THE GOVERNANCE OF MIGRATION AND URBAN WITH MULTILEVEL ACTORS

Öz

Cities are centres of attraction where the population increases rapidly through migration. The urban context, in which social differences and cultural change are addressed, is not independent of governance discussions. It is undeniable that cities, being diverse entities, cannot be handled with a unified governmental strategy. In this respect, the host country's urban policymaking, which incorporates immigrants, introduces multilevel governance. To comprehend this, the factors that create the multiple migration governance from a sociological viewpoint will be reviewed first, followed by an in-depth examination of the numerous aspects of this management form. The challenges generated by the present theoretical framework will be reviewed in the last section, which is the most significant difference and contribution of the study. This part opens space to further researches and questions to clarify urban governance and migration. The role of civil society and NGOs, as well as city diplomacy and independence from central authority, will be highlighted.As a result, the study presents the findings that multiple actors have active functions not only at the national level but also at the international level.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Multilevel Governance
• Migration
• Urban
• City Diplomacy
• NGOs.

KENT VE GÖÇÜN ÇOKLU AKTÖRLERLE YÖNETİŞİMİ

Öz

Kentler, göç yoluyla nüfusun hızla arttığı cazibe merkezleri haline gelmektedir. Toplumsal farklılıkların ve kültürel değişimin ele alındığı kentsel bağlam, nasıl yönetileceği tartışmalarından bağımsız değildir. Farklılıkların ve değişkenliğin mekânı olan şehirlerin tek yönlü bir yönetişim anlayışıyla ele alınamayacağı açıktır ve bir sorun olarak halihazirda tartışılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, ev sahibi ülkenin yerel halkı ile beraber göçmenlerini de içine alan kentsel politika süreci çok katmanlı bir bakış açısını zorunlu kılmaktadır. Bu makalede öncelikle sosyolojik bir bakış açısıyla çoklu göç yönetimini gerektiren faktörler gözden geçirilecek, ardından bu yönetim biçiminin çeşitli yönleri derinlemesine incelenecektir. Çalışmanın en önemli farkı ve katkısı olan son bölümde ise mevcut teorik çerçeve olarak ele alınınan çok aktörlü şehir yönetiminin yarattığı zorluklar gözden geçirilecek ve kent/göç çalışmalarında hangi yönlerin irdelenmesi gerektiği açıklanacaktır. Bu inceleme çok boyutlu şehir yönetiminin katkılarına ek olarak, üreteceği olası problemleri ele alarak gelecekteki çalışmalara katkıda bulunur. Bu noktada, şehir diplomasisinin etki alanı, merkezi otoriteden bağımsızlığın etkileri ve nihayetinde sivil toplum kuruluşlarının şehir yönetimindeki rolleri vurgulanacaktır. Sonuç olarak çalışma çoklu aktörlerin sadece ulusal düzeyde değil uluslararası düzeyde de aktif fonksiyonları olduğunu bulgu alarak sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çok Boyutlu Yönetişim
• Göç
• Kent
• Şehir Diplomasisi
• Sivil Toplum Kuruluşları.

Kaynakça

1. Amiri, S., &Sevin, E. (2020). Introduction. In Amiri, S., Sevin, E. (eds) City Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan Series in Global Public Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45615-3_1.
2. Barber, B. R. (2013). Ifmayorsruledtheworld. In IfMayorsRuledthe World. Yale UniversityPress.
3. Bommes, M. (2010). Migration research in Germany: Theemergence of a generalisedresearchfield in a reluctantimmigrationcountry. Nationalparadigms of migrationresearch, 127-185.
4. Caponio, T., Scholten, P. & Zapata-Barrero, R. (2019). The Routledge handbook of the governance of migration and diversity in cities. Routledge.
5. Clark, A.M. (1995).Non-governmentalorganizationsandtheirinfluence on internationalsociety. Journal of International Affairs, 48 (2), 507-525.
6. Colebatch, H.K. (2009). Governance as a conceptual development in the analysis of policy. Critical Policy Studies, 3(1),58-67. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/19460170903158107.
7. da Cruz, N.F., Rode, P. McQuarrie, M., Nicole Badstuber, N. & Robin, E. (1997). Networked urban governance: A socio-structural analysis of transport strategies in London and New York. https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874221117463.
8. Durkheim, E. (1893). Thedivision of labor in society. TheFreePress.

9. Fischer, C.S. (1975). Thestudy of urban communityandpersonality. AnnualReview of Sociology, (1), 67-89.
10. Fischer, C.S. (1995). Thesubculturaltheory of urbanism: A twentieth-yearassessment. AmericanJournal of Sociology ,101(3),543-577.
11. Flanagan, R. (1993). Risk managementandconstruction. Wiley, Blackwell Publishing.
12. Gans, H. J (1962). Urban villagers. FreePress.
13. Gottdiener, M. (1985). Hegemonyandmassculture: A semioticapproach. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 90(5), 979–1001. https://doi.org/10.1086/228173.
14. Grand, L.K. (2022).City Diplomacy: An EmergingTooltoEnhanceWellbeing in MENA Cities. https://www.iemed.org/publication/city-diplomacy-an-emerging-tool-to-enhance-wellbeing-in-mena-cities/.
15. Karameşe, Ş. (2022). Negotiatingspatiality in urban migrationcontext: Thecase of Syrianstudents in Istanbul.UnpublishedPhDDissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Essex, UK.
16. Lecavalier, E.,& Gordon, D. J. (2020). Beyond networking? Theagency of city network secretariats in therealm of citydiplomacy. In PalgraveMacmillan Series in Global PublicDiplomacy (pp. 13–36). doi:10.1007/978-3-030-45615-3_2
17. Massey, D. (1995). Space, place, andgender. University of Minnesota Press.
18. Massey, D. (2005). Space. Routledge.
19. Pradhan, P.K. (2004). Population Growth, Migration and Urbanisation. Environmental Consequences in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. InUnruh, J.D., Krol, M.S., Kliot, N. (eds) Environmental Change and its Implications for Population Migration. Advances in Global Change Research. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2877-9_9.
20. Rajala, K., Sorice, M.G., & Thomas, V.A. (2020). Themeaning(s) of place: Identifyingthestructure of sense of placeacross a social–ecologicallandscape. People and Nature, 2(3), 718-733. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10112.
21. Rezaee, F., JamileTavakolinia, J. &Sarrafi, M. (2021). Examining the role of non-government organizations (NGOs) in realizing good urban governance(Case study: Tehran metropolitan city). Journal of Geography and Urban Planning, 25(77),113-130.http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/gp.2020.41750.2712.
22. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997).Understanding Governance. Buckingham: Open University Press.
23. Scholten, P. (2013). Themultilevelgovernance of migrantintegration: a multilevelgovernanceperspective on Dutchmigrantintegrationpolicies. In Thediscoursesandpolitics of migration in Europe (pp. 151-169). PalgraveMacmillan, New York.
24. Scholten, P., &Penninx, R. (2016). Themultilevelgovernance of migrationandintegration. In IMISCOE Research Series (pp. 91–108). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21674-4_6
25. Simmel, G. (1905). A contributiontothesociology of religion. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 11(3), 359-376.
26. Singh, B. & Parthasarathy, D. (2010). Civil society organisation partnerships in urban governance: An appraisal of the mumbai experience. Sociological Bulletin, 59 (1),92-110. Sage Publications, Inc. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23620847.
27. Stürner, J. (2020). A new role forcities in global andregionalmigrationgovernance? Robert Bosch Foundation. https://www.bosch stiftung.de/sites/default/files/publications/pdf/2020-09/Study_Cities_Migration_2020.pdf.
28. Sutlles, G.D. (1968). Thesocialorder of theslum. Ethnicityandterritory in theinnercity.
29. TheSocdork (2010). Tonnies vs. Durkheim.RetrievedJuly 10, 2022, fromwww.sociologyonline/studies.com.https://www.studocu.com/enus/document/cuyahoga-community-college/introduction-to-urban-studies/the-soc- dork-tonnies-vs-durkheim/12780032.
30. Thouez, C. (2021). Citiesandmigrationgovernance. RetrievedSeptember 10, 2022 fromhttps://nvvn.nl/cities-and-migration-governance.
31. United Nations, 2015. Transforming our world: The 2030 agendaforsustaınabledevelopment.RetrievedJuly 10, 2022, fromhttps://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf.
32. Waters, T. (2016). GemeinschaftandGesellschaftsocieties. TheBlackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405165518.wbeos0770.
33. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life. TheAmericanJournal of Sociology, 44(1),1-24.
34. World Refugee Council Report (2018). Transformingthe global refugeesystem: Solidarity, humanityandaccountability.RetrievedMay 13, 2022,from www.sociologyonline/studies.com.
35. https://www.cigionline.org/publications/transforming-global-refugee-system-solidarity-humanity-and-accountability/. Young, M., &Willmott, P. (1957). Familyandkinship in East London. RoutledgeandKegan.
36. Tönnies, F. (1957).Community&society (GemeinschaftundGesellschaft).TransactionPublishers.