1 Introduction
This study examines the role of urban happiness in placemaking processes focusing on urban neighbourhoods which has been subject of transformation when liberal urban developmental policies emerged after the 1990s in the post-socialist cities Tirana and Skopje and after 2000 in the city of Istanbul. The fall of the socialist regimes in East-Central Europe had a deep impact on the urban development of post-socialist cities. Common aspects which these cities faced were the privatisation of state land and the increase of land prices based on a free-market economy; these were among the first elements to impact urban development in these countries (Hirt, 2013). The public spaces close to the city centre became overpriced and attractive for the private entrepreneurs, who built high-rise and modern buildings (Murzyn-Kupisz & Gwosdz, 2011). As a matter of fact, such development caused the diminution of public and green spaces in many East-Central European cities. These liberal urban developmental policies also impacted the inner city neighbourhoods, in which the ground floors became subject to capitalist economy commodification processes and were transformed into commercial spaces or, in some cases, the green spaces were filled with high-rise buildings, especially in the case of Tirana (Manahasa & Manahasa, 2022).
In a similar vein, urban development in Istanbul has undergone significant changes over the years which derived from different political and economic policies. According to Durgun (2021), the evolution of urban policies and transformation has encompassed three distinct phases: (1) republican modernist urban politics (1923–1950), (2) populist-developmentalist urban politics (1950–1990) and (3) neoliberal and entrepreneurial urban politics (1990–2000s). The migration of minorities and an influx of local migrants from Anatolia reshaped some historic districts (Beyoğlu, Karaköy and Kadıköy) and led to an increased population, rapid urban transformation and the deterioration of the urban fabric (Uysal, 2006). Post-2000, under neoliberal policies, municipal and private sectors gained prominence in urban management and transformation. Urban development transitioned from populist developmentalism to a market-oriented, glocalisation approach that blends local and global influences (Durgun, 2021).
The period post-1980 marked a turning point in Istanbul. It caused spreading urban development to the city peripheries with the expansion of transportation networks and undervalued historic districts; emerging new commercial and industrial areas; changing consumer spaces and habits; and the forming of a new middle class (Uysal, 2006). A notable effect of these changes was gentrification, elevating social profiles and property values but displacing low-income residents and affecting the social cohesion of neighbourhoods (Davidson & Lees, 2005). These changes, driven by neoliberal policies and the resulting gentrification, have not only reshaped the physical form of the city but also its social and cultural fabric. Therefore, the post-2000 period is determined as the turning point in Istanbul and this study focuses on neoliberal policies and impacts on urban development there.
It is important to mention that the case studies of Tirana, Skopje and Istanbul present a nuanced understanding of urban transformation in the context of shifting political and socio-economic landscapes. While Tirana and Skopje experienced significant changes in the post-1990s era following the collapse of socialism, Istanbul’s transformation under neoliberal policies gained momentum a decade later, in the post-2000 era. Common to all three cities is the impact of these policies on urban spaces – resulting in the decrease of public areas, the rise of commercialisation, rapid urban transformation and the gentrification of historic districts. The study underscores how these cities, despite their varied historical and cultural backgrounds and different timelines of urban transformation, exhibit parallel patterns in urban development in the context of urban happiness in historic districts.
This study is based on placemaking theories and the role of urban happiness within the major concept of placemaking. “Placemaking” was described by Schneekloth and Shibley (1995) as a process focused with “place”, which displays human attachment to settings that are pleasant and suitable for their preferred modes of usage and is articulated in the construction of locations. It also is explained as the practice of altering urban surroundings in order to encourage public participation and pedestrian activity (Ellery et al., 2021). On the other hand, placemaking can be obtained also through a group activity that strengthens community relationships and serves as the foundation for an engaged culture (Gwiaździński et al., 2020). Thus, it comes out as a multidimensional activity of combining the viewpoints and functions of various players in order to transform urban areas, not only by focused on the settlement’s spatial component and physical form, but also by considering the social processes that are inherent in them (Dash & Thilagam, 2023). Undoubtedly, placemaking processes lead to more liveable cities and settlements, making possible an urban happiness related to the neighbourhoods or local environment.
Since urban happiness is related to different aspects (such as social, environmental or economic), its definition is in a continuous change depending on the research context (Taylor et al., 1998). However, in relation to our research context it can be defined as a quality that offers people who live there a positive sense of the location and drives them to stay for lengthy periods of time and/or repeat the same experience (Gehl, 2010; Zidanšek, 2007). Obviously urban happiness can be achieved via different tangible and intangible aspects. Sepe (2017) detailed these aspects in her “Charter of Urban Happiness” by identifying 20 factors:
Place identity
Age inclusiveness
Variety of functions
The possibility of performing actions that normally are not permitted
An appropriate balance between the elements of nature, landscape and equipment
The presence of water in different shapes
The presence of art in its different forms
The presence of sculptures, games or other elements
A public space should have natural lighting during the day and artificial at other times
An adequate state of cleanliness and maintenance
A public space has to give a sense of security and safety to those who walk in it
Noise generated by public transport is either minimised or entirely absent
The possibility of perceiving naturally occurring smells
The possibility of having direct contact with natural materials
The possibility of doing physical actions
Being able to contribute to the life of that place increases the sense of belonging
The place symbolic of the neighbourhood
The educational function in a place
The possibility of using the space in different seasons and weather conditions
The usage of new technology
Building on the urban context explained above where neighbourhoods are subject to transformations due to paradigmatic shifts in political systems and relying on the theoretical concepts of placemaking through urban happiness, this research focuses on three south-eastern European cities (Tirana, Skopje and Istanbul). The study focuses on the intangible aspects which cause urban happiness by comparing the before and after transformation periods. Residents of selected neighbourhoods (N = 30 each; N = 90 in total) were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Apart from comparing the urban happiness in both periods, the intangible aspects which caused it are clustered in memories, experiences and social aspects. The interviewees were also allowed to provide other replies.
2 Cases
The selected neighbourhoods at some extent work as a typical sample, but at the same time they explain the urban development policies and transformation dynamics in each of the countries. For example, the Shallvaret neighbourhood embraces developments from the kingdom and Italian invasion periods when Tirana was established and being constructed as a capital city, to the socialist period and post-socialist period which are driven by liberal urbanisation policies.
An important criterion of the selection of Debar Maalo in Skopje is related to the urban transformation process of the neighbourhood. While before the 2000s it was a homogenous housing district, consisting of predominantly individual housing with small gardens, after that time – and under the influence of a liberal market economy – it was the subject of urban transformation representing a lively and bohemian part of the city, with restaurants and commercial stores, full of activity and casual visitors.
The Yeldeğirmeni Neighbourhood Renewal Project (YNRP) is another case study since it had a distinctive approach to urban transformation by prioritising revitalisation and cultural transformation initiated with a participatory approach (Kuyucu & Ünsal, 2010; Türkmen, 2015). In contrast to the top-down structure of many urban renewal projects, the YNRP sought to involve the community with citizen participation to improve the sense of ownership and neighbourhood identity (Türkmen, 2015). YNRP paved the way for a new cultural class by promoting new places for consuming, art and cultural activities.
2.1 Case 1 – Shallvaret Neighbourhood, Tirana (Albania)
2.1.1 Presentation
The Shallvaret neighbourhood’s historical urban development is strongly related to the political context in Tirana. It is located in a very central location of the city in a site which is bounded by the Lana River in the south, Rinia Park in the east, Myslym Shyri Street in the north, and Sami Frasheri Street in the west. The neighbourhood’s most important urban element was an Ottoman period military field, which was later transformed into a playing field after the foundation of the Tirana football club in 1920. This area was called Fusha e Shallvareve (Shallvaret Field). Its name came from shallvare, a Turkish word referring to men’s trousers. The first documented structures put up there were individual detached houses of noble Tirana citizens built during the King Zog period and located in the northern and western parts of the field. During the Italian invasion period four apartment blocks were built in the south-western corner on the northern bank of the Lana River (Zajmi, 2017). These apartment blocks (Pallatet e Bardha [White Palaces]) were built to accommodate Italian colonial officials and administrators (Figure 4.1).
Fusha e Shallvareve (Shallvaret Field) and the first detached houses built there (left). The first apartment blocks – Pallatet e Bardha (White Palaces) – built in Shallvaret Field (right)
Source: Panorama Journal
It was during the socialist period when the largest urbanisation of the area took place, when, due to its location close to the Central Committee building, it was decided that a new housing complex should be built there. This kind of housing was in great demand during this period. The design of this neighbourhood relied heavily on the Soviet model and its construction started in 1950. The complex featured Stalinist neoclassical architectural exterior details like pediments, arches and columns with capitals (Figure 4.2). According to Misja and Misja (2004) the housing complex was designed by the Russian architect M. Aristov and its construction was supervised by Gani Strazimiri, although in the drawings the chief architect is Vorobjov. The socialist period housing complex consists of L- and U-shaped apartment blocks (Figure 4.3), the combination of which forms rectangular open public spaces and greenery (Manahasa et al., 2022). During this period the 20 Dhjetori school and tennis courts were constructed adjacent to Pallatet e Bardha. More multi-family housing blocks were late built in the northern part of the neighbourhood parallel to Myslym Shyri Street.
The Shallvaret residential complex seen from Rinia Park
Source: Panorama Journal
Drawing of the main façade of the Shallvaret housing complex
Source: AQTN
As explained above, common features of post-socialist cities included the reduction of green and public spaces and the densification of the central zone with high-rise buildings due to the processes of commodification of place. Apart from these features, which are present in the Shallvaret neighbourhood, semi-formal additions and informal settlements rose up which were legalised at a later period. These included four high-rise apartment blocks (up to 14 floors high) constructed between the Dora Distria School and the Shallvaret residential blocks. In addition, in the green spaces located between the Pallatet e Bardha apartment blocks were constructed three nine-floor-high tower apartment blocks (Figure 4.4). Over time, the common outdoor spaces became unregulated due to the increased commercial activities in the ground floors and the lack of a legal framework covering the area. In essence, control of the area was usurped by the owners of the buildings and those who carried out the commercial activities (Figure 4.5). This kind of ultraliberal and uncontrolled urban development is assumed to have had a negative effect on the placemaking of the neighbourhood. The transition from a socialist to a capitalist system impacted Shallvaret deeply.
Current images from the front courtyard of the Shallvaret housing complex front courtyard (left) and the high-rise buildings in the inner parts (right)
Source: The authors
Satellite image of the Shallvaret neighbourhood in 1994 (left) and in 2023 (right)
Sources: Geoportal Albania (left) and Google Maps (right)
2.1.2 Placemaking
Since placemaking is related to local community aiming to create spaces that foster people’s sense of belonging and their well-being, in the case of the Shallvaret neighbourhood it is crucial to understand the dynamics of the influences on both of these concepts with a focus on dwellers’ satisfaction with their neighbourhood. The transformation of ground floor spaces into commercial activities and other socio-economic reasons has caused mobility during the post-socialist period. These aspects have resulted in the arrival of newcomers in the neighbourhood and thus decreased the residents’ sense of belonging. On the other side, the common outdoor spaces decreased in area, although the tennis courts have been maintained to an acceptable level. There has been an effort to revive the spirit of the neighbourhood through writing articles and making TV programmes about its historical development in the framework of city memory by two local intellectuals (Orhan Sakiqi and Uvil Zajmi). However, the perception about placemaking during the questionnaire interviews was that most of the outdoor spaces that were used for gathering and meetings between the dwellers have been usurped by cafes and the quality of the neighbourhood has deteriorated.
2.1.3 Results and Added Value
In this part we will provide the results indicating whether the interviewees were happy or not with their neighbourhood before and after the year 2000 and the neighbourhood’s intangible elements that work as reason for happiness. The results show that the happiness with the neighbourhood before the year 2000 is 83.3%, whereas those not happy were 13.3%. Regarding the period after 2000 the percentage of those who were happy was reported as 23.3%, whereas the non-happy ones are reported as 70%. The results show a drastic decrease in the reported happiness with the neighbourhood (Figure 4.6).
Urban happiness in the Shallvaret neighbourhood before and after the 1990s
When the interviewees were asked about the intangible aspects that caused happiness in the neighbourhood before the 1990s period, the most reported aspects were social ones 43.3%, followed by memories (20%), while experiences and others aspects were reported at lesser values (13.3%) (Figure 4.7). The most reported social aspects which generated happiness were the qualitative values of socialist period neighbourhood society like friendship (20%), people (10%), neighbours (6%), pure society (3.3%) and games (3.3%). As for the memories, the most reported aspect is childhood (20%) and experience aspects are reported in the form of safety and good atmosphere (10%).
Intangible reasons for urban happiness in the Shallvaret neighbourhood before the 1990s
The intangible aspects that were reported as reasons for urban happiness in the neighbourhood after the 1990s were reported as social (10%) and experience-based reasons (6.7%) (Figure 4.8). Although a high value in others was provided, only (6.6%) reported for the central location of the neighbourhood, while the remaining were in fact reasons for not being happy with the neighbourhood; this is why they are not considered. However, we decided to consider it because they also reflect the deteriorated situation of the Shallvaret neighbourhood from the socialist to the post-socialist period. Some of the most reported reasons for not being happy with the neighbourhood after the 1990s are: no green/public spaces (20%), disrespect (3.3%), dirtiness (3.3%) and absolutely disturbed in the neighbourhood (3.3%).
Intangible reasons for urban happiness in the Shallvaret neighbourhood after the 1990s
2.2 Case 2 – Debar Maalo, Skopje (Republic of North Macedonia)
2.2.1 Presentation
The neighbourhood of Debar Maalo is part of the municipality of Centar and is in very close proximity to the city centre of present-day Skopje in the Republic of North Macedonia. Debar Maalo is positioned between Partizanski Odredi Boulevard to the south, Ilindenska Boulevard to the north, St. Kliment Ohridski Boulevard to the east and Franklin Ruzvelt Street to the west. The northern part of Debar Maalo borders the large City Park, which adds to the quality of the life in the neighbourhood.
Before World War I, Debar Maalo was an almost unpopulated area consisting of fields and gardens. In the period between the two wars, the population in this area increased, predominantly due to the arrival of people from western Macedonia who had been forcibly displaced from their homes. Because a large number of the settlers came from the city of Debar, this neighbourhood was named “Debar Maalo” (“Little Debar”). The first houses in the neighbourhood were built after 1918 by Macedonians who had come from Golo Brdo, an area located in present-day Albania. In the 1930s, the economic situation for the citizens of Skopje was difficult. Hence, residents living in the old part of Skopje were selling their houses and started to settle in Debar Maalo due to the cheaper plots in this part of the city. The houses of the wealthier population were distinctive as some included neoclassical elements, while others followed modern styles.
After the devastating earthquake in Skopje in 1963, the city started to develop rapidly and to expand with neighbourhoods to the east and west. This caused the neighbourhood of Debar Maalo to become a very central area in Skopje, which today represents a lively and bohemian part of the city, with restaurants and commercial stores, full of activity and casual visitors.
Before the 2000s, Debar Maalo was a homogenous housing district, consisting of predominantly individual houses with small gardens, created on irregularly shaped parcels. Due to the irregular and organic shape of the parcels it is difficult to extract a typical urban block model.
After the 2000s, the city underwent a process of densification which is still ongoing. Many of the people who migrated from other cities or rural areas in North Macedonia to the capital were drawn to Debar Maalo’s attractive quality and its proximity to the city centre and to the city park. This led to a large demand for properties in the neighbourhood that has persisted until the present day. The urban transformations that took place in Debar Maalo in the last 20 years followed the political and socio-economic changes in North Macedonia and in the capital of Skopje (Figure 4.9).
A detailed urban plan for Debar Maalo throughout the decades: 1990s (left), 2000s (centre), 2020s (right)
Source: Skopje raste (2013)
The densification of the built area clearly impacted the green areas in the neighbourhood. For example, in 1990s, the green spaces were 20% of the total area of the block, while in the 2010s, the green area is approximately 14%. A detailed urban plan for 2020 projected the green areas to amount to only 4.5% of the total urban block area, i.e. an almost a 75% decrease of greenery over 30 years (Figure 4.10).
The decrease in green areas in Debar Maalo and the adjacent neighbourhood of Bunjakovec to the south: 1990 (left), 2012 (centre), 2020 (right)
Source: Skopje raste (2013)
Before the 2000s and the densification process, this neighbourhood was characterised by calm urban living with good neighbour relations, where the social life between the residents was occurring on the street and in the courtyards. Due to the low population density, local residents in most cases knew each other. The slow urban transformation and low-paced increase of population before the 2000s strengthened the sense of belonging to this area.
2.2.2 Placemaking
The dramatic urban and social transformations that occurred in the neighbourhood of Debar Maalo have influenced the sense of the place and the satisfaction with the neighbourhood they live in. The demographic composition has changed in the last 30 years due to several factors. Some of the locals who have lived there for decades sold properties for a profit and moved to other parts of the city, so there are many newcomers. Therefore, the residents and the “newcomers” in the last 10 or 20 years may have a different sense of the place.
The densification of the urban plots caused a significant decrease in the green areas on the plot and in the urban block. The construction of taller buildings (with up to five or more stories) while maintaining the same street profile has caused the isolation of surrounding buildings, which now receive less sunlight, experience reduced air movement, suffer higher temperatures in summer and have more polluted air in winter. The number of cars has increased, thus narrowing the pedestrian lanes. Further, the trend in the last two decades for opening cafes and restaurants and providing nightlife activities has caused an increase in noise from people, cars and loud music, thus disturbing the locals.
The municipality of Centar undertook urban transformation activities in the last decade to strengthen the sense of place by investing in small urban squares, installing benches and fountains, creating a small park, establishing bike lanes, taking measures to increase the safety of pedestrians, remodelling Orce Nikolov Street (the main street that passes through Debar Maalo), solving parking issues etc. Also, the municipality has added sculptures in the gathering places. Even more, it has commissioned a sculpture of the late, world-renowned Macedonian writer Goran Stefanovski, who wrote a theatre piece, The Demon of Debar Maalo, a drama set in the Debar Maalo neighbourhood. This sculpture honours the work of the author and provides a cultural link for strengthening the sense of the place.
2.2.3 Results and Added-Value
A survey was conducted among the residents in the neighbourhood of Debar Maalo, with 30 residents being asked to state their happiness with the urban transformation before and after the year 2000. From the 30 interviewed residents, 44% are male and 56% are female, all of them living in the neighbourhood for more than 25 years and are owners of property in Debar Maalo.
The results from the survey show that the happiness with the neighbourhood before the year 2000 is 93.3%, whereas those not happy were 6.7%. In the period after 2000 the percentage of those that were happy was reported as 40%, whereas the non-happy ones were reported as 60%. The results show a decrease in the happiness level of the locals with the neighbourhood (Figure 4.11).
Comparison of happiness before and after the 2000s in Debar Maalo
Further, the interviewees were asked to state their opinion on intangible aspects as reason for feeling happiness while residing in the neighbourhood of Debar Maalo in the period of from the 1990s to the 2000s. The social aspects are the most common reason for happiness for 50% of the respondents. For 33.3% of the interviewees, the experience was a reason for happiness, while for 13.3% their memories were a reason for happiness before 2000 (Figure 4.12). Among the social aspects which were reasons for happiness, the respondents stated neighbours (44%), friendship (36%) and games (2%). Regarding the memories, the respondents noted memories of a happy and calm life (85%) and the experience aspects are noted as safety and equality (93%).
Intangible aspects for happiness of the residents in Debar Maalo before 2000
Further, the survey investigated the intangible aspects which are reasons for urban happiness in Debar Maalo after 2000 (Figure 4.13). From the 30 interviewees, 13 of them, or 43%, are happy with the neighbourhood, considering they have been living there more than 25 years and are knowledgeable of the transformations that have occurred. Intangible aspects which were reported as reasons for urban happiness with the neighbourhood after 2000 were reported as social (15%) and experience-based reasons (15%). The reasons for not being happy with the neighbourhood after 2000 were: changes in the demographic structure and cultural changes (43%), decrease of social interactions (22%), noise (20%) etc.
Intangible aspects for happiness of the residents in Debar Maalo after 2000
2.3 Case 3 – Kadiköy Yeldeğirmeni District, Istanbul (Turkey)
2.3.1 Presentation
Yeldeğirmeni, a residential district within the boundaries of Kadıköy, has a rich urban history that dates to ancient times. Yeldeğirmeni is named after the four windmills built during the Sultan Abdulhamid I period in the late 18th century. The boundaries of this district are determined by Haydarpaşa Train Station to the north, Söğütlüçeşme Avenue to the south, Ayrılık Çeşmesi Ottoman Cemetery and the railway to the east, and the pier to the west. In the late 19th century, the first apartments were built in the Yeldeğirmeni district. Yeldeğirmeni was a multicultural urban space, hosting diverse ethnicities and building typologies from different architectural styles (Durgun, 2021; Şendur, 2010). The post-1950s period marked a critical demographic shift, due to migration of minorities into the area and an influx of local migrants from rural areas (Duygun & Koçyiğit, 2021). From the 1950s onwards, rapid urban transformation caused an increase in building density, disruption to the traditional structure, socio-economic change in the neighbourhood and high crime rates (Şendur, 2010; Arısoy, 2019). Figure 4.14 demonstrates how the urban fabric changed over the years under the effect of urban transformation. Yeldeğirmeni emerged as a focal point for multiple mega-projects (Marmaray, Anadoluray, Haydarpaşa Port Project, Kadıköy Square and Moda Reclamation Area, and Fikirtepe Urban Transformation projects) starting in the 2000s, driven by neoliberal politics, which also carried the potential for gentrification (Duygun & Koçyiğit, 2021).
Satellite image of Yeldeğirmeni district: 1966 (a), 1982 (b), 2006 (c), 2018 (d)
Source: Sehir Haritası (2023)
In the 2010s, the Yeldeğirmeni Neighbourhood Renewal Project (YNRP) was conducted in collaboration with the Foundation for the Protection and Promotion of the Environment and Cultural Heritage (ÇEKÜL) and Kadıköy municipality between 2011 and 2013 (ÇEKÜL, 2011). The objectives are to protect the neighbourhood culture, create a sustainable urban space, provide active participation, minimise socio-economic problems within rent gaps and prevent gentrification in Yeldeğirmeni (ÇEKÜL, 2011; Yeldeğirmeni, 2014). YNRP aimed to revitalise the area through several key strategies. These strategies encompassed:
The revitalisation of the streets with cultural, dining, and shopping activities
Enhancement of public services
Increase in public open spaces and elevation of their quality and use
Improvement of the physical quality of the urban environment
Renovation of the historical buildings (Türkmen, 2015)
YNRP encouraged civil initiatives and supported the local economy, leading to a social revival in the neighbourhood (Yeldeğirmeni, 2014). Through cultural initiatives like the Mural festival and the rise of art galleries and concept cafes, Yeldeğirmeni underwent a cultural transformation process and became favourable for a cultural middle class (Türkmen, 2015).
2.3.2 Placemaking
Kadıköy Yeldeğirmeni District became a popular residential location and was known for its different social groups, tolerant culture, cultural activities, social networks and authentic and local atmosphere after YNRP (Türkmen, 2015). This location accommodates varied social groups, including students, foreign students, artists and employed young people from the middle class. Additionally, alternative cultural activities mark the emergence of a new cultural class (Türkmen, 2015). They created a new residential profile, and this new profile created a new neighbourhood culture through economic valorisation (Türkmen, 2015). The new cultural groups, changing neighbourhood culture and social diversity improve place inclusiveness and vibrancy and correspondingly make this place favourable for placemaking practices.
In Yeldeğirmeni, neighbourhood satisfaction is satisfactory due to the improvements in the public open spaces, parks, pedestrian-friendly streets and cultural activities (Erturan, 2016). The place attachment shows variation between the newcomers and locals. The newcomers are satisfied with the transformation of this place triggered by new consuming and cultural activities (Durgun, 2021). Old residents are also willing to live in the area; however, they reported that this transformation has negatively affected the old identity of the neighbourhood, the social relationships that the residents used to have and the property values and, accordingly, it changed the resident profile (Erturan, 2016). Additionally, the murals (wall paintings) influence placemaking through public art. Public art plays an essential role in the local identity, the sense of place and the imageability of the neighbourhood (McCarthy, 2006). In Yeldeğirmeni, the murals influence the perceptual and sensory quality of its urban form, together with the sense of belonging (Demir Türközü & Çalışkan, 2021). Figure 4.15 depicts the current situation of the Kadikoy Yeldeğirmeni District.
Current images from the Kadikoy Yeldeğirmeni District
Source: Governorship of Istanbul (2019)
2.3.3 Results and Added-Value
In this section, this study presents the survey results about the urban happiness of the residents in their neighbourhood before and after the pivotal year 2000 from intangible aspects. As the results demonstrate, the happiness with the neighbourhood before 2000 was 36.67%, whereas those not happy were 6.67%. It is noteworthy that 56.67% of participants, who were satisfied, did not live in the neighbourhood during this period. Post-2000, there has been a notable change in residents’ attitudes. The proportion of happy residents marginally increased to 53.33% but, significantly, those unhappy almost mirrored this figure at 46.67%. The results indicate that neighbourhood satisfaction is significantly higher among newcomers. Another significant finding is that there has been a decline in overall neighbourhood satisfaction and a rise in dissatisfaction over the years, as shown in Figure 4.16.
Comparison of happiness before and after the 2000s in the Yeldeğirmeni district
The intangible aspects affecting urban happiness were social factors (46.15%), memories (23.08%) and experience (15.38%), respectively, for old residents, who resided there before the 2000s. Among the social aspects that generated happiness, qualitative values such as activities (16.67%) and social interactions (25%) were prominent (Figure 4.17). Regarding memories, childhood experiences were most mentioned (15.38%), while the neighbourhood’s pleasant atmosphere was the most highlighted (16.67%) regarding the experience aspect. The intangible aspects affecting urban happiness were social factors (23.33%), memories (16.67%) and experiences (13.33%), respectively, for newcomers, who resided in the neighbourhood in the post-2000s period (Figure 4.18).
Intangible reasons for the urban happiness of residents in the Yeldeğirmeni district before the 2000s
Intangible reasons for the urban happiness of residents in the Yeldeğirmeni district after the 2000s
A strikingly high proportion of residents – nearly half of the residents (46.67%) – expressed unhappiness with their neighbourhoods. The rate of dissatisfaction increased significantly from 6.67% to 46.67% following the implementation of neoliberal policies in the city. Among the most cited reasons for this dissatisfaction were changes in social patterns (16.67%), increases in property prices and living expenses (10%) and commercial density (6.67%). Other factors included changes in the physical effects of urbanisation (3.33%) and physical incivilities (3.33%), representing tangible aspects.
3 Discussion of the Outcomes and Results of the Three Cases
In this part, we will discuss the results and outcomes for the three selected neighbourhoods in Tirana, Skopje and Istanbul. Regarding happiness before the 1990s/2000s, we see higher values in all cases with Skopje’s Debar Maalo neighbourhood having the highest value (93.3%), followed by Tirana’s Shallvaret neighbourhood with 83.3% and Istanbul’s Kadıköy Yeldeğirmeni District with 36.7%. It is noteworthy to mention that in Skopje all interviewees were dwellers of the previous period, in Tirana 96.7% were, whereas in Istanbul only 43.3% were inhabitants from that period. This information in some extent demonstrates the high level of mobility in the case of Istanbul.
On the other hand, regarding the happiness with the neighbourhood after the 1990s/2000s, the results show a drastic change in the case of Tirana (from 83.3% to 23.3%) and Skopje as well (from 93.3% to 40%), whereas in the case of Istanbul there is a slight increase (from 36.7% to 53.3%), bearing in mind that those that were not happy were also 46.7%.
In the case of Tirana and Skopje, the main reason for the decrease of urban happiness can be related to the reduction of public and green spaces in the neighbourhoods and also the fact that in both of these formerly socialist places public spaces had been taken over and filled with new buildings. Undoubtedly this kind of urban transformation caused the deterioration of the quality of common spaces and urban life in the neighbourhoods. On the other hand, for Istanbul the mobility and immigration of dwellers appears to be an inherent issue, which also influences the sense of community and, consequently, the placemaking. The issue of mobility is also partly relevant to the case of Tirana’s Shallvaret neighbourhood where there has also been a lot of newcomers.
On the example of Skopje’s Debar Maalo, there has been a decrease in the level of happiness among the population that has resided in this neighbourhood for more than 25 years. They have the experience and knowledge to be able to compare life before and after 2000, when the urban transformations began to gain momentum. The locals have stated that they are less happy in their neighbourhood due to the increased number of buildings and their dense construction, which means there are no courtyards, which were typical elements in this neighbourhood in the past and which was a social place for living with the family as well with the other locals. The noise from the influx of new residents, commerce, cafes and kafanas (restaurants) is also an issue. (The municipality declares that is endeavouring to solve this issue but the problem remains.) Regarding the social activities and interaction, there are pedestrian areas, small squares with benches etc., which stimulate social cohesion and meetings among the residents. These, along with the addition of sculptures and monuments of a Macedonian artist whose work is related to the neighbourhood of Debar Maalo, are strengthening the sense of the place.
In the case of Yeldeğirmeni, the opportunities to engage in social activities is the main reason for urban happiness, in particular, among in newcomers forming new cultural groups. The revitalisation efforts in the Yeldeğirmeni district have attracted mainly high socio-economic profile individuals. The reduction in urban happiness stems from the increase in property values and expenses and decay in the local neighbourhood culture. The influx of a new cultural class and newcomers alters the social pattern of the neighbourhood, contributing to its decline. The revitalisation projects have the risk of gentrification through the increase in property values, class clustering and displacement of the locals (Durgun, 2021; Erturan, 2016). The risk of gentrification also contributes to the decline in urban happiness. Many long-term residents feel dissatisfied due to the decay of the neighbourhood’s unique cultural practices and social relationships, which play a crucial role in shaping the area’s identity and sense of community. Supporting that, Durgun (2021) draws attention to the socio-cultural gap between locals and newcomers that has triggered the decline in urban happiness. Additionally, the changes in urban physical and social patterns have altered consumer habits and led to an increase in commercial functions. The increase in property prices and high costs at cafes and restaurants are causing dissatisfaction and rendering the area unaffordable for both newcomers and long-time residents, leading to displacement. Although the Yeldeğirmeni Neighbourhood Renewal Project (YNRP) was successful, these factors are effective in the decline in urban happiness. Augmenting social capacity in locals can be effective for a sense of belonging (Erturan, 2016). Although the physical quality of the built environment and public spaces are satisfactory, the main reason for the dissatisfaction derives from social factors, local neighbourhood culture and economic reasons.
When we compare the intangible aspects which caused urban happiness for all case studies before the 1990s/2000s, the results show that in all three cities the social aspects are the most important. As such, social intangible aspects are reported as 50% in Skopje, 43% in Tirana and 20% in Istanbul. On the other hand, memories are reported to also be an important intangible aspect which creates urban happiness. In Tirana, mnemonic aspects are reported to be 20%, in Skopje, 13.3%, whereas in the Istanbul neighbourhood they constitute about 10%. Experience-related aspects also are reported at considerable values. They are reported higher in Skopje, 33.3%, followed by Tirana, 13.3%, and Istanbul, 6.7%.
Regarding the intangible aspects that caused urban happiness in all the case studies related to the period after the 1990s/2000s, the results show that in all cities the social aspects were the most important. The highest values are reported for Istanbul’s Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhood with 23.3%, followed by Skopje’s Debar Maalo neighbourhood with 16.7% and Tirana’s Shallvaret neighbourhood with 10%. Experience-related aspects are reported highest in Skopje with 16.7%, followed by Istanbul with 13.3% and Tirana with 6.7%. The mnemonic aspects are reported as 16.7% in Istanbul, followed by 10% in Skopje.
When we compare the three main intangible clusters that serve as reasons for urban happiness from before the 1990s/2000s to after the 1990s/2000s, it is seen that in all the selected neighbourhoods their social meanings and aspects remain the most important, although they are reported at lower values after the 1990s/2000s period – except for Istanbul, where it increases slightly. This is because the neighbourhoods’ most peculiar features are represented by social ties and the sense of community. While memory- and experience-related intangible aspects both decrease after the 1990s/2000s period for Tirana and Skopje, in the case of Istanbul they slightly increase. Both memory- and experience-related intangible aspects are deeply personal, though still very important for placemaking. They reflect a decreased level of attachment and sense of belonging to the neighbourhood. Table 4.1 displays the comparison of the results for these three case studies.
A comparative table of urban happiness responses and intangible aspects reported clustered and in direct quote
Comparative view of urban happiness before and after the 1990s/2000s in selected neighbourhoods of the three cities
Comparative view of the main intangible aspects of urban happiness before the 1990s/2000s in selected neighbourhoods of the three cities
4 Lessons Learned
The lessons learned for Tirana can summarised as follows:
The urban transformations which occurred in the Shallvaret neighbourhood were not based on the principles of inclusiveness and participatory actions in relation to the local dwellers. On the contrary, they consist of high-rise dwellings which have usurped the common public and green spaces.
Urban happiness decreased in the neighbourhood after the 1990s due to the deterioration of common public areas and the transformation of ground floor spaces to support commercial activities (retail and coffee shops), which has resulted in an increase in public noise, disturbing the area’s residents. Another phenomenon which impacts urban quietness is the increasing mobility in the area related to the arrival of newcomers in the housing blocks.
Intellectuals can play an important role in keeping the sense of neighbourhood high, especially through holding commemoration activities and by publishing their memories in books or on websites, providing access to a larger audience.
Comparative view of the main intangible aspects of urban happiness after the 1990s/2000s in selected neighbourhoods of the three cities
The lessons learned for the neighbourhood of Debar Maalo in the municipality of Centar near the city centre of Skopje can summarised as follows:
The findings on the survey among locals residing in Debar Maalo for more than 25 years shows that the municipality of Centar and the urban planning neglect the needs for this group of residents, considering their level of happiness has decreased after the year 2000.
The urban transformation and densification of Debar Maalo is near to its end, considering that its spatial resources are mainly depleted, the buildings are constructed, the courtyards have mainly vanished, the green areas have diminished substantially and the social life that was characteristic of this neighbourhood, especially among the locals, has transformed, leading to alienation among the neighbours.
However, there is active social life among the younger population, which comes from other parts of the city to enjoy the nightlife activities this neighbourhood has to offer. Therefore, this research and survey needs to be expanded further to include other age groups and to investigate their level of happiness with the neighbourhood.
The lessons learned from the Yeldeğirmeni case can be summarised as follows:
The increase in property prices and the high costs at cafes and restaurants causes dissatisfaction and leads to displacement. There is a potential risk of gentrification in this area due to the rent gap and high pricing, despite YNRP initiatives aiming to prevent it. These concerns should be taken into consideration for the affordability of the place.
To sustain the mixed neighbourhood culture, it is also crucial to preserve local neighbourhood practices and strengthen memories about the area, while a new neighbourhood culture is promoted.
To increase urban happiness from a social aspect, it is recommended to draw on the socio-cultural gap between newcomers and locals and foster engagement between them. Continuing participatory practices can be useful to maintain the distinctive character of the Yeldeğirmeni district.
The artistic and cultural initiatives (such as cultural activities and murals) affect the social interactions in particular in newcomers and increase urban happiness.
5 Conclusions
This study revealed the role of urban happiness in the placemaking process of three city neighbourhoods in south-eastern Europe – in Tirana, Skopje and Istanbul. The selected neighbourhoods of Shallvaret in Tirana and Debar Maalo in Skopje are post-socialist neighbourhoods, whereas the Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhood is a historical one in Istanbul. The breaking point for the urban transformations in the case of the Shallvaret neighbourhood in Tirana was the late 1990s, whereas for the Debar Maalo and Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhoods it was the 2000s.
In both the Tirana and Skopje neighbourhoods there were observed typical phenomenon of post-socialist cities – the reduction of public and green outdoor spaces, infill with new high-rise buildings and usurpation of pavements by coffee shops and other retailing units which emerged because of commodification of space in the new liberal economic market reality. Yeldeğirmeni, on the contrary, is not a post-socialist neighbourhood and has been subject to a different range of revitalisation projects, all of which aim to protect the neighbourhood culture, create a sustainable urban space, encourage the active participation of locals, avoid socio-economic problems and prevent gentrification.
It is important to mention that its urban transformation is different and much more positive compared to the other two neighbourhoods. Thus, the study found a direct relation between the results of urban happiness in placemaking and the role of urban transformation processes. On the one hand, there was a drastic reduction in the urban happiness found in the Tirana and Skopje neighbourhoods after the transformations; on the other hand, the results in the Istanbul neighbourhood were different – urban happiness in this neighbourhood was reported to be higher. In all cases for both before and after the transformation period, the most important intangible aspects that produced urban happiness were reported to be the social ones. These results verify the importance of social ties as definers of a neighbourhood and, consequently, their quintessential role in placemaking.
The study found that the urban transformations in the case of the Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhood initiating the Mural festival, the opening of art galleries and concept cafes, has led to a cultural transformation process which maintains the most important placemaking activities in this case. Although both Shallvaret and Debar Maalo have lost the vibrancy of the socialist period, due to their certain peculiarities they still to some extent possess some placemaking dimensions. In the case of Debar Maalo the sense of belonging due to the dwellers’ long period of residence and the sculptural art in the open spaces outdoors are positive aspects that create placemaking. In the case of Shallvaret in Tirana, the most important potential of placemaking relies on the fact that some of the older residents who live in the Italian period apartment blocks were elites in the socialist regime. Also, another important activity is the effort of local intellectuals to keep alive the old memories of the neighbourhood through publishing their memories in books and websites. One of the main limitations of this research is the subtle differences to be found between the urban contexts of Skopje and Tirana in relation to Istanbul. Further studies should be focused on tangible aspects of urban happiness in placemaking processes.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Klaudia Demiraj for her assistance during the interviewing process for the case of Shallvaret neighbourhood in Tirana.
References
Arısoy, A. C. (2019). Sosyal sermaye odaklı kentsel canlandırma yaklaşımı: Yeldeğirmeni örneği [Social capital-led urban revitalization approach: The Yeldeğirmeni case]. MA thesis, Istanbul Technical University. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=FgmkGchPKo23qQqBeqzVZklFhaNefvlAuZw3FzMLhla4GkNdCg0j34skXx8_2TWZ.
ÇEKÜL. (2011). Kadiköy’ün tarihi yeldeğirmeni mahallesi canlanıyor [Kadiköy’s historic Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhood is revitalising]. Foundation for the Protection and Promotion of the Environment and Cultural Heritage. https://www.ÇEKÜLvakfi.org.tr/haber/kadikoyun-tarihi-yeldegirmeni-mahallesi-canlaniyor.
Dash, S. P., & Thilagam, N. L. (2023). Developing a conceptual framework of creative placemaking for social cohesion. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 18(1), 5–26.
Davidson, M., & Lees, L. (2005). New-build “gentrification” and London’s riverside renaissance. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 37(7), 1165–1190. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3739.
Demir Türközü, C., & Çalışkan, O. (2021). Mural as public art in urban fabric: An attempt to link configurational approach to perceptual morphology. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 2, 147–170. https://doi.org/10.47818/DRArch.2021.v2si040.
Durgun, S. (2021). Urban localities under glocal dynamics: The Case of Yeldeğirmeni. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(3), 709–724. https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.1001646.
Duygun, E., & Koçyiğit, R. (2021). Tarihi kent merkezlerinde tüketim mekanlarının dönüşümü: Yeldeğirmeni Mahallesi örneği [Transformation of consumption spaces in historic city centres: The case of the Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhood]. Tasarım Kuram, 17(33), 18–41. https://doi.org/10.14744/tasarimkuram.2021.41103.
Ellery, P. J., Ellery, J., & Borkowsky, M. (2021). Toward a theoretical understanding of placemaking. International Journal of Community Well-Being, 4(1), 55–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42413-020-00078-3.
Erturan, A. (2016). Streets as public spaces: The case of Yeldeğirmeni neighbourhood and [an] event organized by [the] “Street Belongs to Us” organization. Przestrzeń, Ekonomia, Społeczeństwo, 10(2), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.23830/10II2016/117126.
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for people. Island Press.
Governorship of Istanbul. (2019, July 9). İstanbul’un Semtleri: Duvar Resimleriyle Yeldeğirmeni [Neighbourhoods of Istanbul: Yeldeğirmeni with wall paintings]. http://istanbul.gov.tr/istanbulun-semtleri-duvar-resimleriyle-yeldegirmeni.
Gwiaździński, E., Kaczorowska-Spychalska, D., & Pinto, L. M. (2020). Is it a smart city a creative place? Creativity Studies, 13(2), 460–476. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2020.12190.
Hirt, S. (2013). Whatever happened to the (post)socialist city? Cities, 32, S29–S38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.04.010.
Kuyucu, T., & Ünsal, O. (2010). Urban transformation as state led property transfer: An analysis of two cases of urban renewal in Istanbul. Urban Studies, 47(7), 1479–1499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009353629.
Manahasa, E., & Manahasa, O. (2022). Nostalgia for the lost built environment of a socialist city: An empirical study in post-socialist Tirana. Habitat International, 119, 102493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2021.102493.
Manahasa, E., Özsoy, A., & Manahasa, O. (2022). A hierarchical definitional framework for a heterogeneous context: Housing typologies in Tirana, Albania. Open House International, 47(2), 254–281. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-07-2021-0157.
McCarthy, J. (2006). Regeneration of cultural quarters: Public art for place image or place identity? Journal of Urban Design, 11(2), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800600644118.
Misja, V., & Misja, A. (2004). Veshtrim mbi situaten e banesave ne Shqiperi:analize krahasuese. Tirane: Akademia e Shkencave e Shqiperise, Instituti i Ekonomise.
Murzyn-Kupisz, M., & Gwosdz, K. (2011). The changing identity of the Central European city: The case of Katowice. Journal of Historical Geography, 37(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhg.2010.04.001.
Schneekloth, L. H., & Shibley, R. G. (1995). Placemaking: The art and practice of building communities. Wiley.
Şehir Haritası. (2023). https://sehirharitasi.ibb.gov.tr/.
Şendur, S. (2010). Kadıköy semt mimarisinin tipomorfoloji yöntemiyle incelenmesi [Researching the architectural structure of the Kadikoy-Yeldeğirmeni District by typomorphology method]. MA thesis, Yıldız Technical University. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/TezGoster?key=zqI_ZOq-b18GC2rT9c2JGhtVhVeg3HnBIzO8cuGDkwqgu77K-iMZkJ36u6s0TrZG.
Sepe, M. (2017). Placemaking, livability and public spaces: Achieving sustainability through happy places. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 2(4), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.5204/jps.v2i4.141.
Skopje raste. (2013). https://skopjeraste.mk.
Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I. D., & Armor, D. A. (1998). Harnessing the imagination: Mental simulation, self-regulation, and coping. American Psychologist, 53(4), 429–439. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.429.
Türkmen, Z. (2015). The cultural transformation of Yeldeğirmeni neighborhood. MA thesis, Istanbul Bilgi University. https://core.ac.uk/reader/51100240.
Uysal, Ü. E. (2006). Soylulastirma Kuramlarinin Istanbul’da Uygulanabilirligi: Cihangir Örnegi [The applicability of gentrification theories in Istanbul: The case of Cihangir]. Planlama Dergisi, 2006(2), 77–92. https://www.spo.org.tr/resimler/ekler/705e1164a8394aa_ek.pdf.
Zajmi, U. (2017, October 6). Historia e pallateve në qendër të Tiranës, pse u quajtën “Shallvare”. Aty ku Enveri dhe Zogu ndiqnin garat me kuaj. Panorama Online. http://www.panorama.com.al/historia-e-pallateve-ne-qender-te-tiranes-pse-u-quajten-shallvare-aty-ku-enveri-dhe-zogu-ndiqnin-garat-me-kuaj/.
Zidanšek, A. (2007). Sustainable development and happiness in nations. Energy, 32(6), 891–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.09.016.