Executive summary of “Toponyms as carriers of heritage: implications for place branding”

Citation

(2015), "Executive summary of “Toponyms as carriers of heritage: implications for place branding”", Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 24 No. 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-05-2015-850

Executive summary of “Toponyms as carriers of heritage: implications for place branding”

Article Type: Executive summary and implications for managers and executives From: Journal of Product & Brand Management, Volume 24, Issue 3

This summary has been provided to allow managers and executives a rapid appreciation of the content of the article. Those with a particular interest in the topic covered may then read the article in toto to take advantage of the more comprehensive description of the research undertaken and its results to get the full benefit of the material present.

Branding of products and services has long been acknowledged as a source of competitive advantage by the marketing fraternity. Interest in adopting a similar approach to promoting places has gathered momentum in recent years. However, the complexities inherent in place branding means that conventional frameworks will be of limited assistance in this context. Place branding needs to account for a multitude of stakeholders and organizations and the diversity of target audiences. Having only limited control of the brand adds to the challenge.

Such realization has increased the focus on heritage as a core element of place branding. Heritage’s association with the past, the present and the future illustrates its considerable role in helping to differentiate places and create identities for people and communities within them. Heritage is transferred between generations through language, socio-cultural practices and physical products.

Researchers additionally argue that place names or “toponyms” also play a part in conveying heritage because of the identity they transmit at both individual and social levels. That many such names originate centuries ago is seen as proof of their worth in terms of providing stability and continuity. It is furthermore noted that toponyms and other symbols help develop a collective identity and communicate the distinctiveness of the place to outsiders.

A name functions as a semiotic symbol which connects to its referent through “arbitrary or conventional” means. Names are defined as “mono-referential” in that they help differentiate the object or place from others in their category. Correlation exists between the length of history attached to a name and its depth of meaningfulness. Most toponyms were descriptive in that they expressed some relevant information about the place at that time. It is argued that this enables later generations to perceive a name’s historical and cultural elements, albeit often subconsciously. It can thus be posited that names represent what has been termed the “collective memory” of a specific place and the provision of a unique identity and “social belonging” of those born there.

According to one view, people becomes attached to toponyms to a degree that it is the name rather than the place itself that provides the strongest link to the place’s history. Others compare the impact of names to country-of-origin effects. Scope for names to elicit either favorable or unfavorable images and associations provides support for such beliefs. Storytelling involving a narrative which incorporates such as the people, products, myths and heritage associated with the place can help with place branding objectives. Celebrated individuals are highly important in this respect, particularly those who boast lengthy historical relevance.

Two purposes are essentially served by a name. It functions as a linguistic reference to the physical world and it also reflects the variety of “cognitive meanings” associated with the place in question. These meanings are subjective and determined by each individual resident’s “knowledge, experiences, and emotions” based on the strength of their connection to the place.

Hakala et al. note the likelihood of emotions being stirred in the wake of any decision to alter a place name. Other scholars have compared such moves with changing the identity of an iconic consumer brand. The aim of the present study is to therefore explore the response to a potential name change among residents in various towns in South Western Finland.

The study proceeds on the basis that heritage is composed of four dimensions:

1. Place history, which is represented by such as old buildings and eminent people.

2. Place essence: This is captured through the likes of “signature buildings and design”, characteristic events, the association of national celebrities with the place, opportunities for different recreational activities and the presence of distinctive businesses.

3. Place symbols among which are names, signs, slogans, flags and coats of arms, all of which are a fundamental part of a place’s heritage.

4. Residential permanence: The rationale here is that stability of the residential base strengthens brand heritage as feelings about a place will be more powerful among those who have lived there longest.

Survey questionnaires were sent to randomly selected residents in 28 various-sized municipalities across the region and 1,380 responses were obtained. Females accounted for 57.5 per cent of the subjects, who were aged between 18 and 79. Respondents had on average been living in their municipality for 25.25 years. Extensive history and importance of the established church justified the choice of study locale. Government reforms have led to a reduction in the number of municipalities and this decrease is set to accelerate. As a consequence of the ensuing consolidation, some municipal names will disappear to be replaced by newly created alternatives. A few will be combined with other existing names. The authors point out that authorities seem unconcerned about the likely impact on place brands.

Analysis of key statements in the questionnaire revealed participants believe that:

• the importance of a place’s name increases the longer he or she has lived there;

• name encapsulates the place’s history and heritage;

• name plays a key role in building both personal and collective identities of residents; and

• sense of personal and collective identity is stronger among farmers due to their ancestral links to the municipality.

In addition, partial support was found for the belief that personal and collective identity would be greater in places where population size is small. Some indication was likewise evident that the sense of personal and collective identity increases as place heritage becomes stronger.

That names are core to any brand has been pointed out in past research, as has their important function in the complexity that is place branding. The current study has confirmed the significance residents attach to place names, and Hakala et al. purport that place branding might be enhanced by involving them in relevant decision-making. Authorities should be prepared to consider the views of residents and interact more closely with them. Surveys are suggested as being an ideal way to commence.

Names capture the essence of a place and initiating change risks harmful effects on a place brand that has invariably taken considerable time to build. Removing the identity can result in discord between brand and place instead of the cohesion which is essential. It is therefore suggested that authorities are cautious about any plans for municipality consolidation, particular where toponyms are concerned.

Research in future might explore other regions and nations and consider the possible impact of change on local companies that include the place name as part of their business identity.

To read the full article enter 10.1108/JPBM-05-2014-0612 into your search engine.

(A précis of the article “Toponyms as carriers of heritage: implications for place branding”. Supplied by Marketing Consultants for Emerald.)