Following is the first in a series of interviews with world’s top designers and scholars who will participate in the Herald Design Forum in Seoul from Oct. 5 to Oct. 6. ― Ed.

Korea must seek to improve its image through actions, and not words, nation-branding specialist Simon Anholt says.

Anholt, who coined the term “nation brand” in 1998, is one of the world’s foremost experts in nation-branding and has served in advisory roles for a number of governments on related issues.

In an email interview, Anholt said that while Korea and Seoul are handling matters regarding their brands relatively well, a country’s image is most effectively improved when it is being “useful to humanity,” unless the country has a positive image built up over many generations.

He said that while Korea has come a long way in terms of nation-branding, a nation’s image is a “deeply-rooted cultural phenomenon” that requires generations to change.

Anholt also points to the need for a coordinated effort that encompasses a wide range of elements for Korea to build the reputation in the international community it desires. These include effective diplomacy, quality exports of goods and services, cultural relations and responsible foreign policy.

Q: The South Korean government has put lots of effort into promoting a positive image of the country worldwide since the inauguration of President Lee Myung-bak. What do you think of South Korea’s global image?

A: What I personally think about South Korea’s image isn’t nearly as interesting as what international public opinion thinks! According to my annual survey, the Anholt-GfK Roper Nation Brands IndexSM, which represents the opinions of nearly 70 percent of the world’s population, Korea is gradually rising up the ranking, and is approaching the top half of the list of 50 countries in the index. The improvement may seem very slow, but you should remember that national image is a very deeply rooted cultural phenomenon. There are nearly 200 countries in the world, and most people never think about any of them, so it’s not surprising if they don’t change their minds about Korea ― or anywhere else ― very easily.

Q: Please explain as specifically as possible how the nation or city brands that you planned were born. You are known to have participated in the nation-branding of the U.K. In what direction did you build and promote it?

A: I originally coined the term “nation brand” in an article in 1998 and have been working to develop the field ever since. I have been involved in U.K. public diplomacy for over 20 years, sitting on the Foreign Office Public Diplomacy Board. This has nothing much to do with promoting the image of the U.K. and is more about using various “soft power” instruments to carry out our foreign policy objectives. During the last 15 years I have advised the Heads of State, Heads of Government and governments of more than 40 other countries on questions relating to economic competitiveness, investment and tourism promotion, cultural and diplomatic relations, major events, exports, security and education. National image and reputation is just one small part of my work.

Q: What is the relationship between nation-branding and design? How much weight does design have in nation-branding?

A: I think that many people misunderstood what I originally meant by the term “brand” in this context. “Branding” in the commercial context is about logos, slogans and corporate identity: I don’t think this has anything to do with a nation’s image. When I used the word “brand” I was referring to the nation’s brand image: in other words, its international reputation or standing. I wasn’t talking about packaging or communications or logos or advertising campaigns.

A country’s creative industries, including design, can play an important role in helping that country to engage productively and usefully with people in other countries, and that certainly helps the country’s image to improve. Design partly determines the attractiveness of a country’s consumer products and of course exported products are among the most powerful “ambassadors” for any country, as Japan and Germany showed in the second half of the twentieth century. And the way that cities are designed can certainly play a major part in making them more attractive to tourists and foreign investors.

Q: Which countries or cities do you think have succeeded in building nation or city brands? What are their characteristics and what do they have in common?

A: The countries with the most powerful and positive reputations have either been powerful and influential for many generations, or else they have proved more recently that they can contribute in a tangible way to the international community. In other words, a country either inherits a positive reputation from its past, because it is part of the global culture, or else it earns a new reputation by making itself useful to humanity.

Q: Is there any country whose brand value fails to match its economic might? If so, what are the reasons for its failure to manage its image as a nation?

A: Being rich and successful does not guarantee a positive image, and Korea is a good example of this. A country’s economic or social success is generally of no interest or relevance to people in other countries: if you want people in other countries to admire you, you have to do something for them. Instead of asking itself “what can we say to make Korea more famous,” a better question for Korea to ask is “what can we do to make Korea relevant?”

Q: Do you think that South Korea and Seoul do a good job of managing their nation or city brands? If you think they leave something to be desired, what points should they improve?

A: Better than most! Korea is one of the few countries which seem to have understood that simply shouting about how wonderful it is won’t change anything. The key to national standing is engagement with other governments and other populations: this is a very different thing from promotion.

Q: What does it take to build an effective image of a nation? Do you have the know-how to build an effective and positive image of a nation quickly?

A: Countries are judged by what they do and what they make, not by what they say about themselves, and it takes time to earn that reputation. Only one thing can change a nation’s image quickly, and that is having a charismatic leader who provides international leadership: Mandela, Lula, Obama and Churchill. Otherwise, it takes decades and generations, and unfortunately elected governments aren’t usually that patient!

The ingredients of good reputation are the same as the ingredients of positive international engagement: effective public and private diplomacy, quality exports of goods and services, vigorous and mutual cultural relations, responsible foreign policy, effective and principled multilateral engagement, sustainable tourism promotion, foreign direct investment promotion, talent attraction, major events, enlightened and generous overseas aid and development, sustainability. If Korea does all of these things to world-class standards, and in a harmonized and coordinated way, it will soon build its reputation.

Q: In what direction would you like the Herald Design Forum to go?

A: I would like it to be realistic about the limitations of design to impact national image, and to understand that image is much more the consequence of policy than of communications. But it can play a significant role in pointing out the importance of design to quality of life, which is equally important.

By Choi He-suk  (cheesuk@heraldcorp.com)