Gated Communities in Ankara, Turkey: Park Renaissance Residences as a Reaction to Fear of Crime

Abstract

Gated communities have become a major subject in the related literature with their development as a new way of life with an increasing element of isolation on space and evaluated through demand-and supply-side discussions originating from the reasons of their emergence in the big cities, further criticized as a reflection of income polarisation and segregation.

 

The research makes a brief discussion on the reasons behind the development of gated communities based on a literature survey and case study analysis in Park Renaissance Residences in Ankara, proving the fact that the primary reason is the fear of crime, followed by lifestyle the gated communities present for the higher-income groups preferring to live in a unique community order in the case of Park Renaissance Residences altough this example cannot give the signs of a community like their European counterparts.

 

Keywords: Gated communities, security, Ankara, polarisation

Keywords

• Gated communities, security, Ankara, polarisation

References

1. Blakely, E.J., Snyder, M.G., “Fortress America, Gated Communities in the United States”, Brookings Institution Pres, Washington D.C. (1997a).
2. Low, S., “Behind the Gates, Life, Security, and the Pursuit of Happiness in Fortress America”, Routledge, New York (2003).
3. Hook, D., Vrdoljak, M., “Gated communities, heterotopia and a “rights” of privilege: a ‘heterotopology’ of the the South African security park”, Geoforum, 33 (2): 195-219 (2002).
4. Musterd, S., Priemus, H., Van Kepmen, R., “Towards undivided cities: The potential of economic redifferentiation”, Housing Studies, 14 (5): 573-584 (1999). and housing
5. MacLeod, G., “Privatizing the city? The tentative push towards edge urban developments and agted communities in the United Kingdom”, International Centre for Regional Regeneration and Development Studies (ICRRDS), University of Durham, England (2003). [6] Atkinson, R., Blandy, S., “Introduction:
6. International perspectives on the new enclavism and
7. the rise of gated communities”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 177-186 (2005).
8. Luymes, D., “The fortification of suburbia: investigating the rise of enclave communities”, Landscape and Urban Planning, 39: 187-203 (1997).

9. Brandau, B., Schickert, H., Jablonka, P., “Resimlerle Troya”, Arkadaş Yayınevi, Ankara (2004).
10. Rona, Z., “Kent mi, Köy Mü?, Orta ve Geç Bizans Anadolu’sunda Konut ve Yerleşme”, Tarih Vakfı Yayınları, İstanbul: 221-233 (1996).
11. Blandy, S., Lister, D., “Gated communities: (Ne)gating community development”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 287-301 (2005).
12. Grant, J., “Planning responses to gated communities in Canada”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 273-285 (2005).
13. Salcedo, R., Torres, A., “Gated communities in Santiago: Wall or frontier?”, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28 (1): 27-44 (2004).
14. Blakely, E.J., Snyder, M.G., “Putting up the Gates”, Shelterforce Online, May-June (1997b).
15. Atkinson, R., Flint, J., “Fortress UK? Gated communities, the spatial revolt of the elites and time-space trajectories of segregation”, Housing Studies, 19 (6): 875-892 (2004).
16. Roitman, S., “Who segregates whom? The analysis of a gated community in Mendoza, Argentina”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 303-321 (2005).
17. McKenzie, E., “Constructing the Pomerium in Las Vegas: A case study of emerging trends in American gated communities”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 187- 203 (2005).
18. Le Goix, R., “Gated communities: Sprawl and social segregation in Southern California”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 323-343 (2005).
19. Leisch, H., “Gated communities in Indenosia”, Cities, 16 (5): 341-350 (2002).
20. El Nasser, H., “Gated communities more popular, and not just for the rich”, USA Today (2003).
21. Glasze, G., “Some reflections on the economic and political organisation of private neighborhoods”, Housing Studies, 20 (2): 221-233 (2005).
22. Soja, E. S., “Postmetropolis, Critical Studies of Cities and Regions”, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford and Massachusetts (2000).
23. Shamir, R., “Without borders? Notes on globalization as a mobility regime”, Sociological Theory, 23 (2): 197-217 (2005).
24. Allen, J., Massey, D., Pryke, M., “Understanding Cities, Unsettling Cities”, Routledge, London and New York (1999).
25. CHW, “Why we oppose gated communities in Worcester” (2003).
26. Brannen, J., “Mixing Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Research”, Aldershot, Avebury (1992).
27. Bryman, A., “Quantity and Quality in Social Research”, Unwin Hyman, London (1988).
28. Robinson, G.M., “Methods and Techniques in Human Geography”, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1998).
29. Hürriyet, “Asayiş suçları % 57 arttı”, 14 Aralık: 2. (2006).