بررسی عوامل مؤثر بر شکل‌گیری دلبستگی مکانی در محله‌های شهری، نمونه موردی: محله‌های دردشت، چهارسوقی ها، ملاصدرا و دوطفلان شهر اصفهان

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار شهرسازی، دانشکده شهرسازی و معماری، دانشگاه هنر اصفهان، اصفهان، ایران.

2 دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی، دانشکده شهرسازی و معماری، دانشگاه هنر، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

محله‌ها از جمله عناصر سازنده شهری می‌باشند که به‌عنوان قلمرویی کالبدی- اجتماعی، بعد از خانه، مهمترین حلقه واسطه میان فرد و محیط پیرامونی‌اش می‌باشند و از این‌رو نقشی اساسی را در پیوند دادن مردم با محیط زندگیشان عهده‌دار می‌باشند، پیوندهای اصیلی که زندگی انسان در معنای واقعی خود را در مکان جاری ساخته، فضا را معنادار نموده و هویت فردی را در ارتباط با هویت مکانی شکل می‌دهد. با این وجود امروزه در سایه تحولات سریع کالبدی، اجتماعی، اقتصادی و غیره دلبستگی مکانی به محله‌ها، کمتر محلی از اعراب را در زندگی معاصر به خود اختصاص داده است، به‌گونه‌ای که می‌توان بی ریشه‌گی، پریشانی و بی‌خانمانی بشر را در ارتباط با آن دانست. بر این اساس، پژوهش حاضر با هدف پاسخگویی به چرایی دلبستگی مکانی در محله‌های مسکونی با مروری بر آراء عمومی اندیشمندان در این حوزه از دانش بشری، با استفاده از روش تحقیق کیفی و بهره‌گیری از راهبردهای پژوهش چندموردی و استدلال منطقی به مطالعه عوامل دلبستگی مکانی در محله‌های شهر اصفهان پرداخته است. بر این اساس، نخست با استفاده از راهبرد تحقیق چندموردی، مبتنی بر فرآیندی گونه‌شناسانه، محله‌های دردشت، دوطفلان، ملاصدرا و چهارسوقی‌های شهر اصفهان به‌عنوان نمونه‌های مورد تحقیق انتخاب شده و سپس شواهد گردآوری شده از طریق مصاحبه‌های نیمه ساختاریافته و مشاهدات با استفاده از راهبرد استدلال منطقی و به‌طور خاص روش تحلیل محتوای هدایت شده در محیط نرم‌افزاری MAXQDA مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفته است. در نهایت بر اساس مصاحبه‌های 22 گانه صورت پذیرفته در محله‌ها مورد مطالعه، 1067 کُد در ارتباط با دلبستگی مکانی ساکنین به محله‌ها استخراج شده که با طبقه‌بندی‌ ایشان در قالب 40 درون مایه فرعی، 8 درون مایه اصلی صمیمیت اجتماع محلی، هویت اجتماعی، مذهب، شأن، تداوم فضا- زمان، حظ بصری، پاسخ‌دهندگی و طول مدت سکونت به‌عنوان عوامل اصلی دلبستگی مکانی در محله‌های مورد مطالعه شناسایی شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigation of Place Attachment Factors in Urban Neighborhoods, Case Studies: Dardasht, Charsoghiha, Mollasadra and Doteflan Neighborhoods of Isfahan

نویسندگان [English]

  • Bahador Zamani 1
  • Mohsen Honaravar 2
1 Associate Professor of Urbanism, Department of Urbanism and Architecture, Art University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran.
2 Ph.D. Student of Urbanism, Department of Urbanism and Architecture, University of Art, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Neighborhoods are city constructing components. As a socio-physical territory, neighborhoods are the most important interface between individuals and their surrounding urban environments. The original ties forming the human life in place make the space meaningful and shape the individual identity in relation to the place identity. Although in the history of Iranian urbanism the neighborhoods have bonded people and their living environment differently in terms of the cultural, social and economic roots, but nowadays, due to the physical- social and economic changes, place attachment to the neighborhoods is no longer taken into account in the contemporary lives resulting in the impacts such as rootlessness, distress and homelessness. The need for the attention to the place attachment in contemporary era with the diversity of available related terminology have led to the ambiguities of urbanism that have made the urban planners ignore the concept of place attachment while this concept has been moved to the holistic frameworks of other fields of urban knowledge. Due to the necessity of clarifying the concept of place attachment, this term is defined and explained from different viewpoints and applications, so the main problem in studying and investigating the concept of place attachment, either at the theoretical or at the experimental level is the diversity of approaches and definitions for this concept. The terms such as topo-philia, rootedness, community attachment, sense of society, place identity, place reliance, sense of place, etc. -without any semantic signification- have been the origin of many conceptual ambiguities in this field. Such ambiguities have prevented the development of the concept of place attachment. Accordingly, this research aims to find the reasons of the place attachment in urban neighborhood reviewing the available literature in this field using qualitative methodology and multiple case study research methods and logical argument in order to come up with the factors of place attachment in Isfahan neighborhoods. In this regard, using the multiple case study strategy, Dardasht, Doteflan, Mullasadra and Charsoghiha Neighborhoods of Isfahan were selected based on typological approach and techniques. Then using the semi-structured interviews and observation techniques, data was collected and analyzed applying the logical argument strategy in general and the directed contentanalysis and MAXQDA software in particular. The results of thisstudy showed that amain part of differences between place attachment definitions and its related concept such as the place identity, sense of place, and residential satisfaction roots in different fields and disciplines, different applied research systems, and different aspects and factors of the process of attachment. Thus, to come up with a comprehensive definition, every proposed definition not only has to be paid enough attention at the superior and inferior levels of the concept of place attachment, but it also has to specify precisely the aspects and factors of the process of attachment. Accordingly, place attachment is a level of the sense of place that includes cognitive, emotional and behavioral aspects, each of which can affect the individual, social and physical factors. In other words, place attachment includes simultaneously the cognitive aspect (identity, memories, meaning, knowledge and pattern), emotional aspect (love, interest and pride) and behavioral aspect (behavioral patterns and services), while the fulfillment of each of these aspects depending on the analytical scale of the neighborhood can influence individual factors (age, educational level, gender and mobility), social factors (neighborhood relationships, participation in civil and social activities), and physical factors (territory, existence of the historical monuments, open and public spaces, green spaces, building density and size of the building). Furthermore based on 22 interviews conducted in studied neighborhoods, 1067 codes were extracted in relation to the residents’ place attachment to their neighborhoods classified in 40 sub-themes categorized in the main 8 themes including the “community intimacy”, “social identity”, “religion”, “dignity”, “space-time continuity”, “visual pleasure”, “responsiveness” and “residence duration”. These themes were identified as the main factors for place attachment in the studied urban neighborhoods. This in turn confirms the effect of individual, social and physical factors on place attachment beside its effectiveness of the cognitive, emotional and behavioral dimensions. In sum, considering the application of case study and an attempt to select the most suitable samples in urban neighborhoods of Isfahan, the results are relatively generalizable to other neighborhoods of this city. In this regard we can introduce eight themes of community intimacy, social identity, religion, status, time-space continuity, visual pleasure, responsiveness and residence continuity as the main factors and reasons of the residents’ place attachment to the urban neighborhoods of Isfahan. These themes can be obtained by 40 predicators or sub-themes.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Place Attachment
  • Factors of Place Attachment
  • Isfahan’s Neighborhoods
  • Directed Content Analysis

Altman, I., Low, S. (1992). Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press.

Altman, I., Rogoff, B. (1987). World Views in Psychology: Trait, Interactionist, Organismic, and Transactional Approaches. In D. Stokols and I. Altman. Handbook of Environmental Psychology (Vol. 1). New York: John Wiley.

Bagozzi, R.P., (1978). The Construct Validity of the Affective, Behavioural and Cognitive Components of Attitude by Analysis of Covariance Structures. Multivariate Behavioural Research, 13, 9–31.

Ballinger, N.L., Manning, R.E. (1998). Sense of Place: Mount Desert Island Residents and Acadia National Park. Paper Presented At the 1997 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, New York, Bolton Landing.

Beckley, T.M. (2003). The Relative Importance of Sociocultural and Ecological Factors in Attachment to Place. Portland, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest, Research Station.

Bonaiuto, M., Aiello, A., Perugini, M., Bonnes, M. And Ercolani, A. P. (1999). Multidimensional Perception of Residential Environment Quality and Neghbourhood Attachment in the Urban Environment. Environmental Psychology, 19, 331-352.

Bott, S., Cantrill, J.G., Myers, O.E. (2003). Place and the Promise of Conservation Psychology. Journal of Human Ecology Review, 2, 100-12.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss. Vol.1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Breckler, S.J., (1984). Empirical Validation of Affect, Behaviour and Cognition as Distinct Components of Attitude. Personality and Social Psychology, No.47, 1191-1205.

Brett, G. S. (1921). A History of Psychology. Medievulund Early Modern Period. London: George Allen and Unwin.

Brown, B. And Perkins, D. (1992). Disruptions in Place Attachment. In Altman. I., And Low, S., Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press.

Brown, B. B., Perkins, D. D., Brown, G. (2003). Place Attachment in a Revitalizing Neighborhood: Individual and Block Levels of Analysis. Environmental Psychology, 23, 259-271.

Buttimer, A. (1980). Home, Reach, and the Sense of Place. In Buttimer, A., & Seamon, D., The Human Experience of Space and Place. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Cheng, A.S., Kruger, L.E., and Daniels, S. E. (2003). Place as an Integrating Concept in Natural Resource Politics: Propositions for a Social Science Research Agenda. Society and Natural Resources, 16, 87–104.

Daneshpour, S. A., Sepehri Moqaddam, M., Charkhchian, M. (2010). Explanation to “Place Attachment” and Investigation of Its Effective Factors. HONAR-HA-YE-ZIBA, 38 (1), 37-48.

Giuliani, M. V., Feldman, R. (1993). Place Attachment in a Developmental and Cultural Context. Environmental Psychology, 13, 267-274.

Greenwood, D.A. (2009). The Nexus of Geography and Culture. In Fields Of Green: Restoring Culture, Environment, and Education. New Jersy: Hampton Press.

Groat, L. N., Wang, D. C. (2010). Architectural Research Methods. (A. Einifar, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Publication.

Harris, P., Brown, B., Werner, C. (1996). Privacy Regulation and Place Attachment: Predicting Attachments to a Student Family Housing Facility. Environmental Psychology, 16, 287-301.

Hay, R. (1998). Sense of Place in Developmental Context. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18, 5-29.

Hidalgo, M.C., and Hernández, B. (2001). Place Attachment: Conceptual and Empirical Questions. Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 273–81.

Hilgard, E. R. (1980). The Trilogy of Mind: Cognition, Affection, and Conation. The History of the Behavioral Sciences, 16(2), 107–117.

Hummon, D. M. (1992). Community Attachment: Local Sentiment and Sense of Place in I. Altman and S. M. Low. Place Attachment. New York: Plenum Press.

Johnson, C.Y., Zipperer W.C. (2007). Culture, Place and Urban Growth in the US South. Urban Ecosystems, 10(4), 459–74.

Jorgensen, B.S., Stedman, R.C. (2001). Sense of Place as an Attitude: Lakeshore Owners Attitudes toward Their Properties. Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 233–48.

Kasarda, J. D., Janowitz, M., (1974). Community Attachment in Mass Society. American Sociological Review, 39, 328-339.

Katz, D., Stotland, E. (1959). A Preliminary Statement to a Theory of Attitude Structure and Change in: Koch, S., Psychology: a Study of a Science, Vol. 3. New York: Mcgraw Hill.

Khabiri, S. (2012). Setting Up a Mohallah Urban Design Framework in Regard with Creating Place Attachment. Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Art in Urban Design. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University.

Kudryavtsev, A., Stedman, R. C., Krasny, M. E. (2012). Sense of Place in Environmental Education. Environmental Education Research, 18(2), 229–250.

Lewicka, M. (2005). Ways to Make People Active: The Role of Place Attachment, Cultural Capital, and Neighborhood Ties. Environmental Psychology, 25, 381–395.

Lewicka, M. (2008). Place Attachment, Place Identity and Place Memory: Restoring the Forgotten City Past. Environmental Psychology, 28, 209-231.

Lewicka, M. (2010). Place Attachment: How Far Have We Come In The Last 40 Years?. Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 1-24.

Malpas, J. (2010). New Media, Cultural Heritage and the Sense of Place: Mapping the Conceptual Ground. Heritage Studies, 14(3), 197–209.

Mazaheri, M. A. (1999). Iranian Infants Attachment Patterns. Psychology, 2 (4), 291-315.

Mc Andrew, F. T. (2013). Environmental Psychology. (G. R. Mahmoodi, Trans.). Tehran: Vania Publication. 

Ostrom, T.M., (1969). The Relationship between the Affective, Behavioral and Cognitive Components of Attitude. Experimental Social Psychology, 5, 12–30.

Partovi, P. (2008). Phenomenology of Place. Tehran: Farhangestan-E Honar Publication.

Proshansky, H.M. (1978). The City and Self-Identity. Environment and Behavior, 10(2), 147-169.

Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion Limited.

Riger, S., Lavrakas, P. J. (1981). Community Ties: Patterns of Attachment and Social Interaction in Urban Neighborhoods. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 55-66.

Rowles, G. D. (1990). Place Attachment among the Small Town Elderly. Rural Community Psychology, 11, 103-120.

Sarason, S. (1974). The Psychological Sense of Community: Prospects for a Community Psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Press.

Schultz, Ch. (1997). The Phenomenon of Place. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Shamai, S. (1991). Sence of Place: An Empirical Measurement. Geforum, 22, 347-358.

Smith, K. M. (2011). The Relationship between Residential Satisfaction, Sense of Community, Sense of Belonging and Sense of Place in a Western Australian Urban Planned Community. Thesis For PHD Degree In Phsycology, Edith Cowan University.

Steele, Fritz (1981). The Sense of Place. Boston: CBI Publishing Company.

Stokols, D., Shumaker, S.A. (1981). People in Places: A Transactional View of Settings. In Cognition, Social Behavior, and the Environment. New Jersy: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Taylor, R. B., Gottfredson, S. D., Brower, S. (1985). Attachment to Place: Discriminant Validity, And Impacts of Disorder and Diversity. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 525-542.

Theodori, G. L. (2001). Examining the Effects of Community Satisfaction and Attachment on Individual Well-Being. Rural Sociology, 66, 618-828.

Trentelman, C.K. (2009). Place Attachment and Community Attachment: a Primer Grounded in the Lived Experience of a Community Sociologist. Society and Natural Resources, 22(3), 191-210.

Tuan, Y. F. (1974). Topophilia: A Study of Environmental Perception, Attitudes, and Values. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersy: Prentice Hall.

Tuan, Y. F. (1977). Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.

Twigger-Ross, C. L., Uzzell, D. L. (1996). Place and Identity Processes. Environmental Psychology, 16, 205-220.

Waxman, L. (2006). The Coffee Shop: Social And Physical Factors Influencing Place Attachment. Interior Design. 31(3), 35-53.

Williams, D. R., Patterson, M. E. (2007). Snapshots of What, Exactly? A Comment on Methodological Experimentation and Conceptual Foundations in Place Research. Society and Natural Resources, 20, 931-937.

Woldoff, R.A. (2002). The Effects of Local Stressors on Neighborhood Attachment. Social Forces, 81, 87-116.

Wyckoff-Baird, B. (2005). Growth Rings: Communities and Trees. Lessons from the Ford Foundation Community-Based Forestry Demonstration Program. Washington DC: The Aspen Institute.