A Psychological–Geographical Approach to Vulnerability: The Example of a Chinese urban Development Project from the Perspective of the Transactional Stress Model

Anna Lena Bercht and Rainer Wehrhahn

Environment and Planning A, 2010, vol. 42, issue 7, 1705-1722

Abstract: Since the 1980s, reform, the open-door policy, and rapid economic growth have encouraged Chinese cities to become fast-growing and highly dynamic urban areas. They are subject to both innovations and international connectivity as well as to rising socioeconomic and ecological vulnerability. In this paper we sketch the main transformation processes of a traditional Chinese village in the megacity Guangzhou, South China, processes that are linked to the construction of a new railway station in its close proximity. Our research addresses the issue of how the inhabitants of this village view the restructuring of their living environment. What kind of demands or opportunities do they perceive? Do they feel stress with regard to ‘harm/loss’, ‘threat’, or ‘challenge’ and how do they cope with the changing structures and processes? People living in the same environment appraise exposure to certain risks differently, which explains varying coping modes. In this context the question is considered as to whether coping necessarily results in ‘visible’ outcomes (eg building houses to rent out and thus benefiting from in-migration) or whether it encompasses ‘invisible’ person-related processes. The primary aim of this paper is to enrich the geographical debate on vulnerability by taking a psychological perspective and presenting and applying the transactional stress model of Lazarus. This conceptual framework from cognitive psychology and schematises person and environment antecedents of stress and coping as well as appraisal and coping as mediating processes between the person and the environment. To facilitate understanding, the transactional stress model is exemplified on the basis of selected research data collected in the transforming village. With reference to different stress appraisals, examples of varying coping modes and coping efficiency are discussed.

Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a42510 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envira:v:42:y:2010:i:7:p:1705-1722

DOI: 10.1068/a42510

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning A
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().