Publication: Gated communities in Turkey as a governance structure: Istanbul case
The privately managed housing areas are the most common examples of decentralization of state centered governance policies and their transformation to society based management practices that can be seen in urban space. These housing areas called ‘common interest developments’ whose different examples can be traced over the world are such residential areas whose residents form some certain management structures to regularize common rules within contracts. Those housing complexes including various social, physical and environmental features; facilities, services and activity areas are managed by a user group consisted of residents or a representative government body with unique internal structures. Those privately managed areas commonly known as CID are the fastest spreading housing structure around the world (McKenzie, 2003). CID, seen as a form of privatization of local government also symbolizes the reducing local government dependency and rising trust for market systems. CID areas, whose common characteristics are being privately managed, have various types in various names (McKenzie, 2003; Ruju, 2014; Tummers, 2015; Chiodelli 2015). Gated communities have become the most controversial type of CID included in CID literature which has been spreading over the world sincethe 1970s. The most well-known and accepted definitions of gated communities generally imply the privatization of public space and restricted access to housing area (Blake and Snyder, 1997). The common view explaining the emergence of gated communities refers to the safety need originating through the effect of global neoliberal restructuring over the social polarization (Tanülkü, 2012). In that sense, gated communities are the structures emerge in the urban space where social housing and public spaces lose their meaning, gentrificated, entrepreneur and privatized areas arise while urban regeneration works towards city center, mega projects and imbalanced development create neoliberal city (Hackworth, 2007). Those places isolated via physical and cultural barriers from the rest of the society are supported by an internal governance mechanism. Thus, a private governance mechanism operating certain rules to provide order and maintenance is applied for these housing areas (Atkinson and Blandy, 2009; Soja, 2000).
Book of proceedings: Annual AESOP Congress, Spaces of Dialog for Places of Dignity, Lisbon, 11-14th July, 2017
All rights reserved