Human Territoriality in Gated Communities

The results suggested that residents viewed territorial physical markers as extension of their house and believed that these provided a physical safety net extending a sense of home. Many scholars criticized this point of view because it overlooked cultural and environmental factors that influenced territorial and aggressive expressions in humans (Alland, 1972; Elms, 1972; Hall, 1959; Taylor, 1988), for example, humans use of space is multipurpose (Soja, 1971); territories can be protected without aggression; humans do not need territories to fulfill basic needs of food and shelter; humans can have multiple territories (home, office etc.); territories can be shared by other humans; space can be used without conflict (Hall, 1959; Edney, 1974; Malmberg, 1980; Taylor, 1988). On a much bigger scale geographical studies look at territories at global level where land is owned and maintained by countries (Storey, 2001) or studied in psychology, sociology and anthropology that study political and social power in homes and gated neighborhoods (Storey, 2001). Active gated communities require documental identification to enter or visit the space and community, (more restrictive), whereas permeable gated communities require such identification more informally, letting visitors enter the space without IDs, verbal inquiries or resistance.