Journal articles on the topic 'Gentrification – Istanbul'

This paper aims to contribute to the gentrification literature through the potentials of assemblage thinking. We focus on gentrification in Istanbul, which represents the characteristics of both the Global South and North, and use assemblages to link together gentrification and the temporal scales of Istanbul’s urbanisation as well as geographical scales of gentrification around the world. Approaching gentrification as a continual process of transformation and emergence, we intend to illuminate how assemblages of gentrification in a historical inner-city neighbourhood, Cihangir, can be produced and reproduced in the trajectory of this neighbourhood. In so doing, we reveal and explore the role of the state in seemingly market-led gentrification and draw attention to the generative potentiality in the local resistance to the recent state-led gentrification of Cihangir.

This study compared the gentrification processes in Cihangir and Tarlabasi. The dynamics of the gentrification process in Cihangir is compared with the vastly different gentrification process in Tarlabasi. Interpretations of gentrification are also included in this paper. The study analyzed the dynamics of the gentrification process in Cihangir, Istanbul (Turkey) to determine the extent of change during the process. Characterization of the Cihangir neighborhood, which distinguishes Cihangir from other gentrified urban areas, is another aspect of this study. The transformation of Cihangir is currently underway; it involves the revolution and renovation of land and buildings, which is known as gentrification. The gentrification process in Cihangir is affected by socio-economic and socio-cultural transformations. This paper examines gentrification in the Cihangir neighborhood, which has occurred spontaneously and supports the perpetuation of social diversity, which occurs in many urban areas. Although Istanbul’s Tarlabasi region exhibits geophysical characteristics that resemble the geophysical characteristics of Cihangir, Tarlabasi is affected by a completely different gentrification process, which is known as planned gentrification. In the context of this study, scholars question whether gentrification is “erasing the social geography of urban land and unique architectural pattern,” or if gentrification represents “the upgrading and renaissance of the urban land.” (Smith, 1996)

Abstract. In Turkey, gentrification has gained importance in the major cities such as Istanbul because of the rapid urbanization. The establishment of the construction land suitability is one of the main issues raised here. However, it is not easy to start gentrification process in Istanbul where there is a developing transportation and already dense housing. Up-to-date structural health information is then required for an optimum gentrification process. The traditional way of obtaining the structural health conditions on building is generally with the stationary measurements. However, in-situ based information can only provide a small amount of information, and it is impossible to conduct for the entire city. In this context, remotely sensed images, specifically synthetic aperture radar (SAR) ones, can easily provide data to monitor not only ground subsidence but also deformation on the urban sites. The main purpose of the study is to monitor the actual condition of the urbanization on unsuitable and important sites and to guide in determining pioneer areas for gentrification process using freely available remote sensing images, in particular Sentinel-1 SAR images. The potential of these data set will be evaluated with the land suitability map (LSM) produced by The Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM). In this study, we carried out multi-scale interferometric analysis to understand the spatial relationship between the LSM and the freely available satellite-based measurements for detecting urban sites in danger. The capability and usability of PSI and SBAS methods as a guide before gentrification were investigated using Sentinel-1 data covering 2015 and 2018 years.

Abstract The objective of the article is to present the assumptions of the gentrification approach, which allows one to assess the impact of public spatial actions undertaken by various actors in the process of social production of space. The study proposes a research methodology that distinguishes the social, economic and spatial dimensions of gentrification. The author makes use of source literature on the subject of gentrification and public policy theories as well as the results of the author’s gentrification research conducted in Warsaw, New York and Istanbul on examples of places that were planned using various types of participatory techniques. The study performs the operationalisation of the measurement of gentrification as a useful analytical tool in policy science.

This article explores the entangled relationship between Turkish TV series and the city of Istanbul examining both the series’ representation of the city and the effects of flourishing series’ production on the city. We argue that TV series production and representation changes and is changed by the urban restructuring of globalizing Istanbul since the late 1980s. Analyzing internationally popular series such as Noor, Valley of the Wolves, and 1001 Nights and building on television, urban and cultural studies, this article explores the ways that Istanbul’s neoliberal renovation process appears in and is shaped by TV series. The three segments of the article probe how series reflect and push forth the gentrification of historical neighborhoods, their increasing use of abandoned post-industrial areas as shooting locations, and their promotion of spaces associated with creative industries and luxury lifestyles. We show that both images and image making are connected to city making.

Territorial stigmatisation has been drawing attention in the past decade as an important concept in analysing the bad reputation of run-down neighbourhoods and how this bad reputation is used and produced by state agencies. Especially, the links between territorial stigmatisation and urban policies that are followed by state-led gentrification processes have been an emerging discussion in this analysis of understanding the phenomenon of stigmatised places. This paper aims to examine the links and relationships between the concepts of territorial stigmatisation, state-led gentrification and state power in the neighbourhood of Tarlabasi in historic Istanbul. The questions this paper responds to through the analysis of Tarlabasi are: What were the motivations of agencies of power to mobilise stigmatisation of Tarlabasi during urban renewal projects? Why did territorial stigmatisation increase during processes of state-led gentrification? How did the inhabitants of Tarlabasi behave in the face of increased stigma? The paper concludes with reflections on the use of territorial stigmatisation as a tool and accelerator for urban renewal/regeneration/transformation projects as well as its use as a mechanism by which to procure consent from the public.

The Fener-Balat districts, located in the Historical Peninsula, are among the most prominent historical and cultural sites in Istanbul. The rapid growth of the city since the 1950s, mostly due to rural migration, has affected the quality of life in various sections of the city including Fener and Balat, leaving them almost completely derelict. The Rehabilitation of Fener- Balat Districts Programme is a joint program of the European Union and the Fatih Municipality (sub-municipality of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality). It was carried out during the period between January 2003 and June 2007. Regeneration, revitalization and rehabilitation of historical urban centers, which have become degraded and dilapidated due to sub-urbanization has been successful in most cases. The gentrification process has also paralleled the resulting socio-economic revitalization and regeneration process. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to examine and investigate the rehabilitation process and its results in these districts, with special emphasis on the gentrification that occurred as a result of this process. In order to explore how the increase in housing prices in the historical residential Fener and Balat districts after the rehabilitation program affected the social structure and how this process resulted in undesired gentrification, a survey design was conducted and social and economic aspects in Fener-Balat has been analyzed and explored in depth with respect to the individual, immediate surroundings and the urban social structure. The resulting gentrification phase is more important than the preceding phases of revitalization and renovation, because it influences the housing market the most.

Externalization that became prominent in 1980s with the globalization brought along dramatic changes in social and spatial areas. The social, cultural and economic events that took place on an international level thanks to globalization made the impact of change felt which was reflected on the urban space and, therefore, on the house, resulting in an increase in the importance of the residential sector. Externalization and developed economic structure enabled more investments into houses which introduced a concept of housing populated in urban fringes starting from the city centers. The housing concept which was shaped by the impacts of the urban transformation after 1980 turned into a new emerging lifestyle in Istanbul in 2000s. Accordingly, the study aims to establish the position of housing in Istanbul and new meanings formed by the socio-cultural changes. In this sense, housing before and after 1980, globalization, gentrification, urban transformation, spatial segregation, socio-economic and cultural aspects were discussed based on the structural benchmarks, and 4 different housing forms, namely the “Loft”, “Residence”, “Terraced House”, and “Gated Communities”, with individual structural examples. This study, thus, aims to question the form of tenancy of these houses created through varying concepts and concerns today. The results obtained showed that the housing as an indicator of cultural life in Istanbul has turned into a lifestyle that is shaped by similar aspects and commercial concern, despite different approaches or production forms, eliminating the traces of the cultural life of the society.

This article discusses the intricate relationship between cultural identity formation and the urban landscape using an example of urban modernization in Istanbul’s Beyoğlu district. The area under scrutiny is called Tarlabaşi and is currently the site where the state is executing a judicially contested gentrification project. The project is based in an area which housed an ethnically and religiously heterogeneous composition of middle- and working-class groups until the 1960s, became dilapidated from the 1970s onwards and was stigmatized by the Turkish government at local, metropolitan and national levels. It was portrayed by the media as an area of social and cultural deprivation, allegedly home only to the most marginal members of society. This article will discuss the relevance of landscape as a useful category in historical research. Secondly, it will discuss how and why dominant representations of Beyoğlu’s urban landscape have developed and been instrumentalized in modern Istanbul from the 1980s onwards. Finally, this article shows how successive attempts of socio-cultural engineering by local governments, in order to reform or ‘modernize’ the urban landscape, had a strong impact on the physical and imaginary landscape of Beyoğlu and Tarlabaşi. It will be argued that local Istanbul and Beyoğlu governments, inspired by neoliberal ideas of urban planning and city marketing, have attempted to reshape the cultural identity of Beyoğlu and Tarlabaşi in order to legitimize drastic interventions in the area’s urban landscape and socio-cultural composition.

Lofts are housing forms converted from warehouse-workshop into a “habitable environment” in coastal towns of Europe and the USA after the Industrial Revolution. Particularly positioned in coastal towns of New York, Loft life made an impact in the world over time. It became a new form of living when artists converted structures like factories into habitable environment. From past to today, all national and international developments during the process affected and accelerated development of the constant evolution of housing concept. In that sense, in this study, the meaning of Lofts in Istanbul and the effect and change of socio-cultural stratification on spatial conversion of housing consumerism has been examined in the context of Istanbul. Especially, process of gentrification, shaped by effects of urban transformation post 1980, and cultural development affected by this process, attendant Loft life has become an accelerating way of life. In this context, historical and stylistic value and especially usage of Loft living has been examined. In the first chapter; past, present and the post-1980 development of housing sector in Istanbul, in the second chapter, with a thriving cultural life, and Loft formation, has been examined in the context of structural criteria, resulting three different Lofts have been discussed in detail. In the third section, three different types of Loft have been analyzed in the context of space depending on examples. As a result of researches, three different types of Lofts, “Original”, “Semi” and “Imitation” concepts have become clear and it has been concluded that “Imitation Loft” formation gives direction to life in Istanbul.

During the recent refugee crisis and following the common statement-agreement between the European Union and Turkey (18 March 2016), more than half a million refugees have been trapped in Istanbul. Although the vast majority is living in remote areas in the perimeter of the city, there is a remarkable exception in the central neighborhood of Tarlabaşı. Over the decades, this area has become a shelter for newcomers from eastern Turkey and, recently, for thousands of refugees from the Middle East and Africa. In this neighborhood, refugees with the support of local and international solidarity groups establish communal houses, social centers, and collective kitchens, creating an example of commoning practices, mutual help, and transnational togetherness in the urban core. At the same time, over the past few years, Tarlabaşı has been the target of gentrification policies that aim to dislocate poor residents and refugees and to transform the area into a highincome residential area and a tourist destination. Thus, ongoing urban conflict is taking place for the right to the center of the city. This article follows the Lefebvrian concept of ‘the right to the city’ and Soja’s and Harvey’s notion of ‘spatial justice,’ taking also into account the discussion on the spatialities of ‘urban commons’ and ‘enclosures.’ It combines spatial analysis, participatory observation, and ethnographic research, and its main findings concern the refugees’ daily efforts against social segregation and exclusion shaped by commoning practices for spatial justice, visibility, and the right to the center of the city.

Public space directs how we live and act, how we socialize and even protest. If there is no community and solidarity there is no city, no civilization; there can only be a »city-state« as the modern version of an empire, says Murat Germen, photographer known for his critical view on the home-town of Istanbul. Muta-morphosis, probably one of his most famous series, uses digital manipulation to show a dark vision of future cities: buildings cramed together as in a strange and dangerous mutation process, almost melting as objects in Dali’s paintings. Through his artworks, text and lectures, Murat Germen criticizes excessive urbanization, motivated by capital and not by human needs. He also documented Gezi Park protests, in which the political aspect of managing the city became very apparent. His photos can be understood as a visual protest and Murat Germen thinks some of them may turn into visual evidence of the urban crime committed by the present Turkish government since 2002, when it came to power. Keywords: art, art and social power, gentrification, urbanism, visual protest

In this article I reconstruct the place narrative of the Rum community (Greeks of Turkey) in Fener, Istanbul through unrest, displacement, and gentrification, and how the urban fabric, everyday life, and encounters transformed through different phases of urban change. Fener was a neighbourhood where cultural groups coexisted with mutual respect. This environment started to deteriorate when societal unrest towards non-Muslims resulted in a city-wide assault in 1955 and a subsequent displacement of many non-Muslims from the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood decayed and later became an attractive spot for gentrifiers because of its multicultural history. This implicated a massive physical change after an unimplemented regeneration project leading to gentrification. I theorize this narrative mainly based on Whitehead’s “permanences,” the stabilities in the physical and non-physical presence of Rums in Fener and Bhabha’s “in-between temporalities” as complements of permanences, defining space-time envelopes that signify both adjustment and resilience, but also amnesia as a result of urban unrest through social and physical change. The Rum urban narrative provides a complex story of challenged community identity; therefore, it necessitates the use of several qualitative research methods: interviews with older residents, historical investigation with documentation, and personal observation. The study results show that the Rum community’s daily practices and placeworlds were lost; however, the community remembers permanences better than in-between temporalities. Linking fragmented narratives by reconstructing them fights cultural amnesia and leads to a better connection with place and past contexts.

Introduction Despite the emphasis on the theoretical definitions of the concept of “creativity“ and its impact on cities, it is still uncertain, difficult to measure and limited. Creativity and its impacts are difficult to generalise because of the multiplicity of approaches and a lack of comparative analysis. The concept of creativity and its reflection on cities represents a paradigm that brings together academics from different fields, including cultural economists, those working on economic development and innovation, sociologists, economic geographers, and urban planners. The creative economy has been associated with the knowledge economy and innovation since its onset in the 2000s and extends to the creative industries (Caves), the creative class (Florida), and creative cities (Landry; Florida et al.). Given that the term "creative" is still primarily associated with the arts and sciences, Landry points out that two major issues shape our understanding of creativity: first, the power of thoughts and ideas in shaping our mindset, and second, the significance of culture as a creative resource (Landry). Creativity is generally accepted as a critical urban phenomenon, and is viewed as one of the determining factors in the development and growth of cities. For a city to be defined as ‘creative’, it would be characterised by many aspects of ‘cultural cities’ (Scott) and ‘cities of knowledge’ (Yigitcanlar et al.). Creative industries, which provide the foundation for the production of culture and creative products, require a unique environment supported by the public sector to flourish, and they thrive on proximity and strong networks that enable information sharing and exchange. Although accepted as a crucial element of contemporary cities, the use of ‘creativity’ in city development may not be a straightforward task. Globalisation plays an important role in spotlighting creative cities as drivers of global change and innovation. The emphasis on creativity as part of the global city culture incentivises cities to focus on these activities as valuable assets. This view has been reinforced by global initiatives such as the designation of the European Capital of Culture (ECoC). City administrators view innovation and creativity as critical drivers for a more sustainable and inclusive means of urban development. This article lays out how drivers of creative output, design events, and creative industries contribute to local initiatives in the global city of Istanbul: a city that accommodates some of the most long-standing and established craft spaces as well as newly developing creative and design industries. This article provides a critical perspective on cultural frameworks from the perspective of local stakeholders and networks in Istanbul's Tomtom neighbourhood, the most invested district in terms of the city's cultural future, where creative industries are the main focus. Using the Creative Cities Network as a Creative City Identity The creative city concept is used by urban sociologists, geographers, urban planners, and economists to focus on developing a segment of society that is intertwined with the cultural and creative sphere. It represents a crucial and strategic industry for renewing the local economy and sustaining urban growth. Moreover, it has become a robust development paradigm adopted by many urban governments (d’Ovidio). The creative city, according to Costa, is a notion defined by three key elements. The first is the concept of creativity as a toolset for urban development; the second is the concept of the creative city as a collection of creative activities and businesses; the third promotes the concept of the creative city as a human resource capable of attracting creative competencies (Costa et al.). Successful creative cities have some common points, such as visionary individuals, creative organisations, physical and social assets, and a political culture that shares a clear purpose. Leadership was found in the public, private, and non-profit sectors, and it manifested itself in bold public efforts, frequently risky investments, and a web of interrelated undertakings, whether for profit or the common good (Landry). International recognition provides a building ground for attracting attention to local initiatives. UNESCO created the Creative Cities Network (UCCN) in 2004. It was conceived from the very beginning as an interactive process to bridge the possible isolation of cities and their inhabitants as a tool for multi-stakeholder collaboration. In other words, it was a relevant response, analysed in a comprehensive overview of the literature on the problem of urban branding. However, it gradually became clear that a kind of network structure alone was insufficient to combat fragmentation (Rosi). The network's purpose is to foster international cooperation among the selected cities in order to promote "joint development partnerships in line with UNESCO's worldwide priorities of "culture and development" and "sustainable development". A city's participation in the network allows it to communicate with other designated foreign metropoles and to carry out joint projects (Stocker). The 2007 global financial crisis and the ensuing recession led to movements that responded to the commodification of urban public space through applied, community-based activities and independent cultural production. This has resulted in new paths for reorienting the creative city strategy around the concept of "making" (Grodach). Scholars have linked creative placemaking to a long history of arts-based economic growth dating back to the late nineteenth-century City Beautiful movement. However, the reification of "creative placemaking" as a discursive practice guided and enforced by government agencies, funders, and other institutions elevates it above previous forms of arts-based economic development or cultural planning (Zitcer). It seeks to go beyond purely economic motivations and pursue multidimensional outcomes ranging from the economic to bringing "diverse people together to celebrate, inspire and be inspired" (Grodach). Place-selling, or communicating certain features of a place through logos, slogans, advertising campaigns, or public relations exercises, is one of the most prevalent actions carried out under the broad umbrella of place-making and marketing. Physical interventions and communication tactics that pick specific components of local 'identity', 'history', and 'culture' can be used to produce this "forging of associations" between places, their attributes, and specific target audiences (Colomb). This new outlook reflects Landry's emphasis on creative collaboration, but the impetus is on cross-agency partnerships and new funding sources for design and art that foster ‘creative’ cities. Placing Istanbul on the Cultural Map If the world was only one country, Istanbul would be its capital. — Napoleon Bonaparte Istanbul is one of the world's largest metropoles, with approximately 15 million inhabitants. It has served as a crossroads for civilisations, cultures, and international trade throughout its history, leaving behind a multi-layered cultural legacy that inspires new design concepts and is a rich source for traditional arts and crafts. The robust creative economy in Istanbul employs 140,000 people and generates 74.5 percent of Turkey's turnover. As a design hub, Istanbul hosts over 20 globally famous design events each year, including the Istanbul Design Biennial, Design Week Turkey, and Fashion Week Istanbul. In 2016 there were 41 conference centres and 225 art galleries in the city. In the same year, Istanbul's cultural institutions hosted 4,315 events, including international film, music, and theatre festivals, as well as art and design biennials. Events such as Contemporary Istanbul have been important in establishing a network of non-governmental organisations that have also been instrumental in the 2010 designation as the European Capital of Culture (ECoC) and membership in the UNESCO Creative Cities Network (UCCN). It has also served three times as United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) leader. For previous ECoC cities, national or local governments had nominated their cities for the ECoC program, but in Istanbul non-governmental organisations spearheaded and managed the nomination process (Öner). This has lead to a slow and stunted start for the programs which were greatly diminished due to the difficulties in securing the required funding. ​​After becoming an ECoC in 2010, Istanbul joined the UNESCO Creative Cities Network in 2017, joining 246 cities worldwide. UNESCO defines Istanbul as “a geography where craft and craftsmanship have emerged in many different ways in the historical and cultural codes of creative production and everyday life” (UCCN About Us). Because of its cultural heritage, Istanbul can be considered an inspiration for the design sector and promotes its productive capacity. Due to Istanbul’s geographically unique position, there are significant opportunities, experiences, and potentials to reveal new scenarios to promoting a productive future by enhancing innovative approaches for contemporary design. Participating in the UCCN undoubtedly has significant benefits for Istanbul. First of all, it has the opportunity to share its knowledge experience with other cities in the network, and it can have the opportunity to promote its work through networking events organised regularly within Design Cities. In Istanbul, which is the locomotive of the Turkish economy, the vision of the 2014-2023 Regional Plan, prepared by the Istanbul Development Agency, identifies the city as "a city of innovation and culture with its creative and free people; unique Istanbul". Moreover, one of the three essential components of this vision is "a high added value, innovative and creative economy with a voice in the global economy" (ISTKA). This component reveals the importance of innovation and creativity-oriented growth in Istanbul for the gains created in the economic field to bring social development and realise holistic development. Although these frameworks have provided a strong ‘creative’ identity to the city, the lack of specific programs and funding opportunities for ‘creative industries’ that fall under these headings have not allowed these initiatives to be felt at the local scale. Fig. 1: Location of Beyoğlu district. In this article we chose Beyoğlu (fig. 1) as the local case study, due to the existence of cultural/creative industries since the nineteenth century. When we look at previous periods, there were times when Beyoğlu fell out of favour, and different segments gave up coming to Beyoğlu for various reasons. However, Beyoğlu has always recovered and regained its identity as a historical, touristic, and cultural centre (Türkün). Beyoğlu has been the scene of social and spatial changes. Especially a rapid renewal process has been in process since the 1980s. As a result most of the buildings were restored, leading to wide-scale gentrification, and many new buildings were built throughout Istiklal Street, its main avenue. The roads on both sides of the pedestrian street are filled with cafes, art galleries, bookstores, and antique shops, making Beyoğlu a 'Turkish SoHo' (Gül). A Critical Perspective from Tomtom Neighbourhood Tomtom is one of the 45 neighbourhoods of the Beyoğlu district with a historic identity and cultural richness (fig. 2). It has hosted many diplomatic institutions and historical buildings such as the Venetian Palace, the French Palace, the Italian, Russian, Dutch, and French embassies, ​​and continues to house many consulates and foreign schools (Akın). Because it is located in the centre of Galata, Çukurcuma, and Karaköy, since the beginning of the 2000s the Tomtom neighbourhood has become very attractive due to low rental prices in the transformation process in Beyoğlu. With the low-cost renovation practices, the creative class, which has a weak economic accumulation, and has a high artistic quality, has started to open their galleries in this district. In addition to this, cafés, boutique hotels, and entertainment venues opened in succession, and this class transformation attracted the attention of capital owners. The district had to face not only the danger of gentrification caused by this class migration but also the results of the Galataport project, a real estate capital initiative (Kütükoğlu). Fig. 2: Map of the Tomtom neighbourhood and its surroundings. A case study was conducted between September 2018 and August 2021 using secondary data, observation, and in-depth interviews to provide a critical perspective on cultural frameworks from the perspective of local stakeholders and networks in this neighbourhood. In the case study, in-depth interviews were conducted with 30 design studios and art galleries that have moved to Tomtom in the last decade. These interviews were held in three separate periods: the first was in September 2018, following the start of the Tomtom Designhood Project; the second in August 2019; and the last in June 2021. The Missing Ingredients As mentioned above, some criteria are required to be a booming creative city. As a result of the fieldwork carried out in the Tomtom neighbourhood, Istanbul's trajectory in becoming a creative city has been discussed under three headings: ownership and patronage, financial support, and resilience. The creative cluster in the Tomtom neighbourhood started as a neighbourhood revitalisation effort by a real estate investment firm to create a cultural hub in Istanbul, with the creation and promotion of an annual design event since 2017: Tomtom Designhood, inspired by similar events across Europe. However, this business approach did not suit the cultural businesses moving into the neighbourhood. Relying on the market alone and expecting up-and-coming cultural businesses to ‘invest’ in promoting their neighbourhood has not been a sustainable growth model for Tomtom. Interviews with firms in the area have demonstrated that social networks have been a more reliable means for attracting and maintaining design firms in the area. These networks appear to create a sense of belonging and identity, with a high level of personal investment, trust, and support as the foundation of relationships. The slow-paced relocation of businesses within close social networks has been more promising in establishing the cultural hub. The results show that the creative cluster grew slowly due to the lack of support by local authorities and the limited resources for the businesses relocating into the area. In recent years, multidisciplinary design events have been taking place in this new creative neighbourhood. Tomtom Designhood generally organises these events, some of them with the cooperation of the annual design event Contemporary Istanbul, and invites everyone to explore this creative neighbourhood with pop-up events, food and drink, and art and design exhibitions. In addition to design activities that recur periodically, there are also one-time events such as 'Back to Home', 'Tomtom Designwalks', and 'Portugal Is in Istanbul'. The main goal of these events is accessible art. Moreover, they aim to bring together art galleries, institutions, collectors, art students, and people of all ages who want to learn and know art better, especially young people and art professionals. These design events, which were put forward with the idea of "accessible art for everyone", have lacked patronage and backing from donors or government funding and thus had to be self-sustaining. Furthermore, the Tomtom events have been shifted to ‘money-making’ initiatives which further degraded their acceptance in the local neighbourhood. The design events and festivals in the neighbourhood are not directly connected with the creative community around the UCCN. The case study explores the effects of the large-scale design events on local dynamics and has also touched upon the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic, and reveals that the most critical factor in the creative industries' resilience in times of crisis has been support by public policies and advocates. The Covid-19 pandemic, which can be described as a global crisis, has affected the creative sectors at Tomtom and tested the resilience of the design firms in the area. Due to the lockdown measures, restrictions on international mobilities, and social distancing measures implemented in this process, some creative sectors could not continue their operations. There were no specific funding support systems for design professionals. Stating that the most significant potential of this area has been foreign tourists, the designers commented that their work has come to a standstill due to the complete stoppage of the tourist flow during the pandemic. On the other hand, it has been determined that some designers explored new business forms by developing new skills, not affected by the pandemic or relatively less affected. In addition, designers who sell products that appeal to higher-income groups also stated that they have not been economically affected by this process. ‘The City of Design’ title was expected to bring some visible changes to Istanbul, especially in an emerging creative neighbourhood like Tomtom, and even in the entire Beyoğlu district. However, unfortunately, it is not possible to see the effects of these even in a crucial creative neighbourhood like Tomtom. A positive step was taken at the last point of the whole place branding process, and Tomtom was included in the "Beyoğlu Culture Road" project carried out by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in June 2022 (fig. 3). In this project, which is defined as "the branding project that transfers the cultural heritage of a city to future generations", many paid and free design events were held for two weeks in crucial creative and touristic areas such as Galataport, Atatürk Cultural Center, and French Street, with the participation of many national and international designers and artists. Many people had the opportunity to get to know Tomtom as a design neighbourhood, thanks to various concerts, workshops, festivals, design product exhibitions, and food and beverage areas held during this event for two weeks. Fig. 3: Posters for the Tomtom Designhood event in 2018 (left) and 2022 (right). (Source: Tomtom Designhood.) From Istanbul's perspective, the reciprocal relationship between creativity and Istanbul results in more creative industries, strengthening Istanbul's position in the global network. This study proves that a successful cultural policy needs to include financial support and local government cooperation for a more sustainable strategy. From an urban policy perspective, social networks seem a crucial player for a better and more sustainable support system that provides answers to the needs of the creative industries. It is hoped that the results of this study will provide new perspectives on understanding the importance of the collaboration of private, public, and civil society actors in order to strengthen cultural industries in creative cities and promote the diversity of cultural expressions. In Tomtom, as Colomb argued and authors focussed on place-making and branding have argued, specific local culture, history, identity, and aesthetics are picked, sanitised, commodified, and promoted to be consumed by target groups such as tourists or high-income locals as part of the place-making process. However, in this local neighbourhood, this process can negatively affect the spaces and social groups involved, particularly with gentrification pressure from its surrounding neighbourhoods, resulting in a loss of authenticity or outright displacement in the future. Acknowledgment The research was undertaken, in part, thanks to funding from the TUBITAK 2214-A International Research Scholarship Program. Sources Maps in fig. 1 and fig. 2 were developed by the authors using mapstyle.withgoogle.com. Posters in fig. 3 are from Tomtom Designhood: https://www.facebook.com/Tomtom-Designhood-363369284116558/. References Akın, Nur. 19. yüzyılın ikinci yarısında Galata ve Pera. No. 24. Literatur, 1998. Caves, Richard E. Creative Industries: Contracts between Art and Commerce. Harvard UP, 2000. Colomb, Claire. Staging the New Berlin: Place Marketing and the Politics of Urban Reinvention Post-1989. Routledge, 2013. D'Ovidio, Marianna. The Creative City Does Not Exist: Critical Essays on the Creative and Cultural Economy of Cities. Ledizioni, 2016. Florida, Richard. The Rise of the Creative Class. Basic Books, 2019. Florida, Richard, Tim Gulden, and Charlotta Mellander. "The Rise of the Mega-Region." Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society 1.3 (2008): 459-476. Grodach, Carl. "Urban Cultural Policy and Creative City Making." Cities 68 (2017): 82-91. Gül, Murat, Trevor Howells, and Aras Neftci. Istanbul Architecture. Watermark Press, 2013. ISTKA. 2014-2023 İstanbul Regional Plan. 10 Feb. 2022 <http://www.istka.org.tr/>. Kütükoğlu, İlker. Mimarlık ve Seçkinleştirme: Cihangir Örneği. Diss. Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2006. Landry, Charles. The Creative City: A Toolkit for Urban Innovators. Routledge, 2012. Martí-Costa, Marc, and Marc Pradel I. Miquel. "The Knowledge City against Urban Creativity? Artists’ Workshops and Urban Regeneration in Barcelona." European Urban and Regional Studies 19.1 (2012): 92-108. Öner, Oğuz. "Istanbul 2010 European Capital of Culture: Towards a Participatory Culture?" Orienting Istanbul. Routledge, 2010. 283-294. Rosi, Mauro. "Branding or Sharing? The Dialectics of Labeling and Cooperation in the UNESCO Creative Cities Network." City, Culture and Society 5.2 (2014): 107-110. Scott, Allen J. "The Cultural Economy of Cities." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 21.2 (1997): 323-339. Stocker, Karl. "The Power of Design." A Journey through the 11 UNESCO Cities of Design. 2013. Türkün, Asuman. “Arafta Bir Beyoğlu: Tarihsel Kesitleriyle Bir Semt Yıllar İçinde Değişimler” 5 Apr. 2022 <https://www.araftabirbeyoglu.com/tr/>. UCCN. “About Us.” 2 Feb. 2022 <http://en.unesco.org/creative-cities/content/about-us>. UCCN. “UNESCO Creative Cities Network for Sustainable Development.” 2 Feb. 2022 <https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000375210>. Yigitcanlar, Tan, Koray Velibeyoglu, and Cristina Martinez‐Fernandez. "Rising Knowledge Cities: The Role of Urban Knowledge Precincts." Journal of Knowledge Management (2008). Zitcer, Andrew. "Making Up Creative Placemaking." Journal of Planning Education and Research 40.3 (2020): 278-288.