Kamusal Açık Mekânların Kalitesi ve Sosyal Etkileşim Üzerindeki Etkileri / Quality of Public Open Space and Effects on Social Interaction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v7i2.1508Keywords:
Açık kamusal mekân, Açık kamusal mekân kalitesi, Sosyal etkileşim, Dinlenme alanları, Public open space, Environment, Quality of public open space, Social interaction, Refreshment areas.Abstract
Abstract
The quality of public outdoor space has recently become an important issue and has been revealed by many studies. However, there are few studies that show the relationship between the quality of space and the social interaction that occurs between people. The most important goal of urban designers should be to create public open spaces that can meet the various needs of people. Using longer and more frequently, public open spaces allow the fulfilment of needs and also support social interaction. In this context, the concept of 'quality' of public open spaces is gaining importance. The quality of open spaces revealed by different characteristics of the environment has been determined by evaluating of the open spaces by their inclusiveness, meaningful activities, comfort, security and pleasurability and revealed the relationship between social interaction (passive-fleeting-enduring relationship). In order to determine this relationship, a questionnaire was conducted with 140 people (70 people in each park) in Atatürk Square Park and Fatih Park in Trabzon. As a result, a high level of relationship was found between the factors of inclusiveness, comfort and meaningful activities that determine the quality of space and social interaction.
Öz
Kamusal açık mekânın kalitesi son zamanlarda üzerinde önemle durulan bir konu haline gelmiş ve birçok çalışma tarafından ortaya konmuştur. Ancak mekânın kalitesi ile insanların arasında oluşan sosyal etkileşim arasındaki ilişkiyi ortaya koyan az sayıda çalışma vardır. Oysaki kentsel tasarımcıların en önemli hedefi insanların çeşitli ihtiyaçlarını karşılayabilen kamusal açık mekânlar yaratmak olmalıdır. İhtiyaçların karşılanmasına olanak sağlayan kamusal açık mekânlar, insanlar tarafından daha uzun süreli ve sık kullanılarak oraların canlı, sosyal etkileşimi destekleyen yerler olmasını sağlar. Bu kapsamda, kamusal açık mekânların ‘kalitesi’ kavramı önem kazanmaktadır. Çevrenin farklı özellikleri ile ortaya konulan açık mekânların kalitesi, bu çalışma kapsamında açık mekânların kapsayıcılık, anlamlı etkinlikler, konfor, güvenlik ve memnun ediciliğini değerlendirerek tespit edilmiş ve sosyal etkileşimle (pasif-geçici-sürekli ilişki) arasındaki ilişki ortaya konmuştur. Bu ilişkinin belirlenmesi için Trabzon kentinde bulunan, Atatürk Meyden Parkı ve Fatih Parkında 140 kişi (her parkta 70’şer kişi) ile anket çalışması yapılmıştır. Sonuçta, mekânın kalitesinin belirlendiği kapsayıcılık, konfor ve anlamlı etkinlikler faktörleri ile sosyal etkileşim arasında yüksek düzeyde ilişkiler tespit edilmiştir.
References
Abdulkarim D. & Nasar J. L. (2014). Do Seats, Food Vendors, and Sculptures Improve Plaza Visitability? 46, 805-825.
Aelbrecht, P. S. (2016). ‘Fourth Places’: The Contemporary Public Settings Informal Social Interaction among Strangers, Journal of Urban Design, 21, 1, 124-152.
Alexander, C.; Ishikawa, S.; Silverstein, M.; Jacobson, M.; Fiksdahl-King, I. & Angel, S. (1977). A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction, New York: Oxford University Press.
Alpak, E. M. (2017). Alışveriş caddelerinin sosyal davranış yerlerine dönüşmesi: Çevresel özellikle ile Kendileme davranışının incelenmesi. Doktora Tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
Amin, A. (2008). Collective Culture and Urban Public Space, City, 12, 4-24.
CABE (2002). Paving the Way-How to Achieve Clean, Safe and Attractive Streets, Thomas Telford Ltd for the Office of Deputy Prime Minister
Carr, S.; Francis, M.; Rivlin, L. G. & Stone, A. M. (1992). Public Space, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Coleman, A. (1999). Le procès de l'utopie Vision et réalité dans les conceptions de l'habitat. Les Cahiers de la Recherche Architec- turale et Urbaine (1), 51–64.
Düzenli, T. ; Yılmaz, S. & Eren, T. E. (2017). A Study on Healıng Effects of Hospıtal Gardens. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 26(12):7342-7352
Farida N. (2013). Effects of outdoor shared spaces on social interaction in a housing estate in Algeria. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 2, 457–467
Forsyth, A. & L. Musacchio (2005). Designing Small Parks: A Manual for Addressing Social and Ecological Concerns. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Fyfe, N. R. (1998). Introduction: Reading the Street. In N. R. Fyfe (Ed.), Images of the street: Planning, identity, and control in public spaces, 1-12, London, England: Routledge.
Gehl, J. (1987). Life between Buildings, New York: Van Nostrand-Reinhold.
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for People, Island Press, Washington, Covelo, London
Goličnik, B. & Thompson C. W. (2010). Emerging Relationships between Design and Use of Urban Park Spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 94, 1, 38 -53
Gür, Ş. (1996). Mekân Örgütlenmesi. Gür Matbaacılık.
Hernandez E. N. (1986). Sociability and Outdoor Urban Open Spaces, A master’s thesis.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, New York.
Johnston, C. (2005). What is heritage? http://www.teachingheritage .nsw.edu.au/1views/w1v_johnston.html
Keane, C. (1991). Socio environmental determinants of community formation. Environment and Behavior, 23(1), 27-46.
Knack, R. E. (2000). Hanging out: teens search for the perfect public space. Planning 66, 8,4–9.
Laurier, E. & Philo, C. (2006). Cold Shoulders and Napkins Handed: Gestures of Responsibility. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31, 193-207.
Lofland, L. (1998). The Public Realm: Exploring the City’s Quintessential Social Territory. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.
Lynch, K. (1984). Good City Form, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Madanipour, A. (Ed.) (2010). Whose Public Space? International Case Studies in Urban Design and Development. London, England: Routledge.
Madanipour, A. (1999). Why are the Design and Development of Public Spaces Significant for Cities? Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26, 879- 891.
Marcus, C. & Francis, C. (1998). People Places: Design Guide- lines for Urban Open Space. John Willey &Sons, New Yok.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370– 396.
Massey, D. & Rose, G. (2003). Personal Views: Public Art Research Project.
Montgomery, J. (1998). Making a City: Urbanity, Vitality and Urban Design, Journal of Urban Design, 3, 1, 93-116.
Mebirouk, H. (2005) .Appropriation de l'espace public dans les ensembles de logements collectifs, forme d'adaptabilité ou contournement de normes? cas des ZHUN d'Annaba (Nordest Algérien)' Revue Norois, 195.
Mehta, V. (2007). Lively Streets: Determining Environmental Characteristics to Support Social Behaviour, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 27, 165-187.
Mehta, V. (2009). Look Closely and You Will See, Listen Carefully and You Will Hear: Urban Design and Social Interaction on Streets, Journal of Urban Design, 14, 1, 29–64,
Mehta, V. (2013.) The Street. A Quintessential Social Public Space. Florence Production Ltd, Stoodleigh, Devon, UK.
Mehta, V. (2014). Evulating Public Space. Journal of Urban Design, 19, 1, 53-88
Oldenburg, R. (1989). The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other.
Peters, K.; Elands, B. & Buijs A. (2010). Social İnteractions in Urban Parks: Stimulating Social Cohesion? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9, 93–100
PPS. Street as Places: Using Streets to Rebuilding Communities, Projet for Public Spaces Publication, New York, https://www.pps.org/pdf/bookstore/ Using_Streets_to_Rebuild_Communities.pdf, 28 Nisan, 2013.
Ruppert, E. S. (2006). Rights to Public Space: Regulatory Reconfigurations of Liberty. Urban Geography, 27, 271-292.
Sullivan, W.; F. Kuo & S. DePooter (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces. Environment and Behavior 36:678–700.
Semenza C. J. & March L. T. (2009). An Urban Community-Based Intervention to Advance Social Interaction, Environment and Behaviour, 41, 22-42
Simpson, P. (2011). Street Performance and the City: Public Space, Sociality, and Intervening in the Everyday, Space and Culture, 14, 415-430
Trip, J. J. (2007). What Makes a City? Planning for ‘Quality of Place. The Case of High-Speed Train Station Area Redevelopment", The Series Sustainable Urban Areas is published by IOS Press under the imprint Delft University Press.
Uzgören G. & Erdönmez, M. E. (2017). Kamusal Açık Alanlarda Mekan Kalitesi ve Kentsel Mekan Aktiviteleri İlişkisi Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir İnceleme, Megaron, 12 (1), 41-56.
Whyte, W. H. (1980). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, Washington DC: The Conservation Foundation.
Wooley, H. (2003). Urban Open Spaces. London, Spon Press
Zacharias, J.; Stathopoulos, T. & Hanqing, W. (2004). Spatial Behaviour in San Francisco’s Plazas: The Effects of Microclimate, Other People, and Environmental Design. Environment and Behavior, 36, 638-658.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All papers licensed under Creative Commons 4.0 CC-BY.- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Under the following terms:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
