Kentli Hakları Kapsamında Kamusal Alanın Kullanımına Yönelik Katılımcı Bir Model Önerisi

Abstract

Dünyada 18. ve 19. Yüzyıllardan itibaren gerçekleşen sanayi devrimi ve sonrasında, kentleşme oranları hızla artmaya başlamıştır. Bu süreç Türkiye’de farklı iç dinamikler sebebiyle daha kısa sürelere sıkışmış, dolayısıyla sonuçları da daha özgün olmuştur. Kırdan kente göç oranlarının hızlı artışı ile beraber, altyapı olarak bu dramatik büyümeye hazır olmayan kentler, çarpık kentleşme gibi sonuçlar doğurmuştur. Kırdan kente göçmüş insanlar için yeni toplu yaşam alanları, çalışma alanları, kentsel alanlar inşa edilmesi gerekmiştir. Kentleşme süreci aynı zamanda “kentlileşme” süreci henüz olamamış Türk insanı için tüm bu değişim, kentle ilişkisinin en başından kopuk bir şekilde kurulduğu (veya kurulamadığı), kendi yaşam tarzlarına göre tasarlanmamış tip evlerde yaşamaya mahkum edildiği, kentte nefes alma, sosyalleşme, tanıdığı ve tanımadığı insanlar ile ilişki kurma şansını yakaladığı alanlardan mahkum bir kent hayatına dönüşmüştür. Gene bu süreçte, aynı zamanda birey olma, temel haklarını elde edebilme, ekonomik ve sosyal alanlarda var olabilme mücadelesini sürdüren, belki bir Avrupalı’nın, yokluğunun nasıl bir şey olduğunu hayal dahi edemediği temel insanlık meseleleri, kendi yaşam kavgasının tamamını oluştururken, kentli hakları veya kentsel hak gibi kavramlar, onun yaşamını çoğunlukla teğet geçmiştir. Dünya literatüründe dayanışma hakları olarak da geçen, 3. kuşak insan haklarından sayılan “kentli hakları” veya “kentsel haklar”ı en temel başlıklarda sıralayacak olursak; sağlıklı, aydınlık, yeterli büyüklüklerdeki evlerde yaşama; yeterli yeşil alan, sessizlik gibi önemli çevre gerekleri, kentsel işlevler arası bağlantılar, kültürel olanaklar, spor ve dinlence aktiviteleri, sosyal gelişim, özgür dolaşımın sağlanması, yoksullukla savaşma, engelliler için uygun, sağlıklı çevrelerin yaratılması, güvenlik, refah, iş ve eğitim olanaklarına, kültür ve tarih mirasına sahip olabilme ve yönetime katılabilme hakları öncelikli olarak söylenebilir. 20. yüzyıldan itibaren dünyada yükselen ekonomik kriz ve kentlinin hayatında daha fazla çalışmayan küreselleşme, globalleşme gibi kavramlar ile neo liberal kent politikaları, yerellik kavramının artan bir ivme ile daha fazla önem kazanmasına, kentlinin çeşitli sivil veya politik örgütlenmelerle beraber kent hakkına sahip çıkma yolunda bilinçli ve aktivist bir hak talep etme sürecine girmesine sebep olmuştur. Bu süreçte dünyanın pek çok ülkesinde yükselen kentsel muhalefetin sesleri ve haklarını geri almak için mücadele eden kentlinin oluşturduğu eylemlilik hali, teknolojik olanaklarla beraber dünyanın bambaşka yerlerinden yakın olarak izlenebilmektedir. Kentsel haklarla beraber “kullanıcı katılımı” kavramının kentsel politikalara dahil edilmesi de bir gereklilik ve zorunluluk olarak bu çağda yerini almıştır. Kullanıcı katılımı kavramının kentsel politikalarda yer almadığı ve kentli haklarının ihlal edildiği durumlarda karşılaşılan kent kaynaklı direnişlerin dünya çapındaki farklı örnekleri incelenerek ve sebepleri anlaşılarak, hem otoriteler, hem de bireyler için belirli modeller oluşturulmalıdır. Kentler, onu oluşturan kentliden bağımsız düşünülmemeli, planlanmamalıdır. Kentsel haklar ve özellikle katılım hakkı, ulusal ve uluslararası politikalar ve denetim mekanizmalarıyla korunma altına alınmalı, tehdit altında olduğu durumlarda kentli için bu hakları yönetimlerden ve otoritelerden talep edebildiği yol haritaları olmalıdır. Tez çalışmasında da, dünyanın farklı yerlerindeki kentsel mücadeleler ve katılım örnekleri incelenmiş, bu sayede kentler için katılımcı bir model önerisi oluşturulmuştur.

Cities exist by their dwellers who experience city life and seize the spirit in it. Technological, cultural, social and economical developments not only affect people but also have a great impact on cities, too. Cities change according to developing world conditions, due to its organic nature. Industrial revolution starting from 18th and 19th centuries, has caused a dramatic increase in the urbanization ratios all over the world. There has been a rapid rise at using the technological tools in industry and daily lives, too. This urbanization process; has been pushed to much less period in Turkey, because of its own specific dinamics; and that has caused its results uniquely. The infrastructures of the cities in Turkey were not exactly ready for all the high urbanization ratios, when people has started to migrate from the rural to the urban sites. These new inhabitants of the cities needed place for housing, public space, labor, transportation and all the other urban services. The rapid urbanization process that Turkey has been through, has caused many different socio-economical classes to appear and these diversities were unfortunately not a kind of a variety that enrich the urban culture. Many difficulties has been started to be seen from housing to culture; from services to diversities. These struggles have come together and found some urban movements in many cities of the world with new worldwide mottos such as “Right to the city”, governance, user participation. In 20th century, a very recent phenomenon has been added to the human rights; the Right to the city. The neo-liberal economic urban policies were not working for the contemporary needs of the urban dwellers any more. As a democratic demand, people wanted the authorities to have good governance principles and to be more active and forceful in the public matters that relate to himself. This phenomenon called “right to the city” meant much more than a right to live, right to health or housing rigths. Right to the city means; to have a right to comment on the public issues that relate to the people living in that place. It is not a simple task to found that system working together with the user, it should be established and protected by some national and international systems and laws. In developed countries all over the world, user participation methods are in use by many urban policies. Altough, having specific and different socio-cultural origins and contemporary conditions, there should still be a common guide for cities to make its dwellers participate in the governance. Participation in all the public issues relating to themselves, is the right of all citizens and should exist in the new urban policies of the cities. This participation issue should be realized and accepted with city-dwellers, local administrations, authorities and designers together. User participation should necessarily be entegrated to the city policies as a democratic approach of this century. The right to the city concept is much beyond the basic human needs. Since the social needs of people are much deeper; it consists not only issues like housing, labor, transportation or urban services; but also the need for security, necessary openings and the green areas, the place for play or independence, or even some adventure and romantic relations. The right to the city concept exist to satisfy those notional needs of today’s people, whose needs are much beyond the basic ones. When looked at the history; according to some, both the architects and the planners had a role such as “assign a lifestyle” for the public or “decide in someone’s stead”. Because it was tought to be more ideal as a lifestyle if it was assigned by a professional. But in 21th century, this theory no more exists since its much more important to design together with the user. No matter how professional is the designer; he may not always know the best for the people living in “Favelas or Bahamas”. This must be the first that he/she should be aware and conscious of. Design should be a process both the designer and the users are efficiently exist in all the stages of it. User participation is one of the most important phenomenons of the 21th century’s cities; especially in the public issues and the public projects. The “Rigth to the city” concept of Henri Lefebvre, first said in 1968, focuses on the idea of how important where someone lives in and how much he/she has a right to speak on it. This deeply affects the ratio of satisfaction within our lives in cities. In a public project; starting from the very initial phases which is the presentation stage; all the actors such as designers, contractors, media and users should be in corporation. Both for the project itself and also to increase the awareness about this participation subject; many organisations must be held. To present the projects to the public; technological tools can be very practical solutions. If necessary; the written information about the projects should be translated into many languages; renders and visual documents, interesting presentation technics should be prepared and presented to the people, in order to increase their dominance about the projects. Online galleries, web based systems may be other subsidiary methods. After presentation, there is the evaluation stage which may be much more effective by the help of the designer; for example with some workshops including the users. The designer should also be aware of the fact that; the user is not also a single voice, its much more a choir consisting of different voices. It is only possible to get meaningful answers by asking correct questions to the users. Also it’s known that; what the user expects from this process is not only fill out some questionaries but to be told about all different aspects and thoughts and decide in the final analysis. An ordinary person may not easily understand a project’s drawings fully, so that the designer should make them understand correctly, by the presentation techniques. With this process, it is the feedback stage that the users form their decisions and thoughts. To give their feedbacks, again the technological tools are the most practical ways for the ones who do not want to spend their whole day in a meeting or who feel nervous about speaking in front of the public. Television, radios, telephones, internet are all the ways of this feedback phase. To practice user participation; its mainly the designer who should build a bridge between authorities and the users; then it will be his/ her professional success and a gain for the participation history. The designer who is thought to be the major actor of this process, should have some important features as quick comprehension, true address form and ability to motivate; so that the user can be easily adapted to the process and the projects. To spend more time with the user on the projects will increase the ratio of embracing those public issues. These characteristic features of the designer side, will help the users experiencing the participation period. With the guideness of the article “The Right to the city” and more, the thesis examines eight different case studies all over the World. First four cases are the struggles resulting from the lack of these rights, the first one is the famous French Commune which is thought to be the ancestor of the city movements; the other is from Brazil and the two examples are from Turkey; one struggle from the capital city; Dikmen Valley in Ankara; and a very recent one, Taksim Gezi Resistance in 2013. The common property of all the urban movements is that they have rised from a lack of an urban right. This has affected people’s lives somehow; and after a stage, a spontaneous or more organized urban movement has started to be seen. These examined famous urban movements have affected the histories of today’s cities deeply. The second group of four examples in the thesis; are the cases that experience urban participation in their own ways. The first is the famous Porto Alegre experience from Brazil with its specific participatory budget concept; the second is from Dominician Republic that had rised from the urban transformation based destructions. Again the last two cases are from different parts of Turkey, experiencing good governance in local scale; Fatsa/ Ordu in Black Sea region, and Karşıyaka from İzmir. In the last two cases from Turkey, there are two good examples of local government and city council’s activities. These are the promising experimentings of participation phenomenon. The aim of this study is; to establish a good governance model in the light of the “Right to the city” concept. Both by the help of the literature review about this subject and the eight solid cases from all over the world; the framework of the participatory model has been constituted and prepared. The analysed urban resistances were helpful to see when a movement is succesful, by which factors and actors are most likely the crucial ones; or when a movement is condemned to fail. To learn from the history is always a good idea in order not to repeat a mistake that has been experienced before. With the light of a common model helping the user participation come true; the content and themes of the public projects will also evolve accordingly; they will be enriched inside, they will represent the dwellers’ ideas and characteristics more. This changing of the projects in content, will increase the self satisfaction of people within their city life, which is a desired philosophy of 21th century.