Journals / İDEALKENT / 2026 / Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3

Globalization, City and Culture

Küreselleşme, Kent ve Kültür

Şerife Geniş(ADNAN MENDERES ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Journal
İDEALKENT
Pages
48–61
Publication Date
2010-05-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The last section, looks at the impact of the new urban economy and urban politics on urban culture and life. 

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Since the 1980s we have witnessed a remarkable transformations in the cities around the world and in Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:These changes resulted in significant impacts on urban life.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The last section, looks at the impact of the new urban economy and urban politics on urban culture and life. 
🔬Design:Derleme
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:küreselleşme · kent · kültür

Abstract

Since the 1980s we have witnessed a remarkable transformations in the cities around the world and in Turkey. These changes resulted in significant impacts on urban life. This article seeks to analyze why and how the concept of culture occupies a central place in our efforts to understand these changes in economic, social and spatial fields. The first section of the article looks at the increasing role and significance of culture in the organization of urban economy and its social impacts. The second part analyzes the role of culture in the transformation of urban space. The last section, looks at the impact of the new urban economy and urban politics on urban culture and life. 

Özet

1980’lerden beridir dünyada ve Türkiye’de ba ş ta metropoller olmak üzere bütün kentlerin önemli de ğ i ş imler ya ş adı ğ ına tanık olduk. Bu de ğ i ş imlerin kentsel ya ş amın farklı kertelerinde derin etkileri oldu. Bu çalı ş ma, günümüz kentlerindeki ekonomik, toplumsal ve mekansal alanlarda ya ş anan bu deneyimleri anlamada kültür kavramının neden ve nasıl merkezi bir rol oynadı ğ ını incelemeyi amaçlıyor. Yazının ilk bölümü, kentsel ekonominin organizasyonunda ve toplumsal etkilerinde kültürün artan rolüne ve önemine de ğ iniyor. İ kinci bölüm, kentsel mekanın dönü ş ümünde kültürün rolünü inceliyor. Son bölüm de, yeni kent ekonomisi ve kent politikalarının kent kültürü ve ya ş amı üzerindeki etkilerine dair bir kaç tespitte bulunuyor. 

🔖

Cite This Article

Geniş, Ş. (2010). Globalization, City and Culture. İDEALKENT, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3, 48–61. https://ajindex.com/articles/1094690

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (36)

  1. Aksoy, A. & Robins K. 1994. Istanbul between Civilization and Discontent, New Perspectives on Turkey (10), ss. 57-74. Ayata, S. 2002. The New Middle Class and the Joys of Suburbia, D. Kandiyoti ve A. Saktanber (der.) Fragments of Culture, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
  2. Bartu Candan, A. & Kolluoğlu, B. 2008. Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: A Gated Town and a Public Housing Project in Istanbul, New Perspectives on Turkey, No. 39, ss. 5-47.
  3. Boratav, K. 1995. İstanbul ve Anadolu'dan Sınıf Profilleri. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayınları.
  4. Castells, M. 1996. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Vol. I. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  5. Çağlar, K. 1992. İstanbul'u Nasıl Satmalı? İstanbul (3), ss. 81-85.
  6. Çağlar, K. & Öncü, A. 1993. Istanbul and the Concept of World Cities. Istanbul: Friedrich Ebert Foundation.
  7. Danış, D. & Perouse J. F. 2005. Zenginliğin Mekanda Yansımaları: İstanbul’da Güven likli Siteler, Toplum ve Bilim, 104, ss. 92-103.
  8. Demirtaş, N., & Şen, S. (2007) Varoş Identity: The redefition of low income settlements in Turkey, Middle Eastern Studies, 43 (1), ss. 87-106.
  9. Erman, T. 2004. Gecekondu çalışmalarında “öteki” olarak gecekondulu kurguları. European Journal of Turkish Studies, Thematic Issue 1, Erişilme tarihi, 02.12.2005, http://www.ejts.org/document85.html.
  10. Etöz, Z. (2000) Varoş: Bir istila, bir tehdit! Birikim,132, 49-53.
  11. Fainstein, S. 1996. The Changing World Economy and Urban Restructuring. S. Fainstein & S. Campbell (der.) UrbanTheory, Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  12. Featherstone, M. 1991. Consumer Culture & Postmodernism. London: Sage Publications. Geniş, Ş. 2007. Producing Elite Localities: The Rise of Gated Communities in Istanbul, Urban Studies, 44(4), ss. 771-798.
  13. Hall, T., and P. Hubbard. 1998. The Entreprenurial City. Chichester: Wiley.
  14. Hannigan, J. 1998. Fantasy City, Pleasure and Profit in the Postmodern Metropolis. London: Routledge.
  15. Harvey, D. 1989. From Managerialism to Entreprenurialism: The Transformation of Urban Governance in Late Capitalism, Geographiska Annaler B 71 (1), ss. 3-18.
  16. . 1990. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. London: Blackwell.
  17. Held, D., and A. McGrew. 1999. Global Transformations: Politics, Economics and Culture. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  18. İslam, T. & Behar D (Derleyenler). 2006. İstanbul’da Soylulaştırma: Eski Kentin Yeni Sakinleri. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  19. Jessop, B. 1997. The Entrepreneurial City, N. Jewson ve S. MacGregor (der.) Transforming Cities: Contested Governance and New Spatial Divisions, London and New York: Routledge.
  20. Knox, P. L. 1993. Capital, Material Culture and Socio-spatial Differentiation, P. L. Knox (der.) The Restless Urban Landscape, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prencite Hall.
  21. Kurtuluş, H. 2005a. İstanbul’da Kapalı Yerleşmeler: Beykoz Konakları Örneği, H. Kurtuluş (der.) İstanbul’da Kentsel Ayrışma, İstanbul: Bağlam. ———. 2005b. Bir Ütopya Olarak Bahçeşehir, H. Kurtuluş (der.) İstanbul’da Kentsel Ayrışma, İstanbul: Bağlam.
  22. Kuyucu, T. & Ünsal, Ö. 2010. State-led Property Transfer: An Analysis of Two cases of Urban Renewal in Istanbul, Urban Studies, 47 (7), ss. 1479-1499. Low, S. 1997. Urban Fear: Building Fortress America. City and Society (Annual Review), ss. 52-72.
  23. The Edge and the Center: Gated Communities and the Discourse of Fear. American Anthropologist 103 (1), ss. 45-58.
  24. Marcuse, P. 1997. The Enclave, the Citadel, and the Ghetto. Urban Affairs Review 33 (2), ss. 228-264.
  25. Öncü, A. 1999. Istanbulites and Others: The Cultural Cosmology of Being Middle Class in the Era of Globalism. Ç. Keyder (der.) Istanbul Between the Global and the Local, New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
  26. Sassen, S. 1991. The Global City. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  27. Scott, A. J. 1997. The Cultural Economy of Cities, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 21 (2), ss. 323–339.
  28. Smith, N. 2002. New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Strategy, Antipode 34 (3), ss. 434-457.
  29. Sönmez, M. 1996. İstanbul'un "İki Yüzü": 1980'den 2000'e Değişim. İstanbul: Arkadaş.
  30. İstanbul'da Gelir Dağılımı Eşitsizliği Ürkütücü. Power Temmuz, ss. 18-25.
  31. Urry, J. 2002. The Tourist Gaze. Londra: Sage.
  32. Wilson, D. 2001. Colouring the City: 'Black-on-Black Violence' and Liberal Discourse, Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geographie, 92 (3), ss. 261-278.
  33. Yardımcı, S. 2005. Kentsel Değişim ve Festivalism: Küreselleşen İstanbul’da Bienal. İstanbul: İletişim.
  34. Yeoh, B. S. A. 2005. The Global Cultural City? Spatial Imagineering and Politics in the (Multi)cultural Marketplaces of South-east Asia, Urban Studies, 42 (5/6), ss. 945-958
  35. Zukin, S. 1997. Cultural Strategies of Development and the Hegemony of Vision, A. Merrifield ve E. Swyndegouw (der.), The Urbanization of Injustice, New York: New York University Press.
  36. . 1998. Urban Lifestyles: Diversity and Standardization in Spaces of Consumption, Urban Studies 35 (5-6), ss. 825-839.