The document discusses the role of welfare states in making global cities like London liveable. It explores how global cities influence national welfare debates due to their economic power and differing social contexts. London faces special challenges as a global city, with issues like high income inequality, poverty rates, housing costs and lack of income protection that differ from the rest of the UK. While welfare services are important for London, its unique environment as a global city presents complex governance challenges for its welfare state.

1. The Role of Welfare States in Making Global Cities Liveable:
Reflections on London’s Experiences
John Hudson
w: www.york.ac.uk/spsw/hudson.html
e: john.hudson@york.ac.uk

2. Overview
• A social policy perspective
• Welfare states & wellbeing
• Global Cities, welfare & wellbeing
• Reflections on London

3. Background
• Comparative social policy analysis
– Tremendous output, innovation
• National welfare states/regimes focus
– Global dimension of social policy?
– Post-national welfare regimes?
• Flaws arise from national focus

4. Background
• Core data sets provide state-istics
• Methodological fix for sub-national variation:
– National aggregates or averages
– Exclude ‘non-typical’ regions/areas
– Base data on a ‘typical’ region/area
• Okay if sub-national variation matters less than
cross-national variation…. does it?

5. Global Cities
• Castells – Network Society
– Annihilation of time and space
– Space of flows replaces space of place
• Place matters less so matters more?
– Key hubs/nodes exist within the network
– Space of flows is most intense in global cities

6. Global Cities
‘[they] articulate the global economy, link up the
informational networks, and concentrate the world’s
power
[…]
concentrating
the
directional, productive, and managerial upper functions
all over the planet: the control of the media; the real
politics of power; and the symbolic capacity to create
and diffuse messages’
Castells, The Network Society (2010)

7. Global Cities & Welfare
#1: How do leading world network cities
influence national political debates about
globalisation and welfare?
•
Inevitably follows theory
–
a process not a place
–
creation of knowing agents
–
influence composition of key national policy networks

8. Global Cities & Welfare
# 2: How does the context for social policies in
leading world network cities differ from the
national picture of the territories they reside in?
•
Economically different
•
Demographically different
•
More like each other than their national
average?

9. Global Cities & Welfare
# 3 - How do welfare outcomes in leading
world network cities differ from the national
picture of the territories they reside in?
• Sites of heightened social inequality and
tension?
• Sharp end of globalisation

10. Global Cities & Welfare
# 4: How do welfare inputs in leading world
network cities differ from the national picture
of the territories they reside in?
• Magnets for economic resources…
• …magnets for public expenditure?
– Differing needs
– Heightened power

11. The Case of London
• Best example of a global city?
• Significant social challenges
• Local-national-global interactions
• Reflect on London’s experience

12. London: Low Liveability?
Components
Jobs
Income
Gross Household
Income per head
Health
% working age potn
unable to work due
to disability or illness
Work-Life
Balance
% working >45 hrs a
week
Sectoral
balance
Manufacturing share
of GVA
Housing
House prices to
earnings ratio &
owner occupation
rate
Transport
Average commuting
time
Providing for
Future
Generations
% households with
long term savings
Income
Distribution
% population in top
and bottom income
deciles
Environment
http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/goodgrowth/
Unemployment rate
CO2 emissions per £
GDP

13. London’s Special Context
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

14. London’s Special Context
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

15. London’s Special Context
Source: ONS
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/
http://www.ons.gov.uk

16. London: Social Spending Magnet?
Source: ONS
http://www.ons.gov.uk

17. London: Key Social Outcomes
Income Inequality
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

18. London: Key Social Outcomes
Poverty
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

19. London: Key Social Outcomes
Poverty
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

20. London: Key Social Outcomes
Poverty
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

21. London: Key Social Outcomes
Poverty
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

22. London: Key Social Outcomes
Housing
Mix adjusted house prices (£),
selected regions,
June 2013
Wales
Northern Ireland
North East
North West
West Midlands
East
London
South East
United Kingdom
http://www.ons.gov.uk
162,000
130,000
145,000
161,000
184,000
256,000
425,000
299,000
242,000
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

23. London: Key Social Outcomes
Housing
http://www.rightmove.co.uk

24. London: Key Social Outcomes
Income Protection
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

25. London: Key Social Outcomes
Income Protection
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

26. London: Key Social Outcomes
Education
http://www.londonspovertyprofile.org.uk/

27. Conclusions
• Complex interplay of global, local, national
• Governance issues are complex
• Successes exist
• But great challenges, especially housing
• Welfare services key, but welfare state?