سنجش دلبستگی به مکان و نحوه تأثیر مقیاس مکانی بر آن در بافت‌های مختلف شهری، مورد مطالعاتی: شهر رشت

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 کارشناسی‌ارشد برنامه‌ریزی شهری، دانشکده معماری و هنر، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ، ایران.

2 استادیار گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و هنر، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

3 دانشیار گروه شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و هنر، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران.

4 استادیار گروه هنر و معماری، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

دلبستگی به مکان، به‌عنوان پیوند احساسی مثبت بین افراد و گروه‌ها و محیط شان تلقی می‌شود. حضور و ارتباط افراد با مکان‌هایی که به آن دلبسته‌اند نتایج روان‌شناختی مثبتی برای آن‌ها خواهد داشت. اما دور افتادگی از این مکان‌ها می‌تواند به پریشانی و آشفتگی روانی منجر شود. عدم بررسی نحوه تأثیر مقیاس مکانی بر دلبستگی مکانی باعث می‌شود نیازهای شهروندان برای ایجاد رابطه احساسی در مقیاس‌های مختلف مکانی توسط طراحان و برنامه‌ریزان نادیده گرفته شود. هدف این مقاله شناخت نقش مقیاس مکان بر دلبستگی به مکان می‌باشد که به ما در شناخت دلبستگی در این سطوح مکانی و ارزیابی رابطه آن‌ها کمک خواهد کرد. برای این منظور 400 پرسشنامه در میان ساکنین چهار بافت شهری مختلف جدید، قدیم، میانی و پیرامونی شهر رشت توزیع شد و داده‌های به‌دست‌آمده از طریق آزمون همبستگی مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. با توجه به تحلیل‌ها ارتباط U شکل میان مقیاس‌های مکانی به دست آمد که در آن مقیاس خانه دارای بیش‌ترین میزان دلبستگی میان ساکنین و مقیاس محله دارای کم‌ترین میزان دلبستگی می‌باشد. بر اساس حداقل بودن دلبستگی به محله در ارتباط U شکل، می‌توان نامحسوس‌تر بودن محدوده و مرز محله در شهرها را نسبت به محدوده شهر متصور شد. از طرف دیگر تحلیل همبستگی دلبستگی میان این سه مقیاس نشان می‌دهد، دلبستگی به محله کم‌ترین همبستگی را با دلبستگی به شهر و خانه دارد. این یعنی علاوه بر این‌که دلبستگی به محله در شهرهای امروزی کم‌تر شده است، همین دلبستگی نیز نقش کمی در ایجاد دلبستگی فرد به سایر مقیاس‌های مکانی و از همه مهم‌تر شهر دارد. این نتایج نشان می‌دهد که جایگاه محله‌های شهری در زندگی شهروندان رو به تضعیف است و برنامه‌ریزان باید با اتخاذ سیاست‌های مناسب فرصت‌های بیش‌تری برای ایجاد پیوندهای عاطفی میان شهروندان و محله‌شان به وجود بیاورند.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Measuring Place Attachment and the Effect of Place Scale on It in Different Urban Fabrics; Case Study: Rasht City

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahyar Monsef 1
  • AliAkbar Salaripour 2
  • Nooreddin Azimi 3
  • Saman Abizadeh 4
  • Nader Zali 3
1 M.A. of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Art, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor of Urban Planning, Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Art, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
3 Associate Professor of Urban Planning, Department of Urban Planning, Faculty of Architecture and Art, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
4 Assistant Professor of Art and Architecture, Department of Art and Architecture, Payam-e Noor University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Attachment to place is seen as a positive emotional connection between individuals and groups and their environment. The attendance and relationship of people with the places they are attached to will have positive psychological consequences for them. However, staying away from these places can lead to distress and mental chaos. Failure to study the effect of spatial scale on spatial attachment causes the needs of citizens to create an emotional relationship to be ignored by designers and planners at different spatial scales. This paper aims to understand the role of place scale on attachment to place, which will help us to identify attachment at these spatial levels and evaluate their relationship. To this end, 400 questionnaires were distributed among the residents of four different urban contexts of Rasht (new, old, middle and peripheral neighborhoods), and the obtained data were analyzed by correlation test. Based on the analysis, a U-shaped relationship was attained between spatial scales in which the house scale has the highest degree of attachment among residents and the neighborhood scale has the lowest degree of attachment. Regarding the minimal attachment to the neighborhood in a U-shaped connection, it can be imagined that the boundaries and limits of the neighborhood in cities are more invisible than the city limits. On the other hand, correlation analysis reveals the attachment between these three scales. Neighborhood attachment has the least correlation with attachment to city and home. This means that in addition to the lack of attachment to the neighborhood in today's cities, this attachment also has a minor role in creating an attachment to other spatial scales and most importantly the city. These results indicate that the position of urban neighborhoods in the lives of citizens is fading and planners should adopt suitable policies to create more opportunities to create emotional bonds between citizens and their neighborhood.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • attachment to place
  • Spatial scale
  • social and personal factors
  • Rasht
Cuba, L., & Hummon, D.M. (1993). A Place to Call Home: Identification with Dwelling, Community, and Region. Sociological Quarterly, 34(1), 111-131. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1993.tb00133.x
Degnen, C. (2016). Socialising Place Attachment: Place, Social Memory and Embodied Affordances. Ageing & Society, 36(8), 1645-1667. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ageing-and-society/article/socialising-place-attachment-place-social-memory-and-embodied-affordances/4D8CF24926614AAEE99136078D74DA1D
Farnum, J., Hall, T., & Kruger, L.E. (2005). Sense of Place in Natural Resource Recreation and Tourism: an Evaluation and Assessment of Research Findings. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-660. Portland, OR: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 59 p, 660. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/21301
Fried, M. (2000). Continuities and Discontinuities of Place. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20(3), 193-205. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494499901548
Gieryn, T.F. (2000). A Space for Place in Sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 463-496. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.463
Giuliani, M.V., Ferrara, F., & Barabotti, S. (2003). One Attachment or More?. In G. Moser, E. Pol, Y. Bernard, M. Bonnes, J. Corraliza & V. Giuliani (Eds.), People, Places, and Sustainability (111-122). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe & Huber. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228091203_One_attachment_or_more_In_G_Moser_E_Pol_Y_Bernard_M_Bonnes_J_Corraliza_V_Giuliani_Eds_People_Places_and_Sustainability_21st_Century_Metropolis
Haynes, R., Daras, K., Reading, R., & Jones, A. (2007). Modifiable Neighbourhood Units, Zone Design and Residents’ Perceptions. Health & Place, 13(4), 812-825. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1353829207000135
Hernández, B., Hidalgo, M.C., Salazar-Laplace, M.E., & Hess, S. (2007). Place Attachment and Place Identity in Natives and Non-natives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(4), 310-319. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494407000515
Hidalgo, M.C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place Attachment: Conceptual and Empirical Questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 273-281. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S027249440190221X
Jordan, B. (1996). A Theory of Poverty and Social Exclusion. Polity. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/A+Theory+of+Poverty+and+Social+Exclusion-p-9780745616940
Lewicka, M. (2005). Ways to Make People Active: The Role of Place Attachment, Cultural Capital, and Neighborhood Ties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(4), 381-395. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494405000691
Lewicka, M. (2008). Place Attachment, Place Identity, and Place Memory: Restoring the Forgotten City Past. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(3), 209-231. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494408000157
Lewicka, M. (2010). What Makes Neighborhood Different from Home and City? Effects of Place Scale on Place Attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 35-51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494409000449
Low, S.M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place Attachment. In Place Attachment (1-12). Boston, MA: Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_1
Manzo, L.C. (2005). For better or Worse: Exploring Multiple Dimensions of Place Meaning. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(1), 67-86. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S027249440500006X
Manzo, L.C., & Devine-Wright, P. (2013). Place Attachment: Advances in Theory, Methods and Applications. Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203757765/place-attachment-lynne-manzo-patrick-devine-wright
Moser, G., Ratiu, E., & Fleury-Bahi, G. (2002). Appropriation and interpersonal relationships: from dwelling to city through the neighborhood. Environment and Behavior, 34(1), 122-136. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013916502034001009
Najafi, M., & Kamal, M. (2012). The Concept of Place Attachment in Environmental Psychology. Elixir International Journal of Sustainable Architecture, 45, 7637-7641. https://www.elixirpublishers.com/articles/1350368123_45%20(2012)%207637-7641.pdf
Ratcliffe, E., & Korpela, K.M. (2016). Memory and Place Attachment as Predictors of Imagined Restorative Perceptions of Favourite Places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 48, 120-130. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494416300858
Raymond, C.M., Brown, G., & Weber, D. (2010). The Measurement of Place Attachment: Personal, Community, and Environmental Connections. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 422-434. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494410000794
Salaripour, A. (2018). Exploring the Process of Neighborhood Attachment among Children; Study of Golsar ‎Neighborhood in Rasht City Applying Resident Employed Photography (REP)‎. Urban Planning Knowledge, 2(1), 23-39. doi: 10.22124/upk.2018.9147.1031
Salaripour, A., Daneshpour, S., & Safaye Karpour, M. (2021). Exploring the Concept of Place Attachment in Phenomenology and Psychometrics; Identifying the Capacity of Reflective Interaction for Theoretical Development. Urban Planning Knowledge, 5(2), 1-18. doi: 10.22124/upk.2021.16159.1434
Salaripour, A., Ramezani, H., Zali, N., & Safaye Karpour, M. (2019). Exploring the Quality of Neighboring Ties in Iranian Islamic neighborhood and its Role in the Place Attachment; Case Study: Sagharisazan Neighborhood, Rasht. Journal of Studies on Iranian Islamic City, 9 (34), 35-48. http://iic.icas.ir/Journal/Article_Details?ID=246
Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining Place Attachment: A Tripartite Organizing Framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 1-10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494409000620
Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2017). The Experienced Psychological Benefits of Place Attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 256-269. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272494417300518
Shamai, S., & Ilatov, Z. (2005). Measuring Sense of Place: Methodological Aspects. Tijdschrift Voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 96(5), 467-476. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2005.00479.x?casa_token=1YK5bgbvEIUAAAAA:V9U59MkY-3oRX9z-oJhmtu3nO4F7cO8ejFJTaucx1Mb7WYhC-DVjDdbGOOhzFWqy7be2tucAy1XChQ
Zali, N., Ahmadi, H.,&  Faroughi, S.M., (2013). An Analysis of Regional Distribution in the East Azarbaijan Province. Journal of Urban and Environmental Engineering, 7(1), 183-194. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26203403?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
Zali, N., Ebrahimzadeh, I., Zamani-Poor, M., & Arghash, A. (2014). City Branding Evaluation and Analysis of Cultural Capabilities of Isfahan City. European Spatial Research and Policy, 21(2), 213-234. https://www.czasopisma.uni.lodz.pl/esrap/article/view/7163