[nature's calling]

What do you think are elements of a world city?? Here's what I think.


A good public transportation system
A large presence of universities and colleges
A large amount of diversity
Diversified economy
Large amount of multicultural options. (e.i. ethnic restaurants, shops, events)
Good parks


Those are just a few.

[krudmonk]

lots of threads about it

[Evergrey]

there's only one standard

http://www.pbase.com/deadwing/image/60682357.jpg
credit: me

[llamaorama]

Everything mentioned basically+A major airport with direct flights to other important world cities

But no another major feature I have felt that really defines the importance of a city is if it is like the gateway or capital of an greater region. Like a representative for everyone on the world stage. I consider places like Auckland(my opinion, not for arguing city vs city here) as world cities by relative terms, even if they aren't really very big in population or urban characteristics. Likewise there are some rather major cities out there overshadowed by larger competitors that don't get recognized as much.

[deja vu]

A sense of identity, possibly from landmarks, local history, sports teams, and local culture/customs. I don't think a world city can happen overnight, although it hasn't stopped many places from trying.

[ls1z28chris]

What do you think are elements of a world city?? Here's what I think.


A good public transportation system
A large presence of universities and colleges
A large amount of diversity
Diversified economy
Large amount of multicultural options. (e.i. ethnic restaurants, shops, events)
Good parks


Those are just a few.

You forgot strip clubs and liquor stores. :tup:

[edmontonenthusiast]

Having lots of stuff to do, but not the same everything to do as other world cities ... it needs a unique character. Like Tokyo and London are obviously different but have lots to do.

[edluva]

all of the above, in addition to being a leading center of global finance or commerce. it can't be a world city without the latter.

[Lear]

all of the above, in addition to being a leading center of global finance or commerce. it can't be a world city without the latter.

Nope.

Berlin and Beijing are certainly the most famous examples of world cities where finance and commerce does not have a prominent role. Whereas Zurich and Frankfurt are global centers of finance but usually are not considered a world city in a comprehensive sense.

[Brandon716]

Finance and economics can be a little overrated, for example Los Angeles is known as an entertainment capital and its a global city for that, despite the fact that Los Angeles lacks euro-style architecture and density.

Multi-culturalism sometimes plays a role, but its not just about being supportive of multiculturalism. New York and Toronto are two areas where multi-culturalism is a real demographic makeup, not just tolerance. But just because London and Berlin and Madrid may have less multi-culturalism doesn't make them less of a world city.

These definitions are so loose, everyone has different values. For example, someone in the entertainment industry would recognize Los Angeles very much as a world city, but someone on here who doesn't value sprawl may consider it a big suburb (which wouldn't be out of the question).

To someone in the arab world, they may consider Cairo a world city. Or Islamabad for someone who is persian.

But what about super cities that many North Americans and Europeans have never heard of, like Chongqing, China? What role do those kinds of cities play?

[krudmonk]

but someone on here who doesn't value sprawl may consider it a big suburb (which wouldn't be out of the question).
Actually, it would be.

[the urban politician]

Having lots of Asian guys with orange mohawks

[Crawford]

Nope.
Berlin and Beijing are certainly the most famous examples of world cities where finance and commerce does not have a prominent role. Whereas Zurich and Frankfurt are global centers of finance but usually are not considered a world city in a comprehensive sense.

I would disagree that Berlin is a world city. And I would say Frankfurt is a world city, but Zurich, maybe not.

[Crawford]

I'm not sure that diversity is a requirement for world-city status. Tokyo is 98% Japanese, but noone would argue it isn't a world city.

And how diverse are Beijing, Seoul, Mexico City, Buenos Aires, Moscow, Cairo, Mumbai, Manilla and Bangkok? I would say these are all world cities.

[krudmonk]

I'm not sure that diversity is a requirement for world-city status. Tokyo is 98% Japanese, but noone would argue it isn't a world city.

And how diverse are Beijing, Seoul, Mexico City, Buenos Aires, Moscow, Cairo, Mumbai, Manilla and Bangkok? I would say these are all world cities.
No, you need diversity or else everyone is a redneck. Pay attention to the boards more.

[Lear]

A world city encompasses a broad number of economic, political and cultural institutions. The power, the size and the global influence of these institutions and firms make a city a true world city.

I think, that around 30 cities on this globe could be described as a world city fulfilling most of the criteria.

[mongoXZ]

The only requirement I feel is necessary is a city's global influence. Ethinic diversity, great parks, architecture, etc etc are all just bonuses.

Yes, DC is a world city.

[ChiMIchael]

That's a given, it's the political center of the most powerful nation.

[pwp]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city

Great article on the subject. I'm sure the qualifications are backed by data to some extent, however I feel in part it's subjective. You could make a case for Philadelphia as a global city on most of the mentioned points in this article yet its usually considered a tier 3 city I believe.

[plinko]

Now are we talking about 'Alpha' world cities, 'MEGA' world cities, or 'Tier 1' world cities?

Only 1 city qualifies as all three of those and it's in Wyoming...

[Gordo]

:previous: Billings is in Montana, not Wyoming.

[muppet]

Plurality, choice, variety etc. on an epic scale in lifestyle, entertainment, business, food etc. It's all about opportunity and diversity (not necessarily ethnic, but it helps). Size and history adds a great deal of help in diversifying your options too, from mixing the built environment to pluralising modern globalisation with traditional cultures. It is hard to create this exchange of ideas and cross pollination without a good transport system, a progressive society and open governing.


Also, it's not just about power or how rich the city is -eg Washington DC, Beijing, Moscow or LA could easily rub shoulders with the heavyweights otherwise, with LA richer than London, Beijing with more political power than Paris etc...

...For which these heavyweights I would say imo, would be the ones that tick every box decisively, and are well rounded in every aspect (not lacking in any aspect particularly), and have the weight of size and cultural power behind them -

Paris, London, NYC, Tokyo.

In terms of culture (and not strictly economy) Shanghai and Istanbul will soon join them methinks, closely followed by Buenos Aires. The kinds of places where old clashes with the new, and creates radical cutting edge stuff. Berlin is already there (the current global centre for new culture and arts), but its too small and suffers from German decentralisation. Beijing, if ever it lets go of its political and bureaucratic (read: stifling) reins would do well too, its currently very radical under all that authoritarian planning (and the epicentre of the art world, alongside Berlin).

[StethJeff]

London, Paris, Milan, Madrid, Berlin, Moscow, Istanbul, Beijing, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Seoul, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Washington, New York, Miami, Toronto, Sydney, Johannesburg, Mumbai, and I'm sure something in Switzerland

Gotta have a global brand name with substance (transportation, population, business, art/culture/sports, identity) to back it up. And if CNN doesn't have a correspondent there, it definitely isn't a world city.

[LosAngelesSportsFan]

Miami and Milan stick out from that list StethJeff, especially Miami. certainly both are mega cities, but World Cities on par with the rest of that list, im not so sure.

[ls1z28chris]

London, Paris, Milan, Madrid, Berlin, Moscow, Istanbul, Beijing, Hong Kong, Tokyo, Seoul, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, New York, Miami, Toronto, Sydney, Johannesburg, Mumbai, and I'm sure something in Switzerland

Gotta have a global brand name with substance (transportation, population, business, art/culture/sports, identity) to back it up. And if CNN doesn't have a correspondent there, it definitely isn't a world city.

I like how the city that is the home of CNN, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, and the busiest airport on the planet isn't included on your list. :koko:

Based on all your stated criteria, Atlanta should be on your list before Miami.

[dimondpark]

GAWC's Connectivity Ranking is usually confused for being a ranking of global power and influence, when its merely a ranking of office locations.

They did, however come up with a ranking that weighed economic, cultural and political influence.


THE WORLD'S MOST WELL ROUNDED CITIES by GaWC released in 2004

Quote:
Five levels of global city are identified. First, and clearly above all others, there are London and New York. All previous research has highlighted the dominance of these two cities in the world city hierarchy (Taylor 2004a) and they emerge here as the most important 'all-round' global contributors. They are followed by three cities that make smaller all-round contribution and with particular cultural strengths: Los Angeles, Paris and San Francisco. Finally, among 'all-rounders' there are seven incipient world cities identified in Table 11. In the second category of global niche cities, the three leading Pacific Asian cities are critical economic nodes in the world city network and there are also three critical nodes that are non-economic: Brussels, Geneva and Washington, DC. Thus a total of 18 cities are deemed to be global, actual or incipient.

The remaining world cities encompass articulator and niche cities. The former are focussed upon subnets and there are 13 distributed between the three non-economic spheres. Classic examples are Vienna at the centre of a UN agency subnet and Nairobi at the centre of a NGO subnet. There are 21niche world cities identified of which seven have important concentrations of economic activities and 14 concentrations of non-economic activities. Frankfurt is typical of the first group with its concentration of banks while Manila is typical of the second group with its concentration of NGOs.

These two sets of cities represent the upper echelons of the hierarchical tendencies in world city networks. To reiterate a point made in the introduction, they do not encompass all globalization processes, all cities as so involved, but they are the key locales that network formation agents are using in their everyday activities that are creating world city networks.
GLOBAL CITIES

Well rounded global
Very large contribution: London and New York
Smaller contribution and with cultural bias: Los Angeles, Paris and San Francisco

ii Incipient global cities: Amsterdam, Boston, Chicago, Madrid, Milan, Moscow, Toronto

Global niche cities - specialised global contributions

i Economic: Hong Kong, Singapore, and Tokyo

ii Political and social: Brussels, Geneva, and Washington

WORLD CITIES

Subnet articulator cities

i Cultural: Berlin, Copenhagen, Melbourne, Munich, Oslo, Rome, Stockholm Political: Bangkok, Beijing, Vienna

ii Social: Manila, Nairobi, Ottawa

Worldwide leading cities

i Primarily economic global contributions: Frankfurt, Miami, Munich, Osaka, Singapore, Sydney, Zurich

ii Primarily non-economic global contributions: Abidjan, Addis Ababa, Atlanta, Basle, Barcelona, Cairo, Denver, Harare, Lyon, Manila, Mexico City, Mumbai, New Delhi, Shanghai

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb146.html#tab11

[Pioneer]

I like how the city that is the home of CNN, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, and the busiest airport on the planet isn't included on your list. :koko:

Based on all your stated criteria, Atlanta should be on your list before Miami.


actually neither Atlanta nor Miami are world class cities-- or even near most of the other cities on that list.

[ls1z28chris]

actually neither Atlanta nor Miami are world class cities-- or even near most of the other cities on that list.

I personally wouldn't compare Atlanta to top tier cities like New York, London, or Tokyo, but that dude's criteria simply stated top names in business and transportation, and a CNN correspondent. If that is the basis for judgement, then there is no reason to put a retirement community in south Florida ahead of Atlanta.

[urbanactivistTX]

I don't know about Houston as a true world city in the alpha league, but it's very important as a "world economic engine".

New Orleans is a "world tourist mecca"... no doubt about that.

[chiphile]

The only requirement I feel is necessary is a city's global influence. Ethinic diversity, great parks, architecture, etc etc are all just bonuses.

Yes, DC is a world city.


YES, the parks and culture and everything else follows from that.

It's the DECISIONS made in the city that affect the rest of the world or a large region, that's what makes it a world city. The most obvious examples, the decisions and meetings held in New York and Washington affect the world directly.

[Lear]

Decision making institutions which influence a large region and the globe is certainly the measurable way to identify a world city. The whole urban environment, its diversity in every sense, derives from these powerful organizations, administrations, firms.

Another indicator, which is not easy to identify, is a dimension which can be called presence. The brand name of a metropolis. The question of, how well known a city is and what kind of reputation a city has (globally) seems to be important as well.

[MolsonExport]

Q: What do you think are elements of a world city??
A: Whatever Forbes tells us. ;)

[StethJeff]

I like how the city that is the home of CNN, Coca-Cola, Delta Airlines, and the busiest airport on the planet isn't included on your list. :koko:

Based on all your stated criteria, Atlanta should be on your list before Miami.

That list I spewed was just off the top of my head. Singapore and Bangkok should also be on the list, now that I think about it.

Atlanta is a fine town, don't get butt hurt.

[McBane]

to be a world city, i think you must have to be an international center of finance and education and politics; historical prestige, culture, and an international airport that will take you anywhere are also very important and so is the city's brand.

here are some questions to ask that relate to your city's brand.

do you live in the paris of xyz or do you live in paris? i live in philadelphia and i don't know anywhere in the world that calls itself the philadelphia of xyz. and sorry chris, nobody says they live in the atlanta of xyz. or miami for that matter. if your city is the one being compared (i.e. paris), then you probably live in a world city.

do you have a hotel styled after something of yours in las vegas? now it may sound stupid, but hotels being modeled after your city is a sign of immiation which is the strongest form of flattery. again, i love philly, but i don't see a hotel being built on the basis of it. why? because it lacks worldwide brand recognition. but venice? paris? new york? yes. yes. and yes.

atlanta may have a busy airport, but how many of those flights are for people actually coming into atlanta versus as a layover? and washington d.c. may be a major political city, but i'm not sure it has much of anything else in comparisson with other world cities.

finally, to truly be a world city, you have to have a near-consensus of belief. we can argue from today til tomorrow of whether or not DC is a world city. but i'll just look and say, "hey, if you can have an argument about it or you need to convince someone that your city is a world city, then chances are, it's probably not."

but who can argue with london, nyc, shanghai, paris, hong kong, and tokyo?

LA, milan, moscow, rio de janeiro, toronto, mumbai, cairo, bejjing, sydney, rome, and perhaps a few others can be successfully argued my most as being a world city (i'm on the fence about DC).

but when you have to start pointing out the corporations that make your city home (sorry for all the atlanta jibes), you're really reaching out on a limb to make your point. and the fact is, a world city is much more than just a few well known corporations. it's a brand, an identity that is often immitated but never duplicated.

[Lear]

In order to estimate the presence of a city I made a simple Google "Results" list of 30 world cities. This list and the methodology has obviously several flaws. "Paris Hilton" alone contributes 63,000,000 hits to the Paris score. Cities which are usually known for shorter spelling like Rio or L.A. have a disadvantage here. Some of the figures also vary at certain times. The biggest flaw is probably the English spelling of the names. Tokyo for instance is written Tokio in German and gets another 45,100,000 results in this language, Rome also widely written as "Roma" gets another 173,000,000. In the end it still gives a hint of how well a world city (the pure name of it) is present in the english internet.

Double names have been searched with " ".

839,000,000 "New York"
547,000,000 Paris
532,000,000 London
497,000,000 Washington
341,000,000 "Hong Kong"
333,000,000 Chicago
313,000,000 Singapore
311,000,000 Berlin
292,000,000 Madrid
286,000,000 "Los Angeles"
247,000,000 Boston
242,000,000 Barcelona
217,000,000 "San Francisco"
172,000,000 Miami
158,000,000 Tokyo
158,000,000 Istanbul
146,000,000 Toronto
142,000,000 "Sao Paulo"
142,000,000 Sydney
122,000,000 Milan
112,000,000 Rome
109,000,000 Frankfurt
105,000,000 Montreal
-99,800,000 Melbourne
-99,800,000 Beijing
-96,500,000 Mumbai
-90,300,000 "Buenos Aires"
-81,700,000 "Rio de Janeiro"
-68,800,000 Moscow
-34,400,000 Seoul

The biggest surprise for me was the low results for Moscow and Tokyo and the high score for Boston and Istanbul. The rank order in general pretty much supported my perception of the actual presence... What are your thoughts ? Did you expect something different ?

[SAV]

Atlanta does have global influence. But its not on the same scale as some of those other cities. Give it 5-10 years. A lot is changing down there in Georgia.

[Westsidelife]

Los Angeles is all too often searched/referred to as "Hollywood".

[Jaroslaw]

A world city is a city that makes a contribution to world culture. Cairo and Moscow, for example, are not world cities, because they represent attempts to wall off one culture from the rest of the world. Seoul is a world city because it is the center of a vibrant culture which is self-conscious about influencing Asia and the world. In that sense, I'd say also HK and Singapore, and maybe Shanghai in Asia, but Tokyo less so, because of its relative insularity. Perhaps Taipei more than Shanghai, because of its much greater political freedom, the freedom to engage the rest of the world freely.

[muppet]

In order to estimate the presence of a city I made a simple Google "Results" list of 30 world cities. This list and the methodology has obviously several flaws. "Paris Hilton" alone contributes 63,000,000 hits to the Paris score. Cities which are usually known for shorter spelling like Rio or L.A. have a disadvantage here. Some of the figures also vary at certain times. The biggest flaw is probably the English spelling of the names. Tokyo for instance is written Tokio in German and gets another 45,100,000 results in this language, Rome also widely written as "Roma" gets another 173,000,000. In the end it still gives a hint of how well a world city (the pure name of it) is present in the english internet.

Double names have been searched with " ".

839,000,000 "New York"
547,000,000 Paris
532,000,000 London
497,000,000 Washington
341,000,000 "Hong Kong"
333,000,000 Chicago
313,000,000 Singapore
311,000,000 Berlin
292,000,000 Madrid
286,000,000 "Los Angeles"
247,000,000 Boston
242,000,000 Barcelona
217,000,000 "San Francisco"
172,000,000 Miami
158,000,000 Tokyo
158,000,000 Istanbul
146,000,000 Toronto
142,000,000 "Sao Paulo"
142,000,000 Sydney
122,000,000 Milan
112,000,000 Rome
109,000,000 Frankfurt
105,000,000 Montreal
-99,800,000 Melbourne
-99,800,000 Beijing
-96,500,000 Mumbai
-90,300,000 "Buenos Aires"
-81,700,000 "Rio de Janeiro"
-68,800,000 Moscow
-34,400,000 Seoul

The biggest surprise for me was the low results for Moscow and Tokyo and the high score for Boston and Istanbul. The rank order in general pretty much supported my perception of the actual presence... What are your thoughts ? Did you expect something different ?

You'd need to do the same study with other languages to get a more representative and less misleading result for a 'global' list. For example you've missed out the biggest internet market - China with 300 million users (as opposed to US 240 million), and growing by 40 million a year, exponentially. Spanish also significantly dents the stats with 130 million users.

When you're getting to the fourth largest internet language, Japanese with 90 million, you're starting to realise that in terms of global representation, internet languages may not be indicative as they seem. Japanese represents only 6% of internet users yet is the 4th largest language.

Moreover only 1.6 billion out of the earth's 6.7 billion people are internet users. Thus even if you were to calculate with all online languages, and all internet users, you're still missing out on 76% of all people.

If you think about it, for example, there are more Indians than there are Westerners. Yet the capital, Delhi isn't even on the internet list. Likewise Shanghai, and Beijing on it but not far from bottom, although Miami, Boston, Montreal, Melbourne etc. rate higher.

[J. Will]

to be a world city, i think you must have to be an international center of finance and education and politics; historical prestige, culture, and an international airport that will take you anywhere are also very important and so is the city's brand.

Yes, except "historical prestige". Just because a city wasn't a world city 100 or 50 years ago doesn't mean that it isn't today. No place becomes a "world city" overnight, but that doesn't mean it needs "historical prestige" to be one either.

[dimondpark]

but who can argue with london, nyc, shanghai, paris, hong kong, and tokyo?

Shanghai, Tokyo and Hong Kong do not attract millions of people from around the world the way that the others do.

That a city is seen as a place where people the globe over want to be and do anything to get there is a very important factor imo.

[flamesrule]

For me :Parks Office space,
Fireplaces,
Cops
Schools,
Good transport system.
Parks
Rec Areas
Goog mayor and parks.
Good Goverment too

[muppet]

Shanghai, Tokyo and Hong Kong do not attract millions of people from around the world the way that the others do.

That a city is seen as a place where people the globe over want to be and do anything to get there is a very important factor imo.


I still think Tokyo as the world's biggest, richest city with the largest amount of global HQ, businesses, shops, restaurants, bars, clubs etc. more than double (or even 12x more) than the next on the list still belongs. Not only in terms of economic power or size, but in massive cultural influence (global brands, fashions, pop culture over billions of Asians) and huge plurality of choice (many more x the choice than even the other global cities in food, entertainment, quality etc.) Tokyo may not have the multicultural people's as other cities, but you will still be able to live and buy multiculturally due to the vast plurality of the place, from eating out at your local Congolese to buying those Bhutanese monk robes, from the latest London underground dubstep, to the myriad urban tribes whether they be 1980s German Romantics or female Nigerian sex fetishists.

[dimondpark]

I still think Tokyo as the world's biggest, richest city with the largest amount of global HQ, businesses,

From a business standpoint, absolutely.

Not only in terms of economic power or size, but in massive cultural influence (global brands, fashions, pop culture over billions of Asians)

Aside from automakers, what brands from Japan are massively influential over Asian culture?

I wouldnt consider Tokyo's cultural impact even on the same page as somewhere like Los Angeles or London.

LA is beamed around the world and everyone has an opinion or is influnced one way or another by how LA is represented to them by the worldwide media.

London, NY, Paris are all the same way.

Tokyo, Hong Kong, Shanghai are for the most part only culturally relevent to the people who live in their respective countries. Language doesnt matter in the case of NY, LA and London because English is more global than any other language, but Language is a huge barrier for Asian Cultural Movements making their way outside of that continent.

[muppet]

People all over Asia (and we're talking billions here) listen to J-pop, watch Japanese tv shows and Japanese films, read Japanese manga, copy Japanese styles, learn Japanese martial arts, buy a huge amount of Japanese technology, drive Japanese cars, play Japanese video games, party in Japanese karaoke bars or to Japanese DJ's, and eat out Japanese. Hong Kongers now traditionally celebrate Chinese New Year with sashimi, North Koreans have seen karaoke officially banned due to its infiltrative cultural influence, whilst the amount of sushi bars opening in Shanghai rivals that of Tokyo. The Japanese media industry is worth something like $120 billion.


...And Tokyo is the nexus of all that, the world's largest, yet still the most technologically advanced and richest city. Its global brands ($1.5 trillion economy), business HQ's (47 listed from the Fortune 500 compared to 20 from NYC) and the sheer amount of people (39 million) also ensure a staggering choice. Compare the figures for the Tokyo ward alone, 3000 bars in NYC, 8000 in London, Madrid 30,000, whilst Tokyo comes in with 27,000 karaoke bars alone, and over 100,000 in total. When Michelin finally started to rate Tokyo for its food it had a mammoth task ahead. NYC, Paris, London had about 15,000 restaurants a piece - but Tokyo 80,000, and another 100,000 establishments with food licenses, serving every conceivable cuisine from Eritrean to Belarusian. Its final tally of 191 stars (more than double runner up Paris), still drew criticism so many establishments were missed out. Its streets serve up the latest homegrown trends, much copied by global fashion houses and exported to the rest of the world, its technology is years ahead of the competition.

Tokyo's vibrancy is part of its cultural history of constant renewal, and love for the new - and it's the only developed world city growing at developing world rates, much to the surprise of experts that had been estimating on slow growth for years. In the latest census it had added over 5 million people to its metro in less than a decade, spurred by falling birthrates (youth leaving for the big city rather than stay in ageing environs) and falling land prices- almost 6x the growth rates of metro NYC. This all spurs new fads, new people, new concepts, and a large amount of urban tribalism (in replacement of a largely homogenous ethnicity), that results in a huge pop culture and cutting edge media industry that is sold all over Asia, to billions.

[dimondpark]

People all over Asia (and we're talking billions here) listen to J-pop, watch Japanese tv shows and Japanese films, read Japanese manga, copy Japanese styles, learn Japanese martial arts, buy a huge amount of Japanese technology, drive Japanese cars, play Japanese video games, party in Japanese karaoke bars or to Japanese DJ's, and eat out Japanese. Hong Kongers now traditionally celebrate Chinese New Year with sashimi, North Koreans have seen karaoke officially banned due to its infiltrative cultural influence, whilst the amount of sushi bars opening in Shanghai rivals that of Tokyo. The Japanese media industry is worth something like $120 billion.


...And Tokyo is the nexus of all that, the world's largest, yet still the most technologically advanced and richest city. Its global brands ($1.5 trillion economy), business HQ's (47 listed from the Fortune 500 compared to 20 from NYC) and the sheer amount of people (39 million) also ensure a staggering choice. Compare the figures for the Tokyo ward alone, 3000 bars in NYC, 8000 in London, Madrid 30,000, whilst Tokyo comes in with 27,000 karaoke bars alone, and over 100,000 in total. When Michelin finally started to rate Tokyo for its food it had a mammoth task to take on. NYC, Paris, London had about 15,000 restaurants a piece - but Tokyo 80,000, and another 100,000 establishments with food licenses, serving every conceivable cuisine from Eritrean to Belarusian. Its final tally of 191 stars (more than double runner up Paris), still drew criticism so many establishments were missed out. Its streets serve up the latest homegrown trends, much copied by global fashion houses and exported to the rest of the world, its technology is years ahead of the competition.

Tokyo's vibrancy is part of its cultural history of constant renewal, and love for the new - and it's the only developed world city growing at developing world rates, much to the surprise of experts that had been estimating on slow growth for years. In the latest census it had added over 5 million people to its metro in less than a decade, spurred by falling birthrates (youth leaving for the big city rather than stay in ageing environs) and falling land prices- almost 6x the growth rates of metro NYC. This all spurs new fads, new people, new concepts, and a large amount of urban tribalism (in replacement of a largely homogenous ethnicity), that results in a huge pop culture and cutting edge media industry that is sold all over Asia, to billions.
Perhaps you are correct. Maybe the sheer size of Tokyo is reason alone to include it among the World's Cities-obviously its corporate presence is massive.

On the other hand, when I lived in India and throughout my travels around Asia, I can't say that people really 'looked' to Tokyo for cultural and social trends the way many in the west look to LDN or NYC.

But I could be wrong.:shrug:

[muppet]

^yeah, I should say East and SE Asians specifically, rather than the rest (but that's still a huge market, over 2 billion people, and twice the population of the West). I mean, yes there is alot of Japanese pop influence among that region's peoples, but in a globalised world that doesn't mean they do ALL of the above (eat, drink, sleep Japanese 24-7 etc.), but just that it's there for them in mainstream choice.

[Shawn]

Perhaps you are correct. Maybe the sheer size of Tokyo is reason alone to include it among the World's Cities-obviously its corporate presence is massive.

On the other hand, when I lived in India and throughout my travels around Asia, I can't say that people really 'looked' to Tokyo for cultural and social trends the way many in the west look to LDN or NYC.

But I could be wrong.:shrug:

As muppet has said, Tokyo is the "it" city for East Asian fashion, music and pop culture. J-pop is huge in Korea, China, the Philippines, and especially Taiwan. Chinese pop groups model themselves after whatever is hot among J-pop stars. Bathing Ape, Comme Ça, the dozens of boutique brands which export whatever's clever on Takeshita-dori (Harajuku) or in 109 (Shibuya) are all wildly popular and influential in East Asia. Japanese anime is so popular in China that the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television bans all foreign cartoons (specifically Japanese) from 5 to 9 p.m. in order to promote domestic products.

I know it's hard for those who have limited exposure to East Asian - particularly Japanese - media to appreciate, but Japan's soft power in East Asia is tremendous.

[StethJeff]

finally, to truly be a world city, you have to have a near-consensus of belief. we can argue from today til tomorrow of whether or not DC is a world city. but i'll just look and say, "hey, if you can have an argument about it or you need to convince someone that your city is a world city, then chances are, it's probably not."

. . .

but when you have to start pointing out the corporations that make your city home (sorry for all the atlanta jibes), you're really reaching out on a limb to make your point. and the fact is, a world city is much more than just a few well known corporations. it's a brand, an identity that is often immitated but never duplicated.

Perfect.

[Lear]

If you think about it, for example, there are more Indians than there are Westerners. Yet the capital, Delhi isn't even on the internet list. Likewise Shanghai, and Beijing on it but not far from bottom, although Miami, Boston, Montreal, Melbourne etc. rate higher.

And that is the point. While certainly languages like Japanese and Mandarin have a high presence in the internet, the information, knowledge, the culture coming from these languages is only spread in these regions. Whereas the the content transported by the English language can cross the borders.

Yes, except "historical prestige". Just because a city wasn't a world city 100 or 50 years ago doesn't mean that it isn't today. No place becomes a "world city" overnight, but that doesn't mean it needs "historical prestige" to be one either.

Historical prestige is part of the cultural influence of a city, in some cases it even forms a political status of a city. Athens democracy, The Roman Empire, The Boston tea party, French revolution Paris, Imperial London, 20th century Berlin /Berlin wall, September 11th New York City are forming the Western and to a high degree the global collective conscience. These points of references are repeated in history school books, documentaries, movies and even video games.

So yes, historical prestige, or better presence, still influences the minds today and adds to the status of a city.

The real problem is to measure these incidents and realities. In other words: Does the Chicago of the Michael Jordan era has a higher significance than Jerusalem as a spiritual center ? The answer is up to you....

[J. Will]

And that is the point. While certainly languages like Japanese and Mandarin have a high presence in the internet, the information, knowledge, the culture coming from these languages is only spread in these regions. Whereas the the content transported by the English language can cross the borders.



Historical prestige is part of the cultural influence of a city, in some cases it even forms a political status of a city. Athens democracy, The Roman Empire, The Boston tea party, French revolution Paris, Imperial London, 20th century Berlin /Berlin wall, September 11th New York City are forming the Western and to a high degree the global collective conscience. These points of references are repeated in history school books, documentaries, movies and even video games.

So yes, historical prestige, or better presence, still influences the minds today
and adds to the status of a city.

The real problem is to measure these incidents and realities. In other words: Has the Chicago of the Michael Jordan era a higher importance than Jerusalem as a spiritual center ? The answer is up to you....

I'm not saying it doesn't add to the status of a city. I'm just saying historical prestige isn't necessarily a requirement of a "world city". A contributing factor - yes.

[Lear]

I'm not saying it doesn't add to the status of a city. I'm just saying historical prestige isn't necessarily a requirement of a "world city". A contributing factor - yes.

In the end, a catalogue of more then 100 elements could be established in order to identify the status of city. The complexity and the quality of all these elements contribute to the status. Its almost impossible to include or exclude certain elements, because they all ADD to the status of a world city.

[McBane]

^agreed. my inititial posting said "historical prestige is also important" meaning just that - it's important but not make or break. i mean, i did cite hong kong as one of my near-consensus world cities and, correct me if i'm wrong, but what historical prestige does hong kong have? it was a puny fishing village 100 years ago. and in japapn, kyoto has all the historical prestige of japan, not tokyo.

the historical prestige argument however, does lend itself well to cities like london and paris, particularly during the imperial ages where these cities were the centers of expansive empires.

[Urban Zombie®]

What do you think are elements of a world city??

Carbon.


ZING! ZIM-ZAM-ZOO!

[Crawford]

Muppet, while I agree with your overall sentiments (Tokyo is indeed a world city of the first rank) none of your supporting numbers make any sense.

They just read like B.S. from some city tourism site or something. There is no global count of bars or restaurants by city, for example. You cannot make a ranking of such amenities by city.

Michelin Stars are not a proxy for restaurant quality; they are a proxy for a certain type of formalized dining.

Tokyo is not the richest city/region. That would probably be the Bay Area. Tokyo has (barely) the biggest economy, but it's (easily) the biggest population agglomeration. I wouldn't say that Mexico City is richer than Madrid because its economy is much bigger. I'm not even sure that Tokyo would have the largest economy in 2009, (and it won't for long) but the most recent numbers from a few years back have it at #1.

I also suspect the extent of Tokyo cultural influence. There is a Japanese cultural influence, but that is not a strictly Tokyo influence. American pop culture in Tehran is not indicative of the global influence of New York.

[muppet]

Tokyo estimated number of restaurants:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TRAVEL/09/29/tokyo.eat/index.html


Monday, Jan 19th

http://www.tastingmenu.com/archive/2004/01-january.htm

Tokyo biggest city economy (and no, Im not talking per capita here, that would be Zurich or something. Size or not its still the largest economy):

http://www.qualityhealth.com/health-lifestyle-articles/6-richest-cities-world

[Lear]

.... but what historical prestige does hong kong have? it was a puny fishing village 100 years ago. and in japapn, kyoto has all the historical prestige of japan, not tokyo.

The Hong Kong of Bruce Lee and Jackie Chan adds to the cultural and even historical prestige. To some extent this era is gone but still in the minds of movie lovers. I would point to the handover Hong Kong experienced when it became part of the PRC. This was an historic moment on a global scale. Its a fixed incident of Hong Kong´s history and an international reference point.

Tokyo is closely attached to all incidents around WW2 and the Japanese economic miracle of the 70ies and 80ies. Its also historical prestige many people on the globe can relate to.

One word to Japans/Tokyo´s influence in world culture, the whole arcade and video game industry is almost unthinkable without the contributions from this city.

The major influence Tokyo is lacking would be rather political.
Whereas Washington controls a global military and Berlin as a major driver of European integration, Tokyo neither pushes in the UN at G8 and can´t even control tiny neighbours like North Korea.

[kevike]

its (Tokyo) technology is years ahead of the competition.



Great! Give us all a hint of some of the technology we here in the West will be seeing in the future.

[muppet]

okee this'll be fun to watch

fridges
v/DzUH8MfMeN4&hl=en&fs=1&


toilets
v/veW2yRYBADY&hl=en&fs=1&

car parking
v/utDGn7eiqzo&hl=en&fs=1&

bicycle parking
v/2U7W5dbrWwc&hl=en&fs=1&

trains
/v/4BHw26kNstU&hl=en&fs=1&

Japanese McDonald's (you can store credit for use at any vending machines, travelling, shops etc)
v/cXqXfU8PA9M&hl=en&fs=1&

tallying your bill
v/lgqVZbX25Bk&hl=en&fs=1&

cellphone 2008 (also contactless credit card)
v/h4zUQHC34-w&hl=en&fs=1&

music player
v/Q7ilp5z-e9A&hl=en&fs=1&

[muppet]

electric paper
v/iMz1iwkZFbE&hl=en&fs=1&


Gaming
v/LqAIKtDWab8&hl=en&fs=1&


robots
v/78t5NK6m1T4&hl=en&fs=1&

cars
v/FpAgUMUlhw4&hl=en&fs=1&

tv
v/sZ3Nm52MRKc&hl=en&fs=1&


motorcycle
v/hNrJOrfqA-E&hl=en&fs=1&

[initiald]

Quality street food available cheap. That's a key element of a world city.