Resilience Planning and Urbanization Experience of Bayburt

Abstract

Negative developments in the environment of the modern world such as pollution, disasters, scarcity of different sources and water resources, climate change and global effects of any local changes requires taking precautions and introduce the need for new approaches. The concept of “resilience” becomes a current issue in this process and it develops existing discussions on sustainability, management of risks and governance. Resilience is a capacity of system to cope with external unexpected risks. In the urban area, the concept means adaptation and coping capacity of urban systems against shocks and risks which may arise, disasters and emergencies. The main aim of this study is to evaluate existing urbanization practices of Bayburt in terms of the concept of resilience. In this context, consistency of existing urbanization dynamics and ecological system is questioned with resilience perspective. In the first stage, the resilience concept and its offers in the planning area are discussed. Then, framework for the analysis of Bayburt is presented. In the last part, economic, social and ecological risks are determined for the case study of Bayburt. In this stage, economic, social and ecological indicators (such as the change of employment, income and main economic activities; changing population, education and migration status, dependency ratios and welfare; changing land use characteristics in historical process) were used to define the existing situation of the city. Also, old plans of the city are analyzed. The findings show that urbanization policy and practices in Bayburt are the reasons of ecological risks. New planning approach should immediately be developed with the resilience perspective. Otherwise, the city will be faced with big risks in the near future in terms of livability.

Keywords

• Resilient city
• adaptation
• planning
• Bayburt

References

1. Abel ND, Cummıng HM, Anderıes JM, 2006. Collapse and Reorganization in Socialecological Systems: Questions, Some Ideas, and Policy Implications. Ecology and Society, 11 (1): 17-42, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art17/. (Date of access: 15 April 2019).
2. Adger WN, 2000. Social and Ecological Resilience: Are They Related?. Progress in Human Geography, 24 (3): 347-364.
3. Aguirre BE, 2006. Preliminary Paper 356: On the Concept of Resilience. Disaster Research Centre, University of Delaware, Newark-USA.
4. Baud ISA, Hordjick MA, 2009. Dealing With Risks in Urban Governance: What We Can Learn From Resilience Thinking. The 4th International Conference of the International Forum on Urbanism The New Urban Question – Urbanism beyond Neo-Liberalism, 26-28 November 2009, Delft.
5. Berkes F, Folke C, Berkes F, 1998. Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge-UK.
6. Dursun D, Dursun D, Kaya AB, 2020. Urban Resilience Assessment of Trabzon. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi / Iğdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech., 10 (2): 1286-1297.
7. Dursun D, 2018. The Concept of Resilience: A Critical Evaluation of Erzurum. Iğdır Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi / Iğdır Univ. J. Inst. Sci. & Tech., 8 (3): 295-304.
8. Dursun D, Dursun D, Yavas M, 2017. Resilience Planning and Urbanization Experience of Erzurum. International Conference on Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development, 19-20 August 2017, Seoula.

9. Dursun D, Yavaş M, 2016. Resilience Planning Approach and Urbanization Experience of Erzurum. 15. Regional Scince / Regional Planning Congress, 3-4 December 2015, Trabzon.
10. Dursun D, 2015. The Effects of Restructuring in the Property Development Sector on Urban Processes: A Case Study on Erzurum and Kayseri. METU The Program of Urban Policy Planning and Local Government, Doctor of Philosophy Thesis (Not Printed).
11. Eraydın A, 2010. Resilience Thinking for Urban Analysis And Planning: An Exploratory Research On Istanbul. 24th AESOP Annual Conference, 7-10 July 2010, Finland.
12. Eraydın A, Durmaz B, Erdem A, Yaman C, Yavuz B, 2011. The concept of Resilience: Ankara region case study. ODTÜ Bölge Planlama Yüksek Lisans Programı, Bölge Planlama Stüdyosu Çalışma Raporu (Not Printed).
13. Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmqvist T, Gunderson LH, 2002. Resilience and Sustainable Development: Building Adaptive Capacity in a World of Transformations. Edita Norstedts Tryckeri AB, Stockholm-Sweden.
14. Frantzeskaki N, 2016. Urban Resilience: A Concept for Co-Creating of the Future. Erasmus University, Rotterdam-Netherlands.
15. Gunderson L, Holling CS, 2001. Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Island Press, Washington DC-USA.
16. Hill EW, Wial H, Wolman H, 2008. Exploring Regional Economic Resilience, Working Paper 2008-04. University of California, USA.
17. Maguire B, Hagan P, 2007. Disasters and Communities: Understanding Social Resilience. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 22(2): 16-20.
18. Resilience Alliance, 2007. Urban Resilience Research Prospectus. CSIRO, Australia Arizona State University, USA Stockholm University, Sweden.
19. TÜİK, 2019a. Province Indicators Province indicators.
20. TÜİK, 2019b. Regional Statistics, GDP, www.tuik.gov.tr (Date of access: 20 April 2019).
21. TÜİK, 2019c. Regional Statistics-Population Census; ABPRS
22. TÜİK, 2019d. Regional Statistics, Education
23. TÜİK, 2019e. Regional Statistics, Migration
24. TÜİK, 2019f. Regional Statistics, Demography
25. Türkiye Bankalar Birliği, 2019. İstatistiki Raporlar, Bayburt, https://www.tbb.org.tr/tr/bankacilik/banka-ve-sektor-bilgileri/istatistiki-raporlar/59 (Date of access: 20 April 2019).
26. Walker B, Salt D, Reid W, 2006. Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in a Changing World. Island Press, USA.