Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Contents
1 Forewords
Executive Summary
3.2 Methodology
1
Our world is
changing at a
faster pace
than ever before.
Rapidly developing
technology,
population growth
and the emergence
of a truly global
economy mean
that the notion of
national borders has
become increasingly
less relevant while
the concept of the
global city has
swiftly taken hold.
As our planet
continues to evolve,
people will continue
to flock to its busy,
dynamic and
imposing urban
centers. Urban
migration is now very
much the norm. Love
them or avoid them,
we are now entering
the Age of the City.
ARCADIS view
The Age of the City
London
4
GUEST forward
We are living in the century of
the city, but are we living in the
century of the sustainable city?
EXECUTIVE
summary
In a rapidly urbanizing world, the way in which
cities are planned, built, operated and redefined
has a huge social, environmental and economic
impact
City leaders need to find ways to balance the
demands of generating strong financial returns,
being an attractive place for people to live and
work in, whilst also limiting their damage to the
environment
The first Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index
explores these three demands of People, Planet
and Profit to develop an indicative ranking of
50 of the worlds leading cities
Across the world, cities are performing better
for being sustainable for Profit and Planet
purposes, but are failing to sufficiently meet
the needs of their People
No utopian city exists, rather, city leaders face
a difficult task balancing the three pillars of
sustainability
Well established, European cities come top
of the overall rankings, with Frankfurt in
first place, followed by London, Copenhagen,
Amsterdam and Rotterdam
Asian cities show the most divergence, with
Seoul, Hong Kong and Singapore in the top
ten and Manila, Mumbai, Wuhan and New Delhi
forming four of the bottom five cites
No North American city makes it into the top
ten. Toronto is the highest ranked at 12th,
Boston (15th) and Chicago (19th) are the most
sustainable US cities
SUSTAINABLE
cities index
3.1. What do we mean by sustainability?
Sustainability can encompass a wide variety of practices
sustainable development has been defined by the United Nations
as: Development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs, although there are other definitions. In an urban context,
this means cities that work well for their citizens in the present
without causing problems for themselves and the rest of the
world in the future.
Sustainable cities build transport systems that enable people
to navigate the city quickly and affordably, have clean and safe
water supplies, strong social structures and institutions that work
predictably and efficiently, a healthy and well-educated workforce,
and an environment conducive to strong economic performance.
To take the needs of the future into account, cities must take
care of their waste, avoid polluting the atmosphere and protect
the surrounding water from contamination. Cities also need to
guard against rare and unpredictable events such as disasters
that can cost lives and set back their development. Sustainable
development means meeting current requirements without
jeopardizing the potential for future generations of inhabitants.
The broad definition of the concept means its measurement should
reflect a variety of different dimensions. This research develops a
composite index of sustainability, created from combining many
other input indices that each measure single aspects of urban
performance. The Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index takes into
account data on these criteria from reputable sources such as the
United Nations, the World Bank, the World Health Organization,
the International Labour Organization and many others.
10
3
A detailed,
evidence-based
metric is derived
to quantify each
citys performance.
The headline ranking
can then be divided
into three broad
subcategories:
People, Planet
and Profit. These
correspond to
three dimensions
of sustainability
social, environmental
and economic and
can be described
as the triple
bottom line.
3.2. Methodology
The research examines 50
People
Measures social
performance
including quality
of life
Planet
Captures environmental
factors like energy
emissions
and pollution
Profit
Assesses business
environment and
economic
performance
11
Figure 1:
Frankfurt tops the overall sustainability index
Frankfurt
2
3
London
Copenhagen
4
5
Amsterdam
Rotterdam
6
7
Berlin
Seoul
8
9
Hong Kong
Madrid
10
11
Singapore
Sydney
12
13
Toronto
Brussels
14
15
Manchester
Boston
16
17
Paris
Melbourne
18
19
Birmingham
Chicago
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
New York
Houston
Philadelphia
Tokyo
Rome
Washington
Kuala Lumpur
San Francisco
Los Angeles
Dallas
Santiago
So Paulo
Mexico City
Dubai
Abu Dhabi
Shanghai
Istanbul
Johannesburg
Buenos Aires
Beijing
Rio de Janeiro
Doha
Moscow
Jeddah
Riyadh
Jakarta
Manila
Mumbai
Wuhan
New Delhi
Nairobi
0%
Key
People
Planet
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Hong Kong
13
1
Germany
People 9
Planet 1
Profit 1
14
London
Chicago
People 3
Planet 12
Profit 2
People 18
Planet 29
Profit 12
United Kingdom
Frankfurt
19
USA
15
5
Rotterdam
Netherlands
People 1
Planet 5
Profit 19
3.4. People
The People sub-index, presented in Figure 2,
measures the social performance of the city,
that is, the interaction between a city and its
community. To investigate this, The Sustainable
Cities Index uses nine separate indicators, all of
which influence the quality of life enjoyed
within the city.
The top 10 is dominated by European cities, with
seven of the top ten coming from this continent.
In these cities, transportation infrastructure is
typically quite good the average commuting
time amongst the top ten, for example, is around
ten per cent lower than amongst the 50 cities
overall. London, Berlin and Manchester are slight
exceptions here, however, and have the lowest
transport indicator scores amongst the top ten.
Rotterdam rises to the top of the People subindex, supported by relatively strong performance
across most indicators. The exception to this is
on higher education, since the city has relatively
few high ranking universities compared to other
cities. However, this is more than compensated
for by both the affordability of property within the
city and the work-life balance enjoyed by citizens.
Compared to other countries within the top ten,
property is estimated to be around 60% cheaper
in Rotterdam, while relatively low hours worked
support a more favourable work-life balance.
Figure 2:
Rotterdam tops the People sub-index,
demonstrating strong social sustainability
1
Rotterdam
2
3
Seoul
London
4
5
Sydney
Copenhagen
6
7
Hong Kong
Amsterdam
8
9
Melbourne
Frankfurt
10
11
Berlin
Brussels
12
13
Manchester
Boston
14
15
Madrid
Toronto
16
17
Singapore
Birmingham
18
19
Chicago
Beijing
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Paris
Tokyo
Shanghai
Kuala Lumpur
Philadelphia
Abu Dhabi
Dubai
Houston
San Francisco
Los Angeles
Dallas
Moscow
Rome
New York
Doha
Washington
Buenos Aires
Jeddah
Santiago
So Paulo
Istanbul
Johannesburg
Riyadh
Mexico City
Jakarta
Wuhan
Rio de Janeiro
Manila
Mumbai
New Delhi
Nairobi
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Key
Transport infrastructure
Dependency ratio
Inequality
Literacy
Education
Work-life balance
Health
Green spaces
Property prices Source: Cebr analysis
16
17
26
Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia
People 23
Planet 24
Profit 22
3.5. Planet
The sub-index measuring environmental
performance, which focuses on resource
consumption, resource disposal and risk
of exposure to natural catastrophes, is the
second component of the overall measure.
The top ten features many European cities,
with only Singapore and Toronto coming from
outside the continent. The two German
entrants are at the top of the list.
18
Figure 3:
Two German cities score highest on environmental
stability, with Europe performing strongly
1
Frankfurt
2
3
Berlin
Copenhagen
4
5
Madrid
Rotterdam
6
7
Amsterdam
Singapore
8
9
Rome
Toronto
10
11
Birmingham
Paris
12
13
London
Seoul
14
15
Manchester
Brussels
16
17
So Paulo
Rio de Janeiro
18
19
Sydney
Hong Kong
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
39
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
New York
Boston
Washington
Melbourne
Kuala Lumpur
Buenos Aires
Mexico City
Santiago
Tokyo
Chicago
Houston
Philadelphia
Istanbul
Shanghai
Manila
Johannesburg
Mumbai
San Francisco
Jakarta
Jeddah
Riyadh
Moscow
Dallas
Los Angeles
Abu Dhabi
Nairobi
Beijing
Dubai
Wuhan
New Delhi
Doha
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Key
Energy use and renewables mix
Natural catastrophe exposure
Air pollution
Greenhouse gas emissions
Solid waste management
Drinking and sanitation Source: Cebr analysis
19
20
43
New York
Jeddah
People 33
Planet 20
Profit 13
People 37
Planet 39
Profit 41
USA
20
Saudi Arabia
31
So Paulo
Brazil
People 39
Planet 16
Profit 39
21
Figure 4:
3.6. Profit
The Profit sub-index aims to capture economic
sustainability. On this measure three of the
worlds largest financial centers lead: Frankfurt
comes first, followed by London and Hong
Kong. Many well-known commercial and
financial centers are impacted by the high cost
of doing business, as measured by the cost of
living and of property Tokyo, New York and
San Francisco would each receive higher scores
if not for this.
Shanghai, mainland Chinas largest financial
center, ranks relatively low, losing out on percapita GDP, energy efficiency and the ease of
doing business. So Paulos score is harmed by
relatively poor transportation, low GDP per head
and Brazils below-average score on ease of
doing business. Inefficient use of energy, which
drives up the cost of doing business, holds back
Singapore from an even higher score.
Transport infrastructure is calculated as a
composite of public transport, commuting
time, airport quality ranking and the extent of
the rail network. While Los Angeles currently
faces challenges with these ratings, significant
investment is underway to improve congestion
and mobility. The United States first high-speed
rail system is under construction in California,
connecting Los Angeles with other regions and
LAs Metro Rail system is also being doubled.
Elsewhere, some Middle Eastern cities Doha,
Jeddah, Riyadh also have metro systems that
are under construction and underdeveloped
bus networks, meaning their score is also low
in this respect.
Frankfurt
London
3
4
Hong Kong
Amsterdam
5
6
Melbourne
Seoul
7
8
San Francisco
Brussels
9
10
Singapore
Madrid
11
12
Copenhagen
Chicago
13
14
New York
Boston
15
16
Houston
Sydney
17
Los Angeles
18
19
Toronto
Rotterdam
20
21
Philadelphia
Manchester
22
23
Kuala Lumpur
Dallas
24
25
Tokyo
Washington
26
27
Berlin
Dubai
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
Paris
Birmingham
Doha
Mexico City
Johannesburg
Santiago
Abu Dhabi
Rome
Istanbul
Beijing
Shanghai
So Paulo
Manila
Jeddah
Buenos Aires
Jakarta
Riyadh
Moscow
Rio de Janeiro
Mumbai
New Delhi
Nairobi
Wuhan
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Key
Singapore
22
Transport infrastructure
Energy efficiency
Economic development
Ease of doing business
Cost of doing business
Importance to global networks Source: Cebr analysis
23
28
10
Los Angeles
USA
People 29
Planet 43
Profit 17
Singapore
Asia-Pasific
People 16
Planet 7
Profit 8
Whilst Singapore is placed in the top ten in the Sustainable Cities Index, it ranks
lower than Hong Kong and Seoul through achieving low scores for indicators
like work-life balance, having expensive property prices, low use of renewable
energy and a high cost of doing business.
25
Table 1:
Selection of the worlds largest cities with growth
rates and ranking in the Sustainable Cities Index
Sustainable Cities
Index 2015 rank
City
Population, thousands
2010
2030
Expansion 20102015 %
Expansion 20102030 %
41
Doha
529
837
36%
58%
33
Dubai
1,778
3,471
36%
95%
34
Abu Dhabi
879
1,608
30%
83%
39
Beijing
16,190
27,706
26%
71%
44
Riyadh
5,227
7,940
22%
52%
50
Nairobi
3,237
7,140
21%
121%
19,980
30,751
19%
54%
3,452
4,988
18%
44%
35
Shanghai
43
Jeddah
26
Kuala Lumpur
5,810
9,423
18%
62%
37
Johannesburg
7,992
11,573
18%
45%
49
New Delhi
21,935
36,060
17%
64%
21
Houston
4,976
6,729
13%
35%
36
Istanbul
12,703
16,694
11%
31%
29
Dallas
5,149
6,683
11%
30%
10
Singapore
5,079
6,578
11%
30%
12
Toronto
5,499
6,957
9%
27%
46
Manila
11,891
16,756
9%
41%
47
Mumbai
19,422
27,797
8%
43%
25
Washington
4,604
5,690
8%
24%
45
Jakarta
31
So Paulo
9
38
17
3
Madrid
Buenos Aires
9,630
13,812
7%
43%
19,660
23,444
7%
19%
5,787
6,707
7%
16%
14,246
16,956
7%
19%
Melbourne
3,951
5,071
6%
28%
Copenhagen
1,192
1,455
6%
22%
London
9,699
11,467
6%
18%
42
Moscow
11,461
12,200
6%
6%
48
Wuhan
7,515
9,442
5%
26%
Frankfurt
13
Brussels
681
774
5%
14%
1,958
2,203
4%
12%
32
Mexico City
20,132
23,865
4%
19%
40
Rio de Janeiro
12,374
14,174
4%
15%
14
Manchester
2,538
2,968
4%
17%
30
8
Santiago
6,269
7,122
4%
14%
Hong Kong
7,050
7,885
4%
12%
10,460
11,803
4%
13%
2,429
2,808
4%
16%
16
Paris
18
Birmingham
24
Rome
3,592
3,842
4%
7%
11
Sydney
4,364
5,301
3%
21%
Amsterdam
1,057
1,213
3%
15%
4
23
Tokyo
36,834
37,190
3%
1%
Berlin
3,475
3,658
3%
5%
Philadelphia
5,449
6,158
2%
13%
22
15
Boston
4,185
4,671
2%
12%
19
Chicago
8,616
9,493
1%
10%
20
New York
18,365
19,885
1%
8%
28
Los Angeles
12,160
13,257
1%
9%
10%
27
San Francisco
3,283
3,615
1%
Seoul
9,796
9,960
0%
2%
Rotterdam
996
1,077
0%
8%
4
Mumbai are growing
relatively slowly in
the short term from
2010 to 2015, but
have among the
highest projected
expansions between
today and 2030.
GLOBAL
urbaniszation
challenges
The challenges cities face are large and varied since
sustainable development requires a wide range of
outcomes to be achieved. Moreover, nearly all of
the cities studies are growing all the time creating
constantly evolving demands and pressure. According
to UN analysis, only two of the worlds largest 71 cities
will experience a decline in population between 2010
and 2015. Indeed, some city populations are growing
at rates of 4%, 5%, or even 6% per year over the same
period, making it incredibly difficult for urban planners
and policymakers to keep up. Table 1 includes
data from the United Nations which illustrates the
projected population growth of the cities included
within the Sustainable Cities Index analysis.
The population expansion between 2010 and 2015
demonstrates the short-term stress that cities
are facing as they strive to achieve sustainable
development. A notable feature here is the
difference between developed-world cities, which
are experiencing more moderate population growth,
and developing-world cities, which are experiencing
rapid increases. Large population growth combined
with rapid rural-to-urban migration has tended to
accompany economic development everywhere,
and currently poses huge challenges for planners in
developing countries.
Looking at the longer-term, Table 1 also illustrates
forecasts for urban populations through to 2030.
Six cities in the analysis Nairobi, Dubai, Abu Dhabi,
Kuala Lumpur, Beijing and Delhi will see growth of
more than 60% over this time period. This growth will
place tremendous stress on transport networks, water
supply, waste collection systems, sewage systems and
land values, unless these cities work hard to keep up
with the influx of migrants. Tokyo is the worlds largest
city today and is projected to remain so in 2030, yet
has the lowest rate of growth of any city listed. In
contrast emerging market cities such as Jakarta and
Key
High ranking & lower population growth
Low ranking & higher population growth
Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision
26
27
35
41
Doha
Shanghai
China
People 22
Planet 33
Profit 38
Qatar
People 34
Planet 50
Profit 30
Doha is one of the up and coming
global cities that is expected to rise
rapidly through the rankings over
the coming years.
28
ENERGY &
CLIM
ATE
AC
TIO
N
LO
C
AL
EC
ON
O
M
G
L-BEIN
WEL
SO
UR
CE
WASTE
RE
&
S
IN
RI
AL
GS
30
&
TH
AL
HE
IL D
Balancing priorities
BU
ER
AT
W
5
UNITY & CULTURE
COMM
MOVING
towards a more
sustainable city
M
B IO
D IV
ERS
TIY
TR
CC E
T&A
A NSP OR
SS
IBI
E
AT
Y
LT
Figure 5:
Sustainability Target Assessment Rating Framework
Source: Arcadis
31
Region
North America
Chicago
Dallas
Houston
Los Angeles
Boston
San Francisco
Toronto
Washington
New York
32
Frankfurt
Hong Kong
London
Shanghai
Singapore
Tokyo
Ambition
Global financial center
Copenhagen
Jakarta
Melbourne
Rio de Janeiro
Rotterdam
Issue
Delta Cities
Figure 6:
Sample city clusters by issue, region or ambition
Source: Arcadis
33
Concluding thoughts:
Delving deeper into the
Sustainable Cities Index
The pattern of learning from others makes the
Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index a very interesting
tool that can be used to gauge how cities are
seeking to strike the balance between People,
Planet and Profit and the interdependencies
between them. For example, the Planet indicators
show that cities that perform well economically
often do so at a high environmental cost. The
breakdown into sub-indices demonstrates where
cities need to make investment to improve their
overall performance. Cities like New York, Hong
Kong, London and Singapore are victims of their
own success in some ways with very high land
costs. For long term economic and social
sustainability, this requires a heavy program of
investment in housing and office space.
Similarly, the findings demonstrate that European
cities need to refocus their attention on the
business environment and achieving stronger
economic performance. On various components
of the Profit sub-index the European cities
perform weakly as the Eurozone financial and
sovereign debt crisis continues to drag on. The
findings highlight the major competitiveness
challenges faced by the continent.
On the other hand, many US cities would perform
much better in the Sustainable Cities Index if it
were not for their energy use characteristics, with
heavy reliance on cars and lower ranking waste
management practices. The Middle Eastern
entrants, bar Jeddah, share in common this out
performance on the Profit sub-index relative to
the Planet rankings.
New York
34
APPENDIX:
methodology
and data sources
Methodology
Disclaimer
36
6
Arcadis is the
leading global
natural and built
asset design
& consultancy
firm working in
partnership with
our clients to
deliver exceptional
and sustainable
outcomes through
the application of
design, consultancy,
engineering, project
and management
services.
Table 2:
People
Planet
Profit
Source
Description
Literacy
Education
Green spaces
Dependency ratio
Income inequality
Work-life balance
Property prices
Rail infrastructure
Airport satisfaction
Energy consumption
Health
Public transport
Transport
infrastructure
(composed of--)
Commuting time
Renewable
consumption
Natural
catastrophe
exposure
Air pollution
Greenhouse gas
emissions
Solid waste
management
World Bank
Rates of landfill/recycling/compost/
waste-to-energy of solid waste
Drinking water
and Sanitation
(composed of)
Drinking water
Sanitation
Energy efficiency
Importance to
global networks
GDP per capita
Ease of doing
business
Cost of doing
business
Brookings institute
37
38
39
CONTACT
John Batten
Global Cities Director, Arcadis
E john.batten@arcadis.com
T @jbattenbuc
Colin Edwards
Senior Economist
Centre for Econimics and Business Research
E cedwards@cebr.com