The Global Urban Competitiveness Report – 2010

The Global Urban Competitiveness Report – 2010

Pengfei Ni and Peter Karl Kresl

The Global Urban Competitiveness Report – 2010 is an empirical study of the competitiveness of 500 cities around the world. This one-of-a-kind annual resource draws on a wealth of data sources, all of which are described and assessed. Using a sophisticated methodology and a team of 100 researchers from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, the book not only ranks these cities but also presents a wealth of information with regard to the strengths and weaknesses of each city in relation to each other. The book includes a full discussion of the factors that create urban competitiveness, what sorts or categories of cities are most competitive, and comments on the policies and initiatives that are adopted by the most competitive cities.

Chapter 7: Which Factors Decide Global Urban Competitiveness?

Pengfei Ni and Peter Karl Kresl

Subjects: economics and finance, public sector economics, urban and regional studies, urban economics, urban studies


Based on the measurement and comparison of the comprehensive competitiveness of the 500 sample cities, we conducted an in-depth analysis of 150 major cities. We analyzed why some cities are more competitive while others are less competitive. To gain insight into the composition and root of the cities’ competitiveness, we designed an index system, which includes 103 level-III indices, 49 level-II indices and seven level-I indices. In this book, only seven level-I indices, that is, enterprise, industrial structure, human resource, hard environment, soft environment, living environment, and global connectivity of the 150 major cities are compared to explain the levels of the comprehensive competitiveness of the cities (see Table 7.1). The other indices are available on the following web address: www. Specifically, Seattle has the highest score for the index of enterprise; Tokyo ranks no. 1 in terms of industrial structure and infrastructures; Paris tops other cities in terms of human resource and living environment; New York ranks no. 1 for its global connectivity, and no. 2 for its industrial structure and hard environment, and is among top 20 in terms of many other indices. Further observation indicates that cities with leading comprehensive competitiveness tend to have high scores in each of the aspects, and do not have any distinct disadvantages in any of the aspects. Some cities have high ranks in some of the indices, but are restricted by other aspects. Therefore, their comprehensive competitiveness ranks remain low. Obviously, in order to improve their comprehensive competitiveness, cities should...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information