Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T18:52:12.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Democratic Citizenship Movements in the Context Of Multilayered Governance: The Case of the Bergama Movement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Ahmet Öncü  and
Gürcan Koçan
Ahmet Öncü
Affiliation:
Sabanci University
Gürcan Koçan
Affiliation:
Bilkent University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper explores the democratic capacities, demands, and aspirations of citizenship movements in relation to deliberations within a formal political system whose territorial boundaries have become blurred as a result of global political and economic restructuring. The case of the mobilization of a group of people from 17 villages located in the hills of Bergama in the northern Aegean region of Turkey in opposition to Normandy Mining Corporation, an Australian-based multinational consortium operating a gold mine in the region, provides an empirical context for the discussion. Normandy Mining Corporation uses the controversial cyanide-leaching method to extract gold, a method that allegedly has damaged the environment and has resulted in health problems for local residents. For more than a decade, Bergama villagers have been struggling to drive Normandy out of their region, as they are concerned about their own health and the well-being of the land on which they live and work.

Type
Articles
Information
New Perspectives on Turkey , Volume 26 , Spring 2002 , pp. 29 - 57
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arato, Andrew, and Cohen, Jean. 1992. Civil Society and Politicai Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1998. Acts of Resistance: Against the Tyranny of the Market. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Burton, Bob. 1996. “Normandy’s Turkish Foray,” Mining Monitor 1 (2), pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
Cable, Vincent. 1999. Globalization and Global Governance. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
Calhoun, Craig. 1992. Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Camilleri, Joseph A. 1998. “The United Nations’ Place in the Era of Globalization: A Four-Dimensional Perspective,” pp. 333–50 in Between Sovereignty and Global Governance: The United Nations, the States and Civil Society, ed. Paolini, Albert J., Jarvis, Anthony P., and Reus-Smit, Christian. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cobb, Roger W., Keith-Ross, Jeannie, and Ross, Marc Howard. 1976. “Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process,” American Political Science Review 70, pp. 126–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Çoban, Aykut. 2001. “International Arbitration, Sovereignty and Environmental Protection: The Turkish Case.” Berlin Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. Berlin, 7-8 December.Google Scholar
Garrett, Geoffrey. 2000. “Shrinking States? Globalization and National Autonomy,” in The Political Economy of Globalization, ed. Woods, Ngaire. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gezgör, Burcu. 2001. Spillover Effects of Environmental Consciousness: The Bergama Environmental Movement in Turkey. Ankara: unpublished M.A. thesis, Bilkent University.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1981. The Theory of Communicative Action, trans. McCarthy, Thomas A.. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Burger, Thomas and Lawrence, Frederick. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. Rehg, William. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hale, William M. 1994. Turkish Politics and the Military. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hay, Colin, and Marsh, David. 2000. Demystifying Globalization. New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Held, David. 1995. Democracy and the Global Order. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Held, David, McGrew, Anthony, Goldblatt, David, and Perraton, Jonathan. 1999. Global Transformations. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Holzer, Petra. 1998. “Bergama ve 10 Yıllık Direniş Hareketi.” Cogito, no. 15, pp. 275–86.Google Scholar
Keane, John. 1998. Democracy and Civil Society: On Predicaments of European Socialism, the Prospects for Democracy, and the Problem of Controlling Social and Political Power. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Martin, Hans-Peter, and Schumann, Harald. 1998. The Global Trap: Globalization and the Assault on Democracy and Prosperity. London and New York: Zed Books Ltd.Google Scholar
McBride, Stephen, and Wiseman, John. 2000. Globalization and its Discontents. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michael, Philip. 2000. “Globalization: Myths and Realities,” pp. 274–91 in From Modernization to Globalization, ed. Roberts, Timmons and Hite, Amy. Maiden and Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Moran, Robert. 2002. “De-coding Cyanide: An Assessment of Gaps in Cyanide Regulation at Mines.” A Submission to the European Union and the United Nations Environmental Programme. http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/mdaf.html.Google Scholar
Morris, Christopher. 2000. “The Very Idea of Popular Sovereignty: ‘We the People’ Reconsidered.” Social Philosophy Policy 17 (1) pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal. 1992. “Democratic Citizenship and Political Community,” In Dimensions of Radical Democracy: Pluralism, Citizenship, Community, ed. Mouffe, Chantal. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Mouffe, Chantal. 2000. Democratic Paradox. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Ozbudun, Ergun. 2000. Contemporary Turkish Politics: Challenges to Democratic Consolidation. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian. 1998. “Changing Patterns of Governance: From Absolutism to Global Multilateralism,” pp. 3–28 in Between Sovereignty and Global Governance: The United Nations, the States and Civil Society, ed. Paolini, Albert J., Jarvis, Anthony P., and Reus-Smit, Christian. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenau, James N. 1998. “Powerful Tendencies, Enduring Tensions and Glaring Contradictions: The United Nations in a Turbulent World,” pp. 252–73 in Between Sovereignty and Global Governance: The United Nations, the States and Civil Society, ed. Paolini, Albert J., Jarvis, Anthony P.. and Reus-Smit, Christian. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sassen, Saskia. 1996. Losing Control: Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Schölte, Jan Aart. 2000. “Global Civil Society,” pp. 173–201 in The Political Economy of Globalization, ed. Woods, Ngaire. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Tanör, Bülent. 2001. “Türkiye’de Yeni Anayasal Düzen,” pp. 633–40 in Devlet ve Demokrasi: Anayasa Hukukuna Giriş. Server Tarulli. İstanbul: Adam.Google Scholar
Touraine, Alain. 1981. The Voice and the Eye. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tully, James. 2000. “The Unfreedom of the Modems in Comparison to their Ideals of Constitutionalism and Democracy,” in Canadian Political Philosophy; ed. Beiner, Ronald and Wayne, Norman. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Waterman, Peter. 1998. Globalization, Social Movements, the New Internationalisms. London and Washington: Mansell.Google Scholar
Waterman, Peter 2000. “Social Movements, Local Places and Globalized Spaces: Implications for ‘Globalization from Below,’” pp. 135–49 in Globalization and the Politics of Resistance, ed. Gills, Barry K.. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waters, Michael. 1995. Globalization. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Woods, Ngaire. 2000. The Political Economy of Globalization. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar