Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T11:06:07.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of Urban Regeneration: The Case of the Fener and Balat Initiative

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Dikmen Bezmez
Dikmen Bezmez*
Affiliation:
Binghamton University, Sociology Department, LT 3rd-4th floors, Box 6000, Binghamton, NY, 13902-6000, bi90492@binghamton.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since the late 1990s, Fener and Balat, two adjacent historic neighborhoods on the shoreline of the Golden Horn (Haliç) in İstanbul, have been the stage of urban regeneration efforts. Following a process of de-industrialization in the mid-1980s, these efforts have aimed to revitalize the area through the promotion of tourism. Today, almost ten years after the initial attempts, regeneration remains incomplete. This essay explores the reasons underlying this “failure.” For this purpose, I focus on the key actors, their interests and power struggles within the context of the project. I argue that one needs to highlight the particularities of the institutional arrangements at the district, city and national levels in order to explain the situation in Fener and Balat. More specifically, due to the absence of relatively autonomous market mechanisms, the lack of the private sector's involvement, the gap between the public sector's interests and the demands of the market, and the effectiveness of electoral politics at the district level, the case of Fener and Balat has been shaped by district mayors and local communities reluctant to implement and participate in the project.

Keywords

globalizationurban regenerationgentrificationpower dynamicsİstanbulFener and Balat
Type
Articles
Information
New Perspectives on Turkey , Volume 37 , Fall 2007 , pp. 59 - 86
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adranovich, Greg, Burbank, Matthew J., and Charles, Heying. “Olympic Cities: Lessons Learned from Mega-Event Politics.” Journal of Urban Affairs 23, no. 2 (2001): 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akin, Nur. “Balat.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: Tarih Vakı, 1994.Google Scholar
Ayata, Bilgin, and Yükseker, Deniz. “A Belated Awakening: National and International Responses to the Internal Displacement of Kurds in Turkey.” New Perspectives on Turkey, no. 32 (2005): 5–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayla, Filiz. “Balat ve Fener'de Tanıklıklarımız… 2003.” In Dünü ve Bugünü ile Haliç Sempozyumu, edited by Göncüoğlu, Süleyman F., 545–551. İstanbul: Kadir Has Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2004.Google Scholar
Barnes, John, Colenutt, Bob, and Patrick, Malone. “London: Docklands and the State.” In City, Capital and Water, edited by Malone, Patrick, 15–37. London: Routledge, 1996.Google Scholar
Bartu, Ayfer. “Who Owns the Old Quarters?” In İstanbul: Between the Global and the Local, edited by Keyder, Çağlar, 31–47. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999.Google Scholar
Bassett, Keith. “Urban Cultural Strategies and Urban Regeneration: A Case Study and Critique.” Environment and Planning A 25, no. 12 (1993): 1773–1788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Bir Tarihi Ev de Siz Alın.” Sabah, 7 April 1999.Google Scholar
Bongenaar, Arne, and Malone, Patrick. “Amsterdam: The Waterfront in the 1990s.” In City, Capital and Water, edited by Malone, Patrick, 240–261. London: Routledge, 1996.Google Scholar
Çelik, A. Betül. “‘I Miss My Village!’: Forced Kurdish Migrants in İstanbul and Their Representation in Associations.” New Perspectives on Turkey, no. 32 (2005): 137–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deleon, Jak. Balat ve Çevresi: İstanbul'un Fethi ve Haliç Semtleri, İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2001.Google Scholar
Desfor, Gene, and Jørgensen, John. “Flexible Urban Governance: The Case of Copenhagen's Recent Waterfront Development.” European Planning Studies 12, no. 4 (2004): 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erden, D. “Kentsel Yenileşmede Bir Araç Olarak Dönüşüm Projeleri.” Ph. D. Dissertation, Mimar Sinan University, 2003.Google Scholar
Erendil, Asuman Türkün, and Ulusoy, Zuhal. “İronik Karşılaşmalar: Kale'nin Kentle ve Kentin Kale'yle İki Karşılaşması.” In Şehrin Zulası: Ankara Kalesi, edited by Bora, Tanıl, 221–287. İstanbul: İletişim, 2004.Google Scholar
Ergüder, Üstün. “Patterns of Authority.” In Local Government in Turkey: Governing Greater İstanbul, edited by Heper, Metin. London: Routledge, 1989.Google Scholar
Ergün, Nilgün. “Gentrification Kuramlarının İstanbul'da Uygulanabilirliği.” In İstanbul'da “Soylulaştırma”: Eski Kentin Yeni Sahipleri, edited by Behar, David and Islam, Tolga, 17–31. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2006.Google Scholar
Falay, Nihat, Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin, and Özkırımlı, Umut. Belediyelerin Mali Yönetimi: iktisadi ve Siyasal bir Çözümleme, İstanbul: TESEV Yayınları, 1996.Google Scholar
Feldman, Merje. “Urban Waterfront Regeneration and Local Governance in Tallinn.” Europe-Asia Studies 52, no. 5 (2000): 829–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foundation for the Support of Women's Work Fener-Balat Semtleri Araştırma Raporu, İstanbul: Unpublished Report, 2004.Google Scholar
Göktaş, Uğur. “Haliç.” In Dünden Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi. İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı, 1994.Google Scholar
Gomez, Maria V. “Reflective Images: The Case of Urban Regeneration in Glasgow and Bilbao.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 22, no. 1 (1998): 106–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gündüz, Serpil. “Haliç Deniz Kimliğine Kavuşuyor.” Cumhuriyet, 2 January 1989.Google Scholar
“Haliç 2 Yıl Sonra Plaj Olarak Kullanılabilir.” Cumhuriyet, 8 May 1986.Google Scholar
“Haliç'te Yeni Çağ.” Hürriyet, 4 December 1997.Google Scholar
Harding, Alan. “Urban Regimes and Growth Machines: Toward a Cross-National Research Agenda.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 29, no. 3 (1994): 356–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, Alan, “Urban Regimes in a Europe of the Cities?” European Urban and Regional Studies 4, no. 4 (1997): 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, David. The Condition of Postmodernity. Cambridge: Blackwell, 1989.Google Scholar
Harvey, David, “From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism.” Geografiska Annaler 71, no. 1 (1989): 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hastings, Annette. “Unraveling the Process of ‘Partnership’ in Urban Regeneration Policy.” Urban Studies 33, no. 2 (1996): 253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, Jeffrey, and Castells, Manuel, eds. Global Restructuring and Territorial Development. London: Sage, 1987.Google Scholar
Hiller, Harry H. “Mega-Events, Urban Boosterism and Growth Strategies: An Analysis of the Objectives and Legitimations of the Cape Town 2004 Olympic Bid.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24, no. 2 (2000): 449–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyle, Brian. “Urban Waterfront Revitalization in Developing Countries: The Example of Zanzibar's Stone Town.” The Geographical Journal 168, no. 2 (2002): 141–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hula, Richard C. “The Two Baltimores.” In Leadership and Urban Regeneration: Cities in North America and Europe, edited by Judd, Dennis and Parkinson, Michael, 191–216. New York: Sage, 1990.Google Scholar
Imrie, Rob, and Thomas, Huw. “The Limits of Property-led Regeneration.” Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 11, no. 1 (1993): 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imrie, Rob, and Thomas, Huw, “Urban Policy Processes and the Politics of Urban Regeneration.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 19 (1995): 479–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
İslam, Tolga. “Merkezin Dışında: İstanbul'da Soylulaştırma.” In İstanbul'da “Soylulaştırma”: Eski Kentin Yeni Sahipleri, edited by Behar, David and İslam, Tolga, 43–59. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2006.Google Scholar
“İstanbullulara Rağmen Kentsel Dönüşüm.” İstanbul Dergisi, no. 57 (2006).Google Scholar
Judd, Dennis R., and Simpson, Dick. “Reconstructing the Local State: The Role of External Constituencies in Building Urban Tourism.” The American Behavioral Scientist 46, no. 8 (2003): 1056–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin. “Division of Responsibility.” In Local Government in Turkey: Governing Greater İstanbul, edited by Heper, Metin, 12–30. London: Routledge, 1989.Google Scholar
Kantor, Paul, Savitch, Hank V., and Haddock, Serena V.. “The Political Economy of Urban Regimes: A Comparative Perspective.” Urban Affairs Review 32, no. 3 (1997): 348–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keleş, Ruşen. “Urban Regeneration in İstanbul.” Paper presented at the Priority Action Program, Regional Activity Center, Split 2003.Google Scholar
“Kentsel Dönüşüm ve Katılım.” Mimar.ist, no. 12 (2004).Google Scholar
Kerimoğlu, Baki, and Hakan Yılmaz, H.. “Türkiye'de Merkezle Yerel İdareler Arasında Gelir Paylaşımı Sistemi ve Uygulaması.” In MaliYerelleşme: Yoksulluk ve Bölgesel Eşitsizlik Sorunlarının Çözümü için Yeni Yaklaşım, 36–54. İstanbul: TESEV Yayınları, 2005.Google Scholar
Keyder, Çağlar. “Globalization and Social Exclusion in İstanbul.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 29, no. 1 (2005): 124–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keyder, Çağlar, “The Setting.” In İstanbul: Between the Global and the Local, edited by Keyder, Çağlar, 3–31. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999.Google Scholar
Keyder, Çağlar, and Öncü, Ayşe. “Globalization of a Third-World Metropolis: İstanbul in the 1980s.” Review 17, no. 3 (1994): 383–421.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. Cambridge: Blackwell, 2000.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Ute, and Laidley, Jennefer. “Old Mega-projects Newly Repackaged? Waterfront Redevelopment in Toronto.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Loftman, Patrick, and Nevin, Brandon. “Going for Growth: Prestige Projects in Three British Cities.” Urban Studies 33, no. 6 (1996): 991–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, Margit. “Post-Fordist City Politics.” In Post-Fordism: A Reader, edited by Amin, Ash, 316–338. London: Blackwell, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrifield, Andrew. “The Struggle over Place: Redeveloping American Can in Southeast Baltimore.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 18, no. 1 (1993): 102–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Molotch, Harvey. “The City asa Growth Machine: Toward a Political Economy of Place.” American Journal of Sociology 82, no. 2 (1976): 309–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narlı, Nilüfer. A Case Study on the Households in Balat-Fener. The European Commission UNESCO Sponsored Rehabilitation and Restoration Project, İstanbul: Unpublished Report, 1997.Google Scholar
“Neoliberalizmin Kentsel Taarruzu.” İstanbul Dergisi, no. 60 (2007).Google Scholar
Öz, Reha. “Haliç Turistik Tesislerle Donatılacak.” Cumhuriyet, 13 June 1984.Google Scholar
Paddison, Ronan. “City Marketing, Image Reconstruction and Urban Regeneration.” Urban Studies 30, no. 2 (1993): 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pınarcıoğlu, Melih, and Işık, Oğuz. Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk: Sultanbeyli Örneği, İstanbul: İletişim, 2001.Google Scholar
Sassen, Saskia. The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Sassen, Saskia, “Whose City Is It? Globalization and the Formation of New Claims.” In Cities and Citizenship, edited by Holston, James, 177–195. London: Duke University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Stoquart, Rémi, and Çağlar, Nurdane. Rehabilitation of Balat and Fener Districts (İstanbul Historical Peninsula), İstanbul: Municipality of Fatih, 1998.Google Scholar
Stoquart, Rémi, Çağlar, Nurdane, and Yerasimos, Stefanos. Balat ve Fener Semtlerinin Rehabilitasyonu (İstanbul Tarihi Yarımadası): Analiz ve Düzenleme Önerileri, İstanbul: Unpublished Feasibility Study, 1998.Google Scholar
Strom, Elizabeth. “In Search of the Growth Coalition: American Urban Theories and the Redevelopment of Berlin.” Urban Affairs Review 31, no. 4 (1996): 455–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Sulukule Yıkılmasın.” Radikal, 9 June 2007.Google Scholar
Tekeli, İlhan. “Dünya Kenti Olma Süreci İçinde Akımlar Mekanını Yeniden Biçimlemdiren İstanbul.” İstanbul, no. 37 (2001): 88–93.Google Scholar
Terhorst, Pieter, and Ven, Jack Van De. “The National Urban Growth Coalition in the Netherlands.” Political Geography 14, no. 4 (1995): 343–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tokatlı, Nebahat, and Boyacı, Yonca. “The Changing Morphology of Commercial Activity in İstanbul.” Cities 16, no. 3 (1999): 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“TOKİ'den Kentsel Dönüşüm İhalesi.” Radikal, 4 February 2007.Google Scholar
Toksöz, Fikret. “Önsöz.” In Mali Yerelleşme: Yoksulluk ve Bölgesel Eşitsizlik Sorunlarının Çözümü için Yeni Yaklaşım, İstanbul: TESEV Yayınları, 2005.Google Scholar
Tutel, Eser. Haliç: Dünden Bugüne Yedi Tepenin Koynunda Uyuyan Büyülü Cennet, İstanbul: Globus Dünya Basınevi, 2000.Google Scholar
Yenen, Zekiye, and Yücetürk, Eser. “Haliç'in Mekansal Bütünlüğü ve Siluet İrdelemesi.” In Dünü ve Bugünü ile Haliç Sempozyumu, edited by Göncüoğlu, Süleyman F., 591–605. İstanbul: Kadir Has Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2003.Google Scholar
Zhang, Yan, and Fang, Ke. “Is History Repeating Itself? From Urban Renewal in the United States to Inner-City Redevelopment in China.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 23, no. 3 (2004): 286–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar