The Urban Way of Life - Literature review Example

The Urban Way of Life Pacione (1997) is of the view that urban development cannot be separated from its social, economic and political context. Globalization has resulted in a restructuring of most urban areas, with growing income disparities, which has been accepted as an inevitable consequence of economic development. This has resulted in a spatial concentration of urban poverty within inner city areas, with the wealthy increasingly moving into suburban areas in a trend that is characterized as the urban sprawl, which has resulted in further aggregation of the poor into economically disadvantaged an din some instances, racially segregated neighborhoods. (Pacione, 1997) One of the key thinkers about urban space was LeFebvre (1970), who is of the view that urbanism is a social practice, with space itself as well as its political organization being not only an expression of social relationships, but also reaching back upon them. Soja (2000) refers to urban specificity as a particular type of type of urban configuration of space relations that is represented by the built forms within the city, the human activity that takes place within it and the extent of its geographical sphere of influence. Such spatial configuration arises out of city space as a distinctive material that is socially organized and forms a symbolic context within which human life exists. Byrne has highlighted the development of the new nightlife styles, which has radically changed the face and look of many urban areas. He points out that in the Bristol area for example, there were a smattering of cocktail bars catering to middle aged people, but this has changed rapidly to theme bars and branded names taking over downtown areas and creating a standardized experience, so that “in 2001, most drinking places open all day and many late into the night as well.” (Byrne 2001:23). Through such a branding process, urban brand scapes are created that link nightlife as an integral part of the city identity. Such rebranding processes occur within cities mainly to create myths repositioning urban areas into an international hierarchy, so that they can cater to wealthy groups of people, overriding the concern for every day citizens and their needs. The development of an active nightlife as represented through bars and nightclubs is also linked to general social and spatial processes and Gottdiener (2001) states that there has been a recognition that in recent times, there has been a significant change in urban form, with the move away from a model consisting of a centre and suburbs towards edge cities that are characterized by peripheral or polycentric urbanization. The development in nightlife and the increasingly gentrified style of living are therefore spatial transformation that have resulted in a move beyond the urban core. Any set of space/s that are built around a particular theme, such as an entertainment center or theme park, etc is characterized by one key aspect, it is part of the “powerful forces that define the symbolic value of commodities to our society” and these are generally tools that are used for business benefits or gains, competition and place marketing rather than being geared towards the generation of social value or benefit.(Gottdiener, 2001:10). Hence, this gives rise to the inference that there has been a shifting in the goals of urban spatial configuration – moving away from the work centered communities that existed in earlier times to the urban sprawls of today, where many families are moving out into suburban areas and business owners are shifting their priorities to the economic gains arising out such suburban sprawls. Soja (2000) refers to such rearrangement of traditional urban spaces and the move outward into suburban areas as a postmetropolis, in which the composite experiences and forms of inner cities and suburban areas become blurred so that the city appears to be turned inside out and outside in, such that spatial coherence also becomes blurred and therefore incoherence and polarization that takes place. For example, suburban areas may be characterized by the presence of sprawling multi-complexes, where there may be bars, cinemas, malls, multiplexes and nightclubs, meant to cater to groups that have leisure time and money to spare. Sheffeld has been characterized as an industrial slum by Paul Belford, in his study of the Crofts of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries (Mayne and Murray 2002). It had a strong industrial base and a predominantly working class population, so that unions have played an important role in the urban configuration of Sheffield and these unions have maintained strong links with the Labor Party. Space in the industrial town was carefully configured around the workplaces of the poor. Those who worked in the factories lived in a shanty town that emerged around them, since no transport facilities were available to the poor to travel over long distances to work. This city is characteristically seen as one of England’s least historic cities, developing around what was primarily an industrial town. But recent archaeological excavations unearthed the remains of a huge medieval castle which is thought to have been built by a medieval knight, on a site which is low largely occupied by Sheffield’s great indoor market that was constructed in the 1930s to serve the citizens.(Keys 2002). The post world War II period in Britain has been characterized by growth coalitions, that were focused upon establishing an urban legacy of beautiful cities which were still functional enough to serve the community and the nation. (www.gillespies.co.uk). Local decision making which was a highly political issue earlier, in the intensely industrial focused city of Sheffield, with great emphasis being placed on community issues. But in the post war era, for a brief period, the rationality and efficiency of local development began to overpower political and local community concerns.(Clavel and Kraushaar,1998). But this did not lead to any alleviation in urban problems and the wider economic decline still persisted, because there was an overall decline in manufacturing while service based employment began to thrive instead. Sheffield was an industrial town with the nationalized company British Steel employing up to 40,000 people in England. But the city experienced economic restructuring as a result of the decline in manufacturing in the 1970s, leading to 41,000 layoffs between 1980 and 1983, which led to the rise of new social movements (Clavel and Kraushaar, 1998), thereby joining an era of collective urban social movements that led to reorganization of urban spatial dimensions in such a manner that the needs of existing residents became a priority over only economic gain (Castells, 1983). Most of the business in Sheffield was based around steel and engineering firms and several of these firms became victims of mergers and takeovers by multinational firms, which resulted in a decline in economic control. Sheffield was the fourth largest city in England with a population of 550,000 in the 1980s, when policies to counter economic declines in urban areas originated. Local Government was recognized as being important to the well being of the community, however its sphere of control began to dwindle in the 1970s and there was a recognition for local Governments to play a role in the life of the community by promoting industrial and commercial development in the area, through housing, education and employment (Clavel and Kraushaar, 1998). A link was established between the reconnection of social needs with economic means. In the city of Sheffield, a popular policy theme became that of participation and inclusion. This was a natural extension of Sheffield’s industrial base, because most members of political groups were those who had belonged to union and community movements. The city of Sheffield, which had earlier been run by a small group of Labor councillers, threw open its meetings to members of the public every month, where major issues pertaining to urban issues were debated in order to arrive at decisions. This formed the base for a social, progressive movement, but the base of the movement was not strictly community centered, but union centered, so that the local authority could be controlled, re-politicized and reconnected with the Labor Party.(Clavel and Kraushaar, 1998). In analyzing the reasons behind such a political reorganization of urban communities, Clavel and Kraushaar (1998) have quoted the views of Child and Paddon (1984), as follows: The issue was “how to involve new groups and generations in politics while rekindling some of the optimism of older generations. Given the close links between the industrial and political arms of the movement….the ability for one to address the issues is equally crucial for the other.” (Child and Paddon, 1984:21) The connection of social, political and economic areas has resulted in a progressive urban planning policy in Sheffield, wherein the spatial needs of present residents are taken into consideration before new initiatives are approved. Recent policies in Sheffield aim to city development and the improvement of neighborhoods through improvements in the overall well being of its citizens, without being restricted to economic improvement. This also includes the regeneration of disadvantaged areas while developing new ones, with due attention being paid to environmental factors as well, while planning development.(www.gillespies.co.uk). As pointed out by Carley (2000), urban regeneration is a difficult task when urban sprawl and the movement of people into suburban areas are taken into account. Economic and social activity has shifted out of the cities and towns, with their earlier locational advantages and well served by local transport, out into automobile dependent suburban areas with their large entertainment and shopping centers and other decentralized, Greenfield locations that are out of reach for those poor households that do not have cars. This has resulted in a mass scale migration out of urban areas, which has also led to these areas becoming derelict through inadequate community support in maintaining town facilities. It has become more profitable for developers to concentrate their housing, business developments, parks and shopping malls in out of town areas (Carley, 2000). There is now a growing awareness of the need to address the needs of economically disadvantaged neighborhoods and ensure some measure of economic prosperity in these areas as well. Sheffield’s urban development policies are in line with almost all regeneration policies in Britain which now focus on partnerships between the local Government, business and voluntary organizations. This is a reflection of the broader concern around the world for Government to work in association with civil society in the challenging task of urban governance (Carley, 2000) In conclusion, it may be noted that the earlier spatial configuration of towns and cities such as Sheffield were centered within the town. Being a primarily industrial town, housing and development centered around the industrial hub of the city, with a more active role for local governments and political groups in Sheffield, comprised mainly of union workers. These early towns were social, political and economic hubs, with high levels of communication and interaction among residents. However with the manufacturing decline in the 1970s and the shift to a service centered economy has produced the phenomenon of urban sprawl, which has resulted in a reorganization of urban areas. There has also been a shift of power into the centre, away from local Governments which are often strapped of funds for development and maintenance activity. The decentralization of urban development and the failure to integrate it effectively with economic and social needs, has resulted in communities that have been divided into largely derelict inner city areas where the poor and disadvantaged are congregated, while the affluent have moved out into suburban areas, with development activity revealing a corresponding decentralization. Therefore, Sheffield’s new development initiatives that focus upon the rejuvenation of disadvantaged areas while also fostering new initiatives through partnerships with business and other groups appears to be a well founded trend, which may help in urban regeneration through a renewal of the spatial areas that once symbolized community and solidarity. References: * Byrne, David, 2001. “Understanding the Urban” Basingstoke: Palgrave * Carley, Michael, 2000. “Urban partnerships, governance and the regeneration of Britain’s cities.” International Planning Studies, 5(3): 273-298 * Castells, Manuel, 1983. “The city and the grassroots: A cross cultural theory of Urban Social movements” Berkeley: University of California Press * Child, D. and Paddon, M, 1984. “Sheffield: steelyard blues” Marxism Today, July. * Clavell, Pierre and Kraushaar, Robert, 1998. “On being unreasonable: Progressive planning in Sheffield and Chicago.” International Planning Studies, 3(2): 143-163 * Gottdiener, M, 2001. “Life in the Air: Surviving the new culture of air travel.” Lanham:Rowman and Littlefield * Keys, David, 2002. “Digging up the past; Sheffield.” History Today, 52 (5): 6 * Mayne, Alan and Murray, Tim, 2002. “The archaeology of urban landscapes : explorations in slum land. New Directions in Archaeology.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press * Pacione, Michael, 1997. “Britain’s cities: Geographies of Division in Urban Britain” London: Routledge * Regeneration Masterplanning. Retrieved August 1, 2007 from: http://www.gillespies.co.uk/services/Urban_Design/Masterplanning/default.htm * Soja, Edward, 2000. “Post Metropolis: Critical studies of cities and regions.” Oxford: Blackwell Read More