Abstract
In this chapter I argue that place attachment in cities stems from constant (re-)negotiatons between individuals and groups in urban space and their interaction with the space’s materiality. Based on a case study from Darmstadt, Germany, I show how citizens and urban materiality engage in a process of co-creating place attachment. Empirical data from autoethnographic observation and photographic documentation of the Georg-Büchner-Platz, a centrally located urban square in Darmstadt, highlight this double-sided relation: on the one hand, people establish attachments to particular places in their environment by interacting with other people and the ambient materiality. On the other hand, materiality serves as means to stabilise attachments to places and as means to re-frame local belonging and place attachment. As a consequence of the constant interactions and reframings of attachment, place attachment can be understood as (1) processual in character, (2) only temporarily stable and (3) the result of an interplay of sociality and materiality. This example then is evidence for the broader argument followed in this chapter that place attachment should be understood as dynamic over time and fundamentally intertwined with the material qualities of spaces and has the potential to contribute to social cohesion in an urban society.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
It is important to note that not everyone in Darmstadt feels attached to the Georg-Büchner-Platz, especially not with its current material-spatial design. During my fieldwork, I was told that the square now lacks niches where people can gather without being observed by others. The former design of the square included such niches, and this was portrayed to me as a key element why the square was so attractive during adolescence, being “the only location where we could be among ourselves in public” (informal interview, Darmstadt 2021).
References
Bochner, A. P., & Ellis, C. (2016). Evocative autoethnography: Writing lives and telling stories. Left Coast Press.
Bundesministerium des Innern, für Bau und Heimat (Ed.). (2021). Stadtentwicklungsbericht der Bundesregierung 2020 (p. 156). Bundesministerium des Innern, für Bau und Heimat. https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/veroeffentlichungen/2021/04/stadtentwicklungsbericht-2020.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2
Denzin, N. K. (2014). Interpretive autoethnography (2nd ed.). Sage.
Deutsch, N. L. (2005). A second home. In B. J. Hirsch (Ed.), A place to call home: After-school programs for urban youth (pp. 41–56). American Psychological Association/Teachers College Press.
Farias, I., & Bender, T. (Eds.). (2009). Urban assemblages: How actor-network theory changes urban studies. Routledge Chapman & Hall.
Fried, M. (1963). Grieving for a lost home. In L. J. Duhl (Ed.), The urban condition. People and policy in the metropolis (pp. 124–152). Simon & Schuster.
Gustafson, P. (2001). Roots and routes: Exploring the relationship between place attachment and mobility. Environment and Behavior, 33(5), 667–686. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160121973188
Holt, N. L. (2003). Representation, legitimation, and autoethnography: An autoethnographic writing story. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(1), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690300200102
Kurnicki, K. (2022). What do cars do when they are parked? Material objects and infrastructuring in social practices. Mobilities, 17(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2021.1981538
Lefèbvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell Publishers.
Löw, M. (2001). Raumsoziologie. Suhrkamp.
Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment (pp. 1–12). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_1
Manzo, L. C. (2014). Exploring the shadow side: Place attachment in the context of stigma, displacement, and social housing. In L. C. Manzo & P. Devine-Wright (Eds.), Place attachment. Advances in theory, methods and applications (pp. 178–190). Routledge.
Milligan, M. J. (1998). Interactional past and potential: The social construction of place attachment. Symbolic Interaction, 21(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1525/si.1998.21.1.1
Müller, A.-L. (2017). Infrastrukturen als Akteure. Die Materialität urbaner Infrastrukturen und ihre Bedeutung für das Soziale. In M. Flitner, J. Lossau, & A.-L. Müller (Eds.), Infrastrukturen der Stadt (pp. 125–141). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10424-5_7
Müller, A.-L. (2021). Wissenschaftliche Heimat in der Stiftung. Die neue Schader-Residence in Darmstadt. Stiftung & Sponsoring, 5(21), 14–15.
Müller, A.-L., & Reichmann, W. (2020). Architektur und Teilhabe. In S. Meier & K. Schlenker (Eds.), Teilhabe und Raum. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven (pp. 65–82). Barbara Budrich.
Müller, A.-L., & Tuitjer, L. (2022). Rre-vitalising discourses of solidarity: Governing populations in times of uncertainty and crisis. In M. Hellmann, T. Kettunen, S. Salmivaara, & J. Stoneham (Eds.), Governing human lives and health in pandemic times. Social control policies (pp. 37–54). Routledge.
Pollini, G. (2005). Elements of a theory of place attachment and socio-territorial belonging. International Review of Sociology, 15(3), 497–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906700500272483
Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K., & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Place-identity: Physical world socialization of the self. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3, 57–83.
Reichmann, W., & Müller, A.-L. (2015). The secrets of architecture’s actions. In Architecture, materiality and society. Connecting sociology of architecture with science and technology studies (pp. 2–23). Palgrave Macmillan.
Robinson, J. (2006). Ordinary cities: Between modernity and development. Routledge.
Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.006
Simmel, G. (1908). Soziologie. Untersuchungen über die Form der Vergesellschaftung. Duncker & Humblot.
Simmel, G. (1995). Die Großstädte und das Geistesleben. In O. Rammstedt (Ed.), Aufsätze und Abhandlungen 1901—1908. Band I (Vol. 7, pp. 116–131). Suhrkamp.
Acknowledgements
Many thanks to the OpenStreetMap contributors for providing the maps used in this publication. The license agreements can be found here: www.openstreetmap.org/copyright and here: www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Müller, AL. (2022). Place Attachment Through Negotiation. How Citizens and Materiality Co-create Urban Spaces in Darmstadt, Germany. In: Ilovan, OR., Markuszewska, I. (eds) Preserving and Constructing Place Attachment in Europe. GeoJournal Library, vol 131. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09775-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09775-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-09774-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-09775-1
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)