Discussion Papers 2007.
Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization.
The Case of Central Europe. 11-17. p.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND: GLOBALISATION
AND SOCIO-SPATIAL STRUCTURE
International trends
In the economically advanced countries of West-Europe (as well as in the USA
and Japan) since the 1960s and 70s an economic and social centralization process
has been going on with the urban concentration of skilled labour, the domination
of  multiregiona,  interregional  and  later  on  multinational  and  transnational  firms
with an intensive development of cities and their urban peripheries as an impact
(Veltz, 1996, 33).
The development of global economy, global economic integration and acceler-
ating metropolitan development have shaped new urban spaces and urban systems
(Enyedi  2003).  The  global  economy  created  metropolitan  spaces  and  urban  re-
gions have been analysed by several researchers. Hall in the 1960s (Hall, 1996),
Castells and Godard in the 1970s (Castells–Godard, 1974), Friedmann, Wolff and
Enyedi  described  the  economic  processes  playing  key  role  in  the  formation  of
global cities in the 1980s (Freidmann–Wolff, 1982; Enyedi, 1988). In his compre-
hensive study published in the early 1990s Sassen investigated the intensive urban
and  metropolitan  concentration  of  global  capital  and  its  institutional  system  as
well  as  their  fragmentation  as  an outcome of evolving peripheral areas (Sassen,
1991, 17–35).
The world’s more than 300 metropolises with over one million inhabitants are
not  only  oversized  urban  settlements  but  they  are  rather  more  multifunctional,
multi-centered and new-structured urbanized regions. One of their important fea-
tures is that they are representing a diversity of urban forms (Enyedi, 2001). By
Castell’s  interpretation  global  cities  are  the  special  urbanisational  forms  of  our
age (Castells–Godard, 1974, 442). By now it has become clear that metropolitan
regions and global cities are getting more and more important for world economy
by their functioning as innovation, manufacturing and service centres (Hall, 1996,
19–31). It is mostly big metropolises that can guarantee the dynamic operation of
post-fordist economy, the growth of services, the quaternary sector. These growth
poles are the steering wheels of economic development. They are the main loca-
tions of international capital, of skilled labour force, of the development of infor-
matics, of organising international relations and of the diversity of social cultures
(Sassen, 2000, 152). It is also metropolisest that can offer real competitive advan-
tages for global firms.
Our researches have revealed the dark sides of metropolitan life as well. The
growth of metropolises increased regional disparities everywhere in the economi-

11

Szirmai, Viktória : Theoretical Background: Globalisation and Socio-Spatial Structure.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 11-17. p. Discussion Papers, Special
cally advanced industrial societies. According to the relevant analyses in France,
in the United Kingdom and in Japan regional income differences due to the de-
centralized  industrial  development  have  decresed int he 1950s and 60s but they
increased again from the mid–1970s due to the globalisation of economy, to the
concentration of multinational firms in metropolian areas and to the concentrated
presence of the top-manager classes of the leading global firms (Veltz, 1996, 51).
In the USA, Japan and the countries of Europe increasing spatial differences as
a result of the concentration of metropolitan regions have become a general trend.
Veltz is on the opinion that the French urban space having been formulated by the
metropolitan concencentration of global economy is bipolar: it is characterised by
strong regional inequalities between the region of Paris and the other regions (es-
pecially the southern parts of France (Veltz, 1996, 33). Phillipe Cadene says that
the 117 settlement groups with over two million inhabitants are concentrating the
biggest organisations, the richest families as well as a part of the poverty that is
characteristic for the given countries (Cadene, 2000, 139).
Mollenkopf  és Castells used the term of dual society for labelling inequality
problems (Mollenkopf–Castells, 1993). By this term they mean globalization gen-
erated  socio-spatial  inequalities;  the  advantages  of  territories  and  social  groups
involved in global economy and the disadvantages of those having been excluded.
The  term  „société  duale,” or „dual city” expresses the economic and social dis-
crepancies  between  the  world  of  groups  linked  to  global  economy  in  big  me-
tropolises,  urban  agglomerations  and  the  world  of  old  industrial  towns,  urban
areas suffering from crisis, big urban residential areas inhabited by poor classes
and the world of small towns and declining small rural areas (Ascher, 1995, 126).
However  the  concept  of  dual  society  is  criticised  from  several  sides  as  dy-
namic urban spaces are also structured and high classes are available in declining
areas as well. Starting from this assumption Ascher for example proposes to in-
troduce the term of three grouped society on the basis of positioning it into the
post-fordist wage structure. By this interpretation the first group covers those who
are employed in the public sphere or those having a secure job and consolidated
social  positions  at  big  private  sector  companies.  The  other  group  covers  those
having  uncertain  career  perspectives  or  being  excluded  from  the  labour  market.
The first group could further be differentiated from security aspects. Thus, people
with uncertain existence would create the third group. The members of these three
groups are living three different manners of life leading different urban lifestyles
(Ascher, 1995, 130).
Inequalities occur not only between metropolises, global urban regions and the
remaining  regions  but  also  within  the  internal  structure  of  metropolises  and  big
cities:  there  are  spatial  and  economic  disparities  between  the  city  centre  and  its
surrounding  urban  peripheries  as  well.  Veltz  for  example  is  demonstrating  the

12

Szirmai, Viktória : Theoretical Background: Globalisation and Socio-Spatial Structure.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 11-17. p. Discussion Papers, Special
relationship between the core Paris region and its environment by a pyramid of
spatial hierarchy (Veltz, 1996, 33).
The  development  chances  of  urban  networks  created  by  globalising  world
economy and of cities and their environment (and of their involved societies) are
strongly differing from each other. Social polarization with gradually increasing
social  inequalities  manifesting  in  space  has  increased  between  core  areas  and
peripheries and within settlements themselves. In global cities – defined simply as
‘shop-window cities’ by Boltanski and Chiapello – social tensions have become
more  and  more  apparent.  The  differences  between  the  urban  quarters  populated
by the elite – i.e. the management and expertise of multinational firms, economic
and political decision-makers and skilled middle classes – and the residential ar-
eas  of  socially  handicapped  and  unemployed  classes  became  quite  apparent
(Boltanski–Chiapello, 1999).
Sassen’s analyses are also confirming the spatial disparities of inner city areas,
the  differences  between  urban  core  areas  and  peripheries  originating  partially
from historical reasons, partially from the spatial features of the corporate loca-
tion of global capital and partially from the social background and lifestyles of the
local residents of urban areas. In this way really the top global corporations (and
their new classes top managers, high-qualified professionals, stakeholder employ-
ees) are located in central urban quarters while standard national-level companies
(mostly national-level middle classes) are rather located in the peripheral parts of
urban areas (Sassen 2000). The investigations of Savitch and Kantor for ten big
cities  ended  with  similar  results.  West-European  (covering  such  cities  as  Paris,
Marseille, Napoli, Milan, Liverpool and Glasgow) and North-American (covering
such cities as Toronto, Detroit, Houston, New York) comparative researches show
a very low rate of active elite groups (professionals and managers) compared to
the  total  number  of  economically  active  wage  earners  (except  in  Napoli  with  a
rate between 40–80%) (Savitch–Kantor, 2004).
In  economically  advanced  industrial  societies  the  growing  concentration  of
economy and population in big cities and global cities has produced an increasing
spatial separation between the location of residential and work areas and a quicker
expansion of residential areas than workplaces towards urban peripheries. It de-
termines  the  spatial  direction  of  capital  investments,  infrastructure  development
projects, the siting of commercial and other services from city core areas towards
urban  peripheries  (Hall,  1996).  This  will  generate  a  quick  spatial  expansion  of
urban peripheries consuming up free territories with the increasing trend of short-
and long-distance commuting, an increasing demand and capacities of transport,
the expansion of environmental damages, decreasing territories of green areas and
the  transformation  of  urban  socio-spatial  structure.  The  out-migration  of  urban
middle classes from the city centre into the urban periphery is already a part of
this trend.

13

Szirmai, Viktória : Theoretical Background: Globalisation and Socio-Spatial Structure.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 11-17. p. Discussion Papers, Special
During the past 15 years OECD countries have faced a dramatically acceler-
ated  economic  and  social  suburbanization  process.  As  a  result  –  although  in  a
varying amount by countries – the number of city centre residents only slightly
but the population of urban peripheries has significantly increased. For example
in  the  USA  according  to  the  1990  census  data  more  than  half  of  the  total
population  lives  in  39  metropolitan  regions  having  over  one  million  residents
each. The growth rate of the suburbs of these 39 metropolitan regions was 55 %
between 1970 and 90 while the population growth rate in their inner quarters was
2 % only (Innovative Policies… 1996, 26).
Suburbanisation was accompanied by a ‘structural deficit’ i.e. wealthy social
classes  moved  out  to  the  peripheral  areas  of  the  city  while  social  classes  with
moderate or low income remained in the central parts of the city (Innovative Poli-
cies… 1996, Territorial Development…1999). This trend was further intensified
by the fact that due to the suburbanisation of middle classes the poor classes of
certain  suburbs  are  back-migrating  into  slumming  inner  city  quarters  (Caldeira,
1996, 71).
This  is  all  accompanied  by  a  rising  European  segregation  trend  with  the
growth of ‘underclass’, i.e the socially excluded groups living in low quality ur-
ban districts in residential areas of social housing. In West-European global cities
and  metropolises  the  number  of  declining  urban  centres  and  deteriorated  urban
quarters providing handicapped living prospects, concentrating poor social classes
with  marginal  and  deviant  lifestyle,  accumulating  social  problems  and  conflicts
unable to provide any facilities for social integration is growing everywhere (Ber-
ger, 1998).
There exists another segregation trend which is called as ‘enbourgeoisement’,
or gentrification: this is the growth of middle-classes in central urban quarters, the
cocentration of high social classes. Researches in France have pointed out that in
the early 1980s in the region of Paris the residents’ social polarization was much
weaker  than  in  the  1990s  the  period  of  intensifying  residential  segregation
(Tabard,  1990).  These  changes  have  been  generated  by  urbanisation  processes,
residential and urban housing policies and international labour market trends. The
latest analyses have also revealed that aristocracy and upper middle classes (just
like in the historic past) live in Paris in the city centre, in the western urban quar-
ters and in the southern and southwestern suburbs (Rhein, 1995, 54). The wealthy
households are located in the so-called ‘Beaux Quartiers’, i.e. in the elegant parts
of the city with manager or highly qualified or skilled free-lancing family heads.
The elite suburbs are different from the social content of city centres as they have
more old-aged inactive and less immigrant family heads. (This is true for Ameri-
can suburbs as well having fewer immigrants (Alba et al. 1999). French workers
(since the beginning of the 20th century) have been living in the eastern and north-
eastern  quarters  of  Paris  and  in  its  eastern,  north-eastern  and  south-eastern

14

Szirmai, Viktória : Theoretical Background: Globalisation and Socio-Spatial Structure.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 11-17. p. Discussion Papers, Special
industrial outskirts (Rhein, 1995, 57). Unskilled workers live in cheap housing es-
tates while skilled workers in private houses in the suburban villa zones or in the
new  cities  (having  been  built  in  the  1960s  and  ‘70s)  of  Paris  region  (Szirmai,
1998, Haumont, 1996).
The rapid concentration of economy and high classes with their spatial segre-
gation can very easily be recognized in the Paris Region. The signs of poverty are
less spectacular there. The poorest social classes are not concentrated in the eco-
nomically  most  advanced  Paris  region  (Preteceille,  1997,  107).  The  French  re-
searcher is on the opinion that several other important French cities such as Mar-
seille, Lyon and Strasbourg have similar trends (Preteceille, 1997, 107).
In  his  book  comparing  New  York,  London  and  Tokio  Sassen  claims that by
the impact of globalisation the so-called ‘new class’ i.e. elite qualified profession-
als, rich and young managers have articulated their new demands for changing the
traditional patterns of their living habits and creating new forms of urban lifestyle.
These new demands are associated with global cities functioning as organisational
units of consumer society manifesting in buying fancy goods, the costly spending
of  leisure  time,  going  to  elegant  restaurants,  theatres and visiting exclusive cul-
tural and entertainment programmes. These lifestyle attitudes have not ‘suburban’
or  ‘periurban’  but  rather  ‘ultraurban’  character  and  closely  associated  with  city
centres. The consumer demands of the global economic elite are attracting artists
into the city centre with those groups of the cultural elite who by the traditional
features  of  the  urban  social  structure  would  not  live  there  and  would  have  no
contacts  with  the  actors  of  economy.  These  trends  are  also  contributing  to  the
formation of elite social structure of global cities (Sassen, 1991, 250–283).
Other researches are also confirming the existence of the high social classes’
new residential attitudes. According to a representative survey in France a grow-
ing number of urban citizens give up their private car based suburban or periurban
lifestyle and formulate their demand for the development of core city areas (in-
cluding the application of new architectural solutions for a more community tar-
geted  life  with  two  or  three-storey  buildings  instead  of  living  in  isolated  gated
communities). They are also urging for elaborating a sustainable public transport
development concept. 60–70% of the suburban citizens and 30–45% of periurban
citizens of the total participants of research (investigating the differences between
flat property and rental forms) claimed that they would prefer living in cities than
in suburban or periurban environment (Kaufmann, 2002, 56–62).
Although American and European socio-spatial location and the segregational
models were always differing from each other the latest trends show changes both
in the European and the American segregation models. In the American model the
well-off classes had greater inclination for living in suburbs and the poor classes
tend much more to living in the slums or ‘derelict’ sites of inner urban zones. In
European cities the out-migration rate of middle classes was never as high as in

15

Szirmai, Viktória : Theoretical Background: Globalisation and Socio-Spatial Structure.
In: Social Inequalities in Urban Areas and Globalization. The Case of Central Europe.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2007. 11-17. p. Discussion Papers, Special
America; historic city centres were always preserving their high reputational val-
ues for middle classes.
Preteceille denies the assumption that segregation would be more intensive in
American cities. He is on the opinion that ethnic segregation is stronger and more
spectacular in the United States than for example in France. But comparing it with
London, Madrid, New York and Paris, he found that the degree of the segregation
of elite classes is higher in European cities. At the same time the concentration of
working classes is lower in Paris than in New York (Preteceille, 1997, 104–105).
The increasing social prestige of inner city quarters, the gentrification process
can be perceived in the central parts of North-American cities as well (see Sas-
sen’s description). New York’s example also proves it as Manhattan also has ele-
gant urban quarters. The intensive office building boom in the city centres of the
USA  between  1960  and  1990  the  regeneration  of  metropolitan  city  centres  the
building  of  new  hotels,  commercial  centres,  the  recreation  and  congress  centre
development  projects  halted  the  deterioration  process  of  city  centres.  All  these
filled  up  the  inner  parts  of  American  metropolises  with  new  content  (Ascher,
1995, 30). Despite these changes American high classes still assign much higher
social value to suburban settlements.
The increasing appreciation of suburban zones is perceivable in European cit-
ies  as  well.  In  the  suburbs  of  London,  Paris  (south-east  and  west)  high  social
classes  have  settled  down  (Rhein,  1995;  Preteceille,  1997,  105).  It  was  already
seen in the 1982 census that 60% of high class intellectuals were living in suburbs
(Haumont, 1996, 55). Of the eighty urban quarters of Paris twenty-seven are in-
habited by high social classes as well, and eighty four satellite settlements of Paris
have high class residents in high percentage (Preteceille, 1997, 105).
Segregation  schemes  have  several  origins  such  as  historical  background,  the
spatial structure of economy, the periods of global urbanization, social demands
and  possibilities, socio-ecological processes, changes in sociatial structures. Ac-
cording  to  international  literature  the  different  data  sets  (statistical  anayses,  in-
comes, life perspectives, summer holiday spending habits, leisure time and sport-
ing patterns) are showing a homogenization process on a long-term period, indi-
cating decreasing differences among different profession categories. Lower social
differences  have  been  manifested  in  a  lower  polarisation  degree  of  residential
areas during the 1980s.
However we are facing now a new kind of socio-spatial disparities (Fitousssi–
Rosanvallon,  1996,  Galland–Lemel,  1998).  Globalization,  global  economy,
macro- and micro-economic impacts, the everyday fights for defending our inter-
ests in the global economy, the economic impacts of success or failure have re-
vealed several contradictions having been hidden so far, such as massive unem-
ployment,  the  defencelessness  of  individuals,  new  dependencies  and  they  have
completely reshaped traditional structures. They have halted the processes facili-

16