A Literature Review From a Spatial Perspective
Prepared for:
GEOG697 Dr. Lily House-Peters
Department of Geography
California State University, Long Beach
Prepared by: Cameron Mayer
May 5th, 2020
Introduction
Sense of place is, at its very core, a conceptualization that refuses to be readily defined. An attempt at a workable definition for the context of this paper is that a sense of place takes into account feelings and emotions associated with belonging in a spatial construction layered with intangible meaning beyond straightforward comprehension. There is no shortcut to the abstract. Literature pertaining to a sense of place is multilayered, encompasses many theoretical directions and pathways, and is examined to a variety of extents academically. Throughout the readings henceforth referenced, it is hereby noted that some grapple with a sense of place directly. By this it is meant that a given author explores this overarching concept with a particular geographical lens, or as it is interwoven with a specific subject matter. Additionally, there are included texts that reference sense of place tenets or literature in passing, and others from which aspects of sense of place must be extracted indirectly. Referenced literature includes peer-reviewed research articles, as well as several book chapters written by notable geographic theorists. The organization of this writing will be thematic and its scope will include four self-titled subtopics: general abstract theory, the natural environment, sense of place and environmental issues, and urban sense of place. The intention is to allow for a baseline understanding of academic literature pertaining to the broad topic of a sense of place, in addition to providing potential “jumping off” points for investigation into gaps in the literature and specific topics that warrant further study.
General Abstract Theory
Fundamentally speaking, a sense of place can be broken down into the dual components of space and place. Space is thought of as an abstract undefined area that within lies the ability for the production of experience. It can also be thought of as a fluid, instant connection between all things tangible and intangible (Massey, 1992). Space has no innate meaning. Space also lacks the constraints of time (Massey, 1992). How might time and space not intersect? Due to its abstractness, space is static. Space does not change because it is simply a non-tangible “placeholder” for experience(s) and tangible objects.Time is a dynamic force that produces constant and inevitable change. Time would thus impact place but not space. It has been argued within the context of time and experience of place that if time is understood to be constant temporal movement, or flow, then place is pause (Massey, 1992).
However, space transforms into place when imbued with meaning through perception or experience over time (Tuan, 1977). Meaning takes the form of memories, attachment, symbolism, among other manifestations. Place is socially constructed, and with positive meaning carries with it the connotation of home. It suggests comfort and rootedness (Buttimer and Seamon, 2015). Places can be nostalgia - inducing. Meaning associated with place is strengthened when looking back through the lens of personal thoughts. In this way memory produces and reproduces place related sentiment.
Feelings of place remind us of what it's like to be a human being. Humans are emotional creatures, and thus require places deemed intimate. Intimate places reinforce individual and collective selfhood (Tuan, 1997). We leave imprints upon places as they form their own impressions upon us. These impressions tie in to who each person is as an individual, as a part of a larger community, and as a part of the existential universe. With a universal sense of belonging, one contends with a state of existence and placeness far beyond perceptible scale. In this sense, a disproportionate amount of sense of place literature exhibits an exceedingly narrow focus.
Human interactions with space and place result in socially constructed notions of varying inclusivity. Who is allowed to be in, or is represented in, a given locale? The interplay between space, place, and gender provides relevant insight into this dynamic. Spaces and places, along with perceptions of them, are effectively gendered (Massey, 1994). This gendering of space and place has far reaching implications for place immersion, and thus a sense of place. The “gendering” (Massey, 1994) of place is reflective of the myriad ways in which gender is socially constructed and understood in society at large. A place or space can be dominated by a particular gender or sex, and therefore be understood as barred to all others. Social constructions are ascribed geographically and layered with meanings. This significantly, though not entirely, determines the nature of space and place through human experience.
The Natural Environment
The environment in its infinite iterations has the capacity to induce love of the land, or topophilia. What underlies the subjective reality of some environments having the ability to “excite” topophilic feelings? This ability is tied to one’s cultural and personal background. Also worth consideration is landscape geometry, subject matter, and human comfortability (Tuan, 1990). Every conceivable type of physical environment has the power to influence any given person. Even extreme environments claim a hold over a select few. However, there exists a gap in the literature in terms of less popularized or stigmatized environments such as deserts.
Natural environments are symbolic. They take on characteristically symbolic values by virtue of the distinctive physical features found within landscapes. A flat valley hemmed in by sloping hillsides is nurturing. By contrast, a desert with sparse vegetation and extreme weather is contradictorily foreboding and peaceful. The connotations and symbols placed upon environments are a product of human intersections with place. We afford the placement of meaning with place in this fashion for purposes of environmental engagement, personal satisfaction, or nature appreciation.
Appreciation of nature and landscapes form the basis for creation of place out of space. A prevailing approach in appreciation lies in the aesthetic. Aesthetic appreciation carries with it the connotation of simplicity. One might think of a tourist snapping a quick photograph at a scenic overlook as an example of this “landscape as scenery” approach (Benediktsson, 2007). The line of thought entailed supports a determination that the significance of place attachment correlates with significance of interaction, time spent, and physical proximity to place (Kil et al, 2012). However, the mediation of landscape experience and perception with technology provides complications to the established narrative. Immediate and profoundly intimate experience that results in feelings of placeness is also not taken into proper account. There is now the need for a redefinition of environment perception, landscape appreciation, and by extension the concept of place in this context.
Sense of Place and Environmental Issues
The natural world is one in which humanity is simply a cog in the complex, interdependent wheel of ecology. Nevertheless, humans have had an undeniable impact on the world and everything living within it. Human impact has and will continue to produce change to spaces and places. Relationships to place take on a different meaning when confronted with the possibility or reality of significant change. Change to place(s) of a detrimental manner is likely to also negatively impact the well being of those who value or have attachments to them (Marshall et al, 2019). Environmental issues such as climate change, destruction of natural spaces for development, and increasing prevalence and intensity of natural disasters drive a significant amount of current and expected future change to spaces and places.
Ties with place will serve as a basis for combatting pressing environmental issues going forward. Current research suggests this by indicating that place attachment is an effective way to communicate about and spur environmental engagement (Nicolosi and Corbett, 2018). Simply put, the fight against environmental issues will benefit from drawing upon personal meanings associated with places. Studies on this subject tend to gravitate towards places with relatively limited human disturbance or interference. However, more anthropogenically altered spatial contexts warrant comparable study.
Understanding place meanings in areas where the urban sphere lies proximate with wildland - termed the wildland urban interface (WUI) - is necessary in an era of unprecedented human encroachment upon wild spaces. Necessity stems from the informal “rule” that further urbanization in WUI areas will bring about increased instances of certain environmental disasters. Wildfire risk in particular is closely related to urban expansion (Anton and Lawrence, 2016). Nevertheless, WUI areas are sources of many benefits, including recreation, research, and personal well being/discovery. It is not enough to say that these interface regions are solely sources of conflict and destruction. Place attachments suggest complexity in this regard.
Urban Sense of Place
Urbanization is a rapidly occurring phenomenon. At no point in history has there existed a greater urban interface. This urban interface is variable and complex in its spatial modality. If geographical variation has the capability to produce consummate variations in perception and related experience, then it is reasonable to assume that this variation also applies in an urban context.
Despite an insistence on geographic variation, distinctly urban localities do not receive the same individualized treatment as rural or natural counterparts. Rather, they are grouped into regions of study. A relevant example is the coining of the term “Surfurbia” (Davidson, 2004), which refers to the urban communities of the South Bay region in southern California. This bias feeds into their perceived sense of place. The entirety of the South Bay cannot be accurately represented by the label of a Baywatch culture (Davidson, 2004). In actuality, urban regions encompass individualized spaces and places that each create a unique reality. An urban sense of place can be symbolic, such as a city beach representing carefree leisure, or a neighborhood coffee shop that represents a comfortable community enclave. It can also be literal or material, such as a high rise office building that in its very construction holds the dreams of the architect who designed it.
Urban verticality is an aspect of urban living that significantly contributes to an urban sense of place. How might verticality contribute? Verticality proposes distance between those within a vertical structure, and those at other levels or the ground. What this vertical distance means in relation to place related perception has not yet been adequately studied. However, urban verticality does carry with it the implication of one seeking the spiritual or cosmological (Harris, 2015), further implicating a belonging in the universe. As referenced earlier, a universal belonging by translation equates to a universal sense of place. Vertical spaces can also have a bearing on one’s outlook, memory, and experiences in an urban environment (Harris, 2015).
Urban spaces and places are largely left out of literature on sense of place. There are a number of potential reasons for this reality. One proposition is the relative novelty of the “urban age” (Harris, 2015). As such, research in urban studies likely has not had adequate opportunity to catch up, so to speak. Another potential reason is the perceptive homogenization of urban culture and experience (Davidson, 2004). Regardless of the reason, a greater focus is needed in research on urban place reality for an accurate understanding of this phenomenon.
Conclusion
As shown in this survey of the literature, a sense of place can be conceptually broken down into fundamental components of space and place. These fundamental aspects, when combined with any blend of experience and perspective produce emotions and feelings that are inextricably bound to specific localities. Moreover, sense of place literature can be subdivided into innumerable categories in relation to place characteristics. Places are experienced differently from one another. A distinctly urban place offers the potential for a significantly different sense of place in comparison to a wilderness area. What exactly results in a specific sense of place is unclear. Academic readings suggest a wide variety of answers, ranging from highly individualized approaches to larger group evaluations. What is clear is that in order to truly understand what a sense of place truly means, what it actually feels like, one must have an open mind and the ability to grapple with it at different geographic scales, or even with no scale, mental framework, or organizing principles at all.
References:
Anton, C., & Lawrence, E. (2016). Does Place Attachment Predict Wildfire Mitigation and Preparedness? A Comparison of Wildland–Urban Interface and Rural Communities. Environmental Management, 57(1), 148-162.
Benediktsson, K. (2007). "Scenophobia", Geography and the Aesthetic Politics of Landscape. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 89(3), 203-217.
Buttimer, A., & Seamon, D. (2015). The Human Experience of Space and Place. Routledge.
Davidson, R. (2004). Before ″Surfurbia″: The Development of the South Bay Beach Cities through the 1930s. Yearbook of the Association of Pacific Coast Geographers, 66, 80-94.
Eisenhart, A., Crews Meyer, K., King, B., & Young, K. (2019). Environmental Perception, Sense of Place, and Residence Time in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. The Professional Geographer, 71(1), 109-122.
Harris, A. (2015). Vertical urbanisms: Opening up geographies of the three-dimensional city. Progress in Human Geography, 39(5), 601-620.
Kil, N., Stein, T., Holland, S., & Anderson, D. (2012). Understanding place meanings in planning and managing the wildland-urban interface: The case of Florida trail hikers. Landscape And Urban Planning, 107(4), 370-379.
Marshall, Nadine, Adger, William, Benham, Claudia, Brown, Katrina, Curnock, Matthew, Gurney, Georgina G, . . . Thiault, Lauric. (2019.). Reef Grief: Investigating the relationship between place meanings and place change on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 579-587.
Massey, D. (1992). POLITICS AND SPACE-TIME. New Left Review, (196), 65-84.
Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender.
Nicolosi, E., & Corbett, J. (2018). Engagement with climate change and the environment: A review of the role of relationships to place. Local Environment, 23(1), 77-99.
Paveglio, T., Moseley, C., Carroll, M., Williams, D., Davis, E., & Fischer, A. (2015). Categorizing the Social Context of the Wildland Urban Interface: Adaptive Capacity for Wildfire and Community "Archetypes". Forest Science, 61(2), 298-310.
Tuan, Y. (1997). SENSE OF PLACE: WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HUMAN? American Journal of Theology & Philosophy, 18(1), 47-58.
Tuan, Y. (1977). Space and place: The perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Tuan, Y. (1990). Topophilia: A study of environmental perception, attitudes, and values (Morningside ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.
Comments