Table Of Content

Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect Progress in Planning journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/progress Global city Sydney Ronald K. Vogela,⁎,1, Roberta Ryanb,1, Alex Lawrieb,2, Bligh Grantb,3, Xianming Mengc,3, Peter Walshb,4, Alan Morrisb,5, Chris Riedyd,6 aDepartmentofPoliticsandPublicAdministration,RyersonUniversity,Toronto,ON,M5B2K3,Canada bInstituteforPublicPolicyandGovernance,UniversityofTechnologySydney,P.O.Box123,Broadway,NSW,2007,Australia cInstituteforRuralFutures,SchoolofBehavioural,CognitiveandSocialSciences,UniversityofNewEngland,Armidale,NSW,2351,Australia dInstituteforSustainableFutures,UniversityofTechnologySydney,P.O.Box123,Broadway,NSW,2007,Australia ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Sydney has emerged as a major global city in the 21st century. We review the “global city thesis”, which Sydney dominates urban scholarship and practice, and ask whether it adequately captures the Sydney experience. Globalcity Althoughtheglobalcitythesisisausefulanalyticalconstructforpolicymakersandscholars,wearguethatit Urbanproblems doesnotadequatelychartSydney’sriseasaleadingglobalcityanditscurrentproblems.Theglobalcitythesis Housingaffordability ignoresthepoliticalinstitutionsandprocessesthatshapeanddirecttheglobalcity.TheCityofSydneyisasmall Localgovernmentreform areaofthecity-region,accountingforonlyaboutfourpercentofthemetropolis.Sydneylacksametropolitanor Metropolitangovernance regionalgovernmentandhasfewregionalcollaborativeprocessesorplatforms.Insteadtheglobalcitystrategy Urbanisation Economiccompetitiveness ofSydneyisshapedanddirectedbytheNewSouthWalesstategovernment.Thisiscontrarytothepolitical Publictransit decentralisationanddevolutiontrendsheraldedbyinternationalactorssuchastheOrganisationforEconomic Climatechange Co-operationandDevelopment. Climateleadership Sydney also illustrates the dilemma of global cities in that those members at the top of the knowledge Climatepolicy economyarehighlyrewardedandthoseinthemiddleandlowerstratafacedifficultymaintainingorimproving Inequality theirsituations.Localgovernmentslackthecapacitytoactindependentlyandthestateandfederalgovernments financializationofhousing areunwillingtoaddressseriousurbanproblemsassociatedwithglobalisation,suchaspublictransitorhousing. Housingcrisis Giventhegovernments'embraceofneoliberalism,theglobalcityvisionadvancedbyleadersisthreatened.There Housingstress Socialhousing islittleconcretepolicyofferedbyanylevelofgovernmenttoaddressthecrisis. Privaterenters Sustainabilitytransition Transformativecapacity 1. TheGlobalCitythesisandthecaseofSydney leadership,activelysettheagendatosolveproblemsandguidedevel- opment policy to ensure the city’s competitiveness in the world 1.1. Introduction economy (Barber, 2013; Katz & Bradley, 2013; Newman & Thornley, 2011). The“globalcitythesis”hasbecomethedominantparadigmtoex- Inthisstudy,wefocusonthecaseofglobalcitySydneytoconsider plaintheplaceofcitiesintheworldeconomy(Brenner&Keil,2006; twomainresearchquestions.First,weaskhowareacademicstudyand Tsukamoto&Vogel,2007).Thisthesishasimportantimplicationsfor placemakingpoliciespursuedbypractitionersandcivicleadersshapingthe urban policy and development. Recent academic studies suggest that global(orworld)cityagendainSydney?Wereviewtheglobalcitythesis localcivicleadersandgovernmentofficials,oftenwithstrongmayoral and then consider whether it can account for the rise of Sydney as a ⁎Correspondingauthor. E-mailaddress:[email protected](R.K.Vogel). 1Guesteditors,authorsofSection1and7. 2AuthorofSection2. 3AuthorsofSection3. 4AuthorofSection4. 5AuthorofSection5. 6AuthorofSection6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2018.09.002 Received15August2018;Accepted3September2018 0305-9006/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Please cite this article as: Ronald K. Vogel, et al., Progress in Planning, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2018.09.002 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx leadingglobalcity.Theglobalcitythesishasbeensubjecttoanumber “the World City Formation” and “The World City Hypothesis” (Clark, ofcritiques.First,thethesisembodieseconomicdeterminismatitscore 2016,pp.92–93). (Robinson2016).Second,thecausallinkageofglobalcityrankingsto Global cities scholarship has come to dominate the study of cities the city’s economic competitiveness and economy are weak (Leff & andurbanpoliticssincethepublicationofSaskiaSassen’sTheGlobal Petersen,2015).Third,theglobalcitythesisisheavilybiasedtowardsa City (1991). Sassen pointed to New York, Tokyo, and London at the Westernanddevelopedworldperspective,mostcloselyassociatedwith head of the command and control of the world economy. Underlying the US and Europe (Robinson, 2006). Whether it can explain urbani- thisstrategicrolewastheconcentrationinthecentralbusinessdistricts sation and the development of places such as Sydney is a more open ofthesecitiesoffinanceandadvancedproducerservices.Sassen’sstudy question.Fourth,thewidespreadregardforglobalcityrankingsleadsto wasfollowedcloselybythatofpolicy-makersandbusinessleaderswho adistortionoftheglobalcityagendaaslocalandcivicleaderspursue soughttoraisetheirowncity’sprofileandcompetitiveadvantageinthe strategiesaimedtoraisethecity’srankings(Dupont,2011).Thefocus worldeconomy.Sassencontinuedtoupdateherresearch,findingthat of urban policy emphasises concern for economic competitiveness ra- by 2001 some 20 cities were deemed important global cities and by therthanthequalityoflifeofurbanresidentsmoregenerally.Fifth,the 2006thenumberhadrisento40ormore,althoughNewYork,Tokyo, globalcitythesisoverlooksorminimisestheroleofformalgovernment and London remained at the pinnacle of the global cities network. institutionsandurbanpoliticsincreatingandpromotingtheglobalcity Taylor’s (2001) world city network research focused on the intercity (Abu-Lughod,1999;Savitch,Kantor,andVicari,2002).Inthecaseof networksandshiftedfocustoquantitativestudyofglobalcities. Sydney, we assert that the formal city government is rather incon- sequentialinpursuingaglobalcityagenda,whichislargelythedomain 1.3. TheGlobalCityandurbanisation ofthecivicleadershipandmoreimportantlydirectedfromthestateof NewSouthWales. Urbanisation has often been treated as a global process with the Second,weaskhowsuccessfularecivicandgovernmentleadersinad- same forces directing urbanisation worldwide. The study of urbanisa- dressing the complex urban challenges facing Sydney? We focus on local tion in the social sciences is rooted in the Chicago School of urban government organisation (Section 2), economic competitiveness (Sec- sociology (Park et al., 1925; Wirth, 1938). Scott and Storper (2015), tion 3), metropolitan planning and transportation (Section 4), afford- highlight Manuel Castells (1977) Marxist critique of the Chicago ablehousing(Section5),andclimatechange(Section6).Whilethereis School,faultingitforbeingneitherespeciallyurbanand“ideologythat significantpublicpolicyformulatedtoaddresstheseproblems,theso- obfuscatesthemorefundamentalnatureofcapitalismasaframework lutionspursuedinmostcasesfailtomatchthescaleanddepthofthe of social organization” (p. 2). Castells joins other Marxists, including problems identified. In some cases, the solutions are not logically Lefebvre(2003)andHarvey(1973)whoemphasisedthecityatitscore connectedtothepolicychallengesidentified.Forexample,withrespect is“atheatreofclassstruggle,centeredonlandmarketsasmachinesfor toeconomiccompetitiveness,therankingsofglobalcitieslackscientific distributing wealth upward and on associated political claims from rigor. The world city agenda suggested by the rankings is more a ra- belowaboutcitizenshiprightstourbanspaceandresources”(p.2). tionalisation than a causal explanation. They also provide little gui- Brenner (2004), in the book New State Spaces argues “new state danceoranalysisforactuallyaddressingincomeinequalityorthelack spaces”, or metropolitan regionalism, is associated with the need for of employment associated with the new economy they promote. The corporatecapitaltorestructureandre-territorialisespaceandgovern- local government restructuring that was pursued by the state of New ance to better meet its needs in the current phase of global capital. SouthWalesisnotafunctionofthepolicyanalysisthatwasundertaken Thus, urbanisation and the rescaling of the state are presented as a by a government commission rather it was aimed at facilitating the universalphenomenonrespondinglargelytoexternalandeconomically statemetropolitanvisionthatwasadoptedfromabove. determined forces rather than local circumstance or politics. Storper The concept of “solution sets” serves as a short-cut narrative to (2013) adds social and political factors to economic forces shaping provideguidanceforpolicyintervention.Solutionsetsare“character- urbanisationandeconomicregionalisminKeystotheCity.However,it isticpatternsofsolutionstoproblemsandopportunitiesfacingthecity” stillimpliesanurbanprocessthatisglobalinnature(Robinson&Roy (Jones&Bachelor,1993,p.7).Theyarepertinentforchallengingurban 2016).Morerecently,BrennerandSchmid(2011,2015)havepointed problems - including growing income inequality, inadequate public to the emergence of "planetary urbanization" where the city, suburb, transit and urban infrastructure, an economy that cannot provide en- and rural hinterlands are joined in an extended urbanisation. The re- ough work for residents, growing unaffordability of housing, and an levanceofthecityas"ananalyticalsocialsciencetool"isseenas"ob- insufficientplanformitigatingoradaptingtoclimatechange–asthey solete" (2011, p. 12). It includes all space whereever it is that "have suggest“solutionsareformulatedindependentofanalysisofparticular becomeintegralpartsoftheworldwideurbanfabric(2011,p.12). problems and that policy decisions result from ‘solutions looking for issues’ (Cohen, March, & Olsen,1972, 2)” (Bachelor, 1994, p. 605). 1.4. Neoliberalurbanismandurbanpolitics Thus,evenastheevidencemountsthatseriousurbanproblemsarenot being adequately addressed leaders continue to pursue solutions that Scholarshaveoutlinedthemainfeaturesofgovernanceandurban areclearlyfailing. policyinglobalcities,whichembraceneoliberalurbanism(e.g.Clement & Kanai, 2015). The primary features are market centric policies, in- 1.2. TheGlobalCitiesthesis cluding an emphasis on free trade and globalisation as the principal focus on economic development policy. At the national and state Thestudyofglobalorworldcitiescanbetracedtotheearlypartof (provincial) level, there is a retreat from the welfare state, including thetwentiethcentury,whenurbanscholarswroteofgreatcitiesorworld deregulation,budgetcutsprimarilyfocusedonwelfareprograms,and citiesintheUSandEurope,althoughwithlittleclarityaboutwhatmade thepromotionoffreetradepolicies.Atthelocallevel,globalcitiesaim a city a world city (Clark, 2016, pp. 92–93, see also, Brenner & Keil to be more entrepreneurial and focus on land use and infrastructure 2006).Moresignificantly,inthe1970sand1980s,scholarsfocusedon policies designed to ensure economic competitiveness and meet the the emergence of a small number of cities that housed world head- needs of the finance and advanced producer services sectors of the quarters of multinational corporations. Clark notes that the studies economy. Large municipal governments generally face severe fiscal usuallyhighlightedthehierarchicalnatureofanemergingnetworkof stress as revenue support from above declines due to budget and tax world cities. The “global city” phrasing is traced by Clark to David cuts, while local revenue often is limited due to legal constitutional HeenaninaHarvardBusinessReviewarticlepublishedin1977andwas constraintsandpressureintheeraofneoliberalismtokeeptaxeslow. thenpickedupbyJohnFriedmannandGoetzWolffintheirworkson The governance of global cities also has shifted in the era of 2 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx neoliberalism.Thehierarchicalstate,withitscommandandcontrolin not to abandon the study of global cities but to avoid both economic formalcitygovernment,isgreatlyincapacitatedbydecliningresources, determinismandtoengageinmorenuancedcomparativeurbanism. particularly tax receipts, yet it has greater responsibility for service TheprimaryinsighttobegainedforourstudyofSydneyfromthis provision and infrastructure, while receiving less money from above reviewisthatamorebalancedtreatmentofurbanpolicyandgovern- (Brandtner, Höllerer, Meyer, & Kornberger, 2016). Governance now ance in the global city is necessary. Current understanding of global requireslinkingthepowerofthestate(s)(local,regional,state,federal, urban politics presents a very compelling but distorted view of the i.e., multilevel governance) with informal actors. Governance is thus emergence, governance, and policies in global cities with a single non-hierarchicalandrequiresthelinkingofpublicandprivate,formal narrative. But in practice, the narrative is much more nuanced and andinformalactorstopursuecommongoals.So,governancetakesthe open-ended.Moreover,theglobalcitythesisoftennarrowsthefocusof form of networks, urban regimes, public-private partnerships, and es- urban policy to economic competiveness, whether in terms of a city tablishing public authorities (Brandtner et al., 2016; Rhodes 1996; striving toraise itsprofilevis-à-visother cities(i.e.,rankings)orpro- Savitch & Vogel, 2000). Brandtner et al. speak of the need to have motingpoliciesthatfavouroneeconomicsector,financeandadvance “processes of control, coordination, and regulation” and to develop producer services, over all others. The critical urban perspective also “consensus”aboutpolicyobjectives,howtostructurerelationshipsand highlightshowtheglobalcitynarrativeleadstoadistortionofurban coordinateactivities,andbeacceptedas“legitimate”(2016p.3). policy as leaders focus on policies to promote economic competitive- nessandoverlookbroaderconcernwiththequalityoflifeforpeoplein 1.5. CriticalurbanstudiesandtheGlobalCitythesis thecity.Inotherwords,socialjusticeorequityaretreatedassecondary issuesorevenharmfultoeconomiccompetitivenessofthecity.Atits Theriseofcriticalurbanscholarshiphighlightedthebiasednature root,theglobalcitythesisfrequentlyleadstoanoverlyeconomicde- oftheAnglospherestudyofglobalcities,whichhasmarginalisedmany terministicportrayalofglobalcities. citiesintheglobalsouth(seeMiraftab&Kudva,2014).First,according to Robinson (2006) and Robinson and Roy (2016) almost exclusive 1.6. ThecaseofSydneyincomparativecontextwithapolicyfocus focusonfinanceandadvancedproducerservicesoverlooksmany“or- dinary” cities. Economic globalisation is too narrowly focused and OurmethodologyforthestudyofglobalcitySydneyisdistinctive overlooks important contributions to the world economy and culture andsignificantinseveralways.First,weundertakeaheuristiccasestudy madebymanycitiesbeyondplaceslikeNewYork,London,andTokyo. ofSydneytohaveadialoguewiththeglobalcitythesisthatcontinues Although primarily concerned with the global south, this vein of re- to dominate urban studies. In employing the heuristic approach, the search also pointed to the limited number of global cities that were Sydneycaseisusedtoassessandrefinetheglobalcitythesisoutsideof generating urban theory and knowledge. As we shall see, this theme the Euro-American cases that dominate urban theorising. Second, we willhavesignificanceforthestudyofurbanisationanddevelopmentin take a policy focus. Studies of global cities have concentrated almost Sydney. exclusivelyoneconomiccompetitiveness.Weenlargethefocusbymore Criticalurbanscholarshipresearchhasbeenadvancedbytwoedited comprehensively studying the top issues facing global cities and the volumesinthelastdecade,DaviesandImbroscio(2010),CriticalUrban urban policies put in place to address those problems including local Studies,andBrenner,Marcuse,andMayer’s(2012),CitiesforPeople:Not government reorganisation, economic development, land use and for Profit: Critical Urban Theory and the Right to the City. Davies and transportation, housing, and climate change. Third, we take a critical Imbroscio frame the question as one of challenging orthodoxies, par- perspectivetoensurethatwemovebeyondthesingle-mindedattention ticularlyfocusedonurbanpoliticsasasubfieldofpoliticalscience.The on economic competitiveness and carefully examine the global city volumecallsforresistingthehegemonyofpositivistsocialsciencethat narrative. The focus on the individual detailed accounts of urban po- largelyacceptspluralistsaccountsofurbanpolitics.Traditionalurban licies in Sydney and New South Wales highlights the importance of politicsscholarshipneglectssignificantbiasesofthepoliticalandeco- institutional arrangements and politics. This also helps counter the nomicstructurethatleadstosevereinequalityandgreatlycompromises economic determinism embedded in planetary urbanism accounts of the quality of life and democracy in communities. What unites the globalisationandcities. worksinthecollectionistoprovidemorespacetourbaniststodevelop Sydney has emerged as a major global city in the Asia-Pacific acriticalurbanperspectiveandmethodologythanusuallypermittedin (Baum,1997).Yet,theformalCityofSydneyisaweakjurisdictionwith mainstreamsocialsciencedisciplines. verylimitedterritorialboundariesandauthority(McNeill,Dowling,& Going a step further, Brenner et al. (2012) join the battle “to roll Fagan,2005).GlobalcitySydneyisafictionoranalyticalconceptra- backcontemporaryprofit-basedformsofurbanization,andtopromote therthanamunicipaljurisdiction.Whothenspeaksforthiscoreglobal alternative, radically democratic, and sustainable forms of urbanism” city?McNeilletal(2005)arguethatafoundationalnarrativehasbeen (p. i). In the authors’ words, “the slogan, ‘cities for people, not for constructedtoelevatetheroleandimportanceofthecentralareas,such profit,’ sets into stark relief what the contributors view as a central aswhentheBritisharrivalin1788wasrecreatedatCircularQuayfor politicalquestioninvolvedinefforts,atoncetheoreticalandpractical, the bicentennial in 1988 and again in 2000 when Olympics coverage toaddresstheglobalurbancrisesofourtime”(p.i).Theauthorstarget usedSydneyHarbourasthefocalimagepointforSydney.TheCityof “neoliberal forms of urbanization” that favour corporate and banking Sydneyisasmallpartofthecity-region,accountingforonlyaboutfour interests in economic policy making and city building. The authors percent of the metropolis. Sydney lacks a metropolitan or regional outline various efforts by citizens and social movements to resist and governmentandhasfewregionalcollaborativeprocessesorplatforms. challengethewaycapitalismisorganisedandoperatesinthecity.The Rather,theglobalcitystrategyofSydneyisshapedanddirectedbythe authorsarguethat“[h]umansocialneeds,”ratherthan“capitalistprofit stateofNewSouthWales(discussedextensivelybelow).Thus,thety- making”arewhatthecity’spriorityshouldbe(p.2). picalglobalcitynarrativeofthedynamiclocalpoliticalleadersguiding Applyingcriticalstudiestoglobalcitiesresearch,wemightbenefit andshapingtheglobalcitytoenhanceeconomiccompetitivenessdoes fromRobinson’s(2016)reminderthattherealvalueoftheglobalcity notfittheexperienceofSydney.Thisnarrativehas,however,beenused labelwasin“markingamajorbreakinpolicyagendas…fromredis- to justify restructuring local governance and development agendas tribution and quality of life to economic growth and global competi- promoted by the Committee for Sydney, a group of local civic and tiveness” (p. 270). She points out that the most common attribute businessleadersinSydney,whichhasalsogainedsometractionintheir scholarstreat,namelyadvancedproducerservicestocharacteriseand questtoinfluencestategovernment. describeglobalcities“isbothinaccurateandanalyticallymeaningless Critical urban scholarship has called for the dominant “Euro- forthestudyofwiderprocessesofurbanization”(p.270).Thelessonis Americanlegacyofurbanstudies”tobereopenedtoallowforgreater 3 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx recognitionofthevarietyofurbanexperiencesaroundtheworld(e.g., problemsincitiesinacomprehensivewayinglobalcitiesgenerallyor Robinson&Roy,2015).Thiscritiqueisaimedatthemarginalityofthe inSydneyspecifically.Thisleadsustoundertakeacomparativepolicy globalsouthinurbantheorising.However,dominanturbantheoriesare studyofglobalcitySydneythatembracesaheuristic andcriticalper- alsoincompleteintheirapplicationtoSydneyandAustralia(e.g.,Scott spectiveinexaminingtheglobalcitythesis.Thisensuresthatpolitics &Storper,2015).Herewereviewtheglobalcitythesisasitappliesto andpolicytakecentrestageinouranalysis. Sydney, consider the nature of the urban problems and current solutions pursued in Sydney and the implications for the study of global 1.7. Escalatinginequalityandtheneoliberalproject cities. For example,we do notfind that politicaldecentralisation and devolutionareassociatedwithglobalisationinSydney,whichscholars Sydney is characterised by a combination of particular early set- oftenpointtoasaworldwidetrend(Tsukamoto&Vogel,2007).Rather, tlement patterns, constrained geography, increasing migration, ex- inthecaseofSydney,wefindincreasingcentralisationundertheau- tremely fragmented governance and is dominated by urban sprawl. thorityofthestateofNewSouthWales(seeSections2and3).None- Sincethe1980sSydneyhasalsobeenprofoundlyaffectedbyeconomic, theless, government and civic leaders have adopted the global city social and technological transformations and this impact has been narrative as the worldview, which in large measure is driving their spatiallyuneven(Beer&Forster,2002;Ryan&Selim,2017).Oftenthe generalpolicyorientationsandproposedsolutions. most severe disadvantage is concentrated in the outer and middle However, there is more than one narrative of global city Sydney. suburbsofSydney(Pawson,Davison,&Wiesel,2012).Thishasinsome Brandtneretal.(2016)suggestthattostudygovernanceintheglobal waysfuelledthestereotypeofwesternSydneyas“disadvantaged”(Beer city requires identifying the “configuration of governance,” which is &Forster,2002).ThisimageofapoorwesternSydneyiscoupledwith createdwhensomesetofgovernmentandnon-governmentleadersor the poor accessibility to services and employment (Beer & Forster, actors set a common goal in “strategic texts” that present a “grand 2002) and very long travel towork times leading toa dichotomy be- narrative” of the nature of the problem and the consensus on what tweenthewestandtheeast.IfSydneycontinuestoproclaimitsglobal shouldbedone,includingspecifyingwhatactionsdifferentactorsneed city position, then a key question is: a global city for whom (Ryan & to take (p. 6). Studying “Sustainable Sydney 2030,” Brandtner et al. Selim,2017)? (2016) identify the general global city strategy developed through a The spatial structure of Sydney has become increasingly complex City of Sydney planning process. This narrative and strategy presents (Forster,2006).SpatialinequalityinSydneyisevidencedbymarkedly the city as facilitator promoting a green strategy that citizens de- differentemploymentlocation,journeytoworkpatternsandaccessto termined.Thisiscontrastedwiththecompetingnarrativepromotedby publicgoods.InSydneyresidentsinthecity,InnerEastandInnerWest, the Committee for Sydney on behalf of the local business leadership and the North Shore are more likely to have higher weekly incomes thathasreceivedsomesupportfromthestateofNewSouthWales.In than those living in the western parts of Sydney (see Section 3). Al- that narrative, the global city Sydney requires a more efficient local though having transport for journeys taken regularly is equally im- governanceandametropolitanvision. portant to those on high and low household incomes, eastern Sydney Baker and Ruming (2015) examine the “worlding” of Sydney residentsaremorelikelytohavethetransporttheyneedincomparison highlightingthebenefitofacriticalperspective.Theauthorsfindthe towesternSydneyresidents(seeSection4).Perhapsofgreaterconcern globalcityasrevealedinstrategicplanningdocumentsreflectsselective isthattherelativelywell-off,mostinfluentialcitizensarelargelyuna- global urban realities determined from above (i.e., the state govern- ware of the living conditions of their less advantaged fellow city re- ment). However, the comparisons and standards underlying the stra- sidents. tegicplansfavoursomevisonsoverothersandarenotnecessarilyap- The factors outlined above are exacerbated by neoliberal thinking, propriategivenlocalconditionsorlackofevidencethatbestpractices prioritisingindividualist,smallgovernment,marketorientedbeliefspro- areaccurateordesirable.Rogers(2014)employsdiscourseanalysisto moting property for profit and absent of state interventions to address illustrate how a “discourse of obsolescence” has been used to justify increasingspatialdisadvantage.However,theneoliberalprojectisfarfrom destructionofpublichousinginSydney.Bothofthesestudiesillustrate hegemonicaspresentedbyglobalcityscholars(Centeno&Cohen,2012). theutilityofacriticalperspective.Thesestudiessensitiseustotheneed ThisisespeciallytrueinthecaseofglobalcitySydney,NewSouthWales, for a more careful review of globalisation as it enters applied urban andAustralia.Aswehavealreadyseen,thereiscertainlyanalternativeto policyanalysisandtheimportanceoftheglobalcitynarrativesusedto neoliberalismtobepromotedbythevarietyofvoicesinSydney–ofwhich furtherglobalisation. thecityofSydneyisasalientexample–anditisnotatallclearwhether Our method is to undertake a heuristic case study of global city theCommitteeforSydney’sglobalcityagendawillprevail.Here,Sydney Sydneyandconsiderwhethertheglobalcitiesthesisbothexplainsthe illustratesthecontestednatureandincompleteadoptionoftheeconomic riseofglobalcitySydneyaswellasaccountsforthedynamicsorurban determinismembeddedinorthodoxglobalcitythesis. politicsandpolicyinthecity.Aheuristiccasestudyisonewhere The policy interventions – those which seek to support economic growth and aim to increase housing around public transit through case study [is] deliberately used to stimulate the imagination to- privatesectorurbanrenewal–arelargelyabsentofanyunderstanding wards discerning important general problems and possible theore- thatinequalityimpedesrealisationofthebenefitsofeconomicgrowth ticalsolutions.Thatistheessenceofheuristiccasestudies(heuristic andtheveryoutcomessoughtbyglobalcitypositioning.Indeed,“the meaning ‘serving to find out’). Such studies … tie directly into metropolitanplanningstrategiessuggestaninflexible,over-neatvision theorybuilding,andthereforearelessconcernedwithoverallcon- for the future that, however well-intended, sits dangerously at odds crete configurations than with potentially generalizable relations with the picture of increasing geographical complexity that emerges betweenaspectsofthem.Eckstein,1975,p.104. clearly from recent research on the changing internal structure of Whilethereareotherstudiesofglobalisationandglobalcitiesthat Australiancitiessincetheearly1990s”(Forster,2006,p.180).Citizens focusonSydney(e.g.,BakerandRuming2014;Rogers,2017),thereare have little influence in shaping the metropolitan vision or specific fewstudiesthatexaminethepoliticsofglobalisationwithincitiesand urban renewal initiatives. Public participation is dominated by the more specifically that examine the key urban problems facing global concerns of government-backed property interests, which privilege citiesinsomedetail.Thereareselectivestudiesofhowglobalisationis support for economic growth through a rather limited strategy of in- reshaping urban politics in Sydney (MacLeod, 2011), local and me- creasedhousingsupply.Moreover,propertyowners trytoprotectthe tropolitan planning (Davidson & Arman 2014; Forster, 2006), and homogeneity and amenity of their locales from increased transit and economiccompetitiveness(Hu,2015;Hu,Blakely,&Zhou,2013).To servicesimpacts,whichisoftendisguisedasenvironmentalprotection. ourknowledge,therearenostudiesthatcarefullystudythekeyurban Astheinequalityworsens,Sydneyasaglobalcityisatrisk. 4 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Fig.1.LinesofconflictinthegovernanceofAustralia’smetropolitanareas. ReprintedfromBlakelyandHu(2007). Fig.2.AdministrativefragmentationofmetropolitanSydneycomparedtootherAustralianmetropolitanareas. ReprintedfromKubler(2007). 2. GoverningglobalcitySydney jurisdiction. Who then decides what boundaries, infrastructure, services,andpoliciestoadoptandwhatpoliticalinstitutionsorprocesses 2.1. Introduction areusedtomakethesedecisions?Thissectionoutlinestheevolutionof globalSydney’sfragmentedgovernancesystem,andmorerecentefforts Theglobalcityisananalyticalconceptratherthananauthoritative todevelopstrategiccapacitytomanageacitythatnownumbersclose Fig.3.IdentificationsofSydney’sgoverningcoalitionshowingrelativestabilityofactorsandsomefluidity. ReprintedfromMcGuirk(2003)andBlakelyandHu(2007). 5 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Fig.4.Sydney’sstrategiccentresandtheGlobalEconomicCorridor,2015. ReprintedfromDepartmentofPlanningandEnvironment(2015). 6 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Fig.5.GreaterSydney’sThreeMajorCentres. ReprintedfromGreaterSydneyCommission(2016). to5millionpeople.Thereisalackofcorrespondencebetweenthescale at metropolitan scales: metropolitan government; public choice; and oftheSydneymetropolisandtheorganisationofthelocalstate.New new regionalism (Kübler & Randolph, 2007; Savitch & Vogel, 2009). waysofplanningandgoverningSydneythatacknowledgeandunder- Each represents different ways to determine collective goals and co- stand how it works as a global city are needed. New institutional ordinatedeliveryofservices(Pierre,2011).Metropolitangovernment structures or processes able to reconcile a broad range of urban an- coordinates through administrative and legal power and authority; tagonistsarerequiredtoharness,deliveranddistributethebenefitsof public choice coordinates through markets to better match service globalisationwhilstcounteringthelocalimpactsofurbanisation. supply and demand; and, new regionalism coordinates through net- First, we consider the functions of governing, the governance of workscooperatinginservicedelivery(Kübler,2005). global city regions and then the historic and current governance ar- Metropolitangovernmentandpublicchoicerelyontraditionalno- rangements in Australia at the local, state and federal level. Then we tions of all-powerful governments directing resources towards service discussthegovernanceofGlobalSydneyandtheimplicationsthereof. delivery. However, regardless of the normative strength of legal and Nextwereviewthecurrentendeavourstoreconciletheglobalandthe administrative authority, territorially elected governments are ill- localthroughstate-ledlanduseplanning.Thissectionconcludeswith equipped to coordinateresources that increasingly flowin and outof anassessmentofcurrentgovernancearrangementsforGlobalSydney. territorialboundaries.Newregionalismrespondstothisbyrelyingon governmentaswellasprivateandnon-governmentactorsbothwithin andwithoutaterritorytovoluntarilycoordinateindeliveringservices. 2.2. Thetaskandfunctionsofgoverning There are two functions in the governing task. First, deciding on 2.3. Globalisation,theglobalcityandgovernance collectivegoals,suchaswellbeing,liveabilityoreconomicgrowth;and, second, coordinating resources for delivery of services which realise The defining features of globalisation include increasingly porous these goals (Hambleton & Simone Gross, 2007; Kübler, 2005). Tradi- national borders and more open trade, heightened direct foreign in- tionally,territorialpoliticalprocessesdecidegoalsthroughelectionof vestment,diminishedcostsoftransportationandcommunication,rapid governments offering different service packages. Once elected, gov- international movement of capital, and, in advanced economies, the ernmentsuseadministrativeandlegalpowerandauthoritytoallocate declineofoncedominantlabourintensivemanufacturingindustriesas resourcestoservicedelivery. theyareopeneduptoglobalcompetition(Collits,2008;Sassen,2001; Therearethreeapproachestodischargingthesegoverningfunctions Pierre,2011).Today,inaglobalisedeconomy,countriesandcitiesseek 7 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Fig.6.Medianincome(residentsaged25–65),2011. ReprintedfromKellyetal.(2013). to create competitive advantage by lowering taxes to attract capital metropolitan Sydney, providing rural traders with access to markets (Hambleton&SimoneGross,2007). andseaports,facilitatinginwardflowsofruralandoverseasmigrants, Inanincreasinglyurbanisedworld,localplacequalitiesareplaying andgeneratingsubstantialemploymentopportunitiesinSydney’searly a more prominent role in determining competitive advantage days(Auster,1987).Increasingeconomicprosperityintheearly19th (Herrschel&Newman,2002).Someplacesarenaturallyadvantagedas Century enabled affluent middle class citizens to flee high density, strategic locations for increasingly mobile capital flows and highly pollution ridden, substandard housing in the inner city for new low- skilledlabour(e.g.,closetotraderoutes,cosmopolitanorpicturesque densityhousingingardensuburbs,whichatthattimewereemerging environments). Swyngedouw (2004) refers to this as “glocalisation”, along rail lines (Department of Infrastructure and Regional whereglobalisationfavourscertainlocalplacesoverothers.However, Development[DIRD],2014). Feiock,Tao,&Johnson(2004)arguesophisticatedtelecommunication Fromthemid-1940s,theriseofmanufacturingbasedindustriessaw systemshavereducedtheneedforcapitaltobelocatedclosetolabour further increases in prosperity and demands for better housing and and,asagglomerationsoflocalplaces,citiesincreasinglyfaceaneedto urbanservices(Power&Wettenhall,1976).Followingworldwartwo worktogetherasregionstoderivebenefitsfromtheircompetitiveand (WW2), there was a need for housing and employment for returned naturaladvantages. service people and availability of affordable land saw major Federal The implications of globalisation and urbanisation for the econo- Governmentpublichousingprogramscreatenewurbancentresbeyond miesandgovernanceofcitiesareprofound.Increasingspatialmobility theearlygardensuburbs(DIRD,2014;Meyer,2014).Thesewerelar- of labour and capital means globalisation and urbanisation are inter- gely detached from publictransport and sparkeda longperiod ofcar twined (Kubler & Heinelt, 2005; LeGates & Stout, 2015). Economic dependentsuburbanisationthatchangedmetropolitanSydney’sspatial competition between cities and regions has grown, contributing to structure from mono- to poly-centric, which has been reinforced ever unevendevelopmentatthecity,regionalandglobalscaleaslabourand since by a centres-based approach to metropolitan planning (Meyer, capital favour competitively advantaged locations over those without 2014). such advantage (Savitch & Vogel, 2009; Post, 2004; Hambleton & The1950ssawsuburbanisationcontinueatarapidpaceasspatial Simone Gross, 2007). There is broad agreement among scholars that mobility transitioned to more thoroughgoing car dependency (DIRD, addressing this uneven development lies at the heart of governing 2014).FederalGovernmenthousingpoliciesfavouredsingledetached urban regions in a globalised and urbanised world (Hambleton & dwellingsasthedominantformofhousingandsawlargetractsofland Simone Gross, 2007; Herrschel, 2014; Pierre, 2011; Healey, 2011; ontheouteredgesconsumedforlargescalehousingandretaildevel- Fainstein,2010;Wheeler,2002). opments,supportedbysubstantialgrowthinprivatevehicleownership andmajorpublicroadbuildingprograms(DIRD,2014).Thisdevelop- ment trajectory was characterised by inadequate provision of public 2.4. Sydneyhistorically transport and utilities infrastructures and resulted in socio-economic division, unequal access to employment, and environmental Rail lines and Sydney Harbour have reinforced the primacy of 8 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Fig.7.Percentageofresidents(aged25–65)withauniversitydegree,2011. ReprintedfromKellyetal.(2013). degradation of Sydney’s rural hinterland (Spearritt, 2000). Growing countries in the world (Parkin, 1982; Kubler, 2007). It is a nation of publicconsciousnessoftheexternalitiesofthistrajectoryhasseenmore cities,wherealmost90%ofthepopulationlivein18citieswithapo- recentmetropolitanplansincreasinglyfavourcompactcitypoliciesand pulationgreaterthan100,000(MajorCitiesUnit,2013).Broadly,allof a concentration of development around existing centres and public Australia’smetropolitanareashavefollowedsimilardevelopmenttra- transportnodes(DIRD,2014). jectories (DIRD, 2014). They have formed around Australia’s major Intheearly1970s,theWhitlamLaborfederalgovernmentdirected colonialerasettlementsofSydney,Melbourne,Brisbane,Perth,Hobart thestatesandterritoriestoremedytheinfrastructurebacklogthrough andAdelaide. conditionalfundingfromtheFederalGovernmentGrantsCommission Prior to Federation in 1901, Australia’s metropolitan areas were (DIRD,2014;Spearritt,2000).Thelate1970sthroughthe1980ssaw governed by a two-tier system. Each colony had its own government removalofindustrytariffprotectionsandsignificantnationaleconomic and military responsible for administering economic, land, trade and restructuring.AstheAustralianeconomyopeneduptoglobalmarkets, civicordermatters(DIRD,2014).Thesegovernmentsestablishedlocal manufacturingindustriesdeclinedandthereweresignificantjoblosses, administrationstorespondtostreet-by-streetdemands,withthewillof particularly in the suburbanised outskirts of Australia’s metropolitan a few individuals often determining collective goals (DIRD, 2014). areas(DIRD,2014). FollowingFederation,Australia’sthreelevelsofgovernmentallhada The 1990s onwards has seen intense inner-city gentrification. The significantroleingoverningmetropolitanareas(Collits,2008). riseofserviceindustriesandcompetitiontoattractglobalcapitaland TheAustralianConstitutionassignsdirectresponsibilityforcitiesto highlyskilledlabourhasagainalteredSydney’sspatialstructure(DIRD, thestates.Stategovernmentsprovidelocalgovernmentswithfinancial 2014).Areasthathistoricallywerepredominantlyworkingclasshave assistance, develop policies for urban development and infrastructure become highly sought after by the middle classes. Former inner city provisionthroughmetropolitanscaleplanning,andprovidemostmajor warehouseshavebeenreplacedbyhighqualityresidential,commercial urban services, including public housing and transport, roads, educa- andtourismdevelopmentsthat,combinedwiththepicturesqueharbour tion, health, recreation and cultural services and key utilities such as sideenvironment,haveproducedglobalcityamenity(Bounds&Morris, waterandelectricity(Collits,2008). 2006;Spearritt,2000).Atthesametime,continuingsuburbanexpan- The federal government’s control of immigration, trade, welfare sionandunder-investmenthavecompoundedtheearliertrendstowards and, from time to time, housing policies has had significant con- spatialsocio-economicinequalityandinfrastructurebacklogs,particu- sequences for population growth, economic opportunity, housing in- larlyinWesternSydney(DivisionofLocalGovernment,2013). vestment, social composition, and infrastructure provision in cities. Localgovernmentsprovideservicesincluding drainageandsewerage, andreceiverevenuesfromhigherlevelsofgovernmenttoprovidein- 2.5. GovernanceoftheAustralianmetropolis—anhistoricaloverview frastructureandservicesatthelocallevel, includingrecreation,community and cultural facilities. They also play a significant role Australia is one of the most urbanised and metropolitanised 9 R.K.Vogel,etal. Progress in Planning xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx Fig.8.Percentageofjobsthatcanbereachedina45mincartrip,2011. ReprintedfromKellyetal.(2013). implementing metropolitan planning through local strategic planning indirectly filled this gap; although, as Forster (2006) observes, it is andregulationofdevelopmentandbuildingstandards. unclearwhethertheyhavebeensuccessfulindoingso. Metropolitan primacy and the division of government responsi- TherehavebeentimeswhentheFederalGovernmenthasledthemost bilitiesengenderverticalandhorizontalconflictsinthegovernanceof vigorous and direct attempts to address this governance gap, which Australia’smetropolitanareas(Collits,2008).TheFederalGovernment Marshall, Dollery, and Witherby (2003) consider an indictment on the collects a large share of tax revenue (Figs. 1–8). In 2014–2015 this conservatismandparochialismoflocalgovernmentacrossAustralia.The revenue equated to $357,406 million, whilst the states collected WhitlamFederalGovernment’s(1972–1975)significantinterestinurban $73,640 million and local governments $15,779 million (Australian andregionalaffairssawtheestablishmentofthepowerfulDepartmentof Bureau of Statistics, 2016). These disparities often result in conflict Urban and Regional Development (DURD). DURD sought to engage in between each level of government over how tax revenues should be adventurous Federal Government organisational restructuring to reduce spenttoprovideurbanservicesandinfrastructure(Kubler,2007). publicserviceduplicationandadvancethesocio-economicconditionsof Responsibility for local planning regulations establishes a veto regions (Power & Wettenhall, 1976). Much of this work focused on de- power for local governments over metropolitan outcomes, often re- fining regional boundaries and, through conditional grants tied to co- sultinginconflictwithstategovernments(Collits,2008).Historically, operationbetweengroupingsoflocalgovernments,establishingregionsas rural areas have made a greater economic contribution to state and the most appropriate unit for the administration of policy (Power & nationaleconomieswhencomparedwithmetropolitanareas(Spearritt, Wettenhall, 1976). Although excited by additional funding, most local 2000). Yet the greater population size of metropolitan areas and governmentsdidnotsharetheFederalGovernment’scommitmenttore- growingroleastradehubsenhancedtheirpoliticalinfluence(Spearritt, gionalisation and sought to secure funding whilst retaining as much of 2000).Althoughtheeconomiccontributionofruralareashasdeclined, theirindependenceaspossible(Power&Wettenhall,1976). conflict between non-metropolitan and metropolitan areas and prior- Upon installation of the Liberal Federal Government in 1975, the itisation of the latter’s interests has been prominent in policy-making DURD was abolished and the task of reducing duplication fell to the (Kübler,2005). newly established Administrative Review Committee (Power & High levels of urbanisation and metropolitan primacy have en- Wettenhall, 1976). Since then, Federal Government attention on me- hancedAustralia’snationalcompetitiveadvantageasitisnotrelianton tropolitanareashasfloweredunderprogressiveLaborGovernmentsin one metropolitan area to drive the economy (DIRD, 2014). However, the late 1980s to early 1990s, and late 2000s (Marshall et al., 2003; while national wellbeing is closely tied to Australia’s metropolitan Dawkins,2010).Newfundingandprogramshavesoughtto:encourage areas,theyallsufferagovernancegap(Gleesonetal.,2012).According collaborationbetweenlocalgovernments,businessandhigherlevelsof toGleesonetal.(2012),this arisesfrom governmentalfragmentation government;developmoreefficientmanagementpracticeswithinlocal andlackofclearresponsibilityforthemetropolitanscale,andtheab- government; promote public-private partnerships as infrastructure senceofdemocraticforumsformetropolitancitizenstoexpressacol- fundingmechanisms;andestablishnationallyconsistentcriteriaforthe lective will. As a result, state government metropolitan plans have governance of metropolitan areas, including increased community 10