At the beginning of August, the Economist Intelligent Unit (EIU) of the British magazine The Economist published its annual "The Global Liveability Report 2017" surveying 140 cities around the world and ranking them according to what was supposed to measure and depict the quality of life for their residents.

"The concept of liveability is simple," writes the Economist in a <link https: de.scribd.com document external-link-new-window global liveability report a free>summary of its research available for free (p.9). Each city is evaluated based on more than 30 qualitative and quantitative indicators in five categories: stability, health care, culture and environment, education, and infrastructure.

The report has brought particularly good news for Canadians and Australians. Melbourne was named the most liveable city for the seventh time in a row, and the Australian cities of Adelaide (6th place) and Perth (7th place) also made it to the top ten. Canadian Vancouver, Toronto and Calgary occupied places from 3 to 6, while among European cities, only Vienna (2nd place) and Hamburg (10th place) appeared among the Top-10 of “the most liveable”. Actually, a very few changes compared to the previous years’ reports - overall only 12 cities enhanced their position and six were considered to plunge in terms of quality of their performance.

One reason why European cities tend to occupy lower positions in the ranking is the growing threat of terrorism in Central Europe. Manchester moved down by 8 places after Manchester Arena explosion in May. <link https: www.theguardian.com cities aug manchester-global-livability-liveability-survey-arena-terror-attack-economist external-link-new-window>"Is it fair to punish Manchester's 'liveability' survey after its terror attack?", - The Guardian asks in its article reviewing the ranking of The Economist and points to the "remarkable spirit" of Manchester residents in response to the attack. It is not the terrorist attack, but the reaction of local people, which should influence the reputation of a city.

The Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, was ranked 131 out of 140 cities, opening the list of the 10 least-liveable urban areas, and followed by Douala (Cameroon), Harare (Zimbabwe), Karachi (Pakistan), Lagos (Nigeria), Tripoli (Libya), Dhaka (Bangladesh), Port Moresby (Papua New Guinea) and Damascus (Syria) at the very bottom of the ranking. The EIU justified its poor assessment of Kyiv’s liveability by overall economic instability in Ukraine and above all by the ongoing conflict in the Donbass region of the country. This decision, however, besides being named controversial , led to some fierce discussions as well as indignation in both Ukraine’s media and social networks. This ranking has come up exactly when the country tries to persuade the world that it is safe and attractive, while life is almost unaffected by the ongoing conflict in the east – so is the view of many Kyiv’s residents.

Moving to Asia, Singapore has been pleased to outperform Hong Kong for the first time, reports <link http: www.channelnewsasia.com news singapore singapore-moves-above-hk-in-liveability-for-the-first-time-eiu-9128338 external-link-new-window>Channel News Asia. Simultaneously, <link http: timesofindia.indiatimes.com world rest-of-world melbourne-most-liveable-city-karachi-dhaka-among-the-least articleshow external-link-new-window and dhaka among the reveals>The Times of India could not refrain from mentioning that neighboring megapolises of Dhaka and Karachi were ranked among “the least-liveable”, while no Indian city appeared at the bottom of the ranking.

However, what does it all say? Is the concept of a "liveable" city really so simple or the concept of the economist perhaps too simplistic? Melbourne is one of the 20 most expensive cities in the world and Hamburg is one of the most expensive in Germany. For whom is life particularly worth living there? A further look at the indicators shows that in the category "education" the factor of “availability and quality of private education” is one of the key indicators influencing the assessment. In the category "infrastructure", there are, among others, such indicators as "quality of international links" or "availability of good quality housing", but affordable housing is not an indicator at all. The Online Citizen therefore comes to the following conclusion: <link https: www.theonlinecitizen.com economists-liveability-report-meaningless-for-non-expats external-link-new-window online>"Economist's liveability report meaningless for non-expats". The report may be of interest to global companies in their choice of business locations or in the calculation of salary premiums for executives sent to the cities with particularly difficult living conditions.

It probably remains in line with an old wisdom - to trust the only statistics, that you "falsified" yourself. Perhaps, it makes more sense to let the residents themselves speak about their cities, sharing their impressions and experiences from daily life, as for example in the social <link https: www.facebook.com cityexplorationsadmin _blank external-link-new-window>Cityexplorations Network. So far, for most of the inhabitants of 140 cities rated by The Economist, the Liveability Report has not been written.

------------------------------------

Autor: Burkhard Vielhaber

The contents of this article reflect the opinion of the author and not necessarily those of Connective Cities or any of their partner organizations.