Güneydoğu Asya’nın sefalet mahalleleri: Manila örneği, Filipinler

Öz

Manila; oldukça elverişsiz çevre şartlarında enformal-kayıt dışı ticari işlerde çalışarak geçinmeye çalışan yüzbinlerce insanın bir arada yaşadığı eski bir sömürge başkentidir. Ülkenin siyasal, ekonomik ve kültürel hayatın odağını oluşturan Manila, özellikle farklı bölgelerden aldığı göçlerle mekânsal ve demografik yönden büyümeye devam etmektedir. Manila’da bir dönem boş olan araziler bugün büyük ölçüde farklı şehirsel arazi kullanışlarına sahne olmuştur. Bu kullanışların başında ise ağırlıklı olarak konut ve enformal ticari işlerin bir arada yürütüldüğü slum alanları gelmektedir. İnsan yerleşimi için elverişsiz ve sağlıksız olarak sınıflandırılan bu slum alanları ise yönetim boşluklarına dayanan çeşitli politik ve ekonomik güçlerin desteklenmesiyle ortaya çıkmıştır. Filipinler hükümeti ise kontrolsüz olarak ortaya çıkan şehirsel sorunlarla başa çıkmakta çoğu zaman yetersiz kalmaktadır. Bu çalışma, Güneydoğu Asya’nın başlıca metropollerinden biri olan Manila’daki slum alanlarına odaklanmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı slum semtlerinin ortaya çıkışı ve bunların yakın zamanlarda kaldırılmasında etkili olan dinamikleri ortaya koymaktır. Etnografik yöntemin kullanıldığı çalışmanın başlıca veri toplama araçlarını ise katılımcı gözlem, etnografik görüşmeler ve dokümanlar oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmanın sonuçları göstermektedir ki kırsal alanlardan Manila’ya gerçekleşen göçler ve kentsel dönüşüm projelerinden kaynaklanan iç göçler ile Manila'nın hızlı demografik ve mekânsal büyümesi arasında önemli bir ilişki vardır. 2000’lerden itibaren toplumun lüks yerleşim bölgelerine, alışveriş merkezlerine, eğlence mekanlarına, otellere ve iş merkezlerine olan talebi artmıştır. Bu durum, Manila’nın göçlerle yapılaşan alanların yeniden yapılandırma planlarının bir parçası olarak slum alanlarının ağırlıklı olarak “kentsel dönüşüm projeleriyle” kaldırılmasına zemin hazırlamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• slum
• Manila
• Filipinler
• Kentsel dönüşüm projeleri

Slums of Southeast Asia: The Case of Manila, Philippines

Abstract

Manila is a former colonial capital where people live together by working in informal trading businesses within a quite unfavourable ambience. Manila, which is the focus of the country's political, economic, and cultural life, has recently grown spatially and demographically, especially with new migrations from different parts of the country. The lands in Manila, which were once vacant, are today largely filled with different urban areas. At the beginning they were slums which were used for housing and informal commerce. These areas, classified as unfavourable and unhealthy for human settlement, emerged with the support of certain political and economic forces using administrative gaps. The government of the Philippines is also incapable of dealing with uncontrollable urban problems. This paper focuses on slums in Manila, which are in one of the main metropolises of Southeast Asia. Its purpose is therefore to reveal the occurrence of slum districts and the dynamics that were effective in their recent demolition. During the study, an ethnographic method which was predominantly based on observation was used. Primary data collection tools used for the purposes of this study were participant observation, ethnographic interviews and documents. In the light of the data obtained from this research study, the fact that there is a significant relationship between migration from the countryside to Manila and internal migration flows resulting from urban transformation projects and the rapid demographic and spatial growth of Manila was revealed. It also revealed that the demand of the society for luxurious residential areas, shopping malls, entertainment venues, hotels, and business centres has increased since the 2000s and this situation caused the removal of slums in Manila as part of "urban transformation projects”.

Keywords

• slum
• manila
• philippines
• Urban transformation projects

Kaynakça

1. Abad, R, G. (1981). Internal migration in the Philippines: A review of research findings, Philippine Studies, 29 (2), 129-143.
2. Adger, W,N., Arnell, N, W., Black, R., Dercon, S ., Geddes, A., & Thomas, D,S, G. (2015). Focus on environmental risks and migration: Causes and consequences, Environmental Research Letters, 10, 1-6.
3. Bankoff, G. (2003). Constructing vulnerability: the historical, natural and social generation of flooding in metropolitan Manila. Disasters, 27 (3), 224-238.
4. Bankoff, G. (2006). Fire and quake in the construction of old Manila. The Medieval History Journal, 10 (1-2), 411-427.
5. Beltran, J. V. (1982). The concept of urban renewal in metropolitan Manila: An analysis (Doctoral dissertation, University of Tasmania).
6. Berner, E. (1997). Defending a place in the city: Localities and the Struggle for Urban Land in Metro Manila, Ateneo de Manila University Press.
7. Berner, E. (1998). Globalization, fragmentation and local struggles: squatter organizations in Metro Manila Philippine, Sociological Review, 46 (3-4),121-142.
8. Berner, E. (1998). Poverty alleviation and the eviction of the poorest: Urban land transfer programs in the Philippines, Institute of social studies, Working paper series No:282.

9. Berner, E.(1997). The metropolitan dilemma-global society, localities, and the struggle for urban land in Manila, Space, culture and power: New identities in globalizing cities, Zed Books.
10. Berner, E., & Korff, R. (1995). Globalization and local resistance: The creation of localities in manila and Bangkok, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19,208-222.
11. Bhan, G. (2009). “This is no longer the city I once knew” Evictions, the urban poor and the right to the city in millennial Delhi, Environment and Urbanization, 21 (1), 127-142.
12. Brennan, E. M. (1993). Urban land and housing issues facing the third world. In J. D. Kasarda, & A. M. Parnell (Eds.), Third world cities: Problems, policies, and prospects, SAGE Publications, Inc.
13. Clark, H., & Martin, C. (2013). Anarchy, geography, modernity: Selected writings of Elisée Reclus. PM Press.
14. Davis, M. (2006). Planet of slums. Verso.
15. Ellison, C, E. (1985). Rousseau and the modern city: The politics of speech and dress, Political Theory, 13, 497-533.
16. Flieger, W. (1977). Internal migration in the Philippines during the 1960's, Philippine Quarterly Of Culture And Society, 5 (4),199-231. Fouberg, E., Murphy, A., & Blij, de, H. (2012). Human geography, people, place, and culture. Wiley.
17. Friesen, J., Taubenböck, H.,Wurm, M., Peter,F., & Pelz, P,F. (2018). The similar size of slums, Habitat International, 73, 79-88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2018.02.002
18. Geertz, C.(1983). Local knowledge: further essays in ınterpretive Anthropology. Perseus Books.
19. Gilbert, A. (2007). The return of the slum: does language matter? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 31, 697-713
20. Harvey, D. (2014). Seventeen contradictions and the end of capitalism. Oxford University Press.
21. Hua, Q. (2012). Environmental effects on rural-to-urban migration in China, Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 10 (3), 9-17.
22. Izutsu, T., Tsutsumi, A., Islam, A, Md., Kato, S., Wakai, A., & Kurita, H. (2006). Mental health, quality of life, and nutritional status of adolescents in Dhaka, Bangladesh: Comparison between an urban slum and a non-slum area, Social Science & Medicine, (63),1477-1488.
23. Kapan, K., Yulu, A., & Yu, A . (2018). Filipinler’de turizm faaliyetlerinin tarihsel gelişimi, Marmara Coğrafya Dergisi, 37, 144-151.
24. Kassab, S.(1997). On two conceptions of globalization: the debate around the reconstruction of Beirut, Space, Culture and Power: New Identities in Globalizing Cities, Zed Books.
25. Kaya, İ. (2014). Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Y.Arı ve İ.Kaya (Ed.) Coğrafya Araştırma Yöntemleri. Coğrafyacılar Derneği Yayınları.
26. Koç, Y., Soykan, A. (2017). Göçün ekolojik etkileri, Akademik bakış açısıyla göç, İKSAD Yayınevi.
27. Marris, P. (1960). Slum clearance and family life in Lagos, Human Organization, Special Issue: Social science in action in Sub-Saharan Africa, 3, 123-128.
28. Minnery, J., Argo, T., Winarso, H., Hau, D., Veneracion, C,C., Forbes, D., & Childs, İ.(2013). Slum upgrading and urban governance: Case studies in three South East Asian cities, Habitat International, 39,162-169.
29. Morley, I, (2018). Manila, Cities, 72, 17-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.022
30. Munárrız, L, T, M., Perez, P,J, A., & Caguımbal, R,S.(2015). Urban renewal of the city of Manila and its impact to environment and physical design: Where can we go from here?, Journal of Architecture and Allied Arts in the Philippines. Nelson, J. M. (1979). Access to power: Politics and the urban poor in developing nations. Princeton University Press.
31. Öncü, A., & Weyland, P .(1997). Introduction: struggles over 'lebensraum' and cultural identity in globalizing cities, Space, culture and power: New identities in globalizing cities, Zed Books.
32. Ortega, A, A. (2016). Manila’s metropolitan landscape of gentrification: Global urban development, accumulation by dispossession & neoliberal warfare against informality, Geoforum, 70, 35-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2016.02.002
33. Ortega, A.A. (2016). Neoliberalizing spaces in the Philippines: Suburbanization, transnational migration, and dispossession. Lexington Books. Özbay, H. (1988). Gecekondu sorunu ve ucuz konut deneyimi, Mimarlık, 27 (6), 47-49.
34. Öztürk, M. (2014). Coğrafya eğitiminde araştırma. Pegem Akademi.
35. Papola, T,S .(1988). Rural-urban migration: problem of socio-demographic regulations, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 24, (2), 230-237. Perlman, J. (2010). Favela four decades of living on the edge in Rio de Janeiro, Oxford University Press.
36. Perouse, F.J. (2014). İstanbul’da yüzleşme denemeleri, çeperler, hareketlilik ve kentsel belek. İletişim Yayınları. Philippine Statistics Authority, 2020. https://psa.gov.ph/
37. Pre-Colonial Manila http://malacanang.gov.ph/75832-pre-colonial-manila/
38. Ragragio, J, M. (2003). The case of Metro Manila, Philippines, Understanding slums: Case Studies for the Global Report 2003. Reclus, E. (1895). The evolution of cities, The contemporary Review.
39. Riis, A. J. (2010). How the other half lives, studies among the teenements of New York. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
40. Roberts, P. (2004). The evolution, definition and purpose of urban regeneration. Urban Regeneration, A Handbook. SAGE Publications.
41. Saran, N. (1971). İstanbul’da gecekondu problemi. İstanbul Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Matbaası.
42. Schöller, P. (1975). The problems and consequences of urbanization, Essays on World Urbanization. Georg Phillip and Son.
43. Shin, H, B., & Li, B. (2013). Whose games? The costs of being “Olympic citizens” in Beijing, Environment & Urbanization, International institute for environment and development (IIED), 25 (2), 559-576.
44. Smith, N. (2008). Uneven development: nature, capital, and the production of space, University of Georgia Press.
45. Soria, J, L, A., Switzer, A,D., Villanoy, C, L., Fritz, H, M., Bilgera, P,H,T,. Cabrera, O,C., Siringan, F,P., Maria, Y,Y,S., Ramos, R,D., & Fernandez, I,Q. (2016). Repeat storm surge disasters of typhoon Haiyan and its 1897 Predecessor in the Philippines, American Meteorological Society.
46. Steinberg, F. (2008). Revitalization of historic inner-city areas in Asia: The potential for urban renewal in Ha Noi, Jakarta, and Manila. Asian Development Bank.
47. Struyk, R, J., & Lynn, R. (1983). Determinants of housing investment in slum areas: Tondo and other locations in Metro Manila, Land Economics, 4, 444-454.
48. The World Bank. (1988). Project performance audit report Philippines, Manila urban development project, Second urban development project. Report No: 7092.
49. Thorns,D,C. (2002). The transformation of cities, Urban theory and urban life. Palgrave Macmillan.
50. Tümertekin, E. (1997). İstanbul, İnsan ve Mekân. Tarih Vakfı Yurt Yayınları.
51. Tümertekin, E., Özgüç, N. (2017). Beşeri coğrafya, İnsan. Kültür. Mekân. Çantay Kitabevi.
52. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. (2003). The challenge of slums, Global report on human settlements, Earthscan Publications Ltd London and Sterling, Va.
53. Vaughan, J, B, (1956). The land and people of the Philippines, J.B. Lippincott Company.
54. Venida, V, S. (2002). Conflicts over heritage: The case of Quiapo. Kritika Kultura, (2), 55-74.
55. Wacquant, L. (2007). Urban outcasts, a comparative sociology of advanced marginality. Polity Press.
56. Wallace, E, S. (1980). The Urban environment, The Dorsey Press.
57. Warf, B. (2006). Encyclopedia of geography human. SAGE Publications.
58. Yu, Anson .(2002). District of hope: walking tour of Quiapo, Colors Philippines, 1,(2), 40-53.
59. Yulu, A., & Kapan, K. (2020). The role of tourism in urban conservation: The case of manila, The Philippines. Cografya Dergisi, 41,13-27. https://doi.org/10.26650/JGEOG2020-0011
60. Zialcita, N,F. (2006). Revitalizing the city through heritage, Quiapo: Heart of Manila.