---

History and Structure of Water in Istanbul

Istanbul, the largest city in Turkey, is a prominent example of a civilisation that has thrived due to its proximity to bodies of water. Situated on the Bosphorus strait, which connects the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara, Istanbul’s strategic location has made it a hub for trade, culture, and history. Despite being surrounded by water, the city struggled with freshwater scarcity, a challenge deeply intertwined with its remarkable history as the capital of three successive empires—Roman, Byzantine, and Ottoman (Soylu, 2024). Since its founding, Istanbul has depended on repeated efforts to reassemble its water infrastructure to meet the demand for centuries. The Romans transported water to the city instead of situating the city near a water source. This decision set a precedent to view water supply development as an ongoing process to maintain viability.

General Structure of Water Policies in Istanbul

Istanbul’s water policies are primarily managed through a top-down approach, with several key institutions playing crucial roles:

1. Istanbul Water and Sewerage Administration (İSKİ): Established as an autonomous entity, İSKİ is responsible for planning, designing, constructing, and operating water supply and sewerage services in the greater Istanbul metropolitan area. It serves as a model for water and sewerage administration for other metropolitan municipalities in Turkey.
2. State Hydraulic Works (DSİ): This is the main bureaucracy responsible for water governance at the national level. DSİ oversees the planning, construction, and operation of water-related structures throughout Turkey, including dams, hydroelectric power plants, and irrigation systems.
3. Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs: This ministry oversees national water policies and strategies, including the Turkish Water Institute (SUEN), which acts as a think tank for developing short- and long-term water management strategies.
4. Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality: Works in conjunction with İSKİ to implement water policies and projects at the local level.

The general structure of water policies in Istanbul reflects a centralised approach, with national institutions like DSİ setting overarching policies, while local entities like İSKİ implement and manage these policies at the city level.

History of Water Infrastructure in Istanbul

The management and transformation of water infrastructure in Istanbul for “modernisation” began in the late 19th century, marking a significant shift in the city’s approach to water supply and distribution. This period saw the introduction of new technologies and management practices to improve the efficiency and reach of Istanbul’s water systems. However, the complete centralization of water management under a single authoritative body did not occur until after the foundation of the Turkish Republic in 1923. The foundation of the state marked a significant shift from the fragmented, often waqf-based water management systems of the Ottoman period to a more centralised, state-controlled approach with infrastructural developments, including the construction of water facilities and the acquisition and municipalisation of privileged water companies, marking an end to a concession period that covered the last fifty years of the Ottoman era and the first decade of the Republic (Soylu, 2024). This transition set the stage for a public organisational phase lasting from the 1930s through the 1980s. 

In the early 1980s, post-military coup, Istanbul underwent significant administrative changes, including expanding its jurisdiction and reorganising water and sewage services under the newly established Istanbul Water and Sewerage Administration (İSKİ), as per Law No. 2560. Water and Sewerage administrations were tasked with providing drinking, utility, and industrial water within metropolitan administrative boundaries, encompassing water supply from source to consumer, treatment, network management, wastewater collection, treatment, and all necessary operations. The enactment of Law No. 3009 in 1983 marked a significant legal reform under the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM), allowing the private sector to participate in the provision of drinking water and sewage services alongside public entities. It initially enabled İSKİ in Istanbul to secure a minimum profit margin of 10% from water services (Ilhan, 2017). It later extended this model to include water and sewage services in other metropolitan areas (Soylu, 2024).

The 1990s saw a critical peak in water scarcity due to drought and inadequate investment (Doygun, 2022), prompting the city to adopt desperate measures such as importing water. İSKİ adopted a city-wide water supply system to plan according to the increasing demand in 1999. Small landowners capitalized on the opportunity to sell water extracted from their wells, giving rise to an underground water-selling market by law no (Güvenç, 2017). This period also saw the implementation of regulations to standardise water transportation for public health, resulting in the growth of the bottled water industry into one of Turkey’s largest sectors. The second phase of the DAMOC projects, which included the Alibeyköy, Sazlıdere, and Büyükçekmece reservoirs, was completed during this period. In 1999, İSKİ’s Greater Istanbul Drinking Water Project master plan (fig.1) revealed a critical shortage of perennial water sources within the city limits. To address this deficit and support Istanbul’s rapidly growing population, which had surpassed 10 million, water began to be diverted from nearby basins such as the Istranca Creeks and the Melen River. The Bosphorus crossings have unified the water systems of both the European and Asian sides, including the transitions at Salacak-Sarayburnu and the islands. The water system now operates integrated transfers between the two sides, allowing the capacities of both shores to be shared. This shift towards sourcing water from outside the city’s immediate vicinity marked a significant change in Istanbul’s water management strategy, reflecting the increasing challenges of meeting the water demands of a rapidly expanding metropolis.

Today, Istanbul relies on nearby lakes, dams, and basins for 72% of its tap water. However, with a population exceeding 16 million, these sources are insufficient. The Big Melen Project aims to address this demand but remains incomplete. This dam is outside of Istanbul’s city borders. The city’s water needs are primarily planned to be sourced by th Big Melen Project, in which only the 1st phase is completed. While the Big Melen Project is still in progress, Istanbul’s water resources are facing increasing pressure from large-scale infrastructure projects like the Canal İstanbul and Istanbul Airport. In 2018, the Turkish Parliament passed legislation that brought projects like the Canal Istanbul under the build-operate-transfer model, potentially accelerating their implementation despite environmental concerns (Kara, 2021). New Istanbul Airport (2016), along with Yavuz Sultan Selim bridge and the Northern Marmara motorway has been planned and build in the northern side of the city, attracting further expansion to the north, and further stressing Istanbul’s green reserves.

In statements released as part of positive communication campaigns by the Turkish Ministry of Communications, it has been argued that the completion of the Melen Project can compensate for any potential loss of water resources due to projects like the Canal Istanbul. Additionally, officials assert that the Sazlıdere and Terkos dams account for only 3% of Istanbul’s total water reserves. Yet the possible environmental impact on watershed areas and surrounding settlements is unknown.

The Canal Istanbul is a proposed mega-project that threatens Istanbul’s already strained water resources and ecology. Announced in January 2018, the route of the canal will begin at Küçükçekmece Lake in the south, pass through Sazlıbosna Reservoir, and continue 500 meters east of Terkos Lake, ultimately connecting to the Black Sea between Yeniköy and Karaburun in the north. This affects 3 major water reservoirs in use and will open over 10,000 hectares for urban development but at a significant environmental cost. The project is expected to attract at least an additional 1.2 million people, exacerbating current urbanisation pressures on the Sazlıdere, Terkos, and Küçükçekmece basins (İlhan, 2021). This will necessitate the construction of additional reservoirs. The project risks deforestation—cutting nearly 400,000 trees—and will destroy 17% of Istanbul’s agricultural land and 24% of its pastures (Adanalı et al., 2021). Losing their habitats, the native species of fisheries and birds along floodplains will be displaced during the construction of the channel as well (Doğa Derneği, 2020). These changes will worsen ecological pressures on water resources already strained by urban growth and other large-scale infrastructure projects like Istanbul Airport.

Effects of Water Policies on Local Communities

While these urban-scale, high-cost development projects on water basins are publicly debated, this discussion more often dismisses their effects on the lives of local communities on the basins. This report aims to document the problems and challenges faced in community life due to top-down water policies by narrating the stories of people living through the transformation of water basins.

This section of the report focuses on the narratives of residents living on the proposed route of the Canal Istanbul Project, which includes both rural and urban settlements around 3 major lakes, waterways, and coastal areas. The report is based on field research conducted through August/ September 2024 and a literature review of resident statements on various reports and media. The field research has been conducted as face-to-face interviews with nine community leaders, NGO representatives and village leaders and informal/unrecorded interviews in 7 villages around Terkos and Küçükçekmece Lakes. Various interviews conducted with residents in documentary films, news and printed press between 2018 and 2024 are also used as sources. An extensive report on the narratives of residents in the Canal Istanbul Project area is the “Canal Istanbul Report” of Mekanda Adalet Derneği, which was conducted in 2020. Open-source Interviews of MAD’s report have also been referred to in this report.

Shown in Figure 2 is a mapping of community problems based on statements of sources from field research and literature review. The map documents the spatial distribution of community problems based on human stories. Through the interviews, sources were asked “where” the transformation occurs. The map aims to visualise the spatial reflection of the transformation of basic daily practices traced in the personal stories.

Based on the outcomes of the mapping exercise, the effects of transformation on community life and daily practice are categorised into four basic thematic caps; i) transformation of rural economy, ii) loss of recreational spaces and community interaction, iii) Land speculation and displacement, iv) Sense of belonging and lack of trust to the authorities.

Conclusion

The interviews along the Canal Istanbul route depict how shifts in water policies, particularly those associated with the proposed Canal Istanbul project, are profoundly affecting community relations in the areas surrounding the project’s intended path. The looming threat of displacement caused by the project creates fear among residents, leading to strained community relations. People are worried about losing their homes, livelihoods, and the social connections they have built over generations.. This uncertainty breeds resentment and suspicion, as some residents may benefit from rising property values while others face the prospect of being forced out. Differing opinions on the Canal Istanbul project have created divisions within communities. Some residents, particularly those involved in real estate, see the project as an opportunity for economic growth and prosperity. Others, however, view it as a threat to their environment, livelihoods, and way of life. These opposing viewpoints create tension and conflict, eroding the social cohesion that previously existed.

The lack of transparency and clear communication from authorities regarding the project has eroded trust between residents and those in power. The absence of reliable information about relocation plans, compensation, and the project’s overall impact fuels speculation and rumours, leading to further division and mistrust. The changes brought about by shifts in water policies, such as dam construction and potential water diversions associated with the Canal Istanbul project, have disrupted traditional lifestyles and community practices centred around water resources.

The pollution of Küçükçekmece Lake, once a source of livelihood and recreation, serves as a poignant example of how altered water policies can negatively impact communities. The potential destruction of agricultural lands and meadows further threatens the livelihoods of farmers and livestock breeders, potentially forcing them to abandon their traditional ways of life. This disruption of established practices can lead to social and economic upheaval, undermining community stability.

The influx of investors and developers seeking to capitalise on the Canal Istanbul project has led to real estate speculation and rising property values. This influx of capital can change the demographic makeup of communities, leading to gentrification and displacement of long-time residents. These changes can create resentment and conflict between newcomers and established residents, as well as within communities as residents grapple with the economic and social implications of these transformations.

The destruction of natural areas and community spaces associated with water resources, such as lakeshores and meadows, further isolates residents and diminishes opportunities for social interaction. The potential displacement of residents can also scatter communities, severing social ties that have provided support and a sense of belonging. This loss of community cohesion can exacerbate feelings of alienation and powerlessness in the face of large-scale development projects.

The modernisation process in Turkey has amplified socio-environmental inequalities through centralised, technology-driven, market-oriented, and construction-focused water governance approaches. These methods prioritise large-scale infrastructure projects over community-centred solutions, disrupting ecosystems and marginalising vulnerable populations. The narratives of sources in this report paint a picture of communities grappling with the far-reaching consequences of changing water policies. The proposed Canal Istanbul project, in particular, has emerged as a catalyst for heightened anxieties, divisions, and disruptions in the social fabric of the affected areas. These changes underscore the profound impact that decisions regarding water management can have on the lives and relationships of those who depend on these vital resources. To address the socio-environmental challenges posed by Istanbul’s water governance, inclusive policies prioritising community resilience and environmental sustainability are essential.