Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:54:51.342Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reappropriating the “Green”: Islamist Environmentalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2015

Oğuz Erdur
Oğuz Erdur*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, Columbia University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Soon after coming to power in 1994, one of the first actions of the Islamist municipality in Istanbul was to paint the cobblestones around the municipal area green. The semiotics involved in this seemingly unimportant alteration from the usual yellow or white was immediately recognized by the media, which in turn drew the public's attention to the issue. The municipality was harshly criticized for marking out its territory with an Islamist symbol, i.e., the color green. The mayor, in return, responded by asserting that green was one of the colors that was legally designated for this particular purpose. Yet, instead of arguing further in terms of the lawfulness of this action and democratic rights involved in the administration of a municipality, he declared that the green cobblestones in fact symbolized the environmentalist aspect of the municipal policy.

Type
Articles
Information
New Perspectives on Turkey , Volume 17 , fall 1997 , pp. 151 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © New Perspectives on Turkey 1997

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

Antonio, R. J. 1990. “The Decline of the Grand Narrative of Modernity: Crisis or Renewal in Neo-Marxian Theory?” in Ritzer, G. (ed.), Frontiers of Social Theory, Columbia, Columbia University Press, pp. 88–116.Google Scholar
Asad, T. 1993. Genealogies of Religion, Discipline and Reasons of Power in Christianity and Islam. London: The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Ayubi, N. 1991. Political Islam: Religion and Politics in the Arab World. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bramwell, A. 1989. Ecology in the 20th Century: A History, New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Brechin, S. R. and Kempten, W. 1994. “Global Environmentalism: A Challenge to the Postmaterialism Thesis?” Social Science Quarterly, 75, pp. 245–269.Google Scholar
Bulaç, A. 1995. Din ve Modernizm [Religion and Modernism]. Istanbul: İz Yayıncılık.Google Scholar
Canan, I. 1995. Ayet ve Hadislerin Işığında Çevre Ahlakı [Environmental Ethics under the Light of the Verses and the Hadiths]. Istanbul: Yeni Asya Yayınları.Google Scholar
Commoner, B. 1972. “Science and the Sense of Humanity,” in Armstrong, T. R. (ed.), Why do we still have an ecological crisis?, pp. 19–30, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Dunlap, R. E., Gallup, G. H. Jr., and Gallup, A. M. 1993. “Of Global Concern: Results of the Health of the Planet Survey,” Environment, 35 (9), 7-15, pp. 33–39.Google Scholar
Dwyer, W. O., Leeming, C. F., Cobern, M. K., Porter, B. E., and Jackson, J. M. 1993. “Critical Review of Behavioral Interventions to Preserve the Environment: Research Since 1980,” Environment and Behavior, 25 (3), pp. 275–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enis, M. A. 1994. Cinsel Ahlak ve Biyolojik Tehlike Istanbul: İz Yayıncılık.Google Scholar
Erdur, O. 1996. “An Inquiry on Environmental Values in Turkey,” Unpublished Masters Thesis, Boğaziçi University Library.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1979. Discipline and Punishment: The Birth of The Prison. Trans. Sheridan, Alan, New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Fudkar, A. and Erdur, O. “Are Good Citizens Environmentalists?” Environment and Behavior, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Furman, A. and Erdur, O. 1995. “Environmental Attitudes Among Boğaziçi University Students: Testing the ‘Environmentalist’ Hypothesis,” Boğaziçi Journal, 9 (2), pp. 109–122.Google Scholar
Gagnon-Thompson, S. C., and Barton, M. A. 1994. “Ecocentric and Anthropocentric Attitudes Toward the Environment,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14, pp. 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Göle, N. “The Quest for the Islamic Self Within the Context of Modernity” in Kasaba, Reşat and Bozdoğan, Sibel (eds.) Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, Seattle: University of Washington Press, pp. 81–94.Google Scholar
Gürdoğan, E. 1993. Kirlenmenin Boyutları [Dimensions of Pollution] Istanbul: İz Yayıncılık.Google Scholar
Gürsel, D. 1989. Çevresizsiniz [You Are Environmentless], Istanbul: İnsan Yayınları.Google Scholar
Gürsel, D. 1995. Gelenekselci Çevrecilikten Gelenekselci Liberalizme [From Traditionist Environmentalism to Traditionist Liberalism] Ankara: Vadi Yayınları.Google Scholar
Harrison, P. 1993. 3. Dünya ve Ekoloji. (Translated from Inside The Third World by Cevdet Cerit), Istanbul: Pınar Yayınları.Google Scholar
Henson, P. 1994. “Population Growth, Environmental Awareness, and Policy Direction,” Population and Environment, 15 (4), pp. 265–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, D. 1993. “Environmental Consciousness: An Empirical Study,” Environment and Behavior, 25 (1), pp. 126–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martell, L. 1994. Ecology and Society: An Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Reich, C. A. 1970. The Greening of America. Middlesex: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Scott, D. and Willits, F. K. 1994. “Environmental Attitudes and Behavior: a Pennsylvania Survey,” Environment and Behavior, 26 (2), pp. 239–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, P. W. and Stone, W. F. 1994. “Authoritarianism and Attitudes Toward the Environment,” Environment and Behavior, 26 (1), 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, B. S. 1994. Orientalism, Postmodernism, and Globalism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Uslu, I. 1995. Çevre Sorunları: Kainat Tasarımındaki Değişimden Ekolojik Felaketlere [Environmental Problems: From the Transformation in the Conception of Cosmos to the Ecological Catast-rophies]. Istanbul: İnsan Yayınları.Google Scholar
White, L. Jr. 1967. “The Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis,” Science, 155, pp. 1203–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar