* European cities continue to dominate the top of the ranking
* Vienna remains at the top, Baghdad at the bottom
* Calgary is first in the new Eco-city ranking
Regional focus
Americas
Europe
Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific
City rankings
Vienna retains the top spot as the city with the world’s best quality of living, according to the Mercer 2010 Quality of Living Survey. Zurich and Geneva follow in second and third position, respectively, while Vancouver and Auckland remain joint fourth in the rankings.
Mercer conducts the ranking to help governments and multi-national companies compensate employees fairly when placing them on international assignments. The rankings are based on a point-scoring index, which sees Vienna score 108.6 and Baghdad 14.7. Cities are ranked against New York as the base city, with an index score of 100.
Mercer’s Quality of Living index list was revised and now covers 221 cities compared to 215 last year, which means direct trend comparison will not be possible until 2011. The new selection includes prominent capital and other major cities from across the world currently available in Mercer’s database and better reflects where companies are sending their expatriate employees in the current business environment.
Slagin Parakatil, Senior Researcher at Mercer, commented: “As the world economy becomes more globalised, cities beyond the traditional financial centres are emerging as attractive places in which to expand or establish a business. Cities in many emerging markets, such as in the Middle East or Asia, have seen a significant influx of foreign companies and their expatriate employees in recent years.”
“To ensure their expatriates are compensated appropriately and an adequate hardship allowance is included in their benefits package, companies seek a clear picture of the quality of living in these cities. We have reviewed our index to reflect these developments and it now better represents the cities that most interest our clients,” Mr Parakatil said.
European cities continue to dominate amongst the top 25 cities in the index. In the UK, London ranks at 39, while Birmingham is at 55 and Glasgow at 57. In the US, the highest ranking entry is Honolulu at position 31, followed by San Francisco at position 32. Singapore (28) is the top-scoring Asian city followed by Tokyo at 40. Baghdad, ranking 221, remains at the bottom of the list.
“Quality of living standards remained relatively stable on a global level throughout 2009 and the first half of 2010, but in certain regions and countries the economic recession had a noticeable impact on the business climate,” according to Mr Parakatil.
“Despite the economic downturn and companies’ efforts to contain costs, quality of living and hardship premiums remain important means of compensating expatriates for differences in living conditions. However, companies are more inclined to review the measurement of such allowances to ensure they are cost-effective."
This year’s ranking also identifies the cities with the best eco-ranking based on water availability and drinkability, waste removal, quality of sewage systems, air pollution and traffic congestion. Calgary is at the top of this index (score 145.7), followed by Honolulu in second place (score 145.1) and Ottawa and Helsinki in joint third (score 139.9). Wellington in New Zealand (5), Minneapolis (6), Adelaide (7) and Copenhagen fill the next four slots, while Kobe, Oslo and Stockholm share ninth place. Port-au-Prince in Haiti ranks at the bottom of this table with a score of only 27.8 (see attached table).
Mr Parakatil commented: “A high-ranking eco-city optimises its use of renewable energy sources and generates the lowest possible quantity of pollution (air, water, noise, etc). A city’s eco-status or attitude toward sustainability can have significant impact on the quality of living of its inhabitants. As a consequence these are also pertinent issues for companies that send employees and their families on long-term assignments abroad, especially considering the vast majority of expatriates are relocated to urban areas.”
“A certain standard of sustainability is essential for city living and forms a very important part of its inhabitants’ quality of living. Though a high standard of living may be taken for granted in certain cities, a lack thereof is much more noticeable and can even lead to severe hardship,” said Mr Parakatil.
Americas
Canadian cities still dominate the top of the index for this region with Vancouver (4) retaining the top spot, followed by Ottawa (14), Toronto (16) and Montreal (21). Calgary ranks 28 on the overall quality of living ranking.
Honolulu (31) is the city in the US with the highest quality of living, followed by San Francisco (32) and Boston (37). Chicago and Washington share position 45 and New York - the base city - is in position 49. Newly added cities Philadelphia and Dallas are ranked 55 and 61, respectively.
In Central and South America, Point-à-Pitre, the largest city and economic area of Guadeloupe and new to the index this year, ranks the highest for quality of living at 62. San Juan in Puerto Rico follows at 72 and Buenos Aires at 78. Havana (192) and Port-au-Prince (213) are the lowest-ranking cities in the region.
Mr Parakatil commented: “Quality of living remained stable in North American cities. However, in South and Central America a general decline is witnessed mostly due to political instability, economic woes and energy shortages in certain countries. High levels of crime also remain a major problem in many of the region’s cities.”
Canadian and US cities are strongly represented at the top of the eco-city ranking, both for this region and globally. Calgary grabs the top spot globally with a score of 145.7, closely followed by Honolulu (score 145.1) in second. Ottawa is in third position with a score of 139.9 and Minneapolis follows in sixth place (score 137.8). Mr Parakatil commented: “Calgary’s top ranking is down to its excellent level of service on waste removal, sewage systems, and water drinkability and availability, coupled with relatively low air pollution.”
The highest-ranking Central and South American city is again Pointe-à-Pitre (49), followed by San Juan (69) and Montevideo (70).
Europe
Europe has 16 cities amongst the world’s top 25 cities for quality of living. Vienna retains the highest ranking both for the region and globally and is again followed by Zurich (2), Geneva (3) and Düsseldorf (6). The lowest-ranking Western European cities are Leipzig (64) and Athens (75). In the UK, London is the highest-ranking city at 39, followed by newcomer to the list Aberdeen (53), Birmingham (55), Glasgow (57) and Belfast (63).
Levels of quality of living continue to improve in Eastern Europe, with most index scores increasing slightly. Prague is the highest-ranking city at 70 and its index score increased from 93.9 to 94.8 in 2010. Budapest follows in position 73 and Ljubljana in 77.
In the eco-city index, Nordic cities fare particularly well with Helsinki (3) the highest-ranked in the region, followed by Copenhagen (8) and Oslo in joint ninth place with Stockholm. “Nordic cities do particularly well because the modern parts of most of them have been designed with potential environmental impacts in mind,” said Mr Parakatil. Aberdeen (19) is the highest-ranking UK eco-city, followed by Belfast (30), Glasgow (47), London (63) and Birmingham (64).
Middle East and Africa
Dubai (75) in the United Arab Emirates and Port Louis in Mauritius (82) are the region’s cities with the best quality of living. Abu Dhabi (83), Cape Town (86) and Tunis (94) follow and are, along with Victoria in the Seychelles (95), Johannesburg (96) and Muscat in Oman (100), the region’s only other cities in the top 100. Following the revision of the index a selection of cities from this region has been added, including Doha in Qatar (110), Rabat in Morocco (112), Banjul in Gambia (164) and Abuja in Nigeria (205).
Baghdad (221) remains at the bottom of the table, though its index score has increased slightly (from 14.4 to 14.7 in 2010). A lack of security and stability continue to have a negative impact on Baghdad’s quality of living and its score remains far behind that of Bangui (27.4) in the Central African Republic which is second to last.
In the eco-city index, most of the region’s cities rank below 100. The highest-ranking cities are Cape Town (30), Victoria (38), Muscat (48), Johannesburg (54) and Abu Dhabi and Dubai (in joint 65). Antananarivo in Madagascar (217) is at the bottom of the list with an eco-city score of 39.7, while Baghdad is at 214, scoring 40.5.
Mr Parakatil commented: “The lack of adequate modern infrastructure in some of the African cities combined with relatively high air pollution explains why many of them are ranked below 100.”
Asia Pacific
Auckland (4) retains its position as the highest-ranking city for quality of living in the region. Sydney follows at 10, Wellington at 12, Melbourne at 18 and Perth at 21. At 26, Canberra is new to the index. Singapore remains the highest-ranking Asian city at 28, followed by Japanese cities Tokyo (40), Kobe and Yokohama (both at 41), Osaka (51) and Nagoya (57). The region’s lowest-ranking cities are Dhaka in Bangladesh (206) and two cities new to the list – Bishkek in Kyrgyzstan (209) and Dushanbe in Tajikistan (210).
Mr Parakatil commented: “Quality of living declined in a few countries in Asia between the start of 2009 and 2010. Increasing threats of violence and terrorism, coupled with natural disasters such as earthquakes, typhoons and cyclones have had a negative impact on the quality of living in Asian cities. This may result in higher hardship allowances for expatriates sent to these countries.”
With a score of 138.9, Wellington (5) is the highest-ranking eco-city in the region followed by Adelaide (7), Kobe (9), Perth (12) and Auckland (13). Dhaka in Bangladesh (220) ranks lowest with a score of 30.9.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expatriates in difficult locations: Determining appropriate allowances and incentives
Companies need to be able to determine their compensation packages rationally, consistently and systematically. Providing incentives to reward and recognise the efforts that employees and their families make when taking on international assignments remains a typical practice, particularly for difficult locations. Two common incentives include a quality of living allowance and a mobility premium.
* Quality of living or “hardship” allowances compensate expatriates for decreases in the quality of living between their home and host locations.
* By contrast, a mobility premium simply compensates for the inconvenience of being uprooted and having to work in another country.
A quality of living allowance is typically location-related whilst a mobility premium is usually independent of the host location. Some multi-national companies combine these premiums but the vast majority of international companies provide them separately. The latter approach is deemed to be clearer and more transparent.
Mercer hardship allowance recommendations
Mercer evaluates local living conditions in all the 420 cities it surveys worldwide. Living conditions are analysed according to 39 factors, grouped in 10 categories:
1. Political and social environment (political stability, crime, law enforcement, etc)
2. Economic environment (currency exchange regulations, banking services, etc)
3. Socio-cultural environment (censorship, limitations on personal freedom, etc)
4. Health and sanitation (medical supplies and services, infectious diseases, sewage, waste disposal, air pollution, etc)
5. Schools and education (standard and availability of international schools, etc)
6. Public services and transportation (electricity, water, public transport, traffic congestion, etc)
7. Recreation (restaurants, theatres, cinemas, sports and leisure, etc)
8. Consumer goods (availability of food/daily consumption items, cars, etc)
9. Housing (housing, household appliances, furniture, maintenance services, etc)
10. Natural environment (climate, record of natural disasters)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
City rankings
Top 50 cities: Quality of living ranking
Base City: New York, US (=100)
Rank 2010
City Country QOL index 2010
1 VIENNA AUSTRIA 108.6
2 ZURICH SWITZERLAND 108
3 GENEVA SWITZERLAND 107.9
4 VANCOUVER CANADA 107.4
4 AUCKLAND NEW ZEALAND 107.4
6 DUSSELDORF GERMANY 107.2
7 FRANKFURT GERMANY 107
7 MUNICH GERMANY 107
9 BERN SWITZERLAND 106.5
10 SYDNEY AUSTRALIA 106.3
11 COPENHAGEN DENMARK 106.2
12 WELLINGTON NEW ZEALAND 105.9
13 AMSTERDAM NETHERLANDS 105.7
14 OTTAWA CANADA 105.5
15 BRUSSELS BELGIUM 105.4
16 TORONTO CANADA 105.3
17 BERLIN GERMANY 105
18 MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA 104.8
19 LUXEMBOURG LUXEMBOURG 104.6
20 STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 104.5
21 PERTH AUSTRALIA 104.2
21 MONTREAL CANADA 104.2
23 HAMBURG GERMANY 104.1
24 NURNBURG GERMANY 103.9
24 OSLO NORWAY 103.9
26 CANBERRA AUSTRALIA 103.6
26 DUBLIN IRELAND 103.6
28 CALGARY CANADA 103.5
28 SINGAPORE SINGAPORE 103.5
30 STUTTGART GERMANY 103.3
31 HONOLULU UNITED STATES 103.1
32 ADELAIDE AUSTRALIA 103
32 SAN FRANCISCO UNITED STATES 103
34 PARIS FRANCE 102.9
35 HELSINKI FINLAND 102.6
36 BRISBANE AUSTRALIA 102.4
37 BOSTON UNITED STATES 102.2
38 LYON FRANCE 101.9
39 LONDON UNITED KINGDOM 101.6
40 TOKYO JAPAN 101.4
41 MILAN ITALY 100.8
41 KOBE JAPAN 100.8
41 YOKOHAMA JAPAN 100.8
44 BARCELONA SPAIN 100.6
45 LISBON PORTUGAL 100.3
45 CHICAGO UNITED STATES 100.3
45 WASHINGTON UNITED STATES 100.3
48 MADRID SPAIN 100.2
49 NEW YORK CITY UNITED STATES 100
50 SEATTLE UNITED STATES 99.8
Friday
World's most livable cities
The world's most livable cities is an informal name given to any list of cities as they rank on a reputable annual survey of living conditions. Two examples are the Mercer Quality of Living Survey and The Economist's World's Most Livable Cities (using data from Mercer as well). The list does not necessarily include factors such as entertainment.
Mercer's Quality of Living Survey is released annually, comparing 221 cities based on 39 criteria. New York is given a baseline score of 100 and other cities are rated in comparison. Important criteria are safety, education, hygiene, health care, culture, environment, recreation, political-economic stability and public transportation.[1]
The importance of the list lies primarily in that internationally operating companies use it to determine where they will open offices or plants and how much they pay the employees.
In the 2010 list for city, the top is dominated by cities from Europe, with several entries from Canada, Scotland, Australia and New Zealand. Switzerland and Germany both have 3 cities in the top 10, which is especially striking for Switzerland, given the size of the country. The first entries from other countries are the USA at 31, Singapore at 22 and Japan at 37. Baghdad was at the bottom of the list. Of the 25 cities at the bottom, 15 are from Africa. Compared to lists from previous years, countries from South Asia (mainly India), East Asia (mainly China), the Middle East and Eastern Europe are clearly on the rise.
Mercer also has a 'Personal Safety' list, which is also dominated by EU and Swiss cities, with the top 5 being Luxembourg, Bern, Geneva, Helsinki and Zürich.
2010 year’s ranking also identifies the cities with the best eco-ranking based on water availability and drinkability, waste removal, quality of sewage systems, air pollution and traffic congestion. Calgary is at the top of this index (score 145.7), followed by Honolulu in second place (score 145.1) and Ottawa and Helsinki in joint third (score 139.9). Wellington in New Zealand (5), Minneapolis (6), Adelaide (7) and Copenhagen fill the next four slots, while Kobe, Oslo and Stockholm share ninth place. Port-au-Prince in Haiti ranks at the bottom of this table with a score of only 27.8.[2]
Mercer's Quality of Living Survey is released annually, comparing 221 cities based on 39 criteria. New York is given a baseline score of 100 and other cities are rated in comparison. Important criteria are safety, education, hygiene, health care, culture, environment, recreation, political-economic stability and public transportation.[1]
The importance of the list lies primarily in that internationally operating companies use it to determine where they will open offices or plants and how much they pay the employees.
In the 2010 list for city, the top is dominated by cities from Europe, with several entries from Canada, Scotland, Australia and New Zealand. Switzerland and Germany both have 3 cities in the top 10, which is especially striking for Switzerland, given the size of the country. The first entries from other countries are the USA at 31, Singapore at 22 and Japan at 37. Baghdad was at the bottom of the list. Of the 25 cities at the bottom, 15 are from Africa. Compared to lists from previous years, countries from South Asia (mainly India), East Asia (mainly China), the Middle East and Eastern Europe are clearly on the rise.
Mercer also has a 'Personal Safety' list, which is also dominated by EU and Swiss cities, with the top 5 being Luxembourg, Bern, Geneva, Helsinki and Zürich.
2010 year’s ranking also identifies the cities with the best eco-ranking based on water availability and drinkability, waste removal, quality of sewage systems, air pollution and traffic congestion. Calgary is at the top of this index (score 145.7), followed by Honolulu in second place (score 145.1) and Ottawa and Helsinki in joint third (score 139.9). Wellington in New Zealand (5), Minneapolis (6), Adelaide (7) and Copenhagen fill the next four slots, while Kobe, Oslo and Stockholm share ninth place. Port-au-Prince in Haiti ranks at the bottom of this table with a score of only 27.8.[2]
Thursday
Global liveability report - January 2010 (EIU)
Vancouver (Canada) continues to top the Economist Intelligence Unit's global liveability survey. A score of 98% bodes well for visitors during the Winter Olympics this year. Conversely, as security concerns abound in Sub-Saharan Africa following the Africa Cup of Nations, Football World Cup host Johannesburg (South Africa) comes in joint 92nd place with a score of 69.1%. Nonetheless, this is still the highest score in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Jon Copestake, editor of the report, comments: "Vancouver scores well across all categories in the survey and the forthcoming Winter Games contribute to a strong score in the cultural and sporting events category. Johannesburg has had well-documented crime problems, but performs better in other categories, with the highest overall liveability rating in Sub-Saharan Africa."
Elsewhere, European and North American cities continue to dominate the top tier of the ranking, alongside cities in Australia and New Zealand. Other regions fair less well, especially Sub-Saharan Africa, with security concerns under renewed scrutiny following attacks on the Togo national football team in the 2010 Africa Cup of Nations in Angola. The ongoing social and economic crisis in Zimbabwe ensures that Harare is still the worst of the 140 cities surveyed.
The Economist Intelligence Unit's liveability survey assesses living conditions in 140 cities around the world. A rating of relative comfort for 30 indicators is assigned across five broad categories: stability; Healthcare; culture and environment; education; and infrastructure. The survey gives an overall rating of 0-100, where 1 is intolerable and 100 is ideal.
A tale of two cities
Vancouver (Canada) still sits atop the global ranking, with the city offering an excellent infrastructure and low crime levels ahead of playing host to the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. Despite controversy surrounding the growing number of homeless people in Vancouver, particularly proposals to force people into shelters during the Olympics, general liveability levels are high. Visitors will benefit from good transport links and broad cultural and recreational availability, notably the Olympics themselves although, as with any large event in any large city, there is still some prevalence of petty crime.
Johannesburg (South Africa), host to the world's other major sporting event this year, fares less well. Security concerns over the 2010 Football World Cup abound and this is reflected in the city's position of joint 92nd in the ranking with a score of 69.1%, almost 30 percentage points lower than that achieved by Vancouver. Security is the main concern in South Africa, owing to a well-documented struggle with violent crime rates. However, Johannesburg does enjoy strong availability of cultural and recreational activities, ensuring that visitors to this year's Football World Cup will have plenty to do in addition to watching the tournament. South African cities also achieve the highest liveability scores in a region plagued by instability and problems with health and infrastructure.
Looking ahead
Ironically, Johannesburg shares its joint 92nd position with two of the major cities of the next host of the Football World Cup, Brazil, which will stage the contest in 2014. Both Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo have the same overall liveability score as Johannesburg, although both benefit from slightly higher levels of stability, with lower scores in other categories resulting in parity (note that Rio de Janeiro will also host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games). Awarding high-level sporting events to developing cities provides an opportunity for investment in infrastructure needed to raise levels of liveability in these locations and also to prompt investment in countries more generally.
Turning to other upcoming sporting events, the Rugby World Cup in 2011 will be held in New Zealand, where liveability scores are at the top of the scale. Auckland, host to the Rugby World Cup final, is the tenth most liveable of the 140 locations surveyed and achieves a score of only 2.3 percentage points lower than top-rated Vancouver. Conversely, in the same year, the Cricket World Cup will take place in locations at the other end of the ranking amid security concerns following the 2009 attack on the Sri Lankan national cricket team in Pakistan. Although the 2009 attack led to Pakistan's exclusion as a host nation, other hosts such as Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are home to locations in the bottom ten of the league table, and worst category of liveability (Colombo is 132nd and Dhaka is 138th, with liveability scores of just 47.3% and 38.7% respectively). Locations in India, the third host nation, fare a little better, with Mumbai (117th) and New Delhi (113th) scoring 56.5% and 58.6% respectively.
In Western Europe, London, host to the 2012 Olympic Games, sits in 54th position with a liveability score of 88.4%. This is almost 10 percentage points below Vancouver's score, but London remains in the very top tier of the liveability ranking. Although concerns have been raised about the city's ability to meet the infrastructural demands of the Olympics, stability, particularly following terrorism attacks in July 2007, is the poorest-performing liveability category. Also in 2012, Warsaw and Ukraine are set to co-host the European Football Championship. Warsaw scores relatively well in areas important to visitors to the event, with stability, infrastructure, and culture and the environment all scoring 80% or more. Ukraine lies 91st in the ranking and only marginally outscores Johannesburg, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo with a rating of 69.2%.
About the Liveability survey
The concept of liveability is simple: it assesses which locations around the world provide the best or the worst living conditions. Assessing liveability has a broad range of uses, from benchmarking perceptions of development levels to assigning a hardship allowance as part of expatriate relocation packages. The Economist Intelligence Unit's liveability rating, part of the Worldwide Cost of Living Survey, quantifies the challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in 140 cities worldwide. Each city is assigned a score for over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories:
* Stability
* Healthcare
* Culture and environment
* Education
* Infrastructure
Each factor in each city is rated as acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable or intolerable. For qualitative indicators, a rating is awarded based on the judgment of in–house analysts and in–city contributors. For quantitative indicators, a rating is calculated based on the relative performance of a number of external data points. The categories are compiled and weighted to provide an overall rating of 1–100, where 1 is considered intolerable and 100 is considered ideal. The report considers that any city with a rating of 80 or more will have few, if any, challenges to living standards. Liveability scores can be scaled as follows:
The suggested liveability scale
Rating Description
80–100 There are few, if any, challenges to living standards
70–80 Day–to–day living is fine, in general, but some aspects of life may entail problems
60–70 Negative factors have an impact on day-to-day living
50–60 Liveability is substantially constrained
50 or less Most aspects of living are severely restricted
Top 10 cities
Rank Country City Rating
1 Canada Vancouver 98.0
2 Austria Vienna 97.9
3 Australia Melbourne 97.5
4 Canada Toronto 97.2
5 Canada Calgary 96.6
6 Finland Helsinki 96.2
7 Australia Sydney 96.1
8= Australia Perth 95.9
8= Australia Adelaide 95.9
10 New Zealand Auckland 95.7
Bottom 10 cities
Rank Country City Rating
130= Senegal Dakar a 48.3
132 Sri Lanka Colombo 47.3
133 Nepal Kathmandu 47.1
134 Cameroon Douala 43.3
135 Pakistan Karachi 40.9
136 Nigeria Lagos 39.0
137 PNG Port Moresby 38.9
138= Algeria Algiers 38.7
138= Bangladesh Dhaka 38.7
140 Zimbabwe Harare 37.5
Jon Copestake, editor of the report, comments: "Vancouver scores well across all categories in the survey and the forthcoming Winter Games contribute to a strong score in the cultural and sporting events category. Johannesburg has had well-documented crime problems, but performs better in other categories, with the highest overall liveability rating in Sub-Saharan Africa."
Elsewhere, European and North American cities continue to dominate the top tier of the ranking, alongside cities in Australia and New Zealand. Other regions fair less well, especially Sub-Saharan Africa, with security concerns under renewed scrutiny following attacks on the Togo national football team in the 2010 Africa Cup of Nations in Angola. The ongoing social and economic crisis in Zimbabwe ensures that Harare is still the worst of the 140 cities surveyed.
The Economist Intelligence Unit's liveability survey assesses living conditions in 140 cities around the world. A rating of relative comfort for 30 indicators is assigned across five broad categories: stability; Healthcare; culture and environment; education; and infrastructure. The survey gives an overall rating of 0-100, where 1 is intolerable and 100 is ideal.
A tale of two cities
Vancouver (Canada) still sits atop the global ranking, with the city offering an excellent infrastructure and low crime levels ahead of playing host to the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. Despite controversy surrounding the growing number of homeless people in Vancouver, particularly proposals to force people into shelters during the Olympics, general liveability levels are high. Visitors will benefit from good transport links and broad cultural and recreational availability, notably the Olympics themselves although, as with any large event in any large city, there is still some prevalence of petty crime.
Johannesburg (South Africa), host to the world's other major sporting event this year, fares less well. Security concerns over the 2010 Football World Cup abound and this is reflected in the city's position of joint 92nd in the ranking with a score of 69.1%, almost 30 percentage points lower than that achieved by Vancouver. Security is the main concern in South Africa, owing to a well-documented struggle with violent crime rates. However, Johannesburg does enjoy strong availability of cultural and recreational activities, ensuring that visitors to this year's Football World Cup will have plenty to do in addition to watching the tournament. South African cities also achieve the highest liveability scores in a region plagued by instability and problems with health and infrastructure.
Looking ahead
Ironically, Johannesburg shares its joint 92nd position with two of the major cities of the next host of the Football World Cup, Brazil, which will stage the contest in 2014. Both Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo have the same overall liveability score as Johannesburg, although both benefit from slightly higher levels of stability, with lower scores in other categories resulting in parity (note that Rio de Janeiro will also host the 2016 Summer Olympic Games). Awarding high-level sporting events to developing cities provides an opportunity for investment in infrastructure needed to raise levels of liveability in these locations and also to prompt investment in countries more generally.
Turning to other upcoming sporting events, the Rugby World Cup in 2011 will be held in New Zealand, where liveability scores are at the top of the scale. Auckland, host to the Rugby World Cup final, is the tenth most liveable of the 140 locations surveyed and achieves a score of only 2.3 percentage points lower than top-rated Vancouver. Conversely, in the same year, the Cricket World Cup will take place in locations at the other end of the ranking amid security concerns following the 2009 attack on the Sri Lankan national cricket team in Pakistan. Although the 2009 attack led to Pakistan's exclusion as a host nation, other hosts such as Sri Lanka and Bangladesh are home to locations in the bottom ten of the league table, and worst category of liveability (Colombo is 132nd and Dhaka is 138th, with liveability scores of just 47.3% and 38.7% respectively). Locations in India, the third host nation, fare a little better, with Mumbai (117th) and New Delhi (113th) scoring 56.5% and 58.6% respectively.
In Western Europe, London, host to the 2012 Olympic Games, sits in 54th position with a liveability score of 88.4%. This is almost 10 percentage points below Vancouver's score, but London remains in the very top tier of the liveability ranking. Although concerns have been raised about the city's ability to meet the infrastructural demands of the Olympics, stability, particularly following terrorism attacks in July 2007, is the poorest-performing liveability category. Also in 2012, Warsaw and Ukraine are set to co-host the European Football Championship. Warsaw scores relatively well in areas important to visitors to the event, with stability, infrastructure, and culture and the environment all scoring 80% or more. Ukraine lies 91st in the ranking and only marginally outscores Johannesburg, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo with a rating of 69.2%.
About the Liveability survey
The concept of liveability is simple: it assesses which locations around the world provide the best or the worst living conditions. Assessing liveability has a broad range of uses, from benchmarking perceptions of development levels to assigning a hardship allowance as part of expatriate relocation packages. The Economist Intelligence Unit's liveability rating, part of the Worldwide Cost of Living Survey, quantifies the challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in 140 cities worldwide. Each city is assigned a score for over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories:
* Stability
* Healthcare
* Culture and environment
* Education
* Infrastructure
Each factor in each city is rated as acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable or intolerable. For qualitative indicators, a rating is awarded based on the judgment of in–house analysts and in–city contributors. For quantitative indicators, a rating is calculated based on the relative performance of a number of external data points. The categories are compiled and weighted to provide an overall rating of 1–100, where 1 is considered intolerable and 100 is considered ideal. The report considers that any city with a rating of 80 or more will have few, if any, challenges to living standards. Liveability scores can be scaled as follows:
The suggested liveability scale
Rating Description
80–100 There are few, if any, challenges to living standards
70–80 Day–to–day living is fine, in general, but some aspects of life may entail problems
60–70 Negative factors have an impact on day-to-day living
50–60 Liveability is substantially constrained
50 or less Most aspects of living are severely restricted
Top 10 cities
Rank Country City Rating
1 Canada Vancouver 98.0
2 Austria Vienna 97.9
3 Australia Melbourne 97.5
4 Canada Toronto 97.2
5 Canada Calgary 96.6
6 Finland Helsinki 96.2
7 Australia Sydney 96.1
8= Australia Perth 95.9
8= Australia Adelaide 95.9
10 New Zealand Auckland 95.7
Bottom 10 cities
Rank Country City Rating
130= Senegal Dakar a 48.3
132 Sri Lanka Colombo 47.3
133 Nepal Kathmandu 47.1
134 Cameroon Douala 43.3
135 Pakistan Karachi 40.9
136 Nigeria Lagos 39.0
137 PNG Port Moresby 38.9
138= Algeria Algiers 38.7
138= Bangladesh Dhaka 38.7
140 Zimbabwe Harare 37.5
Top 50 cities: Eco-City ranking-Mercer
*Eco-City Ranking 2010 includes the following criteria: Water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion.
Rank 2010 City Country Eco-city index* 2010
1 CALGARY CANADA 145.7
2 HONOLULU UNITED STATES 145.1
3 OTTAWA CANADA 139.9
3 HELSINKI FINLAND 139.9
5 WELLINGTON NEW ZEALAND 138.9
6 MINNEAPOLIS UNITED STATES 137.8
7 ADELAIDE AUSTRALIA 137.5
8 COPENHAGEN DENMARK 137.4
9 KOBE JAPAN 135.6
9 OSLO NORWAY 135.6
9 STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 135.6
12 PERTH AUSTRALIA 135.3
13 MONTREAL CANADA 133.6
13 VANCOUVER CANADA 133.6
13 NURNBERG GERMANY 133.6
13 AUCKLAND NEW ZEALAND 133.6
13 BERN SWITZERLAND 133.6
13 PITTSBURGH UNITED STATES 133.6
19 ZURICH SWITZERLAND 133.5
19 ABERDEEN UNITED KINGDOM 133.5
21 CANBERRA AUSTRALIA 133.3
22 SINGAPORE SINGAPORE 132.4
23 BRISBANE AUSTRALIA 131.6
23 WASHINGTON UNITED STATES 131.6
25 MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA 131.5
25 GENEVA SWITZERLAND 131.5
25 BOSTON UNITED STATES 131.5
28 DUSSELDORF GERMANY 130.7
28 MUNICH GERMANY 130.7
30 CAPE TOWN SOUTH AFRICA 129.4
30 BELFAST UNITED KINGDOM 129.4
32 LYON FRANCE 129.3
33 DUBLIN IRELAND 128.9
34 HAMBURG GERMANY 128.8
34 STUTTGART GERMANY 128.8
34 PHILADELPHIA UNITED STATES 128.8
37 YOKOHAMA JAPAN 128.7
38 VICTORIA SEYCHELLES 128.5
39 TORONTO CANADA 127.1
39 AMSTERDAM NETHERLANDS 127.1
41 BRUSSELS BELGIUM 126.8
41 LEIPZIG GERMANY 126.8
43 ST. LOUIS UNITED STATES 126.6
44 VIENNA AUSTRIA 126.2
44 LUXEMBOURG LUXEMBOURG 126.2
46 SYDNEY AUSTRALIA 125
47 GLASGOW UNITED KINGDOM 124.7
48 MUSCAT OMAN 124.2
49 POINT-A-PITRE GUADELOUPE 123.8
50 NAGOYA JAPAN 123.1
50 OSAKA JAPAN 123.1
50 FRANKFURT GERMANY 123.1
Mercer is a leading global provider of consulting, outsourcing and investment services. Mercer works with clients to solve their most complex benefit and human capital issues, designing and helping manage health, retirement and other benefits. It is a leader in benefit outsourcing. Mercer’s investment services include investment consulting and investment management. Mercer’s 18,000 employees are based in more than 40 countries. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., which lists its stock (ticker symbol: MMC) on the New York, Chicago and London stock exchanges. For more information, visit www.mercer.com
Rank 2010 City Country Eco-city index* 2010
1 CALGARY CANADA 145.7
2 HONOLULU UNITED STATES 145.1
3 OTTAWA CANADA 139.9
3 HELSINKI FINLAND 139.9
5 WELLINGTON NEW ZEALAND 138.9
6 MINNEAPOLIS UNITED STATES 137.8
7 ADELAIDE AUSTRALIA 137.5
8 COPENHAGEN DENMARK 137.4
9 KOBE JAPAN 135.6
9 OSLO NORWAY 135.6
9 STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 135.6
12 PERTH AUSTRALIA 135.3
13 MONTREAL CANADA 133.6
13 VANCOUVER CANADA 133.6
13 NURNBERG GERMANY 133.6
13 AUCKLAND NEW ZEALAND 133.6
13 BERN SWITZERLAND 133.6
13 PITTSBURGH UNITED STATES 133.6
19 ZURICH SWITZERLAND 133.5
19 ABERDEEN UNITED KINGDOM 133.5
21 CANBERRA AUSTRALIA 133.3
22 SINGAPORE SINGAPORE 132.4
23 BRISBANE AUSTRALIA 131.6
23 WASHINGTON UNITED STATES 131.6
25 MELBOURNE AUSTRALIA 131.5
25 GENEVA SWITZERLAND 131.5
25 BOSTON UNITED STATES 131.5
28 DUSSELDORF GERMANY 130.7
28 MUNICH GERMANY 130.7
30 CAPE TOWN SOUTH AFRICA 129.4
30 BELFAST UNITED KINGDOM 129.4
32 LYON FRANCE 129.3
33 DUBLIN IRELAND 128.9
34 HAMBURG GERMANY 128.8
34 STUTTGART GERMANY 128.8
34 PHILADELPHIA UNITED STATES 128.8
37 YOKOHAMA JAPAN 128.7
38 VICTORIA SEYCHELLES 128.5
39 TORONTO CANADA 127.1
39 AMSTERDAM NETHERLANDS 127.1
41 BRUSSELS BELGIUM 126.8
41 LEIPZIG GERMANY 126.8
43 ST. LOUIS UNITED STATES 126.6
44 VIENNA AUSTRIA 126.2
44 LUXEMBOURG LUXEMBOURG 126.2
46 SYDNEY AUSTRALIA 125
47 GLASGOW UNITED KINGDOM 124.7
48 MUSCAT OMAN 124.2
49 POINT-A-PITRE GUADELOUPE 123.8
50 NAGOYA JAPAN 123.1
50 OSAKA JAPAN 123.1
50 FRANKFURT GERMANY 123.1
Mercer is a leading global provider of consulting, outsourcing and investment services. Mercer works with clients to solve their most complex benefit and human capital issues, designing and helping manage health, retirement and other benefits. It is a leader in benefit outsourcing. Mercer’s investment services include investment consulting and investment management. Mercer’s 18,000 employees are based in more than 40 countries. The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., which lists its stock (ticker symbol: MMC) on the New York, Chicago and London stock exchanges. For more information, visit www.mercer.com
2007 List of cities by quality of living-Mercer
This is a list of the world's cities by quality of living, according to the "Mercer Human Resource Consulting Quality of Living Survey".
In 2008, Zurich retains its 2007 title as the highest ranked city, followed by Geneva (2), jointly Vienna (3) and Vancouver (3), finally Auckland (5). The quality of living survey covers 215 cities and is conducted to help governments and major companies place employees on international assignments. The survey also identifies those cities with the highest personal safety ranking based on internal stability, crime, effectiveness of law enforcement and relationships with other countries. In this case, Luxembourg is top, followed by Bern, Geneva, Helsinki and Zurich, all equally placed at number 2.
The 2007 survey identified Zurich, Geneva, Vancouver and Vienna as having the highest quality of living. The least desirable cities were found to be Brazzaville and Pointe Noire in the Republic of Congo which scored 23 and 30.5 respectively.
The cities — 218 in total — were evaluated on 39 factors including political, economic, environmental, personal safety, health, education, transportation and other public service factors. Cities were compared to New York City which was given a base score of 100.
2007 Rank↓ City↓ Country↓ Index 2007↓
1 Zürich Switzerland Switzerland 108.1
2 Geneva Switzerland Switzerland 108.0
3 Vancouver Canada Canada 107.7
3 Vienna Austria Austria 107.7
5 Auckland New Zealand New Zealand 107.3
5 Düsseldorf Germany Germany 107.3
7 Frankfurt Germany Germany 107.1
8 Munich Germany Germany 106.9
9 Bern Switzerland Switzerland 106.5
9 Sydney Australia Australia 106.5
11 Copenhagen Denmark Denmark 106.2
12 Wellington New Zealand New Zealand 105.8
13 Amsterdam Netherlands The Netherlands 105.7
14 Brussels Belgium Belgium 105.6
15 Toronto Canada Canada 105.4
16 Berlin Germany Germany 105.2
17 Melbourne Australia Australia 105.0
18 Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg 104.8
18 Ottawa Canada Canada 104.8
20 Stockholm Sweden Sweden 104.7
21 Perth Australia Australia 104.5
22 Montreal Canada Canada 104.3
23 Nürnberg Germany Germany 104.2
24 Calgary Canada Canada 103.6
24 Hamburg Germany Germany 103.6
26 Oslo Norway Norway 103.5
27 Dublin Republic of Ireland Ireland 103.3
27 Honolulu United States United States 103.3
29 San Francisco United States United States 103.2
30 Helsinki Finland Finland 103.1
30 Adelaide Australia Australia 103.1
32 Brisbane Australia Australia 102.8
33 Paris France France 102.7
34 Singapore Singapore Singapore 102.5
35 Tokyo JapanJapan 102.3
36 Lyon France France 101.9
36 Boston United States United States 101.9
38 Yokohama Japan Japan 101.7
39 London United Kingdom United Kingdom 101.2
40 Kobe Japan Japan 101.0
41 Barcelona Spain Spain 100.6
42 Madrid Spain Spain 100.5
42 Osaka Japan Japan 100.5
44 Washington DC United States United States 100.4
44 Chicago United States United States 100.4
46 Portland, OR United States United States 100.3
47 Lisbon Portugal Portugal 100.1
48 New York City United States United States 100.0
49 Milan Italy Italy 99.9
49 Seattle United States United States 99.9
51 Lexington United States United States 99.8
52 Pittsburgh United States United States 99.7
52 Winston Salem United States United States 99.7
54 Nagoya Japan Japan 99.5
55 Riyadh Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 98.3
55 Jeddah Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 98.3
57 Glasgow United Kingdom United Kingdom 98.2
58 Los Angeles United States United States 98.1
58 Cleveland United States United States 98.1
60 Minneapolis United States United States 97.9
61 Rome Italy Italy 97.4
62 Miami United States United States 96.3
63 Yokkaichi Japan Japan 96.2
64 Detroit United States United States 96.1
65 San Pedro Garza García Mexico Mexico 96.1
66 St Louis United States United States 96.1
67 Atlanta United States United States 95.7
68 Leipzig Germany Germany 95.5
69 Houston United States United States 95.4
70 Omuta Japan Japan 94.9
71 Hong Kong Hong Kong Hong Kong 94.3
72 San Juan Puerto Rico Puerto Rico 92.9
73 Prague Czech Republic Czech Republic 92.3
74 Medinah Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 91.4
75 Budapest Hungary Hungary 90.2
76 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Malaysia 88.9
77 Montevideo Uruguay Uruguay 88.2
78 Port Louis Mauritius Mauritius 87.7
79 Athens Greece Greece 87.6
80 Buenos Aires Argentina Argentina 87.4
81 Dubai United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates 87.0
82 Ljubljana Slovenia Slovenia 87.0
83 Vilnius Lithuania Lithuania 86.6
84 Taipei Republic of China Taiwan 86.5
85 Santiago Chile Chile 86.5
86 Cape Town South Africa South Africa 85.7
87 Warsaw Poland Poland 85.7
88 Seoul South Korea South Korea 85.2
89 Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates 84.1
90 Tallinn Estonia Estonia 83.7
91 Johannesburg South Africa South Africa 83.3
92 Limassol Cyprus Cyprus 83.2
93 Valletta Malta Malta 82.9
94 Panama City Panama Panama 82.9
95 Khobar Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 82.6
96 Tunis Tunisia Tunisia 82.4
97 Victoria Seychelles Seychelles 82.2
98 Papeete French Polynesia French Polynesia 82.0
99 Port Elizabeth South Africa South Africa 82.0
100 Bratislava Slovakia Slovakia 81.7
101 Shanghai People's Republic of China China 81.6
In 2008, Zurich retains its 2007 title as the highest ranked city, followed by Geneva (2), jointly Vienna (3) and Vancouver (3), finally Auckland (5). The quality of living survey covers 215 cities and is conducted to help governments and major companies place employees on international assignments. The survey also identifies those cities with the highest personal safety ranking based on internal stability, crime, effectiveness of law enforcement and relationships with other countries. In this case, Luxembourg is top, followed by Bern, Geneva, Helsinki and Zurich, all equally placed at number 2.
The 2007 survey identified Zurich, Geneva, Vancouver and Vienna as having the highest quality of living. The least desirable cities were found to be Brazzaville and Pointe Noire in the Republic of Congo which scored 23 and 30.5 respectively.
The cities — 218 in total — were evaluated on 39 factors including political, economic, environmental, personal safety, health, education, transportation and other public service factors. Cities were compared to New York City which was given a base score of 100.
2007 Rank↓ City↓ Country↓ Index 2007↓
1 Zürich Switzerland Switzerland 108.1
2 Geneva Switzerland Switzerland 108.0
3 Vancouver Canada Canada 107.7
3 Vienna Austria Austria 107.7
5 Auckland New Zealand New Zealand 107.3
5 Düsseldorf Germany Germany 107.3
7 Frankfurt Germany Germany 107.1
8 Munich Germany Germany 106.9
9 Bern Switzerland Switzerland 106.5
9 Sydney Australia Australia 106.5
11 Copenhagen Denmark Denmark 106.2
12 Wellington New Zealand New Zealand 105.8
13 Amsterdam Netherlands The Netherlands 105.7
14 Brussels Belgium Belgium 105.6
15 Toronto Canada Canada 105.4
16 Berlin Germany Germany 105.2
17 Melbourne Australia Australia 105.0
18 Luxembourg Luxembourg Luxembourg 104.8
18 Ottawa Canada Canada 104.8
20 Stockholm Sweden Sweden 104.7
21 Perth Australia Australia 104.5
22 Montreal Canada Canada 104.3
23 Nürnberg Germany Germany 104.2
24 Calgary Canada Canada 103.6
24 Hamburg Germany Germany 103.6
26 Oslo Norway Norway 103.5
27 Dublin Republic of Ireland Ireland 103.3
27 Honolulu United States United States 103.3
29 San Francisco United States United States 103.2
30 Helsinki Finland Finland 103.1
30 Adelaide Australia Australia 103.1
32 Brisbane Australia Australia 102.8
33 Paris France France 102.7
34 Singapore Singapore Singapore 102.5
35 Tokyo JapanJapan 102.3
36 Lyon France France 101.9
36 Boston United States United States 101.9
38 Yokohama Japan Japan 101.7
39 London United Kingdom United Kingdom 101.2
40 Kobe Japan Japan 101.0
41 Barcelona Spain Spain 100.6
42 Madrid Spain Spain 100.5
42 Osaka Japan Japan 100.5
44 Washington DC United States United States 100.4
44 Chicago United States United States 100.4
46 Portland, OR United States United States 100.3
47 Lisbon Portugal Portugal 100.1
48 New York City United States United States 100.0
49 Milan Italy Italy 99.9
49 Seattle United States United States 99.9
51 Lexington United States United States 99.8
52 Pittsburgh United States United States 99.7
52 Winston Salem United States United States 99.7
54 Nagoya Japan Japan 99.5
55 Riyadh Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 98.3
55 Jeddah Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 98.3
57 Glasgow United Kingdom United Kingdom 98.2
58 Los Angeles United States United States 98.1
58 Cleveland United States United States 98.1
60 Minneapolis United States United States 97.9
61 Rome Italy Italy 97.4
62 Miami United States United States 96.3
63 Yokkaichi Japan Japan 96.2
64 Detroit United States United States 96.1
65 San Pedro Garza García Mexico Mexico 96.1
66 St Louis United States United States 96.1
67 Atlanta United States United States 95.7
68 Leipzig Germany Germany 95.5
69 Houston United States United States 95.4
70 Omuta Japan Japan 94.9
71 Hong Kong Hong Kong Hong Kong 94.3
72 San Juan Puerto Rico Puerto Rico 92.9
73 Prague Czech Republic Czech Republic 92.3
74 Medinah Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 91.4
75 Budapest Hungary Hungary 90.2
76 Kuala Lumpur Malaysia Malaysia 88.9
77 Montevideo Uruguay Uruguay 88.2
78 Port Louis Mauritius Mauritius 87.7
79 Athens Greece Greece 87.6
80 Buenos Aires Argentina Argentina 87.4
81 Dubai United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates 87.0
82 Ljubljana Slovenia Slovenia 87.0
83 Vilnius Lithuania Lithuania 86.6
84 Taipei Republic of China Taiwan 86.5
85 Santiago Chile Chile 86.5
86 Cape Town South Africa South Africa 85.7
87 Warsaw Poland Poland 85.7
88 Seoul South Korea South Korea 85.2
89 Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates 84.1
90 Tallinn Estonia Estonia 83.7
91 Johannesburg South Africa South Africa 83.3
92 Limassol Cyprus Cyprus 83.2
93 Valletta Malta Malta 82.9
94 Panama City Panama Panama 82.9
95 Khobar Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia 82.6
96 Tunis Tunisia Tunisia 82.4
97 Victoria Seychelles Seychelles 82.2
98 Papeete French Polynesia French Polynesia 82.0
99 Port Elizabeth South Africa South Africa 82.0
100 Bratislava Slovakia Slovakia 81.7
101 Shanghai People's Republic of China China 81.6
Global liveability report
Rank Country City Rating
1 Canada Vancouver 98.0
2 Austria Vienna 97.9
3 Australia Melbourne 97.5
4 Canada Toronto 97.2
5 Canada Calgary 96.6
6 Finland Helsinki 96.2
7 Australia Sydney 96.1
8= Australia Perth 95.9
8= Australia Adelaide 95.9
10 New Zealand Auckland 95.7
1 Canada Vancouver 98.0
2 Austria Vienna 97.9
3 Australia Melbourne 97.5
4 Canada Toronto 97.2
5 Canada Calgary 96.6
6 Finland Helsinki 96.2
7 Australia Sydney 96.1
8= Australia Perth 95.9
8= Australia Adelaide 95.9
10 New Zealand Auckland 95.7
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)