Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
The most liveable city in the world...is not London
This will come as no surprise to Alan Stanton, who is a big fan but Vancouver is the “most live-able” city, according to worldwide analysis by The Economist Intelligence Unit.
The city met an impressive 98% of the criteria set by the surveyors, including the quality of healthcare, culture, environment and infrastructure.
Vienna in Austria is ranked second, closely followed by Melbourne, Australia. The top 20 includes five Australian cities, three Canadian cities and two German cities.
Poor old London limps in at 51st place with Manchester ranking higher at number 46
For more on liveable cities.
The Economist
Source: The Independent
The city met an impressive 98% of the criteria set by the surveyors, including the quality of healthcare, culture, environment and infrastructure.
Vienna in Austria is ranked second, closely followed by Melbourne, Australia. The top 20 includes five Australian cities, three Canadian cities and two German cities.
Poor old London limps in at 51st place with Manchester ranking higher at number 46
For more on liveable cities.
The Economist
Source: The Independent
Tags for Forum Posts: liveable cities
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Perth has just had to build a desalination plant after exhausting the aquifer under the Margaret river. Adelaide has basically run out of water. Sydney can have similar problems. Also, those five cities are full of Australians.
London is a fantastic place to 'live'.
-
Permalink Reply by matt on
-
Agree. Good points John.
The so-called top three cities each year are Oslo, Vancouver and Melbourne. They just move about the places. They are 'nice' cities but that's about it. Oslo often soaks up British music after all as very little happens there.
Vienna? What, the capital of the resurgent far right. No thanks.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
Its interesting to read the comments on the Economist site. There seems to be some doubt about the positive effects of the liberal drug policy in Vancouver on crime and quite a few people who raise the issue of racism in these top ranking cities. Guess its difficult to build any urban utopia...
London is a great city but its not always very 'liveable' especially if you have a low income.
-
-
.... its not always very 'liveable' especially if you have a low income.
True, but that's same every where including the country side.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
The full report from the Economist Intelligence Unit is a real bargain at only US$250 !
Though aren't these rankings pretty meaningless unless:
■ You're thinking of emigrating or buying your third home; or
■ Like me, you love London, and want us to learn from other people's experience.
Which means discovering and trying out the very best ideas from other cities and towns — and even other London boroughs. (While understanding and avoiding their mistakes, of course.) So whether it's Berlin, Beijing, or Birmingham, if you travel, please bring back ideas and suggestions.
As Liz says, Zena and I do have a soft spot for Vancouver. At least in 2004, it was a great place to visit, with very friendly people. Plus a City Council which seemed way ahead in its thinking — including about the range of problems shared by London and many other cities.
To get a flavour, look at its website. And especially, the huge collection of streamable or downloadable short videos.
-
Permalink Reply by Old-Age-Emporium(OAE) on
-
In the liveable cities league, according to Matilda Battersby of The Independent:
'The poorest performing locations were Africa and Asia . . . . . Zimbabwe was ranked 140th out of 140'. Maybe it's because they speak African or Asian there. Is Matilda a lazy journalist, Australian, not up to reading The Economist, in need of a few Geography lessons, or all of the above?
Sorry to see Afghanistan omitted. A decade ago I found Spin Ghar's Tora Bora caves eminently liveable, though I'm told that both the qualitative and quantitative indicators of environment, health care and infrastructure suffered a marked deterioration some months after my departure.
-
-
.... though I'm told that both the qualitative and quantitative indicators of environment, health care and infrastructure suffered a marked deterioration some months after my departure.
Those CIA boys love to splash the cash don't they; funding Osama Enterprises and all that innit (Talirubberban). Don't the courts have something called 'manslaughter'/ funding by misadventure. And the US secret services are? .... 'Guilty, your honour'.
-
-
Tom, We were in Vancouver only a few days. (And actually on holiday. Though our trip was cut short by a bereavement.) But nobody we met - city officials, police, social services, ordinary residents - were anything but candid and deeply concerned about drugs, homelessness and street people, mental health services etc. And the concentration of problems in the Downtown Eastside area.
In fact, these were major factors underpinning the Vancouver Agreement. Things may have changed enormously, but at least at that time, it looked like a genuine partnership between three levels of Government - City, Provincial and Federal - working together to tackle problems.
Which seemed in sharp contrast to London. Here, despite the very best intentions to break out of departmental 'silos', the outcome is often unhelpful micromanagement by civil servants, many of whom seem to have little clue about local issues.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
