Article | 2011 | International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35 ( 6 ) , pp.1099 - 1117
This study examines the changing role of the public sector in Turkey with regard to housing provision since 1950, and particularly since 2000, and seeks to clarify how public intervention has affected housing provision and urban development dynamics in major cities. Three periods may be identified, with central government acting as a regulator in a first period characterized by a 'housing boom'. During the second period, from 1980 to 2000, a new mass housing law spurred construction activity, although the main beneficiaries of the housing fund tended to be the middle classes. After 2000, contrary to emerging trends in both Northern . . .and Southern European countries, the public sector in Turkey became actively involved in housing provision. During this process, new housing estates were created on greenfield sites on the outskirts of cities, instead of efforts being made to rehabilitate, restore or renew existing housing stock in the cities. Meanwhile, the concept of 'urban regeneration' has been opportunistically incorporated into the planning agenda of the public sector, and - under the pretext of regenerating squatter housing areas - existing residents have been moved out, while channels for community participation have been bypassed. © 2010 Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Article | 2010 | Cities27 ( 3 ) , pp.154 - 163
The geographical location of Turkey in general, and Istanbul in particular, in a wider region encompassing the Black Sea, Balkans, Caucasus and Middle East provides an absolute advantage for the city to become an important international logistics node. Recent research has also identified Turkey as the fifth largest logistics market in the world. Therefore, promoting Istanbul as a logistics center of international importance has been high on the agenda of the Turkish central government, city authorities, and interest groups in recent years. To achieve this aim, local and central governments have been sponsoring new infrastructural pr . . .ojects to strengthen the position of the city as a world-class logistics center. However, other research has pointed to serious problems resulting from legislative shortcomings, lack of coordination among public bodies, mistakes in implementation, and insufficiencies in infrastructure and human capital. This article is based on a research project involving logistics firms in Istanbul designed to investigate the strengths and weaknesses of Istanbul in its quest to become as a logistics center serving a wider region beyond Turkey. The results of the interviews and survey have shown that today, logistics activity in the Marmara region (and Istanbul in particular) is mainly the result of economic activities taking place in a national context, rather than the result of entrepôt or logistics node operations at a regional or global level. In the promotional literature of public authorities, nevertheless, 'links with Turkic republics' and 'a bridge between Europe and Asia' are repeatedly referred to, despite their diminishing relevance to the operational requirements of Turkish logistics companies. Bureaucratic and legislative implementation deficiencies, and consequent transport shortcomings seem to occupy a more concrete and higher place on their agenda for the growth of logistics service provision. Policy formation needs to recognize this ordering of priorities in order to integrate economic and urban planning more effectively. © 2009 Elsevier Ltd
Özdemir, D. | Darby, J.
Article | 2009 | European Urban and Regional Studies16 ( 1 ) , pp.87 - 99
Despite various reasons for the relatively low levels of foreign direct investment (FDI) inflow into Turkey throughout the postwar period, Istanbul has proved relatively successful in attracting inward FDI in services in recent years. Increased production by both foreign and domestic manufacturers in the wider Marmara region has also resulted in a concentration of service sector firms in the greater Istanbul metropolitan area. Examination of the profile of foreign investors and investment categories reveals that Germany and the Netherlands remain major sources of investment, and that investment from these two countries shows the mos . . .t marked signs of functional linkage between manufacturing and service projects. This growth of functional linkage, exemplified by the increased importance of logistics operations, may represent the removal of one more factor inhibiting inward investment into Turkey on a scale appropriate to its size and growth potential. © 2009 SAGE Publications