Content uploaded by Greg Richards
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Greg Richards on May 16, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtrr20
Tourism Recreation Research
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtrr20
Developing a tourism region through tourism and
culture: bordering, branding, placemaking and
governance processes
Brian King, Greg Richards & Angela Mai Chi Chu
To cite this article: Brian King, Greg Richards & Angela Mai Chi Chu (2023): Developing
a tourism region through tourism and culture: bordering, branding, placemaking and
governance processes, Tourism Recreation Research, DOI: 10.1080/02508281.2023.2207156
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2023.2207156
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group
Published online: 16 May 2023.
Submit your article to this journal
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Developing a tourism region through tourism and culture: bordering, branding,
placemaking and governance processes
Brian King
a
, Greg Richards
b
and Angela Mai Chi Chu
c
a
Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA;
b
Academy for Leisure, Breda University of Applied
Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands;
c
Tourism & Languages Subject Group, The Business School, Edinburgh Napier University, Scotland, UK
ABSTRACT
China’s pre-pandemic national-level planning advocated a combination of culture and tourism to
advance growth in the Greater Bay Area (GBA) mega-region. Culture is seen as increasing regional
cohesion, with multi-destination travel products connecting subregions and cities. This paper
examines perceptions of progress towards a coherent GBA cultural identity and its implications
for tourism. We examine tourism stakeholder perceptions of the GBA, assess the prospects for
the development of collective identities in the region and assess the prospects for
implementation of the GBA brand. Surveys and interviews with stakeholders indicate that the
prevalent top-down planning approach has so far generated limited regional coherence and
may also be limiting bottom-up placemaking initiatives. Debordering between Hong Kong,
Macao and the mainland cities offers opportunities for tourism development, but these have so
far been limited, also because of intensifying competition between mainland GBA cities in
international markets, challenging the implementation of an umbrella brand. Regional
stakeholders so far show little buy-in to the overarching ‘quality living circle’concept for the
GBA. New governance structures may be to support the development of a coherent regional
identity and generate place leadership to successfully combine top-down and bottom-up
placemaking initiatives.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 23 January 2023
Accepted 17 April 2023
KEYWORDS
Greater Bay Area;
placemaking; debordering;
tourism product
development; regional
branding; destination
marketing
Introduction
Cities and regions have increasingly adopted placemak-
ing strategies to create coherent destination images and
positioning. This paper considers the application of
these concepts in China’s Greater Bay Area (GBA) –a
new ‘megacity region’with aspirations of global promi-
nence (Hui et al., 2020). The GBA region is being devel-
oped through de-bordering and re-bordering
processes, with the integration of former colonies
Hong Kong and Macao into mainland China. This
creates the challenge of developing a new destination
brand for the GBA region, which must also be given
meaning for internal and external audiences through
placemaking processes. As noted by Chen (2022,
p. 86): ‘The rapid development of such a huge megalo-
polis that attracts attention globally is worth
investigating.’
The Pearl River Delta (PRD) area in China’s south has
been a focus of government economic policymaking
since the ‘opening up’of the country started in 1978.
The recent ‘Greater Bay Area’(GBA) plan extended the
PRD concept by incorporating the two special adminis-
trative regions (SARs) of Hong Kong and Macao into
the economic integration process, strengthening
regional economic and education links and promoting
culture and tourism as drivers of regional coherence.
The GBA initiative envisages an integrated economic
and cultural region of more than 70 million inhabitants
drawing on international ‘bay area’settings such as
San Francisco, New York and Tokyo. It will capitalise on
Hong Kong’s positioning as a global business hub con-
necting mainland China with the Belt and Road Initiative
(BRI). Macao, a former Portuguese colony, also contrib-
utes to the BRI, by making global connections
between Lusophone-speaking nations (Greater Bay
Area - Hong Kong, 2017). The GBA partners nine Guang-
dong cities with Hong Kong and Macao in pursuit of
‘mutual benefits and improve all people’s well-being
and living standards; a high-level social civilization; and
increased international competitiveness and influence,
strengthening soft power of Chinese culture and
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted
Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
CONTACT Greg Richards Richards.g@buas.nl Academy for Leisure, Breda University of Applied Sciences, Monseigneur Hopmansstraat 2, 4817 JS Breda,
The Netherlands
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH
https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2023.2207156
deepening cultural exchange and integration’(Li et al.,
2021, p. 3). Central Government aims to create a globally
competitive business environment by accelerating
market integration. In their evaluation of GBA govern-
ance, Meulbroek et al. (2022, p. 12) have noted a ‘tacit’
invitation to local and regional governments, the SARs
and businesses to marshal the ‘resources and capacities
of a multi-polar region-in-waiting …in the service of a
nationally initiated and tendentially mainland-centric
vision’.
The top-down GBA plan is economically-focused, and
supported by advanced infrastructure and region-wide
transportation networks such as Express Rail, bridges,
and boundary control points. However, the GBA also
seeks to promote social integration and to improve the
quality of life in terms of education, healthcare, social
wellbeing, housing, and environmental protection.
Tourism can potentially help advance ‘The creation of a
‘quality living circle’within the GBA –providing an ideal
place for living, working and travelling ….. (which)
involves the development and enhancement of new
and existing lifestyle facilities around sports and recrea-
tion, arts and culture, tourism and hospitality.’(KPMG,
2018). The GBA tourism and culture initiative is a large-
scale experiment, which parallels the European Union
de-bordering experience (Stoffelen & Vanneste, 2017)
and has significant governance implications. Achieving
such aims requires not just a new regional brand, but
also the shaping of a new regional reality through place-
making, which can be summarised as a process of turning
the regional space into a public place which has meaning
for all stakeholders (Dupre, 2019).
This study analyses the role of placemaking in creat-
ing regional coherence following debordering between
Hong Kong and Macao and the mainland GBA cities,
and the rebordering of the GBA as a new region. The
primary objectives are to: (1) identify tourism stake-
holder perceptions of the current status of the GBA, (2)
to assess prospects for creating meaningful collective
identities applicable to residents, visitors, and mobile
populations and (3) address city-level implementation
by identifying how GBA coherence is strengthened
through brand building and by cultural development.
This research makes a contribution to the study of the
processes of tourism region building in the new
context of the GBA in China, and highlights the need
to combine branding and placemaking initiatives in
such programmes.
The following literature review considers region-wide
planning, placemaking and (de)bordering processes
(Timothy et al., 2016). The authors then evaluate pro-
gress across the GBA towards a coherent region-wide
sense of place.
Literature review
The Greater Bay Area (GBA) comprises nine municipali-
ties across China’s Guangdong province. Inclusion of
the two SARs lends support to the Chinese govern-
ment’s pre-pandemic ‘going global’strategy (Greater
Bay Area - Hong Kong, 2020). Researchers have investi-
gated governance of the two SARs within the GBA
context (Wan, 2013), and border issues between Hong
Kong and mainland China (Graddol & Danielewicz-Betz,
2015; Liu & Shi, 2021; Shen, 2003; Yang, 2006). Tourism
has also been analyzed through themes such as urban
networks (Zhao et al., 2019), city competitiveness
(Kaijun, 2016; Yang & Yu, 2020; Zheng et al., 2016), des-
tination branding (Kirillova et al., 2020), destination
attractiveness (Chan & Shek, 2021; Hong, Ngan, Yu, &
Zhou, 2022), product development (Bi & Tian, 2020),
spatial structure (Hui et al., 2020), and infrastructure
(Zheng et al., 2016). Recent studies have also highlighted
tourism governance (Park et al., 2022) and cultural prac-
tices (Luo & Huang, 2023). Ong and Liu (2022) high-
lighted urbanization in Hengqin, a borderland sub-
component of Zhuhai where governance is shared
with Macao. Though GBA related research is growing,
the role of culture in tourism development and regional
attractiveness has not been addressed. The following
section considers the literature on governance and
(de)bordering processes, place leadership and place-
making, particularly emphasising GBA related studies.
Governance and bordering processes
As former British and Portuguese colonies respectively,
Hong Kong and Macao were designated ‘Special Admin-
istration Regions’(SARs) on their return to China in 1997
and 1999. Since handover, they have formed part of the
‘One-Country Two-Systems’arrangement. Hong Kong
has sought to retain its ‘distinct identity and strengths
as an international business, financial, shopping and avia-
tion centre’(Hong Kong Government Information Centre,
2021). The integration of the SARs is critical to GBA
development, transforming the mainland borders from
international to intra-national (Graddol & Danielewicz-
Betz, 2015), thereby fostering political, socio-economic,
taxation, mobility, legislative, and linguistic integration.
However, Chen (2022, p. 98) argues that future coordi-
nated development across borders will be constrained
by the different administrative system, ideologies and
culture prevalent across the GBA cities.
Gao et al. (2019) argue that China should be under-
stood through its borders, and Huang et al. (2022)
note border research has shifted towards regional and
local boundaries from the previous national border
2B. KING ET AL.
focus. Though borders are typically created by insti-
tutions and policy makers, individual actors are also
active in devising strategies to respond to and negotiate
border constraints (Zhao et al., 2019). Bordering is there-
fore a negotiated process, and as evidenced by the GBA
case, which includes both the bordering processes of
creating new regional borders, as well as a de-bordering
process linking the two SARS and the mainland cities.
Creating the GBA may be viewed as a ‘symbolic
process where local authorities (or entrepreneurs) inten-
tionally emphasise the boundary and the differences
between countries to enhance its tourist appeal’(Zhou
et al., 2018). Bordering processes involve more than
simply drawing lines –the enclosing and differentiation
of space creates a new reality, externally projected
through place branding, and experienced internally
through placemaking processes.
Referring to debordering between the PRD and Hong
Kong, Shen (2003) argued that cooperation has been
‘bottom-up’and a consequence of post-handover
demographic and cultural ties, rather than direction by
mainland authorities. Nevertheless, the ‘reform and
open-door’policy was critical for stimulating the move-
ment of people and goods between the mainland and
Hong Kong. Yang (2006) reported that the borderlands
became a ‘co-existent’and highly interdependent
space, with Hong Kong making large-scale manufactur-
ing investments in the GBA. Critically for tourism, inte-
gration of the borderland contributed to an
acceleration of Mainland Chinese arrivals into Hong
Kong from 2.38 million in 1997 (Hong Kong 2003 –
Travel and Tourism,2003) to 43.8 million in 2019
(HKTB, 2020). The debordering process has also stimu-
lated regional mobilities and integration (Więckowski &
Timothy, 2021), and the GBA boundary may now be con-
sidered domestic or supranational rather than inter-
national. This distinguishes the GBA from longer
established Asian ‘growth triangles’which have lever-
aged resources and attracted investors across inter-
national borders (Henderson, 2001).
As a result of de-bordering, infrastructural develop-
ments are improving GBA connectivity, notably
through high-speed rail and cross-boundary bridges
(Choi, 2021). The world’s longest bridge-tunnel system
–the iconic Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge (HZMB)
(Han, 2018)–includes artificial islands, which now
feature as attractions in tour packages combining
border features, bridge-viewing, shopping, and dining
areas (China Highlights, 2021). This will arguably create
a‘dual circulation’pattern between the GBA and China
(Kan, 2022), extending to both inbound and outbound
tourism. Despite the progress towards integration,
many respondents in Choi’s(2021) survey of Hong
Kong businesses were vague about the meaning and
scope of the GBA. Others viewed the region as focused
exclusively on integration between the two SARs and
the mainland. A further 40.6% anticipated that the
GBA would not impact on their businesses, indicative
of a gap between official aspirations and local stake-
holder perceptions.
Internal fragmentation of the region is also evident
from the differing roles assigned to each city in GBA
planning. Hong Kong is positioned as an international
hub for finance, professional services, transportation,
trade, and aviation (Greater Bay Area –Hong Kong,
2020), with Macao functioning as a global centre for
tourism and leisure. Li et al. (2022) noted that the
diverse resources, capacities, and priorities of the
various GBA cities are a challenge to top-down central
planning.
This indicates that (de)bordering processes may com-
plicate destination branding. A brand story is needed for
tourists to build experiences around a unique regional
identity that can provide lasting competitive advantage.
The brand is an outcome of multi-stakeholder collabora-
tive decision-making (Prideaux & Cooper, 2002), invol-
ving both tangible and intangible aspects: ‘The place
product is a unique combination of building, facilities,
and venues which represent a multiplicity of auton-
omous service businesses, both public and private’(Han-
kinson, 2009, p. 98). A partnership approach is necessary,
but this presents many challenges for destination mar-
keting organizations (DMOs), who often struggle to exer-
cise management control, and destination identities
often remain under-developed. Destination branding
also faces the challenge of authenticity: ‘what sells and
has success is the brand that is honest, and valuable in
itself’(Hornskov, 2014). According to Gilmore (2002) des-
tination branding should therefore reflect an authentic
reality, rather than a projection. Linking the GBA regional
brand to an authentic local reality and engaging a range
of stakeholders might arguably be achieved more effec-
tively through placemaking rather than through tra-
ditional destination branding. Placemaking goes
beyond the intangible brand to include physical, social
and cultural elements as well. This is important to
enable the individual destinations in the GBA to estab-
lish distinctive identities within the GBA umbrella. By
emphasising placemaking, the current study extends
the theoretical contribution of Kirillova et al.’s(2020)
GBA study which consolidated the coopetition and
cross-border marketing concepts in light of stakeholder
perceptions, thereby underpinning the uniqueness of
member cities united under a common brand.
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 3
Placemaking and place leadership
An extensive review of the placemaking literature
related to urban development and tourism by Dupre
(2019) identifies placemaking as a process of creating
place meanings or sense of place through identities
and images associated with local communities.
Palermo and Ponzini (2015) have defined placemaking
broadly as the process of ‘making better places’. Lew
(2017) emphasises that placemaking can be achieved
either through bottom-up, organic and incremental pro-
cesses, or through top-down, master planned
approaches. He argues that organic placemaking can
support local culture more effectively than top-down
programmes, which often struggle to link to local stake-
holders. Placemaking can facilitate holistic destination
development by enhancing attractive place qualities
for both residents and visitors and link cultural,
tourism and other stakeholders through a coherent
place narrative. It is increasingly viewed as an effective
strategy for the development of tourism markets
(Hultman & Hall, 2012; Priatmoko et al., 2021). Richards
(2020) operationalised this concept in the tourism
context by identifying resources, meanings, and creativ-
ity as the core elements of placemaking, with all three
necessary to make better places for tourism. Richards
(2020, p. 7) conceptualised resources as the ‘network
linking space of flows and space of places to harness
resources, tangible and intangible’. Tangible resources
include destination hardware, such as heritage build-
ings, natural resources, and facilities, whereas intangible
resources or ‘software’include language, knowledge,
and skills. Creativity gives meaning to resources by
enabling stakeholders to identify with them, and creativ-
ity is also a catalyst for ‘making things happen’. Insti-
tutional creativity includes the development of
structures to facilitate action, including governance. In
the case of the GBA, Chen (2022) views the development
of the new region as ‘a process of making meaning’,
reflecting the analysis of placemaking by Dupre (2019).
Richards’holistic view of placemaking envisages a
blend of the top-down and bottom-up approaches
identified by Lew (2017), with multiple stakeholders par-
ticipating in the formation of meanings. Razali and Ismail
(2014) also emphasise the need for ‘a balanced or a har-
monious relationship between tourists, local commu-
nities, and organizations and businesses that provide
tourism services’in tourism destination development.
The GBA programme approaches regional development,
branding and placemaking from a predominantly top-
down perspective, aiming to reach across (formal)
borders to unite previously divided territories. Więck-
owski and Timothy’s(2021) work on (de)bordering in
the European Union (EU) has potential lessons for the
GBA. The EU used placemaking strategies to promote
regional and cross-border cohesion. Whereas earlier
European programmes promoted cohesion through
economic measures such as fiscal integration and free
movement of labour, later measures stimulated cultural
and social identification. A notable example is the
Øresund Region encompassing Copenhagen in
Denmark and Malmo in Sweden. The new economic
dynamics of bridging the Peberholm Strait and connect-
ing the two cities raised questions about regional place-
making and local attachments for the new region and its
identity (Hospers, 2006). Stoffelen and Vanneste (2017)
observed that tourism de-bordering within Europe has
relied on informal networks that build capacity and
trust, as well as developing ‘thick’institutional relations.
Though there is a parallel GBA de-bordering process, the
prevalent placemaking approach remains one of top-
down master planning, as Lew (2017) suggests. Whilst
the authorities seek meaning for those who live, work,
study in and visit the region, we can question whether
the formation of a coherent regional brand supported
by all stakeholders is achievable in a top-down fashion.
Branding the GBA as a new destination
The GBA seeks to develop a ‘Cultured Bay Area’and to
expand regional cooperation through education,
culture, tourism, and social security (Greater Bay Area -
Hong Kong, 2019). In line with the placemaking
concept as a means of ‘improving the quality of life for
all’(Richards & Duif, 2019), the Outline Development
Plan for the GBA (Greater Bay Area - Hong Kong, 2019)
seeks to enhance the quality of ‘living, working, and tra-
veling’by: (1) developing education and talent hubs; (2)
developing a ‘Cultured Bay Area’to promote cultural
and creative industries; (3) stimulating leisure travel in
the GBA; (4) expanding employment and entrepreneur-
ship; (5) shaping a ‘Healthy Bay Area’through
cooperation in medical and healthcare services and; (6)
cooperation in social security and social governance to
encourage Hong Kong and Macao residents to work,
live and retire in the GBA. The development of the ‘9+
2’GBA cities includes developing a coherent identity
around the unique positioning of the two SARs. The
GBA brand is based on going ‘global together’, welcom-
ing the two SARs into the ‘motherland’, with tourism as a
critical placemaking element, and intra-GBA travel sti-
mulating shared cultural identities. However, the coher-
ence of the current regional brand is questionable. Lei
et al. (2022) found that traveler perceptions of the
various constituent GBA cities vary in terms of
4B. KING ET AL.
gastronomy, hotels, integrated metro transport net-
works and photo-taking opportunities. Lu et al. (2017)
concluded that though all GBA cities are actively brand-
ing themselves to attract tourism and investment, Hong
Kong, Macao, Guangzhou and Shenzhen exhibited more
sophisticated brand development. They noted potential
conflicts between stakeholders, which questions the
achievability of a unified brand.
Cultural assets across the GBA
Some of the ‘9+2’GBA cities (see Figure 1) have used
cultural developments to progress the meaning aspect
of placemaking. Shenzhen and Foshan, for example,
have implemented ‘cultural governance’strategies,
including constructing and/or renovating cultural
spaces, organising large public events, and promoting
cultural tourism (Luo & Huang, 2023). The wider region
possesses two UNESCO world heritage sites which evi-
dence tangible heritage –Kaiping Diaolou and Village
in Jiangmen and the Historic Centre of Macao (Huang
& Liu, 2023). UNESCO Intangible Heritage is epitomised
by Yueju Opera and the Dragon Boat Festival. The
Chinese Government has also recognised Lingnan heri-
tage, Cantonese cuisine, Cantonese dialect, and Martial
arts as intangible cultural attributes. Guangdong Pro-
vince has 589 cultural assets linked to particular cities,
notably the Puzhai Fire Dragon which is associated
with Fengshun city (Chinese Cultural Studies Centre,
2021).
The two SARs have emphasised tangible over intangi-
ble heritage, although Macao secured designation as a
UNESCO ‘City of Gastronomy’. The Hong Kong auth-
orities are progressing the culture and tourism
connection with iconic developments such as West
Kowloon Cultural District. The Hong Kong Government
established a Culture, Sports and Tourism Bureau in
2022, a response to the national 14th five-year plan,
which envisages the city as an ‘East-meets-West centre
for international cultural exchange’(Hong Kong SAR,
2022).
There is a prospect of developing GBA-wide tourism
products through ‘quality’initiatives which strengthen
local awareness of what Guangzhou, Macao and Hong
Kong offer. Enhanced intra-GBA infrastructure has
strengthened physical links thereby improving mobili-
ties. A Culture and Tourism Development Plan for the
GBA was also adopted in late 2020. Tourism potentially
extends regional integration by bringing together
people from across the region and strengthening inter-
national exposure. However, the top-down planning
approach compounds the challenges of developing a
unified and coherent GBA regional image and identity
that resonates with all relevant actors.
To examine the opinions of stakeholders about the
prospects for coherent GBA placemaking, we conducted
quantitative and qualitative research, as outlined in the
following section.
Methodology
We adopt a mixed-methods research approach to
accommodate the complexity and dynamism of the
study setting. The single region focus is considered
appropriate because the GBA is globally significant at a
time when global political tensions have shaken inter-
actions between the US and China. It is timely to assem-
ble the combined findings of various official documents,
Figure 1. The GBA cities. Source: https://www.smartkarma.com/home/daily-briefs/brief-thematic-chinas-greater-bay-area-the-essen-
tial-and-more-2/
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 5
the relevant scholarly literature and the perspectives of
tourism related respondents who have advanced
insights into progress of the GBA.
The structure of the data collection process is shown
in the research path diagram in Figure 2. This shows the
different steps taken to ensure the trustworthiness of the
data collection, and to provide a clear research audit trail
(Carcary, 2009). As suggested by Gunawan (2015)we
undertook the steps of respondent selection, triangu-
lation, detailed transcription, and coding. These are
described in detail in the following section.
Selection of key informants
During stage one of the study, a short online survey was
distributed amongst regional contacts to source inter-
viewees familiar with the GBA and to rank cities that
will benefit from GBA developments using a Likert
scale of 5 (1 –least to 5 –most benefit). The survey
also included sections on: (1) participant information,
including locations and organizational position; (2)
GBA-related questions, including level of knowledge of
the GBA and (3) participants’willingness to be inter-
viewed subsequently. Recipients were also asked to
forward the survey link to contacts with GBA-related
knowledge. The survey was developed in English and
then translated into Simplified and Traditional Chinese.
The translations were checked by a professional linguist.
The instrument was distributed in late 2020 and early
2021 to hospitality and tourism industry partners and
university graduates in Hong Kong, Macao, and main-
land China, through snowball sampling, generating
about 3,000 leads. A total of 69 valid responses were
received from a total of 83 complete responses.
To select interviewees, initial screening selected
respondents who ranked their knowledge of the GBA
at a level of 4 and above on a 5-point Likert scale. The
ten selected participants included six from hospitality
(the hotel, F&B, and MICE sectors), one each from
tourism services (i.e. travel agency), consulting, recrea-
tion and entertainment, and real estate. The sample
was then expanded through snowballing, until reaching
saturation. The final purposive sample used in the
second research stage included 24 experts from policy-
making, higher education, hospitality, tourism services,
transportation, recreation and entertainment, market-
ing, and consulting companies. The selected informants
were leaders/experts in tourism and their titles ranged
from Chief Executive/Chair to managers of well-estab-
lished businesses in Hong Kong, Macao, and mainland
China. Those in senior positions are probably better
informed than those at lower levels in the organisation,
and therefore in a better position to make an informed
judgement on the prospects of the GBA. The majority
of our respondents come from the business sector and
are business-oriented, however we also interviewed
some academic and government (or former) officials to
gain a broader coverage of opinions.
Interviewee profiles
The interviews of between 30 and 90 min were adminis-
tered between February and April 2021. They were con-
ducted in either English, Cantonese, or Mandarin with
Figure 2. Research path for the study.
6B. KING ET AL.
the interviewer outlining the study purpose and pro-
cedures for informed consent. The Chinese transcripts
were translated into English for analysis. Nvivo qualitat-
ive data analysis software was used for initial coding,
selective coding, and thematic coding. Interviewee
profiles are listed in Table 1. Most respondents were
Hong Kong-based, because their high level of GBA invol-
vement provided a key perspective on the debordering
processes involved in creating the GBA.
The authors evaluated the interviewee backgrounds
and their company affiliations, thereby setting the
stage for more in-depth exploration of current GBA col-
laborations or projects. A good balance of male (13) and
female respondents (11) was achieved. The open-ended
interview questions generally addressed: (1) how inter-
viewees perceived the GBA, including its relevance to
their respective businesses, (2) overall GBA identity and
(3) the self-identity of GBA cities and areas in terms of
culture, heritage, and tourism. The interviews included
questions about collaborative activities across the
public and private sectors as well as between the
different GBA sub-regions and constituent cities. The
interview items drew from Richards’placemaking attri-
butes, covering regional resources (both tangible and
intangible), meanings or identification with these
resources, and creativity (for example governance
arrangements), as well as aspects of GBA marketing
and branding.
The Interview transcripts were subject to open/initial
coding, axial/selective coding, and theoretical/thematic
coding to denote key concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 2015).
Each interview began with a series of open-ended
questions, thereby permitting data analysis into emer-
gent themes for comparison (Hardy, 2005). This ‘constant
comparison’of themes provides an analytic process when
developing the structure of the theory by comparing
pieces of data for similarities and differences (Corbin &
Strauss, 2015). A broad picture of GBA placemaking and
identity creation was formulated.
Findings
Benefits for GBA cities
The GBA city rankings presented in Table 2 show that
respondents identified Shenzhen, Zhuhai, and Macao
as the main prospective GBA beneficiaries. The proximity
of Shenzhen and Zhuhai to Hong Kong and Macao
respectively may have been a factor. Macao may be a
beneficiary because of the disproportionate market
share of mainland Chinese arrivals (70.9% in 2019)
Table 1. Participant profiles.
Interviewee # Gender (M/F) Sector Title Location Level of GBA involvement
1 M Travel trade Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Substantial
2 M Former government Executive VP Hong Kong Limited
3 M Transport Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Substantial
4 F Travel trade CEO Hong Kong Substantial
5 M Travel trade Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Substantial
6 M Entertainment CEO Hong Kong Substantial
7 M Former government Executive VP Hong Kong Substantial
8 F Hospitality Manager Zhuhai Limited
9 F Hospitality Manager Hong Kong Limited
10 F Hospitality President Hong Kong Substantial
11 F Entertainment Manager Macao Limited
12 F Entertainment Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Limited
13 F Hotel Developer/ Real Estate Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Substantial
14 M Transport General Manager Hong Kong Substantial
15 M MICE Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Substantial
16 M Government Executive VP Hong Kong Substantial
17 F MICE Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Limited
18 M Hospitality General Manager Shenzhen Limited
19 M Academic Associate Professor Zhuhai Substantial
20 M Academic Professor Macao Substantial
21 F Destination Marketing / Real Estate Director/ Chairman Macao Substantial
22 F Consulting company Director/ Chairman Hong Kong Substantial
23 F FoShan Government Manager FoShan Substantial
24 M Hospitality Director/ Chairman Macao Substantial
Table 2. To what extent will these cities benefit from GBA
developments? Rankings of GBA cities from the online survey.
City City ranking
Rank Average score (out of 5)
Shenzhen 1 4.130
Zhuhai 2 3.986
Macao 3 3.899
Guangzhou 4 3.768
Dongguan 5 3.333
Hong Kong 6 3.290
Zhongshan 7 3.275
Foshan 8 3.130
Huizhou 9 3.101
Jiangmen 10 2.696
Zhaoqing 11 2.580
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 7
(Macao Statistics and Census Service, 2020). Hong Kong
will arguably derive less benefit because the more dis-
persed regional structure may undermine its current
gateway status. The more peripheral locations of the
lowest ranked cities –Jiangmen and Zhaoqing –may
account for the lesser familiarity amongst respondents.
Respondent awareness of GBA cities and sub-regions
was analyzed using an NVivo word frequency analysis of
the interview data. Respondents from the two SARs were
removed from the analysis to allow a clearer interpret-
ation of prospective GBA benefits of mainland cities.
Table 3 compares online survey responses and intervie-
wee word frequencies for the nine cities. A Spearman’s
rank-order correlation of the perceived benefits from
the survey and number of mentions in the interviews
produced a correlation coefficient of 0.812, statistically
significant (p= .008) at the 5% confidence level.
Additionally, the interviewee rankings correlate signifi-
cantly with city rankings in terms of tourism develop-
ment (0.785, p= 0.012) and happiness (0.876, p=
0.002), indicating a high level of consistency in the
results (Kan, 2022; Xie et al., 2021).
The city rankings show Shenzhen, Zhuhai and
Guangzhou as the central core of a hierarchical
network, likely attributable to their locations (Chong &
Pan, 2020). Guangzhou is administrative capital of
Guangdong province and since 1957, has hosted the
globally significant China Import and Export Fair
(Canton Fair). More knowledgeable interview respon-
dents also ranked Foshan quite highly, indicative of its
‘hidden gem’status. Foshan is well-known for martial
arts (kung fu) and respondents frequently mentioned
the culinary attributes of one of its districts –Shandu.
Jiangmen also received 23 mentions, perhaps attribu-
table to its UNESCO World Heritage-listed Kaiping
Diaolou. Though Huizhou with its mountains and
scenic undulating countryside was viewed as less devel-
oped, one attribute mentioned was as a Chinese Medi-
cine city. Dongguan is a renowned manufacturing hub,
more recently promoting its cultural profile (Luo &
Huang, 2023). Zhaoqing was the least mentioned city.
In aggregate the word count frequencies are at the
low end (below 30) for Zhongshan, Huizhou, Dongguan,
and Zhaoqing.
Perceptions of GBA geographies
Interviewee perceptions of the GBA helped form a more
detailed understanding of the territory. Some articulated
a clear distinction between the western and eastern
zones, indicative of linkages. With Guangzhou as a geo-
graphic centre, the West encompasses Huizhou, Dong-
guan, and Shenzhen with the East including Zhaoqing,
Foshan, Zhongshan, Jiangmen, and Zhuhai. Interviewees
viewed the West as more culture-oriented and less
developed and the East as business focused. Another
noted the more rugged landscapes and relative inac-
cessibility of the West, leading to the retention of estab-
lished cultural practices. The East’s better regional,
national, and international connectivity has been
enhanced by debordering through infrastructural devel-
opments such as the HZMB, high-speed rail and ferry
connections between Hong Kong International Airport
and Guangzhou. Interviewee 14 highlighted that the
HZMB links Zhuhai and Hong Kong airports, thereby
establishing the former as ‘a satellite airport of Hong
Kong …linking up the airlines to do code-sharing …
apart from passengers we also see a lot of cargo oppor-
tunity from Zhuhai via Hong Kong.’He stated that ‘pol-
itically, we don’t have borders, we have boundaries’.
Park et al. (2022) also noted strong linkages between
Hong Kong and Zhuhai.
Respondents frequently noted the changing impor-
tance of the GBA cities. Guangzhou was characterised
as China’s original ‘window to the world’, though with
Hong Kong increasingly assuming this role. Maritime
culture is another prominent GBA feature, supporting
cultural manifestations such as the Dragon Boat Races
and Fire Dragon Dance in Hong Kong and Na-Tcha
and A-Ma Gau in Macao. Gastronomy is also seen as a
prominent manifestation of intangible heritage in the
GBA.
There was recognition of Foshan’s future prospects as
a GBA cultural centre –it has strong historical links to
Lingnan architecture, gastronomy, martial artists, and
historic figures. Interviewee 24 described Foshan as
one of China’s four ancient towns with strong gastro-
nomic associations and quoted the Cantonese saying
‘eat in Guangzhou, chefs are from FengCheng (an area
Table 3. Rankings of Guangdong cities from the quantitative
survey and qualitative (interview) data.
Guangdong
City**
Survey: To what
extent will these
GBA cities benefit
from the GBA
development?
Interviews: Frequency of city
mentions
Rank
Average
score (out of
5) Rank
Word count
frequency
Frequency
%
Shenzhen 1 4.130 1 252 29.3%
Zhuhai 2 3.986 2 208 24.2%
Guangzhou 3 3.768 3 198 23.0%
Foshan 6 3.130 4 102 11.9%
Zhongshan 5 3.275 5 27 3.1%
Jiangmen 8 2.696 6 23 2.7%
Huizhou 7 3.101 6 23 2.7%
Dongguan 4 3.333 8 17 2.0%
Zhaoqing 9 2.580 9 10 1.2%
** All districts or towns are grouped under the respective city.
8B. KING ET AL.
of Foshan) (食在廣州廚出鳳城)’. Expressed differently,
this means that the finest food is available in Guangz-
hou, though with the best chefs originating from
Foshan. So-called ‘Father of the Nation’Sun Yat-sen is
another regional connection and linkage. Born in Zhong-
shan, Sun moved to Foshan before residing in Hong
Kong. Interviewees also mentioned various prominent
marital artists such as Lam Sai Wing, Yip Man, and
Wong Fei Hung. They have stimulated the growth of
the regional film industry, as well as prompting the
establishment of the National Art Studio in Foshan’s
Xiqiao Mountain.
Cuisine differentiates the GBA from the rest of China.
Cantonese cuisine exhibits notable commonalities of
cooking methods, taste, local seasonings and ingredi-
ents, as well as local variations. The varieties of meat
dumpling consumed during the Dragon Boat Festival
were mentioned previously. Regional foods are also
associated with language, as evidenced by the
following:
One of the unique features of Huizhou is the Huizhou
spoken language, which combines Hokkien, Hakka,
and Guangdong. This is found nowhere else and is
reflected in the lives of locals and in the food. It’s impor-
tant for you to identify the cultural characteristics of the
people. (Interviewee 3).
The authors anticipated that language might emerge as
a potential regional differentiator. Surprisingly, only
three interviewees referred specifically to Cantonese
language/dialect as a distinction from the rest of
China. These respondents were either non-Chinese or
had been educated overseas. They expressed the view
that the Cantonese dialect preserves the identity of
GBA, with Hong Kong as its apex.
On the one hand, there’s a strong sense of local identity
and at the same time there’sinfluence from the outside
filtering in, while people continue strongly preserve the
local dialect, more than elsewhere in China. (Interviewee 3).
Respondents may have been reluctant to raise the issue
of language because of its potential sensitivity in a
country where Mandarin Chinese has been vigorously
promoted as a source of national unity. Future research-
ers may wish to use alternative research methods to
draw out any underlying views on this issue.
Perspectives on GBA coherence
Some interviewees characterised GBA as ‘nothing new’,
and as simply a ‘multi-destination’re-packaging of the
PRD. A few commented that economic development is
driven by China as a whole rather than by GBA initiatives.
Interviewees with a stronger business orientation/
background perceived GBA as a hub for business
tourism and meetings, incentives, conferences and exhi-
bitions (MICE). Others indicated that the links between
Hong Kong, Macao, and Guangdong provide a ‘destina-
tion cluster’catering to business and leisure tourism.
Currently though, GBA seems more developed for dom-
estic markets. Longer term, intensified international
travel is predicted to bring growth, contingent on
post-pandemic opening up.
Although interviewees identified many potentially
unifying elements across GBA encompassing culture,
language and gastronomy, regional integration may be
constrained by developmental inconsistencies. Table 3
indicates that the major beneficiaries of GBA develop-
ments will be Shenzhen (near Hong Kong), Zhuhai
(near Macao), and Guangzhou. Each has a stronger
image than the other six mainland cities. The centre-per-
iphery pattern focused around Hong Kong and Guangz-
hou is a challenge for reducing developmental
inequalities. This said, Hong Kong may struggle to
retain its current advantages in the long term. Some
interviewees believe that the city will maintain its com-
petitiveness in service delivery standards and deep inter-
national experience, particularly in hospitality and
tourism. However, Mainland Chinese service levels are
expected to rise progressively with accelerated GBA inte-
gration, easier cross-border travel and greater inter-
national experience, notably in finance and
professional services. In this context, Hong Kong may
lose some of its competitive edge over other Guang-
dong cities. Consistent with Park et al.’s(2022)
findings, one explanation derives from the different
administrative priorities in Hong Kong, Macao, and
mainland China:
They even have a functional spin-off, say, for some of the
regulatory bodies. So, you can see that this is how it has
been operated and promotional wise, we have the HKTB
joining them –previously there was another setup. So
this is as good as you can get …the challenge is
always the priorities that all these different authorities
see for themselves. –(Interviewee 16).
Another interviewee opined that divergent mindsets
may impede GBA-wide planning. He characterised
Hong Kong as more ‘economically oriented, aggressive,
and competitive’, with Macao being more ‘laid-back’
and focusing on quality of life.
In contrast to Park et al.’s(2022)findings, respondents
questioned the capacity of the Guangdong, Hong Kong,
and Macao authorities to implement the Culture and
Tourism strategy effectively. Interviewees identified con-
tinuing barriers to debordering between the two SARs
and the mainland, including the banking system, taxa-
tion, customs, and currencies. Uncertainties continue
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 9
over the regulations governing Hengqin island. Though
under Macao administrative control, the mainland auth-
orities exercise oversight (Macao Trade and Investment
Promotion Institute, 2021). A lack of clarity over the
status of the border has disinclined Macao residents
from acquiring property and/or taking up residence on
Hengqin island. The debordering process and progress
towards more seamless mobilities has also been
delayed by opaque labor laws, taxation, and financial
regulations between the 9 + 2 cities.
Respondents noted a lack of transparency in GBA-
wide policymaking, including unclear relationships
between the various city-wide and municipal govern-
ments. One observed the negative implications of
inadequate information for foreigners about tax
changes for investment and managing human capital.
Concerns were also expressed about the reluctance of
government officials to engage in industry consul-
tations, thereby constraining the prospective develop-
ment of bottom-up approaches. One interviewee
attributed the prevalence of ‘government language’as
inhibiting stakeholder inputs which reinforces top-
down approaches to governance:
They (government) will tell you this is how we do things
…this has always been our way …etc. But it will be
better if they are willing to listen to us earlier. They
tend to look only at themselves. Everything is about ‘I’.
‘I am like this …’ ‘I.I …I…’…We still pay lots of tax.
You are using our taxpayer’s money. Instead of maximiz-
ing effectiveness, they use ‘government language’.
(Interviewee 13)
Effectiveness is inhibited by a knowledge gap between
senior leadership and those administering policies,
even when government planning initiatives are sound.
Implementing GBA planning evidently suffers from
inadequate attention to operational issues and feasi-
bility. Respondents look forward to devolved power
sharing across various levels of government as attention
on the GBA increases, thereby reducing incoherence.
Potential for a coherent GBA brand
Many respondents had only vague awareness of the GBA
brand and of the positioning of the cities. One proposed
adopting a bottom-up approach amongst both resi-
dents and visitors to identify key impressions of GBA
cities. Tech-smart Shenzhen, for example, could be posi-
tioned as a ‘smart city’. Another suggested a different
positioning for each GBA city, thereby enabling the
region to appeal to different tourist markets. These can
include segmentations based on visitor motivation and
activities, such as gastronomy, photography and con-
sumption of cityscapes (Lei et al., 2022; Kirillova et al.,
2020). An overall umbrella brand for the region could
follow positioning for the constituent cities, with the-
matic region-wide tourism products drawing upon the
disparate attractions of each. A Hong Kong travel trade
respondent proposed developing cross-border theme-
based itineraries between Hong Kong and mainland
cities to attract a diversity of visitors. This is complex,
given the aspiration of each city and/or district to high-
light a multiplicity of cultural assets. One interviewee
proposed adopting the ‘umbrella concept’of Lingnan
culture drawing on shared elements of history, culture,
arts and gastronomy to inform a distinct identity for
each city. The interviewee reactions reflect the diverse
cultural governance strategies of the GBA cities and
suggest challenges to establishing a coherent region-
wide image and identity.
Discussion
Our research indicates that the GBA currently lacks a
coherent brand, at least in part because the placemaking
activities needed to underpin a collective branding are
lacking. While debordering processes in the GBA may
be enhancing tangible aspects of integration, such as
increased accessibility, intangible placemaking
measures, such as developing collective meanings
around cultural expressions, lag behind. This is partly
because of differential reactions to the GBA among sta-
keholders and persisting barriers to collaboration, as dis-
cussed below.
Reactions to the GBA
Respondents reacted to GBA developments in one of
two main ways. ‘Early adopters’have chosen to be
proactive and to capitalise on the opportunities associ-
ated with the National Plan. Some hotel groups have
already emphasised ‘GBA culture’as part of their Guang-
dong-wide property development plans. Travel trade
and MICE related companies have also established
branch offices and formed partnerships within the
GBA. By contrast and consistent with Choi’s(2021)
findings, ‘laggard’respondents have adopted a ‘wait-
and-see’approach, citing a lack of clarity and transpar-
ency in GBA policies. Many regional stakeholders are evi-
dently not yet embracing the central government vision
of building a quality place for people to work, live and
visit. There were concerns among some Hong Kong-
based participants and notably former government
officials, that the city may lose its competitive advan-
tage, consistent with Chan’s(2021) observations. These
stakeholders have not yet bought into the ‘quality
living circle’placemaking concept of the GBA.
10 B. KING ET AL.
However, respondents with more GBA-related knowl-
edge opined that involvement from the SARs will
enhance levels of service and product quality in the
region, and in time can create a shared sense of place.
Removing tangible and intangible barriers
(De)bordering processes mean many implementation
challenges remain for the GBA. Although the Chinese
government introduced 144-hours visa-free for
foreigners traveling to Guangdong, travel trade respon-
dents indicated that travel is still impeded by distinct
visa requirements for entering Hong Kong, Macao, and
mainland China. These respondents advocate swift elim-
ination of this obstacle, enabling tourism developments
to capitalise on new cross-boundary transportation net-
works and facilities. The so-called ‘artificial island’Hong
Kong and Macao entry and exit points symbolise the
current debordering process and are attractions in
their own right.
Further debordering initiatives may provide opportu-
nities to enhance mega-regional identities. Cross-border
settlement is already evident between Macao and
Hengqin island, where Macao residents can cross the
border freely. However, there is still hesitancy amongst
many Macao residents due to diverging systems of
income tax and social security legislation. As has been
demonstrated in Europe, effective placemaking means
going beyond the removal of barriers and attaching
meanings or storytelling to the region. According to
Meulbroek et al. (2022), if the GBA is a unilateral creature
of central-state fiat, it will only amount to a package of
infrastructural projects and financial incentives; it must
ultimately become ‘eco-systemic’, by animating ‘in
region’developmental practices, mixed progressively
with an emergent culture-economy of concertation
and ‘co-ordination’(p. 20).
Integrating culture and tourism
The GBA Plan envisages a unique culture as a resource
connecting people from across the region, especially
the intangible elements identified by interviewees,
such as gastronomy, language, and martial artistry.
Respondents suggested that GBA cities can become
‘microregions’by strengthening linkages with their hin-
terlands and leveraging gastronomy, marital arts,
Lingnan, and Cantonese dialect connections across
South China. Foshan was identified as a prospective
GBA cultural hub because of its rich tangible and intan-
gible heritage. Luo (2021) also suggested that Foshan
can use its location and rich cultural resources to
strengthen network relationships with Hong Kong,
Macao, Guangzhou and Shenzhen. A coherent place nar-
rative can add meaning to increase identification with
the GBA: an ‘internal story’can provide local commu-
nities with a sense of pride and self-identity and an
‘external story’could encourage tourists and investors
to learn about and explore the region. However, the
fact that no current respondent could articulate a coher-
ent GBA place narrative is indicative of the elusiveness of
such stories.
Top-down and bottom-up placemaking
approaches
In line with Lew’s(2017) analysis, both top-down and
bottom-up placemaking activities were identified in
the GBA. Some respondents observed that China’s top-
down approach offers administrative advantages and
swift implementation. However, its effectiveness in the
GBA case is debatable. Our interviews indicated that
the ‘9+2’cities have been operating relatively indepen-
dently, and businesses seem to have been investing
because of the perceived opportunities within China as
a whole, rather than within GBA. Devoid of a coherent
GBA brand, each city proceeds to brand itself, with
bottom-up placemaking initiatives predominating.
These findings reflect Chen’s(2022) observation that
little is being done ‘to publicise the integrated tourism
resources of the GBA as a whole.’Park et al. (2022) also
noted the absence of GBA-wide governance to stimulate
the necessary multilateral government interactions that
might overcome the competing interests of diverse
cross-border actors.
As Dupre (2019) notes: ‘Place-making is a collective
act, and it reinforces relations between community
members, consolidates the foundations of a culture.’
However, in the GBA there seems to be less collective
identification that could provide a basis for an umbrella
image. As mentioned previously, only three respondents
proposed Cantonese language as a unique identity for
GBA, despite the dialect’s prevalence and rich cultural
heritage. This also reflects Luo and Huang’s(2023)
identification of divergent views about cultural assets
across the various GBA cities, a lack of identification
that can limit regional placemaking prospects.
To build regional branding, sensitive place manage-
ment will be needed, drawing upon divergent cultural
assets. It will be important to develop a higher-level
and values-based regional vision which extends
beyond a task-orientation (Beer et al., 2019;Hu&
Hassink, 2017). The various interesting localised place-
making initiatives across the region (such as Lang Kwai
Fong, New World Development’s K-11 Musea Art Mall
in Hong Kong and family D-Theme Park in Shenzhen’s
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 11
Prince Bay), indicate a focus on bottom-up rather than
top-down placemaking, which might also explain the
lukewarm stakeholder reactions about the prospects of
the GBA. Achieving stakeholder buy-in may require
them to be given a clear stake in the collective
benefits of the ‘quality living circle’of the GBA,
perhaps as noted by Chong and Pan (2020) by creating
‘channels for entrepreneurs other than government to
participate in regional governance.’
Conclusions and opportunities for future
research
Our findings indicate that to date the top-down brand-
ing initiatives of the GBA have failed to produce regional
coherence, and may even have limited bottom-up place-
making activity. Regional stakeholders have so far recog-
nised little benefit from the development of a ‘quality
living circle’, and the indications are that new govern-
ance structures will be needed to engage stakeholders
and develop the combination of top-down and
bottom-up placemaking activity advocated by Lew
(2017) and Richards (2020).
Linking these two levels of placemaking activity
might be facilitated by the development of a cultural
governance system, as suggested by Luo and Huang
(2023). Cultural governance supposes greater collabor-
ation in development processes, through dialogue,
trust building, commitment to the process and shared
understanding. Gugu and Dal Molin (2016) suggest
that increasing involvement of stakeholders through cul-
tural governance can have important outcomes in terms
of developing new projects and infrastructure, new
knowledge and increased cultural activities and audi-
ences. Cultural governance would arguably allow GBA
actors to capitalise on the significant cultural resources
of the region with tourism potential, notably gas-
tronomy, martial arts, Lingnan culture and language.
Currently these resources are being utilised by some of
the cities to develop their own tourism markets, with
little consideration being given to their regional poten-
tial, which would also facilitate opening up the GBA to
international markets. Having a cultural base for GBA
integration might also emulate the success of placemak-
ing initiatives elsewhere, as EU examples have shown
(Stoffelen & Vanneste, 2017). However, the GBA de-bor-
dering experience offers a different perspective from the
European examples prevalent across the literature. For
Europe, Stoffelen and Vanneste (2017) emphasised the
importance of providing an overarching vision that
includes cultural and social aspects and building trust.
Whilst physical integration has been the major GBA
underpinning, there has been minimal attention to
developing cultural inclusivity and feelings of belonging.
This may explain the highly variable support evident for
the GBA concept between stakeholders across the
region. The currently prevalent top-down governance
may stifle the emergence of bottom-up placemaking
initiatives, and has prompted a ‘wait-and-see’approach
amongst private sector entities in real estate and enter-
tainment. City support has also been patchy, thereby
perpetuating interregional imbalances, notably
between cities in the East and West.
The (de)bordering processes linked to the GBA have
also created challenges. In the SARs, concerns remain
about losing competitive advantage versus the main-
land cities, thereby increasing regional tensions. This
also explains the deficient coordination and coherence
across regional governance and diverging city priorities.
The top-down implementation of ‘big ideas’across
China generally works well for hardware and infrastruc-
ture. However, it is less productive for culture since the
latter relies more on ‘bottom-up’organic approaches,
evident in the concept of ‘tactical placemaking’or ‘crea-
tive placemaking’. Although the SARs were seen as
helping the GBA to go global, uneven development
means that each city will need its own clear direction
and strategy to support the goal of regional develop-
ment. Combining the individual efforts of the cities
into an integrated destination development strategy
will be important, because as Ho (2020) notes: ‘Exactly
because there is a natural tendency for intercity rivalry,
it is important to remind each of the cities that
working together rather than fighting each other will
serve the best interest of all the cities in the area.’In
our view this coherence can best be developed
through the cultural governance approach described
above.
Contribution to scholarship
The current study adds value to the literature by analys-
ing (de)bordering and placemaking processes in the
unique context of the GBA. Our research shows that
the top-down placemaking approach in the Chinese
context generates different opportunities and chal-
lenges than previous studies in the EU. A top-down
approach is shown to have a number of advantages, par-
ticularly in terms of speed and the development of tan-
gible resources, but at the same time creates challenges
for stakeholder inclusion and the development of intan-
gible cultural resources. Relative to previous GBA
studies, the current investigation has given greater
attention to destination development and Richards’pla-
cemaking perspective has provided a more holistic
assessment of the challenges and opportunities.
12 B. KING ET AL.
Demand side challenges have also been considered,
notably a prospective future emphasis on domestic
versus international visitors. We have also extended
Haven-Tang and Jones’(2012) work in emphasising
place leadership as a complement to governance.
Study limitations
Much of the stakeholder sample was Hong Kong and/or
Macao-based and tourism oriented, with lesser coverage
for mainland and cultural perspectives. However, many
respondents have active GBA involvements, enabling
them to offer a tourism perspective on the complex
emerging relationship with culture. A further methodo-
logical limitation was respondent self-identification of
their levels of knowledge about the topic of interest.
Some relevant respondents may have been omitted
and others may have overestimated their level of aware-
ness. Against this, the authors ascertain their thoughtful
consideration of respondent suitability in covering key
criteria (e.g. industry subsector, government, and
private sector). A further concern stems from the assem-
bly of empirical inputs in early 2021 as the pandemic was
spreading, though before the implications were becom-
ing understood. The authors are nevertheless confident
that the findings offer meaningful guidance for the post-
pandemic period beyond the continuing limitations on
travel to and from China at the time of writing.
Opportunities for future researchers
Further investigations might provide enhanced insights
about opportunities to develop aspects of intangible
GBA culture. Events provide a prospective marketing
and promotion tool, forming connections with other
agendas such as fostering positive cultural, social and
economic impacts. Though the potential impacts of de-
bordering have mainly been addressed from a physical
perspective (e.g. the construction of new bridges and
related infrastructure), cultural impacts merit further scho-
larly consideration. Finally, attention should be paid to
recent Hong Kong initiatives to develop GBA cultural
links, connecting with the central government’slong-
range planning objectives to 2035. Our research has
also focused on the decision-makers who are already
aware of GBA developments. Future research could use-
fully also reflect on the role of grass-roots stakeholders,
particularly those in the cultural and creative sectors, in
driving bottom-up placemaking processes.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This paper and research project (Work Programme: 5-ZJLZ) are
funded by Research Grant of Hospitality and Tourism Research
Centre (HTRC Grant) of the School of Hotel and Tourism Man-
agement, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University..
Notes on contributors
Brian King is Professor and Department Head of Recreation,
Park and Tourism Sciences at Texas A&M University, USA. He
specializes in the cultural dimensions of tourism and has pub-
lished books and articles on tourism marketing, resorts, VFR
travel and Asia-Pacific tourism. He is Co-editor-in-chief of
Tourism, Culture and Communication.
Greg Richards is Professor of Placemaking and Events at Breda
University and Professor of Leisure Studies at the University of
Tilburg in The Netherlands. His recent publications include
Reinventing the Local in Tourism, Small Cities with Big
Dreams: Creative Placemaking and Branding Strategies and
Rethinking Cultural Tourism.
Angela Chu is the Lecturer of the Tourism and Languages, The
Business School at Edinburgh Napier University. Her research
interests in hospitality leadership, tourism, cruise, and
revenue management.
ORCID
Brian King http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5300-5564
Greg Richards http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5903-6310
Angela Mai Chi Chu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7875-0827
References
Beer, A., Ayres, S., Clower, T., Faller, F., Sancino, A., & Sotarauta,
M. (2019). Place leadership and regional economic develop-
ment: A framework for cross-regional analysis. Regional
Studies,53(2), 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.
2018.1447662
Bi, D., & Tian, W. (2020). The charateristics and trends of tourism
development in the guangdong-Hong Kong-macao greater
Bay area. In J. Jiang & D. Bi (Eds.), Tourism product develop-
ment in China, Asian and European countries (pp. 93–107).
Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-
4447-7
Carcary, M. (2009). The research audit trial—Enhancing trust-
worthiness in qualitative inquiry. Electronic Journal of
Business Research Methods,7(1), 11–24.
Chan, C. S., & Shek, K. F. (2021). Are guangdong-Hong Kong-
macao Bay area cities attractive to university students in
Hong Kong? Leading the potential human capital from
image perception to locational decisions. Journal of Place
Management and Development,14(4), 404–429. https://doi.
org/10.1108/JPMD-04-2020-0032
Chan, H. Y. K. (2021). Can economic integration reduce social
unrest? Evidence from China, Hong Kong and Macau.
Journal of East Asian Studies,21(3), 403–426. https://doi.
org/10.1017/jea.2021.23
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 13
Chen, X. (2022). Exploring the translation–development inter-
actions from an emergent semiotic perspective. Linguistica
Antverpiensia, New Series –Themes in Translation Studies,
21,85–105. https://doi.org/10.52034/lanstts.v21i.736
China Highlights. (2021). The Hong Kong –Zhuhai –Macau
Bridge. https://www.chinahighlights.com/hong-kong/hong-
kong-zhuhai-macau-bridge.htm.
Chinese Cultural Studies Centre. (2021). Intangible Cultural
Heritage in China. https://www.culturalheritagechina.org/.
Choi, J. N. (2021). Building a bridge over muddy waters –
Findings from a survey of HK SMEs on their understanding
of the GBA Initative. https://repository.ust.hk/ir.
Chong, Z., & Pan, S. (2020). Understanding the structure and
determinants of city network through intra-firm service
relationships: The case of guangdong-Hong Kong-macao
greater Bay area. Cities,103, 102738. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cities.2020.102738
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research:
Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory
(4th ed.). SAGE Publicaitons, Inc.
Dupre, K. (2019). Trends and gaps in place-making in the
context of urban development and tourism. Journal of
Place Management and Development,12(1), 102–120.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-07-2017-0072
Gao, J., Ryan, C., Cave, J., & Zhang, C. (2019). Tourism border-
making: A political economy of China’s border tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research,76,1–13. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.annals.2019.02.010
Gilmore, F. (2002). A country—can it be repositioned? Spain—
The success story of country branding. Journal of Brand
Management,9(4), 281–293.
Graddol, D., & Danielewicz-Betz, A. (2015). Borderland English:
Signs of transition across the expiring China–Hong Kong
border. Asian Englishes,17(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.
1080/13488678.2014.956406
Greater Bay Area –Hong Kong. (2017). Framework Agreement
on Deepening Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Cooperation
in the Development of the Greater Bay Area. https://www.
bayarea.gov.hk/en/about/overview.html.
Greater Bay Area –Hong Kong. (2019). Outline Development
Plan for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay
Area Contents. https://www.bayarea.gov.hk/filemanager/
en/share/pdf/Outline_Development_Plan.pdf.
Greater Bay Area –Hong Kong. (2020). Guangdong-Hong
Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area - Overview. https://www.
bayarea.gov.hk/en/about/overview.html.
Gugu, S., & Dal Molin, M. (2016). Collaborative local cultural
governance. Administration & Society,48(2), 237–262.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399715581037
Gunawan, J. (2015). Ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative
research. Belitung Nursing Journal,1(1), 10–11. https://doi.
org/10.33546/bnj.4
Han, S. (2018). Hong Kong-zhuhai-macao bridge artificial island
port. ArchDaily.Com. https://www.archdaily.com/905074/
hong-kong-zhuhai-macao-bridge-artificial-island-port-ecadi.
Hankinson, G. (2009). Managing destination brands: establish-
ing a theoretical foundation. Journal of Marketing
Management,25(1-2), 97–115.
Hardy, A. (2005). Using grounded theory to explore
stakeholder perceptions of tourism. Journal of Tourism and
Cultural Change,3(2), 108–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09669580508668490
Haven-Tang, C., & Jones, E. (2012). Local leadership for rural
tourism development: A case study of adventa, monmouth-
shire, UK. Tourism Management Perspectives,4,28–35.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2012.04.006
Henderson, J. C. (2001). Regionlisation and tourism: The
Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore growth triangle. Current
Issues in Tourism,4(2-4), 78–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/
13683500108667883
Hong Kong Tourist Board (HKTB). (2020). 2019 hk tourism stat-
istics. HKTB
Ho, L. S. (2020). Greater Bay Area: A market-driven plan to
enhance quality of life and development. Asian Education
and Development Studies,9(3), 287–295.
Hong Kong 2003 –Travel and Tourism. (2003). HK Government
Yearbook. https://www.yearbook.gov.hk/2003/english/
chapter15/15_00.html.
Hong Kong Government Information Centre. (2021). One country,
two systems. https://www.info.gov.hk/info/sar5/e12.htm.
Hornskov, S.B. (2014). The authenticity challenge. In N. Morgan,
A. Pritchard & R. Pride (Eds.), Destination brands: Managing
place reputation (3rd ed., pp. 105–116). Routledge-Taylor &
Francis Group.
Hospers, G. J. (2006). Borders, bridges and branding: The trans-
formation of the Øresund region into an imagined space.
European Planning Studies,14(8), 1015–1033. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09654310600852340
Hu, X., & Hassink, R. (2017). Place leadership with Chinese
characteristics? A case study of the zaozhuang coal-mining
region in transition. Regional Studies,51(2), 224–234.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2016.1200189
Huang, K., & Liu, Y. (2023). The embeddedness and hidden political
economy of the world heritage site inscription boom in China.
Growth and Change.https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12665
Huang, X., Xu, H., & Li, X. R. (2022). Spatial development of two
villages: Bordering, debordering, and rebordering in a com-
munity scenic area. Annals of Tourism Research,93, 103370.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2022.103370
Hui, E. C. M., Li, X., Chen, T., & Lang, W. (2020). Deciphering
the spatial structure of China’s megacity region: A new
bay area—The guangdong-Hong Kong-macao greater Bay
area in the making. Cities,105, 102168. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.cities.2018.10.011
Hultman, J., & Hall, C. M. (2012). Tourism place-making. Annals
of Tourism Research,39(2), 547–570. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.annals.2011.07.001
Kaijun, W. (2016). Research on brand competitiveness of pro-
vincial tourism destinations in mainland China—A visual
perspective of world-class and national scenic spot brands.
Economics & Management Journal,38(06|6), 154–165.
Kan, F. (2022). Study on coupling and coordinated develop-
ment of regional tourism industry and new-type urbaniz-
ation using entropy method: A case study of Guangdong-
Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area. DOI:10.21203/rs.3.rs-
2233291/v1
Kirillova, K., Park, J., Zhu, M., Dioko, L. (Don), & Zeng, G. (2020).
Developing the coopetitive destination brand for the
greater Bay area. Journal of Destination Marketing &
Management,17(5), 100439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jdmm.2020.100439
Hong Kong SAR. (2022). Proposed Culture, Sports and Tourism
Bureau. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202201/26/
P2022012600270.htm.
14 B. KING ET AL.
Hong,W.C.H.,Ngan,H.F.B.,Yu,J.,&Zhao,Y.(2022). An eye-track-
ing study of exoticism in intra-national destinations in the
Greater Bay area of China, Tourism Recreation Research,47(4),
414–427, https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2020.1846431
KPMG. (2018). Connecting opportunities in the greater Bay area.
Hong Kong. https://kpmg.com/cn/en/home/insights/2018/
11/connecting-opportunities-in-the-greater-bay-area.html.
Lei,W.S.,Chen,Z.,Zhou,X.,&King,B.E.M.(2022). Organic des-
tination imagery and social media: Mapping tourism dynamics
across China’s greater Bay area cities. Journal of China Tourism
Research,https://doi.org/10.1080/19388160.2022.2047857
Lew, A. A. (2017). Tourism planning and place making: Place-
making or placemaking? Tourism Geographies,19(3), 448–
466. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2017.1282007
Li, X., Gong, J., Gao, B., & Yuan, P. (2021). Impacts of COVID-19
on tourists’destination preferences: Evidence from China.
Annals of Tourism Research,90, 103258.
Li, C., Ng, M. K., Tang, Y., & Fung, T. (2022). From a ‘world factor-
y’to China’s Bay area: a review of the outline of the develop-
ment plan for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao greater
Bay area. Planning Theory & Practice,23(2), 310–314.
Liu, J., & Shi, W. (2021). A cross-boundary travel tale: Unraveling
Hong Kong residents’mobility pattern in Shenzhen by using
metro smart card data. Applied Geography, (December 2020),
102416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2021.102416
Lu, H., de Jong, M., & Chen, Y. (2017). Economic city branding in
China: The multi-level governance of municipal self-pro-
motion in the greater pearl river delta. Sustainability,9(4),
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040496
Luo, M. (2021). Research on the joint development of cities of
guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau greater Bay area: A case
study of foshan city. Proceedings of Business and Economic
Studies,4(5), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.26689/pbes.v4i5.2604
Luo, X., & Huang, Y. (2023). A cultural turn in urban governance:
Cultural practices of governance in the guangdong-Hong
Kong-Macau greater Bay area. International Journal of
Cultural Policy,29(2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10286632.2022.2028781
Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2020). Macao Top 10
Visitor –2019 Source Markets. In Macao Government
Tourism Office. https://dataplus.macaotourism.gov.mo/
Publication/Report?lang = E.
Macao Trade and Investment Promotion Institute. (2021).
Welcome to Hengqin New Area. https://www.ipim.gov.mo/
en/welcome-to-hengqin-new-area/.
Meulbroek, C., Peck, J., & Zhang, J. (2022). Bayspeak: Narrating
China’s greater Bay area. Journal of Contemporary Asia,53(1),
95–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2021.1998579
Ong, C. E., & Liu, Y. (2022). State-directed tourism urbanisation
in China’s Hengqin. Annals of Tourism Research, 94, 103379.
Palermo, P.C., & Ponzini, D. (2015). Place-making and Urban
Development: New Challenges for Planning and Design.
Routledge.
Park, J., Tse, S., Mi, S. D., & Song, H. (2022). A model for cross-
border tourism governance in the greater Bay area.
Journal of China Tourism Research,18(6), 1259–1283.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19388160.2022.2036664
Priatmoko, S., Kabil, M., Vasa, L., Pallás, E. I., & Dávid, L. D. (2021).
Reviving an unpopular tourism destination through the pla-
cemaking approach: Case study of ngawen temple,
Indonesia. Sustainability,13(12), 6704. https://doi.org/10.
3390/su13126704
Prideaux , B., & Cooper, C. (2002). "Marketing and Destination
Growth: A symbiotic relationship or simple coincidence".
Journal of Vacation Marketing ,9(1), 35–51.
Razali, M. K., & Ismail, H. N. (2014). Tourism place-making at
tourism destination from a concept of governance.
International Journal of Ecology and Development,30(3), 88–97.
Richards, G. (2020). Designing creative places: The role of creative
tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,85(November 2019),
102922. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102922
Richards, G., & Duif, L. (2019). Small cities with Big dreams:
Creative placemaking and branding strategies. Routledge.
Shen, J. (2003). Cross-border connection between Hong Kong
and mainland China under ‘two systems’before and beyond
1997. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography,85(1),
1–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0467.00127
Stoffelen, A., & Vanneste, D. (2017). Tourism and cross-border
regional development: Insights in European contexts.
European Planning Studies,25(6), 1013–1033. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1291585
Timothy, D. J., Saarinen, J., & Viken, A. (2016). Editorial: Tourism
issues and international borders in the Nordic Region.
Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism,16(sup1),
1–13.
UNESCO. (2021). China - UNESCO World Heritage Centre.
http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/cn https://doi.org/
10.1080/15022250.2016.1244504.
Wan, P. Y. K. (2013). A comparison of the governance of tourism
planning in the two special administrative regions (SARs) of
China –Hong Kong and macao. Tourism Management,36,
164–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.12.005
Więckowski, M., & Timothy, D. J. (2021). Tourism and an evol-
ving international boundary: Bordering, debordering and
rebordering on usedom island, Poland-Germany. Journal of
Destination Marketing & Management,22.https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jdmm.2021.100647
Xie, A., Liu, L., & Qin, L. (2021). Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation
of happiness index of nine cities in pearl river delta based on
AHP. Journal of Mathematics, 7732095. https://doi.org/10.
1155/2021/7732095
Yang, C. (2006). The pearl river delta and Hong Kong: An evol-
ving cross-boundary region under “one country, two
systems”.Habitat International,30(1), 61–86. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2004.06.004
Yang, L., & Yu, L. (2020). A study on the evaluation of urban
tourism competitiveness in guangdong-Hong Kong-macao
greater Bay area. IOP Conference Series: Earth and
Environmental Science,526(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1755-1315/526/1/012059
Zhao, M., Liang, W., Xu, G., & Li, Z. (2019). Urban networks of
leisure activities: Using douban event to measure interaction
in the megacity region of the pearl river delta. In X. Ye & X.
Liu (Eds.), Cities as spatial and social networks (pp. 165–189).
Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-319-95351-9_10
Zheng, Q., Kuang, Y., & Huang, N. (2016). Coordinated develop-
ment between urban tourism economy and transport in the
pearl river delta, people’s republic of China. Sustainability,8
(12), https://doi.org/10.3390/su8121338
Zhou, Q. B., Zhang, J., Zhang, H., & Li, X. R. (2018). Is all authen-
ticity accepted by tourists and residents? The concept,
dimensions and formation mechanism of negative authen-
ticity. Tourism Management,67,59–70.
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH 15
