Week 10: Lecture -The Virtual City-State: Singapore, Shanghai, Berlin and Beyond

Week 9:

Cities in the World System:

Singapore, Shanghai, Berlin, Dar es Salaam and Beyond

Topics: -

1. City-States, Virtual City-States, Capitals and Megacities

2. Sister-Cities and Inter-City Organisations

3. Cities and Foreign Policy

4. Population Growth, Megacities and The Sustainable City Project

5. Cities in War and 'Peace': The Strategic Perspective

6. World Cities in the World System

7. Bibliography, Resources and Further Reading

1. City-States, Virtual City-States, Capitals and Megacities

Cities and urban centres are one of the key elements in the development of most civilisations. They are key centres of invention, as well as foci of economic and political power (Masterton 2002). Today, cities are the focus of many crucial interactions: economic growth, industrial development, and global service centres. The crucial interaction of urban and rural areas (Taylor et al. 2001; Ginsburg et al. 1991), population growth and urbanisation, ecological impact areas, and strategic centres are located in or on the fringe of cities. They are also increasingly key actors in globalisation flows and transnational interactions. Yet cities as a category often receive extremely limited discussion in international relations, globalisation and strategic studies. We will focus on some of these important roles of the city as an international actor and node of interactions in the 20th-21st centuries. In the current period, with some decline in the centrality of the sovereign state, cities form one important element in a group of emerging supranational, global and sub-national units which have an important role to play in international affairs (Sassen 1991). Cities thus often form the locus for economic, political and cultural groups that work across national boundaries (for useful overviews of these issues, see Rosenau 1997; Ohmae 1993). They are part of global flows that reinforce the relative power of some geographical locations (cities and nations) that also form part of uneven globalisation (Taylor et al. 2001). They are also interfaces where the global and the local meet, with a strong tendency for the concerns of local citizens to flow into the wider relations of the city (see Cremer et al 2001).

In the past cities were also the centres of government and were sometimes sovereign states: these were the traditional city-states of ancient Greece, Phoenicia, and Mesopotamia. In the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the city-states of Italy in the Netherlands were also extremely important. The basic conception of the city-state is one major city controlling a relatively small hinterland of villages and small towns as its agricultural resource base. All political, economic and intellectual life was thus concentrated into a small and intense urban zone. City-states have thus been viewed as extremely creative hubs of civilisational development. The creation of democracy, written constitutional law, sophisticated trade and financial patterns, the development of Renaissance art and science have all in part been developed by the social conditions in city-states such as Athens, Corinth, Venice and Florence. In the long-run, most of these city-states were unable to secure enough military power to resist the armies of extended territorial nation-states and empires, but for some hundreds of years they were extremely successful.

In the early modern period, however, as empires were expanded and intercontinental patters of trade developed, major cities within Europe began to develop as the key centres of administrative and economic power. These forces were at first channelled through major trading cities, e.g. Venice, Amsterdam, London, and in part through emerging mercantilist European empires, Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, French, British (Braudel 1986). In general this may be the origin of the first 'world cities' which had a unique place in the global distribution of ideas, wealth and power. According to Fernand Braudel, these early world cities tended to rise and fall in relative succession, each one coming to relative dominance within the early capitalist world system (Braudel 1986). Today, however, some 9-20 cities jostle each other for pre-eminence as hubs of the current international order (Taylor 2001; see further below).Today, moreover, very few cities have the formal structure of city-states, e.g. Singapore, Macau (see Porter 1996), and the Vatican come close to his structure.

However, from the late 20th century a wide range of trends have begun to heighten the importance of cities, and to give them back considerable decision making powers and greater ability to act internationally. We thus speak of 'virtual city-states', i.e. cities which are part of a larger nation but in fact have a strong degree of autonomy and high levels of influence internationally.

These trends can be summarised: -

The existence of a number of cities, small countries, or small regional areas with full or partial sovereignty or autonomy, e.g. Macau, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, Kuwait, Catalonia, Quebec, all approximate this condition.

Hong Kong: A 'Virtual City-State' within PRC, a World City,

and a semi-autonomous administrative region

The existence of major trading-port cities, or cities with such central economic and financial roles that they are virtual international powers in an individual sense. Cities such as New York, London, Tokyo (for unique features of Tokyo, see Hill & Kim 2000), Shanghai (see Wu 2000), Paris, Frankfurt and Jakarta are important hubs of economic networks that make them much more than national urban centres (Shin & Timberlake 2000; Taylor et al 2001). Likewise, cities located in special economic zones in China (mainly along the coast) have had a major economic role in Chinese development, based upon greater economic autonomy and different administrative procedures for these regions (see Park 1997).

The emergence of a number of megacities whose populations often exceed those of medium-sized states. These megacities are great power-houses of social and economic activity, but also pose major problems for management, standards of living, and for the environment (Hardoy et al. 1993). These megacities are also a major source of population growth. Established megacities include New York, Shanghai, Mexico City, Bombay, New Delhi, Sao Paulo, Manila, Bogota and Cairo. On average, urban growth is 1.5 to 2.5 times greater than overall population increase in these cities (Friedmann 1995, p323). Definitions of the megacity remain arbitrary, but usually only cities with a population of over 5 or 10 million are significant. A short listing of such cities as of 2000 includes (Hinrichsen et al 2001): -

City--2000 Population

Tokyo 26.4

Mexico City 18.1

Bombay 18.1

Sao Paulo 17.8

Shanghai 17.0

New York 16.6

Lagos 13.4

Los Angeles 13.1

Calcutta 12.9

Buenos Aires 12.6

Dhaka 12.3

Karachi 11.8

Delhi 11.7

Jakarta 11.0

Osaka 11.0

Metro Manila 10.9

Beijing 10.8

Rio de Janeiro 10.6

Cairo 10.6

Megalopolises are also a possible trend in the 21st century: these are cases where several adjacent cities grow and merge, thereby creating a huge, extended urban environment. Likely prospects include the Boston to Washington strip, a South California strip centring on Los Angeles, the existing Tokyo-Osaka-Kyoto complex, a London-Midland cities complex, the Netherlands-central Belgium area, and extended corridors of urban development around Jakarta.

Around the world, a large number of cities have endured rapid but not always sustainable growth, but have been unable to provide the resources and infrastructure to support theirurban populations, leading to major health, developmental and environmental problems (Masterton 2002). This is led to a major rethinking of city development, the Sustainable City Programme, run by the UNEP, as well as being a major component of UN Habitat Conferences (see further below).

The existence of cities with great symbolic importance, either because they are the administrative capitals of major powers, or because of their unique histories. Cities such as Berlin, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Rome, Beijing, Washington D.C., Patna and Ujjain in India, Yogyakarta, Mecca, Jerusalem, Damascus, and Kyoto fulfil some of these roles.

Since the end of World War II, cities around the world have sought to increase their international activities and leverage, to form sister city linkages, and to create associations that bring together city managers to help solve common problems. These trends have given cities a greatly enhanced international profile, with some cities running their own foreign affairs policies (see below).

These trends have led to the emergence of cities as a major aspect of international relations and international political economy. These cities are often now linked in trade, information and command networks which give them a privileged position in the current age of globalisation. They are centres of transnational corporations, foci for migration and labour flows, and are often multicultural centres hosting diaspora populations with strong transnational connections, e.g. major cities near the U.S. and Mexico borders (see for example Goldring 2002). Hence, it is now possible to speak of a network of World Cities that in many ways is just as important as the network of nation-states.

2. Sister-Cities and Inter-City Organisations

One of the most active of the international activities of cities is based around sister-city alliances. This is a process whereby one city negotiates with another international city to enter into a specific relationship (sister cities) which formally recognises a special bond. Usually, sister cities are of similar size, share particular cultural or economic interests, or have a historical or ethnic connection. Larger cities will often have ties with several others around the world, e.g. Los Angeles has 16 sisters, while Moscow has 25 (Zelinsky 1990). Small towns will usually one have one or two such connections. There are more than 11,000 such sister-city arrangements globally, with some 1,200 U.S. towns and cities engaging with 1,858 communities in 125 countries (Ames 1999; Zelinsky 1990). In the United States these activities had become so vigorous that by 1956 a special organisation, Sister Cities International, had been set up to give advice and technical support in creating and supporting sister city connections, as well as arrange conferences (Ames; 1999; Zelinsky 1990).

However, the most active locus of sister city arrangements was found in Europe. These arrangements began in earnest after 1950, when 'the mayors of towns in war-torn Germany and France realized that informal, people-to-people links might be the most effective way to prevent future conflicts and eventually to create a united Europe' (Zelinsky 1990). France and Germany have over 3,000 twinnings for each country. British and German twinning were also prominent in the post-World War II period (see Brown 1998). Likewise, Hanover and Bristol from 1947 began to form a relationship, soon followed by other cities throughout Europe, leading to the Council of European Municipalities (CCRE): -

Oxford and Bonn were next in tying the knot, Reading and Dusseldorf followed suit, and the first German-French twinning, between Montbeliard and Ludwigsburg, came about in 1950. Surprisingly, yet in line with the original idea of informal contacts, the phenomenon was allowed to mushroom in a more or less random fashion until 1951, by which time Germany had well over 100 twinnings in place. That year saw the establishment of the Council of European Municipalities (CCRE) with offices in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Spain and Switzerland. For the first time, an assembly of 50 European mayors had got together to establish standards and guidelines by joint decisions, draw up standard twinning contracts and finally put the aims of twinning down on paper. The CCRE was hoping to promote a European spirit at grass roots level, encouraging the idea that Europe needed to unite in order to rebuild. Above all, it recognized the autonomy of - and democratic structures within - local government as the base of any democratic state and as a means actively to rule out the possibility of another dictatorship. Local government was to act as a mediator between people and national government, with a view to influencing national foreign policy over time. (Weyreter 2003)

Cities around the world have particular reasons for building these networks, and gain benefits from these sister city arrangements including: -

To improve trade, business connections and investment, e.g. Portland in the U.S. receives hundreds of millions of dollars in trade from its sister city of Sapporo in Japan, while Coldwater in the U.S. has received extra foreign investment through its sister city connection. Vancouver businesses have secured a number of major deals in China through their sister city connection with Guangzhou. (Zelinsky 1990). Likewise, Bandung in Indonesia has developed ties with Suwon in Korea, and recently developed ties with Abu Dhabi (in the United Arab Emirates, UAE) for these reasons (Muchtar 2001). Cities in New Zealand have sought linkages with communities in Australia, Japan and China, with linkages to Chinese cities mobilising face-to-face networking: -

The integrated approach to sister-cities is particularly necessary in the early phases of establishing a sister-city relationship with a Chinese city, when the formal, protocol based input of the mayor and councillors cannot be underestimated. Without visible and active support from the mayor and city councillors and other leading local personalities, initiatives and activities in China lack credibility and clout. Building a good relationship between the two respective city mayors is, on a very practical level, seen as a signal that administrative and bureaucratic procedures and obstacles can be overcome smoothly, a perception equally appropriate to business ventures and the involvement of chief executive officers. The cultural background to this is that the Chinese tend to emphasize individual authority, integrity and linkages more than procedures, contracts and organisations. The Chinese concept of "face" and "giving face to somebody" is also a good reason why city officials should be involved in sister-city activities whenever possible, especially at the beginning. (Cremer et al 2001)

Increase tourist and personal contacts, e.g. in the U.S. some 150,000 visitors come to sister cities each year.
Adopt a poorer or struggling city as a humanitarian gesture (Zelinsky 1990).
Direct technical and financial aid can flow between sister cities, e.g. Raleigh in the U.S. helped the city of Tetouan in Morocco construct its first waste-water treatment facility, with Raleigh helping get the $25-35 million needed from the US Agency for International Development, USAID (Superka 1992, p194).
Develop effective environmental or employment training schemes in a sister city, as in the trainee placements between Hamburg and St. Petersburg from 1992 (Wyreter 2003).
In response to historical or ethnic connections, e.g. New England towns linking to English towns which supplied original settlers, or Sante Fe's connection to cities in Mexico and Spain (Zelinsky 1990).
Less tangible educational and cross-cultural benefits by opening a window onto a different culture (see Cremer et al 2001).

Beyond sister city arrangements, however, cities and mayors have been able to build up other tools of solidarity on an international or global basis. In part this is due to the recognition that cities share many similar problems and needs, that problems can sometimes be solved by supporting each other, and that since cities are now the major loci of wealth and population growth, that collective action by cities can have a global impact. On this basis, groups such as the International City-County Management Association (ICMA) meet regularly to discuss shared interests and problems. In 1995, for example, 125 delegates met at the ICMA conference from more than 20 different countries (Honey 1996). It was recognised that today cities really operate in a global as well as a national context: 'Decisions that are made are interconnected through a cumulative impact on global sustainability, on worldwide systems of telecommunications, and on the global web of increasing economic interdependency' (Honey 1996). More recently the ICMA has also begin researching and extending the E-government concept whereby new IT technologies may deliver faster, more accountable and transparent government in modernising cities, though financial and legal restrains limit this trend (Moon 2002). Cities can thus help each other by providing economic opportunities, and by allowing the copying of best practices where ever they occur, e.g. recycling and environmental issues is one area where city managers can learn from each other and make a real gains (Honey 1996).

Cities can also promote good inter-cultural and inter-racial relations, both internationally and locally, through promoting certain skills and attitudes, e.g. within their own staffs and operations, 'develop the skills of cultural openness, cultural curiosity, and cultural humility' and 'embrace the cultural and ethnic diversity within our communities' (Honey 1996). These activities can be very important when globalisation trends begin to create fear and xenophobic reactions, or when minority nationalistic parties use these fears to their own ends. In Queensland, for example, the Brisbane City Council has been very keen to support multicultural events, e.g. the Buddhist festivals which were staged as a major multicultural event on the South Bank area (1997-2005). Likewise, Brisbane in 2002 strongly supported a major festival of international religious festival designed to support both multiculturalism and mutual tolerance of different religions. In Germany, sister city arrangements improved relations with French and British cities, while from the 1990s onward German and Russian cities were one avenue of German influence eastward (Weyreter 2003), and it has been suggested that new sister-city arrangements might help reduce current social tensions in Germany: -

Germany is now a nation facing many internal changes and problems. Above all, it is turning into a multicultural society where immigrants - mainly from Turkey, the Balkan states and the Middle East, a high percentage of them Muslims - have made their new home. Perhaps new twinning arrangements will reflect these changes. With Turkey and the Balkans already popular holiday destinations for Germans and with immigrants maintaining links to their countries of origin, nothing should really stand in the way. (Weyreter 2003)