Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health; 2020:6;8
CITY CASE STUDY
|
Urban Design and Psychological Health in Ankara, Turkey: A City Case Study
Erkin Sarı (1) and Özlem Bozo (2)
(1) PhD Candidate, Research Assistant at Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
(2) Professor at Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
(1) PhD Candidate, Research Assistant at Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
(2) Professor at Department of Psychology, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey
Abstract
This paper examines how the Turkish capital city, Ankara, employs the key standards of urban planning and design to support a good population mental health. Although there are numerous studies are investigating the relationship between urban planning and well-being, the number of research studies understanding Ankara's specific situation regarding urban planning and mental health is low. Taking this gap into account, in this study, it was intended to ensure a broader insight into the opinions of Ankara based urban design professionals and psychological health specialists.
In line with this aim, first, we provide the current situation of psychological health in Turkey and Ankara, the transformation of urban planning in Ankara, plus information about Ankara’s socio-economic situation. Then, we present the findings obtained through qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews. The findings indicate that some factors are essential for creating a mental health friendly city. These are walkability, access to restorative environments, access to public transportation, safety, pro-social places that promote positive social interactions, reducing the negative effects of pollution, planned urbanization, and equal access to the city. The analyses also revealed political, financial, and informational barriers to implement mental health in urban design in Ankara. Findings suggested that some developments in urban design and policymaking may positively shape the future of Ankara’s design.
In line with this aim, first, we provide the current situation of psychological health in Turkey and Ankara, the transformation of urban planning in Ankara, plus information about Ankara’s socio-economic situation. Then, we present the findings obtained through qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews. The findings indicate that some factors are essential for creating a mental health friendly city. These are walkability, access to restorative environments, access to public transportation, safety, pro-social places that promote positive social interactions, reducing the negative effects of pollution, planned urbanization, and equal access to the city. The analyses also revealed political, financial, and informational barriers to implement mental health in urban design in Ankara. Findings suggested that some developments in urban design and policymaking may positively shape the future of Ankara’s design.
Introduction
Ankara became an important center for Turkey after it was declared as the capital city in 1923. The city’s population has been constantly increasing and it offers a variety of educational, health, and employment opportunities to its residents. The main aim of this paper is to examine how Ankara employs the basic standards of urban design to ensure good population psychological health. This analysis may describe opportunities for Ankara and may include suggestions for other cities.
The World Health Organization (2004) defines mental health “a state of well-being in which every individual realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community”. WHO’s (2004) definition is quite an inclusive one since it focuses on both individual, and the social-environmental determinants of mental health. This description of psychological health is relevant to both psychological health specialists including psychiatrists and psychologists, and professionals who are responsible for urban planning, including city planners, architects, and policymakers. According to Bilotta and Evans (2013), some aspects of city life can be threatening for personal health. These aspects (e.g., noise, crowding, traffic density) can also be labeled as environmental stressors. Although these factors are quite detrimental to psychological health and life quality, some implementations might be influential in reducing the city’s adverse effects on mental health. More green spaces that ensure individuals to access to nature, active transportation which is cheap and easily accessible for everyone, plenty areas for exercise, adequate pro-social environments, and urban elements that improve individuals’ sense of safety in cities are some aspects of a ‘good city’ (UDMH, 2020).
The World Health Organization (2004) defines mental health “a state of well-being in which every individual realizes his or her own potential, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to make a contribution to her or his community”. WHO’s (2004) definition is quite an inclusive one since it focuses on both individual, and the social-environmental determinants of mental health. This description of psychological health is relevant to both psychological health specialists including psychiatrists and psychologists, and professionals who are responsible for urban planning, including city planners, architects, and policymakers. According to Bilotta and Evans (2013), some aspects of city life can be threatening for personal health. These aspects (e.g., noise, crowding, traffic density) can also be labeled as environmental stressors. Although these factors are quite detrimental to psychological health and life quality, some implementations might be influential in reducing the city’s adverse effects on mental health. More green spaces that ensure individuals to access to nature, active transportation which is cheap and easily accessible for everyone, plenty areas for exercise, adequate pro-social environments, and urban elements that improve individuals’ sense of safety in cities are some aspects of a ‘good city’ (UDMH, 2020).
Figure 1. Ulus, the historical center of Ankara. (Photo: Muhammed Sadık Erdoğan)
Figure 2. Çankaya, the cultural and financial center of Ankara. (Photo: Muhammed Sadık Erdoğan)
Ankara: context of the city
Ankara, Turkish capital, is in the Central Anatolia region of Turkey. Throughout history, it has been one of the central provinces of various civilizations including the Hittites (BC 2500-1700), Frigs (BC 1100-600), Lydians and Persians (BC 522-486), Galats (BC 278-25), Romans (BC 25-AD 334), Byzantines (334-1073), the Seljuks (1073-1413), and the Ottomans (1413-1923) (Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018).
After the victory of the Turkish War of Independence, Ankara became the new capital of Turkey on October the 13th, 1923. Its historical importance during the War of Independence, its central position in Anatolia, its residents’ reliance and loyalty to Turkish independence, and İstanbul’s symbolic representation of the Ottoman Empire are some reasons for the city to be chosen as the capital (Kaçar, 2010). After the city was declared as Turkey’s capital, policymakers initiated works to rebuild Ankara.
Just before World War I, the population of Ankara was only about 30.000, and was a small town rather than a city. After the war, its population rose to 75.000 in 1927 (Batuman, 2013). Its population has consistently increased, and today the city serves about six million inhabitants. According to the Turkish Statistical Institute (2018), 70.8% of the Ankara population is between the age of 15 and 64, and 20.3% of the population has at least a college degree. There are 18 universities in Ankara, and five of them are on the list of the ten most successful universities in Turkey (URAP, 2020). The Turkish Statistical Institute (2011) reports that the shares of agriculture, industry, and service sectors in gross value added are 2.8%, 27.5%, and 71.5%, respectively. Over the half of the Ankara population (53.5%) participate in the labor force, and rates of unemployment and youth unemployment are 11.3% and 24.1%, respectively.
After the victory of the Turkish War of Independence, Ankara became the new capital of Turkey on October the 13th, 1923. Its historical importance during the War of Independence, its central position in Anatolia, its residents’ reliance and loyalty to Turkish independence, and İstanbul’s symbolic representation of the Ottoman Empire are some reasons for the city to be chosen as the capital (Kaçar, 2010). After the city was declared as Turkey’s capital, policymakers initiated works to rebuild Ankara.
Just before World War I, the population of Ankara was only about 30.000, and was a small town rather than a city. After the war, its population rose to 75.000 in 1927 (Batuman, 2013). Its population has consistently increased, and today the city serves about six million inhabitants. According to the Turkish Statistical Institute (2018), 70.8% of the Ankara population is between the age of 15 and 64, and 20.3% of the population has at least a college degree. There are 18 universities in Ankara, and five of them are on the list of the ten most successful universities in Turkey (URAP, 2020). The Turkish Statistical Institute (2011) reports that the shares of agriculture, industry, and service sectors in gross value added are 2.8%, 27.5%, and 71.5%, respectively. Over the half of the Ankara population (53.5%) participate in the labor force, and rates of unemployment and youth unemployment are 11.3% and 24.1%, respectively.
Mental health in Turkey and specifically in Ankara
As in most countries, statistics on mental health in Turkey focus only on the pervasiveness of psychological diseases. In addition, these statistics are not up to date. The most comprehensive report on mental health titled ‘Turkey Mental Health Profile Report’ was published in 1998, and its data were based on field studies conducted between December 1995 and January 1996. According to the results of this report, 17.2% of adults, 11.3% of children aged between 4 and 18, and 10.9% of children who were between 2 and 3 suffered from mental illnesses. Depression, somatic symptom disorder, and anxiety disorders were the most prevalent psychological illnesses in Turkey (Kılıç, 1998; Erol & Şimşek, 1998).
Although these numbers are outdated, it is possible to infer the conditions of Turkey’s mental health from some relevant statistics and statements of authorities. As the Turkish Health Minister stated, about 8 million individuals (nearly 10% of the population) have sought mental treatment in the last three years (“Psikiyatri kliniklerine 3 yılda 8 milyon başvuru”, 2020).
WHO’s (2017) report claims that the prevalence rate of depression is 4.4% in Turkey. Regarding antidepressants use, OECD’s (2017) data demonstrated that daily consumption of antidepressants was 43.5 per 1000 individuals in 2017. Although this was significantly higher than 2008 consumption (27.8 per 1000 inhabitants), Turkey is one of the countries which consumed the least amount of antidepressants within the OECD sample. Another report investigating the global burden of diseases indicated that depressive disorders were the third most crucial cause of years lived with disability (YLD) in Turkey, and its effect on YLD increased 13.4% from 2007 to 2017 (IHME, 2018). Besides, drug use disorders were the fifth (28.6% increase in ten years), and anxiety disorders were the ninth (14.5% increase in ten years) most vital cause of YLD.
Accessibility of psychological healthcare is also problematic in Turkey. WHO’s 2008 report indicated that the number of psychological health specialists per 100.000 citizens (0.28 psychiatrists and 2.2 psychologists) is substantially lower than most of the European countries such as the Netherlands (30 psychologists), Greece (14 psychologists), Denmark (10 psychologists), and Finland (47 psychologists) (Doğan, Göregenli & Karakuş, 2016).
Taking the literature into consideration, it can be suggested that in terms of mental health indicators (e.g., antidepressant use) although Turkey may be in a better condition than some other OECD countries, sufficiency of mental health services and accessibility to them are two essential problems that need to be solved. But out-of-date mental health statistics do not let researchers draw conclusions about the current condition of mental health in Turkey. Thus, increasing the efficiency of mental health services, and accessibility to them and understanding the current mental health condition through up-to-date statistics are crucial to improve mental health in Turkey.
As compared to most of the other Turkish cities, Ankara seems to be more developed in terms of health. Ankara with 0.74 health index (6th in Turkey) is successful compared to İstanbul (0.65) and İzmir (0.68). Some indicators of health used include infant mortality rate, life expectancy at birth, and the rate of health satisfaction. In addition to these numbers, there are 35.2 beds and 31 medical doctors for 10.000 citizens in Ankara. These numbers are above the average for Turkey (i.e., 27.3 beds and 18.1 medical doctors) (Turkish Statistical Institute, 2015). Although there are no available statistics for current mental health status in Ankara; despite their methodological shortcomings, there are some studies investigating the epidemiology of mental disorders in Ankara (see Table 1) that help to make inferences.
Although these numbers are outdated, it is possible to infer the conditions of Turkey’s mental health from some relevant statistics and statements of authorities. As the Turkish Health Minister stated, about 8 million individuals (nearly 10% of the population) have sought mental treatment in the last three years (“Psikiyatri kliniklerine 3 yılda 8 milyon başvuru”, 2020).
WHO’s (2017) report claims that the prevalence rate of depression is 4.4% in Turkey. Regarding antidepressants use, OECD’s (2017) data demonstrated that daily consumption of antidepressants was 43.5 per 1000 individuals in 2017. Although this was significantly higher than 2008 consumption (27.8 per 1000 inhabitants), Turkey is one of the countries which consumed the least amount of antidepressants within the OECD sample. Another report investigating the global burden of diseases indicated that depressive disorders were the third most crucial cause of years lived with disability (YLD) in Turkey, and its effect on YLD increased 13.4% from 2007 to 2017 (IHME, 2018). Besides, drug use disorders were the fifth (28.6% increase in ten years), and anxiety disorders were the ninth (14.5% increase in ten years) most vital cause of YLD.
Accessibility of psychological healthcare is also problematic in Turkey. WHO’s 2008 report indicated that the number of psychological health specialists per 100.000 citizens (0.28 psychiatrists and 2.2 psychologists) is substantially lower than most of the European countries such as the Netherlands (30 psychologists), Greece (14 psychologists), Denmark (10 psychologists), and Finland (47 psychologists) (Doğan, Göregenli & Karakuş, 2016).
Taking the literature into consideration, it can be suggested that in terms of mental health indicators (e.g., antidepressant use) although Turkey may be in a better condition than some other OECD countries, sufficiency of mental health services and accessibility to them are two essential problems that need to be solved. But out-of-date mental health statistics do not let researchers draw conclusions about the current condition of mental health in Turkey. Thus, increasing the efficiency of mental health services, and accessibility to them and understanding the current mental health condition through up-to-date statistics are crucial to improve mental health in Turkey.
As compared to most of the other Turkish cities, Ankara seems to be more developed in terms of health. Ankara with 0.74 health index (6th in Turkey) is successful compared to İstanbul (0.65) and İzmir (0.68). Some indicators of health used include infant mortality rate, life expectancy at birth, and the rate of health satisfaction. In addition to these numbers, there are 35.2 beds and 31 medical doctors for 10.000 citizens in Ankara. These numbers are above the average for Turkey (i.e., 27.3 beds and 18.1 medical doctors) (Turkish Statistical Institute, 2015). Although there are no available statistics for current mental health status in Ankara; despite their methodological shortcomings, there are some studies investigating the epidemiology of mental disorders in Ankara (see Table 1) that help to make inferences.
Table 1: Psychiatric Epidemiology of Ankara (Adapted from Binbay et al., 2014)
Mental disorder |
Sample size |
Sample characteristics |
Prevalence |
Depressive Disorders (Cebeci et al., 2002) |
100 |
Postpartum women |
10-15% |
Depressive Disorders (Kitiş & Karaçam, 2009) |
488 |
Postpartum women |
24.2% |
Depressive Disorders (Karaçam & Ancel, 2009) |
1039 |
Pregnant women |
27.9% |
Depressive Disorders (Ergene & Yıldırım, 2004) |
984 |
High school students |
45% |
Depressive Disorders (Tekbaş et al., 2003) |
2910 |
Men |
29.9% |
Trauma Related Disorders (Kılıç et al., 2006) |
526 |
Migrants |
25% (PTSD), 11% (MDD) |
Factors affecting mental health in Ankara
It is also possible to make inferences by evaluating specific issues, such as unemployment and poverty in Ankara, that affect population's mental health:
According to unemployment statistics of 2019 (TSI, 2020), 14.4% (11.5% in 2014) of the Ankara population between the 15-64 ages are unemployed, which is higher than Turkey’s (14%) average. This increasing rate of unemployment might be detrimental to individuals’ well-being (Clark & Oswald, 1994; Darity Jr. & Goldsmith, 1996).
Poverty is another variable that might negatively affect individuals’ well-being (e.g., Johnson, Cohen, Dohrenwend, Link & Brook, 1999; Ritsher, Warner, Johnson & Dohrenwend, 2001). According to Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018), the poverty rate of the Middle Anatolian region (where Ankara is located) is 19.1%. This rate is higher than İstanbul (16.2%), West Marmara (16.7%), and East Marmara (17%) regions. Taş’s (2012) study demonstrated that poverty is experienced more harshly in the periphery of the city. According to Taş (2012), average poverty rate of Ankara is 7.3%. However, districts that are far away from the city center, such as Akyurt (36.5%), experience higher levels of poverty.
Another possible factor affecting residents’ well-being negatively is public transportation. According to Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018), there are significantly more buses in public transportation (74.8%) than the subway system (25.2%). This was labelled as an issue by municipality since it increases traffic density. In addition, residents living far away from the city center cannot benefit from public transportation services as much as the residents living in the central districts. This poses an equity problem in the city.
Air pollution is another possible factor affecting population mental health in a negative way (e.g., Szyszkowicz, Rowe & Colman, 2009; Vert et al., 2017). According to Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018), the first major environmental issue of Ankara is air pollution. Districts that are closer to the city center are affected by the detrimental consequences of low air quality more than other districts, as indicated in the report of Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018).
It is also possible to make inferences by evaluating specific issues, such as unemployment and poverty in Ankara, that affect population's mental health:
According to unemployment statistics of 2019 (TSI, 2020), 14.4% (11.5% in 2014) of the Ankara population between the 15-64 ages are unemployed, which is higher than Turkey’s (14%) average. This increasing rate of unemployment might be detrimental to individuals’ well-being (Clark & Oswald, 1994; Darity Jr. & Goldsmith, 1996).
Poverty is another variable that might negatively affect individuals’ well-being (e.g., Johnson, Cohen, Dohrenwend, Link & Brook, 1999; Ritsher, Warner, Johnson & Dohrenwend, 2001). According to Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018), the poverty rate of the Middle Anatolian region (where Ankara is located) is 19.1%. This rate is higher than İstanbul (16.2%), West Marmara (16.7%), and East Marmara (17%) regions. Taş’s (2012) study demonstrated that poverty is experienced more harshly in the periphery of the city. According to Taş (2012), average poverty rate of Ankara is 7.3%. However, districts that are far away from the city center, such as Akyurt (36.5%), experience higher levels of poverty.
Another possible factor affecting residents’ well-being negatively is public transportation. According to Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018), there are significantly more buses in public transportation (74.8%) than the subway system (25.2%). This was labelled as an issue by municipality since it increases traffic density. In addition, residents living far away from the city center cannot benefit from public transportation services as much as the residents living in the central districts. This poses an equity problem in the city.
Air pollution is another possible factor affecting population mental health in a negative way (e.g., Szyszkowicz, Rowe & Colman, 2009; Vert et al., 2017). According to Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018), the first major environmental issue of Ankara is air pollution. Districts that are closer to the city center are affected by the detrimental consequences of low air quality more than other districts, as indicated in the report of Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018).
Evolution of Urban Planning in Ankara
After Ankara was announced as the newly found Turkish Republic’s capital, authorities began urban planning studies to create a modern city. Starting from 1924 with Lorcher Plan, local and national policymakers have put several city plans into practice including Jansen Plan (1928-1932), Yücel-Uybadin Plan (1955-1957), 1990 Master Plan (1982), and Planning Studies for 2015 (1986), 2023 (2006), and 2038 (2017). Of these urban planning models, Jansen Plan deserves particular attention. After realizing that Lorcher Plan was failing to meet Ankara’s needs, the municipality organized a competition, and Hermann Jansen’s plan was accepted. This plan aimed to meet the housing deficiency in Ankara and focused on how the occupants’ residences were positioned in the city. It also aimed to plan a green and modern city (Kaçar, 2010; İkiz, 2018). In line with this plan, several important green areas of Ankara, including Gazi Forest Farm and Ankara Youth Park were planned by Jansen. Jansen’s main purpose mentioned in the project report is given below:
“I am bringing to you the most recent principles of the art of urbanism. A very wide street reserved for cars, and side streets which will open to this street connecting this street to blocks of apartments. There will be houses and apartments whose doors will open not to the main street, but to side roads. In all of Ankara, there would be no traffic police because the streets will be elevated, and traffic will flow without interruption” (Atay, 2008, pp. 488-489 as cited in Kaçar, 2010).
However, in 1927, the population projection was 300,000 by 1970; but Ankara had already reached a population of 451.241 by 1955. This situation led authorities to develop new urban plans (Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018).
The Yücel-Uybadin Plan, which was accepted in 1957, projected a population of 750.000 by the year 2000 (Altaban & Güvenç, 1990). This plan designed the city as monocentric, and without squatter settlements. However, the projected population was reached before 1965, and increasing number of squatter settlements as well as higher density caused authorities to prepare new urban plans (Altaban & Güvenç, 1990; Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018). Although these urban plans have had some positive effects for the city, housing shortage and infrastructure issues endured (Altaban & Güvenç, 1990). This situation led authorities to replace squatters with modern apartment complexes, and to facilitate Ankara’s infrastructure.
In 2018, Ankara Metropolitan Municipality announced the “2038 Ankara Environmental Plan”. Some of the aims of the current urban planning project are to ensure the balance of preservation and use in planning area, to form viable rural fabric and to reduce rural-to-urban migration, to increase the number of social housing projects, to improve the conditions of public transportation and rail transport, to preserve accessible public spaces (e.g., parks and urban square) and to increase their number. Besides, there are sections on climate change, environmental issues (e.g., air pollution, noise), social infrastructure areas (e.g., green areas, active spaces, national parks), historical areas (e.g., Gazi Forest Farm, Atatürk’s Mausoleum), tourist areas, and interurban and intracity transportation (Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018).
Residents’ well-being and their quality of life depends on numerous factors, including planning principles of their cities. Reducing the detrimental effects of contextual sources of stress (e.g., air pollution, higher rates of crime, noise) and increasing the positive impacts of restorative components in the city (e.g., access to green areas, higher levels of safety) can influence residents’ well-being.
“I am bringing to you the most recent principles of the art of urbanism. A very wide street reserved for cars, and side streets which will open to this street connecting this street to blocks of apartments. There will be houses and apartments whose doors will open not to the main street, but to side roads. In all of Ankara, there would be no traffic police because the streets will be elevated, and traffic will flow without interruption” (Atay, 2008, pp. 488-489 as cited in Kaçar, 2010).
However, in 1927, the population projection was 300,000 by 1970; but Ankara had already reached a population of 451.241 by 1955. This situation led authorities to develop new urban plans (Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018).
The Yücel-Uybadin Plan, which was accepted in 1957, projected a population of 750.000 by the year 2000 (Altaban & Güvenç, 1990). This plan designed the city as monocentric, and without squatter settlements. However, the projected population was reached before 1965, and increasing number of squatter settlements as well as higher density caused authorities to prepare new urban plans (Altaban & Güvenç, 1990; Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018). Although these urban plans have had some positive effects for the city, housing shortage and infrastructure issues endured (Altaban & Güvenç, 1990). This situation led authorities to replace squatters with modern apartment complexes, and to facilitate Ankara’s infrastructure.
In 2018, Ankara Metropolitan Municipality announced the “2038 Ankara Environmental Plan”. Some of the aims of the current urban planning project are to ensure the balance of preservation and use in planning area, to form viable rural fabric and to reduce rural-to-urban migration, to increase the number of social housing projects, to improve the conditions of public transportation and rail transport, to preserve accessible public spaces (e.g., parks and urban square) and to increase their number. Besides, there are sections on climate change, environmental issues (e.g., air pollution, noise), social infrastructure areas (e.g., green areas, active spaces, national parks), historical areas (e.g., Gazi Forest Farm, Atatürk’s Mausoleum), tourist areas, and interurban and intracity transportation (Ankara Metropolitan Municipality, 2018).
Residents’ well-being and their quality of life depends on numerous factors, including planning principles of their cities. Reducing the detrimental effects of contextual sources of stress (e.g., air pollution, higher rates of crime, noise) and increasing the positive impacts of restorative components in the city (e.g., access to green areas, higher levels of safety) can influence residents’ well-being.
Method
Investigating a research question like ours with quantitative methods may cause a researcher to draw limited conclusions and it may restrain the expressions of participants’ as well. As Howitt and Cramer (2011) claimed, qualitative studies ensure a more profound comprehension of what researchers are interested in, and they investigate individual experiences by not reducing to numbers or little numbers of variables. For that reason, conducting a qualitative study was adopted for the current study.
Participants
After ethical approval was obtained from The Human Subject Ethics Committee of Middle East Technical University, we carried out eleven semi-structured interviews with Ankara based urban planners, urban designers, landscape architects, academics, psychologists, and municipal authorities to receive their opinions about which urban design elements support the mental health of residents in the city. Participants of the current study were recruited via snowball sampling. In these interviews, questions on the demographic information of the participants (e.g., SES, education level, occupation) and semi-structured questions related to urban design and mental health were asked to respondents.
Four participants participating in this study had a master’s degree, six of them had a Ph.D., and one of them was a master’s student. Average age of our sample was 42. In average, they have worked for 18 years. 10 of the 11 respondents indicated that they belong middle socioeconomic class. Four interviewees indicated that they study (or consider to study) the subject of the current research.
Procedure and Analysis
Due to the COVID-19 outbreak, all interviews were carried out through Zoom. All interviews have been audio and video recorded, and they were conducted in Turkish. All the interviews were transcribed word by word. The average length of interviews was 40 minutes.
For the analysis, we used thematic analysis (TA) since it provides a flexible way to arrange, define, and understand the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In order to obtain different viewpoints and a wider comprehension of our study’s topic, a focus group was held with five participants who are either master’s or Ph.D. students at Middle East Technical University Department of Psychology. As suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) and Crowe, Inder, and Porter (2015), first, independent coders tried to fully comprehend the data by re-reading all the interview transcripts several times. Then, they coded the data independently, and compared their independent codings in the focus group to decide on the final form of coding.
In the second step, we searched for themes. In this phase, we preferred to understand what our interviewees focused on rather than determining the themes before analysis. After the identification of the themes, we described and named them. In the final section of the analysis, we examined how our themes are related to each other and how they are associated with the Turkish social context.
Participants
After ethical approval was obtained from The Human Subject Ethics Committee of Middle East Technical University, we carried out eleven semi-structured interviews with Ankara based urban planners, urban designers, landscape architects, academics, psychologists, and municipal authorities to receive their opinions about which urban design elements support the mental health of residents in the city. Participants of the current study were recruited via snowball sampling. In these interviews, questions on the demographic information of the participants (e.g., SES, education level, occupation) and semi-structured questions related to urban design and mental health were asked to respondents.
Four participants participating in this study had a master’s degree, six of them had a Ph.D., and one of them was a master’s student. Average age of our sample was 42. In average, they have worked for 18 years. 10 of the 11 respondents indicated that they belong middle socioeconomic class. Four interviewees indicated that they study (or consider to study) the subject of the current research.
Procedure and Analysis
Due to the COVID-19 outbreak, all interviews were carried out through Zoom. All interviews have been audio and video recorded, and they were conducted in Turkish. All the interviews were transcribed word by word. The average length of interviews was 40 minutes.
For the analysis, we used thematic analysis (TA) since it provides a flexible way to arrange, define, and understand the data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). In order to obtain different viewpoints and a wider comprehension of our study’s topic, a focus group was held with five participants who are either master’s or Ph.D. students at Middle East Technical University Department of Psychology. As suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) and Crowe, Inder, and Porter (2015), first, independent coders tried to fully comprehend the data by re-reading all the interview transcripts several times. Then, they coded the data independently, and compared their independent codings in the focus group to decide on the final form of coding.
In the second step, we searched for themes. In this phase, we preferred to understand what our interviewees focused on rather than determining the themes before analysis. After the identification of the themes, we described and named them. In the final section of the analysis, we examined how our themes are related to each other and how they are associated with the Turkish social context.
Results
The participants were asked in the semi-structured interviews about the components of urban design that support residents’ psychological health, whether professionals and policymakers give importance to psychological health or not, and their opinions about the obstacles to prioritization of psychological health in city’s design. Lastly, they spoke of the developments that implement psychological health into urban design (see Table 2).
Table 2: Emergent themes from the opinions of interviewees on urban design and psychological health in Ankara
Components of Psychological Health Friendly Urban Design
1. Walkability
2. Access to Restorative Environments
3. Access to Public Transportation
4. Places that Encourage Positive Social Interactions
5. Equal Access to City
6. Reducing the Negative Consequences of Pollution
7. Safety in the City
8. Planned Urbanization
Barriers identified for Implementing Mental Health in Urban Design in Ankara
1. Political Barriers
1.1. The commodification of the urban land
1.2. Centralist governance mechanisms
2. Financial Barriers
3. Informational Barriers
3.1. Lack of Knowledge
3.2. Lack of Awareness
Opportunities for Implementing Mental Health in Urban Design
1. The Existence of Participative Management Tools
2. Ongoing Projects (e.g., the construction of bicycle routes)
3. Encouraging Role of the COVID-19 epidemic
1. Walkability
2. Access to Restorative Environments
3. Access to Public Transportation
4. Places that Encourage Positive Social Interactions
5. Equal Access to City
6. Reducing the Negative Consequences of Pollution
7. Safety in the City
8. Planned Urbanization
Barriers identified for Implementing Mental Health in Urban Design in Ankara
1. Political Barriers
1.1. The commodification of the urban land
1.2. Centralist governance mechanisms
2. Financial Barriers
3. Informational Barriers
3.1. Lack of Knowledge
3.2. Lack of Awareness
Opportunities for Implementing Mental Health in Urban Design
1. The Existence of Participative Management Tools
2. Ongoing Projects (e.g., the construction of bicycle routes)
3. Encouraging Role of the COVID-19 epidemic
Urban design factors considered to influence mental health in Ankara
The thematic analysis identified several components of urban design that might have positive outcomes for citizens’ wellbeing and mental health. Interviewees also identified some aspects of current urban design that they believed may have a negative impact, including unplanned urbanization. They proposed that minimizing negative characteristics of current urban design and reinforcing positive elements would result in higher levels of well-being for individuals settled in Ankara.
These elements can be categorized as: walkability, access to restorative environments, access to public transportation, places that encourage positive social interactions, equal access to the city, reducing the negative consequences of pollution, safety in the city, and planned urbanization.
Walkability
Respondents identified that the presence of neighborhoods and areas that motivate individuals to walk are an essential part of a mental health-friendly city. They acknowledged that design elements that encourage individuals to move have also a restorative effect for individuals.
"If we talk about urban design and mental health, I can say that my primary concern is walkability and the existence of green spaces. I mean, within a diameter of 500 or 1000 meters, to reach the school, the health institution, or the commercial centers where we can meet our daily needs by walking." − Urban Planner
While some respondents acknowledged that the short distance between main centers of Ankara makes walking easier, some of them argued that city’s design elements threaten the walkability.
"I think the best part of Ankara regarding mental health and well-being is that I can walk from one place to another. I mean, the short distance between important centers of the city is good." − Sociologist
"Walking is quite essential for our psychological health and restoring ourselves. It may be more crucial than green spaces. However, this is not an easy task in Ankara. Consider road traffic, landscape design, noise etc. I do not even mention the difficulties experienced by individuals with disabilities, elderly, or people carrying children." − Urban Planner
Access to restorative environments.
Our interviewees considered that the existence of restorative environments, including green and blue spaces such as forests, lakes, and urban parks are quite essential for residents’ mental health.
"Regarding mental health, look at the face of a person walking in Kızılay Square. You can see that they are distressed and anxious. Then, walk two kilometers from there and go to Kuğulu Park. Please observe individuals sitting in that tiny area of Kuğulu. You can see how people differ. You can see how calm they are. I mean, instead of flashy things, we should focus on a design that supports the natural structures." – Policymaker
However, they indicated that several things need to be considered when designing and maintaining these environments. Encouraging individuals to exercise by creating active green spaces is crucial.
"I think that green spaces should not only be passive spaces, instead they should make people move, they should lead individuals exercise and make individuals feel good with better landscaping." − Urban Planner
Our interviewees suggested that location of these restorative environments needs to be carefully determined. Parks that are built near the main roads can be a source of noise. Besides, our respondents pointed out that the location of restorative environments should be accessible for all residents.
"In Ankara, we easily observe that urban parks are surrounded by main roads. In addition, it is not easy to reach a really quiet park like Eymir Lake. How many public transportation vehicles go there and how often do they run?" − Social Psychologist
"You design and build a park, but a nearby boulevard may spoil your work since that boulevard may be a source of noise. So, you cannot enjoy the park." − Urban Planner
The participants also argued that maintenance of the green spaces is essential for both aesthetic and safety reasons.
"Our parks and green areas should be well maintained. We, as users, also need to take care of these environments." − Landscape Architect
"Urban parks are not well maintained, and they are not safe places. Its existence is not enough, functionality and maintenance are also important." − Urban Planner
These elements can be categorized as: walkability, access to restorative environments, access to public transportation, places that encourage positive social interactions, equal access to the city, reducing the negative consequences of pollution, safety in the city, and planned urbanization.
Walkability
Respondents identified that the presence of neighborhoods and areas that motivate individuals to walk are an essential part of a mental health-friendly city. They acknowledged that design elements that encourage individuals to move have also a restorative effect for individuals.
"If we talk about urban design and mental health, I can say that my primary concern is walkability and the existence of green spaces. I mean, within a diameter of 500 or 1000 meters, to reach the school, the health institution, or the commercial centers where we can meet our daily needs by walking." − Urban Planner
While some respondents acknowledged that the short distance between main centers of Ankara makes walking easier, some of them argued that city’s design elements threaten the walkability.
"I think the best part of Ankara regarding mental health and well-being is that I can walk from one place to another. I mean, the short distance between important centers of the city is good." − Sociologist
"Walking is quite essential for our psychological health and restoring ourselves. It may be more crucial than green spaces. However, this is not an easy task in Ankara. Consider road traffic, landscape design, noise etc. I do not even mention the difficulties experienced by individuals with disabilities, elderly, or people carrying children." − Urban Planner
Access to restorative environments.
Our interviewees considered that the existence of restorative environments, including green and blue spaces such as forests, lakes, and urban parks are quite essential for residents’ mental health.
"Regarding mental health, look at the face of a person walking in Kızılay Square. You can see that they are distressed and anxious. Then, walk two kilometers from there and go to Kuğulu Park. Please observe individuals sitting in that tiny area of Kuğulu. You can see how people differ. You can see how calm they are. I mean, instead of flashy things, we should focus on a design that supports the natural structures." – Policymaker
However, they indicated that several things need to be considered when designing and maintaining these environments. Encouraging individuals to exercise by creating active green spaces is crucial.
"I think that green spaces should not only be passive spaces, instead they should make people move, they should lead individuals exercise and make individuals feel good with better landscaping." − Urban Planner
Our interviewees suggested that location of these restorative environments needs to be carefully determined. Parks that are built near the main roads can be a source of noise. Besides, our respondents pointed out that the location of restorative environments should be accessible for all residents.
"In Ankara, we easily observe that urban parks are surrounded by main roads. In addition, it is not easy to reach a really quiet park like Eymir Lake. How many public transportation vehicles go there and how often do they run?" − Social Psychologist
"You design and build a park, but a nearby boulevard may spoil your work since that boulevard may be a source of noise. So, you cannot enjoy the park." − Urban Planner
The participants also argued that maintenance of the green spaces is essential for both aesthetic and safety reasons.
"Our parks and green areas should be well maintained. We, as users, also need to take care of these environments." − Landscape Architect
"Urban parks are not well maintained, and they are not safe places. Its existence is not enough, functionality and maintenance are also important." − Urban Planner
Figure 3. Güvenpark, Kızılay. (Photo: Nimet Kütük-Sarı)
Access to public transportation
Our respondents argued that providing a public transportation service that is cheap and accessible to all groups, including people with physical disabilities, elderly, and workers, is an important characteristic of a mental health-friendly city. They stated that some issues need to be solved to provide quality public transportation service to all residents living in Ankara.
"There are no facilities which are suitable for disabled citizens in buses; the ramps for the disabled individuals do not work, so they cannot easily get in and off. In addition, elevators are very limited in subway stations for such a big city. I only mention about someone with a walking disability but consider the effort of someone who cannot see and goes from one place to another in Ankara." − Urban Planner
"In order for a person to feel pleased in a city, I think one must be a little bit away from the things that will cause problems. This is actually a problem caused by transportation in Ankara; buses do not run frequently, and they are generally overloaded. In addition, access to business centers such as OSTİM (Middle East Industry and Trade Center) Organized Industrial Region is problematic. After getting off the subway, workers need to use another vehicle in order to reach their workplaces." − Social Psychologist
"If we think about psychological health, I can say that the transportation between home and workplace should be easy." − Urban Planner
Places that encourage positive social interactions
The benefits of pro-social environments, where individuals meet each other, build positive relationships and attend social and cultural activities, were widely recognised by our respondents. Some of them argued that the principles of urban planning in Ankara cause residents to live isolated from society. They also stressed that relationships between neighbors and family members are not as strong as they were in the past.
"Current urban planning practices cause individuals to disconnect from each other. Neighbors do not know each other. It is very important to create environments where people can gather, meet, and talk. Various cultural activities that bring people together should be organized." − Landscape Architect
"We are social beings and we need environments that both preserving our privacy and regulating our social interactions. We need social spaces on both neighborhood and city scales where we can come together with different people and groups to form positive social interactions. Although there are several public spaces in the city scale, we observe that places where we can produce social interactions has disappeared in the neighborhood scale." − Urban Planner
Our respondents argued that providing a public transportation service that is cheap and accessible to all groups, including people with physical disabilities, elderly, and workers, is an important characteristic of a mental health-friendly city. They stated that some issues need to be solved to provide quality public transportation service to all residents living in Ankara.
"There are no facilities which are suitable for disabled citizens in buses; the ramps for the disabled individuals do not work, so they cannot easily get in and off. In addition, elevators are very limited in subway stations for such a big city. I only mention about someone with a walking disability but consider the effort of someone who cannot see and goes from one place to another in Ankara." − Urban Planner
"In order for a person to feel pleased in a city, I think one must be a little bit away from the things that will cause problems. This is actually a problem caused by transportation in Ankara; buses do not run frequently, and they are generally overloaded. In addition, access to business centers such as OSTİM (Middle East Industry and Trade Center) Organized Industrial Region is problematic. After getting off the subway, workers need to use another vehicle in order to reach their workplaces." − Social Psychologist
"If we think about psychological health, I can say that the transportation between home and workplace should be easy." − Urban Planner
Places that encourage positive social interactions
The benefits of pro-social environments, where individuals meet each other, build positive relationships and attend social and cultural activities, were widely recognised by our respondents. Some of them argued that the principles of urban planning in Ankara cause residents to live isolated from society. They also stressed that relationships between neighbors and family members are not as strong as they were in the past.
"Current urban planning practices cause individuals to disconnect from each other. Neighbors do not know each other. It is very important to create environments where people can gather, meet, and talk. Various cultural activities that bring people together should be organized." − Landscape Architect
"We are social beings and we need environments that both preserving our privacy and regulating our social interactions. We need social spaces on both neighborhood and city scales where we can come together with different people and groups to form positive social interactions. Although there are several public spaces in the city scale, we observe that places where we can produce social interactions has disappeared in the neighborhood scale." − Urban Planner
Figure 4. A food stall in Kızılay. (Photo: Nimet Kütük-Sarı)
Equal access to city
Our interviewees argued that urban design should allow all residents access to city and make it easier to use city’s facilities, regardless of their age and capabilities. Respondents claimed that some elements of current urban design in Ankara cause problems especially for older people and for people with disabilities.
"It is necessary to plan a city where people with disabilities can express themselves comfortably, go outside and travel easily. In the current situation of Ankara, they adapt in a way but why do they need to adapt? It is already difficult for them to adapt to life outside, and the obstacles in urban life make this adaptation process more difficult." – Psychologist
"If you attach importance to public health in a city, you need to increase the number of the areas that children can play, and you need to make the accessibility of older people and individuals with disabilities easier." – Urban Planner
"In my opinion, it is very difficult for a person with physical disability to reach the bus station, and to reach the metro station after getting off the bus." – Urban Planner
"It is quite important to adopt principles of universal design in urban planning. I mean, a design that individuals can easily go outside. For example, I cannot walk or may be disabled, but comfort is essential. I do not mean luxury, I mean usability." – Landscape Architect
Reducing the negative consequences of pollution.
Our respondents posited that minimizing the harmful effects of air, visual, and auditory pollution is quite influential to residents’ mental health and well-being.
"We need to design by using the facilities that nature offers us. For example, consider a city which has been designed without the consideration of direction of the wind. The wind always soughs there. I mean, we need to consider elements such as view, noise, sun, and water." – Urban Planner
"There are giant advertising signboards and they distract us in the traffic. It’s all dark at night and its light distracts you. It also threatens the road safety. I mean, the proper adjustment of the lights and the colors have an effect on psychological health." – Urban Designer
"These high-rise buildings negatively affect public health. They do not allow for proper air circulation in the city. The negative effects of changing climate, lack of rain, and rising temperature on physical and mental health are more visible." – Urban Planner
Safety in the city.
Interviewees proposed that a sense of safety is an important determinant of mental health. Specifically, they posited that urban design should make inhabitants feel secure in the neighborhood and the city.
"Safety is essential in the city life. I mean, do I need to cross the intersection while walking? Or are there any places that I do not want to see on my way? For example, there is a small auto industrial area here and crossing over this area is psychologically exhausting. – Urban Planner
One of our respondents claimed that both policymakers and professionals intend to provide safety in cities by building gated communities. However, one of our interviewees posited that this causes social segregation.
"As the urban designers, we are trying to solve the issue of security in the cities by strengthening boundaries between the public and the private spaces. We form gated communities that have security guards. However, this mindset causes social segregation." – Urban Planner
Planned urbanization
Our participants identified that planned urbanization is one prerequisite of public health. They asserted that Ankara is facing the consequences of unplanned and rapid urbanization, and suggested that these consequences adversely affect both physical and psychological health of residents.
"When you consider the past and today, we easily observe that Ankara has grown. However, this progress has been independent of urban planning and urban design. The city has become dense." – Urban Designer
"Apartment buildings are constructed too close to each other. A garden is not a prerequisite for the construction of them, but a parking lot is. While the number of green spaces is decreasing, the number of high-rise buildings is increasing. The city is actually losing its authenticity and its colors." − Sociologist
"What happened in İstanbul is a signifier of how unplanned urbanization affects the city. Municipalities give permission contracting companies to build 50 storey buildings although legislation permits only 6-7 storey buildings. Now, no one lives in those buildings." – Urban Planner
In addition to these elements, respondents identified that several places in Ankara that influence individuals’ mental health in a positive way. These places can be categorized as restorative environments (e.g., Eymir Lake, Seğmenler Park, Kuğulu Park), pro-social environments (e.g., Tunalı Hilmi Street, Sevent Streeth - Bahçelievler), and historical environments (e.g., museums, Ankara Castle, Ulus, August Temple, Hacı Bayram Mosque).
Our interviewees argued that urban design should allow all residents access to city and make it easier to use city’s facilities, regardless of their age and capabilities. Respondents claimed that some elements of current urban design in Ankara cause problems especially for older people and for people with disabilities.
"It is necessary to plan a city where people with disabilities can express themselves comfortably, go outside and travel easily. In the current situation of Ankara, they adapt in a way but why do they need to adapt? It is already difficult for them to adapt to life outside, and the obstacles in urban life make this adaptation process more difficult." – Psychologist
"If you attach importance to public health in a city, you need to increase the number of the areas that children can play, and you need to make the accessibility of older people and individuals with disabilities easier." – Urban Planner
"In my opinion, it is very difficult for a person with physical disability to reach the bus station, and to reach the metro station after getting off the bus." – Urban Planner
"It is quite important to adopt principles of universal design in urban planning. I mean, a design that individuals can easily go outside. For example, I cannot walk or may be disabled, but comfort is essential. I do not mean luxury, I mean usability." – Landscape Architect
Reducing the negative consequences of pollution.
Our respondents posited that minimizing the harmful effects of air, visual, and auditory pollution is quite influential to residents’ mental health and well-being.
"We need to design by using the facilities that nature offers us. For example, consider a city which has been designed without the consideration of direction of the wind. The wind always soughs there. I mean, we need to consider elements such as view, noise, sun, and water." – Urban Planner
"There are giant advertising signboards and they distract us in the traffic. It’s all dark at night and its light distracts you. It also threatens the road safety. I mean, the proper adjustment of the lights and the colors have an effect on psychological health." – Urban Designer
"These high-rise buildings negatively affect public health. They do not allow for proper air circulation in the city. The negative effects of changing climate, lack of rain, and rising temperature on physical and mental health are more visible." – Urban Planner
Safety in the city.
Interviewees proposed that a sense of safety is an important determinant of mental health. Specifically, they posited that urban design should make inhabitants feel secure in the neighborhood and the city.
"Safety is essential in the city life. I mean, do I need to cross the intersection while walking? Or are there any places that I do not want to see on my way? For example, there is a small auto industrial area here and crossing over this area is psychologically exhausting. – Urban Planner
One of our respondents claimed that both policymakers and professionals intend to provide safety in cities by building gated communities. However, one of our interviewees posited that this causes social segregation.
"As the urban designers, we are trying to solve the issue of security in the cities by strengthening boundaries between the public and the private spaces. We form gated communities that have security guards. However, this mindset causes social segregation." – Urban Planner
Planned urbanization
Our participants identified that planned urbanization is one prerequisite of public health. They asserted that Ankara is facing the consequences of unplanned and rapid urbanization, and suggested that these consequences adversely affect both physical and psychological health of residents.
"When you consider the past and today, we easily observe that Ankara has grown. However, this progress has been independent of urban planning and urban design. The city has become dense." – Urban Designer
"Apartment buildings are constructed too close to each other. A garden is not a prerequisite for the construction of them, but a parking lot is. While the number of green spaces is decreasing, the number of high-rise buildings is increasing. The city is actually losing its authenticity and its colors." − Sociologist
"What happened in İstanbul is a signifier of how unplanned urbanization affects the city. Municipalities give permission contracting companies to build 50 storey buildings although legislation permits only 6-7 storey buildings. Now, no one lives in those buildings." – Urban Planner
In addition to these elements, respondents identified that several places in Ankara that influence individuals’ mental health in a positive way. These places can be categorized as restorative environments (e.g., Eymir Lake, Seğmenler Park, Kuğulu Park), pro-social environments (e.g., Tunalı Hilmi Street, Sevent Streeth - Bahçelievler), and historical environments (e.g., museums, Ankara Castle, Ulus, August Temple, Hacı Bayram Mosque).
Figure 5. Lake Eymir. (Photo: Muhammed Sadık Erdoğan)
Figure 6. Aerial view of Bahçelievler. (Photo: Muhammed Sadık Erdoğan)
Figure 7. Anıtkabir, The Mausoleum of Atatürk. (Photo: Erkin Sarı)
Perceived Prioritization of Mental Health in Urban Planning and Design in Ankara
The thematic analysis demonstrated that mental health is not seen as a priority in Ankara’s urban planning and urban design. Our participants stated that official plans and guides of Ankara do not directly embrace psychological health in urban design. Nevertheless, they believed that including psychological health in urban design is a novel topic for Turkish professionals, and this might be an encouraging factor for architects, planners, designers, and policymakers.
"It (including mental health in urban planning) is about vision and mentality, and it is not understood right now because this is not like preparing a book about built environment and mental health and putting this information into practice. I think professionals will gradually understand the importance of mental health in urban planning." – Urban Planner
Respondents identified that several barriers that need to be eliminated in order to implement improved urban design for psychological health. These barriers can be classified as political factors including the commodification of the urban land and centralist governance mechanisms, economic factors including financial constraints and economic priorities, and informational factors including the limited number of academic studies on mental health in urban planning, lack of awareness, and nonexistence of courses on mental health in relevant departments (i. e., city and regional planning and architecture).
Political barriers.
Interviewees claimed that although a growing number of professionals (e.g., urban planners, architects, landscape architects) care about life quality, and the mental health and well-being of city residents, political circumstances in the country and in Ankara limit these professionals’ actions.
"It can be said that the biggest barriers are socio-economic circumstances and political conditions. Although we, as professionals, consider the importance of mental health in urban planning, these barriers restrict our actions." – Urban Planner
Our respondents stressed that the commodification of urban land can have harmful effects for residents. Specifically, they asserted that almost all policymakers are involved in the generation of the rent from urban land.
"When money and urban land rent become involved, both physical and psychological health lose their importance." – Urban Planner
"The city should not be seen as a commercial commodity in order to provide happiness to its residents." – Policymaker
Another political issue raised was the centralist governance mechanisms. Respondents identified that professionals including urban planners, urban designers, and architects are excluded from the decision-making processes. Specifically, they pointed out that top-down approaches limit the innovative actions of professionals.
"Unfortunately, neither urban planners nor architects have the right to comment on decisions about urban planning." – Urban Planner
"People who think about our physical and psychological health and people who decide about our city are not same. It would be better to implement the former ones suggestions into urban planning." – Social Psychologist
"Some urban planners and architects make a plan just by looking at map of the city and considering prior planning aspects. No detailed research is done for the planning of a neighborhood or a city. They don’t even go there, and they do not care about human psychology. They are implementing whatever decision-makers tell them." – Urban Planner
Informational barriers
Respondents identified that implementing mental health in urban design is quite connected to the knowledge and awareness of professionals. Some respondents posited that most professionals working in the urban planning and urban design fields have not adequate knowledge about mental health and human psychology. In addition, interviewees indicated that the awareness of urban planning/design professionals and policymakers regarding the importance of psychological health in urban design may be lacking.
"This is about lack of knowledge. We do not improve ourselves after graduating from university. It is not only about getting a master’s degree. An urban design professional needs to follow recent developments and contemporary studies in his/her field." – Urban Designer
"They may have not an idea to implement mental health into urban planning. It may be about lack of knowledge. Or it may be that the importance of this issue was not well explained to them." – Neighborhood Association Leader
"We consider psychologist as a person who treats personal problems. We are not aware the dimensions of social psychology." – Urban Designer
Some interviewees asserted that the number of academic publications (e.g., articles, books, conference proceedings) on the psychological health and city planning is not sufficient.
"The number of scientific products is very limited. We do not have enough academic studies that examine human behavior and urban design together." – Urban Planner
In addition to professionals’ lack of knowledge and awareness, and perceived inadequacy of scientific studies on mental health and urban planning, some of our respondents pointed out the significance of education of professionals working on urban planning and urban design.
"An architect may probably think about physical health in planning and designing. It may be easy for them to consider disabled individuals and elderly. However, this is not the case for psychological health. It may be about the courses in their curriculum. There may be a need to include some psychology courses in their curriculum." – Psychologist
Financial barriers
Our analysis revealed that financial priorities of public and private sectors are also responsible for the current situation in Ankara’s urban planning. Specifically, some respondents claimed that both policymakers and private sector principals pay more attention to money than to the wellbeing of inhabitants.
"It would not be wrong to say that policy makers seek profit rather than public health and well-being of residents. In general, they make investment if they think that they would make profit." – Social Psychologist
"When considering decisions and actions of policymakers, we see that opinions of architects and urban planners are not considered important. They (policymakers) are more concerned about financial side of the projects." − Psychologist
"The production of urban housing has become an industrial activity. The technologies used in this activity, expectations, and the surplus value were determined. Under these conditions, it is not possible for an architect or urban planner to behave differently." – Urban Planner
"It (including mental health in urban planning) is about vision and mentality, and it is not understood right now because this is not like preparing a book about built environment and mental health and putting this information into practice. I think professionals will gradually understand the importance of mental health in urban planning." – Urban Planner
Respondents identified that several barriers that need to be eliminated in order to implement improved urban design for psychological health. These barriers can be classified as political factors including the commodification of the urban land and centralist governance mechanisms, economic factors including financial constraints and economic priorities, and informational factors including the limited number of academic studies on mental health in urban planning, lack of awareness, and nonexistence of courses on mental health in relevant departments (i. e., city and regional planning and architecture).
Political barriers.
Interviewees claimed that although a growing number of professionals (e.g., urban planners, architects, landscape architects) care about life quality, and the mental health and well-being of city residents, political circumstances in the country and in Ankara limit these professionals’ actions.
"It can be said that the biggest barriers are socio-economic circumstances and political conditions. Although we, as professionals, consider the importance of mental health in urban planning, these barriers restrict our actions." – Urban Planner
Our respondents stressed that the commodification of urban land can have harmful effects for residents. Specifically, they asserted that almost all policymakers are involved in the generation of the rent from urban land.
"When money and urban land rent become involved, both physical and psychological health lose their importance." – Urban Planner
"The city should not be seen as a commercial commodity in order to provide happiness to its residents." – Policymaker
Another political issue raised was the centralist governance mechanisms. Respondents identified that professionals including urban planners, urban designers, and architects are excluded from the decision-making processes. Specifically, they pointed out that top-down approaches limit the innovative actions of professionals.
"Unfortunately, neither urban planners nor architects have the right to comment on decisions about urban planning." – Urban Planner
"People who think about our physical and psychological health and people who decide about our city are not same. It would be better to implement the former ones suggestions into urban planning." – Social Psychologist
"Some urban planners and architects make a plan just by looking at map of the city and considering prior planning aspects. No detailed research is done for the planning of a neighborhood or a city. They don’t even go there, and they do not care about human psychology. They are implementing whatever decision-makers tell them." – Urban Planner
Informational barriers
Respondents identified that implementing mental health in urban design is quite connected to the knowledge and awareness of professionals. Some respondents posited that most professionals working in the urban planning and urban design fields have not adequate knowledge about mental health and human psychology. In addition, interviewees indicated that the awareness of urban planning/design professionals and policymakers regarding the importance of psychological health in urban design may be lacking.
"This is about lack of knowledge. We do not improve ourselves after graduating from university. It is not only about getting a master’s degree. An urban design professional needs to follow recent developments and contemporary studies in his/her field." – Urban Designer
"They may have not an idea to implement mental health into urban planning. It may be about lack of knowledge. Or it may be that the importance of this issue was not well explained to them." – Neighborhood Association Leader
"We consider psychologist as a person who treats personal problems. We are not aware the dimensions of social psychology." – Urban Designer
Some interviewees asserted that the number of academic publications (e.g., articles, books, conference proceedings) on the psychological health and city planning is not sufficient.
"The number of scientific products is very limited. We do not have enough academic studies that examine human behavior and urban design together." – Urban Planner
In addition to professionals’ lack of knowledge and awareness, and perceived inadequacy of scientific studies on mental health and urban planning, some of our respondents pointed out the significance of education of professionals working on urban planning and urban design.
"An architect may probably think about physical health in planning and designing. It may be easy for them to consider disabled individuals and elderly. However, this is not the case for psychological health. It may be about the courses in their curriculum. There may be a need to include some psychology courses in their curriculum." – Psychologist
Financial barriers
Our analysis revealed that financial priorities of public and private sectors are also responsible for the current situation in Ankara’s urban planning. Specifically, some respondents claimed that both policymakers and private sector principals pay more attention to money than to the wellbeing of inhabitants.
"It would not be wrong to say that policy makers seek profit rather than public health and well-being of residents. In general, they make investment if they think that they would make profit." – Social Psychologist
"When considering decisions and actions of policymakers, we see that opinions of architects and urban planners are not considered important. They (policymakers) are more concerned about financial side of the projects." − Psychologist
"The production of urban housing has become an industrial activity. The technologies used in this activity, expectations, and the surplus value were determined. Under these conditions, it is not possible for an architect or urban planner to behave differently." – Urban Planner
Opportunities for Implementing Mental Health in Urban Design
Our respondents acknowledged that there are some developments to support residents’ psychological health through urban design in Ankara. These improvements can be categorized as the existence of participative management tools in both neighborhood and city level, ongoing projects - including the construction of bicycle routes (see Case Study 1), and the encouraging role of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Our interviewees responded that a psychological health-friendly city need to involve all relevant stakeholders (e.g., city’s residents, neighborhood associations, union chambers, academics, professionals who work in relevant fields) into urban planning and urban design processes. Some of our respondents pointed out that neighborhood initiatives have an important role in including citizens in urban design processes in the neighborhood.
"I am not certain how it is related to psychology, but these topics that we covered are closely associated with life quality. For example, we, as neighborhood association, take into consideration our neighbors’ needs and develop studies in order to increase solidarity among them." – Neighborhood Association Leader
Besides, they indicated that the new municipal government is more inclined to use participative management tools in the city. Specifically, they insisted that municipal authorities are more open to collaboration with professionals and citizens.
"It is possible to say that more participative, more deliberative decision-making mechanisms have begun to emerge in places, such as Ulus. Too many agents came together there. Opinions were received from the university, from the chamber, from the tradesmen. Actually, this participatory process is more important than the result." – Urban Planner
Our interviewees did also appreciate the role of city councils in the decision-making processes. They acknowledged the city council endeavors to improve representation of citizens’ and professionals in urban management.
"I am hopeful about this management period. The statement of the mayor’s (Mansur Yavaş) “we will govern the city together” is crucial. This statement is also appreciated by the union chambers. I think it will be better. One of the most important outcomes of that is city councils. Because these are the places for exchanging opinions and working together."− Neighborhood Association Leader
Most of our interviewees emphasized the promising role of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, they indicated that pandemic lead professionals and policymakers to carefully think about physical and psychological health.
"One of the main causes of the COVID-19 that we are experiencing today is unplanned urbanization and its effects on environmental degradation." – Policymaker
"In fact, I believe this epidemic will encourage us. People experience what we (professionals) know well and what we discuss (e.g., how to create a healthy environment, what are their components, how to make the environment sustainable), and this has created an opportunity for us." – Urban Planner
Our interviewees responded that a psychological health-friendly city need to involve all relevant stakeholders (e.g., city’s residents, neighborhood associations, union chambers, academics, professionals who work in relevant fields) into urban planning and urban design processes. Some of our respondents pointed out that neighborhood initiatives have an important role in including citizens in urban design processes in the neighborhood.
"I am not certain how it is related to psychology, but these topics that we covered are closely associated with life quality. For example, we, as neighborhood association, take into consideration our neighbors’ needs and develop studies in order to increase solidarity among them." – Neighborhood Association Leader
Besides, they indicated that the new municipal government is more inclined to use participative management tools in the city. Specifically, they insisted that municipal authorities are more open to collaboration with professionals and citizens.
"It is possible to say that more participative, more deliberative decision-making mechanisms have begun to emerge in places, such as Ulus. Too many agents came together there. Opinions were received from the university, from the chamber, from the tradesmen. Actually, this participatory process is more important than the result." – Urban Planner
Our interviewees did also appreciate the role of city councils in the decision-making processes. They acknowledged the city council endeavors to improve representation of citizens’ and professionals in urban management.
"I am hopeful about this management period. The statement of the mayor’s (Mansur Yavaş) “we will govern the city together” is crucial. This statement is also appreciated by the union chambers. I think it will be better. One of the most important outcomes of that is city councils. Because these are the places for exchanging opinions and working together."− Neighborhood Association Leader
Most of our interviewees emphasized the promising role of the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, they indicated that pandemic lead professionals and policymakers to carefully think about physical and psychological health.
"One of the main causes of the COVID-19 that we are experiencing today is unplanned urbanization and its effects on environmental degradation." – Policymaker
"In fact, I believe this epidemic will encourage us. People experience what we (professionals) know well and what we discuss (e.g., how to create a healthy environment, what are their components, how to make the environment sustainable), and this has created an opportunity for us." – Urban Planner
Case study: promoting cycling in Ankara
Encouraging environmentally-friendly transportation methods is an important project of the newly elected municipal government. In line with this aim, municipal authorities initiated a bicycle lane project in November 2019. 53.6 kilometers (33 miles) bike lane will connect six different routes and a number of public and educational institutions, including eight universities, ministries, and hospitals. In order to encourage individuals to cycle, the municipality will make suitable subways and buses to carry bicycles. Authorities plan to complete this project in 2020.
Figure 8. Bicycle route construction. (Photo: cyclistmag.com.tr)
Discussion
This paper aimed to investigate how Ankara applies the basic standards of urban design to support positive psychological health to its residents. After providing information on the current situation of mental health in Turkey and Ankara, Ankara’s place in history and its demographics, and the evolution of Ankara’s urban planning; eleven semi-structured interviews were done with professionals associated with the subject of the study. These interviews postulated that, for good population mental health, some factors need to be taken into consideration in urban design. In addition, they demonstrated that mental health is not currently a key component of Ankara’s urban design because of the existence of political, financial, and informational barriers. However, these interviewees stated that there are also some developments intended to implement mental health related factors into urban design, and they had a positive look on the future of Ankara’s urban design.
Our interviewees suggested that a good walking environment is a necessary component for physical activity. In the literature, walking was found to influence both physical and psychological health positively (e.g., Kent, Ma, & Mulley, 2017; Wang & Yang, 2019). It is related to low obesity rates (Saelens et al., 2003; Pucher et al., 2010) and decreased possibility of heart diseases and diabetes (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1996). Besides its positive effects on physical health, walking is also positively associated with life quality and psychological health. Walking and the other types of physical activities are negatively related to depression rates (Eyler et al., 2003; Hanson & Jones, 2015) and anxiety (Rosenbaum et al., 2016). Outside walking activity also positively influences one’s self-esteem (Fox, 2000), subjective well-being (Richards et al., 2015), and psychological well-being (Panahi et al., 2016). In addition to these findings on the positive effects of walking activity itself, Kelly et al.’s (2018) meta-analysis study documented that the context of walking is also influential in mental health. Specifically, it was suggested that green and natural (vs. urban) environments, and outdoor (vs. indoor) areas influence mental health in a more positive way. All in all, the literature suggested that walking and other types of physical activities (e.g., exercise) are quite essential for both physical and mental health. Thus, in terms of mental health, creating areas that encourage individuals to walk is an essential element of urban design.
Restorative environments, including urban parks, forests, and lakes, was another characteristic of a mental health-friendly city, according to our respondents. Earlier research depicted that access to green spaces is positively associated with life satisfaction (Gidlof-Gunnarsson & Ohstrom, 2007; Ambrey & Fleming, 2014), and perceived greenness in the neighborhood is positively related to both physical and psychological health (Hartig et al., 1991; Sugiyama et al., 2008). Similarly, it was shown that activities undertaken in green environments, including walking, cycling, and preservation of nature, help to improve one’s self-esteem and well-being (Pretty et al., 2007).
Green areas were also shown to foster social activities. Sullivan et al. (2004) suggested that places’ physical characteristics are influential in being a part of social activities. Specifically, they stated that people tend to participate in social activities taken place in green areas rather than in barren environments. Restorative environments in the city were also related to greater levels of sense of community and perceived security (Kim & Kaplan, 2004), which emerged as another subtheme in the present research.
Sense of safety was reported by our interviewees as an important element of a psychological health friendly city. It was well-documented that both physical (e.g., piles of rubbish, derelict houses) and social (e.g., areas with higher levels of crime) elements of incivilities in cities lead to lower levels of perceived safety (Perkins et al., 1992). According to Deniz (2016), a low level of perceived safety limits residents’ outdoor physical activities, and thus, adversely influences their both physical and psychological health, and it has a negative impact on sense of community. For the provision of sense of safety, the maintenance of the urban parks (e.g., mowing, pruning trees, watering the grass and the flowers, cleaning) is vital. A badly maintained and unsafe park may discourage individuals from using these environments (Türkseven-Doğrusoy & Zengel, 2017). Thus, creating a safer urban environment by incorporating structural, physical, and social facets is essential for good population mental health.
Public transportation is another key characteristic of a mental health friendly city, as our interviewees suggested. Our analysis proposed that public transportation that is accessible for all individuals in the city, including disadvantaged individuals (e.g., individuals with disabilities, elderly, children), is important for mental health. This finding is in line with the claim of Mental Health Action Group (2011). They reported that public transportation makes it easier to access jobs and education. On the other hand, inaccessible public transportation restrains inhabitants’ actions, including missing job and education opportunities. Thus, its lack or insufficiency may hinder self-esteem, negatively affect psychological health, and may contribute to social isolation. This report also documented that individuals experience numerous obstacles while accessing public transportation, including overcrowding, negative attitudes of public transportation personnel, and discrimination. Similarly, McCay et al. (2017) demonstrated that some elements of public transportation could influence psychological health. They categorized these elements as comfort (e.g., overcrowd, hygiene, seating), accessibility (e.g., physical accessibility, financial accessibility), dangers and disturbances (e.g., road safety, incivilities), lack of control (e.g., long waiting times, the nonexistence of parking lots near the stations), social interactions (e.g., attitudes of public transportation personnel, both positive and negative relationships between passengers), areas around transit access points (e.g., the effects of public transportation to residential noise), active transport (e.g., bike lanes and pedestrian friendly design), and use of transit time (e.g., travel time). Thus, these factors should be taken into consideration by the authorities for the sake of the mental health of residents.
Pro-social environments, where residents develop positive social interactions, are also essential for mental health and life quality, as our respondents posited. Earlier research has suggested that social networks (Zenker & Rütter, 2014), positive interactions in the neighborhood (Kahrik et al., 2015), and various cultural activities including theatre (Zenker et al., 2013) support the quality of urban life. Moreover, pro-social environments also help individuals to be more tolerant of differences (Zenker et al., 2013), and they enhance community feeling (Manzo, 2018). Thus, for a better mental health in the city, it is essential to include prosocial environments in urban plans.
The elements of unplanned urbanization also adversely affects psychological health, as our respondents suggested. In line with our findings, earlier studies have suggested that the management of urban density is crucial for life quality (Manzo, 2018). As Stokols (1972) indicated, density refers to the population in a specific place, and it positively influences sense of community (Jacobs & Appleyard, 1987). However, if individuals experience this density as overcrowding, they may feel anxious and may isolate themselves from society (Stokols, 1972). Moreover, urbanization leads to an increase in stressful life events (e.g., overcrowding, traffic intensity, noise) and it decreases social support (e.g., increase of nuclear families, underemployment) (Harpham, 1994; Bilotta & Evans, 2013). Thus, planned urbanization is vital for both good population mental health and sense of community.
Our respondents stressed various types of environmental pollution having deleterious effects on both physical and mental health. They suggested that minimizing the effects of the pollution may result in higher levels of psychological health of inhabitants. Similarly, previous literature demonstrated that low air quality is linked to higher levels of both physical and psychological disorders. Specifically, air pollution was found as a risk factor for heart and lung diseases (Chen et al., 2008) and neurological diseases, including Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease (Genç et al., 2012). Besides, air pollution and low water quality were found to be associated with bipolar disorder, personality disorders, major depression, and schizophrenia (Attademo & Bernardini, 2017; Khan et al., 2019). Thus, it can be concluded that urban design elements, such as choosing environmentally friendly transportation ways (e.g., cycling, walking), are essential for a good population physical and mental health (King, 2018).
Our interviewees suggested that a good walking environment is a necessary component for physical activity. In the literature, walking was found to influence both physical and psychological health positively (e.g., Kent, Ma, & Mulley, 2017; Wang & Yang, 2019). It is related to low obesity rates (Saelens et al., 2003; Pucher et al., 2010) and decreased possibility of heart diseases and diabetes (U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1996). Besides its positive effects on physical health, walking is also positively associated with life quality and psychological health. Walking and the other types of physical activities are negatively related to depression rates (Eyler et al., 2003; Hanson & Jones, 2015) and anxiety (Rosenbaum et al., 2016). Outside walking activity also positively influences one’s self-esteem (Fox, 2000), subjective well-being (Richards et al., 2015), and psychological well-being (Panahi et al., 2016). In addition to these findings on the positive effects of walking activity itself, Kelly et al.’s (2018) meta-analysis study documented that the context of walking is also influential in mental health. Specifically, it was suggested that green and natural (vs. urban) environments, and outdoor (vs. indoor) areas influence mental health in a more positive way. All in all, the literature suggested that walking and other types of physical activities (e.g., exercise) are quite essential for both physical and mental health. Thus, in terms of mental health, creating areas that encourage individuals to walk is an essential element of urban design.
Restorative environments, including urban parks, forests, and lakes, was another characteristic of a mental health-friendly city, according to our respondents. Earlier research depicted that access to green spaces is positively associated with life satisfaction (Gidlof-Gunnarsson & Ohstrom, 2007; Ambrey & Fleming, 2014), and perceived greenness in the neighborhood is positively related to both physical and psychological health (Hartig et al., 1991; Sugiyama et al., 2008). Similarly, it was shown that activities undertaken in green environments, including walking, cycling, and preservation of nature, help to improve one’s self-esteem and well-being (Pretty et al., 2007).
Green areas were also shown to foster social activities. Sullivan et al. (2004) suggested that places’ physical characteristics are influential in being a part of social activities. Specifically, they stated that people tend to participate in social activities taken place in green areas rather than in barren environments. Restorative environments in the city were also related to greater levels of sense of community and perceived security (Kim & Kaplan, 2004), which emerged as another subtheme in the present research.
Sense of safety was reported by our interviewees as an important element of a psychological health friendly city. It was well-documented that both physical (e.g., piles of rubbish, derelict houses) and social (e.g., areas with higher levels of crime) elements of incivilities in cities lead to lower levels of perceived safety (Perkins et al., 1992). According to Deniz (2016), a low level of perceived safety limits residents’ outdoor physical activities, and thus, adversely influences their both physical and psychological health, and it has a negative impact on sense of community. For the provision of sense of safety, the maintenance of the urban parks (e.g., mowing, pruning trees, watering the grass and the flowers, cleaning) is vital. A badly maintained and unsafe park may discourage individuals from using these environments (Türkseven-Doğrusoy & Zengel, 2017). Thus, creating a safer urban environment by incorporating structural, physical, and social facets is essential for good population mental health.
Public transportation is another key characteristic of a mental health friendly city, as our interviewees suggested. Our analysis proposed that public transportation that is accessible for all individuals in the city, including disadvantaged individuals (e.g., individuals with disabilities, elderly, children), is important for mental health. This finding is in line with the claim of Mental Health Action Group (2011). They reported that public transportation makes it easier to access jobs and education. On the other hand, inaccessible public transportation restrains inhabitants’ actions, including missing job and education opportunities. Thus, its lack or insufficiency may hinder self-esteem, negatively affect psychological health, and may contribute to social isolation. This report also documented that individuals experience numerous obstacles while accessing public transportation, including overcrowding, negative attitudes of public transportation personnel, and discrimination. Similarly, McCay et al. (2017) demonstrated that some elements of public transportation could influence psychological health. They categorized these elements as comfort (e.g., overcrowd, hygiene, seating), accessibility (e.g., physical accessibility, financial accessibility), dangers and disturbances (e.g., road safety, incivilities), lack of control (e.g., long waiting times, the nonexistence of parking lots near the stations), social interactions (e.g., attitudes of public transportation personnel, both positive and negative relationships between passengers), areas around transit access points (e.g., the effects of public transportation to residential noise), active transport (e.g., bike lanes and pedestrian friendly design), and use of transit time (e.g., travel time). Thus, these factors should be taken into consideration by the authorities for the sake of the mental health of residents.
Pro-social environments, where residents develop positive social interactions, are also essential for mental health and life quality, as our respondents posited. Earlier research has suggested that social networks (Zenker & Rütter, 2014), positive interactions in the neighborhood (Kahrik et al., 2015), and various cultural activities including theatre (Zenker et al., 2013) support the quality of urban life. Moreover, pro-social environments also help individuals to be more tolerant of differences (Zenker et al., 2013), and they enhance community feeling (Manzo, 2018). Thus, for a better mental health in the city, it is essential to include prosocial environments in urban plans.
The elements of unplanned urbanization also adversely affects psychological health, as our respondents suggested. In line with our findings, earlier studies have suggested that the management of urban density is crucial for life quality (Manzo, 2018). As Stokols (1972) indicated, density refers to the population in a specific place, and it positively influences sense of community (Jacobs & Appleyard, 1987). However, if individuals experience this density as overcrowding, they may feel anxious and may isolate themselves from society (Stokols, 1972). Moreover, urbanization leads to an increase in stressful life events (e.g., overcrowding, traffic intensity, noise) and it decreases social support (e.g., increase of nuclear families, underemployment) (Harpham, 1994; Bilotta & Evans, 2013). Thus, planned urbanization is vital for both good population mental health and sense of community.
Our respondents stressed various types of environmental pollution having deleterious effects on both physical and mental health. They suggested that minimizing the effects of the pollution may result in higher levels of psychological health of inhabitants. Similarly, previous literature demonstrated that low air quality is linked to higher levels of both physical and psychological disorders. Specifically, air pollution was found as a risk factor for heart and lung diseases (Chen et al., 2008) and neurological diseases, including Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease (Genç et al., 2012). Besides, air pollution and low water quality were found to be associated with bipolar disorder, personality disorders, major depression, and schizophrenia (Attademo & Bernardini, 2017; Khan et al., 2019). Thus, it can be concluded that urban design elements, such as choosing environmentally friendly transportation ways (e.g., cycling, walking), are essential for a good population physical and mental health (King, 2018).
SWOT Analysis: Urban Design and Mental Health in Ankara
STRENGTHS
|
WEAKNESSES
|
OPPORTUNITIES
|
THREATS
|
Conclusion
This study examined how the Turkish capital city of Ankara employs the main assumptions of urban design to support a good population psychological health. Throughout the paper, it was demonstrated that some elements are required to create a mental health friendly urban environment. Besides, perceived prioritization of mental health in Ankara’s design and obstacles to implementing psychological health into urban design were depicted. Considering these findings, it is possible to offer suggestions to both professionals and policymakers for improving psychological health through urban design for Ankara and other cities.
Lessons from Ankara that could be applied to promote wellbeing and good mental health through urban planning and design in other cities
1. Invest in a high number of environments (e.g., urban parks, museums) that support good population mental health.
2. Leverage the city's academic resources to develop new academic studies on urban design and mental health.
3. Leverage the motivation of both municipal authorities and professionals (e.g., union chambers, academics) to work collaboratively.
2. Leverage the city's academic resources to develop new academic studies on urban design and mental health.
3. Leverage the motivation of both municipal authorities and professionals (e.g., union chambers, academics) to work collaboratively.
Recommendations for Ankara to improve public mental health and wellbeing through urban planning and design
1. In spite of having 18 universities located in Ankara, interdisciplinary work between health professionals and urban design professionals is not adequate. Professionals in relevant fields should come together and produce scientific studies to improve psychological health through urban design.
2. Although Ankara has numerous restorative environments, they are not always well maintained, and do not always feel safe for users. Authorities and users should consider maintenance and functionality of these areas to maximise benefits to residents' mental health and wellbeing.
3. Unplanned and rapid urbanization is an important source of threat for Ankara. Both policymakers and private sector principals should attach more importance to the physical and psychological health of inhabitants alongside financial considerations.
4. Authorities in relevant departments of universities (e.g., architecture, city and regional planning, landscape architecture) should consider including psychology courses in their educational program.
5. Ankara should consider adding official guidelines, policies, or recommendations about prioritizing mental health in urban planning.
2. Although Ankara has numerous restorative environments, they are not always well maintained, and do not always feel safe for users. Authorities and users should consider maintenance and functionality of these areas to maximise benefits to residents' mental health and wellbeing.
3. Unplanned and rapid urbanization is an important source of threat for Ankara. Both policymakers and private sector principals should attach more importance to the physical and psychological health of inhabitants alongside financial considerations.
4. Authorities in relevant departments of universities (e.g., architecture, city and regional planning, landscape architecture) should consider including psychology courses in their educational program.
5. Ankara should consider adding official guidelines, policies, or recommendations about prioritizing mental health in urban planning.
About the Authors
Erkin Sarı is a Ph.D. candidate in Social Psychology Program and works as a research assistant in Psychology Department at Middle East Technical University, Ankara. His research interests include pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors, basic human values, place attachment and psychological well-being.
|
References
Altaban, Ö., & Güvenç, M. (1990). Urban planning in Ankara. Cities, 7(2), 149−158.
Ambrey, C., & Fleming, C. (2014). Public greenspace and life satisfaction in urban Australia. Urban Studies, 51(6), 1290–1321.
Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018). 2038 Ankara Çevre Düzeni Planı: Plan Açıklama Raporu. Ankara Metropolitan Municipality: Directorate of Construction and Planning Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.ankara.bel.tr/2038-ankara-cevre-duzeni-plani
Attademo, L., & Bernardini, F. (2017). Air pollution and urbanicity: common risk factors for dementia and schizophrenia? The Lancet Planetary Health, 1(3), 90−91.
Batuman, B. (2013). City profile: Ankara. Cities, 31, 578−590.
Bilotta, E., & Evans, G. W. (2013). Environmental Stress in L. Steg, A. E. Van Den Berg, J. I. M. De Groot (eds). Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, UK: BPS Blackwell.
Binbay, T., Direk, N., Aker, T., Akvardar, Y., Alptekin, K., Cimilli, C., … Ulaş, H. (2014). Türkiye’de psikiyatrik epidemiyoloji: Yakın zamanlı araştırmalarda temel bulgular ve gelecek için öneriler. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 25(4), 1−18.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77−101.
Cebeci, S. A., Aydemir, Ç., & Göka, E. (2002). Puerperal dönemde depresyon semptom prevalansı: Obstetrik risk faktörleri, kaygı düzeyi ve sosyal destek ile ilişkisi. Kriz Dergisi, 10(1), 11−8.
Chen, H., Goldberg, M. S., & Villeneuve, P. J. (2008). A systematic review of the relation between long-term exposure to ambient air pollution and chronic diseases. Reviews on Environmental Health, 23(4), 243–297.
Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1994). Unhappiness and unemployment. The Economic Journal, 104(424), 648−659.
Crowe, M., Inder, M., & Porter, R. (2015). Conducting qualitative research in mental health: Thematic and content analyses. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 49(7), 616−623.
Darity Jr., W., & Goldsmith, A. H. (1996). Social psychology, unemployment and macroeconomics. Journal of Economic Perspective, 10(1), 213−229.
Deniz, D. (2016). Improving Perceived Safety for Public Health through Sustainable Development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 216, 632−642.
Doğan, A., Göregenli, M., & Karakuş, P. (2016). Youth mental health context in Turkey. European Health Psychologist, 18(3), 116−118.
Ergene, T., & Yıldırım, İ. (2004). Üniversite adaylarında depresyon düzeyleri. Psikiyatri Psikoloji Psikofarmakoloji (3P) Dergisi, 12(2), 91−100.
Erol, N., & Şimşek, Z. (1998). Çocuk ve gençlerde ruh sağlığı: yeterlik alanları, davranış ve duygusal sorunların dağılımı in N. Erol, C. Kılıç, M. Ulusoy, M. Keçeci, Z. Şimşek (eds) Türkiye Ruh Sağlığı Profili Raporu. Ankara, Turkey: Turkish Ministry of Health.
Eyler, A. A., Brownson, R. C., Bacak, S. J., & Housemann, R. A. (2003). The Epidemiology of Walking for Physical Activity in the United States. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(9), 1529−1536.
Fox, K. R. (2000). The effects of exercise on self-perceptions and self-esteem. In S. J. H. Biddle, K. Fox, S. Boutcher (eds.) Physical Activity and Psychological Well-being, London: Routledge.
Genç, Ş., Zadeoğulları, Z., Fuss, S. H., & Genç, K. (2012). The Adverse Effects of Air Pollution on the Nervous System. Journal of Toxicology. Article ID 782462. doi: 10.1155/2012/782462
Gidlof-Gunnarsson, A., & Ohrstrom, E. (2007) Noise and well-being in urban residential environments: the potential role of perceived availability to nearby green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(2-3), 115–126.
Hanson, S., & Jones, A. (2015). Is there evidence that walking groups have health benefits? A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49, 710–715.
Harpham, T. (1994). Urbanization and Mental Health in Developing Countries: A Research Role for Social Scientists, Public Health Professionals and Social Psychiatrists. Social Science & Medicine, 39(2), 233–245.
Hartig, T., Mang, M. & Evans, G. W. (1991). Restorative Effects of Natural Environment Experiences. Environment and Behavior, 23(1), 3–26.
Howitt, D., & Cramer, D. (2011). Introduction to Research Methods in Psychology (3rd edition). Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
IHME (2018). Global Burden of Disease Country Profiles: Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.healthdata.org/turkey
İkiz, S. U. (2018, November 12). Hermann Jansen’in Ankara Planı. Retrieved from https://www.arkitektuel.com/hermann-jansenin-ankara-plani/
Jacobs, A., & Appleyard, D. (1987). Toward an urban design manifesto. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53(1), 112−120.
Johnson, J. G., Cohen, P., Dohrenwend, B. P., Link, B. G., & Brook, J. S. (1999). A longitudinal investigation of social causation and social selection processes involved in the association between socioeconomic status and psychiatric disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108(3), 490−499.
Kaçar, D. (2010). Ankara, a small town, transformed to a nation’s capital. Journal of Planning History, 9(1), 43−65.
Kahrik, A., Temelova, J., Kadarik, K., & Kubes, J. (2015). What attracts people to inner city areas? The cases of two post-socialist cities in Estonia and the Czech Republic. Urban Studies, 53(2), 355−372.
Karaçam, Z., & Ancel, G. (2009). Depression, anxiety and influencing factors in pregnancy: A study in a Turkish population. Midwifery, 25(4), 344−356.
Kelly, P., Williamson, C., Niven, A. G., Hunter, R., Mutrie, N., & Richards, J. (2018). Walking on sunshine: scoping review of the evidence for walking and mental health. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 52, 800−806.
Kent, J. L., Ma, L., & Mulley, C. (2017). The objective and perceived built environment: What matters for happiness? Cities & Health, 1(1), 59−71.
Khan, A., Plana-Ripoll, O., Antonsen, S., Brandt, J., Geels, C., Landecker, H., Sullivan, P. F., … Rzhetsky, A. (2019). Environmental pollution is associated with increased risk of psychiatric disorders in the US and Denmark. PLOS Biology, 17(8), 1−28.
Kılıç, C. (1998). Erişkin nüfusta ruhsal hastalıkların yaygınlığı, ilişkili faktörler, yetiyitimi ve ruh sağlığı hizmeti kullanımı sonuçları in N. Erol, C. Kılıç, M. Ulusoy, M. Keçeci, Z. Şimşek (eds.) Türkiye Ruh Sağlığı Profili Raporu. Ankara, Turkey: Turkish Ministry of Health.
Kılıç, C., Aydın, I., Taşkıntuna, N., Özçürümez, G., Kurt, G., Eren, E., … Zileli, L. (2006). Predictors of psychological distress in survivors of the 1999 earthquakes in Turkey: effects of relocation after the disaster. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 114(3), 194−202.
Kim, J., & Kaplan, R. 2004. Physical and psychological factors in sense of community: new urbanist kentlands and nearby orchard village. Environment and Behavior, 36(3), 313−340.
King, J. (2018). Air pollution, mental health, and implications for urban design: a review. Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health, 4(6). 1−7.
Kitiş, Y., & Karaçam, Z. (2009). Postpartum depresyon sıklığı ve etkileyen faktörler. Türkiye’de Psikiyatri, 11(2), 62−74.
Manzo, L. C. (2018). City Life and Well-Being in A. S. Devlin (ed) Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being. Academic Press.
McCay L, Abassi A, Abu-Lebdeh G, Adam Z, Audrey S, Barnett A, Carrasco-Turigas G, … Zolnierczuk M. (2017). Scoping assessment of transport design targets to improve public mental health. Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health, 3(8). Retrieved from https://www.urbandesignmentalhealth.com/journal-3---transport-and-mental-health.html#
Mental Health Action Group (2011). Mental Health & Public Transport. Retrieved from http://www.derbyshiremind.org.uk/pdf/MHPublicTransportReport.pdf
OECD (2017). OECD Statistics on pharmaceutical market: Pharmaceutical consumption. Retrieved from https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?ThemeTreeId=9
Panahi, S., Yunus, A. S., Roslan, S., Kadir, R. A., Jaafar, W. M. W., & Panahi, M. S. (2016). Predictors of Psychological Well-being among Malaysian Graduates. The European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 16, 2067−2083.
Perkins, D. D., Meek, J. W. & Taylor, R. B. (1992). The physical environment of street blocks and resident perception of crime and disorder: implication for theory and measurement. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(1), 21−34.
Psikiyatri kliniklerine 3 yılda 8 milyon başvuru. (2020, January 29). Retrieved from https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/gundem/2020/01/29/psikiyatri-kliniklerine-3-yilda-8-milyon-basvuru/
Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Hine, R., Sellens, M., South, N., & Griffin, M. (2007) Green exercise in the UK countryside: Effects on health and psychological well-being, and implications for policy and planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 50(2), 211−231.
Pucher, J., Buehler, R., Bassett, D. R., & Dannenberg, A. L. (2010). Walking and Cycling to Health: A Comparative Analysis of City, State, and International Data. American Journal of Public Health, 100(10), 1986−1992.
Richards, J., Jiang, X., Kelly, P., Chau, J., Bauman, A., & Ding, D. (2015). Don’t worry, be happy: cross-sectional associations between physical activity and happiness in 15 European countries. BMC Public Health, 15(53), 1−8.
Ritsher, J. E. B., Warner, V., Johnson, J. G., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (2001). Inter-generational longitudinal study of social class and depression: a test of social selection models. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178(40), 84−90.
Rosenbaum, S., Vancampfort, D., Tiedemann, A., Stubbs, B., Steel, Z., Ward, P. B., Berle, D., & Sherrington, C. (2016). Among Inpatients, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptom Severity Is Negatively Associated with Time Spent Walking. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 204(1), 15−19.
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Black, J. B., & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1552−1558.
Stokols, D. (1972). On the distinction between density and crowding: Some implications for future research. Psychological Review, 79(3), 275−277.
Sugiyama, T., Leslie, E., Giles-Corti, B., & Owen, N. (2008) Associations of neighbourhood greenness with physical and mental health: do walking, social coherence and local social integration explain the relationships? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 62(9), 1–6.
Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & De Pooter, S. F. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighbourhood spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678–700.
Szyszkowicz, M., Rowe, B. H., & Colman, I. (2009). Air pollution and daily emergency department visits for depression. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 22(4), 355−362.
Taş, R. (2012). Ankara’nın Kentsel Yoksulluk Haritası. Ankara, Türkiye: Turgut Özal Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Tekbaş, O. F., Ceylan, S., Hamzaoğlu, O., & Hasde, M. (2003). An investigation of the prevalence of depressive symptoms in newly recruited young adult men in Turkey. Psychiatry Research, 119(1-2), 155−162.
Turkish Statisical Institute (2011). Bölgesel Hesaplar: Gayrisafi Katma Değerde Sektörlerin Payları. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do?alt_id=1075
Turkish Statistical Institute (2015). İllerde Yaşam İndeksi Değerleri. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1106
Turkish Statistical Institute (2018). Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1059
Turkish Statistical Institute (2020). İşgücü istatistikleri bölgesel sonuçları. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1007
Türkseven-Doğrusoy, İ., & Zengel, R. (2017). Analysis of Perceived Safety in Urban Parks: A Field Study in Büyükpark and Hasanağa Park. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 34(1), 63−84.
URAP (2020). University ranking by academic performance. Retrieved from https://www.urapcenter.org/Rankings/2019-2020/world-2019
Urban Design and Mental Health (2020). How urban design can impact mental health. Retrieved from https://www.urbandesignmentalhealth.com/how-urban-design-can-impact-mental-health.html#
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (1996). Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Jones and Bartlett Publishers: MA.
Wang, H., & Yang, Y. (2019). Neighborhood walkability: A review and bibliometric analysis. Cities, 93, 43−61.
World Health Organization (2004). Promoting mental health: Concepts, emerging evidence, practice (Summary Report) Geneva: World Health Organization. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/en/promoting_mhh.pdf
World Health Organization (2008). Policies and practices for mental health in Europe: Meeting the challenges. Retrieved from http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/policies-and-practices-for-mental-health-in-europe.-meeting-the-challenges
World Health Organization (2017). Infographic: Depression in Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.euro.who.int/en/countries/turkey/data-and-statistics/infographic-depression-in-turkey-2017
Vert, C., Sanchez-Benavides, G., Martinez, D., Gotsens, X., Gramunt, N., Cirach, M., … Gascon, M. (2017). Effect of long-term exposure to air pollution on anxiety and depression in adults: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 220(6), 1074−1080.
Zenker, S., Petersen, S., & Aholt, A. (2013a). The citizen satisfaction index (CSI): Evidence for a four basic factor model in a German sample. Cities, 31, 156–164.
Zenker, S., & Rütter, N. (2014). Is satisfaction the key? The role of citizen satisfaction, place attachment and place brand attitude on positive citizenship behavior. Cities, 38, 11–17.
Ambrey, C., & Fleming, C. (2014). Public greenspace and life satisfaction in urban Australia. Urban Studies, 51(6), 1290–1321.
Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2018). 2038 Ankara Çevre Düzeni Planı: Plan Açıklama Raporu. Ankara Metropolitan Municipality: Directorate of Construction and Planning Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.ankara.bel.tr/2038-ankara-cevre-duzeni-plani
Attademo, L., & Bernardini, F. (2017). Air pollution and urbanicity: common risk factors for dementia and schizophrenia? The Lancet Planetary Health, 1(3), 90−91.
Batuman, B. (2013). City profile: Ankara. Cities, 31, 578−590.
Bilotta, E., & Evans, G. W. (2013). Environmental Stress in L. Steg, A. E. Van Den Berg, J. I. M. De Groot (eds). Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, UK: BPS Blackwell.
Binbay, T., Direk, N., Aker, T., Akvardar, Y., Alptekin, K., Cimilli, C., … Ulaş, H. (2014). Türkiye’de psikiyatrik epidemiyoloji: Yakın zamanlı araştırmalarda temel bulgular ve gelecek için öneriler. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 25(4), 1−18.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77−101.
Cebeci, S. A., Aydemir, Ç., & Göka, E. (2002). Puerperal dönemde depresyon semptom prevalansı: Obstetrik risk faktörleri, kaygı düzeyi ve sosyal destek ile ilişkisi. Kriz Dergisi, 10(1), 11−8.
Chen, H., Goldberg, M. S., & Villeneuve, P. J. (2008). A systematic review of the relation between long-term exposure to ambient air pollution and chronic diseases. Reviews on Environmental Health, 23(4), 243–297.
Clark, A. E., & Oswald, A. J. (1994). Unhappiness and unemployment. The Economic Journal, 104(424), 648−659.
Crowe, M., Inder, M., & Porter, R. (2015). Conducting qualitative research in mental health: Thematic and content analyses. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 49(7), 616−623.
Darity Jr., W., & Goldsmith, A. H. (1996). Social psychology, unemployment and macroeconomics. Journal of Economic Perspective, 10(1), 213−229.
Deniz, D. (2016). Improving Perceived Safety for Public Health through Sustainable Development. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 216, 632−642.
Doğan, A., Göregenli, M., & Karakuş, P. (2016). Youth mental health context in Turkey. European Health Psychologist, 18(3), 116−118.
Ergene, T., & Yıldırım, İ. (2004). Üniversite adaylarında depresyon düzeyleri. Psikiyatri Psikoloji Psikofarmakoloji (3P) Dergisi, 12(2), 91−100.
Erol, N., & Şimşek, Z. (1998). Çocuk ve gençlerde ruh sağlığı: yeterlik alanları, davranış ve duygusal sorunların dağılımı in N. Erol, C. Kılıç, M. Ulusoy, M. Keçeci, Z. Şimşek (eds) Türkiye Ruh Sağlığı Profili Raporu. Ankara, Turkey: Turkish Ministry of Health.
Eyler, A. A., Brownson, R. C., Bacak, S. J., & Housemann, R. A. (2003). The Epidemiology of Walking for Physical Activity in the United States. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(9), 1529−1536.
Fox, K. R. (2000). The effects of exercise on self-perceptions and self-esteem. In S. J. H. Biddle, K. Fox, S. Boutcher (eds.) Physical Activity and Psychological Well-being, London: Routledge.
Genç, Ş., Zadeoğulları, Z., Fuss, S. H., & Genç, K. (2012). The Adverse Effects of Air Pollution on the Nervous System. Journal of Toxicology. Article ID 782462. doi: 10.1155/2012/782462
Gidlof-Gunnarsson, A., & Ohrstrom, E. (2007) Noise and well-being in urban residential environments: the potential role of perceived availability to nearby green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(2-3), 115–126.
Hanson, S., & Jones, A. (2015). Is there evidence that walking groups have health benefits? A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49, 710–715.
Harpham, T. (1994). Urbanization and Mental Health in Developing Countries: A Research Role for Social Scientists, Public Health Professionals and Social Psychiatrists. Social Science & Medicine, 39(2), 233–245.
Hartig, T., Mang, M. & Evans, G. W. (1991). Restorative Effects of Natural Environment Experiences. Environment and Behavior, 23(1), 3–26.
Howitt, D., & Cramer, D. (2011). Introduction to Research Methods in Psychology (3rd edition). Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
IHME (2018). Global Burden of Disease Country Profiles: Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.healthdata.org/turkey
İkiz, S. U. (2018, November 12). Hermann Jansen’in Ankara Planı. Retrieved from https://www.arkitektuel.com/hermann-jansenin-ankara-plani/
Jacobs, A., & Appleyard, D. (1987). Toward an urban design manifesto. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53(1), 112−120.
Johnson, J. G., Cohen, P., Dohrenwend, B. P., Link, B. G., & Brook, J. S. (1999). A longitudinal investigation of social causation and social selection processes involved in the association between socioeconomic status and psychiatric disorders. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108(3), 490−499.
Kaçar, D. (2010). Ankara, a small town, transformed to a nation’s capital. Journal of Planning History, 9(1), 43−65.
Kahrik, A., Temelova, J., Kadarik, K., & Kubes, J. (2015). What attracts people to inner city areas? The cases of two post-socialist cities in Estonia and the Czech Republic. Urban Studies, 53(2), 355−372.
Karaçam, Z., & Ancel, G. (2009). Depression, anxiety and influencing factors in pregnancy: A study in a Turkish population. Midwifery, 25(4), 344−356.
Kelly, P., Williamson, C., Niven, A. G., Hunter, R., Mutrie, N., & Richards, J. (2018). Walking on sunshine: scoping review of the evidence for walking and mental health. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 52, 800−806.
Kent, J. L., Ma, L., & Mulley, C. (2017). The objective and perceived built environment: What matters for happiness? Cities & Health, 1(1), 59−71.
Khan, A., Plana-Ripoll, O., Antonsen, S., Brandt, J., Geels, C., Landecker, H., Sullivan, P. F., … Rzhetsky, A. (2019). Environmental pollution is associated with increased risk of psychiatric disorders in the US and Denmark. PLOS Biology, 17(8), 1−28.
Kılıç, C. (1998). Erişkin nüfusta ruhsal hastalıkların yaygınlığı, ilişkili faktörler, yetiyitimi ve ruh sağlığı hizmeti kullanımı sonuçları in N. Erol, C. Kılıç, M. Ulusoy, M. Keçeci, Z. Şimşek (eds.) Türkiye Ruh Sağlığı Profili Raporu. Ankara, Turkey: Turkish Ministry of Health.
Kılıç, C., Aydın, I., Taşkıntuna, N., Özçürümez, G., Kurt, G., Eren, E., … Zileli, L. (2006). Predictors of psychological distress in survivors of the 1999 earthquakes in Turkey: effects of relocation after the disaster. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 114(3), 194−202.
Kim, J., & Kaplan, R. 2004. Physical and psychological factors in sense of community: new urbanist kentlands and nearby orchard village. Environment and Behavior, 36(3), 313−340.
King, J. (2018). Air pollution, mental health, and implications for urban design: a review. Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health, 4(6). 1−7.
Kitiş, Y., & Karaçam, Z. (2009). Postpartum depresyon sıklığı ve etkileyen faktörler. Türkiye’de Psikiyatri, 11(2), 62−74.
Manzo, L. C. (2018). City Life and Well-Being in A. S. Devlin (ed) Environmental Psychology and Human Well-Being. Academic Press.
McCay L, Abassi A, Abu-Lebdeh G, Adam Z, Audrey S, Barnett A, Carrasco-Turigas G, … Zolnierczuk M. (2017). Scoping assessment of transport design targets to improve public mental health. Journal of Urban Design and Mental Health, 3(8). Retrieved from https://www.urbandesignmentalhealth.com/journal-3---transport-and-mental-health.html#
Mental Health Action Group (2011). Mental Health & Public Transport. Retrieved from http://www.derbyshiremind.org.uk/pdf/MHPublicTransportReport.pdf
OECD (2017). OECD Statistics on pharmaceutical market: Pharmaceutical consumption. Retrieved from https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?ThemeTreeId=9
Panahi, S., Yunus, A. S., Roslan, S., Kadir, R. A., Jaafar, W. M. W., & Panahi, M. S. (2016). Predictors of Psychological Well-being among Malaysian Graduates. The European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 16, 2067−2083.
Perkins, D. D., Meek, J. W. & Taylor, R. B. (1992). The physical environment of street blocks and resident perception of crime and disorder: implication for theory and measurement. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12(1), 21−34.
Psikiyatri kliniklerine 3 yılda 8 milyon başvuru. (2020, January 29). Retrieved from https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/gundem/2020/01/29/psikiyatri-kliniklerine-3-yilda-8-milyon-basvuru/
Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Hine, R., Sellens, M., South, N., & Griffin, M. (2007) Green exercise in the UK countryside: Effects on health and psychological well-being, and implications for policy and planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 50(2), 211−231.
Pucher, J., Buehler, R., Bassett, D. R., & Dannenberg, A. L. (2010). Walking and Cycling to Health: A Comparative Analysis of City, State, and International Data. American Journal of Public Health, 100(10), 1986−1992.
Richards, J., Jiang, X., Kelly, P., Chau, J., Bauman, A., & Ding, D. (2015). Don’t worry, be happy: cross-sectional associations between physical activity and happiness in 15 European countries. BMC Public Health, 15(53), 1−8.
Ritsher, J. E. B., Warner, V., Johnson, J. G., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (2001). Inter-generational longitudinal study of social class and depression: a test of social selection models. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178(40), 84−90.
Rosenbaum, S., Vancampfort, D., Tiedemann, A., Stubbs, B., Steel, Z., Ward, P. B., Berle, D., & Sherrington, C. (2016). Among Inpatients, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptom Severity Is Negatively Associated with Time Spent Walking. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 204(1), 15−19.
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Black, J. B., & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. American Journal of Public Health, 93(9), 1552−1558.
Stokols, D. (1972). On the distinction between density and crowding: Some implications for future research. Psychological Review, 79(3), 275−277.
Sugiyama, T., Leslie, E., Giles-Corti, B., & Owen, N. (2008) Associations of neighbourhood greenness with physical and mental health: do walking, social coherence and local social integration explain the relationships? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 62(9), 1–6.
Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & De Pooter, S. F. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighbourhood spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678–700.
Szyszkowicz, M., Rowe, B. H., & Colman, I. (2009). Air pollution and daily emergency department visits for depression. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 22(4), 355−362.
Taş, R. (2012). Ankara’nın Kentsel Yoksulluk Haritası. Ankara, Türkiye: Turgut Özal Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Tekbaş, O. F., Ceylan, S., Hamzaoğlu, O., & Hasde, M. (2003). An investigation of the prevalence of depressive symptoms in newly recruited young adult men in Turkey. Psychiatry Research, 119(1-2), 155−162.
Turkish Statisical Institute (2011). Bölgesel Hesaplar: Gayrisafi Katma Değerde Sektörlerin Payları. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/VeriBilgi.do?alt_id=1075
Turkish Statistical Institute (2015). İllerde Yaşam İndeksi Değerleri. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1106
Turkish Statistical Institute (2018). Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1059
Turkish Statistical Institute (2020). İşgücü istatistikleri bölgesel sonuçları. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1007
Türkseven-Doğrusoy, İ., & Zengel, R. (2017). Analysis of Perceived Safety in Urban Parks: A Field Study in Büyükpark and Hasanağa Park. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 34(1), 63−84.
URAP (2020). University ranking by academic performance. Retrieved from https://www.urapcenter.org/Rankings/2019-2020/world-2019
Urban Design and Mental Health (2020). How urban design can impact mental health. Retrieved from https://www.urbandesignmentalhealth.com/how-urban-design-can-impact-mental-health.html#
U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (1996). Physical Activity and Health: A Report of the Surgeon General. Jones and Bartlett Publishers: MA.
Wang, H., & Yang, Y. (2019). Neighborhood walkability: A review and bibliometric analysis. Cities, 93, 43−61.
World Health Organization (2004). Promoting mental health: Concepts, emerging evidence, practice (Summary Report) Geneva: World Health Organization. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/mental_health/evidence/en/promoting_mhh.pdf
World Health Organization (2008). Policies and practices for mental health in Europe: Meeting the challenges. Retrieved from http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/policies-and-practices-for-mental-health-in-europe.-meeting-the-challenges
World Health Organization (2017). Infographic: Depression in Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.euro.who.int/en/countries/turkey/data-and-statistics/infographic-depression-in-turkey-2017
Vert, C., Sanchez-Benavides, G., Martinez, D., Gotsens, X., Gramunt, N., Cirach, M., … Gascon, M. (2017). Effect of long-term exposure to air pollution on anxiety and depression in adults: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 220(6), 1074−1080.
Zenker, S., Petersen, S., & Aholt, A. (2013a). The citizen satisfaction index (CSI): Evidence for a four basic factor model in a German sample. Cities, 31, 156–164.
Zenker, S., & Rütter, N. (2014). Is satisfaction the key? The role of citizen satisfaction, place attachment and place brand attitude on positive citizenship behavior. Cities, 38, 11–17.