Based on the measurement and comparison of the comprehensive competitiveness of the 500 sample cities, we conducted an in-depth analysis of 150 major cities. We analyzed why some cities are more while others are less competitive. To gain insight into the composition and root of the cities’ competitiveness, we designed an index system, which includes 103 level-III indices, 49 level-II indices and 7 level-I indices. In this book, only 7 level-I indices, i.e., enterprise, industrial structure, human resource, hard environment, soft environment, living environment, and global connectivity of the 150 major cities are compared to explain the levels of the comprehensive competitiveness of the cities. The other indices are available on the following web address: www. gucp.org.
Specifically, Seattle has the highest score for the index of enterprise; Tokyo ranks No. 1 in terms of industrial structure and infrastructures; Paris tops other cities in terms of human resource and living environment; New York ranks No.1 for its global connectivity, and No. 2 for its industrial structure and hard environment, and is among top 20 in terms of many other indices. Further observation indicates that cities with leading comprehensive competitiveness tend to have high scores in each of the aspects, and do not have any distinct disadvantages in any of the aspects. Some cities have high ranks in some of the indices, but are restricted by other aspects. Therefore, their comprehensive competitiveness ranks remain low. Obviously, in order to improve their comprehensive competitiveness, cities should focus on balanced development and leverage their competitive advantages.
—— From“Global Urban Competitiveness Report（2007-2008）”，Pengfei Ni with Peter Karl Kresl