Social Justice and the Centralisation of Governance in the Australian Metropolis: A Case Study of Melbourne

摘要

澳大利亚的城市迅速但松散地铺展开来,众多社群各怀其志，社会流动性降低。这样的模式在很大程度上可归因于结构性经济变化，这种变化的最大特点是高附加值，"知识密集型"，全球联网的行业内发生强劲的集中趋势。当然，城市治理的改革也在其中助了一《之力。以墨尔本为例，澳大利亚城市出现不断集中的趋势，规划，基础设施和开发基本是州政府的事，而州政府是除联邦政府外获得澳大利亚宪法承认的唯一治理机构。结果，城市社群无法表达其集体意愿。许多本可缓解现代经济对社会不利彰响的政策提议和投入，不是半途而废，就是没有连续性。这些失之交臂的机会原本可以塑造一个更紧凑更团结的城市，现在却削弱了人力资本的积累，导致澳大利亚生产力和竞争力的下滑。我们需要重建城市治理论坛，以民主为圭臬,具有独立的财政能力，独立于州政府和地方政府而又与之向配合。为了扭转目前澳大利亚城市社会分裂、生产力流失的趋势,这样的论坛十分必要。%The prodigious, low-density spread of the Australian metropolis is creating communities of divergent aspirations and diminished social mobility. To a large degree, these patterns can be attributed to structural economic change, characterised by powerful centripetal tendencies within high value added, 'knowledge-intensive' and globally linked industries. However, reforms in metropolitan governance have also played a part. As evidenced in Melbourne, most Australian cities have seen a steady centralisation of planning, infrastructure and development facilitation functions into State Governments, the only constitutionally recognised sphere of governance in Australia besides the Commonwealth (federal) government. The upshot is that metropolitan communities effectively have no voice for their collective will. Many urban policy initiatives and investments that may have mitigated some of the socially adverse features of the modern economy have been foregone or implemented in a desultory manner. Moreover, these foregone opportunities to foster a more compact and connected metropolis have diminished human capital accumulation to the detriment of Australian productivity and competitiveness. Reinstatement of a metropolitan governance forum, with its own democratic mandate and fiscal capacity, to operate separately from, but in cooperation with, state and local governments, may be necessary if the trends in social division and lost productivity in the Australian city are to be reversed.