Gouverner les Métropoles (Managing the Major Cities), Villes en parallèle series

IN THESE TIMES of increasing globalization, the future of major cities is undoubtedly one of metropolization, and the challenge is to manage, in a democratic way, millions of inhabitants spread out over wide areas and separated by differences in income, cultural background and citizenship. The development of these cities is torn between a strong relationship with the local environment and the trend of globalization. Through a comparative study of different major cities from around the world with varied historical and social contexts, this book outlines different thoughts on various methods relating to the new urban geography. The subject is the future of major cities, and these are considered both as agents and targets of change. There is an analysis of the spatial dimension of urban politics and, more precisely, of the relations between the different concepts, the objectives, and the implementation of space regulations and the new urban configurations (layouts). This book’s interest lies in the fact that the case studies highlight specific contexts for each city although they are facing similar problems.
The 13 examples are presented within four chapters. Chapter one, on the powers to rebuild, uses Johannesburg, Beirut and Cairo as examples. Johannesburg is at the stage of reorganizing its divided city and the ideal development project would produce an economically, politically and socially compact city. The paper analyzes why this can not been achieved. Beirut is between reconstruction and metropolization, and this example encourages thinking on the theme of metropolitan politics from the point of view of its objectives and the way they are set up. Cairo is growing beyond its city walls. Since 1950, the objective of consecutive plans has been to contain uncontrolled population growth and reorganize it along the Nile; this never was a great success. The city has arrived at a post-modernist stage where the state no longer manages and plans everything. It has ended up managing only the major transport trunk road and has delegated the rest to private investors, associations and NGOs.
Chapter two on flexible urbanization is illustrated by London, Los Angeles and Tokyo. In London, the metropolitan organization and development strategies are analyzed. The case of Los Angeles underlines the limits of metropolitan action without the intervention of the federal state. Tokyo and its chaotic landscape shows that town planning has never been properly implemented there and has constrained Japanese town planning to a town-by-town zoning system.
Chapter three gives details of controlled projects in Paris, Ile-de-France, Tours and Orléans. The paper on Paris assesses territorial regulation and the obstacles it encounters. The Ile-de-France paper assesses the master plan and its implementation, and outlines some of the criticism. The paper on Tours and Orléans deals with the public policies that may turn the two cities into one metropolis. Chapter four, on urban innovations, is illustrated by Naples, Rio de Janeiro and Mexico City. Naples is an example of some of the advantages of the lack of metropolitan scale for planning policies but the creation of a metropolitan area is now included under the necessary reform of the state. The recognition that Rio de Janeiro is a metropolis, which is daily confirmed by the actions of its inhabitants and taken advantage of by economic actors, is still absent from public policies. In Mexico City, spatial growth has resulted in the fact that over half of the metropolitan population lives in the state of Mexico rather than in the central federal district. This creates a number of difficulties, which are analyzed. Whatever the case, wherever power needs to be rebuilt because of war, a political revolution or an urban explosion, or because some societies may have an historic tradition or ideology and would prefer either a flexible or a regulated system of urbanism, it is always a question of decisions