It`s all about being connected and resilient networks

Transcription

The world according to GaWC: “It’s all
about being connected and resilient
networks” – On cross-border mobility and
global commodity chains
Professor Frank Witlox, PhD
Professor of Economic Geography, Ghent University
Director of the Doctoral School of Natural Sciences, Ghent University
Associate Director of Globalization and World Cities research group (GaWC), Loughborough University
Visiting professor of Warehouse and Hinterland Distribution Management, University of Antwerp (ITMMA)
email: [email protected]
Let’s start with a quote…
“The most important cities are those that
connect the global with the local in that
they operate as places in which daily
activity patterns, trade in goods and
services, information and communication
networks and corporate-control networks
come together” (Burger, 2011, p. 96)
In other words, it is about…
Connections, relationships, linkages, flows, …
(demographic) Size, (economic) Role,
(geographic) Reach & (cultural) Diversity
Between ‘important’ cities (not states)
Global and Local (‘glocal’)
Production & Consumption
Infrastructure approach vs. Institutional
approach
Measuring, explaining, modelling, …
In other words, it is about…
Connections, relationships, linkages, flows, …
(demographic) Size, (economic) Role,
(geographic) Reach & (cultural) Diversity
Between ‘important’ cities (not states)
Global and Local (‘glocal’)
Production & Consumption
Infrastructure approach vs. Institutional
approach
Measuring, explaining, modelling, …
GaWC : www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc
Objective
•
Aim of this presentation: overview of GaWC research on inter-city relations in the
global economy
•
GaWC: think-tank on globalization/cities-nexus, a collaborative venture between
researchers at Loughborough (UK), Ghent (BE) and Virginia Tech (USA) Universities
and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS)
•
More
I.
II.
III.
IV.
specific objective: GaWC research on :
Cities and infrastructure networks
Cities as post-industrial production sites
Trying to explain what goes on
Looking for clues …
http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc
GaWC methodology (1)
• Rationale: world cities are based on what flows through them
(information, knowledge, money, people, goods) rather than what is
contained in them plea for ‘relational data’
• Conceptual starting point : Manuel Castells’ The Rise of the Network
Society (1996, 2001) and its focus on ‘space of flows’ (>< ‘space of
places’)
• cities are places: specific locations in space that provide an anchor
• cities are a process by which centers are connected in a global network
• GaWC focus: analyzing connections and connectivity in city networks
through transportation network flows (airline data, internet data,
container flows, ...) -> ‘first vs. second nature of cities’ (P.J. Taylor,
2004)
• internal differentiation within a city
• inter-city relations, dependencies, and interdependencies between cities
Using attribute data within empirical world cities
research
• Attribute (‘stock’) data “how do we become
a global/world city ?”
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Airports, ports
Skycrapers
Hotels
Monuments
Olympic games, FIFA
Concerts, Arts, Exhibitions, …
…
• State-istics vs. city-istics
research
research
• Hierarchy of cities “how do we become a
first tier // core global/world city ?”
Friedmann, 1986
research
• Hierarchy of cities “how do we become a
first tier // core global/world city ?”
Beaverstock et al., 1999
Using relational data within empirical world cities
research
• Relational (‘flow’) data “how do we become
a global/world city ?”
– Infrastructure networks
•
•
•
•
•
•
Airports IATA; AEA; ICAO; OAG; Boeing/Airbus; MIDT; Sabre, …
Ports Global container flow data (Alphaliner)
Rail networks
Telephone calls and Internet data (Telegeography)
Pipelines
Trade data, global commodity chains (between cities)
– Corporate structures
• Multinationals (transnational) entreprises
• Intra-firms networks, inter-firm networks (GaWC)
– Miscellaneous
• Flow of waste
• Money flow, credit card transactions
• Drug traffic
Using relational data within empirical world cities
research
• Relational (‘flow’) data [A]. Infrastructural approach, measuring insertion in
global infrastructure networks (airline networks)
[B]. Institutional, corporate organizational approach,
measuring insertion in office networks of global
‘advanced’ producer services firms (banking/finance,
law, accountancy, auditing, management consultancy,
and advertising)
[A] Cities and infrastructure
networks
1. It’s all about being connected …
Infrastructure networks and global cities
Global cities as ‘accessible’ nodes in infrastructure networks
Seaport
Information and
(tele)communication hub,
submarine cables
Airport, port, train station
…
Flows of
commodities
Flows of
information/knowledge
-container movement flows (1970-2007)
-world air traffic (24hrs)
Flows of people &
commodities
Mapping the global city network economy
25 cities with the largest incoming & outgoing airline flows
Derudder, B. & Witlox, F. (2005) ‘An appraisal of the use of airline data in assessing the world city
network: a research note of data’. Urban Studies. 42(13), 2371-2388.
intra-firm ownership, based on the global Fortune 100 (2005) and their
many worldwide subsidiaries
Wall et al. (2011) ‘The geography of global corporate networks: the poor, the rich and the happy
few countries’. Environment and Plannng A. 43, 904-927.
Global container transport flows
Tavasszy et al. (2011) ‘A strategic network choice model for global container flows: specification,
estimation and application’. Journal of Transport Geography. 19, p. 1169.
50 most important cities in terms of google search “global environmental
score” (GES)
Devriendt et al. (2011) ‘Searching for Cyberspace: The Position of Major Cities in the Information
Age’. Journal of Urban Technology. 18 (1), p. 84
[B] Cities as post-industrial
production sites
2. It’s all about being connected …
World city network
Global cities as ‘postindustrial production sites’ for
advanced producer services
Politics, trade,
communication, finance,
education, culture,
technology
Cosmopolitan characteristics
& multinational corporate
economy
Role of MNC
New (spatial) international
division of labour
Command and control
centers of capital
Role of international
institutions, business
service sector, TNC
Internationalization,
concentration, intensity of
producer services
Knowledge-rich environment,
specialist markets
Role of advanced producer
services (APS)
GaWC methodology (2)
•
Rationale: commonsense notion ‘cities in the global economy’ is poorly understood in the social
sciences, both in conceptual and empirical terms. Globalization -> key cities cannot be
understood in a ‘national’ or even a ‘regional’ framework
•
Conceptual starting point : Saskia Sassen’s The Global City and its focus on
‘advanced producer services’ (APS) Global Cities = ‘strategic places’
•
GaWC focus: transnational spatial relations between cities, adding up to a ‘world city network’
(WCN), cf. ‘NY-LON-KONG’
•
Specific type of network: interlocking network formed at the sub-nodal level, where APS firms
(i.e. accountancy, advertising, banking/finance, insurance, law and management consulting)
are the ‘interlockers’
•
Many APS firms have ‘gone global’, and their locational strategies are thereby heavily
influenced by agglomeration economies in important cities → office network covering major
cities in the world economy (to be active in at least 15 cities)
Saskia Sassen: ‘The Global City’
‘capitals’
Deloitte advertisement @ Amsterdam Airport
Baker & McKenzie’s city-centred office network
Specification of the WCN
• Service value vij: measure of the importance of the office of firm j in
city i
Importance can be standardized between 0 and 5:
•
•
•
•
•
•
5=
4=
3=
2=
1=
0=
global HQ
regional HQ
national HQ or ‘large’ office
typical office
local partner
no office
• Inter-city relation rai,j: measure of the importance of the flows
between offices in cities a and i
< heuristic // spatial interaction tradition:
r ai , j = v aj .v ij
• Global network connectivity GNCa: measure of the importance of a
city’s flows to all other cities i across all firms j:
GNC a =
∑r
i, j
ai , j
The GaWC approach: specification
Global Network Connectivity of city a (GNCa) ≠ summing service values
Rather, an assessment of how a city is connected in office networks <
heuristic // ‘spatial interaction modeling’:
GNC a =
∑v
aj
.v ij
i, j
For instance:
o relation between city with global HQ (5) and city with regional HQ (4)
o relation between two cities with ‘typical offices’ (2)
o relation between city with national HQ (3) and city with no office (0)
= 5x4
= 2x2
= 3x0
= 20
= 4
= 0
Credible when a large number of firms (175) and cities (526) are used
GNC is expressed as a proportion of the largest GNC value to make the
values independent from the number of firms/cities in the dataset
The GaWC approach: sample dataset
Amsterdam
Accra
Atlanta
Bangkok
Barcelona
Brisbane
…
KPMG
3
0
3
1
1
2
…
PWC
3
1
2
2
2
2
…
AA
2
3
0
1
4
0
…
D&T
4
2
2
3
0
2
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
…
The GaWC approach: example
Amsterdam
KPMG
3
Price Water House Coopers
3
Arthur Andersen
1
Atlanta
Bangkok
Barcelona
3
1
1
2
2
2
0
1
…
…
…
4
…
3*2+3*2+3*2=18
1*0+1*1+1*4=5
∑v
aj
.v ij
3*3+3*1+3*1=15
i
GNCa = ∑ v aj.vij
i, j
15+18+5=38
…
…
…
…
…
…
The GaWC approach: data
Required data < specification = info on the importance of the presence
of key APS firms in key cities (‘service values’)
Data gatherings have been carried out in 2000, 2004, 2008, 2010
New data gathering has been carried out in 2012
o Selection of cities: all cities > 1,5 million inhabitants + all cities with
key economic importance (based on literature review)
=> 526 cities
o Selection of firms: for each sector rankings based on turnover or
combined indices such as Forbes
=> 175 firms
o For each of the 175 firms: analysis of corporate websites to assess
importance of presence in each of the 526 cities
=> 92050 service values
Viewpoint from the city
City
E&Y
AAA
MSI
AGN
BDO
GTI
HOI
KPM
SBT
...
Amsterdam
2
2
3
2
2
2
5
5
0
...
Atlanta
3
3
0
2
0
1
2
3
0
...
Bangkok
0
0
0
1
2
2
3
3
0
...
Barcelona
2
2
2
2
0
0
2
2
0
...
Peking
0
2
3
0
1
2
2
2
0
...
Berlijn
0
2
2
2
0
0
3
3
0
...
Boston
3
2
0
0
0
1
0
3
2
...
Brussel
2
2
2
2
5
2
3
2
0
...
Boedapest
2
2
2
2
0
2
2
3
0
...
Buenos Aires
2
2
0
2
4
2
3
2
0
...
Caracas
0
2
0
1
2
2
2
2
0
...
Chicago
2
5
0
2
2
5
2
3
2
...
Dallas
0
2
2
0
0
2
2
3
0
...
Düsseldorf
0
2
3
3
0
0
0
2
0
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
2008
Rank
City
GNC
1
London
1
2
New York
0,98
3
Hong Kong
0,71
4
Paris
0,70
5
Tokyo
0,69
6
Singapore
0,65
7
Chicago
0,62
8
Milan
0,60
9
Los Angeles
0,60
10
Toronto
0,59
11
Madrid
0,59
12
Amsterdam
0,59
13
Sydney
0,58
14
Frankfurt
0,57
15
Brussels
0,56
16
Sao Paulo
0,54
17
San Francisco
0,51
18
Mexico City
0,49
19
Zurich
0,48
20
Taipei
0,48
Hinterworld
How the world changes… 2000 2008
Data gathering(s)
•
2000:
–
–
•
2008
–
–
•
315 cities, 100 ‘leading’ service firms in banking, insurance, management consultancy,
accountancy, law & advertising
Different number of firms and selection criterion for each sector
526 cities, 175 ‘leading’ service firms in finance (previously banking & insurance) (75),
management consultancy (25), accountancy (25), law (25) & advertising (25)
Uniform selection of criterion for each sector: corporate size as given by the Forbes
composite index, a measure that combines rankings for sales, profits, assets and market
value formation
2000 & 2008: assignment of service values based on corporate websites
Making measures compatible...
•
Only for cities that feature in 2000 and 2008
•
GNC is expressed as a proportion of the largest GNC value to make the values
independent from the number of firms/cities in the dataset
•
Specialization implies that some cities do relatively well in a particular sector (e.g.
NY in finance and Chicago in law): use of sectoral distribution of 2008
(75/25/25/25/25) to recalculate connectivities for 2000
•
Cartograms only focus on cities that have a GNC > 20% GNCmax (London) in either
2000 or 2008
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
London
New York
Hong Kong
Tokyo
Paris
Singapore
Chicago
Milan
Los Angeles
Madrid
Toronto
Sydney
Amsterdam
Frankfurt
Brussels
Sao Paulo
San Francisco
Taipei
Zurich
Jakarta
2000
100,00
97,26
72,47
70,87
70,16
66,26
61,49
60,47
59,87
59,74
58,25
58,03
57,66
57,50
56,19
54,74
51,38
48,77
48,49
48,47
22
23
26
28
30
32
34
39
Mumbai
Buenos Aires
Kuala Lumpur
Shanghai
Beijing
Seoul
Warsaw
Moscow
47,52
46,92
44,56
44,27
43,01
42,20
42,08
41,17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
New York
London
Hong Kong
Paris
Singapore
Tokyo
Sydney
Shanghai
Beijing
Milan
Madrid
Seoul
Moscow
Brussels
Toronto
Buenos Aires
Mumbai
Kuala Lumpur
Warsaw
Sao Paulo
2008
100,00
98,96
81,44
76,83
73,36
72,18
71,90
69,74
69,16
67,56
66,01
63,50
63,44
63,30
62,69
61,19
60,86
59,72
56,40
56,19
21
23
25
26
30
32
42
50
Zurich
Taipei
Amsterdam
Jakarta
Chicago
Frankfurt
Los Angeles
San Francisco
56,01
55,37
55,09
54,96
52,71
51,16
42,92
40,83
Major negative changes
Major positive changes
Los Angeles
-2,52
Shanghai
2,76
Miami
-2,31
Beijing
2,64
San Francisco
-1,91
Moscow
2,62
Cologne
-1,76
Seoul
2,12
St Louis
-1,74
Rome
1.89
Montreal
-1,73
Tel Aviv
1,84
Nassau
-1,68
Bucharest
1,44
Hamilton
-1,63
Riyadh
1,39
Düsseldorf
-1,63
Kuwait
1,38
Frankfurt
-1,48
Kuala Lumpur
1,37
Globalism vs Localism
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
City
Frankfurt
Munich
Cologne
Düsseldorf
Hamburg
Berlin
Stuttgart
Nuremberg
Dresden
Bremen
Leipzig
Essen
Dortmund
Hannover
Globalism
1,29
0,90
0,49
0,48
0,12
-0,12
-0,24
-0,45
-0,66
-0,69
-0,75
-0,78
-0,82
-0,84
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
City
Dortmund
Cologne
Nuremberg
Leipzig
Dresden
Essen
Hannover
Bremen
Hamburg
Düsseldorf
Munich
Stuttgart
Berlin
Frankfurt
Localism
1,87
1,38
1,35
1,33
1,32
1,29
1,07
1,00
0,89
0,84
0,75
0,67
0,65
-0,05
Geography of standardized connectivity
change (2000-2008)
[C] Trying to explain what
goes on: Cross-border mobility
and global commodity chains
Location/scale matters …
link between commodity flows and APS
Commodity flows
recent changes in the structure and functioning of the global economy:
lower transportation costs
emergence of ICT
increasing international competition
search for cheap production factors
...
↓
production and consumption of commodities and services obtains worldwide character:
internationalization vs globalization
made in China?
Commodity flows
consequence: difficulties in establishment of theories
production obtains a transnational dimension
↕
traditional theories depart from a national frame of reference
↓
necessity of a new frame of reference
’90s – early 2000s: three new approaches
global commodity chain approach (Gereffi, 1994)
global value chain approach (Gereffi et al., 2005)
global production network approach (Henderson et al., 2002)
basic assumption: production as a trans-border, networked process
[D] Looking for clues…
Let’s retake our quote, and add another quote…
“The most important cities are those that connect the global with
the local in that they operate as places in which daily activity
patterns, trade in goods and services, information and
communication networks and corporate-control networks come
together” (Burger, 2011, p. 96)
-> “What is needed in order to become ‘a most important city’?”
“Problems associated with urban agglomerations have usually been
solved by means of creativity, human capital, cooperation
(sometimes bargaining) among relevant stakeholders, bright
scientific ideas: in a nutshell, ‘smart’ solutions (Caragliu et al.,
2009, p. 46)
The ‘smart’ (‘intelligent’) city solution …
1. utilization of networked infrastructure to improve economic and political
efficiency and enable social, cultural and urban development (i.e., ‘the
wired city’ = business services, housing, leisure and lifestyle services, ICTs
(mobile and fixed phones, satellite TVs, computer networks, e-commerce,
internet services).
2. underlying emphasis on business-led urban developments.
3. social inclusion of various urban residents in public services (equitable
urban growth).
4. crucial role of high-tech and creative industries in long-run urban growth
(R. Florida). (i.e., soft infrastructure: knowledge networks, voluntary
organizations, crime-free environments)
5. attention to the role of social and relational capital in urban
development: learn to learn, adapt and innovate.
6. social and environmental sustainability as a major strategic component.
The ‘smart’ (‘intelligent’) city solution …
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
smart economy (regional competitiveness)
smart mobility (transport and ICT economics)
smart environment (natural resources)
smart people (human and social capital)
smart living (quality of life)
smart governance (participation of societies)
In sum: “a city is smart when investments in human and social capital and
traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure
fuels sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with a wise
management of natural resources, through participatory governance”
(Caragliu et al., 2011)
Measuring ‘smartness’
What SEG/GaWC can do ?
1) Market analysis I: detailed, systematic and sensible analysis of trends in
urban economic markets
2) Market analysis II: evolving trends in relation to other urban markets
3) Market analysis III: holes in corporate structure
4) Policy advice: detailed appraisal of where city ‘is’ for city governments
Market analysis II
Market analysis: evolving trends in relation to other urban markets
GaWC focuses on a specific segment of urban economies, but ‘indicator
species’ analogy
Extensive (core periphery) vs intensive (core core) globalization
Links with other globalized urban markets, e.g. airlines, Internet service
provision, … have been explored in previous research
Market analysis III
Market analysis: revealing ‘holes’ in corporate structure
GNC can be broken down by sector and firm
co-location
firms sectors
Looking for obvious ‘missing links’ in office network versus urban service
markets in general and other firms in the same sectors in
particular
Example: most-connected cities in which Accenture is absent are
Auckland, Dubai, Riyadh, Cairo & Jeddah
Similar assessments can be made vis-à-vis specific firms, specific
groups of firms, specific sectors, etc.
Policy advice
Policy advice: detailed appraisal of where city ‘is’ for city governments
and planning agencies
London and Madrid: development agencies dubbed GaWC analyses as the
most relevant and detailed
E.g., Dublin City Council (DCC): detailed appraisal of where Dublin’s ‘peer
cities’ are in terms of network connectivity, sectoral mix,
geography of connections,…
=> basis for detailed monitoring scheme of comparable cities
E.g., Abu Dhabi Council for Economic Development (ADCED): large-scale
awareness program for business leaders and government officials
Want to know/read more?
More ?
– contact us via:
www.geoweb.ugent.be/seg
www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc
– email:
[email protected]
[email protected]

It`s all about being connected and resilient networks

Transcription

Similar documents