Branding, politics and democracy

Abstract

Branding and franchising, which are common features of commerce, have, more recently, permeated into politics in a number of ways. However, this development has received limited academic attention, an omission which this article addresses. More specifically, it has two main aims. Firstly, we develop a heuristic for analysing the relationship between branding and politics. Here, our intention is to stimulate discussion and, as with any heuristic, this one will stand or fall depending on whether other researchers find it useful. Secondly, we critically examine the relationship between political marketing/branding and governance and democracy. Here, we argue strongly that it is essential to develop a more critical political marketing/branding agenda. This research agenda would be much less instrumental in its research concerns and draw on broader epistemological and theoretical perspectives, allowing it to interrogate the relationship between marketing/branding and democracy in more depth than is the case at present.

Keywords:

• branding
• governance
• policy transfer
• public policy

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Carsten Daugbjerg, Jennifer Lees-Marshment, Catherine Needham and Heather Savigny, as well as the referees and editor of the journal, for their insightful comments on earlier versions of this article.

Notes

1. The nation branding index is based upon six criteria: people, governance, exports, tourism, culture and heritage, and investment and immigration. The 20 countries surveyed were the USA, Canada, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Russia, Poland, Turkey, Japan, China, India, South Korea, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Egypt and South Africa. Anholt-GfK Roper also produces a City Brand Index.

2. There have been major changes in this area since the coalition government came to power in June 2010. In June, OGC, and thus Gateway, were moved to the Cabinet Office, as part of a new Efficiency and Reform Group (ERG). Later that month Nigel Smith, Head of the OGC, left his post. In March 2011, a new agency, the Major Projects Authority (MPA), was established within the ERG, whose remit was to make savings in large government procurement projects. At the time of writing, April 2011, the relationship between the MPA and the Gateway Process is unclear.

3. We are grateful to Carsten Daugbjerg for this important point.

4. See Gershon (1999). For more details of the case, see Marsh and Fawcett (2011a, 2011b).

5. There has also been transfer to other, sub-state jurisdictions in Australia, notably Brisbane City Council, which has established itself as a leader in this area and is attempting to market itself as a centre of information and advice about Gateway among councils in North Eastern Australia.

6. This is not to say that other factors were not important, particularly: the extensive contacts between UK Gateway and Victoria; the strong interpersonal relationships that developed; and the fact that the UK and Australia share a language and a Westminster political system (see Marsh and Fawcett 2011b).

7. However, OGC is becoming more conscious that the intellectual property involved in Gateway is valuable and has been exploring ways of raising revenue in this way.

8. In 2008 and 2009, the UK was approached for information and advice on Gateway by over 30 jurisdictions, including: Jordan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Israel, Norway, Singapore, Iceland and France.