A practical NbS framework for ecological landscape design: The Pınarbaşı example

Öz

Recreation and leisure activities have become vital components for enhancing social welfare and overall quality of life in contemporary urban and rural environments. Within this context, natural areas play a crucial role in strengthening social interaction, maintaining ecological resilience, and supporting public health. The growing interest in nature-based recreation highlights the need for design strategies that integrate ecological preservation with user-oriented functionality. This study develops a landscape design model explicitly grounded in Nature-Based Solutions (NbS), positioning NbS as the core conceptual and methodological framework of the project. Conducted in the Pınarbaşı Public Garden located in the Şarkikaraağaç district of Isparta, Türkiye, the research demonstrates how NbS principles can be operationalized in ecological landscape design to address environmental, social, and functional needs simultaneously. The design process was structured around a comprehensive analysis of topography, vegetation, hydrology, land use, and social dynamics. The proposed design integrates ecological services such as shading, water management, carbon sequestration, and soil protection with multifunctional recreational facilities including picnic areas, bicycle paths, wooden bridges, and local product stands. Sustainable materials, minimal intervention strategies, and universal accessibility standards were prioritized throughout the design process. The findings demonstrate that NbS-based landscape design enhances ecological continuity, supports local identity, and strengthens the interaction between humans and nature. This case study offers a replicable model for developing resilient recreational landscapes that contribute to environmental sustainability and community well-being.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ecological resilience
• Landscape design
• Nature-based solutions (NbS)
• Planting design
• Slope stabilization
• Sustainable recreation

Etik Beyan

The author declares that this study complies with both national and international research and publication ethics, and that ethics committee approval was not required.

Teşekkür

The project design for the Pınarbaşı Public Garden in Çarıksaraylar town was drawn by Dr. Gizem Dinç and her master’s students from the Department of Landscape Architecture, Süleyman Demirel University. The author gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the Çarıksaraylar Municipality staff and the master’s students (Görkem Özden, Sılanur Ünal, and Zeynep Dila Dizibüyük) for their valuable support throughout the project process.

Ekolojik peyzaj tasarımı için uygulamalı bir doğa tabanlı çözüm (DtÇ) Çerçevesi: Pınarbaşı örneği

Öz

Günümüzde rekreasyon ve boş zaman etkinlikleri, kentsel ve kırsal çevrelerde toplumsal refahı ve yaşam kalitesini artıran temel bileşenler haline gelmiştir. Bu bağlamda doğal alanlar, sosyal etkileşimi güçlendirmede, ekolojik dayanıklılığı sürdürmede ve halk sağlığını desteklemede kritik bir rol oynamaktadır. Doğa temelli rekreasyon alanlarına artan ilgi, ekolojik koruma ile kullanıcı odaklı işlevselliği bütünleştiren tasarım stratejilerine duyulan gereksinimi ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışma, Doğa Tabanlı Çözümler (DtÇ) yaklaşımına dayanan bir peyzaj tasarım modeli geliştirmekte ve DtÇ’yi projenin temel kavramsal ve yöntemsel çerçevesi olarak konumlandırmaktadır. Isparta ili Şarkikaraağaç ilçesinde yer alan Pınarbaşı Millet Bahçesi’nde yürütülen araştırma, DtÇ ilkelerinin ekolojik peyzaj tasarımında çevresel, sosyal ve işlevsel gereksinimleri eş zamanlı olarak karşılayacak şekilde nasıl uygulanabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Tasarım süreci; topoğrafya, bitki örtüsü, hidroloji, arazi kullanımı ve sosyal dinamikleri kapsayan kapsamlı bir analiz üzerine yapılandırılmıştır. Önerilen tasarım; gölgeleme, su yönetimi, karbon tutumu ve toprak koruma gibi ekolojik hizmetleri, piknik alanları, bisiklet yolları, ahşap köprüler ve yerel ürün satış stantları gibi çok işlevli rekreasyonel alanlarla bütünleştirmektedir. Tasarım süreci boyunca sürdürülebilir malzeme kullanımı, minimum müdahale stratejileri ve evrensel erişilebilirlik standartlarına öncelik verilmiştir. Bulgular, DtÇ temelli peyzaj tasarımının ekolojik sürekliliği güçlendirdiğini, yerel kimliği desteklediğini ve insan-doğa etkileşimini artırdığını göstermektedir. Bu örnek çalışma, çevresel sürdürülebilirliğe ve toplumsal refaha katkı sağlayan dayanıklı rekreasyon alanlarının geliştirilmesi için uygulanabilir bir model sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekolojik dayanıklılık
• Peyzaj tasarımı
• Doğa tabanlı çözümler (DtÇ)
• Bitkisel tasarım
• Şev stabilizasyonu
• Sürdürülebilir rekreasyon

Kaynakça

1. Albert, C., Brillinger, M., Guerrero, P., Gottwald, S., Henze, J., Schmidt, S., Ott, E., Schröter, B., 2021. Planning nature-based solutions: Principles, steps, and insights. Ambio, 50(8): 1446-1461.
2. Almenar, J.B., Elliot, T., Rugani, B., Philippe, B., Gutierrez, T.N., Sonnemann, G., Geneletti, D., 2021. Nexus between nature-based solutions, ecosystem services and urban challenges. Land Use Policy, 100 (104898): 1-22.
3. Brändli, U.B., Ulmer, U., 2001. Recreational function. In: Swiss National Forest inventory: Methods and models of the second assessment (Ed: Brassel P., Lischke H.), Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, pp.254-264.
4. Çakır, M., 2023a. Kargılı recreation area landscape design process. Journal of Protected Areas Research, 2(2): 1-15.
5. Çakır, M., 2023b. Şehit Ömer Halisdemir Square urban design and landscape design. Journal of Protected Areas Research, 2(2): 72-84.
6. Chen, B.X., Qi, X.H.,Qiu, Z.M., 2018. Recreational use of urban forest parks: A case study in Fuzhou National Forest Park, China. Journal of Forest Research, 23(3):183–189.
7. Cohen, D.A., Sturm, R., Han, B., Marsh, T., 2014. Introducing SOPARC: Quantifying the contribution of public parks to physical activity and health. RAND Corporation, Report, RR-774.
8. Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C., Maginnis, S., 2016. Nature-based solutions to address global societal challenges. IUCN, Report, Gland, Switzerland.

9. Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Braat, L., Kubiszewski, I., Fioramonti, L., Sutton, P., Farber S., Grasso, M., 2017. Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28: 1-1.
10. Dönmez, S., Aciksoz, S., 2010. Landscape planning and design principles of holiday village: Antalya Kemer Ulusoy holiday village. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(12): 1448-1455.
11. Dönmez, Ş., Koçak, N., Çakır, M., 2019. A new design approach for Süleyman Demirel University Botanical Garden. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 20(1): 62-71.
12. Eggermont, H., Balian, E., Azevedo, J.M.N., Beumer, V., Brodin, T., Claudet, J., Fady, B., Grube, M., Keune, H., Lamarque, P., Reuter, K., Smith, M., van Ham, C., Weisser, Wolfgang W., Le Roux, X., 2015. Nature-based solutions: new influence for environmental management and research in Europe. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 24(4): 243-248.
13. European Commission, 2015. Towards an EU research and innovation policy agenda for nature-based solutions and re-naturing cities: Final report of the Horizon 2020 expert group on nature-based solutions and re-naturing cities. Brussels: European Commission. https://data.europa.eu/ doi/10.2777/765301, Accessed: 05.08.2025.
14. Fagerholm, N., Eilola, S., Arki, V., 2021. Outdoor recreation and nature’s contribution to well-being in a pandemic situation-Case Turku, Finland. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 64: 127257.
15. Frantzeskaki, N., 2019. Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environmental Science and Policy, 93: 101-111.
16. Gül, A., Gezer, A., 2004. A model proposal for urban forest site selection and its evaluation in the case of Isparta. Proceedings of the 1st National Urban Forestry Congress. 9–11 April, Ankara, Türkiye, pp. 365–382.
17. Gül, A., Örücü, Ö.K., Karaca, Ö., 2006. An approach for recreation suitability analysis to recreation planning in Gölcük Nature Park. Environmental Management, 37(5): 606-625.
18. Hartig, T., Staats, H., 2006. The need for psychological restoration as a determinant of environmental preferences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(3): 215–226.
19. Hatt, P. 1946. The concept of natural area. American Sociological Review, 11(4): 423-427.
20. He, M., Wang, Y., Wang, W. J., Xie, Z., 2022. Therapeutic plant landscape design of urban forest parks based on the Five Senses Theory: A case study of Stanley Park in Canada. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parks, 10 (1): 97-112.
21. Hernández‐Blanco, M., Costanza, R., Chen, H., DeGroot, D., Jarvis, D., Kubiszewski, I., Montoya J., Sangha K., Stoeckl N. , Turner K., van ‘t Hoff, V., 2022. Ecosystem health, ecosystem services, and the well‐being of humans and the rest of nature. Global Change Biology, 28(17): 5027-5040.
22. Hobbie, S. E., Grimm, N. B., 2020. Nature-based approaches to managing climate change impacts in cities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 375(1794): 20190124.
23. IDCT (Isparta Directorate of Culture and Tourism), 2025. Şarkikaraağaç, https://isparta.ktb.gov.tr/TR-165539/ sarkikaraagac.html, Accessed: 05.07.2025.
24. Isparta Governorship, 2025. Şarkikaraağaç ilçesi hakkında. https://www.isparta.gov.tr/sarkikaraagac, Accessed: 05.07.2025.
25. IVST- Isparta Vocational School of Tourism, 2025. Şarkikaraağaç tanıtımı. https://sktmyo.isparta.edu.tr/tr/tanitim/sarkikaraagac-7709s.html, Accessed: 23.07.2025.
26. Kabisch, N., Frantzeskaki, N., Hansen, R., 2022. Principles for urban nature-based solutions. Ambio, 51(6): 1388-1401.
27. Kabisch, N., Frantzeskaki, N., Pauleit, S., Naumann, S., Davis, M., Artmann, M., Haase, D., Knapp, S., Korn, H., Stadler, J., Zaunberger, K., Bonn, A., 2016. Nature-based solutions to climate change mitigation and adaptation in urban areas: perspectives on indicators, knowledge gaps, barriers, and opportunities for action. Ecology and Society, 21(2): 39.
28. Lafortezza, R., Chen, J., Van Den Bosch, C. K., Randrup, T.B., 2018. Nature-based solutions for resilient landscapes and cities. Environmental Research, 165: 431-441.
29. Liu, H., Li, F., Li, J., Zhang, Y., 2017. The relationships between urban parks, residents’ physical activity, and mental health benefits: A case study from Beijing, China. Journal of Environmental Management, 190: 223–230.
30. Lynn, N.A., Brown, R.D., 2003. Effects of recreational use impacts on hiking experiences in natural areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64(1-2): 77-87.
31. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being. Island Press, Washington.
32. Olgun, R., Yilmaz, T., 2019. A'wot method in determination of sustainable strategic objectives towards open green areas in the medium sized cities: The case of Nigde, Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 28(7): 5188-5194.
33. Pauleit, S., Zölch, T., Hansen, R., Randrup, T.B., Konijnendijk van den Bosch, C., 2017. Nature-based solutions and climate change: Four shades of green. In: Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas: Linkages between science, policy and practice (Ed: Loorbach, D., Shiroyama, H., Wittmayer, J.M., Fujino, J., Mizuguchi, S.), Springer International Publishing, pp. 29–49.
34. Peschardt, K. K., Stigsdotter, U. K., 2013. Associations between park characteristics and perceived restorativeness of small public urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 112: 26–39. Raymond, C.M., Frantzeskaki, N., Kabisch, N., Berry, P., Breil, M., Nita, M. R., Geneletti D., Calfapietra, C., 2017. A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas. Environmental Science and Policy, 77: 15-24.
35. Roe, P., Hrymak, V. Dimanche, F., 2014. Assessing environmental sustainability in tourism and recreation areas: A risk-assessment-based model. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(2): 319-338.
36. RTMCT -Republic of Turkey Ministry of Culture and Tourism 2022. http://ktb.gov.tr, Accessed: 04.03.2025.
37. Samuelsson, K., Barthel, S., Colding, J., Macassa, G., Giusti, M., 2020. Urban nature as a source of resilience during social distancing amidst the coronavirus pandemic. OSF Preprints, Technical Report, Preprint No. 3wx5a
38. Şarkikaraağaç Governorship. 2025. Genel bilgiler. https://www.sarkikaraagac.gov.tr/genel-bilgiler, Accessed: 05.07.2025.
39. Şarkikaraağaç Municipality. 2025. Genel bilgiler. https://www.sarkikaraagac.bel.tr/sehir/genel-bilgiler/7/, Accessed: 23.07.2025.
40. Scott, M., Lennon, M., Haase, D., Kazmierczak, A., Clabby, G., Beatley, T., 2016. Nature-based solutions for contemporary cities. Planning Theory and Practice, 17(2): 267–300.
41. Tayefi Nasrabadi, M., 2022. How do nature-based solutions contribute to urban landscape sustainability?. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 24(1): 576-591.
42. Tuğluer, M., Gül, A., 2018. The use of UFORE model for determination of environmental effects and value of urban trees; case study of Isparta city. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 19(3): 293-307.
43. TÜİK, 2025. Adrese dayalı nüfus kayıt sistemi sonuçları. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, https://data.tuik.gov.tr, Accessed: 05.07.2025.
44. Tülek, B., Mirici, M.E., 2019. Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services on Urban Systems. Peyzaj, 1(2): 1-11.
45. Tupenaite, L., Kanapeckiene, L., Naimaviciene, J., Kaklauskas, A., Gecys, T., 2023. Timber construction as a solution to climate change: A systematic literature review. Buildings, 13(4):1-23.
46. Uzun, Ö. F., Ad, A. 2025. Sakarya Atatürk Park’s landscape design: An evaluation based on universal design principles. Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(1): 177-190.
47. Zorbaugh, H.W., 2005. The natural areas of the city. In: The Urban Sociology Reader