The spatial crises of capitalism and in-between spaces as an instrument of urban production: the case of Galataport

Abstract

This study examines the ontological transformation of in-between spaces from the 1960s to the present, within capitalism’s spatial crises. While previous literature has viewed these spaces as idle voids or symptoms of spatial segregation, this study reimagines them as dynamic modes of spatial production shaped by capital flows and control regimes. Focusing on Istanbul’s Galataport Project, the research explores how the discrepancies between architectural representation of inclusive public domains and reality of controlled environments produce spatial realities. Drawing on Park’s urban critiques, Harvey’s and Lefebvre’s theories and synthesising these with Merrifield’s proposal to “analyse what emerges as space”, this study adopts a qualitative, post-structuralist methodology. It treats in-betweenness as a condition that oscillates between structural state and dynamic action. A framework derived from seventeen primary sources is empirically tested through field observation, including spatial mapping of security infrastructure and access boundaries. Positioned at a Eurasian threshold, the study provides a comparative perspective on negotiation of boundaries in port cities. By analysing capitalist spatial practices at Galataport, the study demonstrates how urban thresholds become transparent boundaries that manage spatial crises. It provides an explanation of how in-between spaces are instrumentalised in contemporary redevelopment, offering a framework for interpreting public-private negotiations elsewhere.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 2026 · DOI ↗