By Joe Peach at This Big City.
In recent years, cities have solidified their importance on a global scale, and citizens have become increasingly mobile alongside this. As a result, the search for the perfect place to settle, live and work has become something of an obsession to many. With so many options around, it is no surprise that cities are competing more and more to attract people by selling their unique features.
Cities are now subjects of a variety of rankings carried out by academics, international organisations and consultancies to showcase what makes them stand out from the crowd. These rankings however, have been questioned by many observers as they try to measure tricky features such as happiness, liveability and perceptions. Thus, rankings like the happy index, Mercer’s Quality of Living rankings and others are often an object of debate amongst city dwellers across the globe.
This Big City and Future Cape Town asked the community on their views about such measures and rankings, and what made their cities more liveable than others. And indeed, whether these made sense at all.
These are some of our favourite comments from this month’s #citytalk:
A1 Livability is subjective. There are different needs. A city needs a vocation so it can start working on its livability factors #CityTalk
— Nikolai Elneser (@nikolai_em) January 15, 2014
A2: I’m not sure that people make decisions about where to live based on ranks, but it can be prestigious or motivating for a city #citytalk
— Kayla Jonas Galvin (@jonaskayla) January 15, 2014
A2 liveability rankings are good indicators for making informed choices about how to interact in and with changing environments #CityTalk
— Naren Sewpaul (@NarenSewpaul) January 15, 2014
— Maren Larsen (@mareninthecity) January 15, 2014
A4 Livability is a Q for people that have far bypassed the Q of SURVIVE-ability. It generally knocks out all impoverished people #citytalk
— Christine Cepelak (@_cepcity) January 15, 2014