Vol. 16 No. 2 (2025): (Regular Issue in Progress)
Research Article

Not Just Any Village: Lifestyle Migration and the Search for Cultural Compatibility in Turkey's Gallipoli Peninsula

PDF
Rüya Erkan Öcek
Yıldız Technical University, Türkiye
Tolga Islam
Yıldız Technical University, Türkiye
Timeline of Key Events Shaping the Transformation of the Gallipoli Peninsula
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.r.erk.16.2.393.405
Categories

Published 2025-11-27

Keywords

  • counter-urbanization,
  • lifestyle migration,
  • rural authenticity,
  • rural gentrification,
  • cultural compatibility,
  • Gallipoli Peninsula
    • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Erkan Öcek, Rüya, and Tolga Islam. 2025. “Not Just Any Village: Lifestyle Migration and the Search for Cultural Compatibility in Turkey’s Gallipoli Peninsula”. European Journal of Geography 16 (2):393-405. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.r.erk.16.2.393.405.

Copyright (c) 2025 Rüya Erkan Öcek, Tolga Islam

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Received 2025-07-25
Accepted 2025-11-25
Published 2025-11-27

Abstract

This article examines the motivations and destination choices of urban residents relocating to rural areas in Turkey’s Gallipoli Peninsula, a “late-discovered” region that has recently attracted a growing number of lifestyle migrants. Drawing on qualitative fieldwork—including in-depth interviews and participant observation in seven villages—the study analyzes how migration decisions emerge through the interaction of urban disillusionment and rural attraction. Employing Lee’s (1966) push-pull framework within the broader literature on lifestyle migration, it demonstrates that these relocations are not isolated acts of individual preference but socially embedded and morally charged projects of self-realization. The peninsula’s appeal stems from its perceived authenticity as an "undiscovered" destination, largely untouched by the over-commercialization. This “quest for authenticity,” however, operates through culturally specific moral geographies: migrants are not simply searching for rural authenticity but specifically seeking progressive rural spaces that can accommodate their secular, liberal lifestyles—what they describe as "open-minded" and "democratic" environments distinct from "conservative Anatolia." Their rejection of over-commercialized destinations while simultaneously avoiding "conservative" rural areas reveals a narrow corridor of acceptable rurality defined by both authenticity and cultural comfort. By highlighting how lifestyle migration in Turkey operates through an additional cultural-compatibility filter, this study extends existing debates on lifestyle migration and demonstrates that the notion of a “better life” is deeply contingent upon cultural and political contexts. Furthermore, the study carries early warning signs that the migrants' presence may trigger rural gentrification processes similar to those observed in other amenity-rich regions across Turkey.

Highlights:

  • Cultural compatibility filter shapes rural relocation choices beyond amenities.
  • Migrants seek "authentic yet progressive" rural spaces in Gallipoli Peninsula.
  • Early signs show Gallipoli’s “authentic” villages facing rural gentrification risks.
PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Abrams, J [JesseB], Gosnell, H., Gill, N., & Klepeis, P. (2012). Re-creating the rural, reconstructing nature: An international literature review of the environmental ımplications of amenity migration. Conservation and Society, 10(3), 270. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4923.101837
  2. Argent, N., Tonts, M., Jones, R., & Holmes, J. (2013). A creativity-led rural renaissance? Amenity-led migration, the creative turn and the uneven development of rural Australia. Applied Geography, 44, 88–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.07.018
  3. Arslan, F., Gürbıyık, C., & Şenlik, Y. F. (2024). Kırsal peyzajdaki değişim üzerinden soylulaştırmayı okumak: Yunt Dağı örneği (Manisa). Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 22(2), 556–587. https://doi.org/10.33688/aucbd.1512560
  4. Arslan-Avar, A., Doğan, F., Cive, Y. Ö., & Akış, T. (2024). Contextualising the housing problem of the Roma community in relation to counter-urbanisation in Urla, İzmir. Habitat International, 143, 102972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2023.102972
  5. Bahar, H. İ., Laçiner, S., Bal, İ., & Özcan, M. (2009). Older migrants to the Mediterranean: the Turkish example. Population, Space and Place, 15(6), 509–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.528
  6. Başaran-Uysal, A., & Sakarya, İ. (2018). Rural gentrification in the North Aegean countryside (Turkey). ICONARP International Journal of Architec-ture and Planning, 6(1), 99–125. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2018.40
  7. Bell, M. M. (2007). The two-ness of rural life and the ends of rural scholarship. Journal of Rural Studies, 23(4), 402–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.03.003
  8. Benson, M. (2011). The Movement Beyond (Lifestyle) Migration: Mobile practices and the constitution of a better way of life. Mobilities, 6(2), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2011.552901
  9. Benson, M. (2013). Living the "real" dream in la France profonde? Lifestyle migration, social distinction, and the authenticities of everyday life. Anthropological Quarterly, 501–525. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/anq.2013.0031.
  10. Benson, M., & O’Reilly, K. (2016). From lifestyle migration to lifestyle in migration: Categories, concepts and ways of thinking. Migration Studies, 4(1), 20–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnv015
  11. Benson, M., & O'Reilly, K. (2009). Migration and the search for a better way of life: a critical exploration of lifestyle migration. The Sociological Review, 57(4), 608–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2009.01864.x
  12. Berry, B. J. L. (1976). The counterurbanization process: Urban America since 1970. In B. J. L. Berry (Ed.), Urbanization and counter-urbanization (Urban Affairs Annual Reviews, Vol. 11, pp. 17–30). Sage
  13. Beyaz, C. (2020). Lives without a last stop rural migrant, return migration, and practice of multiple place. Journal of Humanity and Society (İnsan & Toplum Dergisi), 10(1), 145–175. https://doi.org/10.12658/M0329
  14. Bijker, R. A., Haartsen, T., & Strijker, D. (2012). Migration to less-popular rural areas in the Netherlands: Exploring the motivations. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(4), 490–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.07.003
  15. Black, R. (1993). Migration, return, and agricultural development in the Serra Do Alvão, Northern Portugal. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 41(3), 563–585.
  16. Boyle, P., & Halfacree, K. (Eds.). (1998). Migration into rural areas: Theories and issues. John Wiley & Sons.
  17. BULUT, M., & Dinçmen, S. (2021). Geriye dönüş üzerine bir araştırma. Uluslararası İnsan Çalışmaları Dergisi, 4(7), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.35235/uicd.820202
  18. Bunce, M. (1994). the countryside ideal: Anglo-American images of landscape. Routledge.
  19. Calvário, R. (2017). Food sovereignty and new peasantries: on re-peasantization and counter-hegemonic contestations in the Basque territory. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 44(2), 402–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1259219
  20. Champion, A. G. (Ed.). (1989). Counterurbanization: the changing pace and nature of population deconcentration. Edward Arnold.
  21. Chunyu, M. D., Liang, Z., & Wu, Y. (2013). Interprovincial return migration in China: Individual and contextual determinants in Sichuan Province in the 1990S. Environment and Planning a: Economy and Space, 45(12), 2939–2958. https://doi.org/10.1068/a45360
  22. Cloke, P. (2006). Conseptualizing rurality. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden, & P. Mooney (Eds.), The Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 18–28). Sage.
  23. Çeliker, İ. Ö., & GÜLER, K. (2022). Kırsal soylulaştırmanın eşiğinde olan Ayvacık-Büyükhüsun tarihi yerleşiminin miras değerleri. Yakın Mimarlık Dergisi, 6(2), 292–325. https://doi.org/10.32955/neujna202262438
  24. Démurger, S., & Xu, H. (2011). Return migrants: The rise of new entrepreneurs in rural China. World Development, 39(10), 1847–1861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.04.027
  25. Egidi, G., Quaranta, G., Salvati, L., Gambella, F., Mosconi, E. M., Giménez Morera, A., & Colantoni, A. (2020). Unraveling causes and consequences of international retirement migration to coastal and rural areas in Mediterranean Europe. Land, 9(11), 410-. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9110410
  26. Erkan-Öcek, R. & İslam, T. (2025). Who moves to the countryside, and why? A systematic review of urban-to-rural migration. Planning, 35(1), 171-181. https://doi.org/10.14744/pla nlama.2024.00086
  27. Ertuğrul, G. (2016). British migrants in the Turkish countryside: Lifestyle migration, loss of social status and finding ‘true life’ in difference. METU Studies in Development, 43, 475–496.
  28. Farrell, M., Mahon, M., & McDonagh, J. (2012). The rural as a return migration destination. European Countryside, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/v10091-012-0012-9
  29. Fielding, A. J. (1982). Counterurbanisation in Western Europe. Progress in Planning, 17, 1–52.
  30. General Directorate of Land Registry and Cadastre. (2024). Parcel inquiry system: Land registry data (2012–2022). https://parselsorgu.tkgm.gov.tr
  31. Glasgow, N. (1995). Retirement migration and the use of services in nonmetropolitan counties. Rural Sociology, 60(2), 224–243.
  32. Gosnell, H., & Abrams, J [Jesse] (2011). Amenity migration: Diverse conceptualizations of drivers, socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges. GeoJournal, 76(4), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-009-9295-4
  33. Gülümser, A. A., Baycan-Levent, T., & Nijkamp, P. (2011). Business dynamics as the source of counterurbanisation: An empirical analysis of Tur-key. Research Memorandum, 21. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2010.035108
  34. Gümüş, N., İlhan, A., & Gülersoy, A. E. (2013). Bir tersine göç örneği: Köprücük Köyü (Varto-Muş). Electronic Turkish Studies, 8(6), 233–261.
  35. Güreşci, E. (2010). Türkiye'de kentten-köye göç olgusu. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 11(1), 77–86.
  36. Hayes, M. (2015). Into the universe of the Hacienda: Lifestyle migration, individualism and social dislocation in Vilcabamba, Ecuador. Journal of Latin American Geography, 14(1), 79–100.
  37. Hekimoğlu, D., & Altınörs-Çırak, A. (2018). Conservation in gentrifying traditional tissues: The impacts of the on-going transformations in Alaçatı on the place and conservation processes. Türkiye Bilimler Akademisi Kültür Envanteri Dergisi, 17, 77–92. https://doi.org/10.22520/tubaked.2018.17.005
  38. Hoey, B. A. (2005). From pi to pie: Moral narratives of noneconomic migration and starting over in the postindustrial midwest. Journal of Con-temporary Ethnography, 34(5), 586–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605279016
  39. Hoggart, K., & Buller, H. (1995). Retired British home owners in rural France. Ageing and Society, 15(3), 325–353. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X00002580
  40. Hurley, P. T., & Arı, Y. (2011). Mining (dis)amenity: The political ecology of mining opposition in the Kaz (Ida) Mountain region of Western Turkey. Development and Change, 42(6), 1393–1415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2011.01737.x
  41. Hurley, P. T., & Arı, Y. (2018). Saying "no" to (the) oxygen capital? Amenity migration, counter-territorialization, and uneven rural landscape change in the Kaz Dağları (Ida Mountains) of Western Turkey. Journal of Rural Studies, 62, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.08.008
  42. İslamoğlu, E., Yıldırımalp, S., & Benli, A. (2014). Türkiye’de tersine göç ve tersine göçü teşvik eden uygulamalar: İstanbul ili örneği. Sakarya Üniver-sitesi İktisat Dergisi, 3(1), 68–93.
  43. Kaba, B. (2022). Turkish rural lifestyle migrants to Muğla: A qualitative analysis of video narratives. Ege Coğrafya Dergisi, 31(2), 305–319. https://doi.org/10.51800/ecd.1124245
  44. Karakayacı, Z., & Aydın-Öz, A. (2020). Kentten köye göç eğiliminin sınıflandırma ağacı yöntemine göre analizi; Konya İli Altınekin İlçesi örneği. Ziraat Mühendisliği, 369, 94–107. https://doi.org/10.33724/zm.727263
  45. Karaman, M. (2024). Bitlis İli Tatvan İlçesine yönelik tersine göç hareketlerinin sebepleri ve Tatvan üzerindeki rolü. Eren Dergisi, 3(4), 43–53.
  46. Kepenek, E. B., & Uğuzman, T. (2018). Haydi köyümüze geri dönelim! Tersine göçün sosyoekonomik etkileri: Yeniyol Köyü örneği. Sosyal Politika Çalışmaları Dergisi, 40(2), 11–36.
  47. Kılıç, S. N., & Buzlukçu, C. (2021). Yaşam tarzı göçü bağlamında kentten kırsala kaçış: Yeni köylü turizm girişimcileri üzerine nitel bir araştırma. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 24(46-1), 1387–1400. https://doi.org/10.31795/baunsobed.1019745
  48. Kocabıyık, C., & Loopmans, M. (2021). Seasonal gentrification and its (dis)contents: Exploring the temporalities of rural change in a Turkish small town. Journal of Rural Studies, 87, 482–493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.09.002
  49. Lee, E. S. (1966). A theory of migration. Demography, 3(1), 47–57.
  50. Little, J., & Austin, P. (1996). Women and the rural idyll. Journal of Rural Studies, 12(2), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-0167(96)00004-6
  51. Matarrita-Cascante, D. (2017). Moving the amenity migration literature forward: Understanding community-level factors associated with positive outcomes after amenity-driven change. Journal of Rural Studies, 53, 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.05.004
  52. Matarrita-Cascante, D., & Suess, C. (2020). Natural amenities-driven migration and tourism entrepreneurship: Within business social dynamics conducive to positive social change. Tourism Management, 81, 104140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104140
  53. McGranahan, D. A. (2008). Landscape influence on recent rural migration in the U.S. Landscape and Urban Planning, 85(3-4), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.12.001
  54. Memiş, L., Düzgün, S., & Köseoğlu, S. (2024). Counter-urbanisation as refuge during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Hrvatska İ Komparativna Javna Uprava, 23(4), 559–591. https://doi.org/10.31297/hkju.23.4.7
  55. Milbourne, P. (2007). Re-populating rural studies: Migrations, movements and mobilities. Journal of Rural Studies, 23(3), 381–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.04.002
  56. Milone, P., & Ventura, F. (2019). New generation farmers: Rediscovering the peasantry. Journal of Rural Studies, 65, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.12.009
  57. Mitchell, C. J. (2004). Making sense of counterurbanization. Journal of Rural Studies, 20(1), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0743-0167(03)00031-7
  58. Moss, L. A. G. (Ed.). (2006). The amenity migrants: seeking and sustaining mountains and their cultures. CABI.
  59. Nelson, P. B., & Frost, W. (2023). Migration responses to the COVID-19 Pandemic: A case study of New England Showing movements down the urban hierarchy and ensuing impacts on real estate markets. The Professional Geographer, 75(3), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2022.2114092
  60. Ní Laoire, C. (2007). The ‘green green grass of home’? Return migration to rural Ireland. Journal of Rural Studies, 23(3), 332–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.01.005
  61. Okumuş, D. (2020). "Inherited gentrification": Changing profiles of gentrifiers via inheritance, the case of Bozcaada. ICONARP International Jour-nal of Architecture and Planning, 8(Special Issue), 143–168. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2020.147
  62. Orhan, G., & Yücel, Y. G. (2019). Kırsal mekânın metalaşması ve soylulaştırmanın köy hâli: Doğanbey Köyü’nün dönüşümü. MAD Journal, 1(8), 8–38.
  63. Osbaldiston, N. (2016). Seeking authenticity in place, culture, and the self: The great urban escape. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137007636
  64. Özerim, M. G. (2012). Emekli göçleri rotasında Türkiye: Avrupalı emekli göçmenlerin Türkiye’yi tercih etme nedenleri ve Türkiye algıları. Journal of Yasar University, 28(7), 4766–4787.
  65. Özlü-Diniz, S., & Arslan, Ç. (2022). Ters göç, refah ve mekan ilişkisi. İnsan Hareketliliği Uluslararası Dergisi, 2(2), 200–241.
  66. Perkins, H. C., Mackay, M., & Espiner, S. (2015). Putting pinot alongside merino in Cromwell District, Central Otago, New Zealand: Rural amenity and the making of the global countryside. Journal of Rural Studies, 39, 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2015.03.010
  67. Sağır, A. (2011). Kültürel bütünleşme bağlamında Antalya’nın Finike İlçesi’ne yerleşen turistlerin sosyolojik çözümlemesi. Anatolia: Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 22(1), 49–64.
  68. Sahin, T. (2025). In pursuit of happiness: Motivations for urban to rural migration in Turkey. Continuum, 39(1), 148–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2024.2384959
  69. Stockdale, A. (2016). Contemporary and ‘messy’ rural in-migration processes: Comparing counterurban and lateral rural migration. Population, Space and Place, 22(6), 599–616. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1947
  70. Stockdale, A., & Haartsen, T. (2018). Editorial introduction: Putting rural stayers in the spotlight. Population Space and Place, 24(4), Article e2124. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2124
  71. Südaş, İ., & Mutluer, M. (2008). Ekonomik etkileri açısından Türkiye'nin turizm merkezlerine yönelik Avrupalı göçleri. Ege Coğrafya Dergisi, 17(1-2), 51–59.
  72. Südaş, İ., & Mutluer, M. (2010). Daha iyi bir hayata doğru: "Yaşam biçimi göçü". Ege Coğrafya Dergisi, 19(1), 31–47.
  73. Tamer-Görer, N. (2017). ‘Hayalet’ göç: Yaşam kalitesi arayışında Türkiye kıyı yerleşmelerine yönelen Avrupalı emekliler. İdealkent, 5(14), 206–233.
  74. Tezcan, M. (1989). Kentten köye göç. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 22(1), 37–42.
  75. Turkkan, C. (2025). Entrepreneurial back‐to‐landers: How neo‐farmers in Turkey choose where to settle. Population, Space and Place, 31(1), Article e2863. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2863
  76. Unguren, E., Tekin, Ö. A., & Bayırlı, M. (2021). Exploring the effect of push and pull motivation factors on destination satisfaction: Empirical evi-dence from amenity migration perspectives. European Journal of Tourism Research, 28, 2811.
  77. van der Ploeg, J. D. (2008). The new peasantries: Struggles for autonomy and sustainability in an era of empire and globalization. Earthscan. http://site.ebrary.com/lib/academiccompletetitles/home.action
  78. Verinis, J. P. (2011). New immigrants and neo-rural values. Anthropological Journal of European Cultures, 20(1), 48–68. https://doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2011.200104
  79. Vukomanovic, J., & Orr, B. (2014). Landscape aesthetics and the scenic drivers of amenity migration in the New West: Naturalness, visual scale, and complexity. Land, 3(2), 390–413. https://doi.org/10.3390/land3020390
  80. Yılmaz, H. (2021). Türkiye'de klasik ve tersine iç göçlerin dönemsel olarak karşılaştırılması. Journal of History School, 14(LI), 1423–1444. https://doi.org/10.29228/joh.50650
  81. Yürüdür, E. (2008). Koyulhisar İlçesinde(Sivas) göç hareketleri. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 13(20), 19–34.