SUSTAINABLE
CITIES INDEX 2016

Putting people at the heart of city sustainability

NA SEOUL AM
EN
RD
VI URT MSTE
S
ARI
KF H A
N
N P
E
FRA UNIC
G
HA
IN

NIL
NA A
W
I
N
O
W
LK
AT C D HELI
A A IR O

AG

HOUSTON C HI C

ABI

CA
PE

DH

DD
AH

TO

MA

AB
U

AN

UH

SC
OW

TA
U
AR GD
EN
H

M
O

W

H

RI
C

ST
OC

U

K HO
LM

S
AN

JA
N
E N EIR
NA O
L
I
JO IM
HA A

W O RLE

CA
MADRID
H
N
LOS ANG
NEW SYDN B E G AM
EL
ER
YOR EY R EN B
NVTA SHENZHE ES
RA EV UR LO
K
P
N
G ND
A
IN HIL BRISB WE RO
A
AN
E
D
E
SH
LEE
A
RIYA
DS
DH N

NE

E

O

OR

Y

Z

P
S I N GA

AS IT
LL IT C
DA A
W

CH

B
JE
ES
HA
A IR
DO
OS
EN
BU

E

GO

D

NJIN AM
TIA NGAL MAN
HA
UR
BE
U
MU NO
MB I J
AI AK
C

P
I
TS
SB LY
UR ON
GH T

I DE
PE
AI TLAN
A

RI O

LO
U

M
L
PEN
BER
O N UE
CO
TER
G
CHES
ON
AG GH
MAN
GK
A
N
N
PR BUR
LO
HO
E
P
R
C
E
N
R
I
BA
D
NTW
ASGOW W
AM ER
L A UBLIN GL
ARS
V
RD
D
EA
AW
TORONTO B
TE COU
TR
O
RNE S MA
T
N
N
OU
L
CAU STON
RO VA
MO
ELB BRUSSE
M
MIL
E TON HAM
O
A
C
N
M G NG
CIS
IN MI FRAN ATTLE WASHINGTON T
OK
LL BIR
SE
N
YO
SA
M
E
I
A
R
M
O
I
M
I
LIS
KUA
ALT
BO
LA
I B
BA
LU
N
BANGKOK TAMPA
M
DU
S
N
D
PU
E
ET
A
I
H
T
R
H
R
A
OI
LP
T
IS
SA
T
A
L
K
N
C
DE
O
S
ZHOU SA
U
TI
ANG
A
AP
OP
MU
GU
N
A
L
IA
AI
H
BU
G
N
TA
XICO CI
IS
ME BU TY
S RG
EI
NE
N
JIN
G

NE I
B
RO
K

  

 

   

CONTENTS
1. FOREWORD
2.  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3.  SUSTAINABLE CITIES INDEX
 3.1   THE IMPORTANCE OF URBAN    
  SUSTAINABILITY
 
3.2   THE FINDINGS
 
3.3  OVERALL INDEX RANKINGS
 
3.4  PEOPLE SUB-INDEX
 
3.5  PLANET SUB-INDEX
 
3.6  PROFIT SUB-INDEX
4.  SPOTLIGHT ON GLOBAL
 
CHALLENGES - DEMOGRAPHICS
5.  PUTTING PEOPLE AT THE HEART OF
 
CITY SUSTAINABILITY
6. APPENDICES
 
6.1  METHODOLOGY AND INDICATORS
7. 

FURTHER READING

 1. FOREWORD
THE SUSTAINABLE CITIES INDEX 2016
City Sustainability is increasingly accomplished in new and different
ways. At Arcadis we believe the best way to truly understand
the sustainability of a city is to amalgamate attributes from the
perspectives of people, planet and profit to form a holistic view of each
location and its position on the sustainability scale. Only then can we
obtain a clear picture of how sustainable, or not, a city is.

“What is
the city
but the
people?”
William Shakespeare

A

s a citizen, I observe how
sustainability affects
my fellow city dwellers.
Increased stresses like water
shortages, climate change,
housing prices and employment
factors are impacting our quality
of life. No city could acquire its
unique identity without its people;
the inhabitants are the heart
of a city. They are the change
agents, from the city mayors and
their constituents who vote and
implement laws that progress city
needs, through the musicians and
artists who influence culture, to
the educators and industries that
create human capital and new
technology, services and products.
People make a city.
Rio de Janeiro had the distinction
of being an Olympic host in 2016;
welcoming guests to experience
world-class athletics on a grand
stage. The press highlighted
Rio’s other ‘host’ attributes
such as traffic, security, public
transportation, recession, crime
and water pollution, to name a few!
It seems the social, environmental
and economic prevailing
characteristics of the host city
got as much media attention as
the games themselves. As Doha
prepares for the 2022 World
Cup, they had to assure the FIFA
committee, as a host city, that they
could prepare enough amenities,
lodging, infrastructure and water
reserves to sustainably support

over a million guests. The ability
of a city to properly host and
accommodate tourists is a real
measure of a city’s capacity to
elevate the personal experience
of what that city has to offer. The
sufficiency of a city to appropriately
host guests also applies to the
city’s ability to effectively host
its residents. Cities always relish
the opportunity to roll out the
red carpet, putting their best
faces forward and welcome their
visitors. However, where the rubber
meets the road in truly defining
urban sustainability is how well
cities perform in meeting and
unburdening the everyday needs of
their citizens.
The 2016 Arcadis Sustainable Cities
Index goes deeper in assessing the
people dimension of the urban
experience. A city revolves around
its people, and sustainability
ultimately improves their quality
of life. The range of people’s needs
in a city is broad, encompassing
livelihood requirements of
nourishment, housing and
safety, education and vocational
opportunities, recreational outlets
and access to culture and arts. A
city’s built assets, such as buildings,
transportation networks and
pedestrian thoroughfares, perform
optimally when planned and
installed to accentuate the living
experience of its people. Getting a
city to invest, develop, evolve and,
ultimately, be a better host for its

permanent residents, will propel
it to become more sustainable
and competitive.
The purpose of the first Sustainable
Cities Index was to take 50 of the
world’s most prominent cities and
look at their viability as places to
live, their environmental impact,
their financial stability and how
these elements complement one
another. This year, we’ve created a
more robust data set to provide a
more comprehensive indication of
sustainability and we’ve increased
the coverage of the Index to
100 cities, both developed and
emerging, around the world. All of
these cities are in various stages
of evolution, some further along
their sustainability journey than
others. Importantly, the purpose
of the Arcadis Sustainable Cities
Index is not to create a hierarchy
of elite cities, but to indicate areas
of opportunity. All cities continue
to make progress on their missions
to become more sustainable
economically, environmentally and
for the good of their inhabitants.
As the world continues to become
more reliant on its urban centers,
it is our hope that city leaders and
industry find this a valuable tool
in assessing their priorities and
pathways to urban sustainability
for the good of all.
John Batten
Global Director of Water
and Cities

 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
•  The 2016 Arcadis Sustainable
Cities Index ranks 100 global
cities on three dimensions of
sustainability: people, planet and
profit. These represent social,
environmental and economic
sustainability and offer an
indicative picture of the health
and wealth of cities for the
present and the future.
•  The research shows that cities
around the world are not
effectively balancing these
three pillars of sustainability.
Instead, many demonstrate
split personalities. While taking
the lead in some areas, cities
often underperform in one
element of sustainability which
negatively impacts their overall
performance.
•  Zurich leads the overall ranking
and tops the planet sub-index.
But, while it scores highly
in profit, it reveals its split
personality by appearing in
27th place for people.
•  Well-established European
cities dominate the top of the
ranking, making up 13 of the 15
leading places. Global hubs such
as London (5th), Frankfurt (6th)
and Paris (15th) perform well. In
the two remaining places are the
Asian cities of Singapore (2nd)
and Seoul (7th).

•  The Asian cities of Singapore and
Hong Kong rank highly in profit
performance, but this seems to
be straining social sustainability.
Factors such as the high cost of
living mean these cities, sitting
first and second in the profit
rankings, place 48th and 81st
respectively for people.
•  In North America, the Canadian
city of Vancouver (23rd) takes
the region’s top spot, but no U.S.
city makes it into the top quartile.
New York is the country’s most
sustainable city (26th globally)
and does particularly well in the
profit sub-index (8th place), but
at 77th has room to improve on
its people ranking. Vancouver
and New York are followed by
Montreal (28th) and Toronto
(33rd) in the region.
•  San Francisco, New York and
Dallas follow the global trend of
having higher rankings for profit
but lower rankings for people.
•  UAE cities lead the Middle East
rankings, with Dubai as the bestperforming city in 52nd spot,
closely followed by Abu Dhabi
in 58th.
•  Cities in Australasia sit well
within the top half of the ranking.
Canberra (18th) leads the way
in that region, followed by
Sydney (21st).

•  Fast-growing, emerging cities in
Asia, Latin America, Africa and
the Middle East make up much of
the fourth quartile of the Index,
with many facing significant
challenges across each area of
sustainability.
•  The Brazilian cities of São Paulo
and Rio de Janeiro sit out in front
of their continental counterparts
in the planet sub-index, ranking
in 30th and 38th place.
•  The span of median ages across
the cities in the Index is vast,
ranging from just 18.7 years in
Nairobi to 46.6 years in Tokyo.
•  In order to improve their
sustainability, city leaders are
encouraged to put people at
the heart of their sustainability
plans and use the Index to help
them to compare and learn from
similar cities across the world.
•  This journey begins with a clear
assessment of where a city is
today, identifying the outputs,
positive and negative, arising
from the interplay between
the city’s physical, social and
economic systems. This will help
cities achieve a better balance
across each of the pillars of
sustainability.

 3. SUSTAINABLE
CITIES INDEX

3.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF URBAN
SUSTAINABILITY
Cities are under pressure from all angles. Some pressures can be
modeled and forecasted, such as population growth and mobility
needs, but others, political uncertainly or flash floods for example,
are more difficult to predict. Balancing the immediate needs of today
without compromising the needs of tomorrow is at the heart of
being a sustainable city, and of this report.
As the needs of the present can encompass almost anything, it is
necessary to focus on certain dimensions to assess how cities are
performing at this essential task. The Sustainable Cities Index seeks to
do this through an indication of urban sustainability that encompasses
measures of the social, environmental and economic health of cities, as
shown in Figure 1. These are the three ‘P’s – people, planet and profit.

 Arcadis partnered with the Centre for Economic and Business Research
(Cebr) to explore how cities are doing across these three areas. Cebr
assessed 100 of the world’s leading cities, using 32 different indicators, to
develop an indicative ranking of the sustainability of each. A city receives
a score on each of the three pillars of sustainability and a city’s overall
score is equal to the average of the three sub-indices. A full list of these
indicators can be found in Table 1 in the appendix to this report.

FIGURE 1: THE THREE PILLARS OF SUSTAINABILITY

PEOPLE

PLANET

PROFIT

SOCIAL

ENVIRONMENTAL

ECONOMIC

Measures social
performance including
quality of life

Captures 'green'
factors like energy,
pollution & emissions

Assesses business
environment &
economic health

The People sub-index
rates health (life
expectancy and obesity),
education (literacy and
universities), income
inequality, work-life
balance, the dependency
ratio, crime, housing and
living costs. These
indicators can be broadly
thought of as capturing
“quality of life”.

The Planet sub-index
ranks cities on energy
consumption and
renewable energy share,
green space within cities,
recycling and composting
rates, greenhouse
gas emissions, natural
catastrophe risk, drinking
water, sanitation and
air pollution. These
indicators can broadly
be thought of as capturing
“green factors”.

The Profit sub-index
examines performance
from a business
perspective, combining
measures of transport
infrastructure (rail, air and
traffic congestion), ease of
doing business, tourism,
GDP per capita, the city’s
importance in global
economic networks,
connectivity in terms
of mobile and broadband
access and employment
rates. These indicators
can broadly be thought
of as capturing
“economic health”.

While geographical factors such as location, climate and access to resources all
make like-for-like comparisons problematic, the report gives cities the opportunity
to measure their overarching performance across these three areas, each vital for
sustainability, to benchmark and learn from higher placed cities and take action
to sustain future performance.

3.2 THE FINDINGS
The research indicates that there
are three significant areas
of correlation:
•  No one city is effectively
balancing all three areas of
sustainability. Many cities do
well in two of the people, planet
and profit ratings, but very few
do well in all three, indicating
the challenge that cities have
in balancing all three needs
effectively to ensure long-term
sustainability.
•  There is a geographical bias, with
European cities achieving higher
scores overall and emerging
cities towards the bottom of
the Index. Comparing cities with
their geographical peers or with
similar sustainability challenges
(such as age demographics)
therefore offers a better
comparison.
•  The challenge of putting
people at the heart of a city’s
sustainability is one that many
cities struggle with. A clear vision
and identity for the city is the
starting point of this process, and
has the benefit of giving people,
business and finance a much
clearer idea of what will attract
them to the city in question. The
built and natural environment
has a critical part to play in
forming a city’s unique identity.
The report is divided into the
overall ranking and sub-indices
of people, planet and profit. It
explores each of these in depth,
and contains profiles of some of
the key cities in the Index.

 3.3 OVERALL INDEX RANKINGS
Cities around the world are living
at extremes and exhibit polarized
performance across the three
pillars of sustainability
The Swiss city of Zurich tops the
overall Sustainable Cities Index,
scoring particularly well across the
planet and profit categories. With
the exception of Singapore and
Seoul, the top ten ranked cities are
mostly from northern and central
Europe – three of the top ten are in
Germany alone.
Around the middle of the Index
are cities from southern Europe,
the U.S. and some cities of the
Middle East. The U.S. cities show
a differing performance across
the categories. Overall they rank
far higher for profit compared to
people and planet, which brings
them down in the overall rankings.
New York leads the pack at 26th,
while Tampa (68th) and Detroit
(69th) finish out the U.S. rankings.
The lower half of the Index
contains all of the mainland
Chinese cities, with cities from Latin
America mostly following. The less
advanced Asia-Pacific metropolises
are a little further down, with the
least-developed cities in the Index,
predominantly those in India and
Africa, finishing the Index. The
cities of the Middle East are spread
throughout the lower half.
A clear link between economic
development and environmental
sustainability is apparent.

Therefore, cities in advanced
economies are largely at the
top while those in emerging and
developing economies tend to
cluster towards the bottom.
The tension inherent in a
sustainable economy, be it a
city or a country, is whether
future generations’ well-being is
jeopardized by today’s lifestyles. At
present, all advanced economies
put future standards of living at
risk through high emissions of
greenhouse gases, by not recycling
enough of the finite resources we
use and by depleting our nonrenewable energy sources. Some
contain the adverse effects of
these activities better than others,
and this report seeks to show how
different cities compare in this
respect.
As such, the Sustainable Cities
Index does not look like a
typical development ranking.
Some emerging economies are
unexpectedly high relative to a
“standard” development ranking,
while some developed economies
fall down in their obligations to
the future. We can look at the
three sub-indices to see in which
dimensions of sustainability cities
are performing well and in which
they have opportunities for further
investment and improvement.

 FIGURE 2: OVERALL INDEX RANKINGS:
ZURICH ON TOP OF THE SUSTAINABLE CITIES INDEX (SOURCE CEBR)

ZURICH 1

PHILADELPHIA 51

SINGAPORE 2

DUBAI 52

STOCKHOLM 3

BALTIMORE 53

VIENNA 4

MIAMI 54

LONDON 5

KUALA LUMPUR 55

FRANKFURT 6

DALLAS 56

SEOUL 7

MOSCOW 57

HAMBURG 8

ABU DHABI 58

PRAGUE 9

HOUSTON 59

MUNICH 10

CHICAGO 60

AMSTERDAM 11

NEW ORLEANS 61

GENEVA 12

PITTSBURGH 62

EDINBURGH 13

ATLANTA 63

COPENHAGEN 14

SHENZHEN 64

PARIS 15

INDIANAPOLIS 65

HONG KONG 16

ATHENS 66

BERLIN 17

BANGKOK 67

CANBERRA 18

TAMPA 68

ROTTERDAM 19

DETROIT 69

MADRID 20

KUWAIT CITY 70

SYDNEY 21

SANTIAGO 71

ROME 22

DOHA 72

VANCOUVER 23

BEIJING 73

BARCELONA 24

SHANGHAI 74

MANCHESTER 25

MUSCAT 75

NEW YORK 26

RIYADH 76

WELLINGTON 27

ISTANBUL 77

MONTREAL 28

GUANGZHOU 78

ANTWERP 29

SAO PAULO 79

BRISBANE 30

BUENOS AIRES 80

BIRMINGHAM 31

JEDDAH 81

MELBOURNE 32

RIO DE JANEIRO 82

TORONTO 33

LIMA 83

BOSTON 34

MEXICO CITY 84

DUBLIN 35

TIANJIN 85

GLASGOW 36

AMMAN 86

WARSAW 37

HANOI 87

LEEDS 38

JAKARTA 88

SAN FRANCISCO 39

CHENNAI 89

BRUSSELS 40

JOHANNESBURG 90

MACAU 41

BENGALURU 91

MILAN 42

MUMBAI 92

SEATTLE 43

CHENGDU 93

WASHINGTON 44

WUHAN 94

TOKYO 45

CAPE TOWN 95

LISBON 46

MANILA 96

LYON 47

NEW DELHI 97

TAIPEI 48

NAIROBI 98

DENVER 49

CAIRO 99

LOS ANGELES 50

KOLKATA 100
0

10

20

PEOPLE

30

40

50

60

70

80

PLANET

0

10

PROFIT

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

 H

Z U RI

C

OVERALL
RANKING: 1

PEOPLE: 27

PLANET: 1

CITY PROFILE
ZURICH
Zurich, the number one city in the Sustainable Cities Index, has a
strong reputation as a liveable, contemporary city known for its strong
focus on environmentalism as well as world-renowned financial
institutions. Despite leading both the overall ranking and the planet
sub-index, and ranking 5th in profit, Zurich appears 27th on the people
sub-index; affordability and work-life balance are the primary causes of
this disparity.
Topping the planet sub-index, the city pioneers the long-term goal
of becoming a 2000-watt society by 2050. The 2000-watt society is
Zurich’s approach to tackling climate change and resource scarcity: a
goal for its people to use 2000 watts of energy per capita (the global
amount established as ‘sustainable’ energy use). Commitments include
investment and focus on energy efficiency and renewable energies,
sustainable buildings, mobility for the future and an effort to increase
public awareness, including events such as annual environment days and
the Zurich Multimobil action day.
Public transit in the city is highly regarded as a sustainable model
for other cities. Trams, trains, buses, light rail and more are highly
coordinated, making mobility simple, quick and affordable.

PROFIT: 5

As a global economic hub the city is not only able to attract business
but also people, with a good quality of life, attractive educational and
employment opportunities as well as a leading health ranking on the
Index. Various innovative businesses and industries, both small and
large, form an important basis of the Zurich economy. In addition, high
productivity levels and low non-wage labor costs make production costs
lower than competing economies around the world. All in all, this makes
Zurich an attractive place to invest, live and work.

 N
O

LO N D

OVERALL
OVERALL
RANKING:
RANKING: 5
5

PROFIT: 37
3
PEOPLE:

PLANET: 9
PLANET: 9

PEOPLE: 37
PROFIT: 3

CITY PROFILE
LONDON
London is one of the world’s foremost economic powerhouses, ranking
third in the profit sub-index. Sitting at the center of global finance,
London’s heavyweight position, combined with a long history of
cultural and economic evolution, means it is well equipped to reap
the long-term benefits of its status as a true world city. However, if
the capital is to maintain its long-term competitiveness, there are a
number of issues that still need to be addressed.
With an environmental ranking of 9, there is a commitment to improving
environmental performance of the city through, for example, lowemission buses, environmental clean-up programs, infrastructure such
as the Thames Tideway Tunnel and volunteer actions from
its citizens.
Ranking only 37 on the people sub-index, the mobility and housing needs
associated with a densely populated, growing metropolis are at the
forefront of the city’s challenges. With London’s population projected
to reach 10 million people by 2030, improving infrastructure capacity
and providing the right number and type of homes that will enable all
people to live and work is critical. 28% of the city’s population are living
below the poverty line, and addressing income inequality and the high
cost of living will do much to improve London’s people score and its
overall rankings.
London has reached a tipping point, as the large differential between
its people and profit rankings demonstrates. Yet, in the aftermath of
Brexit, the Mayor needs to persuade global businesses that London’s
infrastructure priorities have not changed and that the capital remains
just as viable outside of the EU.

 AI

H

SH A NG

OVERALL
RANKING: 74

PEOPLE: 43

PLANET: 91

PROFIT: 77

CITY PROFILE
SHANGHAI
Shanghai is one of the key gateway cities into China. It has always been
a hub for international trade, finance and business. It ranks 74th overall
on the Arcadis Sustainable Cities Index and scores highest among all
the mainland China cities on the people sub-index ranking.
With Shanghai continuing its quest to be one of the most sustainable
cities in China, urban regeneration and innovation hubs will be important
elements of its future development, as the city transforms itself from a
manufacturing center to a knowledge, technology and innovation center
for the nation. Zhanjiang and Caohejing developments play an important
part in Shanghai’s future as they continue to expand and evolve.
Shanghai’s urban transformation is underpinned by an evolving
transportation system. 13 of the city’s 25 metro lines are completed
and operational. The region continues to evolve its transportation
connectivity to the greater Yangtze River Delta with new high-speed rail
and urban highway connections.
Tourism will also become a major element of Shanghai’s urban
transformation, with the opening of the Disney resort and other
entertainment-related mixed-use developments. The future growth of
Pudong will bring more resort and entertainment development to the
city, making it one of the key aspects of Shanghai’s continued growth
and evolution.
Education plays an important role in Shanghai in ensuring the quality of
future workforce supply. With the opening of the Shanghai tEch campus,
in addition to well-established universities such as TongJi and Fudan, the
future is looking optimistic.

 LE
S

LO S N G E
A

OVERALL
RANKING: 50

PEOPLE: 49

PLANET: 60

PROFIT: 47

CITY PROFILE
LOS ANGELES
Los Angeles continues to be a main hub for economic growth and
innovation in the U.S., attracting population growth, entrepreneurship
and international investors. With the first full year of the
“Sustainability City Plan” implementation under its belt, Los Angeles
is now more focused than ever on developing creative ways to expand
overall city sustainability, ensuring a future improvement in its ranking.
Water quality improvements and conservation efforts are priority areas,
as the state of California experiences the fifth year of its current drought
crisis. Recent reports have found that the region’s underground plumes
of pollution are steadily expanding. The Los Angeles Department of
Water and Power has said that within five to eight years the plumes will
become so dense that the groundwater wells will likely shut down unless
a solution can be implemented. Despite these challenges, Los Angeles
has been successful in meeting the Mayor’s goal of decreasing water
usage by 25% by early next year. The rollout of the upcoming One Water
LA plan will also serve as a guiding force to instill resilience in all aspects
of water management to support the city’s future. With a planet subindex ranking of 60th, it is fitting these environmental initiatives are
being addressed.
Los Angeles’ continued population growth is driving infrastructurerelated initiatives, such as improved affordable housing options,
downtown revitalization and increased transit connectivity. The city is
also committed to reducing the affordability gap (which contributes
to their middle-of-the-road ranking of 49th for people) by increasing
the minimum wage rate and developing social programs to support
the homeless community, continuing on the path to a more
sustainable future.

 3.4 PEOPLE SUB-INDEX
LOW INEQUALITY THE
SECRET OF SOCIAL
SUSTAINABILITY
The people sub-index measures
social sustainability and gives
some surprising results, showing
a substantial degree of departure
from many of the other ways of
comparing cities. Seoul ranks first
and, although the remaining top
five cities are European, Muscat
and Montreal enter the top ten,
at 9th and 10th respectively. The
U.S. cities are generally weighed
down by a high degree of income
inequality, high crime, obesity
(as part of the health indicator),
a lack of affordable housing and
long working hours. Many cities
that rank higher in the planet and
profit sub-indices tend towards
lower people rankings, often
hampered by long working hours,
a skewed distribution of wealth
and the affordability of both
housing and consumer goods
and services.
To some extent, cities with low
affordability scores are victims
of their own success. High land
values, which in turn raise the
prices of not just housing but also
goods and services, are a result of
successful urban economies. Over
time, however, unaffordability

poses a threat to lower-paid
workers who are essential to a
city’s proper functioning, as well as
the cheap workspaces that start-up
businesses require. This illustrates
the need for cities to address these
issues to enable and drive future
growth.
The most reliable predictor of
where a city ranks in the people
sub-index is income inequality.
This has strong links with the
other indicators: crime, education,
work-life balance, health and
affordability. The link explains
the high performance of many
northern European cities and the
low performance of cities in Latin
America and sub-Saharan Africa.
This pattern holds despite the
unfavorable demographics in much
of Europe versus Chinese cities
(whose inhabitants are largely
of working age). The power of
equality to influence other social
objectives has been noted by many
social researchers (e.g. Wilkinson
& Pickett, The Spirit Level) and
its acknowledged effects on a
range of issues such as health,
drug abuse, education and obesity
mean it is bound to correlate
strongly with the people sub-index,
as a broad social-sustainability
indicator.

 FIGURE 3: PEOPLE SUB-INDEX:
AFTER SEOUL, EUROPE LEADS THE WAY (SOURCE CEBR)
SEOUL 1

PITTSBURGH 51

ROTTERDAM 2

ATHENS 52

HAMBURG 3

KUALA LUMPUR 53

VIENNA 4

SAN FRANCISCO 54

BERLIN 5

DUBAI 55

PRAGUE 6

RIYADH 56

AMSTERDAM 7

DOHA 57

MUNICH 8

JAKARTA 58

MUSCAT 9

JEDDAH 59

MONTREAL 10

ABU DHABI 60

ANTWERP 11

SEATTLE 61

BRUSSELS 12

WUHAN 62

BARCELONA 13

CHENGDU 63

STOCKHOLM 14

BANGKOK 64

WARSAW 15

GUANGZHOU 65

FRANKFURT 16

PHILADELPHIA 66

CANBERRA 17

WASHINGTON 67

MADRID 18

TIANJIN 68

LYON 19

MACAU 69

PARIS 20

ATLANTA 70

BRISBANE 21

AMMAN 71

MELBOURNE 22

DETROIT 72

VANCOUVER 23

SHENZHEN 73

COPENHAGEN 24

CHICAGO 74

SYDNEY 25

BENGALURU 75

LEEDS 26

CHENNAI 76

ZURICH 27

NEW YORK 77

BIRMINGHAM 28

KOLKATA 78

LISBON 29

HOUSTON 79

GENEVA 30

BALTIMORE 80

MANCHESTER 31

HONG KONG 81

TAIPEI 32

DALLAS 82

ROME 33

INDIANAPOLIS 83

MILAN 34

TAMPA 84

MOSCOW 35

SANTIAGO 85

KUWAIT CITY 36

MUMBAI 86

LONDON 37

NEW DELHI 87

EDINBURGH 38

BUENOS AIRES 88

DUBLIN 39

MIAMI 89

TORONTO 40

ISTANBUL 90

BOSTON 41

LIMA 91

GLASGOW 42

CAIRO 92

SHANGHAI 43

NEW ORLEANS 93

TOKYO 44

MANILA 94

BEIJING 45

RIO DE JANEIRO 95

HANOI 46

MEXICO CITY 96

DENVER 47

SAO PAULO 97

SINGAPORE 48

NAIROBI 98

LOS ANGELES 49

JOHANNESBURG 99

WELLINGTON 50

CAPE TOWN 100
DEMOGRAPHICS

EDUCATION

INCOME INEQUALITY

WORK-LIFE BALANCE

CRIME

HEALTH

AFFORDABILITY

 SE O U

L

OVERALL
RANKING: 7

PEOPLE: 1

CITY PROFILE
SEOUL
Seoul, an up-and-coming global cultural capital, tops the people subindex. Health and education rankings propel Seoul to the top, with
programs such as the 2030 Seoul Plan focusing on five core issues:
“a people-centered city without discrimination”, “a dynamic global
city with a strong job market”, “a vibrant cultural and historic city”, “a
lively and safe city” and “stable housing and easy transportation, a
community-oriented city”.
The program also includes urban planning policies to strengthen the
city’s identity, global competitiveness, development direction and
innovation in the living environment for citizens. It has 139 projects in 13
districts that plan to transform the urban metropolis into a “safe, warm,
dreaming, breathing city”.

PLANET: 26

Seoul’s leaders have taken serious steps towards city sustainability with
projects like the Cheonggyecheon urban renewal and river restoration
project. This previously polluted area has been transformed into a public
recreation space in the heart of the city. Restoration not only spurred
economic development but also provided much-needed flood protection
for the downtown area, boosting Seoul’s economic, environmental and
social sustainability.

PROFIT: 18

Seoul’s 2030 plan will positively impact all three sustainability areas in
the Index. In addition, Seoul is active in the C40 and 100 Resilient Cities
initiatives, actively participating in these knowledge exchanges and
global initiatives.

 AM

R OT T E R D

OVERALL
RANKING: 19

PEOPLE: 2

PLANET: 17

PROFIT: 46

CITY PROFILE
ROTTERDAM
Rotterdam, situated with multiple major river deltas flowing into
the sea, has unique characteristics and sustainability challenges.
Rotterdam has learned how to deal with water; not only does the
city have the largest port in Europe (which has the ambition of being
the most sustainable port in the world), but it also drives global best
practices on resiliency. It deploys multifunctional flood protection, a
water plaza and innovative water storages under new, iconic buildings,
for example. Rotterdam is actively sharing its knowledge with other
cities through the Connecting Delta Cities program, C40 and the
Rotterdam Center for Resilient Delta Cities.
Now halfway into their 2015–2018 sustainability plan, the city of
Rotterdam aims to get sustainability closer to all people, with programs
on green cities, clean energy and innovative economic developments.
There are many bottom-up initiatives driven by the city’s inhabitants,
making Rotterdam more appealing and sustainable. Collaboration
between inhabitants and the municipality is very successful, contributing
to Rotterdam’s current rise in attractiveness for businesses, tourists and
inhabitants and its ranking of second on the people sub-index.
An example of a successful sustainable, collaborative initiative is the 7
Square Endeavour program which has an international mission to prepare
cities for the future. The initiative will enhance Rotterdam’s theatre
district and act as an experimental area for new innovative technologies,
cyclical processes and business models. Rotterdam serves as the first of
seven squares in a series worldwide.

 N

BE R LI

OVERALL
RANKING: 17

PEOPLE: 5

PLANET: 16

PROFIT: 32

CITY PROFILE
BERLIN
Ranking 17th on the Index, Berlin is diverse and innovative. As the
largest city in Germany, it provides a home for more than 3.5 million
people. Its ethnic and cultural diversity is a significant advantage for
the city. To continue the enhancement of the city, different programs
and measures are being defined to retain and improve the quality
of life.
Named as a “green city”, Berlin has set ambitious sustainability goals
to achieve by 2050 which will improve both its environment and its
social sustainability. These goals include the city becoming CO2 neutral,
additional urban mobility through the new bicycle paths, 5% redensification allowing residential space usage to be reduced, and a rise
in the energy refurbishment rate. These measures will enhance Berlin’s
attractiveness as an economic hub and accelerate its growth by assisting
people and companies in adopting sustainable practices.
Additionally, because Berlin is in the lower half of the Index for air
pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, one of its most important goals
is to eliminate coal-powered plants and notably reduce reliance on oil for
power. By 2030, the city aims to have a third of the vehicles on its roads
powered by renewable fuels.

 DOH

A

OVERALL
RANKING: 72

PEOPLE: 57

PLANET: 98

PROFIT: 50

CITY PROFILE
DOHA
Doha ranks fourth out of the eight cities in the Middle East covered in
this year’s report, and 72nd overall. While this score may appear low,
it’s important to place it in context. Doha is a young city with much
of its development taking place over the last 20 years. It’s all but
inevitable that emerging major cities in rapidly developing economies
will score well on the profit sub-index, but leave room for improvement
on the planet sub-index due to extensive natural resource consumption.
The city’s 2030 National Vision offers a positive glimpse of the future
in this respect and includes a commitment to offset any environmental
impact with investment in areas like green technology and cleaner
energy sources. So it’s no surprise to see Doha score highest in the
profit sub-index. The average GDP per capita is high, and the country is
also making a significant investment in its transport infrastructure and
in improving its overall business environment.
Doha, along with Qatar, is also building a strong presence on the world
stage. Its commitment to becoming a home of major sporting events is
evidenced in their hosting of the 2022 FIFA World CupTM, which in turn
drives development and economic growth.
The city scores reasonably well on the people sub-index. The 2030
National Vision provides a real focus on improving human development,
resulting in the construction of a number of new education and
healthcare facilities like Hamad Medical City. Areas where Doha is
challenged in the people sub-index (income inequality and work-life
balance) are in part due to the size of the city’s expatriate workforce in its
construction and service industries.

 3.5 PLANET SUB-INDEX
ENERGY SUPERPOWERS
FIND ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY
MORE DIFFICULT
The Swiss cities of Zurich and
Geneva dominate the top three
positions in the planet subindex (first and third places
respectively) with Stockholm in
second. Wellington and Sydney
join the top ten which is otherwise
made up of European cities.
U.S. cities are negatively affected
by their high per-capita emissions,
energy use and lower amount of
green spaces. San Francisco (53rd)
and Los Angeles (60th) feature in
the lower half of the sub-index.
While these two Californian
cities have the highest recycling
rates in the world, they also have
the highest exposure to natural
disasters. This indicator affects
developed and emerging cities alike
and, while there is some reflection
in the rankings of the degree to
which cities prepare themselves,
some are inevitably left vulnerable
and exposed regardless of the

actions they’ve taken to reduce risk
in this area.
Middle Eastern cities also feature
towards the bottom of this subindex. One cause of this is the
energy indicator, which measures
the proportion of electricity from
renewable sources, the energy
intensity (i.e. the amount of energy
consumed to produce each dollar
of GDP), and energy use per capita.
The Middle Eastern cities are
using an increasing proportion of
renewable energy but, given their
vast fossil fuel resources, incentives
to conserve energy are much
weaker than elsewhere. Moscow is
in a similar predicament and also
appears near the bottom at 87th.
There are also a few unexpected
high performers in emerging
economies. For example,
Bengaluru is fairly high (62nd);
while its performance for waste
management is one of the worst in
the sub-index, the city makes up for
it by having very low greenhouse
gas emissions and energy use.

 FIGURE 4: PLANET SUB-INDEX:
SWISS CITIES GREENEST ON THE PLANET (SOURCE CEBR)
ZURICH 1

MACAU 51

STOCKHOLM 2

ATHENS 52

GENEVA 3

SAN FRANCISCO 53

VIENNA 4

WARSAW 54

FRANKFURT 5

AMMAN 55

WELLINGTON 6

TAMPA 56

ROME 7

SANTIAGO 57

SYDNEY 8

MEXICO CITY 58

LONDON 9

DALLAS 59

HAMBURG 10

LOS ANGELES 60

MADRID 11

INDIANAPOLIS 61

SINGAPORE 12

BENGALURU 62

COPENHAGEN 13

BUENOS AIRES 63

MANCHESTER 14

DENVER 64

BIRMINGHAM 15

DETROIT 65

BERLIN 16

SHENZHEN 66

ROTTERDAM 17

CHICAGO 67

VANCOUVER 18

HOUSTON 68

AMSTERDAM 19

CHENNAI 69

GLASGOW 20

CAPE TOWN 70

LEEDS 21

TAIPEI 71

EDINBURGH 22

JOHANNESBURG 72

BARCELONA 23

PITTSBURGH 73

MUNICH 24

ISTANBUL 74

CANBERRA 25

MUMBAI 75

SEOUL 26

HANOI 76

MONTREAL 27

TIANJIN 77

TORONTO 28

ATLANTA 78

HONG KONG 29

BANGKOK 79

SAO PAULO 30

GUANGZHOU 80

PRAGUE 31

JEDDAH 81

PARIS 32

RIYADH 82

NEW YORK 33

NAIROBI 83

BRUSSELS 34

KUALA LUMPUR 84

SEATTLE 35

JAKARTA 85

MILAN 36

MANILA 86

ANTWERP 37

MOSCOW 87

RIO DE JANEIRO 38

MUSCAT 88

DUBLIN 39

KUWAIT CITY 89

LYON 40

NEW DELHI 90

BRISBANE 41

SHANGHAI 91

BALTIMORE 42

CHENGDU 92

LISBON 43

CAIRO 93

NEW ORLEANS 44

LIMA 94

BOSTON 45

ABU DHABI 95

PHILADELPHIA 46

DUBAI 96

MIAMI 47

BEIJING 97

WASHINGTON 48

DOHA 98

MELBOURNE 49

WUHAN 99

TOKYO 50

KOLKATA 100
ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS

ENERGY

GREEN SPACE

AIR POLLUTION

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

WASTE MANAGEMENT

DRINKING WATER AND SANITATION

 Y

SY D N E

OVERALL
RANKING: 21

PEOPLE: 25

PLANET: 8

PROFIT: 35

CITY PROFILE
SYDNEY
Sydney scored strongly in the planet sub-index, ranking 8th, reflecting
the abundance of green space and the quality of its air, drinking water
and sanitation. The Sustainable Sydney 2030 initiative has ambitious
targets to reduce the city’s carbon emissions by 70%, reflected in
its performance against the greenhouse gas emissions indicator.
Geographic vulnerability and susceptibility to natural disaster
impacted its planet sub-index ranking, something which is likely
to be further exacerbated by the effects of climate change.
In the profit sub-index, Sydney’s score was outside the top 30 in all profit
indicators except connectivity. Interestingly, for one of the world’s most
iconic and visited cities, tourism and transport infrastructure were two
of its lowest rankings. Sydney’s vision is to create easy and affordable
mobility to address the current constraints, including enhancing
walkability, transit and cycling networks.
Sydney’s people sub-index ranking of 25th is bolstered by a worldclass education system, including six universities, as well as low crime
rates, but hampered by high housing prices and cost of living. The city’s
demographics, health and work-life balance were all ranked ‘middle of
the road’ compared to other global cities.

 AM

OVERALL
RANKING: 5
AM S E R D
T

OVERALL
RANKING: 11
PROFIT: 3

PEOPLE: 7
PLANET: 9

PLANET: 19
PEOPLE: 37

CITY PROFILE
AMSTERDAM
Amsterdam exhibits one of the best balances in the Index across the
three pillars of sustainability. Historically, Amsterdam is recognized
as a city of commerce and entrepreneurship. Its successful
entrepreneurial background has built an innovative ecosystem
creating synergies between inhabitants, public organizations, schools
and businesses. Amsterdam was awarded the European Innovation
Capital for 2016. One of the driving factors behind this award was the
AMS institute, a consortium of public and private partners developing
interdisciplinary metropolitan solutions. 179 European companies are
headquartered in Amsterdam.
Amsterdam continues to invest in sustainability measures to improve
quality of life. Examples include its involvement in the Zero Emissions
Cities (ZEC) program, the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (WBCSD) and Amsterdam ArenA’s Utility Hub (The Hub).
The Hub will help the entertainment area move towards the shared use
of energy resources and infrastructures. These partnerships help people
visit, live, work, invest and do business in Amsterdam.
Amsterdam is a safe, healthy and equitable place overall. 58% of
Amsterdam’s residents cycle daily, enjoying the city’s 40 parks, 1,500
cafes and bars, as well as its universities and famous canals.

PROFIT: 16

 LO

SOVERALL
à O PA U
RANKING: 5
OVERALL
RANKING: 79

PROFIT: 3
PEOPLE: 97

PLANET: 9
PLANET: 30

PEOPLE: 37
PROFIT: 84

CITY PROFILE
SÃO PAULO
Considered the largest city in the Southern Hemisphere, São Paulo is
the home of more than 22 million people, making it the most populous
city in Latin America. With this large population, São Paulo faces many
urban challenges such as transporting more than 3 billion passengers
a year on public transportation, handling 20 tons of waste a day and
providing 180 liters of water per person every day.
The effects of rapid urban growth, an aging infrastructure and a lack
of sufficient planning are felt throughout the city daily (traffic jams and
water outages are common, for example). These are all reflected in São
Paulo’s people sub-index ranking.
São Paulo intends to implement a 2030 plan which includes housing
programs, geographically dispersed businesses, improved mobility,
an environmental agenda and initiatives that generate cultural and
economic vibrancy. The implementation and success of the 2030 plan are
challenged by a lack of strategies to attract investment and stakeholders,
and barriers in adopting technology and innovation.

 O

OVERALL
RANKING: 5
CHI C A G

OVERALL
RANKING: 60
PROFIT: 3

PEOPLE: 74
PLANET: 9

PLANET: 67
PEOPLE: 37

PROFIT: 45

CITY PROFILE
CHICAGO
Chicago has been enhancing the lives of its residents through its
aggressive “Sustainable Chicago” plan and has led the way on several
fronts, such as the development of more than 225 miles of cycle lanes
and the successful launch of Divvy, a cycle-sharing program where
residents can rent cycles and return them to any of 580 conveniently
located stations. Chicago currently ranks as one of the most cyclefriendly cities in the U.S.
The city also prides itself on having high quality water, with little-to-no
pollutants in its freshwater sources. The Chicago Department of Water
Management has been replacing 100 miles of water and sewer lines each
year and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District is now looking
into technologies to become energy neutral, taking Chicago’s water
infrastructure to the next level.
As with any urban city, limited land for green space and congestion
both continue to be a challenge. But the city is making the necessary
strides towards greater sustainability. The Chicago Park District has been
working aggressively in support of the Building on Burnham plan, which
is focused on reaching the goal of 2,020 acres of protected natural areas
by 2020 and enabling each Chicagoan to be within a two-block radius of
green space. Additionally, with the Chicago Transit Authority’s Wilson
Station on plan to open in 2017, commuters will have a much more
efficient experience transferring between rail lines. The station will also
serve as a strong, revitalized anchor point in Uptown, further enhancing
the strength of the city.

 3.6 PROFIT SUB-INDEX
THE KEY TO ECONOMIC
SUSTAINABILITY: EASE
OF DOING BUSINESS
The profit sub-index measures
economic sustainability. It is
headed by the East Asian financial
centers of Singapore and Hong
Kong. These two cities are well
known as recent developers
and now rank among the most
prosperous cities in the world.
Their high scores derive from
a strong performance across a
number of metrics, particularly
tourism, connectivity and ease
of doing business. Completing
the top five are London, Dubai
and Zurich.
The profit sub-index is related to
cities’ wealth, as the economic
development indicator is the
city’s gross domestic product
(GDP) per capita (essentially,
average economic output). Global
importance also plays a role via
the indicators of tourism and
importance to global networks, a
metric that maps economic and
commercial links between the cities
of the world. However, this does
not tell the whole story, as shown
by major Latin American financial
centers like Mexico City and São
Paulo which rank 83rd and 84th
respectively in the profit sub-index.
If doing business is difficult, and
transport networks are neglected,
even economic powerhouses
can struggle for sustainability in

the profit arena. For example,
Brazil’s rapid transition from a
star emerging economy to deep
recession shows that sustainability
requires stronger systems and
foundations.
Five American cities make the top
25 of the profit ranking, led by the
financial capital of New York and
followed by the digital hub of San
Francisco.
Shanghai, low in the ranking at
77th, is impacted by low GDP per
capita, barriers to doing business
and lower employment rates.
In Europe, the profit sub-index
reveals the split personalities of a
number of cities. Istanbul, Athens,
Lyon, Brussels, Leeds, Glasgow and
Lisbon, for example, all sit in the
bottom 40 cities for profit but are
further ahead in the people and
planet pillars.
Of the indicators assessed in this
ranking, the two that have the
greatest impact on the profit
rankings are ease of doing business
and GDP per capita. The World
Bank’s ease of doing business
rating started in 2002 and assesses
issues like how many days and
procedures are needed to start a
business, the ease of cross-border
trade, and the ease of obtaining
credit from banks. Economic
sustainability requires investment
in the future, without which a
city would not fare as well on the
other indicators.

 FIGURE 5: PROFIT SUB-INDEX:
GLOBAL FINANCIAL CENTERS REIGN (SOURCE CEBR)
SINGAPORE 1

MANCHESTER 51

HONG KONG 2

BALTIMORE 52

LONDON 3

BANGKOK 53

DUBAI 4

MONTREAL 54

ZURICH 5

PHILADELPHIA 55

EDINBURGH 6

SHENZHEN 56

PRAGUE 7

MILAN 57

NEW YORK 8

WELLINGTON 58

PARIS 9

NEW ORLEANS 59

STOCKHOLM 10

BIRMINGHAM 60

MUNICH 11

LISBON 61

SAN FRANCISCO 12

INDIANAPOLIS 62

ABU DHABI 13

PITTSBURGH 63

VIENNA 14

GLASGOW 64

MACAU 15

DETROIT 65

AMSTERDAM 16

BRUSSELS 66

COPENHAGEN 17

BEIJING 67

SEOUL 18

KUWAIT CITY 68

KUALA LUMPUR 19

LEEDS 69

CANBERRA 20

TAMPA 70

WASHINGTON 21

LYON 71

BOSTON 22

ATHENS 72

FRANKFURT 23

JOHANNESBURG 73

DENVER 24

LIMA 74

HAMBURG 25

ISTANBUL 75

MELBOURNE 26

SANTIAGO 76

TAIPEI 27

SHANGHAI 77

TOKYO 28

GUANGZHOU 78

VANCOUVER 29

RIYADH 79

BRISBANE 30

CAPE TOWN 80

DALLAS 31

JEDDAH 81

BERLIN 32

BUENOS AIRES 82

SEATTLE 33

MEXICO CITY 83

MADRID 34

SAO PAULO 84

SYDNEY 35

MUSCAT 85

WARSAW 36

RIO DE JANEIRO 86

HOUSTON 37

TIANJIN 87

TORONTO 38

JAKARTA 88

DUBLIN 39

WUHAN 89

ANTWERP 40

NAIROBI 90

MIAMI 41

MANILA 91

GENEVA 42

CHENGDU 92

BARCELONA 43

MUMBAI 93

MOSCOW 44

HANOI 94

CHICAGO 45

CHENNAI 95

ROTTERDAM 46

NEW DELHI 96

LOS ANGELES 47

AMMAN 97

ATLANTA 48

CAIRO 98

ROME 49

BENGALURU 99

DOHA 50

KOLKATA 100
TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

EASE OF DOING BUSINESS

TOURISM

CONNECTIVITY

EMPLOYMENT

 R

SI N

GAP

O

E

OVERALL
RANKING: 2

PEOPLE: 48

CITY PROFILE
SINGAPORE
A number of sustainability initiatives are currently underway which
will proactively help Singapore to evolve and remain competitive.
Even as the top ranked city in Asia, and second in the world, the city is
continuing to be proactive. For example, with a population predicted
to grow to more than six million people by 2030, the government has
committed significant investment over the next decade to improve
mobility and connectivity within the city. This investment includes two
new underground lines, extensions to four existing MRT lines, a new
terminal and runway at Changi Airport, a high-speed rail link between
Singapore and Malaysia and the relocation of the container port.
The city also faces an aging population and a need for greater investment
in social infrastructure. This, coupled with long working hours,
income inequality and affordability, impacts Singapore’s people subindex ranking.

PLANET: 12

PROFIT: 1

Singapore has also set an ambitious goal to make at least 80% of all
buildings ‘green’ by 2030 as part of a concerted push to create a vibrant
and high-quality living environment, that is resilient and supports the
broader climate change agenda. Additional resiliency investment is
underway in Singapore, including its ‘close the loop’ water strategy.
Ranked first in profit, Singapore is in the top ten for all six indicators in the
profit sub-index, topping the world in ease of doing business and tying
with Macau for the top spot for tourism.

 R

NE W YO

K

OVERALL
RANKING: 26

PEOPLE: 77

PLANET: 33

PROFIT: 8

CITY PROFILE
NEW YORK
New York’s dynamic culture and environment continues to attract
and sustain millions of residents, while serving as an international hub
for commerce and politics. With key infrastructure located along its
coasts, climate change continues to be a driving force in an effort to
protect New York’s residents and economy. The first phase of the East
Side Coastal Resiliency Project is planned to break ground in 2017.
The project, also known as the “Big U”, is a riverfront barrier system
in lower Manhattan aimed at safe-guarding the city from rising sea
levels. Despite headways with this development, future projections
show that storms and flooding events will occur more frequently and
possibly with even more intensity over the next century. New York’s
biggest concern is determining the best solutions to withstand these
impending events. This vulnerability heavily impacts New York’s
planet sub-index ranking, along with lower green space and higher
greenhouse gas emissions.
As part of the “One New York” plan, the Mayor’s Office has been focused
on implementing social programs to improve poverty; nearly 45% of
the city’s population live at or close to the poverty line, impacting its
people sub-index ranking of 77th. The city is on track with increasing
its minimum wage by 2019, providing more affordable housing options
and improving access to education by rolling out a free, universal prekindergarten program. The city has also made great strides in improving
air quality and lowering greenhouse gas emissions, but transportation
infrastructure continues to deteriorate as more people migrate to
the city. An additional emphasis on infrastructure expansion and
modernization, as well as streamlining commutes, are key factors for
an even stronger New York.
New York’s tourism, ease of doing business and GDP per capita all
bolster its profit ranking of 8th in the world, and first in North America.

 I

D U BA

OVERALL
RANKING: 52

CITY PROFILE
DUBAI
Dubai ranks higher than any of the other eight cities in the Middle
East and is placed 52nd overall. It is widely recognized as the region’s
most developed city, a global business hub, and a world-class tourist
destination.

PEOPLE: 55

Dubai, finishing fourth in the profit category, is today considered the
capital of the Islamic economy and the preferred destination for foreign
direct investment into the Middle East. With economic prosperity
projected to rise, Dubai has the goal of becoming the most businessfriendly city in the world.

PLANET: 96

The city’s ‘2021 Dubai Plan’ features a strong focus on people, aspiring to
become a city of happy, creative and empowered citizens. Dubai currently
ranks well in many indicators within the profit sub-index, notably tourism,
connectivity and employment. However, like many cities in the Middle
East, it scores lower on income inequality due to the disparity between
the mega-rich and the blue-collar expatriate communities and lowerincome workers.

PROFIT: 4

Dubai scores lowest in the planet sub-index largely due to energy
consumption, pollution and the lack of available green space. Dubai, like
the other Middle East cities in the Index, is partially constrained by its
desert climate. However, the city has set targets to reduce CO2 emissions
per GDP and the level of solid waste generated. It has also launched an
Integrated Energy Strategy action plan, which aims to reduce energy
demand by 30% by 2030 and diversify the city’s energy portfolio.
With the World Expo confirmed to take place in Dubai in 2020, the city
continues to make significant investment in improving quality of life for
the people that live there.

 KU

P

OVERALL
RANKING: 5
A L A LU M

U

R

OVERALL
RANKING: 55
PROFIT: 3

PEOPLE: 53
PLANET: 9

PLANET: 84
PEOPLE: 37

PROFIT: 19

CITY PROFILE
KUALA LUMPUR
Kuala Lumpur’s regional ranking in Asia is 7th overall, and 8th in the
people sub-index, 15th for planet and 5th for the profit sub-index.
Malaysia’s current Economic Transformation Program (ETP), improving
Kuala Lumpur and the Greater Klang Valley around the capital, has been
identified as a key growth engine in delivering its national vision and
driving continued economic growth across the country. The government
has set a goal to transform Kuala Lumpur into a world-class city by
2020, one that appeals to both residents and tourists alike. Specific large
projects are being implemented to improve Kuala Lumpur’s ranking,
ranging from the 118 Tower to KL-Singapore High Speed Rail and the Tun
Razak Exchange.
The local city hall, DBKL, has also embarked on Kuala Lumpur city
competitiveness masterplan studies and InvestKL is offering global
businesses access to a growing workforce, a sophisticated business
ecosystem, world-class infrastructure and connectivity, competitive
cost advantage and a principal hub tax incentive that caters to their
business models.

 G

N

HO N G KO

OVERALL
RANKING: 16

PEOPLE: 81

CITY PROFILE
HONG KONG
With a ranking of 16th overall, Hong Kong scored strongly in second
place in the profit sub-index. With a world-class infrastructure, vibrant
economy and well-educated talent pool it’s no surprise that Hong
Kong is considered one of the world’s best places to do business.
Hong Kong is one of Asia’s leading cities (third in region) in relation to the
planet sub-index. Its national parks and islands provide easy access to
an extensive natural playground, though it needs to improve the quality
of open space within the urban environment. Despite being located in a
typhoon zone, Hong Kong is a world leader in mitigating the associated
risks and rarely suffers significant disruption.

PLANET: 29

Compared with its global peers in the people sub-index, Hong Kong faces
significant challenges in work-life balance and the wealth gap. It has to
find solutions to housing and social infrastructure issues affecting both
its young and its increasingly aging population. These factors have to be
among the city’s top priorities if it’s to ensure a brighter, more sustainable
future for its people. The city is extremely safe with low crime levels.

PROFIT: 2

As other Asian cities grow in prosperity and dominance, Hong Kong is
under increasing pressure from regional competitors and, critically, it has
to maintain its relevance to China’s continued development. The city’s
plan should enable it to rise to these challenges provided it’s delivered
in a faster, more connected and sustainable manner. If so, it will rightly
maintain its mantle of “Asia’s World City”.

 4. SPOTLIGHT ON GLOBAL
CHALLENGES - DEMOGRAPHICS
The variance in median ages
across the 100 cities in the
Sustainable Cities Index is
astonishing, ranging from just
18.7 years in Nairobi to 46.6
years in Tokyo.
Demographics are particularly
important to the economic and
social elements of sustainability.
They are economically significant
because the production of a society
depends on its workforce, which in
most countries means those aged
between approximately 16 and 65
years (with the exception of the
unemployed, students and other
non-participants in the labor force).
However, the consumption of
a society depends on its total
population, and the ratio between
those of working age and those
outside it is an important factor in
the standard of living. Demography
is of social concern because two
key public services – health and
education – are mostly used by
those outside working age, but
funded by those within it. The
amount available to spend on each
person’s health and education
is affected by how the resources
are sourced; if few are providing
the resources, but many need the
services, the quality will suffer.
So, in the short to medium term,
it’s desirable to be “in the middle”
in age terms – not to have too
many people either in education or
in later life. Cities that are highest
on the demographic indicator are
in the UAE, while China scores
well too. Cities in Europe and the
U.S. are challenged, but then so
are Nairobi and Cairo, where huge
young populations put immense
pressure on education meaning
these economies find it hard to
provide proper training for their
youth.
However, seen over a longer
horizon, a young cohort in
education will eventually join the
labor force and the population
will hit the demographic “sweet
spot”, just as China is experiencing,
enabling far faster growth than can
be achieved in the mature - in both
senses - economies.

This changes the picture. Which
economies are best placed
demographically in the long run?
This is crucially dependent on the
median age of their inhabitants.

FIGURE 6:
CITIES IN THE SUSTAINABLE CITIES INDEX,
BY MEDIAN AGE IN YEARS 1
TOKYO 1
ROME 2
MILAN 3
BERLIN 4
HAMBURG 5
FRANKFURT 6
HOUSTON 7
HONG KONG 8
AMSTERDAM 9
ROTTERDAM 10
MUNICH 11
BRUSSELS 12
ANTWERP 13
BARCELONA 14
COPENHAGEN 15
GLASGOW 16
EDINBURGH 17
VIENNA 18
MONTREAL 19
VANCOUVER 20
PITTSBURGH 21
ZURICH 22
MADRID 23
ATHENS 24
LISBON 25
SEOUL 26
GENEVA 27
MANCHESTER 28
LEEDS 29
TORONTO 30
BIRMINGHAM 31
PRAGUE 32
BALTIMORE 33
MOSCOW 34
SAN FRANCISCO 35
TAIPEI 36
MIAMI 37
STOCKHOLM 38
BANGKOK 39
DETROIT 40
WARSAW 41
SEATTLE 42
NEW YORK 43
SYDNEY 44
TAMPA 45
MELBOURNE 46
SHANGHAI 47
BEIJING 48
WUHAN 49
GUANGZHOU 50

SHENZHEN 51
TIANJIN 52
MACAU 53
CHENGDU 54
PARIS 55
LYON 56
DOHA 57
CHICAGO 58
CANBERRA 59
LOS ANGELES 60
NEW ORLEANS 61
ATLANTA 62
LONDON 63
SINGAPORE 64
INDIANAPOLIS 65
WASHINGTON 66
DENVER 67
SANTIAGO 68
PHILADELPHIA 69
MANAMA 70
DUBLIN 71
BRISBANE 72
DALLAS 73
DUBAI 74
ABU DHABI 75
BOSTON 76
BUENOS AIRES 77
KUWAIT CITY 78
SAO PAULO 79
RIO DE JANEIRO 80
HANOI 81
ISTANBUL 82
CHENNAI 83
KUALA LUMPUR 84
JAKARTA 85
JEDDAH 86
RIYADH 87
MUSCAT 88
MEXICO CITY 89
LIMA 90
JOHANNESBURG 91
CAPE TOWN 92
KOLKATA 93
BENGALURU 94
CAIRO 95
MUMBAI 96
NEW DELHI 97
MANILA 98
AMMAN 99
NAIROBI 100

1Some cities did not have data available on the city level; here we have used national-level sources

 6. PUTTING PEOPLE AT THE
HEART OF CITY SUSTAINABILITY
CITIES, PEOPLE AND
SUSTAINABILITY
What makes a city sustainable
for its people? It’s a question that
is being asked more and more
frequently by planners, developers
and policymakers as they try to
shape the conditions that help
cities compete in what is an
increasingly global tussle for talent
and investment. A city’s character
is formed by the dynamic mix of
multiple influences that contribute
to its appearance, culture and
shared values. But, above all, a
city’s strengths and its character
come from its people. How can
cities do more to ensure that,
as they develop and implement
strategies and policies to address
the considerable challenges they
face (from environmental to socioeconomic), they do so in a way that
puts people at the forefront of
their sustainability?
On a fundamental level, providing
adequate access to basic resources
for all citizens, such as shelter,
clean water and air, is essential.
But for many cities – particularly,
but by no means exclusively, in
the developing world – this is far
from straightforward. The systems
that enable a city to function and
thrive, from mobility to housing
and culture to education, create
a highly complex ecosystem
of interacting and intersecting
services and infrastructure that
is under constant pressure to
change, regenerate and respond
to the developing needs of the
population.
The trend to localism and
devolution of powers is evident
across many urban centers,
making questions of governance
increasingly important. Cities’
governance varies from top-down
to bottom-up, greater or lesser
influence of private or public
interests and a range of decisionmaking, from formal to informal
processes and routes. A city’s
values, too, are key drivers of its
‘personality’ affecting both the
day-to-day experience of citizens

and creating the city’s wider image
and global impression that can
attract business, talent, investment
and tourism.
Of course, none of these elements is
static. Cities can, and do, constantly
reinvent themselves as they strive to
compete and secure an advantage
over each other. Throughout, people
are at the heart of that change. If
cities are today generally falling
short of meeting the needs of their
people, what changes do they need
to make in order to improve? There
are a number of key dimensions to
address.

CREATING A SENSE
OF COMMUNITY
Cities create a sense of community
from built and natural assets.
This is visible in the multiple
neighborhoods of which cities are
comprised. Each has its own style
and distinct sense of community.
Scale is important, as it enables
people to feel a strong connection
to their core neighborhood
community and, through that, with
the wider secondary community
of the entire city. A successful city,
therefore, is likely to have many
different neighborhoods with their
own unique sense of themselves,
but which, together, can form a
common identity.
To that end, the degree of equality
evident in a city is important for
shaping people’s experience and
perceptions. When the differences
in a city are too big and visible, this
will affect inhabitants’ sense of
community. People will struggle
to build a common identification
with parts of their city that are very
different from their own. This is
not to say that there should be no
differences, for example, in income.
Cities are inevitably associated
with disparities in wealth. However,
taking steps to ensure that all
people enjoy at least a basic
standard in the quality of life,
with water and food, a dwelling,
education and health and a sense
of opportunity, is critical in binding
a city’s diverse population together.

By doing so, citizens understand
that everyone has their own role
and responsibility in the city.
Greater equality in a city drives
a sense of inclusion in its people.
When people feel included,
they start collaborating, taking
responsibility for their own areas
and achieving greater wellbeing.
A city attracts a variety of people,
and it’s this diversity that makes
a city productive: everybody feels
empowered and incentivized to
make a positive contribution that
improves the quality of life for all
and drives a more sustainable city
environment.

BALANCING PEOPLE
AND PROFIT
Access to natural resources is
critically important. As well as
clean water and air, for example,
the availability of green spaces
is becoming a more important
requirement and a source of
differentiation for a city. In
response, cities are developing
some innovative solutions to
address this need. Cities are
beginning to build with, rather than
against, nature. The natural capital
within the city is being incorporated
to create new spaces that can make
a direct contribution to the shared
quality of life available to citizens
and can attract visitors. New York’s
High Line turned an abandoned
transport asset into an extremely
popular and successful new urban
park that has spurred economic
development along its route.

BUILDING A
RESILIENT CITY
The physical, social and economic
systems that together create a
city need to be resilient in order to
enable a city to grow and develop
in a way that is sustainable and
secures the greatest benefits
for the widest possible group of
people. Infrastructure that works,
community cohesion and stability,
and the conditions in which
business can flourish are all key
elements of a city that meets the

 needs of its people. This is as true
for developed cities, such as Miami
that must balance its people and
profit with its resiliency to flooding
and climate change, as it is for
developing cities in parts of Asia
and Africa that strive to accelerate
their development in the midst of
resiliency pressures.
According to the 2016 Arcadis
Sustainable Cities Water Index,
most cities across the world are
in need of greater prioritization to
improve their resiliency to extreme
weather events and unforeseen
water shortages. From rising sea
levels and rapid urbanization
hindering permeability to lack
of diverse water portfolios, the
report finds that most cities
need greater investment when it
comes to their ability to withstand
natural disasters and drinking
water shortages. Cities that are
proactive in responding to these
resiliency issues have a competitive
advantage for future investment as
well as in attracting people.

ASSESSING A
CITY’S ECOSYSTEM
Given all these competing needs,
getting the right start is essential.
Each city will have its own unique
vision for achieving those aims.
And each will need a distinct road
map to reach its destination. But
starting the journey begins with a
clear assessment of where the city
is today, and the outputs (positive
and negative) arising from the
interplay between its physical,
social and economic systems.

Figure 7 shows three layers of
assessment that city leaders should
undertake in order to evaluate their
city’s ecosystem.
With that understanding in place,
city planners and policymakers can
start taking steps to shape a city
with people and their wellbeing at
its heart.

FIGURE 7:
CITY ECOSYSTEM ASSESSMENT - THREE LAYERS
VALUES AND COURAGE
OF DECISION MAKERS

GOVERNANCE AND
INVESTMENT POWER

Top down - bottom up,
public - private, formal - informal

SYSTEMS

Mobility, housing, energy, water,
food, health, education, air
quality, culture, waste...
Urbanism!

 6. APPENDICES
METHODOLOGY
Table 1 shows the indicators that form the building blocks of the
Sustainable Cities Index. The rightmost column shows which pillar
each indicator belongs to. Indicators within each category are averaged
to calculate the pillar’s score. Each city receives a percentage score
reflecting its place in relation to the others.

WHAT’S NEW FOR 2016?
Incorporating feedback from the first report published in 2015, Arcadis
and Cebr have both sought to create a more indicative global picture of
urban sustainability by including an additional 50 cities in the ranking
and incorporating seven new indicators of sustainability in the Index. This
provides a broader view of the world and captures the rapid globalization
of and competition between our cities. As a result of this, it would be
inaccurate to compare the rankings to last year’s. Future reports will seek
to follow the same methodology and allow year-on-year comparisons to
be made.
The Sustainable Cities Index is constructed by a three-stage averaging
process. Some of the indicators are composites. These take the simple
average of their component sub-indicators. The three sub-indices are
calculated by taking simple averages of their component indicators. In
turn, the overall score is calculated by taking the simple average of the
three sub-indices.
Therefore, there is no weighting system applied, although, since the
number of indicators differs across sub-indices, the weights in the overall
Index do differ. The same applies for the sub-indicators: two components
which go into one indicator will naturally have half the weight of another
indicator within the same pillar which has only one component to it.
The averaging process demands that the scores be converted into
common units, for which we use percentages. Each is scaled such that the
worst-performing city receives 0% and the best performer receives 100%.
Since the sub-indices and the overall Index are simply averages of the
indicators, they are also measured in percentage terms.
Several of the indicators have outlying values – these are defined as
observations two standard deviations away from the mean. These are
given the maximum or minimum score, as appropriate, and the nexthighest/lowest value is defined as the boundary observation which is
used to calculate the scores of the other (non-outlier) values.
City-level data is used wherever possible, though in some cases only
national-level data exists. Where there is no comparable city-level data
across countries, the national value is taken and a national database is
used to scale the cities so that they are given a spread around the
national average.

 

 6.1  METHODOLOGY AND INDICATORS
TABLE 1: LIST OF INDICATORS USED IN THE SUSTAINABLE CITIES INDEX.
New indicators to the 2016 Index are shown in orange
INDICATOR NAME

INDICATOR DESCRIPTION

MAIN SOURCE

Literacy rate

World Bank

University rankings

QS

Share of population with tertiary
education

Barro & Lee, various
national sources

Life expectancy

World Bank

Obesity rate

World Health Organization

Demographics

Dependency ratio

World Bank

People

Income Inequality

Gini coefficient

World Bank

People

Consumer price index

UBS Prices and Earnings

Property prices

UBS Prices and Earnings

Work-life balance

Average annual hours worked

OECD, UBS Prices and Earnings

People

Crime

Homicide rate

UN Office on Drugs and Crime

People

Environmental risks

Natural catastrophe exposure

The International Disaster Database

Planet

Green spaces

Green space as % of city area

Siemens Green City Index

Planet

Energy use

Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Renewables share

Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Education

Health

Affordability

Energy

SUB-INDEX
People

People

People

Planet

Energy consumption per $ GDP

Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Air pollution

Mean level of pollutants

World Health Organization

Planet

Greenhouse gas emissions

Emissions in metric tonnes (per
capita)

CDP Cities open data

Planet

Solid waste management (landfill
vs recycling)

World Bank

Share of wastewater treated

OECD & FAO Aquastat

Access to drinking water (% of
households)

World Health Organization

Access to improved sanitation (%
of households)

World Health Organization

Congestion

TomTom Traffic Index

Rail infrastructure

Metrobits World

Airport satisfaction

Skytrax World Airport Awards 2015

Economic development

GDP per capita

Brookings Global Monitor

Profit

Ease of doing business

Ease of Doing Business Index

World Bank

Profit

Tourism

International visitors per year,
absolute & per capita

Euromonitor International

Profit

Mobile connectivity

United Nations Statistics Division

Broadband connectivity

United Nations Statistics Division

Importance in global networks

Geography Department, Loughborough
University

Number of people employed, %
of city population

Brookings Global Monitor

Waste management

Drinking water and
sanitation

Transport infrastructure

Connectivity

Employment

Planet

Planet

Profit

Profit

Profit

 DISCLAIMER
While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the material
in this document, neither Centre for Economics and Business Research
Ltd nor Arcadis will be liable for any loss or damages incurred through the
use of the report.

AUTHORSHIP AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was commissioned by Arcadis and informed by research
produced by Cebr, an independent economics and business research
consultancy established in 1992. The expert commentary was compiled
by a cross section of Arcadis’ city and sustainability experts. The views
expressed herein are those of the authors only and are based upon
independent research by them.
© 2016 Arcadis

 7. FURTHER READING

SUSTAINABLE CITIES
WATER INDEX

INTERNATIONAL
CONSTRUCTION COST

MODE

GLOBAL INFRASTRUCTURE
INVESTMENT INDEX

URBAN LAND
RESTORATION INDEX

SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2015

 CONTACT US
John Batten
Global Cities Director
E cities@arcadis.com
@jbattenbuc

@ArcadisGlobal
Arcadis
www.arcadis.com/SCI2016

Arcadis. Improving quality of life