Globalization is not a new phenomenon in contemporary society. This ideology has gained massive influence in the late 20th century around the globe, a factor that has powerfully affected the structure of the urban system in Europe’s environmental, economic, cultural, and political conception (Blank, 2017, p.110). People speculate and make a various hypothesis on how globalization is connected to the competitiveness of cities which plays a significant role in the innovative, structure, creative ideas, and economical on city planning (Brenner, Neil, &Christian, 2019, p.151). Besides, most of the researches about the notion of the competitive city remain premised on cities tends to compete with each other, notwithstanding, few scholars happen to question the same concept. Competitiveness has a different definition depending on the several perspectives. In this context, it remains defined as the level to extend individuals’ income and maintain peace of state concerning specific condition within the globe. In the line of cities, it is the philosophy of generating a better life, better investments, and better goods and services (Oinas, 2017, p.24).
Competition remains experienced everywhere in the world, but no clear extent can be defined as competition among cities. It remains complicated to clarify which kind of game is experienced between states, regions, cities or nations. A reasonable explanation for that line of thinking is that can competition that is experienced between countries be the same experienced among areas? London is a city that tends to present the United Kingdom in the global ranking (Oinas, 2017, p.24). For instance, when measuring the wealth of a nation the GDP from London can give the United Kingdom. Therefore, this paper attempts to discover and justify whether global cities compete with one another or they are enmeshed in a worldwide network with each other.
Global city competitiveness remains deemed to the performance of the city in most cases, and this concept tends to reveal the quality of life of the town (Blank 2017, p.110). The logic behind this line of thinking is that the notion of production of the cities is effective measures of the city’s competitiveness. For that reason, the critical indicator of city competitiveness is the ideology of global linkages, social cohesion, economic, environmental, technological advancement, and government management (Juergensmeyer 2017, vol 3). Conversely, most of the scholars who have researched this line tend to intensify on economics. This indicator tends to play a significant impact on the supply systems of service and manufacturing companies as well as operations on the local public services. Due to this scenario, there is stress that rise due to competitive tension primarily considering the notion of oversupply experienced by most of the global market.
Global city competition has led to the adjustment of the private and public business model. Most of the big global companies are exalting highly in their significant economic cost achievements (Oinas, 2017,p.24). In that regard, globalization requires the abandonment of the competitive reference to a closed domain so that they can coincide with the familiar physical and administrative contexts. Additionally, this aspect has contributed negatively on the benefits that could be achieved by the pursuit of the advancing dimensional economics since most of the global cities are focusing on meeting the demands primarily created by the notion of comparison (Martinus et al., 2018, p.26).
Most of the challenges that market-driven industries are facing are represented on the growth of competition among global cities and thus other need to adapt their offer to the real modified needs of markets. The only option for these companies to stand up global competition is by developing blueprints like time-based policies competition so that they can reduce time to market. However, this kind of systems requires the global cities to address two types of competences market sense and market relation for it to work effectively (Oinas, P. 2017, p.24).
The growth of global city perspective, competition has facilitated the creation of violative strategic planning to gain their market platform and agonistical position and variegation of their development (Graham, Hjorth, &Lehdonvirta, V.2017, 158) To add on, this notion will lead to the nature of the end-consumer inhabitants for the few coming years because of a significant increase in the global cities size leading to increased life expectancy. Further, this also means that all industries that are developing business-to-consumers relationship will be forced to reset their offerings.
Currently, there is a crucial focus on the role and development prospects of the world’s cities. Nonetheless, the critical part of this line of reasoning is the mutual relationship that exists between these global cities (Blank,2017, p.110). Importantly, two significant strategic triads are vital when it comes to the development of the worldwide economy. The primary triad is composed of New York, London, and Washington. The second triad is made up of Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Beijing (Blank, 2017, p.110) For the first cities, they are crucial since they have played a vital role as the leaders of the economic o the globalization. The second cities are important because they tend to continue with the notion of globalization among towns. Additionally, they tend to increase mutual relationship among the global cities thus are improving the economic scale of the world. For instance, these cities have played a significant role in the shifting of economic power to the East.
In reality, the notion of global city networks is a vital aspect of the development of the economic scale (Blank, 2017, p.110). A sensible explanation behind this line of thinking is that as systems grow in size and magnitude, there is an increase in the inner and external linkage relationship. Additionally, this concept is essential as far as the economic globe is the concern since it helps to promote city stability thus achieving the highest global commercial scale. Think of economic, social and political power; these ideologies can never be produced without the notion of the worldwide network. If the philosophy of power is the most important factor that dictates what is happening around the essential cities, then it is clear that it’s the powerful city network that allows such cities to exercise those abilities. Honestly, network mobilization is the primary role that is important to scan and monitor the performance of a city (Blank, 2017, p.110). Therefore, people need to understand that power of a city is not based on t fundamental characteristics or the concept of competitive advantage instead the role of the town is mostly connected to it being part of the network that gives it an opportunity to overcome space limitations and even go beyond the national ones(Blank, 2017, p.110).
From the discussion above, it is clear that it is the very position of the city hub that influence ad allocates power. The logical concept developed from that point of view is that when the composition of the city network is altered, the relationships and tie of the city tends to vary thus creating new poles (Cerny, 2017, p.45). In a layman’s language, the notion of network power remains shaped by the cooperation power and not the opposed power (Oinas, 2017, p.24). Finally, the crisis of the supranational nature of the city network is the primary consequence of globalization which tends to enhance the development of the world flows and strengthening particularism, specificity of individual’s identities
Conclusively, the competition among cities and regions do happen, meanwhile, so do global networks. Ideally, both of these ideologies are important for the cities to be considered a global city. There are several researches that reveal that most of the cities tend to engage in competitiveness and cooperation. On the other hand, the advantages that are created from the global city networks are numerous as compared to competitiveness (Blank, 2017, p.110). According to the research published by the department of trade and industry of United Kingdom noted that they support global city networking so that they can attract the notion of creativity, innovation, and investment t reinforce the growth of the global economic scale.
Blank, Y., 2017.The city and the world.In International Legal Personality (pp. 105-170).Routledge.
Brenner, Neil, and Christian Schmid. “Towards a new epistemology of the urban?.” City 19, no. 2-3 (2015): 151-182.
Cerny, P.G., 2017. The limits of global governance: Transnational neopluralism in a complex world. In Partnerships in international policy-making (pp. 31-47). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Graham, M., Hjorth, I. and Lehdonvirta, V., 2017. Digital labour and development: impacts of global digital labour platforms and the gig economy on worker livelihoods. Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, 23(2), pp.135-162.
Juergensmeyer, M., 2017. Terror in the mind of God: The global rise of religious violence (Vol. 13). Univ of California Press.
Martinus, K., Sigler, T.J., O’Neill, P. and Tonts, M., 2018. ‘Global restructuring’two decades on: Australia’s relational economy in the twenty-first century.
Murphy, J.T., Carmody, P., Grant, R. and Owusu, F., 2018. The impact of China on African cities: Potentials for development. In Handbook of Emerging 21st-Century Cities.Edward Elgar Publishing.
Oinas, P., 2017. Proximity, external relations, and local economic development. In Proximity, Distance and Diversity(pp. 11-30). Routledge.