The Global Liveability Report 2017
It’s very exciting to see Toronto ranked as the 4th most global Liveable urban cities! Among 140 cities surveyed Toronto scored 97.2, 0.3 less than No. 1 Melbourne!
What draws my attentions are How the rating is calculated, by reading that we know how Toronto can rank so high.
Toronto scores 100 for 3 Categories: Stability, Healthcare and Education. Culture and Environment Toronto scores 97.2 and Infrastructure scores 89.3; as we know the government is investing more money in infrastructure in futures year, which seems to resonate what the report implies; although I still hear lots of protest comments on the big infrastructure expenditure plan.
I am thinking about Shanghai which is the biggest urban business center in China and also where I came from, I bet it gets a very high score in Infrastructure, within recent 10 years we are so impressed with recent developments in Chinese internet business and all the light rails and the express trains connecting thousands of cities in the really speedy way. However, the education and healthcare might be not so satisfactory there. Shanghai is a very stable city, however, stated in the report ” the concerns over geopolitical stability are growing in Asia owing to potential flashpoints involving a number of countries, including China and North Korea. It is therefore not surprising that declining stability scores haven been felt around the world. ”
Here are the reports finding: Those that score best tend to be mid-sized cities wealthier countries with a relatively low population density. These can foster a range of recreational activities without leading to high crime levels or overburdened infrastructure. Six of the ten top-scoring cities are in Australia and Canada, which have, respectively, population densities of 2.9 and 3.7 people per square kilometer. These densities compare with a global average of 57 people/sqkm and a US average of 35 people/sq km.
Also, I am impressed about reports on the the global business centers: Global business centers like New York, London, Paris, and Tokyo are all prestigious hubs with a wealth of recreational activities, but all suffer from higher levels of crime, congestion, and public transport problems than are deemed comfortable. The question is how much wages, the cost of living and personal taste for a location can offset livability factors. Although Global centers fare less well in the ranking than mid-sized cities, for example, they still sit within the highest tier of liveability and should, therefore, be considered broadly comparable, especially when contrasted with worst-scoring locations.
The report free version can be downloaded from Economic