Content uploaded by Özge Keskin
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Özge Keskin on Jan 24, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
S.ARCH-2023
POTENTIALS OF RURAL-URBAN INTERSECTIONS IN ISTANBUL:
THE CASE OF BAŞAKŞEHIR DISTRICT
Ozge KESKIN, Hulya TURGUT*
Ozyegin University,
Nisantepe District, Orman Street, 34794. Istanbul/TURKEY
ozge.keskin@ozu.edu.tr, hulya.turgut@ozyegin.edu.tr
Abstract
The rural lands located on the peripheries of Istanbul entered the process of structuring and
transformation, especially with the neoliberalism and industrialization policies increased after
1980. Rural-urban relations have changed and created ambiguous settlements that can
neither be defined as urban nor rural have emerged. This rapid urbanization alters the quality
of rural areas while reducing natural resources. As a result, social, economic, and ecological
vulnerabilities may arise, threatening the city's resilient future. At this point, the urban-rural
relations and ecological sustainability of the city should be reconsidered. This study is based
on research carried out in the City and Architecture Master's Program at Ozyegin University
and the aim is to re-think the city through new perspectives on the rural and urban
relationship in Istanbul. In this paper, by revealing the various boundary situations at rural-
urban relations, the potentials and vulnerabilities of in-between spaces will be examined. In
the method of the research, Başakşehir district will be chosen as the case study. Rural-urban
intersections were examined over the Basaksehir district, which is intertwined with the rural
area in the urban periphery of Istanbul. Through this district existing vulnerabilities and
potentials will be discussed in the socioeconomic and spatial context. The research results will
provide a better understanding of the rural-urban intersections in Istanbul, and the findings
will be used to develop strategies for a more resilient and sustainable urban future.
Keywords
urban, rural, r-urban, intersection, resilience
1 Introduction
Urban and rural definitions are often perceived as two opposite concepts. According to these
definitions, daily social life practices, economic and socio-cultural values differ according to
the place, and the uses of the space have changed. The urban and rural dichotomy and its
borders gradually weakened with the industrialization, neoliberal, and globalization
movements that started in the 1980s. With increased urbanization and reliance on rural
peripheries, settlements that spread to rural areas create spatial encounters where the rural
283283
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
and the urban coexist. These spaces can be defined as rural-urban intersections, which serve
as an interface where the boundaries between urban and rural become blurred. The rural-
urban periphery, in this context, is a dynamic transition zone between rural and urban areas,
located on the fringes of the urban built area, where urban and rural uses are blended and
sometimes conflicted, and where there are mixed periphery uses[1].
The distinction between rural and urban is rapidly disappearing due to modernization and
globalization, with technological developments supporting this shift [2]. Now the urban has
come to define where the rural is, because the rapidly expanding city is spreading beyond its
borders to the rural peripheries. The industrial revolution and the change of production
relations created superiority of the urban over the rural [3]. This triggered intensive migration
from rural to urban areas, resulting in the formation of slums in the city and urban settlements
that proliferated in the rural areas. Mass housing areas and mega projects rising in the rural
areas of Istanbul expose the villages and slums in the region to urban transformation
activities. These transformations cause the urbanization of rural areas but reveal places that
can be neither urban nor rural. The ambiguity of Istanbul's urban and rural boundaries creates
a blur on where the rural ends and the urban begins. These ambiguous areas as the rural-
urban (R-urban) transition zones, there are life practices in these places where some rural
activities and traditions are preserved while adapting to urban life. This is a unique
phenomenon that is a result of the rapid modernization and globalization of our world, and it
is important to recognize and understand the implications of this shift.
When re-setting the city, it should be rethinking all the systems and relationships. A self-
renewing city is a city that can adapt itself to the problems caused by fragility and maintains
its resistance to future crises. Fragility is the degree of being sensitive to negative effects of a
system and the degree of inability to cope with them and the stress, shock, and adaptation
capacity of the system [4]. In this context, when we consider the relationship between the
rural-urban, rural practices in Istanbul are weakened and transformed. In the 1970s, 60 %of
the population of Istanbul lived in rural areas, while 7% live in the rural in 2020 [5]. In this
case, the rate of communities living in the rural and still maintaining production practices has
been decreasing. As a metropolis, Istanbul is not self-sufficient, has weakened connections
with the rural areas, is inadequate in the use of natural resources and local production
activities, and relies on the surrounding provinces' supply of food and water resources.
Istanbul has a capacity to produce only 19% of annual herbal food consumption itself and is
dependent on the environment in food supply [6]. This affects not only Istanbul but also the
resources of the surrounding provinces and villages and its ecological and economic situation.
Considering this situation of Istanbul, socioeconomic and ecological fragility emerges that will
shake the durability of the city in a future crisis. To eliminate this fragility in the system, socio-
economic and ecological systems that renew the city and support the adaptation capacity
should be developed. The socio-economic system is defined as a system that includes social
and ecological subsystems in mutual interaction [7]. At this point, it is necessary to think about
the nature-human relationship in the rural and the urban. Since a fragile (vulnerable) social-
economic system loses its elasticity and losing flexibility means loss of adaptation ability [8].
The production-consumption gap and the urbanization situation here may turn Istanbul into
a state that does not use its own resources in the future. Therefore, the rural area has great
potential for the future. Rural-urban intersections are important in ensuring the ecological
284284
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
resilience of the city with its natural resources, production practices and natural environment.
These intermediate spaces are places where urban transformations occur, local cultures and
productions are lost, and many ecological vulnerabilities occur where natural areas are
destroyed. For this reason, it is important to consider a sustainable rural-urban relationship
to ensure the ecological resilience of the city. Ecological resilience can be defined as the
system's ability to instantly respond to this situation in times of disruption and disaster,
renewing itself and reaching a state of balance. While there may be uncontrollable risks in
these unexpected situations, human activities may also shake the ecological balance.
Sustainable urbanization is a phenomenon that provides connections between cities and the
surrounding rural areas, and between all settlements from the smallest urban centers to
metropolitan areas [9]. To create sustainable and ecological rural and urban relations, it can
be discussed how effective resource use, healthy social environment, production-
consumption network and a symbiotic city-rural relationship will be. At the same time, it is
important to reconsider the relationship between the urban and the rural by revealing the
characteristics of the rural-urban areas, which accumulate on the peripheries of the city and
have a high potential for construction.
This paper is based on the "Advanced Design Research Laboratory" studies within the scope
of Ozyegin University, City and Architecture Master's Program, and continues to be
developed. The research aims to provide a new perspective for future urban studies on the
change in the rural-urban relationship, to define the socio-economic and spatial qualities of
the rural-urban intersections, and to rethink the city to develop strategies for a more resilient
and sustainable urban future. The case study explored the blurring of rural and urban areas
in Istanbul, examining the rural-urban intersections. The study focused on Başakşehir district,
situated on the city's periphery. This region has undergone a transformation in the wake of
industrialization, migration, and rural production practices since 1980, becoming increasingly
intertwined with urban life. The study recommends interventions to strengthen the rural-
urban connection in the region and suggests creating a symbiotic relationship between the
rural-urban through small interventions that can have a catalytic effect.
A qualitative methodological process was adopted in the research based on: (1) definitions of
rural and urban, explaining concepts related to rural-urban relations and interactions; (2) to
understand new approaches on rural-urban described in the literature; (3) a case study for
analysing and interpreting rural-urban relations and transformation process in Istanbul.
2 Rural-Urban (R-Urban)
A city is defined as a residential area where most of the population is engaged in trade,
industry or administrative affairs and there are no agricultural activities. Many definitions and
discourses about the city have been made by looking at different approaches in urban
sociology. The city has been described in relation to situations such as forms of social
relations, individuality, and division of labor. According to Wirth (1938), the city is the place
where population size, heterogeneity and density are all three, as the heterogeneity structure
increases, the stimuli in the city increase and social differentiation and lifestyles vary [10].
Therefore, the city is a mixed society structure with different lifestyles and population density.
Simmel (2012) sees cities as the growth of computational rationality and rationality. He says
that the operation in the city is based on the money factor and capitalism. Simmel (2012)
285285
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
states that the individual living in the metropolis develops an individuality type, has a high
level of consciousness, and becomes more indifferent by developing an immunity to the
intense stimuli of the city [11]. Finally, Tonnies(2012) describes society as a place where social
differences, independence of the individual and goals are dominant, where individuals who
are far from tradition live [12]. Lefebvre (2013) states that the city and urban society is a
structure originating from industrialization [13]. It defines it as a society born after this
industrialization process that dominates agricultural production. Therefore, urban society
emerges with the changes in the forms of the city and the disappearance of its old form.
Capitalism plays an effective role in the reproduction of the city. In this sense, “urban
revolution” is defined as the transformation from industrial production to modern capitalist
production originating from the city. Looking at these definitions, the city is the place where
a dense, variable, heterogeneous society exists as a space reproduced by capitalist relations.
Rural areas are generally seen as agricultural production areas. Wirth (1938) states that cities
distance human beings from organic nature and states that the characteristic settlement
forms of rural areas are farms, mansions and villages. Urban space, which Harvey (1982) calls
the "built environment", is man-made and has different characteristics from the rural area
[14]. The rural area, on the other hand, is a much more natural and less complex,
homogeneous structural settlement. According to Tönnies (2012), community relations are
seen in rural areas and social relations between people are stronger, acquaintance,
neighborliness, common values, and beliefs are more common.
In today's, the traditional distinction between urban and rural areas is no longer applicable.
The terms urban and rural still have unambiguous connotations, but in a world where it is
increasingly difficult to distinguish between urban and rural environments, such definitions
are out of date. From a dichotomous binary perspective based on alterity to the urban
environment, the terms "rural" and "urban" refer to spatial realities that have frequently been
interpreted as opposed, or even antagonistic and divergent [15]. This strategy expresses a
nonexistent homogeneity of rural and urban spaces, as if there were only one model for each
category. It also represents a simplification in many other ways. The rural-urban dichotomy is
now thought to have a more complex relationship and interactive togetherness. The concept
of dichotomy is a duality that has lost its boundaries and interacts. Dichotomies are mixed
and "joined" realities created through unexpected associations and crossovers, and
paradoxically based on principles arising from seemingly impossible mergers [16]. These
binary expressions and dichotomy are therefore understandable not only on their own but
when considered together with the concept of simultaneous opposite.
The boundaries of the urban and rural dichotomy began to weaken gradually with the
industrialization, neoliberal and globalization movements that started in the 1980s. With the
increase in the rate of urbanization and their reliance on rural peripheries, settlements that
spread over rural areas form a spatial form in which the rural and the urban are together.
These spaces reveal a heterogeneous structure where rural and urban practices are mixed. In
this sense, the concept of rural-urban (r-urban) is places where rural and urban boundaries
are blurred, and spatial and daily practices are transformed. Rural-urban is defined as the area
between the city and the rural area, where the spatial boundaries are variable, and where
urban functions are intertwined with rural functions [17]. In this sense, rural-urban is a
transition zone where rural and urban practices are mixed. Being a transition zone also
286286
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
requires examining the concept of "border". Boundary is the line that divides two different
things. Boundaries can be sharp or blurred, continuous or discontinuous, natural, or artificial,
and sometimes the exact location of the boundary is unclear or disputed [18]. The boundaries
to indicate where time or movement begins and ends are vague. Likewise, the boundaries in
space become blurred and unclear. It is the weakening of the urban-rural divide, the merging
of borders through intermingling. It's a blurry place where the boundaries between the rural
areas and the urban cannot be seen. The ambiguity lies only in our ignorance of the exact
location of the boundaries because infinite fragments can be found at cross-border transitions
[19]. In these ambiguous spaces, where boundaries are blurred, a variety of identities and
uses intersect, leading to unexpected encounters, spontaneous activities, creative daily uses,
and alternative publicity. This creates a unique time-space experience that is far more
valuable than the discontinuities that arise from rigid borders. By creating porous and
ambiguous spaces, we can unlock the potential of any given place [20]. For this reason, the
blurred boundaries of a phenomenon or space are not clear but are seen as a threshold and
a transition zone. Any deterioration or change in the sharp boundaries of space leads to
deterioration or transformation of the qualities of the space.
The resulting state of' re-urbanity,' with urban forms and practices reinvented and articulated
in a variety of settings, the abandonment of traditional rural-urban dichotomies, and the
search for new socio-spatial models [21]. On the one hand, the discovery of a networked
space characterized by multiple flows and dependencies connecting urban and rural, suggests
that the rural dichotomy is collapsing. To account for this, a set of intermediate classifications,
such as 'peri-urban' - areas near cities that often function as extensions of them - have been
introduced. This allows for a more complex understanding that exists between urban and
rural areas, which no longer lend themselves to simple distinctions. Various recent studies
have examined and interpreted the functional territories that result from rural-urban
integration or hybridization in the area known as the "rural-urban periphery," which is viewed
as a space with its own distinct characteristics. This entity has also been referred to as the
"urban-rural interface," and it is composed of urbanized rural areas, intermediate territories,
in-between territories, territories of a new modernity, or "hybrid geographies “[22]. Rural-
urban (r-urban) has formed the intermediate spaces of this duality, which are intertwined,
blurred, and a hybrid transition zone. Here, it is a region that is neither urban nor rural, but
which has the characteristics of both urban and rural areas on the periphery, which has
defined a residential area by leaping from the city, but where practices can be realized
mutually.
In-between space is the threshold where two different environments, functions meet,
intersect and undergo a constant transformation and change. While the rural areas on the
peripheries are included in the city, it is often encountered that the lands in the city are
dissolved without foreseeing, and these dissolved areas often turn into a rural appearance. In
a sense, these areas can be defined as the lines between the rural and the city becoming
blurred and turning into each other, but never turning into a rural or a urban. These
transformations form the definition of a new area between rural and urban areas and are
referred to as "in-between space"[23]. Also, rural-urban intersections can have permeability.
It is a region between urban and rural textures. It is a texture transition between urban-urban
or urban-rural adjacent to the undefined areas left by the urban leaps.
287287
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
Based on conceptual framework (Figure 1) of this research, (1) to explain the conceptual
evolution of the rural-urban, (2) to analyze the characteristics of the rural-urban interactions
with the concepts of in-betweenness, blur, ambiguity, permeability, and hybridity. (3) re-
thinking the city by rural-urban intersections and discussed the potential for resilient future.
Figure 1. Conceptual framework of the research
3. Rural-Urban Intersections: The Case of Istanbul, Başakşehir District
From the perspective of Istanbul, it is seen that the boundaries between rural and urban
spaces are becoming increasingly blurred. The reason for this is the intermediary spaces
formed in the city periphery by the transformation of spaces in terms of politics, economy
and sociology. It is seen that the necessity of making a different definition from the definitions
that limit rural areas to agriculture, animal husbandry and forestry activities, characterize
them as undeveloped infrastructure and superstructure, and specify rural dwellings. The most
effective situation in the formation of rural-urban intersections can be said to be
industrialization of rural areas by changing production practices. In addition, the relocation of
some functions within the city to the periphery has also led to a transformation process in the
rural. This situation has revealed the blurring of rural-urban borders.
The rural-to-urban migration that has been spurred by industrialization has led to the
emergence of squatter settlements, which have grown more quickly than planned areas.
Initially, these settlements were established in the empty spaces of city centers, but over
time, they have spread to the outskirts of cities due to a lack of space in city centers and the
availability of jobs in industrial zones. This phenomenon is not unique to one rural but is seen
288288
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
in many developing countries. The characteristics of these settlements, such as the quality of
housing, access to essential services, and infrastructure systems, may differ from rural to
rural, yet the process of their development is largely the same (Davis, 2006) [24]. Due to
political reasons and amnesties, squatter settlements in Turkey have been recognized and
have gradually become urban housing areas where the middle class also resides. Despite the
expectation that migrating people would adapt to the lifestyle and cultural texture of a city,
they have been unable to fully integrate and have instead developed an "in-between identity
neither urbanized nor villager. These squatter areas have become increasing on the urban
agenda and have become the new vicious knots of urban peripheries (Keyder,2000) [25].
Despite their precarious existence in the urban space, these settlements remain a significant
potential, and are still a topic of discussion in today's urban transformation projects.
The change and transformation of rural and urban peripheries, it is seen that political,
economic, social, and urban interventions are effective in the change of visible and invisible
borders of Istanbul. It is formed because of factors such as transportation networks providing
access to rural areas, unplanned construction, urban transformation and mega projects as
factors affecting the formation of rural-urban intersections in Istanbul. Urban transformation
and sprawl create rural-urban spaces and create an Istanbul between the local and the global.
The change in the rural and urban borders of Istanbul has been affected by industrialization,
migration and globalization movements and the formation of new settlements. Especially in
the period between 1970-1990, the factors that caused the change of rural and urban borders
are the rapid industrialization of Istanbul and the relocation of industrial zones to the city
periphery. In addition, during this period, situations such as the Real Estate and Credit Bank
and the Expropriation Law, which strengthened the zoning operations, emerged. In these
newly formed industrial zones, zoning activities started with migrations and squatting. The
Bosphorus Bridge, which was opened in 1973, and the Fatih Sultan Mehmet Bridge, which
was opened in 1988, were built to balance the distribution of workplaces and residences on
the European and Anatolian sides and to increase the access between the two continents.
Along with these bridges, the construction around them started to gain speed.
The 2000s, as can be seen in Figure 2, it is seen that the change in rural and urban peripheries
in Istanbul has been affected by the increase in transportation networks and the mega
projects carried out, and the rural area is getting smaller and smaller. In addition, political
interventions were also effective in rural and urban borders. With the Disaster Law enacted
in 2012, regions and structures deemed risky have led to the emergence of urban
transformation and construction-destruction activities, and many slums and rural settlements
have undergone spatial transformations in this way [3]. The mega-projects, where the largest
interventions on urban and rural borders, seen after 2016, were effective. These are the 3rd
Bridge, Istanbul Airport and Northern Marmara Motorway and the planned Canal Istanbul
and Canal Riva projects. The common feature of these projects is that they create an urban
development direction that will lead to the construction of rural areas in the north of the city.
Transformations in the rural, which started near these projects, will change the boundaries
of the city, cause the rural areas to be built and the city to grow towards the north.
289289
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
Figure 2 . The impact of urban interventions on the transformation of rural and urban
areas through the construction of Istanbul from 1970 to 2022.
The changes in the rural and urban peripheries of Istanbul over the years, it is seen that the
development of access networks, mega projects, relocation of industrial areas, mass housing
and urban transformation activities transform the rural area and urbanization begins at the
points where the city periphery meets the rural area. Urbanization is the beginning of
adaptation of rural space or people living in rural areas to urban space and practices. has
developed with urban transformation and mass housing.
Figure 3 presents the current status of Istanbul's active and passive green spaces, water
resources, and urban and rural settlements, along with the ecologically significant reserves,
water resources, and basins. It is clear that urbanization is spreading to the city's northern
periphery. Notably, Başakşehir was chosen as the study area due to its location at the
intersection of various domains, resulting in hybrid and ambiguous spaces that blend urban
and rural areas, industrial and agricultural activities, and diverse lifestyles. The area and land
uses in the area are varied. The district exhibits a diverse range of textures and land uses.
While looking at the rural-urban intersections, it was seen that Başakşehir also showed an
intersection feature within the city and contained different spatial textures from the city to
the rural.
290290
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
Figure 3. Geographical and urban structure of Istanbul, the location of Başakşehir as
an intersection. (The map was created by the author using the source [26]).
4. Potentials of Rural-Urban Intersections: Başakşehir
Until the 1980s, Başakşehir region was a rural settlement consisting of villages
connected to Bakırköy district, where agriculture and livestock production were located. Due
to the organized industrial zone established in the 1980s, there were intense migrations to
the district, and the number of closed settlements in the region increased rapidly with the
"Basaksehir Mass Housing Project" initiated by the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM)
due to the increasing housing need. With this rapid construction and urbanization dynamics,
Başakşehir District was established with the decision taken in 2008. Basaksehir; It consists of
11 neighborhoods. Güvercintepe, Şahintepe, Altınşehir Neighborhoods are the regions where
citizens with low economic level reside; Başak, Başakşehir, Kayabaşı and Bahçeşehir Districts
are observed as residences of citizens living in protected gated communities. Apart from this,
Ziya Gökalp District has a dense urban texture due to its proximity to the organized industrial
zone. Başakşehir exhibits a heterogeneous appearance where the rural and the urban coexist.
Gated settlements and rural neighborhoods in the region bring border situations in
settlement areas. This situation does not allow encounters in rural and urban residential areas
within the city. As a result, spatial, social, cultural and economic segregation occurs. Due to
the rapid construction process, rapid transformation of rural areas, industrialization, dense
closed settlements and green areas in the urban fabric, Başakşehir district was chosen as the
study area by considering the rural-urban intersections. The present study critically examines
the emergence of textures resulting from the juxtaposition of disparate spatial conditions,
namely the rural and the urban, within a singular locale. Drawing on a theoretical framework
that foregrounds the concepts of in-between, blurred boundaries, permeability, ambiguity,
and hybridity, the study examines five distinct
291291
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
intersections in Başakşehir to illustrate how diverse spatial situations are conjoined (Figure
4). Each intersection is named with a number (I.1, I.2, I.3…) and explained their potentials and
vulnerabilities.
Figure 4. Rural-Urban Intersections in Başakşehir
As seen in Figure 5, the existing rural and urban areas of Başakşehir, its natural physical
features and the areas where rural productions are made are mapped. In addition, due to the
planned “Canal Istanbul” project, which was announced in 2011 and whose zoning plans
continue, it is foreseen that the existing rural settlements will undergo urban transformation
and the green areas under protection will be destroyed. With this project, the areas planned
as a new urban development zone in Başakşehir were shown and the damage that could occur
in the ecological texture was also evaluated.
Figure 5. Existing geographical and urban structuring in Başakşehir (The map was
created by the author using the source [27]).
292292
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
Organized industrial zone and urban transformation activities in Başakşehir have been
effective in the development of the region. Developing and transforming housing around the
Ikitelli Organized Industrial Zone has brought along mass housing and estates, and some
shantytowns have been converted into apartments with the urban transformation.
Başakşehir socioeconomic levels were compiled from real estate sites and compared on a
neighborhood basis. Socioeconomic analysis has been studied to understand the invisible
boundaries between the intersection regions and urban space and their spatial reflections.
Neighborhoods with the highest socio-economic level as neighborhoods are seen as areas
that have been renovated with urban transformation and have closed sites and are at A/A-
levels [28]. In this case, it has been observed that the neighborhoods defined as C at the
lowest socioeconomic level are rural settlement areas and shantytowns. In this sense, the
socioeconomic situation and the situation of rural-urban intersection areas were tried to be
read. The importance of this in the research is to be able to detect not only spatial but also
existing social and economic vulnerabilities in the intersections.
Catalyst impact points were determined by considering the existing potential to reduce the
fragility factors in the region. These catalysts can help to eliminate the pressure of urban and
urban transformation from the exploitation of the urban to the rural by establishing urban
and rural ties and creating a symbiotic way of life with small-scale interventions. For this
purpose, catalyst points that will strengthen the rural-urban relationship have been proposed
(Figure 6). While choosing the focus of influence of these catalyst points, the rural-urban
potential, production activities, and cultural and social situation around them were taken into
consideration. For this reason, ecological, economic, cultural and social focal that can help to
repair these vulnerabilities have been determined in the cross-sectional regions with low
socioeconomic level and lack of social and cultural infrastructures on a district basis.
Figure 6. Proposal of creating economic, cultural, ecological and social focal that can
act as a catalyst to enhancing rural-urban intersections.
293293
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
INTERSECTION 1 (I.1) : It is one of the old settlement patterns of Başakşehir before 1980. As
an intermediate space, it is a region where two different environments, urban and rural,
intersect and open to continuous transformation and change. It is that the lines between the
rural and the urban become blurred and begin to transform into each other, but never turn
into a rural or a urban. There are factories where both agricultural and livestock activities and
industrial production take place. Considering the current situation, the regions where active
agriculture is still practiced in the district are shown as the focus of agricultural production. It
has been proposed to strengthen agricultural activities as an economic focal by supporting
the agricultural activities in this region, which has a low socioeconomic level.
INTERSECTION 2 (I.2): There are rural settlements with agricultural production, slums. It is
also a rural-urban intersection adjacent to production facilities, industrial enterprises and
gated communities. The region is located at an ecologically important point. The rural space
where Sazlıdere Dem Reservoir and its surrounding basin areas are located has been taken
into consideration as an ecological focus. In addition, this region has been defined as one of
the new urban development areas within the scope of the Canal Istanbul project and there
are many agricultural farms and basins and states in the region. Taking this region as an
ecological focus is important for the protection of both the dam lake, biological diversity and
natural resources.
INTERSECTION 3 (I.3): It is a section where the rural neighborhood, which is one of the oldest
rural settlements of the district, comes side by side with urban structures. The region harbors
a tension between the city and the rural, which shows the characteristic of a border. It is the
transition area between the settlement showing the urban character and the other
settlement showing only the rural character. The stadium, subway, water treatment plants
and gated residential areas are next to each other, but they are not texturally intertwined
with the urban area. It is also a region with Azatlı Gunpowder House built in the 18th century,
which has historical and cultural features, and Yarımburgaz Caves, which are one of the oldest
settlements in the world with a history of 400,000 years and were granted the status of 1st
Degree Archaeological-Natural Site in 2001. For this reason, it is recommended to evaluate
the cultural focus of this place and to strengthen the historical and local identity of the region.
INTERSECTION 4 (I.4): In this region, rural settlements, Başakşehir Fatih Terim Stadium, are
located next to closed site settlements and there is an impermeable border with a highway.
It is the place where these contrasting rural and urban settlements positioned side by side
cannot blend into each other. In determining the region as a social focus, it is a region where
social interaction is weak except for commercial and production activities.
INTERSECTION 5 (I.5) : The intersection area, as a rural slums, is located between industrial
sites and is adjacent to closed sites and apartments. For this reason, it is a hybrid region where
the urban and rural dichotomy weakens and becomes blurred by intermingling. It is a blurred
place where the rurality stays within the urban. It is a region where social interaction is weak
except for commercial and production activities. For this reason, the social focus aims to
integrate the people living in the slums between the industrial area and the gated
communities with the city and to reduce the tension created by the rural-urban dichotomy.
Because the relationship of the people living in the region with the city has been limited, and
the bond between the rural and the urban has created a border both physically and socially.
294294
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
6. Conclusion
Rural-urban intersections are important in ensuring the ecological, socioeconomic, and
spatial durability of the city with its natural resources, production practices and natural
environment. These intermediate spaces are places where urban transformations occur, local
cultures and productions are lost, and many ecological vulnerabilities occur where natural
areas are destroyed. Therefore, intersections have many potentials. In this study, which is
examined on Başakşehir, it is seen that the intersection spaces of the region are the regions
at the lowest socioeconomic level and there are spatial vulnerabilities because it is tried to be
urbanized as a region where continuous urban transformation activities take place. The most
concrete example of this that we can foresee in the future is the Canal Istanbul project located
in the region where rural areas and settlements are located and the urban development areas
to be developed around it. The common feature of these intersections is that by being side
by side with the urbanized region, they never turned into an urban space, but they also lost
their rural qualities in a sense. Meanwhile, the remaining regions are the transition zone of
the city and the rural. For this reason, the subject of this research in terms of urban life is to
rethink the city by looking at the rural-urban intersections and to explore the potential for the
future. The fact that rural-urban intersections have natural resources and production
practices that can support ecological sustainability can reduce the exploitation of the city to
the rural by supporting the provision of urban agricultural production. At the same time, rural-
urban intersections contain local culture, and they need to be protected. Conservation of
these areas can help restore biodiversity and urban ecology, as areas where rural-urban
characteristics often exist in the urban periphery have access to urban forests and natural
resources. This situation ensures the adaptation and sustainability of the city against the
climate crisis that may exist in the future, lack of natural resources, and food problems. When
we reset the city, we can start to rethink the rural-urban relations. In this way, the future city
should be resistant to crises and be able to renew itself. By strengthening rural-urban ties, we
can reorganize the rural-urban relationship with local interventions. Thus, a sustainable
relationship that can create its own production-consumption capacity can be created from
these intersection spaces, which are seen as a potential for construction and urban
transformation. For this reason, it is important to reconsider the relationship between rural
and rural areas by revealing the characteristics of rural-urban regions.
Acknowledgements
This paper is based on the research of the City and Architecture Master's Program at Ozyegin
University. It is with great appreciation to the Advanced Design Research Laboratory members
who have generously shared their knowledge and expertise and esteemed advisor,
Prof.Dr.Hülya Turgut, whose invaluable guidance has greatly enriched this study.
References
[1] Hazar, D., Kır-Kent Çeperine Ekolojik Yaklaşım. Şehir ve Toplum, (2017), 7, 135-142.
295295
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
[2] Türk, E., Hızlı Kentleşme Sürecinin Toplumsal Yapıya Etkileri: Batman Örneği, Doctoral
Dissertation, Sakarya University, Sakarya, Turkey, 2016.
[3] Kantürer, G., İstanbul Kent Çeperlerinde Kırsal Arazilerin Dönüşümü: Ağaçlı-Yeniköy
Yöresi Örneği, Doctoral dissertation, Istanbul Teknik University, Istanbul, Turkey, 2016.
[4] Adger, W. N., Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16, (2006). 3, pp. 268-281,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006.
[5] Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu, https://data.tuik.gov.tr.
[6] Yerküre Yerel Çalışmalar Kooperatifi., İstanbul Nasıl Beslenir?:Üretici Pazarları
Odağında Alternatifler ve Olanaklar, Greenpeace, Istanbul, Turkey, 2020.
[7] Gallopín, G. C., Linkages Between Vulnerability, Resilience, And Adaptive
Capacity. Global Environmental Change, 16, (2006), 3, pp. 293-303,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.004.
[8] Folke, C., Resilience: The Emergence of a Perspective for Social-Ecological Systems
Analyses. Global Environmental Change, 16, (2006), 3, pp. 253-267.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002.
[9] Kaya, H. E., & Susan, A. T., Sürdürülebilir Bir Kentleşme Yaklaşımı Olarak, Ekolojik
Planlama ve Eko-Kentler. İDEALKENT, 11, (2020), 30, pp. 909-937.
[10] Wirth, L., Urbanism as a Way of Life. American Journal of Sociology, 44, (1938), 1, pp.
1–24, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2768119.
[11] Simmel, G., The Metropolis and Mental Life. In The Urban Sociology Reader, (Jan Lin,
Christopher Mele), Routledge, (2012), pp. 37-45.
[12] Tönnies, F., Community and Society. In The Urban Sociology Reader, (Jan Lin,
Christopher Mele), Routledge, (2012), pp. 30-36.
[13] Lefebvre, H., Kentsel Devrim. (The Urban Revolution) Sel Yayıncılık, İstanbul, Turkey,
2013.
[14] Harvey, D., Limits to Capital, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, England, 1982.
[15] Champion, T.& Hugo, G., Beyond the Urban–Rural Dichotomy. In New Forms of
Urbanization, (Tony Champion, Graeme Hugopp), Routledge, London, England, 2004,
pp. 3–24.
[16] Gausa, M., Guallart, V., Muller, W., & Soriano, F., The Metapolis Dictionary of
Advanced Architecture: City, Technology and Society in the Information Age, Actar,
Barcelona, Spain, 2003.
[17] Avram, Sorin I., The Position of Rural-Urban Fringe in the Framework of Human
Settlement System. Forum Geografic, 8 (2009), 8, pp. 139-145.
296296
Proceeding of the 10th International Conference S.ARCH-2023
Berlin, Germany
S.ARCH-2023
[18] Varzi, A., Boundary, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2015,
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2015/entries/boundary/
[19] Sorensen, R.A. Transitions. Philosophical Studies, 50, (1986), pp. 187–193
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00354587
[20] Cebir Meral, G.İ., Özsoy, A., The Porosity of Borders: Between Formal and Informal
Urban Patterns. In The Dialectics of Urban and Architectural Boundaries in the Middle
East and the Mediterranean. (Girginkaya Akdağ, S., Dinçer, M., Vatan, M., Topçu, Ü.,
Maro Kırış, İ.) The Urban Book Series, Springer, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-71807-7_2
[21] Woods, M., Rural Geography: Blurring Boundaries and Making Connections. Progress
in Human Geography, 33, (2009), 6, pp. 849-858,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508105001
[22] Delgado-Viñas, C., & Gómez-Moreno, M. L., The Interaction between Urban and Rural
Areas: An Updated Paradigmatic, Methodological and Bibliographic
Review. Land, 11(2022), 8, pp. 1-21, https://doi.org/10.3390/land11081298 .
[23] Karadaban, M., & Erkök, F. Delikli Bir Kent Olarak İstanbul’a Bakmak: Kentin Müphem
Alanlarına Dair Bir Araştırma, Master’s Thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul,
Turkey, 2020.
[24] Davis, M., Gecekondu Gezegeni (Planet of Slums), Metis, İstanbul, Turkey, 2006.
[25] Keyder, Ç., Enformel Konut Piyasasından Küresel Konut Piyasasına: Istanbul Küresel ile
Yerel Arasında. Metis Press, Istanbul, Turkey, 2000.
[26] 39 KENT Bir İstanbul, Kentsel Vizyon Platformu, Istanbul, Turkey, 2016,
https://kentselstrateji.com/proje/39-kent-1-istanbul/
[27] Başakşehir İlçesi. Şehir Planlama Müdürlüğü.
https://sehirplanlama.ibb.istanbul/basaksehir-ilcesi/
[28] REIDIN: Veri Analitiği. https://reidin.com/tr/
297297
