EBSCO FullText 2024 04 15

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM
2021, VOL. 25, NO. 2, 129–154

https://doi.org/10.1080/14775085.2021.1895872
Toward a co-Creation framework for developing a green

sports event brand: the case of the 2018 Zürich E Prix
Rune Bjerke and Hans Erik Naess
Department of Leadership and Organisation, Kristiania University College, Oslo, Norway
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This paper addresses the 2018 Zürich E Prix as a sport event brand Received 27 April 2020
and the city of Zürich as a key co-creator. We applied a conceptual Accepted 23 February 2021
and exploratory approach in a service-dominant logic (SDL) and co-
KEYWORDS
creation perspective. Next to analysing the motor sport event and Motorsport; sustainability;
relevant documents related to the world championship, we sports event tourism; event-
interviewed a key informant representing the organising linked smartphone
committee, which acted as the main co-creator. First, this paper application; branding
offers a new understanding of the development of green sports
event brands where a city plays a significant role. For instance,
green city policy making, networking strategy and collaboration
with stakeholders, logistical innovation, green event leadership,
flexible management, and green social norms are areas, where a
city can contribute substantially. The findings, supported by
existing theory, are summarised in a conceptual model consisting
of the green event support system and the formation of the
green sports event brand. Further, based on relevant cross-
disciplinary theories, the motor sport event case, information
about the FIA Formula E world championship, and findings
related to the strategic role of Zürich, we propose a co-creation
framework consisting of four steps: (1) the strategy and support
system: (2) the sports event experience; (3) the green sports
event brand development; and (4) the event evaluation. This
suggested framework for a green sports event brand serves as a
guideline for developing a green sports event brand in a city new
to the sports event tourism literature.
Introduction
As Formula E races are held in cities only, it begs the question of how to adapt co-creation
theory and approaches to brand personality to this particular event format. Here, the
event context is relevant to understand the choice of Formula E as Switzerland’s return
to motorsport. From being a list of separate competitions until the 1970s, new media
developments, commercialisation of sports and business investments in teams and ath-
letes merged in the 1980s to become a rapidly growing ‘sport media complex’ (Rowe,
2015). Especially since the 1984 Olympics, events have evolved into hubs of leisure,
business and marvel, where the role of public authorities has shifted from facilitator to
CONTACT Rune Bjerke rune.bjerke@kristiania.no Department of Leadership and Organisation, Kristiania

University College, Kirkegata 24-26, 0153 Oslo, Norway
© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
130 R. BJERKE AND H. E. NAESS
direct service provider (Tomlinson & Young, 2006). An example that precedes our case of
the Zürich E Prix is Sturm’s (2019) research on the 2015 London E Prix. Shaped as a case
study of the issues of staging a race in London’s Battersea Park, it resembles the dilemma
of hosting motorsport events as part of a strategy to rejuvenate a city in a green direction.
Whereas the idea was to stage the race as a platform for innovative technology by low-
ering the barriers for spectators, the reality was this: hosting a race in a historical parkland
without sufficiently consulting with those with an interest in it, made the event trouble-
some from the beginning (Sturm, 2019). Overlooking the fact that infrastructural issues
were as important to acknowledge as the race content itself, indicates that the combi-
nation of motorsport and green image require a different approach than with a classic
race. Green attributes may be added to a location or destination brand in a planning
stage and be positioned as e.g. a ‘smart city’ or ‘green city’– but only if these attributes
are harmonious with the sentiments of an extended stakeholder group.
Erhardt, Martin-Rios, and Chan (2019) encourage future research in, among others the
co-creativity domain related to sports events and stakeholders. Horbel, Popp, Woratschek,
and Wilson (2016) are pointing to the service ecosystems perspective and encourage to
develop a holistic understanding of event experiences and the related value creation.
Future research should address co-creation of value-in-context at the intra, micro, -and
macro levels. Binkhorst and Den Dekker (2009, p. 324) maintained that in tourism ‘we
are only at the beginning of exploring co-creation experiences’. They stated that the
co-creation of tourism experience is consumer generated and indicated that future
research should view it as an integrated part of the business structure and process of sta-
keholders taking part in the tourism experience development.
Therefore, in this paper, we present a study of how key stakeholders co-created a
motor sports event and a city as the event arena. Combined with Woratschek, Horbel,
and Popp’s request (2014, p. 21) for further research on how also non-consumers
influence the value of a sports event, we focus on assessing the strategic role of the
city of Zürich as an event partner and value co-creator at the 2018 Zürich E Prix – a
round of the FIA Formula E 2018 world championship. In their contribution to the
special issue of European Sport Management Quarterly, ‘Value co-creation in Sport Man-
agement’, Woratschek et al. (2014) took issue with what they saw as shortcomings in
the analysis of sport value creation. In particular, they argued that:
Managers must be aware that they have limited control over their organisations’ value
creation, as they rely on other actors (e.g. partners, consumers, fans, clubs and media). Con-
sequently, they must develop strategies for value co-creation and collaborative brand build-
ing with other actors in the network (Woratschek et al., 2014, p. 21).
Gemser and Perks (2015) examined the concept of customer co-creation and its evol-
utionary nature of a relationship and a network/ecosystem perspective. The content
analysis of relevant articles revealed that in some cases it was challenging to distinguish
between business-to-business (B2B) and business-to-consumer (B2C) contexts as
researchers failed to clarify the origin of the data and due to the network or ‘ecosystem’
approach, it is difficult to differ between B2B and B2C actors. Marcos-Cuevas, Nätti, Palo,
and Baumann (2016) used a case study approach applying various methods of data col-
lection to investigate the co-creation practices of four B2B organisations and in particular
the series of practices executed in business markets to co-create value. The study revealed
JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM 131
that ‘sustained purposeful engagement’ fortifies the organisatiońs capability to co-create

value.
Voorberg, Bekkers, and Tummers (2015) completed a thorough examination of 122
articles and books identifying (a) the objectives of co-creation and co-production, (b)
its influential factors and (c) the outcomes of the processes. They concluded that most
studies addressed mainly the identification of influential factors. However, the assessed
research articles lacked focus on the final value creation of the processes. Consequently,
the researchers advised that future studies could focus on the results of co-creation and
co-production processes. Therefore, this article focuses on the outcomes of the co-cre-
ation process of a sports event, where the event arena is a city. Also, Kohtamäki and
Rajala (2016) concluded, among others, that the research covering value co-creation
and the co-production in multi-actor service ecosystems shields a plethora of positions
with respect to economic and social exchange. The researchers encouraged to initiate
studies addressing the co-creation of value in the B2B context.
In this article, focusing on co-creation of a green motor sports event, we apply the
meaning of service ecosystems proposed by Vargo and Lusch (2011), which is a self-
adjusted, self-contained system of actors connected due to economic and social interests.
Also, in a service ecosystem there are actors, which are connected because the relation-
ships are expected to provide mutual value creation (Vargo, Maglio, & Akaka, 2008). There-
fore, based on the Zürich E Prix case, the overall purpose of this research is to address
what roles key stakeholders had in the co-creation process and what measures and activi-
ties were undertaken to co-create a green sports event. Research question 1 (RQ1) is
dealing with the roles of stakeholders as co-creators and RQ2 is about measures under-
taken to develop a green sports event brand, fan engagement and experience. Thus,
this article contributes with a new understanding of how a city-based green sports
event brand can be co-created in particular between the organiser, sponsors, and the
city as an event arena.
Literature review
This review deals with the service-dominant logic and the co-creation of a green sports
event brand, brand equity and brand personality, location brand, fan engagement, and
event experience. Sections in the literature review are followed by the specific research
questions. It is important to note that this study is conceptual and explorative in
nature. Therefore, key literature from this section will be added to the findings of the
2018 Zürich E Prix case to suggest the co-creation process model depicted in Figure 2
(see implications section).
The service-dominant logic and the co-creation of sports event

The service-dominant logic (SDL) ‘advocates a network-with-network model of value cre-
ation that enables the central provider and beneficiary to integrate resources from actors
connected with them’ (Woratschek et al., 2014, p. 12), which is in line with the co-creation
concept in a B2B context (Gemser & Perks, 2015; Marcos-Cuevas et al., 2016). By combin-
ing SDL with fan studies, Uhrich (2014) argues that customer-to-customer relations – or
socialising with other fans both on and off the event site – contribute to people’s value
perception. To follow up on the claim that sports management research needs to go

‘beyond the inadequate perspective of many traditional theories and models’ (Wor-
atschek et al., 2014, p. 20), our analysis of the Zürich E Prix exemplifies the necessity for
new conceptualizations of event value creation. Also referring to SDL, Gemser and
Perks (2015) stressed the importance of understanding the required resources, routines
and capabilities of stakeholders to co-create effectively.
The study of Marcos-Cuevas et al. (2016) shows that organisational capabilities to co-
create is not developed independently, but as a result of engaged responses to joint
event projects, processes and interactions over time within organisations and their B2B
networks. The capabilities ‘concerted, individuated, relational, ethical, empowered, and
developmental’ (p. 34) were defined vital to realise value in B2B systems. According to
Vargo and Lusch (2016) are many analyses of co-production and co-creation focusing
on either the supplier–customer relationship or the organisation. They maintain that
the network/ecosystem perspective is relevant for co-creation research, but it is not
sufficiently used in empirical research like in most motorsport studies emphasising
event value as financial output (Couto, Lai Tang, & Boyce, 2017; Jensen & Cobbs, 2014;
Mackellar & Reis, 2014). But, related to the SDL framework, it can also be argued that
the fundamental economic offering of motor sports events is not services or goods,
but experiences, here understood as the physical impression of amusement, education,
escapism and sense-based encounters with the sport (Donahay & Rosenberger, 2007;
Green, 2001; Mackellar & Reis, 2014).
Value creation, in a B2C perspective, is about customers’ creation of value-in-use
accomplished by ‘an interactive relativistic preference experience’ (Holbrook, 1994,
p. 27), which means that value is generated by the user when consuming (Becker,
1965). The interactions can be either indirect or direct, but either may produce value,
meaning that all stakeholders are potential co-producers of value (Hatch & Schultz,
2010). Ind and Coates (2013) suggested that by including end-users, risks may be
reduced in the product development process and more appropriate and practical pro-
ducts and services may be the outcome. By integrating participantś sentiments, for
instance in a participatory design process, a testable prototype as a source for further
feedback may be a result. Consequences of not co-creating with customers, accordingly,
runs the risk of getting lower scores on participant satisfaction (Roggeveen, Tsiros, &
Grewal, 2012). Most research on co-creation, however, is done on established brands or
services in a B2C setting. As the Zürich E Prix was a new sports event, where the city of
Zürich was a major stakeholder and actor, it was relevant to research key stakeholder
roles in the co-creation process mainly in a B2B context, which is reflected in the first
research question below.
RQ1: What were the roles of key stakeholders in the co-creation of Zürich E Prix?
Brand equity, location brand and brand personality

Exploring how value, defined as ‘brand equity’, is created (the added attraction endowed
by the brand to the product) (Christodoulides & de Chernatony, 2010) becomes increas-
ingly important in order to expand our knowledge of event differentiation (Pine &
Gilmore, 1998, 2011). Brand equity was suggested by Aaker (1996) to comprise brand
awareness, brand associations, perceived quality, and brand loyalty. A keyword in gener-
ating brand equity is co-creation – a social process needing interaction spots to realise
value co-creation openings (Iglesias, Ind, & Alfaro, 2013; Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2004).
For location brands, adopting the human characteristics of brand personality moreover
invoke similarities to corporate brands (where relationships within its architecture and
portfolio are of major importance) rather than the product brand (such as with destination
offerings) (Kerr, 2006, p. 280).
The concept of location brand encompasses a place’s infrastructure, people, industries
and quality of life emerged from a suggestive vision supported by the stakeholders
(Chalip & Costa, 2005). According to McManus (2002), community involvement can stimu-
late relationships, develop loyalty from the consumers, and finally produce public good-
will. Possible emotional relations between consumers and brands may be strengthened as
a result of brand experience and longer lasting brand relationships like friendship and
dependency may occur (Fournier, 1998; Mehmetoglu & Engen, 2011). To create such
relationships, creating event brand personality is one possible strategy. Azoulay and
Kapferer (2003, p. 151) stated that brand personality is ‘the unique set of human person-
ality traits both applicable and relevant to brands’, and these human characteristics
associated with a brand, are originally rooted in the discipline of personality psychology
(Aaker, 1997). Similarly, Keller (1993) defined brand personality as a set of human charac-
teristics associated with a brand. Such human characteristic as brand associations, part of
the brand equity concept (see above), represent informational nodes related to the brand
in peoplés recollection giving meanings (Keller, 1993, p. 3). The notion of event brand per-
sonality can be used as a differentiating tool in the context of city-based sports events
enforcing the city position (De Jong, Joss, Schraven, Zhan, & Weijnen, 2015; Sharifi, 2016).
With the growth of Formula E and other city-based events (Herstein & Berger, 2013), it,
therefore, seems relevant to pay more attention to the city’s role in engendering brand
equity. Dimensions of brand equity for sports events are suggested to be like awareness
(recall and recognition), associations/brand personality, and brand loyalty, which can be
the aspects differentiating a particular sports event brand from another (Bjerke & Kirke-
saether, 2020). As brand associations seem to be key drivers of brand loyalty (see e.g.
Baumann, Hamin, Phan, & Ghantous, 2013; Romaniuk & Nenycz-Thiel, 2013), brand aware-
ness, brand associations, and perceived quality impact purchase decision (Perera & Dissa-
nayake, 2013), and brand awareness influence preference/purchase intention/loyalty (see
e.g. Macdonald & Sharp, 2000; Malik et al., 2013; Shahid, Hussain, & Zafar, 2017), they are
incorporated into this conceptual and exploratory study. As the Zürich E Prix was a new
sports event, it could not factor in perceived brand quality, which has been proven to
influence positively the creation of green brand equity elsewhere (Ng, Butt, Khong, &
Ong, 2014).
The green sports event brand

Referring to green events, Getz (2009) integrates environmental dimensions with wider
sustainability factors (social, cultural, and economic), and argues that green events are
about reducing, re-using and recycling. For instance, within the tourism domain, there
is a need to reduce energy consumption. According to Laing and Frost (2010) a green
event has a sustainability policy and the event management applies sustainability
practices when running its operations and processes. The sustainability standards should
be met to satisfy the needs of future generations, not only the current one (Jenkins, 2010;
Wang, 2017). To inspire event organisations and event managers to run events in a sus-
tainable manner, Ahmad, Rashid, Abd Razak, Yusof, and Shah (2013) to focus on six areas:
(1) Energy Efficiency (using energy star rated products, natural light and ventilation, keep
electricity consumption to a minimum, etc.); (2) Waste Minimization (like avoiding using
paper printouts and placement of recycle bins); (3) Water Consumption (e.g. all measures
to promote water conservation); (4) Eco-Procurement (use suppliers whose products are
eco-friendly and manufactured locally); (5) Communication (communicate the greening
intentions and interventions to all stakeholder before, during, and after the green
event), and (6) Sustainable Development (take environmental responsibilities sincerely
to influence stakeholder, to develop a competitive edge and to create value for
owners). Thus, improved green event management practices may back the movement
in transforming the society resulting in value-added quality of life.
In a stakeholder perspective, the case study on the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games
(Sydney ‘Green Games’) by Kearins and Pavlovich (2002) shows that it seems wise to
cooperate with environmental groups keeping their independency as they, in this case,
supported setting the green agenda and having the right to assess and openly criticise
the practices. Besides, the Sydney ‘Green Games’ exemplifies the benefits of engaging sta-
keholders to strengthen the understanding of the various dimensions of the environ-
mental challenges. When improving green event strategies followed by effective
implementation, there are opportunities to influence green awareness and behaviour
of organisers, employees, partners, visitors, and citizens benefitting the awareness of
environmental protection, and the event industry (Wang, 2017). Merrilees and Marles
(2011) concluded that instead of using generic checklists at a real business event, the
actual applied green practices are more effective as a promotional tool for green policies
intended to decrease possible environmental costs of business events. The choice of a
sports event setting may be evaluated in a sustainability perspective as Buckley (2012)
underlined that the fundamental concern of sustainability is the aggregate consequences
of human activities, which put pressure on the ecosystem and the survival of humans.
The sports event engagement and experience of citizens and tourists

Given the Zürich E Prix sports event and the FIA Formula E platform the sports event
venue and situational aspects are likely influential factors regarding participantś event
experience (Kurtzman & Zauhar, 2003). Besides, event experiences made up of amongst
others structure, culture, processes, and design components (Orefice, 2018). Also, match-
ing event happenings are of great importance to attract more tourists and to increase the
output of sports events (Daniels & Norman, 2003). Economic, environmental and social
aspects restrained to legal compliance, next to political, marketing, and public relations
planning are dynamic dimensions in the tourism industry (Buckley, 2009; Hall, 2010;
Weaver, 2009). Sports tourism is basically event tourism governed by event management
aiming at reaching effects (Deery, Jago, & Fredline, 2004). According to Kurtzman and
Zauhar (2003) is sports tourism events is about sports activities drawing tourists of
which most are spectators. The actual sports tourism events may be centred around ath-
letes and coaches attracting media, technical personnel, and other sports stakeholders.
Besides, for events to be touristic as a category, tourists will have travelled distances to see
athletes or teams, and they may take part in sports activities at the event arena
(destination).
Related to the Australian World Rally Championship event in 2009, the organisers in
New South Wales ‘commitment to the economic benefits of the rally to the NSW public
sat uneasily with local community values and expectations’ (Dredge et al., 2010, p. 23).
The rally was met with responses from the No Rally Group and 7th Generation, and gen-
erated protest because it was staged in ‘a contrived space, controlled and manipulated by
special legislation and the actions of the event organiser’ (Dredge & Whitford, 2011,
p. 491). Intention to revisit a destination for sports tourism activities was significantly
impacted by destination image and past experience, and the intention was a significant
predictor of actual revisiting the destination (Kaplanidou & Vogt, 2007). Kaplanidou and
Gibson (2010) found that event characteristics as part of destination attributes are of
great importance for destinations hosting repeated sports events. Chen and Mo (2014)
concluded that ‘novelty’ and ‘self-development’ are important motivational pull factors
of green event visitors indicating that using famous persons as attractions (actors or
artists) and communicating about the green event to foster knowledge are wise. Atten-
tiveness to sports event characteristics can impact behavioural intentions in terms of revi-
siting the destination, visitorś recommendations and place attachment. Therefore, it is
vital to offer activities, attractions, event atmosphere and characteristics that can
develop attachment with the sports event destination. To maximise the outcome of
sports events and to increase sports tourism attendance, complementary activities play
an important role (Daniels & Norman, 2003). Thus, the sports event setting seems impor-
tant in order to amplify the event experience result (like the cultural, natural, man-made,
social, and economic) (Kurtzman & Zauhar, 2003).
In both the marketing domain and the tourism field attitude and satisfaction are key
terms.
Kaplanidou and Gibson (2010) realised that attitudes and satisfaction were significant
predictors of sports event participants’ intentions to re-visit. Besides, attitude toward
event participation mediated the influence satisfaction and destination image had on
intentions. The researchers concluded that satisfaction with the sports event and attitude
toward event participation are potent in forecasting the probability that an active event
sports tourist will take part in future events organised by the community. So, based on the
notion that perceived quality of sports tourism impacts tourist satisfaction which, again,
impacts the tourist’s intention to return to the event or event destination, Shonk and
Chelladurai (2008) proposed four principal sports tourism quality dimensions. The dimen-
sions also included subdimensions: (1) access quality (access to destination, sports venue,
hotel); (2) accommodation quality (the environment, interactions, and value), (3) venue
quality (environment, interactions, and value), and (4) contest quality (the process and
product of the contest).
In line with Pine & Gilmore’s arguments (2011) on how to develop customer relation-
ships and winning loyalty through experiences, a co-creation approach between partners
at an event has primarily been explored by measuring consumers’ experiential satisfaction
for managerial purposes (Payne, Storbacka, Frow, & Knox, 2009; Pine & Gilmore, 2011;
Richins, 1997). For example, Kaplanidou and Vogt (2010) developed semantic differential
scale items measuring the meaning of a sports event experience and suggested the scales
‘unfulfilling/fulfilling’, ‘poor/excellent’, ‘not stimulating/stimulating’, ‘sad/joyful’, ‘distres-

sing/relaxing’, ‘boring/exciting’, ‘worthless/valuable’, ‘gloomy/cheerful’, ‘ugly/beautiful’,
‘unhealthy/healthy’, and ‘unadventurous/adventurous’.
RQ2: What green event brand elements were incorporated to increase fan engagement and
visitorś experience?
Method
In order to increase our understanding about the co-creation process for developing a
green sports event brand with a focus on key stakeholders, we applied a case study
approach (Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 2013) using the case of the Zürich E Prix. Barratt, Choi,
and Li (2011, p. 329) refer inductive case study to generate theories based on collected
data. They define a qualitative case study as empirical research that primarily uses contex-
tually rich data from bounded real-world settings to investigate a focused phenomenon.
On 10 June 2018, the Formula E electric car race Zürich ePrix (formally the 2018 Julius Baer
Zürich E-Prix) was delivered at the Zürich Street Circuit in Zürich, Switzerland with
approximately about 150,000 spectators. The Zürich electric car race was the tenth
round of the 2017–18 Formula E season. After the last 1954 Swiss Grand Prix, this E
race was the first Swiss circuit race. Below is presented the setting/case, design, the
data collection, and the quality evaluation of the data collection.
Setting/case
In sync with the institutional reforms initiated by FIA President Jean Todt in 2013–2014,
the FIA considered with enthusiasm the suggestion from Spanish businessman Alejandro
Agag to establish a full-electric racing series under the FIA logo. Agag’s vision was to
create a distinctive motorsport spectacle, with its own brand identity and competitive
profile, which would offer participating teams (car manufacturers) and sponsors a new
venue to promote products and services related to sustainability issues. Although both
Formula 1 (F1) and the World Rally Championship (WRC) has or will shift to hybrid tech-
nology, they still rely on a traditional market base and participant pool. Formula E, by con-
trast, which in 2020 was granted world championship status from the FIA (the governing
body of world motorsport), does everything differently. So far, it has garnered consider-
able attention from the media, sponsors and motorsport fans since its inaugural race in
2014. In 2017–18, more than 300 million viewers globally tuned into at least one
Formula E race. More specifically, an average of 27.1 million people globally watched
each Formula E race (there are 12 races in a season).
Formula E (for electric) is an all-electric racing series that started up in 2014, governed
by FIA, the global motorsport association, with emphasis on green technology. The
purpose of Formula E was to create a distinctive motorsport spectacle. In contrast to
for example the London E Prix, hosted in a country of great motorsport traditions
(Sturm, 2019; Walton & Beck-Burridge, 2000), the Zürich E Prix was the first race in Switzer-
land since 1955. In other words, the Zürich E Prix had no historical repository to utilise in
order to attract stakeholders. The media indicated after the event that the 2018 Zürich E
Prix still was a success (Burgt & Kalinauckas, 2018), and the city of Zürich demanded fresh
insights on ‘E Mobility’ as part of the event if it was to be given the green light for racing in
the streets (Brückmann, Huber, & Bernauer, 2018, p. 4). According to FIA, the FIA Smart
Cities concept, launched 2017, targeting important stakeholders to discuss and deal
with urgent sustainability issues in order to identify answers appropriate for contempor-
ary mobility systems. The inventiveness attempts to exhibit how cities can be developed
in an improved sustainable direction applying adaptive policy-making and innovative
technology.
The FIA Formula E platform provides a unique arena for the FIA Smart Cities initiative along
with the FIA’s expertise in its complementary pillars of Mobility and Sport. This urban-focused
fully electric championship is hosted in city centres around the world, one of the objectives
being to promote interest in sustainable motoring and showcase the use of innovative clean
technologies. The focus on innovation is therefore at the core of the FIA Smart Cities frame-
work (FIA, 2020).
Design
We applied a conceptual and exploratory approach, a merger of cross-disciplinary the-
ories, and findings rooted in multiple methods of data collection and analyses in this
study. Such a triangulation method is to improve the credibility and dependability of
the study (Golafshani, 2003; Morrow, 2005). Furthermore, we argue that three established
criteria for quality in qualitative studies are central to the overall trustworthiness of this
study: credibility, confirmability, and transferability (Flick, 2007; Hammersley, 2007;
Seale, 1999; Shenton, 2004). An evaluation of the quality of the data collection is pre-
sented below in terms of these three criteria and how the Zurich E Prix was selected as
a case example, that is, appropriate models or examples that are utilised ‘for clarification
rather than for verification of value co-creation’ (Kolyperas, Maglaras, & Sparks, 2018, p. 7).
Data collection, data quality and analysis

Credibility is about generating confidence in the ‘truth value’ of the study. Standard strat-
egies to do so involve collecting data from multiple sources (triangulation), doing
‘member checks’, and persistent observation. The data were drawn from two sources,
one in-depth interview and secondary sources providing the case information. Related
to the car race, we used a single key informant, who was instrumental in all stages of
the 2018 Zürich E Prix – planning, executing, and evaluation. The informant was a
member of the organising committee consisting of people from the city council, sponsors,
Formula E and the local event organisation. Having only one informant for this purpose
involve the risks of subjectivity bias, random error, false claims, or impression manage-
ment (Golden, 1992; Rahman, 2012). These risks were addressed in two ways: (a) by vali-
dating the information given by the key informant through other sources, and (b) building
a case for the selection of the single key informant. The following key question, with sub-
themes, are pulled out from the interview guide: (1) How was the cultural context of Swit-
zerland’s race history part of the event planning process of stakeholders? (culture, history,
vision, purpose; alignment, planning process, stakeholders) (2) How were different of
aspects the event coordinated between the key stakeholders to make fan engagement
part of the experience? (stakeholders, roles, engagement, event experience, fans); (3)
What specific green event dimensions, offerings or sites were used as tools for co-creating
value? (stakeholders, sponsors, co-creation, tools, value); and (4) What strategic measures
were taken to include fans as co-creators of event value? (fans, public, accessibly, ticket
price, content, programme, digital platform).
Drawing upon March, Sproull, and Tamuz (1991) and Mintzberg (1979), who saw no
reason for the organisation researcher to apologise for ‘samples of one’ (p. 583) if that
one person was rich on information relevant to the research question, we concur with
Krause, Luzzini, and Lawson (2018, p. 45) in that ‘having multiple respondents is less
important than having the right respondent – that is, the key informant.’ But how is
the key informant selected, particularly within ‘retrospective event-history method-
ology’ (Glick, Huber, Miller, Doty, & Sutcliffe, 1995, p. 140)? Assuming that the aim
with a qualitative approach is ‘to grasp the multidimensionality of meanings, contexts,
unanticipated phenomena, processes and explanations which can be found in the world
of sport’ (Stelter, Sparkes, & Hunger, 2003), it can be argued that ‘key informants typi-
cally serve as gatekeepers regulating access to people and information and as cultural
experts explaining culture to an outsider’ (McKenna & Main, 2013, p. 117). This expertise,
moreover, is not necessarily translated to a position within a social unit, but to a ‘status
that stems primarily from their knowledge about topics of interest to the researcher
rather than of great import to the community as a whole’ (McKenna & Main, 2013,
p. 118). We concur with Krause et al. (2018, p. 45) in that ‘having multiple respondents
is less important than having the right respondents.’ Further, assuming that the aim
with a qualitative approach is ‘to grasp the multidimensionality of meanings, contexts,
unanticipated phenomena, processes and explanations which can be found in the world
of sport’ (Stelter et al., 2003), it can be argued that ‘key informants typically serve as
gatekeepers regulating access to people and information and as cultural experts
explaining culture to an outsider’ (McKenna & Main, 2013, p. 117). Besides, Boddy
(2016, p. 430) concluded
that in these cases a single case study involving a single research participant can be of impor-
tance and can generate great insight. This logically means that the smallest acceptable
sample size in these types of qualitative research is a sample of one.
And Sim, Saunders, Waterfield, and Kingstone (2018) stated that the subject of sample size
should not outdo other essentials of qualitative data collection and analysis.
By taking part in all aspects of the event Zürich E Prix, while not necessarily being the
person responsible for the outcomes, the informant used to strengthen the case meth-
odology fulfils the demands posed by Krause et al. (2018). We identified a person with
‘the capacity to abstract from the situation and provide a sufficiently unbiased view of
the unit of analysis, a single-informant design can be appropriate’ (Krause et al., 2018,
pp. 45–46). For the sake of quality control of key informant data (Poggie, 1972), the
informant’s views were triangulated by additional data about Formula E and the city
of Zürich’s arrangements for hosting the event. Key secondary sources were http://
www.fiaformulae.com/en (the official website of the championship), https://www.
zuricheprix.ch/ (the official event site), https://edays.ch/en/ (the supporting programme
of the race) and http://new.abb.com/news/detail/3182/abb-and-formula-e-partner-to-
write-the-future-of-e-mobility (the official title sponsor, with its headquarters located
in Zürich), as well as journals, magazines, and newspaper articles about the event. By
using multiple data sources, as well as allowing the key informant and the researcher
not involved in the interviews to comment on interview transcripts, these strategies

ensured that our findings were not a product of either inquirer’s imagination (Lincoln
& Guba, 1985, p. 243).
Confirmability refers to ‘the qualitative objectivity of a naturalistic report’ (Edwards &
Skinner, 2009, p. 72) meaning that researchers must demonstrate that ‘their findings
were factually based, that the data were systematically collected, sorted, and categorized’
(Edwards & Skinner, 2009, p. 72). As mentioned, our interview guide related to the Zürich E
Prix consisted of only four open-ended questions about the role of the city, the green
sports event and event engagement and experience, which made the interview into a
conversation. Reviewing the interview transcript and secondary sources, were done in
light of the claim that texts in sports management research ‘are essentially culturally stan-
dardized discourses associated with the value system an organization wants to promote’
(Edwards & Skinner, 2009, p. 114). That means paying specific attention to impression
tactics and PR strategies associated with Formula E, while triangulating any primary infor-
mation with other kinds of information.
During this course of the research, which can be traced through an ‘audit trail’
(Shenton, 2004, p. 72), we also find it relevant to highlight the researchers’ predispositions
and how they affected the project. One of us has been involved with research on motor-
sport and the FIA in a former study. This experience gave him ideas beforehand on where
to look for informants in the organisational matrix of FIA-governed events and select rel-
evant approaches to the research topic. However, as the other researcher was not familiar
with neither motorsport nor the FIA, he acted iteratively as sparring partner and reviewer
of decisions made throughout the project. As he, in addition, was more knowledgeable
than the other about corresponding theories, findings from related event management
research and his current experience with the development of event technology, this part-
nership created a possibility to unravel from the data what was obvious to one of us and
explain what was not to the other.
To improve transferability, the third criterion, we paid particular attention to inference
checks. This means that once a finding appears open to generalisation, it is checked
against other sources to avoid false transferability claims (Lewis & Ritchie, 2003, p. 278).
The understanding of our data was framed within the theoretical context outlined
above. We looked for similarities with existing theory while searching for theoretical dis-
coveries new to the domain. This study is suitable for ‘inferential generalization’ (Lewis &
Ritchie, 2003, p. 264) providing an explanation of how meaning can be extracted from
sample sizes of one (or few) and pull out new knowledge usable for other organisations
(March et al., 1991). The interview was recorded and transcribed to ensure reliability
(Spiggle, 1994; Yin, 2013). The coding of the recorded and transcripted data from the
interview was completed thematically Braun, Clarke, and Weate (2016). We searched
for wordings belonging to the pre-defined codes like culture, history, vision, purpose,
alignment, planning process, stakeholders, roles, engagement, event experience, fans,
sponsors, co-creation, tools, value, public, accessibly, ticket price, content, programme,
and digital platform (Glaser, 1978). We analysed patterns in the transcription, searching
also for sentiments belonging to these codes and themes in line with the codes in
order to disclose the finding as a response to the research questions (Charmaz, 2003; Cres-
well & Creswell, 2017).
Findings
The findings from the Zürich E Prix case, which are based on secondary sources and the in-
depth interview with a key representative of the organising committee, are structured
according to the two research questions.
RQ1: What were the roles of key stakeholders in the co-creation of Zürich E Prix?
Being the first track-based race in Switzerland since 1955, the organisers had no historical
repository – which in common in similar cases and races – to attract stakeholders. With
participants from automotive companies like BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar and Porsche, the
challenge of creating a motorsport show that combined tradition and innovation there-
fore came in a specific form to the Swiss organisers. Ambitious to do things differently
than in F1, the organisers formed a stakeholder management group which researched
local attitudes to the event, invited residents to come and see what it was all about,
and established a programme of activities which answered to the overall goals of
Formula E.
A key partner in this context was ETH Zürich, i.e. the Swiss Federal Institute of Technol-
ogy, which organised a symposium that featured an exhibition of newest solutions devel-
oped by ETH spin-offs as well as external start-ups and organisations in the field of
mobility and sustainability. Moreover, multiple research projects and activities were
paired with the third session of the FIA’s international forum on urban sustainability
issues on June 9. Present at this forum, was high-profile speakers such as Nathan Borg-
ford-Parnell, Science Affairs Officer at the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, United
Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), but also students and entrepreneurs carving
out new mobility ideas for the future. For example, ETH student projects like Swissloop
(a high-speed travel capsule that took part in Elon Musk’s Hyperloop competition in
Los Angeles the summer of 2018) displayed their work at the ‘eVillage’ near the racetrack,
a ‘festival space’ which according to the organisers attracted 160,000 visitors (Burgt & Kali-
nauckas, 2018). Between the race’s Free Practice sessions 1 and 2 on Saturday, ETH stu-
dents also drove their cars on track. By governing all these activities as part of the
same package, the event was accomplished in sync with the Formula E championship’s
‘green image’ (Wilbaut, 2015). From the very beginning, the intention with Formula E
was to design a different motorsport spectacle. According to the founder and CEO
Formula E, Alejandro Agag, it went from ‘an idea on a napkin’ to a global vision of rein-
venting motorsport:
As a family man, I wanted to make a contribution to preserving our world for the next gen-
eration (…) In light of climate change, Formula 1 no longer appeared appropriate for the
times we live in. E-mobility, on the other hand – that is the future.1
The Zürich councillor and initiator of the idea to bring Formula E to the city, assumed the
role of coordinator of a five-person strong administration, on behalf of Swiss E-Prix Oper-
ations AG.2 The informant says that it was a combination of a functionalist division of
labour and an egalitarian structure between the core group and the stakeholders that
shaped the management process. As a result, the managerial setup was not really a
result of a particular approach. The informant says, ‘there was no governing or advisory
committee, no hierarchy, it was a collaboration structure mostly driven by the lack of time!’
A team of five people acted as deliver of ideals. Decisions were then pragmatically made in
relation with key stakeholders. This was a win-win situation as stakeholders gained more visi-
bility and we could realize our projects.
The city of Zürich had actively pursued environmental progress for some time, which led
to 1st place in the Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index 2016 and 2nd place in the Mercer
Quality of Living Ranking 2018.3 Hence, the city’s engagement was essential as foundation
for green co-creation ventures. Therefore, for the city of Zürich, it was important to align
the purpose and vision of the event with the Zürich E Prix and Formula E as partners.
However, as an example of a wider cooperation with stakeholders, the informant under-
lines that the Formula E title sponsor, the Swiss bank Julius Baer, through this process
went astray from their traditional customer image of heralding the past through art
and culture. With the event, the bank instead portrayed itself through marketing channels
as part of the future, cluttered with futuristic images, and mirrored the overall agenda of
the event. According to statements from Julius Baer the logic of sponsoring this race was
to support ‘its role as a testing laboratory for e-mobility innovations and as an investment
in the future of our society.’4 A reasonable interpretation of these thoughts is therefore
that racing history was not considered at all, other than for initial PR purposes, as the
whole idea of the event was to showcase something new. According to the informant
this was a strategic decision, as in ‘yes, this event marks a return of racing to Switzerland
after 60 years, but from thereon we never looked back in time and concentrated exclu-
sively on today and the future’.
RQ2: What green event brand elements were incorporated to increase fan engagement and
visitorś experience?
By hosting events in urban areas and combining wheel-to-wheel action with educational
activities and ‘smart city’ initiatives as part of the race weekend, Formula E has a mission to
leave its venues in better shape than when they got there (Wilbaut, 2015). Moreover, as
addressed in eStory, the ‘value statement’ of Formula E, the championship target a
different fan demographic than F1 and the WRC: ‘Very much anchored in the Generation
Y values, Formula E is targeting young people, families, and groups interested in sustain-
ability to increase the popularity of this new brand of motorsport’ (Wilbaut, 2015, p. 26).
The championship sprung out of a desire to create a futuristic championship. Given
this desire, the informant elaborates, Swiss E-Prix Operations AG therefore built a web
of fan-engaging activities, but not necessarily directed towards traditional motorsport
fans. Further, to reach and engage the target groups and to develop the interest
among young, environmentally progressive and social media-savvy fans, Formula E
endorse race hosts to utilise a stakeholder policy which differ from the one in F1.
Whereas F1 merely deal with race organisers, Formula E seeks to include race title spon-
sors, residents, local businesses, and social projects in the planning and execution of an
event. According to the Formula E website in 2018, the championship saw an increase
of 347% among 13-17-year old fans engaging with online content compared with
2017. Moreover, the number of followers aged between 18 and 24 grew by 54 per cent
since the 2017/18 season, and those groups together (13–17 and 18–24) accounted ‘for
almost half of the total engagement – currently coming in at 49 per cent, which is up
439 per cent – likes, comments and shares – when measured in comparison to statistics
from the previous season.’
The Zürich E Prix communicated the city brand elements of the race as a festival rather
than a political forum on how to ‘save the world’, while relying more on an innovative
event design than on social media tactics says the informant: ‘We based our plans on
the activity platform ‘More than a race’. This part was crucial to get support, as the city
did not want to offer public space to a purely commercial event.’ To an extent the race
therefore, anthropomorphised the concept of ‘social normalisation’ of green values.
Coined by Rettie, Burchell, and Riley (2012) it describes ‘a social process in which activities
and products gradually become accepted as mainstream, normal, and everyday’ (p. 421).
In a similar vein, Formula E CEO Alejandro Agag, claimed that the integration of experi-
ences made Zürich different from other formula-based races:
It’s exactly the thing we want to do in Formula E – take the race to the people and make it part
of the city. People sunbathing on the shores of Lake Zurich were not there because of the
race; they were there enjoying their weekend while the race was going on too. The
Formula E race was part of the city life (Agag, 2018).
Even though environmental imagery was omnipresent, the eDays programme coordi-
nated this kind of norm promotion in a less aggressive format than is often the case
with green marketing efforts. On one hand, the Zürich E Prix partnered – without men-
tioning it in their own promo material – with myclimate.com, a non-profit organisation
based in Zürich that ‘aimed at offsetting the event’s CO2 emissions’.5 On the other
hand, the special nature of the challenge – combine racing with environmentalism –
required the organisers to review the norms associated with the car. In Rettie, The
Zürich E Prix organisers positioned the car was inevitable to green technology. For
example, ETH Zürich was instrumental in eDays – the supporting programme of the
Zurich E Prix,6 which included the eDays Startups, a stage for start-up entrepreneurs.
In a co-creative ‘global stakeholder community’ in which the race took part (despite its
city-based operations) the initiation of the event’s brand personality relied as much on
social acceptance than marketing or financial considerations. A survey done shortly
before the event showed that slightly more than half of the respondents supported
the race, whereas about a third was against it. The approval for the race in the coming
year (2019) was slightly lower at 47% (Brückmann et al., 2018). According to the key infor-
mant, trying to combine traditional motorsport values with innovative solutions was not
their concern at all. The Formula E event CEO, Pascal Derron, stated that ‘we applied an
integrative approach for the residents living in the heart of the city of Zurich’. One
example is the personal invitation of all residents living in the inner circle of the race or
directly outside of the track’ (cited from Burgt & Kalinauckas, 2018). This invitation, the
informant says, turned out to be a success. ‘We expected a couple of hundred people
to come to this ‘pitlane walk’ one day before the race – more than 1400 showed up. I
think this was a good way to demystify the event, buffer the negative energy, and motiv-
ate new kinds of fans to come and see’. ‘Therefore, residents will become even more
important in the preparation of the Zurich E-Prix 2019, which is planned for June 9,
2019’, Derron concludes (cited from Burgt & Kalinauckas, 2018). Through an inclusive sta-
keholder policy based on comprehensive mapping of stakeholder engagement, the
Zürich E Prix organisers dampened much of the social unrest that could have been
there due to the prospect of having a large motorsport event in the middle of Zürich –
and paved the way for a return of the Formula in 2019.
Since attracting tourists was part of the event’s mission, the enabling of people to
experience the merger of classic race elements with urban characteristics of the event
venue was key to the Zürich E Prix. The basic idea was ‘to make everything opposite to
a Formula 1 race’, says the informant, and to break with the secluded practices of
global motorsport race track events. This meant enhancing maximum accessibility for
normal fans rather than VIPs, including an open pit lane, and selling tickets to the
event in different locations than a standard formula-based competition between cars.
Although not always considered as engaging-increasing activities, logistics are tools to
smoothening the event experience like improving the walkability in and around the
event arena. The informant says, the customer journey – literally speaking – was simplified
by for example the Zürich E Prix’ partnering with the Swiss Federal Railways (SBB). ‘With
the ticket you receive a train ticket from wherever you live’.
Also, when buying an entry ticket to the race online you got it for free you if went all
the way from Geneva to Zürich. This was both ‘a green idea’, and a ‘practical idea’ as nor-
mally many spectators arrive with cars causing traffic jams. That way, the organisers gave
the consumers an economic and environmentally friendly incentive to use trains as well as
coping on their own with a practical issue of traffic jams around the race track. The infor-
mant added that this e-race and city event attracted a ‘huge interest by the public’ as it
was promoted as the biggest Formula E race in the world. This mega event ‘got frontpage
coverage in all our media ‘pushing the visibility of the event’. ‘And we coordinated our
activities in full transparency with our title sponsor Julias Baer, and ETZ Zurich (Federal
Technical University). For the sponsor Julias Baer, this sponsorship represented a small
revolution for a conservative bank previously associated with arts and culture.
However, new perspectives of the future was distributed through social media. An
example of a co-creation activity is the launch of the event in April 2018 together with
the city mayor and the sponsor Julias Baer. ‘We organized a showcase where Formula E
driver Seb Buemi drove a Formula E race car in the city traffic of Zurich to the University
area where we held a media conference’. The Zürich E Prix was organised as a family event
where several activities were offered on the event arena targeting the younger gener-
ations. To catalyse a fan boost targeting new groups and to engage the youngsters it
was possible to get activated in vision projects, video creations, and in competitions
open for young people below 16 (such as associations with FE race, Lego installations/
constructing FE race cars in Lego, and new ideas). Winning prizes were ‘all access to
the race’ and the winners were promoted.
The green sports event support system in Figure 1 presents the key findings of this
study. The fundamental components forming the support system are related to co-creat-
ing networks, management characteristics, green social norms, and green logistics. Based
on the inevitable roles of the support system, event design and experience, we argue that
the green sports event support system drives the development of the green sports event
brand.
Discussion
Our findings above demonstrate how the organisers organised the Zürich E Prix in con-
cordance with ‘green’ event values, despite hosting a sport that is seen as the opposite
of environmentally friendly. The drawbacks of such an operation could however have
Figure 1. The green sports event support system and the formation of the green sports event brand.
Figure 2. The co-creation of a green sports event brand.
been numerous. First, due to the event design and the location as intrinsic to the event
brand, partners were interdependent on each other to such a degree that if one major
player backed out, the event as a whole would have been in danger. Second, as con-
cluded by Næss (2018), based on the study of UK broadcasts from selected Formula E
races, the Zürich E Prix needed media on their side. If media coverage failed to incorporate
the green dimensions of the event, or even making a mockery out of them, the co-cre-
ation efforts by the organiser – and their stakeholders – could have been clouded by mis-
placed comparisons with conventional race dramaturgy and associations to the elitism,
noise and emissions of Formula 1. Third, as the first event of its kind in Zürich, there
were no benchmarks which the organisers could rely on other than the standard formula-
based races.
As indicated, the managerial setup was not really a result of a particular approach. In
light of Maak’s argument (2007) that a key task for responsible leaders is to ‘enhance
social capital and thereby contribute to both a sustainable business and the common
good’ (p. 329), stakeholdership beyond traditional fan groups and sponsors was instru-
mental in gathering urban support. As Formula E races for a number of reasons may
be prone to conflicting stakeholder interests, the Zürich E Prix organisers operationalised
what Maak argues that responsible leaders need to do:
(…) leaders need to build, and rely on, social capital, i.e. social structures and resources both,
internal and external to the organization, which allow us to facilitate responsible action and
which are inherent to more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual recognition (Maak,
2007, p. 331, italics original).
And since managers pursued making co-creation processes an intrinsic part of the event
design and execution, the outcome was a new version of the Formula E event rather than
an emulation of a traditional motorsport race. Against this backdrop, we therefore argue
that the mix of the service-domain logic (SDL) and co-creation in a B2B setting is a relevant
point of departure for this kind of research topics, as explored by our analysis of the
organising committee’s integration of resources from various stakeholders. On the
basis of the data and due to our exploratory research design, we therefore found it rel-
evant to merry theories on co-creation, location brand, brand equity, brand personality,
and social norms to flesh out the Zürich E Prix’ comparative advantage: its green brand
equity dimension and moving toward establishing a green sports event brand. With
the emphasis on experiences of new technology and trade fair-like atmosphere the
Zürich E Prix was not primarily something to consume. Rather, it seems that its design
as an action-packed, futuristic, and inclusive experience where financial transactions
were downplayed in favour of a collaborative, innovative greening of the city, enforced
the race’s green brand equity. Positioning the car as important for the future green tech-
nology is supported by Rettie et al.’s (2012) who concluded that ‘since driving a car is not
green, the task for marketing is to reposition driving a car as not normal and to reinforce
its current positioning as not green (p. 435).
In this process, the city took on a particular role as co-creator. The Zürich E Prix organ-
isers realised the potential reciprocity the race could evoke between the championship
and the city instead of viewing public intervention and protest groups as a threat to
the sport’s essence. In this context, the Zürich E Prix mirror the findings by Twynam
and Johnston (2004) who documented that by intervening and make changes in facilities
and service in an event community, it was possible to change residentś views on the
impact of hosting an event. For that reason, the stakeholder group became co-creators
of value in a way specific to the Swiss Formula E event. In contrast to the London E
Prix (Sturm, 2019), the Swiss organisers embodied a co-creation perspective where knowl-
edge about social norms was instrumental in connecting with a segment of consumers
that did not fit the conventional typology of motorsport fans. Part of this solution
came from the general aims of Formula E. A report by consultancy firm Ernst & Young,
commissioned by Formula E in 2013, stated that the championship’s impact on the
future car consumers could add 57–77 million electric vehicles sold around the world
over the next 25 years – mostly because of the consumer preferences of Generation Y
(Wilbaut, 2015, p. 26).7 Hence, when the city council and sponsors created unconventional
means of including stakeholders in the co-creating phases of the event, the result was a
race that was less intrusive to urban life than in the London case.
In light of the Formula E’s emphasis on green values through among other things its
collaboration with BreathLife, the UN Clear Air campaign, it can be argued that a particular
operationalisation of co-creation and brand management is needed in which the city take
on a strategic role. A city as an event host and an event organisation of a car race may be
regarded as co-creating partners creating values for the sponsor, event arena, and host in
exchange for funding (Cornwell, Weeks, , & Roy, 2005). Providing the event support
system as defined above stimulating the formation of a green sports event brand, the
city becomes a major co-creation partner (Hatch & Schultz, 2010) with the Zürich E Prix
in a joint project (Grohs & Reisinger, 2005).
Given the emerging focus on environmental issues and sustainability related to motor-
sport events (Fredline & Faulkner, 1998; Tranter & Keefee, 2004), there are opportunities
for an event host, a destination brand, and an electric motor sport series to take advan-
tages in terms of green positioning through the Zürich E Prix. According to Peattie and
Peattie (2009) ‘Creating meaningful progress towards sustainable measures requires
more radical solutions than just the development of new products and product substi-
tutions amongst consumers’ (p. 261). Simply marketing E Prix races as ‘green events’
can overshadow the practical opportunities to become eco-conscious, as well as
convey an expectation from consumers and participants that in order to join the event
you have to be environmentally progressive on a personal level (Elgaaid-Gambier,
Monnot, & Reniou, 2018; Rettie et al., 2012). And as this study emphasise, to develop a
sports event brand, it is vital to enhance the event experience of the visitors. User engage-
ment is described in the multimedia perspective as a system that creates curiosity, focus
and intrinsic value (O’Brien & Toms, 2010). According to Fredricks, Blumenfeld, Friedel,
and Paris (2005) there are three main categories of engagement (presence). Behavioural
engagement is where the user shows optimism, curiosity, passion and attention, which
increases motivation to learn. Emotional engagement is when users display emotional
tendencies such as joy with the event. Cognitive engagement is when users display criti-
cal thinking and challenge themselves when interacting with event competitions. Accord-
ing to Wilbaut’s (2015) historical outline of the Formula E ‘the idea is to leave each race
venue better than it was before. Lwin and Murayama (2011) referred to walkability as
how easy and encouraging an area in terms of walking to and from destination points.
This is achieved through programmes such as investing in the infrastructure where the
race took place or installing a social legacy to educate people on sustainability’
(Wilbaut, 2015, p. 47). And improved infrastructure in an event city and experienced
green event practices may trigger behavioural, emotional or cognitive engagement
among both citizens and tourists, which is likely to strengthen event satisfaction.
Implications
Considering events as brands, we concur with Walsh, Clavio, Lovell, and Blaszka (2013) in
that ‘while there has been some difficulty in measuring the event brand in sport, under-
standing an organization’s brand personality is still important due to its overall influence
on the brand image of the organization’ (p. 216). For brand research, consequently, the par-
ticipation of the city of Zürich expands the conceptualisation of an event brand and a city
brand to co-create in positioning an event as green among competitors. Our conceptual
and exploratory study of the 2018 Zürich E Prix indicates that if focus is locked on the
future, event-specific traditions do not have to be a hindrance to designing and executing
the event brand as green for events in general, and sporting events in particular. Quite the
contrary, by exploiting the linkages between green imagery, new technology and the
potential of applying the social norm approach (SNA, see Rettie, Burchell, & Barnham,
2014) as stakeholder integration, event design innovations are necessary to escape the
expectations of what a sporting event is. To make this escape in the case of the Zürich E
Prix, and to flesh out the green of the race event, the city’s balanced view of urban
demands and event management freedom was crucial to the outcome. The way Zürich
E Prix operationalised these linkages mentioned above, potentially makes it a ‘field-confi-
guring event’ in the world of Formula E. Defined as arenas for innovation and learning
based on a set of characteristics, field-configuring events are ‘producing sociability by
involving community members in the setup of the events’ which relies on an ‘open, parti-
cipatory event format is crucial for social innovation’ (Schüßler, Grabher & Müller-Seitz,
2015, p. 168). As a potential field-configuring event, the Zürich E Prix offer green learning
perspectives on how to manage the co-creation of green sports event brand.
From a tourist travel perspective, which can lead to the optimal stage of flow (Getz,
2008). ‘Flow’ or ‘being in the zone’ is a mental stage where a person performs an
action and is fully involved in the experience and achieves a high degree of satisfaction
by performing the activity (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Emotions play an important role in
sports event experiences (Del Chiappa & Atzeni, 2016). And all emotions seem to stem
from a relatively small range of fundamental direct emotions such as joy, anger, con-
tempt, disgust, shame, guilt, sadness, horror and surprise (Del Chiappa & Atzeni, 2016;
Del Chiappa & Gallarza, 2013; Del Chiappa, Andreu, & Gallarza, 2014).
New to the sports event tourism literature, this study has developed a co-creation fra-
mework usable for developing a green sports event brand. Both the organisational and
event participant perspectives are taken into account. The framework is a result of a con-
ceptual and exploratory study, where both existing literatures, a case, and in-depth inter-
views have been used as sources. Figure 2 exhibits the co-creation process targeting both
tourists and residents. The elements from the green sports event support system (findings
summarised in Figure 1) represents stage one in the framework with aspects like co-creat-
ing networks, management characteristics, and green city policy making. Stage two
consist of the participantś sports event experience, which may start prior to the physical
event through a digital platform. The framework´s stage three is indicating that the actual
sports event experience is the main source for the development of the green sports event
brand with the experienced quality (stage three). The final stage four is the event evalu-
ation is incorporating perceptions of both the organisers and the participants, which is
vital for the continuous event product development.
Limitations and future research

This study is limited in particular by its research design. Having only one informant involve
the risks of subjectivity bias, random error, false claims, or impression management
(Rahman, 2012). These risks are addressed in two ways: (a) by validating the information
given by the key informant through other sources, as we will return to below, and (b)
building a case for the selection of this single key informant. As a consequence, there
is lacking various viewpoints related to the research questions even though the informant
claimed to represent the management of five, and confined attention to organising
tactics and co-creation networks to achieve event aims for the 2018 Zürich E Prix
became difficult. Another consequence is that the possibility to explore network theories
in order to provide new directions for green event brand research and the different roles
in the co-creation process, crystallized rather than was transformed. This study is founded
on the theoretical marriage between co-creation, sports event tourism, green event brand
and brand equity in a SDL and co-creation perspective using a B2B setting. Even though
the research area of sports event and green brand has been strengthened by this study,
we encourage future studies on the networks in the co-creation perspectives. Future
studies of Zürich E Prix may however weaken or support the notion of the race as a
field-configuring event. We would also encourage authors to do a comparative study
of Formula E races with emphasis on the urban perspective. As indicated by the data, sep-
arating the brand of the race and of the city is futile as the one requires the other to
qualify as green sports event brand in the context of Formula E races. By zooming in
on the city’s co-creating role, this could add a substantial dimension to the general
research on sports management because of the city’s ever-changing role in generating
societal acceptance for major sports events targeting both residents and tourists.
Notes
1. ‘The history of Formula E: how it all began’, 16 July, 2018. Retrieved November 12, 2018 from
https://www.juliusbaer.com/uk/en/insights/insights-detail-page/item/the-history-of-formula-e-
how-it-all-began/.
2. ‘Press release – 2018 FIA Formula E Julius Baer Zurich E-Prix: The countdown has begun’,
Retrieved November 12, 2018 from https://dksvkggk50f6a.cloudfront.net/files/2018/01/
05205614/MM-Zurich-E-Prix-2018-5.-Januar-2018_engl-neu.pdf.
3. ‘Zurich Revealed as Most Sustainable Global City’, Arcadis, 12 September 2016. Retrieved
November 19, 2016 from https://www.arcadis.com/en/global/news/latest-news/2016/09/
zurich-revealed-as-most-sustainable-global-city/; see also https://www.zuerich.com/en/
about-zt/sustainability.
4. ‘Zürich E Prix: a historic event’, 21 May, 2018. Retrieved November 12, 2018 from https://www.
juliusbaer.com/global/de/news-insights/news-insights-detailseite/item/zurich-e-prix-
a-historic-event/.
5. ‘The Spectacle of Electromobility: myclimate as partner at the premiere of the 2018 Zürich E
Prix’, 22 June, 2018. Retrieved November 12, 2018 from https://www.myclimate.org/
information/news-press/news/newsdetail/the-spectacle-of-electromobility-myclimate-as-
a-partner-at-the-premiere-of-the-2018-zuerich-e-prix/.
6. See https://edays.ch/en/.
7. See also ‘Life Cycle Assessment – Sustainable Impacts of Formula E’, n.d. Retrieved November
12, 2018 from http://www.fiaformulae.com/en/sustainability/studies/.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
References
Aaker, D. A. (1996). Measuring brand equity across products and markets. California Management
Review, 38(3), 102–120.
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347–356.
Agag, A. (2018). The pinnacle of street racing construction. Motorsport.com, 4 July. Retrieved 22
August 2018 from https://www.motorsport.com/formula-e/news/agag-zurich-eprix-street-
racing-construction-1055817/3134858/
Ahmad, N. L., Rashid, W. E. W., Abd Razak, N., Yusof, A. N. M., & Shah, N. S. M. (2013). Green event
management and initiatives for sustainable business growth. International Journal of Trade,
Economics and Finance, 4(5), 331–335.
Azoulay, A., & Kapferer, J.-N. (2003). Do brand personality scales really measure brand personality?
Journal of Brand Management, 11(2), 143–155.
Barratt, M., Choi, T. Y., & Li, M. (2011). Qualitative case studies in operations management: Trends,
research outcomes, and future research implications. Journal of Operations Management, 29(4),
329–342.
Baumann, C., Hamin, H., Phan, K. N., & Ghantous, N. (2013). Managing brand associations to drive
customers’ trust and loyalty in Vietnamese banking. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 31
(6), 456–480. doi:10.1108/IJBM-04-2013-0038
Becker, G. S. (1965). A theory of allocation of time. Economic Journal, 75, 493–517.
Binkhorst, E., & Den Dekker, T. (2009). Agenda for co-creation tourism experience research. Journal of
Hospitality Marketing & Management, 18(2-3), 311–327. doi:10.1080/19368620802594193
Bjerke, R., & Kirkesaether, E. (forthcoming 2020). How should sponsorship activation work? A sports
event and athlete-based brand building framework (SEA-BB) capturing an internal And external
route. Event Management, 24(5), doi:10.3727/152599519X15506259856002
Boddy, C. R. (2016). Sample size for qualitative research. Qualitative Market Research: An International
Journal, 19, 426–432. doi:10.1108/QMR-06-2016-0053
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2016). Using thematic analysis in sport and exercise research. B. Smith & A. C.
Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise (pp. 191–205).
London: Routledge.
Brückmann, G., Huber, R., & Bernauer, T. (2018). Das Zürcher Formel E Rennen im öffentlichen
Meinungsbild. ISTP Paper Series 2, ETZ Zürich. Retrieved 12 November 2018 from https://www.
ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/dual/istp-dam/documents/ISTP/Research/Mobility/
ISTP20Paper20Series/Das20ZC3BCrcher20Formel20E20Rennen20im20C3B6ffentlichen20Meinun
gsbild2020Final20Report%2005Jun18.pdf
Buckley, R. (2012). Sustainable tourism: Research and reality. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 528–
546.
Buckley, R. C. (2009). Evaluating the net effects of ecotourism on the environment: A framework, first
assessment and future research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(6), 643–672.
Burgt, A., & Kalinauckas, A. (2018). Why Formula E’s inaugural Zurich E-Prix surpassed expectations.
Autosport, 12 June. Retrieved 12 November 2018 from https://www.autosport.com/fe/news/
136703/why-fe-swiss-breakthrough-beat-expectations
Chalip, L., & Costa, C. A. (2005). Sport event tourism and the destination brand: Towards a general
theory. Sport in Society, 8(2), 218–237. doi:10.1080/17430430500108579
Charmaz, K. (2003). The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods. London: Sage publi-
cations, Inc.
Chen, Y. F., & Mo, H. E. (2014). A survey of push and pull motivations of green event tourists.
International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 4(3), 260–263.
Christodoulides, G., & de Chernatony, L. (2010). Consumer-based brand equity conceptualization
and measurement: A literature review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 52(1), 43–66.
Cornwell, T. B., Weeks, C. S., & Roy, D. P. (2005). Sponsorship-linked marketing: Opening the black
box. Journal of Advertising, 34(2), 21–42.
Couto, U. S., Lai Tang, W. S., & Boyce, P. (2017). What makes a motorsports event enjoyable? The case
of Macau Grand prix. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 18(1), 26–40. doi:10.1080/15470148.
2016.1207121
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. New York: Harper & Row.
Daniels, M. J., & Norman, W. C. (2003). Estimating the economic impacts of seven regular sport
tourism events. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 8(4), 214–222.
Deery, M., Jago, L., & Fredline, L. (2004). Sport tourism or event tourism: Are they one and the same?
Journal of Sport & Tourism, 9(3), 235–245.
De Jong, M., Joss, S., Schraven, D., Zhan, C., & Weijnen, M. (2015). Sustainable–smart–resilient–low
carbon–eco–knowledge cities; making sense of a multitude of concepts promoting sustainable
urbanization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 109, 25–38. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.004
Del Chiappa, G., Andreu, L., & Gallarza, M. G. (2014). Emotions and visitors’ satisfaction at a museum.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(4), 420–431.
Del Chiappa, G., & Atzeni, M. (2016). The role of emotions in a sport event experience. Tourismos,
11(5), 124–152.
Del Chiappa, G., & Gallarza, M. G. (2013). Objectivism or emotionalism? Shaping visitors’ satisfaction
at a museum. Scientific Committee, 406–414.
Donahay, B., & Rosenberger III, P. J. (2007). Using brand personality to measure the effectiveness of
image transfer in formula one racing. Marketing Bulletin, 18(1), 1–15.
Dredge, D., Lamont, M., Ford, E.-J., Phi, G., Whitford, M., & Wynn-Moylan, P. (2010). Event governance:
The rhetoric and reality of the World Rally Championship, northern rivers, NSW. CAUTHE 2010:
Tourism and Hospitality: Challenge the limits (pp. 427–452). Hobart: University of Tasmania.
Dredge, D., & Whitford, M. (2011). Event tourism governance and the public sphere. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 19(4-5), 479–499.
Edwards, A., & Skinner, J. (2009). Qualitative research in sport management. Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management
Review, 14(4), 532–550.
Elgaaid-Gambier, L., Monnot, E., & Reniou, F. (2018). Using descriptive norm appeals effectively to
promote green behaviour. Journal of Business Research, 82, 179–191. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.
09.032
Erhardt, N., Martin-Rios, C., & Chan, E. (2019). Value co-creation in sport entertainment between
internal and external stakeholders. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-03-2018-0244?journalCode=ijchm
FIA. (2020). FIA Smart Cities programme. Retrieved April 11, 2020 from https://www.fia.com/fia-
smart-cities-0
Flick, U. (2007). Managing quality in qualitative research. London: SAGE.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer
research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343–373.
Fredline, E., & Faulkner, B. (1998). Resident reactions to a major tourist event: The Gold coast indy
car race. Festival Management and Event Tourism, 5(4), 185–205. doi:10.3727/106527098791784475
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P., Friedel, J., & Paris, A. (2005). School engagement. In K. A. Moore & L.
Lippman (Eds), What do children need to flourish? (pp. 305–321). Boston, MA: Springer.
Gemser, G., & Perks, H. (2015). Co-creation with customers: An evolving innovation research field.
Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 660–665.
Getz, D. (2009). Policy for sustainable and responsible festivals and events: Institutionalization of a
new paradigm. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure & Events, 1(1), 61–78. doi:10.1080/
19407960802703524
Getz, D. (2008). Event tourism: Definition, evolution, and research. Tourism Management, 29, 403–428.
Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley,
CA: Sociological Press.
Glick, W. H., Huber, G. P., Miller, C. C., Doty, D. H., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (1995). Studying Changes in organ-
izational design and effectiveness: Retrospective event histories and periodic assessments. In G.
P. Huber, & A. H. Van de Ven (Eds.), Longitudinal field research methods. Studying processes of
organizational change (pp. 126–154). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative
Report, 8(4), 597–606.
Golden, B. R. (1992). The past is the past – or ist it? The use of retrospective accounts as indicators of
past strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 35, 848–860.
Green, B. C. (2001). Leveraging subculture and identity to promote sport events. Sport Management
Review, 4, 1–19.
Grohs, R., & Reisinger, H. (2005). Image transfer in sports sponsorships: An assessment of moderating
effects. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship, 7(1), 42–48.
Hall, M. (2010). Changing paradigms and global change: From sustainable to steady-state tourism.
Tourism Recreation Research, 35(2), 131–143.
Hammersley, M. (2007). The issue of quality in qualitative research. International Journal of Research
& Method in Education, 30, 287–305. doi:10.1080/17437270701614782
Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for brand
governance. Journal of Brand Management, 17(8), 590–604.
Herstein, R., & Berger, R. (2013). Much more than sports: Sports events as stimuli for city re-branding.
Journal of Business Strategy, 34(2), 38–44. doi:10.1108/02756661311310440
Holbrook, M. B. (1994). The nature of customer value–An axiology of services in the consumption
experience. In R. T. Rust, & R. L. Oliver (Eds.), Service quality: New directions in theory and practice
(pp. 21–71). Thousand Oak: Sage.
Horbel, C., Popp, B., Woratschek, H., & Wilson, B. (2016). How context shapes value co-creation:
Spectator experience of sport events. The Service Industries Journal, 36(11-12), 510–531. doi:10.
1080/02642069.2016.1255730
Iglesias, O., Ind, N., & Alfaro, M. (2013). The organic view of the brand: A brand value Co-creation
model. Journal of Brand Management, 20(8), 670–688.
Ind, N., & Coates, N. (2013). The meanings of co-creation. European Business Review, 25(1), 86–95.
doi:10.1108/09555341311287754
Jenkins, C. L. (2010). Tourism development and the environment: Beyond sustainability? Journal of
Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 2, 195–196. doi:10.1080/19407963.2010.482285
Jensen, J. A., & Cobbs, J. B. (2014). Predicting return on investment in sport sponsorship. Journal of
Advertising Research, 54, 435–447. doi:10.2501/JAR-54-4-435-447
Kaplanidou, K., & Gibson, H. J. (2010). Predicting behavioral intentions of active event sport tourists:
The case of a small-scale recurring sports event. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 15(2), 163–179.
Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2007). The interrelationship between sport event and destination image
and sport tourists’ behaviours. Journal of Sport & Tourism, 12(3-4), 183–206.
Kaplanidou, K., & Vogt, C. (2010). The meaning and measurement of a sport event experience
among active sport tourists. Journal of Sport Management, 24(5), 544–566.
Kearins, K., & Pavlovich, K. (2002). The role of stakeholders in sydney’s green games. Corporate Social
Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9(3), 157–169. doi:10.1002/csr.19
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and Managing customer-based brand equity.
Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 1–22.
Kerr, G. (2006). From destination brand to location brand. Journal of Brand Management, 13(4-5),
276–283. doi:10.1057/palgrave.bm.2540271
Kohtamäki, M., & Rajala, R. (2016). Theory and practice of value co-creation in B2B systems. Industrial
Marketing Management, 56, 4–13. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.027
Kolyperas, D., Maglaras, G., & Sparks, L. (2018). Sport fans’ roles in value co-creation. European Sport
Management Quarterly. doi:10.1080/16184742.2018.1505925
Krause, D., Luzzini, D., & Lawson, B. (2018). Building the case for a single key informant in supply
chain management survey research. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 54(1), 42–50.
Kurtzman, J., & Zauhar, J. (2003). A wave in time-The sports tourism phenomena. Journal of Sport &
Tourism, 8(1), 35–47.
Laing, J., & Frost, W. (2010). How green was my festival: Exploring challenges and opportunities associ-
ated with staging green events. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(2), 261–267.
Lewis, J., & Ritchie, J. (2003). Generalising from qualitative research. In J. Lewis, & J. Ritchie (Eds.),
Qualitative research practice (pp. 263–286). London: SAGE.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London: SAGE.
Lwin, K. K., & Murayama, Y. (2011). Modelling of urban green space walkability: Eco-friendly walk
score calculator. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 35(5), 408–420. doi:10.1016/j.
compenvurbsys.2011.05.002
Maak, T. (2007). Responsible leadership, stakeholder engagement, and the emergence of social
capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 329–343.
Macdonald, E. K., & Sharp, B. M. (2000). Brand awareness effects on consumer decision making for a
common, repeat purchase product: A replication. Journal of Business Research, 48(1), 5–15. doi:10.
1016/S0148-2963(98)00070-8
Mackellar, J., & Reis, A. C. (2014). World Rally championships 2009 and 2011: Assessing the tourism
value in Australia. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 20(1), 17–28.
Malik, M. E., Ghafoor, M. M., Hafiz, K. I., Riaz, U., Hassan, N. U., Mustafa, M., … Shahbaz, S. (2013).
Importance of brand awareness and brand loyalty in assessing purchase intentions of consumer.
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(5), 167–171.
March, J. G., Sproull, L. S., & Tamuz, M. (1991). Learning from samples of one or fewer. Organization
Science, 2(1), 1–13.
Marcos-Cuevas, J., Nätti, S., Palo, T., & Baumann, J. (2016). Value co-creation practices and capabili-
ties: Sustained purposeful engagement across B2B systems. Industrial Marketing Management, 56,
97–107. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.03.012
McKenna, S. A., & Main, D. S. (2013). The role and influence of key informants in community-engaged
research: A critical perspective. Action Research, 11(2), 113–124.
McManus, J. (2002). The influence of stakeholder values on project management. Management
Service, 46(6), 8–15.
Mehmetoglu, M., & Engen, M. (2011). Pine and gilmore’s concept of experience economy and its
dimensions: An empirical examination in tourism. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality &
Tourism, 12(4), 237–255.
Merrilees, B., & Marles, K. (2011). Green business events: Profiling through a case study. Event
Management, 15(4), 361–372. doi:10.3727/152599511X13175676722609
Mintzberg, H. (1979). An emerging strategy of “direct” research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24
(4), 582–589.
Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 250–260.
Ng, P. F., Butt, M. M., Khong, K. W., & Ong, F. S. (2014). Antecedents of green brand equity: An inte-
grated approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(2), 203–215.
Næss, H. E. (2018). Stories and stakeholders: How to explore the paradox of commercialism in sports.
Sport in Society, 21(2), 201–214.
O’Brien, H. L., & Toms, E. G. (2010). The development and evaluation of a survey to measure user
engagement. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(1), 50–69.
Orefice, C. (2018). Designing for events–a new perspective on event design. International Journal of
Event and Festival Management, 9(1), 20–33. doi:10.1108/IJEFM-09-2017-0051
Payne, A., Storbacka, K., Frow, P., & Knox, S. (2009). Co-creating brands: Diagnosing and designing
the relationship experience. Journal of Business Research, 62(3), 379–389. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.
2008.05.013
Peattie, K., & Peattie, S. (2009). Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction? Journal of
Business Research, 62(2), 260–268.
Perera, W. L. M. V., & Dissanayake, D. M. R. (2013). The impact of brand awareness, brand association
and brand perceived quality on female consumers" purchase Decisions of foreign makeup products
(A study of youth segment). Conference proceedings of 4th International Conference on business
& information (ICBI), University of Kelaniya, Sri Lanka.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every business a stage.
Boston: Harvard Business Press.
Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (2011). The experience economy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Poggie, J. J. (1972). Toward quality control in key informant data. Human Organization, 31(1), 23–30.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value cre-
ation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14. doi:10.1002/dir.20015
Rahman, S. (2012). Impression Management motivations, strategies and Disclosure credibility of cor-
porate narratives. Journal of Management Research, 4(3), 1–14.
Rettie, R., Burchell, K., & Barnham, C. (2014). Social normalisation: Using marketing to make green
normal. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13, 9–17. doi:10.1002/cb.1439
Rettie, R., Burchell, K., & Riley, D. (2012). Normalising green behaviours: A new approach to sustain-
ability marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(3-4), 420–444.
Richins, M. L. (1997). Measuring emotions in the consumption experience. Journal of Consumer
Research, 24(2), 127–146.
Roggeveen, A. L., Tsiros, M., & Grewal, D. (2012). Understanding the co-creation effect: When does
collaborating with customers provide a lift to service recovery? Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 40(6), 771–790. doi:10.1007/s11747-011-0274-1
Romaniuk, J., & Nenycz-Thiel, M. (2013). Behavioral brand loyalty and consumer brand associations.
Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 67–72. doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.024
Rowe, D. (2015). Assessing the Sociology of sport: On media and power. International Review for the
Sociology of Sport, 50(4-5), 575–579.
Schüßler, E., Grabher, G., & Müller-Seitz, G. (2015). Field-Configuring events: Arenas for
innovation and learning? Industry and Innovation, 22(3), 165–172. doi:10.1080/13662716.2015.
1038098
Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5, 465–478.
Shahid, Z., Hussain, T., & Zafar, F. (2017). The impact of brand awareness on the consumers’ purchase
intention. Journal of Marketing and Consumer Research, 33, 34–38.
Sharifi, A. (2016). From garden city to Eco-urbanism: The quest for sustainable neighborhood devel-
opment. Sustainable Cities and Society, 20, 1–16. doi:10.1016/j.scs.2015.09.002
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects.
Education for Information, 22(1), 63–75.
Shonk, D. J., & Chelladurai, P. (2008). Service quality, satisfaction, and intent to return in event sport
tourism. Journal of Sport Management, 22(5), 587–602.
Sim, J., Saunders, B., Waterfield, J., & Kingstone, T. (2018). Can sample size in qualitative research be
determined a priori? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 21(5), 619–634. doi:10.
1080/13645579.2018.1454643
Spiggle, S. (1994). Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. Journal of
Consumer Research, 21(3), 491–503.
Stelter, R., Sparkes, A., & Hunger, I. (2003). Qualitative research in sport sciences—An introduction.
Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 4(1), Retrieved September
9, 2018 from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs030124
Sturm, D. (2019). Formula E’s green challenge to motorsport events, spaces and technologies. In H.
Seraphin, & E. Nolan (Eds.), Green events and green tourism: An International guide to good practice
(pp. 165–173). London: Routledge.
Tomlinson, A., & Young, C. (2006). Culture, politics, and spectacle in the global sports event: An intro-
duction. In A. Tomlinson, & C. Young (Eds.), National identity and global sports events: Culture, poli-
tics, and spectacle in the Olympics and the football world Cup (pp. 1–14). Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Tranter, P. J., & Keefee, T. J. (2004). Motor racing in Australia’s parliamentary zone: Successful event
tourism or the emperor’s new clothes? Urban Policy and Research, 22(2), 169–187. doi:10.1080/
0811114042000229636
Twynam, G. D., & Johnston, M. (2004). Changes in host community reactions to a special sporting
event. Current Issues in Tourism, 7(3), 242–261.
Uhrich, S. (2014). Exploring customer-to-customer value co-creation platforms and practices in team
sports. European Sport Management Quarterly, 14(1), 25–49. doi:10.1080/16184742.2013.865248
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-domi-
nant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5–23.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2011). It’s all B2B… and beyond: Toward a systems perspective of the
market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 181–187.
Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems
and service logic perspective. European Management Journal, 26(3), 145–152. doi:org/10.1016/j.
emj.2008.04.003
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J., & Tummers, L. G. (2015). A systematic review of co-creation and co-
production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–
1357. doi: org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505
Walsh, P., Clavio, G., Lovell, M. D., & Blaszka, M. (2013). Differences in event brand personality
between social media users and non-users. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 22(4), 214–223.
Walton, J., & Beck-Burridge, M. (2000). Britain’s Winning formula. Achieving world leadership in motor-
sports. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wang, J. (2017). Perceptions of individual behavior in green event—from the theory of planned
behavior perspective. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management, 7(8), 973–988.
doi:10.4236/ajibm.2017.78070
Weaver, D. (2009). Reflections on sustainable tourism and paradigm change. In S. Gössling, C. M.
Hall, & D. B. Weaver (Eds.), Sustainable tourism futures (pp. 33–40). New York: Routledge.
Wilbaut, M. (2015). The eStory: Undertaking the Mobility Challenge. FIA Formula E. Retrieved
September 9, 2018 from http://admin.fiaformulae.com/media/301817/estory_undertaking-the-
challenges-of-sustainable-mobility.pdf
Woratschek, H., Horbel, C., & Popp, B. (2014). The sport value framework – a new fundamental logic
for analyses in sport management. European Sport Management Quarterly, 14(1), 6–24.
Yin, R. K. (2013). Evaluation Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation,
19(3), 321–332.
Copyright of Journal of Sport & Tourism is the property of Routledge and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

EBSCO FullText 2024 04 15

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EBSCO FullText 2024 04 15

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOURNAL OF SPORT & TOURISM

2021, VOL. 25, NO. 2, 129–154

Toward a co-Creation framework for developing a green

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

CONTACT Rune Bjerke rune.bjerke@kristiania.no Department of Leadership and Organisation, Kristiania

that ‘sustained purposeful engagement’ fortiﬁes the organisatiońs capability to co-create

The service-dominant logic and the co-creation of sports event

perception. To follow up on the claim that sports management research needs to go

Brand equity, location brand and brand personality

The green sports event brand

The sports event engagement and experience of citizens and tourists

‘unfulﬁlling/fulﬁlling’, ‘poor/excellent’, ‘not stimulating/stimulating’, ‘sad/joyful’, ‘distres-

Data collection, data quality and analysis

not involved in the interviews to comment on interview transcripts, these strategies

Figure 2. The co-creation of a green sports event brand.

Limitations and future research

You might also like