Dear Editor,
Professor David Dabydeen is reported in SN of December 10 as saying:
“I am acutely aware, from my travels, of how Guyana’s rainforest is associated exclusively with Jonestown, and Guyanese are seen as citizens of a benighted country that experienced the largest mass suicide/killings in modern history. This frankly makes me ashamed to be Guyanese.”
The above quote was reported in the context of the nomination of President Jagdeo of Guyana for a Nobel Prize, particularly following the latter’s identification with the country’s internationally recognised Low Carbon Development Strategy. What this observation has done, however, is to raise questions as to how Guyana is perceived as a nation at this juncture, when there has also been the counter-productive projection of an image of torture, drug-trafficking and related negatives.
Professor Dabydeen’s confession of being “ashamed” makes the very fundamental point that the negative image is not so much about the administration, but more profoundly about Guyana and Guyanese as a whole. It seems an important time therefore for a concerted effort to be made to identify our collective positives with a view to reconstructing our image to the world, and our national psyche in the process.
In short the nation needs to re-brand itself. The whole concept of branding is as critical to our economy as it is to our people development. It involves a conscious national effort to identify the country and differentiate it from other countries. Examples of current brandings include, amongst many others:
Belize: Mother nature’s best kept secret
Canada: Keep Exploring
New Zealand: 100% Pure
Uganda: Gifted by Nature
Tanzania: Land of Opportunities
As the terminology implies, branding is basically about selling goods and services. A country’s reputation can influence the price of its products and services. As one expert explains:
“Today, the world is one market; the rapid advance of globalisation means that every country, every city, every region, must compete with each other for its share of the world’s consumers, tourists, investors, students, entrepreneurs, international sporting and cultural events…”
Professional and other critical skills were omitted from the listing – a priority so far as Guyana is concerned.
Also of importance to Guyana is the respect of the international media (not to mention our own), other governments, international organisations and ultimately the people of other countries.
Consequently, in addition to export promotion, investment attraction and tourism promotion, there is what may be
considered the over-arching function of public diplomacy which cannot be overlooked, and indeed should be proactively conducted.
If it is not already, branding must be a substantive component of any competitiveness strategy.
Amongst other things, a strong brand has the potential for:
§ Attracting both talent and investment
§ Redressing stereotypical images
§ Generating profitable exports
§ Inspiring and enhancing change
§ Expressing a unique identity (as in LCDS and tourism, for example)
The logical conclusion is that nation branding must be a highly collaborative effort between the public and private sectors – the latter including the widest possible representation of stakeholders, for in the final analysis the process is an active component of nation building/national development, since interwoven in the discourse must be elements of tolerance and multiculturalism.
It would be interesting to be advised through your columns of the perspectives of other correspondents on this topic.
Yours faithfully,
E B John
