It is believed that social and spatial polarization has intensified in German cities due to globalization. We find this recognition in the discourse on the “Socially Integrative City Program,” which has been conducted as a common task of the Federal and Länder governments of Germany since 1999. There is, however, little empirical research on the degree to which polarization has intensified in the process of globalization. The purpose of this article is to examine this theme using the case of Dortmund. This city is in the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia, which tackled the problem of intraurban polarization earlier than the Federal government from the beginning of the 1990s. Dortmund is one of the cities that has worked hard to resolve the problem, and its policy was supported by the EU in the framework of the URBAN II program of during 2000 and 2006.
Although there are different views on the beginning of globalization, the author thinks that it has intensified since around 1990, because information and communication technology made significant advances around that time and has deeply influenced not only the economic but also the social and political spheres. In the case of Germany, we should take into account the unification of the Federal Republic and the Democratic Republic and the influx of migrants from all over the world, but especially from the former socialist countries, when we discuss the effects of the globalization on German society. Thus the present author compares the spatial segregation of foreign inhabitants before and after 1990.
To measure intraurban polarization, the spatial concentration of the poor and the unemployed can be compared only between around 2000 and 2004 because of limited data availability. These indicators including the spatial segregation of foreign inhabitants are considered as variables of social exclusion as a multidimensional phenomenon of intraurban polarization not only in German but also in European cities as a whole. The present author uses the Unterbezirk or subdistrict as the unit area for analysis. There are 170 subdistricts in Dortmund, which can be regarded as neighborhoods, although the former is larger than the latter.
As a result, all subdistricts in so-called Nordstadt and two inner-city subdistricts west of the city center are identified as problem districts. These districts are characterized by immigrants of various origins and represent social exclusion and intraurban polarization. There were traditional heavy industries, especially firms in the steel industry, and breweries in these districts. But almost all the traditional industries closed down from the 1970s through the 1990s. The terminal port of the Dortmund-Ems Canal is in northwest of Nordstadt. Because of the decline of the steel industry and breweries, the logistics companies around the port were hard hit.
The concentration of foreign inhabitants in those subdistricts was also observed before 1990, and the dissimilarity indices of foreign inhabitants have declined since at least 1987. There have been a complex of ups and downs of residential location quotients of each nationality, but most of them declined between 1987 and 1995. On the other hand, the concentration of persons depending on welfare benefits accelerated between 2000 and 2004 in most subdistricts of Nordstadt, although their proportion in the district's total population declined in the second half of the 1990s. The number of unemployed increased more rapidly in many subdistricts between 1999 and 2004. In regard to the segregation of foreign inhabitants, their absolute number increased in the 1990s. According to the estimation of the city authority of Dortmund, the proportion of people with migrant backgrounds reaches more than 60% in the eastern and middle parts of Nordstadt.
It should be noted that so-called guest workers do not always represent polarization. ...

View full abstract

The purpose of this study is to discuss the role that industry-university-government collaboration plays in industrial agglomeration by investigating the realities of such collaboration and transformation of actors' relations in a company town. This is a case study of the city of Ube, the company town of Ube Industries.
Traditionally, the core of actors' relations in Ube was Ube Industries. Many SMEs are subcontractors of Ube Industries. Relations between Yamaguchi University and actors were built gradually. Industry-university-government collaboration overcame air pollution in the 1950s. In the 1980s, Ube and its neighboring region were selected to become a technopolis. At that time, the basis for industry-university-government collaboration was solidified. In addition to attracting the university and a laboratory, exchanges between local enterprises and Yamaguchi University started.
With the progress of industry-university-government collaboration, Yamaguchi University and Ube Industries became the core of actors' relations in Ube. The university interacts with large enterprises that have local connections and local governments in a form of inclusive cooperation. Ube Industries uses the collaboration for the high value-added product development. SMEs acquire new seeds and have increased the number of customers. Subcontractors are supported in being independent. Such collaboration can unlock locked-in industrial agglomeration.

View full abstract

The creation of new periodic markets and the reinstatement of interrupted periodic markets are critical issues in any discussion of changes made in the market system. The main problem with these issues, however, is that we have little knowledge of how the market system was maintained during the Edo era. The purpose of this paper is to help increase our knowledge and understanding of this problem.
Historical sources show that the creation of new periodic markets was not allowed, on principle, during the Edo era. The Tokugawa government give documents to market towns, specifically on awards for disputes, which record this ban on new periodic markets.
The creation of new periodic markets was much more complicated than the reinstatement of markets. Because of the level of difficulty, the creation of new periodic markets was rare, although two provisions permitted it. The first provision was a consensus by the market towns around the new periodic market or government. The second was a promise to continue the periodic market over a lengthy period of time, with no disputes concerning its creation. The government directed it to close if there was a dispute. However, if there was no dispute, the government did not become involved.
The reinstatement of interrupted periodic markets was only allowed if two provisions were met. The first provision was documentary evidence that a periodic market had been held in the past. The second was that there must be a consensus between the town where a periodic market would reopen and neighboring market towns. There is evidence that disputes occurred when nearby market towns did not agree to the reopening of an interrupted periodic market.

View full abstract