A Study of Anatolia in the Context of the Protection and Sustainability of Traditional Urban Areas: Cases of Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi

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 346 1. Introduction Traditional urban areas hold significant importance for the conservation of historical and cultural identity and are central to contemporary discussions on sustainability. Anatolia, in this regard, offers a rich diversity and serves as a vital field of study for conservation practices (Ahunbay, 2019). This study aims to examine the conservation and sustainability of traditional settlement patterns in Anatolia through a comparative analysis of the cases of Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi. Located in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia respectively, Harput and Suriçi are not only situated in neighboring cities but also stood as significant centers during the Ottoman period. They serve as documentary evidence of the historical fabric of their respective settlements and remain active sites of archaeological excavations and conservation efforts today. The study will evaluate the similarities and differences of these two settlements in terms of conservation policies and the threats they face. The primary goal is to propose strategies to ensure the transmission of these areas to future generations. The conceptual framework of the study is grounded in urban conservation and sustainability, which denote a complex process requiring an interdisciplinary approach (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020a). Accordingly, the scope of the study includes not only the physical characteristics of the historical fabric but also the socio-cultural and economic dynamics. The concept of conservation in architecture encompasses interventions aimed at transmitting the physical, cultural and social values of historical buildings and environments to future generations (Jokilehto, 2007). Conservation involves not only the 347 restoration of structures but also the sustainability of their identity and context. This process requires an interdisciplinary approach, involving collaboration among fields such as architecture, archaeology, urban planning, and sociology (Ahunbay, 2019). International charters and legal regulations constitute the foundation of conservation practices. The 1964 Venice Charter is among the most significant documents outlining the principles of historic building conservation, emphasizing concepts such as authenticity and integrity (ICOMOS, 1964). Similarly, UNESCO’s 1972 Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage regulates the safeguarding of sites with outstanding universal value on a global scale (UNESCO, 1972). The UNESCO World Heritage List, a key mechanism for monitoring conservation, aims to safeguard cultural and natural assets with exceptional universal value for future generations. To be inscribed on this list, a site must possess historical significance, retain its authenticity and have adequate legal protective measures to ensure sustainability (Ministry of Culture and Tourism, 2025). Many sites in Turkey, such as the Diyarbakır City Walls and Hevsel Gardens, have been included in the list by meeting these criteria (UNESCO, 2015). Regarding conservation policies in Turkey, legal frameworks such as the Law on the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Properties (1983) and related regulations are in place. These regulations cover the registration of historic buildings, the authority of conservation councils, and procedures concerning restoration practices (Kuban, 2000). 348 In conservation practices, public participation plays a role as critical as legal regulations. The exclusion of local communities from the process and the lack of awareness-raising initiatives often lead to the failure of conservation projects (Olğun & Şahin, 2021). In successful examples such as Süleymaniye and Safranbolu, sustainable outcomes have been achieved through community engagement and economic incentives (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020c). Today, urban transformation projects, tourism pressure and natural disasters pose new threats to historical settlements. Rapid transformations in many cities have led to the inclusion of some sites in UNESCO’s List of World Heritage in Danger (UNESCO, 2019). This has intensified debates on how to balance conservation and development (Erder, 2010). Ultimately, conservation in architecture is not merely a technical intervention but also a socio-legal process aimed at sustaining cultural heritage. In this process, detailed analyses of heritage sites are interpreted through interdisciplinary studies and evaluated in accordance with both national and international legislation. Considering not only international standards but also local dynamics is essential for developing sustainable conservation policies. Harput and Diyarbakır Suriçi, which are discussed in the context of conservation in this study, are settlements where similar conservation problems are observed, despite having different geographical and historical contexts. The research compares these two historic areas in terms of architectural fabric, current state of preservation and sustainable conservation practices. Additionally, it investigates whether the conservation status of the Diyarbakır City Walls, listed as a UNESCO 349 World Heritage Site, can serve as a model for Harput, which is currently on the tentative list. The methodology of the study is primarily based on qualitative research techniques, supported by fieldwork and a comprehensive literature review. Within the scope of fieldwork, observations and photographic documentation were conducted in both settlements to analyze the current conditions. The literature review was carried out through an examination of conservation approaches, national and international regulations, and published works related to the study areas (Jokilehto, 2007). The qualitative data will be analyzed using a descriptive analysis method, offering a comparative perspective. This approach is expected to enhance the understanding of successes and shortcomings within the conservation processes of the two settlements. Harput and Suriçi stand out as prominent representatives of Anatolia’s historical urban fabric. While Harput preserves a unique identity through its medieval architecture, Suriçi is distinguished by its traditional residential pattern and monumental structures (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020b; Aydın, et al., 2020). Both settlements are challenged by issues such as urban transformation and population decline. This study critically evaluates the effectiveness of various strategies aimed at addressing these and similar problems. Ultimately, the research seeks to present a perspective specific to Anatolia regarding the conservation and sustainability of traditional urban areas. The assessments made through the case studies of Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi may serve as a guide for the sustainable conservation of other historic cities. The findings of the study provide suggestions for improving conservation 350 policies and highlight the importance of accurate transmission to future generations, thereby aiming to contribute to the continuity of Anatolia’s cultural heritage. 2. Material and Method This study has been primarily structured using qualitative research methods. Qualitative approaches involve collecting and interpreting data through techniques such as on-site observation, investigation and document analysis to deeply understand and convey various phenomena (Creswell, 2013; Denzin & Lincoln, 2017). In this research, qualitative data collection and analysis methods were employed to compare the preservation status of the traditional urban settlements in Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi. The reasons for selecting these settlements as study subjects can be listed as follows: - Cultural and Architectural Diversity: The selected settlements contain numerous elements representing the architectural diversity of Anatolia, including traditional civil architecture, historical religious buildings, inns, bazaars, and urban layouts surrounded by walls. This allows for the examination of how cultural and architectural values are addressed within the context of conservation. - Urban Fabric and Topography: The defensive hilltop settlement of Harput and the dense urban fabric of Diyarbakır/Suriçi, surrounded by defensive walls, represent two traditional urban types adapted to the diverse geographical conditions of Anatolia. This diversity offers a rich opportunity for investigation in terms of spatial organization and sustainability. 351 - Historical Continuity and Multilayeredness: Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi uniquely reflect Anatolia's deep-rooted urbanization traditions with their multilayered historical structures, bearing traces of diverse civilizations such as the Urartian, Byzantine, Seljuk, and Ottoman periods. These characteristics offer an important research area for examining the continuity of urban heritage and the spatial traces of different periods. - Different Approaches in Conservation Practices: The selected settlements are areas where different conservation policies, practices, and intervention styles have been implemented at the national and local levels. These differences constitute suitable examples for evaluating and jointly addressing the outcomes of conservation and sustainability approaches. - Potential for Association with UNESCO Studies: Diyarbakır/Suriçi is on the UNESCO World Heritage List, while Harput is on the World Heritage Tentative List. This provides a significant research basis for examining how international recognition and conservation efforts are shaped. - Current Conservation Problems and Sustainability: Both settlements face rapid urbanization, the pressures of modern construction, population changes, and socio-economic transformations. This provides important data for exploring how conservation and sustainability policies can be improved in the face of current threats. The data collection process consisted of fieldwork-based observations and a comprehensive literature review. During the fieldwork, both historical settlements were examined in situ and the current conditions of 352 the architectural fabric were documented through photographs. The literature review focused on national and international conservation policies, UNESCO criteria and academic publications related to the region. Within this framework, a theoretical basis for conservation practices was established, and areas for potential improvement in practice were identified. The qualitative data collected were analyzed and interpreted accordingly. This analysis enabled a systematic evaluation of the architectural characteristics, conservation status and the threats encountered in both Harput and Suriçi. Additionally, it was questioned whether the UNESCO World Heritage status of the Diyarbakır City Walls could serve as a model for Harput. The findings and resulting recommendations were interpreted with the aim of developing perspectives for the sustainable preservation of similar historic cities. 3. Findings and Discussion Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi are two significant settlements located in neighboring regions of Anatolia, both reflecting the historical and cultural diversity of the area through their traditional urban fabrics. Both districts have hosted various civilizations throughout long historical processes and possess a rich architectural, social, and cultural heritage (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020b; Aydın, et al., 2020). 3.1. Characteristics of Elazığ/Harput Traditional Urban Settlement Harput is a traditional settlement area that embodies the historical and cultural heritage of Elazığ. With a history dating back to the Urartian period, this settlement maintained its significance as a central hub during the Byzantine, Seljuk, and Ottoman eras. Established on a defensible hill 353 due to its geographical position, Harput reflects the characteristics of a medieval city (Sunguroğlu, 1958) (Figure 1). Among the key elements that define its physical fabric are the castle, mosques, churches, and traditional houses. Figure 1. Location of Harput (adapted from Google Earth, 2025) The traditional urban fabric of Harput developed in harmony with the region’s climatic and topographic conditions. The houses in the settlement were constructed with inward-oriented plans and thick walls, adapted to the region's cold winters (Sunguroğlu, 1958). Characteristic features of traditional Harput houses include adobe walls with timber reinforcements built on stone foundations, flat roofs, and oriel windows (Topçu, 2014) (Figure 2). These architectural features also represent local building traditions and the use of native materials. 354 Figure 2. Examples of traditional housing structures in Harput Harput’s religious architecture, like its civil architecture, reflects the traces of its multicultural past. The Grand Mosque is one of Harput’s oldest Islamic structures and is regarded as a significant monument of the Artuqid period (Sunguroğlu, 1958) (Figure 3). Christian architectural examples, such as the Virgin Mary Church, are also present (Topçu, 2014) (Figure 3). These religious buildings reveal Harput’s cosmopolitan character, where different faiths and cultures coexisted. Furthermore, the monumental structures in the settlement provide valuable insights into the construction technologies and aesthetic sensibilities of their respective periods. (a) 355 (b) Figure 3. The Grand Mosque (a) and Virgin Mary Church (b) One of the most important components of Harput’s urban fabric is the traditional castle and its surroundings (Figure 4). Ongoing excavations in this area not only trace the city’s history back to ancient times but also provide significant data on daily life, religious practices, and trade (Aytaç, 2017). Additionally, the settlement’s water systems demonstrate original engineering solutions. The fountains constructed to meet the water needs of the area are important for understanding how water was supplied in the past (Olğun, 2023a) (Figure 5). Moreover, the water systems around the castle can also be interpreted as integral to the city's defensive strategy. 362 Figure 12. Conservation-Oriented Development Plan for Suriçi (Egeplan, 2025) When considering the current state of Suriçi, it is evident that, although many elements of its architectural heritage have survived to the present day, there are several challenges in terms of conservation and sustainability. In recent years, armed conflicts and urban transformation projects have caused irreversible damage to the historical fabric (Işık, 2023). Many historical structures have been destroyed; the socio-cultural structure has also undergone significant change, which is reflected in the physical characteristics of the district (Çatalbaş, 2012). Despite all these challenges, Suriçi continues to preserve its traditional fabric through intensive conservation efforts, particularly with the support of UNESCO. Diyarbakır Suriçi was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List in 2015, whereas Harput was added to the Tentative List in 2018 (UNESCO, 2015; UNESCO, 2018). This difference points to various distinctions in conservation policies and practices. The process of inscription to the permanent list by UNESCO is based on specific criteria that evaluate aspects such as conservation status, authenticity, and 363 integrity (UNESCO Operational Guidelines, 2021). The current designations of the two historical areas reflect their respective conditions in this regard. The inclusion of Diyarbakır Suriçi on the list is closely linked to its city walls of outstanding universal value, multicultural social structure, and preserved urban form (Çatalbaş, 2012). The 5,5 km-long walls and the historic structures enclosed within reflect the traces of the Artuqid and Ottoman periods in particular. In terms of UNESCO criteria, the preservation of both cultural landscape and architectural integrity has played a key role in Suriçi’s recognition (ICOMOS, 2015). Although Harput also hosts a multi-layered history, it has not yet completed the process of being inscribed on the World Heritage List. While both settlements have aspects that need improvement in terms of conservation, it is evident that Harput requires more comprehensive efforts in this regard. 4. Discussion In Turkey, conservation policies are framed by Law No. 2863 on the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Assets, enacted in 1983. This law outlines the registration of heritage sites, the restoration of structures, and the principles for cultural heritage conservation. Both Harput and Suriçi have been designated as urban conservation areas under this legislation. However, practical differences in implementation have led to significantly different levels of conservation between these two historical settlements (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020b; Aydın, et al., 2020). While conservation plans in Suriçi are supported through interdisciplinary 364 approaches, practices in Harput are often constrained by uncertainty and lack of resources. In the conservation process of Diyarbakır/Suriçi, the Management Plan prepared under UNESCO’s guidance has supported the development of a sustainability-oriented conservation strategy. This plan adopts a multifaceted approach that integrates spatial planning with cultural heritage management (UNESCO, 2015). In addition, public participation and educational activities were promoted as part of social sustainability objectives. In contrast, such a comprehensive management plan has not yet been fully developed for Harput, though efforts in this direction are ongoing. This represents a major limitation for achieving international recognition. One of the most important international documents, the 1972 UNESCO Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, defines areas of outstanding universal value. Suriçi was listed under this convention due to its recognition as possessing such values. The inclusion of Harput in the Tentative List indicates its potential for possessing these values and its emerging significance. However, to move to the permanent list, comprehensive conservation measures, restoration activities, and multidisciplinary documentation efforts must be intensified, along with improved visibility (UNESCO, 1972). Although the traditional architectural fabric in Harput has been largely preserved, many historic structures have not survived to the present. Pressures from tourism, unplanned development, and uncontrolled functional changes in historic buildings emerge as major threats to the integrity of the area. While Suriçi also faces similar issues, interventions 365 there are monitored more frequently through UNESCO’s oversight mechanisms. This international system of monitoring and supervision serves as an important factor in enhancing conservation quality. In Harput, although the situation has improved since its inclusion in the Tentative List, monitoring is still largely localized and hampered by resource limitations. In academic literature, Suriçi is often cited as a model in the integrated conservation of historic city centers and in discussions on cultural sustainability (Yıldırım, 2006). The projects conducted in this area encompass not only physical but also socio-economic components. Academic studies on Harput, on the other hand, have primarily focused on individual buildings; however, more recent research has begun to address the settlement as a whole through various disciplinary perspectives (Azar, 2019). This suggests that Harput’s academic visibility and thereby its international recognition—is still at an early stage. It is important to promote and enhance both the quantity and quality of these studies. Academic research and interdisciplinary publications play a crucial role in the monitoring, documentation, and critical evaluation of conservation processes. While scholarly work on Suriçi supports this process, studies on Harput have mostly focused on field reports and regional inventories. This situation adversely affects Harput’s representation in the academic and scientific community. Therefore, promoting national and international publications is of great importance for the holistic conservation of Harput. Such scholarly contributions would strengthen institutional and public awareness alike. 366 In Suriçi, religious and civic buildings such as the Grand Mosque, Hasan Pasha Inn, and various Armenian and Syriac churches reflect a multicultural architectural heritage. This diversity has provided a major advantage for UNESCO’s "multicultural heritage" criteria (UNESCO, 2015). Although Harput also possesses a similar historical diversity, the surviving architectural elements are more limited in number and condition. For instance, Harput Castle, the Grand Mosque, and some Armenian churches can be cited as representatives of this multicultural past (Azar, 2019). However, systematic conservation and promotional strategies for these structures have not yet been adequately developed in Harput. According to national regulations, "Conservation-Oriented Zoning Plans" aim to integrate heritage areas into physical planning processes. In Suriçi, these plans are largely implemented and regularly updated. In the case of Harput, however, similar plans often face setbacks during the implementation phase (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020b). The continuity and supervision of these plans are of critical importance for conservation success. Without consistent application, the degradation of historic urban fabric becomes inevitable. Extensive restoration activities are carried out in both Suriçi and Harput, yet there are notable methodological differences between them. In Suriçi, restoration projects emphasize documentation of registered buildings and the use of authentic materials. In Harput, by contrast, the use of modern materials and structural additions have sometimes negatively affected the authenticity of heritage structures (Akyıldız & Olğun, 2020b). This constitutes a negative aspect in terms of UNESCO’s criteria on 367 authenticity. Scientific principles must be strictly followed in restoration practices. The promotion of these areas and their integration with cultural tourism also affect their conservation status. Thanks to its UNESCO designation, Suriçi has been widely incorporated into tourism-oriented cultural routes. Despite its significant potential, Harput has not yet achieved the same level of integration. This results in disadvantages not only economically but also in terms of conservation (Olğun, 2023b). Promotion strategies based on scientific planning are vital for addressing this shortcoming. UNESCO’s proposed "Historic Urban Landscape" (HUL) approach involves multiple dimensions—social, economic, physical, and cultural (UNESCO, 2011). Suriçi, with practices aligned with this holistic approach, appears to be ahead in terms of effective conservation. In Harput, this approach has yet to be fully reflected in practice. If Harput adopts this methodology in the near future, its conservation level can significantly improve. This would also pave the way for its transition from the Tentative List to the World Heritage List, provided that expert support, financial resources, and local capacity-building efforts are mobilized. 368 Table 1. Comparison of the current status of Harput and Suriçi in terms of protection and sustainability 5. Conclusion and Suggestions In this study, the conservation and sustainability of traditional urban areas in Anatolia are comparatively examined through the neighboring settlements of Elazığ/Harput and Diyarbakır/Suriçi. The findings reveal that both historical fabrics host a significant cultural and architectural heritage; however, they differ in terms of the scope and effectiveness of conservation practices. The inclusion of Suriçi in the UNESCO World Heritage List has enhanced the site's national and international visibility and facilitated the implementation of conservation policies within a more systematic framework. In contrast, Harput’s status as part of the tentative list remains a limiting factor in the execution of such practices. An analysis of the spatial, social, and cultural fabric of Harput and Suriçi shows that both areas possess a rich composition of traditional residential 369 architecture, religious structures, and other public spaces. Nevertheless, in terms of conservation, it is evident that physical interventions alone are not sufficient; public engagement and awareness-raising among local communities also play a decisive role. The Site Management Plan implemented in Suriçi alongside the UNESCO process can be considered a significant model in this context. In Harput, although conservation efforts are ongoing, a similar management approach has yet to become widespread, and existing practices appear to be concentrated more on individual buildings. This situation highlights the need for multidimensional and inclusive perspectives in the sustainable conservation of traditional urban areas. The current conservation status of the Diyarbakır City Walls, which are included in the UNESCO World Heritage List, along with related efforts, may serve as a potential model for Harput, which remains on the tentative list. However, the sustainability of this model is not solely dependent on physical conservation criteria; it also requires a strong correlation with administrative components such as management, financing, education, and community participation. The monitoring and evaluation mechanisms applied in Suriçi may serve as valuable references for developing effective policies for Harput. That said, considering Harput’s unique context and multiple potentials, the Diyarbakır model should not be treated as a direct template, but rather as an adaptable example shaped by the shared geography and cultural proximity of the two settlements. Within this framework, the sustainable preservation and emphasis on Harput’s authentic values are essential for its inclusion in the permanent list. Accordingly, the following 370 recommendations should be considered for the sustainable conservation of both settlements: - A comprehensive Site Management Plan should be prepared for Harput and structured in alignment with UNESCO standards. - The monitoring, reporting, and participatory mechanisms applied in Suriçi should be maintained and flexibly adapted to Harput, taking its local context into account. - Educational and awareness-raising programs should be conducted to ensure the active participation of local communities in the conservation process in both areas. - Digital inventory systems should be developed to document and archive registered structures. - Conservation practices should prioritize the use of traditional building materials and techniques. - Sustainable tourism policies should be implemented to prevent tourism pressures from damaging the authenticity of the historic fabric. - Multidimensional collaborations should be encouraged through national and international funding sources. - Partnerships with universities and expert institutions should be established to support conservation practices academically and promote scholarly dissemination. - The visibility of structures reflecting cultural diversity should be enhanced to strengthen the emphasis on multicultural heritage in both settlements. 371 In conclusion, this study reveals the differences and commonalities in the conservation of traditional urban areas in the Anatolian context through the cases of Harput and Suriçi. The experience and outcomes derived from Suriçi’s UNESCO World Heritage journey offer valuable insights for other sites like Harput that are still on the tentative list. However, the unique contextual characteristics of each site must be taken into account, and conservation policies should be designed accordingly. Sustainable success can only be achieved not through structural interventions alone, but through public participation, good governance, and resource continuity, as well as fabric-scale approaches. In this regard, it is deemed essential to promote holistic, participatory, and locally rooted conservation strategies.