İstanbul İçin Öneri: Yeşil Altyapı Sistemi

Abstract

Kentleşmenin artması ve kentin hızla yayılması, genellikle şehirlerin doğal ekosistemlerinin tahrip olmasına ve ekosistem işlevlerinin bozulmasına yol açmaktadır. Yeşil-mavi altyapı, kentsel planlamada sürdürülebilir bir yaklaşım olarak kabul edilmektedir. Yeşil altyapı, topluma ekolojik, ekonomik ve sosyal-kültürel fayda sağlayan yeşil-mavi alanlardan oluşan birbirine bağlı ağ sistemidir. Özellikle İstanbul gibi kentleşmenin yoğun olduğu mega şehirlerde gerek doğal ekosistemler üzerinde kentleşme baskıların azaltılması, gerekse kentsel ara yüzde yeşil alan ihtiyacının karşılanmasında, yeşil alan ve yeşil koridorlar önemli yer tutmaktadır. Yeşil altyapı sistemi, kentlerde peyzajın esnek olması, yeşil alan planlama geleneklerinin farklı olması, yeşil alan koruma ve kullanım kültürünün farklılaşması, ekonomik gelişmişlik düzeyinden etkilenerek farklılık göstermektedir. Bu çalışma, İstanbul için öneri yeşil altyapı sistemi geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda, literatürden elde edilen yeşil altyapı kavramı, kentsel yeşil sistemler, yeşil altyapının kökeni, bölgeler arası yeşil altyapı politikaları, yeşil altyapı unsurlarının analizleri sonucunda İstanbul için yeşil altyapı sisteminde yer alacak unsurlar tayin edilmiştir. Yeşil altyapı sisteminde yer alan doğal bileşenler alansal olarak belirlenmiştir. Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri ortamında üretilmiş veri setleri kullanılmıştır. İstanbul’un yeşil altyapı sistemi; mevcut geniş ekolojik ekosistemleri; potansiyel ekolojik alanları; bağlantı için geniş yeşil koridorları içermektedir. Mevcut yeşil altyapı alanlarında; ekolojik açıdan önemli büyük doğal alanlar, doğal ve rekreasyon değeri olan kentsel yeşil alanlar bulunmaktadır. Potansiyel yeşil altyapı alanları; işlevini yitirmiş veya ekolojik özelliklerini koruyan kentsel yeşil alan potansiyeli olan alanları kapsamaktadır. İstanbul’da çok sayıda akarsu havzasının bulunmasından dolayı vadi ve dereler önemli yeşil koridorları oluşturmaktadır. Sonuçta potansiyel alanlar geniş alanlardan oluşmaktadır. Bu alanların mekansal olarak eklenmesi kentsel alan içinde yeşil alan eksikliği önemli derecede giderecektir. Vadi ve derelerin yeşil koridor olarak planlanması bağlantı özelliği ile yeşil altyapı sisteminin etkinliğini artıracaktır. Mevcut ekosistemlerin korunması, potansiyel alanların iyileştirilerek eklenmesi ve planlı yeşil ağlar aracılığıyla ekosistem işlevlerinin dayanıklılığının artmasını, doğal ekosistemlerin sürekliliğini ve kentsel açık yeşil alan miktarının artmasını sağlayacaktır.

Keywords

• Sürdürülebilir kentsel planlama
• doğal ekosistemler
• kentsel yeşil alan
• yeşil koridor
• İstanbul

Proposal for Istanbul: Green Infrastructure System

Abstract

Increasing urbanization and rapid urban sprawl often lead to the destruction of cities' natural ecosystems and the deterioration of ecosystem functions. Green-blue infrastructure is considered a sustainable approach to urban planning. Green infrastructure is an interconnected network of green-blue spaces that provides ecological, economic, and social-cultural benefits to society. Especially in densely urbanized megacities like Istanbul, green spaces and green corridors play a crucial role in both reducing urbanization pressures on natural ecosystems and meeting the need for green space at the urban interface. Green infrastructure systems vary across cities, influenced by the flexibility of landscapes, diverse green space planning traditions, the culture of green space protection and use, and the level of economic development. This study aims to develop a proposed green infrastructure system for Istanbul. In this context, the concept of green infrastructure, urban green systems, the origin of green infrastructure, interregional green infrastructure policies, and analyses of green infrastructure elements derived from the literature have determined the elements to be included in the green infrastructure system for Istanbul. The natural components of the green infrastructure system were spatially determined. Data generated in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) were used. Istanbul's green infrastructure system includes existing extensive ecological ecosystems, potential ecological areas, and extensive green corridors for connectivity. Existing green infrastructure areas include large ecologically significant natural areas and urban green spaces with natural and recreational value. Potential green infrastructure areas encompass areas that have lost their function or have potential for urban green space while maintaining their ecological characteristics. Due to the numerous river basins in Istanbul, valleys and streams constitute important green corridors. Consequently, potential areas comprise large areas. Spatially, the addition of these areas will significantly address the lack of green space within the urban area. Planning valleys and streams as green corridors will increase the effectiveness of the green infrastructure system through their connectivity. Protecting existing ecosystems, improving and adding potential areas, and planning green networks will increase the resilience of ecosystem functions, the continuity of natural ecosystems, and the amount of urban open green space.

Keywords

• Sustainable urban planning
• natural ecosystems
• urban green space
• green corridor
• Istanbul

References

1. Abhijith, K. V., Kumar, P., Gallagher, J., McNabola, A., Baldauf, R., Pilla, F., … Pulvirenti, B. (2017). Air pollution abatement performances of green infrastructure in open road and built-up street canyon environments – A review. Atmospheric Environment, 162, 71–86.
2. AFAD. (2022). İstanbul İl Risk Azaltma Planı (İRAP) 2021-2026. https://istanbul.afad.gov.tr/istanbul-irap-plani-hazirlandi (Erişim tarihi: 22.06.2026).
3. Ahern, J. (2007). Green infrastructure for cities: the spatial dimension. Cities of the Future:Towards Integrated Sustainable Water and Landscape Management içinde (ss. 267–283). IWA Publishing: London, UK; Citeseer: Princeton, NJ, USA.
4. Ahern, Jack. (1995). Greenways as a planning strategy. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33(1–3), 131–155.
5. Ahern, Jack. (2004). Greenways in the USA: theory, trends and prospects. Ecological Networks and Greenways içinde . Cambridge University Press.
6. Akkemik, Ü., Tolunay, D., Erdönmez, C., Atmış, E. ve Kurdoğlu, O. (2021). İstanbul’un Yeşil Alan Sorunları Çerçevesinde Yeşil Duvarların İrdelenmesi ve Öneriler. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(1), 337–345.
7. Andreucci, M. B., Russo, A. ve Olszewska-Guizzo, A. (2019). Designing urban green blue infrastructure for mental health and elderly wellbeing. Sustainability, 11.
8. Austin, G. (2014). Green Infrastructure for Landscape Planning. London: Routledge.

9. Avrupa Çevre Ajansı. (2020). CORINE Land Cover. https://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover/clc (Erişim tarihi: 02.02.2024) adresinden erişildi.
10. Bagaeen, S. G. (2006). Brownfield sites as building blocks for sustainable urban environments: A view on international experience in redeveloping former military sites. Urban Design International, 11, 117–128.
11. Barbier, E. B., Hacker, S. D., Kennedy, C., Koch, E. W., Stier, A. C. ve Silliman, B. R. (2011). The value of estuarine and coastal ecosystem services. Ecological Monographs, 81(2), 169–193.
12. Baschak, L. A. ve Brown, R. D. (1995). An ecological framework for the planning, design and management of urban river greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33, 211–225.
13. Beatley, T. (2000). Green urbanism: learning from European cities. Island, Washington, DC.
14. Benedict, M. A. ve McMahon, E. T. (2002). Green Infrastructure: Smart Conservation for the 21st Century. Renewable Resources Journal, 20(3), 12–17.
15. Benedict, M. A. ve McMahon, E. T. (2006). Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities.
16. Beveridge, C. E. (2009). Mount Royal in the Works of Frederick Law Olmsted. https://ocpm.qc.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/P24/3c1.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 02.03.2026).
17. Brüel, M. (2012). Copenhagen, Denmark: Green city amid the finger metropolis. Green Cities of Europe: Global Lessons on Green Urbanism içinde (ss. 83–107).
18. Burke, G. L. (1966). Greenheart Metropolis-Planning the Western N etherlands. Springer.
19. Burkholder, S. (2012). The New Ecology of Vacancy: Rethinking Land Use in Shrinking Cities. Sustainability, 4, 1154–1172.
20. Çelik, Z. (2010). 19. Yüzyılda Osmanlı Başkenti DEĞİŞEN İSTANBUL. Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
21. Chen, W. Y. (2015). The Role Of Urban Green İnfrastructure İn Offsetting Carbon Emissions İn 35 Major Chinese Cities: A Nationwide Estimate. Cities, 44, 112–120.
22. Çınar, H. S. (2025). İklim Değişikliği Bağlamında Sürdürülebilir Kentsel Su Yönetimi: Küresel Yaklaşımlar Ve Uyum Stratejileri. PEYZAJ - Eğitim, Bilim, Kültür Ve Sanat Dergisi, 7(2), 243–258.
23. Conradin, F. ve Buchli, R. (2005). The Zurich Stream Day-Lighting Program. Enhancing Urban Environment by Environmental Upgrading and Restoration içinde (ss. 277–288).
24. Davies, C, MacFarlane, R., McGloin, C. ve Roe, M. (2006). Green infrastructure Planning Guide, 1–43.
25. Davies, Clive, Chen, W. Y., Sanesi, G. ve Lafortezza, R. (2021). The European Union roadmap for implementing nature-based solutions: A review. Environmental Science and Policy.
26. Davies, Z. G., Edmondson, J. L., Heinemeyer, A., Leake, J. R. ve Gaston, K. J. (2011). Mapping an urban ecosystem service: Quantifying above-ground carbon storage at a city-wide scale. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 1125–1134.
27. Demuzere, M., Orru, K., Heidrich, O., Olazabal, E., Geneletti, D., Orru, H., … Faehnle, M. (2014). Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multi-scale assessment of green urban infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management, 146, 107–115.
28. DeOliveira, F. L. (2017). Green Wedge Urbanism: History, Theory and Contemporary Practice. Bloomsbury Publishing.
29. Depietri, Y. ve McPhearson, T. (2017). Integrating the Grey, Green, and Blue in Cities: Nature-Based Solutions for Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Reduction. Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages Between Science, Policy and Practice içinde (ss. 29–50). Springer.
30. Dogan, E. ve Stupar, A. (2017). The limits of growth: A case study of three mega-projects in Istanbul. Cities, 60, 281–288.
31. Ellis, J. B. (2013). Sustainable surface water management and green infrastructure in UK urban catchment planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56(1), 24–41.
32. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014). Water: Green Infrastructure. https://www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure (Erişim tarihi: 02.02.2026).
33. Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). Saving the Rain: Green Stormwater Solutions for Congregations. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/documents/saving_the_rain_0.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 03.03.2026).
34. European Commission. (2000). Natura 2000. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/index_en.htm (Erişim tarihi: 05.03.2026).
35. European Commission. (2012). The Multifunctionality of Green Infrastructure. Science for Environment Policy; In-depth Report. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/docs/Green_Infrastructure.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 03.03.2026).
36. European Commission. (2013). Green infrastructure (GI) — Enhancing Europe’s Natural Capital. Commission Communication. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content(Erişim tarihi: 05.03.2026).
37. European Commission. (2015). Towards an EU research and innovation policy agenda for nature-based solutions & re-naturing cities : final report of the Horizon 2020 expert group on “Nature-based solutions and re-naturing cities”. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/765223 (Erişim tarihi: 05.03.2026).
38. European Commission. (2019). Nature-based solutions: Transforming cities, enhancing well-being. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/236007 (Erişim tarihi: 22.02.2026).
39. European Environment Agency. (2011). Green infrastructure and territorial cohesion. The concept of green infrastructure and its integration into policies using monitoring systems. Tecnical Report (Number 18). https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/green-infrastructure-and-territorial-cohesion (Erişim tarihi: 10.03.2026).
40. European Environment Agency. (2014). Spatial analysis of green infrastructure in Europe. EEA Technical report. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/spatial-analysis-of-green-infrastructure (Erişim tarihi: 05.03.2026) adresinden erişildi.
41. Fabos, J. G. (2004). Greenway planning in the United States: Its origins and recent case studies. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68, 321–342.
42. Fabos, Julius Gy. (1995). Introduction and overview: the greenway movement, uses and potentials of greenways. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33, 1–13.
43. Faivre, N., Fritz, M., Freitas, T., de Boissezon, B. ve Vandewoestijne, S. (2017). Nature-Based Solutions in the EU: Innovating with nature to address social, economic and environmental challenges. Environmental Research, 159, 509–518.
44. Faivre, N., Sgobbi, A., Happaerts, S., Raynal, J. ve Schmidt, L. (2018). Translating the Sendai Framework into action: The EU approach to ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction.
45. Fleischer, A. ve Tsur, Y. (2003). Measuring the recreational value of open space. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54(2), 269–283.
46. Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., … Donovan, R. J. (2005). Increasing walking: How important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space? American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 169–176.
47. Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R. ve Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting cities for climate change: The role of the green infrastructure. Built Environment, 33(1), 115–133.
48. Göksoy Sevinçli, B. ve Bayrakcı, E. (2025). Kentsel Altyapının İklim Değişikliğine Karşı Dirençli Hale Getirilmesinde Yeşil Altyapı Çözümleri. Uluslararası Yönetim Akademisi Dergisi, 7(4), 1001–1014.
49. Hamel, P. ve Tan, L. (2021). Blue–Green Infrastructure for Flood and Water Quality Management in Southeast Asia: Evidence and Knowledge Gaps. Environmental Management.
50. Hansen, R., Lorance, E. R., Werner, R. ve Stephan, P. (2017). Urban Green Infrastructure Planning a guide for practitioners. Green Surge.
51. Hansen, R. ve Pauleit, S. (2014). From multifunctionality to multiple ecosystem services? A conceptual framework for multifunctionality in green infrastructure planning for Urban Areas. Ambio, 43, 516–529.
52. Hanzl, M. (2020). Urban forms and green infrastructure – the implications for public health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cities & Health.
53. Hellmund, P. C. ve Smith, D. S. (2006). Designing greenways: sustainable landscapes for nature and people. ISLAND PRESS.
54. Howard, E. (1902). Garden Cities of Tomorrow.
55. Hu, T., Chang, J., Liu, X. X. ve Feng, S. (2018). Integrated methods for determining restoration priorities of coal mining subsidence areas based on green infrastructure: –A case study in the Xuzhou urban area, of China. Ecological Indicators.
56. İBB. (2022). İstanbul Arazi Kullanım Yayınlanmamış Veri Seti. Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemi Şube Müdürlüğü.
57. Ignatieva, M., Stewart, G. H. ve Meurk, C. (2011). Planning and design of ecological networks in urban areas. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 7, 17–25.
58. İSKİ. (2022). İstanbul Akarsuları Yayınlanmamış Veri Seti. İstanbul Su ve Kanalizasyon İdaresi.
59. İBB. (2006). 1/100.000 Ölçekli İstanbul İl Çevre Düzeni Plan Raporu.
60. İBB. (2009). 1/100.000 Ölçekli İstanbul İl Çevre Düzeni Planı.
61. Jaffe, M. (2010). Reflections on green infrastructure economics. Environmental Practice, Cambridge.
62. Jia, Y. P., Lu, K. F., Zheng, T., Li, X. B., Liu, X., Peng, Z. R. ve He, H. Di. (2021). Effects of roadside green infrastructure on particle exposure: A focus on cyclists and pedestrians on pathways between urban roads and vegetative barriers. Atmospheric Pollution Research, 12(3), 1–12.
63. Jongman, R. H. G. (1995). Nature conservation planning in Europe: developing ecological networks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32, 169–183.
64. Jongman, R. H. G. (2004). The context and concept of ecological networks. Ecological Networks and Greenways. Cambridge University Press.
65. Jongman, R. ve Pungetti, G. (2004). Ecological Networks and Greenways: Concept, Design, Implementation. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge University Press.
66. Jorgensen, A. (2018). A city is still a landscape. Landscape Research, 43(1), 1–7.
67. Kambites, C. ve Owen, S. (2006). Renewed prospects for green infrastructure planning in the UK. Planning Practice and Research, 21(4), 483 – 496.
68. Kamer Aksoy, Ö. ve Arslan, E. S. (2022). Kentlerde İklim Değişikliğinin Olası Etkilerinin Azaltılmasında Yeşil Altyapı ve Ekosistem Hizmetlerinin Rolü. İnsan ve İnsan Dergisi, 9, 53–62.
69. Kim, G., Miller, P. A. ve Nowak, D. J. (2015). Assessing urban vacant land ecosystem services: Urban vacant land as green infrastructure in the City of Roanoke, Virginia. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 14, 519–526.
70. Konyalı, C. ve Çay, R. D. (2020). Sürdürülebilir Yağmur Suyu Yönetimi Kapsamında Yeşil Altyapı Sistemlerinin Değerlendirilmesi: Edirne İli Örneği. Kent Akademisi, 13(4), 668–687.
71. Lafortezza, R., Davies, C., Sanesi, G. ve Konijnendijk, C. C. (2013). Green infrastructure as a tool to support spatial planning in European urban regions. IForest, 6, 102–108.
72. Landscape Institute. (2009). Green Infrastructure Position Statement May 2009. https://www.landscapeinstitute.org/policy/green-infrastructure/ (Erişim tarihi: 10.02.2026).
73. Li, J. ve Liu, K. (2024). Sustainable Space Transformation Design Strategies for Post-Landfill Closure. Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(8).
74. Little, C. E. (1990). Greenways for America. Leisure Sciences. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, MD.
75. Liu, L. ve Jensen, M. B. (2018). Green infrastructure for sustainable urban water management: Practices of five forerunner cities. Cities.
76. Liu, Z., Lin, Y., De Meulder, B. ve Wang, S. (2019). Can greenways perform as a new planning strategy in the Pearl River Delta, China? Landscape and Urban Planning, 187, 81–95.
77. Mell, I. (2015). Green infrastructure planning: Policy and objectives. Handbook on Green Infrastructure: Planning, Design and Implementation içinde (ss. 105–123). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
78. Mell, I. (2016). Global green infrastructure: lessons for successful policy-making, investment and management. Routledge. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.
79. Mell, I. (2017). Green infrastructure: reflections on past, present and future praxis. Landscape Research, 42(2), 135–145.
80. Morakinyo, T. E., Lam, Y. F. ve Hao, S. (2016). Evaluating the role of green infrastructures on near-road pollutant dispersion and removal: Modelling and measurement. Journal of Environmental Management, 182, 595–605.
81. Naumann, S., McKenna, D., Kaphengst, T., Pieterse, M., Rayment, M. ve Davis, M. (2011). Design, implementation and cost elements of Green Infrastructure projects. Final report Brussels,European Commission.
82. Nelson, A. C. (1985). A Unifying View of Greenbelt Influences on Regional Land Values and Implications for Regional Planning Policy. Growth and Change.
83. Nemeth, J. ve Langhorst, J. (2014). Rethinking urban transformation: Temporary uses for vacant land. Cities, 40, 143–150.
84. O’Sullivan, F., Mell, I. ve Clement, S. (2020). Novel Solutions or Rebranded Approaches: Evaluating the Use of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) in Europe. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 2.
85. Ökten, A; Şengezer, B. (2013). Istanbul ’ S Resilience in Question. Proceedings of AESOP -ACSP 5th Joint Congress, Dublin, Ireland, 15-19 July içinde (ss. 1–13).
86. Pauleit, S., Vasquéz, A., Maruthaveeran, S., Liu, L. ve Cilliers, S. S. (2021). Urban Green Infrastructure in the Global South. Cities and Nature.Urban Green Infrastructure in the Global South içinde (ss. 107–144). Springer.
87. Peng, J., Zhao, H. ve Liu, Y. (2017). Urban ecological corridors construction: A review. Shengtai Xuebao/ Acta Ecologica Sinica, 37, 23–30.
88. Shoup, L. ve Ewing, R. (2010). The Economic Benefits of Open Space, Recreation Facilities and Walkable Community Design. Active Living Research.
89. Sole, L. ve Ariza, E. (2019). A wider view of assessments of ecosystem services in coastal areas: the perspective of social-ecological complexity. Ecology and Society, 24(2). doi:10.5751/ES-10883-240224
90. Taşdemir, İ; Batuk, F. (2009). Boğaz Geçişlerinin İstanbul ’ un Mekânsal Gelişimine Etkileri. Jeodezi, Jeoinformasyon ve Arazi Yönetimi Dergisi, 101(1), 22–27.
91. Tekeli, İ. (1994). The Development of the Istanbul Metropolitan Area: Urban Administration and Planning. KENT Basımevi.
92. Tiwari, A., Kumar, P., Kalaiarasan, G. ve Ottosen, T. B. (2020). The impacts of existing and hypothetical green infrastructure scenarios on urban heat island formation. Environmental Pollution.
93. Toccolini, A., Fumagalli, N. ve Senes, G. (2006). Greenways planning in Italy: the Lambro River Valley Greenways System. Landscape and Urban Planning, 76, 98–111.
94. Tolunay, D. (2014). İstanbul’da Yapılması Planlanan Projelerin Orman Ekosistemi ve Endemik Türler Üzerindeki Etkileri.
95. Trombadore, A., Rolovic, D. ve Congiatu, P. P. (2018). Green infrastructure and low energy architecture for eco-tourism in Asinara island. Renewable Energy and Environmental Sustainability, 3(2).
96. TUİK. (2024). Nüfus Verileri. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu.
97. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı. (2023). On İkinci Kalkınma Planı (2024-2028). https://www.sbb.gov.tr/on-ikinci-kalkinma-plani-2024-2028/ (Erişim tarihi: 10.10.2025).
98. UK. (2016). Chapter 5: Green infrastructure .London Environment Strategy. https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/london_environment_strategy_0.pdf (eRİŞİM TARİHİ: 20.10.2025).
99. Uslu, A. ve Shakouri, N. (2013). Kentsel peyzajda yeşil altyapı ve biyolojik çeşitliliği destekleyecek olanaklar. Turkish Journal of Scientific Reviews, (1), 46–50.
100. Vincevica-Gaile, Z., Burlakovs, J., Fonteina-Kazeka, M., Wdowin, M., Hanc, E., Rudovica, V., … Zahoor, M. (2023). Case Study-Based Integrated Assessment of Former Waste Disposal Sites Transformed to Green Space in Terms of Ecosystem Services and Land Assets Recovery. Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(4), 3256.
101. Wen, Y., Zhao, Y., Guan, Z. ve Zhang, X. (2023). Remodeling of Abandoned Land: A Review of Landscape Regeneration and the Reconstruction of Urban Landfill Sites. Sustainability (Switzerland), 15(14), 10810.
102. Williamson, K. (2003). Growing with green infrastructure. Retrieved June.
103. Wirth, P., Chang, J., Syrbe, R. U., Wende, W. ve Hu, T. (2018). Green infrastructure: a planning concept for the urban transformation of former coal-mining cities. International Journal of Coal Science and Technology.
104. Yenen, Z. (2001). A world city on water: urban development of Istanbul and transformation of townscape. NED Journal of Architecture and Planning, 1(1–14).
105. Zhang, Z., Meerow, S., Newell, J. P. ve Lindquist, M. (2019). Enhancing landscape connectivity through multifunctional green infrastructure corridor modeling and design. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 38, 305–317.