SUMMARY AND EVALUATION
The book, The Triumph of the City, is based on this premise that it is cities, which are engines of progress and innovation. In the introduction of the book, the author has shared statistics, regarding the urban centers and their role in economic and social progress. For instance, we learn that around forty-three (43) million Americans live in large cities of the United States, which make 3three (3%) of the total territory of United States. Similarly, around thirty-six million people live in Tokyo, which is another large urban center and a huge metropolitan area. These small towns evolved into large urban centers because of various factors, which continue to aid their progress. Also, it is also suggested, in the introduction of the book, that these large urban centers are not the only hub of major economic activity in a country, but also they are knowledge centers. Studies suggest that knowledge is a key to innovation, which ensures competitive edge and better management of resources.
When we study the evolution of large urban centers, we learn that there is a pattern in their evolution and this systematic evolution is influenced by particular types of variables. We learn that large cities around the world are strongly influenced by industrial expansion, and at later stages of their evolution, they turn into economic hubs, where the service sector dominates. This economic evolution directly impacts society and the notions that prevail in it.In fact, it can be conjectured that knowledge/information enables economic evolution and therefore; it is knowledge and information that transforms a city and plays a key role in its evolution and survival.
However, the evidence, regarding the evolution of urban centers and then their role in the evolution of the political-economic-social system, suggests that knowledge is refined when exchanged among the civilizations. The systematic scrutiny of historical evidence, by Edward Glaeser, strongly purposes, that when knowledge is not refined, through the exchange, its ability to innovate, starts to decline. He has rightly said that the Chinese invented the gunpowder; however, it was Westerners, who employed it to devastating effect. In fact, the 17th-century military might, of Western powers, was primarily based on the sophisticated military use of gunpowder during skirmishes, battles, and wars.
There are several other examples in history, which one way or another endorses this viewpoint. For instance, the British invasion of sub-continent affected it in several ways. It allowed many large towns to transform into cities and these evolved towns had administrative apparatus similar to the western cities. Also, the universities, which were established to produce Indian bureaucracy to help the colonial power to run, the vast country, aided in the development of large cities. As ministries developed, in particular, parts of the country, technical and non-technical information started to flow; first abruptly, then in a systematic manner, which made the city’s hub of opportunities.
From the study of the emergence of civilizations, we learn that when large urban centers started to appear, civilizations started to emerge. One such example is the ancient city of Babylon, of Iraq, which became a large urban center, where trade and knowledge thrived. In this book, many cities have been referred to, which grew into large cities that ensured the economic and political stability of a civilization/empire/country.
Edward also asserts that swelling, of cities, has a pattern. According to me he suggests rightly that these are port cities, which develop into large urban centers and continue to grow because of their continuous interaction with civilizations through these ports. For instance, New York was a port city, which importance grew gradually. As its importance grew, because of its population, culture, size of trade and low cost of transportation, it started to evolve at a rapid pace. In fact, the economic progress, such as specialization in shipping wheat and flour, to feed the southern colonies of the United States played a vital part, and as the economically it progressed, it produced more opportunities, which attracted talent from surrounding towns and rural areas. It had allowed talent/knowledge to accumulate, in one place, from where it could be exploited and transferred to other parts of the country and the world.
It makes sense that port cities developed faster than other cities, as ports allowed large-scale trade and easy access. We know that road infrastructure, in the 18th century was not very well established and during the same period more and more countries were trading and invading by sea. Therefore, port cities attained a special status and these factors facilitated in its rapid development and in making these port cities a hub of economic activity and in For action. To new, it seems, from the economic and social activities were, in fact, knowledge-driven and they can be purely understood in information or knowledge context.
In Chapter 1 This phenomenon is explained in depth and at length. In one of the topics of the chapter, Ports of intellectual Entry, it is explained that ports, cities have been centers of economic activity and knowledge. I do agree with the author that the port cities, at that time, not just allowed the exchange of goods and services, but also it facilitated the exchange of ideas and precepts. The author provides good examples for great cities, which emerged on the banks of the rivers, allowed travelers to trade goods and ideas, which were then further developed asymmetrically. However, another necessary condition for these cities to swell and evolve was stability, as it was in the case of Athens. As the skirmishes increased between the ancient empire of Persia and Greece, many minds, which lived on the frontiers of the empire and had benefitted from the exchange of ideas and cultures, moved towards Athens, which was economically developing and was far more stable that frontier towns and cities. This development played a vital role in the evolution of Athens from an ordinary city to an extraordinary city that attracted and retained talent and knowledge. According to the author, on similar patterns, other cities, such as Baghdad and Nagasaki, developed. Therefore, we can presumed that large cities are developed because of 1) exceptional economic progress, 2) growing population, and 3) exchange of ideas and culture. This pattern is very apparent in the evolution of any large city with almost no exceptions.
I agree with Edward when he argues that it is not mere intellectual interactions, which ensures the success of a metropolitan. He proposes that when a large urban center is growing and at the same time potential of its talent is augmenting, it attracts investors or employers. As investors or employees invest in translating the potential of talent into profit, economic opportunities are produced, which attract talent from the surroundings. It creates a kind of virtuous cycle, in which potential employees (talent) are attracted by the large pool of potential investors or employers and potential investors or employers are attracted by the pool of talent or workers with the desired potential.
According to my opinion, in a highly entrepreneurial environment, both talent and wages increase. When an employee switches from one company to another, his/her knowledge expands and his/her skills enhance. Also, there is a vertical and horizontal spillover effect of industrial evolution, which brings more stability to the entire system.
Edward addresses the question that why some cities become manufacturing or technology hub? Here, I have my opinion that it is assumed that geography plays a major part in ascertaining, what a city would produce and in what manner. However, Edward disagrees, as he believes that it is not the geography that decides that, but rather it is potential and skills of talent or potential employees. In the case of Bangalore, Edward is convinced that it was the skills, or potential employees, which made Bangalore into an Information-Technology center. He asserts initial kernel of engineering expertise attracted many Information Technology based companies to Bangalore, which gave birth to a virtuous cycle.
Other cities around the world developed in a similar manner or fashion. For instance, during the period of industrialization, many English cities developed on these patterns. The industrial activity offered employment opportunities, and when certain areas started to produce opportunity of a particular type, specialization occurred. This specialization attracted investment (employers) and employment, creating the virtuous cycle that has also been discussed in the book. This phenomenon, I believe, very still much exists and there is enormous evidence regarding it.
Bangalore is connected to other cities around the globe, where it is selling its expertise and ideas. It is not only generating revenue and income at large scale, but also this interaction is yielding new ideas and precepts. Therefore, in many ways, this economic/financial interaction, of this large urban center (Bangalore), is not only exchanging goods for money but also ideas, which has ensured its sustenance. Also, these urban centers ensure transportation of goods and exchange of ideas at a rapid pace, which is essential for their survival and evolution.
According to author investment in Human Capital is essential to the success of any urban center or city and I agree with him in this regard. He used ancient/contemporary cities as an example to endorse his argument. It is presumed, based on the data, that whenever there is an increase in the education, in the adult population, not only income has grown, but also the productivity. In fact, the book claims that whenever the share of the population with college degrees increases by 10 percent, per capita, gross metropolitan product rises by 22 percent. Also, we also learn that increase in population is directly correlated with education; as education increases, so do the income, which attracts more people or potential employees to cities (Glaeser).
It seems that the author of the book is suggesting that these are in fact economic laws and factors, which give birth to the phenomenon. For instance, the demand/supply of labor, opportunities, specialization, and economic evolution are in fact real reasons why cities triumph. When the economic evolution halts, cities start to collapse, which is why the state must focus on providing such environment that facilitates the economic evolution of cities, which is primarily associated knowledge and innovation.
The first chapter aids us in the understanding of the emergence of large cities, the pattern of their evolution and their role in growth and innovation.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that it is very apparent that economic factors and knowledge play a huge role in the 1) emergence, 2) evolution, and 3) sustenance of an urban center. However, economic factors and information impact different cities differently. We have learned how and why the emergence, evolution, and sustenance of New York are different from Bangalore. We have also learned that when economic expansion and evolution slows down, the innovation, which is based on knowledge, assists sustenance or growth of a city. Large urban centers are innovation-driven, which impacts the structure of a city as well.
Work Cited
Glaeser, Edward. Triumph Of The City. New York: The Penguin Press, 2011.
+447462439809