THE HUMAN NATURAL WORLD RELATIONSHIP

Place Attachment

100

to attitudes to the resource and to management priorities. The study concluded that

management objectives were more important to those with a higher level of place attachment,

which in this case was the local community. Key park management issues such as grazing

and hunting were the subject of a study in the Grand Teton National Park in the USA by

Smaldone and colleagues (2005). The study found that while place attachment was strong

amongst visitors, those negatively affected by issues portrayed a stronger emotional

attachment than those unaffected. The study concluded that in discovering place attachment

levels management could identify community groups for public involvement in management

processes (Smaldone, Harris, Sanyal & Lind, 2005). Opposition to development and

landscape change was evident in a study on river communities in Nebraska, which provided

management with a meanings based framework for addressing controversial problems

(Davenport & Anderson, 2005). Trust and community involvement in decisions in natural

resource management agencies were examined by Payton, Fulton and Anderson (2005). The

study found that trust was a major issue in mediating civil action. Further, understanding

place attachment would lead to developing trust and improving civic relationships.

Place Dependence and Influence on Identity and Environmental Behaviour

The influence of place dependence on place identity was examined by Pretty, Chipuer and

Bramston (2003) in Australian rural communities, by Vaske and Kobrin (2001) on youth in

natural resource work programs, Kaltenborn (1997) on homeowners in Norway, and Moore

and Graefe (1994) on rail trail users. The study by Vaske and Kobrin confirmed that place

dependence can influence the development of place identity, which was strongly linked to

environmental behaviour. However, a study of traditional mountain farmers in the Hohe

Tauere National Park in Austria showed that they did not consider themselves as protectors of

the environment although this may have been the perception of others (Ploner, 1995).

Further studies reveal that people with a strong place dependence can also develop a strong

place identity, which can influence environmental behaviour (Kyle, Graefe, Manning &

Bacon, 2004b; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001).

Place Attachment

101

Summary of Place Dependence

The goal directed/functional attachment, place dependence, explains the dependence on a

place for a specific activity such as recreation or employment. Place attachment studies

identify higher levels of place attachment amongst those who are dependant on the resource.

In addition, recreationalists with a specialisation in an activity had a stronger place

attachment than those less experienced.

Furthermore, studies found that in discovering variations in place attachment, management

could identify community members suitable for public involvement in management processes

(Smaldone et al., 2005). In addition, people with a strong place dependence often have a

strong place identity, which can influence environmental behaviour (Kyle, Graefe, Manning

& Bacon 2004b; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001).

4.5.2 Place Identity

Introduction to Place Identity

Within the context of the place attachment literature, place identity refers to the

emotional/symbolic attachment to a place, which can also develop from place dependence,

which is the reliance on a place for functional activities. Williams et al. (1995) explains that

the way a person identifies with a place is linked strongly with a special childhood memory,

adult memory or a place of special significance, such as a symbol of heritage. A person may

have particularly happy childhood memories of holidays in a seaside town; a couple may

have special memories of their honeymoon destination; a historic site, such as Anzac Cove in

Gallipoli, may hold particular historic importance for many Australians. Users with an

emotional or symbolic attachment can be passive recreationalists, users of walking trails or

picnic grounds or they may have an interest in historic or cultural aspects, or they may have

an emotional or symbolic attachment, which has developed from a functional attachment

referred to as place dependence.

Place Attachment

102

Place Identity and Emotional Attachment

Research by Hernández, Hidalgo, Salazar-Laplace and Hess (2007) suggests that place

attachment forms before place identity, which is a component of our personal identity.

Emotional attachment to a place, Proshansky (1978) explains, is linked to a person’s unique

socialisation in the world revealed through their place identity. This in turn reflects their

personal identity, which is established through a complex web of conscious and unconscious

ideas, feelings, preferences and values. Expanding on this concept, other social and physical

characteristics of places may also be linked to a person’s place identity (Measham, 2004;

Mura, 2004) which evolves over time with life experience and inner growth (Measham 2004;

Speller, 2000). A case in point was a study that examined the effect of climate on place

identity. The study concluded that a person’s perception of a place might be influenced by

climate, and showed to be a strong influence on those with a high emotional attachment to

their residential area (Knez, 2005). There are many aspects that influence place identity,

some of which are discussed below. This section considers place identity/emotional

attachment in relation to environmental education, past experience, community, destination

choice and the role of narrative in identifying emotional attachment.

Place Identity and Environmental Education

A study by Blizard and Schuster (2004), examined children’s reactions after a woodland area

used for creative play was removed from their use. Blizard and Schuster observed that the

children had formed a strong emotional attachment to the trees, plants and animals. The bond

to the natural area was evident through the sense of wonderment and care the children

displayed towards the area, and the subsequent emotional loss they expressed for both the

“loss of nature, their place and the animals that had made their homes in the trees” (p. 60).

This expression of loss was also an expression of the loss of the social and physical link to

their place identity, that is, their link to their forest home and the community of children that

played in the forest and participated in building the forest forts. The study supports

environmental education in schools as suggested by Measham (2004), who found that the

emotional attachment of place identity is strongly influenced by childhood experiences, more

Place Attachment

103

so than by engaging in adult activities such as land production or recreational activities.

Additionally, Measham (2004) explains that environmental education in childhood can

encourage learning about places and foster links between the environment and ourselves.

Place Identity and Past Experiences

A person’s past experiences is considered an important influence in developing identity.

Various studies into the role of past experience in developing place attachment support this

argument (Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000; Moore & Graefe, 1994; Williams, Patterson,

Roggenbuck & Watson, 1992). Zajonc (2001) explains that if repeated exposure to a place

either through the written or visual media can form place attachment, “…then past experience

should also be a powerful predictor of place identity” (Backlund & Williams, 2003, p. 321).

Negative past experiences however, can have the reverse effect on emotional attachment as

demonstrated in a study by Johnson (1998). The study showed that black Americans had a

lower level of attachment to wilderness than white Americans did. Johnson suggests that the

collective memory of the groups past experience was linked with the negativity associated

with slavery, sharecropping and lynching (Johnson, 1998) which caused displacement and the

breaking of emotional connections (Inalhan & Finch, 2004).

Alternatively, inattentiveness or disinterest in local affairs can still occur when community

attachment is strong. A study by Lima and Castro (2005) explained that residents were more

concerned with global catastrophic events than local ones, as they did not feel threatened and

believed that science was quite capable of dealing with these events. Additionally, the

residents believed that their community “could not be contaminated with the same problems

that concerned them globally” (p. 33). The exceptions to disinterest in local affairs were

those residents individually affected by local issues, which are sometimes referred to as the

“not in my backyard” syndrome (Lima & Castro, 2005).

Place Attachment

104

Place Identity and Community

The formation of community is the result of common experiences and a shared context of

meanings (Ballesteros & Ramırez, 2007) that “shape situations in which participants create

values” (p. 2). Furthermore, communities as well as the individual are strong reference

points for the creation of identities, which are symbolic realities. According to Auge (cited in

Ballesteros & Ramırez, 2007, p. 677), “when strong collective identities are linked to life

spaces, a solid sense of community is formed” (p. 677).

A study by Kim and Kaplan (2004) on community identity in an urban environment showed

that residents had a strong sense of community identity when natural features and open

spaces were present which allowed social interaction. Likewise, social interaction was

relevant in a study on residents’ place attachment to their homes, neighbourhood and city

(Hildago & Hernandez, 2001). Further studies addressed the level of support for tourism

development in communities (McCool & Martin, 1994), and government planning of

landscapes (Al-Hathloul & Aslam Mughal, 1999), the process that Russell and Harris (2001)

believe can foster and result in a strong sense of community identity.

In an effort to understand the relationship between identity and choices that people make in

their lives, a study on the elderly in rural communities revealed that they strongly identified

with their homes and community and because of this emotional attachment were reluctant to

move in their autumn years (Ponzetti, 2003). A study by Billig (2006) on communities in the

Gaza region, found that even when people were faced with dangerous situations, they were

inclined to stay in the region. In contrast, Mark Halstead, in a review on Yemeni girls who

have settled with their families in America (Sarroub, 2005), commented that while struggling

with two cultures, the girls must come to terms with an identity constructed mainly from the

influence of males, family members and community leaders.

Williams (2002) believes that globalisation has removed the traditional place based

community identity, which he refers to as Politics of Place. He explains that Politics of Place

Place Attachment

105

is when leisure activities are used to “affirm connections to places which in turn can create

and structure social differences between locals and outsiders and assert power and authority

over place” (p. 352). This will have implications in a global context as communities compete

for claims on places.

Place Identity and Loss of Attachment

Displacement is a term used to describe a way of dealing with disruptions to attachment. To

illustrate this, an individual may cope by moving to another location or by visiting a site on a

different day to avoid noise or crowding (Blizard & Schuster, 2004). Desegregating

communities can dislocate personal or community identity (Dixon & Durrheim, 2004), and

likewise shifts in social and community attachments can also result in displacing

communities (Fried, 2000a). A study by Windsor and McVey (2005) on the displacement of

indigenous communities in Canada through dam construction in the 1950s resulted in

displacement and a loss of place identity, by the forcible removal of the community from

their lands. According to Snyder, Williams & Peterson (2003, p. 109) in regard to indigenous

communities, “to move a culture is tantamount to destroying it”, this is because so much “is

woven into special patterns and localized meanings”. Displacement and loss of identity for

indigenous cultures is the result of how modern societies interpret human relationships with

nature (Snyder, 2003). Modern societies use valuation methods based on legal and economic

criteria, “while in a subsistence culture, meaning and relevance of much of the culture’s

knowledge and practices are specific to geographic places, for example, the knowledge of the

particular location and timing of harvestable plants and game” (p. 110).

The displacement of cultures is also evident in a study by Possick (2006) on evicted Jewish

settlers. The study described the trauma of separation and an ideological place attachment

amongst those effected. Similarly, a study on immigrants by Van Ecke (2005) supported

these results. The complexity of attachment, place identity and displacement, accentuated

through the Kashmiri Hindu migrants who settled in New Delhi, is worth noting.

Displacement occurred through increased military activity and an unstable political climate,

and many migrants still cling to the hope of one day returning to their homeland (Duschinski,

Place Attachment

106

2004). Wallace (2006, p. 23) states that the acknowledgement of a community’s “collective

historic” past and the creation of cultural areas is important in the resettlement of displaced

communities.

Place Identity and Destination Choice

Whilst place identity refers to the emotional or symbolic attachment to a place, repeat

visitation can play a significant role in strengthening this attachment (Altman & Low, 1992;

Belk, 1992). Additionally, an emotional, symbolic or functional attachment also serves to

shape activities and preferences for specific settings (Backlund & Williams 2003), for when

we are exposed to a place, we can develop a preference for that setting (Zajonc, 2001).

Alegre and Juaneda (2006) assert that the reason for repeat visitation is due in part to

developing an emotional attachment to the destination. Similarly, Marles and colleagues

(2001; 2003) discovered that a link existed between place identity and repeat tourist

visitation, and that emotional bonds are strengthened through repeat visits to a place.

Another study of visitors to Myrtle Beach and Charleston in the USA by Lee, Backman &

Backman (1997) supported the view that place attachment can help to explain repeat

visitation. The two destinations offered a different experience; one offered an historic

resource, while the other offered a family facility. Both experiences strengthened emotional

attachments to places, while the latter also strengthened attachment within the family unit.

However, attachments to places that children form may vary with gender and age. For

instance, Min and Lee (2006) established that children in the 10-12 age group preferred city

fringe settings, sports facilities and vacant areas, while children in the 7-10 age group

preferred play grounds and green spaces. However, common to all children was the

preference for natural settings, private and secret places and rest areas, uninterrupted by adult

interference. Concerning urban environments, Min and Lee (2006) believe that if a child is

exposed to the safe, comfortable built playground environment, they accept this setting as

special to them for their psychological and social play needs.

Place Attachment

107

Understanding the significance and meaning of the destination to the visitor is important if

managers are to meet their needs (Lee, 2001). Hailu, Boxall and McFarlane (2005) found

that place attachment “formed through previous trips to a destination can also influence

recreational demand and travel costs” (p. 581). Hailu and colleagues integrated place

attachment into a recreational demand and travel cost model. They hypothesised that “as

place attachment develops, visits to a site increase, as recreationists perceive fewer sites as

adequate substitutes” (Hailu, Boxall & McFarlane 2005, p. 583). By examining the link

between place attachment and recreational habits, they were able to calculate likely costs

associated with such trips, therefore having “the potential to affect the estimate of per trip

consumer surplus” (p. 595).

Williams et al. (1992) in a study of visitors to four wilderness sites, highlighted differences

between attachment to a wilderness setting and attachment to a place for other recreational

use such as a holiday. The study identified an alliance between wilderness and lifestyle

choice, such as membership to an organisation or group, while attachment of other users

related to lower socio-economic status. However, a study by Harris and Orams (1990), of

regional parks between users and non-users in Auckland, New Zealand found that a lower

economic status was more a characteristic of non-park users (Griffin, Wearing & Archer,

2004).

Place Identity and Narrative

The travel experience is particularly valuable for people in transitional stages of their lives, a

theme explored by White and White (2004) in a study of visitors to the Australian Outback.

The study concluded that self-identity could be revitalised, or changed through the travel

experience, which is communicated through postcards, photos or talk about travel. A study

by McCabe and Stokoe (2004, p. 602), explained the role of narrative as an expression of

place identity “…when tourists relay their experiences of a place their talk about the place

becomes their talk about their identity”. Place attachment can be expressed as a visual

narrative such as a postcard, (Pritchard & Morgan, 2003) or in the tourist’s description of a

Place Attachment

108

place (McCabe & Stokoe, 2004). Similarly, Johnstone (1990) explains that the sense of self-

identity is rooted in narrative, as stories about places can create meaningful attachments.

Trauer and Ryan (2005, p. 483) conclude that “narrative serves to structure a person’s sense

of self and place while also influencing interactions with others on a personal as well as a

community level”.

Place Identity and Symbolic Attachment

Symbolic attachment to a place is assigned by “individuals, groups and societies, and is not

necessarily related to the physical attributes of a place” (Williams, Patterson, Roggenbuck &

Watson, 1992, p. 33). Moreover, either the recreational experience, according to Tuan (1977)

can be a “direct experience of the senses” or it can be experienced through

“cognitive/symbolic processes” (in Williams, Patterson, Roggenbuck & Watson, 1992, p.

33).

Most community studies are in urban or rural settings, and within these communities are

symbols that contribute to both self-identity and community identity. Place identity studies

generally support the view that a person’s identity is closely linked to their community

identity (Dixon & Durrheim, 2004; Fried, 2000a; Hildago & Hernandez, 2001). A study by

Hull, Lam and Virgo (1994) on community icons identified a connection to the past through

symbols, which represented social groups that the residents, belonged to, or identified with,

or were reminders of personal accompaniments and concerns that evoked feelings and

emotions.

This next section considers place identity/symbolic attachment to National Parks, historic and

cultural sites, cultures and spirituality, all of which contain symbolic meaning to particular

individuals or communities.

Place Attachment

109

Place Identity and National Parks

National Parks are considered national symbols, which can “evoke memories of experiences,

developed through cultural and social meanings attached to the place” (Griffin, Wearing &

Archer 2004, p. 265). Recognition of the cultural and psychological benefits of a quiet

untouched setting as found in national parks has been well recognised in the research (Mace,

Bell & Loomis, 2004). It is important to note that ethnic groups may not relate to the park as

a national symbol but are more likely to use urban parks or national parks that are close to

their community as a social space, as they are large enough to accommodate family

gatherings (Griffin, Wearing & Archer, 2004, p. 274). Moreover, those who have never been

exposed to national parks are unlikely to visit them “because they do not have the cultural

attachment and traditionally will follow their own cultural habits” (p. 267). However, if park

managers are aware of these cultural differences, they can develop strategies that will

encourage new users, such as gatherings or events that will attract specific community

groups. This would potentially support the development of community identity and social

meaning for the users. Social value has become an important feature of community identity

and maintaining broad community support for national parks is important if environmental,

economic, socio-cultural, physiological or psychological benefits are to be realised (Griffin,

Wearing & Archer, 2004). Using a site for family gatherings can result in attachment,

through the process of identifying with the site for social or cultural activities.

Place Identity and Historic or Cultural Sites

Symbolic attachment was examined in a study on visitors to the Historic Lincoln, Vietnam

and Korean War Veteran Memorials in Washington DC USA (Chen, Wang & Larsen, 1999).

The study showed that the connection to the past was deep and profound for most visitors

who “reconnected with the principles and values of the sites, reflected and reconnected with

the past and honoured those that had passed before them” (p. 343). People who visit historic

or cultural sites, according to Svensson (1998), reconnected with their separation from culture

and nature through the tourist experience. By understanding the tourist’s relationship to the

Place Attachment

110

sites, managers may be in a better position to stimulate and foster stewardship (Svensson,

1998).

Fredrickson (2001) examined symbolic attachment through studying visitors’ knowledge of

the cultural and natural history of the region they were visiting. The importance of this

study showed that those who considered this knowledge important had a stronger place

attachment, which in turn had a favourable influence on their environmental ethic. A

further study of Taiwanese cultural tourists found that “the meaning and the formation of

place attachment may differ depending on the background of the tourist (Hou, Lin &

Morais, 2005, p. 221). Hou and colleagues found that those tourists with the same cultural

background as the host community expressed identity with the community, while those

from non-ethnic backgrounds expressed a dependence on the resource to define their place

attachment. These authors also found that destination attractiveness and involvement were

linked to the formation of place attachment and the formation of cultural identity (Hou, Lin

& Morais, 2005).

Place Identity and Cultures

The symbolic attachment that people have to their environments was evident in many

studies. Finland is known for its lakes and waterways, which form part of everyday life and

hold iconic meaning in the Finnish Culture (Tauhinu & Pitkanen, 2004). Similarly, island

communities often have the sea as a major active force in their mythic history, while

American Indians may emphasise a relationship between earth and sky” (Steele 1981, p. 6).

Symbolic attachment and community identity have been used to reflect the heritage of

mining towns in Spain (Ballesteros & Ramırez, 2007). Furthermore, features such as

“geographical, social and economic isolation” are common to many mining communities

worldwide (p. 3). “Strong nostalgic feelings and the desire to preserve cultural heritage”

(Cunningham 2004, p. 505) were considered most important in a community study in the

Ogasawara Islands of Japan. Consisting of 30 islands, Ogasawara was declared a National

Park in 1994, and the community retains strong cultural links to activities in the islands

Place Attachment

111

during the Second World War. The attachment of communities living near the main

waterways of the Mississippi and the Missouri Rivers was examined in the USA. The

study explored community attachment to the river location and found that community

image and identity varied between the locations (Rice & Urban, 2006).

The symbolic attachment of cultures can be an emotional experience and “create intense and

heated views and lead to conflict amongst groups” (Presley, 2003, p. 27). Symbolic

attachment and conflict amongst user groups is evident in a case study of Devils Tower

Monument in the USA. The American Indians, who held a deep symbolic attachment to the

monument as a sacred site, were in conflict with the rock climbing community who were

place dependant on the site for rock climbing (Dustin, Schneider, McAvoy & Frakt, 2002).

To avoid this issue in the future requires park management to understand the meaning

attached to places by user groups.

The symbolic attachment of cultures has implication for communities displaced by natural

events or unrest. Cultures and community attachment was examined in the resettling of

immigrants (Mazumdar, Mazumdar, Docuyanan & McLaughlan, 2000; Ng, 1998). These

authors found that re-establishing the social and ritual activities of the migrant groups, helped

them to settle into the community. Low (in Griffin, Wearing & Archer, 2004, p. 265)

explains that these activities bring cultural meaning and worth to a new community because

“a symbolic relationship exists between people and places”. A study of Padampur Villages in

Nepal found that lack of consultation with the local people led to strategies that threatened the

heritage and culture of the villages and the relationship with their environment (McLean &

Straede (2003). The case study highlighted the importance of community consultation in

relationships between people and their environment.

Place Identity and Spirituality

Spiritual attachment in ancient philosophies and eastern religions began with the worship of

nature spirits (Wall, 1994). This attachment is evident in contemporary society in those with

Place Attachment

112

a great compassion for animals, as displayed by the Buddhist community (Wall, 1994), and

activists such as animal liberationists. In comparison, the Judeo-Christian traditional

religions taught the domination of nature, through which Mebratu (1998) believes the

attachment to the natural world was compromised. Ecotheology seeks to address this by

calling for reverence for nature and the continuity between humans and non-humans as a

single integrated community (Berry, 1996).

Spiritual attachment is evident in a study of the community of Nazareth, which consists of

Christian and Muslim-Arab residents. The purpose of the study was to establish the attitudes

of the community towards heritage tourism development. Uriely, Israeli & Reichel (2003)

found that the Christian minority were more likely than the Muslim majority to support the

development as it would promote their beliefs and culture. The authors also suggested that

the culture that was not promoted (Muslim-Arab) should be allowed to develop their own

sites and benefit from promoting the region as a heritage tourism site through tax incentives

and other initiatives.

The effect of wilderness attachment on spirituality has been examined (Brayley & Fox, 1998;

Driver et al., 1996; Stringer & McAvoy, 1992). A summary by Heintzman (2003) concludes

that people who visit wilderness places “alone and participate in nature orientated

experiences are more likely to experience spiritual benefits”. Likewise, some places have a

spiritual resonance for particular groups such as the rapport that Buddhists have to the

Himalayas (Frumkin, 2003), which is likened to a retreat experience at a monastery

(Ouellette, Kaplan & Kaplan, 2005), or the spiritual attachment of indigenous communities to

their ancestral land. This capacity of humans to reconnect with the earth is also an

anticipated outcome of James Lovelock’s GAIA hypothesis. A study by Kidd (2002)

examined the impact of laws that took away traditional land rights of the Australian

Aboriginal and subsequently lead to severing their spiritual attachment, which was closely

linked to the landscape. Kidd stated that from the perspective of the aboriginal community,

without traditional lands, the ancestral spirit totems that reside in the landscape, as well as the

personal and community identity of these people has disappeared. Similar to the American

Place Attachment

113

Indians, the indigenous communities linger with nowhere to direct their spirituality or anchor

their community identity.

Frumkin (2003) found that the attachment that people have with places can have either a

positive or a negative impact on a person’s wellbeing, and he concluded that health should be

synonymous with place. Additionally, religious rituals have a positive effect on place

attachment (Mazumdar & Mazumdar 1993; 2004), while the rituals of indigenous cultures

also have a positive effect in their connection with the earth through songs, chants and

prayers (Dunbar, 2000).

The spiritual and restorative aspect of the nature experience, which may include adventure

and health therapies, has been the subject of examination in the area of Ecopsychology.

Ecopsychology considers that sense of place in nature is beneficial to human wellbeing

(Devereux 1996) and when humans are separated from nature; it can lead to suffering for

both the environment and humans (Seed, 1994). Bioregionalism (Metzner, 1999) and deep

ecology (Taylor & Zimmerman, 2005) also recognise that the relationship between humans

and the environment can have mutually restorative benefits.

The restorative benefits of holidays have been reported in the tourism literature by Gilbert

and Abdullah (2004) and Mura (2004), while the restorative benefits of natural settings have

also been examined (Hartig, Kaiser & Bowler, 2001; Korpela & Hartig 1996; Korpela,

Hartig, Kaiser & Fuhrer, 2001). The first two studies examined the restorative qualities of

favourite places though the authors noted that the physiological benefits of travel had not

been adequately explored in the tourism literature. The study by Hartiz et al. (2001)

considered that people who believe the restorative aspects of nature are important also behave

more responsibly towards natural environments.

Place Attachment

114

Summary of Place Identity

Within the context of the place attachment literature, place identity refers to the

emotional/symbolic attachment to a place. A person’s past experiences is considered an

important influence in developing identity, and underlies various studies into the role of past

experience in developing place attachment (Bricker & Kerstetter, 2000; Moore & Graefe,

1994; Williams, Patterson, Roggenbuck & Watson, 1992). Furthermore environmental

education in schools is supported by Measham (2004), who found that place identity is

strongly influenced by childhood experiences, more so than by engaging in adult activities

such as land production or recreational activities.

A study by Kim and Kaplan (2004) on community identity showed that residents had a strong

sense of community identity when natural features and open spaces, which allowed social

interaction, were present. Williams (2002) stated that globalisation had removed the

traditional place based community identity, which can also occur through the integration of

communities (Dixon & Durrheim, 2004).

As place identity refers to the emotional or symbolic attachment to a place, repeat visitation

can play a significant role in strengthening this attachment (Altman & Low, 1992; Belk,

1992). A study by McCabe and Stokoe (2004, p. 602), explained the role of narrative as an

expression of place identity “…when tourists relay their experiences of a place their talk

about the place becomes their talk about their identity”.

Symbolic attachment to a place is assigned by “individuals, groups and societies, and is not

necessarily related to the physical attributes of a place” (Williams et al., 1992, p. 33). Within

communities are symbols that contribute to self-identity and a distinctive community identity.

Place identity studies generally support the view that a person’s identity is closely linked to

their community identity (Dixon & Durrheim, 2004; Fried, 2000a; Hildago & Hernandez,

2001).