The Coordination of Actors in Urban Regeneration Projects: Fikirtepe, Istanbul, Turkey

2019·1.2 MB·English

by  Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs

Contemporary Urban Affairs

2019, Volume 3, Number 2, pages 114– 123

The Coordination of Actors in Urban Regeneration
Projects:
Fikirtepe, Istanbul, Turkey
* Ph.D. candidate TUBA SARI HAKSEVER1, Dr. CANDAN ÇINAR ÇITAK2
1 & 2 Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul, Turkey
1E mail: [email protected] and 2E mail: [email protected]

A R T I C L E I N F O: A B S T R A C T
Article history: It is necessary for urban regeneration projects to be carried out successfully
Received 16 April 2018 in coordination with other actors. During the process of realising
Accepted 23 May 2018
regeneration, many actors and stategically-given decision plays a crucial
Available online 12 October
2018 role. The ways how actors/factors are involved in the process, the
relationships founded among them and investigating the methods followed
Keywords:
during the process constitute the content of this study. The purpose of this
Fikirtepe;
study is to develop an approach with regard to the coordination establised
Urban Regeneration;
between actors/factors participated during the regeneration process. This
Actors;
Partnerships study covers the regeneration activities realised in Fikirtepe and its
surrounding area, and it aims to solve the relationships among the actors
during the time of planning and applications by using semi-structured
technique, one of the qualitative research methods, and detailed interviews.
Thanks to the data gained from the detailed interviews effectiveness of the
actors has been determined. By the help of the findings obtained from
Fikirtepe region, the relationships and coordination among the actors has
This work is licensed under a been revealed and a new approach has been created (and suggested)
Creative Commons Attribution
concerning the effectiveness and coordination.
- NonCommercial - NoDerivs 4.0.

"CC-BY-NC-ND"
CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS (2019), 3(2), 44-52.
https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2018.4708

www.ijcua.com
Copyright © 2018 Contemporary Urban Affairs. All rights reserved.

In our country, the issue of urban transformation
1. Introduction
has become one of the most discussed and
The concept of urban transformation have
disputed topic with the problems of
emerged with the interventions made to
urbanization and settlement that became
regenerate the areas that had collapsed both
more visible specifically following the
in social and economic terms. These
catastrophes in 1999 Marmara and Düzce
interventions were generally in the form of
earthquakes. (Kalağan and Çiftçi, 2012).
implementation of projects that will contribute
to the economic development of the city in
*Corresponding Author:
housing zones, old vacant ports and industrial Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul, Turkey
zones where the population decline was E-mail address: [email protected]
observed or where low income groups live
under poor economical and physical
conditions (Ataöv and Osmay, 2007).
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

When we take a look at the path of 1. It's objective is to change the nature of
transformation in Turkey and legislative an area (space) and to involve the residents of
regulations made in parallel with this we see the area and the other actors who have a say
that urban transformation is defined as in the future of that area.
'regeneration' but with the applications seen in 2. It covers various objectives and
time, the concept varied within itself and activities that intersects with basic functional
gained new dimensions. In order to have responsibilities of the state depending on
successful outcomes in urban transformation specific problems and potential of the area.
projects, it is necessary to carry out the 3. Special corporate structure of this
transformation in a coordinated manner with partnership may change however it includes a
all stakeholders. Multiple actors from local structure that generally works among different
government to centralized management, and stakeholders.
strategic decisions have a role in the Urban transformation practices now have a
transformation process. The approaches that multi-actor structure different than the previous
these actors bring in throughout the urban years. It is a multi-dimensional action process
transformation process, their relations and where a wide range of actors act together,
partnerships are the topics explored in this rather than the applications involving only the
study. public or private sector. The tree basic
To analyze the relations of the actors in elements referred above can be listed as
planning and implementation processes of the engagement, roles and responsibilities of the
urban transformation projects carried out in the public and partnerships.
study area, Fikirtepe neighborhood and its
vicinity, in-depth interviews were made using 2.2. Actors, Associations And Engagements In
one of the qualitative research methods, the The Urban Transformation
semi-structured interview technique. Multi-actor Main actors involved in the urban
structure of the transformation projects in and transformation process are the public sector
around Fikirtepe makes it possible to determine (centralized and local government), private
urban transformation actors and the way sector, local residents, voluntary sector and
actors are included in the process and to map other relevant groups (Turok 2005, Mccarthy
the relations of these actors. 2005). The members of the parties of the urban
transformation projects, their qualities,
2. Literature Review quantities may vary according to the quality of
2.1. Definition and Sacope of Urban the transformation project, the objectives,
Transformation spatial scale (approach for districts or the entire
Urban transformation is defined as city) and may shape according to the purpose
comprehensive vision and action which leads of transformation and other conditions ( Turok,
to the resolution of urban problems and which 2005). The term "partnership" that emerged
seeks to bring about a lasting improvement in according to the agreement reached as the
economic, physical, social and environmental result of political interests in UK draws the
conditions of an area that has been subject to conclusion that a closer bond between the
change (Roberts/Sykes 2000). Urban area that public and private sector and direct
undergoes a change may be a historical engagement of the local communities are
settlement, an industrial zone that lost its required (Mccarthy, 2005).
function or a housing zone with a lot of social Basically four main reasons stand out in
and location related problems. The process response to the question why partnerships are
that involves interventions made to required: first of all a multi-actor partnership is
economically, socially and physically resolve able to cover all aspects of the problem. This
the problems of the region is generally referred will help an efficient and fair distribution of the
to as "urban transformation". An urban funding where all sectors are engaged, which
transformation project should be based on makes it the second reason of the partnership
detailed analysis of urban area's condition and approach. And third of all, vertical and
effort should be made to reach an agreement horizontal engagement of all actors and
with best possible engagement and organizations results with coordination of
cooperation of all related stakeholders in activities, funds and efforts planned for the
regeneration of the area (Roberts / Sykes 2000). same purpose. The fourth reason is to ensure,
In its UK experience, Turok (2005) associates contrary to the top-to-bottom centralization
urban transformation concept with three basic approach, the engagement of the local
attributes. community with a more extensive role, since it

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 115
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

is the most affected party from the order to have a long-term transformation, the
transformation. Partnerships made in the urban residents who live in the area must own the
transformation with engagement of actors and process and engagement of the local
large-scale engagement of actors that work in community must be ensured in order to win
coordination, in an integrated way, by creating trust of the resident of the area.
financial resources and versatile strategies in 4) Voluntary agencies are extensive in
order to resolve the multi-dimensional and content and functional terms, and they are
complex structure of urban problems play an formed of civil society structures who play the
important role in urban transformation efforts. role of independently handling the non-profit
The partnership is formed with both the organizations, voluntary organizations like
organizational structure and the structure foundations and groups that provide funds to
created to set policies and the actors that the society and various issues of the community
enable achieving the common targets. Based and enlighten the public. (Turok, 2005).
on this, to begin with it is necessary to define Efficient urban transformation should be based
the roles of the actors that stand out in urban on engagement and cooperation of numerous
transformation processes (Beswick, 2001). actors and stakeholders including local
1) Public sector; In the transformation municipalities, states, national governments,
efforts, there is a strong public sector landowners, investors and corporations and
engagement that is managed by relevant organizations at all levels. The idea behind the
public institutions. It is composed of local partnership is that it gathers together different
authorities (generally the representatives of actors and participants in the urban
various units), economic development transformation process in order to create a
institutions, university and colleges, synergic effect. In its widest sense, a
representatives of regional and national partnership can be defined as a coalition of
administrations depending on the targets set. interest regulated officially, which includes
(Turok, 2005). Beswick (2001). Beswick suggest actors from different sectors (public and
that the public sector, which we can define as private) and which creates a common policy
the fundamental actor of the urban and common agenda and action plan (Lang
transformation process, generally leads the 2005).
urban transformation projects with its As urban problems have a multi-dimensional
supervisory and regulatory role in this and complex nature, it may help coordinating
partnership process. Another important partnership activities and exceeding beyond
function of the public sector is its ability to boundaries of traditional policies (Roberts/Sykes
minimize the private sector risks by making the 2000). Partnerships for urban regeneration is
spatial planning of the area and generating based on risk sharing by transferring the liability
information about political requirements in the of the public sector to private sector (Davies
area (Mccarthy, 2005). It is one of the most 2004). In the urban transformation process,
important qualities that enables the private mainly three types of public-private sector
sector to be part of the transformation process. partnership interventions are cited (Split, 2005):
(Özden, 2008). Public sector managed leadership model: This
2) The most important quality of the model is composed of political actors and
private sector and what sets it apart from the planning experts in the government and local
public sector is its fast operation power, design governments. It is the model where the most
skills and professionalism, which improves the authoritarian interventions take place in the
quality of urban transformation. Private sector urban transformation process both in
looking for attractive opportunities to operational and spatial terms.
undertake urban transformation activities, In the public sector managed leadership
usually pays attention to the physical and model, basically the public sector provides
economic aspects of the transformation work regulative scope in the decision process,
to be carried out. The biggest contribution of develops corporate/legal frames regarding
private sector to urban transformation efforts is incentives and restrictions and this way the
about resources and areas of expertise. public interest is maximized. (Alp, 2012)
3) Local actors are individuals like residents It is the type of cooperation formed generally
in the area who will be directly affected from by the centralized government and local
the project, members of social groups and municipality, and sometimes by more than one
large landowners. Turok (2005) stated that local municipality. In this model, municipalities act as
engagement may be easier in urban entrepreneurs in regards to land services.
transformation projects with a social aspect. In Private sector does not have a very extensive

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 116
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

role in this partnership structure it only carries structural transformations in the rural areas (Isik,
out some construction works on contractual 2005).
and commission basis. In short, municipalities In Turkey, partnerships made with private sector
have the total control and power in this are mostly seen in areas where the land value
process (Split, 2004). is high. Today, metropolitan cities where the
real estate market is highly active have
Public-private sector partnership model: Public- become the center of attraction for investors.
private sector partnerships have emerged as a Transformation projects carried out at areas
partnership model that followed the where the land value is high, appear before us
privatization policies in 1980s and found itself as projects that are self-financing and that can
an execution area very rapidly. The objective generate profit with the development rights
of this application is to meet the housing needs and functions of use that are changing.
by making use of public lands and taking It is seen that organization among actor groups
advantage of the private sector experiences. and form of relations develop and become
Public private sector partnership model is different within the scope of unforeseen
composed of actors from both sectors and problems. Public sector that is much superior in
semi-public representatives. It is considered as legal terms due to the powers it possesses,
the most efficient, productive and balanced requires the experience of the private sector in
partnership model in the urban transformation issues like workforce and organization and two
process. In this type of partnership model, sectors complement one another and speed
actors form sector-based partnership coalitions up the projects. However planning and
and develop regeneration strategies specific managing this relation accurately is the most
to the process. In this type of partnership important criteria for successful completion of a
models, actors form sector-based partnership transformation project.
coalitions and develop required regeneration Urban transformation model organized by
strategies (Alp, 2012). Ministry of Environment and Urbanization at
General characteristic of this type of Fikirtepe and its vicinity reveals out that the
partnership model may be defined as having partnership structure between the private and
the strong financial means of the private sector public sector has not been fully developed yet,
and the efficient function of public sector, the project process was not planned
which is guidance and regulation (as required). accurately with decisions reached throughout
What sets this type of partnership apart from the process, and the parties continue to find
the others is that the cooperation with private the accurate execution by trying to
sector continues not only on the construction understand the problems encountered in
phase but also throughout the operation phase implementation and reaching new decisions.
and a construction and operational Urban transformation project for Fikirtepe and
partnership is formed with the private sector its vicinity is analyzed by breaking it down to
(Split, 2004). stages in order to understand which roles the
public, private, and civil sector and local
Private sector-managed leadership model; are community actors should play in which stages
composed of investors in private sector, land of an urban transformation project.
owners and/or semi-public representatives. This
model is dissimilar to all other models in the 3.1 Site
urban transformation project as the most liberal Fikirtepe is located at Anatolian side of Istanbul,
type of strategies both on operational and at the center of Kadikoy country, at the point
spatial level are developed with this model of intersection of Bosporus Bridge and D-100
(Alp, 2012). highway and is very close to TEM access roads.
Also it is easily accessible with public
3. Case Study transportation. Despite its central position, we
When we analyze the development of can say that it is a shanty settlement made up
urbanization movements in Turkey, we may of unplanned structures deviating from public
divide it into two periods: before and after housing laws, its population is high, level of
1950. Country's urban population that income and life quality is low and it is deprived
demonstrated a very slow increase until 1950 of municipal services. Buildings are generally
(with its own dynamics) has entered a stage of old, two and three story buildings without
very rapid increase after this date as the result construction permit. Project site is defined as
of the immigration to the cities arising from the special project site under 1/5000 master plan

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 117
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

and is declared as an urban transformation site parts into ownerships with larger parts. The plan
by the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. allows individual settlements as well. However
the main approach of the plan is to realize
structural regeneration and transformation in
line with granting extensive development rights
by expanding the parcels.
It is believed that when development rights are
granted to larger parcels, title holders will start
to merge and eventually a structural
transformation will start. As the new master plan
grants the structures in the form of city blocks,
the right to use 100% additional floor area ratio,
a lot of construction companies tried to make
agreements with the local community on flat
for land basis and tried to collect parcels to
Figure 1: The location of Fikirtepe in Istanbul form a city block. Construction companies that
made an agreement with the land owners on

flat for land basis, are giving the land owners
Fikirtepe, elected as the study site was used as
flats under the new project according to
a picnic area until 1950s and after that
square meter of their lands, and the companies
unplanned urbanization occurred due to
also cover their rental fees until the end of the
immigration after 1950s and in 1970s, the
project and pay their moving in costs.
number of this unplanned structures increased

and due to expansion of the city, the area is no
in a central location and became a topic on
the agenda of urban transformation process.
This project has a special spot among
transformation projects being carried out in
Istanbul both due to its scale and the new
transformation approach envisaged.
Fikirtepe area is composed of 60 city blocks.
Each one of these blocks with an approximate
area of 20 decare have 100-120 parcels and
houses 300-400 households. With the new
master plan, the structures in the form of city Figure 2: Current Structure in Fikirtepe
blocks are granted the right to use 100%
additional floor area ratio, and the objective
was to follow a gradual construction system
and to turn the ownerships formed of very small

Figure 3: The Structure in Fikirtepe following transformation

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 118
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

Fikirtepe and its vicinity is explored in 3 phases transformation process:
in terms of efficiency of the actors in the

Table 1: Fikirtepe Urban Transformation Process
Fikirtepe Urban Transformation Process Stage Actors
22.02.2011 Implementary Development 1st Stage Isyanbul Metropolitan Municipality-
Plan 2011-2013 Kadiköy Municipality
Ministry Of Environment And
2nd Stage
Urbanization-
2013-2016
28.02.2013 Cancellation Of Plan Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality
3rd Stage Ministry Of Environment And Urbanization
28.12.2016 Plan Note Amendment 2016-2018

1. Stage: 2011-2013; The period from the To begin with, documentations regarding
time the transformation process was initiated Fikirtepe Urban Transformation project were
by Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality with the examined in-depth by taking into consideration
cooperation of Kadikoy Municipality until the the roles, responsibilities and perspectives of
Ministry of Environment and Urbanization various stakeholders. Then in order to analyze
declared the area as risky in 2013, the approach of the stakeholders to the
2. Stage: 2013-2016; The period until partnerships and the transformation process,
Ministry of Environment and Urbanization has from the perspective of engagement,
been authorized as the sole authority of the interviews that were semi-structured as 3 stages
new process that was initiated by Istanbul were made from 2016 to 2018 with 45 actors
Metropolitan Municipality and Ministry of who were directly or indirectly involved in the
Environment and Urbanization, the public project.
authorities for the area that had been The interview questions were envisaged to
declared as risky, underline any challenges that had been
3. Stage: 2016-2018; The new process encountered to date, to discuss the ways to
initiated with the partnership of Ministry of resolve these and to examine the strategies for
Environment and Urbanization and Kiptas and facilitating engagement and partnerships of
Ilbank; the private and public sector.

4. Methodology 5. Findings
In this study, in order to accomplish the Different options of implementation for the
objectives of the study, semi-structured face-to- transformation envisaged under Fikirtepe
face interviews were made with the actors Implementary Development Plan and project
playing a role in the urban transformation implementation methods that require
process at Fikirtepe and its vicinity. Separate arrangements like increase of floor area ratio
forms were issued depending on the depending on parcel combinations etc. had
participants and actor groups interviewed. caused the implementation process of the plan
Semi-structured in-depth interviews were made to differ from the implementation processes
with the actors at determined stages and that were carried out until then. Many title
questions and answer method is used in the holders in the area preferred to unite their
process. parcels with the other title holders, instead of
In this study, as the determinative feature of the acting individually, in order to benefit from the
qualitative researches is to discover the highest floor area ratio granted to city blocks
perspectives of the persons interviewed with, in under the plan.
order to explain the process that took place in
the area and to understand the actors and 5.1 First Stage
relations, semi-structured interview technique Within the scope of the study regarding the
composed of open and closed end questions transformation process, 1st stage starts upon
was used as the data collection method. approval of the 1/1000 scale plan by Istanbul
Accordingly stages and actors were Metropolitan Municipality in 2011. As the actor
determined. Afterwards in-depth interviews that started the Urban Transformation Process,
were analyzed with the help of these stages IBB followed the strategy of monitoring the
and titles.

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 119
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

process rather than being involved in the Environment and Urbanization started to
process. At the beginning IBB had the authority manage the process as the sole actor at the
to make the planning required to resolve the beginning. Then the plan was amended and
problems in the area but later it refrained from the Ministry shared this authority with
being part of the implementation process. At Metropolitan Municipality. Due to problems like
that stage, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality urban and social reinforcement areas not
who was the only authority under the plan, did being sufficient, sustainability of reinforcement
not take part in the process and land areas not being maintained as spatial
acquisitions were made based on the distribution of reinforcement areas to be
contracts made between the title holders and acquired from the areas to be assigned to the
investors. public, is not configured with a holistic
The people interviewed stated that major approach, and the administration to whom the
challenges were experienced at this stage as reinforcement areas will be assigned to not
the floor area ratio determined was high and being clear, it was decided to increase the
as the agreements were being made between ratio of the reinforcement area to be assigned
the title holders and the contractors, and they to the public from 20% to 25% and to assign
said “contractors should be inspecting the these areas to the treasury.
process, the local community incurs loss as the Interviewed person with code CSB1 states the
awareness raising was insufficient and that following “the ministry was involved in the
most people had to sell their land share due to project process in order to clear the way for the
extension of time„. process that faced a bottleneck „ ; interviewed
In the settlement process, the content of the person with code CSB3 says “the main target is
contract concluded between the title holders to expedite and facilitate the process „;
and companies was configured entirely in line The Ministry holds the authority for the
with their demands and no public institution amendment of the plan and building permits
had any control or guidance at this stage. and has granted the authority to approve the
Interviewed person with code YH1 mentioned project to Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. As
that contracts were not sufficient, and the one officially Kadıköy Municipality is no longer part
with code GK3 stated “we do not trust the of the transformation works. Another important
investors„. step taken to expedite the agreements was
1st stage is carried out under the supervision of the Urgent Expropriation Decree enforced by
the Metropolitan and Kadıkoy Municipalities, the Ministry. This way the state would have the
with the title of authorized institutions, and the authority for expropriation in respect of the city
stage ends after the plan for the process is blocks on which an agreement could not be
cancelled and Ministry of Environment and reached and the process will progress more
Urbanization is authorized within the scope of rapidly. However the expropriation process
the law no. 6306 on transformation of areas lasted much longer than estimated so shortly
under Disaster Risk. 1st stage is mostly the after it was decided to annul the decree for
period when first impressions about the expropriation.
transformation process in the area starts to Another important development in the process,
shape. in respect of organization among the actors,
was the formation of Fikirtepe Platform by 17
5.2 Second Stage members of Fikirtepe Urban Transformation
2nd stage is in fact an important first step taken Association that continue their Urban
to find solutions for the challenges Transformation studies in Fikirtepe, with the
encountered with the plan in the 1st stage. First purpose of ensuring secure and regular housing
of all, there was a requirement at the in the area. Platform Member with code ÖS1
beginning to have approval of 100% of the title states his opinion;
holders for applications to be made on city “Urban transformation at Fikirtepe
block basis which lead to substantial problems gained outstanding speed with the
and later with law no. 6306, 2/3 majority was support of Ministry of Environment and
considered acceptable, which paved the way Urbanization”.
for these applications. At the Preliminary One of the most important problems in this
Project and building permit stages, both process was the lack of a reconciliation
municipalities (IBB and Kadiköy Municipality) platform where actors could meet. That’s why
were authorized, the time of approval contractors’ platform has become very
processes extended, so the Ministry of efficient in determining the common problems

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 120
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

of the private sector and communicating the “this amendment was made to achieve
problems to relevant authorities. progress in the process”.
IBB and Ministry of Environment and
Urbanization acted unofficially as problem Likewise interviewed person with code OS11
resolution units. Title holders and contractors states that “The Ministry should be part of the
participated in meetings at Metropolitan transformation process exercising its control
Municipality and Ministry premises from time to authority”;
time in order to both explain their problems Ministry of Environment and Urbanization
and to reach a consensus. continues its activities to complete the
Another important development in terms of transformation in the area rapidly by providing
expediting the process was the omnibus bill interim solutions, while negotiating for
enacted in 2016. By including the provision partnership with companies in the area that
permitting sales on city block basis, urgent are facing financial difficulties. To avoid
expropriation cases were dropped and share suffering of the public due to projects that
sales started. could not have been completed by the
Companies informed the Ministry of companies because of the financial difficulties
Environment and Urbanization about the they face, the Bank of Provinces running under
agreement ratio in the city blocks they are the Ministry and Kiptaş, an affiliate of Istanbul
interested in and the Ministry evaluates Metropolitan Municipality, formed a
whether these city blocks are subject to sale. In partnership to complete the 2 projects that
case an agreement of 2/3 is reached, the were suspended. In this partnership protocol
rights of the remaining 1/3 is sold to the other signed by Ministry of Environment and
residents of the city block. This omnibus bill Urbanization, the Bank of Provinces and Kiptas,
paved the way for permitting sale of the rights the Bank of Provinces is responsible of the
of 1/3rd of the title holders, which was an financing and Kiptas is responsible for the
important development that expedited the construction.
process.
However since city block based agreements 6. Discussion
took long and evacuations on area basis were Urban transformation process being
made and as the contractors had to pay rent implemented at Fikirtepe area chosen as the
for a long term as public institutions could not site for this study, was explored to uncover the
reach a settlement among themselves which role of the actors in the transformation process
caused delay of required documents, they and engagement among actors and
faced financial difficulties. At this stage some partnerships. The findings suggest that
companies declared bankruptcy and tried to transformation works should be carried out in
reach settlements with foreign partners. At this coordination with all stakeholders in order to
point it was highlighted that as a right granted have a successful outcome and that a more
under the law “rent fees should be paid by the efficient and productive relation is required
public„. between the private and public sector (Roberts
and Sykes, 2000). It is specifically anticipated
5.3 Third Stage that the effects of partnership structures of the
One of the most important phase of urban actors will become evident in the long term
transformation process of Fikirtepe and its (Garcia, 2004).
vicinity is the addition of the decision In order to have a feasible urban
“preliminary project approval will be cancelled transformation, long term planning should be
and implementation will be done only made and partnership and cooperation
according to the architectural project to be between actors should be ensured by taking
approved by the Ministry of Environment and into consideration all the transformation
Urbanization” with the amendment of the plan factors. Solid coordination and strong
in 2016. With this decision, Istanbul Metropolitan communication network among the parties is
Municipality that was included in the required to realize the partnership model, it
transformation process as required by its should not be just an economic agreement.
authority, is no longer an actor in the process In the study exploring the urban transformation
as required by the plan note. And this project for Fikirtepe and its vicinity, some of the
amendment of the plan is the start of the 3rd major issues that arise as problems in the urban
stage. The interviewed person with code CS4 transformation processes in our country are
emphasizes that; elaborated. These are;

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 121
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

The members of the parties of the urban transformation and should determine the
transformation projects, their qualities, responsibilities. Multi-actor partnership structure
quantities may vary according to the quality of has the ability to cover all aspects of an urban
the transformation project, the objectives, problem.
spatial scale (approach for districts or the entire As Scharpf (1997) says each actor in the urban
city) and may shape according to the purpose transformation process has its own strategy and
of transformation and other conditions ( Turok, style. Each actor is in fact an institution on its
2005). Actors and their roles in the own. However since the result of the selected
transformation area should be determined. strategy depends on the strategies of the other,
Authorities and responsibilities in the the objectives are interdependent. Also we
management and organization of urban should not forget that people always act in the
transformation area should be defined clearly. interest of their own so it is not possible to
The public sector, the actor initiating the explain the interactions purely objectively.
transformation projects, needs to take the (Scharpf, 1997). Actor groups that can organize
leadership role throughout the process. The take decisions much easily. The size of the
authority and task sharing among public group show that people are controlled by the
institutions must be clarified as a priority. It is group they are part of and their actions are
considered that the public sector, which we limited accordingly. (Douglas, 2007).
may describe as the main actor of the urban
transformation process, needs to take on 7. Conclusion
supervisory and regulatory role in the Models that involve all actors in the planning
partnership process and in general the and implementation process are required to
leadership role in the urban transformation figure out the multi-dimensional and complex
projects (Split, 2005). Public sector should be structure of urban transformation projects.
able to minimize the private sector risks by These models should be formed under the
generation of knowledge regarding spatial leadership of the public sector and
planning and political requirements in the area engagement of all relevant actors in the
(Mccarthy, 2005). transformation process should be ensured. The
If the local community does not clearly primary role of the public sector should be to
understand the methods and reasons of guide, supervise and regulate.
transformation, the expectations of the target In Turkey, a multi-actor partnership approach
group will vary and this will lead to loss of trust. should be adopted with participation of
The project scenario should be developed private sector, voluntary sector and local
together with the residents of the area and the community along with the public sector. As
community must take an active role in the actors take more roles in urban transformation
project and its implementation. projects, economic, social and managerial
It is observed that organization among actor aspects will develop. To incorporate the private
groups and relation patterns listed under sector in urban transformation projects, some
unforeseen problems are developing and of the incentives expected by the private
changing. Public sector that is much superior in sector should be given and attractive terms
legal terms due to the powers it possesses, should be provided. Local community should
requires the experience of the private sector in be incorporated in the transformation process
issues like workforce and organization and two at the planning phase and must be informed
sectors complement one another and speed about updates at each stage of the process
up the projects. However planning and and their engagement should be ensured.
managing this relation accurately is the most Urban transformation projects should be clearly
important criteria for successful completion of a configured and planned right from the start
transformation project. and partnership structures that will follow-up
Public wants to be a part of the negotiation the changing conditions and keep these under
process among title holders and contractors control needs to be developed.
until an agreement is reached between the
parties (contract based) just like in Fikirtepe References
case. However it’s role should be to balance Alp, J. (2012). Urban projects in the context of
the relations between actors and to control the organizing capacity Istanbul Kartal
transformation project. Government should example, (Doctoral Dissertation), Mimar
protect the rights of the actors, encourage Sinan Fine Arts University, İstanbul. Retrieved
engagement of various organizations that will from:
make significant contributions to urban

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 122
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 3(2), 114-123 / 2019

https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/3285 http://www.irs-
16 net.de/download/wp_insights.pdf
Ataöv, O. and Osmay, S. (2007). Mccarthy, J., (2005). Kentsel Dönüşümde
Methodological approach to urban Ortaklık Pratiği [Partnership Practice in
transformation in Turkey, Middle East Urban Transformation], International
Technical University Journal of the Faculty Symposium on Urban Transformation, D.
of Architecture, 2007/2, (24:2), 57-82. Özdemir, P. Özden, S. Turgut, International
http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258- Symposium on Urban Transformation, 99-
5316/2007/cilt24/sayi_2/57-82.pdf 107. Küçük Çekmece Municipality
Beswick, C. Ann (2001). Public-Private Publications, Istanbul 2004 proceedings
Partnerships In Urban Regeneration: The book, İstanbul .
Case of London Docklands, (Master http://dergipark.gov.tr/tojdac/issue/34578/
Dissertation), Calgary University Faculty of 381850
Enviromental Design, Calgary. Ozden, P. P. (2008). Urban Renewal. Istanbul,
https://scholar.google.com.tr/scholar?q=Pu Turkey: Imge .
blicPrivate+Partnerships+In+Urban+Regener http://www.onuracar.com/wp-
ation:+The+Case+of+London+Docklands&h content/uploads/2014/02/5320_odev.pdf
l=tr&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart Roberts P.W., & Sykes, H. (2000). Urban
Davies, Jonathan (2004). Conjuncture or Regeneration. A Handbook. London. SAGE.
disjuncture? : An institutionalist analysis of Retrieved from
local regeneration partnerships in the http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446219980
UK. International Journal of Urban and Scharpf, F (1997). Games Real Actors Play.
Regional Research, Vol.28 (No.3). pp. 570- Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy
585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0309- Research. Oxford: Westview Press.
1317.2004.00536.x Retrieved from
Douglas, M. (1966). Purity and danger: an https://epdf.tips/queue/games-real-actors-
analysis of the concepts of pollution and play-actor-centered-institutionalism-in-
taboo, London: Routledge. policy-research-theore.html
https://monoskop.org/images/7/7d/Dougla Spit, T., (2004). Public-private partnerships: a
s_Mary_Purity_and_Danger_An_Analysis_of_ tense relationship in the context of urban
Concepts_of_Pollution_and_Taboo_2001.pd restructuring: Dutch experience, D.
f Özdemir, P. Özden, S. Turgut, International
Garcia, B. (2004). Cultural policy and urban Symposium on Urban Transformation, 108-
regeneration in Western European cities: 116. Küçük Çekmece Municipality
Lessons from experience, prospects for the Publications, Istanbul 2004 proceedings
future. Local Economy, 19(4), pp. 312-326. book, İstanbul.
Retrieved from http://www.academia.edu/1367335/Kentse
https://doi.org/10.1080/02690940420002868 l_D%C3%B6n%C3%BC%C5%9F%C3%BCmde
28 _Kamu_%C3%96zel_Ortakl%C4%B1klar%C4%
Isik, S. (2005). Urbanization and Urbanization B1_ve_%C3%96zel_Giri%C5%9Fimin_D%C3%
Model in Turkey. Aegean Geographical B6n%C3%BC%C5%9F%C3%BCmdeki_Varl%C
Journal: 14, s. 57-71. Retrieved from 4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1_Konya_%C3%96rne%
http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article- C4%9Fi
file/56792 Turok, I., (2005). Cities, Competition and
Kalağan, G., Çiftçi, S. (2012). Public-Private Competitiveness: Identifying New
Sector Cooperation in Urban Space Connections, Changing Cities. Retrieved
Reflections: Urban Transformation Example from http://25-43. doi:10.1007/978-0-
and New Actors, Journal of Social and 23021203-9_2
Humanities, Volume 4, No 2, 2012 ISSN:1309-
8012. Retrieved from
http://dergipark.gov.tr/sobiadsbd/issue/113
54/135702
Lang, Thilo (2005). Insights in the British Debate
about Urban Decline and Urban
Regeneration, Working Paper, Erkner,
Leibniz-Institute for Regional Development
and Structural Planning. Retrieved from

Tuba Sari Haksever, Candan Çinar Çitak 123