See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/349935641

Place Attachment in the Riverfront Public Space Case of Malaysia

Article  in  IOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering · March 2021

DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

CITATIONS READS

0 21

4 authors, including:

Bambang Karsono Bassim Saleh

University Malaysia Sarawak Ajman University
43 PUBLICATIONS   38 CITATIONS    12 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Julaihi Wahid
University Malaysia Sarawak
46 PUBLICATIONS   112 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Place Identitiy in Medan View project

The Author View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Bambang Karsono on 14 March 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Place Attachment in the Riverfront Public Space Case of Malaysia

To cite this article: B Karsono et al 2021 IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 1101 012028

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 113.211.181.167 on 13/03/2021 at 15:01

The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

Place Attachment in the Riverfront Public Space Case of

Malaysia

B Karsono1, B M Saleh2, C O Chung2 and J Wahid1

1
Architecture Department, Faculty of Built Environment, University Malaysia Sarawak
(UNIMAS), Malaysia
2
Architecture Engineering Department, College of Architecture, Art and Design, Ajman
University, United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.)
Corresponding author: kbambang@unimas.my

Abstract. Many cities in Malaysia established their first development on the banks of the river.
Urbanization phenomenon and technological advances then cause these riverfront areas
developed and changed gradually. Progressively, inappropriate physical changes at the riverfront
environment can reduce the usage and meaning of place together with the level of place
attachment. The role of physical appearances related to the activities become famous issues in
urban design discourses as an effort to establish the identity to the place; nevertheless, the
research to measure the attachment level in public space is rarely done. This research is to
identify the place attachment and its contributed components focus on pedestrian space in the
riverfront area, public spaces which are favoured in Malaysia. Mixed-method approaches are
implemented in this study by developing a framework to indicate the elements that affect the
place attachment by the user. Surveys and interviews carried out in two riverfront promenade in
Kuching and Malacca, there are Sarawak and Malacca riverfront promenade. 330 respondents
involved in the questionnaire while 26 people were interviewed. Triangulation method is used to
analyse the data and the results are achieved based on the objective of the research. The results
found that some factors affected the level user’s attachment, namely: their familiarity to place,
length of engagement, personal background and user’s role.
Keywords. place attachment, familiarity to place, length of engagement, place dependence

1. Introduction
Place attachment is related to the quality of user’s experiences within the urban space, concerning the
importance and function of a place who use and occupy the space. It is important to recognize precisely
the specific quality embedded in a place resulted from the user’s perception in a correct interpretation.
Therefore, to investigate the quality of place attachment and its elements become an important effort to
understand the identity of the place. Place attachment is an important component to generate and giving
meaning to the place in supporting urban life and sustaining the activities within the city.
This study attempts to evaluate the physical elements in urban centres in Malaysia by identifying the
characters and identities. Besides, external influences have led the cities to emerged in global features,
which have reflected on the homogeneity of buildings shape and appearance, instead of loss of local
cultural values, loss of urban attractiveness, the role of public space for cultural as well as social
interaction. This transformation will influence the way users perceive and experience the places and will
giving effects on their existing psychological meanings. Loss of psychological meanings can affect the
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

identity of place and interfere with the level of emotional attachment to the place.
This study aimed to examine the place attachment and its elements that influence the perceptions of
the user in the riverfront promenade in Malaysia. Further to this, the research will explore the causal
relationship between place attachment, place meaning, attributes as well as characteristics of a place that
strongly influence the level of attachment.
Two riverfront open spaces that pioneered riverfront urban renewal as public spaces in Malaysia were
selected as the case study, i.e. the Sarawak riverfront promenade (S-RP) in Kuching and the Melaka
riverfront promenade (M-RP) in Malacca. The two case studies are not analysed, by comparison,
however, the context of the discussion will have a bearing on the objective of the study. The picture
from these two places will enlighten the discussion further. Both of the study areas was dominated by
important historical buildings, sites and streets which were constantly changing according to the time of
day. Concerning this place, the historical value is one of the reasons for visitors to stopover at the sites
along with the existent of modern physical design features available at the site which become alternate
destination and attraction for the visitors.
From the above background, this study identifies the element which covers the familiarity related to
the place, length of engagement, the background of the user and user’s role as well as the strong
characteristics that influence the place attachment. This study will assist in developing parameters for
the development of local urban areas more identifiable and meaningful to users.

2. Literature Review
There are three elements needed to figure out the quality of a place i.e. physical features, functional
concern, and meanings or symbols [1]. According to Relph [1], a place is made up of physical forms,
supported by activities and developed meanings. Canter [2] has a similar view in describing a place –
he profound that it is three-dimensional generated by its activities, physical environment as well as the
concept of place. In light of this, this research aims to find out the level of attachment in the riverfront
promenade within the city in Malaysia. This research argues that the attachment means the relatedness
of physical elements and its function or relatedness of the user to a specific place. It can be understood
that the level of attachment will influence the meaning of the place.
Definitions for place attachment is known as a good emotional attachment among individuals within
their groups to a certain environment [3]. For the last three decades, attachment of places and concepts
related to the sense of place has become a debated theory among scholars. [1], [3], [4]. Various efforts
through empirical study have been conducted to explore these concepts for the last 15 years, and this
study becomes part and partial of the contribution to the study focusing on measuring the quality of
attachment.
Majority of scholars agree that the level and form of attachment are affected by several elements, i.e.,
by characteristics of socio-demographic [5], [6], activity and management relationships [7], [8] and
landscape type [9]. Lobo [4] argue that the sense of place in North America’s community emerges from
the length of engagement and also concerning all the values of its emotional and physical and perceptual
as well as attributes that attached to the place.
The physical appearances and its characteristics contribute to the formation of a sense of place and
followed by intense attachment and place satisfaction [10]. Researchers sometimes failed to describe
the degree of influence and the causes of attachment formation [10]. Corresponding to this opinion, the
research is composed to examine the degree of the characteristics and attributes of riverfront promenade
affect the place attachment.
Research in place attachment usually encompasses the dimensions of physical appearances,
perceptual and psychological as well as socio-cultural aspects to the place. Urban design has accentuated
the relatedness of these dimensions in research into the perception and the quality of place within the
city. Place attachment delineates the bonding of people with their place and interdependence among
them which create the characteristics and attributes within the place. Assessment of the attachment level
and recognition of place differences may clarify the relationship between perception and meaning
through the attributes that they have on the place. By taking the riverfront promenade as the case study

2
The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

it is believed that has a strong influence on the nature of the city centre and acts as a contributor to the
lives of urban users. In this context, place attachment research is important to preserve the common
sense of the city as well as enhancing the well-being of users who have an affinity for the place.

3. Methodology
Many researchers and scholars conduct quantitative and qualitative methods in evaluating place
attachment [6], [11], [12], [13]. They had established two methods of measuring environmental
perceptions and attachment either direct or indirect [14], [15]. Indirect methods are self-assessment
reports (including questionnaire, interviews, checklists and discussion) and time-sampling (reporting at
several time intervals on what to see), whereas the direct method implicates a phenomenological
approach to examine people's activities and events, as they occur spontaneously in daily life [16]. This
technique can be produced by a critical description concerning the phenomenon and discarded all
preconceived notions about the object [17]. The purpose is to conceive the qualitative uniqueness
concerning the place's holistic meaning. This method has been broadly used by scholars and researchers
[6], [13], [18], [19], [20] in urban studies.
This research implements both methods, direct and indirect, to examine place attachment and place
distinctions. Indirect methods (questionnaires, interviews, checklists and discussions) explain common
and specific patterns of human contact with places, while direct methods (field observations) provide
researchers with an opportunity to examine the reality of a place and the activities involved in
influencing attachment. By implementing these methods, the holistic patterns and meanings of
attachment to the place can be uncovered.

4. Findings and Discussion

4.1. Length of engagement
Length of engagement affects the level of attachment in the specific place variously. Conforming to the
existing research by many scholars, place attachment is affected by the length of engagement, frequent
visits also are often generated by the length of stay in a particular area [20]. Evidence gathered from
surveys and interviews has shown that continuous and frequent engagement contributes to familiarity
with places and long-term involvement creates a sense of belonging.
Respondents linked their awareness and familiarity into the place to the frequency of visits and the
duration of engagement indicated in such reactions:
"I'm familiar with this place. I've been running my family's souvenir shop for the past 20 years. It's
a special place because of the old building" (Respondent 05: Store Owner, 20 years of involvement).
M-RP
“I came here because I've been shopping here for the past 10-25 years. The facilities here are nice
and convenient for walking. I come here if I'm looking for certain foods. It's very special because it's
been there a long time ago. " (Respondent 6: buyer, 20 years involvement). S-RP

The results in Table 1 shows the respondents frequent the area regularly. Daily activities mostly
implicate static users whereas mobile users (visitors and buyers) have engaged more weekly and
monthly. S-RPs show the highest percentage of daily engagement while M-RPs show higher frequency
for monthly engagement.

3
The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

Table 1. Engagement Frequency (N=330) Table 2. Engagement period (N = 330)

Place S-RP M-RP Place S-RP M-RP

FREQUENCY % LENGTH OF ENGAGEMENT %

Daily 58.2 47.3 1-4 hours 35.45 42.7
Once a week 9.1 10.0 5-8 hours 10.91 15.5
2 – 3 times per month 9.1 14.5 9-12 hours 50.00 29.1
Once a month 23.6 26.4 More than 12 hours 3.64 10.9

The presence of significant numbers of office workers as well as those who do business and work in
the buildings next to S-RP and M-RP has contributed to the value of urban usage of space. This situation
is proved by the period of engagement shown in the results of the study (refer to Table 2) indicate that
in S-RP 50% of respondents engage 9-12 hours in the place, whereas in M-RP only 29%. The highest
number of respondents engage 1-4 hours in both S-RP and M-RP for leisure and shopping purposes.
Resultant from the frequent visits increases the familiarity level of people within the place.
Table 4. Do you visit this promenade every
Table 3. Last visited (N = 165)
time you are in this city? (N = 165)
Place S-RP M-RP Place S-RP M-RP

LAST VISIT To Place % FREQUENCY %

Last week 25.5 21.82 Must 25.5 21.82
Last month 15.5 22.73 Always 15.5 22.73
A few months ago 6.3 5.45 Sometimes 6.3 5.45

Last year 2.7 0.0

Patterns of engagement are also supported by research findings showing the frequency of visits
indicated by respondents' during their last visits. Table 3 shows that the majority of respondents' of their
last visits were 'last week' and 'last month' and the most of them also came to see this places all the time
or most of the time when they came to Kuching or Malacca (refer to Table 4).
Figure 1 indicates higher levels of an emotional attachment appeared from respondents who engaged
in the promenade daily or who have been implicated in promenade for more than five years. Both user’s
groups (mobile and static) in S-RP and M-RP were identified as having strong feelings about attachment,
meaning, positive affect, satisfaction and enjoyment. Although the study also shows that less positive
stances about safety and security were mentioned.
The differences in reaction between groups are significant in S-RP and M-RP. Based on our depth
interviews, the pattern may be related to the strength of the place's identity as reflected in the historical
open space, the sense of belonging due to the period of engagement and feelings towards changes and
physical improvement in the area.
Although there are differences in the types of engagements, for those who have been involved less
than five years in S-RP and M-RP, the values of 2.88 and 2.43 in Table 5 indicates the different degree
of attachment to place. This can be related to the issues of insecurity that appeared during the interview.
This finding suggests that riverfront promenade as a place of attraction also reflects diversity in
attachment

4
The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

Figure 1. Emotional attachment levels referring to its length of engagement for static
respondents in S-RP and M-RP.

Table 5. Emotional attachment levels referring to its length of engagement for static
respondents in S-RP and M-RP
LEVEL OF EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT
ENGAGEMENT
S-RP M-RP
< 5 years ≥ 5 years < 5 years ≥ 5 years
Duration of stay
(N=29) (N=28) (N=26) (N=28)
Average 2.88 3.25 2.43 2.78

The results of the survey indicate that the functional attachment is varied according to its length of
engagement. Figure 2 shows that static respondents who have been engaged in promenade for more than
five years have higher levels of functional connectivity than those who have been there for less than five
years. Static respondents from S-RP who have more than five years of experience know this place have
a strong attachment with promenade as the best place to do whatever they need to do, feel comfortable
and that place is important for them. However, positive reactions have led to the process of improving
physical quality to the promenade.
Table 6 indicates the functional attachment level for static respondent associated with its length of
engagement. Respondents who were involved with open space less than five years of 2.78 (S-RP) and
2.57 (M-RP) accordingly indicated that the attachment level to promenade open space was above the
average value. This scenario is corresponding to its long term influence of the engagement on open
space in the sense of supporting pride, belonging and attachment. Many static respondents were those
implicated in economic transactions and thus their continued involvement in open space created a sense
of security in their activities and dependencies.

Table 6. Functional attachment levels in S-RP and M-RP referring to its length of
engagement for static respondents
LEVEL OF FUNCTIONAL ATTACHMENT
ENGAGEMENT
S-RP M-RP
< 5 years ≥ 5 years < 5 years ≥ 5 years
Duration of stay
(N=29) (N=28) (N=26) (N=28)
Average 2.78 2.96 2.57 2.86

5
The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

Figure 2. Functional attachment levels in S-RP and M-RP referring to its length of engagement for
static respondents

4.2. Length of familiarity

Table 8. Relationship between familiarity and

Table 7. Familiarity Level to places (N=330)
emotional attachment
S-RP M-RP FAMILIARITY (N=330)
FAMILIARITY
% Attachment Very familiar Familiar
Very familiar 47.3 39.6
Place S-RP 89.0 % 55.7 %
Familiar 52.7 60.4
M-RP 81.3 % 58.4 %

Table 9. Familiar places in S-RP and M-RP

S-RP M-RP
Square Tower Boat Museum
Floating mosque Open space
Food and drinks vendor Tan Kim Seng Bridge
Shaded seat Clock tower
Boat jetty Jonker street
Shophouses Kampung Jawa
Pedestrian bridge Rempah Garden
DUN building Kampung Morten
River cruise boat Hang Tuah & Chan Koo Chen Bridge

The respondents were asked about their level of familiarity in S-RP and M-RP about their continued
engagement, knowledge and familiarization. Table 7 indicates the high level of familiarity with the
places founded from most respondents. This is endorsed by static users involved daily and has a close
relationship with other people who engage in the places.
Based on interviews, familiarity is the highly frequent mentioned aspect from respondents while
asked about their reason why they attached to a place. One such response was from a street vendor in S-
RP:
"I chose to vend here because here is where I started doing business for many years and got used to
this place, already know many people here and know them well ..." (Respondent 03: hawker, 12 years
of involvement) S-RP

6
The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

Length of engagement and frequent visits become reasons for most of the respondents to mention that
they recognize the place very well. The familiarity is also shown from respondents' understanding about
the physical appearances and changes in the place.
“Uncle is very familiar with this area. Names of the street have changed a lot. The old market used
to be next to the dockyard but the market was demolished and it became a field and parking lot…
”(Respondent 04: pedestrian, 20 years of involvement) S-RP.
The following illustrates the respondent's familiarity with other people:
"No, I will not leave this place. Because I have many regular customers and I know other traders
here ..." (Respondent 05: street vendor, 15 years of involvement) M-RP.
It is found that the respondents' familiarity level is related to the frequent visit to special physical
appearances, shops kiosk and open spaces. Table 9 indicates the most commonplace is the place that
represents the main function of the place. It is noteworthy that respondents also described the open space
as a whole for their familiarity while others noted the existence of a well-known and popular building
that attracted visitors.
Referring to the influence of familiarity, the findings are in line with Manzo [21] which argue that
the most commonplace is the space that users often use or visit. An intense familiarity with places can
support the cultivation of a sense of belonging to a particular place.

5. Conclusion
Level of attachment to S-RP and M-RP is strongly influenced by the role of the user and also by the
length of engagement within the place. It can be concluded that the stronger attachment can be developed
if more engagement frequency emerges within the place. Length of engagement as well as familiarity is
the elements that link to the level of attachment. Studies agree with the idea that in some places people
can become more attached to such places because of a high level of experience, which is usually shaped
by their long-term settlements in specific locations, witnessing important events and frequent visits to
the place [6], [20]. Experiences that related to long term involvement in an economic transaction, regular
business and socio-cultural activities, can be associated with increasing levels of engagement with the
public and activities in open space.
The results of the study clearly show that the length of engagement contributes to the familiarity to
the place, thus affecting the level of attachment. These findings bear out that the level of attachment is
affected by the length of engagement. Whereas the cultural characteristics of the place and the ethnic
background of the consumer influence the level of attachment which was reflected on the strength of
the sense of belonging to the place. Level of attachment was reflected by the memory, knowledge about
the place used by the high level of familiarity and long-term integration within the place.
The study indicates that there are slight differences in emotional and functional attachment amongst
static and mobile users. The static user expresses a stronger sense of identity and dependence to the
place, while the mobile user is closer to the functional aspects of the riverfront promenade. The study
results support the assumption that the attachment level of a place differs depends on the role of the user
in that place.

6. References
[1] Relph E 1976 Place and placelessness (London: Pion Publication).
[2] Canter D 1977 The psychology of place (London: The Architectural Press Ltd).
[3] Low S 1992 Symbolic ties that bind: Place attachment in the plaza. In I. Altman & S. Low (Eds.),
Place Attachment (New York: Plenum Press).
[4] Lobo C 2004 The role of environmental perceptions in a sense of place: A case study of
neighbourhoods in Phoenix, Arizona. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Arizona State University,
UMI Proquest Digital Dissertation,
[5] Altman I, Low S, (Eds.) 1992 Place attachment (New York: Plenum Press).
[6] Gustafson P 2001 Meanings of place: Everyday experience and theoretical conceptualizations,
Journal of Environmental Psychology 21 pp. 5-16.

7
 The 13th International UNIMAS Engineering Conference 2020 (ENCON 2020) IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 1101 (2021) 012028 doi:10.1088/1757-899X/1101/1/012028

[7] Kyle G, Graefe A, Manning R, Bacon J 2004 Effects of place attachment on user’s perceptions
of social and environmental condition in natural setting, Journal of Environmental Psychology
24 pp. 213-225.
[8] Davenport M A, Anderson D. H 2005 Getting from sense of place to place-based management:
An interpretative investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape change Journal
of Society and Natural Resources 18 pp. 625-641.
[9] Williams D R, Anderson B S, McDonald C D, Patterson M. E 1995 Measuring place attachment:
More preliminary results. Paper presented at the Leisure Research Symposium, NRPA
Congress, San Antonio.
[10] Stedman C R 2003 Is it just a social construction? The contribution of the physical environment
to sense of place, Journal of Society and Natural Resources 16 pp. 671-685.
[11] Gieryn, T F 2000 A Space for a place in sociology. Journal of Annu. Rev. Social 26 pp 463-496.
[12] Karsono B, Indira S S, Deni 2015 The significance of uniqueness, comfort, security and safety to
place attachment. Jurnal Teknologi 78 pp. 179-183.
[13] Karsono B, Deni, Fithri C.A 2016 Assessment of Functional and Emotional Attachment in
Malacca Riverfront Promenade, Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering) 78 pp. 153-157.
[14] Proshansky H M, Ittelson W H, Rivlin L G 1976 Environmental psychology: People and their
settings (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston).
[15] Gifford R 1987 Environmental psychology: Principles and Practice (Boston: Allyn and Bacon,
Inc).
[16] von Eckartsberg R 1998 Introducing existential-phenomenological psychology. In R. Valle (Ed.),
Phenomenological inquiry in psychology (pp. 3-20), (New York: Plenum).
[17] Seamon D 2003 A geography of the lifeworld, (New York: Routledge Keegan Paul).
[18] Jacobs J 1984 The death and life of great American cities: The failure of modern town planning,
(London: Peregrine Books).
[19] Shuhana S 2004, Kriteria kejayaan jalan membeli-belah tradisi di Malaysia: Kajian kes Kuala
Lumpur, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
[20] Karsono B, Wahid J 2015Attributes and Characteristics of Place Attachment, Applied Mechanics
and Materials 747 pp. 132-135.
[21] Manzo L C 2009 A search for social connection in America's town square: Times square and
urban public life, Southern Communication Journal 69 pp. 1-21.

View publication stats