Post-War Changes in London - Essay Example

?Post-War Changes in London Introduction At the end of the Second World War, most of Europe, including Britain lay in ruins. The war caused much physical and economic devastation to the country and it basically lost its edge as one of the world’s superpowers. In the years following the Second World War, changes in the population, economy, and social structure of London became apparent. These changes gradually occurred and have reached relative normality since then. This paper shall discuss and outline the key changes which have taken place in the population, economic, and social structure of London over the post-war period and it shall identify the key social and spatial divisions in London. It shall serve as an analysis of the demographic and social changes in London post Second World War and how these changes have occurred through time. Body Changes in population Since the end of the Second World War, Britain in general has gone through various changes in its ethnic composition, primarily involving its minority population (Hamnett, 2011). In 1951, their minority ethnic population was at 800,000, and in 2001, those numbers have ballooned to four million. Although the increase in ethnic population has relatively been distributed across Great Britain, the largest concentration of their population – about 29% -- can be found in the Greater London area; in two boroughs in this area, their numbers have reached 50% of the population and in the rest of Britain, their population is thinly distributed (Hamnett, 2011). Large-scale immigration from various ethnicities and races were seen in the post WWII period and the ethnicities were more diverse, thereby causing major cultural effects (Black, 2003). With advances in medicine, the increase in population also manifested a more or less equal growth population among men and women, and later, a growth in the population of the elderly. Moreover, the average life expectancy rates in London and in Britain also manifested an increase (Black, 2003). Large-scale immigration from the West Indies and South Asia, as well as Eastern Europe became very much apparent. The 1970s saw the Hindu, Muslim, and Sikh population in Britain increase to 375,000 and by 1993, more than 1.6 million Muslims have been registered (Black, 2003). This is a major change from before WWII where the minority ethnic population only represented a small number of London’s general population. Since WWII, the movement of people into London representing various ethnicities and nationalities have grown and their numbers now represent larger communities in the city (CD Network, 2010). Immigrants from Commonwealth nations like Jamaica, India, Bangladesh, and Pakistan also increased in number in London and their entry into the city significant changed the look and the face of the city, making it one of the most ethnically diverse places in the whole of Europe (CD Network, 2010)). The integration of these migrants into the city had its own violent history to tell and racial tensions emerged in the form of the Brixton Riots in the 1980s. The expansion of the city was negatively affected by WWII and the introduction of the Metropolitan Green belt did not help matters (Thomas and Roberts, 2002). Metropolitan Green Belt In the mid-1960s, the old County of London and the London County Council were eliminated and this gave way to the larger Greater London, established by the new Greater London Council (Thomas and Roberts, 2002). The population of the Greater London area declined in the years following the Second World War; however, their numbers increased yet again in the 1980s highly supported by the positive economic performance and image of the city (Thomas and Roberts, 2002). In 2016, the London population is set to reach about 8.2 million (GLA, 2002). London has managed to bounce back from its declining population, to an impressive rate opposite to continuing declining rates seen in areas like South Yorkshire, Greater Manchester, and Merseyside which continued to experience declining populations in the 1980s and 1990s (Simmie, 2002). In breaking down these changes, figures indicate that since 1971, Greater London saw an increase in its population. Due to its economic and social class structure, it has incurred a higher rate of natural increase in its general population (Simmie, 2002). By the end of the 1980s, however, this natural increase in population was not matched by a net loss in population due to the increased migration out of Greater London. These figures saw an increase after 1989 and this was maintained into the 1990s. From the start of the millennium, the net migration saw an increase of 46,500 in its Greater London population (Simmie, 2002). Internal and external migration played a significant role in these seemingly random changes in the city’s population. Surveys indicate that during the 1990s, the city decreased its population through internal migration out of the metropolitan area, and they chose to consider residency in the Outer Metropolitan area (Simmie, 2002). However, this population change did not significantly impact on the population because of the increase in London’s international population, many of these being refugees and asylum seekers. Due to these changes, the population in London more or less maintained its growing numbers. Economic structure In 1943, Forshaw and Abercrombie drew up the County of London Plan and this was followed by the Greater London Plan by Abercrombie; the City of London Plan was later approved in 1951 (Dimitriou and Thompson, 2002). Abercrombie’s strategic plan for the Greater London area proved to be the more influential plan of the two; it followed the recommendations of the Barlow Commission which established “that there should be no new industrial development in London and the Home Counties, that more than a million people should be decentralised from inner London, and that there should be no more population growth in the region” (Simmie, 2002, p. 22). This plan was used for land use planning interventions in London for the next thirty years. Plans to disperse the development to cover various businesses and populations in London were also established by the plan. The plan was also meant for New Towns to accommodate the London population overspill with about populations to be moved in satellite towns and other new planned communities (Hall, et.al., 1973). Their loss in the Greater London area represented the decline in the population from over 8 million 1945 to 6.8 million in 1983. By the start of the 1960s, it became clearly apparent that the decentralization plan was not achieving the goals which the plan sought to achieve (Stephens, 2005). The plan hoped to redistribute the decreasing population in the city, however, it created the opposite effect, increasing the population to 10.6 million. Abercrombie Plan A new plan was drawn up in the mid-60s, and this plan was focused on the relationship between land use and socio-economic processes which impacted on them (Simmie, 2002). However, concerns on the impact of decentralization also caused a reversal of the Abercrombie Plan, leading to the termination of the New and Expanded Towns programme (Dimitriou and Thompson, 2002). Docks in inner London saw closures in the 1960s and Tilbury emerged as the main container port by the early 70s (Plowden and Plowden, 1972). These issues and their impact on the existing manufacturing industries in London caused increasing concerns on the socio-economic issues of inner London. This started the beginning of the end for the Abercrombie plan for London (Plowden and Plowden, 1972). By the end of the 70s, the post war plans for the Greater London area were reversed and they were replaced by increased concern for the inner city, including the economic and social forces causing the changes in the area. In relation to land use, the economic changes and commercial investments in lands and buildings eventually caused changes in land use (Foley, et.al., 1972). Since most of the city’s new employment opportunities were office-based, land use was directed towards buildings for offices. The devastation which the Second World War brought to the city opened up other possibilities for redevelopment (Simmie, 2002). Property developers took advantage of such possibilities, however comparative land use in the city proved to be slow after WWII (Marriott, 1967). Overall land use change was slow in the 1960s with an increase from 640 to 642 acres, and retail land use increasing from 420 t0 451. Moreover, residential land use increased from 11557 to 11749 hectares only, spanning 1966 to 1971 (Simmie, 2002). Net changes in land use in London were apparent from 1985 to 1999 and changes indicate that most of the new office land use was found in three boroughs; the first one being the Tower of Hamlets, the second included the City at 24.11 hectares and Islington at 15.4 hectares (Simmie, 2002). Finally, the third group included Westminster, Southwark, as well as Hammersmith. These changes in land use signalled the increasing competition between the City and Docklands, each wanting to offer modern suites of offices (Buck, 2002). Distribution in land use in London also indicated how it was keeping pace with the economic changes in the city. With changes in employment in Central London, related increases in land use became apparent. There was a significant relationship seen between office land use and employment growth in Tower Hamlets and in Islington and Southwark (Ehrlich and Clout, 2009). On the other hand, growth in employment in Westminster, Camden, and Chelsea were not seen and no growth in office spaces was apparent. Employment statistics decreased by 7.5% and office land use increased to 19.4% (Simmie, 2002). Space requirements in ICT cabling and similar services did not have the same demands for space in buildings. This would mean that there is a need for increased rates of conversion to office land uses in Westminster, Camden, and Kensington (Ehrlich and Clout, 2009). All in all, data establishes that there is a higher need for lands for office use in the City Fringe boroughs as compared to the City itself (Simmie, 2002). As changes in the land use in the City and Tower Hamlets have coincided with changes in employment, this was not seen in the City Fringe boroughs of Camden and Southwark, the same with Kensington and Chelsea. Poverty Poverty has also been very persistent in London and not many changes in these levels have been seen throughout the years (Dorling and Pritchard, 2010). These poverty levels have been strong, affecting Salford and Oldham, and the mortality rates in these towns have been considered as the highest in England. The forces which drive poverty are also resistant to interventions (Dorling and Pritchard, 2010). With the passage of time, as some cities perform well, the poorer cities contract and affluent suburbs increase their land coverage in the poor areas. Therefore in relation to most cities in England, there are not much poor enclaves; however these poor enclaves have been seen elsewhere and at increasing numbers (Dorling and Pritchard, 2010). Booth’s Descriptive Map of London Poverty As in most urban areas, there are also social and spatial divisions in London. London seems to have a high percentage of individuals belonging to two occupational groups than any other part of UK (Perrons, 2005). Employment also increased in this city for highly qualified migrants coming from UK and other countries. The range of compensation for individuals working in London is wide. This implies that there are highly paid jobs in the area, as well as very low paid jobs in the same (Perrons, 2005). Women’s employment opportunities have increased in recent years, however, available positions for men are still significantly more numerous as compared to positions available for women. Moreover, salaries for these women are not as competent as compared to salaries for men (Perrons, 2005). This displays a labour-based inequity, one which is biased towards women. There is also a significant gap in opportunities and benefits offered to those belonging to the lower income groups (Perrons, 2005). They are also made to work during weekends and for longer hours with inadequate overtime pay. Spatial divisions in labour are also apparent in terms of their distribution in the city with a bulk of their concentration around metropolitan London and the greater south east (Boschma and Martin, 2010). This can sometimes lead to a skewed development of areas in London, with the metro area being more developed as compared to other areas with a lesser number of successful residents. Despite the different setbacks of the city in terms of economic development, London has become an internationally competent city. London has always traded in the international scale for the last 400 tears and it has become globally competitive, serving as an access to national economies. London was identified in 1989 as a city with a significant role in international Eurocurrency business, foreign exchange and corporate financial advice (Simmie, 2002). It has also become a design, media, entertainment, and fashion centre of the world. These industries have served to provide increase in land use and buildings in central London. Export is one of the many forces ruling the economic changes and growth and innovations as well as international exports support the current success of the London economy (Holden and Holford, 1951). Its trade in goods constitutes a significant contribution to the growth in the region. The improved tourism activities in London are also critical factors in balancing trade and financial and business services have contributed to about 53% of London’s exports (Simmie, 2002). Market forces have improved London into a metropolitan region and based on the above analysis, London’s economic experiences up to the 1980s were considered part of its life-cycle of growth and development (Harrison, 2000). During the early stages of its life cycle, its population was focused on the metropolitan areas. Later, development was seen in the fringes of London (Das, 2007). The population had an outward movement and it overflowed the metropolitan. The last stage of such cycle included the expectation that the metropolitan area would later stagnate as its population and employment improved outside its territorial bounds. This was seen in other urban areas in the world, including North America and Northern Europe (Berry, 1980). This cycle resembled the changes in Greater London before the early 1980s. This cycle has been seen at various point of history with the dispersal of activities, decrease in decentralization, and competition for land and labour. This cycle also includes a generation of innovative economic ventures in the cities, and some of these have concentrated on improving communication and information dissemination (Berry, 1980). London’s resilience in adapting to its various issues has helped it maintain its recovery from the post WWII hardships in population and job opportunities. However examples of urban plans for the long-term are very few and it is patently doubtful if such new growth would continue. Conclusion Based on the above discussion, London has gone through various changes in its population, economic and social structures since the end of the Second World War. Population changes indicate that foreign immigration increased since the end of the Second World War. As a result, London’s population became very much ethnically diverse. It also gave way to some forms of racial and social tension with these ethnic minorities. In relation to the economic changes, these were seen in terms of rebuilding the city which went through different ups and downs in terms of urban population and development. All in all these changes also impacted on their land use which benefitted some areas of London and were not seen in some others. For which reason, although London is one of the most developed metropolitan districts in the world, its low poverty levels is still one of its major issues. Nevertheless, the city has come a long way from its WWII devastation, in terms of its economic, political, and the social development. Reference Black, J. 2011, Overview: Britain from 1945 onwards, BBC History, viewed 07 December 2011 from http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/modern/overview_1945_present_01.shtml Berry, B. 1980, Urbanization and Counterurbanization in the United States, Annals of the American Academy of Political Science, vol. 451, pp. 13-20. Boschma, R. & Martin, R. 2010, The handbook of evolutionary economic geography, London: Edward Elgar Publishing. Buck, N. 2002, Working capital: life and labour in contemporary London, London: Routledge. CD Network, 2010, Doing Business in the UK, viewed 07 December 2011 from http://www.cdnetwork.org.uk/ Das, A. 2010, Urban planning in India, New Delhi: Rawat Publications. Dimitriou, H. & Thompson, R. 2007, Strategic planning for regional development in the UK: a review of principles and practices, London: Taylor & Francis. Dorling, D. & Pritchard, J. 2010, The Geography of Poverty, Inequality and Wealth in the UK and Abroad: Because Enough is Never Enough, Appl. Spatial Analysis, vol. 3, pp. 81–106. Ehrlich, B. & Clout, H. 2009, London, History.com, viewed 07 December 2011 from http://www.history.com/topics/london Foley, D., University of California, and Institute of Governmental Studies, 1972, Governing the London region: reorganization and planning in the 1960's, London: Routledge. Greater London Authority 2002, Planning for London's Growth, London, GLA. Hall, P., Thomas, R., Gracey, H. and Drewett, R. 1973, The Containment of Urban England, Vols. I and II, London: George Allen & Unwin. Hamnet, C. 2011, Concentration of diffusion? The changing geography of ethnic minority pupils in English secondary schools, 1999-2009, Urban Studies Journal Ltd, pp. 1-26. Harrison, M. 2000, The economics of World War II: six great powers in international comparison, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Holden, C. and Holford, W. (1951) The City of London: A Record of Destruction and Survival, London, Architectural Press. Marriott, O. 1967, The Property Boom, London: Pan Books. North Mymms District Green Belt Society, 2007, What are Green belts, and who are we?, viewed 07 December 2011 from http://website.lineone.net/~greenbelt/About%20us.htm Plowden, S. 1972, Towns against traffic, London: Deutsch. Perrons, D. 2005, The new economy and earnings inequalities: explaining social, spatial and gender divisions in the UK and London, London School of Economics, Gender Institute Roberto Greco, (n.d), The City of London Plan, viewed 07 December 2011 from http://robertogreco.tumblr.com/post/1579272206/the-county-of-london-plan-by-patrick-abercrombie Simmie, J. 2002, The changing city: population, employment and land use change since the 1943 county of London plan, Oxford Brookes University, viewed 07 December 2011 from https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3A04A983-8261-4E97-8F35-217C190F84BB/0/BC_RS_changingcity_0210_FR.pdf Stephens, M., Whitehead, C., & Munro, M. 2005, Lessons from the past, challenges for the future for housing policy: An evaluation of English housing policy 1975-2000, London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister Thomas, R. & Roberts, P. 2002, Metropolitan Planning in Britain: A Comparative Study, London: Routledge. Read More