7 minute read
4.3 Position of Budapest in the international rankings
At present, 80 per cent of the world’s GDP is generated in urban areas (World Bank, 2015). In the case of Europe, it has proven that in the cities where the number of inhabitants exceeds 1 million the per capita GDP outstrips the European average by 25 per cent (UN, 2014b). The urban concentration of high value added activities is even more apparent in Hungary.
Table 4-2 Weight of the capitals in the visegrád countries, 2012 Contribution Contribution GDP per to national to the capita as a GDP countries share of the (per cent) population national average (per cent)
Budapest 38,13 17,46 218,38 Bratislava 27,25 11,27 241,94 Prague 24,70 11,84 208,69 Warsaw 12,92 4,44 291,00 Source: EUROSTAT (2015)
As a result of this, Hungary is represented first of all by Budapest in the decision-making process of many large enterprises, particularly in the service sector. Accordingly, the international perception of Budapest and its position in the competition of cities is relevant for the international competitiveness of the entire country.
The international rankings that provide a comparative assessment of the cities list these regions based on different criteria, where the quality of life, liveability, quality of environment, the innovation capacities and economic power relations are of utmost importance. On a global scale, the relative position of Budapest is best in the area of innovation, quality of life and liveability. In the rankings focusing on these aspects, it usually belongs to the top 30 per cent (Chart 4-12).
budapest achieved the highest rank in the Global
innovation Cities index, where it ranked 64 th out of 445 ranked countries. This indicator rates the maturity of the background sectors responsible for the cultural assets, the human infrastructure and the favourable innovation environment, as well as the conditions necessary for the creation and development of the network markets. The global list is led by San Francisco, New york and London. In the CentralEuropean region Budapest is overtaken only by Vienna (6 th ) and Prague (62 nd ).
in the area of liveability, budapest was ranked high in
the Spatially Adjusted Liveability index, initiated on an experimental basis by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) in 2012. In this respect, the capital took the 24 th position out of 70 ranked countries. The ranking is led by Hong kong, Amsterdam and Osaka. A special feature of the indicator is that in addition to the traditional liveability indicators, it also takes into account the spatial character of the urban environment determining the social welfare and quality of life, as well as the equal spatial access to the city’s green areas, natural resources and to the region’s cultural values.
The cost of living measured by international standards shows a favourable picture; in the ranking of the most expensive cities Budapest is at the end of the list, which is a favourable position and at present this factor represents a major competitive advantage. In the Mercer ranking, which lists the cost of living, living costs higher than those in Budapest are indicated for 170 cities out of 207 ranked cities.
Based on the positions achieved in the various rankings budapest also performed relatively well in the competitiveness and the prosperity dimensions. In the EIU competitiveness list, within the CentralEuropean region Budapest (35 th ) is preceded only by Vienna (29 th ); which order is similar to the UN’s City Prosperity Index, where Budapest (21 st )
is preceded only by Vienna (1 st ) in the CentralEuropean region. In the five sub-dimensions of the UN indicator –productivity, quality of life, infrastructure, environmental sustainability, equity and social inclusion – Budapest obtained the highest score in infrastructure, and thus this performs as a key factor
in its competitiveness.
In terms of urban environmental quality and financial centre role, Budapest precedes less than half of the cities included in the international lists. As regards the quality of urban environment, Budapest is at the end of the mid-range of the ranked cities of global significance, taking the 17 th position out of 30 European cities. In this respect, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Oslo have the best position.
As it is evidenced by the respective index, Budapest does not play a central financial role in the international network of cities. This financial role alone is not a priority factor, however, as Budapest has a significant weight in terms of the national economic processes, the lower maturity degree of the financial and capital markets may represent a drawback in terms of competitiveness in the international processes. Based on the index, New york, London and Hong kong have the highest level of financial role, while in the Central-European region Budapest (76 th ) is preceded by Vienna (35 th ) and Prague (60 th ).
Chart 4-11 relative position of budapest in the ranking of various city indices*
Per cent
90 70 80 Innovation 60 40 50 Competitiveness and prosperity Urban green 10 20 30 Liveability and standard of living Financial centre 0 Global Innovation Cities Index (64/445), 2014 Mercer Quality of Living Rankings (75/230), 2015 EIU Liveability Index (50/140), 2014 Mercer Cost of Living Ranking (170/207), 2015** EIU Spatially Adjusted Liveability Index (24/70), 2012 UN-HABITAT City Prosperity Index (21/69), 2013 EIU Global City Competitiveness (35/120), 2013 Siemens European Green Cities Index (17/30), 2012 Global Financial Centres Index (76/82), 2015 Note: * Percentage of the countries preceded in the ranking ** Percentage of the countries which precede Budapest Sources: EIU (2012, 2013, 2014); QFC (2015); GIA (2014); Mercer (2015); Transparency International 2014; UN (2013; 2014);
referenCeS
EIU Hot Spots 2025 – Global City Competitiveness, 2013: http://www.citigroup.com/citi/citiforcities/pdfs/ hotspots2025.pdf Eurostat, INSEE, 2011: Report of the Task Force,
EIU Liveability index, 2014: Best cities ranking and report, August 2014 http://pages.eiu.com/rs/eiu2/images/Liveability_ rankings_2014.pdf https://www.gfmag.com/globaldata/non-economic-data/best-cities-to-live Europe 2020 Strategy
EIU Spatial Adjusted Liveability Index, 2013: Best cities ranking and report, August 2013 http://pages.eiu.com/rs/eiu2/images/EIU_BestCities. pdf Qatar Financial Centre – Global Financial Centres
Eurostat: Quality of Life (QoL) – Context http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/gdp-and-beyond/
Eurostat, 2015: Quality of life indicators – measuring quality of life http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/ index.php/Quality_of_life_indicators_-_measuring_ quality_of_life
Multidimensional measurement of the quality of life http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/42577/ 43503/TF3-Final-report-Quality-of-Life/991bffa3-35ff49a4-8ddb-f0a13e527b9e
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/HU/ TXT/?uri=URISERV:em0028 http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/targets_hu.pdf
quality-of-life/context Index, 2015: http://www.finance-montreal.com/sites/ default/ files/ publications/gfci17_23march2015.pdf
Global Innovation Agency – Global Innovation Cities Index, 2014 http://www.innovation-cities.com/innovation-citiesindex-2014-global/8889
Jakobi, Á., 2004: Az információs társadalom területi egyenlőtlenségeinek tartalma és értelmezési lehetőségei. (Content of the information society’s spatial inequalities and ways of interpreting it). In: Hungarian Geographical Conference, Szeged 2004 http://geography.hu/mfk2004/mfk2004/cikkek/ jakobi_akos.pdf
Weimann J. – knabe, A. – Schöb, R., 2015: Measuring Happiness: The Economics of Well-Being, MIT Press
Stiglitz, J. E. – Sen, A. – Fitoussi., J. P.: Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress htt p : / /e c . e u r o p a . e u /e u r o sta t / d o c u m e nt s / 118025/118123/Fitoussi+Commission+report
kerényi Á., 2011: A Gazdasági Együttmûködési és Fejlesztési Szervezet Better Life indexének bemutatása (Presentation of the Better Life Index of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) http://www.asz.hu/penzugyi-szemle-cikkek/2011/agazdasagi-egyuttmukodesi-es-fejlesztesi-szervezetbetter-life-indexenek-bemutatasa/506-526-kerenyia. pdf
HCSO Regional Statistical yearbooks, 2003–2013
HCSO, Statistical Pocketbook of Counties and Regions, 2011, 2014
HCSO Statistical yearbook of Hungary, 2013
HCSO Social Map of Hungary, 2012
HCSO Hungary 2013
HCSO System of Well-being Indicators in Hungary, 2013
HCSO Statistical Review, 2010/115 “Regional differences in life expectancy at birth”
HCSO Statistical Review, 2015/54 ”Housing prices, housing price index, 2015 Q1”
HCSO “Regional differences in research and development”, March 2013
HCSO ”Regional differences in economic processes, 2012”; December 2013 Hungarian Partnership Agreement 2014–2020 http://palyazat.gov.hu/download/52032/ Partners%C3%A9g_Meg%C3%A1llapod%C3%A1s_ 2014-2020.pdf
MasterCard Global Destination Cities Index http://newsroom.mastercard.com/wp-content/ uploads/2015/06/MasterCard-GDCI-2015-FinalReport1.pdf
Mercer Cost of living, 2015: https://www.imercer.com/uploads/GM/col2015/ e654123/index.html
Mercer Quality of Living in Cities Global Survey, 2015 https://www.imercer.com/uploads/GM/qol2015/ h5478qol2015/index.html
Monocle’s Most (25) Liveable Cities Index, 2015 http://monocle.com/film/affairs/the-monoclequality-of-life-survey-2015/ http://www.dailymail. co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3126280/Tokyorated-world-s-best-city-live-London-New-York-notmaking-25.html
OECD, Better Life Index http://www.oecdbetterlife index.org/
Salamin G., 2015: Changing Spatial Dimensions in the Current Economic Development of the European Union. In:Salamin, G. (ed.) Cities in Action Reflecting Global Economic Challenges and Technological Trends with Special reference to the Smart City Concept http://issuu.com/mut_tudaskozpont/
Siemens European Green Cities Index, 2012 – European Green City Index Report, 2012 http://www.siemens.com/entry/cc/features/ greencityindex_international/all/en/pdf/gci_report_ summary.pdf
Sustainable development in the European Union – 2013 monitoring report of the EU sustainable development strategy, 2013 http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/en/web/productsstatistical-books/-/KS-02-13-237
yale University, The World Economic Forum, 2014 http://issuu.com/yaleepi/docs/2014_epi_report
World Bank, 2012: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTUNIKAM/ Resources/2012.pdf
United Nations, 2014a: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-3-inequalityadjusted-human-development-index#b
United Nations, 2014b: World Urbanization Prospects, the 2014 revision, Final report http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/FinalReport/
United Nations, 2013: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-genderinequality-index
Transparency International, 2014: http://www.transparency.org/cpi2014/results
Legatum Institute, 2014: http://www.prosperity.com/
World Bank, 2014: http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings The Heritage Foundation, The Wall Street Journal, 2015: http://www.heritage.org/index/
WEF The Global competitiveness report 2014-2015 http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_ GlobalCompetitivenessReport_2014-15.pdf
World Economic Forum, 2015: http://reports.weforum.org/global-informationtechnology-report-2015/network-readiness-index/
WEF The Global competitiveness reoprt 2014-2015 http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_ GlobalCompetitivenessReport_2014-15.pdf
World Bank Group, 2014: Doing Business 2015. Going Beyond Efficiency. Comparing Business Regulations for domestic firms in 189 Economies. A World Bank Group Flagship Report http://www.doingbusiness.org/ ~/media/ GIAWB/ Doing%20Business/Documents/Annual-Reports/ English/DB15-Chapters/DB15-Report-Overview.pdf (downloaded 2015.12.07.) ISBN (electronic): 978-1- 4648-0352-9 (P.4. Table 1.1)
