Journals / İTÜ Dergisi Seri A: Mimarlık, Planlama, Tasarım / 2006 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

A model for migration-attachment relations: example Berlin/Kreuzberg

Göç-aidiyet ilişkisinin belirlenmesi için model: Berlin/Kreuzberg örneği

Pages
59–70
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)

Because they have lost their identity and don’t know where they belong to and this is reflected in their houses, equipments and behaviors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study defines the attachment of immigrants in their new housing environment.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A model for defining attachment level in the immigrated environments has been progressed similar to the model of territoriality.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Because they have lost their identity and don’t know where they belong to and this is reflected in their houses, equipments and behaviors.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study defines the attachment of immigrants in their new housing environment. The attachment and identity characteristics of immigrants have been examined in this study. The core elements of identity searched, and cultural, social, historical and selfidentity are defined. The identities of urban housing settlements, spatial and housing are searched in relation with social and individual characteristics of identity. Meaning, territoriality, and privacy concepts are included in the research since they are considered as the important factors while working on the issues of identity. Behavioral model of territoriality emphasizes the importance of appropriation and its interaction with the place attachment. A model for defining attachment level in the immigrated environments has been progressed similar to the model of territoriality. Place and group attachment of Turkish immigrants and Turkish-Germans who live densely in Kreuzberg has been determined by using the migration - attachment model. With the fieldwork, attachment of the Turkish immigrants in Kreuzberg has been proved. Questionnaires, interviews, observations, and signs showed that there is no attachment but a double identity structure for the Turkish immigrants and Turkish-German people. Some people are also in search for a new identity. Because they have lost their identity and don’t know where they belong to and this is reflected in their houses, equipments and behaviors.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı göç eden insanların konut çevrelerinde aidiyetlerinin belirlenmesidir. Göçmenlerin aidiyet oluşumları ve kimlik değişimleri irdelenmektedir. Öncelikle kimliğin öz elemanları ele alınarak kültürel kimlik, toplumsal kimlik, tarihi kültürel kimlik ve bireysel kimlik incelenmiştir. Kimliğin sosyal, bireysel özelliklerinin etkisi ile oluşan kent kimliği, konut yerleşmeleri kimliği, mekânsal kimlik ve konut kimliği irdelenmiştir. Egemenlik alanına ilişkin davranış modeli, mekânı kendilemenin önemli bir yer tuttuğunu ve aidiyetle karşılıklı ilişki içinde olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. Bu model temel alınarak göç sonucu konut çevrelerinde aidiyetin belirlenmesi için bir model geliştirilmiştir. Model çerçevesinde Almanya’ya göç eden Türklerin yaşadığı Berlin-Kreuzberg’te bir uygulama gerçekleştirilmiştir. Alan çalışması sonucunda Kreuzberg’te yaşayan Türk göçmenlerin aidiyeti konusunda tespitler yapılmıştır. Göçmenlerin aidiyetlerinin oluşmadığı, ikili kimlik yapısı olduğu ve sonuçlarının konutlarına, eşyalarına ve davranışlarına yansıdığı saptanmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ILGIN, C., HACIHASANOĞLU, O. (2022). A model for migration-attachment relations: example Berlin/Kreuzberg. İTÜ Dergisi Seri A: Mimarlık, Planlama, Tasarım, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 59–70. https://ajindex.com/articles/556775

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Altman, Rapoport, Wohlwill, (1980).
  2. Human behavior and environment, Advances in Theory and Research, Rapoport, A., Cross-Cultural Aspects of Environmental Design, Plenium Press, New York and London. 2.Bilgin, N.(1996). İnsan ilişkileri ve kimlik; Sistem Yayıncılık, Istanbul. 3.Duncan, S.J., (1981) (Ed.). Housing and ıdentity cross-cultural perspectives; Duncan,J., Introduction, Croom Helm Ltd., London. 4.Edney, (1976).
  3. Human territories, March, Environment & Behavior, 42. 5.Güvenç, B., (1996). Türk kimliği, kültür tarihinin kaynakları, Remzi Kitabevi AŞ., İstanbul. 6.John, B. (2000).
  4. Türkische Berlinerinnen und Berliner, Die Auslaenderbeauftragte des Senats von Berlin, Pressemitteilung, Berlin. 7.Jonker,G.(1999). Kern und Rand. Religiöse Minderheiten aus der Türkei in Deutschland. Zentrum Moderner Orient, Verlag Das Arabische Buch, Berlin. 8.Lawrence,R. (1987). Housing, dwellings and homes, Design Theory, research and practice, John Wiley + Sons, Great Britain. 9.Rapoport,A. (1982).
  5. The meaning of the built environment, Sage Publications, California. 10.Rapoport,A. (1980). Cross cultural aspects of environmental design, I. Altman & J. Wohlwill (eds.) Human Behavior and Environment, Plenium Press, New York. 11.Suher,H.(1995).
  6. Şehircilik Yardımcı Ders Kitabı, İ.T.Ü Mimarlık Fakültesi Baskı Atölyesi, İstanbul. Tagesspiegel, 26.06.1983. Gazete ilanı. 12.Tap, P. (1979). Introduction, identites collectives et changements sociaux, ed. Privat, Toulouse, s.11- 18. Bilgin, N. (1996). İnsan İlişkileri ve Kimlik; Sistem Yayıncılık, Istanbul’dan alınmıştır. 13.Wiberg, (1993). Medium sized cities and renewal strategies, The Journal of the Regional Science Association International, Papers in Regional Science,72,2