IESE

Cities in
Motion
Index
2019
IESE Cities
in Motion Index
2019

We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AEI) of the Ministry of
Economy and Competitiveness—ECO2016-79894-R (MINECO/FEDER), the Schneider-Electric Sustainability and
Business Strategy Chair, the Carl Schroeder Chair in Strategic Management and the IESE’s High Impact Projects
initiative (2017/2018).

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.15581/018.ST-509
CONTENTS

Foreword 07

About Us 09

Working Team 09

Introduction: The Need for a Global Vision 10

Our Model: Cities in Motion. Conceptual Framework, Definitions and Indicators 11

Limitations of the Indicators 23

Geographic Coverage 23

Cities in Motion: Ranking 25

Cities in Motion: Ranking by Dimension 28

Cities in Motion: Regional Ranking 40

Noteworthy Cases 46

Evolution of the Cities in Motion Index 50

Cities in Motion Compared With Other Indexes 53

Cities in Motion: City Ranking by Population 54

Cities in Motion: Analysis of Dimensions in Pairs 57

Cities in Motion: A Dynamic Analysis 64

Recommendations and Conclusions 66

Appendix 1. Indicators 69

Appendix 2. Graphical Analysis of the Profiles of the 174 Cities 76

Foreword

Once again, we are pleased to present a new edition (the sixth) of our IESE Cities in Motion Index
(CIMI). Over the past years, we have observed how various cities, companies and other social actors
have used our study as a benchmark when it comes to understanding the reality of cities through
comparative analysis.

As in every edition, we have tried to improve the structure and coverage of the CIMI and this, the
sixth edition, has been no exception. As in the previous editions, we have tried to provide an index
that is objective, comprehensive, wide-ranging and guided by the criteria of conceptual relevance
and statistical rigor. However, this edition features some different elements with respect to the
others. The first important difference is that we have significantly increased the number of variables
in relation to the cities. This edition includes a total of 96 indicators (13 more than in the previous
edition), which reflect both objective and subjective data and offer a comprehensive view of each
city. Among the new variables, there are, for example, the hourly wage, purchasing power, mortgage
as a percentage of income, and whether a city is a favorable environment for the development of
women. In our opinion, this increase in the quantity and quality of the variables used allows for a
more accurate assessment of the reality of the cities that appear in the CIMI.

A second difference is reflected in our effort to widen the geographical coverage, which has resulted
in the analysis of a greater number of cities than in the previous edition: we cover a total of 174 cities
(79 of them capitals), which represent 80 countries. In this regard, 11 new cities have been added,
notably Quebec (Canada), Edinburgh (United Kingdom) and Denver and Seattle (United States). The
breadth and scope of the CIMI establish it as one of the city indexes with the widest geographical
coverage existing today. On the website citiesinmotion.iese.edu/indicecim/?lang=en, the data about
each of the cities can be consulted in an interactive way and two cities can be compared at the same
time.

As in the previous edition, we have merged two dimensions of our conceptual model, which
originally took into account 10 key dimensions: human capital, social cohesion, the economy,
public management, governance, the environment, mobility and transportation, urban planning,
international outreach, and technology. We have kept governance and public management in a
single category (“governance”) for two fundamental reasons: in the first place, because there is a
certain overlapping between both dimensions that makes it difficult to distinguish between them
conceptually and, secondly, because the limited number of city-related indicators that cover each
of these dimensions led us to join them together so we have a more reliable measure. We believe
that this change does not significantly affect the conclusions of the CIMI but rather it strengthens
them. In any case, we continue to strive to obtain more and better indicators that will capture these
dimensions.

These differences with respect to previous editions oblige us to remind the reader that the rankings
are not directly comparable from one year to another. The inclusion of new cities and new indicators
produces variations that do not necessarily reflect the trajectory of the cities over time. To be able to
study the evolution of the cities, in each edition we analyze the trend of the cities by calculating the
index of the previous three years, which allows us to make more appropriate comparisons.

We see this index as a dynamic project and therefore we continue to work so that the future editions
of the index will have better indicators for all the dimensions and give wider coverage, as well as a
growing analytical and predictive value. In this respect, your comments and suggestions are always
welcome as they will enable us to progress, and we invite you to contact us via the channels you will
find on our website: www.iese.edu/cim.

Likewise, we would like to inform our readers that our efforts here at the IESE Cities in Motion
platform have not been limited to just ranking cities but we have continued to publish our series
of minibooks in English, which identify good practices in each of the dimensions of the IESE Cities
in Motion model. Currently there are four publications available on Amazon about the dimensions

7 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

of the environment, mobility and transportation, the economy, and social cohesion, while the next
volume will be devoted to international outreach and shortly this collection will be expanded to
cover the rest of the dimensions.

Moreover, new case studies have been published in addition to those that already exist about
Vancouver ("Vancouver: The Challenge of Becoming the Greenest City"), Barcelona ("Barcelona: A
Roman Village Becoming a Smart City") and Málaga ("Málaga: In Search of Its Identity as a Smart
City"). During this academic year, moreover, we have added a case about the city of Medellín, which
has the title "Medellín: Transformation Toward a More Equitable, Innovative and Participatory Urban
Society." These documents are available on the IESE case study portal (www.iesepublishing.com),
and there will be new cases available shortly, including one about the city of Singapore and its digital
identity project. This new teaching material has allowed us to consolidate our courses linked to cities
in both IESE programs and those undertaken in collaboration with other schools and institutions.

In parallel, we continue to work on a series of academic papers, especially focused on the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations in urban contexts. We hope that these
publications will soon be added to other articles already published in prestigious journals such as
the Academy of Management Journal, the California Management Review and the Harvard Deusto
Business Review.* We have also strengthened the presence of the IESE Cities in Motion platform
on the Internet with our Twitter account (@iese_cim) and our monthly posts on the IESE Cities
in Motion blog (blog.iese.edu/cities-challenges-and-management). Finally, it is worth highlighting
our participation in various projects, such as GrowSmarter, financed by the European Commission
(www.grow-smarter.eu/home), or the technical guide about public-private partnerships (PPPs) that
we have produced with the CAF-Development Bank of Latin America. This guide can be acquired
free of charge (scioteca.caf.com/handle/123456789/1179) and it is complemented by a series of
explanatory videos (www.ieseinsight.com/doc.aspx?id=2165&idioma=1).

We regard both our publications and our presence in cyberspace as being the ideal complements
of this index as they contribute to a better understanding of the reality of cities. Therefore, we
believe that it will be useful for those in charge of making cities better environments in which to
live, work and enjoy life. Urban managers face significant obstacles such as difficulties in mobility,
aging populations, increases in inequality, the persistence of poverty and pollution, among many
others. Their scope and magnitude demonstrate the need for all of the world’s cities to carry out a
strategic review process that covers: what type of city they want to be, what their priorities are, and
what changes they should undertake in order to take advantage of the opportunities—and minimize
the threats—of urbanization. Therefore, our effort focuses on the concept of smart governance.
This report is our modest contribution to advancing this process. We are convinced that we can
live in better cities, but this will be possible only if all the social actors—the public sector, private
companies, civic organizations and academic institutions—actively participate and collaborate to
achieve this common goal.

THE AUTHORS
Prof. Pascual Berrone Prof. Joan Enric Ricart
Holder of the Schneider Electric Holder of the Carl Schrøder
Sustainability and Business Chair of Strategic
Strategy Chair Management
Academic codirector of Academic codirector of
IESE Cities in Motion IESE Cities in Motion

*
You will find a complete list of publications on our website: www.iese.edu/cim.

8 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

About Us

IESE Cities in Motion is a research platform launched jointly by the Center for Globalization and
Strategy and IESE Business School’s Department of Strategy.

The initiative connects a global network of experts in cities, specialist private companies and local
governments from around the world. The aim is to promote changes at the local level and to develop
valuable ideas and innovative tools that will lead to more sustainable and smarter cities.

The platform’s mission is to promote the Cities in Motion model, with an innovative approach to city
governance and a new urban model for the 21st century based on four main factors: sustainable
ecosystem, creative activities, equality among citizens, and connected territory.

Working Team

ACADEMIC TEAM

Pascual Berrone
Professor of Strategic Management and holder of the Schneider Electric Sustainability and Business
Strategy Chair of IESE Business School

Joan Enric Ricart

Professor of Strategic Management and holder of the Carl Schrøder Chair of Strategic Management of
IESE Business School

Ana Isabel Duch T-Figueras

Research Collaborator

Carlos Carrasco
Research Collaborator

TECHNICAL TEAM

David Augusto Giuliodori

Professor of Statistics 2 at the National University of Córdoba (Argentina) and Econfocus Consulting

María Andrea Giuliodori

Professor of Statistics at the Institute of Stock Exchange Studies (IEB)

9 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Introduction: The
Need for a Global
Vision

Today more than ever, cities need to develop strategic have been sustainable in the medium term as, in some
planning processes, since only then can they outline cases, they were created for studies meant to cover the
paths toward innovation and prioritize the aspects that specific information needs of certain bodies, whose life
are most important for their future. span depended on how long the financing would last
and, in other cases, the system of indicators depended
This process should be participatory and flexible, and a
on a political desire in specific circumstances, so they
central aim must be established: to define a sustainable
were abandoned when political priorities or the authori-
action plan that will make the metropolis unique and re-
ties themselves changed. As for the indicators developed
nowned. Just as two companies do not have the same
by international organizations, it is true that they strive
recipe for success, each city must look for its own model
for the consistency and solidity necessary to compare cit-
based on a series of common reflections and consider-
ies; however, for the most part, they tend to be biased or
ations.
focused on a particular area (technology, the economy,
Experience shows that large cities must eschew short-ter- and the environment, among others).
mism and broaden their field of view, as well as turn to
Taking all this into account, the index that provides
innovation more frequently to improve the efficiency and
this publication with its title, the Cities in Motion Index
sustainability of their services. Also, they should promote
(CIMI), has been designed with the aim of constructing a
communication and ensure that the public and business-
“breakthrough” indicator—in terms of its completeness,
es are involved in their projects.
its properties, its comparability, its quality and the ob-
The time has come to practice smart governance that jectivity of its information included—that would enable
takes into account all the factors and all the social actors, measurement of sustainability with regard to the future
with a global vision. In fact, over the past few decades, of the world’s leading cities, as with the quality of life of
various national and international organizations have their inhabitants.
produced studies focusing on the definition, creation and
The CIMI is intended to help the public and governments
use of indicators with a variety of aims, although mainly
to understand the performance of nine fundamental di-
that of contributing to a diagnosis of the state of cities.
mensions for a city: human capital, social cohesion, the
The definition of the indicators and the process of their
economy, governance, the environment, mobility and
creation are the result of the characteristics of each study
transportation, urban planning, international outreach,
and of the statistical and econometric techniques that
and technology. All the indicators are linked with a strate-
best fit the theoretical model and the available data, as
gic purpose whose goal is to implement a novel form of
well as the analysts’ preferences.
local economic development that involves the creation of
Today we have a great deal of “urban” indicators, al- a global city, the promotion of the entrepreneurial spirit,
though many of them are neither standardized nor and innovation, among other aspects.
consistent and they cannot be used to compare cities.
Each city, unique and unrepeatable, has its own needs
Actually, despite numerous attempts to develop city indi-
and opportunities, so it must design its own plan, set its
cators at a regional, national and international level, few
priorities, and be flexible enough to adapt to changes.

10 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Smart cities generate numerous business opportunities
and possibilities for collaboration between the public
Our Model: Cities in
and private sectors. All stakeholders can contribute, so
an ecosystem network must be developed that will in-
Motion. Conceptual
volve all of them: members of the public, organizations, Framework,
institutions, government, universities, experts, research
centers, etc. Definitions and
Networking has its advantages: better identification of Indicators
the needs of the city and its residents, the establishment
of common aims and constant communication among Our platform proposes a conceptual model based on the
participants, the expansion of learning opportunities, in- study of a large number of success stories and a series
creased transparency, and the implementation of more of in-depth interviews with city leaders, entrepreneurs,
flexible public policies. As a report by the Organization for academics and experts linked to the development of
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) pointed cities.
out back in 2001, the network approach allows local pol-
icies to be focused on the public. This model proposes a set of steps that include diagnosis
of the situation, the development of a strategy, and its
Private enterprise also has much to gain with this system subsequent implementation. The first step to making
of networking, given that it can collaborate with the ad- a good diagnosis is to analyze the status of the key
ministration in the long term, access new business op- dimensions, which we will set out below along with the
portunities, gain a greater understanding of the needs of indicators used to calculate the CIMI.
the local ecosystem, gain greater international visibility
and attract talent. Human Capital
Thanks to its technical expertise and its experience in The main goal of any city should be to improve its human
project management, private enterprise, in collaboration capital. A city with smart governance must be capable of
with universities and other institutions, is suited to lead attracting and retaining talent, creating plans to improve
and develop smart city projects. In addition, it can pro- education, and promoting both creativity and research.
vide efficiency and result in significant savings for pub-
Table 1 sets out the indicators used in the human capital
lic-private partnerships.
dimension, along with descriptions of them, their units of
Finally, it must not be forgotten that the human factor measurement, and the sources of information.
is fundamental in the development of cities. Without a
While human capital includes factors that make it more
participatory and active society, any strategy, albeit intel-
extensive than what can be measured with these indica-
ligent and comprehensive, will be doomed to failure. Be-
tors, there is international consensus that level of educa-
yond technological and economic development, it is the
tion and access to culture are irreplaceable components
inhabitants who hold the key for cities to go from “smart”
for measuring human capital. One of the pillars of human
to “wise.” That is precisely the goal to which every city
development is this capital and, given that the Human
should aspire: that its residents and its rulers deploy all
Development Index published annually by the United Na-
their talent in favor of progress.
tions Development Program (UNDP) includes education
To help cities identify effective solutions, we have created and culture as dimensions, it is valid to use these indica-
an index that integrates nine dimensions in a single indi- tors to explain the differences in human capital in a city.
cator and covers 174 cities worldwide. Thanks to its broad
and integrated vision, the CIMI enables the strengths and To define this dimension, the CIMI includes the 10 vari-
weaknesses of each of the cities to be identified. ables detailed in Table 1. Most of the variables are incor-
porated into the index with a positive sign due to their
contribution to the development of the dimension, the
exception being expenditure on education per capita.

To measure access to culture, the number of museums,

art galleries and theaters and the expenditure on leisure
and recreation are taken into account. These indicators
show the city’s commitment to culture and human cap-
ital. Cities that are considered creative and dynamic on a
global level typically have museums and art galleries open
to the public, offer visits to art collections, and carry out

11 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 1. Human Capital Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

1 Higher education Proportion of population with secondary and higher education. Euromonitor

2 Business schools Number of business schools (top 100). Financial Times

3 Movement of students International movement of higher-level students. Number of students. UNESCO

4 Universities Number of universities in the city that are in the top 500. QS Top Universities

5 Museums and art galleries Number of museums and art galleries per city. OpenStreetMap

6 Schools Number of public or private schools per city. OpenStreetMap

7 Theaters Number of theaters per city. OpenStreetMap

Expenditure on leisure and

8 Expenditure on leisure and recreation per capita. Euromonitor
recreation
Expenditure on leisure and Expenditure on leisure and recreation. In millions of dollars, according to
9 Euromonitor
recreation 2016 prices.

10 Expenditure on education Expenditure on education per capita. Euromonitor

activities aimed at their conservation. The existence of a of the rule of law, and solidarity. This allows us to under-
city’s cultural and recreation provision implies greater ex- stand the importance of policies that foment and rein-
penditure on these activities by the population. force social cohesion based on democratic values.

Finally, expenditure on education per capita represents Table 2 sets out the indicators selected to analyze this
what each member of the public spends individually to dimension, descriptions of them, their units of measure-
obtain an appropriate level of education. A high level of ment and the sources of information. This selection seeks
expenditure is an indicator that the state’s budget alloca- to incorporate all the sociological subdimensions of so-
tions for education are insufficient, since they oblige the cial cohesion, taking into account the different variables
public to assume that cost in order to gain access to a suit- available.
able education. For this reason, this variable is included The ratio of deaths per 100,000 inhabitants and the crime
with a negative sign. rate are incorporated with a negative sign when this di-
mension is created. Furthermore, the health index and
Social Cohesion the number of public and private hospitals and health
Social cohesion is a sociological dimension of cities that centers per city are added with a positive sign, since ac-
can be defined as the degree of consensus among the cess to and coverage provided by basic social services
members of a social group or as the perception of be- help strengthen social cohesion.
longing to a common situation or project. It is a measure
of the intensity of social interaction within the group. Employment, meanwhile, is a fundamental aspect in the
Social cohesion in the urban context refers to the level societies, to the extent that, according to historical evi-
of coexistence among groups of people with different in- dence, a lack of it can break the consensus or the implicit
comes, cultures, ages, and professions who live in a city. social contract. For this reason, the unemployment rate
Concern about the city’s social setting requires an anal- is incorporated with a negative sign in the dimension of
ysis of factors such as immigration, community develop- social cohesion. With regard to the ratio of women who
ment, care of the elderly, the effectiveness of the health work in public administration, this is incorporated with a
system, and public safety and inclusion. positive sign, since it is an indicator of gender equality in
access to government jobs.
The presence of various groups in the same space and
mixing and interaction between them are essential in a The Gini index, calculated on the basis of the Gini coeffi-
sustainable urban system. In this context, social cohesion cient to measure social inequality, assumes a value equal
is a state in which citizens and the government share a to 0 for situations in which there is a perfectly equitable
vision of a society based on social justice, the primacy distribution of income (everyone has the same income)

12 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 2. Social Cohesion Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

11 Mortality Ratio of deaths per 100,000 inhabitants. Euromonitor

12 Crime rate Crime rate. Numbeo

13 Health Health index. Numbeo

14 Unemployment Unemployment rate (number of unemployed out of the workforce). Euromonitor

Measure of social inequality. It varies from 0 to 100, with 0 being a situation of

15 Gini index Euromonitor
perfect equality and 100 that of perfect inequality.

16 Price of property Price of property as percentage of income. Numbeo

International Labour
17 Female workers Ratio of female workers in the public administration.
Organization (ILO)
An index that measures the peacefulness and the absence of violence in a
Institute for
18 Global Peace Index country or region. The bottom-ranking positions correspond to countries
Economics and Peace
with a high level of violence.

19 Hospitals Number of public and private hospitals and health centers per city. OpenStreetMap

An index that measures the level of happiness of a country. The highest

World Happiness
20 Happiness index values correspond to countries that have a higher degree of overall
Index
happiness.
Ranking that considers the proportion of people in a situation of slavery in
21 Global Slavery Index the country. The countries occupying the top positions in the ranking are Walk Free Foundation
those with the highest proportion.
This variable measures how the government deals with situations of slavery
Government response to
22 in the country. The top positions in the ranking indicate countries that have Walk Free Foundation
situations of slavery
a more effective and comprehensive response.
Global Terrorism
Database (GTD) of
23 Terrorism Number of terrorist incidents by city in the previous three years.
the University of
Maryland
The variable seeks to measure whether a city provides a friendly
24 Female-friendly environment for women on a scale of 1 to 5. Cities with a value of 1 have a Nomad List
more hostile environment, while those whose value is 5 are very friendly.

25 Suicides Suicide rate by city. Nomad List

26 Homicides Homicide rate by city. Nomad List

and it assumes a value equal to 100 when the income dis- The price of property as a percentage of income is also
tribution is completely unequal (one person hoards all the negatively related since, when the percentage of income
income to the detriment of all the others). This indicator to be used to buy a property increases, the incentives to
is included in the dimension with a negative sign, since a belong to a particular city’s society decrease.
greater Gini coefficient has a negative effect on a city’s
social cohesion. With regard to happiness, it is increasingly considered a
suitable measure of social progress and has become a
The Global Peace Index is an indicator that represents the goal of government policies. According to the World Hap-
degree of tranquility and peace in a country or region, as piness Report, people assert they are happy if they have
well as the absence of violence and war. It includes in- a stable job and are healthy and if there is a more homo-
ternal variables such as violence and crime and external geneous distribution of wealth within the country or city
ones, such as military spending and the wars in which the where they live. To represent this degree of satisfaction,
country or region is taking part. The countries at the top the happiness index is included in the CIMI. This variable
of the ranking are countries with a low level of violence, is included with a positive sign, since the countries that
so the indicator has a negative relationship with the CIMI. show themselves to be “happiest” (with high values in the
index) are those that pay special attention to freedom,

13 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

employment, health care, income and good governance. ative sign in the index, due to their impact on the dimen-
Thus, the happiness of a country or city would also be re- sion also being negative: the higher the homicide rate, the
flected in greater social coexistence. more insecure the city becomes; the higher the suicide
rate, the less attractive it is as a place to live.
The proportion of people enduring slavery and the mea-
sures that governments take to respond to this type of Economy
crime are incorporated with a negative sign in the ranking,
since they do not contribute to the development of a just This dimension includes all those aspects that promote
and socially cohesive city. the economic development of a territory: local economic
development plans, transition plans, and strategic indus-
The terrorism variable takes into account the acts of ter- trial plans; cluster generation; innovation; and entrepre-
rorism that have been committed in the previous three neurial initiatives.
years in the city. It is included with a negative sign since
such acts undermine the social peace of the city. The indicators used to represent the performance
of cities in the economic dimension are specified in
This year, three new variables have been incorporated. Table 3, along with a brief description, their units of mea-
The female-friendly variable seeks to measure the ur- surement, and the sources of information
ban degree of freedom and safety for the development
of women and it is expressed in categories from 1 to 5, Considering that the CIMI seeks to measure, via multi-
where the highest score corresponds to cities that are ple dimensions, the future sustainability of the world’s
more female-friendly. It is included in the index with a main cities and the quality of life of their inhabitants,
positive sign. The other two variables incorporated are real GDP is a measure of the city’s economic power and
the suicide rate and the homicide rate by city, with a neg- the income of those who live there. Indeed, in numer-
ous studies, GDP is considered the only or the most im-

Table 3. Economic Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

27 Productivity Labor productivity calculated as GDP per working population (in thousands). Euromonitor

28 Time required to start a business Number of calendar days needed so a business can operate legally. World Bank

The top positions in the ranking indicate a more favorable regulatory

29 Ease of starting a business World Bank
environment for creating and developing a local company.
Globalization and
30 Headquarters Number of headquarters of publicly traded companies.
World Cities (GaWC)
Percentage of people involved in TEA (that is, novice entrepreneurs and
Motivation to get started in TEA Global
owners or managers of a new business), driven by an opportunity for
31 (total early-stage entrepreneurial Entrepreneurship
improvement, divided by the percentage of TEA that is, in turn, motivated by
activity) Monitor (GEM)
need.

32 GDP estimate Estimated annual GDP growth. Euromonitor

33 GDP GDP in millions of dollars at 2016 prices. Euromonitor

34 GDP per capita GDP per capita at 2016 prices. Euromonitor

Mortgage as a percentage of income. It is calculated as a proportion of

the real monthly cost of the mortgage with respect to the family income
35 Mortgage Numbeo
(estimated via the average monthly salary). The lower the percentage, the
better.
The variable assumes the value of 1 if the city has the Glovo service and 0
36 Glovo Glovo
otherwise.
The variable assumes the value of 1 if the city has the Uber service and 0
37 Uber Uber
otherwise.

38 Salary Hourly wage in the city. Euromonitor

Purchasing power (determined by the average salary) for the purchase of

39 Purchasing power goods and services in the city, compared with the purchasing power in New Numbeo
York City.

14 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

portant measure of the performance of a city or country. by the mortgage, the worse the situation will be for the
However, in this report, it is not considered as exclusive family. For that reason, the variable is incorporated with
nor as the most important measure but as one more indi- a negative sign.
cator within the framework of the nine dimensions of the
CIMI. Thus, its share of the total is similar to that of other Taking into account the degree of dissemination of new
indicators. For example, if a city with a high or relatively technologies and the services that emerge from them,
high GDP does not have a good performance in other in- we also incorporated the Glovo and Uber variables as in-
dicators, it may not be in one of the top positions. In this dicators of the new digital economy. Both variables show
way, a city that is very productive but has problems with the coverage of the respective service in the city. They
transportation, inequality, weak public finance or a pro- are binary variables and are incorporated with a positive
duction process that uses polluting technology probably sign. Information concerning the Mytaxi service was also
will not be in the top positions of the ranking. Additional- collected but this was discarded, since it currently has a
ly, we have included the estimated annual GDP growth to presence in all the cities considered in the ranking.
study the future progress of the city.
Finally, the variable for the hourly wage in the city has
For its part, labor productivity allows for a measurement been incorporated, along with the index that represents
of the strength, efficiency and technological level of the the purchasing power relating to goods and services in
production system. With regard to local and internation- the city compared with the purchasing power of a New
al competitiveness, productivity will have repercussions, York resident. Both indicators are added with a positive
obviously, on real salaries, capital income, and business sign, since high values of these represent a better work
profits—for which reason, it is very important to consid- situation.
er the measure in the economic dimension, since differ-
ent productivity rates can explain differences in workers’ Governance
quality of life—and the sustainability over time of the “Governance” is the term commonly used to describe
production system. the effectiveness, quality and sound guidance of state in-
tervention. Given that the city resident is the focal point
Other indicators selected as representative of this di-
for solving all the challenges facing cities, factors such as
mension enable the measurement of some aspects of
the level of the public’s participation and the authorities’
the business landscape of a city, such as the number
ability to involve business leaders and local stakeholders
of headquarters of publicly traded parent companies;
should be taken into account, as well as the application
the entrepreneurial capacity and possibilities of a city’s
of e government plans. Moreover, this dimension en-
inhabitants, represented by the percentage of entre-
compasses all those actions aimed at improving the ad-
preneurs who start their activity motivated by personal
ministration’s efficiency, including the design of new or-
improvement; and the time required to start a business
ganizational and management models. In this area, great
and the ease of setting up a business in regulatory terms.
opportunities open up for private initiative, which can
These indicators measure a city’s sustainability capacity
bring greater efficiency.
over time and the potential ability to improve the quality
of life of its inhabitants. The time required to start a busi- In this work, governance is understood to have a strong
ness and the ease of launching it are incorporated into correlation with the state of public finances of a city or
the economic dimension with a negative sign, since lower country. In this sense, public accounts decisively affect the
values indicate a greater ease of starting businesses. The population’s quality of life and a city’s sustainability, since
number of headquarters of publicly traded parent com- they determine the level of present and future taxes that
panies, the entrepreneurial capacity and possibilities of a the residents and the production system must face, the
city’s inhabitants and the number of entrepreneurs have expected growth of the general level of prices, the possi-
a positive relationship, since the high values of these indi- bilities of public investment in basic social infrastructure,
cators reflect the economic dynamism of a city, as well as and incentives for private investment. In addition, if the
the ease of setting up and starting a new business. state has financing needs, it will compete with the private
sector for funds available in the financial system, which
This year, five new variables have been incorporated in will affect investment.
this dimension. In the case of the percentage of the fam-
ily income represented by mortgage payments, this is The indicators that represent the governance dimension
added to complement the information collected by the in this report are listed in Table 4, along with descriptions
variable of the price of private property. An attempt is of them, their units of measurement and the sources of
made to measure the extent to which access to a 20-year information.
mortgage is within the reach of a middle-income family.
The level of reserves is an indicator of the strength of
The higher the percentage of the family income taken up
the public finance system in the short and medium term,

15 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 4. Governance Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

Total reserves in millions of current dollars. Estimate at city level according to
40 Reserves World Bank
the population.

41 Reserves per capita Reserves per capita in millions of current dollars. World Bank

42 Embassies Number of embassies and consulates per city. OpenStreetMap

This establishes whether or not the city has ISO 37120 certification. Certified
cities are committed to improving their services and quality of life. It is a World Council on City
43 ISO 37120 certification
variable coded from 0 to 6. Cities that have been certified for the longest time Data (WCCD)
have the highest value. The value 0 is for those cities without certification.

44 Research centers Number of research and technology centers per city. OpenStreetMap

45 Government buildings Number of government buildings and premises in the city. OpenStreetMap

The strength of legal rights index measures the degree to which collateral
and bankruptcy laws protect the rights of borrowers and lenders and thus
46 Strength of legal rights index facilitate access to loans. The values go from 0 (low) to 12 (high), where the World Bank
highest ratings indicate that the laws are better designed to expand access
to credit.
Countries with values close to 0 are perceived as very corrupt and those Transparency
47 Corruption perceptions index
with an index close to 100 as very transparent. International
CTIC Foundation and
48 Open data platform This describes whether the city has an open data system.
Open World Bank
E-Government Development The EGDI reflects how a country is using information technology to
49 United Nations
Index (EGDI) promote access and inclusion for its citizens.
Ranking where the countries in the highest positions are those considered The Economist
50 Democracy ranking
more democratic. Intelligence Unit

Percentage of population employed in public administration and defense;

Employment in the public
51 education; health; community, social and personal service activities; and Euromonitor
administration
other activities.

of their ability to cope with changing economic cycles, The strength of legal rights index measures the degree to
and of the strength and sustainability of the economic which collateral and bankruptcy laws protect the rights
structure in relation to the state. Likewise, the number of borrowers and lenders and thus facilitate access to
of embassies and consulates is an indicator of the city’s loans. The values go from 0 (low) to 12 (high) and the
international importance for global standards. This indi- highest ratings indicate that the laws are better designed
cator is based on the embassies that foreign countries to expand access to credit. Creating the conditions and
assign to the city. ensuring the effective implementation of the rights of the
public and companies situated in their territory are func-
Cities that have ISO 37120 certification are committed to tions that pertain to national or local governments and
improving their services and quality of life, so a variable cannot be delegated. The perception of the observance
has been included that considers whether a city has ob- of legal rights influences all aspects of life of a country or
tained the certification or not. Standards for smart cities city, such as its business climate, investment incentives,
are established in this standard, based on 100 indicators. and legal certainty, among others. For this reason, the
The aim of this to provide a parameter to compare all the strength of rights index has been included with a positive
cities equally. This variable is incorporated with a positive sign in the creation of this dimension.
sign.
The government corruption perceptions index is a way to
For their part, the number of research centers and the measure the quality of governance, since a high percep-
number of government buildings show the degree of tion in society of corruption in public bodies is a sign that
representativeness of local government among the pub- state intervention is not being efficient from the point of
lic for attending to their requests and carrying out ad- view of the social economy, given that public services—
ministrative tasks, etc. These variables are included with understood in a broad sense—involve higher costs in
a positive sign in the CIMI calculation. relation to a situation with no corruption. In addition,

16 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

incentives to invest or settle in countries or cities with a energy, efficient water and waste management, and the
high perception of corruption will be lower than in others existence of policies that help counter the effects of cli-
with low levels, which negatively affects sustainability. In mate change are essential to guarantee the long-term
the case of the CIMI, it is taken as an explanatory indi- sustainability of cities.
cator of the governance dimension, with a positive sign,
Since the CIMI also seeks to measure environmental
due to how the index is calculated by the organization
sustainability, the environment is included as one of the
Transparency International, which assigns a value of 0 to
essential aspects of measurement. Table 5 sets out the
countries with a high level of corruption and 100 to those
indicators selected in this dimension, as well as brief de-
with a high degree of transparency.
scriptions, their units of measurement, and the sources
Finally, the variable that considers whether a city’s gov- of the information.
ernment has an open data platform is an indicator of The indicators selected include measurements of air pol-
transparency in government management, a communi- lution sources and water quality in cities, which are in-
cation channel with the public and a platform for gener- dicators of the quality of life of their inhabitants, as well
ating new business models. The variable assigns a value as the sustainability of their production or urban matrix.
of 1 if there is an open data platform and 0 otherwise.
Therefore, the indicator is incorporated with a positive CO₂ emissions come from the burning of fossil fuels and
sign into this dimension. the manufacture of cement, while methane emissions
arise from human activities such as agriculture and the
The E-Government Development Index (EGDI) reflects industrial production of methane. Both types of emis-
how a country is using information technology to pro- sions are the main measures that are commonly used
mote access and inclusion for its citizens. It is a measure to evaluate the degree of air pollution, since they are
composed of three important dimensions of e govern- substances that are strongly related to the greenhouse
ment: the provision of online services, telecommunica- effect. In fact, reducing these indicators’ values is one of
tions connectivity and human capacity. This variable is the goals of the Kyoto Protocol.
included with a positive sign.
Other very important indicators for measuring air pol-
The Democracy Index, for its part, shows a country’s de- lution in cities are PM2.5 and PM10, designations that
gree of democracy, represented by its electoral system, correspond to small particles (solid or liquid) of dust,
its freedom of expression, the functioning of the govern- ash, soot, metal, cement, or pollen, scattered in the at-
ment, and political participation and culture. It is includ- mosphere and whose diameter is less than 2.5 µm and
ed with a negative sign since the countries in the highest 10 µm, respectively. These particles are formed primarily
positions are those considered more democratic. by inorganic compounds such as silicates and aluminates,
heavy metals, and organic material associated with car-
This year, a new variable has been incorporated for the
bon particles (soot). These indicators are commonly used
percentage of employees in public-sector jobs, such as
in the indexes that seek to measure the state of environ-
education, defense and health, and it is included with a
mental pollution. They are also complemented by the in-
positive sign in the dimension, since it is an indicator of
formation provided by a city’s pollution index, which es-
the human capital in the public sector.
timates its overall pollution. The greatest weight is given
to those cities with the highest air pollution.
The Environment
Sustainable development of a city can be defined as The Environmental Performance Index (EPI), calculat-
“development that meets the needs of the present with- ed by Yale University, is an indicator based on the mea-
out compromising the ability of future generations to surement of two major dimensions related to the envi-
meet their own needs.”1 In this respect, factors such as ronment, namely: environmental health and ecosystem
improving environmental sustainability through antipol- vitality. The first is divided into three subdimensions:
lution plans, support for green buildings and alternative effects on human health of air pollution, water quality
and the environmental burden of diseases. In turn, eco-
1
Definition used in 1987 by the UN’s World Commission on Environment and
Development, created in 1983.
system vitality contains seven subdimensions: effects on

17 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 5. Environmental Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

CO₂ emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and the manufacture of cement.
52 CO₂ emissions World Bank
Measured in kilotons (kt).

53 CO₂ emission index CO₂ emission index. Numbeo

Methane emissions that arise from human activities such as agriculture and
54 Methane emissions World Bank
the industrial production of methane. Measured in kt of CO₂ equivalent.
Percentage of the population with reasonable access to an appropriate
55 Access to the water supply World Bank
quantity of water resulting from an improvement in the supply.
The indicator PM2.5 measures the number of particles in the air whose World Health
56 PM2.5
diameter is less than 2.5 micrometers (µm). Annual mean. Organization (WHO)
The indicator PM10 measures the amount of particles in the air whose
57 PM10 WHO
diameter is less than 10 µm. Annual mean.

58 Pollution Pollution index. Numbeo

Environmental Performance This measures environmental health and ecosystem vitality. Scale from 1
59 Yale University
Index (EPI) (poor) to 100 (good).
Food and Agriculture
60 Renewable water resources Total renewable water sources per capita. Organization of the
United Nations (FAO)

Percentage of the rise in temperature in the city during the summer

61 Future climate forecast for 2100 if pollution caused by carbon emissions continues to Climate Central
increase.

Average amount of municipal solid waste (garbage) generated annually per Waste Management
62 Solid waste
person (kg/year). for Everyone

the ecosystem of air pollution, water quality, biodiversity city represents potential harm for its inhabitants and the
and habitat, afforestation, fish, agriculture, and climate environment due to the prevalence of poor solid waste
change. Given the completeness of this indicator—which management. In many cities, this poor management also
covers almost all aspects related to measuring the state means an additional health risk for the people who work
and evolution of the environment in a city, complement- with this waste. For this reason, the variable is incorpo-
ed by the other indicators that the CIMI incorporates— rated into the index with a negative sign.
the environment dimension is considered to be repre-
sented proportionately. Mobility and Transportation
Water is a renewable energy source that is fundamental The cities of the future have to tackle two major challeng-
for dealing with climate change and its devastating ef- es in the field of mobility and transportation: facilitating
fects. The variable of total renewable water sources per movement (often over large territories) and access to
capita considers both internal and external renewable public services.
surface water resources, and it represents the resources Mobility and transportation—both with regard to road
that a country has so it can have a sustainable future. For and route infrastructure, the vehicle fleet, and public
this reason, it is included with a positive sign in the calcu- transportation, as well as to air transportation—affect the
lation of the index. quality of life of a city’s inhabitants and can be vital to the
sustainability of cities over time. However, perhaps the
The variable of future climate represents the percentage most important aspect is the externalities that are gen-
of the rise in the city’s temperature during the summer erated in the production system, whether because of the
forecast for 2100 if pollution caused by carbon emissions workforce’s need to commute or because of the need for
continues to increase. This variable shows the future risks an outlet for production.
of today’s pollution and is included with a negative sign,
since a continuous increase in temperature in a city pos- Table 6 sets out the indicators selected in the dimension
es a threat to public health and the economy. of mobility and transportation, descriptions of them, their
units of measurement, and the sources of the informa-
Finally, the average amount of municipal solid waste tion.
(garbage) generated annually per person (kg/year) in a

18 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 6. Mobility and Transportation Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

Consideration of the time spent in traffic, the dissatisfaction this generates,
63 Traffic index Numbeo
CO₂ consumption and other inefficiencies of the traffic system.
Estimation of traffic inefficiencies (such as long journey times). High values
64 Inefficiency index Numbeo
represent high rates of inefficiency in driving.
Index of traffic for commuting to Index of time that takes into account how many minutes it takes to commute
65 Numbeo
work to work.
This system shows the automated services for the public use of shared bicycles
Bike-Sharing World
66 Bike sharing that provide transport from one location to another within a city. The indicator
Map
varies between 0 and 8 according to how developed the system is.

67 Length of the metro system Length of the metro system per city. Metrobits

68 Metro stations Number of metro stations per city. Metrobits

69 Flights Number of arrival flights (air routes) in a city. OpenFlights

70 High-speed train Binary variable that shows whether the city has a high-speed train or not. OpenRailwayMap

71 Vehicles Number of commercial vehicles in the city (in thousands). Euromonitor

72 Bicycles per household Percentage of bicycles per household. Euromonitor

The indexes for general traffic, traffic caused by commut- This year we have also incorporated variables for the
ing to work, and inefficiency are estimates of the traffic number of vehicles and the percentage of bicycles that
inefficiencies caused by long driving times and by the dis- the city has. The former is integrated with a negative sign,
satisfaction that these situations generate in the popula- and the latter with a positive sign, due to the negative
tion. These indicators are a measure of the safety of roads and positive influence they respectively have on traffic
and public transportation, which, if it is effective and has and traffic congestion.
a good infrastructure, promotes a decrease in vehicular
traffic on public thoroughfares and reduces the number Urban Planning
of accidents. All these are included with a negative sign
Urban planning has several subdimensions and is close-
in the calculation of the CIMI, since they have a negative
ly related to sustainability. If this is inadequate, it causes
impact on the development of a sustainable city.
a reduction in the public’s quality of life in the medium
The bike-sharing indicator, for its part, collects informa- term and can also negatively affect investment incen-
tion about a city’s public system of shared bicycles aimed tives, since bad planning or a complete lack of planning
at making it possible to move from one location to anoth- hinders and increases the costs of logistics and workers’
er using them. It varies between 0 and 8, where 0 refers transportation, among other aspects.
to the lack of such a system in the city and 8 refers to a To improve the habitability of any territory, it is necessary
highly developed system. It is incorporated with a posi- to take into account the local master plans and the design
tive sign in the CIMI. of green areas and spaces for public use, as well as opt-
ing for smart growth. The new urban planning methods
The number of metro stations and the length of the sys- should focus on creating compact, well-connected cities
tem are indicators of commitment to the development with accessible public services.
of the city and investment with respect to the population
size. The number of air routes (arrivals) and the posses- Depending on the information available, several aspects
sion of a high-speed train represent the degree of mo- related to urban plans, the quality of health infrastruc-
bility development of a city. A highly developed city will ture, and housing policies are incorporated as indicators
favor the incorporation of new commercial air routes, of this dimension. Table 7 sets out the indicators includ-
as well as the circulation and transit of passengers using ed in this dimension, along with descriptions of them,
different means of transport. These indicators are includ- their units of measurement, and the sources of informa-
ed with a positive sign in the calculation of the index be- tion used.
cause of the good influence they have on the dimension.

19 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 7. Urban Planning Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

Number of bike-rental or bike-sharing points, based on docking stations where
73 Bicycles for rent OpenStreetMap
they can be picked up or dropped off.
Percentage of the urban Percentage of the urban population that uses at least basic sanitation
74 population with adequate services—that is, improved sanitation facilities that are not shared with other World Bank
sanitation facilities households.
Number of people per household. Occupancy by household is measured
75 Number of people per household compared to the average. This makes it possible to estimate if a city has Euromonitor
overoccupied or underoccupied households.
Percentage of buildings considered high-rises. A high-rise is a building of at Skyscraper Source
76 High-rise buildings
least 12 stories or 35 meters (115 feet) high. Media
This variable is the number of completed buildings in the city. It includes
structures such as high-rises, towers and low-rise buildings but excludes Skyscraper Source
77 Buildings
other various others, as well as buildings in different states of completion (in Media
construction, planned, etc.).

The bicycle is an effective, fast, economical, healthy, and International Outreach

environmentally friendly means of transportation. There-
fore its use has a positive impact on a city’s sustainable Cities that want to progress must secure a privileged
development as it does not cause pollution or use fuel, place in the world. Maintaining global impact involves
among other benefits. Considering this positive effect, improving the city brand and its international recognition
the index includes in the CIMI the number of points for through strategic tourism plans, the attracting of foreign
the rental or sharing of this means of transport, based investment and representation abroad.
on docking stations where bicycles can be picked up or Cities can have a greater or lesser international outreach
dropped off. Many cities historically considered to be even if they are from the same country but this aspect is
smart cities have a certain positive correlation with wide- not independent of the degree of openness nationally.
spread bicycle use. As a result, this variable is included This dimension seeks to reflect these differences and to
with a positive sign. measure the international outreach of cities.

For its part, the quality of health infrastructure refers to In this respect, the following indicators have been includ-
the percentage of the urban population with improved ed: airports, number of passengers by airport, number of
sanitation facilities that are not shared with other house- hotels in a city, ranking of the most popular places in the
holds. This indicator has a high correlation with that of world according to Sightsmap, and number of meetings
urban planning, since it can be shown that inadequate and conferences that are held according to data from
planning inevitably results in health problems in the the International Congress and Convention Association.
short and medium term. This last indicator is important for a city’s international
reputation, taking into account that these events usual-
In addition, from the urban planning and housing point of ly take place in cities with international hotels, meeting
view, a city with proper urban planning generally has few rooms specially fitted out for such ends, good frequency
or no problems of overcrowding in households, since nor- of international flights, and appropriate security mea-
mally housing policy, in relation to the estimated growth sures. Table 8 summarizes these indicators, along with
in the number of residents, is a determining factor in descriptions of them, their units of measurement, and
urban planning. For this reason, within the explanatory the sources of information.
indicators of this dimension, the number of occupants of
each household is included with a negative sign. All indicators of this dimension, except Sightsmap, are
incorporated with a positive sign into the calculation of
In turn, the number of completed buildings and the per- the CIMI since the higher the value of the indicators, the
centage of high-rises contribute to the creation of com- greater the impact that the city has on the world. Sights-
pact and organized cities. These variables are incorporat- map is incorporated with a negative sign, since the top
ed with a positive sign. positions in its ranking correspond with the most-pho-
tographed cities, of which there is a higher number of
references in Wikipedia and Foursquare.

20 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 8. International Outreach Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

78 McDonald’s Number of McDonald’s chain restaurants per city. OpenStreetMap

79 Number of passengers per airport Number of passengers per airport in thousands. Euromonitor

Ranking of cities according to the number of photos taken there and uploaded
80 Sightsmap to Panoramio (community where photographs were shared online). The top Sightsmap
positions correspond to the cities with the most photographs.
International Congress
Number of conferences and
81 Number of international conferences and meetings that are held in a city. and Convention
meetings
Association (ICCA)

82 Hotels Number of hotels per capita. OpenStreetMap

The index shows the prices of food and beverages in restaurants and bars
83 Restaurant index Numbeo
compared to New York City.

This year, the variable “restaurant index” is included. It The indicators that represent the number of Twitter and
seeks to compare the price of the restaurants in the city LinkedIn users are grouped into a variable called “social
with respect to those of New York. It is incorporated with media.” This is incorporated with a positive sign in the
a positive sign as an indicator of the international culinary CIMI, since it shows the degree to which a city’s inhabi-
quality. tants are connected with technology.

The variables showing the percentage of households

Technology
with the Internet and with mobile phones, as well as the
Although it is not the only important aspect for cities, in- variables for landline and broadband subscriptions, show
formation and communications technology (ICT) is part the degree of technological development that a city has,
of the backbone of any society that wants to achieve as they enable households and businesses to access the
“smart” status. means necessary to make efficient use of technology.
Technology, an integral dimension of the CIMI, is an as- The innovation cities index is calculated by carrying out
pect of society that improves the present quality of life, assessments on the basis of various factors relating to ur-
and its level of development or spread is an indicator of ban technological innovation in sectors such as health,
the quality of life achieved or the potential quality of life. the economy in general and the population, among
In addition, technological development is a dimension others. It is now the most comprehensive indicator for
that allows cities to be sustainable over time and to main- measuring the degree of development of innovation in
tain or extend the competitive advantages of their pro- cities, and is divided methodologically into three aspects
duction system and the quality of employment. A tech- or dimensions: cultural assets, human infrastructure and
nologically backward city has comparative disadvantages interconnected markets.
with respect to other cities, both from the point of view
of security, education, and health—all fundamental for The number of wireless access points globally represents
the sustainability of society—and from the point of view the connection options available to the city’s inhabitants
of the productive apparatus. As a consequence, the pro- when they are outside their home. This variable shows
duction functions become anachronistic. So competitive- the city’s degree of commitment to technological devel-
ness, without protectionism, becomes depleted and has opment.
a negative effect on the city’s capacity for consumption This year, four new variables have been incorporated:
and investment, as well as reducing labor productivity. percentage of households with some kind of telephone
The indicators selected for measuring the cities’ perfor- service, percentage of households with personal com-
mance in terms of the reach of technology and growth puters, Internet speed in the city, and Web Index. The
in the cities are set out in Table 9 below, along with de- four variables attempt to show, along with the previous
scriptions of them, their units of measurement, and the ones, the degree of technology penetration of the city.
sources of information. All the indicators of this dimension are related directly to
technology, so they are incorporated with a positive sign
in this dimension.

21 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 9. Technology Indicators

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Source

84 Twitter Registered Twitter users in the city. This is part of the social media variable. Tweepsmap

85 LinkedIn Number of users in the city. This is part of the social media variable. LinkedIn

International
Number of mobile phones in the city via estimates based on country-level
86 Mobile phones Telecommunication
data.
Union
Number of wireless access points globally. These represent the options in the
87 Wi-Fi hot spot WiFi Map app
city for connecting to the Internet.
Innovation index of the city. Valuation of 0 (no innovation) to 60 (a lot of Innovation Cities
88 Innovation Cities Index
innovation). Program
International
89 Landline subscriptions Number of landline subscriptions per 100 inhabitants. Telecommunication
Union
International
90 Broadband subscriptions Broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants. Telecommunication
Union

91 Internet Percentage of households with access to the Internet. Euromonitor

92 Mobile telephony Percentage of households with mobile phones in the city. Euromonitor

The Web Index seeks to measure the economic, social and political benefit World Wide Web
93 Web Index
that countries obtain from the Internet. Foundation

94 Telephony Percentage of households with some kind of telephone service. Euromonitor

95 Internet speed Internet speed in the city. Nomad List

96 Computers Percentage of households with a personal computer in the city. Euromonitor

22 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Limitations of the Geographic Coverage
Indicators

Appendix 1 describes, by way of summary, all the indica- For the production of this year’s CIMI, 174 cities
tors used in each dimension, and brief descriptions, units have been studied, 79 of which are capitals, with the
of measurement and the sources of information are in- geographical distribution depicted in Figure 1.
cluded.

Perhaps the most significant limitation in the calculation

of the CIMI is linked to the availability of data, although
efforts were made to minimize the impact of this. First
of all, for those indicators that did not have data for the
entire period under analysis, extrapolation techniques
were used. Secondly, for situations where the indicator
values by city were nonexistent but where there were
valid values by country, individual values were assigned
to each city, connecting the indicator at the country level
via some other variable linked theoretically at the city
level. Lastly, in those cases where no data were available
for a particular city or group of cities for the whole period
under consideration, statistical cluster techniques were
used. The scope and detail of these tools are discussed
thoroughly in the supplementary document IESE Cities in
Motion Index 2014: Methodology and Modeling.

With the CIMI platform, we continue to work to obtain

more complete and accurate indicators, while we urge
cities to allow access to their information, since analyzing
it will make it easier to improve those aspects that can
be optimized.

23 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Figure 1. Geographical Distribution of the Cities Included in the Index

Western Europe Eastern Europe and Russia

Linz, Austria Düsseldorf, Germany Eindhoven, Netherlands Zaragoza, Spain Baku, Azerbaijan Wrocław, Poland
Vienna, Austria Frankfurt, Germany Rotterdam, Netherlands Göteborg, Sweden Minsk, Belarus Warsaw, Poland
Antwerp, Belgium Hamburg, Germany Oslo, Norway Stockholm, Sweden Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina Bucharest, Romania
Brussels, Belgium Munich, Germany Lisbon, Portugal Basel, Switzerland Sofia, Bulgaria Moscow, Russia
Copenhagen, Denmark Stuttgart, Germany Porto, Portugal Bern, Switzerland Zagreb, Croatia Novosibirsk, Russia
Helsinki, Finland Athens, Greece A Coruña, Spain Geneva, Switzerland Prague, Czech Republic Saint Petersburg, Russia
North America Lille, France Reykjavík, Iceland Barcelona, Spain Zurich, Switzerland Tallinn, Estonia Belgrade, Serbia
Lyon, France Dublin, Ireland Bilbao, Spain Birmingham, United Kingdom Tbilisi, Georgia Bratislava, Slovakia
Montreal, Canada Marseille, France Florence, Italy Madrid, Spain Edinburgh, United Kingdom Budapest, Hungary Ljubljana, Slovenia
Ottawa, Canada Nice, France Milan, Italy Málaga, Spain Glasgow, United Kingdom Riga, Latvia Ankara, Turkey
Quebec, Canada Paris, France Naples, Italy Murcia, Spain Leeds, United Kingdom Vilnius, Lithuania Istanbul, Turkey
Toronto, Canada Berlin, Germany Rome, Italy Palma de Mallorca, Spain Liverpool, United Kingdom Skopje, North Macedonia Kiev, Ukraine
Vancouver, Canada Cologne, Germany Turin, Italy Seville, Spain London, United Kingdom
Baltimore, USA Duisburg, Germany Amsterdam, Netherlands Valencia, Spain Manchester, United Kingdom
Boston, USA Valladolid, Spain Nottingham, United Kingdom
Chicago, USA
Dallas, USA Asia
Denver, USA
Houston, USA Beijing, China
Los Angeles, USA Guangzhou, China
Miami, USA Hong Kong, China
New York, USA Shanghai, China
Philadelphia, USA Shenzhen, China
Phoenix, USA Tianjin, China
San Antonio, USA Bangalore, India
San Diego, USA Kolkata, India
San Francisco, USA Mumbai, India
Seattle, USA New Delhi, India
Washington, USA Jakarta, Indonesia
Nagoya, Japan
Osaka, Japan
Tokyo, Japan
Latin America and the Caribbean Almaty, Kazakhstan
Middle East Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Buenos Aires, Argentina Cali, Colombia Karachi, Pakistan
Córdoba, Argentina Medellín, Colombia Lahore, Pakistan
Africa Manama, Bahrain
Rosario, Argentina San José, Costa Rica Manila, Philippines
Jerusalem, Israel
La Paz, Bolivia Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic Singapore, Singapore
Douala, Cameroon Tel Aviv, Israel
Santa Cruz, Bolivia Guayaquil, Ecuador Seoul, South Korea
Cairo, Egypt Amman, Jordan
Belo Horizonte, Brazil Quito, Ecuador Bangkok, Thailand
Nairobi, Kenya Kuwait City, Kuwait
Brasília, Brazil Guatemala, Guatemala Taipei, Taiwan
Casablanca, Morocco Doha, Qatar
Curitiba, Brazil Mexico City, Mexico Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
Rabat, Morocco Riyadh, Saudi Arabia Oceania
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Panama, Panama
Lagos, Nigeria Abu Dhabi, UAE
Salvador, Brazil Asunción, Paraguay
Cape Town, South Africa Dubai, UAE Melbourne, Australia
São Paulo, Brazil Lima, Peru
Johannesburg, South Africa Sydney, Australia
Santiago, Chile Montevideo, Uruguay
Tunis, Tunisia Auckland, New Zealand
Bogotá, Colombia Caracas, Venezuela
Wellington, New Zealand
Cities in Motion.
Ranking

The CIMI, which is the subject of this report, is a synthetic Given the partial indicators, the factors are given by the
indicator and, as such, is a function based on the partial complement of the coefficient of determination (R2)
indicators available. for each indicator compared with the rest of the partial
indicators. The order in which the indicators of each
The process of creating this synthetic indicator is based dimension have been included, as well as their relative
on a model of weighted aggregation of partial indicators weight in the CIMI, is as follows: the economy (1), human
that represent each of the nine dimensions that make up capital (0.612), international outreach (0.511), urban
the CIMI theoretical model. The dimensions selected to planning (0.487), the environment (0.831), technology
describe the situation of cities in terms of sustainability (0.356), governance (0.404), social cohesion (0.567) and
and the quality of life of their inhabitants, both in mobility and transportation (0.548).
the present and in the future, are as follows: human
capital, social cohesion, the economy, governance, While the order in which the synthetic indexes of each
the environment, mobility and transportation, urban dimension are incorporated influences the value of the
planning, international outreach, and technology. CIMI, the sensitivity studies carried out concluded that
there are no significant variations in it. More details on
The partial indicators representative of each dimension the methodology can be seen in the supplementary
also correspond to the category of synthetic indicators, document IESE Cities in Motion Index 2014: Methodology
which are defined as “weighted aggregations of each of and Modeling, mentioned previously.
the selected indicators that represent different factors of
each dimension.” Table 10 sets out the CIMI city ranking, together with
the index value. The cities are grouped according to their
Given the type of indicator in question and the data performance, measured by the value of the synthetic
available, for the calculation of the CIMI, the DP2 indicator. The performance of the cities is rated as follows:
technique has been used, this being the most widely used high (H) if they have an index greater than 90; relatively
internationally and the most suitable. Its methodology high (RH) if the city is between 60 and 90; medium (M)
is based on distance—that is, the difference between if it is in the range between 45 and 60; low (L) if it is
an indicator’s given value and another value taken as a between 45 and 15; and very low (VL) if it is below 15.
reference or target. Likewise, this technique attempts to
correct the dependence among the partial indicators,
which would artificially increase the indicator’s sensitivity
to variations in certain partial values. The correction
consists of applying the same factor to each partial
indicator, assuming a linearly dependent function is
established between them.2

2
Because linear estimates are involved, variables with a normal distribution are
required, so a log transformation has been applied to some variables to obtain the
said normality. Likewise, outlier techniques have been applied to avoid bias and
overestimations of coefficients.

25 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 10. City Ranking

Ranking City Performance CIMI Ranking City Performance CIMI

1 London ‐ United Kingdom H 100,00 62 San Antonio ‐ USA RH 61,33
2 New York ‐ USA H 94,63 63 Birmingham ‐ United Kingdom RH 61,30
3 Amsterdam ‐ Netherlands RH 86,70 64 Glasgow ‐ United Kingdom RH 61,23
4 Paris ‐ France RH 86,23 65 Tallinn ‐ Estonia RH 60,96
5 Reykjavík ‐ Iceland RH 85,35 66 Santiago ‐ Chile RH 60,96
6 Tokyo ‐ Japan RH 84,11 67 Quebec ‐ Canada RH 60,64
7 Singapore ‐ Singapore RH 82,73 68 Osaka ‐ Japan RH 60,50
8 Copenhagen ‐ Denmark RH 81,80 69 Warsaw ‐ Poland RH 60,13
9 Berlin ‐ Germany RH 80,88 70 Bratislava ‐ Slovakia M 59,92
10 Vienna ‐ Austria RH 78,85 71 Baltimore ‐ USA M 59,86
11 Hong Kong ‐ China RH 78,76 72 Antwerp ‐ Belgium M 59,84
12 Seoul ‐ South Korea RH 78,13 73 Budapest ‐ Hungary M 59,65
13 Stockholm ‐ Sweden RH 77,89 74 Vilnius ‐ Lithuania M 59,15
14 Oslo ‐ Norway RH 77,45 75 Rome ‐ Italy M 59,09
15 Zurich ‐ Switzerland RH 76,66 76 Seville ‐ Spain M 58,57
16 Los Angeles ‐ USA RH 76,04 77 Buenos Aires ‐ Argentina M 58,42
17 Chicago ‐ USA RH 75,55 78 Manchester ‐ United Kingdom M 58,05
18 Toronto ‐ Canada RH 75,30 79 Leeds ‐ United Kingdom M 57,98
19 Sydney ‐ Australia RH 75,26 80 Málaga ‐ Spain M 57,59
20 Melbourne ‐ Australia RH 75,08 81 Tel Aviv ‐ Israel M 57,47
21 San Francisco ‐ USA RH 75,07 82 Nagoya ‐ Japan M 57,26
22 Helsinki ‐ Finland RH 74,08 83 Beijing ‐ China M 56,81
23 Washington ‐ USA RH 73,14 84 Riga ‐ Latvia M 56,27
24 Madrid ‐ Spain RH 73,02 85 Nice ‐ France M 56,09
25 Boston ‐ USA RH 72,91 86 Moscow ‐ Russia M 55,91
26 Wellington ‐ New Zealand RH 72,82 87 Linz ‐ Austria M 55,89
27 Munich ‐ Germany RH 72,71 88 Palma de Mallorca ‐ Spain M 55,57
28 Barcelona ‐ Spain RH 72,25 89 Marseille ‐ France M 55,10
29 Basel ‐ Switzerland RH 70,39 90 Duisburg ‐ Germany M 54,93
30 Taipei ‐ Taiwan RH 70,04 91 Porto ‐ Portugal M 54,76
31 Bern ‐ Switzerland RH 70,03 92 Montevideo ‐ Uruguay M 54,75
32 Geneva ‐ Switzerland RH 69,78 93 Ljubljana ‐ Slovenia M 54,41
33 Frankfurt ‐ Germany RH 69,39 94 Liverpool ‐ United Kingdom M 53,52
34 Hamburg ‐ Germany RH 69,23 95 Wroclaw ‐ Poland M 53,39
35 Auckland ‐ New Zealand RH 69,10 96 Nottingham ‐ United Kingdom M 53,36
36 Göteborg ‐ Sweden RH 68,65 97 Zagreb ‐ Croatia M 53,30
37 Dublin ‐ Ireland RH 68,19 98 Lille ‐ France M 52,93
38 Montreal ‐ Canada RH 66,82 99 Dubai ‐ United Arab Emirates M 52,92
39 Ottawa ‐ Canada RH 66,68 100 Kuala Lumpur ‐ Malaysia M 52,83
40 Miami ‐ USA RH 66,31 101 Zaragoza ‐ Spain M 52,53
41 Milan ‐ Italy RH 65,94 102 A Coruña ‐ Spain M 51,85
42 Phoenix ‐ USA RH 65,73 103 Bucharest ‐ Romania M 51,49
43 Rotterdam ‐ Netherlands RH 65,38 104 Bangkok ‐ Thailand M 51,35
44 Lisbon ‐ Portugal RH 65,32 105 Murcia ‐ Spain M 51,19
45 Dallas ‐ USA RH 65,13 106 Athens ‐ Greece M 50,71
46 Edinburgh ‐ United Kingdom RH 65,06 107 Bilbao ‐ Spain M 50,14
47 Prague ‐ Czech Republic RH 64,97 108 Florence ‐ Italy M 49,54
48 Brussels ‐ Belgium RH 64,79 109 Turin ‐ Italy M 49,51
49 San Diego ‐ USA RH 64,43 110 Minsk ‐ Belarus M 49,23
50 Düsseldorf ‐ Germany RH 64,34 111 Kiev ‐ Ukraine M 49,11
51 Cologne ‐ Germany RH 64,19 112 San José ‐ Costa Rica M 49,01
52 Denver ‐ USA RH 64,01 113 Guangzhou ‐ China M 48,40
53 Stuttgart ‐ Germany RH 64,01 114 Panama ‐ Panama M 47,51
54 Philadelphia ‐ USA RH 63,27 115 Sofia ‐ Bulgaria M 46,71
55 Vancouver ‐ Canada RH 63,15 116 Naples ‐ Italy M 46,62
56 Lyon ‐ France RH 62,56 117 Bogotá ‐ Colombia M 46,01
57 Eindhoven ‐ Netherlands RH 62,35 118 Istanbul ‐ Turkey M 45,85
58 Seattle ‐ USA RH 61,96 119 Shenzhen ‐ China M 45,28
59 Shanghai ‐ China RH 61,78 120 Belgrade ‐ Serbia L 44,86
60 Houston ‐ USA RH 61,74 121 Saint Petersburg ‐ Russia L 44,12
61 Valencia ‐ Spain RH 61,52 122 Ho Chi Minh City ‐ Vietnam L 43,49

26 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 10. City Ranking (continued)

Ranking City Performance CIMI Ranking City Performance CIMI

123 Jerusalem ‐ Israel L 43,27 149 Skopje ‐ North Macedonia L 33,88
124 Tbilisi ‐ Georgia L 42,96 150 Amman ‐ Jordan L 33,61
125 Rosario ‐ Argentina L 42,45 151 Belo Horizonte ‐ Brazil L 33,40
126 Doha ‐ Qatar L 42,14 152 Guayaquil ‐ Ecuador L 33,10
127 Abu Dhabi ‐ United Arab Emirates L 42,12 153 Bangalore ‐ India L 32,65
128 Rio de Janeiro ‐ Brazil L 42,08 154 Tianjin ‐ China L 32,62
129 Almaty ‐ Kazakhstan L 42,04 155 Casablanca ‐ Morocco L 32,31
130 Brasília ‐ Brazil L 41,84 156 Novosibirsk ‐ Russia L 32,05
131 Baku ‐ Azerbaijan L 41,24 157 Tunis ‐ Tunisia L 31,36
132 São Paulo ‐ Brazil L 40,90 158 Cape Town ‐ South Africa L 30,68
133 Mexico City ‐ Mexico L 40,79 159 Manama ‐ Bahrain L 30,06
134 Medellín ‐ Colombia L 40,67 160 Guatemala City ‐ Guatemala L 30,06
135 Ankara ‐ Turkey L 39,61 161 Mumbai ‐ India L 28,36
136 Córdoba ‐ Argentina L 38,38 162 Nairobi ‐ Kenya L 27,99
137 Quito ‐ Ecuador L 38,19 163 Manila ‐ Philippines L 27,73
138 Lima ‐ Perú L 38,14 164 Riyadh ‐ Saudi Arabia L 27,71
139 Santo Domingo ‐ Dominican Republic L 37,43 165 Cairo ‐ Egypt L 26,74
140 Curitiba ‐ Brazil L 37,33 166 New Delhi ‐ India L 26,52
141 Asunción ‐ Paraguay L 37,25 167 Johannesburg ‐ South Africa L 25,95
142 Jakarta ‐ Indonesia L 35,96 168 Rabat ‐ Morocco L 24,78
143 Kuwait City ‐ Kuwait L 35,61 169 Kolkata ‐ India L 19,54
144 Sarajevo ‐ Bosnia‐Herzegovina L 35,39 170 Douala ‐ Cameroon L 17,03
145 La Paz ‐ Bolivia L 35,12 171 Lagos ‐ Nigeria VL 10,24
146 Salvador ‐ Brazil L 34,20 172 Caracas ‐ Venezuela VL 6,71
147 Santa Cruz ‐ Bolivia L 34,16 173 Lahore ‐ Pakistan VL 6,27
148 Cali ‐ Colombia L 34,04 174 Karachi ‐ Pakistan VL 4,57

In the 2018 ranking, headed by London, New York and Figure 2 depicts the ranking of the cities according to
Amsterdam, it can be observed that 39.66% of the cities population. The size of the bubbles reflects the position
(69) have a performance rated high (H) or relatively high of the city in the general ranking, and the color reflects
(RH). There are 50 cities (28.74%) with an average (M) the population group to which it belongs, according to
performance, while those classified as low (L) comprise the categorization used in the CIMI.
29.31%. It should be added that, this year, four of the New York

cities (2.29%) have obtained a rating of very low (VL).

Osaka

Figure 2. Ranking by Population

Geneva
Lyon

London
Boston

New York Seoul

Dublin

Rome Auckland
Osaka

Copenhagen
Geneva Los Angeles Stockholm
Lyon Lisbon
Barcelona
Toronto
Munich
Prague
London Denver
Boston Phoenix Dallas Bern
Singapore Milan

Dublin Amsterdam
Chicago Melbourne
Auckland Oslo H
Tokyo
Miami
Helsinki
Reykjavik
Copenhagen
Basel Hong Kong
Lisbon
Barcelona
Toronto
San
Prague
Denver Zurich Francisco
Dallas Bern Madrid
Berlin
Milan
Sydney

Ottawa
Oslo Taipei
Tokyo
Hamburg Population
Población
Miami
Helsinki 1-Less than
than 600,000
600,000
2-Between 600,000mil
2-Between 600,000 and
and1 million
1,000,000
3-Between
3-Between 11million
millionand
and55millions
million
Paris Vienna
San
4-Between
4-Between 55and
million and 10 million
10 millions
Francisco
5-More than10
5-More than 10millions
million

Población 27 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

1-Less than 600,000
2-Between 600,000 mil and 1,000,000
 New York
Mumbai Wroclaw
Glasgow Nottingham Philadelphia Edinburgh Linz
Geneva Miami
Osaka Nagoya
Bilbao Malaga Cordoba Bratislava
Quebec Liverpool Montreal Riga
Zurich Melbourne Seoul Barcelona
Lyon
Stockholm Vienna
Bangkok
isburgJerusalem Montevideo

Taipei Berlin
Shanghai
San Jose
Chicago Lisbon
Rio de Janeiro
Eindhoven Novosibirsk Rotterdam Warsaw

London
Singapore
nto Domingo Palma de Mallorca

Bern AucklandDoha
Vancouver Boston Toronto
Santia
Dalla

Reykjavik
Frankfurt Porto
Copenhagen
Milan Cologn
Antwerp
Sydney Dublin

Oslo Hong Kong

Dubai
Washington Helsinki Tbilisi
Tokyo
Quito

n Antonio
PhoenixBelgrade Basel Dusseldorf
San FranciscoSeattle
Marseille
exico City
Ottawa Cali San Diego A Coruña

ParisWellington Amsterdam
Los Angeles
Nice Moscow
Bangalore Saint PetersburgSeville
Manama Guayaquil Belo Horizonte Munich Bogota Buenos AiresTunis Shenzhen Salvador Ki

nkara
Lagos Brussels Guatemala City Vilnius Caracas
Asuncion Valencia Gothenburg
MurciaNaples
Beijing Budapest Houston Almaty Douala
Istanbul BirminghamSofia
Stuttgart Panama Madrid Hamburg Ho Chi Minh City Johannesburg Baltimore Casablanca
Jakarta
Zagreb Riyadh
Sao Paulo Sarajevo Rabat Prague Ljubljana Manchester Cape Town Santa Cruz Lahore Delhi Lima
Kuala Lumpur Kuwait City Saragossa Florence Tel Aviv
Baku Tianjin Medellin Karachi La Paz
Rome Rosario Curitiba Turin Lille
Athens Leeds Cairo
Skopje

Cities in Motion:
Ranking by
Dimension

This section sets out the ranking according to each of New York is in second place in the overall ranking, thanks
the dimensions that make up the index, together with to its performance in the dimensions of the economy
the city’s position overall and in each dimension. To (position 1), human capital (position 3), urban planning
make the visual layout more intuitive, the darker greens (position 2) and mobility and transportation (position 5).
correspond to the top positions in the CIMI ranking, and As in previous years, it shows a worse performance in social
the darker reds to the worst-ranked cities, while yellow cohesion (position 137) and the environment (position
shades reflect the intermediate positions. 78) and, although it has made some improvement in the
latter with respect to the previous year, it has not achieved
Year after year, the top place in the ranking seems to
an outstanding position.
be disputed by London (United Kingdom) and New York
(United States), two highly developed and smart cities. The city of Amsterdam (Netherlands) ranks third, having
This year it has been London’s turn to occupy the top improved a lot in international outreach (position 2) and
position in the overall ranking, thanks to its performance also standing out in the economy, urban planning, and
in the dimensions of international outreach (position 1), mobility and transportation.
human capital (position 1), mobility and transportation
(position 3) and the economy (position 12). However, Table 11 shows the rankings, both overall and by
the city does not show such a good performance in dimension, for the 174 cities included in the index. The
the dimensions of social cohesion (position 45) and interpretation of the table is very important for the
the environment (position 34). It should be made clear analysis of the results, since it allows the relative position
that, although the city is not in a prominent position in of all the cities in each dimension to be known. In
these dimensions, each year it shows an improvement, Figure 3, the positions of the cities on the world map can
consistent with the work being done to turn it into a also be seen.
smart city in every way.

28 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 11. Ranking by Dimension

Human Social International Mobility and Cities in

City Economy Environment Governance Urban planning Technology
capital cohesion outreach transportation Motion

London ‐ United Kingdom 12 1 45 34 7 9 1 8 3 1
New York ‐ USA 1 3 137 78 26 2 8 11 5 2
Amsterdam ‐ Netherlands 10 36 38 28 27 11 2 7 11 3
Paris ‐ France 8 6 86 54 37 50 3 15 4 4
Reykjavík ‐ Iceland 90 53 18 1 19 108 22 4 46 5
Tokyo ‐ Japan 3 9 49 6 71 24 35 20 29 6
Singapore ‐ Singapore 21 44 47 10 20 31 4 1 67 7
Copenhagen ‐ Denmark 25 28 11 3 12 75 16 10 25 8
Berlin ‐ Germany 50 5 39 47 6 40 5 32 6 9
Vienna ‐ Austria 57 23 31 15 25 45 7 13 7 10
Hong Kong ‐ China 29 17 140 20 21 8 15 2 40 11
Seoul ‐ South Korea 15 14 95 32 39 27 34 6 17 12
Stockholm ‐ Sweden 18 58 60 5 24 48 24 14 21 13
Oslo ‐ Norway 17 71 20 8 52 54 19 17 20 14
Zurich ‐ Switzerland 22 35 1 25 9 68 21 25 55 15
Los Angeles ‐ USA 2 2 82 152 5 14 33 21 134 16
Chicago ‐ USA 7 10 104 130 41 5 18 35 38 17
Toronto ‐ Canada 40 30 76 53 17 1 27 16 58 18
Sydney ‐ Australia 28 29 22 18 22 23 10 26 109 19
Melbourne ‐ Australia 34 33 23 31 4 15 6 40 111 20
San Francisco ‐ USA 4 11 79 122 64 13 36 3 100 21
Helsinki ‐ Finland 32 55 10 12 8 64 39 66 47 22
Washington ‐ USA 5 8 71 141 13 10 40 31 92 23
Madrid ‐ Spain 39 41 55 58 46 33 17 34 9 24
Boston ‐ USA 9 4 84 115 15 21 69 19 131 25
Wellington ‐ New Zealand 31 68 6 2 14 41 79 79 70 26
Munich ‐ Germany 36 63 16 69 32 58 28 38 8 27
Barcelona ‐ Spain 51 46 89 51 29 29 11 24 12 28
Basel ‐ Switzerland 35 54 4 36 11 136 49 57 19 29
Taipei ‐ Taiwan 83 20 3 145 3 12 55 23 10 30

29 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 11. Ranking by Dimension (continued)

Human Social International Mobility and Cities in

City Economy Environment Governance Urban planning Technology
capital cohesion outreach transportation Motion

Bern ‐ Switzerland 75 67 2 70 1 104 112 71 22 31

Geneva ‐ Switzerland 37 85 30 60 2 139 13 48 41 32
Frankfurt ‐ Germany 41 45 44 80 59 25 32 73 18 33
Hamburg ‐ Germany 45 32 74 57 28 55 46 59 14 34
Auckland ‐ New Zealand 30 95 25 7 38 53 51 37 106 35
Göteborg ‐ Sweden 33 75 68 11 36 82 83 55 33 36
Dublin ‐ Ireland 26 105 42 24 67 92 30 28 69 37
Montreal ‐ Canada 53 50 43 63 40 7 41 43 84 38
Ottawa ‐ Canada 55 43 13 62 16 6 98 75 79 39
Miami ‐ USA 20 18 102 142 47 36 9 62 94 40
Milan ‐ Italy 42 34 81 66 109 56 31 96 23 41
Phoenix ‐ USA 19 13 72 137 56 59 43 56 66 42
Rotterdam ‐ Netherlands 69 62 35 49 101 16 92 47 16 43
Lisbon ‐ Portugal 71 77 70 14 73 76 26 49 76 44
Dallas ‐ USA 6 12 80 134 63 71 85 29 120 45
Edinburgh ‐ United Kingdom 61 24 12 81 75 109 38 54 39 46
Prague ‐ Czech Republic 96 57 29 26 82 81 20 46 57 47
Brussels ‐ Belgium 65 112 66 43 44 49 45 33 24 48
San Diego ‐ USA 23 21 62 138 10 61 52 45 122 49
Düsseldorf ‐ Germany 47 88 24 33 89 126 47 88 26 50
Cologne ‐ Germany 43 61 26 92 31 130 63 70 27 51
Denver ‐ USA 16 31 78 158 45 18 44 12 96 52
Stuttgart ‐ Germany 38 70 15 65 79 96 89 69 30 53
Philadelphia ‐ USA 14 16 96 144 51 43 88 22 110 54
Vancouver ‐ Canada 104 83 33 77 68 3 58 44 71 55
Lyon ‐ France 62 52 41 64 66 72 75 64 51 56
Eindhoven ‐ Netherlands 56 82 9 107 58 69 99 9 48 57
Seattle ‐ USA 11 51 77 143 23 78 67 30 149 58
Shanghai ‐ China 80 27 129 147 74 37 59 116 1 59
 Human Social International Mobility and Cities in
City Economy Environment Governance Urban planning Technology
capital cohesion outreach transportation Motion

Houston ‐ USA 13 40 119 150 60 17 56 39 129 60

Valencia ‐ Spain 70 109 46 39 33 51 107 111 31 61
San Antonio ‐ USA 27 37 63 135 57 44 103 51 99 62
Birmingham ‐ United Kingdom 59 38 34 72 55 70 80 85 75 63
Glasgow ‐ United Kingdom 68 25 17 95 49 80 60 84 95 64
Tallinn ‐ Estonia 79 47 37 21 125 62 95 53 90 65
Santiago ‐ Chile 63 93 111 30 87 28 57 100 56 66
Quebec ‐ Canada 54 84 7 79 18 97 114 52 93 67
Osaka ‐ Japan 44 72 85 23 104 91 113 80 60 68
Warsaw ‐ Poland 78 79 69 96 77 20 53 124 45 69
Bratislava ‐ Slovakia 91 49 14 35 50 67 122 113 85 70
Baltimore ‐ USA 24 56 103 129 42 47 91 60 115 71
Antwerp ‐ Belgium 86 108 40 48 96 42 129 63 32 72
Budapest ‐ Hungary 105 42 108 38 85 83 37 67 61 73
Vilnius ‐ Lithuania 94 22 128 22 53 57 108 109 78 74
Rome ‐ Italy 48 48 120 123 62 141 14 106 62 75
Seville ‐ Spain 76 96 50 67 86 60 97 107 37 76
Buenos Aires ‐ Argentina 132 66 113 29 30 19 29 110 133 77
Manchester ‐ United Kingdom 115 19 53 101 76 101 74 77 52 78
Leeds ‐ United Kingdom 77 26 27 84 72 119 128 99 74 79
Málaga ‐ Spain 74 101 54 86 100 107 62 117 34 80
Tel Aviv ‐ Israel 60 126 57 41 54 34 104 42 126 81
Nagoya ‐ Japan 66 91 52 16 98 132 131 103 89 82
Beijing ‐ China 58 64 127 163 116 63 50 115 2 83
Riga ‐ Latvia 146 74 101 27 97 26 93 61 73 84
Nice ‐ France 87 73 73 83 93 116 42 82 105 85
Moscow ‐ Russia 100 7 163 136 43 22 73 92 65 86
Linz ‐ Austria 117 80 5 37 90 143 153 112 35 87
Palma de Mallorca ‐ Spain 120 115 64 88 110 98 12 94 64 88
Marseille ‐ France 84 94 83 106 80 77 87 86 68 89

31 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 11. Ranking by Dimension (continued)

Human Social International Mobility and Cities in

City Economy Environment Governance Urban planning Technology
capital cohesion outreach transportation Motion

Duisburg ‐ Germany 126 92 21 105 102 135 66 108 28 90

Porto ‐ Portugal 85 125 56 19 92 138 86 89 103 91
Montevideo ‐ Uruguay 106 131 106 4 69 84 110 65 118 92
Ljubljana ‐ Slovenia 136 100 32 45 91 93 134 36 72 93
Liverpool ‐ United Kingdom 110 65 19 109 78 103 127 93 101 94
Wroclaw ‐ Poland 92 89 92 98 112 46 135 128 49 95
Nottingham ‐ United Kingdom 81 69 28 117 81 124 147 90 104 96
Zagreb ‐ Croatia 135 110 61 46 35 86 130 78 98 97
Lille ‐ France 88 97 59 99 117 111 137 95 53 98
Dubai ‐ United Arab Emirates 64 145 36 159 70 90 25 5 117 99
Kuala Lumpur ‐ Malaysia 49 116 109 113 126 94 64 130 59 100
Zaragoza ‐ Spain 122 81 75 93 83 102 149 98 42 101
A Coruña ‐ Spain 128 98 67 59 135 73 150 101 44 102
Bucharest ‐ Romania 72 102 97 104 122 88 78 81 127 103
Bangkok ‐ Thailand 46 133 123 125 150 30 23 127 140 104
Murcia ‐ Spain 125 111 48 97 108 65 163 74 50 105
Athens ‐ Greece 114 78 155 52 143 133 61 27 80 106
Bilbao ‐ Spain 118 117 88 91 107 89 125 87 63 107
Florence ‐ Italy 121 59 90 128 127 147 68 121 54 108
Turin ‐ Italy 111 87 98 133 105 131 101 131 36 109
Minsk ‐ Belarus 113 90 105 61 132 113 146 118 77 110
Kiev ‐ Ukraine 107 103 158 120 114 4 123 119 108 111
San José ‐ Costa Rica 97 158 112 13 61 146 100 105 138 112
Guangzhou ‐ China 82 128 117 154 145 105 90 132 13 113
Panama ‐ Panama 119 146 110 42 147 99 81 50 125 114
Sofia ‐ Bulgaria 164 76 87 90 88 149 115 97 82 115
Naples ‐ Italy 127 99 99 112 141 115 111 136 81 116
Bogotá ‐ Colombia 124 106 159 89 34 112 76 125 148 117
Istanbul ‐ Turkey 67 124 165 132 151 66 48 76 112 118
Shenzhen ‐ China 73 137 136 153 158 100 126 133 15 119
 Human Social International Mobility and Cities in
City Economy Environment Governance Urban planning Technology
capital cohesion outreach transportation Motion

Belgrade ‐ Serbia 161 107 132 56 128 121 96 68 121 120

Saint Petersburg ‐ Russia 145 39 153 155 99 52 77 120 135 121
Ho Chi Minh City ‐ Vietnam 98 154 124 73 156 114 94 153 83 122
Jerusalem ‐ Israel 150 136 150 55 48 148 65 134 139 123
Tbilisi ‐ Georgia 102 139 122 100 129 140 132 72 141 124
Rosario ‐ Argentina 171 118 51 87 103 32 138 144 142 125
Doha ‐ Qatar 52 168 58 166 149 129 84 18 128 126
Abu Dhabi ‐ United Arab Emirates 116 157 8 169 84 118 54 83 97 127
Rio de Janeiro ‐ Brazil 149 114 168 110 95 38 72 129 154 128
Almaty ‐ Kazakhstan 123 127 138 108 153 74 167 140 87 129
Brasília ‐ Brazil 144 151 151 85 106 106 118 139 88 130
Baku ‐ Azerbaijan 137 123 100 75 164 137 143 122 119 131
São Paulo ‐ Brazil 138 129 167 102 123 39 70 123 168 132
Mexico City ‐ Mexico 131 60 141 168 111 35 71 135 116 133
Medellín ‐ Colombia 140 132 143 114 113 87 155 143 107 134
Ankara ‐ Turkey 162 113 115 139 131 95 142 138 86 135
Córdoba ‐ Argentina 170 120 93 74 119 123 148 151 146 136
Quito ‐ Ecuador 139 130 130 82 169 122 116 157 143 137
Lima ‐ Peru 101 122 139 140 115 142 136 147 152 138
Santo Domingo ‐ Dominican Republic 134 166 149 44 137 120 133 159 158 139
Curitiba ‐ Brazil 153 149 145 71 138 128 152 145 124 140
Asunción ‐ Paraguay 168 119 94 9 160 159 162 165 137 141
Jakarta ‐ Indonesia 160 15 152 127 139 151 102 142 174 142
Kuwait City ‐ Kuwait 163 161 91 146 124 161 117 41 123 143
Sarajevo ‐ Bosnia‐Herzegovina 173 86 160 124 133 85 158 146 102 144
La Paz ‐ Bolivia 152 155 131 68 142 144 120 169 156 145
Salvador ‐ Brazil 157 135 162 103 148 110 139 161 144 146
Santa Cruz ‐ Bolivia 148 147 135 17 167 167 140 168 157 147
Cali ‐ Colombia 143 140 114 118 146 155 170 155 151 148
Skopje ‐ North Macedonia 169 150 142 119 121 162 154 102 113 149

33 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 11. Ranking by Dimension (continued)

Human Social International Mobility and Cities in

City Economy Environment Governance Urban planning Technology
capital cohesion outreach transportation Motion

Amman ‐ Jordan 154 173 126 121 118 153 141 114 169 150
Belo Horizonte ‐ Brazil 156 141 154 116 154 127 160 148 159 151
Guayaquil ‐ Ecuador 142 153 107 111 173 152 156 162 150 152
Bangalore ‐ India 93 134 116 165 140 156 106 154 166 153
Tianjin ‐ China 89 138 125 172 161 134 161 137 43 154
Casablanca ‐ Morocco 99 165 134 156 170 154 151 58 160 155
Novosibirsk ‐ Russia 147 121 147 157 120 117 165 149 163 156
Tunis ‐ Tunisia 166 152 118 76 136 158 168 163 145 157
Cape Town ‐ South Africa 165 142 169 131 94 145 109 152 161 158
Manama ‐ Bahrain 129 156 65 167 166 172 119 91 91 159
Guatemala City ‐ Guatemala 141 164 144 126 134 163 144 166 165 160
Mumbai ‐ India 103 162 148 164 155 157 121 150 164 161
Nairobi ‐ Kenya 130 170 166 40 152 169 145 171 173 162
Manila ‐ Philippines 133 148 161 149 162 160 105 158 170 163
Riyadh ‐ Saudi Arabia 108 169 121 173 65 165 157 104 136 164
Cairo ‐ Egypt 109 144 170 160 172 125 159 141 167 165
New Delhi ‐ India 95 159 157 170 144 168 82 160 114 166
Johannesburg ‐ South Africa 158 143 171 151 130 150 164 156 155 167
Rabat ‐ Morocco 167 174 133 148 163 166 169 126 132 168
Kolkata ‐ India 155 160 156 161 157 164 171 170 172 169
Douala ‐ Cameroon 172 163 146 50 171 173 172 174 162 170
Lagos ‐ Nigeria 159 167 164 162 165 170 173 173 171 171
Caracas ‐ Venezuela 174 104 174 94 159 79 124 164 130 172
Lahore ‐ Pakistan 151 172 173 171 168 174 166 172 147 173
Karachi ‐ Pakistan 112 171 172 174 174 171 174 167 153 174
Figure 3. Map of Cities in the CIMI Ranking

35 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 12 shows the top 10 positions in the ranking for each dimension. In this way, the regional representativeness can be
appreciated in each of the dimension.

Table 12. Top 10 by Dimension

ECONOMY HUMAN CAPITAL SOCIAL COHESION

1 New York - USA 1 London - United Kingdom 1 Zurich - Switzerland

2 Los Angeles - USA 2 Los Angeles - USA 2 Bern - Switzerland

3 Tokyo - Japan 3 New York - USA 3 Taipei - Taiwan

4 San Francisco - USA 4 Boston - USA 4 Basel - Switzerland

5 Washington - USA 5 Berlin - Germany 5 Linz - Austria

6 Dallas - USA 6 Paris - France 6 Wellington - New Zealand

7 Chicago - USA 7 Moscow - Russia 7 Quebec - Canada

8 Paris - France 8 Washington - USA 8 Abu Dhabi - United Arab Emirates

9 Boston - USA 9 Tokyo - Japan 9 Eindhoven - Netherlands

10 Amsterdam - Netherlands 10 Chicago - USA 10 Helsinki - Finland

Throughout the years, New York The city that ranks first in this Zurich (Switzerland) is the city with
City (United States) has topped the dimension is London (United the highest rating in this dimension.
ranking in this dimension, thanks Kingdom) and it has achieved this Considered one of the cities with
especially to its high GDP and to the thanks to it having the most top- the best quality of life in the world
number of publicly traded parent level business schools, as well in 2018 (Mercer Quality of Living
companies. Although its indicators as having the highest number of ranking) and the second most
mean that, for the moment, this universities within the best 500 sustainable in 2017 (Sustainable
city is difficult to beat, Tokyo—with in the world. It also has a large Cities Index), it has a low homicide
characteristics that can put it at the number of high schools, both and crime rate, one of the world’s
top of this dimension—has been state-run and private, and a high highest happiness indexes, and the
getting closer to the top position proportion of the population with highest score for an environment
year after year. secondary and higher education, conducive to the development
as well as a broad cultural offering of women. Likewise, it has a low
In the top 10 for this dimension, made up of theaters, museums and unemployment rate and a rather
there are seven US cities in total, art galleries. equitable distribution of income.
due mainly to their high GDP per
capita. US cities also stand out in this Of the top 10 cities in the ranking
dimension. Five of them are in its for this dimension, six are European
top 10. and three of those are Swiss.

36 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 12. Top 10 by Dimension (continued)

THE ENVIRONMENT GOVERNANCE URBAN PLANNING

1 Reykjavík - Iceland 1 Bern - Switzerland 1 Toronto - Canada

2 Wellington - New Zealand 2 Geneva - Switzerland 2 New York - USA

3 Copenhagen - Denmark 3 Taipei - Taiwan 3 Vancouver - Canada

4 Montevideo - Uruguay 4 Melbourne - Australia 4 Kiev - Ukraine

5 Stockholm - Sweden 5 Los Angeles - USA 5 Chicago - USA

6 Tokyo - Japan 6 Berlin - Germany 6 Ottawa - Canada

7 Auckland - New Zealand 7 London - United Kingdom 7 Montreal - Canada

8 Oslo - Norway 8 Helsinki - Finland 8 Hong Kong - China

9 Asunción - Paraguay 9 Zurich - Switzerland 9 London - United Kingdom

10 Singapore - Singapore 10 San Diego - USA 10 Washington - USA

In this dimension, the same as in For another year, Bern (Switzerland) Toronto (Canada) has obtained
the previous year, the best-ranked is ranked first in this dimension, first place in this dimension. It is
cities are Reykjavík (Iceland) and displaying a good performance notable for its very well-developed
Wellington (New Zealand), which in the indexes of corruption infrastructure, with a large number
are at the top of the EPI and have perceptions, reserves per capita of buildings and skyscrapers, and
low levels of PM10 and PM2.5 and number of embassies. access to adequate sanitation
pollution and contamination. facilities for almost the entire urban
In this dimension, six other
Moreover, Reykjavík also stands out population. Furthermore, the
for its renewable water sources. Western European cities also stand number of people per household in
out among the first 10 positions in
This year, the entry of Asunción the city is around the average.
the ranking, in addition to two US
(Paraguay)—the city with the
cities. It is worth noting that, in this
lowest CO₂ emissions—stands out
dimension, seven of the 10 top-
in the top 10 of this ranking.
ranking cities are North American.

37 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 12. Top 10 by Dimension (continued)

INTERNATIONAL OUTREACH TECHNOLOGY MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION

1 London - United Kingdom 1 Singapore - Singapore 1 Shanghai - China

2 Amsterdam - Netherlands 2 Hong Kong - China 2 Beijing - China

3 Paris - France 3 San Francisco - USA 3 London - United Kingdom

4 Singapore - Singapore 4 Reykjavík - Iceland 4 Paris - France

5 Berlin - Germany 5 Dubai - United Arab Emirates 5 New York - USA

6 Melbourne - Australia 6 Seoul - South Korea 6 Berlin - Germany

7 Vienna - Austria 7 Amsterdam - Netherlands 7 Vienna - Austria

8 New York - USA 8 London - United Kingdom 8 Munich - Germany

9 Miami - USA 9 Eindhoven - Netherlands 9 Madrid - Spain

10 Sydney - Australia 10 Copenhagen - Denmark 10 Taipei - Taiwan

London (United Kingdom) leads Singapore (Singapore) is in first Shanghai (China) is the first city
this dimension, while Amsterdam place in this ranking. As is often in the ranking and excels mainly
(Netherlands) and Paris (France) said, in this city everything revolves for the scope of its metro system,
are in second and third place around technology: it is the city that as well as being the city with the
respectively. London is among the provides the fastest Internet speed second-highest number of stations.
cities with the highest number to its residents, with three mobile Furthermore, it has one of the most
of airline passengers, something phones for every two inhabitants; it developed bicycle systems and the
consistent with it having the largest has a high innovation culture index number of air routes arriving there
number of air routes, and it also (Innovation Cities Index); almost is the fourth-highest among the
stands out for the significant number 100% of its population has a mobile cities.
of hotels it has and the amount of phone; and it has a large number of
Six European and three Asian cities
international conferences that it wireless access points globally. The
can be found in the top 10 positions
organizes. Amsterdam stands out, second position for this dimension
for this dimension.
just like the British capital, for the goes to Hong Kong (China), which
number of airline passengers and stands out for its high Web Index
the large number of international rating and the amount of mobile
conferences, while the French phones per capita.
capital, for its part, is in fourth
Of the cities that occupy the top 10
place in the ranking of cities with
positions, three are east Asian and
the most photographs uploaded to
five are European.
Panoramio and comes second for
the organization of international
meetings and congresses, as well as
having a large number of hotels.

Of the top 10 cities for this

dimension, five are European, two
are North American and two are
from Oceania.

38 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

“THE GREAT CHALLENGES THAT CITIES
FACE WILL NOT BE SOLVED SIMPLY WITH
TECHNOLOGY. ALSO NECESSARY ARE A
LONG-TERM VISION, A SINCERE DESIRE TO
COLLABORATE, AND A CLEAR FOCUS ON
THE NEEDS OF THE PUBLIC”.
Pascual Berrone

“A TRULY SMART CITY IS ONE THAT

HAS AS ITS GOAL IMPROVING THE
QUALITY OF LIFE OF ITS RESIDENTS,
WHICH MEANS ENSURING ECONOMIC,
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY”.
Joan Enric Ricart

39 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Cities in Motion:
Regional Ranking

In this section, there is an analysis by geographical Figure 4 shows the extent to which each region is
region. One of the limitations of our index is the unequal represented in the ranking. As can be observed, 33% of
coverage given to all the regions, due fundamentally to the cities considered are from Western Europe, the most
the scarcity of information available in certain areas for represented region.
cities that are not capitals or do not have a significant
population. Despite this limitation, every new edition of
the CIMI attempts to widen the current coverage in a
more equitable way, if new information is available.

Figure 4. Percentage of Cities From Each Geographical Region in the CIMI

Oceania Middle East
5%
North America 2%
12% Western Europe
33%

Asia
14%

Eastern Europe and 
Latin America and 
Russia
the Caribbean Africa 14%
15% 5%

40 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

In Figure 5, the 174 cities of the CIMI are divided into The third group contains the cities located between
four groups according to their performance. The goal is positions 87 and 130 of the overall ranking. Here we
to observe how the different regions are represented in find cities from Western Europe (40%), eastern Europe
the overall ranking in accordance with their performance. (19%), Latin America (16%), the Asia-Pacific (16%) and
the Middle East (9%).
The first group is made up of the 25% of the cities with the
best performance (positions 1 to 43). Of this group, more In the final group are the cities with the worst
than half are from Western Europe (55%), 25% are from performance, since they occupy the positions from 131
North America, 11% from the Asia-Pacific region and 9% to 174. Here, 40% are from Latin America, 21% from
from Oceania. Although each region is not represented the Asia-Pacific, another 21% from Africa, 9% from the
equally, we can see clearly that there are areas that are Middle East, almost 7% from eastern Europe and just
not represented in this group of cities with superior over 2% from Western Europe.
performance. This is the case with Latin America, eastern
It is interesting to note that North America is not
Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
represented in the worst-performing groups (the third
The second group of cities comprises those that are in and fourth), since all of the North American cities in the
the next 25%—that is, those in positions 44 to 86 of ranking occupy prominent positions. However, Western
the overall ranking. This group is made up of cities from Europe has a presence in all four groups, perhaps given
Western Europe (43%), North America (23%), eastern its wide geographical range. Latin America, for its part,
Europe (18%), the Asia-Pacific (9%) and Latin America does not have any cities in the best-performing group,
and the Middle East, although with lower percentages. and it is represented with a very low percentage in the
second group. As an extreme case, it can be observed
that all the African cities are part of the worst-performing
group, without any of them achieving good positions in
the ranking.

Figure 5. Geographical Regions According to Performance in the CIMI

Western Europe 54.55% North America 25.00% Asia Western Europe 39.53% Latin America 39.53%
Pacific
11.36%

Australasia 9.09% Eastern Europe Asia Pacific Africa 20.93% Asia Pacific
18.60% 16.28% 20.93%

Western Europe 43.18% Eastern Europe 18.18%

Latin America 16.28% Middle

Asia Pacific 9.09% East 9.30%
Middle East Eastern
North America 22.73%
9.30% Europe
6.98%
Middle East
Latin America 4.55% Western Europe
2.27%
2.33%

41 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Below are the tables of the top five cities in each territory The global position rankings for 2016 and 2017 shown in
and their evolution in the global ranking of the past three the tables have been revised to take account of changes
years. Each map shows the cities of the region with the to the range of indicators used in this year's edition of the
corresponding position that each city occupies in the Cities in Motion Index publication so the rankings are not
territory. The colors of each city refer to their position in directly comparable to editions of previous years.
the overall ranking.

* Please click on the maps for a larger and more detailed version.

Western Europe Top Five

Global Global Global REYKJAVIK

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018 COPENHAGEN
AMSTERDAM
London - United
1 1 1 1
Kingdom
LONDON
Amsterdam -
2 6 3 3
Netherlands

Paris - France 3 3 4 4 PARIS

Reykjavík - Iceland 4 4 5 5

Copenhagen -
5 12 9 8
Denmark

London leads the ranking in Europe and holds first place in the world classification. As in other years, the following
top places are shared between Amsterdam, Paris and Reykjavík, which occupy the second, third and fourth positions
respectively. This year Copenhagen occupies the last position in the top five. As can be seen in the previous table, all of
the cities in the regional top five are in the top 10 in the overall ranking.

Eastern Europe Top Five

Global Global Global TALLINN

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018

Prague - Czech WARSAW

1 51 48 47
Republic

Tallinn - Estonia 2 63 66 65
PRAGUE BRATISLAVA
Warsaw - Poland 3 84 74 69

Bratislava - BUDAPEST
4 73 75 70
Slovakia

Budapest -
5 74 72 73
Hungary

The eastern Europe ranking, as in previous years, is led by Prague. This city, as well as heading the region, is in the top 30
in the dimensions of social cohesion, the environment and international outreach. It is joined in the regional ranking by
Tallinn, Warsaw, Bratislava and Budapest.

42 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Latin America Top Five

Global Global Global

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018 PANAMA CITY
SAN JOSÉ
Santiago - Chile 1 65 73 66

Buenos Aires -
2 83 65 77
Argentina

Montevideo -
3 97 97 92 SANTIAGO
Uruguay
MONTEVIDEO
San José - Costa
4 102 108 112
Rica BUENOS AIRES
Panama City -
5 110 111 114
Panama

Over the years, the leadership of this region has been divided between the top two cities. This year, Santiago has beaten
Buenos Aires, since it has had a better evolution, and it is in the top 30 for the dimensions of urban planning and the
environment. Buenos Aires is in the top 30 for urban planning, the environment and international outreach but its poor
position for the economy puts it below Santiago in the overall ranking. Montevideo, San José and Panama also stand out
in the region.

As can be seen in the table and in the map above, most of the Latin American cities are worse than position 100 in the
overall ranking, with the exception of Santiago, Buenos Aires and Montevideo. Latin America is one of the regions with the
greatest urban concentration on the planet, so the challenges facing these cities are increasingly global, with problems
common to all of them.

Asia-Pacific Top Five

Global Global Global

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018
SEOUL
Tokyo - Japan 1 7 6 6 TOKYO
Singapore -
2 8 8 7 HONG KONG
Singapore
TAIPEI
Hong Kong -
3 19 14 11
China
SINGAPORE
Seoul - South
4 10 10 12
Korea

Taipei - Taiwan 5 28 30 30

Tokyo leads the ranking in the Asia-Pacific region and is ranked sixth overall, a position it has held for the past two years.
The Japanese capital stands out particularly in the economy (position 3), the environment (position 6), and human capital
(position 9). The second city in this classification is Singapore, which comes seventh in the overall ranking. It stands out
in the dimensions of technology, international outreach and the environment, featuring in the top 10 for these three
dimensions. Completing the regional ranking are Hong Kong, Seoul and Taipei.

43 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Middle East Top Five

Global Global Global

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018

Tel Aviv - Israel 1 77 79 81 JERUSALEM

TEL AVIV
Dubai - United
2 107 103 99
Arab Emirates
DUBAI
Jerusalem - Israel 3 115 118 123
DOHA
Doha - Qatar 4 126 127 126

Abu Dhabi - United ABU DHABI

5 129 129 127
Arab Emirates

Tel Aviv heads the Middle East classification and, in turn, is in position 81 in the general ranking. This city stands out for its
good performance in the dimensions of the environment (41), urban planning (34) and technology (42). It is followed by
Dubai, which is noteworthy for occupying the fifth position in the technology ranking. Closing the top five of the region
are Jerusalem, Doha and Abu Dhabi.

Africa Top Five

Global Global Global

Regional position position position CASABLANCA
City position 2016 2017 2018
TUNIS
Casablanca -
1 153 152 155 CAIRO
Morocco

Tunis - Tunisia 2 156 157 157

Cape Town - NAIROBI

3 146 151 158
South Africa

Nairobi - Kenya 4 163 162 162

CAPE TOWN
Cairo - Egypt 5 165 163 165

Casablanca heads the Africa’s ranking, followed by Tunis. Cape Town, Nairobi and Cairo complete the list of the top five in the
region. All of the African cities included in the index are among the lowest positions in the overall ranking.

44 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

North America Top Five

Global Global Global

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018

New York - United

1 2 2 2
States
TORONTO
Los Angeles -
2 16 15 16 SAN FRANCISCO
United States CHICAGO
NEW YORK CITY
Chicago - United
3 20 21 17
States
LOS ANGELES
Toronto - Canada 4 14 13 18

San Francisco -
5 11 17 21
United States

New York leads the North America ranking and is also in second position in the overall classification. In the regional top
five, it is followed by Los Angeles, in position 16 in the general ranking, and by Chicago, Toronto and San Francisco. It
should be noted that, as in previous years, Toronto is the only city that is always in the region’s top ranking and is not in
the United States.

As mentioned previously and as can be seen in the table above, North American cities occupy some of the top places
in the overall ranking. In the case of US cities, six of the 16 included in the study are among the top 30 at a global level.

Oceania Top Three

Global Global Global

Regional position position position
City position 2016 2017 2018

Sydney - Australia 1 22 18 19

Melbourne -
2 17 20 20
Australia
SYDNEY
Wellington - WELLINGTON
3 23 23 26
New Zealand

MELBOURNE

The Oceania ranking is always contested by the top two cities. Although Sydney is leading on this occasion, Melbourne
also has a significant performance, not only in the region but also at a global level. Sydney is noteworthy for its rather
homogeneous performance across the dimensions, which leads it to be situated around about position 25 in each one of
them. Melbourne, for its part, has a somewhat lower performance in some dimensions but it stands out in governance and
international outlook, where it is in positions 4 and 6 respectively.

Completing the regional ranking is Wellington, which performs very well—especially in the environment dimension, where it
is in second place, and in social cohesion, where it is sixth.

45 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Noteworthy network. The navigation system can issue an alert if
an ambulance, the police or a fire engine is coming, if
Cases the traffic lights are about to turn red or if there is a
pedestrian on the sidewalk who is going to cross. These
systems have been designed to address the specific
mobility challenges in eight pilot cities in Europe, and
This section describes some noteworthy cases. See the Barcelona is one of them.
graphical analysis in Appendix 2 of the 174 cities included
in the CIMI.
BUENOS AIRES
This is the capital and
AMSTERDAM the most populous
Capital of the city of the Argentine
Netherlands, this is the Republic and the
country’s largest city most visited city in
and a major financial South America. It has
and cultural center, the second-highest
with international number of skyscrapers
outreach. The in the region and
combination of is the best-placed
financial technology, Latin American city in the Global Liveability Index (The
energy efficiency and Economist Intelligence Unit). Buenos Aires is in 25th
culture makes it an important European power. Some place in the world ranking of cities to choose to study in
90% of its households have bicycles and it has an (QS Best Student Cities 2018, drawn up by Quacquarelli
advanced system of automated services for the public use Symonds) and in that year it succeeded in being the
of shared bicycles. In addition, it has put forward a project favorite among Spanish-speaking cities. It is in position
to ban gasoline and diesel cars by the year 2025 and thus 77 in the overall ranking and second in its region,
become Europe’s first zero-emissions city. In the overall behind Santiago. It stands out, at the regional level, in
and regional rankings, it is in positions 3 and 2 the dimensions of the environment, governance, urban
respectively. It performs well overall and stands out planning, and international outreach. Furthermore, it is
especially in the economy, technology, urban planning, carrying out urban planning projects aimed at improving
international outreach, and mobility and transportation, the road system in order to connect different urban
dimensions in which it is among the top 20. areas and alleviate the current traffic problems.

BARCELONA
This is the second
best-placed Spanish
city and is in position
28 in the overall
ranking. It performs
well in almost every
dimension and stands
out especially in
governance, urban
planning, international
outreach, technology, and mobility and transportation,
dimensions in which it is in the top 30. Barcelona is
noteworthy for its growing population of industrial
designers and its prominent use of smartphones, and
it is a pioneer in traffic management using big data. It
is considered one of the 25 most technological cities in
the world, according to Business Insider and 2thinknow,
and it is carrying out the C MobILE project, within
the framework of cooperative intelligent transport
systems, to increase awareness of the use of the road

46 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

LONDON NEW YORK
This is the capital and This is one of the largest
the most populous and most populous
city of the United urban agglomerations
Kingdom. It makes up in the world and is the
the largest urban area second most densely
in the country and populated city in
holds first place in the North America (after
overall ranking. The Mexico City). This
British capital hosts year, it is in second
more start-ups and place in the overall
programmers than almost any other city in the world ranking, behind London, but it enjoys the leading
and has an open data platform (London Datastore) that position in the economy dimension. It is the world’s
is used by more than 50,000 individuals, companies, most important economic center and is the city with
researchers and developers every month. Its innovation the highest GDP. The Big Apple has almost 7,000 high-
with regard to transportation has led it to install the tech firms and stands out for its integrated technology
Heathrow pods, capsules that work as a means of transit services, such as the free Wi-Fi service LinkNYC. Its good
to connect with Heathrow Airport, one of the busiest general performance is demonstrated in the different
on the planet. Its investment in public transport is dimensions of the CIMI since, as well as heading the
pursuing one of Europe’s biggest construction projects dimension of the economy, it has succeeded in being
(the Crossrail project), which will add 10 new train lines among the top places for human capital (3), urban
to the city to connect with 30 already existing stations planning (2), international outreach (8), technology (11),
toward the end of 2019. London is a well-placed city and mobility and transportation (5).
in almost all the dimensions: it has obtained first place
for human capital and international outreach and
is in the top 10 for the dimensions of mobility and OSLO
transportation, governance, technology, and urban This Scandinavian
planning. Its worst performance can be seen in the city occupies position
dimension of social cohesion (position 45). 14 of the overall
ranking and is eighth
in the environment
MADRID
dimension. It is one of
This is the capital of
the cities in the CIMI
Spain and the country’s
with the fastest growth
most populous city.
in the period from 2016
It is also the first
to 2018, an evolution
Spanish city in the
that is hardly surprising since it plans to become the
overall ranking, where
smartest, greenest, most inclusive and most creative
it occupies position
city for all its residents. Some of its projects range from
24. It stands out in the
testing electric buses, construction sites with zero
dimensions of mobility
emissions and the remodeling of existing buildings to
and transportation (ninth place) and in international
the development of waste management systems and
outreach (17th). It is committed to the development
green energy based on circles. Any service oriented to
of a sustainable city. The platform MiNT (Madrid
the residents that can be digitized will be digitized, and
Inteligente or “Smart Madrid”) lets residents use their
the needs of the public are the guiding principles for
smartphones to inform the council of any incident in
the city’s development.
the management and quality of urban public services,
such as a sidewalk in poor condition or a faulty light in
a streetlamp, to make the city more sustainable. The
city also has the citizen participation platform Decide
Madrid (“Madrid Decides”), launched to contribute to
the direct democracy in the city’s management. The
platform allows residents to decide on a wide range of
issues related to the city and has served as a model for
other cities.

47 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

PARIS almost 80% of its total energy production come from
French capital is hydroelectric and geothermal energy, which makes its
the most important buildings naturally green. It has a tacit commitment
financial center to the environment to promote the use of renewable
in Europe, at the energy and reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.
heart of which are Reykjavík put forward a climate policy document with an
the headquarters action plan in which goals are established for a city with
of almost half of zero carbon emissions by 2040.
the largest French
companies, as well
as the headquarters SANTIAGO
of 20 of the 100 largest companies in the world. The This city occupies
City of Light works to promote clean transport through position 66 in the
the use of bicycles and electric vehicles and it is a overall ranking, is the
city characterized by open innovation, which gives its leader in its region
inhabitants and other actors control and access to the and stands out in the
city’s data flows. Through the application of the Internet dimensions of urban
of Things (IoT), it tries to optimize the flows of people planning and the
and vehicles in the city. The Grand Paris Express project environment. Together
is one of the biggest overhauls of transport in Europe, with Buenos Aires, it
which will rethink and redesign the transport network is the most innovative
in the city’s metropolitan area, adding four additional city in Latin America. Smartcity Santiago is Chile’s first
metro lines, 200 kilometers of new rail lines and 68 prototype of a smart city, designed in response to
completely new interconnected stations, all with a 100% unplanned urbanization and the need to improve the
automatic metro system. Paris is, together with London, inhabitants’ quality of life. The future is forged on the
one of the most important financial hubs in Europe. basis of projects that have their maximum inspiration
It is in fourth place in the overall ranking and stands in innovation, services, sustainability and taking care of
out in the economy (position 8), human capital (6), public space.
international outreach (3), technology (15), and mobility
and transportation (4).

SINGAPORE
It occupies position 7
REYKJAVIK in the overall ranking
Iceland’s most and is the top city
populous city is the in its region and
country’s capital— in the technology
where half of its dimension, as well as
population live—and occupying position
the northernmost 4 in international
city on the planet. outreach. In Singapore,
Despite being one of everything revolves around technology: it has a fiber-
the “smallest cities,” optic network the length and width of the island and
since its incorporation up to three mobiles for every two residents, and it
in the CIMI, it has stood out by occupying position 5 in has robot hospitals (with human staff and robots),
the overall ranking and, for the second consecutive year, autonomous taxis (with no driver), and vertical gardens
by heading the dimension of the environment. Iceland is and farms that regulate the temperature by absorbing
the country with the world’s second-best performance and dispersing heat while collecting rainwater. In this
according to the Environmental Performance Index (EPI) city, the authorities have a commitment to innovation. It
for 2018. More than 99% of electricity production and is said that technology triumphs over politics.

48 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

TOKYO that a successful city is often measured by its diversity
This is the capital and, in that context, the number of children is shown
of Japan, the most as a measure of success. If a city is built that allows
populous urban children and young people to thrive and develop safely,
agglomeration in then it will be an inclusive and sustainable city for all
the world and one that is being built. Furthermore, the city is working
of the cities with the to convert disused areas into minimetropolises full of
highest rate of labor life. The smart city project being prepared by Sidewalk
productivity. It is Labs, a firm linked to Google, seeks to develop a smart
considered the world’s district in the eastern part of the Canadian city, on
most innovative city the shores of Lake Ontario. Via new technologies, the
(Business Insider and 2thinknow) and is in the top 10 aim is to develop a model of a connected city based
of the Global Financial Centres Index (Z/Yen) for 2018. on the collection of data by means of sensors that can
In the CIMI, it is sixth in the overall ranking, leading the shed light on aspects of traffic, noise, air quality, waste
Asian region. It stands out particularly in the economy collection or the performance of the electrical grid. The
(position 3), human capital (9) and the environment goal of the technology project is to turn Toronto into a
(6). In addition, it is in the top 30 for the dimensions model of a sustainable city in which green construction
of urban planning, mobility and transportation, and plans play the leading role.
technology.

ZURICH
TORONTO The largest city in
This city occupies Switzerland occupies
position 18 in the position 15 in the
overall ranking and overall ranking. It is
is the top city for the top city in the
urban planning. It dimension of social
is a city that, in its cohesion and stands
commitment to out in governance,
urban planning and where it has achieved
technology, houses ninth place. It is a
30% of Canada’s city with low crime and homicide rates and with a
technology firms, most of which have fewer than 50 high rating for being women-friendly, as well as being
employees. Since 2017, it has been developing an cosmopolitan and open. Its great cultural diversity forms
urban-planning project with which it intends to create part of its identity: its foreign population, around 32%,
new houses in multifamily buildings designed to comes from more than 100 nations. Zurich is the world’s
adapt better to families with children and adolescents sixth most sustainable city (Sustainable Cities Index,
(Growing Up: Planning for Children in New Vertical 2018) and has the second-highest quality of life (Quality
Communities). In Toronto, the authorities consider of Living city ranking, 2018).

49 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Evolution of the Cities
in Motion Index

A city’s transformation is vitally important in Within the group of cities with a negative evolution in the
understanding the focus of its development target. Thus, period from 2016 to 2018, San Francisco is noteworthy,
Table 13 sets out the evolution of the index during the falling 10 positions: despite its good performance in
past three years with respect to the top 50 cities in the general terms, it has not achieved the same success in
2018 CIMI ranking. the dimensions of the environment and mobility and
transportation. Another successful city that has fallen—
The results show a lot of stability in almost all the cities, down four places—is Toronto, whose general evolution is
with no very sudden changes, neither in a positive nor negative due to its performance in specific dimensions,
in a negative direction. However, two US cities stand including those of social cohesion and mobility and
out with a positive evolution in the period from 2016 transportation.
to 2018: Dallas, which rises 11 places due to its better
performance in human capital, and San Diego, which goes
up eight positions because of a better performance in the
economy. Moreover, Frankfurt and Oslo rise three and
four places respectively while, in the case of the Spanish
cities, Madrid has gone up one place and Barcelona has
fallen one.

50 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Table 13. Evolution of the Index for the Top 50 Cities in the 2018 Ranking (Past Three Years)

City 2016 2017 2018 2016-2017 2017-2018

London ‐ United Kingdom 1 1 1 0 0
New York ‐ USA 2 2 2 0 0
Amsterdam ‐ Netherlands 6 3 3 3 0
Paris ‐ France 3 4 4 ‐1 0
Reykjavík ‐ Iceland 4 5 5 ‐1 0
Tokyo ‐ Japan 7 6 6 1 0
Singapore ‐ Singapore 8 8 7 0 1
Copenhagen ‐ Denmark 12 9 8 3 1
Berlin ‐ Germany 5 7 9 ‐2 ‐2
Vienna ‐ Austria 15 11 10 4 1
Hong Kong ‐ China 19 14 11 5 3
Seoul ‐ South Korea 10 10 12 0 ‐2
Stockholm ‐ Sweden 9 12 13 ‐3 ‐1
Oslo ‐ Norway 18 19 14 ‐1 5
Zurich ‐ Switzerland 13 16 15 ‐3 1
Los Angeles ‐ USA 16 15 16 1 ‐1
Chicago ‐ USA 20 21 17 ‐1 4
Toronto ‐ Canada 14 13 18 1 ‐5
Sydney ‐ Australia 22 18 19 4 ‐1
Melbourne ‐ Australia 17 20 20 ‐3 0
San Francisco ‐ USA 11 17 21 ‐6 ‐4
Helsinki ‐ Finland 25 24 22 1 2
Washington ‐ USA 24 22 23 2 ‐1
Madrid ‐ Spain 21 25 24 ‐4 1
Boston ‐ USA 26 28 25 ‐2 3
Wellington ‐ New Zealand 23 23 26 0 ‐3
Munich ‐ Germany 27 26 27 1 ‐1
Barcelona ‐ Spain 30 27 28 3 ‐1
Basel ‐ Switzerland 35 31 29 4 2
Taipei ‐ Taiwan 28 30 30 ‐2 0
Bern ‐ Switzerland 34 34 31 0 3
Geneva ‐ Switzerland 33 32 32 1 0
Frankfurt ‐ Germany 36 36 33 0 3
Hamburg ‐ Germany 32 29 34 3 ‐5
Auckland ‐ New Zealand 37 33 35 4 ‐2
Göteborg ‐ Sweden 29 37 36 ‐8 1
Dublin ‐ Ireland 31 35 37 ‐4 ‐2
Montreal ‐ Canada 39 40 38 ‐1 2
Ottawa ‐ Canada 46 38 39 8 ‐1
Miami ‐ USA 43 39 40 4 ‐1
Milan ‐ Italy 38 41 41 ‐3 0
Phoenix ‐ USA 49 42 42 7 0
Rotterdam ‐ Netherlands 50 43 43 7 0
Lisbon ‐ Portugal 45 44 44 1 0
Dallas ‐ USA 56 50 45 6 5
Edinburgh ‐ United Kingdom 48 47 46 1 1
Prague ‐ Czech Republic 51 48 47 3 1
Brussels ‐ Belgium 41 45 48 ‐4 ‐3
San Diego ‐ USA 57 55 49 2 6
Düsseldorf ‐ Germany 44 49 50 ‐5 ‐1

51 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Figure 6 below shows the positions of the top 50 cities in Table 13, there is no city among the top 50 that
in the ranking in 2016 and 2018. Those cities that show a experienced a very sudden variation in the period being
positive evolution are below the 45-degree angle formed considered, with the exception of San Francisco, which
by the diagonal, while those that did not experience such has dropped 10 positions. The rest show a rather stable
an evolution are above the line. As could be observed evolution over time.

Figure 6. Evolution of the Index for the Top 50 Cities in the 2018 Ranking

60

Düsseldorf San Diego
50
Brussels Prague
Edinburgh Dallas
Lisbon
Rotterdam
Milan Phoenix
40 Miami
Ottawa
Cities in Motion ranking 

Dublin Montreal
Göteborg
Auckland
Hamburg
Frankfurt
Geneva
Taipei Bern
30
Barcelona Basel
Wellington Munich
Madrid Boston
Washington
San Francisco Helsinki
20 Melbourne
Toronto Sydney
Chicago
Zurich Los Angeles
Stockholm Oslo
Seoul
Hong Kong
10 Berlin Vienna
Copenhagen
Singapore
Reykjavík Tokyo
Paris
Amsterdam
New York
London
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Cities in Motion ranking 2016

52 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Cities in Motion The city of Singapore, which occupies position 7 in the
CIMI and is in the top 10 of four of the six other rankings
Compared With analyzed, stands out for showing a high performance
in the dimensions of international outreach, the
Other Indexes environment, governance, and the economy. In terms
of technology, as mentioned previously, it shows a very
good performance and heads the dimension.

In this section, we conduct a comparative study of the New York, London, Paris, Tokyo, Vienna and Copenhagen,
CIMI and other indexes. Table 14 shows the top 10 cities for their part, also appear frequently in other
in this ranking (2018) and those in six other indexes that classifications with respect to the 10 most prosperous
have been considered. Cities that also appear in the CIMI cities or those with the best quality of life in the world
are shaded.
As can be seen, all the cities in our top 10, with the
While the classifications being studied vary in terms exception of Reykjavík, appear in the top positions of
of methodology and indicators, they all agree that a the indexes under consideration. The Icelandic city
city is more powerful, prosperous, and competitive if is often excluded from many rankings due to the size
it manages to develop in its various dimensions: from of its population although, despite this, it has been
the economy and finance, via the ease of ensuring the demonstrating its capabilities and strengths over the
creation of businesses, the quality of life, and the use of years and has managed to stand out among the best cities.
high technology, to its cultural importance, which could Unlike many of the indexes with which it is compared, the
be measured by how it promotes music and fashion. CIMI takes into account a greater geographical coverage.
Moreover, it can be noted that all of the cities in the CIMI
Finally, it can be observed that the top two positions in
frequently appear in some of the other indexes under
the Global Financial Centers Index (Z/Yen) and the Global
consideration, with the exception of Reykjavík.
Power City Index (Mori Memorial Foundation) coincide
exactly with the top two of the CIMI.

Table 14. Comparison With Other Indexes (Top 10)

Global Financial Global Quality of Global Liveability Sustainable

Global Cities Centres Index Power City Living City Index 2018 Cities
Ranking CIMI 2018 Index 2018 (GFCI) 2018 Index 2018 Ranking 2018 (Economist Index 2018
by city (IESE) (A.T. Kearney) (Z/Yen) (MMF) (Mercer) Intelligence Unit) (Arcadis)

1 London New York London London Vienna Vienna London

2 New York London New York New York Zurich Melbourne Stockholm

3 Amsterdam Paris Hong Kong Tokyo Munich Osaka Edimburgh

4 Paris Tokyo Singapore Paris Auckland Calgary Singapore

5 Reykjavík Hong Kong Tokyo Singapore Vancouver Sydney Vienna

6 Tokyo Los Angeles Shangai Amsterdam Düsseldorf Vancouver Zurich

7 Singapore Singapore Toronto Seoul Frankfurt Toronto Munich

8 Copenhagen Chicago San Francisco Berlin Geneva Tokyo Oslo

9 Berlin Beijing Sydney Hong Kong Copenhagen Copenhagen Hong Kong

10 Vienna Brussels Boston Sydney Basel Adelaide Frankfurt

53 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Cities in Motion:
City Ranking by Population

This section presents a ranking of cities according to their population, obtained after producing a classification of the 174
cities included in the index according to this value. The cities were grouped by considering various sources, such as The
Economist and the United Nations. Table 15 shows the various categories and the number of CIMI cities included in each.

Table 15. Classification of Cities According to Their Population (Number of Inhabitants)

Category Number of cities

Less than 600,000 Smallest cities 12

Between 600,000 and 1 million Small cities 13

Between 1 million and 5 million Medium cities 93

Between 5 million and 10 million Large cities 26

More than 10 million Megacities 30

RANKING OF THE “SMALLEST CITIES”

Like the previous year, the top five so-called “smallest cities” are headed by Reykjavík, which comes fifth in the overall
ranking and fourth in the Western Europe region. In the general ranking, this city has a far superior performance compared
to the other cities of a similar size, which are more than 20 positions below. In second place in this classification is
Wellington, which, along with Reykjavík, also heads the ranking for the environment. The top five are completed by three
Swiss cities—Bern, Geneva and Basel—which stand out for their good performance in the governance dimension.

Top Five Cities With Fewer Than 600,000 Inhabitants

Global Global Global

Position
City position position position
by size
2016 2017 2018

Reykjavík - Iceland 1 4 5 5

Wellington - New Zealand 2 23 23 26

Basel - Switzerland 3 35 31 29

Bern - Switzerland 4 34 34 31

Geneva - Switzerland 5 33 32 32

54 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

RANKING OF THE “SMALL CITIES”

The following table shows the top five “small cities,” or those that have a population of between 600,000 and 1 million
inhabitants. This ranking is led by Edinburgh, followed by Quebec, newly added to the index this year. The third and fourth
places go to Bratislava and Vilnius respectively, and Málaga completes the ranking. With the exception of Vilnius (capital of
Lithuania), which stands out in the environment and human capital, the other four small cities excel for their performance
in social cohesion.

Top Five Cities of Between 600,000 and 1 Million Inhabitants

Global Global Global

Position
City position position position
by size
2016 2017 2018

Edinburgh - United Kingdom 1 48 47 46

Quebec - Canada 2 64 64 67

Bratislava - Slovakia 3 73 75 70

Vilnius - Lithuania 4 71 76 74

Málaga - Spain 5 76 78 80

RANKING OF THE “MEDIUM CITIES”

Below are the top five “medium cities”—that is, those that have between 1 million and 5 million inhabitants. This ranking
is led by Amsterdam, followed by Copenhagen, Vienna, Stockholm and Oslo, which are in the top 20 of the overall ranking
and stand out in almost every dimension.

Top Five Cities of Between 1 Million and 5 Million Inhabitants

Global Global Global

Position
City position position position
by size
2016 2017 2018

Amsterdam - Netherlands 1 6 3 3

Copenhagen - Denmark 2 12 9 8

Vienna - Austria 3 15 11 10

Stockholm - Sweden 4 9 12 13

Oslo - Norway 5 18 19 14

55 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

RANKING OF THE “LARGE CITIES”

Below is shown the ranking of the “large cities,” those that have between 5 million and 10 million inhabitants. Singapore
heads this classification, followed by Berlin and Hong Kong, while Toronto and Chicago occupy the final positions.

Top Five Cities of Between 5 Million and 10 Million Inhabitants

Global Global Global

Position
City position position position
by size
2016 2017 2018

Singapore - Singapore 1 8 8 7

Berlin - Germany 2 5 7 9

Hong Kong - China 3 19 14 11

Chicago - United States 4 20 21 17

Toronto - Canada 5 14 13 18

RANKING OF THE “MEGACITIES”

The “megacities” ranking includes those cities with a population of more than 10 million inhabitants. This year, it is headed
by London, followed by New York, Paris, Tokyo and Seoul, which are in the overall top 20 and stand out in almost every
dimension, with the exception of that of social cohesion.

Top Five Cities of More Than 10 Million Inhabitants

Global Global Global

Position
City position position position
by size
2016 2017 2018

London - United Kingdom 1 1 1 1

New York - United States 2 2 2 2

Paris - France 3 3 4 4

Tokyo - Japan 4 7 6 6

Seoul - South Korea 5 10 10 12

56 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 Cities in Motion:
Analysis of Dimensions in Pairs

In this section, the position of cities with respect to two contrast, the megacities are located on the left and their
dimensions is analyzed simultaneously with the aim of performance in this dimension is low. The top part of
observing whether there is any relationship between the figure shows the cities with a good performance in
the two. Furthermore, cities are analyzed by population, the economy, such as Tokyo, New York, Los Angeles, San
according to the categories analyzed in the previous Francisco, London and Paris, while in the lower part we
section. have cities that are in the lowest positions of the ranking
in the economy, such as Asunción, Córdoba and Rosario.
Figure 7 examines the dimensions of the economy on The most conspicuous case is that of Caracas, which is
the y-axis and social cohesion on the x-axis. As can be at the bottom of both rankings and appears in the lower
observed, the cities of fewer than 600,000 inhabitants left corner.
(the smallest cities) show a high performance in social
cohesion and are located on the right of the figure. In

Figure 7. Economy and Social Cohesion Dimensions

Los Angeles
New York San Francisco Tokyo
Chicago Paris Dallas Washington
Boston Amsterdam
Houston Philadelphia Seattle London
Seoul Denver Stockholm Oslo
Miami Phoenix Singapore Zurich
San Diego
Baltimore Dublin Sydney Copenhagen
San Antonio
Hong Kong Helsinki Wellington
Göteborg Auckland
Melbourne
Geneva Munich Basel
Milan Toronto Madrid Stuttgart
Frankfurt Cologne
Bangkok Osaka Hamburg
Rome Kuala Lumpur Düsseldorf
Berlin
Barcelona Doha Ottawa Quebec
Montreal
Beijing Vienna Eindhoven
Tel Aviv
Lyon Birmingham
Santiago Brussels Dubai Edinburgh
Istanbul Nagoya
Glasgow
Lisbon Valencia Rotterdam
Shenzhen Bucharest
Economy ranking

Málaga Bern
Seville Leeds
Shanghai Warsaw
Guangzhou Tallinn Nottingham
Marseille Porto Taipei
Tianjin Nice Lille Antwerp Reykjavík
Bangalore
New Delhi Vilnius Wroclaw Bratislava
Casablanca San José Prague
Moscow Ho Chi Minh City
Lima Tbilisi
Mumbai Budapest Vancouver
Kiev Montevideo
Cairo Riyadh Liverpool
Turin
Karachi Athens Minsk Manchester Abu Dhabi
Bilbao Zaragoza Linz
Almaty Panama Palma de Mallorca
Bogotá Florence
Naples A Coruña Murcia Duisburg
Nairobi Mexico City Manama
Manila Buenos Aires
Santo Domingo Zagreb
Quito Baku Ljubljana
São Paulo Medellín
Brasíia
Guatemala City Guayaquil
Rio de Janeiro Saint Petersburg Cali
Novosibirsk Santa Cruz Riga
Jerusalem
Lahore Curitiba La Paz
Salvador Kolkata Amman
Belo Horizonte
Johannesburg Lagos Belgrade Ankara Kuwait City
Jakarta
Cape Town Rabat Tunis Asunción Sofia
Skopje
Rosario
Caracas Sarajevo Douala Córdoba

Less than 600.000
600,000 Between 600.000 and 1 millon
600,000 Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

Social cohesion ranking 

57 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 Figure 8 analyzes the dimensions of the economy and of European cities, such as Stockholm, Copenhagen,
the environment. The former is shown on the y-axis and Amsterdam, London, Oslo and Zurich, as well as Asian
latter on the x-axis. cities such as Tokyo and Seoul, and cities from Oceania
such as Sydney and Wellington. In the lower left corner
In the upper left are the Asian and US cities, which are those cities with a low performance level in these two
stand out because they perform well in the dimension dimensions, such as Lagos, Kolkata, Lahore and Rabat.
of the economy but whose performance is deficient in Finally, the lower right-hand side shows the cities with
that of the environment. This information could lead to low economic development but a good performance in
the belief that a high level of economic development is the environment, with cities such as Asunción, Riga, Santa
detrimental to the well-being of the environment if cities Cruz and Buenos Aires. In this case, a conclusion could
do not take ecological criteria into account during that be drawn that cities with less economic development
development. However, on the opposite side—the upper preserve the environment better.
right—appear those cities that have a good performance
in both dimensions. This group includes a large number

Figure 8. Economy and Environment Dimensions

Los Angeles New York
Dallas San Francisco Tokyo
Washington Chicago Paris
Boston Amsterdam
Houston Seattle
Philadelphia London Seoul Oslo
Denver Miami Phoenix Stockholm
Zurich Singapore
San Diego Baltimore Sydney Copenhagen
Dublin
San Antonio Auckland
Hong KongHelsinki
Munich Geneva Melbourne Göteborg Wellington
Madrid Basel
Frankfurt Stuttgart Toronto
Bangkok Cologne Milan Osaka
Hamburg
Rome Kuala Lumpur Berlin Düsseldorf
Doha Montreal
Quebec Barcelona
Eindhoven Ottawa
Beijing Vienna
Birmingham Tel Aviv
Edinburgh Lyon
Istanbul Santiago
Economy ranking

Dubai Glasgow Brussels Nagoya

Shenzhen Bucharest Málaga Bern Rotterdam Valencia Lisbon
Warsaw Leeds Seville Tallinn
Guangzhou Shanghai Nottingham
Taipei Lille Antwerp Porto
Tianjin Marseille Nice Reykjavík
Bangalore Wroclaw Bratislava
Vilnius
New Delhi Casablanca Ho Chi Minh City Prague San José
Moscow
Mumbai Tbilisi
Lima Vancouver Budapest
Riyadh Cairo Kiev
Liverpool Montevideo
Karachi Turin Minsk
Manchester Athens
Bilbao Linz
Abu Dhabi Palma de Mallorca
Florence Almaty Panama
Zaragoza
Murcia Bogotá
A Coruña Nairobi
Manama Naples Duisburg Buenos Aires
Mexico City Manila Santo Domingo
Guatemala City Medellín São Paulo Baku Zagreb
Quito Ljubljana
Saint Petersburg Guayaquil
Cali Brasilia Riga
Novosibirsk Rio de Janeiro Jerusalem Santa Cruz
Lahore Amman La Paz
Kolkata Johannesburg Belo Horizonte Curitiba
Lagos Jakarta Salvador
Ankara Belgrade
Kuwait City Sofia
Cape Town Tunis
Rabat Skopje Rosario Asunción
Córdoba
Sarajevo Caracas Douala

600,000
Less than 600.000 600,000
Between 600.000 and 1 millon Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

Environment ranking 

58 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Figure 9 shows the dimension of mobility and with other European cities such as Paris, London and
transportation on the y-axis and that of the environment Berlin. The lower left shows those cities with a low level
on the x-axis. The upper left shows cities that perform of development in terms of mobility and transportation
well in mobility and transportation but poorly in the as well as the environment, the main examples being
environment dimension. This is the case with some Asian Lagos, Manila, Mumbai, Bangalore and Kolkata. Finally,
cities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Tianjin and the lower right-hand side shows the group of cities
Taipei, and some US cities, such as Chicago. The upper with a high level of environmental development but
right-hand side shows the group of cities that show good a low level in mobility and transportation, made up of
management in both dimensions, such as the Swiss cities belonging to Central and South America, such as
city of Basel and the Scandinavian cities of Oslo and Asunción, Montevideo, Santa Cruz, San José and Buenos
Stockholm. For their part, Madrid and Barcelona also Aires.
show a good performance in both dimensions, along

Figure 9. Mobility and Transportation and Environment Dimensions

Beijing Shanghai
New York Paris London
Berlin Vienna
Taipei Munich Madrid
Guangzhou Barcelona Amsterdam
Shenzhen Frankfurt Hamburg Rotterdam Seoul
Oslo
Basel Stockholm
Milan Brussels
Bern Düsseldorf Copenhagen
Cologne
Duisburg Stuttgart Valencia Tokyo
Turin Málaga Antwerp Göteborg
Seville Linz
Chicago
Mobility and transportation ranking

Edinburgh Hong Kong
Tianjin Zaragoza Geneva
Eindhoven Warsaw A Coruña Reykjavík
Wroclaw Helsinki
Manchester Murcia Lyon
Santiago Zurich
Florence Lille
Toronto Prague
Kuala Lumpur Bilbao
Moscow Rome Osaka
Palma de Mallorca Budapest
Singapore
Phoenix Marseille Dublin
Vancouver Wellington
Ljubljana
Leeds Birmingham Riga
Minsk Lisbon
Naples Sofia Ho Chi Minh City Ottawa Athens Vilnius
Ankara Montreal Bratislava
Almaty Brasília Nagoya
Manama
Washington Tallinn
Denver Miami Glasgow Quebec
Abu Dhabi San Francisco Zagreb
San Antonio Liverpool
Sarajevo Nottingham Porto
Nice Auckland
Philadelphia Kiev Medellín Sydney
New Delhi Istanbul Skopje Melbourne
Dubai Baltimore
Mexico City Baku Montevideo
Kuwait City Dallas Belgrade Panama
San Diego Bucharest Curitiba
Doha Houston Tel Aviv
Rabat Boston Caracas
Buenos Aires
Riyadh Los Angeles Asunción
Saint Petersburg Tbilisi Jerusalem
Bangkok Rosario San José
Salvador Quito Tunis
Lahore Seattle Córdoba
Cali Guayaquil Bogotá
Lima
Karachi Johannesburg Rio de Janeiro
La Paz Santo Domingo Santa Cruz
Casablanca Belo Horizonte
Mumbai Novosibirsk Cape Town Douala
Guatemala City
Bangalore Cairo São Paulo
Manila Amman
Lagos Nairobi
Kolkata Jakarta

Less than 600.000
600,000 Between 600.000 and 1 millon
600,000 Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

Environment ranking 

59 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 Figure 10 shows the relationship between the economy On the contrary, it is most common for them to perform
and human capital dimensions. As can be observed, those badly in both dimensions, as in the case of Rabat, Douala,
cities with a good position in the economy also do well in Cape Town, Lahore and Amman.
human capital and are located in the upper right-hand
With respect to the size of the population, it can be
part of the figure. These are cities in the United States,
inferred that cities with fewer than 600,000 inhabitants
such as Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco and Dallas;
do not show a very poor performance in human capital.
cities in Europe, such as London, Paris, Copenhagen and
Finally, we observe that cities with a good performance
Zurich; and in Asia and Oceania, such as Tokyo, Hong
in human capital also, generally speaking, perform well in
Kong and Sydney. With some exceptions, such as Jakarta,
the economy and vice versa.
Manchester and Saint Petersburg, it can be gathered from
the figure that those cities that perform poorly in the
economy are unlikely to perform well in human capital.

Figure 10. Economy and Human Capital Dimensions

New York
Tokyo Los Angeles
San Francisco Washington
Amsterdam Dallas
Seattle ChicagoParis Boston
Houston Philadelphia Seoul London
Stockholm
Singapore Denver
Oslo Miami Phoenix
Zurich San Diego
Dublin Baltimore Copenhagen
Wellington San Antonio Sydney Hong Kong
Auckland
Göteborg Helsinki
Melbourne
Munich Basel Madrid
Geneva Stuttgart Toronto
Cologne Milan
Osaka Frankfurt
Bangkok Düsseldorf Hamburg
Kuala Lumpur Rome Berlin
Doha Quebec Montreal Barcelona
Ottawa Vienna
Eindhoven Beijing
Tel Aviv
Economy ranking

Santiago Lyon Birmingham Edinburgh

Dubai
Istanbul Brussels Nagoya
Glasgow
Bucharest Rotterdam
Valencia Lisbon
Shenzhen
Málaga Seville Warsaw Bern Tallinn
Leeds
Guangzhou Nottingham Shanghai Taipei
Antwerp Marseille
Porto Nice
Tianjin Reykjavík
New Delhi Lille Wroclaw Bratislava
Casablanca Bangalore Vilnius
Ho Chi Minh City Prague
San José Lima Moscow
Tbilisi Vancouver
Mumbai Montevideo Kiev Budapest
Cairo Turin Liverpool
Karachi
Abu Dhabi Bilbao Minsk Manchester
Palma de Mallorca Linz
Panama Florence
Bogotá Duisburg Zaragoza
Almaty
Nairobi Murcia Naples A Coruña
Mexico City
Santo Domingo São Paulo Zagreb Ljubljana Buenos Aires
Baku
Guayaquil Quito
Guatemala City
Brasilia Cali Medellín Novosibirsk Saint Petersburg
Riga
La Paz Santa Cruz Rio de Janeiro
Lahore Jerusalem
Amman CuritibaBelo Horizonte
Kolkata
Salvador
Lagos Johannesburg Ankara Belgrade Jakarta
Kuwait City Sofia
Rabat Tunis Cape Town Asunción
Douala Córdoba Rosario Caracas Sarajevo

Less than 600.000
600,000 Between 600.000 and 1 millon
600,000 Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

Human capital ranking

60 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 In Figure 11, we have the relationship between the the smaller cities (of fewer than 1 million inhabitants)
technology and social cohesion dimensions. Here we show a relatively good performance in social cohesion.
observe that, with the exception of London and Tokyo, the This is the case with Basel, Bern, Wellington and Linz.
most-populous cities that achieve a good performance in In the bottom left quadrant, we find cities with a poor
technology have a poor performance in social cohesion. performance in both dimensions, such as Brasília, Cape
This is the case with New York, Hong Kong and Seoul. Town, Santo Domingo and New Delhi, all located in
On the opposite side of the figure, the upper right, we emerging countries.
have less populated cities with a good performance in
both dimensions: Reykjavík, Copenhagen, Eindhoven,
Taipei, Oslo and Amsterdam, for example. Furthermore,

Figure 11. Technology and Social Cohesion Dimensions

Singapore
Hong Kong San Francisco Reykjavík
Seoul Dubai
London Amsterdam Eindhoven
New York Denver
Paris Stockholm Vienna Copenhagen
Toronto Oslo
Philadelphia Boston Doha
Los Angeles Tokyo Taipei
Barcelona Zurich
Seattle Dublin Sydney
Dallas
Washington Brussels Madrid Berlin
Chicago Ljubljana
Munich
Houston
Kuwait City Montreal Auckland Melbourne
Tel Aviv Vancouver
San Diego Prague
Lisbon
Panama San Antonio Rotterdam Geneva Quebec
Tallinn
Baltimore Phoenix Göteborg Edinburgh Basel
Casablanca
Riga Hamburg Antwerp
Miami
Montevideo Lyon Helsinki
Belgrade
Technology ranking

Budapest Cologne Stuttgart

Murcia Bern
Tbilisi Frankfurt
Istanbul Ottawa
Bucharest Osaka Manchester Wellington
Nice Zagreb Glasgow
Birmingham Abu Dhabi
Marseille
Bilbao Porto Düsseldorf
Palma de Mallorca
Moscow Nottingham
Milan Lille Liverpool
Santiago Sofia Zaragoza Leeds
A Coruña Nagoya
Rome San José
Vilnius Seville Duisburg
Amman Buenos Aires Valencia Linz
Beijing
Kiev Bratislava
Shanghai Minsk Málaga
São Paulo Saint Petersburg Florence
Baku
Bogotá Kuala Lumpur Warsaw
Rabat Bangkok Wroclaw
Rio de Janeiro
Jerusalem Shenzhen Guangzhou Turin
Mexico City
Brasília Tianjin Ankara Naples
Cairo Almaty
Jakarta Medellín
Sarajevo Belo Horizonte Curitiba Rosario
Lima
Novosibirsk Ho Chi Minh City Córdoba
Cape Town Mumbai Bangalore
Johannesburg Cali
Santo Domingo Quito
Caracas New Delhi
Salvador Guatemala City Tunis Guayaquil
Karachi Santa Cruz Asunción
Nairobi Kolkata
La Paz
Lahore Lagos Douala

600,000
Less than 600.000 600,000
Between 600.000 and 1 millon Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

Social cohesion ranking 

61 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 Figure 12 sets out the relationship between the economy the economy and a bad one in international outreach. In
and international outreach. Here we observe the the opposite case, we find only exceptional examples—
following pattern: the cities either perform well in the such as Buenos Aires and Palma de Mallorca—that
two dimensions or, on the other hand, perform poorly do not achieve good positions in the economy but do
in both. This allows us to see the relationship between perform well in international outreach. Among those
the dimensions, where, in this case, a good performance cities that perform well in both dimensions are the US
in the economy could translate into good international cities New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and San Francisco;
outreach or, on the contrary, a bad performance in the the European cities Paris, London and Amsterdam; and
economy manifests itself in less international outreach. the Asian cities Tokyo, Seoul, Singapore and Hong Kong.
So, it is not strange to find that, of the cities considered The cities with a poor performance in both dimensions,
in the index, there are none with a good performance in include Tunis, Asunción, Sarajevo and Córdoba.

Figure 12. Economy and International Outreach Dimensions

Tokyo Los Angeles New York

Dallas Boston Washington San Francisco Chicago Paris
Seattle Amsterdam London
Philadelphia Houston Seoul
Denver Oslo Miami
Phoenix Stockholm
Zurich Singapore
Baltimore San Diego
Dublin Copenhagen
San Antonio Sydney
Wellington Auckland Hong Kong
Göteborg Helsinki
Basel Munich Melbourne
Geneva
Milan Toronto Madrid
Stuttgart Frankfurt
Osaka Cologne Hamburg
Kuala Lumpur Düsseldorf Bangkok Rome
Berlin
Ottawa Doha Montreal Barcelona
Quebec
Eindhoven Beijing Vienna
Tel Aviv Birmingham Edinburgh
Economy ranking

Lyon Santiago Dubai

Nagoya Brussels
Rotterdam Glasgow Istanbul
Valencia
Shenzhen Bucharest Lisbon
Bern Seville Málaga
Leeds Guangzhou Warsaw
Nottingham Tallinn Marseille Shanghai Taipei
Lille Antwerp Porto Nice
Tianjin Reykjavík
Wroclaw Bratislava Bangalore
Vilnius San José New Delhi Prague
Casablanca Lima Ho Chi Minh City Moscow
Tbilisi Mumbai Vancouver
Montevideo Budapest
Cairo Kiev
Karachi Minsk Liverpool Turin
Manchester Abu Dhabi
Linz Palma de Mallorca
Bilbao Panama
Almaty Zaragoza Florence
Bogotá
Murcia Naples Duisburg
A Coruña Nairobi Santo Domingo Mexico City
Zagreb Buenos Aires
Medellín Baku Ljubljana Quito São Paulo
Cali Guayaquil Guatemala City Brasília
Riga Saint Petersburg
Novosibirsk Santa Cruz
Lahore Curitiba Amman La Paz Jerusalem
Rio de Janeiro
Kolkata Belo Horizonte Jakarta
Lagos Johannesburg Salvador
Kuwait City Belgrade
Ankara
Tunis Cape Town
Rabat Asunción Córdoba Sofia
Douala Sarajevo Rosario
Caracas

Less than 600.000
600,000 Between 600.000 and 1 millon
600,000 Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

International outreach ranking 

62 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Figure 13 connects the technology and environment top right quadrant, we observe those cities that perform
dimensions. In the top left quadrant are the cities well in both dimensions, with European cities such as
characterized by a good performance in technology but London, Copenhagen and Brussels; Canadian cities such
not in the environment. We can see grouped together as Toronto and Montreal; and cities from Oceania such
US cities such as Philadelphia, Houston, Los Angeles and as Auckland and Melbourne. Finally, in the group of
San Diego and cities in the Middle East such as Dubai cities that perform badly in technology but do well in
and Doha. In the bottom left quadrant are those cities the environment, we find South American cities such as
that perform badly in both dimensions. This is the case Buenos Aires, Santo Domingo, La Paz and Santa Cruz and
with Lahore, Lagos, Mexico City and Bangalore. In the eastern European such as Minsk and Vilnius.

Figure 13. Technology and Environment Dimensions

Hong Kong
Seoul Singapore
San Francisco Reykjavík
Dubai
Amsterdam
Eindhoven Paris Copenhagen
Denver New York London Vienna Stockholm
Doha Toronto Oslo
Philadelphia Boston Tokyo
Zurich
Los Angeles Taipei Barcelona Sydney
Seattle Dallas Berlin Dublin
Washington Madrid Brussels
Chicago Munich Ljubljana Auckland
Houston Kuwait City Melbourne
Montreal Tel Aviv
San Diego Vancouver
Rotterdam Prague
Quebec Geneva Panama Lisbon
San Antonio Tallinn
Phoenix Göteborg
Casablanca Edinburgh Hamburg Basel
Technology ranking

Baltimore Riga
Miami Lyon Antwerp Montevideo
Tbilisi Stuttgart Belgrade Budapest Helsinki
Cologne
Murcia Bern
Frankfurt
Manchester Ottawa Zagreb
Istanbul Osaka
Abu Dhabi Bucharest Nice Wellington
Glasgow Birmingham
Nottingham Marseille Bilbao Porto
Düsseldorf
Moscow Lille Palma de Mallorca
Liverpool Sofia Milan
Leeds Santiago Nagoya
Zaragoza A Coruña
Rome Duisburg Seville Valencia San José
Vilnius
Linz
Beijing Shanghai Amman Buenos Aires
Málaga Minsk Bratislava
Saint Petersburg Florence Kiev São Paulo Warsaw
Baku
Rabat Bogotá
Shenzhen Turin Bangkok Rio de Janeiro
Wroclaw
Guangzhou Kuala Lumpur
Mexico City Jerusalem
Naples
Ankara Brasília
Tianjin Cairo Almaty
Jakarta Medellín Rosario Curitiba
Lima Sarajevo
Mumbai Novosibirsk Belo Horizonte
Cape Town Córdoba
Bangalore Cali Ho Chi Minh City
Johannesburg Quito
New Delhi Guayaquil Santo Domingo
Salvador
Karachi Caracas Tunis Asunción
Kolkata Guatemala City La Paz Santa Cruz
Lahore Lagos Douala Nairobi

Less than 600.000
600,000 Between 600.000 and 1 millon
600,000 Between 1 million and 5 million Between 5 and 10 million More than 10 million

Environment ranking 

63 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Cities in Motion: A geographical regions: Philadelphia, Vancouver, San
Francisco and Toronto (North America); Berlin, Göteborg,
Dynamic Analysis Brussels, Birmingham, Stuttgart, Rome, Stockholm,
Madrid, Milan, Lyon, Valencia, Düsseldorf and Glasgow
(Europe); Wellington and Melbourne (Oceania); and
Taipei (Asia).

To assess the growth trends and potential of the different The second group, that of challenger cities (top right
cities, we have created a figure that seeks to capture these quadrant), is made up of those that have improved their
aspects. Thus, Figure 14 sets out the current position of positions in the index at a fast rate and are already in the
each of the cities considered in the CIMI (x-axis) and the middle to high area of the classification. Some examples
trend (y-axis). As a measure to calculate the latter value, are Warsaw, Eindhoven, Dallas, Hong Kong, Basel,
the change in position experienced between 2016 and Ottawa, San Diego, San Antonio, Houston, Buenos Aires,
2018 by the cities in this study’s ranking has been used. Barcelona, Chicago and Frankfurt.
This means that those cities in the top part of the figure
The third group is made up of those cities that show great
have improved in position while those in the bottom part
potential and that, despite their current position in the
have dropped position. Consequently, in the center are
middle to low area of the index, are evolving positively
those that have not experienced significant changes in
at great speed (top left quadrant). They are cities such
their position in the years analyzed.
as Minsk, Dubai, Wrocław, Córdoba, Belo Horizonte and
The figure’s area has been divided into four quadrants Murcia; Latin American capitals such as Brasília, Bogotá
according to the type of city: consolidated, challenger, and Montevideo; and Asian cities such as Bangkok and
potential, and vulnerable. Kuala Lumpur.

The first group, that of consolidated cities (bottom right The final group includes those that are in a vulnerable
quadrant), includes those that, although they have a position (bottom left quadrant), are growing at a slower
middle to high overall position, have not experienced pace than the rest and are in the middle to low position
any changes throughout the period or have lost a of the classification, such as Mexico City, Cape Town and
few positions. It is made up of cities from different Sarajevo.

Figure 14. Current Position of the Cities in the CIMI and Their Trend

Warsaw

Brasília Eindhoven Dallas

Bangkok
Minsk
Challengers
Belo Horizonte
Potential Dubai
Wroclaw Manchester San Diego Hong Kong
Leeds
Córdoba San Antonio Houston Phoenix
Ottawa
Rosario Rotterdam
Basel
Athens Buenos Aires
Mumbai Curitiba Bogotá Vienna
Montevideo
Tbilisi Kuala Lumpur Seattle Cologne Oslo Copenhagen
Cali
Murcia Duisburg Bratislava Prague HelsinkiSydney
Guayaquil Salvador Miami Frankfurt Amsterdam
Belgrade Bern
Kolkata Tianjin La Paz Baku Linz Seville Denver Edinburgh Auckland Chicago
Guatemala City Medellín Ho Chi Minh City Barcelona
Rabat Nairobi Amman Abu Dhabi Liverpool Montreal Geneva Tokyo
Quito Porto Washington
New Delhi Budapest Singapore New York
Naples Lisbon Boston
Cairo Bangalore Santo Domingo Doha Turin Zaragoza Nagoya Antwerp Shanghai
Tunis Santa Cruz Palma de Mallorca Los Angeles Paris
Douala Manama Saint Petersburg Shenzhen Nottingham Santiago Munich London
Kuwait City Baltimore
Casablanca Asunción São Paulo Guangzhou Bilbao HamburgTaipei Zurich Seoul Reykjavíc
Osaka Tallinn
Almaty
Istanbul Sofia Florence Vilnius Madrid
Riyadh Zagreb Ljubljana Quebec Valencia
Rio de Janeiro Riga Melbourne
Johannesburg Lima Ankara Bucharest Marseille Lyon Milan Wellington Toronto
Tel Aviv Málaga Berlin
Manila Panama A Coruña Stockholm
Glasgow
Jakarta
Skopje Moscow Düsseldorf Dublin
Nice Brussels Göteborg
Novosibirsk
Vulnerable Jerusalem
Lille
Beijing Vancouver

Sarajevo San Francisco
San José
Kiev Birmingham Stuttgart
Trend

Cape Town Mexico City
Consolidated
Rome

Philadelphia

Current position

64 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

The information presented in the figure is complemented lowest with regard to social cohesion. Another example is
by an analysis of variance of the dimensions concerning Los Angeles, which ranks among the top positions in the
the cities. That is, the aim is to understand not only how economy, human capital and governance but among the
much they have grown but also how they have done so. lowest with regard to the environment and to mobility
To do this, the variation of the different dimensions was and transportation. Likewise, in this category, we find
calculated for each of the cities that appear in Figure 15. cities such as Geneva, Shanghai, Denver and Boston.
Those at the bottom have similar positions in all the fields
The third quadrant (top left quadrant) corresponds to
and therefore show a more homogeneous distribution.
the so-called “unbalanced” cities—that is, those that
However, those at the top stand out in one or several
are in the bottom positions of the ranking but stand out
fields while other cities are in a relatively low position.
in one field in particular. are For example, the cities of
This information, combined with the position of each
Doha, Asunción and Shenzhen, which, despite being
city, allows us to identify four categories.
in worse than position 100 in most of the dimensions,
The first of these is made up of “balanced” cities (bottom stand out in a particular dimension: Asunción stands out
right quadrant)—that is, those that are in the upper in the environment (position 9), Doha in technology (18)
middle part of the table and show relatively high values and Shenzhen in mobility and transportation (15). Other
in all the dimensions. Examples from this category are cities that are included in this category are Jakarta, Rio de
Stockholm, Madrid, Amsterdam, Birmingham, Montreal, Janeiro, Istanbul, Panama and Rosario.
Lyon, Toronto, London, Tokyo, Munich and Vienna.
In the fourth and final quadrant (bottom left quadrant)
The second category consists of the “differentiated” are the so-called “stagnant” cities, which achieve poor
cities (top right quadrant)—that is, those that are in results in almost all the dimensions analyzed. Some
high positions in the ranking and get very good results in examples are Lima, Kolkata, Johannesburg and Naples,
several dimensions but relatively poor ones in others. An which are in worse than position 100 in seven of the nine
example is New York, which is among the top positions dimensions.
in seven of the nine dimensions but occupies one of the

Figure 15. Variance Between the Cities’ Dimensions

Los Angeles

Unbalanced
Doha
Differentiated
Dubai
Asunción
Moscow Houston
Bangkok Linz Beijing
Abu Dhabi Seattle Boston
Santa Cruz Shanghai Denver Taipei
Buenos Aires Washington New York
Jakarta Rosario Shenzhen
San José Dallas
Jerusalem Philadelphia Chicago
Miami
Mexico City Athens Rome San Francisco
Nairobi Saint Petersburg Guangzhou San Diego
São Paulo Hong Kong
Tianjin Duisburg Geneva
Kiev Bern
Douala Manama
Kuwait City Rio de Janeiro Istanbul Ljubljana
Panama Murcia Riga Vilnius Basel
Nagoya Reykjavík
Riyadh Casablanca Santo Domingo Bogotá A CoruñaMontevideo
BaltimoreQuebec
Zagreb Porto Tel Aviv Leeds Düsseldorf Phoenix
Bratislava San Antonio
Florence Nottingham Antwerp Eindhoven
New Delhi Sarajevo Palma de Mallorca Tallinn Cologne Ottawa Auckland
Ho Chi Minh City Belgrade Liverpool Valencia
Kuala Lumpur Melbourne
Almaty Sofia Edinburgh Dublin
Córdoba Warsaw Vancouver Milan Wellington Sydney
Tunis La Paz Wroclaw Manchester Santiago Paris
Turin Zaragoza Rotterdam
Málaga Osaka GlasgowStuttgart Prague
Bangalore Minsk
Curitiba Baku Brasília Budapest Brussels Göteborg Seoul
Cape Town Lille
Skopje Quito Lisbon Toronto
Ankara Tbilisi Seville
Barcelona Helsinki
Cairo Guayaquil Amman Medellín Oslo Singapore
Tokyo
Mumbai Nice
Montreal Copenhagen
Manila Salvador Bilbao Munich Zurich
Novosibirsk Bucharest Frankfurt Berlin
Rabat Cali Naples Birmingham Stockholm
Lima Hamburg Vienna
Madrid
London
Belo Horizonte
Guatemala City Amsterdam

Stagnant
Variance

Johannesburg Marseille Lyon

Balanced
Kolkata

Current position

65 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Recommendations
and Conclusions
The CIMI synthetic index makes it possible, through are with the aim of looking for creative ways to resolve
an objective calculation methodology, to compile a them. Undoubtedly, one of the great challenges for cities
ranking of cities taking into account various aspects. The in the 21st century is to transform themselves into urban
different dimensions analyzed offer a broad and holistic areas that are simultaneously prosperous, equitable and
vision of what a city represents, while allowing greater inclusive. This goal is essentially a permanent, holistic
understanding of its composition and its evolution over and long-term process.
time.
An all-embracing vision is necessary. Related to the
The results of the index and our experience of using previous point, the CIMI makes clear that it is not enough
it to assess different cities allow us to make the to be good in only one dimension. There are cities at the
following recommendations and reach some significant top of the ranking in some dimensions, such as Asunción,
conclusions: Abu Dhabi, Moscow and Kiev, which do relatively well in the
environment, social cohesion, human capital and urban
Size matters (although not so much). This new edition planning respectively but, in the overall classification,
of the CIMI makes clear that large cities occupy leading are located in positions 141, 127, 86 and 111, again
positions in the ranking. The first 10 positions are held by respectively. These cities—called “unbalanced” in the
megacities such as London, New York, Paris and Tokyo. analysis of variance—are recommended to be capable
However, among the top positions some medium-sized of reaching acceptable minimums in the dimensions as a
cities also stand out such as Amsterdam, Vienna and whole if they seek to play in the big leagues. This message
Copenhagen and even small cities, as in the case of must also reach those cities that understand technology
Reykjavík in particular. These results reveal that size is not to be the main (or only) ingredient of a smart city and do
a prerequisite for achieving top positions in the ranking. not take into account other critical fields that define the
Finding the right balance is a complex (and permanent) urban situation. If a city does not see the whole picture,
process. The report’s dynamic analysis shows that only it will be difficult for it to become a smart city.
a select number of cities is capable of doing well in all A long-term vision is necessary. Cities need to define
the dimensions. For instance, London, Amsterdam, Seoul their identity and establish a strategic plan. One of the
and Vienna stand out in this regard. Many struggle to most important (and difficult) questions that must be
balance their performance across the different fields asked is what kind of city they want in the future. The
but lose that battle. For example, when analyzing the answer will not only define their identity but also set
relationship between the dimensions of technology and out the path of transformation that they must travel to
the environment, we can observe how several US cities achieve it. That is, they must consider what their strategic
perform relatively well in the former dimension but fail plan will be. In fact, a sound strategic plan will prevent
in the latter. So they could use as benchmarks other changes that may veer the city away from its identity
cities, such as Singapore, which are able to perform well as circumstances or governments change, and the plan
in both dimensions, and identify practices applicable to must be unique and individual for each city. This means
their situation. Something similar comes to light when that local governments must escape from the one-size-
studying the relationship between the economy and fits-all approach and define a specific long-term vision for
social cohesion. It can be observed in this respect that their city. The CIMI makes clear that there is no single
many cities that are capable of reaching high economic model of success.
levels (in average terms) are, at the same time, more
inequitable and unequal. This aspect, which seems Strategic priorities must be established. In relation
prevalent in large cities—such as Hong Kong, New York, to the previous point, the CIMI shows that the cities
Houston and Bangkok—must be managed properly as that top the ranking are not only not identical but
it can generate tensions and conflict between different they prioritize various dimensions. (See Appendix 2.)
strata in society. To do so, it is essential to understand Moreover, there are several paths to get to the top of
the relationships and interactions between the different the index. Establishing and defining strategic priorities
dimensions of a city and to identify where the trade-offs whose goal is to achieve the long-term vision defined in

66 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

the strategic plan mentioned previously will strengthen with each other, especially those that, in addition to
the city’s capacity for organization and action, as well as being in proximity, share infrastructures and services. In
its ability to achieve those goals successfully. this way, they will achieve more efficient urban systems.

The first step is a good diagnosis. One of the first activities The participation of the public must be a tool
that must be carried out in any strategic definition is to for transformation. In addition, the collaboration
understand where we are. In this regard, the CIMI can be mentioned in the previous point must be fluid between
used as a diagnostic tool to do a first assessment of the residents and the administration because, otherwise, any
current status of the city in the different dimensions of solutions adopted will not be efficient when it comes to
our model. Likewise, it allows a quick X-ray to be taken of responding to society’s real needs. More and more cities
the cities to identify their strengths and point out where are becoming aware of the importance of involving the
there may be room for improvement. public in the processes of transforming and managing
them, as reflected in the proliferation of initiatives
The benchmark is the beginning of change. The ability to such as participatory budgets and digital participation
compare 174 cities across nine different dimensions helps platforms, where members of the public can give their
us to identify those that perform best in the different opinions, make suggestions and, in short, have a voice in
urban aspects. In this sense, cities that are lagging behind the definition and execution of strategic plans.
or stagnant in one or more dimensions can study the best
in each category with the aim of identifying the practices There are many good cities but the perfect city does
that will improve their performance. This comparison will not exist. It is very difficult for a single city to maximize
allow cities to start moving in the right direction. That said, all the dimensions. Even those cities in the top positions
it must be borne in mind that, while the challenges facing of the rankings have weak points. Cities such as New
cities are global, their effects are local. Therefore, the York and Los Angeles have a long way to go with regard
benchmark should serve as a source of inspiration rather to social cohesion and the environment. Therefore,
than as a road map for action. In this regard, at IESE Cities in they have been classified as “differentiated” and so we
Motion, we have published a series of books—available on recommend that they make the most of the advantages
Amazon—that identify good practices across the different they have in the fields in which they are leaders in order
dimensions and we invite the public to read them. to progress in the positions where they are lagging
behind more. For example, a city can make the most of its
The CIMI is not a “beauty contest.” It has surprised us technological leadership to improve its results in terms
to see how many cities included in the index are more of the environment. In addition, for the cities that we
concerned about their position in the ranking than the have classified as “balanced,” the main recommendation
analysis that can be derived from it. Our perspective is that they should not rest on their laurels. Despite
is that the value of the CIMI lies not only in its ability to their more harmonious growth, they still have room for
detect strengths and weaknesses but also in its temporal improvement.
component, which makes it possible to identify where each
city is heading toward. In this regard, our recommendation Change is slow for most of the cities. While our temporal
to urban managers is that they pay more attention to the analysis of the CIMI indicates that some cities are capable
trend (dynamic analysis) than to the position. of making great advances in a relatively short time and
of moving to higher positions quickly (Oslo, Dallas, San
Collaboration is the cornerstone of success. Our Diego and Frankfurt, for example), in general it shows us
experience from IESE Cities in Motion and the associated that, in most cases, cities’ positions in the ranking have
platform PPP for Cities (www.pppcities.org) tells us that not changed significantly from one year to the next.
the cities that do best in the ranking understand fully This is due, to a large extent, to the time that projects
that the challenges facing them are too big to be tackled of any magnitude need to crystallize. Therefore, when
individually. Collaboration is needed between different seeking to generate changes needed to become smart
social partners—public, private, educational institutions, and sustainable, cities should adopt long-term policies
or nonprofit organizations—and, although it can adopt as soon as possible—especially the worst-placed cities,
various formats (from public-private partnerships to which we have called “stagnant” in our analysis. There
collaborative economy structures), it is essential for are many cities that still have problems when it comes
achieving long-term success. Ideas of collaboration and to dealing with the major challenges, including the lack
cooperation should be extended within city councils of collaboration between public and private bodies and
themselves, where there are often “silos” that prevent between civic institutions and the public; the impossibility
people from seeing the relationships and the possible of promoting new business models that could provide
synergies among the different dimensions of our financing for new businesses; and a shortsighted vision
conceptual model. Finally, we ask that cities collaborate of smart cities.

67 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

The urbanization process is one of the most significant
challenges of the 21st century. As the world population
moves toward cities, existing problems grow and new ones
are generated that, in turn, are influenced profoundly
by the globalization process. This trend means a closer
relationship between global dynamics and cities, which
generates local impacts: effects on the economy and
demographics, social divisions or environmental impacts.

Despite these challenges, cities and their leaders should

understand the positive aspect that these generate. From
our perspective, the city offers a much more delimited
sphere of action, which enables work to be done more
directly for people’s benefit. However, urban managers
must take a step back and analyze their problems, try
to discover what other cities do, and learn what good
practices are being carried out elsewhere in the world.
Day-to-day management makes it difficult for cities to ask
themselves how to promote the positive effects of the
urbanization process and reduce the negative ones. For
this reason, from the IESE Cities in Motion platform, we
want to create awareness and generate innovative tools
with the goal of achieving smarter governments. With
this index, we hope to have contributed to this aim.

68 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Appendix 1. Indicators
No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

Proportion of population with secondary and higher

1 Higher education Human capital Euromonitor
education.

2 Business schools Number of business schools (top 100). Human capital Financial Times

International movement of higher-level students.

3 Movement of students Human capital UNESCO
Number of students.

Number of universities in the city that are in the top

4 Universities Human capital QS Top Universities
500.

5 Museums and art galleries Number of museums and art galleries per city. Human capital OpenStreetMap

6 Schools Number of public or private schools per city. Human capital OpenStreetMap

7 Theaters Number of theaters per city. Human capital OpenStreetMap

8 Expenditure on leisure and recreation Expenditure on leisure and recreation per capita. Human capital Euromonitor

Expenditure on leisure and recreation. In millions of

9 Expenditure on leisure and recreation Human capital Euromonitor
dollars, according to 2016 prices.

10 Expenditure on education Expenditure on education per capita. Human capital Euromonitor

11 Mortality Ratio of deaths per 100,000 inhabitants. Social cohesion Euromonitor

12 Crime rate Crime rate. Social cohesion Numbeo

13 Health Health index. Social cohesion Numbeo

Unemployment rate (number of unemployed out of

14 Unemployment Social cohesion Euromonitor
the workforce).

Measure of social inequality. It varies from 0 to 100,

15 Gini index with 0 being a situation of perfect equality and 100 Social cohesion Euromonitor
that of perfect inequality.

16 Price of property Price of property as percentage of income. Social cohesion Numbeo

International Labour
17 Female workers Ratio of female workers in the public administration. Social cohesion
Organization (ILO)

An index that measures the peacefulness and the

Institute for
absence of violence in a country or region. The
18 Global Peace Index Social cohesion Economics and
bottom-ranking positions correspond to countries
Peace
with a high level of violence.

Numbers of public and private hospitals and health

19 Hospitals Social cohesion OpenStreetMap
centers per city.

An index that measures the level of happiness of a

World Happiness
20 Happiness index country. The highest values correspond to countries Social cohesion
Index
that have a higher degree of overall happiness.

69 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

Ranking that considers the proportion of people in

a situation of slavery in the country. The countries Walk Free
21 Global Slavery Index Social cohesion
occupying the top positions in the ranking are those Foundation
with the highest proportion.

This variable measures how the government deals

Government response to situations with situations of slavery in the country. The top Walk Free
22 Social cohesion
of slavery positions in the ranking indicate countries that have Foundation
a more effective and comprehensive response.

Global Terrorism
Number of terrorist incidents by city in the previous Database (GTD)
23 Terrorism Social cohesion
three years. of the University
of Maryland

The variable seeks to measure whether a city provides

a friendly environment for women on a scale of 1
24 Female-friendly to 5. Cities with a value of 1 have a more hostile Social cohesion Nomad List
environment, while those that have a value of 5 are
very friendly.

25 Suicides Suicide rate by city. Social cohesion Nomad List

26 Homicides Homicide rate by city. Social cohesion Nomad List

Labor productivity calculated as GDP per working

27 Productivity Economy Euromonitor
population (in thousands).

Number of calendar days needed so a business can

28 Time required to start a business Economy World Bank
operate legally.

The top positions in the ranking indicate a more

29 Ease of starting a business favorable regulatory environment for creating and Economy World Bank
developing a local company.

Globalization
Number of headquarters of publicly traded
30 Headquarters Economy and World Cities
companies.
(GaWC)

Percentage of people involved in TEA (that is, novice

Global
Motivation to get started in TEA (total entrepreneurs and owners or managers of a new
31 Economy Entrepreneurship
early-stage entrepreneurial activity) business), driven by an opportunity for improvement,
Monitor (GEM)
divided by the percentage of TEA motivated by need.

32 GDP estimate Estimated annual GDP growth. Economy Euromonitor

33 GDP GDP in millions of dollars at 2016 prices. Economy Euromonitor

34 GDP per capita GDP per capita at 2016 prices. Economy Euromonitor

Mortgage as a percentage of income. It is calculated as

a proportion of the real monthly cost of the mortgage
35 Mortgage with respect to the family income (estimated via the Economy Numbeo
average monthly salary). The lower the percentage,
the better.

70 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

The variable assumes the value of 1 if the city has the

36 Glovo Economy Glovo
Glovo service and 0 otherwise.

The variable assumes the value of 1 if the city has the

37 Uber Economy Uber
Uber service and 0 otherwise.

38 Salary Hourly wage in the city. Economy Euromonitor

Purchasing power (determined by the average salary)

39 Purchasing power for the purchase of goods and services in the city, Economy Numbeo
compared with the purchasing power in New York City.

Total reserves in millions of current dollars. Estimate at

40 Reserves Governance World Bank
urban level according to the population.

41 Reserves per capita Reserves per capita in millions of current dollars. Governance World Bank

42 Embassies Number of embassies and consulates per city. Governance OpenStreetMap

This establishes whether or not the city has ISO

37120 certification. Certified cities are committed
to improving their services and quality of life. It is World Council on
43 ISO 37120 certification Governance
a variable coded from 0 to 6. Cities that have been City Data (WCCD)
certified for the longest time have the highest value.
The value 0 is for those cities without certification.

44 Research centers Number of research and technology centers per city. Governance OpenStreetMap

Number of government buildings and premises in the

45 Government buildings Governance OpenStreetMap
city.

The strength of legal rights index measures the degree

to which collateral and bankruptcy laws protect the
rights of borrowers and lenders and thus facilitate
46 Strength of legal rights index Governance World Bank
access to loans. The values go from 0 (low) to 12
(high), where the highest ratings indicate that the laws
are better designed to expand access to credit.

Countries with values close to 0 are perceived as very

Transparency
47 Corruption perceptions index corrupt and those with an index close to 100 as very Governance
International
transparent.

CTIC Foundation
This describes whether the city has an open data
48 Open data platform Governance and Open World
system.
Bank

The EGDI reflects how a country uses information

E-Government Development Index
49 technology to promote access and inclusion for its Governance United Nations
(EGDI)
citizens.

Ranking where the countries in the highest positions The Economist

50 Democracy ranking Governance
are those considered more democratic. Intelligence Unit

71 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

Percentage of population employed in public

Employment in the public administration and defense; education; health;
51 Governance Euromonitor
administration community, social and personal service activities;
and other activities.

CO₂ emissions from the burning of fossil fuels and the

52 CO₂ emissions The environment World Bank
manufacture of cement. Measured in kilotons (kt).

53 CO₂ emission index CO₂ emission index. The environment Numbeo

Methane emissions that arise from human activities

54 Methane emissions such as agriculture and the industrial production of The environment World Bank
methane. Measured in kt of CO₂ equivalent.

Percentage of the population with reasonable access

55 Access to the water supply to an appropriate quantity of water resulting from an The environment World Bank
improvement in the supply.

The indicator PM2.5 measures the number of particles World Health

56 PM2.5 in the air whose diameter is less than 2.5 micrometers The environment Organization
(µm). Annual mean. (WHO)

The indicator PM10 measures the amount of particles

57 PM10 in the air whose diameter is less than 10 µm. Annual The environment WHO
mean.

58 Pollution Pollution index. The environment Numbeo

Environmental Performance Index This measures environmental health and ecosystem

59 The environment Yale University
(EPI) vitality. Scale from 1 (poor) to 100 (good).

Food and
Agriculture
60 Renewable water resources Total renewable water sources per capita. The environment Organization of
the United Nations
(FAO)

Percentage of the rise in temperature in the city

61 Future climate during the summer forecast for 2100 if pollution The environment Climate Central
caused by carbon emissions continues to increase.

Waste
Average amount of municipal solid waste (garbage)
62 Solid waste The environment Management for
generated annually per person (kg/year).
Everyone
Consideration of the time spent in traffic, the
Mobility and
63 Traffic index dissatisfaction this generates, CO₂ consumption and Numbeo
transportation
other inefficiencies of the traffic system.

Estimation of traffic inefficiencies (such as long

Mobility and
64 Inefficiency index journey times). High values represent high rates of Numbeo
transportation
inefficiency in driving.

Index of traffic for commuting Index of time that takes into account how many Mobility and
65 Numbeo
to work minutes it takes to commute to work. transportation

This system shows the automated services for the

public use of shared bicycles that provide transport
Mobility and Bike-Sharing World
66 Bike sharing from one location to another within a city. The
transportation Map
indicator varies between 0 and 8 according to how
developed the system is.

72 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

Mobility and
67 Length of the metro system Length of the metro system per city. Metrobits
transportation

Mobility and
68 Metro stations Number of metro stations per city. Metrobits
transportation

Mobility and
69 Flights Number of arrival flights (air routes) in a city. OpenFlights
transportation

Binary variable that shows whether the city has a Mobility and
70 High-speed train OpenRailwayMap
high-speed train or not. transportation

Number of commercial vehicles in the city Mobility and

71 Vehicles Euromonitor
(in thousands). transportation

Mobility and
72 Bicycles per household Percentage of bicycles per household. Euromonitor
transportation

Number of bike-rental or bike-sharing points, based

73 Bicycles for rent on docking stations where they can be picked up or Urban planning OpenStreetMap
dropped off.

Percentage of the urban population that uses at least

Percentage of the urban population
74 basic sanitation services—that is, improved sanitation Urban planning World Bank
with adequate sanitation facilities
facilities that are not shared with other households.

Number of people per household. Occupancy by

household is measured compared to the average.
75 Number of people per household Urban planning Euromonitor
This makes it possible to estimate if a city has
overoccupied or underoccupied households.

Percentage of buildings considered high-rises. A

Skyscraper Source
76 High-rise buildings high-rise is a building of at least 12 stories or 35 Urban planning
Media
meters (115 feet) high.

This variable is the number of completed buildings

in the city. It includes structures such as high-rises,
Skyscraper Source
77 Buildings towers and low-rise buildings but excludes other Urban planning
Media
various others, as well as buildings in different states
of completion (in construction, planned, etc.).

International
78 McDonald’s Number of McDonald’s chain restaurants per city. OpenStreetMap
outreach

International
79 Number of passengers per airport Number of passengers per airport in thousands. Euromonitor
outreach

Ranking of cities according to the number of photos

taken there and uploaded to Panoramio (community
International
80 Sightsmap where photographs were shared online). The top Sightsmap
outreach
positions correspond to the cities with the most
photographs.

73 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

International
Number of international conferences and meetings International Congress and
81 Number of conferences and meetings
that are held in a city. outreach Convention
Association (ICCA)

International
82 Hotels Number of hotels per capita. OpenStreetMap
outreach

The index shows the prices of food and beverages in International

83 Restaurant index Numbeo
restaurants and bars compared to New York City. outreach

Registered Twitter users in the city. This is part of the

84 Twitter Technology Tweepsmap
social media variable.

Number of users in the city. This is part of the social

85 LinkedIn Technology LinkedIn
media variable.

International
Number of mobile phones in the city via estimates
86 Mobile phones Technology Telecommunication
based on country-level data.
Union

Number of wireless access points globally. These

87 Wi-Fi hot spot represent the options in the city for connecting to the Technology WiFi Map app
Internet.

Innovation index of the city. Valuation of 0 Innovation Cities

88 Innovation cities index Technology
(no innovation) to 60 (a lot of innovation). Program

International
89 Landline subscriptions Number of landline subscriptions per 100 inhabitants. Technology Telecommunication
Union

International
90 Broadband subscriptions Broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants. Technology Telecommunication
Union

Percentage of households with access to the Internet

91 Internet Technology Euromonitor
in the city.

Percentage of households with mobile phones in the

92 Mobile telephony Technology Euromonitor
city.

The Web Index seeks to measure the economic, social

World Wide Web
93 Web Index and political benefit that countries obtain from the Technology
Foundation
Internet.

Percentage of households with some kind of

94 Telephony Technology Euromonitor
telephone service.

95 Internet speed Internet speed in the city. Technology Nomad List

Percentage of households with a personal computer

96 Computers Technology Euromonitor
in the city.

74 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

No. Indicator Description / Unit of measurement Dimension Source

Disposable income (annual average). Decile 1.

97 Disposable income City cluster Euromonitor
In dollars.

Disposable income (annual average). Decile 2.

98 Disposable income City cluster Euromonitor
In dollars.

Disposable income (annual average). Decile 5.

99 Disposable income City cluster Euromonitor
In dollars.

Disposable income (annual average). Decile 7.

100 Disposable income City cluster Euromonitor
In dollars.

Disposable income (annual average). Decile 9.

101 Disposable income City cluster Euromonitor
In dollars.

City/country
102 Population Number of inhabitants. Euromonitor
cluster

103 Percentage of population employed Percentage of population employed. Country cluster Euromonitor

Expenditure on medical and health services per

Expenditure on medical and health
104 inhabitant. In millions of dollars, according to 2016 Country cluster Euromonitor
services
prices.

Expenditure on hospitality and catering services per

105 Expenditure on hospitality and catering inhabitant. In millions of dollars, according to 2016 Country cluster Euromonitor
prices.

Expenditure on housing per inhabitant. In millions of

106 Expenditure on housing per inhabitant Country cluster Euromonitor
dollars, according to 2016 prices.

75 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Appendix 2.
Graphical Analysis of
the Profiles of the 174 Cities

Below is a graphical analysis of the 174 cities included in interpretation of each city’s profile by identifying the
the CIMI, based on the nine key dimensions. These radar values of the various fields and, at the same time, they
charts, arranged according to ranking, aim to facilitate enable comparisons of two or more cities at a glance.

# 1 ‐ London ‐ United Kingdom # 2 ‐ New York ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 3 ‐ Amsterdam ‐ Netherlands # 4 ‐ Paris ‐ France

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 5 ‐ Reykjavík ‐ Iceland # 6 ‐ Tokyo ‐ Japan

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

76 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 7 ‐ Singapore ‐ Singapore # 8 ‐ Copenhagen ‐ Denmark
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 9 ‐ Berlin ‐ Germany # 10 ‐ Vienna ‐ Austria

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 11 ‐ Hong Kong ‐ China # 12 ‐ Seoul ‐ South Korea

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 13 ‐ Stockholm ‐ Sweden # 14 ‐ Oslo ‐ Norway

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

77 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 15 ‐ Zurich ‐ Switzerland # 16 ‐ Los Angeles ‐ USA
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 17 ‐ Chicago ‐ USA # 18 ‐ Toronto ‐ Canada

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 19 ‐ Sydney ‐ Australia # 20 ‐ Melbourne ‐ Australia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 21 ‐ San Francisco ‐ USA # 22 ‐ Helsinki ‐ Finland

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

78 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 23 ‐ Washington ‐ USA # 24 ‐ Madrid ‐ Spain
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 25 ‐ Boston ‐ USA # 26 ‐ Wellington ‐ New Zealand

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 27 ‐ Munich ‐ Germany # 28 ‐ Barcelona ‐ Spain

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 29 ‐ Basel ‐ Switzerland # 30 ‐ Taipei ‐ Taiwan

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

79 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 31 ‐ Bern ‐ Switzerland # 32 ‐ Geneva ‐ Switzerland
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 33 ‐ Frankfurt ‐ Germany # 34 ‐ Hamburg ‐ Germany

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 35 ‐ Auckland ‐ New Zealand # 36 ‐ Göteborg ‐ Sweden

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 37 ‐ Dublin ‐ Ireland # 38 ‐ Montreal ‐ Canada

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

80 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 39 ‐ Ottawa ‐ Canada # 40 ‐ Miami ‐ USA
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 41 ‐ Milan ‐ Italy # 42 ‐ Phoenix ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 43 ‐ Rotterdam ‐ Netherlands # 44 ‐ Lisbon ‐ Portugal

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 45 ‐ Dallas ‐ USA # 46 ‐ Edinburgh ‐ United Kingdom

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

81 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 47 ‐ Prague ‐ Czech Republic # 48 ‐ Brussels ‐ Belgium
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 49 ‐ San Diego ‐ USA # 50 ‐ Düsseldorf ‐ Germany

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 51 ‐ Cologne ‐ Germany # 52 ‐ Denver ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 53 ‐ Stuttgart ‐ Germany # 54 ‐ Philadelphia ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

82 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 55 ‐ Vancouver ‐ Canada # 56 ‐ Lyon ‐ France
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 57 ‐ Eindhoven ‐ Netherlands # 58 ‐ Seattle ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 59 ‐ Shanghai ‐ China # 60 ‐ Houston ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 61 ‐ Valencia ‐ Spain # 62 ‐ San Antonio ‐ USA

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

83 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 63 ‐ Birmingham ‐ United Kingdom # 64 ‐ Glasgow ‐ United Kingdom
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 65 ‐ Tallinn ‐ Estonia # 66 ‐ Santiago ‐ Chile

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 67 ‐ Quebec ‐ Canada # 68 ‐ Osaka ‐ Japan

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 69 ‐ Warsaw ‐ Poland # 70 ‐ Bratislava ‐ Slovakia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

84 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 71 ‐ Baltimore ‐ USA # 72 ‐ Antwerp ‐ Belgium
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 73 ‐ Budapest ‐ Hungary # 74 ‐ Vilnius ‐ Lithuania

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 75 ‐ Rome ‐ Italy # 76 ‐ Seville ‐ Spain

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 77 ‐ Buenos Aires ‐ Argentina # 78 ‐ Manchester ‐ United Kingdom

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

85 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 79 ‐ Leeds ‐ United Kingdom # 80 ‐ Málaga ‐ Spain
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 81 ‐ Tel Aviv ‐ Israel # 82 ‐ Nagoya ‐ Japan

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 83 ‐ Beijing ‐ China # 84 ‐ Riga ‐ Latvia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 85 ‐ Nice ‐ France # 86 ‐ Moscow ‐ Russia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

86 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 87 ‐ Linz ‐ Austria # 88 ‐ Palma de Mallorca ‐ Spain
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 89 ‐ Marseille ‐ France # 90 ‐ Duisburg ‐ Germany

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 91 ‐ Porto ‐ Portugal # 92 ‐ Montevideo ‐ Uruguay

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 93 ‐ Ljubljana ‐ Slovenia # 94 ‐ Liverpool ‐ United Kingdom

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

87 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 95 ‐ Wroclaw ‐ Poland # 96 ‐ Nottingham ‐ United Kingdom
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 97 ‐ Zagreb ‐ Croatia # 98 ‐ Lille ‐ France

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 99 ‐ Dubai ‐ United Arab Emirates # 100 ‐ Kuala Lumpur ‐ Malaysia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 101 ‐ Zaragoza ‐ Spain # 102 ‐ A Coruña ‐ Spain

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

88 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 103 ‐ Bucharest ‐ Romania # 104 ‐ Bangkok ‐ Thailand
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 105 ‐ Murcia ‐ Spain # 106 ‐ Athens ‐ Greece

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 107 ‐ Bilbao ‐ Spain # 108 ‐ Florence ‐ Italy

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 109 ‐ Turin ‐ Italy # 110 ‐ Minsk ‐ Belarus

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

89 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 111 ‐ Kiev ‐ Ukraine # 112 ‐ San José ‐ Costa Rica
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 113 ‐ Guangzhou ‐ China # 114 ‐ Panama ‐ Panama

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 115 ‐ Sofia ‐ Bulgaria # 116 ‐ Naples ‐ Italy

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 117 ‐ Bogotá ‐ Colombia # 118 ‐ Istanbul ‐ Turkey

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

90 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 119 ‐ Shenzhen ‐ China # 120 ‐ Belgrade ‐ Serbia
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 121 ‐ Saint Petersburg ‐ Russia # 122 ‐ Ho Chi Minh City ‐ Vietnam

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 123 ‐ Jerusalem ‐ Israel # 124 ‐ Tbilisi ‐ Georgia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 125 ‐ Rosario ‐ Argentina # 126 ‐ Doha ‐ Qatar

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

91 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 127 ‐ Abu Dhabi ‐ United Arab Emirates # 128 ‐ Rio de Janeiro ‐ Brazil
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 129 ‐ Almaty ‐ Kazakhstan # 130 ‐ Brasília ‐ Brazil

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 131 ‐ Baku ‐ Azerbaijan # 132 ‐ São Paulo ‐ Brazil

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 133 ‐ Mexico City ‐ Mexico # 134 ‐ Medellín ‐ Colombia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

92 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 135 ‐ Ankara ‐ Turkey # 136 ‐ Córdoba ‐ Argentina
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 137 ‐ Quito ‐ Ecuador # 138 ‐ Lima ‐ Peru

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 139 ‐ Santo Domingo ‐ Dominican Republic # 140 ‐ Curitiba ‐ Brazil

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 141 ‐ Asunción ‐ Paraguay # 142 ‐ Jakarta ‐ Indonesia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

93 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 143 ‐ Kuwait City ‐ Kuwait # 144 ‐ Sarajevo ‐ Bosnia‐Herzegovina
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 145 ‐ La Paz ‐ Bolivia # 146 ‐ Salvador ‐ Brazil

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 147 ‐ Santa Cruz ‐ Bolivia # 148 ‐ Cali ‐ Colombia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 149 ‐ Skopje ‐ North Macedonia # 150 ‐ Amman ‐ Jordan

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

94 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 151 ‐ Belo Horizonte ‐ Brazil # 152 ‐ Guayaquil ‐ Ecuador
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 153 ‐ Bangalore ‐ India # 154 ‐ Tianjin ‐ China

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 155 ‐ Casablanca ‐ Morocco # 156 ‐ Novosibirsk ‐ Russia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 157 ‐ Tunis ‐ Tunisia # 158 ‐ Cape Town ‐ South Africa

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

95 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 159 ‐ Manama ‐ Bahrain # 160 ‐ Guatemala City ‐ Guatemala
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 161 ‐ Mumbai ‐ India # 162 ‐ Nairobi ‐ Kenya

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 163 ‐ Manila ‐ Philippines # 164 ‐ Riyadh ‐ Saudi Arabia

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 165 ‐ Cairo ‐ Egypt # 166 ‐ New Delhi ‐ India

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

96 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

 # 167 ‐ Johannesburg ‐ South Africa # 168 ‐ Rabat ‐ Morocco
Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 169 ‐ Kolkata ‐ India # 170 ‐ Douala ‐ Cameroon

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 171 ‐ Lagos ‐ Nigeria # 172 ‐ Caracas ‐ Venezuela

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

# 173 ‐ Lahore ‐ Pakistan # 174 ‐ Karachi ‐ Pakistan

Economy Economy
100 100
Social cohesion 80 Human capital Social cohesion 80 Human capital
60 60
40 40
International International
Governance 20 Governance 20
outreach outreach
0 0

Mobility and Mobility and
Urban planning Urban planning
transportation transportation

Technology Environment Technology Environment

97 IESE Business School - IESE Cities in Motion Index / ST-509-E

Follow us

IESE Business School

IESE Business School

iesebs

iese

Barcelona Madrid New York Munich Sao Paulo

Av. Pearson, 21 Camino del Cerro 165 W. 57th Street Maria-Theresia-Straße 15 Rua Martiniano de
08034 Barcelona, Spain del Águila, 3 New York, 81675 Munich, Germany Carvalho, 573
(+ 34) 93 253 42 00 28023 Madrid, Spain NY 10019-2201 USA (+49) 89 24 20 97 90 Bela Vista
(+34) 91 211 30 00 (+1) 646 346 8850 01321001 Sao Paulo, Brazil
(+55) 11 3177 8221