• Wed
  • Oct 22, 2014
  • Updated: 4:46am
NewsHong Kong

It’s true, Hong Kong’s a better place to live than five years ago, report says

PUBLISHED : Thursday, 29 August, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Thursday, 29 August, 2013, 10:25am


  • Yes: 13%
  • No: 87%
29 Aug 2013
  • Yes
  • No
Total number of votes recorded: 661

Hong Kong appears to have become a better place to live compared to five years ago, an international think tank says in its annual report on 140 cities.

Worldwide, the city is ranked 31st in the latest "liveability" ratings - up 10 places from 2008, despite the world becoming a less habitable place in general, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) said.

Hong Kong scored full marks for education, compared with 83.3 out of 100 for Singapore, which was up two places to 52.

However, City University economist Chan Yan-chong sounded a note of caution, pointing out that the report reflected only the opinions of English speakers. Each of the 140 cities rated were given a score out of 100 for each category, based on the judgment of the EIU's in-house analysts and in-city contributors. That meant the rankings relied on the perceptions of the unit's own analysts instead of being survey-based, Chan said.

EIU economist Edward Bell said the ranking "is geared towards the challenges for somebody not from that city to live there; what they would be anticipating and looking forward to if they move there".

He added: "Ratings reflect specific improvements in the quality [of living], or the deterioration in other cities."

The report considered more than 30 factors broadly grouped under stability, health care, culture and environment, education and infrastructure.

Melbourne, Australia, ranked first, with Vienna second and Vancouver third.

Hong Kong scored higher than Singapore in four of the five categories.

The city scored 92 for overall liveability, while Singapore scored 88.7.

"There is no objectivity [when comparing cities]; it always depends on who you ask," Chan said.

Both places scored 87.5 for health care.

Chan said Singapore's health care had been developed as an industry, so basic medical services and hospital beds were much more expensive than Hong Kong, which had one of the cheapest public medical services in the world.

Chan said pupils in Singapore were known for good exam grades; however, they were under more pressure than those in Hong Kong as they had four public exams - two in primary school and two in secondary school - before they even entered university.



For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

I have lived in HK for 20 years & in SG for 30 years, and still travelling between the 2 cities. HK has indeed made tremendous progress in terms of environment since 2003 and it has a wide array of cultural programmes for enjoyment & learning. Its public transportation is top notch (taxi drivers who know the streets so well, buses and trains that are so predictable and frequent). Public transportation affects a lot of people and it's irritating if its not efficient. The survey results are pretty true in my experience.
and if the magical F1 night race and the upcoming WTA championships tournament in the Lion City aren't world class entertainment, I don't know what is.
Dai Muff
Education for English speakers is only decent if your company is giving you a grant to pay for your kids' education.
Not sure if the writer can count.
From what I can see, Hk edges Singapore in two categories, there are two ties, and the Lion City ranks higher in infrastructure.
I'm very surprised that Singapore scored so lowly in education. If the survey was geared towards those are not from the city, then surely Singapore should score 101 if HK is a perfect score as it a greater variety of international schools than the territory. It also has a greater diversity of quality collaborations between its world class universities and those from the West
As culture and entertainment, maybe the Westerners can stand the fact that they can't buy **** from HMV here. But if you talk about the number of top international music acts that are passing through the city (from various genres), theatre and dance performances and the works, exhibitions, as well as intellectual discussions, I find it very strange that the Lion City scores so lowly as well.
The report clearly shows the laziness of the EIU in keeping up with the times in the Lion City.
HK is riding its luck on past perceptions, whilst Singapore suffers from its old reputation as a "nanny-state/cultural desert".
Its not a reflection on either city but the tardiness of those who conduct these rankings




SCMP.com Account