David Connolly, Director, Dublin Inner City Partnership.
 
Presentation on : BUILDING AN INCLUSIVE CITY (Page 4)
 
The impact of globalisation.
 
I do not think that we should under-estimate the likely impact of globalisation on Dublin. We are already living with some of the consequences of this global restructuring of capital, reduced trade barriers and increased labour mobility. While clearly there are many negative implications from this fundamental change and as an open economy with a high dependence on multi-national investment and tourism we are not in a particularly strong position to resist some of the detrimental impact. On the other hand as the capital city with a size and population among the larger in Europe there are many new opportunities presented if we adjust and absorb the change effectively. I want to look briefly at three areas arising from this global restructuring. These are the potential for a multi-cultural Dublin, the importance of access to information and communications technology and the future impact on employment.
 
Dublin is already on the way to becoming a multi-cultural city. This is a very recent and welcome phenomenon. While the 5000 asylum seekers living here are the more obvious change there are many more thousands of different European nationalities and members of ethnic groups that have now chosen to live in Dublin. This is a global trend in migration from the poorer regions and is expected to continue for the next fifty years. While there has been concern expressed about a growth in racism I would suggest that this is missing the point. As residents of Dublin we are not inherently racist as has been suggested in some quarters. There have always been different cultural identities present in Dublin in the past and through our history.
 
The real issue is how we as a city organise to ensure the full participation of all of the new citizens while they can retain their own cultural identities if they choose. The other issue is how we facilitate the continuous and free movement in and out of the city rather than the restrictive approach adopted to date. The current national policies of dispersal and voucher systems are not suitable for application in Dublin we need to find the means to introduce more friendly and welcoming approaches that relate to the needs of Dublin now and in the future. All the indications are that a significant increase in the diversity and size of the city population is vital to our needs in the longer term.
 
The introduction of information technology and the potential digital divide presents a significant challenge when seeking to build an inclusive city. Little progress has been achieved in ensuring access for the wider community. This is a difficult area in particular because it is heavily controlled by the private sector. We have to identify ways to introduce and spread the available and rapidly developing technology to every area not just the wealthier sections of society. It is difficult to find a model for this to happen. The Information Society Commission has suggested that the state sector may be the most effective way to spread the use and access of this technology. We have tried a number of approaches at community level and among inner city schools however this is a very slow process. The Dublin City Development Board is also pioneering a new approach to internet use through the TV. This is a vital area for the future and should be a major priority in order to ensure the wider use and access in the poorer areas. However, if we are to achieve any significant impact at a local community level which is where it is most required then we need an intensive effort to be made through the community and voluntary sector with the active assistance of the state.
 
Finally, given that this conference was organised by the Dublin Employment Pact it is important to examine the implications for future work arising from globalisation.
 
Urbanisation in Dublin as elsewhere is being driven by what has been referred to 'as the new economy of cities'. In our post industrial society, the development of the knowledge economy, fuelled by the widespread use of new information and communications technologies is actually increasing the clustering of economic activity. Cities, with extensive pools of knowledge and skills and critical mass of ICT bandwidth, are increasing their economic dominance. Dublin's IFSC points to this.
 
However maintaining competitiveness and economic diversity is critical. In the coming period successful cities may be defined as those with a diverse population and knowledge base and with the flexibility to adapt to new growth sectors in the economy. Quality of life is also increasingly regarded as a critical component of regional economic competitive advantage, particularly in the attraction and retention of skilled labour- the main currency in the knowledge economy. As Saskia Sassen has established social exclusion is a by-product of the new economy of cities. Just as the knowledge economy is reinforcing activity in urban areas, poverty, unemployment and social disadvantage are also concentrated in cities. The polarisation of those who are valued in the new economy of cities and those who are denied access to opportunity, is ever more acute. This disparity is now greater in English and Irish cities than in the US. This has a major implication for the future employment of residents of Dublin and particularly those in the most disadvantaged circumstances in relation to the labour market.
 
The employment trends in Dublin in recent years confirm the influence of globalisation. 408,000 people were employed in the Dublin region in 1996, representing just below one-third of all employment in Ireland. The city is an integral part of the regional economy. Whilst overall employment increased by more than 23% between 1986-1996, jobs in services grew by more than 32%; the service sector now employs more than 77% of the workforce in the Dublin region. Commerce, insurance, financial and business services and the professional services account for the majority of the growth. Tourism- contributing more than £500 million and 25,000 jobs to the Dublin economy in 1996- and retailing are also key sectors (consumer spending is currently growing at a rate of 4% per annum). Dublin is now one of the top visitor destinations in Europe. However this change has also resulted in increased casualisation of work, a large low wage sector, and even the recent phenomenon of increased part time working by up to 70% of full time pupils in secondary schools surveyed by the pact.
 
The current situation presents a significant challenge to the city with regard to the nature of future work provision. With the present level of full time employment there is a unique opportunity to plan a strategy for future work based on the types of changes which will result from globalisation and in meeting the needs of the residential communities in the city. Dublin is already engaged in the leading edge sectors. Even at a community level the development of the social economy is happening faster than the rest of Europe. Substantial direct investment by the state in service provision could also introduce work opportunities for those most distant from the present private labour market. The creation and provision of public service jobs are necessary to balance the reductions arising from global restructuring.
 
In Conclusion
 
Dublin is the economic driver for the whole of the island. It needs to be viewed in the context of competing with similar sized cities outside of Ireland and not solely in the comparison to other Irish cities. The continued expansion of the city over the next few decades is likely to result in a doubling of size. This substantial change provides a unique opportunity to reverse and resolve some of the social and economic disparities that have emerged historically in Dublin.
 
All of the people living here have a right to share in the prosperity of the city and to participate in determining the future shape of the city. This is not the position as it applies at present. In a political sense there is a major obstacle to be overcome because there is substantial resistance to delegating responsibility to a city government. Decentralisation is taken to mean moving out of Dublin rather than removing authority over our affairs from central government. This requires to be changed radically if we are to address some of the current and future problems which are unique to Dublin in an increasingly global context.
 
In Dublin "the socially and economically integrated parts of society experience less and less spacial contact with the low income, poorly integrated households, who are locked into areas of reduced economic activity, suffering basic difficulties in getting access to the labour market, and are thus locked out, bystanders in an otherwise lively and active urban scene". This is an indictment of our city and must be tackled urgently.
 
The Urban Future 21 major study concluded that "cities everywhere are highly and increasingly tied into a system of global competition- even though everywhere, most of their people work for local markets. So ruthlessly efficient is this global division of labour that all cities have to run in order to keep still. As lower-cost locations compete in the production of goods and services, so do cities constantly need to seek new economic niches. Cities like nations need to travel up the learning curve, moving into activities needing higher investment in human capital, above all, advanced services. This is the history of the most successful cases in urban economic development in recent decades". Are we up to the challenge?.
 
In order to achieve similar success as a city I would suggest that we need now is to become more directly involved in developing a better future for the whole city and not just at a local level but collectively through our organisations and as citizens. As I set out above this effort is only worth it if we can ensure that Dublin becomes a fully inclusive city for all citizens in the future. This will not happen without the active participation of all of us.