Can numbers tell the story? An investigation on the impact of three place branding and marketing campaigns 2003–2019 on the attraction of new residents to the Isle of Man

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of three place branding and marketing campaigns conducted by the Isle of Man (IoM) government between 2003 and 2019. Using archival data from the IoM Census and data on the taxpayers in the IoM, research analyses the fluctuation on the number of residents relocating to and from the IoM during the period covered by the campaigns and tries to establish whether any changes can be attributed to the campaigns. Findings suggest that the residents’ numbers increased during two of the three campaigns; however, full causality cannot be confirmed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41254-023-00303-8.

Research question

How effective were the three place branding and marketing campaigns, 2003–2019, on the attraction of the residents in the Isle of Man?

Aims of the research

This study aims to:

1. Investigate the fluctuation of the residents numbers in the Isle of Man during the period 2003–2019

2. Identify whether the three place branding and marketing campaigns conducted between 2003—2019 had any impacts on the attraction of residents to relocate to the Isle of Man

Background

The Isle of Man (IoM) is a small island located in the Irish sea, in relatively close proximity to England, Scotland, Wales and both Northern and the Republic of Ireland. As an independent Crown Dependency of the British Crown, the IoM has its own parliament, the Tynwald, and its own government. The IoM was historically a well-regarded holiday destination for British tourists. However, towards the 70 s and later, when British tourists chose to holiday in the Mediterranean instead, the drastic drop in tourists’ numbers prompted the IoM government to find other ways to prosper the Island’s economy (Kelly 1999, p. 327–328). A number of important political decisions in the 60 s and 70 s paved the way for the transformation of the Manx economy, focusing by then into the banking and finance sector (Winterbottom 2007, p. 187–190). By 2015, the IoM Government reported an unbroken 32 years of growth of the Manx economy (Economic Affairs Cabinet Office 2017). Using taxation policies and rates far lower than the UK not only served as an attraction for offshore banking and financial services but at the same time gained the Island the reputation of tax haven.

The relocation of businesses brought the relocation of many people working in the banking and finance sector. Figures (Kelly 1999, p. 327; Statistics Isle of Man and Cabinet Office 2022), show that the IoM population has fluctuated at around 50,000 residents from 1821 until 1971, and from then on the population has steadily increased to approximately 84,000 in 2021, as shown in Fig. 1. Considering a tendency of “naturally declining population” (Kelly 1999, p. 325), it is not surprising to notice in the IoM 2021 Census that only 49% of the IoM population are born in the IoM, which appeared to have been the case for many decades (Boyle 1999, p. 320), thus highlighting the importance of maintaining a constant flow of new residents relocating to the Island.

Fig. 1.

(Kelly 1999; Statistics Isle of Man and Cabinet Office 2022). 1921 figures are an anomaly as visitor numbers were included in the census (Kelly 1999)

Census numbers in Fig. 1 show that the efforts to attract people to relocate would appear to have been successful and Kelly (1999, p. 334) reports that the increase of population in the late 80 s was accompanied by an unprecedented national income growth.

However, post-2000, the population increase together with the economic development brought a number of new issues for the IoM government, the most significant being the ageing population. Firstly, in the early 2010s, the IoM had a higher than average proportion of aged population with worrying predictions for the decades to come (Isle of Man Government 2013). Secondly, the increase of the aged population was accompanied by a big deficit in the public sector pensions fund (Cabinet Office 2016). Thirdly, right at the same time, changes in the VAT exchange agreement with the UK brought a significant reduction in the income received by the IoM (BBC News 2011). It appeared that the solution for the IoM government was the increase of population, and this time the focus was on businesses and experts (Isle of Man Government 2017). In an interview with Hon. Lawrence Skelly, Minister for the Department of Enterprise 2017–2021 (personal communications March 4, 2019), it was confirmed that the aim was to increase the population, but the government had not set any limits for the population increase, rather the aim was a wide range of talented people from different sectors, especially IT.

Supporting the efforts in attracting people and businesses to relocate, according to Kelly (1999, p. 333), “new residents campaigns” have been a continuous feature in the IoM government’s activity over many decades; however, no information could be located to even identify their existence. In other research (Clements 2020), it was identified that the IoM government undertook three place branding campaigns spanning between 2003 and 2019. Despite investment by the government, no data were collected after two of the first campaigns (confirmed in personal communications with Department for Enterprise and Cabinet Office in 2017), whilst the third is still ongoing, making evaluation of their success almost impossible. The lack of information on the campaigns served as a reason to explore any possible ways that could shed light on the impacts these three place branding and marketing campaigns might have had on the process of attracting people to relocate to the IoM. However, the first question raised was what kind of data would be appropriate to collect in order to evaluate the success or failure of a place branding and marketing campaign? Therefore, a brief review of the academic literature on the impacts of place branding and its evaluation would help deepen the understanding of the place branding process and guide the data analysis.

Literature review

This literature review opens with a brief introduction of the Place Branding and Marketing field of studies. It continues with a discussion on the impacts of place branding and place marketing processes and the models and frameworks that can assist to build place branding strategy. This section concludes with identification of various measures and tools that place branding practitioners use to evaluate the success of the campaigns.

Place branding as process, in some shape or form has been present long before any formal academic focus was placed on it (Green et al. 2016, p. 257), with places having brands with or without any intentional efforts. However, it was only in the last two decades that place branding has become a “standard practice” (Green et al. 2016, p. 260) tool in the competition for resources, talent, FDIs (foreign direct investments) and businesses. At the same time Place Branding and Marketing as an interdisciplinary area of research, has gained a lot of traction in the last 20 years with extensive research in different aspects, an academic journal—Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, and the regular academic conferences organized by the International Place Branding Association (IPBA).

Despite disagreements in place branding purpose and application (Aronczyk 2008; Jansen 2008; Olins 2002; Anholt 2008; Kotler and Gertner 2002; Kavaratzis and Hatch 2013), both academics and practitioners concur in the fact that place branding practice plays an important role and can have significant impacts on places. Place branding and marketing are used to improve place reputation which in turn can play a very important role in achievement of political and economic goals (Porter 1990, p. 2000; van Ham 2008).

A number of frameworks and models, which could be used as strategic and tactical tools in place branding, have been introduced by different authors (Anholt 2006; Bose et al. 2016; Botschen et al. 2017; Donner et al. 2014; Jacobsen 2012; Rojas-Méndez 2013; Zenker 2011, 2014; Zenker and Martin 2011). However, except for Anholt’s various indices, which rank nations and cities on regular basis (Anholt 2006; Ipsos 2019) and the place brand equity concept (Jacobsen 2012; Govers 2013; Papadopoulos and Heslop 2002; Donner et al. 2014; Konecnik and Gartner 2007; Zenker 2014; Bose et al. 2016), the majority of the methods suggested in various studies are lacking wider testing and application. This does not imply lack of rigour in the place branding as a process, rather the practitioners are using any tools or strategies that they consider apt in the particular circumstances, frequently borrowed from corporate branding and marketing (Bell 2016; Olins 2002; Kavaratzis and Ashworth 2005; Kotler and Gertner 2002; Zenker and Martin 2011). Examples of these strategies in place branding and marketing campaigns have been presented in a number of case studies and discussions in books such as Dinnie’s (2008) “Nation branding concepts, issues and practice”, Kaefer’s (2021) book “An insider’s guide to place branding”, and numerous case studies published in various academic publications. However, as Kaefer (2021, p. 30) concludes, “measuring the effectiveness of place branding can be tricky due to its complexity, the many stakeholders involved and the difficulty to prove the causality between your activities and changes in performance”.

A very important factor in the area of place branding and marketing is the fact that the terms place branding and place marketing are frequently used interchangeably or confused with one another. Boisen et al. (2018, p. 5) clarify that place branding, place marketing and place promotion are three different concepts and processes as shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Organizational aspects of place promotion, place marketing and place branding (Boisen et al., 2018, p. 9)

As such, place branding, place marketing and place promotion deal with different issues, therefore, they have different goals and different metrics of measure (Boisen et al. 2018, 8), as shown in Fig. 3; however, they are closely interconnected.

Fig. 3.

Place promotion, place marketing, place branding and place development (Boisen et al. 2018, p. 8)

Boisen et al. (2018, p. 7) insist that the success of place branding is reflected in the positive reputation of the place and as such it should be measured within the affective domain, unlike place marketing and place promotion which should be measured respectively within conative and cognitive domains. As place branding deals with place reputation management, it is paramount that place branding is treated as a high road policy (Cleave et al. 2016; Gertner 2007; Jones and Kubacki 2014), which requires buy-in from all stakeholders (Kaefer 2021, p. 30) and should never be reduced to logos and slogans (Govers 2013; Anholt 2008).

Kaefer (2021, p. 30) suggests that one of the ways to measure the success of the place branding campaigns could be by using quantitative measures such as investments, number of people moving in and benchmarking against previous performance; however, quantitative measures should be complemented by qualitative measures which would give a comprehensive view of the overall performance. Hereźniak et al. (2018, p. 38) suggest that measuring the effectiveness of place branding will depend on the perspective taken, for example an outward perspective would make use of various indices such as Anholt brand indices, whilst a public management perspective would be focused on achievement of KPIs and budgetary controls. The Place Brand Observer (TPBO) website lists a number of measures that various panels of experts suggest would assist practitioners to evaluate place branding (TPBO 2022) such as: the number of long-term settled residents, increased business activity, satisfaction surveys or interviews et cetera.

Considering the various indicators suggested by the literature and the data readily available from different sources in the IoM, an investigation on the fluctuations of the number of people relocating to and from the IoM and whether there is any correlation or coincidence with the branding campaigns conducted by the IoM government was deemed as a possible pathway to provide an indication on the success or not of some of these place branding and marketing campaigns. An important consideration was the fact that, whilst the IoM government has conducted many branding and marketing campaigns over the years in some shape or form, it would be feasible to focus the study only in the last three place branding and marketing campaigns from 2003 until 2019.

Methodology

This study adopts a pragmatic philosophical approach, because the focus and the value of the study is placed upon the practicality of the findings rather than theory building (Saunders and Tosey 2013, p. 58). As a result, the archival research strategy was considered suitable because it offers the opportunity for longitudinal and subset data analysis, whilst using high quality data at relatively minimal cost (Bryman and Bell 2011). Using a monomethod data collection, three different sources of secondary quantitative data were exploited: (a) IoM census 2021 and the IoM government report “IoM in numbers” which contains data from 2016 Census, (b) IoM government accounts, (c) data on taxpayers’ numbers in the IoM obtained from the IoM Treasury.

Census data from the IoM Census 2021 and IoM government accounts are readily available on line in the IoM government’s website under the respective URLs: https://www.gov.im/census and https://www.gov.im/categories/tax-vat-and-your-money/government-accounts/. In addition, the IoM government has published a wide range of data under the report “IoM in numbers 2021 Open Data” which is also readily available on line in IoM government’s website under the URL: https://www.gov.im/news/2021/aug/02/isle-of-man-in-numbers-2021/.

All reports contain a great number of statistical data related to various aspects of life in the IoM. “OGL—All content is available under the Open Government Licence, except where otherwise stated” (Isle of Man Government 2022a) at the bottom of the website implies permission on the use of the content “freely and flexibly with only few conditions”, which relate to personal data and information on third parties (Isle of Man Government 2022b). This research contains no personal data or third party information.

Whilst the census gives a relatively accurate overview of changes in the number of residents over long periods of time (for example every 5 years), these figures represent only a snapshot of situation on the days that the census data are collected. Below this high level, it is difficult to see with accuracy what happens. Furthermore, the IoM’s close proximity with the UK and Ireland and the unrestricted movement of citizens between places, make it difficult to accurately identify the number of people relocating to and from the IoM. Therefore, the closest figure that could provide a relatively accurate insight was considered the fluctuation in the number of taxpayers, considering that according to Income Tax Act 1970, Section 10, every citizen residing in the IoM for a continuous period of 6 months with intent to establish residence is liable to pay income tax (Isle of Man Government 1970). For this reason a Request for Disclosure of Information under the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information was submitted to the Treasury Department of the IoM government in May 2022 (ref: 2431437). This request provided data on the number of the taxpayers that had relocated to and from the IoM for the last 20 years. This period covers the time span of the three branding campaigns selected. The characteristics of data requested from the Treasury (specifically the Income Tax Division) were:

1. The number of taxpayers arriving in the IoM every year between 2000 and 2022, by age groups (excluding returning Manx students)

2. The number of taxpayers leaving the IoM every year between 2000 and 2022, by age groups (excluding returning Manx students)

   • c.
     The average length of stay in the IoM of the people leaving the Island by age groups

Data from all sources were analysed using univariate/bivariate analysis and frequency tables and are displayed by charts and tables.

Findings and discussion

The three place branding campaigns under study are: “Freedom to flourish” campaign, which initiated in 2003, “The IoM where you can” campaign in 2011, and “Our Island: a special place to live and work” in 2017.

In 2003, a Steering Committee, composed of representatives from different stakeholder groups in the IoM including head of government and various government ministers, started working on the “Freedom to flourish” campaign. In conjunction with consultancies Acanchi and HPI, the Steering Committee presented a detailed plan and budget of the place branding campaign to the Tynwald (the IoM Parliament) (Steering Committee et al. 2006). The main aim of this campaign was: “To help the Isle of Man (IOM) enhance its unique identity and social cohesion, and generate continued strong economic growth” (Steering Committee et al. 2006, p.3), suggesting that the aim would be first to create a good place for residents, which in itself would present an attractive proposition to external targets. However, the elections followed by a change of government in 2006, caused the campaign to be side-lined and later abandoned due to lack of buy-in from the politicians and the new government (Clements 2020; Mackrell 2013), a chronic problem for place branding campaigns, which are very much dependent on political changes (Alaux et al. 2015, p. 63). According to Prof. Davidson, Chairman of the Steering Committee, (personal interview, September 2019) it appeared difficult for the politicians to explain to their voters the use of the money budgeted for the campaign, which was £500,000 at the time (Steering Committee, Acanchi, and HPI 2006). Despite the “Freedom to flourish” being pushed aside in 2006, a number of events happened in the IoM under this tag line between 2003 and 2006, and a few continue nowadays, such as the annual IoM Newspapers Awards for Excellence (IoM Newspapers Ltd n.d.).

However, the government continued to invest heavily in marketing, considering the expenditure across government in the following years, as it can be seen in the chart below. It is evident that perhaps in 2006 the government did not appreciate the importance of branding and marketing, but it appears that what might have happened has had such a profound impact to more than quadruple the yearly expenditure between 2007 and 2010 (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4.

Expenditure in marketing 2006-2019 (Source data: Isle of Man Government, 2022a)

Despite several requests in both the Department for Enterprise and the Cabinet Office in 2018, no plans, objectives, budgets or post-campaign data were available for the last two campaigns, “IoM where you can” 2011 and “Our Island, a special place to live and work” 2017. Whether these campaigns had any plans laid out before start, it can only be speculated; however, their outcomes have not been reported anywhere.

Turning to the numbers from different data sources, it is evident that the census data show a significant overall increase of the IoM population post-2001 until 2011 (as shown in Fig. 1).

At face value, it looks that the “Freedom to flourish”, which started in 2003, might have had an impact in attracting people to relocate, whilst the other two campaigns, “The Isle of Man, where you can” and “Our Island, a special place to live and work”, might not have brought the desired impact. However, as Kaefer (2021, 30) suggests, it is difficult to connect cause and effect in place branding initiatives.

According to the 2021 Census, only 49% of the IoM population were born in the IoM, which by a very slight percentage are a minority. Boyle (1999, P. 320) confirms that this has been the case since 1991, where for the first time the non-IoM born population crossed the 50% mark. The 51% of the residents relocated to the IoM over the years are shown in Table 1. However, it should be noted that the figure for 2016–2021 covers only a period of 5 years, whereas other figures relate to a ten-year period.

Table 1.

Time of relocation of the current residents, not born in the IoM, (Statistics Isle of Man and Cabinet Office, 2022)

Before 1956	642
1956–1965	1027
1966–1975	3934
1976–1985	4162
1986–1995	7284
1996–2005	10,286
2006–2015	8696
2016–2021	6782

As it can be seen from Table 1, it appears that the biggest influx occurred between 1996 and 2005, or perhaps from the people that have relocated over the years, the highest number of people who decided to stay in the IoM belongs to this decade. However, it is difficult to deduce from these numbers the real case. Therefore, zooming in into the last 20 years would help to clarify the picture.

The figures generated by the Income Tax division of the IoM Treasury (Fig. 5), show only the number of the taxpayers who have taken or given up residence between 2000 and 2021. This is not to be confused with census figures which include the entire population of the IoM. With exception of the last three years, 2019–2021, which relate to the Covid 19 pandemic period and represent a picture influenced by uncontrollable factors, the rest of the numbers reflect a major decline. Whilst efforts are constantly made through place branding campaigns to attract talented people to relocate and taxpayers’ money is spent in place branding and marketing, there is a constant flow of people leaving the IoM. In 2013, the number of people who came to the IoM was equal to the number of people who left.

Fig. 5.

Movement of taxpayer residents between 2000 and 2021

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

In terms of the turnover of the residents (%), it appears that in 2003 the turnover rate crossed the 60% level, stabilizing at this level for the next few years until a drastic jump in 2009 at above 80%, where it stayed until 2016 (Fig. 6).

Fig. 6.

Turnover of the residents (number of people leaving divided by the number of people coming to the IoM)

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

Considering the numbers, it might be assumed that the number of people relocating to the IoM had already started declining in 2000 (perhaps even before, however, no data could be provided prior to this year). In addition, round this time the number of people leaving the IoM had started increasing slowly. It is clear from the chart that during the “Freedom to Flourish” campaign the decline in the number of people relocating to the IoM slowed right down and most importantly, the number of people leaving the IoM started decreasing as well, keeping the turnover stable nearing the 60% mark. Whether this effect can be fully attributed to the “Freedom to flourish” campaign it is highly likely, but cannot be confirmed with certainty.

In terms of budgets, it could be argued that whilst the £0.5 million budget for the “Freedom to flourish” might have sounded high to the politicians in 2006, the IoM government did not hesitate spending a marketing budget of nearly £14 million in the next five years (Teare 2012, P. 21). When placing together the number of residents remaining on the Island and the marketing expenditure, the picture looks as below (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7.

Comparison of marketing expenditure with the net number of taxpayers relocated on island

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022) (Isle of Man Government 2022a)

It is clear that the investment in marketing did not compensate for the abysmal performance in talent attraction. This situation resonates closely with Niedomysl’s and Jonasson’s (2012, p. 228) observation that “when a place invests heavily in place marketing measures, it is likely to be a crisis measure”.

Whether “The Isle of Man, where you can” was a successful campaign or not, it is not clear, as this campaign started in 2011 whilst the large decline in the number of people relocating to the IoM had already started in 2007. It could be speculated that perhaps the campaign saved an even bigger attrition of people from the IoM. However based on the data available, it cannot be concluded. It is evident that what happened between 2007 and 2014 with talent attraction raises more questions than answers. From Fig. 5, it is clear that whilst the level of attrition remained almost steady between 2009 and 2019, it was the attraction of new residents that dropped drastically after 2007, with signs of recovery starting in 2016. This change coincides with the general elections in the IoM in 2016.

The campaign “Our Island, a special place to live and work” started in 2017. It appears that the attraction and attrition rates stayed almost steady with a very slight drop for the following two years. Similarly as for the other two campaigns, attribution of success, failure or no impact at all, cannot be fully determined.

The figures provided in the census and the figures on the taxpayers do not allow identification of the talented people (people with qualifications equal or above the tertiary education as per Kerr et al. (2016, P. 85) definition, or people with a bachelor’s degree as per Florida’s (2002, P. 743) definition), or entrepreneurs, thus, whether the campaigns achieved the overarching aim to attract this group of people or not, it cannot be established. However, a breakdown by age groups can help understand the composition of the IoM population and which age groups felt more or less attracted by the IoM’s offer (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8.

IoM population in 2021 by quinary age (Statistics Isle of Man and Cabinet Office 2022)

Looking at the relocated, or non-IoM born population, the spread by age group looks different as shown in Fig. 9. From the charts, it is evident that the higher proportion of population in the brackets 45 to 80 can be attributed to the higher levels of relocated people after 1986.

Fig. 9.

Non-IoM born population by quinary age (Statistics Isle of Man and Cabinet Office 2022)

The report “Meeting our population challenges” (Cabinet Office 2018) highlights that the age group 19–30 years old represents a challenge, because historically in the IoM this group has had the tendency to migrate, as shown in the chart below. However, the report notices that this trend is similar in other small island jurisdiction and correlates with an overall tendency of this age group moving around in different places in bigger countries (Cabinet Office 2018).

It is interesting to notice from the Fig. 10 that this age group’s tendency of migrating out of the IoM has been the highest between 2011 and 2016 and 1981 and 1986. The report highlights that 50% of high school students in the IoM go to study in universities in the UK, but only 48% of them return to the IoM after their studies (Cabinet Office 2018), leaving the other 52% remaining permanently in the UK. Competing for graduates with big cities in the UK with universities was and still is a lost battle for the IoM and many other smaller cities (Swinney & Williams 2016).

Fig. 10.

Migration by age Cohort IoM Census (Cabinet Office 2018)

However, a closer look at the taxpayers’ data (which do not include the graduates) shows a slightly different picture (Fig. 11). Between 2000 and 2006, 18–25 years old represented the second highest age group growing from 20 to almost 30% of the total relocated people, after the 25–35 years old which stayed steady at 30%. However, after 2006, the number of people in this age group continued to decline, whilst the 25–35 years old remained the highest proportion of the relocated people, followed by 35–45 years old.

Fig. 11.

Distribution of relocated residents by age group

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

Turning to the figures of the taxpayers who left the IoM for the same period (Fig. 12), the age group 18–25 years old saw an increase from 20 to 25% between 2000 and 2006 and after that remained steady at the 20% level. It is clear that the percentage of 25–45-year-olds leaving the IoM has continued to decline, which is a positive sign; however, it is compensated by an increased percentage of over 45-years-olds leaving the IoM.

Fig. 12.

Distribution of residents who left the IoM by age group

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

Florida (2002) and Whisler et al. (2008) confirm that young and childless people tend to relocate to places with high population density and entertainment and recreational amenities. What occurred in the IoM appears to go against the first part of this assertion, the high population density. Cross-examining Figs. 1, 11 and 12, it appears contradictory that the under 25 s stopped coming into the IoM and started migrating out at the time when its population density hit the highest level. One explanation could be that, as confirmed by Canavan (2013, 2014, 2015a, 2015b), the constant decline of tourism in the IoM had brought the closure of many entertainment facilities and significantly reduced the night life over the years, which concurs with the second part of the assertion.

From the absolute number of people relocating in or out the IoM, it could be hypothetically suggested that the lower the number of people relocating in, the lower the number of people leaving the Island as shown in Figs 13 and 14. 

Fig. 13.

New residents relocating to IoM (excluding Manx students)

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

Fig. 14.

Residents leaving the IoM (excluding Manx students)

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

Looking at the correspondence of the different place branding campaigns, it appears that despite rapid decline in attraction of under 25 s, during the time of “Freedom to Flourish” campaign, the other age groups were almost steady or slightly growing. During the “IoM, where you can”, the attraction was nearly half of the previous decade; however, it was a steady inflow of people relocating. Whilst it appears that during the “Our Island, a special place to live and work” the number of people relocating increased compared to the previous campaign (Fig. 14).

From examining the numbers of the residents leaving the IoM, it can be seen that during both “Freedom to flourish” and the “Our Island, a special place to live and work” the rate of people leaving has slowed down for the under 45 s, but stayed steady for 45–65. The situation did not change during the “IoM where you can” campaign.

Looking at the net increase in the number of taxpayers by age group, the under 25 s and the over 65 s are the groups with the highest decline in numbers (important to note that the taxpayers numbers do not include Manx students or deaths, simply people changing residence in or out the IoM). The residents who tend to remain in the IoM are mostly between 25 and 55 years old, which could represent the age group of people who have a decent level of work experience and qualifications. It is clear from the chart below that whilst the decline in the net number of people relocating had started prior or perhaps in 2000, the highest net numbers of the relocated people coincide with two of the place branding campaigns but almost no improvement during “The IoM where you can” (Fig. 15).

Fig. 15.

Net increase of taxpayers by age group

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

As highlighted in the suggestions from experts in TPBO website (TPBO 2022), a good indicator of the success of the place branding campaigns is the length of stay for the residents. The spread of the length of stay of the current residents who were not born in the IoM is shown in Fig. 16.

Fig. 16.

Length of residence of current non-IoM born residents 2021 (Statistics Isle of Man and Cabinet Office 2022)

These figures highlight once more that the majority of current residents, not born in the IoM took up residence in the 90 s and early 2000s. Also looking at their current age, it could be deduced that the majority of these people were mostly in their 30 s, but a considerable number were in their 20 s and 40 s at the time they took residence in the IoM; however, from the data available, the length of stay cannot be correlated with the campaigns.

When examining the length of stay for the residents that leave, the IoM the picture is different. The cumulative rate of leaving, Fig. 17, shows that 50% of the people who leave the Island, do so in the first 3 years and 65% within 5 years, demonstrating a relatively quick turnaround of the people relocating.

Fig. 17.

Cumulative rate of taxpayers leaving the IoM

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

From the chart below it can be seen that 30% of all age groups below 55 years old leave the IoM after only one year, 50% of them within three years and 60% with 4 years (Fig. 18).

Fig. 18.

Length of stay by age group

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

It is important to bear in mind that relocating to an island is no mean feat; it is expensive both financially, emotionally and time wise, despite the constant support with tax breaks from the government, thus relocating back might suggest further underlying issues.

In summary, putting some of the indicators together, Table 2 shows that based on the numbers, the most successful campaign was “Freedom to flourish”, followed by “Our Island, a special place to live and work”, with the “IoM where you can” trailing far behind.

Table 2.

Campaigns comparison

(Source data: Income Tax Division, Treasury, IoM, ref: 2431437, 2022)

Indicators for the period of 3 years after the launch	Freedom to flourish (2004–2006)	Isle of Man where you can (2012–2014)	Our Island a special place to live and work (2017–2019)
Peak of yearly incoming	2766	1629	2107
Lowest of yearly out going	1565	1331	1377
Peak Turnover rate	70%	100%	74%
Lowest Turnover rate	60%	93%	72%
Overall turnover rate over 3 years	65%	97%	73%
Total net increase over 3 years	2886	136	1534

Conclusion

The data available suggest that the IoM has experienced a high level of taxpayers’ turnover fluctuating between 60 and 100% in the period examined (excluding the Covid 19 pandemic years).

From the evaluation of the effectiveness and the impact of the place branding campaigns, it could be concluded that the “Freedom to flourish” corresponds with the most improved number of people being attracted to relocate and a decrease in the number of people leaving the IoM, followed by “Our Island, a special place to live and work”; however, it is difficult to establish full causality. Whilst the same cannot be said for “IoM where you can”, despite the high expenditure in the marketing budget in the corresponding years.

Will further place branding and marketing campaigns be needed for the IoM? Whilst the current government plan focuses on improving the living standards and ensuring a sustainable future for the IoM (IoM Government 2021), which the academia has long suggested as the very basis of the most efficient place branding campaign (Anholt 2008b, 2011), the plan specifically stipulates increasing the population again and this time to 100.000 by 2037 (Isle of Man Government 2022b).

Did the numbers tell the story? From the analysis, it is clear that the numbers could only tell part of the story. The numbers could not go further than describing the outcome of what happened; the causality between the facts cannot be fully established. It is obvious that what would complete the picture would be further qualitative research (Kaefer 2021; Hereźniak et al. 2018; Boisen et al. 2018), which would facilitate understanding of why and how did people decide to relocate to and from the IoM.

This study has potential implications from both managerial and policy perspectives. From the managerial perspective, the main implication would relate to a constant detailed monitoring of the residents migration in and out the Island and any place branding and marketing campaign. In addition, clear analysis of the motivations for relocation should be used as consideration to inform policy making and marketing and promotional messages.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Florida Clements

is a lecturer in Business Management and a researcher at the University College Isle of Man. Her research focuses on place branding theory and practice and how it can help small nation islands in attracting talent and businesses.

Declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.