I think that inter-city relations are inherently cooperative cities exist in city networks and networks can only exist through collective complementarities (Powell 1990 Thompson 2003). The intellectual power of this theoretical framework can be appreciated through the fact that ‘city hierarchies' appear almost natural (Taylor 2009) – how else would cities relate to each other except through hierarchies? From this position ambitious cities are expected to ‘climb the hierarchy' at the expense of rival cities.
This is in keeping with the long-term, conventional theoretical approach to inter-city relations that described ‘national urban systems' in each of which exists a ‘national city hierarchy' broadly conforming to classical central place theory. But there is a basic sense in which concern for city rankings operates against the spirit of the GaWC project (Taylor 2004).Ĭity rankings fit into the approach to inter-city relations that emphasizes competition between cities. In fact, it appears that it is these rankings that most people want from GaWC. GaWC, with its measures of network connectivity, has contributed to this situation with its rankings of the importance of cities in the world city network. But beyond boosterism there has been a genuine concern for cities as business centres in a rapidly globalizing world economy. Some years ago my city, Newcastle, was ranked above Rio as a ‘world party city' it made headlines in the local press. People are interested in where their city ranks and this can be fun. And so it is with cities, there are numerous rankings of cities available in both the commercial and academic spheres. We live in an age of ‘list-mania' there is so much information available that ordering selected topics has become popular entertainment. (Z) Measuring the World City Network: New Results and Developments
0 kommentar(er)
