Measuring socio-economic urban resilience in Türkiye: An empirical study of 81 cities


BATUHAN T.

CITIES, cilt.170, 2026 (SSCI, Scopus) identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 170
  • Basım Tarihi: 2026
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.cities.2025.106671
  • Dergi Adı: CITIES
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Avery, Environment Index, Geobase, Index Islamicus, Political Science Complete, Public Affairs Index, Urban Studies Abstracts
  • Atatürk Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

This study evaluates the socio-economic resilience performance of all 81 cities in T & uuml;rkiye over the period 2013-2022 by developing a multidimensional indicator framework. A total of 37 carefully selected indicators-17 representing economic resilience and 20 representing social resilience-were identified through a hybrid process combining internationally recognized standards with locally relevant metrics. To ensure objective weighting, the Entropy Method was applied based on the information contribution of each indicator, while Grey Relational Analysis (GRA) was used to rank the resilience performance of cities. This dual-stage Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach enables the identification of temporal trends and spatial disparities in urban resilience, providing a robust basis for both cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons. Data were primarily drawn from the Turkish Statistical Institute and supplemented with information from administrative sources. Indicators were normalized to allow comparability across cities of varying sizes. The results reveal diverse patterns of resilience development, offering valuable insights for policymakers, urban planners, and decisionmakers. The "Urban Resilience Indicator" set and analytical methodology introduced in this study represent a novel contribution to resilience measurement and policy design tailored to the Turkish context. Nonetheless, the complexity and multidimensionality of urban resilience, alongside the exclusion of environmental and institutional dimensions, present limitations that call for future research. Subsequent studies should consider expanding indicator sets, exploring alternative weighting methods, and integrating mixed-method approaches to deepen understanding and improve the practical applicability of resilience assessments.