Urban forests and sustainable planning: Legislation and practices in Turkey

Öz

The industrialization process in Turkey, which accelerated in the 1950s, led to radical changes in urbanization dynamics, providing opportunities for economic growth and modernization, but also bringing with it various problems such as unplanned construction, infrastructure deficiencies, traffic density and environmental degradation. Air and water pollution, loss of green space, decrease in biodiversity and increase in the urban heat island effect are among these problems that negatively affect the quality of life in cities, and therefore the need for sustainable urban planning is becoming increasingly important. In this context, urban forests have become one of the main components of contemporary urbanism with their functions such as protecting ecological balance, improving air quality, building resilience of cities against climate change and supporting the physical and mental health of urban dwellers. Urban forests, which contribute to the sustainability of urban life by providing social and economic contributions as well as ecosystem services, stand out as an indispensable element of creating healthy and livable cities today, when the need for nature is increasing. In this study, in the context of urban ecosystem problems, the contribution of urban forests to sustainable urban planning and urban ecosystem, the existence and effectiveness of existing policies and legal regulations for urban forests in Turkey and the potential of these regulations to produce solutions to urban problems were evaluated.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Urban forests
• Sustainable urban planning
• Urban quality of life
• Urban ecosystem

Kent ormanları ve sürdürülebilir planlama: Türkiye'deki mevzuat ve uygulamalar

Öz

Türkiye’de 1950’li yıllarla birlikte hız kazanan sanayileşme süreci, kentleşme dinamikle-rinde köklü değişimlere yol açarak ekonomik büyüme ve modernleşme açısından fırsatlar sunarken plansız yapılaşma, altyapı eksiklikleri, trafik yoğunluğu ve çevresel bozulma gibi çeşitli sorunları da beraberinde getirmiştir. Kentlerde yaşam kalitesini olumsuz etkileyen bu sorunlar arasında hava ve su kirliliği, yeşil alan kaybı, biyolojik çeşitliliğin azalması ve kentsel ısı adası etkisinin artması gibi unsurlar öne çıkmakta, bu nedenle sürdürülebilir kent planlaması gerekliliği giderek daha fazla önem kazanmaktadır. Bu bağlamda kent ormanları; ekolojik dengeyi koruma, hava kalitesini iyileştirme, kentlerin iklim değişikliğine karşı dayanıklılığını artırma, kent sakinlerinin fiziksel ve ruhsal sağ-lığını destekleme gibi işlevleriyle çağdaş şehirciliğin temel bileşenlerinden biri haline gelmiştir. Doğaya olan ihtiyacın arttığı günümüzde, sosyal ve ekonomik katkıların yanı sıra ekosistem hizmetleriyle kent yaşamının sürdürülebilirliğine katkı sağlayan kent or-manları, sağlıklı ve yaşanabilir kentler yaratmanın vazgeçilmez bir unsuru olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, kentsel ekosistem sorunları bağlamında kent ormanlarının sürdürülebilir kent planlamasına ve kentsel ekosisteme katkısı, Türkiye'de kent ormanları-na yönelik mevcut politika ve yasal düzenlemelerin varlığı, etkinliği ve bu düzenlemelerin kentsel sorunlara çözüm üretme potansiyeli değerlendirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kent ormanları
• Sürdürülebilir kentsel planlama
• Kentsel yaşam kalitesi
• Kent ekosistemi

Kaynakça

1. Alshuwaikhat, H. M., & Nkwenti, D. I. (2002). Developing sustainable cities in arid regions. Cities, 19(2), 85-94.
2. Ayaşlıgil, T., & Uslu, Ş. (2007). Kent Ormanlarının Rekreasyonel Amaçlı Kullanımı ve İstanbul Örneğinde İrdelenmesi. YTÜ Arch. Fac. E-Journal-MEGARON, 2(4).
3. Basner, M., Babisch, W., Davis, A., Brink, M., Clark, C., Janssen, S. A., & Stansfeld, S. (2014). Auditory and non-auditory effects of noise on health. The Lancet, 383(9925), 1325-1332.
4. Bekci, B., Durkaya, B., & Varol, T. (2016). Bartın Kent Ormanının Karbon Tutma, Oksijen Üretimi ve Rekreasyonel Açıdan Değerlendirilmesi. Kastamonu University Journal of Forestry Faculty, 16(1).
5. Berman, M. G., Jonides, J., & Kaplan, S. (2008). The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychological Science, 19(12), 1207-1212.
6. Cullen, G. (1995). The concise townscape. Routledge.
7. Crompton, J. L. (2005). The impact of parks on property values: Empirical evidence from the past two decades in the United States. Managing Leisure, 10(4), 203-218.
8. Davies, Z. G., Edmondson, J. L., Heinemeyer, A., Leake, J. R., & Gaston, K. J. (2011). Mapping an urban ecosystem service: Quantifying above‐ground carbon storage at a city‐wide scale. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48(5), 1125-1134.

9. Dearborn, D. C., & Kark, S. (2010). Motivations for conserving urban biodiversity. Conservation Biology, 24(2), 432-440.
10. Demirel, Ö., Pirselimoğlu, Z., Sarıkoç, E., Özdemir, B. (2011). Kent Ormanlarının Sosyal ve Çevresel İşlevlerinin Kullanıma Dayalı Bozulma Süreci. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 36(2), 201-208.
11. Elmqvist, T., Fragkias, M., Goodness, J., Güneralp, B., Marcotullio, P. J., McDonald, R. I., & Wilkinson, C. (2013). Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: Challenges and opportunities: A global assessment. Springer.
12. Fang, C. F., & Ling, D. L. (2003). Investigation of the noise reduction provided by tree belts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 63(4), 187-195.
13. Fawcett–Thompson, M. (1996). The urbanist revision of development. Urban Design International, 1(4), 301-322.
14. Geray, U. (2003). Kent Ormanı ve 2/B İşlemleri. İÜ Orman Fakültesi, İstanbul.
15. Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting cities for climate change: The role of the green infrastructure. Built Environment, 33(1), 115-133.
16. Gobster, P. H., Nassauer, J. I., Daniel, T. C., & Fry, G. (2007). The shared landscape: What does aesthetics have to do with ecology? Landscape Ecology, 22(7), 959-972.
17. Goddard, M. A., Dougill, A. J., & Benton, T. G. (2009). Scaling up from gardens: Biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 25(2), 90-98.
18. Grahn, P., & Stigsdotter, U. K. (2010). The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban parks and health and wellbeing. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 299-304.
19. Grey, G. W., & Deneke, F. J. (1986). Urban forestry (p. 299). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
20. Hartig, T. (2008). Green spaces and public health: The benefits of nature for human well-being. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116(3), A136-140.
21. Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014). Nature and health. Annual Review of Public Health, 35, 207-228.
22. Jennings, V. (2015). Urban green spaces and social inequality: Examining the role of green infrastructure in addressing social disparities. Urban Planning Review, 28(3), 345-360.
23. Jim, C. Y., & Chen, W. Y. (2006). Impacts of urban environmental elements on residential housing prices in Guangzhou (China). Landscape and Urban Planning, 78(4), 422-434.
24. Kabisch, N., Korn, H., Stadler, J., & Bonn, A. (2017). Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas: Linkages between science, policy and practice. Springer Nature.
25. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press.
26. Kale, B., (2019). Kent Ormanlarının Sunduğu Ekolojik Hizmetler, Kent Akademisi, Volume, 12 (39), Issue 3, Pages, 420-440
27. Kuo, F. E. (2003). The role of arboriculture in a healthy social ecology. Journal of Arboriculture, 29(3), 148-155.
28. Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
29. Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press.
30. Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: An observational population study. The Lancet, 372(9650), 1655-1660.
31. Nowak, D. J., Crane, D. E., & Stevens, J. C. (2006). Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11(4), 449-453.
32. Nowak, D. J., Greenfield, E. J., Hoehn, R. E., & Lapoint, E. (2013). Carbon storage and sequestration by trees in urban and community areas of the United States. Environmental Pollution, 178, 229-236.
33. Oke, T. R. (1982). The energetic basis of the urban heat island. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 108, 1-24.
34. Oke, T. R., Mills, G., Christen, A., & Voogt, A. J. (2017). The urban climate. Cambridge University Press.
35. Öner, N., Ayan, S., Sıvacıoğlu, A., & İmal, B. (2007). Kent ormancılığı ve kent ormanlarının çevresel etkileri. Kastamonu University Journal of Forestry Faculty, 7(2), 190-203.
36. Seto, K., Fragkias, M., Güneralp, B., & Reilly, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLOS ONE, 6(8), 1-9.
37. Tülek, B., & Ersoy Mirici, M. (2019). Kentsel Sistemlerde Yeşil Altyapı ve Ekosistem Hizmetleri. PEYZAJ, 1(2), 1-11.
38. Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemela, J., & James, P. (2007). Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using green infrastructure: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81(3), 167-178.
39. Tyrväinen, L., Pauleit, S., Seeland, K., & van den Bosch, C. (2007). Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 6(4), 309-317.
40. Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224(4647), 420-421.
41. UNESCO. (2022). Sustainable development goals: Goal 11 – Sustainable cities and communities. Retrieved from www.unesco.org.
42. Van Diepen, A., & Voogd, H. (2001). Sustainability and planning: Does urban form matter?. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 4(1), 59-74.
43. Van Geenhuisan, M., & Nijkamp, P. (1994). Sürdürülebilir kenti nasıl planlamalı. Toplum ve Bilim Dergisi, 64(65), 129-140.
44. Yılmaz, S., Bulut, Z., & Yeşil, P. (2011). Kent Ormanlarının Kentsel Mekana Sağladığı Faydalar. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37(1), 131-136.
45. Van Renterghem, T., & Botteldooren, D. (2016). View on outdoor vegetation reduces noise annoyance for dwellers near busy roads. Landscape and Urban Planning, 148, 203-215.
46. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). Our common future. Oxford University Press.
47. Wells, N. M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Nearby nature: A buffer of life stress among rural children. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 311-330.
48. World Health Organization (WHO). (2018). Environmental noise guidelines for the European region. WHO Regional Office for Europe.
49. World Health Organization (WHO). (2019). Urban green spaces and health. https://www.who.int/sustainable-development/cities/health-risks/urban-green-space/en/ (E.T: 10.01.2025).
50. Ziter, C. D., Pedersen, E. J., Kucharik, C. J., & Turner, M. G. (2019). Scale-dependent interactions between tree canopy cover and impervious surfaces reduce daytime urban heat during summer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(15), 7575-7580.
51. https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.4122.pdf
52. https://www.ab.gov.tr/195.html
53. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/tur169415.pdf
54. https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.5531.pdf
55. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2013/03/20130305-9.htm
56. https://www.ogm.gov.tr/tr/e-kutuphane-sitesi/mevzuat-sitesi/Tebligler/Mesire%20Yerleri%20Uygulama%20Tebli%C4%9Fi.pdf
57. https://www.ogm.gov.tr/tr/e-kutuphane/resmi-istatistikler