This is a re-posted article.
THE COUNTRY’S capital has maintained its quality of living from last year, though it still ranked in the lower half of an annual survey designed to guide both governments and firms in compensating employees when they are deployed overseas.
Specifically, Manila again scored 128th out of 221 cities in the 2011 Quality of Living Survey of human resource consultancy Mercer LLC.
The survey, held in September, evaluated cities according to 39 indicators grouped into 10 categories: political and social environment; economic conditions; social-cultural environment; health and sanitation; schools and education; public services and transportation; recreation; consumer goods; housing; and natural environment. Scores were weighed against a baseline, New York City, which was assigned 100 points.
A summary Mercer released on Tuesday also provided a separate ranking of the same cities that placed Manila at a lower 173rd spot when it comes to personal safety, based on internal stability, crime level, effectiveness of law enforcement and the host country’s international relations.
Topping the global list in quality of living were, in descending order: Vienna, Zurich, Auckland, Munich, Dusseldorf, Vancouver, Frankfurt, Geneva, Bern and Copenhagen.
In Asia, the list was led by Singapore (25th), Tokyo (46th), Hong Kong (70th), Kuala Lumpur (76th), Seoul (80th) and Taipei (85th).
Manila was also bested by the likes of Chinese cities Beijing (109th), Guangzhou (119th) and Chengdu (127th); Malaysia’s Johor Baru (101st); as well as by Bangkok and Mexico City, both tied in 121st spot.
Still, Manila fared better than several others like Chinese cities Shenzen (132nd), Nanjing (134th), Qingdao (137th) and Shenyang (146th); India’s Bangalore (141st), New Delhi (143rd), Mumbai (144th), Chennai (150th) and Kolkata (151st); Vietnam’s Hanoi (147th) and Ho Chi Minh City (149th); Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh (157th) and Jeddah (159th); as well as Jakarta (140th), Vientiane (169th), Phnom Penh (186th) and Yangon (196th).
Personal safety
Topping the list in terms of personal safety were, in descending order: Luxembourg, Bern, Helsinki, Zurich, Vienna, Geneva, Stockholm, Singapore, Auckland and Wellington.
In Asia and the Pacific, the list was led by Auckland and Wellington (tied at 9th); as well as Canberra, Melbourne, Perth and Sydney, all tied at 25th place.
Ranking better than Manila in terms of personal safety were the likes of Malaysia’s Kuala Lumpur and Johor Baru (both 75th); China’s Beijing, Chengdu, Guangzhou, Jilin, Nanjing, Qingdao, Shanghai and Shenyang (all at 94th spot), and Senzhen (112th); India’s Chennai (108th), Bangalore (117th), Kolkata and New Delhi (both 127th), and Mumbai (142nd); Vietnam’s Hanoi (110th) and Ho Chi Minh City (119th); as well as Vientiane (144th) and Bangkok (160th), among others.
Manila, which tied with St. Petersburg at 173rd place, ranked better than cities like Sao Paulo (178th), Jakarta (181st), Yangon (190th) and Phnom Penh (193rd).
“As a region, Asia-Pacific is highly diverse,” Mercer said in a statement.
“Many Asian cities rank at the bottom, due to social instability, political turmoil, pollution, disease and sanitation issues, natural disasters such as typhoons and tsunamis, and lack of suitable infrastructure.”
Closer to home, Wei-Lin Tan, ASEAN Marketing Manager for Mercer (Singapore) Pte. Ltd., said via e-mail that “Manila fared well in terms of economic and sociocultural environment, also scoring quite highly in its quality and range of consumer goods and recreation options.”
But she added that the capital’s ranking “was adversely affected by its internal stability, level of crime, traffic congestion, as well as record of natural disasters elsewhere in the Philippines.”
==============================================================================
By: E. J. Diaz
Source: Business World, Nov. 30, 2011
To view the original article, click here.
Subscribe to the Arangkada NewsRoom via RSS
Loading IntenseDebate Comments... Loading IntenseDebate Comments... Loading IntenseDebate Comments...
