Keywords:
City, cosmopolitism, anthropocene, urban diplomacy, liberal orderCopyright (c) 2020 Relaciones Internacionales
![Creative Commons License](http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-nd/4.0/88x31.png)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abstract
The city has been the political unit of organization in the international system for long periods of history. As actors in international society, cities have left irreplaceable classics: Athens, Imperial Rome, the Hanseatic League or Machiavelli's Florence. However, the dominant school of thought has diminished the role of the city on the international scene. The Westphalian model consolidated the nation-state as the axis and macro-political unit object and subject of study. Following this logic, cities' capacity for international action was limited and, as a field of study, was reduced to cultural activities or of little diplomatic relevance (e.g. twin cities). This state-centered approach, both in theory and practice, finds its place in the legal approach over the political one in the development of international society and international relations theories. However, the global dynamic has changed substantially, and it opens the door to new structures or vectors of transnational analysis. The Westphalian system loses weight in the face of the concatenation of phenomena and transformations of international society. Taking this to be the case, the current international structure opens avenues of research in the international political activity of the city, diplomatic practice, global and economic hub relations, or the rise of city brands as a marketing strategy. Of course, the nation-state will not disappear in the short term, but it does seem that new actors and dynamics are emerging in the construction of the post-liberal order. Above all, the city emerges as a new point of reference for solving globalization problems: climate change, migrations, diversity, or identity. The effect is relevant to the epistemological bases of a transversal discipline: the city is incorporated as a reference subject in the reformulation of the general theory of International Relations.
The consensus around the liberal order, born after 1945, has been broken. The current theoretical doctrine only agrees on one element: there is no new consensus on the foundations of the international system. The global architecture of institutions, the effective capacities for the exercise of power, the decline of multilateral practices, or the difficulty in establishing a common economic agenda are symptoms of a change in global power structures. With or without legitimacy, cities act in the international sphere with the aim of influencing, modifying knowledge, behavior, or judgment. In this context, the institutionalization of the city as an actor in international relations is one of the most relevant fields for studying the new organizing principle of international society. The city lacks the normative and institutional instruments, but it does promote principles that later become public policy practices that affect the international order. The theoretical approach emphasizes the economic aspects of the global city, since the economic and industrial capacity has reinforced the ability to influence the transformation of the international system. From a methodological point of view, urban cosmopolitanism is not a theory closed by the very diversity of global cities. Therefore, the areas of interest of each city can vary from one to the other, as well as the global action repertoire. Working in collaborative networks and alliances of a political and economic nature is facilitated. In its relationship with the State, the global city poses agency problems that are relevant to the future of theory: will they be cooperative or competitive? In what disciplines? The asymmetry of interests can deepen dissonances and accelerate the theoretical basis of development. The proposed methodology affects the impact of climate change on the reformulation of the theoretical bases of international studies. It is theorized from practice. The institutionalization of urban diplomacy refers to the search for practical solutions of a collective nature. There are networks such as C40, the Clean Air Coalition or We are Still In that are led and organized from urban practice. The climate issue gives moral strength to the city as an international actor insofar as it does not deal with political borders, but with the consequences of climate change on the lives of residents. It fits in with the cosmopolitan tradition insofar as it affects all individuals, without discrimination of origin, gender, or nationality; and it is a matter of universal status, because it impacts all territories and human life conditions. There is no arbitrariness in Anthropocene reason.
The article studies the succession of changes in the international political structure before the reconfiguration of the sources of power. It establishes three aspects in the theoretical bases of urban cosmopolitanism. The first indicates what the foundations of a theoretical elaboration should be. The international city contributes to the reconfiguration of the structure and the exercise of interstate power by occupying or creating new spaces that contribute to the plurality of international relations. The second aspect analyzed is the growth of the city as a unit of measurement in the global economy. Capital flows circulate and operate on a local basis with global destinations. It is the cities and their metropolitan areas that benefit from the economic system. Large pockets of internal inequality appear and, above all, with a rupture between cities within and outside the economic order, including the relational inequality that is generated in the least populated territories. Finally, anthropogenic reason is stressed, that is, the impact of human action on natural conditions and its consequences on the world order. Climate change changes the main substrate of international relations, which is the physical environment and geography. On these two tangible dimensions, the bases of power and the basic theory of international studies are ordered. By changing the strategic board, the city conquers positions of non-coercive power, facilitating collaboration through networks and structures. The military and security aspect are not relevant to urban diplomacy, which focuses on aspects of economic and social power. The results indicate that the new cosmopolitanism has urban bases and offers a framework for interpreting the tensions between the center and the periphery of foreign action, economic globalization, and new public policies in the fight against climate change. Urban cosmopolitanism emerges as a theoretical reference in the post-liberal order.
The present work seeks to establish the foundations of urban cosmopolitanism, a theoretical approach to the current world organized around urban areas, be they cities, megacities, or metropolitan regions. Cities have become structural axes of international society with consequences in the political, economic, and social spheres. There is no closed conclusion, a kind of theory that replaces the previous ones. On the contrary, urban cosmopolitanism aspires to reflect a change in the paradigm of international relations. Thus, climate change is a transforming element of the global scene and opens new avenues for international politics, which can end with a substantial change in the modes of government, representation, and citizen participation. Be that as it may, this first paper addresses difficulties, raises research questions, and supports elements for change.
Downloads
References
Acuto, M. y Parnell, S. (2016). Leave no city behind. Science, 352 (6288), 873. DOI: 10.1126/science.aag1385
Acuto, M. y Rayner, S. (2016). City networks: breaking gridlocks or forging (new) lock-ins? International Affairs, 92 (5). DOI: 10.1111/1468-2346.12700
Bäckstrand, K., Kuyper, J. W., Linnér, B.y Lövbrand, E. (2017). Non-state actors in global climate governance: From Copenhagen to Paris and beyond. Environmental Politics, 26 (4). DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2017.1327485
Barber, B. (2017). Cool cities: Urban sovereignty and the fix for global warming. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Barder, B. (2019). Diplomacy, ethics, and the national interest: what are diplomats for? The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 5 (3), 289-297. DOI: 10.1163/187119110X511653
Beardsworth, R. (2011). Cosmopolitanism and International Relations Theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bjola, C. (2016). Diplomatic Ethics. En Costas, C., Kerr, P. y Sharp, P. The Sage Handbook of Diplomacy (pp. 123-132). Londres: SAGE. DOI: 10.4135/9781473957930.n11
Boulton, J. G., Allen, P. M. y Bowman, C. (2015). Embracing complexity: Strategic perspectives for an age of turbulence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199565252.001.0001
Bulkeley, Harriet (2013). Cities and Climate Change. Nueva York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203077207
Buzan, B. y Little, R. (2000). International systems in world history: Remaking the study of international relations. Oxford y Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Ciudades y Gobiernos Locales Unidos (2016). El compromiso de Bogotá y la agenda de acción. Bogotá: UCLG.
Cornago, N. (2013). Plural Diplomacies: Normative Predicaments and Functional Imperatives. Amsterdam: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004249554
Curtis, S. (2011). Global cities and the transformation of the international system. Review of International Studies, 37 (4), 1923-1947. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210510001099
Curtis, S. y Acuto, M. (2018). The foreign policy of cities". The RUSI Journal, 163 (6), 8-17. DOI: 10.1080/03071847.2018.1562014
Davidson, K., Coenen, L. y Gleeson, B. (2019). A Decade of C40: Research Insights and Agendas for City Networks. Global Policy, 10 (4), 697-708. DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12740
Duncombe, C. y Dunne, T. (2018). After liberal world order. International Affairs, 94 (1), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix234
Friedman, J. (1986). The world city hypothesis. Development and Change, 17 (1), 69-83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-7660.1986.tb00231.x
García-Segura, C. (coord.). (2016). La tensión cosmopolita. Avances y límites en la institucionalización del cosmopolitismo (pp. 19-56). Madrid: Tecnos.
Hale, T. (septiembre, 2020). Catalytic cooperation: BSG Working Paper Series. Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford. Recuperado de: www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2018-09/BSG-WP-2018-026.pdf (10.01.2020).
Hale, T. (2018). The role of sub-state and non-state actors in international climate process. Londres: Chatham House.
Hartley, K. (septiembre, 2019). Global Goals, Global Cities. Achieving the SDGs through Collective Local Action. Trabajo presentado en The Chicago Council on Global Affairs / Connected Cities Lab, Chicago. Recuperado de www.thechicagocouncil.org/publication/global-goals-global-cities-achieving-sdgs-through-collective-local-action (17.01.2020).
Held, D. (1995). Democracy and the global order. From the modern state to the cosmopolitan governance. Londres: Polity Press.
Held, D. (2003). From executive to cosmopolitan multilateralism. En Held, D. y Koenig-Archibug I, M. (Eds.) Taming Globalization: Frontiers of Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Jacobs, A. (2011). Governing for the Long Term: Democracy and the Politics of Investments. Nueva York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921766
Kavaratzis, M., Warnaby, G. y Ashworth, G. (Eds.) (2015). Rethinking place branding: Comprehensive brand development for cities and regions. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12424-7
Katz, B. y Nowak, J. (2018). The New Localism. How Cities can Thrive in the age of Populism. New York: Brookings Institution Press.
Keohane, R. y Victor, D. G. (2011). The regime complex for climate change. Perspectives on Politics, 9 (1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592710004068
Klaus, I. y Curtis, S. (27.11.2019). Cities of the New Silk Road. Recuperado de: www.diplomaticourier.com/posts/cities-of-the-new-silk-roads (16.12.2019)
Kuznetsov, A. S. (2015). Theory and Practice of Paradiplomacy. Subnational governments in international affairs. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315817088
Lall, S. V., Henderson, J. V. y Venables, A. J. (2017). Africa's cities: Opening doors to the world. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Publications. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1044-2
Latour, B. (2013). An Inquiry Into Modes of Existence. Harvard University Press.
Leffel, B. y Acuto, M. (2018). Economic Power Foundations of Cities in Global Governance. Global Society, 32 (3), 281-301. DOI: 10.1080/13600826.2018.1433130
Longo, F. (2010). Ejes vertebradores de la gobernanza en los sistemas públicos. Un marco de análisis en clave latinoamericana. Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, 43.
Lövbrand, E., Hjerpe, M. y Linnér, B. (2017). Making climate governance global: how UN climate summitry comes to matter in a complex climate regime. Environmental Politics, 26 (4), 580-599. DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2017.1319019
Markushina, N. (2019). Features of 'Soft Power' in the Eurasian Economic Union and the Role of Russia. En Lagutina, M. Regional Integration and Future Cooperation Initiatives in the Eurasian Economic Union. Nueva York: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1950-9.ch008
Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). Bound to fail: The rise and fall of the liberal international order. International Security, 43 (4), 7-50. DOI: 10.1162/ISEC_a_00342
Mezzetti, P. y Ayuso, A. (2016). Tackling inequality in cities through social innovation. En Coll, J. M. (coord.), Wise Cities: A new paradigm for urban resilience, sustainability, and well-being (pp. 37-46). Barcelona: CIDOB.
Michelmann, H. y Soldatos, P. (1990). Federalism and International Relations: The role of Subanational Units. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Olivares-Jara, K. (2017). Las ciudades cosmopolitas y globales como parte del poder suave de México. Revista Mexicana de Política Exterior, 111.
Owen, T. (2015). Disruptive power: The crisis of the state in the digital age. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199363865.001.0001
Paris, R. (2019). Can Middle Powers Save the Liberal World Order? Londres: Chatham House.
Parnell, S. (2916). Defining a global urban development agenda. World Development, 78, 529-540. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.10.028
Pipa, A. F. (2019). Shaping the global agenda to maximize city leadership on the SDGs: The experiences of vanguard cities. Nueva York: Global Economy and Development at Brookings Institution.
Reus-Smit, C. (1997). The Constitutional Structure of International Society and the Nature of Fundamental Institutions, International Organization, 51, 555-589. DOI: 10.1162/002081897550456
Rosenau, J. (2005). Global Governance as Disaggregated Complexity. En Ba, A. y Hoffman, M. (eds.), Contending Perspectives on Global Governance. Londres: Routledge.
Sassen, S. (1991). The global city: New York, London, and Tokyo. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Schragger, R. (2016). City Power: Urban governance in a global age. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
Suárez-Sipman, M. (19.12.2019). El Grupo de Visegrado: alcaldes liberales contra el populismo. Recuperado de: www.politicaexterior.com/actualidad/grupo-visegrado-alcaldes-liberales-populismo/ (17.01.2020).
Taylor, P. J. (2012). The challenge facing word city network analysis. GaWC Research Bulletin, 409. Recuperado de www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/rb/rb409.html (14.10.2019)
Van der Pluijm, R. y Melissen, J. (2007). City diplomacy: The expanding role of cities in international politics. The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations.
Wallerstein, I. (2006). Análisis de sistemas-mundo. Una introducción. Madrid: Siglo XXI Editores.
We Are Still In (2017). We Are Still in Declaration. Recuperado de: www.wearestillin.com/we-are-still-declaration (28.01.2020).
Zeraoui, Z. y Castillo-Villar, F. (2016). La paradiplomacia de la ciudad. Una estrategia de desarrollo urbano. Revista del CLAD Reforma y Democracia, 65, 225-242.