Kriti  Gupta  –  s2943375  Essay  Question  One:  Australian cities are often highly ranked in international measures of urban quality of life. What factors account for the position of Australian cities in these international rankings and how well do you think Australian cities will rank in fifty years’ time? How well do these measures capture what it is like for you to live in an Australian city?  

1 0 3 7 E N V   U n d e r s t a n d i n g   A u s t r a l i a n   C i t i e s  W o r d   C o u n t :   1 5 1 9  

         

Reflection  of  Australian  Urban  Quality  of  Life  and  its  Future  

  2  

Abstract:   For   hundreds   of   years   now   the   design   and   building   of   a   city   reflects   our  everyday  lives  as  the  two  go  hand  in  hand.  This  paper  focuses  on  the  quality  of  city  life  and  the  physical,  social  and  economical  actors.  Based  on  these  through  multiple  surveys  and  reports  such  as   the  UN  Index,  Mercer’s  Quality  of  Life,  Organisation   for  Economic  Co-­‐operation   and   Development   (OECD)   and   the   Economist   Intelligence   Unit’s   (EIU)  Liveability  Ranking,  Australia  has  been  ranked  high  on  international  standards  of  living.  These   ‘standards’   and   ‘measures’   are  what   the  general  public   as  well   as  officials  have  deemed   of   importance   in   order   to   make   a   city   liveable.   Australia   has   met   these  requirements  but  the  question  is  will  the  country  continue  to  do  so?    Introduction:  The  concept  of   ‘liveable’  urban  cities  goes  hand  in  hand  with  quality  of  life   (QoL).   This   is   a   notion   that   represents   the   standards   of   living   that   are   deemed  satisfactory  by  citizens  of  the  societies  they  reside  in.  The  process  of  enhancing  said  QoL  has   become   an   essential   aim   for   urban   policy   all   across   the   globe.   In   urban  circumstances   the   biggest   problems   facing   cities   that   undermine   the   quality   of   urban  life   are   pollution,   transportation,   social   inequalities   and   crime.   However   it   is   a  theoretical   concept   as   it   is   more   subjective   ideation,   rather   than   clear,   concise  measurable   factors.   Nevertheless   the   following   studies   aim   to   provide   the   objective  approach  that  is  required  to  understand  the  requirements  that  need  to  be  met.    Factors:    United  Nations:  Since   1998   Australia   has   been   ranked   in   the   top   five   nations   on   the  United  Nations  Human  Development  Report  (UNDP,  2015).  The  purpose  of  the  HDI  is  to  combine  all  elements  of  life  into  one  number  as  well  as  represent  the  sub-­‐components.  Traditionally   income  was  the  only  indicator  of  a  nation’s  position  compared  to  others,  placing  Australia  nineteenth  according  to  its  GDP.  Where  as  the  UN  weighs  all  categories  equally   and   due   to   Australia   being   ranked   highly   on   education   quality   and   life  expectancy  the  HDI  is  higher  than  countries  such  as  the  UAE  who  have  higher  incomes  per  capita  (Jericho,  2014).      Mercer’s  Quality  &  OECD:  The  purpose  of  Mercer’s  ranking  is  to  “help  governments  and  major   companies   place   employees   on   international   assignments”   (Mercer,   2015).   In  order  to  do  this  Mercer  evaluates  the  living  conditions  of  over  440  cities,  according  to  39  factors  that  are  grouped  into  ten  categories:    

 Category:   Example  factors:  

1.  Political  and  Social   Crime,  Law  enforcement,  International  Relations  

2.  Economic  Environment   Banking  services,  Currency  exchange  

3.  Socio-­‐Cultural  Environment   Media  &  Censorship  4.  Health   Hospitals,  Sewage,  Water,  Air  

Pollution  5.  Education   Schools  6.  Public  Services   Electricity,  Water  Availability,  

Transport  7.  Recreation   Leisure  activities,  restaurants  8.  Consumer  Goods   Consumption,  private  vehicles  

  3  

9.  Housing   Availability,  appliances,  repairs  10.  Natural  Environment   Climate,  natural  disasters  Source:  Mercer  Quality  Of  Living  Survey,  2015.  

 The  factors  that  affect  and  are  used  as  indicators  for  urban  quality  of  life  (UQoL)  reflect  socio-­‐economic   ideologies   the  most.   In  regards   to  employment  around  72%  of  people  aged  15-­‐64  have  a  paid  job,  which  is  above  the  OECD  average  of  65%.  This  then  reflects  the   average   household   net-­‐adjusted   disposable   income,   which   per   capita   is   at   USD  31,588   per   year   in   comparison   to   the   standard   of   USD   25,908   (Craddock   Murray  Neumann  Lawyers,  2014).  Australia’s  life  expectancy  is  approximately  82  years,  giving  two  more  years  than  the  average.  Australian  citizens  are  also  generally  more  satisfied  than   their   neighbours  with   a   7.3   grade   on   a   scale   of   0-­‐10,   once   again   ranking   higher  than   the   OECD   average   (OECD   Better   Life   Index,   2015).   Based   on   this   criteria   and  findings  Sydney  has  been  ranked  the  Australian  city  with  the  best  living  standards  as  it  is   ranked   ten   on   Mercer’s   list   (as   shown   in   Figure   1).   Following   that   Melbourne   is  ranked  at  16,  Perth  at  22,  Adelaide  at  27,  Canberra  at  30  and  Brisbane  at  37.                                        

     EIU   Liveability   Ranking:   In   comparison   to   Mercer’s   Index   the   EIU   Liveability   Ranking  judges   cities   on   30   different   factors   across   five  main   categories:   stability,   healthcare,  culture  &  environment,  education,  and  infrastructure  (The  Economist  Intelligence  Unit  Limited,  2014).  Figure  2  displays  the  rankings  that  the  top  ten  cities  have  within  each  category  giving  us  the  respective  total  of  the  most  liveable  cities.  Also  categories  aren’t  equally  weighted  within  this  survey,  which  could  be  a  reason  as  to  why  there  are  more  Australian   cities   in   the   top   ten   based   on   this   ranking   system.   Stability   holds   a   25%  weighting,   healthcare   –   20%,   culture   &   environment   –   25%,   education   –   10%,   and  infrastructure  –  20%.  This  is  a  clear  representation  of  what  the        

Figure  1.  Source:  Mercer  Quality  of  Living  Index  (2015)  

  4  

 Comparison:  Based  on  the  results  found  over  the  four  major  case  studies/reports  it  is  clear  that  the  subjective  indicators  are  similar.  As  mentioned  in  the  introduction  to  the  paper   the   rankings   of   different   categories   within   these   quality   of   life   indices   are   in  direct  correlation  to  an  ‘urban  quality  of  life’  as  they  are  representative  of  what  it  means  to   be   in   a   liveable   city   of   high   standards.   Infrastructure   and   the   prevalence   of  environmental   benefits   and   locations   would   take   precedence   in   terms   of   an   urban  planning   approach.   Mercer’s   QoL   and   the   EIU   Liveability   Index   have   both   clearly  demonstrated  that  these  categories  are  of  upmost  importance  and  Australian  cities  have  managed  to  reach  a  level  that  is  beyond  satisfactory.    Future   Predictions:   Australians   as   a   collective   are   aiming   for   a   future   that   is  sustainable  and  self-­‐sufficient  (Australian  Academy  of  Science,  2015).  Since  Australia’s  population   is   predicted   to   increase   by   50-­‐100%   it   is   crucial   for   the   infrastructure,  education   system,   public   services   and   healthcare   to   keep   up   with   the   demand  while  protecting   the   environment   (Australian   Bureau   of   Statistics,   2015).   This   is   already   a  demand   that   is   struggling   to   be   met   regardless   of   population   increase   due   to   the  circumstances   that   place   environmental   concerns   second   to   economic.   In   order   for  Australia’s   urban   quality   of   living   to   stay   the   same,   or   preferably   continue   to   rise,   it  won’t  be  enough  for  the  government,  planners  and  society  to  continue  to  act  as  they  are  because  that  is  only  beneficial  for  today  and  not  tomorrow.  While  Australia  is  currently  ranked   amongst   the   top   cities   in   the  world   for   its   standard   of   living,   it   is   crucial   for  improvements  on  what  already  exists  in  a  positive  manner.  If  all  of  this  is  achieved  it  is  easy  for  Australian  cities  to  continue  to  be  amongst  the  highest  ranked  internationally.  However  over  time  it  is  possible  for  the  standards  of  living  to  change,  which  will  in  turn  alter  what  is  required  for  urban  quality.  Based  on  the  current  standards  it  is  very  likely  that  they  will  stay  among  the  top  twenty-­‐five  cities  in  the  world  but  it  is  impossible  to  predict  their  rankings  fifty  years  from  now  without  a  basic  outline  of  the  standards  that  would  need  to  be  met  

Figure  2.  Economist  Intelligence  Unit’s  (EIU)  Liveability  Ranking  (2014)  

  5  

Personal  Perspective:   In   regards   to   the   research   that  has  been  conducted  and  how  accurately  it  represents  Australian  cities,  Brisbane  is  a  perfect  example.  While  it   is  not  within  the  top  ten  cities,  it  still  makes  the  top  25  locations  in  the  world  for  its  quality  of  life.  However  Brisbane  is  on  average  more  expensive  than  all  other  Australian  capitals,  apart  from  Sydney  (Wong,  2014).  What  makes  up  for  that  though  is  the  cost  of  living  as  a  whole  is  less  than  other  global  cities  (Queensland  Government  -­‐  Business  and  Industry  Portal,   2015).   Established   from   personal   experiences   Brisbane   in   general   is   a   rather  pleasurable  city  to  reside  in  as  all  basic  needs  are  met  to  a  standard  beyond  satisfactory.  There   is  always  room  for   improvement  however  and  criteria  such  as  public   transport  and   culture   &   environment   within   the   metropolis   aren’t   as   satisfactory   as   in   other  Australian  cities.  Regardless  Brisbane  has  improved  since  1998,  just  like  Australia  and  the  majority   of   the   world   in   the   hopes   of   achieving   the   subjective   notion   that   is   the  desired  urban  quality  of  life.    

  6  

Reference  List  • Australian  Academy  of  Science,  (2015).  Australia  2050.  [online]  Available  at:  

https://www.science.org.au/publications/australia-­‐2050  [Accessed  13  May  2015].      

• Australian  Bureau  of  Statistics,  (2015).  Population  Projections,  Australia,  2012  (base)  to  2101.  [online]  Available  at:  http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3222.0main+features32012%20(base)%20to%202101  [Accessed  15  May  2015].    

• Craddock  Murray  Neumann  Lawyers,  (2014).  Australia  ranks  highly  for  quality  of  life.  [online]  CMN  Immigration  Law.  Available  at:  http://www.immigrationlaw.com.au/document-­‐78589/australia-­‐ranks-­‐highly-­‐for-­‐quality-­‐of-­‐life  [Accessed  12  May  2015].    

• Jericho,  G.  (2014).  UN  scores  Australia  high  for  quality  of  life  but  low  on  climate  change  progress.  The  Guardian.  [online]  Available  at:  http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2014/jul/28/un-­‐scores-­‐australia-­‐high-­‐for-­‐quality-­‐of-­‐life-­‐but-­‐low-­‐on-­‐climate-­‐change-­‐progress  [Accessed  10  May  2015].      

• Mercer,  (2015).  Vienna  tops  latest  Quality  of  Living  rankings.  [online]  Available  at:  http://www.uk.mercer.com/newsroom/2015-­‐quality-­‐of-­‐living-­‐survey.html  [Accessed  10  May  2015].    

• Myers,  D.  (1988)  Building  Knowledge  about  Quality  of  Life  for  Urban  Planning,  Journal  of  the  American  Planning  Association,  54:3,  347-­‐358.    

• Psatha,  E.,  Deffner,  A.  and  Psycharis,  Y.  (2011)  Defining  the  quality  of  urban  life:  Which  factors  should  be  considered?,  ESRA  conference  papers,  European  Regional  Science  Association.      

 • OECD  Better  Life  Index,  (2015).  Australia.  [online]  Available  at:  

http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/australia/  [Accessed  12  May  2015].      

 • Queensland  Government  -­‐  Business  and  Industry  Portal,  (2015).  Queensland's  

idyllic  lifestyle.  [online]  Available  at:  https://www.business.qld.gov.au/invest/benefits-­‐business-­‐queensland/queenslands-­‐idyllic-­‐lifestyle  [Accessed  17  May  2015].  

 • The  Economist  Intelligence  Unit  Limited,  (2014).  A  Summary  of  the  Liveability  

Ranking  and  Overview.  August  2014.  [online]  Available  at:  http://www.eiu.com/Handlers/WhitepaperHandler.ashx?fi=Liveability-­‐rankings-­‐Promotional-­‐August-­‐2014.pdf&mode=wp&campaignid=Liveability2014  [Accessed  13  May  2015].  

 

  7  

• UNDP,  (2015).  Human  Development  Reports.  [online]  Available  at:  http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/AUS  [Accessed  10  May  2015].    

 • Wong,  C.  (2014).  Sydney  11th-­‐priciest  city  in  world,  according  to  crowdsourced  

comparison.  Brisbane  Times.  [online]  Available  at:  http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/nsw/sydney-­‐11thpriciest-­‐city-­‐in-­‐world-­‐according-­‐to-­‐crowdsourced-­‐comparison-­‐20140105-­‐30bwf.html  [Accessed  16  May  2015].