Errors in determining the real rural population and the example of coastal towns

Türkiye’s Settlement Pattern and Population Dynamics (Article 6)

Aydın Tiryaki (2026)

When examining the data of the last twenty years in Türkiye, it is seen that the urbanization rate has risen rapidly, reaching the level of 93 percent. However, this picture is the result of an administrative regulation rather than a sociological reality. The transition of villages in metropolitan areas to neighborhood status with Law No. 6360 has led to millions of people being considered “urban” statistically overnight, even though their way of life has not changed (1). This situation creates a major fallacy in Türkiye’s settlement policies, which can be defined as “urbanization on paper.”

The way to eliminate this fallacy is to look at the real identity of the settlement units rather than just administrative borders in population calculations. The definitions of “Rural Neighborhood” and “Urban Village” that we proposed in our previous studies are the most rational measurement tools at this point. It constitutes a requirement to calculate the population of settlements that are within metropolitan borders and have “Rural Neighborhood” status as “rural population,” and the population of settlements that are in non-metropolitan provinces and have an “Urban Village” identity as “urban population” (2). When this method is applied, Türkiye’s urbanization and rural population rates will become compatible with real life.

Another dimension of the statistical fallacy is seen in our coastal towns. Especially on the Aegean and Mediterranean coasts, settlement units where the population reaches hundreds of thousands in the summer months while being a few thousand in the winter are analyzed as if there is an urban density throughout the year. However, a significant part of these regions maintains their rural characteristics for a major part of the year, but this transitionality cannot be measured correctly due to the established data logic in the census system (3).

In Türkiye’s planning for the coming decades, updating statistical data through these new definitions constitutes a necessity. Ignoring rural areas by relying on figures on paper risks many strategic areas from food security to regional development. Türkiye’s settlement map should be re-read with this new measurement method we propose, and investment planning should be made over these real numbers (4).

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: Administrative Jump in Urbanization Rate in Türkiye

• Pre-2012 (Before the Law): 77.3%
• Post-2014 (After the Law): 91.3%
• 2026 (Estimate with Proposed New Calculation Model): 72.5% (By including rural neighborhoods in the rural population)

Annex B: Examples of Some Districts with Seasonal Population Change

• Bodrum, Muğla: Winter population ~190,000 / Summer population ~1,000,000+
• Çeşme, İzmir: Winter population ~50,000 / Summer population ~800,000+

REFERENCES

(1) Law No. 6360 on the Establishment of Metropolitan Municipalities and the Expansion of Their Borders. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr

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

(3) Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat), Address Based Population Registration System (ABPRS) Data Analyses. https://www.tuik.gov.tr

(4) General Directorate of Development Agencies, Rural and Urban Area Identification Criteria and Applications. https://www.ka.gov.tr