Urbanization in Türkiye

Urbanization in Türkiye is a multifaceted transformation process with social, economic, cultural, and spatial dimensions that accelerated notably from the second half of the 20th century. It is defined not merely as a movement of population but as a process of population accumulation encompassing industrialization, economic development, increasing division of labor and specialization in social structure, and changes in human behavior and relationships. Türkiye’s urbanization experience exhibits parallels with global trends but has been shaped by its own unique dynamics and historical ruptures.

Definition and Conceptual Framework

To understand the phenomenon of urbanization, key concepts must be defined:

City

A social settlement unit characterized by non-agricultural production, concentration of distribution and control functions, and attainment of a specific population size, heterogeneity, and level of integration. It also denotes a lifestyle marked by specialized labor division, weakening of kinship ties, and the role of mass media. It is further described as a space organized by a self-governing community arising from administrative association. In Türkiye, the definition of a city varies among institutions. According to Law No. 442 on Villages, places with a population exceeding 20,000 are considered cities; the State Planning Organization set this threshold at 20,000, while the State Institute of Statistics (today’s TÜİK) defines cities as the municipal boundaries of provincial and district centers.

Urbanization

The process by which the number of cities and the population residing in existing cities increases in tandem with industrialization and economic development. This process entails not only demographic growth but also structural changes in society such as reorganization, division of labor, and specialization.

Urbanization as Cultural Adaptation

Refers to the individual and cultural dimensions of urbanization. It is the process by which individuals adapt to urban lifestyles, behavioral patterns, and value systems. In Türkiye, the rapid pace of urbanization, disconnected from industrialization, has resulted in a condition described as “urbanization without urbanization adaptation.”

Historical Development of Urbanization in Türkiye

Türkiye’s urbanization process can be analyzed in three main periods under the influence of different dynamics during the 20th century:

Prior to 1950

From the founding of the Republic until 1950, Türkiye did not experience a strong urbanization movement. The rate of urbanization was very slow, and population growth in cities occurred largely due to internal dynamics such as natural population increase rather than rural-to-urban migration. Indeed, until 1950, there were no significant differences between the overall national population growth rate and the urban population growth rate. According to administrative criteria, the urban population ratio was 24.2% in 1927 and reached only 25% by 1950.

The most notable exception of this period was Ankara, which became the capital in 1923 and attracted large-scale migration. Ankara was the only city during this period whose population grew annually by more than 6%, driven by the gravitational pull of its administrative function. Planning activities during this time were carried out with the assistance of foreign experts. Hermann Jansen was involved in Ankara’s planning, while Henri Prost played a key role in Istanbul’s urban planning.

Rural-to-Urban Migration and Industrialization (1950–1980)

The 1950s marked the beginning of a period of accelerated urbanization in Türkiye. From this date onward, urban population growth was largely shaped by intense migration from rural areas to cities. The urban population ratio rose from 25% in 1950 to 43.9% in 1980. The main causes of this rapid migration wave were:

• Push Factors in Rural Areas: The introduction of mechanization in agriculture reduced demand for agricultural labor, coupled with rapid population growth in rural areas, unequal land ownership, and fragmentation of land through inheritance, all served as key drivers pushing rural populations toward cities.

• Pull Factors in Cities: Industrial investments were concentrated primarily in major cities such as Istanbul, Ankara, İzmir, and Adana, turning them into centers of attraction. The desire for better education, healthcare, and living conditions in cities further encouraged migration.

During this period, urbanization was concentrated in areas where industrial activities developed. Batman grew rapidly with the establishment of a petroleum refinery, Kırıkkale expanded due to defense industry investments, and Ereğli and Karabük grew with iron and steel plants, becoming the cities with the fastest population growth of the era. However, this process did not result in “healthy” urbanization as seen in Western countries, because the employment opportunities created by industrialization could not absorb the influx of migrants. It was instead characterized as “distorted urbanization” or “urbanization without industrialization.”

New Dynamics and Urbanization Models (Post-1980)

The post-1980 period is characterized by diversification in urbanization dynamics in Türkiye. Alongside traditional industry-driven migration, new urbanization models emerged:

• Industry-Driven Urbanization: The traditional model continued to persist. Particularly in the Marmara Region, the Istanbul–İzmit–Bursa corridor and centers such as Çorlu and Çerkezköy to the west of Istanbul continued to grow through industrial activity.

• Tourism-Driven Urbanization: Developments in the tourism sector from the 1980s onward generated a new wave of urbanization, especially along the Mediterranean and Aegean coasts. Centers such as Antalya, Alanya, Marmaris, Fethiye, and Manavgat expanded rapidly by attracting large-scale migration due to employment opportunities created by tourism.

• Terrorism-Driven Urbanization: Intensified terrorist activities in the rural areas of Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia during the late 1980s and 1990s forced large segments of the local population to migrate for reasons of personal safety. These migrations were primarily directed toward provincial centers within the region such as Van, Şırnak, Diyarbakır, and Hakkari. The distinguishing feature of this model is that the receiving cities lacked the economic capacity to absorb this concentrated population.

During this period, cities such as Kayseri, Gaziantep, and Denizli, integrated into the global economy and known as the “Anatolian Tigers,” also grew significantly through industry and trade, becoming important centers of attraction.

Outcomes and Characteristics of Urbanization in Türkiye

The rapid and largely unplanned urbanization process in Türkiye has generated a series of structural problems:

Distorted Urbanization and the Gecekondu Phenomenon

One of the most prominent features of Türkiye’s urbanization is its “distorted” or “unhealthy” structure, which did not progress in parallel with industrialization. The inability of cities to meet the housing needs of incoming populations led to the proliferation of unauthorized residential areas built on public land, known as “gecekondus,” particularly around major cities. The number of gecekondus rose from 50,000 in 1950 to 2 million in 1995, and the population living in them increased from 250,000 to 10 million. This situation resulted in cities being surrounded by infrastructure-deficient, unhealthy, and illegal structures. Over time, these structures were legalized through successive urban regularization programs.

Spatial and Social Segregation

Rapid urbanization has deepened spatial and social segregation within cities. On one hand, gecekondu and slum neighborhoods emerged; on the other, gated communities for high-income groups appeared, especially from the 1980s onward. The concentration of migrant groups in specific neighborhoods has led to a structure known as “ghettoization,” where these areas develop inward-looking subcultures.

Economic and Infrastructure Problems

Intense migration to cities has brought about a range of problems including unemployment, inadequate infrastructure, transportation challenges, environmental pollution, and rising crime rates. Particularly in large metropolises, this has created complex structures characterized by both opportunities and challenges.

Regional Imbalances

The urbanization process has exacerbated regional imbalances in Türkiye. The concentration of industry, trade, and population largely in the western part of the country, especially in the Marmara Region, has created a development gap between the eastern and western regions.

Urbanization and Planning Policies

Parallel to the urbanization process in Türkiye, planning policies and legal regulations aimed at guiding urban development and addressing its problems have varied over time according to the country’s economic and political conditions. These policies have evolved from centralized and modernist approaches toward more flexible, project-oriented models emphasizing local administrations and market actors.

Modernist Planning and the Construction of the Nation-State (1923–1950s)

The early years of the Republic were shaped by the ideal of creating modern cities that reflected the identity of the newly established nation-state. During this period, Ottoman-era regulations were replaced with a new institutional and legal framework. Planning was largely viewed as an aspect of architecture and approached through a modernist lens that showed little regard for existing urban fabrics, under the concept of the “beautiful city.”

Legal and Institutional Reforms

• The Municipality Law No. 1580 enacted in 1930 defined the role of municipalities in the construction of the modern city and mandated the establishment of municipal organizations in all settlements with a population exceeding 2,000. The law made the preparation and implementation of zoning plans mandatory duties for municipalities.

• In 1933, the Municipalities Bank was established to finance municipal planning and infrastructure activities; this institution was transformed into the Provincial Banks in 1945.

• Regulations such as the Building and Roads Law No. 2290 enacted in 1933 sought to place urban development activities on a legal foundation.

Planning Approach and Practices

• The planning philosophy of this period was influenced by the Western “garden city” utopia, proposing residential layouts with gardens in new settlement areas.

• International competitions were organized and foreign experts invited to plan the new capital Ankara and the economic center Istanbul. Hermann Jansen led Ankara’s planning; Henri Prost managed Istanbul’s urban development for many years. These plans included modernist interventions targeting the city as a whole.

Period of Rapid Urbanization (1950s–1980)

The accelerated rural-to-urban migration from the 1950s created major housing and infrastructure problems in cities, compelling new approaches in planning policy. This period was marked by planning becoming more centralized and technical in nature.

Legal and Institutional Framework

• The Urban Planning Law No. 6785 enacted in 1956 and the establishment of the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development in 1958 were results of efforts to intervene centrally in the challenges of rapid urbanization.

• Following the 1960 military coup, Türkiye adopted the “planned development” model and established the State Planning Organization (SPO). Through Five-Year Development Plans, urban development was guided alongside economic and social policies.

• In response to the widespread gecekondu phenomenon, the Gecekondu Law No. 775 enacted in 1966 legally recognized these structures for the first time and proposed measures including prevention, rehabilitation, and clearance as solutions.

Changes in Planning Philosophy

• In the 1960s, the previous period’s focus on physical form gave way to the concept of comprehensive rational planning, based on multidisciplinary research.

• Within the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, Metropolitan Planning Offices were established for Istanbul, Ankara, and İzmir, conducting scientific planning studies that included land use and transportation models for these cities.

• To prevent speculation and generate land for planned development, the Land Office was established in 1969.

Neoliberal Period (Post-1980)

The 1980s marked a period in which Türkiye shifted to open and liberal economic policies, fundamentally altering the planning paradigm and the production of urban space. Centralized planning approaches weakened, and local administrations and the private sector became more prominent actors.

Legal and Administrative Reforms

• The “Metropolitan Municipality Application” was implemented through Law No. 3030 starting in 1981. This regulation expanded the administrative boundaries of major cities to include surrounding settlements, artificially inflating urban population figures.

• The new Urban Planning Law No. 3194 enacted in 1985 transferred most planning authority to local administrations, creating a decentralized structure.

• The Mass Housing Administration (TOKİ) was established and assumed a dominant role in housing production and urban transformation projects, especially from the 2000s onward.

New Planning Tools and Approaches

• During this period, the comprehensive planning model was abandoned in favor of more flexible, market-oriented planning instruments. With capital increasingly directed toward urban land and projects, urban transformation and megaprojects became primary planning interventions.

• Regulations such as the Urban Regularization Law No. 2981 granted new construction rights to gecekondu areas, accelerating their integration into the market through contractors and their transformation into apartment complexes.

• Planning gradually shifted from a public-interest-oriented regulatory activity to a management tool focused on public-private partnerships, promoting the city as a brand and marketing it internationally.