Young People's Everyday Lives in the City

2017 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY AND GEOSCIENCES OF DEPARTMENT 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.

A52 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A52

Department of Geosciences and Geography A52 HELI PONTO 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) http://ethesis.helsinki.fi city: living and experiencing daily places

Painosalama Oy Turku 2017 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 [email protected]

Supervisors: Professor Mari Vaattovaara Department of Geosciences and Geography University of Helsinki

Professor Sirpa Tani Faculty of Educational Sciences University of Helsinki

Pre-examiners: Docent Anna-Kaisa Kuusisto-Arponen University of Tampere

Docent Leena Suurpää Finnish Youth Research Society

Opponent: Docent Jani Vuolteenaho University of Turku

Figures: By author, unless otherwise stated. Cover photo: Antti Lukkarila

Publisher: Department of Geosciences and Geography P.O. Box 64, 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland¨ ISSN-L 1798-7911 ISSN 1798-7911 (print) ISBN 978-951-51-2927-7 (paperback) ISBN 978-951-51-2928-4 (pdf) http://ethesis.helsinki.fi Painosalama Oy Turku 2017 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 arkiseen 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 fields of humanis- adults’ in different 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 signifi- 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, specifically 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 findings indicate that adults despite the presence of friends, however, espe- define 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 different 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 findings 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 extensions that typically arise between adults and periential and bodily connections between them young people no longer influenced 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 influencing 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 staff 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 different 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-Sofia 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 opportunities 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 misfit ...... 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 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

6.2.2 Encountering ‘them’: places of unwanted encounters...... 92 6.3 Im/mobilities as constructors of young people’s experiences of urban places ...... 101 6.3.1 Mobile routines and new forms of mobility creating experiential connections between places ...... 102 6.3.2 Immobilities complicating and limiting young people’s access to daily places...... 112 6.4 Webs of meaningful places: young people’s experiences in an urban environment.. 117 7 Conclusions...... 124 7.1 Subjective webs of meaningful places...... 125 7.2 Three dimensions of young people’s places: personal, social and mobile...... 127 7.3 Re-thinking place, mobilities and youth in the context of growing up...... 133 References...... 137 Appendices...... 148

10 1 Introduction and opportunities than the ones adults encounter. However, this does not mean that young people’s daily lives are homogenous in terms of the dilemmas they face. In fact, the two quotations ’Teenagers terrorised the library – –’ ’Young people always find a place to be. When there focus on two different phases of life: the former are many young people in the same place, on young teenagers who are defending their right their presence will irritate some people – –’ to be in the public realm, and the latter on young (Näveri 2015) people who are struggling with the problems of ‘High rents, low salaries, temporary work and unemployment compel an increasing number emerging adulthood. This research focuses on in- of young adults to live at their parental home’ dividuals who are between these two phases of (Salmela 2013) life. They are no longer young teenagers, nor are This is a geographical study investigating young they adults, but are experiencing their late youth. people’s personal relationships with daily city en- The motivation for the study was the scarcity vironments. In other words, it reports research on of discussion about the lives of people in their place. As the above quotations from news reports late youth in geographical research focusing on imply, even the most personal places are con- young people (see Harker 2009: 11). Late youth structed in specific socio-spatial contexts, which is a phase of life when hanging out in the public for young people means they are experiencing realm has become less attractive as people be- daily life from the position of ‘young people’. come more mature and acquire new agency. At The former quotation touches on the conflict the same time, it is a period of life when aspects between young people and adults, which could such as seeking full-time employment and inde- be characterised as a typical difficulty in young pendent living are still perceived as rather distant. teenagers’ lives that is played out in public urban To shed light on the lives of these young people space. This kind of tension is well-recognised in as experienced I am focusing on their personal research on young people’s daily lives in the city. and subjective place experiences. How do they Their presence in public space is not uncondi- experience the environments of their everyday tionally accepted by adults, even if their right to lives in the city? What does it mean, as a young be in the public realm is acknowledged (see e.g. person, to live and construct meaningful relation- Valentine 1996a: 590, 597; Malone 2002: 162; ships with daily environments? Aitken 2001: 186–189; Tani 2015: 138–143). Along the lines of humanistic geography (e.g. Given this contradiction, young people might Tuan 1974, 1975; 1977; Buttimer 1976, 1978; experience the feeling that there are no places Relph 1976; Karjalainen 1986; 2004, 2006), I for them in the city. The second quotation, on the understand place as a ‘centre of meaning con- other hand, refers to aspects of the daily lives of structed by experience’ (Tuan 1975: 152). In oth- young adults whose life circumstances and trou- er words, subjective experiences of a place con- bles are quite different to those encountered by struct its meanings. As a certain environment young hangers-out. The specific problems men- becomes imbued with meanings it becomes a tioned include issues related to societal insecu- meaningful place. Thus, from this perspective rities and personal life, such as unemployment place is constructed by an individual – an expe- and independent living. It could be claimed in riencer. It is assumed in this research that expe- the light of these two examples that young people riences of a place are constructed, first, when an and young adults face different daily challenges individual encounters certain environments and

11 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 gives them meanings and second, when an in- e.g. Valentine 2004; Thomas 2005a; Woolley dividual encounters other individuals and shares 2006; Kallio & Häkli 2011, 2013; Christensen certain meanings they have associated with cer- & Mikkelsen 2013; Pyyry 2015a; Tani 2015). tain environments. Place experiences therefore Social encounters with adults undoubtedly in- refer to the entity of meanings assigned to certain fluence young teenagers’ constructions of daily environments, or places, and become manifest places. However, I suggest that the relationships in an individual in the form of memories and between people in their late youth and adults are expectations. Thus, place is not merely a phys- potentially less tense, and therefore are not nec- ical location, being constructed through subjec- essarily dominant constructors of young people’s tive meaning-making, it also refers to meanings places. Thus, I argue that there is a knowledge that can be linked with physical environment(s). gap concerning how encounters with different Why should one study young people’s place individuals (who are not necessarily defined as experiences? First, people in their late youth adults) influence the place experiences of people encounter several changes in their lives because in their late youth. My focus in this research is of increased independence and the need to as- on how daily social encounters, whether posi- sume responsibility (see e.g. Arnett 2004: 16, tively or negatively experienced, influence young Northcote 2006: 2; Macek et al. 2007: 464). people’s constructions of their place experienc- This research derives from the assumption that es, as well as their feelings of insideness and these changes influence the meanings young outsideness. people give to their places. For humanistic ge- Third, it is impossible to ignore recent dis- ographers, places encountered are also man- cussions on mobility in a study on place. In ifested as memories (Karjalainen 2006: 91), brief, the focus on mobility represents a change hence growing up presumably changes the in social-scientific thinking according to which meanings and memories of young people’s social phenomena should be understood as mo- places and how they are experienced in the bile rather than static (see e.g. Hannam et al. present moment. On the other hand, if there 2006; Sheller & Urry 2006: 208–212; Büscher are also imagined future places that are ‘wait- et al. 2016). Albeit the literature on mobility ing for us’ (Karjalainen 2006: 85), it could be is massive (I will return to this later), I argue assumed that growing up also has an impact that there are two aspects that remain under-re- on young people’s imagined places-to-be in searched. The first of these concerns how sub- the future. My aim, therefore, is to enhance jective place experiences and the (bodily) mo- understanding of the dynamics at play between bility of daily life are intertwined. Daily living young people and their personal places of the comprises ‘systematic movements of people past, present and future. for work and family life, for leisure and plea- Second, the meanings of places are construct- sure’ (Sheller & Urry 2006: 208), which could ed in social encounters with the world and oth- also be described as daily contexts in which er people, which influence people’s feelings of place experiences accumulate. Mobility in this belonging and insideness (see Relph 1976: 55, sense concerns bodily actions (see e.g. Eden- Tuan 1977: 139–140) as well as of outsideness sor 2011: 192) that are of the essence for hu- (Relph 1976: 51). There is an abundance of re- manity (see Cresswell 2006: 1), as well as the search focusing on encounters and socio-spatial experiences of a mobile individual. Whereas tensions between young people and adults (see (bodily) mobility is full of meanings (Cress-

12 well 2006: 2) and creates a sense of distance new places in which they may experience feel- (see Jain & Lyons 2008: 85–86), less is known ings of adulthood on the one hand, and leav- about how aspects of daily mobility influence ing their childhood places behind on the oth- experienced connections and disconnections er. In addition, youth is often perceived as a between places and an individual. Second, the period of life filled with problems and dilem- mobility turn has aroused interest in the field mas (Macek et al. 2007, see also Evans 2008: of young people’s geographies, and increasing 1675). In this context, agency has also been academic attention is being given to their daily emphasised as young people require agentic mobility (see e.g. Barker et al. 2009; Porter et capacities to tackle insecurities related to ed- al. 2010a, 2010b; Leyshon 2011; Skelton 2013; ucation and temporary job opportunities, for Pyyry 2015a). Nevertheless, there is still a need instance (Côté & Bynner 2004; Evans 2008). to enhance understanding of daily mobility and Thus, the aim of this study is to question the personal place experiences among young peo- assumption that youth is a difficult and prob- ple. In the light of the above discussion, there- lematic phase of life, and to consider the op- fore, I argue that there is a need to investigate portunities and solutions inherent in these so- the relationships between young people’s daily cio-spatial challenges. mobility and place experiences, with a specific The main question addressed in the research focus on how experienced connections and dis- concerns how young people’s daily subjective connections between places and young people and intersubjective place experiences are con- are constructed in their daily lives. structed in urban environments in which living Fourth, I was fascinated by the notion that is characterised in terms of mobility and im- young people live their lives in between child- mobility. More precisely, I investigate, second, hood and adulthood (Skelton 2000: 69), thus how young people, whose lives are influenced putting them in a position in which they are no by childhood places and new places of emerg- longer children but are not adults either (e.g. ing adulthood, experience their everyday plac- Kett 1971: 283; Northcote 2006; Valentine et es; third, how positively and negatively experi- al. 1998: 4; Evans 2008: 1663). My interest enced social encounters influence the meanings intensified when I realised how little research young people assign to their places in the city; there was on the older group of young people and fourth, the role of local daily mobility and (who are becoming decreasingly young and immobility in young people’s place experiences increasingly adult) in the field of geography. and experienced (dis)connections. In fact, geographical research focusing on chil- I focus on young people living in the Helsinki dren and young people has been criticised for metropolitan area, which is the most extensive highlighting the perspectives of children (see urban environment in Finland. Like all environ- Valentine 2003: 39; Harker 2009: 11) and rare- ments, there are special contextual elements in ly considering the experiences of young people this region that should be accounted for in in- (see Evans 2008: 1675). Furthermore, more vestigations of place experiences. For instance, research is conducted from the perspectives the extensive public-transport network facili- of younger as opposed to older teenagers and tates mobility in many ways. It is worth point- young adults (Harker 2009: 11). Consequent- ing out that certain phenomena related to person- ly, there is also a need to study young people’s al place experiences and daily social encounters, place experiences when they are encountering such as social segregation (see e.g. Vaattovaara

13 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

1998; Vilkama 2011; Bernelius 2013; Kortteinen young people who ‘conform in many ways to & Vaattovaara 2015) and the impact of global social expectations’ given that ‘(w)e have an mobility (such as immigration), are more rec- inadequate understanding of young people who ognisable in the Helsinki metropolitan area than perform well at school, [and] have good and elsewhere in Finland. However, these are beyond positive relationships with their parents and the scope of this study given that my focus is other adults’. Two decades later there is still on experiences of the city. Thus, my research in- a gap in knowledge concerning this group of terest represents the stream focusing on young young people. In line with youth researchers people’s experiences of city places in the public I see age as a relational and social construct, (or semi-public) realm (see e.g. Vanderbeck & which means that it has differing significance Johnson 2000; Valentine 2004; Thomas 2005a; in different times and spaces (see e.g. Matthews Woolley 2006; Kallio & Häkli 2011; Christensen & Limb 1999: 66; Valentine 2003: 38; Hop- & Mikkelsen 2013; Tani 2015)1. kins & Pain 2007; Skelton 2007: 166; Evans The study participants were in upper-sec- 2008: 1663–1664). Thus, I understand youth ondary education2 during the research project, as a ‘way of being’, referring to an individual’s from 15 to 19 years of age. They were study- behaviour and physical appearance (see Evans ing for an upper-secondary certificate in one 2008: 1663–1664), rather than biological age. I of three locations (Leppävaara, Itäkeskus and therefore aim to avoid referring to young peo- Tikkurila) in the Helsinki metropolitan area. ple as ‘future adults’ who will be active agents As well as being young, they could be loosely only when they are mature, and rather consider defined as having a middle-class background them as individuals actively living their lives (despite the broadness of the term) as they were in the present (see e.g. Qvortrup 1994; Skelton all in upper-secondary education, had a place 2007: 1173; Valentine 2000: 256–257; Kjørholt to live (i.e. were not homeless), were living 2013: 247–248). with their parent(s) or step-parent(s), and had In line with many studies on young peo- (at least relatively) stable life conditions. Gill ple, this research also draws on participato- Valentine and colleagues (1998: 24) argued ry action research, during which knowledge that more research was needed on the lives of is produced together in cooperation among the participants and the researcher (see e.g. 1 However, I am conscious that the public and private spheres are intertwined in many ways. Wright & Nelson 1995: 57–59; Pyyry 2012: 2 There is a dual system of education on the upper-sec- 37). In my view, participatory research is suit- ondary level: at general or vocational upper-secondary schools (Kilpi-Jakonen 2011: 79). Although both give able for investigating experiences in that the access to tertiary education (at traditional universities participant may choose the most fitting way and universities of applied sciences), those matriculating from a general upper-secondary school are much more in which to express his or her feelings (Trell likely to continue to the tertiary level (see Kilpi-Jakonen 2013: 112–113). I tried throughout the project 2011: 79). General upper-secondary education is free of charge for full-time pupils, who are also entitled to a and in conducting the research to respect the free daily meal. Most of them are eligible for reimburse- research participants, their multi-voiced experiment of school-transportation costs. However, they buy their own study materials, such as books. According to ences, ideas and opinions (see e.g. Pyyry 2012: the legislation (Lukiolaki 629/1998), upper-secondary 37; Eldén 2013: 75). Adopting the participatory education includes studies in the first language, literature, the second official language and other languages, approach also means accepting that my own po- mathematics and science, humanistic and social sciences, religion or life philosophy, physical education and sition had an impact on the atmosphere during other practical and arts subjects, and health. The sylla- the research project (see e.g. Pain & Francis bus runs over three years.

14 2003: 51), which therefore influenced the re- youth could be studied from the perspective search material. I used many research meth- of humanistic geography. The discussion then ods, including go-along interviews conduct- focuses on the impact of young people’s social ed with young people, photographs taken by encounters with other individuals on their con- young people during interviews, GPS tracking struction of place experiences. Finally, given recorded during interviews, and independent the mobility of everyday life, I explore how as- assignments (a sort of literal questionnaire). pects of daily, bodily mobility are intertwined Whereas the multi-method approach allowed with young people’s place experiences. the participants more freedom to express them- I introduce the research participants and the selves in ways that suited them the most, the recruiting process in Chapter 4. The research extensive research material also illustrates the was conducted in three district-level centres diversity of young people’s place experiences. (Leppävaara, Tikkurila and Itäkeskus), located This introductory chapter continues with in the Helsinki metropolitan area. Rather than a discussion of the research perspective: hu- comparing the research areas I see them as multi- manistic geography. I very briefly describe the ple contexts of young people’s daily lives. At the epistemological starting points for the research end of the chapter I describe certain social and and introduce my approach to place. I then turn structural characteristics of the Helsinki metro- the focus on young people’s geographies and politan area that are relevant to this study. on research from their perspective. The first re- Chapter 5 begins with a critical overview searchers studying children’s and young peo- of participatory research and how it is applied in ple’s environmental experiences drew on envi- this study. I go on to introduce and discuss the ronmental psychology and humanistic geogra- research methods and materials I used. Given phy, to be joined later by sociologists and other the crucial need to consider research ethics when (e.g. feminist) geographers. Nowadays the field young people are involved, I reflect on ethical is influenced by several academic discussions. issues at the end of the chapter, and discuss the Finally, I outline the research aims and the re- impact of my own position-taking. search questions I address in this study. Chapter 6 comprises an extensive analysis Chapter 2 goes into more depth on the of the research material, organised in line with the main topic of this research: place. I explain research questions. First I examine how young how place was understood in humanistic ge- people compose their subjective place experienc- ography from the 1960s onwards, and how es (the second research question). I go on to ex- the research has become richer and more di- plore how social encounters influence their con- verse following various shifts in academic struction of these experiences and their feelings thinking, such as the cultural turn and the of insideness and outsideness (the third research mobility turn. I build up my theoretical ap- question). The discussion then turns to how lo- proach to places and synthesis through these cal mobility and immobility create connections discussions. and disconnections between young people and Chapter 3 explains how humanistic ge- their daily places (the fourth research question). ographers’ ideas of place are (and could be) In the light of these findings I take a step further translated into young people’s geographies. I and explore how young people’s personal and first develop my approach to how the subjec- social places are constructed as meaningful en- tive place experiences of people in their late tities (the first research question).

15 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Finally, in Chapter 7 I briefly outline the are constructed through subjective experienc- main findings and discuss their potential rele- es, they do not need to have a physical loca- vance to the research on place and young peo- tion (see Relph 1976: 29)3: they are imagined, ple’s geographies. Looking forward, I discuss experienced and borne out of the living con- how my research topic could be further devel- text, which needs to be lived (see Tuan 1975: oped in future research. 165; Karjalainen 1993: 67, 2006: 84–85). Third, the experiencing of places is always related to 1.1 Humanistic geography time, even if the time is short (see Tuan 1975: as a starting point 164; Relph 1976: 30). Places are the nodes of Of the many ways of investigating young peo- time, space and the self (Karjalainen 2004: 60), ple’s lives and places, humanistic geography which comprise the meaningful ‘I’. Personal re- is the perspective taken in this study. Place lationships with places are perceived as memo- traditionally belongs to the discipline of ge- ries that define what we are, implying connec- ography, and has long held its central positions with the past and expectations regarding tion. Humanistic geographers investigate the the future (see Karjalainen 2004: 62). Time is meanings of place from a phenomenological not meaningful for an individual per se, but in perspective, at which subjective experiences its manifestations, all that happens, will happen are at the core. Places are described as experi- and has happened to us (Karjalainen 2004: 61). enced, lived and personal in the various defi- Thus, memories of past places and expectations nitions (Relph 1976: 10–11, see Tuan 1977: of future places form the meaningful nodes of 12). They are pieces of terrestrial-spatial re- time and space. ality, full of human intentions (Karjalainen Since humanistic geography emerged in 1986: 125). Place is therefore dependent on the 1960s its proponents’ theorisations of an experiencer, given that it is an individual place have encountered criticism. As I see it, who constructs his or her personal place ex- this criticism suggests different approaches periences. Humanistic geography is a suit- to place rather than restricting its definition. able perspective to adopt given my focus on First, I support and contribute to the research personal place experiences. Such experienc- on humanistic geography, in which place is es do not exist without an experiencer, and in considered a subjective experience (e.g. Tu- this study the experiencers are young people. an 1974, 1975; 1977; Buttimer 1976; 1978, Studying place from the perspective of hu- Relph 1976; 1985; Karjalainen 1986; 1997a; manistic geography sets certain epistemologi- 1997b; 2003; 2004; 2006). My understanding cal parameters (see Chapter 2 for further dis- is further informed by the cultural turn, which cussion). First, humanistic geographers under- stresses the social and intersubjective nature stand place as an individual experience deriving of place (see e.g. Cosgrove 1983; Cosgrove & from human existence (Tuan 1975; 1977; Relph Jackson 1987; Jackson 1989; Tani 1995: 32– 1976: 54–55; Karjalainen 1986: 125). Place is 33, Karjalainen 1997a; Cresswell 2004: 29– a centre of meanings, built up during everyday life experiences (Tuan 1975: 152), hence plac- 3 However, as bodily beings we have other options than es could be defined as lived and personal (see living somewhere (Karjalainen 2003, see also Relph 1976: 29–30). In addition, certain sensual reactions (e.g. Tuan 1975: 152; Relph 1976: 10–11). Second smells, visions, sounds) that clarify the ‘essential char- and related to the first point, given that places acter’ of place (see Tuan 1974: 11) emanate from the physical world.

16 32, Kuusisto-Arponen 2003: 53, 2009: 548; (at least somewhat) contrastive, especially 2010: 79, 81; but see also Tuan 1977: 139– among humanistic geographers (Tuan 1977: 140, Relph: 1976: 12, 33). A further implica- 179, see Relph 1976: 29–30, 88). However, tion is that experienced reality is socially con- there is a need for additional research focusing structed, hence I am aware that an individual’s on place experiences and mobility to enhance social position (e.g. age, gender and social understanding of the influence of meaning- background) affects how places appear to him ful movements on individual, experiences and or her (see e.g. Rose 1993; Gilmartin 2002: place. My interest in these theoretical foun- 36–37). At the same time, the ways in which dations lies in how young people experience an individual interprets the presence of other the different facets of place (as subjective, individuals influences his or her construction as social and as constructed in mobile con- of the subjective meanings of places. For in- texts) in their daily lives. Furthermore, I ex- stance, social encounters, which are physical plore how daily places become organised as and social events (see e.g. Ahmed 2000: 21; meaningful entities in young people’s lives. I Harinen et al. 2005: 283; Simonsen 2007: 169, have gathered empirical research material in 178), influence the meanings that individuals pursuit of this aim5. Hence, the research com- attach to places and their feelings of inside- bines the different perspectives on place into ness and outsideness (see Relph 1976: 49–55). one approach that stresses the importance of I have also gained insights from theories re- subjective experiences. lated to the mobility turn, according to which Despite the critique, humanistic geogra- places and daily living are constructed in im/ phy constitutes the basis of this research given mobile contexts (e.g. Cresswell 2006; Han- that it is still the richest approach for study- nam et al. 2006; Sheller & Urry 2006; Eden- ing meaningful relationships with places (e.g. sor 2011, 2014; Elliott & Urry 2010; Adey Buttimer 1976; Karjalainen 2003, 2006). It et al. 2014; Tomaney 2016)4. Consequently, provides the tools with which to investigate the meaningful movements of individuals in how places define the individual’s selfhood their daily lives (see Cresswell 2006: 3; Adey and are lived in daily life (see e.g. Karjalain- et al. 2014: 3) cannot be ignored in a study en 2004: 60, 2006: 83). Among the strongest on place. Although there has been debate as reasoning behind this standpoint is the fact to whether mobility makes places less mean- that even if the world is perceived as socially ingful (see Tuan 1977: 179, see Relph 1976: constructed and places are also intersubjective 88), it is suggested nowadays that even if daily creations, the experience of a place is always life is mobile, places continue to be meaning- specific to the experiencer. Second, I suggest ful (Karjalainen 2006: 85; Seamon & Sow- that the humanistic geographical approach to ers 2008: 50; Jirón 2010b; Tomaney 2016). young people’s place experiences could give I consider it relevant to study the impact of fresh insights into the geographical research meaningful movement (Cresswell 2006: 3) on on young people, which (broadly speaking) the construction of place, given that place and investigates aspects of children’s and young mobility have traditionally been considered people’s everyday lives (see e.g. Cele 2006, 2013; Horton & Kraftl 2006a; Kallio 2008;

4 Many researchers studying mobility have made an analytical distinction between mobilities (the potential for 5 This is the case even if humanistic geography was not mobility) and immobilities (limitations on mobility). originally empirically driven (see Ley 1981: 251).

17 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Table 1. Examples of areas of research influencing the development of young people’s geographies and the study of young people’s places that are relevant in the context of this study

SCIENTIFIC APPROACH STUDIES CRITIQUE Children’s and young people’s per- Consider childhood mostly in bio- Young people’s places (environ- ceptions of places (Blaut et al. 1970; logical terms (Aitken 2001: 14–15; mental psychologically oriented Blaut & Stea 1971; Bunge 1973, Ergler 2012: 9; Holloway 2014: research) 1975; Hart 1979) 377–378). Young people in their environments Young people’s experiences of their Tend to deny that childhood is so- (humanistic geographically and en- environments (e.g. Rikkinen 1992; vironmental psychologically orient- Kääriäinen & Rikkinen 1998; Kaivola cially constructed and ‘political’ (see ed research) & Rikkinen 2003; Tani 2016). Aitken 1994; 2001: 27). Geographers focusing on young A young people’s perspective tak- people should also pay attention Research with young people (e.g. ing social position into account (e.g. to the practices and routines that feminist geography) James 1986, James 1990; Valentine construct their daily lives (see e.g. 2000). Horton & Kraftl 2005; 2006b). Focus on children and young people There is a lack of inter-disciplinary from multiple perspectives and on dialogue (Punch 2016). Studies on Youth studies (e.g. sociology, geog- the social construction of childhood youth and childhood should be more raphy, anthropology) and youth. Children and young peo- closely integrated into policy and ple are viewed as social actors (see practice (Holloway & Pimlott-Wilson Tisdall & Punch 2012). 2011; Punch 2016). There is a lack of multi-voicedness Young people’s perspectives from and cross-disciplinary dialogue Young people’s geographies (e.g. many different viewpoints (see e.g. (Vanderbeck 2008; Holloway & geography, sociology) Horton & Kraftl 2006a; Robson et al. Pimlott-Wilson 2011). Anglophonic 2013; Cuervo & Wyn 2014). and UK-centred (Cele 2006: 34).

Anderson & Jones 2009; Skelton 2010; Kallio people6 are, first and foremost, considered the & Häkli 2011, 2013; Trell et al. 2012; Trell experiencers of places. Table 1 lists the areas of 2013; Horton et al. 2014; Cele & van der research that have influenced the development Burgt 2015; Pyyry 2015a; Tani 2015; Trell & of young people’s geographies and the study of van Hoven 2015). Although the above-men- young people’s places. tioned studies also concern experiences (e.g. I consider an individual’s age a category that Horton & Kraftl 2006a), I suggest that turning influences how places manifest themselves to the focus on place experiences contributes to him or her. In this research, age generally refers the research on young people. Thus, although to a young age. Youth tends to be considered a humanistic geography is not a new branch of nebulous period in which an individual is no lon- research, I propose that it has the potential to ger a child and not yet an adult, and therefore is provide a novel, in-depth understanding of awkwardly aged (e.g. Kett 1971: 283; Northcote young people’s personal worlds. 6 As Susie Weller (2006: 101) points out, the categories ‘children’ and ‘young people’ are problematic given that 1.2 Young people as a ‘child’ refers to a ‘young person’, and a young person is not necessarily a child. Researchers seem to use both research subjects terms, sometimes almost interchangeably. However, as Academic discussion on children’s and young I note, people in the later stages of youth are sometimes described as ‘young people’ or ‘young adults’ in par- people’s geographies provides another vantage allel (see e.g. Trell et al. 2014). In this research, I use point for this research. It constitutes the most in- the terms ‘young people’ and ‘young adults’ to refer to the participants, who rarely considered themselves fluential branch of research on issues that affect ‘children’. Nevertheless, the study is theoretically based on young people’s geographies and children’s geogra- children and young people. It is therefore also in phies, basically because academics have not necessarily line with the focus of this study, in which young explicitly differentiated children and young people (see e.g. Jeffrey 2010; Hörschelmann & van Blerk 2012).

18 2006; Weller 2006: 101; Valentine et al. 1998: young people. To a lesser extent, but of relevance 4; Evans 2008: 1663). In other words, youth is to this research, some academics drew on human- an ‘in-between age’ (Skelton 2000: 69). It is tra- istic geography and applied ethnography to ac- ditionally perceived as a problematic ‘breathing cess experiences of place and nature (see Aitken space between the golden age of ‘innocent’ child- 2001: 27). Research in the field of humanistic hood and the realities of adulthood’ (see Valen- geography focused on children and young peo- tine et al. 1998: 4). Even if age also refers to ple ‘in their environments’ (e.g. Rikkinen 1992; biological age, the above reasoning implies that Kääriäinen & Rikkinen 1998; Robertson 2000; youth is a social construction that sets certain Kaivola & Rikkinen 2003; Tani 2016), and has limitations on young people’s socio-spatial being remained influential in pedagogically and geo- (e.g. they cannot access certain places because of graphically oriented studies (Kallio 2006: 23). their age). Thus, I consider age a category that This stream of research is also relevant to my affects young people’s construction of their plac- study in that it was one of the first to focus on es, and influences how other people (e.g. adults) young people’s subjective and experienced rela- encounter the young. tionships with their lived environments. Howev- Research focusing on children’s and young er, both branches (environmental psychology and people’s experiences of their environments has humanistic geography) have their weaknesses, relatively long roots. In the 1970s, academ- including their heavily biological perspectives on ics started to concentrate on children’s and childhood and growing up (see Holloway 2014: young people’s perceptions of place and their 377–378, referring specifically to research con- environments (e.g. Blaut 1970; Blaut & Stea ducted in the 1970s). Thus, they oppose the view 1971; Bunge 1973, 1975; Hart 1979), com- that age is a social construction (see e.g. Aitken monly focusing on attachment to place, cog- 1994; 2001: 27). nition and competence, behaviour and percep- It was noted in the late 1980s that the so- tions of environments (e.g. Aho 1987; Horelli cial-scientific and geographical study of- chil 1998; Mäkinen & Tyrväinen 2008). Thus, the dren was very limited (Alanen 1988: 54; James approach investigating young people’s envi- 1990: 278), and that a ‘third of the population’ ronmental experiences has drawn much from should not be excluded from (geographical) re- environmental psychology. Academic interest search (James 1990: 278). Although there had in children and young people increased follow- been several studies investigating children and ing claims that children are spatially oppressed young people, this shift in the social sciences in- in and by the built environment in cities, giv- stigated a critical approach to the subject, claim- en that different political, social and cultural ing that children and young people should be contexts are commonly controlled by adults considered competent and active agents who (Bunge 1973, 1975, discussed in Valentine & would, furthermore, expand their agency (see McKendrick 1997). It also became obvious that James 1990: 282–283). It derived from two de- as active users of urban space young people velopments, which are also relevant to this re- have opinions on urban planning: like adults, search. First, researchers started increasingly to they appreciate safe, socially and culturally in- see childhood as a social position, a ‘class’ that clusive environments (see Lynch 1977). existed in relation to other classes (see Alanen Another group of researchers studied en- 1988: 64). More broadly, childhood, youth and vironmental experiences among children and families were also seen in social terms (Hollo-

19 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 way 2014: 380), as socially constructed catego- an interest in children, young people and plac- ries. Children and young people were acknowl- es (as the specific sites of meaning), as well as edged as capable of collective action, and thus of in spaces (as the settings of interaction) (Philo engaging in social struggles (see Alanen 1988: 2000a: 245). According to Chris Philo (2000a: 65). This claim emanated from gloomy research 245), this included topics such as: findings suggesting that being young meant ‘be- –– first, the material aspects of children’s geog- ing nothing, having nowt to do and nowhere to raphies paying attention on physical, natural go’ (see James 1986: 155). Although I do not and non-natural elements, where the forms consider young people’s social struggles per se, and layout of forests and fields, buildings I understand youth as a social position defining and streets were central, the everyday socio-spatial circumstances of in- –– second, social elements, which are prevalent dividuals who are experiencing their places as in children’s daily life, young persons. –– third, political-economic forces, and their un- Second, it was inferred that research that balanced influence on children’s everyday helps to shed light on young people’s (so- possibilities, cial) struggles grants them agency, and there- –– fourth, imagined elements, including feel- by is aligned with them (see Alanen 1988: ings, lived experiences, memories and hopes. 65). Researchers therefore became increas- It can be inferred from the above that chil- ingly interested in how studies could be con- dren’s and young people’s daily experiences ducted with children rather that of children were now considered political, and that the (e.g. Alanen 1988: 65; James 1989). This imagined and experienced characteristics of was the starting point for participatory replace also mattered. Although investigating search, which is also applied in this study. the experienced and imagined elements of The feminist practice of looking ‘alongside’ place with humanistic geography at the cen- rather than ‘looking at’ (e.g. Holloway & tre, I nevertheless take account of the impact Valentine 2000; Kindon 2003: 143) was a of young people’s socio-spatial possibilities source of inspiration for geographers focus- and the regulation of their place experiences. ing on children and young people because At the beginning of the 2000s, research on it expanded geography to include voices of young people with a humanistic-geograph- the Other (see England 1994). Methodolog- ical orientation was criticised for consider- ically, this change meant that participatory ing space a container of their lives, and for methodology became more common among portraying young people as one-dimensional researchers studying children’s and young beings who were separate from social, cul- people’s experiences. Even nowadays it is tural and moral contexts (Aitken 2001: 27) worth considering how to study young peo- – from the politics of space.7 However, this ple’s perspectives without treating them like is no longer necessarily the case, and I argue observable objects. that humanistic geography provides the tools Geographical research on children and young 7 people became more strongly established at the This was also the man criticism of humanistic geography, which emerged during the cultural turn. There beginning of the 2000s (see Philo 2000a: 245, was a tendency to ignore the impact of the political on the construction of socio-spatial contexts (see Chapter see also Kallio 2006: 21), and the research topics 2 for further discussion). Thus, it is not surprising that became more diverse. Geographers developed researchers focusing on young people’s geography also noted this gap.

20 to enhance understanding of young people as tive place experiences is the only way to multidimensional beings living in contested enhance understanding of how young people places of daily life. Indeed, it has plenty to construct meaningful relationships, compose offer the geography of young people, which memories and formulate intentions related to has more commonly categorised children and their living environment, in other words how young people as agentic ‘doers’ and users they become political subjects in and through of their places rather than as thinkers who their daily living environments. Thus, I com- experience and imagine their environments bine humanistic geography with more recent (see McCormack 2002: 194–194; van der discussions on young people’s geographies. Burgt 2008: 257). Studies on children’s and young people’s ex- Sarah Holloway and Gill Valentine (2000) periences of place and mobility inspired me called for ‘new social studies of childhood at specifically, in that everyday life is construct- the beginning of the 2000s’, identifying three ed on the move (e.g. Kullman 2010, 2012; inter-related ways of thinking about spatiality Porter et al. 2010a, 2010b; see also Fager- and childhood. First, they emphasised the pro- holm & Broberg 2011). Thus, this study con- gressive nature of place exemplified in global tributes to the afore-mentioned branch of re- and local processes of childhood; second, they search in enhancing understanding of young discussed how children’s identities are generated people’s relationships with personal places through certain spaces; and third, they explored in their mobile daily lives. the ways in which our understandings of childhood may constitute the meanings of places and 1.3 Aims and research questions spaces (Holloway & Valentine 2000: 765–777). The aim of this research is to investigate how In other words, young people’s place experiences young people living in cities construct mean- were increasingly seen not only as subjective but ingful places. I consider a city as a realm also as constructed in an intersubjective world – in which daily social encounters (whether which simultaneously suggests that place experi- positively or negatively experienced) take ences are political in nature. In retrospect, how- place and formulate young people’s place ever, it could be said that research on young peo- experiences. As I understand it, young people’s experiences, memories and imaginations of ple’s daily lives are characterised by mo- place (as understood in humanistic geography) bility and immobility, which create experi- is not of major significance in the most recent enced and embodied connections and dis- social studies of childhood. connections between places. These topics As noted above, humanistic geography are rarely studied together, even if they are has not been a mainstream approach to the facets of the same phenomenon – place. In study of young people’s lives. A possible theoretical terms, humanistic geography is reason for this is that researchers investi- the starting point of this research, and place gating lived experiences have integrated so- is at the centre of the study. My approach cial, cultural and political contexts into their reflects the changing notion of place in the research (see also Aitken 2001: 28), which light of shifts in academic thinking (e.g. the has not been common practice among hu- cultural turn and the mobility turn). manistic geographers. I suggest, neverthe- My study concerns urban individuals in less, that conducting research into subjec- their later youth, who are therefore approach-

21 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 ing adulthood. Given that the city constitutes a The objective of the research is to investigate context for the place experiences of young ur- young people’s place experiences as construct- banites, I follow a stream of research in which ed in the social world, where living is mobile. young people (including children) are studied More precisely, the aim is to explore the differ- in urban contexts (see e.g. Vanderbeck & John- ent facets of place and how they are organised son 2000; Chawla 2002; Karsten 2005; Kal- as meaningful entities in young people’s daily lio & Häkli 2011; Hörschelmann & van Blerk lives. The research questions addressed in this 2012). Young people’s situatedness in the city study are as follows: is ambivalent: they are both a part of it but at the same time are often excluded from it (Skel- 1. How are young people’s daily subjective ton & van Gough 2013: 455). They neverthe- and shared place experiences constructed less constitute demographically large groups as meaningful entities in mobile urban en- that remake, create and transform urban spatial vironments? structures (Skelton & van Gough 2013: 455) 2. How do people in their late youth construct and construct places in cities. The implication subjective place experiences? is that young people are regulated in terms of 3. How do positively and negatively experi- what they can do in the city. It would there- enced social encounters in daily life influ- fore be interesting to study the place experience young people’s place experiences? ences of people in their late youth, who (usu- 4. How do everyday mobility and immobility ally) have more agency in the city than their influence young people’s place experienc- younger counterparts. es?

22 2 Place in humanistic & Samuels 1978: 1). My aim in this chapter is geography: a critical approach to explain how the concept of place has evolved, and to discuss the approach taken in this study. One of the major changes humanistic geography brought about in research on individ- ‘Humanistic geography achieves an uals was to desert the strict, dichotomous divi- understanding of the human world by studying people‘s relations with nature, sions of objectivity/subjectivity (Buttimer 1976: their geographical behavior as well as their 277). Individuals were seen to be far from being feelings and ideas in regard to space and place.’ ‘brothers under the skin’, in fact ‘– – almost dif- (Tuan 1976: 266) ferent species’ (Tuan 1974: 45). Place experiences were therefore considered relational, and the The basic idea in humanistic geography is to in- researcher could not make objective generali- terpret meaningful relationships between humans sations. Relationality led to new philosophical and their environment, or places (see Tani 1995: underpinnings in geography: humanistic geog- 14). Its origins can be traced to the 1960s when raphers drew from phenomenology, leaving the it emerged as a critique of positivistic method- lifeworld to reveal itself by its own means as it ology (see Ley 1981: 250; Jackson 1989: 20; was lived (see Buttimer 1976: 277). In retro- Häkli 1999: 78–79; Cresswell 2008: 53–54)8. spect, it could be said that humanistic geogra- It stressed the importance of subject and indi- phy was a major turning point in the discipline vidual experiences (see Ley 1981: 250; Häkli of geography. It generated new terminology and 1999: 78–79) and took a stand against objectiv- research streams, upon which this study draws. ism, which was the starting point of the positiv- For example, I understand that an individual has ist and behavioural sciences. Although human- a unique, personal and experiential relationship ism as a scientific approach has a long history, with places. On the theoretical level this means humanistic ideas were rediscovered, harnessed that place experiences are tied to an experiencer: and reframed to serve geographical thinking in an individual. Ontologically, the implication is the 1960s (Ley & Samuels 1978: 1). The con- that the only way to study and understand sub- text was broadly critical, as many questioned jective place is to study individuals. emerging technological development and criti- The work of Anne Buttimer, Yi-Fu Tuan and cised the techniques of scientific rationality (Ley Edward Relph has largely structured the concept of place, and it inspired my thinking. I also ac- 8 Early humanistic geographers tended to discuss their ideas theoretically rather than empirically, and focused knowledge the work of Pauli Tapani Karjalainen, less strongly on developing a specific methodology (see which has influenced the construct of human- e.g. Winchell 2000: 349–350). First, at that time ‘empirical’ strongly referred to scientifically verifiable -ob istic geography in Finland. More specifically, servations (Entrikin 1976: 627), and humanistic geogra- these academics brought in new perspectives, phers sought to understand the complexity of the lived world relationally. Second, humanistic geography was including experiences, feelings and memories as perceived as a critique of ‘scientific’ geography (En- aspects of place experiences. Their aim was to trikin 1976: 631–632, see Ley 1981: 253–254) rather than a new type of methodology. The aim was to pro- study life as it is lived: the lifeworld. Lifeworld vide philosophical underpinnings to humanistic research is ‘(t)he culturally defined spatiotemporal setting that would ‘match the positivist foundation of spatial analysis’ (Ley 1981: 251), decreasing the centrality of or horizon of everyday life’ (Buttimer 1976: 277), methodology and methods. The lack of methods was not only ideological, but also epistemological; it was a and ‘the concrete reality of the individual’s lived question of how to make generalisations of relational experience – –. We can say that in the life-world subjective experiences.

23 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 reality is given pre-scientifically, that is, directly to ‘include all of the effective ties with the ma- and immediately in the context of human expe- terial environment’ (Tuan 1974: 93, 113). The rience’ (Karjalainen 1986: 81). My focus in this word ‘material’ refers to effective ties with the study is on daily place experiences. Hence, the environment (Tuan 1974: 93), and to the expe- term ‘lifeworld’, which encompasses the spatial riencer, his or her senses and the body in which and temporal context of everyday life in which the experiences are experienced. In other words, the subject is living in his or her personal plac- he posited that the physical elements of place es, comes close. Another link in these humanistic were experienced through the senses (Tuan 1974: geographers’ thinking is their phenomenological 10–11). Furthermore, given that the senses are approach to place, the aim of which, in brief, is experienced in bodies and intertwined with ex- to research experience as it appears to the experi- periences, places are lived in through the lived encer (Moran 2000: 5–6). Hence, it is a suitable body in which experiences are felt. Thus, every approach for research focusing on the lived and person is the centre of his or her world, and the experienced world of individuals. However, de- world is analysed from that perspective. spite the strong influence of phenomenology on Later, in ‘Space and Place’, Tuan (1977) nar- humanistic geography, the importance of which rowed his focus to examine ‘place’ and ‘space’ is acknowledged here, further phenomenological from an experiential perspective. He makes a discussion is beyond the scope of this research. clearer analytical distinction between these con- Tuan (1974, 1977 see also Tuan 1975) de- cepts in suggesting that space is more abstract fines people, their conditions and places as the than place; space becomes place once one gets essential tenets of humanistic geography. Along to know it better and imbues it with meaning these lines, I explore the ‘centres of meanings’ (Tuan 1977: 6). Contrary to some claims (e.g. (Tuan 1975: 152) young people have in their Massey 2005: 183–184), Tuan’s (1977) aim was daily lives and how they are lived. Tuan’s work not to dichotomise space and place. He merely has had a strong impact on the research on place suggested that place (as security) and space (as (see Cresswell 2008: 55), and his understanding freedom) were both needed: ‘(f)rom the secu- of place as an individual experience is also the rity and stability of place we are aware of the starting point of this research. In ‘Topophilia’ openness, freedom, and threat of space, and vice (1974), he introduces an innovative alternative versa’ (Tuan 1977: 6). However, unlike some to the geographical research of the time, sug- humanistic geographers (e.g. Relph 19769) who gesting that geographers should also pay atten- seem to use ‘place’ and ‘space’ in parallel or to tion to the subjective meanings and experiential focus more on space (see Buttimer 1976), Tuan elements of places. However, the main aim was makes a clear distinction between them. I use the to investigate values, attitudes and perceptions term ‘place’ given that this research is essential- (Tuan 1974: 1), which are topics that received ly about personal places. less attention in his later work. Even if the book Buttimer (1976, 1978), like other humanis- is somewhat neglected in relation to his later tic geographers discussed in this chapter, stress- work, it contributes the term topophilia to this es the importance of subjective experiences of research. Topophilia is a neologism Tuan coined place and explores place as it appears to the ex- to describe ‘the affective bond between people 9 According to Relph (1976: 8), ‘the various forms of and place or setting’ (p. 4). It associates senti- space lie within a continuum that has direct experiment with place, and could be defined widely ence at one extreme and abstract thought at the other extreme’.

24 periencer (Buttimer 1976: 279–281). However, time and space. Thus, in her view Hägerstrand’s one of the most distinctive characteristics of her time-space paths poorly captured the experiential research (1976: 281–283, 286–287) is her em- characteristics of mobility and experience: ‘(n)o phasis on dynamism and daily movements in the attempt has been made to assess the experiential lifeworld.10 Thus, unlike Relph and Tuan, she did meaning of such scheduling in time and space’ not contrast daily mobility with the routine ‘sta- (Buttimer 1976: 287). Whereas humanistic ge- bility’ of daily places, but rather considered it a ographers have been criticised for their ‘static’ different aspect of the same phenomenon. Hence approach to place (see e.g. Edensor 2014: 165), (Buttimer 1976: 285), ‘tension between stability Buttimer’s theories investigate how mobility and and change within the rhythms of different scales, routines make places meaningful. expressed by the body’s relationship to its world, Reflecting Buttimer’s views, therefore, I pro- may be seen as prototype of the relationship be- pose that even the most subjective place experi- tween places and space, home and range in the ences are constructed in mobile contexts. How- human experience of world.’ Her ideas about mo- ever, her theorisations leave open the question bile daily life inspired me to study how young of how daily dynamisms and place experiences people’s personal places are constructed in the are experienced within the course of everyday context of daily mobility. Buttimer’s (1976: 286– life. Nor did she discuss the impact of mobili- 287) ideas of ‘time-space horizons of the individ- ty constraints on personal experiences of place. ual’ are particularly fascinating: they are drawn How are personal meanings of places composed from Torsten Hägerstrand’s (1970) notion of the in im/mobile everyday life? This question is ad- time-space prism and the relationship between dressed in the current research: how daily mo- daily mobility and the physical environment. By bility and immobility construct young people’s way of comparison, Tuan (1977: 179, see also place experiences. I argue that, in combination, 1975: 165) suggested that a certain amount of Tuan’s notion of meaningful places and Buttim- stability was needed for a place experience to er’s dynamic approach potentially provide tools evolve. Buttimer’s focus on time-space geog- with which to develop a more detailed under- raphy implies an interest in developing theory standing of place and its dynamisms. related to meaningful mobility long before the A distinctive characteristic of Relph’s ap- ‘new mobilities paradigm’ (see Sheller & Ur- proach to place is his assumption that places ry 2006) appeared. She was already describing could be created through careful planning, pos- space as a dynamic continuum along which the sibly because he was also interested in urban experiencing individual moves, lives and search- planning and architecture (Relph 1976: 44). In es for meaning – thereby creating personal places his phenomenological approach he also assumed (Buttimer 1976: 282). As she wrote, ‘(l)ifeworld that places could have physical locations with- experience could be described as the orchestra- out a specific individual defining their subjec- tion of various time-space rhythms’ (Buttimer tive meanings (Relph 1976: 29, 44). This, for 1976: 289): in other words, daily experiences instance, contradicts Tuan’s (1975: 152) con- are organised along individual routes of daily cept of place. According to Relph, individuals clearly experience places subjectively, looking 10 Buttimer (1976) also took a step back from the indi- at them from their personal standpoints (see al- vidual’s perspective and concentrated on social space. Even if she stressed subjective experiences, Buttimer so Seamon & Sowers 2008: 48). Indeed, Relph was more inclined to ’social geography’ in her approach (1976: 147) claims in ‘Place and Placelessness’ than either Tuan or Karjalainen.

25 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 that human beings have a ‘deep need’ for signif- 49, see Relph 1996: 14), original work also tar- icant places: one associates personal roots with geted the multiplicity of place experiences (see places, but if one ignores this need there will be Seamon 1996: 7; Seamon & Sowers 2008; Dov- only environments in which places do not mat- ey 2016: 265). According to Kim Dovey, the ter. Moreover, those who choose to ‘transcend’ challenge is rather to see the interconnections of placelessness are potentially developing an en- these conceptions, their ‘intertwinings, alliances, vironment in which places are for people as well and synergies: place as a “between” condition as reflecting and enhancing the variety of human and a set of relationships’ (Dovey 2016: 265). experience (Relph 1976: 147). Thus, along with studying young people’s places I became interested in Relph’s (1976: 49–55) and social encounters, I argue that the interplay ideas of experienced insideness and outsideness11 of feelings of insideness and outsideness helps when I was studying the social characteristics of to explain changes in the personal relationships place in the context of growing up. More spe- with places young people encounter as they are cifically, my focus in this research is on young growing up. Drawing on Relph’s notion of a people’s feelings of insideness and outsideness lifetime relationship with places (see e.g. Relph associated with place, which are constructed 1976: 38), I argue that one grows up with one’s through daily social encounters. According to personal places, which give intertwined feel- Relph (see 1976: 49–55), experienced insideness ings of insideness or outsideness. Thus, if such is associated with feelings of belonging and out- feelings change from one place to another de- sideness with feelings of non-belonging. Ideally, pending on the intention (Relph 1976: 50) (e.g. one would feel existential insideness, which is the daily social encounters), and given that youth deepest feeling of belonging and refers to a state is an ambiguous period between childhood and in which ‘place is experienced without deliberate adulthood (see Skelton 2000: 69), I propose that and self-conscious reflection yet is full with sig- the context of growing up influences the unique nificances.’ (Relph 1976: 55). In this sense, the mixture of insideness and outsideness. idea of insideness closely reflects Tuan’s (1974) Karjalainen developed the idea of place fur- term ‘topophilia’. Moreover, given my interest in ther. He believed that the world was always how unwanted encounters shape and construct seen, understood and represented in terms of young people’s feelings of outsideness, I am in- places (Karjalainen 1986; 2006: 83–84, see al- terested in the fact that Relph (1976: 49–52) also so 2003: 87), and was interested in how certain explored feelings of non-belonging. The deepest places constituted meaningful entities in indi- feeling of outsideness, existential outsideness, re- viduals’ lives. He discussed places as lifetime fers to feelings of non-involvement with place, processes in more depth than the humanistic homelessness, and alienation from people and geographers referred to above, and described places of non-belonging (Relph 1976: 51). how memories related to past places and future Whereas later interpretations of insideness expectations defined who an individual was and outsideness tended to point out that experi- and determined how he or she considered the ences moved beyond such binaries (see Dovey world and the places in it (Karjalainen 1986, 2016: 264–265, Tomaney 2016), Relph’s (1976: 2003, 2006). He coined the term topobiography to describe these biographical place relations

11 Relph (1976) distinguishes seven modes of insideness (Karjalainen 2006: 83–84, 93; see also 2003: and outsideness, but there are undoubtedly more (see 87). As far as he was concerned, the basic idea Seamon & Sowers 2008: 46).

26 behind topobiography was that places trans- ification, in its lack of precision and clarity and lated themselves as memories, thereby taking in its irrelevance to present social and environ- into account the lived and experienced places mental problems’ (Pocock 1983: 355, see also of the past and their influence on encounters Johnston 1980: 406). with new places (see Karjalainen 2003: 87). The cultural turn influenced perceptions of At first glance it may seem that topobiogra- place in many ways, but especially regarding the phy reflects Buttimer’s (1976) notion of dy- social and the cultural. It represented a change namism in the lifeworld, the aim being to de- in geographical thinking in various subfields as scribe how places are connected. However, a geographers focused their attention on cultural more detailed reading would imply that Kar- issues and started to revise their research meth- jalainen stressed lifelong connections between ods13 and theoretical foundations (cf. Vuolteen- places, whereas Buttimer (1976) was interest- aho 2002: 237–238). This was also the period ed in the dynamism of daily life. Both concern when geographers and other academics studying spatio-temporal connections between everyday the relationships between humans and their envi- places and are thus of theoretical relevance to ronments started to use both ‘space’ and ‘place’14. this research. It would be interesting to investi- The cultural turn brought a shift in academic gate how the personal topobiographies of peo- thinking: it was no longer possible to investigate ple in their late youth change when they have place without taking its social nature more se- more opportunities to encounter new places riously into account. Geographers interested in and people in their daily lives. new academic subjects outside geography and A decade later, critical voices were raised geographical issues forged closer links with cul- against theories of place in humanistic geogra- tural and social disciplines, and started to focus phy. Whereas humanistic geographers implied12 their attention on shared cultural meanings (Tani that people could not be separated from the so- 2001: 144). Although inspired by humanistic ge- cio-physical context because they lived in the ography, the cultural turn brought about a ma- social world, and that places had an intersubjec- jor theoretical shift and a gradual merger with tive character, the more recent definitions placed more emphasis on the socio-spatial character- 13 The cultural turn in the 1980s brought new methodol- istics of space. The criticism was severe and ogy into humanistic geography (see Häkli 1999: 93). Given the lack of specific methods, academics turned wide-ranging, but the main point was that hu- to other disciplines. With a view to reaching the sub- manistic geographers tended to ignore the im- jective level of experience, for instance, they started to apply ethnographic methods and participant observa- portance of the social context in experiences of tion, finding research material from the arts, such as place (see e.g. Jackson 1989: 22; Rose 1993: literature and the visual arts (see Ley 1981: 250–251; Smith 1981: 294–295; Häkli 1999: 83; Winchell 2000: 44; Massey 2005: 183–184; Bondi 2005: 36). 346). The aim was to develop a holistic and in-depth understanding of human experience that was well suited The roots of the problem with humanistic geog- to humanistic geography and involved the phenomeno- raphy lay in its ‘emphasis on the unique, with logical study of meanings, values, goals and purposes (Entrikin 1976: 616). These methods were sensitive to consequent difficulties of generalisation and ver- experience in that they could capture personal experiences that were out of reach otherwise, and allowed the 12 According to Buttimer, for instance: ‘(t)he boundaries research participants to speak with their voices. Thus, of spatial experience are seen to coincide with a social the aim was not to increase the level of objectivity, but world rather than with a particular area’ (Buttimer 1976: rather to develop more diligent and deeper perspectives 285). Similarly, Tuan (1975: 159) wrote: ‘ – – people on the diversity of the experience. may have common experiences of nature and work, feel 14 However, I use the term ‘place’ because it better cap- the same cycles of heat and cold, see the same dusk, tures the experiential characteristics of subjective and and smell the same air’. experienced relationships with everyday environments.

27 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 social geographical and cultural studies, result- ciation and earlier personal experiences (resulting in new, multidisciplinary and more diverse ing from the socially shared worlds). Given the approaches (c.f. Häkli 1999: 93; Philo 2000b; significance of these two notions to this study, I Vuolteenaho 2002). There were ‘ramifications consider them in more detail below. for both social and cultural geography – – lead- First, during the cultural turn researchers ing to debates within (say) economic geogra- started to pay more attention to the subject’s po- phy, political geography, population geography, sition and its effect on subjective experiences. environmental geography and elsewhere.’ (Phi- Moreover, the experiences of individuals, whose lo 2000b: 28). The cultural turn also generat- perspectives were rarely studied (e.g. young peo- ed the geographical perspective on children and ple), started to receive more attention. A group young people (see Kallio 2006: 21). This scien- of geographers (e.g. researchers drawing from tific metamorphosis changed ideas of place such feminist geography) started to insist that individ- that it became impossible to speak of it in isola- ual position and ‘social categories’ be included tion from its social and cultural context. in research methodologies and theories. As ear- The ramifications of the cultural turn are rel- ly as in the 1980s they were criticising accepted evant to this study in at least two ways. First, it quantitative methods and questioning the valid- validates the focus on place as an experience ity of ‘the objective truth’ in geography (Monk in which the individual’s social position15 (es- & Hanson 1982: 13; see McDowell 1993a: 164, pecially age16, but also gender, race and social 1993b: 311–312). This was not a new commen- background) matters (see e.g. Monk & Hanson tary, humanistic geographers having noted the 1982; McDowell 1993b; Young 2005). Second, gap earlier. However, feministic geographers al- it validates the view of place as an intersubjec- so criticised the lack of attention to class, gender, tive experience, constructed in the social world race and sexuality in geographical thinking (see (Jackson 1989; Tani 1995: 33, Cresswell 2004: e.g. Monk & Hanson 1982; Rose 1993: 1–5). 29–32, Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 79–81; see al- The thinking was that a subject’s position was so Tuan 1977: 139–140, Relph: 1976: 12, 33). produced through everyday social practices (see I therefore consider young people’s places as West & Zimmerman 1987: 125), meaning that being produced in social and shared contexts it was a social construction that was under dis- that are also contested, controversial and under pute and relational (see Alasuutari 2004: 131– dispute. Furthermore, I perceive places as nev- 132). What is of relevance to this study is that er-finished products in which social processes these social markers were assumed to determine and activities play a key role (see also Simonsen how places appear to people (Rose 1993: 56–60; 2008: 15), as do the individual’s subjective appre- Gilmartin 2002: 36–37), no matter how unique place experiences are to individuals. The impli-

15 One’s position, ‘the ways that ‘who we are’ emerges in cation is that one’s position necessarily also de- interactions within specific spatial contexts and specific termines one’s everyday place experiences giv- biographical moments.’ (Valentine 2007: 18). Position is something over which individuals have little choice en that meaningful places arise in the (social) because they are placed in it by social institutions (Ala- reality of daily life. In the light of these critical suutari 2004: 131). Thus, individuals develop an attitude and perspective towards their position so they can cope viewpoints, feminist geographers wanted to in- with it, or at least tolerate it (Alasuutari 2004: 132). clude the political in their research (see Rose Even if they can choose what to do in their lives, their positions are ‘waiting for’ them (Alasuutari 2004: 131). 1993: 53–60), which in this context means that 16 Social categories other than age are also influential (e.g. it matters who experiences places. This was al- social class), but they are not the focus of this study.

28 so the case when children’s and young people’s quently, I propose that even if place experiences geography began to emerge, emphasising the im- are unique to the individual, place has an inter- portance of youth as a position and the fact that subjective character that is realised when people age is not only biologically but also socially con- encounter one another and share their experienc- structed (see Alanen 1988: 65). Consequently, I es through different modes of communication. see young people as living in contexts in which It later become evident that it was difficult other individuals (and they themselves) consider to study place without focusing on mobility (see them to be members of the (loose) category of e.g. Massey 1994; Cresswell 2006; Kuusisto-Ar- ‘young people’. Hence, they interpret and make ponen 2009, 2010, Jirón 2010a; Edensor 2011, sense of their places from this position. 2014; Kuoppa 2016; on mobility among chil- Second, geographers also started to perceive dren and young people see also Kullman 2010, places as intersubjective entities. According to 2012; Porter et al. 2010a, 2010b; Buliung et al. Denis Cosgrove (1983: 1), the (re)production of 2012; Holdsworth 2014). This shift is sometimes life is ‘necessarily a collective art, mediated in referred to as the ‘mobilities turn’ (Hannam et consciousness and sustained through codes of al. 2006) or even the ‘new mobilities paradigm’ communication’. Such communication includes (Sheller & Urry 2006) in social sciences. In brief, the interplay of language, routines, gestures and it means that social phenomena should be un- rituals as well as social and personal conduct that derstood and studied on the move. It transcend- sustains and forms historically and geograph- ed disciplinary boundaries and questioned the ically specific human reality (Cosgrove 1983: concepts of ‘territorial’ and ‘sedentary’, which 1; Alasuutari 2004: 14–25). The implication is were used in twentieth-century social sciences that places have a unique social character that (Hannam et al. 2006: 1–2). What is of relevance is constructed when individuals articulate, share to this study is, first, that social relations were and re-interpret their place experiences (see Jack- reconfigured as being on the move rather than son 1989: 161; Karjalainen 1997a; Kuusisto-Ar- static (see Cresswell 2006: 5: Adey et al. 2014: ponen 2010: 79). Intersubjectivity thus refers to 3), as were various aspects of social life. Re- shared elements of subjective relationships with searchers suggested, for instance, that ‘families, the environment (see Tani 1995: 18), and even relationships, access and delivery to services, lei- if every individual has a unique perspective on sure, work and politics’ were increasingly mo- place, experiences are not described in private bile (Adey et al. 2014: 3, 13). Second, mobility language but are conceptualised from the reper- seemed to be constructing daily living. Although toire of shared language (see Jackson 1989: 157, the mobilities concept encompasses the large- 169; Alasuutari 2004: 112, 165). All this pushed scale movement of people, objects, capital and geographers to adopt more interpretative meth- information, everyday local means of mobility odology that takes the social diversity of place such as transportation, movement in the public into account (see Cosgrove & Jackson 1987). realm and the transfer of material within daily Nevertheless, even if humanistic geographers ac- life were also included (see Hannam et al. 2006: knowledged that individuals shared places by 1). Thus, mundane, daily mobility was consid- means of shared routines and cultures (Relph ered ‘part of the energetic buzz of the everyday 1976: 29), they were criticised for conceptualis- (even while banal or humdrum, or even stilled)’ ing ‘social’ largely through biologically universal (see Adey et al. 2014: 3). Therefore, given my human qualities (see Cosgrove 1983: 3). Conse- mobile approach to social life and daily living,

29 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

I also suggest that place experiences are con- fields that have often been held apart.’ (Cress- structed in mobile contexts. well 2010a: 551, see Tomaney 2016), some re- Although humanistic geographers and oth- searchers have also investigated place experiencer early researchers of place were not unaware es from this perspective. Scholars focusing on of the influence of meaningful mobility, it was migration and refugee studies, for instance, have not at the core of their interests (e.g. Buttimer studied mobilities, identities and experiences of 1976; Seamon 1979: 40–42; Cresswell 2008: inclusion and exclusion (see e.g. Malkki 1992; 56). However, I argue that recent discussions Schuster 2005; Pascucci 2011). My overall fo- tend to leave open the question of the influence cus in this study is on young people’s daily mo- of mobility on personal place experiences. Fur- bility and place experiences in their local envi- thermore, there have been few attempts to com- ronments. More specifically, I am interested in bine the research on mobilities and studies of links between daily mobility and place in terms place that rely on humanistic geography. This of how movement is made meaningful, in oth- is a deficiency given that moving is essential to er words how movement becomes mobility (see maintain human life in the world, hence there is Cresswell 2006: 21). According to Tim Cress- a strong need for theoretical development (Cress- well (2006: 3), mobility is a ‘dynamic equiva- well 2010a: 551). I suggest that humanistic ge- lent of place’ (Cresswell 2006: 3). Thus, although ographers’ ideas of place could help to shed new subjective place experiences are built up in the light on how meaningful mobility and place ex- intersubjective world, they are also constructed periences are intertwined in daily life. Empirical in the mobile world. The question of how mean- research in this field would also help to enhance ingful movements and place experiences are in- understanding of what it means to experience tertwined nevertheless remains. My aim in this these interconnections. Contrary to what is some- study is to narrow this gap. times claimed (see e.g. Massey 2005: 183–184), Early humanistic geographers tended to ar- humanistic geographers did not perceive place as gue that some sort of stability was needed to ex- merely static. According to Relph (1976: 29–30), perience place (Tuan 1977: 179, see Relph 1976: for instance, neither stability nor location is a nec- 88). It was posited that place was in danger of essary condition for place, and mobility does not becoming ‘placeless’ if it included ‘too much preclude attachment. Simply experiencing daily mobility’ (see Cresswell 2006: 31). However, environments is associated with movement, for there is no clash between mobility and place in example: ‘In the act of moving, spaces and its contemporary readings, in fact they seem to be attributes are directly experienced.’ (Tuan 1977: creating a ‘mobile sense of place’, the repetitive 52). Experiencing spaciousness is also associat- rhythms of routine movements fostering pleasur- ed with being free and having the possibility to able feelings of familiarity and comfort (Jirón be mobile (see Tuan 1977: 53). Thus, humans 2010a; 2010b; Edensor 2011: 196–197; 2014: are mobile beings who may experience environ- 165–166). Cresswell (2006: 25–56) refers to two ments ‘most vividly in networks of social and research streams, the ‘sedentarists’ and the ‘no- commercial interaction which could not be cir- mandists’, the former stressing the importance cumscribed within a given region or place’ (But- of stopping and maintaining stability, and the lat- timer 1976: 285). ter positing that places are composed in mobile Given that the mobility turn connects ‘forms contexts. Even if these two views are distinct of movement across scales and within research (and sometimes oppositional), they do not need

30 to be conflicting. Kirsten Simonsen (2008: 13– flourish’ (Casey 2001: 685). Meaningfully thick 14) positions herself between these two streams, places may be new and about-to-be-established, suggesting that the relationship between mobility but they may also be familiar, frequently-visit- and place should not be perceived as dichoto- ed places (Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80). Thus, mous or as a form of erosion, nor as hypermo- the idea of thick places is also somewhat close bility meaning that everything is endlessly on the to Tuan’s notion of stopping: ‘- -each pause in move: there should rather be a ‘complex inter- movement makes it possible for location to be twining contributing to the construction of both’ transformed into place.’ (Tuan 1977: 6, 179). On (Simonsen 2008: 14). Thus, I argue that mobile the other hand, daily living also takes place in place experiences are constructed while individ- places that are less thick, in other words pas- uals are engaged in their daily routines (Edensor sages that are not emotionally rich in signifi- 2014: 165), living and moving, and searching cance (Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80). Passages, for meaning (Buttimer 1976: 282). Here, daily or thinned-out places, lack ‘the rigor and sub- mobility (e.g. commuting) could be described stance of thickly lived places’ (Casey 2001: 682), as movement that ‘- - sews places together and but nevertheless give everyday living its habit- produces an itinerary shaped by time, as tempo- ual character and form (see Kuusisto-Arponen ralities of movement are continually reinscribed 2010: 80). Thick places and passages alternate on places - -’ (Edensor 2011: 192). According in everyday life, and both are needed (see Kuu- to another interesting perspective on mobility, sisto-Arponen 2010: 79–81). Most importantly, when one travels from one place to another one however, a sense of being on the move seems to is in ‘transitional time’, experiencing the phys- give structure to places, whether they be mean- ical distance between places, but on the other ingfully intense or more like passages (see Kuu- hand has ‘a temporal opportunity to translate, sisto-Arponen 2010: 80–81). I understand from adjust or prepare oneself for a different social the above that daily moving entails the interplay setting and social identity at the destination’ (Jain between meaningful stopping places and more & Lyons 2008: 85–86: Jirón 2010b: 134–138). routine places, or passages. In this sense, stability Consequently, I propose that not only does daily and mobility together construct the individual’s mobility create a sense of itinerary it also evokes subjective relationship with places rather than feelings of connectedness with significant envi- being dichotomic ‘counterparts’ (see Simonsen ronments. 2008: 13–14; Dovey 2016). To develop these Notions of meaningfully thick places and ideas further I investigate the ways in which ev- places as passages could be used as tools with eryday mobility connects places, whether they which to enhance understanding of the relation- be meaningfully intense or passages, as mean- ship between everyday mobility and place expe- ingful systems. riences (Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80–81, see also My specific interest in this study is in lo- Casey 2001: 685). These concepts reflect the idea cal, bodily mobility, in which daily transporta- that the rhythms of daily living and the bodily tion plays a role. It has been argued that daily feeling of being on the move play a central role travelling is an activity in which one prepares in the construction of experiences (Kuusisto-Ar- oneself to meet the requirements of the place ponen 2010: 79). Thick in this context refers to to which one is travelling (Jain & Lyons 2008: emotionally intense places (Kuusisto-Arponen 85–86). This is an interesting notion, implying 2010: 80–81) in which ‘personal enrichment can that travelling has an impact on how personal

31 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Table 2. The approach to place in this study: it is subjective and shared, and experienced in mobile contexts. SCIENTIFIC SHIFT PLACE AS A CONCEPT CRITIQUE Subjective experience, unique to the Ignores the social context, and is naïve Humanistic geography experiencer (e.g. Tuan 1975; 1977, and ’non-political’ (e.g. Rose 1993: 44– Relph 1976, Karjalainen 1986, 1997). 61; Massey 2005: 183–184). Individuals live in the social world (e.g. Ignores the fact that daily life is mobile Jackson 1989). Places are intersubjec- (e.g. Hannam 2006; Sheller & Urry tive and have shared meanings (e.g. The cultural turn 2006). Humanistic geographers did not Cosgrove 1983, 1985). The individual’s ignore the social context (Seamon & (social) context influences place expe- Sowers 2008: 48). riences (e.g. Rose 1993). Daily life is mobile (e.g. Sheller & Urry Daily life is not ‘constant movement’ 2006), and meaningful movements (see Simonsen 2008). Places matter in The mobilities turn (=mobilities) matter (e.g. Cresswell the mobile world, too (see Karjalainen 2006). Mobilities influence place expe- 2006: 85; Cresswell 2006; Seamon & riences. Sowers 2008: 50–51; Tomaney 2016).

place experiences are interlinked in daily life. places ‘to-be-encountered’. I further suggest In this sense, movement also ‘makes connec- that, in this context, daily travelling creates the tions’ (Elliott & Urry 2010: 45) between per- rhythm and routine of daily life that facilitates sonal places and people. It has also been sug- the construction of meaningful places, memo- gested that movement is required to experience ries and intentions. the physical distance between places (Jain & In the light of the theoretical viewpoints dis- Lyons 2008: 85–86). Consequently, I propose cussed throughout this chapter, I understand daily that moving also creates experienced separa- places as personal, intersubjective and construct- tion between places, and further that travelling ed in daily mobile contexts (see Table 2). I posit is a combination of feelings of spaciousness, that places are constructed in the social world, freedom and distance (see Tuan 1977: 53; Jain even if they have unique meanings for an indi- & Lyons 2008: 85–86), and experiencing con- vidual; and that daily mobility formulates the nections between places. Loosely drawing on rhythm and routine of daily life in which mean- Tim Edensor (2011) and Juliet Jain and Glenn ingful places are constructed. Although only cer- Lyons (2008), I understand moving from one tain places evoke strong feelings or memories in place to another as an individual’s way of forg- the experiencer, daily routes include places that ing meaningful connections between personal are meaningfully intense as well as the more rou- places. Thus, I propose that an individual on tinely experienced passages. To develop this idea the move has mixed place experiences that are further, I study how these meaningful entities of intertwined with experiences associated with places are constructed.

32 3 Young people’s places in the have left, alleyways, pathways and open spaces city: the urban environment as (Matthews et al. 1998: 195). They also include an experiential and lived place shopping centres and local shops (e.g. Anthony 1985; Matthews et al. 1998: 195; Vanderbeck & Johnson 2000: 7; Tani 2015), hamburger kiosks (Trell et al. 2012: 143–145), outdoor areas such 3.1 Place experiences in an urban as the street (Langevang 2008; Trell et al. 2012: environment: living with socio- 142), bus stops, gardens (Trell et al. 2012: 142), spatial opportunities and constraints beaches and parks, mostly in summer time when Individual place experiences derive from a spe- the weather is tolerable (Hörschelmann & van cific position. Youth, the period between child- Blerk 2012: 112; Trell et al. 2012: 142). In brief, hood and adulthood (see e.g. Kett 1971: 283; they are places in (semi)public urban space in Northcote 2006: 2; Weller 2006: 97; Evans 2008: which young people can use their agency and 1663; Valentine et al. 1998: 4), is such a position. create places of their own, as other places are not From a geographical perspective, this means that obviously available (Christensen & Mikkelsen spatial power geometrics regulate young people’s 2013: 202–205). environments, in which certain people or groups Much less geographical research on places (usually adults) have more authority than others has focused on people in their late youth, how- (see e.g. Valentine 1996b; Trell et al. 2012: 146)17. ever, or on young people’s excitement and joy Unbalanced dynamics between young people related to new possibilities and opportunities and adults limit the range of places accessible related to growing up (see Evans 2008: 1675). to youth in the city, and force them into places Those in their late youth encounter fewer au- that are hidden from the gaze of adults (see e.g. thorities than small children (see Matthews et Matthews et al. 1998: 195; Abbott-Chapman & al. 1998: 194–195; Valentine 2003: 38), and are Robertson 2001: 489; Aitken 2001: 16; Thomas therefore less constrained and less likely to be 2005a: 598; Shearer & Walters 2015: 612, 614). contrasted with adults. According to Valentine Young people’s places tend to be located on the (2003: 39), it is ‘somewhat ironic neglect, given borders of the urban realm, but may also be tucked that the emphasis within the sociology of youth away in livelier environments in which people has been on the importance and implications of abound (Matthews et al. 2000). They provide young people’s actions and the distinctiveness of young people with the opportunity to be with their cultures’. Sociological research on young same-aged peers and to develop identities (Mat- people has also extended beyond the process of thews et al. 1999: 1717). They are also realms in becoming an adult, connecting it with more ab- which young people can recognise themselves, stract ideas such as achieving the status of an feel at home and seek recognition from others, individual (see Gordon & Lahelma 2002: 2). Al- even if this sometimes entails breaking the rules though this is beyond the scope of this research, and transgressing spatial limitations set by adults I investigate young people’s daily place experi- (Christensen & Mikkelsen 2013: 204). Such plac- ences as individuals. es include children’s play areas after the children Emerging adulthood is depicted as a complex but exciting period of life. Major chang- 17 Virtual places are increasingly popular among young people (e.g. Hodkinson & Lincoln 2008). However, ex- es such as leaving the parental home, finding periences of such places are not within the scope of this a study place and obtaining employment are to study.

33 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 be faced (see du Bois-Reymond 1998; Gordon their daily places. It has been suggested that, in & Lahelma 2002: 7; Lahelma & Gordon 2003: the context of growing up, actions considered 377; Valentine 2003: 38), and may trigger feel- childish (e.g. norm-breaking behaviour, taking ings of anxiety related to a lack of experience risks and limited emotional control) are increas- in these areas, higher expectations and increased ingly replaced with adult actions (e.g. responsi- responsibility (see Gordon & Lahelma 2002: 7; bility in relation to one’s actions and emotional Macek et al. 2007: 459–469). It is also seen as the regulation: see Galambos et al. 2003: 85–88), age of opportunity, great expectations and hopes which could be indicative of change in young (Cahill 2000: 251). Many aspects of the future people’s appreciation of what is exciting and de- remain open, and little about a young person’s sirable. Consequently, I posit that marginal places life directions is defined in detail (see Gordon (see Valentine et al. 2010: 920), which could be & Lahelma 2002: 9; Arnett 2004: 16; Macek et considered young teenagers’ places, differ from al. 2007: 464). What is certain is that emerging the places of people in their late youth. Just as adulthood is a phase of life when young people some familiar actions may start to seem child- can test their new, adult roles and enjoy free- ish (see Macek et al. 2007: 496), so may certain dom of choice and relative independence (see familiar places. How do young people experi- Northcote 2006: 6–7; Macek et al. 2007: 464; ence their daily places in a new period of life Collin-Lange 2013: 418). It is also the time for when they can legitimately access and experi- first experiences related to self-discovery, per- ence adult places18? How do the new dilemmas sonal development and the interpretation of so- that replace problems related to teenage years cietal value structures (Cahill 2000: 251). In the (see du Bois-Reymond 1998; Gordon & La- context of this study, these changes occur in re- helma 2002; Valentine 2003: 38) translate into lation to the spatial sphere and places. young people’s place experiences? It has been argued that young adults seek Some humanistic geographers argue that places where they can establish their role as an children experience their environments differ- adult in a ‘socially sanctioned manner’ (e.g. in ently than adults (see Tuan 1974: 56). This is nightclubs), and thereby ‘bridge the divide be- because one’s sense of time influences one’s tween the structural roles of childhood and adult- sense of place, and as one grows up one’s ex- hood’ (Northcote 2006: 6–7). These places pro- perience of the past becomes more widespread vide the opportunity to get out into larger urban and diverse (Tuan 1977: 186–187, see also Tu- spaces and embrace new, adult identities (North- an 1974: 56). Nowadays, I suggest, it is accept- cote 2006: 7). They ‘not only represent a site ed that regardless of the shorter life course (see where adult activities are rehearsed, but entry to Tuan 1977: 186–187), places of the past mani- them constitutes a status marker in itself’ (North- fested as memories help young people to make cote 2006: 6–7), and hence are special places. I sense of themselves, too (see Karjalainen 2004: argue that the implication in these notions that 40; 2006: 83; Kuusisto-Arponen & Savolainen young adults do not necessarily need to break 2016). In the context of this study, these ideas im- or transgress the rules (Christensen & Mikkelsen 18 2013: 203–205), and are rather (through their However, places experienced as childish or grown-up should not be seen as mutually contrastive or restrictive. adult behaviour) reconstructing adult space. One In fact, young people’s personal places include both. The difference between them is vague because living is reason for this is that their position has changed, a messy compilation of memories of places and future and they thereby have more options regarding expectations (e.g. an individual may consider childish places safe, and grown-up places intimidating).

34 ply that memories of places are reinterpreted and cally present in those that are restricted (Kallio & reproduced when they are narrated, which influ- Häkli 2011; Tani 2015; Pyyry & Tani 2015), loses ences their meanings. Slow changes in meaning its significance: the meanings of places related are not easily tracked in that everyday life ap- to one’s teenage years change, largely because pears as repetitive accounts and events forming the presence of young adults in the public realm a basic schedule for living (Karjalainen 1986: is not similarly controlled. Thus, in the context 80–81). Daily life constitutes the mundane con- of this study, although memories of past places text in which things are as usual and daily places are important for an individual (see Karjalainen are lived in without questioning (see Karjalainen 2006: 88–91), the familiar environments asso- 1986: 80–81; 2004: 54, 2006: 84). Individuals ciated with them take on new meanings, even assigning complex combinations of meanings to if significant memories remain. Certain places their daily environments do so via observation, that were once at the centre of young people’s thereby making them recognisable and meaning- lives (e.g. places for hanging out) are increas- ful (Karjalainen 2004: 52). Sometimes, however, ingly experienced as significant memories, but these meanings become fragmented because of in daily life they are lived through as passages sudden changes (for instance, one’s own street (see Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80). Drawing on may not feel familiar when there is reconstruction this background, I explore young people’s expe- work going on) (Karjalainen 2004: 54). Accord- riences when certain familiar places begin to feel ing to Karjalainen (2004: 54), places that become less meaningful and are assigned new meanings. visible and recognisable after a sudden change As youth is filled with insecurities and disrup- capture one’s attention: people assume a certain tions19 (Wyn & Dwyer 1999; Valentine 2003: 46– amount of continuity in their places and start to 47; Settersten & Ray 2010; Trell 2013: 5; Wyn pay attention to them when they change in unex- et al. 2012), encounters with new places associat- pected ways. My question is thus: could changes ed with adulthood are not necessarily smooth or in young people’s positions (from young person painless, even if they are expected. I argue that to young adult) be an example of change mak- humanistic geography provides concepts that ening certain places visible? Furthermore, a person hance understanding of this phase of life, when whose position loses its meaning and legitimate familiar places no longer signify what is usual power in changing situations should change strat- (see Karjalainen 2004: 54). When daily places egies (Alasuutari 2004: 131). Thus, I posit that lose their familiarity the change in meaning could new opportunities related to growing up (e.g. be described as a slow fragmentation (see Kar- Valentine 2003: 40–46; Evans 2008: 1675) also jalainen 2004: 54). Even if it is a slow process, change the meanings of places because they are the reorganisation of personal places may have not encountered from a familiar position. very negative connotations, especially for young I argue that actions and places that are typical people in a vulnerable position. The readiness of of young teenagers are not of major significance the young to tolerate these changes and to cope for people in their late youth, who encounter with any difficulties related to changes in the fewer socio-spatial restrictions (e.g. less parental control, fewer restrictions in accessing adult 19 I do not claim that complexities and difficulties are -re places). Hanging out, for instance, which is how solved once an individual reaches adulthood. Life after youth is not stable either, given various societal inse- teenagers may negotiate and (re)define what is curities, for instance (see Roberts 2012). However, in- suitable activity in certain places by being physi- securities related to adulthood are beyond the scope of this research.

35 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 meaning of places varies. This reflects the vari- ation in young people’s personal circumstances 3.2 The city as an arena depending on their social background and con- for social encounters text (see e.g. Trell et al. 2012: 139–140), as well Encountering is a physical event that takes place as their unique place history that influences their in the interplay between places and bodies. In construction of personal places. In the light of brief, it is a process in which one feels a sense the above I posit that when the environments that of belonging with some people and of difference are available to an individual do not match the from others (see e.g. Ahmed 2000: 21; Harinen sought-for place experiences he or she senses a et al. 2005: 283; Simonsen 2007: 169, 178). Ge- sort of misfit. Thus, just as young people are liv- ographers have used the term to facilitate expla- ing in between (Skelton 2000: 69; Evans 2008: nation of how urbanites can learn to live with 1663) childhood and adulthood, they are also liv- cultural difference and show civility to each oth- ing in between their places of the past and their er (Hemming 2011: 65). Encounters also play places-to-be in the future, and the experienced a central role in the construction of place ex- connections between these places may be fragile. periences, which takes place in intersubjective I propose that young people who suddenly feel contexts (see Relph 1976: 29) – significant in- that familiar places are unreachable remnants of dividuals make the place. Encounters, as social- earlier life a may also feel like outsiders, largely ly constructed events, also constitute difference because experiences of belonging and outside- (Rastas 2005: 152). Whereas familiar individuals ness depend on personal aims (Relph 1976: 50). are associated with a sense of community, meet- Whereas ‘in-betweenness’ is well recognised in ing the Other involves practices and techniques youth studies, research on experiences related to related to differentiation (Simonsen 2007: 168, feelings of living in between places is lacking. 178). Furthermore, social markers such as gen- Thus, I explore how young people experience der, race and ethnicity (see e.g. Ahmed 2000), but their places in these contexts. also age, construct the senses of difference and In sum, I explore how young people ex- similarity. Thus, youth is one thing that defines perience their places in contexts in which the how people encounter other individuals and how meanings attached to places of the past (related they are encountered. Given the unpredictabili- to childhood) and places-to-be (related to adult- ty of encounters in everyday life, I propose that hood) are changing. This reflects the need to ex- through increased agency, young people discover plore spatialities and their interconnections that not only new places but also new individuals. I are implicit in young people’s ‘transitions’ from aim in this research to study how negotiations childhood to adulthood (Valentine 2003: 49). If related to social encounters affect young people’s important places create selfhood (see Karjalain- construction of places. en 2006: 83), I suggest that young people need As a researcher of place experiences, I am to find some sort of balance between the new interested in how the daily social encounters of places related to adulthood and the old familiar young people influence their feelings of inside- places of childhood. My interest is thus in how ness and outsideness (see Relph 1976: 79–85). young people making ‘transitions’ from depen- Even if such encounters incorporate fluidity dent childhood to more independent adulthood and negotiability, some of them, such as among (see Valentine 2003: 49), experience their per- friends, call for predictability and trustworthiness sonal places. (see Suurpää 2002: 190). If significant individu-

36 als create the place and the sense of community late youth? How do different daily encounters (see Tuan 1977: 139–140, also Relph 1976: 34; formulate young people’s feelings of insideness Simonsen 2007: 168), I propose that positively and outsideness? experienced encounters will intensify feelings The term ‘hanging out’ is commonly used in of belonging. In everyday encounters, places are the context of young people’s social places, en- shared through discussion (Karjalainen 1997a; counters and feelings of insideness. It is a high- Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 79) and being together ly social action encompassing a range of social (see Gordon & Lahelma 2003: 45–46; Bunnell activities, is usually engaged in with friends, and et al. 2012: 499). Consequently, the meaning at- includes walking or driving around, escaping tached to a place may fade when significant in- weather conditions, sitting and talking in public dividuals are not there (Tuan 1977: 139–140), or private spaces, ‘chilling out’, lounging, shop- making it thinner (see Casey 2001: 682). Coop- ping and watching TV (see e.g. Lewis 1989; Mat- eration between individuals requires checking thews et al. 2000: 281; Aitken 2001: 16; Thomas out their mutual understanding of what is go- 2005a: 592; Langevang 2008: 271; Kato 2009: ing on (Alasuutari 2004: 15). If they are willing 60; Hörschelmann & van Blerk 2012: 112; Trell to share routines, their places may also assume et al. 2012: 144; Pyyry 2015a). Hanging out is shared meanings (see Relph 1976: 34). However, ‘a time of change, a time of aesthetic.’ (Aitken it is clear that people cannot choose exactly who 2001: 16). It is a way of accumulating knowl- will become part of their places in the city, hence edge (Pyyry 2016: 110–111), and is also seen as their daily living includes interpersonal clashes. way of learning the boundaries of social norms I argue that these clashes (re)formulate their re- related to public space (Kato 2009: 59). It could lationship with places. In fact, daily encounters, be considered a form of young people’s voiceless interactions and confrontations form a continu- politics, enabling them to express their opinions ous process of creation, resistance and struggle by being physically present in places to which of- (see Harinen et al. 2005: 282; Pickering et al. ficially they have no access (Kallio & Häkli 2011: 2012), including the possibility of encountering 66–67), and enabling them to construct shared individuals defined as ‘them’. Encounters with places of their own and to reclaim space that is unwanted individuals may be powerful experi- not obviously available (e.g. Valentine 1996b: ences that change the meanings of place in ways 213; Kallio & Häkli 2011; Tani 2015: 142–143). that shatter feelings of insideness (see Cresswell Moreover, I argue that it could be seen as en- 2006: 32). People may feel they are losing their abling young people to control social encoun- personal place when ‘wrong’ individuals, repre- ters. Youth researchers have expressed similar senting ‘them’ and ‘difference’, invade it. Thus, ideas, drawing on the work of Erving Goffman groups labelled ‘us’ should be understood in re- (1959) and his analogy of theatre: frontstage ac- lation to other groups (see Suurpää 2002: 188), tion represents social interaction that is meant to given the prerequisite need for a group of people be public and backstage action is private. Plac- who are ‘different from us’ (see Kuusisto-Ar- es in which young people eschew encounters ponen 2003: 91–92). This is the case even if their with adults are frequently referred to as back- presence is not necessarily a pleasant experience. stage places (Lieberg 1995: 722, see Matthews I aim to study these notions in relation to youth. et al. 2000: 285, 292; Matthews 2003: 106; Trell How do wanted and unwanted social encounters et al. 2012: 144; Tani 2015: 137). Obviously, construct the place experiences of people in their young people do not always avoid encounters.

37 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

When they socialise they tend to maximise the as significant individuals define the meanings buzz by hanging out in places with pockets of of place (see Tuan 1977: 139–140, also Relph known and random people, lots of noise and 1976: 34), it may be that places for hanging out continual flux (Matthews et al. 2000: 286; Trell no longer evoke feelings of belonging. et al. 2012: 144). These are known as on-stage Even if young people are perceived as places where young people are intent on seeing ‘othered’ individuals who need to fight for and being seen (Matthews et al. 2000: 285–286). their own places in public space (see e.g. I also see them as places where young people Aitken 2001: 7–8; Tani 2015: 137–138), actively seek opportunities to encounter want- they may still face individuals who repre- ed and random individuals, who may become sent the ‘other’. It may be extremely difficult included among ‘us’. In this sense, hanging out for youth in a vulnerable position to share in different places is their way of creating ‘our common resources (such as urban space: see places’, which they separate from ‘their places’. Harinen et al. 2005: 283). Strangers who dis- Increased independence also gives young turb the everyday patterns and routines of res- people new opportunities to meet new people, idents may well retain their exotic appeal as both wanted and random. I suggest that this also newcomers, but could also evoke more com- changes the meanings attached to social places. plicated and challenging feelings. Difference Given that the difference between a grown-up tends to be bothersome – especially when young person and an adult is not as clear-cut as ‘the other is in a need of space, resources it used to be, marginal (see Valentine et al. 2010: and attention’ (Harinen et al. 2005: 283). In 920) or backstage places (Matthews et al. 2000: other words, although encounters are mutual, 285, 292, Pyyry 2015a: 8) are not the only se- the emotions and feelings involved are not cluded spots in which to find privacy and to so- necessarily positive (Simonsen 2007). Indi- cialise. Furthermore, when young people have viduals may have an overemphasised need to more access to adult places and more opportu- protect their places from others (see Kuusis- nities to make new social encounters in a wider to-Arponen 2003: 120–121; Pickering et al. variety of social places, the significance of places 2012: 949, 953–956). Reactions to encoun- for hanging out potentially decreases. However, ters with difference may manifest in serious there is a lack of research focusing on how the forms such as racism, which erupts as exces- meanings young people give to social encounters sive defence of or over-attachment to ‘our’ change when they do not need to claim places place (see Nayak 2010: 2381–2382; Picker- of their own (see Valentine 1996b: 213; Kal- ing et al. 2012: 955). It has been argued that lio & Häkli 2011; Tani 2015: 142–143). Thus, in these cases, an individual is afraid that the the question remains as to how the context of unmanageable other will threaten the mor- growing up reformulates definitions of ‘us’ and al character of place and deconstruct it (see ‘them’, which furthermore reconstruct feelings Cresswell 2006: 32). Thus, when a young of insideness and outsideness. Given the flexi- person considers certain individuals threat- bility of meanings assigned to social encounters ening, encounters with them may become the (Suurpää 2002: 190; Gordon & Lahelma 2003: source of ‘alienation from people and plac- 45–46), for instance, individuals who used to es, homelessness, a sense of unreality of the hang out as ‘us’ and ‘friends’ may later feel more world, and of not belonging’ (see Relph 1976: like ‘childish hangers-out’ and ‘them’. In so far 51). I argue that it matters a great deal wheth-

38 er a person has or does not have the skills 307), but is also constructed from one’s personal and potential to handle difficult encounters. experiences of place and the memories on which Those who have such resources have the po- expectations of encounters are based. Thus, place tential to counter discrimination and may al- experiences are built in the interplay among sub- so have feelings of belonging. When daily jective meaning-making, social encounters and places are experienced as hostile, feelings of everyday environments. I study young people’s non-belonging may also arise. place experiences and social encounters in con- It is essential to be able to live with the new texts in which they are increasingly exposed to places of adulthood one encounters, and the new new adult places and the individuals in them. individuals. It has been argued that respectful en- This topic interests me because individuals can- counters are possible if one is willing to turn to not fully choose their experiential reactions to another without imposing one’s own ideas and daily meetings with people. Thus, my aim in attitudes (see Illman 2006: 118). Difference does studying the meanings young people attach to not need to be an obstacle: individuals may look their daily encounters is to reveal novel aspects at the world from different perspectives but still of their personal relationships with everyday en- accept each other and the difference in their re- vironments in the context of growing up. spective places (Illman 2006: 118; Relph 2008: 314–315). However, this is not always the real- 3.3 Young people’s im/mobile ity. For instance, the acceptance of encounters environments in the city may not be what it seems. Peter J. Hemming Researchers have recently started to investigate (2011: 68) distinguishes two responses to ev- young people’s local, bodily mobility and im- eryday encounters: ‘surface acting’ and ‘deep mobility. This increased attention stems from the acting’ (see also Valentine 2008: 329). Surface stronger focus on mobility in the social sciences acting is when ‘particular socially acceptable (e.g. Hannam et al. 2006; Sheller & Urry 2006), feelings are displayed through deception, even and belongs to a stream of research ‘embracing though they may not be genuinely felt’, where- and documenting the lives of mobile subjects and as ‘deep acting’ is when emotions are internal- objects who have been silenced or marginalized’ ly induced or suppressed in social interactions (Adey et al. 2014: 14). The interest in children’s with others, again to comply with the ‘rules of and young people’s mobility stems from the no- feeling’ (Hemming 2011: 68). Even if surface tion that children construct emplaced knowledge acting does not counter racism, I argue that as a of their everyday environments, built up through learned reaction that requires knowledge of the daily encounters with it and filled with personal rules and social norms related to daily encoun- and social meanings (see Christensen 2008: 71; ters it may promote feelings of insideness and Skelton 2009: 1438; see Kyttä 2003: 92). There- the handling of difficult experiences related to fore, the possibility of independent mobility struc- encounters with ‘them’. Thus, to experience in- tures one’s relationship with one’s everyday en- sideness, one also needs to learn to accept the vironment. However, children’s independent mo- presence of ‘them’ in ‘our’ place. bility is usually controlled and regulated (see e.g. Social encounters essentially construct sub- Barker 2003; Kyttä 2004; Karsten 2005; Malone jective place experiences. The definition of who 2007; Mikkelsen & Christensen 2009; Carver represents ‘us’ and who are ‘them’ depends on et al. 2013; Pacilli et al. 2013; Broberg 2015), the speaker’s position (see e.g. Rose 1997: 306– largely because of parental concerns (Karsten

39 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

2005; Malone 2007). In general, young people that are joined together by regular journeys but have more freedom to decide on their everyday also inheres in the experience of mobility en physical mobility, especially on the local level route’ (Binnie et al. 2007: 167). Thus, mobile (see e.g. Barker et al. 2009: 5). The freedom to people are not only randomly behaving mass- be mobile is an expression of power and a priv- es simply governed by transportation systems ilege (see Urry 2002: 262; Jirón 2010a; Adey et but also pedestrians, bicyclists, passengers us- al. 2014: 14), and therefore also a strong symbol ing public transport and drivers (see Toiskallio of maturity. Given that living and dwelling are 2002: 179; Cresswell 2006: 4) ‘who create dif- also assumed to be mobile, I examine how dai- ferent kinds of symbolic and practical operating ly mobilities and immobilities construct young spaces for themselves.’ (Toiskallio 2002: 179). people’s place experiences. I follow Gina Por- Thus, I propose that mobility is a ‘way of being ter’s and colleagues’ (2010a: 796) definition of in the world’, and embodied experience (Cress- everyday mobilities, including daily journeys to well 2006: 3–4). However, it is not only the school, work, shopping areas and cafés, to meet experience of being on the move that matters: friends, boy- and girlfriends, relatives and teach- I also argue that meaningful relationships with ers. Thus, the primary interest is in corporeal places are constructed by mobile people through mobility, referring to the bodily, physical mobil- lived mobilities. I therefore I agree with Cress- ity of young people (cf. Urry 2002: 2) and the well (2006: 3) who defines mobilities as mean- place experiences associated with it. In line with ingful movements, which in the context of this Porter and colleagues (2010a: 796), I focus on research formulate personal place experiences. local mobility rather than more extensive travel Geographers focusing on young people have to distant cities or abroad. recently shown an interest in local mobility in Everyday life in the city abounds with mo- daily life (see Porter et al. 2010a; 2010b: Ley- bility and urbanites on the move, and daily plac- shon 2011; Skelton 2013). It is pointed out that es are constructed in this context. Researchers ‘(y)oung urbanites are of an age where person- focusing on bodily mobility in everyday life al physical mobility to take advantage of all the have tended to make an analytical distinction resources, recreation and sociality offered by an between physical and measurable movements urban landscape is an important part of ‘growing and mobilities as embodied experiences. First, up’ and identity formation’ (Skelton 2013: 467). mobility could be described as an observable It has also been claimed that the way in which brute fact and empirical reality, as a motion that young people ‘engage with urban space is inher- can be tracked (Cresswell 2006: 3). These dai- ently mobile’ (van Blerk 2013: 557). There are ly travels rely upon a combination of practi- studies focusing on, among other things, the sig- cal skills concerning how to get about and the nificance of mobility and immobility in shaping geographical planning of the best routes (see young people’s education and livelihood trajec- Binnie et al. 2007: 166–167). Second, and of tories in rural areas (Porter et al. 2010a, 2010b); more relevance to this study, it could be said local, relative immobility (Harker 2009); local that mobility is practised, experienced and em- experiences of mobility and immobility (Skel- bodied action (Cresswell 2006: 3–4). Every- ton 2013); and mobility among young urban day movement itself produces ‘an embodied, dwellers (Jensen 2006). These authors argue embedded and often unreflexive sense of place that young people are limited in their mobility which is not merely confined to the locations by specific socio-spatial power relations, and at

40 the same time recognise the importance of the which will also structure their relationships with freedom to be mobile. daily environments. Closer scrutiny of mobility and socio-spatial There has been plenty of research on mobil- power relations among young people reveals ity restrictions among young people, even if the that the transformation of children’s and young barriers are somewhat different than among chil- people’s places in cities is one reason for the dren. It has been argued that young people are stricter mobility limitations. Members of this forced into immobility, given curfews and ex- population group spend more of their daily lives cluded from certain areas largely because adults in places that are controlled by adults, whether consider their mobility demands dangerous or they be at home, at school or in the kindergar- troublesome (van Blerk 2013: 558; see McAu- ten, which has not always been the case. During liffe 2013: 520). This has resulted in ‘mobility the 1950s and 1960s ‘play’ referred to playing employed as a subversive tactic, moving around outside and on the street, but the situation be- in order to escape the gaze of police or securi- gan to change when the number of cars in the ty’ (van Blerk 2013: 558), and also of teachers city increased and the streets became danger- and parents (see Gordon 2003: 72). On the other ous playgrounds (see Karsten 2005: 275–278). hand, the regulation of young people’s mobility is Added to this, the decrease in the birth rate, related to the urban and socio-physical contexts. parental and children’s concerns about social Barriers include dangers such as hazardous traf- safety, and middle-class values related to the fic, security problems and violence (see Porter et acquisition of cultural resources during child- al. 2010a: 799, 803, 2010b: 1110; Skelton 2013: hood have strengthened mobility control and 477–478). In addition, access to efficient and -af postponed children’s independence in this re- fordable public transport is not always available, spect (Karsten 2005: 287–288; Malone 2007). even if it would fill a crucial need (see Skelton Researchers use terms such as the ‘backseat gen- 2013: 469). Although safety on public transport eration’ and ‘indoor children’ (Karsten 2005: is not a major issue in the Helsinki metropolitan 288), and the ‘bubble-wrapping’ phenomenon area, cost may be. It has even been argued that (Malone 2007: 513–515) with reference to ur- high transport costs and distance to services are ban children whose lives are highly controlled mobility limitations that can lead to social ex- and who play mainly indoors or very close to clusion (see McAuliffe 2013: 520). It is claimed home (Kyttä 2002; Karsten 2005: 285–286). that public transport helps to combat feelings of In short, children’s environmental behaviours social exclusion in encouraging a sense of behave altered because of changed child-parent longing to the city and the community (Jones relations (see Malone 2007: 513–515), and ev- et al. 2013, see also Jones et al. 2012). Given eryday environments have also changed. I sug- the crucial need for mobility among young peo- gest that these changes have serious implications ple, car ownership has increased in places with for children related to the acquisition of skills a poor transport network, which inherently puts to travel alone, and their understanding of the car users and young people who cannot afford or everyday environment. What is of more rele- borrow a car in different positions. For instance, vance for this study, however, is their impact young people may become more dependent on on young people’s mobility and places. Those parental taxis in such contexts (see Skelton 2013: whose mobility is restricted as children may be- 469). Given that immobility does not necessarily come young adults with poor mobility skills, foster feelings of outsideness (e.g. if one is able

41 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 to negotiate such difficulties) (see Skelton 2013: displaying access to places related to car driv- 479–480), I propose that any limitations have a ing; it is about presenting oneself to the car-driv- major impact on one’s understanding and sense ing world (Collin-Lange 2013: 418). New places of daily places. Although young people’s experi- such as these may seem irrelevant to the con- enced frustrations related to immobility may give struction of mobility, but nevertheless they are rise to feelings of anger, exclusion, despair and places that ‘reflect one’s entry into adulthood or failure (Porter et al. 2010a: 796), at the same time at least a certain maturity.’ (Collin-Lange 2013: it has been argued that micro-mobility through 418). Thus, new forms of mobility foster feel- and in local places between home, school and the ings of maturity and agency in that they provide street tends to be under-represented in research decision-making opportunities concerning plac- (see Holt & Costello 2011: 301). Consequently, es to stop, routes to take and individuals to en- I claim that young people with limited options counter. I perceive a gap in the research on how for daily mobility may experience a lack of in- young people experience new mobility opportu- dependence (see e.g. Porter et al. 2010a: 796), nities and places related to them. My aim is thus and a lack of connection between their personal to narrow this gap. places and themselves. As suggested above, mobilities are con- Young people may experience mobility and structed in unique contexts. There is evidence its implications as exciting and thrilling (see e.g. that mobility among children and young peo- Porter et al. 2010a: 800–802). It could also be ple in the Finnish context differs somewhat perceived as temptation, ‘conceived as a route compared to many other locales. In general, to opportunity and freedom, – – [as] a means Finnish children have more licence in terms of of opening up interstitial spaces beyond surveil- mobility than their counterparts in many other lance and possibly outside conventional norms countries (Kyttä 2004: 194–196, but see also of behaviour (as perceived by parents and au- Kyttä et al. 2015: 7). One reason for this relates thority).’ (Porter et al. 2010a: 803). Mobility cre- to the practices in which children and parents ates places in which the common strictures and engage: parents teach their children to travel restrictions of childhood are abandoned (Symes to school independently, a process that makes 2007: 444). For instance, the journey to school and keeps them mobile (Kullman 2010: 834– or to places where children can practise and try 836). In practice, parents teach and show their out their identities as young people gives them children how to use public transport and urban the opportunity to enjoy autonomy beyond the space safely (Kullman 2010: 834–836). During watchful gaze of parents and teachers (Symes this process families create flexible spatial ar- 2007: 444; see Valentine 2000: 266). People in rangements, or transitional spaces, in which their late youth may be experienced passengers their children can experiment with their attach- engaged in mundane daily commuting, but ob- ment to urban environments (Kullman 2010: taining a driving licence (for a scooter or a car) 834–836). Hence, instead of being bound by and legally becoming an adult provide access regulations these young people may have long to new places. The mere licence to access these personal histories as mobile individuals, which new places is not enough, however, and these also influence their relationships and their dai- young adults need to indicate and confirm their ly places. Although the target of this study is agency and belonging in them (see Collin-Lange not to investigate young people’s independent 2013: 418). For instance, cruising is one way of mobility per se, it should be included as back-

42 ground information on young people’s place perspective, mobilities are not only embodied experiences and mobilities. routines, or mobile practices, ‘experienced as For the purposes of this study I understand the passing of familiar fixtures under the same mobility as a resource that enables young peo- and different conditions of travel, which pro- ple to face emerging adulthood and to live an in- duce a sequence of generally regular events and dependent social life (Thomson & Taylor 2005: phases within a particular (clock-based) time 337–338). Therefore, new mobility opportu- frame’ (Edensor 2011: 191): they are also prac- nities make the new and exciting activities of tices that strengthen one’s sense of maturity in adult life accessible. At the same time, experi- new places. Kim Kullman’s (2010) concept of ences of immobility do the opposite in terms of transitional space is intriguing here. He (2010: hindering the process of emerging adulthood. 834–836) uses the term to describe spaces chil- Furthermore, places become real and lived-in dren and parents and together create places in when (young) people roam and travel in them which the children can develop their mobility (see Buttimer 1976: 283; Seamon 1979: 56– skills and cope with increased latitude in ev- 57). In as far as growing up and enjoying more eryday urban environments. The transitional freedom influence young people’s mobility, it nature of these spaces is exemplified, for in- would be interesting to find out how this con- stance, in practising travelling alone (e.g. with text affects place experiences. Given that new the help of a mobile phone) (Kullman 2010: mobility to (new) places develops the sense of 836–839). Thus, I argue that young people’s maturity and agency, my aim is to study how new mobility possibilities make certain places daily im/mobilities construct experienced (dis) ‘transitional’. This also touches on the topic of connections between places and people. Could interest in my study: how do daily im/mobil- it be that daily movements experientially inter- ities influence young people’s construction of link young people’s place experiences as coher- place experiences, and their experienced con- ently composed entities of places? From this nections and disconnections between places?

43 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

4 The research participants self and my research in general, discussed and their local setting: the my personal place experiences and memories, Helsinki metropolitan area and showed pictures of significant places and as a research context people to demonstrate the topic that I intend- ed to study. I also introduced the range of potential methods. Because of time restrictions I could not design the whole methodological 4.1 The participants setting together with the young people. The The fieldwork was conducted in the Helsinki fact that I was doing the research alone also metropolitan area, during 2011 (10 months, limited my chances of extending the project. from March to December). The participants The methods used included go-along inter- were pupils aged from 15 to 20 years, recruited viewing, GPS data tracking, photographing from one of three upper-secondary schools lo- and independent written assignments (IA). cated on the outskirts of Helsinki: Leppävaara Using various methods seemed to be a (in the city of Espoo), Tikkurila (in the city workable and engaging approach to recruit- of Vantaa) and Itäkeskus (in the city of Hel- ing young people because they could find the sinki). As a researcher, I approached the po- most suitable method for them (see Trell 2013: tential participants through their schools. The 112–113). They were also encouraged to make pupils were protected by adults, or gatekeepers comments and criticise the research whenever (including school management and parents), they wanted to. They were informed that they whose approval of my intent to do research could leave the research project at any time with young people was paramount (Sime 2008: without any negative outcomes (see Skelton 67, see Holt 2004: 20–22). This was evident 2008; Ponto 2015). The participants were also to me too: it was hard to reach these young able to decide on their level of involvement people. First I contacted the school principals, and to influence the research setting (e.g. de- who showed signs of interest in the research cide whether to participate or not, whether to project20. Next I contacted over twenty teach- take photos or videos, and the time and effort ers (teaching geography and biology, but also put into the independent assignment, for ex- psychology and history): eight of them even- ample: see Skelton 2008; Ponto 2015). Ques- tually expressed their interest in the project tions related to anonymity were addressed, and invited me to their schools. Finally, I met and all the names appearing in the text are the young people. Before doing so I conduct- pseudonyms. ed a pilot interview with an adult volunteer to I co-operated with 47 mobile interview- test my research setting. I also received com- ees, of whom twelve wanted to participate in ments on the independent assignment from my the research alone, and the rest were accom- colleagues, together with some suggestions. modated in 14 groups (see Table 3). Thus, With a view to meeting potential participants, there were 26 mobile interviews. The group I began to visit the classes, mostly during ge- sessions included two or three participants ography lessons. I usually talked about my- and myself. The students in Tikkurila were most likely to choose the individual inter-

20 One city required a written research permit, and in view, whereas those in Leppävaara showed two schools the principals decided whether their school the highest preference for group interview- would participate in the project or not.

44 Table 3. The mobile informants: all the names are pseud- ing. The female participants were slightly in onyms. The colours indicate the divisions of the groups. the majority: 26 as opposed to 21 males. Only School Name Age Gender three group interviews included both female Itäkeskus Alex 16 M and male participants. Most of the informants Jan 16 M Victor 16 M were 17–year-olds (22 persons). In addition, Sauli 16 M 115 participants took part in the independent Niklas 18 M assignment, two of whom also participated Patrik 17 M in the mobile interview. Therefore, the total Atte 17 M number of returned IAs was 117 and the total Alexandra 15 F Eeva 16 F number of participants was 162. Iiris 16 F To obtain background information I asked Satu 17 F each of the mobile informants (47 persons) Tommi 18 M whether they were working or if they received Hanna 18 F financial support from their parents. Sixteen Anni 18 F were or had recently been working full- or Leppävaara Hannu 16 M Eetu 17 M part-time. Some had worked earlier in their Ossi 16 M lives or were seeking a (summer) job. Two of Jarkko 18 M them admitted that it was difficult to find the Karoliina 17 F energy to do homework after a work shift. The Olivia 17 F majority nevertheless considered it important Miro 17 M Enni 18 F to focus on studies during the school year rath- Tiina 17 F er than on working, meaning that their par- Helmi 17 F ents supported them financially. The partici- Julia 17 F pants could decide on what to spend their sav- Miia 17 F ings. The majority spent their money during Sofia 17 F Milla 18 F their leisure time (e.g. on snacks, coffee or Adele 17 F fast food), although one said she bought her Iida 17 F study books herself. They were all living with Kirsi 17 F their parents, from whom they therefore re- Jesse 17 M ceived indirect financial support. Most parents Tikkurila Arto 16 M Juuso 16 M also paid for study books, monthly transport Jami 17 M tickets and phone usage. Some participants Aroon 19 M were in receipt of a study grant, which is a Lilli 16 F government allowance for studying. None of Silja 16 F them said their parents were not supporting Ilona 17 F them at all financially. One reason why the Nelli 17 F Kati 17 F participants were still living at their parental Siru 18 F home, apart from their young age, was a lack Emma 19 F of money: it was not financially possible for Alina 20 F them to leave. However, most of them had Reino 17 M sufficient agency, and were allowed to stay Konsta 17 M Miko 17 M overnight at their friend’s or partner’s place,

45 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 for example. Thirty-two of the 47 participants the Helsinki metropolitan area based on the mentioned that their parent(s) or guardian(s) employment level, the number of jobs in re- were employed: a few forgot or were not will- tail services and the level of public trans- ing to say whether their parents were work- port (see Söderström et al. 2015: 23–24). ing or not. The schools in question are located close to Most of the participants had lived in the the centre of each suburb. All three locations Helsinki metropolitan area for a long time. are major logistical centres (at around 15 km Some of them were born outside the region from the centre of Helsinki), also providing or had lived elsewhere in Finland or abroad commercial and social services for the citi- for a while (e.g. as exchange students). Ma- zens living there. ny mentioned grandparents or other relatives From a young person’s perspective, all who lived elsewhere in Finland or abroad. the locations have extensive sports facilities Thus, the participants’ environmental expe- including swimming halls, indoor and out- riences were not restricted to the Helsinki door sports grounds, gyms and possibilities metropolitan area. Most of them had Finn- for skiing and skating. There are also vari- ish-born parents, and seven had a European ous cultural venues such as cinemas, cultural (other than Finnish), Latin American, African centres, concert halls and libraries, and youth or Asian heritage. Four said they had moved centres that are only for those under 18 years to Finland as children, and three told me that of age. The sub-centres are well connect- one or both parents were from a country other ed in terms of public transport: it takes ap- than Finland. All of them were fluent Finnish proximately 15–20 minutes to travel to the speakers and the interviews were conduct- centre of Helsinki from each of them. They ed in Finnish. are also near natural environments, includ- Given the aim of this study to enhance ing forests and parks. understanding of subjective experiences, it is worth noting that each participant is a unique Leppävaara (Espoo) being with a distinct character and a specific The participants in Espoo were pupils at Lep- experiential background. Consequently, their pävaara upper-secondary school in the north- memories and expectations of certain envi- ern part of the district. Along with the gener- ronments and events differ. It is not relevant al study programme the school also offers a to compare experiences in this context given sports programme for which pupils can ap- that similar experiences have different mean- ply. It has approximately 350 pupils (Lep- ings for different individuals. Therefore, I shed pävaaran lukio 2016). From the perspective light on the diversity of the participants’ place of urban diversity and urban planning, Lep- experiences. pävaara has many positive elements: a range of services, plenty of work places, access to 4.2 The research site green areas and good visibility from housing to the streets that enhances feelings of se- 4.2.1 The suburbs and the schools curity (Söderström 2012: 67–69, see Figure 1). The area is densely built and there is a The suburbs in which the participating schools mix of public services and private housing. are located are recognised as sub-centres in However, the services are criticised for be-

46 Figure 1. An image of Leppävaara, depicting the division of private and public buildings, and roads and railways: the scale is referential. ing scattered, and the southern and northern ticipants arriving by public transport in the parts of Leppävaara appear to be unconnect- south need to take a bus or walk. ed, largely because of the road and railway Commercial and public services are rel- that divide the area (Söderström 2012: 69). atively extensive. The first supermarket in Young people, many of whom are pedestri- the Helsinki metropolitan area, Maxi-market, ans or cyclists, consider the distances be- was opened in Leppävaara in 1971 (Han- tween these two parts too long. The school konen 1994: 266). The Sello shopping centre is in the north of Leppävaara, therefore par- opened in 2003 (see Figure 2). It is located

47 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Figure 2. The Sello shopping centre in Leppävaara (Pho- Figure 3. The Galleria shopping centre in Leppävaara to by: Antti Lukkarila) (Photo by: Heli Ponto)

next to a major road intersection and is con- so learned from the teachers that the pupils nected to train and bus networks, making it represent many different nationalities. Itäke- accessible to young people. Along with the skus has some problems with vividness and shopping facilities it houses many commu- environmental quality, including poor traf- nal and commercial services (e.g. library, re- fic flow, car- and parking-dominated envi- cycling centre, post office, cinema, bowling ronments and strong functional separation hall and music hall). Given the range of ser- between services and housing: nevertheless, vices, the shopping centre is popular among it offers many services (Söderström 2012: young people and other residents. The par- 88–89, see also Figure 4). The metro line ticipants liked to go there, and for many it divides the area, especially from the pedes- was ‘the only interesting place’ in the area. trian’s perspective. There was a lot of con- An older and smaller shopping centre (see struction going on in several sites during the Figure 3) nearby has been overshadowed by fieldwork period, which made walking dif- the Sello complex. ficult. Itäkeskus school is located near the metro station, the Itis shopping centre and Itäkeskus (Helsinki) the Puhos shopping centre. The area around The participants from Itäkeskus in Helsin- the school is relatively sparsely built, large- ki were pupils at Itäkeskus upper-second- ly because it is planned for sports facilities ary school21. The school offers two study (e.g. sports fields and halls). The participants programmes: a general and a language pro- did not have a specific place to go to, even if gramme. It has approximately 580 pupils the Itis shopping centre was popular. (Helsingin kielilukio 2016), and focuses on Itäkeskus shopping centre (Itis) was languages, arts and international and cultural opened in 1984 (see Figure 5), and was the education (Helsingin kielilukio 2016). I al- first ‘modern’ shopping centre in the Helsin- ki metropolitan area. It is connected by met- 21 The official name of the school was changed to “Hel- ro and a bus network, and is a daily place for singin kielilukio” in 2015.

48 49 Figure 4. An image of Itäkeskus indicating the locations of public and commercial buildings and the residential areas: the scale is referential. DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Figure 5. The entrance of the Itis shopping centre in Figure 6. The Puhos shopping centre in Itäkeskus (Pho- Itäkeskus (Photo by: Heli Ponto) to by: Heli Ponto)

(young) people using public transport. As in the north of the school. The young people did Leppävaara, there is an older shopping cen- not mention a specific location to which they tre, Puhos, nearby (see Figure 6). wanted to travel, although the railway stations in Tikkurila and Hiekkaharju were common Tikkurila (Vantaa) stopping-off points. Tikkurila upper-secondary school has 1,160 pupils (Tikkurilan lukio 2016), and is one of 4.2.2 Research areas as contexts the biggest upper-secondary schools in Finland. The aim of the study is to shed light on the di- It offers five study programmes in addition to versity of young people’s place experiences rath- the general programme: communications, cine- er than to make comparisons between the three ma, music, sports and mathematics (Tikkurilan suburbs in question. I became interested in these lukio 2016). Tikkurila is the biggest sub-centre suburbs when I was one of the assistant teachers in Vantaa and has been a target of urban devel- on a course for Master’s students investigating opment. It has a new railway station and shop- safety issues in Tikkurila, Itäkeskus and Lep- ping centre. During the field work the centre pävaara (for further information, see Keränen was spread out and divided by the railway (see et al. 2013). We compared the socio-economic Figure 7). There were many construction sites characteristics of these suburbs both qualitative- because of various large renovation projects. ly and quantitatively. The course gave me the There is a small shopping centre, Tikkuri, next chance to test go-along interviewing as a meth- to a railway and bus station (Figure 8). Tik- od before beginning my own field work. The kuraitti street is another busy commercial area interviews were successful, which encouraged with a supermarket and other shopping facili- me to apply the technique in my research. I was ties, pubs and restaurants (Figure 9). From the also thinking of making similar comparisons be- perspective of pedestrians, the school is located tween the research areas in my own study, but I relatively far away from the centre of Tikkuri- soon realised that comparing the suburbs and the la. The surrounding area is relatively sparsely participants’ experiences was not relevant. First, built, except for the small residential area to the interviews conducted during the study course

50 Figure 7. An image of Tikkurila showing the division between residential buildings, and public and commercial buildings: the scale is referential. 51 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Figure 8. The Tikkuri shopping centre (Photo by: Ant- Figure 9. Tikkuraitti pedestrian street in Tikkurila (Pho- ti Lukkarila) to by: Heli Ponto) were with individuals who were living in the re- ample. Their study investigating rural chil- search areas, who were also asked to discuss the dren’s perspectives and their leisure spaces research locations of interest. It turned out that the was based on the assumption that growing up participants in my research were not necessarily is a diverse and varied experience, compris- living in the suburb in which their school was ing multiple realities of difference and diver- located. This may have been why the go-along sity (Tucker & Matthews 2001: 162). Thus, interviewing routes were spread out and some- rather than attempting to make generalisations times very long, which was against my (naïve) about rural children it was considered more presupposition that the participants would have relevant to identify some commonalities in the remained in a relatively small area. Second, I participants’ recreational experiences (Tucker did not want to ask the young people to discuss & Matthews 2001: 162). Similarly, Sofia Cele specific environments, and preferred to impose (2006: 63) decided not to compare participants as few limitations as possible. This was in accor- living in two different countries (Sweden and dance with my aim to understand the subjective the United Kingdom), and rather concentrated characteristics of place experiences, and because I on how children communicated their place ex- wanted to increase the young people’s interest in periences in different ways. Rather than mak- the research project. Third, I felt that comparing ing a comparative study she used the two lo- experiences or certain locations would not serve cations as ‘ways of mirroring how different the needs of my research given the focus on hu- phenomena relating to the physical, social and manistic geography, in which place is seen as an cultural structures of place will occur and in- individual, subjective experience rather than a fluence methodology and children’s everyday particular physical location (e.g. Tuan 1979; Tani life in different contexts’: the two different -re 1995: 19; Karjalainen 2003: 87–88). search locations provided a more diverse ac- I drew on earlier research in support of my count of children’s communicating with place decision not to make comparisons between the (Cele 2006: 63). Similarly, it is not my inten- research areas and participants. Faith Tucker tion to make generalisations about all urban and Hugh Matthews’ (2001) work is one ex- young people. My aim is rather to enhance

52 understanding of the diversity of place expe- ferentiation is still moderate compared to many riences, and to identify some commonalities other countries, by national standards it is distin- among them22. guishable (see e.g. Vaattovaara 1998; Kortteinen & Vaattovaara 1999; Vilkama 2011: 174–175, 4.3 The Helsinki metropolitan area: 194; Bernelius 2013) – and has even been de- social and structural characteristics scribed as alarming (Kortteinen & Vaattovaara The Helsinki region has about 1.1 million inhab- 2015: 569). Socio-economic differences between itants (Helsinki Region Statistics 2016). The ar- neighbourhoods and spatial patterns of segrega- ea comprises the capital Helsinki and three other tion are quite well-established (Vilkama et al. municipalities: Vantaa, Espoo and Kauniainen. 2014: 71). Thus, young people in the Helsinki Over 136,000 young people (15–29-year-olds) metropolitan area are more likely to experience were living in Helsinki in 2014, of whom almost this development than those living elsewhere in 28,000 were between 15 and 19 years of age Finland, hence these social phenomena are un- (Helsinki Region Statistics 2014). The popula- doubtedly reflected in their construction of sub- tion in Helsinki is characterised by a large pro- jective and shared place experiences. portion of young adults (20–39-year-olds), com- The differentiation started to escalate follow- pared with the rest of Finland (Helsinki Region ing the deep recession of the 1990s, when the first Statistics 2014). On the other hand, the numbers signs were observed in the Helsinki metropoli- of children and young people (0–15-year-olds) is tan area (Vaattovaara 1998; Kortteinen & Vaat- relationally higher in Espoo (around 55,000) and tovaara 1999). There seemed to be poverty pock- Vantaa (around 40,600) (Helsinki Region Statis- ets, where educational and income levels were tics 2014). In total, 11.8 per cent of inhabitants lower, and the unemployment rate higher than speak a language other than Finnish or Swed- in other areas (Vaattovaara 1998). In the light of ish, which are the official languages in Finland, these developments, and given that the partici- as their first language (Helsinki Region Statis- pants of this research were born at the end of the tics 2014). At present, Helsinki is the cultural, 1990s, these young people have grown up in a economic and governmental centre of Finland country striving against economic recession, and with over 600,000 inhabitants (Helsinki Region have lived in a city with spatially underprivileged Statistics 2014). pockets. Ethnic segregation has also become a Researchers have noted an emerging so- more distinguishable phenomenon. From the ear- cio-economic and ethnic differentiation in the ly 2000s onwards, patterns of ethnic residential Helsinki metropolitan area. It is worth pointing segregation have become established, and dif- out that this type of differentiation also touches ferences between neighbourhoods have become young people’s daily living, even if the focus of more distinguishable (Vilkama 2011: 194). On this study is not on segregation. Although the dif- a more general level, the Helsinki metropolitan area is divided into two main regions: certain 22 However, I do not deny the importance of social and eastern and north-eastern neighbourhoods have physical contexts for subjective experiences. Location and the characteristics of living environments clearly experienced a rise in immigration percentages, matter in individuals’ everyday lives (see e.g. Korttein- whereas the figures in southern, northern and en & Vaattovaara 1999, 2015; Vilkama 2011; Bernelius 2013). Similarly, socio-economic background and gen- north-western neighbourhoods have remained der have a strong influence on an individual’s life. It is also true that young people experience their daily lives relatively low (Vilkama 2011: 194). Moreover, from the perspective of a young person. Hence, youth there are clear signs of selective migration among is the most important social ‘marker’ of the research.

53 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 native and immigrant populations that have re- were no great differences in part-time working sulted in a noticeable increase in ethnic resi- among young people in Espoo and Vantaa (Hel- dential segregation (Vilkama 2011: 194–195). sinki Region Statistics 2015a). It could be concluded from these findings that the In terms of daily mobilities and flows of peo- participants’ living environment changed from a ple in the Helsinki metropolitan area, it is clear socio-economically homogeneous to a relative- that the region has become polycentric (Laakso et ly heterogeneous city during their childhood (or al. 2005; Vasanen 2012). Accordingly, residents just before). Given the nature of the segregation also have (or should have) access to daily ser- process and despite their favourable social posi- vices outside the city centre. The idea of a poly- tion (as members of the so-called middle class), centric city is realised in the flows of people (e.g. the participants living in the Helsinki metropoli- daily commuting and other trips) and transpor- tan area could not fully avoid the implications of tation systems (see Vasanen 2012: 3627–3628). differentiation. It is not limited to certain neigh- However, access to public transport is easier in bourhoods, for example, but also plays a role in the centre of Helsinki than in the suburbs, and the segregation of schools in Helsinki (Bernelius along railway lines than along the ring roads in 2013). The implication is that young people are the Helsinki metropolitan area (see Salonen & plugged into segregation development in many Toivonen 2013). There have recently been calls ways, even if their social position is not under- to make public transport more efficient, attrac- privileged. tive and flexible (Heikkilä 2014). Youth unemployment is not evenly distribut- A fluent and affordable public-transport net- ed in the Helsinki metropolitan area, either. For work is a prerequisite for young people embark- instance, at the end of 2013 the unemployment ing on urban experiences (Skelton 2013: 469). rate (20–29-year-olds, 12.5%) was higher in the Public-transport systems in the Helsinki metro- eastern part of the city of Helsinki and clearly politan area are subsidised by the government lower in the southern part (4.1%) (Helsinki Re- to facilitate young people’s travelling between gion Statistics 2015b)23. Part-time working was home and school. Full-time students under the relatively common (22% in 2013) among young age of 30 are eligible for a student discount, people taking upper-secondary education in Hel- which is half of the total price. This is a major sinki (Helsinki Region Statistics 2015a). There benefit because the monthly ticket can also be used for leisure travel. However, there has been 23 In general, however, youth unemployment (15–24-year- olds) is not as bleak as accounts in the media would little research on young people’s mobility with- suggest: only half of young people in Finland belong in the Helsinki metropolitan area, and especially to the labour force, and the other half are students (Sta- tistics Finland 2014). The rate was 20.1% in 2011, and on their experiences regarding public transport. 20.4% in 2014 (Helsinki Region Statistics 2015b).

54 5 Methodology, methods encourage the participants to do so (Gallagher and ethical questions 2008: 138). On the other hand, the researcher is also learning together with the participants (Pyyry 2012: 49). The decision to adopt a par- 5.1 Participatory research as ticipatory approach in research is not only an a methodological approach academic choice, given that the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) ‘What we believe is needed in the field of children’s participation is to entice (1989) defines children’s right to participate in practitioners, children and researchers to be actions around them (Skelton 2007: 167). Al- more playful and creative in the relationships they form, to acknowledge that children’s though the discourse of participation spreads culture exists independently of adults, and to further than the CRC, it is embedded within it think of new ways to interact with children where we are opening up rather than (Skelton 2007: 167), and many researchers have closing down dialogue, and so building an used it as a guideline in conducting participato- environment that includes all the possibilities of children’s participation, even those we ry research. My aim is to support participatory haven’t thought of.’ research that is conducted with young people, (Malone & Hartung 2010: 36) not for or about them (see e.g. Fox 2013: 986). Researchers engaged in qualitative research However, the participatory approach also has tend to construct and hold on to power and attracted strong criticism. For instance, it may knowledge, which has encouraged academics be difficult to do in practice (see Pyyry 2012): to develop methods promoting participants’ per- I occasionally found it easier to write about spectives (Fox 2013: 986). Particularly when participatory research than to do it. This has children and young people are involved it is been noted by other researchers as interest in considered important to give the research par- participatory methods has increased. ticipants the opportunity to express their views My interest was sparked at the beginning of as part of the process (e.g. Fox 2013: 986–987, the research project when I encountered claims Pyyry 2012: 49), implying the need to use par- that research with young people required spe- ticipatory methods. This is what I have done in cial methodology (see e.g. Morrow 2008: 53). the form of participatory action research, which Adult-centred methods such as questionnaire is often referred to as a participatory method or surveys and participant observation (see Punch the participatory approach. Michael Gallagher 2002b: 330; Morrow 2008: 53) may fail to in- (2008: 138) defines participatory methodology corporate important elements of children’s ex- as a ‘diverse set of techniques bound together periences and their complex realities, as well as by a common concern for actively involving preventing them from speaking with their own research subjects in the construction of data’. voices (see Morrow 2008: 53). The need for spe- The idea is to practise exchange between the cial methods in research with children and young researcher’s expert and the participants’ local people arose from the realisation that, in gener- knowledge, stressing that participants should al, they have less agency than adults. To bal- have sufficient understanding of the project and ance the power relations, therefore, they should a sense of ownership of the research (Wright & be treated differently (see Thomson 2007: 211). Nelson 1995: 57–59). Some see the researcher’s On the other hand, children and adults seem to role as more of a facilitator whose responsibil- learn differently, and therefore the research re- ity is not to produce knowledge but rather to quires different methods (Thomson 2007: 211).

55 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

However, these assumptions started to seem the researcher to negotiate oppressive discourses increasingly naïve when I was planning the (e.g. Komulainen 2007; Gallacher & Gallagher research project and the field work. Other re- 2008; Warming 2011; Pyyry 2012; Eldén 2013), searchers have also questioned the claim that nor will it ensure that the researcher will listen research with children and young people should to the participant(s) unconditionally and without apply different methods (Punch 2002b). As Sa- censoring them (Thomson 2007: 215). Further- mantha Punch (2002b: 338) suggests, research more, even if it helps participants to compose with children is only potentially different from meaningful narratives of their personal experi- research with adults. The reason for the dif- ences, it does not necessarily make them feel ference relates more to adult perceptions of autonomous or independent (Eldén 2013: 77). children (e.g. the adult researcher cannot nec- I pondered on ethical issues during the pro- essarily regard children as competent actors) cess. Difficult questions such as how voluntary and children’s marginalised role in adult so- the participation was given that the research was ciety (e.g. a child may find it difficult to- re conducted through schools, became part of the spond when an adult considers them both to be project (see also Ponto 2015 for further discus- equal), than to any inherent distinction between sion on ethics during this research project). In- them (Punch 2002b: 388). I also thought that deed, there is a risk that participatory method- participatory methodology might encourage ology mainly helps the researcher to gather ma- the participants to describe their experiences terial (see Eldén 2013: 76–77) rather than being more widely than traditional (i.e. not designed emancipatory for the participants. Partly because for research with young people) methods al- of this, giving children a voice may sometimes low. Thus, applying both novel and tradition- yield ‘untruthful data’ that mixes fantasy and real methods seemed to be a suitable approach ality (von Benzon 2015: 334). Although I do not when trying find a balance with meeting ethi- believe that untruthful research material filled cal requirements (see Punch 2002b: 337–338). with fantasies was a problem in this case, I did In further support of this decision I thought wonder once or twice whether the participants that the mixed-methods approach would fa- were telling white lies (see Ponto 2015: 10–11). cilitate the sketching of a more multi-layered Although it may be unethical to dismiss certain and complex picture of the participants’ dai- reflections as false (von Benzon 2015: 334), an- ly lives (e.g. Morrow 2011; Eldén 2013: 67), alysing this kind of research material with these while at the same time allowing them to ex- thoughts in mind was confusing, especially giv- press themselves in the way that suited them en the focus in phenomenological research on best (e.g. Punch 2002b: 324–325; Langevang the participants’ experiences as they appear to 2007: 279; Trell 2013: 5–6). them. While many researchers seem to agree that Despite the increasingly common participa- children have a right to participate in studies, tion of children and young people in policy dis- academics have found it difficult to definehow courses, it still tends to be a token gesture rather to conduct research in the right way (see Rob- than genuine practice in research, in which reality son et al. 2009). From the phenomenological and rhetoric rarely meet (Mayo 2001: 279; Pain perspective, therefore, I perceived the research & Francis 2003: 47–48; Skelton 2007: 175; Fox material as reflections of young people’s reali- 2013: 966; Tuukkanen et al. 2013). The partici- ties, and did not consider the ‘white lies’ issue patory approach in itself will not necessarily help a massive problem.

56 Table 4. The methods used in the research and the respective aims

Material Aims to… Gathered… Reveal young people’s place ex- Go-along interviews (n=26) periences in-depth During the interviews Contextualise young people’s GPS tracking (n=26) daily environments During the interviews Deepen information about place Photographs (n=259) experiences During the interviews Contextualise young people’s Independent assignments (IAs) environments and mobility prac- Independently by participants (n=117) tices (researcher not present)

A lot of attention has been paid to participa- ing the participants to express themselves in their tory research in general, but research with young own voices in the way that suited them best (see people tends to be more rarely discussed than e.g. Alderson & Morrow 2011: 14; Trell 2013: children’s participation (cf. Trell 2013). Albeit 5–6). However, the reality was more complex. participatory research with children potentially It was difficult, for instance, to combine qualita- requires special methods (see Punch 2002b), I re- tive and quantitative methods consistently when alised that research with an older group of young presenting the results of the project (see Kelle people may not necessarily be very different from 2006: 294). research with adults. For this reason, I did not When I analysed the research material I made use methods that were designed for children or sure I took account of the fact that humanistic ge- young people per se. Instead, I chose methods ography draws on phenomenology, and focuses that were designed to help participants to express on experiences as they appear to the experiencer their voices and viewpoints related to personal (Moran 2000: 5–6). GPS tracking (see Appendi- place experiences in ways that suited them best, ces 1, 2 & 3) and the independent assignments regardless of whether they were children, young (see Appendix 4) provided the necessary con- people or adults. Consequently, I used methodol- textualisation of the young people’s daily envi- ogy that is sensitive to experiential elements and ronments, but the most in-depth expression of respects the research participants’ voices instead place experiences came during the go-along in- of treating them as research objects. terviews. Discussing lived-in places on the move in familiar environments provided insights into 5.2 Methods and research materials young people’s experiences in ways that oth- The research material for this study compris- er methods could not. This notion is linked to es four sets of data: go-along interviews, GPS the epistemological nature of research on expe- tracking, written independent assignments (IA) riences, because to understand their inner world and photographs. Table 4 lists the methods used the participants had to express their experiences and summarises the aims in each case. The somehow. In this sense, the research is depen- multi-method approach was beneficial in that it dent on verbal expression24. Verbal discussions gave glimpses into the different facets of young on the move between me and the participants in people’s lives (see e.g. Trell & van Hoven 2010:

101–102). It also facilitated the balancing of pow- 24 Photographing and IAs were, of course, more suitable er between researcher and participant(s) in allow- methods for participants who were not interested in verbalising their thoughts in discussions.

57 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 their environments gave more intensive insights (Carpiano 2009; Dennis Jr. et al. 2009), noting into the participants’ place experiences than oth- their potential to involve technology in qualita- er applied methods. tive studies (Evans & Jones 2011; Bergeron et Nevertheless, the multi-method approach al. 2014). The more involved I became in mo- was justifiable. First, the GPS tracking, photo- bility theory, the more interested I was in study- graphs and IAs revealed different facets of young ing the interplay of place experiences, mobility people’s places (e.g. recognised their common and daily life. Researchers have begun to apply daily places), and the integration of research movement-inspired methods in childhood and methods highlighted the diversity of the research youth research, including mobile narratives that phenomenon (see Seawright 2016: 1–12). Sec- follow a participant from home to school (Porter ond, GPS tracking and the IAs enhanced un- et al. 2010a, 2010b), participatory photomapping derstanding of the research context, specifical- (Dennis Jr. et al. 2009) and photographing to- ly shedding light on urban design, mobility op- gether with children (Kullman 2010, 2012) and portunities and the physical elements of young young people (Pyyry 2012) on the move. My people’s daily environments. These dimensions goal in following this branch of research was to would have remained obscure had multiple enhance understanding of how young people’s methods not been employed. places become lived and experienced as they go on their daily journeys. 5.2.2 Go-along interviews There were various reasons behind the de- Go-along interviewing (or mobile interviewing) is cision to conduct interviews on the move. First, a data-gathering technique whereby the research- mobile interviewing, compared to sedentary in- er moves alongside the participant (Kusenbach terviews, allows a research project to be more 2003: 463; 2012: 252). It has been used as a ‘place-sensitive’ and dynamic (Kusenbach 2012: method that combines the strengths of ethnog- 254). Second, the methods tend to be epistemo- raphy and interviewing (Kusenbach 2003: 458). logically related to the work of phenomenolog- I became interested in the method because one ically minded academics (e.g. Tuan and Relph) of my aims was to understand the mobile con- and others who stress the importance of the daily text of young people’s place experiences. In- environment in the study of human experiences terest in mobile-interviewing methods and go- and social life (Kusenbach 2003, 2012). Third, along interviews has increased in recent years and possibly the most important, I considered (e.g. Kusenbach 2003, 2012; Anderson 2004; mobile interviewing an adequate way of under- Carpiano 2009; Ross et al. 2009; Porter et al. standing how place experiences and mobilities 2010a, 2010b; Evans & Jones 2011; Garcia et are intertwined and constructed in lived life. al. 2012; Bergeron et al. 2014). Mobile methods I conducted 26 go-along interviews with provide glimpses into subjective experiences and 47 young people, starting from one of three lo- the ways in which individuals navigate in dif- cations: Itäkeskus (eight interviews), Tikkurila ferent environments and elucidate symbolic and (eleven interviews) and Leppävaara (seven interpersonal landscapes (see Kusenbach 2003: 466). views). The idea was that the participant(s) and I These methods are perceived as tools that shed would (corporeally) travel through their daily en- light on the issues of identity, interaction and vironments, intentionally leaving the school en- power (Kusenbach 2012: 252). Researchers have vironment. The go-along interviews were natural also applied mobile methods in health research (Kusenbach 2003: 463) in that the participants

58 decided on the routes. The method applied here gave me glimpses into their personal place ex- was a combination of open and semi-structured periences (see Kusenbach 2003: 466; 2012), and interviewing. I started with open interviewing information about how these places were created (Eskola & Vastamäki 2010: 28–29), my aim be- through mutual practices and shared ‘doings’ (see ing to encourage free-flowing conversation and Bunnell et al. 2012: 499). Because of its infor- a relaxed and informal atmosphere (see Kusen- mal nature, go-along interviewing gives young bach 2003: 470–471). I occasionally achieved people agency, thereby balancing the power re- this aim. For instance, the participants sometimes lations between the researcher and the partici- interviewed me and asked personal questions (cf. pants. It also sometimes seemed easier to talk Christensen 2004: 171–173). I tried to be a lis- while walking, in that walking allows for natu- tener rather than a commentator, allowing the ral breaks and pauses in the flow of the speech. participants to decide on the topics for discus- The participants did not need to maintain direct sion. Many of them discussed very similar topics eye-contact with me while they were speaking, even if I had not mentioned them (e.g. their daily for instance (see also Pyyry 2015b). However, life, school, friends and transportation). Howev- it was occasionally difficult for them to define er, after a few interviews I realised that it was where the travelled route ended because the in- sometimes difficult to encourage free-flowing terviewing was often very informal (see Ponto discussion related to my research topic without 2015: 9–11). I was also aware that discussing and asking specific questions, so I started to ask such walking with an unknown researcher may have questions. Thus, the interviewing started to be- been stressful for some participants (see Roos & come semi-structured, meaning that the form of Rutanen 2014: 36), leading to silent moments. the questions is decided but the order may vary In such cases I respected the silence and waited (Eskola & Vastamäki 2010: 28–29). for a better moment to continue the discussion Some pupils showed interest in the research (Ponto 2013, 2015: 12–14). The length of the project when I talked about the mobile-interview interviews varied from 10 minutes to 1.5 hours. method at their school. This is a typical way of I subjected the interview material to inter- recruiting participants. It was possible to partic- pretative phenomenological analysis (IPA), the ipate alone or as part of a group (on the differ- aim being to find out how people make sense ences between group and individual interviews, of their life experiences (Smith & Osborn 2008: see Punch 2002a: 47–49). However, to ensure 53). With its roots in health psychology, IPA is that I could give adequate attention to the mobile a recently developed approach to qualitative in- interviews I limited the number of participants in quiry and has also been taken up by social sci- each one to three people: other researchers have entists (Liimakka 2013: 47–48). It is epistemo- taken similar steps (Cele 2006: 77). The mobile logically based in terms of its theoretical frame- interviews were carried out during lessons (with work, thereby guiding the researcher in what to the teacher’s consent) and after the school day, say about the data and how to theorise meanings in the participants’ leisure time. In retrospect, I (Braun & Clarke 2006: 80). It also draws from concluded that go-along interviewing functioned phenomenology and hermeneutics, the aim being very well in my study of young people’s place to make sense of a specific phenomenon from experiences. It seemed to be easier for the inter- the perspective of a specific group with a view viewees to discuss certain places when we were to providing a detailed description of individu- in their own environments (see Ponto 2015). This al experiences (Liimakka 2013: 47–48). Indeed,

59 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 it would have been difficult to find an analyti- deductively, building smaller categories from the cal method that would have been better suited data (see Smith & Osborn 2008: 67). In practice, to humanistic geography, especially since IPA I started by coding whole sentences, which I re- is ‘phenomenological in that it seeks an insider duced to more abstract codes26. I was looking perspective on the lived experiences of individu- for differences and similarities, echoes, amplifi- als, and interpretative in that it acknowledges the cations and contradictions in what the participant researcher’s personal beliefs and standpoint and was saying (see Fade 2004: 648–650; Smith & embraces the view that understanding requires Osborn 2008: 67). As I moved the analysis to a interpretation’ (Fade 2004: 648). In other words, higher level of abstraction (see Smith & Osborn IPA research explores lived experience through 2008: 68) I could build an understanding of the meanings that are impressed upon it (Liimakka bigger picture by combining the existing themes. 2013: 47). However, the hermeneutic emphasis After several phases of abstraction I decided on also means that it is the researcher who gives the following: places of independence, places of interpretations of the participants’ interpretations boredom, places of the past, unwanted encoun- of their experiences (Liimakka 2013: 47), hence ters causing outsideness, wanted encounters as the researcher’s values, experiences and position sources of insideness, mobility creating connec- matter. In this sense, the IPA method is engaged tions between places, and immobility creating in ‘double hermeneutics’ in that the ‘researcher disconnections between places. is trying to make sense of the participant trying to make sense of what is happening to them’ 5.2.3 GPS tracking (Smith et al. 2009: 3)25. Moreover, the researcher I tracked the mobile interviews with a global can only access the experiences the participant positioning system (GPS) device. As Lisa Parks decides to divulge (Smith et al. 2009: 3). Thus, (2001: 212) states, mapping can be used as a the researcher’s sense-making is second in that procedure for ‘plotting the personal’, thus my he or she can only access the participants’ ex- aim in gathering GPS data was to test the de- perience through their own accounts (Smith et vice in qualitative research and to obtain new al. 2009: 3). insights into young people’s everyday lives and In the analysis phase, ‘meaning is central, and daily routes. I was also encouraged by the fact the aim is to try to understand the content and that some geographers focusing on children and complexity of those meanings rather than mea- young people have used GPS tracking in their sure their frequency’ (Smith & Osborn 2008: 66). studies (e.g. Mikkelsen & Christensen 2009; Er- Meanings are not transparently available but must gler 2012). However, there were some problems be obtained through engagement with the text and I could not avoid. For instance, the final prod- the process of interpretation (Smith & Osborn uct of GPS tracking is usually a map, the aim of 2008: 66). This involves the researcher engaging which is to give a believable representation of in an ‘interpretative relationship with the tran- the reality and to offer a solution to the research script’ (Smith & Osborn 2008: 66). IPA facilitates problem (Dodge 2014: 517). Mappings are nev- understanding of in-depth experiences, which can ertheless always simplifications of the reality as be recognised after careful analysis (see Smith & the researcher abstracts information and operates Osborn 2008). I classified the research material 26 An example of the coding: ’I like this place and I come here every day with my friends’ -> ’likes the place, so- 25 This has been a challenge in humanistic geography, too cial daily place with friends’ -> wanted encounters as a (see Johnston 1980: 406). source of insideness’.

60 with technical limitations and socially determined All the go-along interviews were GPS- values (e.g. classification and selection) (Dodge tracked and realised as visualisations from each 2014: 517). This was also the case in this study of the locations by means of the ArcScene 3D – it is difficult to locate experiences. software program27. The aim was to depict the Among the advantages of the method, the routes travelled, the locations and the environ- GPS device was easy to use and the data-gath- ments visited during the interviews, in other ering process was effortless. The device also kept words the contexts of the young people’s urban a record of the travelled routes, while I focused living, rather than to describe their experiences on the discussions taking place during the walks directly. The 2D map illustrations of the routes (see Jones et al. 2008). Some participants were did not seem to do justice to the research envi- interested in the device and its use, and many ronments (e.g. the heights of the buildings were seemed to be familiar with it, which added to not recognisable). To remedy this, the areas are their interest in the research. However, problems illustrated from a ‘sloping’ perspective instead of arose when I tried to fit the research material into as a bird’s-eye-view map, which gives a three-di- the theoretical framework. The major difficulty mensional picture of the routes. The heights of was to establish how the GPS data could enhance the buildings were extruded from the base level understanding of place experiences. The GPS de- to enhance the 3D effect. They are not to scale, vice poorly captures the humanistic geographer’s but they were given a constant value to maxi- perspective on place as a centre of meaning (Tuan mise the readability of the images. 1975: 152) rather than a location. Nor does the tracking convey feelings about place or the peo- 5.2.4 Photographs ple in it, and although it was powerful in terms Photographs have long been used for research of providing visualisations of the young people’s in the social sciences (Pink 2007). Researchers movements, it lacked the capacity to respond to focusing on childhood and youth have recently ‘why’ questions. To understand these issues the started to use participatory or collaboratory pho- researcher must somehow interact with the par- tographing as a method for gathering information ticipants. On the ethical level, there may be an and engaging participants (e.g. Morrow 2001; uncomfortable surveillance effect on the partic- Barker & Weller 2003; Cele 2006; Dennis Jr. et ipants as the researcher tracks their movements, al. 2009; Tani 2011; Kullman 2012; Trell 2013). which raises the question of power relations be- The use of visual methods in research with chil- tween participant and researcher (Propen 2006: dren has ethical implications, given that images 135–137). However, I assured the participants potentially maximise engagement in children’s that the final destinations would not be shown in interpretations and minimise potentially distort- the research report when the interviewing end- ing adult opinions (Kullman 2012: 2). The po- ed at their home, for instance. Finally, from a tential of visual methods is congruent with the technical perspective the accuracy of the loca- aim of bringing out the diversity of children’s tion information may be significantly compro- voices (Kullman 2012: 2 –3). mised in highly built-up areas when the signals become weaker (see Jones et al. 2008). Never- theless, the visualisations presented in this study 27 All the data (besides the collected GPS data) used for the visualisation were obtained from the open-data file were adjusted manually when necessary because service of the National Land Survey of Finland. The the original routes were known. ‘Topographic database’ depicts the terrain and covers the whole of Finland (File service of open data 2014).

61 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

One of the benefits of photographing was that of hindsight, it would have been helpful to use the young people seemed to be positive about it the participants’ photographs as prompts for dis- (see also Morrow 2001: 257). Most of them did cussion after the go-along interviews (see Pyyry not struggle with a lack of inspiration (e.g. about 2012: 45–48; Tani 2014: 371). Not doing this, I what to photograph) and were not embarrassed was not always conscious of the meanings the about their photographing skills, contrary to what young people assigned to the photographs. Some is sometimes reported (see Barker & Weller 2003: of them did discuss their experiences related to 42). Furthermore, photographing seemed to in- photographs very openly during the interviews, crease agency, particularly among participants but naturally I was only able to access the ex- who were less willing to express themselves ver- periences they wanted to discuss (see Smith et bally but still wanted to participate in the study. al. 2009: 3). What helped me with the analysis They may have used photographing and concen- was the idea that image is ‘not an absolute rep- trating on the camera as a tactic to focus on silence resentation of a given state, but a tool to help un- or avoid speaking to me, for instance. During the derstandings develop’ (Cook & Hess 2007: 43, walks, the participants who were photographing in Kullman 2012: 3). I used the photographs to sometimes hung back, finding their own, person- contextualise the research phenomenon, which al time and space. Another positive aspect was helped to direct my attention to topics that other- that photographing was a social action for some wise would have remained unnoticed (e.g. stress- of the participants (see Kullman 2012). Those in ing the importance of certain places, or indicating the group interviews often assigned the role of the contrast between the experience and the envi- photographer to one of them, thereby facilitat- ronment: see Gold 2004: 1564). The photographs ing entitlement and a commitment to record the included in this report are of places the mean- shared perspective. On the other hand, sometimes ing of which was discussed with the participant. one of the group asked the photographer to take They added depth to the discussions during our a picture of the objects, people and actions that walks, and gave a more detailed picture of the were important to him or her. Thus, the user of participant’s place experiences. the camera had an important role among friends. I introduced photographing as part of mobile A further advantage was that photographs some- interviewing. The camera I used could be de- times functioned as prompts to discuss (surpris- scribed as a basic digital camera. We discussed ing) topics (see Pyyry 2015b) or certain environ- the photographing and the use of the camera at ments: when a participant was photographing a the beginning of each journey. I asked the par- certain environment, for instance, something in ticipants to photograph anything they wanted it sparked meaningful memories. to, stressing that there was no obligation to take The biggest problems with the photograph- any photos. They took 259 photographs in to- ing emerged in the analysis phase. The research- tal. Females took more (78%) than males (22%). er could either allow the participants to discuss I subjected the photographs to content analy- their photographs or interpret them independent- sis, which is recognised as a tool with which to ly (Trell & van Hoven 2010: 96). I analysed identify and organise qualitatively important el- the photographs independently (see Trell & ements from research material (e.g. Bell 2001; van Hoven 2010: 96), but included the narrat- Seppänen 2005; Jokela 2014). It therefore fa- ed meanings as given by the participants in the cilitates understanding of how certain represen- analysis if I knew about them. With the benefit tations are parts of the wider context (see Bell

62 2001: 13; Seppänen 2005: 144). Once I had the latter they tended to stay at school, although grasped the meanings of the photographs, the some of them went home. Finally, I asked them material appeared to be very rich. One drawback to locate their places on the map and to answer with content analysis is its relatively technical some questions about them and about the route. approach, and thus its relative limitations in an- I also requested feedback on the IA, and asked swering questions about the significance or ef- those who were interested in participating in the fects of the interpreted meanings (see Bell 2001: go-along interviews to leave their contact details. 13) of the photographs, especially if I did not Among the benefits of the method the most know for sure. I constructed five photograph- notable was that the participants could physi- ic themes: ‘route’ (e.g. walkways, roads, under- cally travel their daily routes, which seemed to passes, squares and plazas), ‘transportation’ (e.g. increase their interest in the research project29. public transport, metro and train carriages, metro Second, I noticed that a few of them used the stations, buses and bus stops, cars and scooters), writing assignment to express very personal ex- ‘places of consumption’ (e.g. shopping centres, periences, possibly because they did not have to shops, shopping, purchases), ‘friends’ (e.g. par- discuss them face-to-face. Third, the participants ticipants, study peers) and ‘special places’ (e.g. were free to decide the extent of their participa- related to the participant’s childhood) 28. tion, and not all of them chose to make personal disclosures. 5.2.5 Independent assignments One drawback with the IA was its relative- The participants could contribute further to the ly fixed form, which meant that the participants research project by taking on an independent as- could not influence the questions. This may have signment (see Appendix 4). Although there are been discouraging for some of them. Second, no direct examples for comparison given that I although it was effective in terms of gathering designed the assignment for this purpose, it was information about young people and their daily a combination of a travel diary, a mental map environments, in general it did not provide in- and a questionnaire (see e.g. Ergler 2012: 100). depth information about personal places: it may The aim was to encourage the young people to be too demanding to locate place experiences. write about their everyday place experiences Third, I was not able to have a personal discus- and mobility. First, I asked them to think about sion with all the participants, which occasionally their daily route and the places along it. They resulted in information gaps that prevented the then had the choice of either physically travel- drawing of further conclusions. However, given ling the route or thinking more deeply about it. the high number of participants, I used the IA If they chose the former option they naturally material to make generalisations about young left the school building, whereas if they chose people’s common daily places. A total of 117 participants decided to take 28 I began the analysis by browsing through the photographs and constructing variables from the elements depicted in on the independent assignment: 61 in Tikkuri- them (e.g. ‘building’, ‘vehicle’, ‘human’: see Bell 2001: la30 (F=37, M=24, no gender mentioned=5), 44 13). Some of the variables included more precise elements, referred to as values (e.g. variable: ’building’ -> 29 values: ’school’, ’shopping centre’). The variables were However, it should also be kept in mind that the par- more detailed if I knew the meanings assigned to the ticipants could take part in the research project during objects in the photographs (e.g. variable ‘building’ -> their geography lessons and skip the class. ‘friend’s place of residence’ or ‘participant’s old place 30 Tikkurila is over-represented probably because two of of residence’). After the analysis I identified the com- the teachers were very keen on participating in the re- mon themes and decided which photographs to include search. This had an impact on the number of partici- in this research publication (Bell 2001: 13). pants who eventually joined in the research project.

63 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 in Leppävaara (F=27, M=7) and 12 in Itäkeskus Research ethics play a major role in studies con- (F=2, M=5). In general, the female participants ducted among young people. On the internation- (F=66) were overrepresented (M=46). I applied al level, researchers focusing on childhood and thematic analysis to the IA material, the basic youth have used the United Nations’ Convention idea of which is to recognise, analyse and report on the Rights of the Child (1989) as a guideline, patterns, or themes, within the data (Braun & but many countries also have legislation regulat- Clarke 2006: 79)31. ‘Theme’ captures ‘something ing this type of research, or advisory boards for important about the data in relation to the research researchers to consult. The recently established question, and represents some level of patterned Advisory Board on Childhood and Youth Re- response or meaning within the data set’ (Braun search evaluates non-medical research on chil- & Clarke 2006: 82). Ideally there are several ref- dren and young people in Finland (Nuoriso- ja erences to each theme in the data, but a higher lapsuudentutkimuksen eettinen… 2015). How- occurrence does not necessarily mean that the ever, in general, social scientific research in this theme is more prominent (Braun & Clarke 2006: area is not strictly regulated, although research 82). Thus, researchers must use their judgement practices draw from established ethical practices to define what a theme is (Braun & Clarke 2006: (Nieminen 2010: 34–36). In other words, there 82). Thematic analysis is independent of theory are no clear guidelines regulating youth research and can be applied across a range of theoretical in the field of social science33. The fact that the and epistemological approaches (see Braun & legislation in Finland is still under development Clarke 2006: 79–80). I identified the following does not prevent researchers from taking a crit- themes: places related to travelling, places relat- ical and well-argued stance in their studies, as ed to consumption, school, home and places for they are responsible for their research projects sports32. Given the high number of IA partici- (Hoikkala & Suurpää 2005: 303). Possibly be- pants, and the fact that the analysis of the mobile cause the legislation is somewhat confusing, ma- interviews resonated with the findings, I felt that ny Finnish youth researchers in the fields of social I was on the right track. and cultural studies draw upon the CRC (1989), which obliges them to approach young people 5.3 Research ethics and positionality as independent actors. In addition, the Constitu- tion of Finland (731/1999) states: ‘Children shall be treated equally and as individuals and they 31 I used inductive analysis, and made no attempt to fit codes shall be allowed to influence matters pertaining into a pre-defined theoretical frame (see Braun & Clarke 2006: 83–84). First, I read through the responses sever- to them to a degree corresponding to their lev- al times, noting down initial ideas (see Braun & Clarke el of development’. The research ethics of this 2006: 87–88). Because many of the participants used only a few words in their responses rather than discussing their study are constructed against this background. experiences in-depth, I concentrated on the places they mentioned. I then generated initial codes by systemati- Although there are studies that require writ- cally coding interesting features of the research material ten consent from parents or guardians, some and collated the data that was relevant to each potential theme (see Braun & Clarke 2006: 88–89). Third, I sort- ed the codes into potential themes (see Braun & Clarke 33 Medical research with children is more strictly regulat- 2006: 89–91). At this point I had a long list of codes (26 ed. The Medical Research Act (488/1999) states that if in total). I then collated them under a relevant theme, and a 15-year-old is able to understand the meaning of the refined the selection (see Braun & Clarke 2006: 91–93). research, and the research promotes the participant’s I ended up with five themes. well-being, written consent is sufficient. However, 32 ‘School’ and ‘home’ were also mentioned, but are mostly Nieminen (2010) notes that some researchers in other excluded from the study given the focus on the public disciplines use the age of 15, or even 12, as a suitable domain. age for a child to decide whether to participate or not.

64 Finnish researchers (especially in the fields of knowledge generated depends on who generates humanities and the social sciences) allow young it (Rose 1997: 306–307). Thus, knowledge has a people to decide on their participation. The de- subjective basis that is bound to place and time. cision to conduct the research without parental As Linda McDowell (1992: 399) remarks, ac- consent depends very much on its nature. Some- knowledging one’s positionality and difference times there are practical or ethical reasons. It is the key. Knowledge is positioned and situat- has been suggested that participants (13–18-year- ed, meaning that the researcher’s own facets of olds) would presumably not agree to ask their the self have an impact on the research setting parents for written consent (Raevaara 2010), and (Rose 1997: 308). As a problem-solving meth- that requiring participants over 15 years of age od, post-structural and feminist theories call for to obtain their parents’ permission would destroy reflexive ways of knowing that underline one’s the mutual trust between subject and research- position and situatedness as a researcher (see Ait- er (Tani 2010: 58–60; 2014: 366–367). Further- ken 2001: 18). more, asking for parental consent to investigate As a former upper-secondary-school pupil young people’s personal everyday lives would I understand something about studying in such not have been sensible given that within the the- institutions. I recall how upper-secondary edu- oretical framework of the study young people are cation differed from comprehensive school. I re- considered able and independent agents. I infor- member the autumn when I started upper-sec- mally contacted the National Advisory Board on ondary education and realised how the workload research ethics in Finland via email, asking their had suddenly increased. Studying became much opinion on ethical evaluation. Their response in- more time-consuming and sometimes demand- dicating that my research did not require more ing. On the other hand, as a young postgraduate in-depth ethical evaluation justified my decision researcher I am also a student35, and can position to let the young people decide if they wanted to myself between teachers and pupils. Therefore, inform their guardians34. However, I gave writ- I could assume a ‘least-adult role’ as a person ten information to all the participants, which they who is between youth and adulthood (see Holt could keep and pass on to their parents or guard- 2003: 19–20). I also believe that some female ians if they so desired (Appendix 5). participants found it easier to talk to another fe- Alongside the ethical issues, as a researcher male. This is not a new insight: gender matters investigating experiences I became increasing- in research practice (see e.g. McDowell 1992). I ly concerned about the impact of my personal realised this when I was comparing interviewing values and background on the research project: experiences with female and male participants. ‘– – although in the practice of humanistic ge- My discussions with males tended to be sub- ography much depends upon subjective inter- dued, although a few of them were loquacious. pretation and empathetic enquiry, it is here, par- A comment I received from a teacher who had adoxically, that the selective role of the analyst informed her pupils about my prospective visit most urgently requires elucidating’ (Smith 1981: to their school supports my claim: ‘Oh, the girls 294). The need to situate geographical knowl- were happy to hear that you are a young woman’. edge is based on the argument that the kind of I learned that the female pupils had expected me

34 The reasons given were that the participants were over 35 Naturally, I cannot fully understand what it means to 15 years old and that the research did not have medical be a pupil in an upper-secondary school in the 2010s implications. in the Helsinki metropolitan area.

65 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 to be an older male, which perhaps conformed In ethically demanding situations I adopted with their image of a researcher. Marilys Guillemin and Lynn Gillam’s (2004: In retrospect, the field work took me into a 264) idea of ‘ethics in practice’, meaning that different world. After sitting for months in front the researcher must quickly decide how to re- of the computer I was suddenly face-to-face with spond to what a participant has said or done. He the participants listening to their stories, and as or she must also decide how to interact in a hu- in any research project dealing with the inevi- mane and non-exploitative way, simultaneously table ethical questions. As Louise Holt (2003: understanding the researcher’s role. This was 92–93) recalls, at the beginning of her research difficult sometimes, but I kept in mind the fact project she thought it unlikely that her partici- that a skilled researcher is open-minded, and is pants would disclose their personal thoughts to a willing to adapt in unexpected situations (Kull- relative stranger. However, some children open- man 2012: 2; see Eldén 2013: 77–78). I had also ly talked about very personal issues (Holt 2003: familiarised myself with research ethics: I was 93). I encountered similar experiences. What was prepared as an adult researcher for unexpected one of my participants thinking and feeling when situations that the project might bring. My ‘eth- we passed the school that was filled with memo- ics in practice’ (Guillemin & Gillam 2004: 264) ries of school bullies? How did another one feel meant that I showed empathy with participants when she was recalling a period during which in ethically difficult situations. I kept calm while she had mental-health problems when we were listening to what they wanted to say. I avoided standing outside the psychiatric clinic in which asking them any additional questions if I no- she stayed? These situations resemble the ones ticed that they were distressed or anxious. I also Holt refers to: participants’ openness occasional- made sure that the informal structure of the in- ly put her in a ‘pseudo-therapeutic’ role, referring terviews allowed the participants to change the to an ethically demanding situation to which she topic if the theme was too intimate. After all, was not suited (Parr 1998 after Holt 2003: 93)36. we shared a similar culture, and I could react to difficult events based on my cultural knowl- 36 Along with the emotionally demanding situations I also occasionally faced dilemmas when the young peo- edge. Moreover, I participated in the project as ple talked about (minor) illegal activities in which they myself, which helped me to react to these sit- were involved. Whereas the children in Holt’s (2003: 93) research talked about being victims of crime, a few of uations quite naturally. Thus, many of my re- my participants told me about using the wrong identi- actions were based on my own personality and ty documents (to purchase alcohol). I was familiar with this practice from my earlier youth: it is somewhat com- cultural knowledge, rather than on handbooks mon in Finland for minors to borrow an older friend’s identity documents to pass as older than they are. I al- (see Ponto 2015: 13). As these examples indi- so recalled the code of conduct from my childhood and cate, it is important to realise that a researcher youth: ‘don’t tell adults’ about this (see also Simonen & Tigerstedt 2006). However, as an adult researcher I knew is multiply positioned (see Ponto 2013). these actions were illegal. I nevertheless decided not to disclose the information, for two main reasons. First, I was not personally witnessing anything illegal and therefore had no evidence of illegal activity. Second, disclosure would have broken the mutual trust between me and the participants. I stressed at the beginning of the interview that all the information was confidential. I could perhaps have informed the parents about their children’s activities, but from what these young people told me, their parents knew about their occasional use of alcohol and tobacco, which supported my decision not to inform them.

66 6 Young people’s place derstand and delve into place experiences as experiences in urban they appear to the experiencer. The use of environments participatory methods helped me to achieve this aim in allowing the participants to use their voices. The various sets of research material shed light on the different aspects The humanistic geographical approach to place of young people’s everyday place experi- offers tools and concepts with which to analyse ences. In the analysis I consider the inter- the meanings young people assign to their en- view material in the light of other sourc- vironments that facilitate investigation of their es (photographs, GPS tracking and IAs). everyday lives in the city. It has been argued Complementing the understanding generat- that their being in the public realm may entail ed through the interviews, the photographs transgressing spatial norms or breaking rules set give insights into the young people’s per- by adults (see e.g. Kallio & Häkli 2011; Kal- sonal and shared place experiences. Com- lio 2012; Christensen & Mikkelsen 2013: 203– bined with the interview material, for in- 205; Tani 2015: 138–141). However, it seems stance, they were effective in generating a that these social tensions are not as influential detailed picture of past or future expecta- constructors of place experiences as they used tions of a certain place. Furthermore, GPS to be, especially for those in their late youth. tracking helped me to contextualise the ev- More precisely, it was the young people’s own eryday world of the young people by pro- adults (e.g. parents) who did not control their viding information about the physical envi- daily lives to the same extent as previously. Al- ronment in which they lived. Finally, inde- though encounters between adults also include pendent assignments gave me glimpses into certain codes of conduct and tensions, the par- their everyday places in the city. Given the ticipants had become more closely included in high number of IA participants, I was able the wider social sphere as active agents. They identify certain places that commonly at- had more opportunities to exploit the resources, tracted young people. sociality and recreation on offer in the city (see Coding categories (Table 5) compiled from Skelton 2013: 467). Increased agency provided the interview material were developed through novel opportunities for personal, physical mobil- IPA analysis (see Smith & Osborn 2008; Smith ity in new and familiar places. I discuss the find- et al. 2009), my aim being to explore: a) young ings from my empirical research on the following people’s experiences of personal places in every- pages, focusing on young people’s experienced day life (see e.g. Tuan 1977, Relph 1976; Tani and lived places in their everyday mobile lives. 1995); b) social encounters that construct these Although my main interest is to enhance under- experiences (see e.g. Tani 1995; Kuusisto-Ar- standing of and to explore young people’s place ponen 2003; Cresswell 2004: 30); and c) the in- experiences, I have no intention of ignoring the fluence of everyday mobility on their construc- impact of socio-spatial possibilities and regulation (see e.g. Jensen 2006; Porter et al. 2010a; tions, which I see as the context that constructs Leyshon 2011). The coding categories (Table 5) meaningful place experiences. emerged from the analysis, simultaneously re- Drawing on humanistic geography, my flecting the theoretical framework of the study. methodological approach is designed to un- The aim was to enhance understanding of the

67 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Table 5. Coding categories

1. Places of the past (incl. cinemas, libraries, places for hanging out, school)

2. Places of boredom (incl. place of residence and the region, construction sites and ugly buildings, places for hanging out)

3. Places of independence (incl. the car, driving to school, places of transportation, distant places and travelling, places of consumerism, places for calming down, places-to-be in the future, places for partying, subjectively special places, places in the urban realm)

4. Unwanted encounters causing outsideness (incl. harassment, unwanted young people, frightening individuals, ’foreigners’)

5. Wanted encounters as sources of insideness (incl. friends, family members, girl- and boyfriends)

6. Mobilities creating connections between places (incl. places with good transportation, cycling, driving a car, exploring new places)

7. Immobilities creating disconnections between places (incl. places with poor transportation, limitations on mobility, mobility barriers)

personal as well as the social and physical char- not only a question of independence, but acteristics of young people’s place experiences. is also associated with how young people The rest of this analytical chapter is struc- experience connectedness with their living tured in accordance with the categorisation of environments. This topic includes categories the research material (see Table 5): 6 and 7. 1. Young people’s personal place experienc- 4. Young people’s webs of meaningful places related to their childhood and emerges. Finally, by way of a synthesis, I argue ing adulthood. The analysis reflects the ex- that young people’s places are organised as pectation that the experiences specifically meaningful systems with flexibility and fix- comprise socio-spatial contexts. This topic tures, connections and disconnections. These includes categories 1, 2 and 3. webs of meaningful places holistically re- 2. Daily encounters as constructors of flect their personal relationships and agen- young people’s urban place experienc- cy against their everyday environments. I es. Encounters with wanted individuals are claim that it is crucial for them to learn to considered sources of positive feelings and recognise and handle experiential breakages experienced insideness. However, negative- between places and themselves. This need ly experienced encounters with unwanted is supported in environments that acknowl- individuals may loosen personal ties with edge young people’s agency. places or be sources of outsideness. This topic includes categories 4 and 5. 6.1 Past places of childhood, new 3. Im/mobilities as constructors of young places of adulthood: memories, new possibilities and place experiences people’s urban place experiences. Mobili- ties have a major role in how independence The meanings attached to places change over is experienced. However, being mobile is time as new experiences colour earlier ones. For

68 Table 6. Young people’s key places as mentioned in the independent assignments: the participants were asked to name common places in their everyday lives.

Places of travelling (e.g. bus, train, bus stop, railway station) 136 mentions

Places of consumption (e.g. fast food restaurant, café, shopping centre) 83 mentions

School 81 mentions

Home 53 mentions

Places for sports (e.g. gym, sports hall) 39 mentions

instance, a place that used to be a source of in- young people socialise, meet new people and sideness may no longer be so (see Relph 1976: spend time (e.g. Anthony 1985: 310; Matthews et 49–50, 55), and vice versa. These changes hap- al. 1998: 195, 198; Vanderbeck & Johnson 2000: pen in life, and may be subtle and difficult to 7, 20–21; Kato 2009: 57–58; Tani 2014, 2015). track (see Karjalainen 2006: 84). However, some Moreover, everyday mobility and the places as- of these reformulations were visible and sudden sociated with it are appreciated since they enable among the young people in my study. This is un- young people to observe others and to enjoy the derstandable given that youth is a phase of life urban ‘buzz’ (Jensen 2006: 348). Both places of that is full of opportunities to encounter new en- this type seemed to carry social meanings, al- vironments and new places, but it is also a phase though it is difficult to draw such a conclusion in which childhood places are still present. The from the GPS and IA material. However, these discussion in this section concerns how, in the data do provide information about the young peo- context of growing up, young people experience ple’s life context. They seem to have (relatively) and handle feelings related to their personal plac- many possibilities in their daily living. For in- es, which are constructed in a dialogue between stance, unlike in certain environments (see e.g. the past and the future. Porter et al. 2010a, 2010b), they did not seem to First, concerning the everyday urban envi- be controlled in terms of everyday mobility. The ronment (and the research context), it was evi- findings also shed light on their independence: a dent from the GPS-mapped routes (see Appen- questionnaire involving children may well have dices 1, 2 and 3) that the young people walked given a different picture of daily life. or travelled to shopping centres and other plac- However, crucial elements are left out of the es of consumption (e.g. supermarkets or shops), route visualisations and the references to import- as well as to places with good transport con- ant places, specifically references to experiences nections. Similarly, the material from the inde- and the meanings attached to these frequently pendent assignments (see Table 6) stressed the visited everyday environments. Having identi- centrality of mobility and travelling in the par- fied these young people’s common places and ticipants’ lives, but also places of consumption. living environments, I will look more closely These findings resonate with the results of ear- at how they described their lived experience of lier research. Shopping centres are places where these places.

69 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

hood become less intense as people become more 6.1.1 Places of childhood: feelings of mature. Returning to places of earlier life may be boredom and nostalgic memories disappointing because the memory reformulates Remembering and recalling memories take an them as we would like them to be (Tani 1997: individual back in time and place (Tani 1997: 212). One can never reach places of one’s mem- 211–212, see Karjalainen 2004: 63; Kuusisto-Ar- ories as imagined, because a place is always dif- ponen & Savolainen 2016). These memories and ferent when encountered again later (Tani 1997: places of earlier life, which are reflected on from 212). This type of disillusionment with place was the present, construct the self (Karjalainen 2006: often experienced as feelings of boredom. Mem- 83). Humans have a need to associate with cer- ories of places and current experiences were no tain places (Relph 1976: 147), and memories longer in harmony: play a role in this process. It is more rarely noted, however, that memories of places help one HELI: So now we’re going to Sello, what kind of a place do you think it is? to understand one’s selfhood in the context of growing up. This may happen especially among IIDA: It’s nowadays a young people’s… a young people who have recently started to en- place to hang out. counter environments in which they experience themselves as adults. In the following I show KIRSI: I agree, but it’s a bit passé… how these young people reflected on their experiences of new places against their memories HELI: How do you think it’s passé? of childhood places. After a careful analysis of the interview ma- IIDA: Sello has lost its value now that terial I defined two types of memories of past [young] people just go there to… chat and sit. (see Appendix 1, the route 1) places: a) as childish and boring and b) as nostalgic. I extracted these two types from the coding After noting that certain places had ‘lost their categories: places of boredom and places of the value’, I started to look for reasons. Interesting- past (see Table 5). What connects them is that ly, looser parental control was the strongest rea- both relate to experiences of and feelings about son because it changed the meanings attached places that used to be very important in the par- to places. In practice, young people who do not ticipants’ lives but had lost their centrality. The have curfews and experience less surveillance first type of memory, in which childhood plac- can more freely decide on their schedules and es were seen as childish and boring, seemed to where they will spend time: help these young people to adopt the roles and requirements of new, adult places. In this sense HELI: Do you have a curfew? the memories were transitional. The latter type sheds light on situations when leaving childhood ALEXANDRA: No I don’t because my parents trust me and they basically know what I’m places behind was not easy. These experienc- doing… es were reflected as nostalgic memories of past (see Appendix 2, the route 8) places, or as feelings of misfit. Remembering past places as childish and I noted that the increased freedom decreased the boring refers to experiences in which the mean- centrality of the places that used to be where the ings attached to certain places from earlier child- young people practised agency. As a result, the

70 places that were important in the past started to HELI: When you said that young people here [in Itäkeskus] like to hang out at the metro seem childish when reflected on from the pres- station, would you do that? ent: loosened control had changed their position. Changes in position imply the need to find ALEXANDRA: No! novel strategies (Alasuutari 2004: 131) and to (see Appendix 2, the route 8) adopt new roles to cope with the new life circumstances, and in this case also seemed to re- Discussion 2. formulate the young people’s place experienc- SIRU: When we were younger it was alright es. Being treated more like adults in their new to hang out and sit around. But nowadays I no longer feel like sitting outside when it’s cold. environment enabled them to leave behind the Tikkurila doesn’t have too many things for places of their earlier childhood. In this kind of young people to do [takes a photograph, see Figure 10] situation the participants reflected on their new (see Appendix 3, the route 6) experiences of adult places in the light of their childhood places, which then began to seem bor- Although the meanings of places are constant- ing and childish. Hence, the need for marginal ly evolving, and one’s place is never the same places (see e.g. Matthews et al. 1998: 195; Ab- when reflected on from the present moment bott-Chapman & Robertson 2001: 489; Matthews (see Tani 1997: 212), these narratives indicate 2003: 106; Valentine et al. 2010: 920) in which that the changes in meaning may be dramatic to hide from the gaze of adults was no longer for young people. Alexandra and Siru could acute. In fact, the participants were more inter- easily recall and return to the places of their ested in spending time ‘on stage’ (Matthews et earlier youth (for Alexandra the youth centre al. 2000: 285–286), while acting and behaving and the metro station, and for Siru the street) in the same way as the other adults in the place. through their memories (see Kuusisto-Arponen Thus, the places that were steeped in meaning 2007: 10; Kuusisto-Arponen & Savolainen earlier had become less meaningful everyday 2016), but they were no longer backstage plac- places that were not as important as they once es in which to avoid adults or socialise with were, but still structured the young people’s per- friends (see Matthews et al. 2000: 285, 292). sonal relationships with the world (see Casey Instead, they had become lifeless and dull, 2001; Kuusisto-Arponen 2010). with few interesting elements. Clearly, they were no longer places where they felt at home Discussion 1. (see Tani 1995: 30). These experiences mate- ALEXANDRA: I can’t even imagine that a 16- rialised in feelings of anger and boredom. The or 17-year-old would be at the youth centre, it seems very distant. I don’t mean that there’s experience of disappointment, distinguishable anything wrong with youth centres but I’m not in Siru’s narrative, became a source of outs- so used to it. ideness, even described as a ‘sense of unreality’ and non-belonging in the light of her HELI: So you think it’s more a thing for younger people? changing ‘intentions’ (see Relph 1976: 50–51). These new, negative feelings had suppressed ALEXANDRA: Yes, it is. I remember when her former feelings of insideness and agency, we went to the youth centre at a primary school, but that was a long time ago. And and changed the meanings of place: nowadays what’s happening at Herttoniemi metro station there was ‘nothing to do’. Similarly, Alexan- [where young people of Alexandra’s age are hanging out]? Nothing! dra’s feelings of outsideness in her place(s)

71 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Figure 10. A photograph of Tikkuraitti, where Siru used to hang out as a child and a teenager.

appeared in the form of boredom, but also as places, even if they pointed out who should confusion (‘how can someone spend time in and could experience feelings of insideness such boring and childish places’). These rein them: teenagers and elementary-school pu- actions clearly reflect the changes in the par- pils, but not young (adults) like them. Never- ticipants’ positions. Whereas the street and theless, these memories are needed to expe- youth centre used to be where they exercised rience new places of adulthood because they autonomy, they now seemed to be controlled remind people of what life was like before by adults and were therefore more suitable they became adult. for younger groups of young people. It seems New events related to growing up may that Siru and Alexandra were not interested in sometimes arouse feelings of fear among young the official young people’s ‘spaces for doing people who lack experience of them (cf. Macek things’ (see Kuusisto-Arponen & Tani 2009: et al. 2007: 469). At the same time, with their 51–52), provided by the city or other organ- increased agency some participants reported isations, but neither were they dependent on that certain places of the past had started to be unofficial ‘self-made’ places (Christensen & too safe and fixed, making them tedious and Mikkelsen 2013: 202–203; Tani 2015). Even dull. When the novelty value and the excite- if both of them had trouble finding where they ment related to new autonomy had worn off, belonged, one thing was certain: their child- they were ready for some additional openness hood places (whether ‘official’ or ‘self-made’) and impartiality: were no longer the places of existential insideness (Relph 1976: 55) or topophilia (Tuan Discussion 1. 1974: 4) they used to be. However, the par- EMMA: Tikkurila train station is so familiar to me. I know by heart all the timetables of ticipants did not deny the importance of such the trains and buses going from there. This

72 has been the centre of my life [laughing]. Oh, Johnson 2000: 6; Tani 2014), but these were not I’m getting a bit bored now… It just feels that everything is familiar here, and I miss new commonplace experiences of their present life. places and excitement. Thus, these places became increasingly associ- (see Appendix 3, the route 5) ated with their childhood. Second, given that memories are not simply drawn from the past Discussion 2. to the present, but are creatively brought into SOFIA: They’re sitting here in Sello day after new conscious realms of being (Leyshon 2015: day… 635), I argue that the participants actively used these narratives of the past to establish new ma- MILLA: Teenyboppers and the like. turity. Thus, remembering was a creative process in which they were learning to be themselves, – challenging their attachment to places and accepting related changes (see Leyshon 2015: 630). ADELE: You just think, ‘what was I thinking back then? What did I even see in that I also noted that making the transition from [hanging out]?’ childhood places to adulthood places was not straightforward, and that changes in meaning MILLA: Yeah, what was I thinking? were agonising rather than boring experiences. The following discussion shows how the par- SOFIA: You just grow older and aren’t ticipants elaborated on their experiences in be- interested in the same things anymore. tween their past and present places. For instance, (see Appendix 1, the route 7) those who sometimes visited their old, ‘young people’s places’ (e.g. places for hanging out; see Discussion 3. Valentine et al. 2010: 920) seemed to be slightly NELLI: We call that place industrial because of the… factories and so on there. They used embarrassed by their visits. When I tried to find to be so exciting. But we don’t go there that out why I learned that enjoyment of past places much anymore. (see Appendix 3, the route 7) was no longer desirable because expectations of adulthood were more powerful. However, they The common characteristics of the places the par- were not yet ready to abandon their visits to these ticipants discussed relate, above all, to marginal young people’s places, which were clearly mean- or backstage places (e.g. the street, an industrial ingfully thick in terms of elements and experi- area or a shopping centre). In this they resem- ences (see Casey 2001; Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: ble young people’s places recognised in earlier 81). In that familiar places provoke feelings of research: somewhere to find privacy away from safety and continuation (see Karjalainen 2006), I the gaze of adults (see e.g. Lieberg 1995; Mat- claim that places of the past helped these young thews et al. 2000; Symes 2007; Pyyry 2015a). people to encounter new places of adulthood, However, from the participants’ experiential per- which otherwise might have been too frighten- spective the picture is more complex. First, in ing. However, feelings of insideness or topophilia their reminiscing the participants describe how were no longer self-evident (Tuan 1974: 4; Relph these places were part of their earlier youth and 1976: 50, 55) in places of the past if childishness childhood. They clearly remembered problems was the dominant experience: concerning the use of place and their negotiations with adult authorities (see Vanderbeck & HELI: Many other participants have talked about Sello [shopping centre]. Do you go

73 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

there often? were almost ready to abandon their visits to their hanging-out place (Ossi had already deserted it), HANNU: I go there but… but sometimes they still indulged in such visits, especially in ‘case of emergency’ when there EETU: Well, I never go there alone but with was nothing else to do. Their experienced pun- friends. ishment was that they risked other people (such as Siru and Alexandra) seeing them as childish. OSSI: I go to Sello if I need something, but I never stay there just to hang out. Attempting to find a balance, they sometimes went to do some shopping, which was consid- HELI: Yeah, when you said that ‘you never ered an acceptable and adult reason to spend time go there alone’, so do you go there to buy there. This also seemed to be how the boys ex- something or just for a visit? perienced and showed their emerging adultness in a familiar environment (see Trell et al. 2014: EETU: I sometimes buy something but… I also go there without any specific plans, 325). Equally significantly, they also used humour unfortunately. [laughing] and irony to contest their relationship with the shopping centre (see Ridanpää 2014). Thus, their HANNU: Yes… place experiences had (at least) two sides: one of a young person hanging out and the other of HELI: Oh, why ’unfortunately’? an adult making (necessary) purchases. Togeth- er these mixed experiences comprise a complex EETU: I guess one could have better things to relationship with the lived place in which places do but… of the past and future expectations are present, questioned and strengthened. HANNU: But when you don’t have. (see Appendix 1, the route 4) Building on Kullman’s (2010: 834–836) notion of ‘transitional space’ inhabited by children As the young men report, the shopping centre and parents in which the young learn to adopt was no longer a place of maturity but had rath- the rules of shared (adult) urban space, I argue er turned into a place for childish teenagers. In that the transitional nature of places does not other words, it did not provide similar opportu- disappear from children’s lives when they grow nities to question their position as young people up. For instance, their positive memories of past (see Valentine 2000: 266), but rather strengthened places helped the participants to handle difficult their unwanted status as young hangers-out. In- place experiences of emerging adulthood, even if terestingly, the shopping centre was also a place such places were perceived as boring and lifeless of positive experiences, although it no longer compared with those of the present. In addition, aroused the most intense feelings of insideness it seems that it is not only parents who, together (or existential insideness) (see Relph 1976: 55) with their offspring, make places ‘transitional’ given that enjoyment of it was stigmatised. Their (Kullman 2010: 834–836), but also other individ- sense of belonging had become more complex uals such as friends and adult acquaintances who and contested – and there was even a hint of create a welcoming atmosphere in giving young irony (Ridanpää 2014). The experienced in-be- people the opportunity to practise adulthood. tweenness was manifested as the feeling of be- These transitional places gave the partici- ing stuck with the place. As the boys said, they pants a sense of courage and confidence with

74 which to encounter the new places of emerg- people’s narratives. However, a few participants ing adulthood. On a more concrete level, they discussed (sometimes melancholically) their per- allowed them to practice emerging adulthood sonal places of the past, noting that they nowa- armed with safe memories of familiar places. In days only existed in their memories: practice, this meant that they had access to new places in which they were not treated as children HELI: Could you tell me why you chose this place? It must be important, but why? by other individuals, secure in the feeling that the familiar (and even dull) places of childhood were IIRIS: Yes, it is. also accessible. In this respect, their memories of boring places functioned as a safety net when EEVA: There are quite many familiar places experiences of adult places overwhelmed them. here that belong to our lives… [Places] that Thus, I claim that young people need their past used to be important. experiences of childhood places to make them feel like adults. Without such places it would be – more difficult to recognise adulthood places -be cause of a lack of contrast, and there would be no IIRIS: We have spent a lot of time here [a hill next to a sports field]. sense of a safe background. Thus, places of the past are important transitional spaces (see Kull- EEVA: This is a place of my childhood and I man 2010: 834–836) and constructors of the self have so many memories here. (see Tuan 1977: 186), despite the mixed feelings (e.g. boredom or embarrassment) they evoke. HELI: Would you like to recall one? The world is seen, understood and represented in terms of place (Karjalainen 2006: 83–84, EEVA: Well, we have been hanging out here with our old classmates from secondary see also 2003: 87). One constructs and narrates school. [After it] people went to different one’s personal story through certain places, the schools but we still spent time together on lunch breaks and other breaks. When it was meanings of which comprise chosen memories summer or a warm spring or autumn, we (see Tani 1997: 212). Thus, the past matters: came here to hang out. there is more to an individual than the present (see Appendix 2, the route 3) moment (Tuan 1977: 186). To strengthen one’s sense of self and identity one needs to rescue the Reminiscing is a way of re-visiting significant past and make it accessible (Tuan 1977: 187). places. Even if the important people are not there, Hence, remembering is an active action (see Ley- a familiar environment as a physical entity may shon 2015). Growing up happens in the midst of bring back memories of pleasant events that new place experiences, the present moment and took place (see Tuan 1977: 187; Kuusisto-Ar- memories of past places. It could be concluded ponen & Savolainen 2016). For Eeva and Iiris, from the research material that nostalgic mem- the combination of a familiar environment and ories of past places refer to the childhood plac- active reminiscence brought familiar places into es of the past that help young people to make their present lives. As Eeva pensively expressed sense of themselves when experiencing places it, positive memories made her nostalgic about of emerging adulthood, and demonstrate to them places of the past that were no longer accessi- that they are no longer children. In general, nos- ble. Having a meeting place was important at a talgic memories were not dominant in the young point of life when daily encounters with friends

75 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 were suddenly less frequent. However, reflected grade [in elementary school], I joined in activities that were organised there. They’ve upon from the present moment, it was no longer park lunches [for children], so I went there a social place. Thus, even if the shared memo- when I was younger. When I went to school they provided snacks after school and we ry was part of Eeva’s and Iiris’ common history, spent time there. When I go there now, the it was not the same place as in their memories director of the kindergarten still remembers me. – – I’m a bit… too old to go there without the old group of friends (see Tani 1997: anymore… 212). Hence, there was an experiential discon- (see Appendix 2, the route 1) nection between the memory (of a social place) and the present moment. A lonely hill without Discussion 2. friends was only an empty stage. EMMA: I went to [the name of the school] As the analysis evolved I noted that if familiar elementary school for six years. And now… I’m getting a few mixed feelings when I look places changed too quickly, the experienced con- at this playground because there used to be nection between them was disturbed. The young a really nice climbing frame. Now those old play spaces have gone and have been replaced people even started to feel somehow disconnect- with [a] modern [playground]… Well, it’s nice for the kids there but somehow… This is really ed with these personal places, which seemed to different than it was, and I’m getting a funny result in feelings of frustration expressed as a feeling when I’m looking at this... sense of outsideness and alienation (see Relph (see Appendix 3, the route 5) (1976: 51). Thus, their increased agency and independence were not necessarily sources of pos- Generally speaking, childhood places were no itive experiences (see Macek et al. 2007: 496), longer of major significance to most of the par- and influenced their personal relationships with ticipants. Whereas recalling past places while places in unexpected and unwanted ways. walking, seeing and sensing helped them to access I noticed from narratives that when new, what was familiar in the past (Kuusisto-Arponen adult places became accessible, certain child- & Savolainen 2016; see Tuan 1977: 186–187, hood places became inaccessible as they no Karjalainen 2004: 65), the girls’ physical visits longer belonged to the child who experienced to environments that reminded them of it arose them in its own way. Thus, being able to access intense, but mixed feelings of insideness and out- new places does not mean that leaving childhood sideness. Thus, the narratives quoted above indi- places behind is painless. From the perspective of cate that earlier life experiences are intertwined humanistic geography, nostalgic feelings about with present and future expectations, and are not places of the past could be considered a reaction experienced as a chronological and smooth con- to topobiographical changes (Karjalainen 2006: tinuum but are rather constructed of broken bits 83–84, 93; see also 2003: 87) that block access and pieces (see Karjalainen 2004: 61). Although to familiar places as they appear in one’s mem- this does not necessarily have a negative effect ories. Even if some of them had habitual impli- on previous experiences, I argue that the partic- cations even after these sudden changes (Kar- ipants suffered from temporal confusion, which jalainen 2006: 84), the process of growing out changed the significance of their place experi- of places sometimes seemed to be a confusing ences (cf. Kuusisto-Arponen & Savolainen 2016: and melancholic experience: 66–67). Thus, even if fragility and discontinuity belong to such experiences, for Satu and Emma Discussion 1. the breakages were very intense. Furthermore, SATU: There’s a playground behind the although remembering is an active practice (Ley- kindergarten. When I was in second or third

76 Figure 11. A photograph taken by Sauli of a field where he spent when he was younger

That’s why this place has always been a bit shon 2015), these narratives indicate that it does stressful or exciting. It’s much smaller and not happen as one might think. In this sense, cramped than I remember [laughing]! places of the past do not unconditionally support young people’s transition to adulthood. Growing HELI: You said it’s smaller and more cramped than you remember, so did you notice some up rather seemed like a bizarre melange of adult- kind of change here? hood and childhood experiences, manifested as odd feelings of misfit and belonging. SIRU: Yes, it feels much warmer than it used to feel back then. I wasn’t very enthusiastic I also noted that the nostalgia related to mem- about going there, it was more like a ories of childhood places was not always mel- necessary evil. But now it feels more humane. ancholic. Curiously enough, even the most dis- (see Appendix 3, the route 6) turbing memories can become more bearable over time, and assume positive meanings when Discussion 2. they are flavoured with new experiences. Thus, SAULI: I ended up walking to school across that field a couple of times. In summer there’s I would argue that environments that are remi- some kind of … feeling. I have learned to like niscent of past places are sometimes experienced that. Maybe there’s some kind of nostalgia when I recall what was there. It looks really as intensively lived memories that evoke strong nice in summer and I’ve been hanging out feelings from the past. One could say that they there with my brother and a friend. And we recorded a parkour video with my friend there were lived-in places that became real in the form once. [takes a photograph, see Figure 11] of new landscapes and new experiences in new (see Appendix 2, the route 7) situations, and were comforting for the experiencer (see Karjalainen 2004: 65). To conclude the analysis of this sub-section, it is clear that memories of earlier life phases and Discussion 1. places help young people to (re)organise their per- SIRU: I was a five–six-year-old and did my sonal places topobiographically (see Karjalainen piano audition here [in a music classroom].

77 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

1997a; Karjalainen 2006: 83–84), and to under- to characterise adult places, which were experi- stand their places of the present moment (see Tu- enced as indications of self-possession – experi- an 1975: 164). These young people seemed to ences they attached to adulthood (see also Kull- create connections with place and time through man 2010: 834). These were novel places that the places of their earlier life, which together had recently become part of their lives, and had constructed the self of the present moment (Kar- occasionally replaced others that used to be im- jalainen 2003: 87). However, the narratives al- portant. It was also evident that it was not only so indicate that memories, present places and the licence to access (see Kyttä 2004: 194–196) future expectations are a messy combination of these adulthood places that mattered, the young experiences that is difficult (or impossible) to people also had to indicate how they belonged control. As mentioned, childhood places may by establishing reliable connections with them feel overly childish to young people who would (see Kullman 2010: 835; Collin-Lange 2013: rather encounter places in which to experience 418). In other words, they needed to practise themselves as adults. At the same time, they re- their emerging adulthood in some way. These called positive and dream-like memories of past new adult practices seemed to result in new place places with nostalgia, especially when emerging experiences and meanings. New experiences of adulthood seemed too exhausting. I argue that adulthood were, of course, occasionally confus- both types of experience helped them to encoun- ing. I understood that these encounters were par- ter adulthood. First, recalling boring and em- ticularly stressful for those who could not fully barrassing places of the past helped to mentally associate with the new places but at the same prepare them for adult places when they felt it time felt like outsiders in their childhood plac- was time to explore new environments. Second, es. I use the word misfit to describe this experi- nostalgic and dream-like memories of the past enced confusion with new places of adulthood. functioned as a haven when the seriousness of I collected the experiences discussed in this adulthood seemed overwhelming. Although past sub-section under the coding category places of places help young people to understand who they independence (Table 5), and identified two types are (see Tuan 1975: 164; Karjalainen 2003: 87; of experience related to young people’s encoun- Karjalainen 2006: 83–84), the above discussions ters with new places: a) feelings of excitement indicate that in the context of growing up, the and b) feelings of misfit. I noted that the former connections between places of the past, present seemed to function as transitional places between and future are not necessarily clear to them. In youth and adulthood, whereas the latter tended this sense, I claim that emerging adulthood push- to indicate disconnection from personal places. es young people into a situation in which they These experiences are similar in that they are need actively to (re-)organise their experiential both new to the experiencer on the one hand, disconnections and detachments from daily en- but differ in that the former tend to be positive vironments to cope with a changing daily life. and the latter to be filled with negative meanings. Feelings of excitement with new places re- 6.1.2 Experiencing places of emerging flect young people’s experiences of interesting adulthood: feelings of excitement and misfit places that had recently become part of their The importance attached to new places of emerg- lives and where they assumed or were supposed ing adulthood became evident in discussions with to assume a new kind of authority and agency. the participants. Feelings of autonomy tended New agency relates, for instance, to gaining ac-

78 cess to places that were previously inaccessible, also enhanced their agency. Economic restrictions being considered an adult by adults and hav- are assumed to limit the independence of young ing privacy where previously there was none. people (e.g. by preventing them from moving out These changes brought new place experiences of the parental home) (Gordon & Lahelma 2002: and feelings of maturity. The young people’s 8). Youth researchers have identified various strat- new, meaningful places included cafés, (fast egies they adopt to tackle economic problems. food) restaurants and friend’s homes (when For instance, they may act like adult customers parents were not present), as well as galleries, when they hang out in shopping centres, which festival events, places for partying (e.g. clubs allows them to spend time there without spend- and pubs) and summer cottages. They were all ing money (see Kato 2009: 56–61). However, experienced as relaxed and inspiring. On the this kind of strategy was no longer appropriate level of everyday life, the novelty of these plac- for most of the participants. Curiously enough, es became apparent when the participants re- although they could not afford to move out of flected on how new experiences influenced the the parental home, they still experienced new meanings of places that had previously played agency with everyday places, largely because a central role in their lives: they had some income from part-time jobs. For some, this enhanced economic situation not only Discussion 1. gave them access to new places of consumer- HELI: When you said before that you used to ism, but also allowed them to practise adulthood hang out here [in a youth centre], what kind of activity has replaced that? through being an active customer:

SOFIA: [At Sello shopping centre] We’re like SATU: Going to cafés or spending time at a ‘let’s go to a clothes shop, let’s go there, I’ll friend’s home. If they live on their own, it’s buy a necklace’, and all the money is gone. good to hang out there, privately. That’s more relaxed, after all. (see Appendix 2, the route 1) MILLA: It’s always like that.

Discussion 2. ADELE: Money goes so insidiously! You just realise ‘oh, I’ve spent a hundred euros’, HELI: What kind of activity has replaced because you come here every day. [hanging out on the street]? As you said earlier that you were ‘just loitering’ before, so (see Appendix 1, the route 7) what do you do now instead? Along with an improved economic situation, be- SIRU: Well, I’ve got more homework, for coming a legal adult was a stepping stone that example, and less time. I have different circles of friends, and we’re going to cafés facilitated access to new places. Interestingly, down town or to Kiasma [the museum of I noted that expectations of adulthood were so postmodern art] to see a new exhibition. intense that the relevant places were not always (see Appendix 3, the route 6) real, but sometimes imagined places-to-be in the I continued by exploring the reasons why young young people’s (near) future (see Kenyon 1999: people discussed their experiences of new places, 94–95; Karjalainen 2006: 85). It seems that the realising that access to them reflected a trustful mere knowledge of soon reaching legal adult- relationship between parents and their offspring. hood was enough for the participants to imagine However, as the discussion below indicates, other new places-to-be. Consequently, I argue that a changes such as an improved economic situation new adulthood place may be a real or imagined

79 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 experience of a place-to-be in the future. Some- ing places). I noted that the participants mentally times these adult places were a combination of prepared for their new life situation before these the two: an experience of received freedom and changes came about. As indicated above, Karoli- a future place-to-be: ina and Ilona strongly believed that they would experience inclusivity and insideness (see Relph Discussion 1. 1976: 55), even if they were still imagining plac- HELI: Do you think that turning 18 will es-to-be in the future (see Karjalainen 2006: 81). somehow change your life? Ilona specifically believed that adulthood would give her more courage and confidence. Although – the new adulthood places were still imagined, the visions clearly eased the experienced rift between KAROLIINA: [laughs] present places (youth) and places-to-be (adulthood). Thus, imagining places-to-be seemed to OLIVIA: I no longer need to worry whether there’s a warm place [to spend time]. And I be a transitional experience that connected plac- believe my study motivation will decrease at es of the past with future places along a contin- first because I may get a bit excited [about partying] … Maybe I’ll spend more time uum, which furthermore facilitated encounters in Helsinki. I guess I won’t have any strict curfews, and studying is my own responsibility with real places of adulthood when the time was as my mum doesn’t nag me about it too much. right. In this sense, these imagined places were (see Appendix 1, the route 6) sources of transitional experiences that bridged childhood and adulthood. Discussion 2. Whether it was improved personal financ- ILONA: I guess we’re not going to celebrate es, a trustful relationship with parents or legal [the first of May] otherwise apart from using coloured hair spray… But when I turn 18 coming-of-age, these changes brought adult- I guess we’ll often go to clubs and pubs hood closer. Although young children create [laughing] connections to new places independently and within a framework set by adults (see Kullman HELI: So you think that will change your life? 2010; Ruckenstein 2012: 62), I noted that it was also possible actively to negotiate access ILONA: Yes, I guess I’ll have more courage to go places that used to be forbidden. to serious adult places (cf. Gordon & Lahelma (see Appendix 3, the route 9) 2002: 9). However, not all the participants were as ready to do that as Victor was: When I investigated how legal adulthood influenced the meanings of personal places I found VICTOR: We have our own community in these houses, we know each other. There’s a that the dynamics between private and public house-company board [in Finnish ‘taloyhtiön had changed. Although young people may ex- hallitus’] and I’m also a member... and the only one who is a minor. perience their place of residence as a controlled (see Appendix 2, the route 7) public place (Valentine 1996b: 206; Lahelma & Gordon 2003: 382), it seems that reaching legal Victor was clearly proud of his access to an adult adulthood gives them more privacy in the paren- place where there were no other minors. It has tal home (e.g. parents exerted less control over been suggested that accessing new places re- their daily lives) and more freedom in (semi-) quires active effort from young people (e.g. seek- public places (e.g. access to indoor adult drinking and creating meaningful places), rather than

80 passively accepting that the place has nothing ences, even if they appear to be modest. Third, to offer (Christensen & Mikkelsen 2013: 204). I note that although individuals in general do However, as Victor’s comment suggests, he did not need to reflect on their daily environments not create his own place, but he found an adult given their habituality (Karjalainen 2004: 54), place where he experienced feelings of inclusion in the context of growing up the meanings of and insideness. These feelings were constructed places may change so rapidly that reflection is with the help of adults (e.g. parents and neigh- necessary. bours: see Kullman 2010: 834–836), but access Living between past and new places was a to an adult place as a minor required plenty of very difficult experience for some participants. work from Victor, too. Having discussed his place Feelings of misfit with new places arose when experiences with him, I started to wonder why they could not associate with their past places, other participants did not talk about their expe- but on the other hand could not find adult plac- riences of adult places such as a house compa- es that would engender feelings of insideness. ny. It may be that this was too serious for many Feelings of misfit seemed to refer to place ex- of them, in that it demanded commitment and periences that gave the participant new agen- decision-making. It thus seems that most of the cy but not the opportunity to prove or practice participants wanted to experience adulthood, but his or her adult identity. The reasons for this not too seriously. included a lack of necessary skills or resourc- These examples indicate that young people’s es, and/or limited support from other people experiences of spatial being are multi-layered in in the practising of adulthood. These negative that places of the past, present and future overlap experiences were sources of non-belonging and and are intertwined (see Kuusisto-Arponen 2014: outsideness, and occasionally resulted in inci- 1). I suggested earlier that childhood places help dental outsideness meaning that insideness is young people to understand their past. I claim in partial and limited (Relph 1976: 52). Even if this section that their experiences of adult places, these young people had various ways of han- which were often imagined places-to-be in the dling these experiences, their negative feelings future, were their first opportunities to construct made places seem hostile, exclusive and con- adult identities. They started to seek adult plac- tentious. Although feelings of misfit in every- es when their current everyday places became day places were rarer among the participants boring and prevented them from practising their than experiences of inclusion, I noted that it was newly acquired adulthood. Imagining places-to- not always easy to find a balance between the be helped them to prepare for their adult futures increased freedom of youth and the responsi- and to forge connections between the past and bilities related to adulthood. Specifically, if ex- the future. Thus I argue, first, that young people pectations related to being adult are too strong start to practise their adult agency (see Kullman (see also Macek et al. 2007: 467), young people 2010; Collin-Lange 2013: 418) when they can may go through difficult experiences of misfit: imagine new, adult places. Second, in the light of the above discussions, I suggest that their first SATU: I’m the oldest child and I’ve always had quite a lot of responsibility. I’m not sure if adult places resemble smaller pockets of adult- that sometimes came a bit too early… hood where they can test their novel agency. This is when recently encountered places assume new HELI: Would you like to elaborate what you adult tones and nuances, meanings and experi- mean by ‘responsibility’?

81 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

SATU: Well, when thinking about how to take was a… funny feeling. care of things. (see Appendix 3, the route 2)

HELI: You mean in general? Discussion 2. MILLA: I was in [a city in central Europe] for SATU: Yes, how to get home insurance and all a year [as an exchange student], and I love that when you move to live on your own. the city… But for the future, a long weekend (see Appendix 2, the route 1) will be enough [laughing]. I don’t want to be there any longer. Or maybe it [being an exchange student] just was not my thing. Our Satu was not alone in her confusing experiences exchange-student organisation was extremely rigorous and I had to inform them if I wanted and practices of emerging adulthood (see Gordon to leave the city. My parents in Finland had to & Lahelma 2002: 9–10). Interestingly, however, notify them, my host had to notify them, and the family I was going to visit had to notify the participants experienced this confusion dif- them… And I had to wait for permission. OK, ferently. A few, for example, seemed to consider we didn’t follow the rules but it shouldn’t have been done like that. I want independent living. themselves more adult than the others, but they Studying abroad could be cool but not... life had lost their newly acquired agency. It turned in custody. (see Appendix 1, the route 7) out that, once constructed, places of adulthood were not permanent sources of experienced in- Youth researchers have suggested that leav- sideness, even if the young people had tried to ing the parental home may entail multiple re- maintain their adult identity in their new places: turns and departures, or ‘boomeranging’ (du Bois-Reymond 1998; Tyyskä 2013: 61; Gor- Discussion 1. man-Murray 2015: 248). I claim that growing ALINA: I feel like an outsider because I don’t up also entails boomeranging between places. have many friends left here, of course [after an exchange year]. I’ve met new people but Young people’s experienced level of maturi- they are quite a lot younger than me so… ty does not necessarily match the opportuni- studying feels compulsory. ties everyday places provide, and growing up involves several departures and returns be- HELI: OK, so this is your fourth year? tween childhood and adulthood places. Ali- na and Milla implied in their narratives that ALINA: No, actually I have studied for only one year and I was in [South America] for they expected their adulthood to ‘progress two years [as an exchange student] and came back to finish my studies. – – I still live with linearly’, but the reality was different. As my mum and brother. they told me, they suddenly realised that they no longer fitted in the places of their daily – lives because their agency and independence had been taken away. In Relph’s (1976: 49, ALINA: It’s not so easy to come back to 51) terms, Alina and Milla were experienc- Finland [and to live in the parental home] after two years – – When I came back, this ing outsideness (Alina in Finland, Milla in a place had somehow disappeared from my foreign country), and feelings of homeless- mind… It had become a dream-like place that wasn’t necessarily real. Like it was happening ness and non-belonging, even alienation, be- in a surreal dream world. It was scary to came part of their lives. As Alina described come to a place that should be familiar, but it was a long time since I last encountered it. it, her places of the past had changed such I didn’t have nice feelings... It was like going that she no longer recognised them (see Kar- to a familiar place, but at the same time like stepping into a dream world [laughing]. It jalainen 2004: 54, 2006: 84–85). The place

82 where she had felt at home no longer gave JARKKO: I can’t go to the youth centre because I’m 18 [years old]. her a sense of belonging, but had become a shelter that did not ease the feeling of being HELI: Oh, of course, has Sello replaced it on the move between two countries and two somehow? local environments (see Kuusisto-Arponen 2009: 550). Similarly, Milla felt homesick JARKKO: Yes, we hang out there. in her new place, not least because her independence had been taken away (see Sea- HELI: Do you go to pubs or night clubs now mon & Sowers 2008: 45). Given that feel- that you’re 18? ings of control and acceptance are necessary to experience belonging (see Tuan 1974: 4; JARKKO: Well, I did, but I realised that all my money was gone... So I don’t. I’ve started Relph 1976: 55), the lack of control clearly to spend time with friends who are all 16 or increased the girls’ feelings of alienation. To 17 [year-olds] and we usually drink beer [purchased from the shop] somewhere. ease their sense of misfit, they had set ex- (see Appendix 1, the route 3) pectations and hopes for their future places (see also Karjalainen 2004: 60–63): Ali- As Jarkko’s narrative implies, access to new adult- na was looking forward to returning to the hood places does not guarantee insideness (see place in which she belonged, and Milla was Relph 1976: 51). His feeling of belonging in looking forward to returning to Finland when places of adulthood was partial in that he could she was still abroad. At the same time, their not afford to go to them. At the same time, he memories of the past constructed connections did not have access to certain places of his earlier between places and themselves when their childhood (in this case a youth centre), because current places did not allow for attachment he was an adult. His solution in this difficult sit- (see Malkki 1992). In this sense, these feel- uation of being in between places is interesting: ings of misfit describe how the personal plac- he had started to hang out in marginal places es became experientially disconnected, and again, but now with younger friends who were how the girls handled this. Drawing on these still minors. Interestingly, his experiences related examples I claim, first, that sudden changes to marginal places seemed to be relatively con- in young people’s experienced maturity also sistent, even if his position as a minor had lost reconstruct the meanings assigned to places. its meaning (see Alasuutari 2004: 131). Thus, Second, these narratives also imply that once Jarkko’s reaction was very different from that of received, independence can trickle back into other participants. Unlike many of them, he did tiny pockets of adulthood. not consider spending time in the places of his It has been argued that individuals who feel earlier youth (e.g. for hanging out) embarrassing, that the world is changing too quickly may evoke boring or ironic, and rather expressed feelings of a stable or idealised image of the past (Tuan belonging. From this perspective, his experiences 1977: 188; Malkki 1992). I found that even if of daily places had not radically changed. Life places of the past were not idealised, the stability changes and attachment to the places of his ear- of familiar places strengthened the young peo- lier life may not, in combination, have provided ple’s sense of control. For instance, past places him with many opportunities to experience adult- evoked feelings of safety when new, adult plac- hood, but it seems that he was not interested in es felt exclusive: these things. This would suggest that adulthood

83 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 and youth are subjective experiences and involve fined as young adults. New agency and free- unique relationships with daily environments. dom gave them opportunities to look at their It is no surprise that experienced misfit with places from a new angle, which reconstructed daily places evokes strong reactions. Outside- the meanings they assigned to their everyday ness is a feeling of some sort of lived division places. They tended to discuss how the places or separation between individuals and the world of their daily lives had become imbued with – ‘for example, the feeling of homesickness in a new experiences and new meanings (wheth- new place’ (Seamon & Sowers 2008: 45). The er they be positive or negative). It could be participants’ experiences of misfit were clear- concluded from the analysis that these young ly examples of lived separation from their en- people no longer wanted to associate with the vironments (see Seamon & Sowers 2008: 45), old places they frequented in their childhood, but perhaps were closer to Cresswell’s (2004: largely because they considered them boring 110–111) notion of homelessness, which ‘is very and conservative compared with the new places much defined by a certain kind of disconnection of adulthood. In terms of centrality, their adult- from particular forms of place’. Thus, I argue hood places had started to replace the places that feelings of misfit with places are indicative that were so important in their childhood. These of disconnection between places of the past and places still carried strong memories of the past new places, when one is forced to live in be- but were no longer the focal places of inside- tween. In this respect, the places of misfit were ness in their daily lives (see Relph 1976: 51). not transitional (see Kullman 2010) in that they However, feelings of belonging and inclusion did not function as safe havens when experienc- in the new places were not self-evident. Some es of new places were exhausting. Furthermore, of the young people experienced their new po- even if experiences of misfit were associated on- sitioning as stressful, and they missed the se- ly with certain places, experiences of outside- curity provided by their past places. In these ness tended to be widespread and changed the cases, memories related to places of inclusion meanings of personal places and experiences of and insideness helped them to handle the new adulthood. It is acknowledged that youth is a pe- situations. However, sometimes these memo- riod between childhood and adulthood (e.g. Kett ries were not enough to counteract the outside- 1971: 283; Valentine et al. 1998: 4; Northcote ness inherent in the new places of adulthood: 2006: 2; Weller 2006: 97; Evans 2008: 1663), they were living in between past places and but I argue that it is also a question of living places-to-be, which caused feelings of misfit. I and being experientially in between past places recognise from these findings that growing up and places-to-be. is period of life in which young people create One of the major findings reported in this many new affective bonds between new peo- section is that young people’s place experienc- ple, places and settings, which formulate new es had been recently reconstructed due to their feelings of insideness and acceptance (see Tu- altered position. Knowing that the meanings of an 1974: 4; Relph 1976: 55). As noted in earli- places are reformulated during the life course er research, these experiences describe young (see Karjalainen 2006: 89), I focused on the people’s new, ‘relative independence’ (Macek suddenness of the changes in the participants’ et al. 2007: 464), which is given by adults but place experiences: they were decreasingly po- acted upon by young people and adults togeth- sitioned as young people and increasingly de- er. Nevertheless, it is relative in that it does not

84 Table 7. Travelling on daily routes.

Alone 74 mentions With a friend or family member 66 mentions With a pet 4 mentions always mean full agency. It seems that, on the encounters and their impact on young people’s one hand young people’s independence is replace experiences in more depth. stricted by adults, but on the other hand, young A glance at the travelled routes tracked by the people do not necessarily see themselves as GPS device (see Appendices 1, 2 and 3) reveals adults in the way their environments would that the participants favoured routes and places imply. From the perspective of place experi- where encounters with other individuals were ences, this indicates that feelings of belonging common. The routes typically included shop- in new places of emerging adulthood are un- ping centres, traffic stations, shops and kiosks, sure and open, even if increased independence all located on well-used pathways. The material is an expected event. gathered from the independent assignments (see Table 7)38 also reveals that many of the partici- 6.2 Urban encounters as pants walked or travelled with other people. In constructors of young particular, the importance of being and spending people’s place experiences time with friends was stressed in the IA material, To say that places are socially constructed is al- which also referred to practices such as walking so to say that they are not natural or given. A and going shopping with friends as daily social further implication is that human forces made activities. This analysis is in line with research places, and human forces can equally undo them suggesting that social interaction, especially time (Cresswell 2004: 30). Social encounters37 are forc- spent with friends, is very important for young es that have an impact on place experiences and people (see e.g. Tani 2015: 134; Pyyry 2015a). the construction of their meanings. They define However, the meanings attached to social en- which places are considered meaningfully thick counters and the place experiences related to and which are lived through (see Casey 2001: them remain a mystery if one only looks at the 684; Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 85). Encounters mappings and the IAs. For instance, the rela- also construct feelings of insideness and outside- tionship between social encounters and young ness (Relph 1976: 49–55). I observed during the people’s feelings of insideness and outsideness analysis that the participants reported meetings was not elucidated as intensively as in the other with certain individuals as being more powerful research material. Perusal of the interview mate- constructors of their place experiences than other rial and the photographs gives a more multi-lay- meetings. I also noted that certain places were ered and complex picture, the implication being more socially and culturally diverse than others. that encounters with wanted and unwanted in- These notions encouraged me to study social

38 In retrospect, it would have been useful to distinguish be- 37 The encounters analysed in this research refer to social tween ‘with friends’ and ‘with family members’. Some meetings in (semi-)public spaces. Thus, most encoun- participants underlined the word ‘friend’, or wrote else- ters with parents (at home) and teachers (at school) fall where that friends were their most important compan- beyond its scope. ion.

85 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 dividuals influenced the participants’ feelings of Wanted encounters arousing feelings of con- belonging and non-belonging. tinuation with places took place in familiar places that were socially shared with significant individ- 6.2.1 Encountering ‘us’: places uals (usually friends). In general, they held pos- of wanted encounters itive memories that fostered feelings of predict- If subjective memories help individuals to com- ability and continuation in daily life. The partici- pile a controllable mass of personal places that, pants used these memories to construct a positive furthermore, tell them who they are (see Kar- image of themselves, and although they strength- jalainen 2006: 83), shared memories seem to ened their friendships and self-image, they were influence the construction of feelings of belong- not necessarily related to very special places. The ing. In my study, for instance, wanted encounters places nevertheless tended to be strong sources helped the participants to cope with the doubts of feelings of belonging, despite their mundane and fears associated with novel places of adult- nature. On the level of everyday life, it has been hood. However, I noted that whereas feelings of suggested that friends share experiences through insideness referred to a ‘deep, unself-conscious language, mutual movement and being togeth- immersion in place’ and to an experience to be er, for instance (Cele 2006: 74; Christensen & ‘at home’ in one’s own community (Seamon & Mikkelsen 2013: 203–204). I noted that the par- Sowers 2008: 45), their experiences of wanted ticipants also shared their place experiences in encounters were sometimes ambivalent, even if urban meetings in mundane places: they were positive: their increased independence brought them new opportunities to encounter new Discussion 1. individuals, which occasionally evoked mixed HELI: If you meet here, where do usually go? feelings. Consequently, some of these experiences were very strong. On this basis I would ATTE: If we’re going to a friend’s place who some of us don’t know, we usually meet here define wanted encounters as embodied meetings [at the metro and bus station] with a bigger between individuals that evoke positive feelings group. in the experiencer. They require a shared understanding of common goals (see Alasuutari 2004: NIKLAS: And go there together. 15) to engender feelings of insideness, even if the experiences may also be somewhat mixed. ATTE: Yes. And in summer, we go to the beach and so on. As the analysis proceeded I distinguished two types of wanted encounters: a) those that aroused PATRIK: Yes, through this place. feelings of continuation with places, and b) those that facilitated the construction of new place ex- ATTE: Actually, we always come through this periences. The difference between them is that place when we’re going somewhere with a bigger bunch. Everyone finds their way here the former tended to be associated with memo- and the connections are good: [there is] the ries of places and the latter were commonly re- metro, bus. This works pretty well. lated to encounters with new individuals and/or (see Appendix 2, the route 4) environments. I combined both types of encounters to form the category wanted encounters as Discussion 2. sources of insideness (see Table 5). EEVA: We usually meet there [at the metro station] first and go downtown, or just stay in Itäkeskus, because all the…

86 IIRIS: …the shops are there too. SOFIA: I still spend time with the same people. I’ve met so many people here in Leppävaara, especially in Sello when we used EEVA: Yes, all the shops that we usually go to. to hang out here every day. When we were younger… (see Appendix 1, the route 7) IIRIS: In Helsinki you need to walk… The participants’ shared childhood places were EEVA: …especially in winter you don’t want less significant as social places than they used to walk outdoors, so it’s easy to come to Itäkeskus and spend the day indoors. to be and started to seem childish, although the (see Appendix 2, the route 3) memory of them was still cherished (see also Malkki 1992: 26). Why was this? It has been As exemplified below, certain encounters with suggested that when individuals convey their wanted individuals were such strong experiences subjective experiences to other people they con- that they aroused feelings of continuation even if struct them as new and intersubjective (see Kuu- they were no longer daily events. Strong memo- sisto-Arponen 2010: 79). Hence, personal place ries help to construct one’s self-image (Karjalain- experiences and an intersubjective sense of place en 2006: 83), but I also claim that shared memo- are constructed as new experiences (Kuusisto-Ar- ries help to construct an image of us. I noted that ponen 2010: 79). In this sense, the girls’ mem- feelings of a shared past and experienced con- ories of wanted encounters in childhood places tinuation clearly mattered, even if these places and their experiences of the present moment were no longer evoked similar feelings of belonging. constructed as a shared sense of place. Shared Young people do not necessarily even want these experiences were crucial in terms of connecting places to be part of their present because they past and present places as an experientially co- are so strongly associated with their earlier life herent entity. Specifically, I argue that the shared and childhood (see Malkki 1992: 26). I see this memories of places evoked feelings of contin- is an indication that insideness and outsideness uation in a familiar context in which the mean- operate as hybrids rather than binaries (see Relph ings of the places had recently changed. In this 1976: 49; Dovey 2016: 265; Tomaney 2016: 99). sense, the girls’ social places of childhood were meaningfully thick (see Casey 2001), somewhere ADELE: We came here [to Sello] when we they could always return to via their memories were young. We went to [a pizza restaurant] with friends from elementary school and and recall shared moments with friends. These messed around… We were such pigs then! shared memories also constituted a bond that maintained their attachment to one another years SOFIA: Ah, I remember! I once threw a pizza later, supporting their mutual friendships. Thus, at Leo … He was so small back then! these memories also strengthened their sense of belonging with places and their adult identities, ADELE: He was so small and now he’s so… [grown up] which they had constructed and realised together. Even if a subjective place is not the same as SOFIA: Even if we aren’t hanging out a physical location (see Relph 1976: 29), it was anymore, we have something… in common [with these people]. clear that familiar environments and material elements could evoke memories even in the absence ADELE: Yes, you meet everyone here. of significant individuals (see Tuan 1977: 139– 140; Kuusisto-Arponen & Savolainen 2016).

87 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

When memories of familiar places are consid- memories of the past, her present moment and ered from the present moment they assume an her future expectations in desirable ways. additional layer that differentiates them (see Tani Even if most of the wanted encounters 1997: 212; Karjalainen 2004: 65). However, this strengthened the experienced connections be- additional layer is not necessarily a drawback tween meaningful places of the past and pres- when familiar environments provide a sense of ent, I found that they were not direct sources of belonging: insideness. This was probably because personal meanings of places are time-deepened and mixed EMMA: This street belongs to my teenage (see Relph 1985: 26; Tomaney 2016), and the years [laughing]. My friend used to live here. This is a place I want to tell you more about… meanings attached to the social encounters that We messed around here as teenagers… And constitute place experiences are changeable and drank cider on the terrace and Mum didn’t know about it [laughing]… This house fluid (see Suurpää 2002: 190). Thus, when the and the whole terrace … this has been an important place because my best friend meanings ascribed to certain social encounters from day-care until eighth grade lived here. change, and the individuals who were ‘us’ but And then another girl moved in [when they moved away] and she became my new best became ‘them’, the subjective meanings of plac- friend. In other words, I never got rid of that es also change: place. I also ran down the hill and broke my leg, which wasn’t very nice. But this house, I’ll never get rid of it, there are so many HELI: Do you go to Kamppi to do shopping memories. or have coffee, or just to spend time? (see Appendix 3, the route 5) ALEXANDRA: Not that often anymore. I go Emma, like the participants discussed above, there maybe once a month but before I was cherished the shared memory of her teenage there literally every day. I have so many friends there. But no, [not anymore] because years (see Malkki 1992), even if ‘messing around’ there are so many people who are just messing around. I don’t want to see [them]. They’re with friends was no longer part of her daily life. like ‘let’s get drunk’ and everyone’s having However, her feelings of insideness were strong- sooo much fun…! [Ironically]. And they’re running away from the guards. Well, that ly tied to the physical environment, which she doesn’t interest me. recalled as a material place for important social (see Appendix 2, the route 8) encounters (see Kuusisto-Arponen & Savolainen 2016). A familiar house, road, hill and a broken For Alexandra, certain individuals who were pre- leg were all elements that brought her memo- viously among ‘us’ were now among the child- ry of her social place to life. Thus, as Emma’s ish ‘them’. Their presence had started to dis- experience implies, places are never done with rupt her feelings of insideness and immersion (Karjalainen 2004: 65; Relph 2016), but are nec- (see Tuan 1974: 4; Relph 1976: 55), as she was essarily ‘time-deepened and memory-qualified’ not willing to join in their local ‘place ballets’ (Relph 1985: 26). The places in which Emma had at the shopping centre (see Valentine 1997: 78). lived emerged as images and pictures of the past Her feelings of outsideness were so strong that (Karjalainen 2004: 65). However, not only did even encounters with ‘us’ (her friends) could her encounters and places connect her past and not make her feel at home (see Tani 1995: 30). present, they also forged connections with her However, she still went there to see her friends, future. As she said, she would never ‘get rid of even if unwanted encounters were inescapable. the place’, but she clearly did not want to leave Thus, Alexandra’s place experience had become it: as a socio-material element it connected her ambiguous: her memories aroused feelings of

88 continuation but her present place experience no people. And my new best friend is a boy and I spend plenty of time with him. We have been longer evoked similar feelings of insideness. It classmates with those nerds – – from the first seems from the narrative that at the same time grade. We watch movies together, exercise or celebrate a friend’s birthday. And [I spend as young people’s hanging-out practices may time] with the partygoers sometimes. Well, cause tensions with adults (e.g. Kato 2009: 54; they party more often [than me]. Tani 2011: 8–15) and with other young people (see Appendix 2, the route 1) (Cahill 2000; Pyyry 2015a: 13–14, Pickering et al. 2013: 953–956), such conflicts also detract I argue that growing up is an episode in life during from their personal place experiences and their which definitions of ‘us’ are reformed: the par- feelings of belonging. ticipants had new opportunities for social en- I started to wonder what had caused the counters but at the same time felt that certain changes in Alexandra’s place experience, and encounters prevented them from practising their therefore studied the meanings other partici- new adult identities. Thus, certain encounters be- pants attached to their wanted social encoun- gan to feel unwanted. Social encounters in pre- ters. I found that even if they described certain viously prominent places were no longer very encounters as wanted, they did not necessarily cool. These changes also influenced the mean- have very great expectations of them, despite ings the participants ascribed to their personal having shared certain places and routines over a places. Thus, when the social atmosphere in a long period of time. They changed their descrip- place changes, ‘things and places are quickly tion of social encounters from pleasant to childish drained of meaning so that their lastingness is and unwanted. In most cases, the changed mean- an irritation rather than a comfort’ (Tuan 1977: ings reflected changed ambitions: when certain 140). However, ambivalent meanings given to social encounters felt childish, the place expe- social encounters were not purely negative, and riences associated with them seemed irrelevant seemed to clarify the kind of future expectations or unwanted: the young people had. In fact, these future expectations related to new, positive encounters with Discussion 1. wanted individuals aroused in the participants EMMA: [University admission] would be the feelings of continuation with places. Thus, not beginning of a new phase of life. [It would mean] new places in which to spend time. only did shared memories strengthen feelings of insideness (Relph 1976: 55), future hopes relat- HELI: Do you think your circle of friends ed to social encounters also connected the young would change? people’s experiences of places past and present. As Tuan (1977: 196) suggests, individuals EMMA: Yes, I know that it’ll change, because need to discard any personal memories that stand of new people from the university. I have a few friends who I definitely want to keep in touch in the way of their ‘present and future projects’. with, but I could also say [laughing] that I’m a bit fed up with some of them. It would be While wanting to leave unpleasant memories be- great to meet new people. hind, they are willing to preserve those that sup- (see Appendix 3, the route 5) port their sense of self (see Tuan 1977: 196). Memories of wanted encounters were clear- Discussion 2. ly among those the participants wanted to pre- SATU: I have different groups of friends serve. Such encounters are needed to encourage [nowadays]. One of them is a nerdy group and then there’s a partygoers’ group with new feelings of insideness, for instance, and shared

89 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 places serve to construct experienced connec- HELI: You said that you wanted to meet new people, so did you know anyone from here tions between places of the past and the present. [Tikkurila school]? However, it would be too simplistic to claim that young people’s social relationships always gen- LILLI: I didn’t know anyone here. I didn’t erate feelings of belonging. The context of grow- even have acquaintances… All the people were new. It felt like a good plan to meet new ing up, in particular, seemed to reformulate the people but actually it’s really hard because dynamics of social relations: in many cases indi- everyone comes from this area and they have their own circles and I have to join in as a viduals who were once among ‘us’ later became semi-stranger. But I’ve now got quite a few ‘them’. Thus, encounters that were once experi- acquaintances. (see Appendix 3, the route 4) enced as pleasant were not similarly supportive of these young people’s sense of self (see Tuan Lilli’s narrative exemplifies a situation in which a 1977: 198), and did not promote connectivity young person’s expectations were tested in prac- between places. As discussed above, in new sit- tice (see Arnett 2004: 6, see also Macek et al. uations they recalled shared memories of places 2007). Contrary to her presuppositions, friend- or set hopes for potential new encounters in the ships did not develop very quickly and the status (near) future. Thus, while certain shared places of ‘us’ was not acquired without resilience. Im- became faded memories, others were cherished balance between reality and Lilli’s expectations as constructors of the self. of the place seemed to be a somewhat stressful Wanted encounters that facilitated the con- experience (see Karjalainen 2004: 54). Howev- struction of new place experiences refer to posi- er, she had managed to overcome her feelings of tively experienced encounters that supported the outsideness by actively cultivating relationships young people’s feelings of maturity in new en- in which she belonged to ‘us’ rather than ‘them’, vironments on the one hand, and enabled them and reorganising her place experiences, however to handle insecurities related to adulthood on the unpleasant that was. This active approach not only other. I observed again that these encounters usu- supported her sense of survival but also showed ally involved meetings with familiar people. Giv- that her desire to encounter new individuals was en that the participants had a lot of freedom in so strong that she was ready to experience inse- terms of companionship (e.g. friends, peers, girl- curity and even alienation. and boyfriends), these encounters were proba- Not only were these young people meeting bly very important. They clearly evoked feelings new individuals, they were also exploring new of insideness, meaning that the young people environments with familiar individuals. Young felt ‘safe rather than threatened, enclosed rath- people’s places are often located in the public er than exposed, at ease rather than stressed.’ realm (e.g. Vanderbeck & Johnson 2000: 5). In (Seamon & Sowers 2008: 45). A further out- this respect, the findings of this study resonate come of wanted encounters with friends was to with the results of earlier research in that the par- dispel fears and anxiety related to new places in ticipants discussed their experiences of and en- which something unexpected and exciting could counters in public space. However, even if young happen (see MacDonald et al. 2005: 873; Trell people’s social places tend to be located on the & van Hoven 2014: 325). However, along with borders of the public realm (see e.g. Matthews the familiar the participants were also actively et al. 2000: 284–285; Valentine et al. 2010: 920; seeking places where they could encounter new, Pyyry 2015a: 8), the participants talked about unknown individuals: how their social places in the city had extended

90 to new environments. Encounters with friends same as it used to be. Wanted social encounters were pivotal in this regard in encouraging them played a major role in this change: to explore new places: HELI: You said that you have a new best friend, so what do you usually do together? HELI: Do you go often to the city centre [in Helsinki]? SATU: All kinds of things. We watch movies and TV series, do sports. He moved into his NELLI: Well, quite rarely. Sometimes own apartment last summer. All the basic with friends – –. It’s easier to walk [when things. He is learning to live alone, so we’re I go there] because I’ve got more friends learning to do grocery shopping, laundry and nowadays. It doesn’t matter if you get lost with so on… a friend if you go to an unknown place. So you can go a bit further from the city centre. (see Appendix 3, the route 7) HELI: So you spend plenty of time at his place? Reflecting findings from earlier research, young people’s feelings of spatial belonging developed SATU: Yes. in daily routines and embodied spatial relation- (see Appendix 2, the route 1) ships (see Kuusisto-Arponen 2014: 435), and by just being present and appropriating the place Paradoxically, it has been suggested that places (Pyyry 2015: 13). I found, further, that feelings of in the public realm are where young people can belonging in new places were constructed through enjoy privacy away from adults (see e.g. Mat- shared mobility practices. Here, the company of thews et al. 2000: 284–285). However, I noted friends was crucial: Nelli’s new agency would that although agency related to daily places had not have actualised without new friends, whose increased, the participants did have privacy in company gave her encouragement and confi- private places. I also looked at the social activi- dence, and alleviated her fears associated with ties the young people considered interesting. In- new places. Although it is acknowledged that stead of engaging in dangerous or questionable emerging adulthood abounds with insecurities pursuits (see Porter et al. 2010a: 800–802; Trell and discontinuities, and with societal expectations & van Hoven 2014: 325) that are assumed to (see e.g. Puuronen 1997: 219; Roberts 2012), attract young people, Satu and her friend were the above narrative indicates that on the level of keen to learn about mundane, private activities everyday life, some of these difficulties can be (e.g. doing laundry). These so-called adult activ- overcome in the company of friends. Reclaim- ities called for an active and serious approach. ing new places with friends was not only excit- Interestingly, Satu and her friend were willing to ing, but also a way of experiencing significant acquire these new skills together, hence the place feelings of maturity. fostered feelings of maturity in the friend, and in Although young people’s social places are Satu, who was not yet living on her own. At the acknowledged as marginal in the public realm same time, the place gave them the opportunity to (Valentine et al. 2010: 920; Pyyry 2015a: 8), I behave like relaxed young people, but in privacy argue that there were changes in the meaning of because it was not a place where they would have ‘private’ and ‘public’: their social places seem to been interrupted by adults. Thus, it was also a have extended to private realms. I suggest that place where Satu and her friend could hang out the meaning of the public realm as a social place privately. In this respect, it had shared meanings, and source of insideness and privacy is not the as experiences of childhood and adulthood were

91 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 intertwined. It was also clearly a source of ins- was hidden (see Hemming 2011: 68), they con- ideness in that it made it possible to experience fused the participant’s relationship with person- adulthood and youth at the same time. al places, sometimes resulting in experienced Even if places and social relationships are outsideness. Tolerance, therefore, is not only a renegotiable, the phase of growing up seemed question of equity between individuals but also to push the young people into reorganising the structures one’s sense of spatial belonging (see meanings assigned to social places and relation- Relph 2008). ships. As reported in earlier studies, their want- Adults tend to see young people in pub- ed social encounters seemed to occur in places lic spaces as a potential threat given that the where they could meet their friends at any time public realm is considered an adult-dominated without having fixed plans (e.g. Pyyry 2015a: 8). space (see e.g. Valentine 1996a: 596, 1996b: 206; However, given that they had fewer restrictions Malone 2002: 162; Aitken 2001: 186–189). This in adult-dominated places, I argue that their social places young people in an ambiguous position places were more reminiscent of adults’ places in relation to public space (Malone 2002: 162), in which mature behaviour was required. This causing conflicts with adults (see Tani 2011: also changed their expectations of their social 8–15, 2015). Interestingly, I found that although encounters. These young people were seeking such conflicts had become less common in the encounters that would increase their feelings of participants’ lives, daily collisions in the public maturity and make it possible to experience in- realm assumed a new form. sideness in new places. The analysis revealed two types of unwanted encounters: a) threatening personal places and b) 6.2.2 Encountering ‘them’: places living with ‘them’ in everyday places, which I of unwanted encounters combined under the title unwanted encounters Urban life in the city is characterised by random causing outsideness (Table 5). Both types of encounters as it is impossible to choose the peo- encounter were experienced as negative, which ple who will be involved in place experiences. influenced the participants’ feelings of belonging Daily encounters evoke a range of feelings, some in personal places. The former were more un- of which arouse feelings of insecurity and outs- pleasant and intruded on the participants personal ideness. In this sense, urban life is contested, and sense of belonging, whereas the latter type could both wanted and unwanted encounters are needed be handled, even if it was difficult. (see Kuusisto-Arponen 2003: 55–56). This stems Unwanted encounters threatening personal from the fact that the meanings attached to ‘our places are those that evoked negative feelings place’ are not relevant without the idea of ‘their such as anxiety, fear or anger, culminating in space’ (Kuusisto-Arponen 2003: 55), which in feelings of outsideness. The assumption that fe- general is something that ‘we’ who are part of males find it easier to talk about their fears be- ‘our’ meaning of place cannot or do not wish cause they are not under pressure to be bold res- to experience (Kuusisto-Arponen 2003: 55). I onates with the findings of this study (Koskela noted in the analysis phase that unwanted en- 1997). Feelings of fear were more likely to be counters were often brief and took place in the voiced by female participants, and feelings of public realm, which aroused feelings of insecuri- anger by male participants (see Koskela 1997: ty. Although many of these encounters involved 311). However, whether reacting with anger or (ostensibly) tolerant behaviour, and any hostility fear, it seems that the participants did not wish

92 to associate with members of the Other, who Discussion 3. were considered somehow different from ‘us’ AROON: There’s always something to improve [in urban planning]. For instance, (see e.g. Ahmed 2000; Harinen et al. 2005; the drunks. There are too many bars. If there Simonsen 2007: 177–178). Some of the neg- were fewer drunks, this could be a nice place. ative experiences were so strong that the mere (see Appendix 3, the route 11) physical proximity of ‘them’ was difficult to tolerate. If one thinks of places as ‘meeting Discussion 4. points, moments or conjunctures, where so- SIRU: There are lots of young people in Tikkurila… They sit around and make a racket, cial practices and trajectories’ form configura- and I’m like: ’I’d like to read here…!’ [At the tions, which are constantly in transformation library] and under negotiation, it might explain the hos- (see Appendix 3, the route 6) tile reactions (Simonsen 2008: 22): places are contested. Reflecting on this I concluded that This type of comment encouraged me to find unwanted social encounters had the power to reasons for these negative experiences. As dis- transform subjective experiences of place in cussed below, difficult encounters seemed to have that they seemed to (re)narrate and (re)define something to do with sharing space and other it without permission39. As such, unwanted en- resources, as suggested in earlier research (see counters tended to be strong definers of place Harinen et al. 2005: 283). Some places were more experiences. socially diverse, and involved more encounters The definition of ‘us’ and ‘them’ depends experienced as unwanted than others. In such on the definer and the socio-spatial setting. Ac- cases the participants said that ‘they’ were un- cording to the participants, individuals seen as invited guests in the subjective place experience, ‘them’ included those with different ethnic back- and were not willing to share ‘our’ space. Thus, grounds, those suffering from alcoholism and unwanted encounters with ‘them’ were treated mental-health issues, buskers and beggars, and with suspicion because they threatened, or even other young people: destroyed, the participants’ personal places (see Cresswell 2006: 32). I specifically noted that the Discussion 1. negative encounters were not necessarily verbal, JULIA: There are older foreign men who and that the physical presence of ‘them’ in a per- look… sonal place was enough to disrupt the experience of ‘our place’. Furthermore, when there was no MIIA: Yes, they’re crazy! There’s also a man who’s walking and talking to himself, he’s a verbal communication, ‘they’ (e.g. refugees and total lunatic. foreigners) were perceived as a socio-economic (see Appendix 1, the route 5) threat (Pälli 1999: 209, 213):

Discussion 2. Discussion 1. EEVA: There’s an AA clinic and lots of ILONA: The only problem with this place is that weirdos… There’s a rehab clinic and [the the buskers are always here, as you can see. people in it] are a bit strange… (see Appendix 2, the route 3) HELI: Does their music irritate you? 39 It should be pointed out, however, that only a few of the participants mentioned very difficult encounters they ILONA: Yes, actually. I’ve never liked were not able to handle. Thus, unwanted encounters did beggars. not always result in outsideness.

93 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Figure 12. Miia took a photograph of a solitary accordion that belonged to a street busker.

HELI: How do you feel when there’s someone MIIA: There’s no music here. who’s only begging?

JULIA: Well, there are other accordion ILONA: Well, I don’t know. They irritate me players, they can dance. because they’re only squatting and making money out of it. (see Appendix 3, the route 9) MIIA: That’s true. (see Appendix 1, the route 5)

Discussion 2. Discussion 3. MIIA: Hey, look at that… The accordion there, the man is always playing it. Let’s take ANNI: The beggars are always there, next a photo [Figure 12] to the entrance. The same people everyday. They’re a bit… disturbing, but what can you do? HELI: I’ve also noticed him. How about…?

HELI: Does it irritate you that they spend JULIA: But in my opinion, it’s really irritating time there or that they’re asking for money? that there are beggars, they’re so… irritating!

ANNI: Well, sometimes yes, but they don’t HELI: So… you don’t like them really? actually do anything. If they came to you and said ’gimme money’, that’d be super irritating. They’re quite discrete but… JULIA: No. Buskers are alright, at least (see Appendix 2, the route 6) they’re doing something and aren’t just sitting. And squatting there! Belonging and non-belonging are not necessarily individual choices, and it may be a question of MIIA: But some people can’t afford an accordion, that’s the difference! [ironically] community acceptance (Jones 1999: 19). Where- as some individuals are locals and are likely to JULIA: They could dance then…! remain so, the socio-spatial identity of incomers

94 requires negotiation (Jones 1999: 19). Beggars places not only for the sake of equality but also and street buskers are examples of incomers who to enhance the feeling of belonging. tend to be very poor and in a vulnerable posi- As the analysis evolved it became clear that tion. Nevertheless (or perhaps therefore), ‘their’ the definition of ‘them’ is not fixed. If the ‘eval- actions in ‘our’ places were detrimental to the uation of the out-group is tied to the social and participants’ feelings of insideness. I see this as physical location’ (Suurpää 2002: 189), it is not an indication of the complexity of social rela- surprising that certain personal places seemed to tions and a manifestation of the ‘betweenness’ evoke stronger feelings of tolerance than others. of place (see Dovey 2016). The experience of A discussion with Anni exemplified this. As she a place extends beyond binaries and is rather a said (see the Discussion 3 above), (‘foreign’) mesh of feelings of insideness and outsideness begging individuals aroused feelings of outside- (see Dovey 2016). The problem with unwanted ness in the shopping centre, whereas meetings encounters lies in the fact that accepting the Other with foreigners in the city centre were wanted en- requires more than just their acceptance as part of counters. It thus seems that differences between the place (see e.g. Hemming 2011), and involves individuals may sometimes strengthen feelings crossing imagined borders that are founded on of belonging (Suurpää 2002: 190), even if it was stereotypes and presuppositions (see Illman 2006: the exoticism of ‘them’ that broke through feel- 114–115). I noted that the participants were not ings of outsideness (cf. Harinen et al. 2005: 283): interested in letting ‘them’ be present in ‘our’ places, which indicates that tolerance was still HELI: Do you ever go to other places, like the centre of Helsinki? in the far distance. For Miia and Julia, even the presence of a solitary accordion was enough to ANNI: Well yes, I go shopping downtown. It’s provoke anger and outsideness. In this context, a nice change and there are more people. And the idea of learning to accept difference through lots of foreigners. local knowledge and respecting diversity (see Ill- man 2006; Relph 2008: 314–315) as a way of re- HELI: Eh, pardon? solving difficulties related to ‘them’ is somewhat naïve: the participants were clearly not ready to ANNI: You see many foreigners and hear different languages. open up ‘our’ place to ‘them’, or to see ‘them’ (see Appendix 2, the route 6) as equal individuals (see Illman 2006: 118). In fact, they (indirectly) suggested that ‘they’ should The experiences discussed so far were less ex- learn the cultural ‘norms’ of ‘our’ place. Although treme than the ones I document below. When I researchers have studied young people’s hostile analysed these highly negative feelings and fears attitudes towards the Other (e.g. Rastas 2005; related to encounters with ‘them’, I noted that the Nayak 2010), fewer studies have reflected on experiences had a lot to do with the participants’ the impact of negative encounters on place ex- earlier life and place experiences. On the other periences. Thus, it was interesting to note that hand, places with plenty of social and cultural while the participants did not have the resourc- diversity potentially provoked stronger emotional es or the opportunity to mitigate their attitudes, reactions than more homogenous places: the presence of ‘them’ disturbed their feelings of place. In line with Relph (2008), therefore, Discussion 1. I suggest that one should accept ‘them’ in ‘our’ ALEX: My parents are [from eastern Europe] and my dad’s mother was Finnish. And my

95 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

dad’s father was [from eastern Europe]. I like talking to them. But if there’s only one always speak [a language] at home. But we’re foreigner [it is more tolerable]. I know quite Finnish, which is good, in my opinion. many [well-behaving] foreigners, but I I’m not so sure about ‘internationality’ [that also know foreigners who have done stupid we had been talking about]. I think we should things. I think Finland takes in foreigners quit taking in refugees to Finland because it too easily. Finland is a Schengen country only causes lots of trouble. and [individuals of a nationality] come here to beg. They take your empty bottles and anything that gives them even a little bit HELI: You mean non-European [migrants]…? of money. That does not impress me. But if someone can speak Finnish, that’s fine. (see Appendix 2, the route 8) ALEX: Well, yes. I have quite a lot of foreign friends, I’m not a racist. But when you look at what has happened in Sweden, France and Criticism targeted at humanistic geography warns the UK, I don’t want the same to happen in of the danger that a place may become inac- Finland. tive and passive, a refuge from dynamism (see Massey 1991: 26–27). Although the findings of HELI: Do you mean socially segregated urban areas? this study indicate that place experiences do not need to be static to promote a sense of belonging ALEX: Yes. We were living in our own (see Simonsen 2008: 17; Relph 2008: 317), Alex apartment but there were city rental apartments close to us. And refugee families and Alexandra seemed to believe that stability started to move there. Their kids were would have removed the feelings of alienation screaming and messing around in our yard too. They didn’t understand how to behave. they experienced (see Relph 1976: 51), which were triggered by unwanted encounters. Their HELI: What irritated you the most? That they place experiences were imbued with such neg- came to your area? ative meanings that they used racist expressions to describe their feelings, and referred to ‘them’ ALEX: It’s difficult to explain, but like my as a socio-economic threat (see Pälli 1999: 209, parents have told me that when we moved to Finland we didn’t get money from the 213). What lay behind these extreme experienc- government. And a family from [a country] es? One explanation relates to their life circum- moved there and [the Department of Social Care] paid for their prams and so on. When stances. Both Alex and Alexandra were full-time we moved here my dad had to find a job, mum students on low incomes. Furthermore, Alex had took care of me and my sister went to school. That’s unfair. an immigrant background and Alexandra felt she (see Appendix 2, the route 2) was being displaced in her school. Possibly more significantly, their feelings of anger seemed to Discussion 2. stem from memories of negative encounters in ALEXANDRA: [laughing] I’m actually a bit the past. These painful recollections of ‘them’ of a racist. I’m quite biased against people. strengthened rather than mitigated their attitudes Well, I mean gays are fine but if someone is a foreigner, the situation [is more complicated]. (see Valentine 2008: 325), and did not encourage That’s why Itäkeskus school is not the most suitable place for me [because it is tolerance. Against this experiential background, multicultural] the presence of ‘them’ aroused feelings of injus- tice, and they seemed to feel that their city was HELI: Do you mean individuals who are favouring ‘them’ to the detriment of Alex’s and visibly different? Alexandra’s daily experiences. I also observed that their feelings of unfairness had serious con- ALEXANDRA: It depends. If there’s a group of foreigners making a noise, I don’t feel sequences for Alex’s and Alexandra’s construc-

96 tion of future places-to-be. In practice, they were Discussion 1. anxious about possible encounters with ‘them’ SATU: You can come to this side of Itäkeskus by metro in the middle of the night and and the assumed consequences of these meet- there’s nobody here. There’ve been… drunks ings for their local attachment. The extent of at Tallinnanaukio but they were quite well [driven away] that they don’t spend time there these negative experiences could be considered especially at night. If you want to avoid the somewhat surprising given that the unwanted central part of Tallinnanaukio, it’s quite easy. This is my home… There’s actually nobody encounters with ‘them’ were relatively brief, or around at night. It’s really quiet. even imagined. Perhaps this had something to do with the ‘purposeful segregation’ they prac- - tised: they talked about their avoidance of places in which encounters with ‘them’ were possible This is a familiar place [Itäkeskus] but I (see Thomas 2005b: 1239–1241). A more detailed could move elsewhere. I probably need to move because of my studies. Because… I analysis revealed that Alex and Alexandra also don’t necessarily want to live in Itäkeskus. I seemed to ‘follow the rules’ of correct behaviour like [Itäkeskus] but my [home] is not actually there but next to it. The other side of Itäkeskus when ‘they’ were present (see Hemming 2011: is a bit dodgy. There are many immigrants, drunks and young people who live on their 68), perhaps revealing that, deep down, the pres- own. ence of ‘them’ was not tolerated (see Hemming (see Appendix 2, the route 1) 2011: 68). Thus, emotional dimensions and the politics of belonging are interlinked, but in un- Discussion 2. even ways and concerning questions related to JESSE: There are too many [an abusive term] definitions of who belongs (Tomaney 2016: 97). [in the library] These narratives are also indicative of the fact that places of the past, present and future do not HELI: Pardon? constitute a linear continuum (Karjalainen 2004: 61). Here, past experiences also constructed fu- IIDA: Ehh... ture places-to-be, which (in this case) reflected prejudiced attitudes towards ‘them’. JESSE: [There are] too many foreigners. Alex’s and Alexandra’s feelings of apprehen- sion were extreme reactions compared with the IIDA: The library is all black [laughing] narratives of other participants. Any negative encounters were more commonly associated with HELI: Do you want to… specify what do you mean? specific places – the places of ‘them’. Given that places extend beyond the binary of insideness IIDA: [laughing] No… and outsideness (Liu & Freestone 2016: 8–9), it could be said that unwanted encounters left KIRSI: [laughing] traces of outsideness in places that also aroused (see Appendix 1, the route 1) feelings of insideness. Thus, unwanted encounters did not evoke feelings of extreme fear even Ash Amin (2004: 27) used the term ‘heterotop- if they were sources of mixed experiences. On ic sense of place’ to describe a phenomenon in the everyday level however, the fear of negative which multiple influences make a place cultur- encounters led to a decrease in visits to places ally diverse by bringing together the local and associated with ‘them’: the distant. The above narratives describe expe-

97 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 rienced outsideness (see Relph 1976: 51) result- the discussion in this section, when these ining from this cultural blend, as the meanings of securities of youth are combined with memo- places change. When the world is perceived as ries of difficult encounters, meetings with cer- changing too quickly, strict categorisations of tain individuals may be agonising reminders ‘us’ and ‘them’ may be comforting (see Relph of one’s underprivileged background. What- 2008: 317). These participants also said that they ever the background is, it is essential to find would rather avoid ‘their’ places. In this sense, a strategy that will facilitate the tolerance of they were voluntarily ceding certain places to circumstances related to position (see Alasuu- ‘them’. This finding is interesting given that the tari 2004: 131–132). A few participants used use of places is a question of power (see e.g. Val- intolerance as such a strategy. These reactions entine 1996b: 213), and ‘our’ places are not eas- are problematic not only on the level of equal- ily renounced. However, the participants did not ity, but also because they clearly lead to oner- suggest that they were victims in the struggle for ous experiences among those concerned. Hos- their places, even if people who cannot defend tile reactions seemed to reflect feelings of fear their places for different reasons tend to be less that were commonly associated with the dan- able to maintain their self-determination and sense ger of being excluded from ‘our’ places. The of agency (see Percy-Smith & Matthews 2001: problem is that these feelings of outsideness 51). I wondered about the reasons for this. It may seemed to cause alienation from daily life in be that the presence of ‘them’ was so powerful general among a few participants, which em- that it triggered feelings of alienation with these phasises the need to acquire the skills to han- places, and encountering difference did not help dle difficult experiences. However, the oppor- them to respect it (Relph 2008: 317, 321–323). tunities and resources to deal with experienced It is also possible that their increased opportuni- outsideness triggered by unwanted encounters ties to encounter new places decreased the par- varied among the participants. ticipants’ willingness to fight for ‘their’ places. Unwanted encounters did not generally The real reason for these experiences probably evoke as extreme reactions among the partic- lies somewhere between these two possibilities. ipants as the ones discussed above. Living with In my exploration of the reasons for the ‘them’ in everyday places refers to unwanted hostility of these participants I wish to draw encounters that do not disturb young people’s attention to the context in which they were liv- sense of belonging. Most participants tolerated ing. Their everyday environment (the Helsinki more difference related to unwanted encounters metropolitan area) could be characterised as than the ones discussed above, and had more culturally and socially diverse by Finnish stan- ways of handling the uncomfortable feelings dards, hence encounters with difference were evoked by ‘them’. However, their experiences more likely than elsewhere in the country. I were not free of hostility. This became evident have also suggested that young people’s po- when they discussed their usage of different sition, memories and earlier encounters with strategies related to unwanted encounters, such ‘them’ play a role in their construction of ‘us’ as avoiding ‘their’ places (see Thomas 2005b: and ‘them’. As noted earlier in this study, youth 1246–1247). These young people not only vol- is an awkward period in between childhood and untarily segregated themselves from such plac- adulthood, and may cause experiential outside- es (see Thomas 2005b: 1246–1247), they al- ness with daily places. Moreover, according to so tried not let ‘them’ be part of their places:

98 Discussion 1. Discussion 2. OLIVIA: [Olivia’s residential area] is a ARTO: It’s not frightening, but unpleasant peaceful place. There’s a lake, beach, shop when drunken people come to you and want and a school nearby. It’s compact. It was quite to chat. different to come here.

HELI: Where has that happened? KAROLIINA: There aren’t any drunks or suspicious people. ARTO: In the bus, usually. Or somewhere else if you’re alone, they come to you [and ask] OLIVIA: No, there aren’t people drinking beer ‘do you need company?’. every morning [laughing].

JUUSO: Yes, I’ve had similar experiences. KAROLIINA: Leppävaara has them all year A drunk wants to chat, that’s nothing very round. special. (see Appendix 3, the route 8) OLIVIA: Yeah. The above narratives clearly indicate that young HELI: What do you think of them? urbanites cannot select all the individuals they will encounter, especially in socially vibrant plac- KAROLIINA: Well, I wouldn’t like to walk es. What matters is the impact these unexpect- around here alone after dark. I’m never scared in [Karoliina’s residential area]. ed encounters have. During the analysis phase I wondered why certain young people seemed OLIVIA: [laughing] Me neither. to be more tolerant than others. Along with the reasons discussed above, the notion of ‘spatial HELI: Have you ever had any trouble? risks’ offers one solution. It has been suggested that individuals have different strategies for over- KAROLIINA: No, but sometimes they shout… coming their personal fears (Koskela 2010: 392). That’s not scary, but if you’re walking alone Avoidance is one, but a more proactive way is to after dark… take risks, negotiate and endeavour to conquer one’s fear by encountering difference (Koskela HELI: Do you think it’s disturbing? 2010: 392). I found that the participants did not always avoid places in which encounters with OLIVIA: Not really, when you know the reputation of Leppävaara. This place has difference were likely. Those referred to above always been [restless], so I’m fine with it. were not consciously endeavouring to conquer Well, it doesn’t look nice when all the places are full of beer cans and… Dirty men… But… their fears, but were exposed to encounters with It doesn’t have any impact on anything… ‘them’ by being present in the same environment physically and verbally. Therefore, it was the HELI: Eh, pardon, did you say ‘dirty men’? socially diverse environments that pushed the young people to encounter ‘them’. These forced OLIVIA: Yes, [men] with a beard… encounters seemed to alleviate biases against difference (encountering difference was not as HELI: Oh, do you mean scruffy…? terrible as one might think), even if ‘they’ did not necessarily become part of ‘us’. By tolerat- OLIVIA: Yes. ing them the young people were also defining (see Appendix 1, the route 6)

99 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 how other individuals in the place understood of ‘them’ influenced the boys’ experienced ins- them, in that social practices (re)produce plac- ideness: ‘they’ almost ‘fit in’ ‘our’ places. This es and make certain other practices acceptable is in line with the claim that the more the Oth- (see Thomas 2005b: 1239). However, even if the er transcends the place by following its norms, participants’ surface actions (see Hemming 2011: the more willingly is the strangeness accepted 68) were ostensibly neutral and acceptable, the (see Suurpää 2002: 189). However, the partic- encounters discussed above resulted in mixed ipants made the distinction between ‘us’ and feelings of belonging and non-belonging. Al- ‘them’: practices of separation were so modest though these experiences were not very strong, that even the boys did not notice (see Thomas the places were experienced as ‘thin’ rather than 2005b: 1236–1241). The participants emphasised meaningfully intense, permeating daily encoun- their attitude of acceptance, but their experienc- ters with difference (see Casey 2001; Kuusis- es suggest that they recognised and normalised to-Arponen 2010: 81). the difference (see Thomas 2005b: 1243–1244; Exposure to encounters defined as unwanted Hemming 2011: 68). ‘Their’ way of making a was one reason why difference became tolerat- noise in public places was assumed to be a nat- ed in ‘our’ places. I noted that certain locations ural habit for ‘them’ (see Thomas 2005b: 1238), pushed young people into encountering differ- which at the same time was accepted as ‘their ence more than others, which occasionally re- need’ in a multicultural neighbourhood. Even if sulted in more tolerant attitudes. This prompted the participants’ encounters had been tolerable, me to study the construction of the difference be- and even positive, they evidently found some- tween ‘us’ and ‘them’ in more depth. I noted that thing suspicious in ‘them’, which I propose is even if proactive negotiation with fears related the possibility that future encounters will be un- to ‘them’ was taking place (see Koskela 2010: pleasant. The participants could not be sure about 392), encounters sometimes seemed to evoke future encounters in places-to-be. This example ostensibly neutral feelings but not acceptance. shows that it is possible to adopt an attitude of In such cases, the difference between ’us’ and acceptance that is non-judgemental (Illman 2006) ’them’ was hidden rather than apparent: even though the individual’s feelings may not fully support the idea. OSSI: They [‘foreigners’] don’t bother me, The narratives discussed in this section indi- because they mostly blend in. [In a residential area] they’re among Finnish people. They’re cate that encounters the young people considered no trouble. Maybe they’re a bit boisterous. unwanted are forces that destabilise their sense They make more noise, but that doesn’t bother me. of belonging (see Cresswell 2004: 30). However, HANNU: Yeah, I’ve lived with Eetu in [the residential areas] where they live. Actually, such encounters did not normally cause feelings we get along with all the immigrants in [the of outsideness because the participants had dif- residential area]. A few of them are our friends, too. ferent ways of handling their negative feelings, and hence of tolerating ‘them’. In fact, even if the EETU: Yes… difference of ‘them’ was noted and their inclusion (see Appendix 1, the route 4) seemed more like surface acting (see Hemming 2011: 68), it was crucial for the young people to As the above narrative indicates, insideness confront their fears, which blocked feelings of and outsideness are mutually constitutive hy- outsideness. At the same time, they were con- brid feelings (Tomaney 2016: 99). The presence structing a somewhat tolerant urban space in their

100 practices. Given that fear usually takes a spatial hind these experiences, I noted that a vulnerable form (Koskela 2010: 389–390), they were not position and the level of socio-cultural diversi- actively promoting exclusion, but they were not ty in daily environments mattered. Moreover, actively supporting inclusion either, and the dif- personal memories of difficult encounters also ference between ‘us’ and ‘them’ remained. Hence played a major role, seemingly bringing neg- the participants maintained their reserve when ative experiences from the past to present-day encountering ‘them’. places, which furthermore structured how the I have shown in Chapter 6.2 that daily en- young people encountered ‘them’ and difference. counters are the main constructors of young peo- At the same time, I noted that some participants ple’s feelings of insideness and outsideness. I could tolerate unwanted encounters and differ- found that the participants had more agency to ence better than others. This did not mean that decide who they wanted to encounter in their lei- their feelings genuinely supported the inclusion sure time, because the opportunities to encounter of difference, hence the separation between ‘us’ new environments had increased. The different, and ‘them’ remained. Thus, it makes a big dif- socially vibrant environments also increased the ference whether individuals can handle their dif- risk of unwanted encounters. When I examined ficult experiences related to unwanted encoun- wanted encounters more closely I found that they ters or not. An attitude of acceptance not only often discussed them with friends in whose com- increases urban harmony, it may also help people pany they were establishing connections between to counteract feelings of outsideness (see Relph the places of earlier childhood and emerging 2008: 317, 321–323). Given that definitions of adulthood – feelings of insideness. Hence, indi- the Other are not fixed, it is possible to bend viduals who share the same context at the same the rules and thereby act against discrimination time are sharing and carrying ‘something spe- (Suurpää 2002: 190; see Koskela 2010). cial’, which leaves them with similar traces (see Malkki 1997: 196). I suggest that this something 6.3 Im/mobilities as constructors special, in this case, was growing up together and of young people’s experiences sharing place experiences and memories, which of urban places culminated in feelings of continuation with plac- Numerous researchers studying the mobility es. However, even if shared memories brought of children (and young people) have found the young people together as a tightly-knit group, that their opportunities for daily, local mobil- it did not necessarily mean that their future plac- ity tend to be limited (see e.g. Barker 2003; es-to-be would be shared, too, largely because Kyttä 2004; Karsten 2005; Malone 2007; Mik- they were seeking new places and new encoun- kelsen & Christensen 2009; Porter et al. 2010a, ters in which to practise their new, adult identi- 2010b; Carver et al. 2013; Pacilli et al. 2013), ties. This also meant that the meanings of social usually because of parental concerns. Although relationships were renegotiated. A closer look the restrictions on young people tend to be less at the young people’s unwanted encounters re- severe, parents or guardians may control their vealed that they caused strong feelings of out- daily movements (see e.g. Porter et al. 2010a: sideness, and even alienation (see Relph 1976: 800–803, 2010b: 1097–1100). It was interest- 51) in a few cases. They were comprehensive ing to find from an analysis of the research experiences, which sometimes burst out in the material, therefore, that daily, local mobility form of xenophobia. Exploring the reasons be- was not heavily regulated by adults: on the

101 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Table 8. The most commonly photographed elements of the participants’ daily environments

Route 58 mentions

Transport 46 mentions

Places of consumption 44 mentions

Friends 36 mentions

Subjectively special places 20 mentions

contrary, parents and other adults apparently and experiences of adulthood. There is thus no exerted very little control. doubt that it influences young people’s construc- An analysis of the independent assignments tion of their everyday place experiences. How supports this claim. The young people usually it does so is a question to which the interview did their daily commuting alone, not with their material gives better answers. parents, for instance (see Table 7). They also highlighted the importance of daily mobility in 6.3.1 Mobile routines and new forms mentioning transport-related venues as their most of mobility creating experiential connections between places common daily places (see Table 6). Almost all of them mentioned walking, cycling and travel- My aim in this sub-section is to explore achieved ling by bus and train. They also described their mobility, meaning the opportunities that foster experiences of different forms of urban mobil- feelings of inclusion (see Porter et al. 2010a: ity: cars and scooters, railway and metro sta- 796). I noted that along with increased agency tions and bus stops. These places were so com- came new mobility experiences, which helped mon (136 mentions) that some participants men- to construct the adult identities of these young tioned them more than once. The importance of people. This is in line with earlier research find- daily mobility was also evident in the analysis ings underlining the relationship between mobil- of the photographs. I noted that the participants ity potential and feelings of independence and most commonly photographed elements related confidence (see Jirón 201a; Porter et al. 2010a: to transport or movement (see Table 8). The pho- 796). I also observed that the increasing mobili- tographs concerned their journeys and depicted, ty facilitated connections with and extensions to in particular, the involvement of public transport new environments. Hence, mobility was clearly in their lives. In addition, the participants photo- not only a means of getting from one place to graphed their friends, their friends’ homes and another, but also an embodied and experienced places of friendship. Twenty photographs related practice of everyday life (Cresswell 2006: 3–4) to special, meaningful places in which something that played a role in the construction of new place significant had happened (see e.g. Figure 11). experiences and feelings of belonging. Thus, they tended to be reminiscent of places I identified two types of daily mobility: a) that engendered feelings of belonging. mobile routines constructing daily place expe- It is clear from the IA material and the pho- riences and b) new mobility and experiences tographs that daily mobility concerned not only of adult places, which I combined in the anal- purposeful travel from one place to another but ysis phase under the heading mobilities creat- also place experiences, sociality and meetings, ing connections between places (see Table 5).

102 Both types of mobility are achieved, and function more latitude. They therefore had more freedom as a source of opportunity and temptation (see to define where they went and when, who they Porter et al. 2010a: 796, 800–802). The former would encounter and who would accompany refers to familiar, repetitive routines and is the them on their journeys. This resonates with the most common form of daily mobility: mundane, claim that young people’s mobility opportuni- safe, (relatively) effortless and even banal. The ties increase as they get older, as parents tend latter refers to feelings related to newly acquired to associate preparedness for mobility with age mobility and places. (even if this is not always justified) (see Barker Mobile routines constructing daily place et al. 2009: 5). Second, the context matters. It experiences refers to familiar daily travel that has been claimed that mobility is relative, and plays a central role in the construction of dai- therefore dependent on the socio-spatial context ly places. These routine journeys were general- (see e.g. Sheller & Urry 2006: 211; Adey et al. ly (relatively) effortless, and were experienced 2014: 14). Given that the participants lived in a as mundane in that they could not be avoided (relatively) safe city in which serious social unrest (e.g. the journey to school). Despite their banal- is quite rare (cf. Porter et al. 2010a), social risks ity, they were important in terms of developing did not restrict their mobility. In fact, they were a sense of ‘everydayness’ and constructing ex- fully accustomed to independence in this respect. perienced and embodied connections between Thus, although the participants were enthusi- places. It has been suggested that young peo- astic because of their new mobility opportunities ple see this kind of daily journey (e.g. between (e.g. newly acquired driving licence, increased home and school) as breathing space and respite freedom), they also seemed to be very experi- from adult supervision (see Symes 2007: 444). enced passengers, travellers and drivers, whose However, it became obvious when I analysed daily mobility was characterised by routine and the participants’ stories about their daily mobil- habit. This has contextual implications: instead ity experiences that they did not consider their of facing regulations as children, they seemed to travelling primarily as an opportunity to escape have relatively long personal histories as inde- from the gaze of adults or to find privacy. They pendent travellers and walkers (see also Kyttä did not need such places as their mobility was 2004: 194–196). They revealed their mobile his- generally minimally regulated: tories when recalling their childhood places and early mobility: HELI: Do you have a curfew? I mean, you said you have more freedom nowadays. HELI: Have you ever felt that railway stations are a little unsafe? SILJA: Well, I don’t know that I have a curfew. If I go somewhere, I just let them [Silja’s parents] know where I am. And if I’m going to ALINA: Not at all, actually. I remember when stay later than 10pm, I just tell them, ‘I’ll be I was smaller, I felt unsafe because I was home later’. afraid of not being able find the route I had to take. Otherwise, never. Nowadays, I just feel (see Appendix 3, the route 3) normal at the stations. (see Appendix 3, the route 2) There were at least two reasons for the fewer mobility regulations. Most importantly, the Instead of fearing ‘stranger-dangers’ (see e.g. Val- participants were increasingly considered ‘al- entine 1996b: 206–207) and social threats (see most-adults’ by their parents, who gave them Porter et al. 2010a: 799–800), Alina was more

103 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 worried about finding her way. When I looked ILONA: It’s a place where I go almost daily. My job is there. at the other narratives in this light I realised that memories such as these more generally reflected – – the context in which the participants were living. They did not discuss their memories of be- ILONA: I visit Tikkurila very often. I have ing ‘indoor children’ (Karsten 2005: 285–286), two homes: I live in [a residential area in or being ‘bubble-wrapped’ (Malone 2007), for Vantaa] and, of course, I live in [a residential area in Helsinki]. I live in [Vantaa] with example. Instead, having acquired plenty of ex- my boyfriend. Or we lived there the whole periential information about their daily environ- summer, I have keys there [to her boyfriends’ home]. ment as mobile children (see Christensen 2008: 72, see Kyttä 2003: 92), they seemed to have HELI: Do you pay part of the rent? plenty of agency and knowledge related their local environments as young people. ILONA: I live there for free because [Ilona’s The participants used their mundane mo- boyfriend] is still living with his parents. So, bility agency in different ways. One example basically, I just visit there when his parents aren’t around. of this was when leisure visits to places related (see Appendix 3, the route 9) to friendships and romantic relationships. It has been claimed that social life during the week is Even if access to daily social places seemed to bound up with specific local places, and lon- require relatively much effort from Alina and ger trips tend to be rarer (Larsen et al. 2006: 7). Ilona, the girls did not complain, nor did they Given that the mobile actor is presumed to be seem to consider these trips burdensome. It may adult ‘unless otherwise stated’ (see Holdsworth be that as diverse social places became more ac- 2014: 422), I argue that young people’s daily cessible, giving them more opportunities to go to local mobilities are different. Unlike adults (see new places and encounter new individuals, they Larsen et al. 2006: 7), they also seemed to be were happy primarily because they had permis- ready to make major, time-consuming journeys sion to access these social places on weekdays. on weekdays to meet their friends and boy- and However, being able to get somewhere quickly girlfriends: depends to some extent on the politics of mobility, and is associated with exclusivity (Cresswell Discussion 1. 2010b: 23; Jirón 2010a). Thus, the context ex- HELI: Do you spend time in Tikkurila? plains these extreme forms of mobility: the girls were still living at their parental homes and, not ALINA: No, not really because my life having a driving licence or a car, could not yet actually happens in Helsinki. I try to get home from school quickly and [laughing] go choose their place of residence even if they could hanging out with my friends [to Helsinki]. make decisions concerning their daily mobility. [Tikkurila] is more like: ‘Ohh, I need to go there…’. If they wanted to maintain their social contacts (see Appendix 3, the route 2) they had to accept these mundane constraints – or then they were immobile. Thus, although the Discussion 2. girls’ social places were clearly meaningfully in- HELI: Is Helsinki [the city centre] a leisure- tense, their travelling-related places were rather time place for you or do you go there often? unavoidable by-products of their daily agency (see Jirón 2010a).

104 Figure 13. A photograph of the underpass taken by Silja.

HELI: OK, do you want to say something In cases in which expectations were high- about it? er of the destination than of the journey, the travelling became routine. On reflection, these SILJA: It was of the underpass. routine journeys could be considered places in the habitual daily environment, with no expecta- HELI: Is this a meaningful place or did you tions of unforeseen upheavals (see Karjalainen just take the photo? 2004: 54). It would seem from the analysis that commuting (e.g. between school and home, and SILJA: Well, this isn’t very meaningful. But I walk here every day. vice versa) typified these kinds of places, which (see Appendix 3, the route 3) were filled with familiar, mundane experiences that built on earlier experiences of daily life. Silja’s narrative is an example of a place experi- Some daily places may be more meaningful- ence in which bodily movements are paramount. ly intense than others (see Seamon & Sowers These daily movements are not necessarily reg- 2008), but the mundane places of daily mobil- istered, but are rather experienced as routine, ity seemed to constitute a framework of every- bodily trips (see Middleton 2011: 2863–2864). day life (see Karjalainen 2004: 54). Interesting- My discussion with her encouraged me to study ly, these places were often experienced on the the relationship between mobility, place experi- move, and did not seem to require interruption ences and daily life more deeply as I noted that in momentum. In this sense, the young people this kind of mobility engenders a feeling of ev- were ‘dwelling-in-motion’ (see Sheller & Ur- erydayness. However, further analysis revealed ry 2006: 213–214) in mobile places (see Jirón that even if repetitious, routine trips did not need et al. 2016: 603): to be meaningless:

SILJA: I’ll take a photo now. [see Figure 13] HELI: Do you usually take a bus or drive a moped?

105 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Figure 14. Kati’s photograph taken in the bus, which was her place for calming down and preparing for the place she was travelling to.

KATI: I usually prefer public transport, – because the connections are so good. Well, maybe in the evening, when the buses don’t run so frequently, I’ll choose a moped to HELI: When you said that the bus is a place get around. But usually [I choose] public where you can calm down, how do you calm transport, because basically I can get down? anywhere with it.

KATI: If I’m really busy, because the club HELI: So you’re satisfied? [Kati was a club leader] starts so early, the bus is better. I don’t need to rush to the train and another bus. I have time to take a breath KATI: Yes. and just to be [Kati took a photograph, see Figure 14] (see Appendix 3, the route 1) –

HELI: Did you drive a moped more often For Kati, her travelling place was not a mean- when you got a driving licence? ingless commuting space but somewhere for de-stressing and sorting things out mentally (see KATI: Yes, two years ago I just drove a Watts & Urry 2008: 865–866; Jirón 2010a; Eden- moped, but now it’s more pleasant to take a bus because it’s nicer to discuss things with sor 2011: 196–198). While she was in the bus a friend. If you drive a moped, you can’t. You she could drift off to places and memories that just focus on driving. And the bus is warmer, too. were otherwise inaccessible (Jirón 2010a: 138).

106 Thus, the journey was a combination of smooth- and the relaxed regulations, the possibility to be ness and tedium (see Binnie et al. 2007: 166–167; mobile apparently being the central constructor Edensor 2011: 194, 201), filled with activities and of mobile urban experiences: dreams (Watts & Urry 2008: 860). The bus as a mobile place also seemed to help her escape ILONA: Thinking of mobility in central Helsinki, [and] how people move here… the obligations inherent in fixed places such as There are trains, the metro, buses and school (see Jain & Lyons 2008: 85; Jirón 2010a). trams. I haven’t seen another city with such comprehensive public transport. – – In view of It was a mobile place she had actively appro- the [large] size of Helsinki, it’s easier to move here if you have lived, been and experienced priated and made her own (Jirón 2010b: 130). it. When she had company, however, place took on a different meaning: the bus was a social place – in which to encounter friends. The sociality was constructed through shared discussions (see e.g. ILONA: I don’t know what I would do without Karjalainen 1997a) during the journey, as well the metro connection. – – I haven’t yet found a place where there isn’t a direct connection as through their shared, embodied presence en to Helsinki. route. I therefore claim that daily mobility not (see Appendix 3, the route 9) only weaves places together but is also a process of subjective place-making that occurs in and As Ilona points out, her daily mobility carried through mobilities (Jirón 2010a: 143). extensive meanings: it was a question of living, The above narrative gives an example of being and experiencing daily places. Thus, the meaningful movement (see Cresswell 2006: 3), plethora of possibilities could be read, first, as a and is indicative of how the meanings of per- source of feelings of agency and ability. As re- sonal places are constructed on the move (see ported in earlier research, her freedom to be mo- Karjalainen 2006: 85; Seamon & Sowers 2008: bile reflected her personal power to decide where 50; Jirón 2010a). As the analysis evolved it high- to go and when (see Urry 2002: 262; Sheller & lighted the importance of young people’s mean- Urry 2006: 213; Jirón 2010a; Adey et al. 2014: ingful mobilities as constructors of daily places. 14). For her, unlike for some other young peo- Given that urban life is inherently mobile, local ple, daily mobility was clearly not a challenge, mobility experiences should be read through the nor was it controlled by her parents (see Porter discourse of urban mobilities, in which the city et al. 2010a; 2010b: 1097–1100). Possibly more is perceived as a network of countless mobili- significantly, Ilona’s daily mobility possibilities ty possibilities (see Jensen 2006: 347–348). In seemed to include experiencing the city, and feel- this context, one can always find a place that ing the urban bustle and flow. Given her confi- satisfies one’s own requirements and personal- dent use of public transport and her good local ity (Jensen 2006: 347–348). These possibilities knowledge, her daily mobility not only strength- may be exhausting, but it is claimed that young ened her feelings of insideness and belonging but urban dwellers have grown up with multiple and also, I argue, helped in constructing her everyday complex choices, and therefore know how to deal urban experiences. with them (see Jensen 2006: 246–248). Here, In sum, mundane local mobilities were con- the participants had clearly learned to live with structors of urban experiences and daily places. the complexity of mobility opportunities. In fact, Daily mobilities were clearly meaningful (see they valued the opportunity for (bodily) travel Cresswell 2006: 3), although not necessarily in-

107 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 tensely so. For instance, routine mobility framed OSSI: Probably getting a driving licence, and that living… gets easier and more free. the young people’s daily lives by helping them to (see Appendix 1, the route 4) prepare for the roles required in different places (see Jain & Lyons 2008: 85–86; Watts & Ur- Discussion 2. ry 2008: 865–866), thereby constructing em- HELI: Do you think that getting a driving bodied and experienced connections between licence will change your mobility? places. It was also necessary to maintain social relations, even if that seemed to require some JARKKO: Yes, absolutely. I’ll drive a lot. It’s effort at times. Sometimes the travelling places nicer to do long rides with friends to summer cottages and so on. were socially shared. Finally, the young people’s (see Appendix 1, the route 3) daily mobilities were indicative of their agency. Their living environments supported them in this Discussion 3. in offering plenty of mobility opportunities. In NELLI: When [upper-secondary school] conclusion, I see mundane daily mobilities as started I thought that I would get a moped key urban experiences and the constructors of licence, but I was at the age when it was more sensible to wait until I could get a full driving a ‘feeling of the city’. licence. I’ll probably go to driving school at Along with their mundane experiences, the the end of the summer. young people also discussed their experiences related to new mobility opportunities. New mo- HELI: How do you think it’ll change your mobility? Will you have a car then? bilities and experiences of adult places refer to mobilities that have recently been or are about to NELLI: I guess it’ll change it quite a lot. I’ll be achieved (see also Porter et al. 2010a: 796). be able to drive to more distant places. Loosely drawing on earlier research, I would (see Appendix 3, the route 7) describe this type of mobility as young people’s way of expanding their spatial connections and In line with earlier findings, new mobility op- encountering new people (see Ruckenstein 2012: portunities facilitated the young people’s access 64), and therefore as important practices to ex- to social life and made new activities possible perience the feelings of independence and agen- (Thomson & Taylor 2005: 337–338; Porter et cy. Given the mobile context of Finnish chil- al. 2010a: 801, 803): they were clearly excited dren (see Kyttä 2004: 194–196, Kullman 2010) about driving a car or scooter, and having access and young people’s routine experiences of mun- to new, previously inaccessible environments. In- dane mobility (as discussed above), it was some- terestingly, as minors their experiences of new what surprising how extensively the participants mobilities seemed to be largely imagined. There- discussed their experiences of new mobilities. fore, they had prospective mobility and new plac- Again, I noted that these experiences tended to es, which became real and lived not only when relate to changes in their circumstances. Reach- they roamed and travelled (see Buttimer 1976: ing the age of 18, for example, was a major mile- 283), but also in their imaginations. These im- stone for those who were minors at the time of ages and future expectations were so powerful the interview: that they seemed to feel a sense of belonging with their novel mobilities, even if they were Discussion 1. not yet a physical reality. Looking beyond this, HELI: What do you think is the best thing [in I claim that these young people needed these turning 18]?

108 imagined mobilities to construct imagined con- I believe it’ll extend my social circles, too. I visit her every week and spend more time in nections between local and more distant envi- Helsinki in general. It feels like my world has ronments. In this sense, their imaginings were eventually started to extend [laughing]. I’m also going to move to Helsinki within a year. transitional experiences that connected them with And go to the university, at least I hope so. new environments and with places that were not (see Appendix 3, the route 5) yet fully accessible. The participants also discussed their real ex- Discussion 3. periences related to new places and new mobili- HELI: Have you been visiting the centre of ty. In this sense, their newly acquired mobilities Helsinki since your childhood? were a combination of the real and the imagined (see Kenyon 1999: 94–95). I specifically noted ILONA: Quite a lot, yes. Well, I didn’t go there alone before I was 13. We went to the movies that they were actively seeking places beyond with friends. That was maybe the longest their common local environments. Interesting- trip. Or if we went by sea to the Suomenlinna fortress or Parliament with our class. I started ly, these experiences seemed to concretise in the to go there alone more often, and that has feeling that the places had become closer and increased within the last two years. I’ve also been walking around Helsinki alone, just for that the world had opened out: their places had fun. extended to wider environments: (see Appendix 3, the route 9)

Discussion 1. In line with earlier findings, the participants’ ex- NELLI: If someone says ‘let’s meet in this periences of new mobility opportunities were or that place’, [I can say that] I know more places now. The world has become more open related to feelings of responsibility and inde- now. pendence (see Skelton 2013: 479), as well as of excitement (see Porter et al. 2010a: 796). They HELI: When you said that your social circles also included being able to establish new places have become wider, how do you feel about it? and build up feelings of belonging (see Leyshon 2011: 316). Perhaps more significantly for this NELLI: Well that’s positive, of course. That you can go further, and more freely. That you study, however, I found that these new oppor- don’t need to spend all your time at home. tunities also involved forging connections with the wider city and new adulthood places, which – the young people actively maintained. They described these feelings as if their personal worlds NELLI: It’s quite funny that in the eighth grade I found out that this was an upper- had become more open, and the places on it had secondary school. And the Hiekkaharju sports started to seem closer. I therefore argue that these field, I just thought: ‘a running track, maybe I’ll go there one day’. It seemed so far away new mobilities helped them to understand the from home, because I didn’t know it. Now relationships and connections in their personal that I know it, it feels like the places have somehow come closer… than they were when daily places, and clarified how their daily envi- I was younger. ronments were experientially organised as mean- (see Appendix 3, the route 7) ingful. This did not occur automatically, however, but required determination from them. Discussion 2. Observing that in many cases the young peo- EMMA: My sister moved away [from ple’s new mobility experiences were related to Emma’s parental home] two weeks ago to [a neighbourhood near the centre of Helsinki]. novel environments, I wondered if familiar plac-

109 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 es were sometimes reconstructed in the light of 2004: 62), future and present-day mobilities are novel mobility opportunities. These new oppor- reflected against past experiences. As Lilli’s nar- tunities made it possible to test newly formed rative implies, the feeling of being on the move adult identities (see also Skelton 2013: 479) in was a thread that linked her past mobile expe- familiar places (from childhood), which became riences with her present mobility experiences. filled with new meanings. As discussed below, I also explored the aims of the young people’s this was the case with Lilli: journeys, noting first that there was a difference depending on whether the trips were obligatory LILLI: There’s this feeling [on the local or not. In the context of new mobilities, they tend- train] that ‘I’m travelling alone!’, the feeling of independence. I’ve very rarely travelled ed to discuss their experiences of leisure trips. alone, because I’ve always gone with a friend It was not only the destination that mattered, or my mum. And now I’m alone, I have the feeling: ‘I’m so adult!’ but also the feeling of being on the move. I fo- (see Appendix 3, the route 4) cused on how they visited certain places relatively briefly. Harriet Strandell (2012: 40) speaks of According to Tuan (1977: 52), exploring new, ‘popping’ to places, referring to being there but unknown environments may evoke feelings of staying momentarily. She uses a children’s af- freedom. I also suggest that exploring familiar ternoon club as an example of short-term drop- places from a new perspective could also give ping in (Strandell 2012). I consider ‘popping in’ rise to such feelings. As new experiences pile or ‘dropping in’ good terms that aptly describe up over earlier experiences and memories of the the participants’ newly acquired mobilities and past, familiar places assume a history (see Kar- short visits to new places: jalainen 2004: 60–62). In this case, Lilli’s mobile place was filled with experiences of frus- Discussion 1. trated and achieved mobility (see Porter et al. HELI: Where do you go when you’re driving just for fun? 2010a: 796), that is to say feelings of childhood and adulthood. Nowadays, however, she was not TOMMI: We’ve visited Hanna’s dad’s controlled, and sitting in the train she felt more restaurant in [another city] a couple of times. like an adult and less like a child. Therefore, the embodied experience of new mobility was the HANNA: Yes. central constructor of her agency and feeling of maturity. Nevertheless, her memories of mobility TOMMI: We’ve also driven to our summer also mattered. As she said, it was easier to test cottages and sometimes we just drive to Kaivopuisto [a coastal road in southern new agency in a familiar place where the com- Helsinki]. mon, embodied memories of mobility on the train (see Appendix 2, the route 5) functioned as a safe background and increased her confidence in travelling alone. Thus, expe- Discussion 2. riences of new mobilities and memories of old HELI: Along with Espoo, do you ever go to ones together constructed her feeling of inside- Helsinki? ness with the place (see Relph 1976: 55), which was manifest as a feeling of ability. Moreover, HANNU: Sometimes, but not too often. it could be said that whereas past places define expectations of future places (see Karjalainen OSSI: Yes, quite often. Maybe three or four times a month. If there’s something I need to

110 buy, I usually go there first. trips (Collin-Lange 2013: 415–416), but were also sources of important feelings of belonging EETU: I don’t go there more than every other and agency with daily places. Third, the trips to month, maybe. new places were considered bodily experiences, in which the feeling of being on the move was HELI: Is it so that all you need is here? pivotal. This could help to explain the habit of popping in (see Strandell 2012: 40). I argue that EETU: Yes… the practice of popping into places is a way of intensifying feelings of belonging in new, local HANNU: I shop in Helsinki for my clothes, also because of the trip there. You also get to places on the one hand, and a way of establishing see places, as we’re this close to Helsinki. adult agency on the other. Thus, the participants’ (see Appendix 1, the route 4) new mobilities had different targets, which were constructed through bodily movements. Discussion 3. In this sub-section I have discussed how their LILLI: We just cycle just for fun. Like, that’s achieved mobilities (Porter et al. 2010a: 796) adventurous. We just cycle and check out what’s everywhere, spontaneously. I remember helped the young people to establish their adult- the last time we went to a café in the centre hood and provided opportunities to create mean- of [Lilli’s home neighbourhood], like: ‘Let’s go to eat cinnamon rolls’. Then we were ingful adult places. More precisely, I found that like: ‘Hey, let’s go cycling there, let’s go to new mobilities helped them to make meaningful [a neighbourhood]’. We cycled there and suddenly realised that we’re somewhere in connections between places, whether imagined [a neighbouring city]. We were cycling on or real. These connections were actualised, for a small path, but luckily we found a bigger road. It was such fun! And at the same time, instance, in the experience of perceiving daily we got some fresh air. places as having started to feel smaller, notably (see Appendix 3, the route 4) when mobility extended to new environments When I was analysing the participants’ visits to and seemed to shorten the experienced and phys- new places I made three observations. First, they ical distances between familiar daily places. I were not necessarily expecting to end up any- have pointed out that experienced connections where special. In other words, their mobility did between places strengthened the young people’s not involve a specific destination or stopping local knowledge, feelings of belonging to places place: they seemed to be doing these trips and and adult identities. Curiously, Tuan (1996: 2) making brief stops because they had the required also refers to this, suggesting that we humans agency. Their new mobility gave them new op- move from ‘home’ to ‘cosmos’ as ‘we grow into portunities to travel to more distant places, which a larger world’. I call this change the densifica- had previously been out-of-bounds, too far away tion of the subjective local world, a personal-lev- or otherwise inaccessible. Second, sometimes el time-space compression when increased mo- the aim was to visit places with special mean- bilities create new experiential connections and ings, special because they could not be visited diminish experienced distances between places. every day for different reasons (e.g. they were Therefore, new mobilities potentially help young too far away). Interestingly, the visits to these people to handle experienced disconnections be- places were usually brief, involving popping in tween places, constructed in the context of grow- (see Strandell 2012: 40). Even if brief, howev- ing up. It has been suggested that restrictions on er, I argue that they were more than fun leisure children’s mobility are disadvantageous in that

111 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 they hinder the acquisition of local knowledge Table 5). The difference between the two types (e.g. Kyttä 2003: 92). I would argue that they are of immobility is that the former tended to be a also detrimental to young people who are sup- complicating factor whereas the latter actually posed to take a new kind of responsibility for prevented mobility. their lives: agency needs ability. More intense Daily immobilities complicating access to research on this topic is needed. daily places refers to restrictions that complicate and slow down the everyday mobility of young 6.3.2 Immobilities complicating and limiting people, and was most commonly attributed to young people’s access to daily places a poorly organised public-transport network. It As bodily beings, people need to travel the physi- was experienced as disharmonious and as caus- cal distance between places somehow (Karjalain- ing feelings of discontinuity between daily plac- en 2004: 53). Mobility is not always predictable, es. Thus, in line with earlier research findings (see hence daily living is characterised by constant Porter et al. 2010a: 796; Skelton 2013: 476), the friction (see Karjalainen 2004: 53). In the case experienced frustrations were mainly negative, of the young people in my study, this meant that and at the same time reflected the poor mobil- smooth daily mobility was not self-evident, de- ity opportunities available to the young people spite their agency in this regard. It is clear that in their neighbourhoods. However, the resulting mobility is not only about physical movement immobility was not necessarily a source of stig- or overcoming socio-temporal constraints, but is ma (see McQuoid & Dijst 2012: 32), but was also intertwined with personal and shared feel- rather experienced as a common annoyance of ings (see McQuoid & Dijst 2012: 31–32). For daily life related to the place of residence, which instance, the use of public transport arouses feel- complicated access to other places: ings of humiliation and inferiority in car-dominant contexts if it is associated with poverty and Discussion 1. ghetto-like conditions (McQuoid & Dijst 2012: SAULI: This bus [route] is rather unreliable, because you can miss connections and it’s not 32). Given that there is little (if any) stigmati- very frequent. But now another bus is coming sation of public transport in Finland, the lack of at the same time, [and] it has made travelling a bit easier. – – I use this bus [route] quite a a properly connected network rather connoted lot [also] when I’m not going to school. backwardness and inferiority in the interviews. It seemed that public transport was the primary HELI: So you need to transfer here every day? mode of travel among the participants, rather than (private) cars or mopeds. Poor connections SAULI: Yes, here. caused problems particularly for young people (see Appendix 2, the route 7) living in residential areas far from the suburban centres, and from bus stops and railway stations. Discussion 2. My focus in this sub-section is on two types HELI: Do your friends visit you? of daily immobility that emerged in the analysis: a) immobility that complicated access to HANNU: Yes, sometimes. Even if this seems daily places and b) immobility that prevented like a short trip [the route we were travelling], it’s quite a long way to my friends because this access to places. I combined these experiences is almost in [another residential area]. in the analysis under the heading immobilities creating disconnections between places (see EETU: I used to visit you when I had a

112 moped. But I sold it and I don’t do that Discussion 2. anymore. [laughing] SOFIA: I guess I’ll drive a lot when I (see Appendix 1, the route 4) can drive a car. I live so far away that it’s really irritating to take a bus. I usually stay As discussed above, the immobilities tended to overnight at some friends’ place at weekends. I rarely go home and I’m just asking for a ride increase the length of daily journeys but did not away [from her parents], since the bus runs so entail serious disconnections between places. I infrequently. It’d be so much easier with a car. I’ve never driven a car, but I guess I’ll like it. show below how a few participants were more (see Appendix 1, the route 7) inconvenienced. For them, immobility was a source not only of frustration and despair (see Mobility is the norm in today’s mobile world Jirón 2010a: 75–76; Porter et al. 2010a: 796), (Elliott & Urry 2010: 3). Even personhood is but also of stigma (see McQuoid & Dijst 2012: apparently mobile, as one’s personal life is in- 32), which became manifest as a sense of back- tertwined in complex social and cultural webs wardness and of being an outsider in relation to (see Elliott & Urry 2010: 34). Diverting from urban life. Even if the limitations were relative, the mobile norm, therefore, is undesirable. As the participants, who were not fully immobile, discussed above, it was ‘physical friction’ (see still experienced their mobility possibilities as Karjalainen 2004: 53; Elliott & Urry 2010: 16) too restricted: and social constraints (see e.g. Porter et al. 2010a: 802–803) that separated Kirsi and Sofia emotion- Discussion 1. ally and physically from the hustle and bustle of KIRSI: I’m just hanging around at home, city life and the social places they wanted to vis- because there’s nothing, literally nothing, besides forest and fields. it and linger in, also preventing them from encountering new adulthood places. This separation HELI: Do you enjoy it or would you like to manifested itself as negative feelings of rurality have something different? and backwardness, of being far away from everything. Although it is argued that people living KIRSI: At this point, I don’t care. I’ll move in rural areas can also live a city life because of away soon anyway. – – I’d like to find as cheap an apartment as possible, with good increasing mobility (Jensen 2006: 347), this was transport connections. not the case with these young suburbanites living far away from their sub-centres, as their (bodily) – mobility options were not sufficient. Even if the ability to be mobile ‘produces a unique urban HELI: Would it be more important to live independently or is it the place [of residence] subjectivity and facilitates a heightened aware- that’s frustrating you? ness of one’s habitat’ (see Furness 2014: 321), the obstacles seemed to prevent the participants KIRSI: It’s a frustrating place, because the from constructing an urban identity. Furthermore, nearest bus stop is three kilometres away. immobility seemed to have stigmatic connotations, which were strongly related to the location IIDA: It’s difficult to visit you. [laughing] of the parental home. If the use of certain means of transport can be stigmatised (see McQuoid KIRSI: Yes, and it’s difficult to leave the place...! & Dijst 2012: 31–33), the lack of connections (see Appendix 1, the route 1) seemed to be even more embarrassing. Togeth- er, these mobility barriers triggered feelings of

113 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 exclusion (see Jones et al. 2013: 202): the par- ADELE: There’s no point in going home and then coming back. ticipants could not identify with their place of residence. However, they had little agency in SOFIA: We live so far away that it easily takes terms of changing the situation as they were still an hour and a half there and back. living in their parental homes. Contrary to what (see Appendix 1, the route 7) has been found in earlier research, these young people did not seem to consider walking as a Discussion 2. way of experiencing connectedness with place MIIA: We always take the train at 2.45 pm (cf. Leyshon 2011: 314). Because they could not influence their circumstances, their desire JULIA: We need to rush there. to leave the parental home or to get a driving licence reflected not only the need for privacy MIIA: That’s why we’re super fast walkers. (see e.g. Abbott-Chapman & Robertson 2001: 501; Lahelma & Gordon 2003: 382), but also JULIA: Trains runs only once in an hour. the fact that they did not want to be excluded [laughing] from places of significance. When I was exploring how the young MIIA: Yes, we always have to wait [at the shopping centre] for the next one. people handled the emotional consequences of immobility I noted that being with a - friend alleviated the negative feelings. This was the case, for instance, when the immo- MIIA: We wouldn’t like to spend time here [in bility referred to extended periods of wait- the shopping centre], or at least I wouldn’t ing: waiting with friends helped to counter- like to. act the boredom. Thus, as reported in earlier research, waiting was an active prac- - tice rather than a dead period of stasis (see Bissell 2007: 277). JULIA: It was fun at first that we could hang out here. But now, well, I’m very bored with it. [laughing] – – All my money goes when I Discussion 1. hang out here. You always want something: coffee, something to eat, or clothes… SOFIA: We’re always sitting and talking here [in a hamburger restaurant]. This is our (see Appendix 1, the route 5) ordinary place, actually these benches are always our place. I focused on two notions related to these narratives. First, in actively trying to alleviate the bore- ADELE: We’re always here! dom and frustration linked to waiting the participants made the places where they were waiting MILLA: Yeah! their own (see Christensen & Mikkelsen 2013: 202–205) through the shared practices of eating, SOFIA: We eat and friends come to say hi… chatting and walking. Thus, it was not inactive time, even if it was experienced as immobility MILLA: And if we have to go to work at 4pm, (see Bissell 2007: 278; Jirón et al. 2016: 608). and school ends at 2pm, we spend that time here. [laughing] Second, I suggest that waiting as described by the participants should be distinguished from

114 aimless hanging out without pre-defined goals Daily immobilities preventing access to plac- (Pyyry 2015a: 8; Tani 2015: 142). The partici- es refers to barriers that preclude young peo- pants were not actively trying to reclaim (cf. Val- ple from visiting places or restrict the range of entine 1996b: 213; Kallio & Häkli 2011; Tani places they could visit. Unlike the experiences 2015: 142–143) or stretch the norms of space (cf. of immobility discussed above, in this cast it not Tani 2015: 127), but rather had a clear target - to only slowed down mobility, but also restricted spend time there while waiting. Together, these the young people’s access to certain places. Al- activities could be read as a means of handling though such experiences did not affect all par- daily obstacles, in this case by actively chang- ticipants, a few of them clearly suffered from ing the meaning assigned to places of boredom. excessive stability. Their experiences of immo- As reported in earlier research, young bility aroused powerful feelings that made them people’s daily lives proceed in a rhythmic feel disconnected from their places (see Elliott & context, in which movement constructs their Urry 2010: 45), and were usually associated with place experiences (Buttimer 1976, see also their place of residence, with its poor mobility Seamon 1979), their sense of self and their opportunities (see Jirón 2010a: 75–76). connectedness to places (Leyshon 2011: 304; I noted that mobility barriers made certain Jirón et al. 2016). As I have indicated, experi- places feel like cells, meaning places one cannot enced immobility caused frustration and irri- leave and where there is not much to do (Kyttä tation, and sometimes feelings of outsideness 2003: 12). Unlike children (see Kyttä 2003: 12), from urban living, among the young people the participants had agency in relation to their who could not practice and enjoy daily mo- mobility (e.g. being allowed to leave their place bility, often because of where they lived. In of residence), but enforced immobility weakened this sense, the rhythm was not ideal in that it their sense of experienced independence: disrupted experienced connections between personal places, whether imagined or real. Discussion 1. Although adults did not control their mo- SILJA: I usually drive here, but now my scooter is in for repair. bility to the same extent as previously, their socio-spatial circumstances (e.g. living in a HELI: Did you use public transport or cycle residential area with a poor public-transport before you got a moped licence? network) formulated their mobility opportunities. It seems clear that the one who is mo- SILJA: Actually, I didn’t cycle much. I bile has power (see Urry 2002: 262; Sheller travelled by bus. Since I got the [moped] licence, I’ve driven almost everywhere & Urry 2006: 213; Jirón 2010a), which in [laughing]. I’ll drive as late as possible [in the autumn], even if it’s only one degree, it this case means that the one who is mobile doesn’t matter. After that, it gets so cold that has the chance to enjoy the distance, and not I need proper winter clothes. But it’s so much freer. I can leave anytime, there’s no need to to suffer from it. However, the limitations wait for buses. – – But there’s no driving now discussed here were somewhat tolerable giv- [without a moped]. en patience and the willingness to wait, or (see Appendix 3, the route 3) through other strategies. Nevertheless, immobility was not a desired experience, but Discussion 2. a result of limited agency. SIRU: If I ask my parents to drive me to or get me from the railway station it’s usually OK. It’s two or three kilometres to the station. It’s

115 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

not that far that it’d be impossible to walk, but Consequently, the environments described above it’s long enough to be frustrating. were experienced as cells (see Kyttä 2003: 12) in which the girls felt trapped. Together, these hin- HELI: You said that public transport [in Siru’s neighbourhood] is rather poor? drances disrupted their endeavours to establish their adult identities and belonging with places. SIRU: Yes, there are two bus connections. It seems that daily places easily start to feel They go twice an hour, both, but in the like restrictive cul-de-sacs (see Kyttä 2003: 12; evenings and at weekends once an hour, one after the other… I’m often surprisingly Jirón 2010a) when the potential for mobility is dependent on my parents. regulated. As I have pointed out, the participants’ (see Appendix 3, the route 6) mobility was restricted not because of parental fears (see Karsten 2005; Malone 2007), but Given that immobility is relative (see Adey 2006: rather because of the poor transport network. 83), the participants’ experiences of it should be As reported in earlier research, they did not en- considered against the mobilities of their urban counter immobility to the same extent (see Jirón contexts (e.g. among their friends) (see Leyshon 2010a; Adey et al. 2014: 4; Jones et al. 2013: 2011: 320). As discussed above, the mobility of 202). Participants living in neighbourhoods with the girls did not comply with the norm. This had a poor or single transport network had fewer a two-way effect. On the one hand, their immo- mobility options. Thus, the opportunities in par- bility decreased their experienced level of in- ticular reflected experienced inclusion or exclu- dependence and increased their dependence on sion. From the perspective of place, I claim that their parents (e.g. ‘parents’ taxis’, as discussed this kind of immobility disturbed experienced by Skelton [2013: 469]). The need for indepen- and embodied connections between places and dent, adult mobility seemed so strong that they young people. Thus, I argue that these mobil- made great efforts to achieve it. Indeed, it was ity barriers strengthened young people’s sense so powerful that it could not be satisfied by ex- of in-betweenness, when they were just waiting ploring their own neighbourhoods more inten- for things to change (e.g. Weller 2006: 97; Kett sively, for instance (see Skelton 2013: 479–480): 1971: 283; Northcote 2006: 2; Evans 2008: 1663; local environments did not have the means to Valentine et al. 1998: 4). construct new experiences of maturity. On the Chapter 6.3 focused on the young people’s other hand, immobility influenced the partici- experiences of meaningful movement (see pants’ experienced connections between places Cresswell 2006: 3). It has shown, first, that the Although places could also be viewed from this participants had plenty of agency in relation to perspective, I should point out that one’s relation- their local, bodily mobility. In fact, because of ship with one’s daily environments results from this, many of their daily journeys were habitual, personal meaning-making and bodily movement, which reflects what is described in the literature as well as from earlier experiences and encoun- focusing on adult’s daily mobilities. At the same ters and themselves. If the potential for mobility time, they faced surprisingly many changes that arouses feelings of belonging (see e.g. Leyshon had increased (or would increase) their mobil- 2011: 317–319; Jones et al. 2012, 2013: 202; ity potential even more. New forms of mobili- Furness 2014: 321), immobility seemed to dis- ty were both real and imagined, extending the connect the girls from the places to which they possible environments they could visit, and help- wanted to belong, experientially and physically. ing them to construct meaningful relationships

116 with new environments and new places. I also Individuals have tighter or looser ties, and found that despite their agency, these young peo- some places evoke more intense feelings of ple encountered mobility restrictions. Immobil- insideness than others. As discussed above, ity, which was usually experienced negatively, insideness and outsideness are not dichoto- decelerated daily mobility and sometimes made mies but rather intertwined sets of relation- moving impossible. It also reinforced the sense ships in which the interconnections matter of disconnectedness with daily places. I found, – place is an ‘in-between’ condition (Dov- further, that the participants had different ways of ey 2016: 265; see Tomaney 2016). Reflect- handling these spatial constraints, but it was not ing this in-betweenness, the findings of this always possible to beat immobility. In the light of study underline the importance of daily mo- the above, I therefore suggest that physical mobility in the construction of places. I found bility is tightly connected with young people’s that daily places became interconnected place experiences, their construction of places through mobility, and were experienced in and their feelings of belonging and non-belong- relation to other places. On the level of dai- ing. I propose that daily im/mobilities in partic- ly life, the participants were organising ex- ular structure experienced connections and dis- perienced connections between places and connections between places and young people. In forming them as meaningful systems through this sense, place could be read as an intersection their daily mobilities, albeit unconsciously at of time and spatiality, memories and expectations times. At the same time, the places of daily (see Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 81), and connec- life were not simply a mass of experiences, tions and disconnections that are constructed in but comprised significant places with unique mobile contexts. meanings. Thus, I found that daily mobilities also helped the participants to differentiate 6.4 Webs of meaningful places: places on the experiential level. young people’s experiences in an urban environment Discussion 1. According to the empirical findings discussed SATU: [This is the route] from school to home. There’s a forest and an underpass thus far in Chapter 6, places have different facets. going underneath the highway. This is a nice First, daily places comprise unique and personal and pleasant route. My parents originally wanted to place me in [a secondary school], experiences in which memories of the past and even if it wasn’t the nearest school. But there isn’t much traffic, and now I’ve taken this future expectations intertwine. Second, mean- route for almost 12 years. So, it’s a stable ingful (wanted and unwanted) social encoun- route in my life. [laughing] There’s a library, a swimming hall and a shopping centre. And ters construct feelings of insideness and outs- transport connections are good. And there’s ideness. Third, an individual’s daily mobilities also a sports park. create routine and new, embodied and experi- (see Appendix 2, the route 1) enced connections between places, whereas immobilities disrupt such connections. What, then, Discussion 2. are the implications of these findings taken to- HELI: So, you went there [an old shopping centre] often? gether? The discussion in this section elaborates on them further. ARTO: Yes, many times. Places are constructed in the interplay of individuals and their daily environments.

117 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

HELI: Would you like to tell me something 165–166). Therefore, places that are categorised about it? as mobile are not necessarily placeless (cf. Tu- an 1977: 179; Relph 1976: 88; see Cresswell ARTO: It was the shortest route [from school to the shopping centre]. It was a bit difficult at 2006: 31). In fact, personal relationships with first in the seventh grade because the teachers environments were constructed in and through policed us. But they had got tired of that by the eighth and ninth grades, and they couldn’t daily mobilities. do anything. Many things happened there… I claim that the participants’ places of daily life were organised as subjective and unique webs JUUSO: [laughing] of meaningful places, in which the meaningfully thick and places experienced as passages (see HELI: Well… What kind of things? Casey 2001; Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 79–81) overlapped and came together in turn. Places as ARTO: It’s hard to say… But if we were parts of such webs become meaningfully intense walking there, it would be memory lane. (see Appendix 3, the route 8) when an individual encounters different environments and people, and assume personal and intersubjective meanings. These personal places Discussion 3. became connected as entities, first through sub- EMMA: Bus 133 has always been in my life. It always takes the same route, and all my jective meaning-making and second through the schools are along it. It’s the bus route of my (bodily) im/mobilities that were part of the course life. [laughing] (see Appendix 3, the route 5) of daily life. Thus, I define webs of meaningful places as subjective compositions of personal As the participants told me, their daily routes places, which are constructed in the context of included different kinds of places: meaningfully lived life and daily mobilities. The term webs of intensive places, highlighted in the narratives and meaningful places connotes the dynamisms of passages that were habitually lived through (see the lifeworld (Buttimer 1976), and the perspec- Casey 2001; Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80–81). tive of the individual. Buttimer, however, did not Whereas daily mobilities connected the young empirically investigate how such dynamism was people’s places together, mundane movements constructed, nor did she discuss the impact of seemed to facilitate their separation. Thus, cor- immobility on place experiences. The notion of responding with earlier research findings, it webs of meaningful places is also close to Kar- seems that movement is required to experience jalainen’s (2003: 87, 2006: 83–84, 91) topobi- the physical distance between places (see Jain ographical places. However, whereas he concen- & Lyons 2008: 85–86), and it was clearly al- trates on the lifetime level, my focus is more on so needed to construct experienced distance. In the level of daily life (even if places obviously this sense, moving was a combination of feel- also matter biographically) (Karjalainen 2003: ings of spaciousness and of freedom (see Tuan 87, 2006: 83–84, 91). 1977: 53), but also of connectedness between I found that the young people actively tried places. It would thus seem that movements and to manage the inclusive connections between meaningful places exist simultaneously, given that places and themselves. According to the anal- individuals also construct meaningful relation- ysis, such connections included personal places ships with environments on the move (see e.g. that supported belonging (as discussed in Chap- Sheller & Urry 2006: 213–214; Edensor 2014: ter 6.1), social encounters that constructed feel-

118 ings of insideness (as discussed in Chapter 6.2) ble arrangements of people, energy and matter’ and the potential for (independent) mobility (as (Edensor 2011: 190). Thus, places are construct- discussed in Chapter 6.3). In other words, their ed on the move, while travelling in and through daily lives encompassed meaningfully intense them (Cresswell 2006; Jirón 2010b: 131). Fur- places that were experienced as being connected thermore, ‘– – mobility implies giving mean- to each other. In reality however, these webs of ing to the practice of moving from one place meaningful places included fragilities and dis- to another and suggests the possibility of plac- connections. Even if the young people handled es being appropriated and transformed during these frailties in different ways, some had more this practice – –’ (Jirón 2010b: 131). However, trouble than others and were thus put in a dis- I argue that these interpretations tend to over- advantageous position. Disconnections between look the experiential dimension of mobilities in personal places were sometimes a result of neg- subjective places, and particularly their impact ative experiences: on the subjective sense of belonging to a daily environment. As Alina’s case suggests, individ- HELI: Do your friends live in this area [in uals experience mobilities uniquely, and not all Tikkurila]? daily mobility experiences are positive. Alina’s everyday environments were not imbued with ALINA: Actually, quite a lot of them [live] in central Helsinki. meanings through her daily mobility as she was expecting, and only certain types of mobility con- HELI: So your movements are towards structed a strong sense of belonging (here, jour- Helsinki? neys to Helsinki). This resulted in experienced and embodied disconnections between places. ALINA: Yes. Everyone went to study in In practice, she described her daily places as if Helsinki at some point, but I didn’t get into the school I applied for there. This [Tikkurila they were strictly separate, and organised them school] was my second choice and I got in here. It was quite sad when all the others went in accordance with her feelings of belonging and elsewhere and I ended up here alone… non-belonging. It was significant, however, that she was not entirely powerless in this situation, HELI: So how do you like [Alina’s but actively maintained her social relationships neighbourhood]? with friends living in Helsinki. Thus, mobile people are also experiencing people who may or ALINA: [laughing] It’s not very nice, I’ve never liked living here. My background is may not feel they belong in the daily flows of such that I lived in [another neighbourhood], which they are a part. which I loved, until I went to school. Then my parents divorced and we had to leave Social encounters, whether experienced as the house. I wasn’t very pleased and I’ve wanted or unwanted, constructed personal webs never really adapted to [Alina’s current neighbourhood]. of places. When I looked more closely at the rela- (see Appendix 3, the route 2) tionship between experienced place connections and social encounters, I noted that encounters Mobility practices are clearly essential con- with unwanted individuals caused disconnection structors of daily places, which are ‘continually from personal places. However, as discussed be- (re)produced through the mobile flows which low, important places and reliable individuals course through and around them, bringing to- helped the young people to handle these neg- gether ephemeral, contingent and relatively sta- ative feelings:

119 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

NELLI: I was bullied for a long time. It ings of belonging that they carried her through started in the first or second grade and continued until I left [secondary school]. But I the negative places associated with unwanted managed to make some friends who supported encounters. In this case, unwanted encounters me. did not make her feel disconnectedness with her personal places. Thus, I argue that Nelli’s person- HELI: So, are your memories of that school relatively OK? al web of meaningful places supported her in a difficult life situation in terms of assuring her of NELLI: Yes. It [bullying] was never bad who she was (see Karjalainen 1997b: 41), not as enough for me to skip a class. the bullies tried to define her. Given that encountering is a process of struggle and differentiation - (see e.g. Ahmed 2000: 21; Harinen et al. 2005: 282; Simonsen 2007: 168, 178; Pickering et al. [In a forest near Nelli’s old school] 2012), I claim that Nelli’s agency in recognising and maintaining personal connections with place NELLI: The grass in the field [near the helped her to resolve the dilemmas arising from school] seemed higher when I was a child. This place used to be field and forest. – – It unwanted encounters. hasn’t changed much. We used to play on that Third, im/mobilities played a role in how in- rock. We lived behind these spruces. Maybe because of this [forest] I feel that nature is so dividuals constructed their webs of meaningful close to me. This place hasn’t changed much. We renovated this yard but we could only places, particularly formulating embodied (dis) enjoy it for one summer until we moved away. connections between them. As discussed below, These are our former neighbours, they’re extremely friendly. I visit them sometimes. the participants had different ways of handling the frailties that relative immobilities caused in HELI: Why did you move away? their personal webs:

HELI: Have you thought of staying in [a rural NELLI: My parents separated and we couldn’t village where Julia and Miia lived]? afford to live there anymore. (see Appendix 3, the route 7) JULIA: No, we haven’t.

As Nelli recalled, her relationships with places MIIA: I don’t think we have. I guess I’ll move were complex, largely because of unwanted en- away when I get a permanent job. counters with school bullies. While shared routines connect people in daily life (see Edensor HELI: Why do you want to leave the place? 2011: 192), in school space, for instance (Gordon et al. 1999), Nelli’s routines included forced en- JULIA: I used to live in Helsinki. There’s counters with individuals she would rather have almost nothing in [the village]. And here there’s everything. – – We moved to [the avoided. Thus, shared routines do not always en- village] when I was in fifth grade. Which meant that just when my youth started and tail comfort and predictability (cf. see Binnie et I could’ve done things, we moved to the al. 2007: 167; Edensor 2011: 196–197). However, countryside. Nelli did not have extreme feelings of outsideness, either. When she told me why, it seemed – that positive encounters with friends and important places were such powerful sources of feel- MIIA: But you can do the same things in [the

120 village] as in Helsinki! [ironically] The girls’ narratives revealed how their webs of meaningful places were divided: the areas JULIA: Yes, there’s a grocery store and a around their rural place of residence comprised church. [laughing] one web and the locations around the school and the shopping centre comprised another. They MIIA: You can get married, if you feel like it! shared mixed feelings of outsideness (see Relph 1976: 49) in the former, where most of the other JULIA: And everyone else is a Swedish speaker, apart from us. [laughing] residents were ‘them’, in other words Swedish speakers. In addition, the rural village had few MIIA: Actually, my dad is a Swedish speaker, facilities for young people. Under these circum- so basically I should be quite fluent in stances, Julia and Miia were looking forward to Swedish but I’m not. the future (see Matthews & Limb 1999: 68) when they could leave the parental home. The places - around their school did not seem to offer many sources of belonging either, largely because the HELI: Do you like school [in Leppävaara]? girls were not keen pupils and could not associate with most of their peers. However, I propose MIIA: Well… When there’s good food [in the school canteen], then it’s alright. that their living was not as gloomy as it might seem in the light of two significant elements that JULIA: But we both have problems with our strengthened the links with their personal plac- studies. es: the train connection and the girls’ friendship. First, the train connection between where the par- - ticipants lived and their school constituted a link between the places around the parental home and HELI: Do you like the people there [at the places around the school. This connection school]? represented experienced and embodied independence (see Jirón 2010b: 140–141). Even if the MIIA: Well… [laughing] trains did not run very frequently, it was enough to increase the girls’ experienced agency, which JULIA: Not really. [laughing] furthermore added to their sense of belonging to their daily places. Second, Miia’s and Julia’s MIIA: It depends. What should I say, [they are] what young people are nowadays. But I friendship seemed to support them in handling guess there are cool people, too. experienced disconnections from daily places. In practice, they were actively making certain places HELI: OK, so what do you mean…? important for themselves (see Christensen & Mik- kelsen 2013) and therefore combatting feelings MIIA: They’re… What are they like? of outsideness. For instance, they described their place of residence in an ironic way (see Ridanpää JULIA: Superficial. 2014), separated ‘us’ from ‘them’ at school and tried to change the meanings of boring places MIIA: Yes, and stupid. (as discussed in Chapter 6.2.3). These practices (see Appendix 1, the route 5) clearly helped them to build strong connections

121 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 between places that otherwise would have been I claim above that subjective places are or- weak. However, as they implied, these were only ganised as webs of meaningfully intense places temporary solutions. The girls seemed to believe constructed by the experiencer through daily en- that leaving the parental home would help them counters with environments and individuals in to create new and stronger connections. the context of daily mobility. I suggest that these As discussed above, the fragilities in the webs incorporate fixity and flexibility, repetition, young people’s personal webs of places tend- and new encounters with environments that in ed to relate to feelings of outsideness, encoun- combination construct experienced connections ters with unwanted individuals, and experienced and disconnections between places. Consequent- and embodied immobility. These elements made ly, certain places are thickly filled with mean- places meaningfully intense, but also meaning- ings and others are experienced more as passages fully ambiguous, and sometimes there were ma- within the course of daily living (see Casey 2001; ny sources of disruption making them experien- Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80–81). Thus, webs of tially disconnected. As I have mentioned, dis- meaningful places describe the relationships be- connections within the personal webs of places tween individuals, their personal places and the were negative and sometimes alienating experi- connections between them. In the light of earli- ences, yet the participants had developed work- er research, it could be said that young people’s able strategies for handling them. Significantly, places are dynamic, flexing entities that ‘some- however, none of the narratives described exces- how retain some thread of peculiar narrative that sive disruption. It rather seems that the young sustains them as places’ (see Leyshon 2011: 322). people’s places were generally coherently or- Given the evidence from my research material, I ganised, forming webs of meaningful places. claim that this ‘thread of narrative’ (see Leyshon In contrast to findings from studies investigat- 2011: 322) is constructed by an individual’s sub- ing young people’s places in the city, few of the jective experiences of places and the connections participants of this research mentioned a lack of between them, which are intertwined as webs of places in which to spend time in privacy (alone meaningful places. Memories of past places and or with friends) (cf. James 1986: 155; Matthews expectations related to places-to-be are import- et al. 2000; Matthews 2003), or daily immobility ant in that they pervade the web with different as being among their major concerns (cf. Porter meanings. In this sense, youth is a period of life et al. 2010a). Furthermore, and contrary to my that makes places more slippery and flexible, assumptions, societal restrictions did not dom- but at the same time reveals new environments inate their future expectations (see Gordon & in which to get anchored. Thus, I argue that it Lahelma 2002: 15 for similar findings). In the is crucial for young people to learn to recognise context of this study the implication is that daily their experiential connections and to handle the places offer experiences of insideness, opportu- fragilities in places that belong to daily living. nities for wanted encounters, and agency in rela- Drawing on humanistic geography, I claim, tion to mobility. The kind of changes the young given that place is a subjective construction people were looking for were related to estab- (see e.g. Tuan 1975: 152), that personal webs lishing new, experiential and embodied connec- of places and experienced (dis)connections tions with novel places in which it would be should be studied from the individual’s per- possible to practise their new agency and con- spective. Here, I underline the importance of struct adult identities. daily mobilities in the construction of subjec-

122 tive places. Places appear to be constructed at es and encounters. This holds even if places are the intersection of routes, perspectives and bi- constructed in the social and mobile contexts of ographical journeys, and people (see Edensor daily living, in which social background plays 2011: 190; Büsher et al. 2016), whereas mobil- a role. I do not mean to ignore the diversity of ities could be described as non-reflexive bodily daily mobilities, but rather wish to shed light practices in which the feeling of being on the on the subjective and experienced dimension move matters (see Binnie et al. 2007: 167). and its impact on the construction of personal Although places could also be viewed from places. Thus, the notion of webs of meaningful this perspective, I should point out that one’s places resonates with humanistic geographers’ relationship with one’s daily environments re- approach to studying subjective place experi- sults from personal meaning-making and bodi- ences, while linking the branch more closely ly movement, as well as from earlier experienc- with recent discussions on mobility.

123 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

7 Conclusions of embodied and experienced (dis)connections between places, and therefore as constructors of young people’s place experiences. This research had four aims. The first was This research about young people’s personal re- to investigate the composition of young peo- lationships with daily, urban environments has ple’s personal place experiences in a socially contributed to discussions revolving around hu- constructed world in which living is assumed manistic geography and young people’s geogra- to be mobile. My target was to understand how phies. Taking humanistic geography as a starting the different facets of place (including places as point, I investigated young people’s place ex- subjective, shared and composed in mobile con- periences through three dimensions of place: as texts) in combination construct young people’s subjective, as shared and as constructed in mo- daily places. bile contexts. Humanistic geography as a van- As discussed throughout the study, tage point enhanced my understanding of the in- young people’s living tends to take place in depth meanings of place, in which importance socio-spatial circumstances controlled by is placed on lived experiences of present places, adults (e.g. Valentine 1996b, 2003; Trell et memories of past places and expectations of fu- al. 2012: 146). However, my focus is on peo- ture places. In line with humanistic geographers ple in their late youth, who are considered (see e.g. Tuan 1975; 1977; Relph 1976: 54–55; almost adults in many situations and whose Karjalainen 1986: 125), I posit that places are living conditions differ from those of indi- constructed from subjective place experiences, viduals in their early teens. Thus, the sec- developed as meaningful places. I also studied ond aim of the study was to investigate how place as an inter-subjective phenomenon, con- young people, whose lives are influenced by structed in the social world (see e.g. Cosgrove childhood places and new places of emerging 1983; Tani 1995: 33; Kuusisto-Arponen 2003, adulthood, experience their everyday plac- 2009; Cresswell 2004: 29–32). The implication es. Given that my intention was to explore is that meaningful places are both socially shared the subjective dimension of place, I took in- and subjective. Socially shared means that social spiration from discussions in the fields of encounters affect an individual’s place experi- humanistic geography and young people’s ences, even the most personal ones. I focused geographies. specifically on how daily encounters influence My third aim was to explore how young peo- an individual’s feelings of insideness and outs- ple’s place experiences are constructed in the ideness (see Tuan 1974: 4; Relph 1976: 49–55). social world. More specifically, I investigated The third dimension of place is related to daily how social encounters generate experienced in- mobilities and immobilities. It seems to me that sideness and outsideness in daily places (Relph places are constructed in the mobile world (see 1976). This aim reflects the assumption that the e.g. Cresswell 2006; Jirón 2010b), and I focused meanings of places, even if unique to the expe- on young people’s physical, local, daily im/mo- riencer, are constructed in social contexts, and bilities. I studied mobility as meaningful move- thus are also intersubjective. As discussed above, ment, as practised, experienced and embodied these meanings are shared, for instance, through (Cresswell 2006: 3–4). More specifically, I ex- language (see e.g. Jackson 1989: 169; Karjalain- plored how im/mobilities function as constructors en 2006: 87) and individuals being together (e.g.

124 Bunnell et al. 2012: 499). Not only do social en- have various facets: they are subjective, shared counters construct the intersubjective meanings and constructed in a mobile context. Webs of of places, they also position those involved. The meaningful places include those that are thick positioning of the participants as young people and those that are experienced as thin in terms shaping their possibilities for encounters with in- of their meaning (see Casey 2001). They are dividuals and environments framed their place therefore unique to every individual, even if they experiences. Given my target to enhance under- also include intersubjective elements. The web standing of young people’s subjective experienc- of meaningful places is a novel concept I have es, I focused on the impact of social encoun- developed based on my research findings, al- ters on the place experiences of individuals. My though it also reflects earlier research (Buttimer sources included dialogues that emerged during 1976; Karjalainen 1997b, 2003; 2006). I describe the cultural turn as well as discussions in the these findings in more detail below, and show fields of humanistic geography and young peo- how I reached this conclusion. ple’s geographies. First, I found that young people’s places were The fourth aim was to find out how - dai experienced in relation to other daily places in the ly local mobilities and immobilities influenced mobile context of everyday life. In other words, young people’s place experiences. Specifically, these places were experienced as interconnect- I investigated how young people build mean- ed. This finding verges on the topo-biographical, ingful relationships between places in the im/ meaning that an individual’s experiences of the mobile contexts of everyday life. I studied daily past translate into memories in the present mo- movements as embodied practices that connect ment (see Karjalainen 2006: 83), and that places places experientially in meaningful ways (e.g. are layered on the level of one’s personal biogra- Cresswell 2006: 3; Jain & Lyons 2008: 85–86). phy. However, whereas Karjalainen sees place as Thus, I concentrated on experienced (dis)connec- an invisible, unquestioning frame of daily life40 tions between places resulting from the physical, (Karjalainen 1997b: 41), I argue that mundane local mobilities and immobilities of daily life. places not only frame, but together with daily This aim relates to humanistic geography and mobilities also play a role in the construction recent discussions on the mobility turn, accord- of experiential connections between everyday ing to which daily flows (e.g. Adey et al. 2014) places and people. Second, I found that daily and meaningful movements influence the con- movements were focal in the construction of struction of everyday life (Cresswell 2006: 3). connections between places. Even if daily mobility is a question of dwelling-in-motion (Shell- 7.1 Subjective webs of er & Urry 2006: 213–214) and mobile routines meaningful places convey the sense of daily routines (see Edensor As mentioned above, my first aim was to investi- 2011: 192; Middleton 2011), I argue that daily gate young people’s subjective place experiences mobilities also play a central role in processes of constructed in the social world, in which living personal meaning-making, and that they experi- is perceived as mobile. I use the metaphor of a entially and bodily connect places as meaning- web to describe how young people’s daily en- ful entities. At the same time, I found that they vironments are organised as connected systems of meaningful places According to the research 40 In Finnish: ’(e)simerkiksi jokapäiväisessä elämänkulus- findings, places that are part of these systems sa paikka on näkymätön arkisen elämän kyselemätön kehys’ (Karjalainen 1997b: 41).

125 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 created a sense of separation and experienced enced more embodied disconnections than oth- distance between places. Thus, I propose that ers, which was mostly attributable to their so- daily mobility is a combination of experienced cio-spatial circumstances (e.g. because of expe- spaciousness and freedom (see Tuan 1977: 53), riences of displacement, encounters with school but suggest that it also concerns feelings of con- bullies or living in a remote location). However, nectedness between places and people. Third, they had different strategies for handling and re- therefore, I argue that young people’s places are solving these negative and alienating experienc- organised as personal and unique webs of mean- es. Thus, I argue that it was crucial for their sense ingful places, constructed by every individual. of belonging to learn to recognise their experi- They include thickly lived places (Casey 2001: ential connections with places and to handle the 684) and places experienced as passages (see related fragilities. Kuusisto-Arponen 2010: 80), and become mean- From a broader perspective regarding dis- ingfully intense through encounters with differ- connections, the participants tended not discuss ent environments and individuals as well as (in- problems recognised in earlier research, such as ter)subjective meaning-making. In terms of the the lack of places for young people (James 1986: different facets of places (as discussed above), 155; Matthews et al. 2000; Matthews 2003) or it could be said that webs of meaningful places restricted mobility opportunities (Porter et al. are constructed through personal meaning-mak- 2010a). Instead, I argue that young people’s re- ing when the places are connected in the course lationships with their daily environments were of daily life. On the other hand, certain places brighter and the connections between places in these webs were shared when the participants more balanced than might have been assumed. assigned mutual meanings to them, and shared However, the participants were members of the daily routes. Finally, daily local mobility con- loose category middle class, hence research on structed experiential and bodily connections be- young people in vulnerable positions may well tween places and made them meaningful through have resulted in different conclusions. bodily mobility. The findings related to the first research ques- Fourth, I noted that young people’s webs of tion challenge academics investigating place to meaningful places included fragilities and dis- study the subject holistically through its differ- connections. Again, in terms of the different fac- ent facets: as subjective, as shared and as com- ets of places, I found that experienced discon- posed in im/mobile contexts. I argue that such nection could be attributed to personal dishar- an approach would enhance understanding of mony (e.g. because of forced displacement), and how different elements of place construct daily feelings of outsideness and separation from daily places as meaningful systems in the context of places. Unwanted social encounters also disrupt- mobile everyday life. I also argue that a holis- ed feelings of insideness, thereby making the tic approach would bring new insights into how connections between places more fragile (e.g. young people’s personal relationships with their when an individual avoided certain places be- daily environments are constructed and change cause of unwanted encounters). In addition, ex- in the context of growing up. Furthermore, such perienced and bodily immobilities disconnected an approach that includes different features of places (e.g. when an individual’s daily life in- places would not only enhance understanding cluded waiting or was excessively static). Fifth, of young people’s place relations but also give I observed that some young people had experi-

126 Table 9. The findings of the study

Perspective on place experi- Aim… Findings ences

The young people were living between past places (referring to memories of childhood) and future places-to-be (referring to adulthood places). Familiar childhood memories helped To investigate how them to cope with the difficulties and requirements related to young people, whose the new adulthood places. In this sense, the past and the fu- Young people’s lives are influenced by ture places together comprised an experiential continuation, subjective childhood places and which helped the participants to balance their mixed feelings place experi- new places of emerging of growing up and feeling insideness with new, adult places. ences adulthood, experience their everyday places. However, this continuation was vulnerable. Memories of childhood places did not always support belonging to novel places. This increased young people’s insecurity in relation to adulthood places and led to outsideness.

Wanted encounters (e.g. with friends, peers) tended to strengthen feelings of insideness and belonging. Howev- er, as a result of the increased independence and agency, To study the influence the meanings young people assigned to wanted encounters of social encounters on sometimes changed. Young people’s young people’s place experiences of experiences and their Unwanted encounters (e.g. with foreigners or other young social places feelings of insideness people) evoked feelings of outsideness, which sometimes and outsideness. erupted as xenophobia. More commonly, however, the participants tolerated difference. Their feelings of insideness were related to whether they could handle these negative experiences or not.

Parents generally exerted very little control over the young people’s mobility. Indeed, their mobile routines were similar to those of adults. Immobility related more to poor public-transport connections and the lack of motorised transport than to parental control. Mundane mobilities constructed experiential To investigate how and physical connections between young people and their Young people’s these young people personal places, and increased their understanding of how place experi- built up place experi- such places are organised. ences and daily ences in im/mobile con- im/mobilities texts. New mobility opportunities gave them the feeling that the world was more accessible as their everyday environments expanded. Immobility, in turn, disrupted these connections as well as the young people’s feelings of belonging and sense of adulthood. It was also linked with feelings of backwardness in the context of urban living. glimpses into their inner worlds, which other- their daily places had started to change. For in- wise remain unreachable. stance, they no longer assigned positive meanings to places that had previously been meaningfully 7.2 Three dimensions of young intensive and positively experienced (e.g. places people’s places: personal, for hanging out and youth centres). Instead, these social and mobile places had (relatively recently) started to assume This section summarises the findings related to negative meanings, considered too childish by the second, third and fourth research questions participants who saw themselves as grown-ups. (see Table 9). Addressing the second research When I investigated the reasons for this change question I found, first, that the young people I noted that their socio-spatial circumstances had were in a phase of life when the meanings of altered. They suddenly had more freedom, agency

127 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 and independence in terms of making decisions related to increased agency and experiences concerning their own lives. Parents, teachers and of maturity in other places. Childhood places other adults did not control their agency to the evoked nostalgic memories in some partici- same extent as before, but tended to treat them pants. In accordance with earlier research find- like young adults rather than teenagers. In other ings, these topobiographically important plac- words, the young people’s position as children or es helped them to make sense of their roots young teenagers had been replaced with that of and selfhood (Karjalainen 2006: 83), but also young adults. This is an interesting finding given seemed to foster feelings of safety when the the tendency in the literature to categorise young new adulthood places seemed too intimidating, people as a group of individuals whose living is uncertain or overwhelming. I argue that mem- controlled in varying degrees by adults, whether ories of childhood places did not necessarily at home, at school or in the public realm (see e.g. solve the young people’s everyday problems Valentine 1996b; Trell et al. 2012: 146; Kallio per se (e.g. finding a place to study or to do 2012; Pyyry 2015a: 8; Tani 2015). I therefore their laundry), but they increased their confi- argue that the participants were not living in be- dence. Being accessible only in the form of tween childhood and adulthood (see e.g. Skelt- memories, however, they occasionally had be- on 2000: 69), but between youth and adulthood. come places filled with nostalgia. In line with earlier research findings, the I also found that adulthood places aroused participants’ meaningful places were construct- feelings of excitement and maturity, and pro- ed in the interplay between memories of the vided opportunities to practise novel adulthood. past, experiences of the present and expecta- Some of these places were real, but there were tions for the future, which accumulated in lay- also imagined places-to-be, largely because ers of subjective place experiences (see e.g. these young people were still limited in terms Karjalainen 2004). These were the most per- of agency (e.g. they were living with their par- sonal, private and unique places that defined ents). Real places had come into their lives rel- selfhood and evoked feelings of ownership. atively recently as they exercised their newly My findings specifically shed light on young acquired agency (e.g. going to night clubs or people’s daily living, which was located ex- driving a car). They also prepared for adulthood perientially between memories related to past by imagining places-to-be in the future, if such places and imagined places-to-be in the future, places were not yet accessible (e.g. their own the former being strongly associated with child- home or access to night clubs). My findings hood and the latter with adulthood places. It also underline the fact that encountering adult- appeared that past places aroused feelings of hood is a complex period of life. Some of the safety, familiarity and mundaneness, but had participants discussed their experienced misfit started to seem childish and monotonous. Thus, between places of the past and present, where I argue that the relationship with these places they were unable to exercise their new adult was in transformation: the young people did agency. Feelings of misfit arose when an adult not want to be associated with places of the future seemed overly intimidating, uncertain or past that were manifestly overly childish. How- insecure due to limited support and resources. ever, I found that these childish places were These participants could not associate with their needed as something against which to gauge childhood places either, which they considered places of adulthood. In this respect, they were childish or unavailable. I found that experienced

128 misfit with places manifested as mixed feelings ple’s geographies and contribute to the literature of confusion and despair, resulting in a sense focusing on youth as a period between childhood of outsideness, and even alienation from daily and adulthood (see e.g. Kett 1971: 283; Skelton places. Thus, I argue that young people’s adult 2000: 69; Weller 2006: 101; Northcote 2006: 2; places start in their dreams and could be char- Valentine et al. 1998: 4; Evans 2008: 1663). As acterised as small pockets of adulthood. They I have shown, place experiences assume spe- are nevertheless important in terms of helping cial significance in this phase of life. The young to prepare for adulthood. people were living between places of the past, In the light of these findings I claim that plac- referring to their childhood, and places-to-be in es of the past and future places-to-be together the future, referring to adulthood. Given these constitute an experiential continuum between findings, I challenge scholars focusing on young places, which help young people to balance the people’s geography to study growing up from a mixed feelings related to growing up and feel- diverse perspective, and to include young peo- ing they belong in their daily places in difficult ple’s subjective relationships with their daily en- situations. Both childhood and adulthood plac- vironments in the research. More precisely, given es are needed in this process. Loosely drawing that place experiences could be considered reflec- on Kullman (2010: 834–836), I argue that, in tions of an individual’s personal world, focusing combination, these are transitional places, which on places of the past and places-to-be would give increase young people’s preparedness to adopt novel insights in young people’s personal worlds new, adult roles and feel insideness in new plac- in the context of growing up. I also found that the es. They are places that have not been entirely young people’s future expectations had a strong left behind and continue to be a part of young effect on the construction of their personal place people’s lives (Kullman 2010: 833), as reminders experiences. Some humanistic geographers have of the familiar past. Thus, I argue that transition- discussed how the future is involved in place al places helped the young people to construct experiences (Karjalainen 2004, 2006: 85), but bridges between places of the past and places- they typically tend to focus on how past expe- to-be – that is to say between childhood and riences formulate subjective place experiences. adulthood. However, I also found that feelings Thus, although researchers inspired by humanis- of continuation from the past to the future were tic geography have studied subjective memories vulnerable. For instance, when the safe places and experiences of present places, there is a need of childhood (e.g. a familiar playground, a youth for more research on the individual’s relation- centre, a secondary school) were no longer avail- ship with future expectations and places-to-be. able and the new places of emerging adulthood Concerning the third research question, I (e.g. new school) seemed overwhelming, daily found that as young people’s agency increased places were changing too quickly and disrupt- they had more opportunities to make decisions ed the continuum. Even if the participants had concerning who they wanted to encounter (e.g. various means of handling these insecurities, the friends, girl- and boyfriends and new interesting continuity between memories of the past and im- individuals). However, given the randomness of ages of places-to-be were not self-evident, and urban encounters they could not avoid ‘them’, in required an adaptive attitude. other words social encounters with individuals The findings related to the second research whose presence was unwanted. In line with ear- question enhance understanding of young peo- lier research, the findings shed light on the role

129 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 of social encounters as constructors of the mean- for this was that the participants were looking for ings of personal places (see e.g. Cosgrove 1983; encounters to support their feelings of maturity Cresswell 2004), and particularly on the interplay and insideness in new, adult places. between social encounters and subjective feel- The young people also discussed their experi- ings of insideness and outsideness in daily plac- ences of negative encounters, especially the ones es. I found that, along with being key construc- that took place in the public realm and could not tors of places and a sense of belonging, want- be avoided. In some of them they felt they lacked ed encounters with ‘us’ provided the continuity, agency. In accordance with earlier research find- whereas unwanted encounters aroused mixed ings, unwanted encounters happened when dif- feelings, sometimes also related to outsideness. ferences from the Other had begun to be both- Moreover, although the young people’s ersome (see Harinen et al. 2005: 283) enough to shared places included elements of predictabil- disrupt the illusion of stability in terms of place ity, they were also renegotiated in the context (see Cresswell 2006: 32). Thus, the participants’ of growing up. First, the participants discussed fear of the Other assumed a spatial form in caus- familiar places that had been shared with wanting the physical avoidance of certain places (see ed individuals over time, which manifested as Koskela 2010), and significantly for this study, shared memories. These places evoked strong resulted in mixed feelings of outsideness. Thus, feelings of ‘at-homeness’ (see Seamon & Sowers encounters with ‘them’ not only resulted in hos- 2008: 45), and were often somewhat mundane tility, but also disturbed their sense of belonging. and ordinary. Thus, I argue that they constituted However, strongly negatively experienced en- a safe and familiar background in the form of counters were relatively uncommon. Some par- shared memories, rather than being focal plac- ticipants discussed encounters with difference, es in the young people’s present lives. More- which they noted but tolerated. Although such over, they gave comfort in a phase of life filled encounters disturbed their sense of insideness, I with insecurities, arousing feelings of continuity. noted that they had the tools to deal with their On the other hand, wanted encounters were also negative feelings. Thus, I claim that the ability constructors of new place experiences when the to tolerate difference matters not only in terms young people encountered new places with fa- of promoting equality but also to safeguard per- miliar individuals such as friends. It was easier sonal feelings of belonging (see Relph 2008). to test adult identities and practices in new plac- I was interested in why some participants es in the company of friends. I also noted that could handle the negative feelings evoked by some of the participants were exploring novel unwanted encounters better than others. The places with view to encountering new individ- context could offer one explanation: diversity uals, even if it was sometimes difficult to blend was more apparent in certain places, hence in- in with a new group. Interestingly, the greater dividuals may learn to respect it through the ac- freedom to decide who to encounter changed the quisition of local knowledge (see Illman 2006; meanings the young people attached to wanted Relph 2008: 314–315). These findings under- encounters. Reflecting the claim that group dy- line the importance of daily social encounters namics are contestable and not fully stable (see with friends. I noted that shared feelings of in- Suurpää 2002: 176, 190), certain individuals, de- sideness gave these young people tools to help fined earlier as friends, had started to seem dull, them develop a tolerant attitude towards ‘them’ childish and ‘uncool them’. I believe one reason (e.g. frightening encounters were less intimi-

130 dating when friends were present). The partic- Turning finally to thefourth research ques- ipants and their friends reserved certain places tion, I noted that the young people were relative- for themselves, but also constructed places in ly unrestricted in their mobility. Whereas parents which ‘others’ were accepted, and even desired or guardians tend to regulate children’s mobility (see Kuoppa 2016: 240). However, reflecting (e.g. Karsten 2005; Malone 2007; Mikkelsen & the claim that fear of the Other is socially con- Christensen 2009), the participants’ parents had structed (Koskela 2010: 389), feelings of hos- very little control over their offspring’s daily, lo- tility were shared, too. Participants who shared cal movements. Most of the mobility barriers feelings of outsideness tended to find it difficult they encountered related to poor public transport to accept difference. Hence, researchers aiming or the lack of a car or scooter. Therefore, they to enhance understanding of how feelings of occasionally needed to make long, time-consum- outsideness and hostile attitudes towards ‘them’ ing journeys to maintain their social relation- emerge in daily life should focus on shared feel- ships and visit significant places. Thus, contrary ings of belonging and non-belonging in every- to suggestions in earlier research (see Larsen et day environments. al. 2006: 7; Larsen 2014: 125), I found that the These findings challenge researchers study- young people spent a considerable amount of ing place experiences to shed light on the com- time travelling to meet up with individuals who plexity of belonging, which does not necessarily were important to them. Below I consider these mean the same to insiders and outsiders. It is im- aspects of young people’s agency related to daily portant to include the socio-spatial background mobilities: they had plenty of independence, but and the multiple influences of global mobility living in the parental home sometimes restricted (see Amin 2004), and to understand that belong- their mobility options. ing is a subjective experience. In the light of these Young people’s experiences of daily mobil- findings, I suggest that humanistic geography as ity were diverse. First, their everyday place ex- an approach may help to enhance understanding periences were constructed through mundane of experiences of belonging and the excessive mobile routines, most of which were effortless, need to defend certain places from ‘them’. Sec- but unavoidable. Interestingly, they saw these ond, given that social encounters build up feel- daily places not as realms in which to eschew ings of insideness and outsideness among young ‘adult gaze’ (see Symes 2007: 444), but as part people, the findings challenge geographers in this of their daily lives. They habitually and auto- field to pay more attention to the meanings in- matically practised urban movement (see Mid- dividuals attach to their social encounters, and dleton 2011), which appears to me to resemble how they construct their personal relationships adults’ daily mobility. Even if mundane, these with everyday environments. Focusing on young movements were not meaningless, but rather people’s personal memories of social encounters, generated feelings of ‘everydayness’ and con- for instance, would shed light on the complex re- structed the young people’s adult identities. Sec- lationship between the young and their everyday ond, the participants were still in the process places, belonging and xenophobia. I propose that of acquiring agency in terms of mobility, and a sufficient understanding of these experiences talked about the new types of mobility they had would support efforts to counter discriminating recently discovered or were about to discover. attitudes, and support young people’s belonging For instance, they discussed their adult feelings in their everyday environments. about travelling alone, as well as their experi-

131 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 ences of driving a car and visiting more distant from urban centres, where public transport was places, all of which were experiences of encoun- not a viable option. tering new, adult places. Interestingly, these ex- From the perspective of place experiences, tensions of mobility to daily environments led I argue that young people’s daily mobilities in- to the feeling that the ‘world was widening’. I volve more than ‘dwelling-in-motion’ or embod- therefore argue that, in the context of this study, ied experiences and activities such as talking and daily mobility constituted experienced and bodi- working (see Sheller & Urry 2006: 213–214). As ly connections between places and connected repeated, rhythmic practices (see Edensor 2014: the young people, their daily movements and 165) or forms of preparation for the requirements environments as meaningful webs. It structured of the travel destination (see Jain & Lyons 2008: their understanding of interconnections between 85–86; Lyons 2014: 157), they clearly created places in the city, and extended their everyday embodied and experienced connections between living environments. I therefore propose that daily places and individuals. They represented new forms of mobility exemplify the ways in ways of being and living in the world, in which which young people establish and practise their the mobile environments of daily life are im- emerging adulthood. bued with subjective meanings. I also recognise The young people also discussed immobil- mobility opportunities as the main constructors ities that made daily movement slow and trou- of young people’s adulthood, independence and blesome, and complicated access to everyday agency. The participants were in a phase of life places (see Jirón 2010a). Although bothersome, in which their worlds were expanding through they could deal with the consequences and did new forms of mobility, and where they could not mind waiting or spending a lot of time travel- construct novel previously unknown connections ling. They also used other strategies (e.g. staying to places. At the same time, however, they did overnight at a friend’s place or changing the as- not have full agency in terms of daily mobility. signed meanings of their waiting places). I noted, I therefore argue that they were living between however, that such strategies were often success- the familiar mobility experiences of their earli- ful. Some participants discussed mobility barri- er youth and experiences to be encountered in ers that not only slowed them down but also re- the future. stricted their access to certain places. This kind of The findings related to the fourth research immobility connoted cell-like environments they question bring new insights into the study of could not physically leave (Kyttä 2003: 12; Jirón mobility. First, they imply that individuals need 2010a), and that regulated their access to both daily mobilities to forge experiential connec- novel and familiar places. Thus, even if these tions between places and feelings of belong- young people could handle the consequences of ing. Second, they contribute to the literature immobility, they experienced disrupted connec- in suggesting that daily movements essential- tions between places and themselves, and were ly constitute daily place experiences, and are prevented from trying out their adult identities. also important daily practices that give a sense In the context of urban life, I argue that immo- of everyday life (see e.g. Edensor 2011, 2014; bilities distanced them from urban living and Middleton 2011). I therefore propose that mo- disrupted their sense of the city. As the barriers bilities matter to young people constructing were unevenly organised, immobility had a par- their adult places. A focus on mobility experi- ticularly strong effect on young people living far ences would therefore enhance understanding

132 of how new agency and places of adulthood demonstrated in this study, combining human- are intertwined. istic geography with recent discussion on im/ mobilities allows one to look beyond the notion 7.3 Re-thinking place, mobilities and of place as a stable entity. As a concept, I see youth in the context of growing up it as neither stable and fixed (Tuan 1977: 179, The aim of this research was to investigate young see Relph 1976: 88) nor ‘supermobile’ (Elliot & people’s meaningful relationships with their daily Urry 2010), but first and foremost as anexperi - environments in the city. In retrospect, I claim that ence that includes both – it can be experienced humanistic geography was a pertinent approach as ‘fixed’ or ‘supermobile’, even simultaneously. to this topic, even if it is not a common perspec- I also claim that moving does not make places tive from which to explore place in contempo- meaningless, and that mobility is rather a facet rary geographical research. One possible reason of place and contributes to the construction of for this is that the research on local belonging its meaning. is assumed to reflect the influence of ‘Cartesian Second, it seems that experiences related to notions of bounded totalities’ according to which daily mobilities are not necessarily shared among local attachments are considered inherently exclu- individuals, even if their (bodily) mobile rou- sionary (Tomaney 2016: 96). The results of this tines are. Mobility is clearly a social phenome- study indicate the opposite, implying that local non (see Cresswell 2006: 5; Adey et al. 2014: 3) attachments are open and multi-sided. One of the as people construct its daily flows, but the per- major findings is that these research participants spective of the subject and his or her relation- in their late youth assigned different meanings ship with the daily environment should not be to their places than young teenagers tend to do. ignored. I argue that the meanings individuals I claim that I would not have noticed this major assign to their environments during their daily change in place relations had I not adopted an mobilities are different from embodied experi- approach that focuses on subjective place expe- ences of being on the move (see Spinney 2009; riences as reflections of personal relationships Edensor 2011), embodied kinetics (see Jensen with everyday environments. et al. 2015), or experiences of travelling daily However, insights from humanistic geogra- routes on ‘autopilot’ (see Middleton 2011). Giv- phy, which generally date from the 1970s, should en my findings, I argue that studies on mobility be combined with more recent discussions on and personal place experiences have the potential place. My approach was thus also to include dis- to enhance understanding of how an individual’s cussions that emerged during the cultural and the bodily movements, inner world and subjective mobility turns. Even if humanistic geography has meaning-making constitute a diverse entity that much to offer, researchers tend not to adopt this comprises daily living. research stream as their perspective on mobility. Third, as reported in earlier research, mo- In fact, it has been more common to study mobility is essential to young people in terms of bile routines and associated practices (see e.g. fostering feelings of independence and the con- Middleton 2011; Edensor 2011, 2014; Jensen struction of an adult identity (see e.g. Porter et et al. 2015) than place experiences as part of a al. 2010a: 803, 2010b: 1100, Skelton 2013: 471). mobile everyday life, possibly because place (as However, having recognised daily im/mobilities understood by humanistic geographers) has been as constructors of experiential and physical (dis) considered too fixed a concept. First, as I have connections between places and people, I argue

133 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 that there is a need for research on young peo- tween youth and adulthood, rather than between ple’s mobility experiences in conjunction with childhood and adulthood (cf. Skelton 2001: 69). their daily place experiences. I have suggested From the perspective of humanistic geogra- that this kind of research would enhance under- phy I found that late youth was a phase of life standing of how young people’s webs of mean- in which people increasingly associated places ingful places and experiences of growing up are of the past with childhood, and new experienc- constructed in the mobile context of everyday es of places-to-be with adulthood. Although I life. Furthermore, studying meaningful move- found that both past and future expectations ments and personal involvement in everyday were essential constructors of young people’s environments would provide new insights into selfhood, the participants were increasingly young people’s inner worlds, constructed in the looking towards their places-to-be in their adult context of daily flows and movements. The use future. In this regard, they considered them- of mobile methods, such as go-along interview- selves adults-to-be rather than children. It has ing (see Ponto 2015), helps to further this aim been claimed that young people and children through the intertwinement of the experiential, should be treated not as future adults, but as ac- bodily and material elements of place. tive social agents of the present moment, whose I also contribute to research exploring the social development does not end at adulthood perspectives of people in their late youth. Most (see Skelton 2007: 173; Barker et al. 2009: 2). geographers focusing on young people share the I propose that there is a need for research on view of youth as a period in between childhood young people’s lives in situations in which they and adulthood (Skelton 2001: 69), which young indeed identify themselves as future adults. I do people may find hard to define in terms of -be not claim that adulthood ends one’s socio-bio- longing. Thus, age is not only a biological but logical development, or that children’s agency also a socially constructed phenomenon (see e.g. should be downplayed, but I challenge the ge- Valentine 2003: 38; Hopkins & Pain 2007; Skel- ographers to reconceptualise their understand- ton 2007: 166; Evans 2008: 1662). The findings ing related to late youth. of this study resonate with these notions: in as I further claim that my understanding of much as age meant different things in different young people’s place experiences in the con- places to the young people as opposed to other text of growing up would be superficial had I individuals, their position was nebulous. How- not used a multi-method, participatory approach. ever, one change in their lives was more distinct. The approach to place adopted in humanistic Many socio-spatial rules and strictures that are geography was also crucial in shedding light familiar to children and young teenagers were on how young people construct, influence and no longer relevant to the participants, who were create special experiences in and through their increasingly seen as young adults. I argue that daily environments. In other words, it provided this was a unique and special phase of life with novel insights into young people’s agency and its new possibilities related to adulthood, and relationships with daily places. Humanistic ge- which reconstructed the relationships the partic- ography helped me specifically to understand the ipants had with places. They encountered their dialectics between memories of the past and ex- environments differently than they did as young pectations of places-to-be, as well as the young teenagers. Consequently, I argue that the par- people’s diverse experiences of growing up with ticipants (in their late youth) were living in be- these places. It may not be the most fashion-

134 able branch of research, but I argue that, com- tion than others. Even if the research participants bined with participatory research, it facilitates were at least relatively wealthy in social terms sensitive understanding and the investigation of (e.g. they were living with their parents and in the most intimate and subjective experiences of upper-secondary education, and had a place to daily environments that young people encoun- call ‘home’), they still discussed the insecuri- ter in this phase of life, including research on ties and instabilities in their daily lives. In retro- topical issues such as experiences of belonging spect, I admit that the research material did not and non-belonging, and experienced (dis)con- yield a very deep understanding of their social nections between places in the mobile world. background and its influence on their place ex- I further propose that the concept I refer to as periences. There was a lack of focus on young webs of meaningful places could be used a re- people with a disadvantaged social background, search tool when the target is to understand the for instance. Furthermore, the participants’ back- diversity and complexity of daily places in young ground as members of the so-called middle class people’s lives. In sum, I claim that humanistic was vaguer than I had expected. They lived in geography offers fresh and novel insights into different residential areas, had different kinds research on the everyday lives of young people of family composition and varying economic when combined with other scientific discussion. situations, for instance. These elements doubt- In the introductory chapter I quoted news re- lessly affect people’s personal relationships with ports elucidating young people’s daily difficul- places. It would have been relevant to include ties. These reports shed light on the socio-spa- these issues in the research given that the Hel- tial problems the participants had encountered sinki metropolitan area is in a process of rapid as young teenagers on the one hand, and on the segregation (e.g. Vilkama 2011; Kortteinen & hardships that were awaiting them in the future Vaattovaara 2015), and differentiation is happen- on the other. Thus, daily troubles as noted in ing in residential areas (see Kortteinen & Vaat- these news reports were not unfamiliar to the tovaara 2015) and schools, for instance (Ber- participants, who were living in between youth nelius 2013). Presumably, young people living and adulthood, even if they were not necessar- in poor social-spatial circumstances encounter ily problems that determined the course of their more difficulties in finding meaningful places daily lives at the time. More generally, the par- that support them in their emerging adulthood, ticipants talked about their daily insecurities, but and meet fewer individuals whose company pro- everyday living was filled with more positive vides needed feelings of insideness. Moreover, experiences than I had expected. They discussed they probably have fewer mobility opportunities their abilities and opportunities, and their new on a daily basis. As this study has shown, these feelings of independence and adulthood. Most vulnerabilities are serious and may evoke feel- of the places they encountered aroused feelings ings of outsideness or alienation. Thus, even if of insideness, or at least did not evoke feelings the study did not focus on social segregation, I of alienation. In this sense, I managed to cap- suggest that there is a need to investigate the sub- ture fun experiences, as well as excitement about jective place experiences of young people who new life opportunities (see Evans 2008: 1675), are living in disadvantageous socio-spatial cir- even if I was not specifically searching for them. cumstances. This is a topic for further research. However, as I have mentioned, some of the I posed a question at the beginning of this young people were in a more vulnerable posi- work concerning what it means to live and ex-

135 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 perience daily places as a young person who is structed current places. Social encounters and no longer a child but not yet an adult. I found the meaningful im/mobilities of everyday life that the participants were living their daily lives gave meaning to and effected experiential and in between their places of the past, referring embodied (dis)connection between the young to childhood places, and places-to-be in their people and their places, even if each individual adult future. Subjective places were not organ- ultimately constructed his or her own unique ised chronologically, but memories of the past and specific meanings. and expectations of future places-to-be also con-

136 book of visual analysis, 10–34. SAGE Publica- References tions, London. von Benzon, N. (2015). ‘I fell out of a tree and broke my neck’: Acknowledging fantasy in children’s Alasuutari, P. (2004). Social theory and human reality. research contributions. Children’s Geographies SAGE Publications Ltd, London. 13: 3, 1–13. Abbott-Chapman, J. & M. Robertson (2001). Youth, Bergeron, J., S. Paquette & P. Poullaouec-Gonidec leisure and home: Space, place and identity. Loisir (2014). Uncovering landscape values and mi- et Société / Society and Leisure 24: 2, 485–506. cro-geographies of meanings with the go-along Adey, P. (2006). If mobility is everything then it is method. Landscape and Urban Planning 122, 2: nothing: Towards a relational politics of (im)mo- 108–121. bilities. Mobilities 1: 1, 75–94. Bernelius, V. (2013). Eriytyvät kaupunkikoulut: Hel- Adey, P., D. Bissell, K. Hannam, P. Merriman & M. singin peruskoulujen oppilaspohjan erot, perhe- Sheller (2014). Introduction. In Adey, P., D. Bissell, iden kouluvalinnat ja oppimistuloksiin liittyvät al- K. Hannam, P. Merriman & M. Sheller (eds.): The uevaikutukset osana kaupungin eriytymiskehitystä. Routledge handbook of mobilities, 1–20. Rout- City of Helsinki Urban Facts, Helsinki. ledge, Oxon. Binnie, J., T. Edensor, J. Holloway, S. Millington & Ahmed, S. (2000). Strange encounters: Embodied C. Young (2007). Mundane mobilities, banal trav- others in post-coloniality. Routledge, Oxon. els. Social & Cultural Geography 8: 2, 165–174. Aho, L. (1987). Lapsi, luonto ja kasvatus. WSOY, Bissell, D. (2007). Animating suspension: Waiting for Helsinki. mobilities. Mobilities 2: 2, 277–298. Aitken, S. C. (1994). Putting children in their place. Blaut, J. M., G. S McCleary & A. S. Blaut (1970). Edwards Brothers, Boston. Environmental mapping in young children. Envi- Aitken, S. C. (2001). The geographies of young people: ronment and Behavior 2: 3, 335–349. The morally contested spaces of identity. Rout- Blaut, J. & D. Stea (1971). Studies of geographical ledge, London. learning. Annals of the Association of American Alderson, P. & V. Morrow (2011). The ethics of re- Geographers 61: 2, 387–393. search with children and young people: A practical van Blerk, L. (2013). New street geographies: The handbook. Sage Publications, London. impact of urban governance on the mobilities of Alanen, L. (1988). Rethinking childhood. Acta Socio- Cape Town’s street youth. Urban Studies 50: 3, logica 31: 1, 53–67. 556–573. Amin, A. (2004). Regions unbound: Towards a new du Bois-Reymond, M. (1998). ‘I don’t want to commit politics of place. Geografiska Annaler. Series B. myself yet’: Young people’s life concepts. Journal Human Geography 86: 1, 33–44. of Youth Studies 1: 1, 63–79. Anderson, J. (2004). Talking whilst walking: A geo- Bondi, L. (2005). Making connections and thinking graphical archaeology of knowledge. Area 36: through emotions: Between geography and psy- 3, 254–261. chotherapy. Transactions of the Institute of British Anderson, J. & K. Jones (2009). The difference that Geographers 30: 4, 433–448. place makes to methodology: Uncovering the Braun, V. & V. Clarke (2006). Using thematic analysis ‘lived space’ of young people’s spatial practices. in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology Children’s Geographies 7: 3, 291–303. 3: 2, 77–101. Anthony, K. H. (1985). The shopping mall: A teenage Broberg, A. (2015). They’ll never walk alone? The hangout. Adolescence 20: 78, 307–312. multiple settings of children’s active transportation Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: The wind- and independent mobility. Unigrafia Oy, Helsinki. ing road from the late teens through the twenties. Buliung, R., S. Sultana & G. Faulkner (2012). Guest Oxford University Press, New York. editorial: Special section on child and youth mobil- Barker, J. (2003). Passengers or political actors? ity – current research and nascent themes. Journal Children’s participation in transport policy and of Transport Geography 20: 1, 31–33. the micro political geographies of the family. Bunge, W. (1973). The geography. The Professional Space and Polity 7: 2, 135–151. Geographer 25: 4, 331–337. Barker, J., P. Kraftl, J. Horton & F. Tucker (2009). The Bunge, W. (1975). The point of reproduction: A second road less travelled – new directions in children’s front. Antipode 9: 2, 60–76. and young people’s mobility. Mobilities 4: 1, 1–10. Bunnell, T., S. Yea, L. Peake, T. Skelton, & M. Smith Barker, J. & S. Weller (2003). ‘Is it fun?’ Developing (2012). Geographies of Friendships. Progress in children centred research methods. International Human Geography 36: 4, 490–507. Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23: 1–2, van der Burgt, D. (2008). How children place them- 33–58. selves and others in local space. Geografiska An- Bell, P. (2001). Content analysis of visual images. In naler: Series B, Human Geography 90: 3, 257–269. Van Leeuwen, T. & C. Jewitt (eds.): The hand-

137 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Buttimer, A. (1976). Grasping the dynamism of life- Cosgrove, D. (1985). Prospect, perspective and the world. Annals of the Association of American evolution of the landscape idea. Transactions of Geographers 66: 2, 277–92. the Institute of British Geographers 10: 1, 45–62. Buttimer, A. (1978). On people, paradigms, and prog- Cosgrove, D. & P. Jackson (1987). New directions in ress in geography. University of Lund, Lund. cultural geography. Area 18: 2, 95–101. Büscher, M., Sheller, M. & D. Tyfield (2016). Mo- Côté, J. & J. M. Bynner (2004). Changes in the transi- bility intersections: social research, social futures. tion to adulthood in the UK and Canada: the role Mobilities 11: 4, 485–497. of structure and agency in emerging adulthood. Cahill, C. (2000). Street literacy: Urban teenagers’ Journal of Youth Studies 11: 3, 251–268. strategies for negotiating their neighbourhood. Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A short introduction. Journal of Youth Studies 3: 3, 251–277. Blackwell, Malden. Carpiano, R. M. (2009). ‘Come take a walk with me’: Cresswell, T. (2006). On the move: Mobility in the The ‘go-along’ interview as a novel method for modern western world. Routledge, Oxon. studying the implications of place for health and Cresswell, T. (2008). Space and place (1977): Yi-Fu well-being. Health & Place 15: 1, 263–272. Tuan. In Hubbard, P., R. Kitchen & G. Valentine Carver, A., B. Watson, B. Shaw, & M. Hillman (2013). (eds.): Key texts in human geography, 53–60. A comparison study of children’s independent SAGE Publications, London. mobility in England and Australia. Children’s Ge- Cresswell, T. (2010a). Mobilities I: Catching up. Prog- ographies 11: 4, 461–475. ress in Human Geography 35: 4, 550–558. Casey, E. (2001). Between geography and philosophy: Cresswell, T. (2010b). Towards a politics of mobility. What does it mean to be in the place-world? An- Environment and Planning D: Society and Space nals of the Association of American Geographers 28: 1, 17–31. 91: 4, 683–693. Cuervo, H. & J. Wyn (2014). Reflections on the use of Cele, S. (2006). Communicating place: Methods for spatial and relational metaphors in youth studies. understanding children’s experience of place. Acta Journal of Youth Studies 17: 7, 901–915. Universitatis Stockholmiensis, Stockholm. Dennis Jr., S.F., Gaulocher, S., Carpiano, R.M. & Cele, S. (2013). Performing the political through public D. Brown (2009). Participatory photomapping space: Teenage girls’ everyday use of a city park. (PPM): Exploring an integrated method health Space and Polity 17: 1, 74–87. and place research with young people. Health Cele, S. & D. van der Burgt (2015). Children’s embod- & Place 15: 2, 466–473. ied politics of exclusion and belonging in public Dodge, M. (2014). Mappings. In Adey, P., D. Bissell, space. In Kallio, K. P., Mills, S. & T. Skelton (eds.): K. Hannam, P. Merriman & M. Sheller (eds.): Politics, citizenship and rights, volume 7, Geog- The Routledge handbook of mobilities, 517–533. raphies of children and young people. 189–205. Routledge, Oxon. Springer, Singapore. Dovey, K. (2016). Place as multiplicity. In Freestone, Chawla, L. (eds.) (2002). Growing up in an urbanizing R. & E. Liu (eds.): Place and Placelessness Re- world. London, Earthscan. visited, 257–268. Routledge, New York. Christensen, P. H. (2004). Children’s participation in Edensor, T. (2011). Commuter: Mobility, rhythm and ethnographic research: Issues of power and rep- commuting. In Cresswell, T. & P. Merriman (eds.): resentation. Children & Society 18: 2, 165–176. Geographies of mobilities: Practices, spaces, sub- Christensen, P. (2008). Space, place and knowledge: jects, 239–254. Ashgate publishing, Surrey. Children in the village and in the city. In Lingard, Edensor, T. (2014). Rhythm and arrythmia. In Adey, P., B., J. Nixon & S. Ranson (eds.): Transforming D. Bissell, K. Hannam, P. Merriman & M. Sheller learning in schools and communities: The remak- (eds.): The Routledge handbook of mobilities, ing of education, 69–84. Continuum, New York. 163–171. Routledge, Oxon. Christensen, P. & M. R. Mikkelsen (2013). ‘There is Entrikin, J. N. (1976). Contemporary humanism in nothing here for us...!’ How girls create meaningful geography. Annals of the Association of American places of their own through movement. Children Geographers 66: 4, 615–632. & Society 27: 3, 197–207. Eldén, S. (2013). Inviting the messy: Drawing methods Collin-Lange, V. (2013). Socialities in motion: Auto- and ‘children’s voices’. Childhood 20: 66, 68–81. mobility and car cruising in Iceland. Mobilities Elliott, A. & J. Urry (2010). Mobile lives. Routledge, 8: 3, 406–423. Oxon. The constitution of Finland 1999 (c. 2) England, K. V. (1994). Getting personal: Reflexivity, Cook, T. & E. Hess (2007). What the camera sees positionality, and feminist research. The Profes- and from whose perspective. Fun methodol- sional Geographer 46: 1, 80–89. ogies for engaging children in enlightening Ergler, C. R. (2012). The power of play: A Bourdieu- adults. Childhood 14: 1, 29–45. sian analysis of seasonal outdoor play practices Cosgrove, D. E. (1983). Towards a radical cultural ge- in Auckland children’s geographies. University of ography: Problems of theory. Antipode 15: 1, 1–11. Auckland, Auckland.

138 Eskola, J. & J. Vastamäki (2007). Teemahaastattelu: Gordon, T. & E. Lahelma (2002). Becoming an adult: Opit ja opetukset. In Aaltola, J. & R. Valli (eds.): Possibilities and limitations – dreams and fears. Ikkunoita tutkimusmetodeihin II, 24–42. WS Book- Young 10: 1, 2–18. well Oy, Juva. Gordon, T. & E. Lahelma (2003). Vuorovaikutus ja Evans, B. (2008). Geographies of youth/young people. ihmissuhteet informaalissa koulussa. In Lahelma, Geography Compass 2: 5, 1659–1680. E. & T. Gordon (eds.): Koulun arkea tutkimassa: Evans, J. & P. Jones (2011). The walking interview: yläasteen erot ja erilaisuudet. 42–58. Helsingin Methodology, mobility and place. Applied Geog- kaupungin opetusvirasto, Helsinki. raphy 31: 2, 849–858. Gordon, T., Lahelma, E., Hynninen, P., Metso, T., Pal- Fade, S. (2004). Using interpretative phenomenological mu, T. & T. Tolonen (1999). Learning the routines: analysis for public health nutrition and dietetic ’Professionalization’ of newcomers in secondary research: A practical guide. Proceedings of the school. International Journal of Qualitative Studies Nutrition Society 63: 4, 647–654. in Education 12: 6, 689–705. Fagerholm, N. & A. Broberg (2011). Mapping and Gorman-Murray, A. (2015). Twentysomethings and characterising children’s daily mobility in urban twentagers: Subjectivities, spaces and young men residential areas in Turku, Finland. Fennia 189: at home. Gender, Place & Culture 22: 3, 422–439. 2, 31–46. Guillemin, M. & L. Gillam (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, File Service of Open Data (2014). National Land Sur- and ‘ethically important moments’ in research. vey of Finland. 17.11. 2014. Qualitative Inquiry 10: 2, 261–280. Mobilities, immobilities and moorings. Mobili- Fox, R. (2013). Resisting participation: Critiquing ties 1: 1, 1–22. participatory research methodologies with young Hankonen, J. (1994). Lähiöt ja tehokkuuden yhtei- people. Journal of Youth Studies 16: 8, 986–999. skunta. Otatieto, Helsinki. Furness, Z. (2014). Bicycles. In Adey, P., D. Bissell, Harinen, P., L. Suurpää, T. Hoikkala, P. Hautaniemi, S. K. Hannam, P. Merriman, & M. Sheller (eds.): Perho, A. M. Keskisalo & K. Künnapuu (2005). The Routledge handbook of mobilities, 316–325. Membership contests: Encountering immigrant Routledge, Oxon. youth in Finland. Journal of Youth Studies 8: 3, Galambos, N. L., Barker E. V. & L. C. Til- 281–296. ton-Weaver (2003). Canadian adolescents’ Harker, C. (2009). Student im/mobility in Birzeit, Pal- implicit theories of immaturity: What does estine. Mobilities 4: 1, 11–35. ‘childish’ mean? New Directions for Child Hart, R. (1979). Children’s experience of place. Ir- and Adolescent Development 100, 77–90. vington, New York. Gallacher, L. & M. Gallagher (2008). Methodologi- Heikkilä, S. (2014). Mobility as a service – a proposal cal immaturity in childhood research? Thinking for action for the public administration, case Hel- through ‘participatory methods’. Childhood 15: sinki department civil and environmental engineer- 4, 499–516. ing. Aalto University. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Gallagher, M. (2008). ‘Power in not an evil’: Rethink- Helsingin kielilukio (2016) 12.6.2016 < http://www. ing power in participatory methods. Children’s hel.fi/www/kielilu/fi> Geographies 6: 2, 137–150. Helsinki Region Statistics (2014). Väestörakenne. Garcia, C. M., M. E. Eisenberg, E. A. Frerich, K. 14.10. 2014 E. Lechner & K. Lust (2012). Conducting go- Helsinki Region Statistics (2015a). Työssäkäynti along interviews to understand context and pro- opiskelujen ohella. 12.12. 2015. 1395–1403. Helsinki Region Statistics (2015b). Työttömien osuus Gilmartin, M. (2002) Making space for personal jour- nuorista. 12.12. 2015. neys. In Moss, P. (eds.): Feminist geography in Helsinki Region Statistics (2016). Väestöennuste. 12.6. practice: Research and methods, 31–42. Blackwell 2016 Publishers, Oxford. Hemming, P. (2011). Meaningful encounters? Religion Goffman, E. (1959).The presentation of self in every- and social cohesion in the English primary school. day life. Doubleday, New York. Social & Cultural Geography 12: 1, 63–81. Gold, S. J. (2004). Using photography in studies of Hodkinson, P. & S. Lincoln (2008). Online journals immigrant communities. American Behavioral as virtual bedrooms? Young people, identity and Scientist 47: 12, 1551–1572. personal space. Young 16: 1, 27–46. Gordon, T. (2003). Aika-tila–polut fyysisessä koulussa. Hoikkala, T. & L. Suurpää (2005). Finnish youth re- In Lahelma, E. & T. Gordon (eds.): Koulun arkea search and its relevance to youth policy. Young tutkimassa: yläasteen erot ja erilaisuudet. 59–73. 13: 3, 285–312. Helsingin kaupungin opetusvirasto, Helsinki. Holdsworth, C. (2014). Child. In Adey, P., D. Bissell, K. Hannam, P. Merriman, & M.

139 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Sheller (eds.): The Routledge handbook ing boundaries: Identity and diversity in British of mobilities, 421–428. Routledge, Oxon. cultures, 155–170. Manchester University Press, Holloway, S. L. (2014). Changing children’s geog- Manchester. raphies. Children’s Geographies 12: 4, 377–392. James, S. (1990). Is there a ‘place’ for children in Holloway, S. L. & G. Valentine (2000). Spatiality and geography? Area 22: 3, 278–283. the new social studies of childhood. Sociology 34: Jensen, O. B., M. Sheller & S. Wind (2015). Together 4, 763–783. and apart: Affective ambiences and negotiation in Holloway, S. L. & H. Pimlott-Wilson (2011). Geog- families’ everyday life and mobility. Mobilities raphies of children, youth and families. Defining 10: 3, 364–382. achievements, debating the agenda. In Holt, L. Jeffrey, C. (2010). Geographies of children and youth (eds.): Geographies of children, youth and families: I: Eroding maps of life. Progress in Human Ge- An international perspective, 9–24. Routledge, ography 34: 4, 496–505. New York. Jensen, M. (2006). Mobility among young urban dwell- Holt, L. (2003). (Dis)abling children in primary school ers. Young 14: 4, 343–361. places. Loughborough University, Loughborough. Jirón, P. (2010a). Mobile borders in urban daily mo- Holt, L. (2004). The ‘voices’ of children: De-centring bility practices in Santiago de Chile. International empowering research relations. Children’s Geog- Political Sociology 4:1, 66–79. raphies 2: 1, 13–27. Jirón, P. (2010b). Repetition and difference: Rhythms Holt, L. & L. Costello (2011). Beyond otherness: and mobile place-making in Santiago de Chile. Exploring diverse spatialities and mobilities of In Edensor, T. (eds.): Geographies of Rhythm: childhood and youth populations. Population, Nature, Place, Mobilities and Bodies, 129–143. Space and Place 17: 4, 299–303. Routletge, Oxon. Hopkins, P. & R. Pain (2007). Geographies of age: Jirón, P. A., Imilan, W. A. & L. Iturra (2016). Relearning Thinking relationally. Area 39: 3, 287–294. to travel in Santiago: The importance of mobile Horelli, L. (1998). Creating child-friendly environ- place-making and travelling know-how. Cultural ments case studies on children’s participation Geographies, 23: 4, 599–614. in three European countries. Childhood 5: 2, Johnston, R. J. (1980). On the nature of explanation 225–239. in human geography. Transactions of the Institute Horton, J., P. Christensen, P. Kraftl & S. Hadfield-Hill of British geographers 5: 4, 402–412. (2014). ‘Walking… just walking’: How children Jones, A., A. Goodman, H. Roberts, R. Steinbach & J. and young people’s everyday pedestrian practic- Green (2013). Entitlement to concessionary public es matter. Social and Cultural Geography 15: 1, transport and wellbeing: A qualitative study of 94–115. young people and older citizens in London, UK. Horton, J. & P. Kraftl (2005). For more-than-useful- Social Science & Medicine 91, 202–209. ness: Six overlapping points about children’s ge- Jones, A., R. Steinbach, H. Roberts, A. Goodman, & ographies. Children’s Geographies 3: 2, 131–143. J. Green (2012). Rethinking passive transport: Bus Horton, J. & P. Kraftl (2006a). Not just growing up, but fare exemptions and young people’s wellbeing. going on: Materials, spacings, bodies, situations. Health & Place 18: 3, 605–612. Children’s Geographies 4: 3, 259–276. Jones, G. (1999). ‘The same people in the same plac- Horton, J. & P. Kraftl (2006b). What else? Some more es’? Socio-spatial identities and migration in youth. ways of thinking and doing ‘children’s geogra- Sociology 33: 1, 1–22. phies’. Children’s Geographies 4: 1, 69–95. Jones, P., G. Bunce, J. Evans, H. Gibbs & J. R. Hein Hägerstrand, T. (1970). What about people in regional (2008). Exploring space and place with walking science? Papers in Regional Science 24: 1, 7–24. interviews. Journal of Research Practice 4: 2, 1–9. Häkli, J. (1999). Meta hodos. Johdatus ihmismaanti- Jokela, S. (2014). Tourism, geography and na- eteeseen. Vastapaino, Tampere. tion-building. The identity-political role of Finnish Hörschelmann, K. & L. van Blerk (2012). Children, tourism images. Unigrafia Oy, Helsinki. youth, and the city. Routledge, Oxon. Kaivola, T. & H. Rikkinen (2003). Nuoret Illman, R. (2006). Momo ja lähikaupan Mohammed. ympäristöissään. Lasten ja nuorten kokemusmaa- Ihmistenvälisyys symbolisena tilallisuutena. In ilma ja ympäristömielikuvat. Suomalaisen Kirjal- Knuuttila, S., U. Laaksonen & U. Piela (eds.): lisuuden Seura, Helsinki. Paikka. Eletty, kuviteltu, kerrottu, 110–128. Gum- Kallio, K. P. (2006). Lasten poliittisuus ja lapsuuden merus Kirjapaino, Jyväskylä. synty. Keho lapsuuden rajankäynnin tilana. Tam- Jackson, P. (1989). Maps of meaning: An introduction pere University Press, Tampere. to cultural geography. Routledge, Oxon. Kallio, K. P. (2008). The body as a battlefield. Ap- Jain, J. & G. Lyons (2008). The gift of travel time. proaching children’s politics. Geografiska Annal- Journal of Transport Geography 16: 2, 81–89. er. Series B. Human Geography 90: 3, 285–297. James, A. (1986). Learning to belong: The boundaries Kallio, K. P. (2012). Paikka politiikan välineenä. of adolescence. In Cohen, A. P. (eds.): Symbolis- Nuorten artikuloimaton arkipolitiikka. In Strandell,

140 H., L. Haikkola & K. Kullman (eds.): Lapsuuden grants and the majority compared. Acta Sociolog- muuttuvat tilat, 119–145. Vastapaino, Tampere. ica 54: 1, 77–106. Kallio, K. P. & J. Häkli (2011). Young people’s voice- Kindon, S. (2003). Participatory video in geographic less politics in the struggle over urban space. Geo- research: a feminist practice of looking? Area 35: Journal 76: 1, 63–75. 2, 142–153. Kallio, K. P. & J. Häkli (2013). Children and young Kjørholt, A. T. (2013). Childhood as social investment, people’s politics in everyday life. Space and Polity rights and the valuing of education. Children & 17: 1, 1–16. Society 27: 4, 245–257. Karjalainen, P. (1986). Geodiversity as a lived world: Komulainen, S. (2007). The ambiguity of the child’s On the geography of existence. University of Jo- voice in social research. Childhood 14: 1, 11–26. ensuu, Joensuu. Koskela, H. (1997). ‘Bold walk and breakings’: Karjalainen, P. T. (1993). House, home and the place Women’s spatial confidence versus fear of vio- of dwelling. Scandinavian Housing and Planning lence. Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Research 10: 2, 65–74. Feminist Geography 4: 3, 301–320. Karjalainen, P. T. (1997a). Aika, paikka ja muistin Koskela, H. (2010). Fear and its Others. In Smith S. J., maantiede. In Haarni, T., M. Karvinen, H. Koskela. R. Pain, S. A. Marston & J. P. Jones III (eds.): The & S. Tani (eds.): Tila, paikka ja maisema. Tutki- SAGE Handbook of social geographies, 389–408. musretkiä uuteen maantieteeseen, 227–241. Va- Sage Publications Limited, London. stapaino, Tampere. Kortteinen, M. & M. Vaattovaara (1999). Pääkau- Karjalainen, P.T. (1997b). Maailman paikoista paikan punkiseudun kehityssuunta on kääntynyt. Yhtei- maailmoihin – kokemisen geografiaa. Tiede- skuntapolitiikka 64: 4, 342–351. politiikka 22: 4, 41–46. Kortteinen, M. & M. Vaattovaara (2015). Segregaation Karjalainen, P. T. (2003). On geobiography. Place and aika. Yhteiskuntapolitiikka 80: 6, 562–574. location. Studies in environmental aesthetics and Kullman, K. (2010). Transitional geographies: Making semiotics III, Estonian academy of arts, 87–92. mobile children. Social & Cultural Geography Karjalainen, P. T. (2004). Ympäristö ulkoa ja sisältä. In 11: 8, 829–846. Mäntysalo, R. (eds.): Paikan heijastuksia. Ihmisen Kullman, K. (2012). Experiment with moving chil- ja ympäristösuhteen tutkimus ja representaation dren and digital cameras. Children’s Geographies käsite, 49–68. Gummerus kirjapaino oy, Jyväskylä. 10: 1, 1–16. Karjalainen, P. T. (2006). Topobiografinen paikan tulk- Kuoppa, J. (2016). Kävelyn lupaukset kaupungissa. inta. In Knuuttila, S., U. Laaksonen & U. Piela Kolme tapausta kävelijöiden arjesta ja kokemuk- (eds.): Paikka. Eletty, kuviteltu, kerrottu, 83–92. sista sekä kaupunkisuunnittelusta. Tampere Uni- Gummerus Kirjapaino, Jyväskylä. versity Press, Tampere. Karsten, L. (2005). It all used to be better? Different Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology. The generations on continuity and change in urban go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnog- children’s daily use of space. Children’s Geog- raphy 4: 3, 455–485. raphies 3: 3, 275–290. Kusenbach, M. (2012). Mobile Methods. In Delam- Kato, Y. (2009). Doing consumption and sitting cars: ont, S. (eds.): Handbook of qualitative research Adolescent bodies in suburban commercial spac- in education, 252–264. Edwar Elgar Publishing es. Children’s Geographies 7: 1, 51–66. Limited, Cheltenham. Kenyon, L. (1999). A home from home: students’ Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. (2003). Our places – Their transitional experience of home. In Chapman, T. spaces. Tampereen yliopistopaino Oy, Tampere. & J. Hockey (eds.): Ideal homes? Social change Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. (2007). Sotalapsien paikka and domestic life, 84–95. Routledge, London. (tunne). Alue & Ympäristö 36: 2, 3–17. Kelle, U. (2006). Combining qualitative and quanti- Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. (2009). The mobilities of tative methods in research practice: purposes and forced displacement: Commemorating Karelian advantages. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3: evacuation in Finland. Social & Cultural Geog- 4, 293–311. raphy 10: 5, 545–563. Keränen, J., M. Vaattovaara, M. Kortteinen, R. Ratvio, Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. (2010). Paikkakokemus H. Koski & T. Rantala (eds.) (2013). Turvalliset ja matkalla olon rytmit Kyllikki Villan mat- kaupunkiympäristöt. Rakenteelliset taustat, asuk- kapäiväkirjoissa. Alue & Ympäristö 39: 2, 79–82. kaiden kokemukset ja arjen turvallisuusratkaisut. Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. (2014). Silence, childhood Kopijyvä Oy, Kuopio. displacement, and spatial belonging. ACME: An Kett, J. F. (1971). Adolescence and youth in nine- International E-Journal for Critical Geographies teenth-century America. The Journal of Inter- 13: 3, 434–441. disciplinary History 2: 2, 283–298. Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. & U. Savolainen (2016). Kilpi-Jakonen, E. (2011). Continuation to upper sec- The interplay of memory and matter: narratives ondary education in Finland: Children of immi- of former Finnish Karelian child evacuees. Oral History 44: 2, 59–6

141 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K. & S. Tani (2009): Hengailun and place. In Wyn, J. & H. Cahill (eds.): Hand- maantiede: arjen kaupunki nuorten olemisen tilana. book of Children and Youth Studies, 625–636. Alue & Ympäristö 38: 1, 51–58. Springer, Singapore. Kyttä, M. (2002). Affordances of children’s environ- Lewis, G. H. (1989). Rats and bunnies. Core kids in ments in the context of cities, small towns, suburbs American mall. Adolescence 24: 96, 881–889. and rural villages in Finland and Belarus. Journal Lieberg, M. (1995). Teenagers and public space. Com- of Environmental Psychology 22: 1, 109–123. munication Research 22: 6, 729–744. Kyttä, M. (2003). Children in outdoor contexts: Affor- Liimakka, S. (2013). Re-embodied: Young women, dances and independent mobility in the assessment the body quest and agency in the culture of ap- of environmental child friendliness. Otamedia Oy, pearances. Unigrafia, Helsinki. Espoo. Liu, E. & R. Freestone (2016). Revisiting place and Kyttä, M. (2004). The extent of children’s independent placelessness. In Freestone, R. & E. Liu (eds.): mobility and the number of actualized affordances Place and Placelessness Revisited, 1–19. Rout- as criteria for child-friendly environments. Jour- ledge, New York. nal of Environmental Psychology 24: 2, 179–198. Lynch, K. (1977). Growing up in cities. MIT Press, Kyttä, M., J. Hirvonen, J. Rudner, I. Pirjola & T. Massachusetts. Laatikainen (2015). The last free-range children? Lyons, G. (2014). Times. In Adey, P., D. Bissell, K. Children’s independent mobility in Finland in the Hannam, P. Merriman, & M. Sheller. (eds.): The 1990s and 2010s. Journal of Transport Geogra- Routledge handbook of mobilities, 154–162. Rout- phy 47, 1–12. ledge, Oxon. Kääriäinen, H. & H. Rikkinen (1998). Siirtyminen Lukiolaki 629/1998. Law of secondary education. peruskoulun ala-asteelta yläasteelle oppilaiden Macek, P., J. Bejček & J. Vaníčková (2007). Contem- kokemana. University of Helsinki, Helsinki. porary Czech emerging adults: Generation grow- Laakso, S., T. Halme, P. Kilpeläinen, H.A. Loikkanen ing up in the period of social changes. Journal of & M. Vaattovaara (2005). Kirkkonummen kunnan Adolescent Research 22: 5, 444–475. muuttoliiketutkimus. Dark Oy, Vantaa. MacDonald, R., T. Shildrick, C. Webster & D. Simpson Lahelma, E. & T. Gordon (2003). Home as a physical, (2005). Growing up in poor neighbourhoods the social and mental space: Young people’s reflec- significance of class and place in the extended tions on leaving home. Journal of Youth Studies transitions of ‘socially excluded’ young adults. 6: 4, 377–390. Sociology 39: 5, 873–891. Langevang, T. (2007). Movements in time and space: Malkki, L. (1992). National geographic: the root- Using multiple methods in research with young ing of peoples and the territorialization of na- people in Accra, Ghana. Children’s Geographies tional identity among scholars and refugees. 5: 3, 267–281. Cultural Anthropology 7: 1, 2–44. Langevang, T. (2008). Claiming place: The production Malkki, L. H. (1997). News and culture: Transitory of young men’s street meeting places in Accra, phenomena and the fieldwork tradition.In Gup- Ghana. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human ta, A. & J. Ferguson. Anthropological locations: Geography 90: 3, 227–242. Boundaries and grounds of a field science, 86-101. Larsen, J. (2014). Distance and proximity. In Adey, P., University of California Press, Berkeley. D. Bissell, K. Hannam, P. Merriman & M. Shell- Malone, K. (2002). Street life: Youth, culture and er (eds.): The Routledge handbook of mobilities, competing uses of public space. Environment 125–133. Routledge, Oxon. and Urbanization 14: 2, 157–168. Larsen, J., J. Urry & K. W. Axhausen (2006). Mobil- Malone, K. (2007). The bubble-wrap generation: chil- ities, networks, geographies. Ashgate publishing, dren growing up in walled gardens. Environmental Aldershot. Education Research 13: 4, 513–527. Leppävaaran lukio [Leppävaara upper secondary Malone, K., & C. Hartung (2010). Challenges of par- school]. (2016). 12.6. 2016. B. & N. Thomas (eds.): A handbook of children Ley, D. (1981). Cultural/humanistic geography. Prog- and young people’s participation: Perspectives ress in Human Geography 5: 2, 249–257. from theory and practice, 24–38. Routledge, Oxon. Ley, D. & M. S. Samuels (1978). Introduction: Context Massey, D. (1991). A global sense of place. Marxism of modern humanism in geography. In Ley. D. Today 35: 6, 24–29. & S. M. Samuels (eds.): Humanistic geography, Massey, D. (1994). 7 Double articulation: A place in 1–17. Maaroufa Press, Chicago. the world. In Bammer, A. (eds.): Displacements: Leyshon, M. (2011). The struggle to belong: Young Cultural identities in question, 110–121. Indiana people on the move in the countryside. Population, University Press, Bloomington. Space and Place 17: 4, 304–325. Massey, D. (2005). For space. Sage, London Leyshon, M. (2015). Storing our lives of now: The Matthews, H. (2003). The street as a liminal space: pluritemporal memories of rural youth identity the barbed spaces of childhood. In Christensen, P.

142 & M. O’Brien (eds.): Children in the city. Home, Morrow, V. (2001). Using qualitative methods to elic- neighbourhood and community, 101–117. Rout- it young people’s perspectives on their environ- ledge Falmer, London. ments: some ideas for community health initiatives. Matthews, H., & M. Limb (1999). Defining an agenda Health Education Research 16: 3, 255–268. for the geography of children: review and pros- Morrow, V. (2008). Ethical dilemmas in research with pect. Progress in Human Geography 23: 1, 61–90. children and young people about their social en- Matthews, H., M. Limb & B. Percy-Smith (1998). vironments. Children’s Geographies 6: 1, 49–61. Changing worlds: The microgeographies of young Morrow, V. (2011). Researching children and young teenagers. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale people’s perspectives on place and belonging. In Geografie 89: 2, 193–202. Foley, P. & S. Leverret (eds.): Children and young Matthews, H., M. Taylor, B. Percy-Smith & M. Limb people’s spaces developing practice, 58–72. Pal- (2000). The unacceptable flaneur. The shopping grave MacMillan, Basingstoke. mall as a teenage hangout. Childhood 7: 3, 279– Mäkinen, L. & L. Tyrväinen (2008). Teenage experi- 294. ences of public green spaces in suburban Helsinki. Matthews, H., M. Limb & M. Taylor (1999). Reclaim- Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 7, 4: 277–289. ing the street: The discourse of curfew. Environ- Nayak, A. (2010). Race, affect, and emotion: young ment and Planning A 31: 10, 1713–1730. people, racism, and graffiti in the postcolonial Mayo, M. (2001). Children’s and young people’s par- English suburbs. Environment and Planning A ticipation in urban development in the South and 42: 10, 2370–2392. in urban regeneration in the North. Progress in Nieminen, L. (2010). Lasten ja nuorten tutkimus. Oi- Development Studies 1: 4, 247–293. keudellinen tarkastelu. In Lagström, H., T. Pösö, N. McAuliffe, C. (2013). Legal walls and professional Rutanen & K. Vehkalahti (eds.): Lasten ja nuorten paths: the mobilities of graffiti writers in Sydney. tutkimuksen etiikka, 25–42. Nuorisotutkimusseu- Urban Studies 50: 3, 518–537. ra, Helsinki. McCormack, J. (2002). Children’s understandings of Northcote, J. (2006). Nightclubbing and the search for rurality: exploring the interrelationship between identity: Making the transition from childhood to experience and understanding. Journal of Rural adulthood in an urban milieu. Journal of Youth Studies 18: 2, 193–207. Studies 9: 1, 1–16. McDowell, L. (1992). Doing gender: Feminism, fem- Nuoriso- ja lapsuudentutkimuksen eettinen toimikunta inists and research methods in human geography. [The ethical committee of youth and childhood re- Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers search]. 20.9. 2015. McDowell, L. (1993a). Space, place and gender re- Näveri, A. (2015). Teinit terrorisoivat kirjastoa – Heino- lations: Part I. Feminist empiricism and the ge- la palautti rauhan järein keinoin. Yle News 1.12. ography of social relations. Progress in Human 2016. lations: Part II. Identity, difference, feminist ge- Pacilli, M. G., I. Giovannelli, M. Prezza & ometries and geographies. Progress in Human M. L. Augimeri (2013). Children and the Geography 17: 3, 305–318. public realm: Antecedents and consequenc- McQuoid, J. & M. Dijst (2012). Bringing emotions es of independent mobility in a group of to time geography: The case of mobilities of pov- 11–13-year-old Italian children. Children’s erty. Journal of Transport Geography 23, 26–34. Geographies 11: 4, 377–393. The Medical Research Act 1999. Pain, R. & P. Francis (2003). Reflections on partici- Middleton, J. (2011). ‘I’m on autopilot, I just follow patory research. Area 35: 1, 46–54. the route’: Exploring the habits, routines, and Parks, L. (2001). Cultural geographies in practice – decision-making practices of everyday urban Plotting the personal: Global positioning satellites mobilities. Environment and Planning A 43: 12, and interactive media. Cultural Geographies 8: 2857–2877. 2, 209–222. Mikkelsen, M. R. & P. Christensen (2009). Is chil- Parr, H. (1998). The politics of methodology in dren’s independent mobility really independent? ‘post-medical geography’: mental health research A study of children’s mobility combining eth- and the interview. Health and Place 4: 4, 341–353. nography and GPS/mobile phone technologies. Pascucci, E. (2011). Migration, identity, and social Mobilities 4: 1, 37–58. mobility among Iraqis in Egypt. Refuge: Canada’s Monk, J. & S. Hanson (1982). On not excluding half Journal on Refugees 28: 1, 49–58. of the human in human geography. The Profes- Percy-Smith, B. & H. Matthews (2001). Tyrannical sional Geographer 34: 1, 11–23. spaces: Young people, bullying and urban neigh- Moran, D. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology. bourhoods. Local Environment 6: 1, 49–63. Routledge, London.

143 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Philo, C. (2000a). ‘The corner-stones of my world’: age girls’ hanging out. Children’s Geographies Editorial introduction to special issue on spaces 13: 2, 149–163. of childhood. Childhood 7: 3, 243–256. Pyyry, N. (2016). Learning with the city via enchant- Philo, C. (2000b). More words, more worlds. Reflec- ment: photo-walks as creative encounters. Dis- tions on the ‘cultural turn’ and human geography. course: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Edu- In Cook, I., D. Crouch, S. Naylor & R. J. Ryan cation 37: 1, 102–115. (eds.): Cultural turns/geographical turns: Perspec- Pyyry, N. & S. Tani (2015). Geographies of hanging tive on cultural geography, 26–53. Pearson Edu- out: approaching young people’s play with urban cation, Singapore. public space. In Horton, J. & B. Evans (eds.): Ge- Pickering, J., K. Kintrea & J. Bannister (2012). invis- ographies of children and young people, 193–210. ible walls and visible youth territoriality among Springer, Singapore. young people in British cities. Urban Studies 49: Pälli, P. (1999). ’Kyllä niilläkin joku paikka pitää olla 5, 945–960. missä asua mutta...’: Rasismi suomalaisnuorten Pink, S. (2007). Doing visual ethnography. Images, ulkomaalais- ja pakolaispuheissa. Sosiologia 36: media and representation in research. SAGE Pub- 3, 205–218. lications Limited, London. Qvortrup, J. (1994). Introduction. In Qvortrup, J., Pocock, D. C. D. (1983). The paradox of humanistic M. Bardy, G. Sgritta & H. Wintersberger (eds.): geography. Area 15: 4, 355–358. Childhood Matters: Social theory, practice and Ponto, H. (2013). Kohtaamisten monet kasvot – Tutki- politics, 1–24. Aldershot, Avebury. jan lukuisat positiot. Alue & Ympäristö 3: 3, 1–2. Raevaara, L. (2010). Nuorisotalolla tutkimassa nuorten Ponto, H. (2015) Ethical complexities of mobile in- kielenkäyttöä. In Lagström, H., T. Pösö, N. Ru- terviews with young people. In Evans, R., L. Holt tanen & K. Vehkalahti (eds.): Lasten ja nuorten & T. Skelton (eds.): Methodological approaches, tutkimuksen etiikka, 89–90. Nuorisotutkimusseura, volume 2, Geographies of children and young Helsinki. people, 117-134. Springer, Singapore. Rastas, A. (2005). Racializing categorization among Porter, G., K. Hampshire, A. Abane, E. Robson, A. young people in Finland. Young 13: 2, 147–166. Munthali, M. Mashiri & A. Tanle (2010a). Moving Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. Pion, young lives: Mobility, immobility and inter-gen- London. erational tensions in urban Africa. Geoforum 41: Relph, E. (1985). Geographical experiences and be- 5, 796–804. ing-in-theworld: The phenomenological origins Porter, G., K. Hampshire, M. Mashiri, S. Dube & G. of geography. In Seamon, D. & R. Mugerauer Maponya (2010b). ‘Youthscapes’ and escapes in (eds.): Dwelling, place and environment: Towards rural Africa: Education, mobility and livelihood a phenomenology of person and world, 15–31. trajectories for young people in eastern Cape, South Columbia University Press, New York. Africa. Journal of International Development 22: Relph, E. (1996). Reflections on place and placeless- 8, 1090–1101. ness. Environmental & Architectural Phenome- Propen, A. (2006). Critical GPS: Towards a new pol- nology 7: 3, 14–15. itics of location. Acme 4: 1, 131–144. Relph, E. (2008). A pragmatic sense of place. In Punch, S. (2002a). Interviewing strategies with young Vanclay, F., M. Higgins & A. Blackshaw (eds.): people: The ‘secret box’, stimulus material and Making sense of place. Exploring concepts and task‐based activities. Children & Society 16: 1, expressions of place through different senses and 45–56. lenses, 311–324. National Museum of Australia Punch, S. (2002b). Research with children: The same Press, Canberra. or different from research with adults?Childhood Relph, E. (2016). The paradox of place and the evo- 9: 3, 321–341. lution of placelessness. In Freestone, R. & E. Liu Punch, S. (2016). Cross-world and cross-disci- (eds.): Place and Placelessness Revisited, 20–34. plinary dialogue: A more integrated, global Routledge, New York. approach to childhood studies. Global Studies Ridanpää, J. (2014). Politics of literary humour and of Childhood 6: 3, 352–364. contested narrative identity (of a region with no Puuronen, V. (1997). Johdatus nuorisotutkimukseen. identity). Cultural Geographies 21: 4, 711–726. Vastapaino, Tampere. Rikkinen, H. (1992). Ala-asteen oppilaiden Pyyry, N. (2012). Nuorten osallisuus tutkimuksessa. elinympäristö. Tutkimusprojektin teoreettiset lähtö- Menetelmällisiä kysymyksiä ja vastausyrityksiä. kohdat. Yliopistopaino, Helsinki. Nuorisotutkimus 30: 1, 35–53. Roberts, K. (2012). The end of the long baby-boom- Pyyry, N. (2015a). Hanging out with young people, er generation. Journal of Youth Studies 15: 4, urban spaces and ideas: Openings to dwelling, 479–497. participation and thinking. Unigrafia, Helsinki. Robertson, M. (2000). Identity-building. In Robertson, Pyyry, N. (2015b). ‘Sensing with’ photography and M. & R. Gerber (eds.): The child’s world: Triggers ‘thinking with’ photographs in research into teen- for learning, 131–149. Acer Press, Melbourne.

144 Robson, E., J. Horton & P. Kraftl (2013). Children’s ter planned estate. Children’s Geographies 13: geographies: Reflecting on our first ten years. 5, 604–617. Children’s geographies 11: 1, 1–6. Sheller, M. & J. Urry (2006). The new mobilities para- Robson, E., G. Porter, K. Hampshire & M. Bourdillon digm. Environment and Planning A 38: 2, 207–226. (2009). ‘Doing it right?’: Working with young Sime, D. (2008). Ethical and methodological issues researchers in Malawi to investigate children, in engaging young people living in poverty with transport and mobility. Children’s Geographies participatory research methods. Children’s Geog- 7: 4, 467–480. raphies 6: 1, 63–78. Roos, P. & N. Rutanen (2014). Metodologisia haas- Simonen, J. & C. Tigerstedt (2006). ’Mieluummin teita ja kysymyksiä lasten tutkimushaastattelussa. kavereille kuin läheisille’: solidaarisuus nuorten Journal of Early Childhood Education Research aikuisten alkoholin välittämisessä alaikäisille. 3: 2, 27–47. Yhteiskuntapolitiikka 71: 3, 239–249. Rose, G. (1993). Feminism & geography: The limits of Simonsen, K. (2007). Practice, spatiality and embodied geographical knowledge. Polity Press, Cambridge. emotions: An outline of a geography of practice. Rose, G. (1997). Situating knowledges: Positionality, Human Affairs 17: 2, 168–191. reflexivities and other tactics.Progress in Human Simonsen, K. (2008). Place as encounters. Enacting Geography 21: 3, 305–320. northern European peripheries. In Bærenholdt, Ross, N.J., S. Renold, E. Holland, & A. Hillman (2009). J. O., & B. Granås (eds.): Mobility and place: Moving stories: Using mobile methods to explore Enacting northern European peripheries, 13–27. the everyday lives of young people in public care. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot. Qualitative Research 9: 5, 605–623. Skelton, T. (2000). ‘Nothing to do, nowhere to go?’: Ruckenstein, M. (2012). Lapsuuden tilallisia laa- Teenage girls and ‘public’ space in Rhondda Val- jentumia. Päiväkodin lelumaailmoista verkon leys, South Wales. In Holloway, S. L. & G. Val- yhteisöihin. In Strandell, H., L. Haikkola & K. entine (eds.): Children’s geographies: Playing, Kullman (eds.): Lapsuuden muuttuvat tilat, 61–84. living, learning, 69–85. Routledge, Oxon. Vastapaino, Tampere. Skelton, T. (2007). Children, young people, UNICEF Salonen, M., & T. Toivonen (2013). Modelling travel and participation. Children’s Geographies 5: 1–2, time in urban networks: Comparable measures 165–181. for private car and public transport. Journal of Skelton, T. (2008). Research with children and young Transport Geography 31, 143–153. people: exploring the tensions between ethics, Salmela, M. (2013). Nuoret aikuiset jumiutuvat lap- competence and participation. Children’s Geog- suudenkotiin. Helsingin Sanomat 1.12. 2016. < raphies 6: 1, 21–36. http://www.hs.fi/kaupunki/a1384839272905> Skelton, T. (2009). Children’s geographies/geographies Schuster, L. (2005). The continuing mobility of mi- of children: Play, work, mobilities and migration. grants in Italy: Shifting between places and sta- Geography Compass 3: 4, 1430–1448. tuses. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies Skelton, T. (2010). Taking young people as political 31: 4, 757–774. actors seriously: Opening the borders of political Seamon, D. (1979). A geography of the lifeworld: geography. Area 42: 2, 145–151. Movement, rest and encounter. Croom Helm, Skelton, T. (2013). Young people’s urban im/mobili- London. ties: Relationality and identity formation. Urban Seamon, D. (1996). A singular impact. Environmental Studies 50: 3, 467–483. & Architectural Phenomenology 7: 3, 5–8. Skelton, T. & K. van Gough (2013). Introduction: Seamon, D. & J. Sowers (2008). Place and placeless- Young people’s im/mobile urban geographies. ness (1976): Edward Relph. In Hubbard, P., R. Urban Studies 50: 3, 455–466. Kitchen & G. Valentine (eds.): Key texts in human Smith, J. A., P. Flowers & M. Larkin (2009). Interpre- geography, 43–51. SAGE Publications, London. tative phenomenological analysis. Theory, method Seawright, J. (2016). Multi-method social science. and research. MPG Books Group, Cornwall. Combining qualitative and quantitative tools. Smith, J. A., & M. Osborn (2008). Interpretative phe- Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. nomenological analysis. In Smith J. A. (eds.): Qual- Seppänen, J. (2005). Visuaalinen kulttuuri. Teoriaa itative psychology: A practical guide to research ja metodeja mediakuvan tulkitsijalle. Vastapaino, methods, 51–80. SAGE publications, London. Tampere. Smith, S. J. (1981). Humanistic method in contem- Settersten Jr, R. A. & B. Ray (2010). What’s going on porary social geography. Area 13: 4, 293–298. with young people today? The long and twisting Spinney, J. (2009). Cycling the city: Movement, path to adulthood. The Future of Children 20: meaning and method. Geography Compass 3: 1, 19–41. 2, 817–835. Shearer, S. & P. Walters (2015). Young people’s lived Statistics Finland (2014). Number of students in Fin- experience of the ‘street’ in North Lakes mas- land 1.2 million in 2012. 12.5. 2014.

145 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

stat.fi/til/opiskt/2012/opiskt_2012_2014-01-29_ Thomson, R. & R. Taylor (2005). Between cosmopol- tie_001_en.html> itanism and the locals: Mobility as a resource in Strandell, H. (2012). Lapsuuden muuttuvat tilat: the transition to adulthood. Young 13: 4, 327–342. Näkökulmia lapsuuteen 2000-luvulla. In Strandell, Tikkurilan lukio (2016). 12.6.2016 muuttuvat tilat, 9–26. Vastapaino, Tampere. Tisdall, E. K. M., & S. Punch (2012). Not so ‘new’? Suurpää, L. (2002). Hierarchies of difference Finnish Looking critically at childhood studies. Children’s young people’s conceptions of group member- geographies 10: 3, 249–264. ship. European Journal of Cultural Studies 5: 2, Toiskallio, K. (2002). The impersonal flâneur naviga- 175–197. tion styles of social agents in urban traffic.Space Söderström, P. (2012). Elävät kaupunkikeskukset and Culture 5: 2, 169–184. – Kaupunkiympäristön monipuolisuus ja laatu Tomaney, J. (2016). Insideness in an age of mobilities. verkostokaupungin keskuksissa. Edita Prima Oy, In Freestone, R. & E. Liu (eds.): Place and Place- Helsinki. lessness Revisited, 95–107. Routledge, New York. Söderström, P., H. Schulman & M. Ristimäki (2015). Tuan, Y.-F. (1974). Topophilia: A study of environmen- Urban form in the Helsinki and Stockholm city tal perception, attitudes, and values. Prentice-Hall, regions - Development of pedestrian, public trans- New Jersey. port and car zones. Finnish Environment Institute, Tuan, Y.-F. (1975). Place: An experiential perspective. Helsinki. Geographical Review 65: 2, 151–165. Symes, C. (2007). Coaching and training: An ethnog- Tuan, Y. F. (1976). Humanistic geography. Annals raphy of student commuting on sydney’s suburban of the Association of American Geographers 66: trains. Mobilities 2: 3, 443–461. 2, 266–276. Tani, S. (1995). Kaupunki Taikapeilissä. Helsin- Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and place. The perspective ki-elokuvien mielenmaisemat. Reflektioita iden- of experience. University of Minnesota Press, titeettiin ja mediaan. Helsinki, Yliopistopaino. London. Tani, S. (1997). Maantiede ja kuvien todellisuudet. In Tuan, Y.-F. (1979). Space and place: Humanistic per- Haarni, T., M. Karvinen, H. Koskela & S. Tani. spective. In Gale, S. & G. Olsson (eds.): Philoso- (eds.): Tila, paikka ja maisema. Tutkimusretkiä phy in geography, 387–427. D. Reidel Publishing uuteen maantieteeseen, 211–226. Vastapaino, Company, Dordrecht. Tampere. Tuan, Y.-F. (1996). Cosmos and heart. A cosmopo- Tani, S. (2001). Bad reputation–bad reality? The in- lite’s viewpoint. University of Minnesota Press, tertwining and contested images of a place. Fen- Minneapolis. nia-International Journal of Geography 179: 2, Tucker, F. & H. Matthews (2001). They don’t like 143–157. girls hanging around there: Conflicts over rec- Tani, S. (2010). Hengailun maantiede ja nuorisotut- reational space in rural Northamptonshire. Area kimuksen eettiset ongelmat. Kasvatus & Aika 4: 33: 2, 161–168. 3, 51–71. Tuukkanen, T., M. Kankaanranta & T. A. Wilska Tani, S. (2011). Oikeus oleskella? Hengailua kauppa- (2013). Children’s life world as a perspective on keskuksen näkyvillä ja näkymättömillä rajoilla. their citizenship: The case of the Finnish Children’s Alue & Ympäristö 40: 2, 3–16. Parliament. Childhood 20: 1, 131–147. Tani, S. (2014). The right to be seen, the right to be Trell, E.-M. (2013). Rural realities. Everyday places shown ethical issues regarding the geographies of and practices of young people in rural Estonia. hanging out. Young 22: 4, 361–379. Ipskamp Drukkers BV, Enschede. Tani, S. (2015). Loosening/tightening spaces in the Trell, E. M. & B. van Hoven (2010). Making sense of geographies of hanging out. Social & Cultural place: Exploring creative and (inter)active research Geography 16: 2, 125–145. methods with young people. Fennia-International Tani, S. (2016). Reflected places of childhood: Apply- Journal of Geography 188: 1, 91–104. ing the ideas of humanistic and cultural geogra- Trell, E.-M. & B. van Hoven (2014). ‘It’s a place where phies to environmental education research. Envi- all friends meet’: Shared places, youth friendships ronmental Education Research (Ahead-of-print). and the negotiation of masculine identities in ru- Thomas, M. E. (2005a). Girls, consumption space and ral Estonia. In Gorman-Murray, A. & P. Hopkins the contradictions of hanging out in the city. Social (eds.): Masculinities and Place, 317–333. Ashgate & Cultural Geography 6: 4, 587–605. Publishing. Thomas, M. E. (2005b). ‘I think it’s just natural’: The Trell, E.-M. & B van Hoven (2015). Young people spatiality of racial segregation at a US high school. and citizenship in rural Estonia: an everyday per- Environment and Planning A 37: 7, 1233–1248. spective. In Kallio, K. P., Mills, S. & T. Skelton Thomson, F. (2007). ‘Are methodologies for children (eds.): Politics, Citizenship and Rights, volume keeping them in place?’ Children’s Geographies 7, Geographies of children and young people, 5: 3, 207–218. 423–443. Springer, Singapore.

146 Trell, E-M., B. Van Hoven & P. P. Huigen (2012). ’It’s Vanderbeck, R. M. & J. H. Jr. Johnson (2000). ‘That’s good to live in Järvi-Jaani but we can’t stay here’: the only place where you can hang out’: Urban Youth and belonging in rural Estonia. Journal of young people and the space of the mall. Urban Rural Studies 28: 2, 139–148. Geography 21: 1, 5–25. Trell, E. M., B. Van Hoven & P. P. Huigen (2014). ‘In Vasanen, A. (2012). Functional polycentricity: exam- summer we go and drink at the lake’: young men ining metropolitan spatial structure through the and the geographies of alcohol and drinking in rural connectivity of urban sub-centres. Urban Studies Estonia. Children’s Geographies 12: 4, 447–462. 49: 16, 3627–3644. Tyyskä, V. (2013). Youth and society: The long and Vilkama, K. (2011). Yhteinen kaupunki, eriytyvät kau- winding road. Canadian Scholars’ Press, Toronto. punginosat?: Kantaväestön ja maahanmuuttaja- Urry, J. (2002). Mobility and proximity. Sociology 36: taustaisten asukkaiden alueellinen eriytyminen ja 2, 255–274. muuttoliike pääkaupunkiseudulla. Edita prima United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child oy, Helsinki. (1989). Vilkama, K., Lönnqvist, H., Välimäki-Laurson, J. & Vaattovaara, M. (1998). Päkaupunkiseudun sosiaa- Tuominen, M. (2014). Erilaistuva pääkaupunki- linen erilaistuminen: ymparisto ̈ ja alueellisuus. seutu. Sosioekonomiset erot alueittain 2002–2012. Helsingin kaupungin tietokeskus, Helsinki. Edita Prima oy, Helsinki. Valentine, G. (1996a). Angels and devils: Moral land- Vuolteenaho, J. (2002). ’Uusia sanoja, uusia maa- scapes of childhood. Environment and Planning ilmoja’. Tekstuaalisuus, sosiaalisesti tuotettu tila D: Society and Space 14: 5, 581–599. ja maantieteen kulttuurinen käänne. Terra 114: Valentine, G. (1996b). Children should be seen and not 4, 237–252. heard: The production and transgression of adults’ Watts, L. & J. Urry (2008). Moving methods, travelling public space. Urban Geography 17: 3, 205–220. times. Environment and Planning D: Society and Valentine, G. (1997). ‘Oh yes I can.’ ‘Oh no you Space 26: 5, 860–874. can’t.’: Children and parents’ understandings of Warming, H. (2011). Getting under their skins? Ac- kids’ competence to negotiate public space safely. cessing young people’s perspectives through eth- Antipode 29: 1, 65–89. nographic fieldwork. Childhood 18: 39, 39–53. Valentine, G. (2000). Exploring children and young Weller, S. (2006). Situating (young) teenagers in ge- people’s narratives of identity. Geoforum 31: 2, ographies of children and youth. Children’s Ge- 257–267. ographies 4: 1, 97–108. Valentine, G. (2003). Boundary crossings: Transitions West, C., & D. H. Zimmerman (1987). Doing gen- from childhood to adulthood. Children’s geogra- der. Gender & Society 1: 2, 125–151. phies 1: 1, 37–52. Winchell, D. G. (2000). Humanistic geography. The Valentine, G. (2004). Public space and the culture of Humanistic Psychologist 28: 1–3, 343–352. childhood. Ashgate Publishing, Hants. Woolley, H. (2006). Freedom of the city: Contemporary Valentine, G. (2007). Theorizing and researching inter- issues and policy influences on children and young sectionality: A challenge for feminist geography. people’s use of public open space in England. The Professional Geographer 59: 1, 10–21. Children’s Geographies 4: 1, 45–59. Valentine, G. (2008). Living with difference: Reflec- Wright, S. & N. Nelson (1995). Participatory research tions on geographies of encounter. Progress in and participant observation: Two incompatible Human Geography 32: 3, 323–337. approaches. In Nelson N. & S. Wright (eds.): Valentine, G., S. L. Holloway & M. Jayne (2010). Power and participatory development: Theory Generational patterns of alcohol consumption: and practice, 43–59. ITDG Publishing, London. Continuity and change. Health & Place 16: 5, Wyn, J., & P. Dwyer (1999). New directions in re- 916–925. search on youth in transition. Journal of Youth Valentine, G. & J. McKendrick (1997). Children’s Studies 2: 1, 5–21. outdoor play: Exploring parental concerns about Wyn, J., S. Lantz & A. Harris (2012). Beyond the children’s safety and the changing nature of child- ‘transitions’ metaphor. Family relations and young hood. Geoforum 28: 2, 219–235. people in late modernity. Journal of Sociology Valentine, G., T. Skelton & D. Chambers (1998). Cool 48: 1, 3–22. places: An introduction to youth cultures. In Skelt- Young, I. M. (2005). On female body experience: on, T. & G. Valentine (eds.): Cool places. Geogra- ‘Throwing like a girl’ and other essays. Oxford phies of youth culture, 1–32. Routledge, London. University Press, New York. Vanderbeck, R. M. (2008). Reaching critical mass? Theory, politics, and the culture debate of debate in children’s geographies. Area 40: 3, 393–400.

147 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Appendices

Appendix 1. An image of Leppävaara, depicting the travelled routes: the scale is referential.

148 Appendix 2. An image of Itäkeskus, depicting the travelled routes: the scale is referential. 149 150 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 GEOGRAPHY AND GEOSCIENCES OF DEPARTMENT Appendix 3. An image of Tikkurila, depicting the travelled routes: the scale is referential. Appendix 4. Independent assignment

Paikan kokemisen tutkimus – Arjen reitit

Tehtävän tarkoituksena on tarkastella paikan kokemista yksilön näkökulmasta käve- lemällä tai liikkumalla paikassa. Tätä tehtävää on tarkoitus hyödyntää tieteellisessä tutkimuksessa ja kaupunkisuunnittelussa. Mikäli haluat kysyä jotain tutkimukseen liittyvää, vastaan mielelläni kysymyksiin

Heli Ponto [email protected] Tutkija, tohtorikoulutettava Helsingin yliopisto, Geotieteiden ja maantieteen laitos

Itsenäinen tehtävä a) Karttatehtävä ja paikkaan liittyvät kysymykset Valitse kuljettava reitti ja paikat, joissa pysähdyt. Pysähdyspaikkoja voi olla noin 3–10. Kun olet paikassa, merkitse karttaan numero ja vastaa paikkaan liittyviin kysymyksiin (tehtävä a). Tarkoitus on pysähtyä ja tehdä a)-tehtävä ko- konaan jokaisessa itsellesi merkityksellisessä paikassa. b) Koko reittiin liittyvät kysymykset

Vastaa koko reittiin liittyviin kysymyksiin, kun olet kävellyt koko reitin ja teh- nyt tehtävän a).

Vastaajan taustatiedot

Ikä: Sukupuoli: Kauan olet asunut alueella?

151 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 a) Paikkaan liittyvät kysymykset HUOMIO! Vastaathan tähän tehtävään jokaisen pysähtymäsi paikan kohdalla

1. Nimeä paikka:

2. Miksi valitsit tämän paikan?

3. Mitä myönteistä paikkaan liittyy?

4. Mitä kielteistä paikkaan liittyy?

5. Mitä paikassa näkyy? Minkälaisia ääniä paikassa kuuluu? Minkälai- sia tuoksuja ja hajuja paikassa on?

6. Minkälainen tunnelma paikassa on?

152 b) Koko reittiin liittyvät kysymykset

1. Nimeä reitti (esim. kotimatka koulusta, matka kaverille) ja kerro siitä lyhyesti

2. Kulkeeko reittisi pelkästään tiellä vai liikutko osittain sisätiloissa tai poluilla? Voit ympyröidä kaikki sopivat vaihtoehdot a. vain tiellä b. sisällä c. poluilla d. muualla, missä?

3. Kenen kanssa liikut reitillä? a. yksin b. kaverin tai perheenjäsen kanssa c. lemmikin kanssa d. joku muu, kuka?

4. Kuinka usein käytät reittiä tai käyt reitin paikoissa? a. monta kertaa päivässä b. kerran päivässä c. muutaman kerran viikossa d. kerran viikossa e. harvemmin

5. Kerro vapaasti mitä vain reitin paikoista tai reitistä

6. Voit antaa tehtävästä vapaamuotoista palautetta

153 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52 c) Oletko kiinnostunut osallistumaan kävelyhaastatteluun? Tarvitsen tutkimukseeni lisää haastateltavia kävelyhaastattelun merkeissä ja palaan mielelläni asiaan myöhemmin. Jätä halutessasi yhteystietosi niin vo- imme sopia kävelyhaastatteluajan.

Yhteystiedot:

Sähköposti:

154 155 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A 52

Appendix 5. Participant information sheet

156 2017 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY AND GEOSCIENCES OF DEPARTMENT 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.

A52 DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES AND GEOGRAPHY A52

Painosalama Oy Turku 2017 HELI PONTO