Place Attachment and Related Aspects in the Urban Setting

Abstract

This study reviewed previous studies on place attachment and related factors in the urban setting. Assessments were conducted on over one hundred peer-reviewed journal papers that met the selection criteria. The results were divided into six categories. Place attachment can improve each of the three dimensions of wellbeing. It can also mitigate the negative impacts of environmental stressors on wellbeing. Furthermore, traditional gardens and local landscape characteristics contribute to a stronger place attachment, depending on the degree to which they present local history and culture. Green landscapes can also help immigrants feel more connected to their community and place of origin. Social interaction has also been linked to the development of place attachment, which is stronger in low-income/deprived neighborhoods. Furthermore, higher place attachment promotes civic engagement and social trust. Place attachment also helps older people cope with aging difficulties in their living environments. Finally, there is a mutually beneficial association between place attachment and perceived neighborhood walkability, as well as a relationship between the scale of the place and the level of attachment. The various research gaps recognized by this study could be addressed in future studies to better understand the role of place attachment in creating sustainable urban environments.

1. Introduction

Place attachment, or people’s positive connection to a particular place [1], is an important aspect of the human–environment relationship. It generally refers to the emotional connection or relationship that exists between people and particular locations, and the majority of studies see it as a strong and positive aspect [2]. However, it has a multifaceted, multidisciplinary, multidimensional, and multiparadigmatic nature [3]. Even among trained scholars in environmental and social psychology, as well as psychologists and humanistic geographers, terms like “unclear” [4], “definitional diversity” [5], “slow”, “stuck”, and “little empirical progress” [3] are used to describe research on place attachment. The most significant challenge for researchers in using the multidimensional concept of place attachment is integrating different viewpoints and approaches [5].

According to Cole et al. [6] and Scannell and Gifford [5] (person–process–place (PPP) model), place attachment includes three main dimensions: (1) a personal/cultural dimension focusing on who is attached and how places become significant through individual experiences and collectively determined meanings; (2) a place dimension that emphasizes what it is to which the person is attached, such as different physical (natural, built) and social (opportunities for interaction) features of the place; and (3) a psychological process dimension that emphasizes how the attachment comprises specific behaviors (like staying close to a place), affective bonds (like pride, love), and cognitions (like knowledge, memories). While the tripartite framework identifies important factors in the attachment process, the importance of these factors varies depending on the scale and type of the environment. For instance, studies of recreational areas in city neighborhoods include significantly varied characteristics (e.g., [7]). As a result, factors that are important in one kind of context might not be in another. Stated differently, Turton [8] argues that predictors cannot be seen as generally significant to the attachment process. Consequently, it is recommended that place attachment be contextualized rather than considered as a universal phenomenon [8].

According to studies on place attachment’s contributing factors, place attachment has been shown to improve subjective, psychological, and social wellbeing [9,10]. Furthermore, green and natural spaces play an important role in strengthening place attachment. Urban parks also have considerable effects on people’s wellbeing and quality of life. Exposure to nature increases an individual’s cognitive capacity, but only when nature is consistent with a salient identity [11]. According to Liu [12], landscapes that are distinctive and have significant local features help people feel more connected to their place. Local landscapes can help promote an individual’s self-identity and dependence [13]. Furthermore, nature usually has better restorative outcomes than built environments [14,15]. The created environment that serves as a setting for human activities is referred to as the “built environment”. Studies have shown that stress can be alleviated by (re)connecting people with nature and green spaces (e.g., Stigsdotter, [16]). One proposed mechanism for restorative environments, as conceptualized under Stress Reduction Theory, asserts that contact with restorative environments can help people block out pessimistic thoughts and ruminations, arouse positive appraisals, improve moods, and reduce stress [17,18]. According to Attention Restoration Theory [19,20], environments with four specific psychological characteristics are more likely to attract people’s involuntary attention, potentially reducing stress and restoring mental capacity. This theory has primarily focused on the bottom-up, perceptual properties of restorative environments. This mental restoration has been connected to urban green areas and is one of the indicators of both mental health and wellbeing [17].

The social arena is the next component of place that contributes to place attachment [21]. Studies have shown that social settings may affect one’s sense of wellbeing and perceived restoration in addition to relationships with nature [22]. Furthermore, given that immigrants and refugees experience a kind of discontinuity between their place of origin and their place of destination, the physical and social features of their new location may contribute to their increased place attachment and improved quality of life there [23]. This may also enhance their wellbeing as well [24]. As a result, the relationships between place attachment and these groups of people require particular attention. Furthermore, a person’s place attachment varies according to their individual and/or group characteristics. For example, previous studies have examined the relationship between place attachment and associated characteristics in a variety of age groups, including older adults, adolescents, and children [25].

Finally, perceived neighborhood walkability is one of the environmental factors affecting the formation of a place attachment [15]. Walkability is the extent to which the built environment is friendly to people who walk, which benefits the health of residents and increases the livability of cities [26]. Stronger place attachment may be associated with a positive view of the built environment in one’s neighborhood, which in turn makes one more likely to walk and engage in other physical activities [27]. Neighborhood walkability may therefore be another factor associated with place attachment.

Based on the above-described relationships, this study reviews the relationships between place attachment and related factors in the urban setting. The methodology is explained in Section 2, and the findings are presented in Section 3 in six subsections. The findings are summarized and discussed in the next section, and the conclusion section highlights the most important findings in addition to presenting the key research gaps for future studies.

2. Literature Review Methods

We systematically searched English language journals in databases including the Web of Science Core Collection, PubMed, Avery, the Environment Index, Medline, and Academic Search Complete. In addition, only articles from peer-reviewed journals were selected. This study only reviewed articles between 1995 and 2023. According to the introduction, a combination of the keywords including “place attachment”, “wellbeing”, “green spaces”, “social environment”, “immigrants”, “refugees”, “age groups”, and “walkability” was used. Then, we excluded papers that did not directly address our main topic (place attachment), such as those that dealt with relevant concepts such as place identity, sense of place, and place dependency. The following exclusion criteria were also applied: the articles had to be written in English, non-peer reviewed, published before 1995, or only discussing theory instead of practical application.

To analyze the selected articles (108 remaining articles), summaries of each article were recorded, including the author, year, study objectives, methodology, sample, location, independent and dependent variables, and a summary of the statistical results regarding the significant and non-significant variables. Particular attention was paid to the validity and reliability of the data collection tools. Respecting the studies that used quantitative methods, regardless of the degree of correlation, attributes with positive and negative values across the selected studies were combined and marked with an asterisk (*). Three main types of associations, including “No association”, “Positive significant association”, and “Negative significant association”, were categorized through different codes. For instance, (+) was used for positive association, and (−) was used for negative association. The moderation effects were excluded from the association calculation. We also disregarded other kinds of data and conclusions that had nothing to do with the relationships between place attachment and its contributing factors. However, the control variables from each article were also extracted because of the potential importance of confounders or additional factors that could have affected the study’s results.

The six subsections that organized the Results section were “Place attachment and wellbeing”, “Place attachment and urban greenery”, “Place attachment and cultural/social aspects”, which includes a subsection named “Place attachment and participation”, “Place attachment and immigration/refugees”, “Place attachments and gender/age”, and finally “Place attachment and walkability”. These categories were based on the primary factors related to place attachment that were addressed in the Introduction and used as keywords to find the articles.

3. Results

3.1. Place Attachment and Wellbeing

The main idea of wellbeing refers to global life satisfaction [28]. Wellbeing is considered an umbrella concept in positive psychology theories that include two main categories of hedonic and eudaimonic aspects. Hedonic wellbeing mostly refers to feelings like living a good or happy life, and eudaimonic wellbeing is about life purposes and being fulfilled [29]. Place attachment can enhance all three of the dimensions of people’s wellbeing, which are generally defined within a place: subjective wellbeing (positive emotions and satisfaction) [28]; psychological wellbeing (growth, environmental mastery, positive relationships with others, and self-acceptance) [30]; and social wellbeing (social coherence, acceptance, actualization, integration, and actualization) [31]. Consequently, people can form significant connections with their surroundings through meaningful sociopsychological activities, and this type of place attachment enhances people’s wellbeing [32]. The significant role of place attachment in improving quality of life [33] contributes to better physical and mental health, better social relationships, and more pro-environmental behavior [34].

Place attachment is positively correlated with health not only at the residential level but also at the community level. Having positive feelings (e.g., satisfaction) and expressing a sense of connectedness (e.g., involvement) with physical surroundings are regarded as key indicators of place attachment; however, the degrees of both may vary between individuals in different contexts [35]. Subjective wellbeing is positively correlated with social justice and community attachment, as demonstrated by Wang et al.’s [35] research. The study by Rajala and Sorice [36] reveals several relationships between US owners’ sense of place—acquired through private land ownership—and their wellbeing, since it provides them access to resources, security, and even improved physical health from being outside. This study examined the relationship between community environmental perception and physical wellbeing in addition to hedonic and eudaimonic factors. Berg [37] conducted follow-up interviews with the same respondents about seventeen years after they had moved to rural areas in search of a better life. The purpose of the interviews was to examine the respondents’ unique sources of attachment and how it affected their overall health. This study defines place attachment as a sub-dimension of wellbeing that is formed by “Social relations, Materialities, the Past and memories, and Emotions and affects”. In addition, different aspects of place attachment and wellbeing do overlap with each other, while there is a direct two-way relationship between place attachment and wellbeing, in which improvement in one significantly enhances the other.

According to a study by Wiles et al. [38] in New Zealand, ones who did not express an affect toward their homes have had worse health outcomes, and this relationship is stronger among Indigenous communities. Similarly, Maricchiolo et al. [39] studied the relationship between different components of place attachment and wellbeing in a local Italian community by applying the “Satisfaction with Life Scale” of Diener et al. [40], “Place Attachment to the Hometown Scale” of Scopelliti and Tiberio [41], and “Local Social Identity Scale” of Paolini et al. [42]. The results of this study showed that both social identity and place identity—as sub-dimensions of place attachment—positively correlate with life satisfaction and wellbeing.

In older adults, place attachment is more influenced by the subjective dimensions of wellbeing than by the objective dimensions [38]. According to Lager et al. [43], place attachment fosters and/or develops a “sense of autonomy, control, confidence, and identity” in older people, which improves their overall wellbeing. A study by Sawada and Toyosato [44] in Japan, which used Pearson’s correlation test to measure place attachment and economic status, demonstrates the important role that place attachment plays in lessening the detrimental effects of low economic status on elderly people’s wellbeing. Accordingly, to mitigate the effects of low wellbeing, the contribution of place attachment in providing emotional support, self-esteem, and mutual respect is to be noted particularly. Then, social interactions—through different activities in the neighborhood— significantly increase place attachment and positively improve the wellbeing of low-income groups. Moreover, as discovered by Yuan and Wu [45], the relationship between environmental stressors and wellbeing is mediated by place attachment and leisure activities. It demonstrates that a reduction in outdoor activity, which results from a decrease in place attachment, negatively affects the wellbeing of people, particularly older individuals. They used the scale of Lachowycz and Jones [46] to assess outdoor leisure behavior and social interaction in green zones, the scale of Ryan [47] to measure place attachment, the PERMA model scale of Seligman [48] to measure wellbeing, and the scale of Honold et al. [49] to measure environmental stressors [45]. Finally, the place attachment that older adults have to their neighborhoods can provide them with a feeling of security, which enhances their wellbeing [50].

3.2. Place Attachment and Urban Greenery

Ratcliffe and Korpela [51] investigated place attachment in preferred places by examining the features of these locations—selected by the participants—all of which were natural areas in Finland and presented their real-life experiences. The results of this internet-based survey approach showed that a place’s capacity for restoration can be enhanced by a person’s attachment to it. Cheung and Hui (2018) [52] showed that cultural bonding with greenery heritage makes people more sensitive and responsible about nature—as a collective memory—and promotes environmental awareness in the local community in Hong Kong. This study was based on a quantitative survey measuring the levels of residents’ place attachment, perception of forest heritage, and environmental attitudes. Bazrafshan et al. (2021) [53] investigated the most effective types of urban green spaces that may contribute to enhancing attachment through place dependency. They proposed that because traditional gardens and historic parks have a shared history and memory, they are more important than contemporary parks [53]. Pedestrian accessibility, pedestrian connectivity with surroundings, and satisfaction with children’s playgrounds are three key variables that Yang et al. [54] identified through their quantitative survey in Australia using Pearson correlation and later Hierarchical Multiple Regression analysis as contributing factors to place attachment in urban parks. Liu et al. (2021) [13] found that the presence of local landscape features enhances place attachment and the restorative perception of urban green spaces. Put another way, compared to other landscape types, people tend to have a higher sense of place attachment to their native urban parks. Accordingly, the results of the Pearson correlation analysis showed a positive and significant contribution of a “higher level of local landscape characteristics, place dependent, and place identity” to “greater perceived restorativeness” of green spaces [13]. For instance, using local landscape elements in designing urban green spaces increases their restorative capacity and results in stronger place attachment. Ratcliffe and Korpela [51] used a quantitative method to investigate the mediating effect of place attachment in Finland while examining the restorative potential of places and people’s memories. They found that place memory—through place identity—contributes to restorative perceptions of a place.

Menatti et al. [55] investigated the role of place attachment and place identification in landscape preference in a different study. They found that people value and prefer local natural landscapes over non-local natural landscapes when it comes to their potential for restorative capacities. Nevertheless, they concluded that place attachment had a more significant effect on restorativeness, and that these studies should also take cultural values into account. According to the studies of Liu et al. (2021) [13], the incorporation of local natural elements into urban landscape design contributes to significantly increasing the sense of place attachment, since familiarity with the environment is the key to maximizing its restorative effects. Applying a quantitative method, the Place Attachment Scale and Perceived Restorativeness Scale were used in this study, carried out in China. Similarly, Kil et al. [56] studied the health outcomes of forest therapy—slow, mindful walking in nature—among people with different levels of place attachment in South Korea. Considering the characteristics of the participants, and measuring place attachment through item factors related to place dependence and place identity, the researchers investigated the preferences of the visitors regarding their recreational experiences as well as the improvements in their wellbeing in this quantitative survey. According to their study, those with a higher sense of place attachment were mostly non-locals with more frequency in visiting and more participation in natural-water and land-based restorative activities.

Supporting the urban landscape, pre-urban greenery zones around the cities are considered an important part of the ecosystem, and positive perception of the local people contributes to the sense of attachment that leads to the preservation of such a heritage [52]. Studying three types of natural, artificial, and artificial-natural features in the landscape and their relationship with emotional attachment in an urban park in China, Zhang [57] measured physiological signals—such as heart rate, eye movements, and skin conductance—by analyzing multimodal data and concluded that natural feature—particularly wild plants compared to designed ones—resulted in higher levels of attachment. However, regarding the artificial features, their contribution to place identification is associated with the degree to which they present local history and culture. Highlighting the contribution of place attachment to place meaning in an Australian natural park, Wynveen et al. [58] explored the potential relationships with a qualitative method and later measured them quantitatively. They concluded that people with different levels of attachment to the place expressed the identity and meaning of the place within distinct forms. Put another way, the importance of a particular set of meanings in a certain place to the users depends on their level of attachment to it. Colley and Craig [59] conducted a similar study and examined place attachment between original wildscapes and designed or managed landscapes. They found that both types of greenspaces contribute to place attachment in Scotland, and their findings indicate no relationship between people’s actual perceptions of place attachment and their childhood memories of particular types of greenspaces. Higher degrees of place attachment are also correlated with “frequency of visits” and “walking distance” from home, according to Colley and Craig [59].

Furthermore, it is emphasized that quantity and quality of greenery have a direct impact on wellbeing. The benefits of being linked to nature have been demonstrated for both physical and psychological health, and it is recognized as a major contributor to the wellbeing of individuals from diverse sociocultural backgrounds. Thus, wellbeing appeared as another aspect in the studies that examined the relationship between greenspaces and place attachment. For example, place attachment is considered to function as a mediator in the significant relationship between wellbeing and nature connectedness [60]. According to Han et al. [50], place attachment, social capital, and greenness are all strongly correlated with wellbeing. However, this relationship is more significant among older adults due to their higher levels of place attachment. In their empirical study, Basu et al. [60] measured place attachment as a multidimensional concept by applying the Reymond et al. model [61]. They studied the mediating role of place attachment between nature connectedness and wellbeing in Japan. They used two scales: “The Connectedness to Nature Scale (Mayer and Frantz 2004)” [62] for measuring the affective, experiential connection of an individual to nature, and the scale of “Love and Care for Nature [63]” to analyze the intrinsic value of nature and individual sense of responsibility to protect it within a qualitative design [60]. They found that place attachment accounts for 30% of the total effect of nature connectedness on the wellbeing of the studied population [60]. Bazrafshan et al. [64] verified the important role of place attachment in promoting wellbeing and mitigating stress by examining quantifiable physiological emotions. Accordingly, being familiar with the cultural background of the park and having more attachment to it contributes to feeling more relaxed even in the case of non-native visitors.

3.3. Place Attachment and Cultural/Social Aspects

Chishima et al. [65] used surveys and interviews with 1068 respondents to examine how place attachment and participation differed in traditional and modern communities in Japan. They found a significant relationship between individual values and their preferred environmental characteristics. People with traditional values showed higher levels of place attachment to rural areas, whereas those who valued modernization showed higher levels of place attachment in urban areas. According to a study by Azevedo et al. [66] in Portugal, “Self-efficacy, Perceived happiness, and Active citizenship behavior” -as the attributes of quality of life- are significantly correlated with place attachment when taking social factors into account. They suggest that two relevant indicators of place attachment are “social identification” and “satisfaction” with one’s current residence. However, this study detects the negative impact of economic dependency on place attachment when a place does not provide stable economic development for the residents.

According to Kamalipour et al. [67], who investigated place attachment and its associated factors in a residential complex in Iran, long-term residents as well as homeowners do experience higher levels of neighborhood attachment, and factors including fear of crime, cultural tensions, and less social cohesion negatively affect place attachment [67]. In the United States, Luo et al. [68] investigated how people perceive place attachment differently in urban and rural settings, both at the neighborhood and city level. They used a quantitative method to measure the factors of belonging, happiness, membership, and pleasure. Accordingly, they found that social ties as well as their distribution play a significant role in developing place attachment. In a quantitative survey, Lu et al. [69] investigated place attachment in China’s gated neighborhoods. Their study suggests that a sense of place attachment to one’s community is correlated with inhabitants’ involvement in social events held there. According to Chang et al. [21], in a study conducted in China, neighborhood quality—both physical and social—contributes more to place attachment than housing conditions. This research, which uses a quantitative approach, supports the existence of a more complex interaction between social aspects of the environment and place attachment. Accordingly, more social ties in the neighborhood contribute to place dependence, place identity, and the development of place attachment. In a related study, Shamsuddin and Ujang [70] used surveys and interviews in Malaysia to investigate the role that place attachment plays in defining place identity and meaning. Given the significance of shopping streets for people’s cultural and economic lives in this region, it becomes apparent that these streets have great meaning for long-term users who have strong attachments to their new location because of personal and shared meanings. According to Shamsuddin and Ujang [70], a person’s functional, emotional, and social attachment to a place develops as a result of several factors, such as the duration of engagement, familiarity, and economic dependence on the area. Such a place attachment would be linked to more profound meanings that establish a sense of place.

In addition, Reese et al. [71] conducted an online survey in Germany to evaluate the differences in attachment to their favorite places after imagining the loss of certain physical or social characteristics of those places. They found that there is a significant decrease in the level of place attachment even in this imaginative process. According to this study, social aspects, including community (festivals, social networks, etc.), family and friends, and mentality (welcoming, kind, and open-minded) were all imagined to be lost. The physical features included architectural and urban elements of the place. Accordingly, the loss of social features can affect and reduce the place attachment much more than the loss of the physical features in the same place. Additionally, Pei [72] found that place attachment has a moderating effect on pro-environmental behaviors like recycling household waste, and neighborhood ties are considered a positive motivation for community-level actions toward the environment.

Furthermore, Weijs-Perrée et al. [73] identified satisfaction with social life as an important indicator of wellbeing among neighborhood residents in the Netherlands. In this quantitative path analysis study, the relationship between independent variables (personal and neighborhood characteristics) and dependent variables (place attachment, social network, and social satisfaction) was measured to understand the direct and indirect effects of the above-mentioned variables on overall social satisfaction in the neighborhood. The findings show that while relationships with family and friends might have greater significance than social interactions with neighbors, there is a direct and positive correlation between the two and wellbeing as well as satisfaction.

Added to that, Lomas et al. [74] have emphasized people–place relationships within three themes: “Feelings of control”, “Social and community relations”, and “Understandings and definitions of place”, while examining the consequences of a regeneration project in the UK using an interpretative study. Their study shows that the removal of social spaces—as one of the sources of place attachment—results in mental health reduction and negatively affects wellbeing. According to a statistical investigation, using the neighborhood attachment and perceived environmental quality indices demonstrates how these indices have significantly improved the psychometric qualities of Rome’s citizens [75]. In other research, Albers et al. [32] confirm Self Determination Theory as a useful framework to study different aspects of the creation and development of place bonding that significantly contributes to the wellbeing of the community, especially for those who are at risk of mental illnesses. Also, Marcheschi et al. [76] confirmed the contribution of place attachment to health outcomes among people with mental illness using the Human–Environment Interaction Model [77]. According to this study, a combination of place attachment with perceived social and environmental quality positively impacts people’s quality of life. The degrees of place attachment may vary from a sense of belonging to a place to a sense of identification with it, and as a multifaceted theme that depends on time, it is defined within human–environment interactions. Furthermore, Hatori et al. [78] implemented quantitative research to explore place attachment among rural and urban residents in Japan. They found that residents in areas with population decline have lower attachment to the place.

Furthermore, Collins [79] conducted a qualitative study that involved conducting interviews and creating cognitive maps, ending in the coding of various aspects of cultural assets and a corresponding usage frequency. The study identified the public spaces in Los Angeles, California, where forty-three different ethnic residents felt attached. Accordingly, places of everyday life—like supermarkets, restaurants, etc.—are considered as cultural assets by different groups and associated with the sense of attachment that result in social cohesion and collective action. In addition, the manifestation of place identity—cultural events, festivals, etc.—contributes to place attachment among different people. More importantly, in multiethnic urban areas, monolithic interpretation of cultural identity in neighborhoods is to be avoided to attract more economic investment from distinct groups.

Finally, public green areas foster a sense of belonging, satisfaction, and interaction among community members, which in turn contributes to neighborhood attachment. Comstock et al. [80] measured gardening participation among American respondents with a statistical analysis of questions on walkability, social cohesion, place attachment, fear of crime, and incivilities. Consequently, in addition to the length of residency, higher levels of place attachment are associated with higher perceptions of safety and collective efficacy. Additionally, since gardening requires active neighbor interactions, both informally and formally, gardening activities in backyards and neighbor’s areas positively correlate with place attachment. Finally, Lo and Jim [81] investigated the relationship between the presence of the natural-cultural element of “stonewall trees” and community attachment in Hong Kong. They found that deep engagement with the local community increased the desire to preserve the walls and associated trees.

Place Attachment and Participation

Given the multifaceted nature of the relationship between place attachment and participation, it is important to examine the influences of citizens’ place attachment on their civic engagement in addition to their “participation experience” and “aspiration to participate” [21]. As such, consideration should be given to both the citizens’ past involvement and their motivations for potential future involvement. According to Stefaniak et al. [82], learning about the history of the area contributes to a higher sense of attachment to the place and more civic engagement of the residents. This approach helps to increase social trust among people, which results in their wellbeing. The study was implemented in Poland, and they measured the degree of sense of attachment among young adults both before and after learning about local history to analyze its contribution to their engagement in community activities. Approximately 1500 participants took part in this survey; most respondents (89%) stated that, because of their unique social background, they had not engaged in any civic activities or belonged to any civic organization. This quantitative survey used a “social trust scale”, “civic engagement scale”, and “place attachment scale” to measure the changes in pre- and post-test levels of participation and interest in civic engagement among students. The findings demonstrated that greater place attachment raises social trust and civic involvement. Likewise, the results of the quantitative survey of 1273 respondents in the Chinese city of Guangzhou by Chang et al. [21] confirm that having a higher sense of place attachment would lead to more engagement in neighborhood activities, which directly contributes to quality of life as well as the development of their environment. Using a survey questionnaire, Shaykh-Baygloo [83] investigated the association between place attachment and engagement in a newly constructed town in Iran. She found that a higher sense of attachment positively impacts the degree of civic engagement as well as place loyalty, especially among adult residents compared to teenagers. In the case of recently constructed towns, issues that impact the degree of place attachment among inhabitants include the absence of a local history, culture, and interesting events in addition to inadequate employment opportunities and service provisions [83].

Using information from 1285 respondents in a quantitative survey conducted in China, Pei [72] examined the relationship between participation in pro-environmental behaviors and place-related sociopsychological variables like neighborhood attachment. “Waste recycling intentions” and “neighborhood ties” were the dependent and independent variables in this study. The findings indicate that residents who have closer ties to the community take part in recycling programs at a higher rate than others. In another study, Irani et al. [84] examined the impact of place attachment on civic activities such as social engagement and pro-environmental behavior. The study was based on 240 questionnaires measuring variables of place attachment (place identity, place dependence, emotional attachment, and social attachment) and pro-environmental behaviors (household behavior, information seeking, and transportation). The results show the positive effect of place attachment as well as civic engagement on pro-environmental behaviors. Accordingly, civic participation functions as a mediator in the relationship between place attachment and pro-environmental behaviors. Also, it is found that social attachment is a significant variable regarding place attachment, which motivates people to be engaged in civic activities. Such engagement involves a higher sense of responsibility toward the environment and participating in different social activities to make decisions and solve problems that result in a sense of trust among residents.

3.4. Place Attachment and Immigration/Refugees

Signs of continuity, such as the presence of familiar features in the new environment, are linked to immigrants’ growing sense of attachment to it. This process helps create strong bonds with the place and contributes to their integration [32]. Trąbka [23] used a qualitative research design that involved sixty interviews in London and Oslo to examine the dynamic attachment process among Polish migrants in their new environment. It confirms the coexistence of different aspects of place attachment—including place dependence, place discovered, place identity, and place inherited—and concludes that the adaptation to a new setting is considered a gradual process. The complex relationship between place attachment and spatial mobility is an outcome of socioeconomic variables. For instance, when it comes to adjusting to their new environment, highly trained professionals and lower-status migrants differ significantly. Investigating the important places in both the original and residence country for the migrants as well as their reason for migration and their pre- and post-migration life history, Trąbka [23] found that some migrants may not develop all dimensions of place attachment and only have experienced place dependence in their new setting.

When it comes to immigrants, the nature of place attachment and the direction of future related research might change from the existing literature due to the recent high tendencies in several mobilizations in one’s life [43]. This is while the nature of the belonging also changes over time [43]. Studying local initiatives among former refugees from Myanmar in New Zealand, Kale [24] suggests that place attachment can offer an alternative approach to health and wellbeing based on the everyday multisensory environments of refugees on feelings of safety and happiness. Accordingly, being familiarized with the environment can build place attachment and reduce stress and anxiety while enhancing feelings of safety, autonomy, and belonging.

Kale [24] highlighted the importance of place attachment in the destination setting for refugees in reducing the negative impacts of sense of loss, grief, and disorientation that could affect their wellbeing. This study was based on an analysis of the interviews as well as the paintings drawn by the respondents—female former refugees from Myanmar in New Zealand—representing the places to which they feel attached. According to this study, “connecting to the land and putting down roots” as a form of environmental therapy promotes meaningful relationships with places and enhances place attachment. Furthermore, gardening and planting foster a sense of ownership and place attachment by showing care and responsibility [24].

In another study, Szaboova et al. [85] examined how the subjective wellbeing of migrants in their destination is shaped by core aspects of social and environmental risks and insecurity, place attachment, and aspirations using 2641 immigrants in Ghana, India, and Bangladesh through a quantitative survey. As they state, the subjective wellbeing of international migrants is highly correlated with their deep social integration in the community. They found that, on average, an increase of one standard deviation in the place attachment scale is associated with a 20 percentage point higher probability of reporting being very happy at the destination as one of the indicators of subjective wellbeing. They concluded that despite some general risks—including discrimination, fear of crime, and housing insecurity—that low-skilled immigrants may experience in their new place, the feeling of belonging to the new place is considered a determining factor that is more important than subjective wellbeing for mobile people. In this regard, achieving certain goals related to the migration purpose may contribute to reducing the effects of the possible negative risks. These factors are considered when regarding the aspirations associated with creating and developing an attachment to the new place.

According to a study by Bazrafshan et al. [53], place dependency—the capacity of an urban environment to provide an environment that gives more than basic amenities—is linked to a higher sense of attachment and may even result in place identity, particularly for bicultural immigrants. As a result, this study emphasizes the function of memory as a place attachment catalyst that reduces the consequences of disruption by associating certain similar current urban landscape characteristics with those of the place of origin. In addition, Rishbeth and Powell [86] have highlighted the role of green landscapes in providing a sense of place attachment among migrants by connecting with the memories of their different life stages. The study also demonstrates that the creation of a sense of place attachment among immigrants is facilitated by a sense of continuity as well as the “personal fit” that occurs in the open spaces through various family activities.

Furthermore, studying the association between place attachment and wellbeing, Bazrafshan et al. [64] investigated the relationship between familiarity with landscape features and the physiological reactions of immigrants in Switzerland through an audio-visual simulation. Additionally, the reactions of both immigrants and local respondents toward native and non-native garden environments were analyzed using a comparative method. The result of this study showed that place attachment to urban parks significantly increases the capacity for stress reduction and improves recreational quality for visitors. In addition, using multicultural landscape features enables immigrants to create more efficient bonds with them and accelerates the attachment process. In this regard, respondents showed a more relaxed reaction to the landscape of their own—origin—culture compared to an unfamiliar environment.

Peters et al. [87] used interviews, a qualitative method, to study how natural environments affect immigrants’ place attachment in four countries. Seventy research participants’ interpretations of place, the natural environment, and their social interactions within it were analyzed using a symbolic interaction technique. The study highlights three main concepts concerning place attachment in natural environments for immigrants. These concepts are “History”, referring to their connections to and memories of favorite places in the origin country, “Place”, referring to their evaluation of the natural environments, and “People”, which refers to their social interactions in such places. The results of this study support the dynamic process of place attachment with natural settings that occurs gradually and is influenced by several factors in immigrants’ lives, such as employment, family, income, and housing. Considered a cross-national study, this research shows that immigrants gradually develop a sense of attachment to their new place of residence and create emotional bonds with their surrounding natural environments through holding memorable events—birthdays or graduation celebrations of their children—as well as establishing social interactions with the host community.

Furthermore, Glorius et al. [88] used a mixed-method study (which included surveys and questionnaires) on place attachment for refugees and the value of social interaction with German citizens to demonstrate that various social events and gatherings help newcomers integrate more successfully. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that the positive effects of social integration on refugees’ wellbeing and place attachment will ultimately benefit and strengthen the community as a whole. In another study, Lager et al. (2012) [43] found that cohousing is regarded as a successful experience that results in the wellbeing of older immigrants by extending the environment and developing a sense of attachment in the Netherlands. It also explores the association of social networks and ethnic identity among such groups and their wellbeing in cohousing residences. The photo-voice approach was used in this study, where participants took pictures of objects or situations that represented their feeling of place and wellbeing. They could also subsequently clarify their perceptions in the interviews. Accordingly, cohousing was regarded as a living style that resulted in feeling attached to a place by such people while maintaining their independence and cultural identity. Stated differently, older migrants would be able to feel culturally grounded and attached by having social support from like-minded people, contributing directly to their wellbeing [43].

Liu et al. [89] investigated the degree of sense of attachment among immigrants, considering their feelings in different neighborhoods in a city in China. Accordingly, the findings show that the reason for the low sense of belonging to certain neighborhoods is related to the capacity of the environment for social integration. Stated differently, “living in uncertainty, not being involved in the formal urban economy, and poor neighborhood environment” result in a lower sense of attachment to their neighborhoods. This is a mixed-method study that includes questionnaires, interviews, and site visits to measure the city-level sense of belonging, which is mainly based on the economic relations and social networks beyond their neighborhood in an environment with a high immigrant population. The results of this study indicate that, in addition to the living environment, quality of housing has a direct impact on the sense of belonging for immigrants from various socioeconomic backgrounds. Age also demonstrates a substantial association with sense of belonging, with middle-aged groups presenting higher attachment compared to the elderly, regardless of gender and marital status. Furthermore, there is an obvious difference between immigrants from rural and urban areas, with those from urban areas showing a notably greater sense of attachment.

A study by Wu et al. [90] found that immigrants’ tendencies to engage in civic activities and build social capital in their areas in China are positively impacted by place attachment, and they are less motivated to engage in these kinds of activities since they feel less attached to the neighborhood than natives do. This concern relates to their plans, both present and future, to participate in and spend time in local activities. It should be highlighted that the strength of the correlation between place attachment and civic engagement varies among countries, which is why these correlations are quite context-dependent [90]. Finally, Glorius et al. [88] investigated the critical function of the number of interactions between natives and immigrants as an indicator in Germany’s rural areas. They examined expectations, perceptions, and experiences of immigrants in small rural neighborhoods to measure their effects on the degree of place attachment. They found that the process of forming ties with the new location and the immigrants’ wellbeing are positively impacted by the host community’s openness and welcome, even if it is only shown by a small portion of the local population. This issue especially is highlighted in communities with fewer numbers of immigrants—to develop their internal connections—and consequently, the main source of their social support is native people.

3.5. Place Attachments and Gender/Age

Lewicka [91] examined the factors that contribute to place attachment in three major Polish cities. According to their findings, while education, gender, and family size were not associated with the degree of place attachment, other predictors, including residence duration, age, and ownership status, did play a role in that. A quantitative approach has been used by Casakin et al. [92] to investigate place attachment at the neighborhood level. They found that despite the contribution of one’s satisfaction with place attachment in the neighborhood, it is not related to personal dimensions, including gender, religion, and length of residency. However, according to Kamalipour et al. [67], women showed higher levels of place attachment to their environment. In another study, it was found that gender matters, since female residents felt more attached to their homes, whereas male residents are typically less socially conscious and more economically dependent [66]. Furthermore, a range of age groups—particularly teenagers and older adults—were the subject of numerous studies on place attachment. Shabak et al. [25] investigated the perception of an accessible natural environment, using a visual method based on storytelling so the respondents could express their feelings about bonding with the place. They found a strong correlation between the degree of place attachment and the availability of natural features in the gated communities. Children, however, have different preferences for natural environments than adults; instead, they seek areas that enable them to play freely and creatively. Alcindor et al. [93] examined age variations in place attachment in Portugal and discovered that older generations had more ties to the historic location than did teenagers. In Italy, Bartolo et al. [94] investigated the benefits of place attachment on the pro-environmental behaviors of teenagers and the mediating role it plays in those activities. Similarly, Pretty et al. [95] investigated the sense of place among adults and adolescents in Australia, considering the age of residents in their attitudes and behaviors toward their small town and rural environment. Their study demonstrates that adults’ feelings of place-based belonging encompass both behavioral and emotional commitment, but teenagers’ senses of place-based belonging are mostly based on their perceptions of the facilities and opportunities available to them. Concerning children, Shabak et al. [25] investigated the contribution of natural features and facilities to developing a sense of attachment among children in the residential common open spaces in high-rise buildings. They found that cultural elements, in addition to natural features, contribute to the formation and development of children’s sense of identity. Additionally, promoting pro-environmental behavior is considered a tool to increase both place attachment and wellbeing among adolescents [94].

Furthermore, place attachment is an important predictor of the social wellbeing of older adults. It is to be considered not only at the residential level but also at the neighborhood scale [96]. This qualitative study in Spain confirms that there are strong relations between home and neighborhood attachment, and in the case of older adults, this linkage is highlighted due to their perception of social contacts as well as place dependence. Accordingly, aging in a familiar environment results in a feeling of belonging and security that is considered a source of support for older adults. In this regard, it is suggested that participating in a neighborhood’s cultural and religious events is associated with improving a sense of place attachment. Wiles et al. [38] highlighted the importance of community attachment for older adults. Their study showed that there is a strong relationship between place attachment and the health conditions of the elderly in New Zealand. Similarly, Yuan and Wu [45] investigated the association between middle-aged and older individuals’ wellbeing and place attachment, as well as leisure outdoor activities, in China’s urban green zones. Their research showed a direct relationship between environmental stressors and place attachment. Accordingly, older adults are not interested in outdoor activities in green areas with higher environmental stressors where they feel less attached. In addition, a study by Sun et al. [97] in Hong Kong showed that place attachment contributes to improving the capacity of older adults to cope with aging challenges in their living environment.

Wiles et al. [98] investigated how older persons in New Zealand felt about their physical and social environments, including their homes and neighborhoods, and discovered a correlation between these perceptions and their overall wellbeing. Furthermore, Han et al. [99] verified that older persons’ wellbeing is positively impacted by a green environment. The results of this study also show that older adults with greater levels of actual wellbeing perceive behavioral and environmental characteristics in the green spaces around them more accurately, which improves their overall wellbeing. Additionally, Shenk et al.’s [100] qualitative study explored elderly female residents’ sense of place attachment. They linked gender expectations to the approaches toward the place through the concepts of continuity, identity, and lifetime memories of the place.

Finally, research on the place attachment of immigrants and refugees has also focused on elderly persons. Palladino [101] argued that older adults experience different processes of adaptation when migrating and making bonds with new places. Their opinions and attitudes about their location of residency may differ greatly, depending on their motives for migrating. The interviews with twenty-seven older Italian immigrants to the UK provided the basis for this study. It demonstrates how social ties are important for a person to identify with their new location and lessen the negative effects for migrants of being away from their homeland. Redefining one’s identity is positively correlated with growing up and aging in a place, and the wellbeing of the older migrants is a direct effect of social support for fostering place identity. Additionally, using a qualitative research methodology, Sieng and Szabó [102] explored the degrees of two dimensions of place dependence and place identity among ten older adult migrants in New Zealand. The findings indicate that while all the older migrants may experience place dependency in their new home country, only a small percentage have been able to establish a sense of place identity. The narrative method they used suggested that language, cultural attitudes, and values might have a direct impact on the development of place attachment in both positive and negative ways for the migrants.

3.6. Place Attachment and Walkability

Neighborhood attachment can make walking a positive source of good feelings and change perceptions of the environment [103]. Walking, according to Chan and Li [103], fosters a stronger feeling of place attachment and closer contact with the environment, both of which increase life satisfaction. According to their mixed-method study of survey questionnaires and interviews conducted in China, attachment to the neighborhood has a positive significant effect on the rate of walking among the residents and is associated with creating memory and knowledge of their neighborhood. This study was designed to measure walking satisfaction, life satisfaction, built environment variables, neighborhood attachment, neighborhood characteristics, and sociodemographic variables. It also included interviews designed to determine the relationships between walking, inhabitants’ place attachment, and overall quality of life.

Koohsari et al. [27] studied the mediating role of perceived neighborhood walkability in the relationship between place attachment and neighborhood physical activity in Canada. In this study, 1500 respondents completed questionnaires that measured perceived walkability, place attachment, and level of physical activity in their neighborhoods. The results of this study demonstrate a strong correlation between the amount of time spent walking for recreation in the neighborhood and place attachment. In addition, they found that perceived neighborhood walkability is a mediator between place attachment and walking for transport. This study also emphasizes how important place attachment is in encouraging residents to keep up with their physical activities in the neighborhood.

Van Den Berg et al. [15] aimed to provide insights into the relation between neighborhood walkability and place attachment and the mediating role of (satisfaction with) social interaction. They used 251 residents of different neighborhoods across the Netherlands and two structural equation models to analyze the data. They found that perceived neighborhood walkability is a stronger predictor of place attachment than objective walkability, and perceived walkability has both a positive direct effect on place attachment and an indirect effect, via neighborhood-based social interaction. In another study, Li et al. [104] looked at the relationships between five predictors of perceived qualities of urban design—walkability, accessibility, space quality, urban function, and management—and two place-related dependent factors, place attachment and place satisfaction, in the context of China. They found that walkability and space quality were revealed as the most influential factors associated with place attachment, and place satisfaction and accessibility were indirectly associated with place attachment through the mediation of walkability. The association between accessibility, as one of the main environmental-associated factors with walkability, and place attachment was also examined by Zhang et al. [105] in the main urban area of Jiamusi City, China. They investigated the effect of accessibility on place attachment in metropolitan public open spaces using surveys and structural equation modeling. They found that accessibility has a positive effect on place attachment, and place satisfaction plays a mediating role.

According to research by Chan and Li [103], there is a complex relationship between residents’ satisfaction with walking and their perception of their neighborhood and place attachment. Their study analyzed the various purposes of walking in the neighborhood, such as going shopping, going to school or work, or walking for leisure. Accordingly, different purposes of walking have different degrees of relationship with place attachment in the neighborhood. Arnberger et al. [106] also investigated the level of place attachment among various users of green spaces, including walkers and dog walkers/owners. Also, they investigated different types of settings with distinct levels of development to find their degree of contribution to the place attachment of the users in Austria and the United States. Applying regression analysis, they have found that “motivations, satisfaction, and visit frequency” are predictors of place attachment. They also found that less developed settings result in higher place dependence and place identity among visitors.

4. Discussion

Place attachment can enhance each of the three distinct dimensions of people’s wellbeing—subjective [28], psychological [30], and social [31]—that are typically defined within a location. According to Tartaglia [34], place attachment promotes improved physical and mental health. Subjective wellbeing and community attachment are directly correlated, with increases in one significantly enhancing the other ([35,36,37]). This relationship is stronger among indigenous communities [38]. Sub-dimensions of place attachment, social identity, and place identity positively relate to wellbeing and life satisfaction, and perceptional aspects of wellbeing have a greater impact on place attachment among elderly people compared to objective aspects [38]. According to Han et al. [50], place attachment plays the most significant contribution to the wellbeing of residents compared to other intermediates, namely neighborhood social cohesion and neighborhood social capital. Place attachment contributes to the wellbeing of the elderly through creating and/or developing a “sense of autonomy, control, confidence, and identity” [43]. According to Sawada and Toyosato [44], place attachment plays a critical role in mitigating the negative impacts of low economic status on wellbeing among older adults. This is due to place attachment’s role in fostering neighborhood social interactions and offering emotional support, respect for one another, and self-esteem [44]. Furthermore, the relationship between environmental stressors and wellbeing is mediated by place attachment [45].

In addition, the presence of local landscape features, historic parks, and traditional gardens strengthens the perception of green spaces’ restorative qualities because of people’s familiarity with the area and their shared history and memories. This process also strengthens their attachment to the place. Moreover, compared to developed plants, wild plants produce higher degrees of attachment [57]. Furthermore, certain studies have emphasized the significance of cultural values in the correlation between landscape elements and place attachment. Specifically, the impact of landscape elements on place attachment is dependent on their level of presentation of local history and culture [55,57]. Additionally, wellbeing appeared as another aspect in the studies that examined the relationship between greenspaces and place attachment, since it is highly related to greenness [58,64]. For example, Basu et al. [60] demonstrated place attachment’s mediation function between wellbeing and connection to nature. The process by which greenery helps to lower stress and improve mental wellbeing is explained by Stress Reduction Theory and Attention Restoration Theory [18,19,20].

Moreover, social interaction is associated with developing place attachment [21]. People build functional, emotional, and social attachments because of familiarity with different environmental aspects and shared information [70]. Social networks with friends [71] and ties with one’s family and friends [73] are also positively associated with place attachment. A lesser sense of belonging to a place and population decline are also associated with less place attachment [78]. Social activities and social contacts play a more important role in enhancing place attachment, especially in low-income/deprived neighborhoods, due to the lower quality of the environment [107,108]. Furthermore, public green spaces have been shown to improve place attachment through social aspects like a sense of belonging and interaction among community members [80,81]. Apart from social elements, it has been demonstrated that certain cultural elements, like commonplace locations like grocery stores and dining establishments, may improve a feeling of attachment [79]. Additionally, higher place attachment raises social trust and civic engagement [21,82,83], both of which directly raise quality of life [2]. Such engagement involves a higher sense of responsibility toward the environment and participating in different social activities to make decisions and solve problems. Therefore, improving place attachment helps to increase a variety of pro-environmental variables, including intent to recycle waste [72,84].

Furthermore, plenty of research has been carried out on the attachment to one’s new home among immigrants and refugees. Trąbka [23] asserts that immigrants’ adjustment to a new environment is considered as a progressive process involving several dimensions of place attachment, such as place dependency, place discovery, place identity, and place inherited. In terms of the process of adapting to the new environment, there are also significant differences among immigrants based on socioeconomic factors, such as highly skilled professionals and migrants with lesser status [23]. Immigrants’ growing sense of attachment to their homeland is linked to signs of continuity, such as the presence of familiar elements in the scene [32]. Refugees who plant and garden show empathy and responsibility, which fosters a sense of belonging and attachment to their new home [24]. According to Risbeth and Powell [79], green spaces in public open spaces have a strong association with immigrants’ sense of place attachment by connecting with the memories of their different life stages and enhancing the sense of continuity among immigrants [79]. Particularly for bicultural immigrants, the green urban landscape is linked to a stronger sense of attachment [53]. Furthermore, place attachment can provide an alternative approach to improving the wellbeing of immigrants and refugees [24,85], and becoming familiar with the environment can foster place attachment and lessen stress among refugees [24]. The availability of recreational areas enhances refugees’ wellbeing and place attachment [24]. Immigrants’ sense of attachment and ability to cope with stress are greatly enhanced by the presence of green places, particularly those that are part of their native landscape [64]. Additionally, Peters et al. [87] demonstrate that social interaction with the host community and the organization of memorable events foster the emotional ties that immigrants form with the natural landscapes around them. Comparably, increased place attachment for immigrants and refugees [43,88,89] as well as the wellbeing of older immigrants [43] are facilitated by cohousing, increased social contact with residents, increased environmental capacity for social integration, and the openness and acceptance of the host community [43]. Finally, immigrants’ motivations to engage in civic activities and create social capital in their communities are improved by place attachment [82].

Additionally, female residents showed a stronger sense of attachment to their place of residence compared to male residents while considering the socio-demographic characteristics associated with place attachment [66,67], and depending on the age group, the attributes of the related elements with place attachment change. As an example, older generations have stronger ties to historic sites than adolescents [93]. Open spaces that allow children to play creatively are the main characteristics of natural environments for children so that their place attachment increases, an issue that is not observed in adults [25]. Pretty et al. [95] found that although adolescents primarily rely on their perceptions of the opportunities and amenities of their place of residence, adults’ sense of belonging to the neighborhood involves both emotional and behavioral commitment. Children’s sense of identity is created and developed in part by the presence of cultural aspects, according to Shabak et al. [25].

Studies on place attachment have primarily focused on older persons among the age ranges. Compared to older populations, middle-aged groups show higher levels of attachment [89]. According to Lebrusán and Gomez [96], older persons who live in familiar environments experience a greater sense of place attachment and a sense of belonging and security. Participating in cultural and religious events in the community is linked to older persons having a stronger feeling of place attachment [44]. Older adults are not interested in outdoor activities in green areas with higher environmental stressors where they feel less attached [45]. Place attachment also helps older adults cope with aging challenges in their living environment [90], and the concepts of continuity, identity, and lifetime memories of the place play a role in enhancing the place attachment of older female residents [100]. Finally, studies regarding the sense of attachment among immigrants and refugees have also focused on older adults. Language, cultural attitudes, and values may have an impact on how well elderly immigrants develop place attachment [102]. Social aspects and identification with place are considered as determining factors in improving the place attachment of elderly immigrants [101].

Additionally, there is a positive correlation between walking frequency and place attachment, because walking fosters closer relationships with the environment and is associated with the creation of memories and knowledge of one’s neighborhood, both of which may increase one’s sense of place attachment. Attachment to specific places, such as residential neighborhoods, has been shown to encourage people to adopt and maintain physical activity routines [27,103]. According to Koohsari et al. [27], there is a substantial correlation between the amount of time spent walking for enjoyment in the neighborhood and place attachment. This is supported by Li et al. (2020) [104], who found that walkability and space quality were revealed as the most influential factors associated with place attachment. Koohsari et al. [27] also found that place attachment and walking for transportation is mediated by perceived neighborhood walkability [27]. According to Van Den Berg et al. [15], subjective walkability rather than actual walkability is a better indicator of place attachment. They also found that perceived walkability has an indirect effect on place attachment via neighborhood-based social interaction [15]. Finally, Arnberger et al. [106] found that among various users of green areas, such as walkers and dog walkers/owners, motivations, satisfaction, and visit frequency are predictors of place attachment.

Concerning the relationship between walkability and place attachment, much research has not been carried out on how walkability-related built environment features can strengthen place attachment. For example, it was discovered that place attachment and accessibility are related. Accessibility is a primarily built environmental factor connected with walkability [104]. This is supported by Zhang et al. [105], who found that accessibility has a positive effect on place attachment, while place satisfaction plays a mediating role. In addition, it has also been shown that crime-related factors contribute to a lower sense of place attachment in low-income/deprived neighborhoods [107,108]. The built environment factors that are linked to walkability also include certain qualities of urban design and aesthetic and design-related aspects of path context [109,110,111,112,113,114]. These factors are particularly significant for place attachment because they can contribute to creating more enjoyable walking experiences [115], which pedestrians may use as a basis for their place attachment in their neighborhoods [104]. The presence of parks and green spaces, the existence of natural features, the amounts of greenery, the types of building facades and their maintenance, the presence of landmarks, the degree of enclosure, the transparent façade, building height, and articulation in building design are some examples of these aesthetic and design-related aspects of path context [116,117,118,119,120,121,122] Furthermore, according to Ewing and Handy (2009) [123] and Paydar et al. (2023b) [124], legibility, complexity, mystery, coherence, imageability, enclosure, and human scale are examples of urban design qualities linked to walkability and the everyday walking experience of pedestrians. These aspects of urban design might further promote a sense of place attachment.

Finally, Lewicka (2010) [91] noted that most studies on place attachment are conducted at the middle-scale level and concentrate on people’s relationships with their neighborhood; smaller and bigger scales, which can be defined as cities and housing units, are less investigated. Furthermore, there is an association between the degree of place attachment and the place’s scale [91]. The size of a city can have a significant impact on how people perceive and interact with their place; in particular, large and small cities tend to have higher levels of place attachment than medium-sized cities, according to Casakin et al. [125], who investigated the relationship between the place dimension and the level of attachment among Israeli residents.

5. Conclusions

This study reviewed place attachment and related variables using the following six categories: “place attachment and wellbeing”, “place attachment and urban greenery”, “place attachment and social and cultural factors”, “place attachment and immigrants/refugees”, “place attachment and gender/age”, and “place attachment and walkability”.

All three of the subjective, psychological, and social dimensions of wellbeing can be enhanced by place attachment, and there is a higher correlation between place attachment and subjective wellbeing among indigenous communities. In addition, place attachment contributes to the wellbeing of the elderly by creating and/or developing a sense of autonomy, control, confidence, and identity. This association works to improve social interactions, mutual respect, and emotional support to lessen the detrimental impact that low economic status has on older people’s wellbeing. This applies particularly to city planners trying to lessen the negative impacts of economic distress on the standard of living in lower-income neighborhoods. Place attachment can also lessen the detrimental effects of environmental stressors on wellbeing. Aspects of one’s surroundings that increase psychological or emotional stress are referred to as environmental stressors. Extreme temperatures, crowded spaces, loud noises, and criminal activity are a few examples of environmental stresses. Therefore, improving place attachment in communities with high concentrations of environmental stressors may help mitigate the detrimental impacts of those stresses on wellbeing.

In addition, the presence of local landscape features, historic parks, and traditional gardens all strengthen a person’s sense of place attachment, and the effect of landscape features on place attachment varies according to how much they represent the history and culture of the area. This could be further investigated by future studies. Furthermore, green spaces have been linked to improved mental wellbeing following Stress Reduction Theory and Attention Restoration Theory. It was also found that place attachment plays a mediator function between nature connectedness and wellbeing.

Social interaction is also linked to the development of place attachment, and this relationship is stronger in low-income/deprived neighborhoods due to the lower quality of the environment. As a result, in poor neighborhoods, social context is crucial for improving place attachment. Urban policymakers could use this to raise the level of place attachment among inhabitants by concentrating more on various social features in such neighborhoods. Furthermore, public greenspaces have been shown to contribute to place attachment through social factors such as interaction among community members. Increased place attachment also improves social trust and civic engagement, both of which have a direct positive impact on quality of life. Such engagement involves a higher sense of responsibility toward the environment and participating in different social activities to make decisions and solve problems.

When it comes to immigrants and refugees, signs of continuity—that is, incorporating familiar features into a setting—are linked to an increasing sense of attachment among the immigrants in their new environment. Green landscapes play a significant role in helping immigrants and refugees connect with their memories of their various life stages and enhance their sense of continuity, particularly among bicultural immigrants. Green landscapes connected with the origin culture of immigrants are crucial in strengthening their sense of continuity and place attachment. Natural landscapes also help immigrants strengthen their emotional ties and sense of place attachment by providing opportunities for social engagement with the host community. Furthermore, place attachment positively influences older immigrants’ tendencies to engage in civic activities in their communities, and language, cultural attitudes, and values may have an impact on the development of place attachment in these individuals. Future studies in regions with a high concentration of immigrants and refugees may focus more on the types of landscape features, cultural attitudes and values, and social factors that connect to the immigrants’ home cultures and increase the likelihood of social integration between the immigrants and the host communities, all of which ultimately help to strengthen the immigrants’ sense of place attachment.

Additionally, the process by which place attachment develops varies according to age group: adults’ sense of place attachment involves both behavioral and emotional commitment, whereas adolescents’ sense of place attachment is primarily based on their impressions of the amenities and opportunities provided by their place of residence. Involving older people in the neighborhood’s cultural and religious events is linked to increasing their sense of place attachment, which in turn helps them cope better with the challenges of aging in their living environment. Urban policymakers may help to strengthen the sense of place attachment among older persons residing in communities with higher rates of aging by recognizing and enhancing these cultural activities.

Furthermore, the duration of time spent walking and the perception of the neighborhood’s walkability are positively correlated with each other. Place attachment is indirectly influenced by perceived walkability through social interactions inside the neighborhood. Place attachment relates to accessibility, one of the primary built environmental factors associated with walkability. However, the role of other built environmental factors related to perceived walkability, especially the aesthetic and design-related aspects of path context and certain urban design qualities in enhancing place attachment, has been rarely investigated. Further studies could investigate the potential effects of these aesthetic and design-related aspects of path context and urban design qualities on place attachment. Finally, studies have shown that place attachment is higher in large and small cities relative to medium-sized cities, indicating a link between place attachment and the scale of the place. The contribution of the scale of the place to the sense of place attachment could also be stressed by future studies.