The inextricable connection between the study of place and how people experience it as being experiential inhabitants and occupants has been the historical project of Human and Cultural geography. There is a vast collection of literature on both Cultural (see Duncan, 1980;
Cosgrove and Jackson, 1987; Whatmore, 2006; Crang, 2013) and Human (see Buttimer, 1976;
Seamon, 1982; Tuan, 1990; Fellmann et al., 1997; Pile, 2010; Cresswell, 2014) geographies.
Cultural geography has been publishing consistently since the 1960s (see Wagner and Mikesell, 1962; Rapoport, 1969; Wacker, 1975; Rashid, 1977; Duncan, 1980; Cosgrove and Jackson, 1987; Mitchell, 1995; Nash, 2000; Crang, 2013). The literature looks at how culture is related to place and the experience of place (see Duncan, 1980; Hayden, 1997; Sibley, 2002; Knox and Pinch, 2014). There has been the historical argument that culture – be it capitalism or colonialism – ultimately shape places and should be the main way in which places are viewed.
Ultimately, the literature focuses on how culture can allegedly inscribe itself onto place and determine how the place looks and is most likely to be experienced (see Mikesell, 1978;
50 | P a g e Duncan and Ley, 1982; Price and Lewis, 1993; Nash, 2002; Blunt and Varley, 2004; Ingold and Vergunst, 2008).
Human Geography has also been publishing consistently since the 1960s (see Tuan, 1968;
Relph, 1970; Entrikin, 1976; Goodall, 1987; Sack, 1997; Marston et al., 2005; Johnston and Sidaway, 2015). The literature looks at how the human senses are related to place and the experience of place (see Buttimer, 1976; Tuan, 1990; Rose, 1997; Gregory et al., 2011; Ley and Samuels, 2014). The literature often argues that places are experienced fundamentally through the five human senses (see Fellman et al., 1997; Hay, 2000; Cloke et al., 2004; Pile, 2010; Kitchin and Tate, 2013) alongside the more emotive experiences which will often be the manner in which place is most consequentially experienced (see Tuan, 1974; Relph, 1976;
Seamon, 1979; Cresswell, 1996).
Place as defined by Cultural and Human geography has been historically studied for the elucidation of human-environment relationships under numerous alleged realities of how people relate to place. The experience of place has been historically studied in terms of place attachment (see Fried, 1963; Altman and Low, 1992; Stedman, 2002; Manzo, 2005;
Ramkissoon and Mavondo, 2015), sense of place (see Lalli, 1992; Williams and Stewart, 1998;
Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001; Shamsuddin and Ujang, 2008; McCunn and Gifford, 2014), and place identity (see Gans, 1962; Korpela, 1989; Twigger-Ross and Uzzell, 1996) as the main qualities to be found within people-environment relations. It is important that each area of place research is discussed at length as a way to highlight the space within which the prevailing dissertation will be located.
3.2.1 Place and Attachment
The biggest collection of place-related literature is that related to the experiential reality of the attachment to place that people experience (see Shumaker and Taylor, 1983; Brown and Perkins, 1992; Harris et al., 1996; Brown et al., 2003; Billig, 2006; Scannell and Gifford, 2017).
This literature argues for there being an affective relationship between place and individual as there develops a bond between people and their environment (see Mensch and Manor, 1998;
51 | P a g e Stedman, 2002; Ramkissoon et al., 2013). This literature looks at place attachment as related to both the social environment (see Fried, 1963; Lalli, 1992; Bonaiuto et al., 1998; Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001) and the physical environment (see Stokols and Shumaker, 1982; Manzo, 2005; Ujang and Zakariya, 2015).
Place attachment as it arises out of the social environment has been researched since the early 1960s (refer to Fried, 1963). Here it is the social environment which is highlighted as being most important in influencing the quality of the attachment an individual has with a place (see Brown and Perkins, 1992; Brown et al., 2003; Wu et al., 2019). The social environment can be within such differing scales as the house (see Cuba and Hummon, 1993; Manzo, 2003) to the neighbourhood (refer to Brown et al., 2003). There is a general agreement within this literature collection that people are affected by the social environment to differing degrees that may or may not afford them attachment to place. What is important is that individuals feel an attachment that is most informed by the social environment within which they are located as inhabitants and occupants.
Place attachment as it arises out of the physical environment has been researched more extensively since the early 1980s (refer to Stokols and Shumaker, 1982). Within this research it is the physical environment which is most consequential to the resulting quality of attachment between individual and place (see Mesch and Manor, 1998; Brown et al., 2003; Kamalipour et al., 2012; Ujang and Zakariya, 2015). The physical environment is historically argued to be in many cases of such a quality that it encourages the development of an emotive bond between the individual and their built environment (see Moore and Graefe, 1994; Felonneau, 2004;
Rollero and De Piccoli, 2010; Lewicka, 2011). What is important is that the physical environment most consequentially informs the attachment the individual develops with a place.
Attachment as a result of both the physical and social environment is also studied (see Uzzell et al., 2002; Stedman, 2003; Mazumdar and Mazummdar, 2004; Scannell and Gifford, 2010).
It is the case that these studies often look to decide which reality (social or physical) informs place attachment more (see Vorkin and Riese, 2001; Stedman, 2002; Kyle et al., 2010;
Lewicka, 2011). It is the case that the researchers want to know the inner workings of place
52 | P a g e attachment. This literature often argues that whichever part of the environment leaves a more consequential impression on an individual’s emotions ends up determining which part of the space (physical or social) leads to more enduring attachment (refer to Mazumdar and Mazumdar, 2004; Scannell and Gifford, 2010; Lewicka, 2011).
Since place attachment is defined as an affective bond (refer Altman and Low, 1992; Scannell and Gifford, 2010) most of the research conducted under this place literature has focused on the psychology of the ultimately phenomenological spatial reality. The Journal of Environmental Psychology has produced many of the papers that deal with place attachment.
Most of the research has been conducted geographically in the northern hemisphere (see Lewicka, 2010; Kamalipour et al., 2012; Scannell and Gifford, 2017; Clarke et al., 2018; Wu et al. 2019) and focusing on structured methods of enquiry when qualitative research is conducted (refer to Ujang, 2012; Anton and Lawrence, 2014; Casakin et al., 2015). All of this literature has made the argument for the continued presence of attachment from the individual to the place.
3.2.2 Place and Sense of Place
Sense of place – as fundamentally related to attachment to place – has a healthy collection of literature under place studies (see Lynch, 1960; Hummon, 1992; Jorgensen and Stedman, 2001;
Magee, 2016). The literature makes the argument for there being – just like under the attachment to place literature – an affective relationship between individual and place (refer to Williams et al., 1992; Jorgensen and Stedman, 2001; Stedman, 2003; Casakin and Billig, 2009).
The literature discusses general sense of place issues (refer to Williams and Stewart, 1998) and so-called predictors of sense of place (refer to Gieryn, 2000).
General sense of place has been studied since the 1960s (refer to Fried, 1963). The literature has historically argued that people develop an affective relationship with a place as a result of individuals having experiences within that place that may be thought of as leading to an affective familiarity (see Relph, 1976; Greider and Garkovich, 1994; Stefanovic, 1998; Casakin and Billig, 2009). This relationship is often argued strictly humanistic as it is often the human
53 | P a g e sense of phenomenological reality that encourages the establishment of the affective relationships (refer to Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001). However, there are also studies which have sought to quantitatively examine the equally affective pheonomenolical realities of sense of place (see Shamai, 1991; Williams et al., 1992; Kaltenborn, 1998). These studies have struggled to come up with an agreed upon list because most people bring in different qualities of experience to their sense of place. What is important here is that the individual grows to appreciate further an environmental setting as they engage in activities which lead to profound person-environment relations.
The literature on sense of place predictors has also been publishing consistently since the 1960s (refer to Lynch, 1960). This literature looks at the process whereby an individual grows to have an alleged sense of place within an environment (see Hay, 1998; Stedman, 2003; Shamsuddin and Ujang, 2008; McCunn and Gifford, 2014). The literature argues that the quality of sense of place between the individual and the environment can sometimes be measured as this is a subjective reality which can be documented through how the individual is within a place in terms of their communicated appreciation for a place (see Williams et al., 1992; Jorgensen and Stedman, 2001; Carmona et al., 2008; Magee et al., 2016). However, there is no general agreement on what needs to be counted and how much weight it should be given when calculating sense of place (see Stedman, 2003; McCunn and Gifford, 2014; Magee et al., 2016).
Sense of place research has been conducted across the world without much slant towards a particular place (see Lalli, 1992; Williams and Stewart, 1996; Jorgensen and Stedman, 2001;
Magee et al., 2016). Owed to the preoccupation with trying to work out the inner workings of sense of place, the main method of enquiry within the research field has been survey work (see Shumaker and Taylor, 1983; Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001; Stedman, 2003; Shamsuddin and Ujang, 2008). This survey work being in support of the often argued measurability of sense of place as an experience.
3.2.3 Place and Identity
54 | P a g e One of the smaller literature collections within place studies is that pertaining to what is termed place identity (see Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Proshansky et al., 1983; Feldman, 1990). This literature deals with the identities that people often believe they have been given by places of meaning (refer to Korpela, 1989). This literature collection has established increased publication in the 1960s (refer to Gans, 1962). The literature argues that people will identify with a place as this place is of a meaning to them that interacts with how and what they believe themselves to be (see Proshansky, 1978; Krupat, 1983; Hormuth, 1990; Twigger-Ross and Uzzell, 1996). For instance, someone from Durban may take pride in referring to themselves as a Durbanite – a very particular kind of place-basing identification that is filled with emotions and experiences. What is important in this literature is the phenomenological reality of individuals identifying themselves with places and their meanings for them.