Explain Why Some Locations Are Considered to Be Global Hubs While Others Global Peripheries

630 Words3 Pages
A global hub is a location, such as a country or city, which has a strong international presence, financially and socially. A periphery, on the other hand, is the opposite: they are locations which, due to a variety of possible factors, has been unable to develop a strong enough global presence to be of great international importance. The USA is a prime example of a global hub, while countries such as Gabon or Laos are representative of a peripheral country. The concept of global hubs and peripheries has developed from a number of theories, most prominently, the World-Systems Theory by Immanuel Wallerstein. This theory characterised two main categories of countries: cores and the peripheries. He refers to the world as having one global economy, and the hierarchy in this economy is determined by political and economic importance. Global hubs are the dominant nations internationally. In order to gain such dominance, the regions must have an important role in the global economy, and be culturally and socially evident internationally. With few exceptions, global hubs have an industry structured on high-skill and capital intensive industries. In order to become so prominent in the global economy, hubs aren’t dependant on any one state or country, allowing them to benefit hugely from the capitalist world economy freely. London, in the United Kingdom, is a strong example of a global hub. It plays a huge role in international finance: with a 34% share in global forex markets (worth $1359 billion) and a 54% stake in foreign market equity. Such a strong economy is also attractive to many TNCs (trans-national corporations), resulting in 75% of the world’s 500 largest companies being based in the city. There are global hubs, giants of the economy, so there must be the opposites. Periphery regions are locations which are far less developed than the core (hub) locations. Often
Open Document