3.3 Place Studies and experience through walking
3.3.1 Walking and the (built) environment
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.
55 | P a g e Dill, 2005; Cerin et al., 2006; Nagel et al., 2008; Stevenson and Farrell, 2017). This literature often focuses on the effects of the environment on walking (see Handy and Mokhtarian, 2005;
Khattak and Rodriguez, 2005; Handy et al., 2007) and this very same effect but on a specific type of walking (see Saelens et al., 2003; Li et al., 2005; Giles-Corti et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2016). What is important is that the way the physical environment is built is historically argued as having an effect on walking.
This literature begins with a look at the general effects of the environment on general walking as a way to experience a place (see Carver et al., 2005; Cerin et al., 2006; Handy et al., 2006;
Bias et al., 2010). This literature has been publishing more vigorously since the beginning of the 21st century (refer to Handy and Mokhtarian, 2005) after a slow start in the 1970s (refer to Thayer and Atwood, 1978). In this literature is often the argument that the environment does consequentially inform how and where people walk (see Gauvin et al., 2005; Cerin et al., 2007;
Millington et al., 2009; Burgoine et al., 2011). It is the way a place is designed that determines where the individual walks and what features of place that person gets to experience.
The biggest literature collection of walking as a way to experience the built environment is that related to the effect of the environment on walking for particular purposes (see Duncan et al., 1991; Braza et al., 2004; Alexander et al., 2005; Forman et al., 2008). This literature can be separated to literature on the overall specific walking (see Burton et al., 2005; Andrews et al., 2012; Thielman et al., 2015) and literature on specific walking by particular groups (see Macpherson et al., 1998; Timperio et al., 2004; McMillan, 2005, 2007; Giles-Corti et al., 2011).
These purposes could be recreational or the person could be going to a designated space such as work or school.
Literature on the effects of the environment on specific walking has been publishing at an increasing rate since the beginning of the 21st century (refer to Saelens et al., 2003). This literature looks at the effects of the environment on specific walking (see McDonald, 2008;
Sugiyama et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2016). This collection of literature has been focusing on walking the built-up environment for health (see Frumkin et al., 2004; De Vriese et al., 2013) and recreational walking purposes (see Owen et al., 2004; Cleland et al., 2008). The literature
56 | P a g e argues for the environment often being informative in how people move from place to place as the environment either encourages or dissuades people from walking (see Burton et al., 2005;
McCormack and Shiell, 2011; Andrews et al., 2012; Grasser et al., 2013). Walking for health is historically argued to be encouraged more by places which have more walking spaces rather than those neighbourhoods seemingly built more for automated travel through cars;
Recreational walking is argued encouraged more by places with designated spaces for contemplative walking such as hiking rather than places within central business districts.
Ultimately, how an environment is built is argued consequential for health and recreation levels within the place’s population.
Literature on the effects of the environment on specific walking by specific groups has been publishing at an increasing rate since the beginning of the 21st century (refer to Ball et al., 2001). This literature looks at specific walking by particular groups (see Timperio et al., 2004;
Schlossberg et al., 2006). In this literature there is no agreement over how exactly the environment affects specific walking by particular groups (see Lam, 2001; Timperio et al., 2004). There happen to be many variables determining the effects of traffic on how individuals walk for health. However, there is no agreed measure of effect as there is no agreement on the weights that should be afforded to the different experiential realities which are argued to come in during the walk.
Literature on the effects of the environment upon the walking of a particular group is the last and smallest collection of literature within this collection of literatures on the environment and walking (see Li et al., 2005; Agrawal and Schimek, 2007; Forsyth et al., 2008; Nagel et al., 2008). This collection of literature has been publishing in specialised areas since the beginning of the 21st century (refer to Simpson et al., 2003). This literature looks at the effects of the environment on the walking patterns of a particular group of people (see Humpel et al., 2002;
Bates et al., 2005; Lee and Moudon, 2006; McGinn et al., 2007). This literature looks at walking by a group of people sharing particular traits. There is within this literature collection the minute collection of walking the built-up environment as youth (see Carver et al., 2005;
Kerr et al., 2006; Frank et al., 2006). This collection of literature has been publishing since the early twenty first century (refer to Clifton and Dill, 2005). This literature publishes on the relationship between the youth walking the built-up environment to reach particular points
57 | P a g e within the environment through either commuting on foot (see Timperio et al., 2006; Kerr et al., 2006) or the combination of walking and cycling (refer to Timperio et al., 2004).
Ultimately, the youth are seen as important walkers of the built-up environments that make-up places (refer to Saelens and Handy, 2008). The main argument within this collection of literature seeks to connect the environment’s walkability and the walking appetite of different groups of people (see Plotnikov et al., 2004; Badland and Schofield, 2005; Papas et al., 2007;
Kerr et al., 2007). Ultimately, the argument is that individual traits will at times inform how and where people experience a place most consequentially through walking.
There is lastly the specialising collection of literature on walking the built environment via route choice (see Humpel et al., 2004; Saelens and Handy, 2008; Arango et al., 2011). This literature has been publishing since the late 1970s (refer to Thayer and Atwood, 1978). Within this literature has been the argument for there being certain experiential realities of route that inform consequentially what route is taken within the built environment in terms of route quality (refer to Humpel et al., 2004; Giles-Corti et al., 2005; Alfonzo et al., 2008), walking paths (refer to Arango et al., 2011), and the cost of amenities (refer to Gauvin et al., 2008).
Within this collection of literature there is sometimes the focus on adults and how they use the environment in terms of route selection and usage (see Li et al., 2005; Nagel et al., 2008;
Sugiyama et al., 2012). People are historically argued to pick that route which gives them some utilities that they do find satisfaction within rather than those which do not make their walking experience as easier. Ultimately, this literature highlights that within the built environment, the route chosen when people decide to walk is important on many counts (see Buhyoff et al., 1984; Handy and Mokhtarian, 2005; Agyemang et al., 2007; Sallis et al., 2012).
Most of the literature on the effects of the environment upon walking is conducted indiscriminately across the geographic northern hemisphere (see Li et al., 2005; Handy et al., 2007; Nagel et al., 2008; Andrews et al., 2012). The majority of the literature on the environment as an effect on walking mainly focuses on making connections between the two experiential realities (see Handy, 1996; Schwanen and Mokhtarian, 2005; Cao et al., 2006).
With the focus on finding connections between environment and walking experience the literature then often uses observation methods as a way to conduct research (see Giles-Corti et al., 2011; Timperio et al., 2014; Thielman et al., 2015). There are areas of agreement as to the
58 | P a g e dynamics of walking and environment. However, there are still disagreement on the exact quality of the effects of environment on walking experience as a way into place experience.