واکاوی چشم‌انداز شهرهای جهانی در کشورهای در حال توسعه: از نقد رویکردهای مسلط کنونی تا ارائه چارچوب مفهومی جایگزین

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشکده شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران

2 دانشکده شهرسازی دانشگاه تهران

چکیده

مقاله حاضر به واکاوی چشم­انداز شهرهای جهانی در کشورهای در حال توسعه به واسطه تحلیل انتقادی می­پردازد. حجم عمده ادبیات و الگو یا الگوهای موجود شهر جهانی، تلاش می­کند تا چارچوب­هایی را که در ارتباط با نمونه­های نخستین این پدیده ایجاد شدند، برای سنجش شواهد جهانی شدن شهرها در کشورهای در حال توسعه و بررسی وضعیت آنها به کار بَرَد. این در حالی است که موفقیت این شهرها نیز عمدتاً براساس معیارها و سنجه­های غربی، مورد توجه قرار می­گیرد که اصطلاحاً از این جریان، تسلط و تحکم غربی (انگلیسی_امریکایی) در حوزه مباحث جهانی شدن و شهر، یاد می­شود. در مقابل، گروه در حال رشدی از محققان معتقدند، ارتباط میان مفهوم شهر جهانی با موضوعات قدرت، بازیگران و نهادهایی که در سطح جهانی عمل می­کنند، با اغراق همراه بوده و زمینه و احتمالات محلی، دست­کم گرفته شده است. بر این اساس، در فرآیند ادراک و تحلیل جهانی شدن شهرها در کشورهای در حال توسعه، مناسب است تا از عمومیت­هایی مبتنی بر تجربه شهرهای جهانی غرب به سمت الگو یا الگوهای جدید، از طریق اتخاذ رویکردهایی از جمله چارچوب مفهومی جایگزین پیشنهادی، براساس نقش­ها، موقعیت­ها و ظرفیت­های متنوع و در نتیجه ابعاد، آثار و پیامدهای متفاوت، حرکت نمود. در پاسخ به تلقی­ها و تعابیر فعلی و غالب تئوری شهر جهانی و چالش­هایی که به کارگیری مطلق آنها پدید می­آورد، رهیافت مؤثر در زمینه چشم­انداز شهرهای جهانی در کشورهای در حال توسعه و ارزیابی آن، انجام مطالعات بیشتر در خصوص تعامل میان بازیگران جهانی و محلی بر پایه این چارچوب مفهومی جایگزین به واسطه تجارب، شواهد، قراین و مصداق­ها با استناد به یک نمونه یا دسته­ای از نمونه­های جدید، مبتنی بر ارزش­گذاری ویژگی­ها، اولویت­ها و تفاوت­هاست.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Exploring the Global Cities’ Outlook in Developing Countries: Critique of the Current Dominant Approaches toward an Alternative Conceptual Framework

نویسندگان [English]

  • Farshad Nourian 1
  • Parsa Arbab 2
چکیده [English]

This research aims to explore the outlook of global cities in developing countries through the critical analysis. Global or globalizing cities have emerged in the developing countries during the past two decades. Some of the latest cases include Bangkok, Beijing, Buenos Aires, Istanbul, Jakarta, Johannesburg, Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Shanghai, and Taipei. Other older cases involve Hong Kong, Sao Paulo, Seoul, Singapore, and Mexico City.Questions about the concepts and meanings of the global functions for development of these cities are raised when considering their role as part of the global cities network. The main body of literature on the patterns of the global city attempts to use the framework of the prime examples and paradigmatic cases of the global or globalizing cities such as London, New York, Paris, and Tokyo for evaluating the evidence of the globalization of cities in developing countries. Moreover, the success and the status of these cities are considered and measured mainly based on western criteria. This issue is due to the domination of western (Anglo-American) framework in the field of the globalization and the city.
In contrast, an increasing number of academic researchersbelieve that the relationship between the global city concept and the issues of power, actors and institutions - that operate globally - is exaggerated.  In their view, this challenge has led to the underestimation of the local context and probabilities.  Hence, the application of the current dominant paradigm of the globalization for the outlook of the global cities in the developing countries has been criticized by them. They argue that achieving a general set of comprehensive and universal results is a barren probability. Meanwhile, a type of ethnocentrism dominates the literature of globalization and global cities. Moreover, it is problematic to focus the research on the limited and specific factors and criteria of globalization, especially when such research attempts to explain the results and outcomes of the global cities in the developing countries. Therefore, alternative approaches, differentiated with the current dominant ones, have been proposed in this regard. Other models based on the complexity and diversity of the effects and consequences must be adopted. Serious consideration for the valuation of the local and native capacities, priorities and differences is essential for any theoretical and empirical study on the process of the globalization in the developing countries. It is necessary to operationalize distinct types of measures instead of the current global city label in reference to them. Accordingly, it is very important to use innovative models or patterns through the adoption of new frameworks based on the various roles, positions, capacities, dimensions, effects and consequences. Instead of absolute acceptance of the dominant Anglo-American approaches, it is more useful to conduct further studies on the interaction between the global and local actors. Such approach, presented as an alternative conceptual framework in this paper, could act as a basis for further studies on new cases in the developing countries.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Globalization
  • Global Cities
  • Developing Countries
  • Western (Anglo-American) Domination
  • Alternative Conceptual Framework
Azimi, Naser. 2002. Scanning Urbanization and Basics of Urban System. Mashhad: Nika. [In Persian]

Beaverstock, J. V., P. J. Taylor, and R.G. Smith. 1999. “A Roster of World Cities.” Cities 16(6): 445–458.

Beaverstock, J. V., R. G. Smith, P. J. Taylor, D. R. F. Walker, and H. Lorimer. 2000. “Globalization and World Cities: Some Measurement Methodologies.” Applied Geography 20: 43-63.

Castells, Manuel. 1989. The Informational City: Information Technology, Economic Restructuring, and the Urban-Regional Process. Oxford: Blackwell.

Chubarov, Ilya, and Daniel Brooker. 2013. “Multiple Pathways to Global City Formation: A Functional Approach and Review of Recent Evidence in China.” Cities 35: 181-189.

Creswell, John W. 2009. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative,and Mixed Methods Approaches. London: Sage.

Davis, Diane E. 2005. “Cities in Global Context: A Brief Intellectual History.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 29(1): 92–109.

Fainstein, Susan S. 1995. “Politics, Economics, and Planning: Why Urban Regimes Matter.” Planning Theory 14: 34–41.

Flusty, Steven. 2004. De-Coca-Colonization: Making the Globe from the Inside Out. London: Routledge.

Friedmann, John. 1986. “The World City Hypothesis.” Development and Change 17(1): 69–83.

Friedmann, John. 1995. “Where We Stand? A Decade of World City Research.” In World Cities in a World-System, Edited by P.L. Knox and P.J. Taylor, 21–47. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Grant, Richard, and Jan Nijman. 2002. “Globalization and the Corporate Geography of Cities in the Less-developed World.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92 (2): 320-340.

Hall, Peter G. 1966. World Cities. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hill, Richard Child. 2004. “Cities and Nested Hierarchies.” International Social Science Journal, 56(181): 373–384.

Kalhornia, Bijan. 2009. “Transition through the Crisis of Globalization in Third World Cities.” Abadi 63: 116-121. [In Persian]

Keivani, Ramin. 2009. “Globalization and Urban Competitiveness in the Cities of Developing Countries: Challenges and Opportunities for Municipal Authorities.” Urban Economy (Eghtesad-E-Shahr) 1: 40-67. [In Persian]

Lemanski, Charlotte. 2007. “Global Cities in the South: Deepening Social and Spatial Polarization in Cape Town.” Cities 24(6): 448–461.

Logan, John R. and Harvey A. Molotch. 1987. Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Mahoney, Colleen. 1997. “Common Qualitative Methods.” In User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations, Edited by Joy Frechtling and Laure Sharp, 3-1-3-20. Darby: Diane Publishing Co.

Marcuse, Peter, and Ronald van Kempen. 2000. “Conclusion: A New Spatial Order.” In Globalizing Cities: A New Spatial Order, Edited by P. Marcuse and R. van Kempen. 249–275. London: Blackwell.

Marcuse, Peter. 1997. “The Enclave, the Citadel, and the Ghetto: What Has Changed in the Post-Fordist U.S. City.” Urban Affairs Review 33(2): 228–264.

Mollenkopf, John H. and Manuel Castells. 1991. Dual City: Restructuring New York. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Olds, Kris, and Henry Wai-Chung Yeung. 2004. “Pathways to Global City Formation: a View from the Developmental City-State of Singapore.” Review of International Political Economy 11 (3): 489-521.

Otiso, Kefa M., Ben Derudder, David Bassens, Lomme Devriendt, and Frank Witlox. 2011. “Airline Connectivity as a Measure of the Globalization of African Cities.” Applied Geography 31: 609-620.

Pani, Narendar. 2009. “Resource Cities across Phases of Globalization: Evidence from Bangalore.” Habitat International 33: 114–119.

Pizarro, Rafael. E., Liang Wei, and Tridib Banerjee. 2003. “Agencies of Globalization and Third World Urban Form: A Review.” Journal of Planning Literature 18(2): 111-130.

Rezazadeh, Razieh, and Ali Asgar Badri. 2004. “The Impact of Globalization on Role and Function of Municipalities.” Paper presented at the Municipalities Congress on Urban Economics, Tehran, June 15-16. [In Persian]

Robinson, Jennifer. 2002. “Global and World Cities: A View From off the Map.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 26(3): 531–554.

Sassen, Saskia. 1991. The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princetown: Princetown University Press.

Sassen, Saskia. 1998. Globalization and its Discontents. New York: The New Press.

Sassen, Saskia. 2001. “Global Cities and Developmentalist States: How to Derail What Could be an Interesting Debate? A Response to Hill and Kim.” Urban Studies 38(13): 2537–2540.

Shatkin, Gavin. 1998. “Fourth World Cities in the Global Economy: The Case of Phnom Penh, Cambodia.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 22(3): 378-393.

Shatkin, Gavin. 2007. “Global Cities of the South: Emerging Perspectives on Growth and Inequality.” Cities 24(1): 1–15.

Short, John Rennie. 2003. The Urban Order: An Introduction to Cities, Culture, and Power. Translated by Esmaeil Chavoushi. Tehran: Kharazmi University. [In Persian]

Short, John Rennie, and Yeong-Hyun Kim. 2007. Globalization and the City. Translated by Ahmad Pour Ahmad and Shayan Rostami. Tehran: Academic Center for Education, Culture and Research (ACECR). [In Persian]

Smith, David A. 1996. Third World Cities in Global Perspective. Boulder: Westview Press.

Smith, David A. 2005. “The World Urban Hierarchy: Implications for Cities, Top to Bottom.” Brown Journal of World Affairs 11(2): 45-55.

Smith, David A., and Michael F. Timberlake. 2001. “World City Networks and Hierarchies, 1977-1997: An Empirical Analysis of Global Air Travel Links.” American Behavioral Scientist 44(10): 1656-1678.

South African Cities Network (SACN). 2006. State of the Cities Report 2006. Braamfontein: SACN.

Taylor, Peter J. 2000. “World Cities and Territorial States under Conditions of Contemporary Globalization.” Political Geography 19: 5–32.

Timberlake, Michael, Yehua D. Wei, Xiulian Ma, and Jianmei Hao. 2014. “Global Cities with Chinese Characteristics.” Cities 41(B) 162-170.

UN-Habitat. 2013. State of the World's Cities 2012/2013: Prosperity of Cities. New York: Routledge.

UN Habitat, 2016.  World Cities Report 2016: Urbanization and Development - Emerging Futures, Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.

White, James W. 1998. “Old wine, cracked bottle? Tokyo, Paris, and the global Cities hypothesis.” Urban Affairs Review 33(4), 451–477.