Young people's everyday lives in the city

158 Pages·2017·3.6 MB·English

This study, positioned in the fields of
humanistic geography and young people’s
geographies, deals with young people’s
personal place experiences in the city. Earlier
research findings indicate that adults define
and restrict young people’s places in urban
space. According to the results, socio-spatial
tensions that typically arise between adults
and young people no longer influence the
construction of place experiences among
people in their late youth. The material
sheds light on the lives of individuals who
experientially live between their childhood
and adulthood places, and actively construct
new personal places in their everyday
environments in the process of growing up.
DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A52
Department of Geosciences and Geography A52
ISSN-L 1798-7911
ISSN 1798-7911 (print)
ISBN 978-951-51-2927-7 (paperback) Young people’s everyday lives in the
ISBN 978-951-51-2928-4 (pdf)
htp:/ethesis.helsinki.fi city: living and experiencing daily places
Painosalama Oy
Turku 2017
HELI PONTO
2017 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A52 HELI PONTO
Young people’s everyday lives in the city
Living and experiencing daily places
HELI PONTO
ACADEMIC DISSERTATION
To be presented, with the permission of the Faculty of Science
of the University of Helsinki, for public examination in the Auditorium XV
of the Main Building of the University of Helsinki on August 18th, 2017 at 12 o’clock.
DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A52 / HELSINKI 2017
Author’s address: Heli Ponto
Department of Geosciences and Geography
P.O. Box 64
00014 University of Helsinki
Finland
Ponto, H. (2017). Young people’s everyday lives in the city: living and experiencing daily places.
Department of Geosciences and Geography A52
Tiivistelmä
Tämä humanistiseen ja nuoruuden maantietee- aikuisina” erilaisissa paikoissa. Nuoret kokivat
seen pohjaava tutkimus käsittelee nuorten paikka- lapsuuden paikat tärkeiksi muistoiksi, mutta ne
kokemuksia kaupunkiympäristössä. Tarkastelen eivät olleet enää keskeisiä paikkoja arjessa. Niil-
paikkaa yksilölle ainutlaatuisena kokemuksena lä oli silti tärkeä rooli, sillä ristiriitaisetkin koke-
henkilökohtaisten paikkasuhteiden sekä kuulu- mukset uusista aikuisuuden paikoista tuntuivat
misen ja kuulumattomuuden näkökulmasta. Ym- helpommilta, mikäli muistot tutuista lapsuuden
märrän paikan myös sosiaalisten kohtaamisten paikoista muodostivat kokemuksellisen yhtey-
myötä rakentuvana ja jaettuna kokemuksena. den aikuisuuden paikkojen kanssa. Väitän, et-
Tutkimukseni kytkeytyy lisäksi mobiliteettitut- tä nuoret elävät kokemuksellisesti lapsuuden ja
kimukseen, johon nojaan erityisesti tarkastelles- aikuisuuden paikkojen välissä, jossa he raken-
sani paikkaa arkisen liikkumisen ja sen muo- tavat aktiivisesti uusia henkilökohtaisia paikka-
dostamien henkilökohtaisten verkostojen näkö- sidoksia arjen ympäristöön aikuiseksi kasvami-
kulmasta. Tutkimuksen osallistujat olivat luki- sen kontekstissa.
olaisia pääkaupunkiseudulta. Osallistavilla me- Tutkimukseni nuoret korostivat ystävien
netelmillä kerätty aineisto koostuu liikkuvista merkitystä kuulumisen tunteiden rakentumises-
haastatteluista, valokuvista, GPS-tallenteista ja sa. Ystävyksillä oli yksityisiä ”meidän” paikkoja,
kirjoitustehtävistä. mutta myös avoimempia paikkoja, joihin ”muut”
Aikaisemmat tutkimukset osoittavat aikuis- olivat tervetulleita. Kohtaamiset ”muiden” kans-
ten määrittävän ja rajoittavan nuorten paikkoja sa olivat helpompia ystävien kanssa. Toisinaan
kaupunkitilassa. Nuorten kuulumisen ja kuulu- sosiaalisten kohtaamisten myötä rakentuvat ul-
mattomuuden kokemusten on havaittu olevan kopuolisuuden kokemukset olivat voimakkaita
vahvasti sidoksissa myös muihin arjen merki- ystävistä huolimatta, etenkin jos nuoret jakoivat
tyksellisiin sosiaalisiin kohtaamisiin. Mobili- ulkopuolisuuden tunteen. Mikäli nuorella oli kui-
teettitutkimuksen traditiossa arkinen liikkumi- tenkin taitoja ja resursseja käsitellä kohtaamis-
nen nähdään usein kehollisena ja rutiininomai- kokemuksia ja sietää erilaisia ihmisiä arjen pai-
sena käytäntönä, ja liikkumismahdollisuuksien koissa, hänen kuulumisen kokemuksensa paik-
on havaittu olevan yhteydessä nuorten itsenäis- kaan säilyi.
tymiskokemuksiin. Tutkimukseni osoittaa (inter)subjektiivisten
Tutkimukseni nuorten mukaan sosio-tilalli- paikkojen merkitysten rakentumisen olevan tii-
set jännitteet aikuisten ja nuorten välillä eivät viissä yhteydessä arkiseen liikkumiseen. Nuo-
enää hallinneet heidän paikkakokemustensa ra- ret kuvasivat arjen liikkumisen rakentavan ko-
kentumista. Lapsuudesta tuttujen paikkojen, esi- kemuksellisia ja kehollisia yhteyksiä heidän ja
merkiksi hengailun paikkojen, merkitykset oli- paikkojen välille. Lisäksi se oli nuorten tapa olla
vat muuttuneet, koska nuoret kohdattiin ”lähes ja elää kaupungissa sekä toteuttaa uutta aikui-
3
DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52
suuttaan. Nuorten mukaan heillä oli paljon va- on tärkeä oppia tunnistamaan kokemuksellisia
pautta arkisen, kehollisen liikkumisen suhteen. sidoksiaan ja selviämään katkeamista paikkojen
Heidän liikkumistaan säätelivät heikot julkiset ja itsensä välillä. Nuorten kohdalla tätä tavoitetta
liikenneyhteydet sekä ajokortin ja -neuvon puute, edistävät paikat, jotka tukevat heidän arkista toi-
eivät niinkään vanhempien asettamat rajoitukset. mintavaltaansa, koska näin he voivat aktiivises-
Arjen paikat muodostavat merkityksellisten ti vaikuttaa yhteyksiin heidän ja arjen paikkojen
paikkojen verkostoja ja koettuja yhteyksiä ja kat- välillä sekä kuulumisen tunteisiinsa.
keamia paikkojen ja ihmisten välillä, jossa (inter)
subjektiivinen merkityksenanto kietoutuu arki-
seen liikkumiseen. Koska koetut katkeamat ai- Avainsanat: paikkakokemukset, paikka, nuoret,
heuttivat ulkopuolisuuden kokemuksia, nuorten arki, kaupunkitila
4
Ponto, H. (2017). Young people’s everyday lives in the city: living and experiencing daily places.
Department of Geosciences and Geography A52
Abstract
This study, positioned in the felds of humanis- adults’ in diferent places. Childhood places still
tic geography and young people’s geographies, evoked strong memories, but were no longer at
deals with young people’s place experiences in the centre of daily life. They still had a signif-
the city. I consider such experiences subjec- cant bridge-building role in reconciling memo-
tive, and study place from the perspective of ries of familiar childhood places with contradic-
personal relations and experienced insideness tory experiences of new adulthood places. Thus,
and outsideness. I also understand place as an I claim that young people are experientially liv-
intersubjective experience comprising social ing between their childhood and adulthood plac-
encounters. My research contributes to the lit- es, actively constructing new personal places in
erature on mobility, specifcally in examining their everyday environments in the process of
place from the perspective of daily mobility growing up.
and personal networks. The participants were The young people emphasised the impor-
young people in upper-secondary education in tance of friends in fostering feelings of insideness
the Helsinki metropolitan area, Finland. The re- with place. Groups of friends had their private
search material consists of go-along interviews, ‘our’ places, but also more open places in which
photographs, GPS recordings and independent ‘they’ were welcome. Meetings with ‘them’ were
assignments, gathered in accordance with par- easier if friends were present. Social encounters
ticipatory methods. sometimes evoked strong feelings of outsideness
Earlier research fndings indicate that adults despite the presence of friends, however, espe-
defne and restrict young people’s places in ur- cially if such feelings were shared. Nevertheless,
ban space, and that their experiences of inside- those who had the skills and resources to handle
ness and outsideness are strongly related to oth- experiences related to encounters with diferent
er meaningful social encounters. Daily mobility people in their daily places seemed to retain their
also tends to be perceived as a bodily and rou- feelings of insideness.
tine practice, whereas mobility opportunities are My fndings reveal that the construction of
connected to young people’s experienced inde- (inter)subjective meanings of places is tightly in-
pendence. tertwined with daily mobility. The young people
According to the participants, socio-spatial described how daily moving structured the ex-
tensions that typically arise between adults and periential and bodily connections between them
young people no longer infuenced the construc- and their places, supporting their way of living
tion of their place experiences. The meanings of and being in the city and enabling them to prac-
familiar childhood places, used for activities such tise new adulthood. They had plenty of freedom
as hanging out, changed as these young people related to daily, bodily mobility, and were re-
were more commonly encountered as ‘almost stricted by a poor public-transport network, and
5
DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52
the lack of a driving licence and vehicle, rather ties with places and handle the breakages. To
than parental strictures. do this they need places that support their ev-
Daily places form webs of meaningful places eryday agency in terms of actively infuencing
and experienced (dis)connections between plac- their personal connections with places and pro-
es and people, in which (inter)subjective mean- moting feelings of insideness.
ing-making is intermingled with daily mobilities.
Given that experienced disconnections appear
to arouse feelings of outsideness, young peo- Keywords: young people, place experiences,
ple should learn to recognize their experiential place, everyday life, urban space
6
Acknowledgements
This research would not have been possible with- discussions we had, and to Professor Emeritus
out the help of various people and the organi- Pauli Tapani Karjalainen, who introduced me
sations that sponsored the project. Grants were to humanistic geography.
received from The Doctoral Programme of the I would like to thank all the 162 research par-
Built Environment (RYM-TO) and Helsinki Uni- ticipants and their teachers from the participating
versity. I am also grateful to Helsinki Metro- schools. I am particularly grateful to the 26 young
politan Region Urban Research for funding the people who joined in the go-along interviews.
project within which I was privileged to work. Your stories were fascinating and taught me so
My sincere thanks go to my supervisors, much! I hope I understood your experiences in
Professor Mari Vaattovaara and Professor Sir- the ways you meant.
pa Tani. Mari, thank for your supportive com- I am grateful to my friends and colleagues
ments and helpful advice, and for allowing me from the University of Helsinki and Aalto Uni-
to choose my own path. I am also grateful for versity. My fellow researchers and the staf at
the help you gave me in obtaining research the Department of Geography and Geosciences:
funding. Thank you, Sirpa, for introducing your support was irreplaceable! You have been
me to children’s and young people’s geogra- much more than colleagues. I give special thanks
phies and the study of place experiences, and to my colleagues, Dr Annika Airas, Dr Elina Es-
for your support, encouragement and helpful kelä, Dr Maria Merisalo and Dr Salla Jokela for
comments over the years. I am very grateful to their peer support and friendship. Many thanks,
the pre-examiners, Docent Anna-Kaisa Kuusis- too, to Arttu Paarlahti for his technical support.
to-Arponen and Docent Leena Suurpää, whose I am very grateful to the ‘Metoditytöt’ group
helpful and supportive comments brought this for wonderful peer support: Dr Elina Eskelä,
research onto a new level. I would also like to Dr Eija Hasu, Anne Tervo and Tuulia Puusti-
thank Docent Jani Vuolteenaho for agreeing to nen. I also thank my fellow students in Profes-
be my opponent. sor Sirpa Tani’s postgraduate group for helping
I would like to express my gratitude to Pro- me through the diferent phases of this study.
fessor Tommi Inkinen, whose help and support Thank you, Dr Markus Hilander, D. Kirsi Pauli-
was valuable during the later years of this study. ina Kallio, Dr Jenni Kuoppa and Dr Noora Pyy-
It was a pleasure to be part of your research ry, with whom I have resolved the mysteries of
team. Many thanks, too, to Professor Emeritus what it means to do and popularise science. I
Harry Schulman for his encouragement during also thank the Society for Regional and Envi-
the postgraduate seminars. I also owe thanks to ronmental Studies.
Professor Michael Gentile for his helpful com- Lastly but not least, I come to my friends and
ments. I was privileged to spend time at the family who have lived with me throughout this
National University of Singapore, sponsored by research project. Thank you, Mari Brown, Susan-
RYM-TO, and sincerely thank Associate Pro- na Harvio, Kaisa Herranen, Anni Karlin, Kerttuli
fessor Tracey Skelton there for helping me to Kohonen, Veera Launis, Tiia Lohela, Anna-Sofa
learn about academic writing. My thanks are Nyholm, Irma Mynttinen, Teija Puutio, Maija
also due to Professor Marketta Kyttä for the Rusanen, Liisi Ylönen, and many others too nu-
7
DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52
merous to mention here. I am grateful to Irma for my life, and to my brother Jani Ponto and Hanna
being the mysterious adult volunteer who tested Hooli. Finally, thank you, Antti for your endless
the go-along interviewing method with me. Ma- support, helpful comments, patience and love. I
ny thanks to Sinikka and Dr Matti Lukkarila for also thank our son Reijo. This book would not
your support and help, and to Juhani Lukkarila be here without you.
and Karolina Svahn. I am grateful to my parents
Kaisu and Pentti Ponto, who have uncondition- Helsinki, May 2017
ally supported me in my endeavours throughout Heli Ponto

8
Contents
Tiivistelmä ................................................................................................................................ 3
Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... 7
Contents .................................................................................................................................... 9
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 11
1.1 Humanistic geography as a starting point ................................................................... 16
1.2 Young people as research subjects .............................................................................. 18
1.3 Aims and research questions ....................................................................................... 21
2 Place in humanistic geography: a critical approach ............................................................. 23
3 Young people’s places in the city: the urban environment as an experiential and
lived place.......................................................................................................................... 33
3.1 Place experiences in an urban environment: living with socio-spatial opportu-
nities and constraints ................................................................................................ 33
3.2 The city as an arena for social encounters ................................................................... 36
3.3 Young people’s im/mobile environments in the city ................................................... 39
4 The research participants and their local setting: the Helsinki metropolitan area as a
research context ................................................................................................................ 44
4.1 The participants ........................................................................................................... 44
4.2 The research site .......................................................................................................... 46
4.2.1 The suburbs and the schools ............................................................................. 46
4.2.2 Research areas as contexts ............................................................................... 50
4.3 The Helsinki metropolitan area: social and structural characteristics ......................... 53
5 Methodology, methods and ethical questions ...................................................................... 55
5.2 Methods and research materials .................................................................................. 57
5.2.2 Go-along interviews ......................................................................................... 58
5.2.3 GPS tracking .................................................................................................... 60
5.2.4 Photographs ...................................................................................................... 61
5.2.5 Independent assignments .................................................................................. 63
5.3 Research ethics and positionality ................................................................................ 64
6 Young people’s place experiences in urban environments ................................................... 67
6.1 Past places of childhood, new places of adulthood: memories, new possibilities
and place experiences ................................................................................................ 68
6.1.1 Places of childhood: feelings of boredom and nostalgic memories ................ 70
6.1.2 Experiencing places of emerging adulthood: feelings of excitement and
misft ............................................................................................................... 78
6.2 Urban encounters as constructors of young people’s place experiences ..................... 85
6.2.1 Encountering ‘us’: places of wanted encounters ............................................. 86
9