How and why do urban revitalization projects utilize place branding to mobilize resources and simultaneously create boundaries of belonging and exclusion? Using two in-depth ethnographic case studies, we demonstrate how boundary-making through place branding and revitalization reveals, but also precipitates, sociocultural friction regarding naming and place claims, and invokes rigid ethnic and class divisions that affect civic inclusion. The implications of place branding raise urgent questions about representation and the risk of perpetuating divisions that undermine social cohesion and equity in urban revitalization. Our findings illustrate the intertwined impacts of implementing place branding strategies in city revitalization efforts, highlighting the need for practitioners, policymakers, scholars, and local government officials to more closely and comprehensively examine the boundary-making power of place branding in future place-based revitalization practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Falkenstein et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: