Journals / PLANLAMA / 2017 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1

Do it Yourself (DIY) Movement in Urban Space Production

Kentsel Mekân Üretiminde ‘Kendin Yap’ Hareketi

Journal
PLANLAMA
Pages
57–74
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)

Besides, there are negative aspects such as being illegal activities and having integration problems with comprehensive planning decisions

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Even though urbanism is usually realized within a plan, it is sometimes formed by spontanous interventions of various actors.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study deals with the second type that includes small scale practices spontaneously realized in cities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Besides, there are negative aspects such as being illegal activities and having integration problems with comprehensive planning decisions
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Even though urbanism is usually realized within a plan, it is sometimes formed by spontanous interventions of various actors. This study deals with the second type that includes small scale practices spontaneously realized in cities. The aim of this study is to examine the examples of these movements, which are known as ‘do it yourself urbanism’ (DIY urbanism) or ‘tactical urbanism’, in terms of their actors and purposes and to put forward the effects of these practices on urban space and urbanism process. To manage this aim, research techniques including literature review, media search, observation and case studies are used. The findings of this study shows that the actors involved in these movements are local people, activist groups, public institutions or municipalities, universities, private entrepreneurs and other individuals. It is found that the main purposes of these practices are resolving a need, providing urban easthetics or art, taking advantage of private or commercial benefits and reacting to various issues. The positive aspects of do it yourself urbanism are determined as having the possibility of beautifying and making urban space more livable, walkable and user friendly, providing direct participation of users in urbanism process and proposing practical, implementable and flexible solutions. Besides, there are negative aspects such as being illegal activities and having integration problems with comprehensive planning decisions

Özet

Kentleşme çoğu zaman planlı gerçekleşse de kimi zaman çeşitli aktörlerin spontane müdahaleleri ile şekillenmektedir. Bu çalışma bunlardan ikincisi olan yani kentlerde kendiliğinden gerçekleşen küçük ölçekli uygulamaları ele almaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı 'kendin yap kentleşmesi' (DIY Urbanism) ya da 'taktiksel kentleşme' (Tactical Urbanism) adıyla bilinen bu hareketlerin örneklerini aktörleri ve amaçları açısından incelemek ve bu uygulamaların kentsel mekâna ve kentleşme sürecine etkilerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu amacı gerçekleştirebilmek için literatür taraması, medya araştırması, gözlem ve örnek inceleme araştırma teknikleri kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın bulguları bu hareketlere dâhil olan aktörlerin mahalleliler, aktivist gruplar, kamu kurumları veya belediyeler, üniversiteler, özel girişimciler ve diğer şahıslar olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu uygulamaların en belirgin amaçları bir ihtiyacın giderilmesi, kentsel estetik veya sanat arayışı, şahsi veya ticari fayda sağlama ve çeşitli konularda verilen tepkiler olarak bulunmuştur. Kendin yap kentleşmesinin olumlu yanları kentsel mekânı daha yaşanabilir, yürünebilir ve kullanıcıya uygun hale getirme ve güzelleştirme olasılığının olması, kentleşme sürecine kullanıcıların doğrudan katılımını sağlaması ve pratik, uygulanabilir ve esnek çözümler getirmesi olarak saptanmıştır. Bunların yanında izinsiz eylemler olması ve kapsayıcı planlama kararlarıyla entegrasyon sorunları gibi olumsuz yanları da bulunmaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

KAYA, İ. A., GÖRGÜN, E. K. (2017). Do it Yourself (DIY) Movement in Urban Space Production. PLANLAMA, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 1, 57–74. https://ajindex.com/articles/300514

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Benner, S. M. (2013). Tactical Urbanism: From Civil Disobedience to Civic Improvement. The University of Texas. Campo, D. (2014). Iconic eyesores: exploring do-it-yourself preservation and civic improvement at abandoned train stations in Buffalo and Detroit. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 7(4), 351–380. http://doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.952322
  2. De Wandeler, K. (2015). Learning Tactical Urbanism: An Action-Research Workshop in Brussels, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on ‘Cities, People and Places’, ICCPP, Ekim 2015,
  3. Colombo, Sri Lanka. https://www. researchgate.net/publication/283319667_Learning_tactical_urbanism_an_action-research_workshop_in_Brussels, Erişim Tarihi 21 Şubat 2016.
  4. Deslandes, A. (2013). Exemplary amateurism: thoughts on DIY urbanism. Cultural Studies Review, 19(1), 216-227.
  5. Douglas, G. C. C. (2014). Do-It-Yourself Urban Design: The Social Practice of Informal “Improvement” Through Unauthorized Alteration. City & Community, 13(1), 5–25. http://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12029
  6. Enigbokan, A. (2015). Delai Sam: social activism as contemporary art in the emerging discourse of DIY urbanism in Russia. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 1–16. http://doi.org/10. 1080/ 17549175.2015.1029507 Fabian, L., & Samson, K. (2015). Claiming participation – a comparative analysis of DIY urbanism in Denmark. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 1–19. http:// doi.org/10.1080/17549175. 2015.1056207 Finn, D. (2014-1). Introduction to the special issue on DIY urbanism. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 7(4), 331-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014. 959154 Finn, D. (2014-2). DIY urbanism: implications for cities. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 7(4), 381-398. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17549175.2014.891149
  7. Gamez, J. L. S., & Sorensen, J. (2014). No more waiting for Superman: teaching DIY urbanism and reflexive practice. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 7(4), 333– 350. http://doi.org/10.1080/ 17549175.2014.909516 Iveson, K. (2013). Cities within the city: Do-it-yourself Urbanism and the Right to the City. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 941-956. http://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12053
  8. Jabareen, Y. (2014). “Do it y