Search results

This paper aims to report on the insights from an international workshop entitled Co-creating place brands: sharing research insights and practical experiences towards more inclusive cities and regions hosted by the Erasmus University Rotterdam. The authors outline their collective reflection and the learnings for place branding theory and practice. Additionally, this paper discusses the need to build practitioner-scholar relationships in a co-creative style, to co-develop more inclusive models for co-creating place brands.

The report details key learnings of a whole-day interactive workshop featuring academic and practitioner presentations and discussions around inclusive approaches to co-creating place brands. The report is structured around key emerging themes and their associated learnings.

The workshop yielded six important learnings: 1) a key obstacle to co-creating place brands is that co-creation is often misunderstood among decision-makers; 2) all place stakeholders need to be taken seriously if co-creation is to shape a place’s identity and foster cohesion; 3) broad stakeholder inclusion in place branding can be problematic, but it is a necessary condition to the practice of place brand co-creation; 4) co-creating place brands requires going beyond marketing tools and deep into the levels of community life and place’s social and cultural construction; 5) co-creation at all stages of the branding process from conceptual development to performance measurement and sometimes unconsciously; 6) politics of place must be observed (this is crucial yet easily overlooked in co-creating place brands).

The micro-format of the workshop facilitated valuable interactions between academics and practitioners, effectively blending practical, “on the ground”-knowledge with academic ideas, concepts and models. This approach not only generated key learnings with the possibility to advance the field but also highlighted important future research directions.

This paper aims to provide conceptual clarity on the different approaches of place branding in the literature. It discusses three main approaches and provides a new definition of place brands that acknowledges the full multi-sensory experience of place brands. This paper also elaborates brand management within the three approaches.

Conceptual paper

This study identifies three co-existing approaches of place branding and provides a definition of place brands for each of them. The first approach conceptualises place brands as symbolic constructs that identify and differentiate places from others. Brand symbols such as logos and slogans are central, assuming that brand meaning resides in them. The second approach views place brands as images and associations in the minds of target groups, whereby brands reside in individuals’ minds (the cognitive). This paper aligns with a third approach that views place brands as experiential, multi-sensory constructs. Brands invite not only mental representations in people’s minds but especially also multi-sensory embodied experiences. The authors thus define place brands as marketing systems that consist of dynamic performative assemblages of symbolic, discursive, institutional and material elements that selectively invite certain multi-sensory and embodied experiences of place by stakeholders and target groups.

This paper contributes to conceptual clarity by providing an analytical framework identifying three main approaches to place branding. The authors further reflect on the implications of each approach for brand management. This paper also builds on recent literatures to provide a new and contemporary definition of place brands as multi-sensory experiences that encompasses embodiment.

Social media have become a key part of placemaking. Placemaking revolves around collaboration between multiple stakeholders, which requires ongoing two-way communication between local government and citizens. Although social media offer promising tools for local governments and public professionals in placemaking, they have not lived up to their potential. This paper aims to uncover the tensions and challenges that social media bring for public professionals at the street level in placemaking processes.

This study aims to fill this gap with a case study of area brokers engaged in online placemaking in Amsterdam. In total, 14 in-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted, focusing on area brokers’ social media practices, perceptions and challenges. The authors used an open coding strategy in the first phase of coding. In the second phase, the authors regrouped codes in thematic categories with the use of sensitizing concepts derived from the theoretical review.

The use of social media for placemaking imposes demands on area brokers from three sides: the bureaucracy, the affordances of social media and affective publics. The paper unpacks pressures area brokers are under and the (emotional) labour they carry out to align policy and bureaucratic requirements with adequate communication needed in neighbourhood affairs on social media. The tensions and the multidimensionality of what is required explain the reluctance of area brokers to exploit the potential of social media in their work.

Several studies have addressed the use of social media in placemaking, but all neglected the perspective of street-level bureaucrats who shape the placemaking process in direct contact with citizens.

City identity is a distinct form of collective identity based on the perceived uniqueness and meanings of place, rather than group category and membership. A city’s identity is constructed over time through architecture, which involves three sign systems – material, visual, and rhetorical – and multiple institutional actors to communicate the city’s distinctiveness and identity. We compare Barcelona and Boston to examine the identity and meaning created and communicated by different groups of professionals, such as architects, city planners, international guide book writers, and local cultural critics, who perform the semiotic work of ­constructing city identity.