Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The emerging discourses on world cities and Global Commodity Chains are valuable spatial frameworks for conceptualizing globalization and its spatial consequences. However, both discourses have one thing in common: they neglect the territorial and thus physical dimension of global flows. Hence, in this article I take the perspective of material flows to reconnect the discourses on cities and chains. I aim to clarify the role of urban places and their ability to attract, manage and redirect flows in such networks. I do so by re‐examining classical concepts of spatial interaction and reorganization in human geography, with particular reference to centrality and intermediacy. The case of seaports and port cities is further explored to demonstrate the concrete conflicts and opportunities that arise with chain developments and insertion. To determine the relative position of places with regard to global chains and flows, Sheppard's concept of ‘positionality’ is discussed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Markus Heße (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: