Decline and fall of cities

Just wanted to get some feedback on something I was reading, the decline and fall of cities. One of the articles in a series discussed Hong Kong and its fall from economic importance with grave predictions for its future.

Any British people there who would like to comment on the urban development and job creation in cities such as Liverpool vs. Glasgow? Why has one been more successful than the other? Is Liverpool recovering? What about urban renewal efforts in Manchester, Leeds, Newcastle, etc? I understand that Liverpool was just awarded European Cultural City for 2008? What will this mean for the city?

Second, any Americans who want to talk about the decline of formerly great cities like Detroit, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Baltimore? and what lessons were learned and what makes a great U.S. city great?

Can this also be applied to cities in other parts of Europe or Australia?

This is not meant to be an overly intellectual discussion but perhaps a philosophical view of what makes a city great? How does one keep it great? culturally or economically viable, etc.?

Well, in the case of a city like Detroit, and now a city like Hong Kong, the answer is simple:

J-O-B-S moving elsewhere.

Detroit fell for one reason and one reason only: the decline of GM, Ford, Chrysler, etc. The American automobile industry couldn’t remain competitive with Japanese imports, and many corporations decided to outsource manufacturing to places like Mexico where labor costs were cheaper. Hong Kong is now falling because its former role, as the liason between mainland China and the rest of the world, is no longer the important role it once was. Jobs in Hong Kong are moving to China proper - Shanghai. Hong Kong becoming a part of China was the worst thing to ever happen to the city - as long as it was an independent city state, it could successfully fulfill its niche as a bridge between China and Waiguo; it still maintains that role in part, but the closer it becomes integrated with China proper, the less important it serves a conduit for trade. Taiwan will suffer a similar fate if it ever rejoins the mainland - it will become just another province of the Chinese empire, with nothing special to recommend it for investment, just as now Hong Kong is becoming just another mainland Chinese city, rapidly losing the special incentives that made it a more attractive place for investment than the Chinese mainland.

Yet Detroit has not been able to upgrade itself into a cultural center or tourist city like other places. Why not?

Take a look at all the inner redevelopment going on in terms of waterfront, warehouses, etc. very trendy right now but having a pretty good effect on many downtowns. Heck even look at Canary Wharf, India Docks in London.

Is this possible for a city? I mean to rely on tourism and such after having had an industrial base? Regardless of possible or no, is there anything that a city can do to stem off the inevitable?

I highly recommend The Death and Life of Great American Cities, by Jane Jacobs. It has been influential – but unfortunately not influential enough.

It focuses on what makes a city work for its inhabitants.

Er…it wasn’t an independent city state, it was a British colony. That ended only six years ago. Some people have short memories!

Much obliged Cranky Laowai.

Anyone here from a city such as Liverpool, Glasgow that would like to share experiences (personal) with such urban renewal efforts? I am looking at a site of interesting architectural sites in Liverpool now (see: www.liverpoolphotos.com)

I think it shows that while Liverpool really declined since WWII that efforts are being made to save some pretty decent architecture. How have similar efforts fared in cities that any of you may have visited?

Finally, appeciate the info, let’s not jump on the technicalities (please Juba).

:slight_smile:

Er…it wasn’t an independent city state, it was a British colony. That ended only six years ago. Some people have short memories![/quote]

Agreed. funny how the brits like to portray the PRC as taking away the “DEMOCRATIC” rights of the HK people when the brits themselves never gave any representation to the HK people until like 30 days before handover to spite the Chinese (ok so legico was created more than 30d prior, but u get the drift). It is also well known that job recruitment in the HK government always gave preference to UK people over HK people even if it was just some dude from some brit city with no qualifications. Yes, it was a COLONY, let’s not fool anyone that it was independent in any way, except maybe economically.

And HK was already on its way down regardless of handover. The real killer was that China was opening up, not that HK went back. (kinda what you said, only there’s a distinction to be made). ie HK going back really makes no difference with regard to China’s opening up.

We should have had a MaoMao (kenyan) uprising and bled all of them. muahaha.

Er…it wasn’t an independent city state, it was a British colony. That ended only six years ago. Some people have short memories![/quote]

Agreed. funny how the brits like to portray the PRC as taking away the “DEMOCRATIC” rights of the HK people when the brits themselves …[/quote]

Which Brits is that then? Juba, for instance? :unamused:

Er…it wasn’t an independent city state, it was a British colony. That ended only six years ago. Some people have short memories![/quote]

Agreed. funny how the brits like to portray the PRC as taking away the “DEMOCRATIC” rights of the HK people when the brits themselves never gave any representation to the HK people until like 30 days before handover to spite the Chinese (ok so legico was created more than 30d prior, but u get the drift). [/quote]

MacLehose tried to reform the electoral colleges in the 70s and noone was interested. The majority of Hong Kongers remained utterly uninterested in democratic representation until Tiananmen. Whatever enthusiasm for democracy the massacre created had waned by the mid-nineties as Patten was very unpopular for his last minute attempt to reform the electoral system (which in my opinion was in breach of the Joint Agreement).

[quote=“jackburton”]It is also well known that job recruitment in the HK government always gave preference to UK people over HK people even if it was just some dude from some brit city with no qualifications.

Yes, it was a COLONY, let’s not fool anyone that it was independent in any way, except maybe economically.

And HK was already on its way down regardless of handover. The real killer was that China was opening up, not that HK went back. (kinda what you said, only there’s a distinction to be made). ie HK going back really makes no difference with regard to China’s opening up.

We should have had a MaoMao (kenyan) uprising and bled all of them. muahaha.[/quote]

Yes they were very successful at killing only 200 British Citizens in Kenya. Note that the British killed thousands of Kenyans in reprisal. Brilliant idea. Who are “the brits” anyway ? What are you rabbitting on about ?

I think that your subconscious is asking you to read the book not for the sake of Hong Kong, but Taibei. I have watched the city slowly crumble and degrade since I have been here. The pumping station flood destroyed businesses and homes and wierd building projects abound. I mean look at the bridges connecting ZhongShan N. Road. I was trying to bike to Taibei proper on my bicycle and the bridge just ENDED there. I had to take ChengDe Road. It’s been that way for ages. The public art displays have decayed … Look at the audio/video art at the GongGuan MRT station. It looks like a troop of daileks after Dr. Who gets done with them.
Count the vacancies on Nanjing East Road. Now go to the tech centers of NeiHu. Brand new buildings, low occupancy. Shopping malls: empty.

The bloodletting to Shanghai is taking its toll. And I don’t know when to expect another cycle for Taibei.
Of course, I think I need to travel more to get the full picture for what is really going on, but that’s my assessment at present.

Perhaps Taiwan could become a fine retirement island for Chinese people. A kind of Florida for Greater China.

Prove me wrong if you can. Taibei is my home and I don’t wanna see it flop just as I reach my prime years.

The key is that it preserves its legal and economic system. That has changed little in the past few years.

Hard to make sense of this. The closer it gets to China, the deeper the trade links will be.

Only if it were to sacrifice its capitalist system.

Taiwan seems to be constantly running current account surpluses (a sign of capital leaving the island)- what makes you think it has ever been such an attractive area for investment over the last decade? (That honour goes to the US.)

I think that people who argue against closer links between Taiwan and China as a way to somehow “preserve” Taiwan’s economy are living in a dream world. Listen, China is developing. Chinese companies are already directly competing with Taiwanese companies in many areas of electronics manufacturing. If Taiwan does not move its production to China or buy up Chinese companies, it will have to start paying chinese wages at home.

Infact, the only way for Taiwan to develop is to utilise its natural advantages in doing business in China (language, electronics manufacturing expertise, engineering, family contacts, etc)

Move manufacturing to china, cut costs, raise profits, the extra resources that this frees up at home can be spent… on what?

Well, its about time that Taiwan started developing its consumer market… allow people to buy more stuff, to enjoy better quality foods, restaurants, clothes, etc.

You may take a personal dislike to some of the big shopping malls springing up - that Core Pacific monstrosity or the Mitsukoshi complex… or the stylish Breeze, but they are symtpomatic of a change in Taiwan. A better standard of living. And they are a direct consequence of the efficiencies generated by closer links to China.

If reunification can be managed properly - a maintainance of Taiwan’s administrative freedom, it is this island’s best chance for development.

This is nothing to do with Nationalism versus Independence, its just plain common sense!

This thread is drifting way off topic. Time to bring it back into line.

Sadly I think shopping malls are a terrible blight on cities everywhere (not just Taipei). They have a distinct blandness and sameness about them. You could never say “The Living Mall is what makes Taipei a great city” because in reality once you are inside there is very little to even remind you off the fact you are in Taipei. Ximending, the night markets and the remnants of old Taipei in Wanhua are what makes Taipei interesting and gives it a distinct flavour.

I despair at the development around the World Trade Centre/Warner Village. It is so sterile and boring. Give me the crowded streets of Ximending or the bustling night markets anyday. I’ll admit some people actually do like these new developments. Perhaps it is because they represent modernity or cleanliness or something.

[quote=“Cranky Laowai”]I highly recommend The Death and Life of Great American Cities, by Jane Jacobs. It has been influential – but unfortunately not influential enough.

It focuses on what makes a city work for its inhabitants.[/quote]

Another vote for this book.

I have written a long essay about some of these issues. I won’t post it here, but follow the link if you are interested.
Cities and Access

I see two distinct and diametrically opposed trends. One is that JOBS are moving to China or elsewhere. Second, the quality of life is improving. So we have nicer sidewalks, parks, trees, subway, etc. but that at the very moment that Taipei is becoming a nicer place to live, the economic factors are going the other direction. Therefore are we sort of enjoying our last hurrah or can Taipei and other cities in Taiwan generate a higher standards of living solely based on services, consumerism, etc.? Can other cities do this as well? I mean the old industrial cities of the midwest in the United States and the Midlands of England?

Interesting thread. My home city has undergone enormous changes in the past 30 years, and it continues to change today, as the city gov’t debates whether or not it is time to merge the city with the surrounding county.

When I was a kid, Pittsburgh was going thru very rough times, as the steel industry was dying. Pittsburgh used to by no. 3 in the US in terms of corporate headquartes being located there… but the steel mills closed one after another and we lost in excess of 100,000 jobs. The oil companies (such as Gulf, Pennzoil, Quakerstate) all relocated to Texas, and we were left with nothing but great professional sports teams.

Pittsburgh is still losing population at a higher rate than any other large US city, afaik, yet we have undergone three “rennaisances” which have dramatically changed the look and feel of Pittsburgh. This tradition of renewing was probably started by the likes of Andrew Carnegie, who gave funds to create parks, libraries and museums in Pittsburgh.

When I was a kid I heard stories about what Pittsburgh was like when the mills were going 24 hrs/day, and business men had to change their white shirts during the day or they would look dirty and the street lights were turned on at noon… And the three rivers were filthy… Now the air is clean and there are trout swimming in all three of our rivers.

Despite its continuing population loss and the aging of its population, Pittsburgh continues to renew itself. The mills are closed, mostly, and the largest employer is now the University of Pittsburgh, especially the UP Medical Center (we developed the polio vaccine, did the first liver transplant and the first multiple organ transplant). Carnegie Mellon University continues to lead in robotics and computers (they make the robots that land on Mars and enter volcanic craters and do the computers for the missile defense stuff), as well as in theatre. We have two new stadiums, one for baseball and the other for football. We’ll likely get a new arena for hockey soon… if Mario plays his cards right.

Pittsburgh, when I was a kid, was dying… but at the same time, it was being reborn. While steel died, research and education took its place. Pittsburgh used to be a “shot and a beer town”… “gimme an Imp an’ an Arn” (Imperial whiskey and Iron City beer) was the usual order at local bars. Blue collar to the bone. Now, there are several microbrew pubs (Pittsburgh had the 3rd microbrew on the east coast) and specialty beer bars and nightclubs along the river where the produce used to be delivered by truckers during the late night hours.

Its a long, difficult and often painful process, being reborn. Folks where I come from don’t take to change very well. And even after the change, Pittsburgh still doesn’t know whether its new life will last long.

Tigerman:

I agree with you completely. Can a city live off universities and tourism? How many artist’s villages can one city have? How many microbreweries and tours of this, that or the other to make up for the huge loss in jobs that you mentioned occurred in Pittsburg? Anyone?

Is the same thing happening in Taipei. This used to be a polluted hellhole a few years back too. Now of course things are much better IF you have a job.

[quote=“fred smith”]Tigerman:

I agree with you completely. Can a city live off universities and tourism? How many artist’s villages can one city have? How many microbreweries and tours of this, that or the other to make up for the huge loss in jobs that you mentioned occurred in Pittsburg? Anyone?[/quote]

That remains to be seen. Hong Kong’s biggest industry is currently tourism… but that has been taking hits since 1997, afaik. But other places obviously thrive on tourism. I wonder if it matters that a place has always been a tourist spot as opposed to industrial at first with subsequent attempts to transform into something else.

Yeah, I guess it pretty much sucks, even in paradise, if you ain’t got a job… if you ain’t got the do re mi…

[quote=“Grateful Dead/Cumberland Blues”]Can I go buddy
Can I go down
Take your shift at the mine
Gotta get down to the Cumberland Mine
Make good money $5 Dollars a day
Maybe tomorrow might move away
Some other fellas make nothin’ at all
and you can hear them cryin’
[/quote]

I heard on CNN this morning that tourism makes up about 6% of Hong Kong’s economy.

Careful, Freddie Boy…!!! MANUFACTURING JOBS are moving to China, to be replaced by service sector jobs in Taiwan.

Hollowing out does not cause an absolute loss of jobs - just a change in the mix. We know this because it is exactly the way that the US has been growing. (Remember, the growth of IT manufacturing in Taiwan is just the other sign of the coin of “hollowing out” in the US.)

Now, if you say that unemployment may rise in the short term because it takes time to retrain and to build new businesses, I agree with you. The length of time that unemployment lasts depends on how flexible the people and companies are.

Mr T’s post points out above all else that Pittsburgh has gone through its own changes and continues to do so today. The US is one of the most dynamic countries in this sense. That is why it continues to grow jobs, attract investment, and immigration.

I have high hopes for Taiwan - its people have always seemed to be fairly nimble, as have its companies (at least those in the export sector.) Now it just needs to refocus a little away from making stuff for other people to use, to raising domestic consumption. Thailand has been a notable achiever in this regard recently.

[quote=“Richardm”][quote=“tigerman”]

That remains to be seen. Hong Kong’s biggest industry is currently tourism… but that has been taking hits since 1997, afaik. But other places obviously thrive on tourism. I wonder if it matters that a place has always been a tourist spot as opposed to industrial at first with subsequent attempts to transform into something else.

[/quote]

I heard on CNN this morning that tourism makes up about 6% of Hong Kong’s economy.[/quote]

Whaooo! Then, either I heard wrong, or tourism has really dropped, or all of the other industries each are less than 6% of Hong Kong’s economy…

[quote=“tigerman”][quote=“Richardm”][quote=“tigerman”]

That remains to be seen. Hong Kong’s biggest industry is currently tourism… but that has been taking hits since 1997, afaik. But other places obviously thrive on tourism. I wonder if it matters that a place has always been a tourist spot as opposed to industrial at first with subsequent attempts to transform into something else.

[/quote]

I heard on CNN this morning that tourism makes up about 6% of Hong Kong’s economy.[/quote]

Whaooo! Then, either I heard wrong, or tourism has really dropped, or all of the other industries each are less than 6% of Hong Kong’s economy…[/quote]
Hong Kong is a shopper’s city. I’m sure that figure does not take into account the amount of money that is spent in retail outlets.