Acceso usuarios
Juan Luis Manfredi Sánchez 
El artículo estudia la sucesión de cambios en la estructura política internacional ante la reconfiguración de las fuentes de poder. Establece tres vertientes en las bases teóricas del cosmopolitismo urbano. La primera indica cuáles deberían ser los fundamentos de una elaboración teórica. La ciudad internacional contribuye a la reconfiguración de la estructura y el ejercicio del poder interestatal ocupando o creando nuevos espacios que contribuyen a la pluralidad de las Relaciones Internacionales. El segundo aspecto que se analiza es el crecimiento de la ciudad como unidad de medida en la economía global. Los flujos de capital circulan y operan sobre una base local con destinos globales. Son las ciudades y sus extensiones metropolitanas quienes se benefician del sistema económico. Aparecen grandes bolsas de desigualdad interna y, sobre todo, con una ruptura entre ciudades dentro y fuera del orden económico, incluyendo aquí la desigualdad relacional que se genera en los territorios menos poblados. Por último, se incide en la razón antropocénica, esto es, el impacto de la acción humana en las condiciones naturales y sus consecuencias en el orden mundial. El cambio climático cambia el sustrato principal de las Relaciones Internacionales, que es el medio físico y la geografía. Sobre estas dos dimensiones tangibles, se ordenan las bases del poder y la teoría básica de los estudios internacionales. Al cambiar el tablero estratégico, la ciudad conquista posiciones de poder no coercitivo, lo que facilita la colaboración mediante redes y estructuras. El aspecto militar y de seguridad no es relevante para la diplomacia urbana, que se centra en aspectos de poder económico y social. Los resultados indican que el nuevo cosmopolitismo tiene bases urbanas y ofrece un marco de interpretación de las tensiones entre centro y periferia de la acción exterior, la globalización económica y las nuevas políticas públicas en la lucha contra el cambio climático. El cosmopolitismo urbano emerge como referencia teórica en el orden postliberal.
The city has been the political unit of organization in the international system for long periods of history. As actors in international society, cities have left irreplaceable classics: Athens, Imperial Rome, the Hanseatic League or Machiavelli’s Florence. However, the dominant school of thought has diminished the role of the city on the international scene. The Westphalian model consolidated the nation-state as the axis and macro-political unit object and subject of study. Following this logic, cities’ capacity for international action was limited and, as a field of study, was reduced to cultural activities or of little diplomatic relevance (e.g. twin cities). This state-centered approach, both in theory and practice, finds its place in the legal approach over the political one in the development of international society and international relations theories. However, the global dynamic has changed substantially, and it opens the door to new structures or vectors of transnational analysis. The Westphalian system loses weight in the face of the concatenation of phenomena and transformations of international society. Taking this to be the case, the current international structure opens avenues of research in the international political activity of the city, diplomatic practice, global and economic hub relations, or the rise of city brands as a marketing strategy. Of course, the nation-state will not disappear in the short term, but it does seem that new actors and dynamics are emerging in the construction of the post-liberal order. Above all, the city emerges as a new point of reference for solving globalization problems: climate change, migrations, diversity, or identity. The effect is relevant to the epistemological bases of a transversal discipline: the city is incorporated as a reference subject in the reformulation of the general theory of International Relations.
The consensus around the liberal order, born after 1945, has been broken. The current theoretical doctrine only agrees on one element: there is no new consensus on the foundations of the international system. The global architecture of institutions, the effective capacities for the exercise of power, the decline of multilateral practices, or the difficulty in establishing a common economic agenda are symptoms of a change in global power structures. With or without legitimacy, cities act in the international sphere with the aim of influencing, modifying knowledge, behavior, or judgment. In this context, the institutionalization of the city as an actor in international relations is one of the most relevant fields for studying the new organizing principle of international society. The city lacks the normative and institutional instruments, but it does promote principles that later become public policy practices that affect the international order. The theoretical approach emphasizes the economic aspects of the global city, since the economic and industrial capacity has reinforced the ability to influence the transformation of the international system. From a methodological point of view, urban cosmopolitanism is not a theory closed by the very diversity of global cities. Therefore, the areas of interest of each city can vary from one to the other, as well as the global action repertoire. Working in collaborative networks and alliances of a political and economic nature is facilitated. In its relationship with the State, the global city poses agency problems that are relevant to the future of theory: will they be cooperative or competitive? In what disciplines? The asymmetry of interests can deepen dissonances and accelerate the theoretical basis of development. The proposed methodology affects the impact of climate change on the reformulation of the theoretical bases of international studies. It is theorized from practice. The institutionalization of urban diplomacy refers to the search for practical solutions of a collective nature. There are networks such as C40, the Clean Air Coalition or We are Still In that are led and organized from urban practice. The climate issue gives moral strength to the city as an international actor insofar as it does not deal with political borders, but with the consequences of climate change on the lives of residents. It fits in with the cosmopolitan tradition insofar as it affects all individuals, without discrimination of origin, gender, or nationality; and it is a matter of universal status, because it impacts all territories and human life conditions. There is no arbitrariness in Anthropocene reason.
The article studies the succession of changes in the international political structure before the reconfiguration of the sources of power. It establishes three aspects in the theoretical bases of urban cosmopolitanism. The first indicates what the foundations of a theoretical elaboration should be. The international city contributes to the reconfiguration of the structure and the exercise of interstate power by occupying or creating new spaces that contribute to the plurality of international relations. The second aspect analyzed is the growth of the city as a unit of measurement in the global economy. Capital flows circulate and operate on a local basis with global destinations. It is the cities and their metropolitan areas that benefit from the economic system. Large pockets of internal inequality appear and, above all, with a rupture between cities within and outside the economic order, including the relational inequality that is generated in the least populated territories. Finally, anthropogenic reason is stressed, that is, the impact of human action on natural conditions and its consequences on the world order. Climate change changes the main substrate of international relations, which is the physical environment and geography. On these two tangible dimensions, the bases of power and the basic theory of international studies are ordered. By changing the strategic board, the city conquers positions of non-coercive power, facilitating collaboration through networks and structures. The military and security aspect are not relevant to urban diplomacy, which focuses on aspects of economic and social power. The results indicate that the new cosmopolitanism has urban bases and offers a framework for interpreting the tensions between the center and the periphery of foreign action, economic globalization, and new public policies in the fight against climate change. Urban cosmopolitanism emerges as a theoretical reference in the post-liberal order.
The present work seeks to establish the foundations of urban cosmopolitanism, a theoretical approach to the current world organized around urban areas, be they cities, megacities, or metropolitan regions. Cities have become structural axes of international society with consequences in the political, economic, and social spheres. There is no closed conclusion, a kind of theory that replaces the previous ones. On the contrary, urban cosmopolitanism aspires to reflect a change in the paradigm of international relations. Thus, climate change is a transforming element of the global scene and opens new avenues for international politics, which can end with a substantial change in the modes of government, representation, and citizen participation. Be that as it may, this first paper addresses difficulties, raises research questions, and supports elements for change.
