Today, one can observe that the capital oriented power relations have transformed the process of formation of space into a sphere of production; therefore space has also been transformed into consumption good and a means for obtaining surplus value. Space that is formed as a result of this understanding of production-consumption does not contain diversity and exclude vulnerable groups.
To prevent these exclusions and to guarantee free and equal life for all people in dignity, principles which include everybody during production and utilization of space should be determined and these principles should manifest human rights and minimum standards concerning those rights.
Based on Henri Lefebvre’s idea of the right to the city, this dissertation attempts to explain in detail the right to appropriation and the right to oeuvre through rights of human beings regarding their living spaces in order to determine above mentioned minimum standards. A comparative analysis looks at different documents of human rights in the city in order to achieve norms of human rights regarding space.
All actors taking part in the process of production and utilization of space are responsible for protection of these rights. Among these actors, the architects’ role is vital, since they can affect the process of production and utilization of space both directly by their personal practices and indirectly by their collective activities. Therefore, an ethical code illustrating the ethics of the profession of architecture as well as the responsibilities of architects could guarantee the protection of norms of human rights regarding space.
It is possible to classify the documents of ethics of architectural profession into two categories in terms of their binding force. One category consists of codes of ethics that are binding, and the other includes declarations that are not binding.
The dissertation examines four different ethic codes and 12 different declarations that were published by the American Institute of Architects, the Royal Institute of British Architects, Architect’s Council of Europe and the Union of International Architects as case studies and evaluates these documents in terms of human rights related with space.
This evaluation illustrates that declarations in contrast with codes of ethics are sensitive to norms of human rights. However, it is observed that, human rights norms which are related to public space are not covered within these declarations due to apolitization of architecture in recent years.
The conclusion discusses the results of those evaluations on codes of ethics and declarations in terms of human rights norms related to space. It also suggests recommendations for developing codes of ethics sensitive to human rights related with space.
