Concentration of Industrial Locations
in the CBD and Suburbs of a Capital City
- the case of Malaysia -
EAROPH/RAPI Conference
from 9:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.
on 21st, September, 1999
Fumihiko SETA
Unit of Urban and Environmental Systems
Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology
The University of Tokyo, Japan
1. Introduction
1.1. Background
Since Friedmann
J. advocated the concept of present-day “World City”[1]
(Friedmann, J., 1986), many scholars have made researches and hypotheses about
the relationship between the recent global economy and urban structures. For
example, Sassen S. is one of the most famous scholars who have analyzed and summarized
the concept of globalization and big cities. She especially focuses on the
characteristics of service sectors located mainly in CBD (Central Business
District) of global cities. (Sassen, S., 1991; Sassen, S., 1996) Many other
scholars and analysts have been trying to classify the big cities in the world
by certain criteria, and some of these seems to make it successful to
demonstrate the influence of global economy on urban structures related to
regional development and urban planning. (Knox and Taylor, 1995)
But in the
present situation, it seems that most of the augments have been too focused on
the importance of certain areas (CBDs) and some functions (some of top-level
service sectors). Even if the importance and the power of influence of these
service sectors are increasing rapidly, most of the citizens in cities or countries
are still engaged in other sectors i.e. manufacturing, basic commercial sector,
and even informal sectors undoubtedly have much importance in so-called
developing countries. Whole structures of the cities including world cities are
directly formed by various sectors except at CBDs.
In case of
Asian countries, manufacturing sector has taken the main role for economic
progress continuing till recent years, and urban agglomeration has urged
simultaneously. For example in Malaysia, the share of manufacturing industries
among whole GDP is about 30% in recent years and increased rapidly at least
till economic crisis which occurred in 1997 (Table 1). Particularly the west
coast of Malay peninsula is the main region for industrial locations and economic
progress, and it can be found that the manufacturing sector is the most influential
there, by seeing Table 2.
The reason why
Malaysia is selected for this analysis is that analyzing agglomeration and
mono-centralization in the country with relatively dispersive national
structure can show the influence of global economy more visibly. Even now, the
federal capital Kuala Lumpur has the only city that has more, but slightly more
than one million in Malaysia. It’s rather small compared with the capital city of
neighborhood ASEAN countries, i.e. Bangkok (6 million). The second and third
largest city is Ipoh and Johor Bahru, which have about 0.3 million. Its ratio
is larger than the case of other countries. If the country that has relatively
dispersive or decentralized structure originally shows the symptom of
mono-centralization, the relationship between globalization and agglomeration
(which leads to the formation of limited number of world cities) can be proved
partly.
1.2. Purpose of
this Paper
The purpose of
the paper is to demonstrate the mono-centralization of industrial locations to
the biggest city (Kuala Lumpur) in Malaysia, in spite of original relatively
dispersive structure and decentralizing strategy. On the next chapter, the
basic conditions and strategies related to industrial locations will be
explained, divided into some sections including historic situations,
development strategies of recent decades and present infrastructure. And on the
third chapter, the manufacturing locations as the result of these conditions
and strategies will be stated and depicted with some data source; the
concentration to the only one city Kuala Lumpur and its suburbs. The
characteristics of locations will be interpreted as the mono-centralization and
the directional characteristics.
2. Condition of
Regional Development and Industrial Strategy
2.1. Historic
Situation
Before European
people discovered the regions, it is said that there were only 0.3 million
people lived in the whole peninsula (JACTIM, 1998). And after European, Chinese
and Indian people immigrated to the regions, dispersive administrations had
been implemented through the era of Malacca Dynasty and under the control of
Dutch and U.K. There were some footholds for production and trade of rubber and
tin, like Malacca, Penang and Singapore then, and the development of railway
lines for the transportation of products enabled to spread the activity along
the west coast of the peninsula. On the other side, Borneo Island was not
connected closely with the regions in Malay peninsula historically. Political
unification with the regions was done in 19C, when two states (Sabah and
Sarawaku) are incorporated as the colony of U.K. Thus, national structure has
become rather dispersive according to the original population structure and
administration systems and this characteristic continues even after the
economic progress in 80’s and 90’s. Now the population of federal capital Kuala
Lumpur is slightly above one million in the city boundary, and other big cities
like Ipho, Johor Bahru and Kuchin are maintaining about 300 thousands. Recently
suburban centers or satellite cities of Kuala Lumpur, like Petaling Jaya and
Klang, become bigger rapidly.
2.2. Regional
Development Policies
Malaysian
regional development has been implemented systematically on the basis of some
long-term plans (OPP (Overall Perspective Plan), NDP (National Development
Plan), and WAWASAN2020) and medium-term plans (Malaysia Plans)(JICA, 1997).
Planning for infrastructure development has originally aimed at the
decentralization against regional disparity and ethnic problems[2].
For example on the Sixth Malaysian Plan(1991-1995), promotion of industrial
locations in local areas as the means of income distribution was declared on
the chapter of the regional development strategy (Malaysian Govt., 1991). And
other specific industrial strategies related to dispersion are the designation
of Free Zone (FZ) (From 1990) and Licensed Manufacturing Warehouse (LMW) (From
1967), and the establishment of the Promoted Area[3]
(From 1993). But the activation of private sectors has been virtually proceeded
throughout the decades of economic progress and free economic activities have
been assured in the whole nation. So actual development has been virtually
progressed along the west coast of Malay peninsula (JETRO, 1998).
2.3.
Infrastructure related to Industrial Location
Road network in
Malaysia is generally developed well in all regions of Malay peninsula. Especially
in the west coast, North-South Highway goes through the peninsula and
industrial development seems to be done along that route. Development of the
network in Sabah and Sarawaku states is still on the way because of the tropical
rain forests and swamps. International airports are developed in main states
like Penang, Johor and states in Borneo, and Subang Airport[4]
in the suburb of Kuala Lumpur exists on the center of the aviation network.
Deep seaports are also developed in each region but the use of those located in
the east coast of Malay peninsula is limited by Monsoon climate from November
to February, so the main ports are located in the west coast of the peninsula
as the result. Industrial Estates are located mainly in the west coast but
spread nationwide.
3. Data Analysis
of Industrial Locations
3.1. Data Source
In this
analysis, two kinds of data set about manufacturers’ locations, made by MIDA
(Malaysian Industrial Development Agency) and FMM (Federation of Malaysian
Manufacturers) were used. (MIDA, 1998; FMM, 1998) MIDA’s data is based on the
list of manufacturers’ license and including all the large-scale and
medium-scale companies[5]
in Malaysia which are summed up to 3,945. The data of FMM mainly consists of
its membership companies and the total is 1,927 companies.
3.2. Analysis of
whole Malaysia
Firstly, the
locational situation of whole Malaysia is observed. In Figure 1, Malaysia was
divided into six regions; the federal capital Kuala Lumpur, its suburb Selangor
state, the southern west coast (of the peninsula) including Johor, the northern
west coast centered by Penang Island, the states through the east coast and
those in the Borneo Island.
Figure 2 shows
the result that three regions among six have about a thousand manufacturers
respectively. The northern east coast transferred the way of progress from the
channel trade of Penang Port to the assembly industries. (Yusof, N et al,
1995) Afterwards, the southern
west coast has taken part in the growth triangle named IMS-GT (Indonesia-Malaysia-Singapore
Growth Triangle) and the international division of labor is still now proceeded
within and near the region. (Grunsven L. V., 1995)
Looking at the
office locations of manufacturers in Kuala Lumpur, office functions engaged in
management and information gathering are separated from factories which are in
charge of production function. On the other hand, in K.L. Suburbs and the
northern and southern west coast, there are many manufacturing companies but
few office functions separated from factories. What is remarkable is that though
K. L. Suburbs includes a small number of office functions separated, in the
northern and southern west coast they rarely exist.
The data shows
that management functions of foreign companies and domestic major companies
tend to be located in the metropolitan area of Kuala Lumpur including some
sub-centers, and not even in the center of regional core like Johor Baruh or
George Town in Penang. In that sense, only Kuala Lumpur has the makings of an
so-called World City, which has management offices of transregional companies
and influences the other regions strongly. And on the other hand, though George
Town and Johor Baruh maintain large number of manufacturers, they can be
interpreted to be eventually dependent upon Kuala Lumpur or other big cities like
Singapore, or mother cities in case of foreign companies in terms of
management, unless they stand alone.
Similar results
can be said by seeing Table 3 made by FMM data. The office functions are
settled in K.L. and its suburb Selangor state, and particularly if production
functions and office functions are separated, office functions are in or near
K. L. with little exceptions.
3.3. Analysis of
Kuala Lumpur and its Suburbs
Figure 4 is the
result of another analysis by summing up by the direction from CBD of Kuala
Lumpur like Figure 3. There are several sub-centers in the suburbs of Kuala
Lumpur and most of them are along the corridor called “Klang Valley” including
Petaling Jaya, Sha Alam (the state capital of Selangor), Subang airport and
Klang seaport.
Seeing Figure
4, the agglomeration to the Klang Valley can be seen easily and especially on
the west side. Office functions are located in CBD and its suburb of a
particular direction, and production functions show the directional nature
regardless of the simple distance. The phenomenon can be also seen in Bangkok,
Thailand[6].
(Seta and Matsuyuki, 1999)
4. Results and
Future Perspectives
In this
analysis, the sets of data was limited in terms of both sectors and regions, so
it is difficult to assert the relationship between global economy and national
and regional structure. But the mono-centralization and the directional nature
contained by the location of important functions of manufacturers could be
observed in this paper, by using the example of Malaysia, which has originally
relatively dispersive national structure and the phenomena were seen in common
with another ASEAN country with the different structure.
On the other
side, there are no symptoms about locational differentiation of manufacturers’
functions in other places, even in the so-called growth poles of Malaysia like
Penang and Johor Baruh. Johor is assumed to play a part of subordinate role in
the relationship with Singapore, one of the world cities. More detailed
researches are necessary and the relationship among management and
manufacturing sector need to be analyzed. In terms of studying about Malaysia,
racial issue represented by Bumi-Putera policies should be taken into account
in the future observations.
Bibliography ([J]: Japanese Material)
FMM (Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers) (1998) ‘1998 FMM Directory –Malaysian Manufacturers, Exporters & Service Companies–‘
Friedmann J. (1986) “The World City Hypothesis” Development and Change, vol.17, num.1, pp.69-83
Geddes P. (1972) “Spokesman for Man and the Environment” ed. by M. Stalley, New Brunswick, Rutgers University Press
Grunsven L. V. (1995) ‘Industrial Regionalization and Urban-Regional Transformation in Southeast Asia: The SIJORI Growth Triangle Considered’, Malaysian Journal of Tropical Geography, vol.26, num.1, pp.47-66
JACTIM (Japanese Association for Commerce, Trade and Industry in Malaysia) (ed.) (1998) “Malaysia Handbook 1998” [J]
JETRO (Japanese External Trade Organization) (ed.) (1998) “Business Guide –Malaysia–” [J]
JICA (Japanese International Corporation Agency) (ed.) (1997) “Technology Information Data Sheets of Developing Countries –Malaysia– 1/4” [J]
Knox P. L. and Taylor P. J. (ed.) (1995) “World Cities in a World System” Cambridge University Press
Malaysian Government (1991) “Sixth Malaysian Plan 1991-1995”
MIDA (Malaysian Industrial Development Agency) (1998) “Approved Companies by MIDA”
Sassen S. (1991) “The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo” Princeton, N.J. Princeton University Press
Sassen S. (1996) “Losing Control?: Sovereignty in an Age of Globalization” Colombia University Press
Seta F. and Matsuyuki M. (1999) ‘Appropriate Geographical Structure for Metropolitan Areas- Trial to Decentralize Industrial Locations and Activities in case of Thailand-‘, Discussion Paper, World Conference on Model Cities, Singapore
Yusof N., Sirat M and Samsuddin A.(1995) ‘Regional
Industrialization, Labour Supply Problems and Manufacturer’s Responses: The
Penang Case’, Malaysian Journal of
Tropical Geography, vol.26, Num.2, pp.121-130