a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process
a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process
a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
5.2. Results <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Transformati<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Turkish Practices<br />
While plann<strong>in</strong>g before 1980 was def<strong>in</strong>ed as an important tool <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
development paradigm <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state as a public activity, after 1980 <strong>the</strong> legitimate base<br />
entered <strong>in</strong>to a crisis <strong>on</strong> which this public activity based <strong>on</strong> by market <strong>process</strong>es tak<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>the</strong> place <strong>of</strong> development ec<strong>on</strong>omy. In this period development amnesty laws,<br />
privatizati<strong>on</strong> laws and practices <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> “shr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g” <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state are am<strong>on</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />
arrangements that affected <strong>the</strong> urban plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e. These developments caused a<br />
new period <strong>in</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e. Plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e entered <strong>in</strong>to a new period with<br />
new ec<strong>on</strong>omic demands loaded <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> space with <strong>the</strong> effect <strong>of</strong> newly def<strong>in</strong>ed right,<br />
<strong>in</strong>terest, freedom and equality approaches <strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>e side and globalizati<strong>on</strong> period <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r. These developments create a paradox am<strong>on</strong>g <strong>the</strong> acceptances <strong>of</strong> discipl<strong>in</strong>es <strong>of</strong><br />
law, ec<strong>on</strong>omy and plann<strong>in</strong>g and deeper yet from <strong>the</strong> view po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> legitimacy <strong>of</strong><br />
plann<strong>in</strong>g. This paradox; is different def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong>s and practices <strong>of</strong> c<strong>on</strong>cepts like equality,<br />
right, freedom and <strong>in</strong>terest which are <strong>the</strong> comp<strong>on</strong>ents <strong>of</strong> <strong>justice</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual percepti<strong>on</strong>,<br />
legal decisi<strong>on</strong>s, ec<strong>on</strong>omic selecti<strong>on</strong>s and plann<strong>in</strong>g practices. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, searches for<br />
right as c<strong>on</strong>flicts seen <strong>on</strong> urban land, compete <strong>the</strong>ir own discourses and practices <strong>on</strong><br />
urban space by found<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>m <strong>on</strong> different acceptances. This <strong>process</strong> <strong>in</strong> Turkish practice<br />
shows <strong>the</strong> tensi<strong>on</strong> between different values <strong>of</strong> multi-dimensi<strong>on</strong>al def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>of</strong> c<strong>on</strong>cept<br />
and <strong>in</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>of</strong> ownership as an ec<strong>on</strong>omic value, as an <strong>in</strong>dividual right, as a resp<strong>on</strong>se<br />
to need to shelter, as a tool <strong>in</strong> meet<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> needs <strong>in</strong> public space. The multi-dimensi<strong>on</strong>al<br />
def<strong>in</strong>iti<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> ownership <strong>in</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong> is; it shows <strong>the</strong> c<strong>on</strong>flict between<br />
1. Public <strong>in</strong>terest and private <strong>in</strong>terest;<br />
2. Individual rights and social rights.<br />
The dimensi<strong>on</strong>s/results <strong>of</strong> this c<strong>on</strong>flict occur with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> frame <strong>of</strong> divisi<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
city <strong>in</strong>to legal and illegal build<strong>in</strong>g areas (gecek<strong>on</strong>du areas and gecek<strong>on</strong>du problems and<br />
illegal build<strong>in</strong>gs) and urban land policies.<br />
These differentiati<strong>on</strong>s are also resp<strong>on</strong>ses to <strong>the</strong> differentiati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>in</strong> c<strong>on</strong>sider<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>the</strong> <strong>justice</strong> <strong>in</strong> urban area from different approaches, too, <strong>in</strong> Turkey.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> legal transformati<strong>on</strong>s which form <strong>on</strong>e foot <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> imported substituti<strong>on</strong><br />
ec<strong>on</strong>omy policies and modernizati<strong>on</strong>:<br />
a. change <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> mean<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> “public”,<br />
185