Türkiye Küresel Rekabetçi Kentlerde Kentsel Yönetim: Kent Hakki Perspektifi Üzerinde Bir Araştırma

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 14 - 27, 30.09.2022

Md Moynul Ahsan

https://doi.org/10.52539/mad.1161732

Öz

Bugün kentin değerleri, temsili ve katılımcı süreçle pekiştirilmesi “yönetişim” ilkesiyle göz önüne alınmaktadır. Yönetişim göstergelerden biri olan kent hakkı, yönetişim perspektifinden ele alınmaktadır. Öte yandan, küresel kent kavramı, geleneksel devlet yapılarından modern bir yönetişim biçimine köklü değişimlerle güçlü bir şekilde ilişkilidir. Bu çalışma, kentsel yönetişimin teorik bağlamına, kentsel yönetişim, kent hakkı ve yeni kentsel politika ile ilişkisi ve yeni kentsel siyaset perspektifine göre uygulanmasına odaklanmıştır. Uygulamaya, farklı endeksler öne çıkarılarak Türkiye’nin küresel rekabetçi kent perspektifinden bakılmıştır. Çalışma, Türk kentlerinin küresel rekabetteki konumlarını güçlendirmek için halk katılımı uygulamalarını iyileştirmeleri gerektiğini ortaya koyulmuştur. Yeni kentsel siyaset arenasında daha iyi mücadele edebilmek için insan temelli politikalar güçlendirilmeli ve düzenlenmelidir ve aşağıdan yukarıya politikalar kent hakkının sağlanmasında etkin rol oynayabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kentsel mekan, Kentsel yönetişim, Yeni kentsel siyaseti, Kent Hakkı, Türkiye kentleri

Urban Governance in Turkish Global Competitive Cities: A Study on Right to the City Perspective

Öz

Today, the city's values, representation, and reinforcing through the participatory process are turned into an eye by the principle of “governance”. The right to city one of the indicators is represented with the lens of it. On the other hand, the global city concept is strongly connected with fundamental shifts from traditional government structures to a modern governance mode. This study has focused on the theoretical context of urban governance, linkage with urban governance, right to the city and new urban policy, and its application according to the perspective of new urban politics. Application has been viewed from Turkish global competitive city perspectives by highlighting different indexes. The study found that Turkish cities should improve their public participation practices to strengthen their position for global competition. People-based policies should be strengthened and regulated to better fight in the arena of new urban politics; and bottom-up policies can play an effective role in ensuring right to the city.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Urban space, Urban governance, New urban politics, Right to City, Turkish cities

Kaynakça

• Ahsan, M. M., & Rahman, M H. (2013). Environmental Impact of Rapid Urban Growth in Dhaka Megacity: A Case Study of Bhatara Union, in Sarwar Jahan and A K M Abul Kalam (Eds.), Dhaka Metropolitan Development Area and its Planning Problems, Issues and Policies, Bangladesh Institute of Planners, Dhaka, pp. 99-109.
• ARCADIS. (2018). Citizen Centric Cities: The Sustainable Cities Index 2018, https://www.arcadis.com/media/1/D/5/%7B1D5AE7E2-A348-4B6E-B1D7-6D94FA7D7567%7DSustainable_Cities_Index_2018_Arcadis.pdf (Accessed 5 January 2020).
• Aslanoğlu, R. (1998). Kent Kimlik Küreselleşme, Asa Kitabevi.
• Atasoy, Y. (2016). Repossession, Re‐informalization and Dispossession: The ‘Muddy Terrain’ of Land Commodification in Turkey. Journal of Agarian Change, 2016, v. 17, pp. 657-79, https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12182.
• A. T.Kearney. (2018). Global Cities Report 2018. Franklin Center, Chicago, United States.
• Brenner, N. (1999). Globalisation as Reterritoriakisation: The Re-Scaling of Urban Governance and Theodore. N. (2002) ‘Spaces of Neoliberalism: Urban Restructuring in North America and Western Europe’, Blackwell Publishers, USA.
• Brenner, N. (2004). Urban Governance and the Production of New State Spaces in Western Europe, Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 447-488.
• Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2002). Cities and the Geographies of “Actually Existing Neoliberalism. Antipode, v. 34, pp. 349-379, 2002.
• Bouchet et al. (2018). Global Metro Monitor 2018. Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Brookings-Metro_Global-Metro-Monitor-2018.pdf (Accessed 7 January, 2020)
• Candan, A. B., & Kolluoğlu, B. (2015). Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: A Gated Town and a Public Housing Project in Istanbul. Vol. 39, pp. 5-46.
• Council of Europe. (1992). Manifesto for a New Urbanity: European Urban Charter II. https://rm.coe.int/168071923d#P12_317 (Accessed 2 February 2019). de Bellaigue, C. (2013). Turkey: Surreal, Menacing…Pompous. New York Review of Books. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2013/12/19/turkey-surreal-menacing-pompous (Accessed 19 January 2019).
• Dzhusupova, Z. (2013). Enabling Democratic Local Governance through Rural E-Municipalites in Kyrgystan, in Zaigham Mahmood (Eds.), E-Government Implementation and Practice in Developing Countries, IGI Global Book Series, pp.35-36,
• Economist Intelligence Unit. (2013). Hot spots 2025: Benchmarking the future competitiveness of cities. Citi. New York.
• Ezme, A, T. (2017). A Reading of Gecekondu as a Tool of Rapid Urbanization and Cheap Economic Development, in Sadullah Çelik, Osman Küçükahmetoğlu, Julia Dobreva (Eds.) Contemporary Studies in Social Economic & Financial Analysis. IJOPEC Publication, London, pp. 63-86
• Globalisation and World Cities Research Network. (2018). The World According to GaWC 2018, https://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/world2018t.html (Accessed January 3, 2020).
• Guan, Y. S. (2016). The other Kuala Lumpur: Living in the shadows of a globalising Southeast Asian City, Routledge Malaysian Studies Series.
• Harvey, D. (1989). From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism”, GeografiskaAnnaler. Series B, Human Geography, Vol 71 No. 1, pp. 3-17.
• Heinelt, H., & Kübler, D. (2005). Metropolitan governance, Routledge, London. DOI : 10.4324/9780203448083
• IESE. (2019). Cities in Motion Index 2019. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15581/018.ST-509
• Jessop, B. (2002). Liberalism, Neoliberalism, and Urban Governance: A State-Theoretical Perspective, Antipode, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 452-472.
• Jouve, B. (2003). La gouvernance urbaine en question, Elsevier, Paris.
• Lefebvre, H. (1991). The Production of Space. Malden, MA: Blackwell, Original work published in 1974, pp. 31-34
• Lemanski, C. (2017). Unequal citizenship in unequal cities: participatory urban governance in contemporary South Africa, Liverpool University Press. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/42340527.pdf (Accessed 5 December 2021).
• McAdams, M. (2016). Global Cities as Centers of Cultural Influence: A Focus on Istanbul, Turkey, Transtext(e)s Transcultures 跨文本跨文化. http://transtexts.revues.org/149 ; DOI : 10.4000/transtexts.149/ (Accessed 12 March 2019).
• Numbeo. (2019). Cost of Living. https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/ (Accessed 9 January 2020)
• Pamuk, S. (2015). Globalization, Industrialization and Changing Politics in Turkey, Vol. 38, pp. 267-273, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0896634600005008.
• Pierre, J. (1999). Models of Urban Governance: The Institutional Dimension of Urban Politics, Urban Affairs Review, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 372-396
• Plato. (1901). The Republic, Translation of Benjamin Jowett, http://studymore.org.uk/xpla0.html (Accessed 15 March, 2019)
• Sevinç, E. B., & Özdemir Ş. (2016). Turkey’s Local Responses to Globalization: The Emergence of New Actors as State-Level Security Threats. Adnan Menderes University Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, Vol 2 No. 3, pp. 35-47.
• Shaw, A. (2012). Indian Cities, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
• Smith, N. (1996). The New Urban Frontier. Gentrification and the Revanchist City, London: Routledge.
• Smith, N. (2002). New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy. Antipode, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 427-450
• Swyngedouw, E; Moulaert, F., & Rodriguez, A. (2002). Neoliberal Urbanization in Europe: Large-Scale Urban Development Projects and the New Urban Policy, Blackwell Publishers, UK
• Tansel, C. B. (2018). Reproducing authoritarian neoliberalism in Turkey: urban governance and state restructuring in the shadow of executive centralization. Globalizations, https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2018.1502494
• Tanrıvermiş, H., Ahsan, M.M., Güneş, S., Blengabs, A., & Mataracı, O. (2021). Development of Urban Cultural Center with Strategic Planning Approach: A Case of Ataturk Cultural Center in Ankara Province. ERES 2021, June 2 to June 5, 2021, Kaiserslautern, Germany. https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/arzwpaper/eres2021_5f179.htm
• UNDP. (2006). Measuring Democratic Governance: A Framework for Selecting Pro-poor and Gender Sensitive Indicators. http://www.undp-aciac.org/publications/other/undp/gender/propoor-indicators06.pdf (Accessed 18 January 2018).
• URAK- Uluslararası Rekabet Araştırmaları Kurumu (2018), İllerarası Rekabetçilik Endeksi 2018. http://www.urak.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/URAK_%C4%B0RE_2018-2.pdf (Accessed 2 January 2020).
• Yıldırım, A. (2014). Türkiye’de Yerel Yönetişimin Uygulanabilirliği ve Yerel Gündem 21 Örneği Üzerinden Bir İnceleme, Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Vol 2 No 1, pp.75-96.
• Yüksel, M, (2000). Yönetişim Kavramı Üzerine, Ankara Barosu Dergisi Vol. 3
• World Bank. (1992). Governance and Development. The World Bank, Washington, p.3
• World Economic Forum. (2018). The Global Competitiveness Report 2018, Geneva, Switzerland
• Zibel, E. (2008). Globalisation and the Role of the Turkish State: Case Study of Urban Policy in Istanbul, Unpublished MPhil Thesis, London School of Economics and Political Science.
• Z/Yen. (2019). The Global Financial Centres Index 25. London.