After the eruption of the demonstrations along the Syrian cities, in March 2011, the Syrian regime responded with hostile acts against the civilians, therefore, waves of IDPs and refugees occurred for millions of Syrians causing one of the largest catastrophes in the modern era, as a result, the international community specifically the EU and USA intervened to address the needs of those IDPs and refugees.  The thesis aimed at analyzing the Western development interventions in NW of Syria, the interventions were initiated through their development agencies and INGOs and were implemented by local stakeholders.  This thesis explored several impacts of this intervention between 2011 till present, it focused on analyzing from a decolonial approach how the intervention contributed to ngoizing the Syrian Revolution on the basis of community demand driven approach using a historical discourse analysis and interview as methodologies, accordingly, several qualitative interviews were conducted in Gaziantep with thirteen leaders of the revolution and CSOs.  Finally, this thesis reached to conclusions: the Syrians need financial then political and legal support, additionally, it reached to three different dimensions of Ngoisation: A helping strategy that aims at empowering the locals. Wrong implementation of the Donors’ policies, and a hidden agenda of the soft colonial changing tools.

In Turkey, although there are many similar implemented or ongoing conservation interventions, some of historic city centers are in better condition than other ones in terms of urban conservation. Conservation discourse describes the conservation of historic city centers as a shared and sustaining responsibility of various actors. At that point, locality is essential because of near and directs relations with historic environment. However, there are basic problems to develop a synergy based on shared responsibilities of local actors in historic centers. Therefore, the study focuses on the question of &ldquo / What is the role of local conservation capacity in the maintenance of historic city centers as a governance process&rdquo / . The study essentially discusses two issues, local conservation capacity, which is determined as an amalgam term of capabilities of local authority and local community, and urban maintenance, which is used in widening context to determines not only rehabilitation projects, but also interventions of local community let to survive of historic buildings. The method of the study is established as a comparative structure bases on case study researches. Comparisons are made between varying levels of local conservation capacity to determine their relations with success in urban maintenance. As a result, in defined context, the historic city centers of Gaziantep and Sanliurfa are studied as case study areas to evaluate success in urban maintenance as a function of local governance in terms of local conservation capacity.

Istanbul est une métropole anatolienne. Destination préférentielle, depuis le début des années 1950, des flux migratoires internes à la Turquie, la ville est devenue comme une maquette démographique de la Turquie au sein de laquelle chaque groupe et chaque habitant exprime ses propres pratiques, manières de vivre, spatialités et traits culturels. Dans ce contexte, l’analyse de la population originaire du département oriental de Gaziantep et de ses pratiques alimentaires montre comment des groupes immigrés instrumentalisent l’alimentation comme moyen d’inclusion dans un très vaste ensemble urbain, à la fois comme outil identitaire et comme mode d’action sur le fonctionnement métropolitain. Originaires d’un département dont la réputation est associée à sa cuisine, les Gaziantepli se construisent, à Istanbul, une identité qui valorise des pratiques alimentaires héritées, des réseaux spéciaux d’approvisionnement, un entrepreneuriat commercial autour de la cuisine, et l’organisation d’événements valorisant la nourriture régionale. Les significations accordées au séjour stambouliote, ainsi que la nature des systèmes de référence utilisés apparaissent comme des facteurs clés de différenciation et, par rétroaction, se traduisent dans les pratiques alimentaires et urbaines des citadins immigrés. En outre, par leurs manières d’utiliser la référence alimentaire comme outil d’urbanité, ceux-ci contribuent à la recomposition urbaine par une redéfinition des citadinités, une complexification des marquages sociaux dans des quartiers en restructuration, la création d’une offre commerciale et culturelle spécifique. Ce rôle d’acteurs urbains repose sur le statut ambivalent des immigrés gaziantepli à Istanbul, entre partage d’une nationalité commune et distance inhérente à une condition immigrée. / Istanbul is an Anatolian metropolis. Since the beginning of the 1950s, the city has become a preferential destination for the internal migratory flows in Turkey. Hence, Istanbul has become to some extent a demographic miniature copy of Turkey, where each group and inhabitant expresses its own practices, ways of life, spatialities and cultural characteristics. It is in such a context that the food practices of the population from the territorial unit of Gaziantep (East of Turkey) are analysed. Through their food pratices we show how an internal immigrant group uses food as a way to include itself within a huge urban space, but also as an identity tool and a way to leave its mark in the functioning of the metropolis. Coming from a region which reputation is linked to its cuisine, the Gaziantepli people build in Istanbul their own identity through inherited food practices, special supply networks, food retailers entrepreneurship and the organization of special events. The very fact of living in Istanbul and the meanings attributed to that, and the system of identity references the Gaziantepli people use in Istanbul are key factors of differentiation. They influence their urban practices and food choices as immigrant city-dwellers. Moreover, thanks to their ways of using food as a tool of urban integration, they contribute to the growing complexity of the metropolis and its urban dynamics, restructuring districts and creating a specific commercial and cultural supply. This role of urban actors does not erase Gaziantepli immigrants’ ambivalent status: they share a common Turkish citizenship but are still tied to their immigrant condition in Istanbul.