Ayda Eraydin
An academic interested on urban and regional issues and planning
less
Related Authors
Emrah ALTINOK
Istanbul Bilgi University
Dilek Özdemir Darby
Istanbul University
Zeynep Karataş
Istanbul Technical University
Seçil Özalp
Istanbul Technical University
Nevra Akdemir
Universität Osnabrück
Tayfun Salihoğlu
Gebze Technical University
Gökçe Dede
Yıldız teknik üniversitesi
gizem berber
Bilkent University
Uploads
Papers by Ayda Eraydin
Günümüzde egemen olan neo-liberal ekonomik politikalarve bakış açsısı sadece bölgesel ve kentsel gelişim ve yönetişimi değil aynı zamanda planlama söylem ve uygulamalarında da önemli değişimler yaratmış ve planlamayı piyasa güçlerinin egemen olduğu bir alana doğru yönelendirmiştir. Son dönemdki planlama yazını bu gelişmeleri kaygı ile irdelemekte ve kırılganlıkları giderek artan bölge kentlerin sorunlarına mevcut planlama söylem ve uygulamalarının çözüm getiremediğini belirtmektedir. Bu bildiride esnek-uyum (resilience) kavramını odak olarak alan yeni bir planlama söyleminin ana özelliklerine değinilmekte ve iki özgün vurgusunu ön plana çıkarılmaktadır. Uzun dönemli ve çok etkileşimli etkileri dikkate alan bir içerik ve bu içeriğin gerçekleşebilmesi için değer sistemlerinde yeni bir buluşma.
Abstract
In the contemporary era denoted by neoliberal economic agenda, not only affected the urban development and governance but also planning discourses and practices, which pushed them more market-oriented directions. While the recent literature is increasingly critical the outcomes market dominated planning practices, it increasingly became evident that existing planning theories have not been able to deal with the increasing vulnerabilities of urban areas and regions. This paper emphasises the need for resilience thinking in planning and elaborates how this thinking will reflect on planning emphasising call for substance together with process and value systems that defines the reaction to change.
Books by Ayda Eraydin
In the past decades, major cities increased their global functions and became the cores of global movements of goods, finance and human capital. As a result, they attracted people from different origins, ethnic backgrounds, religions and culture. The newcomers tended to settle in a few neighbourhoods where they mixed with people belonging to different socioeconomic statuses, occupations and lifestyles. In the past decade, these diversifying cities and neighbourhoods have received increasing interest in the literature. This is mainly concerned with whether this diverse set of people are able to create a cohesive society that can work towards the wellbeing of all its members, create a sense of belonging, promote trust and offer its members the opportunity of upward mobility (Forrest and Kearns, 2001). In other words, it is focused on social cohesion and conviviality towards others in superdiversified neighbourhoods (Vertovec, 2007).
However, in the literature, studies of neighbourhood diversity and social cohesion have been inconclusive. A number of studies to date have found that despite differences among residents, communities are able to live together in harmony if they accept and respect the identities of others. Albrow (1997) claims that individuals with very different lifestyles and social networks can live in proximity without improper interference with each other, while Vranken (2004), sharing a similar view, asserts that relationships that are non-conflictual and mutually supportive between diverse groups can be structured at a neighbourhood level. Putnam (2007), however, takes a different view, claiming that the greater the ethnic diversity in a neighbourhood, the less trust exists, leading to even lower confidence in the so-called out-group, but also to distrust within the in-group. Similarly, Amin (2002) argues that finding a balance between diversity, harmonious living and solidarity can be quite difficult. Although there are different views on the role of diversity in social cohesion, almost all of them agree that relations among existing groups with different identities are important in defining connections between diversity and social cohesion.
The existing studies, however, pay little attention to differences in the way others are perceived and defined within diverse neighbourhoods and to the implications of such differences on building relations, solidarity among different groups and mutual trust. The aim of this chapter is to contribute to existing debates on neighbourhood diversity and social cohesion by building on fieldwork in Beyoğlu, Turkey, which is the most diversified district in Istanbul. To do so the chapter explores three main questions: What are the key factors in defining others? Is defining others an obstacle in networking and building relations among the groups that differentiate themselves from others? How and under what conditions do these networks help to create trust and mutual help among distinct groups?
Compared to existing literature on super-diverse urban neighbourhoods, this chapter highlights lifestyle as an important factor in the perception of diversity and otherness. It also shows that existing group identities are relatively less important in building relations with diverse others. More precisely, the chapter argues that categories of others are relatively blurred at a local level, leading to networking among people with distinct socioeconomic characteristics, cultural backgrounds and ethnicities.
This presentation is focused on the changing discourse and practice in regional policies in the last decade, and the capacities and characteristics of Turkish regions are evaluated with respect to newly emerging discourses in the literature and EC policy practices. The presentation is organised under three headings: New discourses and trends in regional policies and practice; the characteristics of Turkish regions and their adaptive capacities; the role of regional policies in the adaptive capacities of regions and their performance. The discussions on these headings are supported by empirical studies on the role of regional policies including the factors that reveal the adaptive capacities of region to 2001 and 2008 recessionary shocks and the determinants of regional growth in the last decade. The conclusive remarks summarise the findings with respect to the possible new policies in regional development in Turkey in coming decades.
Günümüzde egemen olan neo-liberal ekonomik politikalarve bakış açsısı sadece bölgesel ve kentsel gelişim ve yönetişimi değil aynı zamanda planlama söylem ve uygulamalarında da önemli değişimler yaratmış ve planlamayı piyasa güçlerinin egemen olduğu bir alana doğru yönelendirmiştir. Son dönemdki planlama yazını bu gelişmeleri kaygı ile irdelemekte ve kırılganlıkları giderek artan bölge kentlerin sorunlarına mevcut planlama söylem ve uygulamalarının çözüm getiremediğini belirtmektedir. Bu bildiride esnek-uyum (resilience) kavramını odak olarak alan yeni bir planlama söyleminin ana özelliklerine değinilmekte ve iki özgün vurgusunu ön plana çıkarılmaktadır. Uzun dönemli ve çok etkileşimli etkileri dikkate alan bir içerik ve bu içeriğin gerçekleşebilmesi için değer sistemlerinde yeni bir buluşma.
Abstract
In the contemporary era denoted by neoliberal economic agenda, not only affected the urban development and governance but also planning discourses and practices, which pushed them more market-oriented directions. While the recent literature is increasingly critical the outcomes market dominated planning practices, it increasingly became evident that existing planning theories have not been able to deal with the increasing vulnerabilities of urban areas and regions. This paper emphasises the need for resilience thinking in planning and elaborates how this thinking will reflect on planning emphasising call for substance together with process and value systems that defines the reaction to change.
In the past decades, major cities increased their global functions and became the cores of global movements of goods, finance and human capital. As a result, they attracted people from different origins, ethnic backgrounds, religions and culture. The newcomers tended to settle in a few neighbourhoods where they mixed with people belonging to different socioeconomic statuses, occupations and lifestyles. In the past decade, these diversifying cities and neighbourhoods have received increasing interest in the literature. This is mainly concerned with whether this diverse set of people are able to create a cohesive society that can work towards the wellbeing of all its members, create a sense of belonging, promote trust and offer its members the opportunity of upward mobility (Forrest and Kearns, 2001). In other words, it is focused on social cohesion and conviviality towards others in superdiversified neighbourhoods (Vertovec, 2007).
However, in the literature, studies of neighbourhood diversity and social cohesion have been inconclusive. A number of studies to date have found that despite differences among residents, communities are able to live together in harmony if they accept and respect the identities of others. Albrow (1997) claims that individuals with very different lifestyles and social networks can live in proximity without improper interference with each other, while Vranken (2004), sharing a similar view, asserts that relationships that are non-conflictual and mutually supportive between diverse groups can be structured at a neighbourhood level. Putnam (2007), however, takes a different view, claiming that the greater the ethnic diversity in a neighbourhood, the less trust exists, leading to even lower confidence in the so-called out-group, but also to distrust within the in-group. Similarly, Amin (2002) argues that finding a balance between diversity, harmonious living and solidarity can be quite difficult. Although there are different views on the role of diversity in social cohesion, almost all of them agree that relations among existing groups with different identities are important in defining connections between diversity and social cohesion.
The existing studies, however, pay little attention to differences in the way others are perceived and defined within diverse neighbourhoods and to the implications of such differences on building relations, solidarity among different groups and mutual trust. The aim of this chapter is to contribute to existing debates on neighbourhood diversity and social cohesion by building on fieldwork in Beyoğlu, Turkey, which is the most diversified district in Istanbul. To do so the chapter explores three main questions: What are the key factors in defining others? Is defining others an obstacle in networking and building relations among the groups that differentiate themselves from others? How and under what conditions do these networks help to create trust and mutual help among distinct groups?
Compared to existing literature on super-diverse urban neighbourhoods, this chapter highlights lifestyle as an important factor in the perception of diversity and otherness. It also shows that existing group identities are relatively less important in building relations with diverse others. More precisely, the chapter argues that categories of others are relatively blurred at a local level, leading to networking among people with distinct socioeconomic characteristics, cultural backgrounds and ethnicities.
This presentation is focused on the changing discourse and practice in regional policies in the last decade, and the capacities and characteristics of Turkish regions are evaluated with respect to newly emerging discourses in the literature and EC policy practices. The presentation is organised under three headings: New discourses and trends in regional policies and practice; the characteristics of Turkish regions and their adaptive capacities; the role of regional policies in the adaptive capacities of regions and their performance. The discussions on these headings are supported by empirical studies on the role of regional policies including the factors that reveal the adaptive capacities of region to 2001 and 2008 recessionary shocks and the determinants of regional growth in the last decade. The conclusive remarks summarise the findings with respect to the possible new policies in regional development in Turkey in coming decades.
Switching the focus to how strategies and forms of depoliticised governance can be repoliticised through renewed planning mechanisms and socio-political mobilisation, Politics and Conflict in Governance and Planning is a critical and much needed contribution to the planning literature and its incorporation of the post-politics and post-democracy debate.
Abstract: In the comtemporary decade the increasing social segmentation, the emphasis on otherness in political discourse and daily practices, the negative attitude of different social groups to each other make the governance of diversity an important issue. In this paper first the evolution and the changing context of the urban diversity concept will be introduced, besides the discussion on how the existing definition of diversity is reflected in current policies, governance and planning. Second, the paper will focus on the main characteristics of the existing approach and policies towards diversity and the drawbacks of central and local governments in governing diversity. In this respect, the main question is defined as how the issue of diversity has to be handled in Turkish metropolitan areas, which are becoming more diverse as a result of domestic and international migratory flows. One of the key question addressed in this paper is whether the policies that evaluate urban areas as source of income generating tool can be consistent to the needs of the diverse social structure. The main aim of the paper, however, is defining the principles of governance for using diversity as an asset.