Urban Resilience Research: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis

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 418 1. Introduction In the face of increasing environmental, social, and economic uncertainties on a global scale, the resilience of cities has become central to the sustainable development agenda of the 21st century. In particular, the increasing frequency and intensity of shocks such as climate change, natural disasters, and pandemics have made it imperative for cities to prioritize not only growth but also the development of resilience against crises (Cutter et al., 2010; Ahern, 2013). In this context, the concept of “urban resilience” has emerged as a new paradigm not only in risk management but also in multidimensional areas such as urban planning, infrastructure design, social participation, and governance (Meerow, Newell & Stults, 2016). Urban resilience has been addressed using different theoretical frameworks due to its interdisciplinary nature. For example, the ecological resilience approach developed by Holling (1973) focuses on the system's capacity to sustain itself despite various stresses and shocks, while social scientists such as Pelling (2010) and Davoudi et al. (2012) have integrated this concept with justice, governance, and learning processes. However, in recent years, concepts such as green infrastructure, nature-based solutions, smart cities, and inclusive planning have increasingly found their place in the urban resilience literature (Elmqvist et al., 2019; Frantzeskaki, 2019). Despite this theoretical diversity, there are only a limited number of studies that systematically map the general trends, key thematic clusters, most influential authors, and emerging topics in scientific publications in the field of urban resilience. Particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic, research addressing the concept of urban resilience has increased. This 419 research focuses on the pandemic's impact on urban planning, design, and management processes (Sharifi & Khavarian-Garmsir, 2020). At this point, bibliometric analysis offers a highly functional method for discovering structural patterns in the literature, identifying leading authors and topics, and identifying gaps for future research. Keyword cooccurrence analyses, author collaboration networks, citation and bibliographic matching maps conducted using software such as VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and Bibliometrix reveal both the temporal evolution of knowledge accumulation and thematic concentration areas in detail (van Eck & Waltman, 2010). 2. Literature Review Global climate change, rapid urbanization, environmental degradation, and social vulnerabilities have made cities increasingly complex, multilayered, and vulnerable structures. In this context, the concept of “urban resilience” refers to the capacity of cities to withstand, adapt to, and transform in the face of these multidimensional threats. Especially the COVID-19 pandemic and increasing climate disasters have turned urban resilience into not just a theoretical concept but also an urgent planning necessity. Urban resilience has developed as a concept that requires a multi-layered analytical framework, ranging from ecological systems to social structures, infrastructure to governance (Ahern, 2011; Meerow et al., 2016). While early studies focused primarily on physical infrastructure and disaster management, in recent years socio-political dimensions such as social justice, governance, and inequality have also entered the literature (Chelleri et al., 2015; Ziervogel et al., 2017). Ecosystem services, green 420 infrastructure, and nature-based solutions constitute the ecological dimension of urban resilience. Kabisch et al. (2017) have shown that nature-based solutions can reduce inequalities in cities by producing not only environmental but also social benefits. McPhearson et al. (2015) noted that urban ecosystems play a critical role through functions such as microclimate regulation and flood risk reduction. The social dimension of urban resilience is related to social cohesion, inclusivity, and the empowerment of vulnerable groups. In this context, Leichenko (2011) emphasized the concept of “social resilience” and drew attention to the resilience-enhancing effect of social ties in times of crisis. In addition, Anguelovski et al. (2016) noted that resilience planning can sometimes create new inequalities and that social justice must therefore be included in the conceptual framework. Infrastructure systems are seen as a decisive factor in the resilience of cities. In the discipline of urban planning, the role of nature-based solutions and multi-level governance structures in increasing resilience has come to the fore (Davoudi et al., 2012; Frantzeskaki, 2019). Bulkeley & Castán Broto (2012) emphasize the development of innovative approaches alongside experimental planning models in urban management. Recent studies have developed subconcepts such as “transformative resilience,” “just resilience,” and “urban adaptability” (Kim & Lim, 2016). In addition, technologies such as artificial intelligence-supported decision-making systems and digital twins have begun to be integrated into urban resilience studies (Batty et al., 2021). 421 2. Material and Method This study adopted a bibliometric analysis approach to reveal the scientific trends in the urban resilience literature. To this end, the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection database was used. The literature review was conducted on June 4, 2025, using the keywords “urban resilience” OR “city resilience” OR “resilient cities” in the Topic field. This search strategy enabled a comprehensive search that included title, abstract, and keywords. The search yielded a total of 3.996 scientific records. The search results were exported from the WoS platform as a plain text (.txt) file in “Full Record and Cited References” format. The obtained dataset was processed and analyzed using VOSviewer (version 1.6.20), one of the open-source bibliometric analysis software programs. VOSviewer is a frequently used tool for visualizing keyword cooccurrences, author collaborations, country-based productivity, and source journal relationships. In the study, general terms (e.g., “article,” “study,” “model”) in the dataset were first filtered out through the VOSviewer interface, and only scientific keywords capable of establishing meaningful conceptual relationships were included in the study. The Author Keywords field was particularly emphasized. Co-occurrences between keywords were analyzed using VOSviewer software, and clustering was performed based on the frequency with which these keywords appeared together in the same studies. The distribution of keywords over the years was evaluated, thereby visualizing how the primary research themes in the urban resilience literature have evolved over time. The overlay visualization method in VOSviewer was used to identify emerging topics in more recent 422 studies. The conceptual structures were visually analyzed through both network visualizations and density visualizations, and the thematic relationships between clusters were interpreted in detail. The clusters obtained were evaluated in terms of content; each cluster was interpreted according to the theme it represented in the literature (e.g., “climate adaptation,” “infrastructure resilience,” “participatory planning,” “disaster management,” etc.). In order to fully reflect the evolution in the literature, no starting year restriction was imposed in the study. All records from the earliest dates were included in the evaluation. Thanks to this methodological structure, not only the concepts frequently repeated in the literature but also the structural and thematic relationships between these concepts were revealed in detail. 3. Findings and Discussion 3.1. Publication Trends The first publication on the subject was made in 2003, and publications have shown a marked increase since 2020, continuing to rise steadily since then. The citation pattern shows similar trends to the publication pattern, with the highest number of citations occurring in 2024. Figure 1 shows an increasing momentum in the number of publications in 2024. Considering that this study reflects data from the first half of 2025, it is anticipated that the increase will continue. 423 Figure 1. Number of publications and citations by year. Of the publications covered by the study, 3.281 were articles, 293 were review articles, 288 were proceeding papers, 161 were book chapters, 98 were early access publications, 97 were editorial material, 39 were book reviews, and 8 were books (Figure 2). Figure 2. Number of publications by publication type 3281 293 288 161 98 97 39 8 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 Article Review Article Proceeding Paper Book Chapters Early Access Editorial Material Book Review Book 424 3.2. WOS Categories and Index The distribution of publications on urban resilience according to Web of Science (WoS) categories clearly reveals the multifaceted nature of this interdisciplinary concept. The three categories with the highest number of publications are Environmental Sciences (n=1222), Environmental Studies (n=1062), and Green & Sustainable Science & Technology (n=805). This indicates that urban resilience studies primarily focus on environment-centric themes such as environmental sustainability, climate change, and nature-based solutions. In contrast, categories such as Urban Studies (n=769) and Regional & Urban Planning (n=355) emphasize the importance of the concept in the context of spatial planning and urban transformation. Themes such as Meteorology Atmospheric Sciences (n=349) and Water Resources (n=343) indicate intersections with areas such as disaster risk, climate extremes, and water management. In addition, the significant number of engineering-based categories such as Engineering Civil (n=304) and Geosciences Multidisciplinary (n=291) indicates that structural resilience and physical infrastructure also play an important role in the studies (Figure 3). Among the categories that contribute less in terms of numbers but are thematically meaningful are Public Environmental Occupational Health, Architecture, and Engineering Environmental. These data demonstrate the strong intersection of urban resilience research with diverse fields of knowledge, including environmental sciences, engineering, planning, public health, and architecture. Furthermore, they demonstrate a growing trend toward integration across these fields. 425 Figure 3. Distribution of publications according to Web of Science categories While 1,982 studies were indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), 1,575 were indexed in Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and 833 in Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) (Figure 4). Figure 4. Number of publications according to Web of Science Index 3.3 Publications The articles reviewed were published in 200 different journals. This shows that studies on “urban resilience” are multidisciplinary and appear on a 118 123 160 204 291 304 325 343 349 355 769 805 1062 1222 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 Architecture Public Environmental Occupational Health Engineering Environmental Energy Fuels Geosciences Multidisciplinary Engineering Civil Geography Water Resources Meteorology Atmospheric Sciences Regional Urban Planning Urban Studies Green Sustainable Science Technology Environmental Studies Environmental Sciences 36 61 115 159 257 833 1575 1982 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Book Citation Index –Science (BKCI-S) Arts & Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) Conference Proceedings Citation Index –… Book Citation Index –Social Sciences & … Conference Proceedings Citation Index –… Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-… 426 wide scale. The top three journals that have contributed the most to the literature by publishing the highest number of studies on the subject are, in order, “Sustainability” (n=367, 9.177%), “Sustainable Cities and Society” (n=148, 3.701%), and “Cities” (n=132, 3.301%). These journals indicate that the literature on this topic revolves around sustainability and urban development. Furthermore, it appears that urban resilience research focuses on sustainability and that solutions are looked at the city level. A common feature of these journals is their openness to interdisciplinary articles and their support for policy frameworks that encompass both environmental and social governance. Journals such as the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (n=101) and Urban Climate (n=63) host studies particularly focused on disaster risk management and climate change adaptation. The prominence of journals such as Land (n=88), Water (n=47), and Journal of Cleaner Production (n=51) highlights the critical importance of resource management, land use, and environmental production processes within the framework of urban resilience (Figure 5). Journals that address more technical or specific sub-themes include Urban Science, Natural Hazards, Journal of Environmental Management, and Buildings. The presence of journals such as Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, which focus on nature-based solutions, indicates that ecosystem-based approaches have found significant resonance in the literature. This table shows that research on urban resilience is not limited to risk reduction, but also considers cities as sustainable, green, flexible, and multi-layered systems. Since these journals are open to interdisciplinary content, urban resilience is addressed not only from an 427 engineering perspective but also from social, environmental, and governance dimensions. Figure 5. Number of publications by journal 3.4. Contributing Countries China (n=955) and the US (n=610) are the leading countries in terms of publication volume in this field (Figure 6). China's high number of publications reveals intense academic interest in themes such as urban transformation, climate adaptation, and infrastructure resilience, driven by both urbanization pressures and central planning policies. The US's contribution, on the other hand, is notable for its multidisciplinary approach, applied planning models, and integration of social sciences. These two countries play a pioneering role in the evolution of the concept, both through their academic infrastructure and policy implementations. Countries such as Italy (n=378), the United Kingdom (n=337), Australia (n=252), Germany (n=221), and Spain (n=207) produce publications from an European perspective, particularly on climate change, sustainable urbanism, community participation, and governance. For example, the 33 34 37 38 39 40 44 47 51 63 88 101 132 148 367 050 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 International Journal of Environmental Research… Urban Forestry & Urban Greening Buildings Journal of Environmental Management TeMA Journal of Land Use Mobility And… Natural Hazards Urban Science Water Journal of Cleaner Production Urban Climate Land International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction Cities Sustainable Cities and Society Sustainability 434 According to the contents of the 15 high-impact publications listed in the table, the concept of urban resilience has been addressed primarily within a multidisciplinary framework. The literature has not only associated this concept with the resilience of physical infrastructure. It has also been closely linked to various fields, including social inequalities, ecological sustainability, public policy, climate change adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and planning theories. This situation demonstrates that the concept of “urban resilience” has evolved beyond being merely a technical planning term to become an inclusive paradigm encompassing socioecological systems, politics, community participation, and knowledge production. 3.8. Keyword Co-occurrence Analysis: Thematic Cluster Interpretations As a result of the analysis conducted with a minimum occurrence count of 5 for the most frequently used keywords, it was observed that 456 keywords grouped into 16 clusters formed 5,545 connections (Figure 9). According to the Overlay Visualization analysis, a significant paradigm shift has been observed in the field of study in recent years. While studies conducted up to 2019 focused more on fundamental theoretical concepts such as “urban planning,” “resilience,” and “governance,” the literature after 2020 has shifted to the application dimension of concepts such as “urban resilience” and “green infrastructure.” Recently, data-driven and technological approaches such as “remote sensing,” “machine learning,” and “resilience evaluation” have come to the fore, indicating that the discipline is undergoing a digital transformation process. These findings 435 suggest that the research agenda is trending toward integration with the climate crisis and disaster management. Figure 9. Keyword links The first cluster represents a combination of literature examining the relationship between urban heat effects, climate change adaptation strategies, and environmental health risks. Terms such as “urban heat island,” “anthropogenic heat,” and “land surface temperature” emphasize the heat accumulation caused by dense urbanization and human activities, while expressions such as “adaptation strategies,” “green roofs,” and “cooling effect” point to solutions aimed at mitigating these effects. Additionally, the joint consideration of environmental and physiological risk factors such as “air pollution” and “heat stress” demonstrates that urban resilience is examined from both a health-based and spatial adaptability perspective in a multidimensional manner. Therefore, this 436 cluster highlights the importance of both spatial planning and environmental management in making cities resilient to the climate crisis. The second cluster highlights the increasing role of digital technologies and modeling approaches in making cities more flexible and predictable in the face of climate risks. Terms such as “agent-based model,” “machine learning,” and “artificial intelligence” reflect the methods used in simulating urban systems and modeling their behavioral dynamics, while expressions such as “decision support system,” “climate risk,” and “resilience evaluation” show how these methods are integrated into policymaking and planning in practice. In particular, the presence of the concepts of “geospatial analysis” and “driving factors” emphasizes that decision support processes are based not only on data but also on spatial context. This cluster represents how the link between technological capacity and data-driven planning approaches and urban resilience is established in the current literature. The third cluster centers on the interaction between governance mechanisms developed at the urban level in response to climate change and principles of social justice. The concept of “climate justice” draws attention to the unequal effects of environmental threats on different segments of society, while terms such as “adaptive governance,” “collaborative governance,” and “transformation” emphasize the importance of flexible and inclusive policies in managing these inequalities. At the same time, the emergence of risk factors such as “uncertainty” and “drought” indicates that decision-making processes must be based not only on existing data but also on the management of uncertainties. This cluster represents a literature trend aimed at rebuilding 437 urban resilience not only at the physical or technological level but also at the social and administrative levels. The fourth cluster focuses on social vulnerability, social capital, and community-based resilience. In this context, it is emphasized that resilience to disasters is built not only through physical infrastructure but also through social interaction, trust relationships, and participation mechanisms. Participatory planning processes, collective learning, and the strengthening of social bonds highlight the social dimension of resilience. The fifth cluster covers urban mobility, accessibility, and pedestrianoriented transportation. Shaped by the 15-minute city, compact city, and public transportation systems, this cluster addresses the restructuring of physical transportation as the cornerstone of sustainable urban planning. The sixth cluster is structured around green infrastructure, ecosystem services, and nature-based solutions. The protection of urban ecology, the preservation of biodiversity, and environmental integrity form the core focus of this cluster. The seventh cluster focuses on disaster risk reduction, hazard assessment, and urban resilience strategies. In this context, risk perception, resilient infrastructure, and climate adaptation planning are prominent. The eighth cluster covers energy efficiency, green building practices, and carbon emission reduction. Building performance, environmental sustainability, and renovation strategies are the main approaches in this area. The ninth cluster includes topics such as urban water management, flood risk reduction, and water-sensitive urban design. Blue infrastructure, flood modeling, and resilient water systems are the focal points of this cluster. The tenth cluster examines the effects of rapid urbanization processes on land use and spatial transformations. Urban 438 sprawl, transformation scenarios, and adaptation planning are analyzed within this cluster. The eleventh cluster focuses on processes such as social learning, knowledge co-production, and participatory governance. These concepts highlight the social and cultural dimensions of urban resilience. The twelfth cluster examines the creation of resilient cities in the context of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Integrated planning and policy alignment, particularly Goal 11, are addressed within this framework. The thirteenth cluster encompasses approaches based on urban nature, biodiversity, and ecological restoration. Nature-friendly urban design and habitat conservation are at the heart of this cluster. The fourteenth cluster assesses resilience building through local government institutional capacities, policy integration, and planning tools. The fifteenth cluster covers smart city technologies, real-time monitoring, and data-driven planning tools. This cluster is important in the context of monitoring vulnerabilities and rapid response capacities. The sixteenth cluster deals with the intersection of climate finance, sustainable economic tools, and public-private partnerships with resilience policies. 3.9. Co-authorship of Authors Analysis Co-authorship analysis is particularly important for understanding the structure of academic collaborations and leading researcher clusters. The analysis was conducted based on the criterion that each author had at least three publications, and it was found that 137 authors, grouped into 18 clusters, had a total of 546 connections and 324 links (Figure 10). The most productive co-authors were Ayyoob Sharifi (n=59), Sara Meerow (N016), Jon Coaffee (n=15), Leire Labaka (n=14), and Niki Frantzeskaki (n=14). 439 According to the co-authorship network, Ayyoob Sharifi is at the center of the network in terms of both the number of publications and the number of connections, collaborating with a large number of different clusters and demonstrating a global interdisciplinary research profile. While authors such as Frantzeskaki and McPhearson specialize in nature-based solutions and urban transition themes, Asian-based researchers such as Yamagata and Wang focus particularly on sustainability, energy efficiency, and technological urbanization. The clustering seen in the map shows that, despite intensive interdisciplinary collaboration, certain thematic groups still remain largely within their own networks. When evaluated in terms of time scale, it can be seen that Asia-centered collaborations have increased in recent years and that these groups have strengthened their position in the scientific literature. Figure 10. Co-authorship links 440 3.10. Citation of Authors Analysis This author citation analysis map visualizes authors who are frequently cited together in the research field. Each point represents an author, and the size of the points represents the frequency of citations. The lines between the points show the frequency with which authors appear together in the same bibliography (co-citation strength). Based on the criterion that each author must have at least 3 publications and 3 citations, the map shows that 531 authors, grouped into 29 clusters, have formed 6380 connections (Figure 11). Sharifi, Ayyoob, who stands out in the map, is positioned as a central figure in the field with strong connection density and large node size. Authors such as Frantzeskaki, Niki, Meerow, Sara, Pelling, Mark, and Labaka, Leire, who surround him, are also other important names that are highly co-cited in the literature and can therefore be evaluated within a common paradigm or thematic context. The color distribution on the map reflects the distribution of cited works by year, showing that authors such as Sharifi had a concentrated influence prior to 2018, while authors such as Wang, Yifei, Cavan, and Gina have come to the fore in more recent works. This analysis contributes to mapping the intellectual structure of the field while also providing important insights into the key reference authors and emerging research clusters that the knowledge base focuses on. 441 Figure 11. Author-citation connections 3.11. Bibliographic Coupling of Authors Analysis This bibliographic connection map reveals the intellectual proximity in the literature by visualizing the extent to which documents are connected to each other through common references (Figure 12). According to the analysis, studies such as Meerow (2016), de Jong (2015), Elmqvist (2019), and Frantzeskaki (2019) stand out as the cornerstones of the field in terms of both size and connection density. These documents share similar sources that are frequently cited in the literature and, in this respect, shape the fundamental theoretical background of the field. The color spectrum reflects the years of publication: purple documents are from 2016 and earlier, while those transitioning to yellow are more recent publications. In this context, it can be seen that recent publications such as Liu (2022), Hong (2021), and Ntounis (2022) build on this intellectual heritage by establishing strong links with the existing literature. Overall, the analysis 442 demonstrates the temporal and structural positioning of key documents in the field, clearly revealing the direction of information flow and which studies have played a central role. Figure 12. Bibliographic coupling of authors 4. Conclusion and Suggestions This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis aimed at mapping the structural and thematic landscape of the urban resilience literature. The analysis of the 3.996 publications obtained from the Web of Science database through keyword co-occurrences, author collaborations, country contributions, and citation patterns has made it possible to reveal the multidimensional nature of the subject. The data obtained demonstrate which concepts dominate the literature. It also demonstrates how these concepts are grouped, how they have evolved over time, and how collaborative networks have been established among academics. The general concept of the article reveals that the concept of urban resilience is not merely a technical planning tool; it is also strongly intertwined with areas such as social equality, governance, digitalization, 443 and ecological sustainability. In particular, the emergence of key concepts such as “green infrastructure,” “climate justice,” “machine learning,” and “adaptive governance” in distinct clusters shows that urban resilience is currently being addressed within both a normative and technological conceptual framework. Thematic clusters in the literature clearly reveal the contributions of different disciplines; however, it is also evident that knowledge production is highly concentrated in some areas, while research gaps remain in others. For example, while there are strong accumulations in areas such as disaster risk management, nature-based solutions, and green infrastructure, the literature is still in its infancy in newly emerging areas such as energy justice, climate finance, and data-driven governance. This situation indicates that urban resilience studies will diversify and develop further in the coming period. The concept of urban resilience first appeared in the literature in the early 2000s, particularly in the context of disaster management and infrastructure planning. Studies conducted during this period focused largely on reducing the fragility of physical and structural systems (e.g., transportation, energy, and water infrastructure). Early studies, such as those by Godschalk (2003) and Cutter et al. (2008), discussed how cities could be made safer against natural disasters and proposed “safe-to-fail” systems instead of “fail-safe” ones. During these years, urban resilience was primarily addressed as a reactive and protective planning strategy. Starting in the 2010s, the concept began to be addressed in a more holistic and systemic manner, with themes such as ecological resilience, social vulnerability, and governance coming to the forefront. Authors such as 450 using large-scale mobility data. Nature Communications, 12(1), 1870. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22160-w. Jabareen, Y. (2013). Planning the resilient city: Concepts and strategies for coping with climate change and environmental risk. Cities, 31, 220229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.05.004. Kabisch, N., Korn, H., Stadler, J., & Bonn, A. (Eds.). (2017). Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas: Linkages between science, policy and practice. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56091-5. Kim, D., & Lim, U. (2016). Urban resilience in climate change adaptation: A conceptual framework. Sustainability, 8(4), 405. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040405. Leichenko, R. (2011). Climate change and urban resilience. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3), 164-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.014. Liao, K. H. (2012). A theory on urban resilience to floods – A basis for alternative planning practices. Ecology and Society, 17(4), 48. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05231-170448. McPhearson, T., Andersson, E., Elmqvist, T., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2015). Resilience of and through urban ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 12, 152-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.07.012. Meerow, S., Newell, J. P., & Stults, M. (2016). Defining urban resilience: A review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 147, 38–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011. Meerow, S., & Newell, J. P. (2019). Urban resilience for whom, what, when, where, and why? Urban Geography, 40(3), 309-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2016.1206395. Ntounis, N., Parker, C., Skinner, H., Steadman, C., & Warnaby, G. (2022). Tourism and Hospitality industry resilience during the Covid-19 pandemic: Evidence from England. Current Issues in Tourism, 25(1), 46-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2021.1883556. Pelling, M. (2010). Adaptation to Climate Change: From Resilience to Transformation (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203889046. 451 Pickett, S. T., Cadenasso, M. L., & Grove, J. M. (2004). Resilient cities: meaning, models, and metaphor for integrating the ecological, socioeconomic, and planning realms. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69(4), 369-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.035. Ribeiro, P. J. G., & Gonçalves, L. A. P. J. (2019). Urban resilience: A conceptual framework. Sustainable Cities and Society, 50, 101625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101625. Sharifi, A., & Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: Impacts on cities and major lessons for urban planning, design, and management. Science of the Total Environment, 749, 142391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142391. Shamshiripour, A., Rahimi, E., Shabanpour, R., & Mohammadian, A. K. (2020). How is COVID-19 reshaping activity-travel behavior? Evidence from a comprehensive survey in Chicago. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 7, 100216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100216. van Eck, N.J., Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84, 523–538 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3. Ziervogel, G., Archer van Garderen, E., & Price, P. (2016). Strengthening the knowledge–policy interface through co-production of a climate adaptation plan: leveraging opportunities in Bergrivier Municipality, South Africa. Environment and Urbanization, 28(2), 455-474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247816647340. 452 Prof. Dr. Pervin YEŞİL E-mail: [email protected] Educational Status: Doktora License: Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 1998 Degree: Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, 2002 Doctorate: Atatürk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, 2009 Professional experiences: Araştırma Görevlisi: Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 2001-2008. Doktor Öğretim Üyesi: Ordu Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 2013-2018 Doçent: Ordu Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 2018-2024 Profesör: Ordu Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 2024-… Assist. Prof. Dr. Mesut GÜZEL E-mail: [email protected] Educational Status: Doktora License: İstanbul Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 2017 Degree: İstanbul Üniversitesi-Cerrahpaşa Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, 2020 Doctorate: Ordu Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı, 2024 Professional experiences: 2019-2025: Araştırma Görevlisi, Ordu Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü Doktor Öğretim Üyesi: Ordu Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü, 2025-…