Advertisement

Theory and Society

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 355–384 | Cite as

Global borderlands: a case study of the Subic Bay Freeport Zone, Philippines

  • Victoria Reyes
Article

Abstract

By developing the concept of “global borderlands”—semi-autonomous, foreign-controlled geographic locations geared toward international exchange—this article shifts the focus of globalization literature from elite global cities and cities on national borders to within-country sites owned or operated by foreigners and defined by significant social, cultural, and economic exchange. I analyze three shared features of these sites: semi-autonomy, symbolic and geographic boundaries, and unequal relations. The multi-method analyses reveal how the concept of global borderlands can help us better understand the interactions that occur among people of different nationalities, classes, and races/ethnicities and the complex dynamics that occur within foreign-controlled spaces. I first situate global borderlands within the literatures of global cities and geopolitical borderlands. Next, I use the case study of Subic Bay Freeport Zone (SBFZ), Philippines to show (1) how the semi-autonomy of global borderlands produces different regulations depending on nationality, (2) how its geographic and symbolic borders differentiate this space from the surrounding community, and (3) how the semi-autonomy of these locations and their geographic and symbolic borders reproduce unequal relations. As home of the former US Subic Bay Naval Base and current site of a Freeport Zone, the SBFZ serves as a particularly strategic research location to examine the different forms of interactions that occur between groups within spaces of unequal power.

Keywords

Borderlands Geographic boundaries Global cities Globalization Inequality Symbolic borders 

Notes

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Miguel Centeno, Viviana Zelizer, and Doug Massey for their guidance during this project. I would also like to thank Kerstin Gentsch, Joanne Wang Golann, and Erin Johnston for comments on earlier versions of this article as well as Sally Engle Merry and Annie Bunting for their feedback during the Law and Society Association’s 2013 Graduate Student Workshop, and Saskia Sassen for her comments at the 2014 Junior Theorist Symposium. Additionally, Amy A. Quark provided valuable advice at a PEWS mentoring activity at the 2014 ASA. The Editors and reviewers at Theory and Society also provided invaluable feedback. The research and writing for this article were supported by generous funds from Princeton University’s Department of Sociology, East Asian Studies Program, Center for Migration and Development, the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies, as well as the American Sociological Association’s Minority Fellowship Program.

References

  1. Abrams, P. (1982). Historical sociology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Adelman, J., & Aron, S. (1999). From borderlands to borders: empires, nation-states, and the peoples in between in north american history. The American Historical Review, 104(3), 814–841.Google Scholar
  3. Alvarez, R. R. (1995). The Mexican-US border: the making of an anthropology of borderlands. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 447–470.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, E. (1992). Streetwise: Race, class, and change in an urban community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Anzaldua, G. (1999). Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.Google Scholar
  6. Bandelj, N. (2002). Embedded economies: social relations as determinants of foreign direct investment in central and eastern Europe. Social Forces, 81(2), 411–444.Google Scholar
  7. Bandelj, N. (2009). The global economy as instituted process. American Sociological Review, 74(1), 128–149.Google Scholar
  8. Baum, S. (1997). Sydney, Australia: a global city? testing the social Polarisation thesis. Urban Studies, 34(11), 1881–1902.Google Scholar
  9. Benton, L. (2008). From international Law to imperial constitutions: the problem of quasi-sovereignty, 1870–1900. Law and History, 26(3), 595–619.Google Scholar
  10. Berman, P. S. (2009). The New legal pluralism. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 5, 225–242.Google Scholar
  11. Berner, E., & Korff, R. (1995). Globalization and local resistance: the creation of localities in Manila and Bangkok. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 19(2), 208–222.Google Scholar
  12. Blakely, E. J., & Snyder, M. G. (1999). Fortress america: Gated communities in the united states. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
  13. Blandy, S., & Sibley, D. (2010). Law, boundaries and the production of space. Social & Legal Studies, 19(3), 275–284.Google Scholar
  14. Blomley, N. (2010). The right to pass freely: circulation, begging and the bounded self. Social & Legal Studies, 19(3), 331–350.Google Scholar
  15. Borer, M. I. (2006). The location of culture: the urban Culturalist perspective. City & Community, 5(2), 173.Google Scholar
  16. Bowen, Alva M. (1986). “Philippine Bases: U.S. Redeployment Options.” Congressional Research Service: Library of Congress.Google Scholar
  17. Bowen, J., Leinbach, T. R., & Daniel, M. (2002). “Air cargo services, the state, and industrialization strategies in the Philippines: the redevelopment of Subic Bay”. Regional Studies, 36(5), 451–467.Google Scholar
  18. Boyenge, Jean-Pierre Singa. (2007). “ILO Database on Export Processing Zones (Revised).” Working Paper No. 251 International Labour Organization.Google Scholar
  19. Bradshaw, Y., & Wallace, M. (1991). Informing generality and explaining uniqueness: the place of case studies. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 32(1–2), 154–171.Google Scholar
  20. Braudel, F. (1975). The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean world in the Age of Philip II Vol I. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  21. Butler, C. (2009). Critical legal studies and the politics of space. Social & Legal Studies, 18(3), 313–332.Google Scholar
  22. Caldeira, T. P. R. (1996). Fortified enclaves: the New urban segregation. Public Culture, 8(2), 303–328.Google Scholar
  23. Casas-Cortes, M., Cobarrubias, S., & Pickles, J. (2012). Re-bordering the Neighbourhood: Europe’s emerging geographies of Non-accession integration. European Urban and Regional Studies, 20(1), 37–58.Google Scholar
  24. Castells, M. (1989). The informational city: Information, technology, economic restructuring, and the urban-regional process. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Chase-Dunn, C., & Grimes, P. (1995). World–systems analysis. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 387–417.Google Scholar
  26. Cohen, L. (1996). From town center to shopping center: the reconfiguration of community marketplaces in postwar America. American Historical Review, 101(4), 1050–1081.Google Scholar
  27. Cooley, A. (2008). Base politics: Democratic change and the U.S. Military overseas. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Cressey, D. (1932). The taxi-dance hall. New York: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  29. D’Argemir, D. C., & Pujadas, J. J. (1999). “Living in/on the frontier: migration, identities, and citizenship in Andorra.”. Social Anthropology, 7(3), 253–264.Google Scholar
  30. Delaney, D., Ford, R. T., & Nicholas, B. (2001). “Preface: Where is Law?”. In B. Nichols, D. David, & R. T. Ford (Eds.), The legal geographies reader. Pp. xiii–xxii. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. DiMaggio, P., & Louch, H. (1998). “Socially embedded consumer transactions: for what kinds of purchases Do people most often Use networks?”. American Sociological Review, 63, 619–637.Google Scholar
  32. Dixon, W. J., & Boswell, T. (1996). Dependency, disarticulation and Denominatior effects: another look at foreign capital penetration. American Journal of Sociology, 102(2), 543–562.Google Scholar
  33. Donnan, H., & Wilson, M. T. (1999). Borders: Frontiers of identity, nation and state. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  34. Donnan, H., & Wilson, T. M. (2010). “Ethnography, security, and the ‘frontier Effect’ in borderlands.”. In D. Hastings & T. M. Wilson (Eds.), Borderlands: Ethnographic approaches to security, power, and identity. Pp 1–20. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  35. Douglas, M. (2008). Purity and danger. London: Routledge. 1966.Google Scholar
  36. Drakakis-Smith, D. (2000[1987]). Third world cities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Drake, S. C., & Cayton, H. R. (1993 [1945]). Black metropolis: A study of negro life in a northern city. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  38. DuBois, W. E. B. (1996 [1899]). The Philadelphia negro: A social study. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  39. Duneier, M. (2000). Sidewalk. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  40. Enloe, C. (2000 [1990]). Bananas, beaches, and bases: Making feminist sense of international politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  41. Evans, P. B., & Timberlake, M. (1980). Dependence, inequality, and the growth of the tertiary: A comparative analysis of less developed countries. American Sociological Review, 45(4), 531–552.Google Scholar
  42. Evinger, W. R. (1995). Directory of U.S. Military bases worldwide. Phoenix: Oryx Press.Google Scholar
  43. Fernandez-Kelly, M. P. (1989). Broadening the scope: gender and international economic development. Sociological Forum, 4(4), 611–635.Google Scholar
  44. FIAS: The Multi-Donor Investment Climate Advisory Service of The World Bank Group. (2008). “Special Economic Zones: Performance, Lessons Learned and Implications for Zone Development.” The World Bank Group.Google Scholar
  45. Firebaugh, G. (2003). The New geography of global income inequality. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Frank Andre Gunder. 1973. “The Development of Underdevelopment. In: The Political Economy of Development and Underdevelopment. New York: Random House (originally published in Monthly Review, September 1966).Google Scholar
  47. Friedmann, J. (1986). The world city hypothesis. Development and Change, 17(1), 69–83.Google Scholar
  48. Friedmann, J., & Wolff, G. (1982). World city formation. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 6(3), 309–344.Google Scholar
  49. Gans, H. J. (1962). The urban villagers. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  50. Garrido, M. (2013). The sense of place behind segregating practices: an Ethngoraphic approach to the symbolic partitioning of metro Manila. Social Forces, 91(4), 1343–1382.Google Scholar
  51. Gocek, F. M. (1995). Whither historical sociology?”. Historical Methods: A Journal of Quantitative and Interdisciplinary History, 28(2), 107–116.Google Scholar
  52. Goffman, E. (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  53. Goldstone, P. (2001). Making the world safe for tourism. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Gonzalez, V. (2007). Military bases, ‘royalty Trips’, and imperial Modernities: gendered and Racialized labor in the postcolonial Philippines. Frontiers, 28(3), 28–59.Google Scholar
  55. Gould, E. H. (2003). Zones of Law, zones of violence: the legal geography of the British Atlantic, circa 1772. The William and Mary Quarterly, 60(3), 471–510.Google Scholar
  56. Grant, J., & Mittelsteadt, L. (2004). Types of gated communities. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 31, 913–930.Google Scholar
  57. Griffiths, J. (1986). “What is legal pluralism?”. Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 24, 1.Google Scholar
  58. Hall, P. (1996). The global city. International Social Science Journal, 48(147), 15–23.Google Scholar
  59. Helleiner, J. (2012). Whiteness and narratives of a Racialized Canada-US border at Niagara. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie, 37(2), 109–135.Google Scholar
  60. Heyman, J. M. C. (2009). Trust, privilege, and discretion in the governance of US borderlands with Mexico. Canadian Journal of Law and Society, 24(3), 367–390.Google Scholar
  61. Hobsbawm, E. (1989). The Age of empire 1875–1914. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
  62. Kelly, P. F. (2001). The political economy of local labor control in the Philippines. Economic Geography, 77(1), 1–22.Google Scholar
  63. Kirk, D. (1998). Looted: The Philippines after the bases. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  64. Korzeniewicz, R., & Moran, T. (2009). Unveiling inequality: A world-historical perspective. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  65. Lamont, M., & Molnar, V. (2002). The study of boundaries in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 167–195.Google Scholar
  66. Lee, C. K. (1995). Engendering the worlds of labor: women workers, labor markets, and production politics in the South China economic miracle. American Sociological Review, 60, 378–397.Google Scholar
  67. Lee, H.-K. (2008). International marriage and the state in South Korea: focusing on governmental policy. Citizenship Studies, 12(1), 107–123.Google Scholar
  68. Liebow, E. (1967). Tally’s corner: A study of negro Streetcorner Men. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  69. Loukaitou-Sideris, A., & Gilbert, L. (2000). Shades of duality: perceptions and images of downtown workers in Los Angeles. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(1), 16–33.Google Scholar
  70. Massey, D. S. (2005). Strangers in a strange land: Humans in an urbanizing world. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  71. Massey, D., & Denton, N. (1993). American apartheid: Segregation and the making of the underclass. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Merry, S. E. (1988). Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review, 22(5), 869–896.Google Scholar
  73. Merton, R. K. (1987). Three fragments from a Sociologist’s notebooks: establishing the phenomenon, specified ignorance, and strategic research materials. Annual Review of Sociology, 13, 1–28.Google Scholar
  74. Michaels, R. (2009). Global legal pluralism. Annual Review of Law and Social Sciences, 5, 243–262.Google Scholar
  75. Murphy, A. (2012). ‘Litterers’: How objects of physical disorder Are used to construct subjects of social disorder in a suburb. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 642, 210–227.Google Scholar
  76. Neal, Z. (2010). Refining the air traffic approach to city networks. Urban Studies, 47, 2195–2215.Google Scholar
  77. Ong, A. (2006). Neoliberalism as exception: Mutations in citizenship and sovereignty. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Paulsen, K. E. (2004). Making character concrete: empirical strategies for studying place distinction. City & Community, 3(3), 243–262.Google Scholar
  79. Philippines. (1975). Presidential Decree No. 825, accessed: http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/presdecs/pd1975/pd_825_1975.html
  80. Philippines. (2001). Republic Act 9003, accessed: http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2001/ra_9003_2001.html
  81. Philippines. (2011). Supreme Court of Appeals. No. 121186.Google Scholar
  82. Pirenne, H. (1969). Medieval cities: Their origins and the revival of trade. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Pisani, M. J. (2013). Cross-border consumption of informal and underground goods: a case study of alternative consumerism in south Texas. Social Science Quarterly, 94(1), 242–262.Google Scholar
  84. Prebisch, R. (1959). Commercial policy in the underdeveloped countries. American Economic Review, 49(2), 251–273.Google Scholar
  85. Reyes, V. (2013). The structure of globalized travel: a relational, country-pair analysis. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 54(2), 144–170.Google Scholar
  86. Reyes, V. (2015). Legacies of place and power: from military base to Freeport Zone. City & Community, 14(1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  87. Rimmer, P. J. (1998). “Transport and telecommunications among world cities”. In L. Fu-Chen & Y. Yue-man (Eds.), Globalization and the world of large cities (pp. 433–470). Tokyo: United Nations University Press.Google Scholar
  88. Rippl, S., Bucker, N., Petrat, A., & Boehnke, K. (2010). Crossing the frontier: transnational social integration in the EU’s border regions. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 5(1–2), 5–31.Google Scholar
  89. Rivera, L. (2008). Managing ‘Spoiled’ national identity: War, tourism and memory in Croatia. American Sociological Review, 73, 613–634.Google Scholar
  90. Rondinelli, D. (1987). Export processing zones and economic development in Asia. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 46(1), 89–105.Google Scholar
  91. Rutherford, B. (2011). The uneasy ties of working and belonging: the changing situation for undocumented Zimbabwean migrants in northern South Africa. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(8), 1303–1319.Google Scholar
  92. Sampson, R., & Raudenbush, S. (2004). Seeing disorder: neighborhood stigma and the social construction of “broken windows.”. Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(4), 319–342.Google Scholar
  93. Sassen, S. (1990). Economic restructuring and the American City. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 465–490.Google Scholar
  94. Sassen, S. (2000). Spatialities and temporalities of the global: elements for a theorization. Public Culture, 12(1), 215–232.Google Scholar
  95. Sassen, S. (2001[1991]). The global city: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Sassen, S. (2006). Territory, authority, rights: From medieval to global assemblages. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Scheppele, K. L. (2010). The constitutional role of transnational courts: principled legal ideas in three-dimensional political space. Penn State International Law Review, 28, 451.Google Scholar
  98. Sewell, W. H. (2005). Logics of history: Social theory and social transformation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  99. Shatkin, G. (2005/2006). Colonial capital, modernist capital, global capital: the changing political symbolism of urban space in Metro Manila, the Philippines. Pacific Affairs, 78(4), 577–600.Google Scholar
  100. Singer, H. W. (1949). Economic progress in underdeveloped countries. Social Research, 16, 1–11.Google Scholar
  101. Sklair, L. (1991). Problems of socialist development: the significance of Shenzhen special economic zone for China’s open door development strategy. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 15(2), 197–215.Google Scholar
  102. Sklair, L. (1992). The Maquilas in Mexico: a global perspective. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 11(1), 91–107.Google Scholar
  103. Sklair, L., & Robins, T. P. (2002). Global capitalism and major corporations from the third world. Third World Quarterly, 23(1), 81–100.Google Scholar
  104. Smith, D. A., & Timberlake, F. M. (2001). World city networks and hierarchies, 197–1997: an empirical analysis of global Air travel links. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 1656.Google Scholar
  105. Snyder, F. G. (1981). Colonialism and legal form: the creation of ‘customary Law’ in Senegal. Journal of Legal Pluralism, 19, 49.Google Scholar
  106. Stack, C. (1974). All Our Kin: Strategies for survival in a black community. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  107. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority. (1992). “Rules and Regulations Implementing the Provisions Relative to the Subic Special Economic and Freeport Zone and the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority Under Republic Act No. 7227, Otherwise Known as the “Bases Conversion and Development Act of 1992.”Google Scholar
  108. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority. (2009). Legal Department. Lease template.Google Scholar
  109. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority. (2011). “Subic Bay Freeport: Residents’ Handbook.Google Scholar
  110. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority. (2012). “SBF Approved Projects as of Jan 2012.” General Business and Investment Department, excel sheet emailed from SBMA BID personnel on September 27, 2012Google Scholar
  111. Sundberg, J. (2008). ‘Trash-Talk’ and the production of quotidian geopolitical boundaries in the USA-Mexico borderlands. Social & Cultural Geography, 9(8), 871–890.Google Scholar
  112. Tamanaha, B. (2007). Understanding legal pluralism: past to present, local to global. Sydney Law Review, 30, 375.Google Scholar
  113. Thanner, M. H., & Segal, M. W. (2008). When the military leaves and places change: effects of the closing of an army post on the local Communit. Armed Forces & Society, 34(4), 662–681.Google Scholar
  114. Thompson, W. S. (1975). Unequal partners: Philippine and Thai relations with the United States 1965–7. Washington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  115. Tirres, A. B. (2008–2010). Lawyers and legal borderlands. The American Journal of Legal History, 50(2), 157–199.Google Scholar
  116. United States Department of Defense. (2010). “Base Structure Report: Fiscal Year 2010 Baseline, A Summary of DoD’s Real Property Inventory.” Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations & Environment).Google Scholar
  117. United States. General Accounting Office. (1992). Report to Congressional Requesters: Military Base Closures: U.S. Financial Obligations in the Philippines.Google Scholar
  118. Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-systems analysis: An introduction. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  119. Wang, J.-h. (2004). World city formation, geopolitics, and local political process: Taipei’s ambiguous development. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(2), 384–400.Google Scholar
  120. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and Society. Edited by Guenther Roth and Claus Wittich. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  121. Wherry, F. (2007). Trading impressions: evidence from Costa Rica. ANNALS American Academy of Political and Social Science, 610, 217.Google Scholar
  122. Widdis, R. W. (2010). Crossing an intellectual and geographic border: the importance of migration in shaping the Canadian-American borderlands at the turn of the twentieth century. Social Science History, 34(4), 445–497.Google Scholar
  123. Wilson, James Q., and George Kelling. March (1982). “Broken windows.” Atlantic Monthly, 29–38.Google Scholar
  124. Yeo, A. (2010). U.S. Military Base Realignment in South Korea. Peace Review: A Journal of Social Justice, 22, 113–120.Google Scholar
  125. Yilmaz, I. (2008). The challenge of post-modern legality and Muslim legal pluralism in England. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 28(2), 343–354.Google Scholar
  126. Zelizer, V. (2005). The purchase of intimacy. Princeton: Princeton University Pres.s.Google Scholar
  127. Zelizer, V. (2013). Economic lives: How culture shapes the economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  128. Zelizer, Viviana. (2010). “How I became a relational economic sociologist and what does that mean?” Paper presented at the University of California at Davis for a Conference on Relational Work.Google Scholar
  129. Zorbough, H. W. (1929). The gold coast and the slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bryn Mawr CollegeBryn MawrUSA

Personalised recommendations