News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.7K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.9K     0 

Okay so far I've done scores for the following countries:
- Canada
- USA
- Australia
- New Zealand
- Mexico
- Brazil
- Netherlands
- Austria
- Spain
- UK
- Germany
- Italy
- Sweden
- Finland
- Norway
- Switzerland
- Croatia
- Poland
- Japan
- Singapore
- Thailand
- Malaysia

I'm only going to include the top 50 and some dishonorable mentions (Bottom 10):

Dishonorable Mentions:
167: Tijuana, Mexico | 43.69181818
168: Cuernavaca, Mexico | 43.59636364
169: Torreon, Mexico | 43.05090909
170: Dallas-Fort Worth, USA | 42.73727273
171: Kansas City, USA | 42.06454545
172: Houston, USA | 41.98727273
173: Juarez, Mexico | 40.77454545
174: Las Vegas, USA | 40.25272727
175: Birmingham, USA | 38.48636364
174: Mexicali, Mexico | 37.24363636
173: Oklahoma City, USA | 35.23363636

Idk how but OKC is still just that awful. Interesting to note that the bottom 10 cities are all in the USA and Mexico, from very similar regions as well.

Okay, now the good cities:

1: Vienna, Austria | 80.86636364
2: Zurich, Switzerland | 80.53090909
3: Paris, France | 79.31363636
4: Sao Paulo, Brazil | 77.78727273
5: Amsterdam, Netherlands | 77.31909091
6: The Hague, Netherlands | 76.54363636
7: Barcelona, Spain | 75.8
8: Copenhagen, Denmark | 75.15454545
9: Berlin, Germany | 74.11181818
10: Melbourne, Australia | 73.39
11: Oslo, Norway | 73.18
12: Valencia, Spain | 73.10090909
13: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil | 72.92818182
14: Lisbon, Portugal | 72.42818182
15: Madrid, Spain | 72.30636364
16: London, UK | 71.40181818
17: Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Japan | 71.38090909
18: Tokyo, Japan | 71.34454545
19: Montreal, Canada | 70.15272727
20: Munich, Germany | 70.14181818
21: Vancouver, Canada | 69.72818182
22: Hamburg, Germany | 69.61090909
23: Milan, Italy | 69.40272727
24: Turin, Italy | 69.37636364
25: Stockholm, Sweden | 69.11545455
26: Manchester, UK | 68.63545455
27: Porto, Portugal | 68.51272727
28: Rotterdam, Netherlands | 68.44909091
29: San Francisco, USA | 68.29545455
30. Krakow, Poland | 68.18454545
31: Washington, USA | 68.03545455
32: Sydney, Australia | 67.89727273
33: Toronto, Canada | 67.84636364
34: Brisbane, Australia | 67.81636364
35: Seville, Spain | 67.65818182
36: Zagreb, Croatia | 67.61727273
37: New York City, USA | 67.48818182
38: Prague, Czechia | 67.41181818
39: Frankfurt, Germany | 67.35636364
40: Helsinki, Finland | 67.31818182
41: Singapore, Singapore | 67.28
42: Seattle, USA | 67.27454545
43: Bordeaux, France | 67.17363636
44: Lyon, France | 67.15454545
45: Bangkok, Thailand | 66.83454545
46: Gothenburg, Sweden | 66.74909091
47: Auckland, New Zealand | 66.69
48: Nagoya, Japan | 66.60727273
49: Belo Horizonte, Brazil | 66.40272727
50: Warsaw, Poland | 66.36

I think my two biggest surprises are definitely how Sao Paulo got up to 4th and how Singapore is down at 41st. Sao Paulo profits a lot from its excellent climate, transit system and walkability, along with being unaffordable. Singapore is very expensive and has poor bike infrastructure, which are probably why it fell so far.

Edmonton has dropped down to 118th, between Sao Luis and Teresina, both in Brazil.
 
Last edited:
Oh, thank goodness, Lord of All Things City, Ted is here to provide his much wanted opinion, and has once again chose to say it in the rudest, least productive way he possible can.

I worked hard on that, and its based largely on factors that are either objective or have some kind of methodology to them (average salary, cost of living, homelessness, transit score, walk score, etc). I never claimed it was the actual objective Best Cities, it's just the ones that came out on top in my list, which is entirely incomplete and missing cities all over the place. It's also just for fun, and I owned a lot of the issues with it in an earlier post.

If you were nice about it, and maybe gave specific criticism I could implement to make the metric better in the future, I might be inclined to listen to what you have to say. However, as it stands I'm not willing to do any of that, because you chose to be condescending and rude for seemingly no reason.

If you're disappointed specifically in Edmonton's placement, I assure it's because of 2 main factors: 1 WalkScore really doesn't like Edmonton for some reason, I think it hasn't updated it's data for Edmonton in a long time. If WalkScore came back here and updated their data, I almost guarantee Edmonton would be higher. The second factor is winter climate, for obvious reasons.

I'm open to productive criticism and if any one has any, I would very much like to hear it. Open to improving the list in any way I can.
 
Okay so far I've done scores for the following countries:
- Canada
- USA
- Australia
- New Zealand
- Mexico
- Brazil
- Netherlands
- Austria
- Spain
- UK
- Germany
- Italy
- Sweden
- Finland
- Norway
- Switzerland
- Croatia
- Poland
- Japan
- Singapore
- Thailand
- Malaysia

I'm only going to include the top 50 and some dishonorable mentions (Bottom 10):

Dishonorable Mentions:
167: Tijuana, Mexico | 43.69181818
168: Cuernavaca, Mexico | 43.59636364
169: Torreon, Mexico | 43.05090909
170: Dallas-Fort Worth, USA | 42.73727273
171: Kansas City, USA | 42.06454545
172: Houston, USA | 41.98727273
173: Juarez, Mexico | 40.77454545
174: Las Vegas, USA | 40.25272727
175: Birmingham, USA | 38.48636364
174: Mexicali, Mexico | 37.24363636
173: Oklahoma City, USA | 35.23363636

Idk how but OKC is still just that awful. Interesting to note that the bottom 10 cities are all in the USA and Mexico, from very similar regions as well.

Okay, now the good cities:

1: Vienna, Austria | 80.86636364
2: Zurich, Switzerland | 80.53090909
3: Paris, France | 79.31363636
4: Sao Paulo, Brazil | 77.78727273
5: Amsterdam, Netherlands | 77.31909091
6: The Hague, Netherlands | 76.54363636
7: Barcelona, Spain | 75.8
8: Copenhagen, Denmark | 75.15454545
9: Berlin, Germany | 74.11181818
10: Melbourne, Australia | 73.39
11: Oslo, Norway | 73.18
12: Valencia, Spain | 73.10090909
13: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil | 72.92818182
14: Lisbon, Portugal | 72.42818182
15: Madrid, Spain | 72.30636364
16: London, UK | 71.40181818
17: Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Japan | 71.38090909
18: Tokyo, Japan | 71.34454545
19: Montreal, Canada | 70.15272727
20: Munich, Germany | 70.14181818
21: Vancouver, Canada | 69.72818182
22: Hamburg, Germany | 69.61090909
23: Milan, Italy | 69.40272727
24: Turin, Italy | 69.37636364
25: Stockholm, Sweden | 69.11545455
26: Manchester, UK | 68.63545455
27: Porto, Portugal | 68.51272727
28: Rotterdam, Netherlands | 68.44909091
29: San Francisco, USA | 68.29545455
30. Krakow, Poland | 68.18454545
31: Washington, USA | 68.03545455
32: Sydney, Australia | 67.89727273
33: Toronto, Canada | 67.84636364
34: Brisbane, Australia | 67.81636364
35: Seville, Spain | 67.65818182
36: Zagreb, Croatia | 67.61727273
37: New York City, USA | 67.48818182
38: Prague, Czechia | 67.41181818
39: Frankfurt, Germany | 67.35636364
40: Helsinki, Finland | 67.31818182
41: Singapore, Singapore | 67.28
42: Seattle, USA | 67.27454545
43: Bordeaux, France | 67.17363636
44: Lyon, France | 67.15454545
45: Bangkok, Thailand | 66.83454545
46: Gothenburg, Sweden | 66.74909091
47: Auckland, New Zealand | 66.69
48: Nagoya, Japan | 66.60727273
49: Belo Horizonte, Brazil | 66.40272727
50: Warsaw, Poland | 66.36

I think my two biggest surprises are definitely how Sao Paulo got up to 4th and how Singapore is down at 41st. Sao Paulo profits a lot from its excellent climate, transit system and walkability, along with being unaffordable. Singapore is very expensive and has poor bike infrastructure, which are probably why it fell so far.

Edmonton has dropped down to 118th, between Sao Luis and Teresina, both in Brazil.

Woah this is so cool! I love how much effort you put into this and I find some of the rankings really interesting, especially with Sao Paulo at #4.

Not Oklahoma City keeping its rightful place at the bottom lol 😭
 
Worthless survey.

Y'know what Ted? No one asked. That kind of negativity isn't needed or welcome, and it contributes to a negative atmosphere on this website. Give some constructive criticism or don't say anything at all.
 
No one has to ask as this is an open forum as I am reminded from time to time. And I paid little attention as to who posted the City ranking and I had no idea that it was actually authored by @erudyk_29 (for whom I have both respect for taking time to put his ideas forth -- I particularly like reading his takes on the Oilers). I do know from past posts that both you @Platinum107 and @erudyk_29 are 1st (or maybe 2nd) year students at UofA in Planning disciplines and I respect your opinions and efforts at elucidating thought in that area. I actually looked at the rankings and it would certainly have helped with a Cities scoring matrix so that one could discern what was weighting the ranking and to what degree. Before I get into specific concerns with the rankings (as I see it), let me apologize to @erudyk_29 for leaving a terse off-hand comment. Here's where I think the study falls short:
-- Vienna is certainly a culture-rich City and it has a picturesque setting and it is well manicured and clean, but does that afford it a ranking above unique cities that are less uniform culturally and have more to offer across the board to a broader segment of population? I could see Barcelona, NYC, London, and Singapore all offering more in terms of lifestyle amenities to a broader group of people.
-- Cities like Las Vegas have a very strong appeal to a select group of world travelers (I like to go there just to marvel at the latest in architecture and interior design; not interested in gambling) and -- as with Orlando as well -- there is a level of un-manicured-ness that draws people to look at "the bent-back tulips to see how the other half lives" (John Lennon) that is appealing on an almost unmeasurable metric.
-- the ranking also seems to ignore a hard-to-quantify measurement that is wrapped up in "potential" -- some of the top-ranked cities are just "coasting", glory days behind them; cities (yes, like Edmonton) have extreme amounts of "potential" and in those sorts of Cities there is a level of experimentation that defies their standing in a world order.
Anyway, that is a brief glimpse as to why I see little value in your ranking @erudyk_29 (for me) -- cities that are more on the edge I find far more interesting; the staid urban-centers are far less appealing. I had a high-school art teacher when giving me a sketching assignment say to me... go down the back alleys and you will find way more interest than the more manicured front-side of any given street.
 
No one has to ask as this is an open forum as I am reminded from time to time. And I paid little attention as to who posted the City ranking and I had no idea that it was actually authored by @erudyk_29 (for whom I have both respect for taking time to put his ideas forth -- I particularly like reading his takes on the Oilers). I do know from past posts that both you @Platinum107 and @erudyk_29 are 1st (or maybe 2nd) year students at UofA in Planning disciplines and I respect your opinions and efforts at elucidating thought in that area. I actually looked at the rankings and it would certainly have helped with a Cities scoring matrix so that one could discern what was weighting the ranking and to what degree. Before I get into specific concerns with the rankings (as I see it), let me apologize to @erudyk_29 for leaving a terse off-hand comment. Here's where I think the study falls short:
-- Vienna is certainly a culture-rich City and it has a picturesque setting and it is well manicured and clean, but does that afford it a ranking above unique cities that are less uniform culturally and have more to offer across the board to a broader segment of population? I could see Barcelona, NYC, London, and Singapore all offering more in terms of lifestyle amenities to a broader group of people.
-- Cities like Las Vegas have a very strong appeal to a select group of world travelers (I like to go there just to marvel at the latest in architecture and interior design; not interested in gambling) and -- as with Orlando as well -- there is a level of un-manicured-ness that draws people to look at "the bent-back tulips to see how the other half lives" (John Lennon) that is appealing on an almost unmeasurable metric.
-- the ranking also seems to ignore a hard-to-quantify measurement that is wrapped up in "potential" -- some of the top-ranked cities are just "coasting", glory days behind them; cities (yes, like Edmonton) have extreme amounts of "potential" and in those sorts of Cities there is a level of experimentation that defies their standing in a world order.
Anyway, that is a brief glimpse as to why I see little value in your ranking @erudyk_29 (for me) -- cities that are more on the edge I find far more interesting; the staid urban-centers are far less appealing. I had a high-school art teacher when giving me a sketching assignment say to me... go down the back alleys and you will find way more interest than the more manicured front-side of any given street.
Understood, and apologies for the over zealous response.

The list is primarily looking at what cities would be the best to live in. With emphasis on strong urbanist, economic, geographic and social metrics. If I were looking at what cities I would rather travel to the list would be completely different. Likewise, if I was arranging these cities based on what I personally think are the best, I would place Paris at number 1, as it is my favorite city I've ever been to. Followed by Singapore as another city I've visited that was truly a great experience. I wanted to get past my personal biases, while still taking some more personal metrics into account, though giving them less importance.

I guess all that to say that, what I value most in a city are livability factors like: how easy is it to get around by walking, biking and using transit, along with whether living there is going to bankrupt me, and if the climate is nice.

So yes, Vienna may not be the absolute most interesting city if you're looking for a grungier, urban feeling to travel to, but in terms of just being a really nice (and shockingly inexpensive) place to live, I think it's very fair to have it at the top of the list. If you're a Classical music enthusiast like me, it's just about the best place in the world for that. I personally would put Paris before it, though a visit to Vienna, potentially coming summer 2025 may change that, as I've never been there.

When it comes to travel, I have long wanted to visit Medellin, Columbia. It seems like an extremely interesting city, that has done a lot with very little in recent years. It is probably one of the most improved cities in the world in the past few years. Going from the capital of the Columbian drug trade and Pablo Escobar's drug empire, and being literally the most dangerous city in the entire world, to an up and coming city that's overcoming its historic, geographic and economic constraints in a matter of a couple decades.

I definitely understand the importance of factors like you mention. When places feel overly sterile, it can be tiresome. This is why it pained me to see Vancouver ahead of Toronto on the list. I personally have the strong opinion, that while Vancouver is very nice, it lacks the je ne sais quoi of Toronto, thanks to its overly sanitized, almost suburban feeling downtown residential towers. Toronto definitely has those too, but they're more integrated into the existing urban fabric and add to the existing vibes, rather than transposing new ones that feel stunningly suburban for being technically, downtown residences. I don't think it's fair to put that same idea on Vienna though, it is a very historic city, with a ton of history, culture and character.
 
One more thing -- a "take it or leave it" -- I would suggest tossing the word "nice" from your vocabulary -- it is a platitudinal word that doesn't really mean anything -- it is a nice day (binary: the opposite meaning "awful" -- another platitudinal word); he or she is a nice person; I had a nice time; it was nice meeting you. Nice is the only nice city that I know of -- why do you say that Ted? because it has a Nice climate, it is in a Nice country, it has Nice people who, when I was last there, treated me Nice.
 
Last edited:
Okay so far I've done scores for the following countries:
- Canada
- USA
- Australia
- New Zealand
- Mexico
- Brazil
- Netherlands
- Austria
- Spain
- UK
- Germany
- Italy
- Sweden
- Finland
- Norway
- Switzerland
- Croatia
- Poland
- Japan
- Singapore
- Thailand
- Malaysia

I'm only going to include the top 50 and some dishonorable mentions (Bottom 10):

Dishonorable Mentions:
167: Tijuana, Mexico | 43.69181818
168: Cuernavaca, Mexico | 43.59636364
169: Torreon, Mexico | 43.05090909
170: Dallas-Fort Worth, USA | 42.73727273
171: Kansas City, USA | 42.06454545
172: Houston, USA | 41.98727273
173: Juarez, Mexico | 40.77454545
174: Las Vegas, USA | 40.25272727
175: Birmingham, USA | 38.48636364
174: Mexicali, Mexico | 37.24363636
173: Oklahoma City, USA | 35.23363636

Idk how but OKC is still just that awful. Interesting to note that the bottom 10 cities are all in the USA and Mexico, from very similar regions as well.

Okay, now the good cities:

1: Vienna, Austria | 80.86636364
2: Zurich, Switzerland | 80.53090909
3: Paris, France | 79.31363636
4: Sao Paulo, Brazil | 77.78727273
5: Amsterdam, Netherlands | 77.31909091
6: The Hague, Netherlands | 76.54363636
7: Barcelona, Spain | 75.8
8: Copenhagen, Denmark | 75.15454545
9: Berlin, Germany | 74.11181818
10: Melbourne, Australia | 73.39
11: Oslo, Norway | 73.18
12: Valencia, Spain | 73.10090909
13: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil | 72.92818182
14: Lisbon, Portugal | 72.42818182
15: Madrid, Spain | 72.30636364
16: London, UK | 71.40181818
17: Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Japan | 71.38090909
18: Tokyo, Japan | 71.34454545
19: Montreal, Canada | 70.15272727
20: Munich, Germany | 70.14181818
21: Vancouver, Canada | 69.72818182
22: Hamburg, Germany | 69.61090909
23: Milan, Italy | 69.40272727
24: Turin, Italy | 69.37636364
25: Stockholm, Sweden | 69.11545455
26: Manchester, UK | 68.63545455
27: Porto, Portugal | 68.51272727
28: Rotterdam, Netherlands | 68.44909091
29: San Francisco, USA | 68.29545455
30. Krakow, Poland | 68.18454545
31: Washington, USA | 68.03545455
32: Sydney, Australia | 67.89727273
33: Toronto, Canada | 67.84636364
34: Brisbane, Australia | 67.81636364
35: Seville, Spain | 67.65818182
36: Zagreb, Croatia | 67.61727273
37: New York City, USA | 67.48818182
38: Prague, Czechia | 67.41181818
39: Frankfurt, Germany | 67.35636364
40: Helsinki, Finland | 67.31818182
41: Singapore, Singapore | 67.28
42: Seattle, USA | 67.27454545
43: Bordeaux, France | 67.17363636
44: Lyon, France | 67.15454545
45: Bangkok, Thailand | 66.83454545
46: Gothenburg, Sweden | 66.74909091
47: Auckland, New Zealand | 66.69
48: Nagoya, Japan | 66.60727273
49: Belo Horizonte, Brazil | 66.40272727
50: Warsaw, Poland | 66.36

I think my two biggest surprises are definitely how Sao Paulo got up to 4th and how Singapore is down at 41st. Sao Paulo profits a lot from its excellent climate, transit system and walkability, along with being unaffordable. Singapore is very expensive and has poor bike infrastructure, which are probably why it fell so far.

Edmonton has dropped down to 118th, between Sao Luis and Teresina, both in Brazil.
Unlike some of us, I am not surprised by Sao Paulo's position in the ranking, considering the criteria used. It is an impressive city, with amazing active transportation and public transit, and relatively affordable, especially considering other cities of similar size.
I will point out, however, that if you are including countries where safety is a major concern (mostly in developing countries) you should include that as a criteria in this ranking. Cities like the Brazilian and Mexican ones can be incredible places, but it is really hard to actually take advantage of all they offer when you have to deal with REALLY high levels of crime. In general, we have way more information (and general knowledge about the reality) of cities in developed countries, so it makes it a lot harder to capture the reality of these places, where some of the standards are so much different from Europe, North America and Oceania (and even Asia, in a sense).
For instance, specifically in the case of Brazil, of which I can talk with a lot more comfort, I'll point it that the two cities that "sandwich" Edmonton, for example, are FAR from being considered good cities in Brazil, for a myriad of reasons. Any ranking of cities made in Brazil would probably have these two very close to the bottom of the list, if we're only talking major cities. I also believe that you might've not been able to capture information for cities other than the state capitals, in Brazil, which kind of skews the data even more, since in the south and southeast of the country there are many mid-sized to large cities (500k-2M) that should fare way higher on this list than some cities you have there, but are hardly advertised in any shape or form.
I also have a small beef with the weather component: extreme heat is JUST AS BAD as extreme cold. Just as many people die from dehydration and heatstroke in some places as people who suffer from frostbite here. I assume that, in your criteria, climate was one of the reasons that put some cities higher up on the list, but I would consider using a temperature range. Also, some of these places you listed suffer from very severe weather events (and some of these are not your typical, like hurricanes, but big floods, etc) that should maybe be considered in the analysis.
 
Unlike some of us, I am not surprised by Sao Paulo's position in the ranking, considering the criteria used. It is an impressive city, with amazing active transportation and public transit, and relatively affordable, especially considering other cities of similar size.
I will point out, however, that if you are including countries where safety is a major concern (mostly in developing countries) you should include that as a criteria in this ranking. Cities like the Brazilian and Mexican ones can be incredible places, but it is really hard to actually take advantage of all they offer when you have to deal with REALLY high levels of crime. In general, we have way more information (and general knowledge about the reality) of cities in developed countries, so it makes it a lot harder to capture the reality of these places, where some of the standards are so much different from Europe, North America and Oceania (and even Asia, in a sense).
For instance, specifically in the case of Brazil, of which I can talk with a lot more comfort, I'll point it that the two cities that "sandwich" Edmonton, for example, are FAR from being considered good cities in Brazil, for a myriad of reasons. Any ranking of cities made in Brazil would probably have these two very close to the bottom of the list, if we're only talking major cities. I also believe that you might've not been able to capture information for cities other than the state capitals, in Brazil, which kind of skews the data even more, since in the south and southeast of the country there are many mid-sized to large cities (500k-2M) that should fare way higher on this list than some cities you have there, but are hardly advertised in any shape or form.
I also have a small beef with the weather component: extreme heat is JUST AS BAD as extreme cold. Just as many people die from dehydration and heatstroke in some places as people who suffer from frostbite here. I assume that, in your criteria, climate was one of the reasons that put some cities higher up on the list, but I would consider using a temperature range. Also, some of these places you listed suffer from very severe weather events (and some of these are not your typical, like hurricanes, but big floods, etc) that should maybe be considered in the analysis.
Thanks @ChazYEG,

I was really going in blind with a lot of the Latin American Cities as regrettably, I'm only really familiar with the big ones, especially in Brazil. I would say I sort of know what's up in Rio, Sao Paulo, Brasilia and maybe like Manaus, Recife and Salvador. Outside of those more famous ones, I'm very unfamiliar. I'm not necessarily surprised that Sao Paulo is high on the list, I agree with you that it is a great city with great transport and walkability and such, I'm more surprised it beat out heavy hitters like Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, etc. I agree with you, now that I have expanded the list to include countries where safety and crime is a major concern, it is definitely an important factor. I'm just not sure the best way to do it, every jurisdiction collects that type of data differently, and this can lead to major inconsistencies. I didn't include crime and safety concerns in the initial list because for a number of reasons (heterogenous distribution across urban areas, generally every city in the initial survey is pretty safe (all in Canada and US)), I didn't feel it was a necessary thing to keep track of. If anyone can think of a really good way to track those type of stats that isn't going to have major issues when comparing across jurisdictions, I would be eternally grateful. Maybe the Canadian Foreign Office travel risk map?

Another problem is that to track income, I used "average income", which was substantially higher for Latin American cities than the stat I should have been looking at "most typical income". I stuck with average income for consistencies sake, however I've already filled in nearly 200 of those statistics using "average". I thought I would account for that inequality by using the stat that measures inequality (Gini Coefficient). This would even things out a little bit more.

My methodology when it comes to climate is looking at the hottest and coldest months and looking at how close or far the average temp is to 17 degrees Celsius. This generally mean daytime highs in the mid to low 20s, which I consider to be the best temperature range. Any temperature higher or lower than that 17 degree threshold loses points. Then a score is assigned based for winter and summer climate.

So the cities who've scored the highest overall on climate are generally either temperate climate climate cities, or high altitude tropical cities, both of which retain that roughly 17 degree average temp for the longest parts of the year.

CDMX, Medellin, San Diego, San Francisco and Melbourne are all examples of cities that did very well on climate score.

The climate score generally favors temperate cities. It punishes cold weather the hardest (like winter climate gets a 15 and below out of 100 if average winter temperature drops below -10 degrees C, like Edmonton), however if the city has an average summer time temperature of 30-35 plus degrees (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Mexicali), they suffer quite a bit as well, and get similarily low scores. Tropical cities seem to hover around an average temperature of 25 degrees at lower altitudes which is hotter than I like for the survey, but isn't hot enough to make it lose a ton of points due to extreme heat, unlike the desert cities, though humidity does also play a factor there, maybe I should revise with humidity in mind.

I also did track natural disasters by referencing each country's respective disaster risk map. Brazil in general seemed to be pretty disaster safe, with not too many earthquakes, fires and hurricanes. Obviously there are issues, but it didn't seem as pronounced as the other places I looked, like Mexico and the USA, which both have combinations of earthquakes, fires, tornadoes, wildfires, etc. Floods, however did not seem to be covered too much in these maps, maybe I should adjust with this in mind.

Thanks for your input, definitely a lot to think about.
 
If anyone can think of a really good way to track those type of stats that isn't going to have major issues when comparing across jurisdictions, I would be eternally grateful. Maybe the Canadian Foreign Office travel risk map?
I would look at the indexes for high severity crimes (murders, kidnappings, etc...). Most places tend to track these similarly (murder rate/100k/year is a very standard measurement, as well as sever crime/100k/year). This will likely give at least some weight to crime and safety i the list. For example, I know that Sao Paulo's murders/100k is around 11~12/100k, which is surprisingly safe for such a large city in Brazil, but you compare it to Edmonton's ~2/100k, or NYC's ~5/100k, it gives a very good understanding of how much more dangerous Sao Paulo is, if you consider that Edmonton is perceived as a very dangerous city for Canadian standards, and NYC for US standards.

I'm more surprised it beat out heavy hitters like Amsterdam, Barcelona, Copenhagen, etc.
I believe it stems a lot from the general lack of awareness regarding developing countries' cities. If you take crime aside, Sao Paulo is a much more vibrant city, and a much hotter cultural hotspot, than any of these cities you mentioned. It IS a heavy hitter in its own right, and for what it counts, it is the biggest cultural and economic hub in Latin America, as well as the epicentre of Portuguese-speaking culture, nowadays.

I thought I would account for that inequality by using the stat that measures inequality (Gini Coefficient). This would even things out a little bit more.
Using Gini is an interesting way of balancing things out. You can also use median income, which is, by virtue, a better measurement than average income, as it leaves out the outliers. Maybe a combination of both?

The climate score generally favors temperate cities. It punishes cold weather the hardest (like winter climate gets a 15 and below out of 100 if average winter temperature drops below -10 degrees C, like Edmonton), however if the city has an average summer time temperature of 30-35 plus degrees (Phoenix, Las Vegas, Mexicali), they suffer quite a bit as well, and get similarily low scores.
though humidity does also play a factor there, maybe I should revise with humidity in mind.
The severe punishment on colder climates might have a slight bias. We tend to overblow our own experiences, for bad or for worse. From experience, and physics, living in a consistently colder weather for longer periods is way more manageable than the opposite. You can always layer up to get warmer, and generating heat is substantially easier than removing it. An example is: if you have trouble with your furnace and are really desperate to get warm, there are TONS of stuff you can burn to generate heat, but if you're living in 40+ degrees and your AC doesn't work, there is absolutely NOTHING you can do that will counter that heat. When you add to that how much more expensive it is, especially for developing countries, to maintain AC running 24/7 for months on end, the situation can get quite dire. Maybe you can think of an adjustment to your scale, so that cold winters don't get as severely punished, for example.
Considering humidity is also a good point, on both ends of the spectrum, and for its positive and negative impacts.

. Brazil in general seemed to be pretty disaster safe, with not too many earthquakes, fires and hurricanes.
Floods, however did not seem to be covered too much in these maps, maybe I should adjust with this in mind.
Brazil is, generally. a fairly disaster-free country, if we're thinking out "typical" disasters, but summer floods, especially in the mountain areas usually claim as many, if not more, lives than hurricanes and tornadoes to in most of the countries in this list, every single years. The financial impact of these is also off the charts, as sometimes cities like Rio and Sao Paulo come to a complete standstill for days due to these. I am fairly confident that other developing countries suffer from similar issues, that tend to go unnoticed by people in developed countries.
 
Alright so after input from @ChazYEG, I've updated the rankings with new metrics accounting for murder rate per 100k, inequality (Gini Coefficient) and I've also added regional HDI (Human Development Index):

I've also added new countries and the list now consists of:
- Canada
- USA
- Mexico
- Colombia
- Brazil
- Argentina
- Chile
- Portugal
- Spain
- France
- United Kingdom
- Norway
- Sweden
- Finland
- Germany
- Denmark
- Netherlands
- Switzerland
- Poland
- Czechia
- Austria
- Italy
- Croatia
- Greece
- Turkiye
- Romania
- Hungary
- Serbia
- Morocco
- United Arab Emirates
- South Africa
- Thailand
- Malaysia
- Singapore
- Japan
- South Korea

With the following countries currently in the works:
- Ecuador
- Bulgaria
- Belgium

Here are the new top 50:

1. Vienna, Austria
2. Zurich, Switzerland
3. Paris, France
4. Amsterdam, Netherlands
5. The Hague, Netherlands
6. Copenhagen, Denmark
7. Barcelona, Spain
8. Berlin, Germany
9. Sao Paulo, Brazil
10. Oslo, Norway
11. Melbourne, Australia
12. Valencia, Spain
13. Madrid, Spain
14. Lisbon, Portugal
15. London, England
16. Tokyo, Japan
17. Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Japan
18. Munich, Germany
19. Montreal, Canada
20. Hamburg, Germany
21. Stockholm, Sweden
22. Vancouver, Canada
23. Milan, Italy
24. Rotterdam, Netherlands
25. Turin, Italy
26. Manchester, England
27. Prague, Czechia
28. Krakow, Poland
29. Sydney, Australia
30. Toronto, Canada
31. Helsinki, Finland
32. Brisbane, Australia
33. Porto, Portugal
34. Frankfurt, Germany
35. Zagreb, Croatia
36. Seville, Spain
37. Gothenburg, Sweden
38. San Francisco, United States
39. Bordeaux, France
40. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
41. Lyon, France
42. Nagoya, Japan
43. New York City, United States
44. Taipei, Taiwan
45. Singapore
46. Seattle, United States
47. Auckland, New Zealand
48. Warsaw, Poland
49. Athens, Greece
50. Washington, United States

The Bottom 10 Are, with the reasons why they are so far down in brackets:

229. Mexicali, Mexico (High crime, summer climate, high inequality)
228. Juarez, Mexico (High crime, summer climate, high inequality)
227. Birmingham, United States (High crime, terrible urbanism)
226. Sharjah, United Arab Emirates (Summer climate, high inequality, terrible urbanism)
225. Tijuana, Mexico (High crime, high inequality)
224. Oklahoma City, United States (terrible urbanism, boring (i.e. bad vibes score))
223. Cali, Colombia (High crime, High inequality)
222. Cuernavaca, Mexico (High crime, High inequality)
221. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (Summer climate, high inequality, terrible urbanism)
220. Dubai, United Arab Emirates (Summer climate, high inequality, terrible urbanism)
219. Las Vegas, United States (Summer climate, terrible urbanism)

Edmonton has climbed, thanks to a solid Gini Coefficient, relatively low crime and extremely high HDI:

It is now ranked 115th, sitting between Fortaleza, Brazil (is this one a bit more reasonable Chaz? I still don't really know much about Brazil) and Lodz, Poland.
 
Alright so after input from @ChazYEG, I've updated the rankings with new metrics accounting for murder rate per 100k, inequality (Gini Coefficient) and I've also added regional HDI (Human Development Index):

I've also added new countries and the list now consists of:
- Canada
- USA
- Mexico
- Colombia
- Brazil
- Argentina
- Chile
- Portugal
- Spain
- France
- United Kingdom
- Norway
- Sweden
- Finland
- Germany
- Denmark
- Netherlands
- Switzerland
- Poland
- Czechia
- Austria
- Italy
- Croatia
- Greece
- Turkiye
- Romania
- Hungary
- Serbia
- Morocco
- United Arab Emirates
- South Africa
- Thailand
- Malaysia
- Singapore
- Japan
- South Korea

With the following countries currently in the works:
- Ecuador
- Bulgaria
- Belgium

Here are the new top 50:

1. Vienna, Austria
2. Zurich, Switzerland
3. Paris, France
4. Amsterdam, Netherlands
5. The Hague, Netherlands
6. Copenhagen, Denmark
7. Barcelona, Spain
8. Berlin, Germany
9. Sao Paulo, Brazil
10. Oslo, Norway
11. Melbourne, Australia
12. Valencia, Spain
13. Madrid, Spain
14. Lisbon, Portugal
15. London, England
16. Tokyo, Japan
17. Osaka-Kobe-Kyoto, Japan
18. Munich, Germany
19. Montreal, Canada
20. Hamburg, Germany
21. Stockholm, Sweden
22. Vancouver, Canada
23. Milan, Italy
24. Rotterdam, Netherlands
25. Turin, Italy
26. Manchester, England
27. Prague, Czechia
28. Krakow, Poland
29. Sydney, Australia
30. Toronto, Canada
31. Helsinki, Finland
32. Brisbane, Australia
33. Porto, Portugal
34. Frankfurt, Germany
35. Zagreb, Croatia
36. Seville, Spain
37. Gothenburg, Sweden
38. San Francisco, United States
39. Bordeaux, France
40. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
41. Lyon, France
42. Nagoya, Japan
43. New York City, United States
44. Taipei, Taiwan
45. Singapore
46. Seattle, United States
47. Auckland, New Zealand
48. Warsaw, Poland
49. Athens, Greece
50. Washington, United States

The Bottom 10 Are, with the reasons why they are so far down in brackets:

229. Mexicali, Mexico (High crime, summer climate, high inequality)
228. Juarez, Mexico (High crime, summer climate, high inequality)
227. Birmingham, United States (High crime, terrible urbanism)
226. Sharjah, United Arab Emirates (Summer climate, high inequality, terrible urbanism)
225. Tijuana, Mexico (High crime, high inequality)
224. Oklahoma City, United States (terrible urbanism, boring (i.e. bad vibes score))
223. Cali, Colombia (High crime, High inequality)
222. Cuernavaca, Mexico (High crime, High inequality)
221. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (Summer climate, high inequality, terrible urbanism)
220. Dubai, United Arab Emirates (Summer climate, high inequality, terrible urbanism)
219. Las Vegas, United States (Summer climate, terrible urbanism)

Edmonton has climbed, thanks to a solid Gini Coefficient, relatively low crime and extremely high HDI:

It is now ranked 115th, sitting between Fortaleza, Brazil (is this one a bit more reasonable Chaz? I still don't really know much about Brazil) and Lodz, Poland.
This ranking seems a lot more balanced, IMO. great job!

Edmonton's position is definitely more reasonable, and I'll try to avoid my own negative bias towards Brazil, as well.


One thing I'm thinking about is in the transit/transportation score, and it brings me to a more general point: the general quality of infrastructure, not just transportation, but in general. For example: several cities I know in Latin America have transit systems that, if looked at from an outsider's perspective look great (goo frequencies, good coverage, high usage) but they are, most of the times, overcrowded, severely aged and poorly maintained buses and trains. I wonder if there is a way to capture this kind of data, because it would certainly make some places shine, even in these areas (Sao Paulo, again, is a prime example of a great transit system that could rival the likes of major European cities, whereas Rio would probably drop a few positions, for example).

Another thing that I can't remember if you are including is air and water pollution. Especially in this day and age, I feel like an environmental measure would definitely be something I would care about if I was choosing a place to live and was referring to a ranking to help me choose. I don't know how great the data for this would be, and I'm willing to help pull my weight and participate in gathering the data, instead of just giving crazy ideas.

But overall, man, this is a great work, and feels like a much more solid ranking than any of these major publications. Incredible job!
 
This ranking seems a lot more balanced, IMO. great job!

Edmonton's position is definitely more reasonable, and I'll try to avoid my own negative bias towards Brazil, as well.


One thing I'm thinking about is in the transit/transportation score, and it brings me to a more general point: the general quality of infrastructure, not just transportation, but in general. For example: several cities I know in Latin America have transit systems that, if looked at from an outsider's perspective look great (goo frequencies, good coverage, high usage) but they are, most of the times, overcrowded, severely aged and poorly maintained buses and trains. I wonder if there is a way to capture this kind of data, because it would certainly make some places shine, even in these areas (Sao Paulo, again, is a prime example of a great transit system that could rival the likes of major European cities, whereas Rio would probably drop a few positions, for example).

Another thing that I can't remember if you are including is air and water pollution. Especially in this day and age, I feel like an environmental measure would definitely be something I would care about if I was choosing a place to live and was referring to a ranking to help me choose. I don't know how great the data for this would be, and I'm willing to help pull my weight and participate in gathering the data, instead of just giving crazy ideas.

But overall, man, this is a great work, and feels like a much more solid ranking than any of these major publications. Incredible job!

Thanks!

I'm not sure if there is any way to track age/quality of transit infrastructure. Things that you mention like coverage, frequency and speed play a part, but I'm not sure where I could find such data.
When it comes to things like pollution and environmental impact, there are things like per capita emissions, however it is Canada, USA, Australia, etc that have the highest, and while we emit the most we definitely aren't the dirtiest in terms of things like litter and pollution of waterways etc. I might look up on if there is some sort of statistic about things like air and water pollution. Maybe # of smoggy days per year or something like that for air quality? I don't know of anything for water quality.
 
Thanks!

I'm not sure if there is any way to track age/quality of transit infrastructure. Things that you mention like coverage, frequency and speed play a part, but I'm not sure where I could find such data.
When it comes to things like pollution and environmental impact, there are things like per capita emissions, however it is Canada, USA, Australia, etc that have the highest, and while we emit the most we definitely aren't the dirtiest in terms of things like litter and pollution of waterways etc. I might look up on if there is some sort of statistic about things like air and water pollution. Maybe # of smoggy days per year or something like that for air quality? I don't know of anything for water quality.
For water quality, at least potable water, maybe the percentage of residences with treated sewage and water? I like the # of smoggy days/year as a measure for air quality. There is also the air quality index that could maybe be found from weather forecasting platforms, and grade them based on a median value?
 

Back
Top