Afetlere Dirençli Kentler İçin Kardeş Afet Parkı Yaklaşımı: Yedisu Segmenti’nde Pilot İl Seçimi

Öz

Afetlere dirençli kentler, doğa kaynaklı afetlere karşı hazırlıklı, esnek ve hızlı toparlanabilen yerleşimler olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Özellikle 2000’li yıllardan itibaren uluslararası politika ve çalışmalarda, afet öncesi risk azaltımı ve afet sonrası iyileşme süreçlerinde kentsel dayanıklılığın güçlendirilmesi öncelikli hale gelmiştir. Bu bağlamda kamusal açık ve yeşil alanlar, deprem gibi yıkıcı afetlerde güvenli toplanma ve geçici barınma mekânları olarak kritik bir rol üstlenmektedir. Bu çalışmada, kardeş şehir modelinden esinlenerek geliştirilen Kardeş Afet Parkları yaklaşımı kapsamında, Yedisu sismik boşluğu çevresindeki iller için pilot il seçimi amaçlanmıştır. Literatürden belirlenen kriterler BWM yöntemiyle ağırlıklandırılmış, TOPSIS analizi sonucunda Erzincan en uygun pilot il olarak belirlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Afet yönetimi
• Afet Parkı
• Kardeş Afet Parkı

Sister Disaster Park Approach for Disaster Resilient Cities: Pilot Province Selection on the Yedisu Segment

Öz

Resilient cities are defined as settlements that are prepared for disasters, flexible, and capable of rapid recovery. Particularly since the 2000s, strengthening urban resilience in pre-disaster risk reduction and post-disaster recovery processes has become a priority in international policy and practice. In this context, public open and green spaces play a critical role as safe gathering and temporary shelter spaces in destructive disasters such as earthquakes. In this study, within the scope of the Sister Disaster Parks approach, developed by drawing inspiration from the sister city model, the aim is to select a pilot province for the provinces surrounding the Yedisu seismic gap. The criteria identified from the literature were weighted using the BWM method, and Erzincan was determined to be the most suitable pilot province as a result of the TOPSIS analysis.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Disaster management
• Disaster Park
• Sister Disaster Park

Kaynakça

1. Akbayram K., Bayrak E., Pamuk E., Özer Ç., Kıranşan K., Varolgüneş S., 2022. Dynamic sub-surface characteristic and the active faults of the Genç District locating over the Bingöl Seismic Gap of the East Anatolian Fault Zone, Eastern Turkey, Natural Hazards, 114(1), 825-847.
2. Alawi M., Chu D., 2024. New approach to integrating disaster resilience into public open space planning and design, Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(9), 5222.
3. Alawi M., Chu D., Hammad S., 2023. Resilience of public open spaces to earthquakes: A case study of Chongqing, China, Sustainability, 15(2), 1092.
4. Alkan H., Öztürk S., Akkaya İ., 2023. Seismic hazard implications in and around the Yedisu seismic gap (Eastern Türkiye) based on Coulomb stress changes, b-values, and S-wave velocity, Pure and Applied Geophysics, 180(9), 3227-3248.
5. Allan P., Bryant M., Wirsching C., Garcia D., Teresa Rodriguez M., 2013. The influence of urban morphology on the resilience of cities following an earthquake, Journal of Urban Design, 18(2), 242-262.
6. Aman D.D., Aytac G., 2022. Multi-criteria decision making for city-scale infrastructure of post-earthquake assembly areas: Case study of Istanbul, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 67, 102668.
7. Başgün Ö.F., Bulut Y., 2023. Post-disaster use of urban parks in settlements with high earthquake density: The example of Kültür Park, Research Article (preprint, it has not been peer reviewed by a journal), https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3255224/v1
8. Bayram A., Sözen Ç., 2024. Disaster Management in Turkey and a New Model Proposal: Sister City Disaster Management Model, Akademik Yaklaşımlar Dergisi, 15(1-Deprem Özel Sayısı-), 26-47.

9. Bingöl Valiliği, 2021. Bingöl İl Afet Risk Azaltma Planı (İRAP), T.C. Bingöl Valiliği Bingöl İl Afet ve Acil Durum Müdürlüğü, Bingöl, Erişim adresi: https://bingol.afad.gov.tr/kurumlar/bingol.afad/E-Kutuphane/Il-Planlari/BINGOL-AFAD-IRAP-2012.pdf
10. Birkmann J., 2013. Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards: towards disaster resilient societies, United Nations University, Institude for Environment and Human Security, 688p.
11. Caymaz G.F.Y., Komar H., 2021. Analysis of earthquake park design criteria: cases in Ataşehir and Topkapı Parks, Istanbul, Architecture and Urban Planning, 17(1), 88-102.
12. Chakraborty S., 2022. TOPSIS and Modified TOPSIS: A comparative analysis, Decision Analytics Journal, 2, 100021.
13. Cutter S.L., 2021. Building disaster resilience: Steps toward sustainability, Challenges, 12(1), 1-16.
14. Cutter S.L., Boruff B.J., Shirley W.L., 2012. Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. (In: Hazards vulnerability and environmental justice, Routledge), 115-132.
15. Çelik A., Erduran F., 2011. Determination of earthquake park facilities in Kocaeli, African Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(24), 5558-5566.
16. Çetin M., Kaya A., Elmastas N., Adiguzel F., Siyavuş A., Kocan N., 2023. Assessment of emergency gathering points and temporary shelter areas for disaster resilience in Elazığ, Turkey, Natural Hazards, 120, 1925-1949.
17. Ecer F., 2020. Çok kriterli karar verme geçmişten günümüze kapsamlı bir yaklaşım, Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara.
18. Erkal T., Değerliyurt M., 2009. Türkiye’de afet yönetimi, Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 14(22), 147-164.
19. Erzincan Valiliği, 2021. Erzincan İl Afet Risk Azaltma Planı (İRAP), T.C. Erzincan Valiliği Erzincan İl Afet ve Acil Durum Müdürlüğü, Erzincan, Erişim adresi: https://www.erzincan.bel.tr/sayfa/irap-eylem-tablosu
20. Fortunoff W., Martens C., Méndez J.A., 2025. A space for kinship in city diplomacy: Re-imagining sister cities amid global migration, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 1(aop), 1-31.
21. French E.L., Birchall S.J., Landman K., Brown R.D., 2019. Designing public open space to support seismic resilience: A systematic review, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 34, 1-10.
22. Greely A.W., 1906. Earthquake in California, April 18, 1906, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.
23. Hardoy J., 2019. Urban disaster, (In: The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Studies, Wiley-Blackwell), 1-10.
24. Jayakody R.R.J.C., Amaratunga D., Haigh R., 2016. The use of public open spaces for disaster resilient urban cities, IIIRR.
25. Kara G., Özhan A.S., 2025. Afet Acil Durum Toplanma Alanlarının Yer Seçim Kriterleri ve Tsunami Riskine Yönelik Bir Değerlendirme: Trabzon Akçaabat Örneği, Türk Uzaktan Algılama ve CBS Dergisi, 6(2), 360-383.
26. Kıranşan K., 2022. Kuzey Anadolu Fay Zonu (KAFZ) üzerinde yer alan Yedisu havzası (Bingöl) ve çevresinde aktif tektonizmanın jeomorfolojik verilerle belirlenmesi, Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(3), 1213-1238.
27. Kurt Konakoğlu S.S., Çelik K.T., 2021. Afet ve acil durum toplanma alanı olarak belirlenen parkların deprem parkı olabilirliklerinin amasya kenti örneğinde değerlendirilmesi, International Social Sciences Studies Journal, 7(81), 1740-1755.
28. Marangoz A., Enginöz E.B., 2021. Afet ve kent planlama ara kesitinde bir olgu: Afet parkları, Ölçü Dergisi, TMMOB İstanbul İl Koordinasyon Kurulu.
29. Masuda N., 2014. Disaster refuge and relief urban park system in Japan, Landscape Architecture Frontiers, 2(4), 52-61.
30. McKean C.A., 2014. Tokyo’s disaster parks: hi-tech survival bunkers hidden under green spaces, Recilent cities, The Guardian, Erişim adresi: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/aug/19/tokyo-disaster-parks-hi-tech-survival-bunkers-hidden-green-spaces-earthquake
31. Meerow S., Newell J.P., Stults M., 2016. Defining urban resilience: A review, Landscape and Urban Planning, 147, 38-49.
32. Meral A., Kayalı R., Kabay Y., Avcı Y.E., 2023. Bingöl kenti açık yeşil alanlarının doğal afetlere hazırlık durumları ve leke senaryoları, Bozok Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1), 58-72.
33. Ogawa N., 2014. Disascape to preemptive landscape: resilient parks for earthquake disaster management, Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia.
34. Rezaei J., 2015. Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method, Omega, 53, 49-57.
35. Rezaei J., Nispeling T., Sarkis J., Tavasszy L., 2016. A supplier selection life cycle approach integrating traditional and environmental criteria using the best worst method, Journal of Cleaner Production, 135, 577-588.
36. Saaty T.L., Vargas L.G., 2006. Decision making with the analytic network process, Springer Science+Business Media, New York, U.S.A.
37. Sarıçam S., 2019. Kentsel Açik-Yeşil Alanlarin Afet Sonrasi İşlevleri, GSI Journals Serie B: Advancements in Business and Economics, 2(1), 1-15.
38. SBB, 2023. 2023 Kahramanmaraş and Hatay Earthquakes Report, Ankara, Erişim adresi: https://www.sbb.gov.tr/2023-kahramanmaras-ve-hatay-depremleri-raporu/
39. Shaluf I.M., Ahmadun F., Said A.M., 2003. A review of disaster and crisis, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 12(1), 24-32.
40. Stein R.S., Barka A.A., Dieterich J.H., 1997. Progressive failure on the North Anatolian fault since 1939 by earthquake stress triggering, Geophysical Journal International, 128(3), 594-604.
41. Sunbul F., 2019. Time-dependent stress increase along the major faults in eastern Turkey, Journal of Geodynamics, 126, 23-31.
42. Tokyo Metropolitan Park Association, 2024. Disaster prevention parks, Erişim adresi: https://www.tokyo-park.or.jp/special/bousai/english/index.html
43. Tunceli Valiliği, 2021. Tunceli İl Afet Risk Azaltma Planı (İRAP), T.C. Tunceli Valiliği Tunceli İl Afet ve Acil Durum Müdürlüğü, Tunceli,, Erişim adresi: https://tunceli.afad.gov.tr/il-planlari
44. Türker T., Bayrak Y., 2017. Assessment of earthquake hazard parameters with Bayesian approach method around Karlıova Triple Junction, Eastern Turkey, IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 95(3), 032038, IOP Publishing.
45. Türker H., Kalkan M., Ortaç G., 2024. Reimagining resilience: The transformative role of urban green areas in Türkiye's disaster preparedness, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 106, May 2024, 104397.
46. UNISDR, 2009. Terminology, United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), Geneva.
47. UNISDR, 2015. Segregated urban disaster risk, United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR).
48. Uyar H.E., Töre E., 2023. Deprem sonrası ilk durak: İstanbul’da toplanma alanlarına dair bir inceleme, Afet ve Risk Dergisi, 6(1), 226-242.
49. Vasilevska L., Slavković S., 2023. Urban resilience: A systematic literature review, Sustainable Cities and Society, 94, 104599.
50. World Bank, 2018. Nature-Based Solutions for Disaster Risk Management, World Bank Group, Washington, D.C.
51. Zabcı C., Akyüz H.S., Sançar T., 2017. Palaeoseismic history of the eastern part of the North Anatolian Fault (Erzincan, Turkey): Implications for the seismicity of the Yedisu seismic gap, Journal of Seismology, 21(6), 1407-1425.