SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Social Inquiry / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1

Participation in Resilient Cities: Evaluation of Stakeholder Relationship Between Municipalities and NGOs in Türkiye

Dirençli Kent Tasarımında Katılımcılık: Türkiye'de Belediyeler ve STK'lar Arasındaki Paydaşlık İlişkisinin İncelenmesi

Erdal Eroğlu(Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Biga İİBF Fakültesi Maliye Bölümü)0000-0002-5359-2420
Semra Taş(ÇANAKKALE ONSEKİZ MART ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BİGA İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-8727-9072
Mine Aydemir Dev(Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi)0000-0003-3276-8148
Pages
297–313
Publication Date
2023-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The most important finding of the study is that the stakeholder relationship between municipalities and NGOs in Türkiye is weak in terms of participation in decision-making processes and that participation should be given importance in resilient urban design.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Acting in partnership with the city's stakeholders in combating all the problems that may arise in a city in physical, environmental, social and economic terms can make the city more resilient and transform it into a city where all stakeholders can feel more secure.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this context, a total of 800 data were collected for the NGO sample and 552 data were collected for the municipality sample.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The most important finding of the study is that the stakeholder relationship between municipalities and NGOs in Türkiye is weak in terms of participation in decision-making processes and that participation should be given importance in resilient urban design.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:dirençli kentler · paydaşlık ilişkisi · katılımcılık

Abstract

Acting in partnership with the city's stakeholders in combating all the problems that may arise in a city in physical, environmental, social and economic terms can make the city more resilient and transform it into a city where all stakeholders can feel more secure. This is possible first and foremost through the adoption of a participatory model in municipalities and a management approach that attaches importance to stakeholder participation. This study focuses on the current state of the participation relationship between municipalities and NGOs, which are important stakeholders of municipalities in resilient city design. The aim of the study is to evaluate the participation relationship between municipalities and NGOs in Türkiye. The quantitative method was adopted in the study. In this context, a total of 800 data were collected for the NGO sample and 552 data were collected for the municipality sample. The most important finding of the study is that the stakeholder relationship between municipalities and NGOs in Türkiye is weak in terms of participation in decision-making processes and that participation should be given importance in resilient urban design.

Özet

Bir kentte fiziksel, çevresel, sosyal ve ekonomik anlamda ortaya çıkabilecek tüm sorunlarla mücadelede kentin paydaşları ile ortaklaşa hareket edilmesi, kenti daha dirençli hale getirebileceği gibi tüm paydaşları kendilerini daha güvende hissedebilecekleri bir kente dönüştürecektir. Bu durum her şeyden önce belediyelerde katılımcı bir modelin benimsenmesi ve paydaş katılımına önem veren bir yönetim anlayışıyla mümkündür. Bu çalışmada dirençli kent tasarımında belediyelerin önemli bir paydaşı olan STK’larla olan katılımcılık ilişkisinin mevcut durumuna odaklanılmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı Türkiye’de belediyeler ile STK’lar arasındaki katılımcılık ilişkisini değerlendirmektir. Çalışmada nicel yöntem benimsenmiştir. Bu kapsamda toplam 800 veri STK örneklemi ve 552 veri Belediye örneklemi için anket toplanmıştır. Çalışmada elde edilen en önemli bulgu karar alma süreçlerine katılımcılık konusunda Türkiye’de belediyeler ile STK’lar arasındaki paydaşlık ilişkisinin zayıf olduğu ve dirençli kent tasarımında katılımcılık ilişkisine önem verilmesi gerektiği yönündedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Eroğlu, E., Taş, S., Dev, M. A. (2023). Participation in Resilient Cities: Evaluation of Stakeholder Relationship Between Municipalities and NGOs in Türkiye. International Journal of Social Inquiry, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1, 297–313. https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.1210342

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (50)

  1. Başaran, İ. (2008). Kent ve yerel yönetim. Okutan Yayıncılık.
  2. Berner, M. (2003). Current practices for involving citizens in local government budgeting: Moving beyond method. Public Administration Quarterly, 27(4), 410-432.
  3. Bush, J., & Doyon, A. (2019). Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: How can urban planning contribute? Cities, 95, 102483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102483
  4. Callahan, K. (2007). Citizen participation: Models and methods. International Journal of Public Administration, 30(11), 1179–1196. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690701225366
  5. Cattivelli, V., & Rusciano, V. (2020). Social innovation and food provisioning during COVID-19: The case of urban–rural initiatives in the province of Naples. Sustainability, 12(11), 4444. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114444
  6. Carter, J. G., Cavan, G., Connelly, A., Guy, S., Handley, J., & Kazmierczak, A. (2015). Climate change and the city: Building capacity for urban adaptation. Progress in Planning, 95, 1–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2013.08.001
  7. Chirenje, L. I., Giliba, R. A., & Musamba, E. B. (2013). Local communities’ participation in decision-making processes through planning and budgeting in African countries. Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 11(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10042857.2013.777198
  8. Coaffee, J., Therrien, M. C., Chelleri, L., Henstra, D., Aldrich, D. P., Mitchell, C. L., Tsenkova, S., & Rigaud, R. (2018). Urban resilience implementation: A policy challenge and research agenda for the 21st century. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(3), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12233
  9. Cretney, R. (2014). Resilience for whom? Emerging critical geographies of socio-ecological resilience. Geography Compass, 8(9), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12154
  10. Çın, S. (2015). Yönetişim sürecinde sivil toplum kuruluşları. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi, 50(1), 16–30.
  11. Çiriş, S. (2017). Kentsel planlamada paradigma değişiminin bir ürünü: "Dirençli Ulaştırma" ve İstanbul kenti üzerine inceleme: Giriş. 12. Ulaştırma Kongresi (Ulaştırma Politikaları) Bildiriler Kitabı içinde (ss. 147–156). https://www.imo.org.tr/resimler/ekutuphane/pdf/18001_41_29.pdf
  12. Cloete, C. E. (2012). Assessing urban resilience. WIT Transactions on Information and Communication Technologies, 44(11), 341–351. https://doi.org/10.2495/risk120291
  13. Derici, N. (2020). Civil society, governance and development. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 25(97), 227–248. https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.679412
  14. Desouza, K. C., & Flanery, T. H. (2013). Designing, planning, and managing resilient cities: A conceptual framework. Cities, 35, 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.06.003
  15. Devas, N., & Grant, U. (2003). Local government decision-making—citizen participation and local accountability: Some evidence from Kenya and Uganda. Public Administration and Development, 23(4), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.281
  16. Eren, Ş. G. (2019). Tokyo: Solaris - Güneş İmparatorluğu’nun dirençli, kırılgan ve tehlikeli kenti. İdealkent, 10(28), 907–941. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.635099
  17. Ergen, Z. (2012). Yönetimden yönetişime: Katılımcı bütçeleme modeli. Maliye Dergisi, (163), 316–334.
  18. European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Manca, A. R., Benczur, P., & Giovannini, E. (2017). Building a scientific narrative towards a more resilient EU society (JRC Science for Policy Report). European Union. https://dx.doi.org/10.2760/635528
  19. Godschalk, D. R. (2003). Urban hazard mitigation: Creating resilient cities. Natural Hazards Review, 4(3), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)1527-6988(2003)4:3(136)
  20. Gönüllü, C. (2020). “STK-Belediye-Yönetişim Ekseninde” birbirlerinin gözünden aktörler: Burdur ili örneği. Emek ve Toplum, 9(23), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.31199/hakisderg.686028
  21. Hayta, Y. (2016). Kent kültürü ve değişen kent kavramı. Bitlis Eren Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 165–184. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/bitlissos/issue/45113/563898
  22. Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245
  23. Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2004). Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(4), 419–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935042000293170
  24. Jabareen, Y. (2013). Planning the resilient city: Concepts and strategies for coping with climate change and environmental risk. Cities, 31, 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.05.004
  25. Kafa, C., & Ataay, F. (2008). Yönetişim: Devlet-Toplum ilişkilerinde yeni bir aşama. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(3), 229–240. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cusosbil/issue/4380/60078
  26. Kavanoz, S. (2020). “Kentsel Direnç” kavramı üzerine. Kent ve Çevre Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 5–24. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/yykentcevre/issue/55330/733459
  27. Kaypak, A. (2012). Yerel yönetimlerde katılımcı/müzakereci demokrasi sürecinde sivil toplum kuruluşlarının önemi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi-International Journal of Management Economics and Business, 8(17). https://doi.org/10.11122/ijmeb.2012.8.17.72
  28. Keyman, F. (2004). Sivil toplum, sivil toplum kuruluşları ve Türkiye (Konferans Yazıları No. 4). Sivil Toplum ve Demokrasi Konferans Yazıları. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi. https://stk.bilgi.edu.tr/media/uploads/2015/02/01/keyman_std_4.pdf
  29. Kim, D., & Lim, U. (2016). Urban resilience in climate change adaptation: A conceptual framework. Sustainability, 8(4), 405. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040405
  30. Kooiman, J. (1999). Social-political governance. Public Management: An International Journal of Research and Theory, 1(1), 67–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037800000005
  31. King, C. S., Feltey, K. M., & Susel, B. O. (1998). the question of participation: Toward authentic public participation in public administration. Public Administration Review, 58(4), 317. https://doi.org/10.2307/977561
  32. Krellenberg, K., Koch, F., & Kabisch, S. (2016). Urban sustainability transformations in lights of resource efficiency and resilient city concepts. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 22, 51–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.04.001
  33. Lister, R. (1998). Citizen in action: Citizenship and community development in a Northern Ireland context. Community Development Journal, 33(3), 226–235. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/33.3.226
  34. Meerow, S., Newell, J. P., & Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 147, 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011
  35. Mirti Chand, A. V. (2018). Place Based Approach to plan for Resilient Cities: A local government perspective. Procedia Engineering, 212, 157–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2018.01.021
  36. Payam, M. M. (2019). Dirençli kentlerde belediyelerin suç önlemedeki rolüne yeni bir bakış. İdealkent, 10(28), 1022–1049. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.634237
  37. Røiseland, A., & Vabo, S. I. (2016). Interactive or counteractive governance? Lessons learned about citizen participation and political leadership. In J. Edelenbos & I. van Meerkerk (Eds.), Critical reflections on interactive governance (pp. 120-145). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  38. Ruige, A., Üskent, S., & Micka, P. (2014). Yönetişim ve katılım: Etkili katılım için araçlar yöntemler mekanizmalar (Katılımcılık Rehberleri No. 1/4). İçişleri Bakanlığı Mahalli İdareler Genel Müdürlüğü, Stratejik Yerel Yönetişim Projesi. Başak Matbaası.
  39. Schauppenlehner-Kloyber, E., & Penker, M. (2016). Between participation and collective action—from occasional liaisons towards long-term co-management for urban resilience. Sustainability, 8(7), 664. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070664
  40. Sharifi, A., & Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Science of the Total Environment, 749, 142391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142391
  41. Spaans, M., & Waterhout, B. (2017). Building up resilience in cities worldwide – Rotterdam as participant in the 100 Resilient Cities Programme. Cities, 61, 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.05.011
  42. Stoker, G. (1998). Governance as theory: Five propositions. International Social Science Journal, 50(155), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12189
  43. Tang, J., & Heinimann, H. R. (2018). A resilience-oriented approach for quantitatively assessing recurrent spatial-temporal congestion on urban roads. PLoS ONE, 13(1), e0190616. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190616
  44. Tuğaç, Ç. (2019). Kentsel dirençlilik perspektifinden yerel yönetimlerin görevleri ve sorumlulukları. İdealkent, 10(28), 984–1019. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.634144
  45. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction [UNISDR]. (2010). Making cities resilient: My city is getting ready. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/14043
  46. Wu, C., Cenci, J., Wang, W., & Zhang, J. (2022). Resilient city: Characterization, challenges and outlooks. Buildings, 12(5), 516. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12050516
  47. Yeşildağ, A. (2020). Sivil toplum ve yerel yönetimlerde katılım: Yönetişim temelli bir yaklaşım. Sosyal Bilimler Metinleri, 2, 31–44. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/sbm/issue/59557/825447
  48. Zhu, S., Li, D., & Feng, H. (2019). Is smart city resilient? Evidence from China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 50, 101636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101636
  49. Zhu, S., Li, D., Feng, H., Gu, T., Hewage, K., & Sadiq, R. (2020). Smart city and resilient city: Differences and connections. WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 10(6). https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1388
  50. Ergen, Z. (2012). Yönetimden yönetişime: Katılımcı bütçeleme modeli. Maliye Dergisi, (163), 316–334.