Saskia Sassen and the Global City
The idea of the “global city” is closely associated with sociologist Saskia Sassen. In her influential 1991 book, The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo, Sassen explored how a small number of cities had become key centres for organising the increasingly interconnected world economy.
Her argument was not simply that large cities matter. Rather, certain cities perform specialist functions that allow global businesses and markets to operate. London, New York and Tokyo were prominent examples: places where financial institutions, multinational companies and professional services were concentrated, and where decisions with far-reaching effects were made.
What makes a city “global”?
For Sassen, a global city is a major hub in networks of international economic activity. Its importance comes from the work carried out there, as well as from its size or political status. Global cities bring together services that businesses rely on to manage complex operations across borders, including finance, law, accountancy, advertising and consultancy.
As companies expanded internationally, they needed more than technology to coordinate their activities. They also needed skilled people and specialist organisations capable of handling complicated transactions and providing expert advice. This helped create dense clusters of service firms in leading cities. Although digital communications make it possible to work across long distances, the face-to-face contact and expertise found in these urban centres remain valuable.
London in the global city network
London is one of the cities most commonly associated with Sassen’s analysis. Its concentration of financial institutions, professional services and international businesses has connected it to economic activity across the world. The city’s role is not isolated: it forms part of a network of centres whose relationships can be as important as their individual influence.
This perspective also helps explain why globalisation is not evenly spread across a country. A city may be deeply connected to international markets while other places nearby experience different economic conditions. Global links can bring investment and employment, but their benefits are not necessarily shared equally.
The costs and contradictions of globalisation
Sassen’s account of global cities draws attention to a striking contrast. Highly paid work in finance and specialist services exists alongside large numbers of lower-paid jobs in cleaning, catering, transport, care and other essential services. These workers help sustain the city’s global economy, but may have limited access to its wealth and opportunities.
Global cities can therefore experience both economic growth and heightened inequality. High demand for housing and commercial space can contribute to rising costs, while changes in employment can make work less secure for some residents. The city’s international success does not automatically improve living conditions for everyone who lives and works there.
Sassen has also examined how global economic processes reshape the role of the state and national economies. In her work, globalisation does not mean that national governments simply disappear. Instead, some activities and forms of authority are reorganised across national borders, while cities become important sites where these changes take practical form.
Why the concept still matters
The global city remains a useful way to think about how economic power is organised geographically. It directs attention to the networks, institutions and workers that make international business possible, and to the uneven effects of that activity within cities.
The concept is not a fixed label or a simple league table. Cities’ roles change as industries, technologies and political relationships evolve. Sassen’s lasting contribution is to show that globalisation is not an abstract process taking place nowhere in particular. It is produced through specific places—and its benefits and pressures are experienced by people in very different ways.
Understanding Global Cities: London’s Role, Specialist Clusters, and the Impact of Globalisation on Urban Life
- Explains how cities connect the global economy.
- Highlights London’s role in international networks.
- Shows why specialist services cluster in major cities.
- Links globalisation to everyday urban life.
- Draws attention to the workers behind city economies.
- Reveals how global growth can deepen inequality.
- Offers a useful framework for understanding urban change.
Critiques of Sassen’s Global City Concept: Overemphasis, Oversights, and Applicability Challenges
- Can overstate the influence of a small group of major cities.
- May underplay the role of smaller cities and regional centres.
- Focuses heavily on finance and advanced business services.
- Can make globalisation seem more city-centred than it is.
- Does not fully capture how digital technology changes urban networks.
- May give limited attention to environmental costs.
- The concept can be difficult to apply consistently across different cities.
Explains how cities connect the global economy.
One of Saskia Sassen’s key contributions is showing how cities connect the global economy. Global cities such as London bring together financial institutions, multinational businesses and specialist services—including legal, accountancy and consultancy firms—that help companies operate across borders. These networks enable decisions, transactions and expertise to flow between countries, making cities important centres for coordinating international economic activity.
Highlights London’s role in international networks.
Saskia Sassen’s concept of the global city highlights London’s importance within international networks. The city connects businesses, financial institutions and professional services across borders, helping to coordinate economic activity on a global scale. This perspective shows that London’s influence comes not only from its size or status, but also from the relationships and specialist work that link it to other major cities around the world.
Shows why specialist services cluster in major cities.
Saskia Sassen’s global city concept explains why specialist services such as finance, law, accountancy and consultancy tend to cluster in major cities. International businesses rely on these services to manage complex operations, and being close to one another makes it easier for firms to share expertise, build professional networks and meet clients face to face. This concentration can make cities such as London important centres for coordinating business across the world.
Links globalisation to everyday urban life.
One of the key strengths of Saskia Sassen’s idea of the global city is that it connects the often abstract process of globalisation to everyday urban life. Rather than treating global markets as distant forces, her work shows how they take shape in cities through offices, transport networks, housing and local services. It also highlights the people behind the global economy: from finance and professional services to the cleaners, couriers and hospitality workers who help keep a city running. This makes it easier to see how international economic change affects local jobs, neighbourhoods and living costs—and how those effects can be experienced very differently by different residents.
Draws attention to the workers behind city economies.
Saskia Sassen’s idea of the global city draws attention to the many workers who keep urban economies running, not just the executives and professionals in high-profile industries. Alongside finance and business services, global cities depend on people working in cleaning, catering, transport, security and care. Recognising these workers shows that a city’s international success rests on a wide range of labour, including jobs that are often low-paid or overlooked.
Reveals how global growth can deepen inequality.
Saskia Sassen’s global city framework reveals that economic growth can deepen inequality within cities. The expansion of finance and other high-value industries may bring investment and highly paid jobs, while also increasing demand for lower-paid service work in areas such as cleaning, catering and care. As wealth and opportunity become concentrated among some businesses and workers, others may face insecure employment, rising living costs and limited access to the benefits of growth.
Offers a useful framework for understanding urban change.
Sassen’s concept of the global city offers a useful framework for understanding urban change by showing how international economic forces shape cities’ jobs, industries and neighbourhoods. It helps explain why activities such as finance and professional services cluster in certain places, while also drawing attention to the effects on housing, work and inequality. This perspective makes it easier to connect local changes in a city to wider global networks.
Can overstate the influence of a small group of major cities.
One criticism of Sassen’s global city theory is that it can overstate the influence of a small group of major centres, such as London, New York and Tokyo. By focusing on these cities, the theory may underplay the role of smaller cities, regional economies and less visible networks that also shape global trade and culture. It can also make globalisation seem more concentrated than it is, overlooking how digital connections and international activity are increasingly spread across many locations.
May underplay the role of smaller cities and regional centres.
One criticism of Sassen’s global city framework is that it may overstate the importance of major financial and business hubs while giving less attention to smaller cities and regional centres. These places can play significant roles in manufacturing, logistics, research, culture and public services, and are often closely connected to global networks in ways that are less visible than those of London or New York. Focusing mainly on a handful of prominent cities may therefore give an incomplete picture of how globalisation operates and overlook the distinct contributions and challenges of places beyond the largest metropolitan centres.
Focuses heavily on finance and advanced business services.
One criticism of Saskia Sassen’s global city framework is that it gives considerable attention to finance and advanced business services, such as law, consultancy and accountancy. This emphasis can make other important parts of urban life less visible, including manufacturing, public services, informal work and community activity. As a result, the framework may offer an incomplete picture of how cities function and overlook the many workers and industries that contribute to their economies without being closely tied to global finance.
Can make globalisation seem more city-centred than it is.
One criticism of Sassen’s global city theory is that it can make globalisation seem more city-centred than it really is. By focusing on major hubs such as London, New York and Tokyo, the theory may underplay the role of smaller towns, rural areas and less prominent regions that supply labour, resources and services to the global economy. It can also overlook the networks of trade, technology and production that extend far beyond major cities. As a result, globalisation may appear to be driven mainly by a handful of urban centres, when in practice it depends on connections between places of many different sizes.
Does not fully capture how digital technology changes urban networks.
One limitation of Saskia Sassen’s global city framework is that it may not fully capture how digital technology has changed urban networks. The growth of online platforms, remote working and rapid digital communication allows businesses and professionals to collaborate across distances, sometimes without being based in a traditional global hub. Although major cities remain important centres for finance, expertise and decision-making, economic connections can now be more dispersed and less dependent on face-to-face contact. This means the framework may understate the influence of smaller cities and digital networks in shaping the global economy.
May give limited attention to environmental costs.
One criticism of Sassen’s global city framework is that it may give limited attention to environmental costs. Its focus on finance, business services and global networks can leave less room for examining issues such as high energy use, air pollution, waste and the emissions generated by transport and construction. These pressures are particularly relevant to cities that depend on frequent international travel and resource-intensive infrastructure. Considering environmental impacts alongside economic power and inequality would give a fuller picture of how global cities function and who bears the costs.
The concept can be difficult to apply consistently across different cities.
One limitation of Saskia Sassen’s global city concept is that it can be difficult to apply consistently across different cities. Cities vary in size, history, political influence and economic structure, so the features that make one a global hub may not be relevant to another. Some cities are influential in finance, while others play a leading role in technology, manufacturing or culture. As a result, researchers may disagree about which measures to use and where to draw the line between a global city and a city with strong international connections.