A Lifestyle Contrary to Globalization “Cittaslow”: Seferihisar Sample

Abstract

The formation of sustainable habitats and the preservation of these occurrences are considered as a phenomenon that contrasts with globalization. While the conservation of local heritage is aimed at cittaslows, globalization aims at a constant change. At this point; it is necessary to accept the difficulty of building new cittaslows and protecting existing ones as our time is the age of globalization.  In spite of this hallenge, the cittaslow approach is a kind that aims to preserve the original values of cities in the face of globalization and to provide more habitable living spaces. This approach should aimed at in spite of the greatest obstacle of globalization against it. From this point of view, the study first tried to determine conceptual framework by making literature studies about the concept of "cittaslow" which contradicts the essence of globalization. Later on, studies on the cittaslow Seferihisar, which received the title of "the first cittaslow" of our country, were examined.  Seferihisar’s current resistance to globalization and how much resistance it can show in the following processes were tried to be analysed, the problems in this regard were questioned and suggestions were made. It has been emphasized in the last part of the study, that Seferihisar District, which has completed the first phase of being a member of a cittaslow union, needs more municipal- citizen integration in order to maintain its title as a cittaslow, to protect the locality and to avoid being lost in the globalization cycle.

Keywords

• Cittaslow,Seferihisar,Sustainability

Küreselleşmeye Aykırı Bir Yaşam Biçimi “Sakin Kentler”: Seferihisar Örneği

Abstract

Sürdürülebilir yaşam alanlarının oluşumu ve bu oluşumların korunması süreci küreselleşme ile zıtlık içeren bir olgu olarak kabul edilmektedir. Sakin kentlerde yerel mirası korumayı hedeflerken, küreselleşme sürekli bir değişimi amaçlamaktadır. Bu noktada; çağımızın küreselleşme çağı olduğu gerçeğinden hareketle yeni sakin kentler oluşturmak ve var olan sakin kentleri koruyabilmenin zorluğunu kabul etmek gerekir. Bu zorluğa rağmen sakin kent yaklaşımı; küreselleşme karşısında kentlerin özgün değerlerini koruyan ve daha yaşanılabilir yaşam alanlarını amaçlayan bir yaklaşımdır. Bu yaklaşım, önündeki en büyük engel olan küreselleşmeye rağmen amaçlanmalıdır. Bu noktada çalışmada ilk olarak küreselleşmenin özüne aykırı olan “sakin kent” kavramı ile ilgili literatür çalışmaları yapılarak kavramsal çerçeve belirlenmeye çalışılmıştır. Daha sonra ülkemizin “ilk sakin kenti” unvanını alan Seferihisar ilçesinin sakin kente yönelik çalışmaları incelenerek, ilçenin küreselleşmeye karşı mevcut direnci ve sonraki süreçlerdeki ne kadar direnebileceği analiz edilmeye, sorunlar sorgulanmaya ve önerilerde bulunulmaya çalışılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuç bölümünde özellikle sakin kent birliğine üye olmakla başlayan ilk aşamayı tamamlayan Seferihisar ilçesinin, aldığı sakin kent ünvanını devam ettirebilmek için bundan sonraki süreçte yereli korumak, küreselleşme döngüsünde kaybolmamak adına daha fazla belediye-vatandaş bütünleşmesine ihtiyacı olacağı noktasına vurgu yapılmıştır.

Keywords

• Sakin Kent,Seferihisar,Sürdürülebilirlik

References

1. Bil, E. ve Yılmaz, F. (2017). Sakin ada Gökçeada örneğinde ekoturizm. Erzincan Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Özel Sayı (4), 157-172.
2. Billig, M. (2005). Sense of place in the neighborhood, in locations of urban revitalization. GeoJournal, 64(2), 117-130.
3. Broadway, M. (2015). Implementing the slow life in southwest Ireland, a case study of clonakilty and local food. Geographical Review 105 (2), 216-234.
4. Calthorpe, P. ve Fulton,W. (2001). The regional city, planning for the end of sprawl. Washington, Island Press.
5. Carp, J. (2012). Environmental reviews and case studies, the Town's Abuzz, collaborative opportunities for environmental professionals in the Slow City movement. Environmental Practice 14 (2), 130-142.
6. http://www.cittaslow.org/content/how-become (Erişim Tarihi: 25.03.2018).
7. https://www.cittaslowgoolwa.com.au/cittaslow-charter/what-cittaslow (Erişim Tarihi: 25.03.2018).
8. www.cnnturk.com (Erişim Tarihi:14.03.2018).

9. Çoban, Ö. ve Harman, S. (2016). Yavaş şehir (Cıttaslow) Türkiye ağı’na üye olan şehirlerin internet sitelerinde yavaş şehir temasının görünürlüğü üzerine bir araştırma, İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(2), 235-253.
10. Dreher, A., Gaston, N., ve Martens, P. (2008). Measuring globalisation: Gauging its consequences. Springer Science & Business Media.
11. Ekinci, M. B. (2014). The cittaslow philosophy in the context of sustainable tourism development; the case of Turkey. Tourism Management, 41, 178-189.
12. Elovich, M. A. (2012). Becoming cittaslow, a city's journey to becoming A cittaslow member. (Yayınlanmamış yüksek Lisans Tezi). California Polytechnic State University: California
13. Grzelak-Kostulska, Elżbieta, Hołowiecka, B. ve Kwiatkowski, G. (2011). Cit-taslow international network, an example of a globalization idea?. In the scale of globalization. think globally, act locally, change invididually in the 21st century, 186-192. Ostrava: University of Ostrava.
14. Hatipoglu, B. (2015). Cittaslow: Quality of life and visitor experiences. Tourism Planning & Development, 12(1), 20-36.
15. Heitmann, S., Robinson, P. ve Povey, G. (2011). 9 slow food, slow cities and slow tourism. Research Themes for Tourism, CABI, 114.
16. International network of cities where living is good. Cittaslow movement. www.cittaslow.org (Erişim Tarihi: 25.12.2016).
17. Knox, P. L. (2005). Creating ordinary places, slow cities in a fast world. Journal of Urban Design 10 (1), 1-11.
18. Küçükaltan, E. G. ve Pirnar, I. (2016). Competitiveness factors of a tourism destination and impact on residents' quality of life: The case of Cittaslow-Seferihisar. Journal of Tourism, Heritage & Services Marketing, 2(1), 22-2.
19. Lowry, L. L. ve Lee, M. (2011). CittaSlow, slow cities, slow food: Searching for a model for the development of slow tourism. Travel- Tourism Research Asso-ciation, 42nd Annual Conference Proceedings: Seeing the Forest and The Trees–Big Picture Research İn A Detail-Driven World.
20. Mudurnu Belediyesi Cittaslow Özel. (2018). Mudurnu Belediyesi Yayını, 18 (8).
21. Miele, M. (2008). Cittáslow: Producing slowness against the fast life. Space and Polity 12 (1), 135-156.
22. New Economics Foundation. (2004). Clone town Britain: The loss of local identity on the nation’s high streets. London, UK: New Economics Foundation.
23. Park, E., ve Kim, S. (2016). The potential of Cittaslow for sustainable tourism development: Enhancing local community's empowerment. Tourism Plan-ning-Development 13 (3), 351-369. Parkins, W. ve Craig, G. (2006). Slow living. London: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
24. Pink, S. (2008). Sense and sustainability, the case of the slow city movement. Local Environment 13 (2), 95-106.
25. Presenza, A., Abbate, T. ve Alibrandi, A. (2014). From conservation to valorization of heritage assets: The contribution of cittaslow certification. HTHIC, 195.
26. Radstrom, S. (2011). A place sustaining framework for local urban identity, an introduction and history of Cittaslow. Italian Journal of Planning Practice 1. (1), 90-113.
27. Rennen, W., ve Martens, P. (2003). The globalisation timeline. Integrated Assessment, 4(3), 137-144.
28. Robertson, R. (2012). Globalisation or glocalisation?. Journal of International Communication, 18(2), 191-208.
29. Salazar, N. B. (2010). The glocalisation of heritage through tourism. In Sophia Labadi & Colin Long (Eds.), Heritage and globalisation, (pp131-145). New York, NY: Routledge Seferihisar Belediyesi Verileri (Erişim Tarihi: 19.06.2017).
30. Semmens, J., ve Freeman, C. (2012). The value of Cittaslow as an approach to local sustainable development, a New Zealand perspective. International Planning Studies 17 (4), 353-375.
31. Servon, L. J., ve Pink, S. (2015). Cittaslow: Going glocal in Spain. Journal of Urban Affairs 37 (3), 327-340.
32. Su, W.-S., Huang, C.H., Hsu, C.C. ve Chang, L.F. (2017). Cittaslow: A new pat-tern of sustainable tourism development in Taiwan. International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online) 9 (4), 90-103.
33. www.tuık.gov.tr (Erişim Tarihi: 20.11.2017).
34. www.yesilcevre.gov.tr (Erişim Tarihi: 20.11.2017).
35. Yurtseven, H. R. ve Karakaş, N. (2013). Creating a sustainable gastronomic destination: The case of cittaslow Gokceada-Turkey. American International Journal of Contemporary Research 3(3), 91-100.