https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797617694728

Tourist Studies2018, Vol. 18(1) 3 –20

© The Author(s) 2017Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.navDOI: 10.1177/1468797617694728

journals.sagepub.com/home/tou

ts

Who owns the name of a place? On place branding and logics in two villages in Galicia, Spain

Guadalupe Jiménez-EsquinasUniversity of Santiago de Compostela (USC), Spain

Cristina Sánchez-CarreteroSpanish National Research Council (CSIC), Spain

AbstractThis article deals with the marketing strategies employed to promote the name of a place in a global context of heritage propertisation. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in two sites on the ‘Costa da Morte’ in Galicia, northwest of Spain, this article analyses the discourses and practices employed to commoditise place names and the strategies regarding place branding. In particular, two strategies are contemplated: first, the creation of a name to refer to a whole area, which is the case of the ‘Costa da Morte’, and, second, the name branding processes of two of the better-known villages on this coastline. Camariñas is developing a registered trademark for bobbin lace protection and the village of Finisterre is promoting the ‘End of the World’ as a tourist destination. This article focuses on the mechanisms by which place branding discourses and practices permeate various social agents and the naturalisation process of place branding structuring logics.

KeywordsCamariñas, Costa da Morte, Finisterre, heritage, names, place branding

Corresponding author:Guadalupe Jiménez-Esquinas, Departamento de Filosofía e Antropoloxía. Universidade de Santiago de Compostela. Praza de Mazarelos. 15782 Santiago de Compostela. Spain. Email: guadalupe.jimenez@usc.es

694728 TOU0010.1177/1468797617694728Tourist StudiesJiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carreteroresearch-article2017

Article

4 Tourist Studies 18(1)

O, be some other name!

What’s in a name? …

William Shakespeare (Romeo and Juliet: Act 2, Scene 2)

What’s in a name?

What’s in the name of a place that is being transformed into a brand? Who owns the name of a place? What are the logics1 at work when the name of a town or region is being commoditised following a marketing logic? Are there alternative ways to understand names, places and heritage outside corporate culture and marketing logics? These are some of the questions that guide this article in which we have analysed three case studies on the Costa da Morte,2 in the northwest corner of Spain.

To be named is to acquire existence, to be known and recognised and, therefore, to be localised in time and space. To name a place implies giving it recognition, and from a marketing logic viewpoint, to have a name with a recognisable genealogy is also to pos-sess a scarce resource on which our reputation depends (Anholt, 2007a: 7). To use a place name as a commodity is becoming increasingly common when applying marketing strat-egies to what are considered ‘cultural products’. In doing so, to possess a place name as a brand is to be differentiated from those competing in the marketplace (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2011; Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 1998: 152; Kotler and Armstrong, 1999: 249; Morgan et al., 2004).

Branding is a well-established marketing concept that refers to the process of design-ing, planning and communicating a name and the identity symbols linked to the name in order to build or manage reputation (Anholt, 2007a: 5). In using identity symbols and cultural practices, branding strategies are powerful and consistent tools, which have the ability to produce emotional and psychological attachment with consumers and financial value for the brand owner (Okonkwo, 2007: 9). In doing so, place branding processes economic aims so as to attract tourists, stimulate inward investment and boost exports. But branding is also intended to reinforce emotional connections between the visitor and the destination and reduce consumer search cost and perceived risk (Blain et al., 2005: 337; Dinnie, 2008: 64).

As Anholt and Okonkwo have explored (Anholt, 2007b: 6; Okonkwo, 2007: 9), defi-nitions of branding are based on ownership discourse. This hazardous discourse on prop-erty and descent rights is also present in heritage and cultural practices, as Hodder (2010) has analysed. The answer to ‘who is the owner of a name, a place or heritage?’ is quite complex; for instance, when considering a specific heritage element which is a private property or when a person or a group of people have been identified as the creators of a name, place or heritage element, it belongs to them and consequently not to others. But when we are dealing with villages’ names, intangible heritage, cultural practices and identity symbols, such as we will analyse in this article, their treatment as private prop-erty cannot be seen as objective or neutral. As Noyes points out in her article on tradi-tional culture, it usually happens that ‘cultural products’ are co-opted by ‘self-proclaimed community representatives, including the state’, local businesspeople, politicians, mar-keting experts, elites who do not live in the village or perform an art and so on (Noyes,

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 5

2011: 40–41). The reformulation of commons such as city names, heritages and cultural practices, turning them into constrained and scarce private properties controlled by own-ers, is in line with the liberal capitalism logic that is colonising our cognitive system (Blondeau et al., 2004). In the light of this, our article analyses how the logic of proper-tisation, branding and corporate culture3 has permeated local discourses about place names.

The expanding nature of branding strategies and corporate culture is an example of how the Authorised Heritage Discourse (Smith, 2006) cannot be linked to a ‘top-bottom’ dichotomy but rather to a heritage regime that is being naturalised as the unquestioned way of being in the world (Alonso González, 2013; Bendix et al., 2012). It is not just a matter of an elitist discourse that may (or may not) be assumed by local population. What we wish to convey in this article is what Karl Polanyi predicted on the ‘oil spot’ effect that market economy has over social structures, customs and cultural environment (Polanyi, 1989: 444). In the line of marketing strategies, destination branding logics are permeating social structures and daily life performances and are molecularly embodied in citizenship (Gramsci, 2010: 284). We have found that municipal officials, tourism agents, local restaurants, café and bar owners and village residents are gradually incor-porating and embodying these discourses on market economy and marketing in relation to their common heritage, with the name of their villages and their folklore.

In order to analyse how destination branding, heritage propertisation and corporate culture are permeating two coastal villages in Galicia (Spain), we are not only looking at the ‘host–guest’ relations that have been thoroughly analysed in anthropology, tourism studies and destination branding literature (Cohen, 1988; Urry, 1990). In this article, based on ethnographic fieldwork, we are focusing on ‘host–host’ relations (Silva, 2013: 13) in order to add some nuance to how the effects of marketing logic are being imple-mented locally and assumed as the only feasible logic even when managing marginal sites and practices in a marginal region in a marginal crypto-colonial country such as Spain (Herzfeld, 2004: 8).4

The underlying idea for this article came to us while carrying out two different research projects. One of them consisted of ethnographic fieldwork on crafts performed by women and their heritagisation and touristification processes from a feminist perspec-tive. The other one was concerned with the research project ‘Processes of Heritagisation in the Camino: Santiago-Fisterra-Muxía’ to understand how the promotion of the Camino affects the villages through which it passes. We were each working in different research contexts, but we were both trying to find alternative models for heritage management. However, when analysing the different case studies on the coast of Galicia (Spain) described in this article, we came across quite the opposite: the reproduction of market-ing and place branding logic.

Threatened heritage

Heritage regimes and the internalisation of their logics constitute a relatively recent pro-cess in many parts of the world. Even though the heritage regime has been labelled a ‘global phenomenon’, this category does not exist in all societies (Davallon, 2010: 43). It was after the Second World War when the concern about heritage protection became a

6 Tourist Studies 18(1)

metacultural discourse affecting different countries (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 2004: 52). Monument protection was defended as a duty to the past as they represented the power, greatness and beauty of a nation that should be preserved for future generations (Choay, 2001). The 1954 Hague Convention was the first time that the expression ‘heritage’ was substituted by ‘cultural property’ as it was used linked to the necessity of protection ‘in the Event of Armed Conflict’ (Prott and O’Keefe, 1992: 312). As Brown (2005) notes, by the 1970s and 1980s, there was an increasing tendency to substitute the expression ‘cul-tural heritage’ for ‘cultural property’ (p. 41). During these decades, the incorporation of a more anthropological and holistic view of culture by considering intangible heritage, performances and oral traditions didn’t change the treatment of cultural practices, which were also considered as material property owned by homogeneous communities with property rights on them (Noyes, 2011: 40–41).

In the 1990s, with the rise of neoliberalism and what Castells called the ‘Network Society’ (Castells, 2000), heritage appeared only to be seen as a property, a resource, an inalienable right and a sign of distinction and modernity (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 2004: 59; Noyes, 2011: 40). Since then, heritage came to be thought of and practised from a marketing perspective. This transition has been seen as a normal development to suit global trends in global competition. It is common to find uncritical approaches focused solely on strategic and quantitative aspects to better position and market cultural prod-ucts (Tadelis, 1999).

The implementation of marketing strategies and ownership discourses regarding ‘cul-tural products’ is a fact nowadays, although, as Comaroff and Comaroff and Blondeau et al. argue, cultural products don’t necessarily follow the standard economic rationality. If we consider identity symbols, cultural practices, city names and heritage as the raw material for branding strategies, it cannot be said that these materials are scarce or that they will be exhausted by mass circulation. On the contrary, these materials follow a counter-economic rationality, ‘the larger the supply the greater the demand’, as massive circulation creates an added value for their use and reinforces the name, cultural practice or heritage status (Blondeau et al., 2004: 17; Comaroff and Comaroff, 2011: 38).

Despite the counter-economic rationality of cultural practices, names and places, there are some destabilising issues that provoke anxiety to protect them as ‘citizens fear that their languages, traditional practices and values are being subverted by cultural influences originating elsewhere, mostly in the developed West’ (Brown, 2005: 43). Therefore, places, names, folklore, identity symbols and cultural practices have been considered scarce resources to be defended as property that may be alienated. In this sense, we’re witnessing some kind of hegemonic intellectual property regime that reduces biological and cultural aspects to alienable rights and private effects in which protection against globalisation and reputation management are a must. As part of this way of reasoning, in the face of global markets it becomes necessary to employ global regimes of control in which bureaucracy, quality control and marketing strategies are implemented into the everyday (Brown, 2005: 44; Comaroff and Comaroff, 2011: 218; Hafstein, 2014; Strathern, 2003), to the extent of recommending the Orwellian fantasy in which branding strategies are applied to public diplomacy, nation management and child education in order to encourage future visitors, residents, investors, advocates and sup-porters (Anholt, 2007a). This is the case, for example, of Marca España, adopted as a

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 7

state policy in order to improve the image of the country abroad and domestically, prior-itising economic terms and developing specific actions in culture, technology, transport, language, cuisine, education and so on in order to boost exports, attract foreign invest-ment, support the internationalisation of its companies, raise tourism and, in short, con-tribute to Spain’s economic recovery.5

Cultural prophylaxis

Cultural appropriation is mostly seen as a negative consequence of globalisation in which the more powerful organisms such as pharmaceutical and fashion corporations squeeze cultural goods out of less powerful communities, market them and make large profits. In recognising such injustices carried out by powerful forces, the research, description, reg-istration, regulation, encapsulation, protection, commoditisation and marketisation of cul-tural practices is seen as the only suitable discourse and the only acceptable approach to what have been labelled as ‘cultural products’. In this case, we use the concept of cultural prophylaxis to refer to how cultural practices and city names are conceived as unique and untouchable material that must be protected, encapsulated and regulated to avoid being attacked (even if this implies detaching them from everything) – a process that can be described as ‘preventive war’. International institutions such as World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) show how to list, regulate, protect as a private possession, and commoditise heritage, names and cultural practices. Marketing and name branding strate-gies are applied to marginal places and practices, such as we will describe in the examples below, and regarded as tools for empowerment, nationalist or identity struggles with supranational bodies such as the Spanish ‘mainstream’ identity.

The logic of propertisation and protection has been progressively implemented in local contexts as the only available alternative, for ‘the weakest are best protected by even the most imperfect international legal safeguards’ (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2011: 56). In doing so, alternative logics for managing names, heritages and cultural practices are being colonised by branding and marketing approaches, which are presented as the only possible solution.

Commoditisation of cultural practices, city names and landscapes is becoming a source for community construction and sometimes the only suitable resource for eco-nomic subsistence in the most pauperised populations (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2011: 38). But it must be said that protection and propertisation create exclusive rights con-cerning participation and obtaining economic or symbolic profits, which sometimes deepen inequalities (Noyes, 2011: 43). Branding and protection processes are a form of inclusion as they create the illusion of an essentialised and unified cultural identity (Bayart, 2005), but they’re also a form of exclusion of what is thought to be without value. These non-neutral practices alienate people from their own heritage, which is sanctioned, homogenised and portrayed as stable material objects alien to the necessity of change and adaptation to new social situations.

International, national, regional and even local authorities are developing legal strate-gies to protect intangible heritage from damage or cultural misappropriation by register-ing it as a guarantee of promotion and social valorisation in local communities. Brown

8 Tourist Studies 18(1)

(2005) argues that ‘none of these legal strategies fit the circumstances of intangible herit-age particularly well and it probably makes sense to create new sui generis regulatory regimes to meet the specific needs of traditional communities, especially indigenous ones’ (p. 45). This maladaptation of heritage logics and protection figures to cultural property has led policymakers to use private corporations’ logics, such as trademark creation, patents, the Spanish figure for food products Denominación de Origen Controlada or the French figure Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée, place branding and advertising, property and name registration, and land and properties purchase. In this sense, we are witnessing what the French philosopher Rancière predicted about statecraft adopting, more and more openly, the rhetoric and logic of for-profit corporations. These practices are no longer a shameful secret that is hidden; they are an openly declared truth through which our governments acquire legitimacy and compete increasingly amongst themselves (Rancière and Pons, 1996: 113). Governments and local authorities are not only mediating, channelling and ensuring community access to collective heritage, but they are also acting as market spokesmen by privatising heritage and removing it from the common domain through branding and marketing strategies.

These marketing strategies – and the naturalisation of the rationale on which they are based – will be explored throughout the rest of this article by looking at the particular cases of the villages of Camariñas and Finisterre, located on the Costa da Morte in Galicia, Spain. First, we will concentrate on the general area of Costa da Morte and its promotion via LEADER funds, and, afterwards, we will focus on each of these villages.

The promotion of Costa da Morte

Costa da Morte is a territorial label that aimed at forging emergent identity links among the inhabitants of one of the poorest areas in Galicia. The coastline is distinctive for its high cliffs, peninsulas and coves that give protection to small villages. This complex geography made the area quite inaccessible from other parts of Galicia. Although there are literary references to the name ‘Costa da Morte’ that date back to the early twentieth century, it was used as a poetic expression to describe the area and there is no evidence that it was employed as a territorial marker.6 The term, as a place name, was fully estab-lished in the 1990s to promote the coastal area between Cape Finisterre and the Sisargas Islands in Malpica, Northwest Galicia (see Figure 1).

During that decade, an association called Neria was founded to promote and coordi-nate rural development and it was linked to European Union (EU) LEADER funds for the development of rural areas. The main objective of Neria was to ‘promote and coordinate rural development, improve life conditions and to help end rural depopulation’.7 The asso-ciation wanted to promote the whole region and needed to find a good name for the area.

There are different accounts to explain the origin of the name Costa da Morte. The term ‘morte’ (‘death’ in English) might be linked to the fact that this coastline represents Europe’s continental Finisterrae (‘end of the world’ in Latin), where the land ends and the sun sets in a mare tenebrosum or dark sea, as the Atlantic Ocean was called in medi-eval times; but the name could also be related to the numerous shipwrecks in the area. As the official guidebook for the area explains, there is a dark legend regarding Galician inhabitants who were believed to have provoked shipwrecks in order to steal their load.8

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 9

To use ‘morte’ as a place brand was indeed a risk. According to Neria representatives, the name Costa da Morte was initially rejected by some people in the area – as well as in the association – because of the connotations of the word ‘death’, but it turned out to be a suc-cess in terms of place branding. The marginal position of this corner of Galicia, both geo-graphically and economically, made the promoters of the place brand select a name that is also ‘on the margins’. Neria’s secretary explains this in a simple and convincing manner: ‘we are the periphery; in the European context, Galicia is the periphery of Europe, and Costa da Morte is the periphery of Galicia’ (15 February 2011, audio recording GR014). Those on the margins are looked down on by the official discourse and are, at the same time, part of the emotional repertoire and symbolic universe of dominant culture (Shields, 1991: 5, cited after Herrero, 2005: 122). These characteristics – being rejected and on the margins – allow the ‘marginal places’ to become ‘mythical places’. According to anthropologist Nieves Herrero, the stigma of marginal places, such as Costa da Morte, needs reconfiguration pro-cesses to change the emotional repertoire linked to the place. In the case we are studying, the Neria association and the mayor of Dumbría (one of Neria’s promoters) made a conscious effort to take the stigma of being a poor and isolated place and to transform it into a tourist destination, a place worthy of being visited. In fact, the same reasons that forged the image of an isolated, semi-abandoned and poor part of Galicia also turned the Costa da Morte into a tourist destination. The Costa da Morte stigma is conveyed in the words of Neria’s repre-sentative: ‘All our life we were told that people from the Costa da Morte were only good at preparing suitcases’ (15 February 2011, audio recording: GR-14S001). By ‘preparing suit-cases’, he refers to the long history of migration of this area.

Figure 1. Map of the Costa da Morte, where Camariñas and Finisterre are located.Author: Anxo Rodríguez-Paz.

10 Tourist Studies 18(1)

Figure 2. Camariñas handcrafts made by skilful women.Author: Guadalupe Jiménez-Esquinas (June 2013).

The construction of the name ‘Costa da Morte’ took a lot of effort, as the secretary of Neria explains:

We put a lot of energy into the debate regarding the name of Costa da Morte as a brand. It took us a lot of effort to achieve it. It was a battle. And now everybody wants to be part of the Costa da Morte. (15 February 2011, audio recording GR-14S001)9

In fact, the EU LEADER programme funding was at the very heart of the origin of the initial marketing plan for the Costa da Morte. The mayor of Dumbría explains that ‘in order to apply for European funding, we needed to create an association; we needed to go to Europe via citizen participation rather than via the institutions’ (7 February 2011, audio recording GR011). Therefore, the association was created as a result of the deci-sion to apply to EU LEADER funds.

At a national level, the name ‘Costa da Morte’ is acknowledged due to not only the marketing efforts of the tourist sector in the area but also another element that cannot be controlled by place branding strategies: the unexpected ecological catastrophe of the sinking of the oil tanker ‘Prestige’ in November 2002. The Costa da Morte was Ground Zero,10 and this put it on the map. The sinking of the tanker gave rise to the innumerable appearances of the Costa da Morte’s name in the mass media, both nationally and inter-nationally. A curious coincidence caused the most powerful tool for building pride and prestige – in the sense of recognition – to be the sinking of a ship called Prestige.

‘Camariñas bobbin lace, quality product’

Bobbin lace making is a cultural practice widely performed by women throughout the whole Costa da Morte and also inland. It constitutes a wide ‘taskscape’ (Ingold, 2010: 97) wherein bobbin lace is still being crafted and represents a significant economic resource controlled by women in a matrifocal, subsistence and fishing-dependent econ-omy (see Figure 2).11

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 11

Until recent decades, the region’s most important commercial port was Camariñas, so every single piece of lace made by the women, the palilleiras, was labelled and exported as ‘Camariñas bobbin-lace’. It was this relation with marketing and commerce which caused the entire bobbin lace production in the whole area to be internationally identified with one village alone: ‘Camariñas’. This enduring relation between lace as a product and Camariñas was an unintended name branding campaign that even today continues to put a peripheral village of 5774 inhabitants on the map.12

This practice has been carried out in the informal economy and controlled at family level. The bobbin lace used to be sold to intermediary buyers when a family needed the money. The local government didn’t use to be involved in women’s issues. But since the 1990s, the local council has been developing several heritagisation processes (Sánchez-Carretero, 2013: 388–389) in this village, such as the creation of a local museum of bob-bin lace, an international trademark annual fair and fashion show, and a school to teach young girls. All these processes are aimed at upgrading the indissoluble link between the name of the village and a distinctive product so as to differentiate Camariñas from other villages and reinsert bobbin lace into a global economic logic. To patrimonialise this traditional craft was to put Camariñas on the map and send the message, using the may-or’s words, that it is not ‘an ordinary fishing village known for its seafood, fishing and misfortunes’ (20 August 2014, audio recording: AU047). In this marketing and place branding campaign, the village name and the cultural practice were thought of as prod-ucts and were registered as a trademark by the local council. Thus, Camariñas is not only the name of a place on the global map but also, as a rural development agent explains, ‘a brand that protects and adds value to our handmade bobbin lace’ (21 June 2013, audio recording: AU014) in the line of branding strategies and corporate culture.13

The registered trademark is working as a protection figure for this unique cultural practice and was created ad hoc by local politicians with the idea that any kind of pro-tection is better than none at all. As explained earlier in this article, heritage protection figures may not be enough to prevent cultural misappropriation of this crucial cultural and mixed economic activity. For politicians and craftswomen, bobbin lace production ‘[this] is not only about culture, this is also about an economic activity. And if it’s not helping the economy then there is no point in protecting it’ (10 February 2014, audio recording AU042, employee of the municipality working to promote bobbin lace) (Jiménez-Esquinas, 2016). They cannot understand the transformation of bobbin lace making into a cultural curiosity for tourists if it’s not economically profitable. In creat-ing a registered trademark, they are following the ‘Galician Craft Plan’,14 the guidelines of the European funds for rural development, which are controlled by local government. They are de-assembling the common heritage and reassembling it in a global logic of capital and marketing, which is supposedly more economically profitable for the impov-erished local economy. This is the logic embedded in international institutions, regional and local governments, local craftswomen and people in general who are convinced that corporate culture and branding strategies are the only feasible solutions to their mar-ginal situation.

Regarding place branding and creating a trademark, the local government controls its production, preservation of specific patterns and tasks, quality standards, marketing and distribution of benefits. As Rancière argues, local government is playing an active role in

12 Tourist Studies 18(1)

the privatisation and marketisation of local products, from a rather paternalistic stand-point (Rancière and Pons, 1996). But it is also true that the trademark endorsed by local government is a protective umbrella that offers a quality guarantee for global buyers who have difficulties and are on unequal grounds when dealing with local craftswomen. Local politicians assure that, ideally, the craftswomen themselves should have taken the initia-tive, but as this was not the case, they helped the women protect their craft in the hope that this would revive the local economy.

As Kirshenblatt-Gimblett states, all heritage interventions change how people under-stand their culture and themselves, and this process is also changing the way people understand bobbin lace production (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, 2004: 58). In this particular case, the delineation of the Encaixe de Camariñas trademark guidelines and require-ments has caused some conflict in its establishment of what exactly needs to be protected (craftswomen and their knowledge, cardboard patterns, practice, materials, end product, etc.), who produces Camariñas bobbin lace, who takes part in the business and, conse-quently, who is excluded from it. Because of this, some palilleiras from nearby villages such as Muxía and Vimianzo have rebelled against the uncompromising and exclusive identification of their craft with the village of Camariñas, for this is excluding them. Finding no support from the local government of Muxía – which is more interested in the heritagisation processes of fishing and the Camino de Santiago – some women are devel-oping small businesses and personal projects to look after themselves in the face of branding strategies developed in Camariñas. As a Muxía lacemaker declared, ‘perhaps it would have been more appropriate to create a supralocal cooperative to face precarious-ness, to regulate the sector and then overcome localisms. Now we are very old and all we are thinking of is our retirement’ (field notes, 11 August 2013, lacemaker in her 60s).

The privatisation and instrumentalisation of the place name by local authorities are heightening the conflict among craftswomen throughout the task space because it doesn’t include a large number of traditional craftswomen. As the trademark is named after a particular village and has been used as a marketing strategy, some harmful discussions are taking place among the artisans concerning birthplace, genealogies and place of resi-dence. Heated talks are going on among the palilleiras as to what and who will be pro-tected by the registered trademark, by which criterion will they be discriminated and where is the line that will determine who are ‘the others’. It is yet to be seen whether these ad hoc protection and promotion tools linked to place branding strategies are effi-cient when applied to intangible heritage.

The case of Finisterre: to be or not to be ‘on the map’

Cape Finisterre is located in Galicia, Northwest Spain. It is said to be the westernmost point of continental Europe, although geographers have shown that both Cape Touriñán – also in Galicia and very close to Fisterra – and Cape Roca in Portugal are further west. Other European mythical ‘ends of the world’ include Land’s End in Britain, Finistère in French Brittany and Dingle in Ireland. The end of the world is linked to the idea of con-quering territories and expanding the limits of the known world. To cite Herrero, ‘these places have frequently been the objects of symbolic elaborations; aspects such as being on the limit or their rough and dangerous seas defined them as liminal spaces, associated

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 13

with the unknown’ (Herrero, 2009: 166). The name Finisterre is applied to the municipal-ity, the cape and the region or comarca. Finisterre is the second tourist destination in Galicia, after Santiago de Compostela. As opposed to the Costa da Morte and Camariñas, Finisterre did not endorse any active name branding marketing strategy because its name was already widely known both nationally and internationally.

In addition to receiving tourists to the cape and the lighthouse, in the last decade the village of Finisterre has also attracted many pilgrims as it is the finishing point of one of the Camino de Santiago (the Way of St. James) routes – a route that is not recognised by the Catholic church because it starts in Santiago, instead of ending there, a route that is called ‘the Camino of the Atheists’ by many pilgrims because their final goal is to see the sun set in the Atlantic. The name Finisterre currently implies a twofold experience: ‘the end of the Camino’ and ‘the end of the world’. The municipal narrative repertoire stresses this double fact.15

In this part of the article, we will focus on how the names ‘Finisterre’ (in Spanish) and ‘Fisterra’ (in Galician) are perceived by the local population; we will analyse how the idea of place branding, implicit in the phrase ‘to be put on the map’, has been naturalised. By ‘naturalised’ we mean an idea that is not questioned as it represents ‘how things should naturally be’. By examining the different uses of the expression ‘to be put on the map’, we will provide a different approach to place branding logic and how it permeates narratives and practices carried out by different local actors.

During fieldwork in Finisterre, the expression ‘to be put on the map’ was repeated in various contexts: conversations in cafés, bars, restaurants, hostels and hotels; interviews with institutional public figures such as the mayor of Finisterre or the priest; and formal and informal conversations with shopkeepers, postwomen and fishermen. Even though the research conducted in Finisterre did not focus initially on the topic of place branding, the various contexts in which the expression ‘to be put in the map’ was used indicated that it was considered a relevant issue by local inhabitants. Two main narrative contexts of ‘being put on the map’ were recorded: first, the use of Fisterra (in Galician) versus Finisterre (in Castilian or Spanish) on maps, and, second, the appearance of Finisterre on television for the weather forecast.

During fieldwork in Finisterre, our collaborators considered the name of their village to be Fisterra (in Galician) and that they are Fisterráns. Therefore, the emotional link is established with the label ‘Fisterra’. Surprisingly, in conversations about the promotion of the place, many restaurant and bar owners expressed that Finisterre (in Spanish) should be used to promote the village. For instance, Antonio, in his mid-40s and owner of a bar well-known by pilgrims, insisted on the importance of keeping the ‘name of Finisterre on the map … and by insisting on the Galician term “Fisterra” we get the opposite effect’ (field notes, 20 July 2011). According to Antonio, the village needs to be marketed as ‘Finisterre instead of Fisterra because that is how we show on the maps; that is how everybody knows us, and we need to be on the map’ (field notes, 20 July 2011). Finisterre should be the name used in every tourism brochure because of its international relevance: ‘A name is also heritage’ (field note, 15 June 2011, bar owner). The idea is that old maps already included the reference to Finisterre, and therefore, it’s a term with added value that should always be used in the same way (see Figure 3). Despite this debate as to which name should be promoted, the municipality does not have a policy

14 Tourist Studies 18(1)

regarding the issue. The name Fisterra, in Galician, is used in most of the brochures about the place and on notice boards located in public places.

Another context in which the expression ‘being put on the map’ is employed is related to the conflict between Finisterre and Muxía. Both villages have recently been promoted due to their importance for the Camino de Santiago, and both claim their village to be the finishing point of the Camino. Pilgrims can go first to Finisterre and then to Muxía, or vice versa, or they can decide to end their pilgrim-age in just one of these places. There is a clear rivalry between the two villages, as illustrated by the creation of the organisation ‘Fisterra, the true end of the Camino’. One of the conflicts between the two villages is related to the presence of their names on the weather forecast on Spanish public television (TVE1). In the last few years, instead of including Finisterre on the weather maps, the place name used to indicate the weather of the area is Muxía. As the pilgrim hostel keeper explains, ‘All our life the name Fisterra came up on the [weather] maps; how is it that now only Muxía appears?’ (field notes, 19 July 2011). The owners of a hotel and restaurant explain that ‘Muxía is now in the isobars and we cannot see Fisterra. Fisterra used to be the most important point on navigation maps; it was the most important point’ (field notes, 19 July 2011). María, Finisterre’s postwoman, thinks likewise: ‘People from Muxía were smarter and that’s fine. A war broke out here when our name was taken out of the television news. The cape [Finisterre] is more important for the sea, I think’ (field notes, 21 July 2011). As geographically Muxía is located on a cape between Fisterra and Camariñas it seems that the rivalry between Muxía and Fisterra is equivalent to the rivalry between Muxía and Camariñas regarding the use of the latter as a brand for bobbin lace. As explained in the introduction, the underlying idea that heritage is a limited good is one of the factors in this conflict and both Camariñas and Finisterre seem to consider Muxía a point of comparison and dif-ferentiation regarding branding strategies .

Figure 3. 1696 map of Europe showing Finisterre.Source: Institut Cartogràfic de Catalunya, http://cartotecadigital.icc.cat/cdm/ref/collection/espanya/id/962.

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 15

The importance of being put on the map is no doubt undisputed by Finisterre inhabit-ants. However, professionals in the tourist sector have strong opinions concerning how Finisterre tourism is promoted. Unlike Camariñas and the Costa da Morte, Finisterre lacks a general strategy to promote its name – the ‘End of the World’. Those who criticise it mimic the logic of the importance of place branding. Place branding strategies are linked to reputation: If a place has a good reputation, it might attract investors and tourists. The reputation perspective is widely employed by state agencies to create marketing strategies. Those who criticise local politicians for not having a general plan to promote Finisterre do not overlook the importance of having a good reputation. Reputation is a concept consid-ered from an external viewpoint: ‘The place has a good reputation for the outsider’. However, for residents, it is not so much a matter of reputation, but rather of ‘pride’. Finisterre is what it is, but as a resident I can choose to be proud of it or not. A hostel keeper summarised in one sentence the relationship between a name, maps and pride: ‘We need to be on the map; our name is our pride in being Fisterrán’ (field notes, 19 July 2011).

Concluding remarks

As we explained at the beginning, the underlying idea for this article came to us while carrying out two different ethnographic fieldworks in different research contexts. Although our aims were different, we were both trying to find alternative models for heritage management. However, as we have attempted to illustrate by means of the dif-ferent case studies, we came across the naturalisation of a heritage regime and the repro-duction of propertisation and place branding logics. Our aim was to understand how the structuring logics of global capitalism infiltrate everyday practices and circumscribe local realities. Therefore, our first step was to investigate how place branding and corpo-rate culture logics were being naturalised in places considered marginal in order to put them on the map and how the logics of global competitiveness, protection and properti-sation of culture have permeated all levels of society. We found corporate culture assump-tions in different social agents, from international organisations to regional governments, municipalities, artisans, waiters and local residents.

Throughout our analysis on how branding logics are being applied to places, ‘cul-tures’, ‘identities’, nations, landscapes, village names and so on, our main conclusion is related to the lack of non-naturalised standpoints regarding place branding. We have observed an unquestioned mode of marketing these places, as well as the naturalisation of the idea that marketing strategies are the only feasible logic and the economic panacea for those who have very little to sell but ‘culture’ (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2011: 22).

At the same time, heritage marketing may be regarded not only as an economic resource but also as a current resource for conflict, as sustained by Poria and Ashworth (2009). Regarding our case studies, we cannot consider the branding strategies uncriti-cally because, as Silva (2013) says,

the making of heritage may give rise to two opposing impacts simultaneously – increased social cohesion and place pride, on the one hand, and envy and competition (and, thus, social atomisation), on the other hand – and residents are totally cognizant of the tension between the two. (p. 14)

16 Tourist Studies 18(1)

In the case studies linked to the Costa da Morte place branding, the Camariñas bobbin lace trademark and Finisterre name branding, we have found that place pride, social cohesion, tourism benefits and sales improvements are expected and welcomed, but con-flict and competitiveness have not been properly evaluated. One of the most obvious consequences is that protection and propertisation create exclusive rights to participate in heritage construction and to obtain some kind of benefit, both economic and symbolic (Prott and O’Keefe, 1992: 302). Branding is a form of essentialising, unifying and including part of a population under the umbrella of cultural identity and simultaneously; it is also a form of excluding those who cannot be protected under that umbrella. In this sense, what can reinforce social cohesion can also deepen inequality, social atomisation and exclusion.

In a marginal but complex context where past hostility is constantly threatening to reappear, where nationalist claims and identities are constantly being negotiated (Herzfeld, 2004: 10), an increase in envy and competition for limited resources may be another unexpected consequence of using branding strategies for ‘cultural products’. Comaroff and Comaroff (2011) sustain that cultural products do not follow standard economic rationality (p. 38). From a marketing viewpoint, ‘culture’ is seen as a scarce resource that must be protected from the threat of globalisation in order to be a competi-tive product. We wanted to raise the question of whether this extra hostility and competi-tion must be understood as the only tool for political empowerment and repositioning places in a global hierarchy of value.

One last unexpected effect of branding strategies applied to ‘cultural products’ is the decline in alternative models for managing heritage. Marketing logic conditions how heritage and culture are practised and talked about – community heritage management is characterised as unrealistic and beyond economic rationality. Heritage, city names, ‘identities’ and ‘cultures’ are frequently portrayed as economic resources and ‘things’ that should be protected, possessed, promoted, commoditised and consumed. Any alter-native approach, reappropriation, change, modification, subversion or participation on behalf of the so-called ‘community’ is not expected to be part of the branding logic.16

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This article is linked to the network TRAMA3, funded by CYTED, Science and Society Area; to the project ‘Heritage and Participation: A Critical Approach’ (HAR2014-54869-R), funded by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, Spain; and the project NEARCH funded by the European Commission CULTURE programme. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. The work on Camariñas is part of the dissertation research conducted by Guadalupe Jiménez-Esquinas on textile crafts performed by women, its heritagisation and touristification processes from a feminist perspective, when she was part of the Institute of Heritage Sciences (Incipit. CSIC). The work on Finisterre is part of the

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 17

research project ‘Processes of Heritagisation in the Camino: Santiago-Fisterra-Muxía’ coordinated by Cristina Sánchez-Carretero and funded by the Galician Government (INCITE09606181PR)

Notes

1. The logic of an idea, a process or an action is commonly used in English in anthropology and sociology. See, for instance, the title of the classic book by Olson (1965), The Logic of Collective Action. We also use the term ‘logics’ in plural to indicate the diversity of natu-ralisation processes that are internalised. The word ‘logics’ is used as a synonym of ‘way of reasoning’. See how Burke and Shear (2014) use the expressions ‘economic logics’ (p. 139) and ‘structuring logics’ (p. 132).

2. Costa da Morte means Coast of Death in Galician. 3. By corporate culture, we mean the implementation of a set of values, beliefs, performances

and affects as capitalist business organisations usually do, which are extended, embodied and practised for all members of the corporation and beyond. In this article, we use the concept of corporate culture to refer to the management of culture and other intangible values as corpora-tions and businesses in order to obtain economic returns, producing subjectivities ‘necessi-ties, social relations, bodies and minds – that is, producing producers’ (Hardt and Negri, 2014: 22).

4. For a definition of crypto-colonialism, see also Herzfeld:

The essence of crypto-colonialism is that the countries in question all claim to be independ-ent nation-states but in key respects (the creation of a ‘national culture’, the policing of their borders, and the legal regime that sustains collective morality) remain heavily dependent on Western colonial influence and control. (Herzfeld, 2015: 27)

5. www.marcaespana.es, accessed 29 August 2014. 6. In a web post concerning the origin of the name Costa da Morte, journalist Xosé Manuel

Lema refers to a 1904 article published in the newspaper El Noroeste as the first mention to this name (Lema, 2012). The second oldest reference dates back to 1908, when the English writer Annette Meakin mentions ‘Coast of Death’ (in English) as the expression used by sail-ors to describe the area due to the high number of shipwrecks (Lema, 2012).

7. www.neria.es/quienes-somos.aspx, accessed 23 July 2014. 8. www.acostadamorte.info, accessed 14 February 2017. 9. The municipalities that constitute Costa da Morte are Cabana de Bergantiños, Camariñas,

Carnota, Cee, Corcubión, Coristanco, Dumbría, Finisterre, Laxe, Malpica de Bergantiños, Mazaricos, Muros, Muxía, Ponteceso, Santa Comba, Vimianzo and Zas.

10. The expression ‘Zona Cero’ was employed during the disaster of the Prestige ship and was frequently used in the media. See the headlines ‘From Prestige Ground Zero’ (http://www.farodevigo.es/galicia/2012/10/21/zona-cero-prestige/699870.html), or ‘Muxía, Ground Zero of the Prestige disaster’ (http://www.lasexta.com/videos-online/noticias/nacional/muxia-zona-cero-desastre-prestige_2012101600177.html), both accessed on 24 March 2015.

11. There is a body of anthropological literature about matrifocality and fishing-dependent econ-omies in the north-western corner of the Iberian Peninsula, such as Lisón Tolosana (1974), Gondar Portasany (1991), Cole (1991), Brøgger and Gilmore (1997) and an edited book of Alonso Población and Roseman (2012).

12. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). Padrón municipal de habitantes. From www.ine.es, accessed 3 March 2015.

13. For more information, please visit the page www.mecam.net, accessed 31 July 2014.

18 Tourist Studies 18(1)

14. https://artesaniadegalicia.xunta.es/sites/default/files/plan_artesania_galicia_2014_2016.pdf (accessed 31 July 2014). This plan is to be carried out between 2014 and 2016, and some of its aims are to make the craft sector more competitive and to develop trademarks.

15. See, for instance, the Mayor’s official welcome message on the municipal website: www.concellofisterra.com, accessed 4 August 2014.

16. Anthropology News, the American Anthropological Association newsletter, dedicated a spe-cial issue to the topic ‘Beyond Capitalism’ (Burke and Shear, 2014; Shear and Burke, 2013) and asked for more research on non-capitalist practices. Our search is linked to this cur-rent global interest which is triggering professionals from the social sciences and humanities fields to detect non-capitalist practices, instead of simply blaming and criticising capitalism. To paraphrase Žižek (2009), the question is whether we endorse the predominant naturalisa-tion of capitalism, or if today’s global capitalism contains antagonisms that are strong enough to prevent its indefinite reproduction (p. 90).

References

Alonso González, P. (2013) The Heritage Machine: A Heritage Ethnography in Maragatería (Spain). León: Universidad De León.

Alonso Población, E. and S. R. Roseman (eds) (2012) Antropoloxía Das Mulleres Galegas. As Outras Olladas. Santiago De Compostela: Sotelo Blanco.

Anholt, S. (2007a) Competitive Identity: The New Brand Management for Nations, Cities and Regions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Anholt, S. (2007b) ‘Competitive Identity: A New Model for the Brand Management of Nations, Cities and Regions’, Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review 4: 3–13.

Bayart, J. -F. (2005) The Illusion of Cultural Identity. London: Hurst & Company.Bendix, R., A. Eggert and A. Peselmann. (eds) (2012) Heritage Regimes and the State. Göttingen:

Universitätsverlag Göttingen.Blain, C., S. E. Levy and J. R. B. Ritchie. (2005) ‘Destination Branding: Insights and Practices

from Destination Management Organizations’, Journal of Travel Research 3: 328–38.Blondeau, O., N. D. Whiteford, C. Vercellone, et al. (2004) Capitalismo Cognitivo, Propiedad

Intelectual Y Creación Colectiva. Madrid: Traficantes De Sueños.Brøgger, J. and D. D. Gilmore. (1997) ‘The Matrifocal Family in Iberia: Spain and Portugal

Compared’, Ethnology 36: 13–30.Brown, M. F. (2005) ‘Heritage Trouble: Recent Work on the Protection of Intangible Cultural

Property’, International Journal of Cultural Property 12: 40–61.Burke, B. and B. Shear. (2014) ‘Introduction: Engaged Scholarship for Non-Capitalist Political

Ecologies’, Journal of Political Ecology 21: 127–44.Castells, M. (2000) ‘Materials for an Exploratory Theory of the Network Society’, The British

Journal of Sociology 51: 5–24.Choay, F. (2001) The Invention of the Historic Monument. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Cohen, E. (1988) ‘Authenticity and Commoditization in Tourism’, Annals of Tourism Research

15: 371–86.Cole, S. C. (1991) Women of the Praia: Work and Lives in a Portuguese Coastal Community.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Comaroff, J. L. and J. Comaroff. (2011) Etnicidad S.A. Madrid: Katz.Davallon, J. (2010) ‘The Game of Heritagization’, pp. 27–38. in X. Roigé and J. Frigolé (eds)

Constructing Cultural and Natural Heritage. Parks, Museums and Rural Heritage. Girona: Icrpc.Dinnie, K. (2008) Nation Branding: Concepts, Issues, Practice. London: Routledge.

Jiménez-Esquinas and Sánchez-Carretero 19

Gondar Portasany, M. (1991) Mulleres Do Mortos: Cara A Unha Antropoloxía Da Muller Galega. Vigo: Xerais.

Gramsci, A. (2010) Cartas Desde La Cárcel. Madrid: Veintisiete Letras.Hafstein, V. (2014) ‘The Constant Muse. Copyright and Creative Agency’, Narrative Culture

1(1): 9–48.Hardt, M. and A. Negri. (2014) Imperio. Barcelona: Paidos.Herrero, N. (2005) ‘La Costa De Morte (Galicia): Localización De Un Modelo De Turismo

Cultural’, pp. 117–30. in A. Santana and L. Prats (eds) Encuentros Del Turismo Con El Patrimonio Cultural. Sevilla: Faaee-Fundación El Monte.

Herrero, N. (2009) ‘La Atracción Turística De Un Espacio Mítico: Peregrinación Al Cabo De Finisterre. Pasos’, Revista De Turismo Y Patrimonio Cultural 7(2): 163–78.

Herzfeld, M. (2004) The Body Impolitic: Artisans and Artifice in the Global Hierarchy of Value. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Herzfeld, M. (2015) ‘Anthropology and the Inchoate Intimacies of Power’, American Ethnologist 42: 18–32.

Hodder, I. (2010) ‘Cultural Heritage Rights: From Ownership and Descent to Justice and Well-Being’, Anthropological Quarterly 83(4): 861–82.

Ingold, T. (2010) ‘The Textility of Making’, Cambridge Journal of Economics 34: 91–102.Jiménez-Esquinas, G. (2016) “This is not Only About Culture”: On Tourism, Gender Stereotypes

and Other Affective Fluxes, Journal of Sustainable Tourism 25(3): 311–26.Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (1998) Destination Culture: Tourism, Museums, and Heritage. Berkeley,

CA: University of California Press.Kirshenblatt-Gimblett, B. (2004) ‘El Patrimonio Inmaterial Como Producción Metacultural’,

Museum International 221–222: 52–67.Kotler, P. and G. Armstrong. (1999) Principles of Marketing. Hoboken, NJ: Prentice Hall.Lema, X. M. (2012) ‘Primera cita de la Costa da Morte’. Available at: http://cronicasnerias.blogs-

pot.com.es/2012/05/primera-cita-de-la-costa-da-morte.html (accessed 11 November 2014).Lisón Tolosana, C. (1974) Antropología Cultural De Galicia. Madrid: Siglo Xxi.Morgan, N., A. Pritchard and R. Pride. (2004) Destination Branding: Creating the Unique

Destination Proposition. Oxford: Elsevier.Noyes, D. (2011) ‘Traditional Culture: How Does It Work?’, Museum Anthropology Review 5:

39–47.Okonkwo, U. (2007) Luxury, Fashion, Branding: Trends, Tactics, Techniques. Basingstoke:

Palgrave Macmillan.Olson, M. (1965) The Logic of Collective Action. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Polanyi, K. (1989) La Gran Transformación. Crítica Del Liberalismo Económico. Madrid:

Ediciones De La Piqueta.Poria, Y. and G. Ashworth. (2009) ‘Heritage Tourism: Current Resource for Conflict’, Annals of

Tourism Research 36(3): 522–5.Prott, L. V. and P. J. O’Keefe. (1992) ‘‘Cultural Heritage’ or ‘Cultural Property’?’, International

Journal of Cultural Property 1: 307–20.Rancière, J. and H. Pons. (1996) El Desacuerdo: Política Y Filosofía. Buenos Aires, Argentina:

Ediciones Nueva Visión.Sánchez-Carretero, C. (2013) ‘Significance and Social Value of Cultural Heritage: Analyzing the

Fractures of Heritage’, pp. 387– 93. in L. Rogerio-Candelera and E. Cano (eds) Science and Technology for the Conservation of Cultural Heritage. London: Taylor & Francis.

Sánchez-Carretero, C. (ed.) (2015) Heritage, Pilgrimage and the Camino to Finisterre: Walking to the End of the World. Amsterdam: Springer.

20 Tourist Studies 18(1)

Shear, B. and B. Burke (2013) ‘Beyond Critique: Anthropology of and for Non-Capitalism’, Anthropology News. Available at: http://www.communityeconomies.org/site/assets/media/Boone-Shear/Anthropology-of-and-for-Non.pdf (accessed 7 August 2014).

Silva, L. (2013) ‘The Two Opposing Impacts of Heritage Making on Local Communities: Residents’ Perceptions: A Portuguese Case’, International Journal of Heritage Studies 20: 616–633.

Smith, L. (2006) Uses of Heritage. London and New York: Routledge.Strathern, M. (ed.) (2003) Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies in Accountability, Ethics and

the Academy. Hoboken, NJ: Routledge.Tadelis, S. (1999) ‘What’s in a Name? Reputation as a Tradeable Asset’, The American Economic

Review 89: 548–63.Urry, J. (1990) The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE.Žižek, S. (2009) First as Tragedy, Then as Farce. London: Verso.

Author biographies

Guadalupe Jiménez-Esquinas is an associate professor at the Department of Philosophy and Anthropology, at the University of Santiago de Compostela. Previously she was a Researcher at the Institute of Heritage Sciences (Incipit) of the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) in Santiago de Compostela, Spain. Her current interests are around the critical analysis of heritagiza-tion processees using a feminits approach, the application of theories of affect and emotion and the analysis of “participation” in the heritage field. She is writing her PhD dissertation entitled “Crafting and affective landscapes: heritagization processes of textile crafts and landscapes in Costa da Morte (Galicia, Spain)” (to be defended at the University of Basque Country).

Cristina Sánchez-Carretero is a staff researcher at the Institute of Heritage Sciences (Incipit), Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), where she coordinates the anthropological team and leads research dedicated to ‘Processes of Heritage Formation: Memory, Identities and Conflict’. Her areas of interest are heritage and conflict, processes of traditionalisation and heritage forma-tion, the intersection of migration and cultural heritage , and the role of rituals and expressive culture in contemporary societies. She has published Heritage, Pilgrimage and the Camino to Finisterre: Walking to the End of the World (Springer, 2015), Grassroots Memorials: The Politics of Memorializing Traumatic Death (Berghahn, 2011), co-edited with Peter Jan Margry.