For A plus writer only

Cities 26 (2009) 245–254

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cities

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / c i t i e s

City branding and the Olympic effect: A case study of Beijing

Li Zhang a,*, Simon Xiaobin Zhao b

a School of Social Development and Public Policy, Fudan University, 220 Handan Road, Shanghai 200433, China b International Center for China Development Studies, Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history: Received 22 January 2009 Received in revised form 25 May 2009 Accepted 25 May 2009 Available online 25 June 2009

Keywords: City branding City’s identity The Beijing Olympics Beijing city

0264-2751/$ - see front matter � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. A doi:10.1016/j.cities.2009.05.002

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 021 55665375; fa E-mail addresses: [email protected] (L. Z

(S.X. Zhao).

a b s t r a c t

City branding is a common practice adopted by many cities in the context of intensified urban competi- tion for mobile resources, markets, opportunities and attention. This paper examines the effectiveness of efforts to brand Beijing, the capital city of China. Based on an analysis of official branding strategies through the Olympics, and an attitudinal survey of peoples’ understanding of Beijing, the paper investi- gates to what extent the current campaign has caught the city’s good attributes. The paper finds a mis- match between the identity and core values as branded by the city government, and the realities as experienced by visitors and residents. The paper argues that the Beijing Olympics could only have limited impacts on the city’s brand.

� 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction

Globalization has increased global shifts of resources, capital and people, and has intensified the competition among cities for attention, influence, markets, investments, businesses, visitors, tal- ents and significant events. City branding, which is regarded as a strategic instrument to publicize a city’s competitive advantages, becomes a common practice to market the city’s history, quality of place, lifestyle, and culture for opportunity, prestige or power in capital accumulation in a competitive environment (Langer, 2001; Morgan et al., 2002; Berci et al., 2002; Evans, 2003).

A city needs to adopt the right strategies in order to brand itself successfully. Successful city branding depends greatly on the iden- tification of distinctive and defining characteristics possessed by the city in question. Characteristics of a city are both functional and non-functional qualities, which include, among others, city appearance, history, cultural attractions, demographics, economics and governance, people’s experience of the city, and people’s per- ception of the city. Consensus on the city’s identity and core values, between the city authorities and the general public, is one of the key factors in achieving the success of city branding. Mega-events are regarded as a valuable opportunity for broadcasting the iden- tity and core values of the host city. Nonetheless, creating a distinc- tive identity that captures the unique spirit of a city is easier said than done. Challenges vary from one city to another.

With rapid economic growth and closer integration into inter- national markets, several Chinese cities, such as Beijing and Shang-

ll rights reserved.

x: +86 021 65107274. hang), [email protected]

hai, are now competing for a place in the global city roster. City branding becomes more and more strategically important in this context. Beijing, the capital city of China, was awarded the right to host the 29th Olympiad on July 13, 2001, and Beijing authorities tried to make use of this opportunity for city branding. Though Bei- jing has a long history as a political center, dating back over eight centuries, it has a relatively short history of branding. Rigorous studies that evaluate Beijing’s brand from both theoretical and empirical perspectives are few.

The objective of this paper is to examine the effectiveness of Beijing branding by reviewing theoretical insights discussed in the literature and by investigating the understanding of the gen- eral public vis-à-vis the city. It analyzes to what extent Beijing’s branding has caught the city’s good attributes, and goes on to iden- tify the lessons one can learn for the improvement of a city’s branding. Special attention is given to the examination of whether a recent mega-event, such as the Olympics, can help Beijing to be re-branded. This study shows that, though Beijing has certain good qualities that can be used for such purposes, its identity and core values—as branded by the city government—have not been well ac- cepted by the general public. People maintain their own readings of what the city is about, and there exists a mismatch between the city’s identity and values, as branded by the city government, and urban realities experienced by its residents. While the Beijing Olympics have physically changed part of the city’s realities, the Olympics per se have not fundamentally changed people’s experi- ence of the host city.

The methodology adopted by this research is, by nature, essen- tially interpretative, one that blends the development of theoretical insights, which guides empirical analysis, with case studies, which can enrich existing theories (Carson et al., 2001). Our evaluation of

246 L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254

Beijing branding is based mainly on a review of the literature of city branding and study of relevant government documents, interviews with officials from the Marketing Department and the Technology Department of The Beijing Organizing Committee for the Games of the 29th Olympiad (hereafter BOCOG), and an attitudinal survey conducted in two periods (18th–24th March 2008, a few months before the Beijing Olympic Games, and 9th–13th September 2008, the period shortly after the Games). Questionnaires were randomly distributed at two sites: (1) Tiananmen Square, a landmark and a hot scenic spot for visitors and in the center of Beijing city, (2) the Sanlitun and Houhai Area, the well-known and most popular night-life spot that attracted many foreign tourists. Taking refer- ence of both Anholt’s and Kavaratzis’s frameworks for the evalua- tion of city branding, we categorized the questions into four parts, based on the official objectives to brand Beijing as an international city, a famous cultural city, a livable city, and a great host of the 29th Olympiad. These objectives were specified in two government documents: Beijing City Master Plan (2004–2020) and The Olympic Action Plan. The questions aimed at seeking the people’s under- standing of Beijing’s identity and branding effects. The questions were mostly objective, insofar as respondents had to rate them by an agreement scale, with 5 being the highest score, the strongest agreement and 1 being the lowest score, the strongest disagree- ment. There were also open-ended questions where respondents were able to provide additional views and make suggestions in free-text form. In total, 100 people participated in the surveys. Among them, 30% of respondents were Beijing residents, 30% were domestic visitors, and 40% were foreigners who visited or worked in Beijing.

The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The following sec- tion reviews strategies commonly used in city branding as well as important considerations for the evaluation of city branding, as discussed in the literature. This is followed by an analysis of the case of Beijing. The analysis is done, first by narrating the official designation of the city’s identity and core values, and then by dis- cussing public perspectives on the officially-designated identity and values. The final section extracts lessons from our empirical investigation.

City branding: strategies and evaluation

City branding draws its inspiration from product branding and marketing. The brand of a product embodies a set of physical and socio-psychological attributes as well as beliefs that are associated with the product (Simoes and Dibb, 2001). Branding is a deliberate strategy to select some attributes of a product as core values in or- der to facilitate the process by which consumers confidently recog- nize and appreciate those attributes (De Chernatony and Dall’Olmo Riley, 1998). From those core values, the product’s identity can be formed. Though some (e.g. Peterson, 1981) object that cities are not products that are involved in direct transactions in markets, proponents of city branding (e.g. Morgan et al., 2002; Kavaratzis and Ashworth, 2005; Anholt, 2007) argue that the concept of prod- uct branding can indeed be transplanted to city branding. They profess that a city can be viewed as an ‘‘entity”, to whom an ‘‘iden- tity” is ascribed with a set of stable values fostered from the long course of urban development (Kavaratzis and Ashworth, 2005). Like a product that possesses utility values, a city can generate util- ity functions that ‘‘customers” (investors, visitors and the resident population) can directly experience through daily business trans- actions and related activities. Cities can be viewed as spatially ex- tended products and cities can compete with each other in a way that is similar to competition between products. Cities therefore should be treated as ‘‘products” to be marketed, through tourism development and through branding activities.

One crucial strategy within city branding is the creation of the city’s identity, which should be developed from a range of contex- tual variables such as history, demography, economy, politics and policies. A city usually has certain identifiable images or core val- ues perceived by its people. For example, Paris is perceived for ro- mance, Milan for style, New York for diversity and dynamics, Washington for power, and Tokyo for modernity. In this paper, city branding refers to a strategy that presents a city with an unforget- table identity and an instrument that can convey a city’s core val- ues with agility. The city’s identity is a complex mixture of a city’s spatial configuration and its socio-cultural values. City branding needs to synthesize various characteristics and to transform them into a unique and irreplaceable identity (Smidt-Jensen, 2006).

A key challenge of city branding is the difficulty of delimiting a city’s identity and core values in a manner that is widely accept- able, easily marketable, presentable and open to experience in a daily manner. In this regard, strategies of product branding may be less appropriate in the context of a city where ownership, stake- holder involvement and branding development are more complex (Kavaratzis, 2009). The city is a residential place of multiple social interest groups and a physical space of multiple contested visions of urban values. A big challenge to city branding thus lies in creat- ing and profiling an identity from diverse values that are not al- ways intangible and that may represent different interests of various social groups in the city. City branding has to be concerned with how culture and history, economic growth and social devel- opment, infrastructure and architecture, landscape and environ- ment, among other things, can be combined into a saleable identity that is acceptable to all people. This pinpoints the reality that city branding is inevitably going to lead to disputes over com- peting representations, understanding, and identification of the city. The city’s identity and core values cannot be simply seen as neutral statements of fact, but must appear as claims, justifications and accusations exchanged with a variety of interests. Construc- tion of a city’s identity and core values becomes the most contested aspect of city branding.

Accordingly, a crucial issue of urban branding is how the city is understood. The branding can be thought of as a success if it is able to deliver core urban values that are deemed valid, distinctive, appealing, durable, and communicable (Gertner and Kotler, 2004). Since many cities have quiet similar characteristics to pres- ent, a strategy of city branding is to create unique values, so distin- guishing one city from another. While city authorities have their own aspirations and in most cases are responsible for the imple- mentation of city branding, people communicate their experience with the city on various occasions and in various forms, acting as ‘‘ambassadors” to represent the city. People often translate their perceptions (imagery, feelings, evaluations and judgments) into their own understandable identity of the city. City branding should convey both the intention of city authorities and the experience of people. If the city’s identity and core values are incongruent with what can be experienced by city residents and visitors, there is a great risk that city branding would consist of rather lofty values that are not accepted by the general public.

In his study of branding experience of European cities, Kava- ratzis (2004, 2008) comes up with six key questions that city branding should be answered. The questions include (1) what the city indubitably is; (2) what the city feels it is; (3) what the city says it is; (4) what the city is seen to be; (5) whom the city seeks to serve; and (6) what is promised and expected? On that basis, he proposes that branding can be understood within a 3-le- vel communication framework. The first level refers to physical and observable aspects from which a city can be seen. The second level consists of propaganda tools that a city adopts to market it- self. The third level is people’s communication about a city through their voices, and those of the media. In the process of city

L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254 247

branding, these multi-level communications build a benefit pyra- mid, which consists of different levels of benefit, including the tangible benefits to both local and non-local populations and the improvement of the city’s reputation which constitutes added value (Morgan et al., 2005).

Mega-events, which possess characteristics of longevity, sus- tained attention, unforgettable experience, and professionalism of organization, may play an important role in both transforming and branding a city. Winning the right to host such events is re- garded as an excellent opportunity for the implementation of city branding (Whitson and Macintosh, 1996). Arguably, mega-events can produce significant changes of urban landscape and functions that can be translated into the city’s identity and core values. These changes can be denoted as:

� Producing new landmarks of urban space and architectures for hosting and servicing the event, exemplified by construction of the grand stadium, and the international-standard athlete vil- lage and infrastructure (Essex and Chalkley, 1998);

� Introducing new markets and new resources, such as securing of funding sources through event sponsorships and various forms of public–private or international–domestic partnership, and marketing of event-centered commodities and souvenirs;

� Redefining the position of the host city in the world’s urban hier- archy through improvement of international relations, enhance- ment of economic and social capacities, upgrading of international gateway status, and speeding up of urban redevel- opment (Derudder et al., 2003); and

� Creating, publicizing, and consolidating the city’s identity through media coverage, tourist visits, public participation and community support (Gold and Gold, 2008).

As intangible assets and core values of a city are largely deter- mined by how the city is perceived, city branding should be eval- uated based on people’s readings on the city. People often view and think about a city in practical terms, focusing on issues such as weather, environment, transport and traffic, living standards and costs, leisure and sport facilities, social order, and cultural life of the city. Anholt (2007) identifies six analytically distinct (but perhaps empirically overlapping) aspects through which a city is perceived and city branding can be evaluated. These aspects, which make up the so-called ‘City Brand Index’, form a hexagon comprising presence (familiarity and contribution to world cul- ture), place (physical aspects), potential (economic and educa- tional opportunities), pulse (vibrancy), people (cultural alignment) and prerequisites (living standards and infrastructure: Anholt, 2007). The aspects cover both tangible and intangible dimensions of a city’s economic and social developments. A sum- mary of the City Brand Index is given in Table 1. In the following sections, these aspects are analyzed against the strategy and ef- fects of Beijing branding.

Table 1 The aspects of people’s perception of the city.

Aspect Meaning

Presence The city’s international status and standing; the city’s global contribution

Place The city’s appearance and physical attributes, such as cleanliness of environment

Potential The city’s opportunities for future development Pulse The city’s vibrant and exciting ways of life, with lots of interesting

activities for residents and visitors People The city’s friendliness, openness, cultural diversification and safety Prerequisite The city’s basic infrastructure and public amenities

Source: Anholt (2007).

Overview of branding strategy of Beijing

The process of Beijing branding involved both semantic promo- tion of certain attributes of the city and a physical reconstruction of the city. It tried to present a cultural, modern, cosmopolitan, and people-based city that was able to impact the world. As we shall see, these city identities and values were expressed in a way that could be termed ‘‘selective story telling” as already noted else- where (Eckstein and Throgmorton, 2003; Sandercock, 2003). The strategy of Beijing branding was to make the city to be understood in a particular way, to publicize its accomplishments, and to change or minimize negative images that the international com- munity had voiced re. controversial issues.

Branding through tourism promotion

Both city branding theory and practice inform us that tourism development is an important component of identity building and place marketing. Undeniably, Beijing possesses good tourism re- sources. Its reputation as a political center dates back 3000 years ago as the capital of the State of Yan. Since the Liao Dynasty, Beijing has become the preeminent power center of major dynasties of China (Garside, 1981). The Forbidden City, the Great Wall, the Tem- ple of Heaven and the Summer Palace, which are icons of Beijing’s long existence of political power, are on the UNESCO List of World Heritage sites (UNESCO, 2008). Those are of historical and cultural significance, and are regarded as valuable tourism resources within the city.

In its early days of the People’s Republic, tourism resources were not used intentionally for tourism development. Before eco- nomic reform was initiated in the late 1970s, China was isolated in a capitalist-dominant world, since socialism was ideologically antagonistic to capitalism. Tourist programs in Beijing were mainly reception services for invited foreign guests.1 Tourism activities, treated as part of the country’s overall diplomatic policy, served the political purposes of facilitating friendship with selected coun- tries and propagandizing communist achievements, with little con- sideration of economic benefits and costs incurred by those tourism activities. Tourism programs were featured by official arrangement of itineraries and full official sponsorship of traveling expenses. Rather than the ‘‘real China” being presented, itineraries set by the city authority were highly selective in nature. Foreign vis- itors had very limited freedom to choose what they wanted to see and what they wanted to learn. Interactions between foreigners and local residents were restricted. Because of official restrictions, few if any individual foreign spectators were found in Beijing. Tour- ism activities, more specifically foreign guest reception services, were a kind of publicity action intended to change the overly nega- tive portrayal of socialist China in the West.

The earlier effort of Beijing branding can be traced back to pro- motion of the city as a tourist choice since China introduced open- ness and reform policies in the 1980s. The rationale for tourism development was primarily economic. In the city planning formu- lated in the mid-1980s, tourism was first viewed as an important economic sector that could generate direct revenues, increase domestic consumption, create employment opportunities, and up- grade the city’s economic structure. Later, to transform Beijing into a first-class metropolis and an attractive destination of tourism was proposed as a chief goal of the city’s ‘‘11th five-year plan” (2005–2010) as well as the medium-term plan of tourism develop- ment (2006–2020: Beijing Municipal Bureau of Tourism, 2006). Various measures were taken to boost tourism. These included

1 Domestic tourism market was seriously constrained by strict restriction of domestic travel as well as the low level of personal income in that time.

Fig. 1. The Olympic mascots – ‘‘Fuwa”. Source: The official website of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, http://en.beijing2008.cn/spirit.

Fig. 2. The logo and theme slogan of the Beijing Olympic Games. Source: The official website of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, http://en.beijing2008.cn/spirit.

248 L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254

massive investment in improvement of tourism infrastructure capacity (such as construction of high-class hotels), creation of new tourist spectacles (such as building of theme parks), interna- tional publicity of the city’s scenic spots, development of different tour routes that linked the city’s historical civilization and recent modernization, formulation of official standards for regulating tourism markets and services (such as an introduction of licensing and ranking systems for rating of travel agents and scenic spots), and establishment of mechanisms for dealing with complains from tourists (such as setting up of hot-lines). While the promotion of tourism contained many types of activities around the city and the surrounding region, the activities and services were organized in such a way that created the ‘‘place myth” (Shields, 1991) or the impressive curiosity for visitation, as well as a hospitable environ- ment and good services for tourists. That was effective when socia- list China re-opened to the international world, following the implementation of economic reforms in the early 1980s. Taking its indubitable advantage of long history of civilization and numbers of ancient wonders, Beijing successfully attracted increasing number of tourists from all around the world, as indi- cated in Table 2. While tourism development became a fast-grow- ing part of the city’s economy, it could be regarded as simply a tourist-oriented advertising of the city’s hot scenic spots to meet the sightseeing expectation of the targeted tourists (particularly international tourists) without blending touring activities into the marketing of the city’s identity and values.

Branding through the Olympic Games

Beijing branding was running throughout the build up to the Beijing Olympics and recent revision of the Beijing Master Planning that guided city development for the period of 2004–2020. The aforementioned historical legacy, the city’s hospitality, and new developments were taken as a point of departure in city planning and branding. The BOCOG put forth magnificent efforts to prepare the city for the 2008 Olympic Games and dedicated the Games as ‘‘People’s Olympics, Green Olympics, and High-Tech Olympics” (The BOCOG, 2002). As part of the preparation campaign, many publicity programs, on a large scale and in various aspects, relent- lessly marketed Beijing as a friendly global city with enduring civ- ilization and embracing modernity. These identities were branded symbolically through the logo, the theme slogans, the mascots and the like, and materially through construction of landmark build- ings and infrastructure. The Olympic mascots articulated the tradi- tional Chinese culture of grace, peace and kindheartedness (Fig. 1). The logo and theme slogans enunciated Beijing city as a harmoni- ous member of the international family, sharing the same vision with other international members (Fig. 2). The million-dollar land- mark buildings for the Games, including the iconic National Sta- dium (dubbed the Bird’s Nest) and the bubble-clad National

Table 2 Number of tourists, Beijing city, by origin, (10,000 person–time).

Year Foreign Domestic

1996 218.9 7683 1997 229.8 8221 1998 220.1 8731 1999 252.4 9260 2000 282.1 10,186 2001 285.8 11,007 2002 310.4 11,500 2003 185.1 8700 2004 315.5 11,950 2005 362.9 12,500 2006 390.3 13,200 2007 435.5 14,280

Source: Beijing Statistical Bureau (various years).

Aquatics Center (dubbed the Water Cube) designed by internation- ally renowned architects, showcased the city’s productive capaci- ties and modernization achievements (Fig. 3).2

The City Master Plan, approved by the central government in 2004, positioned Beijing as an international megalopolis, a famous cultural entity and a city truly suitable for human habitation. ‘‘An international megalopolis” reiterated Beijing as a member of the global city system and reinforced Beijing’s ambition and capability on the world stage. ‘‘A famous cultural entity” reflected Beijing’s determination to carry forward its historic culture and to accom- modate the diversity of cultures. Efforts were made to protect the cultural relics and to maintain the historical sites of Beijing city in recent years. ‘‘A livable city” was an expression of an environ- mentally friendly and socially harmonious Beijing.

As the national capital of China, Beijing possesses many advan- tages for urban growth and is on a positive trajectory in terms of economic development and internationalization. Several city-rank- ing exercises, in which city performances were measured on a number of variables and then those variables were compared, re- vealed that Beijing stood above other cities of the country in over- all development and ranked top in urban competitiveness (Zhao, 2006). At the national level, Beijing’s overall economic power was next only to Shanghai, one of the most populous cities in the world and an economic center of the country. Beijing had the larg- est agglomeration of MNC regional headquarters in China (Zhao et al., 2005). Beijing as a national financial center was evidenced by the emergence of two financial streets (also known as China’s Wall Street) in the CBD of the city. Beijing was also the country’s largest science and technology hub with more than 70 universities

2 It was reported that it cost about US$423 million for construction of the Bird’s Nest (Pasternack and Pearson, 2008), a main venue for the opening and closing ceremonies and athletics competitions, and about US$100 million for the Water Cube (Schearf, 2008), a main venue for competitions of swimming, diving, and synchro- nized swimming.

Fig. 3. The Bird’s Nest and the Water Cube. Source: The official website of the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, http://en.beijing2008.cn/cptvenues/venues/nac/ n214078138.shtml.

L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254 249

and 400 research institutes. Since the top universities and research institutes were most located in Beijing, the city developed strong high-tech industries favoring growth and prosperity.

However, the official conceptualization of the city’s identities and values had not been without opposition. The identities and values branded by the city authority were, to some extent, chal- lenged by the economic, environmental and political reality ob- served or conceived by individuals, particularly those living outside China. Economically, China was associated with low-qual- ity, cheap products and poor services. China was currently the world’s largest manufacturing base of almost any manufactured goods. This production base was formed mainly by the combina- tion of investment and technology from foreign countries with a large supply of cheap domestic labour. It was sustained by price- competitive rather than innovative, high value-added products. Despite having a strong manufacturing capacity for certain goods, China itself had few well-known brand names competing in inter- national markets. This development pattern was a result of a weak R&D foundation. The Chinese economy was still in the very low- end of the global value chain. Environmentally, due to lack of effec- tive controls, ecological degradation and polluted air were widely visible and could not be hidden. Politically, Chinese governments were often criticized for their lack of transparency. Chinese institu- tions and policies for human rights, emerging from a long authoritarian regime, also undeniably met a fair amount of criti- cism from both inside and outside China on various occasions and in various forms (Black and Bezanson, 2004). As the most rep- resentative city of China, Beijing was thought of experiencing all of the above problems.

To address these contentious problems, Beijing made a proac- tive interpretation of the city’s values, emphasizing the achieve- ments that had been made and promising the changes that would come in the future. On the one hand, the city authorities elo- quently argued many errors of reporting on the ‘‘real” China made by prominent Western media (Latham, 2009). On the other hand, Beijing professed that the hosting of the Olympic Games produced opportunities for new developments of the city and to upgrade the city’s position in the hierarchy of the global city system (The BO- COG, 2002; Brownell, 2008). With regard to the ‘‘Green Olympics”, Beijing promised to prioritize environmental protection in the

planning, designing and construction of Olympic projects, with the implementation of strict ecological and environmental stan- dards. The city government used the Games to mobilize local res- idents to clean and beautify the city. It was reported that, to prepare for the Games, Beijing spent more than US$12 billion on environmentally related projects (Li, 2008). Additional ad hoc mea- sures were taken to cut Beijing’s air pollution levels and to green up the landscape during the Games, such as temporarily closing 200 factories and suspending construction projects in the city as well as surrounding provinces, and restricting road traffic, one important source of pollution, by taking half of the city’s 3.3 mil- lion cars off the roads (Greenpeace China, 2008). In responding to sensitive human right issues, Beijing argued that the Games would enhance communication and deepen understanding among the people with different cultural backgrounds. The BOCOG main- tained that China would be more open to international journalists and individual visitors during and after the Games so that they were able to observe what changes had occurred (Close et al., 2006; Brownell, 2008; Latham, 2009). In the next part, we will have a closer look at public perceptions of Beijing city in relation to city branding.

Evaluation of Beijing branding

Table 3 summarizes our survey results and lists respondent ratings on a number of Beijing’s attributes, mainly international- ization, cultural significance and livability. The survey tried to catch, quantitatively and qualitatively, what sort of understand- ing and impression people (both residents and non-residents) had of the city, as a consequence of their personal experiences their. The information collected in the survey reflected public judgment on the official efforts to brand the city. Given the nat- ure of this study and the size of the survey, Table 3 only pre- sents the mean scores which are a summary of what all respondents think of different aspects of Beijing. In addition to learning people’s understanding of the city, the survey also fur- ther evaluated the effect of city branding by investigating the impact of the Beijing Olympics as a platform on promotion of Beijing’s identity and core values.

Table 3 Ratings on Beijing’s attributes.

Variable Dimension Measurement Mean score (N = 100)

Internationalization Economy Presence of MNCs and international organizations, intake of FDI, development of service economy, business climate

2.8

Politics Position and power in international politics and affairs 3.9 Population Cultural mix of residents, presence of international communities 2.7 Infrastructure Ranking of international airport, quality of public transport and cybernetic infrastructure 3.4

Indigenous liberal arts Knowledge on Beijing opera, handicrafts 4.0 Cultural significance Heritage Constructions Landmark building, protection of local traditional culture 4.1

Place-based culture Appreciation of local core values and cultural philosophies 2.9 Lifestyle Understanding of the Beijing dialect, food, entertainment 3.3

Environmental aspects Cleanness and attractiveness of built environment 1.7 Livability Provision of public facilities Access to cultural facilities, such as libraries, museums, theatres, etc. 2.3

Standard of living Transit service, education, accommodation 2.0 Governance Transparency, effectiveness, public involvement, public security 2.3

Impact of the Beijing Olympiad

Promotion of city’s economy Enhancement of competitive advantages, attracting inward investment, technological progress

3.2

Creation of local identity and sense of place

Understanding of iconic architectures, the slogan, the mascots, the logo 3.5

Enhancement of city’s image New cityscapes, promotion activities supporting city marketing, such as exhibitions, forums

2.8

Increase of city’s attractiveness People’s awareness of the city, democratic liberalization, creation of a harmonious society 2.7

Note: The rating indicates the degree of agreement and is on a 5-point scale, with 5 being the highest score or representing the strongest agreement and 1 being the lowest score or representing the strongest disagreement. Source: The authors’ surveys.

250 L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254

General findings of the survey

Based on the responses, it is evident that both achievements and problems existed in Beijing’s effort to brand the city. Specifi- cally, several points can be made on how people viewed and understood the city.

First, it is apparent that Beijing’s international status was acknowledgeable. However, different dimensions of the city’s international profile were rated quite differently. Respondents gave a high score to the political role played by Beijing, and many considered the city, having experienced unprecedented economic opening and growth over the past three decades, as a 21st-century world power. Nearly one-third of the respondents acknowledged an international vision of the city. One respondent stated that Bei- jing was an important world city and China’s ‘cover page’. The for- eign respondents were also impressed by the world class of Beijing’s infrastructure, such as the global connectivity and the handling capacity of the Beijing International Airport, which had been rebuilt for the Olympic Games. In comparison, economic and demographic internationalization received poorer ratings. The respondents postulated that, although there was an upsurge in the number of foreigners living in Beijing, the ethnic diversity and the scale of ethnic congregation in the city were not compara- ble to those found in other global, cosmopolitan megalopolises such as London and New York.

Second, the tangible aspects of the city’s culture were appreci- ated in the making of Beijing branding, but, ironically, the ‘‘top- down” defined, intangible values of culture were not well under- stood and were not widely acceptable. Beijing received a high rec- ognition as a famous cultural city. This understanding went alongside many cultural activities and events organized by the city authorities, such as the Olympic torch relay before the Games, the home-stay program, and a series of lavish cultural shows and per- formances during the Games.3 In ranking, the respondents consid-

3 For the detailed information on the cultural activities during the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games, see the BOCOG document ‘‘Cultural activities during the Beijing 2008 Olympics and Paralympics”, http://files.beijing2008.cn/20080811/upload/English/ 2_Olmpics.pdf.

ered the tangible, eye-catching indigenous liberal arts and ancient architectures as the foremost representative cultural symbols of Bei- jing. However, the cultural influence of Beijing seemed to be limited to the visible components. The philosophies of Beijing’s culture, such as the spirits of the traditional sport of martial arts (wushu), the prin- ciples of geomancy (fengshui) of the city’s physical layout (organiza- tion of the buildings and streets in ancient times), were not well conveyed in city branding activities. Furthermore, foreign respon- dents were confused that Beijing was the cultural center of China, indicated by lower ratings on the prestige of place-based culture. One respondent noted that China was a diverse country in terms of ethnic and cultural compositions, in which Beijing culture only represented a small part of Chinese culture.

Third, the livability component seemed to be the most negative part of the city, as ecological conditions, the provision of public amenities, the standard of public services, and urban governance were in the low end of public evaluation. Our survey indicated that there was little dispute on environmental defects. The overwhelm- ing traffic jams threatened to choke the city, even though huge investments were made to improve the city’s road network (The Economist, 15 May 2004). Despite its best efforts to move polluting industries out of the city’s boundaries and to use natural gas rather than coal for heating, Beijing was unable to improve its air quality to the level that satisfied the residents’ expectation. The respon- dents had a low appraisal for Beijing’s physical environment, giv- ing the lowest score (of 1.7) to environmental aspects among all measurements. The negative image created by the environmental concern seemed to be unavoidable. The respondents believed that the temporary environmental measures adopted during the Olym- pic Games cannot create a good ecosystem for the local people in a sustainable way. Meanwhile, most Beijing residents and foreigners viewed the accommodation in Beijing city as unaffordable due to the surging property prices there. In their open remarks, they com- mented that Beijing city could not provide sufficient amenities for diverse lifestyles and for different income groups. The accessibility to public social facilities such as libraries, museums, theatres, etc. was also a matter of concern. Few respondents were pleased with the existing situation. Many respondents had a negative view on social issues such as equality and social justice, as well as the

L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254 251

transparency and effectiveness of urban governance. It was felt that Beijing branding was essentially a government hegemonic project, with low or passive public participation and involvement in the process. Taking the branding planning and the nature of public involvement into account, the majority of respondents per- ceived that Beijing branding was only a top-down enforced pro- cess, with little branding initiative from the grass-roots level. The city values and branding projects were selected more for their rel- evance to Western tourists than for their representative of actual ways of life of local residents.

5 The official from the BOCOG we interviewed believed that the Beijing Games

The Olympic effect

To many, the Olympic Games were not just sports but were re- garded as a great branding opportunity for the host city to project its identity to the world, as the city would garner worldwide focus and global visibility (Berkowitz et al., 2007). It also provided a pos- sibility to advance the host city in the hierarchy of world cities. Bei- jing held the same optimistic expectations (Ong, 2004; Hashmi et al., 2008). Looking at the focused strategies and initiatives that the city took over the past few years in association with prepara- tion of the Olympic Games, it appeared that the city was struggling to reposition itself as a new superpower. Huge investment on ur- ban (re)development and modernization propelled the city from its former ‘‘ancient city” image and repositioned it as a modern, international city. In their classification of world cities, Derudder et al. (2003) classed Beijing as a ‘‘major regional world city”, a sec- ond tier of the hierarchy of world cities. It was anticipated that the hosting of the 29th Olympiad was a super opportunity for Beijing to join or even surpass the three Asian first tier cities: Tokyo, Sin- gapore and Hong Kong, in terms of global profile (Owen, 2005). The city authority claimed that, because of the Games, Beijing had shortened the gap between the other world-class cities in terms of economic capacity and dynamics, infrastructure standard and the level of environmental protection.4

It is often assumed that mega-sporting events in general, and the Olympics in particular, can create large and lasting economic benefits, such as attraction of funds from non-local sources, crea- tion of more jobs and an increase of tourism incomes for the host cities, despite they need to invest massively in sport venues and re- lated infrastructure (Short et al., 2000). The world-class facilities are regarded as an enduring legacy of hosting the Olympics (Humphreys and Plummer, 1995). However, this assumption of Olympic economic benefits is challenged by several ex-post empir- ical studies which found no statistical evidence of positive eco- nomic impact from mega-sporting events (Rosentraub et al., 1994; Crompton, 1995; Porter, 1999; Owen, 2005). The interna- tional experience showed that economic benefits brought by the Olympics were more potential and forecasted than realized and statistically traceable ones. Some (such as Matheson and Baade, 2004) argued that the lucrative prospect of mega-sporting events was even less likely for developing countries, because the opportu- nity costs of providing high-class facilities were much higher and the lack of modern infrastructure required significant additional investment. Based on an economic impact study on the previous Olympics and an investigation on the expenditures of the Beijing Olympiad, an ex-ante analysis argued that one should not be over confident re. the positive financial outcomes and economic bene- fits generated from the Games (Owen, 2005). In our survey, several

4 For the full official statement on Beijing’s economic growth and urban transfor- mation driven by the Games, see Press Conference: Beijing Olympics and economy held on 21 August 2008. http://en.beijing2008.cn/live/pressconference/mpc/ n214569328.shtml.

respondents raised a question whether it was worthwhile to spend a colossal sum of money to host the Games.5

The ratings from our survey showed that the respondents appreciated physical and economic changes of the city brought by the whole world watching the Olympics, but were conservative about their overall impact on improvement of the quality of life and the enhancement of the city’s identity. It was reported that a total of 37 competition venues were constructed, 59 new roads were built, and 750 km of road were repaired and upgraded (Berkowitz et al., 2007). Research reported that the city also gained some health benefits from Beijing’s Green Olympics (Brajer and Mead, 2003; Mead and Brajer, 2008). Nonetheless, as Baade and Matheson (2002) argued, the economic impact of the Olympics was transitory—one-time changes rather than a steady-state, long-lived change. The overall results of our survey were by and large consistent with Baade and Matheson’s argument concerning short-lived impacts of a single mega-event on city branding. While many agreed that the iconic, high-tech architectures such as the ‘‘Bird’s Nest” and the ‘‘Water Cube” could become new tourism re- sources and create a new sense of place for Beijing, few were con- fident that the Games alone helped fundamentally improve the overall quality of life for the sake of all Beijing residents.

In assessing the Olympic effect on Beijing branding, one may look at whether the central messages of the Beijing Games can effectively deliver the host city’s identity and core values that al- ready gained much public recognition and address the issues that require much more concern and commitment. The discrepancy be- tween the official branded ambitions and people’s expectations was brought up. Through the Games, the Beijing authority sought to obtain legitimacy and international acceptance as a modern city that was able to impact other global cities around the world. ‘‘New Beijing, Great Olympics”, as one of the theme slogans of the Beijing Olympics, revealed the official intention for gaining a place in the world city roster (The BOCOG, 2002). The silhouettes of the specta- cular Olympic venues were marvelous. However, what attracted people most to Beijing (particularly tourists) was not unimaginable modernization but rich historical heritages. Over half of the respondents questioned felt that the Games would enhance the ci- ty’s identity in terms of the resonance of the city’s strong person- ality as an ancient capital. While the slogan emphasized new changes that the city authority wanted to showcase re. what the city had achieved, Beijing’s key personality as an ancient capital was somewhat overlooked. A further example was ‘‘One World One Dream”, another theme slogan of the Beijing Olympics. While this slogan was officially interpreted as a reflection of a harmoni- ous society, it was unclear how this harmony can be materialized through the Games.6 As one respondent pointed out, a global city was characterized by variety and multi-dimensionality. Within a global city, people with different cultural backgrounds did not nec- essarily share the same dream and same ideology. To boost the co- existence of diverse cultures and ideologies remained a long-term task for creating the international character of Beijing.

Seen in a broader perspective, the respondents were skeptical about the introduction of a new quality of life and the common good by the Beijing Olympics. While official branding tried to sell the friendly, smiling, and comfortable city, people generally thought that a one-time event could not help much to satisfy mate- rial needs of the economically and socially marginalized groups

would be profitable by addressing that direct expenditures of the Games (estimated about US$1.6 billion) would be covered by the revenue from multiple sources such as the sale of broadcasting right, souvenirs, and advertising. However, he did not discuss indirect expenditures on preparation of the Games such as investment on improving Beijing transport infrastructure (interview with the BOCOG, March 2008).

6 For the official articulation of the theme slogans, see the BOCOG webpage, http:// en.beijing2008.cn/bocog/concepts/index.shtml.

252 L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254

(including the city’s laid-off workers and rural low-skilled mi- grants working in the city) who represented a significant number of the city’s population and who were supposed beneficiaries. Peo- ple understood the city’s values not only from reading from the physical landscape but also from carrying out the daily routines of their economic and social life. In their open comments, local respondents were concerned with a widening gap of income and social polarization of the city, something which was not directly observable for a short visit. Another critical reservation raised was spatial variations in the quality of the built environment that were intensified by the Games. Certain parts of the city, particu- larly those surrounding the Olympic venues, were redeveloped and beautified for the Games. New lush green spaces, expanded metro and transit systems, and modern shopping arcades appeared in certain locales of the city. Nonetheless, physical renewing and upgrading were very limited in extent in many residential neigh- borhoods, particularly in those distant from the Games venues (Broudehoux, 2007; Smith and Himmelfarb, 2007). Physical decay and substandard housing remained a serious problem in many areas of the city. One respondent remarked that the ideological propaganda slogans (like ‘‘New Beijing, Great Olympics”) did not reflect substantial change and overall improvement that the ordin- ary people expected.

To sum up, evaluations differed to a great extent among mea- surements of various aspects of Beijing city. It seemed that people were attracted more by Beijing’s internationalization status and history than by its environment and social well-being. From the point of view of its people, Beijing emphasized more the promotion of its modern identity to the world rather than addressing its tra- ditional culture. Beijing offered more to tourists than to residents. Beijing was seen as a wonderful tourist destination but not a very good place to live. Some core values promulgated by the city authority were not well recognized by local residents and visitors. Even though great changes were made in preparation of the Beijing Olympics, the mega-event alone did not help much Beijing out of negative images associated with its long-lasting social and envi- ronmental problems. The successful Beijing Olympics have not been enough to offset other concerns that people have.

Implications of Beijing branding

Both branding theories and international experiences suggest that successful city branding is not simply rhetorical promotion of the government’s vision and thoughts, rather, it should portray the city’s identity and core values that present the totality of peo- ple’s experiences, feelings and expectations; consequently, people find them believable (Smidt-Jensen, 2006; Anholt, 2007; Kavarat- zis, 2009). In this respect, city branding is more than an exercise of propaganda slogans or advertisement campaigns. Analysis of the results of our survey shows that a featured problem of Beijing branding was the lack of common consensus re. the city’s identity and values between the city government and the general public. It is noteworthy that the contradiction was linked to the exis- tence of many economic and social challenges and the absence of a two-way process of communication. A city is not only an agglomeration of physical buildings and infrastructure, which have both functional and symbolic meanings, but also a complex organization made up of various political, cultural, and economic groupings, each has its own interest and particular view on the city. For different populations, the city presents different func- tional and symbolic meanings. This makes reaching consensus on the city’s momentous identity and core values a contested task.

Practically, city branding should serve as a channel for people to recognize the city’s identity and should play a guiding role in pol- icy making to pursue development for the economic, cultural and

social prosperity of the local society (Kavaratzis, 2004, 2008). In this sense Beijing branding should pay special attention to the proper conceptualization, communication, and management of the city’s identity and core values that demanded for public recog- nition. This leads to address two crucial issues in relation to the improvement of the effectiveness of Beijing branding.

One issue is more people-oriented treatment of the livable con- tents of the city. Among all the essential attributes of livable Bei- jing, ‘‘social well-being of ordinary population” and ‘‘living environment” are of great importance and that should be given more concern. As discussed above, Beijing’s performance in these two respects was below the public expectation and was awarded low ratings. People, both local residents (including migrant work- ers) and visitors, are users of the city’s built environment and are ambassadors of city branding. The existing activities of Beijing branding focused more on visitors than on local residents, and emphasized more hospitality than social well-being. For example, while a majority of Chinese were certainly proud to host and were willing to support the Beijing Olympics, there were some reports, both from the state and international media, revealing that the Bei- jing Games was prepared and operated, to some extent, at the ex- pense of the interests of local disadvantaged populations. One case was that over 230 officially classified shanty towns, which accom- modated millions of low-income residents of Beijing, were demol- ished as part of the city’s ‘‘beautification” project, to showcase the city’s modernization image during the Olympics, but without any plan for compensation and relocation of affected residents (New Beijing Daily, 2004). Another case was that, in order to ease the security and environmental burdens of the city, thousands of mi- grant workers, who were the main force used to build and beautify the Olympic venues, were sent back to their home towns when Beijing made its last-minute preparation for the Games (Watts, 2008; Jacobs, 2008). For the improvement of Beijing branding, the city government should concern itself more with recognition rather than sacrifice of the interests of economically and socially disadvantaged populations.

Another important issue is to develop a common understanding and to minimize different interpretations of certain issues that generate controversies and disputes over the city’s identity and values. One inference of the earlier discussion is that there was a lack of common desires between the residents of the city and the city government. Some respondents argued that the development goals, set forth by the city government, were not readily applied to their daily life and therefore did not work for many. City resi- dents usually developed their own understandings or perceptions of the city’s values through their experience and always expected that developments could meet more people’s needs. Consensus building through dialogue and communication between the gov- ernment and the general public is necessary to minimize value conflicts and to develop mutually acceptable goals. This requires establishing issue-based institutional mechanisms for wider public participation and collaboration in the decision-making process in public policy arena, which currently seem insufficient and ineffec- tive, at least in the case of city branding.

Concluding remarks

City branding is a popular practice adopted by many cities around the world in the context of intensified urban competition. Beijing is no exception in this regard. This research reviews Bei- jing’s branding strategy and examines its branding effect. It dem- onstrates that, while the branding initiatives that Beijing took were by no means unique in comparison with the practices imple- mented elsewhere, it was an essentially state-led top-down pro- cess. This led to a mismatch between the city’s identity and core values branded by the government and an understanding of the

L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254 253

city in peoples’ minds. Acknowledgement of this mismatch ad- dressed an issue that the city government and the general public read the city in different metaphors. The city government tended to interpret the city’s identity and values in accordance with the government’s vision and motivation of development. The top- down city branding tried to convey the goals that the city authority intended. Nonetheless, the general public often viewed the city with the city’s utility functions and their expectations of personal prosperity. It seemed that the city’s rhetorical values promoted by the government did not well represent peoples’ own experience and perception. To achieve more effective city branding, it is important to change people’s unfavorable perceptions of the city. A lesson one can learn from the Beijing case is that the mismatch could be minimized with more communication and closer cooper- ation between the city authorities and the general public. The city’s core values can be better identified and accepted with more active public participation in city branding. This does not necessarily re- quire a well-established democratic system. What is required is acknowledgement of the need to establish more channels of citizen feedback to create ‘‘error-correction mechanisms” that makes city branding win people’s hearts and minds.

Another lesson one can learn from the Beijing case is that city branding is a long-term process in which the branding goals cannot be effectively achieved through a single event, even if that event it- self is high-profile and can generate worldwide attention and global influence. The branding opportunities provided by an international mega-event constituted an important but only fractional part of the entire process. Taking into account the respondent comments in our survey, one can conclude that a better way of city branding should address the appealing values and images that do not have a big contrast or controversy to the observable economic and social reality, and should be capable of changing negative images that are perceived by many. This suggests that city branding should be part of long-term economic and social development. The city’s identity and core values need to be pursued, not only in official propaganda programs, but also in the development practices that produce them. City branding does not simply refer to the exclusive use of promo- tional ways such as logos or slogans, but, strategically, should in- clude many more areas of activities. From this point of view, international mega-events can provide good opportunities to pro- mote growth and to enhance the sense of the city to some extent. Nonetheless, they can only generate limited effects on fundamen- tally solving the long-existing economic and social problems as well as on construction of the city’s identity and core values, because such events are simply not designed as an instrument of public pol- icy or urban planning. While the Beijing Olympics were hailed internationally as a successful event, at least in terms of the athletic events themselves, and led to positive effects on the increased lev- els of tourism, employment and business opportunities for a certain period, its long-term effects on the economic and social transforma- tion of the city in general, and on Beijing branding in particular, re- main to be seen.

References

Anholt, S (2007) Competitive identity: the new brand management for nations, cities and regions. Palgrave Macmillan.

Baade, RA and Matheson, V (2002) Bidding for the Olympics: fool’s gold? In Transatlantic sport: the comparative economics of North American and European sports, CP Barros, M Ibrahimo and S Szymanski (eds.). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd..

Beijing Municipal Bureau of Tourism (2006) Beijing’s 11th Five-year Plan for the tourism industry development. <http://www.bjta.gov.cn/lyzl/lyfzgh/94549.htm>.

Beijing Statistical Bureau (various years) Beijing statistical yearbook. China Statistical Press, Beijing.

Berci, F, Mommaas, H and Synghel, K (2002) City branding: image building and building images. NAI Publisher, Rotterdam.

Berkowitz, P, Gjermano, G, Gomez, L and Schafer, G (2007) Brand China: using the 2008 Olympic Games to enhance China’s image. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 3(2), 164–178.

Black, D and Bezanson, S (2004) The Olympic Games, human rights and democratisation: lessons from Seoul and implications for Beijing. Third World Quarterly 25(7), 1245–1261.

Brajer, V and Mead, RW (2003) Blue skies in Beijing? Looking at the Olympic effect. The Journal of Environment and Development 12(2), 239–263.

Broudehoux, A (2007) Spectacular Beijing: the conspicuous construction of an Olympic metropolis. Journal of Urban Affairs 29(4), 383–399.

Brownell, S (2008) Beijing’s games: what the Olympics mean to China. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD.

Carson, D, Gilmore, A, Perry, C and Cronhaug, K (2001) Qualitative marketing research. Sage Publications, London.

Close, P, Askew, D and Xu, X (2006) The Beijing Olympiad: the political economy of a sporting mega-event. Routledge, Abingdon.

Crompton, JL (1995) Economic impact analysis of sports facilities and events: eleven sources of misapplication. Journal of Sport Management 9(1), 14–35.

De Chernatony, L and Dall’Olmo Riley, F (1998) Defining a brand: beyond the literature with experts’ interpretations. Journal of Marketing Management 14(5), 417–443.

Derudder, B, Taylor, PJ, Witlox, F and Catalano, G (2003) Hierarchical tendencies and regional patterns in the world cities network: a global urban analysis of 234 cities. Regional Studies 37(9), 875–886.

Eckstein, B and Throgmorton, JA (eds.) (2003) Story and sustainability: planning, practice and possibility for American cities. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Essex, S and Chalkley, B (1998) Olympic games: catalyst of urban change. Leisure Studies 17(3), 187–206.

Evans, G (2003) Hard-branding the cultural city – from Prado to Prada. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 27(2), 417–440.

Garside, R (1981) Coming alive: China after Mao. Mcgraw-Hill Publishing. Gertner, D and Kotler, P (2004) How can a place correct a negative image? Place

Branding 1(1), 50–57. Gold, JR and Gold, M (2008) Olympic cities: regeneration, city branding and

changing urban agendas. Geography Compass 2(1), 300–318. Greenpeace China (2008) After the Olympics: lesions from Beijing. A Greenpeace

Report, 8 August 2008. Hashmi, SM, Fida, BA and Alhayky, A (2008) Economic impact studies of Beijing

2008 Olympic Games. China–USA Business Review 7(5) (Serial No. 59). Humphreys, JM and Plummer, MK (1995) The economic impact on the state of

Georgia hosting the 1996 Olympic Games: 1995 update. Selig Center for Economic Growth, Terry College of Business, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.

Jacobs, A (2008) Olympic message to some in Beijing is ‘please leave’. The New York Times, 8 August 2008.

Kavaratzis, M (2004) From city marketing to city branding: towards a theoretical framework for developing city brands. Place Branding 1(1), 58–73.

Kavaratzis, M (2008) From city marketing to city branding: an interdisciplinary analysis with reference to Amsterdam, Budapest and Athens. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen. <http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/314660232>.

Kavaratzis, M (2009) Cities and their brands: lessons from corporate branding. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 5, 26–37.

Kavaratzis, M and Ashworth, GJ (2005) City branding: an effective assertion of identity or a transitory marketing trick? Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 96(5), 506–514.

Langer, R (2001) Place images and place marketing. Working Paper, vol. 2001-03, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen.

Latham, K (2009) Media, the Olympics and the search for the ‘‘real China”. China Quarterly 197, 25–43.

Li, X (2008) In the Olympic spirit ‘‘truly exceptional” games yield golden legacy for Beijing. Business Beijing, September 2008.

Matheson, V and Baade, RA (2004) Mega-sporting events in developing nations: playing the way to prosperity? South African Journal of Economics 72(5), 1085–1096.

Mead, RW and Brajer, V (2008) Environmental cleanup and health gains from Beijing’s Green Olympics. China Quarterly 194, 275–293.

Morgan, N, Pritchard, A and Pride, R (2005) Destination branding, second ed. Elsevier.

Morgan, N, Pritchard, A and Pride, R (eds.) (2002) Destination branding: creating the unique destination proposition. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.

New Beijing Daily (2004) Beijing will demolish 231 villages encircled by the city and renovate the environment surrounding the stadiums and gymnasiums for the Olympic Game, 28 September 2004.

Ong, R (2004) New Beijing, great Olympics: Beijing and its unfolding Olympic legacy. Stanford Journal of East Asian Affairs 4(2), 35–49. <http:// www.stanford.edu/group/sjeaa/journal42/china3.pdf>.

Owen, JG (2005) Estimating the cost and benefit of hosting Olympic Games: what can Beijing expect from its 2008 Games? The Industrial Geographer 3(1), 1–18.

Pasternack, A and Pearson, CA (2008) National stadium. Architectural Record, July 2008. Peterson, PE (1981) City limits. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Porter, PK (1999) Mega-sports events as municipal investments: a critique of

impact analysis. In Sports economics: current research, J Fizel, E Gustafson and L Hadley (eds.). Praeger Press.

Rosentraub, MS, Swindell, D, Przybylski, M and Mullins, D (1994) Sport and downtown development strategy: if you build it, will jobs come? Journal of Urban Affairs 16(3), 221–239.

Sandercock, L (2003). Cosmopolis II. Mongrel cities for the 21st century. Continum, London.

Schearf, Daniel (2008) China opens ‘‘water cube” Olympic swimming, diving venue. Voice of America, 28 January 2008.

254 L. Zhang, S.X. Zhao / Cities 26 (2009) 245–254

Shields, R (1991) Places on the margin: alternatives of geographies of modernity. Routledge, London.

Short, JR, Breitbach, C, Buckman, S and Essex, J (2000) From world cities to gateway cities: extending the boundaries of globalization theory. City: Analysis of Urban Trends, Culture, Theory, Policy, Action 4(3), 317–337.

Simoes, C and Dibb, S (2001) Rethinking the brand concept: new brand orientation. Corporate Communications 6(4), 217–224.

Smidt-Jensen, S (2006) City branding: lessons from medium sized cities in the Baltic Sea Region. In Medium sized cities in dialogue around the Baltic Sea (ed.). Danish Centre for Forest, Landscape and Planning, KVL.

Smith, C and Himmelfarb, K (2007) Restructuring Beijing’s social space: observations on the Olympic Games in 2008. Eurasian Geography and Economics 48(5), 543–554.

The Beijing Organizing Committee for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad (2002) Beijing Olympic action plan. <http://en.beijing2008.cn/59/80/column211718059.shtml>.

The Economist (2004) Time to hit the brakes, 15 May 2004. UNESCO (2008) The list of world heritage. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/list>. Watts, J (2008) Four weeks to go and Beijing’s unknown army is in retreat. The

Guardian, 12 July 2008. Whitson, D and Macintosh, D (1996) The global circus: international sport, tourism,

and the marketing of cities. Journal of Sport and Social Issues 20(3), 278–295. Zhao, H (ed.) (2006) Report on the development of China’s headquarters economy

2005–2006. Beijing Academy of Social Science, Beijing. Zhao, X, Cai, J and Zhang, L (2005) Asymmetric information as a key determinant for

locational choice of MNC headquarters and the development of financial centers: a case for China. China Economic Review 16(3), 308–331.