TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCities
inaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
JohannesburgandSãoPaulo
MartinJMurray
HSRC
Publishers
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
III
DemocracyandGovernanceResearchProgramme,OccasionalPaper5
SeriesEditor:AdamHabib,ExecutiveDirector:DemocracyandGovernanceResearchProgramme,HumanSciences
ResearchCouncil
PublishedbyHSRCPublishers
PrivateBagX9182,CapeTown,8000,SouthAfrica
www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
©2004HumanSciencesResearchCouncil
Firstpublished2004
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereprintedorreproducedorutilisedinanyformorbyanyelectronic,
mechanical,orothermeans,includingphotocopyingandrecording,orinanyinformationstorageorretrievalsystem,
withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublishers.
ISSN1726-0175
ISBN0796920729
CoverbyJennyYoung
ProductionbycomPress
DistributedinAfricabyBlueWeaverMarketingandDistribution,
POBox30370,Tokai,CapeTown,7966,SouthAfrica.
Tel:+27+21-701-4477
Fax:+27+21-701-7302
email:[email protected]
Distributedworldwide,exceptAfrica,byIndependentPublishersGroup,
814NorthFranklinStreet,Chicago,IL60610,USA.
www.ipgbook.com
metropolisesaskeycommandandcontrolcentreswithinthecapitalistworldeconomy.
Acentralaxiomofthisinnovativetheoreticalframeworkistheclaimthatthespatial
dispersalofgiant‘multi-national’corporationsoverconsiderabledistancesrequiresa
parallelterritorialconcentrationof‘commandandcontrol’functionsattheapexof
theglobalurbanhierarchy.Yetbyprivilegingthefunctionalspecialisationsoflarge
metropolitanregionswithintheworldeconomy,the‘globalcities’approachrestricts
thekindsofquestionsthatcanbelegitimatelyaddressedwithinitsconceptualframe
ofreference.Inparticular,bynarrowingthescopeofresearchtothefunctionalroles
ofcitieswithintheworldeconomy,the‘globalcities’paradigmtendstodownplay
theevolvingspatialformof citiesthataspireto‘world-class’ status.Incontrast,a
growing number of scholars have focused instead on the changing morphological
characteristicsofurbanlandscapes,and,inparticular,ontheuse,management,and
regulationofurbanspace.Byemphasisingsuchspatialfeaturesasunfetteredurban
sprawl,theurbanisationoftheperiphery,theproliferationof‘edgecities’,andthe
emergenceofanew‘fortificationaesthetic’thathasaccompaniedtheconstruction
ofsuchpost-publicplacesasfestivalmarketplaces,citadelofficecomplexes,enclosed
shoppingmalls,andgatedresidentialcommunities,thesetheoristsofurbanlifehave
drawnattentiontotheevolvingpatternsofspatialrestructuringassociationwitha
1
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
2
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
3
distinctivekindofpolynucleatedandfragmentedcity-form,onewhichsomescholars
havecalled‘postmodernurbanism’.
Attheriskofoversimplification,itispossibletoidentityfivefeaturesassociated
with‘post-modernurbanism’.Whilethesedonotexhaustthepossiblecharacteristics
of this particular kind of urbanity, they do constitute its central elements.
Concentrating on the extent to which these characteristic features of postmodern
sitesformanagingworldwidetradeandinternationalbankingandfinance,emergent
‘globalcities’nowfunctionas‘highlyconcentratedcommand[andcontrol]pointsin
theorganisationoftheworldeconomy’andaskeylocationsfortransnationalcorporate
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
2
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
3
head offices.
2
While globalisation has affected all kinds of geographical localities
in a variety of ways, it assumes particular significance in those key urban centres
thatscholars havelabelled‘global’ or‘worldcities’.Inshort,globalisationprecedes
and largely determines urban spatial and sociocultural restructuring, inexorably
transformingemergentglobalcitiesbydisconnectingthemfromtheirlocalties.
3
In its original formulation, the ‘global cities’ thesis laid particular stress on the
historically specific functions of London, New York and Tokyo at the apex of
the world-scale urban hierarchy. At the outset, discussion focused on clarifying
terminological disputes (‘world’ versus ‘global’ cities), refining initial definitions,
and postulating about which cities might be included under the rubric of ‘global
cities’andwhatcriteriamightbeusedtodeterminetheirrankorder.Overtime,the
‘globalcities’debatehasmovedawayfromitsrelativelynarrowfocusonafewleading
urbancentrestoamuchmorenuanced,sophisticatedandbroadertheorisationofthe
changingfunctionsofcitiesinaglobalisingworldeconomyincreasinglydominated
byinformationalisedeconomicactivities(Castells1996;Lo&Yeung1998;Marcuse
&VanKempen2000a;Sassen2000a,2000c).Takenasawhole,the‘globalcities’
model –withits particular stressontheevolving networkof interconnectedurban
centres–hassparkedagreatdealofsubstantiveresearchthathasgreatlyadvancedour
understandingoftheplaceandfunctionofcertainstrategicallylocatedcitiesinthe
characteristics of urban landscapes and, in particular, on the use, management and
regulationofcityspace(Boyer1998;Davis1985;Dear2000;Dear&Flusty1998;Ellin
1996;Ghirado1991;Harvey1989;Hannigan1998;Jencks1993;Soja1989;Soja1992;
Sorkin1992;Zukin1998).Inlookingatthefragmentationoftheurbanrealmintowhat
DavidHarveycalls‘apatchworkquiltofislandsofrelativeaffluencestrugglingtosecure
themselvesinaseaofspreadingdecay’(Harvey2000:152),thesescholarshavedrawnour
attentiontothespatialityofcontemporarycities.Byhighlightingsuchspatialfeaturesas
‘edgecities’,gatedresidentialcommunitiesandotherprivatopias,fortifiedofficecitadels,
downtown renaissance zones,festival marketplaces and other enclosed shopping mall
extravaganzasastheyappearincitiesaroundtheworld,theseurbantheoristshavedrawn
ourattentiontotheevolvingpatternsofspatialrestructuringassociatedwithadistinctive
kindofpolynucleatedandfragmentedcityform,onewhichsomescholarshavecalled
‘postmodernurbanism’.
6
Unlikethe ‘globalcities’paradigmthat takes urban political
economyasitspointofdeparture,thetheoristsof‘postmodernurbanism’lookupon
thecityscapeasacontestedterrain,wherespatialpoliticsinvolvestrugglesovertheuse
ofurbanspace,particularlyinregardtowhobelongswhereandwithwhatentitlements
orcitizenshiprights(Borden,Kerr,Rendell&Pivaro2001;Dovey1999;Harvey2000;
Holston1999;Leach2002;Sandercock1998;Westwood&Williams1997).
As a distinct urban form, postmodern urbanism expresses the confluence of a
multiplicity of macrosocial trends, including deindustrialisation of the metropolis
(wherepost-Fordist‘flexiblespecialisation’hasreplacedFordistmassproductionas
the mainengineofeconomicgrowth),thewidespreadmiddle-classabandonment
ofurbanresidence coupledwithrapidsuburbansprawl,thedevaluationofpublic
space(parks,plazas,streetscapes,sidewalks,collectivemodesoftransportandeasily
accessible places of entertainment), and an awestruck love affair with an ‘inward-
looking’ architectural style that ‘turns its back on’ the surrounding cityscape.
Drivenbytherelentlesspressuresofglobalcompetitioninallitsguises,postmodern
urbanism conforms to an inner logic of spatial partitioning that privileges and
stigmatised)asdifferent,threateningandunwanted(Caldeira1996b;Caldeira2000;
Davis1992;Merrifield&Swyngedouw1997).
Spacematters:post-modernurbanismand
the‘LosAngelesschool’
TheurbantheoristJanNijmanhasproposedthenotionof‘paradigmaticcity’asa
heuristicdevicethatcanassistusindiviningfuturetrendsinurbanrestructuring.
The ‘paradigmaticcity’maybedefinedastheexemplarymetropolisthatdisplays
moreclearlythanotherurbansitesthedistinguishingfeaturesandgeneraltrendsthat
aresymptomaticofbroadersociogeographicaltransformationsofcitiestakingplace
onaworldscale.Inshort,itanticipates,inagenuinelyprescientway,evolvingand
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
6
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
7
unfoldingpatternsofglobalurbanisation.Understoodinthisway,the‘paradigmatic
city’servesasanideal-typicalmodel,alivinglaboratoryforanalysisandaprototype
forinvestigatingtrendsthatarenotasyeteasilydiscernible inothercities. Inthe
1920sand1930s,theso-called‘ChicagoSchool’ofurbanstudies(undertheguiding
hand of Robert Park, Ernest Burgess and Louis Wirth, in particular) defined an
agendaforscholarlyresearchonmetropolitanareasthatachievedundeniablesuccess
asaworkableparadigm.Takingahumanecologyapproachastheiranalyticpointof
departure,the‘ChicagoSchool’urbanistsusedthemodelofconcentricringstodirect
attentiontosuchproblemareasaslandusepatterns,urbanlifestyles,ethnicrivalries
andtheeffectsofurbanenvironmentonhumanbehaviour.Despitechallengesfrom
alternativeperspectives,theChicagoSchooldominatedthefieldofurbanstudiesfor
mostofthetwentiethcentury(Dear&Flusty1997;Nijman2000).
Beginning in the 1980s, a group of urban scholars began to challenge the
conventionalwisdomthattheevolvingurbanlandscapeofthegreaterLosAngeles
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
7
2000;Dymski&Veitch1996;Flusty1994;Flusty1997;Jencks1996;Keil1990;
Keil1994;Keil1998;Krim1992;Scott&Soja1996;Soja1996;Soja1999;Soja
2000;Storper1999).
Thedangersoffacilegeneralisations
Justlikethe‘globalcities’approach(withitsfocusonglobalurbanhierarchies),the
LASchool–withitsstressonfragmentationandperipheralurbanisation,cultural
hybridisationanddecentredsuburbansprawl–hassignificantlyreshapedthefield
ofurbanstudies.Nevertheless,whetherornottheLASchooloffersanewkindof
pathbreakinganalysisforstudyingurbandevelopmentsaroundtheworldhasbeen
thesubjectofintensedebate.
9
Tobesure,uncriticallyapplyingtheinsightsderived
fromtheLASchoolandpostmodernurbanismtoallcitiesaroundtheworldmaybe
notonlyoverextendingwhatthisconceptualframeworkcanreasonablybeexpected
toaccountfor,butalsounnecessarilyconflatingdivergentprocessesof‘citybuilding’
linkedtohistoricallyspecificsocialandmaterialcircumstances,andflatteningoutthe
richdiversityofwhatconstitutestheurbanexperience.Indeed,theterm‘postmodern
urbanism’ has been invoked in analyses of cities that are as radically different as
KualaLumpur,LasVegas,LosAngeles,PhoenixandBuenosAires.Toavoidsuch
homogenisingtendenciesthatcollapseavarietyofheterogeneousexperiencesarising
fromverydifferenthistoricalprocesses,itisnecessarytobeginwithunderstanding
thattherevanchistfeaturesof postmodern urbanismareneversimplyimposed,as
part-and-parcelofthecurrentphase ofglobalisation,onunsuspectingcities ‘from
above’ and ‘from outside’ without the active participation of local agents on the
ground.Whatpostmodernurbanismreallymeans(i.e.thehistoricallyspecificform
thatittakesinparticularcities)mustbeteasedoutonthebasisoftheanalysisof
specific historical and social circumstances, for ‘city building’ is everywhere the
product of the historically specific intersection of global processes, trends and
417).
Expressedsuccinctly,asignificantnumberofurbantheoristshavereactedagainst
thetendencyinboththe‘global cities’ andLASchooltoleta city (whetheritis
London,NewYork,Tokyoor Los Angeles)becomeatheory(Crang2001: 665–
669).Thereisaninherentdangerofassuminguni-directional,genericpatternsof
urbantransformationfromsuch‘paradigmatic’cities.Onemustbesensitivetothe
warningthat‘evocationcannotalwaysbeasubstituteforsystematicanalysis’(Amin
& Thrift2002;Thrift1999).Putinanotherway,whatisneededarenotready-
made, deductive urban theories that employ ‘covering laws’ to generalise across
cases,butakindofgenuinetheoreticalopennessandflexibilitythatseeksthrough
comparisonandcontrasttoaccountforthehistorical-spatialspecificityofparticular
cities.Inasimilarvein,JenniferRobinsonhasraisedstrongobjectionstowhatshe
referstoasthose‘fashionableapproaches’inthefieldofurbanstudies–shespecifies
the‘globalcities’approach,butherpointwouldholdtruefortheLASchoolaswell
–thatpresumetoground‘urbantheory’ontheexperiencesandhistoriesofwestern
cities.Incallingforabroadeningofthescopeofinquirythatlooksatcities‘offthe
map’, she advocates the creation of genuinely ‘cosmopolitan, postcolonial urban
studies’thatfocuson‘understandingthediversityofurbanexperiences’inordinary
cities located around the globe (Dick & Rimmer 1998; Grant & Nijman 2002;
Robinson2002).
Ausefulstartingpointforbuildingthiscosmopolitan,postcolonialapproachto
urbanstudiesmightbetoidentifyandhighlightsomeofthemorevisiblefeatures
ofpostmodernurbanismthathavematerialisedinmanycitiesintheglobalnorth
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
8
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
9
andsouth.Thereisagrowingbodyofscholarlyworkwarningoftheexpansionof
‘fortified’,authoritarianorrevanchisturbanlandscapes,characterisedbythepartition
SãoPauloasexemplarsinextremisThebulkoftheresearchconductedby
thepractitionersofpostmodernurbanismhasbeenconfinedtocasestudiesofthe
greaterLosAngelesmetropolitanregion,andtherearefewstudiesthatactuallyapply
its ambitious agenda for research to other urban areas. While some scholars have
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
10
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
11
subjected‘latedeveloping’citieslikeMiamiandLasVegastothescrutinisinglensof
postmodernurbanism,veryfeweffortshavebeenmadetoextendthecomparative
analysisofevolvingurbanformstometropolitanplayingfieldsoutsidethecoreareas
of the world economy.
12
In acknowledging these deficiencies, Michael Dear and
StevenFlustyhaveproposedthat‘thevalidityandpotentialofthe[LA]Schoolwill
onlybedecidedafterextensivecomparativeanalysisbasedinothermetropolitanareas
aroundtheworld’(Dear&Flusty1998:52).Wideningourfieldofvisiontoinclude
processesofurbanisation thataretakingplaceintheshadowsofNorthAmerican
andEuropeancosmopolitanworlds(cities‘offthemap’,asRobinsonmetaphorically
putsit)enablesustograspmorefullyevolving‘fieldsofforce’thathaveshaped,and
areshaping,urbanlandscapesoutside thegeographicalcircuitsofsuch ‘globalised
cities’ as London, New York, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Paris, Berlin, Chicago, and Los
Angeles.
13
Lookingatthespatialdynamicsoftwoaspirantworldclasscities–São
PauloandJohannesburg–canhelptoshed light on themoresinister,dystopian
aspectsofpostmodernurbanismastheyevolveinurbansocialordersdeeplydivided
along class, race, and possibly ethno-religious lines. If Los Angeles represents the
paradigmatic exemplarofpostmodernurbanism,thenthesprawlingmetropolitan
bothmetropolitanregionshaveundergonesimilarprocessesofindustrialrestructuring
whichhaveresultedinplantclosuresandthespatialdispersalofmanufacturingsites,
thehaemorrhageofjobs,labourredundancies,the‘informalisation’oflabourmarkets
andthesteadyinfluxofnewimmigrants.Theirtransformation,fromconcentrated
centres of industry and manufacturing into service-oriented sites for business and
finance,representsinstancesofsimilarprocessesofworld-historicaltrendsthathave
reshapedmetropolitanregionsoverthepastseveraldecades.
17
Like the view through a kaleidoscope, postmodern urbanism assumes different
shapesandhuesatdifferenttimesandplaces,dependingontheangleofvisionand
thequalityoflight.Attheriskofoversimplification,itispossibletoidentifyfivekey
featuresofpostmodernurbanismthatSãoPauloandJohannesburgshareincommon.
Whilethedynamicsofpostmodernurbanismcannotbesimplyreducedtothesestatic
elements,theyneverthelessconstituteitscoreelements.First,likeotherlargecities
wherethecentrifugalforcesofdecentralisation,deindustrialisationanduncontrolled
suburbansprawlhavereconfiguredtheurbanlandscape,SãoPauloandJohannesburg
have experienced similar patterns of spatial fragmentation and disaggregation, or
whatStephenGrahamhascalledthe‘spectreofthesplinteringmetropolis’(Graham
2001:365–368).Inafullreversalofmodernist-inspiredcitybuilding,thisprocess
of peripheral urbanisation, or the ‘urbanisation of suburbia’, involves the radical
inversionoftheconventionalrelationshipbetweenconcentratedurbancoreandlow-
densitysuburbanperiphery,wherecentral-placefunctions(corporateofficebuildings,
high-endshoppingandcommerce,and‘world-class’entertainment)areincreasingly
dispersedamongstrivalcentres(or‘edgecities’).Second,thebuildenvironmentin
São Paulo and Johannesburg consists of fortified enclaves with distinctive design
motifsthatreflect‘siegearchitecture’.Anerstwhileallianceofbuilders,architectsand
propertydevelopers have come together to inauguratenew buildingtypes: citadel
officecomplexes,enclosedshopping mallsandsecurity estates scattered acrossthe
urbanlandscape.Third,thepatternsofurbanlivinginSãoPauloandJohannesburg
correspondtowhatmightbecalledprecariousurbanisation,whereextremedisparities
particularcities.Investigatingnewkindsofurbanityonthegeopoliticalmarginsof
theworldeconomyallows us toexplorehowthe spatialdynamicsofpostmodern
urbanism bothreproducesocialinequalitiesbutalsolegitimateclassprivilege and
variouskindsofsocialexclusion.Thedistinctivepatternsofspatialsegregationand
socialexclusionthathaveevolvedinJohannesburgandSãoPaulodonotmakethese
city spaces unique, but they do represent exaggerated examples of the dystopian
dimensionsofpostmodernurbanism.
Thespectreofthesplinteringmetropolis
Albeit in different ways, the historical legacies of their country’s colonial and
Eurocentric heritage are deeply embedded in the urban landscapes of both
Johannesburg and São Paulo.
19
In both places, ‘city building’ has long reflected
the interests and preoccupations of settler elites wanting to inscribe the symbols
of their accumulated power in the built environment of the urban fabric. City-
builders,includingpropertydevelopers,realestateagencies,architectsanddesigners,
urban planners, civil engineers and municipal authorities in both São Paulo and
Johannesburg have borrowed, copied and even blatantly plagiarised architectural
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
12
styles, design features and ideas from leading global cities in Europe and North
America, imposing these features on their own cityscapes in ways that fit their
own peculiar needs and idiosyncratic interests. This combination of mimicry,
appropriationandadaptationhasproducedcontemporaryurbanlandscapesinSão
PauloandJohannesburgthatdisplayremarkablysimilarfeatures.
20
Unlikeaspirant‘world-class’citieswherestructuraloradministrativeimpediments
haveplacedlimitsonuncontrolledurbansprawl,SãoPauloandJohannesburghave
experienced extensive growth and development where the city boundaries have
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
14
15
comprehensiveurbanplanning inSãoPaulo werealwaystoo little,toolate.
21
São
Paulo’sexistingplanningregulationsdatebackto1972,whenthecityhadabout4.5
millioninhabitants,welllessthanhalfthecurrentpopulation.Thearchaiczoning
regulations have allowed urban anarchy to rein supreme as once quiet residential
streetshavebecomecommercialhubswithoutanyconsiderationoftrafficcongestion
(Smith2003).Despiteitshumblecolonialorigins,thecompetitiveadvantagesofSão
Paulobecamereadilyapparentduringtheregionalcoffeeboomofthelatenineteenth
centurywhentheconstructionofrailroadsbyBritishcompaniesenabledthecityto
becomethechiefpointoftrans-shipmentfor the lucrative newcashcrop.Profits
fromthecoffeetradewerechanneled into investmentsinindustryandrealestate
development, transforming São Paulo overnight into a booming commercial and
manufacturingcentre.
Bytheearlytwentiethcentury,SãoPaulohadbecomeavirtualtestinggroundfor
theconjoinedeffectsofdiversityandrapidexpansion,absorbingmorethanamillion
immigrantsfromabroad,mainlyfromsouthernEuropeandJapan.Thecommercial-
industrialdominanceofSãoPaulowassecuredinthe1930s,afterPresidentVargas
initiatedanambitiousprogrammeofimport-substitutionindustrialisation.During
the late 1950s and early 1960s, under the umbrella of the 1956 Plano de Metas
(Development Plan), the massive injection of overseas capital, primarily in the
automobileindustry,furtherconsolidatedthenationwideeconomicprimacyofthe
GreaterSãoPaulometropolitanregion(Godfrey1991;Godfrey1999;Morse1958;
ToledoSilva2000).
Theindividualism,dynamicspirit,anddesireforinstantwealththatenergisedthe
urbanelitefoundconcreteexpressionintheapproachtocitybuilding,wherereal
ofperi-urbanexpansionin peripheral areas beyond the citylimits. Thefashionable
residential district that had developed along the Avenida Paulista in the 1920s
succumbedtourbandensification,asmansionsgavewaytoofficebuildingsofbanks,
financial servicesand other businesses.With the development ofthisnew financial
district,thecentral-southwesternneighbourhoodsofJardimAmerica,JardimEuropa
andJardimPaulistawereplannedasmodern‘gardensuburbs’(Godfrey1999).
Inthelate1960sandearly1970s,thecityonceagainexperiencedthemassiveinflux
ofpeople,asmillionsofinternalmigrantsdrawnfromthecountry’shardscrabble,
drought-riddennortheastsoughtabetterlifeintherapidlyindustrialisingsoutheast.
Urban planning has been unable to offer any consistent programme to deal with
explosivepopulationgrowth,thedemandsofinfrastructuralimprovementsandthe
rapidspreadofshantytownsonthecity’soutskirts,particularlyintheeasternzone
(Romero2000a;Schiffer2002;Wilheim1984).Overthepastseveraldecades,the
conjoined processes of economic restructuring, deindustrialisation of the central
core and spatial decentralisation of residence and commerce have led to an even
more complex and distorted morphology of the Greater São Paulo metropolitan
region.Oncetheindustrialandmanufacturingheartlandofthecountry,SãoPaulo
hasexperiencedasteady flightofindustry,firsttotheindustrialsuburbs,thento
abroadzonewithinaradiusofatleast180fromthecentraldowntowncore,and
now to neighbouring states and regions. The once compact downtown core has
metamorphosised into two primary nodes: the traditional central business district
nearthePracadaRepublicaandthenewfinancialdistrictalongtheAvenidaPaulista.
Alongwithseveralimportsatellitezones,theseprimarynodeshavebecomecentres
not of industry but of high-rise office buildings catering to banking, insurance,
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
16
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
17
millionresidentswithincomedisparitiesnotnearlyasskewedastheyhavebecome.An
extensivenetworkoftrolleysandbuses,alongwithonly164,000privateautomobiles,
provided for a relatively fluid transportation system. Yet by the beginning of the
twenty-first century, the number of private automobiles has ballooned to roughly
5.1 million in the Greater São Paulo metropolitan region, with an estimated 600
new vehicles added daily, and 180,000 kilometers of streets. If Los Angeles was
thefirstcitywhose distortedshapeowesits existencetotheautomobile, thenSão
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
16
TheEvolvingSpatialFormofCitiesinaGlobalisingWorldEconomy
17
Paulocannotbefarbehind.Thelackofadequateinvestment ininfrastructurehas
resulted in daily gridlock and mounting ‘road rage’ assaults. For urban residents,
dailycommutesfromhometoworkandbackagaincanlastaslongasthreehours
eachtrip.Theproblemisnotoneofvastdistances,butagonisinglyslowtraffic.The
publictransportationsystemiswoefullyinadequatetocaterforthedemandsplaced
onittocarrypassengers.ThesubwaysystemissmallerthantheoneinWashington
DCwhileservingapopulationfourtimesaslarge.2.5millionpassengerssaturateits
threelineseachday.Incontrast,NewYorkCityhas25subwaylinesthatcarry4.3
millionpassengers.InSãoPaulo,about3.7millionresidentsmakeuseofthecitybus
systemeachday.Ridingthecity’s10,400busesisnotonlyuncomfortable,butalso
oftendangerous,becauseofthehighriskofrobberies.Asapopularalternative,an
armyofillicitminivanstransportstwicethatnumberalongthehaphazardgridofcity
streets(Agostini1999;Romero1999a;Romero2000b;Rotella2001).
Johannesburguntamed:thepost-liberalcityafterapartheidDespite
itsdecliningsignificanceasthecountry’spremierfinancialandbusinesscentre,the
embattledJohannesburgurbancoreanchorsageographicallydisfiguredmetropolitan
region of enormous economic and social contrasts (Beall, Crankshaw & Parnell
2002; Beavon 1998; Tomlinson, Beauregard, Bremner & Mangcu 2003). The
efficiencyoftheirspatialdispersal.Theseconjoinedprocessesofspatialstructuring
tendtoformwhatcanbecalled‘insularconfigurations’.Incontrasttoearlierspatial
expressionsofdivisionsoflabour,thesenewself-sustainingislandsaresite-specific,
yet internally highly complex, multifunctional and integrated (Bremner 2000;
Robinson1998;Saff1994).
The steady expansion of peripheral urbanisation and the secular decline of the
Johannesburgcentralcityhavetakenplacesynchronically.Theclusteringofmixed
commercial and residential development projects on the urban fringe reinforces
the existing patterns of racial segregation, separating social groups by visual
boundaries, growing distancesandsuchinterdictoryspatialfeaturesaswalls,gates
and checkpoints. By offering new housing, shopping and other services, which in
thepastwereonlyavailableclosertothecitycentre,placeslikeSandton,HydePark,
Midrand, Sunninghill and Fourways have become paradigmatic exemplars of the
urbanisation of suburbia. They have attracted increased concentrations of capital
investments, including light industries and small-scale manufacturing operations;
headquarter office complexes and shopping centres. The evolving spatial form of
these places conforms both to the poetics of postmodern design and the politics
andeconomicsofprofit-oriented developmentdecisions.Thevisualappearanceof
the‘urbanising’suburbanzonefallsintolinewithitsrealincreaseinsignificanceas
aneconomicpowerhouseandjobmachine(Beavon1997;Bremner1999;Bremner
2002;Tomlinson1999).
Fortress enclaves and siege architecture The spatial dynamics of post-
modern urbanism promote the steady expansion of social polarisation and spatial
fragmentation, or what urban theorists have variously referred to as ‘dual cities’, ‘
fortresscities’,‘fragmentedcities’,‘modularcities’,‘carceralcities’,‘revanchistcities’,
‘garrisoncities’,‘layeredcities’and‘walledcities’.
22
Bycordoningoffurbanglamour
zones (consisting, in the main, of five-star hotels, fancy restaurants, glitzy airports
andluxuryentertainments)fromtherestofthecity,postmodernurbanismnotonly
luxuryhotels,conventioncentres andshoppertainmentextravaganzas,has comeat
theexpenseofexcludingtheunwanted(Davis1992;Flusty1994;Marcuse1997a;
Marcuse1997b;Marcuse1997c).
SãoPaulo:‘defensiveurbanism’asawayoflifeCreakingunderpolitical
mismanagement, widespread corruption and the apathy generated by decades of
haphazardgrowth,itisadisorderlycityseeminglyatwarwithitself.Urbanresidents
who can afford to do so have fled crowded, chaotic and crime-plagued places in
the city, and have found refuge in the cocooned social spaces fashioned out of
fortifiedofficebuildingsscatteredacrossthefracturedurbanlandscape,oringated
communities,enclosedshoppingmallsandwell-guardedcountryclubsontheperi-
urbanfringe,especiallytheprosperouscentral-southwesternzone(Rolnik2001).In
contrast,thepoorfendforthemselvesinmonotonousrowsofdilapidatedhigh-rise
Free download from www.hsrcpublishers.ac.za
MartinJMurray
20
21
apartmentcomplexesorinthecity’steemingslums.Throughoutthecity,residents
areassaultedbyaBladeRunner-likebarrageofneonsigns,massivetelevisionscreens
andgarishbillboards.EveninoneofSãoPaulo’smoreexclusivedistricts,theAvenida
BrigadeiroFariaLima,wherestatelyofficebuildings,imposinginvestmentbanksand
informationtechnology‘start-up’companiescompeteforlimitedspace,animmense
Reutersscreenconstantlysteamsreal-timeupdatesofbreakingnewsfromaroundthe
world.Abovethedisorderlycityscape,awealthyelitefliesoverintheirhelicopters,
seeminglyoblivioustothevast,pulsatingcentreoflifethatpersistsbelow.Interms
ofitsaestheticattractiveness,itmaybetheugliestlargecityintheworld.Butsocially
andculturally,itisalsoverymuchalive(Faiola2002;Romero2000a).
SãoPauloexperiencedanindustrialboomoverthepastcentury,luringmillionsof
poorandlandlesspeoplefromtheimpoverishednortheasttosettleinthenortheastern
‘growth corridor’ connecting São Paulo with Rio de Janeiro (Diniz 1994). These
recentarrivals have notonlycrowded intoslumareascloseto the centralcitybut
the largest in São Paulo. It is surrounded by a four-metre high cement wall and
barbed wire with its own private army of 1,100 well-armed security officers who
screenallvisitors,patrolthestreetsandmaintainconstantvigilanceoversuspicious
characters.Liketheestimated300 other suchsecuredresidentialestatesthat have
proliferatedintheurbanfringe,Alphavilleis truly a futuristic‘city-within-a-city’,
offeringasequesteredrefuge,anescapefromthe‘bigcity’andallitsproblems.It
is an enclosed, self-sufficient mini-universe with its own shopping mall, its own
supermarketsanditsownrecreationalfacilitiestoaccommodateitsresidents.Besides
thecollectivesecurityprovidedfortheenclosureasawhole,mosthomeownershave
hiredprivatesecuritypersonneltoguardtheirindividualproperties,whichconsistin
themainofeitherluxuriouslyequippedapartmentcomplexesorexclusivehomeson
spaciouslots.Theenclosedestatehasthreehelipadsandfourentrancesandexits;all
monitored24hoursaday.MeticulouslyplannedasasuburbanValhalla,Alphaville
isdividedintodistinctcellsorspecialtyzones.Besidesresidentialareas,thecomplex
alsoincludesretailtrade,officeandservicelocations.Asaconsequence,duringthe
day,thepopulationballoonstoaround130,000people.In2000,thereweremore
than1,400companieswithofficeorcommercialfacilitiesinAlphaville,alongwith
severalhugeshoppingcentres,numerousprivateschools,aprivateuniversity,diverse
leisurefacilities(severalcinemacomplexes,sportsfields,andsoforth)andaluxury
hotelwithaconnectedbusinesscentreandretailshoppingvenue.Alphavilleoffers
a self-sufficient, segregated luxury housing scheme that combines an ‘innovative’
lifestylefortherichandveryrichalongwithconvenienceandsafety(Coy&Pohler
2002;DeLimaSeabra1992).
Alphaville promises its residents a high standard of security in each walled
residentialcompoundwiththehelpofsuchsophisticatedsecuritysystemsasaccess
control,hiddencamerasandprivateguardservices.Inits15residentialareas(called
residenciais), surveillance cameras mounted at security checkpoints surreptitiously
record themovementsofallvisitors.Inthecommunalareas, children can attend
well-guardedschoolsandenjoyafternoonsportsonfenced-infieldsthatarecarefully
monitoredbyprivatesecurityguardsdressedinmilitarystyleblack-claduniforms.