文章基本信息

标题：Development, geography, and the metropolis – a normative appreciation of an emerging agenda
本地全文：下载
作者：Jeroen Klink
期刊名称：International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development
印刷版ISSN：1946-3138
出版年度：2011
卷号：3
期号：2
页码：232-238
DOI：10.1080/19463138.2011.613289
语种：English
出版社：Taylor & Francis Group
摘要：The academic literature, so it seems, has rediscovered the economic role of city regions and metropolitan areas in the process of national development. While Jacobs (1970) had already claimed that economic theory, be it within the Marxist, Keynesian, or neoclassical tradition, had created the equivalent of a ‘fools paradise’ of a spaceless economy, it was not until Krugman (1996) launched his critique on the neoclassical narrative of perfectly competitive markets that territory was being brought back into mainstream economics, leading to renewed research on the significance of cities for national development. At the same time, authors related to regulation theory, such as Benko (1996), and industrial urbanism (Storper 1997; Scott 1998) argued that post-Fordist regimes of flexible accumulation favored a more active economic role for cities and metropolitan areas, especially when compared with the traditional fiscal and monetary policies that were conducted at the national level under the Keynesian–Fordist regime. Business economists such Porter (1990) analyzed the implications of clustering for national competitiveness, while Ohmae (1996) even went so far as to claim that nation states had become the equivalents of dinosaurs, focused on the (inefficient) redistributions of wealth within national frontiers, the bulk of which was anyway being generated by city regions. Schumpeterian inspired work on science, technology, and innovation also led to an increasing awareness on the role of metropolis in the creation of local innovation systems (Nelson and Winter 1982), while the analysis of global city regions (Sassen 1991; Hall 1995), strategic planning, and entrepreneurial urban management (Borja and Castells 1997) also triggered a growing debate within the planning literature on the role of large metropolitan areas as central nerve points in an increasingly interdependent world economy marked by intense flow of information.