Urbanities,
Vol. 3
·
No 1
·
May 2013
© 2013
Urbanities
26
prevailing neo-liberal political approach. Today things have changed and one main reason for
the renewed attention to the role of the cities in the international relations of exchange is the
expansion of the financial and telecommunication sectors and the media; that is, sectors in
which innovation technology is key and needs to be continuously updated. The processes of
spatial reorganization of the economy have contributed to the development of the so called
‘global cities’: New York, London, Paris and Tokyo are characterized by a strong capacity to
attract financial investment and human resources (Sassen 2001). These capitals have reshaped
the urban geography, connecting with each other through complex political, cultural and
economic exchanges. Alongside the establishment of functional and international links, each
city has developed a ‘specific competence’ in some economic field and this has led to a
development based on specific sectors (like manufacturing, culture or fashion). The network
that the most relevant cities of the world have built among them, as an outcome of the
transaction of financial and human capital and of the exchange of products and services,
provides also a frame to establish what position they occupy in the international division of
production, labour and culture (Sassen 1991, 2001; Mariotto 2007). Of course, this network is
also a consequence of the functioning of capitalistic development, which needs equipped
spaces in order to expand. In these processes, the cities that predominate are those that have
improved their competitive performance through efficient governance. These political and
administrative urban élites have managed to produce an effective mix of political reforms and
economic measures: on the one hand, they have actively pursued external financial
investment, on the other, they have offered incentives to the development of human resources
and technology. The point is, then, that the best-performing global cities have succeeded in
implementing urban policies aimed at encouraging economic growth, while attracting private
investment for the promotion of public programmes aimed at the renewal of the urban
infrastructures. Thus, they have managed to modernize urban infrastructures and to protect
urban spaces from decay. Let us now return to the Naples situation.
Although the need for an international re-launch of the city is particularly felt by its urban
élite and especially by the city government, Naples plays no role in the network of global
cities. This finds explanation in an approach shared by the political élites that have governed
the city for the last twenty years, whereby a rhetorical and symbolic management of urban
change does not translate into an improvement in the conditions of life of the population.
