Constructing supranational regions and identities through branding:  Thick and thin region-building in the Barents and Ireland–Wales

Abstract

This paper discusses the current tendency of institutionalizing supranational regions and building their identities in planning. The focus is on the interplay of regional identities and branding, for regional identity and image are understood as intertwined both conceptually and in the everyday practices of region-building. Research on the Barents and Ireland–Wales supranational regions is discussed by making an analytical distinction between thick and thin region-building, emphasizing that regional identity, as an aspect of thin region-building, has a strong instrumental element and is assumed to cause positive development across borders. It is argued that as a result of the emphasis on competitiveness, marketing-oriented promotional representations are now becoming emphasized in region-building. The advocates of region-building did not emphasize thick and/or cultural identity, but they were aware that it, too, is part of European regional policy and that they should react accordingly by promoting it.

Real Geographies, Real Economies and Soft Spatial Imaginaries: Creating a ‘More than Manchester’ Region

“…In some cases, arguments and debates that underlay previous region‐building efforts continued to resonate. Patterns of identity, loyalty and belonging among the actors that developed spatial imaginaries proved surprisingly durable given the turbulent policy changes that had been experienced (Zimmerbauer, ). As the Atlantic Gateway Parklands example showed, earlier imaginaries can outlast the policy and governance ‘innovations’ they initially served.…”

“…Yet simply achieving a degree of resonance in the mindset of policymakers does not guarantee that a particular soft space imaginary will have widespread support or the capacity to withstand the challenge of counter‐hegemonic claims from other soft spaces or territorial units (see Olsen, ). For a soft space imaginary to build momentum, advocates need to define its scope and develop a clear and convincing logic to support its existence (Zimmerbauer, ). In some cases the logic of the imaginary might reflect a particular economic, political, social, cultural or environmental concern.…”

Supranational identities in planning

“…As mentioned, it is connected to mapping and delineating practices, which are typically connected to branding practices. Branding is one way to present the region as a cohesive spatial unit to those who allocate funding (Zimmerbauer 2016). It is advantageous to illustrate the region as a bounded space with a distinctive identity in order to secure the continuity of both region and regional (planning) institutions.…”

“…The Barents Region is unique for its location in what was once a potential scene of military conflict between east and west. The high east-west border originates from the pre-Soviet era, and is still highly visible (Zimmerbauer 2016). Differences between the Nordic countries and northwest Russia exist in many spheres of life, as over centuries the Nordic people have merged together culturally, politically and economically, and Russia has followed its own path in history (Elenius 2015).…”

“…This has increased the number of small-scale, bilateral and locally funded initiatives, and brought in many new actors, such as chambers of commerce, consulting enterprises and other trade organizations. These operate either without the involvement of formal administrative organizations or, more typically, closely linked to regional administrative bodies (Zimmerbauer 2016). Geoeconomization is by no means unique to Barents but can be identified in Cascadia and in many other cross-borders regions as well.…”