HOUSING CONDITIONS AND PROBLEMS OF SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL WORKERS IN ESKIŞEHIR SARICAKAYA SETTLEMENT, AND SUGGESTIONS

Authors

  • Emine Dilay Güney Department of Architecture The Faculty of Fine Arts, Design and Architecture Istanbul Ayvansaray University Istanbul http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1556-8179
  • Fatma Kolsal Department of Architecture The Faculty of Architecture and Design Eskişehir Technical University Eskişehir http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5569-2046

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.150

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this research is to determine the seasonal agricultural workers' housing problems in Laçin Village in Eskişehir and to reveal the solvability of these problems through an architectural design studio.

Design/Methodology/Approach

The research includes two methodological sections. The first section consists of a review of the relevant literature to investigate the historical, legal, administrative and architectural issues on the housing problems of the seasonal agricultural workers. The second phase is based on a case study and a design studio process depending on that case study. The research was conducted in Laçin, to identify the characteristics of the housing problem in place. The data was obtained by observing, measuring, drawing, and photographing the existing housing. A survey was prepared and applied to the workers to gather data about the duration and the character of their stay.

Findings

It was determined that the seasonal agricultural workers in Laçin had some interrelated social, economic, and spatial problems. The duration of the stay excessing 6 months is found to be the main determinant of the life. In the light of these data, the type of housing of seasonal agricultural workers in Laçin was defined as a “new” typology. It is discovered to be neither temporary, nor permanent housing. It is found to be “semi-temporary housing”. In the research-based design process, the prominent design concepts for the “semi-temporary housing” type were identified from the local parameters and the existing user preferences. They are set as convenience, flexibility, sustainability, and being low-cost.

Research Limitations/Implications

The scope of the study is the sheltering problem of seasonal agricultural workers in Turkey. Therefore, it needs specifically to be determined and identified within local parameters. Social/Practical Implications

The study makes an existing problem visible through fieldwork and reveals that a social change can be provided by developing a physical design proposal.

Originality/Value

The fieldwork and design studios are important sources of original knowledge production. The information generated in the field belongs to the place, and this data is articulated and adopted for the nine different design solutions.

Author Biographies

Emine Dilay Güney, Department of Architecture The Faculty of Fine Arts, Design and Architecture Istanbul Ayvansaray University Istanbul

Dilay Güney, following her graduation from Mimar Sinan University in 1988, started her graduate at Istanbul Technical University in 1998. Had been teaching at International American University between 1995-1998 as lecturer. Obtained PhD Degree in architectural design in 2003. Obtained the title of “Assistant Professor” at 2005 and then “Assoc. Prof.” at 2014. She had been teaching at TC Beykent University Department of Architecture between 2003-2016 as full-time teacher and at Anadolu University Department of Architecture between 2015-2018 as part-time teacher. Has been teaching at TC İstanbul Ayvansaray University since. 2018. Research interests are architectural education, contemporary design issues, theory of architecture and Istanbul research.

Fatma Kolsal, Department of Architecture The Faculty of Architecture and Design Eskişehir Technical University Eskişehir

Fatma Kolsal received her Bachelor of Architecture degree in Department of Architecture from Middle East Technical University in 2006. She attended Erasmus exchange program for two semesters in Polytechnic University of Bari, Italy, through 2004-2005. In between 2006-2014 she worked as an architect for various projects. She completed her Master of Science degree in building science at Anadolu University. She has completed her PhD studies in 2020. Her academic field of interest is design process, creativity, design thinking, architectural design studios, industrial heritage and vernacular architecture.

References

Albek, S. (1991). Dorylaion’dan Eskişehir’e (No. 89). T.C. Anadolu Üniversitesi.

Altınsapan, E., & Parla, C. (2004). Eskişehir Selçuklu ve Osmanlı yapıları I: Günyz̈ü-Mihalıççık-Seyitgazi-Mihalgazi-Sarıcakaya-Sivrihisar. TC Anadolu Üniversitesi.

Anonymus. (2015). Tarihi, Doğası, Kültürü Ve Gelenekleriyle Sarıcakaya. Sarıcaya Kaymakamlığı.

Benevolo, L. (1993). The European City (P. 135). Oxford: Blackwell.

Çelik, A. (2005). Avrupa Sosyal Şartı ve Türkiye’nin Çekinceleri. Türk-İş Dergisi, 366, 91-98.

Çinar S. & Lordoğlu, K. (2011, October 25-26). Mevsimlik Tarım İşçileri: Marabadan Ücretli Tarım İşçiliğine [Paper Presentation]. Sosyal Haklar Sempozyumu. Bildiri Kitabı, P. 419-448, Istanbul. https://www.petrol-is.org.tr/sites/default/files/shus-iii-bildiriler-20.10.11_asil.pdf

Çinar, S. (2014). Öteki Proletarya: De-Proletarizasyon ve Mevsimlik Tarım İşçileri. Notabene Yayınları.

Colquhoun, A. (1990). Beaubourg Platosu. Mimari Elestiri Yazıları. (A. Cengizkan, Trans.). Sevki Vanlı Mimarlık Vakfı. İstanbul. (Original Work published 1981)

Culp, K., & Umbarger, M. (2004). Seasonal and Migrant Agricultural Workers: A Neglected Work Force. Aaohn Journal, 52(9), 383-390.

Egemen E. A. (2015). Mevsimlik Tarım İşçileri Ve Barınma Sorunları [unpublished master’s dissertation]. Istanbul Technical University.

Forty, A. (2000). Words and Buildings. Thames & Hudson. London.

Gertel, J., & Sippel, S. R. (Eds.). (2014). Seasonal Workers In Mediterranean Agriculture: The Social Costs Of Eating Fresh. Routledge.

Görücü, İ. & Akbiyik, N. (2010). Türkiye’de Mevsimlik Tarım İşçiliği: Sorunları Ve Çözüm Önerileri Hikmet Yurdu. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 5, 189 – 219.

Hertzberger, H. (1991). Lessons for Students. 010 Publishers. Rotterdam.

İslamoğlu, Ö. & Gülay, U. (2018). Mimari Tasarimda Esneklik Yaklaşimlarina Kuramsal Bir Bakiş. The Turkish Online Journal of Design Art and Communication, 8(4), 673-683.

Karabiyik, E. (2012). Mevsimlik Tarım Göçünden Etkilenen 6-12 Yaş Grubu Çocuklar İçin Temel Araştırma. Kalkınma Atölyesi. Ankara.

Karabiyik, E. (2013). Çukurova’da Mevsimlik Tarım İşlerinde Çalışan Çocuklar İçin Model Eylem Planı. Kalkınma Atölyesi. Ankara.

Koebel, C. T. & Daniels, M. P. (1997). Housing Conditions of Migrant and Seasonal Farmworkers. Virginia Center for Housing Research.

Koruk, İ. (2010). İhmal Edilen Bir Grup: Göçebe Mevsimlik Tarım İşçileri. Türk Tabipler Birliği Meslek Sağlık Ve Güvenliği Dergisi, Ekim Kasım Aralık Sayısı.

Kronenburg, R. (2011). Lecture on Flexible Architecture at the Building Centre in London

Maccreanor, G. (1998). Adaptability. A+T Magazine, December, 40-45.

Maclellan, N. (2008). Seasonal Workers for Australia—Lessons from New Zealand. Farm Policy Journal, 5(3), 43-53.

MIGA. (2012). Tarımda Mevsimlik İşçi Göçü Türkiye Durum Özeti. http://www.fes-tuerkei.org/media/pdf/D%C3%BCnyadan/d%C3%BCnyadan_12%20 (1).pdf

Mitchell, D. (1996). The Lie of the Land: Migrant Workers and the California Landscape. Minnesota Press.

Mumford, L. (1961). The City in History: Its Origins, Its Transformations, and Its Prospects (Vol. 67). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Okur, Z. (2008). Mevsimlik İşlerde Yıllık Ücretli İzin (Karar İncelemesi). Kamu İş Dergisi, C: 10, S: 2, S. 1-17.

Özbekmezci Ş. & Sahil S. (2004). Mevsimlik Tarım İşçilerinin Sosyal, Ekonomik Ve Barınma Sorunlarının Analizi. Gazi Üniversitesi Müh. Mim. Fak. Dergisi, Cilt 19, No 3, 261-274

Rogaly, B. (1998). Workers on the Move: Seasonal Migration and Changing Social Relations in Rural India. Gender & Development, 6(1), 21-29.

Şakar, M. (2010). İş Kanunu Açısından Mevsim Ve Kampanya İşlerinde Çalışan İşçilerin Durumu. Yaklaşım Dergisi, Ekim Sayısı.

Schneider, T. & Till, J. (2005). Flexible housing: opportunities and limits. Arq: Architectural Research Quarterly, 9(2), 157-166.

Selek Ö.C. & Bulut E. (2013). Mevsimlik Tarım İşçilerinin Türk Hukuk Sistemi İçerisindeki Yeri, ÇSGB Çalışma Dünyası Dergisi, 1(1), Temmuz-Eylül 2013, 94-111

Smith, W. S. (1958). The Art and Architecture of Ancient Egypt. Penguin Books. London.

Şimşek Z. (2012). Nüfus Tarım İşgücü Göçü Yaşam Koşulları Üreme Sağlığı Raporu. T.C. Anadolu Üniversitesi.

Taşkent, S. (2010). Karar İncelemesi: Mevsimlik Bir İşte Yapılan Belirli Süreli İş Sözleşmesi. Çalışma Ve Toplum, 2010/3, S.: 223-242.

Tekeli İ. (1998). Türkiye’de İçgöç Sorunsalı Yeniden Tanımlanma Aşamasına Geldi. Türkiye’de İçgöç, İstanbul: Tarih Vakfı Yayını, P. 10.

Thomas A. (2006). Housing characteristics of farmworker families in North Carolina. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 8(2), 173-184.

TUIK. (2018). İşgücü İstatistikleri. 15.05.2018.

UNFPA. (2011). Mevsimlik Tarım İşçilerinin Ve Ailelerinin İhtiyaçlarının Belirlenmesi Araştırması Vallejos, Quirina M, Quandt, Sara A, Grzywacz, Joseph G, Isom, Scott, Chen, Haiying, Galván, Leonardo, . . . Arcury, Thomas A. (2011). Migrant farmworkers' housing conditions across an agricultural season in North Carolina. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 54(7), 533-544.

Ziebarth, A. (2006). Housing Seasonal Workers For The Minnesota Processed Vegetable Industry. Rural Sociology, 71(2), 335-357.

Url-1: Https:// Goc.Bilgi.Edu.Tr/ Last Visitied On 08-07-2019

Downloads

Published

21-06-2021

How to Cite

Güney, E. D., & Kolsal, F. (2021). HOUSING CONDITIONS AND PROBLEMS OF SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL WORKERS IN ESKIŞEHIR SARICAKAYA SETTLEMENT, AND SUGGESTIONS. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 9(1), 53–90. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2021.150

Issue

Section

Articles