Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing

ISSN: 1054-8408 (Print) 1540-7306 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wttm20

Destination Brand Identity, Values, and

Community: A Case Study From Rural Victoria,
Australia

Fiona Wheeler , Warwick Frost & Betty Weiler

To cite this article: Fiona Wheeler , Warwick Frost & Betty Weiler (2011) Destination Brand
Identity, Values, and Community: A Case Study From Rural Victoria, Australia, Journal of Travel &
Tourism Marketing, 28:1, 13-26, DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2011.535441

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2011.535441

Published online: 06 Feb 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2579

View related articles

Citing articles: 28 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wttm20
Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 28:13–26, 2011
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1054-8408 print / 1540-7306 online
DOI: 10.1080/10548408.2011.535441

DESTINATION BRAND IDENTITY, VALUES,

AND COMMUNITY: A CASE STUDY
FROM RURAL VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA
Fiona Wheeler
Warwick Frost
Betty Weiler

ABSTRACT. This article explores a values-based approach to regional destination branding. Drawing
on a qualitative case study of the branding of Victoria’s High Country, a regional tourism area in rural
Victoria, Australia, the article illustrates the shortcomings of a branding process (both in theory and
practice) that draws on an overly narrow values base. It argues for consideration of a broader suite
of values including social, cultural, historic, geographic, symbolic, environmental, and economic, to
fully reflect what the destination has to offer. The article engages with the concept of sense of place
as a theoretical lens through which to view destination branding and suggests that sustainable brands
are those that are developed organically, driven by the values held by local brand communities and
networks, rather than a more limited consumer-based value set being imposed upon a destination.

KEYWORDS. Destination branding, stakeholders, rural tourism, identity, values, brand community

INTRODUCTION values. Hankinson (2007) agrees, advocating

The aim of this article is to explore the con-
cept of a values-based approach to regional
destination branding. According to Morgan,
Pritchard, and Pride (2004), a successful brand
requires commitment to the brand’s essence and
strong, visionary leadership and broad-based
commitment to the brand values which encapsu-
late the destination brand’s promise. According
to Gnoth (2007), place characteristics represent
the “values by which destinations are perceived,
compared, and judged” (p. 351).

Fiona Wheeler, BCom, MBS, MSc, PhD, is Post-Doctoral Researcher in the Tourism Research Unit and
Department of Management at Monash University, P.O. Box 1071, Narre Warren, Melbourne, Victoria 3805,
Australia (E-mail: Fiona.Wheeler@buseco.monash.edu.au).
Warwick Frost, BCom, BA, PhD, is Lecturer of Tourism in the School of Management at La Trobe
University in Bundoora, Melbourne, Victoria 3086, Australia (E-mail: W.Frost@latrobe.edu.au).
Betty Weiler, BA, MA, PhD, School of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Southern Cross University,
Lismore, Australia (betty.weiler@scu.edu.au).
This article is part of the outcome of a PhD research project funded by the Sustainable Tourism
Cooperative Research Centre (STCRC), established by the Australian Commonwealth Government. The
authors would also like to acknowledge the comments of the anonymous reviewers which have significantly
enhanced the article.
Address correspondence to: Warwick Frost, BCom, BA, PhD, at the above address.

13
14 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
The concept of “values” per se has been def-
ined differently in various fields of social
science. For example, sociologists define values
as guiding principles in life, as beliefs or aspi-
rations (Rokeach, 1973). In contrast, tourism
marketing is typically driven by an economic
value paradigm which seeks to increase visi-
tation to and visitor spending at the destina-
tion in order to maximize visitor yield and
generate investment, business profitability, and
employment opportunities. To this end, a tra-
ditional marketing communication-based model
tends to be used, focusing on an externally
directed process of image creation, promotion,
and advertising to generate awareness and drive
visitation. Destination marketers tend to look
to external stakeholders, such as potential vis-
itors and undefined end-users (i.e., consumers
in general or proxy visitor segments) to deter-
mine the positioning of the destination, through
generic marketing research focusing on brand
image, and conducted by tourism marketing
managers and consultants outside of the des-
tination locale itself. Thus, in many cases the
destination brand is determined as it relates
to the quality and values as perceived by the
consumer (brand image), as opposed to the val-
ues of the destination community itself (brand
identity).
According to Roberts and Hall (2001), the
consequence with respect to regional brand-
ing in particular is that subjective, emotional
attachments to imagined place that bear no rela-
tion to the objective reality of a community
(i.e., to the brand owners’ sense of place) may
actually drive rural tourism development and
representations. As such, rural tourism brands
may be shaped to appeal to visitors, rather
than representing stakeholder interests. What
appears to be missing is a process of develop-
ing and implementing the brand by engaging
the values and identity of the host communi-
ties and operators. These are the brand own-
ers charged with delivering the brand, either
by contributing funds to cooperative market-
ing campaigns or, more explicitly, through
their interactions with visitors, thereby facil-
itating the brand experience and the forma-
tion of a subjective sense of place for the
visitor.
REGIONAL TOURISM AREAS:
BRANDING OR BOOSTERISM?
A distinctive brand, it is argued, based on
a destination’s “unique” identity, can be a key
source of competitive advantage for destina-
tions (Buhalis, 2000; Prideaux & Cooper, 2002)
and is touted as a remedy for at least some of
the economic and political ills of most places
(Anholt, 2004), but rural/regional areas in par-
ticular (Cai, 2002).
However, it has been suggested that, at least
in some instances, the branding and marketing
of rural tourism areas may be more accu-
rately described as place “boosterism” driven
by political agendas in response to the growing
competition between places due the economic
restructuring of markets within a globalized
world (Gill, 2004; Kavaratzis & Ashworth,
2005). Such boosterism, according to Shone
(2009), creates the potential for tensions between
the various scales and stakeholder groups associ-
ated with regional tourism areas (RTAs), which
risk the denigrating of social and community
values, and hence identity.
Under this approach, tourism policy and plan-
ning is based on the one-dimensional view that
tourism is inherently good for rural communi-
ties, and that the attraction of tourists has devel-
opmental benefits that exceed the costs, with
little consideration for the wider suite of impacts
(social, environmental, cultural, etc.) brought
about by tourism (Dredge, 2001; Dredge &
Jenkins, 2003; Jenkins, Hall, & Troughton,
1997; Shone, 2009). Such a policy and planning
framework, according to Marcouiller (2007),
tends to create an environment where tourism
is approached within a purely marketing context
focused on economic yield.
Ryan and Zahra (2004) have two concerns
with this approach: a continued emphasis on
economic performance over other dimensions of
regional “success,” and the endless search for
“catch-all” branding slogans which this empha-
sis cultivates. According to Gold and Ward
(1994), the focus on brand slogans and logos
has seen few creative ideas, with most cam-
paigns failing to achieve anything more than
ephemeral indifference in that they are short-
lived. And given the extensive media “clutter”
 Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler
which the competitive environment has invoked,
such marketing initiatives are not brands but
simple symbolic “markers” that fail to differen-
tiate destination places (Kavaratzis & Ashworth,
2005). As Pike (2008) has stated, a brand is
more than merely a symbol or name, it is a
promise to the consumer, so it must stand for
something: that is, and it must be valued.
The result is that what destination marketers
perceive as “brands” are either ignored, unsup-
ported, or superseded in successive rounds of
“re-branding” by virtue of having been deemed
to have “failed” by not delivering on their eco-
nomic value objectives.
A number of authors suggest that destina-
tion branding strategies should extend beyond
the generic level of traditional image manage-
ment activities of advertising and promotion
normally coordinated by Destination Marketing
Organizations (DMOs) on behalf of the destina-
tion region or country (Cai, 2002; Daye, 2010).
This raises the question of whether a different
destination branding paradigm, more akin to the
Triple-Bottom-Line approach engaged with in
other aspects of tourism development and oper-
ation (see, for example, Font & Harris, 2004;
Getz, 2009; Hede, 2008; Sherwood, 2007), and
underpinned by a broader and more holistic set
of values of both the destination’s people and
place might facilitate a more viable and sustain-
able regional brand. In this regard, this article
explores the nexus between destination branding
and values and proposes an alternative values-
based approach to regional destination brand-
ing. This is exemplified with evidence from an
exploratory case study of an RTA in the State of
Victoria, Australia.
AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO
DESTINATION BRANDING
The field of destination branding is relatively
new and to date has drawn heavily from the
product/services branding literature. However,
increasingly it is being viewed and concep-
tualized in a more post-modern and interpre-
tive sense. Olins (2000) describes a destination
brand as that which “helps tourists develop a
coherent, consistent and meaningful sense of
15
place, and offers a ‘brand experience”’ (p. 56).
Ooi (2004) suggests that the brand “provides
a story that tourists can build their experiences
around” (p. 113). The delivery of the brand
promise is ultimately the responsibility of the
local tourism community, and therefore the lat-
ter should feel that the destination brand “repre-
sents their sense of place” (Pike, 2005, p. 259)
which links to the concepts of identity and val-
ues. Kavaratzis and Ashworth (2005) accept the
notion of places as brandable products only if
their intrinsic and distinctive characteristics as
place products are understood and a special
form of marketing developed which accom-
modates, utilizes, and values these character-
istics. These concepts underpin a values-based
approach to destination branding.
Brand Values
According to Hankinson and Cowking (1993,
as cited in Kavaratzis & Ashworth, 2005,
p. 508), a brand is “a product or service
made distinctive by its positioning relative to
the competition and by its personality, which
comprises a unique combination of functional
attributes and symbolic values.” Within the gen-
eral branding literature, places are frequently
cited as examples of the wide utility of cor-
porate brands with a number of associated
brand communities (Balmer, 2006; Jamrozy &
Walsh, 2009; Kavaratzis & Ashworth, 2005):
they apply equally to nation states; regions, such
as the Loire Valley or the Australian Alps; and
cities.
One of the primary concepts of corporate
branding is that of “core values” (Urde, 2003).
As the “brand soul” or “the spiritual centre”
(p. 1034), core values are the guiding princi-
ples for all internal and external brand building,
and therefore must be built into the product,
expressed in behavior, and reflected in commu-
nication (Urde). Rather than externally focused
activities, Urde advocates viewing the brand as
an internal value-creation process which devel-
ops the relationships between “organization”
and “brand,” with the objective to get the orga-
nization to “live” the core values, and therefore
the brand. If stakeholders understand and agree
on the core values and what they represent; then
16 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
over time, these values permeate ways of think-
ing, working, and behaving. What this alludes
to is a greater emphasis to be placed on internal
branding among those involved in delivering the
brand. In terms of destination marketing, as the
all-embracing terms that summarize the identity
of the brand, the core values of the commu-
nity are the basis of the internal brand identity
of the destination; that is, destination stakehold-
ers’ own understanding of the brand and their
commitment to it (Urde).
Brand Identity: The Cornerstone
of Values-Based Branding
Destinations are multidimensional brands
(Morgan et al., 2004): They have multi-
disciplinary roots, address a complex composite
of stakeholders, landscapes, and social pro-
cesses and thus, they possess multiple iden-
tities which may or may not happily coexist
(Kavaratzis & Ashworth, 2005). Destination
brands, unlike product brands, are therefore
more challenging as they are “consumed” by a
variety of different stakeholder groups in differ-
ent ways and for different purposes—including
employment, investment, and for the creation
of identities (Balmer & Greyser, 2006). This is
particularly true in a regional branding sense in
that RTAs tend to span large and diverse land-
scapes comprised of numerous local commu-
nities and tourism operators, many with strong
identities and/or brands of their own. The chal-
lenges associated with accommodating these
factors in applications of branding to destina-
tions are acknowledged in the literature: The
mix of tourism stakeholders and range of tan-
gible and intangible attributes associated with
most destinations make the task of establish-
ing a distinctive and coherent brand identity
especially difficult (Anisimova, 2006; Morgan,
Pritchard, & Piggott, 2003; Ooi, 2004). At the
same time, recognizing the overriding values
of all stakeholders can be a complex process
(Buhalis, 2000).
Identity comprises the ways that a destination
or tourism provider aims to identify or posi-
tion itself or its products. An effective brand
identity establishes the destination’s character
and value proposition, conveys the character
in a distinctive way, and delivers emotional
power beyond a mental image (Kotler, Haider,
& Rein, 1993). Identity is the source of the
desired image, and control of it would appear to
rest quite firmly with the destination stakehold-
ers. As Olins (2000) states, everything that the
branded entity does should be an affirmation of
its identity.
Brand identity relates to how brand owners
want the destination to be perceived, encap-
sulating the features and beneficial attributes,
as well as the symbolic, experiential, social,
and emotional values of the place which are
imbued in the brand (Kavaratzis & Ashworth,
2005). According to Williams, Gill, and Chura
(2004), destination brands are designed to create
a unique and appealing identity conveying val-
ues that are consciously or intuitively linked to
that destination’s sense of place. Yet this inter-
relationship, and the role of values in linking
destination brand identity and sense of place,
tends to be overlooked in the destination brand-
ing literature (Gnoth, 2007). This relationship is
further explored in this case study.
BACKGROUND TO THE CASE
Evidence for the remainder of this article is
drawn from an exploratory case study of regional
destination branding in rural North East Victoria
(NEV), Australia. Located approximately 250
km north east of the State capital Melbourne,
this RTA is approximately 15,000 km2 in size
(over 300 km north–south and east–west) and
is predominantly a mixed agricultural area with
some service and light manufacturing industries.
Apart from the main cities of Wodonga and
Wangaratta, with populations of approximately
28,000 and 16,000, respectively, the region is
largely comprised of small country towns typi-
cally with populations of less than 5,000 people
(State Government of Victoria, 2007). The region
is one of spectacular beauty and diverse land-
scapes with the Victorian Alps comprising the
eastern third, contrasted with flatland agricul-
tural areas and river land valleys in the remainder
of the region. The Murray River forms a natu-
ral boundary with the neighboring state of New
South Wales (NSW) to the north.
 Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler
NEV is promoted largely for nature-based
adventure tourism and winter activities on the
Alpine landscapes, as well as for touring holi-
days, and food and wine experiences (Tourism
Victoria, 2007). The RTA is well known for
its ski fields including Mount Buffalo, Mount
Hotham, and Falls Creek; however, the snow
season is precarious and confined to, at most,
4 months of the year (June–September). The
region is also home to a number of popular
wine regions, the most well-known of which is
Rutherglen, one of the oldest wine regions in
Australia, as well as emerging regions such as
the King Valley. One of the most distinguishing
features of the region is its rich cultural her-
itage landscape of gold rush history and strong
associations with a number of legends includ-
ing the mountain cattlemen and the Australian
bushrangers (outlaws), the most well-known
of which is Ned Kelly. Kelly (ca 1855–
November 11, 1880), it has been argued, is one
of Australia’s greatest cultural icons and “the
closest thing Australia has to a national hero”
(Seal, 1996, p. 145). The NEV region has col-
loquially been known as Kelly Country since
at least the 1940s (McQuilton, 1979), due to
the extensive historical and geographical Kelly
associations, and that is still used on maps and
brochures (Bryson, 2001).
Tourism contributes to the region’s
economy—approximately A$500 million in the
year to June 2006 (Tourism Victoria, 2006a).
Visitors are predominantly domestic (Tourism
Victoria, 2008), with Melbourne and intrastate
Victoria the primary markets, followed by inter-
state visitation from within South Australia.
However, visitation has stagnated or declined
since 2000, with domestic overnight visitors
down by 20%, visitor nights down by 23%,
and day-trip visitors down by 20% in 2007
(Tourism Victoria, 2007), leading to Tourism
Victoria, the State Government statutory
authority responsible for marketing Victoria
to domestic Australian markets, setting about
re-branding the north east RTA as Victoria’s
High Country (VHC). Prior to 2005, the region
had been branded Legends Wine and High
Country (LWHC) with the slogan You Can
Always Blame the Alpine Air. Subsequently,
a new tagline for the VHC brand, Adventures
17
Happen, was developed and launched with
much fanfare in March 2008. The rationale for
the brand name change was a “low level of
consumer recognition and association” for the
LWHC brand name, as measured by Tourism
Victoria’s Regional Awareness and Perceptions
Study (in 2001 and 2003; Tourism Victoria,
2006b) which is an Australia-wide consumer
marketing research survey.
The re-branding of NEV presented a unique
and timely opportunity to examine firsthand
the process of regional branding, including an
exploration of the relationship between brand
identity and sense of place, from which the
concept of values-based branding emerged.
RESEARCH DESIGN
This case study tracked the development
and implementation of the regional brand for
NEV, over the period June 2005 to September
2008. The study sits within an interpre-
tive paradigm and thus employs a qualita-
tive research methodology. Many sources of
evidence were used—including direct observa-
tion, participant interviews, and secondary doc-
umentation data (Denzin, 1989; Eisenhardt &
Graebner, 2007; Yin, 2003).
In order to gain a deep understanding of the
structure of the case, the first named author
became immersed within the context which
allowed her to develop an intimacy with the
case and its protagonists, engender trust, and
glean information on a regular basis. The quasi-
ethnographic approach (Stake, 1995) comprised
a program of research incorporating 16 field vis-
its to NEV (of durations ranging from a couple
of days to weeks long at a time) which included:
attendance at community events and festivals,
a regional branding summit and brand launch
events; visits to a number of local destination
communities to examine amenities, attractions,
and infrastructure; and unstructured in-depth
interviews with 37 tourism stakeholders at all
scales from across the region.
Given the exploratory nature of this study,
generalizability of the findings was not an objec-
tive. Therefore, theoretical sampling was appro-
priately employed to facilitate comparisons
18 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
between participants (Glaser & Strauss, 1967),
with a view to “finding things that might chal-
lenge the limitations of the existing theory,
forcing the researcher to change it in order
to incorporate the new phenomena” (Seale,
1999, p. 92). The research population for the
study was broadly considered to be members
of the regional tourism community in NEV. A
multi-stage sampling approach, combining pur-
posive (convenience or judgement) and induc-
tive snowball sampling, was used to identify
stakeholders (Dawes, 1987). Participants were
drawn from two groups. The first group included
“key” stakeholders (Williams & Palmer, 1999,
p. 268) traditionally involved in regional brand-
ing processes such as institutional state and
local government officials, regional destina-
tion marketers, and high profile industry mem-
bers. The second group comprised members
of the local tourism industries and communi-
ties across the region who constitute the greater
part of the tourism context but who tend to
be excluded from branding decision processes.
These included: representatives of community
associations and committees; historians and her-
itage interpreters; representatives of regional
and local tourism associations, visitor informa-
tion centers, and cooperative marketing groups;
individual members of the local tourism indus-
try including retailers and tourism and hos-
pitality operators; and local entrepreneurs and
community “champions,” as well as stakehold-
ers opposed to tourism. In this way, this research
adopts an eclectic and inclusive approach to
the notion of local community (Macbeth, 1996)
based on a commitment to or interest in the
locale or region.
The objective was rich and meaningful per-
spectives, and interviews continued to the point
of redundancy (Lincoln & Guba, 1985); that is,
evidential or theoretical saturation (Eisenhardt,
1989). The study is cross-sectional rather than
longitudinal, as it does not track the same people
over time but elicits the perspectives of a group
of regional community and tourism stakeholders
at a single point in time (Jennings, 2001).
In this case, a wealth of documentation
existed on rural community development and
tourism development, marketing, and brand-
ing in Victoria and NEV, providing a rich
source of secondary evidence, which when
integrated with other evidence helped to crys-
tallize meaning (Richardson, 1994) through
an understanding of the broader narratives—
cultural, historical, geographical, economic and
marketing—that were at play in the case. This
included: historical literature; regional develop-
ment plans and policies; regional tourism action
plans and strategies; NEV strategic plans, mar-
keting strategies, and branding studies; market-
ing collateral and campaign materials; visitation
data; and newspaper clippings, media articles,
and websites.
Interpretive thematic analysis identified
emergent themes for further investigation.
These themes or issues served as the conceptual
and analytical structure of the study as they
helped to draw attention to particular problems
and concerns with regional branding as derived
from the literature and observed in practice in
NEV (Stake, 1995).
FINDINGS
The VHC brand was launched by Tourism
Victoria to regional community and industry
members at a re-branding summit in May 2006.
Across the RTA, however, the new regional
brand was highly contentious. While some
local destinations, industry groups, and opera-
tors were supportive of the new brand, it was
met with strong criticism by many stakehold-
ers who felt that it neither fit with their sense
of place and identity, nor best represented their
tourism offering. The brand was deemed to fit
well with the values and attributes of the high-
land areas in the Victorian Alps. However, the
various communities and operators located in
the flatlands felt disenfranchised by the new
brand and its processes, and therefore unable
to support it or use it for their local destination
marketing purposes. Many stakeholders felt the
process of consultation to be token, selective,
and after-the-fact; therefore they perceived the
new brand as being imposed upon them by the
Victorian State Government. While on the sur-
face, the objection was to the new brand name
chosen, the contestation that presented revealed
deeper tensions, at the local community scale,
 Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler
with respect to the region’s brand positioning
and image relative to existing place identity and
community values.
Regional Destination Branding in North
East Victoria
Just as corporations are not single organisms,
so are destination regions like NEV a complex
composite of individuals, landscapes, and social
processes. The RTA is characterized by a num-
ber of coexisting identities, not all of which
aligned with the new VHC brand due to different
attributes and values underpinning those iden-
tities. The values that the people of NEV hold
in relation to their localities, and the region in
general, have not been captured in the top-down
regional branding approach to NEV that has
focused on external communication outcomes,
and thus are not reflected in the brand. As Gnoth
(2007) suggests, it is these values that are the
essence of what is created, exchanged, and expe-
rienced in the tourism interaction, being what
visitors seek to engage with and thus, regions
and destinations need to capture these in their
branding processes.
At the regional scale, the branding of NEV
can be viewed through the lens of boosterism.
At the commencement of the study, regional
tourism marketing in Victoria took place under
the direction of Victoria’s Tourism Industry
Strategic Plan 2002–2006 (Tourism Victoria,
2002) in which the stated vision for regional
tourism was:
Over the life of the plan more Australians
and international visitors will be aware of
and visit destinations in regional Victoria.
This will contribute to increased tourism
yield, greater dispersal of visitors and eco-
nomic, social and environmental benefits
[italics added] to regional communities.
(p. 65)
In 2008, this plan was superseded by
the Regional Tourism Action Plan 2009–2012
(Tourism Victoria, 2008) which stated the
following:
The importance of tourism should not be
underestimated. Tourism offerings high-
19
light the value [italics added] of local
and natural attractions, generates economic
activity, jobs and export revenues . . . The
Plan provides strategies to boost the eco-
nomic benefits and employment growth of
the tourism industry in regional Victoria
[italics added] . . . (p. 2)
The boosterism approach was also reflected
in the views of many stakeholders, particularly
those at the state and local Government scales as
follows:
Tourism has brought a lot of add-on wealth
to country towns. And in certain areas
where there is a change in employment . . .
For example, if we stop forestry-work then
people will go into tourism. It’s not as sim-
ple as that. But there is the opportunity
there.
Many authors suggest that the pursuit of a
boosterism approach to regional development
leads stakeholders at all levels to play-off local-
ities against each other as sites for investment
(Dredge, 2005; Herod, Rainnie, & McGrath-
Champ, 2007; Wiseman, 2005), which is elab-
orated upon by a regional tourism marketing
official in this case:
Marketing is the key thing but there is
also government which has a responsibil-
ity to . . . have an even-handed approach
to market all regions. There are some
regions that are not at the right level of
development to be promoted to an inter-
state market or an international market. I
think that’s where the Regional Marketing
Program looks at some regions which
are only marketed to Melbournians and
regional Victoria. Others are marketed to
interstate travellers and we’ve now just
introduced a component of the program for
international marketing . . . it’s all part of
responsibly allocating taxpayers dollars.
In light of this, places and regions are not
given to us: They come with a particular set
of economic, social, political, and geographic
legacies (Allen et al., 1998, p. 3) which set the
context, in a very real sense, for the way they
20 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
appear today and how they are re-created into
the future. It would appear that brand identity,
sense of place, and values are interrelated con-
cepts in that there is a relationship between a
destination’s brand, the identity of the place,
and the values of local community stakeholders
(Durie, Yeoman, & McMahon-Beattie, 2006).
These concepts are elusive and complex, and
therefore incorporating them into a framework
for destination planning, development, and mar-
keting is not clear-cut and further research in
this regard is warranted.
Destination Branding and Sense of Place
in North East Victoria
The findings of this case suggest that the
VHC brand was the result of a policy-driven,
market-led approach to regional tourism market-
ing with little recognition of what sub-regional
and local destinations saw as their identity, as
well as their core tourism strengths and appeal.
In effect, the branding process for VHC did not
reflect the broader values of the region, result-
ing in incongruence between the overarching
umbrella brand and the identity of local commu-
nities. Therefore, internal conflict and alienation
ensued which resulted in a lack of support for,
and buy-in to, the new brand. Many of the infor-
mants spoke very passionately about the region
in general, but in particular about their “locale”
(Agnew, 1987). The following is a passage from
a well-known author and historian and resident
of Beechworth in NEV. It serves to illustrate his
relationship with, or sense of place of, the region
he knows as Kelly Country, and his particular
locale:
Beechworth, it is more than just a town,
it’s an environment. I can remember . . .
my first glimpse of Beechworth in the day-
light . . . and I was in my shirt sleeves
and the frost, you could’ve chipped it
off . . . But the sun was up and it was
comfortable, it was amazing. The clarity
of the air . . . We were the first people
through . . . And that was really my intro-
duction to Beechworth and its countryside
and I became fascinated by the story [of
Ned Kelly] . . . I got to inhale the country,
I got to feel it . . . the landscape spoke
to me as eloquently as any of the old
timers I could meet . . . and that was all
terribly important to getting to understand
the story. Without understanding that land-
scape, the story just didn’t add up . . . the
people lacked roots . . . So, I love this
country.
This passage highlights the relationship many
people have with the natural and cultural her-
itage values associated with a place and the
intrinsic link between the various landscapes,
stories, and characters of that place, which is a
good illustration of the concepts of a destination
brand discussed previously (Olins, 2000; Ooi,
2004).
Hall (2007) states that sense of place is
where “people feel a particular attachment or
personal relationship to an area in which local
knowledge and human contacts are meaning-
fully maintained” (p. 241). Hudson (2001) pro-
poses the concept of “place specific culture”
which is born of a lived unity of experience
that generates particular “structures of feeling”
(p. 267). Consequently, this “place culture” con-
ditions the ways in which place actors (e.g., rural
tourism stakeholders) think and behave, and is
therefore central to destination branding.
Rural communities, in particular, tend to have
a history and a reason for being which pre-date
tourism and which are fundamental to what they
look like and how they function today. At one
level, they may be tourist destinations; how-
ever, they are primarily rural communities that
function first and foremost as places to live,
work, raise families, do business, and recreate
in, as the following suggests: “[The communi-
ties of NEV] are all historical towns, founded
on gold. But they have different atmosphere,
different society and different community val-
ues, because they were all individual little towns
with their own Council.”
Roberts and Hall (2001) cite examples from
Europe, predominantly Central and Eastern
Europe (CEE), where the re-imaging of rural
areas arising out of restructuring and com-
modification of the countryside has resulted
in substantial promotion of rural and nature
tourism through marketing by local and central
 Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler
governments. They go on to acknowledge that
a diversity of culture and histories can form the
basis of tourism to generate income and employ-
ment for both rural and urban areas. According
to McLean (2006), heritage, in both its material
and intangible forms, represents the identity of
people. The identity of a place can take different
forms depending on the context: The identity of
a place and the brand identity of that place as a
tourist destination are intertwined.
The implication for rural tourism develop-
ment and marketing in the region, of the con-
nection people feel for their place, is succinctly
captured in the following:
. . . [it’s] not just about marketing . . . it’s
about balancing tourism. You’ve got a very
strong local community that are passionate
about the place. Most people, even people
who set up businesses and move there for
a better life, what they don’t want to do is
wreck it.
The complex relationship between sense of
place and the values that underpin it are reflected
in a practical sense in the comments of a resident
and tourism business owner in the holiday town
of Bright:
. . . communities move [to regional areas]
because it offers serenity, peace, safety
and a whole range of things that peo-
ple value. It’s a real sea-change1 thing
about “Now that I’m here, pull up the lad-
der behind me” or “Shut the gate behind
me.” They need tourism to make the
economy work, but they resent tourism
because it changes their lifestyle. There’s
this enormous precipice that they’re con-
stantly balancing on as to “Do we want
more tourists? Do we want to grow the
industry?” So communities fight within
themselves . . .
In contrast, however, beneath the overar-
ching VHC brand at the sub-regional and local
destination scales within NEV, there were exem-
plars of communities which appear to have
struck this balance right, in that their tourism
development, marketing, and branding reflect a
21
broader suite of values, other than economic.
One such example is the King Valley, an Italian-
themed wine and food destination, which is the
focus of discussion in the following section.
Local Value-Based Destination Branding:
The King Valley
Italians had been a small ethnic group in
the gold rushes and they had tended to group
together in the north east (Gervasoni, 2005).
They had a long history of working in agri-
culture in the region, but they had tended
to focus commercially on tobacco and dairy-
ing (Cecilia, 1987), originally planting grapes
and olives in nostalgia for their homelands
and their own consumption. For many years
tourism was of little importance. The concerted
move into vineyards was due to increased wine
demand, as well as the modern fascination with
traditional Mediterranean cuisine and lifestyle
(Frost, Reeves, Laing, & Wheeler, 2009) as
commented upon in the following perspective:
“King Valley has managed to differentiate itself
in a competitive market. The brand sells wine
and communicates Italian family heritage.”
In recent years, as the tobacco industry has
declined, the King Valley has developed a niche
tourism experience based on its migrant her-
itage and strong Italian family and community
values (Frost et al., 2009). Many of the his-
toric tobacco kilns have been transformed into
wineries, tasting rooms, and restaurants serving
“home-cooked” Italian cuisine from the fami-
lies’ native regions. This has created a sense of
authenticity and passion which is apparent in
tourism marketing material:
This extraordinary mix of the traditional
and the eclectic gives the King Valley
the edge as Australia’s most exciting and
diverse wine region. . . . The region has
been built on the efforts of enthusiastic
winemaking families . . . an enthusiasm
based on strong family values and a com-
mitment to building a long-term future
for generations to come. (King Valley
Vignerons, 2011)
These statements link to overarching sustain-
ability goals for the regional community, where
22 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
tourism development has more than simply an
economic rationale: it is as much about family,
community, and the continuation of a cultural
tradition in Australia. These community values
are also apparent in the tourism experiences on
offer in the Valley. In November each year, the
vineyards of the King Valley come together to
stage a festival featuring the cultural heritage of
the region and its links to Italy. La Dolce Vita
festival invites tourists to come and be part of the
region’s Italian family and enjoy Italian wines,
food, and folk music reminiscent of regional
festivals in Calabria and Sicily.
From a commercial perspective, the King
Valley appears to have intrinsic touristic
appeal—the region has experienced a high level
of positive media attention in recent years as
well as increasing popularity and visitation
among tourists, keen to experience a little piece
of Italian culture and an authentic community
way of life in Australia (Wallace, 2009). In other
words, a values-based approach has not been at
the cost of regional tourism economic success.
In fact, quite the opposite has occurred; tourists
are attracted to the genuine, authentic nature
of the tourist experience (Carson & Harwood,
2007) on offer: “The King Valley wineries are
small, more family run type things and . . . The
whole experience is totally different and visitors
come away with the feeling that those people
really wanted them there. . . .”
This is in sharp contrast to the visitor expe-
rience, or lack thereof, at other regional des-
tinations which lack the tourism products and
amenities, as well as brand community ethos, to
deliver quality experiences. The small scale of
the King Valley subregion does not appear to be
an obstacle; in fact it appears to afford a level of
flexibility over larger scale destinations.
TOWARD A VALUES-BASED
REGIONAL DESTINATION BRAND
COMMUNITY
According to Gnoth (2007), it is the val-
ues and meanings as expressed in the cul-
tural, social, natural, and economic dimensions
of people’s lives that comprise the assets or
“capital” of the destination, which tourists are
attracted to and served by (p. 345). These val-
ues are relational and living, and form the core
of what makes up the uniqueness of the place
(Gnoth). The approach to tourism marketing and
branding observed in the King Valley is akin to
a brand community, with a strong brand experi-
ence based on the culture, values, identity, and
sense of place of local communities and tourism
stakeholders. Despite the obvious and widely
acknowledged significance of community in
the context of tourism development (Beeton,
2006; Jamal & Getz, 1995, 1999) and tourism
planning (Gill, 2004; Jamal & Getz, 1995;
Reed, 1997; Wearing & McDonald, 2002), it
is rarely mentioned in relation to destination
branding and marketing. Similarly, according to
Schroeder and Salzer-Morling (2006), market-
ing has trailed other disciplines in adopting a
cultural perspective and branding scholars have
seemed reluctant to embrace the cultural world’s
potential contribution to branding knowledge.
Traditionally, community was thought of as a
place, typically rural (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001).
However, advances in communication technolo-
gies have helped widen the concept of commu-
nity to become geographically liberated, in that
it is more than a place: it is a common under-
standing of shared identity (Muniz & O’Guinn).
Bender (1978, as cited in Muniz & O’Guinn,
p. 413) defines the concept as a network of
social relations marked by mutuality and emo-
tional bonds, which links to a relational, social
network system of branding (Hankinson, 2004),
and is exemplified by the King Valley commu-
nity which is united by their common interest
in the culture and heritage of the region. In
the same way that brands are defined by dif-
ferentiation, so too is this community’s identity
defined by its apparent differences from other
communities in NEV and beyond.
Brand community is typically conceptualized
in terms of consumers (McAlexander, Schouten
& Koenig, 2002; Shouten, McAlexander, &
Koenig, 2007), being defined as a specialized,
non-geographically bound community, based on
a structured set of relationships among users
and admirers of a brand (Muniz & O’Guinn,
2001). However, these authors suggest that the
concept of brand community has implication
beyond the narrow consumer behavior context
 Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler
with potential contribution to the broader dis-
course on community and culture (p. 428). The
tourism context is ripe for this extension of the
concept: Brand admirers can include not just
visitors, as consumers of the destination, but
all of the destination stakeholders as the brand
owners, advocates, and stewards.
As Balmer (2006, p. 38) states: “Vultus est
index animi”: the expression on one’s face is
a sign of the soul. A destination brand is often
conceived of in a highly visual sense, as a one-
dimensional mark such as a name, slogan, logo,
and marketing collateral, which are used in pro-
motional advertising. These symbols are the
public face of the brand. But what of the brand’s
soul? It is suggested here that this soul is com-
prised of the culture, values, and identity with
which a wide range of stakeholders—including
visitors, residents, and operators—have an affin-
ity. The soul is manifest through the supporting
programs or frameworks which leverage the
knowledge, skills, and connectivity of these peo-
ple and places in order to build sustainable
destinations for the long-term, as opposed to
short-term promotional gimmicks and generic
advertising campaigns which talk at visitors
rather than creating collaborative dialogue and
relationships between all stakeholders.
In the case of the re-branding of NEV, no
attempt to understand this broader set of values
which underlie the destination brand owners’
sense of place was apparent, with a view to
developing a brand identity that fits the wider
regional destination and reflects these local val-
ues. Hence, the dissonance which manifested.
On this basis, this article proposes the con-
cept of building a destination brand community
for regional destinations, which has a shared
sense of brand identity, based upon the develop-
ment of a regional brand culture which accounts
for, portrays, and reinforces the values of local
communities and tourism stakeholders in the
region.
From an economic value perspective, it is
contended that this broader values approach can
contribute to the overall sustainability of the
destination, as a more credible and enduring
route to achieving the destination’s yield objec-
tives. A successfully implemented values-based
branding process can help destination managers,
23
marketers, and operators to more fully under-
stand how to better meet the needs and objec-
tives of all stakeholders, including visitors, as
opposed to short-term, un-targeted promotion.
Such a strategy would be aimed at giving full
expression to the diversity and complexity of
the destination, which in turn would add to the
appeal and the richness of experiences to be
had there. This is in contrast to a “one-size fits
all” approach which tends to create weak brands
(Gnoth, 2007). A brand that is more befitting
of the place it represents—i.e., that genuinely
reflects the sense of place of the destination and
its stakeholders—is perhaps more likely to be
embraced by these stakeholders, as its identity
better aligns with their values and objectives.
Thus, the brand promise stands a greater chance
of being fulfilled, with reduced potential for dis-
sonance between branding communication and
visitor experience.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The findings of this research support a more
holistic approach to destination branding which
is reflective of the multiplicity of local values,
cultures, and identities that are constitutive of
destination places, as part of a broader sustain-
able destination management philosophy. This
requires engagement with the wider suite of
values and meanings that underpin a destina-
tion community—social, cultural, historic, geo-
graphic, environmental, economic, spiritual, and
symbolic—as the building blocks of the tourist
experience. Only then can a brand be considered
experiential for the visitor and is realistically
capable of being delivered by those who live and
work in the destination region.
The findings reported in this article suggest
a refinement of branding concepts as they are
applied to tourism, and a more organic approach
to destination branding processes within that
tourism context. However, as Pike (2007) has
suggested, the implementation of destination
branding theory and practice is “easier said than
done.” Given the diverse and fragmented nature
of tourist destinations which is accentuated
within a large regional tourism context, consul-
tation with the full spectrum of stakeholders is
24 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
challenging, suggesting issues related to gover-
nance as well as the important role of locally
based relational networks as part of the frame-
work for destination branding.
Practically speaking, there is often evidence
of sub-regional destination brands which are
clear expressions of local community values
which could form a platform for a credible
and sustainable regional brand, built from the
ground up. There are, therefore, key opportuni-
ties to leverage the brand values, identity, and
equity of these local brands for the greater ben-
efit of the overall region through joint- and
co-branding initiatives which showcase the local
rural experiences.
This case study highlighted areas for
potentially fruitful, and much needed, further
research. Rather than viewing destination
branding as communication-based end-point
names or symbols, there appears to be merit
in viewing it as a socially constructed process,
taking account of local destination characteris-
tics and the values embedded in that context.
To this end, use of a values-based approach as
a lens for further case and empirical studies
might serve to underpin the development of a
more inclusive and effective framework and set
of tools for regional destination branding.
NOTE
1. The terms sea-change (moving to coastal areas),
tree-change (moving inland), and mountain-change (mov-
ing to the mountains) have become popular concepts in
Australian media as well as academic research to describe
those from metropolitan cities seeking new lifestyles and
opportunities within regional Australia.
REFERENCES
Agnew, J. (1987). Place and politics: The geographi-
cal mediation of state and society. London: Allen &
Unwin.
Allen, J., Massey, D., Cochrane, A., Charlesworth, J.,
Court, G., Henry, N., et al. (1998). Rethinking the
region. London: Routledge.
Anholt, S. (2004). Nation-brands and the value of prove-
nance. In N. Morgan, A. Pritchard, & R. Pride (Eds.),
Destination branding: Creating the unique destination
proposition (2nd ed., pp. 26–39). Oxford, UK: Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Anisimova, T. (2006). Corporate branding: A case study
analysis utilizing stakeholder perspective. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Monash University, Melbourne,
Australia.
Balmer, J. (2006). Corporate brand cultures and communi-
ties. In J. Schroeder & M. Salzer-Morling (Eds.), Brand
culture. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Balmer, J., & Greyser, S. (2006). Corporate market-
ing: Integrating corporate identity, corporate brand-
ing, corporate communications, corporate image and
corporate reputation. European Journal of Marketing
Management, 40(7–8), 730–741.
Beeton, S. (2006). Community development through
tourism. Melbourne, Australia: Landlinks Press.
Bryson, B. (2001). In a sunburned country. Toronto:
Anchor Canada.
Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination
of the future. Tourism Management, 21(1), 97–116.
Cai, L. (2002). Cooperative branding for rural destinations.
Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 720–742.
Carson, D., & Harwood, S. (2007, February). Authenticity
as competitive advantage for remote tourism destina-
tions. Paper presented at the CAUTHE 2007 Conference:
Tourism—Past Achievements, Future Challenges,
Sydney, Australia.
Cecilia, T. (1987). Immigrant placemaking in colonial
Australia: The Italian-speaking settlers of Daylesford.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Victoria University
of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Dawes, P. (1987). Snowball sampling in industrial market-
ing. Australian Marketing Researcher.
Daye, M. (2010). Challenges and prospects of differentiat-
ing destination brands: The case of the Dutch Caribbean
Islands. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing,
27(1), 1–13.
Denzin, N. (1989). Interpretive biography. Newbury Park,
CA: Sage.
Dredge, D. (2001). Leisure lifestyles and tourism:
Socio-cultural, economic and spatial change in Lake
Macquarie. Tourism Geographies, 3(3), 279–299.
Dredge, D. (2005). Local versus state-driven produc-
tion of ‘The Region’: Regional tourism policy in the
Hunter, New South Wales, Australia. In A. Rainnie &
M. Grobbelaar (Eds.), New regionalism in Australia
(pp. 301–319). Hants, UK: Ashgate Publishing.
Dredge, D., & Jenkins, J. (2003). Destination place iden-
tity and regional tourism policy. Tourism Geographies,
5(4), 383–407.
Durie, A., Yeoman, I., & McMahon-Beattie, U. (2006).
How the history of Scotland creates a sense of place.
Place Branding, 2(1), 43–52.
Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Building theories from case study
research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4),
532–550.
Eisenhardt, K., & Graebner, M. (2007). Theory building
from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of
Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.
 Wheeler, Frost, and Weiler
Font, X., & Harris, C. (2004). Rethinking standards from
green to sustainable. Annals of Tourism Research,
31(4), 986–1007.
Frost, W., Reeves, K., Laing, J., & Wheeler, F. (2009).
Villages, vineyards, and Chinese dragons: Constructing
the heritage of ethnic diasporas. Tourism, Culture and
Communication, 9(1–2), 107–114.
Gervasoni, C. (2005). Bulboar, macaroni and mineral
water: Spa Country’s Swiss-Italian story. Hepburn
Springs, Australia: Hepburn Springs Swiss-Italian
Fiesta Committee.
Getz, D. (2009). Policy for sustainable and responsi-
ble festivals and events: Institutionalization of a new
paradigm. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism,
Leisure and Events, 1(1), 61–78.
Gill, A. (2004). Tourism communities and growth man-
agement. In A. Lew, C. Hall, & A. Williams (Eds.),
A companion to tourism (pp. 569–583). Maldon, MA:
Blackwell Publishing.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of
grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.
New York: Aldin de Gruyter.
Gnoth, J. (2007). The structure of destination brands:
Leveraging values. Tourism Analysis, 12(5–6), 345–358.
Gold, J., & Ward, S. (Eds.). (1994). Place promotion: The
use of publicity and marketing to sell towns and regions.
Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Hall, C. (2007). Introduction to tourism in Australia:
Development, issues and change (5th ed.). Frenchs
Forest: Pearson Education Australia.
Hankinson, G. (2004). Relational network brands: Towards
a conceptual model of place brands. Journal of Vacation
Marketing, 10(2), 109–121.
Hankinson, G. (2007). The management of destination
brands: Five guiding principles based on recent devel-
opments in corporate branding theory. Journal of Brand
Management, 14(3), 240–255.
Hede, A. M. (2008). Managing special events in the
new era of the triple bottom line. Event Management,
11(1/2), 13–22.
Herod, A., Rainnie, A., & McGrath-Champ, S. (2007).
Working space: Why incorporating the geographical is
central to theorizing work and employment practices.
Work, Employment and Society, 21(2), 247–264.
Hudson, R. (2001). Producing places. New York: Guilford
Press.
Jamal, T., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory
and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism
Research, 22(1), 186–204.
Jamal, T., & Getz, D. (1999). Community roundtables for
tourism-related conflicts: The dialectics of consensus
and process structures. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,
7(3–4), 290–313.
Jamrozy, U., & Walsh, J. (2009). Destination and place
branding: A lost sense of place? In S. McCool &
R. Moisey (Eds.), Tourism, recreation and sustainabil-
ity (2nd ed., pp. 131–141). Wallingford, UK: CABI.
25
Jenkins, J., Hall, C., & Troughton, M. (1997). The restruc-
turing of rural economies: Rural tourism and recreation
as a government response. In R. Butler, C. Hall, &
J. Jenkins (Eds.), Tourism and recreation in rural areas
(pp. 43–67). Chicester, UK: Wiley.
Jennings, G. (2001). Tourism research. Milton, Australia:
John Wiley & Sons.
Kavaratzis, M., & Ashworth, G. (2005). City branding:
An effective assertion of identity or a transitory mar-
keting trick? Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale
Geografie, 96(5), 506–514.
King Valley Vignerons. (2011). Welcome to the King Valley
Vignerons. Retrieved from www.kvv.com.au
Kotler, P., Haider, D., & Rein, I. (1993). Marketing places:
Attracting investment, industry and tourism to cities,
states and nations. New York: Free Press.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Macbeth, J. (1996). Dissonance and paradox in tourism
planning—People first? ANZALS Leisure Research
Series, 3, 2–18.
Marcouiller, D. (2007). “Boosting” tourism as rural pub-
lic policy: Panacea or Pandora’s Box? The Journal of
Regional Analysis and Policy, 37(1), 28–31.
McAlexander, J., Schouten, J., & Koenig, H. (2002).
Building brand community. Journal of Marketing, 66(1),
38–54.
McLean, F. (2006). Introduction: Heritage and identity.
International Journal of Heritage Studies, 12(1), 3–7.
McQuilton, J. (1979). The Kelly outbreak 1878–1880: The
geographical dimension of social banditry. Melbourne,
Australia: Melbourne University Press.
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., & Piggott, R. (2003).
Destination branding and the role of stakeholders: The
case of New Zealand. Journal of Vacation Marketing,
9(3), 285–299.
Morgan, N., Pritchard, A., & Pride, R. (Eds.). (2004).
Destination branding: Creating the unique destina-
tion proposition (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Muniz, A., & O’Guinn, T. (2001). Brand com-
munity. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(4),
412–432.
Olins, W. (2000). How brands are taking over the corpo-
ration. In M. Schultz, M. Hatch, & M. Larsen (Eds.),
The expressive organization: Linking identity, reputa-
tion, and the corporate brand (pp. 51–65). Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press.
Ooi, C. (2004). Poetics and politics of destination brand-
ing: Denmark. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism, 4(2), 107–128.
Pike, S. (2005). Tourism destination branding complex-
ity. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(4),
258–259.
Pike, S. (2007, December). Destination branding is
“easier said than done”—Practical challenges faced
by DMOs. Paper presented at the 2nd International
26 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL & TOURISM MARKETING
Conference on Destination Branding and Marketing,
Macao SAR, China.
Pike, S. (2008). Destination marketing: An integrated mar-
keting communication approach (1st ed.). Amsterdam:
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Prideaux, B., & Cooper, C. (2002). Marketing and des-
tination growth: A symbiotic relationship or simple
coincidence? Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9(1),
35–51.
Reed, M. (1997). Power relations and community-based
tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(3),
566–591.
Richardson, L. (1994). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N.
Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative
research (pp. 516–529). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (2001). Rural tourism and recre-
ation: Principles to practice. Wallingford, UK: CABI.
Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New
York: Free Press.
Ryan, C., & Zahra, A. (2004). The political challenge:
The case of New Zealand’s tourism organisations. In N.
Morgan, A. Pritchard, & R. Pride (Eds.), Destination
branding: Creating the unique destination proposi-
tion (2nd ed., pp. 66–86). Oxford, UK: Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Schouten, J., McAlexander, J., & Koenig, H. (2007).
Transcendent customer experience and brand commu-
nity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35,
357–368.
Schroeder, J., & Salzer-Morling, M. (2006). Brand culture.
Oxon, UK: Routledge.
Seal, G. (1996). The outlaw legend: A cultural tradition
in Britain, America and Australia. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Seale, C. (1999). The quality of qualitative research.
London: Sage.
Sherwood, P. (2007). A triple bottom line evaluation of
the impact of special events. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia.
Shone, M. (2009, February). Changing paradigms: The
case of tourism and development in the Hurunui
District, New Zealand. Paper presented at the
CAUTHE 2009 Conference: See Change—Tourism
and Hospitality in a Dynamic World, Fremantle,
Australia.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
State Government of Victoria. (2007). Victoria Australia.
Retrieved September 5, 2007, from http://www. livein-
victoria.vic.gov.au
Tourism Victoria. (2002). Victoria’s tourism industry
strategic plan, 2002–2006. Retrieved June 6, 2005,
from http://www.tourism.vic.gov.au/strategicplan/plan
2002_2006/4_marketing_victoria/marketing_regional_
victoria.htm
Tourism Victoria. (2006a). North East rebranding strategy.
Tourism Victoria. (2006b). What’s in a name? Renaming
‘Legends, Wine & High Country.’ Melbourne, Australia:
Tourism Victoria.
Tourism Victoria. (2007). Victoria’s High Country market
profile year ending June 2006. Retrieved August 24,
2007, from http://www.tourism.vic.gov.au
Tourism Victoria. (2008). Regional tourism action plan,
2009–2012. Retrieved December 5, 2008, from http://
www.tourism.vic.gov.au
Urde, M. (2003). Core value-based corporate brand
building. European Journal of Marketing, 37(7–8),
1017–1040.
Wallace, S. (2009, May 30). The Italian way. The Age,
pp. 21–22.
Wearing, S., & McDonald, M. (2002). The development
of community-based tourism: Re-thinking the relation-
ship between tour operators and development agents as
intermediaries in rural and isolated area communities.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(3), 191–206.
Williams, A., & Palmer, A. (1999). Tourism destination
brands and electronic commerce: Towards synergy?
Journal of Vacation Marketing, 5(3), 263–275.
Williams, P., Gill, A., & Chura, N. (2004). Branding moun-
tain destinations: The battle for “placefulness.” Tourism
Review, 59(1), 6–15.
Wiseman, J. (2005). ‘Growing Victoria Together’: The
challenges of integrating social, economic and environ-
mental policy directions at state and regional levels.
In A. Rainnie & M. Grobbelaar (Eds.), New regional-
ism in Australia (pp. 125–144). Hants, UK: Ashgate
Publishing.
Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
SUBMITTED: July 14, 2009
FINAL REVISION SUBMITTED:
August 5, 2010
ACCEPTED: August 17, 2010
REFEREED ANONYMOUSLY