SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Bilim Teknoloji ve Tasarım Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2

Community Participation for Urban Resilience: Contributions of Non-Governmentel Organizations in Bursa to Urban Design Processes

Kentsel Dirençlilik İçin Topluluk Katılımı: Bursa’daki Sivil Toplum Kuruluşlarının Kentsel Tasarım Süreçlerindeki Etkinliğinin Değerlendirilmesi

Merve Çetin(BURSA ULUDAĞ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MİMARLIK FAKÜLTESİ)0009-0005-6119-6830
Sibel Polat(BURSA ULUDAĞ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, MİMARLIK FAKÜLTESİ, MİMARLIK BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0003-4380-0457
Pages
94–121
Publication Date
2026-08-07
DOI
—
🏛️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 study reveals that understanding the role of NGOs in decision-making processes is critical for building resilient and sustainable cities.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Recent studies reveal that the cooperation between local governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Turkey is weak, that NGOs cannot play effective roles in urban design, and that participatory processes need to be improved in resilient urban design.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study evaluates the role of NGOs in improving participatory processes in urban planning and design decision-making in Bursa.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study reveals that understanding the role of NGOs in decision-making processes is critical for building resilient and sustainable cities.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kentsel Dirençlilik · Topluluk Katılımı · Kentsel Planlama ve Tasarımda Katılım

Abstract

Recent studies reveal that the cooperation between local governments and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Turkey is weak, that NGOs cannot play effective roles in urban design, and that participatory processes need to be improved in resilient urban design. This study evaluates the role of NGOs in improving participatory processes in urban planning and design decision-making in Bursa. The research method is based on a literature review, case studies and interviews with representatives of academic chambers, city councils and unions involved in urban planning and design processes in Bursa. The findings show that NGOs face legal, administrative, political, social and financial problems in participatory processes and that this situation negatively affects the holistic success and sustainability of projects. In the case of Bursa, factors such as the inability to effectively involve stakeholders in the process and the inadequacy of participation mechanisms lead to the inability to develop projects based on community participation. This situation weakens the motivation of social organisation and reduces citizens' interest in participation. The study reveals that understanding the role of NGOs in decision-making processes is critical for building resilient and sustainable cities.

Özet

Son yıllarda yapılan araştırmalar, Türkiye'de yerel yönetimler ile sivil toplum kuruluşları (STK) arasındaki iş birliğinin zayıf olduğunu, STK’ların kentsel tasarımda etkin roller üstlenemediğini ve dirençli kent tasarımında katılımcı süreçlerin geliştirilmesi gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışma, Bursa’da kentsel planlama ve tasarım kararlarının alınmasında katılımcı süreçleri iyileştirmek amacıyla STK’ların rolünü değerlendirmektedir. Araştırma yöntemi; literatür taraması, örnek analizleri ve Bursa’da kentsel planlama ve tasarım süreçlerine dahil olan akademik odalar, kent konseyleri ve birlik temsilcileriyle yapılan görüşmeler üzerinden kurgulanmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, STK’ların katılımcı süreçlerde yasal, yönetsel, siyasal, sosyal ve finansal sorunlarla karşılaştığını ve bu durumun projelerin bütüncül başarısını ve sürdürülebilirliğini olumsuz etkilediğini göstermektedir. Bursa özelinde, paydaşların sürece etkin şekilde dahil edilememesi ve katılım mekanizmalarının yetersizliği gibi faktörler, topluluk katılımına dayalı projelerin geliştirilememesine yol açmaktadır. Bu durum, toplumsal örgütlenmenin motivasyonunu zayıflatarak vatandaşların katılıma olan ilgisini azaltmaktadır. Çalışma, STK’ların karar alma süreçlerindeki rollerini anlamanın, dirençli ve sürdürülebilir kentler inşa etmek için kritik öneme sahip olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çetin, M., Polat, S. (2026). Community Participation for Urban Resilience: Contributions of Non-Governmentel Organizations in Bursa to Urban Design Processes. Uluslararası Bilim Teknoloji ve Tasarım Dergisi, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 94–121. https://ajindex.com/articles/1623180

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (42)

  1. Wamsler, C., Cities, Disaster Risk and Adaptation, 352, Routledge, London, (2014).
  2. Jarvie, J. ve Friend, R., Urbanization, Inclusion, and Social Justice, in State of the World, 343-353, (2016). doi: 10.5822/978-1-61091-756-8_29.
  3. Gacic, J., The Strength of Resilient Cities and Their Challenges, (2022). https://esa.un.org
  4. UN-HABITAT, World Cities Report 2024 - Cities and Climate Action, (2024).
  5. Ribeiro, P. J. G. ve Gonçalves, L. A. P. J., Urban resilience: A conceptual framework, Sustainable Cities and Society, 50, 101625, (2019). doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2019.101625.
  6. Bruneau, M. vd., A Framework to Quantitatively Assess and Enhance the Seismic Resilience of Communities, Earthquake Spectra, 19, 4, 733-752, (2003). doi: 10.1193/1.1623497.
  7. Nop, S. ve Thornton, A., Community participation in contemporary urban planning in Cambodia: The examples of Khmuonh and Kouk Roka neighbourhoods in Phnom Penh, Cities, 103, 102770, (2020). doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2020.102770.
  8. Rachman, S., The concept of required helpfulness, Behaviour Research and Therapy, 17, 1, 1-6, (1979). doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(79)90044-5.
  9. Kirby, N., Stasiak, D. ve von Schneidemesser, D., Community resilience through bottom-up participation: When civil society drives urban transformation processes, Community Development Journal, (2024). doi: 10.1093/cdj/bsae031.
  10. Sanoff, H., Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning, 306, John Wiley & Sons, New York, (2000).
  11. Lydon, M. ve Garcia, A., Tactical Urbanism: Short-Term Action for Long-Term Change, 231, Island Press, Washington, DC, (2015). doi: 10.5822/978-1-61091-567-0.
  12. Friedmann, J., Insurgencies: Essays in Planning Theory, 255, Routledge, London, (2011). doi: 10.4324/9780203832110.
  13. Gehl, J., Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space, Island Press, Washington, DC, (2011).
  14. Hou, J. ve Rios, M., Community-Driven Place Making: The Social Practice of Participatory Design in the Making of Union Point Park, Journal of Architectural Education, 57, 1, 19-27, (2003).
  15. Innes, J. E. ve Booher, D. E., Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century, Planning Theory & Practice, 5, 4, 419-436, (2004). doi: 10.1080/1464935042000293170.
  16. Smith, G., Deliberative Democracy and the Environment, Routledge, Taylor & Francis e-Library, (2003). https://www.routledge.com/Deliberative-Democracy-and-the-Environment/Smith/p/book/9780415309400, (17.01.2025).
  17. IAP2, International Association for Public Participation Statement on Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, https://www.iap2.org/page/IAP2-DEI-English, (31.12.2024).
  18. Fiorino, D. J., Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk: A Survey of Institutional Mechanisms, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 15, 2, 226-243, (1990). https://about.jstor.org/terms, (17.01.2025).
  19. Carrick, J., Bell, D., Fitzsimmons, C., Gray, T. ve Stewart, G., Principles and practical criteria for effective participatory environmental planning and decision-making, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 66, 14, 2854-2877, (2023). doi: 10.1080/09640568.2022.2086857.
  20. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK), https://www.tuik.gov.tr/, (05.01.2025).
  21. Kahne, J. ve Middaugh, E., Digital Media Shapes Youth Participation in Politics, Phi Delta Kappan, 94, 3, 52-56, (2012).
  22. OECD, Regional, rural and urban development, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/regional-rural-and-urban-development.html, (03.03.2026).
  23. TEPAV, Yönetişim ve Katılım: Etkili Katılım için Araçlar, Yöntemler, Mekanizmalar, (2014).
  24. TACSO, Forrester, S. ve Sunar, İ., STK’lar ve Sivil Katılım, (2011). https://www.stgm.org.tr/sites/default/files/2020-09/stklar-ve-sivil-katilim.pdf, (30.12.2024).
  25. T.C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı, On Birinci Kalkınma Planı (2019-2023), Ankara, (2018). https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/KalkinmaSurecindeSivilToplumKuruluslariOzelIhtisasKomisyonuRaporu.pdf, (26.12.2024).
  26. Özdamar, E. ve Önay, E., An Overview of Transdisciplinary and Bottom-up Approach for Urban Resilience: The Case of Turkey, Environmental Science & Sustainable Development, 9, 3, 01-16, (2024). doi: 10.21625/essd.v9i3.1093.
  27. Eroğlu, E., Taş, S. ve Dev, M. A., Dirençli Kent Tasarımında Katılımcılık: Türkiye’de Belediyeler ve STK’lar Arasındaki Paydaşlık İlişkisinin İncelenmesi, International Journal of Social Inquiry, 16, 1, 297-313, (2023). doi: 10.37093/ijsi.1210342.
  28. Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları ile Kamu Sektörü İlişkileri: Sorunlar-Beklentiler, (2013).
  29. Dayanan Uğur, İ. ve A. Saylık, Nitel Verilerin Analizinde Kavram Bunalımı: Teorik Bir Çözümleme, Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16, 1, 299-316, (2025). doi: 10.54558/JISS.1478526.
  30. Braun, V. ve Clarke, V., Using thematic analysis in psychology, Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 2, 77-101, (2006). doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
  31. European Committee of the Regions, CoR - Spain intro, https://portal.cor.europa.eu/divisionpowers/Pages/Spain-intro.aspx, (14.05.2026).
  32. IAAC, Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia, https://iaac.net/, (15.01.2025).
  33. BMI, Federalism and Local Government, https://www.bmi.bund.de/EN/topics/constitution/state-order/federalism-local-government/federalism-local-government-node.html, (14.05.2026).
  34. Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik, Partner bei der Lösung kommunaler Aufgaben, https://difu.de/, (15.01.2025).
  35. Mistra Urban Futures, Mistra Urban Futures, https://www.mistraurbanfutures.org/en, (14.05.2026).
  36. Mistra Urban Futures, About Mistra Urban Futures, https://www.mistraurbanfutures.org/en/about-us/about-mistra-urban-futures, (17.01.2025).
  37. 2020 Yılı Mahalli İdareler Genel Faaliyet Raporu, (2020).
  38. T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı, Yerel Gündem 21, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/yerel-gundem-21.tr.mfa, (19.01.2025).
  39. Mahajan, S., Hausladen, C. I., Argota Sánchez-Vaquerizo, J., Korecki, M. ve Helbing, D., Participatory resilience: Surviving, recovering and improving together, Sustainable Cities and Society, 83, 103942, (2022). doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.103942.
  40. Ianniello, M., Iacuzzi, S., Fedele, P. ve Brusati, L., Obstacles and solutions on the ladder of citizen participation: A systematic review, Public Management Review, 21, 1, 21-46, (2019). doi: 10.1080/14719037.2018.1438499.
  41. Ramos, A. C., Pérez, L. C. ve Nebot, C. P., Participación ciudadana: De la participación en la gestión a la gestión de la participación, Política y Sociedad, (2017). doi: 10.5209/POSO.49980.
  42. Tyler, N., Practical Experience of Public Participation: Evidence from Methodological Experiments, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 16, 3, 253-270, (2003). doi: 10.1080/1351161032000126053.