Transcript Global Urban Competitiveness Report

Global Urban Competitiveness Report
（2011-2012）
Pengfei Ni
Global Urban Competitiveness Project （GUCP）
Center for City and Competitiveness (CCC,CASS）
China Beijing, 27 June, 2012
《Global Urban Competitiveness Report 2011-2012》
Brief of Research
With nearly 100 experts, GUCP project team implemented 2 yea
rs' tasks of data collection, organization, verification and compari
son, improved the index system and evaluation method, quantitie
s analysis and empirical test. The project team members conducte
d considerable number of research and discussion, communicated
with many experts from countries around the world, and contacte
d several city governments for field researches in different countr
ies. The team members fully explored and ultimately finished the
annual report on the basis of sorting out expert opinions and the c
ompletion of the global urban competitiveness assessment.
Part 1
Introduction of Analysis Method
Ⅰ Global Urban Competitiveness:
Background of Research
 Structure of global production, trade and financial are changing
 Developed countries such as The United States, Europe,s promote the
“Re-industrialization” strategy; Resurgence of Developed countries, trade prot
ectionism; Developed countries to increase the savings rate, while Developing
countries are improving the rate of consumption
 Urbans facing re-positioning in The global industrial chain。
 The world's new technological revolution is bred。
The new technological revolution will strengthen the sustainable urban competitive
ness，affect the competitiveness of various cities Significantly 。
 The Urbans of emerging economy rise strongly in the crisis
Ⅱ Global Urban Competitiveness :
research situation
Perspectives
Outcomes
Inputs
Inputs-outcomes
Authors and institutions
Component
Cities
Indicators
OECD, 2005
1
78
1
Peter Karl Kresl (USA,1999)
3
24
3
Pengfei Ni (China, 2001)
6
200
12
Dong-Sung Cho (Korea, 2006)
3
75
5
William F. Lever and Ivan Turok (UK,1999)
3
-
3
Jianfa Shen (HKSAR, China,2002)
3
286
52
Pengfei Ni (China, 2003)
12
60
199
Douglas Webster (World Bank, 2000)
4
-
75
Augusto Lopez Kela-oluosi (World Economic Forum,2005
)
3
55
40
David G. Tuerck (USA, 2002)
8
50
37
Abhishek Sharma (USA, 2006)
2
21
27
Dong-Sung Cho (Korea, 2006)
5
75
90
Alvin Diaz (Philippines, 2001)
7
65
71
Robert Huggins (UK, 2003)
3
44
7
Core City Work Team (UK, 2004)
6
50
21
Ⅲ Global Urban Competitiveness:
Conceptual Framework
 Global Urban Competitiveness:
The urban competitiveness refers to a city’s ability in rel
ation to other cities in the world to attract and translate res
ources, control and occupy markets, to create wealth as fast
as possible and offer well-being for its residents , which is d
etermined by the combination of its enterprise operating fa
ctors and industrial systems
 Concept framework
 Urban Competitiveness Mechanism
A
Value
C
Industry
Environment
B
 Urban Competitiveness' Outcome: Value
Profit situation is the ultimate demonstration of the city cap
acity and a dimensional and comprehensive concept。
In this context, the model is ：
UCI= ƒ (ES, EG, EE, ED, EQ, IE)
UCI：Urban Competitiveness' index
ES：Economy scale
EG: Economic Growth
EE：Economic levels EQ: Economy quality
IE: Exterior Facts
ED: Economic density
 Urban Competitiveness Process: Industry
City’s value is created through enterprises. The level of industry
system constituted by enterprises determines the level of entire
value system.
industrial chains
R&D
production
marketing
circulate
industry
manufacture
manufacture
building trade
computers and
the software industry
building trade
transmission, computers
and the software industry
industry
Inside industry system within a city and its connection
 Urban Competitiveness Input: Environment
Urban competitiveness model including six potential
variables:
UC= ƒ（EQ、LE、LD、LC、GC、PI、LI）
UC: the urban competitiveness input;
EQ: is the enterprises quality;
LE : local environment (factors demand and supply)
LD :local demands ;
LC：interior structure, reflecting interior connection and aggregation
GC： global connection ;( the connection to the exterior, utilize the
exterior factors and market and address the chance and challenge);
PI：public system;
LI：the local infrastructure.
Ⅳ Global Urban Competitiveness:
Indicator system and Research design
 Indicator system
2011-2012 Global Competitiveness Indicator System includes:
 Global Competitiveness Production Indicator System,
 Global Competitiveness Factor Indicator System
 Global Competitiveness Industry Indicator System.
Production Indicator System is comprised of 6 indicators, n
amely, Green GDP, GDP per capita, GDP per Sq Km, GDP grow
th, patent applications and transnational enterprises index.
Production：Global Competitiveness Indicator System
Indicators
Measurement target
O1 GDP scale
Economic scale
O2 GDP per capita Development level
O3 GDP per Sq Km Economic aggregation
Indicators
Measuring object
O4 GDP growth
Economic growth
O5 Patent application
Technological innovation
O6 Transnational enterprises index. International influence
Industry Competitiveness Indicator System is formed through no
nlinear weighted synthesis after the innovation on 2009-2010 Indu
stry Competitiveness Indicator System, industry hierarchy and the
global position of 22 industries.
Process：Industry Competitiveness Indicator System
C Industry Category Indicator
C Industrial Segment Indicator
C3.1.1Defense aviation industry index
C3.2.1Defense aviation industry segment index
C3.1.2Banking industry index
C3.2.2Banking industry segment index
C3.1.3Business service industry index
C3.2.3Business service industry segment index
C3.1.4Financial capital industry index
C3.2.4Financial capital industry segment index
C3.1.5Chemistry industry index
C3.2.5Chemistry industry segment index
C3.1.6 Hard goods industry index
C3.2.6Hard goods industry segment index
C3.1.7multifunctional fiancé industry index
C3.2.7multifunctional fiancé industry segment index
C3.1.8Pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry inde
x
C3.2.8Pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry segment inde
x
C3.1.9 Health medical devices industry index
C3.2.9 Health medical devices industry segment index
C3.1.10Fittingindustry index
C3.2.10Fittingindustry segment index
C Industry Category Indicator
C Industrial Segment Indicator
C3.1.11Insurance industry index
C3.2.11Insurance industry segment index
C3.1.12Journalism industry index
C3.2.12Journalism industry segment index
C3.1.13Retail industry index
C3.2.13Retail industry segment index
C3.1.14Semiconductor industry index
C3.2.14Semiconductor industry segment index
C3.1.15Software industry index
C3.2.15Software industry segment index
C3.1.16Hardware equipment manufacturing industry index
C3.2.16Hardware equipment manufacturing industry segment index
C3.1.17 Telecommunication industry index
C3.2.17 Telecommunication industry segment index
C3.1.18Commerce industry index
C3.2.18Commerce industry segment index
C3.1.19Municipal facility industry
C3.2.19Municipal facility industry segment index
C3.1.20Material industry index
C3.2.20 Material industry segment index
C3.1.21 Transportation industry index
C3.2.21 Transportation industry segment index
C3.1.22 Energy industry index
C3.2.22 Energy industry segment index
Industry Competitiveness indicator system is formed
through nonlinear weighted synthesis after the innovatio
n on 2009-2010 Industry Competitiveness Indicator Sys
tem, industry hierarchy and the global position of 22 ind
ustries.
Investment： Factor Environment Indicator System
Indicators
Measuring objects
I1 Enterprises quality
Indicators
Measuring objects
I4.60.000-bed hospital
Medical facility
I1. Transnational enterprises quant
ity
Enterprises level
I4.7Amusement facility index
Amusement facility
I2. Transnational enterprises growt
h
Enterprises
I4.8 Hotel index
Housing facility
I3.Enterpriese index
Enterprises quantity
I4.9 Hotel price
Commerce cost
I4.Enterprises brand
Enterprises quality
I4.10 Rental reference
Living cost
potential
I2 local situation
I5.Interior environment
I2.1Huamn capital
Human capital
I5.1 Inflation rate
Economic fluctuation
I2.2 Minimum wage
Labor cost
I5.2 Unemployment rate
Unemployment rate
I2.3 College index
Higher education
I5.3 Political stability
Political safety
I2.4 School index
Education facility
I5.4 Crime rate
Social security
I2.5 Stock index
Financial service
I5.5 Climate index
Climate
I2.6Bank index
Financial service
I5.6 CO₂ emission per capita
Environment quality
Indicators
Measuring objects
Indicators
Measuring objects
I2.7bank density
Financial service
I5.7 PM2.5
Environment quality
I2.8 Patent index
Science output
I5.8 History index
History
I2.9 R&D numbers and technology parks
Technology facility
I5.9 Modern culture index
Modern culture
I2.10 Research institution index
Technology facility
I5.10 multi languages index
Diversified culture
I3 Local needs
I6 Public system
I3.1 population
Local needs scale
I6.1 Ease of business
Business regulation
I3.2 wealthy people index
Demand level
I6.2 Economic freedom index
Economic freedom
I3.2 Population growth potential
Demand growth
I6.3 Proportion of fiscal, taxation
Local fiancé autonomy
I3.3 One-hour flight GDP
Region background
I6.4 Public governance index
Governance
I3.4 One-hour flight population
Region background
I3.5 Income per capita
National background
I7.1mutinational companies links
Economic links
I3.6 National economic growth
National background
I7.2 International organizations index
Political links
I7.3 international exhibition index
Culture
I4.Infrasture
I7 Global connection
I4.1 transport convenience
Municipal facility
I7.4 international popularity index
City popularity
I4.2 Water supply ability
Water supply facility
I7.5 distance to sea
Natural position
I4.3 Electricity supply quality
Electricity supply facility
I7.6 Airlines
Infrastructures to the outside
I4.4 mobile phone numbers
Communication facility
I7.7 Road lines
Infrastructures to the outside
I4.5 Network users
Network facility
I7.8 Internet servers
Infrastructures to the outside
 City samples
 Definition: The report called on city refers to an administrati
ve management center, which contains under the governance
suburban urbanization area and may contain rural residents
 The 500 cities in this report are selected in the following proc
edures.
– First and foremost, a loose study was carried out on all countries and re
gional cities, which was labeled as the preliminary screening.
– Second, a research referred to the population and income per capita of t
he country or the region was preceded in the 500 cities in order to ident
ify the number of sample cities in those areas. .
– Afterwards, the research took country as a unit; roughly identify sample
cities in a principle, from big to small, from good to bad, from high to l
ow.
– Finally, considering the accessibility, accuracy and standard of the data,
we adjusted the sample cites to make sure the sample cities’ data were a
vailable, standardized and accurate.
g 
x
wj
j
 Assessment method
 Synthesis method
In the calculations, we used a uniform calculation method to calculate t
he 2007-2008, 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 global urban comprehensive com
petitiveness and ensured the continuity and comparable of the global urban
comprehensive competitiveness index in space and time.
Global Urban Competitiveness Factor Environment Indicators
synthesis
Synthesizing Global Urban Competitiveness Factor Environment Indicato
rs at all levels, we used the simple linear and nonlinear weighted average
method synthesis.
Global Urban Competitiveness Factor industry
synthesis
Indicators
Industry takes nonlinear weighted synthesis and the level of industry and
the industrial structure is calculated by nonlinear weighted (or "multiplicati
on" synthesis)
Part 2
Findings of comparative analysis
City, who can overcome the financial tsunami
 Competitive advantages of “world cities” decease absolut
ely and New York's decreasing amplitude is the first,
while Asian metropolises continue rising.
 Internal environment and public institution are the most
two important factors in a city’s competitive- ability;
 high-tech industry, finance, public utilities are the key
support of urban competitiveness
Ⅰ Analysis on the Most Competitive Cities in the World
 New York rank No.1 and index decreasing amplitude
is the first, while Hong Kong’s index upgrades rapidly
Index Movement of the 2007-2012 Top 10 Most Competitive Cities Worldwide
Compared with the result in 2009-2010, the absolute competitive index in New York,
London, San Francisco, Chicago and Los Angles has decreased in 2010-2012.However,
emerging economies show activity in this year and Asian metropolises like Hong Kong ,
Singapore and Seoul have made themselves into the top 10. The gap of which with the
following cities are narrowing, “Four World Cities” will be overtaken by other cities in
near future if existing trends continue.
 Internal environment and public institution :
The two important factors in a city’s competitive- ability
As the potential competitiveness, competition elements represe
nt the city’s development potential. By comparing and analyzing the
environmental factors of the most competitive cities, we can find:
Environmental Factors of the Most Competitive Cities
Internal environment, public institutions, global relations and enterprise quality are very important factors
of a city’s competitive ability, among which internal
environment and public institution are most prominent
 Internal Environment includes economic environment,
social environment, ecological environment and cultural
environment.
 Public Institutions consist of life convenience, economic
freedom and the administration of the government.
 High-tech industry, finance, public utilities are
the key support of urban competitiveness
Industrial Environment of the most competitive cities
As an important support to a city, industrial environment is the driving force to the u
rban economic development. The study found that the most competitive cities also enjoy
high industrial competitiveness. the high-tech industries like telecommunication, semicon
ductor, software and service, financial industries like insurance agencies, banks, and diver
sified financial institutions together with public utilities are the key support of urban com
petitiveness. For new “world cities” like Beijing and Shanghai, these industries are the m
ost important focus in continuing rising and catching up with the top “world cities”.
Ⅱ Overall Comparative Analysis on Global Cities
 The Global urban competitiveness fell in 2010-2012 as a whole wit
h the steepest drop expected for Europe and US and the gap betwe
en the cities has been reducing.
Average Competitiveness Variation of the Cities in Different Regions
Compared with 2009-2010, the overall competitiveness of global cities are decreased in 2011-2012.
The average competitive index of 500 cities worldwide decreased from 0.328 in 2009-2010 to 0.323 in 2
011-2012.Competitiveness index average score of developed countries cities have respectively decreased
absolutely,while Emerging economies show actively and average score drop Slightly, even some cities ar
ise continuously. On the whole, the gap of global urban competitiveness index is assuming narrower and
narrower .
 American and European cities enjoy a high degree of eco
nomic freedom while emerging economies present a strong
demand.
Environmental Factors of Different Regions in 2011-2012
On the whole, the American and European cities still have great advantage, which mainta
in superiority on overall element competitiveness, especially in the area of public institutio
ns, internal environment and local factors. But the local demand are relative weak that they
have to high depend on foreign trade. On the contrary, Asian cities, especially in some emer
ging economies like China and India, have such great local demand that establish great dev
elopment potential and their GUCI ranking is going straight up.
 American and European major cities are facing over financialization, while emerging economies have entered the period
of the industrial structure transformation
American and European cities show strong overall industrial competitiveness with high ind
ex scores in both industrial structure and industrial sectors, among which the high-tech industr
y is an important support. However, the overexposed proportion of financial centers shows tha
t their economy depends too much on finance. The Asian cities get lowest scores in the industr
ial sectors and the industrial structure is just on an average level and the industrial developme
nt of them is still at the bottom of industrial chain,so that industrial upgrading should be prom
oted and the adjusting paces of the industrial structure should be accelerated. At present, since
the emerging economies like Beijing and Shanghai have entered the period of the industrial st
 Cities of emerging economies rise quickly, technol
ogy centers perform particularly well.
Distribution of the Top 50 Cities with the Fastest Competitiveness Improvement
in 2011-2012
（Show in next page）
• The cities that improve the fastest are, in order, San Jose, Hong Kong, Suzhou, C
hangsha, Lagos, Georgetown, Kingston, Xi’an and Mannheim.
• According to the analysis of these 50 cities we can see that half of them come fro
m China and India, among which 23 Chinese cities are ranking in the list.
• Technology centers perform particularly well, 11 technology centers are include
d in the f top 50 despite the relatively small economic aggregate. San Jose, centra
l city of American Silicon Valley enjoys a fastest rising speed in its competitiven
ess. In 2009, its per capita GDP reached $ 77401.91, occupying the first place in
the world and leading the development of global cities.
Distribution of the Top 50 Cities with the Fastest Competitiveness Improvement in 2011-2
012
 competitiveness indexes and economic aggregate of deve
loped cities dropped together, but mainstream of BRICS co
untries cities are ascension
The Changes of Overall Competitiveness in the Five Developed Cities and the
Five BRICS Cities
In 2007-2009, the overall competitiveness indexes and economic aggregate of develop
ed cities are dropped obviously, but economic aggregate of BRICS countries cities arise a
bsolutely and competitiveness indexes arise relatively. In the near future, it is probably ver
y difficult for developed cities to maintain their dominations in competitiveness.
Ⅲ American and European cities decline obviously,
while Asian cities increase
Average Competitiveness Variation of the Cities in Different Regions
North American cities continue leading the Global Urban Competitiveness Ranking thou
gh the composite index decrease. The European competitive index ranking changed little; th
e dark clouds of European debt crisis remain. The competitiveness of core Asian cities incre
ases with the slight shakes of overall index. In other regions, the cities at the bottom of the c
ompetitive ranking reduced, and the ranking of middle cities differentiated
Ⅵ Financial centers decease while Technology centers
rise
The Drop of Competitiveness in Major Functional Centers. (%)
Ⅴ High Income Cities Drop & Middle Incomes Rise
Comprehensive competitiveness index average score and change of different income level
The income level of Global Urban overall Showed a narrowing of trend.. All sorts of
comprehensive competitiveness index average score declined widespread. Compared wit
h 2009-2010, Figure 2-4 shows, the city of the low-and middle-income levels in emergin
g economies enhanced faster, especially Chinese cities kept a rapid momentum. Europea
n and North American cities with a relatively high GDP per capita demonstrated an absol
ute amount of decline. European cities mean index decreased from 0.32 in 2009-2010 to
0.31 in 2011-2012
Ⅵ Competitiveness input factors: high output efficiency in No
rth America and Asia to enhance the potential of large, Euro
pean investment needs to be strengthened
Regional Distribution of rank Comprehensive Competitive-ness Index and Factors input
annual
Region
10
1-100
101-200
201-300
301-400
401-500
average
inde
x
score
0.38
Competiveness
North
Amer
ican
Factors input
North
Amer
ican
5
56
12
9
6
24
Competiveness
Europe
2
35
33
16
13
39
Factors input
Europe
2
27
31
19
19
40
Competiveness
Asian
4
20
26
52
52
37
Factors input
Asian
3
21
52
54
46
14
Competiveness
Other
0
3
5
12
29
21
4
42
36
20
6
3
0.305
0.331
0.262
0.303
0.258
0.275
Part 3
Global Urban Competitiveness
Research Topics
Introduction of team writing research Topics report
This year, a long-lasting wish has been fulfilled by inviting the research tea
m from International Organization and City and other world renowned expert te
ams, together with experts from GUCP to co-compose this report.
 Research team, led by Banji oyelaran Oyeyinka, director of Global Urban Evalu
ation and Research Department of UN Human Settlement Programme
 Research team, The Doing Business Project of the World Bank Group；
 Research team, led by Lamia Kamal-Chaoui, director of OECD Secretary-Gene
ral Office
 Saskia Sassen, World well-known sociologist ＆ economist, professor of Colum
bia University
 the GAWC team led by Peter Taylor, world renowned urban researcher and a ac
ademician of UK Royal Academy of Social Science
 GUCP team, led by Peter Karl Kresl and Pengfei Ni
Pattern of the global city: Current and Future
What is current pattern of global city? What are opportunities an
d challenges of the global city? etc. Since early 2012, Global Urban
Competitiveness Project group sent e-mail to experts and researcher
s nearly 100 colleges and universities in the world, as well as some
city government officials and to conducted a survey study. On the b
asis of Collecting their answers to these questions and feedback, the
team members list systematically some profound and important insi
ghts points on the pattern of the global city:

New phenomenon, challenges and hot topics of global cities mainly includ
e global financial crisis, natural resources, city development and people’s li
velihood etc.

The important or key questions of cities in the worldinclude natural resour
ces, racial problems, and population movement

There are many aspects that are worthy of researching. For example, im
proving city’s sustaining development, city comprehensive management,
preserving local culture and upgrading environment.

Economic growth and population movements are the key elements. Globa
lization are creating more chances for global city development and exerting
different influence on it.

Today, some cities in developing countries have the tendency of dropping,
while cities in developing countries are rising. These cities development are
getting closer. The economic change on pattern will lead to the change in th
e world city pattern, in which case, the world is shifting to emerging econo
mies cities.
 A country should empower more authority on managing local affai
rs. The cities should strengthen their governance accordingly.
 Technological change and green economy are both playing a role i
n strengthening the sustaining competitiveness in technology and en
ergy and resources, which will significantly affect competitiveness.
 It exerts a significant influence on the future development of a city.
In the process of planning and development, the force the city has is
very crucial, but still needs more joint efforts.
 Apart from the big incidence concerning politics, military, security a
nd natural disasters, the current threat the world is facing is much ag
glomeration and lack of reform.
 All governments of cities are dealing with different problems. The
rise of emerging cities may bring a change to the structure of global
cities. The infrastructures are particularly important.
Experts or research team dissertate some of these issues
 Professor Saskia Sassen believed that the Specialized Differen
ces were one key vector in urban competitiveness.
 Banji Oyelaran-Oyeyinka paid special attention to social and t
echnological innovations in the Competitiveness of Cities.
 The team led by Lamia Kamal-Chaoui explored the developme
nt of green cities and opportunities through the governance cas
es study of the green growth in OECD countries

Team of the Doing Business Project of the World Bank
Group shows the relationship between the system and urb
an competitiveness from the perspective of the business e
nvironment.
 Peter·J·Taylor put forward the challenge facing world c
ity network analysis
 GUCP team, led by Peter Karl Kresl and Pengfei Ni, re
commended that the city's decision-makers should enhanc
e the urban competitiveness of the focus on the driving fa
ctors of the modern cities prosperity on the basis of the an
alysis in the global cities experience.
Pattern of The Global Urban Competitiveness
Global Urban Competitiveness statistical reports
(2011-2012)
Thank you!