One of the major turning points is the 1970s when rural areas have left the understanding of increasing agricultural production and agricultural policy. The economic depression in 1970s has triggered the development of ideas about paradigm based on the mobilization of resources and competition belonging to regions. In this period, while the region is evaluated as a part of system interacting with other regions; rural settlements as important places of local knowledge and dynamics have become the re-interested areas of the planning institution. In other words, rather than the space is a part of a specific land and the advantages presented for production of its in traditional paradigm, the space has become to be regarded as a concept that allows for focusing on social relations, different human practices, economic, historical and cultural diversity, and rural areas that incorporate all these features have increased their importance. Therefore, rural with disadvantaged positions against urban areas have become a place to go facilitating competition and adaptation to social and spatial developments against urban, with rural’ growing potentials based on internal dynamics such as social capital potential, cultural and historical background, cognitive and learning capacity, and natural and economic diversity. As mentioned above, the growing literature on city and regional studies points to the effects on space of economic, social and cultural change in the rural area. In other words, the rural areas have begun to be evaluated as a component that directly shapes the social and economic milieu and holds abstract forces. In this understanding that is explained according to production and consumption activities, it is expressed that rural areas are associated with the manufacturing and services sector in addition to agriculture sector, and it has evolved from static structure to very dynamic and innovative structures.
In perspective that reconsidered the rural area at the relational dimension, rural areas are being rediscovered by paradigms re-defining of roles within social and economic structure, in against mainly on the basis of low productivity and declining economic value/importance. The paradigms to the rural area not only predicts new interactions, strategies and practices at production processes, but also emphasizes institutional restructuring and network-based collaborations that will lead the process. In this restructuring, it is a matter of the situation developing an institutional relations rather than personal relations, providing the diversification of labour force and emerging the new economic hubs, re-considering the value of agricultural land, and being the part of institutional process to governance from government.
Notwithstanding that Turkey having diverse experience in rural areas shows difference potentials on regional inequalities, rural areas in Turkey contain about of 25% of population, and its 30% of population is employed in agriculture, livestock and fishery, and forestry sectors. Sustainable development approaches being the subject to these areas not only based on conservation on natural and environmental resources, but also should include holistic policies in order to get a share of the country’s development within the framework of equality and justice principles of rural population, to have stable income and life security and to develop rural social capacity.
When considering the way of handling of rural areas in Turkey, it is seen that rural areas have subjected to important development politics, and approaches and models since the first years of Republic. Rural areas politics in Turkey have gotten ahead with expressed politics under the names of community development, model village, multi-directional rural area planning, central village, village-city, and agricultural city since the Village Law (1924), which contains provisions that can be considered quite advanced for the period. These policies, which are aimed at socio-economic development of rural areas, have revealed many different analysis practices. Effectuated the National Rural Development Strategy in 2006 recently is one of the important documents prepared for rural areas. The main aim of the National Rural Development Strategy is to improve the assessment living and working conditions of rural areas in harmony with urban areas through assessment of local potential and resources, taking into account the protection of natural and cultural assets. The main principles of National Rural Development Strategy have been identified as “spatial sensitivity”, “cooperation and participation”, “sustainability”, “social inclusion”, “adaptation capacity”, “consistency in policies and regulations” and “efficient use of resources”.
In spite of developed the strategies and gained the experiences for the rural areas, it should be emphasized that there are some structural problems in Turkey and the most important problem is the lack of “specific to rurality” in spatial approaches. Rural areas remain under pressure in different forms due to their geographical location and economic structure within the country, proximity to urban areas, and natural-cultural characteristics. Effectively, management of this pressure is to play a crucial role in terms of the preservation of settlement characteristics and spatial sustainability in rural areas. However, one of the main reasons of the deterioration of the rural settlement character is that spatial development of rural areas in Turkey is regulated by law prepared for handling spread the situation of urban areas. Another important development entered into force upon the 6360 numbered law “Bütünşehir Yasası (Whole City Law) November 12th of 2012 since it is envisaged that the 6360 numbered law will substantially change the character of rural settlement. Metropolitan municipality service boundaries was rearranged as provincial administrative boundaries in the region consisting of 30 metropolitan areas (Adana, Ankara, Antalya, Aydın, Balıkesir, Bursa, Denizli, Diyarbakır, Erzurum, Eskişehir, Gaziantep, Hatay, İstanbul, İzmir, Kahramanmaraş, Kayseri, Kocaeli, Konya, Malatya, Manisa, Mardin, Mersin, Muğla, Ordu, Sakarya, Samsun, Şanlıurfa, Tekirdağ, Trabzon, Van) by accordance with the provisions in this law, and administrative status of rural settlements in Turkey have converted to neighbourhood from village. It should be of course known that the changes in administrative statues of the settlements do not remove “rurality” in terms of economic, social, cultural and physical conditions. Qualifying as urban area status to rural areas can increase dense housing in rural region of the metropolitan areas where constitute more than %75 of the country’s population, and it should not be forgotten that the situation may bring about impossible consequences for the rural areas, when taking into consideration the lack of “specific to rural” issues referring to spatial development in rural settlements.
In this context, the subject of 8th November World Urbanism Day Colloquium, which will be realized as 41th anniversary, is determined as “Rural Areas and Region in Planning”. Colloquium will be held on 7-9 November 2017 at Konya Selçuk University and it is expected to submit papers under the following headings. In addition, papers to be selected by the Scientific Committee will be published in the Planning Journal, which is an official publication of the TMMOB Chamber of Urban Planners, and in ICONARP (International Journal of Architecture and Planning), which is official publication of Selçuk University, Faculty of Architecture.
- National Development and Regional Planning Approaches
- Regional Development Policies and Rural Areas
- Rural Areas and Region within Accessibility Scope
- City and Country Tension in New Paradigms
- Rethinking Rural Areas in its Region
- Whole City Law and Rural Areas
- Rural Areas Management and Planning Policies
- The Future of Rural Areas in Turkey
- Planning and Design in Rural Areas
- Destroyed Rural Areas and its Impacts on Cities
- Rural Areas on the Protection of Natural Values
- Protection of Rural Settlement Texture, Rural Architecture and Landscape
- Rural Areas and Sectorial Diversity
- Social Capital in Rural Areas
- Rural Resilience
- The Impacts and Management of Migration Movements
- Rural Threats and Sustainability.