Content uploaded by A.Suvar Aslan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by A.Suvar Aslan on Jan 20, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
143
ABSTRACT
The importance of the economy created by the construction sector
and the related sectors that support it has become more significant
since the growth in the use of financial instruments. The influence
of financial institutions has reached an unprecedented level in the
shaping of the urban space with the implementation and acceler-
ation of financialization. Geography and urban planning specialists
have been at the center of the debate over financing in the United
States as a result of the economic crisis that began in 2007. After the
collapse of derivative markets due to the mortgage market, which
was the principal cause of the crisis, the mortgage system and the
urban space began to come to the forefront of financialization stud-
ies. These studies seem to be concentrated on the early capitalist
countries. However, there is also a financialization process occurring
in late capitalist countries such as Turkey, and this process can be
observed in urban spaces. The present study aims to contribute to
the financialization debates from this point of view, by evaluating
neoliberal reforms, public policy, and housing market developments
that were implemented in Turkey after the 2001 economic crisis. A
mixed method of analysis was applied, as it oered options a single
method cannot provide. This study first describes the problem, and
then the methodology is explained. A brief discussion of the con-
cept of financialization is presented, focusing on the urban space and
mortgage loans. A literature review provides an analytical basis for
assessing how the housing sector in Turkey is aected by the process
of financialization, and the case of Istanbul, called the financial capital
of Turkey, is examined. In a late capitalist country such as Turkey,
where the mortgage market volume is quite new and thus not at a
level that the sector desires, the possibility that the rapidly increasing
amount of household debt will cause a new economic crisis should
be investigated.
ÖZ
İnşaat sektörü ve onu besleyen diğer sektörlerin oluşturduğu ekono-
minin önemi bu sektörlerin finansal araçlarla ilişkilerinin gelişmesi
sonrasında daha da artmıştır. Finansallaşma sürecinin başlaması ve
hızlanması ile kentsel mekanın şekillenmesinde finans kurumlarının
etkileri daha önce olmadığı seviyelere gelmiştir. Finansallaşma tartış-
malarının coğrafya ve şehir planlama uzmanlarının odağına girmesi
Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde 2007’de başlayan ekonomik kriz
ile oldu. Bu krizin çıkış sebebi olan mortgage pazarına bağlı türev
piyasaların çökmesi sonrasında mortgage sistemi ve kent mekanı fi-
nansallaşma çalışmalarında öne çıkmaya başlamıştır. Bu çalışmaların
erken kapitalistleşmiş ülkelerde yoğunlaşmış olduğu görülmektedir.
Buna karşın Türkiye gibi geç kapitalistleşen ülkelerde de finansallaşma
süreci yaşanmaktadır ve bu süreci kentsel mekanda gözlemleye-
bilmek mümkündür. Bu bağlamda çalışma finansallaşma tartışmalarına
2001 ekonomik krizi sonrası Türkiye’sinde yaşanan neoliberal re-
formlara, kamu politikası ve konut piyasasındaki gelişmeler üzerinden
bakarak katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada tek bir yön-
temin sağlayamayacağı başka seçenekler sunması sebebiyle karma
yöntem belirlenmiştir. İlk basamakta ipotekli krediler başta olmak
üzere kredi sistemine ilişkin veriler toplandı. Daha sonra ise bu ver-
ilerin yol göstericiliğinde niteliksel görüşmeler yapılandırılarak de-
rinlemesine mülakatlar gerçekleştirildi. Çalışma ilk aşamada sorunu
ortaya koymakta, daha sonra metodolojiyi anlatmaktadır. Sonrasında
ise kent mekanını ipotekli konut kredilerini odağa alarak finansal-
laşma kavramı hakkında kısa bir tartışma sunulmaktadır. Aktarılan
literatür incelemesi Türkiye’nin yaşadığı finansallaşma deneyiminde
konutun hangi yönlerden etkilendiğini tespit edebilmek için anali-
tik bir temel sağlamayı amaçlıyor ve konu, geç kapitalistleşen ülke
Türkiye’nin finansal başkenti olarak adlandırılan en büyük metropolü
İstanbul örneğinde inceleniyor. İpotekli konut kredisi sistemi olkuça
yeni olan ve dolayısıyla sistemin hacmi sektörün istediği düzeyde ol-
mayan Türkiye gibi geç kapitalistleşen bir ülkede hızla artan hanehalkı
borçluluğunun yeni bir ekonomik krize sebep olup olmayacağı da
araştırılmayı beklemektedir.
Anahtar sözcükler: Finansallaşma; ipotekli konut kredileri; konut politikası.Keywords: Financialization; mortgage loans; housing policy.
Planlama 2018;28(2):143–153 | doi: 10.14744/planlama.2018.62681
Received: 24.12.2017 Accepted: 13.05.2018
Available Online Date: 01.08.2018
Correspondence: Ahmet Suvar Aslan.
e-mail: ahmetsuvaraslan@gmail.com
The Impact of Mortgage Loans on the Financialization
Process in Turkey
İpotekli Konut Kredilerinin Türkiye’de Finansallaşmaya Etkisi
ARTICLE / ARAŞTIRMA
Ahmet Suvar Aslan, İclal Dinçer
Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
Bu çalışma, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Bilimsel Araştırma Projeleri Koordinatörlüğü tarafından desteklenen
2016-03-02-DOP01 numaralı proje kapsamında gerçekleştirilmiştir.
144 PLANLAMA
Introduction
The importance of the economy created by the construction
sector and the related sectors that nurture it has become more
significant after the development of the relationship of these
sectors with financial instruments. By acting together with the
sector during and after every stage of construction, financial
institutions have a complex relationship with the bonds in the
processes of purchasing the land, completion of construction,
sale and resale of the mortgage loans in derivative markets
by means of the generated financial instruments, and other. In
this context, the influence of financial institutions has reached
an unprecedented level in the shaping of urban space with the
beginning and the acceleration of the financialization process.
From this point of view, the main question of this study is
explaining the spatial transformations that took place in the
post-2000 period in Turkey within the framework of “finan-
cialization”. The study aims to contribute to the financialization
debates by taking in consideration the neoliberal reforms, the
public policy and the housing market developments that oc-
cured in Turkey after the 2001 economic crisis.
There is growing literature on financialization which has been
contributed by geographers and planners who are working on
the housing problem, as well as by economists. While trying
to understand and interpret the early capitalized countries
and the late capitalized countries like Turkey, the approaches
contributing to this literature show the similarities and the
dierences between these two dierent levels of develop-
ment in their narratives. The financialization process of
Turkey departed from early capitalized countries due to the
the fragility of the Turkish economy by reason of external de-
pendence, excess illegal/unlicensed housing rates in the me-
tropolises, especially in Istanbul, and the existing structural
diculties of the finance sector.
The growing liquidity pool presented as the main driving force
of the housing finance (Fernandez and Aalbers, 2016) diers
in early capitalized countries and late capitalized countries
(Pereria 2017). The number, volume and types of loans used
in the early capitalized countries and those used in the late
capitalist countries such as Turkey, are not on similar levels,
as well as the size of the financialization and the financial lit-
eracy.1 As it will be seen later in the case of Turkey, the high
level of the annual interest rate of the mortgage loans directly
aects the periods of the credits used. The annual interest
rates of the mortgage loans used in Turkey are higher than
the similar interest rates in countries such as Holland. This
constitutes a main structural problem for Turkey’s mortgage
markets in showing similar performance as compared to the
developed countries.
The next chapter describes the methodology of the study fol-
lowed by a brief discussion of the concept of financialization.
The article then proceeds by summarizing the specific eect
of financialization on housing. The presented literature review
aims to provide an analytical basis for assessing how the hous-
ing sector in Turkey is aected by the financialization process,
and this topic is examined in the case of Istanbul, called the
financial capital and the biggest metropolis in Turkey.
Methodology
This study is based on the doctoral dissertation titled “Evalu-
ation of the Financialization in Turkey Through the Mortgage
Loans: The Case of Istanbul”. This study uses a mixed method
of both quantitative and qualitative analysis being evaluated
together. The data were collected from national and interna-
tional institutions. The national institutions include the Cen-
tral Bank of the Republic of Turkey, the Banks Association of
Turkey, the Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency, the
Turkish Statistical Institute, and the five largest banks of the
mortgage market by the 2014. First, publicly available data
obtained from these five banks were used, and in the second
phase, analysis was carried out on the information of banks
providing data in Istanbul. The share of mortgage loans in the
total housing sales in Turkey and Istanbul, the average amount,
periods and the historical credit interest rates of these loans,
the ratio of mortgage loans and the total debts of households
to GNP are covered in this paper owing to the data collected
from national institutions. The detailed data obtained for Istan-
bul include the district where each individual uses the mortgage
loan, the amount of the loan, the credit period, and the demo-
graphic and employment status of the borrower. Furthermore,
publicly available data are obtained from the international insti-
tutions such as the Euopean Mortgage Federation (EMF), the
Bank for International Settlements (BIS), and the International
Monetary Foundation (IMF).
In the in-depth interviews conducted with the experts, the
main axis is focused on the general problems, potentials,
market reliability, and the future of the derivative markets in
Turkey in the light of findings obtained from the first stage
of the study. Among the interviewed experts are four in-
ternational banks,2 one of which is a public bank, four real
estate investment companies3 (REICs), one of which is Em-
lak Konut Real Estate Investment Company, four academics
and researchers, two real estate developers,4 two real estate
1 According to TEB, which gives financial literacy education and publishes the financial literacy access index, financial literacy is “the level of competence that enables the
consumer to make informed evaluations in the use and management of money and to make eective and rational decisions in the selection of financial instruments.”.
2 Mid-level managers of Ziraat Bankası, Yapı ve Kredi Bankası, İş Bankası and İNG Bankası were interviewed.
3 A mid-level manager of Emlak Konut REIT, a senior manager of İş REIT, a senior manager of Nurol REIT and a mid-level manager of Tekfen REIT were interviewed.
4 A senior manager of the Strategy Platform for Real Estate and a senior manager of Cushman & Wakefield were interviewed.
145Ahmet Suvar Aslan, İclal Dinçer
appraisers,5 two Mass Housing Administration ocials,6 an
international real estate company operating across the coun-
try,7 and a media company8 from the real estate sector.
According to the Turkish Statistical Institute’s (TUİK) data,
it is seen that the city where the mortgage loans are used
the most in Turkey from 2009 until the end of 2016 is Is-
tanbul with 624.034, followed by Ankara with 364.547. In
this period, the mortgage loans used in Istanbul increased by
926.9%. Istanbul is 41.12% higher than Ankara in the hedo-
nic price index of the Central Bank of Turkey for December
2016. When considering the ratio of mortgage loans used in
Turkey by 2016, to the population of each province in 2016,
Ankara comes first with a mortgage loan of 14.66 people.
Istanbul is the 8th among all provinces with a mortgage loan of
23.64 people. When all these data are evaluated together, the
significant role of Istanbul cannot be denied in terms of mort-
gage loans and the construction sector. Therefore, a study
that aims to explain the spatial transformation in Turkey
through financialization should examine the city of Istanbul
in the first place.
Conceptualizing Financialization
At the present time, debates of housing problem focusing on
mortgage loans can not avoid the conceptualization of the
financialization. This situation raises dierent theoretical de-
bates on the concept of financialization, but also causes blur-
ring of the concept. This sub-section focuses primarily on the
literature that evaluates the financialization debate through
the mortgage loans.
“In the literature, there are various explanations for the
rise of financialized capitalism. Many financialization scholars
situate the beginning of financialization in the 1970s with the
industrial crisis in the West, the breakdown of the Bretton
Woods system, and the rise of neoliberalism... More gener-
ally speaking, financialization is part of and key to structural
transformations of advanced capitalist economies. We here
define financialization as ‘‘the increasing dominance of finan-
cial actors, markets, practices, measurements and narratives,
at various scales, resulting in a structural transformation of
economies, firms (including financial institutions), states and
households’’ (Aalbers, 2016).”
Along with the economic crisis that began in the United
States in 2007, geography and city planning experts have fo-
cused on the debate on financialization. After the collapse of
the derivative markets due to the mortgage market, which
was the outcome of the economic crisis, the mortgage sys-
tem and the urban space began to come to the forefront of
the financialization studies. These studies seem to be con-
centrated on the early capitalist countries (Aalbers, 2017).
However, there is also a financialization process in the late
capitalist countries such as Turkey, and this process can be
observed in urban spaces.
One of the frequently mentioned statements when defining
financialization is the one made by Krippner (2005). Follow-
ing Arrighi’s (1994) study, she defines financialization as “a
pattern of accumulation in which profits accrue primarily
through financial channels, rather than through trade and
commodity production’’.
The definition of Krippner oers a broad context for finan-
cialization, including housing. In this context, we aim to dis-
cuss the role of space in financialization. The capital tries to
remove the spatial obstacles to facilitate its circulation. This
contradiction between movable capital and immovable prop-
erties lies at the bottom of modern capitalist urbanization.
As a result of this tendency inwhich the liquidity of capital
comes to the fore, the power of finance capital is increasing
(Gotham 2009). The flow of the capital to the secondary cir-
cuit is one of the determining factors of this process. As Har-
vey (1985) has pointed out, “urbanism has consequently been
transformed from an expression of the production needs of
the industrialist to an expression of the controlled power of
finance capital, backed by the power of the state, over the
totality of the production process.” As revealed by Harvey in
1985, this point is an important basis for the role of the state
in the financialization debates focusing on housing.
Once Gotham identifies the financialization in a broader
sense, he draws attention to the critical point of its relation
with real estate. According to Gotham (2009), “as a multidi-
mensional, contested and conflictual process; financialization
refers to the growth of financial actors (banks, lenders, pri-
vate equity corporations, etc.), new financial tools (mutual
funds, asset-backed securities, hedge funds, etc.), and the in-
creasing significance of financial firms in dierent areas of the
economy such as real estate” In this sense, securitization is
a critical component of the financialization process (Aalbers,
2009, Newman, 2009, quoted in Gotham 2009).
The financial sector has played an important role in the ac-
cumulation and circulation of the capital throughout the his-
tory of capitalism. With the period following the collapse of
the Bretton Woods system, it is observed that the role of
5 Senior managers of Vakıf Real Estate Apprasial Inc. and Istanbul Real Estate Valuation and Consulting Inc. were interviewed.
6 Two senior managers of the Housing Development Administration of Turkey were interviewed.
7 A mid-level manager of ReMax was interviewed.
8 The editor of Journal of Gayrimenkul Türkiye was interviewed.
146 PLANLAMA
finance in capitalist economies is increasing and deepening.
As discussed frequently in the literature on finance, there has
been a series of transformations in the financial field in many
countries, especially in central capitalist countries. Progresses
such as the development of a new style of governance based
on the shareholder value of the companies, the increase in
derivative instruments and securitization, the diminishing
role of financial intermediaries, and the increasing frequency
of financial crises were among the most striking elements of
this process (Karaçimen 2015). Intertwining with traditional
methods, modern financial markets have oered more risk
management opportunities for companies, and created a
multitude of channels through which volatility in the financial
system can flow. Assets that change hands in the financial
arena symbolize future income. The capitalization of income
to be earned in the future provides for the formation of cap-
ital that does not exist yet, but it is traded so. This is the
abstraction of the production field. Another important devel-
opment observed during this period was that finance took an
unparalleled place in the lives of individuals. One of the most
obvious indicators of this case is the tremendous increase in
household loans in many countries, including Turkey (Akçay
and Güngen, 2016).
Fainstein (2016), argues that the recent intensification of
financialization alone has not produced an uneven develop-
ment. According to her, financialization is intrinsic to the
neoliberal ideology and globalization. Hence, an inequality
arises which is generated by the investment of real estate,
and state-sponsored social welfare and housing aordablility
programs are being narrowed. Fainstein has relatively more
positive opinion on financialization. According to her, the
coexistence of flexibility provided by the financialization and
the new construction and renovation techniques can provide
better distribution of the benefits of urban development. The
politics that prevent the access of this potential is the aus-
terity policy. Fainstein mentions the democratizing aspect of
financialization. However, the “democratization” of financial-
ization has manifested itself as the spread of debt to all seg-
ments of the society, and has resulted in the increased debt
of the narrow-income households.
According to Fields (2015), financial markets and actors are
becoming increasingly centralized in the functioning of cap-
italism and redrawing the relationship between the use of
mortgage loans and urban inequality. The hegemonic role of
finance in neoliberal restructuring constitutes a major debate
on the practices of contemporary communities. Market lib-
eralization policies, such as deregulating the banking and fi-
nancial industries, and opening up global capital flows, have
ensured that financial markets and actors have a more direct
influence on the production of urban space (Gotham, 2009).
Financialization of the Construction Sector in
Turkey
The debate on financialization is mainly shaped by the de-
velopments in the early capitalist countries However, these
developments also aect the markets in the late capitalist
countries such as Turkey, which has been included in the
global system, and financialization is seen in these countries
as well. Studies in the financialization literature usually include
early capitalistized countries (eg Dymski 2009, Gotham 2009,
Haiven 2014, Durand 2017, Loon and Aalbers 2017, Aalbers
2017). It is also possible to say that there is a growing liter-
ature on the financial experience of late capitalist countries
(eg Rolnik 2013, Yalman, Topal and Steel 2016, Güngen 2017,
Pereria 2017). An ocial strategy aimed at involving more
people in the financial system and making it easier for them to
access the financial services in Turkey was announced with the
publication of “Financial Access, Financial Education, Financial
Consumer Protection Strategy and Action Plans”, which was
published in 2014. Furthermore, the legal sub-structure of
the securitization has been prepared in accordance with the
“Communiqué on Principles Regarding Mortgage Finance In-
stitutions”9 issued in 2014. This strategy has been shaped in
line with the policy of spreading the financial services to the
grassroots level that is determined by G20 principles. The
objective of the strategy document published in the ocial
gazette is given below:
“The main purpose of the strategy is to spread the fi-
nancial products and services to all segments, to include o-
system outsiders into the financial system, and to increase
the quality and use of existing products and services. In this
framework, the strategy aims to increase the access and use
of financial products and services through increased knowl-
edge and awareness. It is also aimed at taking eective mea-
sures to protect the financial consumer led by the relevant
actors.”
It is hoped that every segment of society will use financial
products and each individual will benefit from the democra-
tization of finance by making rational decisions. As it can be
seen in the next section, the result is an unavoidable increase
of household debts. Before these action plans, traces of the
financialization in Turkey have become apparent since 2001,
when the biggest economic crisis of the country arose.
The global liquidity abundance, which emerged under the in-
fluence of policy responses in the early capitalist countries
in the period following the 2008 crisis, had an eect on the
high economic growth rates recorded in many late capitalist
countries, including Turkey. Derivatives markets that are de-
9 http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/feb004f0-bb3c-4d52-bb-086c0c72c072/eylemplani.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-feb004f0-bb3c-
4d52-bb-086c0c72c072-kCzrKGg
147Ahmet Suvar Aslan, İclal Dinçer
pendent on housing financing are not suciently developed in
late-capitalist countries. Secondary markets in Turkey are not
as advanced as those in the early capitalist countries. Even if
these markets were to be developed by the state and capital
owners, the economic crisis that started in 2007 led to a
cautious treatment of this issue. Nevertheless, the real estate
certificate system, which is a derivative system, has entered
into force. While low interest rates in Turkey have encour-
aged growth in the housing sector, consumer loans and use
of credit cards have been instrumental for low-wage society
segments in increasingly benefiting from mainstream financial
services. Turkey is similar to other late capitalist countries;
however, financialization and the inclusive financing process
proceed dierent from other countries due to the proactive
role of the government and the eectiveness of the represen-
tatives of the financial sector (Güngen, 2017).
The economic crisis that started in Turkey in 2001 was the
biggest crisis in the history of the country. In order to over-
come this crisis, new institutions were established or new
structuring took place providing the power transfer between
existing institutions (Akçay, 2009) such as the Banking Regu-
lation and Supervision Agency (BRSA) and the Energy Mar-
ket Regulatory Authority. The fact that the Central Bank was
left to technocrats by gaining autonomy and the BRSA was
given extensive authority for the banking sector, were the
important reforms aimed at overcoming this crisis (İslamoğlu,
2002). The central government carried out these practices,
which surpassed the previous neoliberal programs with the
help of the IMF. The ruling Justice and Development Party
(AKP), which came into power as a single party in 2002, con-
tinued this program and implemented privatization practices
of an unprecedented size in the history of the country. When
this program was followed, policies and developments in the
construction sector played an important role in overcoming
the crisis. By making 198 new legislative arrangements in the
field of built environment production after 2002, the state
has performed interventions encouraging the production of
urban built environment (Penpecioğlu, 2016). Between 2002
and 2007, the GDP grew by an annual average of 7%, while
the construction sector grew by an annual average of 11.6%
(Çelik and Karacimen, 2017). When the construction sector
and the related sectors that feed each other are examined
together by taking the same network with the construction
sector, the percentage of the construction sector in GDP
reaches a 20-25% level (Dinçel, 2015). A similar picture of the
growth in the construction sector in Turkey between 1982
and 1987 was also seen after 2002. This explosion in the
housing sector was a combination of policy responses against
the economic crisis after 2001, and the desire of new elites
of the state to ensure that Istanbul enters into the global
cities network. This rapid growth in the construction sec-
tor was achieved through several channels. Thus, the central
government incorporated all the authorisation concerning
urban planning and structuring by continuous revisions on
preparation and regulations of spatial plans via the Ministry of
Environment and Urban Planning. Another important change
is that the reconstructed Housing Development Administra-
tion (TOKI) gained planning authority to increase its ability to
invest, as well as the rapid expansion of its financial resources.
By means of legal regulations the Housing Development Ad-
ministration (TOKI) obtained the ability to act as an eco-
nomic enterprise in the construction and real estate sector
(Penpecioglu, 2016). The government, which regulates the
access to the financial market and the borrowing system, pro-
vides information to the financial market to enable the capital
to survive, and thus, acts as an actor that is embedded in the
capital but is also autonomous. Aside from being embedded
in the capital, it is present as capital as well as by means of
TOKI. Thereby, it also undertakes a task other than being a
regulator among the classes that produce and consume the
housing (Ergüder, 2017).
General Structure of the Mortgage Loans in
Turkey
This study attempts to understand the structure of the mort-
gage loans in Turkey, in order to understand the financializa-
tion debates through the case of Turkey as a late capitalized
country. It is aimed at understanding the relationship between
mortgage loans and the financialization process by trying to
explain the eects of the scale and volume of mortgage loans,
the loan to value (LTV) rate, taken in consideration while
lending loans, and the share of income in repayment on the
mortgage loans used in İstanbul and in Turkey. For this pur-
pose, as mentioned in the introduction, data were gathered
from dierent institutions at dierent stages of the study, and
in-depth interviews with experts were conducted.
In the chapter titled “Sustainable And Inclusive Urban Pros-
perity And Opportunities For All” of the Habitat III New
Urban Agenda, it is committed that sustainable and aord-
able housing and housing finance will be supported at na-
tional, sub-national, and local levels. Furthermore, in the fifth
chapter of Turkey’s National Report on Habitat III, aordable
housing finance is discussed under the sub-title of “Improving
and Strengthening Access to Housing Finance”. In this study,
it is argued that the housing investments have grown through
the rapidly increasing mortgage loan possibilities after 2002.
Turkey argues that urban wealth will be distributed more eq-
uitably to citizens by means of mortgage loans.
The Law on Amendments to Various Laws on the Housing
Finance System No. 558210 also introduced regulations on
10 The Law on Amendments to Various Laws on Housing Finance System No. 5582 was approved on 21st Februrary, 2007.
148 PLANLAMA
credit use. One of the prominent items in the regulations
for the use of the mortgage loans is the fact the a lender
can only give credit after the assessment of buildings by real
estate companies licensed by the capital market institution.
Another important point is the ltv rate. In 2007, when the
mortgage law became legal, the ltv rate was set at 75%. This
percentage was raised to 80% in the last quarter of 2016. The
ltv rate is a major obstacle for people without a certain cap-
ital accumulation to be able to buy dwellings using mortgage
loans. From the enforcement of the law to the last quarter of
2016, individuals who wanted to buy a home using a mort-
gage loan had to have 25% of the housing price they intended
to buy. In the last quarter of 2016, this rate was reduced to
20%. In other words, the necessity of people having a certain
capital accumulation in order to buy a home was presented as
a prerequisite by law. The possible consequences of prevent-
ing access of classes, which could not make capital accumula-
tion, to mortgage loans were among the questions asked to
the experts in the in-depth interviews conducted under this
study. To summarize the answers given; all of the interviewed
bank managers state that the LTV ratio is an important tool
in terms of preventing the system from having a financial cri-
sis. The interviewees indicate that by using this tool people
with poor credit scores, who are likely to make a payment
with diculty, are prevented from getting a mortgage loan,
and so, it is ensured that mortgage loans under administrative
follow-up rates are very low. In fact, all other interviewees
agree on this issue, only one of the real estate developers said
that the banks pursue a very conservative policy by using a
high percentage of ltv ratio, thus causing a transformation of
the market that brings it below the desired level. In examining
the data of the Banking Regulation and Supervision Agency
(BRSA), it can also be seen that by July 2017, the ratio of the
total sum of mortgage loans under the administrative follow-
up to the volume of mortgage loans is 0.46%, which is a lower
rate of non-performing loans. In the same interviews, it is indi-
cated that another reason for this low rate is that homes are
not perceived just as an investment tool in the Turkish society,
rather they are seen as one of the binding agents holding the
family together. Thus, other expenses can be reduced in order
not to lose the home, and if necessary, mortgage loans are paid
with the help of the extended family members. Thereby, it is
emphasized that the mortgage back payment rates are much
higher than the other personal loan rates.
It is above all obligatory that the residential building for which
the mortgage loan will be used has a building use permit. It is
known that the vast majority of housing stocks in Turkey and
Istanbul do not have this permit (Balaban, 2007). In the study
of Kömürlü and Önel in 2007, it is said that roughly 55% of all
the homes in Turkey are unauthorized. Moreover, according
to the statement made by the Istanbul Metropolitan Munici-
pality Mayor Kadir Topbaş11 in 2008, most of the buildings of
1 million 194 thousand 643 in Istanbul are incompatible and
illegal structures, and 57% of these buildings are unlicensed
and are not meeting legal and technical procedures. This
also shows the great dierence between the domain of the
mortgage loan market in the early capitalist countries and the
theoretical domain of the market in Turkey. The mortgage
market in Turkey cannot appeal to the entire housing market.
Mortgage loans which began to be used in Turkey in 2007,
became an important alternative for housing ownership in a
short span of time. While 34% of the residential sales made
in Turkey in 2016 by using mortgage loans, this rate was 38%
for residential purchases made in Istanbul for the same year.
While the period of mortgage loans used in 2016 was 90
months (7.5 years), borrowers used mortgage loans for an
average amount of $36.500 in the same period. Creted ac-
cording to the data obtained from the Central Bank of the
Republic of Turkey, figure 1 shows the average annual inter-
est rates of mortgage loans borrowed from the banks since
2007. In November 2008, the average annual interest rate
reached its highest level with 22.69%, and in December 2016
it reached 11.43% with a fluctuating process. The fact that the
loan interest rates are considerably higher than those of the
early capitalized countries12 constitutes a structural obstacle
to the progress of the credit period spreads to 20-25 years.
The interviewed bankers and real estate developers also see
this as another factor that poses an obstacle for opening up
mortgage loans to the access of low classes.
The importance of the measures taken after the 2001 crisis
Figure 1. Average Interest Rates of Mortgage Loans between 2007-2016.
Source: The Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey.
25
20
15
10
5
0
01.01.2007
01.04.2007
01.07.2007
01.10.2007
01.01.2008
01.04.2008
01.07.2008
01.10.2008
01.01.2009
01.04.2009
01.07.2009
01.10.2009
01.01.2010
01.04.2010
01.07.2010
01.10.2010
01.01.2011
01.04.2011
01.07.2011
01.10.2011
01.01.2012
01.04.2012
01.07.2012
01.10.2012
01.01.2013
01.01.2014
01.01.2015
01.01.2016
01.04.2013
01.04.2014
01.04.2015
01.04.2016
01.07.2013
01.07.2014
01.07.2015
01.07.2016
01.10.2013
01.10.2014
01.10.2015
01.10.2016
11 http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/topbas-deprem-konusunda-yitirecek-1-dakikamiz-yok-9683293
12 At this point, numerical data on the average interest rates of mortgage loans will be useful to understand the gap between in some of the early capitalized countries and
in Turkey. The annual interest rate of the mortgage loans is 2.59% in Holland, 2.34% in UK, 3.65% in USA, 2.01% in Spain and 1.06% in Japan (EMF, HYPOSTAT 2017 A
Review of Europe’s Mortgage and Housing Market)
149Ahmet Suvar Aslan, İclal Dinçer
for the financial process in Turkey was mentioned above. In
figure 2, the ratio of the residential loans to GDP between
2002 and 2016 is shown by using data obtained from the
EMF. Figure 3, visualized using the EMF data, shows that the
volume of the residential loan sector in Turkey has a contin-
uously increasing structure over the years. The households’
GDP rated residential loan debt has a general upward trend,
although it has declined for some years. Figure 4, generated
from the data published by the BIS, shows the ratio of the
total household debt to GDP in Turkey. There are some sim-
ilarities between figure 2 and figure 4. Both charts show a
slight decrease in the debt-to-GDP ratio after 2013. On the
contrary, the total residential loan debt of the household in-
dicated in figure 3 increases exponentially. This is in line with
the arguments of some bankers, real estate developers, and
interviewed academics, who stated that the mortgage market
in Turkey is expanding and has a potential for more expansion.
The increasing household debt is one of the indicators of the
financial inclusion process. It is also necessary to mention
that all those who can use mortgage loans in Turkey belong
to the middle or the upper classes. The sector constituents
interviewed mention that these people are the ones who are
more literate in financial terms, and were involved the finan-
cial inclusion process before the mortgage loan process.
When looking at the data for Turkey, it is not wrong to say
that the financialization has been increasingly taking place in
parallel with the post-2002 period. Both the data obtained
and the enacted laws such as the issuance of mortgage laws
or the promulgated documents including the Financial Ac-
cess, Financial Education, Financial Consumer Protection
Strategy and Action Plans, which was published in 2014 as
mentioned earlier, support this view. Choosing the countries
according to the focus of the study, figure 5 shows the ratio
of the total household debt to GDP in some of the early
capitalized countries and in the late capitalized countries such
as Brazil and Turkey using the data obtained from the BIS.
Turkey’s household debt has increased more than triplicate in
11 years. A similar trend applies to Brazil. The financialization
process of these countries continues rapidly.
Spatialization of the Mortgage Loans in Istanbul
According to the data of the Turkish Statistical Institute for
2015, Istanbul is the most populated city in Turkey. Its popu-
lation is 14.657.434 habitants, and it has the highest popula-
Figure 2. The households’ ratio of total credit dept to GDP in Turkey.
Source : EMF, HYPOSTAT 2017 a review of Europe’s mortgage and housing market.
7.00
5.00
6.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 2004 2009 20142005 2010 20152006 2011 20162002 2007 20122003 2008 2013
Figure 3. Total mortgage loan debt in Turkey between 2005-2017 (mil-
lion euros).
Source: EMF, HYPOSTAT 2017 a review of Europe’s mortgage and housing market
35000
50000
25000
40000
30000
45000
20000
15000
10000
5000
02009 20142005 2010 20152006 2011 20162007 20122008 2013
Figure 4. The ratio of the households’ dept to GDP in Turkey between
2005-2016.
Source: The Bank for International Settlements, “BIS Quarterly Review”
25.0
20.0
15.5
10.0
5.0
0.0
03.02.2007
07.02.2007
11.02.2007
03.02.2007
07.02.2008
11.02.2008
03.02.2008
07.02.2008
11.02.2009
03.02.2009
07.02.2009
11.02.2009
03.02.2010
07.02.2010
11.02.2010
03.02.2010
07.02.2011
11.02.2011
03.02.2011
07.02.2011
11.02.2012
03.02.2012
07.02.2012
11.02.2012
03.02.2013
07.02.2014
11.02.2015
03.02.2016
07.02.2013
11.02.2014
03.02.2015
07.02.2016
11.02.2013
03.02.2014
07.02.2015
11.02.2016
03.02.2013
07.02.2014
11.02.2015
03.02.2016
Figure 5. The ratio of households debt to GDP.
Source: The Bank for International Settlements, “BIS Quarterly Review”
100.0
120.0
140.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
03.2005
08.2005
01.2006
06.2006
11.2006
04.2007
09.2007
02.2008
07.2008
12.2008
05.2009
10.2009
03.2010
08.2010
01.2011
06.2011
11.2011
04.2012
09.2012
02.2013
07.2013
12.2013
05.2014
10.2014
03.2015
11.2016
08.2015
01.2016
06.2016
Netherlands
Canada
United Kingdom
Spain
Japan
Brazil
Australia
United States
Turkey
150 PLANLAMA
tion density with 2.821 people per km2 in Turkey. According
to the BRSA data, Istanbul has 54.3% of the bank deposits
and 40.72% of the total loans used in Turkey, so almost half
of the financial transactions of the country occur in Istanbul.
As of 2015, 53.5% of Turkey’s total exports and 56.8% of its
imports are made in Istanbul. In the same year, the govern-
ment made the largest public investment in the city with the
percentage of 10.3% (The Union of Chambers and Commod-
ity Exchanges of Turkey, 2015).
According to the data of the Turkish Statistical Institute,
17.3% of the homes sold in Turkey in 2016, and 19.4% of the
homes sold by mortgage loans in the same year are realized
in Istanbul. It is the most preferred settlement area in Turkey
for residential sales with or without using mortgage loans.
With regard to the Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey’s
hedonic housing price index from January 2011,13 İstanbul has
a higher value than other residential areas.
Within the scope of the study, when examining the mortgage
loans given to the city of Istanbul in the period between 2010
and 2014 by the bank which is one of the biggest 5 banks of
the housing loan market of the country, it is found that the
average monthly income of those who use mortgage loans in
Istanbul is approximately 6.3 times of the minimum wage. Ac-
cording to the same data, the average income of those whose
education level is below university is 5.1 times of the mini-
mum wage; the average income of the university graduates
is 8.4, and the average income of those who have master or
PhD degree is 11.7 times of the minimum wage. This situation
reveals the simple fact that it is necessary to be a member of
the middle class at least in order to use a mortgage loan in
Turkey. There are serious obstacles to lower income groups
in reaching the mortgage loan market. However, as shown in
figure 4, the household debt is rising and this does not solely
stem from the mortgage loans. According to the data from
June 2017 of the Banks Association of Turkey, 49.5% of the
household loans are mortgage loans. Therefore, the access
to loans constituting the remaining 50.5% is easier than it
is in the mortgage market. Thus, they are used as dierent
instruments in the spread of financialization.
As mentioned above, the real estate certificate system has
entered into force. The real estate certificate was issued for
the project known as “Park Mavera III” which was carried out
in the had, which is a public institution and the biggest player
in the Turkey’s construction sector, and these certificates
started to be traded on the stock exchange on 29 March
2017. However, the issued certificates lost about 21% in the
course of a 6 month-period. In the interviews conducted
within the scope of this study, a senior executive of the HAD
stated that the certification system could not be explained
to the public well-enough, while a mid-level executive of
the Real Estate Investment Company, an organization of the
HDA, stated that the scheduling and the exit price were in-
accurate. Regardless of the performance of the certificate,
its presence indicates that the urban area is being included in
the new financial system. The interviewees were also asked
about the period when the securitization process will go into
operation. The representative of one of the 5 largest private
banks stated that they have been working intensively for the
issue and it is necessary to expect such an attempt from 2
or 3 banks within a few years, but it is early to say something
about the amount of the demand.
Both the mortgage loan usage data and the population data
gained from the TSI regarding Istanbul are evaluated together,
and the ratio of the mortgage loans used in Istanbul in the
period between 2010 and 2016 to the district population is
seen in the figure 6 prepared by using the ArcGIS programme.
While the data are sorted by the number of mortgage loans
per thousand people, the color scale changes from open to
100000
120000
140000
80000
60000
40000
20000
020142005 20102006 201620122008
Figure 7. The Annual Numbers of Mortgage Loans Used in Istanbul.
Source: TSI.
Figure 6. The Ratio of Mortgage Loans Used in Istabul to the District
Population in the period between 2010 and 2016.
Source: TSI.
3 - 15 (every thousand people)
31 - 60
16 - 30
61 - 90
91 - 131
13 http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/tcmb+tr/tcmb+tr/main+menu/istatistikler/reel+sektor+istatistikleri/konut+fiyat+endeksi/veri+%28tablolar%29
151Ahmet Suvar Aslan, İclal Dinçer
dark as the number of people who used mortgage loans in-
creases. When the data set is examined, almost 13 out of
every thousand citizens living in the district of Esenyurt have
used mortgage loans. Esenyurt is followed by Beylikdüzü,
Çekmeköy, and Büyükçekmece Districts, respectively. The
main characteristic of these four districts is that they are
hosting newly-emerging residential areas. All bankers, real es-
tate development specialists, and real estate appraisers stated
in the interviews conducted within the scope of this study
that the use of mortgage loans in these districts is intensive
because of investment purposes. It cannot be said that all
mortgage loans used in these areas are taken only by those
living in these areas. It can be seen on the Map that the two
districts with the least use of mortgage loans according to
the population are the districts of Beykoz and Sultanbeyli, and
the districts of Sarıyer and Çatalca. Arnavutköy is also in the
same range as Sarıyer and Çatalca. While 4.98 of every thou-
sand people in Sultanbeyli used mortgage loans, this value is
3,28 in Beykoz. Işık and Pınarcıoğlu (2001) stated that the
cyclical process of Sultanbeyli was based on the occupation
of land. It can be said that the Sultanbeyli district is behind
the other districts in terms of ownership of the building use
permit, which is a condition for the suitability of the mort-
gage loan use. When the land uses of Beykoz, Sarıyer, Ar-
navutköy, and Çatalca districts in which the minimum number
of mortgage loans used per capita are examined, it is seen
that the forest area is located to the north of all these four
districts. This forest area continues on the north of the en-
tire city and is known as the North Forests. The mortgage
loan performance of these four districts is similar, and the
northern forests, most of which are hosted by these districts,
constitute an important natural area that should be briefly
addressed, although it is not the subject of this study. The
“mega” projects of the local and regional governments con-
tinued with great aggression in the northern forests. These
include the construction of the 3rd Bosphorus bridge, which
is completed and opened for use, and also the construction
of the 3rd Airport Project, which is still ongoing. Despite the
fact that no mortgage loans can be used in the North Forests
Region, the ruling elites have realized major projects on these
areas. As a result of this policy, constructions have began on
this area and it is expected that even larger fields will be
opened to construction. Thus, to say that mortgage loans will
not be used in the new housing projects that are to be built
in this area will be contrary to the policies of the government
and contrary to the natural flow of life as well.
Figure 7 shows the annual numbers of mortgage loans used in
Istanbul in terms of the data taken from the Turkisk Statisti-
cal Institute (TSI). According to this chart, there is a decrease
in the total mortgage loan usage after 2013, and this trend
continues in the following years. Therefore, when conducting
a survey on the use of mortgage loans proportionate to the
population, it is thought that it would be more meaningful to
Figure 8. TThe comparison of the ratio of the total numbers of mortgage loans used in Istanbul in the period between 2010 and 2013 and the period
between 2010 and 2016 to the population.
100.0
120.0
140.0
80.0
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
Çekmeköy
Sancaktepe
Ümraniye
Başakşehir
Kartal
Kağıthane
Avcılar
Bayrampaşa
Şişli
Güngören
Beşiktaş
Zeytinburnu
Beyoğlu
Esenler
Adalar
Sarıyer
Beykoz
Silivri
Eyüp
Esenyurt
Beylikdüzü
Büyükçekmece
Küçükçekmece
Gaziosmanpaşa
Bahçelievler
Sultangazi
Şile
Kadıköy
Bakırköy
Fatih
Arnavutköy
Üsküdar
Bağcılar
Çatalca
Sultanbeyli
Ataşehir
Tuzla
Maltepe
Pendik
Mortgage rate per thousand people in 2013
Mortgage rate per thousand people in 2016
152 PLANLAMA
compare the years 2013 and 2016, and figure 8 is prepared
in this direction. Accordingly, the ratio of the mortgage loans
used to the population does not tend to decrease, but it in-
creases. This is because Istanbul’s population growth rate is
lower than the increase rate in the number of mortgage loans
used. Nevertheless, it is possible to say that there has been a
steady decline in the use of mortgage loans after 2013.14
Conclusion
This study examined the financial transformation process of
Turkey since the crisis in 2001. Household loans, household
debt obligations, the legislation that was issued, and the prac-
tices were examined and an attempt was made to find out if
there was any financialization within this transformation process.
After the 2001 economic crisis in Turkey, the credit debt of
households reached an unparallelled size due to the new eco-
nomic management strategies. Mortgage loans began to be
used and in the short-term they had a rate approaching 40%
of housing purchases. The legislative infrastructure was set up
to enter the secondary markets, and private banks continue
trying to enter the system, albeit with reservations. Istan-
bul, Turkey’s most prominent city in many respects, is also
leading the way in the use of mortgage loans. While Turkey’s
financialization process continues, it will not be misleading
to expect that this period will soon be accelerated by the
introduction of the derivative markets that will be developed
due to mortgage. This will show itself as a much more rapid
acceleration of the strong tendency of the exchange value
taking the place of the use value in the spatial plane.
It is seen in Map 1 that the rate of mortgage loans use is
higher in the newly developed urban areas compared to the
traditional residential areas in Istanbul. In addition, new de-
velopment areas in Istanbul are being organized under the
guidance of mega projects. Along with the completion of
these mega projects, it is not wrong to expect that the use of
mortgage loans will reach high values for Turkey in the forest
areas, where these mega projects are carried out.
During the financialization process in Turkey, the state plays
an active role by regulating the legal system and developing
strategies to increase financial literacy. The practices imple-
mented by the state have eects on everyday life. The house-
holds’ indebtness is accelerated by the spread of mortgage
loans as well. It is understood that mortgage loans, which
are seen as a solution to the problem of housing in the mid-
dle class in Turkey, are one of the main factors that provide
financialization.
In a late capitalist country such as Turkey, whose mortgage
market volume is not so big, one of the main questions to
be answered is whether the financialization process can con-
tinue or not. It also needs to be investigated whether the
household debt, which has increased more than triplicate in
11 years, will cause a new economic crisis. It can also be ar-
gued that the dierence between the mortgage use rates in
the new development areas, where the rates are higher, and
the old city center will lead to the renewal of the old urban
fabric in Istanbul.
14 When the data were taken from the Turkish Statistical Institute, no data regarding Adalar (Prince Islands), Çatalca, and Şile for the 2015 and 2016 were given. While the
population of Adalar (Prince Islands) decreased from 2014 to 2016, the population growth rate of Çatalca was lower than that of Istanbul, while the population growth
rate of Şile was higher than that of Istanbul in the same period. On the other hand, the color and numerical value to be displayed on the Map will be almost the same
when the data of the 3 districts for the period between 2014 and 2016 is taken into account.
153Ahmet Suvar Aslan, İclal Dinçer
REFERENCES
Aalbers, M. B. (2008). e Financialization Of Home And e Mortgage
Market Crisis. Competition & Change, 12.2 148-166.
Aalbers, M. B. (2016). e Financialization Of Housing: A Political Economy
Approach. London & New York: Routledge.
Aalbers, M. B. (2017). e Variegated Financialization Of Housing. Interna-
tional Journal Of Urban And Regional Research, 41.4 542-554
Akçay, Ümit (2009) “2001 Krizi Sonrası Yapısal Reformlar Bağlamında Kamu
İdaresinin Yeniden Düzenlenmesi: Türkiye’de Merkez Bankası Bağımsı-
zlığını Nasıl Anlamak Gerekir?”, Der. Necati Akyıldız Vd. 18. Yüzyıldan
21. Yüzyıla Kamu Yönetiminde Reform, Ankara: TODAİE Yayınları, S.
251-264
Akçay, Ü., Güngen, A. R. (2016). Finansallaşma, Borç Krizi Ve Çöküş: Küre-
sel Kapitalizmin Geleceği. Ankara: Notabene.
Arrighi, G. (1994). e Long Twentieth Century: Money, Power, And e
Origins Of Our Times. London: Verso Books.
Balaban, O. (2007). Bir Konut Finansman Aracı Mortgage Sisteminin
Türkiye’de Olası Etkileri Üzerine. Kent Ve Planlama. Ayşegül Mengi
(Ed.) Geçmişi Korumak Geleceği Tasarlamak içinde (s. 237-258).
Ankara: İmge.
BIS Quarterly Review, September 2016
Çelik, Ö., Karaçimen, E. (2017). Türkiye’de Gayrimenkul Ve Finansın Derin-
leşen Ve Yeniden Yapılanan İlişkisi. Pınar Bedirhanoğlu, Özlem Çelik,
Hakan Mıhcı. (Ed.) Finansallaşma Kıskacında Türkiye’de Devlet, Ser-
maye Birikimi Ve Emek içinde (s. 83-102). Ankara: Notabene.
Celik, O., Topal, A., & Yalman, G. (2016). Finance And System Of Provision
Of Housing. e Case Of Istanbul, Turkey (No. Wpaper152).
Dinçel, G. (2015). Büyüme Bağlamında İnşaat Sektörü. Türkiye Sınai
Kalkınma Bankası Araştırma, Ekonomik Araştırmalar, İstanbul.
Dymski, G A. (2009). Racial Exclusion And e Political Economy Of e
Subprime Crisis. Historical Materialism 17.2, 149-179.
Durand, C. (2017). Fictitious Capital: How Finance Is Appropriating Our
Future. Londo: Verso Books.
EMF, HYPOSTAT 2017 A Review Of Europe’s Mortgage And Hous-
ing Market https://hypo.org/app/uploads/sites/3/2017/09/
HYPOSTAT-2017.pdf
ERGÜDER, B. (2017). Türkiye’de İnşaat Sektöründe Büyüme Ve
Menkulleştirme: Vergi Ve Yasal Düzenlemeler. Institutions, National
Identity, Power, And Governance In e 21st Century, 191-208
Fainstein, S. (2016). Financialisation And Justice İn e City: A Commen-
tary. Urban Studies 53.7, 1503-1508.
Fernandez, R., & Aalbers, M. B. (2016). Financialization And Housing:
Between Globalization And Varieties Of Capitalism. Competition &
Change, 20(2), 71-88.
Fields, D. (2015). Contesting e Financialization Of Urban Space: Com-
munity Organizations And e Struggle To Preserve Affordable Rental
Housing İn New York City. Journal Of Urban Affairs 37.2, 144-165.
Gotham, K. F. (2009). Creating Liquidity Out Of Spatial Fixity: e Se-
condary Circuit Of Capital And e Subprime Mortgage Crisis. Interna-
tional Journal Of Urban And Regional Research 33.2, 355-371.
Güngen, A. R. (2017). Finansal Tabana Yayılma Siyaseti Ve Türkiye’de
Devletin Finansallaşması. Pınar Bedirhanoğlu, Özlem Çelik, Hakan
Mıhcı. (Ed.) Finansallaşma Kıskacında Türkiye’de Devlet, Sermaye
Birikimi Ve Emek içinde (s. 23-44). Ankara: Notabene.
Güngen, A. R. (2017). Financial Inclusion And Policy-Making: Strategy,
Campaigns And Microcredit A La Turca. New Political Economy, 1-17.
Haiven, M. (2014). Crises Of İmagination, Crises Of Power: Capitalism,
Creativity And e Commons. London & New York: Zed Books Ltd.
Harvey, D., (1985). e Urbanization of Capital, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Işık, O, Pınarcıoğlu M. (2001). Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk Gecekondulaşma Ve
Kent Yoksulları: Sultanbeyli Örneği. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
İslamoğlu, H. (2002). Yeni Düzenlemeler Ve Ekonomi Politik: IMF Kaynaklı
Kurumsal Reformlar Ve Tütün Yasası. Birikim, 158, 20-27.
Karaçimen, E. (2015). Türkiye’de Finansallşama: Borç Kıskacında Emek. İs-
tanbul: SAV Yayınları
Kömürlü, R., & Önel, H. (2007). Türkiye’de Konut Üretimine Yönelik Kay-
nak Oluşturma Model Yaklaşımları. Megaron 2.2., 89-107.
Krippner, G. R. (2005). e Financialization Of e American Economy. So-
cio-Economic Review, 3(2), 173-208.
Penpecioğlu, M. (2016). Kapitalist Kentleşme Dinamiklerinin Türkiye’deki
Son 10 Yılı: Yapılı Çevre Üretimi, Devlet Ve Büyük Ölçekli Kentsel Pro-
jeler. Tanıl Bora (Ed.), İnşaat Ya Resulullah İçinde (163-180). İstanbul:
Birikim Kitapları.
Pereira, A. L. D. S. (2017). Financialization Of Housing İn Brazil: New Fron-
tiers. International Journal Of Urban And Regional Research, 41(4),
604-622.
Rolnik, R., (2013). “Late Neoliberalism: e Financialization of Homeown-
ership and Housing Rights”, International Journal of Urban and Regional
Research, 37: 1058-1066.
e Union Of Chambers And Commodity Exchanges Of Turkey, 2015
Ekonomik Rapor https://www.tobb.org.tr/documents/yayinlar/2016/
72gk/72-genel-kurulekonomikrapor2015.pdf
Topbaş, K. (2008, 17 Ağustos). Deprem konusunda yitirecek 1 dakikamız yok
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/topbas-deprem-konusunda-yitirecek-1-
dakikamiz-yok-9683293
van Loon, J., And Manuel B. A. (2017) How Real Estate Became ‘Just Another
Asset Class’: e Financialization Of e İnvestment Strategies Of
Dutch İnstitutional İnvestors. European Planning Studies 25.2, 221-240.
INTERNET REFERENCES
https://www.teb.com.tr/finansal-okuryazarlik-nedir/
http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/feb004f0-bb3c-4d52-bbff-
086c0c72c072/eylemplani.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROO
TWORKSPACE-feb004f0-bb3c-4d52-bbff-086c0c72c072-kCzrKGg
