TAKING CITY RANKINGS SERIOUSLY : Engaging with Benchmarking Practices in Global Urbanism

Abstract

Who cares if our case study city has dropped a place in the so‐and‐so list of such‐and‐such cities? Whilst city rankings are soaring to popularity in media reports and everyday practitioner parlance in municipalities and the consulting world, benchmarking exercises raise more than a few eyebrows within the field of urban studies. As we argue here, whilst not condoning the superficiality of some of these indices, this is an important problem that needs rebalancing. The ‘comparative imagination’ is today not just a renewed locus of urban theory debate, but an economy in its own right at the heart of networked forms of global urbanism, both in the public and private sectors. Reviewing the global landscape of rankings, the rise of a benchmarking industry and the questions that it raises for urban theorizing, our intervention asks urban studies to take rankings seriously. We argue that they have a key place in the changing imaginary of ‘comparative gestures’ and in shaping a more ‘global’ way of worlding by cities. We advocate theorizing ‘back’ to rankings and, building on debates on ‘urban science’, we call for more proactive participation in influencing the political economy of benchmarking.

Inclusiveness of Urban Space and Tools for the Assessment of the Quality of Urban Life—A Critical Approach

“…The analysis of different tools of assessment shows that there is no unambiguous definition of the quality of urban life, and there are no uniform methods of its assessment; there are many soft, objective, and subjective aspects included. The differences in using quantitative and/or qualitative measures in appraisal instruments have also been confirmed by other researchers [2].…”

“…It is argued that urban rankings assessing the quality of life can be potentially used in the development, as well as the creation of urban policy [ 2 , 3 , 33 , 34 , 35 ]. Urban practitioners can use rankings to evaluate the present state in order to compare it to the situation of other cities and learn about their policy strategies.…”

“…This is not just a role of advocating for more cities to be included. It is also a deeper methodological and empirical contribution to advocate for better measurements and benchmarks that capture the variety of factors that shape cities and the different types of urban dwellers that inhabit them beyond the common creative class viewpoints" [2,21].…”

“…Since the early 1990s, the aspects of the quality of life started to attract more and more interest, caused by a growth in international consideration of the environmental and urban issues [ 2 , 3 ]. A great number of works was published on this topic [ 4 ].…”

“…“ Places Rated Almanac ” has been recognized as the first urban ranking that influenced popularization of the rankings concerning aspects of the quality of life in a city [ 2 , 18 , 19 ]. However, it has been the overall wider notice of the system of indicators that caused a total increase in community and managers’ attention paid to rankings [ 2 , 20 ].…”