The word “identity” is derived from its Latin origin of identitas meaning “sameness,” which, infact, is a philosophical term that we articulate as equality or “the relation each thing bears just to itself” (Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 1995).
Urban identity refers to the collective sense of belonging, attachment, and self-definition that individuals and communities establish in relation to urban environments. It encompasses the distinctive characteristics, values, and cultural expressions that differentiate one urban area from another, as well as the shared experiences, memories, and narratives that contribute to the formation of a city's or urban community's identity. This concept is multifaceted and shaped by various factors, including historical heritage, cultural diversity, the built environment, social dynamics, and economic activities. Urban identity is not only influenced by these elements but is also continuously evolving, reflecting the dynamic and ever-changing nature of urban life.Proshansky (1978) expresses urban identity as; the person’s self-identity expressed by complex pattern as mentioned above and has mutual relationship with the environment. Big city life physical settings – sound, light, houses etc. has psychological, social, and cultural effects on urban dwellers. All these consequences an urban identity.
Relph (1960) expresses important component of the identity of place ; “sense of place, “spirit of place” or “ genius of place” (genius loci). Spirit of a place involves topography and appearance, economic functions and social activities, and particular significance deriving from past events and present situations- but it differs from the simple summation of these. Spirit of place can persist in spite of profound changes in the basic components of identity.
Urban identity, which encapsulates the various urban relationships and thresholds that characterize its layered structure, can be defined under four distinct categories to better express the accumulated relational dynamics over time.
Historical Heritage
One of the foundational elements of urban identity is historical heritage, which encompasses the historical events, traditions, and landmarks that contribute to the unique identity and character of a city (Jacobs, 1961). Historical landmarks such as monuments, buildings, and neighborhoods serve as tangible reminders of a city's past and shape its collective memory. For example, in her seminal work "The Death and Life of Great American Cities," Jane Jacobs emphasizes the importance of preserving historic neighborhoods and landmarks as vital components of urban identity (Jacobs, 1961). hese historical artifacts not only enhance the city's aesthetic appeal but also offer residents a sense of continuity and a deep connection to their heritage.
Cultural Diversity
Another crucial aspect of urban identity is cultural diversity, which refers to the mix of ethnicities, languages, religions, and lifestyles that coexist within urban areas (Florida, 2002). Cities are melting pots of cultures and traditions, where diverse communities interact and influence each other, contributing to the richness and diversity of urban identity. Cultural diversity fosters creativity, innovation, and social cohesion within cities, shaping their unique character and identity. Richard Florida, in his book "The Rise of the Creative Class," argues that cultural diversity is a key driver of urban prosperity and vibrancy (Florida, 2002). By embracing cultural diversity, cities can tap into the talents and energies of diverse populations, fostering more inclusive, vibrant, and dynamic urban environments.
Built Environment
The built environment plays a significant role in shaping urban identity, as it reflects the history, values, and aspirations of a city (Mumford, 1961Urban architecture, design, and infrastructure shape the physical landscape of a city while influencing its aesthetic appeal and functionality. Historic landmarks, modern skyscrapers, and public spaces such as parks and plazas are essential elements of the urban fabric, defining the city's identity and character. Lewis Mumford, in his book "The City in History," argues that the built environment is not just a product of physical construction but also a reflection of social and cultural dynamics (Mumford, 1961). By preserving and enhancing the built environment, cities can reinforce their identity and cultivate a strong sense of place for both residents and visitors.
Social Dynamics
Urban identity is also shaped by social dynamics, including the interactions, relationships, and networks that form within urban communities (Soja, 1989). Cities serve as hubs of social activity, where people from diverse backgrounds come together to live, work, and engage with one another. Social cohesion, a sense of community, and shared values play a vital role in shaping urban identity, fostering a sense of belonging and attachment among residents. Edward Soja, in his book "Postmodern Geographies," argues that urban identity is not just about physical space but also about social relations and cultural practices (Soja, 1989). By promoting social inclusion and civic engagement, cities can strengthen their identity and build resilient communities that thrive in the face of challenges.
Economic Activities
Economic activities play a crucial role in shaping urban identity, as they influence the livelihoods, aspirations, and social status of urban residents (Harvey, 2008). Cities are centers of commerce, industry, and innovation, offering abundant economic opportunities for both businesses and individuals. Economic vitality, entrepreneurship, and innovation drive the vibrancy and dynamism of urban life, shaping the city's identity and character. David Harvey, in his book "The Right to the City," argues that urban identity is intimately tied to economic activities and the distribution of resources within the city (Harvey, 2008). By fostering economic growth and opportunity, cities can enhance their identity and improve the quality of life for residents.
Components of Urban Identity
Lynch (1960) studies the mental image of the citizens and visual quality which is “legibility” . He focused on “imageability” on physical settings and categorized them as, paths, edges, districts ,nodes and landmarks. In summary, Lynch (1960, p:41) defines that paths are important components due to people observes “ the image” while moving though it. Districts are not dominant as paths but help people to organize city in their image. Districts are large part of the city and people observe the areas “inside” or outside of it. Nodes are the part of the paths, and they are strategic points. Entering city or beginning of the square can be related to nodes. Landmarks another point reference like nodes but its differ because individuals are not entering within them, they are external. Lynch discuses “image of the city” by dividing the city in parts and creates categorization. Paths, nodes, districts, edges, and landmarks also achieve to point about scales of identity. This work fails on not giving attention to social components.
Relp (2018) explains the components of the identity of places as.
• the buildings, objects, and landscape (which can, for example, be depicted in photographs or drawings) (physical settings)
• the activities that happen there, both regular and occasional (which can be observed and described much as an entomologist observes ants) (activities)
• meanings, including qualities such as whether the buildings are beautiful or ugly, whether the activities are productive or hindrances, or whether the place is attractive or alienating. While meanings may be rooted in setting and activities, they are not a property of them, and they have their own distinctive qualities of complexity and imagination and memory. (meanings)
Relp (1960) mentions physical settings, activities, and meanings as raw material of the identity. The dialectic links between these components are important. Settings and meanings have strong relationship while observing the setting it create a meaning on us ( other important issue of course personal past, experiences, and self-identity), activities in physical settings creates meaningful memories and consequences as identity of that place.
Proshanksy (1978) expresses that to understand the place identity self-identities (also sub-identities) must examined. The self-identity of the person, which is that critical component of personality structure that relates the behavior and experiences of the person, on the other hand, and the continuing demands of his or her social and cultural setting, on the other , to an awareness of self. (Proshanksy (1978) , p; 154). The self-identity of the individual is structured by various more specific identities (sometimes referred to as sub identities) such as sex, social class, ethnic background, occupation, religion, and still other, then it follows that there must be a place identity in this structure (Proshanksy (1978) , p; 155). Proshanksy (1978) also mention that changing economic, social, and cultural condition of individuals personal life’s affect the place identity.
While defining self-identity, Proshanksy (1978) defines three dimensions about physical setting and self-relations; cognitive- descriptive dimension, affective -evaluative dimension and role-related conception. In cognitive- descriptive dimension , person’s place identity, including not just images and memories of spaces and places, but conceptions and beliefs about size ,distance, color and other physical attributes (Proshanksy (1978), p; 157). Affective- evaluative dimension defines as emotional attachment to places and individuals evaluation of the physical settings. Lastly, role related conception requirements of settings and objects and many roles that all of us play in a complex society. (Proshanksy (1978), p; 159). He asserts that social role and physical settings have close relations. Giving an example as; “I still find it difficult to accept the that idea that a doctor whose office and clinic is a storefront in a retail shopping district could be a competent physician” (Proshanksy (1978), p; 159).
Lalli (1992) investigated the place identity with many theoretical approaches and found out that definitions were heterogeneous. Lalli (1992) create five dimensions of urban related identity from theoretical approaches. The subscale external evaluation (EVALUATION) covers the function of residents' self-enhancement. It contains evaluative comparison between own town and others, and the town's perceived uniqueness and special character. The dimension continuity with personal past (CONTINUITY) collects the significance of the urban environment for the sense of subjective temporal continuity. It reflects the hypothesized connection between own biography and the town, the symbolization of personal experiences. General attachment (ATTACHMENT) contains more unspecific items and aims at the measurement of a general sense of being at home in the town. It is the belongingness or rootedness. The subscale perception of familiarity (FAMILIARITY) covers the effects of the daily experiences in the town. Familiarity is assumed to be the result of the actions undertaken in the urban environment. In this sense it is an expression of a successful cognitive orientation. The subscale commitment (COMMITMENT) finally, asks for the perceived significance of the town for personal future, the commitment to 'want to stay'. Personal commitments are of central importance for the stability of self-concept.(Lalli 1992, p;295).
Antonsich (2019) defines social and personal identities are the keys to understanding the “place identity” (place attachment, sense of place etc.).Personal referents revolve around the individual’s unique web of personal relations (e.g. family, friends, and partners), his/her memories of past life (e.g. childhood and school time), relevant past experiences (e.g. first love encounters), and present ordinary practices (e.g., working and shopping). In this sense, echoing a phenomenological perspective, place can be conceptualized as “a cumulative archive of personal spatial experience” (Antonsich 2019 , p. 12 citation in (Paasi 2001, p. 25)).
Social referents refer instead to material and/or symbolic characteristics which exist independently from the subject who experiences them, which cannot be reduced to the history of an individual (Antonsich 2019 , p. 12 citation in (Paasi 1991, p. 249)), and which shape the specific ‘identity’ of a given geographic space: history, traditions, culture, language, institutions, (character of) people, landscape features, economic activities, etc. (Antonsich 2019 , p. 12).
Both personal and social referents can lead to the discursive construction of place as ‘home’ (Blunt, 2005, p. 506). Place attachment is in other terms individuals defines it as felling at “home”. Antonsich (2019) propounds there is two definitions about home. First one is domestic(ated) space, which can be associated with both security and violence; and second home as a symbolic space, which resonates instead with feelings of attachment and familiarity (Antonsich 2019, p13).
In his work, Antonsich (2019) also point out that personal identity does not occur in isolation it’s in relationship with different context. Personal identity shape by social and cultural components of individual for sure. Jenkins expresses (2004, p. 4) that “all human identities are by definition social identities” . When place is evoked as a personal, intimate home for oneself, it does not tend to be filled with meanings of (social) inclusion/exclusion, but it remains open to the fruition, attachment, and belonging of any other individual (Antonsich (2019), p;17).
Dixon and Durrhem (2000) have examined the relationship with self and the place. They identity their research as “displacing place identity”. First to understand place identity , the individualistic dimensions examined ; Human actors are cast as imaginative users of their environments, agents who are able to appropriate physical contexts in order to create, here, a space of attachment and rootedness, a space of being. The personalization of dwellings is an oft-cited example. By this practice, `home’ places are organized and represented in ways that help individuals to maintain self-coherence and self-esteem, to realize self-regulation principles (Dixon and Durrhem (2000), p:29). Secondly, social construction of the place identity investigated; Place-identity as something that people create together through talk : a social construction that allows them to make sense of their connectivity to place and to guide their actions and projects accordingly (Dixon and Durrhem (2000), p:32). These approaches assist to get the idea “self” and “others” and locating yourself in society.
Dixon and Durrhem (2000)’s case study in South Africa is an important example to find out “political approaches” effects on place identity. Dixon and Durrhem (2000) mention that material and political transformation in South Africa causes the loss identities of old places. In this case, relationship with people and place is go under destruction. In this research, south Africa’s beaches are examined. (Between 1982 and 1995). Cape Provincial Administration decided to replace the unwanted people from their home. “Home” (Hout Bay) become another place by destruction of trees , mass influx of people and high-rise buildings. Due to new point of view in political approaches, old local people excluded; “Do they want to become civilized westerners, or do they want to stay tribal? If they want to stay tribal then they mustn’t come down here. “ ( Dixon and Durrhem (2000), p;35). Gentrification hides under the political approaches. Finally, removing from home to another place also differs identity of the “other place” . Now the unwanted people live in beach-side where is a space for family activity occurring for people. Due to surveys of case study, beach-side also lost identity due to pollution and unmannerly dress of others ( Dixon and Durrhem (2000), p;36).
Dixon and Durrhem (2000) ‘s build a political awareness about the place-identity. This perspective of the identity needs more attention. In this case, political approaches affect many components. People avoid going certain places, many locations loss their identity and people become “homeless”. Social life, memories , feeling and material environment ruins and consequences as loss of self-identity as well as the loss of place identity.
CONCLUSION
Urban identity is a complex and dynamic construct shaped by the interplay of historical heritage, cultural diversity, the built environment, social dynamics, and economic activities. It reflects not only the physical attributes of a city but also the collective experiences, values, and memories of its residents. Theories from Proshansky, Relph, Lynch, and others highlight the profound connection between self-identity and place identity, emphasizing that the built environment, social relations, and personal experiences contribute to a sense of belonging and attachment. Moreover, the political, social, and economic transformations within urban areas can either strengthen or disrupt urban identity, as seen in Dixon and Durrheim’s exploration of political influences on place identity. Ultimately, fostering a strong urban identity requires thoughtful preservation of historical and cultural assets, inclusive social policies, and sustainable urban design, ensuring that cities remain vibrant, meaningful, and resilient for future generations.
REFERENCES
Antonsich, M. (2019). LIVING TOGETHER IN DIVERSITY. A JOURNEY FROM SCHOLARLY VIEWS TO PEOPLE’S VOICES AND BACK. Bollettino Della Società Geografica Italiana, 7(3), 317–337.
Blunt, A. (2005). Cultural geography: Cultural geographies of home. Progress in Human Geography, 29, 505–515. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132505ph564pr
Dixon, J., & Durrheim, K. (2000). Displacing place-identity: A discursive approach to locating self and other. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39(1), 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466600164318
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how it's transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. Basic Books.
Harvey, D. (2008). The Right to the City. New Left Review, 53, 23-40.
Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.
Lalli, M. (1992). Urban-Related Identity: Theory, Measurement and Empirical Findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 12, 285-303.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80078-7Relp (1960)
Lewis Mumford (1961), 'The Myth of Megalopolis', in Lewis Mumford, The City in History: Its Origins, Its Transformations, and Its Prospects, London: Secker and Warburg, pp. 525-46.
Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Proshansky, 1978. Proshansky H.M.. The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 10 (1978)
Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. London: Pion
Soja, E. W. (1989). Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory. New York: Verso.