SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ege Mimarlık / 2025 / Sayı: 128

Depreme Dayanıklı Kentler Bağlamında Ulaşım Ağlarının Kritik Rolü: Farklı Ülkelerin Ulaşım Stratejilerinden Deneyimler ve Çıkarımlar

Şevval Kasap(YILDIZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Cenk Hamamcıoğlu(YILDIZ TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Pages
56–67
Publication Date
2025-09-23
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)

Çalışma, depreme dayanıklılık, ulaşım ağları ve dayanıklı kent kavramları çerçevesinde ulaşım ağlarının depremlerdeki temel rolünü ve planlama ilkelerini dünyada depremlere sıkça maruz kalan ülke örnekleriyle ortaya koyarak Türkiye’nin ulaşım ağlarına yönelik stratejiler sunmaktadır.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Deprem, küresel ölçekte insan yerleşmelerini tehdit eden ve çok boyutlu problem olarak karşımıza çıkan bir olgudur.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Depreme dayanıklı kentlerin planlaması vazgeçilmez bir gereklilik haline gelmiş ve dayanıklılığın sağlanmasında ulaşım ağları ana odak noktalarından biri olmuştur.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Çalışma, depreme dayanıklılık, ulaşım ağları ve dayanıklı kent kavramları çerçevesinde ulaşım ağlarının depremlerdeki temel rolünü ve planlama ilkelerini dünyada depremlere sıkça maruz kalan ülke örnekleriyle ortaya koyarak Türkiye’nin ulaşım ağlarına yönelik stratejiler sunmaktadır.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:dayanıklı kent · afet yönetimi · depreme dayanıklı ulaşım ağı

Özet

Deprem, küresel ölçekte insan yerleşmelerini tehdit eden ve çok boyutlu problem olarak karşımıza çıkan bir olgudur. Depreme dayanıklı kentlerin planlaması vazgeçilmez bir gereklilik haline gelmiş ve dayanıklılığın sağlanmasında ulaşım ağları ana odak noktalarından biri olmuştur. Bu makale, depreme dayanıklı kentlerin planlamasında ulaşım ağlarının kritik rolünü vurgulamaktadır. Çalışma, depreme dayanıklılık, ulaşım ağları ve dayanıklı kent kavramları çerçevesinde ulaşım ağlarının depremlerdeki temel rolünü ve planlama ilkelerini dünyada depremlere sıkça maruz kalan ülke örnekleriyle ortaya koyarak Türkiye’nin ulaşım ağlarına yönelik stratejiler sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kasap, Ş., Hamamcıoğlu, C. (2025). Depreme Dayanıklı Kentler Bağlamında Ulaşım Ağlarının Kritik Rolü: Farklı Ülkelerin Ulaşım Stratejilerinden Deneyimler ve Çıkarımlar. Ege Mimarlık, Sayı: 128, 56–67. https://ajindex.com/articles/1644968

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (72)

  1. AFAD. (2013). Ulusal Deprem Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı (2012-2023). TC Başbakanlık, Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı. Ankara.
  2. AFAD. (2022). Türkiye Afet Müdahale Planı (TAMP). T.C. İçişleri Bakanlığı Afet ve Acil Durum Yönetimi Başkanlığı. Erişim Tarihi 27 Haziran 2025, https://www.afad.gov.tr/kurumlar/afad.gov.tr/e_Kutuphane/Planlar/TAMP.pdf
  3. Ağın Gözükızıl, C. ve Tezcan, S. (2023). Cumhuriyet’in Yüzüncü Yılında Türkiye’de Afetler: 06 Şubat 2023 Kahramanmaraş Depremi. Kent Akademisi, 16 (Türkiye Cumhuriyetinin 100. Yılı Özel Sayısı | Special Issue for the 100th Anniversary of the Republic of Türkiye), 97-114.
  4. Anadolu Ajansı. (2022, 30 Ekim). İzmir’i sarsan depremin üzerinden iki yıl geçti. NTV. Erişim tarihi 3 Haziran 2025, https://www.ntv.com.tr/galeri/turkiye/izmiri-sarsan-depremin-uzerinden-iki-yil-gecti,UkrNmn7zgk2vjuz74RC8Lg/ax-BEB2bDEeRlsZSmkapww
  5. Astarita, V., Festa, D. C., Giofrè, V. P., Guido, G. ve Stefano, G. (2018). Mobile for emergencies M4EM: a cooperative software tool for emergency management operations. Procedia Computer Science, 134, 433-438.
  6. Bahadur, A. V. ve Thornton, H. (2015). Analysing urban resilience: a reality check for a fledgling canon. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 7(2), 196-212.
  7. Byun, J. E. ve D’Ayala, D. (2022). Urban seismic resilience mapping: A transportation network in Istanbul, Turkey. Scientific Reports, 12, 8188, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-11991-2
  8. California State Transportation Agency. (2021). California Emergency Support Function 1, Transportation, Annex to the California State Emergency Plan. State of California, Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Preparedness/Documents/01-CA-ESF-Transportation-Annex.pdf
  9. Campanella, T. J. (2006). Urban resilience and the recovery of New Orleans. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(2), 141-146.
  10. Cantillo, V., Macea, L. F. ve Jaller, M. (2019). Assessing Vulnerability of Transportation Networks for Disaster Response Operations. Networks and Spatial Economics, 19, 243-273.
  11. Chadha, R. K. (2022). Living Safely with Earthquakes in Asia. A. Unnikrishnan, F. Tangang, R. J. Durrheim (Ed.) Extreme Natural Events: Sustainable Solutions for Developing Countries içinde, (ss. 361-379). Singapore: Springer.
  12. Chai, J. ve Wu, H. Z. (2023). Prevention/mitigation of natural disasters in urban areas. Smart Construction and Sustainable Cities, 1, 4.
  13. Chang, S. E., Mcdaniels, T., Fox, J., Dhariwal, R. ve Longstaff, H. (2014). Toward disaster-resilient cities: Characterizing resilience of infrastructure systems with expert judgments. Risk Analysis, 34(3), 416-434.
  14. CRED ve UNDRR. (2020). The human cost of disasters: An overview of the last 20 years (2000-2019) UNDRR Publications. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/74124_humancostofdisasters20002019reportu.pdf
  15. Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı. (2023). On İkinci Kalkınma Planı (2024-2028). https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/On-Ikinci-Kalkinma-Plani_2024-2028_11122023.pdf
  16. Çepni, E. Z. (2023). Identification of gaps in the interface between spatial planning decisions and construction practice of built-up areas in the scope of seismic resilient cities: Case of Kahramanmaraş. [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi.
  17. Çınar, A. K., Ekici, Y. ve Baysan, N. (2021). 30 Ekim 2020 Ege Denizi depreminin düşündürdükleri. Journal of Planning, 31(1), 4-11.
  18. Das, P., Rahnamay-Naeini, M., Ghani, N. ve Hayat, M. M. (2017). On the vulnerability of multi-level communication network under catastrophic events. 2017 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), 912-916. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE). Silicon Valley, CA.
  19. Debnath, P., Karmakar, M., Khan, M. T., Khan, M. A., Sayeed, A. Al, Rahman, A. ve Sumon, M. F. I. (2024). Seismic activity analysis in California: Patterns, trends, and predictive modeling. Journal of Computer Science and Technology Studies, 6(5), 50-60.
  20. Denge ve Denetleme Ağı. (2023, 7 Mart). Depremlere karşı kırılganlıkta denge ve denetleme sisteminin etkisi: Türkiye, Şili ve Japonya örnekleri. Analiz Raporu 18. Denge ve Denetleme Ağı. https://www.dengedenetleme.org/dosyalar/file/Depremlere%20Kar%C5%9F%C4%B1%20K%C4%B1r%C4%B1lganl%C4%B1kta%20Denge%20ve%20Denetleme%20Sisteminin%20Etkisi%20T%C3%BCrkiye%20%C5%9Eili%20ve%20Japonya%20%C3%96rnekleri.pdf
  21. Directory of the Region of Central Greece. (2022). Civil Protection planning and actions to deal with risks from the occurrence of seismic phenomena. Independent Civil Protection Directorate. https://pste.gov.gr/en/home/odigies-genikis-grammateias-politikis-prostasias-2/#tab-id-2
  22. Donnellan, A., Arrowsmith, R., Delong, S. (2017). Spatio-temporal mapping of plate boundary faults in California using geodetic ımaging. Geosciences, 7(1), 15.
  23. Duan, M., Wu, D., Dong, B. ve Zhang, L. (2016). Quantitatively measuring transportation network resilience under earthquake uncertainty and risks. American Journal of Civil Engineering, 4(4), 174-184.
  24. Duramy, B. F. (2011). Women in the aftermath of the 2010 Haitian earthquake. Emory International Law Review, 25(3), 1193-1215.
  25. Ergünay, O. (2007). Türkiye’nin afet profili. TMMOB Afet Sempozyumu (5-7 Aralık, 2007) Bildiriler Kitabı içinde, (ss. 1-14). Ankara: TMMOB İnşaat Mühendisleri Odası. https://www.tmmob.org.tr/sites/default/files/afet_sempozyumu_2007.pdf
  26. Erkal, T. ve Değerliyurt, M. (2009). Türkiye’de afet yönetimi. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 14(22), 147-164.
  27. Feng, K., Wang, C. ve Li, Q. (2024). Evaluating the role of transportation system in community seismic resilience. Resilient Cities and Structures, 3(3), 65-78.
  28. Freckleton, D., Heaslip, K., Louisell, W. ve Collura, J. (2012). Evaluation of resiliency of transportation networks after disasters. Transportation Research Record, 2284(1), 109-116.
  29. Ganin, A. A., Mersky, A. C., Jin, A. S., Kitsak, M., Keisler, J. M. ve Linkov, I. (2019). Resilience in Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 100, 318-329.
  30. Godschalk, D. R. (2003). Urban hazard mitigation: Creating resilient cities. Natural Hazards Review, 4(3), 136-143.
  31. Halicioglu, K. ve Ozener, H. (2008). Geodetic network design and optimization on the active Tuzla fault (Izmir, Turkey) for disaster management. Sensors, 8(8), 4742-4757.
  32. Jones, K., Pascale, F., Wanigarathna, N., Morga, M. ve Sargin, S. (2021). Critical evaluation of the customisation process of the UNDRR disaster resilience scorecard for cities to earthquake-induced soil liquefaction disaster events. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 19, 4115-4143.
  33. Kong, Q., Martin-Short, R. ve Allen, R. M. (2019). Toward Global Earthquake Early Warning with the MyShake Smartphone Seismic Network, Part 2: Understanding MyShake Performance around the World. Seismological Research Letters, 91(4), 2218-2233.
  34. Korkmazyürek, B., Kahraman, S. ve Polat, E. (2025). Earthquake-resilient housing setback distances and open road networks for sustainable urbanization: A case study in Elbistan (Türkiye). Sustainability, 17(3), 1254.
  35. Kurtulmuş, T. Ö., Yerlikaya–Özkurt, F. ve Askan, A. (2024). Modeling of kappa factor using multivariate adaptive regression splines: application to the western Türkiye ground motion dataset. Natural Hazards, 120, 7817-7844.
  36. Lankao, P. R. ve Qin, H. (2011). Conceptualizing urban vulnerability to global climate and environmental change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3), 142-149.
  37. Lamond, J. E. ve Proverbs, D. G. (2009). Resilience to flooding: Lessons from international comparison. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Urban design and planning, 162(2), 63-70.
  38. Lee, C. C., Rajput, A. A., Hsu, C. W., Fan, C., Yuan, vd. (2022). Quantitative measures for integrating resilience into transportation planning practice: Study in Texas. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 113, 103496.
  39. Li, X. ve Tan, Q. (2013). Vehicle scheduling schemes for commercial and emergency logistics integration. PLoS ONE, 8(12), e82866.
  40. Liao, T. Y., Hu, T. Y. ve Ko, Y. N. (2018). A resilience optimization model for transportation networks under disasters. Natural Hazards, 93, 469-489.
  41. Lee, P. (1994, 18 Ocak). Transportation crippled, badly damaged firms forced to close. Los Angeles Times. Erişim tarihi 13 Mayıs 2025, https://www.latimes.com/local/earthquakes/fi-12936_1_structural-damage-story.html
  42. Mattsson, L. G. ve Jenelius, E. (2015). Vulnerability and resilience of transport systems – A discussion of recent research. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 81, 16-34.
  43. Memisoglu Apaydin, N. (2024). Earthquake response of the transportation ınfrastructure in the region affected by the Feb. 6 Türkiye Earthquakes’’ Part II-Bridges and Tunnels. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 1-14.
  44. Menegat, S. (2022). From panarchy to world-ecology: Combining the adaptive cycle heuristic with historical-geographical approaches to explore socio-ecological systems’ sustainability. Sustainability, MDPI, 14(22), 1-14.
  45. Miller-Hooks, E., Zhang, X. ve Faturechi, R. (2012). Measuring and maximizing resilience of freight transportation networks. Computers & Operations Research, 39(7), 1633-1643.
  46. Murray-Tuite, P. M. (2006). A comparison of transportation network resilience under simulated system optimum and user equilibrium conditions. Proceedings - Winter Simulation Conference, 1398-1405. https://doi.org/10.1109/WSC.2006.323240
  47. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2014). A guide to regional transportation planning for disasters, emergencies, and significant events. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  48. Office of the Governor for Policy Planning. (2024, 29 Mart). TOKYO Resilience Project -TMG. Tokyo Metropolitan Government. https://www.english.metro.tokyo.lg.jp/w/001-101-001118
  49. Osogami, T., Imamichi, T., Mizuta, H., Suzumura, T. ve Idé, T. (2013). Toward simulating entire cities with behavioral models of traffic. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 57(5). 6:1-6:10.
  50. Ozener, H., Dogru, A. ve Unlutepe, A. (2009). An approach for rapid assessment of seismic hazards in Turkey by continuous GPS data. Sensors, 9(1), 602-615.
  51. Pan, S., Yan, H., He, J. ve He, Z. (2021). Vulnerability and resilience of transportation systems: A recent literature review. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 581, 126235.
  52. Papanikolaou, D. I. (2021). The geology of Greece. Springer Cham.
  53. Parizi, S. M., Taleai, M. ve Sharifi, A. (2022). A GIS-Based Multi-Criteria Analysis Framework to Evaluate Urban Physical Resilience against Earthquakes. Sustainability (Switzerland), 14(9), 5034.
  54. Pitilakis, K., Argyroudis, S., Kakderi, K. ve Selva, J. (2016). Systemic vulnerability and risk assessment of transportation systems under natural hazards towards more resilient and robust ınfrastructures. Transportation Research Procedia, 14, 1335-1344.
  55. Polat, A. ve Tezcan, H. O. (2024). Investigation of trip decisions for an earthquake: A case study in Elazığ, Türkiye. Sustainability, 16(20), 8953.
  56. Reggiani, A., Nijkamp, P. ve Lanzi, D. (2015). Transport resilience and vulnerability: The role of connectivity. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 81, 4-15.
  57. Rimal, B., Zhang, L., Fu, D., Kunwar, R. ve Zhai, Y. (2017). Monitoring urban growth and the Nepal earthquake 2015 for sustainability of Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Land, 6(2), 42.
  58. Salata, S. ve Uzelli, T. (2024). The uncertain certainty of a nightmare: What If another destructive earthquake strikes Izmir (Türkiye)? Sustainability, 16(2), 635.
  59. Salmon, C. M. (2004). Introduction to Natural and Man-Made Disasters and Their Effects on Buildings. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 1(3).
  60. Sarı, F. (2011). Evacuation and access based casualty reduction proposal for high dense settlements in earthquake - vulnerable areas [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi.
  61. Sengezer, B. ve Koç, E. (2005). A critical analysis of earthquakes and urban planning in Turkey. Disasters, 29(2), 171-194.
  62. Siawsh, N., Peszynski, K., Vo-Tran, H. ve Young, L. (2023). Toward the creation of disaster-resilient communities: The Machizukuri initiative – The 2011 Tōhoku Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 96, 103961.
  63. Şahin, Ş. (2019). Türkiye’de afet yönetimi ve 2023 hedefleri. Türk Deprem Araştırma Dergisi, 1(2), 180-196.
  64. Ta, C., Goodchild, A. V. ve Pitera, K. (2009). Structuring a Definition of Resilience for the Freight Transportation System. Transportation Research Record, 2097(1), 19-25.
  65. Thanassoulas, C., Klentos, V., Verveniotis, G. ve Zymaris, N. (2010). The background seismicity rate of the Greek territory, considered as a unified seismogenic area, for the period 1964 - 2010. Is Greece in course for a large seismic event? arXiv:1012.5635
  66. The Christian Science Monitor. (2010, 27 Aralık). Chileans dig out after 8.8-magnitude earthquake. https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2010/0227/Chile-earthquake-Chileans-dig-out-after-8.8-magnitude-earthquake
  67. The Japan Times. (2020, 16 Ocak). Have we learned enough from the 1995 Kobe quake? Erişim tarihi 15 Haziran 2025, https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2020/01/16/editorials/learned-enough-1995-kobe-quake/
  68. TMMOB Makine Mühendisleri Odası. (2023). TMMOB Ön Değerlendirme Raporu Yayımlandı. Mühendis ve Makina. https://na.mmo.org.tr/sites/default/files/06_28.pdf
  69. Tyler, S. ve Moench, M. (2012). A framework for urban climate resilience. Climate and Development, 4(4), 311-326. UNDRR ve CDRI. (2024). Roadmap for infrastructure resilience in the Republic of Chile. Government of Chile. Erişim tarihi 15 Haziran 2025, https://www.undrr.org/media/105606/download?startDownload=20250731
  70. Wamsler, C., Brink, E. ve Rivera, C. (2013). Planning for climate change in urban areas: From theory to practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, 50, 68-81.
  71. Ye, Q. ve Ukkusuri, S. V. (2015). Resilience as an objective in the optimal reconstruction sequence for transportation networks. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security, 7(1), 91-105.
  72. Zhang, W., Wang, N., Nicholsonc, C. ve Tehrani, M. H. (2018). A Stage-wise Decision Framework for Transportation Network Resilience Planning. arXiv:1808.03850