Search

Copyright of Urban Studies (Sage Publications, Ltd.) is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

With this paper, we analyse an ordinary urban process, which has received little attention so far, and propose a new concept to take account of it: plotting urbanism. It is usually subsumed under terms like "urban informality" or "incremental urbanism" and not studied as a distinct process. In comparing Lagos, Istanbul and Shenzhen we captured four defining features of plotting urbanism: first, it unfolds in a piecemeal fashion with limited comprehensive planning. Second, it emerges from specific territorial compromises often resulting from conflicts between overlapping modes of territorial regulation, land tenure and property rights. Third, plotting is based on commodification of housing and land, which might accentuate socio‐economic differentiations between property‐owners, who often live in the same area, and their tenants. The term "plotting" highlights the key role of the plot in the process. It also alludes to strategic acts of collaboration for individual and collective benefit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Istanbul is undergoing a radical and dramatic restructuring as the authorities seek to bring about a 'Neoliberal Modernisation' of the city. This centres on the promotion of market-oriented rationality, and private property. Current plans envisage restructuring huge swathes of the city to bring about functioning land and property markets. The resulting threat to residents and communities has provoked widespread but sporadic resistance. This paper sets the pressure for the social 'purging' of Istanbul in the context of the global spread of Authoritarian NeoLiberalism. After describing the main features of the Turkish variant, and noting the parallels to autocratic rule in late Ottoman Istanbul, it traces the impact on local communities. Three cases studies of responses to regeneration plans, drawn from both the European and Asian sides of the city, reveal the diversity of local responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Istanbul is one of the largest metropolitan cities in the World. The city has experienced rapid industrialization and urbanization in the second half of the twentieth century. Between 1950 and 2000, the city has grown by an average of 4.5% annually. Given the scale of the growth, neither local nor the central governments have shown capability of controlling the influx of migration, most of which settled illegally on public lands. Most of the settlements lack the basic sewerage facilities, and a significant portion of which are on the major water resource basins. As of today, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) not only has to cope with the infrastructure problems, but also has to find ways of solving the problem of illegal occupations of public lands and water resource basins. This paper presents the land use changes in the water resource basins providing water to the Istanbul Metropolitan Area. Using four consecutive Landsat images between 1990 and 2005, the changes in 12 different land use categories are obtained via overlay operations by GIS for water resource basins surrounding the City of Istanbul. It has been observed that the most critical land use changes are in the nearest basins to the city. The capability of Landsat and IKONOS images in determining the alterations in the macro form of the city are also discussed. Finally, possibility of utilization of new technologies in policy making regarding environmental management in Istanbul is discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Urban Academy/ Kent Akademisi is the property of ICAM NETWORK and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Natural disasters have been increased in areas, where people live densely, day by day. Istanbul 1999, Van 2011, and Izmir 2020 earthquakes were just some of the tragic events in the near past in Turkiye. The aim of this study was to define Van 2011 earthquakes effects as a sample on urban development by using land use/land cover projecting techniques. In this case, Van urban development (in urban macroform scale) was simulated without Van 2011 earthquakes based on existing urban development using the Cellular Automata Markov Chain (CA-MARKOV) approach for the year 2018. Effects of the earthquake were determined on urban development by comparing modeling results with observed 2018 built up areas. So that significant physical and social driving factors were evaluated including road distance, slope, hillshade, ground stability, and land use ability, and weighting values on urban development were calculated under the influence of the natural disaster. Van urban built up areas were mapped using high-spatial resolution remote sensing instruments such as SPOT, ASTER, RapidEye, and Göktürk 2 satellite dataset for 1988—2002—2011, and 2018 images applying an object-based classification approach (OBC). First of all, the model was validated using 1988, 2002, and 2011 urban development maps. The Kappa accuracy was found to be 0.85, respectively, for the model. Defined urbanization drivers were applied to the 2002–2011 time period to simulate 2018 urban areas without any earthquake. The results indicated that urban areas were affected by earthquakes. If there was no earthquake, urban development to the periphery would be 30% less. Additionally, 10% more built up areas would be constructed on ground sensitive areas, and only 2% of the new constructions would be established on suitable lands. Today this ratio is around 8%. As a result, urban development has been a trend to move from flat land to slight slopes and has been moved away from roads and settlements. It was determined that the spread into the city was accelerated as well as spread toward the periphery due to the earthquake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]