Notes 1 we found that most studies in this literature

NOTES
1
We found that most studies in this literature stream
cite Marshall (1920), who centers on specialized
producer communities that diffuse the “secrets” of
industry, but do not mention Jacobs (1969, 1984,
2000), who describes a cosmopolitan and haphazard
city life.
2
While we do not apply the demographic tradition
in this paper, we distinguish between megacities and
global cities in the empirical section.
Global cities and multinational enterprise location strategy
Anthony Goerzen et al
446
Journal of International Business Studies

3
This can be considered a special case of the more
general notion of co-evolution between MNEs and
their environments (e.g., Cantwell, Dunning, &
Lundan, 2009).
4
For example, Boeh and Beamish (2012) demon-
strate that travel time between headquarters and
subsidiary is a more powerful predictor of firm gover-
nance and location choices than is geographic distance.
5
For more information, visit
Publications/IDMK_definition.asp
6
Note that the investment motives are not mutually
exclusive; this enables us to include all dummies
without falling into the “dummy variable trap”.
7
These cities, which are included for comparison
purposes, are Guangzhou, Lagos, Calcutta, Dhaka,
Karachi, Delhi, Mumbai, Cairo, Tehran, and Rio de
Janeiro. All of these have more than 10 million
inhabitants, yet they are not classified as global cities
in the Beaverstock et al. (1999) list.
8
Specifically, we compared the Beaverstock et al.
(1999) list with a 2010 version of the same list, a 2008
list from MasterCard, a 2011 list from the Mori
foundation, and a 2012 list from AT Kearney. Out of
the top 30 cities in the 1999 list, five did not show
up in the top 30 of any of the more recent lists
(i.e., Caracas, Dusseldorf, Johannesburg, Prague, and
Santiago). However, all of these five cities did appear
below the top 30 in more recent lists, suggesting that
they did not cease to be global cities, but perhaps
merely have been relegated by other emerging cities
to a lower position in the hierarchy. Similarly, relative
to the 1999 top 30, there was only one new “new”
city that appeared consistently in the more recent lists
– that is, Shanghai – which advanced from the 42nd
place to the 7th place in the GaWC hierarchy,
following the development of the Chinese economy
(Guthrie, 2009). Although not yet in the top tier,
change of a similar magnitude could be observed for
Vienna, which did not appear at all on the 1999 list but
was at 38th place in the 2010 GaWC list, most likely
reflecting the Austrian capital’s development over the
previous decade to become a regional hub by virtue of
a de facto position as bridgehead between eastern and
western Europe (Musil, 2009).
9
The term “Matthew effect” was coined by Merton
(1968), based on the biblical Gospel of Matthew: “For
whoever has will be given more, and they will have an
abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they
have will be taken from them” (Matthew 25:29, New
International Version).