Kondepudi & Kondepudi (2015: 2) use the term “smart sustainable city” to refer to an innovative city using information and communication technologies (ICTs) and other means such as the Internet of Things and big data analytics to improve quality of life, efficiency of urban service provision and management, and competitiveness. They also emphasize that a smart sustainable city meets the needs and demands of present and future generations with regard to socioeconomic and ecological aspects. In another broader definition, a city is considered as “smart” when its investment in human and social capital and in communications infrastructure actively promote sustainable economic development and a high quality of life, including the wise management of resources implemented through a participatory government (UCLG Community of Practice, 2019). According to the EIP-SC European Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities, smart cities are “systems of people interacting with and using flows of energy, materials, services and financing to catalyze sustainable economic development, resilience, and high quality of life; these flows and interactions become smart through making strategic use of information and communication infrastructure and services in a process of transparent urban planning and management that is responsive to the social and economic needs of society” (UCLG Community of Practice, 2019).
Harrison vd. (2010: 2) use the term “smarter city” as “an instrumented, interconnected, and intelligent city”, connecting the physical, ICTs, socioeconomic and business infrastructure to improve the operational efficiency and quality of life of a city and lives of citizens. According to Harrison vd. (2010: 2), in a smarter city, “the traditional concept of a physical city infrastructure is extended to a virtual city infrastructure, an integrated framework that will allow cities to gather, integrate, analyze, optimize, and make decisions based on detailed operational data” through sensors, cameras, kiosks, meters and other similar smart devices and appliances, distributed and centralized digital processing technologies, transmission bandwidth, and software models. According to Harrison vd. (2010: 7), a smarter city is an instrumented, interconnected and intelligent city. Instrumentation enables the capture and integration of live real time data through the use of sensors, meters, cameras and
42 similar other smart data-acquisition systems as well as software in IT systems that extract some diagnostic information about operations, service delivery, customers etc. Interconnected refers to “the ability to connect instrumented systems physically via public and private networks within the city but also the ability to connect together logically the many IT software systems used by the city’s agencies to manage the operation of the city’s services”
(Harrison vd. 2010: 4). The term “intelligent” means “the inclusion of artificial intelligence, complex analytics, modeling, optimization, and visualization in the operation of urban services” (Harrison vd. 2010: 6).
Other definitions are available but this study envisions a sustainable human smart city with smart citizens, smart city management, smart services and innovative milieu. In such a sustainable human smart city, urban governance, service provision and infrastructure should be interconnected through new digital technologies and the IoT with emphasis placed on environmental and human aspects. A sustainable human smart city is built on effectively and widely utilized new digital and green technologies but it is not a technological dump site. The city is primarily considered as a living space for urban dwellers with housing, offices, theaters, cafes, restaurants, lakes, parks, recreation and green areas, among others. A similar approach is presented by Moretti, Schlemmer and Yalova in their 2018 study titled Human Smart Cities: Theories, Practices, Case Studies for Intelligent Cities Today.
Some other main characteristics of a sustainable human smart city could be listed as follows:
1- An urban space of interconnected smart objects, citizens, stakeholders and entrepreneurs.
2- Provision of convenient smart urban services and infrastructure 3- Promotion of joint innovative project developments and start-ups 4- Development of a sustainable human smart city strategy
5- A strategy based on participation, continuous improvement, the IoT, real time data of service provision and citizen experiences
6- Having a balance between quality of life of citizens, environment and technology.
Figure 1. Components and Characteristics of Smart Cities (Manville et. al., 2014: 30)
43 The basic components of a smart city are presented in the above figure. However, there are some highly wired cities claiming to be a developed smart city with a lot of investment in high technologies. Yet, heavily investing in new information and telecommunication technologies is not enough to become a developed sustainable human smart city. Similarly, such cities as the ones listed below may not considered as a developed and well established smart city:
1- A city with free WiFi everywhere etc.
2- A space of the smart objects and projects 3- A city providing e-services on the web 4- A city with a social media manager
5- A city with a geographical or management information system
Thus, city managements with a goal to transform into a sustainable human smart city need to plan and take some other important steps to and to become a smart city. Some of these steps are provided below:
1- Design a sustainable human smart city strategy and develop a road map in a participatory manner
2- Have awareness towards the diverse needs of different groups
44 3- Have an awareness towards sustainability and the use of green technologies,
renewable energy sources
4- Aim for zero emission and for widespread use of renewable energy resources 5- Ensure all public services are fully accessible
6- Aim for continuous improvement and cultural change via educating city employees and citizens
7- Set aside innovative spaces for citizen, stakeholder and entrepreneur interaction and involvement
8- Explore innovative business potential, promote the development of start-ups and relevant projects together with stakeholders
9- Have a policy of training programs to compensate for job losses
Accordingly, it could be argued that a well-established vision of smart cities “lies on the understanding of how to move from high objectives to specific innovative solutions and how replicate successful innovations in a local context - being aware that each solution applied to a city involves a combination of technologies which are adjusted to the needs of a specific city and that can be affected by many factors (technological, financial, economic, regulatory and administrative, social and stakeholder uptake, etc.)” (Annunziato & Maestosi, 2018: 12).
Planning in a Smart City
One has to consider the questions of how the planner of a smart city is different from
“an urban planner” or the defining source of difference is technology? Urban planners are tempted to favor a top-down approach, but considering democratic values makes them consider and place at the forefront the participation of citizens in the planning and policy making in urban governance. It is important to explore how applying new technologies influences or factors in city planning to achieve the bottom lines of urban governance and policy making processes?
The elements required for city planning includes stakeholders and actors such as public authorities, central and city administrations etc., different groups of citizens, private sector, civic actors and organizations, among others. The other group of elements involves resources such as experts, professionals, financial resources and participatory budget, the powers of zoning and eminent domain, among others. The main characteristic of urban planning process in a smart city is its participatory feature at all stages but it should include
45 new participation mechanisms such as city labs, use of software to participate digitally or to reach city management, etc. The sets of important tools and principles for urban planners in smart city are leadership, compatible and flexible legislations, digital technologies, open data, big data analytics, transparency, accountability and citizen participation, among others.
Planning in smart city requires reshuffling relations among the actors and stakeholders in order to increase effectiveness in communications and participation processes. From the elements mentioned about and this reshuffling, two competing approaches emerge: Top-down (planning coming from authorities and professionals) and bottom up approaches (a more flexible participatory approach).
In the top-down approach, proposals in the internet or through other technological mechanisms are considered by the elected officials of the city council representing the constituencies. Public authorities may also conduct consultations (round-table discussions, town-hall meetings etc.). Public administrative bodies harmonize the competing needs of citizen groups and often know what is best for the public or what is best for implementation with given the budget.
In more flexible bottom-up approach, public administration provides the framework for participation but the vision-setting and ideas come from citizen groups, the representatives of private and civic sectors, etc. Citizen groups and the private and civic sectors may also implement on their own but within the framework provided by government. The importance of grassroots and communities cannot be understated. Funding mechanisms for participatory projects may include private sector shares, donations of rich citizens or private sector, budgets of NGOs and CSOs, participatory budgets/bottom-up budgets etc. Yet, decision-making and implementation may stay with public administration for large-scale investment projects. The participatory approach rests on the fundamental question of what are the basic needs of the city, but it is often difficult to implement.
To give some examples, in Tokyo, machizukuri (town-making) of wards invites different groups of people with various interests (students, differently-abled or disabled citizens, elderly, women and men, etc.) to walk around the city (with the planning and implementing agencies) and they contribute to raising and creating a vision for the city on what needs to be done and how the plans should be revised. In Taiwan and Philippines, there are cases where participatory budgeting is implemented as an example of bottom-up planning.
46 Citizens propose projects to be funded by and compete for the city budget. A portion of which can be funded by the city budget but the community has to look for the remainder.7
The Inclusive City: Civic Engagement and Democratic Participation in Smart City Democratic participation and civic engagement are crucial for realizing the vision of a sustainable human smart city. In order for the public to support projects that sometimes make daily life difficult for them while benefiting them greatly in the near future, they must be made a part of the planning and decision making processes. Therefore, sustainable civic engagement and a more participatory understanding of citizenship should be a part of smart urban governance, and its effectiveness should be further strengthened by utilizing new information and telecommunication technologies. In a sustainable human smart city, it should be insured that the youth, children, teenagers, students can acquire civic skills, imagination and creativity via teamwork and civic projects. It is important that they enjoy getting engaged, deal with problems, and develop solutions in teams. Therefore, a participatory education system with a participatory and innovative learning environment is an essential part of sustainable human smart cities.
Social cohesion consisting of a sense of reciprocity, trust and bonding between various stakeholders and citizen groups is also necessary to ensure a vibrant environment of harmonious civic engagement. A practical way to create such a relationship is through round table public meetings and discussions in which stakeholders not only can express their views on projects but also develop awareness of outcomes and ways of implementation. Bureaucrats also have to find new and innovative ways and small actions such as attaching a questionnaire for satisfaction rating and feedback for the improvement of existing services. Programs to foster participation in activities such as volunteering or service to help the betterment of community may be another method. In any case, emerging innovative technologies, e-learning, city or street labs etc. should be utilized as new tools to enable stakeholders, grassroots groups, individual citizens, citizen groups and other actors to engage, learn interaction and develop solutions together.
7 Please see https://www.tycg.gov.tw/budget/home.jsp?id=4&parentpath=0,3
47 Sustainability in Smart Cities: Mobility and Green Transport
Sustainability caters to and balances the pressing demands of the present and the needs of the future. Sustainability in smart city generates awareness of production and consumption processes, the efficient use of resources required for urban development and the quality of citizen lives, and increased use of green technologies. It focuses on enhancing the process of civic engagement, connectivity and the responsible use of urban resources for sustainable lifestyles. It also helps reduce pollution and preserve ecology through smart green solutions via the management of water, waste, energy, and transportation through transit-oriented development (TOD).
Eco-friendly infrastructures connected through the IoT, intelligent transport systems (ITS) and artificial intelligence (AI) are the key tools to establish a sustainable smart city system that includes smart transportation, smart waste management, renewable energy production, water treatment, and passive building. The smart city should use renewable sources such as wind and solar energy, underground geothermal energy, hydropower, biogas produced from waste, among others. It also involves aiming for zero emission especially via smart and human centered mobility and transport systems. These systems require promoting public transport oriented development, well-integrated transport systems and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) with pedestrian oriented city for citizens. It further helps to establish efficient connectivity, zero carbon city, increased green area and eco-friendly transport via widespread bike use, pedestrian-bike oriented streets, streets for only pedestrians and bikes, bike sharing, solar panel roads, MRT (Mass Rapid Transit) and BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) systems.
As one of the crucial components for sustainability and eco-friendly development for smart cities, smart mobility or transportation is critical. Smart city should have streets convenient for all users including especially pedestrians, cyclists and people with special needs. Smart mobility or transportation is based on an intelligent transport system (ITS) consisting of a central system and several auxiliary systems. A Transport Control Center (TCC) as part of an ITS coordinates traffic in an interactive and integrated way through transport control center with the help of artificial intelligence (AI). The TCC gathers data from all the urban systems, analyzes them and transmits necessary instructions to the providers and the users. The system also produces information based on mobility patterns in
48 order to ensure safety, comfort and convenience of citizens, and provides information on traffic accidents and jams, whether and road conditions to warn commuters and help them plan ahead accordingly. It guides the commuters to the best possible alternative roads to reach their destinations. It provides applications that show drivers to available parking lots in the city, and that help tourists navigate the city.
Conclusion
Today, many cities around the world develop policies and implementations to become smart cities in order to better manage today’s and future challenges of growing cities and better meet the ever increasing and diversifying demands of citizens in fields such as governance, policy and decision making, city planning, environmental protection, quality of life, urban safety, transportation, economic development, urban service provision, among others. In this regard, digital technologies provide new and better opportunities for better policy making, decision making, good e-governance, data analytics and innovative methods of service production and provision. Any strategy towards becoming a smart city has to be based on citizen needs and experiences, smart and green technologies and concerns for quality of life and livable environment as well as on such principles as enhanced and accessible mobility, communication, innovation, transparency, competitiveness and participation. The main caution this paper raises is that any strategy regarding smart cities should be human centered and based on smart use of new information and telecommunication technologies and the IoT in order to provide integrated urban services and to avoid becoming a technology dumping ground. Accordingly, this study puts forward a vision of a sustainable human smart city consisting of an innovative milieu, smart citizens, smart city management and smart services that are interconnected through new digital and green technologies and the IoT with emphasis placed on environmental and human aspects.
References
Albino, V., Berardi, U. & Dangelico, R.M. (2015). Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3-21
Annunziato, M. & Maestosi, P. C. (2018). Towards a European Vision for the Smart Cities to
Come. TECHNE, Special Issue (1), 12-15. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paola_Maestosi/publication/326830793_Towards_a_eur opean_vision_for_the_smart_cities_to_come/links/5b65d246458515cf1d35aac1/Towards-a-european-vision-for-the-smart-cities-to-come.pdf?origin=publication_detail on 10.11.2019.
49 Case, S. (2016). The Third Wave: An Entrepreneur’s Vision of the Future. New York: Simon
& Schuster Inc.
Sağır, H., Göksel, Z. S. & Eroğlu, T. (2018). Industry 4.0 and Connectedness in the Digital Era. In Gül, H., Okcu, M. & Turhan, G. (Eds.), Public and Urban Administration and Policy in the Digital Age (s. 27-56). Mauritius, Latviya: LAP Lambert.
Gül, H. (2018). Characteristics of Digitization and its Consequences for Public Administration and Policy. In Gül, H., Okcu, M. & Turhan, G. (Eds.), Public and Urban Administration and Policy in the Digital Age (s. 5-26). Mauritius, Latviya: LAP Lambert.
Harrison, C., Eckman, B., Hamilton, R., Hartswick, P., Kalagnanam, J. Paraszczak, J. &
Williams, P. (2018). Foundations for Smarter Cities. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 54(4), 1-16.
Marrone, M. & Hammerle, M. (2018). “Smart Cities: A Review and Analysis of Stakeholders’ Literature. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 60(3), 197-213.
Kondepudi, S. & Kondepudi, R. (2015). What Constitutes a Smart City? In A. Vesco & F.
Ferrero (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Social, Economic, and Environmental Sustainability in the Development of Smart Cities (s. 1-25). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Lazaroiu, G. C. & Roscia, M. (2012). Definition Methodology for the Smart Cities Model.
Energy, 47, 326-332.
Manville, C. et. al., (2018). Mapping Smart Cities in the EU. Brussel: Directorate General for Internal Policies, European Parliament,
Moretti, G., Schlemmer, E. ve Yalova, Y. (2018). Human Smart Cities: Theories, Practices, Case Studies for Intelligent Cities Today. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık.
Schwab, K. (2016) The Fourth Industrial Revolution. New York: Crown Publishing Group.
Strauss, E. & Özcan, A. (2018). Digital Cities and Digital Citizen’s Rights. In Gül, H., Okcu, M. & Turhan, G. (Eds.), Public and Urban Administration and Policy in the Digital Age (s.
57-79). Mauritius, Latviya: LAP Lambert.
UCLG Community of Practice (2019) “Smart City” Concept. Retrieved from http://www.uclg-digitalcities.org/en/smart-city-concept/ on 10.11.2019.
50 Farklı Eksenlerden Sınır Bölgesinde Suriyeli Sığınmacıların Algılanma Biçimleri8
Doç. Dr. Serdar ÜNAL9 ORCID: 0000-0003-2755-9456
Fatıma DOĞAN10
Özet11
2011 yılından bu yana Suriye’de meydana gelen iç karışıklıklalar nedeniyle milyonlarca Suriyeli vatandaş Türkiye’ye iltica etmiştir. Suriyeli sığınmacılar geldikleri ülke ve sahip oldukları kültür itibariyle yabancı göçmen olarak değerlendirilmektedir. Türkiye tarihinde görülen daha önceki yabancı göçler sayıca daha az olmuş ve daha çok belirli bölgelerle sınırlı kalmıştır. Bugün ise yapılan sayımlarda Suriyeli sığınmacıların farklı oranlarda da olsa Türkiye’nin hemen hemen her ilinde yaşadıkları gerçeği bulunmaktadır. Bu göçün sonucunda Türkiye’de sosyal, siyasal ve ekonomik yapıda birçok değişim yaşanmış ve halen yaşanmaktadır. Suriyeli sığınmacıların aktörü olduğu bu kitlesel göç hareketi ve sonuçları Türkiye’nin gündelik yaşam pratiklerine etki edecek kadar güçlü ve kapsamlı olduğu için sosyolojik temelde çeşitli boyutlarıyla irdelenmeye muhtaçtır. Suriyeli sığınmacılar hakkında yapılan çalışmalarda yerli halkın yabancıya yönelik algı ve tutumları, yerli halkın yabancıya yönelik tutumlarının ardında yatan gerekçelerin neler olduğu vb. konularda ayrıntılı bilgiye ulaşılmasını sağlayan çalışmaların ehemmiyeti yadsınamaz.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Suriyeli sığınmacılar, Algı, Yabancı.
Giriş
İnsanların çeşitli nedenlerden dolayı baskı ve zulümden kaçarak veya sürgün edilerek diğer egemen güçlere sığınmak zorunda bırakılmaları çok eski tarihlerden beri süregelmektedir
8 Bu çalışma danışmanlığını yaptığım ve Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi BAP Koordinatörlüğü tarafından desteklenen Fatıma Doğan’ın Yüksek Lisans Tez Projesinden [Yabancı İle Bir Arada Yaşama ve Ötekileştirme: Mardin Halkının Bakışından Suriyeli Sığınmacılar; FEF-17038] türetilmiştir.
9 Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, Sosyoloji Bölümü.
10 Yüksek Lisans Öğrencisi, Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Sosyoloji Anabilim Dalı.
11 Bu çalışma danışmanlığını yaptığım ve Aydın Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi BAP Koordinatörlüğü tarafından desteklenen Fatıma Doğan’ın Yüksek Lisans Tez Projesinden [Yabancı İle Bir Arada Yaşama ve Ötekileştirme: Mardin Halkının Bakışından Suriyeli Sığınmacılar; FEF-17038] türetilmiştir.
51 (Hazan, 2018:185). 2011 yılında başlayan Suriye’de meydana gelen iç karışıklar sonucu Suriye halkının çok önemli bir kısmı komşu ülkelere iltica etmek zorunda kalmıştır. Suriyeli mültecilerin en çok iltica ettikleri ülke olan Türkiye’deki kayıtlı Suriyeli sayısı Ağustos 2019 tarihi itibarıyla toplam 3 milyon 643 bin 870 kişidir. Bu kişilerin 1 milyon 973 bin 573’ü erkeklerden, 1 milyon 670 bin 297’si ise kadınlardan oluşmaktadır. Suriyeli sığınmacıların Türkiye’ye girişlerinden sonra Türkiye, Avrupa’da en çok göçmene ev sahipliği yapan ülkeler arasında birinci sıraya ulaşmıştır (UNCHR, 2019). Önce, uluslararası hukukta herhangi bir karşılığı bulunmayan “misafir” statüsü verilen sığınmacılara, 2012 yılı Nisan ayında yayınlanan genelge ile “geçici koruma” statüsü verildi. Türkiye aynı yıl Ekim ayında, sağladığı bu geçici korumayı genişletti (Mazlumder, 2014:11).
Hiç şüphesiz, Türkiye tarihinde ilk kez bu kadar kalabalık bir yabancı sığınmacı kitlesine ev sahipliği yapmaktadır. Sürecin ilk başlarında Türkiye krizin oldukça hızlı bir şekilde çözüleceği ve sığınmacıların ülkelerine geri dönüş yapacağı beklentisi içindeydi. Kısa sürmesi beklenen kriz gittikçe karmaşık bir hal alırken başka ülkelere sığınan Suriyelilerin geri dönüş ihtimalleri ise oldukça azaldı (Mazlumder, 2014:11). Türkiye’deki Suriyelilerin belli bir kısmı çeşitli illerde devlet tarafından kurulan sığınmacı kamplarında yaşamlarını sürdürmeye çalışırlarken önemli bir kısmı da kamp dışında yerleşik halk ile iç içe yaşamaktadır.
Aslına bakılırsa, “büyük sayıda mülteci ve yerinden edilmiş insan akışı kaynaklara yeni kısıtlar getirebilir ve onları konuk eden ülkenin ya da bölgenin istikrarını bozabilir” (Ünal, 2014:75). Dolayısıyla, başlangıçta misafir olarak kabul edilen ve tanımlanan Suriyeli sığınmacıların aradan geçen sekiz yıllık süre sonrasında yavaş yavaş Türkiye’de yerleşik hale gelmeye başlaması hiç şüphesiz yerli ile yabancı arasındaki başlangıçtaki ilişkilerin de değişmesine neden olmaktadır. Bu noktada hem niceliksel hem de niteliksel bir dönüşüm süreci içindeki Türkiye’ye gelen veya sığınan gruplar kentlerde birçok sorunla baş etmek durumunda kalabilmektedir. Dolayısıyla, Türkiye’de siyasal, ekonomik, sosyal ve kültürel anlamda derinlemesine etkiler yaratan bu kitlesel göçün ve misafirlikten yerleşikliğe doğru evrilen sürecin mahiyeti son derece önem arz etmektedir.
Göçmen, Mülteci ve Sığınmacı
İnsanların doğal veya insan eliyle yapılmış felaketler, savaşlar gibi pek çok nedenden evlerini, yurtlarını terk edip güvenli bölgelere gitmek zorunda kalmaları çok eski zamanlardan beri yaşanmakta olsa da uluslararası toplum tarafından bu konunun mercek altına alınması yeni
52 sayılabilecek bir durumdur (Hazan, 2018:183). Dolayısıyla, öncelikle tanımsal bir başlangıç yapılacak olursa, göçmen, statü olarak yasal bir yolla hedef bölgeye geçişi tanımlar.
Uluslararası göç hareketinde gidilen ülkenin onayını alan başka bir ifadeyle yasal olarak kabul edilmiş olan kişi veya kişilere göçmen denir (UNHCR, 2013). Bu anlamda, “göçmen, ekonomik nedenlerle, daha iyi bir hayat standardı yakalayabilmek için vatandaşı olduğu devletin ülkesinden ayrılarak, bir başka ülkeye göçen kişiye verilen addır” (Steinbock, 1998:738; akt. Ergüven ve Özturanlı, 2013:1020).
Mültecilerin Hukuki Statüsüne İlişkin 1967 Protokolü’ne göre; mülteci ırkı, dini, tabiiyeti, belli bir toplumsal gruba mensubiyeti veya siyasi düşünceleri yüzünden zulme uğrayacağından haklı sebeplerle korktuğu için vatandaşı olduğu ülkenin dışında bulunan ve bu ülkenin korumasından yararlanamayan ya da söz konusu korku nedeniyle, yararlanmak istemeyen; yahut tabiiyeti yoksa ve bu tür olaylar sonucu önceden yaşadığı ikamet ülkesinin dışında bulunan, oraya dönemeyen veya söz konusu korku nedeniyle dönmek istemeyen her şahıstır. Sığınmacı ise, mülteci olduğu iddiasıyla ülkesini terk eden ama mültecilik statüsü başvurusu sonuçlanmamış kişiyken, mülteci sığınma başvurusu kabul edilen kişidir
Birçok alanda yan yana kullanılan mülteci ve sığınmacı kavramı birbirinden farklıdır.
BMMYK, faaliyetlerinde, “mülteciler” ve “yer değiştirmiş kişiler” ayrımını kullanmaktadır.
Devletin taraf olduğu antlaşmaların kendisine özel statü ve hukuki koruma sağladığı kişiler
“mülteci”, böyle bir sığınma hakkını ve korumayı talep eden; ancak henüz bu korumadan faydalanamayanlar “sığınma arayan kişiler”, BM'ye göre, yerinden olmuş kişiler olarak ifade edilmektedir (Ergüven ve Özturanlı, 2013:1019-1020). Benzer şekilde, bugün özellikle mülteci kelimesinin gerek uluslararası siyasi düzlemde gerekse hukuki manada kısıtlı bir kategoriye dönüşmesi nedeniyle bu alandaki bazı araştırmacılar son yıllarda mülteci çalışmaları yerine zorunlu göç çalışmaları ismini daha çok kullanmaya başlamışlardır (Hazan, 2018:183).
Dünyada Mülteci ya da Sığınmacı Meselesi ve Suriyeli Göçü
2017 yılında yapılan sayımda küresel olarak -doğdukları ülke dışındaki bir ülkede yaşayanlar- uluslararası göç 258 Milyon gibi önemli bir rakama ulaşmıştır. Bu, dünyadaki toplam nüfusun
%3,4'ünü temsil etmektedir (IOM, 2017). BM Mülteci Örgütü verilerine göre ise, 2017 yılı sonu itibarıyla 68,5 milyon kişi yerinden edilmiştir. Bu nüfusun içinde, 16,2 milyon kişi, 2017 yılı içerisinde ya ilk kez ya da üst üste birçok kez olmak üzere yerinden edilmiştir. Bu rakam,
53 hareket halinde olan çok büyük kitlelere tekabül etmektedir ve her gün 44.500 kişinin ya da her iki saniyede bir 1 kişinin yerinden edildiği anlamına gelmektedir. 2017 yılı sonu itibarıyla dünyada, 68,5 milyon zorla yerinden edilmiş insan, 25,4 milyon mülteci bulunmaktadır (UNCHRa, 2019).
Son zamanların en büyük göç dalgası olan Suriyeli göçmenler Dünyadaki göç oranlarını büyük oranlarda etkilemektedir. 2016’da yapılan sayıma göre Suriye'de iç savaş nedeniyle ülke içi ve dışında 13 milyondan fazla Suriyelinin göç etmek zorunda kaldığı belirtilmektedir.
19 Nisan 2018 itibariyle uluslararası hareketlilik dahilinde 6.6 Milyon Suriyelinin dünyaya dağılımı aşağıdaki grafikte gösterilmektedir (UNCHRa, 2018). Bu çerçevede dünyada Suriyelilerin en çok iltica ettikleri ülke Türkiye’dir.
Grafik 1: Dünya Geneli İltica Dağılımı Menşe Ülkelerden İltica Edilen Ülkeye Doğru
Kaynak: Birleşmiş Milletler Mülteci Örgütü (UNCHR) Dünya’da İltica İstatistikleri BMMYK verilerine göre, Avrupa’nın tamamında sığınmacı sayısı 3 milyon 680 bin 215 iken Türkiye’nin ev sahipliği yaptığı sığınmacı sayısı ise 3 milyon 789 bin 320 (GAV, 2018).
Dünya çapında arka arkaya dört yıl içinde en çok sığınmacıya ev sahipliği yapan ülke 3.5 milyon gibi bir sayıyla Türkiye’dir. Türkiye’den sonra 1.4 milyon ile Pakistan ikinci sırada ve Uganda üçüncü sıradadır (UNCHR, 2017). Aşağıdaki grafikte ev sahibi ülkelerde 2016 ile 2017 tarihlerinin sığınmacı sayıları verilmiştir. Bu oranlara bakıldığında sığınmacı sayısının 2017 yılında daha da arttığı gözlemlenmektedir.