Journals / Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2007 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 19

TOWARDS LOCAL AND PROTECTIVE TURKISH DISASTER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

Pages
95–116
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

However, the responsible managers still need to improve the mitigation capacity of the system to diminish the catastrophic effects of disasters to local communities before they occur

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The earthquakes have created destructive consequences in every aspect of community life in Turkey for thousands years.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The symmetry-shattering effect of the 1999 Marmara and Düzce earthquakes awakened the Turkish public administration.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, the responsible managers still need to improve the mitigation capacity of the system to diminish the catastrophic effects of disasters to local communities before they occur
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Afet Yönetimi · Türk afet yönetim yapısı ve politikaları · Afet ve İmar kanunları

Abstract

The earthquakes have created destructive consequences in every aspect of community life in Turkey for thousands years. Centralized and bureaucratic institutional structure and policies ignoring mitigation phase and mainly focusing on the response and recovery phases of disaster management has been ineffective. The symmetry-shattering effect of the 1999 Marmara and Düzce earthquakes awakened the Turkish public administration. The reforms after the earthquakes significantly improved the response capacity of the system. However, the responsible managers still need to improve the mitigation capacity of the system to diminish the catastrophic effects of disasters to local communities before they occur

Özet

Depremler binlerce yıldır Türk insanının hayatının her alanında yıkıcı sonuçlar doğurmaktadır. Merkezi, bürokratik kurumsal yapı ve önleyici tedbirleri ihmal edip, kurtarma ve rehabilite aşamalarına ağırlık veren politikalar bugüne kadar etkisiz kalmıştır. Standard kalıpları yıkan 1999 Marmara ve Düzce depremleri Türkiye'nin Kamu Yönetimi sistemi ve anlayışı üzerinde uyandırıcı etki yapmıştır. Depremlerden sonra yapılan reformlar afet yönetiminin kurtarma kapasitesini kayda değer biçimde artırmıştır. Ancak, afet yönetiminden sorumlu karar vericilerin, zarar önleyici çalışmalara ağırlık verip, afet sistemi içerisindeki kurumların kapasitesini artırarak, depremlerin yerel halk üzerindeki felakete varan etkilerini azaltmaları gerekmektedir

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇELİK, S. (2022). TOWARDS LOCAL AND PROTECTIVE TURKISH DISASTER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 19, 95–116. https://ajindex.com/articles/493552

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Afet İsleri Genel Müdürlüğü (1998). Kanunlar ve Yönetmelikler. Ankara:
  2. Bayındırlık ve İskan Bakanlığı Akdağ, S. Emre, (2002), “Mali Yapı ve Denetim Boyutlarıyla Afet Yönetimi”. http://www.sayistay.gov.tr/yayin/yayinicerik/aras20afetyonetimi.pdf (002005).
  3. Axelroad, R. and D. M. Cohen (1999). Harnessing Complexity. New York: Free Press.
  4. Balamir, M. (1999). “Reproducing the Fatalist Society: An Evaluation of the Disasters and Development Laws and Regulations in Turkey.” In Emine M. Komut, ed. Urban Settlements and Natural Disasters: Proceedings of UIA Region II Workshop. Ankara, Turkey: Chamber of Architects of Turkey. pp. 96- Balamir, M. (2001a). “Disaster Policies and Social Organization”. Paper presented at the 5th Conference of ESA. “Disaster and Social Crisis Research Network sessions: Deconstructing Disaster Management: Beyond the Command and Control Model”, Chaired by Maureen Fordham, Helsinki, August 28-September 1. Balamir, M. (2001b). “Recent Changes in Turkish Disaster Policy: A Strategic Reorientation”. In P. R. Kleindorfer and M. R. Sertel (eds.), Mitigation and Financing Seismic Risks, Kluwer, pp. 207-234.
  5. Barzelay, M. (1992). Breaking Through Bureaucracy: A New Way for Managing in Government. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  6. Comfort, L. K. (1999). Shared Risk: Complex Systems in Seismic Response. Amsterdam: Pergamon. Çorbacıoğlu, S. and N. Kapucu (2005). “A Critical Evaluation of Turkish Disaster Management System”. TODAİE, Turkish Public Administration Annual, Vol. 29-31 DPT (Devlet Planlama Teskilatı) (2000). Doğal Afetler Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu (Yayımlanmadı). Erdik, Mustafa (2000), “Report on 1999 Kocaeli and Düzce Earthquakes”www.koeri.bound.edu.tr/depremmuh/Kocaelireport.pdf (002 002). Ergünay, Oktay (1999). “A Perspective of Disaster Management in Turkey: Issues and Prospects”. In Emine M. Komut, ed. Urban Settlements Natural Disasters: Proceedings of UIA Region II Workshop. Turkey: Chamber of Architects of Turkey. pp. 1-10 and Ankara,
  7. Gülkan, Polat (2001). “595 sayılı Yapı Denetimi Hakkındaki Kanun Hükmündeki Kararnamenin İptali ve Ardından Gelen 4708 Sayılı Denetimi Kanunu Hakkında Bir Deneme” (Yayımlanmadı) Yapı İstanbul Greater Municipality (2003). Earthquake Master Plan for İstanbul.
  8. Prepared by Boğaziçi University, İstanbul Technical University, Middle East Technical University, and Yildiz University. İstanbul: July 7th. JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) (2004). Türkiye'de Doğal Afetler Konulu Ülke S