Urban Economics and Planning

Urban Economics and Planning

Investigating the Effect of the Role of Actors in Placemaking and Shaping Place Attachment (Case Study: Islamshahr)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Zeinab Adeli 1
Samira Roshanaie 2
Mohammad Reza Yazdanpanah Shahabadi 3
1 Assistant Professor. Department of Urban Planning and Design, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin.
2 Master of Urban and Regional Planning, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran.
3 Department of Urban Planning and Design, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Kharazmi University, Tehran
10.22034/uep.2022.368707.1300
Abstract
 Introductoin
Rapid population growth and the subsequent urbanization process require the expansion of cities. In this regard, the spatial expansion patterns of cities have been formed in different ways. Some of these developments are based on the official policy and planning system and some are unplanned because of the growth of rural cores. Some of them result from suburban growth or the rapid growth of small towns around big cities. The supreme goal in these development patterns is the formation of a mutual relationship between man and man-made space, the formation of meaning in space, and turning it into a place. In recent years, many studies have been conducted on places and the way to interact with them. These researches seek to understand and explain the mutual relationship between people and places. Place attachment, as a multi-dimensional and interdisciplinary concept that seeks to examine the emotional bond between a person and a place, is one of the important axes of these studies. Different patterns of place formation have been the result of different actors and their diverse forms of action. These actors can be identified and investigated in different layers of power in the city, and this will lead to different results in the production of place. The main problem of this research is to investigate the way the actions of the actors in the place's formation affect the sense of place attachment. Based on this, the main question of this research is: "How does the interaction of actors in the production of a settlement affect the level of sense of place attachment and the formation of place?"
Materials and Methods
In this article, using the qualitative-quantitative method, the level of place attachment (as the main indicator in the formation of the place) in the neighborhoods of Eslamshahr city, whose formation was the result of the role-playing of various actors, has been investigated. The level of actors' role in the production of space was determined by examining written documents; including books and documents related to Eslamshahr, such as comprehensive and detailed plans, and interviewing city managers, experts, and informants to explore oral memory; for knowing the hidden dimensions of the formation of the investigated neighborhoods, and converting this information into a map. Therefore, the approach of this part of the research is qualitative. In this process, an interview was arranged according to the goals and needs, using the snowball technique. Based on this, in-depth interviews were conducted with 24 people. This number of interviews was conducted based on theoretical persuasion.
After examining the role of actors and their level of participation in the production of neighborhoods, three types of neighborhoods were identified. Neighborhoods with the origin of official action - planning system, neighborhoods with the origin of non-official action - people-based, and neighborhoods with the origin of a combination of activists (dominance with a specific actor is not seen). Based on the role of the activists, the neighborhoods of the city were categorized, and finally, six neighborhoods of Allahu Akbar, Zia Abad (representing neighborhoods with non-official-people origins), Bagh Faiz, Qasim Abad (representing neighborhoods with mixed origins), Vavan and Qamiyeh (as representative of the localities with the official origin-planning system) were selected to check the hypotheses of the research. Since this research examines the existence of a meaningful relationship between the variable of place attachment and the role and level of participation of actors in the production of target neighborhoods (the quantitative part of the research), the research is an applied type based on the Kruskal Wallis Test. The analysis was done by SPSS software. A questionnaire was used to collect the required information about the residents' sense of place attachment. The statistical population of this research is all the residents of the selected neighborhoods of Eslamshahr city. The sample size for each category of neighborhoods was calculated using Cochran's formula and distributed based on the population ratio of each neighborhood in the respective category.The questionnaire was prepared in the form of a five-point Likert scale and was given to 12 experts to check its content validity. Their correction suggestions were applied to the questionnaire and then the Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated. The CVI index was higher than 0.79 for all questions, which indicates acceptable content validity of the questionnaire. To check the reliability of the questionnaire, Cronbach's alpha coefficient was calculated, which was more than 0.7 for all the criteria, and indicated an acceptable level of reliability of the questionnaire. Then, through the Kruskal-Wallis test, the significance level of the difference in the mean dimensions of place attachment was estimated in the three categories of neighborhoods mentioned above.
Findings
After examining and quantifying the role of actors in the formation of each neighborhood, the place attachment indicators were examined under four categories of individual, perceptual, cognitive, social, and physical criteria. The general situation of the measures of sense of place attachment in neighborhoods with the origin of a combination of activists is noticeably higher than the neighborhoods with purely official or non-official origins. The individual measure of sense of place attachment, which includes two indicators of the duration of residence and type of ownership, has a proper and similar situation in two types of neighborhoods with mixed origins and neighborhoods with non-official origins. While in other neighborhoods, the individual indicator shows less than the average of 3. This can indicate the higher willingness of the residents to continue living in such neighborhoods.The perceptual, and cognitive criterion of neighborhoods with mixed origin has a proper status, with an average of 3.45. While the non-official origin neighborhoods (2.75) and official origin neighborhoods (2.40) have a poor situation. This is about the Lack of elements of identity and a sense of belonging due to non-participation in the construction process in neighborhoods with official origin. Some social indicators in this research include neighborhood bonds, network, and social bonds, civic participation, and formative trust in a concept called social capital. This index is usually high due to the existence of close social ties between residents of neighborhoods with non-official origins. However, the organizational trust index (trust in the municipality, government organizations, and schools) does not have a proper situation in this type of settlement. On the other hand, this index has a proper situation in settlements with mixed origins. This index does not have a good status in neighborhoods with the official origin and the level of all sub-indices, including neighborhood ties, civic participation, network, and social ties, as well as trust (public and organizational) is low in these types of neighborhoods. Physical criteria in mixed-origin neighborhoods have a good status (3.55). Also, in the localities with official origins, due to the formation based on the previous plan, the amount of service per capita is approximately standard and provides a relative level of satisfaction. Of course, the physical and functional diversity in neighborhoods with mixed origins causes higher satisfaction in these neighborhoods than in standard neighborhoods of official origin. Due to the pressure of providing housing in non-official settlements and the lack of appropriateness of services to the population, the physical condition of this settlement is poor. Considering the results of the Kruskal-Wallis test (and the significance level of the test (Sig=0.000), the hypothesis of the harmony of the sense of place attachment index in the sample community is rejected, and as a result, the significance of the difference in the sense of place attachment index in different categories of neighborhoods is proven in terms of the origin of formation.
Conclusion
The results of this research show that there is a significant relationship between place actors and the sense of place attachment. This index is the highest in neighborhoods with mixed origins and the lowest in neighborhoods with official origins. What can be considered a practical result of this research is the effect of the processes followed in the construction of space (procedural dimension) on the final product (content dimension) i.e. the construction of place. The formation of the physical and functional shell alone cannot lead to the transformation of space into place. Moreover, the relative level of services in pre-planned neighborhoods, these neighborhoods have less sense of place attachment than other neighborhoods. Perhaps for this reason, it has become difficult and far-fetched to transform newly built urban spaces such as new cities into lively places where its residents feel a sense of belonging. Therefore, the most important solution to overcome this problem can be to change the existing procedures of planning, designing, and building the space and replace them with collaborative, multifaceted procedures with the presence of different actors. The urban planning system should be able to provide the necessary platform for the participation of various official and non-official actors as well as the free market. Regardless of the objective result of this participation, this process itself will shape the sense of place attachment and cause the space to become a place.
Keywords
Actors
Place
Place Attachment
Planned Settlement
Spontaneous Settlement

Subjects

  1. [1] Daneshpayeh N. Habib F and Toghani S. Explanation of the Process of Sense of Place Formation, in New Urban Development (Case Study: Region No. 4 of Tehran Municipality). National Studies Journal 2017;18(72): 137-155.‏

    [2] Gharakhlou M. Abedini A. The Assessments of Challenges, Problems, and Success of the New Towns: New Town Sahand. MJSP 2009; 13 (1) :165-191. [in Persian]

    [3] Meshkini. A. Solaimani M. S. Azizi H and Zarehpisheh N. Evaluating the degree of goals achievement of New Towns in Iran (A case study of Sadra New Town). Urban Structure and Function Studies 2013; 1(1): 29-41. [in Persian]

    [4] zonooz B. Assessment of Implantation of Urban Plans in Tehran. HAFTSHAHR 2016; 4(53,54): 8-35.

    [5] Ojagh Z. Abbasi-Shavazi M. Public Demography for Narrowing Research-policy Gap in Iran. The International Journal of Humanities, 2022; 29(2): 95-118.‏

    [6] Lefebvre H. From the production of space. In: Theatre and Performance Design. Routledge 2012: 81-84.‏

    [7] Loukaitou-Sideris A. Banerjee T. Downtown urban design. In: Companion to urban design. Routledge 2011: 345-355.‏

    [8] Lewicka M. Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years?. Journal of environmental psychology 2011; 31(3): 207-230.‏

    [9] SCANNELL L. GIFFORD R. Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of environmental psychology 2010; 30(1): 1-10.‏

    [10] AREFI M. Deconstructing placemaking: Needs, opportunities, and assets. Routledge, 2014.‏

    [11] Madanipour A. Public and private spaces of the city. Routledge 2003.‏

    [12] Norberg-Schulz C. The phenomenon of place. In The urban design reader 2013. Routledge: 292-304.

    [13] Canter D. The psychology of place. St Martin'S Press 1977.‏

    [14] Low S.M, Altman I. Place attachment. In: Place attachment. Springer 1992, Boston, MA,.

    [15] Gustafson P. Meanings of place: Everyday experience and theoretical conceptualizations. Journal of environmental psychology 2001; 21(1): 5-16.‏

    [16] Ramkissoon H. Smith L.D.G and Weiler B. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tourism management 2013; 36: 552-566.‏

    [17] Daneshpour S. A. Sepehri Moqaddam M and Charkhchian, M. Explanation to “Place Attachment” And investigation of its effective factors. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi, 2009; 1(38): 37-48.

    [18] Ramkissoon H. Smith L. D. G & Kneebone S. Visitor satisfaction and place attachment in national parks. Tourism Analysis 2014; 19(3): 287-300.

    [19] Adeli, Z. Rafieian M. Residents Desire to Stay in a Place: Evidences from Iran’s New Towns. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development 2018; 11(24): 81-95.

    [20] Swapan M.S.H. Sadeque S and Ashikuzzaman M. "Role of place satisfaction and residents’ ambassadorship behaviours (RAB) on place attachment to city and neighbourhood", Journal of Place Management and Development 2022; 15 (4): 442-459.

    [21] Williams D. R. Stewart W. P & Kruger L. E. The emergence of place-based conservation. In Place-Based Conservation. Springer, Dordrech 2013: 1-17.

    [22] Proshansky H. M. Fabian A. K & Kaminoff, R. Place-identity: Physical world socialization of the self. Journal of environmental psychology 1983; 3(1): 57-83.

    [23] Mesch G. S. Manor O. Social ties, environmental perception, and local attachment. Environment and behavior 1998; 30(4): 504-519.

    [24] Xu Y. Wu D & Chen N. C. Here I belong!: Understanding immigrant descendants’ place attachment and its impact on their community citizenship behaviors in China. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2022; 79: 101743.‏

    [25] Shamai S. Sense of place: An empirical measurement. Geoforum 1991; 22(3): 347-358.

    [26] Hernandez B. Martin A. M. Ruiz C & del Carmen Hidalgo M. The role of place identity and place attachment in breaking environmental protection laws. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2010; 30(3): 281-288.‏

    [27] Bonaiuto M. Aiello A. Perugini M. Bonnes M & Ercolani, A.p. Multidimensional perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment. Journal of environmental psychology 1999; 19(4): 331-352.

    [28] Fleury-Bahi G. Félonneau M. L. & Marchand D. Processes of place identification and residential satisfaction. Environment and Behavior 2008; 40(5), 669-682.‏

    [29] Lalli M. Urban-related identity: Theory, measurement, and empirical findings. Journal of environmental psychology 1992; 12(4): 285-303.‏

    [30] Shamai S. Ilatov Z. Measuring sense of place: Methodological aspects. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie 2005; 96(5): 467-476.‏

    [31] Ringel N. B. Finkelstein J.C. Differentiating neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood attachment among urban residents. Basic and applied social psychology 1991; 12(2): 177-193.‏

    [32] Rajala K. Sorice M. G. Sense of place on the range: Landowner place meanings, place attachment, and well-being in the Southern Great Plains. Rangelands 2021: 22-44.‏

    [33] Brown B. Perkins D. D & Brown G. Place attachment in a revitalizing neighborhood: Individual and block levels of analysis. Journal of environmental psychology 2003; 23(3): 259-271.‏

    [34] Kleit R. G. Manzo L. C. To move or not to move: Relationships to place and relocation choices in HOPE VI. Housing Policy Debate 2006; 17(2): 271-308.‏

    [35] Taylor R. B. Gottfredson S.D and Brower S. "Attachment to place: discriminant validity, and impacts of disorder and diversity", American Journal of Community Psychology 1985; 13: 525-542.

    [36] Kyle G. Graefe A & Manning R. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment in recreational settings. Environment and behavior 2005; 37(2): 153-177.

    [37] de Azevedo A. J. A. Custódio M. J. F & Perna, F. P. A. “Are you happy here?”: the relationship between quality of life and place attachment. Journal of Place Management and Development 2013; 6(2): 102-119.

    [38] Lewicka M. Place attachment, place identity, and place memory: Restoring the forgotten city past. Journal of environmental psychology 2008; 28(3): 209-231.

    [39] Chen N. C. Hall C. M & Prayag G. Sense of place and place attachment in tourism. Routledge 2021.

    [40] Dang L. Seemann A. K. Lindenmeier J & Saliterer I. Explaining civic engagement: The role of neighborhood ties, place attachment, and civic responsibility. Journal of Community Psychology 2022; 50(3): 1736-1755.‏

    [41] Forrest R. Kearns A. Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood. Urban studies 2001, 38(12): 2125-2143.

    [42] Rivlin L. G. The neighborhood, personal identity, and group affiliations. In Neighborhood and community environments, Springer, Boston MA 1987: 1-34.

    [43] Stefaniak A. Bilewicz  M & Lewicka M. The merits of teaching local history: Increased place attachment enhances civic engagement and social trust. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2017; 51: 217-225.

    [44] Ma Z. Guo S. Deng X & Xu D. Place attachment, community trust, and farmer's community participation: Evidence from the hardest-hit areas of Sichuan, China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 2022; 73: 102892.‏

    [45] Harlan S. L. Larsen L. Hackett E. J. Wolf S. Bolin B. Hope D. & Rex T. Neighborhood attachment in urban environments. Annual Sociological Association 2005.

    [46] Fornara F. Bonaiuto M & Bonnes M. Cross-validation of abbreviated perceived residential environment quality (PREQ) and neighborhood attachment (NA) indicators. Environment and Behavior 2010; 42(2): 171-196.

    [47] Sugihara S.  Evans G. W. Place attachment and social support at continuing care retirement communities. Environment and Behavior 2000; 32(3): 400-409.

    [48] Devine-Wright P. Howes Y. Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study. Journal of environmental psychology 2010; 30(3): 271-280.

    [49] Korpela K. M. Ylén M. Tyrväinen L & Silvennoinen H. Stability of self-reported favourite places and place attachment over a 10-month period. Journal of environmental psychology 2009; 29(1): 95-100.‏

    [50] Bonaiuto M, Fornara F & Bonnes M. Indexes of perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in urban environments: a confirmation study on the city of Rome. Landscape and urban planning 2003; 65(1-2): 41-52.

    [51] Dunbar M. D. Examining Place Attachment to the Great Lakes (Doctoral dissertation, Kent State University) 2010.‏

    [52] Oliveira V. Urban morphology: an introduction to the study of the physical form of cities. Springer 2016.

    [53] Kazemian GH. Explaining the relationship between governance structure and urban power with space organization, an attempt to design a model (metropolitan area example) [dissertation]. [Tehran]: Tarbiat Modares University; 2004. 284p.

    [54] Carmona M. The place-shaping continuum: A theory of urban design process. Journal of Urban Design 2014; 19(1): 2-36.‏

    [55] Pacione M. What about people? A critical analysis of urban policy in the United Kingdom. Geography 1990: 193-202.‏

    [56] Fridman Jhon, Empowerment, Black alt,1992.

    [57] Majamaa W. The 4th P-People-in urban development based on Public-Private-People Partnership. Teknillinen korkeakoulu 2008.‏

    [58] Juárez-Galeana L. G. Collaborative public open space design in self-help housing: Minas-Polvorilla, Mexico City. Designing Sustainable Cities in the Developing World 2006; 179.‏

    [59] Peykadeh Consulting Engineers. Detailed Plan of Islamshahr; 2012.

    [60] Statistical Center of Iran. Public Census of Population and Housing 2006. Iran.

    [61] Statistical Center of Iran. Public Census of Population and Housing 2011. Iran.

    [62] Statistical Center of Iran. Public Census of Population and Housing 2016. Iran.

    [63] Polit D. F. Beck C. T. The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in nursing & health 2006; 29(5): 489-497.‏

    [64] Li Y. Pickles A. & Savage M. Social capital and social trust in Britain. European sociological review 2005; 21(2): 109-123.

    [65] Zhang M. Social capital and perceived tenure security of informal housing: Evidence from Beijing, China. Urban Studies 2022; 59(12): 2506-2526.‏

    [66] Oh H. Chung MH. & Labianca G. Group social capital and group effectiveness: The role of informal socializing ties. Academy of management journal. 2004 Dec 1; 47(6): 860-75.

    [67] Aliakbarzadeh Arani Z. Zanjari N. Delbari A. Foroughan, M. & Ghaedamini Harouni G. Place attachment and aging: A scoping review. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment 2022; 32(1): 91-108.‏

    [68] Corcoran M. P. Place attachment and community sentiment in marginalised neighbourhoods: A European case study. Canadian journal of urban research 2002: 47-67.‏

    [69] Akbar PN, Edelenbos J. Positioning place-making as a social process: A systematic literature review. Cogent Social Sciences. 2021 Jan 1;7(1):1905920.

    [70] Bose D. Where is the city in “The Right to the City”? The colliding politics of place‐making in a resettlement colony in Delhi’s periphery. Area. 2021 Mar;53(1):38-46.

Urban Economics and Planning
Volume 3, Issue 4
Autumn 2022
Pages 148-163

  • Receive Date 06 November 2022
  • Revise Date 19 December 2022
  • Accept Date 27 December 2022