Why are cities not states?
Alan Freeman
Governance of London

The questions
–
–
–
Where should London’s boundaries be?
How big should a borough be?
How should either and both be governed?
The problem: where to stop?
East-West issues I: the jobs
East-West issues II: the commuters
Why is a city not a state?

Only two points in history when cities assumed
state-type functions
–
–


Greece 700-315 bc
Italy 950-1515
In each case absorbed by a larger territorial
project
Nation state has become the dominant form
Working definition

Function of political power is to optimise the
achievement of social objectives by economic
means
However, the nation-state is in
crisis




‘Globalisation’ (=world market in capital, plus
multilateral economics institutions)
Economy is world-wide, nation is territorially bounded.
Existing boundaries being redrawn
But what is in question?
–

Devolution
–

Not ‘the nation’ but ‘which nation’
Is London really the same as Scotland?
City exists as a component part of a nation
London: between two continents








Globalisation has in fact undermined the political basis
of multilateralism
Return of unilateral political action
Decline of the multilateral institutions
But inadequacy of the national form remains
Structural crisis of the nation-state
But no sign that the city has heightened autonomy
Conclusion: cities, even global cities, can only optimise
in context of relation to world and national economy
But which nation?
The ‘World City’ hypothesis
(Geddes, Sassen, Hall, LPAC)
World cities are four or more of:
Finance and commerce
Culture, knowledge and/or creativity
Communication
‘Power and influence’ or command and control functions both
worldwide (eg Headquarters of TNCs, transnational bodies) and
nationally (core government functions)
Tourism
and/or:
Function within their country as a centre for entrepot and export
processing
•
•
•
•
•
•
The GLA World Cities Project


Originally concerned with World City Hypothesis but
now more limited
‘Core Cities’ project
–
–
–

LDA
–

Regional productivity differentials targetted by HM Treasury
Cities thought to be drivers of regional growth
so cities want to measure their productivity
Want to learn best practice relations with other cities
GLA Economics
–
Want to understand London by comparing it with other cities
The aims



Comparable data
Continuous data
Robust data
BUT…
The world according to Parkinson
GDP Per Capita (Euros) 2001
80000
70000
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
Source: Core Cities project
Nation
Supplier 2
Supplier 1
Parkinson
Growth according to three suppliers
10-year annual growth in GDP per capita, 1998 PPP Euros
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Supplier 1
Supplier 2
Supplier 3
Why so many different estimates?



City definition
Employment
Output
Can this be overcome?
Extract from the Eurostat guide to regional data
Apparently not
Urban Audit – first (official) attempt
to classify and measure cities
‘Cities have generally been defined as the central municipality which is responsible
for local government. In most countries, the city corresponds to the concept of
Local administrative unit (LAU) level 2 (formerly NUTS level 5). Exceptions to this
rule are listed below. Given that the structure of local government varies a lot
between EU countries, the result is a city concept that is not always comparable
between countries. The emphasis has been on identifying a city concept with
political responsibility in the various countries.
‘The following countries have defined “city” differently than LAU level 2 in the
context of the Urban Audit.
Belgium;
France:
Portugal:
United Kingdom:
Ireland:
Some population estimates…
GLA Name
Berlin
Marseille
London
Rome
Madrid
Hamburg
Cologne
Munich
Birmingham
Barcelona
Dublin
Amsterdam
Brussels
Copenhagen
Manchester
Athens
Paris
Lisbon
Stuttgart
1999 LSE
(FUR)
2,125,140
1,498,275
9,245,799
3,926,166
5,183,064
3,064,151
2,171,206
2,940,226
2,870,658
4,630,150
1,567,524
2,635,825
3,464,443
1,939,669
1,866,996
3,535,059
10,902,388
4,077,286
2,616,980
GAME 1997/
8
3,995,074
1,197,623
12,653,500
3,330,298
4,747,548
2,213,649
10,336,511
1,804,920
3,753,500
4,103,470
6,219,212
2,830,590
1,349,755
6,843,700
9,970,315
2,276,890
1,573,303
Supplier 1
3,376,200
1,873,636
7,269,093
3,854,589
5,220,742
1,706,697
1,584,997
1,620,567
2,615,754
4,719,505
1,113,418
1,207,985
963,922
591,628
2,567,913
3,761,478
11,070,662
2,589,168
2,361,437
Supplier 2
3,444,255
1,857,129
7,191,886
3,815,800
5,069,982
1,732,841
4,302,934
1,193,495
976,093
4,588,406
1,099,164
1,176,243
938,344
614,040
2,482,514
3,470,854
11,259,299
3,336,215
3,959,421
UA II
3,386,667
1,349,772
7,172,036
2,459,776
2,938,723
1,704,735
962,507
1,194,560
977,091
1,503,884
495,101
734,629
964,405
499,148
392,819
736,406
2,125,246
556,797
UA/ FUR
159%
90%
78%
63%
57%
56%
44%
41%
34%
32%
32%
28%
28%
26%
21%
21%
19%
14%
Supplier
2/ FUR
162%
124%
78%
97%
98%
57%
198%
41%
34%
99%
70%
45%
27%
32%
133%
98%
103%
82%
151%
Does it matter?
GVA per capita in Euros – EU15=100 (Paul Cheshire)
Greater London
Inner London
157.4
250.6
Inner London –West 461.9
Inner London – East 129.1
Outer London
99.4
South East
116
And now for something entirely
different…
Invention and transformation: The integration of Kondratieff waves with social,
geographical and geopolitical change (Perez)
Date of Boom age Popular name for Core country or
‘big bang’
the period
countries
1771 1800-1825 The ‘Industrial
Revolution’
1829 1848-73 Age of Steam and
Railways
1875 1890-1914
1908 1947-1962
1971
Please
wait for
announcements
Britain
Britain (spreading
to Continent and
USA)
‘Belle Époque’; Age USA and Germany
of Steel, Electricity forging ahead and
and Heavy
overtaking Britain
Engineering
Age of Oil, the
USA (with
Automobile and
Germany at first
Mass Production
vying for world
leadership), later
spreading to
Europe
Age of Information USA (spreading to
and
Europe and Asia)
Telecommunications
Year Big-bang
initiating the
revolution
Arkwright’s mill opens in
Cromford
Test of the ‘Rocket’
engine for the Liverpool–
Manchester railway
Carnegie Bessemer steel
plant opens in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania
Cities born or
transformed
The modern Industrial
City
The North West (UK);
the Midwest (US)
New York
Ruhr
First Model-T comes out Detroit
of Ford plant in Detroit, Birmingham
Michigan
Darmstadt
Etc
Intel microprocessor is
announced in Santa
Clara, California
Silicon Valley
The West (UK)
Global Cities?
Not cycling but waving?
Parameters
Start point
Speed
Top Limit
Ratios
Manufacturing Services
1.22
1.86
1.44
0.01 0.0122
2
3.72
1 1.4433
>1 means Services start earlier
>1 means Services rise slower
>1 means Services rise further
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
manufacturing
Period
business services
Total
35
33
31
29
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
3
1
-
What happened in the nineties?
Manufacturing
Business services
Manufacturing plus Business Services
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
2016
2013
2010
2007
2004
2001
1998
1995
1992
1989
1986
1983
1980
1977
1974
1971
0%
Creative Industries: a qualitative reshaping of industrial structure
Jobs growth
London’s output growth
1995-2000
Output growth
And a new regional pattern of growth
jobs
growth
Including in London itself
London: CI job
growth 1995-2000
Job density: a reminder
Borough
Is there a
pattern of
specialisation?
I = working in Creative industry
O= in Creative Occupation
O  I = Total Creative Workforce =
industry + occupation (DCMS definition)
O I = ‘specialist’ workforce (any creative
occupation also working in creative
industry)
O I /O  I = ‘Creative Factor Utilisation’
indicator
Havering
Barking and Dagenham
Waltham Forest
Harrow
Greenwich
Bromley
Newham
Bexley
Hillingdon
Ealing
Croydon
Enfield
Kingston upon Thames
Hounslow
Redbridge
Merton
Lewisham
Sutton
Brent
Richmond upon Thames
Wandsworth
Barnet
Tower Hamlets
Westminster
Lambeth
Hammersmith and Fulham
Hackney
Kensington and Chelsea
Southwark
Camden
Islington
Haringey




2,744
1,948
6,566
10,517
7,688
16,098
7,072
5,003
9,961
17,849
12,256
8,638
11,237
9,536
7,432
9,995
10,726
9,549
12,721
18,232
27,495
20,093
9,434
21,213
20,237
19,341
11,467
18,410
15,146
24,555
15,426
18,169
4,147
3,587
6,900
8,443
4,939
9,654
4,295
3,337
9,420
14,523
12,713
6,544
9,657
5,094
8,338
8,905
10,557
7,337
10,794
13,535
22,574
15,791
9,121
15,893
17,561
14,931
10,285
14,641
14,390
19,257
12,234
13,750
6,610
5,074
11,726
16,466
10,851
21,558
9,417
6,848
15,874
26,446
20,149
11,844
16,153
11,300
11,953
14,089
15,780
12,435
17,068
22,736
35,658
25,479
12,912
25,479
25,767
23,344
14,756
22,243
19,565
28,665
17,854
20,495
281
461
1,740
2,494
1,776
4,194
1,950
1,492
3,507
5,926
4,820
3,338
4,741
3,330
3,817
4,811
5,503
4,451
6,447
9,031
14,411
10,405
5,643
11,627
12,031
10,928
6,996
10,808
9,971
15,147
9,806
11,424
 
3,866
3,126
5,160
5,949
3,163
5,460
2,345
1,845
5,913
8,597
7,893
3,206
4,916
1,764
4,521
4,094
5,054
2,886
4,347
4,504
8,163
5,386
3,478
4,266
5,530
4,003
3,289
3,833
4,419
4,110
2,428
2,326
4%
9%
15%
15%
16%
19%
21%
22%
22%
22%
24%
28%
29%
29%
32%
34%
35%
36%
38%
40%
40%
41%
44%
46%
47%
47%
47%
49%
51%
53%
55%
56%
Where is the money going?
Woodward, 30 years on
?
??
???
A new technological paradigm?
● Small runs, big bucks: mass producing difference
The end of the market in sameness
What matters: on spec, and on time
● Birth of a new industrial structure
Capital flows into optimising small unit production
Flexible manufacturing becomes a universal technique
Design becomes a universal factor of production
Redefining production

Redefining the city
–
–
–

Economies of scale no longer a property of the unit
Agglomeration as such is the source of economy
The city is the new location for agglomeration economies
Redefining human capital
–
–
–
–
‘Knowledge’ and ‘information’ imply once-for-all transfer
If so they cannot be a ‘factor’ of production
Creativity is ever present in production because each
project is new
Capacity to ‘transform to a vision’
(produce to an incomplete spec)
What London might be doing

New market, both domestic and global
High value-added, short-run, differentiated consumer services
and products

New production paradigm
Flexibly specialised hi-tech delivery of services, or products
which are close substitutes for a service (eg films, videos)

New factor of production
Creative capacity

Organised through specialist productive units
– Using
the new factor of production
– in the new production paradigm
– to produce commodities to the new market