What is the role of place branding in rebuilding cities and their image? The dramatic scenes in the photograph above are of the devastation caused in the centre of Ōtautahi Christchurch by its 2011 earthquake. Whilst gladly such images are rare, many towns and cities worldwide need their infrastructure, community spirit, economies or image rebuilding in some way.
Tragedy and chronic decline
In the United Kingdom this applies to the town of Southport where three young girls were brutally murdered at a dance class and false rumours on social media subsequently helped spark riots. In a less tragic, though nevertheless chronic way, such rebuilding has also been the focus of billions of pounds of U.K. government funding for towns and cities since 2019, that largely targeted investment in infrastructure in the hope of boosting community “pride in place”.
For many, the use of the term “place branding” alongside the need for such a rebuilding of cities may seem inappropriate in terms of timing, simplicity and even the implied insensitivity. I am not entirely sure myself in the case of Southport just yet, except to recognise that in some way we owe it to the memory of the three young girls and the largely unreported shows of community spirit that followed, to shape a positive image going forward. That way maybe the young lives will be remembered for more than their tragic end.
What place branding means to us
To further our understanding of the potential role of place branding in rebuilding cities, we need to first clarify how we define the process. Work by Boisen et al (2018), is very helpful in this, as it seeks to clarify how we define and distinguish place branding, place marketing and place promotion. Whilst they can be considered as different parts of a continuum, if, like me, you are interested in the inter-relationship between the development of places and their identity, you will gravitate towards a definition of place branding that emphasises this inter-play.
Boisen et al distinguish place branding as a process that takes a holistic view to changing how users experience a place by recognising its role in managing the primary (i.e. the behaviour of the place), secondary (i.e. place promotion) and tertiary (word-of-mouth and media representations) communication, as explained by Kavaratzis (2008). They conclude that to achieve this, the place branding process needs to exert a strong influence on “both material and immaterial aspects of urban governance, urban policy, and urban development.” As such, a place brand strategy can be a framework of core values emphasising the identity of the place -not unlike a placemaking visioning statement.
Distinct from promotion and marketing
Boisen et al distinguish place branding from place promotion by proposing that the latter is solely about places getting noticed, though highlighting how it has a role in bringing a place brand to more people’s attention. Place marketing, they conclude is a broader concept that links promotion with aspects of place development that may confer a commercial advantage, such as tax breaks for inward investment or destination management targeted at visitors.
As part of understanding the role of place branding in rebuilding cities and their image, it is also helpful to be clear about what we mean by place brand and its inter-relationship with place identity and image. Boisen et al propose that place identity focuses on the material and immaterial elements that make a place distinctive. The role of place branding is to curate the brand identity to influence people’s image of the place. The ideal is a strong and positive brand image.
What all academics and experienced practitioners will be at great pains to explain, is that a place brand is not a logo, a strapline or necessarily involves an imposed visual identity. And neither, therefore, is place branding a process that needs to create these – other than probably to fulfil a client’s preconceptions of what is involved.
Intrinsic part of the place development journey
Such definitions and distinctions will be important if you are looking to bridge the gap that often exists between place branding and placemaking. This helps emphasise the intrinsic role that place branding can have as part of a “journey” to reimagine places, with a function in identifying, shaping and communicating input from stakeholders. With a place development focus, it is perhaps more important to be clear about negative aspects of place identity during a rebuilding phase, than place branding typically is. This will resonate authentically in addressing issues with local stakeholders and can be forward looking. The process of rebuilding out of adversity, can itself become part of the place identity and positive brand over time.
Making residents feel better about their city
Starting from the perspective of making people feel better about where they live, one of the experiences that stays with me is from my bit-part in the U.K. Government-backed High Streets Task Force. On one of the visits to review progress in a town that had received substantial government funding, I was asked by a member of the town board, “Why when we are doing all this work, does the local community still think the town is sh*t?”
There is so much that can be unwrapped in the potential answer to this question. Strengthening the local identity needs to involve the community in co-creation from the outset: in determining what matters; forming partnerships; developing solutions; organising events; restoring buildings; telling tales. Get that right and the brand becomes so much easier to authentically re-build from within. Community-based stakeholders involved in the rebuilding of a town in this way, can become its authentic brand ambassadors.
Christchurch’s new narrative built around experiences
Turning back to the opening lines about the role of place branding in rebuilding cities such as Ōtautahi Christchurch, it is instructive to read a feature in the Place Brand Observer, 2024 Year Book. The feature offers insights about stakeholders’ perceptions of the city following a rebuilding programme, and the learning from this for destination management.
What to me is a little remiss in the feature, is that whilst the article focuses on how 12 years on from the earthquake a process was initiated to relaunch Christchurch to the world, little is said about the local stakeholder engagement in rebuilding the city prior to this. What, though, is striking in reading around the place development and rebranding of Christchurch, is that whilst mention is made of its new logo as an output of the process, the meaningful brand narrative appears to be around how the city can now be experienced.
This is how one national broadcaster portrayed his observations of how Christchurch’s residents and visitors can now experience the city: “Te Pae, Christchurch’s glorious new convention centre, is a stupendous venue. Across the road, Tūranga, the new library is surely the best of any big city in New Zealand. The art gallery is amazing. The Margaret Mahy playground is the stuff dreams are made of for kids and adults alike.”
Intrinsic from the outset; not an add-on
It may not be called place branding from the outset and is perhaps more often described as stakeholder engagement, though it would seem essential that there is a role for place branding in rebuilding cities and their image from the inside-out. To coin a phrase, actions -that are co-created with stakeholders and clearly communicated – speak louder than logos! The inter-twining of place branding and placemaking skills, would seem essential from the outset in ensuring that what users see, hear and experience about a place and its people, is authentically on message. Even if some of the early, local focus is unavoidably on the bumps in the road of the place brand journey!
Surely, gone are the times when we think we can only brand the pretty places? If we define place branding as an holistic process that shapes users’ experience of a place, then it is an intrinsic part of rebuilding cities, and not an add-on towards the end of the process.
For more information
To learn more about the meaning of place branding and its interplay with place development or placemaking, listen to this podcast interview with Martin Boisen as part of The Place Brand Observer’s series of interviews with place brand leaders.
Read more about the rebuilding and rebranding of Christchurch from a free download of The Place Brand Observer Year Book, 2024.
If you want more insights on my take on the intersection of placemaking and place branding, read my interview on Sustainable Urban Development with The Place Brand Observer.
References
If you are lucky enough to have access to academic journals, here are refrences foir the papers mentione din this post:
Boisen, M., Terlouwb, T., Groote, P., & Couwenberga, O. (2018). Reframing place promotion, place marketing, and place branding – moving beyond conceptual confusion. Cities 80 (4-11).
Kavaratzis, M. (2008), “From city marketing to city branding: an interdisciplinary analysis with reference to Amsterdam, Budapest and Athens,” PhD diss., Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen.
Acknowledgement
With thanks to Martin Boisen for sharing his thinking and commenting on a draft of this post. Martin is a Danish geographer with a MSc. degree from Utrecht University. He lives and works from the heart of the beautiful city of Utrecht in the Netherlands. Martin is a leading advisor, a respected academic and a passionate speaker.
