The loss of status for “urbanized rural” towns and problems in service access

Türkiye’s Settlement Pattern and Population Dynamics (Article 7)

Aydın Tiryaki (2026)

In the history of settlement in Türkiye, town municipalities, which served as a “transition form” between villages and district centers, were the units where local democracy spread to the grassroots. However, with legal regulations made in 2008 and 2012, the legal entities of towns with a population below 2000 and all town municipalities within metropolitan borders were abolished. In this process, thousands of towns were transformed into neighborhood status and included in the district centers they were affiliated with (1). This situation has created a serious service access and representation problem in these regions, which we can define as “urbanized rural.”

The closure of town municipalities has caused local services to become centralized. Towns that used to have their own budget, equipment, and personnel must now wait for approval and service from the district center miles away for the simplest zoning, cleaning, or maintenance work (2). While this hierarchical elongation reduces the speed of solving local problems, it has also weakened the social and economic vitality of settlements that have lost their town identity.

To overcome this administrative blockage, the new definitions we presented in our previous articles offer a vital solution. It constitutes a requirement for former towns that have transformed into neighborhoods in metropolitan areas and maintain their agricultural character to gain flexibility with “Rural Neighborhood” status; and for villages with high population density or former towns in non-metropolitan provinces to be defined as “Urban Villages” (3). This new categorization will eliminate the service disruptions that come with the loss of status for towns and pave the way for defining a special management budget for them.

In conclusion, melting towns within a “uniform neighborhood” structure in Türkiye’s settlement architecture is not a rational management model. Reclassifying settlements as Rural Neighborhoods or Urban Villages according to their urban or rural characteristics, not just their population size, constitutes a necessity to increase the speed and quality of public services (4). The future of local government reforms lies in these flexible and realistic definitions gaining official status.

Aydın Tiryaki Ankara, January 12, 2026

---

All ideas, opinions, and suggestions in this article belong to the author. During the process of writing the text, the artificial intelligence Gemini was utilized for writing assistance and information compilation.

ANNEXES

Annex A: Number of Abolished Town Municipalities

• 2008 Regulation (Law No. 5747): 862 Towns
• 2012 Regulation (Law No. 6360): 1,582 Towns
• Total Number of Abolished Towns: ~2,444

Annex B: Fundamental Problems Arising After Towns Become Neighborhoods

• Distance of Service Units: Moving units such as fire departments, public works, and municipal police to the district center.
• Decision-Making Mechanism: Decrease in public participation in management with the closure of local councils.
• Infrastructure Investments: Neglect of former towns due to the municipal budget focusing on the district center.

REFERENCES

(1) Law No. 6360 on the Establishment of Metropolitan Municipalities and Twenty-Six Districts in Thirteen Provinces and Amendments. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr

(2) Union of Municipalities of Türkiye (TBB), Transformation of Town Municipalities and Service Delivery Impact Analysis. https://www.tbb.gov.tr

(3) Tiryaki, A. (2026). From Village to Neighborhood: Just a Name Change? (Article 5 of the Series).

(4) Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Interior, General Directorate of Local Authorities, Local Government Reform Strategy Documents. https://www.icisleri.gov.tr