Space wars and the new urban imperialism is a study of the multiscalar dynamic of global capitalism through the lens of the global-local nexus of space wars. The thesis analyzes the new logic of uneven development and the glocal forces that transform our cities in the 21st century. The main focus is on globalization of the commercial property market, changes in urban governance and changes in social geography, and interconnections between the three. In the study of globalization of the commercial property market (Chapters One and Two), I have mapped investment patterns in Copenhagen and Lisbon. Both studies showed a rescaling of the commercial property markets during the past two decades. The Lisbon study showed that there are substantial cross-border commercial property investments between Portugal, UK, Spain, France, and Germany. In the Copenhagen case, Swedish investment accounts for a large share of foreign direct investment. These findings support one of the strongest arguments raised against the exaggerated claims of the globalization hype concerning ‘the death of distance’ and
‘the end of geography’, namely that the vast majority of global exchange is upon closer inspection re-scaled regional exchange. Large shares of the investments, however, flow through offshore banks often located on small islands (Engdahl 2004). These offshore institutions have formed “small ‘black holes’ in the topography of regulation through which large sums of money flow” (Warf 2002, 45).
The rescaling of commercial property markets is closely connected to changes in urban governance. Chapters Three, Four and Five elucidate ‘actually existing neoliberalism’ (Brenner and Theodor 2002) in Copenhagen and Lisbon. The shift from government to governance covers a number of changes towards a neo-liberal agenda: changes in the ways the local state and public sector act in the context of and react to processes of ‘glocalization’, economic and political restructuring and technological change. The difference between the two is not so much a definitive break as an unfolding transformation. A new form of
multi-Conclusions
Space wars and the new urban imperialism is a study of the multiscalar dynamic of global capitalism through the lens of the global-local nexus of space wars. The thesis analyzes the new logic of uneven development and the glocal forces that transform our cities in the 21st century. The main focus is on globalization of the commercial property market, changes in urban governance and changes in social geography, and interconnections between the three. In the study of globalization of the commercial property market (Chapters One and Two), I have mapped investment patterns in Copenhagen and Lisbon. Both studies showed a rescaling of the commercial property markets during the past two decades. The Lisbon study showed that there are substantial cross-border commercial property investments between Portugal, UK, Spain, France, and Germany. In the Copenhagen case, Swedish investment accounts for a large share of foreign direct investment. These findings support one of the strongest arguments raised against the exaggerated claims of the globalization hype concerning ‘the death of distance’ and
‘the end of geography’, namely that the vast majority of global exchange is upon closer inspection re-scaled regional exchange. Large shares of the investments, however, flow through offshore banks often located on small islands (Engdahl 2004). These offshore institutions have formed “small ‘black holes’ in the topography of regulation through which large sums of money flow” (Warf 2002, 45).
The rescaling of commercial property markets is closely connected to changes in urban governance. Chapters Three, Four and Five elucidate ‘actually existing neoliberalism’ (Brenner and Theodor 2002) in Copenhagen and Lisbon. The shift from government to governance covers a number of changes towards a neo-liberal agenda: changes in the ways the local state and public sector act in the context of and react to processes of ‘glocalization’, economic and political restructuring and technological change. The difference between the two is not so much a definitive break as an unfolding transformation. A new form of
multi-globalization of the commercial property market and changes in urban governance I argue that urban governance serves as a ‘filter’ through which the global/regional investment rhythms flow.
Chapter Three suggests that Lisbon has experienced a regional rescaling of its commercial property market (similar to Copenhagen) and changes in urban governance, and that these processes are inextricably intertwined. The findings indicate that changes in urban governance have been asymmetrical, benefiting private capital more than citizens. In Chapter Four, the idea of the 'creative city' is studied in the context of the imagineering of Copenhagen. Strategies for developing urban competitiveness are analysed from a perspective on relations between processes of globalization, developments in urban government/governance and social geographic change. It is argued that there is a need to recognize the social costs of developments that are glossed over by the creative city rhetoric, including diminished representative democracy, social and geographic polarization and considerable displacement of the marginalized. In Chapter Five the global-urban nexus of urban space wars is identified as a fundamental aspect of ongoing processes of material and social construction and transformation of urban space. The study shows how (‘Wonderful’) Copenhagen is a socio-economic fortress city in a number of ways. It offers examples of how ethnicity and class are vital elements in the Copenhagen space wars and demonstrates how urban space wars in Copenhagen are largely mediated through urban politics. Urban governance, formed in this age of vagabond capitalism by competition between cities on the global scale, translates into uneven development and space wars at the urban scale.
The shift towards neo-liberal governance in Lisbon and Copenhagen can be seen as an installation of a neo-liberal lebensraum on the urban scale through geoeconomic means (Smith 2003), a form of space war and accumulation by dispossession (Harvey 2003a). In Copenhagen, the gradual shift from Keynesian government towards deregulated urban governance began in the late 1980s and established itself as business as usual in the 1990s. In this process many barriers to globalization were reduced. On top of the general deregulation and introduction of Public-Private/Public Partnerships, privatisation of public owned property was central to the process.
globalization of the commercial property market and changes in urban governance I argue that urban governance serves as a ‘filter’ through which the global/regional investment rhythms flow.
Chapter Three suggests that Lisbon has experienced a regional rescaling of its commercial property market (similar to Copenhagen) and changes in urban governance, and that these processes are inextricably intertwined. The findings indicate that changes in urban governance have been asymmetrical, benefiting private capital more than citizens. In Chapter Four, the idea of the 'creative city' is studied in the context of the imagineering of Copenhagen. Strategies for developing urban competitiveness are analysed from a perspective on relations between processes of globalization, developments in urban government/governance and social geographic change. It is argued that there is a need to recognize the social costs of developments that are glossed over by the creative city rhetoric, including diminished representative democracy, social and geographic polarization and considerable displacement of the marginalized. In Chapter Five the global-urban nexus of urban space wars is identified as a fundamental aspect of ongoing processes of material and social construction and transformation of urban space. The study shows how (‘Wonderful’) Copenhagen is a socio-economic fortress city in a number of ways. It offers examples of how ethnicity and class are vital elements in the Copenhagen space wars and demonstrates how urban space wars in Copenhagen are largely mediated through urban politics. Urban governance, formed in this age of vagabond capitalism by competition between cities on the global scale, translates into uneven development and space wars at the urban scale.
The shift towards neo-liberal governance in Lisbon and Copenhagen can be seen as an installation of a neo-liberal lebensraum on the urban scale through geoeconomic means (Smith 2003), a form of space war and accumulation by dispossession (Harvey 2003a). In Copenhagen, the gradual shift from Keynesian government towards deregulated urban governance began in the late 1980s and established itself as business as usual in the 1990s. In this process many barriers to globalization were reduced. On top of the general deregulation and introduction of Public-Private/Public Partnerships, privatisation of public owned property was central to the process.
Photo 6.1 Graffiti in Gamla Väster in Malmö, Sweden. (Photo: Anders Lund Hansen)
Especially the latter initiative facilitated accumulation by dispossession
— a fundamental characteristic of the new urban imperialism. One of the ideas with this manoeuvre was to install a neo-liberal lebensraum by privatizing public property, in order to ease the progress of globalization of the commercial property market.
Furthermore, the practical consequences of these changes entailed a shift from containment of growth to a pro-growth strategy for Copenhagen as a national priority. Copenhagen changed status in this process, from one town among many Danish towns, to the growth locomotive of all Denmark (a copy of Thatcher’s strategy for London).
The example shows how strong metropolitan regions, like the Øresund Region in Denmark and Sweden, are emerging as crucial production platforms for global capitalism. In this process resources are drawn from the periphery to the urban centers in order to rearm the metropolitan regions in the global battle for investors, good taxpayers and creative people. These findings offer a perspective on the logic behind contemporary urban change, and it shows how space wars and the new imperialism are integral parts of this process. One can argue that the global-local nexus of space wars is a component of a multi-scalar territorial reshaping of core-periphery relations that mediates a new imperial urban world order: an urban context with little room for
Photo 6.1 Graffiti in Gamla Väster in Malmö, Sweden. (Photo: Anders Lund Hansen)
Especially the latter initiative facilitated accumulation by dispossession
— a fundamental characteristic of the new urban imperialism. One of the ideas with this manoeuvre was to install a neo-liberal lebensraum by privatizing public property, in order to ease the progress of globalization of the commercial property market.
Furthermore, the practical consequences of these changes entailed a shift from containment of growth to a pro-growth strategy for Copenhagen as a national priority. Copenhagen changed status in this process, from one town among many Danish towns, to the growth locomotive of all Denmark (a copy of Thatcher’s strategy for London).
The example shows how strong metropolitan regions, like the Øresund Region in Denmark and Sweden, are emerging as crucial production platforms for global capitalism. In this process resources are drawn from the periphery to the urban centers in order to rearm the metropolitan regions in the global battle for investors, good taxpayers and creative people. These findings offer a perspective on the logic behind contemporary urban change, and it shows how space wars and the new imperialism are integral parts of this process. One can argue that the global-local nexus of space wars is a component of a multi-scalar territorial reshaping of core-periphery relations that mediates a new imperial urban world order: an urban context with little room for
“Capitalism means constant war”, reads the graffiti on the wall in gentrified Gamla Väster in Malmö, Sweden (Photo 6.1); hinting at the fact that the capitalist mode of production, even in Sweden, has a constant tendency towards geopolitical and geoeconomic spatial warfare at all scales (Harvey 1985; Smith 2003). Well, not all wars are the product of capitalism, and urban space wars would not disappear if the current mode of production were changed. I do, however, consider it crucial that we use our imaginative powers and courage to think outside the current hegemonic system, and find alternative modes of social organization: towards a more just post-neo-liberal urbanism!
“Capitalism means constant war”, reads the graffiti on the wall in gentrified Gamla Väster in Malmö, Sweden (Photo 6.1); hinting at the fact that the capitalist mode of production, even in Sweden, has a constant tendency towards geopolitical and geoeconomic spatial warfare at all scales (Harvey 1985; Smith 2003). Well, not all wars are the product of capitalism, and urban space wars would not disappear if the current mode of production were changed. I do, however, consider it crucial that we use our imaginative powers and courage to think outside the current hegemonic system, and find alternative modes of social organization: towards a more just post-neo-liberal urbanism!
EPILOGUE