Housing and Housing Environment Satisfaction Indicators: The Case of Kaşüstü and Yalıncak Neighborhoods, Trabzon

Öz

This study’s aim is to reveal the satisfaction levels of individuals and factors affecting their housing acqusition in Kaşüstü and Yalıncak neighborhoods of Trabzon through a descrpitve method. The study area is selected among the residential areas that have been developed in the last 10 years. A literature survey on quality of life and satisfaction with housing and its environment is conducted and under four main headings indicators for evaluating user satisfaction were put forward. These indicators are demographic ones (age, education level, occupation, household size), housing environment and dwelling characteristics (previous and current house type, home ownership, duration of occupancy, number of rooms, etc.), location and accessibility of the housing area (location, transportaion/road infrastructure, natural environment) and social indicators (identity, security, privacy, social relations, status, commodity). In Kaşüstü and Yalıncak neighborhoods, the data obtained at the household level were evaluated in the SPSS program and the effects of the indicators on user satisfaction were revealed. It has been revealed that occupants of the study area have similar profiles regarding age, income status and marital status, and physical and social indicators are determining factors in the satisfaction of individuals with their housing and residential environment.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Housing and residential environments
• housing areas
• user satisfaction
• housing satisfaction indicators

Konut ve Konut Çevresi Memnuniyet Göstergeleri: Kaşüstü ve Yalıncak Mahalleleri Örneği, Trabzon

Öz

Bu çalışmada, Trabzon kentinde son 10 yılda gelişen konut bölgelerinden örnek alan olarak seçilen Kaşüstü ve Yalıncak mahallelerinde yaşayan hane halkı oturdukları konuttan memnuniyet düzeyleri ve konut edinimlerinde etkili olan faktörlerin neler olduğunun betimsel bir yöntemle ortaya konulması amaçlanmıştır. Bu bağlamda, yaşam kalitesi ile konut ve çevresinden memnuniyete ilişkin literatür incelenmesi sonucunda kullanıcı memnuniyetini değerlendirmeye yönelik göstergeler dört ana başlıkta ortaya konulmuştur. Bunlar; demografik göstergeler (yaş, eğitim durumu, meslek, hane halkı büyüklüğü), konut çevresi ve konutların nitel ve nicel özellikleri (önceki konut tipi, mevcut konut tipi, konut sahipliği, konutta ikamet süresi, konutun mimari niteliği, konut büyüklüğü, oda sayısı, kentsel altyapı, mekânsal donatı) konut alanının konumu ve erişilebilirliği (konum, ulaşım/yol altyapısı, doğal çevre) ve sosyal göstergelerdir (kimlik, güvenlik, mahremiyet, sosyal ilişkiler, statü, meta). Çalışma alanı olarak belirlenen Kaşüstü ve Yalıncak mahallelerinde, hane halkı düzeyinde elde edilen veriler SPSS programında değerlendirilerek göstergelerin kullanıcı memnuniyeti üzerindeki etkisi alan çalışması özelinde ortaya konulmuştur. Çalışmanın sonucunda, çalışma kapsamındaki konut alanlarında yaşayanların yaş, gelir durumu ve medeni durum gibi demografik göstergeler bakımından benzer profilde olduğu ve konut ve konut çevreleri ve sosyal göstergelerin bireylerin konut ve konut çevresi memnuniyetlerinde belirleyici unsurlar oldukları ortaya konulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Konut ve konut çevreleri
• konut alanları
• kullanıcı memnuniyeti
• Trabzon
• konut memnuniyeti göstergeleri
• Housing and residential environments
• housing areas
• user satisfaction
• housing satisfaction indicators

Kaynakça

1. Adams, R. (1992). Is happiness a home in the suburbs? The influence of urban versus suburban neighbourhoods on psychological health, Journal of Community Psychology. 20 (4), 353-359.
2. Aksel, E. ve İmamoglu, C. (2020). Neighborhood location and its association with place attachment and residential satisfaction”, Open House International, 45 (3), 327-340. doi: 10.1108/ OHI-05-2020-0035
3. Bajunid, A.F.I., Abbas, M.Y. ve Nawawi, A.H. (2017). Tessellation planning: relationships between the physical environment and the neighbourhood, Asian Journal of Environment-Behaviour Studies, 2 (5), 85-95.
4. Berkoz, L. ve Kellekci, O.L. (2007). Mass housing: residents satisfaction with their housing and environment, Open House International, 32 (1), 41-49.
5. Bilgin, İ., (2006). Kent üretiminin ve kamu yaşamının örgütlenmesinde güncel eğilimler, Toplum ve Bilim, 105, 166-177.
6. Buys, L. ve Miller, E. (2012). Residential satisfaction in inner urban higher-density Brisbane, Australia: role of dwelling design, neighbourhood and neighbours, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 55 (3), 319-338.
7. Cao, J. ve Wang, D. (2016). Environmental correlates of residential satisfaction: an exploration of mismatched neighborhood characteristics in the twin cities, Landscape and Urban Planning, 150, 26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.02.007
8. Chen, Y., Dang, Y. ve Dong, G. (2019). An investigation of migrants’ residential satisfaction in Beijing, Urban Studies, 57 (3), 1-20. doi: 10.1177/0042098019836918

9. Cho, M. (2020). Residential satisfaction among low-income single-mother households: the case of residential welfare facilities in South Korea, Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 14 (3), 359-378, doi: 10.1108/ARCH-09-2019-0218
10. Ciorici, P. ve Dantzler, P. (2019). Neighborhood satisfaction: a study of a low-income urban community, Urban Affairs Review, 55 (6), 1702-1730. doi: 10.1177/10780 87418755515
11. Clapham, D., Foye, C. ve Christian, J. (2018). The concept of subjective wellbeing in housing research, Housing Theory and Society, 35 (3), 261-280. doi: 10.1080/14036096.2017.13483 91
12. Dekker, K., de Vos, S., Musterd, S. ve Kempen, R. (2011). Residential satisfaction in housing estates in European cities: a multi-level research approach, Housing Studies, 26 (4), 479-499.
13. Dovey, K., (2010). Becoming places: urbanism/architecture/identity/power. Routledge. New York.
14. Endeksa, (2022, 24 Aralık). Türkiye, Trabzon Nüfusu, Gelir Düzeyi ve Eğitim Seviyesi hakkında bilgi… [Mekânsal Veri Temelli İstatistik Bilgi Sitesi]. Erişim adresi: https://www.endeksa.com/tr/analiz/trabzon/demografi, Erişim tarihi:24.12.2022
15. Fried, M. (1982). Residential attachment: sources of residential and community satisfaction, Journal of Social Issues, 38 (3), 107-119.
16. Grange, A.L. ve Yau, Y. (2020). Neighbourhood attachment and satisfaction: a Hong Kong’s case study, Open House International, 46 (1), 96-113, doi: 10.1108/OHI-04-2020-0009
17. Görgülü, T., (2006). Mimar – işveren - kullanıcı ilişkisinin satış sloganları bağlamında sorgulanması ve sonuç ürünler, Mimarist, 21, 32-36.
18. Gülmez N.Ü, (2008). Metropolde çeşitlenen hane halkları ve konut. (Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi), İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
19. Gur, M., Murat, D. ve Sezer, F.S. (2019). The effect of housing and neighborhood satisfaction on perception of happiness in Bursa, Turkey, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 35 (2), 1-19, doi: 10.1007/s10901-019-09708-5 Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel Cities: From the Right to the City to the Urban Revolution. New York: Verso,. Print.
20. Hatiopoğlu Şahin, B. ve Tereci, A. (2021). Konut ve Çevresi Kavramına Yaşam Kalitesi Bağlamındaki Yaklaşımların Değerlendirilmesi. İDEALKENT. 33 (12), 852-872. https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.84525
21. Holton, R. J. ve Ruşen Keleş. (1999). Kentler kapitalizm ve uygarlık. Ankara: İmge Kitabevi.
22. Huang, Z. and Du, X. (2015). Assessment and determinants of residential satisfaction with public housing in Hangzhou China, Habitat International, 47, 218-230. doi: 10.1016/j. habitatint.2015.01.025
23. Ibem, E.O. ve Alagbe, O.A. (2015). Investigating dimensions of housing adequacy evaluation by residents in public housing, Facilities, 33 (7/8), 465-484. doi: 10.1108/F-02-2014-0017
24. Karacor, E.K. ve Parlar, G. (2017). Conceptual Model of the Relationship between Neighbourhood Attachement, Collectively Efficacy and Open Space Quality, Open House International, 42 (2), 68-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-02-2017-B0010
25. Kumar, P., Kumar, P., Garg, R.K. ve Garg, R. (2021). Urban housing: a study on housing environment, residents’ satisfaction and happiness, Open House International, 46 (4), 528-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-12-2020-0179
26. Lee, S.M., Conway, T.L., Frank, L.D., Saelens, B.E., Cain, K.L. ve Sallis, J.F. (2016). The relation of perceived and objective environment attributes to neighborhood satisfaction, Environment and Behavior, 49, (2). 136-160. doi: 10.1177/0013916515623823
27. Leslie, E. ve Cerin, E. (2008). Are perceptions of the local environment related to neighbourhood satisfaction and mental health in adults, Preventive Medicine, 47 (3). 273-278.
28. Li, J., Li, D., Ning, X., Sun, J. ve Du, H. (2019). Residential satisfaction among resettled tenants in public rental housing in Wuhan, China, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 34 (4), 1125-1148.
29. Loo, C. (1986). Neighborhood satisfaction and safety: a study of a low-income ethnic area. Environment and Behavior, 18 (1), 109-131.
30. MacLean, L. ve Salama, A.M. (2019). Towards a context specific and multidimensional quality of urban life model, Open House International, 44 (1), 25-33. doi: 10.1108/OHI-01-2019- B0004
31. Mohit, M.A. and Azim, M. (2012). Assessment of residential satisfaction with public housing in Hulhumale, Maldives, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 50, 756-770
32. Mouratidis, K. (2018). Is compact city livable? The impact of compact versus sprawled neighbourhoods on neighbourhood satisfaction, Urban Studies, 55 (11). 2408-2430, doi: 10.1177/0042098017729109
33. Odum, C.O. (2015). Residents’ satisfaction with integration of the natural environment in public housing design, International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 8 (1), 73-96. doi: 10.1108/IJHMA-03-2014-0005
34. Ottensmann, J. R. (1977). Urban Sprawl, Land Values and the Density of Development.” Land Economics, 53 (4). 389, 10.2307/3145984.
35. Parkes, A., Kearns, A. ve Atkinson, R. (2002). What makes people dissatisfied with their neighbourhoods? Urban Studies, 39 (13), 2413-2438.
36. Pendall, R. (1999). Do land-use controls cause sprawl? Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26 (4), 555–571. https://doi.org/10.1068/b260555
37. Permentier, M., Bolt, G. ve Van Ham, M. (2010). Determinants of neighbourhood satisfaction and perception of neighbourhood reputation, Urban Studies, 48 (5), 977-996.
38. Pishgahi, S. ve Partovi, P. (2020). Evaluating the effects of cross neighborhood facilities on residential satisfaction by developing importance-satisfaction rate method (case study: Jahanshahr neighborhood of Karaj, Iran), Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 2, 1-34. doi: 10.1007/s10901-020-09761-5
39. Savasdisara, T. (1988). Residents’ satisfaction and neighbourhood characteristics in Japanese urban communities, Landscape and Urban Planning, 15 (3/4), 201-210.
40. Shucksmith, M., Cameron, S., Merridew, T. ve Pichler, F. (2009). Urban-rural differences in quality of life across the European Union, Regional Studies, 43 (10), 1275-1289, doi: 10.1080/00343 40080 23787 50
41. Swyngedouw, E., Moulaert, F. ve Rodriguez, A. (2002). Neoliberal Urbanization in Europe: Large-Scale Urban Development Projects and the New Urban Policy. Antipode, 34(3), 542–577. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00254
42. Türkoglu, H., Terzi, F., Salihoğlu, T., Bolen, F. ve Okumus, G. (2019), Residential satisfaction in formal and informal neighborhoods: the case of İstanbul, Turkey, Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 13 (1), 112-132. doi: 10.1108/ARCH-12-2018-0030
43. Wang, D. ve Wang, F. (2015). Contributions of the usage and affective experience of the residential environment to residential satisfaction, Housing Studies, 31 (1), 42-60. doi: 10.1080/ 02673037.2015.1025372.