Karmaşık Sorunlarla Mücadelede Yerel Diplomasi: İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi

Abstract

Kent yönetimleri/yerel yönetimler, hem karmaşık sorunların yönetiminde önemli aktörlerden biri hem de bu sorunların somut olarak yaşandığı mekânlardır. Karmaşık sorunlarla mücadelede yerel yönetimler için uygun yöntemlerden biri ağ bağlantılı hizmet sunma yöntemidir. Karmaşık sorunların yönetiminde yerel diplomasi, birçok kenti diğer kent ve aktörleriyle bir araya getirerek, sorunlara ilişkin çeşitli bilgi, uygulama ve kaynakların paylaşıldığı uygun bir platform sunarak, kamusal hizmetlerin sunumunda hiyerarşiden ağlara geçişe izin veren daha esnek bir yönetim formu sağlayarak etkili bir araç olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı, yerel diplomasinin kentlerin karşı karşıya olduğu karmaşık sorunlar üzerindeki etkilerinin tespit etmektir. Bu doğrultuda, çalışmada yerel diplomasi faaliyetleri içerik analizi yoluyla incelenerek karmaşık sorunlarla ilişkisi ortaya konulmuştur. Çalışmada, yerel yönetimlerin diplomasi faaliyetlerinin karmaşık sorunlar kapsamına giren birçok alanla ilişkilisi tespit edilmiş, yerel diplomasi faaliyetlerinin yerel yönetimlerin hizmet alanı üzerindeki etkileri saptanmış ve bir karmaşık sorun olarak ele alınan Covid-19 salgınının yönetiminde yerel diplomasi faaliyetlerinin önemi ortaya konulmuştur.

Keywords

• Yerel Diplomasi
• Ağlar
• İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi
• Karmaşık Sorunlar
• Covid-19.

CITY DIPLOMACY TO TACKLE WICKED PROBLEMS: METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITY OF IZMIR

Abstract

Municipalities/local governments are both one of the key actors in tackling wicked problems and the place where these problems are concretely experienced. One of the methods suitable for local governments in tackling wicked problems is networked service delivery. City diplomacy is an effective tool in addressing wicked problems because it brings many cities together with other cities and actors, provides a suitable platform for sharing different information, practices and resources on problems, and offers a more flexible form of governance that allows a transition from hierarchy to networks in the provision of public services. The aim of this study is to identify the impact of city diplomacy on the wicked problems faced by cities. In this context, the study analyses city diplomacy activities through content analysis and identifies their relationship with wicked problems. The study determines the relationship between city diplomacy activities and a number of areas within the scope of wicked problems, determines the impact of city diplomacy activities on local government service areas, and reveals the importance of city diplomacy activities in the management of Covid-19 outbreak, which is considered a wicked problem.

Keywords

• City diplomacy
• Networks
• Izmir Metropolitan Municipality
• wicked problems
• Covid-19 outbreak.

References

1. Acuto, M., Kosovac, A., & Hartley, K. (2021). City diplomacy: another generational shift?. Diplomatica, 3(1), 137-146.
2. Acuto, M. & Rayner, S. (2016). City networks: breaking gridlocks on forging (new) lock ins?. International Affairs, 92(5), 1147-1166.
3. Berse, K. (2019). International local cooperation. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration Public Policy and Governance, 1-7.
4. Bueren, E. M., Klijn, E. H. & Koppenjan, J. F. M. (2003). Dealing with problems in networks: analyzing an environmental debate from a network perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13(2), 193-212.
5. Bulkeley, H. (2005). Reconfiguring environmental governance: towards a politics of scales and networks. Political Geography, 24, 875-902.
6. Coyne, R. (2005). Wicked problems revisited. Design Studies, 26(1), 5-17.
7. Curtis, S. & Acuto, M. (2018). The foreign policy of cities. The RUSI Journal, 163(6), 8- 17.
8. Chan, D. K. H. (2016). City diplomacy and “glocal” governance: revitalizing cosmopolitan democracy. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 29(2), 134-160.

9. Chester, M. V., & Allenby, B. (2019). Infrastructure as a wicked complex process. Elem Sci Anth, 7, 21.
10. De Villers, J. C. (2009). Success factors and the city to city partnership management process - from strategy to alliance capability. Habitat International, 33(2), 149-156.
11. Duchacek, I. D. (1984). The international dimension of subnational self government. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 14(4), 15-31.
12. ENGELSİZMİR (n.d.). Retrieved September 13, 2021 from http://www.engelsizmir.org-tr-bahceterapicalistayhaber-3070-3125.
13. Erdem, N. & Ersavaş Kavanoz, S. (2021). Türkiye’de yerel diplomasi yönetiminin gelişimi üzerine bir araştırma. Kent ve Çevre Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 28-49.
14. Ersavaş Kavanoz, S. (2021). Karmaşık sorunlarla mücadelede iş birlikçi yönetişim ve aktörler, S. Ersavaş Kavanoz, A. Uzun & H. Şengün (Eds.), karmaşık sorunlar ve kent (pp. 35-50). Ankara: Astana Yayınları.
15. EUROCITIES (n.d.). Live Updates COVİD-19 European Cities Respond to the Coronavirus Crisis. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://covidnews.eurocities.eu-.
16. Fairbrass, J., & Jordan, A. (2001). Protecting biodiversity in the European Union: National barriers and European opportunities?. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(4), 499-518.
17. Ferlie, E., Fitzgerald, L., McGivern, G., Dopson, S., & Bennett, C. (2011). Public policy networks and ‘wicked problems’: a nascent solution?. Public Administration, 89(2), 307-324.
18. Fontana, F. (2017). City networking in urban strategic planning, city networks. Springer: Cham.
19. Hafner-Burton, E. M., Kahler, M., & Montgomery, A. H. (2009). Network analysis for international relations. International Organization, 63(3), 559-592.
20. Head, B. W. (2008). Wicked problems in public policy. Public Policy, 3(2), 101-118.
21. Head, B. W. (2022). Wicked problems in public policy: understanding and responding to complex challenges. Springer Nature.
22. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2010). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/24.12.2013%2013_50_13_2010-FAALIYET-RAPORU%20(1).pdf.
23. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2011). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/2011FaaliyetRaporu.pdf.
24. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2012). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/2012FAALIYETRAPORU%20(1).pdf.
25. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2013). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/14.5.2014%2015_57_34_2013_FaaliyetRaporu.pdf.
26. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2014). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/14.5.2014%2015_57_34_2013_FaaliyetRaporu.pdf.
27. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2015). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/14.5.2014%2015_57_34_2013_FaaliyetRaporu.pdf.
28. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2016). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/FaaliyetRaporu_2016.pdf.
29. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2017). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/43_24042018_032740_2017-yili-faaliyet-raporu.pdf.
30. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2018). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/43_03052019_022539_2018-yili-faaliyet-raporu%20(2).pdf.
31. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2019). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/2019FaaliyetRaporu_web.pdf.
32. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2020). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved September 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/Nisa/Downloads/43_30042021_044242_2020_faaliyet-raporu.pdf%20(2).pdf.
33. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2021). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved February 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/acer/Downloads/43_29042022_120114_29042022111147186_1.pdf.pdf.
34. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2022). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Faaliyet Raporu Retrieved February 13, 2021 from file:///C:/Users/acer/Downloads/43_24052023_111140_%20(3).pdf.
35. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2020-2021). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Haber Arşivi. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.izmir.bel.tr/tr/HaberArsivi/157.
36. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2006-2017). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Stratejik Planı. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.izmir.bel.tr/CKYuklenen/eskisite/file/23_12_2013%2016_23_16_ibb_stratejik_plan.pdf.
37. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2010-2017). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Stratejik Planı. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.izmir.bel.tr/CKYuklenen/eskisite/file/23_12_2013%2016_30_30_2010-2017straplanMyeni.pdf.
38. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2015-2019). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Stratejik Planı. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.izmir.bel.tr/CKYuklenen/eskisite/file/MALI_HIZMETLER/2015_19StratejikPlan_web.pdf.
39. İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi (2020-2024). İzmir Büyükşehir Belediyesi Stratejik Planı. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.izmir.bel.tr/CKYuklenen/Dokumanlar_2020/Stratejik%20Plan2024.pdf.
40. Jones M. L. & Blunt, P. (1999). Twinning’ as a method of sustainable institutional capacity building. Public Administration and Development, 19(4), 381-402.
41. Leonardi, A. P. (2021). Local governments on the global stage. Territorial non-state actors, city diplomacy and international legal order (s). Ordine Internazionale e Diritti Umani, (2), 400-421.
42. Mahdi, Z., & Mazumder, T. N. (2023). Re-examining the informal housing problem in Delhi: A wicked problem perspective. Cities, 140, 104419.
43. McKenzie, P. (2018). Culture as a wicked problem. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://medium.com/@PhilipLeslie/culture-as-a-wicked-problem-677042c7996e.
44. OECD (n.d). Regional development working papers indicators for resilient cities. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/6f1f6065-en.pdf?expires=1642592339&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=7E32C6313C21F1F63C1888CFC210C327.
45. Özcan, Ü. (2006). Yerel yönetimler arasında ortaklıklar ve kardeş şehir ilişkileri el kitabı. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from http://www.dapaturk.com/docs/siyasi/Kardes_Sehir_El_Kitabi_Son_Hali.pdf.
46. Pipa, A. F. & Bouchet, M. (2020a). How to make the most of city diplomacy in the covid-19 era. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.brookings.edu-blog-up-front-2020-08-06-how-to-make-the-most-of-city-diplomacy-in-the-covid-19-era/.
47. Pipa, Anthony, F. & Bouchet, Max (2020b). Multilateralism restored? city diplomacy in the covid-19 er. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15, 599-610.
48. Rittel, H. W. J. & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Political Sciences, 4, 155-169.
49. Roberts, N. (2000). Wicked problems and network approaches to resolution. International Public Management Review, 1(1), 1-19.
50. Rudakowska, A. & Simon, C. (2020). International city cooperation in the fight against covid-19: behind the scenes security providers. Global Policy, 1-14.
51. Sam, M. P. (2009). The public management of sport wicked problems, challenges and dilemmas. Public Management Review, 11(4).
52. Solarczyk, A. (2020). Chinese sister city sending masks to fort wayne. Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.wane.com/news/localnews/chinese/sister/city/sending/masksto/fort/wayne/.
53. Swiney, C. (2020). The urbanization of international law and international relations. The Rising Soft Power of Cities in Global Governance, 41, 227-278.
54. Termeer, C.J.A.M., Dewulf, A. & Lieshout, M.V. (2010). Disentangling scale approaches in governance research: comparing monocentric, multilevel, and adaptive governance. Ecology and Society, 15(4), 29.
55. Uzun, A. (2020a). Bir araştırma nesnesi olarak habis sorunlar ve kamu yönetimi disiplini. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 15(2), 663-676.
56. Uzun, A. (2020b). Kötü huylu problem perspektifinden covid-19 pandemisi ile mücadele stratejileri: teorik ve pratik bir analiz. Electronic Turkish Studies, 15(4).
57. Ünal, Ç. (2020). İzmir’in göç analizi (2008-2018). Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 25(43), 195-208.
58. Van der Plujim, R. & Melissen, J. (2007). City diplomacy: the expanding role of cities in ınternational relations. The Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingendael. http://www.clingendael.nl/publications/2007/20070400_cdsp_paper_pluijm.pdf.
59. Visitİzmir (n.d.). Retrieved September 13, 2021 from https://www.visitizmir.org/.
60. Weber E. P. & Khademian, A. M. (2008). Wicked problems, knowledge, challange and collaborative capacity builders in network settings. Public Administration Review, 334- 349.
61. Yeboah-Assiamah, E., Damoah, C. M., & Bawole, J. N. (2021). Open innovation systems and public policy in Africa: setting new boundaries against wicked problems. Routledge: Handbook of Public Policy in Africa.
62. Zelinsky, W. (1991). The twinning of the world: sister cities in geographic and historical perspective. Annals of Association of American Geographers, 81(11), 1-31.