Searching for traces of counter-urbanization in Turkey: The case of the north İstanbul

The urbanization process, which gained momentum after the Second World War, left its place in the 1970s to the counter-urbanization process, which is defined as population mobility from the metropolitan city to the rural or lower-level settlements. Counter-urbanization, which started in the United States, has been observed in Europe and other countries, especially England. Since the counter-urbanization movement is directly related to factors such as the socio-economic development level of the country, region or metropolitan area, spatial structure, administrative and legal infrastructure, planning system, its processes, and effects differ in developed and developing economies. In this context, the research aims to reveal the differences between the counter-urbanization movement in developed and developing countries in terms of causes, processes, and effects, and to reveal how the counter-urbanization experience in Turkey differs from the counter-urbanization experience in the world. Counter-urbanization is a difficult phenomenon to reveal, and the current literature emphasizes the lack of quantitative research. For this reason, to determine the counter-urbanization centers in the districts forming the northern border of Istanbul, a counter-urbanization index was created by considering the international literature and Turkey data systematically. While the index, which examines the socio-economic and spatial dimensions of the counter-urbanization movement at the neighborhood level, constitutes the quantitative dimension of the research, the in-depth interviews conducted to reveal the causes of the counter-urbanization movement, the socio-economic structure of the counter-urbanized group, and the effects of the counter-urbanization movement on rural settlements constitute the qualitative dimension of the research. In this context, 8 districts were determined according to the results of the counter-urbanization index in the 6 districts that form the northern border of Istanbul, and in-depth interviews were conducted with 82 participants consisting of stakeholders such as real estate offices, non-governmental organizations, and associations, as well as the counter-urbanizing group. In the light of these data, it is observed that the counter-urbanization movement in developed countries is managed by individual decisions, the population ready to adapt to rural life, managers working from home with high income, retired groups, and families with children have a high counter-urbanization potential. The rural perspective of the legal infrastructure, the orientation of public investments, and the construction-oriented economic development model are the main factors triggering the counter-urbanization process. World examples reveal that, contrary to the urbanizing nature of the counter-urbanization, as in the case of İstanbul, rural settlements may have the potential to increase the level of competition.