Читать книгу Global Political Cities - Kent E. Calder - Страница 24

This introductory chapter begins by noting the growing recent role of global cities in international politics and outlining the analytical challenge of explaining the complex and nuanced transformation in the global role of cities. It reviews the rising volume of literature on global cities, and the analytical gaps in that literature which this work aspires to fill. It then clarifies the focus of this volume on the political role of cities in the broader international political economy, introducing and defining a concept of global political city that far transcends a focus on municipal governments alone.

Global political cities are the communities beyond government per se that perform three critical social functions: governing, allocating valued resources, and setting international policy agendas. The principal agents performing these functions are either subnational political actors (especially mayors) or sociopolitical communities, actively advising government. Those communities, if institutionalized and geographically rooted, are known here as penumbras of power. If more fluid and geographically peripatetic, yet institutionalized, they are “political forums.” If more spontaneous and popularly inspired, they are “grassroots movements.”

The chapter then summarizes the analytical processes through which this book explores the nature and future potential of global political cities. It first identifies a set of fifteen global cities widely regarded as filling major political functions of international importance. These include national capitals, major economic centers with political functions, multilateral hubs, city-states, and entrepreneurial yet policy-oriented cities. The chapter then outlines the four hypotheses that are tested with respect to the fifteen cases, so as to determine across the balance of the volume how global political cities operate, and how their international role will prospectively evolve in future years.

The hypotheses explore and test whether the central institutions of the global political city enhance the global influence of the cities under investigation. This process of testing through extensive case study analysis should deepen our understanding of the extent of global city influence in international affairs. It should, however, also lend insights into the nature of that influence, how it varies by city, and why.

The hypotheses presented here explore the importance of four features of the global political city that we identify as potentially central to its global influence: policy-advisory complexes; political forums; grassroots advocacy groups; and local leadership. What if these institutional traits were indeed well developed in the major cities of the world, either individually or in combination? What difference would the emergence of well-developed global political cities make to the conduct of international affairs?

In the pages that follow, we will see that cities in the past have evolved cyclically, both in capabilities and in global influence. Their rise and fall, in the firmament of international affairs, has historically been a function mainly of their external environment. Their surroundings were largely static, save for critical junctures that provoked changes in the military power and economic prosperity of surrounding empires and nation-states. When the surrounding world confronting cities was stable and prosperous, their role was more prominent; when that environment was turbulent and unpredictable, they were at the mercy of broader forces. Neither technological change nor the internal configuration of cities themselves had much bearing on their broader success.

Looking forward to the world now dawning, both technological change and the internal configuration of cities will matter more—especially when cities are heavily exposed to the broader world, as so many global cities are. Cities may well face a more unpredictable equation, presenting new challenges, but also new opportunities for agenda-setting and governance. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the rise of China, divisions in Europe, and the erosion of Pax Americana, the world of nation-states is growing more fragmented and decentralized, even as it is growing more interdependent in economic and financial terms. The world is also changing more rapidly than it has typically done. The ability to amass and process information, together with the flexibility to respond to it, are growing increasingly critical. Many global cities are well positioned in both regards.

If the world now emerging indeed proves to be a volatile one, of growing complexity and connectivity, if not interdependence, the flexible, decentralized institutions emerging in many global political cities, as well as their growing ability to exchange ideas and coordinate, could provide major systemic benefits for the world as a whole. Broadly connected idea industries and advisory complexes—what we term the “penumbras of power”—could help disentangle transnational problems ranging from global warming and cybersecurity to financial recovery from a global pandemic. Policy forums could connect thinkers and policymakers personally and even virtually, while also publicizing new policy initiatives. Grassroots activism, in an era of deepening connectivity, could link citizens across borders, with global cities serving as a stage for their pronouncements.

In such a world, leadership would of course be vital, given the fluid, decentralized structure of the future global political city, and of the global system within which it would be embedded. Leaders would need to pick and choose among priorities amid a blizzard of incoming information and demands. Nation-states of course would be formidable competitors. Yet global cities, if our hypotheses bear out, would have formidable advantages: cosmopolitan perspectives, quicker reaction times, and the intrinsically moderating force of a natural focus on human priorities, contrasted with the geopolitical concerns that almost inevitably preoccupy nation-states. Cities could more easily pioneer in areas central to social welfare, ranging from health and environment to transportation, with the flexibility and maneuverability flowing from their limited scale. They could specialize, branding themselves as experts on clean water, or high-speed transport, or quality healthcare. And they could share their accomplishments in broader partnerships around the world. If the patterns explored in this book continue to materialize, a new era of the global political city may be dawning, and it could be a highly productive one for world affairs.