Journal of Housing and the Built Environment

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 861–875 | Cite as

Comparing the lifestyles and environmental perceptions of rural and urban children: a case study in Turkey

  • Ebru ÇubukçuEmail author
  • Duygu E. Kahraman
  • Öykü F. Yavaşal


This study aims to compare lifestyles and environmental perceptions of urban and rural children. Ninety-two students completed a questionnaire and were given two means (drawing or wring) to express their thoughts regarding (1) the activity and play areas, (2) their neighborhood and (3) their city. The results showed higher levels of parental supervision and restrictions on the independent mobility of the urban children in outdoor areas. This and other differences regarding the life styles are reflected in the children’s drawings of various settings. The results have applied value for planners and urban designers, and additional research is currently underway.


Children Environmental perception Drawings Cities and neighborhoods 


  1. Barraza, L. (1999). Children’s drawings about the environment. Environmental Education Research, 5(1), 49–66. Scholar
  2. Batur, M. (2013). İzmir’in EkoTurizm Potansiyeli, TMMOB 2. İzmir Kent Sempozyumu (pp 597–621).Google Scholar
  3. Béneker, T., Sanders, R., Tani, S., & Taylor, L. (2010). Picturing the city: Young people’s representations of urban environments. Children’s Geographies, 8(2), 123–140. Scholar
  4. Bogner, F. X., & Wiseman, M. (1997). Environmental perception of rural and urban pupils. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(2), 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Çakırer Ö. Y. (2015a). Imagined streets of Urban children: In Beyoğlu Sütlüce-Örnektepe Region. 1. Uluslar arası Kent Araştırmaları Kongresi (pp. 1146–1159).Google Scholar
  6. Çakırer, Ö. Y. (2015b). Çocukların Şehre Katılımı: Bursa Yerel Yönetimleri Üzerinde Bir Okuma. Şehir ve Toplum, 2, 103–115.Google Scholar
  7. Caner, Ç. (2007). Townscape and building complexes in medieval Western Anatolia under Turkish-Islamic culture. Politica, 306, 27–48.Google Scholar
  8. Didkowska, B. (2016). Children’s drawing in the context of the visual language of new media. Research Report. Creativity. Theories–Research–Applications, 3(1), 44–58. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Didkowska, B. (2017). Selected concepts in the development of drawing activity in children aged 3 to 12. Creativity. Theories–Research–Applications, 4(1), 65–79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Drianda, R. P., Kinoshita, I., & Said, I. (2015). The impact of Bandung City’s rapid development on children’s independent mobility and access to friendly play environments. Children and Society, 29(6), 637–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ergler, C., Smith, K., Kotsanas, C., & Hutchinson, C. (2015). What makes a good city in pre-schoolers’ eyes? Findings from participatory planning projects in Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Urban Design, 20(4), 461–478. Scholar
  12. Farokhi, M., & Hashemi, M. (2011). The analysis of children’s drawings: Social, emotional, physical, and psychological aspects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 2219–2224. Scholar
  13. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception (pp. 127–143).Google Scholar
  14. Gillespie, C. A. (2010). How culture constructs our sense of neighborhood: Mental maps and children’s perceptions of place. Journal of Geography, 109(1), 18–29. Scholar
  15. Golledge, R. G. (1991). Cognition of Physical and Built Environments. In T. Garling & G. W. Evans (Eds.), Environment, Cognition, and Action (pp. 35–63). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. James, S. (1990). Is there a ‘place’ for children in geography? Area, 22(3), 278–283.
  17. Karczmarzyk, M. A. (2012). A child in the culture of silence? The meaning and communication in children’s drawings. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55, 554–559. Scholar
  18. Kaygalak, İ. (2006). İzmir’de Karşıyaka-Çiğli aksının kentsel gelişim süreci ve bu gelişimi etkileyen faktörler. Doctoral dissertation, Ege Üniversitesi.Google Scholar
  19. Kelley, M. J., Pendras, M., & Minnella, H. (2012). Sketching culture, sketching nature: uncovering anchors of everyday nature for urban youth. Social and Cultural Geography, 13(8), 873–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kyttä, M. (2002). Affordances of children’s environments in the context of cities, small towns, suburbs and rural villages in Finland and Belarus. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1–2), 109–123. Scholar
  21. Lehman-Frisch, S., Authier, J. Y., & Dufaux, F. (2012). ‘Draw me your neighbourhood’: A gentrified Paris neighbourhood through its children’s eyes. Children’s Geographies, 10(1), 17–34. Scholar
  22. Levend, S., Meşhur, M. Ç., & Sağ, N. S. (2016). Settlement pattern corruption problem in rural areas and alternative approaches: Beyşehir-Emen, Turkey experiences. International Planning History Society Proceedings, 17(6), 41–52.Google Scholar
  23. Machemer, P. L., Bruch, S. P., & Kuipers, R. (2008). Comparing rural and urban children’s perceptions of an ideal community. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28(2), 143–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. MacPhail, A., & Kinchin, G. (2004). The use of drawings as an evaluative tool: Students’ experiences of sport education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 9(1), 87–108. Scholar
  25. Maneja-Zaragoza, R., Linde, D. V., & Juncà, M. B. (2013). Drawing analysis: Tools for understanding children’s perceptions of community conservation. In L. Porter-Bolland, I. Ruiz-Mallén, C. Camacho-Benavides & S. McCandless (Eds.), Community action for conservation. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Matthews, M. H. (1984). Environmental cognition of young children: Images of journey to school and home area. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. Scholar
  27. Matthews, M. H. (1985). Young children’s representations of the environment: A comparison of techniques. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 5(3), 261–278. Scholar
  28. Matthews, M. H. (1987). Gender, home range and environmental cognition. Transactions of the institute of British Geographers. Scholar
  29. McKendrick, J. H. (2000). The geography of children: An annotated bibliography. Childhood, 7(3), 359–387. Scholar
  30. Murtagh, B., & Murphy, A. (2011). Environmental affordances and children in post-conflict Belfast. Space and Polity, 15(1), 65–79. Scholar
  31. Oğuz, V. (2010). The factors influencing childrens’ drawings. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3003–3007. Scholar
  32. Oguzturk, O. (2008). Differences in quality of life in rural and urban populations. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 31(6), 346–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Özdirenç, M., Özcan, A., Akin, F., & Gelecek, N. (2005). Physical fitness in rural children compared with urban children in Turkey. Pediatrics International, 47(1), 26–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rasmussen, K. (2004). Places for children–children’s places. Childhood, 11(2), 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Environment and Urbanization (2014). Turkey Habitat III National Report. Retrieved from
  36. Samaras, G., Bonoti, F., & Christidou, V. (2012). Exploring children’s perceptions of scientists through drawings and interviews. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1541–1546. Scholar
  37. Talen, E., & Coffindaffer, M. (1999). The utopianism of children: An empirical study of children’s neighborhood design preferences. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 18(4), 321–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Uygun, B. (2012). En az yeşil alan İzmir’de. NTV News. Retrieved from,orCpWy08JE2ZJkU5EKjb6w.
  39. Yüksel, Ç. C. (2014). A Western Anatolian Urban Centre from the Aydinid Principality to the Ottoman State: Spatial transformation of tire. Vakıflar Dergisi, 42, 19–33.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of City and Regional PlanningDokuz Eylul UniversityIzmirTurkey

Personalised recommendations