liveability ranking and overview.pdf

THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT

Liveability ranking and overview

January 2008

Economist Intelligence Unit 26 Red Lion Square London WC1R 4HQ United Kingdom

The Economist Intelligence Unit

The Economist Intelligence Unit is a specialist publisher serving companies establishing and managing operations across national borders. For 60 years it has been a source of information on business developments, economic and political trends, government regulations and corporate practice worldwide.

The Economist Intelligence Unit delivers its information in four ways: through its digital portfolio, where the latest analysis is updated daily; through printed subscription products ranging from newsletters to annual reference works; through research reports; and by organising seminars and presentations. The firm is a member of The Economist Group.

London The Economist Intelligence Unit 26 Red Lion Square London WC1R 4HQ United Kingdom Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000 Fax: (44.20) 7576 8500 E-mail: [email protected]

New York The Economist Intelligence Unit The Economist Building 111 West 57th Street New York NY 10019, US Tel: (1.212) 554 0600 Fax: (1.212) 586 0248 E-mail: [email protected]

Hong Kong The Economist Intelligence Unit 60/F, Central Plaza 18 Harbour Road Wanchai Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2585 3888 Fax: (852) 2802 7638 E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.eiu.com

Electronic delivery This publication can be viewed by subscribing online at www.store.eiu.com.

Reports are also available in various other electronic formats, such as CD-ROM, Lotus Notes, online databases and as direct feeds to corporate intranets. For further information, please contact your nearest Economist Intelligence Unit office.

Copyright © 2008 The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited. All rights reserved. Neither this publication nor any part of it may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited.

All information in this report is verified to the best of the author's and the publisher's ability. However, the Economist Intelligence Unit does not accept responsibility for any loss arising from reliance on it.

Symbols for tables �n/a� means not available; �� means not applicable

Liveability ranking and overview 1

January 2008 www.eiu.com © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2008

The Economist Intelligence Unit's 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 quantifies the challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in any given location, and allows for direct comparison between locations.

Every city is assigned a rating of relative comfort for over 30 qualitative and quantitative factors across five broad categories: stability; healthcare; culture and environment; education; and infrastructure. Each factor in each city is rated as acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable or intolerable. For quali-tative indicators, a rating is awarded based on the judgment of in�house analysts and in�city contributors. For quantitative indicators, a rating is calcul-ated based on the relative performance of a number of external data points.

The scores are then compiled and weighted to provide a score of 1�100, where 1 is considered intolerable and 100 is considered ideal. The liveability rating is provided both as an overall score and as a score for each category. To provide points of reference, the score is also given for each category relative to New York and an overall position in the ranking of 140 cities is provided.

Companies pay a premium (usually a percentage of a salary) to employees who move to cities where living conditions are particularly difficult, and there is excessive physical hardship or notably unhealthy conditions.

The Economist Intelligence Unit has given a suggested allowance to correspond with the rating. However, the actual level of the allowance is often a matter of company policy. It is not uncommon, for example, for companies to pay higher allowances�perhaps up to double the Economist Intelligence Unit�s suggested level.

Rating Description Suggested

allowance (%)80�100 There are few, if any, challenges to living standards 0

70�80Day�to�day living is fine, in general, but some aspects of life may

entail problems 5

60�70 Negative factors have an impact on day-to-day living 10 50�60 Liveability is substantially constrained 15

50 or less Most aspects of living are severely restricted 20

The liveability score is reached through category weights, which are equally divided into relevant subcategories to ensure that the score covers as many indicators as possible. Indicators are scored as acceptable, tolerable, uncomfortable, undesirable or intolerable. These are then weighted to produce a rating, where 100 means that liveability in a city is ideal and 1 means that it is intolerable.

How the rating works

The suggested liveability scale

How the rating is calculated

2 Liveability ranking and overview


For qualitative variables, an "EIU rating" is awarded based on the judgment of in�house expert country analysts and a field correspondent based in each city. For quantitative variables, a rating is calculated based on the relative performance of a location using external data sources.

Category 1: Stability (weight: 25% of total) Indicator SourcePrevalence of petty crime EIU rating

Prevalence of violent crime EIU ratingThreat of terror EIU rating

Threat of military conflict EIU ratingThreat of civil unrest/conflict EIU rating

Category 2: Healthcare (weight: 20% of total) Indicator SourceAvailability of private healthcare EIU rating

Quality of private healthcare EIU ratingAvailability of public healthcare EIU rating

Quality of public healthcare EIU ratingAvailability of over-the-counter drugs EIU ratingGeneral healthcare indicators Adapted from World Bank

Category 3: Culture & Environment (weight: 25% of total) Indicator SourceHumidity/temperature rating Adapted from average weather conditionsDiscomfort of climate to travellers EIU rating

Level of corruption Adapted from Transparency InternationalSocial or religious restrictions EIU rating

Level of censorship EIU ratingSporting availability EIU field rating of 3 sport indicatorsCultural availability EIU field rating of 4 cultural indicators

Food and drink EIU field rating of 4 cultural indicatorsConsumer goods and services EIU rating of product availability

Category 4: Education (weight: 10% of total) Indicator SourceAvailability of private education EIU ratingQuality of private education EIU ratingPublic education indicators Adapted from World Bank

Category 5: Infrastructure (weight: 20% of total) Indicator SourceQuality of road network EIU ratingQuality of public transport EIU rating

Quality of international links EIU ratingAvailability of good quality housing EIU rating

Quality of energy provision EIU ratingQuality of water provision EIU ratingQuality of telecommunications EIU rating



The findings of the January 2008 survey

Vancouver poses the fewest challenges to lifestyle of 140 cities surveyed with a liveability rating of almost 100% and an index of 113 when compared with New York (as 100). Vancouver, host of the 2010 Winter Olympics, achieves the best possible score for all indicators, with the exception of prevalence of petty crime. Although Vancouver is perceived as having high crime rates compared to the rest of Canada, the threat of violent crime is low in the global context. As in previous surveys, Canadian and Australian cities are well placed among the most liveable destinations. Four of the five Australian and three of the four Canadian cities included in the survey feature among the ten most liveable. The rest are provided by Austria (Vienna, 3rd), Finland (Helsinki, 6th) and Switzerland (Zurich and Geneva, joint 9th).

Canada and Australia perform strongly as favoured destinations because they benefit from high levels of development and a relatively low population density. As a result, they have well-designed transport and communication infrastructures that address the distances between cities and benefit from lower levels of congestion and crime owing to smaller city populations.

This forms the basis for the strong performance of cities in Western Europe and North America. Any problems associated with larger populations (such as crime, the perceived threat of terror and transport infrastructure) are offset by cultural gains and the broader advantages of wealthier, well-developed locations.

Athens (62nd) scores worst in Western Europe as Greece continues to lag behind its euro zone peers in terms of infrastructure, healthcare and education. Lexington (59th) ranks lowest in North America, partly because it lacks the recreational availability and infrastructure offered by larger cities. In both cases, however, the liveability ratings of Lexington (86) and Athens (83) remain high, and no cities in Western Europe or North America fall below a level where liveability presents a problem.

A total of 65 of the 140 cities included in the survey present no problems in terms of liveability and only 12 are deemed to fall into the worst category of liveability where most aspects of living are severely restricted.

Average regional performances (100=ideal; 0=intolerable)

Region Average rating Stability HealthcareCulture &

environment Education InfrastructureWestern Europe 92.5 87.2 95.9 93.4 94.0 94.4North America 91.8 86.3 93.6 92.2 98.0 93.5

Asia & Australasia 72.6 74.7 69.8 69.0 77.3 74.8Eastern Europe 72.7 70.4 73.3 75.4 77.9 69.1

Latin America 69.4 60.7 67.4 78.9 77.8 66.3Middle East & Africa 59.3 62.6 56.0 56.4 62.9 60.3

World average 76.3 74.5 75.7 76.3 80.8 77.0

Vancouver is most liveable

Western Europe and North America present no challenges



In Eastern Europe, European Union members enjoy higher liveability ratings than elsewhere. This is possibly because of entry requirements to the Union or because of any benefits in subsidies that membership can bring. Budapest (Hungary�54th), Prague (Czech Republic�60th) and Bratislava (Slovakia�65th) present no significant problems in terms of liveability, with Warsaw (Poland�68th) presenting problems to some aspects of life. No cities fall into the lowest category of liveability where everyday life is affected, although Istanbul (Turkey�109th), Baku (Azerbaijan�110th) and Tashkent (Uzbekistan�119th) feature among the worst-scoring cities in the bottom 40.

In Latin America, Buenos Aires (Argentina�61st) and Santiago (Chile�63rd) benefit from a relatively strong education, culture and infrastructure indicators, and present no significant problems overall. All other cities in the region present some difficulties, although none occupy the worst category where most aspects of living are severely restricted. Civil war, crime and the threat of terror combine to give Bogota (Colombia�126th) the lowest stability rating of all 140 cities surveyed. However, the situation in other categories is much stronger and improving, which prevents the overall rating from falling below 50%.

Asian cities are well represented at both ends of the scale, owing to the broad disparities in liveability within the region. Locations across seven countries in the region present no significant problems (Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan). However, Asia is also home to five cities in which most aspects of living are severely restricted: Phnom Penh (Cambodia�130th), Colombo (Sri Lanka�131st), Karachi (Pakistan�135th), Port Moresby (Papua New Guinea�137th) and Dhaka (Bangladesh�139th). Instability plays a significant part in locations that perform poorly, usually in the form of civil unrest, terrorism and war, as these will inevitably worsen crime levels and other factors such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure.

Regional instability is also a key reason why Africa and the Middle East present the lowest liveability ratings. Seven of the 12 lowest scores are in the region (Tehran: Iran�129th, Dakar: Senegal�132nd, Abidjan: Côte d'Ivoire�133rd, Douala: Cameroon�134th, Lagos: Nigeria�136th, Algiers: Algeria�138th and Harare: Zimbabwe�140th), and even the best-performing city in the region (Tel Aviv�Israel) suffers from the threat of terrorism and regional conflict. The worsening situation in Zimbabwe sees Harare falling to the lowest position of all cities surveyed.

Below is a ranking of all the cities surveyed, accompanied by the liveability rating for that city. The liveability score is the combination of all the factors surveyed across the five main categories. Scores are also given for each category.

Full ranking with rating andcategory breakdown

Colombia has worst stability

Asia among the best and worst

Unrest puts Middle East andAfrica at the bottom



Country City Rank Overall rating(100=ideal) Stability Healthcare

Culture & Environment Education Infrastructure

Canada Vancouver 1 98.8 95 100 100 100 100 Australia Melbourne 2 98.2 95 100 98 100 100

Austria Vienna 3 97.9 95 100 96.5 100 100 Australia Perth 4 97.3 95 100 94 100 100 Canada Toronto 5 97.0 100 100 97 92 93

Finland Helsinki 6 96.9 100 100 91 92 100 Australia Adelaide 7 96.6 95 100 94 100 96

Canada Calgary 7 96.6 100 100 89 100 96 Switzerland Geneva 9 96.1 95 100 93 92 100 Australia Sydney 9 96.1 90 100 94 100 100

Switzerland Zurich 9 96.1 95 100 93 92 100 Sweden Stockholm 12 95.7 95 96 91 100 100

Japan Osaka 13 95.2 90 100 94 100 96 Denmark Copenhagen 14 95.1 85 100 95 100 100

New Zealand Auckland 15 95.0 95 96 97 100 89 Germany Hamburg 15 95.0 90 100 94 92 100 Canada Montreal 15 95.0 95 100 91 100 93

Australia Brisbane 18 94.9 95 100 94 92 93 France Paris 19 94.8 85 100 97 100 96

Germany Frankfurt 20 94.7 85 100 97 92 100 New Zealand Wellington 21 94.5 95 92 95 100 93 Japan Tokyo 22 94.0 90 100 92 100 93

Germany Berlin 22 94.0 85 100 97 92 96 Netherlands Amsterdam 24 93.5 80 100 97 92 100

Norway Oslo 25 93.4 95 92 89 92 100 Luxembourg Luxembourg 26 93.3 95 100 91 83 93

Belgium Brussels 27 92.7 85 100 91 100 93 Germany Munich 28 92.6 85 100 97 92 89 US Pittsburgh 29 92.3 85 92 91 100 100

US Honolulu 30 92.1 90 92 88 100 96 Spain Barcelona 31 91.9 80 92 94 100 100

US Boston 32 91.8 85 92 92 100 96 US Chicago 32 91.8 85 92 94 100 93 France Lyon 34 91.7 85 100 91 100 89

Spain Madrid 35 91.6 85 88 94 100 96 Hong Kong Hong Kong 35 91.6 95 83 88 100 96

Germany Düsseldorf 37 91.4 85 100 94 75 96 US Detroit 37 91.4 85 92 93 100 93

Iceland Reykjavik 39 91.3 95 96 87 92 88 US Minneapolis 40 91.2 85 92 89 100 96 US Washington, DC 40 91.2 80 92 94 100 96

US Atlanta 42 91.1 85 92 92 100 93 US Miami 42 91.1 85 92 92 100 93

US Cleveland 44 91.0 85 92 89 100 96 US Houston 45 90.9 85 92 91 100 93 US Seattle 46 90.0 80 92 96 92 93

UK London 46 90.0 75 92 97 100 93 UK Manchester 48 89.9 85 88 97 92 89

US Los Angeles 49 89.8 80 92 94 100 89





Ireland Dublin 50 89.6 85 88 94 100 88

Italy Milan 51 89.5 85 88 92 100 89 US San Francisco 52 89.4 85 92 97 83 86

Italy Rome 53 89.0 80 88 92 100 93 Hungary Budapest 54 88.9 85 92 90 100 84

Singapore Singapore 55 87.8 95 83 76 83 100 Portugal Lisbon 56 87.7 80 92 95 92 82 US New York 57 87.3 70 92 92 100 93

South Korea Seoul 58 86.3 80 83 84 100 93 US Lexington 59 86.0 85 92 83 92 82

Czech Rep Prague 60 84.0 85 79 87 83 84 Argentina Buenos Aires 61 83.6 70 87.5 85.9 100 85.7 Greece Athens 62 83.1 85 88 85 75 79

Chile Santiago 63 81.4 75 71 89 83 89 Taiwan Taipei 64 81.2 80 83 75 100 79

Slovakia Bratislava 65 80.5 90 75 82 75 75 Uruguay Montevideo 66 79.1 70 83 84 83 79

New Caledonia Nouméa 67 78.5 95 88 67 67 70 Poland Warsaw 68 78.2 80 71 80 75 82 Puerto Rico San Juan 69 77.5 90 83 75 67 64

Russia Moscow 70 76.4 60 79 81 92 80 China Tianjin 71 76.0 90 67 65 67 86

Costa Rica San Jose 72 75.9 85 79 75 75 63 Russia St Petersburg 73 75.5 60 83 81 83 77 Bulgaria Sofia 74 75.4 75 79 80 83 63

China Beijing 75 75.2 80 63 69 75 89 China Shanghai 76 75.1 80 63 76 75 80

Israel Tel Aviv 77 74.9 45 96 74 92 84 Malaysia Kuala Lumpur 78 74.0 75 63 70 92 80

China Suzhou 78 74.0 95 67 60 58 80 China Shenzhen 80 73.4 85 63 66 67 82 Amman Muscat 80 73.4 95 58 50 83 86

Peru Lima 82 72.9 60 67 82 92 75 UAE Abu Dhabi 83 72.7 80 75 58 75 79

Romania Bucharest 84 72.5 80 67 74 67 70 China Dalian 84 72.5 85 67 62 67 79 China Qingdao 86 72.2 90 63 64 58 77

Bahrain Bahrain 87 72.0 70 67 71 92 71 Panama Panama City 88 71.6 80 63 72 83 64

UAE Dubai 89 71.3 85 63 58 67 82 China Guangzhou 90 70.9 80 63 61 67 82

Qatar Doha 91 70.4 75 71 59 83 71 Ukraine Kiev 92 69.9 70 75 73 83 54 Kuwait Kuwait City 93 69.6 70 71 50 83 86

South Africa Johannesburg 94 69.1 50 58 91 83 70 Brazil Rio de Janeiro 94 69.1 55 67 78 83 71

Serbia Belgrade 96 68.6 60 75 73 75 64 Kazakhstan Almaty 96 68.6 75 71 65 67 64 Brazil Sao Paulo 98 68.4 60 71 80 67 63

South Africa Pretoria 99 68.0 50 58 88 83 68 Jordan Amman 100 67.6 75 67 65 75 59





Thailand Bangkok 101 67.4 55 63 69 100 70

Paraguay Asuncion 102 67.2 65 63 79 67 61 Brunei Bandar Seri Begawan 103 65.9 85 71 42 75 63

Tunisia Tunis 104 65.7 70 71 64 67 57 Mexico Mexico City 105 65.2 55 67 82 75 50

Ecuador Quito 106 62.5 50 50 79 75 64 Philippines Manila 107 61.9 60 58 64 67 63 Libya Tripoli 108 61.6 85 63 46 67 48

Turkey Istanbul 109 61.3 55 50 70 58 71 Azerbaijan Baku 110 60.7 60 67 61 75 48

Morocco Casablanca 111 60.3 65 50 64 58 61 Saudi Arabia Jeddah 112 60.0 75 71 31 58 68 Egypt Cairo 113 59.4 65 50 61 58 61

India New Delhi 114 59.3 55 58 56 75 63 Saudi Arabia Riyadh 115 59.1 70 67 35 58 68

Syria Damascus 116 58.8 70 54 54 58 55 Guatemala Guatemala City 117 58.3 55 50 72 58 54

Saudi Arabia Al Khobar 118 57.6 75 63 37 50 61 Uzbekistan Tashkent 119 57.4 50 63 58 75 52 Venezuela Caracas 120 56.0 30 46 76 92 55

India Mumbai 120 56.0 60 54 53 50 59 Kenya Nairobi 122 54.8 50 42 72 67 46

Vietnam Hanoi 123 54.2 55 54 54 58 52 Vietnam Ho Chi Minh City 124 53.2 55 50 50 67 52 Indonesia Jakarta 125 52.6 45 50 59 58 54

Colombia Bogota 126 51.7 10 63 75 67 57 Zambia Lusaka 127 51.1 60 33 60 42 52

Nepal Kathmandu 128 50.3 55 46 52 58 43 Iran Tehran 129 49.7 65 63 37 50 34

Cambodia Phnom Penh 130 48.4 60 38 43 58 46 Sri Lanka Colombo 131 48.1 40 42 54 67 48 Senegal Dakar 132 46.8 50 42 60 50 30

Cote d'Ivoire Abidjan 133 46.6 30 46 54 50 57 Cameroon Douala 134 46.0 65 25 47 25 52

Pakistan Karachi 135 41.4 25 46 39 67 48 Nigeria Lagos 136 39.7 25 33 52 33 52 PNG Port Moresby 137 38.9 30 38 41 50 43

Algeria Algiers 138 37.3 50 33 32 25 38 Bangladesh Dhaka 139 36.9 40 29 43 42 30

Zimbabwe Harare 140 36.8 25 21 53 67 32

liveability ranking and overview.pdf

Documents