Speaker
Description
Over the last 22 years of single-party rule in Turkey, both the private sector and the state have made significant investments in housing aligned with a construction-based growth model. While this approach has yielded quantitative results, housing affordability for middle- and lower-income classes, particularly in urban areas, has become a major concern. The housing crisis remains a critical issue on Turkey's agenda, influenced by periodic economic and political changes.
While current discussions and debates on housing focus on the issues arising from households' access to market housing, I believe the relationship between planning and housing policy is often overlooked. I base this assertion on two key observations. First, market actors responsible for the current situation tend to simplify the problem to a narrow focus on land supply and development rights. They argue that housing supply is merely a numerical issue, claiming that removing planning constraints will resolve the issue by increasing the available housing units. Second, those compelled to buy housing from the market often perceive the issue as a straightforward, linear relationship between economic wealth and housing affordability. According to this view, the problem can be resolved once the negative effects of the broader economic situation are addressed or economic barriers are removed. In both instances, I contend that attitudes toward the planning process, its plans, and plan implementation are flawed. Planning can sometimes be seen as a tool to be manipulated to meet individual expectations, undermining the integrity of the planning process and its implementation for the community's benefit. Alternatively, planning may be viewed as something whose social implications can be completely disregarded.
Both of these perspectives highlight the need to elevate the discussion about the causal relationship between planning and housing. In this paper, I will focus on Turkey's planning process as a whole, which often prioritizes physical space and economic returns while neglecting social needs and expectations, and completely overlooking the concept of social value. I will analyze the efficiency and effectiveness of the current planning system in generating alternative land supply and interventions for existing housing stock. Additionally, I will provide concrete examples of who benefits from this efficiency and effectiveness. Furthermore, I will examine the significant impact of elitist planning processes and practices, characterized by technocratic and political relationships, which often exclude broader society. This exclusion undermines public trust in planning and fosters the perception that these plans primarily serve individual interests rather than creating social value.
In line with the conference theme, I aim to demonstrate how the planning system and its implementation tools can address the housing problems faced by low- and middle-income classes while highlighting how this capacity can be influenced by political interests and expectations.
| Keywords | planning; housing; politics; societal relations; societal impacts |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
