[Siuchingach]

Mercer, a consulting company, ranks annually 215 cities around the world for their quality of living. Here are the highlights from the 2007 Quality of Living Survey.

Here is Mercer's ranking Top 20 for the EU :

1) Vienna
2) Düsseldorf
3) Frankfurt
4) Munich
5) Copenhagen
6) Amsterdam
7) Brussels
8) Berlin
9) Luxembourg
10) Stockholm
11) Nuremberg
12) Hamburg
13) Dublin
14) Helsinki
15) Paris
16) Lyon
17) London
18) Barcelona
19) Madrid
20) Lisbon

Like for ranking regarding the cost of life (remember how Tokyo always outranks London !), I am always surprised (not to say appalled) by the results of the survey. The rankings are clearly based on raw number and people who make them obviously haven't lived in the cities in the list before ranking them.

It is time they realise that quality of life (and living) does not depend as much on GDP per capita and sanitation as on the beauty of the place, the quality of the food, the character of the people, and the comfort of the climate. Unfortunately it is impossible to have statistics for the average level of beauty of a city and or the average taste of its restaurants. Hence the aberration of the results.

How can a city as ugly and unpleasant as Düsseldorf be 2nd for the EU, and dreamlike places like Nice, Florence or Rome not even make the top 50 ? I have been to Düsseldorf, and I wouldn't even recommend it as a place to visit or stay overnight. The place is just so depressing; I can't understand how someone would want to put it in the top 100 for Europe.

How comes that Northern Europe, where the weather sucks big time, outranks all the cities in Mediterranean Europe, where life is so comfortable that millionaires and stars hurry to buy a second home there ? Italian and Southern French cities don't even make the top 50.

Then you have cities where the quality of living is fairly similar everywhere (e.g. Tokyo, Luxembourg), and others where the gap between rich and poor neighbourhood is so huge that it would require completely separate rankings (e.g. Paris, Brussels, London, New York).

Mercer's ranking was made for expats, so things like education or social security don't matter, while the attractiveness of the place does. If a city has strong socio-economic divisions, it is most likely than expats will choose to live in the good part of the city, not in the slums. So the ranking should be based on this kind of neighbourhood and leave out the rest.

Paris wouldn't make the top 100 if the lower class banlieues where taken into account in the average. Brussels certainly wouldn't be 7th in the EU. These rankings are probably based on the best neighbourhoods in these cities. But then, how comes London is not in the top 5 ?

However you look at it, this ranking is strange. Among the cities listed, I have lived (or stayed long enough to know the city well) in London, Brussels, Paris, Berlin, Barcelona, Florence, Rome, and Tokyo. I would rank them like this for the quality of living :

1) London
2) Rome
3) Brussels
4) Paris
5) Florence
6) Tokyo
7) Berlin
8) Barcelona


They ranked it :

1) Brussels
2) Berlin
3) Paris
4) Tokyo
5) London
6) Barcelona

- Rome and Florence not in top 50.

They explain the criteria they take into account here

For my rating, I removed "Schools and education" and split "Socio-cultural environment" between "political environment" (censorship, etc.) and recreation (cultural life). I also added 2 new criteria : beauty & atmosphere, and pollution & cleanliness.

A. Political and social environment

I don't think there is a big difference in political stability, crime, censorship, limitations on personal freedom between these cities. Tokyo may have a bit less crime, but a more stifled political environment.

B. Economic environment

It's easier to find a job in London or Tokyo than in Florence or Rome. Banks are definitely better in Belgium than in France, Italy or Japan.

C. Health and sanitation

Medical services are best in continental Europe, then in Britain, and Japan comes last.

D. Public services and transportation

The best metro is Tokyo's, the worst in Brussels. But buses in Tokyo suck, while those in Brussels (+ tramway) are ok. Traffic congestion and pollution are worst in Paris and best in Tokyo. Florence does not have a metro or tramways and suffers a lot from traffic jams (narrow streets) and parking problems.

E. Recreation

Cultural life and recreational activities are obvioiusly better in London and Paris (then Tokyo) than in smaller cities, but all the above fare quite well in this regard.

Restaurants are worst in Barcelona, then Berlin. Paris and Tokyo are probably the world's two best cities for food, but Brussels, London, are also great. Rome and Florence are good, but lack diversity.

F. Consumer goods

Obviously best in the three metropolis : London, Paris and Tokyo. Brussels being so cosmopolitan, everything can be found. Less choice in Mediterranean cities. Prices are the highest in London, followed by Paris. It is cheapest in Barcelona, then Berlin.

G. Housing

Sucks big time in Tokyo and East Berlin. Some of the best houses in the world are to be found in London, Paris, Florence and Rome, but prices go up accordingly. Brussels has one of the best quality/price ratio.

H. Natural environment

The climate is best in the Mediterranean, worst in Tokyo (muggy summers, chilly winters). Paris, London and Brussels are similar. Berlin a bit less good (colder winters). Natural disasters are only a problem in Tokyo (earthquakes, typhoons). Tokyo is also the least green city. The greenest is Brussels (over 50% of greenery), followed by Berlin.

I. Beauty & atmosphere

Tokyo is the ugliest, but has "sexy" (although neurotic) atmosphere. European cities listed are very beautiful, except Berlin, Brussels and Barcelona. East Berlin is absolutely ugly. Most of the city was razed in 1945, so there isn't many historic buildings left. Brussels has some beautiful neighbourhood and monuments, but a lot of ugly parts too. Barcelona is ok, but not exceptionally beautiful compared to Paris or Rome.

The atmosphere is warmer and more relax in Italy and Spain. Parisian can be a P.I.T.A. (rude, arrogant, dangerous drivers...). Brussels can be very friendly and polite, but it tends to be hard to get into a social circle for outsiders. Barcelona is certainly friendlier for (Catalan-speaking) Spaniards than foreigners. The most welcoming cities would be London, Florence, and Rome.

J. Pollution, noise and cleanliness

No big winner here, except maybe Tokyo for cleanliness and air pollution.
Mediterranean cities are more noisy than average (honking, late partying, scooters everywhere). Paris has too much traffic, making it too noisy and polluted. Central Paris and Brussels hav notoriously dirty pavements (not the nicer neighbourhoods though).


My scores from 0 (worst) to 5 (best) for the 9 above citeria for the 8 cities (A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I/J) + overall rating :


1) London : 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 5 + 2 = 40/50
2) Rome : 4 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 2 = 36/50
2) Brussels : 4 + 4 + 5 + 3 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 3 + 2 = 36/50
4) Paris : 4 + 4 + 5 + 4 + 5 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 1 = 35/50
5) Florence : 4 + 3 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 5 + 2 = 34/50
6) Tokyo : 4 + 4 + 2 + 5 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 4 = 32/50
6) Berlin : 4 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 4 + 4 + 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 = 32/50
8) Barcelona : 4 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 3 + 2 = 31/50 View more random threads same category:

• What is your favourite European region for...
• U.S. Gov't. jobs in Europe
• Places to see in Europe
• Finding out wire fees
• Best European city for quality of living ?
• Uncanny similarities between cities on the...