R EPRESENTATION OF THE A RCTIC

The images people hold of the Arctic are often influenced by the map projection of the region, which makes, for example Greenland, look nearly as large as North America (Jacobsen, 1994). The northern arctic area, Arctic, and its southern counterpart Antarctic have been represented in a very similar way, although the areas significantly differ from one another: one is land surrounded by seas, whereas the other one sea area surrounded by countries. They are both visually pictured the same way: as remote, white landscapes full of snow and ice, with a reputation of being harsh locations to their visitors. This way of picturing the areas is based on the extreme conditions of the areas, whether it is the climate, geographical remoteness or for instance the unusual fauna found in the locations. When the Arctic areas are given a human face with the image of indigenous people, is Antarctica experienced to be even more inhuman, since it has no permanent human inhabitancy at all. (Grenier, 2004, p. 203.)

In recent years the representation of the Arctic polar region has changed, as tourist consumption has become increasingly entwined with the visualization and representation of the region. Creation of images, myths and place identities have an increased role in the way Polar Regions are represented in the contemporary world.

(Hall & Saarinen, 2010b.) One does not have to think too long to come up with images typically representing “arctic”: ice, snow, animals such as penguins and polar bears (often in wrong polar context, i.e. pictured or imagined outside their actual living environment) and in the specific context of Rovaniemi, Santa Claus, reindeer and northern lights have been the reoccurring themes in the visualization of the Arctic.

Another common and often seen visual idea of the Arctic is a mental image of a vast and empty landscape, filled with snow and ice. In this type of image of the Arctic human presence, infrastructure or even animal populations are hardly present.

Saarinen (2005) has examined the construction of the ideas of Northern wildernesses for touristic purposes in Northern Finland. These so called touristic wildernesses are based on the consumption, marketing, and visualizing of natural environments, as well as staging wilderness settings solely for touristic purposes. In advertising, this means the usage of positive images such as authenticity, naturalness and freedom. In reality, the touristic wilderness is nothing more than a commercialized space and a commodity, a resource that can be produced, reproduced, replicated and consumed. It is based on the representation of “wild, free, harsh and rugged nature”, and their relation to modern consumerism. (Saarinen, 2005, 40–41.) The representations of the Arctic are often similar to the ones presented by Saarinen (2005), as the elements of nature and wilderness are strongly related to the public image of the region.

A study (Müller, 2012) examining tourism brochures marketing Finland and Finnish Lapland shows, that elements in close relation to the commonly identified features of

“arctic” are actively used in the printed marketing material of both national and regional marketing. Elements such as snow, ice, northern lights and reindeer have been and are still actively used in the tourism marketing of Finland and Finnish Lapland. The usage of elements such as visual representation of a Christmas theme, Santa Claus and indigenous people have decreased in the printed tourism marketing material of the whole country, but still strongly present in the tourism marketing material of Finnish Lapland and especially Rovaniemi – the city declared as hometown of Santa Claus.

(Müller, 2012; see also Visit Finland, 2014 and Visit Rovaniemi, 2013.)

The marketing of Lapland is strongly based on the visual images of wilderness and elements such as the northern lights, yet highlighting the developed and well-functioning infrastructure and services (Müller, 2012). The Lapland brand (Lapland Above Ordinary, 2013) emphasizes five factors which make Lapland attractive: 1) Rich in nature (close relation to nature), 2) Creative madness (“positive originality” and individuality), 3) Open and Arctic (international and transparent meeting point in the Arctic region), 4) Arctic magic (magic that cannot be described, only experienced) and

5) Consider it done! (innovative expertise on international and local matters). The message this new brand work delivers inevitably tries to link Finnish Lapland to the Arctic region and discussion stronger than before. Why is it then, that Finnish Lapland is so aggressively marketed as “arctic”? As mentioned in the introduction of this research, the image people hold of the Arctic areas of the world has altered, as the areas previously viewed as remote and empty peripheries have become exotic, interesting and sexy (Østhagen, 2012). This might be a partial explanation to the question why is Finland and Finnish Lapland marketed with the terms and images of “arctic”. Also, since Finland does not hold any Arctic coastline (unlike all the remaining fellow Arctic nations) can the increased use of the term in the marketing and public speech concerning Finland be seen as a way to highlight Finland's arctic knowledge, nature, expertise and belongingness to the Arctic decision-making, to the rest of the world.

In the field of marketing research, it is widely accepted that images of a holiday destination play an important role in travel decision making (Tapachai & Waryszak, 2000, p. 37). However, tourism promotion does not alone form the image a tourist holds of the destination. Instead, the promotion of a destination is interdependent with many other information sources that influence the decision making concerning the projected and perceived images people hold (Govers, Go & Kumar, 2007, p. 15.) According to Govers, Go and Kumar (2007) the promotion of destination image has many sources, such as promotion (advertising and brochures), the opinions of other people (family and friends, travel agents), media reporting (newspapers, magazines, television news reports and documentaries) and popular culture (motion pictures, literature). Together these elements form a “flood of information”, a concept introduced by Reynolds (1965, p.

69), describing a mental construct based upon certain impression chosen from a flood of information. Accordingly, also in the case of representing an image of the Arctic through destination marketing, other information sources (as presented above) and the images they produce should be taken into consideration.

Further, Tapachai and Waryszak (2000) claim that as tourists are involved in an ongoing search for more information about their vacation destination by collecting a significant amount of information of the destination before the actual experience, the tourist creates an image of the destination, that represents the travel experience. The destination image also sets criteria to the evaluation of the actual destination: if tourists in the destination encounter experiences that differ greatly from their expectations, formed from the influence of destination marketing and other sources of information, can their evaluations of the destination be very negative (Fairweather & Swaffield, 2002, p. 293). This notion of tourist satisfaction is very important in the case of marketing ”arctic” destinations: if the elements used in the marketing of the destination become the valuable features selected from the flood of information by the tourists, can the tourist experience be negative if the tourist does not encounter these ”promised”, projected elements during their holiday. This can be the case with, for instance, northern lights: if the element of northern lights is actively used in the various sources of information and marketing of the arctic destination, but the tourist fails to see the northern lights personally during the visit, can this influence the overall experience negatively (Haantie, 2013). Same applies with the popularly used images of harsh, arctic climate conditions, polar bears and empty wilderness: if such images are being used to market tourism destinations actually based in relevantly urban surroundings and human infrastructure, such as the tourism destination of Rovaniemi, is the tourism marketing sending a contrived image of the destination to the tourists.

Another way, in which the tourists can encounter negative experiences and become dissatisfied, is when the hosts and local people do not represent the projected promise (Govers, Go & Kumar, 2007, p. 17). This can be the case, when producing images of indigenous people or certain ”arctic” style of living in the destination promotion. In the case of Lapland, the Sámi people and projections of their culture and lifestyle (often in outdated form, producing images of traditional tipi-tents formerly used in place of houses) are frequently used in connection to the produced images of “arctic” (Tuulentie, 2009, p. 99). When a tourist expecting to see locals (i.e. the Sámi, often imagined only

in their traditional clothing) and hosts lead a life of constant survival against the extreme arctic conditions arrives to Rovaniemi, is the confusion and disappointment understandable, if the local populations do not represent these images. Fortunately, other sources of information influencing the destination image and expectations add truthful and realistic features to the destination image. The phenomenon of producing contrived images of the north and the Arctic is, however, something the tourism sector and marketing organizations should pay attention to and avoid when possible, in order to not mislead the tourists too much.

On the other hand, tourists visiting the Arctic might have a critical approach to the tourism destination and the images projected of it through tourism marketing and media (Lüthje, 2005). Like all marketing and promotion of goods, services or destinations, also tourism marketing is based on the principle of creating desirable images which result in the viewer wanting to buy the marketed product or in the case of tourism destination marketing, travel to the destination. Also tourists should be considered to have common criticism towards marketing and the possibly contrived images it produces, although it should not be expected of them, this way justifying the use of contrived images.