Melbourne tops most livable city ranking, three Canadian cities in top 10 list
The Economist ranks the cities on 30 factors across various categories, including stability, health care, culture, environment, education and infrastructure
Melbourne, Australia topped the list of 140 cities for the fourth year in a row.
Toronto is the world’s fourth-best city in which to live, according to a report by The Economist.
In an annual poll, the magazine’s Intelligence Unit ranked Toronto just below Vancouver (the third most livable city in the world) and just above Calgary (tied for fifth place with Adelaide, Australia), giving Canada three countries in the top five.
Melbourne, Australia, topped the list of 140 cities for the fourth year in a row, with Vienna, Austria, coming in second overall.
The Economist ranks the cities on 30 factors across various categories, including stability, health care, culture, environment, education and infrastructure.
Rounding out the top 10 were Sydney, Australia, Helsinki, Finland, Perth, Australia, and Auckland, New Zealand.
“This can foster a range of recreational activities without leading to high crime levels or overburdened infrastructure,” said the report. “Eight of the top 10 scoring cities are in Australia and Canada, with population densities of 2.88 and 3.40 people per square kilometres respectively.”
It also pointed out that although crime rates may be on the rise in some of the top-tier cities, it wasn’t in the case in all the top 10 cities.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, human rights violations and conflict were responsible for many of the reasons for the bottom 10 cities on the list.
Damascus, Syria, was ranked the least livable city in the world, preceded by Dhaka, Bangladesh, Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea, Lagos, Nigeria, and Karachi, Pakistan.
“Conflict is responsible for many of the lowest scores. This is not only because stability indicators have the highest single scores, but also because factors defining stability spread to have an adverse effect on other categories,” said the report.
“For example, conflict will not just cause disruption in its own right, it will also damage infrastructure, overburden hospitals, and undermine the availability of goods, services and recreational activities.”