Abstract:This city profile on Leicester focuses on the representation of ethnical diversity in city branding. Through a historical approach, the paper discusses how the local authorities have taken advantage of the arrival of different migration flows into the city, in order to redefine its post-industrial identity in terms of multiculturalism, tolerance and inclusivity. In so doing, the paper emphasises the combination of deliberate marketing communicative activities, the provision of services for attracting and retai… Show more
“…However, cities respond differently to migration and their changing place identities. Some cities (such as Barcelona, New York, London or Leicester) have re-imagined themselves as happy superdiverse cities, defining migration and diversity as an asset that strengthens their economy and global positioning (Glick Schiller & Çağlar, 2009;Hassen & Giovanardi, 2018). They use their 'superdiverse' features to create images of the city as being inclusive and therefore invest in the development of a city identity that transcends national, faith and ethnic boundaries (see Foner, Rath, Duyvendak, &…”
How do superdiverse cities re-imagine themselves in response to migration-related diversity? Based on a double case study on the branding strategies of two superdiverse Dutch cities, Amsterdam and Rotterdam, this paper shows that although diversity is part of the brand identity in both cities, it is not used prominently in urban planning or brand communications. Migration-related diversity is redefined strategically (as 'cosmopolitan' and 'international') for two reasons: (1) to turn it into an asset that enhances the brand, and (2) to align the brand with existing policies and political discourses on migration and accommodate political pressures. City marketers have depoliticized place branding. Marketing logic pushed migration-related diversity to the background, because according to the city marketers diversity does not help a city to stand out. There is limited interaction between spatial planners and city marketers, and marketers use spatial planning selectively in place branding.
“…However, cities respond differently to migration and their changing place identities. Some cities (such as Barcelona, New York, London or Leicester) have re-imagined themselves as happy superdiverse cities, defining migration and diversity as an asset that strengthens their economy and global positioning (Glick Schiller & Çağlar, 2009;Hassen & Giovanardi, 2018). They use their 'superdiverse' features to create images of the city as being inclusive and therefore invest in the development of a city identity that transcends national, faith and ethnic boundaries (see Foner, Rath, Duyvendak, &…”
How do superdiverse cities re-imagine themselves in response to migration-related diversity? Based on a double case study on the branding strategies of two superdiverse Dutch cities, Amsterdam and Rotterdam, this paper shows that although diversity is part of the brand identity in both cities, it is not used prominently in urban planning or brand communications. Migration-related diversity is redefined strategically (as 'cosmopolitan' and 'international') for two reasons: (1) to turn it into an asset that enhances the brand, and (2) to align the brand with existing policies and political discourses on migration and accommodate political pressures. City marketers have depoliticized place branding. Marketing logic pushed migration-related diversity to the background, because according to the city marketers diversity does not help a city to stand out. There is limited interaction between spatial planners and city marketers, and marketers use spatial planning selectively in place branding.
“…Studies on city branding have emerged from a plethora of the associated disciplines, and scholars have drawn meaningful parallels between place branding and the branding of products and services (Parkerson & Saunders, 2005), tourism management (Dinnie, 2011), urban regeneration (Kokosalakis et al, 2006;Tallon, 2013), urban planning (Van Assche & Costaglioli, 2012), place marketing (Dinnie et al, 2010;Gertner, 2011), urban governance and place management (Ye & Björner, 2018), economic (Vanolo, 2015), urban policy and governance (Lucarelli & Olof Berg, 2011), sustainable development (Grubor & Milovanov, 2017), culture (Hassen & Giovanardi, 2018) and city identity (Riza, Doratli, & Fasli, 2012;Ruzzier & De Chernatony, 2013;Mindrut, Manolica, & Roman, 2015).…”
Despite the increasing knowledge about city branding and city identity, there is a fundamental gap in the understanding of city branding among professionals with respect to the relations between Quality of Life (QOL), Economic Improvement Districts (EIDs) and Lighting Branding (LB). This exploratory study is aimed to address this knowledge gap through in-depth interviews with 41 professionals. The results of the study suggest that the strategic potential of LB has positive effects on city nocturnal identity, QOL, and EIDs. In this study, these factors were analysed using ten types of different buildings separately. The findings of the study reveal that attention to the lighting of traditional and old buildings, recreational facilities, commercial buildings, and parks has the greatest effect on city identity. The findings of this research can be applied in planning an urban lighting master plan. The results emphasize the role of LB, lighting architecture, and nocturnal city identity in sustainable development as a determining factor in policy making.
“…As literature has shown, fostering social cohesion and inclusive community building based on culture and identity are sometimes secondary objects of branding policies (Phan & Luk ; Hassen & Giovanardi ). In stressing inclusiveness, the representative takes on tolerance as a common branding tool, which markets certain kinds of diversity as an attitude to a cosmopolitan clientele:Because we've moved as a city from accepting everyone to complete integration and not even thinking where people come from or whether they are gay, straight, or trans, (…) it is kind of post‐diverse (…).…”
Section: Introducing Toronto's Positioning Towards Diversitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As literature has shown, fostering social cohesion and inclusive community building based on culture and identity are sometimes secondary objects of branding policies (Phan & Luk 2008;Hassen & Giovanardi 2018). In stressing inclusiveness, the representative takes on tolerance as a common branding tool, which markets certain kinds of diversity as an attitude to a cosmopolitan clientele:…”
Section: Introducing Toronto's Positioning Towards Diversitymentioning
Under the umbrella of Toronto's city motto, ‘Diversity our Strength’, ethnically labelled Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) have become the object of branding strategies. While these branding processes generate tourist places and multicultural neighbourhoods for the creative and cosmopolitan, they challenge social cohesion. Branding often leads to urban revitalisation and thus causes the displacement of diverse communities and migrant enterprises through rising rents. Furthermore, ethnic place‐making and branding activity can create local conflicts around identity and urban images in which migrant agency plays a central role. This paper compares two ethnically‐branded BIAs in a political‐economy perspective to show that marketability between ethnic groups varies. It provides systematic analysis of urban policies towards the branding of migrant entrepreneurial neighbourhoods in Toronto. It further shows how heterogeneous power structures influence ethnic entrepreneurial neighbourhoods.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
