Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Making of a Disaster: Earthquake Hazard and Urban Development in Istanbul

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Interplay between Urban Development, Vulnerability, and Risk Management

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Environment, Security, Development and Peace ((MEDITERRAN,volume 7))

  • 1308 Accesses

Abstract

Istanbul, the largest and the most populated city in Turkey, lies at the crossroad between two continents. Located on the Strait of Bosphorus, Istanbul is a bridge between Europe and Asia, and through the Sea of Marmara, it links civilizations on the Black Sea with those of the Aegean and the Mediterranean Seas.

The problem is that the damaged buildings are without construction licenses and are at odds with development plans. Out of 15,000 buildings, 2,000 of them were built illegally after 1980 amnesty laws. There are an additional 2,000 buildings that were pardoned by amnesty laws.

B. Yıldırım (Civil Engineer, Zeytinburnu Municipality).

[Author’s translation].

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Tectonic is the geology about the forces that produce movement and deformation of the earth’s crust.

  2. 2.

    According to plate tectonics theory, “the Earth consists of large, mobile oceanic and continental regions of solid rocks, called plates, floating on softer rock. Plates are in motion and interact with one another through collisions, or slide along or over or under one another” (Bolt 2004: 30).

  3. 3.

    In strike-strip faults relative displacement of rocks is purely horizontal (Bolt 2004: 357). In these faults, plates moving past each other horizontally lock together until tension builds to a release point. In the process, stress is released and placed on the neighbouring segments of the fault. These neighbouring segments are then more likely to rupture, resulting in progressive earthquakes along the fault (CU 2002: 123–124).

  4. 4.

    Bibbee et al. (2000): 1.

  5. 5.

    Bibbee et al. (2000): 35.

  6. 6.

    The first number indicates the direct and the indirect losses that have been systematically compiled and reported to date in 2003 World Bank figures. The second numbers by OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) are suggested numbers reported by TUSIAD (Turkish Industrialist’s and Businessmen’s Association) as well as the numbers from Turkey’s State Planning Organization (DPT).

  7. 7.

    EQE (1999): 37.

  8. 8.

    EQE (1999): 7.

  9. 9.

    Liquefaction is “the process by which sandy wet earth materials become fluid like when shaken by earthquakes” (USGS 2000: 3).

  10. 10.

    On the other hand, an earthquake reconnaissance team member reports that “an individual complex being constructed 100 ft from the fault had very well confined columns with damage limited to spalling and large residual displacements” (Bruneau 1999), pointing to the fact that structurally sound buildings could withstand the destruction regardless of their locations.

  11. 11.

    In rare cases where steel construction were used (mostly in industrial buildings), damages were attributed to the failure of anchor bolts and structural instability (Bruneau 1999).

  12. 12.

    Ductility is “the property of a material to deform without catastrophic loss of strength” (USGS 2000: 3).

  13. 13.

    Bruneau (1999).

  14. 14.

    Hazard assessments are calculated using several hazard properties such as event magnitude, frequency, speed of onset, time of onset, event duration, temporal spacing (periodicity) and spatial dispersion of the event. There are two main approaches that are used in assessing an earthquake hazard: probabilistic and deterministic methods. Cutter (2001: 24) explains that “[t]he probabilistic approach attempts to describe the integrated effects from all possible faults at an individual site.” Deterministic approach, on the other hand, specifies a magnitude or level of ground shaking mostly for a single fault. This approach commonly represents a “worst case scenario,” or the maximum risk the location and its residents are exposed to (Cutter 2001: 24).

  15. 15.

    In 2004, Parsons (2004) of the USGS reassessed the hazard with improved Marmara Sea faulting and a new historical earthquake catalogue and recalculated that the 30-year probability of an earthquake at Istanbul is 41 ± 14 %.

  16. 16.

    See Appendix for a map highlighting all mentioned Istanbul locations in this book.

  17. 17.

    HAZUS (Hazard US) is a loss estimation tool, developed by FEMA and the National Institute for Building Sciences (NIBS). This GIS-based loss estimation software has the capability of using both deterministic and probabilistic information. It uses four classes of information in order to calculate a probable maximum loss. These are: (1) Map-based analysis (e.g. potential ground shaking intensity); (2) Quantitative estimate of losses (e.g. direct recovery costs, casualties); (3) Functional losses (e.g. reconstruction of critical facilities); and (4) Extent of earthquake induced secondary hazards (e.g. distribution of fires, floods) (Cutter 2001: 29).

  18. 18.

    See İstanbul’da 1894 depremi (Ürekli 1999); İstanbul depremleri (Genç and Mazak 2000); and The Seismicity of Turkey and Adjacent Areas (Ambraseys and Finkel 1995), for the historic seismicity of Istanbul and its adjoining areas.

  19. 19.

    The part of the city surrounded with Golden Horn on the north, Bosphorus on the east, Marmara Sea on the south, and Theodosius city walls on the west, is called the Historical Peninsula.

  20. 20.

    Translation by Sibel Bozdoğan.

  21. 21.

    Ankara-Istanbul (1943).

  22. 22.

    Among them, Henri Prost could not attend due to his responsibilities as the main urbanist of Paris (Tapan 1998: 78).

  23. 23.

    Author’s translation.

  24. 24.

    Author’s translation.

  25. 25.

    Author’s translation.

  26. 26.

    Author’s translation.

  27. 27.

    Translation by Sibel Bozdoğan.

  28. 28.

    In 1945, the Law of Bank of Provinces (İller Bankası Kanunu) was introduced to establish the Bank, which provides local municipalities with technical aid and financial loans to prepare maps, and master and applications plans.

  29. 29.

    Author’s translation.

  30. 30.

    Author’s translation.

  31. 31.

    It has been reported that 1,148 buildings were destroyed during Prost-Kırdar development operations (Tapan 1998: 80).

  32. 32.

    This internal migration after the Second World War was based on the decrease of rural work demand with agricultural mechanization assisted by the postwar US Marshall Plans. Increase of construction work and establishment of new industry in Istanbul were the main pull factors for the newcomers.

  33. 33.

    Gecekondu, a Turkish word born in the 1940s, means, “Built overnight,” and describes the illegally constructed squatter buildings. According to its official description in 1966, gecekondus are “dwellings erected, on the land and lots which do not belong to the builder, without the consent of the owner, and without observing the laws and regulations concerning construction and building” (Karpat 1976: 16).

  34. 34.

    The development law was an important act to facilitate urban development and planning activities, bringing together many laws and regulations under a single legislation. A continuation of the patriarchal relation between the local and the central government, the law required all municipalities to prepare development plans, and to send it for approval to the central government to the newly established Ministry of Reconstruction and Resettlement.

  35. 35.

    Author’s translation.

  36. 36.

    Author’s translation.

  37. 37.

    These projects were: (a) improvement of gecekondu areas, (b) development of an urban center on the eastern part of the city, (c) location change of the wholesale market, (d) review of the DAMOC sewage system, and (e) a traffic engineering and control project (Tekeli 1994: 205–206; Tapan 1998: 87).

  38. 38.

    Author’s translation.

  39. 39.

    Author’s translation.

  40. 40.

    Author’s translation.

  41. 41.

    For more on the local administration structure in Turkey, see Yerinden yönetim ve siyaset [Local administration and politics] (Keleş 1992).

  42. 42.

    According to the 2011 census, the city receives an annual migration of 450 thousand people annually (Turkiye Istatik Kurumu [State Institute of Statistics]; at: http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/Bolgesel/ (August 2012).

  43. 43.

    According to the latest available numbers in the Turkish State Institute of Statistics in the publication of this book; as of 2001, GDP per capita in Istanbul is $3,063. According to 2010 numbers, 18.7 % of the population in Istanbul has a 60 % risk of poverty. (Turkiye Istatik Kurumu [State Institute of Statistics]; at: http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/Bolgesel/ (August 2012).

  44. 44.

    Author’s translation.

References

  • Alada A (1994) Cumhuriyet döneminde İstanbul’un yönetimi [Istanbul’s administration during republic period], in: Istanbul, vol 8. Tarih Vakfı, Istanbul, pp 133−138

    Google Scholar 

  • Alkan MO (1999) Sansür, jurnal ve söylentiler arasinda ‘1894 İstanbul depremi’ [The 1894 Istanbul earthquake amid censor, news, and rumors]. Cogito vol 20. Yapı Kredi Yayınları, Istanbul pp 33−41

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambraseys NN, Finkel CF (1995) The seismicity of turkey and adjacent areas: a historical review. Eren, Istanbul, pp 1500−1800

    Google Scholar 

  • Angel A (1987) Henri Prost ve İstanbul’un ilk nazım planı [Henri Prost and Istanbul’s first master plan]. Mimarlık 1 (Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankara-Istanbul. La Turquie Kemaliste 47(1943):38–39. Quoted in Bozdoğan S (2001) Modernism and nation building: Turkish architectural culture in the early republic, vol 67. University of Washington Press, Seattle and London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bibbee A, Gonenc R, Jacobs S, Konvitz J,Price R (2000) Economic effects of the 1999 Turkish earthquakes: an interim report. Working paper 247, organisation for economic co-operation and development, economics department, ECO/WKP (2000)20. http://www.oecd.org/turkey/1885266.pdf

  • Boĝaziçi University (BU) (2002) Earthquake risk assessment for istanbul metropolitan area. Final report. Kandilli Observatory, Department of Earthquake Engineering; Boĝaziçi University, Earthquake Research Institute, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Boĝaziçi University (BU), Istanbul Technical University (ITU), Middle East Technical University (METU), Yıldız Technical University (YTU) (2003a) Earthquake master plan for Istanbul. Metropolitan Municipality of Istanbul, Geotechnical and Earthquake Investigation Department, Planning and Construction Directorate, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolt B (2004) Earthquakes. 5th edn, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozdoğan S (2001) Modernism and nation building: Turkish architectural culture in the early republic. University of Washington Press, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Brauch HG (2003) Natural disasters in the mediterranean (1900–2001): from disaster response to disaster preparedness. In: Hans GB, Liotta PH, Antonio M, Paul R, Mohammed S (eds) Security and environment in the mediterranean. Conceptualizing security and environmental conflicts. Springer, Berlin, pp 863–906

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruneau M (1999) Structural damage. In: Preliminary reports from the Kocaeli (Izmit) Earthquake of august 17, 1999. Reconnaissance report. University of Buffalo, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, New York. http://mceer.buffalo.edu/research/Reconnaissance/turkey8-17-99/ScawPrelim.pdf

  • Cansever T (1993) Ülke ölçeğinde İstanbul’u planlamak” [Planning Istanbul in national scale]. Istanbul 4 (Istanbul: Tarih Vakfı)

    Google Scholar 

  • Çelik Z (1993) The remaking of Istanbul: portrait of an Ottoman city in the nineteenth century. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Columbia University (CU) (2002) International urban Planning studio: disaster resistant Istanbul, final report (Unpublished). Columbia University, Urban Planning Program, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, Cutter S (ed) (2001) American hazardscapes: the regionalization of hazards and disasters. Joseph Henry Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielson M, Keleş R (1985) The politics of rapid urbanization: government and growth in modern Turkey. Holmes and Meier, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Duranay N, Gürsel E, Ural S (1972) Cumhuriyetten bu yana İstanbul planlaması. [Istanbul’s planning since the republic]. Mimarlık 7:65–109 (Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgötz H (1934) İstanbul şehrinin umumi planı [General plan of the city of Istanbul].Ahmet Sait Matbaası, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Durukal E, Biro Y, Siyahi B, Akman H (2001) Earthquake risk to buildings in Istanbul and a proposal for its mitigation. Departmental report no: 2001/16. Boĝaziçi University, Department of Earthquake Engineering, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Erdik M, Siyahi B, Şeşetyan K, Demircioĝlu M, Akman H (2003) Current Situation. In: BU [Boĝaziçi University]; ITU [Istanbul Technical Univer-sity]; METU [Middle East Technical University]; YTU [Yıldız Technical Univer-sity]: Earthquake master plan for Istanbul (Istanbul: Metropolitan Mu-ni-cipality of Istanbul, geotechnical and earthquake investigation department, planning and construction Directorate), pp 14–107

    Google Scholar 

  • EQE International (1999) Izmit, Turkey earthquake of August 17, 1999 (M7.4). An EQE briefing. http://www.eqe.com

  • Genç M, Mazak M (2000) İstanbul depremleri: fotoĝraf ve belgelerde 1894 depremi [Istanbul earthquakes: the 1894 earthquake with photographs and documents]. İGDAŞ, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Güzelsu K (1985) Nazım plan büroları çalışma ve deneyimleri” [Studies and experiences of master plan offices] In: Çubuk, M (ed) Türkiye’de metropoliten alan planlama deneyim ve sorunları kolokyumu [Colloquim on experience and problems of metropolitan area planning in Turkey]. Mimar Sinan Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Istanbul 75–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasol D (1994) İmar mı? yıkım mı?” [Development? or demolishment?] Yapı 151:25−27 (Yapı-Endustri Merkezi, Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

  • Heper M (1978) Gecekondu policy in Turkey: an evaluation with a case study of Rumelihisarüstü squatter area. In İstanbul With the assistance of Butler MH, NT Butler. Boĝaziçi University Publications Boĝaziçi University Press, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • İstanbul Belediyesi (İB) (1947) Yenileşen İstanbul: 1939–1947 neler yapıldı [Revitalizing Istanbul: what has been done 1939-1947], İstanbul Belediye Matbaası, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • İstanbul Belediyesi (İB) (1954) Revizyon komisyonu raporu [The revision commission report]. İstanbul Belediye Matbaası, Istanbul. Quoted in: Duranay N, Gürsel E, Ural S (1972) Cumhuriyetten bu yana İstanbul planlaması. [Istanbul’s planning since the republic]. Mimarlık 7:81–82 (Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

  • İstanbul Belediyesi (İB) (1962) İstanbul nazım planı için ana hatlar [Main features for Istanbul master plan]. İstanbul Belediye Matbaası, Istanbul. Quoted in Duranay N, Gürsel E, Ural S (1972) Cumhuriyetten bu yana İstanbul planlaması. [Istanbul’s planning since the republic]. Mimarlık 7:87–93 (Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

  • İstanbul Belediyesi (İB) (1966) Pilot bölge ve İstanbul bölgesi yerleşme planı [Pilot area and Istanbul area settlement plan]. İB Plan ve İmar Planlama Genel Müdürlüĝü, Bölge Planlama Dairesi, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency), IMM (Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality), PCI (Pacific Consultants International), OYO (OYO Corporation) (2002) The study on a disaster prevention/mitigation basic plan in Istanbul including seismic Microzonation in the republic of Turkey. Draft final report summary (JICA)

    Google Scholar 

  • Karpat K (1976) The Gecekondu: rural migration and urbanization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Keleş R (1992) Yerinden yönetim ve siyaset [Local administration and politics]. Cem Yayınevi, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuban (1993) Koloni şehrinden imparatorluk başkentine. [From a colonial town to capital of an empire]. İstanbul, vol 4. Tarih Vakfı, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuban D (1994) Şehrin gelişimi [Development of the city]. İstanbul Ansiklopedisi vol 4. Tarih Vakfı, Istanbul, p 545

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuban D (1995) 1950’lerde İstanbul’da Menderes imarı [Menderes development in Istanbul in the 1950’s], in İstanbul Ansiklopedisi. Tarih Vakfı, Istanbul. Quoted in Tapan, Mete, 1998: “İstanbul’un kentsel planlamasının tarihsel gelişimi ve planlama eylemleri” [Planning actions and the historical development of Istanbul’s urban planning], in: 75 yılda deĝişen kent ve mimarlık [The changing city and architecture in 75 years]: 80–83. Türkiye İş Bankası and Tarih Vakfı, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Le C (1949) Le Corbusier ile mülakat” [Interview with Le Corbusier by S. Demiren] Arkitekt 19:11–12, 230–231. Quoted in Bozdoğan S (2001) Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic, 67. University of Washington Press, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortan K (ed) (2000) İstanbul: bir sosyo ekonomik deĝerlendirme [Istanbul: a socio economic evaluation]. T.C. İstanbul Valiliĝi, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Okyay I, Gencer E, Henden B, Özdemir D (1995) Farklı ve uygulanabilir bir kentsel koruma ve geliştirme modeli: Fener örneği [An applicable urban preservation and redevelopment model: case of Fener], Paper presented at the Üçüncü Kentsel Koruma ve Yenileme Kolokyumu, Mimar Sinan Universitesi, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Özerol U (2001) Proceeding in İstanbul ve deprem [Istanbul and earthquake].İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi (İBB), İstanbul Kültür ve Sanat Ürünleri, Istanbul, pp 111–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons T (2004) Recalculated probability of M≥7 earthquakes beneath the sea of Marmara, Turkey. J Geophysl Res 109, B05304. doi:10.1029/2003JB002667

  • Parsons T, Toda S, Stein R, Barka A, Dieterich J (2000) Heightened odds of large earthquakes near Istanbul: an interaction-based probability calculation. Science 288(5466):661–665

    Google Scholar 

  • Porcacchi T (1576) Constantipoli [Constantinople] In: Porcacchi, Tommaso: L’isole più famose del mondo descritte da arretino e intagliate da con l’aggiunte [The world’s most famous islands described by Thomaso Porcacchi of Castiglione with the addition of engravings by Girolamo Porro of Padova] (Venice: Simon Galignani and Girolamo Porro) (With permission from Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana: Venezia)

    Google Scholar 

  • Prost H (1938) İstanbul’un nazım planını izah eden rapor [The report that explains Istanbul’s master plan]. İstanbul Belediyesi Matbaası, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith K (2001) Environmental hazards: assessing risk and reducing disaster, 3rd edn. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sönmez M (1996) İstanbul’un iki yüzü: 1980’den 2000’e deĝişim [Two faces of Istanbul: transformation from 1980 to 2000]. Arkadaş, Ankara

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapan M (1998) İstanbul’un kentsel planlamasının tarihsel gelişimi ve planlama eylemleri [Planning actions and the historical development of Istanbul’s urban planning]. 75 yılda deĝişen kent ve mimarlık [The changing city and architecture in 75 years]. Türkiye İş Bankası and Tarih Vakfı, Istanbul pp 75–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Tekeli İ (1994) The development of the Istanbul metropolitan area: urban administration and planning. IULA-EMME and YTU, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Türk Mimarlar Odası (1960) Yurdumuzda imar çabaları [Development attempts in our country], report, Ayyıldız Matbaası, Ankara, Quoted in Duranay N, Gürsel E, Ural S (1972) Cumhuriyetten bu yana İstanbul planlaması [Istanbul’s planning since the republic], 93–95: Mimarlık 7:65–109 (Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkish Republic Greater Istanbul Municipality (TRGIM) (1995) Istanbul metropolitan area sub-region master plan by 1/50.000 Scale, Brochure. TRGIM, Planning and Zoning Control and Construction General Department, City Planning Directorate, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkiye Cumhuriyeti İstanbul Büyükşehir Belediyesi (TCİBB) (1995) 1/50.000 ölçekli İstanbul metropoliten alan alt bölge nazım plan raporu [1/50,000 scaled Istanbul metropolitan area sub-region master plan report]. TCİBB, Planlama ve İmar Daire Başkanlıĝı, Şehir Planlama Müdürlüĝü, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkiye Cumhuriyeti İstanbul Valiliĝi (TCİV) (2002) İstanbul afet yönetim merkezi [Istanbul disaster management center]. Briefing

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Geological Survey (USGS) (2000) Implications for earthquake risk reduction in the united states from the Kocaeli, Turkey, earthquake of August 17, 1999. U.S. geological survey circular 1193. U.S. Department of the Interior and U.S. Geological Survey. Denver

    Google Scholar 

  • Ünsal F, Erbaş E, Cavuşoĝlu E (2001) Social cohesion and spatial segregation in globalisation era: the case of Istanbul. Paper presented at the sixth international metropolis conference, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Ürekli F (1999) İstanbul’da 1894 depremi [The 1894 earthquake in Istanbul]. İletisim Yayınları, Istanbul

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner M (1937) İstanbul ve havalisinin plânı” [Plan of Istanbul and its vicinity]. Arkitekt 1−12 (Istanbul)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CUDRR, 12 W. 23rd street 3rd floor, New York, 10010, USA

    Ebru A. Gencer

Authors
  1. Ebru A. Gencer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ebru A. Gencer .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gencer, E.A. (2013). The Making of a Disaster: Earthquake Hazard and Urban Development in Istanbul. In: The Interplay between Urban Development, Vulnerability, and Risk Management. SpringerBriefs in Environment, Security, Development and Peace(), vol 7. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29470-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation