Transcript The Social Structure of Globalization

Urbanization and World City
Formation in China
Shanghai’s Shifting Position in National
and Global Networks of Cities
Michael Timberlake & Xiulian Ma
University of Utah
Objectives of Research Program
 Contribute
to research identifying China’s
leading cities
 Document changes in Chinese cities’
relative importance in national and global
city systems.
 Address broader theoretical issues in
political economy of globalization
Key Assumptions of Research
 Cities
grow and decline in the context of economic
regions.
 Such regions are nested, interlocking, and
hierarchical.
 As basing points in economic regions, cities serve
to integrate these regions internally through their
interrelations.
 The leading cities in a region may serve as bridges
across regions and hierarchical levels.
Key focus of presentation
 China’s
national system of cities
 Chinese cities’ positions in the world
system’s city system.
 Identifying China’s “World Cities”
Increasing size of the urban population
1000000
Mean Urban Population
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
2030
2025
2020
2015
2010
2005
2000
1995
1990
1985
1980
1975
1970
1965
1960
1955
1950
Year
40.0
Mean % Urban
Increasing level of urbanization
80.0
60.0
20.0
0.0
2030
2025
2020
2015
2010
2005
2000
1995
1990
1985
1980
1975
1970
1965
1960
1955
1950
Year
 Underlying
theme: China’s increasing participation
in the global economy
China ahead in foreign direct
investment
Published: August 2003
--OECD Observer
 And
concomitant explosive economic
growth
 Have
resulted in
– Increasingly integrated national system of cities
– Increasing centrality of key Chinese cities in
the world system’s city system
Globalization and Cities: Theoretical
Background
Globalization
 the
“facts”
– many global processes
are “place bound”
 the
“dominant
narrative”
– decentralization
natural resource extraction regime
manufacturing regime
Tire “building” in Akron
P-15 & D-24 HOOD ORNAMENT ASSEMBLY Detroit
finance regime
World Cities
 nodes
in the international system
“World Cities”
 Major
cities found throughout the world
that “articulate” one major economic region
with another major economic region,
usually transnationally.
 As
in previous GaWC diagram, some world
cities are more globally “central” than
others.
Global Cities:
Atop the World City Hierarchy
 key
nodes in the international system
 sites for crucial “producer” services
 sites for telecommunications centers
 sites for financial control
 sites for transnational markets
 Global Control Centers
Global Control Centers:
The Key Global Cities
New York
London
Tokyo
World System of Cities
 The
hierarchy extends through the world
system, from the top global cities through
the whole system.
T h e G l o b a l S y s t e m : A W e b o f P l a c e -B o u n d T r
L ocale 1
C i ty 1
L ocale 5
L ocale 2
L o ca le 3 L o ca le 4
C i ty 2
L ocale 6
C i ty 3
L o ca le 7
L o ca le 8
Conceptualizing the Global InterCity Transactions
 Relative
centrality in networks of
overlapping intraorganizational control
capacity across cities (e.g., from
headquarters to branch offices)—Peter
Taylor and associates.
 Relative
centrality in flow networks of
commodities, people, and information.
Cities and International
Transactions: Functions
 economic
flows
Holiday Velour
from L.L. Bean
Select an
item:
TA 34658
Petite
$79.00
Regular
$79.00
Cities and International
Transactions: Functions
 political
transactions
Cities and International
Transactions: Functions
 cultural flows
Rolling Stones guitarist Ron Wood rocks out to "It's Only Rock and
Roll" with tour bassist Darryl Jones, Saturday night at Ford Field
Cities and International
Transactions: Functions
 social
(social reproduction) transactions
Cities and International
Transactions: Functions
 economic
flows
 political transactions
 cultural flows
 social (social reproduction) transactions
cities and international
transactions: content
 human
transactions
 material transactions
 symbolic transactions
human
economic
political
cultural
social
reproduction
material
information
economic flows
 commodities
and capital
 orders and directives within and between
firms
 businessmen/women
 labor migration
political flows
 arms
shipments
 ambassadors
 invasions
 international treaties
cultural flows
 designer
clothes
 popular music
 scientific exchange
 theater/dance troupes
 literature
 popular cinema
social reproduction
 CARE
packages and other humanitarian aid
 family migration
 “remittances”
 personal mail, telephone calls, e-mail
Cities are hierarchically linked in
such networks of globallystructured flows
Network Analysis and
Network Data
 Strict
data requirements
– input/output for every pair within an alleged
network
Air passenger travel
Findings
 National
City System
 Top Cities’Positions on Four Network
Measures (Outflow, Betweenness,
Closeness, and Outdegree), four time points
(1992, 1995, 2000, and 2003).
Outflow
12000000
10000000
8000000
Beijing
6000000
Guangzhou
Shanghai
4000000
2000000
0
1992
1995
2000
2003
Betweenness
12
10
8
Beijing
6
Guangzhou
Shanghai
4
2
0
1992
1995
2000
2003
an
Sh
an
gh
Ch
ai
an
gc
hu
n
Sh
en
ya
ng
La
nz
ho
Sh
u
en
zh
en
W
uh
an
Ch
en
gd
u
Xi
Be
ijin
G
g
ua
ng
zh
ou
1992 Betweenness
12
10
8
6
Series1
4
2
0
an
Sh
en
y
ia
n
an
g
Da
l
W
uh
an
Ch
on
gq
in
g
Sh
en
zh
en
Xi
Be
ijin
g
G
ua
ng
zh
ou
Sh
an
gh
ai
Ch
en
gd
u
1995 Betweenness
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
an
Ch
en
gd
u
Ch
on
gq
in
g
Sh
en
ya
ng
W
uh
an
Zh
en
gz
ho
u
Sh
en
zh
en
Xi
G
ua
ng
zh
ou
Sh
an
gh
ai
Be
ijin
g
2000 Betweenness
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
an
Ch
on
gq
in
g
Ku
nm
in
g
Q
in
gd
ao
Sh
en
zh
en
Xi
u
an
Ch
en
gd
Jin
Be
ijin
g
ha
G
i
ua
ng
zh
ou
Sh
an
g
2003 Betweenness
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Closeness
102
100
98
96
94
92
90
88
86
84
82
80
Beijing
Guangzhou
Shanghai
1992
1995
2000
2003
OutDegree
43
42
41
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
Beijing
Guangzhou
Shanghai
1992
1995
2000
2003
Table 8. Blocks of Chinese cities, and network positions in 1992 and 2003
1992
2003
1992
2003
Block
1
Beijing, Shanghai,
Guangzhou (3)a
Beijing, Shanghai,
Guangzhou, Shenzhen (4)
Core
Core
2
Haikou, Guilin, Hong
Kong, Shantou, Xian (5)
Chengdu, Haikou, Hong
Kong (3)
SPb 1
SP 1
3
Chengdu, Chongqing,
Dalian, Fuzhou,
Hangzhou, Harbin,
Kunming, Nanjing,
Shenyang, Shenzhen,
Urmqi, Wuhan, Xiamen
(13)
Chongqing, Dalian,
Hangzhou, Harbin,
Kunming, Nanjing,
Qingdao, Shenyang, Wuhan,
Xiamen, Xian (11)
SP 2
SP 2
a
b
The number in the parenthesis indicates how many cities the block includes.
“SP” = Semi-periphery, “P” = periphery, “D” =“Disconnected
1992
2003
1992
2003
Block
4
Changsha, Guiyang, Hefei,
Lanzhou, Nanning,
Qingdao, Taiyuan,
Tianjing, Wenzhou, ,
Zhengzhou (10)
Changsha, Urumq,
Changchun, Fuzhou,
Wenzhou, Taijing, Jinan,
Guilin, Guiyang, Zhengzhou
(10)
P
SP3
5
Hothot, Jinan, Nanchang,
Ningbo, Yantai (5)
Hefei, Shantou, Ningbo,
Nanchang, Nanning,
Taiyuan, Yantai (7)
P
P
6
Qiqihar, Xining, Yinchuan
(3);
Lanzhou, Xining (2)
D
D
7
Baotou, Changchun,
Lasha, Shijiazhuang (4)
Baotou, Yinchuan (2)
D
D
8
Hothot, Lasha, Qiqihar,
Shijiazhuang (4)
D
Findings
 China’s
Cities in the World City Hierarchy
Global Outflow
250
200
Beijing
150
Guangzhou
Shanghai
100
Hong Kong
50
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
Global Outdegree
250
200
Beijing
150
Guangzhou
Shanghai
100
Hong Kong
50
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
Global Betweenness
250
200
Beijing
150
Guangzhou
Shanghai
100
Hong Kong
50
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
Global Outclosenness
300
250
Beijing
200
Guangzhou
150
Shanghai
100
Hong Kong
50
0
1990
1995
2000
2005
Table 9. Network Blocks and Positions in the World City System in 1990
Blocks
Cities
Position
1…Seoul/Bangkok
(13)
Bangkok, Dublin, Hong Kong, Honolulu, Jakarta, Kuala Lumpur, London, New York,
Paris, Seoul, Singapore, Taipei, Tokyo
Core
2…Amsterdam (51)
Amsterdam, Athens, Atlanta, Auckland, Banjul, Barcelona, Boston, Brussels, Cairo,
Chicago, Copenhagen, Cork, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Fukuoka, Geneva,
Guadalajara, Guam Island, Hamburg, Jeddah, Lisbon, Los Angeles, Madrid,
Malaga, Malta, Manila, Mexico City, Miami, Milan, Montreal, Munich, Nagoya,
Nice, Osaka, Oslo, Penang, Puerto Plata, Pusan, Rome, Saipan, San Francisco,
Santo Domingo, Seattle, Shannon, Stockholm, Sydney, Toronto, Vancouver,
Vienna, Washington DC, Zurich
SP 1
3…Berlin West (7)
Berlin West, Bombay, Dallas, Dubai, Houston TX, Montevideo, “San Juan, PR”
SP 2
4…Birmingham (42)
Birmingham, Bogota, Brisbane, Budapest, Buenos Aires, Calgary, Cancun, Caracas,
Casablanca, Christchurch, Cologne, Delhi, Detroit, Dhahran, Guatemala City,
Istanbul, Karachi, Kingston, Larnaca, Lima, Manchester, Marseilles, Melbourne,
Montego Bay, Monterrey, Moscow, Nandi, Panama/Balboa, Perth, Prague, Puerto
Vallarta, Rio De Janeiro, Riyadh, San Jose, Santiago, San Paulo, Stuttgart, Tampa
FL, Teheran, Tel Aviv, Tunis, Warsaw
SP 3
5…Abidjan (5)
Abidjan, Colombo, Harare, Lagos, Nairobi
SP 4
6…Darwin (4)
Darwin, Conakry, Niamey, Oujda
SP 5
7…Addis Ababa (5)
Addis Ababa, Alexandria, Manaus, Santiago COMP., Stansted
SP 6
Table 9. Network Blocks and Positions in the World City System in 1990
9…Beijing
(25)
Aruba, Basel, Beijing, Bilbao, Bordeaux, Dakar, Faro,
Gothenburg, Hanover, Ho Chi Minh CY, Lyon,
Madras, Mazatlan, Medan, Okinawa, Oporto, Palma
Mallorca, Philadelphia, Pisa, Port Au Prince,
Rotterdam, San Jose CABO, Toulouse, Turin, Venice.
P
15…Shanghai Acapulco, Adelaide , Ankara, Antwerp, Bahrain ISLD,
(27)
Bergen, Bologna, Bremen, Calcutta, Cali, Edinburgh,
Edmonton, Glasgow, Graz, Havana, Kano, Linz,
Marrakech, “Papeete, Tahitt”, Paramaribo, Rabat,
Reykjavik, Salonika, Salzburg, Shanghai, Tenerife,
Valencia
P
Table 10. Network Blocks and Positions in the World City System in 2005
1…Seoul/Bangkok (13)
Amsterdam, Bangkok, Dubai, Frankfurt, Hong Kong,
London, Madrid, New York, Paris, Seoul, Singapore,
Taipei, Tokyo
Core
2…Beijing/Shanghai
(29)
Athens, Barcelona, Beijing, Boston, Buenos Aires,
Chicago, Copenhagen, Guam Island, Honolulu, Jakarta,
Johannesburg, Kuala Lumpur, Lisbon, Los Angeles,
Malaga, Manila, Mexico City, Munich, Osaka, Oslo,
Prague, San Francisco, Santiago, San Paulo, Shanghai,
Stockholm, Sydney, Toronto, Washington DC,
SP 1
Table 10. Network Blocks and Positions in the World City System in 2005
5…Guangzhou/
Birmingham, Bucharest, Budapest, Busan, Cairns, Cairo,
Shengyang(27)
Cancun, Dallas/ Fort Worth, Delhi, Detroit, Edinburgh,
Glasgow, Guangzhou, Hamburg, Helsinki, Hanover, Ho
Chi Minh CY, Kuwait, Lyon, Mauritius, Montevideo,
Penang, Philadelphia, Rio De Janeiro, Saipan, Shengyang,
Stuttgart, Vienna
SP 4
6…Baku (5)
Baku, Kyiv, Monterrey, Port-Au-Prince, Yerevan
SP 5
7…Calgary (11)
Calgary, Dhaka, Guatemala City, Guayaquil, Male, Managua,
Medellin, Panama City, Quito, San Salvador, Tashkent
SP 6
8…Dalian (18)
Bahrain, Bilbao, Bristol, Christchurch, Cincinnati, Dalian,
Denver, Gothenburg, Hanoi, Jeddah, Krakow, Leeds,
Puerto Vallarta, Sevilla, Turin, Valencia, Yangon
P
9…Hangzhou/Kun Antananarivo, Bangalore, Beirut, “Charlotte, NC”, Cochin,
ming/
Hangzhou, Hanover, Hyderabad, Islamabad, Kolkata,
Xiamen/Yantai
Kunming, Lahore, Nairobi, Naples, Newcastle, Ottawa,
(27)
Phuket, Riga, Sapporo, Seattle, Sofia, Tallinn, Vilnius,
Xiamen, Yantai, Zagreb, Zurich
P
Summary Findings
 Consolidation
and integration of Chinese
national city system over past 15 years.
 Remarkable rise of Shanghai within this
national city system.
 Increasing integration of Chinese city
regions in global economy.
 Emergence of Shanghai as China’s World
City
Summary Findings
Remarkable
Rise of
Shanghai
within the
National City
System
Increasing integration of Chinese city regions in global economy
Emergence of Shanghai as China’s World City
Theoretical Discussion
 Importance
of national city system to world city
formation vs. declining significance of the state.
– Increasing national city system articulation
accompanies world city formation.
 Beijing
as world city (as well as Shanghai)—
again, importance of role of the state.
 Bejing’s role in Shanghai’s rise as world city.
– State-centered urban “development coalition”?
Future research
 Social
polarization and world city
formation?
 Changing role of the state with respect to
social programs.
 Labor markets and rural-urban migration.
 Sustainability.
Social polarization and world city formation?
Changing role of the state with respect to social programs
Labor markets and rural-urban migration
Sustainability.
The environment