The Case For Brand Aotearoa

During our mid-year travels, I was surprised to learn that Aotearoa New Zealand doesn’t have the profile that we think it does. We’re not riding the wave of The Lord of the Rings: few abroad remember the connection two decades later. No one I encountered recalls 100% Pure, and if public pollution meters in London show that their air is cleaner than Lower Hutt’s or Christchurch’s, can we seriously claim it?

In this very unscientific research, people know two things about us: Border Patrol and our 2020 COVID restrictions. In other words, we don’t let stuff in easily.

Even a decade ago I would regularly come across fans of Flight of the Conchords.

I’ve always approached my work with an eye on exports, since a lot of what I’ve created is intellectual capital, such as digital products or brands. And as we launch another edition of one of our products, I no longer see any advantage in saying that we’re New Zealand-based.

That wasn’t the case one or two decades ago.

People were genuinely fascinated by us, and our film industry generated buzz far beyond what our formal place branding campaigns did. That buzz included the impression that we were innovative thinkers, Kiwis who could get things done, punching above our weight.

I took advantage of that. Country of origin can be a powerful tool—if the national image complements what you do. For a long time, we could be proud of our achievements.

But we’ve let this slip, and there’s no one political side you can exclusively lay the blame on.

We are back to having a brand that serves our primary sector well—and it is only right that they are looked after—but what about everyone else?

Even the primary sector needs more as global marketing becomes more complex, and clean and green don’t go far enough.

There is some excellent agritech in the sector already, just as Aotearoa has world-class biotech. But they need a nation brand that supports more than the environmental qualities—qualities which countries like Ireland, Sweden and Canada themselves push. And frankly, they have more money to do it.

We have an opportunity to rethink how we present ourselves to the world.

Innovation still abounds, and with our economy getting hammered, domestic sales aren’t going to be enough to keep a lot of our businesses afloat.

If we export—and thank goodness trade deals continue to be struck—then we need a nation brand that supports all manner of New Zealand businesses.

The latest deal with the UAE still focuses on dairy, meat and fruit—and as someone who does business in the Gulf, we need to signal that there’s more to us than that.

In the 2000s, I suggested that three qualities we could capitalize on were innovation, independence, and isolation—the last meant in the best sense. Sometimes you need to be away from the din to find a great solution to a problem. Independence means independent thinking, standing tall against forces that seek to absorb or decimate anything distinctive about ourselves.

The primary sector can use these qualities, too—I’m sure isolation is actually one of the appeals of sourcing from here.

These have some overlap with New Zealand, New Thinking that NZTE proffered in the 2000s, and back to 1999 with Bright Future, but we don’t seem to have a desire to stick with nation brands that have a wider vision.

It has to change, especially if the government is about business, and not re-treading old ground. We need the relevant authorities laser-focused on managing our nation brand for export.

© Scoop Media