Branding Tourism: What Has Worked & What Has Not?

[Paul Barnett]

British marketing consultant Simon Anholt is creditied with establishing the idea that nations and places could be considered brands after writing a paper on the subject in 1998. It provoked a mix of positive and negative reaction and interest at the time. Since then, the subject has received a great deal more attention from many quarters; policy makers, consultants, marketers etc.

Until this debate began attempts to manage the reputation of a nation or place, in any conscious and coherent way, were rare. As a consequence, reputations evolved from planned and un-planned, controlled and un-controlled, inputs and influences: their history, geography, natural environment, industry, politics, people, cultural legacies, built environment etc; or as one commentator put it, “by a newspaper or song writer, even more so than a government agency engaging an ad agency.”

In addition to media images, which play an important role in shaping our perceptions of places and products, global travel and communication have increased our exposure to, and awareness of, places. We also receive information via many more media channels and the direct experiences of others, by word-of-mouth. Businesses have long understood that their image and reputation need to be managed, rather than being left to chance. Nations and placed started to realise that too, and developed strategies. But, how successful have these attempts to manage the reputations of nations and places been? What has worked, and what has not? And, why?