Introduction to Urban Rebranding Players L/O: To know who the “rebranding players” are To further understand the economic/social/environmental reasons for rebranding. Starter Activity: In your books make a list (4) of the different groups of people you think would want to get involved in a Rebranding Scheme. Suggest what role this group of people may play e.g. Marketing, advertising funding etc.

Rebranding an urban area cannot be done by one organisation on its own. It requires many different groups of people who have an interest in rebranding (players). They have different roles and different reasons for getting involved. Local Government National Government Urban Regeneration Companies (URCs) Private CompaniesPrivate Investors Not-For-Profit Organisations Tourist BoardsLocal Community Reasons for their involvement can include: Funding, Allowing Planning Permission, Deciding where priorities for rebranding should be, Marketing and Promotion, Providing support and advice for rebranding.

Flagship/community project? What examples of economic/social/environmental rebranding strategies did you see? Why did they need to change? Who were the key players?

The rebranding players Rebranding players are the… Stakeholders are individuals, groups or organisations that have… There is a possible range of stakeholders… Some examples of stakeholders include… …an interest in a particular project. They may be involved financially or emotionally. …English Partnerships, European Union and DEFRA. …including public partners, private firms, sponsors, not-for- profit organisations and government departments. …stakeholders in the rebranding process.

Players, stakeholders and policy-makers have adopted 3 main strategies to tackling rebranding projects StrategyHow it worksAdvantageDisadvantage Top-down approach Bottom-up approach Partnerships

Players, stakeholders and policy makers have adopted 3 main strategies to tackle rebranding projects Top –down approach: decisions made by authorities or agencies and imposed on particular people and places. The advantage of this approach is that it is strategic in nature and offers a co-ordinated strategy. However local communities in both rural and urban environments may feel isolated from the decision-making process and refuse to engage with the project. It also ignores local knowledge.

Bottom-up approach: This is based on listening to local opinion and devising local solutions to problems. The advantage is that local people are closely involved in developments and are empowered. However such approaches may lack the ‘teeth’ or power to make substantial changes; they often rely on volunteers/

The partnership approach: This approach aims to combine the best features of both bottom up and top down. Partnerships are made up of representatives from the state, private and voluntary sectors. Partnerships are often well placed to draw on funding e.g. National Lottery. However decision making can be burreaucratic and longwinded.