Title: Residents Attitudes and Pleasure Towards Outdoor Space Usage of Samatyas Entertainment Centers.

Keywords: pleasure, attitude, exterior space usage, Samatya Sqaure H1: Social status of the residents are effective on the formation of their satisfaction and attitudes towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya Square.

1.Introduction 1.1 The aim of the research 1.2 Hypothesis 1.3 Significance

2. Residents Position in Touristic Places 2.1 Sustainable Tourism Planning Theory 2.1.a Residents Participation to Tourism Development 2.1.b Factors that Determine Residents Attitudes and Social Status Theory 2.2 Tourism Development at Samatya 2.2.a Samatya 2.2.b Current Tourism Activities at Samatya 2.2.c Outdoor Space Usage and Residents Attitudes at Samatya 3. Methodology 3.1 Results and Discussion 4. Conclusion 5. References

1. Introduction Local communities are known as the key stakeholders in leisure and tourism management. Tourism has to be managed with the help and interest of all stakeholders in a given territory with a focus on local inhabitants (Guyer and Pollard, 1997). Considering the importance of residents who have a key role in tourism, many studies have been carried out by researchers in developed countries about local community perceptions toward tourism. But unfortunately, hardly any work has been devoted to examine residents attitudes on touristic places from the view of architecture. This research aims to seek about the residents attitudes and pleasure about the touristic entertainment areas, specifically the outdoor spaces of these places at Samatya Square. Since Samatya includes both a residential and a touristic character, it is quite appropriate to adopt this topic into the site. Samatya Square is a lively touristic place with its taverns and restaurants that open to the square. At that point the spatial condition of the outdoor space usage of entertainment places play an important role for this research with its interface character that creates a tension between tourists and locals. With no difference from other touristic places, at Samatya Square, increasing number of taverns and entertainment venues are arranged according to the tourists demands. Activites and organizations are made by local administrations and Samatya is planned to be open to the global tourism market with big investments. At that transformation period, a sensitivenees about the locals perception is very necessary for a balanced and sustainable development process. This research aims to step in to seek residents attitudes towards outdoor space usage of entertainment areas and determine their pleasure criterias for further plannings about tourism development at Samatya.

1.1 The aim of the research The research studies about the residents position in the touristic places. The main idea on which the research is constructed is that the local peoples attitudes are essential as well as tourists for a healthy and sustainable tourism development. So, the research aims to find out what criterias are effective that shape the residents attitudes and satisfaction about the outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya. 1.2 Significance What is significant for a sustainable tourism is a balanced development process that is sensitive to residents pleasure as well as tourists demands. The participation of the residents to social, economic and cultural life at touristic places is essential for the permanence of the place as a focal touristic region. This research plays a significant role for future tourism plannings conducted by local administrations by exposing the underlying reasons that residents feel uncomfortable or displeased. Besides, the research can lead further detailed researches about residents attitudes at touristic places. The research contains four parts. In the second part of the research, literature review and main theories on which the research is based will be presented about pleasure and residents position. The third section will explain the methods of the site work, data collection procedures, participants and evaluation methods. In the fourth and the last part, findings will be evaluated and drawn a conclusion.

1.3 Hypothesis The research raises the assumption that the social status of the residents is the determinant factor for the formation of their satisfaction and attitudes towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya Square. H1: Social status of residents are effective on the formation of their attitudes and satisfaction towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya. H0: Social status of residents are not effective on the formation of their attitudes and satisfaction towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya. In order to test this main hypothesis, 8 different variables for pleasure and attitude; and 3 different variables for social status is determined. These variables are listed like following:

Variables about social status are determined based on the social status theory of Michelson (1970) that he categorizes social status under three factors which are salary, education and occupation. The varibles for pleasure and attitude of residents are determined based on the social exchange theory that categorizes the impacts of tourism under social, economic and environmental aspects.

2. Residents Position in Touristic Places 2.1 Sustainable Tourism Planning Theory Tourism is often characterized by haphazard development that generates unevenly distributed benefits. Such circumstances apply especially to rural communities, in which few residents stand to benefit directly from tourism. Many communities experience economic leakages, in which most of the profits from tourism leave the community. This outflow occurs mainly because those who have decision-making authority over tourism development reside outside the community. This situation can lead to the eventual deterioration and abandonment of tourism destination sites, leaving the local people worse off than before tourism development began (Mitchell and Reid 2000). According to the sustainable tourism theory, in order to minimize the threats of the developing tourism, there is a need for dialogue, cooperation, and collaboration among the various stakeholders involved (Aas et al., 2005). Arrangements about touristic places are being performed without a

sensitiveness about habitants comfort. Instead, tourist pleasure is the only issue to be focused by investors. Habitants attitudes are generally left outside of this development process.

Extrem examples of this situtation can be seen in the unhealthy and ubalanced transformation process of a place that exceeds without any attendence of local habitants. Loss of community identity and local culture often occurs when a high growth rate with poor planning and growth management are combined. (Rosenow and Pulsifer, 1979) Therefore, development and the transformation periods should be definetely planned taking account of habitants attitudes as well as tourist pleasure. The sresidents involvement must be included in any sustainable tourism plan in order to reduce conflict (Byrd 2007). Menningg (1995) noted development of sustainable tourism in a community is not simply a matter of matching product supply with tourist demand. Local acceptibilty must also be considered. As Richardson and Long (1991) argued, residents leisure needs and wants must take precedence over development for tourists. Concern with residents desires is obviously necessary to maintain support for tourism given their permanent status within the community. 2.1.a Residents Participation to Tourism Development Tourism development should consult the participation of local groups and their opinions. Dijanira Rojer states that one important step towards achieving sustainable tourism is a plan and the inclusion of the different stakeholders in the tourism development.(2009) On the other hand McCool and Moisey indicates that the level of resident participation in tourism management varies in different countries. Compared with many developed countries, local residents in many third world countries do not have the opportunities to share in the decision making process of tourism development.(2001) Mowforth and Munt have discussed and provided vast evidence on how local communities in third world countries have been exploited. Little control is given to them to steer the direction of tourism development in their region. Their views are rarely heard. (2003) The issue of residents perception, attitude or pleasure has been studied by many disciplines. Many of them deal with the problem within a more general framework than this research aims to do. Most of the researchers handle the residents attitudes issue towards tourism case as a general mean. This research seks to find out more specific evidences about spatial attitudes in architectural field. Anyway a general look to the literature about the subject will be essential to understand the issue. As an overall framework, many authors have suggested that attitudes tend to fall into three basic categories; economic, sociocultural and environmental. Other types of attitudes such as support for additional tourism, perceptions of personal benefit from tourism and other varibles have also been considered. 2.1.b Factors that Determine Residents Attitudes and Social Status Theory As discussed above, it is important to understand local residents attitudes toward tourism development in order to plan and develop tourism in a sustainable manner. Accordingly, local residents attitudes toward tourism have been widely examined in the literature. Harrill (2004) outlined three types of factors that influence attitudes toward tourism development: sociocultural factors, environmental (spatial) factors, and economic factors.

Early studies of resident attitudes often rested on the ontological perspective that communities are relatively homogeneous places whose residents either generally support or do not support tourism. It did not take long for researchers to determine that there is often great heterogeneity within communities and as a result great variety in attitudes about tourism development (Snaith and Haley, 1999; Mason and Cheyne, 2000; Iroegbu and Chen, 2001/10) In fact some groups of residents may find more in common with other residents in neighbouring communities than within their own. For example, Iroegbu and Chen (2001) found that male, college educated, urban residents who made more than 25000 dollars per year were most likely to support for tourism development, regardless of region of residence in Virginia. Snaith and Haley (1999) found a great deal of variation in support for tourism development within an historic community in England. In general, those who are not economically tied to tourism view it more negatively than those who are; those who own their own homes view tourism development more negatively than those who rent; and those who live far from the city center are more likely view tourism development more negatively than those who live in town. In other words, persona characteristics have some effect on the respndents view of tourism development, perhaps due to the myriad ways in which people with different personal characteristics experience the impact of tourism. Similarly, Smith and Krannich (1998) found that residents in tourism-dependent communties prefer less tourism development and perceive more negative tourism-related impacts than residets in less tourism-dependent communities. As obviously seen, attitudes and pleasure criterias vary acording to residents personal conditions as well as socicultural, economic and spatial conditions. A number of studies based on social exchange theory have verified a relationship about the attitudes towards tourism. For example, structural equation models have verified a reationship between support for tourism development and economic involvement, ecocentric attitudes, residents perceptions about impacts, the state of the economy, how far residents live from the tourist activities. (Gursoy et al., 2002) According to the social exchange theory, attitudes and pleasure levels are measured under the categories which are social, economic and environmental aspects. The research aims to seek the social factors that affect the attitude and pleasure level of residents. For an overall framework for the topic, social status theories are also significant to investigate. In sociology or anthropology, social status is the honor or prestige attached to one's position in society (one's social position). In pre-modern societies, status differentiation is widely varied. In some cases it can be quite rigid and class based, such as with the Indian caste system. In other cases, status exists without class and/or informally, as is true with some HunterGatherer societies such as the Khoisan, and some Indigenous Australian societies. The German sociologist Max Weber developed a theory proposing that stratification is based on three factors that have become known as "the three p's of stratification": property, prestige and power. He claimed that social stratification is a result of the interaction of wealth, prestige and power. Mitchells social status theory is intimate to Webers and it classifies the social statue under the categories which are salary, education and occupation. This theory which the research is based on provides clear and explicit data in order to measure the social status. 2.2 Tourism Development at Samatya 2.2.a Samatya Samatya locates at the seaside of Fatih county where the old Byzantine walls end. Samatya is a very old settlement of Istanbul where Muslim, Armenian and Christian people live together in a peaceful neighborhood with an intricate cultural mosaic. It is known that Samatya Region is as old as

the city itself. In the period of Byzantine Emperor I. Theodosius, Samatya existed as a small village far from the old city. Samatya conserve its character and identity with its non-Muslim residents even after the Fatih Sultan Mehmet conquered Istanbul. Once upon a time 'Little Paris' so-called Samatya is a place that serves a delightful life with its taverns, casinos, fishermen, delicatessen, sport activities and boat trips along coast in summer times. This lively and multicultural life gradually perished after the big migrations at 6th-7th of September 1950. Since then, Samatya has been living with its new habitants immigrated from the east part of Turkey with a few Armenian and Christian families left. In the present day we cannot say it lost all its identity and soul. The region sustain its existence with an increasing number of taverns, fishermen culture and surviving authenticity as a tourisric destination. 2.2.b Current Tourism Activities at Samatya Samatya has been a touristically attractive district with its multicultural and identical character since hundreds of years. Samatya did not lose all its identity and cultural mosaic however, it has been damaged seriously since the unfortunate migration movements at history. But nowadays, it tries to create new touristic attractions as well as to sustain its historical and cultural context. With the studies conducted by local administrations, Samatya has been entering a new transformation period focusing on the touristical investments and activites. TURAD plays an important role that undertakes this transformation and healing studies. TURAD prepared a project that aims to vitalize Samatyas tourism potential to appeal both local and foreign tourists. With the scope of this project, studies about the outdoor spaces play a huge role. At first stage, a logo was designed to be used at the outdoor spaces like tents, shopwindows etc. Afterwards, the tableclothes and tables were renewed, the equipments used for service are renewed, the facades that looks through the square was painted and repaired, the outdoor spaces of the retaurants were taken under a regular control. Besides them, a new city image of Samatya that highlighted the fish and rak culture was strengthened by the arranged activites and advertisements, music festivals were organized and service trainings were given to the personal working at restaurants. These attempts improves the existing tourism potential of Samatya. The increasing number of taverns and incoming tourists are the vast evidences of this touristic transformation and healing process. 2.2.c Outdoor Space Usage at Samatya and Residents Attitudes at Samatya In touristic centers of the city, outdoor spaces play an important role in displaying an attractive touristic image and a social atmosphere. Because it is the interface that tourists confront and start to perceive the place at first step. The identitiy, sociabilty and the quality of a place reveals itself by this interface. Therefore, outdoor space usage comes into prominence and becomes a dominant component of a touristic place. So long as the global tourism evolves, touristic places start to invest in outdoor arrangements and designs in order to attract more tourists. Physical arrangements of the place and presentation of the service are tried to be improved to enhance the touristic character and the quality of the place. Outdoor space usage is also a very critical issue for Samatya as a fast growing touristical region. Samatya Square, which is very dominant among touristical attractions at Samatya, is full of recreational areas devoted to tourists like taverns, restaurants, etc. There are a few grocery shops and a pet shop that looks towards the square. Rest of all the shops that locate at ground floor are functioned as touristical entrtainment areas. There are 14 fish restaurants with music, 8 meat restaurants and 5 mixed restaurants that locate at the square. All the facilities use their outdoor patios with tables and chairs. These outdoor spaces creates a lively image especially at nights with its lights, musics and crowd. The restaurants serve at day times too. For Samatya, the outdoor spaces of restaurants are dominant factors that shape and effect the character of the whole square with their proximity and visual relation to daily life and pedesterian roads.

The outdoor spaces that are devoted to the touristical use, is a very dominant element for the visual, social and cultural characteristic of the square indeed. The square is the place where all Samatyas daily life is passing within it and where the residents of Samatya use it densely in a day. But, a remarkable part of the sqaure is excluded from the residents use because of their touristical value. At this situation, the relationship between the residents and the outside spaces of restaurants comes into prominence. The question remark rises from this tension. The research is situated at this tension point and asks if the residents are pleased and satisfied about these outside spaces that they are excluded from. Further questions try to find out that what factors are effective on the pleasant and satisfaction level of residents towards these outdoor spaces. The research aims to investigate the relationship between the social status of the residents and the satisfaction and attitudes of them towards outdoor spaces of restaurants at Samatya Square. 3. Methods The aim of the research is to investigate if there is a relationship between residents social status and their satisfaction and attitudes towards outdoor space usage at Samatya Sqaure. The main source of information for this quantitative study is questionnaries with Samatya residents. Before preparing the questionnaires, literature review about the topic was done and main theories about the subjects was investigated. The number of participants are 40. The participants were selected randomly and were approached by asking them if they had a few minutes to fill the questionnaries about Samatya. The questions are categorized under two topics. At the first part, the demographic questions were prepared. At the second part, questions that investigate the residents satisfaction and attitudes were prepared by using a 5 point Likert Scale Method. The independent variable of this hypothesis is the social status and the dependent variable of the hypothesis is residents pleasure and attitudes towards outdoor space usage of restaurants. 8 different variables for pleasure and attitude; and 3 different variables for social status is determined. Variables about social status are determined based on the social status theory of Michelson (1970) that he categorizes social status under three factors which are salary, education and occupation. The varibles for pleasure and attitude of residents are determined based on the social exchange theory that categorizes the impacts of tourism under social, economic and environmental aspects. The variables are tested by crosstabs and Chi-square analyzes with the help of the SPSS Inc Software. Demographic data that is used for the research is given in the following chart. These data are categorized under the categories that are age, gender, occupation, education and salary.

(demografik datalar belirt, bulgular zerinde konu)

At this part of the research, the relationship between the factors that constitute social status and each variables of residents pleasure and attitude will be analyzed one-to-one. The factors that generate social status will be examined if they create any difference on each variable of residentspleasure and attitude.

*Pearson Chi-Square x2: ... p: ... p: 0,05 (salary-privacy) *Pearson Chi-Square x2: ... p: ... p: 0,05 (education-privacy) *Pearson Chi-Square x2: ... p: ... p: 0,05 (occupation-privacy)

1. paragraf (yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve mahremiyete kar tutumlarnn / gelire gre nasl deitiini yzdeler zerinden belirt / bulgular zerinde kunu) chi-square sonucunda edindiin rakam sonucunda gelir ve mahremiyete kar taknlan tutum arasnda bir iliki olup olmadn syle. 2. paragraf (yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve mahremiyete kar tutumlarnn / eitime gre nasl deitiini yzdeler zerinden belirt / bulgular zerinde kunu) chi-square sonucunda edindiin rakam sonucunda eitim ve mahremiyete kar taknlan tutum arasnda bir iliki olup olmadn syle 3. paragraf (yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve mahremiyete kar tutumlarnn / meslee gre nasl deitiini yzdeler zerinden belirt / bulgular zerinde kunu) chi-square sonucunda edindiin rakam sonucunda meslek ve mahremiyete kar taknlan tutum arasnda bir iliki olup olmadn syle Bu yntemi kalan 7 alt hipotez (kullanc tutum ve memluniyetleri) iin ayr ayr yap!

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve sese kar tutumlarnn : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve kalabala kar tutumlarnn : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekanlarndaki masa sandelye younluuna ve yaya geiine kar tutumlarnn : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan dzenlemelrine ve tarihi dokuya kar tutumlarnn : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve meydandaki ekonomik canlla kar tutumlarnn : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan tasarmlarna kar memluniyetinin : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, samatya meydannn elence amal kullanmasn kar memluniyetinin : gelire/eitime/meslee gre nasl deitii)

Bu tabloda: herbir kullanc tutum ve memluniyetinin, sosyal staty oluturan faktrlerle (gelir,eitim,meslek) olan ilikileri toplu olarak gsterilecektir.(chi-square sonular dogrultusunda)

6. References 1.Aas, C., Ladkin, A., Fletcher, j. (2005). Stakeholder Collaboration and Heritage Management. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 2848. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160738304001021 2.Rosenow, J.E. and Pulsifer, G.L. (1979) Tourism: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly. Media Publishing, Kansas City, Montana http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/19/1/30.2.full.pdf+html 3.Byrd, E.T., (2007) Stakeholders in Sustainable Tourism Development and their roles: Applying Stakeholder Theory to Sustainable Tourism Development. Tourism Review. Vol 62 No. 2/2007 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1628309&show=html 4.Long, T. Patrick, (1991) Tourism on our terms: Rural community tourism development impacts and policies, p.58 5.Rojer, D., (2009) Sustainable Tourism Development; Are (All) The Right Stakeholders Considered in the Development. http://www.tourism-master.nl/2009/10/26/sustainable-tourism-development-are-all-the-rightstakeholders-considered-in-the-development/ 6.McCool S.F., Moisey N.R., (2001) Tourism, recreation, and sustainability: linking culture and the environment.p.238, p.255 7.Mowforth M., Munt I., (2003) Tourism and sustainability: development, globalisation and new tourism in the third world, p.31 8.Snaith T., Haley A., (1999) Residents' opinions of tourism development in the historic city of York, England, Western Governors' Association, p.595-603 9.Grsoy, D. and Jurowski, C., (2002) Resident Attitudes in Relation to Distance from Tourist Attractions. http://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/R ESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRA CTIONS.PDF 10.Mason, P., Cheyne, J. (2000). Residents attitudes to proposed tourism development Annals of Tourism Research, vol.27, pp.391-411 11.Iroegbu, H., Chen, J. S. (2001): Urban Residents Reaction Toward Tourism Development:Do subgroups Exist?, Tourism Analysis, vol.6(2), pp. 155-161 12. Guyer, C., Pollard, J. (1997). Cruise visitor impressions of the environment of the Shannon-Erne waterways system. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 199215.

13. Mitchell, R.E., and Reid, D.G. (2000). Community integration: Island tourism in Peru. Annals of
Tourism Research, 28(1), 113-139.