Does Embeddedness Create Miracles The Case of the Anatolian Tigers in Turkey.docx

1、Does Embeddedness Create Miracles The Case of the Anatolian Tigers in TurkeyDoes “Embeddedness” Create Miracles The Case of the “Anatolian Tigers” in Turkey Abstract Drawing on different forms of embeddedness， this study critically examines the so-called economic miracles in the Anatolian region of

2、Turkey， which are commonly known as the Anatolian Tigers. By decomposing the stories of the Anatolian Tigers as new loci of economic growth since 1990s， forms of embeddedness illustrate the spatio-institutional factors affecting both economic and non-economic realms with varying distillations from l

3、ocal institutional assets. These conditions became instrumental for both collectivizing interests of the leading local capitalists and disguising the negative consequences of the rapidly industrializing and urbanizing cities of Anatolia. Through open ended in-depth interviews conducted with leading

4、actors in the cities of Anatolia， content analysis of the available resources published by local organizations and media， this study illustrates the role of multiple forms of embedding mechanisms that orchestrated “fragile” local economic miracles in Turkey. Key words： Anatolian tigers； Forms of emb

5、eddedness； Turkey； Urban transformation Tok， M. E. （2015）. Does “Embeddedness” Create Miracles？ The Case of the “Anatolian Tigers” in Turkey. Canadian Social Science， 11（4）， -0. Available from： http：/ DOI： http：/dx.doi.org/10.3968/6616 INTRODUCTION At the outset， complexities between the culture and

6、 the economy， the role of culture， particularly religion， are evident in the rather distinct growth of Anatolian cities since the 1980s. Yet， the economic， political and social transformations that occurred in Anatolia throughout the 1990s and 2000s sheds light on the dynamics of neoliberal growth o

7、f socially embedded economic relations. A crucial facet of this transformation has been the rapid industrialization of the Anatolian cities， commonly referred to as Anatolian Tigers， and their opening up to world markets. Overall， investigating the urban political economy of rapidly growing Anatolia

8、n cities offers a unique opportunity to better understand the dynamics of the interplay between globalization， local dynamics and urban transformation. The rapid transformation during the modernization period in the early 1920s was followed by increasingly neoliberal development policies accompanied

9、 by high levels of urbanisation and industrialisation in 1980s. Following the 1980 coup detat， which brought a shift towards flexible production， a group of Anatolian businessmen and a new discourse of representing conservative/Islamic business peoples interests emerged. Against the historically est

10、ablished Turkish Industrialists and Businesspeople Association （TUS?AD）， many city-based interest representation organizations flourished throughout the Anatolian region， such as the Industrialist and Businesspeople Associations （S?ADs）， Chambers of Trade/Industry and civil society organizations. In

11、 this context， the buoyance of the emerging conservative bourgeoisie brought in train a new term， which captured the economically booming cities of Anatolia， fuelled by the bourgeoisie and their interest representation organizations， namely the Anatolian Tigers. The Anatolian Tigers refer to the cit

12、ies of Kayseri， Gaziantep， ?orum， Konya， Eski?ehir， and Denizli， all of which have experienced notable economic growth beginning in the 1980s. Flexible production， as Bu?ra （1998， p.522） argues， played a central role in the resurgence of local and regional development by enabling “a strategic fit” b

13、etween traditional structures and global conditions. This refers to ability of local firms， mostly Small-Medium-Enterprise， to respond quickly and flexibly as market conditions change （Sato?lu， 2009， pp.14-16）. Many scholars have studied the city of Denizli， Turkey， one of the earliest Tigers. They

14、identified a “strategic fit” between the local collaborative structures of Small and Medium Enterprises （SMEs） that allowed for an articulation to global production networks， especially in the textiles sector， which in turn led to unprecedented economic development （Mutluer， 1995； Erayd?n， 1998； Ere

15、ndil， 1998； K?ker， 1998； P?narc?o?lu， 2000）. Atasoy （2007）， Ada? （2006）， Yavuz （2003）， and Toprak et al. （2005） focused on the process of agency formation of the Anatolian Tigers. These studies argue that there have been a number of important endogenously driven dynamics in the Anatolian cities. The

16、y focus on the emergence of a synergy between Islam and capitalism within which the definitions of the economy， the market， entrepreneurship and work ethic are reconstructed， reworked and contested by Islamic businesspeople. Bay?rba?s （2007， 2009） studies of Gaziantep have shown， through local busin

17、ess associations， the inter-scalar dynamics of the new political spaces that have been constructed for local and urban actors. Ho?g?r （2011） brings a rather different perspective， critiquing these efforts to theorise culture ?C in this case， Islamic culture ?C with the aim of constructing a new form

18、 of growth. She presents a historical discourse analysis of neoliberal growth of Anatolian cities since 1980s. Overall， whether these cities are the outcome of a successful use of Islamic capital implying a Calvinist approach or whether they are pure products of neoliberal urban growth is still open

19、 to discussion. Against this background， the broad objective of the paper is to critically examine the notion of embeddedness within the versatile context of neoliberal growth through case-studies on three cities in the Anatolian region of Turkey： Kayseri， Gaziantep and Eski?ehir. In doing so， this

20、paper responds to a laudable call for the reciprocity between nation-centric political economic approaches and multi-scalar explanations offered by economic geographies in a political context （Peck & Theodore， 2007）. We argue that the societal， territorial and network embeddedness of “Anatolian Tige

21、rs” can， in fact， be challenged with the structural factors as the main factor behind their particular growth patterns. This is the most evident in how family firms in Anatolia has mutually evolved with the structural reforms and social policy changes at the national state level. In doing so， we als

22、o point out how the notion of embeddedness is articulated in these businessmens perceptions of their practices while the reality turns out to be otherwise. 1. METHODOLOGY In conducting the study， I first reviewed national newspapers and magazines from 1990 to 2012. To help compare national and local

23、 policy discourses， I also reviewed three local newspapers （the total number published in each city） for the same period in Kayseri， Gaziantep and Eski?ehir， the cities investigated in this study. It is important to note that these newspapers were owned by local entrepreneurs and locally prominent f

24、amilies and were thus rich sources for understanding how local growth projects have been communicated to the local public through the families. This study compared these publications and perspectives with the national ones， which helped us to situate local dynamics within a more complete framework.

25、The local sources were also useful in capturing certain power dynamics not covered by national sources. Unlike local newspapers， the national newspapers tended to portray the locality as a unity. Although this is partially correct， it is also important to take note of the power struggles and asymmet

26、ries between local actors， which in turn lead different local newspapers to produce different stories about the same issue. Sometimes， problems between a municipality and a civil society organization， or a municipality and a specific family holding or Small and Medium Enterprises （SMEs） can generate

27、 considerable and insightful local discussion that is not picked up by national media. Likewise， different local actors often have different perspectives on important external processes such as globalization and Europeanization. Local sources were thus consulted to capture and portray these local dy

28、namics， power struggles and institutional/organizational discrepancies. It is also equally crucial to note that local newspapers in the cities investigated have often stayed mute towards the issues pertaining to the poor conditions of workers， unregulated/informal contracts and safety. This claim ma

29、y imply that Kayseris economic success can be linked to the efforts mobilized through closely-knit families who socialize economic decisions and can collectivize their actions. The stability of the demographic conditions also requires attention， however. Unlike Gaziantep and Eski?ehir， Kayseri has a

30、 very low rate of in-migration. The disciplinary and regulatory impact of local institutions in Kayseri also means that economic decisions are made collectively. In Kayseri， 72% of the respondents indicated that they avoided using bank credit since interest payments were forbidden in Islam. When the

31、y ran into financial difficulty they generally borrowed money from family and other kin. Nevertheless， these social dynamics do not always operate on the inclusion side of the spectrum. As Bazzal （2004） identified， economic and political interests that lay outside the local family centred coalitions

32、 are doomed to be excluded and forced to survive without societal embeddedness. Family ties also play an important role in embedding Gazianteps economic relations. In Gaziantep， the Konuko?lu family owns SANKO Holding， the largest economic establishment in Kayseri which employs more than 125，000 workers. In terms of philanthropy， well-established local families， such as the Konuko?lu and Nak?po?lu families， engage in philanthropic activities； the scope of these activities is more modest than in Kayseri. Abdulkadir Konuko?lu states that it is their responsibility， a resp