MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Antiurbanization: an implicit development policy in Turkey.
Author: Levine N.
Journal: J Dev Areas; 1980; 14(4):413-37. PubMed ID: 12338359.
Abstract:
This paper asserts that "antiurbanization" has become an implicit development policy among Turkish policymakers. Antiurbanism is used to justify policymakers' views of economic and social development. As a consequence, social policies become ineffective because they go up against forces producing urbanization and fail to consider the needs of the growing urban population. Turkey has been urbanizing at a rapid rate. In 1935, only 17% of the population lived in urban areas. By 1960 the urban population was 26%, but by 1975 it was 45%. These increases are accounted for by rural-urban migration of 7-9 million people. Reasons for the urbanization are that: 1) population growth has increased in Turkey from less than 2%/year in 1950 to 2.9% in 1960; 2) rural fertility is higher than urban fertility and consequently pressure on land is a major factor leading to migration, 3) higher incomes in urban areas promote rural-urban migration; 4) expansion of credit to landowners and developments in better transportation facilitated migration; and 5) most importantly, there is an institutionalization of migration whereby migrants go to urban areas with hope and for rational reasons. The inconsistency in state development policies is striking in relation to the emphasis on relationships between urban industrialization and economic policy on the one hand and the rural development and social policy on the other. Industrialization is the keystone of Turkish economic policy with 3 goals being sought: 1) industrialization, 2) economic independence, and 3) state initiative in industrialization. Agricultural development has always take a second place to industrialization. However, population estimates in 1928 and 1957 for Ankara were 300,000-750,000. Yet at the current growth rate, Ankara will have a population of 2.25 million in 1980. Clearly the transformation of the rural areas occurred faster than expected. Affects on rural oriented social policies have been felt in health, education, and other policies. Thus, it has been assumed that Turkish society would remain rural. A survey was conducted in 1976 of 240 Turkish planners, implementers, politicians, and influentials. Results of the survey indicated that the majority of policy makers: 1) favored industry (67%) over agriculture, 2) agreed on maintaining economic independence (56%) over foreign economic relationships, and 3) agreed that the state should take initiative in economic development (57%) over encouragement of the private sector. In addition, policymakers favored education (95%) and health (90%) as the social policies most appropriate for state involvement. They also: 1) favored public investments to rural areas (41%) and small cities towns (26%) over metropolises; 3) favored preventive medicine (86%) over treatment and rehabilitation; 4) favored primary (60%) and technical (34%) over secondary and higher education; and 5) favored reducing population growth (81%). In all cases, the policymakers' ranked these policy areas against the current urbanization trends of Turkish economic and social growth. The reasons for antiurbanization attitudes in policy orientation are that: 1) these are generation differences which affect current trends, 2) the institutional framework within which policymakers must operate promotes biases against change, 3) there is a difference in time perspectives among the policymakers, and 4) there is a political split between the elite urban modernizers and the majority of the population. In conclusion, the conflicts between urban and rural development orientations are ones between a long and short term strategy. Demographic forces are important to consider rehabilitating the policy decisions in Turkey.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]