Planning and Design Implementation
Making Sustainable Historical River City Through Place Attachment
2025 Volume 13 Issue 1 Pages 209-229
Details
2025 Volume 13 Issue 1 Pages 209-229
Palembang is one of old historical city in Indonesia. It is an old river city, which its riverside settlements become the physical evidences of past riverine culture. Therefore, the existence of the settlements become a determinant for sustainable identity of river city. Previous studies have explored how the people place relationship support the sustainable identity of a certain heritage area. There is limitation in studies which discussing the people place relationship and the sustainable city identity. The paper examined the way people place relationship at old riverside settlement can support the sustainability of Palembang's identity as historical river city through memorability and place attachment. To achieve this aim, paper has two objectives. Firstly, paper investigated the memorability on the history of the old elements. Secondly, paper investigated the place attachment of old building and spaces along the riverside both at city center and riverside settlement. The study used quantitative method. It surveyed the people of six riverside settlements by using questionnaire. Data were analyzed by using factor analysis. Results found the memorability of historical elements located at riverside settlements is relatively lower than the ones at city center. Meanwhile, the attachment is relatively high for historical elements at settlement. Paper also found the most memorable and attached city elements that represent city identity are located at city center. The sustainability identity comes from the integration between physical aspect and historical value of the old urban elements that lead to the high attachment to people. Paper conclude that encouraging place attachment through promoting historical value and place identity of old elements at riverside settlement lead to the recognition of Palembang’s identity as river city. The study enriches the city branding strategy in urban heritage area.
The old city was built based on social values and community activities in the past. The social values of society and its activities are arranged in a unique system of order, unique as a characteristic of the city. Its uniqueness is rooted over a long period of time and has become the city's identity. Palembang is an old river city in Indonesia which was built in 682, during the riverine culture. The city is divided by Musi River. In area of city center, there are some small rivers that flow to the Musi River. River had function as main transportation line as well as the source of water supply. Therefore, the life of city was begun along the riverside. Wooden buildings were built to function in government area, public market, docks as well as settlements.
The land development was massively done in early 1900 during the colonial era (Sujiyati and Ali, 2015). After the independence era, the land development was continued and formed a new urban structure at landed area. The riverside area is still a part of city center. Musi river and its tributaries are still secondary transportation line to reach other areas in Sumatera. The development at riverside area tend to build new building on land and use modern building material such as brick and concrete. The existence of wooden buildings along the riverside began to be threatened. In addition, modern values have led to a decline in appreciation for old city structures of riverside settlements. On the other hand, riverside settlements in Palembang become the physical evidences of past riverine culture. The uniqueness of a series of old wooden houses become specific character of Palembang. The settlements are still occupied and a place called home for many families for long time ago. People are still lives and related with the settlements. The existence of the settlements could become a determinant for sustainable identity of river city. This decreasing appreciation leads to research question: in what way people place relationship at old riverside settlement can support the sustainability of Palembang's identity as historical river city.
This research investigates in what way the people place relationship at old riverside settlement can support the sustainability of Palembang's identity as historical river city. Unlike city landmarks which are generally in large-dimensional buildings and are known on a wide urban scale, riverbank settlements are on a smaller scale. The scope of the neighbourhood of this riverbank settlement is also composed of buildings and spaces. The owner of these building and spaces are vary from groups of people to families as the smallest entities of the city society. With smaller scale in terms of area and dimensions, this study come to a question whether it is possible for historical elements in the riverbank settlement to form the identity of the city of Palembang. Therefore, paper investigated the memorability and place attachment of old building and spaces along the riverside both at city center and riverside settlement. At the beginning, paper elaborate the theoretical review on identity and place attachment as one of people place relationship theory. It is continued by the explanation on survey questionnaire and factor analysis in method section. How place attachment generates a sustainable the identity is discussed at the final part.
Literature reviewThe city consists of the people and their life. In accommodating the life, the city consists of some urban elements which lay on an ordering system (Handinoto, 1999; Widyatsari, 2002). Those elements are the physical forms (Conzen, 1960; Lynch, 1960) that accommodate various function and land use (Shirvani, 1985). The physical elements with the function link into a supporting system to run the life of the city through economic activity, movement configuration and infrastructure (Fattahi and Kobayashi, 2009; Hillier, 2002; Kostof, 1999).
Besides the ordering system, the entity of the elements contributes to the creation of city distinctiveness and uniqueness. These creations are also known as character, and lead to the identity recognition. Character is another term to describe the identity. In general, it consists of spatial and physical character. Spatial character is understood by the spatial configuration and experienced attached to it. It leads to spatial ambiance of the environment (Gajjar and Bhavsar, 2019). Distinctive feature and natural elements shape the physical character of a natural environment (Gharaibeh, Al.Zu’bi, et al., 2019). For built environment, the literally elements of space shape the character of a place (Jive´n and Larkham, 2003), such as the opening dimensions of buildings along the streets (Ja’afar and Harun, 2018) or narrow streets along the settlement (Gajjar and Bhavsar, 2019).
As character indicates the distinctive feature, then it also indicates a set of quality of a place. Place character consists of many special distinctive feature and elements. Specifically, urban waterfront has unique character as a result of city-river relationship. Besides the unique physical elements, the quality of urban waterfront such as ecosystem quality, programs content, safety and movement also determine the character (Petrtýlová and Matej, 2022). The combination among of these features promote a unique value such as meaning, memory, belongings and familiarity. Furthermore, these values are source of the notion of identity (Gharaibeh, Al.Zu’bi, et al., 2019)
The definition of oneself leads to one’s identity. Ville and Guérin-Pace (2005) mention that there are three identity constructions; (1) status-based identity, (2) private identity and (3) narrative form. With his social position, one can define himself into a certain category of identity, named as status-based identity. A private identity is based on one’s specific personal history, not from a position in social life. His interaction with his social life constructs his narrative form of identity. These three types of identity can be affirmed, imposed or given and connected to the personal identity. Based on this, the personal identity could be influenced by social environment. As mentioned by Ville and Guérin-Pace (2005), the identification of one’s identity is constructed from two sources; the social and event. The social sources mean the application of ones in the society such as family, parental role, work and country of origin whilst the event refers to any episodes of life, value or opinion that led to the establishment of the one’s social affiliation. Hence, the social environment constructs the identity.
Environment is highly important for identity construction. As mentioned by Bers (2001), the society is constantly changing and it is challenging to the construction of identity of people. Therefore, in her study on young generation identity, the firm identity is a need that influence their character. The society form the concepts of self and community through the social-cultural aspects. Castells (2010) mentions identity as a form of meaning directed from cultural attributes that can be generated from the dominant institution that socially coincide with one’s self definition. The dynamic of society contributes to the representing the identity as the social representation (Howarth, 2002). Hence, the social identity and self-categorization is continually developed.
As a social representation, identity and place are inseparable. Place accommodate the physical setting for people to conduct their activities and form social categorization (Relph, 1976). This categorization is the root of identity. Place identity also can be formed by the old elements such as built heritage as well as the modern one such as the modern avant grade designed element (Gospodini, 2004). As it accommodates the people activities for many years, the physical elements is not only generate place distinctiveness, but also shape the memory of the place (Lewicka, 2008). Hence, the physical environment reflects the place distinctiveness or identity. Along with this, the social categorization led to the formation of social meaning as reflection of identity of society. Place and social categorization create the distinctiveness of building and space which is known as place character. It should be physically formed and recognized well by the people Dovey, Wood, et al. (2004). When the place character is related to the representation of one’s identity, the abandonment of place makes the loss of identity.
Other studies on people and identity of place are known as concept of place bonding. Tuan (1977) mentions that there is an affective bond between people and the place which he called it as Topophilia. The theory of affective bond later developed as attachment. People and their environment are tied and this ties enhanced memories and perceptions towards a place and identity, named as attachment. The attachment leads to the affirmation of identity. The types of attachment are sourced from the family linkage, geographical origins, attachment to particular places, and certain habitual activities that form an affiliation to be transformed into an affirmation of identity (Altman and Low, 1992; Ville and Guérin-Pace, 2005).
Attachment to a certain place can grow and become stronger when a person or a group of people are experiencing their live and activities at the place continuously (Smaldone, 2006). The continuous experiences strengthen people's memory and forming perception. This process results in the creation of identity of the place. After a long time, this identity is known in urban scale, become generic in the society as city identity (Inn, 2004). These studies shows that the contribution of attachment to a certain living place to the forming and recognition of city identity. As the history is the continuing experiences from the past to the present, the more recognition for historical identity of a city, the stronger attachment to the environment will be. Further, it leads to better social control for urban development, especially for heritage area within the modern city
People also experience the place by memorizing the history. Seng (2009) mentions that the history become the source and the social memory. The memory shape identity. The collective memory of the city is reflected on the urban space which always changes as the changes of its history (Herold, Langer, et al., 2010). As the memory is embedded with the urban elements, the historical element of the city is named as “site history”. History is the basic foundation of self and society identity (Climmo and Cattel, 2002), as its personal memory and identity (Seng, 2009).
Saleh (2004) concludes that the identity is formed by the distinctive aspects of city or elements; naturally, physically and socially. In other terms, identity is formed by ecofact, artefact and ipsefact. The geographic form of the city can make a different character between a river city and a land one. The natural elements or ecofact form the identity. The physical artefact such as initial public building, religious building, open spaces and major streets are some of elements that also contribute to the making of the city identity. The socio environment or ipsefact also form the identity. How people of the city engage one another based on their culture, social, economic and religious factors also contribute the unique urban form and structure.
There are three dimensions of place attachment, named as place identity, place dependence and place value(Brown and Raymond, 2007; Gospodini, 2004; Proshansky, 1978; Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010; William and Vaske, 2018). Place identity describe how a person categorized themselves in relation to their living place. It questioned how respondents associated him/herself to the place by using the words love, part of me, I am from here (Altman and Low, 1992; Handal, 2006; Hauge, 2007; White, Virden, et al., 2008) . Place dependence show how a person appreciate the place in supporting and accommodating their activities. The questions are delivered by using expression such as best place, unwilling to move, important and satisfy. (Brown and Raymond, 2007; Møller and Radloff, 2010; Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010; William and Vaske, 2018). Place value shows the way a person valuing his living place as assets. The words used in questioning it are those that related to the scenery, economic potency, history and tourism (Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010). In heritage context, Dameria, Akbar, et al. (2020) coins the sense of place figures out people place relationship. Place attachment, place identity and place dependence are the dimensions of sense of place in heritage context. Place attachment is formed by the sense of pride, connectedness and belonginess of a historical element. Place identity is the result of the one experience of a distinctiveness, continuity dan familiarity towards certain historical elements. Place dependence comes from evaluation, preferences and unwilling to move.
From the social side, studies also defined two other dimensions of place attachment named as friend and family bonding. Friend and family bonding is a result of social relation among the people. People engaged not only to the place, but also to one another. The bonding among the family member also determines the space ordering and utilization in settlements and vis a versa (Arief, Subroto, et al., 2024). The family ties create family bonding that has driven one to come back to the place where his family come. The friendship among people creates an attachment called friend bonding. (Brown and Raymond, 2007; Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010; William and Vaske, 2018).
Related to how the attachment is formed, Scannell and Gifford (2010) mention that place attachment has three dimensions in heritage study, namely people, place and process. Continuing this work, Lewicka (2011) added the dimension of process with predictors of place attachment which are time spent, building size and ownership status. The process of engagement and the predictors make people being attached to the place. Extending this explanation, Taima, Asami, et al., (2020) mentioned that people bond to the place composed by both physical and social dimension. The contribution of each dimension to place attachment can differ on various scales. For a large area scale such as a city, the physical dimension is more dominant than the social. such as an example of a tourist area, or a tourist city, how facilities are provided. Mostly, the attachment experienced for a temporal period. For a smaller scale such as a neighbourhood, the social dimension will be more dominant in forming attachment. The attachment is experienced for a longer period of time, it can indeed for a lifetime. Taima’s study have strengthen what was stated by previous studies.
Place attachment has been discussed in relation to old area in the city. Most of the previous study use this understanding to elaborate its ability to influence people behavior toward the heritage (Dameria, Akbar, et al., 2022; Ng and Feng, 2020; Woosnam, Aleshinloye, et al., 2018), restoration activities (Indraswara, Suprapti, et al., 2023), revitalization (Johanda, Esperanza, et al., 2024). In Johanda’s study, the revitalization of Kayu Tangan area is not fulfilled its character as a cultural heritage since the low place attachment of local communities. In Semarang Old Town, Dameria, Akbar, et al. (2022) related the residents’ high sense of place and their sustainable heritage behavior. Ng and Feng (2020) detailed how sense of place creates attitude towards the heritage area. Sense of place contribute both positive and negative attitudes towards the heritage development at Daming Palace. They also find that the involvement of residents on the development of heritage area led to the positive attitude. This work is in line with the work by Woosnam, Aleshinloye, et al. (2018) that found the strong emotional closeness and interaction between residents and tourist contribute to sustainability of tourism development. Indraswara, Suprapti et al. (2023) and Wang (2023) mentions that to maintain the memory and sense of place in the historic village, it is necessary to have the local people support such as related figures as well as a social group. Those mentioned aspects such as sense of place, emotional closeness and memorability are the dimension of place attachment that support the creation of place identity.
The aforementioned studies measure the people place relationship by using data from two types or respondents; the residents and the visitors. Observation in these studies elaborate how the respondents see the observed area in relation to its identity. Meanwhile the similar study that elaborate how the respondents see their living place as a part of city identity is still limited. Study by Nursanty, Husni, et al. (2023) elaborate how the vernacular architecture can rise the city branding. It surveyed documents that related city branding and heritage conservation. It mentioned that the vernacular architecture is important in preserving the authenticity of a city. It reflects community culture, respects the environment, and preserves local values and traditions. Study by Maricchiolo, Mosca, et al. (2021) discussed people place relationship to the local identity. It discloses the relation between local social identity, individual well-being and happiness. Interdependent happiness was positively mediated by place identity and social relations. Similar to this, studies on sustainability heritage done by Kádár and Klaniczay (2022) discover that resident’s participation in heritage event has role in place branding of built heritage. On the contrary, the studies that discuss the formation of city identity is limited to the elaboration of the role of built environment such as cultural assets, authenticity and cultural landscape, specifically in heritage sites (Alp, 2023; Basile and Cavallo, 2020; Nursanty, Rusmiatmoko, et al., 2024). Here, the research gap is arisen.
Generally, the elements of riverside can be grouped into two; those elements that are located at city center and the ones that located at riverside villages. The study observed the physical and social aspects of old urban elements located at along the riverside area. Study investigated the city elements that are perceived by people as the memorable ones. How a certain element such buildings or open space is memorized by the respondents. Study also examined people’s sense of attachments and how it was related to the identity of the city. The investigation towards these two aspects can confirm how the urban elements can represent Palembang identity. So that, city identity can support the sustainability modern development at the old riverside area socially, environmentally and economically.
Location of studyNotes on Palembang's identity as river city found in 1600s in the era of Palembang Sultanate. Started from Musi riverside area, the leader of old Palembang built the early urban structure as river city. The changes of Palembang urban structure were influenced by the different urban policy. For example, the zoning for settlements. In the era of Sultanate, foreigners were directed to build their settlements on the water by using floating house. They stayed in floating houses on the Musi River. During Dutch colonization, the foreigners can build their settlements on the land. This led to the change of urban structure at Musi riverside (Hanafiah, 1995).
In the independence era, one of important policies affecting the urban structure was the construction of the Ampera Bridge. This bridge connects the area as war compensation from the Japan. Started in 1962, the completion of the bridge in 1965 connected the Ilir and Ulu (Sholeh and Nindiati, 2018). Topographically, Ilir has better physical advantages for accommodating the modern activities. Therefore, the physical development at Ilir relatively massive compared to Ulu area. Before 1990s, the modern development at Ilir had intensively broaden the Ilir area. In the late 1990s, the local authority of Palembang emerges the historical potency and put attention in old building rehabilitation as well as riverside settlement. Up to now, the effort is continuing to the effort to rebuild the unique character of river city of Palembang.
The study sites are the six riverside villages known as Sekanak, Suro, Kapiten, Klenteng, Bahrak and Al Munawar as shown in Figure 1. Palembang is divided by Musi River into two sides. The top side is known as Ilir and the bottom one is Ulu. These six villages are located along the riverside. The first two villages were known as Malay villages. The second two were the Chinese villages. The last two villages were Arabian villages. Suro and Sekanak are located at Ilir, whilst the others are located at Ulu. In order to complement the survey of residents' attachment at a broader scale, the respondents are also residents of other six old elements located at city Center. Total number of observed old elements are 18 elements, consist of 13 elements located at riverside village and five elements at city center. The 13 riverside village elements are three old elements at Kapitan villages, two elements at Klenteng Village, one element at Bahrak Villages, three elements at Munawar, two elements at Suro Village and two elements at Sekanak Village The old elements were chosen because they are well known in each village as old and historical building and had been built more than 100 years. The five city center elements are chosen because they are also well known as public building both since Sultanate era as well as colonial Era.
Data and analysisThis study uses quantitative method. A survey questionnaire was conducted at the riverside to investigate on how locals are attached to the physical setting. As shown in Table 1, the name and location mentioned in table are the riverside settlement. From the number of 144 respondents, 3,5 % of them who are junior citizen who have length of stay less than six (6) years. This profile suggests that the respondents are reliable sources to elicit their sense of attachment towards the villages.
| Description | Number of respondents | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Village's name and location | ||
| Kapiten 7 ulu | 26 | 18.1 |
| Klenteng 9/10 ulu | 17 | 11.8 |
| Bahrak 9/10 ulu | 19 | 13.2 |
| Al Munawar 13 ulu | 9 | 6.3 |
| Sekanak 26 Ilir | 20 | 13.9 |
| Suro 30 Ilir | 20 | 13.9 |
| 12/14ulu | 6 | 4.2 |
| 5 ulu | 10 | 6.9 |
| Kuto | 17 | 11.8 |
| Total respondent | 144 | 100.0 |
| Age | ||
| <20years old | 20 | 13.9 |
| 21-30 years old | 55 | 38.2 |
| 31-50 years old | 53 | 36.8 |
| > 50 years old | 16 | 11.1 |
| Length of stay | ||
| <5 years | 5 | 3.5 |
| 6-20 years | 22 | 15.3 |
| 21-30 years | 58 | 40.3 |
| 31-50 years | 42 | 29.2 |
| >50 years | 17 | 11.8 |
In relation to the residents' memorability on the neighborhood and city, respondents had their response on 18 historical urban elements that easily to be memorized and also represent the identity of Palembang. The history in this study become the source for respondent to memorize and recognize a particular urban element. The ability to do this is named as memorability. In this paper, the memorability is shown by residents’ understanding on the history of the old elements. There were two analyses done. Firstly, a frequency distribution was conducted to count the response on each old element. Secondly, the stan three rating scale was done to rank the memorability of each old element.
In order to elaborate the people-place relationships, the three dimensions of place attachment named as place identity, place dependence and place value were measured in the survey. This paper used the survey questionnaire to measure the residents' attachment towards their villages. There were 30 questions asked in the questionnaire. The questions were developed from the parameters obtained from the previous studies and grouped in two parts. Firstly, questions were related to familiarity and experience toward the historical village. The questions are multi answered in order to explore respondent’s awareness toward physical setting. Secondly, the questionnaire was also derived from the studies on psychological aspect of respondents and their environment. It explored how respondents and their place related, attached, memorized and affected one another. The perception towards the physical elements were derived from the parameters of collective memory and cultural expression. The people-place relationship was derived from the place attachment dimension which are place identity, place dependence, family bonding, friend bonding and place value. Those parameters were specified in variables that composed in expressions or narration. Respondents answered the questions by choosing the most suitable narration among 1-5 scale of Likert. The overview of questionnaire as seen in Table 2.
| Dimension | Items | Type | Aspect |
|---|---|---|---|
| Familiarity and Experience |
Define Musi riverside area clearly Ever stayed at Musi riverside area Born at Musi riverside area Time leaving Musi riverside Visiting Musi riverside area Socializing with the residents of Musi riverside villages Describe familiarity on Musi riverside area, and the villages Mention the riverside village that have been visited Frequency of visit Purpose of visit Cultural heritage area |
Single and multiple answer | Familiarity and Experience |
|
PA dimension #1: Place Identity (Altman and Low, 1992; Handal, 2006; Hauge, 2007; Proshansky, 1978) |
Being a part of Musi riverside village Love Musi riverside village Musi riverside village is reflection of his self So meaningful Being accepted in this Musi riverside village |
Likert scale |
Psychological Relatedness |
|
PA dimension #2: Place Dependence (Brown and Raymond, 2007; Møller and Radloff, 2010; Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010; William and Vaske, 2018). |
Musi riverside is the best place for doing any activities, Doing things at Musi riverside is more important rather than any other places Unwilling to move to other places No other better place than this Musi riverside village Satisfy staying and living in this Musi riverside village |
Likert scale | Psychological relatedness |
|
PA dimension #3: Family Bonding (Brown and Raymond, 2007; Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010; William and Vaske, 2018) |
Living in Musi riverside village because most of my family are living here. My relationship with family who live at this Musi riverside village is special and important for me Without the family bonding in this Musi riverside village, might have moved to live at other places |
Likert scale | Psychological relatedness |
|
PA dimension #4: Friend Bonding (Brown and Raymond, 2007; Raymond, Brown, et al., 2010; William and Vaske, 2018) |
Being a member of this Musi riverside community is important The relationship with friend coming from togetherness when doing community activities at this Musi riverside village makes me feel so tied. |
Likert scale | Psychological relatedness |
| PA dimension #5: Place Value (Brown and Raymond, 2007) |
Musi riverside villages have attractive and beautiful scenery Musi riverside village is potential to be tourism destination to improve community economy Musi riverside village is related to the history of Palembang, therefore it must be preserved and maintained Musi riverside village can be an alternative of recreation place |
Likert Scale | Psychological relatedness |
Factor analysis was conducted to gain the factor loading for each place attachment dimension. By doing this, the analysis resulted in form of the scale of attachment of riverside residents on their villages. Related to sample adequacy, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin test was run to measure the sample adequacy. The reliability of each place attachment dimension was checked by using Conbrach's Alpha value. From the analysis, the place attachment toward the old urban elements was gained.
In order to understand the influence of resident’s attachment on the ability of old urban elements in representing city’s identity, the results from memorability and place attachment were cross tabbed. It was done to investigate the appreciation of residents towards the urban elements located within three settings; the village, the neighborhood and the city. The cross tabulation was done by using PASW 18. It cross tabbed the responses on the memorability and the positive responses on place attachment dimensions. Memorability was represented by residents’ understanding on the history of old elements. Whilst the positive response on place attachment was represented by the residents’ choices on strongly agree, agree and neutral options on the questionnaire. The result of cross tabulation shows the relationship between memorability and place attachment in relation to the setting of the old elements in the environment.
The study is aimed to examine in what way people place relationship at old riverside settlement can support the sustainability of Palembang's identity as historical river city through memorability and place attachment. To achieve this aim, first objective of this paper is to investigate the memorability on the history of the old elements along the riverside both. The target location area at city center and riverside settlement. To measure it, there are 18 old elements were chosen. Their position in the city was shown in Figure 2.
| Code | Knowing the village's history | Location | Responses | Level of memorability | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | ||||
| 1 | Kuto Besak Fort (BKB) | City center | 118 | 10.2% | High |
| 2 | Ampera Bridge | City center | 116 | 10.1% | High |
| 3 | Great Mosque | City center | 112 | 9.7% | High |
| 4 | 16 Ilir Market | City center | 78 | 6.8% | Moderate |
| 5 | Leideng Office | City center | 71 | 6.2% | Moderate |
| 6 | Kapiten Cina's House | Kapiten Village | 70 | 6.1% | Moderate |
| 7 | Al Munawar Complex | Al Munawar Village | 68 | 5.9% | Moderate |
| 8 | Klenteng 9 Ulu | Klenteng Village | 57 | 4.9% | Moderate |
| 9 | Bahrak Old Houses | Bahrak Village | 50 | 4.3% | Moderate |
| 10 | Rumah Kembar | Al Munawar Village | 48 | 4.2% | Moderate |
| 11 | Kapiten's Square | Kapiten Village | 46 | 4.0% | Moderate |
| 12 | Rumah Batu Munawar | Al Munawar Village | 44 | 3.8% | Moderate |
| 13 | Tanggo Raja | Kapiten Village | 43 | 3.7% | Moderate |
| 14 | Limas House At Suro | Suro Village | 41 | 3.6% | Moderate |
| 15 | Sekanak Warehouses | Sekanak Village | 39 | 3.4% | Low |
| 16 | Suro Mosque | Suro Village | 34 | 2.9% | Low |
| 17 | Limas of Hasyim Ning | Sekanak Village | 28 | 2.4% | Low |
| 18 | Chinese Townhouses | Klenteng Village | 23 | 2.0% | Low |
| Total | 1086 | 100% | |||
The memorability is reflected by residents’ understanding of the history of the old elements. By counting the responses on the variable of "knowing village history" towards 18 historical elements at riverside and city, the statistics in Table 3 show the different response. By using stan three rating scale, the resident's understanding on historical elements is classified into three hierarchies of memorability; high, moderate and low. The highest memorable elements are Benteng Kuto Besak, Ampera Bridge and Great Mosque. It demonstrates that residents highly appreciate these three as the most memorable city elements in representing the Palembang. However, the statistic shows that the residents consider the historical elements at the riverside villages as moderate and low memorable element. In conclusion the residents are highly attached to the three most memorable elements, and less attached to the overall riverside historical elements.
On the other way around, the responses on Kapiten, Klenteng, Al Munawar and Bahrak Village are categorized in moderate level. These villages are located at city center, near the three most memorable elements. Whilst the low-level responses are addressed to Suro and Sekanak Village. This result implies that the residents give more appreciation to old elements that located in their own village and near to the city center. The residents of a riverside village recognized well on the old elements within the setting of their village and the city. However, they less memorize and appreciate the other elements in the neighborhood setting in different way.
Residents’ attachment towards riverside villageThe study is aimed to investigate in what way people place relationship at old riverside settlement can support the sustainability of Palembang's identity as historical river city through memorability and place attachment. To achieve this aim, the second objective is to investigate the place attachment toward the old building and spaces along the riverside, both at city center and riverside settlement.
Factor analysis is used to find the most significant place attachment dimension that influence people-place relationship. Questionnaire data show that there are three dimensions with high factor values namely place identity, place dependence and place value. The highest three factor value in each dimension were taken for further analysis. As shown in Table 3, the factor values of the dimensions are high for residents of the Musi riverside village. The highest one is place identity followed by place dependence and lastly place value. With the number of respondents s 144, the KMO's value is 0.908 which indicates that the number of samples in this study is adequate. For each of three dimensions, the value of Conbrach alpha is high (>0.8), indicates that the data is reliable.
The results in the Table 4 shows the calue of strong attachment to their Musi riverside villages. Villages are perceived as important place that supports daily and routine activities. As the time goes by, the feeling of attachment become a sense to categorize themselves similar to the place. Here the feeling of love to the place is higher as the place reflects themselves and personalities. In other words, the village reflects the resident’s identity in terms of behaviour, activities and values. In other words, the disappearance of a building from the village lead to the negative effects on the place identity. , it significantly affects the place identity. The village and the residents are inseparable.
| Place attachment dimension | Factors (n=144) |
|---|---|
| Place identity | |
|
0.894 |
|
0.844 |
|
0.819 |
|
0.925 |
| Place dependence | |
|
0.754 |
|
0.771 |
|
0.786 |
|
0.844 |
| Place value | |
|
0.877 |
|
0.670 |
|
0.792 |
|
0.767 |
|
0.908 |
The result also shows how the villages accommodated the resident activities, socially and culturally, that lead to their satisfaction to live and stay in the village. This place ability is the key factor that makes the place is so meaningful and makes residents put their high dependency to the place as the best place to do their routine, and the unchangeable and incomparable place to any other places. Furthermore, the residents realized the tourism and history value of their village. They well understand that these values are potential to be recognized as intangible city's assets. In turn, these values contribute the economic benefit to life or residents. Based on these, the residents are attached positively with their own living environment, as a meaningful place for living, working and returning back from other places.
The old elements in representing city identityAs mentioned in the second research objective, this study also investigated whether the resident's perception towards memorable elements is influenced by their understanding on history and attachment towards the place. In order to achieve this, study cross tabbed the respondent's responses on the dimensions of place attachment dimension and the variables of understanding on the historical place, as shown in Table 5.
The result in Table 5 shows that the pattern of resident's memory to the historical places and their elements is in line with the place attachment. As such, the residents recognized Benteng Kuto Besak, Ampera Bridge and Great Mosque as the landmark of the city even though these elements are not located at their villages. Residents are well understood about the history of the landmark of Palembang. In contrast, the recognition of urban elements in their own riverside villages is lower than the landmark. Moreover, the residents recognized well the history of their village elements but failed to know the history of other villages. For example, one urban element at Sekanak Village, named Hasyim Ning’s Limas. It is a Palembang traditional house, named Limas house, that has genuine architecture style and detail. The results of cross tabulation on responses on place identity and knowing the history show that the strongly agree response towards Limas Hasyim Ning is the lowest one (19%) compared to other urban elements. Meanwhile, the strongly agree response towards Ampera Bridge is the highest one (90.1%). It is followed by the other two city landmark, Benteng Kuto Besak (84.9%) and The Great Mosque (83.9%). Overall, based on the result, it means that the resident recognizes only the name of the historical elements at other villages, but do not understand well about the other village history.
| Attachment vs. History | % in Place Identity | % in Place Dependence | % in Place Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agree | Strongly agree | Agree | Strongly agree | Agree | Strongly agree | |
| Elements and Location | ||||||
| a. City Center (Riverside) | ||||||
| Kuto Besak Fort (BKB) | 83.3 | 84.9 | 80.3 | 83.9 | 84 | 83.8 |
| Great Mosque | 72.1 | 83.9 | 73.2 | 83.9 | 71.6 | 83.8 |
| Ampera Bridge | 65.5 | 90.1 | 71.5 | 91.5 | 72.4 | 86.7 |
| 16 Ilir Market | 42.1 | 71.2 | 49.2 | 72.5 | 41.7 | 67.7 |
| Leideng office | 50.2 | 61.6 | 51.8 | 65.3 | 42.8 | 62.3 |
| b. Kapiten Village | ||||||
| Square at kapiten | 29.8 | 46.1 | 35.9 | 52.5 | 28.6 | 43.2 |
| Kapiten cina's house | 40.7 | 68.7 | 50.3 | 68.4 | 41 | 63 |
| Tanggo raja | 20.9 | 40.3 | 21.6 | 50.4 | 26.9 | 35.4 |
| c. Klenteng Vilage | ||||||
| Klenteng 9Ulu | 36.4 | 52.5 | 46.4 | 56.1 | 38.1 | 50.4 |
| d. Suro Village | ||||||
| Suro Mosque | 18.6 | 27.8 | 20.1 | 30.7 | 18.8 | 29.8 |
| Limas House at Suro | 23.6 | 28.3 | 28.5 | 28.6 | 26.2 | 27.2 |
| e. Sekanak Village | ||||||
| Hasyim Ning’s Limas | 8.9 | 19 | 17.5 | 15.5 | 17.8 | 14.5 |
| Old Warehouses | 18.4 | 35.2 | 24.6 | 30.1 | 25.5 | 30.7 |
| f. Bahrak Village | ||||||
| Bahrak Old Houses | 36.2 | 41.2 | 44.3 | 46.4 | 28.1 | 43.2 |
| g. Al Munawar Village | ||||||
| Al Munawar complex | 45.2 | 58.1 | 54.6 | 57 | 39 | 57.7 |
| Rumah Kembar | 24.2 | 41.3 | 32.4 | 44.5 | 20.3 | 43 |
| Rumah Batu | 21.5 | 41.3 | 26.8 | 45.6 | 17.1 | 40.2 |
The result in Table 5 shows that the pattern of resident's memory to the historical places and their elements is in line with the place attachment. As such, the residents recognized Benteng Kuto Besak, Ampera Bridge and Great Mosque as the landmark of the city even though these elements are not located at their villages. Residents are well understood about the history of the landmark of Palembang. In contrast, the recognition of urban elements in their own riverside villages is lower than the landmark. Moreover, the residents recognized well the history of their village elements but failed to know the history of other villages. For example, one urban element at Sekanak Village, named Hasyim Ning’s Limas. It is a Palembang traditional house, named Limas house, that has genuine architecture style and detail. The results of cross tabulation on responses on place identity and knowing the history show that the strongly agree response towards Limas Hasyim Ning is the lowest one (19%) compared to other urban elements. Meanwhile, the strongly agree response towards Ampera Bridge is the highest one (90.1%). It is followed by the other two city landmark, Benteng Kuto Besak (84.9%) and The Great Mosque (83.9%). Overall, based on the result, it means that the resident recognizes only the name of the historical elements at other villages, but do not understand well about the other village history.
The study is aimed to investigate in what way people place relationship at old riverside settlement can support the sustainability of Palembang's identity as historical river city through memorability and place attachment. Through memorability, memory embedded with the old elements as history (Climmo and Cattel, 2002; Seng, 2009). It could be personal or collective history. A personal history constructs a private based identity. (Ville, and Guérin-Pace, 2005), while the collective history situated in certain site history construct the social identity (Climmo and Cattel, 2002). The result in subsection 3.1 shows that the history of elements at riverside villages is more related to private based identity. It is shown by the respondent appreciation towards the historical elements at city centers and their own village is higher than the neighborhood village. The personal memory towards the elements implies both for elements located at their own village as well as at city center. It is for sure that the elements at city centers had been already embedded with the personal memory of the respondents and become the foundation of social identity. In turn, it constructs the urban identity.
This study show that memorability is a way of people place relationship that can support the sustainability of city identity. The memory of each appreciated elements constructs the identity. If more people outside the village are embedded with the old elements in the village, then the personal memory will become the collective memory. As a results, more collective history will be formed, the collective history forms the urban identity. In this situation, the elements at riverside village can support the sustainability of city identity. The more people outside the village are embedded with the old elements in the village, the more collective history will be formed.
People Perception towards Urban ElementsThe investigation on people- place relationship at the riverside village of Musi River indicates the pattern of how the residents of the historical area perceive their place in three levels: city, neighborhood and village. In the city scale, the residents were attached to the landmarks of the city and valued them as identity of the city even though they do not stay near or at the same location with the landmarks. Meanwhile, in the neighborhood scale, even though the residents knew well the name of the old historical riverside village, but they gave less appreciation to the historical villages.
In village scale, the result of the field study indicates resident's strong attachment towards their villages (Table 4). The high factor values of place identity, place dependence and place value were caused by the engagement and experience with the place since a long time ago. For place identity, the high factor value means the reflection of one's self categorization that is similar to the place. This is caused by the meaning of a place as the family place, place of birth, and childhood memory. For place dependence, the high factor value means the high dependency toward place since the place has ability to accommodate people activities, for example in Klenteng Village where the market 9 Ulu is located. The resident's occupation is dominated by small businessmen. Some of the residents are food vendor. They make traditional food in their house and sell it at the market. The village provides easiness for them to get the ingredients and sell their products at market. This caused the satisfaction to conduct the activities in the village. In turn, it leads to the rejection to move out or being relocated from the village to another place.
Meanwhile the factor value for place value indicates the resident's assessment towards the potential value of their villages. In general, they were aware of the scenery and tourism potentials of riverside area. In contrast, the low factor value of the historical value confirms resident's low attachment towards the overall of riverside settlement in neighborhood scale. For example, the residents in Suro only understood that Al Munawar is one of the oldest villages. That is, they knew the history of the old urban element at Suro, but failed to describe the history of Al Munawar. This is caused by the strong attachment towards their own village that focuses on their village only and fail to understand more on other villages.
The different reaction to the three scales of environment is in line with Hernández, Carmen Hidalgo, et al. (2007). They studied the comparison between place attachment and place identity in three different environments, island, city and neighborhood. The study found that the place attachment and place identity are the two bonds that tied people and the place. The study found that the bonds were stronger with the city than with the neighborhood environment, while the bond with the island was stronger than with the two other environments. These differences on place attachment led to people's different way in perceiving the elements. An element's setting in an environment influences its ability to represent city's identity.
Place Attachment to Support Sustainable IdentityAs a part of the urban structure of a city, historical settlements have contributed to city character. Unlike other urban elements which were recognized by their big scale or sophisticated modern structure, these historical settlements consisted of some small buildings, courtyards and narrow alleys. Along with the economic-socio-cultural life, they formed physical-spatial structure, and in turn formed a unique character. The richness of social-cultural life in the settlements generated from the ethnicity character creating the physiognomy of the place.
Related to rebuilding identity of a place, a study done by Gaspodini (2004) suggests the interdependency between the attachment towards urban elements and the effort to generate the identity of Bilbao, one of the European city. She posits that the built heritage and avant garde design can generate the city's identity since people strongly ties with these two types of elements. In turn, they became the high memorable urban element that represents the identity of the city. Meanwhile this study elaborates the similar concept within the river city context that has smaller built heritage at riverside settlement than Bilbao. It investigated the interdependency between place identity towards these small physical urban elements to generate the identity of the river city.
Like any other city, a river city could be seen as an organic system that is transformed and developed continuously over a long period of time. This system consisted of some elements of the city with various functions such as public building or spaces, government offices, settlements etc. Each of urban elements is situated within a certain urban structure and its setting contributes to the character of the city. If the city is seen as the comprehensive storyline, then the urban structure of the story is composed by the main pattern (macro structure) and the subsidiary pattern (micro structure) of the city.
The main pattern is the macro structure that formed the city based on the city's system order. It is composed by the main artery of the city such as street or river and some areas which are located by following the city's system order. The subsidiary pattern is the micro structure applied in a certain area in the city. It consists of building, spaces, access line that followed its own structure which is linked to the macro structure, such as a commercial area, settlement area, center of governmental area, and religious area.
Until 1930s, the macro urban structure of old Palembang was composed by Benteng Kuto Besak and City Hall (Leideng Office) as the centre of government area, Tengkuruk canal (now Sudirman street) as main city corridor, 16 Ilir market, Sayangan and Beringin Janggut as commercial area, The Great Mosque as religious center, and the riverside settlements. The riverside settlements were seen as a micro urban structure. Each village has its own micro urban structure that is composed of the buildings, open spaces and alleys. It is also alive through its economic activities, social and cultural life of the residents that create attachment towards the village. In turn it contributes to the identity of the place.
The findings reveal that the strong attachment towards the villages and its elements is not adequate to generate the identity of the river city. Place attachment in micro urban setting, especially for built heritage element, can generate the identity of its own area as one of sub area in a city. In order to be utilized in generating the identity of the city, the place attachment towards the elements of micro urban structure must be not separated with the attachment on the elements of macro urban structure.
The study found that the attachment towards the elements of riverside settlement is perceived differently from the three city landmarks. Therefore, the old riverside settlement is appreciated lower than the landmarks. If the old elements at riverside settlements want to be used in generating the identity of a city, their existences must be promoted socially and physically. Socially, their historical value and its relation to the landmarks must be communicated and promoted to the public continuously. Physically, their existence in accommodating the social cultural activities must be sustained and maintained. The unity between the landmarks and old elements at riverside settlement is formed and this can strengthen the identity of Palembang as historical river city. Urban identity is a tool for city planning that accommodate people of historical area to be involved in participatory development. The identity promotes a city’s uniqueness and distinctiveness (Boussaa, 2018). People as users are more related to their environment. This discussion is in line with the concept of space-subject relationship (Akyıldız and Olğun, 2020). In line with place attachment theory, this concept points user’s sense of belonging that promote protection and sustainability of the conservation area in modern development. It is clearly shown that place attachment promotes the sustainability city development physically and socially.
To establish a recognizable identity of a place, the integration between physical aspect and historical value of the old urban elements that lead to the high attachment to people. The place consisted of physical and spatial order that are located in an urban setting. The place has the ability to accommodate people's social-cultural activities. This creates a continuous dependency towards the place. In turn, it strengthens the social-emotional relationship and lead to the attachment, appreciation of the history and memory of the place. Therefore, the two aspects must be integrated into macro and micro urban structure. If the elements are configurable and united in macro urban setting, they will be representative in city scale. Moreover, the strong place attachment leads to recognition of an urban element to be perceived as representative of the city's identity.
In Palembang context, the continuity of dependency is still ongoing since the attachment towards the riverside village is quite strong. However, these villages are only connected visually to the three most attached urban elements (which are Kuto Besak Fort, Great Mosque and Amper Bridge) and somehow are not really recognized by the people who live not at riverside area. Therefore, the effort to sustain the identity of river city should be more integrated among the three most attached city elements and the old historical riverside villages. The integration leads to the sustainability of these old urban elements in the riverside villages, as well as its meaning and value. Hence, the physical development in historical area can be in line with the sustained meaning and value of the city. In other words, sustained identity needs stronger place attachment. In turn, it makes development in historical area more sustainable.
This study has explored the way people place relationship become identity generator. Memorability as well as place attachment can contribute to the rebuild and strengthen the identity of a city. This study has complemented in detailed how those aspects going to work by promoting of social activities as well as maintaining the physical-spatial quality of historical places. Related to physical development, the policy maker must consider the social attractiveness that can bring the live of historical area for people of the area as well as the city. The social attractiveness consists of many activities that related to the uniqueness of the area as well as the city. These activities need to be accommodated through a comprehensive urban planning as well as social economy policy. Once the city identity is generated, the sustainability modern development at the old riverside area can be achieved socially, environmentally and economically. Then, the city branding strategy become fully comprehensive.
However, this study is limited to the old elements at historical area that positioned in a certain living environment, called a village. It does not explore whether the modern elements along riverside area also have people place relationship that can support the sustainability of river city identity. Further study must be conducted to complement the theory of people place relationship and identity.
Conceptualization, W.F.F.A., I.S. and M.H.R.; methodology, W.F.F.A., I.S. and M.H.R; software, W.F.F.A. ; investigation, W.F.F.A; resources, W.F.F.A., I.S. and M.H.R; data curation, W..F.F.A.; writing—original draft preparation, W.F.F.A., I.S. and M.H.R writing—review and editing, W.F.F.A., I.S. and M.H.R; supervision, I.S. and M.H.R All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of the paper.
The authors would like to thank Directorate General of Higher Education, Research and Technology of the Republic Indonesia for supporting the funding of the research.
