You are on page 1of 24

Politics, Democracy and Civil Society: Local Governance in Mugla, Turkey

Ramazan Gunlu1
!stract Democracy and civil society relations in local politics may display significant differences when metropolis, big cities and small or-medium size cities are considered. In Turkey, through the years of 2 !-2 ", several changes have been made in the legislation related to local governance within the framework of the reconstruction of administration. The local elections which were last held in 2# $arch 2 " in Turkey are to be renewed in 2# $arch 2 #. The implementation process of the new arrangements has created changes in the dynamics of local politics and democracy in Turkey, and has obligatorily empowered and activated civil society organizations under the new legislative measures. In this paper the interaction between local political social actors is discussed within the conte%t of changing state-society relations in Turkey from the &## s on. In this paper, 'ithin the framework of a study carried out in the regional city of $ugla, civil society structure and its transformation is investigated and its effect on local politics is evaluated. $ugla is a centre which shares many of the issues also e%perienced at state level when managing regional governance where local politics has a strong and powerful dynamics. This paper aims to highlight such issues by placing emphasis on the local political relationships with civil society and nongovernmental organizations ()*+s, during the local election process. In order to analyze the situation of the actors created by the new legislation, a data set is defined and coded and interviews carried out with the heads of organizations in their relations with the local political sphere, while local political actors are analyzed comparatively. In this analysis, the effect of local social problems on the political actors are identified by comparing the characteristics of governance politics within the local political sphere to its institutional results, and characteristics of the legislative measures arranging the political sphere in Turkey are analyzed and evaluated within a national and global conte%t. "ey#ords: Democracy, Civil Society, Local Governance, Turkey

Democracy has turned into being one of the most spoiled concepts. -owever, it seems difficult without the .democracy/ concept to assess civil liberty, political participation, opportunities and limitations on social and political activists. The

0ssist. 1rof. Dr. 2amazan *unlu, $ugla 3niversity 4conomics and 0dministrative 5ciences, Dept. +f 1ublic 0dministration, 6otekli 6ampusu, $ugla, Tel. # 272 2&&&"8&, 9a%: # 272 22!; ", gunlu<


Democracy problemati=ue emerges in a comparison between ancient *reek democracy and representative democracy. >et the 'estern 4uropean democracy would be incomplete unless it is conceptualized without considering its historical aspects. -istorical aspect is an important phenomenon with formation of political domain, forms of e%istence and opportunities provided to political activists under different societal forms (?aker, 2 7: &!,. Therefore, the democracy concept and its inclusions (liberal democracies, non-liberal democracies, underdevelopment and communism, must be assessed within historical aspect2 ($achpherson, &#;": ;,. Terminological usages of democracy are important for perceiving the progress and undemocratic practices of certain countries. $orlino ! (2 #: 2@8-2@@, 2;", suggests the term .hybrid regimes/. -e suggests that the democracy concept embraces those regimes which do not meet minimum re=uirements of the democracy, as well. Therefore, these regimes can be called as .hybrid regimes/ when they get in touch with democracy (including authoritarian and traditional regime forms, too,. The minimum necessities of democracy are universal suffrage (both male and female,, the free and fair elections (competitive, recurrent, for more than one party, and different and alternative media sources. 0nother property of 'estern democracies is the e%istence of a political regime subAected to the elected ($orlino, 2 #: 2@;-2@#,. .The political weight of military/ is one of the most debated issues in Turkey under the 4uropean 3nion harmonization process. This fact is interpreted as limitation of rights and liberties in civil society. 0dvocates of a more powerful governmental capacity for assurance of liberties, on the other hand, underline the infrastructural capacity where rights are bases upon (9ukuyama, 2 7: &&;B $orlino, 2 #: 2; , 2#!-2#",. Though the governmental capacity is deemed as the assurance of rights, human rights going beyond the borders of nation-state have become de facto-de Aure references as global norms.


$achpherson (&#;": ;, points out that democracy was a bad thing for & years agoB it has become a good thing for the following 7 yearsB It becomes too vague within the last 7 years.

$orlino pointed out that .The inclusion of Turkey in this group of countries has already prompted debate, and other analysts, especially Turkish scholars, place it amongst the minimal democracies, stressing the great and now longstanding fairness of the electoral procedure, for which 9reedom -ouse does not award the ma%imum rating.


Though the historical awareness has been a part of 4uropean consciousness and activities. the rise of populist right-wing can be e%plained starting from the losers of globalization. 2 8: #2". ruralCurban. This. 0gainst the polarizing and peripherizing effects of globalization. this domain continues to be shaped on a national basis under the matri% of globalization and a range of factors (political. #!@-#!. "!-"7. -owever. 2 7: 8#. construction of 4uropean political domain has become evident as a global fact.. 2 ! @: 2&8-2&#. national political elites... 0gainst nation-state practice. political parties and non-governmental organizations still =uarrels within national borders (6oopmans and 1fetsch.. Dariety of identitiesE being a prere=uisite for the progress of capital in globalization process should be interpreted from this point of view. cultural. and internalCe%ternal effects. is the e%pression of politicization of the space where political elites placed themselves on the safe side through cooperation against marketization and degradation of world system (Daeyrynen. 0ccordingly the political space is restructured not only with its historical and actual aspects but also with the change of socio-spatial relations. this should not be assessed on the base of pre-political..'hile rights and liberties provide an assurance in uncovering potentials of civil society.. ?esides the civil society is the domain of potential and actual actors within socio-formation of historicity through sensitivity to religiousCcultural. @ B Fizek. this space is reshaped under interaction of historical confrontations. #2#. of globalization onto the 4uropean political domain. 'hile supranational communication foreshadows new subAects and activity potentials in supranational space. economic.. 1artitions through national culture and economy are transferred through the stage (darstellung. 2 #2!. socioeconomic partitions. a priori natural and cultural constants but on the base of political concrete struggle practice (4nyedi. 2 !: "&. Today. 2 !: ! . In spite of global information flow. and it changes perception and assessment of personality and identity (Daeyrynen. . 1olitical organization of the space changed enlightenment sources of subAects and political activists. This is the e%istence of a new political space. (6riesi et al. at the same time. their utilization depends on the capacity of institutions which lay actual foundations for them. #"#-#7&. regional 8: convergences indicate socio-spatial change. technological.. 2 !: !@B 6riesi et al..

and represented (vetretung. 0s per *ramsci. Hivil society is divided along economical and cultural lines.. Gegacy. 4uropean political field should be assessed as sociospatial formation of a new 4urope in not only re-generation of historicity but also struggle practice of politics under 2okkanian perspective. is related to building of a certain polity and citizenship form. 2!#. Therefore. (2osamond... &##. 2 2anciere.humanity/ and . and bears conflicts perpetually presented (darstellung. Civil society Hivil society has been the field of opportunity and e%perience where potentials of subAects have always brought about new actual subAect conditions. civil society is the source of political society. This fact revealed the cultural aspects of democracy. " . This is the struggle of political subAect on the base of autonomy: this struggle is legitimized in the process of political subAectsE evidencing their grievance or government positions through their political formulations with global references of .human rights/. counter-hegemony and opposing hegemony form modes of e%istence of civil subAects in civil society (Gentner.: &@. In this respect.. on the political stage ($utman. Thus hegemony. is the field of hegemony where activist political subAects are polarized./ The separation between public and private space play a crucial role in shaping the political culture in every country. 2 @: 7. Hivil society.Hivil society is generally conceptualized as the social space in which a democratic polity is enacted. on the other hand. on the other hand. Democracy and civil participation have come out to be fundamental aspects of civil society and transformative politics. 2 @: 2!8-2!@. @"!B 1ozo. This.-7#B )owadays the civil society is of prime importance in conAunction with democratization problems.4uropeEs immigration e%perience of last 8 years caused 4uropean reality to adopt the multiculturalism aspect. civil society is the field where political subAects transformed or re-generated under force and violence together with moral and intellectual leadership. democracy and citizenship debates produced by 4uropean political thought do not emerge within . 2 @: @&-@!. a holistic society can only be fictional. 0n active citizen is considered as the re=uisition of a participatory political community democracy. 7: @!@-@!. .normative returns/ adapted to the 43 practices but in touch and e%perience with actual e%clusionist practices.

The relation between the 43 and national authority levels has become an important agenda of country-oriented researches. 'orld Trade +rganization organizes the scope of this process as an interstate organization. &###: "-7.. an agent of stabilization and reproduction. is the realm in which the e%isting social order is groundedB and it can also be the realm in which a new social order can be founded. Governance *lobal change process carries the set of concepts (privatization. *overnance can be e%pressed as the . 6arl $ar% saw the proletariat as an alternative within civil society. in *ramsciEs thinking.I civil society was generating a force within itself that would ultimately destroy and change it/..Hivil society. participation. transparency.. The emancipatory potential of civil society was the obAect of his thinking. autonomy."B *unlu.commoditization of politics/ standing in the center of the set of concepts mentioned above (*uler. and then to devise a strategy for its transformation. -is concern with civil society was. 2 #. 4uropeanization concept comprises all-round inventor aspect of 43 (4uropean 3nion. The concept of civil society as the current and the potential is to become clearer in the e%planation of Ho%. &###: 8-@. first. and a potential agent of transformation/ (Ho%. 0le%is de Toc=ueville observed this civil society force in municipalities and in volunteer organizations as a limitation of government and potential for freedomization. +4HD and 3nited )ations have been the institutions which served for worldwide popularization of these policies. localization.. The composition of leadership and grassroots movements would be realized as a hegemony struggle by means of organic intellectuals (Ho%.. 'orld ?ank. analysis. *ramsci. I Hivil society is both shaper and shaped.Identity conte%t which turned into being a matter of participation become a part of democracy problem (?erezin. on the other hand. to understand the strength of the status =uo. dealt with class allies within themselves. 2 !aB $ahon and $cbride. . 2 7 @: 2" . &##@: !-7. 0ccordingly effects of the 43 inputs on domestic polity reveal themselves in the rise of multi-level governance literature within the 43 system (2osamond. . 0ccording to him . 2 #: . which will facilitate e%pansion of capital.

(1edersen.. are one of the most common e%amples for this model. dialog model. deregulation. and regulation of network industries as a part of competition which are highlighted by globalization started the . -owever. *lobal governance coordinates the formal and informal relations within the frame of governmental and non-governmental actors and ensures the involvement of civil society into governance process.. This term becomes attractive with actual practices. -onesty has become a political value due to corruption and e%clusionist government structure in many countries (including Third 'orld and 4astern 4urope countries. 2 7: &!B Fizek.. 2 8: #.8-#. It is assumed that network-type organization with the ability of detecting the political problems and changing its own course can facilitate . Transparency is one of the featured terms in governance concept.. In this respect.return/ of political domain (2ay et al. 77. The solution offered to two problems mentioned above.. 5o long as the e%pert authority moves higher up.!"-. 'eberEs e%pertized and institutionalized rational bureaucracy is not a part of practically tested reason but the uniform import of the model.2. societal subAects gain specific political ability within the network model through neocorporatist positioning. Independent 2egulatory 0uthorities (I20s. .2@-. Giberalization. 0ssuming that civil society would grow stronger via such gaps can only be valid for the fictional civil society which became a term of governance.-## .. 1roliferation of I20s is fed from coercive pressures from organizations and relevant authorities.@. Thus governance can be interpreted as sacrifice of variety from the rationality of the e%perience to the rationality of imposition. the governance works as patronizing government model though it is carried forward through negotiationoriented maneuvers within dialog-based network model. 2 8: #.!7B 1edersen.. invited the governance through transparency and participation (De Dries. "&. &: affecting the policy at 4uropean level has become a matter of national policy.. 2 . 2 @: 2&"-2&7. Thus a compatible 8 . 43 regulations have gained importance in national policies (-Jritier. 2 !: !#.Though the governance embraces the politics in (social. transfer factor as a policy learning process among e%perts and credibility factor as the process of convincing e%ponents. This assumes an operational and participative gap.4uropeanization/ process of public administration.

2 !: 288... those which participate into 4uropeanized public domain are maintaining their traditional participation structures. Though the participation of civil society actors is the most emphasized matter. actors and organizations connect different scales (from national civil society to global civil society. 2 7: &. Thus macro-subAects (industries. Thus. 0cting as self-representing structures. local. 2 8B 1oguntke et al.accountability/. The public policy focuses on a competitive economy filled with market actors. &#8. 27@. and governance comes to the fore as a process hiding the politics (Garner and 'alters. Therefore. politics remain as a local resistance. 2 ($ayer at al. governance domain. first introduced in 4ngland.-7& B 1edersen. from nation-states to global governance. decisions made at a 4uropean level represent the consensus of party elites (6oopmans. good governance and politics dialog into global competition by means of e%port orientation. which shows that globalization is a fact that depends on politics. networks. 2 8: & 7-& 8. 5upranational factors impose competition conditions as the key element of economic policy. The liberalized energy markets e%perience... !: 0s in the term .. *overnance is the driving force of reform process all over the world.. 2 277. regional. concepts and terms derived from political domain are governmentalized through governance and the politics are made to include governmental process ('hitman.. states. has subse=uently e%panded into other countries. 2 @: 2 ". 2 @: @7 -@7&. ": 7#-8!.relation is assumed where governance on global scale is possible ('hitman. 1articipative dialog model can be e%clusionist when it comes to characteristics of participants and individual differences @ . it discredits social solidarity (Herny and 4vans.. national. &# . 'hile the governance renders the public policy . Honstitutional reform proAect which will govern the competitive government surrounds multi-actors (governmental. introduce self-governance.8.. $ember 4lectricity and gas sector is regulated at 43 level by Directive 2 countries establish energy regulation authorities by mimetic and normative enforcement. non-governmental. 2 ": 7 . @8"-@87. multi-level (4uropean. !. firms. 28 -282.. 28#-2@ .democratic/ with the participation of non-governmental actors. regions.

happy few/ formed during H-1 (2epublican 1eopleEs 1arty. $ost specifically. 0s asserted by 6alaycioglu.. shows the effect of patronage . the democracy means to destroy the . religious communities. This is the structural weakness of civil society in Turkey (6alaycioglu. points out. coup dEJtat liberal market conditions forced urban middle class to make a choice between non-patronage democracy or authoritarianism against patronage democracy of the urban and rural poor based on populist relations. the urban middle class developed authoritarian aptitudes for ensuring their life standards and styles. citizens are still bereft of courage regarding political participation. citizentry.democratic regime is perceived as functioning though there are criticisms of its efficiency or effectiveness by the masses. There seems some evidence that voluntary non-governmental organizations ()*+s.. 5o long as the rural and urban poor associated themselves with democracy.. good . Democracy and Governance in Turkey It is said that civil society is weak in Turkey. 5truggles of youth. as a result of democratization under the 43 harmonization (0c=uis. women. etc. 1ost &#. public employees and other groups relived the limitations on political participation imposed by the Honstitution./ 0ccordingly the potential of civil society is revealed with the inade=uacy of the government that materialized with the earth=uake. social.. In spite of recovery in opportunity structure (constitution. the maAor earth=uake disasters of summer and fall &### ironically helped promote civic associations providing social services to earth=uake stricken areas of )orthwestern 0natolia. democracy is Aust a patronage performance for the rural and urban poor. kinship. -owever. 6alaycioglu (2 &: 78-7@. . &#. Therefore. The urban middle-class defining itself with central values is identified with military. despite of three brief military interventions. 2 relations on politics and civil society. 1atronage structure (religious. The ongoing weight of cultural and religious factors on votersE selection of a 7: 78 .Civil Society. this very fact causes confrontation between democracy and governance. economic and political organizations which are vital for civil society are still under the influence of citizentry or primary relations. 2 political party in Turkey (?aslevent et al. have started to receive relatively broad support from the masses in Turkey. rule between &#2! and &#7 . &: 7#-8&.2. 'ithin the frame of center-periphery relations. laws and regulations. In that case. is the cause laying behind the democracy defects in Turkey.

.0natolia among 0rmenians.1olitical integrity/ and . 2 7: 22@-22#. 2 7: 2&7-2&8. the anonymous bearers of nation-state. 6urds and the 'estern 0natolian *reeks/ through the 5eKvres Treaty was the origin of the discriminatory practices (ILduygu and 6aygusuz. # . 9ormation of the political domain in Turkey and opportunities provided to political activists are part of the political organization of citizenship.governance practice becomes the irony of the government and a dilemma for Turkey (6alaycioglu.the will of civilization/ since &#2 s (Irem.elects/ (-eper.will of civilization/ for which they asked for a national participation (6eyman. privatization and competition under the new route changed the state-economy interaction and mobilized potentials of civil society. 2 ": "&. 2 : 2&"-2&7. & !-& ". are the founding political ethos of citizenship (ILduygu and 6aygusuz... This ideological stream has become the binder of liberalism and authoritarian government together with Turkish-Islamic synthesis which is the official ideology of Turkey... 2 &: 8"-88. ... 2 ": 2. or that the non-governmental organizations and the public take a stand against political IslamEs e%pansion (-eper. established the political ethos of citizenship on . and follow a course led by . &###: 22-2!.. !. It created the stage where neo-liberalism. 2 2: #@. "". 6emalist elites... Giberalization. *overnment-military relations cause democratization and liberalization through the 43 harmonization regulations. )ationalization of )ational 1act and identification of the government with national identity are outcomes of a fighting process. This very fact signifies the importance of civil society in Turkey under the democratization process. Honservative cultural nationalist movement nowadays known with their ?ergsonian views on the base of individual enterprise. This favourable course pulls the civil-military relations over a liberal model to the e%tent that the government abstains from arrangements which poses a threat to secular regime (appearance of Identities in public domain. & . liberalism and spontaneity is not positivist but has been one of the most important promoters of Turkish revolution as . !2. This dilemma has become more of an issue during recent years.. 1roliferation of identities from civil society is realized under the authoritarian government mentality (+zkazanL.national independence/ (in the Gausanne negotiations. Islam. It was the integrating of divided .

. The continuous base of re-institutionalization has always been the Turkish army. secularism.. Therefore it is not incidental that neo-liberalism offered insights for Islamic policy. Together with overspread of identity. The efficacy gained by Islamic discourse within civil society put religious symbols forward together with increasing importance of individual autonomy within the framework of neoliberal governance. Increasing interest of Islamic section in Turkey towards . *overnance phenomenon in Turkey engaged @: !2 -!2!.-&72. constituted the base of institutionalism and re-institutionalization (6eyman. 22&. . 2 : 2&. culture and economy. civil society . +therwise. 6eyman.. 2 : 2 @-2 .. and revolutionism-reformism from above. from 5aribay.- Government re$orm and criticism on governance in Turkey & . 22@. 2 7: &". !! . drawing the .civil freedoms/ and . populism. 22!.line of identity/ has become an efficient strategy of democracy. it turned into being the most important composition of secular and anti-secular polarization. This fact forms the parado% of 6emalism: relying on the army for 6emalist policy and flight from the civil society caused the Islamic identity to spread in civil society and thus forming an obstacle for socialization of 6emalist identity.. the watchdog of the 2epublic.human rights/ under accession to the 43 can be assumed as a result of autonomous individual concept (*okariksel and $itchell.creates a space for the presence of Islamic discourse as a pluralist mode of organization of the stateCsociety interactions (cit. s. 2 : 227B 6eyman.. 2 2&#. with privatization and elimination of government monopoly and Islamic revival in civil society (5ezen. &7@-&7#.secular Turkish nationalism and ethno-religious belongings are updated (6eyman. *uiding principles of 6emalist elites (republicanism. The fictional-structural crisis between 6emalism and the civil society as a cosmic approach turned the civil society into the source of legitimacy under the memory of coup dEJtat. 2 : 2&8. etatism. nationalism.Turkish-Islamic synthesis/ could not provide for fictional integrity of the community but together with the socio-economic factors during &#.

s now emerges as .7 percent *)1 (*ross )ational 1roduct. into law-making attempts regarding public reform and facilitation of capital movement is the e%pectation for e%tending the space for the capital movements in && . The reason for effective participation of T35I0D (Turkish IndustrialistsE and ?usinessmenEs 0ssociation. 0 maAor e%pansion of state enterprises occurred in the interwar years and especially after &#"7.There is a long history of state ownership of industry in 4urope involving national and regional public corporations. 2 2: &8..: &&. state holdings in private sector companies and operation through local and central government departments.: 2!. 9air distribution of country resources is essentially the duty of the government. surplus. &##. 1olitical 5ciences 9aculty. In this perspective. The policy of downsizing the state or .state adaptation policy/ or . The main factor that sneakingly corroded >ugoslavia which appeared to be a perfect harmonic integration of different ethnicities was the reign of economical instability (Isikli. and T+?? (Turkish 3nion of Hhambers and Hommodity 4%changes.. etc. &##. Therefore the localist and privatist governance is not a liberalization towards the needs of the country and people but the needs of capital (*uler.. The focus of the criticism can be summarized as follows: 1ublic reform is a part of I$9 stabilization program and aims 8. its point of support is the e%pectation and belief that it will ensure growth in local economies. 'hile the main target of the reform is to circumvent 0nkara.. 2 !: 2-!... the pressures of liberalization of the 43 markets and government budgetary difficulties put the governments into the liberalization processB on the other hand construction of 4uropean economic area forced them to develop policies at the 43 level. The most remarkable criticism was made by academicians of 0nkara 3niversity. ?y the late &#8 s a political consensus e%isted in 'estern 4urope favoring the e%istence of a mi%ed economy began to change after the 36Es privatization program (1arker.political-administrative deregulation/. The 4uropean debate on competitiveness associated with advocacy of deregulation and liberalization as the most efficacious responses to globalization (2osamond. 2 !b: !!.financial deregulation/ applied during the &#. The liberalization and deregulation reigning over 4urope is the source of influence of public reform in Turkey. +n the one hand. the 43 policy directed to shift the relationship between governments and state-owned utilities has created an economic environment which has led member states to review the benefits of retaining state ownership (1arker.

the purposes of ?asic 1ublic 0dministration Gaw Draft are in fact not localization and democratization but to establish stations for privatization through the instrumentality of localization (5onmez and DinlerB 2 !: !"-!7. 2 !: 8282. -owever.. 1rivatization and commercialization of basic public services are intended for civil field. This ?oard together with the representatives of private entities and corporates are the elements of . 'ithin this framework. This does not include the &2 .governance/ or . the unsecured public office system will result in prevalence of bribery and corruption (Dikmen. The funds provided by 'orld ?ank for funding services that are transferred from central government to local governments are significant indicators for this process.. does not refer to . on the other hand.. Together with a fle%ible employment system. the Honstitution e%cludes possibility of dissociating the local administrations from the general administration.civilization/. 2 !: 7. 22. The Gaw Draft. while the local administrations are in charge of providing service and organization limited to their geographical borders for meeting . 5tateEs keeping its hand off a great many public services will result in direct or indirect privatization of services through local governments..common re=uirements/ of local people.governance-state/ rationale of 'orld ?ank. This very fact can be seen in the !: @&way of depredation paved by the recommendation in the 'orld ?ank 2eports for integrating the coastal regions in to the . 2 !: &"-&7.civilization/ are Directorate of 5trategy Development and . In this conte%t. .Hivilization/ bears such characteristics that may be interpreted as arrangement of public domain according to private benefits. The integrity of administration principle stipulated in the Honstitution contradicts with the . ..public reform/. 2 @2.accordance with .5trategy Development ?oard/ acting as consultancy authorities which are included into ?asic 1ublic 0dministration Gaw Draft. 0nother point of criticism is that the reform leads to .common local re=uirements/ but first refers to duties of central administration and then assumes the local administration as the general authority in charge. rendering services through private sector can turn into a rule ( economic rationale (Duru.. the parallelism between localization and privatization of public services is remarkable. because the central administration is in charge as the general supervisor.civilization of public domain/ (6arasu. ?y means of a custody structure. The most remarkable e%amples of said .

relations regarding locality of re=uirements but it is essentially a general authorization for privatization of public services (6arahanogullari.. and as the outcasts at the bottom. managerial ('eber. religion. Democracy. $anagerial paradigm ('eber. The hegemony struggle within the civil society takes an important place in the field of interest of theoretical approaches and current pluralism coming to the forefront within local democracy and civil society connection. as instable workers segmented according to ethnicity. 1luralist.. thus re=uiring the government to offer alternative serviceCta% packages to different groups. Civil Society and Local Governance in Mugla Today. 2 !: 72-7@. &###: #-&&. This means that the government is re=uired to supply for local demands with &! . $anagerial paradigm finds its e%planation in public choice theory.. 3nder circumstances where alliances within themselves are blurred. gender and geographic characteristics. The plurality and different polity e%pectations of local choices bring about new income groups. The effect of private sector e%panded on the field vacated by the government for liberalization and marketization purposes puts institutional approaches applied in 'estern welfare-states into new contact points (5engul. International production shaped the workforce hierarchically as permanent core workforce integrated with managing forces. 1luralistic paradigm focuses on the effect of individuals and individual-based groups on decision-making process of the government. the economic globalization restructured the community and removed alliances resulting from class structure. and class ($ar%. the civil society witnesses a bottom-up integration movement. on the one hand. and focuses on capital accumulationCclass conflict. and segmented bottom civil society mobilizing the transforming potential on the other hand are the realities of hegemony struggle (Ho%. paradigms related to government assume the change process as a civil society phenomenon. Top civil society cooperating with global capital and its institutions. Hlass paradigm criticizes the pluralist and managerial paradigm for neglecting class aspect. 2 &: "7-7&. focuses on the effect of bureaucratic structures and corporate domain on decision-making process of the government.

The most important =uestion arising from this method is . is under the responsibility of the (local. 2endering the une=ual development manageable is an obligation for nation-state. remains in $ar%ist paradigm. the key decisiveness is implemented by multi-actors of the city. on the other hand. It both undertakes regulative roles to get through socio-spatial ine=ualities and acts as spokesman of local powers. alliances and e%tensive spatial division of labour. 1luralist paradigm points out the necessity of a participative model under the regime theory in incorporation of current segmented and dissolved urban structures. This can be seen as a new democratic corporatism model. The role of the government is no more to act as an arbitrator assumed by classic pluralist approach but to activate and coordinate the resources under increasingly complicated relations. Gocal administration &" . Hlass paradigm has focused on the concern of winning actual leftist structures after withdrawal of class conflict in the 'est and disintegration of the 5oviet system. 3ne=ual development theory.numerous local administration units. $otivating the civil society. culture. Thus each local unit is a stratified socio-spatial formation within the historicity of the positions in spatial division of labour held in different periods. Therefore local government is not an e%tension of nation-state but a historical response which is une=ually developed against it with its own specificities. regimes advocating stabilization would predominate under power balance. Hircles which drifted away from $ar%ist structure are inspired from pluralist approach which is based on radicalization and reinforcement of civil society against central government.why the government should organize such a civil society/. while paying attention to structures and relations. +ne of the most important features of this approach is to accept the autonomy attributed to municipal authorities by managerial paradigm together with considering limitations of macrolevel power relations and economical structures asserted by $ar%ist approach. This formation has brought out a local (political. the local people benefit from such competition by means of less ta%es and better service. 2adicalization of the democracy is not only the duty of working class but also belongs to non-governmental organizations which are assumed as the key elements of this process. In this conte%t. Thus. on the other hand. government. It is not possible for a homogenous state structure to cope with a non-homogenous spatial pattern. 'hile said numerous local units will compete for getting the local people to their side. and asserts that the capitalism does not only bring forth economic ine=ualities but also spatial ine=ualities.

9or realizing this aim. which have no faith in local administrations. local administrations have played role in promoting the development of political culture based on participation (*ormez. 0s a ground where political activity feeling is rooted. 2 &: 72-7@. Therefore. the factors such as the willingness of participants. Today. nondeterrent effect of the size of community which is interested in the participation are important with regard to participation (6eles. Therefore. it aims to ensure efficacy of participation services together with democracy training. 5tate and nation were assumed to be identical concepts.the city ambient sets people free/ phrase. &##!: &7-&@. promotersE faith in participation..practices represent the centre. and to reinforce local democracy. 3ntil =uite recently.. an approach which did not include any political ground for participation was predominant. &7 . &##!: 2 -22. 0s in . &##&: 7"-8 . Gocal administrations have played an important role not only for politicians but in development of contemporary participative aspects of democracy by encouraging public participation. was drafted on an environment where some circles. were present. Turkish Honstitution of &#8& did not only provide Audicial assurance for local administration but also commissioned the government with the duty of providing income sources to local administrations pro rata to their obligations. The importance of a constitutional ground supporting peopleEs rights on a participative basis is evident. In terms of e%perimental fields. 0nother phenomenon that has e=ual importance is adoption of democracy as a life style. 2egimes where governed people do not participate into political processes are not deemed to be a part of democracy concept anymore. and become the representative of local powers on the other hand (5engul. 0s long as the inefficiency of the centre in providing public services necessitates in-site production and provision of services. the regimes where non-governmental organizations are not represented in participation processes are not deemed to be democratic. we can say that city life forms a proper environment for democracy. local administrations have an important effect on tendencies of leaders and politicians that would govern the nation..2. 1articipative processes that gained weight in political science re=uire making a distinction between political civil organizations and non-governmental organizations.. it reflects disbelief in local administration bodies (6eles. Turkish Honstitution of &#. on the other hand. e%isting traditional institutions for municipal administration remain incapable. on the one hand.

This approach has played an important role on systemizing the central custody. land and house occupations. The rural migration directed into cities and metropolitans resulted in the collapse of urban services and rendered the municipalities incapable of producing services (*eray. &## : @ -@&. &## : &2&. s. these movements emerged as protests against urban regeneration proAects and inefficiency of urban services. 1articipative municipality practices do not date long back to old times. solidarity-based movements were observed to become widespread within the framework of social and spatial bounds. enacted in &#! . urban movements have been taking an important place in social movements. and direct democracy practices. 3rban problems coming to the forefront in parallel with the welfare state in the 'est caused urban-social movements to be the new actors of the participation. $ovements similar to those in 4uropean countries were observed to take place in Turkey in the &#@ s. &## : 2&@-22!.4ach city is a matter of state/ said 5ukru 6aya. 0s of &#. and putting down roots of custodian mentality until now (0lada. as well. &##!: ". The phenomena observed in Turkish metropolitan and rural areas were gecekondu (shantytown. The municipal organization which is based on common benefit on local scale dates back to &.. The municipality heritage inherited by the 2epublic was restructured by $unicipal Gaw &7. 2uralMurban migration period. Therefore.. ?eginning from the &## s. radical local participation e%amples ($unicipality of 9atsa. 0doption of multi-party system in &#"8 resulted in political revival. 1olitical participation of non-governmental organizations &8 . Gocal administration system before said date was =uite faint and ambiguous (+rtayli. . the civil society gained importance day by day. ?eginning from the end of &#... 'e can say that political ideologies were rapidly polarized in civil organization field. was established.It is evident that the disbelief against local administration should be overcome for ensuring them to have their real place in democratic development process (6eles. and opened the organization of civil domain into a serious competition field. poverty and classification under wartime conditions turned cities into important political-social phenomena. s.7" when Istanbul 5ehremaneti (the local administration acting as municipal constabulary which dealt with sanitary and landscaping works of the city during +ttoman reign. movements. Hivil society repositioned itself against hegemony and counter-hegemony.. then the minister of interior.

. 0cting as social actors of participation.. it is observed that there has been no will to participate into this council. The network-type life which introverted people into specific identities and relations in abyss of public domain collapsed by liberalization and privatization turned the citizentry associations into a foothold strategy. 0s a result of migration.Hity Houncils *uidelines/.. socio-spatial and cultural manners (*unlu. 2 &: "8#-"@!. those who call for participation do not have faith in such a council.. and promoted foundation of new non-governmental organizations. general provincial assembly. novelty of participation phenomenon. 2 : !&"-!&@. representatives from public vocational institutes. the ministry of interior structured the participation by issuing . which is active since &###. 0ccording to 0rticle . 2 @: & @-&& . Thus citizentry associations placed themselves among multi-actors of urban life. Incapability of the government triggered intervention of non-governmental organizations. and representatives of civil society will participate into the Hity Houncil under certain ratios (Hoskun. Hivil society and participation has entered into Turkish life as a practical matter after the earth=uakes suffered in &### (0ugust &@ and )ovember &2 earth=uakes. citizentry associations become more important following the new aspects attributed to network-type organizations. 1olitical cultureEs not being promoting has a negative effect on unwillingness for participation. 0s a balancing element. they entered into the segmented chaotic urban spaces where different conflicts of power relations were staged (6urtoglu.under urban practices entered into a parallel or contrary split-up period under ethnoreligious. as an e%ample. Honsidering $ugla Hity Houncil. 2evised legislations in Turkey describe the participation thereof and recommend that such participations should be promoted. and what is more.. 0rticle @8 to $unicipal Gaw 7!#! includes the provision that city councils will be established by the help and support of municipalities. of said *uidelines. inefficiency of participation consciousness and its education. $embers of 1arliament of the relevant province. non-governmental organizations participate into policy development process together with political actors. The participation is interrupted by certain reasons such as the weakness of local democracy. 3nder said law. representatives from political parties. representatives of local administrations (municipality. absence of conditions which promote and encourage &@ .

thus participation. Institutionalization and changing local consciousness would favourably contribute to participation (Hoskun. where representatives of government authority and representatives of civil society meet. 0s specified in their purpose of e%istence. and the government adopting governance principle. 0fter the elections in 2 #. & in $ugla. has grasped the dominance. 9urthermore. on the other hand. 5ome criticism points that should be underlined can be summarized as the dominance of public authority. =uot. 1rovincial -uman 2ights Hommittee and Hounty -uman 2ights Hommittees are operating since 2 non-governmental organizations. The reasons behind limited operational area of these committees are that these committees act on the base of complaints. and do not carry out direct investigations.. lack of institutionalization and failure to promote participation (5ahin. become e%plicit. 2 @: "7 -"72. The economy of &. Institutionalizations at local-level call forth plurality of civil society conceptualized under managerial. . from 2 2. This practice results in decreasing the efficiency.. "7"-"8&. was dominant in $ugla *eneral 1rovincial 0ssembly after the elections in 2 ". 'ithin governance mentality. 3nder governance practices. the provision included in the *uidelines stating that decisions made in the city council will be negotiated in the first meeting of municipal assembly assumes that all public services in the city are produced by the municipality. 2epublican 1eopleEs 1arty (H-1. these committees can contribute to improvement of consciousness regarding human rights in local areas where they are established. 2 @: &&!. Oustice and Development 1arty (061. 0s a field of participation and activity. local government institutionalizes its contradictory structure where both central and local powers are represented.. HoNkun. failing to ensure participation of non-governmental organizations which adopt a human rights-sensitive approach. 2 @: &&-&&2. 5uch institutionalizations are governance structures that come to the forefront today. these committees assemble representatives from public and The structure of said committees includes e%clusionist manners in itself as some non-governmental organizations are invited to the committee while some of them are not. The fact observed in Hity Houncils and -uman 2ights Hommittees is that institutional structures. pluralist and class paradigms.utilization of rights (*okturk and 6avili.

8.Dalaman region ruled by 061 is the centre of rural policies. Re$erences " It is stated that there are @&.. 2apid increase in numbers of non-governmental organizations of the 1rovince " represents socio-spatial segmentation and variety. and environmentalCtourism policies (H-1. the 1rovince reflects the tension between rural policies and environmentalC tourism policies. &# . The effect of 4uropean 3nion programs should be reminded regarding increasing numbers of 0ssociations. 1resentation and coordination activities performed by *overnorship of $ugla contribute to revival of non-governmental organizations 7. which increases up to 2 vocational institutions (+zgur.?odrum region ruled by H-1 is the centre of environmentalCtourism policies. 'hile 9ethiye .2 8. 'ith said properties. it is reported that nongovernmental organizations participate into environmental policies led by *overnorship regarding the pollution caused by >atagan Thermal 1ower 1lant.. associations in $ugla. This fact reflects multi-level formation of polity and socio-spatial division of labour. 5aid politicization institutionalizes the multilevel structure of the civil society within governance practices in $ugla. This situation politicizes the civil society under the effects of two different polity domains. 7 after including In news-report by P-0 1ress 0gency about governance in $ugla (@.. 2econtact of local and central governments under neo-liberalism leads to position conflict in civil society and tensions about local public policy.$ugla mainly relies on tourism activities. The weight of agricultural labour gradually diminishes.. and involves them into the formation of local public policy. 2 . $odern-secular middle class and traditional-conservative sections confront in socio-spatial domain and politicize the separation of the society among rural policies (061. $ilas.

3. )o. . & -2! Tartisma $etinleri. !-2. 5?9 *4T0 Tartisma $etinleri. ?./ Turk ?elediyeciliQinde 8 >Rl.. (2 7. 27. 5?9 *4T0 !. . 0nkara: $etropol Pmar 0.8 .8 . s. Devlet Insasi. 0nnual 2eview of 5ociology v2! p!8&-. (2 !. De Dries.. Dol. 4uropean Oournal of 1olitical 2esearch "": &M&7. (&## .3.*lobalisation and 1ublic 1olicy 3nder )ew " Gabour/ 1olicy 5tudies. (2 !. . . (2 !. ?ozkurt and >. 4uropean Oournal of 7 1olitical 2esearch "": 8#@M@2 . 6irmanoglu.-I3G0-4$$4 2 ..Turk ?elediyeciligine 6ronoloAik >aklasim (&#! -&## .6amu 1ersonel 2eAiminde 3yarlanma/ 0.! E#@ Herny. 2 7 party preferences and economic voting in Turkey/. (2 1olitical 2esearch "": 7"@M782. )o. s. . 2 Dikmen. )o &..3. 7. 0. H.The role of agency in cleavage formation/. 5. . 0nkara: 1aragraf./ Turk ?elediyeciliginde 8 >il.. . H. 0. 2. F. (2 @.5ermaye Gehinde 2eform/ 0. (&###. +zel 5ayR (2. *. '. 4uropean Oournal of ?erezin. Istanbul: 2emzi.1olitics and Hulture: 0 Gess 9issured Terrain/. 0nkara: *azi 6atabevi Ho%. 2 Hoskun. .6amu >Snetimi 2eformunda Tevresel DeQerler: +rmanlar ve !.8 . (&##@. Devrim Hetinkasap. $. 0. )o. 6asim 2 9ukuyama.. s. Turk 6amu >onetimi. *eray. .. .. Lev. 7 generations and policy-periods in five 4uropean countries/.-I3G0-4$$4 ?aker. 2 4rdogdu. ?ozkurt (4d. 5. ?. (2 ". (2 7. +zel 5ayi (2.5. . and 5enatalar.. 7-# $etinleri.6ent >onetimine 6atilim ve 6ent 6onseyleri/..Hhanging policy views at the local level: The effect of age.. +zel 5ayi (2. 5iyasal 0lanRnRn +luNumu 3zerine ?ir Deneme. 3. (&## . and 4vans. (2 7..5. 0nkara: $etropol Imar 0.Hivil society at the turn of the millenium: prospects for an alternative world order/ 2eview of International 5tudies. 0. 27.. (2 7. ?elediyelerin -izli 6entlesmeye >enik Dustugu Donem (&#"7&#8 . ?.. 9.. 8@-@2 6RyRlar/ 5ermaye Gehinde 2eform/ 0. $.. 5?9 *4T0 Tartisma !.0lada. -... 6asRm 2 Duru. $.4mpirical investigation of ?aslevent.. 6asim 2 4nyedi. 1.

*uler. 5.Turkish Honservative $odernism: ?irth of a )ationalist Yuest for 2. )o.. )o. . and the neoliberal subAect: national narratives and supranational desires in Turkey and 9rance/.. ... Dol. (2 5tudies. pp.6entsel -areketler ve -alk 4gitimi: +luNum.. 6. #.0.*okariksel. (&##&.72 services in 4uropean regulation/.27M. >erel Demokrasi ve Turk ?elediyeciligi. and 6aygusuz. . Dol. H. *orunum. & (9eb.. (2 +ctober 2 Isikli.8.TurkiyeEde 6entsel Degisimler ve 5iyasal ?ilinc/.@-&&2 &. . (2 2.3. +. 0. (2 #. (2 ?orders: 9oreign 1olicy and the Honstruction of )ational Hitizenship Identity in Turkey/.3.28 M 7 )o. &-!" !a. 2 (2 7. 8: 2. . 0. 0. +zel 5ayR (2.The Oustice and Development 1arty *overnment and the $ilitary in Turkey/. 2& . 2. 28" 7. 2. s. ?. ?. s. Dol. $iddle 4astern 5tudies. 5?9 *4T0 TartRNma $etinleri.. 1raksis.Deiling. 6. .. 6asim 2 Icduygu.$arket integration and social cohesion: the politics of public &: . pp. 4.5iyaset ve yonetisim: Tarihsel bir bakis/ $Ulkiye Dergisi. 0nkara: $ulkiyeliler ?irligi *unlu. Turkish 5tudies. . . ?.>onetisim: Tum Iktidar 5ermayeye/. ).. (2 *uzC2 -eper. (2 *lobal )etworks 7. 2 6alaycioglu.The 1olitics of Hitizenship by Drawing ".. )ovember 2 Irem.8 . (2 !b.Turkish Democracy: 1atronage versus *overnance/ Turkish Hultural 2enewal/. (2 &. )o.. # 6is-?ahar 2 !./ 0.:7 !.Ikinci Dalga: 5iyasal ve >onetsel Giberalizasyon (6amu !...>erellesme/ 0. 0. &-" ". 2.. pp. and $itchell. . I55) &"@ M2288 *ormez. secularism. )o. 6entlesme *oc ve >oksulluk. +zel 5ayi (2. Tiplestirme/ Hevat *erayEa 0rmagan.7"-@ .. 0nkara: ImaA *unlu. $. Dikmen (4d.. . (2 &." . &"@M&87. #!-&&8. International Oournal of $iddle 4ast 5tudies. (2 s. VVVIII. Oournal of 4uropean 1ublic 1olicy . !". 5?9 *4T0 TartRNma $etinleri. 0nkara: -izmet-PN. 0. !. >onetimi Temel 6anunu. 2&7 W 2!& -Xeritier. *uler.7#.. . 0.. . &. (2 2. . 6asRm 2 *unlu. 2. 7.

. Istanbul: I3G0-4$$4 6eyman. .. T.". 0lternatives Gentner. H.. 2 6urtoglu. 4uropean Oournal of 1olitical 2esearch "8: &. Oenson and ?.6amu >Snetimi Temel 6anunu Taslagindaki 0nayasaya 0ykiriliklar/ 0.6arahanogullarR. Dolezal.*lobalization. ' . (2 ..Towards a 4uropeanised 1ublic 5phereZ 6oopmans. 2 6riesi.!M2& . 024)0 'orking @.-egemony and 0utonomy/ 1olitical 5tudies: 2 7 Dol 7!.?. 2.. (2 2 !. 77-88 6eles. 4.. . 6asim !. 0nkara: ?irey ve Toplum 22 . *rande. Gachat. and 'alters.. +zel 5ayi (2.. +. $ubeccel 6iray Icin >azilar. De 5ousa 5antos (eds.7#. . Hivil 5ociety and Islam: The =uestion of . *lobalizing Institutions.. 4rcanC-. ?. 6. Turkay (4ds. (2 .*lobalization and the transformation of the national political space: 5i% 4uropean countries compared/ 4uropean Oournal of 1olitical 2esearch "7: #2&M#78. 2. )o. (2 1aper 2!C ! 6oopmans. . 5?9 *4T0 Tartisma $etinleri. 6ent ve 5iyaset 3zerine >azilar (&#@7-&##2. 0ldershot. (2 Homparing 1olitical 0ctors and the $edia in *ermany/.. 5?9 *4T0 Tartisma $etinleri. $. 4. (&##!.6urtuluNC$. 0tacanC9..*lobalization as *ovemmentality/.3. ?ornschier.6amu +rgutlenmesi ?oyutuyla 6amu >onetimi Temel 6anunu Tasarisi/ 0. supporters and opponents in 4uropeanised political debates/. (2 . 2.. and 1fetsch. . "@-8@ !.. '. Democracy in Turkey/. 2. +zel 5ayi (2... >erel 5iyaset ve 4lit 5trateAileri/. -. (&#.. s. "#7-7&" 7. Istanbul: ?aglam Garner. 5. trans. -. Demokrasinin *ercek Dunyasi. 0shgate. -.3. 0nd 9rey. 8. 6asim 6arasu.'ho inhabits the 4uropean public sphereZ 'inners and @ losers.. Gevent 6oker. . 9. (2 2# (2 ". in O. ". . 0. )o.. (2 2 !.. 2 8 !.-emsehrilik Dernekleri.8 . 9. . (2 @!7M@72 $acpherson.

(2 !. 2 1oguntke. 5iyasalRn 6RyRsRnda. *. T... . 2. 7.bodrumhabermerkezi. 2. Pstanbul: $etis. 2anciere. ..The 4uropeanisation of national party organisations: 0 conceptual analysis/. D. O.. &! 1arker. (2 (2 #. I.. (2 8. 1arker.. &:&. (2 #... (27th $arch 2 .. Tampubolon..Transfer and transformation in processes of 8 4uropeanization/ 4uropean Oournal of 1olitical 2esearch "7: #. &:2. Trans. 2@!M2#8 4uropean 1olitical 5cience 2eview (2 $utman.. O.. (2 77-. (2 2 7 (&@#M&##. ).. .5iyasete *iris/. G. . . I. 0ylott. .$uglaEda Dernek 4nflasyonu/ http:CCwww. 4dited by D.The roots of hegemony: The mecanisms of clas accomadation @B #&. . G.!M& & #.1rivatisation in the 4uropean 3nion/ in 1rivtisation in the in the 4uropean 3nion. -. . 5avage. @ @. Dol. 4uropean Oournal of @..+toriter yonetim zihniyeti/ $urekkep. $.>erel >onetim: Devraldigimiz $iras/ Turk ?elediyeciliginde 8 >Rl. and Guther. 0.. +. 'arde. Gondon and )ew >ork: 2outledge 1edersen. and Tomlinson. 2 1ozo. #. 0ziz 3fuk 6RlRL... and the emergence of the nation-people/ Hapital\Hlass..! )o. &. >erel 5iyaset ve Demokrasi. (&## . Gadrech. 0. &. 6.. (2 @. 5.$ahon.5tandardizing and disseminating knowledge: the role of the +4HD in global governance/. .The 4%clusiveness of the 1olitical 9ield: networks and political ! mobilization/.. $. Pstanbul: '0GD +rtayli..7M& 2&. 4uropean 1olitical 5cience 2eview $ayer. )o. 2.. 5pring 2 2ay.-I3G0-4$$4 +zgur.0re there hybrid regimesZ +r are they Aust an optical illusionZ/. 6. .comCZsayfa[editorler\yaziID[&"" +zkazanc. and $onnikhof. (&###. 6ent. 2 2! . (2 1olitical 2esearch "8: @"@M@@&. and $cbride. .... 4delenbos.5. . $.Interactive 1olicy Development: 3ndermining or 5ustaining DemocracyZ/. 0nkara: $etropol Imar 0. Gonghurst. p. G.. $orlino. 1ublic 0dministration Dol. $. ?. . (&##. 2. (&##. 2. 5ayR. 5ocial $ovement 5tudies. .

)o. $ugla: $ugla ?elediyesi. 2!&M272 disciplinary politics of a subfield/ International 0ffairs . (2 Ihtiyaclarina >onelik !. Ouly.&7@-&@@ 2osamond. Istanbul: '0GD-Demokrasi 6itapligi !. (2 2. (2 &. p. *idiklanan +zne..2osamond. )o.. p. . . 5lavoA (2 4pos. Dol. +zel 5ayi (2.4uropean integration and the social science of 43 studies: the @... 5?9 *4T0 Tartisma $etinleri. (2 (2 !.Independent 2egulatory 0gencies in Turkey in Turkey: 0re They 2eally 0utonomousZ/. 0nkara: Interviews with $embers of Hounty Houncil and $unicipality Houncil. 3nlu (4ds. !2-"! @. Dol.Imagining the 4uropean 4conomy: ]HompetitivenessE and the 5ocial Honstruction of ]4uropeE as an 4conomic 5pace/ )ew 1olitical 4conomy. 5.. politik ontoloAinin yok merkezi (The Ticklish 5ubAect.Demokratiklesme ve Insan -aklarinin 6orunmasi 0cisindan Insan -aklari 6urullari 3zerine ?ir Degerlendirme: $ugla +rnegi/ 0. (2 !. @. *okturkC$. the absent centre of political ontology. 2. +. (2 5ociety.*lobal Dynamics and the Gimits of *lobal *overnance/ *lobal !. .5ermaye Gehinde 2eform/ 0. and -eads of Gocal Hivil 5ociety +rganizations +bservations interested with local political and social partitions 2" . . D.8 . (2 @.. and Dinler. .2egionalism: +ld and )ew/ International 5tudies 2eview Daeyrynen. ?. trans. ?... 27M7& !. . 1ublic 0dministration and Development 2@. 6entsel Heliski ve 5iyaset. )o. 60>9+2 ID ?ildiriler 6itabR. &@. 2 Fizek. 7. +zfidanerC*. !&#-!!2 5onmez. !. 5engul.6amu >onetimi Temel 6anunu Tasarisi: -alkin 2eform muZ Donusumun 6urumsallasmasi miZ/ . O..3. 6asim 2 5ahin. 2.!: & (2 5ezen. 5amil Han.. 3. T. (2 @. %ntervie#s and &!servations @.. . 27!-2@2 'hitman.