One Clear Image? Challenging Simplicity in Place Branding

Ren, Carina; Blichfeldt, Bodil Stilling

doi:10.1080/15022250.2011.598753

Cited by 72 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A recurring challenge in place branding is how to encapsulate the diversity of a place within a brand (Ren and Blichfeldt, 2011). This challenge increases along with the spatial dimensions of place.…”

Section: Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingent self-definition and amorphous regions

Dinnie

2017

Marketing Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the concept of contingent self-definition, whereby place brands employ flexible self-definitional approaches in constructing their place brand architecture. Adopting a view of regions as social constructs, the article builds on and extends previous work on place brand architecture by identifying the underlying factors that drive contingent self-definition decisions. Based on an empirical study of professionals tasked with managing region brands in the Netherlands, 11 factors are identified as drivers of contingent self-definition by place brands. These factors are grouped into four thematic categories: (i) external perceptions, (ii) proximity, (iii) brand relationships, and (iv) politics and power. A dynamic approach to place brand architecture is advocated, foregrounding the amorphous character of regions as social constructs that defy reification solely as fixed territorial-administrative spaces.

show abstract

Section: Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Contingent self-definition and amorphous regions

Dinnie

2017

Marketing Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet, what is "itself" in something as heterogeneous as place and how can anything ever be the same in a world caught up in constant change (Warnaby, 2011)? There is a clear need for a concept of place (and place identity) that incorporates change and continuity, unity and heterogeneity (see also Kavaratzis and Hatch, 2013;Ren and Blichfeldt, 2011). Weichhart et al (2006) distinguish between three types of place identity:…”

Section: Understanding Place and Place Identitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite intense criticism of this idea in the relevant literature (e.g. Ren and Blichfeldt, 2011), reality shows that place managers are eager to find and present to the world a distinctive, unique place identity. This is often demonstrated by the logos and slogans used for cities, regions and countries, which often feature words such as 'unique', 'one' or 'different'.…”

Section: Introduction -The Difference a Word Makesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the place brand: the interactive formation of place brands and the role of participatory place branding

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rethinking the place brand:The interactive formation of place brands and the role of participatory place branding This is a pre-publication version of Kavaratzis, M. and Kalandides, A. (2015) Rethinking the place brand: The interactional formation of place brands and the role of participatory place branding, Environment and Planning A, 47, 1368-1382. AbstractThis article attempts to 'rethink' place brands after examining in detail how people form them in their minds. The article starts with a very brief account of the place branding literature to provide the necessary background and goes on to identify what we see as a shortcoming in current understanding of the place brand: the dominant idea that brands are formed as sums of mental associations. The article attempts to take current understanding of place brands further by going beyond associations and adding a missing element: the interactions between those associations. We propose a rethinking of place brands based on two pillars: first we incorporate more geographical understanding into place branding and, second, we outline a process that allows place elements and place-based associations to combine and form the place brand. The place brand formation process starts when people use place-making elements (materiality, practices, institutions and representations) to form mental associations with the place. These associations are not static but evolve and change over time as they interact with each other on several dimensions. These interactions constitute the way in which the place brand is formed. The argumentation leads to a novel conceptualization of the role of place branding in the above processes. The practical applicability and implications of the proposed rethinking of place brands suggested here are explored in detail through the examination of the branding process followed recently in Bogotá, Colombia, where our approach to place branding has found practical application.

show abstract

“…Sometimes these are pushed to the limits by tourism marketing (Jeuring, 2015;Pike & Page, 2014;Ren & Blichfeldt, 2011;Warnaby & Medway, 2013), in which socio-spatial identifiers such as nations and regions are used to discern between self and other, between home and away. Uneven capitalization of push and pull factors (i.e.…”

Section: Pull Factormentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenge of proximity: the (un)attractiveness of near-home tourism destinations

Jeuring

Haartsen

2016

Tourism Geographies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imaginaries of touristic otherness have traditionally been closely related to geographical distance and travel far away from the everyday. But in today's context of sustainable tourism, a moral and behavioral shift may be expected, toward traveling near home. Distance may actually become a disadvantage and proximity a new commodity. This implies a need to disentangle subjective understandings of both distance and proximity in relation to perceived attractiveness of and touristic behavior in places near home. Thus, it is aimed to shed light on how 'proximity tourism' is constructed, endorsed and appreciated (or not). An online survey (N D 913) was administered to residents of the Dutch province of Friesland, exploring their attitudes toward their home province as tourism destination and representations of proximity and distance in relation to preferred vacation destinations. We grouped respondents into four categories, reflecting destination preferences: (1) proximate, (2) distant, (3) intermediate and (4) mixed. These groups were differentiated and characterized using quantitative and qualitative analyses. The 'proximate' and 'distant' preference groups, respectively, were most and least engaged in proximity tourism. However, the perceptions of proximity and distance expressed by the 'intermediate' and 'mixed' preference groups were associated in a nonlinear way with appreciation of the home region as a tourism destination. Additionally, respondents used proximity and distance in various ways as push, pull, keep and repel factors motivating their destination preferences. Interpretations of both proximity and distance were thus important in determining engagement in proximity tourism and, in turn, the potential for proximity tourism development in the region. This implies that such development will require a balanced consideration of the relative, temporally sensitive ways that people negotiate distance and proximity in their perceptions of being at home and away. Our results advance the discussion about imaginaries of travel, distance and proximity, and their impact on regional tourism. 抽象旅游者对他者感的想象传统上与地理距离和远离日常生活的旅行密切相关,但是在当今可持续旅游背景下,可能期望人们在道义和

show abstract

One Clear Image? Challenging Simplicity in Place Branding

Cited by 72 publications

References 26 publications

Contingent self-definition and amorphous regions

Contingent self-definition and amorphous regions

Rethinking the place brand: the interactive formation of place brands and the role of participatory place branding

The challenge of proximity: the (un)attractiveness of near-home tourism destinations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About