IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i4p1666-d493167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Ambiguities of “Sustainable” Berlin

Author

Listed:
  • Ares Kalandides

    (Institute of Place Management, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester M15 6BH, UK)

  • Boris Grésillon

    (Centre Marc Bloch, Humboldt-University, 10117 Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

City marketing has a strong tradition in Berlin, with two organizations, Berlin Partner and Visit Berlin, responsible for designing and implementing relevant strategies. Sustainability has been on and off the city marketing agenda, almost exclusively in its environmental dimension. In this article, we examine the current representations of Berlin as a “sustainable city” in the official city marketing strategies. We look at how sustainability is used and instrumentalized to create a specific city profile and also to attract particular target groups in tourism. We propose an analysis of sustainable planning in Berlin since reunification to show how it has moved into different directions over time and how this has (or has not) been followed by city marketing. In this endeavor, we move between the existing, and as we argue deeper and more sophisticated, environmental planning of the city on one hand, and the reductions and simplifications of city marketing representations on the other. Finally, we argue that there are inherent contradictions in marketing a sustainable city, where both in terms of tourism and economic development, the concept of growth seems to be reaching environmental limits.

Suggested Citation

  • Ares Kalandides & Boris Grésillon, 2021. "The Ambiguities of “Sustainable” Berlin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:1666-:d:493167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/1666/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/4/1666/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Novy & Claire Colomb, 2013. "Struggling for the Right to the (Creative) City in Berlin and Hamburg: New Urban Social Movements, New ‘Spaces of Hope’?," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 1816-1838, September.
    2. Viriya Taecharungroj & Morakot Muthuta & Pheereeya Boonchaiyapruek, 2019. "Sustainability as a place brand position: a resident-centric analysis of the ten towns in the vicinity of Bangkok," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 15(4), pages 210-228, December.
    3. Andrea Lucarelli & Susanna Heldt Cassel, 2020. "The dialogical relationship between spatial planning and place branding: conceptualizing regionalization discourses in Sweden," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(7), pages 1375-1392, July.
    4. Mandy Wheadon & Nathalie Duval-Couetil, 2019. "Token entrepreneurs: a review of gender, capital, and context in technology entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3-4), pages 308-336, March.
    5. Ina Richter & Tobias Haas, 2020. "Greening the Car? Conflict Dynamics within the German Platform for Electric Mobility," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Esin Özdemir & Ayda Eraydin, 2017. "Fragmentation in Urban Movements: The Role of Urban Planning Processes," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(5), pages 727-748, September.
    2. Maria Bastida & Luisa Helena Pinto & Ana Olveira Blanco & Maite Cancelo, 2020. "Female Entrepreneurship: Can Cooperatives Contribute to Overcoming the Gender Gap? A Spanish First Step to Equality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Simona Stojanova & Nina Cvar & Jurij Verhovnik & Nataša Božić & Jure Trilar & Andrej Kos & Emilija Stojmenova Duh, 2022. "Rural Digital Innovation Hubs as a Paradigm for Sustainable Business Models in Europe’s Rural Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, November.
    4. Gregor Wolbring & Fatima Jamal Al-Deen, 2021. "Social Role Narrative of Disabled Artists and Both Their Work in General and in Relation to Science and Technology," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, August.
    5. Yassine Bakkar & Susanne Durst & Wolfgang Gerstlberger, 2021. "The Impact of Institutional Dimensions on Entrepreneurial Intentions of Students—International Evidence," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-23, April.
    6. Jiayin Zhang & Min Wang & Yinbin Lin, 2024. "Evaluations of Guangzhou’s brand building through intangible cultural heritage: a brand equity model," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(2), pages 119-129, June.
    7. Sergio Belda-Miquel & Jordi Peris Blanes & Alexandre Frediani, 2016. "Institutionalization and Depoliticization of the Right to the City: Changing Scenarios for Radical Social Movements," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 321-339, March.
    8. Leonidas Hatzithomas & Christina Boutsouki & Fotini Theodorakioglou & Evanthia Papadopoulou, 2021. "The Link between Sustainable Destination Image, Brand Globalness and Consumers’ Purchase Intention: A Moderated Mediation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-16, August.
    9. Welter, Friederike, 2020. "Contexts and gender: Looking back and thinking forward," Working Papers 01/20, Institut für Mittelstandsforschung (IfM) Bonn.
    10. Jing Lin & Jianming Cai & Yan Han & He Zhu & Zhe Cheng, 2016. "Culture Sustainability: Culture Quotient (CQ) and Its Quantitative Empirical Application to Chinese Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-12, November.
    11. María del Mar Serrano-Arcos & Raquel Sánchez-Fernández & Juan Carlos Pérez-Mesa, 2021. "Analysis of Product-Country Image from Consumer’s Perspective: The Impact of Subjective Knowledge, Perceived Risk and Media Influence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    12. Thomas Borén & Patrycja Grzyś & Craig Young, 2021. "Spatializing authoritarian neoliberalism by way of cultural politics: City, nation and the European Union in Gdańsk’s politics of cultural policy formation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1211-1230, September.
    13. Sören Becker & James Angel & Matthias Naumann, 2020. "Energy democracy as the right to the city: Urban energy struggles in Berlin and London," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(6), pages 1093-1111, September.
    14. Mangialardo, Alessia & Micelli, Ezio, 2021. "Grass-roots participation to enhance public real estate properties. Just a fad?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    15. Jung-Ying Chang, 2019. "State participation and artistic autonomy in creative city making," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(1), pages 226-243, February.
    16. Jessica Tanghetti & Roberta Comunian & Tamsyn Dent, 2022. "‘Covid-19 opened the pandora box’ of the creative city: creative and cultural workers against precarity in Milan [A heterodox re-reading of creative work: the diverse economies of Danish visual art," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 15(3), pages 615-634.
    17. Sébastien Darchen, 2017. "Regeneration and networks in the Arts District (Los Angeles): Rethinking governance models in the production of urbanity," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(15), pages 3615-3635, November.
    18. Lauren Andres & Oleg Golubchikov, 2016. "The Limits to Artist-Led Regeneration: Creative Brownfields in the Cities of High Culture," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 757-775, July.
    19. Lundmark, Erik & Milanov, Hana & Seigner, Benedikt David Christian, 2022. "Can it be measured? A quantitative assessment of critiques of the entrepreneurship literature," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    20. Danny Mackinnon & Stuart Dawley & Andy Pike & Andrew Cumbers, 2018. "Rethinking Path Creation: A Geographical Political Economy Approach," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1825, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2018.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:4:p:1666-:d:493167. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.