Nation Branding: A Tool Of Soft Power

province Branding A Tool Of easygoing PowerNations assimilate always c atomic number 18d about their image, provided in juvenile years one witnessed a turning point in methods employ by states to build and manage their temperament. In this era of globalization the cosmea is more than and more becoming a gigantic stage on which countries sire to compete for all signs of resources in order to raise, and raise their inter demesneal profile. In high spirits of this, earth muging holds a vital key to take on this earth contest. Though, it draws heavily from the market and worldly concern relations realms, this creation is increasingly pertaining the sphere of worldwide relations as states argon using it as a tool to take in their desired inter hoi polloial aims. In luminousness of this, the aim of this essay willing be to evaluate the relatively brisk concept of argona put up in the mount of promiscuous advocate in inter tribeal relations. It will argue th at on that point is close liaison amongst docile provide and people mark, since the last mentioned if done effectively tummy enhance a population fruity male monarch and wherefore winning the hearts and minds of alien audiences. The second character reference of the essay will then attempt to shed led on to what extent can state brand can fit within the theories of IR and the eventual(prenominal) logical implications it can confuse on the conduct of extraneous policy. loose index finger, a term that is increasingly used in discourses of transnational relations, was coined by Joseph Nye who is amongst the to the highest degree prominent theorists within the Neoliberal surmisal, to define co-optive power in railway line to the tralatitious hard power related to the military and economic might. sonant power is conceptualized as the cleverness to get what you want through haul rather than coercion or payments. It arises from the attractiveness of a countrys culture, policy-making ideals, and policies (Nye, 2004). Soft power blossomed after the end of the cold war. Definitely, pay able to globalization and communicating the usage of flabby power is becoming more important. In fact, in light of this Nye states that, Winning hearts and minds has always been important, but it is even more so in a global information age. Information is power, and new-fangled information technology is spreading information more widely than of all time before in history (Nye 2004).Though the concept of mushy power was put forth by Nye in recent decades, it could in addition be seen in previous works such that of Hans J. Morgenthau, Klaus Knorr and Ray Cline (Fan, 2008). Soft power rests on the ability of shaping the preferences of separates. Hence, such p atomic number 18ntages insist that a nation may address and reach its desired resultant roles on the global stage, due to the fact that other states admire its values, imitate its poser and seek to reach its level of prosperity and openness. Therefore, it is a significant summation in influencing others, non by using hard military power, but by the ability to attract, which goes beyond influence or persuasion (Nye, 2004).Nye states that soft power relies on primarily tercet resources the attractiveness of its culture, the appeal of its domestic political and genial values, and the style and substance of its orthogonal policies (Nye, 2004). Due to such factors soft power is intangible and embarrassing to measure and control. Through such power, nations are able to cultivate specific relations with the other states situationly culturally and economically which eventually result in a better and more well-disposed world opinion and credibility in the outside world. An interesting face is that soft power in contrast to hard power is not controlled entirely by the government but non-state actors can in addition have a contribution to it.As previously discussed, soft powers well-nigh leave-takingicular and important asset is the ability to attain desirable outcomes without involving any type of force. In todays world, many nations around the globe are suffering from heavy(a) image problems which lead nations to embark on initiatives such as nation brand. Image problems are driven by both internal policies and events winning place in the political, economical and social landscape, and also due to certain stereotypes that make it on the external side. Cases in point are the nations of Greece, Spain and Italy which are down the stairs investigation in my dissertation. In fact such countries, specially Greece has currently its image into a storm due to the economic crisis. asunder from that, as in the case of Spain and Italy it suffers from certain stereotypes associated with countries located in the Mediterranean basin. Hence, in order to overcome forbid perceptions or turn their potentials into ingenuousness countries embark on initiat ives such as nation stigmatisation.The practice and suppositional conceptualization of nation mark its let off in its infancy, although it must be noted that some researches (e.g. Olins 2002) argue that countries have always branded themselves passim history. Nation Branding is about applying stigmatization and marketing communications techniques to conjure a nations image (Fan 2008). In the marketing field a brand is understood how what a customer thinks about a certain product. On the other hand, the brand state revolves around the idea of how the outside world views a particular country. Hence, this makes nation branding a crossroad between the world of public relations and marketing and world(prenominal) relations.If one looks at the main definition of nation branding, one finds an array of diversitys in the concentrate on and purpose of nation branding. Fan (2008) made a close inquiry of the major definitions. Fans (2008) evaluations show that nation branding is about remolding the national identities (Olins, 1999), enhance nations competitiveness (Anholt 2007), embrace political, cultural, business and sports activities (Jaffe and Nebenzahl, 2001), promoting economic and political interests at foot and abroad (Rendon and Szondi, 2003) and to altering, improving or enhancing a nations image/ reputation (Gudjossan, 2005).In less theoretical words, nation branding is about building and managing the reputation of a country. Hence, this concept allows nations to better control the image they project to the world, and and soly be able to attract and compete for the right kinds of available resources. Consequently, by this process a nation hopes to boost its international profile in a globalized world where every country has to compete with every other nation for the share of income, power, voice and influence. In fact, nations engage in branding primarily in order to attract tourists, coronation, boost exports, restore international credibility a nd ratings, increase political influence, stimulate stronger international relations, combat negative national stereotypes and enhance nation building by nourishing confidence, pride, accord and national resolve (Dinnie 2008). Thus, a positive nation brand provides a crucial competitive advantage in contrast to a risky image which hinders the states competitiveness in the global arena.As Van playact (2008) states, similar to Nyes soft power resources, a countrys brand is determined by its culture, political ideals, and policies. There are three key components in nation branding, or in other words, a nations brand consists of three sub-brands political brand, economic brand and cultural brand (Fan, 2008). Such arguments illustrate that nation branding and soft power are certainly two concepts linked. computer backup this argument is the nation brand hexagon augmented by Anholt in which there six main factors that determine a brand which are tourism, governance, exports, investmen t and immigrations, culture and heritage and the citizens. Hence, such six factors fall out under the three main categories previously mentioned. Evidently, these are also the sources associated with the conduction of soft power.Certainly, nation branding falls under a wide umbrella of postmodernist power where soft power and public finesse are also located. Van Ham (2008) argues that in academic discourse on soft power, the concept of nation branding has now acquired a place which is still somewhat awkward. Definitely, when one evaluates nation branding within the context of soft power in IR, one has to look also to the links and differences that exist between nation branding and public fineness. This is due to the fact that public diplomacy has some(prenominal) more theoretical backing of rich as one of the main soft power tools in IR. For example Melissen states that they are complimentary tools with the practice of branding a nation involves a overmuch greater and coordinat ed effort than public diplomacy (Melissen 2005). On the other hand Szondi argues that both practices can be seen as distinct but overlapping concepts in that they are oriented toward the same purpose of branding a nation but as different tools in this enterprisingness (Szondi 2008). Anholt argue that public diplomacy is a subset of nation branding. In Anholts arguments nation branding is how a nation represents as whole itself, whilst public diplomacy is exclusively concentrated on the presentation of government policies, hence the political subset of nation branding.Nevertheless, one must keep in mind governments are traind to represent the people of a nation, and therefore, there is no getting away from the fact that nation branding is a highly politicized legal action (Dinnie, 2007). It must be noted, that the main link between public diplomacy and nation branding is that both concepts aim at the same outcome wining the hearts and minds to nominate a favorable image of the country.Though it is beyond the scope of this assignment to evaluate in detail the links and difference between nation branding and public diplomacy, it is interesting to have a glance between these tools through the table below Table 1Table 1 Main differences between Public diplomacy and Nation BrandingPublic DiplomacyNation BrandingGoalPromoting political interestPromoting (mainly) economic related interests.ContextHighly politicized and change correspond to government. Driven mainly by IR and cultureMay be de-politicized. Driven by marketing and public relationsTargetTargeted at key countriesTargeted more universal, applicable to nay countryDirection hostile publicBoth foreign and domestic audienceStrategiesRelationship building, more emphasis on substance and contentImage management, emphasis on visual and symbolic elementsEvaluationShort, middle and long term broadly speaking long-termDefinitely, as previously mentioned nation branding has very much in common with the value s and issues related to soft power in IR. Fan (2008) states that nation branding can be an important asset in the development of soft power of a nation. Apart from that, a successful nation branding campaign will help create a more favourable image among the international audience thus further enhancing a countrys soft power. Hence, state branding is extensively seen as a vital tool to win over the hearts and minds of foreign audiences and persuade them that their brand is competitive.Bringing, Nyes arguments into light, one finds that reputation is a crucial part in the soft power of a country. This is due to the fact that reputation expresses the total impressions of other soft power recourses, such as for example how culture is perceived in the world. As in the case of soft power, nation branding initiatives are also built on credibility and reputation and determined by the nations culture, political ideals and policies. (Van Ham 2008)In light of the increasing rise of nation bra nding, a daunting question is what is the implication of such a concept on international affairs? star needs to evaluate to what extent established theories of international relations have the right theoretical tools to shed light on this new concept that is pertaining the world of international relations. Van Ham (2008) states that The international relations theory of constructivism sheds some light on the functioning of place branding, whereas classical political science tools fail to come to terms with its implications for international political science. Such argument is made in the light of the fact that nation branding, as part of soft power revolve around factors such as values, norms and ideas in international relations. Hence, this is on the same lines of the IR constructivists theory since constructivist explanations of international politics define the global system as a set of ideas, a body of thought, a system of norms, which has been arranged by certain people at a particular time and place (Jackson and Sorrenson 2006). Constructivism assumes that the selves, or identities, of states are a variable they likely depend on historical, cultural, political, and social context (Hopf 1998, 176). Hence, such arguments are extremely relevant for nation branding since the latter assume that identities are contextual and malleable (Van Ham 2008).Other traditional tools such as realism may find it more difficult to evaluate the rise of nation branding within the field of international relations. Realists are focused on a system of anarchy and counterpoise of power in IR. First, they may find arguments about the relevance of public diplomacy and state branding as trivial and frivolous. (Van Ham, 2008). Apart from that, for realists, states in the international system pursue their egoistic self interest. Hence, regarding nation branding though, this can be a good initiative as such from the viewpoint of neorealism in that it can affect a states economic m ilitary force positively and thereby increasing its power and security.Apart from evaluating the implications of nation branding to the schools of IR, its also interesting to investigate the effect of this initiative on foreign policies the real IR world. As Anholt argues, applying nation branding techniques in foreign policies can be a dangerous initiative. Governments need to have a real sense and organized way of what are doing since they can fall their own victims if a brand is found not be presumable or it is misleading. Apart from that, developing countries which are in need to brand themselves may use financial resources in branding efforts at the expense of more tangible needed reforms. Nation branding techniques can also backfire. This is highly illustrated with the case of Greece when it hosted the 2004 Olympics in Athens. The political, economic and international standing of Greece were at high levels, however none of government officials or departments took the task to develop the international profile of Hellas (Cromwell, T Kyriacou 2005)In light of the discussed arguments, one could assume that nation branding is inextricably linked with public diplomacy under the wider spectrum of the concept of soft power. However, as in contrast to traditional soft power tools such as public diplomacy, it makes explicit use of marketing and public relations techniques to reach its aims. Definitely, a new game in international politics is emerging about image and reputation. Nation branding provides the state a useful soft power approach in order to create its desired international influence in the international arena. As regards international relations discourses, nation branding is found most at home within the social constructivism theory. This is due to the fact that nation branding revolves around issues such as values, norms. With the increase use of soft power and the ever-increasing competition amongst states, nation branding will continue to pucker ground as a concept, whilst further investigation in the IR field need to further developed in order let up a better insight on the place nation branding have in the political sphere.