The concept of place refers to the subjective experience of
embodied human existence in the material world. It is a paradoxical
concept with a meaning that is readily grasped, but difficult to
define. In their review of place attachment literature, Low and
Altman (1992) state that while place is an integrating concept,
there is no systematic theory of place, and numerous commentators
since have echoed their concerns about the lack of conceptual
coherence in place research. Patterson and Williams (2005) suggest
that no systematic theory of place has emerged because the domain
of place research is composed of multiple research traditions based
on very different, often incompatible epistemological foundations
and philosophical assumptions about the nature of reality. Some
aspects of place research are best dealt with quantitatively, while
for other aspects a qualitative approach is more appropriate. They
argue that if researchers grounded in any one research paradigm
recognise the limits to that paradigm and adopt an attitude of
openness to alternative paradigms, their ‘critical pluralist’ framework
provides an overarching coherence to the field.