51,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016
World Cities and Nation States takes a global perspective to show how national governments and states/provinces/regions continue to play a decisive, and often positive, partnership role with world cities. The 16 chapter book comprised of two introductory chapters, 12 central chapters that draw on case studies, and two summary chapters - draws on over 40 interviews with national ministers, city government officials, business leaders and expert academics.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 599
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Title Page
Foreword
Preface
Section I: Introducing world cities and nation states
1 Introduction
Urbanisation and globalisation: The age of world cities
The future imperatives for world cities
Nation states in the urban age
Different models and starting points
Other inherited factors
Overview of the book
2 Cities and nation states
The rise of the nation state and the implications for cities
Nation states and the ‘world cities’ literature
A return to city‐states?
Reasons for caution
The ongoing relevance of the nation state
Summary
Section II: World cities in tight nations
3 London
London’s historic relationship with central government
The return to city government and changes in city powers since 2000
The national system of cities: London and the UK
Ongoing challenges where London needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable London to make progress with UK central government
Conclusion
4 Paris
History of Paris’s relationship with national government
Paris as an established world city
The national system of cities: Paris and France
Ongoing challenges where Paris needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Paris to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
5 Seoul
History of Seoul’s relationship with central government
Adaptation in Seoul’s global age
The national system of cities: Seoul and Korea
Ongoing challenges where Seoul needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Seoul to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
6 Tokyo
History of Tokyo’s relationship with central government
Changes in city powers since 2000: What problems have been solved?
The national system of cities: Tokyo and Japan
The future agenda for collaboration with national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Tokyo to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
Section III: Working remotely
7 Mumbai
History of Mumbai’s relationship with higher tiers of government
Incomplete initiatives and aborted reforms in the 21st century
The national system of cities: Mumbai and India
Ongoing challenges where Mumbai needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Mumbai to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
8 New York
History of the city and nation state relationship up to 2000
Evolution of the city’s relationship with the federal tier since 9/11
The national system of cities: New York City and American metros
Ongoing challenges where New York needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable New York to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
9 São Paulo
History of São Paulo’s relationship with its nation state up to 2000
Changes in São Paulo’s relationship with higher tiers of government since 2000
The national system of cities: São Paulo and Brazil
Ongoing challenges where São Paulo needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable São Paulo to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
10 Toronto
History of Toronto’s relationship with the nation state
Toronto in the 21st century: A mixed record of federal–city relationships
The national system of cities: Toronto and Canada
Ongoing challenges where Toronto needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Toronto to make progress with higher tiers of government
Conclusion
Section IV: Mixed blessings
11 Hong Kong
History of Hong Kong’s relationship with Beijing
Changes in the relationship since the 1997 handover
The national system of cities: Hong Kong and China
Hong Kong’s future imperatives and the role of China’s central government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Hong Kong to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
12 Moscow
History of the city and federal government relationship in Moscow
New approaches in the 21st century
The national system of cities: Moscow and Russia
Ongoing opportunities and challenges where Moscow can benefit from national government support
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Moscow to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
13 Shanghai
History of Shanghai’s relationship with central government
Reforms and cyclical approaches in the Shanghai–Beijing relationship since 2000
The national system of cities: Shanghai and China
Ongoing challenges where Shanghai needs help from national government
Key actors and mechanisms that enable Shanghai to make progress with the nation state
Conclusion
14 Singapore
Singapore’s government and governance history
The impacts of Singapore’s unitary government on global city adaptation and success
The role of key institutions
Singapore’s future challenges
Conclusion
Section V: Conclusion
15 Adjusting to an age of world cities
High‐quality infrastructure and connectivity projects
Step changes to address housing and real estate challenges
Improvement and expansion of governance in world cities
Fiscal and investment systems
Business friendliness and investor readiness
Investment in research and innovation
Support for hosting global events
Open labour markets
Making practical progress with national governments
Conclusion
16 Unintended consequences
The advantages and disadvantages of having a world city
National frameworks to support the wider system of cities
Collaboration between world cities and other cities in their nations
World cities into the future
Conclusion
References
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 01
Table 1.1: Government systems and city designations in the 12 world cities
Table 1.2: Size and scale of world cities and world city regions
Table 1.3: Size of world cities’ metropolitan areas compared to their nation state
Chapter 02
Table 2.1: Differences between traditional and new development policies (developed from OECD)
Table 2.2: World cities’ share of national economic output in financial services and manufacturing
Chapter 03
Table 3.1: London’s metropolitan area: size and economic performance
Chapter 04
Table 4.1: Paris–Île‐de‐France’s metropolitan area: key statistics
Chapter 05
Table 5.1: Seoul’s capital region: key statistics
Table 5.2: Change in Seoul Metropolitan Government’s budgetary spending, 2012–2016
Chapter 06
Table 6.1: Tokyo’s metropolitan area: key statistics
Chapter 07
Table 7.1: Mumbai metropolitan region’s size and economic performance
Chapter 08
Table 8.1: New York metropolitan region’s size and economic performance
Chapter 09
Table 9.1: São Paulo’s metropolitan statistics
Table 9.2: Brazil’s urban policy and development timeline, 1987–2014
Table 9.3: Selected revenue sources for São Paulo and its peers, 2013 ($US billion)
Chapter 10
Table 10.1: Toronto’s metropolitan area: key statistics
Chapter 11
Table 11.1: Hong Kong: key statistics
Chapter 12
Table 12.1: Moscow’s metropolitan area: key statistics
Table 12.2: State procurement spending in 2013 in the three highest spending regions
Chapter 13
Table 13.1: Shanghai’s metropolitan area: key statistics
Table 13.2: China’s urban policy and development timeline, 1989–2014
Chapter 14
Table 14.1: Singapore: key statistics
Chapter 15
Table 15.1: Population and visitor growth in world cities
Table 15.2: Character of city/metropolitan government in world cities
Table 15.3: Recent ‘elected mayoral systems’ created or expanded by higher tiers of government
Table 15.4: Status of regional governance in 12 world cities
Table 15.5: Channels of communication and advocacy between world cities and national governments
Chapter 16
Table 16.1: Advantages and disadvantages of world cities to their nation states
Table 16.2: Performance of second cities in national economies
List of Illustrations
Chapter 01
Figure 1.1: The four dimensions of successful national government and world city relationships.
Figure 1.2: Comparative size of world cities and their metropolitan regions.
Figure 1.3: Comparative density of 12 world city government units and their metropolitan regions.
Chapter 02
Figure 2.1: Typology of world cities and nation state traditions of engaging with globalisation.
Chapter 03
Figure 3.1: Reciprocity between London and the UK central government.
Chapter 04
Figure 4.1: Reciprocity between Paris and the French central government.
Figure 4.2: Division of responsibilities within the new Grand Paris arrangement.
Figure 4.3: Map of the Grand Paris Express lines.
Chapter 05
Figure 5.1: Reciprocity between Seoul and the Korean central government.
Chapter 06
Figure 6.1: Reciprocity between Tokyo and the Japanese central government.
Chapter 07
Figure 7.1: Reciprocity between Mumbai and the Indian federal government.
Chapter 08
Figure 8.1: Reciprocity between New York City and the United States federal government.
Chapter 09
Figure 9.1: Reciprocity between São Paulo and the Brazilian federal government.
Figure 9.2: Balance of revenue and expenditure in São Paulo city government (based on 2014 figures and exchange rates).
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1: Reciprocity between Toronto and the Canadian federal government.
Figure 10.2: The range of institutions collaborating on Toronto’s waterfront (based on Eidelman, 2013).
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1: Reciprocity between Hong Kong and the Chinese central government.
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1: Reciprocity between Moscow and the Government of Russia.
Figure 12.2: Skolkovo Innovation Hub.
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1: Reciprocity between Shanghai and the Chinese central government.
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1: Singapore GDP per capita, 1962–2014.
Chapter 15
Figure 15.1: Indicative relationship between empowerment of world cities’ governments and the centralisation of nation states (Arrows indicate direction of travel).
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
iii
iv
v
xv
xvi
xii
xiii
xiv
1
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
World Cities and Nation States
Greg Clark
Chairman,The Business of Cities, London
Tim Moonen
Director of Intelligence,The Business of Cities, London
This edition first published 2017© 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Registered OfficeJohn Wiley & Sons, Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom.
Editorial Offices9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, United Kingdom.The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom.
For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley‐blackwell.
The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.
Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author(s) have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services and neither the publisher nor the author shall be liable for damages arising herefrom. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.
Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication data applied for
ISBN: 9781119216421
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.
Cover image: 123ArtistImages/Gettyimages
For Julia and Lucy
Foreword
This book begins with a simple premise: if the 20th century was defined by the nation state, our current century will be one driven by global cities. Beneath this observation, however, lies a complex web of implications for leaders across the world and across levels of government and society. In this insightful book, the authors show how adaptive nation states, in partnership with dynamic world cities, point the way towards a shared global future.
In response to the rising role of cities, we need to rethink the traditional arrangements of power between nations and regions. As responsibility shifts downwards, we need to reimagine the roles of legacy institutions that were intended to mediate between countries and invent new institutions that connect and empower cities. And as these global cities expand, we need to ensure that prosperity does not come at the expense of sustainability and equity.
Accelerating urbanisation is a natural response to trends in the global economy. International trade encourages specialisation, which, in turn, rewards agglomeration. By clustering skilled workers and similar types of industrial activity, cities and regions become more innovative and more productive. And despite predictions to the contrary, the benefits of proximity in both manufacturing and services have only increased from new technologies, thanks to everything from shortened product cycles and rapid prototyping to increased demand for customisation.
Still, these very forces of concentration, globalisation and connectivity that are causing the emergence of global cities are also creating challenges within them. Their rise in prosperity can also often come at the expense of secondary cities, increasing inequality across places. As economic hubs, they become magnets for migration, leading to challenges around settlement and integration. And cities that grow too fast or whose growth is too ungoverned often can develop in inefficient and unsustainable ways.
In many parts of the world, governance at the city level is showing it can innovate much more quickly than national governments, and these innovations are being shared and adapted by agile networks of global cities. But the message of this book is that global cities and nation states share a mutual interest in inventing solutions to the problems of our new urban century, and giving cities the tools to implement them at scale. Nation states therefore still have a pivotal role to play. There are a number of areas – national defense, international trade and the social safety net – where national governments must continue to set the rules and provide a stable environment. They also remain the most important source of long‐term and large‐scale investments in basic research, setting the platform for an innovative economy. But within a host of other policy areas, the best role for national governments is to be a partner – allowing their global cities the flexibility to customise solutions to their distinct challenges.
The rise of world cities in the global economy is not disappearing anytime soon. This reality demands a re‐evaluation of how cities relate to their respective nations and to each other. These pages offer that valuable analysis – including both a look at the current variation of government systems across the world and a perspective on what cities need moving forward.
Bruce Katz,Centennial Scholar, Brookings InstitutionJune 2016
Preface
This book has grown out of an initial study that was prepared for the Moscow Urban Forum in 2014. We wanted to inform the global discussion about the ways in which nation states were adjusting to the globalisation of major cities. The debate within nations about the role of their largest and most globally oriented cities varies hugely from one country to another. In some countries this is almost a national obsession, with continuous argument about whether having a global city is a net advantage or disadvantage. In some other countries the debate is almost totally absent, with either complete invisibility or complete acceptance of the global roles of major cities.
For the original study we consulted numerous books and academic journal articles to capture the latest insight into how the rise of world cities is changing government structures in nation states, and how both city and national governments are adapting to the new balance of power. We reviewed prominent contemporary books written in Europe, Asia and North America, and drew from the most recent findings of the World Bank, OECD and relevant international financial institutions.
For this book we identified 12 major world cities that reflected a range of geographic locations, constitutional structures, city statuses and development stages. Together these 12 cities’ GDP exceeds $7 trillion, accounting for roughly a tenth of global GDP. We gradually built up 12 case studies, drawing on recently published books, academic journals, independent media, international benchmarks and local studies and reports.
The ideas and arguments for this book evolved through extensive consultation with current and former senior members of city governments, and with national officials with responsibility for urban policy. Our research also engaged with political science and urban development experts in each of the 12 cities, as well as with business leadership organisations in many of the 12 cities.
We are very grateful to the following individuals who gave us their time and wisdom:
Uma Adusumilli, Chief of Planning Division, MMRDA, Mumbai, India.
Bruce Berg, Associate Professor of Political Science, Fordham University, New York, US.
Claudio Bernardes, President, Ingai Incorporadora S/A, São Paulo, Brazil.
Professor Neil Bradford, Associate Professor of Political Science, Huron University College, University of Western Ontario, Canada.
Professor Miguel Bucalem, Director, USP Cidades, São Paulo, Brazil.
Dr Xiangming Chen, Director of Trinity College, Hartford Center for Urban and Global Studies, Connecticut, US.
Rt Hon Greg Clark MP, former Minister for Universities, Science and Cities, UK. (Now UK Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy).
Professor Alistair Cole, Professor of Politics, Cardiff University, UK.
John Dickie, Director of Strategy and Policy, London First.
Fernando de Mello Franco, Municipal Secretary of Urban Development, São Paulo, Brazil.
Professor Meric Gertler, President of the University of Toronto, Canada.
Dr Vincent Gollain, Director, Department of Economy and Local Development, IAU IDF, Paris, France.
Professor Hiroo Ichikawa, Executive Director of The Mori Memorial Foundation; Dean, Professional Graduate School, Meiji University, Japan.
Dr Yeong‐Hee Jang, former Senior Research Fellow, Seoul Institute, South Korea.
Bruce Katz, Centennial Scholar, Brookings Institution
Paul Lecroart, Senior Urban Planner at IAU (Institut D’Amenagement et D’Urbanisme) Île de France (IDF), France.
Professor Christian Lefèvre, Directeur de l'Institut Français d'Urbanisme, France.
Sir Edward Lister, former Chief of Staff and Deputy Mayor, Policy and Planning, GLA, London, UK.
Professor Hideo Nakazawa, Faculty of Law, Chuo University, Japan.
Narinder Nayar, Chairman of Mumbai First, Mumbai, India.
Dr Karima Nigmatulina, Director at the Institute of Master Planning, Moscow, Russia.
David O’Rear, Chief Economist, Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce, Hong Kong (until 2015).
Dr Abhay Pethe, Vibhooti Shukla Chair Unit in Urban Economics and Regional Development, University of Mumbai, India.
Professor Nirmala Rao OBE, Pro‐Director, SOAS, London, UK.
Dr Xuefei Ren, Associate Professor of Sociology and Global Urban Studies, Michigan State University, US.
Anacláudia Rossbach, Regional Advisor for Latin America and the Caribbean, Cities Alliance; Director President of Rede Interação São Paulo, Brazil.
Professor Andrei Sharonov, Dean, Skolkovo Management School, Moscow, Russia.
Professor Enid Slack, Director, Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto, Canada.
Andrew Stevens, Senior Researcher, Japan Local Government Centre
Professor Tony Travers, Department of Government, LSE; Director of LSE London, London, UK.
Professor Aleksandr Vysokovsky, Dean of the Graduate School of Urban Studies and Planning, Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia.
Professor David Wolfe, Department of Political Science, Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto, Canada.
Professor Fulong Wu, Bartlett Professor of Planning at the Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, UK.
Kathryn Wylde, President and CEO, Partnership for New York City, US.
Norio Yamato, Assistant Manager, Corporate Planning Office, Mori Building, Japan.
Professor Robert Yaro, Former President, Regional Plan Association, New York.
Professor Natalia Zubarevich, Director, Regional Programme, Independent Institute for Social Policy, Moscow, Russia.
With special thanks to Emily Moir for her support in preparing the text and in enabling us to complete the project. With thanks also to Jonathan Couturier, Steve Howard and Dr Patrick Kilkelly for their invaluable research, insight and editing support. Responsibility for any errors is entirely our own.
Section IIntroducing world cities and nation states
1Introduction: Clash of the centuries?
The emergence of ‘world cities’, urban areas that are becoming global in character and orientation, is one of the most important phenomena of our time. World cities1 are where much of the money, the knowledge and the decisions that shape the 21st century are generated. Their influence has propelled humanity beyond the inflection point from the ‘age of the nation state’ and into the ‘age of cities’. And yet this new age inherits all the identities, institutions and organising principles of the nation state system. The tensions, trade‐offs and opportunities that arise out of this unstable equilibrium are the subject of this book.
World cities confront nation states with a historic opportunity and challenge. These dynamic agglomerations of people, industries and infrastructure have the potential to help a national economy be more globally connected and productive, and to spread multiple benefits across national systems of cities through connectivity, economic specialisation and co‐operation. Their activities might increase the connection of their national economy to global systems of trade, investment and talent. They also provide entry points to international markets, and are the spur for entrepreneurship and clustering activity for globally trading firms and sectors. In an increasingly urbanised global economy, world cities help to build the ‘business brands’ of nations and provide them with reputational advantages.
But world cities also depend on nation states and national governments in order to manage the effects of their global integration. Rapid population growth and diversification, urban restructuring and a surge in international investment can lead to multiple challenges. Inflation, congestion, stretched housing and labour markets, exposed infrastructure deficits, land‐use dilemmas, ill‐equipped city systems, sensitive environmental weaknesses and social divisions can all be ‘side effects’ of becoming a world city.
At the same time, national governments want to pay attention to the performance of other cities, towns and rural areas, and many look to address the impact the world city has on how other cities and regions within the nation develop. The world city may be understood in theory to offer competitive advantages and major contributions to fiscal resources, but the most visible effects may be de‐population or de‐clustering of other cities, or extreme concentrations of business, jobs and investment in one place. These challenges lie at the heart of the relationships and friction between nation states and their world cities, and lead to concerns about whether the ‘world city model’ is always a good one to adopt. Such apprehensions were very visible during the debate in the UK as to whether to leave the European Union and the subsequent fallout of ‘Brexit’, but they are also becoming increasingly influential in many other world cities and nation states.
In the current period, some world cities and national governments are beginning to embark upon a range of different forms of negotiation and collaboration around these issues that have major implications for the futures of both. These emerging dialogues and co‐operation aim to address the understanding of the world city model and its needs, enhance the complementary roles of multiple cities within a national system, increase or improve governance and investment in the world cities, or develop national policies and platforms that can support different kinds of cities with specific tools and interventions. In this book we explore this new ground by examining the different ways in which world cities and nation states are contributing to each other’s shared goals.
Each city’s organisational and legal framework is different and complex, and the range of institutional dynamics in the world’s major cities has not been compared in this way before. The book draws on the latest practical experience of 12 cities around the world – in Asia, Europe, Latin America and North America – to identify the trends and innovations in relations between central governments, state or provincial governments and their main international gateway city. Drawing upon a mix of local and governmental insight and global expertise, we identify recent innovations and reforms in governance, communication, investment and planning between different tiers of government. The book pinpoints the potential for nation states to leverage their world city to achieve mutually beneficial national outcomes, but it also raises challenges to the world city model that should be the focus of concerted attention.
Urbanisation and globalisation: The age of world cities
History shows that cities tend to embrace international opportunities in waves and cycles (Clark and Moonen, 2013). Which cities take part in a given wave may depend on major geopolitical events, key industries, new technologies, connective infrastructures or the whims of city, mercantile and/or national leaders. What is clear is that today, more cities than ever are participants in the cycle of globalisation that began after 2008–9. Many of them have no prior global experience, while others draw on a legacy of earlier phases of outward‐facing trade and engagement; as new sectors emerge and integrate, and as some countries increase or resume their global orientation, new world cities are emerging all the time.
One upshot of 21st century globalisation is that more countries have seen their leading city or group of cities become international commercial and corporate management hubs and visitor destinations, serving large customer and client markets in their wider regions beyond national borders. National policymakers find that these cities fundamentally alter the migration patterns of workers, set new business and service standards and have a major impact on the number and kind of international firms, capital and visitors that a nation attracts.
The previous cycles, in which world cities such as London, New York and Tokyo thrived, hinged on cities playing hub roles in finance, business, media, leisure tourism and commodities. In the current cycle, science, medicine, ICT, cleantech, traded urban services, higher education, design and real estate are now prominent activities for globalising cities. World cities have also become complex visitor economies – not just attracting holidaymakers but also students, researchers, events and congresses. Established and emerging world cities all compete for investors, entrepreneurs and start‐ups by focusing on liveability, culture and urban regeneration.
This new cycle of world cities is shaped by a clearer grasp of the mistakes of the past and concerns for the future. The 2008–9 financial crisis exposed the weaknesses of city development approaches that had become over‐dependent on one sector – be it financial services, real estate, IT or tourism. Its fall‐out has also highlighted the fragile investment profile of many cities as they seek to update and renew their own systems – housing, education and infrastructure. It has also focused attention on cities’ environmental and spatial resilience, and how to avoid becoming ‘locked in’ to an undesirable development path.
This current cycle has also homed in on the growing inequalities within and between cities, which has prompted a tide of pessimistic opinion in many countries opposed to the perceived impacts of the ‘world city model’. In many cases, national leadership and public discourse have become more equivocal about whether and how to support major urban centres on their globalisation journey. This cycle of globalisation is therefore unusual because the growing international economic roles of world cities are coinciding with a rise in nationalism, separatism and hostility to immigration (Dowling, 2014; Hashi, 2014; Seib, 2014). These are difficult tensions to resolve.
The future imperatives for world cities
World cities face a number of similar or overlapping challenges that require facilitation and support from national governments. They have little choice but to adapt to increased competition for mobile firms, jobs, people, goods, capital and services (Herrschel, 2014). They face demands to address the externalities that accompany intense demand, such as housing supply constraints, income inequalities and over‐burdened infrastructure. Most have to operate in a context of constrained public investment and cuts to intergovernmental transfers and grants. Sub‐national public investment declined by up to a fifth within the OECD in the five years after the financial crisis, and evidence from non‐OECD countries indicates this drop is even more stark (Allain‐Dupre, 2015). Because even world cities have to achieve ‘more with less’, they have to appeal to alternative sources of international investment, which usually demands that they present a simple and consistent strategy, and assemble a clear pipeline of competitive projects for development. Given these combined imperatives, the leadership of world cities is by no means straightforward.
The distinctive elements of this new cycle of world cities – wide‐ranging competition, new industry trends, strategic awareness and conflict between the ‘winners’ and ‘losers’ of globalisation – all demand a fresh set of relationships and partnerships with leaders and agencies in national government. Nation states are only just getting to grips with this new terrain. As this book demonstrates, the agenda for the future is now coming into view.
Nation states in the urban age
The 20th century is now, in retrospect, widely regarded as the century of the nation state (Waltz, 1999). The global economy experienced a sustained surge in growth and trade after 1945, and it is easy to forget that during those decades national governments deliberately tried to prevent industrial and office development becoming over‐concentrated in their major cities. Subsidies, regulations, financial instruments and the relocation of business parks and public sector jobs were used to de‐centralise economic activity and spread growth more evenly. Policies were also put in place to curb population concentration. This approach was evident in cities as varied as London, Paris, Seoul and Tokyo. Brazil went one step further and relocated its capital city from Rio de Janeiro to inland Brasília partly in order to de‐centralise industrial activities and reduce growth in its large southern cities.
Not all national governments were proactive or successful in these efforts. Some tried to mitigate the externalities of their world city but succeeded only in disrupting cluster agglomeration and damaging overall competitiveness. Others failed to provide a consistent legal and regulatory framework or delivery mechanism to allow world cities to thrive. Many have now abandoned the hope of homogeneity on a national scale and are devising new approaches for their nation and world city (Bunnell, 2002; World Bank, 2009).
This book is about the transition that has since taken place from the age of the nation state to the age of cities. It explores how nation states are responding to the largely unanticipated urbanisation of the global economy with new policies, reforms and methods of joint working. It analyses whether, why and how nation states really have become more place‐specific in their approach to their cities, and what the implications are for city competitiveness and national cohesion (Hill and Fujita, 2011).
The twin processes of urbanisation and globalisation have required nation states to re‐think traditional approaches. Not only do they face the rise of world cities, they also have to recognise three other essential trends that are explained and explored in this book:
Metropolitanisation;
Systems of cities;
Internationalisation of multiple cities.
The first trend that nation states have to take seriously is the emergence of city regions and metropolitan areas. As cities grow they expand beyond their set borders and boundaries, and their economic and social ‘footprint’ becomes ever larger. If national and state governments fail to respond to this phenomenon, what follows are large and expensive co‐ordination failures between neighbouring municipalities that are politically independent of each other and yet are functionally inter‐dependent, sharing a common business community, labour market, infrastructure platform and housing system. National and state governments can adjust to the growth in city regions by changing the boundaries of cities, by creating additional co‐ordination vehicles, by reforming city governance or by incentivising co‐operation in other ways (Arretche, 2013).
Nation states have to adapt to a second trend – the need to accommodate ‘systems of cities’ with complementary roles (World Bank, 2009). Within and across national borders, networks of cities often form a complementary system of different functions and specialisations. This often demands new national approaches. In China, for example, since the mid‐2000s the national urban policy has begun to plan its huge scale of urbanisation by identifying large regional city clusters as strongholds of future sustainable development. The Pearl River Delta, Yangtze River Delta and the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei regions have all become the subject of regional plans, with the aim of accelerating development, bridging regional divides and restructuring the economy.
The third trend to which nation states have to respond is the emerging capacity of multiple cities in the same nation to acquire international roles. As new waves of globalisation occur, new economic sectors internationalise and integrate, and a larger range of cities has the potential to enter the global system of trade and exchange. This can lead to nations having more than one ‘world city’. While this is already common in larger nations (for example, in the United States New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Chicago might all be seen as world cities, and in China Hong Kong, Beijing and Shanghai all have global reach and roles), this can also occur in much smaller nations. In Switzerland, both Zurich and Geneva are world cities. Elsewhere in Europe, Barcelona and Madrid, and Munich, Berlin and Frankfurt, are all examples of more than one city developing clear international roles within the same country. We find similar phenomena in South Africa (Cape Town and Johannesburg), Australia (Sydney, Melbourne and now Brisbane) and Canada (Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal). In many other countries, from the UK and France to Russia and Japan, a second city has a clear aspiration to become the second world city to complement their more established world city sibling.
Having learnt some painful lessons from the past, nation states are beginning to identify the opportunities as well as the threats of globalisation and the rise of world cities. National governments can leverage world cities to achieve development goals that are otherwise hard to achieve. They have also become more willing to endorse urbanisation processes because to do otherwise would weaken their attraction as a place for capital or for talent (Herrschel, 2014). This book shows that territorial approaches adopted by national governments are at different points along a continuum between ‘old‐style’ development policies and ‘new‐style’ approaches. The agility with which countries adapt their ways of working shapes not only how effective they are in pursuing their development objectives, but also has implications for the fortunes of their most globally oriented cities.
In this book we evaluate how far world cities are moving forward to secure mutually productive relationships with their nation states and compatriot cities, and how much farther there is to go. We argue that there are many dimensions to this challenge that make it rather more complex than simply a question of growth and productive agglomeration. In the current cycle of globalisation, world cities have to develop the tools and the leadership to plan and guide their own success, but they also need national partners to help them achieve their competitive and citizen aspirations. Equally, world cities have to contribute actively to the health and vitality of the wider national economy, not just through redistributive fiscal mechanisms but also by acting as an interface for engaging with global markets and knowledge, and as a driver of complementary development and dispersed value chains. This also places responsibility on higher tiers of government to ensure that disparities do not become too great and to create viable strategies for balanced and complementary growth. This matrix of shared imperatives is displayed in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: The four dimensions of successful national government and world city relationships.
Different models and starting points
The relationships between national governments and world cities are important and far‐reaching in all cases, and the message from this book is that their character varies widely. As we show, the mega‐trends of continental integration, globalisation and de‐centralisation do not play out in the same way for all world cities. Each city inherits a different set of organisations, state structures and path dependencies (see Table 1.1). As such, when it comes to finding a new path conducive to the global urban age, they have a different set of constraints and needs.
Table 1.1: Government systems and city designations in the 12 world cities
Note: Under Hong Kong’s ‘one country two systems model’, the city has a high degree of legal and fiscal autonomy akin to a city‐state, but within a Chinese national framework that controls security, defence, and foreign relations, and exercises influence more broadly.
National government system
Higher tiers of govt
Metropolitan government
Special designated city
Hong Kong
Unitary
1
No
Yes
London
Unitary
1
Yes
No
Moscow
Federal
1
Yes
Yes
Mumbai
Federal
2
No
No
New York
Federal
2
No
No
Paris
Unitary
1
Yes
No
São Paulo
Federal
2
No
No
Shanghai
Federal
1
Yes
Yes
Singapore
City‐State
0
—
—
Seoul
Unitary
1
Yes
Yes
Tokyo
Unitary
1
Yes
Yes
Toronto
Federal
2
No
No
Arguably the most decisive factor that shapes the relationship between world cities and nation states is the national system of government. There are essentially four basic types of political arrangement that set the terms for the responsibilities of national government and for the nature of the dialogue between a world city and its national government:
Centralised unitary systems;
Federal systems;
Specially empowered cities;
Independent city‐states.
This typology is the basis for the following sections of the book which compare and contrast the intergovernmental relationships within these distinct models.
Centralised unitary systems
In centralised government systems, the central government controls most public spending and almost all macro policy on economic competition, taxation, infrastructure planning and immigration. These countries’ world cities are usually the capital city and centre of state power, which offers the competitive advantage that national politicians are automatically aware of many of the city’s obvious needs. In these nations the tensions between serving the needs of the world city and looking to the effects upon, and needs of, the second tier of cities and a wider set of regions, is often most acute. National leaders, therefore, tend to pay close attention to city policy and major city projects, and most large infrastructure projects depend on at least some national‐level capital investment. National policies may also designate key clusters and business districts and set the standard of social housing and public services. Examples include New Zealand, the Republic of Ireland, the United Kingdom, the majority of African countries and, to a lesser extent, France and Japan.
Federal systems with a strong tier of state government
In many federal systems it is the state or provincial governments that are de facto world city managers. This ‘middle’ tier usually has the authority to decide all the policies that shape how the world city develops: governance, fiscal policy, infrastructure planning and the allocation of resources to urban development or elsewhere. Even though the world city is always by far the largest in the state, the electoral balance in state governments is often tilted towards rural areas or smaller cities. This means that state‐level decisions rarely favour a pro‐urban or pro‐world city agenda.
Most world cities that operate under these arrangements are not national capital cities. Their relationship with the federal government is more remote, often mediated via a state or provincial government. Formally, these world cities are just one of several thousand municipalities vying for federal attention. This makes a customised relationship difficult, and puts the onus on city governments to be proactive and on the metropolitan area to self‐organise. Sometimes, the regional expansion of a world city may even spill over the borders of more than one state or province – as with New York City and Brussels – giving rise to obvious co‐ordination issues.
National governments in federal systems may issue directives, provide advisory support and fund programmes, but they do not become directly involved in urban governance, and the ministerial focus on the world city may be less sustained. With central grants typically comprising only 5–20% of city revenues, the government’s main roles lie elsewhere: their control of economic, population and immigration policies; their ownership of strategic public land; their management of railways, ports and airports; their research and infrastructure investment programmes; their welfare and poverty initiatives; and their national urban and economic development frameworks. Examples of this model include Australia, Brazil, Canada, India and the United States.
Specially empowered cities
A number of world cities enjoy a high degree of autonomy despite being ruled in full or in part by a sovereign national government and/or operating within a federal system. These federal systems are effectively hybrids, where most of the territory operates through a states and provinces system, but larger and important cities may attain an equivalent status to a state or province and manage their own affairs more directly. Moscow and Shanghai are examples of cities that are directly recognised by their federal governments and have gained a high level of self‐governing powers and fiscal resources. Hong Kong is a rather different and unique case, possessing a high degree of autonomy within the ‘one country, two systems’ approach. Abu Dhabi and Dubai constitute another model of highly empowered emirate cities within a broader confederation.
Independent city‐states
A very small number of cities have a fully independent or autonomous structure that means they are not administered as a part of any national government, and have their own diplomatic and military apparatus. These function as unified metropolitan areas with a highly centralised, unitary government and a single parliamentary chamber. The city‐state system assigns local bodies formal advisory and management roles, and so they do not form an empowered ‘lower tier’ of government that is found in cities such as London and Tokyo. Unlike other world cities, being a small city‐state demands constant attention to resource management (water, energy). Singapore fits the city‐state model more closely than any other major city. Cities such as Berlin and Hamburg are also sometimes described as city‐states because of their high degree of self‐government, but within this typology they belong among the specially empowered cities because they, of course, are subject to German federal legislation.
Other inherited factors
This book highlights three other important factors which shape the character of city‐state relationships in the modern age:
Size and scale;
Political polarisation;
The national system of cities.
First, world cities emerge in their own spatial context and evolve to have rather different population sizes and geographical scales (see Table 1.2 and Figure 1.2). Size alone is no determinant of the degree of global orientation or world city status. Dubai, for example, has rapidly emerged as a world city despite having a population of less than three million, whereas Mexico City and Cairo have only very limited functions of a world city despite their huge populations. Size and scale not only affect how world cities compete, but also affect their ability to thrive in inherited institutional frameworks. Land‐limited cities such as Singapore have not spilled over into a manufacturing hinterland, whereas Hong Kong has been able to through its relationship with the Pearl River Delta. But, for many emerging world cities, the major challenge is dealing with scale and getting the national system to adapt to realities of massive urbanisation (Figure 1.3). Weak growth management resulting from underpowered city government and/or weak alignment between institutional and functional geography, often results in congestion, low productivity, inequality and inflation.
Table 1.2: Size and scale of world cities and world city regions
Sources: Census and Statistics Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, 2015; Greater London Authority Datastore, 2015; INSEE, 2016a, 2016b; Russian Federation Federal Statistics Service, 2014; Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, 2015; IBGE, 2015; National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2015; Department of Statistics Singapore, 2015; Seoul Metropolitan Government, 2015; Tokyo Metropolitan Government, 2014; Ontario Ministry of Finance, 2014; Statistics Bureau of Guangdong Province, 2015; Office for National Statistics (UK), 2014; United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2014; United States Census Bureau, 2014; EMPLASA, 2016; Statistics Korea, 2016; Geographical Information Authority of Japan, 2014; OECD Stat., 2016.
City
City population/m.
City size/km
2
Region
Regional population/m
Region size/km
2
Hong Kong
7.3
1100
Greater Pearl River Delta
65
55,000
London
8.8
1500
Greater South East
24
39,700
Moscow
12.2
2500
Moscow and Moscow Region
19
47,000
Mumbai
12.6
440
Mumbai Metropolitan Region
21.5
4350
New York
8.5
1100
Tri‐state region
23
34,000
Paris
2.2
105
Île‐de‐France
12
12,000
São Paulo
12
1500
São Paulo Metropolitan Region
21
8000
Shanghai
24.2
6200
Yangtze River Delta
100
100,000
Singapore
5.5
720
—
—
—
Seoul
9.8
605
National Capital Region
26
12,000
Tokyo
13.5
2200
Tokyo Metropolis
36
14,000
Toronto
2.9
630
Greater Toronto Area
6.7
14,000
Figure 1.2: Comparative size of world cities and their metropolitan regions.
Figure 1.3: Comparative density of 12 world city government units and their metropolitan regions.
Given the different models of governance described above and the different patterns of ‘shared authority’ implicit in all of the models, it is clear that a high degree of negotiated collaboration between world cities and nation states is desirable. However, negotiated working is not always easy to achieve because of a second factor: intergovernmental conflict. Division along party political lines often influences the speed of progress for world cities. This is especially true in cities that are deeply polarised politically and ideologically, which, from this book’s case studies, include São Paulo, Toronto and Paris, but also include cities such as Milan, Madrid, Brussels and Buenos Aires. In federal systems, the incumbent state government is often ruled by a different party to the city government. Inter‐party rivalry can result in deadlock and tension, and brief periods of political alignment represent an important opportunity to build trust, deliver reform and push through projects.
A third factor is the national system of cities within which world cities sit. Capitals such as London, Moscow, Paris and Seoul have historically always been much larger than their national counterparts due to their lead roles in industrialisation, commerce, trade, institution hosting, diplomatic and media functions, decision‐making and even empire. The urban system may have evolved over time, but their position at the top of the hierarchy is absolutely unchallenged. This means that these cities dominate the political, economic and cultural life of their nations, and central governments are usually vigilant about their impact on national affairs. World cities that tower above the rest of their country’s urban system have great advantages of agglomeration and political influence. However, sometimes they must also manage political grievances that emerge when disparities are perceived to grow too large.
In other city systems, world cities have developed in a context where some compatriot cities are as large, if not larger, than them and where they are not the automatic gateway for investors and decision‐makers. At certain points in the last 50 years, Mumbai, Shanghai and Toronto have all been less favoured by their national governments compared to other large cities (Delhi, Beijing and Montreal, respectively), and each operates in a more evenly balanced system with three to six other major population and corporate centres. To a lesser extent, a diffuse national system is also visible in the cases of New York and São Paulo, where competitive or antagonistic relations with other big cities are much less common (Table 1.3). In this book we argue that the character of the national system of cities is important if world cities are to manage some of the negative externalities that accompany their own growth and success.
Table 1.3: Size of world cities’ metropolitan areas compared to their nation state
% of national population
% of national GDP
Singapore
100
100
Seoul
50
46
Tokyo
28
32
Paris
19
31
London
19
28
Toronto
17
17
São Paulo
10
18
Moscow
8
30
New York
5
8
Shanghai
2
4
Mumbai
1.5
7.5
Hong Kong
0.5
4
Overview of the book
This book is divided into five sections. Section I sets the scene for substantive case studies and analysis later on. In Chapter 2, we put the current dilemmas between world cities and nation states in historic context and review the existing literature that addresses this specific question. The status of the nation state amid the rise of world cities has been neglected and under‐estimated. The chapter examines the new wave of optimism about cities’ capacity to shape their own policies and destinies. It urges caution about this optimism and proposes a more comparative international perspective. Recent work on a wider mix of world cities and changing national governance is highlighted, which lays the groundwork for the approach taken in the rest of the book.
Sections II, III and IV examine the changing world city/nation state relationships on a city‐by‐city basis. Each section addresses different types of government systems which provide many of the initial conditions for how multi‐level governance can unfold and evolve.
Section II examines ‘unitary’ systems, nation states whose sovereignty is concentrated within a single centralised government. This system remains the most popular in the world, adopted in more than three‐quarters of nation states. There are several reasons why unitary systems were established. Frequently, they evolved from systems of monarchical rule where authority was enforced from a core power base. They were also a popular solution for countries that, when founded, were relatively ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. In this system, the spectrum of powers and autonomy that sub‐national units such as cities or regions can exercise may vary, but always depends on decisions made by central government. In unitary systems, the largest and most globally oriented city is nearly always the capital city, which brings distinctive tensions in how the city itself is governed. Indeed, there are many examples where central governments have been known to abolish city or metropolitan governments altogether. The proximity of national politicians to the city itself, however, does ensure that the world cities featured in this section are always uppermost in public and political debate.
Chapter 3 picks up the story of London, a historically independent and assertive city in a highly centralised unitary government arrangement. London, in many respects, epitomises the challenges currently facing world cities, especially in terms of growth management, investment, national inequalities and political hostility. This chapter reviews the important cycles of improvement in city governance over the past 30 years and the role of actively engaged ministries and units within central government. Despite success with eye‐catching co‐funded projects, the city is now confronting the implications of a highly centralised public finance system and the unusually weak recent economic performance of the UK’s large secondary cities. Despite the risks to London presented by the UK’s decision to leave the European Union in 2016, the institutional development in and with cities since 2010 promises a new era of more negotiated intergovernmentalism and a more empowered system of metropolitan governments and combined authorities across the UK.
In Chapter 4 we review the other leading world city in Europe, Paris. As the capital of an archetypal centralised state, Paris has experienced a great deal of institutional re‐shuffling in recent years amid the push to build a metropolitan approach to innovation, housing and social cohesion. This chapter describes the renewed engagement of senior national officials in the Grand Paris project, which has coincided with the ongoing fragmentation of the whole capital region into numerous spheres of authority. It assesses whether the latest cycle of reforms has the practical effect of enhancing Paris’s capacity to deliver change at the pace and scale that is needed to address existing gaps. The Paris experience offers lessons about effective and ineffective state interventions in an institutionally overcrowded metropolis.
With a capital region of nearly half the national population, the city of Seoul plays a fundamental role in shaping the Korean economy and society. In Chapter 5, the role of the national government in supporting Seoul’s transition into an upper‐income world city is explored. As a designated ‘special city’ with its own metropolitan government and directly elected mayor, Seoul is emerging out of a long history of centralised rule. The city and nation state now have to negotiate the externalities of the capital’s growth, including its under‐managed regional scale of development and the limited attractiveness of Korea’s second‐tier cities. The chapter underlines the importance of national governments adopting different approaches to their world cities in new cycles of development.
The case of Tokyo, explained in Chapter 6, reveals the challenges of governing the world’s most populated urban area in the context of persistent low economic growth and deflation. Tokyo is still the only city in Japan governed as a metropolitan prefecture, and has special fiscal and political autonomy that give it unusually wide tax‐raising and service delivery capability. Policy co‐operation between the city and the national government has been essential to revitalise the urban fabric and make Tokyo more open to investment, but the limits of its world city model are now being reached. The chapter provides perspective on the constraints that a national government can come up against in seeking to make reforms in the interests of the competitiveness of its world city.
Section III examines the challenges for world cities that exist in federal states where political power is more dispersed and when attention on leading cities is more inconsistent. Many of the largest and most diverse and influential countries have a federal character. In federal systems, state and provincial government units share sovereignty with the national government, which prohibits unilateral changes or reforms from the national level. In many cases, it is the states and provinces themselves which are unitary and have the authority to amalgamate or empower local municipalities. Different federal systems organise distinctive powers and responsibilities in governmental tiers, and so the relationship between the world cities and the national governments varies among the four systems outlined in this section.
Chapter 7 turns to India to explore the challenges of Mumbai, as a megacity and national financial hub, in negotiating support and reform from above. Mumbai is an example of a world city whose higher tier of government has failed to create the institutions or the planning and co‐ordination mechanisms required to govern the metropolitan space. This chapter describes the mixed effects of past reforms and investments and explains how the Government of India policy has not created the conditions for the state government to overcome short‐term political imperatives and act in the long‐term interest of its major city. The current national government has been a cause for optimism around smarter and more business‐friendly growth, but the chapter reflects on the urgency to make a step change that will allow Mumbai to avoid becoming permanently locked in to an unsustainable and unequal growth model.
New York City, the subject of Chapter 8, today has arguably the most remote relationship with its national government of any of the cities featured in this book. The lack of attention paid by the federal government to its main business hub in the past 20 years is contributing to unmanaged regional growth, under‐investment, an affordability crisis and environmental vulnerability. This chapter shows how federal support for New York City now tends to manifest in the form of crisis response. It highlights the risks that are even posed to world‐class cities if national governments disinvest, apply rigidly prescriptive policies and become polarised along ideological lines.
Located 1000 kilometres south of the capital Brasilia, São Paulo’s attempts to engage its federal government in recognising its position as Brazil’s world city are the focus of Chapter 9. The city has still not come to terms with its earlier 50‐year surge in in‐migration and continues to face a substantial infrastructure deficit and major investment needs which require help from higher tiers of government. The chapter illustrates how fruitful relationships between federal and world city governments in emerging economies require committed leadership, especially in a context where large metropolitan areas lack recognition in national public life. São Paulo has worked hard to show it can be more than simply a tax resource for poorer regions and needs to be supported through fiscal reforms, funding disbursements and changes to regulation.
Chapter 10
