Türkiye’deki Şehirlerde Akıllı Kentleşme ile Gelen Dijital Bölünmenin Toplumsal Etkilerini İncelemeye Yönelik Mekânsal Bir Analiz

Yıl 2020, , 77 - 94, 30.08.2021

Eser Çapık Murat Ali Dulupçu

https://doi.org/10.5505/sjcrp.2021.58066

Öz

Amaç: Amaç: Yapılan araştırmada Bilgi İletişim Teknolojilerinin geleneksel altyapılarla birleştirildiği ve yeni dijital teknolojiler kullanılarak entegre edildiği bir şehir olarak tanımlanan akıllı kent imajı ile Türkiye’deki 81 ilde Bilgi İletişim Teknolojilerinin nimetlerinden eşit olarak yararlanılmaması sonucu meydana gelen dijital bölünmenin beraberinde getirdiği toplumsal faktörlerin incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır.

Metodoloji, yöntem ve değişkenler: Araştırmada 81 ilden oluşan gözlem ile akıllı kentleşme ve dijital bölünmenin alt yapısını oluşturan unsurlardan yola çıkılarak mekânsal bir model kurulmuştur. Analizde akıllı kent modeli için bağımlı değişken olarak, akıllı kent göstergelerinden biri olan akıllı mobiliteyi temsilen illere göre mobil genişbant ile internete erişim sağlayan hanelerin oranı kullanılmış bağımsız değişken olarak ise illerde kişi başına düşen GSYİH, illerin toplam nüfusu ve toplam üniversite öğrenci sayısı kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada ele alınan ikinci model olan dijital bölünme için bağımlı değişken olarak illere göre genişbant ile internete erişim sağlayan hanelerin oranı kullanılırken bağımsız değişken olarak ise illerde kişi başına düşen GSYİH, nüfus yoğunluğu ve bin kişi başına düşen üniversite öğrenci sayısı kullanılmıştır.

Araştırmanın etkileri: Çalışmada kullanılan değişkenlerden yola çıkılarak gelir, eğitim düzeyi ve nüfus değişkenlerinin akıllı kentleşme üzerinde pozitif etkisi olduğu görülürken gelir artışının dijital bölünmeyi azalttığı, nüfus yoğunluğunun ve eğitim düzeyindeki farklılaşmanın dijital bölünmeyi arttırdığı sonucu elde edilmiştir.

Özgün değer: Daha önceki çalışmalarda ele alınan konuya yönelik herhangi bir çalışma incelenmemiş olmasından dolayı bu çalışmanın yapılacak çalışmalarda yol gösterici ve ufuk açıcı olacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Akıllı Kentleşme, Dijital Bölünme, Türkiye, 81 Şehir, Mekânsal Veri Analizi.

A Spatial Analysis to Examine the Social Impacts of the Digital Divide Coming with Smart Urbanization in Cities in Turkey

Öz

Purpose: In the research, the smart city image is defined as a city where Information Communication Technologies is combined with traditional infrastructures and integrated using new digital technologies, and the social factors brought about by the digital divide that occurred as a result of the 81 provinces in Turkey not benefiting equally from the blessings of Information Communication Technologies is intended to be examined.

Methodology, method, and variables: In the research, a spatial model will be established based on the observations consisting of 81 provinces and the elements that constitute the infrastructure of smart urbanization and digital division. In the analysis, as the dependent variable for the smart city model, the percentage of households accessing the internet via mobile broadband, representing smart mobility, which is one of the smart city indicators, is used as the independent variable GDP per capita in the provinces, the total population of the provinces and the total number of university students. As the dependent variable, the ratio of households accessing broadband and internet by provinces was used as the independent variable, while the GDP per capita in the provinces, population density, and the number of university students per thousand people were used.

Effects of the research: Based on the variables used in the study, it was concluded that income, education level, population variables have a positive effect on smart urbanization, income increase reduces the digital divide, and the differentiation in population density and education level increases the digital divide.

Original value: Since no study on the subject discussed in previous studies has been examined, it is thought that this study will be guiding and stimulating in future studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Smart City, Digital Divide, Turkey, 81 Cities, Spatial Data Analysis

Kaynakça

• Abella, Alberto, Marta Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado ve Carmen De-Pablos-Heredero. 2017. “A Model for the Analysis of Data-Driven Innovation and Value Generation in Smart Cities’ Ecosystems.” Cities 64 (Nisan): 47-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.01.011.
• Alawadhi, Suha, Armando Aldama-Nalda, Hafedh Chourabi, J. Ramon Gil-Garcia, Sofia Leung, Sehl Mellouli, Taewoo Nam, Theresa A. Pardo, Hans J. Scholl ve Shawn Walker. 2012.
• “Building Understanding of Smart City Initiatives.” İçinde Electronic Government, editör Hans J. Scholl, Marijn Janssen, Maria A. Wimmer, Carl Erik Moe ve Leif Skiftenes Flak, 7443:40-53. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33489-4_4. Anselin, Luc. 1988. Spatial Econometrics Methods and Models. Netherlands.
• Baccarne, Bastiaan, Peter Mechant ve Dimitri Schuurman. 2014. “Empowered Cities? An Analysis of the Structure and Generated Value of the Smart City Ghent.” İçinde Smart City, editör Renata Paola Dameri ve Camille Rosenthal-Sabroux, 157-82. Progress in IS. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06160-3_8.
• Bakıcı, Tuba, Esteve Almirall ve Jonathan Wareham. 2013. “A Smart City Initiative: The Case of Barcelona.” Journal of the Knowledge Economy 4 (2): 135-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-012-0084-9.
• Barajas, Jason. 2019. “Will Smart Cities Perpetuate the Digital Divide, or Solve It?” The Greenlining Institute (blog). Son erişim tarihi: 06 Ağustos 2019. https://greenlining.org/blog-category/2019/will-smart-cities-perpetuate-the-digital-divide-or-solve-it/.
• Batty, M., K. W. Axhausen, F. Giannotti, A. Pozdnoukhov, A. Bazzani, M. Wachowicz, G. Ouzounis ve Y. Portugali. 2012. “Smart Cities of the Future.” The European Physical Journal Special Topics 214 (1): 481-518. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2012-01703-3.
• Belotti, Federico, Gordon Hughes ve Andrea Piano Mortari. 2017. “Spatial Panel-Data Models Using Stata.” The Stata Journal 17 (1): 139-80.
• Billon, Margarita, Fernando Lera-Lopez ve Rocío Marco. 2010. “Differences in Digitalization Levels: A Multivariate Analysis Studying the Global Digital Divide.” Review of World Economics 146 (1): 39-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-009-0045-y.
• Bouchet, Max, Sifan Liu ve Joseph Parilla. 2018. “GLOBAL METRO MONITOR 2018.” Global Metro Monitor, 48.
• Caragliu, Andrea, Chiara Del Bo ve Peter Nijkamp. 2011. “Smart Cities in Europe.” Journal of Urban Technology 18 (2): 65-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2011.601117.
• Chinn, Menzie D ve Robert W Fairlie. 2004. “The Determinants of the Global Digital Divide: A Cross-Country Analysis of Computer and Internet Penetration.” Oxford Economic Papers 59(1): 16-44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4500086.
• ÇŞB. 2019. 2020-2023 Ulusal Akıllı Şehirler Stratejisi ve Eylem Planı. Ankara: T.C Çevre ve Şehircilik Bakanlığı.
• Darmofal, David. 2015. Spatial Analysis for the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139051293.
• Dasgupta, Susmita, Somik Lall ve David Wheeler. 2001. “Policy Reform, Economic Growth and the Digital Divide.” Oxford Development Studies 33 (2): 229-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600810500137889.
• Deloitte. 2015. “Smart Cities: How rapid advances in technology are reshaping our economy and society”.
• Deloitte. 2016. Akıllı Şehir Yol Haritası.
• Desoky, Abdelmohsen M., Gehan A. Mousa ve Elsayed A. Elamir. 2020. “Determinant Factors of Smart Cities: The Case of MENA Countries.” International Journal of Computing and Digital Systems 9 (3): 523-33. https://doi.org/10.12785/ijcds/090316.
• Dewan, Sanjeev, Dale Ganley ve Kenneth L. Kraemer. 2005. “Across the Digital Divide: A Cross-Country Multi-Technology Analysis of the Determinants of IT Penetration.” Journal of the Association for Information Systems 6 (12): 409-32. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00071.
• Erdoğan, Melike. 2021. “A New Fuzzy Approach for Analyzing the Smartness of Cities: Case Study for Turkey.” Sakarya University Journal of Science 25 (2): 308 - 325. https://doi.org/10.16984/saufenbilder.799469.
• Eskelinen, Heikki, Lauri Frank ve Timo Hirvonen. 2003. “Fine-Grained Patterns of The Digital Divide: Differences of Broadband Access Within Finland.” İçinde 43. ERSA Kongresi, Jyväskylä, 27-30 August 2003, 16.
• Fischer, Manfred M. ve Jinfeng Wang. 2011. Spatial Data Analysis. Springer Briefs in Regional Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21720-3.
• Florax, Raymond J. G. M. ve Thomas de Graaff. 2004. “The Performance of Diagnostic Tests for Spatial Dependence in Linear Regression Models: A Meta-Analysis of Simulation Studies.” İçinde Advances in Spatial Econometrics, editör Luc Anselin, Raymond J. G. M. Florax, ve Sergio J. Rey, 29-65. Advances in Spatial Science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-05617-2_2.
• Giffinger, Rudolf, Christian Fertner, Hans Kramar ve Evert Meijers. 2007. “City-Ranking of European Medium-Sized Cities.” http://www.smart-cities.eu/download/city_ranking_final.pdf. Hall, Peter. 2000. “Urban Renaissance/New Urbanism: Two Sides of the Same Coin?” Journal of the American Planning Association 66 (4): 359-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360008976117.
• Hargittai, Eszter. 1999. “Weaving the Western Web: Explaining Differences in Internet Connectivity among OECD Countries”. Telecommunications Policy 23 (10-11): 701-718.
• Harrison, C., B. Eckman, R. Hamilton, P. Hartswick, J. Kalagnanam, J. Paraszczak ve P. Williams. 2010. “Foundations for Smarter Cities.” IBM Journal of Research and Development 54 (4): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1147/JRD.2010.2048257.
• Ho, Chin Chang ve Shu Fen Tseng. 2006. “From Digital Divide to Digital Inequality: The Global Perspective.” International Journal of Internet and Enterprise Management 4 (3): 215. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIEM.2006.010915.
• Ishida, Toru. 2017. “Digital City, Smart City and Beyond.” Içinde Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion - WWW ’17 Companion, 1151-52. Perth, Australia: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3041021.3054710.
• Joshi, Naveen. 2019. “How governments can bridge the digital divide in smart cities.” Son erişim tarihi: 05 Temmuz 2019. https://www.allerin.com/blog/how-governments-can-bridge-the-digital-divide-in-smart-cities.
• Keniston, Kenneth ve Deepak Kumar. 2003. The Four Digital Divides. Delhi: Sage Publishers.
• Kottayl, Navaneeth Kamballur. 2021. “What is a Smart City? - Definition from Techopedia.” Techopedia.com. 2021. http://www.techopedia.com/definition/31494/smart-city.
• Kourtit, Karima, Peter Nijkamp ve Daniel Arribas. 2012. “Smart Cities in Perspective – a Comparative European Study by Means of Self-Organizing Maps.” Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 25 (2): 229-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2012.660330.
• Kraemer, Kenneth, Dale Ganley ve Sanjeev Dewan. 2005. “Across the Digital Divide: A Cross-Country Multi-Technology Analysis of the Determinants of IT Penetration.” Journal of the Association for Information Systems 6 (12): 409-32. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00071.
• Lombardi, Patrizia, Silvia Giordano, Andrea Caragliu, Chiara Del Bo, Mark Deakin, Peter Nijkamp ve Karima Kourtit. 2011. “An Advanced Triple-Helix Network Model for Smart Cities Performance.” Research Memorandum 2011-45, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
• Millo, Giovanni ve Gianfranco Piras. 2012. “Splm: Spatial Panel Data Models in R.” Journal of Statistical Software 47 (1): 1-38. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v047.i01.
• Myeong, Seunghwan, Yuseok Jung ve Eunuk Lee. 2018. “A Study on Determinant Factors in Smart City Development: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Analysis.” Sustainability 10 (8): 2606. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082606.
• OECD. 2001. Understanding the Digital Divide. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.
• Partridge, Helen. 2004. “Developing a Human Perspective to the Digital Divide in the Smart City.” İçinde AILA 2004 Biennial Conference, 21-24 September 2004, Queensland.
• Pellicer, Soledad, Guadalupe Santa, Andres L. Bleda, Rafael Maestre, Antonio J. Jara ve Antonio Gomez Skarmeta. 2013. “A Global Perspective of Smart Cities: A Survey.” Içinde 2013 Seventh International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing, 439-44. Taichung, Taiwan: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IMIS.2013.79.
• Quibria, M.G, Shamsun N Ahmed, Ted Tschang ve Mari-Len Reyes-Macasaquit. 2003. “Digital Divide: Determinants and Policies with Special Reference to Asia.” Journal of Asian Economics 13 (6): 811-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1049-0078(02)00186-0.
• Şaf, Mehmet Yaşar. 2015. “Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri Sektörünün Makroekonomik Etkileri: Uluslararası Karşılaştırma ve Türkiye Değerlendirmesi.” Uzmanlık Tezi, Kalkınma Bakanlığı.
• Tang, Bo, Zhen Chen, ve Gerald Hefferman. 2015. “A Hierarchical Distributed Fog Computing Architecture for Big Data Analysis in Smart Cities.” İçinde ASE BD&SI '15: Proceedings of the ASE BigData & SocialInformatics.
• Taylor, Linnet ve Christine Richter. 2016. “Customers, Users or Citizens? Inclusion, Spatial Data and Governance in the Smart City.” SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2792565 
• Tekin Bilbil, Ebru. 2017. “The Operationalizing Aspects of Smart Cities: The Case of Turkey’s Smart Strategies.” Journal of the Knowledge Economy 8 (3): 1032-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-016-0423-3.
• World Bank. 2016. World Development Report 2016: Digital Dividends. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0671-1.