Place Shapes Civics
Your city is not just where you live. It is a political education you walk through every day.
We sit down with Dr. John Harner, professor of geography and environmental studies, to connect cultural geography to civic engagement in the United States. We unpack what “place” really means, including place identity (the image a community projects through architecture, branding, and design rules) and sense of place (the personal ties that make us feel rooted). When those pieces work together, people feel valued, connected, and more willing to show up for local politics, volunteer work, and community problem-solving.
Then we follow the thread into the built environment: public spaces that welcome everyone versus landscapes that exclude. We talk about placelessness, the spread of disposable, look-alike development, and how car-centered suburban design can weaken a sense of belonging. From there, we explore how politics can shape place through regulation, sprawl, and privatized enclaves, and how those landscapes can reinforce ideas about property, public services, and community responsibility.
We also zoom out to economic and social forces, linking spatial mobility to social mobility through housing choice, transportation access, and opportunity. Finally, we turn to border regions and the US-Mexico border as dynamic spaces where identity, citizenship, and political boundaries are constantly negotiated, and where proximity can foster empathy and compromise.
If you want smarter conversations about urban planning, civic life, and how place shapes political identity, listen now, then subscribe, share this episode with a friend, and leave a review. What place has shaped your worldview the most?
Check Out the Civic Literacy Curriculum!
School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership
1 SPEAKER_01: Welcome back to civics near.
I'm really excited today because we get to talk about geography.
And I think that sometimes people think that geomography
and civics are two separate things.
But I'm going to argue about the moment.
So with me today, um, Dr.
John Harner from Albert, although he is an AMC alumnus.
But Dr.
Harner, welcome to our podcast.
Can you introduce yourself from our listeners?
SPEAKER_00: Hi, my name is Jim Harner.
I'm a professor of geography and environmental studies at the
University of Colorado, Colorado Springs.
SPEAKER_01: So, Dr.
Harner, you've written about how place is something people
actively create.
How does that idea help us better understand communities
and civic life in the United States?
SPEAKER_00: Well, I'll first say that civic engagement is
frequently place-based, meaning that people are usually working
to make their places better, to make their local places better.
I mean, there's certainly there's national civics, but you
know, a lot of times it's it's rooted in the community.
And I'll also say that people with strong connections to place
tend to be much more engaged with the local politics and the
local initiatives.
There are volunteers who are working to make their community
better.
So I say place and civic life are strongly connected.
I I can answer that in a more longer way, which I will do, but
I let me let me first talk about this, what we mean by this
concept of place, because it's it's pretty vague and oftentimes
people have different interpretations, and rightly so.
Let me just say that when we talk about place, we should
distinguish between the characteristics of that locality
versus the people.
So when we can use a phrase like place identity, that's really
we're talking about the characteristics of the physical
place, right?
Some something that the place projects to create an image or
representation that comes to mind when we think about these
places.
So you know, you can imagine in your mind uh, you know, the uh
white Spanish mission architecture with the red tile
roofs and the palm trees, and you think of Santa Barbara or uh
you know the beautiful piazzas of of Florence or Siena in
Italy, these great public spaces.
Those, you know, create an image that comes to mind.
And even in America, in smaller towns or where elsewhere, these
are often these these images are often consciously and
intentionally constructed through branding or just
marketing slogans or regulations about architectural styles.
And so they create stories that connect uh historic buildings or
districts to the to the past to contemporary.
So once again, think about something like Santa Fe, right?
With we think of the those adobe houses with the flat roofs and
the vegas sticking out.
And this was a you know a rigid architect that was intentionally
created.
It wasn't just organic, and it's a rigid regulations in place
that says when you build in Santa Fe, it's gonna look like
this.
But it's it's functioned to create an identity.
So it creates this this image that we all have about what
Santa Fe is, right?
So landscapes of the built environment, they tell a story,
and city leaders often use those, or sometimes invent them,
but they're usually loosely at least connected to the past.
They want to create this place identity.
So they're looking to create something authentic, which is a
problematic word, but it's it, you know, how authentic can it
be if it's intentionally constructed?
But it's a personalized story about that place and connects
the past in the natural environment with contemporary
meaning.
So that's that's a function they serve.
On the other hand, we often have this phrase, a sense of place,
which we use a lot, which is more meant to express an
individual person's connections to the place.
So this is our personal place ties.
Uh it's a very important part of everyone's identity, an
understanding of who you are, right?
So a strong connection with place provides a secure point
from which to look out upon the world, right?
There was a famous geographer, Edward Ralph, who said it's a
firm grasp of one's own position in the order of things.
So these connections can also transcend individual identities
into a shared understanding or like a cultural identity among
people.
So there's these two concepts, the place identity and the
personal identity, but they're not so easily separated.
I say we ought to distinguish them, but it's not easy to do
because people build places and places shape people.
So just think about as we navigate through our built
world, we internalize the messages and the values that are
embedded there in the landscape and help form our own identity.
We then go out and build the landscape to reflect those
values.
So it's this reinforcing dialectic between people and
place, and it's always in play.
So culture is really embedded into the landscape, and that
continually reshapes our cultural values.
So place is important to our very understanding of the world,
and it plays a strong role in civic engagement.
Because as you said, places are intentionally designed and
created, that I've said before.
And we can build places that function well, or we can build
those that don't.
And what do I mean by functioning well?
Well, they can mean like commercial districts that are
very successful, you know, places where that people want to
be, they want to engage, they like to be there, it's exciting,
or civic spaces that attract people and they feel welcoming,
or historic districts that tell a rich story.
All these are successful spaces that serve to bring people
together.
And what that means for civics is people generally want to feel
that they're part of something larger than themselves, right?
They want to feel part of a community, that they matter, and
that they're not excluded.
So these welcoming places that function well foster
interpersonal connections and offer opportunities for all
residents.
They make people feel valued.
And when you feel heard, when you feel valued, you tend to
engage with civic functions far more frequently.
When people are connected to place, they insist that we take
care of those places, you know, that we that we instill beauty
in the natural environment, in the built environment, and that
we demand justice and fairness.
So you can just look at this from the other point of view,
too, if you don't buy that argument.
Just think about poorly designed places that exclude groups,
whether that's the impoverished people or immigrants or racial
minorities or gendered barriers or whatever it may be.
When people are excluded, they do not engage with their local
community or place.
They feel, they feel, if you feel excluded, why would you
want to have any commitment to that place, right?
So that's a poorly designed space, right?
And and we could even just talk about poorly designed, if you
think of the term placelessness, right?
The opposite of strong place, placelessness or the weakening
of any place characteristics to the point where they all look
alike.
They offer the same bland possibilities for experience,
right?
So if you have cheap, discardable buildings that are
designed for obsolescence, this tells people, hey, this place
doesn't matter, that it's disposable, and therefore you
are disposable.
So in the United States, we see this a lot in in mainly suburban
landscapes that are designed for cars instead of people.
They make people feel unsafe, you know, unwelcome.
They exclude you from connecting to that place.
So they offer no unique or authentic connection, and hence
there's civic engagement lessons.
So I guess the long-winded answer to that is place is more
than just a marketing tool or some abstract concept.
It has real impacts on civic life because it affects people's
identities and how they feel about those places.
SPEAKER_01: I'm just writing all of this stuff down because you
know you think about this stuff, but then you don't.
Like I'm even thinking about I'm here on ASU's campus, like how
this campus is designed.
And it is it's so interesting to think about.
So how do landscapes, cities, or regions shape political identity
over time?
Are there examples where understanding the place helps
explain the politics?
SPEAKER_00: I can definitely say yes to the reverse of that
question, where politics shape the place.
You asked whether place shapes the politics.
Let me give you the opposite first.
I have argued in my, I have a book called Profiting from the
Peak, which is about Colorado Springs, where I live.
And Colorado Springs is known for a conservative political
culture, meaning it's a it's a belief in limited governance,
deregulation, low taxes, and a real trust in the private sector
to solve societal problems and get things done.
So what this does is privilege urban sprawl because uh it the
it's a profitable model for land developers who are doing the
creation of place, really.
And they, particularly when they're subsidized, but even
with just fewer regulations, this provides an enormous profit
model for them.
So we see this urban sprawl as a reflection of the political
culture.
It's these privatized spaces that then go and reinforce that
that sort of political ideology.
And I guess to answer your question, how place helps
explain politics, that whole model, that suburban model,
people have written about it.
One woman, Lisa McGurr, she wrote a great book called
Suburban Warriors.
She talks about Orange County, California, which is really, you
know, the original giant sprawling suburb of the United
States.
And it really doesn't have many recognizable, what you call a
downtown, you know, hubs, urban experiences.
It's a suburb, these private worlds, which are dispersed
relationships and more isolated, you know, private enclaves.
It leads to a more conservative perspective on the primacy of
private property rights, the rejection of public services or
public spaces or public transit.
So community tends to be formed more through dispersed
relationships, maybe churches.
And this is, by the way, the home of mega churches in
Southern California, this big giant 5,000-seat auditoriums.
And, you know, political parties and other ideological groups
come to form your identity.
So it reinforces this belief system which shapes the
landscape.
So you can see that happening in a variety of ways.
You also mentioned in your question regional instead of
just talking place, I've been talking cities and maybe
suburbs.
But if you think of regional identities, you know, the
strongest, I guess, cultural region in our country with has a
strong allegiance would be the South, you know, or Dixie.
And, you know, this phrase of the southern lifestyle is is a
is is loaded with all sorts of political and racial messaging.
It reinforces a cultural identity.
So places really do work to reinforce cultural norms, power
relations, and your your views of the world.
So, like I said before, landscapes really tell a story,
right?
They're they're text.
They're physically written across the surface of the earth.
So that's a good thing about cultural geography, is you
practice trying to read the landscapes and understand the
meanings of those places, which which we can all practice every
day for the rest of our lives.
SPEAKER_01: So, in your work on urban and regional geography,
how do economic and social forces shape not just where
people live, but how they think about power, opportunity, and
belonging?
SPEAKER_00: That's a big question.
Economic and social forces can mean a lot of different things.
I guess in general, I would say I'll repeat what I said earlier,
something.
When people feel excluded, when they have few opportunities
because of the power relations or the economic system, whatever
it may be, then they don't feel like they belong, right?
They become cynical, they disengage with civic life, which
is what you don't want, right?
If you're trying to talk about civics.
So a geographic dimension to this is uh the relationship
between spatial mobility and social mobility.
In other words, your your ability to move across space and
your ability to make yourself get better in life, your social
mobility.
But when we build these impediments to spatial mobility,
in other words, where you can or can't go, where you can or
cannot live, we create impediments to social mobility
or the opportunity for people to improve themselves.
So well-designed places should provide equitable mobility
options and diversity of housing so it's more affordable for a
variety of people.
This enhances all sorts of social mobility opportunities.
So it creates opportunities to excel and promotes innovation,
which then further creates this sense of belonging and this
attachment to place and this more engagement with the civic
life.
So maybe that's not the economic and social forces you were
referring to, but I guess that's one example.
SPEAKER_01: No, I I that example is, I think it's easy to see.
And this, I think for people listening, they're able to kind
of envision this.
So you've also studied border regions.
So I'm here in Arizona.
What can places like the US-Mexico border teach us about
identity, citizenship, and the meaning of political boundaries?
SPEAKER_00: That's a good question.
It's a whole different topic.
I would say the first, my first response to that is those words
identity, citizenship, and political boundaries are all
fluid constructs, right?
They're continually being negotiated and shaped and
changing and evolving and renegotiated.
The U.S.-Mexico border is very dynamic, even though we think of
it as fixed in place, but you know, it it's still dynamic.
It's a it's a rich source of cultural interchange.
It generates all kinds of innovation.
So you can think of borders as being barriers, which they are,
because you know, they stop certain people or goods from
moving, but they're also really opportunities.
For a long time, groups there in Arizona, such as the Chiricawa
Apache, or Mexican revolutionaries, or Mormon
settlers, or multinational corporations, smugglers of
contraband, many others have all exploited the border to their
advantage, right?
It's an opportunity zone.
But one thing about borders is this close proximity to what you
can call the other, you know, someone else, and that's legally
defined at a border.
You know, you cross the border, I'm American, you cross the
border, you're not, or I'm Mexican, you cross the border,
you're not.
You create this this other category.
But when you're nearby to different people, you know, some
different group, it tends to lead to better understanding of
their needs, their values, and creates a more empathy towards
their their life, right?
So spatial proximity, spatial distance leads to social
distance.
If you're farther away from different types of people, you
don't understand them, right?
When you're enmeshed in their lives, you you tend to
understand them more.
So just as I was saying before, cities foster negotiation
because they bring diverse peoples in close proximity into
contact with each other, borders do the same.
They tend to generate an appreciation for compromise and
finding solutions, right?
Of how to get along, because there's, you know, we all got to
live in this world one way or another.
So they build, I would say, stronger civic understandings
about, you know, how do we have policies that are gonna that are
gonna work for everybody.
So I I'm a big fan of border zones personally as opportunity
zones.
SPEAKER_01: Thank you so much.
I think again, sometimes people think of geography as separate
than civics, but you've really shown how they marry really well
together and they work together, you know, to create this bigger
story.
And you've given me so much to think about personally.
Is there anything else you want to make sure our listeners know
about place or about geography?
SPEAKER_00: Well, there's a lot, there's a lot more to geography
than just what I do.
I'm a cultural and urban geographer.
And like you said, I'm a Latin Americanist too, but you know, a
lot of geography deals with physical science and the
landforms and climate and that stuff.
But I say it's all place-based, right?
So place is very important to like our very identity, our
understanding of the world, and and that leads to you know how
well we want to take care of it, which may be a good definition
of civics, right?
How we how we take care of our places.
SPEAKER_01: Dr.
Hunter, thank you again so much for your expertise, for your
storytelling.
You mentioned your book, listeners, that book will be
listed in our show notes.
Dr.
Hunter, again, thank you so much.
SPEAKER_00: My pleasure.
Thank you.