The strange world of nation branding

Jason Dobbins from Politicsinvivo.com has written a good piece about some aspects of the nation branding industry – from his own personal perspective as a politics blogger:

The arrival of the World Cup is always a great time to remember that nationalism ain’t going anywhere. The best matches, well for someone who writes a political blog anyway, are the ones with awkward geopolitical implications. I find most people, sportswriters included, can’t escape the pull of framing World Cup matches in the context of whatever history of war and tension the two countries happen to share. I remember this gem in the Boston Globe from a Germany-Poland match during World Cup 2006:

The Germans dominated this contest, piling on the pressure in the second half as about two-thirds of the 70,000 crowd urged them on and the other third vociferously supported the Poles’ resistance.

Yes the Germans sure did dominate the Polish Resistance. At least he didn’t call the German offensive a blitzkrieg.

The difficulty countries have in trying to overcome and transcend these historical perceptions got me thinking about the concept of nation branding more generally. Nation branding is just what it sounds like: countries using corporate-style advertising techniques to define and promote a particular national identity with the aim of boosting tourism. It’s now a trillion dollar industry. We see these national branding attempts all the time. Some are getting quite creative, like the Party in Sweden’s Pantscampaign, and this bizarre ad featuring a Danish actress purporting to be looking for the father of her baby after having a one-night stand with a tourist. With the impending World Cup spotlight, South Africa is certainly giving it a go. Other countries have their work cut out for them:

Kurdistan-logo2 GoodPeople i_feel_slovenia

Slick advertising campaigns that depict your country as hip and desirable might indeed get you a few more tourists, but there are real limits to this sort of heavy-handed image crafting, mostly because we’re all very savvy consumers, and also terrible racists. Nation branding expert Simon Anholtexplains: “Views about other countries are deeply ingrained cultural prejudices which they hold from a very, very early age. I think what I think about Uganda because I’ve thought it all my life and the idea that a series of advertisements is going to change my mind about that is absolutely ludicrous.” And of course countries cannot overcome bad policies or endemic social ills just by selling a slick image. Maybe South Africa will come off well after its World Cup hosting; then again, look at this recentamazing, awful interview with the mayor of Johannesburg, and tell me how you think the branding campaign will work out.

It turns out that one of the best ways to create a lasting positive national brand is through good old cultural imperialism: you need to have a few popular, well-regarded international consumer products that are indelibly associated with your country. Think Swiss watches, Japanese electronics, German cars, Italian or French fashion, Hollywood, and other American hegemons like Nike and Apple. Even as most of the companies try to downplay or obscure their national associations in order to have truly globalized appeal, their tremendous success as international brands have a rub-off effect on the reputations of their respective countries of origin.

And it’s interesting that many corporations and countries seem to realize the mutual symbiotic advantage of having a product associated with a place and a place associated with a product. IKEA fits this maybe. And the ubiquitous Amstel Light “Dam Good Beer” ads, in which you can’t even tell what they want you to buy, the city or the beer.

There’s a great article in the Post today on how China is starting to feel its glaring dearth of global marquee name brands, both economically and in international prestige. While it assembles and stitches together all the world’s products, it has no associational brands to call its own:

Last year, China overtook Germany to become the world’s largest exporter, and this year it could surpass Japan as the world’s No. 2 economy. But as China gains international heft, its lack of global brands threatens its dream of becoming a superpower.

No big marquee brands means China is stuck doing the global grunt work in factory cities while designers and engineers overseas reap the profits. Much of Apple’s iPhone, for example, is made in China. But if a high-end version costs $750, China is lucky to hold on to $25. For a pair of Nikes, it’s four pennies on the dollar.

“We’ve lost a bucketload of money to foreigners because they have brands and we don’t,” complained Fan Chunyong, the secretary general of the China Industrial Overseas Development and Planning Association. “Our clothes are Italian, French, German, so the profits are all leaving China…. We need to create brands, and fast.”

In typical fashion they are attempting to spur innovation with a series of heavy-handed, government-directed initiatives:

Domestically, it has launched the “indigenous innovation” program to encourage its companies to manufacture high-tech goods by forcing foreign firms to hand over their trade secrets and patents if they want to sell their products there.

Yep, nothing says “indigenous” like stealing the trade secrets and patents of others!

I think the moral is that China would be better off in its branding efforts by just hosting the World Cup and doing really well in it. It worked for Germany. Speaking of Germany, my early geopolitical dream scenario for the 2010 World Cup: Germany vs. Greece: Greece plays poorly, but Germany loses after a series of costly mistakes late in the match. Morning headline will be: “Moral Hazard: Germany bails out Greece in the end.” Can’t wait.

Article by Jason Dobbins