Urban Planning
Mohammad Reza YazdanPanah Shahabadi; Zeinab Adeli
Abstract
Highlights:
- There are distinct differences in the degree of place attachment across the scales of home, neighbourhood, and city.
- Place attachment is strongest at the scale of the home, followed by the city, and lastly, the neighbourhood.
- The factors shaping place attachment are tangible and ...
Read More
Highlights:
- There are distinct differences in the degree of place attachment across the scales of home, neighbourhood, and city.
- Place attachment is strongest at the scale of the home, followed by the city, and lastly, the neighbourhood.
- The factors shaping place attachment are tangible and objective at the scale of the home, intangible and subjective at the scale of the city, and a combination of both at the neighbourhood scale.
Introduction:
Place attachment is an important concept for evaluating the spatial quality of environments, particularly due to its psychological dimension and its strong relationship to the broader concept of sense of place in urban spaces. While the subject has been extensively studied in various fields related to place, less attention has been given to how the scale of place—whether it is the home, neighbourhood, or city—affects the development of this attachment. This study aims to identify and explore the key factors influencing place attachment across these three scales. By understanding the differences in place attachment at varying levels, this research will contribute to a more nuanced approach in urban studies, planning, and design.
Theoretical Framework:
Recent models of place attachment emphasize that, in addition to personal and locational characteristics, both social and physical factors play a vital role in shaping the sense of attachment. The key factors influencing place attachment can be summarized as follows:
Physical Characteristics of a Place: These include elements that range from the smaller scale of the home and neighbourhood to larger urban and national contexts. This includes aspects such as housing satisfaction, the availability and efficiency of services, architectural and aesthetic values, and the sense of safety.
Individual Characteristics: Factors such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, marital status, homeownership, personal values, and community beliefs all significantly impact place attachment. Furthermore, experiences, memories, cultural background, and religion contribute to this connection.
Duration of Interaction with a Place: Research indicates that place attachment is a gradual process. Altman associates a stronger attachment with longer periods of residence, as this tends to result in the formation of deeper relationships and connections with the local community.
Social Characteristics: The development of place attachment also requires meaningful, long-term engagement and participation within the community. Social participation is seen as one of the strongest drivers of emotional attachment to a place, fostering a sense of security and belonging.
Methodology:
This research adopts a qualitative approach, utilizing in-depth interviews to explore the factors influencing place attachment across three scales—home, neighbourhood, and city. The interviews were conducted in six different neighbourhoods in Tehran, which were selected using a cluster sampling method. Two neighbourhoods were chosen from privileged areas (Darband and Jamaran), two from middle-income areas (Tarasht and West Tehran-Pars), and two from low-income areas (Bolur-Sazi and 13th Aban). The interviews were carried out until theoretical saturation was achieved, with a total of 66 interviews (27 men and 39 women) conducted. Each neighbourhood was represented by 11 interviews. The selected participants were individuals over the age of 25 who had lived in the same neighbourhood for at least five years.
Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Key concepts related to place attachment were extracted and categorized into factors influencing attachment at the scales of home, neighbourhood, and city.
Results and Discussion:
At the home scale, four major categories were identified:
- Housing structure
- Social belonging
- Environmental efficiency
- Semantic belonging
At the neighbourhood scale, the factors influencing place attachment included:
- Neighbourhood efficiency
- Sense of belonging
- Social capital
- Institutional-cognitive values
At the city scale, four categories emerged:
- Vitality
- Accessibility and efficiency
- Social dependence
- Perceptual-semantic value
The research revealed significant differences in place attachment across these scales. Place attachment is notably strongest at the home scale, followed by the city, with attachment to the neighbourhood being comparatively weaker. However, this does not minimize the importance of the neighbourhood in shaping place attachment. Further analysis showed that individuals with low attachment to their neighbourhood generally exhibited weak attachment to both the city and their home. This suggests that a certain minimum level of neighbourhood attachment is necessary for the formation of a more comprehensive sense of place attachment.
Moreover, the study highlighted differences in the nature of the factors influencing attachment at each scale. At the home level, factors are primarily tangible and objective—such as the physical structure of the house, its functionality, and the immediate social environment. In contrast, at the city scale, factors are more intangible and subjective, involving perceptions of the city's vitality, accessibility, and social dynamics. The neighbourhood scale represented a blend of both objective and subjective factors, reflecting its intermediary role in individuals' experiences of place.
Conclusion:
The findings of this research underscore the complexity of place attachment and its variation across different scales of place. While the home scale fosters the strongest attachment, followed by the city, the neighbourhood still plays a crucial role in shaping individuals' overall place attachment. The neighbourhood can act as a source of identity and attachment, although it requires further exploration to fully understand its dynamic relationship with other scales. Additionally, the concrete and objective factors that influence attachment at the home scale are contrasted with the more intangible, subjective elements at the city scale, while the neighbourhood embodies a hybrid of these characteristics. This nuanced understanding of place attachment and its relation to the scale of place offers valuable insights for urban planning and design, particularly in fostering environments that strengthen place attachment across all levels of urban life.
Urban Planning
Aliakbar Salaripour; Zahra Seif Reihani,; Narges Taleb vali alah
Abstract
Highlights
The present study endeavors to establish a comprehensive catalog of both positive and negative factors that impact the attachment to a specific place.
These factors were examined across diverse locations and geographic scales.
Aesthetic factors, positive memories, and emotions exert the ...
Read More
Highlights
The present study endeavors to establish a comprehensive catalog of both positive and negative factors that impact the attachment to a specific place.
These factors were examined across diverse locations and geographic scales.
Aesthetic factors, positive memories, and emotions exert the most positive influence on the development of attachment to a place
The inefficiency of urban management, negative sentiments, and economic recession exert the most adverse impact on the formation of attachment to a place.
Introduction:
The intricate relationship between individuals and their surroundings is a dynamic interplay of positive and negative factors that either foster or hinder attachment to a place. This study delves into the multifaceted nature of place attachment in the coastal city of Bandar-Anzali, seeking to establish a nuanced understanding of the factors at play.
Theoretical Framework:
The concept of "place" extends beyond physical spaces to encompass the meaningful connections people form through experiences and ideas. While spatial identity, attachment, and dependence are frequently discussed, there lacks a comprehensive exploration of the myriad factors influencing them across diverse places and geographical scales. This research bridges this gap by creating an extensive list of factors affecting place attachment.
Methodology:
Employing a qualitative-quantitative combined approach, this study utilized thematic analysis to scrutinize interview texts. The sample size, determined by theoretical saturation, involved 89 interviews conducted through purposive sampling. Participants were asked to provide photos of places to which they felt attached, forming the basis for individual in-depth interviews. Four key questions explored the detailed description of the place, the reasons for attachment, motivations for returning or not, and factors strengthening or weakening attachment. Thematic analysis was independently conducted by researchers, resulting in 23 positive and 7 negative factors.
Results and Discussion:
The research identified 23 positive factors, including memories, similarity, positive feelings, security, balance of city and nature, connection with nature, sensory richness, and aesthetic considerations. Negative factors encompassed environmental damage, economic stagnation, inefficiency of urban management, loneliness, societal ignorance, neglect of cultural activities, and negative emotions. Recreational spaces, homes, neighborhoods, commercial places, object spaces, cultural-educational-administrative uses, and social places emerged as the most frequented locations. Aesthetic factors, memories, and positive emotions wielded the most positive influence, while inefficiency of urban management, negative emotions, and economic stagnation exerted the strongest negative impact on place attachment.
Conclusion
This research identifies key factors influencing attachment to a place. Aesthetic elements, memories, and positive emotions positively impact attachment, while urban mismanagement, negative emotions, and economic stagnation have a negative influence. Recreational spaces, homes, and neighborhoods are the most frequented places. Aesthetic considerations are particularly emphasized in images of recreational and commercial spaces. Social places highlight memories, positive emotions, aesthetics, and age as significant factors. The inefficiency of urban management is evident in images from urban neighborhoods, while symbols of Bandar Anzali city dominate urban space photos. Ambient spaces, such as multi-story houses and seaside paths, are the most common settings, with aesthetics holding the highest frequency in environmental spaces. Despite increasing interest in place attachment, the study reveals a need for further exploration of these factors. This research serves as a foundational step for future investigations in this area.
Urban Sociology
Amir Ebrahimi Hasanakloo; بنیادی Bonyadi; Atoosa Modiri
Abstract
Highlights- This research seeks to investigate the factors affecting the levels of residents’ place attachment.- The results demonstrate that place attachment consists of four dimensions: spatial identity, spatial affect, spatial dependence, and spatial social bonding.- Of all these four dimensions, ...
Read More
Highlights- This research seeks to investigate the factors affecting the levels of residents’ place attachment.- The results demonstrate that place attachment consists of four dimensions: spatial identity, spatial affect, spatial dependence, and spatial social bonding.- Of all these four dimensions, spatial social bonding was identified as the most powerful predictor of place attachment.- The method of validation factor analysis validated the place attachment structure as a quadratic component consisting of four dimensions. IntroductionMany urban planners and designers have considered the topic of the quality of the emotional relationship between man and their place of residence, or place attachment, in recent years. In the past, the relationships between neighborhood residents who knew each other and were aware of each other’s circumstances contributed to healthy, familiar emotional relationships among them. In other words, neighborhoods, being familiar social units, involved profound cultural roots, pursued certain traditions and customs, and even continued the rites and ways of life and the norms and customs inherited from the past. In modern cities, however, kinship, shared religious beliefs, and moral values give way to anonymity and individualism as the emotional bonds of the local community weaken. Over time, neighborhood connections have lost some of their function. Lack of familiarity with people in the neighborhoods, lack of joint activities, and lack of ethnic, linguistic, religious, and cultural ties as firm as before have reduced people’s levels of emotional connection, i.e. their senses of place attachment with their residential neighborhoods. Therefore, this article aimed to provide structural modeling to investigate the aspects effective on attachment to residential areas.Theoretical FrameworkIn recent years, many researchers have examined the aspects of place attachment through structural equation modeling, providing a framework for their classification. Understanding the dimensions of place attachment through structural equation modeling allows researchers to better explore the potentials of this concept and its complexity, which makes up the objective of this study along with identification of the dimensions. The construct of spatial attachment consists of spatial identity, spatial dependence, spatial social bonding, and spatial emotion.MethodologyThe development of a valid, trustworthy method to measure and evaluate the dimensions of place attachment has been the focus of numerous studies in recent years, with quantity-oriented academics highlighting the multidimensionality of the construct. However, no one, simple scale of measuring is agreed upon by academics and researchers in the field due to the diversity of the methodologies used in the operationalization of the idea and the levels of relevant multi-dimensionality. Because of this significance, this research sought to investigate the dimensions affecting the level of residents’ place attachment. Since this was not easily possible, the indexing technique was used for examination. In this technique, indicators were considered to identify the dimensions, and questions were asked in the questionnaire to measure them. For assessment of the respondents’ opinions about the research topic, their responses were measured with a 5-point Likert scale. Moreover, a simple random sampling method was used to select the sample in the Haft Chenar neighborhood. The sample size was 687, and data analysis was made using the SPSS software version 22. For this purpose, confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling were used. Results and DiscussionThe findings demonstrated that the level of attachment of the Haft Chenar neighborhood residents is high. On the other hand, the results of the analysis of the structural model of the research supported the hypothesis that place attachment is a quadratic component consisting of the four identified dimensions of spatial identity, spatial affect, spatial dependence, and social connection with the place. It is noteworthy that among all these four dimensions, social connection with the place was identified as the most powerful predictor of place attachment in the research, indicating that the level of social connection in a neighborhood is high, which can directly increase the level of residents’ attachment to the place. Meanwhile, spatial identity received the lowest score for the Haft Chenar neighborhood. Therefore, it seems that residents’ identity to place can be expected to increase due to the experiences formed in the context given that this factor has won the lowest score among the residents, who can realize this by planning and designing an active node and center in the context of these residential neighborhoods and by creating attractive, pleasant places for socializing and embedding community places in the long run. Moreover, a number of solutions were provided for urban planners and designers to increase attachment in the Haft Chenar neighborhood given that these four dimensions of convergent narrative for the structure indicated spatial attachment.ConclusionThe spatial attachment model was experimentally tested given spatial attachment as a secondary component and the claim of this research that spatial dependence, spatial identity, spatial affection, and social connection with place constitute different primary dimensions of place attachment. Hence, the validation factor analysis method confirmed the validity of the spatial attachment structure as a quadratic component consisting of four dimensions. As demonstrated by the fitness indices of the model, it is suitable for research data. AcknowledgmentThis article is taken from Amir Ebrahimi Hasanakloo's Master's thesis entitled "Investigation and evaluation of factors affecting the increase of residents' attachment to residential neighborhoods (with an approach to Haft Chenar neighborhood - District 10 of Tehran)" which was supervised by Dr. Naser Bonyadi and Dr. Atoosa Modiri in the urban planning department of the Islamic Azad University of Central Tehran branch.
Urban Planning
Reza Ramyar; Esmaiel Zarghami
Volume 6, Issue 23 , August 2017, , Pages 39-52
Abstract
Objectives:
Residential and neighborhood open spaces are more than a simple space. They are the most important places for people living in urban areas and are part of their sense of living. The literature of neighborhood environments has always been attempting to describe neighborhoods in terms of the ...
Read More
Objectives:
Residential and neighborhood open spaces are more than a simple space. They are the most important places for people living in urban areas and are part of their sense of living. The literature of neighborhood environments has always been attempting to describe neighborhoods in terms of the criteria of their overall quality. Social and individual attachment are two major factors having an important effect on the overall quality of residents’ lives. Psychological and sociological aspects of people’s behavior in these spaces are addressed in the disciplines of environmental psychology and sociology. These two knowledge areas have evolved with development of new methods and knowledge improvements. In these two disciplines, different and almost independent, sometimes contradicting, theories have been proposed to in a complementary way. Finding a relationship between the proposed theories in these two fields is rarely considered. Investigating one of the most important concepts in environmental psychology, i.e. place attachment, and using this concept to improve social life of residential neighborhoods, this paper tries to establish a link between these separate disciplines. Most studies conducted on place attachment and meaning of place have been at the individual level addressing mostly individual emotions and experiences. Also, in the social domain, only social emotions and experiences have been discussed. Focusing on social participation and place attachment, this research first tries to show the complexity and multi-dimensionality of these concepts and then attempts to from a framework for social planning in common areas like residential open spaces.
Research method:
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), as a vigorous regressive multivariate analysis technique, is used to examine the hypotheses in this research. SEM is a multivariate statistical analysis technique suitable for analyzing structural relationships. Its ability to define relationships between unobserved constructs (latent variables) and observable variables has made it a common justified method in social sciences. In the modeling method here, we use SEM that allows complex relationships between one or more independent variables and one or more dependent variables.
Findings:
Based on the findings, place attachment and participation have a significant impact on social capital. The direct correlation between participation and social capital is stronger than that of place attachment, showing higher significance of participation in affecting social capital. Participation has also a great impact on place attachment.
Results:
Place attachment is a complex process that significantly affects social factors. It spreads and gets shaped over time. It is not only the place, but also social relationships produced in that place that support the maintenance and development of local community relations. Places are formed by individuals, groups and neighborhoods, and neighborhood groups are shaped by their place. According to this research, certain places with a strong sense of identity, higher communication, social capital and collective actions such as participation create a higher sense of attachment in the residents.
