Assessment of the Integration of Ecological Planning and Design into Smart City Frameworks in the Context of European Cooperation Perspectives

ARCHITECTURAL SCIENCES AND SUSTAINABLE APPROACHES: URBAN RESILIENCE Editors Prof. Dr. Ömer ATABEYOĞLU Prof. Dr. Ertan DÜZGÜNEŞ October 15, 2025 Copyright © 2025 by İKSAD publishing house All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. Institution of Economic Development and Social Researches (The Licence Number of Publicator: 2014/31220) TÜRKİYE TR: +90 342 606 06 75 USA: +1 631 685 0 853 E mail: [email protected] www.iksadyayinevi.com It is responsibility of the author to abide by the publishing ethics rules. Iksad Publications – 2025© Architectural Sciences and Sustainable Approaches: Urban Resilience ISBN: 978-625-378-337-2 Cover Design: Prof. Dr. Ertan DÜZGÜNEŞ October 15, 2025 Ankara / Türkiye Size = 16x24 cm PREFACE Dear Professors and Colleagues, We are pleased bring to life that Architectural Sciences and Sustainable Approaches: Urban Resilience, which was published as an e-book by IKSAD Publishing House with the editors Prof. Dr. Ömer ATABEYOĞLU and Prof. Dr. Ertan DÜZGÜNEŞ. This book project, entitled “Architectural Sciences and Sustainable Approaches: Urban Resilience,” aims to address sustainability-oriented approaches to urban resilience from theoretical, methodological, and practical perspectives. The volume seeks to establish a multi-layered platform of discussion, ranging from the scale of individual buildings to the entirety of the urban fabric. Within this framework, it welcomes contributions from scholars and researchers working in architecture, urban design, landscape architecture, urban and regional planning, environmental engineering, and related disciplines. With the valuable contributions of our chapter authors working in the professional disciplines of landscape architecture, architecture, city and regional planning, urban design and sustainability, we have completed Architectural Sciences and Sustainable Approaches: Urban Resilience book study has been completed with 24 book chapters. We would like to thank you, our esteemed authors, for their contributions to the preparation of the book. We would also like to thank the editorial board and IKSAD Publishing House. We wish to continue this process we have started in the coming years. In addition, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to Prof. Dr. Atila GÜL, the book coordinator of IKSAD Publishing House, for his guidance and support throughout the publication process. We hope that our book ‘Architectural Sciences and Sustainable Approaches: Urban Resilience’ will be helpful to the readers. Best regards. 15.10.2025 EDITORS Prof. Dr. Ömer ATABEYOĞLU Prof. Dr. Ertan DÜZGÜNEŞ EDITORS Prof. Dr. Ömer ATABEYOĞLU Prof. Dr. Ertan DÜZGÜNEŞ AUTHORS The authors were listed in alphabetical order Alper ÇABUK Ayça GÜLTEN Ayşe ÖZYETGİN ALTUN Ayşe Özge ŞİMŞEK SOYSAL Ayşegül TANRIVERDİ KAYA Demet EROL Deniz DEMİRARSLAN Ebru Vesile ÖCALIR Eda ŞENTÜRK Elif Kübra ÖZTÜRK Emine BAYDAN Esra KESKİN Feran AŞUR Feyza Sena ŞENOCAK Filiz KARAKUŞ Furkan AKDEMİR Gencay ÇUBUK Gülşah BİLGE ÖZTÜRK Halil DUYMUŞ Hamza ALTAŞ Hande AKARCA İnci OLGUN Kemal Mert ÇUBUKÇU Kumru ÇILGIN Mehmet Akif IRMAK Mehmet Emin DAŞ Mehtap ÖZENEN KAVLAK Merve ALICI AKA Mesut GÜZEL Muhammed Akif AÇIKGÖZ Muhammed Emir GÖRAL Murat YEŞİL Olcay Türkan YURDUGÜZEL Özge DÜZGÜN EREKİNCİ Pervin YEŞİL Rabia Nurefsan ACIKGOZ Sedef ŞENDOĞDU Seher Simay KUŞOĞLU Serim DİNÇ Sevilay YILDIZ Sinem SEYHAN Şevval ERGİNDOĞAN Şuheda ALTUNOK Temuçin Göktürk SEYHAN Tuba Nur OLĞUN Tuna BATUHAN Ufuk Teoman AKSOY Yusuf Eminoğlu REVIEWER LIST The authors were listed in alphabetical order Aslıhan TIRNAKÇI Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University Atila GÜL Süleyman Demirel University Ayşe Kalaycı ÖNAÇ İzmir Katip Çelebi University Bige ŞİMŞEK İLHAN İstanbul Medipol University Burcu YILMAZEL Eskişehir Technical University Eda KOÇAK Siirt University Ekrem BAHADIR Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University Elif KUTAY KARAÇOR İstanbul Technical University Hakan ARSLAN Ondokuz Mayıs University Hilal TURGUT Karadeniz Technical University Meliha AKLIBAŞINDA Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University Murat AKTEN Süleyman Demirel University Nihan Sümeyye GÜNDOĞDU Atlas University Okan Murat DEDE Amasya University Ömer Lütfü ÇORBACI Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University Selcen Nur Erikci Çelik Beykoz University Sibel AKTEN Isparta Unıversıty Of Applıed Scıences Sinem ÖZDEDE Pamukkale University Şeyma ŞENGÜR Ordu University Turgut KALAY Kütahya Dumlupınar University Tendü Hilal GÖKTUĞ Aydın Adnan Menderes University 770 1. Introduction In the 21st century, with the rapid increase in urbanisation, the concept of ‘smart cities’ has come to the fore with the integration of information and communication technologies into all areas of urban life. Initially developed to increase efficiency in infrastructure management, this model has evolved into a multidimensional urban transformation framework that also encompasses social participation, environmental sustainability, and resilience. Today, smart cities are viewed as holistic systems that increase digitalisation in areas such as energy, transportation, and waste management while also promoting social welfare and ecological harmony. The concept of smart cities has evolved over time, not only through technological developments but also through changes in governance structures, service delivery, and approaches to urban life. Sharifi et al. (2021) examined the evolution of smart city literature between 1991 and 2021 through bibliometric analysis, highlighting research clusters that have intensified since 2010, particularly in the areas of IoT, big data, and conceptual structures. Pavlov (2021), on the other hand, focuses on the integration of the concept with administrative structures, emphasising how the digitalisation process has accelerated the transition to integrated intelligence-based structures in public administration. This transformation has led to the positioning of smart cities as a new form of administration built on multi-layered digital systems. This conceptual transformation has brought about a multidimensional change that affects not only administrative but also all components of urban life through technological infrastructures. Singh et al. (2022) and Gracias et al. (2023) systematically evaluate the components and technological architecture of the smart city 771 concept, highlighting the role of sustainability, public participation, and quality of life in the evolutionary process. Studies such as Rani et al. (2021) and Haque, Bhushan, & Dhiman (2022) address how technologies (AI, IoT, big data, blockchain) are integrated into the functioning of cities, as well as the opportunities and security and privacy issues that this integration brings. Bauer, Sanchez, & Song (2021) examine the integration of IoT into the smart city structure alongside the development of technological infrastructure, analysing the evolution of the concept in practical terms through application examples. This practical dimension was explored by Campisi et al. (2021) in the context of autonomous vehicles, evaluating the effects of digitalisation on spatial planning and mobility. Lai & Cole (2023), on the other hand, systematically analysed various smart city indices representing efforts to measure conceptual development, contributing to the evolutionary nature of measurement tools. Alongside these developments, ecological planning and design (EPD) aims to design cities in a way that is compatible with natural systems, sustainable, and resilient. It is directly related to concepts such as climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, ecosystem service conservation, and environmental justice. However, in current smart city applications, these concepts often lag behind technological infrastructure, and naturebased solutions are reflected in urban policies to a limited extent. This situation highlights the need for new planning approaches that require the integration of EPD into smart city systems. EPD aims to minimise the environmental impacts of urbanisation and redefine the relationship between humans and nature. Steiner and Brooks 772 (1981) define this approach as the systematic integration of biophysical and sociocultural knowledge into decision-making processes, outlining a seven-step comprehensive methodology for ecological planning. Building on this structural foundation, Wang, Palazzo, & Carper (2016) point to the inadequacies of approaches reduced to scientific knowledge and propose the concept of ‘ecological wisdom,’ suggesting a transformation in decision-making processes centred on ethics, local context, and social responsibility. Heymans et al. (2019) systematically analyse trends in the literature and present an ‘ecological urban planning paradigm’ consistent with sustainability principles, arguing that concepts such as ecosystem services, resilience, and green infrastructure must be integrated into this paradigm. This holistic understanding is supported by the socialecological-technological systems (SETS) framework developed by McPhearson et al. (2022), which proposes a planning approach based on systems thinking that addresses the multidimensional complexity of nature-based solutions. Ecological networks, an important tool for preserving ecological integrity at the urban scale, are evaluated in functional and social contexts by Ignatieva, Stewart, & Meurk (2011), who emphasise the need to support these structures with cultural and aesthetic values. This view is reinforced by Semeraro et al. (2021) through applications such as green roofs and community gardens, addressing the effects of green infrastructure on human health and well-being. The role of ecological planning in multiscale structural development and the creation of sustainable urban forms is discussed by Bibri (2022) in the context of data-driven approaches, defining the strategic planning dynamics from eco-neighbourhoods to eco- 773 cities. Similarly, Puchol-Salort et al. (2021) evaluate the integration of ecosystem services into planning processes using the UPSUF framework, linking it to decision support systems. Finally, McPhearson et al. (2025) provide a comprehensive synthesis of the integration of nature-based solutions into urban planning at the global scale, highlighting the need for a multi-layered strategic transformation that includes dimensions of justice, governance, and knowledge production. In this context, the European Union supports smart city strategies with comprehensive policies such as the Green Deal, Circular Economy Action Plan, Mission Cities Initiative, and New European Bauhaus. These approaches aim to extend technological progress beyond digitalisation to areas such as environmental sustainability and social inclusiveness. The importance of interdisciplinary cooperation, multi-stakeholder governance, and nature-based solutions in achieving sustainable urbanisation goals is emphasised; in this regard, planning disciplines play important roles. Smart city policies in Europe are developing in an integrated manner with sustainability goals; in this process, local context, governance structures, and technical capacities are decisive. In an analysis of 40 cities in Europe, Cantuarias-Villessuzanne et al. (2021) categorise cities into three groups based on their sustainability strategies and propose different strategy typologies based on core smart city competencies. This diversity demonstrates that cities develop different understandings of sustainability based on their technological capacity, social needs, and environmental context. Shamsuzzoha et al. (2021), on the other hand, compare Helsinki, Singapore, and London to highlight the contribution of multi-stakeholder, 774 data-driven, and participatory strategies to sustainability goals in European cities. Emphasising the decisive role of local context in policy-making, Esposito et al. (2021) reveal how different socio-economic structures are reflected in smart city narratives using the examples of Brussels and Wallonia, arguing that these narratives guide strategy preferences. In terms of institutional capacity and organisational structures, Gasco-Hernandez et al. (2022) highlight the impact of leadership, collaboration, and European Union funds on the success of digital transformation in the cities of Barcelona, Milan, and Munich. Similarly, Masik, Sagan, & Scott (2021) analyse the transformative effects of infrastructure investments and EU funds on governance culture in Polish cities. At the implementation level, sustainable urban mobility plans (SUMP) and mobility as a service (MaaS) models are considered strategic transformation tools for European cities. Russo and Rindone (2023) highlight the role these plans play in policy-making aligned with the 2030 Agenda, while Savastano et al. (2023) examine in detail the impact of digital mobility applications on user perceptions and service quality using the example of Milan. In evaluating electric mobility policies, Ruggieri et al. (2021) measure policy impacts through air quality indicators in cities such as London, Hamburg, & Milan and document their contribution to carbon neutrality goals. Razmjoo et al. (2021) evaluate the sustainability contributions of smart cities through performance indicators developed specifically for green buildings and electric vehicles, identifying technical, governance, and social barriers and proposing solutions. In another analysis specific to the tourism sector, Ivars-Baidal et al. (2023) draw 775 attention to the theoretical and practical gaps in the integration of sustainable tourism indicators into smart city policies. This diversity demonstrates that smart city policies in Europe are shaped not only by technology but also by a multi-layered understanding of sustainability in social, managerial, and environmental dimensions. In this context, this book chapter evaluates the integration of EPD into smart city frameworks, referencing the EPD-Net: Filling the Gap project, which is supported by the European Union's Erasmus+ Programme and is currently ongoing. The project aims to strengthen the role of the EPD approach in creating disaster-resilient and sustainable cities; to this end, an AI-based smart education module is being developed, and a multistakeholder learning network is being established across Europe. In this section, the main objectives and approach of EPD-Net will be introduced, and it will be discussed how European-level collaborations in the context of the ongoing project process can contribute to the institutionalisation of EPD in smart city planning. 2. EPD Approaches in the Context of European Cooperation The European Union's sustainable development policies encourage the adoption of nature-friendly, multi-scale, and multi-stakeholder approaches in urban planning. In this context, EPD is considered not only an environmental sensitivity but also a strategic transformation area associated with innovative urban governance models. EU directives, strategies, and funding mechanisms support the transformation of cities in an integrated manner with technological infrastructure and ecological systems. In this context, the EPD approach enables nature-based solutions, ecosystem services and green infrastructure to be institutionally integrated 776 into urban planning processes. Developing strategies for sustainable urbanisation in Europe are based on transnational network structures involving public actors, universities, civil society organisations, the private sector, and local communities. Such multi-stakeholder structures enhance the applicability of holistic approaches such as EPD by prioritising interdisciplinary cooperation in knowledge production and sharing. Programmes such as Horizon Europe, Erasmus+, Interreg, and URBACT, in particular, ensure the institutionalisation of these collaborations and the dissemination of good practice examples. Eco-neighbourhoods, green infrastructure strategies, and nature-based climate adaptation projects developed across Europe are among the concrete outcomes of this collaboration. The EPD-Net: Filling the Gap project, developed and currently being implemented within this framework, represents a model consortium structure established on the basis of European cooperation. The EPD-Net project is being implemented through a multidisciplinary and multi-sector partnership model comprising universities, municipalities, NGOs, and private sector representatives from Belgium, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Turkey (Figure 1). Figure 1. Multi-disciplinary and Multi-sector Partnership Model 777 The main objective of the project is to develop an innovative learning network and digital training module to support the systematic application of ecological principles in the planning of disaster-resilient and sustainable cities. Through activities such as knowledge exchange, methodology development, pilot implementation tailored to local contexts, and multilingual resource production among partners, the aim is to disseminate EPD principles across Europe (Table 1). Table 1. EPD Strategy and Dissemination Potential Matrix Strategic Area Recommended Strategies Potential for Dissemination Institutional Structures Strengthening multi-level governance mechanisms, developing inter-institutional coordination tools Medium - high Education and Capacity Development Supporting professional transformation with multilingual, contextual educational content High Policy Integration Creating guidelines, indicators, and criteria for integrating EPD principles into planning legislation High Digital Infrastructure Integrating CBS, digital twins, and AI-based decision support tools into planning systems Medium Dissemination and Networks Sharing best practice examples on open platforms, increasing interaction between local government networks Very high The structure of the EPD-Net project is important in that it demonstrates how ecological transformation policies in Europe are being implemented through multi-level governance structures. The project aims not only to produce academic outputs but also to develop decision support tools for implementation through municipalities and local governments, as well as to offer integrated solutions for education and capacity development processes. In this regard, the project lays the groundwork for a unique EPD 778 model developed within the framework of European cooperation that can be replicated in different contexts. 2.1. Partnership Model and Consortium Structure within the Scope of the EPD-Net Project The EPD-Net: Filling the Gap project is a multi-stakeholder European cooperation initiative that aims to strengthen its strategic role in the process of building disaster-resilient and sustainable cities. The project is supported by the European Union's Erasmus+ Programme and is being carried out with the participation of various institutions and organisations from European Union countries and Turkey (Figure 2). The consortium is based on a multidisciplinary and multi-sectoral structure that includes universities, local governments, private sector representatives, civil society organisations, and implementing agencies. 779 Figure 2. EPD-Net Project Partner Countries The partnership model aims to effectively implement the EPD approach at both theoretical and practical levels by bringing together the knowledge, experience, and capacity contributions of actors working at different 786 technical capacity of local governments are critical to the widespread adoption of the EPD approach. Additionally, addressing ecosystem services, nature-based solutions, and environmental justice concepts in planning systems in a measurable, applicable, and locally appropriate manner will strengthen the institutionalisation process. In this context, the EPD-Net project offers an innovative model for shaping the sustainable and resilient cities of the future with its multidimensional approach that combines digitalisation, ecological sensitivity, and governance. 4.1. Strategic Recommendations and Dissemination Potential In order for smart city strategies to develop in line with EPD principles, multi-layered, scalable, and context-sensitive strategies are needed. EPD is not merely an approach to the organisation of the physical environment, but also a planning paradigm that aims to integrate environmental information, social equity, and resilience principles into decision-making processes. Strategies developed in this direction should cover multidimensional areas of transformation, such as strengthening institutional capacity, restructuring professional education and making governance mechanisms more flexible. Findings from the EPD-Net project indicate that interdisciplinary learning networks, decision support systems, and digital content offer important leverage points for institutionalising EPD in European cities. In this context, the use of digital modules in local government capacity development processes should be encouraged, and multilingual and contextually adaptable training materials should be developed for public employees, planning experts, and students. Such materials should not only 787 provide theoretical knowledge but also be designed to guide professional practices with practical examples. As a strategic recommendation, guidance documents, indicator sets, and performance criteria should be developed to facilitate the integration of EPD principles into national and local planning legislation. These tools will enable decision-makers to reflect on nature-based solutions more systematically in policy documents. In addition, it is recommended that urban data infrastructures be organised to respond to EPD-focused planning needs, and that GIS, digital twins, and AI-supported analysis tools be integrated into planning processes. To increase the potential for dissemination, it is necessary to share good practice examples through open access platforms, strengthen knowledge transfer between similar projects, and encourage the active participation of local government networks. In this context, EPD-Net's multi-national and multi-sector partnership model offers the opportunity to increase both adaptability to different contexts and the capacity for widespread impact. The project's digital outputs and training modules can be evaluated as an expandable application pool after being tested in different cities and countries. 4.2. Future Research and Application Areas The integration of EPD into smart city policies is still an emerging interdisciplinary field of research and application. Therefore, there is a need to develop new methodological approaches at the interface between EPD and smart technologies, increase field-based applications, and strengthen impact assessment mechanisms. The SETS framework is increasingly prominent in the literature. However, more empirical data is 788 needed on how this framework can be adapted to local contexts and integrated into decision-making processes using which tools (McPhearson et al., 2022; 2025). In future research, the impact of EPD approaches on planning processes should be evaluated not only through expert opinions but also through stakeholder-based participation. Research on integrating elements such as community representation, social justice, and local knowledge systems into planning models will contribute to the democratisation of this approach. On the other hand, the potential contribution of technologies such as artificial intelligence and big data analytics to the EPD process has not yet been fully revealed. How data management, algorithmic decision support systems, and visualisation tools can be aligned with ecological planning awaits further exploration as an interdisciplinary research area. At the application level, priority should be given to comparative case studies showing how the EPD approach works in different climate zones and socio-cultural contexts. In this context, multi-stakeholder projects such as EPD-Net have great potential in terms of creating an information infrastructure for pilot applications to be tested at various geographical scales. Additionally, increasing the number of applications focused on spatial justice and reducing environmental inequalities will provide an opportunity to assess the social impacts of nature-based solutions, not just their physical ones. Future work should focus on the integration of EPD principles into planning education curricula, their relationship with national planning standards, and their compatibility with the technical capacities of local governments. It is considered a strategic priority for both academia and 789 practice that the conceptual model supporting EPD should not remain abstract but should be supported by measurable, applicable, and socially relevant content. 790 Acknowledgements and Information Note This study was supported by the project titled "EPD-NET: Filling the Gap: Development of Ecological Planning and Design Learning Network and Adaptive Smart Training Module for Disaster Resilient and Sustainable Cities" (GAP-101183961). The article complies with national and international research and publication ethics. Ethics Committee approval was not required for the study. In this study, artificial intelligence was used solely for the purpose of enhancing the language and clarity of the manuscript; it did not play any role in the analysis, interpretation, or generation of the results. Author Contribution and Conflict of Interest Declaration Information 1st Author 50%, 2nd Author 25%, 3rd Author 25% contributed. There is no conflict of interest. 791 References Bauer, M., Sanchez, L., & Song, J. (2021). IoT-enabled smart cities: Evolution and outlook. Sensors, 21(13), 4511. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21134511. Bibri, S. E. (2022). Eco-districts and data-driven smart eco-cities: Emerging approaches to strategic planning by design and spatial scaling and evaluation by technology. Land Use Policy, 113, 105830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105830. Campisi, T., Severino, A., Al-Rashid, M. A., & Pau, G. (2021). The development of the smart cities in the connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) era: From mobility patterns to scaling in cities. Infrastructures, 6(7), 100. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6070100. Cantuarias-Villessuzanne, C., Weigel, R., & Blain, J. (2021). Clustering of European smart cities to understand the cities’ sustainability strategies. Sustainability, 13(2), 513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020513. Esposito, G., Clement, J., Mora, L., & Crutzen, N. (2021). One size does not fit all: Framing smart city policy narratives within regional socioeconomic contexts in Brussels and Wallonia. Cities, 118, 103329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103329. Gasco-Hernandez, M., Nasi, G., Cucciniello, M., & Hiedemann, A. M. (2022). The role of organizational capacity to foster digital transformation in local governments: The case of three European smart cities. Urban Governance, 2, 236–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2022.09.005. Gracias, J. S., Parnell, G. S., Specking, E., Pohl, E. A., & Buchanan, R. (2023). Smart cities—A structured literature review. Smart Cities, 6(4), 1719–1743. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities6040080. Haque, A. K. M. B., Bhushan, B., & Dhiman, G. (2022). Conceptualizing smart city applications: Requirements, architecture, security issues, and emerging trends. Expert Systems, 39(5), e12753. https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.12753. Ivars-Baidal, J. A., Vera-Rebollo, J. F., Perles-Ribes, J., Femenia-Serra, F., & Celdrán-Bernabeu, M. A. (2023). Sustainable tourism 792 indicators: What’s new within the smart city/destination approach? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 31(7), 1556–1582. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1876075. Lai, C. M. T., & Cole, A. (2023). Measuring progress of smart cities: Indexing the smart city indices. Urban Governance, 3, 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ugj.2022.11.004. McPhearson, T., Frantzeskaki, N., Ossola, A., Diep, L., Anderson, P. M. L., Blatch, T., ... Zhou, W. (2025). Global synthesis and regional insights for mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(29), e2315910121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2315910121. Masik, G., Sagan, I., & Scott, J. W. (2021). Smart city strategies and new urban development policies in the Polish context. Cities, 108, 102970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102970. Pavlov, M. (2021). The smart-city: Concept essence and administrative processes evolution. Public Administration and Law Review, 2(6), 13–21. Puchol-Salort, P., O’Keeffe, J., van Reeuwijk, M., & Mijic, A. (2021). An urban planning sustainability framework: Systems approach to blue green urban design. Sustainable Cities and Society, 66, 102677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102677. Rani, S., Mishra, R. K., Usman, M., Kataria, A., Kumar, P., Bhambri, P., & Mishra, A. K. (2021). Amalgamation of advanced technologies for sustainable development of smart city environment: A review. IEEE Access, 9, 150060–150099. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3125527. Razmjoo, A., Nezhad, M. M., Kaigutha, L. G., Marzband, M., Mirjalili, S., Pazhoohesh, M., Memon, S., Ehyaei, M. A., & Piras, G. (2021). Investigating smart city development based on green buildings, electrical vehicles and feasible indicators. Sustainability, 13(14), 7808. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147808. Ruggieri, R., Ruggeri, M., Vinci, G., & Poponi, S. (2021). Electric mobility in a smart city: European overview. Energies, 14(2), 315. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14020315. 793 Russo, F., & Rindone, C. (2023). Smart city for sustainable development: Applied processes from SUMP to MaaS at European level. Applied Sciences, 13(3), 1773. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031773. Savastano, M., Suciu, M.-C., Gorelova, I., & Stativă, G.-A. (2023). How smart is mobility in smart cities? An analysis of citizens' value perceptions through ICT applications. Cities, 132, 104071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104071. Semeraro, T., Scarano, A., Buccolieri, R., Santino, A., & Aarrevaara, E. (2021). Planning of urban green spaces: An ecological perspective on human benefits. Land, 10(2), 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020105. Shamsuzzoha, A., Nieminen, J., Piya, S., & Rutledge, K. (2021). Smart city for sustainable environment: A comparison of participatory strategies from Helsinki, Singapore and London. Cities, 114, 103194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103194. Sharifi, A., Allam, Z., Feizizadeh, B., & Ghamari, H. (2021). Three decades of research on smart cities: Mapping knowledge structure and trends. Sustainability, 13(13), 7140. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137140. Singh, T., Solanki, A., Sharma, S. K., Nayyar, A., & Paul, A. (2022). A decade review on smart cities: Paradigms, challenges and opportunities. IEEE Access, 10, 68319–68363. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3184710. 794 Dr. Mehtap ÖZENEN KAVLAK E-mail: [email protected] Educational Status: PhD License: Business Administration and Geography Degree: Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems Doctorate: Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems Professional experiences: Dr. Mehtap ÖZENEN KAVLAK holds a bachelor's degree in business administration and a master's and PhD degrees in remote sensing and geographic information systems. She is currently working as a postdoctoral researcher at Eskişehir Technical University, Institute of Earth and Space Sciences. Her research interests include remote sensing, geographic information systems, natural resource management, global climate change, natural disasters, environmental analysis, spatial modeling, and spatial cost analysis. Her academic and professional experience has contributed to the integration of GIS-based analyses into planning processes, conservation and management of natural resources, and development of spatial decision support systems. Dr. Özenen Kavlak also plays an active role in the Erasmus+ funded EPD-Net project coordinated by Eskişehir Technical University and has contributed to strategic resilience and adaptation planning efforts led by institutions such as the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization, and Climate Change and the Eskişehir Chamber of Industry. Dr. Halil DUYMUŞ E-mail: [email protected] Educational Status: PhD License: Landscape Architecture Degree: Landscape Architecture Doctorate: Landscape Architecture Professional experiences: Dr. Halil DUYMUŞ holds a bachelor's, master's, and PhD degree in Landscape Architecture. He is currently working as a faculty member in the Department of Landscape Architecture at Çukurova University 795 and is actively involved as a researcher in several national and international projects. His research interests include ecological planning, landscape planning, urban resilience, green infrastructure, remote sensing, and geographic information systems. His academic and professional experience has significantly contributed to the integration of spatial analysis techniques into sustainable urban planning, disaster risk reduction, and climate adaptation strategies. Dr. Duymuş also plays an active role in the Erasmus+ funded EPD-Net project coordinated by Eskişehir Technical University and has contributed to strategic resilience and adaptation planning efforts led by institutions such as the Ministry of Environment, Urbanization, and Climate Change and the Eskişehir Chamber of Industry. Prof. Dr. Alper ÇABUK E-mail: [email protected] Educational Status: PhD, Professor License: Landscape Architecture Degree: Environmental Management and Landscape Planning Doctorate: Landscape Planning Professional experiences: Prof. Dr. Alper Çabuk is a faculty member at Eskişehir Technical University and currently serves as the Dean of the Faculty of Architecture and Design. He previously held positions as Director of the Institute of Earth and Space Sciences and Dean at Anadolu University. He completed his postdoctoral research at the University of Massachusetts and worked at TÜBİTAK MAM and in the private sector abroad. His research interests include GIS and remote sensing applications in ecological planning, disaster risk management, cultural heritage documentation, and computer-aided spatial analysis. He has contributed to national and international projects and played key roles in developing GIS-related qualifications and quality systems in cooperation with public institutions. Prof. Çabuk has authored numerous publications and received several awards in the field of spatial design and planning.