the European Union and the country has made great efforts to adopt Europe's planning methodology for regional planning. New regulations and institutional arrangements have been made to encore a smooth transit from previous planning policies to European regional planning policy. In 2006 a new law was introduced to set up development agencies to speed
19 and further regulate the regional planning and to improve intra- regional cooperation. In 2011 significant development occurred regarding the administrative structure and planning system in Turkey, these also affected regional planning, whereupon the establishment of the Minister of development and the minister of Environment and Urbanization were introduced to further establish a sustainable policy for regional development planning. The new organisational duties of the minister of Development, serves to ensure the integrity between development policies and spatial development strategies on a national and regional level (Dodd 1969, Erkut & Shirazi 2014).
The second important step for improving the regional planning of Turkey was the establishment of the minister of environment and urbanization (2011) whereupon new regulations were established known as the preparation of special plans which came into effect in 2014 and regulated the planning system by modifying previous planning hierarchy. Another positive change made by the new planning regulations, improved the development by further regulating the local level plan, but there are still problems in the Turkish planning system on both a national and regional level, which creates contradictions and makes city planning in Turkey difficult (Kilic 2009, pp. 1283-1301).
Challenges to regional planning in Turkey
Challenges to the regional planning in Turkey occur in the difficulties in identifying a common urban policy for urban development. This is partly based on Turkey's neoliberal urban development agenda, which encourages a free land and real estate market, but the fragmented and shared planning authority in Turkey also creates a great confusion between the participation of different actors and their place in the decision-making process. This means that several planning actors can set up detailed plans for the same geographical area without communicating with each other, which creates a great deal of confusion in which detail plan should be prioritized and implemented. The problematic Turkish planning hierarchy and the neoliberal urban development agenda makes planning in Turkey difficult (Glasson & Marshall 2007, Kilic 2009, pp. 1283-1301).
Planning hierarchy in Turkey
The planning authority in Turkey is fragmented among various actors. In the same geographical area, different institutions can have planning authority, its also sometimes a matter of debate as to which institution´s plan has priority and will be dominant in the planning process. The same situation occurs in regional planning. At the top of Turkish planning administration is the High Planning Council which functions as an advisory unit for
20 the cabinet of Minister on national policy and functions; it is a political mechanism to incorporate decision-making in terms of policy formulation (Dodd 1969, Lovering & Evren 2011, pp. 1-4).
The High Planning Council includes the president of Turkey and his cabinet of ministers, two Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister of Development, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources, the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Forestry and Water Affairs, the Minister of Transport, and the Minister of Maritime Affairs and Communications. The High Planning Council determine policies regarding the planning of economical, social and cultural development and by doing so regulate annual development programmes before presenting it for the Council of ministers who determine the principles of investment and export incentives; to approve the Mass House administration budget; and to decide on matters that are authorized by legislation and law. Aside from the High Planning Council there are four main actors responsible for the regional development and planning in Turkey, these are the Ministry of Development, the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization, Regional Development Agencies, and Metropolitan Municipalities (Dodd 1969, Lovering & Evren 2011, pp. 1-4).
The regional planning actors in Turkey are presented below in Figure 1 form regional to national level. After the High Planning Council, the Ministry of Development and the Ministry of environmental and Urbanization are prominent actors in regional planning at the national level. The Ministry of Developments responsibility is to prepare strategic plans and the Ministry of Environment and Urbanization is responsible for preparing “spatial” plans at the national level, however, no spatial plans on a national level has yet not been approved (Glasson & Marshall 2007).
Although new regulations made regional planning more important in Turkish planning system, the new planning order has further complicated the planning authorities and the existing planning system. As mentioned above, the regional plan, the spatial strategy plan and the environmental order plan are plans prepend and presented by three different public institutions at the regional level, therefore three different plans are prepend for the same region. Because of the different relationship between the planning units there is a major confusion about the planning hierarchy, were the lack of coordination between different planning authority’s creates conflict of goals and objectives for different plans presented (Dodd 1969, Glasson & Marshall 2007).
21 Based on the occasional planning hierarchy mentioned above, there are Regional plans, Regional spatial strategy plans and Environmental order plans at regional level in the Turkish planning hierarchy, whereupon the relationship between them remains uncertain. Although mentioned in the different laws, regional plans are not fully defined in the planning legislation; therefore the purpose of the regional plans is uncertain and unclear. There are shorter expressions about regional planning in the Zoning Law (No. 3194), which is the basic law on structure and planning. According to this law, regional plans are prepend to determine socio-economical development trends, potential of settlements, distribution activity, and substructure and sector targets.
In addition to the problem presented above, there are other shortcomings for the regional planning in Turkey, where the lack of financial and action implementation is limited in the planning process. From where and how to provide financial resources to for implementation of the regional and environmental plans are not defined which makes it difficult to follow up on planning and check that planning regulations are followed. While there is no implementation in the planning legislation on how to prepare regional plans, the states planning organization presented a regional development plan preparation guide in 2010 (Dodd 1969, Glasson & Marshall 2007).
Figure 1. Regional planning system in Turkey.
22 (NUTS), developed by Euro states in aim to further regulates the preparation of spatial plan, but because of what has been mentioned above, there are limited resources insufficient for one's existing regulations on how regional development should proceed. In addition to international challenges regarding the existing planning hierarchy, there are also external factors that affect the regional planning in Turkey. These factors are the High Planning Council decisions for ”risky” and ”reserve” areas and special purpose plans which affect the regional planning in Turkey (Dodd 1969, Lovering & Evren 2011, pp. 1-4).
High planning council decisions
Central planning authority and the government has for the last twenty years strongly relied on implementation of large-scale urban development projects, especially in metropolitan areas. However, the projects conducted have been poorly integrated into the existing projects (Dodd 1969).
The special power invested in the High Planning Councils decision-making, governments have frozen the regulatory planning tools and bypassed statutory regulations to accelerate and facilitate the realization of larger scale development projects in Turkey. The grounds for the government's efforts in bypassing the existing regulation planning system, depends on a long and difficult planning process that requires a large bureaucratic turnover. To speed up the formalization and implementation process for city projects, the central government bypasses the planning system by having the project approved directly by the High Planning Council. When the government seeks to realize a large-scale urban development project, it directly presents it to the High Planning Council through relevant ministers for approval (Kilic 2009, pp. 1283-1301).
The process is defined in the law No.3996. According to this law, the public institution makes investments and provides technology and major financial services by using the build-operation-transfer (BOT) model. Administration that seeks to make investments and provide service under the BOT model can apply directly to the High Planning Council with a preliminary feasibility study of projects and can further familiarize themselves with such investments and services. After approval, public institutions can sign contracts with private companies. Several major urban projects are implemented through this process (Dodd 1969). However, this law favours the neoliberal housing market development in Turkey. Neoliberal urban development has developed since the 1980s and has been pressured by globalized and national market interests. The central government has under several documented occasions
23 used Special Purpose Plans to accelerate large-scale development plans and is defined in law No.3996. Which gives public institutions the right to make investments and provides technology and major financial services by using the "build-operate-transfer model" (BOT). Private investors that seek to make investments and provide service under the BOT model can apply directly to the High Planning Council for approval. Public institutions can sign contracts with private companies. This model opens up for a neoliberal investment market where projects are approved and implemented without passing the local authority (Erkut & Shirazi 2014, Dodd 1969).
Plans for “Risky” and “Reserve” Areas
The 1999 earthquake had a disastrous effect on the urban environment around the Marmara region. To minimize the negative influence that followed the earthquake, the city came up with developed plans and projects to minimize the negative effects of future earthquakes. But the results were not satisfactory and new regulations were introduced in 2012 known as the Regeneration of Areas under Disaster Risk (No. 6306) or Urban Regeneration Law as it is also called. The basic purpose of the law is to define built and undeveloped areas (Kilic 2009, pp. 1283-1301).
Under this law, the Ministry of Urbanization and Environment is the main responsible for the law being applied correctly to the planning of the city. The law intends to be defined: risky areas, risky buildings and reserve areas. Risky areas are defined as “the areas which may cause loss of life and property due to the properties of the ground or the conditions of the buildings” implementations to be carried out per this law”. The law intends to influence construction in the area, but has limited influence on decisions taken by the government (Eren & Özcevik 2015).
The central government has great decision-making power in determining the character for the city’s development, where the high planning concealment led by the country's president has the ultimate right of decision in the planning. Planning for “Risky” and “Reserve” Areas and Special Purpose Plans can therefore directly be presented and approved directly by the high planning concealment, bypassing the planning’s process, leaving local planning agencies unable to affect the planning in the region (Kilic 2009, pp. 1283-1301)
24
Special Purpose Plans
The third additional factor that influences regional planning in Turkey, in addition to plans for “Risky” and “Reserve” Areas, are planning based on Special Purpose Plans. There are several different laws that give the right to implement and approve plans for different institutions, especially for ministers for special areas (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp. 4-6, Dodd 1969). Examples of existing conservation plans or special purpose plans are Technology Development Area Plan, Tourism Development Plan, Organized Industrial Area Plan and Special Forest Development Plan.
While these plans do not make the existing planning hierarchical system less chaotic, the plans also influence the local authority's exercise of power. The principle is called "smoothing the way for development projects". The problem is evidenced in the national central governmental use of special plans to maintain authority over the use of land (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp. 4-6).
In the initial phase, the function was to plan and protect nature and cultural assets. However, the Central Government has used special plans to accelerate the large-scale development project. The lack of coordination and collaboration between local authorities has come to pave the way for the central government to approve and implement larger urban building projects, which is done through special plans. This creates problems for integration of local government into the planning projects which are conducted without local interference, which makes the planning undemocratic and distanced from the local authority by planning at a national level (Kilic 2009, pp. 1283-1301).
How the challenges of regional planning in Turkey affects the urban development in Istanbul
Istanbul has always been the focal point of the country's development both before and after the founding of the republic. Istanbul can be said to be Turkey's locomotive, as the country's largest city, in terms of size and population and as the epicentre of economic growth, Istanbul is nationally valued. The rapid urbanization creates high demand in the housing market and the availability of functioning infrastructure; which makes the city attractive for major construction projects and private investment. This obviously creates difficulties in planning Istanbul based on the national fragmented planning system and the profit-driven neoliberal real estate market influences the planning process. The questioning of the planning authority is a chronic problem with the planning system in Turkey, where the fragmented legal and
25 national planning system creates unclear planning directives in Istanbul. In many of the city's areas, several institutions are authorized with planning rights, all for one and the same area, which leads to a frequent overlap of national laws and how important the plan is to others (Dodd 1969).
External factors affecting regional and local planning In Istanbul, are the decisions of the High Planning Council whose motive is to integrate Istanbul In the global competition and strengthen the national economy, the central government has come to promote several mega projects in Istanbul. At the same time the big mega project is seen as economic promotion for Istanbul, used as a tool to protect economic development and strengthen the country's competition in the global market. The problem is that most plans are not included in neither regional nor local plans but are decided by the High Planning Council (Dodd 1969, Erkut & Shirazi 2014). This gives space and impetus to the neoliberal housing and land interest that exists in Istanbul, where the rapid urbanization and economic turnover in the city attracts private investors to buy land and build the city.
Green structure in the city
Green structure in the city is an integral part of the urban environment, contributing to the resilience and sustainability in the city. Access to green space can provide health benefits, by improving mental health and physical activity, reduces exposure to heat waves, cleans the air, reduce pollution and benefit the biodiversity within the city, but most of all, green open space within the city can provide protection and resilience for natural disaster stricken city’s (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp. 86, 156–166).
A high coverage impervious surface in urban areas prevents surface water from being absorbed into the ground, which increases the risk of flooding and pollution from heavy rainfall. Green space provides natural filtration for surface water and can improve the cities resilient for flooding, but the strategic open space within the city, may also be used as a recovery zone in case of other natural disasters where people in need of temporary housing or to facilitate crisis management can seek shelter (Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
In continuously growing cities, where the need for development of land and housing creates a conflict of interest between preserving green space and expanding the city, creates a challenge for urban sustainability. The green structure of the city consists of many different types of green areas including parks, gardens, residential gardens, cemeteries, plantings, sport areas,
26 colonial gardens and school gardens etcetera. Although, other areas, such as protection areas for industries, military facilities, railway banks and roads can be viewed as important elements for the green areas representation in the city (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp.86, 156– 166).
Historically green structure in the city originates from the 19th century development ideals of
the modern city. Throughout the history of Western towns and cities, urban green structures within the city traditionally had functions relating to representation of the wellbeing of the neighbourhood or display urban hygiene. In previously fortified cities where converted into public walking places in the 19th century and burial sites located in the city during the 19th has
in our modern time become green belts with great values. In the later periods of the 1900s, the need for children 's playground and the increased interest for outdoor life created a need for accessible green spaces in the city. The importance of parks and green areas in the living quarters came to be linked with public health during the 1970s and 1980s whereupon major investments were made during this time to access green areas within the urban settlements (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp.86, 156–166.).
Ecological significance
Green areas hold significant importance for the ecological sustainability in the city by preserving the city´s microclimate, uphold the city´s biological diversity, strengthen the living standards in the city based on air and the soil remediation and reduce heat waves in the city effectively preventing natural disasters by cooling the air (Swanick & Dunnett 2003, pp. 94-106). Based on the changing climate, it is important to preserve the city's vegetation and green areas in order for the city to adapt to the prevailing climate change, which may become a threat to the city due to the warmer climate. Natural disasters such as floods and tsunamis may occur as a result of a warmer climate (Lovering & Yigit 2011.pp. 1-4)
Green areas reduce the spread of dust and other contaminants in the city, binding carbon dioxide and producing oxygen, which improve the air quality in the urban areas and during warmer periods reduce harmful ground-level ozone. The green areas also effectively reduce heat waves affecting global warming and the city's threats for future floods and tsunamis (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14).
Green structure also affects the temperature of the city by levelling air pressure between the city and the countryside, where the dense urban environment does not have the same air
27 circulation as in less populated areas (Lovering & Yigit 2011.pp. 1-4). Green areas also benefit the city's biodiversity, which in itself benefits the greenery in the green area, and further strengthens the positive effect green spaces have on the quality of life in the city. The disappearance of green spaces in the city threaten species and create disruptions in the natural system which in turn affects the quality of life in the city (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14, Allan & Bryant 2010,pp.2-5).
Cultural significance
Green structure has a cultural function as a carrier of the city's history and identity. It’s important to view the significance of the whole city's development, where green spaces become an important element in understanding the state's building tradition and history, which reflects contemporary ideals, social ambitions and technological development (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14).
In Istanbul the function of green areas have a historical significance of wealth and life standard where building open areas in the city shows the importance of the area. Traditionally the Turkish city has development sporadically, where wealthy citizen has funded public areas as a way to demonstrate their power and significance. A tradition that can be argued occurs in the planning of today in Turkey (Baycan-Levent 2003, pp.2-4, Dodd 1969).
Through understanding the city's different areas, its cultural identity will be reflected in the city’s architectural character, where green structures mark characteristic landmarks in the city and reflect it´s original landscape character. Reconstructing and renovating historically significant buildings in the city can be an expensive issue, but it is usually easier to technically recover dilapidated housing then to recover lost or neglected green areas which is both costly to restore and from a historical and cultural point of view almost impossible to replace (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
Social significant
Green structure in the city can in many cases carry a social significance for the city's resident population through its functions as a social connection point in the hectic city. The area can be used as a communication route between areas within the city, contribute with jogging trails or perform other physically stimulating functions. In parks there can also be social hubs such as cafes, playgrounds and stages, which can be used at music events or other recreational activities (Bolin & Standford 1998).
28 The residential green areas play a major role for the resident’s everyday leisure, where accessibility to green areas fulfils a basic need for residents' health and wellbeing by providing spaces to carry out health promoting outdoor activities. Research shows the correlation between lower stress levels and frequent park visitors, where people who frequently visit green areas exhibit less stress symptoms than people who do not visit park areas as often (Boin & ´t Hart 2007, pp. 23-38). Greenery in the city has been shown by research to be important for suspecting stress-related health problems, which is both socially and economically advantageous. Green areas located in the city centre tend to be used more frequently then a green area outside the city, this is due to time and transport shortages. Green areas must therefore be accessible to all citizens to ensure that people have access to these health-promoting areas (Boin & ´t Hart 2007, pp. 23-38, Bolin & Standford 1998).
Green areas in natural disaster affected cities
Urban green areas such as parks, gardens, green roofs, etcetera, provide the city with important ecosystem services that improve the living conditions within the city, but it also promote physical activity, psychological well being, which in turn strengthen the public health (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14,). Furthermore, green open spaces constitute a latent resource for disaster planning in cities, such as Istanbul, who's geographical location makes it vulnerable to earthquake disasters (Allan & Bryant 2010,pp.2-5).
According to the Tokyo Metropolitan Earthquake Disaster Prevention Plan (1997), large-scale parks in urban environments can serve as a base for refugees and disaster recovery after a major natural disaster has occurred; smaller parks can also serve as disaster protection and disaster resistant activity bases in the event of an extreme natural disaster. Green areas not only fulfil an ecological, cultural and social function in major cities, but can also be used as recovery zones for disaster recovery and as a gathering place for people who have no other place to go after a disaster. In such instances, green areas become havens for the victims and temporary homes for affected people, where they may seek help and protection (Allan & Bryant 2010, pp.4-6, Baris 2010, pp. 1657-1664).
The provision of green spaces within urban areas enhances the quality of life and ensures safety for the residents within the city in case a natural disaster should occur. Green areas can therefore be regarded as an important part of major cities' catastrophe risk reduction through their strategic and close connection to the people of the city, which makes it accessible in the event of a disaster (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp.86, 156–166.).
29 For larger cities, such as Istanbul, with limited open spaces and larger buildings and skyscrapers, a larger disaster such as an earthquake may be the only available safe area in the city, where the soft ground makes the area habitable if housing should be destroyed as a result of the earthquake disaster (Allan & Bryant 2010, pp. 3-6). However, rapid urbanization and explosive population growth in larger cities create a direct threat to the city’s green areas. The growing population creates an urgent need for housing and infrastructure, and green areas located within the city make these unexploited locations attractive for infrastructural development (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14).
Exploitation of green areas located in the city centre contributes to densification of the inner city, which can be a security problem for people living in these areas based on their exposure to natural disasters. The quality and relationship of the cities built environment can create a security problem, where builds that are placed close together give little room for people to seek protection during a disaster (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229, Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139). Sustainable development is a prominent part of the city’s development, however sustainable development should not comprise the improvements of disaster resilience within the city. Lack of consideration has been given to the use of open green space within disaster and hazard proven cities where these strategic open zones provide a primary place for recovery, life support and potential shelter in case of an occurred natural disaster (Jabareen 2012, pp. 220-229). Even more significant for the sustainable development and for disaster risk reduction within urban natural disaster stricken cities is to provide a strategic green environment in the urban area to accommodate its residents a safe zone within the city. The provision of green space is an asset that can minimize the negative impact of climate change and straighten disaster resilience in urban areas. In countries and cities where the risk of earthquakes and other disasters is high, green areas and other larger park areas are constructed in the stand to prevent crisis management for future catastrophes (Barrows 1923, pp.1-14) Tokyo is an example of an earthquake-hit metropolis that has seen the value in green areas in a disaster-stricken metropolis. The need for open spaces and parks in the city became clear during the 1923 earthquake in Kanto. During this time, Tokyo had 35 parks and other open green spaces in the city, of which three park areas coped with minor damage. The parks came to save thousands of people from fires and building collapses following disasters and the areas housed 1.5 million refugees from the earthquake-hit city, which at that time represented 70% of Tokyo's total population. The green function's important function for disaster risk reduction
30 and recovery zones later came to inspire more earthquake parks in Tokyo that were planned to cope with major evacuations and crisis management in the event of an earthquake (Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
Earthquake parks have since been planned in major cities in several countries that are at risk of earthquakes. In the present day, there are larger earthquake parks scattered in Turkey and six larger parks are located in Istanbul's metropolitan; Aykut Barka Earthquake Park, İsfanbul Eğlence ve Yaşam Merkezi, Kandilli Observatory and Earthquake Park, Earthquake Park and PROF. DR. AYKUT BARKA EARTHQUAKE PARK (see Figure 2), which is planned as a recreational area and designed to meet the needs of pre-disaster and post-disaster. Esenler Earthquake Park consists of a baseball pitch, playground, picnic area, recreation area, restrooms and showers. In the event of an earthquake, the area can be converted into a camp area for affected residents. The 19,000-m2 park was created to be used for disaster risk reduction in the city. In close proximity and in the area are also Sahr Hospital, the Administrative Unit (Internet-based Computer Hardware), Heliport, 2 total 2320 m2 tent area (700 people), Storage Area, Kitchen-Dining Hall (1000 people), Laundry - Dishwashers and a water tank.
Since 21.5% of the Turkish population lives in the first degree and 31.4% in second degree earthquake region, the need for effective disaster management and regulations benefitting
Figure 2 Earthquake parks in Istanbul Source: Google Maps 2020-05-01
31 future earthquake disasters is essential to cope with a major earthquake like the one in Izmit 1999, where the earthquake hazard created major limitation in the rescue work due to the ill prepared and ineffective hazard response from the government and non-governmental organisations. The following two weeks the state remained paralysed and had limited presence in the recovery- and rescue response following the disaster. Not only were there a lack of response from the local government to cope with the crisis. There were no existing mechanisms to coordinate the rescuing aid offered by the volunteer groups leaving the rescue response at a hopeless situation, unequipped to meet the needs of thousands of wounded, traumatised and homeless people (Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139). This shows the urgent need for green areas (earthquake parks) with built-in functions to enable larger cities such as Istanbul in the Marmara region to be able to cope with future earthquakes.
This shows that the Turkish government learned a lesson from the 1999 earthquake where greenery became important areas for the post-earthquake recovery efforts to enable the city’s to handle future earthquake disasters. Later that year, the Düzce earthquake also occurred, which took Turkey by surprise during their recovery process from the Izmit earthquake. By investing in earthquake parks, Istanbul and other major cities can increase the resilience of larger cities in Turkey and where these green zones in the city can be used as strategic recovery zones to manage future earthquakes (Jalali 2002, pp. 120-139).
Urban green areas in Istanbul
According to information received from the General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks there are twenty-five nature parks existing in Istanbul and is classified bicycle, picnic, sporting, wildlife, festivals, fishing and swimming (Colding & Barthel 2013, pp.86, 156–166). Anatolian Side: nine parks are located on the Anatolian and cover 3780 hectares; Avcikoru Nature Park, Buyukada Nature Park, Degirmenburnu Nature Park, Dilburnu Nature Park, Elmasburnu Nature Park, Goztepe Nature Park, Hacet Deresi Nature Park, Mihrabat Nature Park, Polonezkoy Nature Park (see Figure 3). On the Europe side there are Marmaracik Nature Park, Mehmet Akif Ersoy Nature Park, Neset Suyu Nature Park, Orman Nature Park, Samlar Nature Park,Turkmenbasi Nature Park (see Figure 4).
In Istanbul, there are twenty parks (see Figure 5) centralized in the city centre, but only nine of these are public parks and gardens; Emirgan Park, Fethi Paşa Korusu, Gülhane Park, Miniatürk, Yıldız Park, Taksim Gezi Park, Yoğurtçu Park, Kadıköy, Abbasağa Park, Beşiktaş (Google Maps 2020/05-01). According to Istanbul branch president for the Ministry of public
