Urban Interventions in Tactical Urbanism: Two-Axis Analytical Model

Öz

Tactical urbanism is an alternative mode of urban production that emerges through small-scale, temporary, and experimental interventions in urban space. Existing literature has predominantly examined these practices in terms of intervention types and physical characteristics, while providing only limited insight into the processes through which interventions are produced, transformed, and institutionalized. This study aims to reconceptualize tactical urbanism as a relational process shaped by actor configurations, organizational capacity, and legitimacy relations. To this end, selected intervention cases were comparatively analyzed using a qualitative research approach based on five analytical variables: actor type, organizational level, continuity, legitimacy position, and spatial impact. The findings indicate that tactical urbanism practices can be interpreted through two analytical categories: tactical design and tactical collectivity. The proposed two-axis analytical model explains this distinction through the dimensions of actor scale and legitimacy position, associating tactical design primarily with individual interventions characterized by low levels of legitimacy, and tactical collectivity with collective and institutionally organized practices that achieve higher levels of organizational capacity and legitimacy. Consequently, this study proposes a two-axis analytical model that explains the transformation of tactical interventions over time as a process-oriented phenomenon, thereby contributing to the reconceptualization of tactical urbanism as a relational mode of urban production.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• everyday life
• urban intervention
• tactical urbanism
• tactical collectivity
• tactical design

Taktiksel Kentçilik Bağlamında Kentsel Müdahaleler: İki Eksenli Analitik Model

Öz

Taktiksel kentçilik, kent mekânına yönelik küçük ölçekli, geçici ve deneysel müdahaleler aracılığıyla ortaya çıkan alternatif bir kentsel üretim biçimidir. Mevcut literatür bu pratikleri çoğunlukla müdahale türleri ve fiziksel özellikleri üzerinden açıklamakta; ancak müdahalelerin üretim, dönüşüm ve kurumsallaşma süreçlerini sınırlı biçimde ele almaktadır. Çalışma, taktiksel kentçiliği aktör yapıları, örgütlenme kapasitesi ve meşruiyet ilişkileri çerçevesinde şekillenen ilişkisel bir süreç olarak yeniden kavramsallaştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu doğrultuda seçilen müdahale örnekleri; eyleyici tipi, örgütlenme düzeyi, süreklilik, meşruiyet konumu ve mekânsal etki değişkenleri temelinde nitel karşılaştırmalı analiz yöntemiyle incelenmiştir. Bulgular, taktiksel kentçilik pratiklerinin "taktiksel tasarım" ve "taktiksel kolektivite" olmak üzere iki analitik kategori altında değerlendirilebileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Geliştirilen iki eksenli analitik model, bu ayrımı eyleyici ölçeği ile meşruiyet konumu eksenlerinde açıklamakta; taktiksel tasarımı bireysel ve düşük meşruiyet düzeyindeki müdahalelerle, taktiksel kolektiviteyi ise kolektif ve kurumsal örgütlenme düzeyine ulaşan uygulamalarla ilişkilendirmektedir. Sonuç olarak bu çalışma, müdahalelerin zaman içerisindeki dönüşümünü süreç odaklı biçimde açıklayan iki eksenli bir analitik model önererek, taktiksel kentçiliğin ilişkisel bir kentsel üretim biçimi olarak kavramsallaştırılmasına kuramsal katkı sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• gündelik hayat
• kentsel müdahale
• taktiksel kentçilik
• taktiksel kolektivite
• taktiksel tasarım

Kaynakça

1. Akgün Yüksekli, B., & Kabakoğlu, A. D. (2016). Mikro taktiklerden kentsel tasarım stratejilerine taktiksel kentçilik: Kentsel bir sanat ve zanaat biçimi. IMCOFE: International Multidisciplinary Congress of Eurasia Proceedings, 1, 502–513.
2. Al-Betawi, Y. N. (2024). An agile city? Tactical urbanism and responses to protracted displacement in the City of Amman, Jordan. Environment and Urbanization, 36(2), 377–400.
3. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
4. Bruzzese, A. (2026). Reclaiming Public Space Through Governance Transformation: The Case of Piazze Aperte, Milan. Urban Planning, 11, Article 11032. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.11032
5. Cardullo, P., Kitchin, R., & Di Feliciantonio, C. (2018). Living labs and vacancy in the neoliberal city. Cities, 73, 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.10.008
6. De Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life (S. Rendall, Trans.). University of California Press.
7. Douglas, G. C. (2018). The help-yourself city: Legitimacy and inequality in DIY urbanism. Oxford University Press.
8. Finn, D. (2014). DIY urbanism: Implications for cities. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 7(4), 381–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.891149

9. Holston, J. (1998). Spaces of insurgent citizenship. In L. Sandercock (Ed.), Making the invisible visible: A multicultural planning history (pp. 37–56). University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822396321-008
10. Hou, J. (Ed.). (2010). Insurgent public space: Guerrilla urbanism and the remaking of contemporary cities. Routledge.
11. Hou, J. (2020). Guerrilla urbanism: Urban design and the practices of resistance. Urban Design International, 25, 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-020-00118-6
12. Iveson, K. (2013). Cities within the city: Do-it-yourself urbanism and the right to the city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 941–956. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12053
13. Kilani, B. H., & Dhaher, N. (2024). Tactical urbanism: From temporary action to sustainable urban regeneration. Qeios. https://doi.org/10.32388/3WQAT5
14. Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell.
15. Lydon, M., Bartman, D., Woudstra, R., & Khawazad, A. (2011). Tactical urbanism vol. 1: Short-term action, long-term change. Retrieved from http://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism_vol.1
16. Lydon, M., Bartman, D., Garcia, T., Preston, R., & Woudstra, R. (2012). Tactical urbanism vol. 2: Short-term action, long-term change. Retrieved from http://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism_vol_2_final
17. Lydon, M., & Garcia, A. (2015). A tactical urbanism how-to. In Tactical urbanism (pp. 171–208). Island Press. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-567-0_5
18. Madanipour, A. (2017). Temporary use of space: Urban processes between flexibility, opportunity and precarity. Urban Studies, 55(5), 1093–1110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017705546
19. Morar, T., & Bertolini, L. (2013). Planning for pedestrians: A way out of traffic congestion. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 81, 600–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.483
20. Mould, O. (2014). Tactical urbanism: The new vernacular of the creative city. Geography Compass, 8(8), 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12146
21. Peck, J., Theodore, N., & Brenner, N. (2013). Neoliberal urbanism redux. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 1091–1099. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12066
22. Schreiber, F. (2025). The long road from urban experimentation to the transformation of urban planning practice: The case of tactical urbanism in the city of Barcelona. Urban Mobility, Article 100100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urbmob.2025.100100
23. Silva, P. (2016). Tactical urbanism: Towards an evolutionary cities’ approach? Urban Design International, 43(6), 1040–1051. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813516657340
24. Sparks, E. (2019). Tactical Urbanism in San Francisco: A Critical Planning Analysis. York University Digital Library (York University). http://hdl.handle.net/10315/36372
25. Stan, A., & Mărgăritescu, A. (2024). Urban Microspaces: Between the Figurative and Operative. Methodological Analysis Framework. Argument Spațiul Construit Concept Și Expresie, 16. https://doi.org/10.54508/argument.16.16
26. Stevens, Q., Leorke, D., Dovey, K., Awepuga, F., & Morley, M. (2024a). From 'pop-up' to permanent: Temporary urbanism as an emerging mode of strategic open-space planning. Cities, 154, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.105376
27. Stevens, Q., Leorke, D., Thai, H. M. H., Innocent, T., & Tolentino, C. (2024b). Playful, portable, pliable interventions into street spaces: deploying a ‘playful parklet’ across Melbourne’s suburbs. Journal of Urban Design, 29(2), 231–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2023.2227099
28. Suslowicz, J., & Hillnhütter, H. (2025). From temporariness to mobility futures: A review of progress in tactical urbanism as an active travel planning tool. Transport Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 32, Article 101510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101510
29. Talen, E. (2015). Do-it-yourself urbanism: A history. Journal of Planning History, 14(2), 135–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513214549325
30. Tardiveau, A., & Mallo, D. (2014). Unpacking and challenging habitus: An approach to temporary urbanism as a socially engaged practice. Journal of Urban Design, 19(4), 456–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2014.923743
31. Çıplak kent haritası (Debord, 1958), https://www.museodelcamminare.org/progetti/re_iter/rumney/delmonte_en.html (erişim tarihi: 02.04.2025)
32. Liz Christy Community Garden. https://gardens.si.edu/garden-story/liz-christy-community-garden/ (erişim tarihi: 06.03.2025)
33. Post-it savaşları. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/05/canal-street-buildings-are-waging-a-post-it-war.html (erişim tarihi: 08.06.2025)
34. Yarn Bombing. https://www.artfido.com/grandmother-yarn-bombs-her-town-in-the-name-of-art/ (erişim tarihi: 10.03.2025)
35. PARK(ing) Day. https://streetswithoutcars.wordpress.com/2014/08/23/parking-day/(erişim tarihi: 12.03.2025)
36. City Repair Project. https://cityrepair.org/ (erişim tarihi: 16.03.2025)
37. Superblock – Barselona. https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/superilles/en/ (erişim tarihi: 15.03.2025)
38. TOPUK Projesi. https://www.marmara.gov.tr/en/streets-transforming-for-children (erişim tarihi: 16.03.2025)