Speaker
Description
This paper examines the evolving relationship between urban and rural territories under Turkey’s centralized governance model, focusing specifically on the case of Ayvalık and the implications of the 2012 Metropolitan Law (Law No. 6360). This legislation, which extended the jurisdiction of metropolitan municipalities to encompass rural areas, has significantly altered the socio-spatial dynamics of urban governance. By conceptualizing Ayvalık as a metropolitan hinterland, the study explores how central government's administrative system redefines territorial boundaries, triggering urban expansion beyond ecological thresholds through social confrontations and spatial-environmental transformations (Apostolopoulou, 2023; Arboleda, 2016; Acara & Penpecioğlu, 2022).
The research highlights the role of urban environmental movements in these processes as key actors in participatory planning and governance, providing critical resistance to and engagement with the urbanization agenda. By situating Ayvalık within the broader framework of urban political ecology and planetary urbanization (Brenner & Schmid, 2014), the study seeks to uncover the socio-ecological and political consequences of integrating rural territories into urban governance systems and thus, intends to unravel the role of planning in an age of planetary crisis (Harrison & Heley, 2015).
In 2012, Turkey implemented the Metropolitan Law, which transformed the administrative and governance landscape of the country. By incorporating rural areas into metropolitan boundaries, it effectively erased the legal distinction between urban and rural territories. This restructuring has had profound implications, including changes to land use, resource allocation, and the socio-political fabric of rural communities. Expanding metropolitan boundaries has intensified socio-ecological conflicts, particularly in areas like Ayvalık, where environmental movements contest top-down governance. Known for its ecological and cultural heritage, Ayvalık was found to be an ideal case for studying centralized governance’s impacts on urban-rural boundaries.
Key research questions include:
- How has the 2012 Metropolitan Law redefined the territorial boundaries between urban and rural in Ayvalık regarding socio-political dimensions?
- In what ways do urban environmental movements confront and influence the centralized governance model?
- What are the socio-ecological consequences of this integration for local communities and landscapes?
This study is grounded in the theoretical perspectives of urban political ecology and planetary urbanization, which challenge traditional dichotomies between urban-rural by emphasizing their interconnectedness. These frameworks provide a lens for analyzing the socio-ecological networks that shape and are shaped by centralized governance practices (Taylor & Derudder, 2015). Methodologically, the research adopts a qualitative approach, employing ethnographic methods such as participant observation and in-depth interviews with key stakeholders, including local and metropolitan activists. Additionally, cartographic tools are used to visualize the spatial transformations resulting from the changes in legislation and the activities of resistance.
Preliminary research indicates that Ayvalık’s incorporation into metropolitan governance has led to significant shifts in land use patterns, with increased urbanization encroaching on ecologically sensitive areas. Urban environmental movements in the region have emerged as critical actors in resisting these changes, advocating for the preservation of natural and cultural heritage through participatory and inclusive approaches. These movements highlight the socio-political tensions between centralized governance and local autonomy, revealing new dimensions of urban-rural dynamics.
The study serves to contribute to ongoing debates on centralized governance and urbanization by offering a nuanced understanding of how urban-rural boundaries are redefined in contemporary Turkey. By focusing on Ayvalık, it provides empirical insights into the socio-ecological and political dimensions of this process, emphasizing the transformative potential of social movements. The findings aim to inform both academic discussions and policy-making, advocating for more inclusive and sustainable urban governance models that respect local specificities and ecological constraints.
References
Acara, Eda & Penpecioğlu, Mehmet (Eds.), 2022. Tamamlanmamış Kentsel Devrim: Günümüz Türkiyesi’nde Kent, Kriz ve Gündelik Hayat, 694. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Arboleda, Martín (2016) Spaces of Extraction, Metropolitan Explosions: Planetary Urbanization and the Commodity Boom in Latin America. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 40 (1), pp.96–112.
Apostolopoulou, Elia (2023). Navigating neoliberal natures in an era of infrastructure expansion and uneven urban development. Investigaciones Regionales - Journal of Regional Research, 55, pp.113–126.
Brenner, N. & Schmid, C. (2014). Planetary Urbanization. In Brenner, N. (Ed.), Implosions /Explosions: Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization (pp. 160–163). JOVIS.
Harrison, John, & Heley, Jesse (2015). Governing beyond the metropolis: Placing the rural in city-region development. Urban Studies, 52 (6), pp.1113–1133.
Taylor, Peter, & Derudder, Ben (2015). World City Network: A global urban analysis. Routledge.
| Keywords | Urban-rural boundaries; Centralized governance model; Urban environmental movements; Metropolitan Law |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
