Advertisement

Place Evaluation: Measuring What Matters by Prioritising Relationships

  • Dominique HesEmail author
  • Cristina Hernandez-Santin
  • Tanja Beer
  • Shih-Wen Huang
Chapter

Abstract

Placemaking is well documented for its role in fostering place attachment in increasingly dense, diverse and mobile communities, thus leading to positive impacts on health, community participation, civic behaviour and perceptions of safety. However, many projects can fail to achieve long-term benefits. This chapter explores the existing strategies to evaluate place from a socio-ecological perspective and encourages the practitioners to move beyond easily measurable attributes and economic evaluations and incorporate strategies to assess the intangible benefits of place. Given that placemaking aims to trigger an emotional connection between the individual and the place, this chapter will argue that a place evaluation process should assess the relationships developed between the stakeholders and place. Starting from the [human and non-human] community values of place, it proposes the Four Dimensions of Place Framework (FDP) as a strategy to identify key relationships that place processes need to support between the individual (self), the community, the natural environment and the human-made environment in which it is located. If place processes manage to enhance relationships across these four dimensions, the place is successful. Lastly, this chapter uses a case study to illustrate the FDP: The Living Pavilion (1–17 May 2019), a temporary event space and placemaking project at the University of Melbourne. By developing the evaluation strategy for this case study, we show how the FDP can be applied to your projects and that it successfully provides a way to verify if the evaluation process is taking a holistic approach to place assessment.

Keywords

Rating tools Place values Reflective processes 

References

  1. Amin, A. (2012). Strangers in city. In Land of strangers (pp. 59–82). Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  2. Anton, C. E., & Lawrence, C. (2014). Home is where the heart is: The effect of place of residence on place attachment and community participation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 451–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aravot, I. (2010). Back to phenomenological placemaking. Journal of Urban Design, 7(2, August), 201–212.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1357480022000012230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Billig, M. (2006). Is my home my castle? Place attachment, risk perception, and religious faith. Environment and Behavior, 38(2), 248–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Budruk, M., Thomas, H., & Tyrrell, T. (2009). Urban green spaces: A study of place attachment and environmental attitudes in India. Society and Natural Resources, 22(9), 824–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carmona, M. (2019). Place value: Place quality and its impact on health, social, economic and environmental outcomes. Journal of Urban Design, 24(1), 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng, J. C. H., & Monroe, M. C. (2012). Connection to nature: Children’s affective attitude toward nature. Environment and Behavior, 44(1), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cilliers, E. J., & Timmermans, W. (2014). The importance of creative participatory planning in the public place-making process. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 41(3, June), 413–429.Google Scholar
  9. CoM and MSI. (2016). Caring for country: An urban application. The possibilities for Melbourne. City of Melbourne and Monash Sustainability Institute. Retrieved from https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/720681/Caring-for-Country-Literature-Review.pdf. Accessed 27 Feb 2019.
  10. Davis, A. (2016). Experiential places or places of experience? Place identity and place attachment as mechanisms for creating festival environment. Tourism Management, 55(February), 49–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Donovan, G. H., & Prestemon, J. P. (2012). The effect of trees on crime in Portland, Oregon. Environment and Behavior, 44(1), 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dutcher, D. D., Finley, J. C., Luloff, A. E., & Johnson, J. B. (2007). Connectivity with nature as a measure of environmental values. Environment and Behavior, 39(4), 474–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Elmqvist, T., Fragkias, M., Goodness, J., Güneralp, B., Marcotullio, P. J., McDonald, R. I., … Wilkinson, C. (Eds.). (2013). Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: Challenges and opportunities. A global assessment. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Fincher, R., & Iveson, K. (2008). Conceptualising recognition in planning. In Planning and diversity in the city: Redistribution, recognition and encounter. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Fincher, R., Pardy, M., & Shaw, K. (2016). Place-making or place-masking? The everyday political economy of “making place”. Planning Theory and Practice, 17(4), 516–536. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gilroy, P. (2006). Colonial crimes and convivial cultures. A transcript of a video letter made by Paul Gilroy in London and screened at the Public Hearing “Debating Independence: Autonomy or Voluntary Colonialism”.Google Scholar
  17. Grimm, N. B., Faeth, S. H., Golubiewski, N. E., Redman, C. L., Wu, J., Bai, X., & Briggs, J. M. (2008). Global change and the ecology of cities. Science, 319(5864), 756–760.Google Scholar
  18. Heller, A., & Adams, T. (2009). Creating healthy cities through socially sustainable placemaking. Australian Planner, 46(2), 18–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hes, D., & du Plessis, C. (2014). Reconnecting with nature, re-learning to be natural. In Designing for hope: Pathways to regenerative sustainability (pp. 45–71). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Hodgetts, D., Stolte, O., Chamberlain, K., Radley, A., Nikora, L., Nabalarua, E., & Groot, S. (2008). A trip to the library: Homelessness and social inclusion. Social & Cultural Geography, 9(8), 933–953.Google Scholar
  21. Hou, J., & Rios, M. (2003). Community-driven place making: The social practice of participatory design in the making of Union Point Park. Journal of Architectural Education, 57(1), 19–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ignatieva, M., Meurk, C., van Roon, M., Simcock, R., & Stewart, G. (2008). How to put nature into our neighbourhoods. Report by Landcare Research New Zealand Ltd., Manaaki Whenua Press, Landcare Research, Lincoln, NZ.Google Scholar
  23. Junot, A., Paquet, Y., & Fenouillet, F. (2018). Place attachment influence on human well-being and general pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 2(April), 49–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kellert, S. R., & Wilson, E. O. (Eds.). (1995). The biophilia hypothesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kern, M. L., Benson, L., Steinberg, E. A., & Steinberg, L. (2016). The EPOCH measure of adolescent well-being. Psychological Assessment, 28(5), 586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2004). Effect of activity involvement and place attachment on recreationists’ perceptions of setting density. Journal of leisure Research, 36(2), 209–231.Google Scholar
  27. Lozano, R. (2008). Envisioning sustainability three-dimensionally. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(17), 1838–1846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Manzo, L. C., & Perkins, D. D. (2016). Finding common ground: The importance of place attachment to community participation and planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 20(4), 335–350.Google Scholar
  29. McDonnell, M. J. (2011). The history of urban ecology: A ecologist’s perspective. In J. Niemelä, J. H. Breuste, G. Guntenspergen, N. E. McIntyre, T. Elmqvist, & P. James (Eds.), Urban ecology: Patterns, processes, and applications. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mihaylov, N., & Perkins, D. D. (2014). Community place attachment and its role in social capital development in response to environmental disruption. In L. Manzo & P. Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment: Advances in theory, methods and research (pp. 61–74). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. National Trust. (2019). Places that make us. Report for the National Trust, Wiltshire, UK. [Online] Retrieved from https://nt.global.ssl.fastly.net/documents/places-that-make-us-research-report.pdf. Accessed 25 Feb 2019.
  33. Peattie, K. (1995). Environmental marketing management: Meeting the green challenge. London: Financial Times and Pitman Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Rating Place Co-Developing a Rating Tool Workshop 1, Sydney. (2018). Place agency & place leaders Asia Pacific in partnership with Sydney Olympic Park. Retrieved from https://placeagency.org.au/rating-place/. Accessed 25 Feb 2019.
  35. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F. S., Lambin, E., … Foley, J. (2009). Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2), 32.Google Scholar
  36. Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schlebusch, S. (2015). Planning for sustainable communities: Evaluating place-making approaches. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4(4), 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schultz, P. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of human-nature relations. In Psychology of sustainable development (pp. 61–78). Boston, MA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Shaw, K. (2008). Gentrification: What it is, why it is, and what can be done about it. Geography Compass, 2(5), 1697–1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Summers, J. K., Smith, L. M., Case, J. L., & Linthurst, R. A. (2012). A review of the elements of human well-being with an emphasis on the contribution of ecosystem services. Ambio, 41(4), 327–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. The Living Stage. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://ecoscenography.com/the-living-stage/. Accessed 25 Feb 2019.
  42. The University of Melbourne. (n.d.). New student precinct. Available from https://ourcampus.unimelb.edu.au/student-precinct. Accessed 24 Mar 2019.
  43. Trudeau, D. (2016). Politics of belonging in the construction of landscapes: Place-making, boundary-drawing and exclusion. Cultural Geographies, 13(3), 421–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Young, R. F., & Wolf, S. A. (2006). Goal attainment in urban ecology research: A bibliometric review 1975–2004. Urban Ecosystems, 9, 179–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominique Hes
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cristina Hernandez-Santin
    • 1
  • Tanja Beer
    • 1
  • Shih-Wen Huang
    • 1
  1. 1.Thrive Research Hub and Place Agency, Faculty of Architecture, Building and PlanningThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations