Journals / Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 21

A Contextual Study on Housing Location and Household Mobility

Konut Alanı Yer Seçimi ve Hanehalkı Hareketliliğine Yönelik Kuramsal Bir İnceleme

Pages
73–95
Publication Date
2006-12-01
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 evaluation of the literature is taken with a critical approach and success and failure of each model on the residential location and household mobility are discussed

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Urban development and functional differentiation made the efforts for defining the urban structure necessary.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Therefore, the preliminary studies of spatial diffusion of land value and land usage gave way to subjects such as; urban sizeland use, density, transportation, the plot of land value, location, housing density, household and its socioeconomic structure, and location tendencies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The evaluation of the literature is taken with a critical approach and success and failure of each model on the residential location and household mobility are discussed
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Konut alanı yer seçimi · hareketlilik · konut pazarı

Abstract

Urban development and functional differentiation made the efforts for defining the urban structure necessary. Therefore, the preliminary studies of spatial diffusion of land value and land usage gave way to subjects such as; urban sizeland use, density, transportation, the plot of land value, location, housing density, household and its socioeconomic structure, and location tendencies. This article studies the models of residentiallocation and mobility, which are developed after the Alonso models of urban land use and density, and intermingled with attitudal approaches and evaluated within the market conditions. The studies show that household, house and environmental characteristics are influential on the preference of housing environment. The evaluation of the literature is taken with a critical approach and success and failure of each model on the residential location and household mobility are discussed

Özet

Kentsel gelişme ve işlevsel farklılaşma değişen kent yapısının tanımlanmasına dönük araştırmaları beraberinde getirmiştir. Arazi değerlerinin ve kullanımının mekansal dağılımına dönük ilk çalışmaların yerini, kent büyüklüğü, arazinin kullanımı, yoğunluk, ulaşım, arsa değeri, yer seçimi, konut yoğunluğu, hanehalkı sosyo-ekonomik yapısı ve yerleşme eğilimleri gibi konular almıştır. Bu makalede kentsel alan kullanımı ve yoğunluk kavramlarının ele alındığı Alonso tipi modellerle geliştirilen, daha sonra davranışsal yaklaşımlarla birleştirilen ve pazar mekanizması içinde değerlendirilen konut yer seçimi ve hareketlilik modelleri incelenmektedir. Yapılan araştırmalar hanehalkının konut, konut çevresi ve hanehalkı özelliklerinin konut çevresi seçiminde belirleyici olduğunu göstermektedir. Literatür incelemesi eleştirel bir yaklaşımla ele alınmakta ve konut alanında yer seçimi ve hanehalkı hareketliliği ile ilgili modellerin başarılı ve başarısız olduğu noktalar tartışılmaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZÇAN, F. K. (2006). A Contextual Study on Housing Location and Household Mobility. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 21, 73–95. https://ajindex.com/articles/53631

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Alonso, W., Location and Land Use, Harward University Press,
  2. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1964.
  3. Amato, P., A Comparisan: Population Densities, Land Values and Socio Economics Class in Four Latin American Cities, Land Economics, 41, 4, 447-502, 1970.
  4. Anas, A., A Probabilistic Approach to The Structure of Rental Housing Markets, Journal of Urban Economics, 7, 225-247, 1980.
  5. Anas, A., From Physical to Economic Urban Models: The Lowry Framework Revisited, Advances in Urban System Modelling, Edited by Hutchınson B., Batty, M., Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., North- Holland, 163-171, 1986.
  6. Anas, A., Taste Heterogeneity and Urban Spatial Structure: The Logit Model and Monocentric Theory Reconciled, Journal of Urban Economics, 28, 318- 353, 1990.
  7. Anas, A. and Dendrinos, D., The New Urban Economic: A Brief Survey, in Essays in Mathematical Land Use Theory, Lexington Books, 1976.
  8. Bach, R.L. and Smith, J.S., Community Satisfaction, Expectations of Moving, and Migration, Demography, 14, 147-167, 1977.
  9. Bartel, A.P., The Migration Decision: What Role Does Job Mobility Play?, The American Economic Review, 69, 775-786, 1979.
  10. Batty, M., Mackie, S. The Calibration of Gravity, Entropy and Related Models of Spatial Interaction, Environment and Planning A, 4, 205-233, 1972.
  11. Bertuglia, C.S., Leonardi, G. v.d., “ An Historical Review of Approaches to Ur- ban Modelling”, Urban Systems: Contemporary Approaches to Modelling, Ed: Bertuglia, C.S. and v.d., London, New York, Sydney, 8-40, 1987.
  12. Bölen, F., Giritilioğlu, C., v.d., İstanbul Metropoliten Alanında İskan Yoğunlukla- rı ve Arazi Değerlerinin Mekansal Dağılım Modeli, Proje No:İNTAG -401, İstanbul, 1993.
  13. Bruin, M.J. and Cook, C.C., Understanding Constraints and Residential Satisfaction Among Low-Income Single-Parent Families, Environment and Behavior, 29, 532-552, 1997.
  14. Bussiere, R. and Snickars, F., Derivation of The Exponential Model By An Entropy Maximising Method, Environment and Planning A, 295-301, 1970.
  15. Cadwallader, M., Migration and Residential Mobility, The University of Wisconsin Press,
  16. London, England, 1992.
  17. Capozza, R.D. and Helsley, R.W., The Fundamentals of Land Prices and Urban Growth, Journal of Urban Economics, 26, 295-296, 1989.
  18. Clark, W.A.V. and Onaka, J.L., Life Cycle and Housing Adjustment as Explanations of Residential Mobility, Urban Studies, 20, 47-57, 1983.
  19. Clark, W.A.V., and Deurloo, M.C., Tenure Changes in The Context of Micro- Level Family and Macro-Level Economic Shifts, Urban Studies, 31, 137- 155,