Poor sustainability and high cost public transport mar global cities win

High panoramaLondon scored poorly in the criteria covering the quality of life while winning the Cities of Opportunity global rankings by PwC. It came bottom of the list of 30 cities for the cost of public transport and scored poorly for sustainability.

The rankings by the international professional services company examines cities in 10 different categories that were determined by 59 data points and a survey of 15,000 of PwC’s staff around the globe. The company split the 10 categories into 3 broad areas – Tools for a Changing World, Quality of Life and Economics. As reported by Urbs, London topped the rankings for the first time with good scores in the first and third broad areas. But it was often marked down in judging quality of life.

There were 4 categories in the quality of life part; Transport and Infrastructure covered public transport, housing and construction; Health, Safety and Security looked at health care and crime; the Natural Environment and Sustainability considered recycling, air pollution and public park spaces; and Demographics and Livability looked at issues such as cultural vibrancy and attractiveness for relocation.

London came equal sixth in the first two categories. While its public transport system won accolades for efficiency and reliability it is the most costly among the 30 cities.

But it is in the scoring for the natural environment and sustainability that London slipped down, coming fourteenth. It achieved low scores for air pollution, recycling levels and, perhaps surprisingly, for its public parks.

Singapore joined London in a poor performance in this category prompting PwC to remark, “one would expect two cities as sophisticated as Singapore and London to be among the leaders, both regionally and globally, in environmental sustainability.”

In the livability stakes London rated highly as a vibrant cultural hub that was an attractive destination for workers. But for sheer ease and quality of living it was out-pointed by Sydney.

PwC Quality of Life categories
Transport & Infrastructure Health, Safety & Security Environment & Sustainability Demographics & Livability
1 Singapore Stockholm Stockholm/Sydney Sydney
2 Toronto SydneyToronto London
3 Buenos Aires Berlin/Paris San Francisco
4 Seoul Berlin Berlin
5 Paris San Francisco San Francisco Hong Kong
6 London/ Madrid Chicago/London/   Singapore Toronto Singapore
7 Chicago/Los Angeles Paris
8 Stockholm Stockholm
9 Berlin New York Moscow Toronto
10 Dubai Paris Madrid Chicago/             New York
14 London

Source data

See also

Economic clout helps London to another global cities crown

History gives city the edge in adapting to change in future


The Marmite response to living in the capital

flatsLondon divides opinion among people in the UK.  The Britain Uncovered survey done by Opinium Research for The Guardian shows the love/hate relationship that people have with the capital. Asked where else in the UK they would like to live London was the second favourite destination, just behind the South West, with 15%.  But it was the top answer by some considerable margin to the question of where would you least like to live,  named by 30%.  Northern Ireland and the East Midland were second with 14%.

London is considered the wealthiest place in Britain, identified by 65% of people taking part in the survey.  But being the wealthiest place did not give it the best quality of life.  Only 14% said that was best in the capital.  Although those who live here had a more favourable view.  30% of Londoners said it offered the best quality of life in the UK.

The South West topped the list for quality of life. 29% thought it had most to offer, and perhaps proving that the best things in life are free, only 5% had identified it as the wealthiest region.

Optinium Research interviewed 1,019 people ealier this year.  The survey was weighted to reflect the demographic profile of Britain’s adult population.

See more