text:
Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons www.melbourne.vic.gov.au March 2011 International City Comparisons Contents Executive summary 3 1. Introduction 4 2. Purpose 5 3. Discussion 5 3.1. What the comparison studies say about Melbourne 5 3.1.1. People cities and liveability 5 3.1.2. Prosperous cities 7 3.1.3. Knowledge 9 3.1.4. Creativity and innovation 10 3.1.5. Sustainability 10 3.1.6. Connected cities 11 3.2. Critique of benchmarking and liveability surveys 12 3.2.1. Overstating outcomes 12 3.2.2. Treating city comparisons as progress indicators 13 3.2.3. How the aims behind city comparisons affect rigour 13 3.2.4. Subjectivity of method, analysis and conclusions 15 3.2.5. City comparison studies hide findings within complexity 16 3.2.6. Weighting 16 3.2.7. Volatility of currency 17 3.2.8. City ranking is not within City of Melbourne's control 18 3.2.9. Integrity and compatibility of data among cities 18 3.3. Public policy limitations of city rankings and indexes, specifically 19 3.4. How City of Melbourne can use international city comparison studies 20 3.5. Existing alternatives for measuring city performance 20 3.5.1. Future Melbourne Community Plan monitoring 20 3.5.2. An Australian National Development Index 22 3.5.3. International benchmarking with the World Bank 22 3.5.4. Using Community Indicators Victoria to monitor progress 23 4. Conclusion 24 5. Appendices 25 6. References 27 Acknowledgements This research report was written by Nick Casey, Melbourne City Research. 2 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons Executive summary There is a growing number of national and international city awards, indexes, lists, ranks and studies which purport to benchmark cities against one another in various categories. These studies often receive widespread media attention and consequently are of particular interest to the City of Melbourne for their potential to influence the city's reputation or suggest ways Melbourne's rankings might be "improved". Many of these city comparison studies suggest it is possible to assess complex issues and policy responses by reducing them to a single indexed score or rank. This report argues that in many cases such an approach is flawed for the following reasons: • the aims and audience of are often narrow, biasing the selection of indicators • small survey samples and subjective measures are used and hence the results do not reflect the quality of life for the majority a city's citizens Very few of these studies are actually city benchmarking exercises and hence should not be used as such. Consequently they have little or no value as progress indicators for city monitoring or as tools to inform public policy. The City of Melbourne should be justifiably proud that Melbourne continues to be assessed as amongst the best cities in the world from a range of different perspectives. However the methodology behind different international city accolades and comparison rankings should be understood to keep their results in perspective and ensure they are used appropriately. In many cases this use should be limited to promotional activities only Finally, this paper discusses some alternatives to monitor the progress or the performance of the 'city' over time or compared to other cities. These alternatives most often involve locally developed indicators and point to some existing frameworks that are better suited to City of Melbourne's needs to benchmark or measure progress, including: Future Melbourne Community Plan World Bank Global City Indicator Facility Community Indicators Victoria and The Australian National Development Index. Melbourne City Research 3 International City Comparisons 1. Introduction A growing number of city accolades and studies are being published, purporting to compare various cities, including Melbourne, against one another in various categories. Any city can be ranked or listed on almost anything that can be collected in a comparable way and some international comparisons also suggest it is possible to assess complex issues and policy responses by reducing them to a single indexed score or rank. These studies are typically presented as statistical tools making comparisons between cities for some purpose and they get widespread media attention. Even U.S. celebrity Oprah Winfrey acknowledged Melbourne's liveability ranking (The Age10/12/10) during a brief visit, in 2010, and was reported across Australia and at least parts of the Pacific region. City of Melbourne shows interest in research about the 'city's' reputation, but also monitors both the results of its own activities and overall state of the 'city'. Many city comparison studies are interesting or informative, if used appropriately, but others are not. The number and range of rankings is not only growing but seems increasingly frivolous. For example, one academic (Woolcock, 2010) listed just some rankings from 2009 including 'best and worst city' for men (askmen.com ranked Melbourne second best after New York, in 2010), women, travellers, families, GenYs, office costs, pets, recreation, jobs, street art, book-buying, architecture, coffee, and partying. There are also indexes, ranks and awards that are used to rank cities for car friendliness, ease of commute, parking fees, romance, vegetarianism (in 2008, onlymelbourne reported Melbourne was Australia's most romantic and vegetarian friendly city), literature, commerce, business cost, dynamism, innovation, knowledge, sport events, entrepreneurship, housing affordability, university life, quality of life, cost of living, sustainability and brand. Many international city comparison studies discussed in this paper purport to measure quality of life outright, or treat it as a component, among others, of whatever they rank (see Appendix 2). Querying about the sources revealed most of these indexes and rankings are frequently available to subscribers of newspaper travel sections! The ubiquity and frequent triviality of surveys, indexes and ranks in the media is now reaching the point where a recent newspaper article (The Age, on-line, 5/10/10) even remarked on, 'pointless and incredibly self-serving surveys", and another, entitled The Trouble With Cool (The Age, on-line, 25/02/11), was similarly dismissive of city rankings. This report argues that international city comparison ranks often use small samples and subjective measures that don't reflect quality of life for the average citizen of a city and sometimes appear to offer convenient promotional vehicles for companies producing them. Analysts and policy makers should avoid the temptation to treat them all as progress indicators or public policy tools. City of Melbourne should, however, maintain a watching brief on many of these accolades, ranks, and indexes for use when it wants to enhance and promote 'Melbourne's' image and reputation nationally and overseas. 4 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons 2. Purpose The purpose of this paper is to summarise and discuss key international city study outcomes comparing 'Melbourne' globally against other major cities. It also seeks to clarify the differences between monitoring and benchmarking. The report will evaluate the philosophies, purposes, methodologies and uses of international city comparisons, making conclusions about their usefulness for community or city progress measurement, city benchmarking and detailed city policy input. Finally, the paper considers whether other authors have suggested constructive alternatives, for measuring city performance and whether they point to some alternative city measurement frameworks the City of Melbourne can use. 3. Discussion 3.1. What the comparison studies say about Melbourne Melbourne is consistently well regarded in the various national and international awards and studies. Most recently, for example, Melbourne received an honourable mention in the inaugural Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize, 2010 (City of Melbourne, on-line, 23/11/10), for its integrated and inclusive approach to strategic planning over time. Some of the most well known accolades and city rankings, by broad category, are mentioned below (see Appendix 2 for rankings table). 3.1.1. People cities and liveability In 2011, Melbourne (liveability score 97.5) is the second most liveable city in the world after Vancouver. Sydney was seventh with a score of 96.1. Vancouver hosted the Winter Olympic Games recently and this contributed to its strong score in the cultural and sporting events category and pushed it to number one (EIU.com, on-line, 12/02/10). Melbourne rated first in the Economist Intelligence Unit's (EIU's) Global Liveability Report from 2002–04, second from 2005–07 and third from 2008–10. In contrast to the EIU's findings, in 2010 Mercer Human Resource Consulting's latest Global Liveability Report, ranked Melbourne's liveability eighteenth of 215 cities. The survey has rated Melbourne in its top 20 since 2003 (Mercer, 28/04/09). In 2011 a new national liveability report was released, entitled My City: The People's Verdict Survey, and commissioned by the Property Council of Australia. It revealed Adelaide to be Australia's most liveable city, followed by Canberra. Sydney was ranked Australia's worst city – by its own residents. Melbourne was rated third most liveable Melbourne City Research 5 International City Comparisons Australian City and scored highest of all cities for range of cultural activities and design and appearance (Stolper, D, 2011). The Property Council of Australian anticipates repeating this survey regularly in future. Monocle Magazine's Liveable Cities Index rated Melbourne eleventh in 2007 and ninth most liveable in 2008 and 2009 (Monocle 2007 and 2008). In 2010 it again ranked Melbourne ninth and Sydney twelfth most liveable city, with Munich named most liveable city (Monocle, 2010). RMIT University's Global University Cities Index (discontinued and apparently under review) ranked Melbourne the world's fourth best education centre in 2008 (RMIT, on-line, 09/12/08). Melbourne's highly regarded liveability was a contributor to its success in the ranking (although there is the obvious question whether it was an unbiased study). Anholt GfKRoper's City Brand Index ranked Melbourne the eighth best city in 2006 and the sixth best in 2007. Melbourne was not ranked amongst the top ten global cities in 2009, however it was (GfKAmerica, on-line, 2010) placed third in the domain of 'People', suggesting that the rest of the world regards Melbourne as possessing a friendly and culturally diverse population (after Sydney and Toronto at first and second place, respectively). As well as producing indexes rankings of liveability, Mercer and the EIU produce cost of living studies. Bi-annually, Mercer conducts a Cost of Living Survey that is generally similar to the EIU's in that it collects prices for approximately 200 products and services in more than 140 cities. In 2010, Mercer Human Resource Consulting published its latest cost of living study, which ranked Melbourne thirty-third most expensive city out of 215 cities worldwide. For the first time, an African city (Luanda, in Angola) was ranked most expensive (Mercer 29/09/08). EIU's Worldwide Cost of Living Survey enables managers and executives to compare the cost of living in other cities and calculate compensation for relocating employees. It gathers data (in each city) on the cost of over 160 products or services, for example, food, toiletries, clothing, domestic help, transport and utility bills. More than 50,000 individual prices are collected and by a small sample of expatriates residing in each country. For each product the survey data is collected in three stores: A supermarket; a mid priced store; and a high priced specialist store. Surveys are taken at specifically selected, typical central shopping locations in the city in question (not suburban neighbourhoods). These are places where people would do their shopping for the items included in the survey and they vary by country depending on identified local trends. There are sound methodological reasons for this, including the size of the overall project and logic of sampling prices where we know 'people' shop. 6 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons A cost of living index is calculated from price data to express cost of living differentials between any two cities. EIU also releases the data to the media, in list form, ranking each city in the survey according to total score. According to EIU Melbourne was thirty-ninth most expensive city in 2009 (EIU.com, on-line, 26/06/10). Mercer and EIU price indexes are 'customizable' on line or in software packages. This means users may subtract, from a price index, items that are not necessary to calculating employee costs of living in another city on a case by case basis. The sixth Demographia International Housing Affordability Study, Cox and Pavletich, on- line, 2010), covered 272 urban markets in 6 countries, including Australia and found that in 2010 Melbourne's median multiple was 6.8, or third least affordable. A market with a median multiple (ratio of average household earnings to house costs) of 3 is considered affordable. Vancouver is the least affordable market, with a median multiple of 9.3, followed by Sydney (9.1). 3.1.2. Prosperous cities In 2008 MasterCard Worldwide ranked Melbourne forty-first in its Worldwide Centres of Commerce Rankings. London was ranked number one commerce centre. Melbourne's greatest strength was its liveability, but its greatest weakness was its 'financial flow' because of the lack of key institutions, such as the Australian Stock Exchange, Reserve Bank of Australia and Futures Exchange which are all based in Sydney (Mastercard, on- line, 28/10/08). While the Mastercard commerce rankings focused most on evaluating the structure and frameworks of city financial sectors the Brookings Institute's Global Metro Monitor (Berube, et al, 2010) compared the recent economic performance of cities around the world on three important economic indicators: growth in population, employment and income. The study examined the performance of the latter two (standardised and added) before, during and after the recent financial crisis and found the world's fastest recovering cities were overwhelmingly from China, India, Southeast Asia, and Latin America. Only three cities from outside this region appeared on the list: Montreal, Austin and Melbourne. There were no European cities in the top 30 and nor were there African cities outside Egypt in the top 50 (The Atlantic Monthly, on-line, 3/12/10). The study ranked Melbourne 14 out of 150 of the world's metropolitan areas studied in terms of post 'recession' performance. The Atlantic Monthly's analysis drew attention to Melbourne's status as the only city from Australia on the list and expressed surprise given Australia's commodity economy and the proximity of Asia. Its analysis considered that Melbourne was chosen for being the nation's busiest seaport. Melbourne City Research 7 International City Comparisons Melbourne's business cost competitiveness and it tax competitiveness were highly regarded by KPMG in 2010. Melbourne was rated number one by consultants KPMG for cost competitiveness in the Asia-Pacific region and eleventh most cost competitive of 41 large cities internationally. For example, clinical trials management costs nearly 35% less in Melbourne than in the United States, while electronic systems development and testing industries are 20% less (Invest Victoria, on-line, 21/12/10). This study measured all costs to corporations, labour, facility, transport utility and tax costs. Costs were calculated and then indexed against costs of business in the U.S. Business costs in the U.S. was assigned a score of 100 with a city score under 100 indicating a lower operating cost. Further, KPMG's study on average annual tax costs on (foreign owned and newly located) businesses in their first 10 years, in 41 cities globally, found Melbourne was the 9th most competitive location for tax costs in the world and the most competitive in Asia (KPMG, 2010). Similarly to the business costs index, this study measured all taxes on corporations, including income taxes, capital taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, miscellaneous local business taxes and statutory labour costs. The taxes applying to corporations were calculated and then indexed against taxes paid by companies operating in the U.S, with the U.S. assigned a score of 100. Scores under 100 indicate a lower tax cost. Melbourne was ranked number one in the world for its tax treatment of research and development (10% of the tax costs of the U.S.) and sixth in the world for its treatment of manufacturing. For corporate and IT services, however, it was ranked 30th (KPMG, 2010). Perhaps Melbourne's tax regime for research activities pays dividends in its ability to foster innovative business ideas. The information this paper uncovered about innovation and creativity rankings (discussed below) is unclear whether such a connection has been found. Apart from strictly economic studies, Melbourne is well regarded as a destination for tourism, business travel and events. Conde Nast Traveller magazine (2009) has given the Readers' Travellers Choice Awards annually since 1997. The results of the awards are based on a questionnaire asking readers (around 30,000) to choose the best the travel world has to offer across a number of categories. The questionnaire was a self select form, sent to readers in the United Kingdom and made available on the website. In the Overseas Cities category, which determines readers favourite travel cities outside the United Kingdom, respondents were asked to rate a city with marks out of five for: aesthetics/architecture; culture; cleanliness; user- friendliness; range of accommodation; food/restaurants; people/hospitality; 8 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons nightlife/entertainment; safety; and value for money. Votes were calculated as an average on each criterion, providing the overall satisfaction index. After being ranked twelfth best city for travellers, in 2005 and 2006 (a score of 85.6, in 2006), Melbourne has not been ranked in the top cities since 2007. Sydney, however, has been voted the world's number one city for travellers every year from 2001 to 2009. Accommodation website 'Wotif', however, found Melbourne was voted the most popular destination for business travel, according to thirty-three percent of business travellers surveyed. Business travellers chose Melbourne above Sydney (27%), Brisbane (10%), Perth (9%) and the Gold Coast (7%) during the company's annual business traveller survey. Melbourne was first place each year from 2006-08 (MICEBTN News, 2008). Euromonitor International, an independent provider of business intelligence on industries, countries and consumers, releases an annual City Destinations Ranking, covering over 230 of the world's leading cities in terms of international tourist arrivals. The methodology used is an objective one that uses many data sources, including World Tourism Organisation; European cities tourism; national statistics; national tourist boards; local tourism & convention bureaux; trade press (local and national newspapers, business travel news) and Euromonitor International's own data. Melbourne was the 95th largest tourist destination in the world (out of 230 surveyed) in 2007 (Euromonitor, 2007). While this rank seems mediocre, Melbourne still attracted approximately 954,000 international visitors in 2007. In 2008 (the latest ranking to be released by Euromonitor) Melbourne has disappeared from the published list of 100 cities. All cities on that list have more than one million visitors per year and Melbourne, it seems, has not kept up. Sydney, meanwhile is ranked fifty-fourth (Euromonitor, 2008) with more than 2.2 million visitors (though this is down 2.2 percent on 2007). In terms of events, Melbourne won the biennial, Ultimate Sports City Award in 2006, 2008 and 2010 (Sportbusiness, on-line, 29/04/10), recognizing its facilities, government support, legacy planning, good weather and its calendar of events. Events held in Melbourne over this time included hosting the Australian Open Tennis, Formula One Grand Prix, the AFL season, Boxing Day Test, Bledisloe Cup, President's Cup golf, Spring Racing Carnival and Australian Masters Golf. 3.1.3. Knowledge The World Capital Institute voted Melbourne the Most Admired Knowledge City in 2010. The institute considers Melbourne's multiculturalism and some recent knowledge-based initiatives (Melbourne Knowledge Management Leadership Forum, and Association of Knowledge Work) as contributing to Melbourne's success (World Capital Institute, 2010). Melbourne City Research 9 International City Comparisons 3.1.4. Creativity and innovation Melbourne has long been considered a creative capital and, in 2007, Melbourne was made the world's first City of Literature by UNESCO. Creativity is about more than art or literature, however. It is also about innovation and entrepreneurship. An international study by the OECD named Melbourne the third most entrepreneurial city of 27 OECD cities in 2008. Almost 12 per cent of Melbourne's population are entrepreneurs, according to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Auckland and Vancouver had slightly higher proportions of entrepreneurs than Melbourne. Cities in Anglo Saxon countries are characterised by a high surplus of in-migration, individualism, and a "more or less" passive role of government, according to the authors of the study. Sydney (ranked sixth in the study) outranked Melbourne on job growth oriented criteria, sectors linked to the creative classes criteria and use of latest technology. From 2007-08 Melbourne was ranked eighth most innovative city in the world, by 2Thinknow's Innovation Cities Index and was ranked among the top 20 cities every year since. Most recently, in 2010, Melbourne was ranked nineteenth most innovative city (of 289 cities). Boston was considered the world's most innovative city in 2010. Melbourne was considered a 'Nexus' by 2Thinknow. Nexus cities dominate the innovation across many economy sectors (2Thinknow, on-line, 09/08/10). It is interesting to note that 2Thinknow also highly regards Melbourne's ability to inspire innovation through art, food, high culture, design, its people and its openness. 3.1.5. Sustainability In 2008 MasterCard Worldwide ranked Melbourne first in its Environmental Ranking of Centres of Commerce in Asia/Pacific, Middle East and Africa. Melbourne's result highlights how government policies and actions make a difference in creating a high urban quality of life and the potential impact of climate change (Mastercard, on-line, 09/12/08). Also in 2008, the Ethisphere Institute rated Melbourne sixth of the ten most sustainable cities in the world. The institute referred to key objectives of the Future Melbourne Community Plan (Herald-Sun, 2008). This was enough to label Melbourne a 2020 'Global Sustainability Centre'. The Institute describes Global Sustainability Centres as large, international cities demonstrating a strong, dedicated commitment to long-term sustainability without sacrificing economic potential and quality of life. In contrast, in 2010 the Australian Conservation Foundation considered Melbourne only the seventh most sustainable of 20 Australian cities. Darwin was considered the most sustainable city. Melbourne's lowest score was for Public Participation, with only 12.6 per cent of residents volunteering. Density was Melbourne's best performing indicator with the 10 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons city taking third place (behind Sydney and Newcastle) with 1808 residents per square kilometer (Trigg et al, 2010). For the first time, in the 2010 quality of living report, Mercer included an 'Eco-ranking', in its liveability survey, mentioned above (City Mayors, on-line, 23/11/10). The ranking criteria included water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion. The results contrast with other published comparisons of sustainable cities, such as Mastercard's and this could be explained by Mercer's emphasis on transport congestion rather than water, waste and sewerage issues on which Mastercard concentrated its analysis. In this rank, Melbourne was twenty-fifth, with other Australian cities such as Adelaide, Perth, Canberra and Brisbane being ranked higher (seventh, twelfth, twenty-first and twenty-third, respectively). 3.1.6. Connected cities When it comes specifically to transport, international city indexes and rankings seem to focus on cars. While it is easy to locate comparisons of how good cities are for cars and car parking it proved finding comparisons of the best and worst cities for public transit. Consequently this section discusses national and international 'best and worst' city comparisons for driving and car parking. In May 2008 and August 2009, IBM conducted a survey of more than 8,000 adult drivers in twenty major cities around the world, repeating similar surveys done in the United States. The survey intended to gather drivers' opinions about local traffic and related issues. IBM compiled the results of the survey into an index, ranking the emotional and economic toll of commuting in each city on a scale of one to 100, with 100 being the most onerous. The index reveals Stockholm (score of 15) had the least painful commute of the cities studied, followed by Melbourne and Houston (which tied with scores of 17). Beijing and Mexico City had the 'worst' commutes (scored 99 each). The index is comprised responses to 10 questions and issues: 1) commuting time, 2) time stuck in traffic, agreement that: 3) price of gas is already too high, 4) traffic has got worse, 5) start-stop traffic is a problem, 6) driving causes stress, 7) driving causes anger, 8) traffic affects work, 9) traffic so bad driving stopped, and 10) decided not to make trip due to traffic. The study itself made some interesting and potentially useful findings, including the degree of physical, economic, emotional and other harm being done to commuters by traffic congestion. It also drew attention to the fact that Melbourne has a driving level comparable to north American cities (greater than 90%). The authors themselves also expressed their hope that the report will stimulate debate, thinking, and solutions to traffic congestion problems. Melbourne City Research 11 International City Comparisons New research from Virgin Car Insurance suggests Perth is the best place to drive in Australia, and Sydney is the worst,. The study ranked Australian cities ranked in order of best to worst for drivers in capital cities: 1. Perth 2. Darwin 3. Hobart 4. Adelaide 5. Canberra 6. Melbourne 7. Brisbane 8. Sydney. According to this study, Melburnians pay $0.29 per kilometre and Brisbane residents pay $0.13 per kilometre while in Sydney the cost is $2.02. Melbourne's average $60 parking fines for expired meters were higher than Perth's ($50), they were lower than Sydney's at $84. Virgin Car Insurance undertook research in December 2009 and January 2010 to determine which cities across Australia could be considered 'unfriendly' for motorists. The results were weighted and cities ranked highest to lowest based on most to least car friendly city. Criteria were costs of: petrol; comprehensive car insurance; vehicle registration; expired parking fines; two hour metered parking; two hour commercial parking; toll roads per kilometre; as well as numbers of parking spaces available and car thefts. Colliers 2010 International Parking Rate Survey, Melbourne's monthly ($310.35) and daily ($31.05) car parking fees compared favourably with most other Australian capital cities. Melbourne was ranked thirty-fourth lowest monthly parking fees (Sydney and Perth were seventh and eight, respectively) and twenty-fourth lowest for daily parking fees (Sydney had the fourth most expensive daily parking fees). This survey was conducted in major cites around the world and included cities such as London (highest monthly parking fees at $977.63), Tokyo, Oslo (highest daily parking fees at $57.19), Hong Kong, Rome, New York, Amsterdam, Vienna, Athens, Zurich, Stockholm and Copenhagen. 3.2. Critique of benchmarking and liveability surveys The outcomes of International city ranks, lists and indexes should be kept in perspective and used with some care for the reasons this report outlines below. 3.2.1. Overstating outcomes Overstating the cause and effect relationship between indicators and city performance (Holloway and Wajzer, 2008 and Stokie, 1999) is not just a flaw of city comparison indexes but is often the mistake made by analysts or policy makers who refer to them. Although Melbourne is ranked eighteenth in the Mercer liveability index, with a score of 104.8, the difference between the top cities in the survey represents little practical difference in liveability between them. Similarly, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) Global Liveability Report for example, advises every city with a score above 80 per cent belongs to the same 'very top tier of liveability'. There were 64 cities (almost half the cities surveyed) internationally, including Melbourne, that could lay a claim to sharing the same effective quality of life (EIU.com, on-line, 12/02/10). 12 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons The top tier of liveability features cities from Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand and some Asian countries (Singapore, Tokyo) and these cities could be considered the world's truly global cities where, setting aside superficial differences, and the weather, a person could enjoy good quality of life. This becomes important when we consider next the purpose of the EIU and Mercer surveys. In another example Simon Anholt warns readers against overstating top line brand scores (Anholt. S, on-line, 17/03/10) in the City Brand Index (although - for a different reason - these rankings are based on scores that are 'averages of averages', and simply illustrate a summary of responses to the survey). 3.2.2. Treating city comparisons as progress indicators Another common mistake made by analysts and policy makers when using international city benchmarking indexes (such as the Mercers or EIU's Liveability and Cost of Living indexes, Demographia Housing Affordability Index or the Anholt City Brand Index) is to treat them as progress indicators, when changes in Melbourne's rank or score from year to year are less relevant than its position relative to other cities globally in any given year. This is the case because, "benchmarking and indicators are two separate concepts" (Holloway and Wajzer, pg 4). Monitoring progress indicators involves comparison of an indicator itself over time, to measure progress while benchmarking is the systematic comparison of an indicator or entity against another (for the purposes of this report, another 'city') to learn what works well and what doesn't. Since they don't perform this function of a benchmarking exercise, such studies as the indexes and ranks discussed in this paper are not real benchmarking. One solution is to compare actual indexed scores and other survey results over time. A positive case in point is Demographia's Housing Affordability Index which advises readers (Cox and Pavletich, 2010) to compare cities' broad affordability categories, rather than overstate the relativities of actual index scores or ranks from year to year. 3.2.3. How the aims behind city comparisons affect rigour International city comparisons are often treated by the media and some analysts as though they rate the quality of life for day-to-day residents of a city (Holloway and Wajzer, 2008 and Stokie 1999), when they don't. There are many definitions of 'liveability' and methodologies for measuring it in city benchmarking rankings and indexes. Unfortunately, they don't cover the range of issues needed to provide a comprehensive picture of quality of life from the perspective of the resident community. Analysts would be advised not to use those city benchmarking studies to monitor or infer actual city performance or rely upon them when preparing a plan. Melbourne City Research 13 International City Comparisons Aims and audience influence the indicators included in assessments of liveability (or whatever is being scored). For example, the intent of Mercer's quality of living and cost of living surveys is to judge how liveable cities would be for a worker from overseas, help firms decide where to send workers and how much hardship allowance to pay them (Mercer, on-line, 29/09/08). The EIU's liveability ranking similarly aims to quantify challenges that might be presented to an individual's lifestyle in other cities worldwide, and suggest indexes for providing that persons a premium on their salary (EIU.com, on- line, 12/02/10). Mercer and EIU don't rate a city's liveability for average citizens, rather, for expatriate executives (as New Geography on-line [05/03/10] magazine puts it, "for people with a lot of money and a big expense account") so data about currency exchange rates are pertinent, whereas in a locally derived indicator for measuring liveability for residents it's unlikely to be considered. Mercer and EIU conduct research to understand how workers and employees, across the world, define liveability and have constructed a common framework to gather data from cities, globally. Mercer's quality of living index is based on a survey of a small number of expatriate workers in each city, while the EIU's liveability index awards ratings for indicators based on the judgment of a small number of expert country analysts employed by the EIU (in- house analysis) and a field correspondent based in each city and the relative performance of a city or country using metrics sourced externally. Similarly, Monocle magazine uses data and information collected by in-house experts and correspondents to derive its liveable cities index. A limitation with the narrow aims, samples and methodologies, described above, is illustrated in the EIU's Global Liveability Report. The EIU report draws conclusions about costs and quality of rental accommodation, using data gathered from a select group of suburbs (Caulfield, South Yarra, Hawthorn, Toorak, Albert Park, East Melbourne, Port & South Melbourne) in Melbourne's inner east and south (EIU, on-line, 26/06/10). Expatriate workers are unlikely to rent in Melbourne's suburban fringe, so conclusions about housing quality and affordability for ordinary Melburnians, based on this sample, is irrelevant. Monocle magazine and website pitches its most liveable cities index to individuals on a personal level, rather than to international companies. The magazine, however, provides a globalist perspective on international affairs, business, travel, culture, fashion and design to wealthy, mobile, cosmopolitan readers, so the target audience is still selective. In contrast to these examples, the 'Peoples Verdict' survey, conducted by Auspoll on behalf of the Property Council of Australia, surveyed 4,000 Australian residents about their own cities and asked what felt was important to liveability. The survey covered seventeen aspects of liveability. Considering the Anholt/GfKRoper City Brand Index, it is important to remember the purpose of its survey is to record people's perceptions of the brand image and reputations 14 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons cities, whether they are realistic or not (Anholt. S on-line, 17/03/10). The underlying premise of the City Brand Index is that there are already many surveys and publications in existence which evaluate the reality of visiting or living in places (already noted in the introduction), but that what is missing is what people believe about those places – even if they haven't directly experienced them. The way city comparisons introduce this kind of subjectivity is a recurring theme of this paper. 3.2.4. Subjectivity of method, analysis and conclusions City indexes (Stokie. T, 1999) are subjective in their selection of indicators, methodology, analysis and conclusions. Some examples follow. In one example, 2Thinknow previously sent a request to the administrations of major cities around the world to participate in its annual innovation cities study. In effect it invited city administrations to score their own cities (introducing a potential source of bias). Where there wasn't a reliable source for participants 'estimate' or they didn't participate (or they provided clearly biased information), the company did the work in-house using its own estimates, opinions and data from a variety of publicly available sources and this could be argued to introduce subjectivity into the index (2Thinknow, on-line, 08/09/10). Latest advice from the company itself is that 2Thinknow has changed to using external personnel as analysts, rather than city administrations. The Anholt City Brands Index (already described) presents another example of the application of a mix of objective data and surveys of respondents, which can introduce a degree of subjectivity to the ranking process, thus opening it to the variation of attitudes based on fashion and exposure/awareness. The author himself suggests outcomes of the surveys should be read as indicative only (Anholt. S, on-line, 17/03/10) Similarly, Conde Nast travel magazine's readers' travel awards, which are based on the views of its readership, are hence a product of fashion (City of Melbourne, 2009). Monocle magazine's liveability ranking seems to be the product of the staff's value judgments about what is liveable. Likewise, Mastercard Worldwide's indexes for centres of commerce and for urbanization and environmental challenges appear to be products of professional and corporate value judgments about what is important in the context of commerce or urbanization and environmental challenges. This becomes important when we consider the subjectivity applied in weighting indexes used to rank cities. Demographia's rankings are based on the premise that urban planning places unnatural restrictions on the supply of land for development, thus putting pressure on housing affordability. Demographia's philosophy equates to a perspective that planning for growth in many guises constitutes an artificial restriction on the supply of residential land which Melbourne City Research 15 International City Comparisons drives down housing affordability. This philosophy should be borne uppermost in mind when analysing Demographia's housing affordability benchmarks (City of Melbourne plays an advocacy role for sustainable residential development and as a local authority has planning regulation responsibilities.). It has potential to introduce a value judgment that 'colours' Demographia's interpretation of the survey outcome and dismisses other possible causes of unaffordable housing. City of Melbourne should not rely upon Demographia's conclusions alone (City of Melbourne, 2009). There is a potentially positive side to subjectivity in methodologies (although this doesn't refute discussion above). City indexes usually don't include the intangible aspects of what makes a city great, but Monocle magazine's liveability index is an example that tries to balance subjective input, such as ambience, against simple externally derived metrics. 3.2.5. City comparison studies hide findings within complexity "Benchmarking studies hide findings within complexity" (Holloway and Wajzer, 2008 and Stokie, 1999). While it is superficially attractive to present a ranking or a single indexed figure, the reality is that it is difficult to 'unpick' most city benchmarking results and to understand relationships between ranks, scores, data, subjective judgments and the realities the rankings purport to describe. 2Thinknow uses a scoring scheme involving more than 160 indicators across many domains (2Thinknow, on-line, 08/09/10). Mastercard Worldwide's indexes for centres of commerce and for urbanization and environmental challenges are also detailed indexes covering up to ten domains, with sub indicators and indexed scores for each domain, plus an overall city score (discussed below). Mercer's quality of living index is based on 10 domains covering 39 indicators (Mercer, on- line, 2009), including air pollution and currency-exchange rules which EIU does not cover, while EIU's global liveability report uses five domains, including 30 indicators and, for example, treats housing more comprehensively. Mercer's worldwide cost of living survey however, includes fewer (nine) cost and price indexes than EIU's which has 13 sub categories. The EIU's Worldwide cost of living survey includes utility costs and Mercer's cost of living survey doesn't (EIU Worldwide Cost of Living, on-line, 26/06/10). 3.2.6. Weighting Many indexes use weightings that are unclear and subjective and this further demonstrates the complexity hidden within. The EIU's Worldwide Cost of Living index, on- line (accessed 26/06/10), demonstrates how different methods of calculation can return different indexes, even using the same prices data. Using the same price data for two cities, but treating their data differently, for example treating one city as the 'base' city or weighting prices for different goods inconsistently between cities, will return a different 16 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons score. Scores can be combined and weighted to give more importance to categories deemed significant by the in-house expert staff. Mastercard Worldwide's indexes for centres of commerce and for urbanization and environmental challenges present a further example of how the application of weightings can present a flaw in a city benchmarking index (it is interesting to note Mastercard's Worldwide Centres of Commerce Index actually includes a dimension for 'liveability', in which Melbourne received its best score in 2008). The Index of Urbanization and Environmental Challenges (Mastercard, 2008) applied a weight to enhance the importance of subjective assessments of everyday environmental health issues under government control (water potability and availability, sewage system, waste removal, air quality, and infectious diseases). Mastercard explains its reasons for doing so but this introduces a skew in favour of measures relating to the daily city environment that are under government control and, arguably, does play down impacts of climate change on cities. The weights applied to indicators under government control helped Melbourne top this particular ranking. The Australian Bureau of Statistics advises indicators to, "be able to be disaggregated and easily interpreted" (ACT Government, 2008). 3.2.7. Volatility of currency International cost of living, tax or business cost competitiveness rankings (conducted by KPMG, for example) can be subject to volatility of currency exchange rates. There are a number of explanations for the volatility of prices and hence, indexes. While they are not all relevant to Melbourne, the most common sources of price volatility generally are: Inflation (or even deflation) within a city or even between some products between surveys; Currency exchange rates and imports can change prices, particularly if they're imported; Local shortages: drought, flood, failed harvests, local disasters, panic buying and civil unrest-all affect local availability and prices; Legislative changes; Increasing competition or new products introduced in a growing market; Seasonal fluctuations; Package size can affect unit cost; Deregulation and liberalisation; and Taxation (EIU Worldwide cost of Living, on-line, 26/06/10). Melbourne City Research 17 International City Comparisons External factors outside a municipality's, or even a national government's control, can change cost of living indexes and rankings and it is important to understand that these also have a bearing on other cost of living indexes and rankings. 3.2.8. City ranking is not within City of Melbourne's control In a city rank or list, changes in Melbourne's rank from year to year is relative and effectively beyond the influence of the city administration to change through its activities. To illustrate, any out of the cities in a ranking system could do anything to try to improve their city's position in the rank for next year (or do nothing at all) and with the number of cities and other variables involved it may not make any difference. 3.2.9. Integrity and compatibility of data among cities Benchmarking exercises between many cities internationally can be limited by the availability and comparability of data and this often results in selecting indicators simply because they're available rather than being meaningful (Holloway and Wajzer, 2008). A prime example is the Brookings Institute's Global Metro Monitor (2010), an otherwise clear and reliable method, which relied upon forecasted data from different providers, each using a different model, and advised some caution when interpreting results. Furthermore, work was limited to the data collection and statistical methods utilised by each country's statistical agencies. Therefore, indicators may be calculated slightly differently between countries. New Geography magazine critiqued Mercers' liveability and cost of living rankings for inconsistent and selective comparison of different geographic areas within the New York metropolitan area. Mercers' liveability rankings were based on the New York City municipality while the cost of living study ranks White Plains, New York (population: 57,000) separately in the New York metropolitan area, but has no ranking for the many larger cities in the metropolitan area, except for New York itself (New Geography, on-line, 2010, 18/11/10). The Melbourne Urbanist (on-line, 04/06/10) points out that city liveability indexes are also of limited value in making intra-country comparisons (for example between Sydney and Melbourne). They include variables that reflect national characteristics rather than city- specific characteristics, so their ability to discriminate between places in the same country isn't high. A clear demonstration is EIU's global liveability survey which measures the dimension of stability, for example, using EIU's assessment of the threat of military conflict and civil war. For obvious reasons, there are negligible differences between Melbourne and Sydney in regard to the threat of armed conflict and civil war. 18 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons 3.3. Public policy limitations of city rankings and indexes, specifically Authors, such as Holloway and Wajzer, 2008 and Stokie, 1999 opine that city indexes, ranks and lists have limited value to inform public policy. This is because most of these city comparisons aren't made to inform public policy and also don't take account of the perceptions of local residents. EIU and Mercer liveability studies can highlight an indicator or domain where a city such as Melbourne has not scored as highly as other domains or as highly as it has in the past but don't provide a lot of detailed explanation or policy prescription beyond very broad suggestions to provide the basics of liveability, for example. In the case of Monocle magazine's liveability index, the writers do go a step further and suggest a "Monocle Fix" for one identified shortcoming per city, per year (the index is annually updated). In 2008, for example, an airport rail link between Melbourne and the Tullamarine Airport was suggested as a 'fix' for Melbourne. In 2009 the suggested 'fix' was tackling youth violence in the city (Monocle, 2009) and in 2010 it was 'ramping up' public housing construction (Monocle, 2010). Many of these ideas get a public airing anyway and other than suggesting what to do, broadly, not much more detail was offered by Monocle so the suggestions don't necessarily add anything from a policy perspective (although they do add to the weight of commentary, however, about a city's perceived shortcomings and this is discussed below). Comparisons by Demographia have limited value for policy development. Demographia's interpretation of its own findings should not be relied upon by Council, for the reasons discussed earlier. Additionally, Demographia's policy recommendations to remove land regulation are unrealistic and beyond City of Melbourne's control (City of Melbourne, 2009). Finally, city indexes, lists and ranks are not designed as progress indicators for use in city monitoring projects. There are good reasons, explained throughout section 3.2, why experts don't consider them appropriate for use as indicators. In the Grattan Institute's The Cities We Need (2010) report, the authors argued that a city's most important characteristic is whether it meets all residents' needs. For example, it would be more constructive if governments set out to understand what liveability means to local people, then plan, deliver and measure it. This implies a process similar to Future Melbourne Community Plan (described below). The idea has some support, since it has been observed in a review of city planning by the Federal Government's Major cities Unit that "we should not get hung up on benchmarking cities against each other, if the goal is liveability it is not about competing with other cities. Data should be used to analyse what is going on and improve the place rather than competing' (Elton Consulting, 2009). In the executive summary of its report entitled, Liveable cities: Challenges and opportunities for Melbourne City Research 19 International City Comparisons policymakers, the EIU argued that governments and citizens benefit when they collaborate in planning and service delivery, to the ultimate benefit of the 'city' (on-line, 09/02/11). 3.4. How City of Melbourne can use international city comparison studies Liveability rankings are popular with the media and City of Melbourne uses them to enhance and promote Melbourne's image and reputation, for example providing some cost of living and liveability information as part of the promotion articulating why overseas companies may want to establish staff in Melbourne. The City of Melbourne's Enterprise Melbourne website uses some benchmark surveys, rankings and lists backed by other indicators, data (for example economic information about the municipality (www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/AboutMelbourne/Statistics/Pages/EconomicProfile.aspx) and marketing, to promote Melbourne as a location for business and investment. There are some good reputation management reasons why City of Melbourne notes the outcomes of liveability studies as they are released. They often seem to enhance Melbourne's reputation and frequently concur with 'Melbourne's' claim to liveability or world/global city status. They can highlight the extent of reputational harm done by failing to constructively address some existing and often already publicly known problems in a city. City of Melbourne's Research and Media, Marketing and Communication staff collaborate to prepare for media enquiries following the public release of international city benchmarking results, maintaining a shared understanding of their implications and an agreed approach for responding to these media enquiries. When potentially useful information or conclusions (apart from lists, rankings or indexed scores) are provided by city comparison surveys, appropriate staff can be made aware of its existence, if they're not already. 3.5. Existing alternatives for measuring city performance 3.5.1. Future Melbourne Community Plan monitoring An alternative approach to measuring 'Melbourne' could be to concentrate on measuring progress, which could be achieved by continuing to develop local community indicators monitoring the Future Melbourne Community Plan (www.futuremelbourne.com.au). The plan's development was sponsored by the City of Melbourne and developed collaboratively through a wide ranging and ongoing open public engagement with the community. Melbourne City Council invited 12 prominent Melburnians to be the Future Melbourne Reference Group. This group of thinkers and leaders championed and guided the development of Future Melbourne. 20 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons Public participation occurred, between May 2007 and June 2008, via public forums, face- to-face meetings, round table discussions, an online discussion forum, community surveys, public road shows, community art-making, an exhibition, a state-wide newspaper campaign and information hubs around the municipality. In May 2008 the draft Future Melbourne plan was made available as an online wiki with an open invitation to the 'Melbourne' community and the world to contribute directly. The Future Melbourne plan is the product of this engagement. Future Melbourne is, therefore, a community plan and its goals outline what 'Melbourne's' community wants to achieve and how. Local governments are increasingly developing community plans alongside their council plans. Community plans are aspirational, long term, involving community consultation and dealing with matters often outside local governments' domain and direct control. Community plans have key features in common including: Engaging citizens in creating a vision for the future, setting priorities and contributing to decision-making Valuing and utilising local networks Focussing on people and place that requires a more flexible and joined-up approach to policy and service delivery Connecting top-down and bottom-up policy processes that influence resource allocation (www.futuremelbourne.com.au). Future Melbourne is a plan to grow 'Melbourne' as a global, liveable and sustainable city in the world. The measures of success will be the published goals under the following themes: A city for people A creative city A prosperous city A city of knowledge An eco-city A connected city. For measuring goals under these themes, fifty to sixty indicators have been identified and will be reported to provide a progressive measure of 'city' outcomes. In situations where monitoring requires new data collection, a program of research is being designed to meet needs. Melbourne City Research 21 International City Comparisons The City of Melbourne has accepted responsibility for monitoring the Future Melbourne indicators over the ten years from 2008. 3.5.2. An Australian National Development Index Another option is participating in the creation of an Australian National Development Index (ANDI). Amongst other things, the Australia 2020 Summit in April 2008, recommended creating a National Development Index to measure Australia's economic, social and environmental progress. It would include social inclusion indicators and be reported annually in Federal Budget papers. The Australian Government has endorsed the idea, and the need to 'engage the community in discussion about what is important to Australia's progress and development'. Participation in this project could present a real opportunity to help shape the approach to be taken. Latest thinking from the project may require choices to be made between differing approaches (The Allen Consulting Group, 2010); one (called top-down) which offers potential to benchmark internationally with one index number and a dashboard of composite indicators and another (bottom-up) which offers a locally and perhaps more consultatively developed composite indicators of wellbeing that can be benchmarked locally. While the consultants preparing that analysis argue that the two options should be considered as a continuum, there are important differences between their approaches and outcomes. The former may experience issues (raised in section 3) relating to incomparability and inconsistent data quality between international cities, or having a limited range of cities to compare performance against. It appears likely it would be accessible in the sense that the index could be easily unpicked by users and the methodology is likely to be quite sound. The latter approach, while not promising a measure or comparison of national progress, seems to focus on developing better tools for local government to measure and benchmark local wellbeing as well as models and processes for engaging Council's local communities about the aspects of wellbeing that are most important to their citizens. 3.5.3. International benchmarking with the World Bank In 2010, City of Melbourne joined the World Bank Global City Indicators Facility (managed by Toronto University). It is a database of city indicators, established on-line (www.cityindicators.org) with a globally standardised methodology for comparability of city performance and knowledge sharing. The website serves more than 200 cities that have become members to measure and report on a core set of indicators. Indicators include 22 measures of city service provision and quality of life. It could allow 'Melbourne' to be benchmarked against other world cities and is a potentially useful development. It attempts to provide a globally standardised performance benchmarking system for city governments that purports to include not just performance metrics but also opportunities 22 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons for exchanging knowledge about best practices, she says, cities can improve their quality of life and attractiveness to international investors The main drawback of this framework appears to that it relies upon officials in city governments to contribute data in a similar way to that which was formerly used by 2Thinknow in its Innovation rankings. 3.5.4. Using Community Indicators Victoria to monitor progress Established in 2007, Community Indicators Victoria (www.communityindicators.net.au) provides a comprehensive community indicator suite (more than 70 indicators across several domains of wellbeing) for every municipality in Victoria and has developed some trends over the past few years. It is used by the City of Melbourne in an ad hoc way at present but when it is used provides excellent insights about community wellbeing and sustainability in the municipality. This facility could also be used to measure social wellbeing progress and benchmark selected issues against other Victorian areas. Community Indicators Victoria is a collaborative project, funded by VicHealth and hosted by the McCaughey Centre, School of Population Health, at the University of Melbourne. The McCaughey Centre works in partnership with a wide range of government, community, and academic organisations to ensure its indicators Victoria remain relevant to its users. Melbourne City Research 23 International City Comparisons 4. Conclusion There are a number of recurring themes that this paper has sought to illustrate. International city comparisons, ranks, lists and indexes should be kept in perspective. Most acknowledge Melbourne is amongst the most liveable and economically dynamic cities in the world and City of Melbourne should be justifiably proud that Melbourne continues to be ranked so. City of Melbourne can use them to alert it to public relations issues (positive and negative) and enhance and promote its reputation accordingly. Free publicity is probably the most effective use for city comparison studies. City of Melbourne still maintains a 'watching brief' on any city comparisons it encounters or its staff hear of and it should continue to do so. This activity, however, should be one among a suite of activities that City of Melbourne uses to help monitor and manage its reputation. Some international city comparisons yield useful information and use what appear to be comprehensive analyses or apply well regarded methodologies. The IBM Commuter Pain Index made some interesting findings about the costs of traffic congestion, for example. Demographia's method of assessing housing affordability is used by the United Nations and World Bank for assessing home ownership affordability and the trends it identifies are real. The EIU or Mercer Cost of Living and Quality of Life indexes are also appropriate, quality tools when used for their intended purposes – calculating compensation for relocated employees. While popular with the media, however, most city lists rankings and indexes have methodological or other issues, making their results unsuitable for monitoring community wellbeing or city progress over time and rendering them unsuitable for developing city policy. International city indexes and rankings are not necessarily comprehensive definitions of liveability, sustainability or anything else and they don't recognise how these things are defined by average citizens. City comparison studies don't necessarily aim for citizen inclusion and this influences indicator choice, treatment, ranking and therefore their indexes and ranked results. Governments have realised that it's important to agree meaningful indicators of wellbeing, progress or performance, with their local communities and linked these to a plan for how a city's performance should be improved. The final theme is that there are better options available for benchmarking and city monitoring and the City of Melbourne is using several of these to good effect. City of Melbourne's alternatives for benchmarking performance and measuring progress include: Monitoring Future Melbourne Community Plan Participating in the World Bank Global City Indicator Facility Analysing data provided by Community Indicators Victoria and Participating in the development of an Australian National Development Index.. 24 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons 5. Appendices Appendix 1. International city comparisons that include or mention liveability 1. 2thinknow's Global Innovation Review; 2. Anholt/Gfk Roper's City Brands Index; 3. Australian Conservation Foundation's Sustainable Australian Cities; and 4. Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey; 5. ECA International 15 Best Locations in the World for Asian to Live 6. Economist Intelligence Unit's Cost of Living indexes; 7. Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize 8. Mastercard Worldwide's Worldwide Centres of Commerce Rankings (no longer published); 9. Mastercard Worldwide's Worldwide Environmental Rankings (no longer published); 10. Mercer's Quality of Living rankings; 11. Monocle magazine's 12. RMIT's Global University City Index (under review and no longer published); 13. Sportbusiness, Ultimate Sports City Award. Melbourne City Research 25 International City Comparisons Appendix 2. Recent international city accolades and rankings for Melbourne Study Year Accolade or ranking 2thinknow - Global Innovation Review 2009 20th most ionnovative city out of 256 internationally Anholt - City Brands Index 2009 15th best city brand out of 40 internationally Askmen Best Cities to Live in for Men 2010 2nd of 29 cities internationally Australian Conservation Foundation Sustainable Australian Cities 2010 7th out of 20 Australian cities Brookings Institute's Global Metro Monitor 2010 14th most dynamic city economy out of 150, post 'recession' Conde Nast Traveller - Readers' Travelers Awards 2006 12th best city to visit out of 20 cities internationally Demographia - International Housing Affordability 2009 4th most unaffordable housing market out of 325 city markets ECA International 15 Best Locations in the World for Asians to Live 2010 8th of 15 locations Economist Intelligence Unit - Business Trip Index 2006 9th best city for business travellers out of 127 cities internationally Economist Intelligence Unit - Quality of Life Ranking 2011 2rd most liveable of 140 cities internationally Economist Intelligence Unit - Worldwide Cost of Living Survey 2009 39th most expensive of 149 cities internationally Ethisphere Institute - 2020 Global Sustainability Centres 2008 6th out of 10 cities internationally Euromonitor - Top Destination Cities 2007 95th of 150 cities internationally IBM Commuter Pain Index - Cities With the Least Painful Commute 2009 2nd best commute of the of the 100 cities surveyed internationally KPMG's Competitive Alternatives - Business Costs 2010 1st for cost competitiveness in the Asia-Pacific, 11th of 41 large cities internationally. KPMG's Competitive Alternatives - Tax Competitiveness 2010 9th most competitive for tax costs, of 41 large cities and 1st in Asia. Lee Kuan Yew World City Prize 2010 Honourable mention for Melbourne municipality MasterCard Worldwide Centres of Commerce 2008 41st out of 50 cities internationally MasterCard Worldwide Urbanization & Environmental Challenges 2007 1st meeting environmental challenges out of 21 cities internationally Mercer - Eco Ranking 2010 25th most sustainable out of 50 cities internationally Mercer - Worldwide Cost of Living Survey 2010 33rd most expensive out of 221 cities internationally Mercer - Worldwide Quality of Living Survey 2010 18th most liveable out of 221 cities internationally Monocle - Quality of Life Survey 2010 9th most liveable out of 30 cities internationally Most Admired Knowledge City (MAKCi) 2010 First prize winner OECD Entrepreneurial City 2008 3rd highest proportion of entrepreneurs in 27 cities in OECD countries RMIT - Global University City Index 2008 4th best education centre of 30 cities internationally, for students Sportsbusiness Ultimate Sports City Prize 2010 Ultimate Sports City (1st of 25 cities internationally) City of Literature by UNESCO 2007 First City of Literature Property Council's My City: The People's Verdict 2010 Third most Liveabile city after Adelaide and Canberra The New York Times 41 Places to Go in 2011 2011 15th out of 41 locations world wide - "a foodie hotspot". Virgin Car Insurance - Australia's Car Friendly Cities 2010 7th most car friendly city out of 8 Australian capital cities International City Comparisons 6. References 2Thinknow [on-line], Global Innovation Review Annual, 2010, (accessed 08/09/10), www.innovation-cities.com/top-100-city-rankings-for-the-innovation-economy/; ACT Community Inclusion Board, 2008, Community Well-being Indicators, ACT Government; Anholt, S [on-line], Simon Anholt's Placeblog, (accessed 09/12/10), www.simonanholt.blogspot.com/; Anholt, S (2006) Anholt City Brands Index, How the World Views its Cities, 2nd Edition, December 2006; Anholt, S (2007) The Anholt City Brands Index, Results For Melbourne 2006 Report; Askmen.com [on-line] Top 29 Cities to Live In (accessed 26/11/10), www.askmen.com ; Berube, et al, (2010), Global Metro Monitor: The Path to Economic Recovery, Brookings Institution, Washington City Mayors [on-line] The world's 'greenest' cities, (accessed 23/11/10), www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey.html; City of Melbourne (2009) Melbourne Benchmarking and Liveability, City of Melbourne; City of Melbourne (2008), [on-line], FM Plan - Future Melbourne Wiki, (accessed 23/11/10), www.futuremelbourne.com.au; City of Melbourne [on-line], Melbourne recognised in World City Prize, (accessed 23/11/10), http://www.melbourne.vic.gov.au/AboutCouncil/MediaReleases/Pages/Melbournereco gnisedinWorldCityPrize.aspx; Conde Nast Traveller Magazine, [on-line] Overseas Cities, 2001-2007, (accessed 28/10/08), www.condenast.com/; Council of Capital City Lord Mayors (2007), Australian Capital Cities Partners in Prosperity Executive Summary Report, 2007, Canberra; Cox and Pavletich (2010) 6th Annual Demographia International Housing Affordability Survey 2010, Demographia, www.demographia.com/; Elton Consulting (2009) Proceedings of the Major Cities Unit Research Roundtable, Sydney; Economist Intelligence Unit, [on-line], Economist Intelligence Unit Global Liveability Rankings, 2002-2010, (accessed 12/02/10), http://eiuhelp.enumerate.com/; Economist Intelligence Unit, [on-line], Liveable cities: Challenges and opportunities for policymakers - Executive summary, September 2010, (accessed 09/02/11), http://www.businessresearch.eiu.com/; Economist Intelligence Unit, [on-line], Worldwide Cost of Living Surveys, 2005-2010, (accessed 26/06/10), http://eiuhelp.enumerate.com/; Euromonitor, 2010, [on-line], 2008 Top City Destinations Rankings, Euromonitor International, (accessed 16/12/10), http://www.euromonitor.com; Euromonitor, 2008, [on-line], 2007 Top City Destinations Rankings, Euromonitor International, (accessed 18/02/09), http://www.euromonitor.com; Euromonitor, 2007, [on-line], 2006 Top 150 City Destinations Rankings, Euromonitor International, (accessed 18/02/09), http://www.euromonitor.com; Frances-Kelly, J (2010) The Cities We Need, Grattan Institute; GfKAmerica [on-line] Paris Tops Ranking in Global City Image Study; GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media and Simon Anholt Release 2009 City Brands Index, (accessed Melbourne City Research 27 International City Comparisons 26/11/10), www.gfkamerica.com/newsroom/press_releases/single_sites/004195/index.en.html; Herald-Sun [on-line] We Sustain Top Ten Spot (accessed 22/09/08) www.heraldsun.com.au/; Holloway. A & Wajzer. C, (2008) Improving City Performance through Benchmarking, presentation to International Cities Town Centres & Communities Society Conference October, 2008, SGS Economics and Planning/Australia; KPMG, (2010) Competitive Alternatives – KPMG's Guide to International Business Locations, 2010 Edition; KPMG, (2010) Competitive Alternatives – Special Report: Focus on Tax, 2010 Edition; IBM (June 30, 2010) Globalization of Traffic Congestion: IBM 2010 Commuter Pain Survey, IBM; Invest Victoria [on-line], Competitive & Dynamic Business Environment, (accessed 21/12/10), www.invest.vic.gov.au/: Marieke Hardy (25/03/11), The trouble with cool, The Age Magazine; MasterCard Worldwide, [on-line], Insights - Urbanization and Environmental Challenges in Asia/ Pacific, Middle East and Africa – Ranking of Worldwide Centres of Commerce, 1Q 2008, (accessed 09/12/08), www.mastercard.com/au/general/en/aboutus/press/080303.html; MasterCard Worldwide, [on-line], Worldwide Centres of Commerce Index 2008, (accessed 28/10/08), www.mastercard.com/us/company/en/insights/pdfs/2008/MCWW_WCoC- Report_2008.pdf; Mercer Human Resource Consulting, [on-line], Australian Quality of Living Global City Rankings 2009 – Mercer Survey 2009, (accessed 28/04/09), www.mercer.com.au/; Mercer Human Resource Consulting, [on-line], Worldwide Cost of Living survey 2008 – City ranking (accessed 24/07/08), www.mercer.com/costoflivingpr; Mercer Human Resource Consulting, [on-line], Worldwide Cost of Living survey 2010 - City rankings, (accessed 29/09/10), www.mercer.com/costoflivingpr#City_rankings; Mercer Human Resource Consulting, [on-line], Australian Mercer's 2008 Cost of Living survey highlights, (accessed 24/07/08), www.mercer.com/costofliving; Mercer Human Resource Consulting, [on-line], Worldwide Cost of Living Survey, 2001-07, www.imercer.com/default.aspx?page=home&contentId=2529&newRegionId=2; MICEBTN News, (09/07/08), [on-line] Melbourne Tops With Business Travelers, (accessed 26/10/10), http://wotnews.com.au/news/business_travel__and__Melbourne/; Monocle Magazine, "The world's top 25 most liveable cities - 2010", Monocle, Issue 35, Volume 4, Jul/Aug 2008, pg 22; Monocle Magazine, "The world's top 25 most liveable cities - 2009", Monocle, Issue 25, Volume 3, Jul/Aug 2008; Monocle Magazine, "The world's top 25 most liveable cities - 2008", Monocle, Issue 15, Volume 2, Jul/Aug 2008, pg 18-28; Monocle Magazine, "The world's top 25 most liveable cities - 2007", Monocle, Issue 5, Volume 1, Jul/Aug 2007; New Geography [on-line] Rating the Unaffordable: The Economist and Mercer (accessed 05/03/2010), http://www.newgeography.com/content/001548-rating-unaffordable-the- economist-and-mercer; 28 Melbourne City Research International City Comparisons New Geography [on-Line] Rating World Metropolitan Areas: When Money is an Object (accessed 18/11/2010), http://www.newgeography.com/content/00934-rating-world- metropolitan-areas-when-money-object; Only Melbourne [on-line] Melbourne Australia's most Romantic City, accessed 26/10/10, http://www.onlymelbourne.com.au/melbourne_details.php?id=16051; PerthNow, (12/03/10), [on-line] Perth the Best Place to Drive in Australia, (accessed 06/10/10), http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/perth-the-best-place- to-drive-in-australia/story-e6frg13u-1225839848070 ; RMIT University, [on-line], Global University City Index Presentation, 2008, (accessed 09/12/08), http://mams.rmit.edu.au/ddglvp4xqmgy.pdf; RMIT University, [on-line], Launch of Committee for Melbourne Higher Education Taskforce White Paper and Global University Cities Index, Aug 2007, (accessed 09/12/08), www.rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=lc8c7ugp2fby; Stolper, D (2011) My City: The People's Verdict, The Property Council of Australia; Smartcompany, (13/08/08), [on-line] Melbourne World's Third-most Entrepreneurial City, Sydney 6th, (accessed 18/09/10), http://www.smartcompany.com.au/information- technology/melbourne-world-s-third-most-entrepreneurial-city-sydney-6th.html; SportBusiness International, (29/04/10), [on-line], Melbourne retains the SportBusiness 'Ultimate Sports City' award, (accessed 29/04/10), www.sportbusiness.com/news; Stokie, T (1999) Benchmarking Melbourne: Indicators of Liveability and Competitiveness, in Yuan, L., Yuen B., and Low, C. (1999) Urban Quality of Life: Critical Issues and Options, National University of Singapore Press, Singapore; The Age. (5/10/10), [on-line] Aussies love pointless studies (accessed 5/10/10), http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/computers/blogs/gadgets-on-the-go/aussies-love- pointless-studies/20101005-1650i.html; The Age, (10/12/10), [on-line] O-Pelessly Devoted Melbourne Fans Greet Winfrey, (accessed 16/12/10), http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/opelessly- devoted-melbourne-fans-greet-winfrey-20101210-18san.html; The Allen Consulting Group (2010) Developing an Australian National Development Index. Options Paper to the Australian Conservation Foundation; The Atlantic Monthly, (01/12/10), [on-line], The Most Dynamic Cities in the World, (accessed 3/12/10), http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/12/30-most- dynamic-cities-in-the-world/67234/; The Australian, (06/10/10), [on-line] City Traffic Congestion a $20bn Problem, (accessed 06/10/10), http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/city-traffic- congestion-a-20bn-problem/story-e6frg97o-1225934584732; The Melbourne Urbanist [on-line], Sydney or Melbourne – which is more liveable (04/06/10), http://melbourneurbanist.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/what-is-liveability- part-2/ Trigg, et al (2010) Sustainable Cities Index - Ranking Australia's 20 largest cities in 2010, Australian Conservation Foundation; Woolcock, G (2010) Measuring up? Assessing the liveability of Australian Cities, Griffith University; World Capital Institute (2010) Most Admired Capital City 2009, World Capital Institute. CoM Ref. Docs: #6163032-v5 Date prepared: 27/4/2011 4:57 PM Date printed: 27/4/2011 Melbourne City Research 29
Pages to are hidden for
"International City Comparisons"Please download to view full document


text:
What Are The 1st Symptoms Of Hivaids
Here's a taste of what TheBody.com has to offer on this topic:
Get the Facts
How to Spot HIV/AIDS FraudWhat Is HIV/AIDS Fraud? Warning Signs of an HIV Fraud Common Sense About Unproven Treatments Questions You Should Ask Take Your Time; Check It Out The Bottom Line What Is HIV/AIDS Fraud? HIV fraud is the promotion, advertisement, or sale of products that are supposed to diagnose, treat, or cure HIV when those products have not been proven to be safe and effective for those purposes. Regular medicine does not have a cure...
Ask the Experts
HIV/AIDS (HIV TRANSMISSION BETWEEN TWO HIV NEGATIVES, 2010)Can two HIV negative men develop HIV/AIDS from having unprotected sex with each other?
Response from Robert J. Frascino, M.D.
The Robert James Frascino AIDS FoundationHello,See below.Dr. BobHow to contract HIV (HIV TRANSMISSION BETWEEN TWO HIV NEGATIVES, 2009) (Obama Budget Would Kill Abstinence-Only Funding) May 15, 2009If a HIV - woman and a HIV - man have sexual intercourse while the woman is on her menstrual... Read more »
A Barrister in Boston (I've read through archives and I don't think my question has been answered yet!)Dr. Bob,Heres my story: I had sex with a guy for the first time and I ended up inserting and of course I wrapped it. The only thing that I am worried about is that I performed oral on him for 30 seconds with no ejaculation or anything (possible...
Response from Robert J. Frascino, M.D.
The Robert James Frascino AIDS FoundationHey Barrister in Boston,I absolutely agree with your assessment: Oral sex is low risk (very low), ARS symptoms within 48 hours would be extremely unlikely (they take weeks, not days, to appear), PN would be uncommon during ARS, PN without any other... Read more »
Weird SymptomsHe Doc,Its me J from San Fran again. I attached my original question below, not to bore you but I know you get allot of questions so just as a little background. HIV Pos and my last tests indicate that my Cd4 count is 380 and my VL is 22,000. My...
Response from Robert J. Frascino, M.D.
The Robert James Frascino AIDS FoundationHello J,Unfortunately, without having access to your medical file and all laboratory tests and the benefit of a physical exam, I cannot advise you, with any degree of certainty, what is causing your various symptoms. What I can do is advise you that... Read more »
Please HELP!!Doctor Frascino,Thanks for the fantastic work you and your organization are doing in regards to HIV/AIDS, and I am inclined to make a donation. I am in a dilemma and scared to death. I have what I believe to be HIV related symptoms, however, I...
Response from Robert J. Frascino, M.D.
The Robert James Frascino AIDS FoundationHello,Your HIV-transmission risk unprotected oral sex while having a canker sore with a partner of unknown HIV status is extremely low to negligible. Symptoms beginning three days after the encounter would not be HIV related. Acute Retroviral... Read more »
Lactic Acidosis and HIV/AIDSTable of Contents Understanding Lactic Acidosis What Causes Lactic Acidosis? Symptoms of Lactic Acidosis Treatment Risk Factors Taking Care of Yourself Understanding Lactic Acidosis Mitochondria are small organs in... Read more »
Caring for Your Gut: Dealing With Diarrhea, Nausea and Other Stomach Problems if You Have HIV/AIDSTable of Contents Gut Basics The Gut and HIV Diarrhea and HIV Coping With Diarrhea Nausea, Vomiting and Anorexia Gas, Bloating and Heartburn Taking Care of Yourself Gut Basics The gut includes the stomach, small... Read more »
Women, Depression and HIV/AIDSTable of Contents Depression Is More Common in Women How Do I Know if I'm Depressed? Depression Can Cause Serious Problems Treatment Options Get Evaluated and Treated for Depression Depression Is More Common in Women ... Read more »
Women and HIV/AIDSTable of Contents A Look at the Numbers Is HIV Different for Men and Women? Treatment in HIV+ Women: Efficacy, Side Effects, and Drug Interactions Gynecological Issues in HIV+ Women Pregnancy and HIV In Conclusion A... Read more »
Connect With Others
Am I Infected
Posted by delhiguy, 3 RepliesI am 30 YO guy. Worried that I may have got infected. I met this friend of mine on 5th of Dec 2010 which was just a causual meeting after 5 years. After having drinks she started touching me and I got aroused and we end up mating. While in act, she... Read more »
1st week as positive
Posted by RandyNnyc, 8 RepliesI just read several of the posts here...I recently tested positive too...i found out on November 5th at a routine visit to my regular doctor. I did not suspect it at all (i guess noone expects to hear the news). I'm still partly in a state of... Read more »
1st Birthday
Posted by pozz_in_SA, 5 RepliesVera-Virus is celebrating het first birthday with me. A year ago I was scared and started planning my funeral. It is amazing what knowledge and the support of friends can do. To all on this site. Thanx for being there and helping me through a... Read more »
An unfortunate point in my HIV+ life
Posted by Anonymous, 1 ReplyAs of the 1st of the year, I lost my ADAP (due to holding a good job) and I won't qualify for work's insurance. Topping that, the next day I was sevred and now sued for the third time for incompetent medical billing in the thousands of dollars (ha,... Read more »
Resource Centers
Guides for People With HIV

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Conway Holds Double Digit Lead Over Lee In Poll
Posted: 11/03/2007 - A new poll shows Democratic candidate Jack Conway with a 22 point lead over Republican state Rep. Stan Lee in the race for attorney general.
Posted: 11/03/2007 - A new poll shows Democratic candidate Jack Conway with a 22 point lead over Republican state Rep. Stan Lee in the race for attorney general.
Posted: 11/03/2007 - A convicted drug dealer offered the FBI information that two elected officials allegedly committed vote fraud, but couldn't produce proof to back up the assertions, court records show.
Updated: 11/04/2007 - With just two days left until Kentuckians head to the polls to decide who will be governor for the next four years, the candidates continued their last minute campaigning in several locations throughout the Commonwealth Saturday.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Martin County Emergency Management responded to the spill at Wolf Creek on Meat House Road Friday morning.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Court officials say Paul Terry pleaded not guilty and waived formal arraignment
Updated: 11/02/2007 - The Kentucky Department for Public Health (DPH) has issued a warning for Kentucky consumers to be aware of a recent voluntary food recall by an Ohio firm.
Updated: 11/02/2007 - Officials at an Eastern Kentucky manufacturer say the housing slump is forcing them to lay off workers.
Updated: 11/02/2007 - A truckload of help was sent from another union Friday to support the nurses on strike now for more than a month. Union nurses from several ARH hospitals got to pick up groceries in Hazard while on the picket line. It's relief that many say they need.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Attorney General Greg Stumbo today announced that agents with the Kentucky Bureau of Investigation (KBI) will visit numerous precincts throughout the state to observe the conduct of the general election on November 6, 2007.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - A Perry County man on federal probation for drug trafficking was arrested Thursday, November 1, after police witnessed him selling drugs.
Updated: 02/05/2010 - Governor Ernie Fletcher today announced Renaissance on Main grants to eight cities in the commonwealth.
Updated: 11/03/2007 - Crews will be working on busy Route Seven in Perry County this weekend.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Billy Sartin is accused of killing Jeffrey Mattox and Billy Proctor and injuring Sue Collins.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - A Laurel County man accused of setting fire to a church and a store was in court Friday.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - A man accused of killing a former Johnson County constable is no longer facing the death penalty if convicted.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Republican incumbent Trey Grayson holds a slim lead over Democratic challenger Bruce Hendrickson in the race for secretary of state, according to a new poll.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Gov. Ernie Fletcher's administration, a week before the general election, has asked a federal court to clarify a 2006 ruling on the Ten Commandments in hopes of posting a recently donated collection.
Updated: 11/02/2007 - Police say Thomas Scott went on an early morning crime spree Monday that included setting fire to the East London Church of God and burning down the old Johnson Grocery.
Updated: 11/02/2007 - Police are asking for the public's help in identifying two men who burglarized a Beattyville pharmacy early Thursday morning.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Environmental remediation work to reclaim the old Perry County Landfill and to protect nearby groundwater and surface waters has been completed, thanks to the Kentucky Pride Fund administered by the state Environmental and Public Protection Cabinet (EPPC).
Posted: 11/02/2007 - An eastern Kentucky man charged with 22 counts of rape, assault, kidnapping and wanton endangerment involving children was sentenced to 70 years in prison.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Repair work on the twin bridges over Interstate 64 in Franklin County will begin Monday, with lane closures on the two, two-lane spans.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - Gov. Ernie Fletcher mooed like a cow and meowed like a cat, proving that politicians may sometimes do anything for a vote.
Posted: 11/02/2007 - For Christian Illig, one issue looms above all others in Tuesday's gubernatorial election: casino gambling.
Posted: 11/01/2007 - There was a lot of cleaning at one Knox County school Thursday, but it had nothing to do with concerns about staph infections.


text:
American Quilting Traditions: 11 Free Quilt Designs, Quilt Blocks, and More Americana
Bonus: Get our newsletter & special offers for free. We will not share or sell your email address. View our Privacy Policy
Crazy Nine Patch
By: Jenny B. Harris from Allsorts
We are adding the pattern to your Quilt Basket.
The pattern was added to your Quilt Basket.
Click here to view your Quilt Basket.
The Crazy Nine Patch is a super easy quilt block that comes together in no time! You don't have to worry about straight lines or precise measurements to make this easy crazy quilt block. Coordinate colors and prints in blocks to make stripes and make your fat quarter quilt patterns pop with unique piecing techniques. Quilters with an experimental side will love making these crazy quilt block patterns, and you may even find yourself taking a few exceptionally creative cuts. Any quilt with these individual quilt block patterns is guaranteed to look totally unique.
Project Type: Make a Project
Block Size: 10 inches wide x 10 inches long
Time to complete: In an evening
Primary Technique: Pieced
Difficulty Level: Beginner
You can find more creative beginner patterns in our collection 16 Simple Quilt Patterns: Quilting for Beginners.
Tags / Related Topics
Your Recently Viewed Projects
Love these projects? Get MORE delivered to your Inbox – FREE Click Here!
I made this quilt using greens in light, medium and dark. Would post the pic if I knew how. Turned out well, and I'm sure my 11-year-old grandson will love it for Christmas. He is one of twins, so now I am working on sugar almonds in shade of blue for the other one. Love using up my scraps!
There is a better and more cohesive way to do this.
Looks like something I would make after having a round of chemo. No offense, I have had chemo 4 x's for 4 cancers. So much to remember and so little brain.
@jmeyerhoff 0299426: If you like star patterns, check out Aunt Eliza's star block here: http://www.favequilts.com/Block-Patterns/Aunt-Elizas-Star/ Enjoy! -- Editor of FaveQuilts
interested in star patterns
Something worth saving?
- SAVE all your favorite patterns
- ADD personal notes
- QUICKLY reference your patterns
Free eBooks
- 12 Awesome Free Quilt Patterns and Small Quilted Projects
- 14 Easy Baby Quilt Patterns for Boys and Girls
- 17 Quilting Tutorials: Quilting for Beginners and Top Tips for How to Quilt
- American Quilting Traditions: 11 Free Quilt Designs, Quilt Blocks, and More Americana
- DIY Home Decor: How to Make Placemats and Other Easy Sewing Projects for a Country Kitchen
- Easy Quilt Patterns: 11 Applique Quilt Patterns + Quick Quilts
- How to Make a Jelly Roll Quilt: 9 Jelly Roll Quilt Patterns
- How to Quilt a Bag With Style: 7 Free Bag Patterns and Purse Patterns
- Patterns for Quilting: 8 Free Quilt Block Patterns to Make a Quilt for Your Home
- Super String Quilts: 13 Paper Piecing and Scrap Quilt Patterns
Our Newest Projects & Articles
- Eccentric Star Quilt Block
- Zany Zebra Quilt Block Pattern
- Four Square Free Quilting Pattern
- Red Diamond HST Pattern
- The Boudoir Quilt Pattern
- Lap & Throw Quilts
- Precuts Pizzazz
- Linking Blocks HST Block Patterns
- Medallion Patch-Along
- Grecian Square Block Pattern


text:
Dear Teenagers: true love does not always conquer all, but sometimes it makes for a good story. Here Hailee Steinfeld (True Grit) gets a shot at playing a star-crossed lover. 2013.
Password Forgot?
Sign in
Confirm password
Sign up
Matthew Lickona 12:30 p.m., March 25
Scott Marks 11 a.m., March 25
Scott Marks 11:30 a.m., March 18
Walter Mencken 12:05 p.m., March 15
Scott Marks 5 p.m., March 12
© 2015 San Diego Reader. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced without our written permission.
Each newsletter subscriptionmeans another chance to win!


text:
President of HBO Miniseries and Cinemax Programming Kary Antholis announced today that the popular action series "Strike Back" is set to return to Cinemax in 2014 for a final 10-episode season.Read More »
It's tremendously fun to talk movies with James Toback. The writer of "Bugsy" and director of "The Pick-up Artist" and "Black and White" and others, Toback is frank, funny, knowledgable, opinionated and appreciative of the talents of others -- and, to be sure, his own.Read More »
You're known as one of the most provocative filmmakers in the world (James Toback). Your lead actor is one of the most celebrated thespians working in America (Alex Baldwin). So who wants to finance "Last Tango In Tikrit" (the working title), your would-be erotic political drama set in the Middle Ea...Read More »
Sure, Sunday tends to be overcrowded with high-end TV, including "Boardwalk Empire," "Eastbound and Down," "Homeland," "Masters of Sex," "The Walking Dead" and more, but what to watch the rest of the time? Every Monday, we bring you five noteworthy highlights from the other six days of the week.Read More »
Every glimpse HBO has offered so far of the network's upcoming limited series "True Detective" has looked incredibly promising, and this new trailer is no different, providing more insight into the central pair of Louisiana cops played by Matthew McConaughey and Woody Harrelson.Read More »
With the on demand age has come growing frustration from TV viewers about having to order bundles of cable channels and services you don't need in order to get the ones you want. In order to get HBO on Comcast, for instance, you have to order a package that includes hundreds of other channels in whi...Read More »
"More than ninety percent of directing a picture is the right casting," says Martin Scorsese at the outset of Tom Donahue's engrossing documentary "Casting By," which will be released in theaters November 1. And Scorsese's not alone in his feelings -- Woody Allen, Robert Redford, Clint Eastwood and ...Read More »
If you aren't already familiar with Jenny Slate from her stint on "Saturday Night Live," you probably know her as the voice behind the title character in "Marcel the Shell with Shoes On," the stop-motion short she made with her husband Dean Fleischer-Camp that became a viral smash and screened at th...Read More »
Some HBO series roll out with much fanfare, but upcoming comedy "Getting On" is looking to get a quieter premiere on the premium network. Check out the trailer.Read More »
In the new behind the scenes trailer from HBO, below, "Girls" creator/star Lena Dunham and company tease a few details from the new season of the show, which starts on January 19th.Read More »


text:
A U.S. Department of Agriculture proposal to allow Mexican avocados to be shipped to all 50 states threatens the livelihoods of the California and Florida avocado industries, The Ledger argues. Florida growers, who say their avocados are lower in fat and calories than the Haas variety grown in California and Mexico, will position their product as an alternative to those regions' fruit.
View Full Article in:Ledger (Lakeland, Fla.), The
Published in Brief:


text:
Sign in now to view, license and download this image or contact us to see this image without a watermark. Want to embed this image on a non-commercial website or blog? Learn more.
Similar imagesView all
Girl With Lipstick On Lips And Face Stock PhotoChild,Lipstick,Childhood,Messy,4-5 Years,Blond Hair,Caucasian Ethnicity,Children Only,Close-up,Color Image,Day,Elementary Age,Front View,Holding,Looking At Camera,Medium-length Hair,Mischief,One Girl Only,One Person,Outdoors,People,Photography,Portrait,Red,Sadness,VerticalPhotographer Arne Pastoor / STOCK4BCollection: Stock4B


text:
The Case For A Close Czar
The close czar can proactively identify issues and help management make timely decisions, set expectations, and help meet financial reporting deadlines.
CFO Journal from The Wall Street Journal
Deloitte writes and compiles a regular stream of CFO-centric content and timely features - research, topical digests, perspectives, insights, and technical analysis - which appear in a separate module of CFO Journal, an online publication from The Wall Street Journal.
Similar topics
Financial Statements: Framing Your Judgment Calls
CFO Insights
Equipped with a formal framework, finance chiefs can help avoid once-in-a-lifetime events that could sideline a company or cost heavily in terms of time, reputation, and at worst, regulatory scrutiny, fines, and restricted access to capital.
Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) and their teams continually strive to achieve zero material defects in their financial statements.
Backed by effective internal controls, the knowledge of the senior officers in their accounting teams, and input from external advisors, they work diligently to avoid last-minute adjustments. Still, their efforts are not foolproof.
In this issue of CFO Insights, we examine why companies might consider implementing a formal framework to support accounting and financial reporting judgments, and discuss why they could benefit from a more disciplined approach.
More topics
Dbriefs Webcast
Driving Enterprise Value
Anticipating tomorrow's complex issues and new strategies is a challenge. Reach new heights with Dbriefs—live webcasts that give you valuable insights on important developments affecting your business.Dbriefs offers live webcasts featuring practical knowledge from Deloitte specialists.
Discover more
Next steps


text:
Pronunciation: raton
Added on: 2008-12-17 Listened: 521 timesin: mouse
Pronunciation in French [fr]
- Pronunciation by Gavors (Male from France)
0 votes
Could you do it better? different accent? Pronounce raton in French
Accents & languages on maps
raton pronunciation in Romanian [ro]
- Pronunciation by RedHotMoon (Female from Romania)
0 votes
- Could you do it better? different accent? Pronounce raton in Romanian
- Random word: foulées
by Wiktionary Phonetic spelling:
by Google Translate English translation:
raton = young rat
Modify word:
· Add languages
· Add categories
Report word:
Is there anything wrong with this word?
Please report it here.


text:
Attn: Growers (?) How Many Bushes Do I Need?
I am growing Goji berries to replace the ones I now buy from China. I am trying to determine how many bushes I need to plant to get a minimum yield of 730 ounces of dried berries per year. Is there a way to figure this out?
Ya, divide 730 by oz dry fruit per bush....;-)
Sorry I'm pulling your leg. The link below says 30ft of row with 15 plants could yield 100 lbs. If they dry down to 20% that would be 20 lbs. So you'd need about 75ft of row with 35-40 plants.
How do they taste compared to raisins or dried cranberry? Any other dried fruit that tastes similar?
Here is a link that might be useful: Goji yield
Wow! fruitnut, Thanks!!! That is perfect info! I now have three plants (LOL!) so I will go on a mission for the other 35. I wonder who might sell them wholesale? I would be OK with starts.
Goji berries taste like nothing else and people either really love them or dislike them. They are not extremely tart like cranberries though they do have a mild tartness kind of similar to a sweet tart. They are not extremely sweet like raisins either. They are neither extreme. They smell sweet. I am a blackberry/blueberry fanatic of all the fruits in the world and Goji's are right up there with the Big Two in my opinion. The fact that they renew cells, give you mad energy and other things is a bonus. One small handful a day. I can't do without them and they are seriously pricey. You also can only get them from China which is extremely polluted now and does not have a food quality oversight branch like we do. It would be worth it to me plant that many assuming I can get starts.
bamboo_rabbit they are extremely easy to grow. No fertilizer needed. Just give them well drained dirt with no peat. They need a high ph of 7 or more. I had to transplant mine out of the miracle grow I originally planted them in (the link from fruitnut showed me my error in time) and as of tomorrow they will be in coir coconut mix and top soil with dolomite lime. I am growing in pots and they need big pots - at least 5 gallon to start due to deep tap roots so they are going in 10 gallons. Try some dried fruit first. We think it is to die for. I got my plants on eBay and they were huge and in flower. For my mass purchase I guess I will go with buygojiberryplants.com - the link from fruitnut. The leaves are edible too and just as nutritious for salads or tea. As for the berries - they meet 80% of your total daily nutritional requirements. I am not kidding. Oh, and they are relatively insect and disease free. Do I sound psyched?
They are self fertile. If you contain roots they stop growing. Growth can be trim to make hedge only insect I found would be tobacco horn worm.
The wolfberry plant prefers to be planted in well-drained soil with an abundant amount of organic matter. Mixing a ratio of 50 percent peat moss into the garden soil prior to planting is ideal. The plant can tolerate less then ideal soil conditions and will even thrive in sandy soils, but for the adequate productions of berries it is important to add adequate organic material to enrich the soil. Only one wolfberry plant needs to be planted because the shrub is self-fertile.
gator-rider2, according to buygojiberryplants.com, peat is to be avoided. Peat is way too acidic as they need a PH of at least 7.0. In fact, they specifically mention to avoid peat and any soils with peat in it. I am using compost, sand and top soil with some dolomite lime as recommended.
bamboo_rabbit - Aftertaste? I think all fruits do so I guess so. I tell you what they are addictive. Some people don't like them like any food but if you like them people usually LOVE them. They are very addictive. My friend makes granola with them. At least try some.