This article is based on a comparative study of 9- to 11-year-old children’s place use and preferences in six low-income historic Istanbul neighbourhoods with varying degrees of redevelopment. Data on places used and preferred by children were obtained using the participatory photography technique. The article contributes to the existing literature by showing that children in more redeveloped neighbourhoods are more likely than those in less redeveloped ones to be confined to highly controlled and regulated places and less likely to interact with nature, pay attention to the social attributes of their communities and appreciate heritage.
ÄnggårdE (2015) Digital cameras: Agents in research with children. Children’s Geographies13(1): 1–13.
2.
ArefiM (2011) Order in informal settlements: A case study of Pinar, Istanbul. Built Environment37(1): 42–56.
3.
BenwellMC (2013) Rethinking conceptualisations of adult-imposed restriction and children’s experiences of autonomy in outdoor space. Children’s Geographies11(1): 28–43.
4.
BjörklidPNordströmM (2007) Environmental child-friendliness: Collaboration and future research. Children, Youth and Environments17(4): 388–401.
5.
BlazekM (2011) Place, children’s friendship, and the formation of gender identities in a Slovak urban neighbourhood. Children’s Geographies9(3–4): 285–302.
6.
BourkeJ (2014) ‘No messing allowed’: The enactment of childhood in urban public space from the perspective of the child. Children, Youth and Environments24(1): 25–52.
7.
CastonguayGJutrasS (2010) Children’s use of the outdoor environment in a low-income Montreal neighbborhood. Children, Youth and Environments20(1): 200–230.
8.
ChawlaL (2007) Childhood experiences associated with care for the natural world: A theoretical framework for empirical results. Children, Youth and Environments17(4): 144–170.
9.
De VisscherSBouverne-De BieM (2008) Recognizing urban public spaces as a co-educator: Children’s socialization in Ghent. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32(3): 604–616.
10.
DoucetB (2009) Living through gentrification: Subjective experiences of local, non-gentrifying residents in Leith, Edinburgh. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment24(3): 299–315.
11.
DupontVDN (2011) The dream of Delhi as a global city. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research35(3): 533–554.
12.
ElsleyS (2004) Children’s experience of public space. Children and Society18: 155–164.
13.
EnlilZM (2011) The neoliberal agenda and the changing urban form of Istanbul. International Planning Studies16(1): 5–25.
14.
FyhriAHjortholRMackettRL. (2011) Children’s active travel and independent mobility in four countries: Development, social contributing trends and measures. Transport Policy18(5): 703–710.
15.
FreemanC (2010) Children’s neighbourhoods, social centres to ‘terra incognita’. Children’s Geographies8(2): 157–176.
16.
Hadfield-HillSA (2013) Living in a sustainable community: New spaces, new behaviours. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability18(3): 354–371.
17.
HartR (2009) Charting change in the participatory settings of childhood. In: ThomasN (ed.) Children, Politics and Communication: Participation at the Margins. Bristol: The Policy Press, pp. 7–30.
18.
HeSWuF (2007) Socio-spatial impacts of property-led redevelopment on China’s urban neighbourhoods. Cities24(3): 194–208.
19.
Inzulza-ContardoJ (2012) ‘Latino gentrification’? Focusing on physical and socioeconomic patterns of change in Latin American inner cities. Urban Studies49(10): 2085–2107.
20.
Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (2006) Transportation Survey. Directorate of Transportation Planning, Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality.
21.
KaramanO (2013) Urban renewal in Istanbul: Reconfigured spaces, robotic lives. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research37(2): 715–733.
22.
KarstenL (2003) Children’s use of public space: The gendered world of the playground. Childhood10(4): 457–473.
23.
KarstenL (2005) It all used to be better? Different generations on continuity and change in urban children’s daily use of space. Children’s Geographies3(3): 275–290.
24.
KorpelaKHartigT (1996) Restorative qualities of favorite places. Journal of Environmental Psychology16: 221–233.
KraftlPChristensenPHortonJ. (2013) Living on a building site: Young people’s experiences of emerging ‘Sustainable Communities’ in England. Geoforum50: 191–199.
27.
KuyucuTÜnsal (2010) ‘Urban transformation’ as state-led property transfer: An analysis of two cases of urban renewal in Istanbul. Urban Studies47(7): 1479–1499.
28.
KwonYKimSJeonB (2014) Unraveling the factors determining the redevelopment of Seoul’s historic hanoks. Habitat International41: 280–289.
29.
Loukaitou-SiderisA (2003) Children’s common grounds: A study of intergroup relations among children in public settings. Journal of the American Planning Association69(2): 130–143.
30.
MasseLCDasaCGauvinL. (2002) Emerging measurement and statistical methods in physical activity research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine23(2S): 44–55.
31.
MatthewsH (2001) Children and Community Regeneration. London: Save the Children.
32.
MinBLeeJ (2006) Children’s neighborhood place as a psychological and behavioral domain. Journal of Environmental Psychology26: 51–71.
33.
MitchellD (2003) The Right to the City: Social Justice and the Fight for Public Space. New York: Guildford Press.
34.
NémethJ (2006) Conflict, exclusion, relocation: Skateboarding and public space. Journal of Urban Design11(3): 297–318.
35.
NémethJHollanderJ (2010) Security zones and New York City’s shrinking public space. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research34(1): 20–34.
36.
NosofskyRM (1986) Attention, similarity, and the identification–categorization relationship. Journal of Environmental Psychology115(1): 39–57.
O’BrienM (2003) Regenerating children’s neighborhoods: What do children want? In: ChristensenPO’BrienM (eds) Children in the City: Home, Neighbourhood and Community. London: RoutledgeFalmer, pp. 142–161.
39.
OlesenMLassenC (2012) Restricted mobilities: Access to, and activities in, public and private spaces. International Planning Studies17(3): 215–232.
40.
OwensPE (2002) No teens allowed: The exclusion of adolescents from public spaces. Landscape Journal21(1–2): 156–163.
41.
PassonCLeviDdel RioV (2008) Implications of adolescents’ perception and values for planning and design. Journal of Planning Education and Research28: 73–85.
42.
PazerS (1992) The development of place categories in children. Children’s Environments9(1): 20–41.
43.
PorterGHampshireKAbaneA. (2011) Perspectives on young people’s daily mobility, transport and service access in Sub-Saharan Africa. In: GriecoMUrryJ (eds) Mobilities: New Perspectives on Transport and Society. New York: Routledge, pp. 65–90.
44.
PyyryN (2015) ‘Sensing with’ photography and ‘thinking with’ photographs in research into teenage girls’ hanging out. Children’s Geographies13(2): 149–163.
45.
RankinBHAytaçIA (2006) Gender inequality in schooling: The case of Turkey. Sociology of Education79: 25–43.
46.
SaelensBESallisJFFrankLD. (2012) Obesogenic neighborhood environments, child and parent obesity: The neighborhood impact on Kids Study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine42(5): e57–e64.
47.
SaffordLB (2013) Cultural heritage preservation in modern China: Problems, perspectives and potentials. ASIA Network Exchange21(1): 1–13.
48.
SancarFHSevercanYC (2010) Children’s places: Rural–urban comparisons using participatory photography in the Bodrum Peninsula, Turkey. Journal of Urban Design15(3): 293–324.
49.
SandbergA (2003) Play memories and place identity. Early Child Development and Care173(2): 207–221.
50.
SetalaML (1972) Leikki- ja elintilan laajeneminen 10–12 vuoden iässä [The expansion of territorial range between ages 10 to 12]. Reports from the Department of Psychology, 58. University of Tampere.
51.
SevercanYC (2012) Children’s attachment to public space in the context of urban regeneration: Effects of children’s involvement in planning and design activities. Doctoral thesis, University of Colorado Denver.
52.
SevercanYC (2015) The effects of children’s participation in planning and design activities on their place attachment. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research32(4): 271–293.
53.
SevercanYCBarlasA (2007) The conservation of industrial remains as a source of individuation and socialization. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research31(3): 675–682.
54.
SmithFBarkerJ (2000) Contested spaces: Children’s experiences of out of school care in England and Wales. Childhood7: 315–333.
55.
SpeakS (2000) Children in urban regeneration: Foundations for sustainable participation. Community Development Journal35: 31–40.
56.
TezelE (2011) Exploring parental concerns about children’s interactions in gated communities: A case study in Istanbul. Children’s Geographies9(3–4): 425–437.
57.
TrumbullNS (2012) Redevelopment and conservation in the built fabric of post-socialist St. Petersburg. Urban Geography33(3): 370–400.
58.
TURK-IS Haber Bulteni (2011) Aclik ve yoksulluk siniri [Starvation and poverty line]. TURK-IS Haber Bulteni, 26December.
59.
ValentineGMcKendrickJH (1997) Children’s outdoor play: Exploring parental concerns about children’s safety and the changing nature of childhood. Geoforum28(2): 219–235.
60.
ValentineGSkeltonTChambersD (1998) Cool places: An introduction to youth and youth cultures. In: ValentineGSkeltonT (eds) Cool Places: Geographies of Youth Culture. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–32.
61.
WangFLiuJPanB. (2012) Stuck between the historic and modern China: A case study of children’s space in a hutong community. Journal of Environmental Psychology32(1): 59–68.
62.
Ward ThompsonC (2007) Playful nature: What makes the difference between some people going outside and others not? In: ThompsonCWTravlouP (eds) Open Space: People Space. New York: Taylor & Francis, pp. 23–38.
63.
WilliamsDR (1988) Measuring perceived similarity among outdoor recreation activities: A comparison of visual and verbal stimulus presentations. Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal10(3): 153–166.
64.
WooleyH (2006) Freedom of the city: Contemporary issues and policy influences on children and young people’s use of public open space in England. Children’s Geographies4(1): 45–59.
