發(fā)布時(shí)間：2016-05-04 14:53

1.0 Introduction介紹

自20世紀(jì)60年代以來(lái)，隨著新的國(guó)際分工的逐步形成，跨國(guó)公司的增長(zhǎng)和信息和通訊技術(shù)的革命性進(jìn)步，全球化進(jìn)程大大加快。經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化對(duì)城市發(fā)展有著重要的影響，使城市在全球經(jīng)濟(jì)中扮演著越來(lái)越重要的角色。一批具有世界性的城市與超國(guó)家的影響和全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的指揮和控制的出現(xiàn)，如：紐約、倫敦、東京的作用等。學(xué)者如Sassen（1991）研究了這些城市，，提出了有關(guān)全球城市理論。在全球城市的研究中，魯濱孫作為代表指出，全球城市理論忽視了區(qū)域性問(wèn)題，它強(qiáng)調(diào)集體性的城市，這遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)城市品質(zhì)的研究，忽略了對(duì)原來(lái)的歷史背景差異的研究，在城市的地理位置和文化系統(tǒng)，他提出和普通城市理論，它不同于“全球城市”理論。這2種理論對(duì)城市政治、發(fā)展、城市之間的關(guān)系有著不同的解釋。本文將以這2種不同的理論為基礎(chǔ)，分析墨爾本市城市政治、管理、規(guī)劃的特點(diǎn)。Since the 1960s, with the gradual formation of a new international division of labor, growth of multinational corporations and revolutionary advances in the information and communication technologies, the process of globalization accelerates greatly. Economic globalization has a significant impact on urban development, so that cities play an increasingly important role in the global economy. A number of cosmopolitan cities with supranational influential and the roles of command and control in the global economy emerge, such as: New York, London, Tokyo and so on. Scholars such as Sassen (1991) studied on these cities and proposed theory relating to global cities. In the study of global cities, Robinson as the representative pointed out that the theory of global cities neglects locality issues, it emphasizes communality of cities, which far exceeds the research on urban qualities and ignores research on differences in the originally historical backgrounds, geographical locations and cultural systems among the cities, he went to propose and the theory of ordinary city, which is different from the “global city” theory. The two kinds of theories have different interpretation on urban politics, development, relationship between cities. This essay will be based on these two kinds of different theories to analyze the characteristics of urban politics, management, planning of Melbourne.

2.0 Theoretical framework理論框架

2.1 The “global city” theory
Sassen’s (1996) “global city” theory believes that the key driver of global cities’ development in the world economy lies in their concentrated excellent infrastructure and services, so that they have the ability to control the world. Sassen also conducted a lot of empirical analysis on New York, London, Tokyo, noting that three major cities are truly global cities. They are in the top of the pyramid of the world's urban system, constituting a clear new urban form - global cities. These three cities control the operation of the world's global economic system.
Sassen (1991) considered that a global city is the site which is able to provide multinational corporations with a good service and communication facilities for the global economy operations and management, multinational headquarters gather there. A global city has the following four basic characteristics. Firstly, it is the highly centralized control center of the world economy. Secondly, it should be the main site of financial and special services industries. Thirdly, it should be production site leading industries. Fourthly, it should be a market for products and innovation. 
Sassen (1996; 1991) carried out a systematic study on producer services complex of global city, considering that finance and production service sectors have become the new important factors that determine whether a city has strong competitive strength in the global economy. Taylor, Catalano and Gane (2002) also noted that development of service function of a global city will further grow up because of the rapid growth of global trade and investment as well as strong demand for financial and service industries. 

Sassen (1999) analyzed that globalization of economic activity has greatly increased the complexity of business transactions, along with the concentration of the most advanced communications technologies in these cities, enterprise command and control functions also agglomerate in these cities. Motive power of formation of a global city comes from the combination of two powerful economic forces, first is that manufacturing-based economic activities continued to spread in the world, second is that the control of such production activities continue to concentrate in big cities (Friedmann and Wolff, 1982). In the increasingly fierce international competition, in order to pursue the ongoing competitiveness, each country must uses a large amount of internal investment to provide the best environment and facilities to investors to improve its competitive advantage (Keil, 1998).

2.2 The “ordinary city” approach
2.3 Similarities
2.4 Differences
3.0 Melbourne and global city
4.0 Melbourne and ordinary city

References文獻(xiàn)

Amin, A. and Graham, S. (1997). The ordinary city. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22(4):411-429.
Etherington, D. and Jones, M. (2009). City regions: new geographies of uneven development  and inequality. Regional Studies, 43(2): 247-265.
Friedmann, J. and Wolff, G., (1982). World city formation: an agenda for research and action. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 6(3): 309-344.
Godfrey B. and Zhou, Y. (1999). Ranking world cities: multinational corporations and the global urban hierarchy. Urban Geography, 20(4):68-81.
Kamal-Chaoui, L. and Sanchez-Reaza, J. (eds.) (2012). Urban trends and policies in OECD countries [online].
OECD Territorial Reviews. (2014). Competitive cities in the global economy [online]. 
Robinso, J. (2002). Global and world cities: a view from the map. International Journal of regional Research, 26(3):531-554
Robinson, J. (2006). Ordinary cities: between modernity and development. London: Routledge, 204.
Robinson, J. (2005). Urban geography: world cities, or a world of cities. Progress in Human Geography, 29(6):757-765.
Sassen, S. (1996). Identity in the global city: economic and cultural encasements. In: Yaeger, P. (ed.).The Geography of Identity, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 481.
Sassen, S. (1991). The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Sassen,S.(1999).Whose city is it? Globalization and formation of new claims. In: Holstion, J.(ed) Cities and citizenship, Durham, NC: Duke University Press,177-194.
SGS Economics & Planning. (2013). Understanding the property and economic drivers of housing:  city of Melbourne [online]. 
Smith, D. and Timberlake, M. (2002). Hierarchies of dominance among world cities: a network approach. New York: Routledge.
Taylor, P. J., Catalano, G. and Gane, N., (2002). A geography of global change: cities and services 
2000-2001. Urban Geography, 24(5): 431-441.
Taylor, P. J., Catalano, G. and Walker, D. R. F. (2004). Multiple globalizations: regional, global business service through world cities. The Service industries Journal, 24: 64-82.
Varsanyi, M.W. (2000). Global cities from the ground up: a response to Peter Taylor. Poltical Geography, 19(1):33-38.
Wilkinson, J. (2010). Sydney and Melbourne: an economic overview [online]. 

本文編號(hào)：41912