1 RETHINKING GLOBALISATION AND SOCIAL CHANGE: LINKING GLOBALISATION, LABOUR MARKETS AND SOCIAL INTERACTION PATTERNS Ayda Eraydın Middle East Technical University Department of City and Regional Planning Ankara ayda@metu.edu.tr ABSTRACT Since the 1980s, there is a growing literature on the adaptation of cities and regions to globalisation. The use of the metaphor “globalisation” and the notion of “competitiveness” have been the starting points to understand the new dynamics of spatial organisation and the changing contextual issues of cities. The economic and socio-spatial changes and the increasing pressure for institutional, financial and regulatory changes on different urban settlements have been explained as a par t of the major theme “the impacts of globalisation and struggles for increasing competitiveness”. This framework of analysis has been widely used to explain the economic changes that have taken place in different cities, especially the large metropolitan areas of the world. Recently, however, there is increasing concern on the socio-spatial changes and the impact of economic restructuring on the different social groups. The paper aims to define how globally induced changes affect the different social groups and to explain whether the change in the economic conditions lead to social transformation. In order to reach this aim firstly, the paper presents the different arguments that relate social transformation and globalisation and it concentrates on the labour markets and social interaction mechanisms as the major links between competitiveness and social cohesion. Thirdly, the findings of the study on social transformation and the dynamics of change in the social interaction patterns of the İzmir metropolitan area are presented, which also defines the survival strategies and struggles of different social groups to change their relative conditions are strongly emphasised to depict the outcomes of economic transformation in the public sphere. I. INTRODUCTION The use of the metaphor “globalisation” and the notion of “competitiveness” have been a starting point to understand the new dynamics of spatial organisation and the changing contextual issues of cities. The economic and socio-spatial changes and the increasing pressure for institutional, financial and regulatory changes on different urban settlements have been explained as a part of the major theme “the impacts of globalisation and struggles for increasing competitiveness” under a meta-level framework that depended on the periodisation of the economic regimes (see Brenner, 2003 and 2006). However, still there are important questions that need further explanations. How do globalisation and restructuring for global competitiveness affect the social and spatial changes in large cities and city regions? How far social organisation, interaction patterns and identities change in order to adapt to the new conditions? What are reactions to these changes; adaptation, urban movements or collaboration for change? Against the wide literature on the interrelationships between economic competitiveness on social cohesion, it is still a domain not much studied (Forrest and Kearns, 2001; Maloutas and Malouta, 2004; Morrison, 2003). As Turok and Bailey (2004) pointed out the relation between competitiveness and social transformation is still discussed in general terms and there is less attention on spatial reconfiguration of cities under the new conditions triggered by globalisation. Although in recent years there are increasing number of empirical studies on different cities that try to explain relations between competitiveness and socio-spatial transformation (Kazepov, 2005; Buck et al., 2002; Boddy and Parkinson, 2004), these studies, unfortunately, do not provide clear-cut conclusions due to the complex nature of relations between these two concepts. The review of the literature shows the two contradictory views. The first view is the negative relation between competitiveness and social cohesion, which took the globalisation and loss of the earlier welfare states as the core (Castells, 1977; Sassen, 2000; Andersen and van Kempen, 2001; Forrest and Kearns, 2000; 2001). The second view is a positive relation between competitiveness and the socio-spatial cohesion (Fainstein, 2001), which indicates the contribution of social cohesion to the competitiveness of cities and regions. Most of the existing debates indicate that competitiveness supports exclusionary process within the society, which may also increase spatial inequalities (Fainstein, 2001b; Maloutas and Molouta, 2004; Mingione, 1991, 1995). They share a general understanding that there is less social cohesion in the period defined by globalisation than the former period identified by Keynesian capitalism. They gave the reason for social and spatial inequalities as the breakdown of Keynesian welfare state (Forrest and Kearns, 2000; 2001). Especially the early literature on competitiveness emphasizes the tendency towards a greater segregation, social exclusion and inequality (Fainstein, 2001b) and claims that competitiveness and economic growth can result in certain levels of social exclusion (Maloutas and Molouta, 2004; Mingione, 1991, 1995). These debates are based upon two arguments. Firstly, they state that economic