Place identity

The Role of Place Identity in the Perception, Understanding, and Design of Built Environments Edited By

Hernan Casakin Ariel University Center of Samaria Israel &

Fátima Bernardo Technical University of Lisbon and University of Evora Portugal

CONTENTS About the Editors

i

Foreword

ii

Preface

iii

List of Contributors

iv

Acknowledgements

vii

Introduction

viii

CHAPTERS PART I: THEORETICAL POSITIONS AND DEBATES ON PLACE IDENTITY 1. Place, Place Identity, and Phenomenology: A Triadic Interpretation Based on J.G. Bennett’s Systematics David Seamon

3

2. Essential Human Qualities in Strengthening Place Identity as Expressed in Louis Kahn’s Architectural Theory Susan Noormohammadi

22

3. Place Identity: A Central Concept in Understanding Intergroup Relationships in the Urban Context Fátima Bernardo and José Manuel Palma-Oliveira

35

PART II: PLACE IDENTITY AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE PUBLIC SPACE: REVITALIZATION, RESTORATIVENESS, AND TRANSFORMATION 4. Revitalization of Public Spaces in a Working Class Neighborhood: Appropriation, Identity and the Urban Imaginary Hélène Bélanger, Sara Cameron and Cecilia de la Mora

47

5. Reconstitution of the Place Identity within the Intervention Efforts in the Historic Built Environment Humeyra Birol Akkurt

63

6. Place Identity as a Useful Psychological Construct for Approaching Modern Social Challenges and New People-Environment Relations: Residential Mobility, Restorative Environments, and Landscape Tomeu Vidal, Renato Troffa, Sergi Valera and Ferdinando Fornara

78

PART III: PLACE IDENTITY AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE PUBLIC SPACE: ATTACHMENT, APPROPRIATION, AND PERCEPTION 7. Open Spaces in Informal Settlements in Bogotá, Expressions of Attachment and Identity Jaime Hernández-Garcia

92

8. Place Identity in the Neighborhood as Perceived by the Elder Residents: Relations with Attachment, Dependence and Place Quality Hernan Casakin and Shimshon Neikrug

107

9. Multilayered Identity of Places: Linkage Between Physical Form, Behaviour Patterns and Public Perception Barbara Goličnik Marušić and Matej Nikšič

120

PART IV: PLACE IDENTITY, CULTURE, AND RELIGION 10. Place Identity and Religion: A Study of Hindu Immigrants in America Shampa Mazumdar and Sanjoy Mazumdar

133

11. Place Identity Principles and Cultural Metaphors in a Mexican Environment Hernan Casakin and Esi Abbam Elliot

146

12. Place and the Politics of Local Identity: Belonging and Immigrant Settlement in American Suburbia Debra Lattanzi Shutika

163

PART V: PLACE IDENTITY, ARCHITECTURE, URBANISM, AND GLOBALIZATION 13. Identity and Identification: The Role of Architectural Identity in a Globalized World Robert Adam

176

14. Context, Identity and Architectural Design Thinking. Álvaro Siza’s ‘Bairro da Malagueira’ Jorge Spencer and Nuno Miguel Seabra

194

15. Wither Genius Loci?: The City, Urban Fabric and Identity in Perth, Western Australia Felicity Morel-Edniebrown

209

Index

228

eBooks End User License Agreement Please read this license agreement carefully before using this eBook. Your use of this eBook/chapter constitutes your agreement to the terms and conditions set forth in this License Agreement. Bentham Science Publishers agrees to grant the user of this eBook/chapter, a non-exclusive, nontransferable license to download and use this eBook/chapter under the following terms and conditions: 1. This eBook/chapter may be downloaded and used by one user on one computer. The user may make one back-up copy of this publication to avoid losing it. The user may not give copies of this publication to others, or make it available for others to copy or download. For a multi-user license contact [email protected] 2. All rights reserved: All content in this publication is copyrighted and Bentham Science Publishers own the copyright. You may not copy, reproduce, modify, remove, delete, augment, add to, publish, transmit, sell, resell, create derivative works from, or in any way exploit any of this publication’s content, in any form by any means, in whole or in part, without the prior written permission from Bentham Science Publishers. 3. The user may print one or more copies/pages of this eBook/chapter for their personal use. The user may not print pages from this eBook/chapter or the entire printed eBook/chapter for general distribution, for promotion, for creating new works, or for resale. Specific permission must be obtained from the publisher for such requirements. Requests must be sent to the permissions department at E-mail: [email protected] 4. The unauthorized use or distribution of copyrighted or other proprietary content is illegal and could subject the purchaser to substantial money damages. The purchaser will be liable for any damage resulting from misuse of this publication or any violation of this License Agreement, including any infringement of copyrights or proprietary rights. Warranty Disclaimer: The publisher does not guarantee that the information in this publication is error-free, or warrants that it will meet the users’ requirements or that the operation of the publication will be uninterrupted or error-free. This publication is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, either express or implied or statutory, including, without limitation, implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The entire risk as to the results and performance of this publication is assumed by the user. In no event will the publisher be liable for any damages, including, without limitation, incidental and consequential damages and damages for lost data or profits arising out of the use or inability to use the publication. The entire liability of the publisher shall be limited to the amount actually paid by the user for the eBook or eBook license agreement. Limitation of Liability: Under no circumstances shall Bentham Science Publishers, its staff, editors and authors, be liable for any special or consequential damages that result from the use of, or the inability to use, the materials in this site. eBook Product Disclaimer: No responsibility is assumed by Bentham Science Publishers, its staff or members of the editorial board for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products instruction, advertisements or ideas contained in the publication purchased or read by the user(s). Any dispute will be governed exclusively by the laws of the U.A.E. and will be settled exclusively by the competent Court at the city of Dubai, U.A.E. You (the user) acknowledge that you have read this Agreement, and agree to be bound by its terms and conditions. Permission for Use of Material and Reproduction Photocopying Information for Users Outside the USA: Bentham Science Publishers grants authorization for individuals to photocopy copyright material for private research use, on the sole basis that requests for such use are referred directly to the requestor's local Reproduction Rights Organization (RRO). The copyright fee is US $25.00 per copy per article exclusive of any charge or fee levied. In order to contact your local RRO, please contact the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations (IFRRO), Rue du Prince Royal 87, B-I050 Brussels, Belgium; Tel: +32 2 551 08 99; Fax: +32 2 551 08 95; E-mail: [email protected]; url: www.ifrro.org This authorization does not extend to any other kind of copying by any means, in any form, and for any purpose other than private research use. Photocopying Information for Users in the USA: Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by Bentham Science Publishers for libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Services, provided that the appropriate fee of US $25.00 per copy per chapter is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers MA 01923, USA. Refer also to www.copyright.com

i

About the Editors Hernan Casakin Dr. Hernan Casakin, is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Architecture, Ariel University Center of Samaria, Israel. He holds a Bachelor of Architecture and Town Planning from the University of Mar del Plata, Argentina, and a Master and a PhD in Architecture from the Technion – IIT, Haifa, Israel. His professional experience includes appointments as Research Fellow in the Department of Cognitive Sciences and Computer Science, Hamburg University, Germany, and in the Environmental Simulation Laboratory, Tel Aviv University, Israel. He was invited as a visiting professor at the Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, TUDelft, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands during the year 2012. Hernan is a board member of a number of international architectural and design journals that includes: Open Environmental Sciences- Bentham Open, Journal of Town & City Management, Icograda Journal of Design Research, and the Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture. Part of his research focuses on environmental issues like wayfinding, place attachment, sense of place, and place identity. He published widely in international peer reviewed journals, eBook chapters, and eBook proceedings of international conferences.

Fátima Bernardo Fátima Bernardo is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology, University of Évora in Portugal. She is responsible for the disciplines of environmental psychology, and social psychology. She is also a Research Assistant in the Center for Urban and Regional Systems (CESUR), Technical Institute of the Technical University of Lisbon. She holds 5 years degree in Psychology and Master in Psychology from the Superior Institute of Applied Psychology, pos-Graduation in Environmental Psychology and Education.and PhD in Environmental Psychology in Évora University, Portugal. She has been involved in multi-disciplinary research projects at national and European levels, in particular in risk perception, landscape perception, and place identity. Her research has been published in international peer reviewed journals, eBook chapters, and eBook proceedings of international conferences.

ii

FOREWORD In a rapidly changing world, how do place identity and place attachment have relevance to people’s everyday lives and to professional design and planning? In various ways, this question underlies all the chapters of this volume, expressed through a wide range of conceptual perspectives and approaches. Place identity, place attachment, genius loci, people-place interaction, place-based planning and design are all valuable concepts and approaches that can help bridge divisions between research and practice and between academic knowledge and everyday life. Contributors to the volume convincingly demonstrate how the themes of place, place identity, and place making can facilitate valuable linkages among a wide range of disciplines and professions, including architecture, sociology, geography, environmental psychology, landscape architecture, and urban design and planning. Increasing awareness of environmental and architectural experience was a major aim of humanistic geographer Yi-Fu Tuan, one of the earliest academic proponents for studying place and place identity. In his 1977 Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience, he laid out a provocative set of questions for which today we still do not have thorough answers: How do we describe “familiarity,” that quality of “at homeness” we feel towards a person or place? What kinds of intimate places can be planned, and what cannot—at least, no more than we can plan for deeply human encounters? Are space and place the environmental equivalents of the human need for adventure and safety, openness and definition? How long does it take to form a lasting attachment to place? Is the sense of place a quality of awareness poised between being rooted in place, which is unconscious, and being alienated, which goes with exacerbated consciousness—and exacerbated because it is only or largely mental? How do we promote the visibility of rooted communities that lack striking visual symbols? What is the loss and gain in such promotion?” (Tuan, 1977, p. 202). The contributors to this volume offer a wide range of intriguing answers to Tuan questions. The chapters provide, on one hand, valuable knowledge regarding place identity and, on the other hand, inspiring insights regarding place creation. Planning, envisioning, and actualizing sustainable communities and places is a challenging task demanding an understanding and approach that move beyond arbitrary, piecemeal policies and fashionable, image-driven design. The chapters of this volume offer much in advancing a more robust, comprehensive place making grounded in the needs and actions of people-inplace. REFERENCE Tuan, Y. (1977). Place and Space: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Maria da Graça Saraiva Landscape Architect and Associate Professor, School of Architecture, Technical University of Lisbon (UTL); Researcher, Center for Urban and Regional Systems (CESUR), Technical Institute of the Technical University of Lisbon; Researcher, Research Center of Architecture, Urbanism and Design (CIAUD), School of Architecture, University of Lisbon (UTL ).

iii

PREFACE The concern that identity has recently generated comes as a reaction to the recent processes of globalization, integration, and homogenization, which seriously threaten the identity of places (Lewicka, 2010; Relph, 1976). Whereas, the progressive deterioration of local values, and the the loss of individuality and distinctiveness is a dominating characteristic of our era (Borja & Castells, 1997; Scholte, 2005), identity is seen as a fundamental need that encompasses all aspects of human life. Identity in relation to places and the physical environment is one of those. To these regards, identity is the basis of perception, experience, and appreciation of the environment. It allows people to develop affective bonds to place, as well as a sense of belonging that brings people together around shared values, issues and localities (Manzo, 2003; Tuan, 1980). Place identity contributes to forge the image of an environment, as well as its vitality, livability, and performance. Place identity is concerned with a set of concepts and ideas about place and identity in a variety of disciplines such as environmental psychology, philosophy, semiotics, urban sociology, geography, urban planning, urban design, architecture, and landscape architecture. It refers to the personal meanings, symbols, and significance that places have for their residents, visitors, and users. Thus, place identity constitutes a component of personal identity through which people describe themselves in terms of belonging to a specific place (Proshansky, 1978; Proshansky, Fabian, & Karminoff, 1983). Place identity can be affected by the physical or spatial features of a setting (e.g., structure, spatial characteristics, built form, landscape, and furniture), the activities carried out in it (circulation flow, behavior patterns), and its meaning (legibility, cultural associations, and semiotics). In consequence, the interaction between people and these fundamental elements of the environment has a strong influence on how place identity is perceived and understood. As such, the concept of place identity can vary as a result of geographic conditions, culture, technical, political, social, psychological, and technological factors. While place identity constitutes a significant theme for debate, the relationship between identity, place, architecture, and urban design still deserves more attention. What constitutes place identity is a controversial issue that continues to generate heated discussion and disagreement. This eBook aims at developing knowledge in relation to some of the main themes related to place identity nowadays, and most of all on a science of identity in the built environment, across a multifaceted and multicultural society. We hope that this collection of chapters will capture the attention of those already in the place identity community, and of all those who will find an interest here. REFERENCES Borja, J. & Castells M. (1997). Local and Global, Management of Cities in the Information Age, London: Earthscan. Lewicka, M. (2010). What makes neighborhood different from home and city? Effects of place scale on place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 35-51. Manzo, L. C. (2003). Beyond house and haven: Toward a revisioning of emotional relationships with places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 47-61. Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 10, 147-169. Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A.K., & Karminoff, R.(1983). Place identity: Physical world socialization of the self. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 57-84. Relph, E. C. (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion. Scholte, J. A. (2005). Globalisation: a critical introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Tuan, Y. F. (1980). Rootedness versus sense of place. Landscape, 24, 3-8.

Hernan Casakin Senior Lecturer, School of Architecture, Ariel University Center of Samaria, Israel

iv

List of Contributors Barbara Goličnik Marušić PhD in Landscape Architecture (Edinburgh College of Art, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, UK). Researcher at the Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia and Assistant Professor at the School of Architecture, University of Maribor, Slovenia.

Cecilia de la Mora Architect and Urban Planner. MSc in Urban Development (Universidade Federal de Pernambuco). MSc student in Urban Studies in Montreal, at UQAM, Université du Québec, Montréal, Canada,

David Seamon Geographer and Environment-Behaviour researcher. PhD. in Geography (Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts USA, 1977). Professor of Architecture at Kansas State University in Manhattan, Kansas, USA. Editor of the Environmental and Architectural Phenomenology Newsletter.

Debra Lattanzi Shutika Folklorist. Ph.D. in Folklore and Folklife (University of Pennsylvania). Associate Professor of English and Cultural Studies at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, USA.

Esi Abbam Elliot PhD Candidate in Marketing, Department of Managerial Studies, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA.

Fátima Bernardo Psychologist. MSc in Psychology (Superior Institute of Applied Psychology, Lisbon). Assistant Teacher in the Department of Psychology, University of Évora, Portugal. Research Assistant in Center for Urban and Regional Systems (CESUR) Technical Institute of the Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal.

Felicity Morel-Edniebrown Urban Semioticist. Director Stakeholder Management and Strategy Department of Planning, Councillor History Council, Honorary Research Fellow (University of Western Australia). Member International Committee on Interpretation and Presentation of Heritage Sites, Australia.

Ferdinando Fornara Psychologist. MSc in Environmental Psychology (University of Surrey, UK) and PhD in Social Psychology (University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy). Researcher and lecturer in social and environmental psychology at the University of Cagliari, Italy.

Hélène Bélanger BA in Urban Planning and Ph.D. in Urban Studies (INRS- Institut national de la recherche scientifique). Professor in urban studies and urban planning in the Département d’études urbaines et touristiques de l’Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada.

Hernan Casakin Architect. BA in Architecture and Town Planning (University of Mar del Plata, Argentina), and MSc and PhD in Architecture, Technion – IIT, Haifa, Israel. Senior Lecturer in Architecture at Ariel University Center of Samaria, Ariel, Israel.

Humeyra Birol Akkurt Architect. MSc on the Restitution and Conservation Studies and PhD on the analyses of spatial identity through the historic residential areas of Levantines of Izmir Assistant professor in Dokuz Eylul University, Faculty of Architecture, Department of Restoration, Izmir, Turkıye.

v

Jaime Hernandez-Garcia Architect. MSc in Architecture (York University, UK). PhD in Architecture, Planning and Landscape (University of Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK). Lecturer in the School of Architecture and Design, Javeriana University in Bogota, Colombia.

José Manuel Palma-Oliveira Psychologist. PhD in Psychology (University of Lisbon). Professor at Faculty of Psychology and Education – University of Lisbon Psychology, Portugal.

Matej Nikšič Architect. MSc in Urban Design (Oxford Brookes University) and PhD in architecture (University of Ljubljana). Researcher at the Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia.

Nuno Miguel Seabra Architect. MSc Degree in Architecture Theory. PhD student (Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Lisbon). Researcher and lecturer in Architecture Theory at Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal. Assistant Teacher at Faculty of Architecture and Arts, Lusíada University of Lisbon, Portugal.

Renato Troffa PhD. in Psychology (University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy). Ad. Professor of Environmental Psychology (University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Italy). Ad. Professor of Psychology of Groups University of Cagliari, Italy.

Robert Adam Director of ADAM Architecture, Winchester, UK. Visiting professor of Urban Design, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland.

Sanjoy Mazumdar Architect-Planner. BA in Architecture (IIT, Kharagpur, India) and MSc in Architecture (M.Arch.A.S.), MSc of City Planning (M.C.P.), Ph.D. in Organizational Studies and Environmental Design (M.I.T.). Professor in the Department of Planning, Policy, and Design at the University of California, Irvine.

Sara Cameron BA in Anthropology (McGill University) and MSc in Geography, Urban and Environmental Studies (Concordia University). PhD candidate in the Département d’études urbaines et touristiques de l’Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada.

Sergi Valera Psychologist. Ph.D. in Psychology and Master in Environmental Intervention (University of Barcelona, Spain). Professor of social and environmental psychology at University of Barcelona.

Shampa Mazumdar Sociologist. B.A. in History (Calcutta University). Master and PhD. in Sociology (Northeastern University). Lecturer in the Department of Sociology, University of California, Irvine, Spain.

Shimshon Neikrug Social Worker. PhD in Sociology. Ariel University Center, Department of Social Work, Israel.

Susan Noormohammadi Architect. MSc and PhD. in Architecture Faculty of Architecture, University of College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

vi

Tomeu Vidal Psychologist. Ph.D. in Psychology and MSc in Environmental Intervention (University of Barcelona). Professor of social and environmental psychology at University of Barcelona, Spain.

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Deep thanks are due to all the contributors, and the following referees for their valuable comments, and insights to this eBook: Mariela Alfonzo (USA) Mirilia Bonnes (Italy) Jonh Cameron (Australia) Sylvia Cavalcante (Brasil) Rui Gaspar de Carvalho (Portugal) Kaliopa Dimitrovska Andrews (Slovenia) Gabriella Esposito (Italy) Isabel Loupa Ramos (Portugal) Patricia Mosconi (Argentina) Bianca Petrelli (Italy) Ashraf Salama (Quatar) Helena Teräväinen (Finland)

viii

The Role of Place Identity in the Perception, Understanding, and Design of Built Environments INTRODUCTION As a contribution to previous literature dealing with identity and the physical environment, this eBook offers a deep insight about the role played by place identity with regard to architecture and the city. A major interest resides in exploring from a multidisciplinary perspective, how place identity affects and is affected by the bonds established between people and their environments. Considering that place identity is a controversial issue that continues to generate passionate discussion and not little discrepancy, this eBook is as an attempt to contribute to this debate. The volume is aimed at a broad audience of practitioners, educators, and researchers that embraces: architects and landscape architects, town planners and urban designers, environmental psychologists and environmental sociologists, ecologists, semioticians, geographers, folklorists and philosophers interested in the environment.

Part I: THEORETICAL POSITIONS AND DEBATES ON PLACE IDENTITY

The Role of Place Identity in the Perception, Understanding, and Design of Built Environments, 2012, 3-21

3

CHAPTER 1 Place, Place Identity, and Phenomenology: A Triadic Interpretation Based on J.G. Bennett’s Systematics David Seamon* Department of Architecture, 211 Seaton Hall, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-2901, USA Abstract: As recent phenomenological studies have demonstrated (Casey 1997, 2009; Malpas 1999, 2006; Mugerauer 2008; Stefanovic 2000), the phenomenon of place is a multivalent structure sophisticated and complex in its existential constitution. In this chapter, I offer one phenomenological vantage point from which to examine this lived complexity. I contend that, as an integral structure of human life, place can be understood in terms of three dimensions: first, the geographical ensemble— i.e., the material environment, including both its natural and human-made dimensions; second, peoplein-place, including individual and group actions, intentions, and meanings; and, third, spirit of place, or genius loci. Drawing on the conceptual approach of “systematics” developed by the British philosopher J.G. Bennett, I argue that these three dimensions can engage in six different ways, each of which relates to one particular lived mode whereby place contributes to human life. These six modes are: (1) place interaction, (2) place identity, (3) place creation, (4) place intensification, (5) place realization, and (6) place release. I argue that place identity is important to understand the nature of place but is complemented by other modes of relationship that together help clarify the complexity and richness of place and place experience.

Keywords: Place, place identity, place attachment, place making, place as lifeworld, phenomenology of place. INTRODUCTION Since the early 1970s when phenomenological geographers Yi-Fu Tuan (1974a & b, 1977), Edward Relph (1976, 1985), and Anne Buttimer (1976, Buttimer & Seamon 1980) first realized the need to explore the topic in terms of its everyday lived dimensions, research on place has proliferated1. Though this work is impressive in its range of conceptual outlooks and real-world examples, Patterson and Williams (2005) conclude that there remains no systematic theory of place. Rather, the work involves multiple research approaches incorporating conflicting epistemological and ontological assumptions. Patterson and Williams call for an academic openness to alternative conceptions of place and place experience; they contend that this “critical pluralist” framework might provide place research with an overarching coherence, including a more thorough understanding of place attachment and place identity. As researchers work toward this encompassing framework, one aim is to facilitate an understanding of place that is neither objectivist (i.e., interpreting place as an objective environment outside experiencers) nor subjectivist (i.e., interpreting place as a subjective representation, whether cognitive or affective, inside experiencers). Rather, researchers need to understand place as incorporating a lived engagement and process whereby human beings afford and are afforded by the world of places in which they find themselves. Toward this aim, a phenomenological perspective is valuable because one of its central concerns is identifying foundational structures through which human life is given coherence and continuity (Finlay, 2009; Moran, 2000; Seamon, 2000; van Manen, 1990).

*Address correspondence to David Seamon: Department of Architecture, 211 Seaton Hall, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-2901, USA; E-mail: [email protected] 1 The research on place is voluminous; reviews include Altman & Low 1992; Cresswell, 2004; Foote & Azaryahu, 2009; Hay, 2000, 2006; Janz, 2005; Lewicka, 2011; Manzo, 2005; Mugerauer, 1994; Seamon, 2000. Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

4 The Role of Place Identity in the Perception…

David Seamon

In this chapter, I develop a phenomenology of place by drawing on an approach called systematics, a method of understanding developed by the British philosopher J. G. Bennett (1897-1974). Systematics can be interpreted as a phenomenology of the qualitative significance of numbers as each can be used to explore one particular aspect of a phenomenon. Bennett argued, for example, that one-ness can be used to explore the wholeness of a phenomenon; two-ness, to explore polarity and complementarity; three-ness, relationship; four-ness, activity; five-ness, potential; and so forth (Bennett, 1956, 1961, 1966a & b, 1993). I use Bennett’s approach of systematics to suggest that one helpful way in which the people-place relationship might be clarified is in terms of three-ness—in other words, as a triadic relationship among three dimensions of place that I label: (1) geographic ensemble; (2) people-in-place; and (3) spirit of place, or genius loci. The meaning of these terms and their triadic relationships are laid out as the chapter proceeds, but first it is important to review conventional views on the people-environment relationship and to provide a more thorough understanding of Bennett’s systematics as it might be used to explore a phenomenon like place. THE PEOPLE-ENVIRONMENT RELATIONSHIP AS DYAD AND MONAD Until the 1980s, the people-environment relationship in Geography and other environmental disciplines was theorized dualistically in terms of people vs. environment. This dyadic relationship was typically interpreted in terms of three conceptual possibilities (Sprout & Sprout 1965): (1) environmental determinism, in which the environment is seen as an active force that largely controls and thus “determines” human actions; (2) possibilism, which reverses the relationship by claiming that, in fact, people actively shape their physical environment and, therefore, all human efforts are “possible”; or (3) an ecological perspective, which contends that the relationship between people and environment is reciprocal and that negative human actions can eventually undermine and destroy nonhuman and human environments. More recently, partly because of the existential-phenomenological work of philosophers such as Martin Heidegger (1962) and Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1962, 1968), there is a growing recognition that any dualistic conception of the people-environment relationship is inadequate because of the lived fact that human beings are always conjoined, enmeshed, and immersed in their world. In other words, a relationship that is assumed conceptually to be two (people/environment) is lived existentially as one (peopleenvironment intertwinement). Thus, for example, Merleau-Ponty described this holistic relationship through such phenomenological-/concepts as body-subject, chiasm, and flesh, while Heidegger spoke of Dasein, or human being-in-the-world (Casey, 2009; Heidegger 1962; Malpas, 1999, 2006; Merleau-Ponty, 1962, 1968; Mugerauer, 2008; Seamon, 2012). Because of this always-already-lived-togetherness of person and world and people and environment, one cannot phenomenologically assign specific phenomena to either self or world alone. Rather, the two must be envisioned together as the experienced wholeness of people-in-world. I do not mean to suggest here that this holistic perspective is widely accepted in the environmental disciplines today. In fact, the dualistic, ecological perspective of people/environment reciprocity still dominates and has become even more entrenched, partly because of the popular tropes of sustainability, green design, and climate change. Still, there is a growing awareness in the environmental, ecological, and environment-behavior literatures that any dichotomizing conception of the people-environment relationship needs to be re-envisioned in theory and application (Gallagher 1986; Graumann 2002; Hay 2000; Mugerauer, 2008; Schatzki, 2007; Seamon, 2000, 2007; Stefanovic, 2000). As the burgeoning literature on the topic indicates, one thematic possibility is the notion of place, which, from a phenomenological perspective, is powerful conceptually and practically because, by its very nature, it offers a way to portray the experienced wholeness of people-in-world (Casey, 1997, 2009; Malpas, 1999, 2009; Mugerauer, 1994, 2010; Relph, 1976, 1985; Seamon, 1979; Stefanovic, 1998, 2000). As a phenomenon always present in human life, place gathers worlds spatially and environmentally, marking out centers of human action, intention, and meaning that, in turn, contribute to the making of place. “[B] y virtue of its unencompassability by anything other than itself”, writes philosopher Edward Casey (2009, p.

Place, Place Identity, and Phenomenology

The Role of Place Identity in the Perception… 5

15-16), place “is at once the limit and the condition of all that exists… To be is to be in place”. In other words, human connections with place are not contingent, accidental, or nostalgic remnants of an outmoded past (Malpas, 1999, p. 29-33). Rather, to be human is always already to be emplaced: “It is through our engagement with place that our own human being is made real, but it is also through our engagement that place takes on a sense and a significance of its own” (Malpas, 2009, p. 23). From Bennett’s perspective of systematics, a phenomenological emphasis on place as an integral peopleworld whole relates to an interpretation grounded in the significance of one and one-ness—what in Bennett’s terms would be called the monad of place experience. As a multifaceted phenomenon incorporating and shaping the environmental fabric of taken-for-granted daily life, place is an integral, inescapable constituent of human-being-in-the-world: “it is not merely human identity that is tied to place or locality, but the very possibility of being the sort of creature that can engage with a world., that can think about that world, and that can find itself in the world” (Malpas 1999, p. 8). Or as Relph (2008, p. 36) explains, place is “not a bit of space, nor another word for landscape or environment, it is not a figment of individual experience, nor a social construct…. It is, instead, the foundation of being both human and nonhuman; experience, actions, and life itself begin and end with place”. In this chapter, I suggest that Bennett’s understanding of three-ness and the triad offers additional insight into the people-place relationship because the triad moves away from the hermetic wholeness of place and opens a view onto its processual dimensions, both those dynamics that allow place to be what it is as well as those dynamics that allow place to change, both constructively and destructively. In other words, one gains a fuller sense of the various interactions and processes by which places and their people survive and prosper, on one hand; or degenerate and flounder, on the other hand. As we shall see, place identity is one integral dimension of a triadic understanding of place experience and place making. BENNETT’S SYSTEMATICS From the 1920s until his death in 1974, Bennett sought to develop a conceptual method—what he called systematics—to clarify the constitution of phenomena by drawing upon the interpretive possibilities of number (Bennett, 1956, 1961, 1966a, 1966b, 1993). From a phenomenological perspective, one can argue that Bennett’s achievement was a phenomenology of wholes in which each integer—1, 2, 3, 4, and so forth up to 12—points toward a different mode of togetherness and belonging in regard to the thing studied. The central assumption of systematics is that “there is something inherent in number itself that is fundamental to the way the world is and the way we can understand it. If we are able to penetrate more deeply into the nature of number, then we must become able to see reality more clearly” (Blake, 2003, p. 8)2. Bennett used the word system to designate the underlying pattern that a specific number represents. Further, by using the Greek word for the particular number followed by the suffix –ad, he gave each system a name. Thus the monad represents one-ness; the dyad, two-ness; the triad, three-ness; the tetrad, four-ness, and so forth. Bennett argued that each of these systems offer varying but equally accurate perspectives on the particular thing in which the researcher is interested. In this way, he or she gains a more comprehensive and integrated understanding of the thing and be better able to appreciate and to work with it. Table 1 lists each system and its central descriptive quality up to five-ness and the pentad (Table 1). Bennett (1993, p. 13) defined a system as “a set of independent but mutually relevant terms, in which term refers to those elements of the system that express a specific character, such as universality, complementarity, dynamism, activity, potential, and so forth”. The number of terms in a system identifies its order; thus the monad is of the first order and has only one term that is called totality. The second-, third-,

2 Bennett (1993, 97) defined systematics as “the study of all the possible forms of connectedness”. The most accessible introduction is his Elementary Systematics (Bennett 1993). Bennett described systematics most thoroughly in his four-volume master work, The Dramatic Universe, published between 1956 and 1966 (Bennett 1956; 1961; 1966a & b). On how systematics is different from the general-systems theory developed by biologist Ludwig von Bertalanffy, see Bennett 1970. For a discussion of the mode of understanding assumed in systematic explication, see Bortoft, 1996.

22


CHAPTER 2 Essential Human Qualities in Strengthening Place Identity as Expressed in Louis Kahn’s Architectural Theory Susan Noormohammadi* Faculty of Architecture, University of College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Abstract: Place identity is a term that has arisen within the past two decades and which has affected architecture considerably. Consequently, architectural space and place are also related to place identity. There are two dimensions for place identity. On one hand, cultural characteristics such as social, historical and geographical factors form the distinctiveness of individual places. On the other hand, some common, unchangeable and essential qualities in human nature are considered to be effective in the formation of similar qualities in different places. This paper signifies similarities of place identity. In this sense, identity is analyzed more through its relation to nature rather than to culture. This approach is argued through the analysis of what is known as ‘essential human qualities’ in the main theories in psychology and phenomenology. Consequently, with reference to the main objectives in Gaston Bachelard’s (1964) theory, the relationship between natural human needs and desires in architectural space is argued. This theory provides the basis upon which the essential human qualities in Louis Kahn’s architectural approach are analyzed. This part gives an insight into how place identity is related to Louis Kahn’s theory. In the conclusion, it is presented that a significant fundamental need to return to essential human qualities in architectural discourse exists. This paper argues that it is necessary to attain the levels of space which are very humane. In this sense, space can possess unique and special qualities which are ‘true’, ‘pure’, ‘simple’, ‘familiar’, ‘intimate’, and ‘free’. When an architectural space is deeply experienced, perceived, and appreciated, then we can expect to achieve a place which is more intimate with our human identity.

Keywords: Place identity, essential, human nature, natural human needs, meaning, louis kahn, architectural space. INTRODUCTION The intention of this paper is to analyze the significance of essential human qualities in creating deep and intimate architectural spaces. It discusses the link between essential human qualities and the sense of belonging and attachment in relation to an architectural space. The paper tries to analyze: What kind of architectural spaces and places have their roots in human nature; How focusing on essential human needs or existential dimensions in human nature can influence the creation of architectural space; How an architectural space can be experienced in a deeper, more intimate, and more profound way; and How this process will affect developing place identity. This paper will analyze four main parts: Place identity and its relationship to culture and nature; Essential human qualities; Essential human qualities in Louis Kahn’s architectural approach; and Place identity related to Louis Kahn’s Theory. It is assumed that this analysis will provide a basis upon which to return to essential human qualities in an architectural approach. In the first part, a brief discussion of the term ‘place identity’ will be presented. Also its main determinants will be reviewed and analyzed. There will be discussion on how identity is related to cultural factors and how at the same time it is connected to natural human needs. Other factors, for example the concepts of place and space, have been significant in clarifying and developing this term. In the second part of the paper the essential human qualities that are regarded as characteristics in ‘human nature’ will be explored. Human nature is a very complex concept and in different philosophical ideologies *Address correspondence to Susan Noormohammadi: Faculty of Architecture, University of College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran; E-mail: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Essential Human Qualities in Strengthening Place Identity

The Role of Place Identity in the Perception…

23

is considered differently. The varied arguments on human nature are explicit. But this paper focuses more on the theories in which essential characteristics in human nature are always the same. This idea is strengthened through the concepts of ‘natural human needs and desires’ or ‘values being’ in some of the main attitudes in eastern thoughts and also in some psychological theories. In order to support this idea, the paper analyzes ‘natural human needs and desires’ at the physical and psychological levels. In this process some of the basic values of being, such as truth, goodness, beauty, completion, totality, uniqueness, whole, order, justice, necessity and simplicity are signified. The paper attempts to find a relationship between these basic and essential needs in human nature and theories which are in search of creating deep, intimate and essential places. In this process the main idea of Gaston Bachelard (1964) relating to ‘inhabited space’ is presented. His ideology can be perceived as a connection between psychological and architectural terms relating to humane spaces. The focus of the third part of the paper will be on Louis Kahn’s architectural approach concerning essential human qualities. Generally Louis Kahn’s idea in architectural theory is based on the revival of architecture and nature. In a more specific discussion, there is more focus on the inner and spiritual meanings of nature in his theory. This part of the paper gives an insight into an architectural approach which is centralized on essential human needs or existential dimensions in human nature. The intention is to find out how essential human qualities have generally emerged in Louis Kahn’s theories and designs. In this regard the main theoretical ideas in his approach such as ‘psyche’, ‘beginning’, ‘human inspirations’, ‘human nature’, ‘institution’, immeasurable’ and ‘order’ will be analyzed. In the fourth part of the paper the relationship between Louis Kahn’s theory and essential human qualities from the first part of the paper will be clarified. The relationship between communalities in human nature, as Kahn believes, and how his design of architectural space has been effective in increasing place identity, will also be discussed. In the conclusion the way that essential human needs can address humane architectural spaces will be argued. Further, the means by which a space with this special quality can increase place identity will be discussed. The main research methodology is a qualitative and logical argument and focuses on phenomenology. In this process the research of relevant theoretical references have formed the main structure of explanation, analysis, and interpretation of theories. PLACE IDENTITY AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO CULTURE AND NATURE The term ‘place identity’ which emerged at the end of the 20th century has been more focused on the significance of ‘place’, ‘people’, and ‘meaning’. David Seamon (1985), who focuses on the significance of phenomenological perspective, mentioned that in the modern world, “themes such as community, at-homeness, and sense of place take on renewed significance in both academic discussions and daily conversations” (Seamon, 1985, p. 227). Like other similar terms, creating place identity has emerged as a solution to the effects of modern societies. Consequently this field has largely influenced architecture and seeks to connect people with their environment and increase the sense of attachment and belonging in architectural spaces. PLACE, SPACE AND IDENTITY The word ‘identity’ is based on the Latin pronoun ‘idem’, which means ‘the same’ (Online Etymology Dictionary, 2010). The verb ‘to identify’ means to show and prove who or what somebody or something is (Hornby & Cowie, 1989, p. 616). As Relph (1976) expresses, “Identity is a phenomenon that evades simple definition, although some of its main characteristics are apparent”. He has declared that “identity of something refers to a persistent sameness and unity which allows that thing to be differentiated from others” (Relph, 1976, p. 45). In architectural discourse, talking about ‘space’ normally reflects a common meaning. It can be perceived as somewhere that is enclosed and which is defined within its limitations; but this kind of enclosure can be


Susan Noormohammadi

perceived as abstract. On the other hand, ‘place’ generally represents somewhere that is incorporated in our memory. In other words, space becomes a place when it is lived in and experienced. The terms ‘space’ and ‘place’ are interrelated, but not reciprocal. As Casey (1998, p. ix) has stressed, “Whatever is true for space and time, that much is true for place: we are immersed in it and could not do without it”. But he has also indicated that to begin with the term place is to start with something that contains space. “There is no return to place from space, but from place space is generated”. (Casey, 1998, p. 275) We can denote that both space and place are significant in architectural discourse. In order to make this subject clearer, in reference to Relph (1976, p. 8), “It seems that space provides the context for places but derives its meaning from particular places”. This fact indicates that “when space feels thoroughly familiar to us, it has become place”. Tuan (1977, p. 73, 136) states that “It transforms place as it acquires definition and meaning”. In other words, “It is interpretation and narrative that gives identity and it is identity that transforms space into place” (Hague & Jenkins, 2005, p. 4, 5). It is not the intention of this paper to review the main theories and their development about space and place specifically within the 20th century, but it is unavoidable to talk only about place and its relation to identity. Space is still largely used in architectural discourse. The application of ‘architectural space’ in this paper does not persist in its diversion from the term place. Also it is necessary to indicate that the term ‘architectural space’ in architectural discourse does not always indicate abstract space, but also in many related texts architectural space signifies somewhere that is experienced by human beings. This concept about place is explicitly presented in many theories. By the term ‘place’, “we mean something more than a mere location”. It is perceived as a totality made up of concrete things having material substance, shape, texture, and color (Norberg-Schulz, 1980, p. 13, 14). Meaning is closely linked to the term place. This concept is clearly expressed in Norberg-Schulz’s idea. “The places are goals where we experience the meaningful events of our existence, but they are also points of departure from which we orient ourselves and take possession of the environment”. (Norberg-Schulz, 1971, p. 19) Also this term is strengthened by the quotations of Relph (1992) and Rose (1995, cit in Hague & Jenkins, 2005, p. 4), that “place implies some mix of memory, sensual experience and interpretation”. Referring to Norberg-Schulz (1980, p. 166), meaning is a psychic function, as it is dependent on identification and implies a sense of belonging. For him the work of Martin Heidegger (1978) has been the main source of inspiration. According to Norberg-Schulz “the relation of man to place is more than simply a matter of being able to orientate oneself to one’s surroundings but has to do with a much deeper process of identification”. In this sense he means to become friends with a particular environment. He believes that human identification with a place presupposes that places have character. “To belong to place means to have an existential foothold, in a concrete everyday sense” (Abel, 2000, p. 141, 143). Place is also accompanied with ‘character’ and ‘atmosphere’. “A place is therefore a qualitative, ‘total’ phenomenon which we cannot reduce to any of its properties such as spatial relationships, without losing its concrete nature out of sight”. (Norberg-Schulz, 1980, p. 8) Related to his theory, character is more comprehensive than space. “On one hand it denotes a general comprehensive atmosphere and on the other the concrete form and substance of the space-defining elements” (Norberg-Schulz, 1980, p. 13, 14). This concept is also presented in the term ‘attribute of identity’, which signifies ‘spirit of place’, ‘sense of place’ or ‘genius of place’ (Relph, 1976, p. 48). In general, physical elements, setting and meaning have been considered as the three fundamental components of place. They are each important in their own right, yet are inseparably interwoven in our experiences of places. Related to this fact, Relph has declared that their significance is determined through the way in which physical setting, activities and meanings are always interrelated (Relph, 1976, p. 47, 48). Kimberly Dovey (1985, cit in Seamon & Mugerauer, 1985, p. 4), has concluded that “authentic environmental meaning is not a condition of physical world but, rather, is a situation of ‘connectedness’ in the relationship between people and their world”. When the terms ‘place’ and ‘identity’ are joined together, a kind of relationship between places, and places with other people, is indicated. In other words, this term signifies the


35

CHAPTER 3 Place Identity: A Central Concept in Understanding Intergroup Relationships in the Urban Context Fátima Bernardo1,* and José Manuel Palma-Oliveira2 1

Centre of Urban Studies, Technical Institute of Lisbon (IST) and Psychology Department, University of Évora, Portugal and 2Faculty of Psychology, Lisbon University, Portugal Abstract: The aim of this chapter is to emphasize the importance of the place identity concept in understanding inter-group relationships in the urban context. Due to the weakness of the concept, we propose to understand place identity as a self-categorization process in terms of belonging to a place. And in this sense, we propose to understand this concept using the principles and strategies identified by social identity theory. A set of studies developed by us in recent years are reviewed and discussed, in order to contribute to systematization of the concept and simultaneously contribute to the understanding of the city in particular, and the political space in general, as a mosaic of interrelated identities.

Keywords: Place identity, intergroup relationships, urban studies. INTRODUCTION In the context of intervention in urban environments there is a growing trend in delinquency problems, as well as positive and negative discrimination based on the sense of belonging to a particular geographical area. It is generally recognized that different parts of an urban area are associated with stereotypes about their residents. It is also expected that the place where we live determines how we perceive the city, and the residents of different neighbourhoods, and how we relate to them. Although the importance of inter-group relationships in urban management is largely acknowledged, few studies systematically focus on this theme, and in particular on the significance of place identity in inter-group relationships within the urban context. In contrast, also in inter-group studies we are confronted with the systematic neglect of the environment value as an identity definer. However, if we look back through the history of psychology, there are references to the environment in conceptions of identity by classic authors such as James (1890) and Erickson (1956). James (1890) conceptualizes the Self using two main constituents, the “I” and the “me”, which correspond to the known and the knower’s self. In the “I” he discusses the difficulty in distinguishing between what is “me” and what is “mine” or what is “us” and what is “ours”. In this sense some objects of belonging, for example a house, can be understood as relevant elements for identity. In the “me” James included the material self that consists of the body, clothes, home and possessions. Erickson (1946) introduced the concept of “spatial identity”, and includes spatial aspects, such as place status, as defining factors of identity. But references to the relevance of the environment in identity have been few and far between since then. The concept of social identity has been developed and extensively tested in the scope of social psychology, but only recently have there been some very timid references to the environment as a source of social identity (for a review see: Haslam, Ellemers, Reicher, Reynolds & Schmitt, 2010). In fact Social Identity Theory emphasizes that social identity is context-dependent, and in this sense several significant social identities are based on places (e.g., nationality, place of residence, home). This is an important reminder, but still does not correspond to real integration of the spatial dimension in understanding identity. In environmental psychology, the concept of place identity introduced by Proshansky, Fabian and Kaminoff (1983), despite the controversy concerning its conceptualization and operationalization, has the merit of *Address correspondence to Fátima Bernardo: Psychology Department, University of Évora, 7002-554 Évora, Portugal; E-mail: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Bernardo and Palma-Oliveira

having led to a large number of studies. Nevertheless, their notion of place identity emphasized the importance of identity almost only from an individualistic perspective, neglecting the collective nature of the relations between persons, identities and place (Dixon & Durrheim, 2000). The aim of this article is to bring the concept of place identity into the context of inter-group relationships, by conceptualizing the urban space as a stage for intergroup relations, based on the subject’s sense of belonging to physical spaces (which by definition, always include and are defined by people). The Concept of Place Identity in the Environmental Tradition In the field of environmental psychology, the concept of place identity was introduced by Proshansky and colleagues (Proshansky, 1978; Proshansky et al., 1983; Proshansky & Fabian, 1987) and defined as ‘‘a substructure of the self-identity of the person consisting of, broadly conceived, cognition about the physical world in which the individual lives’’ (Proshansky, Fabian & Kaminoff, 1983, p. 59). The authors emphasize two main issues. The first is that development of self-identity is not only based on individual, interpersonal and social processes, but also extends to the physical environment, making the place a fundamental component of personal identity. The second issue has to do with the idea that place identity changes to some degree over the lifecycle, as a result of changes in the physical and social environment. But despite the relevance of the concept, there is no agreement concerning the conceptualization and operationalization of place identity (e.g., Twigger-Ross, Bonaiuto & Breakwell, 2003; Dixon & Durrheim, 2004). Krupat (1983) states “in general, this contribution (.) has asked far more questions than it has answered, and suggested far more possibilities than the concept may yet be able to deliver. It is only a start, but I believe it is still an auspicious one” (p. 344). This conceptualization has the merit of having generated a larger number of studies, and now place identity has become a core concept in environmental psychology. But these studies have focused on contexts, seeking only confirmation of the importance of the concept for understanding the relationship between subjects and the environment, rather than contributing to clarification of the concept. In the literature, it is possible to identify at least three different perspectives or conceptualizations of place identity that are related to three research topics (cf. Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010, who identify four perspectives). The first conceptualization is the notion that place can be experienced as part of the self, as a self-extension (Proshansky, et al., 1983; Belk, 1992, 2000). In this context, some research analysed threats to place and their implications for identity. In the home context, some studies found similarities between home violation by a burglar and the reaction to body violation (Wirtz & Harrell, 1987; Korosec-Sefarty, 1976). Studies on the impact of significant changes in the area of residence such as reclassification of the place as environmentally protected (Bonaiuto et al., 2002) or urban renewal (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996) have demonstrated their effect on residents’ self-perception. The second approach is the idea that place can be congruent with the values, attitudes and behavioural dispositions of the self. In this connection, Feldman (1990) introduced the term settlement-identity to stress the idea that each person has an identity linked to a particular type of settlement (e.g., tall buildings, small houses in the countryside). Thus, residential mobility does not imply a redefinition of people-place bonds, if the old and new areas of residence are consonant with the place identity of the subject (Feldman, 1990). Some studies report the idea that the residents of an area support their place identity in the perception of equivalence between the elements that typify such an area, the nature of the interactions that occur there and the self values and attitudes (e.g., Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996; Speller, Lyons, & Twigger-Ross, 2002; Bernardo & Palma-Oliveira, 2005). The third and most common approach has been the comprehension of place identity in terms of the emotional link to the place. In this sense, place identity can be seen as equivalent to place attachment. In the literature, the relationship between place attachment and place identity is not consensual, but there is general agreement that place identity and place attachment are two closely-related concepts (e.g., Chow & Healey, 2008; Hernandez, Hidalgo, Salazar-Laplace, & Hess, 2007; Lewicka, 2008; Kyle, Graefe, Manning & Bacon, 2004). However, according to Hernandez et al., (2007) and Lewicka (2008), place attachment and place identity are two different

Place Identity


37

concepts, both connected to people’s bonds with places. In order to clarify the relationship between these two concepts, Hernandez et al., (2007), developed a set of studies and found that place attachment precedes formation of place identity (For a more detailed discussion of the two concepts see Hernandez et al., 2007; Lewicka, 2008; Rollero & De Piccoli, 2010). Thus, place attachment is the affective bond that people can establish with some places, where they feel content and secure. Place identity can be defined as a component of self-identity (Proshansky et al., 1983) and “a process by which, through interaction with places, people describe themselves in terms of belonging to a specific place” (Hernandez et al., 2007). Nevertheless, research on place identity has mostly emphasized the importance of identity from an individualistic perspective. In this chapter we explore the concept of place identity in the context of intergroup relationships. In this sense, the urban space can be conceptualized as a stage for inter-group relations based on the subject’s sense of belonging to physical spaces. In the absence of a theoretical tool to analyse relationships between the environment and the self, we present a conceptualization of place identity as self-categorization in terms of place, built upon the principles of Social Identity Theory (SIT) (Tajfel, 1978, 1981; Tajfel & Turner, 1979, 1986) and SelfCategorization Theory (SCT) (Turner, 1985, 1987). This approach has also been used both explicitly and implicitly by other authors (e.g., Lewicka, 2008; Hernandez et al., 2007; Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010). Thereby, place identity is conceptualized here as a substructure of the social identity of the self, consisting of aspects of self-concepts that are based on the idea of belonging to geographically defined groups. Accordingly, places can be seen as social categories, with a shared social meaning as a result of the interaction between the elements of a group, and not only as a scenario where interaction occurs. It is important to stress that, according SIT, a group is defined as a psychological phenomenon, i.e., a group exists insofar as a person believes that he/she belongs to it. Similarly, a place exists insofar as a person makes a psychological delimitation of its boundaries. If, conceptually, we can consider the theoretical possibility of a place defined without people, in practice a place is always defined with activities, the people who psychologically own it. In this context, the aim of this chapter is to understand if the concept of place identity follows the same principles and strategies used in social identity. Thus, it is expected that (1) place identity may lead to positive appraisal of the place with which the subject identifies him/herself through overestimation of the positive elements and devaluation of the negative elements of that space. It is hypothesized that place identity contributes as another social identity to the individual's positive social identity. This positive distinctiveness may result in spatial distortions (distortions in the perception of space), including distortions in the perception of distance between areas that correspond to the perceived psychological distance of the group; (2) it is further expected that place identity may lead to processes of perception of in-group homogeneity, and inter-group differentiation; (3) we consider there are multiple identities based on a person’s membership of different places. These identities become salient in different contexts according to needs of positive distinctiveness. Finally, (4) some environmental physical factors can act as facilitators of the subject's identification with the space, and of the external perception of such a space as fostering a strong identity (e.g., Brewer, 1993). Area size, type of organization and consistency of architecture are some of these factors. In order to achieve these objectives, the second part of this chapter begins with a brief description of the main concepts of Social Identity Theory (SIT) and Self Categorization Theory (SCT). Then, some of the principles and strategies used in social identity are tested in relation to place identity. To this end, we review some of the investigations we have conducted in recent years. Social Identity Theory and Self Categorization Theory: Main Concepts Social Identity Theory (SIT) and subsequent developments, in particular Self Categorization Theory (SCT), is one of the most widely diffused and extensively used theories in social psychology (Brown, 2000). One of the reasons for this is the scientific utility of the concept in explaining inter-group relationships in general, the relation of the individual to the group in particular, and comprehension of the individual cognitions influenced by group phenomena (Capozza & Brown, 2000).

Part II: PLACE IDENTITY AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE PUBLIC SPACE: REVITALIZATION, RESTORATIVENESS, AND TRANSFORMATION


47

CHAPTER 4 Revitalization of Public Spaces in a Working Class Neighborhood: Appropriation, Identity and the Urban Imaginary Hélène Bélanger*, Sara Cameron and Cecilia de la Mora Université du Québec à Montréal, Département d’études urbaines et touristiques, École des sciences de la gestion, Case Postale 8888, Montréal (Québec) H3C 3P8, Canada Abstract: After years of decline due to the relocation of industries and the closure of the canal, PointeSaint-Charles—located in the Southwest Borough near the city of Montreal’s downtown core—is experiencing significant real estate (re)development projects. As a result, long-time residents are now facing the transformation of the built and social environment at the neighborhood level. With the rise of the post-industrial economy, natural resources and public spaces that were once perceived as part of the industrial production process have become residential and leisure “landscapes” due the recycling of old industrial buildings and changes to specific site function. With a newly arrived resident population sharing this new leisure site with the “old working class”, there is a possibility that contrasting representations of these post-industrial spaces will be produced. This chapter presents the results of an investigation into the contrasting representations of the living environment (home territory) of residents living in the neighborhood of Pointe-Saint-Charles (Montreal, Canada), following the revitalization of the Lachine Canal Park and the massive redevelopment projects that took place along the canal’s banks. Residents’ representations are explored through the collection and comparison of long-time and new residents’ sketch maps of their living environment, as well as through semi-structured interviews. Sketch map analysis (scale, complexity, meaningful spaces) showed that long-time and new residents’ appropriated territory is not determined by length of residency. The Lachine Canal (and its banks), variously imagined as an historical industrial site bordering a working class neighborhood and a postmodern leisure space bordering modern housing developments, is shown to be the most important element in residents’ home territories.

Keywords: Appropriation, identity, urban imaginary, territory, regeneration, public spaces. INTRODUCTION The identity of a city is not necessarily the same as the image that individuals perceive. Neither is it exactly a mental map nor a sense of place. City identity involves the meaning projected by a landscape. Identity can change through time, as may image. Transcending physical examples that serve as the icon of a city, such as a skyline or a mountain, identity can also be conceptual—a regional flavor like southwestern or a specific function like mining. Urban identity is inevitably a constructed idea that is tied to a real or ideal landscape. This quality of inseparability from landscape distinguishes identity from image. Arreola (1995, p.518) Urban forms are marked by contrasting representations of public or private spaces due to different social and cultural models held by individuals and groups (Dris, 2005). Ranging from a single individual to public administrations, actors will have an impact on urban forms and their representations. In the case of public administrations, their actions take place in a context of important local, regional or global competition to attract (or maintain) private investments. One of the now classic “recipes” applied in many cities around the world is to try to construct a unique identity, using public spaces in branding strategies (Bassand, Compagnon, Joye, & Stein, 2001). This does not mean, however, that goals cannot focus mainly on *Address correspondence to Hélène Bélanger: Université du Québec à Montréal, Département d’études urbaines et touristiques, École des sciences de la gestion, Case Postale 8888, Montréal (Québec) H3C 3P8, Canada. Email: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Bélanger et al.

reducing physical degradation and socioeconomic decline of an area of the city. Whatever the objective, most public administration projects will contribute to the construction of a positive image of an area, neighborhood or city, making it more attractive for new activities or populations. It is at this stage where there is a risk of revealing contrasting (though not necessarily conflicting) representations of a neighborhood, a community. This chapter presents results of an investigation on the representations of the living environment (the home territory) of residents of the Pointe-Saint-Charles neighborhood (Montreal, Canada). This neighborhood experienced very important real estate (re)development projects following the revitalization of a linear park on the site where Canada’s industrialization first began. The first part of this chapter will focus on possible outcomes of major disinvestment/reinvestment in specific areas of cities, followed by a discussion of the impact on home territory, the identity process and the use of sketch maps in research on the living environment. Next, we will present the case study and the method, followed by results. INNER CITY REVITALIZATION AND THE POSTMODERN CITY Public administrations of declining industrial cities have a lot to gain in changing the city’s imagery in order to attract (or stimulate the creation of) new economic activities and new populations. As Short et al. (1993) have demonstrated, the reconstruction of the city, to make it more attractive for consumption by outsiders, can take three forms. The first form is through advertising—“imagineering” of the city (see for example Holcomb, 2001 in Vale & Warner, 2001). Changing imagery can also be achieved through changing the meaning of some “key feature” such as lakes or rivers that were once part of the industrial profile of the city and are now part of its leisure infrastructures, or through changing the iconography with the production of space by building or recycling old buildings and infrastructures, thus challenging or altering the image, or identity, of a city. It is the second and the third forms of imagery transformations via reconstruction that are of particular interest in this research project. In their attempt to create a new or more positive image of the city, authorities will not hesitate to create, rehabilitate or revitalize public spaces, creating a display to show how they wish the city to be perceived by tourists, investors, workers and residents. As Lofland (1998) and Vlez (2004) have shown, their actions will be in consideration of “spectators’ preferences and sensibilities”, sometimes leading to what Germain et al. (2008) call the “pasteurization” of public spaces through design, programmed uses, activities and exclusion (or harassment) of more marginal populations and/or non-official uses. However, the transformation of public spaces into sites of mobility, sites of consumption or sites of heritage conservation (by the changing of meanings or the changing of iconography) alters the symbolic value of public spaces (Ghorra-Gobin, 2001). Thus, what was once perceived as part of production process (i.e., land and water resources) in the industrial economy can become residential and leisure “landscapes” due to the recycling of old industrial sites and a change of function (Short et al., 1993) in the post-industrial economy. Although some revitalizing actions are aimed at reducing physical degradation or the socioeconomic decline in a specific area of the city, these actions may contribute to the creation of a positive image of an area, neighborhood or city, rendering it more attractive to a population with different socioeconomic characteristics and lifestyles. The built environment gets a facelift and new commercial and service activities follow in order to meet the needs and demands of a new population (which serves to increase fiscal revenues). With a new population sharing open spaces with the established one, there is a potential for contrasting representations of these post-industrial spaces. Despite the preservation of strong markers of historical identity, a question to be addressed is whether new representations of public spaces are creating territorial tensions and invalidating them in some way in the place-identity process. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK Imaging the City and Representations City dwellers, tourists, corporations, and public officials (among others) use, appropriate, shape, build, modify, abandon or destroy the urban fabric, which is at the core of the creation of mental images of the

Revitalization of Public Spaces in a Working Class Neighborhood


49

city and the urban experience (Warner & Vale, 2001). By participating in the transformation of the urban form, these actors (willingly or not) will impact not only the making and modifying of mental images but also the representations of the city. Some actions may even try to construct “visually based narratives about the potential of places” (Warner & Vale, 2001, p. 14-15). Urban imagery (or urban mindscape) is complex; It includes not only the built environment but the social landscape and (social) experiences, the history of spaces and people, etc. (see Warner & Vale, 2001; Bianchini, 2006). In other words, people's characteristics and experiences will influence their perception of the built environment, resulting in a "distorted" mental image which is sometimes, from one individual to another, in contrast though not necessarily in conflict. For Dris (2005) these contrasting representations of public or private spaces are due to different social and cultural models held by individuals and groups. One’s representation of the city, of urban spaces, is a construction, a model of reality, filtered through one’s senses, experiences, expectations, etc. (see Jodelet, 1989 for more on social representation). In addition, imagination can also play a role in the production of mental images. As Lynch (1960) and others have demonstrated (see for example Appleyard, Lynch, & Myer, 1966; Cullen, 1961), these images will influence the choice made to use a space and the way the space is used, appropriated, or adapted to one’s needs, thereby giving it meaning (Rapoport, 1990). Appropriation, Territory, Identity and the Urban Imaginary The appropriation of space can be physical or symbolic, permanent or temporary, casual, contrived or borrowed, and it can cause conflict. Behavior in public spaces demonstrates cultural norms, and not only gives meaning(s) to people but to spaces as well. The daily actions that take place in public spaces are an act of a gradual spatial appropriation, thus defining it (i.e., this is “my” home/neighborhood as opposed to “yours”) (De Certeau, Giard, & Myol, 1994). It is not an overt process, however- the complex cultural practices that serve to identify or define are disguised by the (apparent) banality of everyday activities (De Certeau et al., 1994). How does this appropriation take place? De Certeau (1994) gives the example of the quartier (neighborhood1), a known space where one is familiar (with the space itself, and others) and where one understands (and has mastered) the social environment (i.e., one knows how to act and what to anticipate in the actions of others). Due to this familiarity with the environment and acceptance of and by others, the private space of users—the dwelling—creeps bit by bit into the public spaces of the neighborhood. This creeping in of private space is the process of appropriation, where public spaces are taken over (overtly or subtly) by individuals or groups in the activities of their daily life, becoming part of their space (De Certeau et al., 1994, p. 19), their territory (see also Cuba & Hummon, 1993). According to Delaney (2005, p. 15), territory it is a "bounded meaningful space”. Three main ideas are associated with the notion of territory: first is the idea of control of and in the space; second is the projected image of such control; third is the idea of physical or symbolic limits for controlling access of strangers (Campos, 1999; see also Delaney, 2005). If we accept that public spaces are spaces of socialization of the community to which the individual belongs, we can conclude that the appropriation of public spaces consists of a natural dynamic where the social actors constantly lose and conquer territories. In this context, the neighborhood can be considered as the progressive appropriation of public spaces by local residents. As a collective, a social or cultural group, residents can appropriate an entire neighborhood, making it (marking it) as their own through daily practices. Individuals are in a continual process of not only appropriating and developing their “territory” but also appropriating and developing the “pattern of beliefs, feelings, and expectations regarding public spaces and places” (Proshansky, 1978, p. 167). Territories communicate meaning(s) and identity (Arendt, 2003). Gomes (2002) affirms that the territory of each (social) group is conceived of as a space within which “the rules that establish the identity enjoy an

1

Quartier can signify district, area, neighbourhood and quarter, defined as social, administrative, economic or functional space. In the context of De Certeau's (1994) text, we decided to translate quartier as neighbourhood, but the other possible translations should be noted.


63

CHAPTER 5 Reconstitution of the Place Identity within the Intervention Efforts in the Historic Built Environment Humeyra Birol Akkurt* Dokuz Eylul University, Faculty of Architecture, Izmir, Turkıye Abstract: The built environment, with its political, ideological and cultural structure formed in different layers of history, is one of the main components of cultural memory. Due to the important role that historic urban fabric plays on space-identity relations, its reorganization is one of the main focuses of the government and the local authorities. Beyond the demands to meet the expectations of its time and to increase the value of cultural properties, implementations concerning the historic urban fabric have the power to reform collective memory, to redefine space-identity relations, and to reconstruct place identity. In order to define the role that renovation transformation projects have on the space-identity relations, this study focuses on the annihilation of place identity, and the reconstruction of cultural memory. The effects of destruction and or transformation of the built environment on the reconstruction of cultural memory are discussed. From this point of view, the study examines the renovation/transformation/ revitalization activities in Turkey with the aim of underlining the conflicts between expectations and outcome. This is done by analyzing three projects with different priorities such as ideological leanings, reformation of the urban image and gentrification. In addition, the tension between the destruction of the place and the annihilation of the place identity, as well as the relation between the redefinition of the life and reconstitution of the place identity are explored.

Keywords: Place identity, cultural memory, transformation, historic urban environment. INTRODUCTION The modern world adopts discontinuity, rather than the continuity of the physical and social environment. The annihilation, destruction and, reproduction of space and its social aspects are imposed in the built environment. On the other hand, the continuity of cultural values is considered to be one of the main concerns of preservation philosophy. Thus, the transformation of historic urban environments, as an attempt to reproduce space, has always been a paradoxical phenomenon. Transformation projects that aim to consolidate, reorganize and revitalize the historic fabric usually face problems concerning the weakening of collective memory and the annihilation of place identity. With such concerns, this study scrutinizes the transformation experiences in Turkey with the aim of clarifying their impact on the continuity of the collective memory and the reconstitution of the place identity. In order to have a deeper understanding of the subject, concepts such as place, identity and, memory, as well as the relevant components of the built environment as urban reminders and historic districts are examined. Built environments play an important role in space-identity relation studies. Beyond their quality to provide habitats for individuals and society, these sites offer information on the traditions, customs, and experiences related to the past and present. With regard to the relations between the public and the built environment, historic sites have become one of the main focuses of attention in terms of world heritage. Since historic urban environments represent the physical, social and cultural character of their times, they bear hints regarding history and present, priorities and values. Thus, such sites play an important role in the identification of individuals and society. Identity, which is the object of serious interdisciplinary studies, is outlined by Tomlinson (1999) as a *Address correspondence to Humeyra Birol Akkurt: Dokuz Eylul University, Faculty of Architecture, Izmir, Turkıye; Email: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Humeyra Birol Akkurt

description of the cultural belonging, besides being a collective treasure of local communities. According to Douglas (1997), it provides the basis for choice making, supportive social interaction, coherence and consensus, while facilitating relationships with the other as well as emphasizing sameness. Beyond expressing feelings, habits and behaviours of the individual and society, identity reflects the memories, attitudes and decisions related to the past. However, Oncu and Weyland (2000) point out that it not only reflects the retrospective, the past history but also current power struggles. Studies on identity refer to place as one of the main descriptors. For Tuan (1977), place is an object to perceive and understand space, it is an emotionally bound area to which an individual or a group of people have a strong relationship. It is considered to be the root of human identity and experience (Raadik-Cotrell, 2010). Regarding the meaning of place, Korpela (1989) claims that the built environment becomes important in itself for the individual. For Anderson (1993), by offering a home, the imagined origin and a place to return to, place helps to stabilize cultural identites. Considering its stability in time and the existing social ties with individuals, place has an important influence through its physical features and the symbolic meanings it conveys. Bearing clues to the history of both the place and the public, historical urban environments create a sense of continuity with the past, 1 embody traditions and facilitate place attachment . According to Relph (1976), the essence of place lies in its largely unselfconscious intentionality, which defines places as profound centres of human existence. In relation, referring to the arguments of Lefebvre, de Certeau, and Soja, Creswell (2002, p. 25) argues that “place is a raw material for a creative production of identity rather than a priori label of identity”. When dealing with space-identity relations, the fundamental relation between the place and the individual society leads to another concept: place identity. Place identity is defined as a way to express identity through the physical environment, a manifestation of self (and collective) memory, a psychological structure that arises from the individuals’ attempts to regulate their environments, and a sum of the 2 cognitions of the individual about the physical world in which she/he lives . According to Woods (2006), place identity is a system of references about a particular place defined over time. The individual is defined by the places in which she/he lives, works and plays, while at the same time, place is also defined by the individuals who use or visit it. For Lalli (1992), place identity offers a cognitive perspective to represent the environment, and covers the sociological approaches that have an influence on the public’s understanding concerning the physical environment. Within the context of the built environment, it is possible to define place identity as a set of links that allows and guarantees the distinctiveness and continuity of place in time. Hay (1989) and Lewicka (2008) indicate that people need an emotional bond to place, in order to be able to overcome their identity crisis, to feel a sense of stability, and a sense of presence within the changing world. It is critical to define and to measure the links, as well as the individuals’ bonds with place. At this point the concepts of place attachment, sense of place, place dependence and cultural memory are confronted. Therefore, in order to clarify the relation between the historic built environment and identity, the essence of place attachment and cultural memory are to be understood. Stedman (2002) defines place attachment as the bond between people and their environment, based on emotion and cognition. He claims that for any particular place there are as many different place identities as there are people using that place. According to Low (1992), place attachment is composed of six symbolic forms that link people and land: links through history or family lineage, links due to loss or destruction of land, economic links such as ownership, inheritance or politics, universal links through religion, myth and

1 Further reading: Devine-Wright P (2007). ‘Reflections on place attachment and favourite places’; Hay R (1998), ‘Sense of place in developmental context’; Low SM (1992), ‘Symbolic ties that bind: Place attachment in the place’. 2 Further reading: Proshansky HM, Fabian AK, Kaminoff R (1983), Place-Identity: Physical world socialization of the self; Korpela KM (1989), Place-identity as a product of environmental self-regulation; Fernando NA (2007), Culture and Identity in Urban Streets; A Case Study in China Town, New York City; Dixon J & Durrheim K (2004), Dislocating Identity: Desegration and the Transformation of Place.

Reconstitution of the Place Identity


65

sprituality, links through religion and festive cultural events, and finally narrative links through stroytelling or place naming. Dixon and Durrheim (2004) indicate that place identity processes are powerfully shaped by the history of relations between groups. They engender collective as well as individual forms of attachment. Contrary to this assumption, Hernandez, Hidalgo and Sazar-Laplace (2007) draw attention to the fact that it is possible for an individual to be attached to a place, however not to be identified with it and vice versa. In order to clarify the relation tension between the possibility “to attach to a place without identifying oneself through it” and “to sense the place identity without attaching to that place”, the concept of “memory” must be understood. Social psychologists often use the term “collective memory” to identify the memory shared by groups or societies. Lewicka (2008) states that collective memory does not depend on personal experiences, but on traditions, cultural transmissions and the motivation to discover the past. She claims that there are three variables that play part in shaping the contents of cultural memory. These variables are socio-demographic variables, emotional bonds with place, and the presence of urban reminders. Socio-demographic variables are defined as sources such as education, age, length of residence and the extent of residence together with parents or grandparents, since they offer knowledge on the multicultural history of the city. Emotional bonds such as place attachment and place identity can be distinguished through ethnic, national and local place identities, the interest in the place’s past and the individuals own experiences. Urban reminders are the traces of the built environment. They offer knowledge, establish links with the cultural history, increase motivation to discover the forgotten past and construct collective memory. Due to their high visibility and public significance, Tuan (1977) indicates that urban reminders have the power to create a sense of place. Since they are mnemonic aids to collective memory, as Lewicka (2008) asserts, they offer the possibility to gather and to dominate the public through historical and cultural sources. Thus, public spaces, together with monuments, sculptures and monumental buildings are urban reminders that evoke the ideology, the constructed collective memory and the life style that has been proposed to the public. Forming connections between the individual and the city through visions within the collective memory, urban reminders become the main components of the built environment, along with cultural history and place identity. Within this theoretical framework, the study underlines the potential of place as a unique matter within the concept of identity. The ability of place to bind the individuals gathering around identicalness, its capability to offer a different synergy for others and its ability to carry moments, activities, memories to the future makes it possible for social life to be experienced and the previsions of power to be satisfied. With this in mind, the study highlights the role that the reorganization of the historic built environment plays on the reconstitution of place identity and the reformation of cultural history. In accordance with the main arguments introduced above, experiences in the reorganization of historic built environments in Turkey are exemplified and three important cases, which represent different intervention priorities, are examined. Through the sample cases, the tension between the reorganization of the place and the reconstitution of the place identity are discussed; and the effect of the destruction and/or the transformation of the place within the effort to break the continuity of the cultural memory are underlined. RENOVATION AND TRANSFORMATION EXPERIENCES IN TURKEY Douglas (1997, p. 215) claims that, “the social and political change, particularly if it has cumulated over protracted periods of time, will lead to identity change”. New social structures that are caused by change, provide new ways of expressing identity. Therefore, the changes in the national/local compositions of the cities and the reduction of the state of belonging that affected by the ideological, political, economical, demographical concerns are considered to be important research targets by social psychologists. Consequently, urban reminders and historic urban environments become important subjects, since they are the main components of cultural history. Cahantimur (2002) describes the urban environment as a social system, an instrument of communication, a historic artifact. Tuan (1977) indicates that the built environment defines social roles and relations. He states

78


CHAPTER 6 Place Identity as a Useful Psychological Construct for Approaching Modern Social Challenges and New People-Environment Relations: Residential Mobility, Restorative Environments, and Landscape1 Tomeu Vidal1,*, Renato Troffa2, Sergi Valera1 and Ferdinando Fornara3 1

University of Barcelona, Department of Social Psychology, Psicosao Group Research and Polis Research Center, Spain; 2University of Cagliari, Department of Economic and Social Researches, Italy and 3 University of Cagliari, Department of Psychology, Italy Abstract: The study explores the strengths and weaknesses of place identity and related concepts for analyzing certain features of today’s globalized society: changes in transportation routes and mobility patterns, alteration of historic areas in cities, and the transformation of natural and historic landscapes. We present an overview of previous studies in the area and propose a theoretical framework rooted in the domain of Positive Environmental Psychology. The chapter presents and discusses empirical findings related to three main questions: a) mobility and place identity: can mobility generate identity? b) restorativeness: what is the role of historic landscapes as a source of restoration? and c) preference and types of landscape: what is the role of the landscape in place and social identity? The results highlight the importance of the relationship between place identity, landscape and restorativeness. We discuss ways of researching place identity processes in a “positive” manner, oriented to people’s well-being.

Keywords: Place identity, residential mobility, restorativeness, landscape preference, positive environmental psychology. INTRODUCTION Defined by Proshansky and colleagues (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983), place identity, is one of the main constructs focusing on the relationship between people and places. Other relevant concepts are restorativeness (Herzog, Maguire & Nebel, 2003), and the role of nature in the person-environment interaction (Kaplan, 1995). Place-identity and restorativeness (which is taken to include landscape preferences) are two psychological constructs that explain people-environment interactions in two different ways, or “paradigms”. While place-identity stresses place and its meaning, then, as Stanley Milgram (Milgram, 1970) points out, restorativeness focuses on “overloads” of living experiences in cities. In spite of their importance, the relationship between these two psychological constructs has received little attention in the literature. Focusing on the city as the backdrop to most life experience today and the context in which most individuals develop bonds with places, landscapes and environments, we include restorativeness and landscape concepts in our analysis of place identity processes. In this paper we explore the usefulness of the psychological construct of place identity in an era of intense global change. The processes of globalization resulting from economic and ecological changes and the development of digital communication technologies have transformed the human environment and, in turn, the places we inhabit, visit and hold dear. In our study of these new environments it is essential to take into account the new ways of creating places and identities. The causes of the rapid changes in the last two decades - technological development, economics, geopolitical developments, natural and cultural resources, the environment, urban planning, social and

*Address correspondence to Tomeu Vidal: University of Barcelona, Department of Social Psychology, Psicosao Group Research and Polis Research Center, Spain; Email: [email protected] 1 This chapter is a result of research financed by grants from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (PSI2010-21214-C02-02, subprograma PSIC), and the Italian National Council of Investigation. Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Place Identity as a Useful Psychological Construct


psychological aspects - are interconnected. From a psychological point of view, individual and societal problems such as anxiety, stress, isolation, and health disorders are related to the social fragmentation of communities, the loss of interpersonal bonds, distrust, and the perception of insecurity in public spaces. Generally speaking, these typical urban phenomena of our age are related to global changes and unsustainable development. The task facing environmental psychologists is to establish new guidelines to help people to cope with these “new” scenarios, and, more specifically, to show how global changes are “included” in people-environment transactions. If places are changing, then we can assume that people’s transactions with their surroundings will change too. For instance, variations in transportation routes, with consequences for mobility patterns, are modifying the attachment and identity processes related to place; at the same time, the positive value of allowing people access to restorative environments may have a highly negative impact on historic areas in cities and the natural landscape. Environmental psychologists must also examine the impact of global (and local) changes on historic urban environments as a source of restoration and identity meanings, and assess how these changes affect the landscape as a source of identification. Daniel Stokols, Misra, Runnerstrom and Hipp (2009) stressed the need to consider new directions for psychological research and practices in order to help reduce global threats to personal and collective well-being. After a characterization of the main changes in human environments caused by global sources (e.g., internet and digital communication technologies, climate change, and increased disparities among different groups), Stokols et al., stressed the emergence of polyfunctional and hybrid environments. These environments combine virtual and place-based linkages, in which participants are able to pursue multiple, diverse activities. The hybridization of home, work, recreational, and natural environments provides a good example for reassessing Oldenburg’s (1999) classical conceptualization of settings according to global conditions, and to examine the changes in people’s relationships with their sociophysical surroundings (Stokols et al., 2009). We apply two of the psychological perspectives mentioned by Stokols et al to reconsider the relationships between local and global environments: residential mobility, and restorative environments. We focus on residential mobility because, as Stokols et al., say, “factors that encourage people to identify with places and populations that are geographically distant from their own barely have been explored” (p. 188); and we consider restorative environments because, again according to Stokols et al., new conceptualizations addressing the interdependencies between psychological experience and collective efforts are needed to improve the quality of community and global environments. We also regard landscape as a source of identification in people-environment transactions. Ohta (2001) posits that landscape may become an important part of the place identity process. Moreover, place identity has frequently been studied from “individualistic, local and short term orientations”. Stokols et al., (2009), for example, criticized the mainly psychological approaches to people-environment relations, and proposed a broader focus in order to understand place and identity processes. For these reasons, when studying the interaction between people and environment in environmental psychology, we consider restorative environments and landscape preference together with place-identity, that is, as non-separate areas. Stokols et al., (2009, p. 188) calls for theories and research that: 1.

Explain how and when people become aware of and conceptualize the relationships between their immediate and more distant surroundings,

2.

Addresses the social and collaborative dimensions of environmental decision making, coping with stress, and achieving restoration and well-being,

3.

Gives broader attention to the ways these phenomena unfold over extended time frames—for example, developmental and intergenerational influences on how individuals, organizations, and governments construe and cope with environmental change.

In this chapter, we examine residential mobility, restorative environments, and landscape and identity relation as examples for the study of place and identity processes. We consider their connections with the effect of


Vidal et al.

global change and its consequences. Drawing on empirical evidence from environmental psychology, we attempt to establish whether residential mobility patterns can influence the formation of place-identity. We also focus on the relationship between restorative experiences, favourite places and the development of personal identity, and try to determine whether the landscape can encompass an identitarian meaning. To do so, we provide an overview of some relevant studies and outline a theoretical framework rooted in Positive Environmental Psychology. More specifically, the chapter will present and discuss some empirical findings on the following topics: a) mobility and place identity; b) the historic urban environment as a source of restoration and identity meanings; c) the landscape as a source of identification. We begin with some reflections on place identity and other related terms such as place attachment. We consider that approaches related to these psychological constructs need a more complex and multidimensional view than that generally considered in the scientific literature. Eschewing the local and short term perspective of many psychological theories (Stokols et al., 2009), we aim to explore whether high residential mobility is in fact incompatible with the development of place identity. We also suggest that restoration processes are not only related to emotional issues, but are involved in the development of place-identity. Finally, we propose that landscape is a source of identification in social terms (group membership), and in spatial and physical terms (place belongingness). PLACE IDENTITY AND PLACE ATTACHMENT People’s relations with places have been explored using a wide array of psychological constructs which are well known in the domain of people-environment studies. Various epistemological research traditions and disciplines refer to place attachment (Altman & Low, 1992), place identity (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983), and sense of place (Hay, 1998), among others. This diversity may be seen as a reflection of a lack of theoretical clarity requiring further development and systematization. However, other authors have proposed a more pluralistic view, locating these theoretical concepts in different research traditions in terms of paradigm and method (Patterson & Williams, 2005). Nevertheless, there is broad agreement that place identity and place attachment are closely related concepts (Chow & Healey, 2008; Giuliani & Feldman, 1993; Hidalgo & Hernández, 2001; Knez, 2005; Lewicka, 2008). According to Proshansky, Fabian and Kaminoff (1983), place identity refers to a set of cognitions, emotions and bonds of belonging related to the places where the person lives, which become a substructure of the self. This cognitive structure allows the person to recognize properties of new environments, which relate to his/her environmental past, and therefore promotes a sense of familiarity, a perception of environmental stability, and feelings of control and environmental safety. Consequently, people may describe themselves in terms of their belonging to specific places, stemming from the interactions occurred with/in them. In this way, belonging becomes a component of our personal identity (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996). Taking into account Lalli’s urban identity concept (1992), Hunter’s notion of symbolic community (1987) and Turner’s contributions (1987) to the social identity theory, a link can be established between the emphases on place meaning and identity (Valera, 1997; Valera & Pol, 1994), through the concept of urban symbolic space (Valera, Guàrdia & Pol, 1998). This latter concept can be understood as a social category that identifies the group, and the person. Physical space is a self-categorization that produces the sense of belongingness to certain environments that are significant to the group. In addition, the explicative principles of temporal continuity, distinctiveness, self-efficacy and self-esteem around the identity processes presented by Breakwell (1992) have been developed in relation to place (Bonaiuto, Breakwell & Cano, 1996; Knez, 2005; Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996). However, as Dixon and Durrheim (2004, p. 457) contend, this substructure of the self has been understood as a trait capable of being quantified and tested. It is thus far removed from other phenomenological views that focus on the construction of the self through attribution of meanings to places (Seamon, 1982). In line with Lewicka (2008), we conceive place attachment and place identity as different though interrelated ways of thinking about the same phenomenon, that is, the way in which people bond to places.

Part III: PLACE IDENTITY AND THE EXPERIENCE OF THE PUBLIC SPACE: ATTACHMENT, APPROPRIATION, AND PERCEPTION

92


CHAPTER 7 Open Spaces in Informal Settlements in Bogotá, Expressions of Attachment and Identity Jaime Hernández-Garcia* School of Architecture and Design, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Carrera 7 No 40-62, Bogotá, Colombia Abstract: Urban open spaces in informal settlements, the same as housing, are largely produced by people themselves. Similarly, these spaces are mainly used by the people who live around, with few ‘outsiders’ visiting those places. The product observed is the result of people’s needs, expectations, possibilities and symbolic constructions. This paper explores the social construction of open space in the barrios, arguing that it generates attachment and identity. Social practices are transformed to accommodate new interactions with open spaces and new and changing actors, while places change to accommodate those new and changing social practices. The research draws on empirical data of open spaces in barrios of Bogotá collected between 2003 and 2007, from within a further exploration of six cases was carried out in 2008 and 2009 for the specific purposes. A qualitative methodology was employed with a multi-method strategy. Major themes are analyzed and discussed with regard to social and cultural expressions in open spaces.

Keywords: Appropriation, attachment, identity, open spaces, informal settlements. INTRODUCTION Open spaces in informal settlements can be seen as social production and construction of space. The production of space in informal settlements is largely self helped and several times also self built by the people. The ‘space is permeated with social relations; it is not only supported by social relations but it is also producing and produced by social relations’ (Lefebvre, 1991, p. 286). ‘Social space “incorporates” social actions, the actions of subjects both individual and collective, who are born and who die, who suffer and who act’ (ibid.: 3). But the production of space is also mediated by consumption, as Harvey (1996) argues: production and consumption processes work in a dialectical relationship. Therefore, production and consumption are part of the same spatial transformation process. It is also argued that not only people transform places, but they are transformed by the interaction with them. As Holloway and Hubbard (2001, p. 7) suggest ‘as people construct places, places construct people’. Open spaces can be seen as social produced and constructed places, with no ‘natural’ meanings but created (Cresswell, 1996); ‘where value and meaning are not inherent [.], they are created, reproduced and defended’ (Lombard, 2009, p. 64). People are related to places, and places are related to people in an emotional bond (Groat, 1995), in a subjective and emotional attachment (Cresswell, 2004). In informal settlements this relationship can be even greater because people are involved with places since their production. The relationship between people and place can be seen as the experiential construction of space, originated from the everyday use of places; including social and cultural usages. Attachment and identity are arguably among the most important outcomes of this experiential construction of space. The aim of this paper is therefore, to investigate open spaces' social cultural consumption patterns, from both functional and symbolic perspectives. What is the relationship between open spaces and the people (users) who create them? Barrio open spaces are mostly used by the people who live nearby. They are also used by others who live and/or work in the same area, with the occasionally observed presence of outsiders. This question investigates the consumption of open spaces in the barrios and its implications. It is about the social construction of open spaces. *Address correspondence to Jaime Hernández-Garcia: School of Architecture and Design, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Carrera 7 No 40-62, Bogotá, Colombia; E-mail: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Open Spaces in Informal Settlements in Bogotá


The paper is structured in four parts. The first part summarises the theoretical framework, and the major themes and on which the paper is built upon: informal settlements, open spaces in informal settlements, and social construction of space, attachment and identity. The second section explains briefly the methodology. The third part discusses the findings on how open spaces in the barrios are consumed, and the outcome especially in terms of social and cultural expressions. The paper ends with a concluding section that recapitulates on the main findings and links together with the main points on attachment and identity of open spaces in informal settlements. THEMES AND FRAMEWORKS Informal Settlements Before the industrial revolution, self-help and self-building practices were the main ways through which people provided themselves with shelter. With technical developments and a growing economy, these practices were left to the more disadvantaged people, especially in urban areas, and gradually lapsed from the formal procedures of the economy and the city; the phenomenon is called today informal settlements. Urban expansion in the last five decades has contributed to the phenomenon of informal housing and informal settlements in general. In 2001 more than 75% of the population in Latin America lived in cities and over 30% (128 million people) of the continent’s urban population were estimated to be living in conditions defined by United Nations Human Settlements as slums (UNCHS, 2003, p. 14).

Figures 1 & 2: Different consolidation levels of informal settlements in Bogotá. Aguas Claras barrio shows a low consolidation level (Fig. 1) and Manuela Beltran barrio (near Los Cerezos park) shows a higher level (Fig. 2).

Informal settlements not only make up a large portion of Latin American cities, but are also a dynamic part of them in physical, social and cultural terms. Fiori and Brandao (2010: 188) argue that ‘Urban informality is inexorably interwoven with the city as a whole – at all scales and levels – and has to be seen as another way of being in the city and constructing it.’ Informal settlements are also viewed as innovative and creative: ‘Today we recognize the innovative genius of the urban poor in taking advantage of the specific cultural opportunities to survive and improve their living conditions.’ (AlSayyad, 1993, p. 5). In terms of the built environment they are subject to different interpretations: ‘We do not believe “informal” means “lacking form”. It implies, for us, something that arises from within itself and its makers, whose form has not been recognised, but which is subject to rules and procedures potentially as specific and necessary as those that have governed official, formal city-making.’ (Brillembourg & Klumpner, 2010, p. 120) Or in the association with vernacular settlements: ‘. spontaneous settlements, no less than the more widely admired traditional vernacular ones, can teach designers much.’ (Rapoport, 1988, p. 72-73) in which design and construction procedures rooted in local contexts can be similar to those found in traditional settlements (Oliver, 2006). Today, informality is not only associated with poverty, marginality and deprivation; it is increasingly accepted as an alternative way of doing things. ‘Lo popular’ is acknowledged as a strategy that informal settlers use to face their everyday economic realities, but is also referred to in relation to social and cultural aspects. Informality is not taken necessarily as a transitional step into formality, among other things because the border line between one and the other is increasingly becoming blurred. In other words, the


Jaime Hernández-Garcia

relationship between formality and informality is very close. In economic terms, formal and informal activities are highly interconnected; and in urban aspects well consolidated informal settlements can eventually become indistinguishable from formal settlements (Figs. 1 & 2), especially when upgrading programmes have taken place and land tenure regularisation has been implemented (Kellett, 2005). Informal settlements are today a consistent feature of Bogotá (Fig. 3); they are not growing at the same pace as in the 1960s and 1970s, but they are still expanding at a faster rate than the rest of the city. More than 50% of the city has grown from some kind of informal pattern, urban and/or housing development (Rueda Garcia, 2000). Although it is possible to find centrally-based settlements with informal characteristics, informal settlements are normally found in peripheral areas. They are normally defined in urban and housing policies and to some extent in the academic debate by what they lack: shortage of economic and urban resources, lack of urban infrastructure and lack of proper housing and social services. But perhaps their main characteristic is that they have largely developed through self-help practices, with little participation by public or private bodies.

Figure 3: Informal settlements in Bogotá. A view of the south east periphery of Bogotá, where several informal settlements are located.

Open Spaces in Informal Settlements There is a wide range of terms referring to urban outdoor spaces, or ‘life between house spaces’ to paraphrase Gehl (1987): public spaces, semi-public spaces, urban areas, open spaces, communal spaces, and so on. Public space tends to be dominant in the literature, however, on further investigation, it was found that public space is not completely accurate as an identification of barrio outdoor space: there are conceptual and practical differences. Urban outdoor spaces are about comparative degrees of publicness and privateness (Madanipour, 1999, 2003); and the interrelationship between people and places may affect both sides of the behaviour-morphology interaction (Carmona, Heath, Oc, & Tiesdell, 2003; Chaparro & Niño, 1998; Madanipour, 2003; Paramo & Cuervo Prados, 2006; Viviescas, 1996). Public space is not just the opposite of private, and is not only defined by ownership and accessibility. Each public space is defined according to how it is used (Carmona, et al., 2003; Gehl, 1987; Madanipour, 2003; Niño & Chaparro, 1997; Segovia & Oviedo, 2000); in other words, through the inter-relationship between people and place. For Paramo and Cuervo Prados (2006, p. 23), urban outdoor spaces are ‘places to meet others, to rest, to play, to celebrate, and other things pertaining to urban conviviality’. Madanipour (1999, p. 880) adds that these spaces ‘have always had political significance’. In symbolic terms, there may even be additional purposes for urban outdoor spaces; for example Viviescas (1996) presents them as the expression-scenario of the people, the place for confrontation and cultural production, the place to discuss the material and transcendent matters of individuals and societies, and the place to build community. Open spaces in informal settlements play an important role in physical and social dynamics, and, as in the case of housing, they are largely developed by local people. However, little attention has been given to them, in comparison with the extensive literature on housing issues. Open spaces are the most important social places in the barrio; they are also places for cultural exchange and building values (Hernandez


107

CHAPTER 8 Place Identity in the Neighborhood as Perceived by the Elder Residents: Relations with Attachment, Dependence and Place Quality Hernan Casakin1,* and Shimshon Neikrug2 1

Ariel University Center of Samaria, School of Architecture, P.O. Box 3, Ariel 44837, Israel and 2Ariel University Center of Samaria, Department of Social Work, P.O. Box 3, Ariel 44837, Israel Abstract: The way that elder relate to and identify with their neighborhoods is considered to be an important reason affecting continued living in place. Predilection for ageing in place becomes even more dominant as individuals grow older, despite of undermined social support system, and deterioration in the physical condition of the neighborhood. A positive neighborhood that supports continued activity, social interaction, and accessible services can potentially contribute to successful aging in place. The purpose of this investigation was to examine place identity and its relation to place dependence, place quality, and place attachment as perceived by elders living in neighborhoods with different levels of maintenance. Findings showed that place attachment, place dependence and place quality were moderately and strongly correlated with place identity. Place attachment and place dependence were found to be higher in well-maintained neighborhoods, but no significant differences were found in place identity with regard to the declined neighborhoods. Different dimensions were observed to have a contribution as predictors of place identity in each type of neighborhood. While services quality and place dependence were found to be additional predictors of place identity in wellmaintained neighborhoods, independence and quality of the physical environment resulted the unique predictors of place identity in the neighborhoods. Place attachment was found to be the most important predictor of place identity in both types of neighborhoods. Findings from this study are considered for the design of neighborhoods for elder people.

Keywords: Place identity, place attachment, place dependence, place quality, neighborhood, elder adults. INTRODUCTION Older persons prefer to age in place, and to remain in their own neighborhoods where they have memories and special meanings (Chui, 2008; Eckert, Morgan, & Swamy, 2004; Horner, & Boldy, 2008). Living in place signifies to older adults the possibility of prolonging their stay in their own homes where they can continue usual community relationships (Pynoos, 1993). In Israel older persons, tend to age in place and this is the modal arrangement. Only 4.1% of older persons in Israel live in institutions as compared to 5.7% in the U.S., and 6.8% in Canada (Jacobzone, 2000). The predilection for ageing in place becomes more dominant as people grow older. The elder tend to remain in their places until becoming overwhelmed with tasks such as housework and self-care, experience a strong decrease in mobility, or suffer a catastrophic event (Young, 1998). While many elder prefer to stay living in their own residences and neighborhoods for as long as possible, they do so in spite of increasing frailty, weakened social support system, and decline in the physical condition of their homes and environments (Costa-Font, Elvira, & Mascarilla-Miro, 2009; Hart & Reed, 1990). Golant, (2007; 2008) found that poor older homeowners are more likely to occupy physically deficient dwellings. The use of existing housing stock requires numerous, and costly physical adaptations. There is a tendency of elders to delay expensive repairs, and home adaptations. A significant portion (19%) of elderly households report problems of access to minimal resources and services (Berg-Warman & Brodsky, 2004). Israeli statistics show that 24% have difficulty managing the stairs when entering their home, and 29% fear *Address correspondence to Hernan Casakin: Ariel University Center of Samaria, School of Architecture, PO Box 3, Ariel 44837, Israel; E-mail: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Casakin and Neikrug

walking in their neighborhood after dark. Of 60 year olds and older, 24% live alone, which further adds to their vulnerability. In addition, 22.6% of households are beneath the poverty line (Statistical Abstract of the Elderly in Israel, 2008). Inaccessible and unsupportive housing, and declined neighborhood conditions push frail older people towards undesired experiences. In fact, the physical and social environments inform the experience of old age no less than do biology and culture (Kontos, 1998). A positive environment that supports continued activity, social interaction, and access to minimal services contribute to successful aging in place. Various programs have been developed in Israel in order to advance an aging-in-place policy (Berg-Warman 2003; Berg-Warman & Chekhmir, 2006). These programs attempted to provide the necessary support to allow for continued living in place by developing creative solutions to such problems as accessibility of services, and home and environmental maintenance. Considering that the greatest proportion of older persons in Israel live in their own homes, we are concerned that aging in place should be positive and offer the possibility of a good quality of life. The willingness of old people and their ongoing effort to stay in place and suffer obstacles is an expression of their desire for autonomy and continuity in their lives (Leith, 2006). The way that elder relate to their environments is considered to be one of the most important reasons affecting continued living in place. In the last decades, literature about human-environment relationships started to consider place identity, place dependence, place attachment, and environmental quality as fundamental aspects affecting the bonds established between different population groups such as the elder, and their place of residence. The purpose of this investigation is to examine the concept of place identity and its links to place dependence, place attachment, and place quality using data collected from elders living in different types of neighborhoods. We explore possible differences among these variables and their relations as presented in neighborhoods that differ by their environmental quality, and level of maintenance. Place Attachment, Place Dependence, Place Quality and the Neighborhood The experience of place has been a major research topic in the environmental psychology field. In particular, the ties that people establish with their environments that concern place dependence (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001; 2006; Stokols & Schumaker, 1981), place attachment (e.g., Altman & Low, 1992; Giuliani, 2003; Hummon, 1992; Lewicka, 2005), and perceived place quality (Brown & Werner, 1985) have become the core research issues of today's literature. Place attachment is generally defined as the emotional ties that individuals develop with their places of residence (Bonaiuto et al., 1999; Brown, Perkin, & Brown, 2003; Manzo, 2003; Knez, 2005), where they tend to maintain close relations (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001). Place attachment is also considered a bond that people develop towards an environment characterized by emotional content (for a review see Giuliani, 2003). It is as Hernandez et al., (2007, p.310) defined: "the affective link that people establish with specific settings, where they tend to remain and where they feel comfortable and safe". In their view, the emotional bond developed in a place and the positive tendency to establish a close relationship with that place is a main characteristic of place attachment. For Altman and Low (1992) this bond is concerned not only with the interaction of affect and emotions, but also with actions and behaviors with regard to a place, which is a major characteristic of place dependence. This construct has also been defined as the relationship between people and environments that is affected by social action, local participation, or civic behavior (Lewicka, 2005). Place dependence was found to be intimately related to place attachment, and even to be a component part of it (Pretty, Chipuer, & Bramston, 2003). Not many studies have investigated the relationships between place dependence, place attachment, and place identity. One of the few exceptions is the work of Jorgensen and Stedman (2001; 2006) who studied these concepts as components of sense of place. Jorgensen and Stedman (2001) regarded sense of place as a multi-dimensional subjective experience grounded in attitude theory, and characterized by a combination of cognition, affection and behavioral commitments related to a particular physical environment. Jorgensen and Stedman (2006) further noted that

Place Identity in the Neighborhood as Perceived by the Elder Residents


essentially, place identity, place attachment and place dependence can be viewed above all as cognitive, affective and behavior dimensions, respectively. In another study, Stedman (2002) found that place attachment was strongly related to sense of place. However, this construct was less related to place identity, and place dependence. The multidimensionality of sense of place was confirmed by Jorgensen and Stedman (2001) through the considerable degree of independence among its component variables. These authors showed that identity-based beliefs about a place, positive emotions associated with a place, and behavioral commitments toward a place were not entirely exchangeable factors. The relationship between place attachment, and place identity was further examined by Knez (2005) using Breakwell's (1988) four processes model of place identity. Moreover, Chow and Healey (2008) studied the impact that the transition of moving from home to a new residence in the university had for students on place identity and place attachment. They found that changes in the socio-spatial relationships in the new environment had a negative impact on these variables. In a study carried out between religious and secular residents, Casakin and Billig (2009) observed that the religious, who were the most socially involved and most attached people, established strong relations between the emotional ties, and the perceived quality towards their place of residence. Place dependence, place attachment, and perceived place quality can be developed in environments that have different scale, such as a house (Cuba & Hummon, 1993; Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001), a city (Bonnes et al., 1990), or a neighborhood (Cuba & Hummon, 1993; Brown et al., 2003). Despite the different scales of place with which people establish bonds, research on place attachment generally focused on the neighborhood (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001; Giuliani, 2003). According to Hernandez et al., (2007) this is partly due to the intimate connection between residential quality and place attachment that motivated most studies to center on the neighborhood scale. Attachment to the neighborhood is a social-psychological process that captures people's emotional bonds to physical and social environments (Brown, Perkins, & Brown, 2003, 2004). Such ties affect not only the affective interplay between individuals and their local environments, but also their ties of dependence manifested through a positive behavior and physical activity in such environments. Neighborhood attachment is affected by the characteristics of the built environment and the perceptions of that environment (Hummon, 1992). Residents with low neighborhood attachment have uncompromised bonds, and are more likely to leave (Manzo & Perkins, 2006). Moreover, with longer years of residence in a neighborhood, people develop higher attachment and higher dependency (Brown & Perkins, 1992; Comstock et al., 2010; Taylor, 1996). This may be one of the reasons since the most attached residents are generally the elderly (Fuhrer, Kaiser, & Hartig, 1993). According to Brown and Perkins (1992), place attachment embraces dynamic and long-term positive links with appreciated socio-physical environments such as neighborhoods. Attachment to a neighborhood reflects not only positive feelings (Twigger-Ross & Uzzel, 1996), but also general satisfaction towards the quality of the residential area (Brown & Werner, 1985). Place attachment develops through daily encounters with neighbors, and a positive attitude with respect to the place of residence (Brown et al., 2003). Attachment to the neighborhood endows people with familiarity, stability, and security. Although the links that people develop in their neighborhood are generally related to the physical conditions and perceptions of the environment (Hummon, 1992), they are not always the direct consequence of them (Brown et al., 2003). In a study carried out in a depressed neighborhood in New York, Saegert (1989) found that residents established strong ties to their neighborhood despite its deteriorated physical conditions. Likewise, poor physical maintenance and physical vandalism in the neighborhood was not always associated with weak ties (Taylor, 1996). In contrast, other research showed that residents developed low bonds in neighborhoods perceived as physically disordered and declined (MCGuire, 1997). Residents with low neighborhood attachment showed more propensities to leave (Manzo & Perkins, 2006; Twigger-Ross & Uzell, 1996), and well maintained neighborhoods were found to be associated with strong place attachment (Evans, Kantrowitz, & Eshelman, 2002). Whether and to what extent the quality of a neighborhood may affect the different types of ties that people create with the environment is a question that deserves further examination. The present study aims to


120

CHAPTER 9 Multilayered Identity of Places: Linkage Between Physical Form, Behaviour Patterns and Public Perception Barbara Goličnik Marušić* and Matej Nikšič Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia, Trnovski pristan 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia Abstract: The importance of simultaneous treating of the constituent elements of space on a detailed level of urban design is debated in this chapter. Three aspects are given particular attention when defining these elements: the physical form, the patterns of use of place, and the perceptual dimensions of space. These are based on physical and functional definition of space, as well as its symbolic dimension. The study is illustrated by two squares in Ljubljana, Slovenia - Prešernov trg and Kongresni trg. Both places are characterized by short and long stay active and passive activities. The research showed that the physical articulation and detailed physical characteristics of space makes it recognisable at first hand by their users. In addition, it was found that the presence of users resulted as an important aspect giving character to each place. Although, both case studies bear rich historical footprints and symbolic meanings, only the latter was present in the mental images of space constructed by the users. These empirical findings contribute to the debate on the development of place identity of these historic urban areas, strongly present in contemporary life. Results reflected the importance of a multi-layered approach to place identity.

Keywords: Public space, behaviour mapping, cognitive mapping, identity, design. INTRODUCTION Places’ identities in contemporary cities, where technological development, socio-cultural challenges and environmental issues are severely transforming our lives and where change becomes the only constant, are often questioned. In such circumstances it is necessary to talk about multi-layered identity of places. It is challenging to see which layers can interfere and how. This is especially important in public open spaces, characteristic for diversity of users, where people go for different reasons, and where they perceive these places in different ways. From this point of view, a common mental image of place and its dynamic behaviour patterns seem interesting to explore in order to gain a deeper understanding bout place identity. Place identity is the product of local determinants, such as climate, geology, geography and culture. It evolved from necessity rather from a design or decision as the settlements were shaped according to local constraints (Hough, 1990). The environments were mainly shaped through vernacular processes with locally-sourced materials (Butina & Bentley, 2007) and the own character of the place, which distinguished it from other places. Thus, until the industrialisation times, identity of a place had been achieved without any extra efforts. With the industrialisation, local constraints were progressively loosened (Norberg Schulz, 1980), and the question of local distinctiveness became rather a question of choice and design than of necessity. Originally, two distinct schools considered place identity, each with different emphasis. One focused aesthetics and physical elements of the environment; and the other on the social conception of place and identity, and emphasised the activities, functions and interpretations of a place beyond its physical appearance. These two approaches were later drawn into a closer relationship, which led to a comprehensive understanding of the term of place identity. This understanding links the physical appearance of a place with the activities and functions that the place supports, as well as the interpretation of the elements that constitute the place (Smith, 1997). *Address correspondence to Barbara Goličnik Marušić: Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia, Trnovski pristan 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia. Email: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Multilayered Identity of Places


121

The first set of believes which places great emphasis on the external (visual) appearance of space is rooted in Sitte’s work ‘City Planning According to Artistic Principles’ (Sitte, 1965). Although this approach addressed social usage of space, its objective was to re-establish an artistic approach to urban design, with emphasis on the visual experience of the urban spaces. Similarly, from 1950’s the townscape approach was developed. This can be interpreted as reaction against the 'anywhere' quality of modernist environments. One of the most influential approaches was developed by Cullen (1971), whose philosophy emphasised the visual sense to the virtual exclusion of all others. By enumerating the elements of the visual appearance of the city, and the ways of their manipulation by sequential changing, he interpreted the built environments as a tool to channel the emotional responses of the users of space. Although Cullen’s approach has been criticised for being abstract and idealistic, it had a strong influence on urban design practice in the past decades. In a broader scale, a combined investigation of the characteristics of physical and functional structures of urban spaces, and their geometry in relation to the socio-economic context of city development has been introduced by the urban morphology approach. This approach treats a city as a concrete physical form, and at the same time as an organism that responds to societal changes. A relation to the creation of sense of place was well expressed by Whitehand (1992), who claimed that the past provides the key for the future, and that the urban landscape embodies the efforts and aspirations of the current occupants as well as their predecessors. A consequence of this is the creation of a sense of community, which is crucial as it enables individuals and groups to identify with an area. The conservation of the physical structure and the continuity of its growth are thus seen as a mean to protect and manage, as well as gradually change the local identity of place. Samuels and McGlynn (2000) stressed that it is essential to understand how places grow, in order to produce extensions to existing settlements. They developed the morphological approach on a detailed level that identified essential components of local character, and their relationships. These included: districts, streets, plots, forms, elements and materials, and represent the levels of resolution in traditional and modern developments. The second set of approaches focused on user oriented, and is based on psychological rather than sociological issues. A number of approaches were developed upon the perceived dimensions of space. Although each individual creates and bears his/her own image of space, there seems to be substantial agreement among members of the same group (e.g., regarding age, gender, culture, etc.). On such base, common mental images represented by a large number of residents of a city can be identified. In other words, it is about areas of agreement that might be expected to appear in the interaction of a single physical reality, a common culture, and a basic physiological nature. According to Lynch (1974, 1998) a highly imageable city must be well formed, distinct and remarkable to invite the senses to greater attention and participation. He uses the term imageability to address quality in a physical object, which gives it a high probability of evoking a strong image in any given observer. Lynch is convinced that any existing functioning urban area has structure and identity, even in a weak measure. Moreover, Relph (1976) stresses that place identity is often provided more or less ready-made by the mass media, and remote from direct experience. He considers it a superficial and manipulated identity, which undermines both individual experiences, and symbolic properties of the identity of place. With the development of the new (virtual and wireless) technologies, this issue is becoming even more topical today. From an experiential point of view, this reflects a critical note on place identity. On this regard, Jacobs (1961), argues that users’ experiences are embedded in their presence and actions in places. She states that 'only intricacy and vitality of use give to the parts of a city appropriate structure and place' (p. 24), which suggests that it is people and their action, which make place and that the place identity is actually the reflection of the users identity above aesthetic and spatial arrangements. Alexander's approach (1977) links place and activities, integrating social and aesthetic issues. According to him, the soul of place and the experiences we get does not depend simply on the physical environment, but on the 'pattern' of events that we experience. He relates physical space to everyday-life events, and refers to a wide range of issues- from the regional urban scale to the individual building details - as an expression of the aesthetic dimension of place. Similarly, Halprin in RSVP cycles (1969) introduces a theory dealing with usagespatial relationship in place. In particular, it focuses on the multidimensional interconnectedness between all the elements of the cycle. His approach is concerned with a complex view about design, including place identity interpreted either through physical characteristics, resources, or place users.


Marušić and Nikšič

For Relph (1976), places are essentially centres of meaning constructed out of lived-experience. Spaces are being turned into places by imbuing them with meaning, which might be different for individuals, groups or society as a whole. This again emphasises the importance of sense of belonging and emotional attachment to place. For Relph the ‘essence of place’ lies in the occasionally unconscious experience of an ‘inside’ as distinct from an ‘outside’. Similarly Carmona et al., (2003) argued that urban environments contain symbols, meanings and values which are created through the process of ‘signification’. The meaning of nonverbal signs arises from social and cultural conventions. Their interpreting is flexible - with the changes in the society the meanings can change as well. According to Knox and Pinch (2000), social and emotional meanings attached to (or evoked by) elements of the urban environment are at least as important as the structural and physical aspects of people's imagery. In this respect, Lynch's approach is criticised for merely addressing the physical characteristics, but not telling much about the attached meanings. Bentley and Butina (2007) remind about the importance of the meanings of cultural landscapes (landscapes modified by human interventions), and human identities. They define place identity as 'the set of meanings associated with any particular cultural landscape which any particular person or group of people draws on in the construction of their own personal or social identities' (p. 6). These researchers stress the multi-sensority of the process of inhabiting place's structures and open spaces. This involves both patterns of use and form, and leads to the complexity of meanings. According to Bentley and Butina, the key dimensions of the identityconstruction process helps users to construct a rooted sense of community, incorporating 'rooted' elements into new designs at all scales. Moreover, this process also aids members of different imagined communities to live harmoniously with others. By so doing, they contribute to develop a sense of their own empowerment. As shown above, many scholars stress the importance of simultaneous consideration of different layers when either analysing the existing place identity, or proposing new interventions into places to strengthen their identity (Canter, 1977). On the other hand, when identity by design is in question, the everyday practice shows that approaches are partial, and do not address multi-layered aspects. In this chapter, the term place identity is understood as widely as possible. It pays special attention to the relationship between the physical environment and its users. A dimension of users is addressed from two basic viewpoints: actual peoples’ engagements in places, and their conceptions of places. The concept of place identity is defined as the own character of place as a result of spatial arrangements (physical characteristics), actual activities in places, as well as people’s cognition of places they use. The concept also addresses the essential components of identity-construction process. i.e., physical characteristics of spaces, and their attached meanings. The chapter focuses on cognitive and behavioural dimensions of public urban open space in relation to its physical characteristics, and the influence of these relations on a perceived identity of space. It is based on the results of researches in the field of behavioural and cognitive mapping for two public open spaces in Ljubljana, Slovenia - Kongresni trg and Prešernov trg (Goličnik, 2005; Nikšič, 2008). Both case studies are historical squares located in the city centre of Ljubljana, and express a daily vibrant life. They represent a complex environment, where historical and contemporary notions of space juxtapose. In the following section, we present the research methodology. In particular we describe observation and behaviour mapping as a method for recording behavioural patterns, and interviews, and cognitive mapping as a method addressing the perception of places. Thereafter, we introduce research questions, and present the case studies. In the last part, we show results in three different sections that include: place identity and activities and uses, place identity as a perceptual dimension, and a combination of both. Finally, conclusions elaborate on main findings, and stresses the role of cognitive, behavioural and physical characteristics of places in the construction of place identity. METHODOLOGY In this section we illustrate the methods used in this research, in particular those addressing people’s engagement with places. Observation and behaviour mapping approaches explore the physical form, and the dynamic patterns of spatial occupancy in places. Interviewing and cognitive mapping examine the qualitative and quantitative dimensions of open urban spaces as represented in the mental images of the

Part IV: PLACE IDENTITY, CULTURE, AND RELIGION


133

CHAPTER 10 Place Identity and Religion: A Study of Hindu Immigrants in America Shampa Mazumdar1 and Sanjoy Mazumdar2,* 1

Department of Sociology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-5100 and 2Department of Planning, Policy, & Design, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-7075, USA Abstract: How does religion influence place identity, especially for immigrants? This chapter examines how an immigrant group developed, sustained, and continued religious place identity in their new place of residence. Based on an ethnographic naturalistic field research project on Hindu immigrants in the USA four themes are detailed, including Memories of the sacred; Homes: the sacred and the individual; Temples: the sacred and the collective; and Nature: ecology and the sacred. The learnings from this study include the following: 1) religion can play an important role in the formation of place identity; 2) past places play significant and continuing role in religious and place identity; 3) religious place identity can be expressed and experienced at the individual, community, and ecological levels; 4) for immigrants, religious place identity is not static and rigid, but is fluid and adaptive, accommodating and including new places, and experiences; 5) religious place identity is actively created; and 6) identity involves unique characteristics, place features and ambiance, cultural views, actions, and rituals, among others.

Keywords: Identity, place, and attachment, religious place identity, immigrant religious adaptation, sacred ecology. INTRODUCTION Is a person’s self-identity linked to place? Does place identity affect immigrants’ sense of self? Does religion and religious identity affect place identity? These are a few broad questions this paper is concerned with. To understand what is known about these topics, we first review what has been suggested in the relevant literature. Identity, Place, and Attachment The connection between identity and place has been the subject of extensive interdisciplinary scholarship and research. Among the earliest to link a person’s self identity (Fig. 1) and place (Fig. 2) was Proshansky (1978). To these environmental psychologists “(t)he development of self identity is not restricted to making distinctions between oneself and significant others but also extends with no less importance to objects and things and the very places in which they are found” (Proshansky, Fabian & Kaminoff, 1983, p. 57). Place identity to them is “a substructure of the self-identity of the person consisting of broadly conceived cognitions about the physical world in which the individual lives” (Proshansky et al., 1983, p. 59). In their analysis, a person’s “environmental past” consisting of significant places and spaces is seen as salient. Places can “act as references to past selves and actions” and provide continuity (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996, p. 207), stability and emotional well-being (Cooper Marcus, 1992). “Through memory, people create place meaning and connect it to the self” (Scannell & Gifford 2010, p. 3). Other environmental psychologists (e.g., Korpela, 1989; Twigger-Ross & Uzzell 1996; Devine-Wright & Lyons, 1997) have further elaborated on the linkages between place and identity. Some architects (e.g., Norberg-Schulz, 1979; Nitschke, 1966) and geographers (e.g., Tuan, 1974; Relph, 1976) have also emphasized the importance of place and its characteristics. According to Relph (1976, p. 48) “the raw materials of the identity of place” consist of three elements, namely “physical appearance, activities and meaning”. He further suggests that there is a connection between “insideness”, place belonging, and identity: *Address correspondence to Sanjoy Mazumdar: Department of Planning, Policy, & Design, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-7075; E-mail: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Mazumdar and Mazumdar

Self Identity

Self Identity Place

Figure 1: Diagrammatic representation of self identity.

Figure 2: Diagrammatic representation of place identity.

“To be inside a place is to belong to it and to identify with it and the more profoundly inside you are the stronger is this identity with the place” (Relph 1976, p. 49) Sociologists, such as Hummon (1989) and Abrahamson (1996), have noted the socially negotiated and learned aspects of place identity. Unique place characteristics and features, whether they are natural settings, historic architectural landmarks, or treasured household artifacts, may be invested with symbolic meaning. They can “serve as icons” and can “contribute significantly to one’s place identity” (Hull, Lam, & Vigo, 1994, p. 118; see also Belk, 1992; Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996; Scannell & Gifford, 2010). Much of the research on identity and place has focused on home spaces (e.g., Cooper, 1976; 1992; Duncan, 1982; Csikzentmihalyi & Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Rapoport, 1982; Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 1993), though a few studies have paid attention to the city, neighborhood and community (Feldman, 1990; Rivlin, 1987; Fried, 1963; Hummon, 1992; Mazumdar, Mazumdar, Docuyanan & McLaughlin, 2000), giving rise to such concepts as “spatial identity” (Fried, 1963), “settlement identity” (Feldman, 1990) and “community identity” (Hummon, 1992). Increasingly, scholars are researching the role of nature and natural settings in the development of the self through the ideas of “ecological” and/or “environmental identity” (Thomashow, 1995; see also Clayton & Opotow, 2003; Kiesling & Manning, 2010). The literature reviewed in the preceding section establishes the important connections between self, identity, and place. But the self is a complex phenomenon (James, 1890; see also Devine-Wright & Clayton, 2010; Hull, Lam, & Vigo, 1994; Belk, 1992). It is multi-faceted, including, but not limited to, such factors as ethnicity, membership in a culture, occupation, gender, among others. To this list can be added religion, which constitutes an important layer of a person’s identity (Fig. 3) (e.g., Sopher, 1967; Low, 1992; Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2004, 2006, 2009). For religious persons, places significant to religion, such as sacred architecture, cities, landscape and ecology, play a significant role in the development of the self, and help constitute religious place identity (Fig. 4). This may include characteristics, history, experience, rituals, and memories of religious places. Attachment to such places runs deep as evidenced in the emotional connections to sacred cities, such as Jerusalem, Amritsar, Vārānāsī, Mecca, as well as to temples, churches, mosques, altars, and religious symbols and artifacts. This attachment to place, along with the consequent feelings of place loss, forms an important component of place identity.

Self Identity Religion

Figure 3: Diagrammatic representation of religious self identity.

Self Identity Place

Religion

Figure 4: Diagrammatic representation of religious place identity (RPI).

Place Identity and Religion


135

Several scholars have focused on the importance of the emotional connections to place (Tuan, 1974; Relph, 1976; Low & Altman 1992; Fullilove, 1996; Giuliani, 2003; Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2004; Scannell & Gifford 2010)1. A recent review piece proposed a three-dimensional framework of place attachment that includes “person, psychological process, and place dimensions” (Scannell & Gifford, 2010, p. 2). For Low (1992, p. 165) however, “place attachment is more than emotional and cognitive experience and includes cultural beliefs and practices that link people to place”. She identifies six linkages namely genealogy, narrative, economics as well as ties through pilgrimage, cosmology and place loss. In describing pilgrimage, Low points to religion related attachment, but barring a few important exceptions (Sopher, 1967; Low, 1992; Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2004), the literature has been largely silent on this topic. Attachment to place can be developed at the individual, community, and national level (Scannell & Gifford, 2010; Brown & Perkins, 1992; Belk, 1992; Mazumdar & Mazumdar 2004). Certain architectural landmarks, religious and secular (cathedrals, walls, museums or monuments for example), can come to be viewed as “collective possessions” (Belk, 1992) or national treasures, as containers of memory, heritage, and history. In his study of Boston, Firey (1945) demonstrated how collective community sentiments resisted changes to Boston’s significant landmarks such as Beacon Hill, Boston Commons and the burial grounds. For some, attachment to place is so strong that place loss due to destruction, displacement or relocation can lead to a deep sense of grief and bereavement (Gans, 1962; Fried, 1963; Tuan, 1974; Erikson, 1976; Brown & Perkins, 1992; Fullilove, 1996; Scannell & Gifford, 2010; Mazumdar, 1992). Tuan (1974, p. 99) describes it in the following way: “… a person in the process of time, invests bits of his emotional life in his home, and beyond the home in his neighborhood. To be forcibly evicted from one’s home and neighborhood is to be stripped of a sheathing, which in its familiarity protects the human being from the bewilderments of the outside world”. In such situations, place attachment gets linked to place identity. Displacement can lead to feelings of alienation (Brown & Perkins, 1992), placelessness (Relph, 1976), disorientation (Fullilove, 1996) and “fragmentation of routines, of relationships and of expectations” (Fried, 1963, p. 232) and loss of part of one’s identity. Immigrants relocating to a new land also experience varying degrees of place loss (Figs. 5 & 6). They bring with them only memories of places and place experiences, and some portable artifacts, a few of which are sacred ones, on which they rely for identity continuity (see also Mehta & Belk, 1991). They leave behind their homes and communities, cities, buildings, and landscapes, as well as places and ambiances they consider sacred. While building new lives, they face unique challenges of remembering, reconciling, and connecting past identity with the present context, and of constructing a new religious microcosm and identity through placemaking that may involve modification and transposition over the old (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2009).

Self Identity

Self Identity Place 1

Place 2

Place 1

Place 2

Religion Figure 5: Diagrammatic representation of immigrant place identities.

Figure 6: Diagrammatic representation of immigrant religious place identity (IRPI).

1

For a fuller discussion of place identity, place attachment and sense of place see Scannell and Gifford (2010).

146


CHAPTER 11 Place Identity Principles and Cultural Metaphors in a Mexican Environment Hernan Casakin1,* and Esi Abbam Elliot2 1

Ariel University Center of Samaria, School of Architecture, PO Box 3, Ariel 44837, Israel Ariel, Israel and University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

2

Abstract: The research investigated the concept of place identity based on the principles presented in the model of identity motivation by Drostelis and Vignoles. The study was carried out in Pilsen, Chicago, a neighborhood with a strong presence of the Mexican community. The major aim was to investigate the importance of place identity principles in this cultural and physical context. The goal was to learn how Mexicans, in comparison to White Americans, establish identity ties with their environment. A number of servicescapes characterized by the use of cultural metaphors were selected as case studies. The present work added further clarity to the relation between place and identity. It provided evidence for the use of cultural metaphors in the preservation and development of a number of identity processes. The study enabled to identify existing differences between Mexicans, the more emotionally related to the neighborhood, and the White-Americans, the less attached group. Cultural metaphors in servicescapes allowed Mexicans to express their feelings and emotions towards their culture in different ways reflected throughout a variety of identity principles, classified into psychological needs and motives, as well as social and symbolic links to places.

Keywords: Place identity principles, mexicans, white-Americans, cultural metaphors, servicescapes. INTRODUCTION In the last three decades, the study of people's emotional relationships has captured the attention of researchers from diverse disciplines. In the environmental psychology domain, a main interest was to explore the relationship between people and their places (Manzo, 2003). A number of concepts such as 'place attachment' (Altman & Low, 1992; Lewicka, 2005), 'sense of place' (Tuan, 1980; Hay, 1998), and 'place dependence' (Stokols & Shumaker, 1981) come out to understand the nature of this relationship. A construct central to the study of human-environment interactions is place identity, defined as a component of the self that develops in relation to the physical environment (Proshansky, 1978). Lack of agreement about the structure of place identity, and the processes related to it has affected research on this construct (Manzo, 2003; Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010). In this study we aim to shed further light to this issue by further exploring the concept of place identity by means of principles from the model of identity (Drostelis & Vignoles, 2010), which contributed to a better integration within place identity literature. The research centers in a specific physical and cultural context, defined by the strong presence of an ethnic community. A goal is to investigate the relevance of the place identity principles in this context, and learn how Mexican people establish identity ties with their environment, characterized by the use of cultural metaphors. The significance of cultural metaphors stems from their capacity to express and materialize in the physical environment, the feelings and emotions of this ethnic community for their homeland in Mexico. Another goal is to study differences between the Mexican group and another less attached group of participants such as the White Americans in regard to place identity in environments characterized by the use of cultural metaphors,. The work may help to add further clarity to the relation between place and identity, and to test the validity of the identity process model applied in a cultural context. *Address correspondence to Hernan Casakin: Ariel University Center of Samaria, School of Architecture, PO Box 3, Ariel 44837, Israel Ariel, Israel. Email: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Place Identity Principles and Cultural Metaphors in a Mexican


Definitions of Place Identity Many have been the studies carried out in the environmental psychology literature that attempted to study the relationship between identity and the environment (e.g., Deener, 2010; Knez, 2005; Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983), and numerous were the definitions used to refer to this notion. According to TwiggerRoss and Uzzell (1996), the way that place relate to identity can be described in two ways. The first deals with place as a social category, or to an individual social identification with a place. As such, place identification can reflect membership of a social group defined by its location, e.g., people from Paris may see themselves as Parisians. The other way to understand the relation between place and identity is by means of what Proshansky (1978) termed place identity. This researcher suggested that place identity is a sub-structure of the self-identity that describes a person's socialization with the environment in which he or she lives. Proshansky et al., (1983) also defined place identity as the "ideas, feelings, attitudes, values, preferences, meanings, and conceptions of behavior and experience which relate to the variety and complexity of physical settings that define the day-to-day existence of every human being" (p.59). In this view, the notion of place identity was understood as a component of personal identity, or as an extension of the self that is affected by the outstanding elements of an environment, and the actions and interactions that take place there (Wester-Herber, 2004). Unfortunately, Proshansky and colleagues did not specify what kind of relationships can be established between the social and physical aspects of identity, leaving behind them a cloud of confusion. For some researchers, place identity can be perceived as the emotional links established with places, but for others it is conceptualized in terms of attachment (e.g., Altman & Low, 1992; Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000; Relph, 1976). The diverse definitions used in reference to the relationship between place identity and place attachment has been a cause for strong disagreement (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001; Manzo, 2003). In some occasions, place identity and place attachment have been considered as components of sense of place (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001; 2006). In other cases, place attachment has been suggested to develop and support place identity (Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996). Haziness in the semantic differentiation between these two constructs caused place identity to be considered as a synonymous of place attachment, and to use these concepts interchangeably (e.g., Brown & Werner, 1985). Place identity and place attachment were also seen as component parts of each other (Lalli, 1992; Kyle, Graefe, & Manning, 2005), but also as two different constructs (Hernandez et al., 2007). The lack of clarity on the definition of place identity added more difficulty to its empirical study. Principles of Place Identity Bearing in mind existing concerns about the definition of place identity, a purpose of the present study is to examine how recent developments in modeling processes that included the construction of different aspects of identity can help to explore its relation to place. To this aim we utilize the principles investigated by Vignoles et al., (2006), and extended by Drostelis and Vignoles (2010) to integrate previous research on place identity. These identity principles, classified into individual motives (Breakwell, 1988), basic needs (Maslow, 1970), as well as social and symbolic links to places (Low, 1992), provide a comprehensive theoretical approach to explore the way that people identify with places. The first group of motives belonging to the identity model suggested by Vignoles and co-workers deals with psychological motives and needs such as: self-esteem, continuity, self-efficacy, distinctiveness, meaning, belongingness, control, security, and aesthetic satisfaction. This group of motives has its roots in the identity process model (e.g., Breakwell, 1988; 1993; Vignoles et al, 2006), and on basic human needs (e.g., Maslow, 1970). The identity process model proposed by Breakwell (1988, 1993), and later on applied to the environmental psychology field by Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996) has a motivational nature, and is composed by four principles dealing with: (i) self-esteem, and implies a positive self-assessment of an individual or a group (e.g., Korpela, 1989; Lalli, 1992); (ii) continuity, referring to the connection over time and location between past and present (e.g., Korpela, 1989); (iii) distinctiveness, concerned with a specific type of relationship that people have with their environments, which is remarkably distinct from others (e.g., Hummon, 1990; Lalli, 1992); and (iv) self-efficacy, which is the capacity of a person to deal with circumstantial needs and demands, and considered important for achieving personal well-being (e.g., Bandura, 1977). Twigger-Ross and Uzzell (1996), and Knez (2005) showed that the more attached residents living in the Docklands of London were able to establish higher emotional links connected to


Casakin and Elliot

these four principles, than the less attached residents. Belonging to place, and meaning of place were also found to be involved in the construction of people identities (Vignoles et al., 2006), and showed to be good predictors of place identity (Droseltis & Vignoles, 2010). In addition to the identity principles proposed by Breakwell (1988; 1993), further motives concerned with security, control, and aesthetic needs were included in the extended model of identity motivation by Drostelis and Vignoles (2010). Security and control, which are part of essential human needs (Maslow, 1970), were found to be related to the desire to avoid or come back to a place (Korpela, 1989). The aesthetics of the physical environment, on the other hand, is a major factor of architectural and urban design affecting the image of the environment. This motive not only has an influence on the way places look like, but also on how people react to and interact with them (Bonnaiuto et al., 1999). The second group of the identity model proposed by Drostelis and Vignoles (2010) has its origins in social research on place identity, and refers to six different possible ways to establish social and symbolic ties to places (Low, 1992). It embraces: genealogical links (e.g., relations with sources, ancestors, and origins), economic links (e.g., money making, financial interest), sense of loss or dislocation of community (e.g., places that vanished as a result of gentrification, resettlement, devastation), narrative links (stories related to place), cosmological links through religious, spiritual or mythological relationship (e.g., holy places), and links to special cultural events (e.g., concerts, parades). In the present study we aim to explore the relation between the model of identity motivation described above, and physical environments characterized by the use of cultural metaphors. Metaphors, Culture, and Place Identity Metaphors help understand a novel experience in terms of a known experience. These are described as cognitive strategies that enable to become familiar with the juxtaposition of two concepts that normally are not related (Lakoff, 1987; Ortony, 1991). An important feature of metaphors is that they can organize our conceptual system, affecting how we think and how we perceive and categorize experiences (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Lakoff, 1993). When a metaphor is part of our conceptual thinking, it can affect the way that we perceive and interact with an environment. Different types of metaphors, both semantic and visual, have been used in the design of physical environments, and many examples can be found in literature. For instance, many Modern buildings have been designed by making resource of metaphors related to the idea of a "fluid space". An outcome is a layout characterized by the superposition of spaces with blurred borders. The use of visual metaphors in the design of physical environments such as servicescapes can have an effect on the way people interact and develop affective ties with their environments (e.g., Kristensen & Gronhaug, 2003), and can contribute to reflect and communicate affective elements of the self-concept (Ortony & Fainsilber, 1989). When environments are designed for, or by a specific community, the use of cultural metaphors can be useful to stress certain elements representative of their culture. Cultural metaphors are representative of communities and cultural groups (Gannon, 2002), and can be used to reflect the behavior and thoughts of such groups (Denny & Sunderland, 2005). For this reason, cultural metaphors are priceless cognitive devices that can inform about the interactions and type of identity links that people construct and develop with their environments. The use of cultural metaphors and visual cultural metaphors in particular, in the design of physical environments such as servicescapes, can have a significant effect on people's identification with place. However, whether and how cultural metaphors affect the identity links that people establish with their environments still needs more research. The Study The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of cultural metaphors on place identity, as perceived by different ethnic groups. The main goal was to explore the extent to which the use of cultural metaphors contributes to establish place identity ties with servicescapes. In particular, we wanted to explore what are the identity principles relevant for the local Mexican community in comparison to the White American group. Mexicans were selected for this study, since they are the segment of Latino immigrants with one of the bigger populations in the United States with a rich cultural heritage (Benitez, 2007). Cultural metaphors in this group


163

CHAPTER 12 Place and the Politics of Local Identity: Belonging and Immigrant Settlement in American Suburbia Debra Lattanzi Shutika* Department of English, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444, USA Abstract: Since the mid-1980s, the United States has experienced a rapid increase in the Latino population across the nation. These changes have been the most prominent in communities that have been termed “new destinations,” or locations outside the historic gateway immigration communities in California, Texas and Illinois. The most extreme changes have taken place in suburban communities, which historically have been the home to Caucasian middle- and upper-class families. This essay examines how Latino immigration has affected the sense of place and local identity in two suburban communities: Kennett Square, Pennsylvania and Manassas, Virginia. In each case, the longer-term population reacted negatively to the newcomers and the changes they brought to the community. Using case studies based on ethnographic research, I argue that the negative reactions are not always nativist responses; immigrant settlement disrupts the sense of place, place identity and belonging for longerterm residents. A number of interventions are offered so that policy makers, community activists and planners can help communities adapt to the transition to becoming multi-ethnic community.

Keywords: Immigration, belonging, latino, suburban identity. INTRODUCTION Not very long ago, I stumbled upon a collection of magazines that had been accumulating in my home office. All the titles centered on one topic immigration in the early 21st century. I began collecting these magazines while I was in graduate school writing my dissertation. I saved them because they were examples in the popular press that affirmed many issues that I discovered in my fieldwork. Most of the articles examined the rise of immigration in what have been termed “new destinations,” those places throughout the U.S. that have until recently had not had a significant history of immigrant settlement, most notably outside the U.S.-Mexico borderlands. The first magazine is dated 2000, about the same time that significant numbers of immigrants seem to be gaining notice in places like Southeastern Pennsylvania, northern Virginia and other unexpected locations in the mid-Atlantic region. Following the cover stories of each magazine, they demonstrate a transformation in popular attitudes about the growing Latino presence in American suburbs. In the early 21st century suburban immigrants were characterized as invigorating force, especially in older suburbs that had been neglected or abandoned native-born suburbanites who had moved into newer communities and what seemed to be an ever-expanding suburban landscape. Of course that was then, this is now. What began in the early 21st century as a sense of wonderment and curiosity about the effects of immigration started to shift by mid-decade. This shift was also documented in magazines that began to characterize immigrants as criminals, invaders, and an unnecessary expense to local communities. Of course, this is nothing new. If you were to peruse similar magazine stories from the late 1880s through the 1920s, you would find nearly identical descriptions of immigrants to the ones we see today. What is different is today we can contextualize recent anti-immigrant attitudes as part of a longer historical pattern (Walker, 1896). One of America’s greatest ironies is that, although a nation of immigrants, the country also has a longstanding history of ambivalence, and at times, hostility, toward its newest arrivals. Since 2000, the *Address correspondence to Debra Lattanzi Shutika: Department of English, George Mason University, 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030-4444, USA; E-mail: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Debra Lattanzi Shutika

increased number of Latino immigrants living in new destinations, those settlements located outside the U.S.-Mexico borderlands and historic gateway cities1, has coincided with an upsurge in local antiimmigrant sentiment. My examination of Latino migration and settlement focuses on the transformation of sense of place in two communities: Kennett Square, Pennsylvania and Manassas, Virginia. In both ethnographic contexts I have examined the mobile population of Latinos and their relationships with their native-born neighbors. Conflict is not always by-product of immigrant settlement, but in locations where longer-term residents feel that their community is changing too quickly or too dramatically, local conflict is more likely to take place2. American suburbs have long been the exclusive home of white middle- and upper-class residents. These communities were formed after World War II in response to a number of issues: the development of the interstate highway system, the availability of government subsidized loans to promote home-ownership, and the desire to flee inner-city neighborhoods that were diversifying with the introduction of African Americans who were moving north. The immigration patterns that were taking hold at the end of the late 1980s began to change the constitution of American suburbia, and these transitions have been met with mixed responses. Some communities seem to make the transition with few conflicts, but others seem to resist the very notion that their communities are changing. Since 2007, the number of suburban communities in the U.S. that have experienced racial and ethnic turmoil related to the presence of newly arrived immigrant residents have increased significantly. This essay is an examination of immigration conflict using a new framework: local identity and sense of place. I will use two case studies of communities that experienced rapid and unprecedented population growth secondary to immigration between 1990 and 2005. In each place the circumstances of community change centered on discussion of how public and private spaces ought to be used, and how immigrants were changing the local identity and history of the community, and ultimately the sense of belonging for longer-term residents. These communities also represent two distinct ways that American suburban communities have responded to their immigration “problem.” By focusing on issues of identity and the sense of place, this essay offers a unique perspective on contemporary immigration in that it avoids simplistic discussions of immigration conflict as an expression of racism or nativism. While many of the events I have documented can be characterized as racist or nativist, I argue that analyzing local identity and sense of place allows for a more nuanced understanding of cultural processes in newly emerging immigrant settlements. There are three points that I would like to consider in regard to new destinations of immigrant settlement and anti-immigrant sentiment; each is discussed in the debate about immigrant incorporation and the sense of place from time to time, but they are rarely considered together. The first is a discussion of some of the causes of that anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States today. While many scholars are postulating ideas about the economic downturn and the longstanding bias that some Americans have (and have had) toward minorities, I am going to examine anti-immigrant attitudes through the lens of emplacement and belonging. While I have chosen to focus on this aspect of anti-immigrant sentiment, I want to emphasize that I am not discounting other causes, such as racism, nativism or economic insecurity. The second is an examination of anxiety and fear of immigration, and how these emotions can affect group behavior in

1

Throughout the 1990s, the U.S. foreign-born population grew dramatically--57.4 percent--and by 2000, nearly a third of these new immigrant settlers were residing outside of locations that were the historic gateway settlement states and moving into places with little history of immigrant settlement (Singer 2004).1 This shift in settlement gave rise to new immigrant gateways that experienced growth rates of more than double the national average. These new gateways included states like Colorado, Georgia, Nevada, and North Carolina, as well as a number of large metropolitan areas, including Washington, DC, Atlanta, and Denver (Singer 2004: 9-10). Most notably, by 2000 immigrants in these newly emerging gateways were much more likely to be living in suburbs rather than in cities (Singer, 2004, p.11). 2 A notable exception to this is the Mexican community in Dalton, Georgia. Although Dalton has had a similar pattern of immigrant settlement, the community response to newcomers included strategies to make immigrants feel welcome and to more effectively integrate them into the community. (See Davis et al., 2009; Zúñiga & Hernandez-Leon, 2005).

Place and the Politics of Local Identity


165

regard to emplacement and belonging. Finally, I will argue that there are specific interventions that cultural scholars, policy makers and planners who locate their work in the public sphere are in a particularly strong position to address. My conclusions will include recommendations for community-based scholars working in transforming suburban-immigrant communities to employ to help residents adjust to their changing communities. PLACE AND THE POLITICS OF BELONGING As a folklorist who studies the sense of place, my premise is that sense of place develops as newcomers move into (or out of) a place, and is dependent on the types and quality of relationships that they build and maintain in the places where they live (Cresswell, 1996; Mulgan, 2009). Place is “space made culturally meaningful;” it is the lived context for all human activity and cultural processes (Low, 1994, p. 66). Examinations of sense of place include an assessment of lived experiences and the distinctive characteristics that are associated with places identities. It also references the subjective and emotional attachments that people associate with a place (Agnew, 1987). More importantly, sense of place considers how humans shape the places they inhabit, and how places similarly influence human social interactions and cultural processes (Cresswell, 2004).3 Places are intimately experienced, and the sense of place is often described as feeling rooted, attached, or belonging to a place (Tuan, 1974; 1977). It is broader than an emotional and cognitive experience, however. Sense of place includes, and emerges from, cultural beliefs and practices that are embedded within particular places (Low, 2000; Basso, 1996; Merrifield, 1993). Fundamental to the sense of place are the feelings of belonging that all people associate with the places they call home. Belonging is a basic human need (Baumeister & Leary,1995; Young et al., 2004; Mulgan & Johnson, 2007; Mulgan, 2009), but it is not a naturalized state. Rather, it is socially constructed and negotiated. It is a process through which “people reflexively judge the suitability of a given site as appropriate given their social trajectory and their position in other fields” of experience (Savage, Bagnall & Longhurst, 2005, p.12). In new destinations, issues of belonging become a two-fold challenge. Local social contexts shift with the introduction of the new population making new destinations “new” for newcomers and longer-term residents alike. New residents are understandably struggling to belong, but the same can be true for those who have lived their entire lives in what has become the new destination. In many instances, longer-term residents experience a type of localized displacement, a feeling that their “home” is no longer a familiar and predictable place, thus making it difficult to embrace the changes taking place around them.4 The feeling of “place-belongingness” is an important aspect of place identity (Proshansky, Fabian & Kaminoff, 1983, p. 66). If place-identity is the individual’s incorporation of place into the larger concept of the self, a “pot-pourri of memories, conceptions, interpretations, ideas, and related feelings about specific physical settings,” it is plausible that feelings of displacement can arouse strong emotional responses (Proshansky, Fabian & Kaminoff, 1983, p. 60). While place identity is influenced by multiple factors, theories of place identity do not provide adequate exploration of how place identity is structured and processed (Twigger-Ross, Bonaiuto & Breakwell, 2003). The case studies explore the process of placeidentity through perceptions of belonging. METHODOLOGY The case studies presented here are based upon ethnographic fieldwork conduced in Kennett Square from October 1995 through May 2000 and in Manassas from May 2007 through August 2008. In both communities I used semi-structured interviews and participant observation to collect data from over 100 residents in each community. In Kennett Square, participant observation included attending local events

3 Scholarship on Sense of place scholarship draws from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, including folklore, geography, philosophy, and anthropology. 4 Localized displacement is a term used to reference the nearby relocation of residents after a natural disaster has permanently altered the landscape (Levine, Esnard & Sapat 2007). I use the term here to signify the perceptions of displacement and loss expressed by longer-term residents in Kennett Square.

Part V: PLACE IDENTITY, ARCHITECTURE, URBANISM, AND GLOBALIZATION


176

CHAPTER 13 Identity and Identification: The Role of Architectural Identity in a Globalised World Robert Adam* Adamarchitecture, 9 Upper High Street, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8UT, UK Abstract: The last 20 years have been marked by the expansion and liberalization of international capital and major advances in communication which have created the phenomenon known as globalisation. The breakdown of national barriers to trade and communication and the increased movement of populations have had a significant effect on the stability of communities and have affected their sense of identity. Place identity has also been transformed as cities adapt and project themselves on the global market. Architects are the agents of the symbolic visual markers of identity and, at the top of their profession, have been instrumental in major changes in the built environment. As social identity is challenged by the effects of globalisation, geographically stable place identity can be a palliative to vulnerable communities. The architectural profession has a unique opportunity to influence the character of places to the benefit or dis-benefit of the resident and incoming communities. A broad view of how the architectural profession itself fits into an emerging global society and how it has responded to these challenges and opportunities will reveal if it is acting as a positive or negative force for newly destabilised communities and their sense of identity.

Keywords: Identity, globalisation, architectural profession, modernism, city, community. INTRODUCTION People identify with the places they live and identify places as different. While there may be some relationship between these two types of identity, the way a place contributes to personal and community identity and the way people recognise different places are not the same thing. Both aspects of identity are, however, important to architects and urban designers. Architects and urban designers have a unique responsibility in their ability to transform and create the built symbols that contribute to the complex series of phenomena that make up the identity of people and communities. In this transforming and creative process designers will make - and will usually wish to make - buildings and places that are in some way distinctive. It is, however, possible for these two aspects of identity – and let us now call them identity and identification – to work in opposition to one another. While a new or transformed building or place may be highly distinctive or identifiable it could undermine the particular character of a place that the community regard as a critical part of their identity. On the other hand, that same distinctiveness could reinforce or even create an enhanced sense of identity. The relationship between identity and identification can be a source of conflict between designers and those who must live with the public face of their designs. Although it is not usually expressed in these terms, the importance of identity to the individual is of such significance that any threat of change in their home environment can be seen as a threat, not just to the character of where they live, but also and consequently to their own personal identity. In other words, a strongly identifiable design may be seen to run contrary to the accepted identity of the place to those who identify with it. The resultant strength of feeling is wellknown to all experienced designers. It must be clear that identity as a psychological and sociological phenomenon is of importance to anyone who seeks to transform the built environment. IDENTITY The basic principles of identity are quite straightforward and move from identification in general to *Address correspondence to Robert Adam: Adamarchitecture, 9 Upper High Street, Winchester, Hampshire, SO23 8UT, UK. Email: [email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Identity and Identification


177

personal identity. Identification is fundamental to human perception and indeed that of any living creature. We have to identify phenomena in order to understand them and interact with them. We identify things as the same and different: as humans we give a common identity and name to groups of things we categorise as similar; to do so we must identify a group of things as different from other groups of things. We can also identify social groups. Each person seeks their identity as an individual and does so through the social groups to which they belong. Identity is established through sameness and difference: in the sense of sameness with groups of people who it is assumed share this sense; in the sense of difference from other groups. As Jan Aart Scholte explains, this goes to heart of self and community. “Understanding and affirming the self - both as an individual and as a group member - is a prime motivation for, and major preoccupation of, social interaction. People seek in social relations to explore their class, their gender, their nationality, their race, their religious faith, their sexuality, and other aspects of their being. Constructions of identity moreover provide much of the basis for social bonds, including collective solidarity against oppression. Notions of identity underpin frameworks for community, democracy, citizenship and resistance. In short, identity matters (a great deal)” (Scholte, 2005, p. 146-7). Group identity is a fundamental part of human behaviour. In 1970, the psychologist Henri Tajfel (1970) conducted a series of experiments which reduced the identity of a series of individuals, one to another, to the absolute minimum by identifying only similar scores in trivial tasks. These individuals, knowing no more about their relationship with the others than a correspondence of score, consistently gave preferential treatment to those whose scores came closest to their own. This is known as Social Identity Theory and establishes the principle that for each of us there is an “in-group”, which we favour, and “out-groups”, which we do not. Marliynn Brewer puts this into an evolutionary perspective: “our ancestors chose cooperation rather than strength, and the capacity for social learning rather than instincts. As a result humans are characterized by obligatory interdependence (…) Clear group boundaries provide a compromise between individual selfishness and indiscriminate cooperation or altruism. In effect, defined in-groups are bounded communities of mutual obligation and trust that delimit the extent to which both the benefits and costs of cooperation can be expected. (..) If human survival depends on bounded communities of mutual, obligatory interdependence, then humans must also have evolved psychological characteristics that support functioning in such a social context. The capacity for symbolic self-representation, the need for belonging and contingent, group-based trust are all cognitive and motivational mechanisms that support and maintain interdependent group living. Similarly, social identity and the need for positive distinctiveness can be viewed as psychological mechanisms that bind individuals to groups and commit them to the preservation of intergroup boundaries” (Brewer, 2000, p. 122-123). From our evolutionary origins in small social groups or tribes of about 150, (“Dunbar’s number”) (Dunbar, 2010), joined together for mutual benefit and survival, we have now expanded a genetic predisposition to in-group identity into a much wider field. From an existence where there was mutual recognition and shared activities to a modern life in a nation state, where we share carefully protected and even enforced identities with populations numbered in the millions, we find ourselves in a much more complex condition in which we must find our identity. In both tribes and nation states, this complexity is managed through the use of symbols. In The Symbolic Construction of Community, Anthony Cohen shows that, “the consciousness of community has to be kept alive through manipulation of its symbols. The reality and efficacy of the community's boundary - and, therefore, of the community itself - depends upon its symbolic construction and embellishment” (Cohen, 1985, p.118) We can recognise these symbols from the ceremonials of state to the use of distinctive language and dress amongst social groups. Much as communities do not spring from nowhere, the symbols that define them are not spontaneous but are often traditional. “As sets of assumptions, beliefs and patterns of behaviour handed down from the past, traditions provide some of the symbolic materials for the formation of identity both at the individual and at the collective level. The sense of oneself and the sense of belonging are both shaped - to varying degrees, depending on social context - by the values, beliefs and forms of behaviour which are transmitted from the past. The process of identity formation can never start from scratch; it always builds upon a pre-existing set


Robert Adam

of symbolic materials which form the bedrock of identity” (Thompson, 1996: 91-3) As they are traditions rather than history, these symbols are not fixed. They can evolve with the community and even be invented (Hobsbawm & Grainger, 1983) but, in all cases, their effectiveness as traditional symbols requires a convincing pedigree, real or imagined. As the scale and variety of community expands, identity becomes less clear cut. As Judith Howard points out, (Howard, 2000, p.367-8) “At earlier historical moments, identity was not so much an issue; when societies were more stable, identity was to a great extent assigned, rather than selected or adopted. In current times, however, the concept of identity carries the full weight of the need for a sense of who one is, together with an often overwhelming pace of change in surrounding social contexts – changes in the groups and networks in which people and their identities are embedded and in the societal structures and practices in which those networks are themselves embedded” And indeed, it is not necessary to choose any single one of these and for most of us, “Individual identification is revealed as, to a considerable extent, a customized collage of collective identifications” (Jenkins, 2004, p.142) Now, Salman Rushdie, can ask of the modern condition, “Do cultures actually exist as separate, pure, defensible entities? Is not melange, adulteration, impurity, pick'n'mix at the heart of the idea of the modern?” (Rushdie, 1991, p.394). In as much as we can describe our age as the global age, identity can now be seen as a problem. As Jan Aart Scholte says, “globalisation has tended to increase the sense of a fluid and fragmented self, particularly for persons who spend large proportions of their time in supraterritorial spaces, where multiple identities readily converge and create `lost souls'. In more globalised lives, identity is less easily taken for granted; self-definitions and associated group loyalties are much more up for grabs. Hybrid identities present significant challenges for the construction of community. How can deep and reliable social bonds be forged when individuals have multiple and perhaps competing senses of self - and indeed often feel pretty unsettled in all of them?” (Scholte, 2005, p.253) If group identity is, as the evidence suggests, a fundamental human need necessary for the proper function of family, community and nation, this rootlessness could undermine all these essential pillars of society. It is perhaps at this moment that the identity of place becomes significant. Manuel Castells describes how people try to manage threats to their identity, “When the world becomes too large to be controlled, social actors aim to shrink it back to their size and reach. When networks dissolve time and space, people anchor themselves in places, and recall their historic memory…. These defensive reactions become sources of meaning and identity, constructing new cultural codes out of historical materials” (Castells, 2000, p.69-70). If society is fluid and symbolic markers of identity are ambiguous, almost all of us have at least somewhere we call home. As Stephanie Taylor points out, “Discussions of place and identity, whether among academic theorists or research participants, almost inevitably return to the concept of home” (Taylor, 2010, p.43-4) Home is a place that is at least geographically stable; “one’s home is where in the world one most truly belongs” (Matthews, 2000, p.192) “This dwelling or residence always involves different levels of choice, in terms of location, neighbourhood, cost, size, typology, image, it is also part of our identity - whether that identity is professional, class, social, ethnic, cultural or, in particular places, racial. The location and dwelling where we live is one (important) way of how we either choose to, or are seen to, represent ourselves to others” (King, 2004, p.129). Simon Anholt describes how, as the secure foundation of our identity of place, home is the bedrock of all other geographic identities: “The identity and image of the places we inhabit are really a seamless extension of the identity and image of ourselves; it is a natural human tendency for people to identify themselves with their city, region or country. Our sense of self isn't bounded by our own bodies: it extends out into family, neighbourhood, district, region, nation, continent, and ultimately to the human race” (Anholt, 2010, p. 157). The tremendous significance of the places we call home makes any challenge to the security or stability of place identity particularly critical. “To be without a place of one's own - persona non locata - is to be almost non-existent” (Gieryn, 2000). And now it seems, as we enter a new age, as Marshall McLuhan said prophetically in 1967, “The old civic, state, and national groupings have become unworkable. Nothing can be further from the spirit of the new technology than ‘a place for everything and everything in its place.’ You can’t go home again” (McLuhan & Fiore, 1967, p.16).

194


CHAPTER 14 Context, Identity and Architectural Design Thinking. Álvaro Siza’s ‘Bairro da Malagueira’ Jorge Spencer and Nuno Miguel Seabra* Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Lisbon, Rua Sá Nogueira, 1300 Lisboa, Portugal Abstract: This paper aims to explore the potential of context for architectural design thinking based in a recent Portuguese reality. Departing from a particular case in Portuguese practice – Álvaro Siza ‘Bairro da Malagueira’ –, it will observe a process where context is an operative asset of the design process. This reflection is established in the process of ‘defamiliarization’ (Shklovsky, 1990), considering the interpretation model suggested by ‘Critical Regionalism’, as described by Tzonis and Lefaivre (1986, p. 279). As a ‘measurement’ device, this process serves to (re)open the debate about the pertinence of cultural and physical context to the architectural design process, and contributes in establishing a place identity.

Keywords: Identity, context, design thinking, critical regionalism, portuguese architecture, bairro da malagueira. INTRODUCTION Considering the growing phenomenon of universalization (Ricouer, 1965), commonly known as globalization, it becomes clear that in a recent architectural production, it arises a tendency to dissolve historical, cultural, regional and local references. An apparently characteristic of this is that placelessness and the loss of place identity are overvalued. However, these themes are not new to architecture, for they have been revealed and discussed through the debate between ‘Universal culture’ and ‘Regional culture’. This debate emerged in the mid-fifties of the last century while revising the Modernist paradigms that were valid until then. Among other things, this debate exposed an interest in ‘reality’, considering it as an operative substance for the process of designing. In the first part, this paper briefly explores the possibility of establishing a place identity by showing the direct and intimate relation of architectural design thinking with the peculiarities of a ‘reality’ – ‘reality’, is here understood as a cultural and physical (or geographical) context. In the second part, the paper investigates the singularity of some contemporary works by Portuguese architects, to whom is credited a sensitivity project methodology, capable to (re)define a place identity. The case study chosen to demonstrate this distinctiveness is Álvaro Siza’s ‘Bairro da Malagueira’. These two complementary parts intend to reopen the discussion about the operative potential of context in architectural design thinking, and, through this, understand the vitality of a design process in establishing a place identity. IDENTITY, ‘DEFAMILIARIZATION’ AND ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN THINKING It’s important to note that ”(…) the notion of Identity [is] not as a static system or closed system, but as impregnated by the local culture, changing over time and allowing critically evaluated influences from outside” (Moraes Zarzar, 2004, p. 2). As concisely described by Moraes Zarzar (2004, p. 3), “(…) Manuel Castells names three approaches towards Identity: “legitimizing identity”, “resistance identity” and “project identity”. If, on the one hand, “legitimizing identity” is an approach “introduced by the dominant *Address correspondence to Nuno Miguel Seabra: Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Lisbon, Rua Sá Nogueira, 1300 Lisboa, Portugal. Email:[email protected] Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Context, Identity and Architectural Design Thinking


institutions of society to extend and rationalize their domination vis à vis social actors”, then on the other hand, “resistance identity” is “generated by those actors who are in positions/conditions devalued and/or stigmatized by the logic of domination, thus building trenches of resistance and survival on the basis of principles different from, or opposed to, those permeating the institutions of society” (Castells 1997, p. 8). (…) According to Castells, a “project identity” becomes real “when social actors, on the basis of whatever cultural materials are available to them, build a new identity that redefines their position in society and, by so doing, seek the transformation of overall social structure” (Castells 1997, p. 8)”. These notions, provided by Castells, are relevant for our theoretical exploration, and can be applied to architecture through the relation between design thinking and the peculiarities of ‘reality’. While looking for a possible identity in architectural design thinking, this paper aims to explore the theoretical approach of ‘Critical Regionalism’1 (Tzonis and Lefaivre, 1981) by considering a particular case in contemporary Portuguese Architecture practice. ‘Critical Regionalism’ “(…) selects [the] regional elements for their potential to act as support, physical or conceptual of human contact and community what may be called as ‘place defining’ elements and incorporate them ‘strangely’ rather than ‘familiarly’. In other words it makes them appear distant, hard to grasp, difficult even disturbing. It frames as if it were a sense of place in a strange sense of displacement. It disrupts the sentimental ‘embrace’ between buildings and their consumers, ‘de-automatizing’ perception and thus ‘pricking the conscious’ (…)” (Tzonis & Lefaivre, 1990 cit in Nesbit, 1996, p. 489). In this approach, architecture design thinking should also refer to the notion of self-reflection towards an identity construction. This self-reflective function is executed through the method of ‘defamiliarization’2, contrasting with the Romantic regionalism of the ‘familiarization’ method (Tzonis & Lefaivre, 1990 cit in Nesbit, 1996, p. 489). Tzonis and Lefaivre“(…) discuss the notion of Identity and the modernist technique of defamiliarization as a mechanism to arrive at an idea of Identity in design that was critically open to the import of worldwide elements (Tzonis & Lefaivre, 1996) and I explored the idea of how this kind of technique would also help us to achieve a variety of high standard worldviews against the homogenization that globalization is bringing to us” (Moraes Zarzar, 2005, p. 4). They argue that in order to achieve a (critical) identity “(…) architects should critically consider the use, the potentiality of the place [‘reality’] (including cultural and political backgrounds) as well as the use of products of globalization (including new technologies and new materials)” (Moraes Zarzar, 2007, p. 1). Moraes Zarzar (2007, p. 3) also notes that:“(…)“reinventing” of a “place” seems to be linked to Castells’ “project identity”, which critically refers to continuation (local potential) and change (new technologies, new materials, products of globalization); to the homely and unhomely”. Tzonis and Lefaivre explore V. Shklovskys (1990) modernist technique of “[d]efamiliarization [that] is at the heart of what distinguishes critical regionalism from other forms of regionalism and its capability to create a renewed versus an atavistic, sense of place in our time” (…) “The critical approach of contemporary regionalist architecture reacts against this explosion of regionalist counterfeit setting [as used in Romantic regionalism] by employing defamiliarization. Critical regionalism is interested in specific elements from the region, those that have acted as agents of contact and community, the place-defining

1

The term 'Critical Regionalism' appears for the first time in “The Grid and the Pathway:An Introduction to the Work of Dimitris and Susana Antonakakis” byAlexander Tzonis e da Liane Lefaivre in the year 1981. Years later, the term 'Critical Regionalism’ reappears in the text “Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six points for an architecture of resistance" (1983), by Kenneth Frampton. Following Tzonis and Lefaivre investigations, Kenneth Frampton mediatize it in Modern Architecture, a critical history (2nd edition, 1985). 2 In Shklovsky (‘defamiliarization’ procedure) “[t]he primary aim of literature in thus foregrounding its linguistic medium, as Victor Shklovsky put it in an influential formulation, is to estrange or defamiliarize; that is, by disrupting the modes of ordinary linguistic discourse, literature "makes strange" the world of everyday perception and renews the reader's lost capacity for fresh sensation. (In the Biographia Literaria, 1817, Samuel Taylor Coleridge had long before described the "prime merit" of a literary genius to be the representation of "familiar objects" so as to evoke "freshness of sensation"; but whereas the Romantic critic had stressed the author's ability to express a fresh mode of experiencing the world, the formalist stresses the function of purely literary devices to produce the effect of freshness in the reader's experience of a literary work.) The foregrounded properties, or "artistic devices," which estrange poetic language are often described as "deviations" from ordinary language.” (Abrams, 1993, p. 102). Also see: Shklovsky, Viktor, Art as Device, Theory of Prose, Dalkey Archive Press, Illinois, 1990.


Spencer and Seabra

elements, and incorporates them ‘strangely’, rather than familiarly, it makes them appear strange, distant, difficult even disturbing. It disrupts the sentimental ‘embracing’ between buildings and their consumers and instead makes an attempt at ‘pricking the conscience’. To put it in more traditional terms, the critical approach reintroduces ‘meaning’ in addition to ‘feeling’ in people’s view of the world” (Tzonis & Lefaivre, 2001, pp. 8-9). In this sense, “[v]ia defamiliarization architects can differentiate their work, and prick the consciousness of the dweller by provoking a dialog with him/her via a reflection that the dweller is invited to identify the known from the unknown. The dweller remains alert to the changes, to the disadvantages and advantages of the modern society” (Moraes Zarzar, 2007, p. 1). Based on the poetic process of ‘defamiliarization’ (Shklovsky, 1990), Tzonis and Lefaivre (1986) suggested, three different approaches for criticism: ‘Citationism’, ‘Syncretism’ and the use of fragments in architectural ‘Metastatement’ (Tzonis & Lefaivre, 1986, pp. 279-281). ‘Defamiliarization’ can be considered as “(…) a device to be used for a critical regionalism where local potentialities are allied to a critical import of products/plans of globalization. The local potentialities are then recollected in an unfamiliar and not in a picturesque or kitsch way (Tzonis & Lefaivre, 1990; Tzonis & Lefaivre, 1996; Tzonis & Lefaivre, 2001)”, and “(…) defamiliarization could be used as a technique to promote identity”(Moraes Zarzar, 2004, p. 5). The first one, ‘Citationism’ can be understood when the “(…) architect gives the viewer the sense of familiarity or over-familiarity. It is an approach that, accordingly, alienates the dweller from the reality of living in current modern societies, in particular in the metropolis. A citationist approach alienates because it does not prick the conscience of the dweller. It avoids confrontation and tries to promote a sentimental embracing between the building and the consumer, a relation that is broken in modernity” (Moraes Zarzar, 2004, p. 5). The other two approaches can be“(…) fragments of physical precedents [physical context] or conceptual precedents [cultural context] are brought to the new design. By defamiliarization, the fragment may mutate and be recombined with different elements or in a different domain producing a sense of estrangement. The intention is to provoke in the viewer a kind of dialog” (Moraes Zarzar, 2004, p. 5). While taking a closer look to this interpretation model, its importance becomes evident to understand the potential of how context operates in an architectural design process and, through this, to understand the vitality of a design process to establish a place identity. The ‘defamiliarization’ procedure, as a ‘measurement’ device, will allow to understand, and try to clarify, the leading role of context as an operative aspect relevant to the architectural design thinking process. In this sense, the possibility of establishing a (critical) architectural design thinking – as a participated and reflexive process, founded in ‘reality’, or in context – can (re)uncover the possibility of a “project identity” and, by that, unveil a place identity. Thus, “[d]efamiliarization, in the sense it is used in Critical Regionalism, may be seen as contributing to a “critical” identity that brings together for the dweller his local cultural values and the world-wide process of modernization” (Moraes Zarzar, 2004, p. 5). Physical Context, Cultural Context Nowadays “[the] reality seems to have escaped to the architectural practice, and the architectural practice deserted the reality”3 (Freitag, 2004, p.12). Paradoxically, architectural practice and production face, a more and more noisy silence in the dialogue established with ‘reality’ and, consequently, with the context where it is raised. “Since the beginning of the nineties, in the whole world buildings have been constructed more and more without any attachment to its context, in a movement for the alienation of the buildings. For this architecture, environs do not constitute a factor of legitimation nor a factor of inspiration, being that these derive from what exists in the interior of the building, in its program”4 (Ibelings, 1998, p. 88). In our

3

Translation from text in Portuguese: “[a] realidade parece ter escapado à arquitectura, e a arquitectura desertado a realidade” (Freitag, 2004, p.12). 4 Translation from text in Portuguese: “Desde os princípios dos anos noventa, em todo o mundo, cada vez mais edifícios se construíram sem qualquer apego ao seu contexto, num movimento para a alienação dos edifícios. Para esta arquitectura, as imediações não constituem um factor de legitimação nem um factor de inspiração, sendo que estes derivam do que existe no interior do edifício, no seu programa” (Ibelings, 1998, p. 88).


209

CHAPTER 15 Wither Genius Loci?: The City, Urban Fabric and Identity in Perth, Western Australia Felicity Morel-Edniebrown* Department of Humanities, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Department of Planning, Perth, Western Australia Abstract: In the face of global interconnectivity where homogenization of culture is endemic, what price individuality and sense of the authentic? While commercial corporate identity is rampant, showing the same branding in Prague as in Pittsburgh, where stands the differentiated meaning of cities and what creates their sense of individuality? This paper will argue that a sustainable and culturally enriched engagement with place primarily comes from understanding the context of the place — its history, its layered meanings and the contexts that individuals draw from their understandings of their physical environment, mediated by their past experience. It will propose that ‘sense of place’ (‘genius loci’) is the physical manifestation of authenticity and outline a simple model for understanding authenticity. It will draw upon examples from Perth, Western Australia to show how the topography and interpretation of the city’s historical connection to water still is a defining factor for city development and how memories of the built environment in the inner city have strongly influenced residents’ sense of place and, by extension, their sense of self.

Keywords: Genius loci, sense of place, historical cities, modern cities, interpretation, authenticity, heritage, built environment. INTRODUCTION This paper will background different aspects of sense of place and identity in an urban environment and, in particular, look at the importance of sense of place in city identity and self definition.1 It will show that aspects of city development that seek to draw on sense of place as a point of differentiation but fail to embrace authenticity do not respond well to opportunities in the city fabric. It will explore both the micro experience of how the built environment can create a sense of identity and a sense of place in individuals; and how imagery of a city can embed into the broader consciousness a sense of place of city which then becomes a metaphor for that which makes the city special and unique. Analysis of the importance of sense of place on self identity was based upon empirical observation of the built environment and the use of heritage fabric and interpretation in the city, and, by looking at historical images of the use of the city of Perth as a backdrop to cultural activities and by reviewing representations of the city itself since 1838. Although Perth as been used in this paper, these components — extant heritage fabric, photographic records, the continuity of depictions of the city over time and the model of authenticity — have been chosen because similar elements are easily identified in different cities and, thus, the value of them as examples remains relatively stable no matter which urban area is studied. As such they are a methodology for investigating the genius loci in any city. The paper is written in three parts a narrative style, wherein each part draws its foundation from that preceding it. As such it seeks to neither to present case studies per se nor to debate others theses but to synthesize a wide range of literature supplemented by images and mapping. It is structured to flow from a

*Address correspondence to Felicity Morel-Edniebrowu: Department of Humanities, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Western Australia, Department of Planning, Perth, Western Australia. Email: [email protected] 1 For the purposes of this paper, Sense of Place and genius loci will be used as interchangeable terms. Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers


Felicity Morel-Edniebrown

broad global concept of genius loci as applied to cities; to a discussion of the components of a sense of place in a city and why that is important; to intrinsically underpins sense of place. The first section — Genius loci and cities — deals with the context of genius loci in cities and how the concept of a city identity has grown over time and changed to suit economic and political purposes. The second section — Authenticity analysis for and of a sense of place — looks at Authenticity as a concept and provide a model showing how it is a collation of several components commonly referred to when assessing sense of place. The third section — Sense of place and Perth — gives an analysis of the visual images of Perth and how they contribute to the city’s sense of place. GENIUS LOCI AND CITIES Historical Cities In classical culture, genius loci was a distinctive spirit which occupied and protected a particular location. Often assumed to have fantastical forms, fear of encountering such a spirit was used to protect the place, for example, the minotaur on Knossos or the bunyip or wagyl in an Australian watercourse. Its spiritual qualities were reinforced by symbol and legend and, over time, these messages coalesced to form a distinctive impression of a place and were accepted as the norm even if that character was projected onto it by those external to it (Relph, 1976). During the Enlightenment, the qualities of the ‘spirit’ of a place had developed a more benign aspect and began to mean the distinctive character or atmosphere of a place with reference to the impression that it made on the mind (or senses), which qualities were used to contextualize and remember it — viz., a ‘sense of place’. By the twentieth century, existentialist discussions defined sense of place as an internalized concept mediated by the engagement of mind, memory, recollection and thought (Sartre, 1943/1969, 1960/1976). When town planner Jane Jacobs (1961/1962) began to question the basis of urban renewal in New York, her analysis was intimately connected to sense of place. In her view, the success or failure of urban interaction was not attendant upon beautiful architecture or designed civic spaces but as a result of the 'ownership' and occupation of spaces by people and their daily interactions and differences. The physical fabric of the city was an essential part of this interaction as older areas — compact, densely built with narrow streets and diverse building types — provided multiple and varied areas for human interaction. In return, people felt passionate about ‘their’ districts and strongly identified with place as nurturing their culture and daily lives. Analyzing how the built environment supported these diverse activities and people’s personal connection to it, Gordon Cullen (1961/1971) suggested that for people to be psychologically influenced by their surroundings there needed to be a sense of enclosure in the city. He described the structure of an ideal place as embodying a sense of arrival to, and departure from, a defined space. This sense of containment engendered an emotional response of safety and protection and created an emotional attachment which, effectively, personalized the space. Cullen called it 'Hereness', as opposed to 'Thereness' and it was largely, he argued, identifiable by a sense of being within 'It': 'I am in IT or above IT or below IT, I am outside IT, I am enclosed or I am exposed' (1961/1971, p. 29, p. 35). This concept was later developed further by Edward Relph and his investigations of ‘insideness’ and ‘outsideness’ (1976) which mirrored in part Cullen’s 'hereness', and 'thereness'. The resulting sense of containment and security gave a sense of that which was without, the corollary of which was a sense of what was within — effectively a ‘sense of place’2. By the 1970s, sense of place had taken on a distinctly geographic tone. In 1972, geographer George Seddon wrote A Sense of Place about Perth in Western Australia (1972). A ground breaking study which

2 Various other scholarly disciplines were also writing extensively on place/space dialectic, place definition, place attachment, aesthetics and the geographic extent to which a concept of ‘place’ could be applied (Castells, 1983; Dyos, 1968; Hay, 1998; Lefebvre, 1974/1985, 1996; Massey, 1993; Mumford, 1938, 1961; Relph, 1976; Sartre, 1943/1969, 1960/1976; Soja, 1989; Twigger-Ross & Uzzell, 1996).

Wither Genius Loci?


‘foregrounded the landscape as an ecological structure for, and a cultural influence on, the city’ (Weller, 2009, p. 43), the term ‘sense of place’ promptly entered the lexicon of city analysis world-wide. Led by Seddon’s study, other geographers (Relph, 1976; Tuan, 1977) began to explore the concept of space as having an intrinsic meaning in the formation of the human experience of place and to focus on the intimate relationships that people fashion, reinforce and perceive about the place they experience. Genius loci or 'spirit of place' began to reflect a sense of personalized recollection and engagement with a geographic location and to be used interchangeably with 'sense of place', 'sense of belonging' and, increasingly, ‘place identity’ (Proshansky, 1978, p. 15). In 1977, Yi-Fu Tuan wrote that it was familiarity with the physical city and surrounding terrain that made an individual connect with it intimately (1977, p. 175-176). This connection built on a person’s understanding and remembrance of spatiality throughout their lives (Tuan, 1977, 72-73), but was brought into particular focus in the city which ‘was and is an elaborate conglomeration of innumerable stages for the performance of private and semi-public dramas’ (Tuan, 1977, 173-174). These multiple and competing activities echoed philosopher Lewis Mumford’s assessment that the city was a stage which: 'itself provides a theatre for the spontaneous encounters and challenges and embraces of daily life' (1961, p. 653). However, where Mumford saw the city on a giant scale: 'the City is the most concrete, the most lasting, and the most inspiring expression of man's social genius' (1961, frontispiece), Tuan proposed that ‘identity of place was achieved by dramatizing the aspirations, needs, and functional rhythms of personal and group life’ (1977, p. 178). He saw people’s activities as primarily domestic in scale, neither grand in gesture nor civic in focus, and predominantly happening at the periphery of the city rather than centrally located. His view of the significance of place in the city was overlaid with an intimacy of being that Mumford’s lacked, and was more democratic. Crucially, it was not the city giving meaning to the actions but the actions giving meaning to the city — through highly personal interactions, places assumed meaning and significance for individuals and, by extension, the broader community. As such a sense of place was critical to an understanding of the behavior of people in urban settings because self definition was intimately connected to their experience of particular built environments. The localized, personalized important of place and its potential to influence an individual’s ‘conscious and unconscious ideas, beliefs, preferences, feelings, values, goals, and behavioral tendencies and skills’ was subsequently termed ‘place identity’ (Proshansky, 1978, 155). This was the beginning of a new paradigm. It was the city as a democratic entity subservient to the people; the antithesis of the city as symbol (Kostof, 1991, p. 15ff, Chapter 12; Tuan, 1977, p. 173). Within the symbolic city, the people of the city were subservient to the constructed environment. They occupied its spaces but the spaces were shaped to reflect wealth or influence. Long-term social and political cohesion was achieved by the engagement of the populace in significant spaces where people could gather to become part of a unified whole, and participate in ways that drew on their commonality rather than their differences. Cultural expositions, celebrations, festivals, religious rites and competitions gave the populace both entertainment and a sense of being one community. Such spaces — built by the aristocracy — reflected the historical time of their creation: either formed by the juxtaposition of important buildings, for example, the Piazza del Campo in Siena, Piazza della Santissima Annunziata in Florence, the Piazza della Cisterna in San Gimignano or, to showcase the talents and wealth of the ruling classes, for example, La Plaza Mayor/Plaza del Arrabal in Madrid, the Place des Vosges in Paris, the Piazza del Campidoglio in Rome. These were places for the gathering of the populace, for pomp and circumstance and festivities; spectacle and engagement across all strata of society; the places where people gathered to be entertained, to ogle others, to engage in conversations, flirtations and transactions. The rules and codes of conduct, if not expressly stated, were tacitly understood — a city full of strangers (Landry, 2006) acted as a single unit, occupying different levels of society but providing a comprehensible unity which underpinned civic stability by regular interaction. Physically conducive to mingling, these places allowed infinite possibilities for personal interaction, investigation, interpretation and interpolation. They became ‘place[s] of transformations and appropriations…constantly enriched by new attributes’ (De Certeau, 2002, p. 95) and one in which the sum of the whole was greater than its parts (Venturi, 1977, p. 88). Over time, these places became synonymous with the human experience of the city and culture and defined its sense of itself.

228


Index Accessibility, 81, 94, 96, 108, 115, 127, 155, Activities, 16, 24, 37, 48- 50, 52, 55, 58-60, 63, 65, 70-71, 74-75, 79, 81, 84, 94-95, 98, 100, 102, 104-105, 110, 112, 120-127, 131, 133, 136, 143, 158, 166, 177, 202, 209-211, 216-218 Aesthetic Satisfaction, 147, 155, 156, 159 Alexander, Christopher 13,14,17,18,29,121,195 Anxiety, 79,164,166,170,171,172,173,189 Appropriation, 49, 55, 59, 96, 99,100,101,104, 211 Architectural design thinking, 194, 195, 196, 198, 199, 205 Attachment (see also place attachment)- 3, 10, 13, 16-17, 22-23, 32,36-37, 42, 55, 57, 60, 64-65, 70, 73, 79-84, 87-88, 92-93, 95, 99, 104-105, 107-116, 122, 125, 133-136, 147, 184, 196, 210, 218. Authenticity, 72, 206, 209-210, 215-216, 218-220, 224 Bachelard (Gaston) 22-23, 27-28, 30-32, 217. Bairro da Malagueira (see also Siza) 194, 199, 201, 205-206. Behavior pattern, 120, 126, 130 Behaviour mapping, 120, 122-123, 125, Belonging, 5, 13, 15-17, 22-26, 32, 35, 36-38, 42-44, 64-65, 68, 73-76, 80, 82-83, 96, 105, 122, 133, 139, 147-149, 153-154, 156, 158-159, 163-166, 170-173, 177, 180, 183, 190, 211, 215, 218 Bennett (J.G.) 3-10, 13, 15, 17. Built environment, 48-49, 53, 63-71, 73, 75-76, 85, 93, 105, 109, 115-116, 121, 176, 182, 184, 187, 191, 209-211, 214218 Celebrations, 101-102, 110, 136-137, 160, 166, 186, 211 City, 10-15, 18, 35, 39, 41-44, 47-53, 60, 65-75, 81, 83, 85, 93-94, 97, 99-100, 103, 105, 111, 121, 123-127, 131, 134, 149, 164, 168-170, 177-178, 182, 185, 188, 201-202, 206, 209-228 Cognitive mapping – 122, 126 Cognitive map – 50, 54, 60, 123, 125 Community, 17, 23, 48-53, 56, 59, 72-74, 79, 80, 94-105, 107, 116, 121-122, 133,-135, 139, 142, 146, 148-151, 156, 158-160, 163-173, 176-178, 180, 183, 185-186, 188-190, 195, 211, 214-218 Continuity (see also descontinuity) 3, 8, 31, 54, 55, 63-66, 70, 72, 74-76, 80, 83-84, 87, 108, 121, 133, 135, 137, 140, 147, 151-152, 156, 159, 184, 189, 198, 209, 216, 218, 220. Control – 4, 49, 70, 80, 83, 95, 99-100, 102, 104, 147-148, 156, 160, 166, 171, 178-179, 182-183, 185. Critical regionalism – 187-189, 194-197, 199, 207. Cultural memory, 63-65, 68-70, 75. Cultural metaphors, 146, 148-150, 152, 154-156, 159-160. Culture, 17, 22-23, 26, 30, 32, 53, 64, 66, 72-73, 75, 96, 108, 110, 121-122, 134, 146, 148, 150-158, 169, 170, 179-190, 194, 197-198, 209-216, 224 Defamiliarization, 194-199, 204-207 Dependence (place) 64, 107-116, 146. Descontinuity (see also Continuity) - 55, 63. Design thinking – 194-199, 205-206. Discrimination - 35, 43-33, 171. Distinctiveness – 22, 25, 31, 37-39, 43, 64, 80, 120, 123, 143, 147, 152-153, 156, 159, 176-177, 179, 181, 194, 218. Ecology – 133-134, 140-141-143, 223. Economic Links – 64, 148, 157-159. Elder – 107-109, 111-117, 126. Essential Human Qualities – 22-23, 25, 28, 31-32. Genealogical Links – 148, 157-159 Genius loci – 3, 4, 10-17, 209-212, 214, 224 Gentrification – 53, 63, 68, 71, 73-75, 148-149 Globalization – 32, 66, 75, 78, 81, 176, 178-185, 187-191, 194-196, 206-207 Group dimension - 43 Heritage – 48, 52, 63, 66, 68, 70-73, 75, 84, 135, 148-149, 151-152, 157, 159-160, 187, 189, 209, 213, 216, 218-220 Hernan Casakin and Fátima Bernardo (Eds) All rights reserved-© 2012 Bentham Science Publishers

Index


Hindu – 26, 133, 136-142, 180 Historic built environment – 64-66, 68 Historic Landscape – 78, 81, 84-86, 88 Historic urban environment – 63, 65-67, 71, 74-75, 79, 80, 87 Historical Citeis - 210 Homogeneity, 37, 40-41, 187-188 Human nature, 22-23, 25-32 Human need, 22-23, 26-32, 43, 147-148, 165, 178 Identification, 16, 24, 37-39, 41-43, 63, 75, 79-80, 86, 88, 94, 104, 142, 147-148, 152, 154, 160, 176-178, 199, 218 Immigrant, 110-111, 133, 135-137, 139-143, 148-149, 157, 163-166, 168-173 Immigration, 111, 163-164, 166, 168-169, 172-173 Informal settlement – 92-97, 99, 101, 103-105 Insecurity (see also security), 79, 164 Intergroup differentiation, 40 Intergroup relationships, 35, 37-38 Kahn, Louis, 22-23, 28-33 Landscape, 5, 10-11, 47-49, 51, 60, 78-81, 84-88, 121-122, 134-136, 140, 142-143, 163, 165, 168, 186, 188, 198, 201, 211, 218, 220-223 Landscape preference, 78-79, 81, 86-87 Land uses, 10, 131 Latino, 110, 148, 150, 155, 163-164, 168-171. Links to Special Events, 158, 160 Living Environments, 53-56, 185 Local identity, 52, 121, 163-166, 168-170, 184, 187, 189 Malagueira, 194, 199-203, 205-207 Maslow (theory) 26, 147-148, 150, 160. Meaning, 3, 4, 10, 11, 16, 18, 23-28, 30-33, 37-38, 47-50, 59, 60, 64, 66, 75, 78-81, 85, 86, 87, 92, 96, 99, 101, 105, 107, 114-115, 120, 122, 131, 133-134, 136, 140-142, 147-148, 155-156, 159, 171, 178, 180, 184, 190, 196, 209, 211, 214-216, 218-220, 224 Meaningful spaces (or places), 10, 47, 53, 55-56, 59, 64, 72, 75, 78-81, 133, 148, 165, 179, 183, 211, 224 Memory, 24, 27-28, 30, 50, 63-66, 68-76, 96, 133, 135, 137, 141-142, 178, 199, 205 Metaphors, 6, 11, 146, 148-156, 159-160, 189, 209 Mexicans, 146, 148-150, 154, 156- 160, 168 Mobility, 17, 36, 42, 48, 53, 78-83, 87, 107, 110, 129, 189, 212 Modern Citeis, 209, 212 Modernism, 12, 41, 66-67, 69-72, 121, 176, 183- 191, 195-196 Modern movement, 183 Modern Architecture, 27, 72, 190, 195, 199, 204 multi-ethnic community, 163, Multilayer approach, 129, 131, Natural human needs, 22-23, 26-29, 31-32 Nature, 6, 78, 86, 133-134, 140, 142-143, 151-160 Neighborhood, 10, 13, 15-16, 47-51, 53, 55-60, 107-117, 134-135, 146, 149-151, 153-154, 157, 159, 164, 166-173, 200, 202 Norberg-Schulz, 11, 24, 29, 31, 133 Open spaces, 14, 48, 92-105, 120, 122-125, 127, 221 People-environment relationship, 4 People-place triad, 10, 12 Perceptual dimension, 120, 122, 125-126, 128, 131 Phenomenology, 3-5, 13, 22-23, 27, 33 Phenomenology of place, 3-4 Physical form, 25, 120-123, 125 Place as lifeworld, 3 Place attachment (see also attachment) 3, 16, 36-37, 42, 64-65, 73, 80-83, 87, 107-116, 122, 125, 135, 147, 210, 218.


Casakin and Bernardo

Place creation, 3, 12, 14-16, 18 Place dependence, 64, 107-116, 146. Place event, 18 Place identity, 3, 6, 7, 10, 12-13, 15-18, 22-23, 25, 31, 35-44, 48, 60, 63-69, 71, 75-76, 78-88, 96, 104-105, 107-117, 120-122, 125-126, 128, 130, 131, 133-143, 146-151, 160, 163-165, 176, 178, 190, 194, 196-199, 204, 206-207, 211, 216, 224 Place identity, definition, 147 Place Identity, predictors 107, 111, 114, 117, 148 Place identity, principles, 146, 160 Place intensification, 3, 12, 14, 15, 18 Place making, 3, 5, 12, 96, 143 Place meaning (see meaningful spaces or places) Place quality, 107-116 Place realization, 3, 12, 15, Place release, 3, 12, 15, 17 Place Scale, 10, 40-43, 47, 50-51, 54-55, 59, 67, 74, 82-83, 87, 93, 109, 111, 121-122, 200-201, 204-205, 211-214, 219 Portuguese architecture, 194-195, 198 Positive environmental psychology, 78, 80-81, 84 Postmodern, 47-48, 53, 219 Proshansky, 35, 36-37, 64, 78, 80-81, 96, 105, 110, 133, 143, 146-147, 165, 211 Public perception, 129, 131 Public space, 13, 47-49, 54, 57, 59, 65, 70, 79, 81, 94, 96, 99, 110, 120, 166, 169, 171, 214, 218 Regeneration, 47, 58, 124 Religion, 26, 64-65, 112, 133-139, 143, 160 Religious beliefs, 101 Renewal, 15, 36, 67, 73-75, 112, 210, 213 Renovation, 63, 65-88 Residential mobility, 36, 78-83, 87 Residents, 17, 35-36, 38-42, 47-51, 53-60, 74, 85-86, 97, 107, 109-112, 115-116, 121, 126, 139, 147-149, 163-173, 185, 189, 203, 209 Restorative environments, 78-79, 82, 84, 88 Restorative Properties, 84-85, 88 Restorativeness, 78, 81, 84-85, 87 Revitalization, 47-53, 59-60, 63, 67-68, 74-75, 149, 222 Religious place identity, 133-135, 137, 139-140, 142-143 Sacred, 11, 133-143, 160 Salience, 41 Scale (see place scale) Security (see also insecurity) 28, 32, 99, 104, 109, 117, 147-148, 156, 160, 178, 210 Self Categorization Theory, 37-38 Self Categorization, 35, 37-38, 40-41, 44, 80 Self-efficacy, 80, 82, 147, 154-156, 159 Self-esteem, 80, 147, 150-151, 156, 159 Sense of place, 6, 11, 13, 23-25, 47, 64-65, 68, 80-81, 108-109, 121, 126, 130, 135, 139, 146-147, 163-166, 195, 209212, 215-225 Servicescapes, 146, 148-150, 153-156, 158-160 Siza, Alvaro, 194, 199-206. Social construction of space, 93, 95-96 Social Identity Theory, 35, 37-38, 80, 177 Social links to places, 156, 160 Spatial Representations, 60, 86 Spiritual significance, 157-158 Suburban identity, 163 Suburban environments, 12

Place identity

Recommend Documents