Journals / ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning / 2018 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

Rural Gentrification in The North Aegean Countryside (Turkey)

Pages
99–125
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

On the other hand, replacement of theagricultural sector by the service sector and change in land use createspost-productive landscape in North Aegean Countryside.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article examines rural gentrification as experienced on the NorthAegean coasts of Turkey.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study is based principally on indepthinterviews with village mukhtars, local people, newcomers,tourism entrepreneurs, and professionals.While the rural gentrification process in Turkey, a Mediterraneancountry, shows similarities with the gentrification process in rural areasof developed Western countries, differences can be observed as well.Depopulation in rural areas since 1950s and development of tourism incoastal areas after 1980 has brought about the investmentdisinvestmentcycle, which is in the rural gentrification theory.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:On the other hand, replacement of theagricultural sector by the service sector and change in land use createspost-productive landscape in North Aegean Countryside.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This article examines rural gentrification as experienced on the NorthAegean coasts of Turkey. The study area chosen is the closest Aegeancoast to İstanbul and it attracts attention because of its archeological andmythological values, as well as its natural beauty and vernacularlandscape. The most important element determining the rural landscapeof the region is olive production. The study is based principally on indepthinterviews with village mukhtars, local people, newcomers,tourism entrepreneurs, and professionals.While the rural gentrification process in Turkey, a Mediterraneancountry, shows similarities with the gentrification process in rural areasof developed Western countries, differences can be observed as well.Depopulation in rural areas since 1950s and development of tourism incoastal areas after 1980 has brought about the investmentdisinvestmentcycle, which is in the rural gentrification theory. It hasbeen observed that in the rural area where tourism facilities have beenimproved, gentrification occurs in parallel. The migration of middle classto the villages has transformed the traditional land use and rural landscape. The newcomers, who are well educated and having aprofession, use the houses in the villages as summerhouses. While stonehouses unique to the region are purchased and restored, buildings usedfor agricultural production are transformed into summerhouses orbuildings used for tourism. The increase in the demand for new housingthreatens the olive groves and increasing real estate prices make itdifficult for local people to acquire property in the villages.Reinvestment, social class change and the process of displacement,pointed out in the literature on the rural gentrification, are also observedin the North Aegean countryside. However, the real estate market did notyet play a significant role in the rural gentrification in this area, unlike indeveloped Western countries. On the other hand, replacement of theagricultural sector by the service sector and change in land use createspost-productive landscape in North Aegean Countryside.

🔖

Cite This Article

UYSAL, A. B., SAKARYA, İ. (2022). Rural Gentrification in The North Aegean Countryside (Turkey). ICONARP International Journal Of Architecture And Planning, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 99–125. https://ajindex.com/articles/538336

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Adatepe Köyü, (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2011, http://www.adatepekoyu.com/
  2. Aksoy, Y. (2008). Rakamlarla Küçükkuyu Beldesi. Küçükkuyu Değerleri Sempozyumu (pp. 1-9). Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  3. Atabay, M. (2008). Mübadiller Küçükkuyu’da. Küçükkuyu Değerleri Sempozyumu (pp. 89-115). Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Yayınları. B2 Evi: Arkiv. (n.d.). Retrieved March 30, 2011, from Arkiv (The Architectural Journal) Website: http://www.arkiv.com.tr/proje/b2-evi/1858
  4. Başaran-Uysal, A. (2017). Kırsalda Koruma ve Soylulaştırma İkilemi. Ege Mimarlık Dergisi, Mayıs 2017, 36-39.
  5. Bijker, R. A., Haartsen, T., & Strijker, D. (2012). Migration to lesspopular rural areas in the Netherlands: Exploring the motivations. Journal of Rural Studies(28), pp. 490-498.
  6. Boyle, S. C. (2008).
  7. Natural and Cultural Resouces, The protection of vernacular landscape. In R. Longstreth, Cultural Landscapes: Balancing Nature and Heritage in Preservation Practice. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
  8. Boynudelik, M. (2008). Zeytin Kültürü: Miras ve Sorumluluk. Küçükkuyu Değerleri Sempozyumu (pp. 43-50). Çanakkale: Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  9. Chaney, P., & Sherwood, K. (2000). The resale of right to buy dwellings: a case study of migration and social change in rural England. Journal of Rural Studies(16), pp. 79-94.
  10. Cloke, P. (1985). Counterurbanisation: A Rural Perspective,. Geography, 70(1), pp. 13-23.
  11. Cloke, P., & Thrift, N. (1987). Intra-class conflict in rural areas. Journal of Rural Studies 3(4), pp. 321-333.
  12. Cloke, P., & Thrift, N. (1990). Class change and conflict in rural areas. In T. Marsden, P. Lowe, & S. Whatmore, Rural restructuring (pp. 165–181). London: David Fulton Publishers.
  13. Çamur, C. K., & Yenigül, S. B. (2009). The Rural-Urban Transformation Through Urban Sprawl: An Assessment Of Ankara Metropolitan Area. The 4th International Conference Of The International Forum On Urbanism (IIFoU):. Amsterdam/Delft. Retrieved May 12, 2012, from http://newurbanquestion.ifou.org/proceedings/ 7%20The%20New%20Metropolitan%20Region/E016_S evinc%20Bahar_Yenigul_TheNewUrabanQuestionForm.p df Darling, E. (2005). The City In The Country: Wilderness Gentrification and The Rent Gap. Environment and Planning A (37), pp. 1015-1032.
  14. Davidson, M., & Lees, L. (2005). New-build `gentrification' and London's riverside renaissance. Environment and Planning A, 1165-1190.
  15. Dean, K. G. (1984). The Conceptualisation of Counterurbanisation. Area 1