Article Preview
TopIntroduction
Urban areas have a complex and dynamic structure, consisting of physical, social, economic, legal and administrative components (Roberts & Sykes, 2000). Urban areas are subject to aging, change and intervention. There are many reasons for this, including population growth, economic development, urban accessibility and disaster risks (Tekeli, 2003). Such factors may cause incompatibilities, deterioration and regression within the different dynamics that make up a city. In city centers, some areas of degeneration have been abandoned and/or have become industrial, commercial, public or disaster risk areas. Additionally, some areas contain buildings destroyed by war, or that no longer contribute to the city’s economy—these areas require urban regeneration. Urban regeneration helps these spaces and structures regain their vitality, thus enhancing quality of life for the city’s inhabitants (Yenice, 2014; Yıldız, 2013).
Regeneration processes offer unique approaches and outcomes in various global contexts. One example of urban transformation, within the scope of this study, is Medellin, the second largest city in Colombia. Medellin has a challenging land structure, low-income urban areas, and a high level of criminal activity. The city carried out improvements and renewal works across economic, social, and cultural areas, as well as spatial infrastructure and superstructure spheres. In the city of El-Poblenou in Barcelona, the aim was to transform the old industrial area into one with new workspaces, public buildings and green areas. In both cities, smart city tools were used by private sector, local government, citizens and civil society organizations as they carried out joint studies (Torun & Bektaş, 2022).
Understanding a city’s history is crucial for gaining a comprehensive view of contemporary urban regeneration strategies and practices. In European cities, historically shaped by the Industrial Revolution, World War II, and the ensuing post-war reconstruction, there have been three notable transformative phases. The first of these was the rapid urbanization triggered by the Industrial Revolution (Türkün, 2015). The second included reconstruction of cities destroyed during the Second World War, and the creation of state welfare policies (Türkün, 2005). Neoliberal policies affected the third transformation process that emerged in the second half of the 1980s.
In Türkiye, there have been three main problems caused by urban regeneration practices carried out within a neoliberal framework of urbanization policies. Firstly, transformation projects have proved ineffective at creating settlements with a high quality of urban life. Secondly, urban regeneration practices cannot be used effectively as a tool to reduce disaster risks or increase adaptation capabilities. Finally, by not treating cities holistically, urban regeneration plans have been disruptive regarding the continuity and integrity of planning decisions (Terzi, 2017). Urban regeneration plans have led to fragmented interventions, with revisions and changes following each declared intent for urban transformation (Bektaş, 2022; Kılınç, 2021).
Across the world, urban planning is shaped by different approaches and systems. The relationship between plan changes and urban regeneration differs, based on each country’s legal regulations, economic conditions, and urban development needs. At the international level, plan changes are handled through both regulatory (plan-based), and project-based systems. Practices in different countries provide important clues about these two approaches (Booth, 2003; Kılınç & Türk, 2021; Needham, 2007; Steele & Ruming, 2012).