Transcript The emotional capital and desirability of European cities Robert Manchin Gallup Europe October 11, 2007, Brussels.

The emotional
capital and
desirability of
European cities
Robert Manchin
Gallup Europe
October 11, 2007, Brussels
Note on data sources
Data are based on the results of
Flash EB 194 (Urban Audit
Perception Survey 2006), and the
Gallup Soul of the City Database.
Sample sizes are about 500 and
1000 per city, interviewing was
carried out by telephone.
The Gallup ‘Soul of the City’
programme measures and tracks the
political, economic and social wellbeing of cities globally, based on how
residents view their city’s
performance in providing healthy
living and working conditions.
The object of desire: cities as magnets








How European cities are shaping up on the needed emotional
capital to keep and attract
Attracting whom? Within country, outside
A look at drivers of loyalty
Is there a city-specific bias in the “eyes of beholders”
Imagining cities as a place to make a living
Attracting visitors
A special case – is there a differential emotional appeal for
the young and educated “creatives”?
Drivers of loyalty and satisfaction
Slide 3
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Luxembourg
London
Brussels
Riga
Antwerpen
Manchester
Paris
Marseille
Tallinn
Munchen
Liege
Amsterdam
Strasbourg
Ljubljana
Wien
Zagreb
Malmö
Lille
Lisboa
Stockholm
Hamburg
Rotterdam
Berlin
Essen
Graz
Newcastle
Glasgow
Dortmund
Bordeaux
Kobenhaven
Cardiff
Dublin
Athinia
Braga
Belfast
Vilnius
Kosice
Madrid
Frankfurt an der Oder
Bratislava
Groningen
Leipzig
Barcelona
Rennes
Ostrava
Lefkosia
Torino
Aalborg
Budapest
Valetta
Malaga
Gdansk
Irakleio
Praha
Roma
Istanbul
Helsinki
Verona
Ankara
Burgas
Warszawa
Oulu
Cluj-Napoca
Sofia
Antalya
Miskolc
Bucuresti
Krakow
Oviedo
Bialystok
Bologna
Palermo
Piatra Neamt
Napoli
Diyarbakir
Attracting from near and far
10 0
Country native
EU immigrant (1st or 2nd generation)
© 2007 Gallup Europe
non-EU immigrant (1st or 2nd generation)
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Slide 4
Levels of Emotional Capital
“FULLY ENGAGED”
“GOOD BUT
DISINTEGRATING”
“STRIVING”
“DISENGAGED
Cities where it is
generally good to live
(residents gave positive
assessments in all or
most aspects
investigated)
Cities with especially
satisfactory
infrastructure and
housing, but citizens
are discontent with
city administration and
the integration of
immigrants is
problematic
Cities, where -- despite
various problems
regarding services –
citizens are satisfied,
optimistic about the
future, they see their
city clean and well
integrated
Cities where according
to local evaluation it is
generally bad to live
(residents gave
negative assessments
in all or most aspects
investigated)
Slide 5
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Cities in the various categories...
“FULLY ENGAGED”
“GOOD, BUT
DISINTEGRATING”
“STRIVING”
“DISENGAGED”
Aalborg, Amsterdam,
Antwerp, Belfast,
Bordeaux, Cardiff,
Glasgow, Groningen,
Helsinki,
Copenhagen, Lille,
Luxembourg, Munich,
Newcastle, Oulu,
Oviedo, Rennes,
Rotterdam,
Strasbourg, Vienna
Berlin, Bologna,
Brussels, Dortmund,
Dublin, Essen,
Frankfurt a.d. Oder,
Graz, Hamburg,
Leipzig, Liege,
London, Malmö,
Paris, Prague,
Stockholm
Barcelona, Bialystok,
Braga, Cluj-Napoca,
Gdansk, Herakleion,
Kosice, Krakow,
Ljubljana, Malaga,
Manchester, Miskolc,
Ostrava, Piatra
Neamt, Riga, Tallinn,
Verona, Vilnius,
Ankara, Antalya,
Athens, Bratislava,
Bucharest, Budapest,
Burgas, Diyarbakir,
Istanbul, Nicosia,
Lisbon, Madrid,
Marseille, Napoli,
Palermo, Roma,
Sofia, Torino, Valetta,
Warszawa, Zagreb
Slide 6
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Pillars of Emotional Capital
(regression model, dependent: satisfied in city, attributes with highest Beta shown for each
cluster, in descending order)
“FULLY ENGAGED”
“GOOD, BUT
DISINTEGRATING”
“STRIVING”
HIGH on emotional attachment if very positive assessments of...:
Primary healthcare
Feel safe in [CITY]
Good place to live for
immigrants or minority
people
Good place to live for
people with disabilities
Noise
Foreigners well integrated
5-year optimism
Cleanliness
Donated money
Cultural facilities
Public transport
Attractive for talented
young people to come to
live from elsewhere in
[COUNTRY]
Volunteerism
Easy to find good housing
Spends resources
responsibly
Green spaces such as
public parks and gardens
Donated money
“DISENGAGED”
5-year optimism
Feel safe in the
neighborhood
Attractive for talented
young people to come to
live from abroad
Public transport
Cinemas
Volunteerism
Good place to live for
people with disabilities
The beauty of the city
Hospitals
Slide 7
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Distribution of urban emotional capital:
North(west )– South(east) divide
FULLY ENGAGED
GOOD, BUT DISINTEGRATING
STRIVING
Kép: Európa népsűrűségi térképe
DISENGAGED
© 2007 Gallup Europe
The strength of attraction is related to urban quality
== but straining manageability
Country native
EU immigrant (1st or 2nd generation)
non-EU immigrant (1st or 2nd generation)
100
95
9
11
90
85
9
5
4
4
10
12
80
75
70
86
80
91
77
65
60
FULLY ENGAGED
GOOD, BUT
DISINTEGRATING
© 2007 Gallup Europe
STRIVING
DISENGAGED
Degrees of satisfaction
mostly dissatisfied but feel secure, still love the city overall
cultural offerings are satisfactory, but jobs and housing as well as immigration are seen as problems
satisfied to live, proud of history, inclusiveness -- but not the rest
generally dissatisfied
generally satisfied
1 00%
1
3
9 0%
24
80%
3
15
8
7 0%
6 0%
21
3
21
6
7
9
13
11
14
34
5 0%
2 0%
48
10
23
8
35
18
26
14
21
37
23
5
4 0%
52
12
26
39
23
3 0%
7
39
17
26
13
33
1 0%
28
19
44
13
40
11
0%
Helsinki Stockholm Paris
Berlin
London
Dublin
Rome
Barcelona Madrid
Slide 10
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Demands of the Creative Class
(attributes that make the European Creative Class satisfied with living in their city)
In the next five years, it w ill be m ore pleasant to live in [CITY]
Attractive for talented young people to com e live from abroad
The beauty of the city
Attractive for talented young people from elsew here in country
[CITY] is a clean city
[CITY] citizens can be proud of the city's history
The adm inistrative services of [CITY] help you efficiently
Cultural facilities
Good place to live for people from other EU countries
[CITY] is a good place to live for im m igrants
[CITY] is a good place to live for people w ith disabilites
[CITY] spends its resources in a responsible w ay
Cinem as
Foreigners w ho live in [CITY] are w ell integrated
Internet access at hom e
In [CITY], it is easy to find a good job
Schools
Public Internet access
Green spaces
Health care services offered by doctors
Health care services offered by hospitals
Easy to find good housing at a reasonable price
Public transport in the city
Sports facilities
You feel safe in [CITY]
In [CITY], noise is a big problem
You feel safe in the neighborhood you live in
Donated m oney to poor or disadvantaged people in [CITY]
[CITY], air pollution is a big problem
You have difficulty paying your bills at the end of the m onth
Slide 11
© 2007 Gallup Europe
You are satisfied to live in [CITY]
(strongly agree, %)
GENERAL POPULATION
YOUNG & CREATIVE POPULATION
90
80
77 78
74
67
70
60
(NEXT TO THE CITY’S NAME, THE OVERALL
RANK AMONG 75 EU CITIES IS SHOWN)
67
64
57
56
55
49
50
51
54
54
50
46
50
41
40
34
30
20
10
73. Madrid
55. Madrid
69. Helsinki
31. Helsinki
59. London
68. London
58. Barcelona
56. Barcelona
55. Paris
64. Paris
39. Dublin
15. Dublin
26. Berlin
51. Berlin
22. Rome
53. Rome
3. Stockholm
7. Stockholm
0
Slide 12
© 2007 Gallup Europe
[CITY] is a good place to live for people from
other EU countries (strongly agree, %)
GENERAL POPULATION
YOUNG & CREATIVE POPULATION
70
(NEXT TO THE CITY’S NAME, THE OVERALL
RANK AMONG 75 EU CITIES IS SHOWN)
60
49
50
45
41
40
39
37
35
31
29
30
35
32
31
29
28
23
22
25
24
20
20
10
54. Paris
59. Paris
51. Madrid
44. Madrid
43. Rome
55. Rome
40. Dublin
7. Dublin
39. Stockholm
26. Stockholm
24. Barcelona
36. Barcelona
18. London
16. London
14. Helsinki
42. Helsinki
2. Berlin
56. Berlin
0
Slide 13
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Foreigners are well integrated
(strongly agree, %)
GENERAL POPULATION
YOUNG & CREATIVE POPULATION
30
25
25
25
20
(NEXT TO THE CITY’S NAME, THE OVERALL
RANK AMONG 75 EU CITIES IS SHOWN)
18
16
14
15
10
10
10
10
11
9
9
6
6
4
5
5
3
4
2
74. Berlin
72. Berlin
67. Stockholm
73. Stockholm
65. Rome
49. Rome
56. Madrid
40. Madrid
52. Helsinki
65. Helsinki
50. Paris
71. Paris
34. Dublin
21. Dublin
16. London
31. London
15. Barcelona
46. Barcelona
0
Slide 14
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Easy to find good housing at a reasonable price
(strongly agree, %)
GENERAL POPULATION
YOUNG & CREATIVE POPULATION
40
36
35
(NEXT TO THE CITY’S NAME, THE OVERALL
RANK AMONG 75 EU CITIES IS SHOWN)
30
25
19
20
12
7
5
5
5
5
3
3
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
58. Stockholm
58. Rome
72. Rome
52. Dublin
48. Dublin
47. Helsinki
73. Helsinki
37. London
42. London
32. Madrid
28. Madrid
8. Barcelona
41. Barcelona
2. Berlin
15. Berlin
0
0
70. Paris
7
71. Paris
10
62. Stockholm
15
Slide 15
© 2007 Gallup Europe
It is easy to find a good job
(strongly agree, %)
GENERAL POPULATION
YOUNG & CREATIVE POPULATION
40
36
35
35
(NEXT TO THE CITY’S NAME, THE OVERALL
RANK AMONG 75 EU CITIES IS SHOWN)
30
25
25
20
19
18
15
15
12
13
12
9
10
6
7
6
59. Rome
1
1
65. Berlin
2
67. Berlin
2
64. Rome
4
5
54. Madrid
40. Madrid
47. Paris
47. Paris
28. Helsinki
13. Helsinki
26. Stockholm
11. Stockholm
14. Barcelona
31. Barcelona
5. London
5. London
1. Dublin
1. Dublin
0
Slide 16
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Competitive creative destinations
100
DESTINATIONS
90
HELSINKI
80
STOCKHOLM
70
60
DUBLIN
BERLIN
LONDON
50
PARIS
40
30
BARCELONA
20
10
MADRID
ROME
0
Berlin
Barcelona Madrid
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Paris
Dublin
Rome
Helsinki Stockholm London
Q8.b - What do you think what are the most attractive
cities for innovative people to migrate to?
% by city
Slide 17
Moscow
StPetersburg
Bucharest
Budapest
Hamburg
Warsaw
Milan
Munich
Naples
Brussels
Cologne
Turin
Marseille
Riga
Salonika
Palermo
Frankfurt
Glasgow
Vilnius
Lisbon
Helsinki
Oslo
Copenhagen
Dublin
Liverpool
Antwerp
Edinburgh
Manchester
Lyon
Bologna
Firenze
Nice
Amsterdam
Zürich
Cardiff
Belfast
NewcastleuponTyne
Strasbourg
Graz
Geneve
Vienne
Desirability
as visiting
destinations
VIENNA
Stockholm
Prague
BERLIN
Berlin
Diyarbakir
Riga
Paris
Bologna
Aalborg
Graz
Dortmund
Rennes
Ljubljana
Strasbourg
Sofia
Amsterdam
Antwerpen
Lisboa
Newcastle
Verona
Rotterdam
Marseille
BARCELONA
LONDON
Kosice
Barcelona
Malaga
MADRID
Glasgow
London
Paris
Roma
Cardiff
ROME PARIS
Braga
Antalya
Athinia
Luxembourg
Essen
Lille
Palermo
Groningen
Kobenhaven
Madrid
Zagreb
Belfast
Barcelona
Madrid
VENICE
Burgas
Roma
Torino
AMSTERDAM
Venezia
PRAGUE
Berlin
Istanbul
Frankfurt
Helsinki
Bialystok
London
Oviedo
Liege
Manchester
Leipzig
Hamburg
Bordeaux
Malmö
Dublin
Cluj-Napoca
Munchen
Wien
Bratislava
Stockholm
Brussel
Valetta
Oulu
Warszawa
Krakow
Napoli
Irakleio
Bucuresti
Cities people would like most to visit
© 2007 Gallup Europe
Lefkosia
Gdansk
Vilnius
the Respondent’s cities
Piatra-Neamt
Budapest
Tallinn
Miskolc
Ostrava
Praha
Ankara
Q8. If you would be completely free to choose,
which European city would you like to visit the
most?
Slide 18
Athens
ATHENS
Satisfied with
living
Explore
it: in [CITY]
(very satisfied, %)
Slide 19
© 2007 Gallup Europe