The purpose of this study is to test the validity of the social capital knowledge that belongs to the local business community as an instrument for the formation of the initial strategies of urban transformation and to test the effect of independent variables in the formation of such social capital. This study takes as its point of departure the recently increasing interest in the role of social capital in planning and development, and the need for access to embedded knowledge in the sites of urban transformation. The lack of field data makes managing implementations of urban transformation difficult, and these implementations are not supported by appropriate policies. It is important to study this issue in İstanbul, which is going through the process of urban transformation and harbors a variety of resources for social capital due to its unique conditions. The hypothesis of this study, which aims to contribute to research being conducted in the field, is that the levels of security, belonging, awareness, and expectations inherent in social capital can change according to the profile of the small business community and according to the characteristics of the physical capital in sites of urban transformation. In this study, conducted in 2012, data from the neighborhood of Çeliktepe were collected using ‘mixed methods social research.’
Social capital, local networks, small businesses, urban transformation, mixed methods social research
 Granovetter, M., The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), pp. 1360–1380, 1973. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/225469
 Granovetter, M., Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness, American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), pp. 481–510, 1985. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228311
 Castells, M., The Rise of the Network Society: The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture, John Wiley & Sons, 500 pp., 2010.
 Bourdieu, P., The forms of capital. Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, ed. J.G. Richardson, Greenwood Press: New York, pp. 241–258, 1986.
 Coleman, J., Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 94, pp. 95–120, 1998. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228943
 Putnam, R.D., The Prosperous Community: Social Capital and Public Life The American Prospect, Vol. 13, Routlegde: UK, pp. 35–42, 1993.
 Fukuyama, F., Social capital and civil society and development. Third World Quarterly, 22(1), pp. 7–20, 2001. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713701144
 Uphoff, N., Understanding social capital: learning from the analysis and experience of participation. Social Capital: A Multifaceted Perspective, eds. P. Dasgupta & I. Serageldin, The World Bank: Washington, DC, pp. 215–254, 2000.
 Grootaert, C. & Bastelaer, T., Conclusion: measuring impact and drawing policy implications. The Role of Social Capital in Development: An Empirical Assessment, eds. C. Grootaert & T. Bastelaer, Cambridge University Press, pp. 341–351, 2008. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511492600.013
 Glaeser, E.L., Laibson, D. & Sacerdota, B., An economic approach to social capital. The Economic Journal, 112(November), pp. 437–458, 2002. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00078
 Mayer, M., The onward sweep of the social capital: understanding cities, communities and urban movements. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(1), pp. 108–130, 2003. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00435
 Raco, M. & Tunney, E., Visibilities and invisibilities in urban development: small business communities and the London Olympics 2012. Urban Studies, 47(10), pp. 2069–2091, 2010. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042098009357351
 Mehta, G., Redeveloping while preserving the social capital neighborhoods: the case of Dharavi, Mumbai. Made in Şişhane, ed. Aslı Kıyak İngin, Istanbul, pp. 62–77, 2011.
 Çekic-Inal, T. & Okten, A.N., Re-evaluation of rural development problematic in the context of social capital. Megaron, 4(3), pp. 203–213, 2009.
 Altınok, E., Yasadışı Yapılaşan Alanlarda Dönüştürme Kapasitelerinin Tükenişi ve Kentsel Yoksulluk-Çeliktepe Örneği, Unpublished Master’s Thesis, YTÜ, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences, İstanbul, 2006.
 Turkish Act 6306 on Transformation of Areas under Disaster Risk, Official Bulletin No: 28309, May 31, 2012.
 Hewson, C., Mixed methods. The Sage Dictionary of Social Research Methods, ed. V. Jupp, Sage Publication: London, pp. 179–180, 2006. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9780857020116
 Onwuegbuzie, A. & Leech, N.L., Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedure. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), pp. 474–498, 2006.
 Anderson, A., Park, J. & Jack, S., Entrepreneurial social capital: conceptualizing social capital in new high tech firms. International Small Business Review, 25(3), pp. 245–272, 2007. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0266242607076526
 Driscoll, D.L., Appiah-Yeboah, A., Salib, P.J. & Rupert, D., Merging qualitative and quantitative data in mixed research: how to and why not? Ecological and Environmental Anthropology, 3(1), pp. 19–28, 2007.
 Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L., Gutmann, M.L. & Hanson, W.E., Advanced mixed methods research designs. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 209–240, 2003.
 Creswell, J., Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches, Sage: London, p. 21, 2009.
 Field, J., Sosyal Sermaye (Social Capital), trans. B. Bilgen & B. S¸en, İstanbul Bilgi University Publishing: İstanbul, 2008.
 Johnson, B.R. & Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), pp. 14–26, 2004. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0013189x033007014
 Ozcevik, O. & Tan, P., Do we have the right toolbox? A process of mixed-methods: a research case from an urban transformation site in İstanbul. WIT Transactions in Ecology and the Environment, 179, pp. 437–450, 2013. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2495/sc130371