Globalization and the World City System: Region, Role, and
Position since 1981
by
Arthur S. Alderson
Department of Sociology
Indiana University
*This research was supported by a grant from the World Society Foundation. Direct all
correspondence to Arthur S. Alderson, Department of Sociology, Indiana University,
Ballantine Hall 744, Bloomington, IN 47405. Email: aralders@indiana.edu.
World City Hypotheses
I. Stephen Hymer. 1972. "The Multinational Corporation and the Law of
Uneven Development."
II. John Friedmann. 1986. "The World City Hypothesis."
III. Saskia Sassen. 1991. The Global City: New York, London, and Tokyo
• All three see globalization fundamentally altering the geography of
inequality, but they differ strongly on exactly how it is changing.
• Hymer argues that globalization will reproduce and magnify existing
patterns of inequality and dependency.
• Friedmann and Sassen propose that a new geography of centrality and
marginality is emerging, one that cuts across established North/South
and East/West divides in the global system.
World City Hypotheses
• Hymer, Friedmann, and Sassen share the view the globalization has
been a fundamentally implosive, rather than explosive process. While
economic activity has been spatially dispersed, its organization is
described as growing increasingly centralized, centralized in the “world”
or “global cities.”
• All three thus share the view that the fate of cities has become
increasingly tied to their position in international flows of investment and
trade.
• Friedmann and Sassen differ in suggesting that such flows are
increasingly orthogonal to those of an earlier geography of inequality
constructed around the nation-state system.
Globalization and the World City System: Region, Role, and
Position since 1981
• How extensively has the global urban hierarchy been altered?
• Have power and prestige in the world city system grown more
concentrated?
• Does the new world city system cut across pre-existing patterns of
global inequality?
Data
• Our research focuses on a key relation linking cities into a world system
of cities: that between multinational enterprises and their subsidiaries.
• Headquarter and branch locations of the world’s 500 largest
multinationals in 1981 and 2000.
• Relational (network) data. Cities are linked by tie between multinational
headquarters and subsidiaries.
• Data coded as directional (i.e., distinguishing between senders and
receivers) and valued (i.e., allowing multiple ties between two cities).
• Data set links more than 3700 cities at two time points.
• In 2000, the total revenue of the Global 500 totaled $12.6 trillion, more
than twice the combined gross domestic product of the world’s 156
poorest societies.
Figure 1. 2- and 3-step paths from Indianapolis to Durham
Figure 2. 2- 3- and 4-step paths from Indianapolis to the Durham
Point Centrality
• Power of cities is assessed as outdegree, closeness, and
betweenness.
• Prestige of cities is assessed as indegree.
Point Centrality
The Star
The Circle
A
G
F
B
G
B
C
F
C
A
E
D
E
D
outdegree = the number of ties sent from city i
closeness = the inverse average distance between city i and all
others
betweenness = the probability that the paths linking cities j and k
contain city i
indegree = the number of ties that city i receives
Blockmodeling
• Regular equivalence blockmodeling partitions cities into sets composed
of cities have that the same relation to members of other equivalence
sets (e.g., Susan is daughter of Jane’s sister and Tess is daughter of
Lisa’s sister → “niece” and “aunt”).
• We focus in particular on two positions that emerge in the
blockmodeling: the primary and isolate positions.
Primary blocks = the “core” of the world city system, highly cliquish
sets of cities whose members are involved in high levels of relations
with outsiders (i.e., >exp in-group preference + >exp outdegree and
indegree)
Isolate blocks = the “periphery” of the world city system, internally
disconnected sets of cities whose only relations are with members of
more active sets (i.e., <exp in-group preference + <exp outdegree
and indegree)
Q1: How extensively has the global urban hierarchy been altered
across the era of globalization?
Method:
Calculate the Spearman rank-order correlation between each measure
of power and prestige in 1981 and 2000
Results:
outdegree 1981, 2000
closeness 1981, 2000
betweenness 1981, 2000
indegree 1981, 2000
r = 0.672
r = 0.568
r = 0.665
r = 0.616
Conclusions:
Spearman correlations in this range mean that there has been
substantial change between 1981 and 2000 in the rank order of cities in
the global urban hierarchy. Plainly stated, the “deck” has been
“reshuffled” in the past two decades, consistent with the idea that
globalization is generating a new urban hierarchy.
Q2: Have power and prestige in the world city system grown more
concentrated?
Method:
Track the change from 1981 to 2000 in the coefficient of variation (COV)
for each measure of power and prestige
Results:
COV outdegree:
COV closeness:
COV betweenness:
COV indegree:
1981 = 11.100
1981 = 0.104
1981 = 9.663
1981 = 5.917
→
→
→
→
2000 = 13.018
2000 = 0.095
2000 = 12.672
2000 = 5.957
Conclusions:
With the exception of closeness, the results are consistent with the
expectation that power and prestige will become concentrated in an
increasingly small number of “world” or “global” cities as the world
economy develops.
Q3: Does the new world city system cut across pre-existing patterns of
global inequality?
Method:
Estimate a series of conditional-change (OLS) and logistic regressions
to determine the association of world system position (i.e., of a city being
located in a core, semiperipheral, or peripheral country) with change in
the power, prestige, and blockmodel position of cities 1981-2000.
Q3: Does the new world city system cut across pre-existing patterns of
global inequality?
Method:
Estimate a series of conditional-change (OLS) and logistic regressions
to determine the association of world system position (i.e., of a city being
located in a core, semiperipheral, or peripheral country) with change in
the power, prestige, and blockmodel position of cities 1981-2000.
Results for point centrality:
Outdegree:
Closeness:
Betweenness:
Indegree:
semiperipheral cities -11%, peripheral cities -21%
semiperipheral cities -43%, peripheral cities -46%
semiperipheral cities -2%, peripheral cities -3%
semiperipheral cities -17%, peripheral cities -23%
1981
2000
Figure 3. Reduced graphs of the world city system 1981 and 2000, nodes
sized by proportion non-core cities in block
Q3: Does the new world city system cut across pre-existing patterns of
global inequality?
Method:
Estimate a series of conditional-change (OLS) and logistic regressions
to determine the association of world system position (i.e., of a city being
located in a core, semiperipheral, or peripheral country) with change in
the power, prestige, and blockmodel position of cities 1981-2000.
Results for blockmodel position/role (effect on odds of joining a block,
1981-2000):
Primary:
Isolate:
semiperipheral cities = 0.053, peripheral cities = 0.007
semiperipheral cities = 1.450, peripheral cities = 2.031
1981
2000
Figure 4. Reduced graphs of the world city system 1981 and 2000, nodes
sized by proportion non-core cities in block (blue = isolate block)
Q3: Does the new world city system cut across pre-existing patterns of
global inequality?
Method:
Estimate logistic regressions to determine the association of region (i.e.,
of a city being located in Africa, Latin America, or Asia) with change in
the blockmodel position of cities 1981-2000.
Results for blockmodel position/role (effect on odds of joining a block,
1981-2000):
Primary:
Isolate:
Africa = -------; Lat. Am. = 0.921; Asia = 1.719
Africa = 3.978; Lat. Am. = 1.199; Asia = 1.230
1981
2000
Figure 5. Reduced graphs of the world city system 1981 and 2000, nodes
sized by proportion African cities in block (blue = isolate block)
1981
2000
Figure 6. Reduced graphs of the world city system 1981 and 2000, nodes
sized by proportion Latin American cities in block (blue = isolate block)
1981
2000
Figure 7. Reduced graphs of the world city system 1981 and 2000, nodes
sized by proportion Asian cities in block (blue = isolate block)
Q3: Does the new world city system cut across pre-existing patterns of
global inequality?
Conclusions:
Rather than cutting across the hierarchy of states in the inter-state
system – across the Global North and South – the urban hierarchy maps
onto it increasingly well. Cities located in core countries have grown
relatively more powerful and prestigious, not less. They are relatively
more likely to play the primary role in the world city system and are
relatively less likely to be isolates.
Disaggregating the Global South, we again find little evidence for a new
geography of inequality that is orthogonal to the “old.” African and Latin
American cities are more likely to be “satellites” in 2000 than they were
in 1981. The experience of Asian cities is more mixed.
Summary
We find that the world city system is in the midst of substantial
restructuring and that it is changing in such a way as to concentrate
power and prestige in a small number of cities. However, in contrast to
some accounts, we find no evidence for a new geography of inequality
that cuts across existing patterns of global inequality. Rather, we find
just the opposite – the reproduction of the “old” geography in a starker
form.
Limitations and Future Tasks
1) The city system that we describe and analyze should be compared
with results of research rooted in different conceptualizations of the
world city problematic (e.g., the Loughborough group) and validated with
data that allow for more culturally-, socially-, and politically-informed
senses “world-cityness.”
•
•
•
•
•
•
unimodal/bi-modal nets
“levels” of command/control
sector/producer-service focus
cultural flows (e.g., people, telephony, internet)
political (GO/NGO & IGO/INGO nets)
slice and dice
2) The ultimate aim of world city research is to say something
meaningful about the changing fortunes of cities and their residents.
Combining our measures of power, prestige, and position with, for
instance, readily available data at the SMSA (U.S.) or NUTS 5 (E.U.)
levels, one could rigorously assess arguments about how the position of
cities in the global urban network affects their fate.