1. Kriti
Gupta
–
s2943375
Essay
Question
One:
Australian cities are often highly ranked in international measures of
urban quality of life. What factors account for the position of Australian cities in these
international rankings and how well do you think Australian cities will rank in fifty years’
time? How well do these measures capture what it is like for you to live in an Australian
city?
1 0 3 7 E N V
U n d e r s t a n d i n g
A u s t r a l i a n
C i t i e s
W o r d
C o u n t :
1 5 1 9
Reflection
of
Australian
Urban
Quality
of
Life
and
its
Future

2. 2
Abstract:
For
hundreds
of
years
now
the
design
and
building
of
a
city
reflects
our
everyday
lives
as
the
two
go
hand
in
hand.
This
paper
focuses
on
the
quality
of
city
life
and
the
physical,
social
and
economical
actors.
Based
on
these
through
multiple
surveys
and
reports
such
as
the
UN
Index,
Mercer’s
Quality
of
Life,
Organisation
for
Economic
Co-­‐operation
and
Development
(OECD)
and
the
Economist
Intelligence
Unit’s
(EIU)
Liveability
Ranking,
Australia
has
been
ranked
high
on
international
standards
of
living.
These
‘standards’
and
‘measures’
are
what
the
general
public
as
well
as
officials
have
deemed
of
importance
in
order
to
make
a
city
liveable.
Australia
has
met
these
requirements
but
the
question
is
will
the
country
continue
to
do
so?
Introduction:
The
concept
of
‘liveable’
urban
cities
goes
hand
in
hand
with
quality
of
life
(QoL).
This
is
a
notion
that
represents
the
standards
of
living
that
are
deemed
satisfactory
by
citizens
of
the
societies
they
reside
in.
The
process
of
enhancing
said
QoL
has
become
an
essential
aim
for
urban
policy
all
across
the
globe.
In
urban
circumstances
the
biggest
problems
facing
cities
that
undermine
the
quality
of
urban
life
are
pollution,
transportation,
social
inequalities
and
crime.
However
it
is
a
theoretical
concept
as
it
is
more
subjective
ideation,
rather
than
clear,
concise
measurable
factors.
Nevertheless
the
following
studies
aim
to
provide
the
objective
approach
that
is
required
to
understand
the
requirements
that
need
to
be
met.
Factors:
United
Nations:
Since
1998
Australia
has
been
ranked
in
the
top
five
nations
on
the
United
Nations
Human
Development
Report
(UNDP,
2015).
The
purpose
of
the
HDI
is
to
combine
all
elements
of
life
into
one
number
as
well
as
represent
the
sub-­‐components.
Traditionally
income
was
the
only
indicator
of
a
nation’s
position
compared
to
others,
placing
Australia
nineteenth
according
to
its
GDP.
Where
as
the
UN
weighs
all
categories
equally
and
due
to
Australia
being
ranked
highly
on
education
quality
and
life
expectancy
the
HDI
is
higher
than
countries
such
as
the
UAE
who
have
higher
incomes
per
capita
(Jericho,
2014).
Mercer’s
Quality
&
OECD:
The
purpose
of
Mercer’s
ranking
is
to
“help
governments
and
major
companies
place
employees
on
international
assignments”
(Mercer,
2015).
In
order
to
do
this
Mercer
evaluates
the
living
conditions
of
over
440
cities,
according
to
39
factors
that
are
grouped
into
ten
categories:
Category:
Example
factors:
1.
Political
and
Social
Crime,
Law
enforcement,
International
Relations
2.
Economic
Environment
Banking
services,
Currency
exchange
3.
Socio-­‐Cultural
Environment
Media
&
Censorship
4.
Health
Hospitals,
Sewage,
Water,
Air
Pollution
5.
Education
Schools
6.
Public
Services
Electricity,
Water
Availability,
Transport
7.
Recreation
Leisure
activities,
restaurants
8.
Consumer
Goods
Consumption,
private
vehicles

3. 3
9.
Housing
Availability,
appliances,
repairs
10.
Natural
Environment
Climate,
natural
disasters
Source:
Mercer
Quality
Of
Living
Survey,
2015.
The
factors
that
affect
and
are
used
as
indicators
for
urban
quality
of
life
(UQoL)
reflect
socio-­‐economic
ideologies
the
most.
In
regards
to
employment
around
72%
of
people
aged
15-­‐64
have
a
paid
job,
which
is
above
the
OECD
average
of
65%.
This
then
reflects
the
average
household
net-­‐adjusted
disposable
income,
which
per
capita
is
at
USD
31,588
per
year
in
comparison
to
the
standard
of
USD
25,908
(Craddock
Murray
Neumann
Lawyers,
2014).
Australia’s
life
expectancy
is
approximately
82
years,
giving
two
more
years
than
the
average.
Australian
citizens
are
also
generally
more
satisfied
than
their
neighbours
with
a
7.3
grade
on
a
scale
of
0-­‐10,
once
again
ranking
higher
than
the
OECD
average
(OECD
Better
Life
Index,
2015).
Based
on
this
criteria
and
findings
Sydney
has
been
ranked
the
Australian
city
with
the
best
living
standards
as
it
is
ranked
ten
on
Mercer’s
list
(as
shown
in
Figure
1).
Following
that
Melbourne
is
ranked
at
16,
Perth
at
22,
Adelaide
at
27,
Canberra
at
30
and
Brisbane
at
37.
EIU
Liveability
Ranking:
In
comparison
to
Mercer’s
Index
the
EIU
Liveability
Ranking
judges
cities
on
30
different
factors
across
five
main
categories:
stability,
healthcare,
culture
&
environment,
education,
and
infrastructure
(The
Economist
Intelligence
Unit
Limited,
2014).
Figure
2
displays
the
rankings
that
the
top
ten
cities
have
within
each
category
giving
us
the
respective
total
of
the
most
liveable
cities.
Also
categories
aren’t
equally
weighted
within
this
survey,
which
could
be
a
reason
as
to
why
there
are
more
Australian
cities
in
the
top
ten
based
on
this
ranking
system.
Stability
holds
a
25%
weighting,
healthcare
–
20%,
culture
&
environment
–
25%,
education
–
10%,
and
infrastructure
–
20%.
This
is
a
clear
representation
of
what
the
Figure
1.
Source:
Mercer
Quality
of
Living
Index
(2015)

4. 4
Comparison:
Based
on
the
results
found
over
the
four
major
case
studies/reports
it
is
clear
that
the
subjective
indicators
are
similar.
As
mentioned
in
the
introduction
to
the
paper
the
rankings
of
different
categories
within
these
quality
of
life
indices
are
in
direct
correlation
to
an
‘urban
quality
of
life’
as
they
are
representative
of
what
it
means
to
be
in
a
liveable
city
of
high
standards.
Infrastructure
and
the
prevalence
of
environmental
benefits
and
locations
would
take
precedence
in
terms
of
an
urban
planning
approach.
Mercer’s
QoL
and
the
EIU
Liveability
Index
have
both
clearly
demonstrated
that
these
categories
are
of
upmost
importance
and
Australian
cities
have
managed
to
reach
a
level
that
is
beyond
satisfactory.
Future
Predictions:
Australians
as
a
collective
are
aiming
for
a
future
that
is
sustainable
and
self-­‐sufficient
(Australian
Academy
of
Science,
2015).
Since
Australia’s
population
is
predicted
to
increase
by
50-­‐100%
it
is
crucial
for
the
infrastructure,
education
system,
public
services
and
healthcare
to
keep
up
with
the
demand
while
protecting
the
environment
(Australian
Bureau
of
Statistics,
2015).
This
is
already
a
demand
that
is
struggling
to
be
met
regardless
of
population
increase
due
to
the
circumstances
that
place
environmental
concerns
second
to
economic.
In
order
for
Australia’s
urban
quality
of
living
to
stay
the
same,
or
preferably
continue
to
rise,
it
won’t
be
enough
for
the
government,
planners
and
society
to
continue
to
act
as
they
are
because
that
is
only
beneficial
for
today
and
not
tomorrow.
While
Australia
is
currently
ranked
amongst
the
top
cities
in
the
world
for
its
standard
of
living,
it
is
crucial
for
improvements
on
what
already
exists
in
a
positive
manner.
If
all
of
this
is
achieved
it
is
easy
for
Australian
cities
to
continue
to
be
amongst
the
highest
ranked
internationally.
However
over
time
it
is
possible
for
the
standards
of
living
to
change,
which
will
in
turn
alter
what
is
required
for
urban
quality.
Based
on
the
current
standards
it
is
very
likely
that
they
will
stay
among
the
top
twenty-­‐five
cities
in
the
world
but
it
is
impossible
to
predict
their
rankings
fifty
years
from
now
without
a
basic
outline
of
the
standards
that
would
need
to
be
met
Figure
2.
Economist
Intelligence
Unit’s
(EIU)
Liveability
Ranking
(2014)

5. 5
Personal
Perspective:
In
regards
to
the
research
that
has
been
conducted
and
how
accurately
it
represents
Australian
cities,
Brisbane
is
a
perfect
example.
While
it
is
not
within
the
top
ten
cities,
it
still
makes
the
top
25
locations
in
the
world
for
its
quality
of
life.
However
Brisbane
is
on
average
more
expensive
than
all
other
Australian
capitals,
apart
from
Sydney
(Wong,
2014).
What
makes
up
for
that
though
is
the
cost
of
living
as
a
whole
is
less
than
other
global
cities
(Queensland
Government
-­‐
Business
and
Industry
Portal,
2015).
Established
from
personal
experiences
Brisbane
in
general
is
a
rather
pleasurable
city
to
reside
in
as
all
basic
needs
are
met
to
a
standard
beyond
satisfactory.
There
is
always
room
for
improvement
however
and
criteria
such
as
public
transport
and
culture
&
environment
within
the
metropolis
aren’t
as
satisfactory
as
in
other
Australian
cities.
Regardless
Brisbane
has
improved
since
1998,
just
like
Australia
and
the
majority
of
the
world
in
the
hopes
of
achieving
the
subjective
notion
that
is
the
desired
urban
quality
of
life.

6. 6
Reference
List
• Australian
Academy
of
Science,
(2015).
Australia
2050.
[online]
Available
at:
https://www.science.org.au/publications/australia-­‐2050
[Accessed
13
May
2015].
• Australian
Bureau
of
Statistics,
(2015).
Population
Projections,
Australia,
2012
(base)
to
2101.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/3222.0main+features32012
%20(base)%20to%202101
[Accessed
15
May
2015].
• Craddock
Murray
Neumann
Lawyers,
(2014).
Australia
ranks
highly
for
quality
of
life.
[online]
CMN
Immigration
Law.
Available
at:
http://www.immigrationlaw.com.au/document-­‐78589/australia-­‐ranks-­‐highly-­‐
for-­‐quality-­‐of-­‐life
[Accessed
12
May
2015].
• Jericho,
G.
(2014).
UN
scores
Australia
high
for
quality
of
life
but
low
on
climate
change
progress.
The
Guardian.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2014/jul/28/un-­‐scores-­‐
australia-­‐high-­‐for-­‐quality-­‐of-­‐life-­‐but-­‐low-­‐on-­‐climate-­‐change-­‐progress
[Accessed
10
May
2015].
• Mercer,
(2015).
Vienna
tops
latest
Quality
of
Living
rankings.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.uk.mercer.com/newsroom/2015-­‐quality-­‐of-­‐living-­‐survey.html
[Accessed
10
May
2015].
• Myers,
D.
(1988)
Building
Knowledge
about
Quality
of
Life
for
Urban
Planning,
Journal
of
the
American
Planning
Association,
54:3,
347-­‐358.
• Psatha,
E.,
Deffner,
A.
and
Psycharis,
Y.
(2011)
Defining
the
quality
of
urban
life:
Which
factors
should
be
considered?,
ESRA
conference
papers,
European
Regional
Science
Association.
• OECD
Better
Life
Index,
(2015).
Australia.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/australia/
[Accessed
12
May
2015].
• Queensland
Government
-­‐
Business
and
Industry
Portal,
(2015).
Queensland's
idyllic
lifestyle.
[online]
Available
at:
https://www.business.qld.gov.au/invest/benefits-­‐business-­‐
queensland/queenslands-­‐idyllic-­‐lifestyle
[Accessed
17
May
2015].
• The
Economist
Intelligence
Unit
Limited,
(2014).
A
Summary
of
the
Liveability
Ranking
and
Overview.
August
2014.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.eiu.com/Handlers/WhitepaperHandler.ashx?fi=Liveability-­‐
rankings-­‐Promotional-­‐August-­‐
2014.pdf&mode=wp&campaignid=Liveability2014
[Accessed
13
May
2015].

7. 7
• UNDP,
(2015).
Human
Development
Reports.
[online]
Available
at:
http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/AUS
[Accessed
10
May
2015].
• Wong,
C.
(2014).
Sydney
11th-­‐priciest
city
in
world,
according
to
crowdsourced
comparison.
Brisbane
Times.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/nsw/sydney-­‐11thpriciest-­‐city-­‐in-­‐world-­‐
according-­‐to-­‐crowdsourced-­‐comparison-­‐20140105-­‐30bwf.html
[Accessed
16
May
2015].