THE SAFE CITIES INDEX 2015 Assessing urban security in the digital age A report by The Economist Intelligence Unit Sponsored by The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age About the report The Safe Cities Index 2015 is an Economist Intelligence Unit report, sponsored by NEC The report is based on an index composed of more than 40 quantitative and qualitative indicators These indicators are split across four thematic categories: digital security; health security; infrastructure safety; and personal safety Every city in the Index is scored across these four categories Key Overall Index Digial security Health security Infrastructure safety Personal safety Each category, represented throughout the report by the icons shown in the key, comprises between three and eight sub-indicators These indicators are divided between inputs, such as policy measures and levels of spending, and outputs, such as the frequency of vehicular accidents A full explanation of the methodology is contained in Appendix The Index focuses on 50 cities (see box over the page for the full list and regional breakdown) selected by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU), based on factors such as regional representation and availability of data Therefore, it should not be considered a comprehensive list of the world’s safest cities (ie, a city coming number 50 in the list does not make it the most perilous place to live in the world) The analysis of the Index results, conducted by the EIU, was supplemented with wide-ranging research and in-depth interviews with experts in the field Our thanks are due to the following © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 people (listed alphabetically by surname) for their time and insights: l Alan Brill, senior managing director and founder of the global high-tech investigations practice Kroll l Jonathan Brown, programme manager of city system integration, Future City Glasgow l Vivien Carli, co-author of Practical Approaches to Urban Crime Prevention, International Centre for the Prevention of Crime l Tim Chapman, director of the infrastructure design group at Arup l Carlos Dora, co-ordinator in the department for public health, environmental and social determinants of health, World Health Organisation l Boyd Cohen, director of innovation and associate professor of entrepreneurship, sustainability and smart cities, Universidad del Desarrollo, Chile l Bruno Fernandez, head of security, Metro de Madrid l Frederick Krimgold, director of the disaster risk reduction programme, Virginia Tech l Tom Lawry, director of worldwide health, Microsoft l Dan Lewis, head of the urban risk reduction programme, UN Habitat The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age l Peggy Liu, chairperson, Joint US-China Collaboration on Clean Energy (JUCCCE) l Yoichi Masuzoe, governor of Tokyo l Toshiro Muto, CEO of the Tokyo organising committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games 2020 l Patrick Otellini, chief resilience officer, the city and county of San Francisco l Brian Quinn, adviser, Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (Cabe) at the UK Design Council l Josep Rius, chief of staff to the deputy mayor of Barcelona l Andrew Smyth, professor of civil engineering and engineering mechanics, Columbia University l Sandra Švaljek, deputy mayor of Zagreb l Sameh Naguib Wahba, manager for urban development and disaster risk-management, World Bank The report was written by Sarah Murray and edited by James Chambers Amie Nagano and Takato Mori conducted additional interviews Chris Clague built the Index Gaddi Tam was responsible for design The Economist Intelligence Unit bears sole responsibility for the content of this report The findings not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsor Safe Cities Index: List of 50 constituents by region (listed in descending order of rank) Asia-Pacific North America Europe Toronto Stockholm Brussels New York Amsterdam Paris San Francisco Zurich Milan Montreal Barcelona Rome Chicago London Istanbul Los Angeles Frankfurt Moscow Washington DC Madrid Tokyo Singapore Osaka Sydney Melbourne Hong Kong Taipei Seoul Shanghai Central & South America Santiago Buenos Aires Lima Rio de Janeiro Sao Paulo Mexico City Shenzhen Middle East & Africa Tianjin Abu Dhabi Beijing Doha Guangzhou Kuwait City Bangkok Riyadh Johanesburg Tehran © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 Delhi Mumbai Ho Chi Minh City Jakarta The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age Executive summary Cities are already home to a majority of people on the planet The current level of urbanisation ranges from 82% of the population in North America to 40% in Africa But all regions are expected to follow this trend towards greater urbanisation over the next three decades Lagos, the most populous city Nigeria, is predicted to double in size in the next 15 years However, cities should not take continued population growth for granted As the UN’s latest World Urbanisation Prospects study points out, some cities have experienced population decline because of, among other things, low fertility rates, economic contraction and natural disasters The population of Seoul, the capital of South Korea, has shrunk by 800,000 since 1990 Likewise, the safety of cities can ebb and flow New York recorded a record high of 2,245 homicides in 1990, equating to six murders per day Since then the population has grown by over 1m people, while homicide rates have fallen The murder rate in 2013 stood at 335, a historic low, moving New York below Chicago—a city with under one-third of New York’s population As some threats recede, others mature The frequency of terrorism and natural disasters has changed the nature of urban safety: power, communications and transport systems must © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 be robust and able to withstand new external shocks Meanwhile, new risks emerge Cyber risk has accompanied the advent of the digital age Urban safety is therefore a critical issue that is set to become even more important over time Securing public safety means addressing a wide—and evolving—range of risks The Safe Cities Index aims to capture this complexity The Index tracks the relative safety of a city across four categories: digital security, health security, infrastructure safety and personal safety The Index’s key findings include the following l Tokyo tops the overall ranking The world’s most populous city is also the safest in the Index The Japanese capital performs most strongly in the digital security category, three points ahead of Singapore in second place Meanwhile, Jakarta is at the bottom of the list of 50 cities in the Index The Indonesian capital only rises out of the bottom five places in the health security category (44) l Safety is closely linked to wealth and economic development Unsurprisingly, a division emerges in the Index between cities in developed markets, which tend to fall into the top half of the overall list, and cities in developing markets, which appear in the bottom half Significant gaps in safety The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age exist along these lines within regions Rich Asian cities (Tokyo, Singapore and Osaka) occupy the top three positions in the Index, while poorer neighbours (Ho Chi Minh City and Jakarta) fill two of the bottom three positions l However, wealth and ample resources are no guarantee of urban safety Four of the five Middle Eastern cities in the Index are considered high-income, but only one makes it into the top half of the Index: at 25 Abu Dhabi is 21 places above Riyadh at number 46 Similar divides between cities of comparable economic status exist elsewhere Seoul is 23 positions below Tokyo in the overall ranking (and 46 places separate the two on digital security) l US cities perform most strongly in the digital security category, while Europe struggles New York is the only US city to make it into the top ten of the overall index (at 10) However, it is third for digital security, with three of the four other US cities in the Index (Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago) joining it in the top ten Meanwhile, European cities perform relatively poorly London, at 16, is the highest-ranking European entry in the digital security index; Rome is the lowest, at 35 l Leaders in digital security must not overlook real-world risks Los Angeles falls from 6th place in digital security to 23rd for personal safety San Francisco suffers a similar drop, falling from 8th to 21st For these cities—both home to high-tech industries—a focus on technology and cyber security does not seem to be matched by success in combating physical crime Urban safety initiatives need to straddle the digital and physical realms as the divide between them blurs © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 l Technology is now on the frontline of urban safety, alongside people Data are being used to tackle crime, monitor infrastructure and limit the spread of disease As some cities pursue smarter methods of preventing— rather than simply reacting to—these diverse security threats, a lack of data in emerging markets could exacerbate the urban safety divide between rich and poor Nonetheless, investment in traditional safety methods, such as bolstering police visibility, continues to deliver positive results from Spain to South Africa l Collaboration on safety is critical in a complex urban environment Now that a growing number of essential systems are interconnected, city experts stress the need to bring together representatives from government, business and the community before threats to safety and security strike Some cities have appointed an official to co-ordinate this citywide resilience With the evolution of online threats transcending geographical boundaries, such co-ordination will increasingly be called for between cities l Being statistically safe is not the same as feeling safe Out of the 50 cities, only Zurich and Mexico City get the same rank in the overall index as they in the indicator that measures the perception of safety among their citizens Urban citizens in the US, for instance, tend to feel less safe than they should, based on their city’s position in the Index The challenge for city leaders is to translate progress on safety into changing public perceptions But cities also aspire to be attractive places to live in So smart solutions, such as intelligent lighting, should be pursued over ubiquitous cameras or gated communities The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age Appendix 1: Safe Cities Index EIU Safe Cities Index 2015: Overall Weighted total of all category scores (0-100 where 100=best) OVERALL Rank 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 FACT SHEET City Tokyo Singapore Osaka Stockholm Amsterdam Sydney Zurich Toronto Melbourne New York Hong Kong San Francisco Taipei Montreal Barcelona Chicago Los Angeles London Washington DC Frankfurt Madrid Brussels Paris Seoul Abu Dhabi Milan Rome Santiago Doha Shanghai Buenos Aires Shenzhen Lima Tianjin Rio de Janeiro Kuwait City Beijing Guangzhou Bangkok Sao Paulo Istanbul Delhi Moscow Mumbai Mexico City Riyadh Johannesburg Ho Chi Minh City Tehran Jakarta Score/100 85.63 84.61 82.36 80.02 79.19 78.91 78.84 78.81 78.67 78.08 77.24 76.63 76.51 75.6 75.16 74.89 74.24 73.83 73.37 73.05 72.35 71.72 71.21 70.9 69.83 69.64 67.13 66.98 66.41 65.93 65.88 65.76 65.01 63.55 63.52 63.47 63.25 62.79 62.69 62.33 62.25 61.88 61.6 60.72 59.46 57.09 56.26 54.93 53.78 53.71 Capital city Y N/A N Y Y N N N N N N N Y N N N N Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y N Y N N Y Y N Y N N Y Y N Y Y N N Y Y Country Life expectancy (average number of years) Population band* Host of summer Olympic games (year) 82 82 83 82 79 81 84 81 86 81 84 80 83 81 82 78 80 82 76 79 82 81 81 83 77 83 82 78 78 80 76 75 74 79 73 78 81 76 74 71 72 70 76 71 77 75 60 73 77 73 10m+ 5-10m 10m+ 0-5m 0-5m 0-5m 0-5m 5-10m 0-5m 10m+ 5-10m 0-5m 0-5m 0-5m 5-10m 5-10m 10m+ 10m+ 0-5m 0-5m 5-10m 0-5m 10m+ 5-10m 0-5m 0-5m 0-5m 5-10m 0-5m 10m+ 10m+ 10m+ 5-10m 10m+ 10m+ 0-5m 10m+ 10m+ 5-10m 10m+ 10m+ 10m+ 10m+ 10m+ 10m+ 5-10m 5-10m 5-10m 5-10m 10m+ 1964, 2020 Japan Singapore Japan Sweden The Netherlands Australia Switzerland Canada Australia U.S.A China U.S.A Taiwan Canada Spain U.S.A U.S.A U.K U.S.A Germany Spain Belgium France Republic of Korea U.A.E Italy Italy Chile Qatar China Argentina China Peru China Brazil Kuwait China China Thailand Brazil Turkey India Russia India Mexico Saudi Arabia South Africa Vietnam Iran Indonesia *United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 1912 1928 2000 1956 1976 1992 1932, 1984 1908, 1948, 2012 1900, 1924 1988 1960 2016 2008 1980 1968 The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age Appendix 1: Safe Cities Index EIU Safe Cities Index 2015: Rankings by category Weighted score per category (0-100 where 100=best) DIGITAL SECURITY Rank 10 11 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 City Tokyo Singapore New York Hong Kong Osaka Los Angeles Stockholm San Francisco Abu Dhabi Chicago Toronto Montreal Santiago Sydney Washington DC London Amsterdam Mumbai Zurich Melbourne Taipei Brussels Kuwait City Delhi Shenzhen Milan Mexico City Madrid Barcelona Buenos Aires Doha Paris Frankfurt Beijing Rome Shanghai Guangzhou Lima Sao Paulo Rio de Janeiro Tianjin Ho Chi Minh City Riyadh Johannesburg Bangkok Moscow Seoul Jakarta Istanbul Tehran HEALTH SECURITY Score/100 Rank 87.18 83.85 79.42 78.78 77 74.99 74.82 73.85 73.71 72.9 72.04 72.04 70.51 70.48 69.99 69.42 68.81 68.07 67.04 65.42 65.11 64.6 64.21 63.33 62.74 62.62 61.69 60.78 60.29 59.58 58.73 58.4 57.45 56.87 56.67 56.14 55.14 55.09 54.93 54.74 54.26 53.31 53.26 52.9 52.86 51.54 51.46 48.48 46.83 46.58 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 City Zurich New York Brussels Frankfurt Paris Osaka Barcelona Tokyo Taipei Stockholm Madrid Singapore Amsterdam Melbourne Hong Kong San Francisco Sydney Seoul Washington DC Montreal Toronto London Chicago Moscow Rome Los Angeles Milan Santiago Buenos Aires Beijing Shanghai Shenzhen Mexico City Tianjin Bangkok Sao Paulo Guangzhou Rio de Janeiro Kuwait City Lima Doha Delhi Riyadh Jakarta Abu Dhabi Istanbul Johannesburg Ho Chi Minh City Tehran Mumbai Score/100 79.05 78.52 77.63 77.38 76.95 76.55 76.35 76.26 76 75.83 75.53 75.31 74.28 74.27 73.61 73.53 73.35 72.86 72.53 72.4 70.8 69.78 69.71 68.93 67.13 66.57 66.16 65.02 64.64 64.1 63.31 61.85 61.16 60.93 60.5 60.37 60.07 57.48 56.81 54.44 54.16 53.76 53.33 53.11 52.06 50.77 50.17 48.39 48.22 45.31 The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age Appendix 1: Safe Cities Index EIU Safe Cities Index 2015: Rankings by category Weighted score per category (0-100 where 100=best) INFRASTRUCTURE SAFETY Rank 10 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 City Zurich Melbourne Sydney Amsterdam Tokyo Montreal Singapore Toronto Madrid San Francisco Abu Dhabi Osaka Chicago Barcelona Seoul New York Brussels Rome Los Angeles Frankfurt Stockholm Taipei Milan Santiago London Paris Istanbul Buenos Aires Washington DC Shanghai Guangzhou Beijing Tianjin Shenzhen Sao Paulo Doha Lima Rio de Janeiro Kuwait City Hong Kong Moscow Bangkok Tehran Riyadh Johannesburg Delhi Mumbai Jakarta Mexico City Ho Chi Minh City PERSONAL SAFETY Score/100 Rank 92.63 92.28 91.4 91.27 89.79 89.47 88.86 87.57 87.28 86.16 86.16 85.71 85.69 85.65 85.64 84.93 84.34 83.77 83.72 82.79 81.92 79.25 78.91 78.83 78.78 78.22 77.71 77.03 77 76.63 76.57 76.54 76.53 76.5 76.41 76.34 75.69 74.4 73.4 71.46 70.65 66.44 63.98 61.53 60.67 57.71 55.89 54.02 52.93 52.41 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 © The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2015 City Singapore Osaka Tokyo Stockholm Taipei Hong Kong Toronto Melbourne Amsterdam Sydney Barcelona London Zurich Doha Lima Frankfurt Washington DC Istanbul Seoul Mumbai San Francisco Delhi Los Angeles Paris Chicago Bangkok Milan New York Montreal Shanghai Rio de Janeiro Abu Dhabi Madrid Ho Chi Minh City Tianjin Buenos Aires Mexico City Shenzhen Johannesburg Rome Brussels Riyadh Kuwait City Guangzhou Jakarta Sao Paulo Tehran Beijing Moscow Santiago Score/100 90.42 90.2 89.31 87.51 85.67 85.09 84.82 82.72 82.39 80.4 78.36 77.35 76.62 76.41 74.81 74.57 73.95 73.7 73.62 73.61 72.96 72.7 71.66 71.29 71.27 70.97 70.87 69.45 68.48 67.66 67.45 67.39 65.81 65.62 62.46 62.25 62.07 61.96 61.29 60.94 60.31 60.26 59.47 59.37 59.23 57.59 56.35 55.51 55.27 53.58 While every effort has been taken to verify the accuracy of this information, The Economist Intelligence Unit Ltd cannot accept any responsibility or liability for reliance by any person on this report or any of the information, opinions or conclusions set out in this report Cover image - ©Shutterstock LONDON 20 Cabot Square London E14 4QW United Kingdom Tel: (44.20) 7576 8000 Fax: (44.20) 7576 8500 E-mail: london@eiu.com NEW YORK 750 Third Avenue 5th Floor New York, NY 10017, US Tel: (1.212) 554 0600 Fax: (1.212) 586 0248 E-mail: newyork@eiu.com HONG KONG 6001, Central Plaza 18 Harbour Road Wanchai Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2585 3888 Fax: (852) 2802 7638 E-mail: hongkong@eiu.com GENEVA Rue de l’Athénée 32 1206 Geneva Switzerland Tel: (41) 22 566 2470 Fax: (41) 22 346 9347 E-mail: geneva@eiu.com .. .The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age About the report The Safe Cities Index 2015 is an Economist Intelligence Unit report, sponsored by NEC The report... ubiquitous cameras or gated communities The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age Appendix 1: Safe Cities Index EIU Safe Cities Index 2015: Overall Weighted total of all... 52.06 50.77 50.17 48.39 48.22 45.31 The Safe Cities Index: Assessing urban security in the digital age Appendix 1: Safe Cities Index EIU Safe Cities Index 2015: Rankings by category Weighted