How Epidemics Impact Brand Image Of Cities
In 1793, when the Yellow Fever epidemic broke out in Philadelphia, about 5,000 people were killed and over 20,000 people reportedly fled the US city. It was only in the 19th century that the practitioners of medicine could establish that mosquito bites were the prime cause of that deadly fever. Even after 200 years, the feared disease and its deadly impact continue to be associated with the city's name to this day.
Closer home, an outbreak of the Modern Plague during the 1860s killed over 12 million people across China, India, and Hong Kong. It wasn't until the 1890s that a vaccine was created to cure people of the disease. The three countries were able to tide over the crisis but generations of their people suffered from the slow and long-lasting after-effects. Again, in 2003, China saw another outbreak in the form of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) . It was estimated that 774 people had succumbed to the syndrome by July 2003. The episode certainly brought a bad name to the fastest emerging country of the world.
There is no dearth of such instances and the case studies can go on and on, but the most striking revelation from these is that outbreaks of epidemics of large scale, though contained over a period of time, continue to be associated with the most affected places – even after years, decades or centuries. Any reference to these killer diseases cannot be complete without a mention of cities or countries where they took the heaviest toll. These references often raise a serious doubt on living conditions and health care facilities in those cities and countries.
The impact of such outbreaks on a city's health might be temporal, but their negative effect on the health of the city's brand image is, clearly, a lasting one. Though there are many factors that decide which place one chooses to live in, one certainly would like to give cities with such deadly associations a miss. It is only natural for one to prefer a place that is healthier.
These are some reasons why authorities in Delhi must not take lightly the matter of Chikungunya and Dengue deaths in Delhi. Even as a blame-game is on between the state and the Centre over who is responsible for the outbreak, not enough measures are being put in place to nip the mosquito-borne diseases in the bud. The authorities should understand that the impact of a severe outbreak could be more long-lasting than it presently appears. The outbreaks would be contained over a period of time, and the health of the people of Delhi will improve, too. But if authorities do not act on a mission level to limit the scale of damage in the city, there might be a lingering impact on the heath of brand Delhi.
Despite the fact that it is India's national capital and the political powerhouse by the virtue of that, real estate in Delhi has been increasingly losing its sheen among home buyers. Rising pollution levels, bad air quality, and poor sustainability score have already hit brand Delhi hard enough; an epidemic outbreak is the last thing the city needs at present.
No matter how lucrative a job you grab in an African country, it is not without the fear of dying of Ebola that you pack your bags – if at all you do. So, the health of a city or country, as a matter of fact, decides its wealth and prosperity.
We must be awake to the fact that a global citizen might not be much impressed by the government blitz of projecting India as an investment hotspot, or home to an ancient human civilisation, or an emblem of culture for the world to emulate. It is the outbreak of epidemics – and the multiple questions they raise on living conditions – that might do 'brand India' in.