Implications for Place Attachment in

This study found out that there is a close association between social norms within the urban and place attachment, and how they are mutually reliant and informative. As it was discussed above, social capital requires mutual reliability, this means, as highlighted by Portes (2000), that there needs to be

relatedness between individuals and others, and others meaning not only other people but also places. This perspective also has been heavily discussed in branding literature as well in the context of corporate branding and its link to social identity literature.

Ashforth and Mael (1989) discussed that Social Identity Theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) can be applied to understand organisational identity, where the organisation is seen as a social group and there is an integration of individual’s self-concept with the organisational identity. Despite the initial static, unified view on self-concept, researchers abandoned this idea to elaborate further and agree on the multidimensional and dynamic structure and use it to refer to the multiplicity of identity (Markus and Wurf, 1987; Burke, 1980; Martindale, 1980 and Stryker, 1980). Markus and Wurf (1987) further argued that self-concept and identity research veered towards the notion of self-concept containing a variety of representations that are not just verbal or image based but also include depictions of demographic characteristics of past, present and future. This view was also engrained in the nature of the present study where the associations between self (both in social and individual aspect), place through the notions of relatedness and representations. However the representations in here refer to the both representations of places to outsiders and to the residents but also the representations of people in regards to places. This intertwined relationship created a platform to serve the mutually reliant and informative nature of the place attachment elements.

Similarly, Maxwell and Knox (2009) drew attention to the similarity of this concept with employer branding (in the context of corporate branding) and suggested that an attractive and a unique employer brand can motivate employees to “live the brand” (pg.5). This promotes employers to reflect a more positive image of the organisation to external stakeholders (Dutton and Dukerich, 1991) through the positive representation of self-concept. There are several examples of this in corporate world such as Google, Facebook, Dropbox and Airbnb.

In this perspective, this study revealed that in the context of places and place branding, this ‘reflection of positive image’ occurs in forms of relatedness, ownership and loyalty, involvement and pride, despite the cultural, social and geographical differences of the two cases. However it is important at this stage to clarify what involvement entails. There is a general consensus amongst researchers and practitioners that the use of the word involvement implies a distinction between different types of involvement rather than a stand alone meaning (Laurent and Kapferer, 1985).

Houston and Rothschild (1977) made a distinction of enduring and situational involvement where the former relates to a more general and permanent concern and the latter refers to a more situational behaviour (Laurent & Kapferer, 1985). Arora (1982) discussed enduring involvement further by stating that it derives from centrally held values of the consumers that defines

their identity and their ego (Ostrom and Brock, 1968). Another distinction highlighted by the researchers is personal involvement (Laurent & Kapferer, 1985 and Zaichkowsky, 1985) where the choice of brand relates to the self- concept because of their symbolic meaning and capacity to express lifestyle or personality (Levy, 1959).

In reflection of this, in Leeds, the dynamics were less complicated where there was a harmony between the elements of place attachment, yet, in Istanbul it was much more complex. For instance, the data from Leeds revealed that the ownership and loyalty is enhanced by relatedness and fed into involvement into community projects and subsequently to the feeling of belongingness and pride. This dynamism was observed to be an organic and sustainable way of creating and being a part of, as well as reflecting, a positive image. However in Istanbul, this was done in a less sustainable way where relatedness was on a relatively minimal level and heavily relied on visual environment (including built environment and people as evidence) whereas ownership was fed by pride. Involvement, on the other hand, was just a nostalgic idea where the residents yearn for but something not actively interested in being a part of. This also highlights a gap in the social dynamism and suggests a top-down approach of the urban governance and policymaking where the focus is on the creation, management and communication of city brand image to outsiders.

This, as it was also revealed in the data, caused individualistic pockets of city lives where place attachment is based on the economic representations of the visual environment and lack of it caused a happier gated community life. This indeed is not any means of a measurement of the city brand nor that is the intention of the present study however it creates an isolation in between the communities, a social and economic gap, and even potential political tensions within the different communities. Most importantly, it creates a generation of “neutral citizens” who are less interested and feel less encouraged to be involved in the wellbeing of an overall city.

This parallels Trueman et al. (2007)’s emphasis on the experience of cities as brands is very much likely to be influenced not just by its aspirations and achievements but also its communities as brand ambassadors. This perspective suggests a need of ‘brand story’ where people are encouraged to take ownership of a place or disown and disassociate where there is a negative image emphasis (Trueman and Cornelius, 2008).

The word ‘attachment’, in its core, suggests an initiative of a degree of attractiveness, appeal, aptness and/or emotional tie in order for the other part to be attached. In environmental psychology literature, place attachment is defined as a collection of emotional ties that are developed between place of residence and people (Giuliani, 2003; Lewicka, 2008, 2010; Low and Altman, 1992). In addition Florek (2010) stressed that attachment can result in many positive consequences for a city. In view of this, the present study is in line

with this perspective and revealed the differences between Leeds and Istanbul in terms of the possible outcomes of resident attachment and loyalty behaviour.