Our world is moving from one of nation-states to one of city-states. Rather than the future being one of the US versus China, it is going to be Silicon Valley vs. Beijing or Chicago vs. Paris. Each dominant city will define its region. With the “flattening” of the world, Chicago is no longer vying with US cities like New York for influence, commerce and jobs, but other major cities in the world.
This is a clear long time direction that I definitely agree on. The obstacles are some of the core structural elements that keeps the nation states together. I think about e f the national currencies and their base, the national monopoly of violence and the legally defined and internationally presumed national “ownership” of citizens. These things are gradually changing but there is great uncertainty if un uncertain and crisis filled future will play towards the cities or the nation states. The financial crisis e g played, at least in the short term, played out in the favour of the nation state.
Definitely fits what we’re hearing from other researchers and observers.
What are the implications of a shift like this for economic development? What does it means particularly for the current US structure of incentives, programs, etc.? Are current methods likely to lose relevance and become a further strain on the system?
And what does this mean for rural areas?