Globalization generally implies decentralization and denationalization. But in international financial markets, something quite different is happening. Although market activity is spreading to new corners of the world, a powerful process of centralization is reinforcing the traditional dominance of financial capitals, led by London and New York. Battered by the Asian economic crisis, Tokyo and Hong Kong could become leading financial centers again if they open up to the world and continue to let investors snap up Asian assets at bargain prices. Even after globalization, markets will still be based in cities, not computers.
Saskia Sassen is Professor of Sociology at the University of Chicago. Her latest book is Globalization and Its Discontents.
NEW YORK AND LONDON TRIUMPH
The transformation of global capital markets into a new supranational order is continuing apace despite the current market crisis. Nationally based financial operations are shrinking and internationally oriented operations are taking their place. Globalization usually implies decentralization. But while the international network of financial centers is indeed expanding, a leaner system dominated by a handful of strategic cities is evolving. As financial operations disperse around the world, only a few cities will have the resources to be dominant. First among them are London and New York, with their enormous concentrations of resources and talent. These two will conduct the most critical and complex financial operations of the future. A secondary network of smaller economic capitals will be headed by Frankfurt, boosted by Europe's economic and monetary union. The ultimate status of battered Hong Kong and Tokyo remains murky as markets wait to see what will be left in the wake of the Asian crisis. Although Singapore and Sydney are strengthening their positions, it is difficult to imagine them replacing Tokyo's resources and Hong Kong's expertise.
The emerging financial system will sharply differ from earlier versions, which were strings of closed domestic markets with a few scattered global centers such as the offshore markets and Swiss international banking. Traditionally, each national center duplicated all financial functions for its own economy, and collaboration between national markets was crude and rare. Today, however, cooperation is on the rise. Leading financial services firms are now setting up operations across the globe while traditional national centers are becoming home to foreign firms with global operations. Leading cities like London and New York are executing complex operations for firms and governments from myriad countries, packaging capital in innovative ways while working with secondary cities through affiliates and direct exports of financial services. In contrast, other cities in the global network are playing "gateway" roles, such as monitoring capital flows or issuing bonds. One example is Argentina's $1 billion government bond in November, the largest emerging market bond since the market turmoil last August. Although the bond was issued in Argentina, its lead managers were J. P. Morgan and Germany's Deutsche Bank and most of its buyers were U.S. institutional investors.1
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Protesters in Lower Manhattan are missing the point. The so-called "one percent" actually does a lot of good. It's Washington's willingness to bailout banks that is the real problem.
Thanks to a woefully corrupt and inefficient tax system, Beijing is going broke. China must fix its tax problems fast, before globalization speeds it into bankruptcy.
Miss Prism, instructing Cecily Cardew to read her Political Economy, added a warning to omit the chapter on the Fall of the Rupee: "It is somewhat too sensational Even these metallic problems have their melodramatic side," And so they do; but my story will not do it justice. I believe that the story of international money, and of our own balance of payments, allows no place for villains and little, even, for fools. To be specific: my contention is that the difficulties which we have faced in international finance have not been the result of American wickedness or irresponsibility or foolishness, or, indeed, of the wickedness of mythical short men in Zurich or mystical tall men in Paris.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.