The impact of Fordism and

Post Fordism on Urban Space

Eva van Beek 0436143

Simon Buwalda 0418978
Jonathan Stoop 0441996
1 Introduction

When we look at maps for example we can see that cities are overtaking a lot of space.
This space is claimed by cities, in brief: the space that is used for urban activities is
named Urban Space. Looking in the future the amount of urban area will increase
through the growth of the numbers of urban dwellers.
In this paper we will discuss urban space in western countries by taking Fordism and
Post Fordism as our starting point. These two industrial movements have had a very
important influence on the development of western cities. We will focus on the social
effects on the society and the physical aspects on the urban landscape.

At first we will explain Fordism and the influence on production processes. After that we
discuss the impact of the changes on industries. We will explain this by two examples of
Fordism, one in the Netherlands and the other one in the USA.
Then we will make a transition to Post Fordism. We will explain the underlying thoughts
of the changes. For a concrete example we will look at Los Angeles (USA). The impacts
on the urban spaces will be discussed after this example.
The difference between the two forms of production will be compared in our conclusion.
We also give arguments to take the two industrial movements by approaching the
present urban spaces.

1
2. Fordism

2.1 On the end of a labour day begins freedom

Fordism is associated by the well-known industrial
Henry Ford (1863-1947). His factories were
examples for many other factories in the world. He
introduced a production system that made it
possible to fabricate a large number of identical
goods in a short time. Ford specialised every
worker to do one single action. The workers, mostly
men, worked the whole day on the moving band
(assembly line) to do the same single action. Fig.1. Henry Ford
This was a successful revolution for the efficiency of producing and a cheaper product.
Fordism has to be seen as a broader concept on economic and social issues. It has its
own specific influence on urban space.

2.2 Taylorism basis of Fordism

First of all we will start with an explanation of Taylorism. Fordism is an example of
Taylorism and not a phenomenon on itself. Friedrich Taylor (1856-1915) mentioned the
importance of a rational and efficient organisation of companies by standardisation of the
production process. In Taylorism the management had less knowledge about the
practical work of the production, so the management had to
know how the production was organised. Taylor said:

“All possible brain work should be removed from the shop and centred in the
planning or laying-out department leaving for the bosses work strictly executive in
its nature” 1.

This planning department in the organization selected the best people for a job. They
were the ‘denktank’ of the company because;

‘Industry suffers under a sabotage of hands’ 2.

2
The managers had to decide what the workers should do. This is the essence of
Taylorism: the separation of thinking and doing. When a worker had thought about his
action he got used to it and tried to improve it. Human and machine has to be ‘one’
without the feeling for the worker that he is a sort of a robot. The relation between
employer and worker is called a social-technical relation. Both sides had different
demands.
The planning department wanted to have an efficient production process but workers
wanted to have a good payment, not much work hours and good workingcircumstances.
There will be a conflict of disturbances between the demands for the workers and the
planning department.3 Taylorism can be schematized like below fig. 2:

Fig. 2

Ford recognized the importance of the relation between worker and employer. He
introduced an eight-hour workday and gave a higher wage by an increasing production.
But these improvements were made on an economic base to make a better profit of
labour. In Fordistic time the management was very hierarchical. The power of the
company was only in the top of the organization.

2.3 Consequences on urban spaces

The economic benefits of mass production were the most important issues in Fordism to
deal with. The company was only interested in, ‘how many products can we make and
for how less money’?
This mass production had consequences for urban spaces. First of all we will discuss
the physical effects on the urban space. The little workplaces in rural regions were not
strong enough to win the competition of the larger factories in the cities. In the rural

3
regions rose the unemployment. The migration of rural people towards makes the city
growth fast. The people were unemployed and were looking for work in the city. The
growth of the cities was explosive. The companies choose to build their factories in the
cities because they’re where the most people were living. In and around the cities arose
great complexes of industry. To reach the complexes they needed roads and railway
tracks. Fordism and his production process had also social effects. Workers and
employers became socially separated.
Marx came up with the idea of classes. The workers were in one class and were dictated
by the employers. In the ‘fin de siècle’ till the sixties was the class-war the heaviest. After
that the working class got more rights and their demands were granted. In the production
process every link was important. Albert Hahn (1877-1918) illustrated in 1903 in the
Dutch newspaper ‘Het Volk’ a drawing with the line ‘Gansch het radarwerk staat stil, als
uw machtige arm het wil’4. Translated to: The wheel will be standing still, when your
mighty arms will stop turning, it will.

2.4. Examples of Fordism

The influence of Fordism on urban spaces is not obvious. Fordism is a production
process that standardized the production for a lower price and for a larger production.
The factories were build on
places where labour or raw
materials for the product were
available. The companies were
in this way dependent of the
place they were built. Besides
that the city was dependent of
the companies, because they
served employment. We’ll
explain this by two Western
cities.

Fig. 3

4
2.4.1 Let’s makes things … quicker and cheaper’
First the city of Eindhoven (Noord-Brabant, The Netherlands) was developed mostly by
the company Philips. The brothers, Gerard and Anton, started here a glowlamp factory.
(Nice to tell is that Karl Marx is a nephew of the Philips and Marx meet them several
times in a place called Zaltbommel. So the Fordist/capitalist like Philips and Marxist/
communist Marx came together at one point). The brothers went to Eindhoven because
there were enough workers in contradiction of the rural areas. The factory developed
also other products like radios, vacuum cleaners and later televisions. Eindhoven
developed quarters of typical workinghouses and large complex of industries. That’s one
of the reasons that Eindhoven is nowadays the 4th city of The Netherlands.

2.4.2 ‘You can choose every colour, only when the colour is black’
The city Detroit (Michigan, U.S.A. was developed by the car industry. Ford started his
factory here and Detroit became a large city with a workers districts. The city Detroit had
before the time of car industry an industry of wooden carts. The founders of the city
made the city like the shape of a cartwheel. When the industry of carts, change to the
production of cars, the coincidence was that the necessary raw material, iron, was also
found near Detroit7. The industry in city could easily develop because they were not
dependent of transportation of iron elsewhere.

5
3 Post Fordism

3.1 Introduction
In the text above is written down the influence of Fordism on urban spaces. From now
on we will focus on Post-Fordism. Fist of all we will describe “Post Fordism”. After this
we will look to the influence, of the period of Post Fordism, on the city.

3.2 Post Fordism

The period of Post Fordism was a reaction on Fordism. The transformation from Fordism
to Post Fordism was not fast. It was not so that Fordism totally disappeared when Post
Fordism came in. In the 70’ seventies of the 20th century, Fordism was not very popular
common anymore in the Western States. The economy wasn’t growing that much as in
the first years after the Second World War and there was some critique on the
production methods which characterized the period of Fordism. The work in the factories
wasn’t very attractive for the workers. The production process was quit mind-numbing for
the workers. Intellectuals were thinking about new methods which could increase the
economy and could make there country stronger. The keywords which would let to
increasing were diversity and flexibility. These keywords are the pillars of Post Fordism.
When the term Post Fordism was borne the society was changing. In Western capitalist
societies, welfare gave people the possibilities to travel, to consume etc. There was a
certain standard of living. Making money and producing as many goods became not the
main issues in the post war ages. The ecological environment was becoming more and
more important for many people.

Key elements of
Post Fordism
Diversity
Figure 4
Integration
Flexibility
Dispersal
Decentralization
Optimalism

6
3.3 The theory of Post Fordism
Post Fordism is characterized by the application of production methods, considered to
be more flexible than those of the Fordist area8. The period is also called the age of
Flexibility.
In figure 2 you can find the main components of Post Fordism production in factories.
We will look more specific to the elements of schedule 2.1.
Diversity is a main component in Post Fordism. The Post Fordism way of thinking is
based on the fact that it’s important that factories are making more than only one
product. For example it’s necessary to make not only a T-Fords but also escort or
mustang or KA etc. More, almost the same products, will keep the market in good
health. Integration is also a main thing in the age of Post Fordism. Workers can produce
more than only one product. So they can do different things in the production process.
The way of thinking behind this approach is: When people get more integrated in the
process of making a product they can identify themselves more with the product. They
will work harder and are more satisfied. Teamwork became more important and a new
phenomenon JIT, Just in Time, was introduced. The principle of JIT is to minimize
inventory at each stage of the production process9. The JIT principle requires that parts
arrive "just in time" for their use in the production process. So the communication and
infrastructure needed to be perfect! Making product was ordered by the system of supply
and demand. If there was a great demand for goods, a lot of products were made. A
result of the new methods was that workers and managers work more closely with each
other and not on the traditional, hierarchical and compartmentalized Fordist way 10. A
way to keep workers motivated was giving them promotion possibilities.
Increasing flexibility was being seen as the key ingredient for a successful Post Fordism
period. One related to the component above was: more flexibility in labor. The new
vision was that a worker in the industry can work at more places in the production line.
Dispersal was a new element. Different locations were used for the production. Parts of
the production were displaced to the periphery. Overseas investment in cheap labor
areas became more and more popular. There was a growth of less labor-intensive high-
technological industries. Nevertheless the management and the knowledge stay in the
Western countries.

7
In this case to optimize the production means that not only making as many product as
possible is important. Also the effects on the ecological environment are essential.
People realize: A healthy environment is necessary to have opportunities in the future.

First of all the transition from Fordism to Post Fordism was essential for the industry and
for industrialization. But the process had influence on the whole society included the
industry. Influences of Post Fordism were and are for instance founded in city planning.
Now we will look more concretely to the influence of Post Fordism on urban space.

3.4. Post Fordism and Urban Space.

The transition from Fordism to Post Fordism had some spatial effect on the Western
capitalist cities. The biggest impact was seen in the cities in the USA.
In the time of Fordism, raw material and labor were the main location factors for
companies. The main location factor in Post Fordism age was attainability. The industrial
activities in cities, which needed good infrastructure for there attainability, were
sometimes replaced from the centre of the city to the periphery. At the edge of the cities
factories formed some kind of clustering areas. Agglomerations became a new
phenomenon. In the old centre, were old Fordist factories moved, the open spots got
new functions. There were often build offices and companies.

3.4.1. Los Angeles:

For a more concrete look we will take Los Angeles as an example, a Post Fordist
industrial metropolis. Besides the Ruhr area in Germany, Los Angeles is the second
larges urban-industrial sub region in the world. In the 1960s, the area contained the
largest automobile assembly, tire and glass manufacturing, iron and steel industries in
the Western USA11 (in the time of Post Fordism almost every one of these major
production sites moved to other areas). LA is divided in parts. It’s a good example of a
Post Fordist city. The city is divided in sub-centres, area with the same
factories/companies. Attainability is the reason for companies to locate there factories in
such an area. The factories can help eachother by making high quality product and by
minimize the costs.

8
3.5 The end of Post Fordism
It isn’t possible to say when the Post Fordism period ended. This is because different
thoughts of Post Fordism and also Fordism are nowadays still very important. Keywords
like efficiency and diversity are being found in industries of the modern world. These
keywords are nowadays not mentioned by the terms Fordism and Post Fordism. But
they still are the foundations of the industrial production processes.

4. Conclusion
We tried to approach urban spaces by a rather economical view. Because the impact of
Fordism and Post Fordism was firstly be seen inside the companies. Both had a different
style of production. The difference between them was firstly that Fordism was
concentrated to make so many products as possible. Post Fordism on the otherhand
was producing so many as possible by demand. The stocks and production are linked
with the demanding of consumers. Fordism only looks particular at producing.

In the text above we explained the influence on urban spaces by Fordism and Post
Fordism. The impacts of these have physical and socially outcomes on urban spaces.
Fordism creates large areas of houses and factories but it also creates social classes.
Post Fordism, on the other hand, created a movement. The production areas moved
from the centre to the edges (periphery) of the city.
The question we can ask is; are the impacts on urban space of these periods the only
consequence of Fordism or Post Fordism?

Nowadays Fordism and Post Fordism still have there influences on the urban spaces.
Keywords like efficiency and diversity of those times are still up to date. The basics of
our present society can be approached by these two industrial movements.

9
Sources:
Literature:
• E.W. Soja, Postmetropolis, critical Studies of Cities and Regions, 2000
• David Harvey, the urban experience, Basil Blackwell, 1989
• Ben de Pater en Herman van der Wusten, het geografisch huis, Coutinho,
1996
• R.J. Johnston, Derek Gregory and others, the dictionary of human geography,
4th edition, Blackwell publishing, 2000
• R. Tamsa (translator/editor), USA geografie en groei, United States information
services, 1959
• Hans Keser, Het gatje van opa, 1989

Websites:
• www.globalinfo.nl/article/articleview/426/1/1/
• www.antenna.nl/ravage/archief2000/0012a6.htm
• www.sap-pos.org/txt-nl/2004/juli/neoliberaleondernemig.htm
• www.willamette.edu/~fthompso/MgmtCon/Post-Fordism.html
• www2.cddc.vt.edu/digitalFordism/Fordism_materials/Schneider.htm
• www.ethesis.net/Fordisme/Fordisme_inleiding.htm

Figures:
• Figure 1: www.academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/. ../portrait/ford.jpg
• Figure 2 : Edited by S. Buwalda of the scheme of Vanessa Rottiers, De
verspreiding van het Fordisme in de Belgische textielindustrie van 1950 tot 1970,
Case-study aan de hand van het textielbedrijf DACCA, 2003.
• Figure 3 : www.v-market.ro/ techpark1eng.html
• Figure 4: key elements of post fordism

Notes:
1
Quote from: Bloemen, Scientific Management in Nederland 1900-1930, 38.
2
Carsalade, Les grandes étapes de l’histoire économique, 94
3
Huys, Pollet, e.a., Bouwen en schaven aan de kwaliteit van arbeid, 30-31

10
4
Frans Steeghs and others, Een nieuwe eeuw, nieuwe verhoudingen, Nijgh Versluijs,
1998
5
Hans Keser, Het gatje van opa, 1989.
6
R. Tamsa (translator/editor), USA geografie en groei, United States information
services, 1959
7
quote from the Dictionary of Human Geography, 2000
8
note from; www.willamette.edu/~fthompso/MgmtCon/Post-Fordism.html
9
note from; http://www.willamette.edu/~fthompso/MgmtCon/Post-Fordism.html
10
E.W. Soja, Postmetropolis, critical Studies of Cities and Regions, 182

11