Research Article

Examining the Symbolic Landscapes in the Context of Sustainable Culture

Volume: 4 Number: 2 December 25, 2019
EN TR

Examining the Symbolic Landscapes in the Context of Sustainable Culture

Abstract

A society with a culture of sustainability perceives urban culture more intensely, and a culture of sustainability could also develop more easily in societies that strongly perceive the urban culture. On sustainability of urban spaces, the relationship between physical, sociocultural and psychological sub-components is effective. Therefore, environmental organizations that allow cultural sustainability are very important in preventing the alienation of the members of the society to each other and the space and creating cultural diversity. Contemporary cities and spaces are defined and characterized by symbolic references. The present study focused on the concepts of cultural sustainability and symbolic landscape. The primary aim of the present study was to investigate the physical (activity and space) interaction of cultural change in symbolic landscapes and satisfaction with the spaces.

Initially, a survey was conducted with 18 experts to determine the effects of landmarks on urban cultural sustainability and then, the same survey was conducted with 186 occupants in Trabzon province open spaces in Turkey. In the survey, the sustainability of open spaces that symbolize the city was questioned. Then, One-Sample T test and Correlation analyzes were conducted on the survey data using SPSS (v. 23.0) software.

It was determined that Hagia Sophia and Boztepe were the most influential landmarks on urban cultural sustainability. As a result, it was demonstrated that Hagia Sophia, Boztepe, Meydan park, Ganita, City Walls, Atatürk mansion, Soumela Monastery, and Uzungol were effective on cultural sustainability as urban landmarks. One-Sample T test was conducted with SPSS (v. 23.0) software to determine whether the differences in the effects of the landmarks on cultural sustainability based on activity diversity were statistically significant. The test results demonstrated that the landmarks had statistically different effects on cultural sustainability based on reflecting the activity diversity (p <0.01).

The present study findings demonstrated that Meydan park and Ganita stood out as the urban landmarks that affected cultural sustainability the most in satisfaction. Because, these two spaces are easy to reach in the urban center with historical significance and dense occupancy. Thus, they were prominent in cultural sustainability.


Keywords

Sustainable,culture,symbolic landscape,urban spaces

References

  1. Adam, R. (2012). Identity and Identification: The Role of Architectural Identity in a Globalized World. In H. Casakin, F. Bernardo, (Eds.). The Role of Place Identity in the Perception, Understanding, and Design of Built Environments, pp. 176-193. Bentham Science Publishers.
  2. Bayramoğlu, E., Cindik Akinci, Y. Demirel, Ö. (2016). Interactıon between Urban Desıgn And Ergonomıcs Of Fıttıngs: Case Study Of Trabzon Coastal Area, Journal of Envıronmental Protectıon and Ecology, 17, 711-718.
  3. Blowers, A. (1997). Environmental planning for sustainable development in Blowers, A. ve Evans, B., (eds.), Town Planning Into The 21st Century, Routledge, 33-54, London.
  4. Çahantimur, A., Yıldız, H.T. (2008). Sürdürülebilir kentsel gelişmeye sosyokültürel bir yaklaşım: Bursa örneği. İTÜ Dergisi/A Mimarlık, Planlama, Tasarım. 7(2) :3-13.
  5. Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L.G., Stone, A.M. (1992). Public Space, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.
  6. Doğan, F. (2016).Tarihsel Süreç İçerisindeki Kültürel Değişimin Fiziksel ve Algısal Değişim Bağlamında İrdelenmesi: Trabzon Kent Meydanları Örneği. KTÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Peyzaj Mimarlığı Anabilim Dalı doktora tezi.
  7. Düzenli T., Alpak, E.M., Doğan F. (2017).Trabzon Kemeraltı Hıstorıc Bazaar In The Context Of Sustaınable Culture, in: Ecology, Plannıng And Desıgn, Koleva, I., Yuksel, U.D., Benaabıdate, L., Eds., St. Kliment Ohridski University Press, Sofia, pp.104-115.
  8. Düzenli T., Mumcu S., Yilmaz S. (2019). The Effects of Symbolıc Landscapes on Cıty Identıty, the Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication- TOJDAC, 9, 438-448.
  9. Emery, F.E. (1972). Systems Thinking. Harmondsworth:Penguin.
  10. Gür, Ş.Ö. (1996).Mekan Örgütlenmesi, Gür Yayıncılık, Trabzon.
APA
Düzenli, T., Alpak, E. M., & Çiğdem, A. (2019). Examining the Symbolic Landscapes in the Context of Sustainable Culture. Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 4(2), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.553779