Rural Rebranding

How successful has rebranding been in the Countryside?

The case study I have studied in relation to this topic is Cornwall.

What kinds of solutions do we witness in Cornwall?

  1. Rural tourism which is promoted by the media and ‘image’ of the place. Cornwall has tried to create a very ‘green’ and ‘food’ image. The media has promoted this by continually discussing the importance of being one with nature and that the ‘green’ way is the way forward.
  2. The countryside traditionally would have limited technology hence why in the past many people young people moved to the city. Now though places like Cornwall are just as technologically advanced as cities; modern houses were built and many hi-tech gadgets can be brought there. However, the quaternary sector is not as big in the countryside as it is in cities.Therefore, people still move to the city to get these specialist jobs.
  3. Many rural places have opened their own tourist attraction to bring in destination tourists. The rural town of Cornwall has their own enterprise e.g. the Eden Project which brings in over 1 million tourists a year.
  4. Adding value locally is the concept of making a place better and more prosperous. For example if more bins were added less litter would be on the floor and this would be an example of value added locally.
  5. Rural diversification in the past-production countryside includes farm diversification etc. Farm diversification is the process where by farms integrate into other industries as farming is not enough to keep a stable income. An example of this Lobb’s Farm Shop in cornwall which is now the second most visited attraction after the Eden Project. It offers visitors to purchase local produce, take tour  of the farm, an information centre and much more.

What methods can take place to investigate the success of rebranding?

  1. Oral histories/interviews – local residents and key players are interviewed and they help tell us about the history of a place and compare the past to the present. They can be recorder on electronic devices and analysed later. The one problem with this is that what people say will not be accurate and will be bias.
  2. Maps (goad, GIS etc.) – they can help us get an accurate image of what the place was like before and what it is like now. We can compare these to see if rebranding has been successful. However, it is not always possible yo get hold of historic maps.
  3. Visitor surveys – rebranding has a lot of influence on tourism; hence, visitor surveys allow us to get an idea whether it has been successful i.e. improved and increased tourism. Questions in the survey can be closed which is good for statistical analysis.
  4. Sphere of influence allows us to examine where rebranding has been most successful and when we see the results,we can make judgements on whether that is because rebranding has had some effect or not.
  5. Activity maps (inc. footfalls) help us see the economic activity in areas. Comparing footfall results from the past help us see whether rebranding has had an impact on economic activity. In theory economic activity should have increased.
  6. Questionnaires – these can be given to local residents, land owners, business owners etc. They help us get a clear idea that the people who rebranding has happened for, are they happy with it. Using closed question can allow us to statistically analyse data.
  7. ACORN and CAMEO are geo-demographic database which have quantitative data in relation to things like footfall. These data base allow us to see what changes has rebranding made to statistic e.g. number of people employed.
  8. Brochures and adverts – looking at these types of sources means we can see how the image of an area has changed. and looking at statistics like number of visitors allows us to see how successful rebranding has been at drawing in people.

Law, History & Equity

This post will explore a bit about equity…

First the definition of ‘Equity’ is this: a source of law based on principles of fairness and natural justice.

Historically, the King of England would oversee and resolve disputes. You could only take a dispute to the King if you purchased a writ and over time these writs become fixed and inflexible and only parliament could supply them. It was the Provisions of Oxford 1258 that restricted the availability of writs. This rigidity and lack of remedies (for example only  damages were the outcome of going to court) forced people to petition to the King for natural justice. The petitions were given to the Chancellor to manage as it was the chancellor who was believed to be the conscience of the King. The petitions usually had one of the four allegations: (i) common-law is defective; (ii) the remedy of the court, damages, was not satisfactory and inadequate; (iii) the defendant was too powerful, unequal bargaining power existed and; (iv) court lack jurisdiction where non-domestic people where involved like foreign traders.Given the mass of petitions that were received, the chancellor created a court, Court of Chancery, to resolve these issues by applying flexible customary rules.

At first the chancery court was very unpredictable as it didn’t follow any basis of law, just merely the chancellor’s judgement and eventually these did form a precedent but anyway between 1673-1828 guidelines were prescribed and these were known as equitable maxims. Examples of equitable maxims include: (i) He who comes to equity must come with clean hands i.e.should not be trying to use equity for unfair and unjust reasons e.g. D&C Builders v Rees [1966] 2 QB 617; (ii) Equity looks at intention not the form i.e. equity will look at what intention has the person come here with not what they have done or history etc; and (iii) He who seeks equity must do equity i.e. equity must apply both ways its a kind of negotiation e.g. Chappell v Times Newspapers [1975] 1 WLR 482.

Examples of equitable remedies include: (i) specific performance so to compel a party to fulfill their contractual obligation e.g. Beswick v Beswick [1967] 2 All ER 1197; (ii) rescission so a resolution that brings the parties as far away as possible from original contractual position e.g. Redgrave v Hurd (1881) LR 20 ChD 1; and (iii) injunction so to cease a party from doing certain acts e.g. Lumley v Wagner [1843-60] All ER 814.

The Chancery court was successful in fulfilling its purpose of dispute settlement. However, there were conflicts with the regular Common law courts, outcomes were unpredictable and it suddenly had also had president over where common law and equity clashed. The King clearly stated the president of equity in the Earl of Oxford’s case (1615) 1 REP Ch 1 where the chancery court found the common law courts to have committed fraud and they put an injunction on the common law court. This dissatisfaction caused by the Chancery Court can be seen in comments such as ‘equity varies with the length of the chancellor’s foot’ (John Seldon, jurist). So Parliament put an end to this in 1873-1875 by creating the Judicature Act which stated that it the common law courts’ responsibility both to practice equity as well as common law reasoning. This tension between two sets of laws even in the one court has given scope for judicial creativity for making law.

It is important to note that equity itself is not a self-sufficient system, as Maitland says it is a ‘gloss’ on the common-law system, bettering the defects of common law. It is also important for studying precedent because it shows the value and need of precedent. Precedent which is a form of equity has been created to rectify some of issues and hardships associated with a common law system.