Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Cities
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cities
Multiple pathways to global city formation: A functional approach
and review of recent evidence in China
Ilya Chubarov a,b,⇑, Daniel Brooker b
a
b
Department of Geography of World Economy, Faculty of Geography, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow 119991, Russia
Department of Urban and Economic Geography, College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing 100871, PR China
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 2 November 2012
Received in revised form 9 April 2013
Accepted 27 May 2013
Available online 23 August 2013
Keywords:
Global city
World city
Globalisation
China
Typology
Functionality
a b s t r a c t
The rapid growth of the Chinese economy during the last three decades since the period of ‘‘reform’’ and
‘‘opening’’ ushered in the interrelated processes of globalisation and urbanisation. Such processes have
resulted in the emergence of a number of large urban centres drawing in capital, labour and multinational
firms and characterised by their competing claims of becoming ‘‘global cities’’. However, to date research
on global cities has tended to focus on case studies from the ‘‘Global North’’ and limited attention has
been given to unpacking the urban outcomes of globalisation in China. Concomitantly, where studies
have been undertaken there has been a pre-occupation with the production of rankings, both specific
and comprehensive in nature, to measure the ‘‘global-ness’’ of cities. The paper here seeks to examine
the pathways to ‘global city’ formation in China and is grounded in empirical research attentive to the
functionality of different cities and China’s uniqueness as the largest developing and transition economy.
Utilising recent evidence the focus of the paper is to develop a typology of China’s global cities and to
unpack their different political, economic and socio-cultural domestically and globally. The first part of
the paper summarises recent developments in ‘global city’ theory and then provides a summary of work
within the East Asian context. The paper then offers a conceptual framework for understanding global
cities in the Chinese context drawing on literature from Chinese and international scholars. A preliminary
typology is then discussed drawing on empirical data which suggests the emergence of Beijing as a
‘global capital city’, Hong Kong as a ‘global gateway city’ and Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou as ‘global
industrialised cities’.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Introduction
The rapid growth of the Chinese economy during the last three
decades since the period of ‘‘reform’’ and ‘‘opening’’ has gained
wide coverage in academic and popular debates (e.g. Brandt &
Rawski, 2008; Naughton, 2007). A key outcome of the ‘‘opening’’
of China to the outside world has been China’s engagement with
the multifaceted processes of globalisation and the rapid growth
of a number of cities that have become ‘‘command and control’’
points for managing inward flows of global capital, multinational
firms and labour into China. Once a developing country and a
mainly agrarian rural nation, now China is characterised by rapid
urbanisation and the rise of cities that are the ground zero for
colossal physical, economic and social transformations. Over the
last decade, with rapid economic development, attention has
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Geography of World Economy, Faculty
of Geography, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow 119991, Russia. Tel.:
+7 9265588674.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (I. Chubarov), dmbrooker@pku.
edu.cn (D. Brooker).
0264-2751/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2013.05.008
shifted to a number of large urban centres characterised by their
competing claims of becoming ‘global cities’1. As Ma and Timberlake observe (2008: 20) ‘‘China’s rapidly increasing economic development trajectory is propelling its leading cities into more
prominent positions within the world system of cities.’’
Despite the rapid transformation of Chinese cities from developing to developed and over-developed in a short space of time little attention has been given to understand their potential
transformation into global cities. To date research on global cities
has tended to be ‘‘overly dependent upon a theoretically globalist
perspective derived out of studies of few hyper global cities’’
(Wei & Yu, 2006: 378). Against this backdrop the paper here seeks
to challenge a ‘globalist perspective’ which posits ‘global city’ formation is a uniform process whereby cities all end up striving to
be, or resembling, London, New York and Tokyo (Sassen, 1991).
Much global/world city research has been obsessed with these
exemplar case studies. Furthermore, a great deal of empirical effort
has been undertaken to highlight, and sometimes unravel, these in
1
Friedmann prefers the term, ‘world city’; Sassen, ‘global city’. We will use the two
terms interchangeably, as well.
182
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
all their glory with a narrow focus on their high-value economic
functions.
The argument here is to rebuke two pervasive notions in the
globalist literature. Firstly, that there is one single pathway to ‘global city’ formation whereby global cities are homogenous entities,
coming more to resemble one another with their Multinational
Corporations, transnational elites, consumer cultures, identikit
business districts, internationalised gated communities, etc. Secondly, that these global cities are somehow deterritorialised, severing ties from their own nation states as they look to engage with a
Castellsian global ‘space of flows’. Following Olds and Yeung
(2004), the paper highlights the need for analytical attention directed towards unpacking the dynamic pathways associated with
varieties of global cities. Our suggestion is that there is not but
one trajectory to ‘global city’ formation, but multiple pathways
contingent with local conditions and different city functions. Moreover these pathways are made, forged by multiple actors and institutions which actively transform their cities in different ways in
different places at different times. ‘Global city’ formation is not
an outcome determined by the outward forces of globalisation
reaching into the city but rather it is the result of these different
actors, institutions and wider contexts such as national urban systems, cultural norms, politico-legal infrastructures and everyday
place-making practices (Smith, 2001). For example, there are qualitative differences between the ‘‘market-centred’’ global cities and
their institutions in the Global North and the ‘‘state-centred’’ global cities of the Global South, notably in East-Asia (Hill & Kim,
2000; Ma & Timberlake, 2013).
In China ‘global city’ formation is a dialectical process driven on
the one hand out of the capitalist imperative of economic globalisation and on the other the influenced by the unique characteristics of PRC as a developmental post-socialist state and
transitional economy. The contribution of the paper is to expand
on current global city literature by adopting a functional approach
sensitive to the specific political, economic, socio-cultural functions of individual cities. This functional approach is described by
Lo and Yeung (1996: 2) in the following context:
‘‘A functional city system is a network of cities that are linked,
often in hierarchical manner based on a given economic or
socio-political function at the global or regional level. . . The collection of different functional networks of a city serves to define
that city’s external linkages with the world economy and its status within the world city system. A city grows in importance if
it performs effectively and efficiently a number of key functions
that another one does not. . . Cities are thus defined by the operation of their externally linked functions.’’
A functional approach rejects the notion that ‘one city tells all’
(Thrift, 1997) based on exemplar case studies and potentially
‘Eurocentric’ views of how cities globalise. As Gugler argue
(2004) there are numerous emerging global cities in developing
world. These are cities are not so much command centres for globalisation but rather, as Olds and Yeung posit (2004: 506), ‘‘. . .more
dependent upon inward flows of development capital, people,
goods and services and information from the global economy.’’
Although these emerging cities are included in the hierarchical formulation of the ‘world city system’, they are often treated in a
selective and superficial manner without explanation of their unique internal socio-economic functionalities or external linkages
(Lin, 2004). The paper here will pay specific attention to both functionality and connectivity through examination of empirical data.
In doing so the paper finds strong evidence unpacking the different
functionalities of Chinese cities as they interrelate to global processes in different ways. Thus following Kratke (2011) the paper
attempts to specifically unpack the different pathways or sectoral
trajectories of cities in globalisation based on their unique local
conditions and functional characteristics. The frequent emphasis
on advance producer services and financial sector activities when
ranking global cities creates a blind spot to the different features
of globally connected economic activities that bring together globalising cities across the world. The paper adopts a holistic view of
globalised economic activities alongside a consideration of the
political, social and cultural profiles of cities.
The functional approach seeks to identify these multiple pathways and provides a preliminary typology explaining how Chinese
cities are globalised in different ways. The functional approach is
particularly useful in the Chinese context because China economic
development and industrialisation effects world city formation
more so than other cities in different regions. These cities perform
specific function both domestically and globally that are uniquely
attuned to China’s status as an industrialising and transition
economy.
The structure of the paper is as follows. The first part of the paper summarises recent developments in what we might term ‘‘global city theories’’ drawing on academic literature in and beyond
China. The second part reviews key evidence and posits although
there are number of large cities in China there are five potential cities that are global cities. In the final part of the paper a preliminary
typology is then discussed drawing on empirical data which suggests the emergence of Beijing as a ‘global capital city’, Hong Kong
as a ‘global gateway city’ and Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou as
‘global industrialised cities’.
Contextualising the ‘global city’ in China and beyond
Global/world city research originates in Hall’s (1966) assertion
that ‘‘there are certain great cities, in which a quite disproportionate part of the world’s most important business is conducted’’.
Hall’s much documented criteria for identifying a world city were
twofold: (1) cities possessing political power functioning as locales
national government and attracting’ international political organisations; (2) cities with economic power being national centres of
trade, banking and finance. Friedmann (1986), influenced by Wallerstein (1974), argued economic factors and the new international
division of labour were of primary importance in ‘global city’ formation. He adopted a hierarchical approach ranking cities according to seven interrelated themes (employment structure, external
trade, FDI, migrations, etc.) that could provide a framework for
understanding global cities. The term ‘global city’ gained wider
academic currency through Sassen’s (1991) work on London,
New York, and Tokyo. Her central thesis was that leading global
cities are characterised by the presence of advanced producer service industries (e.g. banking, finance, insurance, and accounting)
and leading multinational corporations (MNCs) engaged in ‘command and control activities’ of economic globalisation.
Following Sassen, Global and World Cities Research Network
(GaWC) have continued to measures cities global status according
to presence of advanced producer service firms (Taylor et al.,
2009). GaWC have undertaken extensive quantitative analysis of
world city networks with interesting results. Undoubtedly big,
but still fairly localised European cities Milan and Madrid ranked
2 levels higher in hierarchy than capital of biggest EU economy
Berlin. While Jakarta, capital of a large but developing country disconnected from global decision-making has the same weighting as
the second city of the US Los-Angeles and the European Union capital of Brussels. Such anomalies occur because researchers frequently measure ‘‘global city-ness’’ by economic indices; namely
corporate networks of certain industries. Consequently what manifests is not just hierarchy of world cities, but moreover a more
homogenised hierarchy of divisional (branch) networks of leading
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
firms from core capitalist countries. This notion of ‘‘global cityness’’ is reflective of a particular urban hierarchy of global competitiveness skewed towards (western) capitalist relations that
ignores the functionality of cities in different non-western or
non-capitalist contexts. Reflecting back can we assume that in
the 1980s neither Moscow nor Beijing were world cities just because of fact were not integrated into international capital flows?
By intuition they were globally influential cities of that epoch considering their political role and their wider influence as centres of
science, education and migration within their spheres.
Derudder (2006) identifies two categories of indicators generally used in global cities studies to measure a cities connection to
process of globalisation. Firstly, data on infrastructure networks
have been used as proxies for global connectivity including rankings on the penetration of advanced telecommunications into cities
(Vinciguerra et al., 2010) and flows of airline passengers (Mahutga,
Ma, Smith, & Timberlake, 2010) or maritime traffic (Verhetsel & Sel,
2009). Secondly, the presence of Multinational Corporations
(MNCs) are used based on the assumption that these are the prime
agents in the formation of transnational urban networks, geography of these networks can be used to reveal spatial hierarchy of
global city network (Alderson, Beckfield, & Sprague-Jones, 2010;
Taylor et al., 2009). Given the diversity of data mapping a world
city network accurately reflecting the level of city’s interaction
with economic, social, political and cultural processes of globalisation is difficult to achieve due to the lack of up-to-date, accessible
and comparable city-based data.
This paper can be positioned in the context of a number of global/city studies offering a view beyond the ‘‘Global North’’. Hill and
Kim (2000), then followed by Wang (2003) endeavour to provide
an alternative view to ‘global city’ theory that avoids pre-occupation with New York as the standard ‘global city’ against which all
others should be compared. Drawing on insights from emerging
global cities in Asia they identify the uniqueness of Tokyo and
Seoul as ‘state-centred’ world cities that do not comply with the
‘world city’ model. These are alternative types of global cities because their industrial policies and finance institutions are entrenched in the mechanics of the developmental states
exemplifying their uniqueness from other global cities. As Hill
and Kim (2000) argue, these cities are national basing points for
the operations of indigenous firms and not the global basing points
for borderless multinationals. Furthermore, they are relatively
homogenous, with a low proportion of foreign residents and occupied and managed by a political bureaucratic elite rather than
dominated by the Sklair’s (2000) transnational capital class. China’s emerging global cities can be seen in a similar context (Beeson,
2009) pushing outwards engaging in multiple processes of globalisation in various ways following different pathways. Although the
role of the state is not the direct focus of the paper, and an incredibly complex multi-scalar actor in China, it is important to recognise that, following Wei and Yu (2006: 393), that globalisation of
China’s cities ‘‘. . .is not only an economic process, but also a political manoeuvre and in this sense very much mobilised by the
development state’’.
Turning to Chinese language research there is a body of ‘global
city’ research which has mostly never been translated to English
and published outside China that can be reviewed. Such studies
generally reject western-centric views of a ‘global city’ hierarchy
but do draw upon western theorisations to try to understand the
Chinese context. As Lin (2004) argues, much of this literature has
been preoccupied with how Chinese cities can restructure and upgrade to join the elite hierarchy of global cities. A great deal of energy has been spent by researchers to analyse how Chinese cities
can further globalise to elevate them to the level of London, New
York and Tokyo. For example, Qi, Zhang, and Zhao (2011) developed a set of 27 indicators for comparing Beijing’s globalisation
183
to levels of New York, Tokyo and London. Relatedly, Lu (2011) also
ranked 39 cities according to a different criteria and discussed policies for Beijing global city formation to boost its standing from
28th place in the global ranking.
Some of the earliest studies in mainland China dated back to the
beginning of the 1990s when major cities were undertaking rapid
transformation from socialist cities with manufacturing and residence functions to trade, exchange and consumption cities in a
new era of Chinese modernity and global engagement. The local
governments became more active in encouraging internationalisation and more entrepreneurial in mobilising different strategies
designed to gear cities, or parts within it, as global cities. As Douglass and Friedman (1998: 111) argue the role of the state in framing cities to be nodal points in a globalising world economy was
common through Asia during this time:
‘‘[the] appearance of ‘‘world city’’ as the new shibboleth of global achievement has not been missed by governments in Pacific
Asia.... In realising that the status of their national economies
will be increasingly determined by the positioning of their principal urban regions, governments in Pacific Asia are actively
intervening in the physical restructuring of cities in the new
competition for world city prominence.’’
Research in China centred around two main themes: (1)
descriptions of international ‘global city’ theories translated and
tailored for a domestic audience (see Lu, 2007; Xie & Ning, 2004);
(2) application of these theories to mainland situation (see Pang,
1996). For example, Ning (1991), Xu (1993) were first to examine
the conditions for emerging global cities comparing domestic and
international contexts. Gu and Sun (1999) developed a typology
suggesting that established international cities of developed countries are true ‘global cities’ while regional centres should be conceptualised as ‘international metropolises’. Zhou (2002) also
takes a wider metropolitan view on China’s global cities and argues
each leading city connects outwardly to the world economy
through the vast metropolitan regions in which they are located.
For example, Guangzhou for the Hong Kong–Guangzhou–Macao
region in the Pear River Delta, Shanghai for the Nanjing––Shanghai–Hangzhou region in the Yangtze Delta, and Beijing for the Beijing––Tianjing–Tangshan region.
A second wave of studies coincided with China’s accession to
the WTO in 2001 and further internationalisation of the Chinese
economy. Xue (2003) outlined multiple criteria blocked in four
groups (economic power, social development, infrastructure, international contacts), to measure globalising Chinese cities. Third and
most recent wave of studies caused by the decision of the Chinese
state to promote Beijing as a world city in tandem with its status as
Olympic host city. (see Xu, 2011).
Much research in China has been characterised by indeterminacy
in naming and a lack of unified vocabulary for describing the articulation of Chinese cities with globalisation. Such a problem is ongoing
and in Chinese language literature a number of terms are mention
including ‘international city’ ‘guoji chengshi’ (as by Lu, 2007), ‘internationalised city’ ‘guojixing chengshi’ or ‘guojihua chengshi’ (as by Gu
& Sun, 1999; Xu, 1993), ‘internationalised metropolis’ ‘guojixing
dadushi’ (as by Zhao & Zhen, 2004), global city ‘quanqiu chengshi’
(as by Zhou, 2006). Of these, the term ‘world city’ ‘shijie chengshi
‘(as by Li, 2011; Qi et al., 2011; Shen, 2010) has been most adopted
in government reports and more commonly used in Chinese academic literature. Cook (2006) promotes the concept of ‘internationalised metropolis’ as more concomitant with Chinese conditions.
‘‘Going Global’’? Comparing selected globalising cities in China
Although there are an estimated 858 cities in China only a small
number have populations over 5 million and are influential beyond
184
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
their national borders (McKinsey, 2009). The rapid urbanisation of
China is characterised by the concentration of the urban population
in cities on the open and economically advanced eastern coast. Large
cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen have attracted a huge number of migrants because of their advantageous
positions as both centres of economic growth and destinations of
foreign capital investments. China’s contemporary urban and economic development creates a different context from the early
1990s when some of the early research on global cities in the region
was conducted. At this time only Hong Kong (then under British
colonial rule) was identified as a level two global city within the
sphere of a semi-peripheral country (Friedmann, 1986: 72). The
remarkable physical transformation and skyscraper modernity of
Shanghai’s new district Pudong enhanced Shanghai’s claims as an
emerging global city in China. For example, Ng and Hills (2003) analysed both Shanghai and Hong Kong together with three other Asian
cities while researching on East Asian global cities. Lin (2004) included three continental Chinese cities – Beijing, Shanghai and
Guangzhou in his assessment of global cities in the East Asia region
(Lin, 2003). We include Shenzhen in our assessment due to its rapid
economic growth and its growing position as a global trade hub. The
five cities provide interesting case studies for the paper because they
are all rapidly globalising in different ways and remain functionally
tied to the domestic economy and the national urban system. With
their rapid growth and orientation to the global economy they are
now starting to appear in the numerous global city ranking indices
as summarised below in Table 1.
However, to talk of just five cities on the pathway to become
globally important urban centres doesn’t tell the whole story of
China’s remarkable transformation. It should be noted that other
aspirants to global city status do exist in the vast urban landscape
of mainland China. For example, Tianjin has great ambitions to replicate the success of the southern growth cities and become the
Shenzhen of northern China. To fuel such ambitions Tianjin has
heavily invested in new infrastructure including a massive CBD
development and seaport facilities linked to the Binhai new district. Dalian is the economic leader of the vast north-eastern region
of China and is making waves as a destination for domestic and
international tourism. Chongqing is a massive population centre
in the centre and has gained coverage for its alternative development models and political ambitions. Elsewhere, cities like Changsha and Suzhou are succeeding in attracting numerous foreign
high-tech enterprises, research and manufacturing facilities.
While all of these cities have particular comparative advantages
and deep connections to processes of globalisation none can be
compared to Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen as leading globalising cities in China and these five form the
basis for our analysis. This is not to suggest they are imitating
one another or that a homogenous type of Chinese ‘global city’ is
emerging. Rather these five cities have an influence that resonates
globally through the economic, political, social, cultural activities
that are summarised below. While Table 2 summarises key data
a few important trends deserve highlighting.
Geopolitical status
The presence of international government and non-government
organisations can be taken as a proxy for the geopolitical importance
of a particular city. Despite China’s growing political and economic
influence, aside from Beijing, large cities have not attracted a large
amount of international political institutions thus far. Hong Kong
as a highly autonomous administrative unit has the right to participate in international organisations and has foreign governmental
representative offices but this is anomalous to other cities. It participates in 13 international organisations (Ng & Hills, 2003), and has
120 diplomatic missions worldwide. In terms of city governance,
post-reunification, more Hong Kong policies are consulted with
mainland central government and the bordering Guangdong provincial government. Generally, the administrative status of mainland
cities are not uniform with Beijing and Shanghai municipalities under state management while Guangzhou and Shenzhen function as
sub-provincial cities under administration of Guangdong province.
Economic status
Considered purely in economic terms the five cities are already
large enough in size to bear comparison to existing cities globally
although their economic structures differ from one another. All five
cities are increasingly characterised by economic and financial
‘‘command and control’’ functions within a wider new international division of labour and specific ‘‘headquarter economy’’ functionalities (Chan & Poon, 2012) often taken to be key marker of
esteem for global cities. Hong Kong was one of Asia’s first postindustrial cities; Beijing has been de-industrialising for some time
while the other three have a comparatively lower proportion of
service industries. All five are characterised by the growing presence and influence of financial services industry. According to
news agency Xinhua (30.01.2012), Shanghai has been identified
by government to become a global financial centre and hub for
transaction, pricing and clearing of RMB-denominated financial
products. There were 1049 financial institutions in Shanghai as of
the end of 2010, 439 more than five years earlier. According to Vice
Mayor Ji Lin (cited by Xinhua 11.01.2012) Beijing financial service
contributes to around 15% of the city’s GDP and it is estimated that
roughly 60% of the country’s financial assets and over 40% of the
financial clearances are conducted in Beijing.
International integration and socio-cultural influence
Aviation passenger traffic is readily assumed as the benchmark
for examining level of connectivity a city has externally (Mahutga
et al., 2010) and maritime traffic reflects level of a city’s involvement
in physical goods transportation (Verhetsel & Sel, 2009). Shanghai
topped world port ranking by cargo tonnage back in 2005, and world
container port ranking in 2010, and all other global Chinese cities
ranked in the global top 10. Beijing’s Capital airport ranked 2nd in
world in 2010 in term of passenger traffic while Hong Kong airport
Table 1
Positioning of Chinese cities inside selected global cities ranking.
Global Power City Index (Mori Foundation, 2012)
Global Cities Index (Knight Frank, 2011)
Global Cities Index and Emerging Cities Outlook
(A.T. Kearney, 2012)
Global City Competitiveness Index (The
Economist Intelligence Unit, 2012)
The World According to GaWC (2010), level,
count from top = 1, (GaWC, 2010)
Global Urban Competitiveness Report (Ni, 2011)
Number of cities
in the report
Hong
Kong
Beijing
Shanghai
Guangzhou
Shenzhen
Mentioning of other Chinese cities
40
40
66
9
17
5
11
8
14
14
18
21
–
–
60
–
–
65
–
–
Chongqing
120
4–5
39
43
64
52
296
2
3
2
6
7
500
11
59
37
120
71
Tianjin, Dalian, Chengdu, Suzhou,
Chongqing, Qingdao, Hangzhou
Tianjin, Nanjing, Chengdu,
Hangzhou, Qingdao, Dalian
Tianjin, Dongguan (in top-200)
185
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
Table 2
Comprehensive table of Chinese global cities performance in selected fields. Sources: [a] United Nations, 2012; [b] Statistical Department of each city web-cites. Hong Kong http://
www.censtatd.gov.hk, Beijing http://www.bjstats.gov.cn, Shanghai http://www.stats-sh.gov.cn/, Guangzhou http://www.gzstats.gov.cn/, Shenzhen http://www.sztj.gov.cn/; [c]
Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopaedia, http://en.wikipedia.org; [d] Brookings, 2013; [e] Fortune, 2013; [f] UNCTAD, 2012; [g] CIA, 2013; [h] Biztradeshows (BZT), 2013; [i] World
Federation of Exchanges (WFI), 2013; [j] Airports Council International (ACI), 2013; [k] American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), 2012; [l] Euromonitor International,
2012.
Hong
Kong
Beijing
Shanghai
Guangzhou
Shenzhen
15.0n19.6
16,801
9n82n9
19.6n23.0
6340
9n81n10
10.5n12.7
7434
12n82n6
10.2n10.4
1989
9n90n1
HDI, 2008, [c]
Position in administrative division of PRC, 2012
7.1
1104
12n75n
13
0.944
SAR
0.891
Province-level city
0.908
Province-level
city
0.844A
Sub-provincial
city
0.844A
Sub-provincial city
Economic and trade performance
GDP, total, PPP, billion USD, 2011, official data/Global Metromonitor
(not PPP) [a], [d]
GDP, per capita, PPP, USD, 2011, [a], [c]
MNC TOP-500 headquarters, 2012 [e]
Economy structure (agriculturenindustrynservices), 2011, [b]
FDI, billion USD, 2011, [b], [f]
Total value of export and import, billion USD, 2011, [b], [g]
Budgetary expenditure of local governments, billion USD, 2011, [b]
Average wage of staff and workers, yearly, USD, 2010, [b]
Number of international trade fairs held annually, 2012, [h]
353.7/
227
46,900
4
0n7n93
78.4
966.9B
43.2
22,815
96
382.8/157
460.4/213
253.1/136
226.3/123
19,900
44
1n24n75
11.3
389.4
49.9
8589
150
20,400
6
1n42n57
20.1
437.4
60.2
9387
293
20,500
1
2n37n61
6.7
116.1
18.2
7314
156
23,400
3
0n47n53
7.6
414.0
24.4
6900
42
Financial sector (operation parameters of stock exchanges, Dec. 2012)
Number of listed companies, [i]
Domestic market capitalisation, billion USD, [i]
Value of share trading (year-to-date), billion USD, [i]
1547
2831.9
1106.1
–
–
–
954
2547.2
2598.8
–
–
–
1540
1150.1
2869.1
56.1
4.1
277.4
24.4
175
8.0C
470
81.9
1.8
–
–
442
4.9
160
78.7
3.4
590.4
31.7
437
5.4
160
48.3
1.2
431.0
14.3
236
2.7
60
29.6
0.9
205.5
22.6
179
1.7
30
2008 Summer
Olympics
204
11,099
World EXPO
2010
190
–
2010 Asian
Games
45
9704
2011 Summer
Universiade
150
7587
Background
Population, million (UN 2010)nofficial, 2010, [a], [b]
Land area, km2 (administrative division), 2011, [b]
Population structure (under 14n15–64n65 and above), 2011, [b]
Transport and socio-cultural influence
City airport(s) passengers traffic, 2012, million, [j], [c]
City airport(s) handled cargo tonnage, 2012, ml tones, [j], [c]
City seaport handled cargo tonnage, 2011, ml metric tones, [k]
City seaport container traffic, 2011, ml TEUs, [k], [c]
Subway lines length, 2012, km, [c]
Foreign visitors arrivals, 2011, ml, [l]
Permanent foreign population of city, estimate according to open press
materials, 2012, ‘000
Key mega-event
Number of participating countries, [c]
Number of participating athletes, [c]
A
B
C
Guangdong province.
Total trade of manufactured goods, including re-export of goods. Else, total export and import of services is 160 bl USD (2010).
Without visitors from Mainland China, estimated.
has been a long standing hub for international air travel and air cargo. Ma and Timberlake (2008) use air passenger flows as a proxy for
measure the globalisation of Chinese cities and posit that Beijing,
Shanghai and Guangzhou are leading cities due to their status as
air transportation hubs.
Beside the more tangible economic and transport connectivities, the socio-cultural influence of a ‘global city’ is invariably more
difficult to measure than its economic or political status. This reflects a need to ‘redress the current imbalance in which most
authors focus on the economic dimension of world cities/global cities to the exclusion of social, political and environmental criteria’
(Cook, 2006: 78). Socio-cultural indicators used by the indices
listed above include the number and share of foreign inhabitants
in total population, number of holding international sport, cultural,
science and other events, amount of foreign tourist arrivals, degree
of world recognition and cultural influence, quality of life in city.
Several of the five cities have hosted high-profile international socio-cultural events to showcase themselves to a global audience
(see Table 2).
Another constituent part of globalising city ambitions equally
important in their symbolism is the very urban fabric of the city it-
self. Much of China’s rapid urbanisation has been vertical with
prominent skylines clustered around monumental Central Business Districts (CBDs) like Shanghai World Financial Centre, Hong
Kong’s International Commerce Centre and Two International Finance Centre. This trend is evident in the three other globalising
cities with Guangzhou’s new CBD Zhujiang New Town actively under construction. While Shenzhen contains two CBDs: (1) Luohu
dominated by famous high-rise Shun Hing Square and newly
opened King Key 100; and (2) Futian, containing a new city government building and Pingan International Finance Centre which will
become highest building in China after finishing construction in
2015, China’s ancient capital avoids the construction of numerous
super tall skyscrapers. Instead numerous landmark architectural
projects have been undertaken to create a new cityscape asserting
China’s new modernity including the CCTV Headquarters designed
by Rem Koolhaas.2
2
Among international architects and firms, actively participating in mainland
China are Rem Koolhaas, Steven Holl, Paul Andreu, Gensler, Norman Foster, Kohn
Pedersen Fox, Terry Farell and Partners, Welkinson Eyre Archiects, Skidmore, Owings
and Merill.
186
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
Multiple pathways: an emerging typology of China’s globalising
cities
The typology is based on our assessment of the empirical data
and the unique functionalitiy of each city within the Chinese context. By examining global city formation within one particular
country the functional differences attentive to local characteristics
and political, economic and socio-cultural features become clearer.
The objective of the approach is twofold: firstly, to provide a detailed analysis on process of world city formation in China; second
to illustrate the different pathways through empirical data and in
doing so elucidate a functional approach to global cities. That is
an approach which is inherently nonprescriptive and flexible to
the local contexts. The purpose here is not to measure the cities
against some pre-defined ‘‘criteria’’ of global-ness (a la London,
New York, Tokyo) but rather to let the empirical information tell
its own story and forge the narrative of how cities within the Chinese urban system are globalising in different ways that resonate
from domestic contexts and global connectivities. The cities identified below are not showing signs of convergence or following a
pre-defined pathways but rather multiple pathways emerge
according to divergent functionality.
Hong Kong as a ‘global gateway city’
Hong Kong is the most mediated of China’s global cities (see
Chiu & Lui, 2009; Jessop & Sum, 2000). Taylor (2012) assert Hong
Kong is a high-connectivity gateway city 3rd after London and
New York. Hong Kong has strong positions in almost all functional
urban networks; as such we suggest Hong Kong’s pathway is similar to London and New York. The city is unique both due to its governance structure but also its ‘‘westernisation’’. English is widely
used despite the fact that 95% of Hong Kong’s inhabitants are ethnic Chinese. City is bilingual de facto: 20 of 43 newspapers and 199
of 640 periodicals are published in English. The city state is home
to 470,000 foreign nationals (according to 2011 census) which is
more than the number for the entire mainland China.
Hong Kong’s role in the world economy is, according to Sassen
(2001: 174), primarily ‘‘a strategic exchange node for firms from
China to the rest of the world and from the rest of the world to China,
as well as among all overseas Chinese.’’ Hong Kong is not just politically tied to the mainland but its economic prospects also increasingly depend on the PRC’s integration into world’s economy. Share
of Hong Kong in net FDI in China (stock in the end of 2009) is
66.9% and mainland cumulative investments accounts around 40%
of city’s total. Hong Kong is also an important offshore capital raising
centre for Chinese firms and state owned enterprises. For the past
10 years, mainland companies have raised more than $1.4 trillion
(US$180 billion) via stock offerings in Hong Kong (Hong Kong Trade
Development Council Online, 14.08.2012). Re-export of goods to the
Mainland of China and re-export goods of mainland origin before the
financial crisis were 51.6% and 80.7% respectively of whole city’s
trade. In this sense evidence clearly points to Hong Kong’s primary
functions as a global gateway providing a conduit for linking China
and the world economy (Chiu & Lui, 2009).
Beijing as ‘global capital city’
Beijing is the ‘global capital city’ performing the role as the real
and symbolic centre of a vast and incredibly diverse country. Centralisation is both a historical phenomena (dynastical) and a result
of the Soviet inspired socialism (planned economy and one-partysystem). In the wake of the open door policy the capital inevitably
found itself at the forefront of engaging with processes of globalisation. Its long history of serving as diplomatic and political centre
gave Beijing an advantage compared with other Chinese cities in
terms of international familiarity, tourist arrivals and intercity
transport infrastructure. Beijing became the first mainland city to
transit to a service based economy and become a post-industrial
hub for China’s scientific and technological research and innovation
capacity. The city’s service sector received 76.4% of total
investments in fixed assets in period 1978–2009, and this share
was growing during the last decade – 86% at 2001–2005, 89% for
2006–2009 years. Services now comprise over three quarter of city’s
economic activity (higher if we exclude the rural areas that are
administered by Beijing’s City government). In 2012 Beijing launched
the annual Innovation China International Fair for Trade in Services
in an attempt to consolidate the capital’s position as China’s
post-industrial hub for the rapidly growing service industries.
As China’s ‘global capital city’ Beijing has a multi-functional role.
First, Beijing is a strong political and command-and-control centre
for government. It contains all government ministries, several dozens of representative offices of international organisations and city
government is attempting to attract more (Beijing Daily,
05.01.2012). Beijing is a politico-corporate hub for state enterprises,
foreign incorporated and private firms. The city accommodates one
fifth of top 500 companies of PRC, but their operational revenue
makes 51% of all enterprises in the list (Xinhua, 03.09.2011). The
clustering of high level corporate headquarters in Beijing is a result
of their need to be proximate to powerful governmental decisionmakers. More than half of country equity transfers (such as privatisation, or reorganisation of government and municipal property) are
conducted by China Equity Exchange in Beijing. While three main
financial regulatory bodies, the ‘‘Big Four’’ government-owned
banks (with their assets-management divisions) and two of the five
leading insurance companies (other ones in Hong Kong, Shanghai
and Shenzhen) are headquartered in Beijing.
The second key function is that of a scientific research and education hub. There are located more than 70 higher educational
institutions, 42 of them are national-level (half of whole country
number) in Beijing. Of these 61 institutions are allowed to admit
international students of which there are around 80,000 in Beijing
studying (Beijing Daily, 31.08.2010). In Beijing is a domestic centre
for policy and strategic though with six of the top nine Chinese
think tanks located in the capital (McGann, 2013). Beijing also
holds significance globally as a leading centre for Chinese language
studies; in terms of student numbers one in ten students in Beijing
are now foreigners, what makes up more than one fourth of all
international students in PRC. The city is also home to over 400 research institutes, leading universities (Peking and Tsinghua) and
various research centres and laboratories, publishing houses, graduate universities, libraries and other supporting facilities.
Beijing also functions as the media and broadcasting hub for the
national TV network CCTV, China National Radio and accommodates China’s largest news agencies in Xinhua (operates more than
one hundred foreign bureaus) and China News Service (a major
publisher and home to representative offices of foreign press). Beijing’s pre-eminent status as information hub resonates with Friedmann’s (1986: 73) observation that that:
‘‘. . .an important ancillary function of world cities is ideological
penetration and control. New York and Los Angeles, London and
Paris, and to a lesser degree Tokyo, are centres for the production and dissemination of information, news, entertainment
and other cultural activities.’’
Due to the presence of these information industries Beijing is
now a focal point for projecting China’s ‘‘soft power’’ on global level as seen through the internationalisation of CCTV services and a
growing emphasis to outreach broadcasting services to Chinese
diasporas worldwide.
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
Beijing’s status as a cultural attraction is well established with
historical sites (6 UNESCO World Heritage Sites, zero in other Chinese global cities), museums (more than 150) and various other
classical cultural facilities. Sport infrastructure was improved in
the wake of the 2008 Olympic Games. A total of ten new venues
were built, including landmarks of iconic National Stadium (‘‘Bird’s
nest’’) and National Aquatic Centre (‘‘Water Cube’’), nine fully renewed. Beijing also stages one of Asia’s biggest international professional tennis tournaments (China Open) and an annual
marathon (one of two international marathons in China, the other
being in the small coastal city of Xiamen).
Policy makers are now realising the potential of media and culture to enhance global urban competitiveness and attract potential
visitors and investors. As Shen (2010) notes Beijing is actively positioning itself as a ‘cultural world city’ (wenhua de shijie chengshi)
by emphasising its cultural heritage but also through the ‘‘construction of mega-projects, staging hallmark events, the development of a cultural industries sector and an upsurge of urban
image-making and branding activities’’ (Yeoh, 2005: 945). Contemporary art is becoming a key part of this strategy. Now half of the
ten largest auction houses (measured by turnover) are located in
Beijing (Artprice, 2011: 16). Beijing is now the ‘world’s second global market for contemporary art behind New York’ (Artprice, 2011:
25). The contemporary art fair of Art Beijing and the popularity of
the 798 Art Zone are examples of Beijing status as a global art hub.
In terms of art sales 8 of 20 world leading art sellers are from Beijing (Financial Times, 01.07.2011). Five of twelve ‘‘best’’ galleries,
selling Chinese art in Beijing (Forbes, 10.01.07). To capitalise on
this there are plans afoot to build a ‘‘cultural free trade zone’’,
which upon completion will serve as a public platform providing
bonded warehouse, exchange and trade services for collection of
antiques and artworks, cultural design and production, high-end
cultural exhibitions, fashion design and other cultural services
(Xinhua 11.03.2012).
Beijing’s pathway as ‘global capital city’ is in common with
other capital cities which are seats of powerful national governments, hubs for state-related enterprises, economically post-industrial, culturally vibrant, and concentrate international and
domestic media and broadcasting activities. Most functions are
connected with status of capital, which promote concentration of
such activities, which gives capital cities certain advantages to
compare with non-capital cities.
Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen as ‘global industrialised cities’
Third in our typology is the generically named ‘global industrialised city’. These are cities, whose globalism are based on economic
scale and their functionality as manufacturing hubs. Among them
in China, Shanghai is the largest economic centre and the traditional industrial capital of China. Guangzhou has more than
2000 years of history and has found a niche as a global manufacturing hub within a new international division of labour. Shenzhen
is a manufacturing, export hub and oft cited showcase for economic reforms in China. For mainstream global city theorists (e.g.
Friedmann, Sassen) dominance of industrial activities in cities is often interpreted as a sign of under-development. However, the relative lack of advanced producer services or a high concentration of
financial activities in these cases does not necessarily signal a lack
of competitiveness or innovation. As Kratke (2011) argues:
‘‘The vision of a ‘post-industrial’ city which has led many urban
researchers to concentrate on service sector activities might
become increasingly questionable, as global finance and service
centres represent the major geographic hubs of the disastrous
development model of finance-dominated capitalism. Cities
that are searching for a sustainable development path might
187
be better off by extending and improving ‘real sector’ economic
activities. Taking into account the structural diversity of the
worldwide urban system, we can empirically detect that many
cities in the global North and South are linked to transnationally
extended production networks and continue to play an important role in the development of manufacturing industries.’’
Thinking through the case of Shanghai, Li (2011) argues that
industrialisation must be a character of China’s word city formation.
Indeed, industry composes relatively high share of GDP for the three
cities. It took almost 15 years for Shanghai to lower its share of secondary industry from 50% to 40% in GDP structure, 20 years in
Guangzhou, in Shenzhen it’s still higher that 40% (compared to
5 years it took in Beijing in the mid-1990s). Although manufacturing
is dominant in economic activity in these three cities their fields of
industrial specialisation differ from one another. Shanghai’s status
as industrial capital dates back to the 19th century and the start of
industrialisation triggered by foreign investments. After modern reforms started, the city consolidated its position, and more than half
of total investment after 1979 concentrated in manufacturing. As
noted by Wu and Yusuf (2004), Shanghai adopted a multipronged
strategy to capitalise on city’s industrial capabilities to build a
high-technology manufacturing sector and to greatly expand logistics infrastructure already in place. Key industries here are electronics and IT, automobile, petrochemical and fine chemistry, fine steel
materials, complete plants and biomedicine. The number of foreign
R&D facilities in Shanghai during the period 2002–2009 rose much
quicker compared to the number of branches of foreign service
(investment and financial) firms (Li, 2011).
Shanghai, Guangzhou and Shenzhen are global industrial cities
that contain advanced manufacturing activities and are highly
specialised in international trade and logistics (physical distribution of goods). The Shanghai custom zone is the globe’s largest handler of imported and exported goods and comprises 23% of the
country’s external trade. Value of external trade of foreign-funded
enterprises here are larger than in any other city totalling $186 billion (15.3% of the national shared compared to Beijing’s 4.3%).
Shanghai is now the world’s busiest world port and performing
the role of China’s trade hub for material goods. Guangzhou has become more prominent as a trade hub also and is the world’s 5th
largest port and Shenzhen is 15th (AAPA, 2012). Total growth from
2004 was more than 100% for each of those cities while Hong
Kong’s cargo trade handling has roughly stagnated during this period. Also, Shanghai now ranks world’s 1st, Shenzhen 4th, Guangzhou 7th in world container traffic flows (AAPA, 2012).
Before 1949, all the cities in the Zhujiang Delta were integrated
into one urban system, with Guangzhou as the largest and the
most prosperous city. It was and still is the capital of Guangdong
province and has been the most important seaport in South China
for over 2000 years. Since the 1980s export-led industrialisation
dominates Guangzhou’s pathway to globalisation. It functions as
manufacturing hub for foreign automotive manufacturers (e.g. Nissan, Honda, Toyota), electronics and petrochemicals. These industries as well as light industrial products (shoes, textiles and
clothes) are dominant exports into the global economy. The
Guangzhou trade and commerce hub functions are marketed
through a number of high profile trade fairs; of which the most
prominent is the world famous China Export and Import Fair (Canton Fair). This event is one of the largest commodities trade shows
of its kind in the world comprising 20,000 participant companies
from all over China, and was visited by approximately 190,000
international visitors from across the world. Local government
are now implementing a strategy for Guangzhou to be a global city
by 2020 based on its dominance as a trade and investment hub.
Shenzhen is one of the first special economic zones in China and
now specialises in electronic components production. Starting
188
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
from 1979 Shenzhen grew rapidly (annual around 30%) as a centre
for manufacturing for exports. After initial success as a low-cost
assembly centre, the government promoted an indigenous innovation system to encourage higher technology business activities.
The city is home to domestic consumer electronics giants as Hasee,
Huawei, Konka, Skyworth, ZTE Corporation, TCL, Tencent and China’s leading electro-car producer BYD. Shenzhen Hi-Tech Industrial
Park is one of the most successful and large zones of such type in
China. In contrast to Beijing, which also possesses strong regional
innovation system, for example ‘‘90% of the R&D in Shenzhen is
conducted by firms, and 80% of all R&D funding originates from
firms’’ (Chen & Kenney, 2007: 1069).
High-tech and logistics became mainstays of the city. To support them around a dozen leading Chinese institution set up research and practise facilities here. According to city government,
‘‘the city’s number of domestic patent applications reached
49,430, including 23,956 applications for invention patents. Its
PCT (Patent Cooperation Treaty) applications numbered 5584 in
2010, topping China for the seventh consecutive year’’ (Shenzhen
Government Online Net, http://english.sz.gov.cn/). Local government states the function of Shenzhen is as ‘. . . a link between the
Chinese mainland and Hong Kong and a transport hub in coastal
southern China. The city leads in high-tech, financial services, foreign trade, shipping and creative cultural industries. It has undertaken a mission to pilot China’s structural reform and a broader
opening to the outside world.’ (Chen & Kenney, 2007: 1069).
Cross-border connections between Hong Kong and Shenzhen are
high volume – everyday border crossings total 470,000 people
and 41,000 cars (2009). According to South China Morning Post
(15.03.12) Shenzhen is also bidding to create an image of green
global city with local government having set a goal to replace more
than 50% of its combustion engine buses with electric or hybrid
ones by 2015.
Concluding remarks
Due to its sheer scale and size, China’s increasing interaction
with globalisation and the global economy is attracting wider
attention from scholars. However, understanding the uniqueness
and complex processes of urban transformation in China is challenging due to both the rapidity of the changes and the heterogeneity of outcomes in different localities thereby making attempts
at generalisation impossible. Bearing this in mind, the paper has
sought to investigate the multiple pathways to ‘global city’ formation focusing on the functionality of different cities in China thereby avoiding essentialist views about what a ’global city’
constitutes. When examining Chinese cities in all their complexity
the objective should not be simply to benchmark their perceived
‘‘global-ness’’ cities against established global cities like London,
New York and Tokyo. Rather the focus should be on how these cities are transforming in relation both to globalisation processes and
inward political, economic, social, cultural functionalities.
To examine the different pathways to globalisation the paper
adopted a functional approach to global city studies based on an
evaluation of quantitative measure of globalisation, policy materials and wider academic literature. The paper concludes that only
very few cities contain a full range of developed political, economic, social and cultural functions. Most have strengths and
weaknesses that are grounded in divergent local characteristics
and comparative functional advantages in economy, politics, culture and geography. These local characteristics and institutional
environments push cities along different functional pathways to
global city formation. Multiple pathways are easier to detect in
the few countries which contain a set of large and rapidly globalising cities; China is recent example, the USA and Germany are oth-
ers. When a number of world cities tend to emerge in one
particular country, it forces these different cities to cooperate
and find a position within their national urban hierarchy. Our
understanding of global city formation in these cases needs to be
attentive to the specific roles each city plays in the hierarchy and
its functional place in urban networks rather than ‘measuring’
globalisation in individual cities by different proxies. Limiting the
number of cities under examination to one country or one region,
it becomes possible to reveal interactions, interdependencies and
complementarities among cities. The typology presented here not
to depict a set of characteristics common to every city, but rather
to examine the uniqueness and functionality of each city.
At the top of the Chinese hierarchy is the global city-state of
Hong Kong that emerged out of unique economic, geographical,
political conditions and firmly embedded in multifaceted global
networks. It is a true ‘global city’ in the functional sense which
means that the city contains all range of well-developed functions
and is of true global influence. Other cities could be labelled as
multifunctional, to emphasise they didn’t reach level of full-range
functional cities. The first tier consists of Beijing and Shanghai,
whose scale and set of functions are already big enough to be compared to Hong Kong, but whose development and global influence
are inferior. These cities are multifunctional and dominant within
the Chinese urban system but yet to become global in the holistic
sense. Beijing and Shanghai represent two different types of global
city, while first can be considered a classic ‘global capital city’ with
high concentration of political, socio-cultural and educational scientific functions and Shanghai is more an economic and trade
hub. Foreign analogues to Beijing could possibly include global
capitals such as Paris and Moscow. At the lower tier are Shenzhen
and Guangzhou functioning as industrialised global cities with accents on manufacturing, industrial innovations, international trade
and logistics, potentially emulating the experience of Shanghai.
Such ‘global industrialised cities’ emerge as a result of rapid industrialisation, urbanisation and global influence due to economic
competitive advantages.
Although the paper suggests a typology based on evidence from
China’s globalising cities it is unwise to promote the universal
applicability of the typology. Future research needs to be sensitive
to the unique contexts in which global cities are emerging and
attentive to the national urban system in which they grow and extend influence outwards. Importantly, when we shift focus away
from ‘hyper global’ city exemplars and towards cities in developing
countries competing on pathways to ‘global city’ formation indicators like the concentration of MNC headquarters becomes less relevant. Therefore, research needs to be manageable and realistic
based upon in-depth case studies that seek to explain the unique
pathways of cities in China while also endeavouring towards a
wider contribution unpacking macro-economic processes and urban transformations.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for constructive comments and helpful feedback. Ilya Chubarov would
like to acknowledge the support of his scientific adviser Nikolay
Sluka, PhD, a pioneer of research on global cities in Russia.
References
A.T. Kearney Inc. (2012). Global cities index and emerging cities outlook.
Airport Council International (2013). Preliminary 2012 world airport traffic and
rankings. <http://www.aci.aero/>.
Alderson, A. S., Beckfield, J., & Sprague-Jones, J. (2010). Intercity relations and
globalisation: The evolution of the global urban hierarchy, 1981–2007. Urban
Studies, 47(9), 1899–1923.
I. Chubarov, D. Brooker / Cities 35 (2013) 181–189
American Association of Port Authorities (2012). World port rankings 2011. <http://
www.aapa-ports.org/>.
Artprice Ltd. (2011). Contemporary art market 2010/2011. Lyon.
Beeson, M. (2009). Developmental states in East Asia: A comparison of the Japanese
and Chinese experiences. Asian Perspective, 33(2), 5–39.
Biztradeshows (2013). Trade shows by countries. <http://www.biztradeshows.com>.
Brandt, L., & Rawski, T. G. (2008). China’s great economic transformation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Brookings (2013). Global metromonitor. <http://www.brookings.edu/research/
interactives/global-metro-monitor-3>.
Chan, C.-P., & Poon, W.-K. (2012). The Chinese local administrative measures for
building up the ‘headquarter economy’: A comparison between Pudong and
Shenzhen. Journal of Contemporary China, 21(73), 149–167.
Chen, K., & Kenney, M. (2007). Universities/research institutes and regional
innovation systems: The cases of Beijing and Shenzhen. World Development,
35(6), 1056–1074.
Chiu, S. W.-K., & Lui, D. (2009). Hong Kong: Becoming a Chinese global city. London:
Routledge.
CIA (2013). The world Factbook. <http://www.cia.gov/library/publications/theworld-factbook/>.
Cook, I. (2006). Beijing: An ‘internationalized metropolis’. In F. Wu (Ed.),
Globalisation and the Chinese city (pp. 63–84). London: Routledge.
Derudder, B. (2006). On conceptual confusion in empirical analyses of a
transnational urban network. Urban Studies, 43(11), 2027–2046.
Douglass, M., & Friedman, J. (Eds.). (1998). Cities for citizens. Chichester: Wiley &
Sons.
Euromonitor International (2012). Top 100 city destination ranking. <http://blog.
euromonitor.com/2012/01/euromonitor-internationals-top-city-destinationsranking1-.html>.
Fortune (2013). Fortune global 500. <http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/
global500/>.
Friedmann, J. (1986). The world city hypothesis. Development and Change, 17(1),
69–84.
GaWC (2010). The world according to GaWC 2010. <http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/
world2010t.html>.
Gu, C., & Sun, T. (1999). Jingji quanqiuhua yu zhongguo guojixing chengshi jianshe
[Economic globalisation and construction of international cities in China].
Chengshi guihua huikan [Urban Planning Forum], 3, 1–6.
Gugler, J. (Ed.). (2004). World cities beyond the west: Globalisation, development, and
inequality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, P. M. (1966). The world cities. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
Hill, R. C., & Kim, J. W. (2000). Global cities and development states: New York,
Tokyo and Seoul. Urban Studies, 37(12), 2167–2195.
Jessop, B., & Sum, N. L. (2000). An entrepreneurial city in action: Hong Kong’s
emerging strategies in and for (Inter)urban competition. Urban Studies, 37,
2287–2313.
Knight Frank Llp (2011). Global cities index. London: The Wealth Report.
Kratke, S. (2011). How manufacturing industries connect cities across the world:
Extending research on ‘multiple globalisation’. GaWC Research Bulletin, 391.
Li, J. (2011). Shijie chengshi yanjiu de zhuanxing, fansi yu shanghai jianshe shijie
chengshi de tantao [A new development model for world cities – A case study of
Shanghai on world city formation]. Chengshi guihua xuekan [Urban Planning
Forum], 3, 20–26.
Lin, G. C. S. (2004). The Chinese globalising cities: National centers of globalisation
and urban transformation. Progress in Planning, 61, 143–157.
Lo, F.-C., & Yeung, Y.-M. (1996). Emerging world cities in Pacific Asia. Tokyo; New
York: United Nations University Press.
Lu, L. (2007). Quanqiu chengshi lilun yu zhongguo de guoji chengshi jianshe [Theory
of global city and establishment of Chinese global city]. Dili Kexue [Scientia
Geographica Sinica], 4, 49–55.
Lu, J. (2011). Shijie chengshi panbie zhibiao tixi ji Beijing de nuli fangxiang [What
Beijing aiming at: Based on the study of the indicator system of world city].
Chengshi fazhan yanjiu [Urban Studies], 18(4), 16–23.
Ma, X., & Timberlake, M. (2008). Identifying China’s leading world city: A network
approach. GeoJournal, 71, 19–35.
Ma, X., & Timberlake, M. (2013). World city typologies and national city system
deterritorialisation: USA, China and Japan. Urban Studies, 50(2), 255–275.
Mahutga, M. C., Ma, X., Smith, D. A., & Timberlake, M. (2010). Economic
globalisation and the structure of the word city system: The case of airline
passenger data. Urban Studies, 47(9), 1925–1947.
McGann, O. (2013). 2012 Global go to think tanks report and policy advice. Think
Tanks and Civil Societies Program, International Relations Program, University
of Pennsylvania.
McKinsey (2009). Preparing for China’s urban billion. McKinsey Global Institute.
189
Mori Memorial Foundation (2012). Global power city index 2012. Tokyo.
Naughton, B. (2007). The Chinese economy: Transitions and growth. Cambridge,
Mass.; London: MIT.
Ng, M. K., & Hills, P. (2003). World cities or great cities. A comparative study of five
Asian metropolises. Cities, 20(3), 151–165.
Ni, P. (2011). The global urban competitiveness report. London: Edward Elgar
Publishing.
Ning, Y. (1991). Xin guoji laodong fengong, shijie chengshi yu woguo zhongxin
chengshi de fazhan [New international division of labour, world cities and
development of Chinese central cities]. Chengshi wenti [Urban Problems], N3,
2–7.
Olds, K., & Yeung, H. W. C. (2004). Pathway to global city formation: A view from
developmental city-state of Singapore. Review of International Political Economy,
11(3), 489–521.
Pang, X. (1996). Guanyu zhongguo shijie chengshi fazhan tiaojian yu qianjing de
chubu yanjiu [A preliminary study on the conditions and prospect for China to
develop world-cities]. Dili yanjiu [Geographical Research], 15(2), 67–73.
Qi, X., Zhang, B., & Zhao, J. (2011). Beijing shijie chengshi zhibiao tixi de goujian yu
ceping [Construction and assessment of beijing building world city index
system]. Chengshi fazhan yanjiu [Urban Studies], 18(4), 1–7.
Sassen, S. (1991, 2001). The global city: New York, London, Tokyo. NJ: Princeton.
Shen, J. (2010). Wenhua de shijie chengshi: Beijing de youxian lijing [Cultural world
city: Priority way for Beijing]. Beijing guihua jianshe [Beijing Planning Review], 4,
40–42.
Sklair, L. (2000). The transnational capitalist class. London: Blackwell.
Smith, M. P. (2001). Transnational urbanism: Locating globalisation. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Taylor, P. (2012). Global urban analysis: A survey of cities in globalization. London:
Routledge.
Taylor, P., Ni, P., Derudder, B., Hoyler, M., Huang, J., Lu, F., et al. (2009). Measuring
the world city network: New developments and results. GaWC Research Bulletin,
300.
The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd. (2012). Hot spots. Benchmarking global city
competitiveness. 2012.
Thrift, N. (1997). Cities without modernity, cities with magic. Scottish Geographical
Magazine, 113, 138–149.
UNCTAD (2012). Global Investments trends monitor 8. New York.
United Nations (2012). World urbanization prospects: The 2011 revision. New York.
Verhetsel, A., & Sel, S. (2009). World maritime cities: From which cities do container
shipping companies make decisions? Transport Policy, 16(5), 240–250.
Vinciguerra, S., Frenken, K., & Valente, M. (2010). The geography of Internet
infrastructure: an evolutionary simulation approach base on preferential
attachment. Urban Studies, 47(9), 1969–1984.
Wallerstein, I. M. (1974). The modern world-system. New York; London: Academic
Press.
Wang, C. H. (2003). Taipei as a global city: A theoretical and empirical examination.
Urban Studies, 40(2), 309–334.
Wei, Y. D., & Yu, D. (2006). State policy and globalisation of Beijing: Emerging
themes. Habitat International, 30, 377–395.
World Federation of Exchanges (2013). Monthly reports. <http://worldexchanges.org/statistics/monthly-reports>.
Wu, W., & Yusuf, S. (2004). In J. Gugler (Ed.), Shanghai: Remaking of China’s future
global city (pp. 27–58).
Xie, S., & Ning, Y. (2004). Shijie chengshi yanjiu zongshu [A review of the research of
world cities]. Dili yanjiu jinzhan [Progress in Geography], 23(5), 56–66.
Xu, J. (1993). Dui woguo fazhan guojixing chengshi de sikao [Thoughts on
development of international cities in China]. Chengshi guihua [Urban
Planning], N3.
Xu, Y. (2011). Beijing jianshe shijie chengshi zhanlue dingwei yu fazhan moshi
[Research on strategic goals and development model of Beijing as world city].
Chengshi fazhan yanjiu [Urban Studies], 18(3), 72–77.
Xue, Y. (2003). Yujian cheng shijie chengshi: Shanghai yu guoji de chaju zai na li?
[Desire to build a world city: What is the difference between Shanghai and
internationals?]. Guoji Shichang [International market], 1, 18–19.
Yeoh, B. S. A. (2005). The global cultural city? Spatial imagineering and politics in
the (multi)cultural marketplaces of South-east Asia. Urban Studies, 42, 945–958.
Zhao, Q., & Zhen, Y. (2004). Zhongguo guojixing dadushi de gongneng dingwei
[Functional placement of internationalised metropolis in China]. Jingji Luntan
[Economic Tribune], 14, 6–7.
Zhou, Z. (2006). Quanqiuhua, quanqiu chengshi wangluo yu quanqiu chengshi de
luoji guanxi [Logic relations between globalisation, global urban network and
global cities]. Shehui Kexue [Journal of Social Sciences], 10, 17–26.
Zhou, Y.-X. (2002). Prospect of international cities in China. In J. R. Logan (Ed.), The
new Chinese city: Globalisation and market reform. Oxford: Blackwell.