Bartlett School of Planning
MPhil FT2 DR3/Diploma/MSc
Comparative Planning  Autumn 2000

CLASS FOUR: CITIES
DISCUSSION

ISSUE 1:
Consider the issue of local autonomy and effectiveness at the city level.
Particularly look at Fainstein et al  The City Builders.   Look at the theoretical controversies on p9 and the key issues on p 18-19. Chapters 1 through 4 are useful.

Question: Regardless of who controls the  local regime can local actors have any effect on their economies and carry  out redistributional policies?
	
ISSUE 2:
Consider the hypothesis of ‘Divided Cities’: that economic revival and urban renaissance have been accompanied by accelerating social and economic polarisation.

Question: To what extent was the revival of the eighties a consequence of the fact that London and New York are global cities? 

Question: Has public policy/planning played any part in this if so what? Can the distributional consequences/sustainability of revival be modified by public action?

(Relevant chapters are the introduction plus chapters 3,8 and 9)

ISSUE 3:
Consider Les Budd and Michael Edwards’ critique of Peter Hall’s arguments on global cities.

Question: Do cities compete? Can we say that cities compete any more than we can say that regions compete? Are we talking about competition between enterprises rather than regions or cities?

REFERENCES:

Fainstein S.S, Gordon I and Harloe M (1992) Divided Cities: New York and London in the Contemporary World Oxford: Blackwell 
Fainstein S.S, (1994) The City Builders Oxford: Blackwell
Llewelyn Davies, Peter Hall and Comedia (1996) Four World Cities: A comparative study of London, Paris, New York and Tokyo, HMSO
Budd L and Edwards M (1997) “Confirming conforming conventions: the Four World Cities Study” City 7:171-181.