Today, urban centers are disproportionately affected by financial crises over other regions due to the increased concentration of capital and financial institutions (Amin, 2014). They are also extremely vulnerable to a range of disruptions. The need for urban and social resilience is increasing due to the privatization and commercialization of public spaces. Research by (The resilient city: How modern cities recover from disaster, 2005) and (Coaffee & Chandler, 2016) suggest that “resilience is in the very DNA of the urban” (Brantz & Sharma, 2020). Resilience has been primarily utilized in climate change adaptation, sustainability science, disaster risk reduction, poverty reduction, and increasingly in economics and planning studies [(Alexander, 2013); (Meerow et al., 2016); (Figueiredo et al., 2018)]. The three main approaches to resilience are the socio-ecological, sustainable livelihoods, and disaster risk reduction (DRR) approaches (Schipper & Langston, 2015) (see (Figueiredo et al., 2018)). Context-specific urban resilience plans, integrated policies, and risk management must be implemented to link sectors such as transport, infrastructure, land- use planning, education, and employment to clear and strategic long-term planning. Policy indicators can be used to assess resilience levels and track the effectiveness of resilience policies. Some of the indicators used to measure urban resilience from four perspectives are: social (spatial segregation due to social inequality and homelessness), economic (education levels and a wider range and quality of livelihood opportunities), nature and built environment (housing deprivation, housing quality, and accessibility), and institutional aspects (land-use plans, risk-based, inclusive, and participatory urban planning are central to an effective approach) (Figueiredo et al., 2018).

To adequately address the various forms of resilience that are nevertheless interconnected, it is essential to consider the contributions of prominent theorists such as Jane Jacobs, Henri Lefebvre, and David Harvey. These theorists put forth the proposition that urban residents are active and conscious participants in the shaping of their environment. This process is considered to be fundamental to the realization of urban justice and rights. Jacobs advanced the concept of "organic, spontaneous, and untidy" cities, which exemplifies a bottom-up philosophy of urbanism. This approach emphasizes the pivotal role of citizens in influencing the development of their urban environment (Jacobs, 1961). Similarly, Lefebvre posited that urban space should be shaped and governed by its inhabitants rather than by market forces such as commercialization and capitalism (Lefebvre, 1996). This perspective has been embraced by a variety of social movements and urban activists across the globe, resulting in calls for greater social justice and democracy. The Right to the City has emerged as a vision for urban democracy, encompassing a range of demands aimed at addressing spatial inequalities in urban areas. These include government-supported housing, access to public space, participation in urban governance, and legislation that prohibits displacement and gentrification. Similarly, Harvey supported this approach, stating that it is a collective rather than individual right. He argued that the ability to shape our cities and ourselves is a fundamental yet often overlooked human right [(Harvey, 2004); (Harvey, 2008-09)].

In numerous urban contexts across the globe, top-down policies continue to represent the dominant paradigm in urban planning. However, these policies cannot provide a comprehensive framework for urban planning and design and therefore fail to meet the diverse and changing needs of urban residents, resulting in discontent. Top-down strategies entail decision-making by representatives or authorities in positions of power. In contrast, bottom-up approaches prioritize active citizens’ participation in the urban development process, as exemplified by community-oriented approaches. These methods establish a structure that effectively fulfills societal requirements while promoting greater social involvement and inclusivity. Bottom-up approaches have been explored from various perspectives (Mitchell & Tang, 2017). Firstly, bottom-up approaches are rooted in tactical urbanism. Coined by (Lydon & Garcia Mike, 2011), tactical urbanism is defined as “an approach to neighborhood building and activation using short-term, low-cost, and scalable interventions and policies.” Various stakeholders utilize this approach to test ideas or implement changes quickly, including government bodies, citizen groups, businesses, non-profit organizations, individuals, municipal units, government, developers, and non-profit organizations. This approach tackles urban development and planning through its open, iterative, rapid, and creative development, efficient use of resources, creative problem-solving, and social interaction (Lydon & Garcia Mike, 2011) (Figure 1).

Secondly, tactical urbanism refers to a "decentralized, bottom-up, extraordinarily agile, networked, low-cost, and low-tech" strategy (İkiz, 2023-01-10). It is "a city, organizational, and/or citizen-led approach to neighborhood building using short-term, low-cost, and scalable interventions intended to catalyze long-term change" (İkiz, 2023-01-10). It encourages communities to take an active role in managing their habitats and places, enabling them to take ownership of urban areas and spaces and contribute to positive transformation (İkiz, 2023-01-10). Like tactical urbanism, bottom-up strategies are crucial in increasing urban and social resilience and sustainability. Urban development strategies aim to empower local communities and incorporate their needs and insights, thereby fulfilling citizens' aspirations.

In Turkey, there has been a discernible surge in the focus of urban governance bodies on bottom-up techniques and tactical urbanism. However, there are notable deficiencies in the manner in which these approaches have been addressed in Turkey. The transdisciplinary approach (TR) can be evaluated as a potential means of enhancing the efficacy of these approaches. Transdisciplinary (TR) approaches are characterized by their emphasis on real-world problems, integration of diverse disciplines and perspectives, and engagement with stakeholders beyond academia (Klein et al., 2001). By bringing together various actors, experts, and knowledge systems, these approaches can drive innovative solutions to complex urban challenges. These approaches are well-suited to addressing the complex societal problems that require a fundamental rethinking of the relationship between science and society (Jahn et al., 2012).

These approaches initially emerged in the social sciences and were first employed to address social-ecological issues in the 1950s. They were subsequently articulated at a conference in the 1970s and subsequently spread to the physical sciences, including mathematics and quantum physics, where they were regarded as a new mode of knowledge production (Mode II) [(Jahn et al., 2012); (Gibbons et al., 1994)]. Mode II knowledge production entails the dissemination of socially distributed knowledge among individuals and groups across society. This process-oriented framework facilitates communication beyond institutional boundaries, thereby establishing a global network of nodes (Gibbons et al., 1994). TR methodologies are distinguished by their capacity to integrate diverse perspectives and expertise, thereby facilitating the generation of innovative solutions. This collaborative approach can contribute to the establishment of trust between residents and local governments, which may in turn lead to the creation of more resilient and sustainable urban environments (Pamukcu-Albers et al., 2021). This approach is commonly used in the social sciences, education, environmental management, and urban planning. Transdisciplinary research (TDR) as a part of this process is a practical way to address contested, “high-stakes societal problems where knowledge is uncertain, the specific nature of the problem may be disputed and the potential impacts on stakeholders are significant” (O.E.C.D., 2020-06-16) (Figure 2).

In Figure 2, three stages of an ideal TDR process are distinguished. The initial stage entails the framing of the problem. The subsequent stage comprises the generation of new knowledge, which is achieved through the analysis of the problem. The final stage involves the integration and application of this newly acquired knowledge, enabling an investigation into its potential impact [(Jahn et al., 2012); (Brandt et al., 2013)]. TDR is key to sustainable development. It integrates diverse societal actors and their different skills, knowledge, and expertise (Pohl et al., 2021).

Approaches based on TR can be employed as effective instruments for the reimagining and development of bottomup strategies to enhance urban resilience and sustainability. Furthermore, they can facilitate the amalgamation of diverse multi-stakeholder engagements in urban design, transformation, and implementation. Therefore, this article examines the potential for these approaches to enhance the effectiveness and applicability of a range of resilience strategies at a common intersection in Turkey. This study considers the potential for diverse actors to collaborate effectively in addressing concerns about rent-driven urban transformation projects through transdisciplinary (TR) approaches. It further argues that this connection can assist urban governance in addressing the observed changes in urban life by reframing how communities are connected. A TR approach may be defined as a communication strategy that is developed through a combination of top-down and bottom-up processes.

The article presents a theoretical framework that examines the potential for integrating tactical urbanism and bottom-up approaches with TR in urban design. The article employs a critical lens and draws on existing literature, practices, and examples of planning policies in Turkey to explore the potential for integrating tactical urbanism and bottom-up approaches with TR approaches in urban design. First, it presents a literature study on the aforementioned method, contextualizes urban governance in Turkey, and identifies the adverse effects of top-down planning. Subsequently, it puts forth the proposition of the efficacious implementation of TR approaches. However, TR approaches are susceptible to uncertainty, ambiguity, and the emergence of new circumstances during the process. The most significant challenges associated with this approach are analogous to those encountered in TDR approaches. These include 1) the "lack of coherent framing," which can impede effective communication and collaboration between diverse communities due to the use of different terminology and concepts (O.E.C.D., 2020-06-16), and 2) the "integration of methods," given the absence of clear relations between the theoretical concepts (phases and types of knowledge). Furthermore, the methods themselves present a challenge (Brandt et al., 2013), 3) the "engagement of practitioners," who may lack familiarity with this concept (Lange et al., 2012), and 4) "generating and measuring impact," which requires the reproducibility of methods to track societal impacts (Lange et al., 2012). As a consequence of the research, certain difficulties were encountered, which are addressed in the article. Furthermore, recommendations are proposed for addressing these issues.

TR methodologies encourage collaboration across disciplinary boundaries to address complex problems. To be effectively weighed in Turkey in the TR approach, it is essential to consider how the top-down and bottom-up approaches are integrated. In many projects, a linear approach is employed whereby first the policymakers and public authorities make decisions or draw the lines, the conditions for active participation are determined, and then participation is included in the next stage. While this gradual approach may gain importance in land planning and selection and land protection, it is necessary to discuss the lack of a sufficiently interactive framework. Given the divergence between urban governance practices in Turkey and those observed in Europe and numerous other countries, it is imperative to cultivate a more methodological and systematic environment conducive to contemplating diverse perspectives, fostering collective thinking, and devising innovative urban solutions.

Research on bottom-up approaches includes the recognition and acceptance of the expected impacts of bottom-up efforts. This research includes studies on support for collaborative processes and enhanced public debate (Mens et al., 2023), the role of bottom-up urban initiatives in the city [(Papachristou & Rosas-Casals, 2015); (Rabbiosi, 2016); (Pradel-Miquel, 2021); (Schönfeld & Tan, 2021)], an in-depth study on the merits of bottom-up initiatives in urban development, and a comprehensive, global literature review examining the potential outcomes of the broader phenomenon of citizen initiatives (Igalla et al., 2019) (Mens et al., 2023). Some of the outcomes of bottom-up urban planning include fostering a strong sense of ownership and identity within neighborhoods, enabling citizens to take charge of their environmental conditions, responding to urban inequalities, and perpetuating models that lead to fairer cities. Furthermore, some research translates decarbonization into an equitable process of urban transformation (as mentioned by the IPCC), accelerates decision-making, and identifies relevant solutions to people’s needs (Campos & Adame, 2023-03-14). Bottom-up urban resilience projects, such as community-led environmental initiatives, urban labs, and sustainable solutions, foster resilience through multi-stakeholder collaboration between government, civil society, academia, and the private sector. Bottom-up strategies work best when combined with top-down planning to create flexible urban frameworks tailored to local contexts. For example, New York City’s Plaza Program partners the government with community groups to reclaim streets for public use [(Gattupalli, 2023-08-21); (Campos & Adame, 2023-03-14)]. Urban labs are an increasingly popular bottom-up approach, providing experimental spaces for multi-stakeholder collaboration to co-create solutions to specific urban challenges (Campos & Adame, 2023-03-14). Decision-scaling is another method that uses a bottom-up adaptation approach to analyze which options are resilient to a range of socioeconomic and climate futures (Ilunga, 2021-10-31). Therefore, bottom-up approaches are crucial for enhancing urban resilience, as they ensure that development is equitable, climate-friendly, and responsive to local needs. Combining these grassroots efforts with top-down support allows cities to tackle complex challenges through a synergetic approach [(Capital, 2024-04-25); (Gattupalli, 2023-08-21); (Campos & Adame, 2023-03-14); (Ilunga, 2021-10-31)].

One illustrative example of a study that employs a combination of bottom-up and top-down approaches within the TR framework is the project conducted by the Municipality of Lecce in Italy in 2018 to address social issues and promote sustainable development. The project aimed to utilize the urban space within the Urban University Center, which was 12,000 square meters, to meet the diverse needs of various stakeholders. The top-down planning process involved stakeholders, university designers, and supervisory authority members, considering diverse roles in socio- ecological system transformation. The bottom-up approach involved citizens expressing their perspectives on decision-makers’ views, aiming to address diverse social issues and promote sustainable development. The project involved a five-stage process to design a building for educational activities, a park area, and a recreational green area. The stages comprised formulating a method to gather insights on citizens’ perceptions regarding social issues associated with urban space (Stage 1); collecting data and analyzing the findings (Stages 2 and 3); deliberating on the outcomes of citizen participation (Stage 4); and reviewing the questionnaire results with decision-makers (Stage 5) (Semeraro et al., 2020).

Some other notable projects currently employ a TR approach, integrating top-down and bottom-up methodologies within a unified framework. These initiatives seek to address complex societal issues by combining diverse knowledge frameworks and engaging multiple stakeholders. The combination of top-down frameworks, which are characterized by institutional or governmental direction, with bottom-up initiatives, which are propelled by community involvement, exemplifies a transdisciplinary methodology for problem-solving. This approach has been demonstrated to be effective in addressing complex societal issues. The table below enumerates projects and initiatives that integrate these approaches. These initiatives concentrate on lifelong learning methodologies, both within the domain of higher education and among the general public and experts, to integrate TR science and society by focusing on information, cooperation, and transformation (Table 1).

The difficulties that have arisen in the Turkish case regarding TR, bottom-up, and participatory approaches are primarily due to a lack of awareness and experience with participatory processes. According to OECD resilience reports mentioned in previous sections, this can be developed primarily through education and transformed into active grassroots movements. Achieving this in primary, secondary, and high school education in Turkey is a longterm issue, as the education system exhibits inadequacy in terms of demonstrating the importance of the interactive framework between the individual and the community practically due to its oppressive and broadly centralized, topdown nature. On the other hand, as (Arslan & Kaya Erol, 2023) states, the absence of a legal participation framework in the Turkish planning system stems from the fact that to establish a knowledge and experience base for participatory-oriented design, legal and flexible frameworks must be established to include participation arrangements in planning and design.

By disseminating information about sustainable lifestyles, community education programs significantly contribute to the development of a grassroots culture of sustainability and resilience in society (Olazabal, 2012). People can make better decisions that benefit the environment and themselves by implementing community education programs to raise awareness of environmental issues and resource conservation. These programs may include multifaceted and varied activities such as workshops, training sessions, awareness campaigns, and educational initiatives in different schools and community centers. The benefits of promoting sustainable lifestyles through community education programs include reduced resource consumption and waste generation; increased community resilience to environmental challenges; and enhanced well-being and quality of life for residents. Developing comprehensive strategies for addressing complex urban challenges requires a TR approach that goes beyond traditional knowledge silos. By considering the interconnectedness of social, economic, environmental, and spatial dimensions of urban systems, planners can create integrated solutions that promote resilience and sustainability across multiple fronts (Zeng et al., 2022). Another aspect of participation is the emergence of technological advancements such as ICT- enabled participatory design, which allows stakeholders to engage through web-based platforms and various mobile applications. These options are increasingly popular in urban transformation and can also be effective in bringing urban communities in Turkey together (Gün et al., 2021). Local governments should play an active role in establishing planning instruments that will provide urban spaces with character and establish the conditions necessary for participation in these processes (Yılmaz Bakır et al., 2018). By actively involving residents, planners can access valuable information to co-create solutions that are contextually appropriate and culturally sensitive. This participatory approach is essential for ensuring that urban planning initiatives align with the community, fostering a sense of ownership and commitment to the resilience-building process (Pamukcu-Albers et al., 2021).

The utilization of TR approaches and TDR has the potential to facilitate a more collaborative approach to decisionmaking by bringing together a diverse range of stakeholder groups. Involving experts from diverse fields such as economics, sociology, architecture, urban planning, and environmental science, can facilitate the creation of a comprehensive framework for addressing complex urban issues. Another effective strategy is to promote bottom-up processes that involve community members in urban development while considering larger concerns like economic and environmental sustainability. Urban planning that integrates TR methods can encourage cooperation and foster collaboration among different disciplines, thereby contributing to the creation of more resilient and sustainable cities. This collaborative effort allows for a thorough examination of multiple perspectives and the generation of creative solutions to tackle the intricate challenges faced by urban areas (Maiello et al., 2011). By leveraging the synergy of various disciplines, urban planners can develop and devise strategies that not only enhance urban resilience but also promote long-term sustainability (Zeng et al., 2022). The incorporation of local knowledge and expertise is a critical component of building urban resilience and sustainability through TR approaches (Sant, 2022).

Engaging local communities in decision-making processes is a crucial bottom-up approach to enhancing urban resilience and sustainability (Zeng et al., 2022). Key benefits of engaging local communities in decision-making processes include increased social cohesion and community bonding, greater transparency and accountability in governance, and enhanced responsiveness to local challenges and opportunities. By incorporating the input of residents at the planning and decision-making stages of urban development projects, cities can ensure that initiatives are aligned with the specific needs and priorities of the community and integrate them into long-term planning strategies. This approach not only fosters a sense of ownership and empowerment among residents but also leverages local knowledge and expertise to create more effective and sustainable solutions.

In this context, workshops and charrettes can be held to raise awareness of TR approaches among local governments and the public, as well as to enhance the experience of their implementation. These activities can be instrumental in conveying the notion that TR approaches operate within a distinct framework than that of top-down, mechanical, linear, inorganic, and centralized systems (Özdamar, 2024). It is crucial to prioritize the development of internal models over the exclusive reliance on democratic participation forms that are constrained to local governments, educational institutions, institutes, and civil society organizations (NGOs). The internal urban struggle may facilitate the formation of new perspectives, which could be addressed by gradually integrating large mass movements into the city. This would be a preferable approach to explosive movements against capitalist developments driven by rent and governments. The right to the city is a crucial element of social resilience, community consciousness, and the existence of urban residents. These transformations, which are particularly evident in Turkey, move in the opposite direction and can lead to more stable long-term transformation tactics, resulting in rhizomatic, organic, self- determining, imageless, and immanent transformations (Özdamar, 2022).

The article highlights how bottom-up strategies integrate community involvement and grassroots participation in urban regeneration, promoting urban resilience and sustainability. The evolving interplay between top-down and bottom-up approaches, TR methodologies, and participatory practices in the urban planning landscape in Turkey has been thoroughly examined. Concepts such as resilience, sustainability, and participatory decision-making have been contextualized within several urban challenges, including the commodification of urban land, rapid urbanization, sustainability, and environmental degradation. However, the discussion also identifies potential conflicts that may emerge from the concurrent implementation of bottom-up strategies and TR methodologies in urban development. Moreover, the importance of community-based solutions, the involvement of a diverse range of stakeholders, and the necessity for comprehensive urban planning strategies are crucial insights that must be considered. The value of collaboration, community education programs, and ICT-enabled participatory design must be intertwined to achieve urban resilience and sustainability.

The multi-faceted discussions on the transformation of participatory processes and the critical importance of sustained awareness and experience in participatory initiatives have established a foundation for future developments in urban planning and design practices. In conclusion, this research serves to advocate for the continued advancement and implementation of inclusive and sustainable urban planning practices, underscoring the significance of community participation and collaboration. It is emphasized that a combination of bottom-up strategies, TR methodologies, and participatory approaches is fundamental to the creation of resilient and sustainable urban environments, thus facilitating the development of a more equitable and vibrant urban future. Consequently, it is necessary to re-examine Alexander’s (2013) concept of resilience, moving beyond a purely ecological perspective to encompass socio-ecology and human (cultural) ecology. This expanded ecological framework can be effectively addressed in the present era through TR approaches.

Local governments, public authorities, and policymakers must acknowledge and advocate for transdisciplinary research (TR) as an essential complement to conventional research methodologies in addressing intricate societal challenges (O.E.C.D., 2020-06-16). The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (2015) have progressively emphasized the necessity for comprehensive, integrated strategies and inclusive involvement to address interrelated developmental challenges (United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, 2015).

Therefore, TR collaboration and TDR can facilitate the management of uncertainties, the adjustment to diverse resilience forms, and the thriving amidst emerging challenges, thereby augmenting urban resilience. To address the emerging issues of urban sustainability and resilience, it is essential that architects, planners, and researchers receive training in knowledge transfer and that design research is recognized as a legitimate method of generating knowledge (Després et al., 2011). In Turkey, it is essential to utilize the insights derived from this knowledge base to reduce the impact and extent of top-down planning initiatives executed by local government. Instead, there is a need to transform these activities into a dynamic and participatory process. Planners can play a pivotal role in this transformation by raising awareness among local authorities and citizens, thereby influencing the outcome of these activities. In a politically charged country like Turkey, individuals and governments aware of this reality can work strategically to dismantle and eradicate this centralization over time. It is of the utmost importance to strike a balance between competing priorities and interests among stakeholders when implementing both bottom-up and TR approaches concurrently. The empowerment of local communities, the encouragement of collaboration, and the engagement of diverse perspectives can address complex problems and foster more inclusive and effective solutions. This is accomplished by cultivating stakeholder collaboration, incorporating local knowledge and expertise, and advocating for sustainable lifestyles through community education initiatives. This perspective enables the development of comprehensive strategies that address complex urban challenges and promote long-term urban resilience and sustainability.

The most significant challenge to active participation in Turkey is the centralized administrative structure, which necessitates the development of diverse models to ensure seamless collaboration (İzci & Geylani, 2021). The participatory democracy model posits the existence of active citizens (Tekeli, 2012). The implementation of numerous reforms has resulted in the establishment of a multitude of novel mechanisms in comparison to those that existed previously. These mechanisms are designed to ensure the principles of openness, transparency, citizen participation, and decentralization in governance. In this context, one of the initial steps for policymakers and public authorities should be to establish platforms for implementing an interactive participatory environment through the implementation of regulations containing policy proposals or strategies. However, given the lack of success of this planning, it is crucial to emphasize the importance of citizens' participation in parliamentary committees and their roles in voluntary work and cooperation with city councils and civil society organizations. This approach will ensure the formation of sustainable and resilient communities, cities, and open systems.

Not applicable.