21. Yüzyılda Kentsel Adalet: Kapsayıcı Kent Planlaması Yoluyla Eşitsizliğin Ele Alınması

Öz

Kentsel alanlar, karmaşık sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel zorlukların neden olduğu sistemik eşitsizlikleri ele almak için giderek ön plana çıkmaktadır. Bu makale, eşitlik, katılım ve sürdürülebilirliği önceliklendiren dönüştürücü bir çerçeve olarak adalet odaklı kentsel kalkınmayı incelemektedir. Kaliteli eğitim, sağlık hizmetleri, kamu hizmetleri, uygun fiyatlı konut ve ulaşım imkanlarına eşit erişim sağlanarak, şehirler eşitsizlikleri azaltabilir ve sosyal hareketliliği teşvik edebilir. Yönetişimde usuli adalet ve hesap verebilirlik, güveni artırarak ve kapsayıcı karar alma süreçlerini destekleyerek kentsel sistemleri daha da güçlendirmektedir. Katılımcı bütçeleme, kapsayıcı imar ve topluluk odaklı yenileme projeleri gibi küresel örnekler, adalet merkezli yaklaşımların sosyo-ekonomik uçurumları nasıl kapatabileceğini ve canlı kentsel alanlar yaratabileceğini göstermektedir. Bu fırsatlara rağmen, adalet odaklı politikaların uygulanması, sınırlı kaynaklar, siyasi direnç ve kurumsal kısıtlamalar gibi önemli engellerle karşılaşmaktadır. Bu engellerin aşılması, eşitlik ve kapsayıcılığı kentsel planlama ve yönetişimde temel ilkeler olarak konumlandıran bir paradigma değişikliği gerektirir. Bu makale, adaletin yalnızca bir ideal değil, aynı zamanda kentsel eşitsizlikleri ele almak ve daha eşitlikçi, dirençli ve sürdürülebilir bir gelecek şekillendirmek için pratik bir araç olduğunu savunmaktadır. Kentsel nüfuslar büyüdükçe, şehirler sistemik eşitsizlikleri dönüştürmek ve toplulukları güçlendirmek için yenilikçi ve iş birliğine dayalı yaklaşımları benimsemelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kentsel Adalet
• Kentsel Kalkınmada Eşitlik
• Kapsayıcı Yönetişim
• Sürdürülebilir Şehirler
• Katılımcı Kentsel Planlama

Etik Beyan

Etik kurul belgesi gerektiren bir çalışma değildir.

Urban Justice in the 21st Century: Addressing Inequality Through Inclusive Urban Planning

Öz

Urban areas are increasingly coming to the forefront in addressing systemic inequalities caused by complex social, economic, and environmental challenges. The study examines justice-oriented urban development as a transformative framework that prioritizes equity, participation, and sustainability. By ensuring equitable access to quality education, healthcare, public services, affordable housing, and transportation, cities can reduce disparities and promote social mobility. Procedural justice and accountability in governance further strengthen urban systems by fostering trust and supporting inclusive decision-making processes. Global examples such as participatory budgeting, inclusive zoning, and community-driven revitalization projects demonstrate how justice-centered approaches can bridge socio-economic divides and create vibrant urban spaces. Despite these opportunities, the implementation of justice-oriented policies faces significant obstacles, including limited resources, political resistance, and institutional constraints. Overcoming these barriers requires a paradigm shift that positions equity and inclusion as core principles in urban planning and governance. The study argues that justice is not merely an ideal, but also a practical tool for addressing urban inequalities and shaping a more equitable, resilient, and sustainable future. As urban populations grow, cities must adopt innovative and collaborative approaches to transform systemic inequities and empower communities.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Urban Justice
• Equity in Urban Development
• Inclusive Governance
• Sustainable Cities
• Participatory Urban Planning

Etik Beyan

The study does not necessitate an approval of ethical committee.

Kaynakça

1. Amado, M. P., Santos, C. V., Moura, E. B., & Silva, V. G. (2010). Public participation in sustainable urban planning. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 5(2), 102–108.
2. Biswas, R., Jana, A., Arya, K., & Ramamritham, K. (2019). A good-governance framework for urban management. Journal of Urban Management, 8(2), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2018.12.009
3. Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M. (2005). Rethinking sustainable cities: Multilevel Governance and the ‘urban’ politics of climate change. Environmental Politics, 14(1), 42-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/0964401042000310178
4. Campbell, H., Tait, M., & Watkins, C. (2014). Is there space for better planning in a neoliberal world? Implications for planning practice and theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 34(1), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X13514614
5. Cook, I. R., & Swyngedouw, E. (2012). Cities, social cohesion and the environment: Towards a future research agenda. Urban Studies, 49(9), 1959-1979. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012444887
6. de Sousa Santos, B. (1998). Participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre: Toward a redistributive democracy. Politics & Society, 26(4), 461-510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329298026004003
7. Fainstein, S. S. (2014). The just city. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 18(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2013.834643
8. Fainstein, S. S. (2017). Urban planning and social justice. In The Routledge handbook of planning theory (p. 130–142). Routledge.

9. Farrelly, M. (2009). Citizen participation and neighbourhood governance: Analysing democratic practice. Local Government Studies, 35(4), 387-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930902992675
10. Fincher, R., & Iveson, K. (2012). Justice and injustice in the city. Geographical Research, 50(3), 231-241. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-5871.2011.00742.x
11. Fitzgibbons, J., & Mitchell, C. L. (2019). Just urban futures? Exploring equity in “100 Resilient Cities.” World Development, 122, 648-659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.06.021
12. Gössling, S. (2013). Urban transport transitions: Copenhagen, city of cyclists. Journal of Transport Geography, 33, 196-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.10.013
13. Guarneros-Meza, V. (2015). The local bureaucrat in the making of urban power. Cities, 44, 146-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.07.004
14. Guzman, L. A., & Bocarejo, J. P. (2017). Urban form and spatial urban equity in Bogota, Colombia. Transportation Research Procedia, 25, 4491-4506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.345
15. Harvey, D. (2010). Social justice and the city (Vol. 1). University of Georgia Press.
16. Harvey, D. (2019). City and justice: Social movements in the city. In The human sustainable city (p. 235–254). Routledge.
17. Hendriks, F. (2014). Understanding good urban governance: Essentials, shifts, and values. Urban Affairs Review, 50(4), 553-576. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087413511782
18. Kempin Reuter, T. (2019). Human rights and the city: Including marginalized communities in urban development and smart cities. Journal of Human Rights, 18(4), 382-402. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2019.1629887
19. Kuo, N. L., Chen, T. Y., & Su, T. T. (2020). A new tool for urban governance or just rhetoric? The case of participatory budgeting in Taipei City. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 55(2), 125-140. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajs4.110
20. Lefebvre, H. (2018). Şehir hakkı (3rd ed., I. Ergüden, Trans.). Sel Yayıncılık.
21. Lehman-Frisch, S. (2011). Segregation, spatial (in) justice, and the city. Berkeley Planning Journal, 24(1), 70-90. https://doi.org/10.5070/BP324111866
22. Lid, I. M., & Solvang, P. K. (2016). (Dis)ability and the experience of accessibility in the urban environment. Alter, 10(2), 181-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2015.11.003
23. Levy, C., & Dávila, J. D. (2017). Planning for mobility and socio-environmental justice: The case of Medellín, Colombia. In Environmental justice and urban resilience in the Global South (p. 37–55).
24. Marcuse, P. (2015). Gentrification, social justice and personal ethics. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(6), 1263-1269. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12319
25. Mercier, J. (2009). Equity, social justice, and sustainable urban transportation in the twenty-first century. Administrative Theory & Praxis, 31(2), 145-163. https://doi.org/10.2753/ATP1084-1806310201
26. Nahar Lata, L. (2021). To whom does the city belong? Obstacles to right to the city for the urban poor in Bangladesh. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 51(4), 638-659. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2020.1791934
27. Roy, A. O., Sophie, M. E. (2019). Housing justice: Towards a field of inquiry. Housing Justice in Unequal Cities, UCLA Pub. 13.
28. Shybalkina, I. (2022). Toward a positive theory of public participation in government: Variations in New York City's participatory budgeting. Public Administration, 100(4), 841-858. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12754
29. Silver, H., Scott, A., & Kazepov, Y. (2010). Participation in urban contention and deliberation. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34(3), 453-477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00963.x
30. Stafford, L., Vanik, L., & Bates, L. K. (2022). Disability justice and urban planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 23(1), 101-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2022.2035545
31. Swyngedouw, E., & Heynen, N. C. (2003). Urban political ecology, justice and the politics of scale. Antipode, 35(5), 898-918. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2003.00364.x