Transformative city branding for policy change: The case of Seoul’s participatory branding

Abstract

City branding has been widely adopted by entrepreneurial local governments to strengthen city identities and to attract global attention amid intensified intercity competition. Asian global cities, in particular, have competitively branded themselves to signal that they belong to the group of advanced global cities. This paper illustrates the transformative role of city branding in the making of a global city’s local identity, which has been hitherto underexplored in the literature. Specifically, it examines Seoul’s branding exercises, focusing on its unconventional projects that reflect the city’s recent efforts to become a “human-centered,” progressive city. We suggest adding a “transformative-enhancing” dimension to the existing “external–internal” city-branding framework, and argue that Seoul’s transformative city branding is, in fact, communicating the mayor’s new signature policies with citizens. When combined with a strong mayor’s efforts to cater to changing societal pressures, city branding is no longer solely a neoliberal marketing exercise, but a political project of policy change.

Comparing city image and brand identity in polycentric regions using network analysis

“…However, place branding and polycentric development are strongly interlinked, especially when it comes to governance approaches. This is the case since place branding is in fact both a strategy and a communicative policy instrument to achieve long-term policy goals (Joo and Seo 2017) in a polycentric geographic context where positioning choices of cities and their quest for uniqueness and complementarity directly affect those of their neighbours and peers (Boisen 2015). In polycentric regions, coordination efforts and effective regional governance are crucial (ESPON 2005) and have a positive effect on the performance of the region (Meijers et al 2017).…”

City Branding and the Link to Urban Planning: Theories, Practices, and Challenges

“…Acknowledging that slogans, logos, and top-down branding campaigns do not deliver the expected outcomes, city branding practice has turned to public participation and urban planning to craft durable and “authentic” place brand strategies. City branding scholarship is beginning to recognize social inequity and exclusion as manifested in mainstream place branding practices, calling for participatory approaches as a viable remedy (see, e.g., Kavaratzis and Kalandides 2015; Jernsand and Kraff 2017; Joo and Seo 2018). These welcome contributions celebrate the notion of social inclusion (Eisenschitz 2017), embody sufficient measures to prioritize civic participation (Kavaratzis and Kalandides 2015), and accommodate the communities’ aspirations and their diverse interests (Jernsand and Kraff 2017).…”

“…Another example is Seoul’s new policy paradigm aiming to make the city a global Asian hub with the potential to become one of the world’s top global cities. Joo and Seo (2018) base their analysis on Seoul to make a case for what they claim to be participatory branding. Their examination demonstrates that Seoul’s government efforts, unlike orthodox, top-down city branding approaches, were informed strongly by crowd-culture and democratic conscience, recognizing the plurality of voices, the reality of the city, and the centrality of local communities.…”

Transformative city branding and the evolution of the entrepreneurial city: The case of ‘Brand New Helsinki’

“…Researchers have widely discussed city branding as a differentiation strategy that fosters ‘urban competitiveness under the neoliberal vision of entrepreneurialism’ (Joo and Seo, 2018: 242). From this perspective, city branding is closely tied to the emergence of what Harvey (1989) has famously termed the ‘entrepreneurial city’.…”