2018

van der Veer, Katif Araz, and Yehuda Elkana. Special thanks to Hubert Weterwami, Helene Simerwayi, and their children, who have been an ongoing inspiration for this book. This book would not have been possible without the support of our partners and children:

The world is very different from the year 2000, when we began our long-term research into relationships between migrants and three seemingly disparate cities. 1 Mardin, Turkey, lies on the Turkish-Syrian Border; Manchester, New Hampshire, is in the northeastern United States;

Urban Studies, 2019

Routledge Handbook of Immigration and Refugee Studies [Second Edition], 2023

Cities have always been shaped by a range of migratory processes and historically have been at the centre of reflections on human mobility. Nevertheless, in recent years scholars and policymakers have increasingly turned their attention to the urban dimension of migration in response to the intensification and diversification of links between migration and cities. Drawing on examples from a range of localities from Europe and the Global South, this chapter provides guidelines and caveats for navigating the migration-city nexus and surveys recent research in three key areas: migration and urban economies; the settlement and spatial distribution of migrants in cities; and the local dimension of migration governance.

In Migrants and City-Making Ayse Çaglar and Nina Glick Schiller trace the participation of migrants in the unequal networks of power that connect their lives to regional, national, and global institutions. Grounding their work in comparative ethnographies of three cities struggling to regain their former standing—Mardin, Turkey; Manchester, New Hampshire; and Halle/Saale, Germany—Çaglar and Glick Schiller challenge common assumptions that migrants exist on society’s periphery, threaten social cohesion, and require integration. Instead Çaglar and Glick Schiller explore their multifaceted role as city-makers, including their relationships to municipal officials, urban developers, political leaders, business owners, community organizers, and social justice movements. In each city Çaglar and Glick Schiller met with migrants from around the world; attended cultural events, meetings, and religious services; and patronized migrant-owned businesses, allowing them to gain insights into the ways in which migrants build social relationships with non-migrants and participate in urban restoration and development. In exploring the changing historical contingencies within which migrants live and work, Çaglar and Glick Schiller highlight how city-making invariably involves engaging with the far-reaching forces that dispossess people of their land, jobs, resources, neighborhoods, and hope.

Studia Migracyjne – Przegląd Polonijny, 2021

ABSTRACT Human being makes an effort to reach an absolute judgement inherently. Just like “cities”. They want life to proceed under control, its' own rationality and in the direction of cognition. At this point a major conflict begins. Today's modernity - rationality and history - tradition with a long past are waiting to collide for each other. It's almost impossible to creat universal and total structures in the light of all the modern discourses. Every settlement, every street, every building have certain characteristics in terms of that culture, perception and inhabitants. To understand and recognize the city, senses should belong to “it” before brains in contrary to the rationalist approach. Wars, especially the World Wars, throw up modernity to the transience of life. First I.World War, then II. World War caused a major trauma as the destruction of people, cities and countries. Big traumas were began to live in their own environment by individuals that are progressive in modernity. Life almost began to stop in cities that were destructed with their structure, vision, past and future. Immediately afterwards, this concerns and efforts to holding on life began to cover pain. At this point, architectural improvements have been effective for the cities that were demolished and struggled to re-stand up. Many items such as modernization, industrialization, urbanization begin to create traces through the texture and posture of the city. Should ‘connection with the past’ or ‘directly future orientation’ be effective for the settlement that wants to stand up to move on the road? Initially everything should be open, then all administrative and architectural decisions should be taken. First option for the city should restore a living organism with its' own dynamics. A place, in which its' people live their lives with the consciousness of their past, can entirely be "CITY". Necessary decisions about cities' own dynamics should be taken and make arrangements before important connections between regions, intersections, meeting points and transport networks. In order to reach right solutions, planning should be based on the transition from human& building scale to architectural scale. All the vital criterias should be determined carefully by emphasizing on the concepts as transformation, transition, interaction and ergonomics. From now on studies should be made for the creation of a real city. KEY WORDS: modernization, organism, inhabitants, settlement, building scale, architectural scale.

2015

We support Eduardo Barberis and Emmanuele Pavolini's call for further explorations of the relationships between migration and localities that are not " gateway cities " including towns and rural areas. Their project points beyond methodological nationalism and builds on the critical geography of the neoliberal restructuring of cities. They wish to capture the complex, plural, heterogeneous, multidirectional relations and ties between migrants and various localities in a world that is constantly in political, economic, and cultural flux. However, to meet these goals we suggest that it is urgent for both migration and urban scholars to put aside many of the key concepts that have become the stock in trade of studies of cities that have been dubbed global and gateway and ask about what are the appropriate concepts and methodologies for the task at hand. We would also suggest that the concepts that have been generated by the study of migrants' relationships to a handful of cities are not appropriate, because these concepts are not useful for the study of the relationship between localities and migrants anywhere and at anytime. These key and apparently tried and true concepts include those of ethnic segregation, ghettoization, immigrant communities as units of study and analysis, ethnic enterprises, push and pull, assimilation , segmented assimilation, old and new migration and typologies of cities by population size. The concepts are not useful because they: 1) disconnect the entangled processes of city/locality making, migration settlement, and the restructuring of processes of capital accumulation; 2) misunderstand the difference between localities as entry