Western development economists believe newly developing nations (still in the industrial process) have to forge their own development institutions and ideologies. While they have a different set of problems in relation to being less technologically advanced, less developed nations also have a hidden reserve of labor, savings, and entrepreneurship. Nations wishing to advance require a strong state that will actually “get something done. ” Tokyo, Japan ? Beginning in the 1920s-1940s (post-WWII), Japanese developmentalism addressed industrialization at the level of the nation-state and focused on national production to maximize gains from international trade.
State regulation and non-market governance mechanisms were used to control market: restrain competition and maintain orderly, long-term economic growth and productivity. Japanese managers emphasized cooperative industrial relations, in contrast to conflict-prone Western market-centered bourgeois counterparts. Family based zaibatsu business groups were reorganized into management-controlled keiretsu networks. Keiretsu networks and the main bank system influence big-firm strategies via the supply and cost of capital to networks, and the system was also designed to protect Japanese companies against foreign penetration and short-term profit pressures.
Tokyo’s relationship to the world economy is not driven in the first instance by market efficiency but by a strategic concern to preserve national autonomy through global economic power. That is, Japan’s economic power is indexed by world market shares held by the nation’s industries. Tokyo’s hierarchy is not determined by the city’s ability to attract global investments, but by the ability of companies to generate earnings from abroad. ? Tokyo’s global control apparatus resides in financial and industrial policy networks among public policy companies, banks and industrial enterprises under the guidance of government. ? ? i. Emphasis on reinvestment and employment rather than high profits and individual consumption.
Tokyo does not follow world city theory because: Still persistence of manufacturing jobs: in fact, one-quarter of Tokyo still works in manufacturing, mostly high-tech, research-intensive pilot plants and headquarters of companies, ii. iii. iv. ? Low levels of immigration, Fairly equal wealth distribution: as opposed to extreme income disparity, Fairly equal social and spatial distribution: as opposed to polarization. The clash between classes in the state-centered ‘productionist’ world city is not between transnational and local capital classes but between bourgeois and political-bureaucratic elites. ? Tokyo does not part with the Japanese nation and central state: Japan is a unitary state. Seoul, South Korea ? The Seoul Metropolitan Region (SMR) is Korea’s command post for government planning and business management.
Due to scarce natural resources and a small domestic market, the State subsidized export oriented industries, and so South Korea industrialized by exporting to overseas markets. ? Seoul is a basing-point for TNCs but contrary to world city theory, Seoul’s TNCs are industrial, not finance or producer service companies. Most are manufacturing and construction firms. ? Contrary to world city model, Seoul is primarily a national basing point for global operations of Korean TNCs. The State has controlled the inward and outward flow of foreign investment until recently. ? Seoul’s global control apparatus is anchored in central government ministries and the state’s continuous channels of communication with business leaders to monitor industrial performance.
State offers credit (money) to help with overhead investment costs in the initial stage of industry. Without it, Korea’s rapid transformation would not be possible. ? Companies who finance investments through bank credit and foreign loans (instead of above) are in heavy debt. By controlling finance, Korean government became risk partner to launch projects. And by controlling banks, government created incentives for firms to maximize assets and growth for long term achievements. ? i. ii. Seoul does not follow world city theory because: Most migrants are from Korea’s countryside not abroad. Fairly equal wealth distribution: as opposed to extreme income disparity. Income disparity between wards hard to discern.
Still not under the sway of transnational class: instead, state officialdom led the industrialization effort. The state is still the bureaucratic elite, not the bourgeoisie, iv. Korea is a unitary state: the city is not growing apart from the country, but on par with, as a whole, v. Still persistence of manufacturing jobs: in fact, one-quarter of Seoul’s labour still works in manufacturing, mostly high-tech, research-intensive pilot plants and headquarters of companies. Conclusion: Tokyo and Seoul do not conform to the world city model. They are: ? National basing-point for their own national transnational corporations, to help generate wealth from foreign investment and trade.
Knowledge-intensive manufacturing and command and control intensive, Have not experienced severe manufacturing decline, rapid expansion in producer service employment, extensive foreign immigration or much social special polarization, Under sway of bureaucratic elite, not transnational capitalist class, Are intenerated with the rest of the country. The world city paradigm makes sense in market-centered New York and London, but not in statecentered Tokyo and Seoul. ? These countries are attempting to open their markets to foreign competition and to pursue national and regional industrial policies simultaneously. Soja Reading for JGI 216 Midterm LA centrifugal metropolis with suburbs in search of a city.
LA was poised to get a lot of public housing investment money They experienced defeat and uproar from anti-socialists Acceleration of ethnic communities in the 60’s dominated the downtown (lots of ghettos were created) “LA seems to break every rule of urban readability and refularity, challenging all traditions of what is urban and what is not” 181 Amsterdam. Bicycle is prime source of transportation Downtown=quaint Transitional concepts of urban form and function Absence of a housing shortage Note: centrum is privately owned for the most part, the rest of the city is social housing Amsterdam Squatter movement “a fight for the rights to the city itself, especially for the young and for the poor. Nowhere has this struggle been more successful than in Amsterdam.
Nowhere has it been less successful than LA” Geographical Recomposition of Urban Form ? “The current geographical recomposition is in large part a continuation on a larger scale of the decentralization and polunucleation of the industrial capitalist city that was begun in the last half of the ninteenth century” 183 ? ? Note: size and scales of city is rapidly reaching unprecedented levels Industrial growth Factors of Creating a New Global City ? ? Geographical Recomposition of Urban Form Increasing Internationalization of the Regional Metropolis o Scope of cities’ internationalization in terms of capital and labour differentiates current and past cities o o o ?
Today: first, second and third world cities are integrated into global economy (unlike before) Today world cities penetrate local cities’ decision making ability (unlike before ) Today foreign workers invade local labour sectors (unlike before) Industrial Reconstructing o Reconstructing of the organization of production and the labor process, reindustrialization and the downfall of large assembly based industries = new dynamic of uneven development
Increasing social and economic Polarization o Led to new social divides and therefore changes in employment in cities that shaped how a global city looked ? Neoconservative form of post-modernism o Where image replaces reality and the simulated representations assume increasing political and economic power is reshaping popular ideologies and everyday life
Soja is trying to explore how both cities (LA and Amsterdam) are very different in themselves for a variety of reasons (urban structure, population, population diversity, economy, history etc…) but together they demonstrate a new path of urbanization that is very different from the process that shaped the industrial capitalist period.
The monster house In the 80s back in Vancouver, there was a massive wave of Asian (Honk Kong) immigrant that bought the neighbourhood houses, knock them down, altered the neighbourhood style and caused massive out roar by residents that felt their violated leading to a huge wave of racism. Margit Mayer (2000: 207) “Opposition movements have formed both in the cities and at their peripheries.
They have either built on existent (latent) networks or organizations, or have sprung up anew, and they range from defensive and pragmatic efforts to save existing quality of life or privileges (which are sometimes progressive, environmentally conscious, and inclusive, but other imes selfish, anti-immigrant, or racist) to highly politicized and militant struggles over whose city it is supposed to be (as in anti-gentrification struggles or movements against other growth policies). Chrysler AD: Using patriotism as a way to sell more goods.
Finally, the third novel trend in urban politics is that the local level of politics has gained renewed significance (and in the process has transformed itself), simply because the concrete supply-side conditions making for structural competitiveness can neither be provided by multinationals’ strategies nor by uniform national policy. Similarly, many cultural projects have become part of the “official” city, and youth and social centers play acknowledged roles in integrating “problem groups” and potential conflict. these (former) movement organizations that have inserted themselves into the various municipal or foundation-sponsored funding programs play a rather complicated role within the urban movement scene.