Christian Wichmann Matthiessen: Europe 1991: Metropoles
and Capitals. Copenhagen and the Changing South Scandinavian
Scene. Geografisk Tidsskrift 92:39-47. Copenhagen 1992.

A number of large European urban agglomerations have a growth potential - one being Copenhagen. The construction of a bridge between Copenhagen and the Swedish city of Malmo, and the forthcoming Swedish membership of EC will open the door to the integration of the two large urban centers. This article will present the European urban scene of metropoles and capitals and will discuss growth issues.

Keywords: Metropoles, capitals, economic geography, Scandinavia,
Denmark, Copenhagen, fixed links.

Christian Wichmann Matthiessen, Dr.Sc., Professor, Institute of
Geography, University of Copenhagen, Øster Voldgade 10, DK-1350
Copenhagen K.

The 1991 European urban scene is a scene of both growth and decline. It is a scene of turbulence and of changing potentials. The large urban agglomerations have the possibility of acquiring new and important roles as regional centers in a new 'Europe of regions'. The latent potential of large cities is under pressure to be realized through a more and more competitive situation. Although the economy of urban units is linked to national economy and politics, their urban product is highly influenced by their own government (Berg etal., 1990).

Large units with superior metropolitan and capital city functions are the engines behind economic recovery and growth for regions and nations (Klaassen et al., 1989). Metropolitan functions are: communication node, financial center, culture, entertainment, top level private services, science, higher education, and economic leadership. Capital city functions are similar, but include political leadership, public administration, and top level public services. Metropoles and capitals exhibit urban products of high quality.

Metropolitan and capital units are the focal points of the exchange of communication and the exercise of competition. They are also the privileged places of historic heritage. Large cities have the capacity of innovation and adaption. It is often within the large cities that productivity is highest, and income is above average. Most large urban agglomerations in Western Europe are problem areas (Terhorst & v. d. Ven, 1990). They face environmental, infrastructural, social, and economic problems. The solution is an active, strategic policy based on revitalizing their economic bases, and renewing their infrastructures.

A number of large cities face fundamental problems. Some are declining without any prospects of revitalization. This is true of many large cities in the old manufacturing regions of Europe. Cities with few metropolitan or capital functions have little prospect of success.

The future of the large agglomerations of Western Europe depends much on their ability to anticipate and accommodate innovations. The trends and opportunities of the 1990's will be influenced by new growth factors. West European integration (the Single Market Act), will probably play the greatest role, but the opening of the East European market and possible enlargements of the EC will also be important. New infrastructure investment (TGV-trains, tunnels and bridges), and the growing environmental concern will alter the scene.

Some of the old patterns of growth location will break down, although the European center (see fig. 1) will take on its share of new activity. The disadvantages of agglomeration; congestion, land prices, and pollution are a problem, especially in the European center. Other growth centers will be identified as promising. This will be the case for metropolitan and capital units with large, rich regions outside the traditional center. New areas, such as in Eastern Europe, will be given the status of peripheral areas and receive subsidies, while the old peripheral regions of the Atlantic fringe and south-eastern Europe will lag further behind. A possible downturn in Mediterranean growth might be expected as investors shift their focus from the south to the east. The regionalisation of Eastern Europe is a realistic alternative to present-day centralization.

Some of the large units of Europe have the potential to change and experience rapid growth. This is a consequence of new qualities and characteristics, Berlin being an obvious example as the coming capital of Germany. Barcelona with the Olympic Games, and Lille, as the planned node of the TGV-trainlines, as well as a series of airport towns, becoming the new gateways to Eastern Europe, are other examples of such new characteristics. The capitals of new nations will evolve and take their place in the first line of important centers.

Then there is Copenhagen, where new growth potential has been created by the decision to construct a link across the Strait of Oresund (the Sound) to Sweden which will lead to greater organizational integration with the large urban centers of southern Sweden. The distance between Copenhagen and Malmo is only 18 kilometres. In 1991, this distance, along with Swedish non-membership of EC, creates a strong barrier. By the year 2001, this barrier will probably belong to history.

Europe: Large Urban Agglomerations

Europe has around 250 urban agglomerations of more
than 200,000 inhabitants.

The definition of urban agglomeration varies from nation to nation, and even within nations, depending on the statistical source. For instance, the size of Milan varies between 1.6 and 4.0 million inhabitants all according to the data source. In table 1, the largest European urban agglomerations are presented. They are delimited as functional, consolidated urban areas. This means that the Dutch series of large cities (Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam, and Utrecht) are considered as one unit, Randstadt, with 5.6 million inhabitants. The closely interdependent system of cities in Nordrhein-Westphalen (Dortmund, Duisburg, Essen, Dusseldorf, Cologne, and Bonn) is delimited as one unit, Rhein-Ruhr, with 10.4 million inhabitants. In the United Kingdom, Manchester and Liverpool are counted as one unit, and so are Sheffield and Leeds. The data are the latest available and are estimated

on the basis of various statistics. Estimates for
Eastern Europe are more uncertain than for Western Europe.

Air traffic is a highly important link between superior international activities. Important users of the air network are decision-makers, knowledge handlers, administrators, and other advanced personnel.

Table 2 presents international passenger traffic measured in terms of embarking and disembarking persons. The urban agglomeration is the unit, so if there is more than one airport to a city (as for instance in London), their data are totalled.

London has an outstanding lead, being twice the size of 'number Two'. Three cities follow; Paris, Frankfurt and Randstadt. The third level consists of 7 units; Zurich, Copenhagen, Palma, Rhein-Ruhr, Manchester-Liverpool, Rome, and Brussels.

More and more urban activities can be described as being knowledge- and information-based. Investment and employment are increasingly reflecting the transformation of the economy from being capital-intensive to information-intensive, (see Capello & Nijkamp, 1991). An increasing number of activities are now associated with the production, collection, manipulation, storage, and distribution of information.

Innovation is a strategic resource for firms and is closely connected with urban growth. Andersson & Stromquist (1989) have given the label 'creativity' to this growing base of wealth production. Creativity may be defined as, 'the production and handling of; technical, cultural, social, and organizational innovations'. Communication capacity, cognitive skill, knowledge availability, and the supply of creative and cultural capacities are all development factors. Excellence in all areas is a principal growth factor. Rapid development is favoured by universities and other research facilities, by advanced and efficient telecommunication networks, by other information technology equipment, and by fast passenger transport systems. Still, according to Andersson & Stromquist (1989), the increasing importance of the creativity sector is associated with the complete renewal of the economic system in Europe towards dynamic product competition.

Andersson (1989) has presented a new study of the creativity base (measured by science citation indexes) based on the largest West European agglomerations, (see table 3). It is interesting to discover that the 10 leaders, in this respect, are North European agglomerations. It is also interesting to note that, outside the economic center of Europe (see fig. 1), only Stockholm and Copenhagen can be identified as important centers of creativity.

Exercising decision power is probably the most important role played by metropolitan cities, especially when performing capital city functions, see below. Decision power may be defined as,'the ability to control the spatialeconomic development, the administrative and political circumstances, as well as the conditions of daily life for persons and firms.'

Decision power is illustrated by table 4 whose rank order is based on the important decisions of buying and selling that take place at the large stock exchanges. The financial operations listed are very concentrated (no data on Switzerland!). Nearly 70 % of the total European stock market turnover is accounted for by London and the combined German stock markets. Paris, Amsterdam, Milan, and Madrid form the second level, whereas Stockholm, Copenhagen, Oslo, Vienna, and Brussels represent a third level. The rest of the stock exchanges are very small.

Europe 1991: Economic Geography

There are few comparative studies of the large urban agglomerations of Europe, due to tremendous statistical problems. The above-mentioned French study of Western Europe (EC plus Switzerland and Austria) remedies this lack of information (Groupement d'lntérét Public RECLUS, 1989). The French study and other sources of information (Matthiessen, 1989 & 1990; Minshull, 1990; Torrani & Gario, 1987; Claval, 1990; Tweede Kamer, 1989) have been synthesized in fig. 1. In Eastern Europe, Berlin and five East European cities are registered as metropoles. This is based on judgement.

Within the European center, 15 of Europe's 30 metropolitan units are found. They are interdependent and compete with one another. The labour markets overlap. The urban functions, for instance airports, are often shared between cities. Hinterlands are not clearly delimited. Many large units are strongly specialized, for example the manufacturing cities of Rhein-Ruhr and central England. There is a certain amount of specialization by cities, exemplified clearly by the German cities; Rhein Frankfurt and Stuttgart. Some urban units of considerable size can be described as the suburbs of larger neighbours. There is no clear urban hierarchy. The metropolitan areas are congested, local environments are under strain, and the price of land is very high. The disadvantages of agglomeration are often obvious.

Outside the central parts of Western Europe, there are few large units with metropolitan status. To the north and east, there are (1991) only six; Glasgow-Edinburgh, Stockholm, Copenhagen, Hamburg, Berlin, and Vienna. Each of these cities dominates large areas and plays the leading urban role. Berlin is a new member of the group, and within a few years the city will take her former place in the top row of competing, metropolitan units.

The six North European metropoles are competitors within the urban network. They also compete with the cities at the other levels within the urban hierarchy. Competition has to do, for example, with the offering of new locations for companies and institutions, or the attraction of customers and clients from a shared hinterland.

Capital cities: A Special Case

Capital cities are not just the national capitals. Conversely, some national capitals display functions, history, and size that ought hardly to place them under the definition. Capital functions are always looked upon as convincing factors when marketing cities at competitive, domestic and international levels. This is a consequence of the importance of their size, functions, and dominance of other cities and regions. It is also reflected in the fact that capital cities are high income areas.

Capital cities are usually large cities with extended historical quarters. Their inner parts contain street patterns from the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Industrial Revolution and subsequent industrialization, the modern historical period, and the present day. The building stock often mirrors long-gone heydays, especially the most recent. Most of the capital cities were large for centuries, and the inertia of their diverse markets has kept them growing at or above national growth rate, or at periods in time kept them from lagging far behind. The same argument is valid with regard to their function as traffic nodes, although some, often old-fashioned, nodal functions have moved out from the capitals. Capital cities differ from other cities in that the capital function secures a strong and lasting centrality and ensures a special hospitable environment (Gottmann, 1977& 1983).

Capital cities were always opulent and distinguished. To some degree, they excluded the location of heavy manufacturing during the Industrial Revolution or the subsequent period of industrialization. The consequence being that most capital cities today experience de-industrialization as only a minor threat to their economic base.

The most important function of capital cities has to do with political and economic leadership. Parliament, national government, and the supreme court are the focal institutions in the decision-making process. Foreign embassies, national organizations, union headquarters, the stock exchange, banks and financial institutions seek nearness to national government institutions, as do the headquarters of many, large, private corporations and firms. Services, culture, entertainment, and sport have their most important centers in a high income society characterized by good international connections and a cosmopolitan way of life. The national presidency and royalty in particular are important to the promotion and marketing of a national capital. The best known citizen of Copenhagen is without doubt Queen Margrethe.

Capital cities have been centers of learning and knowledge for centuries. Within them, or nearby, one finds large universities and research institutes often in synergetic interaction with private and public enterprises. Capital cities were traditionally the nodal points of foreign trade, and nodal functions were always supreme. Today,

these cities are important nodes in the networks of modern traffic and communication, being headquarters for national airline companies, mail, and telecommunications.

Excellence is a pull-factor. Capital cities have always
attracted and concentrated persons, firms, and institutions
that come under that label.

The capital cities of Europe, as they stand in 1991, are shown on the map in fig. 2. Even those cities hardly fulfilling the criteria required have been included. Within the area shown, 34 capital units have been identified. 26 are national capitals (counting both Bonn and Berlin). 6 play an almost national role for large regions in Scotland, northern Germany, Bavaria, Baden-Wurttemberg, Catalania, and Lombardy. Strasbourg and Geneva exhibit capital functions at an international level, and so do the national capitals Brussels, Luxembourg, and Vienna. Within Eastern Europe, only pre-1992 national capitals are included because of the hitherto high degree of centralization in decision power. A consequence of East European turbulence in the beginning of the 1990's will be a manifest change in the urban hierarchies. Urban centers such as Minsk and Kiev have now joined the group of national capitals, and more cities are expected to do so after 1991, as new nations are recognized.

The level of decision power for the different capital cities is illustrated by the series of maps and conclusions presented by Reclus-Datar 1989 (Groupement d'lntérét Public RECLUS, 1989). The grouping of the 154 largest West European cities is based on data on international firms, places of finance, international exhibitions, and the press. The national capitals are in the two upper groups (of seven). Paris, London, Madrid, Rome, Bern, Brussels, Amsterdam-The Hague, Copenhagen, and Bonn are placed in Group One. Group Two consists of; Dublin, Lisbon, Athens, Vienna, and Luxembourg. Furthermore, the cities listed as capitals in table 6, without being national ones, are all found in the two upper groups. Milan, Barcelona, Bern, Hamburg, Munich, and Stuttgart are in Group One, while Strasbourg, Dublin, and Edinburgh are in Group Two. The French study does not take into account Finland, Norway, and Sweden.

The role of capital cities as centers of public decision
power is illustrated with national figures in table 5. The
large nations, with high gross national products, rank high

in the table. Germany is the leader, followed by France, Italy, and United Kingdom. A second level is represented by Spain only. Then a third level follows with eight nations with smaller power bases, and the lowest level comprises three nations; Greece, Portugal and Ireland. A summary of the observations based on capital cities is presented in table 6. It illustrates West European competition at capital city level. The city rank order is based on estimates and judgements of a subjective character.

The first division comprises large national capitals dominating sizable hinterlands. They are important centers for a wide range of capital functions. Their function as knowledge bases is evident, and their political and economic decision power is great. They have major international airports, and their other types of external communications are excellent.

The second division comprises medium-sized national capitals, large regional capitals, and international centers. They have good international airports and a solid knowledge base. The degree of economic and political decision power is high or even very high. In this respect, some of the large, non-capital units are more important than the smaller national capitals of the first division. Berlin is ranked according to the 1990-position in the West European urban system. The city will certainly change its ranking position, but to some degree at the expense of Bonn and the other large cities in the neighbourhood of this former capital city of West Germany.

Some of the small capitals listed, such as Bonn, Bern and Edinburgh, are themselves, apart from their capital function, of relatively little importance, but they are parts of larger conurbations, and this increases their attraction as capitals.

The cities could be ranked differently, as, for example, according to Mauri (1991), who identifies a rank hierarchy of European decision-making centers on the basis of several important activities. He identifies three leaders; London, Paris and Brussels, followed by a group of 17 important centers, and then a number of centers of minor importance. The second group includes in rank order; Geneva, Randstadt, Stockholm, Frankfurt, Munich, Copenhagen, Rome, Vienna, Moscow, Strasbourg, Zurich, Oslo, Helsinki, Madrid, Luxembourg, Milan and Hamburg.

Geography 1991: Southern Scandinavia

Geographically, South Scandinavia may be considered as a European crossroads. The straits between the Baltic Sea and the oceans of the world delimit the Danish islands and the peninsulas of Jutland and Scandinavia. Sea-going traffic is intense, and is expected to increase as the East European nations catch up in international trade.

Ferry-lines crossing the straits connect the Danish railroads
and motorway network with their German and
Swedish counterparts (see fig. 3).

Between Zealand and Germany, the trip takes the large combined rail and car ferries 1 hour (plus 1/2-1 hour's handling time, plus waiting time). There are around 40 departures each way every day. The line between Zealand and the continental parts of Denmark takes 1 hour as well (plus 1/4 of an hour of handling time, plus waiting time). All together, different kinds of ferries (train, cars, trucks) depart close to 100 times every day each way. Seven lines connect Zealand with southern Sweden. Between the central business districts of Copenhagen and Malmo, hydrofoils carry businessmen and tourists (40 minutes, 50 daily departures each way). Passengers landing at Copenhagen Airport may continue to down-town Malmo by hovercraft (35 minutes, 11 daily departures). Railroad ferries, car ferries, and combined rail and car-ferries leave Greater Copenhagen for southern Sweden more than 200 times each day (25 minutes for the shortest crossing at Elsinore). In addition to the transport time, there are handling operations (1/2 an hour) and waiting time.

An island location means an extra expenditure for road and rail traffic. The cost in time and price can be measured as an extra two hours, both ways, by road or by rail. Yet, an island location is certainly an advantage to the 2.3 million people who live on the almost 10,000 km² of Zealand (incl. nearby minor islands). Nowhere on this island is the distance to the sea more than 30 km. Beaches, marinas, and fishing hamlets are numerous along the 2,300 km coastline. The nature of the coastal environment add to the attractiveness.

To complete the picture of ferry connections between Scandinavia and the European continent, it should be mentioned that there are different direct lines between Sweden and Germany, and between Sweden and the Danish peninsula of Jutland (3-8 hours crossing, plus handling and waiting).

The Missing Scandinavian Links

Three of the Scandinavian straits are considered as lacking fixed links. They are The Storebelt' between the islands of Zealand and Funen (Funen is linked to the European continent by bridges), The Sound' between Zealand and Sweden, and The Femarbelt' between Zealand and the German island of Femår (Femår is linked to the European continent by a bridge). Each of the straits is close to 18 km in width.

The 'missing links' present different obstacles. Storebelt is a time and price barrier. The two other links also function as national borders. Languages are different and so are the culture and economy. In addition, The Sound' is an EC-border. It also represents an effective hindrance for the integration of the Danish capital (Copenhagen, 1.6 mio. inhb.) and the Malmo-Lund agglomeration (0.5 mio. inhb.) on the Swedish side of The Sound' (see fig. 4).

The Storebelt Link' is under construction and should be open to traffic by 1998. The Sound Link' has been agreed upon and signed by the Danish and Swedish governments. It should be ready by 2001. The Femarbelt Link' is being discussed at government level between Denmark, Germany and Sweden.

The Sound Link: Effectuating Changes in Rank

In Europe (inclusive European Russia), Copenhagen is ranked as no. 32 based on the size of its agglomeration population. The city is no. 16 when size is measured as gross agglomeration product, and it just makes the top-ten list when the measure is based on creativity (knowledge, culture, and communication: innovations). Copenhagen is the sixth most important city in Europe in terms of international, air-passenger traffic.

Just by adding figures from the Swedish side of the Sound to the Copenhagen figures, the ranks shift. Altogether, the towns within a radius of 50 kilometres from Copenhagen Airport make one of the five largest European agglomerations concerning creativity (measured as science citations, Andersson, 1989). This Danish-Swedish agglomeration also represents one of the major population concentrations in Northern Europe, no. 20 on the European list. To find larger neighbours you have to go to Rhein-Ruhr, Berlin, Warsaw, or Set. Petersburg. In addition, Copenhagen, Malmo, and Lund are high-income cities compared with the European average. The new rank measured as gross agglomeration product is 8. When international passengers departing from the airport of Malmo are added to the Copenhagen figures the total increases, but not enough to change the rank which remains at 6.

The Sound Link: Realizing New Growth Potential for Copenhagen

To the changes in rank, will come the changing potentials
of growth for the new Copenhagen-Malmo-Lund conurbation.

In 1991, Copenhagen is the center of Denmark where
total population is 5 mio. inhabitants. At the turn of the
century, the new Danish-Swedish agglomeration could be

the center of South-Scandinavia (8-9 mio. inhabitants). The consequence will be large-scale change in its dominance and its hinterland at the Copenhagen - Stockholm level, for example when it comes to the use of international airports.

The fusion of Greater Copenhagen and the Malmo agglomeration will give the two hitherto non-interdependent urban economies access to further specializations from the 'other side' and pave the way for a cooperation as yet hardly envisaged. New synergy will be an obvious consequence.

A product of this change in growth potential will be the results of a new optimism coupled with a rise in world interest due to the bridge construction itself. Large-scale engineering and construction is always of international interest, and a fusion of two urban agglomerations, which at present cooperate minimally, will be a world-class event.

In many respects, Copenhagen and the other South Scandinavian centers, are expected to increase their economic growth once the problem of the lacking transport links between Scandinavia and the European continent are solved by; 1) fixed links, 2) Sweden becoming an EC-member, 3) the resulting integration of regional organization. The arguments are illustrated in fig. 5.

Copenhagen: Additional Growth Issues

The urban product of Greater Copenhagen is generally of high quality, but, in many respects, it is also problematic. Obvious growth-promoting investment is given low priority.

The creativity function of the city and Copenhagen Airport are probably the most important growth factors of the agglomeration. The airport is not connected with the national networks of railroads and highways. Other similarly high-status European airports have benefited from such investment.

The reinforcement of international links should be discussed. High-speed rail links to the European network should be planned and the necessary money invested to improve existing lines or construct new ones between Copenhagen and Germany.

More attention should be paid to improve the inner cities to give higher priority to the quality of life and the natural environment. Traffic problems must be solved. A growth factor would be to improve the accessibility of work places, their interaction and their contact with the rest of the world. Giving priority to these activities would be growth-promoting in itself.

Between 1972 and 1989, the weak organization of Greater Copenhagen Council was responsible for the management of some agglomeration issues, but as a result of a national government decision, the authority has followed Greater London Council into the history books.

The problems involved in creating any new form of agglomeration government are enormous. Existing establishments are not interested in giving away any power to a new regional government. National government (and the politicians elected in the provinces) are not especially interested in changes that would strengthen Copenhagen at the national level, thus giving low priority to possible solutions. Should any progress be made, then marketing

of the issue of agglomeration government must be initiated. The way a large city should function, be governed and be marketed is not simple to present and understand. An efficient agglomeration government would probably lead to an increase in income and promote growth. This should be discussed. A realistic model for some kind of centralized structure, taking high-level decisions and strategic planning into consideration, should be presented and discussed.

References

Andersson, Å. E. (1989): Sydsvensk framtid. Stockholm, Morabergs
Forlag.

Andersson, Å. E. & U. S'rrømgw/s?(l9B9):TheemergingC-society.

Berg, L. v. d., L. H. Klaassen & J. v. d. Meer (1990): Marketing
Metropolitan Regions. Rotterdam.

Capello, R. & P. Nijkamp (1991): Telecommunications as a Catalyst
Development Strategy. Vienna, conference paper.

Claval, P. (1990): The spatial evolution of France. In Statens
Offentliga utredninger 1990:33: Urban Challenges. Stockholm.

Danmarks Turistrdd (1990): Nyt fra Danmarks Turistråd.
Copenhagen.

Gottmann, J. (1983): Capital cities. Ekistics 299.

Gottmann, J. (1977): The role of Capital Cities. Ekistics 264.

Groupement d'lntérét Public RECLUS (1989): Les villes Européennes'.
Montpellier.

International Center for Urban Studies (1989): Eurocities. Barcelona.

Klaassen, L. H., L. v. d. Berg & J. v. dMeer, Eds. (1989): The City:
Engine Behind Economic Recovery. Aldershot.

Matthiessen, C. W. (1989): Storkøbenhavns vækstpotentiale i
vesteuropæisk perspektiv. Geografisk Tidsskrift, no. 89.

Matthiessen, C. W. (1990): Vesteuropa 1990. Geografisk
Tidsskrift, no. 90.

Minshull, G. N. (1990): The new Europe - into the 19905.

Palomåki, M. (1991): On the Possible Future West European
Capital. GeoJournal 24.3.

Terhorst, P. & J. v. d. Ven (1990): The territorial Strategies of
Amsterdam. Tijdschrift voor Econ. en Soc. Geografie 81 no. 4.

Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal (1989): Op weg naar 2015.
s'-Gravenhage.