Abstract
The concept of place attachment has been studied extensively across multiple disciplines but only
recently with empirical measurement using public participation GIS (PPGIS) and related crowd-sourcing
mapping methods. This research trialed a spatially explicit method for identifying place attachment in a
regional study in South Australia. Our research objectives were to (1) analyze and present the spatial
results of the mapping method as a benchmark for future research, (2) compare mapped place attachment
to the more common practice of mapping landscape values in PPGIS that comprise a values home
range, (3) identify how participant socio-demographic and home location attributes influence place
attachment, (4) provide some guidance for mapping place attachment in future research. We found large
spatial variability in individual place attachment and mapped landscape values using both area and
distance-based measures. The area of place attachment is influenced by occupational roles such as
farming or conservation, as well as home location, especially in coastal versus non-coastal contexts. The
spatial distribution of mapped landscape values or values home range is related to, but not identical to
mapped place attachment with just over half of landscape values located outside the area of mapped
place attachment. Economic livelihood values, as an indicator of place dependence, and social values, as
an indicator of place identity, are more likely to be mapped within the place attachment area. Aggregated
place attachment across participants in the region showed similar spatial intensity to aggregated values
home range, but area-based assessment of place attachment and values home range are distorted by edge
effects such as a coastline. To further develop the mapping of place attachment in PPGIS, we identify
knowledge gaps from our study and offer suggestions for future research.
recently with empirical measurement using public participation GIS (PPGIS) and related crowd-sourcing
mapping methods. This research trialed a spatially explicit method for identifying place attachment in a
regional study in South Australia. Our research objectives were to (1) analyze and present the spatial
results of the mapping method as a benchmark for future research, (2) compare mapped place attachment
to the more common practice of mapping landscape values in PPGIS that comprise a values home
range, (3) identify how participant socio-demographic and home location attributes influence place
attachment, (4) provide some guidance for mapping place attachment in future research. We found large
spatial variability in individual place attachment and mapped landscape values using both area and
distance-based measures. The area of place attachment is influenced by occupational roles such as
farming or conservation, as well as home location, especially in coastal versus non-coastal contexts. The
spatial distribution of mapped landscape values or values home range is related to, but not identical to
mapped place attachment with just over half of landscape values located outside the area of mapped
place attachment. Economic livelihood values, as an indicator of place dependence, and social values, as
an indicator of place identity, are more likely to be mapped within the place attachment area. Aggregated
place attachment across participants in the region showed similar spatial intensity to aggregated values
home range, but area-based assessment of place attachment and values home range are distorted by edge
effects such as a coastline. To further develop the mapping of place attachment in PPGIS, we identify
knowledge gaps from our study and offer suggestions for future research.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Tidsskrift | Applied Geography |
| Vol/bind | 57 |
| Sider (fra-til) | 42-53 |
| ISSN | 0143-6228 |
| DOI | |
| Status | Udgivet - 1 feb. 2015 |