4.3 Article

Land disputes on the outskirts of Istanbul: a unique case of legalization amidst demolitions and forced evictions

期刊

ENVIRONMENT AND URBANIZATION
卷 32, 期 1, 页码 69-88

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0956247819893187

关键词

forced evictions; gecekondu; Istanbul; land legalization; planning; self-built popular neighbourhoods; state mediation; urban struggles

资金

  1. l'Agence universitaire de la francophonie (AUF, MeRSI Program)
  2. l'Institut de recherche sur le Maghreb contemporain (IRMC, Tunis)
  3. Centre d'etudes et de documentation economiques juridiques et sociales (Cedej, Cairo)
  4. l'Institut francais recherche en Iran (IFRI, Theran)
  5. l'Institut francais d'etudes anatoliennes (IFEA, Istanbul)
  6. l'Universite Paris 8 Vincennes Saint-Denis
  7. l'Ecole nationale superieure d'architecture de Paris -La Villette
  8. l'Universite de Damas
  9. l'Universite Galatasaray (Istanbul)
  10. Development Planning Unit (DPU) at University College of London
  11. Centre SUD (Paris)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper focuses on struggles for land by ordinary people in globalizing cities. By drawing on three cases in Istanbul, it explores the circumstances under which these struggles can be successful. It analyses the evolution of the self-built settlements of Ayazma, Yakacik and Hurriyet and their varied outcomes, from legalization to razing. Three conditions seem to explain why land titling was obtained in Yakacik and proved impossible elsewhere. One is specific to land ownership. The second reason revolves around the mediating role and political commitment of a district municipality, primarily through the engagement of one of its decision-makers in favour of poor residents. The third reason relates to the nature and form of Yakacik residents' mobilization and organizations. All of these conditions are essential; none is sufficient individually. The difficulty of bringing all these conditions together at one time and in one place explains the exceptional nature of the case in point.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据