The main problem of this research is that the majority of the Ankara
residents’ satisfaction with life is low in their daily life. Urban happiness
is a contemporary subject due to industrialization and its problems, which leads individuals to find new coping strategies towards food security
and sustainable cities. In this context, the main research question aimed to be
answered is: What is the relationship between gardening and individual
happiness in Ankara? McFarlane’s non-human and Latour’s ANT as relational
sociological theories are used to explain plants as “actants” and gardening as
a function to increase happiness in cities. In this research, a mixed method
was used combining quantitative and qualitative research techniques that
contribute to relational sociology. Online surveys with gardeners and
non-gardeners of 69 participants in Ankara were conducted. Statistical analyses
showed that gardening activities are influential in greater satisfaction with
life, which is reversely correlated with citizens’ will to migrate. In contrast
to expectations, there was no significant relationship between gardening and
environmentalist concerns, and no difference was found when gardeners and
non-gardeners were compared. This may be interpreted by commodification of the gardening
activity or the hedonistic lifestyle of Turkish society as well as the
consumerist base of Islamic culture and social differences in addition to
economic concerns that undermine environmental concerns. In order to understand
the effects in specific, qualitative research was conducted with 14
participants. Through axial coding and word cloud analyses, it was
revealed that the environmentalists’ dance with nature can be categorized into
three as “humanists”, “holistics” and “activists” regarding their human
centralization perspective.
References
[1]
Adevi, A. A., & Martensson, F. (2013). Stress Rehabilitation through Garden Therapy: The Garden as a Place in the Recovery from Stress. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 12, 230-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.01.007
[2]
Ak, S. (2008). Llköğretim öğretmen adaylarinin cevreye yönelik bilinclerinin bazi demografik değiSkenler acisindan incelenmesi. Abant Lzeet Baysal űniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitűsű Yűksek Lisans Tezi.
[3]
Ambrose, G., Das, K., Fan, Y., & Ramaswami, A. (2020). Is Garden Associated with Greater Happiness of Urban Residents? A Multi-Activity Dynamic Assessment in the Twin-Cities Region, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning, 198, 103776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103776
[4]
Bhatti, M., & Church, A. (2001). Cultivating Natures: Homes and Gardens in Late Modernity. Sociology 35, 365-383. https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000177
[5]
Buyan Kop, Z., & Kasapoğlu, A. (2015). “Happiness” from a Sociological View: The Case of Colak Dam. International Journal of Happiness and Development (IJHD), 2, 331-345. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJHD.2015.073923
[6]
Cansaran, D. (2018). Kuresellesmeye aykiri bir yasam bicimi “sakin kentler”: Seferihisar örnegi. Kent Arastirmalari Dergisi (Journal of Urban Studies), 9, 885-908.
[7]
Cetin, E. (2018). Gűndelik hayatin sosyolojisi. Lstanbul űniversitesi Acik ve Uzaktan Eğitim Fakűltesi.
[8]
Cieslik, M. (2017). The Happiness Riddle and the Quest for a Good Life. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-31882-4
[9]
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Nitel AraSturma Gelenekleri. Ankara űniversitesi.
[10]
Cruz, S. M., & Manata, B, (2020). Measurement of Environmental Concern. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, Article No. 363. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00363
[11]
Dağli, A., & Baysal, N. (2016). YaSam doyum ölceğinin Tűrkce’ye uyarlanmasi: Gecerlik ve gűvenirlik calsmasi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15, 1250-1262.
[12]
Deniz, T. (2017). Hizli dunyada surdurulebilir mekanlar: Sakin kentler. Lnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri AraStrmalari Dergisi, 6, 1399-1412.
[13]
Deviren, N., & Yildiz, O. (2015). Kontrolsűz kentsel bűyűme karsiti bir hareket: űlke deneyimleriyle yavaS Sehirler. Uluslararasi Hakemli Sosyal Bilimler E-Dergisi, 51, 346-367.
[14]
Eryilmaz, C. (2017). Sosyal bilim paradigmalari cercevesinde cevre sosyolojisi’nin kuramlari ve kavramlari. Firat űniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 27, 159-174.
[15]
Hondagneu-Sotelo, P. (2010). Cultivating Questions for a Sociology of Gardens. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 498-516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241610376069
[16]
Lslamoğlu, E., Yildirimalp, S., & Abdurrahman, B. (2014). Tűrkiye’de tersine göc ve göcű teSvik eden uygulamalar: Lstanbul ili örneği. Sakarya Lktisat Dergisi.
[17]
Kaptan, S. (1991). Bilimsel AraStSrma ve Lstatik Teknikleri. Gazi űniversitesi Eğitim Fakűltesi Eğitim Bilimleri.
[18]
Kasapoğlu, A. (2016). Uygulamali LliSkisel Sosyoloji. Yeni Lnsan Yayinevi.
[19]
Kasapoğlu, A., & Ecevit, M. C. (2004). Culture and Social Structure: Identity in Turkey. Human Studies, 27, 137-167. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:HUMA.0000022536.25841.d1
[20]
Kavuran, T., & Dede, B. (2013). Platon ve Aristoteles’in Sanat Etiği, Estetik Kavrami ve Yansimalari. Sanat Dergisi, 23, 47-64.
[21]
Kepenek, E. B., & Uğuzman, T. (2018). Haydi köyűműze geri dönelim! Tersine göcűn sosyoekonomik etkileri: Yeniyol köyű örneği. Sosyal Politika CaliSmalari Dergisi, 40, 11-36.
[22]
Kongar, E. (1972). Toplumsal DeğiSme (1. baski). Bilgi Yayinevi.
[23]
Latour, B. (1996). On Actor-Network Theory: A Few Clarifications Plus More than a Few Complications. Science Studies San Diego, 47, 369-381.
[24]
Neuman, W. L. (2007). Basics of Social Research, Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Pearson Education.
[25]
özler, I. S., & Obach, K. B. (2019). Cultural Barriers to Environmental Mobilization in the Republic of Turkey. Sociological Perspectives, 62, 773-793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121419866810
[26]
Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164-172. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.5.2.164
[27]
Plano Clark, V. L., & Creswell, J. W. (2008). The Mixed Methods Reader. Sage Publications.
[28]
Powell, C., & Depelteau, F. (2013). Conceptualizing Relational Sociology: Ontological and Theoretical Issues. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137342652
[29]
Pringle, S., & Guaralda, M. (2018). Images of Urban Happiness: A Pilot Study in the Self-Representation of Happiness in Urban Spaces. International Journal of the Image, 8, 97-122.
[30]
Sahinöz, A. (1990). YeSil devrim ve aclik sorunu, Hacettepe űniversitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakűltesi Dergisi, 8, 233-239.
[31]
Stanescu, V. (2010). “Green” Eggs and Ham? The Myth of Sustainable Meat and the Danger of the Local. Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 8, 8-32.
[32]
Tampieri, A. (2017). Urbanization and Its Effects on the Happiness Domains. University of Bologna.
[33]
Winters, J. V., & Li, Y. (2015). Urbanization, Natural Amenities, and Subjective Well-Being: Evidence from U.S. Counties. IZA Discussion Paper No. 8966.
[34]
Wong, F. (2019). Life Satisfaction and Quality of Life Enjoyment among Retired People Aged 65 or Older. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 7, 119-127. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2019.75009
[35]
Yalcin, E. (2019). Kűresel kente alternatif olarak sakin Sehir: Tűrkiye sakin Sehirleri űzerinden değerlendirme. Sosyal Ekonomik Arastirmalar Dergisi, 19, 202-231.
