Journal of Place Management and Development

The problem with spatial identity: revisiting the “sense of place”

Ares Kalandides
Article information:
To cite this document:
Ares Kalandides, (2011),"The problem with spatial identity: revisiting the “sense of place”", Journal of Place
Management and Development, Vol. 4 Iss 1 pp. 28 - 39
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17538331111117142
Downloaded on: 25 July 2016, At: 15:35 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 33 other documents.
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1249 times since 2011*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2011),"How to catch a city? The concept and measurement of place brands", Journal of Place
Management and Development, Vol. 4 Iss 1 pp. 40-52
(2011),"City branding: a state-of-the-art review of the research domain", Journal of Place Management and
Development, Vol. 4 Iss 1 pp. 9-27
(2013),"My city – my brand: the different roles of residents in place branding", Journal of Place
Management and Development, Vol. 6 Iss 1 pp. 18-28 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17538331311306087

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:528416 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1753-8335.htm

JPMD
4,1 The problem with spatial
identity: revisiting
the “sense of place”
28
Ares Kalandides
Inpolis, Berlin, Germany

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold: on the one hand, it is to contribute to a sound
conceptualization of the notion of place identity in the context of geographical spatial approaches; on the
other, it is to show the implications this has in place branding research.
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

Design/methodology/approach – First, the paper draws from place branding literature to point out
the lack of a conceptualization of place identity, second, it presents the case study of Prenzlauer Berg to
show how place identity is constituted. Finally, these findings are linked to literature about the
constitution of space and place.
Findings – The concept of spatial identity suffers under the anthropomorphism of the term identity.
Only in a sound conceptual framework and through a method mix it is possible to understand how the
specificity of space is constituted.
Research limitations/implications – The case study that is the base of this conceptual paper is a
neighbourhood. There is a need to further discuss the issue of scale, i.e. whether the same rules apply for
cities, regions or nations.
Practical implications – Place branding/marketing is often based on a fuzzy notion of place identity.
The above non-essentialist approach of this identity deeply questions both the legitimacy and the
efficiency of any place branding strategy. It thus asks for more sophisticated analytical methods by
policy makers and consultants alike.
Originality/value – Conceptualization of spatial identity is a rather vague concept and, though it is
often used as a point of departure for several issues, it is usually taken for granted. This paper offers a
new systematic approach to the disambiguation of the concept.
Keywords Urban areas, Germany, Place identity, Place marketing, Place branding
Paper type Research paper

Places tell a story. Sometimes they tell their story to only a few people, sometimes to the whole
world and in rare cases to a whole nation – even to the world (Ipsen, 2002, p. 234).

1. Place branding and place identity

In literature about place marketing and branding, there is often reference to
the term of identity in relation to place/space[1] (Ashworth and Voogd, 1990; Dematteis,
1994; Anholt, 2007, 2010; Kavaratzis, 2004, 2007). Numerous variations of the term
place identity (spatial, territorial, local, etc.) are used in different ways. Sometimes place
identity is used as just another word for place image and can thus be qualified as good
or bad, “negative” or “under-developed” (Skinner, 2008); another time it becomes
Journal of Place Management and
Development associated with local culture:
Vol. 4 No. 1, 2011
pp. 28-39 In times of globalisation local identity has become a key concern and the arts are, apart from
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1753-8335
landscape features, the only local asset to display such difference [. . .] the cultural content
DOI 10.1108/17538331111117142 remains the last bastion of local identity (Kunzmann, 2004, p. 387).
 Identity is also often considered as the “objective reality” and is thus opposed to image: The problem
Places also have identities. The “identity” may be regarded as an objective thing: it is what with spatial
the place is actually like. Identity though is not the same as “image” which defines how an identity
organisation or a place is perceived externally. Naturally, image may be strongly influenced by
the “objective” identity and image makers will seek to structure the perceptions of others but
cannot finally control them (Barke and Harrop, 1994, p. 214).
But it is exactly this distinction (between image and identity) that is confusing:
29
At the heart of the matter lies the interaction between the city’s identity and the image of the city
that is used in and, at the same time formed by marketing. Although there is a wide agreement
that one of the most important assets cities possess is the distinctive and unique local character
and identity, the argument is raised that marketing implementation in cities has diminished
local identity (Kavaratzis, 2007, p. 708).
In certain cases, place identity is used in conjunction with tradition: “A city’s
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

identity relates to its historical background and to the particularities that traditionally
characterized that city” (Deffner and Metaxas, 2010, p. 52). And further down “place
identity concerns those distinctive characteristics that historically more or less provide
the place with a character.”
For a term that is used so extensively in place branding/marketing literature,
it is surprising that there have been so few attempts to conceptualize it (Kalandides
and Kavaratzis, 2009). There is no discussion on how it is constituted, negotiated or
contested, and its relations with time and space remain vague. It is taken as given,
homogeneous and static. How do we conceptualize change? Does a place lose its identity
when it develops? How do we understand the way that places interact with each other
in the context of globalization? Only as an identity loss? Even if we understand the use
of the term merely as a metaphor, do the complex mechanisms in the formation of
individual (human) identity apply in the case of space or are we dealing here with an
anthropomorphism that leads us to totally wrong conclusions?
There are several attempts to conceptualize place identity in the context of
place branding: Weichhart et al. (2007) while researching the East German city of
Eisenhüttenstadt use the term “space-related identity” in two different ways: first, to refer
to the ways in which space is formative of the individual (human) and group identity,
second, to refer to the perceptions of space – also by the individual and the group, e.g. in
the form of mental maps. Place identity though as external to the human is not examined.
I would argue (and will try to show below) that indeed place identity and its perceptions
cannot be easily dissociated, but that they are still not identical. The German sociologist
Martina Löw uses the term Eigenlogik (intrinsic logic) to talk about the place-specific
elements that influence the local form of broader phenomena (Löw, 2008; Berking and
Löw, 2008). She mentions the Gay Pride Parade as an example to demonstrate how the
same event may take a completely different form in Berlin (as a party), in Frankfurt
(as mourning for the victims of aids) and Cologne (as a political demonstration). Yet,
the method she proposes for the analysis of this phenomenon is based solely on the
representations of place, i.e. on the image posters that communicate the cities of Berlin and
Munich. Dematteis (1994) distinguishes between place identification – exterior attributes
such as size, shape, or geographical co-ordinates that distinguish one city from another –
and identity – “a set of attributes capable of representing something similar to the
personality of an individual” (Dematteis, 1994, pp. 430-1):
 JPMD The identity of a city [. . .] refers to the urban collectivity which has expressed itself and
continues to do so in these forms. In other terms, we imagine identity as what gives coherence
4,1 and continuity to the life of this collectivity, what makes the city appear as a structured and
stable set of actors and relations which bind them together and to a given physical
environment. The identity of the city thus understood would therefore be that of a group with a
territorial base (Dematteis, 1994, p. 431).

30 The “set of actors and relations” and the way that those interact with the physical
environment are indeed unique in each place, but I take issue with the idea of identity as
“that of a group with a territorial base”. Once again, how does this account for change?
Also, how does this account for the multiplicity and transformations of social groups?
In a world made of difference and movement, does not this conceptualization of place
identity exclude newcomers?
Rereading the above, we can then distinguish between several uses of the term:
(1) place identity as part of individual (human) identity;
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

(2) place identity as formative of group identity;

(3) mental representations of place by an individual;
(4) group perceptions of place;
(5) identification of a group with a territory; and
(6) place identity as a sense of place, “character”, “personality” and distinctiveness.

In the remaining body of this paper, I want to contribute to the disambiguation of the
concept of place identity and its different uses. I focus particularly on what is often called
“a sense of place”, this particular quality that makes a place unique, but I also examine
how this interacts with some of the other definitions. The relations between space and
group identity have been examined extensively in geographical studies about ethnicity,
gender, sexuality, etc. (Keith and Pile, 1993; Carter et al., 1993; Bell and Valentine, 2005)
and I will not go deeply into that, except where needed. In the following section of the
paper, I introduce the case study (the Prenzlauer Berg district in Berlin) using different
perspectives and narratives. Section 3 is an attempt to understand the information
provided by the three narratives and think about them in geographical terms. Finally,
I discuss the implications of this approach for place branding research.

2. Three narratives from Prenzlauer Berg

Perceptions of place and the practices of the everyday
Petra[2] is a 38-year-old German White middle-class woman who has lived in the Berlin
district of Prenzlauer Berg for six years. She has bought an “overpriced” (her words)
two-room apartment which she shares with her partner:
There was not much choice really. Coming from Hamburg this was the only area that I found
attractive, though the West would have worked, too, I guess. But this area had more history.
Asked what she means by that, Petra says: “It is these old buildings, the shops, the trees in
the streets, also, imagine that this was the poorest area in the city and what it looks like
today!” Petra is referring to the gentrification process which has been very well
documented in literature (Häußermann et al., 2002; Holm, 2006). In the 1990s, Prenzlauer
Berg was the “largest urban renewal area in Europe” (Haeder and Wüst, 1994, p. 9) and
was totally transformed from a run-down neighbourhood to one of the most exclusive
 urban residential areas in Berlin. This was clearly a state-led gentrification, where the The problem
urban renewal laws, triggered a process of social change towards the wealthy professional with spatial
middle classes (Kalandides, 2007). With it came new uses: cafés, boutiques, delicatessen
and several children’s shops: identity
I’ve changed several jobs in these past few years and none of them was in the area. Some in the
West [West Berlin] and also once in Hamburg. So I commute. [. . .] But of course I have my
rituals: same baker every morning, coffee at the corner, the same ice-cream place in the summer. 31
And of course the market on Saturdays. It’s more a meeting place than market, really. That’s
where I get to see all the mothers with the prams. I am probably the only one in my generation
around here who has not had a baby in the past couple of years. Some of them moved here after
having a baby, because they say it’s the most children-friendly area in Berlin.
Babies attract baby shops and baby shops attract more babies. According to the vast
gentrification literature, Petra would belong to the gentrifiers of Prenzlauer Berg, this
affluent professional middle class that is driven both by the economic value of their
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

homes but also by the particular place feel, “these old buildings” the “history” that Petra
mentions. Sabine (41) is a rather different case:
We have lived here since 1991, well before the renewal frenzy started. Now that the baby is
almost 4 our flat is too small, but we could not afford to move to a larger one if we wanted to stay
in the neighbourhood and we do. Most of our friends live close and my son’s kindergarten is
around the corner.
Petra and Sabine do their daily shopping in the same neighbourhood and yet their
interpretation could hardly be more different. For Petra, the shops are:
[. . .] quite unique. You don’t see any chains here, they are all individual boutiques. It’s a
pleasure to shop here. It gives me the feeling I am part of the place.
Sabine:
We can’t really afford most of the shops, but with time you learn. So I have the old butcher
who’s been here since the East and is still good and cheap, or the supermarket. Though the
Vietnamese corner store is just downstairs it is too expensive.
Sabine and her husband moved to Prenzlauer Berg when the neighbourhood was still
full of dilapidated buildings erected around 1900 and never refurbished.
They were born and raised in the German Democratic Republic (GDR) and their
narrative of the area is quite a different one:
Nobody really wanted to live here. These old flats had no central heating, sometimes not even a
bathroom. When we moved in most of the building was empty. But also, this was the place
where the East German intelligentsia lived. All of the unconventional people who did not fit
into the system. Then we had the Franz-Club right at the end of the street and that was a legend.
I think that is what attracted us in the first place.

Relational place identities and the space of beer production

In the early hours of 1 August 1997 one of the legendary clubs of (former) East Berlin
closed its doors for good. The “Franz Club” was not only home to several East German
music bands, but also part of the Prenzlauer Berg myth (as Sabine already mentioned).
It was only several years later, in 2004 that a new club would open up in the
same location, the Frannz Club obviously building on the legend of the old one.
 JPMD Yet, the location, the Kulturbrauerei, has been a place of entertainment continuously for
4,1 over a century. It is the former Schultheiss brewery, one of several former brewery
buildings that still today mark the neighbourhood. Prenzlauer Berg itself is a district
(until 2001 a municipality) in Northeast Berlin, marked mostly by nineteenth century
residential buildings. Former brewery buildings have a long history in the area.
The mid-nineteenth century saw an important transformation in beer production in
32 Berlin, until then mostly limited to small quantities in home breweries inside the city
limits. For centuries, Bavarians had been storing beer in cold alpine caves, thus isolating a
particular fermenting yeast that produces longer life beer known as lager (lagern –
to store) (Kunze, 2007). The fungus responsible for this particular method of “cold
fermentation” (as opposed to warm fermentation that produces ale) was only isolated
in the nineteenth century by Emil Christian Hansen who worked for the Danish
Carslberg brewery. It was those new developments (the Bavarian tradition and the Danish
discovery) that allowed for a more “scientific” and industrial production of beer. Warm
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

fermentation (ale) was meant for immediate consumption, whereas cold fermentation
(lager) could be produced in larger quantities that were then stored. With the change in
method and production volumes, it was obvious that the traditional home-brewery was no
longer large enough. In the winter of 1828/1829, the new “Bavarian” method of beer
production was introduced to Berlin and some years later, in 1848 the “Pfeffer” brewery
opened up in Prenzlauer Berg, the hill right outside the city gates. The location offered
several advantages: there was space for building a larger industrial unit, there was
good quality non-taxed ground water, indispensable for the production of beer; the
hilly ground permits the creation of cold cellars where beer and ice can be stored
(Kuervers et al., 2005). Further, technological progress such as the introduction of the
steam-driven machines or the cooling machine as well as the reform of the stock law in
1868 (it permitted corporations to draw new capital at the stock exchange market) allow
the industry to expand rapidly. By the year 1900, there are 21 breweries in the area which
has become mostly residential, with the breweries integrated into the urban fabric.
Not only do those produce beer, but they also serve it to Berliners who regularly visit their
biergartens:
This district was nice to live in. With all that was offered to young people in the ‘30s and
’40s before the destruction [. . .] We had the “Pfefferberg” [i.e. the Pfeffer brewery] where we
partied. A dancing place for the young and the old, at different times, but as I said also mixed.
Upstairs, there was a beautiful café and biergarten in the summer. But “Pfefferberg” was also a
brewery. This other brewery in Schönhauser Allee, Schultheiss, was not a meeting point for us.
Occasionally there would be a ball there at New Year’s Eve or at Easter, when the brewery
invited. But then it would be only for the posh folk, from the directors and the employees.
Us ordinary people did not go there. Private parties that we only saw and smelled with our nose
flat on the windows. But without envy. That’s how things were. The social order did not permit
anything else so there was no envy. We had fun at the “Pfefferberg” (Erika Meusel, born 1924,
quoted in Jensen, 2000, pp. 67-8).
For some, Prenzlauer Berg was a place of production; for others, a place of entertainment.
In the meanwhile, breweries in Prenzlauer Berg thrived: with the train reducing
distances breweries import raw material (barley and hop) from agricultural areas, export
beer to far away places and recruit workers among the new immigrants who move to
Berlin while the Reich is expanding. It is at the same time that Prenzlauer Berg becomes
home to a growing Jewish population.
 Dominant identities and the Jewish Prenzlauer Berg The problem
There is not much in Prenzlauer Berg today to remind one that this used to be a with spatial
neighbourhood once populated by a thriving Jewish community. Only the synagogue on
Ryke strasse and the cemetery on Schönhauser Allee are still witnesses of this past. identity
Yet, from the end of the nineteenth century and until Second World War with the
destruction of Jewish life in Germany, this was one of the areas most marked by the
everyday life of Berlin Jews (Kreutzer, 1997). In 1931, 11 per cent of the population living 33
in the southern neighbourhoods of Prenzlauer Berg was Jewish, while in most parts of
the city (with prominent exceptions the districts of Mitte and Wilmersdorf where it was
even higher) the Jewish population did not exceed 2-3 per cent:
The many Jewish families who lived in Metzer St. influenced the character of the street for a
long time. “At that time we lived in two different worlds. On the one side was Metzer St. with
the religious celebrations and songs and already at the next corner they played German
oompah-pah music” (Max Nesher quoted in Roder, 1997, p. 123).
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

It is rather late, i.e. after 1997 that the interest in the Jewish history of Prenzlauer
Berg arises. This is not a coincidence: in the GDR, the area was symbolically loaded and
codified as a working-class neighbourhood. While most of the sources in literature seem to
corroborate that perception, there is some controversial evidence. The newspaper Berliner
Tageblatt from 18 July 1892, discussing the viability of a new market hall, writes: “The
market has been built in the middle of a densely populated district which is inhabited
mostly by well-off people” (quoted in Haeder and Wüst, 1994, p. 143). This was confirmed
in a personal interview (Kalandides, 2010) with a former inhabitant of the area: at least
during Second World War, it seems that the population was rather mixed and closer to the
petite bourgeoisie than the working class. “Most of our neighbours were civil servants.
There was also the occasional doctor, but that was rare. We knew the children mostly of
course.” Kreutzer (1997) was able to reconstruct the social mix for the years around 1930,
but because of the available sources, this profile is not very clear. It seems though, that the
southern part of the area (where also most of the Jews lived) was indeed a petit-bourgeois
area becoming more working class towards the north.
Yet, East Germany chose to pick out, stress and showcase the working-class element.
In particular, the celebrations for Berlin’s 750th anniversary in 1987 saw the staging of
an urban renewal programme in Husemann St. with the renovation of 30 residential
buildings from the period 1870-1890 and the inauguration of a “Museum of Berliner
Working-class Life around 1900”. Facades were restored, nostalgic shop and street signs
were designed and a cast iron pump and historical street lights were installed. Urban
(2007) interprets this decision in many ways: as a new understanding in the GDR of what
the city is about, as the rejection of the modernist planning principles and as a growing
interest of sociology towards the everyday life. But also, though secondarily, as an
ideological “stress of the importance of the place for the struggles of the working-class
movement around the turn of the century” (Urban, 2007, p. 154). As Urban (2007, p. 155)
mentions:
[. . .] there were more than enough overfilled proletarian flats in Prenzlauer Berg around the
turn of the century, but rather few in Husemann St. A large part of the structure was large
middle-class flats overlooking the street [. . .] The presentation of the street as a “historical
working-class neighbourhood” was mostly a marketing image.
 JPMD 3. The trouble with place identity
4,1 These are only three short narratives out of a potentially infinite number of them. There
could be the narrative of the people who had to move away because of gentrification;
the story of the Vietnamese woman who opens her grocery at 8 in the morning and closes
it at 9 every night; the story of the strong gay community and its infrastructure, which
were already present in East Berlin; the narrative of the symbolic renaming of street
34 names; the narrative of media representation and a lot more. Yet, even these three stories
selected for the purpose of this paper bring us back to one of the basic questions of
geographical thought: the constitution of space and place. I will limit myself to a very
partial review of three authors, whom I find useful for my argumentation.
In her seminal essay “A global sense of place” originally published in 1991, Doreen
Massey asks a simple question, very close to the focus of this paper: “Can’t we rethink
our sense of place? Is it not possible for a sense of place to be progressive; not self-closing
and defensive, but outward-looking?” (Massey, 1994, p. 147). She proposes to rethink
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

place in the following terms: first, place is:

[. . .] absolutely not static. If places can be conceptualized in terms of the social interactions
which they tie together, then it is also the case that these interactions themselves are not
motionless things, frozen in time. They are processes.
Second, “places do not have boundaries in the sense of divisions which frame simple
enclosures. ‘Boundaries’ [. . .] are not necessary for the conceptualization of a place
itself”. Third, “[. . .] places do not have single, unique ‘identities’; they are full of internal
conflicts,” [. . .] “for different social groups and different individuals, are placed in very
distinct ways in relation to [. . .] flows and interconnections”, a relation that Massey calls
“power geometries”. And finally:
[. . .] none of this denies place nor the importance of the uniqueness of place. The specificity of
place is continually reproduced, but it is not a specificity which results from some long,
internalized history (Massey, 1994, pp. 155-6).
It is in this line of thought in the understanding of a “sense of place” that this paper is
inscribed.
Läpple’s (1991) “Essay about space”, where he traces back the origins of the concept of
relative space in German geography and sociology, throws light on several important
issues. Läpple proposes the following four constitutive elements of space: first, the
material-physical substrate of social relations, as the material external form of social
space. This socially produced substrate consists both of place-bounded artefacts and of
the human body. It also functions as crystallized history and materializes collective
memory. Second, there are the structures of social interaction, i.e. human practices in
relation with the material substrate. This includes production, use and appropriation of
materiality and relates to differentiation of class. Third, there is an institutionalized and
normative regulation system as mediator between the material substrate of social space
and the social practice of its production, appropriation and use. This regulation system
consists of forms of property, power and control relations, legal regulations, planning
guidelines, social and aesthetic norms. And fourth, there is the spatial system of
signs, symbols and representations linked to the material substrate (Läpple, 1991,
pp. 196-7). The recurring theme in the above is the material substrate that interconnects
the different elements. It is the materiality and the regulatory system that give place its
continuity, while practices and social interaction leave space for change and progress.
 Finally, in her work “Space Sociology” (2001) Martina Löw develops her own concept The problem
on the constitution of space. For her, space is constituted through two processes: with spatial
spacing and synthesizing. With spacing she understands the:
identity
[. . .] placing of socially produced goods and people or the positioning of primary symbolic
markers, in order to render recognizable sets of goods and people (e.g. the sign at the entrance
of a town) [. . .]. Placing is erecting, building or positioning (Löw, 2001, p. 158).
35
Synthesizing is the “processes of perception, imagination and memory though which
people and goods are summed up in places (spaces?)” (Löw, 2001, p. 159). Though Löw
suggests a different nomenclature than Läpple, synthesizing comes very close to
Läpple’s representations.
Keeping the above in mind and revisiting the three narratives from Prenzlauer Berg,
there are several interesting points to be made.
First, there is a basic question about the boundaries of place identity: is it possible to
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

understand what is happening in Prenzlauer Berg without understanding what is

happening in other places? Or put differently: would it be possible to understand a place
in isolation rather than in interconnection with other places? We need to look at how
Berlin was interconnected with Bavaria or Denmark to understand what changed in beer
production (and this brewery building) in that particular moment in history. This space
of beer production and distribution is a geographically spread out and discontinuous
space, a contingent space of relations, flows and interconnections. It works the other way
round, too: the ability to form breweries of that size with the place-specific conditions of
Prenzlauer Berg affected other areas – which either imported beer from here or exported
the raw material (barley and hops) to it. The same thing goes for the Jewish community.
Only in relation to wider nationalist and migration movements in late nineteenth century
Europe is it possible to understand why and how the community found a home in
Prenzlauer Berg. It is almost impossible to interpret what we see by looking at isolated
locations. The question of a place’s identity (what is this place and what distinguishes it
from others) can rarely be answered without seeing a place in relation to other places.
A snapshot of a place is bound to be reductive and lead to misinterpretations.
Second, the above narratives tells us a lot about how a particular type of place
(the brewery and extendedly Prenzlauer Berg) is constituted: for decades this was
the place of particular relations (economic, social and others), practices (excursions to the
biergarten for some, daily work at the brewery for others) which produced institutions
(more breweries, but also the laws and regulations about their functioning) which in turn
reproduced the buildings and the material setting responsible for that practice in the first
place. The interconnections between institutions and materiality also become obvious in
the issue of gentrification. It was the institutional frame of urban renewal that triggered
the process which in turn led not only to material change but also to a change in the social
mix, with its losers and winners. Gentrifiers attract boutique shops which then attract
gentrifiers. Also, it was the presence of Jews with their religious practices that gave birth
to a synagogue. The synagogue in its turn attracted more Jews into the same area. These
elements, materiality, institutions and practices, are so interwoven in place that is
impossible to dissociate them. For analytical reasons, it is interesting to research them
separately and discern their interdependencies. It is only when seen together though that
they allow us to think about what makes a place what it is.
 JPMD Third, this is a tale of continuities and discontinuities. The interdependency of the
4,1 place-constitutive elements could go on forever, reproducing itself in eternity. Yet, the
last brewery in Prenzlauer Berg closed down only a few years after Second World War.
The production and the distribution stopped, people had to find new jobs and numerous
of the neighbourhood’s connections with the rest of the world were severed. It is
once again only if we understand places as open systems, integrated in much broader
36 relations that there is space for change. Neither the Second World War nor the division of
Germany can obviously be adequately understood by looking at the area alone and yet
are responsible for its interruptions and discontinuities. I will argue on the other hand,
that these broader events were also produced in places and that Prenzlauer Berg with its
particular role (be it as small as it is) in German expansive capitalism of the twentieth
century has its position in those events. Finally, practices are marked both by the
repetition of human actions and by the break of routines, thus making space for change.
Place indeed becomes an open-end process.
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

Fourth, both Sabine and Petra moved into the neighbourhood because of things they
knew about it or that they thought they knew about it – Löw’s synthesizing. Mental
representations of space are images and are mediated through narratives – in the media,
the arts or even in the recounts of friends. We should not understand this image as
something totally abstract and independent of some “objective materiality”. These
images are not only woven into space, but they tend to reproduce themselves and the
material world. Petra and others like her are not only the followers of a gentrification
process, but became active formers of the social change that took place in the area,
through their perceptions of the place. In the same way, the creation of a museum of
working class struggle is an attempt to influence precisely these mental representations
of place, an exclusivity constantly contested by the material presence of the synagogue
or the Jewish cemetery.
Fifth, both Sabine and Petra are integrated into a system of complex power relations
deeply woven into space – relations of gender, class and a lot more. It is only in the relative
power between the gentrifiers and the (potentially) displaced that we can understand what
the two women are saying and why this is formative of the neighbourhood. The
construction and destruction of breweries is also a tale of power relations, admittedly the
broad ones of capitalist production. Also, if a place is narrated, this is done by a subject
integrated in a cultural system of symbols and in a “power geometry”. The decision of the
GDR to tell the story of the working class creates a hierarchy of narratives, where, at least
for a certain period of time, one is highlighted while the other is silenced. To think of place
identity as an “objective reality” is to ignore this deeply political nature of place.
Finally, this interconnection of materiality, practices, institutions and representations
weaves a net of co-existing narratives. The former brewery buildings, the people and their
practices – the infinite multiplicity of stories – exist simultaneously. It is this coexistence
of difference that we perceive as place at any given moment in time. Sabine’s and Petra’s
life stories intersect in Prenzlauer Berg with the “life story” of the Kulturbrauerei or this
of the Jewish community. Each of these trajectories has a past, a present and a future,
but they all happen to meet here and “make” Prenzlauer Berg what it is.

4. Conclusions
“‘Identity’ implies an undifferentiated unity or sameness, one that constitutes the essential
‘being’ of an entity” (Martin, 2005, p. 97). Yet, as we already saw, identity also means
 distinctiveness, not being “the other”. The transposition of the term identity from humans The problem
to place is highly problematic and can only be understood as a metaphor. There is with spatial
obviously confusion in place branding literature in the use of the term; it can mean
anything from place image to territorial group identity. In order to understand place identity
identity as a “sense of place”, it is necessary to think about how space/place is constituted,
a process that brings us back to former geographical discussions. For methodological
reasons, we can think of place in terms of distinctive constitutive elements: materiality, 37
practices, institutions and representation. But all of these are relational formations
integrated in far reaching interconnections and always permeated by continuities and
discontinuities in time. Place this way can be understood as the simultaneity of difference.
Also, place identity needs to be conceptualized together with power. Power relations are
profoundly woven into place. A study of place identity needs to take all of the above into
account. Finally, it is important to understand that place identity is a process, never
immobile or fixed, and any attempt to define it will always be futile. What research can do
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

is bring some of its elements to the fore through a series of approximations:

In this interpretation, what gives a place its specificity is not some long internalized history
but the face that it is constructed out of a particular constellation of social relations, meeting
and weaving together at a particular locus (Massey, 1994, p. 154).

Notes
1. At this point, it is important to state that place and space are not identical nor do I use them
as alternatives for the same concept. Yet, it is not in the scope of this paper to conceptualize
the distinction.
2. Both this interview and the two following ones (Sabine and the former inhabitant of
Prenzlauer Berg) in Kalandides (2010).

References
Anholt, S. (2007), Competitive Identity: The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and
Regions, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Anholt, S. (2010), Places. Identity, Images and Reputation, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke.
Ashworth, G.J. and Voogd, H. (1990), Selling the City: Marketing Approaches in Public Sector
Urban Planning, Belhaven Press, London.
Barke, M. and Harrop, K. (1994), “Selling the industrial town: identity image and illusion”,
in Gold, J.R. and Ward, S.V. (Eds), Place Promotion: The Use of Publicity and Marketing to
Sell Towns and Regions, Wiley, Chichester, pp. 93-114.
Bell, D. and Valentine, G. (2005), Mapping Desire, Routledge, London.
Berking, H. and Löw, M. (Eds) (2008), Die Eigenlogik der Städte, Campus, New York, NY.
Carter, E., Donald, J. and Squires, J. (1993), Space and Place: Theories of Identity and Location,
Lawrence and Wishart, London.
Deffner, A. and Metaxas, T. (2010), “Place marketing, local identity and branding cultural images
in Southern Europe: Nea Ionia, Greece and Pafos, Cyprus”, in Ashworth, G. and
Kavaratzis, M. (Eds), Towards Effective Place Brand Management. Branding European
Cities and Regions, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 49-68.
Dematteis, G. (1994), “Urban identity, city image and urban marketing”, Abhandlungen –
Anthropogeographie, Institut für Geographische Wissenschaften, FU Berlin, Vol. 52,
pp. 429-39.
 JPMD Haeder, A. and Wüst, U. (1994), Prenzlauer Berg. Besichtigung einer Legende, edition q, Berlin.
4,1 Häußermann, H., Holm, A. and Zunzer, D. (2002), Stadterneuerung in der Berliner Republik.
Modernisierung in Berlin-Prenzlauer Berg, Leske und Budrich, Opladen.
Holm, A. (2006), Die Restrukturierung des Raumes. Stadterneuerung der 90er Jahre in Ostberlin.
Interessen und Machtverhältnisse, Transcript, Bielefeld.
Ipsen, D. (2002), “Die Kultur der Orte. Ein Beitrag zur sozialen Strukturierung des städtischen
38 Raumes”, in Low, M. (Ed.), Differenzierung des Städtischen, Leske und Budrich, Opladen,
pp. 233-45.
Jensen, J. (2000), Berlin Prenzlauer Berg. Alltag und Geschichte 1920-1970, Sutton, Berlin.
Kalandides, A. (2007), “For a stricter definition of the term ‘Gentrification’”, Geographies, Vol. 13,
pp. 158-72 (in Greek).
Kalandides, A. (2010), “Place identity: multiple narratives from Prenzlauer Berg”, unpublished
PhD thesis, National Technical University of Athens, Athens.
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

Kalandides, A. and Kavaratzis, M. (2009), “From place marketing to place branding – and back:
a need for re-evaluation: guest editorial”, Journal of Place Management and Development,
Vol. 2 No. 1.
Kavaratzis, M. (2004), “From city marketing to city branding: towards a theoretical
framework for developing city brands”, Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Vol. 1
No. 1, pp. 58-73.
Kavaratzis, M. (2007), “City marketing: the past, the present and some unresolved issues”,
Geography Compass, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 695-712.
Keith, M. and Pile, S. (1993), Place and the Politics of Identity, Routledge, London.
Kreutzer, M. (1997), “Über konzentrierte jüdische Nachbarschaften in Prenzlauer Berg 1886-1931.
Eine historisch-statistische Beschreibung anhand von Adressbüchern und
Adressverzeichnissen”, Leben mit der Erinnerung. Jüdische Geschichte in Prenzlauer
Berg, pp. 353-80, Kulturamt Prenzlauer Berg, Prenzlauer Berg Museum für
Heimatgeschichte und Stadtkultur, Bernt Roder, Berlin.
Kuervers, K., Roder, B. and Tacke, B. (2005), Hopfen und Malz. Geschichte und Perspektiven der
Braureustandorte im Berliner Nordosten, Museumsverbund Pankow/Text Verlag, Berlin.
Kunze, W. (2007), Die Technologie der Brauer und Mälzer, VLB, Berlin.
Kunzmann, K.R. (2004), “Culture, creativity and spatial planning”, Town Planning Review, Vol. 75
No. 4, pp. 383-404.
Läpple, D. (1991), “Essay über den Raum”, in Häußermann, H., Ipsen, D., Badoni, T.K., Läpple, D.,
Siebel, W. and Rodenstein, M. (Eds), Stadt und Raum. Für ein gesellschaftswissenschaftliches,
Raumkonzept, Pfaffenweiler, pp. 157-207.
Löw, M. (2001), Raumsoziologie, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt.
Löw, M. (2008), Soziologie der Städte, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt.
Martin, J. (2005), “Identity”, in Atkinson, D., Jackson, P., Sibley, D. and Washbourne, N. (Eds),
Cultural Geography: A Critical Dictionary of Key Concepts, I.B. Tauris, London, pp. 97-102.
Massey, D. (1994), “A global sense of place”, in Massey, D. (Ed.), Space, Place and Gender,
Polity Press, Cambridge, pp. 146-56.
Roder, B. (1997), “Sammelstelle Senefelderplatz. Max Nesher, geborener Raubvogel,
Metzer Strasse 18”, Leben mit der Erinnerung. Jüdische Geschichte in Prenzlauer Berg,
Kulturamt Prenzlauer Berg, Prenzlauer Berg Museum für Heimatgeschichte und
Stadtkultur, Bernt Roder, Berlin, pp. 121-7.
 Skinner, H. (2008), “The emergence and development of place marketing’s confused identity”, The problem
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 24 Nos 9/10, pp. 915-28.
Urban, F. (2007), Berlin/DDR Neo-historisch. Geschichte aus Fertigteilen, Gebr. Mann Verlag,
with spatial
Berlin. identity
Weichhart, P., Weiske, C. and Werlen, B. (2006), Place Identity und Images. Das Beispiel
Eisenhüttenstadt, Institut für Geographie und Regionalforschung der Universität Wien,
Vienna. 39
Corresponding author
Ares Kalandides can be contacted at: kalandides@inpolis.de
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Melinda Benkő Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary Tibor Germán
Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary Cathy Parker Manchester
Metropolitan University Manchester United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Ares Kalandides INPOLIS UCE GmbH Berlin Germany .
2016. Crime prevention aspects of public space renewal in Budapest. Journal of Place Management and
Development 9:2. . [Abstract] [PDF]
2. Francisco J. Sarabia-Sanchez, Maria J. Cerda-Bertomeu. 2016. Place brand developers’ perceptions of
brand identity, brand architecture and neutrality in place brand development. Place Branding and Public
Diplomacy . [CrossRef]
3. Nergis Aziz, Habibe Ilhan, Barry A. Friedman, Nizameddin Bayyurt, İbrahim Keleş. 2016. Universities
as stakeholders that influence students’ intention to visit a place. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy
. [CrossRef]
4. Francesco Capone, Luciana Lazzeretti. 2016. Fashion and city branding: An analysis of the perception of
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

Florence as a fashion city. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing 7:3, 166-180. [CrossRef]
5. Khalid Hafeez, Pantea Foroudi, Keith Dinnie, Bang Nguyen, Sanjai K Parahoo. 2016. The role of
place branding and image in the development of sectoral clusters: The case of Dubai. Journal of Brand
Management 23:4, 383-402. [CrossRef]
6. Senay Oguztimur, Ulun Akturan. 2016. Synthesis of City Branding Literature (1988-2014) as a Research
Domain. International Journal of Tourism Research 18:4, 357-372. [CrossRef]
7. Jesper Falkheimer. 2016. Place branding in the Øresund region: From a transnational region to a bi-
national city-region. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy . [CrossRef]
8. Arnela Ceric, Heather J. Crawford. 2016. Attracting SIEs: Influence of SIE motivation on their location
and employer decisions. Human Resource Management Review 26:2, 136-148. [CrossRef]
9. Aleksandr Michelson, Katrin Paadam. 2016. Destination branding and reconstructing symbolic capital
of urban heritage: A spatially informed observational analysis in medieval towns. Journal of Destination
Marketing & Management 5:2, 141-153. [CrossRef]
10. Kelly Greenop, Sébastien Darchen. 2016. Identifying ‘place’ in place branding: core and periphery in
Brisbane’s “New World City”. GeoJournal 81:3, 379-394. [CrossRef]
11. Verity Anne Greenwood, Larry Dwyer. 2016. Reinventing Macau tourism: gambling on creativity?.
Current Issues in Tourism 1-23. [CrossRef]
12. André Ouwehand, Eva Bosch. 2016. Planning “Home” by Branding. Home Cultures 13:2, 169-192.
[CrossRef]
13. Amelia Green, Debra Grace, Helen Perkins. 2016. City branding research and practice: An integrative
review. Journal of Brand Management 23:3, 252-272. [CrossRef]
14. Ying Fan, Akram Shahani. 2016. Country Image of Pakistan: A Preliminary Study. International Journal
of Tourism Research 18:3, 220-227. [CrossRef]
15. Chung-Shing Chan. 2016. The application of fuzzy sets theory in eco-city classification. Place Branding
and Public Diplomacy . [CrossRef]
16. Norberto Muñiz Martínez Department of Economics and Business Management, University of León,
León Spain . 2016. Towards a network place branding through multiple stakeholders and based on cultural
identities. Journal of Place Management and Development 9:1, 73-90. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
 17. Chung-Shing Chan, Lawal M. Marafa. 2016. Perceptual content analysis for city image: a case study of
Hong Kong. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 1-15. [CrossRef]
18. Fabiana Mariutti, Ralph Tench. 2016. How does Brazil measure up? Comparing rankings through the
lenses of nation brand indexes. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 12:1, 17-31. [CrossRef]
19. Sebastian Zenker, Robert Govers. 2016. The current academic debate calls for critical discussion. Place
Branding and Public Diplomacy 12:1, 1-4. [CrossRef]
20. Ole Have Jørgensen. 2016. Place and city branding in Danish municipalities with focus on political
involvement and leadership. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 12:1, 68-77. [CrossRef]
21. Andrea Lucarelli, Massimo Giovanardi. 2016. The political nature of brand governance: a discourse
analysis approach to a regional brand building process. Journal of Public Affairs 16:1, 16-27. [CrossRef]
22. Olga Kolotouchkina, Gildo Seisdedos. 2016. The urban cultural appeal matrix: Identifying key elements
of the cultural city brand profile using the example of Madrid. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 12:1,
59-67. [CrossRef]
23. Kaveh Peighambari, Setayesh Sattari, Tim Foster, Åsa Wallström. 2016. Two tales of one city: Image
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

versus identity. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy . [CrossRef]

24. Alok Acharya, Zillur Rahman. 2016. Place branding research: a thematic review and future research
agenda. International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing . [CrossRef]
25. Richard Sadler, Evan Cleave, Godwin Arku, Jason Gilliland. 2016. A comparative analysis of place branding
in Michigan and Ontario. Urban Research & Practice 9:1, 16-36. [CrossRef]
26. Heike Oevermann, Harald A. Mieg. 2016. Nutzbarmachung historischer Industrieareale für die
Stadtentwicklung. disP - The Planning Review 52:1, 31-41. [CrossRef]
27. Tan Yigitcanlar, Mirko Guaralda, Manuela Taboada, Surabhi Pancholi. 2016. Place Making for Knowledge
Generation and Innovation: Planning and Branding Brisbane's Knowledge Community Precincts. Journal
of Urban Technology 23:1, 115-146. [CrossRef]
28. Michael Alexander SeidelKonzeptioneller Rahmen 7-78. [CrossRef]
29. Valery Gordin, Julia TrabskayaSt. Petersburg as a Tourist Destination 87-108. [CrossRef]
30. Efe Sevin, Emma Björner. 2015. A new China: Media portrayal of Chinese mega-cities. Place Branding
and Public Diplomacy 11:4, 309-323. [CrossRef]
31. Dr Magdalena Florek, Dr Massimo Giovanardi Andrea Insch Department of Marketing, University of
Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand Menique Stuart Department of Marketing, University of Otago, Dunedin,
New Zealand . 2015. Understanding resident city brand disengagement. Journal of Place Management and
Development 8:3, 172-186. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
32. Ángel Herrero, Héctor San Martín, María del Mar García de los Salmones, Andrea del Río Peña. 2015.
Influence of country and city images on students’ perception of host universities and their satisfaction
with the assigned destination for their exchange programmes. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 11:3,
190-203. [CrossRef]
33. Nergis Aziz, Barry A Friedman, Habibe Ilhan. 2015. The impact of nonprofit organizations on the
intent to visit Turkey: An empirical test using the theory of planned behavior. Place Branding and Public
Diplomacy 11:3, 175-189. [CrossRef]
34. Teemu Moilanen. 2015. Challenges of city branding: A comparative study of 10 European cities. Place
Branding and Public Diplomacy 11:3, 216-225. [CrossRef]
 35. Eva Maria Jernsand, Helena Kraff. 2015. Participatory place branding through design: The case of Dunga
beach in Kisumu, Kenya. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 11:3, 226-242. [CrossRef]
36. Janne Lindstedt Department of Economic Geography, Turku School of Economics, University of Turku,
Turku, Finland . 2015. A deliberately emergent strategy – a key to successful city branding. Journal of
Place Management and Development 8:2, 90-102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
37. Cathy Parker, Stuart Roper, Dominic Medway. 2015. Back to basics in the marketing of place: the impact
of litter upon place attitudes. Journal of Marketing Management 31:9-10, 1090-1112. [CrossRef]
38. Maya Fitri, Sugeng Triyadi. 2015. Community Cultures in Creating the Place-Bound Identity in Musi
Riparian, Palembang. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 184, 394-400. [CrossRef]
39. Bernard Leca, Charles-Clemens Rüling, Dominique Puthod. 2015. Animated Times: Critical Transitions
and the Maintenance of Field-Configuring Events. Industry and Innovation 22:3, 173-192. [CrossRef]
40. Eduardo Henrique da Silva Oliveira Department of Spatial Planning & Environment, Faculty of Spatial
Sciences, University of Groningen Groningen, The Netherlands . 2015. Place branding in strategic spatial
planning. Journal of Place Management and Development 8:1, 23-50. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

41. Massimo Giovanardi. 2015. A Multi-scalar Approach to Place Branding: The 150th Anniversary of Italian
Unification in Turin. European Planning Studies 23:3, 597-615. [CrossRef]
42. Mine Eder, Özlem Öz. 2015. Neoliberalization of Istanbul's Nightlife: Beer or Champagne?. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research 39:2, 284-304. [CrossRef]
43. Eduardo Oliveira. 2015. Place branding as a strategic spatial planning instrument. Place Branding and
Public Diplomacy 11:1, 18-33. [CrossRef]
44. Shi-xu. 2015. International city branding as intercultural discourse: workplace, development, and
globalization. Language and Intercultural Communication 15:1, 161-178. [CrossRef]
45. Mihalis Kavaratzis, Greg Ashworth. 2015. Hijacking culture: the disconnection between place culture and
place brands. Town Planning Review 86:2, 155-176. [CrossRef]
46. John Rennie ShortCity Marketing 662-668. [CrossRef]
47. Michał Dębek, Bożena Janda-Dębek. 2015. Perceived Residential Environment Quality and Neighborhood
Attachment (PREQ & NA) Indicators by Marino Bonaiuto, Ferdinando Fornara, and Mirilia Bonnes –
Polish adaptation. Polish Journal of Applied Psychology 13:2. . [CrossRef]
48. Erik Braun, Jasper Eshuis, Erik-Hans Klijn. 2014. The effectiveness of place brand communication. Cities
41, 64-70. [CrossRef]
49. María José Álvarez Rivadulla, Diana Bocarejo. 2014. Beautifying the Slum: Cable Car Fetishism in Cazucá,
Colombia. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 38:6, 2025-2041. [CrossRef]
50. Bill Merrilees, Dale Miller, Wei Shao, Carmel Herington. 2014. Linking city branding to social
inclusiveness: A socioeconomic perspective. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 10:S4, 267-278.
[CrossRef]
51. Per Olof Berg, Guje Sevón. 2014. Food-branding places – A sensory perspective. Place Branding and
Public Diplomacy 10:S4, 289-304. [CrossRef]
52. Judith Naeff. 2014. Absence in the Mirror: Beirut's Urban Identity in the Aftermath of Civil War.
Contemporary French and Francophone Studies 18:5, 549-558. [CrossRef]
53. Ida Andersson. 2014. Beyond “Guggenheiming”: From flagship buildings to flagship space in Sweden.
Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift - Norwegian Journal of Geography 68:4, 228-237. [CrossRef]
 54. Maria Lichrou, Lisa O’Malley, Maurice Patterson. 2014. On the marketing implications of place narratives.
Journal of Marketing Management 30:9-10, 832-856. [CrossRef]
55. Ida Andersson. 2014. Placing place branding: an analysis of an emerging research field in human
geography. Geografisk Tidsskrift-Danish Journal of Geography 114:2, 143-155. [CrossRef]
56. H. Efe Sevin. 2014. Understanding cities through city brands: City branding as a social and semantic
network. Cities 38, 47-56. [CrossRef]
57. Sebastian Zenker, Natascha Rütter. 2014. Is satisfaction the key? The role of citizen satisfaction, place
attachment and place brand attitude on positive citizenship behavior. Cities 38, 11-17. [CrossRef]
58. Mikael Andéhn, Azadeh Kazeminia, Andrea Lucarelli, Efe Sevin. 2014. User-generated place brand equity
on Twitter: The dynamics of brand associations in social media. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy
10:2, 132-144. [CrossRef]
59. Sebastian Zenker, Tobias Gollan, Niels Van Quaquebeke. 2014. Using Polynomial Regression Analysis
and Response Surface Methodology to Make a Stronger Case for Value Congruence in Place Marketing.
Psychology & Marketing 31:3, 184-202. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

60. Massimo Giovanardi, Andrea Lucarelli, Patrick L’Espoir Decosta. 2014. Co-performing tourism places:
The “Pink Night” festival. Annals of Tourism Research 44, 102-115. [CrossRef]
61. Staci M. Zavattaro. 2013. Expanding Goffman's Theater Metaphor to an Identity-Based View of Place
Branding. Administrative Theory & Praxis 35:4, 510-528. [CrossRef]
62. Chung-shing Chan, Lawal M Marafa. 2013. A review of place branding methodologies in the new
millennium. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 9:4, 236-253. [CrossRef]
63. Cecilia Pasquinelli, Jukka Teräs. 2013. Branding Knowledge-intensive Regions: A Comparative Study of
Pisa and Oulu High-Tech Brands. European Planning Studies 21:10, 1611-1629. [CrossRef]
64. Jong Youl Lee, Chad David Anderson. 2013. The Restored Cheonggyecheon and the Quality of Life in
Seoul. Journal of Urban Technology 20:4, 3-22. [CrossRef]
65. Sebastian Zenker, Suzanne C Beckmann. 2013. Measuring brand image effects of flagship projects for
place brands: The case of Hamburg. Journal of Brand Management 20:8, 642-655. [CrossRef]
66. Eduardo Moncada. 2013. Business and the Politics of Urban Violence in Colombia. Studies in Comparative
International Development 48:3, 308-330. [CrossRef]
67. Arja Lemmetyinen, Frank Go, Mervi Luonila. 2013. The relevance of cultural production – Pori Jazz –
in boosting place brand equity. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 9:3, 164-181. [CrossRef]
68. Francesco Massara, Fabio Severino. 2013. Psychological distance in the heritage experience. Annals of
Tourism Research 42, 108-129. [CrossRef]
69. Sebastian Zenker, Sibylle Petersen, Andreas Aholt. 2013. The Citizen Satisfaction Index (CSI): Evidence
for a four basic factor model in a German sample. Cities 31, 156-164. [CrossRef]
70. Ares KalandidesTore OmholtInstitute of Marketing, Norwegian School of Management, Oslo, Norway.
2013. Developing a collective capacity for place management. Journal of Place Management and
Development 6:1, 29-42. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
71. Ares KalandidesJaime Hernandez‐GarciaSchool of Architecture and Design, Pontificia Universidad
Javeriana, Bogota, Colombia. 2013. Slum tourism, city branding and social urbanism: the case of Medellin,
Colombia. Journal of Place Management and Development 6:1, 43-51. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
72. Sebastian Zenker, Felix Eggers, Mario Farsky. 2013. Putting a price tag on cities: Insights into the
competitive environment of places. Cities 30, 133-139. [CrossRef]
 73. Frank M. Go, Robert Govers 195. [CrossRef]
74. Gildo Seisdedos, Pablo Vaggione 81. [CrossRef]
75. Frank M. Go, Robert Govers 1. [CrossRef]
76. Eva Gustavsson, Ingemar Elander. 2012. Cocky and climate smart? Climate change mitigation and place-
branding in three Swedish towns. Local Environment 17:8, 769-782. [CrossRef]
77. Bradley C Freeman, Trang Nhung Nguyen. 2012. Seeing Singapore: Portrayal of the city-state in global
print media. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 8:2, 158-169. [CrossRef]
78. Erik-Hans Klijn, Jasper Eshuis, Erik Braun. 2012. The Influence of Stakeholder Involvement on The
Effectiveness of Place Branding. Public Management Review 14:4, 499-519. [CrossRef]
79. Ares Kalandides (1), Mihalis Kavaratzis (2) and Martin Boisen (3)Mihalis KavaratzisSchool of
Management, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. 2012. From “necessary evil” to necessity:
stakeholders' involvement in place branding. Journal of Place Management and Development 5:1, 7-19.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
80. Massimo Giovanardi. 2012. Haft and sord factors in place branding: Between functionalism and
Downloaded by Universidad de Chile At 15:35 25 July 2016 (PT)

representationalism. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 8:1, 30-45. [CrossRef]

81. Sheela Agarwal. 2012. Relational spatiality and resort restructuring. Annals of Tourism Research 39:1,
134-154. [CrossRef]
82. Ares KalandidesINPOLIS, Berlin, Germany. 2011. City marketing for Bogotá: a case study in integrated
place branding. Journal of Place Management and Development 4:3, 282-291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
83. Sebastian Zenker, Nicole Martin. 2011. Measuring success in place marketing and branding. Place
Branding and Public Diplomacy 7:1, 32-41. [CrossRef]
84. Ebru UzunogluUsing Social Media for Participatory City Branding: 94-116. [CrossRef]