Download Examining the Role of Place Marketing in the Regeneration of UK

Examining the Role of Place Marketing in the Regeneration of UK Cities from a Place
Stakeholders' Perspective
Introduction
Place marketing has been used as a means for places to prevail over other places for many
centuries (Kavaratzis & Ashworth, 2008), and has gained increasing importance in recent
years due to the increasing competition among places, cities, regions and nations around the
world (Baker & Cameron, 2008). Place marketing is now recognised as an important
instrument in regional and urban development, place positioning, public and international
relations, and in continued infrastructural and economic growth (Maheshwari et al., 2011). A
variety of marketing and management tools are widely used by practitioners who are engaged
in improving the competitive image of a place (Niedomysl & Jonasson, 2012). Moreover, the
emergence of “place branding” as an associated field (Hankinson, 2001, 2004; Caldwell &
Freire, 2004; Kavaratzis, 2004; Hanna & Rowley, 2008) introduced the concepts of brand
management and corporate branding, thus offering practitioners and researchers the
opportunity to add more “arrows in the quiver” when implementing strategies related to
places.
However, place marketing is seen as a fairly weak field of research by academics, due to lack
of empirical or evidence-based research (Hall & Hubbard, 1996; Hall, 2001; Bradley et al.,
2002; Lucarelli & Berg, 2011; Gertner, 2011; Niedomysl & Jonasson, 2012). In fact, place
marketing research has more similarities to consultancy, mainly because it is practitioner-led
(Dinnie, 2004). Many authors (e.g. Berglund & Olsson, 2010; Gertner, 2011; Kavaratzis &
Hatch, 2013; Lucarelli & Brorström, 2013) have stressed the need for better theories and
typologies in the field, that will help place marketing move from a descriptive to a normative
stage of research (Gertner, 2011). As the field of place marketing is predominantly
practitioner-focused, there is a dire need to address the gap between research and practice and
develop a common language, which will benefit both parties and will lead the field towards
maturity (Kalandides & Kavaratzis, 2009; Gertner, 2011).
Aim of the study
This study aims to examine which practices and actions that are coined as "place marketing"
ones have the potential to contribute to the development of a place marketing theory that will
move the field towards a holistic approach, which puts a place's internal and external
stakeholders in the forefront. The current landscape of planning in the UK is already stressing
the importance of adding communities and other place stakeholders "in the mix" and a
renewed emphasis on citizen action, participation and engagement in the process is already
apparent in some form of community-led planning in many places (Murray & Parker, 2012).
The trends of community and stakeholder involvement are perfectly aligned with the latest
advancements in branding and marketing theory(e.g. brand co-creation, brand ownership,
service-dominant logic, participatory marketing & branding). Therefore, an examination of
how these stakeholders understand and engage in actions relevant to them and the place that
they "consume" or "own", coupled with cultural and geographical concepts such as place
identity, are promising to develop place marketing theory and contribute to better
conceptualisations of "place" and "marketing" within the field (Vargo & Lusch, 2004, 2008;
Ind & Bjerke, 2007; Govers & Go, 2009; Warnaby, 2009; Aitken & Campelo, 2011; Skinner,
2011; Zenker & Seigis, 2012; Kavaratzis & Hatch, 2013).
Literature Review
Place marketing encompasses a variety of marketing activities, instruments, and strategies
that can be applied to geographic locations and is about developing a place that fits the needs
and wants of its place stakeholders (citizens, visitors, tourists, investors) (Eshuis et al., 2013).
The process can be much more effective, when place stakeholders can become active
participants of it and can cooperate in order to create conditions for sustainable development
(van den Berg & Braun, 1999). Braun (2008) stressed the need for responsiveness in
marketing activities in his definition of place marketing:
"...the coordinated use of marketing tools supported by a shared customer-oriented
philosophy, for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging urban offerings that
have value for the place's customers and the place's community at large" (Braun, 2008; pg.
43)
This definition is almost identical with the latest definition of marketing (AMA, 2007) and
follows the trend of understanding place marketing as a social practice (Svensson, 2007),
which can fulfil place stakeholders’ demands in a way that will contribute to the overall longterm prosperity and sustainability of that particular place (Kotler et al., 1999). The overall
process needs to be treated as a holistic one, because of the range of place stakeholders
involved in it and the multiple characteristics and spatial elements of places (Boisen et al.,
2011).
Elements of place marketing, the "place" in place marketing & stakeholders' role
Place marketing needs to assist in the place's development, planning and cooperating
attempts, and deliver propositions that will benefit society, without neglecting the persuasive
role of marketing, in the form of value propositions and place promotions (Eshuis et al., 2013;
Kalandides, 2013). From the literature, the study has already identified six elements that are
part of a holistic place marketing effort: coordinating practices; planning practices; place
promotion practices; developmental practices; service marketing practices; and sustainable
practices (see Appendix 1 for a brief description).
However, formulation and successful implementation of all these elements in a place's
marketing effort is almost impossible due to the complexities of places and the different
ways/contexts that each place is used (Creswell, 2004; Warnaby & Medway, 2013). People
are not only attached to the natural, physical or built environment of a place, but they are also
influenced and interpret a place based on cultural, temporal, genetic, and social factors
(Hauge, 2007). Therefore, the relationship between people and the environment is determined
as dynamic and interactive, and includes the social, cultural and psychological meanings of a
place (Franck, 1984). In this context, it is apt to think “places” as social constructions, with
unique identities, made up of a selection of spatial elements by humans (Boisen et al., 2011).
This view blends “the place of stones” (physical) and “the place of words” (symbolic)
(Therkelsen et al., 2010), and fits a holistic place marketing framework for theory and
practice, because it regards communication and physical product development as two
mutually supporting processes.
As mentioned above, the introduction of S-D logic places the concept of co-creation, and the
need to involve stakeholders as co-creators of value, in the heart of every place marketing
initiative (Warnaby, 2009; Kavaratzis, 2012). A multitude of stakeholders must cooperate and
build strategic networks that will develop ideas and cooperate with each other in order to
create conditions for sustainable development (Kotler et al., 1999; van den Berg & Braun,
1999). Hankinson (2004) illustrated that the core of the place brand is created through
relational networks of stakeholder groups, whereas Baker (2007) criticises city marketing and
branding initiatives that do not reach out to a wide range of stakeholders, arguing that it is the
conflicting voices of different stakeholder groups that can contribute to the development of
places and place brands through dialogical processes. Houghton and Stevens (2011) argue
that the value of engaging stakeholders lies in the fact that it is difficult and challenging, but
can stimulate new perspectives and ideas for places, further supporting Baker’s view. Place
stakeholders, particularly a place’s residents, need to be involved in place marketing
processes, as they have specific roles and rights from the place they live in, as well as distinct
responsibilities (Aitken & Campelo, 2011). Residents have also multiple roles, as they can be
citizens, business owners, visitors, ambassadors etc. at the same time (Braun et al., 2013),
which helps them to form a well-rounded image and opinion about the place. In addition, their
capability to form unique relationships with each other and with the place establishes them as
“co-creators” and “co-owners” of the place, thus constituting their presence in a constant
“multilogue” for making a place better imperative (Kavaratzis & Hatch, 2013).
The ugly truth?
Recent place marketing and place branding literature urges the need for constant interactions
between all stakeholder groups over the direction of a place's marketing efforts (Ind & Bjerke,
2007; Kavaratzis, 2012) and stresses the multifaceted phenomenon of "place" (Warnaby,
2009). However, place marketing is rarely implemented in a way that meets the suggestions
above. Place-wise, practitioners look past the multi-layered notion of spatial identities, and
ignore the relations, flows and interconnections within and between places (Kalandides,
2011). What remains marketed is a static, large administrative entity (city, region/district, and
even country), with a perceived homogenous place image that is irrelevant to place
stakeholders and often alienates them.
Furthermore, place marketing initiatives that are contributing to a place's "regeneration phase"
must comply with statutory obligations and guidance from the UK government which call for
"community participation", "involving the community" and "holistic partnership" throughout
the attempt to "economically transform areas and create sustainable places where people want
to live and can work and businesses want to invest" (CLG, 2009; pg.1; Greig et al., 2010).
However, various critics have stressed that participation and partnership in place-making and
regeneration schemes can have a capacity for tyrannical decision-making (Jones, 2003). As
place marketing aims to contribute to the development of a place/town/city/region, it can be
argued that it falls to the same "trap", as the vast majority of place marketing initiatives seem
to neglect place stakeholders' opinions, by following top-down, mechanistic methodologies in
order to develop place brands and place promotion strategies (Kalandides & Kavaratzis, 2009;
Kavaratzis, 2012). In addition, fixed commercial strategies ignore the complexities of places
and the differences in local conditions from place to place, ignores local people's role as
active participants in the place marketing effort, and form sellable, meaningless to most
audiences, fixed identities (Aitken & Campelo, 2011; Kalandides, 2011; Kavaratzis & Hatch,
2013). The outcome of these strategies might be beneficial for the place at first, but it can also
lead to alienation and disengagement of a place's stakeholders.
Study Objectives
From the literature review, it is evident that the field of place marketing is still blurry and has
certain research gaps. These stem from the lack of suitable place marketing typologies, as
well as from the uncertainty of defining the "place" in place marketing, and the role of
stakeholders in the process. The following research questions are addressing those issues.
1.
2.
3.
4.
How is place marketing practiced during a place's "regeneration phase"?
Are place stakeholders an integral part of the strategic process of place marketing?
How place marketing affects the “consumption" of place for its stakeholders?
What place marketing means for different place’s stakeholders?
Two research aims have already been identified. These are:
1. To identify the potential involvement and significance of place marketing in place
regeneration from a place stakeholder’s perspective.
2. To make a contribution to place marketing theory by making new conceptualisations
of "place" and "marketing" within the field
Finally, the following research objectives highlight the study's attempt to shed light to this
complex field.
1. To examine how place marketing initiatives are practised in places under a
regeneration phase in the UK
2. To examine stakeholders’ roles during these strategic processes and their influence on
these
3. To identify what “place marketing” means for each stakeholder group involved
4. To develop a place marketing theory/framework relevant for places under a
regeneration phase from a place stakeholders' perspective
5. To offer new theoretical and philosophical conceptualisations of "place" and
"marketing" in the "Place Marketing" field
Research Philosophy
The philosophical stance for this study stems from a mixed-paradigm approach, which
combines a pragmatic view of the "place" and a social constructionist view of "marketing".
The proposed pragmatic relationship between people and places derives from the transactional
view of settings (Dewey & Bentley, 1949; Stokols & Shumaker, 1981), which focuses on the
interface between people and environments, and describes places and people as a unit
working together, highlighting the reciprocal influence between them (Hauge, 2007). In
Dewey's (1958) view, this transaction between people and place involves a certain stability
that is not stagnation but is rhythmic and developing. In social constructionism, social
relations between people are intersubjective, and the approach sees the social world and its
meaning as co-constructed or co-created (Ferguson, 2002; Hines & Quinn, 2005). A social
constructionist approach in place marketing can lead to a theory or framework, which entails
the notions of value co-creation between place stakeholders and place managers, and
coordination processes which enable exchange and resource integration (Löbler, 2011).
Research Approach & Research Design
A pragmatic, mixed-methods approach can place emphasis on shared meanings and joint
action between elements involved in the study, and can allow sequential or simultaneous data
collection, which will offer flexibility towards answering the study's research questions
(Morgan, 2007; Saunders et al., 2009). The suggested approach can link the two main fields
in place marketing (geography and marketing), and make them work together by synthesising
a view of "place" and a view of "marketing", which can offer insights about theoretical and
practical implications.
Grounded Theory as a Strategy and Method for Research
Grounded theory is ideal for exploring integral social relationships and the behaviour of
groups when there has been little exploration of the contextual factors that affect individual’s
lives (Crooks, 2001). A "theoretical sensitivity", which stems from the researcher's
background and experience in the field can aid the interpretation of data collected during the
research process (Glaser, 1978; Goulding, 1999). Glaser maintains that theory simply
“emerges” from the actual data (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007), and refutes Strauss and Corbin's
(2008) formulaic and forceful interpretation of data. Therefore, Glaser's open approach is
considered more appropriate for this study as it can allow the discovery of new concepts and
hypotheses regarding place marketing and place regeneration (Robson, 2011). Common
approaches to place marketing research (e.g. single case studies, narratives, conceptual
papers) either failed or vaguely achieved to identify theories and concepts, which contributed
to the novelty and under-development of the field. Grounded theory has the potential to lead
to the development of a substantial theory for place marketing based on place stakeholders'
roles, influences and experiences during place marketing initiatives.
Research Design
The research design for this study is following the principles of grounded theory, which
advocate the use of the constant comparative method for the analysis of data and the continual
use of theoretical sampling for data delimitation and saturation (Glaser, 1978). In addition, the
"all is data" rule of grounded theory allows the researcher to use a variety of data collection
techniques.
Data Collection Methods & Data Analysis Procedures
A sequential mixed-methods approach will be implemented for the study. The researcher will
aim to collect data from up to 5 cities throughout the UK that are part of a national research
project that he is a part of. Observations are considered essential for the study of place
marketing, as it is a direct and appropriate way for carrying out research in the real world
(Flick, 2006). At first, structured observations will take place in natural settings or events
(public events, transition town events, grassroots events, parks, museums, local markets, etc.),
with the aim to quantify place stakeholders' behaviours and reveal initial concepts. Parallel to
that, participant observation in organisations that will allow access (e.g. town centre
initiatives, transition town movements) will further develop concepts and categories. Selfmemos and audio data will be used for the documentation of data as the researcher plans to
have an active role in these processes. Once key place stakeholders will be identified from the
previous phases, the researcher is planning to conduct in-depth interviews with them. The
conversational approach of in-depth interviews is deemed appropriate for this study, as it may
eliminate biased opinions rooted in classic marketing activities that occur to places (e.g.
promotion, branding, selling, tourism).
Contribution
The study has the potential to make important contributions to knowledge and in the field; the
study aims to help towards the understanding of how place marketing works and of its
importance for place regeneration/renewal. The philosophical position discussed above can
also contribute to an understanding of "place" and "marketing", by situating and placing place
boundaries relevant to a place's situation and by examining in detail the dialogical processes
between place stakeholders. The new theoretical conceptualisations of "place" and
"marketing" within the place marketing field can also be supplemented by a framework for
theory and practice, which can be relevant to places under a regeneration phase, thus
successfully linking theory and practice of place marketing.
References
Aitken, R. & Campelo, A. (2011). The Four Rs of Place Branding. Journal of Marketing
Management, 27, 913-933.
American Marketing Association (2007). Definition of Marketing. [ONLINE]. Retrieved
from: http://www.marketingpower.com/AboutAMA/Pages/DefinitionofMarketing.aspx.
Ardley, B. (2011). Marketing Theory and Critical Phenomenology: Exploring the Human
Side of Management Practice. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 29,628 - 642.
Baker, B. (2007). Destination Branding for Small Cities: The Essentials for Successful Place
Branding, Creative Leap Books: Portland.
Baker, M. & Cameron, E. (2008). Critical Success Factors in Destination Marketing. Journal
of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8, 79-97.
Begg, I. (2002). ‘Investability’: The Key to Competitive Regions and Cities. Journal of
Regional Studies, 36 ,187-200 .
Berglund, E. & Olsson, K. (2010). Rethinking Place Marketing – A Literature Review. Paper
presented at the 50th ERSA Congress. Jönköping, Sweden, 19th – 23rd August.
Boisen, M., Terlouw, K. & van Gorp, B. (2011). The Selective Nature of Place Branding and
the Layering of Spatial Identities. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4, 135147.
Bradley, A., Hall, T. & Harrison, M. (2002). Selling Cities: Promoting New Images for
Meetings Tourism. Cities, 19, 61-70.
Braun, E. (2008). City Marketing: Towards an Integrated Approach. PhD Dissertation,
Erasmus University Rotterdam .
Braun, E., Kavaratzis, M. & Zenker, S. (2013). My City – My Brand: The Different Roles of
Residents in Place Branding. Journal of Place Management and Development, 6, 18 – 28.
Bryant, A. & Charmaz, K. (2007). Grounded Theory Research: Methods And Practices. In A.
Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory, (pp. 1-28). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Caldwell, N. & Freire, J. (2004). The Differences Between Branding a Country, a Region and
a City: Applying the Brand Box Model. The Journal of Brand Management, 12,50-61.
Campbell, S. (1996). Green Cities, Growing Cities, Just Cities? Urban Planning and the
Contradictions of Sustainable Development. Journal of the American Planning Association,
62, 296-312.
CLG (2009). Communities and Local Government: Transforming Places Changing Lives
Taking Forward the Regeneration Framework. Department of Communities and Local
Government. London.
Cresswell, T. (2004). Place: A Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Crotty, M. (2007). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the
Research Process. London: Sage.
Dewey, J. & Bentley, A.F. (1949). Knowing and the Known. Beacon: Boston.
Dewey, J. (1958). Experience and Nature. Dover: New York. (originally published in 1929).
Dinnie, K. (2004). Place Branding: Overview of an Emerging Literature. Place Branding and
Public Diplomacy1, 106-110.
Eshuis, J., Braun, E. & Klijn E.H. (2013). Place Marketing as Governance Strategy: An
Assessment of Obstacles in Place Marketing and Their Effects on Attracting Target Groups.
Public Administration Review, 73, 507-516.
Ferguson, P. (2002). After Marketing and Social Construction. Ephemera: Critical Dialogues
on Organization, 2, 258–262.
Gergen, K.J. (1999). An Invitation to Social Construction. Sage: London.
Gertner, D. (2011). A (tentative) Meta-Analysis of the ‘Place Marketing’ and ‘Place
Branding’ Literature. Journal of Brand Management, 19, 112-131.
Gibb, K., Lever, W., & Kasparova, D. (2001). The Future of UK Cities: Measurement and
Interpretation. A Report to the RICS Research Foundation, Department of Urban Studies,
University of Glasgow, Scotland.
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded
Theory. Sociology Press: Mill Valley, CA.
Goulding, C. (1999). Grounded Theory: Some Reflections On Paradigm, Procedures And
Misconceptions. Working Paper Series, June, University of Wolverhampton.
Govers, R. & Go, F. (2009). Place Branding: Virtual and Physical Identities, Glocal,
Imagined and Experienced. Palgrave-MacMillan: Basingstoke, UK.
Greig, A., El-Haram, M. & Horner, M. (2010). Using Deprivation Indices in Regeneration:
Does the Response Match the Diagnosis? Cities, 27, 476–482.
Hall, T. & Hubbard, P. (1996). The Entrepreneurial City: New Urban Politics. New Urban.
Hall, T. (2001). Urban Geography. Routledge: London.
Hankinson, G. (2001). Location Branding: A Study of the Branding Practices of 12 English
Cities.The Journal of Brand Management, 9, 127-142.
Hankinson, G. (2004). Relational Network Brands: Towards a Conceptual Model of Place
Brands. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 2, 109-121.
Hanna, S. & Rowley, J. (2008). An Analysis of Terminology Use in Place Branding. Place
Branding and Public Diplomacy,4,61-75.
Hauge, A.L. (2007). Identity and Place: A Critical Comparison of Three Identity Theories.
Architectural Science Review, 50, 44-51.
Hines, T. & Quinn, L. (2005). Socially Constructed Realities and the Hidden Face of Market
Segmentation. Journal of Marketing Management , 21, 529–543.
Houghton, J.P. & Stevens, A. (2011). City Branding And Stakeholder Engagement. In Dinnie,
K. (Ed.),City Branding: Theory and Cases (pp.45-53). Palgrave-Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Ind, N.& Bjerke, R. (2007). Branding Governance: A Participatory Approach to the Brand
Building Process. Wiley: London.
Jones, P.S. (2003) Urban Regeneration's Poisoned Chalice: Is There an Impasse in
(Community) Participation-based Policy. Urban Studies, 40, 581+.
Kalandides, A. & Kavaratzis, M. (2009). From Place Marketing to Place Branding – and
Back: A Need for Re-evaluation. Journal of Place Management and Development, 2, 5-7.
Kalandides, A. (2011). The Problem with Spatial Identity: Revisiting the ‘Sense of Place’.
Journal of Place Management and Development, 4, 28–39.
Kalandides, A. (2013). The Business Of Place: Critical, Practical And Pragmatic Perspectives.
Journal of Place Management and Development, 6.
Kavaratzis, M. & Ashworth, G. (2008). Place Marketing: How Did we Get There and Where
are we Going?. Journal of Place Management and Development, 1, 150-165.
Kavaratzis, M. & Hatch, M.J. (2013). The Dynamics of Place Brands: An Identity-based
Approach to Place Branding Theory. Marketing Theory, 13, 69-86.
Kavaratzis, M. (2004). From City Marketing to City Branding: Towards a Theoretical
Framework for Developing City Brands. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 1, 58-73.
Kavaratzis, M. (2012). From ‘Necessary Evil’ To Necessity: Stakeholders' Involvement In
Place Branding. Journal of Place Management and Development, 5, 7-19.
Kotler, P., Asplund, C., Rein, I. & Haider, D.H. (1999). Marketing Places Europe. Financial
Times: Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., Haider, D. H. & Rein, I. (1993). Marketing Places: Attracting Investment,
Industry, and Tourism to Cities, States, and Nations. The Free Press: New York.
Löbler, H. (2011). Position And Potential Of Service-Dominant Logic - Evaluated In An
‘Ism’ Frame For Further Development. Marketing Theory, 11, 51-73.
Lucarelli, A. & Brorström, S. (2013.) Problematising Place Branding Research: A MetaTheoretical Analysis Of The Literature. The Marketing Review, 13, 65-81.
Lucarelli, A., & Berg, P.O. (2011). City Branding: A State-Of-The-Art Review Of The
Research Domain. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4, 9-27.
Maheshwari, V., Vandewalle, I. & Bamber, D. (2011). Place Branding's Role In Sustainable
Development. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4, 198 - 213.
Morgan, D.L. (2007). Paradigms Lost and Pragmatism Regained: Methodological
Implications of Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods. Journal of Mixed Methods
Research, 1, 48-76.
Murray, C. & Parker, G. (2012). Beyond Tokenism? Community-led Planning and Rational
Choices: Findings from Participants in Local Agenda-setting at the Neighbourhood Scale in
England. Town Planning Review, 83, 1-28.
Niedomysl, T. & Jonasson, M. (2012). Towards a Theory of Place Marketing. Journal of
Place Management and Development, 5 223-230.
Rainisto, S. (2003). Success Factors of Place Marketing: A Study of Place Marketing Practice
in Northern Europe and the United States (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Helsinki University
of Technology, Institute of Strategy and International Business, Espoo.
Robson, C. (2011) Real World Research (3rd ed.). Wiley & Sons: West Sussex.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students,
(5th ed.). Pearson Education Limited: Harlow.
Skinner, H. (2011). In Search of the Genius Loci: The Essence of a Place Brand. The
Marketing Review, 11, 281-292.
Smyth, H. (1994). Marketing the City: The Role of Flagship Developments in Urban
Regeneration. E & F Spon: London.
Stokols, D. & Shumaker, S. A. (1981). People in places: A transactional view of settings, In J.
H. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition, Social Behavior and the Environment (pp. 441-488). Newark,
New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Strauss, A.L. & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). Sage: Newbury
Park, CA.
Stubbs, B., Warnaby, G. & Medway, D. (2002). Marketing at the Public/Private Sector
Interface; Town Centre Management Schemes in the South of England. Cities, 19,317-326.
Svensson, P. (2007). Producing Marketing: Towards a Social-phenomenology of Marketing
Work. Marketing Theory, 7, 271-290.
Therkelsen, A., Halkier, H. & Jensen, O. B. (2010). Branding Aalborg: Building Community
or Selling Place?. In G. Ashworth and M. Kavaratzis (eds.). Towards Effective Place Brand
Management: Branding European Cities and Regions (pp. 136–55).
Cheltenham/Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
van den Berg, L. & Braun, E. (1999). Urban Competitiveness, Marketing and the Need for
Organising Capacity. Urban Studies, 36, 987-999.
Vargo, S.L. & Lusch, R.F. (2004). Evolving to a New Service Dominant Logic for Marketing.
Journal of Marketing, 68, 1-17.
Vargo, S.L. & Lusch, R.F. (2008). Service-dominant Logic: Continuing the Evolution.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 1–10.
Warnaby, G. & Medway, D. (2013). What About the 'Place' in Place Marketing?. Marketing
Theory, 13,345-363.
Warnaby, G. (2009). Towards a Service-Dominant Place Marketing Logic. Marketing Theory,
9 , 403-423.
Zenker, S. & Martin, N. (2011). Measuring Success In Place Marketing And
Branding. Journal of Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 7, 32-41.
Zenker, S. & Seigis, A. (2012). Respect and the City: Resident Participation in Place
Marketing. Journal of Place Management and Development, 5, 20-34.
APPENDIX 1
PLACE MARKETING
ELEMENTS
DEFINITION
REFERENCES
Coordinating Practices
Activities that nurture
conditions for cooperation of
all place stakeholders and
creation of strategic networks
for sustainable development
van den Berg & Braun; 1999;
Ind & Bjerke, 2007;
Kavaratzis, 2012; Zenker &
Seigis, 2012; Kavaratzis &
Hatch, 2013
Planning Practices
Place-related activities
relevant to the regeneration
and long-term development
of a place that are formulated
via action planning and
benchmarking
Kotler et al., 1993,1999;
Stubbs et al., 2002; Rainisto,
2003
Place Promotion Practices
Branding, integrated
marketing communications
(IMC) and public relations
practices which deliver a
consistent place identity
relevant to all stakeholders
Caldwell & Freire, 2004;
Hankinson, 2004; Kavaratzis,
2004; Brayn, 2008;
Kavaratzis & Ashworth,
2008; Skinner, 2011
Developmental Practices
Place development initiatives
concerned with the delivery
of urban development and
regeneration projects
Smyth, 1994; Gibb et al.,
2001; Begg, 2002; Zenker &
Seigis, 2012;
Service Marketing Practices
The mixture of tangible
goods and intangible services
of a place of a place which
include all service
encounters between target
consumers and place actors
Hankinson, 2004; Warnaby,
2009; Berglund & Olsson,
2010
Sustainable Practices
Practices that are being
Campbell, 1996; Maheshwari
implemented with the aim to et al., 2011; Zenker &
improve the overall quality of Martin, 2011
living and prosperity of a
place, and maintain the
balance between economic
growth, social harmony,
employment, and
environmental protection