Harnessing Place Branding through Cultural Entrepreneurship

F. Go, A. Lemmetyinen, U. Hakala, F. Go, A. Lemmetyinen, U. Hakala

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781137465153
• eBook ISBN: 9781137465160
• Topic: Business
• Subtopic: Small Business
• Index: Business

This book draws together three overlapping relationships and knowledge domains. These are the cultural entrepreneurship/creative industries, the public and/or private philanthropic contributions that have funded artistic production and the preservation and presentation of place brands as a mechanism to revitalize local economies and communities.

Part I

Place Branding: Multidisciplinary Principles

1

Place Branding and Culture: ‘The Reciprocal Relationship between Culture and Place Branding’

Marinda Scaramanga

Keywords: culture, cultural industries, cultural mapping, cultural planning, place branding

The identity of cities and regions is a concern of many who reflect the spatial consequences of globalization, global values, global mobility and global consumption patterns (Kunzmann, 2004). In this chapter, we review the state of knowledge about arts and culture as the main element of a place’s image and highlight tools used by urban planners and decision-makers to achieve regional development through existing resources. The goal of this chapter is to develop a conceptual framework to describe possible key features in the relationship between culture and place branding, to identify methods, including the harnessing of branding, and to leverage the cultural resources that convey meaning to places in a co-creative process by providers who have aspirations for their place brand and citizens, visitors and investors who imbue such brands with personal relevance. Thus, this chapter does not seek to create a discourse about developing a culture and infrastructure for the sake of the arts first and then communicating the same to the place-brand audience.

We accomplish the aforementioned proposition by referring to literature resources that examine the reciprocal relationship between culture and place branding, from a wide range of disciplines: marketing, place branding, cultural management, urban studies, cultural policy, and so on. On the one hand, we aim to point out the powerful advantages in using the existing art(s) and culture-based activities to promote a place. On the other, we highlight the layered dilemmas for practitioners concerning the amalgamation of such a practice on a branding campaign.

Beginning our research and having as the central pillar the bibliographical resource of Simon Anholt’s City Brand Hexagon, about branding regions, and taking as a given that ‘culture is one of the main factors influencing a place’s reputation’ (Anholt, 2007: 97), we came across other authors supporting this crucial statement who provide strong links between culture and place branding. After a thorough review, we discovered that both place branding and culture seek the same principal point: originality. In light of theoretical assumptions, there is room for arguments supporting the ‘go global, stay local’ strategies that look to culture-led regeneration and the celebration of diversity (Evans, 2003), built on local creative industries. In this chapter, we provide a deeper understanding of culture, bridging the gap between technocrats and culture-oriented professionals by contributing to the creation of a coherent communication system for the study of the cultural aspect of place branding theory.

Place branding as a multidisciplinary field

With a view to studying the relationship of these two interwoven fields, as we will shortly see, we should start by defining their essential significance. In the pioneering literature about place branding, at least three definitions can be distinguished. Firstly, the Journal of Place Branding and Public Diplomacy suggests the following definition: ‘Place branding is the practice of applying brand strategy and other marketing techniques and disciplines to the economic, social, political and cultural development of cities, regions and countries’ (http://www.palgrave-journals.com/pb/index.html).

According to another definition, place branding is indeed a practice but also (Pryor and Grossbart, 2007: 294) ‘the process of inscribing symbols and images to a place that represent that set of central, enduring, and distinctive characteristics which actors have ascribed to that place, thereby creating a focus of identity’. In the first instance, place branding is more than the creation and promotion of place images as part of place management¹ (Kavaratzis and Ashworth, 2008), concerned with the pre-existing reputation (Parkerson, 2007). Academics and practitioners agree that place branding is a multidisciplinary field of research and activity – such as corporate branding (Ashworth and Kavaratzis, 2009), as it addresses multiple groups of stakeholders, has a high level of intangibility and complexity, must take account of social responsibility, deals with multiple identities, and requires long-term development (ibid.). It is more accurate to consider a place brand as intellectual property, such as ‘the totality of the thoughts, feelings, associations and expectations that come to mind when a prospect of consumer is exposed to an entity’s name, logo, products, services, events or any design or symbol representing them’ (Lindsay, 2000). Place branding can be considered an effort to use strategies developed in the commercial sector to manage, if not necessarily wield, the soft power² of a geographical location (http://www.placebrands.net).

In this chapter, we will discuss in more detail, on a theoretical level, culture as one of the ingredients of a successful place branding campaign, since many accept as true that it enhances the value of locations (Kunzmann, 2004). Our aim is not to focus on places which need to reinvent their identity, but on those which have already invested in their cultural infrastructure.

What is culture?

The definition of ‘culture’ has been formulated and treated by many different scientific fields, as it is one of the most difficult notions to define, since it has not just one single dimension. Culture can include every expression of life in a certain time-space framework (Kavaratzis, 2011). Kunzmann (2004: 384) argues that the most popular meaning of culture is that of a ‘particular system of art, thought, and customs of a society’, or ‘the arts, customs, beliefs, and all other products of human thought made by a people at a particular time’. For that reason, culture is a powerful human tool for survival, but at the same time, it is a fragile phenomenon: it is constantly changing and easily lost because it exists only in our minds. Starting from the fact that every creative mind is unique, we can easily conclude that culture developed by a specific group of people is unique, to be called ‘original’. Following Zukin’s (1995) observation ‘culture is a system for producing symbols’, we conclude that products of culture are the written languages, artworks, policies and so forth. The movement of the Italian Renaissance was at the time an authentic creative movement which flourished in the city of Florence. Today, we can still enjoy the sublime artworks spread throughout that city. The local identity is maintained as a unique representation of the social identity.

We have noticed that in the place branding literature, when we talk about ‘culture’, our understanding is centred on arts, architecture, design, history (Kunzmann, 2004), heritage (Anholt, 2007), relative events like festivals and cultural facilities, like museums, galleries, theatres or art centres. Culture can refer to ‘highbrow culture’, the fine arts, the great masters, haute couture, opera and much more: this is taste as determined by the elite. It also forms an integral part of human life, its system of beliefs, social mores, emotional behaviour and its socio-culturally constructed knowledge (Ryser and Meyer, 2011).

By the early nineties, the term ‘cultural industry’ started to appear in the literature, and was widely used by arts managers, funders and policymakers to describe the production and distribution of creative goods (Evans and Shaw, 2004). Those industries include all the above-mentioned forms of creativity. Furthermore, according to Landry (2000: 9), ‘cultural industries’ are those which shape culture and, thus, include casinos or theme parks as well as design or the arts. The term ‘cultural industries’ refers to those industries in our society which employ the characteristic modes of production and organization of industrial corporations to produce and disseminate symbols in the form of cultural goods and services – usually as commodities (Garnham, 1987). In place branding, when using the word ‘culture’, we include the description and notion of ‘cultural industry’, as urban cultural policies have been used within urban revitalisation and city marketing strategies (Lavanga, 2009). More generically speaking, when talking about culture, the first key word which comes to mind is ‘creativity’, a new kind of currency for places (Landry, 2000: xxv). Likewise, part of the cultural sphere is also entertainment (Kunzmann, 2004) as enjoyable performance (Montgomery, 1990).

Associations between culture and place branding

Culture is the panoply of resources that show that a place is unique and distinctive (Landry, 2000: 7). As previously described, in place branding, when using the word ‘culture’, we include the description and notion of ‘cultural industry’, as urban cultural policies have been used within urban revitalisation and city marketing strategies (Lavanga, 2009). The term ‘culture’ within the concept of place branding is oriented more towards cultural goods, products of cultural industries and heritage. As Kavaratzis (2005) explains, branding – such as arts and culture – has the power to ‘create powerful associations, attributing to almost everything that takes place in the city a symbolic value, next to its functional value’. When creating a brand image for a place, we need to trigger positive emotions to the consumer (i.e. visitor, potential investor, citizen etc.) contributing to the established preconceptions and the global perception.

The Parthenon in Athens, the Colosseum in Rome and, more recently, the Centre Pompidou in Paris are buildings intended not only to be residences of particular public functions but, more important, to be a ‘signature’ of the unique identity of the place and, finally, built a reputation. On the other hand, due to the uniqueness of individuals, place branding uses personalities, often artists (architects, sculptors, painters etc.), as they are more suitable for this purpose, being less divisive than politicians, for instance, to create associations between them and the place. Examples of this particular practice are Paul Cezanne for Aix-en-Provence and Raphael for Urbino. Lastly, cultural events such as festivals and historical pageants are often chosen to be part of place branding campaigns because of their visibility, political neutrality and acceptability, adding value to the place and contributing to its global recognition. Examples are the Edinburgh Festival, the Avignon Theatre Festival and award title events such as the ‘European City of Culture’. The Edinburgh Festival and the Avignon Theatre Festival are good examples of actions that brand the place automatically as ‘cultural’, for the long term.

The fundamental component that art(s) and culture in reality provide to a place is its authentic features. Many researchers (Landry and Bianchini, 1995; Gibson, 2004) have emphasized the importance of authenticity. Gran (2010) discusses how image and identity are fundamental components of brands. He explains the branding of places and attractions in the context of the experience economy and relates the concepts of theatre and marketing together. He states (2010: 27), brands ‘must relate to some relevant facts or reality effects: It is very difficult to put a middle age image on a modern town dominated by the architecture of international style. This means that a brand of a place must take into consideration what kind of resources and characteristics the place really has’. Gran (2010: 28) stated that ‘products and places need both image and identity in order to form brands and added value. An added value is what the brand is worth beyond, and in addition to, its area of use and technical quality’.

Where traditional cultural heritage – although unique and authentic – does not seem to be sufficient in the race for a place, new sites must be constructed in order to meet contemporary expectations and demands of the ‘creative class’ (Haddock, 2010). The example of Florence supports this argument. Despite the strong presence of heritage, the city today welcomes the creative headquarters of the most well-known luxury brands as a consequence of the creative tradition of Tuscany.

Florida’s (2002; cited in Scott, 2006: 11) theory on the creative class is based on the idea that once the creative class has been attracted to a place then ‘its innate entrepreneurial and cultural energies will automatically be activated in the construction of a vibrant local economy’. Generalising this observation, cultural industries are principally located in cities where a significant mass of both producers and consumers is available, to make them economically viable. These cities attract culture as the local society stimulates innovation and creative ideas (Lavanga, 2009). Simultaneously, assuming the intimate relationship between a place and its locals, we should reflect that ‘while we develop programs which seek to attract new people to our cities we must remain focused on the fact that what makes our city interesting in the first place are the people who already occupy it and the culture which they produce’ (Gibson, 2004). Additionally, it is important that local artists have opportunities to develop and not be forced to leave town in the search for recognition, while city managers are busy trying to attract the ‘big names’ (Montgomery, 1990).

In practice, culture is used by local authorities with tangible and manageable tools for their place’s brand (Kavaratzis, 2011), as they have strong place-bound characteristics, relying on the local production system (Lavanga, 2009). Ashworth and Kavaratzis (2011) detect three major types of contributions of culture, commonly used as place-branding instruments: signature building and design, personality association and hallmark events. At the same time, many researchers (Landry and Franco, 1995; Gibson, 2004) have emphasized the importance of authenticity, as it is the fundamental component that art(s) and culture in reality provide to a place. The Principality of Monaco, known especially for the Formula 1 car race – held in the streets of Monte Carlo – has established a variety of cultural events and foundations in order to encourage the local population and add value to its image through culture. The Opera of Monte Carlo and the Monte Carlo Ballet are today world renowned and attract thousands of spectators, contributing to the projection of a positive image of the Principality.

Impacts of culture

Nowadays, we come across the phenomenon of globalization. As a result of this process, we are heading towards a ‘homogenization’ of culture. The paradox is that as people become more similar, they also become more different from one another. The process of globalization has created both greater individuality and cultural diversity. Consumers exercise more choices in their spending patterns and their lifestyles. T...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Introduction
• Part I  Place Branding: Multidisciplinary Principles
• Part II  Chapters on Individual Place Case Studies
• Part III  Chapters on Particular Place Brand Themes
• Epilogue
• Index