Abstract:

It is argued in this article that there is continuity between the evaluation of the forms of the problem-atisation in the early gecekondu studies and in the late urban renewal programs. The modernist ap-proaches which are pejorative and hostile according to the concept of gecekondu in the studies, mainly constructs the legitimate principle of the urban renewal programs that are actually carrying out. The urban renewal discourse and the narrative of the urgency and mobilization depend on such historical custom of the inquiry. But there are critical stances about those urban renewal programs which are in general erected upon such understandings pertaining to gecekondu. It is also observed in some examples that there are disputes. For a healthy urban renewal it is necessary to overcome such disputes. It is maintaining for this purpose that it should be made revision on the urban renewal pro-gram.

Keywords: