THE URBAN AUDIT Towards the Benchmarking of Quality of Life in 58 European Cities docx

THE URBAN AUDIT
Towards the Benchmarking of Quality of Life in
58 European Cities
V
V
O
O
L
L
U
U
M
M
E
E


I
I
:
:

The Yearbook
• Overview
•
•

Comparative Section
The Urban Audit is supported by the European Commission. It is aimed at improving comparative information on
urban areas. The Urban Audit was supervised by Marcello Roma and Mireille Grubert of Directorate General for
Regional Policies and Gilles Durand and Berthold Feldman of Eurostat.

The realisation of the pilot phase of the Urban Audit was entrusted to ERECO under the direction of David Taylor,
Cambridge Econometrics, Nick Bozeat, Ecotec, Michael Parkinson, EIUA, and Mireia Belil, Borakasi and including
a network of national and city level correspondents.
Further information on the Urban Audit can be accessed at the INFOREGIO web site
(inforegio.cec.int/urban/audit).
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2000.
ISBN 92-828-9241-7
© European Communities, 2000
Reproduction is authorised, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.
Yearbook
1
Foreword

This is the first edition of the Urban Yearbook. It presents the main results of the pilot phase of the Urban Audit.
The purpose of the Urban Audit is to provide a resource allowing comparisons across national boundaries on
conditions in EU urban areas. The work has, for the first time, brought together information from 58 major EU
cities concerning a wide range of aspects of the ‘quality of life’ in urban areas.

This process has engaged directly the city authorities who were invited by the European Commission to
participate. Though practice concerning information collection and management varies between and within
countries, use has been made of a large number of local data sources, in order to supplement the ‘official
statistics’ available at national levels.

To achieve this, close co-operation has been necessary between the European Commission and the cities. Many
individuals within the cities, in statistical agencies at the national levels, and in other agencies at the local level
have contributed to the work. Without this active co-operation, the completion of the pilot phase would not have
been possible. Special thanks are due to the cities of Bilbao and Nuremberg who were invited to ‘test’ the manual
and procedures being developed during the pilot phase to discover the ease with which they could be applied to
other cities not yet participating in the Urban Audit. The statistical results from these cities are not included in the

urban Yearbook. The advice and feedback will be used however, to inform the future plans of the Urban Audit.

The results of the pilot phase are, we hope, of immediate interest to city authorities and citizens alike. However,
the value of the information brought together in the pilot phase of the Urban Audit will be much increased if steps
are taken to fill the gaps, to update the information, to increase the number of participating cities, to improve the
richness of the information in particular domains, and to ensure easy and wide access to the detailed information.
The European Commission proposes to continue to work with the cities to this end.

The Urban Audit has been directed and managed by Directorate General REGIO, Regional Policy, unit A.1 and
Eurostat. Other Directorates of the European Commission have advised on aspects of the work. The urban
Yearbook and other products have been prepared by a team of consultants and researchers brought together
under the umbrella of ERECO for the Urban Audit pilot phase. The opinions expressed in the Urban Audit
products are not necessarily those of the European Commission.

The results of the Urban Audit pilot phase are published in three Volumes.
Volume I provides the first part of the Yearbook with an overview of the results and brief analyses of the apparent
differences in results between different types of cities and emerging trends. Volume I also presents the main
results in a series of comparative tables so that findings may be compared between cities and with the results at
the Conurbation/Wider Territorial Unit and national levels.
Volume II, which is the second part of the Yearbook, presents the summary results for each of the 58 cities. The
presentation of findings allows the reader to see how a particular city compares with the other Urban Audit cities
and, if appropriate, the variation between scores at the city and Conurbation/Wider Territorial Unit level.
Volume III presents the Urban Audit Manual, which allows readers to appreciate in detail the way in which the
information was collected and compiled during the pilot phase of the Urban Audit.


Yearbook
2
In addition to this publication, the pilot phase of the Urban Audit generated several other outputs, which are
publicly available. Namely:

- An Urban Audit Web Site ( Visitors to the Web Site can investigate
different aspects of the Urban Audit process and have access to the results contained in this urban Yearbook
and Individual City Audits. The Web site also provides access to the bibliography of parallel work concerning
urban indicators. Where applicable, hyperlinks are provided from the Urban Audit Web Site to the sites of
participating cities.
- Individual City Audits. for each of the 58 Urban Audit Cities. These Individual City Audits elaborate on the
information summarised for each city in this document and are ‘virtual’ annexes to the Yearbook. They
include maps on population density and land use illustrating the City and WTU/Conurbations boundaries
used in the Urban Audit. They are available via the Urban Audit Web Site.

Yearbook
3
The Urban Audit Volume I: The Yearbook
FOREWORD
…………………………………………………………………………………….
1
OVERVIEW
…………………………………………………………………………………….
5
• Introduction …………………………………………………… ………………………………………….
7
• Policy Context ……………………………………………………………………………………………
7
• City Coverage …………………………………………………………………………………………….
7
• Indicators …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
• Spatial Level – City and Conurbation level – Wider Territorial Units – Sub-city Level …………… 14
• Feasibility ………………………………………………………………………………………………….
15
• Key findings ……………………………………………………………………………………………….

16

1. Population ……………………………………………………………………………………. 18
2. Nationality ……………………………………………………………………………………. 19
3. Household structure ………………………………………………………………………… 20
4. Labour market and Unemployment ……………………………………………………… 22
5. Income, disparities and poverty ……………………………………………………………. 24
6. Housing ………………………………………………………………………………………. 25
7. Health…………………………………………………………………………………………. 26
8. Crime …………………………………………………………………………………………. 27
9. Employment …………………………………………………………………………………. 28
10. Economic activity …………………………………………………………………………… 29
11. Civic involvement …………………………………………………………………………… 31
12. Education and Training Provision ………………………………………………………… 32
13. Level of educational qualifications …………………………………………………………. 33
14. Air quality and Noise ………………………………………………………………………… 34
15. Water ……………………………………………………………………………………… 35
16. Waste management ……………………………………………………………………… 36
17. Land use ……………………………………………………………………………………. 37
18. Travel patterns …………………………………………………………………………… 38
19. Energy use ………………………………………………………………………………… 40
20. Climate/geography ………………………………………………………………………… 41
21. Culture and recreation ………………………………………………………………………. 42
Subcity variations ………………………………………………………………………………… 43
• Annex 1 Detailed results of analysis informing the Overview ………………………… ……………
45
•

Annex 2 Methodological aspects
………………………………………………………………………

75
City Coverage
………………………………………………………………………………………
Indicators …………………………………………………………………………………………
Spatial Level
……………………………………………………………………………………….
City
…………………………………………………………………………………………
Wider Area ………………………………………………………………………………
Sub-City Level
…………………………………………………………………………….
Data flow and data base
………………………………………………………………………….

Testing the Urban Audit Manual
…………………………………………………………………
76
76
77
77
77
78
79
79

COMPARATIVE SECTION…………………………………………………………………………. 81

• Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………….
82
• Notes of caution ….………………………………………………………………………………………

82
• Socio-economic aspects ………………………………………………………………………………
84

1 Population ………………………………………………………………………………………… 84
1.1 Population and change ………………………………………………………………………. 84
1.2 Population Age Structure ……………………………………………………………………. 87

2 Nationality
…………………………………………………………………………………………
90
3 Household Structure ………………………………………………………………………………. 93
Yearbook
4
4 Labour market and Unemployment ……………………………………………………………… 96
4.1 Activity …………………………………………………………………………………………. 96

4.2 Unemployment
…………………………………………………………………………….…
99
5 Income, Disparities and Poverty ……………………………………………………………… 102
5.1 Household Income and Disparities …………………………………………………………. 103
5.2 Poverty ………………………………………………………………………………………… 105

6 Housing
………………………………………………………………………………………….…
108
6.1 Type of Housing ………………………………………………………………………….… 108
6.2 Type of Tenure ……………………………………………………………………………… 110
6.3 Housing Costs ………………………………………………………………………………… 113

7 Health ………………………………………………………………………………………….……. 116

8 Crime
………………………………………………………………………………………………
119
9 Employment Change ……………………………………………………………………………… 122
10 Economic Activity ………………………………………………………………………………… 125
11 Civic involvement ………………………………………………………………………………… 128
11.1 Elections …………………………………………………………………………………… 128
11.2 Municipal Budget ……………………………………………………………………………. 131
• Levels of Training and Education ……………………………………………………………………
134

12 Education and Training Provision… ………………………………………………………….…. 134
12.1 School Performance ……………………………………………………………………… 134
12.2 Pre and Post School Provision ……………………………………………………………. 137
13 Level of Educational Qualifications …………………….…………………… …………………. 140
• Environment ……………………………………………………………………………………………
143

14 Air Quality and Noise ……………………………………………………………………… ……. 143

15 Water
………………………………………………………………………………………… …….
146

16 Waste Management
………………………………………………………………………………
149
17 Land Use ……………………………………………………………………………………… …. 152

18 Travel Patterns ……………………………………………………………………………… …… 155
19 Energy Use ………………………………………………………………………………… …… 158

20 Climate
……………………………………………………………………………………… …….
161
• Culture and Recreation ………………………………………… ……………………………….…….
163

21 Culture and Recreation ……………………………………………………………………… … 163
21.1 Music and cinema ………………………………………………………………………… 163
21.2 Museum, Theatre and Libraries …………………………………………………………… 166
21.3 Sports ………………………………………………………………………………………… 169
• Sub-City variations ……………………………………………………………………………………… 172

O
O
V
V
E
E
R
R
V
V
I
I
E
E
W

W
6
Yearbook: Overview
7

Introduction

This is the first urban Yearbook to be published by the European Commission. It has been informed by the results
of the pilot phase of the Urban Audit. This pilot phase began in May 1998 and was funded under the aegis of
Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation which enables the support by the European Commission of innovative
measures. Directorate General REGIO for Regional Policy and EUROSTAT are responsible for managing the
Urban Audit. Other Directorates of the European Commission have advised on the choice of information to be
included in the Urban Audit. The pilot phase was undertaken by ERECO on behalf of the European Commission.

The overall purpose of the Urban Audit is to enable an assessment of the state of individual EU cities and to
provide access to comparative information from other EU cities. It is intended that the process will facilitate the
exchange of information amongst cities.


Policy Context

There is demand amongst policy makers at all levels for an assessment of quality of life in Europe’s cities. To meet
this demand, there is a need for comparable information. Such information helps to identify priorities, to target
actions and to assess progress. Such information is currently very limited.

The Commission Communication ‘Towards an Urban Agenda in the European Union (COM(97)197)’ identified this
need for comparable information and proposed a two-fold approach.

First, the Urban Audit to ‘measure the quality of life in our towns and cities through the use of a simple set of urban
indicators and a common methodology’. This would be undertaken with a view to these indicators being updated

and, in the future, providing an assessment of the impact of urban policies on the development of urban areas.

Second, in parallel with this approach, EUROSTAT, in co-operation with national statistical institutes, would
process the ‘local’ level information on cities and urban agglomerations and harmonize information systems and
definitions.

The subsequent Commission Communication ‘Sustainable Urban Development in the European Union: A
Framework for Action’ published in October 1998 and debated at the European Urban Forum in Vienna, November
1998, also identified, as one of 24 actions ‘Improving Comparative Information on Urban Conditions’.

City Coverage

The 58 cities included in the Urban Audit pilot phase were identified by the European Commission on a systematic
and objective basis. The largest cities (by population size within their administrative boundaries) within the EU
member states have been included. The main exceptions to this principle are: the exclusion because of their large
scale of London and Paris; and, in order to ensure a good geographical spread across the EU and to cover a
significant percentage of the population in each country, some cities from the smaller EU countries were included
even though they have smaller populations than some of those cities not included from the larger countries.

Yearbook: Overview
8
POPULATION OF URBAN AUDIT CITIES, CONURBATIONS AND WTU AND NUMBER OF SUB-CITY AREAS
CITIES CONURBATIONS WTU SUB-CITY
COUNTRY Population
(1996)
Conurbations
1
Corresponding
population
Wider territorial

units
1
Corresponding
population
Number of
Sub-city
areas (within
city level)
Germany
Berlin 3425759
(1997)
23
Hamburg 1707247 4
Munich 1321557 113
Cologne 1014910
(1997)
85
Frankfurt 652324 Frankfurt 2470215 46
Essen 612690 50
Stuttgart 560925 Stuttgart 866631 23
Leipzig 457173 49
Dresden 456102 56
Austria
Graz 240179 17
Vienna
(1-23)
1616240 46
Belgium
Antwerp 455852 25
Brussels (19

Communes)
950597
(1997)
19
Denmark
Copenhagen 476751 Copenhagen 1172884 15
Spain
Madrid 2866693 Madrid 4404398 21
Barcelona 1508805 Barcelona 2904941 38
Valencia 746683 Valencia 1344436 38
Seville 697485 Seville 983662 12
Zaragoza 601674 24
Malaga 549135 17
Finland
Helsinki 532053 Helsinki 905555 33
France
Marseilles 799849
(1990)
Marseilles :
Urban
Community, 16
communes
962634 215
Lyon 414000 Lyon : Urban
Community, 55
communes
1134693 126
Toulouse 358290
(1990)
Toulouse 495431 47

Nice 342766
(1990)
34
Strasbourg 251554
(1990)
Strasbourg :
Urban
Community, 27
communes
422849 30
Bordeaux 217871 Bordeaux :
Urban
Community, 27
communes
658738 28
Nantes 265000
(1990)
Nantes : Urban
District, 15
communes
546000 35

1
See page 14 for explanations of Conurbations and Wider Territorial Unit.
Yearbook: Overview
9
POPULATION OF URBAN AUDIT CITIES, CONURBATIONS AND WTU AND NUMBER OF SUB-CITY AREAS
CITIES CONURBATIONS WTU SUB-CITY
COUNTRY Population
(1996)

Conurbations
1
Corresponding
population
Wider territorial
units
1
Corresponding
population
Number of
Sub-city
areas (within
city level)
Lille 172138
(1990)
Lille : Urban
Community, 86
communes
1067761 24
Greece
Athens 772072
(1991)
Athens 3481995 7
Thessaloniki 383967
(1991)
5
Patras 153344
(1991)
3
Italy

Rome 2801389 122
Milan 1340451 Milan 3540060 144
Naples 1038342 Naples 2909244 60
Turin 919602 92
Palermo 740940 25
Genoa 653529 71
Florence 380058 14
Bari 353417 9
Ireland
Dublin 481854 Dublin 1058264 5
Cork 127187
Luxembourg
Luxembourg 76316 24
Netherlands
Amsterdam 718119 14
Rotterdam 592745 Rotterdam 1147922 12
Portugal
Lisbon 663394
(1991)
Lisbon 1611598 53
Oporto 302472
(1991)
Oporto 1113112 15
Braga 140653
(1991)
62
United
Kingdom
Birmingham 1020589 Birmingham 2630642 37
Leeds 727476

(1997)
33
Glasgow 611660
(1997)
Glasgow 2266564 (1991) 96
Bradford 482859 28
Liverpool 463708
(1997)
Liverpool 1413441 33
Edinburgh 450000
(1997)
64
Manchester 427693
(1997)
Manchester 2571849 66
Cardiff 318282
(1997)
23
Sweden Stockholm 718462 Stockholm 1197713 48
Göteborg 454016 42
Total (cities)
58 7 20
Sub city areas
Total
Population
City Level: 46.2 million City with WTU/Conurbation areas: 70 million 2500
Yearbook: Overview
10

The combined population of the 58 cities (at the city administrative level) is 42.6 million. Taking into account the

wider territorial areas (Conurbation and Wider Territorial Unit) for which information has been collected for 27 cities,
the total population within the Urban Audit cities is 70 million.

Indicators

The Terms of Reference for the Urban Audit pilot phase identified 33 ‘indicators’ grouped under five headings
2
.One
of the main criteria emphasised in the selection of indicators was the likelihood of information being available.

During the pilot phase, the indicators were refined more precisely so that, as far as possible, information could be
collected on a comparable basis for the 58 cities. This process involved: a review of existing relevant work;
discussions amongst those involved in the Urban Audit pilot phase work, including correspondents in each member
state and representatives from participating cities; and, a detailed assessment of the practicality of obtaining
information to inform the 33 Terms of Reference ‘indicators’.

As a result of this work, the following refinements were made :

- The indicators were regrouped into 21 domains reflecting aspects of urban ‘quality of life’. The grouping
offered the practical advantage that because, by and large, the information required to inform the indicators
within each domain is available from a small number of sources, and usually different from the sources for
other domains, the wide ranging data collection work could be managed more easily.
- A full list of indicators was defined within the 21 domains. For most variables forming part of the indicator a
preferred ‘standard’ definition was given. However, scope was also provided for minor revisions to be made to
the definitions if this would enable the generation of ‘useable’ indicator scores.
- A system was devised so that the following information was recorded for each variable used to generate the
indicator scores: the date to which it refers; any differences to the ‘standard’ definition; any differences to the
spatial boundary to which the indicator applies; and the dataset used to source the information and its
characteristics.
- Information to inform all the indicators was, where possible, obtained for three points in time (1981,1991, and

1996).
- Where appropriate, comparable information at the national level was collected. This process assists the
interpretation of results in that Urban Audit users can better judge the extent to which differences in indicator
scores between the 58 cities are a consequence of national differences.

During the Urban Audit pilot phase, a methodology was developed for collecting information to inform these
indicators. All available information sources at national, regional and local levels have been investigated and
where appropriate used. Account has been taken of the variety of data sources and definitions used in different
contexts so that useful comparisons can be made.

2
These had been informed by the study ‘L’offre et la demande en matière de statistiques urbaines’, Michel Poulain, EUROSTAT Working Papers, March 1997.


Yearbook: Overview
11
URBAN AUDIT INDICATORS
Quality of life
domains
Indicators
I SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS
1. Population Total population with distribution by sex and age (13 age groups)
Total population change (by sex and age)
Percentage of the Population aged below 16 and above the national retirement age - Demographic Dependency Index.
2. Nationality Nationals as a proportion of total population
Other EU nationals as a proportion of total population
Non-EU nationals as a proportion of total population
3. Household structure Total number of households
Average size of Households
Percentage of households that are one person households

Percentage of households that are lone parent households
Percentage of households that are lone pensioner households
Number of unemployed (ILO Labour Force Survey)
Unemployment rate (by sex)
Percentage of unemployed who are male/female
Percentage of unemployed who have been unemployed continuously for more than one year
Percentage of unemployed who are under 25
Employment/population ratios (male-female-total)
4. Labour market and
Unemployment
Activity rate (male-female-total)
Household income, median and average income for each quintile
Male/Female earnings, Full-time/Part-time earnings, median and average earnings for each quintile
Ratio of first to fifth quintile earnings
Percentage of households receiving less than half of the national average household income
Percentage of households without cars
5. Income, disparities and
poverty
Number of households reliant upon social security-national definition
Number of homeless people
Number of homeless people as a percentage of total resident population
Average house prices to average annual household income ratio
Average weekly social housing rents as a percentage of average weekly household income
Percentage of dwellings lacking basic amenities
Useful living area per person (m2)
Percentage of households buying or owning their own dwellings
Percentage of households that are social housing tenants
Percentage of households that are private renting tenants
6. Housing
Number of conventional dwellings

Percentage of households living in houses
Percentage of households living in apartments
Percentage of households living in "other" dwellings
Life expectancy at birth for males and females
Infant mortality rate: 0-1 year per 1000 births
Low birth rate : Number of children born weighing less than 2.5 kg (or national definition of low birth weight) per1000 births
7. Health
Mortality rate for individuals under 65 from heart diseases and respiratory illness
Yearbook: Overview
12
URBAN AUDIT INDICATORS
Quality of life
domains
Indicators
8. Crime Total number of recorded crimes per1000 population per year
Recorded crimes against people per 1000 population per year
Recorded crimes against commercial and residential properties per 1000 population per year
Recorded crimes against cars (including thefts of and from vehicles) per 1000 population per year
9. Employment Employment by sector-male/female, part time/full time, by sector (Nace Rev.1)
Percentage change in employment
GDP per capita at city level (if available) or at the regional level10. Economic activity
Number of companies with headquarters in the city quoted on the national stock market
Net level of business registrations (new registrations minus deregistrations per year)
Proportion of net office space that is vacant
Number of tourist overnight stays in registered accommodation per year
Number of air passengers
II CIVIC INVOLVEMENT
Percentage of registered electorate voting in European, national and city Elections. For each of the last three European
Parliament Elections; and for each of the last three national elections; for each of the city elections (nearest dates to the last
three national elections)

Percentage of the resident population of voting age eligible to vote
Percentage of the eligible electorate registered to vote
Percentage of young (aged less than 25 years ) eligible electorate voting in city elections
Percentage of elderly (above retirement age) eligible electorate voting in city elections
Percentage of elected city representatives who are women
11. Civic involvement
Annual expenditure of the municipal authority per resident
Annual expenditure of the Municipal Authority per resident as a proportion of GDP per capita
Proportion of Municipal Authority income derived from: local taxation; transfers from national government; charges for services
and "other".
III LEVELS OF TRAINING AND EDUCATION
Number of crèche places (public and private provision) per 1000 population
Percentage of students not completing their compulsory education
Percentage of students completing compulsory and achieving the national minimum standard
Percentage of students completing compulsory but not achieving the national minimum standard
Percentage of the age cohort (i.e. total number of students registered for the last year of compulsory education in the reference
year) that continues education and training after leaving compulsory education
12. Education and Training
Provision
Number of places in universities and further education establishments located within the above specified boundary per 1000
resident population
13. Level of Educational
Qualifications
Percentage of resident population -male/female who have completed lower secondary education (ISCED level 2) (International
Standard Classification for Education)
Percentage of the resident population – male/female - who have completed upper secondary education (ISCED level 3)
Percentage of the resident population – male/female - who have completed tertiary education (first stage) not leading to first
university degree (ISCED level 5)
Percentage of the resident population – male/female - who have completed tertiary education(first stage) leading to first
university degree or equivalent (ISCED level 6)

Percentage of the resident population – male/female – who have completed tertiary education (second stage) leading to a post-
graduate university degree or equivalent (ISCED level 7)
Yearbook: Overview
13
URBAN AUDIT INDICATORS
Quality of life
domains
Indicators
IV ENVIRONMENT
14. Air Quality and Noise Winter Smog: Number of days SO2 exceeds 125µg/m3 (24 hour averaging time)
Summer Smog: Number of days Ozone O3 exceeds 120µg/m3 (8 hour averaging time)
Number of days per year that NO2 concentrations exceed 200mg/m3 (1 hour averaging time)
Proportion of the population exposed to outdoor noise levels above 65 db (24 hour averaging time)
Number of determinations (total number of annual tests on all parameters
on drinking water quality) which exceed the prescribed values, as specified in the Directive 80/778/EEC - 'Directive relating to
the quality of water intended for human consumption'
Consumption of water (cubic metres per annum) per inhabitant
15. Water
Percentage of dwellings connected to potable drinking water supply Infrastructure
Percentage of dwellings connected to the sewerage treatment systems
16. Waste management
Amount of solid waste collected within the boundary (domestic and commercial) tonnes per capita per annum
Proportion of solid waste (domestic and commercial) arising within the boundary processed by landfill, incinerator, recycled
Green space to which the public has access (sq meters per capita ) Percentage of the population within 15 minutes walking
distance of urban green areas
Percentage of the urban area unused and in main land uses
Percentage of the urban area subject to special physical planning /conservation measures
17. Land use
Population density -total resident population per square km
Mode of journey to work : rail/metro, bus, tram, car, cycle, walking

Characteristics of all travel by residents (purpose, distance and mode of travel)
18. Travel patterns
Number of cars registered within the specified boundary per1000 population
Road accidents resulting in death or serious injury per 1000 population
Average number of occupants of motor cars
Total energy use by fuel type (coal, petrol, electricity, natural gas, fuel oil)
Total energy use by sector (transport, industry, domestic, commercial [services])
Percentage of final energy consumption by different sectors ( transport, industry, domestic, commercial)
Electricity consumption per capita (toe)
Gas consumption per capita (toe)
19. Energy use
CO2 emissions per capita
Number of days of rain per month (averaged over one year)
20. Climate/Geography
Average number of hours of sunshine per day (averaged over one year)
V CULTURE AND RECREATION
Number of cinema showings and annual attendance per resident
Number of cinema seats
Number of concerts and annual attendance per resident
The number of theatres and annual attendance per resident
Number of museums and annual visitors per resident
The number of sports facilities and annual users per resident
21. Culture and Recreation
The number of public libraries and total book loans per resident

Yearbook: Overview
14
Spatial Level

The indicator scores have been calculated at the city level corresponding to the normal administrative area for the

58 participating cities. For 27 cities, information has also been collected at the Wider Territorial Unit or Conurbation
level. Whenever possible in all cities, information has also been compiled at the sub-city level.

City and Conurbation level

The primary focus of the Urban Audit has been on the “city level” as defined by the main administrative areas under
the jurisdiction of an elected body and on the conurbation where the urban area has its own administrative entity.

Wider Territorial Units (WTU)

In order to facilitate possible comparisons, where “local authority areas adjoining a city partake significantly in the
life of the city” (Terms of Reference), a Wider Territorial Unit comprising a combination of administrative areas was
identified.

The general approach used to define the 20 WTU was that the wider areas should fulfil either of the two criteria
below :

That the administrative areas each contiguous with the city administrative level have a population density equal to
or greater than 500 persons per square kilometre;

That the proposed group of administrative areas corresponds to a build-up area with less than 200 metres between
two built units.

Furthermore the total populations of the city and administrative areas within the WTU were at least 50% greater
than the population of the city.

Sub-City Level

For a small number of indicators, mainly those concerning socio-economic aspects, indicator scores have been
calculated for a total of 2500 sub-divisions of the cities. The main purpose of the sub-city analysis is to estimate

the apparent level of disparities in conditions between parts of the Urban Audit cities.

More particularly, the Terms of Reference for the Urban Audit pilot phase indicated that the Urban Audit should
“enable city authorities to gather precise information on possible ‘pockets of concern’ within the city which could
lead to serious internal disparities”. The objective was to ‘pinpoint major disparities in terms of social cohesion’
between districts.

There are considerable variations amongst the Urban Audit cities in the ways in which cities are normally
subdivided for administrative and/or statistical purposes. However, as far as possible a common approach has
been adopted to the assembly and analysis of information at the sub-city level. This has involved the collection of
information for all sub-city areas of population in the order of 10,000 and where possible the assembly of further
more detailed information for 2 sub-city areas.




Yearbook: Overview
15
Feasibility

The pilot phase of the Urban Audit has demonstrated, for the first time, the feasibility of obtaining and presenting
information on a consistent pan-European basis for a wide range of indicators at the city administrative level, the
wider urban area, and for sub-city areas.

This has been achieved through the active co-operation of the cities invited by the European Commission to
participate. Information has been assembled from a wide variety of sources. Whilst many of the chosen indicators
have been informed by national data sources, information compiled at the local level has also been extremely
important with respect to recreation and culture, civic involvement, and levels of education and training provision,
as well as aspects of economic conditions.

The wide variety of variables for which information was sought, the three points in time and three different spatial
levels posed a major challenge. However, for most indicators, the information was obtained for the majority of
cities. Furthermore, at least one city had sufficient information to complete in its entirety the information requested
in each domain. Only the domains of energy and travel patterns stand out as having been particularly difficult to
complete. The lack of information on household income is also disappointing.

There are many issues of definitions that limit cross-national comparability and the confidence with which
generalisations can be drawn. However, taken as a whole, the Urban Audit pilot phase has demonstrated the
strong potential that exists for European comparative urban information.
Yearbook: Overview
16
Key Findings
The philosophy of the urban Yearbook is that it should present information in an objective but comprehensible manner so
that the figures can “speak for themselves”. Thus readers of the urban Yearbook can use the information to inform their
interpretation of the situation affecting EU cities in general and the comparative position of particular cities. To assist this
process the broad findings of the Urban Audit are reviewed below for each domain and for the sub-city level analysis.

In the review of key findings, the cities have been classified:
- by size at city level in three categories (above 1 million, above 500,000, below 500,000 inhabitants)
- by geographic location: northern and southern,
- by geographic location: central and peripheral, and
- by capital and non capital cities.
The table below presents the cities within each category.

Size of the City Geographical location
Large
Above 1 million
Medium
(Above 500,000)
Small

(Below 500,000)
Northern Southern Central Peripheral
Capital Cities
Berlin Frankfurt Leipzig Berlin Madrid Berlin Valencia Berlin
Hamburg Essen Dresden Hamburg Barcelona Hamburg Seville Vienna
Munich Stuttgart Graz Munich Valencia Munich Malaga Brussels
Cologne Brussels Antwerp Cologne Seville Cologne Helsinki Copenhagen
Vienna Valencia Copenhagen Frankfurt Saragossa Frankfurt Athens Madrid
Madrid Seville Lyon Essen Malaga Essen Thessalonika Helsinki
Barcelona Saragossa Toulouse Stuttgart Marseilles Stuttgart Patras Athens
Rome Malaga Nice Leipzig Lyon Leipzig Naples Rome
Milan Helsinki Strasburg Dresden Toulouse Dresden Palermo Dublin
Naples Marseilles Bordeaux Graz Nice Graz Bari Luxembourg
Birmingham Athens Nantes Vienna Bordeaux Vienna Dublin Lisbon
Turin Lille Antwerp Athens Antwerp Cork Stockholm
Palermo Thessalonika Brussels Thessalonika Brussels Lisbon
Genoa Patras Copenhagen Patras Copenhagen Oporto
Amsterdam Florence Helsinki Rome Madrid Braga
Rotterdam Bari Strasburg Milan Barcelona Glasgow
Lisbon Dublin Nantes Naples Saragossa Edinburgh
Leeds Cork Lille Turin Marseilles Stockholm
Glasgow Luxembourg Dublin Palermo Lyon Gothenburg
Stockholm Oporto Cork Genoa Toulouse
Braga Luxembourg Florence Nice
Bradford Amsterdam Bari Strasburg
Liverpool Rotterdam Lisbon Bordeaux
Edinburgh Birmingham Oporto Nantes
Manchester Leeds Braga Lille
Cardiff Glasgow Rome
Gothenburg Bradford Milan

Liverpool Turin
Edinburgh Genoa
Manchester Florence
Cardiff Luxembourg
Stockholm Amsterdam
Gothenburg Rotterdam
Birmingham
Leeds
Bradford
Liverpool
Manchester
Cardiff
Yearbook: Overview
17
The following paragraphs are based upon information presented in Annex 1 to the overview and in the comparative
section. The comparative tables give scores and averages based upon the latest year for which information is
available in each city (i.e. 1996 or near equivalent, or 1991 or near equivalent). The information in Annex 1 gives
averages for 1996 or near equivalent, as well as averages for 1991 and for 1981.
For each domain, the main variations in the average scores on selected indicators of cities grouped within different
categories (size of the city, geographical location, capital/non capital) using available data at the city level for 1996
or near equivalent are presented.
Where appropriate ordinal (higher/lower/same) comparisons are also made between the city and conurbation/wider
territorial unit level scores and those at the national level. Again 1996 or near equivalent year are used.
The trends over time in indicator scores are illustrated in two ways. First, for selected indicators, the average score
for cities for which information is available is given for three points in time 1996 (or near equivalent year), 1991 and
1981. As the cases for which information is available vary between the years these results need to be viewed with
caution. Second, for each city and conurbation/ wider territorial unit, for which data are available for more than one
point in time, the proportion of cases with each direction of change (increasing, decreasing, stable) has been
calculated. The information used to determine the direction of change for each case is the difference between
scores for the longest period over which information is available. In any case, the findings on changes over time

need to be viewed as indicative. Information on trends at the individual city level, which in general terms is reliable,
is available from the Web Site (Section Results-City by City).
Yearbook: Overview
18
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASPECTS
1. Population

Urban Audit city population levels stabilising; populations at WTU/Conurbation level are increasing


In the last two decades, around half of the Urban Audit cities
have gained population and half have lost residents. Amongst
the cities with WTU/
Conurbations, the population have tended
to decline slowly at the city level but increase within the
WTU/Conurbation level. Population decline at the city level was
greater amongst large, southern,
central
and capital cities, but
the decline has slowed. The majority of Urban Audit cities
experienced a decline in the eighties whilst only a minority did
so in the nineties. Fourteen cities experienced a reversal in
population trends, from a decline in the eighties to an increase
in the nineties. Only four cities experienced the opposite.


Population Change in cities with
WTUs/Conurbations (millions)
18.4 17.1
21.1

22.4
1981 1996 or latest

Wider Territorial Unit/ Conurbation
City Level
39.5 39.5

The trends in population over the last two decades indicate stable levels of population within the boundaries of the
cities with similar numbers of cities experiencing growth and decline. However, much of the decline in cities
population that characterised the nineteen eighties has been arrested and the populations within the wider urban
areas of which the cities form part have, in most cases, grown.
Urban Audit city populations are relatively young but the number of elderly is increasing


Population age structure in Urban Audit
cities (1996 or latest)
17.1%
13.5%
53.2%
16.4%
0-15 16-24 25-64 Retirement
age and
over
Age
group

Proportion of resident population
less than 16 years old and above
retirement age
33.3

35.8
33.9
1981 1991 1996
%
One third of the population of the Urban Audit cities are less than 16 years old or above retirement age. The
proportion has been reducing since the early eighties. Trend information available on the Urban Audit web site
indicate that the numbers of youngsters have declined and elderly increased. Compared with national populations,
more than two third of the cities have smaller proportions of the population outside of the “working age” bracket.

Yearbook: Overview
19

2. Nationality

Nationals

The Urban Audit cities are becoming more international and cosmopolitan.


Nationality in all Urban Audit cities
(%) (1996)
89.6%
6.6%
3.7%
Nationals
Other EU
nationals
Non-EU
nationals
Proportion of nationals

92.6
89.6
92.2
1981 1991 1996
%
Around 90% of the Urban Audit cities resident population are nationals. The proportions range widely and are
normally higher at the WTU/Conurbation level. Compared with the national level, nearly all cities have lower
proportions of nationals than the countries as a whole. The proportions of nationals are typically higher in
southern, peripheral and non capital cities. Nearly 84% of cities have experienced a decline in the proportion of
nationals.
Other EU nationals

Of the non-national population, around one third are from other
European Union countries and two thirds are non-EU nationals.
The proportions of other EU nationals are higher at the city level
and in small, northern and central cities. Over three fifths of the
cities have higher proportions of other EU nationals than the
countries in which they are located.
Proportion of other EU
nationals
3.7
3.9
2.9
1981 1991 1996
%
Non-EU nationals
The majority of non nationals are from outside the European Union.
The proportion of non-EU nationals are higher at the city level in
large, northern and central cities. In more than four fifths of the
cities, the proportion of non-EU nationals are higher than in

WTU/
Conurbations in which they are located. In over 90% of
cities, the proportions of non EU nationals have increased.
Proportion of non-EU nationals
6.6
4.6
5.1
1981 1991 1996
%
The results of the Urban Audit illustrate both the increasing cosmopolitan and international character of large urban
areas, and the wide differences in the nationality mix between cities across the EU.
Yearbook: Overview
20

3. Household Structure

Household size

The Urban Audit cities have relatively small households and they are getting smaller.


On average, there are 2.3 persons per household in
the Urban Audit cities. Over four fifths of cities have
smaller households on average than their countries as
a whole. Households are typically larger in southern
and peripheral cities. Nearly all cities have
experienced a decline in household size.

Average size of households
2.3

2.8
2.5
1981 1991 1996
persons
One person households

The Urban Audit cities have more one person households compared with national level.

Household Structure (1996)
38.1%
14.7%
7.5%
One person
households
Lone
pensioner
households
Lone parent
households

Proportion of one person households
38.1
26.7
33.9
1981 1991 1996
%
Over a third of all households are ‘one person households’. The proportion is higher at the city than
WTU/Conurbation level and amongst northern, central and capital cities. All of cities have proportionally more one
person households than their countries as a whole. The proportion has increased in all cities.

Lone pensioner households


Nearly 15%
of households are lone pensioner
households. The proportions are greater in
large
central and
non capital cities. The majority of cities
have experienced increases in the proportions but this
is more marked at the WTU/Conurbation than city level.

Proportion of lone pensioner
households
14.7
13.3
14.4
1981 1991 1996
%
Yearbook: Overview
21

Lone parent households

Lone parent households are increasing.

Nearly one in twelve households
are lone parent households.
The proportion is higher in small and in peripheral cities. The
majority of cities have higher proportions of lone parent

households than at national level. At the city level, 84% of cities
have experienced an increase in the proportion of lone parent
households.

Proportion of lone parent
households
7.5
6.5
7.6
1981 1991 1996
%

Yearbook: Overview
22

4. Labour Market and Unemployment

Levels of activity

More people, especially women are in work or seeking work especially in northern cities, but unemployment is
increasing.


Just over two thirds of the population of working age in Urban
Audit cities are in work or seeking work. The proportions are
lower in southern cities. Half of the cities have higher activity
rates than the national levels and the majority higher activity
rates than in 1981. (Activity rate is the number in work or
seeking work as a proportion of the population of working age).

The majority of women of working age are in the workforce.
The proportions are much lower in southern cities but overall,
they have grown considerably since 1981 and in almost all cities
the female activity rates have increased. Three fifths of the
cities have higher female activity rates than at the national level.





Activity rate
67.7
63.9
65.3
1981 1991 1996
%


Female Activity Rate
60.754.8
49.3
1981 1991 1996
%


Population in employment

Around three fifths of the Urban Audit city level working age
populations are in work. The proportion is lower in southern and
peripheral cities. The proportion has declined in more cities than
it has increased although the average levels have increased
between 1981 and 1996.

Proportion of population of
working age in employment
59.2
56.9
57.4
1981 1991 1996
%

Yearbook: Overview
23

Unemployment
Urban Audit Cities bear the brunt of unemployment, and long term unemployment, but fewer young people are out
of work than at the national level.
Unemployment averages over 8% and is higher in the
medium sized cities, in southern cities and capitals. In nearly
two thirds of cities, it is higher at the city than at national
levels. For the WTU/Conurbation level, three quarters have
higher unemployment rates than the national level. In three
quarters of cities, the rate has increased over the last two
decades.
Unemployment rate
8.3
7.2

8.3
1981 1991 1996
%
Long Term Unemployment



Nearly two in five of the unemployed
are long term
unemployed. The proportion is similar throughout the EU
and to the national pictures. The trends indicate some
decline in the proportion of long term unemployed in the
nineteen eighties, but an increase in the nineties.

Proportion of unemployed who
are long term unemployed
38.4
40.4
34.3
1981 1991 1996
%

Youth Unemployment



Around one in five of the unemployed are aged under 25
years. The proportion is similar across Europe and varies
little between cities of different size. The proportions are
lower in capitals and, for over four fifths of cities, the

proportions are lower than for the countries as a whole. In
almost all cities, the proportion of unemployed who are
under 25 has decreased over the last two decades.

Proportion of unemployed who are
under 25 years
19.7
38.4
25.3
1981 1991 1996
%