Indicator Met

Draft
Global City Indicators: Definitions and Methodologies
Submitted to
The World Bank
April 5, 2007
Executive Summary
Indicators are commonly used by all levels of government to measure performance. These
indicators, however, are not standardized, consistent, or comparable over time or across cities.
This lack of standardization limits the ability of cities to share best practices and to learn from
each other. Because of this, the World Banks Latin America and Caribbean Region (LCR)
proposes to build on existing indicators and to help facilitate the development of standardized city
indicators. Measurements would be sufficiently standardized to allow cross-city comparisons and
third-party verification. The indicators should be sufficiently simple and inexpensive to collect.
Furthermore, results should be published annually in order to maximize usefulness.
The proposed Global City Indicator Program focuses on cities with over 100,000 population,
rather than geographic areas such as urban agglomerations. The Global City Indicators Program
is structured around 22 themes organized into three categories that measure a range of city
services and quality of life. City performance relative to each of these themes is measured by a
suite of several indicators, which collectively tell a story. Overall, 67 indicators have been
proposed. Recognizing the differences in resources and capabilities between developed and
developing world cities, the overall set of 67 indicators has been divided into 29 core
indicators, which all cities participating in the initiative would be expected to report on, and 38
supporting indicators, which all cities would be encouraged, but not expected, to report on.
This document presents methodologies for reporting all recommended core and supporting
indicators for the Global City Indicators Program. The document supplements the Global City
Indicators Program Report, draft February 9, 2007 but, in response to comments from the partner
cities and other organizations, revises the indicators that were recommended in Table 4 of that
draft Report. The definitions and methodologies found in this report form the basis of the Global
City Indicators Program.
ES-1
Methodology Report
Table of Contents
1.0
Introduction.....................................................................................................................................1
2.0
Methodology ..................................................................................................................................11
2.1
City Services ................................................................................................................................. 11

A.
Education............................................................................................................................ 11
Core Indicator:
Percentage of children completing primary and secondary education:

survival rate............................................................................................. 11
Core Indicator:
Percentage of school-aged children enrolled in schools by gender......... 13
Supporting Indicator: Student/teacher ratio ............................................................................... 16
B.
Energy................................................................................................................................. 18
Core Indicator:
Percentage of city population with authorized electrical service ............ 18
Supporting Indicator: Total electrical use per capita.................................................................. 19
Supporting Indicator: Number and duration of electrical interruptions per year per customer.. 20
C.
Fire and Emergency Response........................................................................................... 21
Core Indicator:
Number of firefighters per 100,000 capita.............................................. 21
Core Indicator:
Number of fire related deaths per 100,000 capita ................................... 22
Supporting Indicator: Response time for fire department from initial call ................................ 23
D.
Health.................................................................................................................................. 24
Core Indicator:
Core Indicator:
Under age five mortality per 1,000 live births ........................................ 24

Immunization against infectious childhood diseases (percent of eligible
population that have been immunized) ................................................... 26
Supporting Indicator: Number of in-patient hospital beds per 100,000 population ................... 28
Supporting Indicator: Number of physicians per 100,000 population ....................................... 29
E.
Recreation ........................................................................................................................... 30
Core Indicator:
Core Indicator:
F.
Square meters of public recreation space per capita ............................... 30

City expenditure on public recreation as a percentage of overall city
budget ..................................................................................................... 33
Safety................................................................................................................................... 34
Core Indicator:
Number of homicides per 100,000 population........................................ 34
Core Indicator:
Number of sworn police officers per 100,000 population....................... 35
Supporting Indicator: Violent crime rate per 100,000 population ............................................. 36
G.
Social Services UNDER DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................... 37
H.
Solid Waste.......................................................................................................................... 38
Core Indicator:
Core Indicator:
Percentage of city population with regular solid waste collection .......... 38

Percentage of solid waste disposed to sanitary landfill/incinerated and
burned openly/disposed to open dump/recycled/other............................ 40
Supporting Indicator: Total solid waste generation per capita................................................... 41
I.
Transport ............................................................................................................................ 42
Core Indicator:
Km of transportation system per 100,000 population (separated by mode

road/dedicated busway/passenger rail/bicycle path/pedestrian path)... 42
Core Indicator:
Modal split (percent of commuters using a travel mode other than a
personal vehicle) ..................................................................................... 44
Supporting Indicator: Number of public transit trips per 100,000 population ........................... 46
Supporting Indicator: Commercial Air Connectivity (Number of nonstop commercial air
destinations) ............................................................................................ 48
Supporting Indicator: Average travel speed on primary thoroughfares during peak hour ......... 49
Supporting Indicator: Transportation fatalities per 100,000 population .................................... 50
J.
Wastewater.......................................................................................................................... 51
Core Indicator:
Core Indicator:
Percentage of city population served by wastewater collection.............. 51

Percentage of wastewater receiving no/primary/secondary/tertiary
treatment ................................................................................................. 53
Supporting Indicator: Number of days effluent not in compliance with World Bank standards 55
K.
Water................................................................................................................................... 57
Core Indicator:
Core Indicator:
Percentage of city population with potable water supply service ........... 57

Number of household days per year that boil water advisories are in effect
(number of households impacted times number of days) as a percent of
total household days................................................................................ 59
Supporting Indicator: Domestic water consumption per capita ................................................. 61
Supporting Indicator: Incidence of water borne diseases........................................................... 63
Supporting Indicator: Number of interruptions in water service per 1,000 hec. of service area 64
2.2
City Management ......................................................................................................................... 66

A.
Finance ............................................................................................................................... 66
Core Indicator:
Supporting Indicator:
B.
Debt service ratio (debt service expenditures as a percent of a

municipalitys own-source revenue) ....................................................... 66
Bond rating ............................................................................................. 67
Tax collected as a percentage of tax billed ............................................. 69
Own-source revenue as a percent of total revenues ................................ 70
Capital spending as percentage of total expenditures ............................. 71
Governance ......................................................................................................................... 72
Core Indicator:
Accountability and Transparency (percent of maximum score) ............. 72
Supporting Indicator: Percentage of city government workforce that is women/minorities in
proportion to city population composition.............................................. 78
C.
Urban Planning .................................................................................................................. 80
Core Indicator:
2.3
Latest approval date of Master Plan........................................................ 80

Green area (hectares) per 100,000 population ........................................ 82
Housing in hazardous locations .............................................................. 83
Jobs/housing ratio ................................................................................... 85
Percentage of land parcels with a registered title.................................... 86
City Sustainability........................................................................................................................ 87
A.
Civic Engagement............................................................................................................... 87
Core Indicator:
Voter participation (as a percent of eligible voters)................................ 87
Supporting Indicator: Citizens participation: number of local officials elected to office per
100,000 population ................................................................................. 88
Supporting Indicator: Number of civic organizations per 100,000 population .......................... 89
B.
Culture ................................................................................................................................ 90
Core Indicator:
Number of cultural establishments per 100,000 population.................... 90
Supporting Indicator: City expenditures on culture as a percentage of overall city budget....... 91
C.
Economy ............................................................................................................................. 92
Core Indicator:
City product per capita............................................................................ 92
Supporting Indicator: Employment rate by age and sex ............................................................ 94
Supporting Indicator: Construction value divided by assessed value ........................................ 96
D.
Environment ....................................................................................................................... 97
Core Indicator:
Greenhouse gas emissions measured in tons per capita .......................... 97
Supporting Indicator: Number of days with PM10 exceedences ................................................ 99
E.
Shelter ............................................................................................................................... 101
Core Indicator:
F.
Percentage of city population living in slums ....................................... 101

Areal size of informal settlements as a percent of city area.................. 103
Housing price/income ratio................................................................... 106
Housing rent/income ratio..................................................................... 108
Social Equity..................................................................................................................... 110
Core Indicator:
Percentage of city population living in poverty .................................... 110
Supporting Indicator: Cost of basic necessities or Market Basket Measure (MBM) ............... 111
G.
Subjective Well-Being....................................................................................................... 113
Supporting Indicator: Subjective Well-Being (SWB) Index.................................................... 113

H.
Technology and Innovation ............................................................................................. 117
Core Indicator:
Number of internet connections per 100,000 population ...................... 117
Supporting Indicator: Number of telephones per 100,000 population ..................................... 118
Supporting Indicator: Number of patents registered to resident persons or corporations of the
city in past year per 100,000 population ............................................... 119
3.0
Desirable Future Indicators .......................................................................................................120
1.0
Introduction
Purpose
This document presents methodologies for reporting all recommended core and supporting
indicators for the Global City Indicators Program. The document supplements the Global City
Indicators Program Report, draft February 9, 2007 but, in response to comments, revises the
indicators that were recommended in Table 4 of that draft Report.
Overview of the Global City Indicators Initiative
Indicators are commonly used by all levels of government to measure performance. These
indicators, however, are not standardized, consistent, or comparable over time or across cities.
This lack of standardization limits the ability of cities to share best practices and to learn from
each other.
The World Bank proposes to build on existing indicators and to help facilitate the development of
standardized city indicators. Measurements would be sufficiently standardized to allow cross-city
comparisons and third-party verification. The indicators should be sufficiently simple and
inexpensive to collect. Furthermore, results should be published annually in order to maximize
usefulness.
Project Development Process
This initiative is being led by the World Banks Latin America and Caribbean Region (LCR),
which is the most urbanized region within the developing world with 77 percent of its population
living in cities. The World Bank has partnered with 9 cities in Brasil, Canada, Colombia, and the
United States for purposes of this initiative. The World Bank has also consulted with several
international agencies (e.g., UN-HABITAT) and city-focused organizations (e.g., United Cities
and Local Governments UCLG). Through a process of workshops, consultant research,
discussion papers, meetings, and videoconferences, a draft set of Global City Indicators has been
developed.
Framework
The proposed Global City Indicator Program focuses on cities with over 100,000 population,
rather than geographic areas such as urban agglomerations. The term city is used broadly to
refer to any form of local government, and even can include regional or metropolitan
governments. These are the units of government that are closest to the public and that are
accountable to their residents for providing a range of services and improving their quality of life.
The Global City Indicator Program is structured around 22 themes organized into three
categories that measure a range of city services and quality of life (Table 1). The three categories
are: City Services, which includes services provided by both city government and other entities;
City Management, which includes city financial and governmental operations; and City
Sustainability, which includes critical contributors to the overall quality of life, but that are not
the direct responsibility of any one local service provider.
Methodology Report
Table 1: Global City Indicators Organizational Structure

Category
Themes
City Services
- Education
- Energy
- Fire and Emergency
Response
- Health
- Recreation
- Safety
City Management
City Sustainability
Indicators
- Social Services
- Solid Waste
- Transport
- Wastewater
- Water
- Finance
- Governance
- Urban Planning
19 Core
16 Supporting
3 Core
9 Supporting
- Civic Engagement
- Culture
- Economy
- Environment
- Shelter
- Social Equity
- Subjective WellBeing
- Technology and
Innovation
7 Core
13 Supporting
City performance relative to each of these themes is measured by a suite of 67 indicators, which
collectively tell a story (Table 2). Recognizing the differences in resources and capabilities
between developed and developing world cities, the overall set of 67 indicators has been divided
into 29 core indicators, which all cities participating in the initiative would be expected to
report on, and 38 supporting indicators, which all cities would be encouraged, but not expected,
to report on. This Methodologies Document provides definitions and methodologies for all of the
Core and Supporting Indicators shown in Table 2 on the following page.
Methodology Report
Table 2: Proposed Global City Indicators

Theme
1. City Services
A. Education
B. Energy
C. Fire and
Emergency
Response
Questions
(Core indicator questions in bold)
Global City Indicators

(Core indicators in bold, supporting indicators non-bold)
a. Percentage of children completing primary and secondary education: survival

rate
b. Percentage of school aged children enrolled in schools by gender
c. Student/teacher ratio
d. Desirable future indicator1: Number of libraries per 100,000 population
e. Desirable future indicator1: Number of visits to library per 100,000 population: total
electronic and non-electronic
f. Desirable future indicator1: Performance on standardized test
Do residents have access to authorized a. Percentage of city population with authorized electrical service
b. Residential electrical use per capita
power?
Is the service reliable? Is the city using a c. Number and duration of electrical interruptions per year per customer
lot of energy? Is the citys energy use
d. Desirable future indicator1: Share of renewable energy use out of primary energy
sustainable?
supply
e. Desirable future indicator1: Residential energy use per household: by types of energy
Are residents protected from fires and a. Number of firefighters per 100,000 population
b. Number of fire related deaths per 100,000 population.
emergencies?
c. Response time for fire department from initial call
e. Desirable future indicator1: Response time for ambulance from initial call
f. Desirable future indicator1: Emergency medical services indicators
Are there enough teachers?
Are children getting good basic
(elementary) education? Are residents
literate?
Does the city foster access to books and
information?
D. Health
Is the city a healthy place to live?

Is there access to health care? Are
residents satisfied with their lives?
a. Under age five mortality per 1,000 live births

b. Immunization against infectious childhood diseases (percent of eligible population
that have been immunized)
c. Number of in-patient hospital beds per 100,000 population
d. Number of physicians per 100,000 population
a. Desirable future indicator1: Annual HIV/AIDS death rate per 100,000 population
E. Recreation
Is the city vibrant?

Are there enough places to recreate and
a. Square meters of public recreation facility space per capita

b. City expenditures on public recreation as a percentage of overall city budget
Methodology Report
Theme
F. Safety
G. Social
Services
H. Solid Waste
Questions

Desirable future indicator1: An indicator of recreational use levels
Number of homicides per 100,000 population
Number of sworn police officers per 100,000 population
Violent crime rate per 100,000 population
Desirable future indicator1: Perception of safety
play?
Is there a lot of crime?
Do residents feel safe?
c.
a.
b.
c.
a.
Do many people need social services?

Is there shelter for those without
housing?
Is the city clean?
Does the city generate a lot of solid
waste? Is the citys solid waste disposed
of safely?
UNDER DEVELOPMENT
I. Transport
How easy is it to travel in the City by

different modes?
Is there good access to the city from
other parts of the world? How extensive
and safe is the road system?
J. Wastewater
Is wastewater collected?
What is the quality of wastewater
treatment? Is wastewater affecting
a. Percentage of city population with regular solid waste collection

b. Percentage of solid waste: disposed to sanitary landfill/incinerated and burned
openly/disposed to open dump/recycled/other
c. Residential solid waste generation per capita
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percentage of population participating in recycling
program
a. Km of transportation system per 100,000 population (separated by mode
road/dedicated busway/passenger rail/bicycle path/pedestrian path
b. Modal split (percent of commuters using a travel mode other than a personal
vehicle)
c. Number of public transit trips per 100,000 population
d. Commercial Air Connectivity (number of nonstop commercial air destinations)
e. Average travel speed on primary thoroughfares during peak hours
f. Transportation fatalities per 100,000 population
a. Desirable future indicator1: Total municipal road and transit expenditures per capita
(include capital and operating expenditures)
a. Percentage of city population served by wastewater collection
b. Percentage of wastewater receiving no/primary/secondary/tertiary treatment
c. Number of days effluent not in compliance with World Bank standards
Methodology Report
Theme
Questions
receiving water bodies?
K. Water
Do residents have access to safe

drinking water?
Is the water supply safe and regular?
Does the city use a lot of water?
2. City Management
A. Finance
Is the city and its government
financially healthy?
B. Governance
Is government equitable, open and

transparent?
Is government efficient?

a. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of assimilative capacity of receiving water body
used
b. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of untreated wastewater entering
streams/lakes/oceans
a. Percentage of city population with potable water supply service
b. Number of household days per year that boil water advisories are in effect
(number of households impacted times number of days) as a percent of total
household days
c. Domestic water consumption per capita
d. Incidence of water borne diseases
e. Number of interruptions in water service per 1,000 hectares of service area
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of treated water lost during distribution
b. Desirable future indicator1: Water quality measured by: i) number of days per year that
water quality was below national standards; ii) number of days per year that boil water
advisories are in effect; iii) contaminates exceeding acceptable limit
a. Debt service ratio (debt service expenditures as a percent of a municipalitys ownsource revenue)
b. Bond rating
c. Tax collected as percentage of tax billed
d. Own-source revenue as a percent of total revenues
e. Capital spending as percentage of total expenditures
a. Accountability and Transparency (percent of maximum score)
b. Percentage of city government workforce that is women/minorities in proportion to
city population composition
c. Desirable future indicator1:.City Governance Index
d. Desirable future indicator1: Average number of days to get a business license
e. Desirable future indicator1:.Number and percentage of requests for service received
during the past year for which the response time was exceeded (e.g. 10 working days)
Methodology Report
Theme
Questions
C. Urban
Planning
Does the city have green and open

areas?
Is the city densely populated? Are
residents at risk from hazards? Does the
city have a balance of jobs and housing?
Is the citys permit process efficient?
3. City Sustainability
A. Civic
Do residents effectively participate in
Engagement
local governance?
B. Culture
Is the city vibrant?

Are there enough places to recreate and
play?
C. Economy
Are people working?

Is the city economically healthy? Is
there investment? How easy is it to do
business?
D. Environment
Is the city contributing to climate

change?
Is the air clean?
E. Shelter
Do many residents live in housing that

is substandard or insecure?
Does the city have many informal
neighborhoods? Is housing affordable?

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Latest approval date of Master Plan

Green area (hectares) per 100,000 population
Housing in hazardous locations
Jobs/housing ratio
Percentage of land parcels with a registered title
a. Voter participation (as a percent of eligible voters)

b. Citizens participation: number of local officials elected to office per 100,000
population
c. Number of civic organizations per 100,000 population
a. Number of cultural establishments per 100,000 population
b. City expenditures on culture as a percentage of overall city budget
a. Desirable future indicator1: Attendance at cultural events per capita
b. Desirable future indicator1: City vitality
a. City product per capita
b. Employment rate by age and sex
c. Construction value divided by assessed value
d. Desirable future indicator1: Competitiveness Index
e. Desirable future indicator1: Commercial/Industrial assessment as percent of total
assessment
f. Desirable future indicator1: Investment indicator
g. Desirable future indicator1: Purchasing power parity
a. Greenhouse gas emissions measured in tons per capita
b. Number of days with PM10 exceedences
a. Desirable future indicator1: Indicator linking air quality to respiratory problems (e.g.
environmental burden of disease)
a. Percentage of city population living in slums
b. Areal size of informal settlements as a percent of city area
c. Housing price/income ratio
d. Housing rent/income ratio
Methodology Report
Theme
Questions
F. Social Equity
Is there a lot of poverty? How

equitable is the distribution of wealth?
Are basic necessities affordable? Are
there assets for the collective production
of well-being?
a. Percentage of city population living in poverty

b. Cost of basic necessities or Market Basket Measure (MBM)
c. Desirable future indicator1: Percentage of population receiving government financial
assistance
d. Desirable future indicator1 Social Capital Index
a. Subjective Well-Being Index
Does the city have good access to the

internet?
Is there good phone service?
Is the city a creative and innovative
place?
a. Number of internet connections per 100,000 population

b. Number of telephones (land lines and cell phones) per 100,000 population
c. Number of patents registered to resident persons or corporations of the city in past year
per 100,000 population
d. Desirable future indicator1: Creativity Index
e. Desirable future indicator1: Venture capital investment
f. Desirable future indicator1: Broadband penetration rate
G. Subjective
Well-Being
H. Technology
and
Innovation

Indicators that cannot currently be reported on globally
Methodology Report
This set of global city indicators was selected based on significant input from the partner cities to
insure that these indicators reflect city information needs and interests and a rigorous screening
process. The indicators must be:
Available, up to date, and able to be reported annually;

Readily comparable among cities globally;
Relevant for public policy decision making and/or linked to established goals (e.g.
MDG);
Cost effective to collect;
Meaningful to cities across the globe regardless of geography, culture, affluence, size, or
political structure;
Understandable and not overly complex;
Clear as to whether changes in the indicator are good or bad.
For each indicator the following information is presented:

1) The rationale for reporting the indicator.
2) A definition of the indicator.
3) The methodology to collect the indicator. Most of the methodologies are used or have
been adapted from methodologies already in use by international or regional
organizations, such as the UN-HABITAT, UNESCO, the World Bank, the Federation of
Canadian Municipalities or by individual cities. In many cases the definitions have been
modified so that the information reported through the Global City Indicators Program is
both internally consistent and comparable globally.
4) A commonly agreed upon benchmark for the indicator, if available.
5) Any comments or limitations associated with the indicator.
6) Names of other organizations or agencies which collect the indicator.
7) An example of the indicator, if available.
Global City Indicator Process
The Global City Indicator Program requires a process for orderly monitoring, reporting,
verifying, and amending the Global City Indicators.
Monitoring An essential element in the adoption and use of any city indicator is the
establishment of a standardized methodology for measuring the indicator. Without this, cities
would not be able to confidently make apples to apples comparisons of their performance with
other cities. It is recommended that a Global City Indicator Standard within the framework of the
International Standards Organization (ISO) be developed to ensure that a consistent standardized
methodology is used globally in collecting and reporting on these Global City Indicators. At this
time, only the core indicators are recommended for inclusion in the ISO standard, but over time
the supporting indicators could also receive ISO certification.
Reporting The Global City Indicators should be reported regularly. We recommend that the
indicators be reported as a Performance Statement annually at the same time as the city
Financial Statement is issued. The City Performance Statement:
Provides results for all Core Indicators (we encourage all Participating Cities will report
on all Global City Indicators);
Identifies the responsible service provider for each of the service-based indicators;
Compares results with applicable benchmarks or individual city-established targets;
Methodology Report
Compares results with prior years to show trends;

Indicates consistency with the approved collection methodology; and
Provides for signatures by a responsible City government employee as well as an
independent verifier.
Verifying The collection and reporting of the Global City Indicators should be independently
verified. This verification will help assure other cities that the data have been collected using the
approved standardized methodology, assure the public that the city is accurately reporting its
performance, and provide transparency to the overall process. Although there is clearly value in
providing third party verification, the partner cities have emphasized the need for verification
should not impose a significant cost on participating cities. It is expected that universities, some
non-governmental organizations, and professional auditors could be qualified to verify the annual
performance statements.
Amending The set of Global City Indicators will need to change over time to address emerging
issues, changes in the roles and responsibilities of city government, development of improved
indicators or methodologies, or for other reasons. The Board of Directors would be responsible
for any additions or removals from the set of Global City Indicators. If a Global City Indicator
Standard is developed, then any changes in methodology for an ISO-certified indicator would
require ISO approval.
Definitions
The following terms are used throughout the methodologies, and should be used as defined
below. Individual methodology sheets contain definitions specific to that indicator.
Term
City
Definition and Explanation

The term city is used to refer to any local government body corporate or municipal
administration with a population of 100,000 or over. City is understood broadly as
the entity that is officially established by law or by an Act - including, but not limited
to, borough, city, county, municipality, parish or township.
For all of the Global City Indicators, data should be collected for the incorporated city
boundary. Data for informal neighborhoods within the incorporated city boundary
should be included for all indicators. We recognized that data for informal
neighborhoods might not be as available or accurate as for the remainder of the City.
However, it is still important to collect this data and include this best estimate data
with the other city data.
Population
Household
Informal
settlements
The total number of people, including in informal neighborhoods, living within the
Citys incorporated boundary.
Includes all the people who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence
(U.S. Census Bureau, 2007)
Areas where groups of housing units have been constructed on land that the occupants
have no legal claim to, or occupy illegally; 2. Unplanned settlements and areas where
housing is not in compliance with current planning and building regulations
(unauthorized housing). (http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environmentgl/default.asp
Additional notes
1) Regional data and information. Many indicators rely on data that may not be available
exactly for the area within the incorporated city boundary. Examples include percentage
of wastewater receiving no/primary/secondary/tertiary treatment, and percentage of
school-aged children enrolled in schools. Where possible, and using best judgment, data
should be adjusted to the city boundaries. Where differences between the city area and
the area the data are reported for are small (10% as a general rule), report for the area for
9
Methodology Report
which the data is reported. Please document how such regional data and information are
reported in the Supplemental Notes.
2) Currency. To facilitate comparability nearly all the indicators have been normalized as
percentages or number per capita or 100,000 of city population. A small number of the
indicators (such as City Product and Cost of Basic Necessities) must be reported in actual
monetary terms. These few indicators should be reported in $US. To make the
conversion from local currency, we recommend cities use the rates posted by the US
Federal Reserve Bank http://www.ny.frb.org/markets/foreignex.html.
3) Data and information periods. An important objective of the Global City Indicators
Program is that the indicators be available, current and reported annually. The Program
methodologies do not fix specific global dates or time periods for which data are
reported. Many of the indicator methodologies ask for information to be provided for an
agreed date (established by the City itself). Others ask for data to be reported for the last
fiscal year. Others ask for the most recent data available. Cities are free to select the
periods or times for which they report, and in subsequent years should report each
indicator for the same period. Please document these selections in supplemental notes.
Reporting
Indicator results should be reported on line at www.cityindicators.org. The reporting pages will
be available in May, 2007. The reporting pages will include a Performance Statement for the
core indicators and space for the supporting indicators.
The reporting pages will include space for notes to supplement the numbers in the indicators. We
encourage cities to supply additional background information to explain the results presented in
the Performance Statement or other reports. For example, a City may wish to explain a
particularly high or low number, how it collected a particular piece of information, or
assumptions it used in arriving at number or a result.
10
Methodology Report
2.0
Methodology
2.1
City Services
A.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Education
Education
Percentage of children completing primary and secondary education:
survival rate
Rationale:
Survival rate measures the holding power and internal efficiency of an education
system. Survival rate to grade 5 of primary education is of particular interest since
this is commonly considered as a pre-requisite for sustainable literacy.
Definition:
Percentage of a cohort of students enrolled in the first grade of primary education

who reached the final grade of primary education.
For example, if the City reporting year is 2012 and primary education lasts 5 years,
report the percentage of students that entered primary education in 2006 and
reached the final grade of primary education in 2011.
Report on the students completing secondary education, if known.
Report on survival rates by gender for both primary and secondary education, if
known.
Methodology:
The total number of pupils belonging to a school-cohort who reached each

successive grade of the specified level of education (the numerator) divided by the
number of pupils in the school-cohort i.e. those originally enrolled in the first grade
of primary education, (the denominator) and multiply the result by 100.
Data on school enrollment are usually recorded by the ministry or department of
education.
This methodology is adapted from Education Indicator Technical Guidelines,
published by UNESCO. (see
http://www.uis.unesco.org/ev.php?URL_ID=5455&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_
SECTION=201). For reference, the full methodology is provided at the end of this
table.
Benchmark:
Survival rates approaching 100% indicate a high level of retention and low
incidence of drop-out.
Comments and
Limitations:
In most cities survival rates will only be readily available for public school systems.
Survival rates for the private education sector should be reported, if known.
If the geographies of school districts and the city are different, best judgment should
be used to relate enrollment data to the city boundaries.
Since the calculation of this indicator is based on pupil-flow rates, the reliability of
the Survival Rate depends on the consistency of data on enrolment and repeaters in
term of coverage over time and across grades.
Definitions of primary and secondary are from the International Standard
Classification of Education (ISCED97), published by UNESCO
11
Methodology Report
Other
Organizations/Agencies
which use this
indicator:
UNESCO
Example:
SURVIVAL RATES BY GRADE
Definition: Percentage of a cohort of pupils (or students) enrolled in the first grade of a given level or cycle of
education in a given school-year who are expected to reach successive grades.
Purpose: Survival rate measures the holding power and internal efficiency of an education system. It illustrates the
situation regarding retention of pupils (or students) from grade to grade in schools, and conversely the magnitude of
drop-out by grade.
Calculation method: Divide the total number of pupils belonging to a school-cohort who reached each successive
grade of the specified level of education by the number of pupils in the school-cohort i.e. those originally enrolled in
the first grade of primary education, and multiply the result by 100.
Formula:
Data required: Enrolment by grade for two consecutive years (years t and t+1); number of repeaters by grade for
year t+1.
Data source: School register, school survey or census.
Type of disaggregation: Survival Rates can be disaggregated by gender, by geographical location (region,
urban/rural) and by type of institution (private/public). It can also be disaggregated between survival with and without
repetition.
Interpretation: Survival Rate approaching 100% indicates a high level of retention and low incidence of drop-out.
Survival Rate may vary from grade to grade, giving indications of grades with relatively more or less drop-outs. The
distinction between survival rate with and without repetition is necessary to compare the extent of wastage due to
drop-out and repetition. Survival rate to grade 5 of primary education is of particular interest since this is commonly
considered as pre-requisite for sustainable literacy.
Quality standards: Since the calculation of this indicator is based on pupil-flow rates, the reliability of the Survival
Rate depends on the consistency of data on enrolment and repeaters in term of coverage over time and across grades.
Limitations: Given that this indicator is usually estimated using cohort analysis models that are based on a number
of assumptions, care should be taken in using of the results in comparisons.
Source: Education Indicator Technical Guidelines, published by UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
12
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Rationale:
Education
Percentage of school-aged children enrolled in schools by gender
Education is one of the most important aspects of human development. This
indicator addresses the issue of educational opportunity, by indicating how
widespread formal education is in the city among school age children.
Reporting on the differential enrollment by gender is consistent with goal 3 of the
Millennium Development Goals to promote gender equality and empower women.
Definition:
1. The number of school aged children enrolled at primary and secondary levels in
public and private schools (the numerator) divided by the total number of the
school aged population (the denominator).
Primary school refers to elementary school, including 1st grade through 5th grade,
though in some school systems it may extend to 6th grade.
Secondary school includes grades 5th or 6th through 12th.
Gender
2. The number of male school aged children enrolled at primary and secondary
levels in public and private schools (the numerator) divided by the total number
of male school aged population (the denominator).
3. The number of female school aged children enrolled at primary and secondary
levels in public and private schools (the numerator) divided by the total number
of female school aged population (the denominator).
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date for the reporting city calculate the total number of
children enrolled in primary and secondary, public and private schools in the city.
Divide this number by the citys school aged population and express the result as a
percentage.
Enrollment
Data on school enrollment are usually recorded by the ministry or department of
education. If enrollment data from these sources are not available derive the
enrollment from surveys or censuses.
The definitions of primary and secondary follow UNESCOs;
Education at the primary level usually begins between the ages of five and seven
and lasts about five years.
Do not include kindergarten enrollment.
Education at the first stage of the secondary level begins at about age 10 to 12
and lasts about three years. At the second stage of the secondary level education
begins at about age 13 to 15 and lasts about four years.
Count one part-time enrolment of a half-day or more as full-time enrolment. For

example count a child as enrolled if he/she is enrolled in school for half a day, but
do not include a child as enrolled who only is only enrolled for 0.25 of a day.
be used to relate enrollment data to the city boundaries.
13
Methodology Report
Schools
Enrollment in public and private schools should be reported. In many cities private
schools are a significant component of education in the city. Private schools should
be recognized as providing real, bona fide education; many ministries or
departments of education have a program that recognizes such schools. Therefore,
for example, enrollment in religious schools and home schools may be included if
they are recognized.
School aged population
Following the definitions above of primary and secondary schools, school aged
population will be the number of children in the city between ages five, six, or seven
and 17 or 19. This number will be derived from the latest city population estimates,
census or survey.
Gender
If possible report separately the percentage of male and female of school-aged
children enrolled in schools.
Benchmark:
Achieving universal primary education is Millennium Development Goal number 2;

Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to
complete a full course of primary schooling.
A benchmark may be developed as comparative data is accrued over the initial five
years of the Global City Indicators Program.
Comments and
Limitations:
This methodology is based on Urban Indicators Guidelines from the United Nations
Human Settlements Programme (2004). The UN methodology includes the tertiary
education level (including universities and colleges). To simplify this indicator the
tertiary level is excluded from the proposed Global City Indicators methodology.
Separate reporting of the percentage of male and female of school-aged children
enrolled in schools is recommended, consistent with United Nations Human
Settlements Programme methodology.
According to the United Nations Human Settlements Programme, among
international surveys, Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey and Demographic Health
Surveys (and sometimes Living Standards Measurement Surveys and the Core
Welfare Indicators Questionnaire Surveys in Africa) provide school attendance data.
UNESCO publishes an Education Indicators Technical Guidelines that contain a
Gross Enrolment Ratio methodology that is similar to the proposed Global City
Indicators methodology. (see
http://www.uis.unesco.org/ev.php?URL_ID=5455&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_
SECTION=201)
Other
which use this
indicator:
UN-HABITAT, UNESCO Institute for Statistics
14
Methodology Report
Example:
In Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, in 2003 total enrollment in primary education was

81.1%. Female enrollment was 78.3%. Male enrollment was 84.5%. Source:
United Nations Human Settlements Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
15
Methodology Report
Theme:
Education
Supporting Indicator: Student/teacher ratio
Rationale:
The Student/teacher ratio is an indicator of the adequacy of teacher availability and

the strength and quality of an education system.
Definition:
The number of enrolled primary school students (the numerator) is divided by the
number of full-time equivalent primary school classroom teachers (the
denominator), expressed as a ratio.
Primary school refers to elementary school, generally for children ages 6-12 years,
or 1st grade through 5th grade, though in some school systems it may extend to 6th
grade.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of full-time equivalent primary

(elementary) school classroom teachers and the number of enrolled primary
(elementary) school students is collected from the local public school system or
ministry of education.
be used to relate student and teacher data to the city boundaries.
One part-time student enrolment should be counted as one full-time enrolment; in
other words a student who attends school for half a day may be counted as a fulltime enrolment. If a city elects to report full-time equivalent (FTE) enrolment
(where two half a day students equal one full student enrolment), this should be
noted.
The number of classroom teachers and other instructional staff (e.g., teachers
aides, guidance counselors), should not include administrators or other nonteaching staff. Kindergarten or Pre-School teachers and staff should not be
included. Count the number of teachers in 5th time increments. For example, if
known, count a teacher working one day per week as 0.2 teachers, count a teacher
working 3 days per week as 0.6 teachers.
The student figure should then be divided by the staff figure and the result
expressed as a ratio.
Benchmark:
2004 primary education student/teacher ratio in North America and Western Europe
14:1; East Asia and the Pacific 22:1; Latin America and the Caribbean 24:1.
This benchmark will be refined as comparative data is accrued over the initial five
Comments and
Limitations:
Limiting the measure to primary school ratios will simplify data collection and
reporting.
The proposed definition does not include private educational facilities which may
be important in some cities. However, at the country level, including the data for
public and private sectors of education in the same indicator has no appreciable
effect on student/teacher ratios.
The student/teacher ratio reflects teacher workload and the availability of teachers'
services to their students. The lower the student/teacher ratio, the higher the
availability of teacher services to students. The student/teacher ratio has
16
Methodology Report
implications not only for the cost of education, but also for the quality. Higher
educational attainment is correlated with a lower student/teacher ratio.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Bogota
Example:
In 2004 the City of Baltimore, US, had an elementary student/teacher ratio of 9.97.
(39,962 students in grades 1 through 6, divided by 4,008 instructional staff)
FCM, International Center for Education Statistics

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
17
Methodology Report
B.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Energy
Energy
Percentage of city population with authorized electrical service
Rationale:
The percentage of city residents with lawful connection to the electricity supply
system (the electricity grid) is an indicator of lawful provision of a basic urban
service. Electrical service is a contributing indicator of sustainability and health.
Definition:
The number of persons in the city with lawful connection to the electrical supply
system (the numerator) divided the total population of the city (the denominator),
expressed as a percentage.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of city households lawfully connected to the
electricity grid is multiplied by the current average city household size to derive the
number of city residents with lawful connection to the electricity supply system (the
electricity grid).
Most electricity supply authorities distinguish billing accounts to residential and
non residential establishments. Residential establishments in most cities equate to
households (although in some condominiums, the body corporate holds the account
for multiple households).
The number of city residents with lawful connection to the electricity supply system
is then divided by the city population and the result expressed as a percentage.
Benchmark:
To be determined as comparative data is accrued over the initial five years of the
Global City Indicators Program.
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator is also dependant on the age, standard of maintenance and reliability
of the infrastructure that constitutes the electricity grid and the electricity
transmission capacity that services the grid. The ability of both the grid and its
electricity transmission supply to provide supply on demand and to cope with peak
loads is also an important consideration.
Some of these qualifications and limitations can be dealt with in the supporting
indicators.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Sao Paulo and Bogot both incorporate City Indicators on electricity consumption
but do not express it as a measure of the percentage of city population with lawful
connection to the electricity grid
Example:
In 2003, Dhaha (Bangladesh) had 88.2% of its population with access to electrical
service. (UN-HABITAT).
18
Methodology Report
Theme:
Energy
Supporting Indicator: Total electrical use per capita
Rationale:
Electricity consumption statistics are typically collected in three categories,

residential, commercial and industrial.
Definition:
The total electrical usage of a city in kilowatts (the numerator) divided by the total
official population of that city (the denominator).
Methodology:
Total electrical usage per capita is calculated by dividing the total electrical use of
the city (including residential and non-residential use) by the total official
population of a jurisdiction to determine average per capita usage.
In the notes section, please identify residential electrical use per capita, if possible.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Electricity providers typical report electricity consumption statistics by customer

and not by resident or they report consumption by sector (residential, commercial
and industrial) in bulk and then report more detailed statistics as averages.
Other
which use this
indicator:
All electricity providers in Canada
Example:
19
Methodology Report
Theme:
Energy
Supporting Indicator: Number and duration of electrical interruptions per year per customer
Rationale:
It is fairly common practice in the electric utility industry to use the standard IEEE
reliability indices to track and benchmark reliability performance. These Indices
serve as valuable tools to compare utility reliability performance, as long as similar
data is being matched (for example, all data that excludes major storms or defines
an interruption in the same manner).
Definition:
The System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI) is commonly used as a

reliability indicator by electric power utilities to measure the average number of
interruptions per customer. It is typically reported annually.
The Customer Average Interruption Duration Index (CAIDI) is a reliability index
commonly used by electric power utilities to measure the average length of
interruption. It is typically measured in hours.
Methodology:
1) Total number of customer interruptions = SAIFI
Total number of customers served
2) Sum of all customer interruption duration = CAIDI
Total Number of customer interruptions
3) Report as one figure SAIFI/CAIDI
Benchmark:
According to IEEE Standard 1366-1998 the median value for North American
utilities is approximately: 1.10 interruptions/1.36 hours duration per customer.
Comments and
Limitations:
It is normal to expect interruptions in service for a number of reasons including

scheduled maintenance and equipment breakdown. To establish the opportunity to
have a reasonable comparison between energy providers, major storms and weather
events are typically excluded due to their unpredictability and randomness since
they are difficult to predict, prevent or mitigate against.
Other
which use this indicator:
With more than 370,000 members in over 160 countries, the Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the IEEE Standards Association are leading
developers of international standards that underpin many of today's products and
services, particularly in telecommunications, information technology and power
generation.
BC Hydro
Ontario Energy Board (OEB) Service Quality Reporting Program
New York State Electric & Gas Corporation
Example:
BC Hydro
2003/2004 - 1.43 interruptions/2.69 hours duration per customer annually.
20
Methodology Report
C.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Fire and Emergency Response

Number of firefighters per 100,000 capita
Rationale:
Fire response is one of the fundamental services that all cities provide in its role of
protecting life and property of its citizens. The choice of 100,000 population was
chosen to permit cities of different sizes to be able to compare results with each
other relatively easily and effectively. It should be noted that in Canada this statistic
is typically collected per 1000 capita and a slight mathematical adjustment may be
necessary to reflect this difference to obtain an accurate comparison with other
jurisdictions.
Definition:
A fire fighter means a full time operational staff member located in the fire
suppression unit that regularly responds to daily calls. It is not intended to include,
staff from fire prevention, safety, training, administration, senior management not
directly involved in fire suppression, communication and dispatch.
Methodology:
(Total number of fire fighters multiplied by 100,000)

Official population of the City
Benchmark:
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) states that: the median staffing rate for
career fire departments in Canada is roughly one firefighter per 1,000 capita or 100
per 100,000 population.
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator does not accommodate volunteer fire fighters. This is a rare situation
for most cities located in the urban core. However, if a city has volunteer fire
fighters, this figure should be captured and reported separately. This measure is only
intended to identify the number of paid fire fighters engaged in fire suppression or
directly related activities. If there are other related fire services provided that are
deemed to be relevant then these could also be captured and reported separately.
Other
which use this
indicator:
The U.S. based National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
Example:
In 2005, the City of Toronto had an official population of 2.48 million and 2766
first response fire fighters. Using this indicator, Toronto has 111 fire fighters per
100,000 capita.
Most North American cities.
Vancouver currently has 123 fire fighters per 100,000.

In 2006, Montreal had 122 fire fighters per 100,000 capita.
21
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:

Number of fire related deaths per 100,000 capita
Rationale:
One of the many measures used to demonstrate the effectiveness of a citys fire
services is the number of fire related deaths that occur on an annual basis. This is a
figure that is easily captured and reported by most countries.
Definition:
The number of deaths annually directly attributed to a fire incident.
Methodology:
(Total number of citizen fire related deaths in a 12 month period * 100,000)

The official population of the City
Benchmark:
The U.S based National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)

National statistics for citizen deaths directly attributed to a fire incident:
Canada: 1.1 per 100,000 capita (2001)
Japan: 1.7 per 100,000 capita (2001)
Sweden: 1.5 per 100,000 capita (2002)
United Kingdom: 0.9 per 100,000 capita (2002)
United States: 2.2 per 100,000 capita (2001)
Comments and
Limitations:
Some of the factors that can influence the rate of fatalities in a city include: Age and
density of housing, fire prevention and education efforts, socio-demographics,
enforcement of Fire Code, and presence of working smoke detectors (OMBI).
Other
which use this
indicator:
Information is supplied by the Council of Canadian Fire Marshals and Fire

Commissioners (CCFM &FC) and Statistics Canada.
Example:
In 2005, Toronto had 0.5 citizen fire related deaths per 100,000 capita.
The U.S based National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
In 2005, Vancouver had 0.33 citizen fire related deaths per 100,000 capita.
In 2006, Montreal had 0.96 citizen fire related deaths per 100,000 capita.
22
Methodology Report
Theme:
Supporting Indicator: Response time for fire department from initial call
Rationale:
The average response time (in minutes and seconds) it takes a fire department to
respond to an initial distress call is an indicator of how protected a Citys residents
are from fires and emergencies.
Definition:
The annual number of minutes elapsing from all initial distress calls to the on-site
arrival of the fire department personnel and equipment (the numerator) is divided
by the number of fire department responses in the same year (the denominator),
expressed in minutes and seconds.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total number of minutes taken to respond to all
emergency calls being the time elapsed from the initial call for assistance was
received to arrival on-site of fire department personnel and equipment is calculated
for the preceding twelve months. This figure is then divided by the total number of
such emergency events where the fire department dispatched their personnel and
equipment over that same twelve month period. The result is expressed in minutes
and seconds.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Because it has the appearance of objectivity, response time is the single key
operational measure used to assess system performance from the citizens
perspective
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Belo Horizonte and the U.S. National Fire Protection Association.
Example:
23
Methodology Report
D.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Health
Health
Under age five mortality per 1,000 live births
Rationale:
The under age 5 mortality rate is a leading indicator of the level of child health
and overall development in cities. Child mortality is an indicator of the status
of the City as a healthy or unhealthy place to live. In addition, mortality rates
are among the most frequently used indicators to compare levels of
socioeconomic development across countries. Improving Child Mortality rates
is a vital component of the Millennium Development Goals.
Definition:
The probability of a child born in a specified year dying before reaching the age
of five is expressed as a rate per 1,000 live births,.
Methodology:
The under age five mortality rate, is strictly speaking, not a rate (i.e. the number
of deaths divided by the number of population at risk during a certain period of
time) but a probability of death derived from a life table and expressed as rate
per 1,000 live births.
Computation, data collection and sources of data:
Age-specific mortality rates among children and infants are calculated from
birth and death data derived from vital registration, census, and/or household
surveys. Estimates based on household surveys data are obtained directly (using
birth history, as in Demographic and Health Surveys) or indirectly (Brass
method, as in Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, UNICEF). The data are then
summed for children under age five and are expressed as a rate per 1,000 live
births.
At the city level, the best source of data is complete vital statistics registration
system one covering at least 90 percent of vital events in the population.
Such systems are uncommon in developing countries, so estimates may be
obtained from sample surveys or derived by applying direct and indirect
estimations techniques to registration, census or survey data.
Benchmark:
To be determined as comparative data is accrued over the initial five years of

the Global City Indicators Program.
Comments and Limitations:
In developing countries, household surveys are essential to the calculation of

this indicator, but there are some limits to their quality. Survey data are subject
to recall error, and surveys estimating under age five deaths require large
samples, because such incidences are uncommon and representative households
cannot ordinarily be identified by the sampling. Moreover, the frequency of the
survey is generally only every three to five years. Therefore, when using
household surveys it is important to take sampling errors into account. Also,
indirect estimates rely on estimated actuarial (life) tables that may be
inappropriate for the population concerned.
Other
Which Use This Indicator:
Belo Horizonte, Porto Alegre, Sao Paulo, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, and
Bogota.
The United Nations Population Division, the United Nations Childrens Fund
and the World Health Organization regularly produce estimates of under age
24
Methodology Report
five mortality based on available national data.

Example:
In 2002, Zimbabwes under age five mortality rate was 123 per 1,000.
25
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Rationale:
Health
Immunization against infectious childhood diseases (percent of eligible
population that have been immunized)
Immunization indicators measure a citys immunization services. Immunizations
are important because they are a guide to disease eradication and elimination
efforts and are a good indicator of health system performance (WHO, World
Health Statistics 2006).
It is important to monitor the percentage of one-year-olds immunized for measles
since every year, almost 11 million children under the age of five in developing
countries die from readily preventable and treatable illnesses, of which measles is
one (UNICEF, Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses).
This indicator directly correlates to the prevalence of health services in a City, the
amount of access the Citys population has to these services, and the education of
the City population to recognize the warning signs of life-threatening illnesses
such as measles.
Definition:
The percent of the eligible population that have been immunized against
diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, poliomyelitis, tuberculosis and hepatitis B
before their first birthday (the numerator) divided by the number of infants
surviving to age one (the denominator) (Department of Economic and Social
Affairs Indicators of Sustainable Development, 2001).
Methodology:
Measurement Method:
(Number of infants fully immunized with for diphtheria, tetanus,

pertussis, poliomyelitis, and hepatitis B * 100) / The number of infants
surviving at age one;
(Number of infants fully immunized for tuberculosis * 100) / Number

of live births;
(Number of infants in their second year of age fully immunized for

measles * 100) / The number of infants surviving at age two
Note: If the national schedule provides for immunization in a different age group,
the value should be the percentage of children immunized in the target age group.
A child is considered adequately immunized against a disease when he/she has
received the following number of doses: tuberculosis (1 dose); diphtheria, tetanus
and pertussis (DTP) (2 or 3 doses according to the immunization scheme adopted
in the country); poliomyelitis (3 doses of live or killed vaccine); measles (1 dose);
hepatitis B (3 doses).
(This indicator was adapted from the Department of Economic and Social Affairs
Indicators of Sustainable Development, 2001)
In order to gather information from the appropriate sources data should be
requested through the Citys department or ministry of health. The following data
should be requested:
1. Administrative coverage data:
the number of doses administered as recorded by the health
26
Methodology Report
providers;
the number of children in the target population, usually live births
or infants surviving to the age of one year;
an estimate of completeness of reporting, e.g., percentage of
districts in the country that reported their data (this information
should be included in a footnote to the actual percentage).
(adapted from the WHO/UNICEF Joint Reporting Form on Vaccine-preventable

Diseases)
Benchmark:
According to the Global Strategy for Health, all children should be immunized for
diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, poliomyelitis, tuberculosis, and hepatitis B.
The Ninth General Programme at Work says 90% of children should be
immunized against the above mentioned diseases.
Comments and
Limitations:
Measles remains a leading cause of death among young children, despite the
availability of a safe and effective vaccine for the past 40 years. An estimated
345,000 people, the majority of them children, died from measles in 2005 (the
latest year for which figures are available) (WHO, January 2007).
For the proper management of immunization programs, it is essential to be able to
break down data in such a way as to show the percentage covered in the first year
of life (or second year of life for measles).
Immunization coverage surveys are also recommended to be conducted
periodically to verify administrative coverage data. Cities should provide their
best estimate of coverage (administrative or survey data) (based on WHO
standards, 2007).
It is important to capture immunizations performed by the private sector and not
just the public sector.
Other
which use this
indicator:
WHO, UNICEF
Example:
27
Methodology Report
Theme:
Health
Supporting Indicator: Number of in-patient hospital beds per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of in-patient public hospital beds is one of the few available indicators
which monitor the level of a health service delivery. Service delivery is an
important part of health systems, and in-patient public hospital bed density is one of
the few indicators which can be collected worldwide (WHO, World Health
Statistics 2006).
Definition:
Number of in-patient public hospital beds (the numerator) divided by 100,000th of

the city population (the denominator), expressed as the number of in-patient public
hospital beds per 100,000 of the City population.
Methodology:
At a locally determined date, the total number of public and private hospital inpatient beds in the City is determined. The city population is then divided by
100,000 and the result divided into the number of public hospital in-patient beds in
the City. The result is expressed as the number of in-patient hospital beds per
100,000 of city population.
Hospital beds include in-patient and maternity beds. This includes beds in wards
which are closed for reasons such as lack of health staff, building works, etc. It also
includes beds for patients admitted who require continual assistance, incubators and
specialized care. It does not include day care beds, pre-anesthesia beds, wake-up
beds, beds for members of patients family, cots for births without complications,
and beds for hospital staff. Cots and delivery beds are excluded (Urban Audit
Methodological Handbook, 2004)
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator relies on administrative records, based on reported data by public inpatient facilities. Data may also come from censuses of health care facilities.
Other
which use this
indicator:
World Health Organization, Urban Audit Methodological Handbook
Example:
In 2001, Budapest had 1,281 in-patient hospital beds per 100,000 of its population
(European Urban Audit).
28
Methodology Report
Theme:
Health
Supporting Indicator: Number of physicians per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The availability of physicians is an important indicator of the strength of a citys

health system. There is evidence that the number of physicians is positively
associated with immunization coverage, outreach of primary care, and infant, child
and maternal survival (WHO, World Health Statistics 2006).
Definition:
The number of general or specialized practitioners whose work-place is in the city

(the numerator) divided by 100,000th of the city population (the denominator),
expressed as the number of physicians per 100,000 of the City population.
Methodology:
The number of physicians is determined at a locally agreed upon date. The number
of physicians is divided by the result of the city population divided by 100,000. The
result is expressed as the number of physicians per 100,000 population.
For this indicator, a physician is someone who graduates from any facility or school
of medicine whose work-place is in the City. This excludes doctors in hospitals
unless they are the first access point for patients. (Urban Audit Methodological
Handbook, 2004).
In order to capture doctors working part-time in hospitals and in practices, Full
Time Equivalents (FTE) should be applied.
Cities report the number of physicians based on administrative records such as
registered physicians in the City. Information may also be obtained from the
census, labor force statistics or other surveys which inquire about occupation.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
The purpose of this indicator is to measure the number of first access points for
patients, and this is why the indicator focuses on generalists in practices and not
hospitals.
The accuracy and completeness of the human resource data in countries can be a
problem because databases are not updated frequently, private sector data is often
not included and definitions of workers vary. It is for this reason that yearly
updated data sources, such as administrative records, should be used. The definition
presented above should be the definition used when gathering data to report on this
indicator.
Other
World Health Organization, Urban Audit Methodological Handbook
Example:
In 2001, Hamburg had 192 doctors per 100,000 of its population (European Urban
Audit).
29
Methodology Report
E.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Recreation
Recreation
Square meters of public recreation space per capita
Rationale:
Recreation is an important aspect of city life, contributing to the health of citizens

and the vitality of the city. Recreation is a service that many cities provide through
a parks and recreation department or related office
Definition:
Square meters of indoor and outdoor public recreation space (the numerator)
divided by the population of the city (the denominator), expressed as the number of
square meters of recreation space per capita.
Methodology:
Calculating recreation space could be a very detailed, time consuming and onerous
task. The following methodology has been adapted from other methodologies i) to
be comprehensive yet simple and ii) to be collectable and reportable in a consistent
manner by cities around the world.
Public Recreation Space
Public recreation space is defined broadly to mean land and buildings open to the
public for recreation.
Public recreation space includes parks, ball fields (soccer, football, baseball etc.),
courts (tennis, basketball etc.), golf courses, recreation buildings (gyms,
neighborhood centers), public plazas (used for recreation), beaches,
boating/swimming lakes, trails, playgrounds, and gardens. Recreation space can
include:
City owned or maintained land and buildings. This can include city-owned
undeveloped land intended for recreation (future recreation land).
Other recreation lands and buildings within the City not owned or operated by
the City, provided they are open to the public. This category can include state or
provincially owned lands and buildings, schools and colleges, as well as nonprofit and commercial facilities (such as commercial gyms).
Recreation space includes only space that primarily serves a recreation purpose.
Recreation space does not include space that does not have a primary recreation
purpose. Do not include, for example, :
Green areas whose primary purpose is natural resource protection,
Entertainment facilities (including professional sports stadiums)
Zoos
Cultural facilities, such as museums.
Calculation
It is recommended that recreation spaces be delineated using aerial photography
and/or land use maps. Once the areas have been identified on a map, the area in
square meters can be calculated using low cost Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) or, if not available, through use of hand held measuring devices. Area can be
calculated in hectares or acres and converted to square meters. A City Planning
Department together with departments knowledgeable about the city should be able
30
Methodology Report
to accomplish this task. Local academic institutions may also be of assistance.

Measurement guidelines
Include the area of the entire recreation site (including, for example, parking areas,
wooded areas of parks, building maintenance and utility areas). Rationale: i)
simplicity ii) these areas support the recreation function.
For multi-story buildings count the floor area of all floors in the building, if this is
known, and can be done easily.
For multi-use facilities count only the portion of the land or building devoted to
recreation (the play areas at a school or college, for example, not the entire school
site).
Avoid double counting. For example, do not include indoor facilities on parkland.
Reporting
If cities report only city-owned recreation space, this should be noted on the report
form.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Many cities report city-owned recreation space. While this is simple, it does not
include the contribution to recreation from non-city owned facilities. This may be
very important in developing countries. While the proposed methodology in this
Global City Indicators Program is more complex, the result will ultimately be more
meaningful.
It is recommended that a recreation space inventory be created (see sample below).
The inventory can be refined over time.
Other
which use this
indicator:
Cities in the Province of Ontario, Canada, report on municipally owned indoor and
outdoor recreation space through the Municipal Performance Measurement Program
http://www.mah.gov.on.ca
Example:
In 2005 the City of Toronto provided 27.4 square meters of recreation space per
capita (maintained parks only; http://www.toronto.ca/city_performance/pdf/2005mpmp-narrative-p-f-app-C.pdf).
In 2005 Anne Arundel County (United States) provided 63.1 square meters of
recreation space per capita (includes County and municipal land, plus school
recreation areas, plus trails, and future parks).
http://www.aacounty.org/RecParks/lpprp.cfm
31
Methodology Report
Example City Recreation Inventory
City Owned or Maintained

1
Tucker St., West Annapolis

Annapolis Sports Complex, Locust Ave
(Germantown Fields).
0.2
Street End
35
Citywide
Poplar Trail
College Creek Park, Clay St & College
Creek
Stanton Center, West Washington St.
Trail
0.2
0.5
Fleet Street Park

West Gate Circle
Wiley H. Bates Field, Smithville Rd
Annapolis Walk Community Park, Belle
Drive
15
16
17
Spa Creek Trail

Bates Athletic Complex, including WeemsWhalen Memorial Field
Spa Creek Conservancy, Silopanna Rd.
Amos Garrett Park, Amos Garrett Blvd &
Spa View Road
Newman St. Playground
Recreation Center, Compromise Street &
St. Mary's St.
Susan C. Campbell Park (City Dock)
First & Spa Creek, Eastport
18
19
City Owned
Type
Acres
(recreation)
Map #
City Owned
Type
Map #
Acres
(recreation)
Parks and Recreation Areas, Small US City
Housing Authority Sites

Annapolis Gardens/Bowman
H 1 Court
H 2 Glenwood Senior Center

Obery Court/College Creek
H 3 Terrace
Mini Park
Center
Y
Y
H 4 Newtowne Twenty
H 5 Bloomsbury Square
N
N
0.05
0.1
15
Mini Park
Special Facility
Citywide
Y
Y
N
N
N
Neighbhd
3.86
Trail
H 6 Eastport Terrace / Harbor House

H 7 Robinwood
Schools/Colleges
Mills Parole Elementary (Walter
S 1 S. Mills Park)
Germantown Elementary (see
S 2 under City of Annapolis)
15
5
Citywide
Conservation
N/Y
Y
0.25
0.5
Street End
Mini Park
Y
Y
S 5 St. John's College

S 6 US Naval Academy
1.5
0.5
0.1
Center
Street End
Street End
Y
Y
Y
Severn Ave. & Spa Creek, Eastport
0.1
Street End
0.1
Street End
1.5
Special Facility
S 12 Tyler Heights Elementary
0.75
Neighbhd
S 13 Georgetown East Elementary
22
Horn Point, Chesapeake Ave., Eastport

Annapolis Maritime Museum/Herby
Sadler. 2nd Street and Bayshore Ave.
Rev. Joseph J. Turner Park, Third St. &
Chester Ave.
Davis Park, Fourth St. & Back Creek
(George Washington Davis Memorial
Park)
S 7 Annapolis Elem. School

S8 St. Mary's High School
S 9 Eastport Elementary
Bates Middle (see under City of
S 10 Annapolis)
Annapolis Middle (in AA
S 11 County)
0.1
Street End
23
24
25
26
Leon Wolfe, 4th St & Spa Creek

Fifth Street & Spa Creek
Burnside Park, Burnside St., Eastport
Northwest Street Park
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Street End
Street End
Street End
Street End
Y
Y
Y
Y
Hillsmere Elementary (in AA

S 14 County)
Other public/ semi public
facilities
01 Salvation Army Building,
02 Maryland Hall
Eisenhower Golf Course
27
28
29
30
Eastport Post Office Park, Americana Dr.

Vytar Property
Truxtun Park, Hilltop Lane
Lafayette Ave & Spa Creek
0.1
10.5
70
0.2
Mini Park
Conservation
Citywide
Mini Park
Y
Y
Y
Y
Private Facilites
Admiral Hts Community Pool
Green Acres Park
N
N
31
32
Primrose Acres, Garden Gate & Edelmar

Monticello Ave., at Spa View Ave.
0.2
0.2
Mini Park
Street End
Y
Y
Heritage Pool
Hunt Meadow Pool
N
N
33
Back Creek Nature Park, Edgewood Rd.
12
Citywide
34
Chambers Park, Dorsey Ave. & Kirby Lane
Neighbhd
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
20
21
S 3 West Annapolis Elementary

S 4 J. Albert Adams Academy
32
6.4
School
School
School
School
N
N
School
School
N
N
School
School
School
N
N
N
School
30
School
13
School
11.9
School
0.7
8.1
0
1.4
13.7
208
N
N
Y
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Recreation
City expenditure on public recreation as a percentage of overall city budget
Rationale:
The amount of expenditure by the city on public recreation as a percentage of the

total annual city expenditure is an indicator of the emphasis the city places on
recreational facilities and services.
Definition:
The total expenditure on public recreation in the preceding year (the numerator)
divided by the total expenditure by the city in that same period (the denominator),
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date (after the receipt of the audited accounts for the
preceding year) the total expenditure on public recreation facilities and services in
that preceding year is determined and this figure is then divided by the total
expenditure by the city in that same period.
The figures used in this calculation are to be taken directly from the citys audited
financial statements without amendment or variation.
Recreation expenditure includes the acquisition, maintenance, capital improvement
and provision of services which promote the use and enjoyment, and enrichment of
public recreation space as that term is defined in the companion City Indicator of
Square meters of public recreation space per capita.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
The inclusion of this city indicator was requested by Infrastructure Canada.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Example:
33
Methodology Report
F.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Safety
Safety
Number of homicides per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of homicides is an indicator of the amount of crime and a lead

indicator of feelings of personal safety.
Definition:
The annual number of reported homicides (the numerator) is divided by one

100,000th of the city population (the denominator), expressed as the number of
homicides per 100,000 of City population.
Methodology:
Each year at a locally determined date the total number of reported intentional and
non-intentional homicides is determined. The number of homicides is divided by
the result of the city population divided by 100,000. The result is expressed as the
number of homicides per 100,000 population.
Homicide includes intentional and non-intentional homicide. Intentional homicide
refers to death deliberately inflicted on a person by another person, including
infanticide. Non-intentional homicide refers to death non-deliberately inflicted on a
person by another person. This includes manslaughter, but excludes traffic
accidents that result in the death of a person and excludes suicides.
The data can be obtained from the police or other law enforcement agencies.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Homicides are not always reported as such. In particular, domestic homicides are
sometimes reported as suicides or accidents.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
UN-HABITAT (homicides per 10,000); FCM, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver

(violent crimes per 100,000); Bogota and King County (number and rate of
homicides); Bogota (violent death rate)
Example:
In 2003, Bogota had 23.4 reported homicides per 100,000 of its population
(http://www.worldpress.org/Americas/2119.cfm).
34
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Safety
Number of sworn police officers per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of sworn police officers per 100,000 population is an indicator of the
overall crime prevention in place in a City.
Definition:
The number of permanent full-time (or full-time equivalent) sworn police officers
(the numerator) divided by 100,000th of the city population (the denominator),
expressed as the number of police officers per 100,000 of the City population.
Methodology:
Each year, law enforcement agencies will report the total number of sworn law
enforcement officers as of a locally determined date. Sworn officers will meet the
following criteria:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Work in an official capacity;

Have full arrest powers;
Wear a badge;
Carry a firearm; and
Are paid from governmental funds set aside specifically for payment of sworn
law enforcement representatives.
Personnel counts are based on permanent, full-time equivalents (FTE). Part time
employees are converted to full-time equivalents (e.g., four employees working 10
hours per week would equal one full-time employee working a 40-hour week).
Data for this indicator should be gathered through police personnel information
collected annually. For example, the United States relies on the Uniform Crime
Reporting (UCR) Program for their data (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm), while
Canada relies on a Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (http://www.statcan.ca/cgibin/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=3302&lang=en&db=IMDB&dbg=f
&adm=8&dis=2) as well as data collected through the Police Administration Survey
(http://www.statcan.ca/cgibin/imdb/p2SV.pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=3301&lang=en&db=IMDB&dbg=f
&adm=8&dis=2).
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Temporary officers are not included in this count.
Other
Canada, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Example:
In 2005 Washington, D.C had 682 sworn police officers per 100,000 population
(FBI, Crime in the United States).
35
Methodology Report
Theme:
Safety
Supporting Indicator: Violent crime rate per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of violent crime is an indicator of the amount of serious criminal

offences in a City and a lead indicator of feelings of personal safety. The
number of violent crimes in a city is considered a benchmark measure of the
overall level of safety in the City.
Definition:
The number of all violent crimes reported (the numerator) divided by 100,000th
of the city population (the denominator), expressed as the number of violent
crimes per 100,000 of the City population.
Methodology:
Violent crimes (the numerator) are offenses that involve force or the threat of
force to a person. Violent crime is composed of four offenses (in order of
severity):
1. Murder and non-negligent manslaughter;
2. Forcible rape;
3. Robbery; and
4. Aggravated assault.
In order to calculate the numerator, use the following calculation:
Violent Crime = (number of murders and non-negligent manslaughters +
number of forcible rapes + number of robberies + number of aggravated
assaults)
This number is then divided by the result of the city population divided by
100,000.
Source of information usually a reporting program such as the Uniform Crime
Reports (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm).
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
For a multiple-offense criminal, only the most serious/sever offense should be

counted.
Other
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics,

Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Example:
In 2005 in Washington, D.C, there were 1,402 violent crimes reported per
100,000 population (FBI, Crime in the United States 2005).
36
Methodology Report
G.
Social Services
UNDER DEVELOPMENT
37
Methodology Report
H.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Solid Waste
Solid Waste
Percentage of city population with regular solid waste collection
Rationale:
The percentage of the city population served by regular solid waste collection is an
indicator of city health, cleanliness and quality of life.
Definition:
The number of people within the city that are served by solid waste collection (the
numerator) is divided by the city population (the denominator), expressed as a
percentage.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of households in the city serviced with
regular solid waste collection is determined. The definition of regular solid waste
collection is that on at least a weekly basis the household has its solid waste pickedup, transported and dropped at a proper treatment facility (recycling or landfill
sites). If the solid waste is collected in any moving vehicle by persons that have not
constituted a legally established entity, the house is considered not to have solid
waste collection service.
Information should be obtained from the local operator(s) of solid waste collection
systems.
The number of households being serviced by the regular solid waste collection
service is then multiplied by the then current average household size for that city to
determine the number of persons serviced with regular solid waste collection. This
number is then divided by city population. The result is expressed as a percentage
of city population serviced by solid waste collection.
Benchmark:
In developed countries and in most urban regions of developing countries in Latin

America, the collection of solid waste is between 95 and 100 percent. Urban areas
are considered to be well served if they fall in this range. However, in developing
countries, many urban areas have insufficient, inadequate or no landfill sites.
This benchmark will be refined using comparative data accrued over the initial 5
Comments and
Limitations:
Results will only indicate how much of the city population has access to solid waste
collection systems, not the quality of the system: the quality of the service (street
level), the levels of recycling (and of land fill misuse), or the capacity of the land
fill to meet the demand. Some of these issues will be addressed in the supporting
indicators.
Use of persons rather than city area as the metric for this indicator avoids the
distortion arising from local government areas that include both urban and nonurban areas.
The proper discharge, transportation and treatment of solid waste is one of the most
important components of life in a city and one of the first areas in which
governments and institutions should focus. Normally, solid waste systems cover
the region of several urban areas. Solid waste systems contribute in many ways to
public health, the local economy, the environment, and the social understanding
38
Methodology Report
and education about the latter. A proper solid waste system can foster recycling
practices that maximize the life cycle of landfills and create recycling microeconomies; and it provides alternative sources of energy that help reduce the
consumption of electricity and/or petroleum based fuels.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Belo Horizonte, Bogota
Example:
In 1999, 75% of Kathmandus population was served by solid waste collection

(Asian Development Bank, Cities Data Book).
The World Bank, the Asia Development Bank, Inter American Development Bank,
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the World Health
Organization, the United Nations (UN-HABITAT), the Urban Audit, the US
Environmental Protection Agency, Ingeniera Sin Fronteras (Engineering Without
Frontiers), Engineers for a Sustainable World, the International Rescue Committee,
the North American Environmental Education Association, the Center for
Ecological Pollution Prevention, the Solid Waste Association of North America,
and the International Solid Waste Management Association.
39
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Solid Waste
Percentage of solid waste disposed to sanitary landfill/incinerated and
burned openly/disposed to open dump/recycled/other
Rationale:
Many cities generate more solid waste than they can dispose of. Even when
municipal budgets are adequate for collection, the safe disposal of collected wastes
often remains a problem. Open dumping and unsanitary landfills are sometimes the
main disposal methods in many developing countries; sanitary landfills are the norm
in only a handful of cities.
Definition:
Solid waste: a) disposed to sanitary landfill; b) incinerated and burned openly; c)

disposed to open dump; d) recycled; or e) other (the numerator) divided by the total
amount of solid waste (the denominator).
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total tonnage amount of the citys solid waste that is
disposed of in: a) a sanitary landfill; b) an incinerator or burned openly; c) an open
dump; d) recycled; or e) other is determined. These amounts are then divided by the
total tonnage of solid waste produced in the city. This total is then multiplied by
100.
This information should be available from the municipal bodies, public services and
major private contractors dealing with solid waste collection and disposal.
Data may be obtained from specific studies carried out on solid wastes for specific
projects.
Parastatal and private companies dealing with solid waste treatment shall be able to
provide information on selected disposal methods. Solid waste experts as well as
NGOs working in this area may be consulted for other sources.
Benchmark:
Benchmarks are set locally through processes such as Agenda 21. UN-HABITAT
reports that in cities of highly developed countries, 95% of solid wastes are formally
disposed of, including 19% formally recycled, leaving 5% to open dumps. In
Transitional countries, 75% of solid wastes go to open dumps.
Comments and
Limitations:
When data is not available, please provide at least an estimate of the proportion of
waste to sanitary landfill (a) and the proportion disposed to open dump (c).
Other
which use this
indicator:
UN-HABITAT; the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Indicators of

Sustainable Development; the Asia Development Bank; the Urban Audit.
Example:
The City of Toronto reported that 60 percent of its residential solid waste was
disposed of in landfills in 2005, a decrease from 64 percent in 2004. 18 percent of
residential solid waste was recycled.
40
Methodology Report
Theme:
Solid Waste
Supporting Indicator: Total solid waste generation per capita
Rationale:
Sustainability is achievable if consumption is efficient and generates minimum

amounts of waste.
Definition:
Total solid waste collected per year in tons (the numerator) divided by the
estimated average population for the city for that year (the denominator).
Methodology:
The total amount of solid waste collected over the course of the year is collected
from municipal bodies, public services and major private contractors dealing with
solid waste collection and disposal. This includes solid waste generated from
residential and industrial sources.
Annual estimates of the total city population are available from the city, state or
national government based on records of births, deaths and immigration and
supplemented by data on housing construction and surveys of housing occupancy.
Average annual population is used to offset effects of seasonal changes in
population.
In the notes section, please identify residential-only solid waste generations per
capita, if possible.
Benchmark:
Benchmarks are variable, established through local Agenda 21 process. For

example, the 1994 Solid Waste Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver
Regional District (GVRD) had a goal to reduce solid waste disposal from a 1990
baseline figure of 1.38 tons per year per capita to less than 0.69 tons per year per
capita by the year 2000 (personal tonnages including demolition, land-clearing
and construction wastes).
Comments and
Limitations:
Only areas for which solid waste is collected are considered in the calculation.
Other
UN-HABITAT uses kg of solid waste collected per capita served. City of Tokyo
uses amount of garbage (kg) generated per person per year as a supplementary
indicator. The Asian Development Bank and the United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs Indicators of Sustainable Development also use this
indicator.
Example:
41
Methodology Report
I.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Rationale:
Transport
Transport
Km of transportation system per 100,000 population (separated by mode
road/dedicated busway/passenger rail/bicycle path/pedestrian path)
The density of a citys transportation network can provide insight into traffic
congestion, transportation system flexibility, and urban form. Cities with larger
amounts of transportation mileage tend to be more geographically compact, and
may be more supportive of public transit, and non-motorized modes of
transportation. Such cities also tend to offer multiple routes between origin and
destination points, spreading traffic over more routes and thereby reducing
congestion on any single route.
Measuring each type of transportation infrastructure sheds light on travel
behaviorit will be impossible for cities with no passenger rail infrastructure to
score highly on other indicators related to travel mode.
Definition:
The total lane-kilometers of public roads and dedicated busway, and centerlinekilometers of passenger rail, dedicated bicycle and pedestrian paths, and other
specific transportation infrastructure within the city (the numerator), divided by
100,000th of city population, expressed as km of transportation system per 100,000
population. Separate calculations would be performed for each type of
transportation infrastructure.
Methodology:
Centerline kilometers can be counted using computerized mapping, aerial

photography, or existing paper maps, all of which should be field-verified. The
definition of public roads or bicycle/pedestrian facilities will vary from city to
city. For many cities, this will equate to publicly maintained roads, in which case
city maintenance records can also clarify centerline kilometers. For other cities, this
indicator will equate to the amount of paved roads, or roads with public access,
regardless of pavement or maintenance status.
Bicycle paths should include all marked bicycle lanes on public roads, as well as
off-road paths available for bicycle or pedestrian use. Pedestrian facilities should
include all roads with sidewalks (on either side), as well as off-road sidewalks or
paths available for pedestrian use (non-specific bicycle/pedestrian paths should be
double-countedonce each for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure).
The inventory of centerline kilometers should be updated annually.
City population can be gathered from a number of sources, such as censuses, official
estimates, and tax records.
Benchmark:
To be determined as comparative data are accrued over the initial five-year

collection period.
Comments and
Limitations:
The extent of the transportation system can belie other factors that may degrade the
travel experience. For example, a large amount of roads with poor quality pavement
or unpaved roads can actually indicate a transportation system in need of upgrades.
The inventory of centerline km also does not necessarily take into account
geographic barriers (such as rivers or mountains) that can contribute to travel
42
Methodology Report
congestion, regardless of the amount of infrastructure present.
Other
which use this
indicator:
The Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative (UTBI) centerline km per million

residents as part of its Mobility in Cities Database.
Example:
In Stuttgart, there are approximately 7.9 km of road per 100,000 inhabitants.
43
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Rationale:
Transport
Modal split (percent of commuters using a travel mode other than a
personal vehicle)
The mode of transportation used to commute to work is a key indicator of
transportation policy, traffic congestion, urban form, and energy use.
Cities with lower personal vehicle usage tend to be more supportive of public
transit, and are more geographically compact. Lower SOV use is increasingly
correlated with lower energy consumption and lower emissions of smog-producing
chemicals.1
Definition:
The number of commuters working in the subject city who typically use a mode
other than a private SOV as their primary way to travel to work (the numerator)
divided by all trips to work, regardless of mode (the denominator). Non-SOV modes
can include carpools, bus, mini-bus, train, tram, light rail, ferry, motorcycle, bicycle,
walking, and other modes.
Methodology:
The definition of the subject population should be carefully considered. This

indicator uses commuters who work in the subject city, regardless of where they
live. Even if these individuals do not live in the subject city, they use the
transportation resources of the city, and therefore create impacts on the citys entire
transportation system.
The most likely sources of data for this indicator are travel surveys that collect trip
frequency, trip duration, and travel mode information from a statistically significant
sample of a citys population. Such surveys are frequently performed at irregular
intervals (primarily due to the cost and time associated with such an undertaking).
One common form of survey is a written travel log. Individuals or families use a
log book or notebook to record information such as travel mode, time, distance, and
length of each trip.2
For cases where multiple modes are used, the indicator should reflect the primary
travel mode, either by length of trip on that mode or by distance traveled on that
mode. For example, if a person drives a SOV from home to a suburban train station
(5 minutes), takes a 30-minute train ride to the central city, and then takes a 5minute bus ride to their office, the primary travel mode is the passenger train.
This information is also frequently collected in general population censuses, which
occur at regular intervals.
Benchmark:

collection period.
Comments and
Limitations:
Ideally, this indicator should evolve to reflect travel on all modes, and not just SOV
vs. non-SOV modes.
Surveys (including the census) are the primary methodology for collecting this data.
1
2
UN HABITAT Urban Indicators Guidelines. Page 44.

European Common Indicators (ECI): Toward a Local Sustainability Profile. Page 184.
44
Methodology Report
However, surveys are inherently subject to problems such as sampling bias and
participant error. Accordingly, survey methodology needs to be carefully
constructed, tested, and verified, before being implemented.
It is also not clear that higher non-SOV mode shares always equate to a more
livable city. Higher SOV use can be one measure of affluence, while extreme
transit dependence can be a sign of poverty and crowding.
Other
which use this
indicator:
Mode splits are frequently collected by cities and nations throughout the world.
Non-municipal organizations and initiatives such as the UN-HABITAT Global
Urban Indicators Program, the Asian Development Bank, CEROI, the Urban
Transportation Benchmarking Initiative, and the European Common Indicators also
collect similar data.
Example:
In Hong Kong, approximately 92 percent of commuters use non-SOV modes to

travel to work.
45
Methodology Report
Theme:
Transport
Supporting Indicator: Number of public transit trips per 100,000 population
Rationale:
Transit usage is a key indicator of how easy it is to travel in the City by modes
other than single occupancy vehicles. The indicator might also provide insight into
transportation policy, traffic congestion, and urban form. Cities with higher transit
ridership rates tend to invest more in their transit systems and are more
geographically compact. Transit usage also addresses overall travel patterns in the
city, and not just the journey to work.
Definition:
The average number of daily transit trips originating in the city (the numerator),
divided by 100,000th of city population (the denominator), expressed as the number
of trips per 100,000 population.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the annual number of daily transit trips (ridership of
public transport) is determined and divided by 100,000th of the city population.
The result is expressed as the number of trips per 100,000 population.
However, transit systems often serve entire metropolitan areas, and not just central
cities. For this indicator, it is recommended that cities calculate the number of
transit trips with origins in the city itself divided by city population. This will still
capture many trips whose destination are outside the city, but will generally capture
the impact that the city has on the regional transit network.
Transit data can be gathered from a number of sources, including: official transit
surveys, revenue collection systems (e.g., number of fares purchased), and national
censuses.
Benchmark:
To be determined as comparative data are accrued over the initial five years of the
Comments and
Limitations:
Farebox records (e.g., transit fares paid) will be the primary source of data for this
indicator. However, the relationship between fares purchased and trips taken is not
always exact. For example, many transit systems do not actively check for proof of
fare purchaseoften, riders are expected to have valid tickets, and are severely
fined if a ticket is not presented, but enforcement of such rules is not uniform for
every rider on every trip. Other transit systems offer monthly or weekly passes,
which do not necessarily allow for accurate counts of each trip.
In many countries, a large number of trips are made via informal transit services
(e.g., mini-buses not operated by the government or municipal transit corporation).
While not part of the official transit network, these modes of transportation
nonetheless serve as de facto mass-transit.
While higher transit ridership rates are generally considered desirable, extremely
high ridership rates can also indicate cities with overcrowding problems or with
disproportionately large low-income populations.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
King County, Washington (USA). and Toronto.
46
Methodology Report
Example:
In 2005, there were approximately 12,100 daily transit trips (annual average) on the
Miami-Dade Transit (MDT) system per 100,000 residents of Miami-Dade County
(For purposes of this example, it is assumed that all MDT transit trips originated
within Miami-Dade County).
47
Methodology Report
Theme:
Transport
Supporting Indicator: Commercial Air Connectivity (Number of nonstop commercial air
destinations)
Rationale:
The diversity of nonstop commercial airline destinations is indicative of a citys

connectivity to the rest of the nation and the world. Cities with high commercial air
connectivity typically have more robust economies and political systems, and are
able to provide a higher level of service to residents.
Definition:
The number of airports that can be accessed via nonstop commercial (i.e.,
scheduled) flights from airports serving the city (maximum of two hours land travel
from the subject city).
Connecting flights are excluded because travel is theoretically possible between any
two cities in the world, given an unlimited number of connections.
Methodology:
All passenger airports typically keep a list of commercial air destinations. Web
resources including airline websites and the Official Airport Guide (OAG) can also
provide this information.
Every airport with commercial service (within the two-hour travel distance), and
any destination airport (including multiple airports serving the same city) are
included in this indicator. For example, Paris could count flights departing from
Charles de Gaulle and Orly airports. Similarly, nonstop flights originating at
Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport and terminating at Reagan
National, Dulles International, and Baltimore-Washington International Airports (all
serving Washington, DC) would all be counted individually.
Benchmark:

collection period.
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator should be updated often to reflect the frequent changes in

destinations. The commercial airline industry is particularly volatile, and the list of
destinations may occasionally reflect an airlines financial situation rather than the
citys true connectivity.
Other
which use this
indicator:
This indicator is not widely used by cities or other organizations.
Example:
The City of Albuquerque, NM (USA) is served by Albuquerque International

Sunport, which offers nonstop flights to 32 airports.
48
Methodology Report
Theme:
Transport
Supporting Indicator: Average travel speed on primary thoroughfares during peak hour
Rationale:
Travel speeds are an indicator of the overall efficiency and capacity of the
transportation network. Cities with higher peak-hour travel speeds tend to have
adequate roadway capacity to efficiently move traffic.
Definition:
The average travel speed for all private motorized vehicles and public transit
vehicles that use roads (e.g., excluding trains or trolleys), across all locally defined
thoroughfares, during the peak commuter hours (typically, morning and evening).
Methodology:
Accurate and meaningful calculation of travel speed on major thoroughfares

requires the City to answer a number of very important questions:
Which roads should be considered thoroughfares? Major freeways (highspeed, access-controlled roads) are an obvious choice, but not all cities have
such facilities. For some cities, the widest road may not be a principal traffic
artery, or may be designed specifically for slower speeds or local service.
How many monitoring locations are adequate to correctly characterize

average travel speed? This is a question that must be answered by highlyqualified traffic engineers, and will be unique to each road in each city. A single
speed monitor at a single point on a given road may not adequately capture the
average travel speed along the entire roadway, let alone an entire network of
major roads.
How many days per yearand which days of the weekshould be monitored?
What kind of equipment should be used to conduct speed monitoring?

Magnetic loops under the pavement do not always produce accurate
measurements, while pneumatic strips are designed for temporary use.
Data recorders can be installed in public transit vehicles.

Benchmark:

collection period.
Comments and
Limitations:
The cost and complexity of speed monitoring systems may be higher than many
cities wish to bear. In addition, combining speeds across different modes may not
be a fair comparison. Buses or other public transit vehicles typically make
numerous stops along a given route, whereas private vehicles do not. In addition,
several cities have dedicated rights-of way for buses, which makes their behavior
more akin to trains than to the overall traffic stream.
Other Organizations/
Agencies which use
this indicator:
The City of Porto Alegre collects this data, as does the Urban Transport
Benchmarking Initiative (UTBI) as part of its Mobility in Cities Database.
Example:
The average peak hour speed of cars and motorcycles in Madrid in 2005 was 22.8
km/h.
49
Methodology Report
Theme:
Transport
Supporting Indicator: Transportation fatalities per 100,000 population
Rationale:
Traffic accident ratesand specifically fatality ratescan serve as indicators for

the overall safety of the transportation system, the complexity of the roadway
network, the amount and effectiveness of traffic law enforcement (particularly for
pedestrians), the quality of the transportation fleet (public and private), and the
condition of the roads themselves. Traffic deaths represent the most severe type of
traffic safety failure, allowing cities to focus on their most urgent traffic safety
needs.
Definition:
The annual number of fatalities related to transportation of any kind (the

numerator), divided by 100,000th of city population (the denominator), expressed as
number of transportation deaths per 100,000 population.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the annual number of transportation fatalities is

determined and divided by 100,000th of the city population. The result is expressed
as the number of deaths per 100,000 population.
This indicator counts deaths due to any transportation-related proximate cause
(crashes, weather, violence, etc.) and aboard any mode of travel (automobile, public
transit, walking, bicycling, etc.). This indicator should count any death directly
related to a transportation incident within city limits, even if death does not occur at
the spot of the incident, but is directly attributable to the accident.
Benchmark:

collection period.
Comments and
Limitations:
Transportation fatalities are used here as a proxy for all transportation injuries.
Whereas many minor injuries are never reportedand thus cannot be measured
deaths are almost always reported.
However, it is worth noting that differences in the quality of the roadway, the
quality of motorized vehicles, and the nature of law enforcement can change the
relationship between injury and fatality. For example, automobile death rates (per
100 million miles traveled) in the United States decreased from 1.73 to 1.45, due in
part to improvements in vehicle design and regulations mandating seat belt usage.
Such improvements and enforcement may not be as widespread in other countries.
Cities and countries may have different definitions of causality, specifically related
to the amount of time that can elapse between a traffic incident and a death.
Other
which use this
indicator:
The Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative (UTBI) collects data on deaths on the
road network per year as part of its Mobility in Cities Database. Most cities collect
information on transportation-related deaths.
Example:
In 2005, there were 46 transportation deaths per 100,000 residents of London.
50
Methodology Report
J.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Wastewater
Wastewater
Percentage of city population served by wastewater collection
Rationale:
The percentage of the city population served by a wastewater collection is an

indicator of city health, cleanliness and quality of life. Wastewater collection and
treatment is a significant component of the Millennium Development Goals.
Definition:
The number of people within the city that are served by wastewater collection (the
percentage.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of households in the city serviced with
regular wastewater collection is determined by the local operator(s) of wastewater
systems. The wastewater connection must form part of a public or community
owned system of discharge of served waters and other residues through a pipe or
similar duct that is connected to a network that takes it to a facility where it is
treated.
The number of households being serviced by wastewater connection is then
multiplied by the then current average household size for that city to determine the
number of persons serviced with wastewater collection. This number is then
divided by city population. The result is expressed as a percentage of city
population serviced by wastewater collection.
Benchmark:

America, access to waste water systems is between 95 and 100 percent. Urban
areas are considered to be well served if they fall in this range. However, in
developing countries, many urban areas have insufficient or no treatment plants at
all.
Comments and
Limitations:
Results will only indicate whether or not a house has access to wastewater
systems, not the quality of the system, the capacity and quality of the service, the
levels of loss (contamination), or the capacity of the treatment plants to meet the
growth in waste water volumes.
Some of these limitations will be addressed in the supporting indicators.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Belo Horizonte, Porto Alegre, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Bogota

UN-HABITAT, the World Bank, the Inter American Development Bank, the
Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the World Health Organization, the United Nations (Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, Indicators for Sustainable Development), the Urban
Audit (European Commission), the US Environmental Protection Agency,
Ingeniera Sin Fronteras (Engineering Without Frontiers), Engineers for a
Sustainable World, the International Rescue Committee, the Laboratory for
51
Methodology Report
Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Water Renovation, the Center for Ecological
Pollution Prevention, the Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater
Treatment, and many similar organizations.
Example:
In 1999, 80% of the households in Bangalore were served by wastewater collection

(Asian Development Bank, Cities Data Book).
52
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Wastewater
Percentage of wastewater receiving no/primary/secondary/tertiary
treatment
Rationale:
It has been proven that improvement of water treatment reduces the incidence of a
variety of water-borne diseases. A reliable wastewater treatment system is a major
indicator of the level of local development and of community health. Water
pollution from human wastes is less of a problem in countries that can afford to treat
sewage and wastewater, and water pollution can be minimized with adequate
investment in treatment systems. The percentage of wastewater treated is a key
indicator of water quality management.
Definition:
Amount of wastewater undergoing: a) no treatment; b) primary treatment; c)

secondary treatment; and d) tertiary treatment (the numerator) divided by the total
amount of wastewater collected.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total amount of the citys wastewater that has
undergone: a) no treatment; b) primary treatment; c) secondary treatment; or d)
tertiary treatment is determined. These amounts are then divided by the total
amount of wastewater produced in the city. This total is then multiplied by 100.
All forms of treatment include treatment to permit water release into water
resources of different levels of environmental sensitivity. They are:
1. No treatment: collected wastewater is discharged to a water body without
any treatment, including periods when wastewater volume exceeds
treatment plant capacity.
2. Primary treatment: screens and sediments sewage to remove grosser debris.
3. Secondary treatment: reduces Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) to
acceptable levels by microbial oxidation using activated sludge or a trickle
filter.
4. Tertiary treatment: reduces BOD still further through microstraining or
filtering, the microbial removal of phosphates and nitrates, and disinfection
using chlorine or ozone.
This information is usually known by municipal authorities and is available from
the main water supply and treatment companies
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Some cities have no system for treating water. Any plan to implement new
treatment facilities in the near future may also be indicated.
BOD is the amount of dissolved oxygen required to oxidize or neutralize
biodegradable matter in water. High BOD levels represent high amounts of
contaminant matter, and the reduction of BOD is a common measure for
determining the efficacy of water treatment.
Other Organizations/
Agencies which use
this indicator:
Toronto
UN-HABITAT; Asia Development Bank.
53
Methodology Report
Example:
In 2006, 40% of Belo Horizontes collected wastewater is treated.
54
Methodology Report
Theme:
Wastewater
Supporting Indicator: Number of days effluent not in compliance with World Bank standards
Rationale:
The World Bank Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook established

guidelines for process wastewater, domestic sewage and contaminated stormwater
discharged to surface waters that are applied as minimum standards for World
Bank Group funded projects, subject to stricter local standards. Applying these
guidelines, which emphasize pollution prevention, to wastewater effluent
discharges in cities within this indicator program is a reasonable extension.
Definition:
The number of days in which one or more parameters in wastewater discharges

within the city is found to exceed the limits defined in the World Bank Pollution
Prevention and Abatement Handbook.
Methodology:
The World Bank Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook established

guidelines for 28 pollutants and parameters, as well as requiring that effluent
discharges not exceed either 0.5 milligrams per liter or 100 times the World
Health Organization drinking water standards for pesticides, dioxins, furan and
other toxics, such as polynuclear aromated hydrocarbons (PAH). In addition,
leachate from a solid waste disposal site should not exceed the guidelines for
toxic metals in wastewater effluent.
Table 4. Limits for Process Wastewater, Domestic Sewage, and Contaminated
Stormwater Discharged to Surface Waters, for General Application (milligrams
per liter, except for pH, bacteria, and temperature)
Pollutant or parameter
pH
BOD
COD
Oil and grease
TSS
Metals
Heavy metals, total
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Hexavalent
Total
Copper
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Cyanide
Free
Total
Ammonia
Fluoride
Chlorine, total residual
Phenols
Phosphorus
Sulfide
Coliform bacteria
Temperature increase
55
Limit
69
50
250
10
50
10
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.5
3.5
0.1
0.01
0.5
0.1
0.5
2.0
0.1
1.0
10
20
0.2
0.5
2.0
1.0
< 400 MPN/100 ml
< 3Ca
Methodology Report
Note: MPN, most probable number.

a. The effluent should result in a temperature increase of no more than 3
C at the edge of the zone where initial mixing and dilution take place.
Where the zone is not defined, use 100 meters from the point of
discharge.
Benchmark:
This indicator should not exceed 18 days within any calendar year (World Bank
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook).
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator varies from the Industry Sector project guidelines in the World
Bank Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook, which calls for all of the
maximum levels for pollutants and parameters being achieved at least 95 percent
of the time that the plant or unit is operating, calculated as a proportion of annual
operating hours. The benchmark is based on an assumption of constant operation
and a violation of compliance not exceeding five percent of the days in a calendar
year.
The 1999 Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook can be purchased
through the World Bank at the following website:
(http://publications.worldbank.org/ecommerce/catalog/product?item_id=202374).
Other
Example:
56
Methodology Report
K.
Water
Theme:
Water
Core Indicator:
Percentage of city population with potable water supply service
Rationale:
The percentage of the city population served by a potable water supply is an

indicator of city health, cleanliness and quality of life and significant component of
the Millennium Development Goals.
Definition:
The number of people within the city that are served by a potable water supply (the
percentage.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of households in the city connected to a
potable water supply service is determined.
Potable water must be treated or confirmed safe for human consumption. A potable
water supply service must deliver potable water through a pipe or similar duct that
is connected to a network, the supply of which is relatively continuous given that it
includes a deposit built for its storage. In developing countries, if the connection is
illegal or pirate, the house is still considered to have access to potable water.
Also, if a house or group of houses has a mother pipe connected either
provisionally or permanently; it is considered to have access to potable water.
A house is NOT considered to have access to potable water when an individual
house or group is served by a conduit system built on wood, bamboo, rubber hoses
or similar, connected directly to a river, well, or to another house. Information
should be obtained from the local operator(s) of water systems.
The number of households with a potable water supply service is then multiplied
by the then current average household size for that city. This number is then
divided by city population. The result is expressed as a percentage of city
population serviced by a potable water supply service.
Benchmark:

America, access to potable water is between 95 and 100%. Urban areas are
considered to be well served if they fall in this range.
Comments and
Limitations:
Results will only indicate whether or not a house has access to potable water, not
the quality of the resource, the quality of the delivery, the levels of loss,
consumption or misuse, or the capacity of the sources to meet the demand.
If the household size estimate is undifferentiated or unknown within the city, the
percentage of population served is assumed to be the same as the percentage of
households served.
Some of these limitations will be addressed in the supporting indicators.
57
Methodology Report
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Vancouver, Porto Alegre, Belo Horizonte, Bogota
Example:
Mumbai, India: 68.0 percent in 1990; 82.2 percent in 2003.
The World Bank, the Inter American Development Bank, the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the European Commission Urban Audit, the
World Health Organization, UN-HABITAT, the United Nations Department of
Economic and Social Affairs, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the
Drinking Water Inspectorate, the Campaign for Safe and Affordable Drinking
Water, the International Committee of the Red Cross, Ingeniera Sin Fronteras
(Engineering Without Frontiers), Engineers for a Sustainable World, the
International Rescue Committee and many similar organizations.
(UN-HABITAT Urban Indicators Database)
58
Methodology Report
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Water
Number of household days per year that boil water advisories are in effect
(number of households impacted times number of days) as a percent of total
household days
Rationale:
Boil water advisories are issued by government ministries when public health is at
risk due to microbiological contamination of drinking water. Relating the
incidence of boil water advisories to the proportion of households affected and the
duration of the advisory provide insight into the severity of the problem that is not
revealed by data on incidences alone.
Definition:
The sum of the number of days each household in a city is impacted by boil water
advisories within a calendar year (the numerator) divided by the product of the
total number of households in the city and the number of days in the year (the
denominator), the ratio multiplied by 100 to yield the percentage.
Methodology:
Tests of total coliform and E. coli in drinking water samples are typically used for
routine regulatory compliance as well as in response to reports of water borne
illnesses. When a boil water advisory is issued, it typically identifies the date the
advisory is initiated and the area, typically including an estimate of the number of
households, affected by the advisory. The date the advisory ends is also recorded.
Therefore, the duration of the advisory in days is recorded in the advisory. If the
number of households is not recorded in the advisory, the number of housing
units within the affected are may be counted on an aerial photograph or property
map or by visual inspection.
Records of boil water advisories are maintained by provincial or city health
agencies and by potable water utilities.
The duration of the advisory in days within a calendar year is multiplied by the
number of households to which the advisory applies (the numerator) and divided
by the number of households times 365 days per year (or the number of days the
household existing during the year in the event of new development), the
denominator. For advisories applied to individual households instead of general
area, the number of days an advisory is applied to each household is totaled over a
calendar year for the numerator. Multiplying the result by 100 yields the
percentage.
Benchmark:
No benchmark for this indicator has yet been established, although the indicator
should approach zero.
Comments and
Limitations:
The number of households impacted by a boil water order may not be precisely
known, either because the number of households in an area is not known or the
service area for a contaminated public water supply source is not known (the
latter could be the case if contaminated water is distributed among independent
water systems through legal or illegal interconnections or leaks). The number of
households may be greater (due to licensed or unlicensed apartments) or lesser
(due to vacancies) than the known number of housing units. Water utilities may
not be able or willing to provide accurate or timely data regarding its customers in
a service area.
59
Methodology Report
Other
While many organizations measure the incidence of boil water advisories, none
are known to relate incidence to the number and duration of households affected.
Example:
(Hypothetical.) A 200 unit housing development in a city of 1,000 housing units

was placed on a boil water advisory on December 1 after routine sampling found
levels of total coliform exceeding standards and remained under advisory for the
remainder of the year. The numerator of 200 x 31 household days (6,200) is
divided by the denominator of 1,000 x 365 total household days in the city per
year (365,000) to yield 0.017, and this number was multiplied by 100 to yield 1.7
percent.
60
Methodology Report
Theme:
Water
Supporting Indicator: Domestic water consumption per capita
Rationale:
Water consumption must be in harmony with water resources to be sustainable.

This harmony may be achieved through improvements in water supply systems
and changes in water consumption patterns. This indicator will need to be
measured in terms of changes from year to year within a city within a range of
rates due to the variability among cities. Consumption of water per person
depends on the availability and price of water, the climate, and the uses to which
water is customarily put by individuals (drinking, bathing, washing, gardening).
In many cities, potable water supply is not constant and households rely on a few
hours to tap the available water during the day. Water consumption is much
higher in cities of higher income countries, as with most other forms of
consumption.
Definition:
Consumption of water in liters per day (the numerator) divided by the total
population (the denominator), for all domestic uses (excludes industrial and
commercial).
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total amount in liters of the citys water
consumption for domestic use is determined. This amount of water is then divided
by the total city population.
Only water consumed for domestic purpose will be taken into account. This
information is usually available from the main water supply companies, which
maintain record on water supplied, delivered, consumed and ultimately paid by
the end-users for domestic purposes.
In interpreting the indicator, water consumption per capita should fall within a
range that is sustainable for the climate of the city. A minimum benchmark
should be established to meet public health and safety needs. Higher rates of per
capita water consumption should show reductions approaching the minimum or
sustainable consumption rates.
Benchmark:
Water should be available at a quantity of at least 20 liters per person per day.
Typically people in cities of developed countries use 272 liters per day while the
average in Africa is 53 liters per day. North American cities use, on average,
double the amount of water per person that Western European cities use, and
seven times that of African cities.
Comments and
Limitations:
Domestic water use is a small portion of total water consumption (10 percent in
the European Union), trailing agricultural and industrial uses. Before reaching the
users, a part of the water supplied might be lost through leakage or illegal tapping.
In cities with old and deteriorating water reticulation systems, a substantial
proportion of piped water may be lost through cracks and flaws in pipes for
example up to 30% of water is lost in this way in some countries in Eastern
Europe. It is therefore important to take this into account in the final consumption
and if possible, not to take the actual supply as the final consumption figures.
Water consumption rates may temporarily spike with income as new appliances
are purchased until water prices increase, encouraging water saving appliances to
enter the market.
61
Methodology Report
Other
UN-HABITAT; Sao Paulo, Brazil; Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, Canada;

Bogota, Columbia; European Commission, Urban Audit; Asian Development
Bank, Urban Indicators for Managing Cities: Cities Data Book; ICLEI Local
Governments for Sustainability; European Environment Agency
Example:
Water consumption per capita in Denmark was reduced from 192 liters per person
per day in 1988 to 138 liters per person per day in 1998.
62
Methodology Report
Theme:
Water
Supporting Indicator: Incidence of water borne diseases
Rationale:
There are a number of water borne diseases that cause diarrheal effects, such as
Campylobacteriosis, Giardiasis, Salmonellosis and Verltoxigenis E. coli. This
indicator is important for targeting projects to improve access to higher quality
potable water supplies and for targeting health initiatives to address sanitation,
hygiene, handwashing and the spread of water borne disease. Diarrhea, primarily a
disease of childhood, is an indicator of water-borne disease and is one of the leading
causes of morbidity and mortality in developing countries. 90 percent of diarrheal
disease incidence attributed to water is in children below five years of age.
Definition:
The percentage of children under five years of age requiring medical treatment for
diarrhea from water-borne sources within the past year.
Methodology:
Incidence of diarrhea in children under five from water-borne or potentially waterborne sources can be reported by health care workers, clinics and hospitals and
compiled in health statistics and epidemiological studies.
Benchmark:
National data for 1995 through 2003 for urban areas range from 9.8 percent to 31.6
percent in African nations, 11.7 to 24.1 percent in Latin America and 3.5 to 26.1
percent in Asia.
Comments and
Limitations:
Incidence of diarrhea in children from water borne disease must be distinguished

from food-borne disease. However, the source of the disease is not well reported.
Further, water-borne disease may contaminate food.
Up to 90 percent of all water or food borne diseases remain unreported and selftreated. Reporting will tend to emphasize where a number of cases is caused by the
same agent. Also, reports of incidents may be separated from patient records
resulting in multiple incidents reported for the same patient unless the reporting
form asks for whether the patient was last treated for diarrhea.
Water quality has less of an impact on diarrhea incidence in urban and periurban
settings than in rural settings (23 percent reduction compared to 47 percent
reduction) according to study for World Bank.
Data is often aggregated to national or regional levels and not published for
individual cities.
Other
which use this
indicator:
This indicator is nearly universally used, including WHO, UNEP, USAID and
individual nations.
Example:
No published data available for individual cities.
63
Methodology Report
Theme:
Water
Supporting Indicator: Number of interruptions in water service per 1,000 hectares of service area
Rationale:
The reliability of water service to the user is the ultimate consideration in

evaluating water supply, even though this reliability is based on both quantity and
quality considerations and on interconnected systems of source water availability,
water treatment and water distribution. This indicator determines whether a water
supply system is reliable, or whether the water supply system needs fundamental
or marginal improvements. A physically larger service area is likely to have more
Km of pipes and mains in the distribution system vulnerable to service
interruptions. To facilitate comparison among cities, the number of interruptions
is related to the hectares of the water service area within the city.
Definition:
The number of incidents during a year in which full water supply service is
interrupted anywhere within the city (numerator) divided by the size of the
service area in hectares divided by 1,000 (denominator). Incidents of complete
shutoff, low flow restriction, boil water advisory, water main flushing, planned
and unplanned interruptions are counted equally.
This indicator excludes:
incidents where there is some reduction to the level of service but where
normal activities (shower, washing machine, toilet flushing etc.) are still
possible, and
breaks in house connection branches.
An unplanned interruption is an interruption caused by a fault in the utility's

system.
A planned interruption is an interruption for which the utility has provided at
least 24 hours' advanced notification (or as otherwise prescribed by regulatory
requirements).
Methodology:
The total of all incidents of interruptions in water service within the city within
the year that are reported by the water utility or by civil authorities as separate
incidents comprise the numerator. The land area of the water supply service area
within the city in hectares is divided by 1,000 for the denominator.
Benchmark:
The benchmarks for this indicator must be established locally by each city as the
number of interruptions within a city is associated with the age and areal extent of
the water distribution system and the nature of its sources.
Comments and
Limitations:
Cities with older infrastructure, in areas with electric power interruptions, in areas
of war or civil unrest, or in areas that are more susceptible to natural hazards such
as earthquakes and extensive flooding will tend to report more incidents of
service interruptions.
This indicator may also need to be compared differently among large (greater
than 25,000 connections or bulk water providers), medium (1,000 to 25,000
connections) and small (1,000 or fewer connections) service providers.
While a more comprehensive index of reliability would account for the duration
of each interruption, the number of people affected and economic productivity
64
Methodology Report
lost, the increase in the number of measures would add cost to data collection,
complexity to interpretation, and reduction in participation.
Other
United Kingdom Office of Water (UK OFWAT) uses complex indices of

performance based on a range of 0 to 5.5 percent of properties at risk of low water
pressure and combinations of 6, 12 and 24 hour service interruptions ranging from
0.14 to 2.77. The Australian Government National Water Commission has
advanced an indicator of frequency of interruption in its draft National
Benchmarking Framework; a variation of these indicators was reported for
Queensland. These indicators are not adjusted for the size of the service area.
Example:
65
Methodology Report
2.2
City Management
A.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Finance
Finance
Debt service ratio (debt service expenditures as a percent of a municipalitys
own-source revenue)
Rationale:
Widely accepted as a measure of sound financial management, this indicator reflects

the amount of financial resources that are available for day-to-day operations and
how much money is spent paying down debt. It can be a controllable cost and can
assist in priority setting.
Definition:
Debt service ratio is the ratio of debt service expenditures as a percent of a

municipalitys own source revenue. A lower number can indicate either an
increased ability to borrow or a decision by a municipality to limit its debt to enable
funding of other service areas.
Methodology:
Debt service ratio is calculated by dividing total long-term debt servicing costs
including lease payments, temporary financing and other debt charges by total own
source revenue. Total own source revenue is total revenue less transfers.
Benchmark:
Debt service ratio exceeding 20% is considered a warning signal for municipalities.
A ratio of 10% or less is considered acceptable.
Comments and
Limitations:
Care must be used in evaluating this indicator. A high debt service ratio may
indicate a municipality that has taken on too much debt but it may also indicate that
the municipality has taken an aggressive approach to debt repayment and is paying
down their debt quickly. Similarly, a low debt service ratio could indicate a
municipality is strong financially and can finance most capital projects through their
operating budget. It may also indicate that a municipality is financially weaker and
has deferred capital projects and allowed important infrastructure to deteriorate.
Other
which use this
indicator:
Montreal
The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) supports this measure as
part of its recommended budget best practices.
Debt Service Ratio is also a key indicator for bond rating agencies in assessing a
municipalitys credit rating.
Depending upon which level of government provides public transit (a high capital
cost service) or water/wastewater facilities, the size of the debt could be
significantly higher or lower between similar sized municipalities.
Example:
The 2006 BMA municipal study identified the City of Toronto with a ratio of 4.8 %
and the City of Ottawa with 5.3%.
Another study by the New York City Comptroller showed NYC with a ratio of 13.9
% for 2006.
66
Methodology Report
Theme:
Finance
Supporting Indicator: Bond rating
Rationale:
The General Purpose Municipal Bond Rating is an indicator of the city

governments financial health.
Definition:
A general purpose municipal bond rating ranks the stand alone capacity of a
municipal government to service the debt and repay capital in accordance with the
terms, structure, and obligations of a specific long-term financial security it has
originated.
The General Purpose Municipal Bond Rating is expressed on a scale ranging from
the A category (top ranking) to lowest NR category (not ranked) which rankings are
determined by one of the bond rating agencies using the methodology outlined
below.
Methodology:
The city reports its most recent General Purpose Municipal Bond Rating together
with a citation advising the date of the rating and the Ratings Agency that issued it.
This indicator must be for long term municipal bonds and should be careful to
exclude extraordinary support that may be provided by another entity for the
purpose of credit enhancement or default insurance. Special purpose municipal
bonds or short term instruments should be excluded as they are less likely to
properly reflect the credit worthiness of the municipal government.
A rating from one of the International Rating Agencies will be an essential
prerequisite for those municipal governments seeking to source investment from the
global capital markets for their long term general purpose municipal bond issues.
Summary details on how bond ratings are determined and expressed are as follows:
Prior to the origination of a general purpose municipal bond raising the city will
commission a Ratings Agency to determine the issues bond rating. Such ratings are
globally comparative and are expressed in descending sub categories within the
categories of A, B, and C where the A categories entail least risk and the C
categories, the most. Ratings in the D category are assigned to entities or securities
in default and the NR category denotes the fact that they are Not Rated. The
category R is sometimes used to denote that the entity is under external
management or regulation due to financial non-performance.
The three major International Ratings Agencies: Moodys; Standard and Poors;
and, Fitch use a similar methodology in their analysis of municipal bond rating. The
factors analyzed in determining individual ratings are:
1. the operating environment, i.e., national circumstances that affect the risk of an
economic, financial market or political crisis;
2. the institutional framework that determines the local government powers and
responsibilities;
3. financial condition and performance;
4. the debt profile;
5. governance and management practices; and
6. economic fundamentals.
On the basis of this analysis the Ratings Committee of the relevant agency will
67
Methodology Report
allocate the bond rating.

Benchmark:
Bond Ratings in the A categories are described as investment grade or blue

chip securities (the higher the ranking within the A category, the lower the risk)
while those rated in the B and C categories are non-investment grade securities with
the descending order in each category denoting increasing levels of investment risk.
Comments and
Limitations:
With the globalization of capital markets, Moody's, Standard and Poors, and Fitch
(the three major international ratings agencies) are expected to dramatically expand
their global reach both through new office openings in developed and developing
countries and through acquisition of and partnerships with local ratings agencies,
e.g. Moody's acquisition of ICRA in India, Standard and Poors acquisition of
CRSIL, Fitch partnerships with local agencies in Korea, PRC, South America and
Russia. GCR--Global Credit Rating Co. which claims to be the largest credit rating
agency in Africa may have some rich insights in how to reconcile the disparity
between developed and developing country ratings.
It should be understood that municipal governments in advanced industrial
economies have a huge advantage over developing country municipal governments,
irrespective of their quality and circumstance, due to the general risks of their
country location that may preclude the assignment of an investment grade rating
that they might otherwise deserve.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
King County, Washington, USA.
Example:
As of October 2006, of Moodys global portfolio of municipal bond ratings, 80% in

the advanced industrial nations were rated in the A categories while 70% in the
developing nations were rated in the B and C categories.
68
Methodology Report
Theme:
Finance
Supporting Indicator: Tax collected as a percentage of tax billed
Rationale:
Tax collection is the major source of income for all levels of government including
cities. This indicator is intended to measure the effectiveness of a citys financial
management capabilities and to some extent is a proxy of the willingness of citizens
to pay taxes.
Definition:
Ratio of the actual tax collected to the mandated tax.
Methodology:
Identify all revenues generated by tax collection, and divide by the amount of taxes
billed multiplied by 100.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Other
which use this
indicator:
The UN- Habitats Urban Governance Index (UGI) uses a similar indicator called:
percentage of mandated local revenue actually collected by local government.
Example:
In Seoul in 1997, 96.1% of mandated taxes were actually collected (Asian

Development Bank, Cities Data Book).
69
Methodology Report
Theme:
Finance
Supporting Indicator: Own-source revenue as a percent of total revenues
On a very basic level, this indicator measures the level of dependence of the city on
Rationale:
other levels of government for revenues to deliver its services to the public.
The balance between its own sources of income and senior level government
transfers provides an indication of a citys viability, independence and control over
its own resources and in a small way, measures its financial planning and
management effectiveness.
Definition:
Percentage of local government revenues originating from fees, charges and taxes as
permitted by law or legislation to all revenues including those provided by other
levels of government. This only includes operating or re-occurring revenues as
determined through methods such as: formula driven payments (such as repatriation
of income tax), grant donations from higher government levels including national or
state governments and other types of financial transfers that may be tied to the
delivery of specific services.
Methodology:
The total amount of funds obtained through permit fees, user charges for city
services, and taxes collected for city purposes only, divided by all operating or reoccurring revenues including those provided by other levels of government
transferred to the city, multiplied by 100.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Other
which use this
indicator:
UN-Habitats Urban Governance Index (UGI)
Example:
70
Methodology Report
Theme:
Finance
Supporting Indicator: Capital spending as percentage of total expenditures
Rationale:
The amount of capital expenditure by the city expressed as a percentage of the total
annual city expenditure is an indicator of capital re-investment and the fiscal health
of the city.
Definition:
The total expenditure on fixed assets in the preceding year (the numerator) divided
by the total expenditure by the city in that same period, expressed as a percentage.
Methodology:
preceding year) the total expenditure on fixed assets (capital spending) in that
preceding year is determined and this figure is then divided by the total expenditure
by the city in that same period.
Fixed assets are not expected to be consumed or converted into cash in the normal
course of business. They are long-term, more permanent or "fixed" items, such as
land, building, equipment, fixtures, furniture, and leasehold improvements.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator needs to be considered in conjunction with the Debt service ratio
indicator to obtain an understanding of the citys capacity to maintain its capital
expenditure.
The level of capital expenditure in relation to recurrent expenditure may reflect the
citys financial capacity to invest in capital items needed to support future growth
and development.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Example:
97% of Hohhots total expenditures was capital spending in 1998 (Asian

Development Bank, Cities Data Book).
71
Methodology Report
B.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Governance
Governance
Accountability and Transparency (percent of maximum score)
Rationale:
Accountability is a fundamental tenet of good governance. Governmental

institutions must be accountable to the public and to its institutional stakeholders.
Definition:
The presence of representative mechanisms that ensure accountability and

transparency in the operational functions of the local government, expressed as a
score out of 100.
Methodology:
1. The indicators and their weighting (out of 100) are as follows:

Indicators
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Weight
Formal publication of contracts, tenders, budget and accounts

Control by local government
Codes of conduct
Facility to receive complaints
Anti-corruption commission
Disclosure of personal income and assets
Regular independent audit
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.15
0.15
0.15
2: Definitions for each indicator are on the next pages of this methodology.
3. Enter the results on the Accountability table in the results column (see page
following the methodology), apply the weighting and record the result.
Benchmark:
A score approaching 100 is the appropriate benchmark
Comments and
Limitations:
The methodology described above is adapted from UN-HABITATs Urban

Governance Index Conceptual Foundation and Field Test Report (2004), and the
Methodology Guidelines addendum.
UN-HABITAT launched the Global Campaign on Urban Governance in 1999 to
support the implementation of the Habitat Agenda and contribute to the eradication
of poverty through improved urban governance. UN-HABITATs Urban
Governance Index is described as a work in progress. The index comprises four
sub-indexes of which Accountability is one. Accountability is defined as follows:
Mechanisms are present and effective for transparency in the operational functions
of the local government; responsiveness towards the higher level of the local
government; local population and civic grievances; standards for professional and
personal integrity and rule of law and public policies are applied in transparent and
predictable manner UN-HABITAT Urban Governance Index Conceptual
Foundation and Field Test Report (2004) page 23
There have been a number of critiques of governance measures (for example, M.A.
Thomas, 2006; What Do the Worldwide Governance Indicators Measure? and Arndt
and Oman 2006, Uses and Abuses of Governance Indicators. This methodology for
72
Methodology Report
this indicator is proposed in the ongoing effort to improve measurement efforts.

Other
UN-HABITAT.
Example:
Using the methodology above, Ibadan had a score of 41, Vancouver 76, Colombo
93, and Naga City 100.
Methodologies for Accountability Indicators (from UN-HABITAT, 2004 Addendum

http://www.unhabitat.org/categories.asp?catid=260).
Indicator 19:
Formal Publication of contracts/tenders, budgets & accounts (core set, no. 14)
Principle(s):
Accountability (Transparency), Participation, Equity, Effectiveness
Definition:
Existence of a formal publication (to be accessible) by the local government that consists of
contracts, tenders and budgets and accounts.
Methodology:
A formal publication process may be assessed through regular mass publication of contracts,
tenders, budgets and accounts of the local government's activities.
The following queries need to be addressed:
Is there a formal publication of:

- Contracts and tenders? (Yes/No)
- Budgets and accounts? (Yes/No)
What is the medium of publication of the standards? (E.g. Newspaper, radio, Internet,
notice board etc.)
Reference:
UN-HABITAT Global Urban Indicators Database (GUID)
Indicator 20:
Control by higher levels of Government (core set, no. 15)
Principle(s):
Accountability (Responsiveness), Effectiveness, Participation
Definition:
Measures the control of the higher levels of government (National, State /provincial) for
closing the local government and removing councilors from office.
Methodology:
The indicator is measured by a simple yes or no to the following questions:
Can higher levels of government (National, State /provincial):

- Close the local government? (Yes/No)
73
Methodology Report
Remove councilors from office? (Yes/No)

If the higher level of government can remove the councilors, what is the process?
Can the local government, without permission from higher governments:

- Set local tax levels?
- Set user charges for services?
- Borrow funds?
- Choose contractors for projects?
Reference:
UN-HABITAT Global Urban Indicators Database (GUID)
Indicator 21:
Codes of conduct
Principle(s):
Accountability (integrity), Participation, Equity
Definition:
Existence of a signed published statement of the standards of conduct that citizens are
entitled to from their elected officials and local government staff.
Methodology:
The following queries need to be addressed:
Is there a signed, published statement of standards of conduct citizens are entitled to

from their elected officials and local government staff? (Yes/No)
At what institutional level are these codes of conduct prescribed? (Municipality,
State/Province)
If the codes of conduct are prescribed at the District/State/Province level are they
applied to local councilors? (Yes/No)
Please submit a copy of the published code of conduct.

Reference:
Transparency International
Indicator 22:
Facility for citizen complaints
Principle(s):
Definition:
Methodology:
Accountability (Integrity, Corruption: Disincentives & Protection), Participation,

Effectiveness
The existence of a facility established within the local authority to respond to complaints
and a local facility to receive complaints and information on corruption.
A simple yes or no measures the existence of the facility while percentage of
complaints addressed measures the level of responsiveness.
The following questions are elaborated:
74
Methodology Report
1.
2.
3.
Are there any facilities or mechanisms to receive complaints or grievances from

citizens? (Yes/No)
Is there any official appointed to receive and respond to complaints against public
authorities (Yes/No)
Percentage of complaints addressed (Pc)
Pc = (Ta/Tc) x 100
Tc= Total number of registered complaints (last 1 year) and
Ta = Total number of cases addressed
Reference:
Indicator 23:
New Indicator (Adapted from indicator Ombudsmans office of Transparency International)
Anti-corruption Commission (core set, no. 16)
Principle(s):
Accountability (Corruption: Disincentives & Protection), Participation, Equity
Definition:
Existence of a local agency to investigate and report cases of corruption.
Methodology:
A simple yes or no can measure the indicator.
1.
Is there a local agency to investigate and report cases of corruption? (Yes/ No)
Reference:
New indicator
Indicator 24:
Disclosure of income/ assets (core set, no. 17)
Principle(s):
Accountability (Corruption: Disincentives & Protection)
Definition:
Are locally elected officials required to publicly disclose their income and assets (and those
of their immediate family) prior to taking office?
Methodology:
A simple yes or no can measure this indicator.
Prior to taking office, are locally elected officials required by law to publicly disclose:
Personal income (Yes/No)
Personal assets (Yes/No)
Immediate family income (Yes/No)
Immediate family assets (Yes/No)
75
Methodology Report
Are local office bearers' incomes and assets regularly monitored? (Yes/No)
Reference:
Indicator 25:
Independent audit (core set, no. 18)
Principle(s):
Accountability (Corruption: Disincentives & Protection),
Definition:
Is there a regular independent audit of municipal accounts, the results of which are widely
disseminated?
Methodology:
A simple yes or no can measure this indicator.
Is there a regular independent audit of municipal accounts? (Yes/ No)

Is the audit external or internal?
Additional information: Which entity is responsible for the regular independent audit of
municipal accounts?
Reference:
Accountability Results Table

No. Indicator
1
Data (X) Formula
Result
Weight
Total
Formal Publication (FP)
NA
CTBA = Average (CT + BA)
1.00
0.20
a. Formal publication: contracts and

tenders (CT)
Yes = 1
CT =X
1.00
NA
Yes = 1
BA = X
1.00
NA
CG = Average (CLG+RC)
0.50
0.07
0.035
Yes = 0
CLG = X
0.00
No = 1
RC = X
1.00
0.08
0.08
b. Formal publication: budget and

accounts (BA)
2.1 Control by higher Govt. (CG)

a. Control by higher Govt.: close local
government (CLG)
b. Control by higher Govt: removal of
councillors (RC)
2.2 Local government authorities (LGA)
c. Local government: set local tax levels
(SLT)
LGA = Average (SLT+SYC+BF+CP)

Yes = 1
SLT = X
1.00
d. Local government: set user charges for

No = 0
services (SUC)
SUC = X
1.00
e. Local government: borrow funds (BF)
BF = X
1.00
No = 0
76
Methodology Report
0.20
f. Local government: choose contractors

for projects (CP)
Yes = 1
CP = X
1.00
Codes of conduct (CoC)
Yes = 1
CoC= X
1.00
0.10
0.10
Facilities to receive complaints (FRC)
FRC = Average (OA + EF)
1.00
0.10
0.10
1.00
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
Accountability sub-index
0.965
b. Official appointed to receive complaints Yes = 1

on public authorities (OA)
c. Exclusive facility to receive complaints
on corruption (EF)
Yes = 1
Anti-corruption commission (ACC)
Yes = 1
Personal Income and assets (PIA)
NA
PIA = (0.75* Average PIA + FIA) + 0.25* IAM
1.00
a. Disclosure of personal income and

assets (PIA)
Yes = 1
PIA = X
1.00
Yes = 1
FIA = X
1.00
c. Income and assets regularly monitored

(IAM)
Yes = 0
IAM = X
1.00
Regular independent audit (RIA)
Yes = 1
b. Disclosure of familys income and

assets (FIA)
0.75
ACC = X
RIA = X
1.00
77
Methodology Report
Theme:
Governance
Supporting Indicator: Percentage of city government workforce that is women/minorities in
proportion to city population composition
Rationale:
The percentage of the city government workforce that is women or minority is a

direct reflection of the equity of the hiring system within the City government.
Definition:
The percentage of the city government workforce that is women or minority (the
numerator) divided by the total number of the city government workforce (the
denominator).
Methodology:
The question this indicator answers is: What is the number of women or minorities
employed in the city government workforce as a percentage of the total number of
employees in the city government workforce?
Minority is defined here as: non-dominant ethnic, religious, and linguistic
communities, who may not necessarily be numerical minorities (Minority Rights
Group International, 2007).
The following equations should be used when calculating this indicator in order to
avoid double counting:
Xw = Ew * 100
T
Xm = Em * 100
T
Where:
Xw = Percentage of women employed in the city government workforce;
Xm = Percentage of minorities employed in the city government workforce;
Ew = Number of women employees in the city government workforce;
Em = Number of minority employees in the city government workforce;
T = Total number of employees in the city government workforce
Formula adapted from the Urban Governance Index Methodology Guidelines, 2004
(http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/2232_55927_Addendum%20%20Methodology%20Guidelines.doc)
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
The following definitions should be used when calculating the equation found in the
methodology section:
City government workforce: total number of employees working within some
division of the City government
Minority: non-dominant ethnic, religious and linguistic communities, who may not
necessarily be numerical minorities (Minority Rights Group International, 2007)
Other
UN-HABITAT
78
Methodology Report
Example:
79
Methodology Report
C.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Urban Planning
Urban Planning
Latest approval date of Master Plan
Rationale:
The effective and efficient management of land is a primary responsibility of any

city. It is therefore essential for a city to have a publicly approved land use plan that
directs and supports its economic growth, encourages the creation and maintenance
of safe and vibrant neighborhoods, and protects the local natural environment.
This indicator refers to a Master Plan but names for this plan that controls land
development in the city can vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Some common
examples are: Spatial Plan, Development Plan, Territorial Ordering Plan, Official
Plan, etc. The Plans legal authority is typically acquired through a municipal
Ordinance, By-law or similar type of municipal legislation.
Identifying the approval date of the current city master plan not only confirms the
fact that a plan exists, but also provides some indication of how active and relevant
the land planning process is within the city.
Definition:
Latest approval date by City Council of the current city master plan in effect. This is
intended to include the whole plan and not simply amendments to it.
Methodology:
Provide the date the plan was officially approved by City Council or if necessary, the
local regulatory agency (City Planning Board, Planning Commission etc.). The first
public approval date is considered key in that it is the first formal identification of
the citys intention to control the use of land within its boundaries. It is recognized
that in some countries, there may be an appeal process or a formal approval by
another level of government or Minister that may legally prevent the plans
immediate implementation. The intention of this measure is first to determine the
existence of a land administration plan and by identifying the latest approval date,
provides an indication of its likely use and effectiveness. If a plan doesnt exist, or
has not been updated for some time, it may indicate that land administration may not
be that effective in managing the citys development, or in protecting its natural
environment.
Benchmark:
A Master Plan that has been approved during the last five years is considered to be a
positive indication of an effective and current tool for managing growth and
development in that city.
Comments and
Limitations:
Results from this measure will only indicate if the city has a comprehensive land
administration plan. It will not be able to identify the degree of compliance of land
development, if it is used on a regular basis to evaluate and approve new
development proposals, or if it had broad based community input into its creation.
Other
which use this
indicator:
In the Province of Ontario Canada, it is a requirement for every city to have a public
approved land use plan and that it publicly reviewed at least every five years.
80
Methodology Report
Example:
Through City Decree 190 of 2004, the Territorial Ordering Plan of Bogot was
adopted.
81
Methodology Report
Theme:
Urban Planning
Supporting Indicator: Green area (hectares) per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The amount of green area per capita is an indicator of how much green and open
space a City has. Green areas perform important environmental functions in an
urban setting. They improve the urban climate, capture atmospheric pollutants and
provide recreation for urban inhabitants.
Definition:
The total number of hectares of green/open space (the numerator) is divided by

100,000th of the city population (the denominator), expressed as a whole number in
hectares.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total area (in hectares) of green/open space in the
city is determined. This figure is then divided by 100,000th of the city population.
The result is expressed as whole number in hectares.
Green area may include parks, recreation areas, publicly accessible open spaces
including natural areas and beaches, and may also include public plazas and
gathering places.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Green area is broader than recreation space (see Public recreation space per capita,
indicator). The focus is on publicly accessible as opposed to whether or not the
green area is protected.
Cities may have different urban land use classification systems and what they
consider a green areas.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Montreal, Toronto, Porto Alegre, Belo Horizonte, Sao Paulo, Bogota, and King
County, WA all use variations of this indicator.
Example:
Pamplona, Spain has 230 hectares of green space per 100,000 of city population.
82
Methodology Report
Theme:
Urban Planning
Supporting Indicator: Housing in hazardous locations
Rationale:
Housing in hazardous locations is a threat to human health, safety, and property.

Large scale disasters can result from housing being located in hazardous locations.
UN-HABITAT (2006) estimates that at least 30 to 40 percent of non-permanent
houses in cities in developing countries are located in areas prone to natural
disasters.
The amount of housing in hazardous locations is an indicator of the effectiveness of
urban planning in a city in directing housing away from natural and manmade
hazards.
Definition:
The number of housing units located in hazardous locations (the numerator) divided
by the number of housing units in the city (the denominator), expressed as a
percentage.
Methodology:
The following locations are considered hazardous:

z
z
z
z
z
Housing settled subject to disaster at more than the once in a hundred years
level (disasters include flooding, earthquakes, volcano, storm surge, landslip or
avalanche);
Housing not adequately protected against cyclones (hurricanes) or bushfires
which occur at this frequency;
Housing settled on garbage-mountains;
Housing around high-industrial pollution areas;
Housing around other high-risk zones, e.g. railroads, airports, energy
transmission lines.
1. Areas of housing located in hazardous locations should be delineated using aerial

photography and/or land use maps and the area in square kilometers calculated.
The City Planning Department together with departments knowledgeable about
the city should be able to accomplish this task. Local academic institutions may
also be of assistance.
Judgment will be needed in delineating the areas. For example, some housing in
areas subject to earthquakes, cyclones or flooding may be adequately protected,
while some may not. Housing in airport safety zones may be considered
hazardous while other housing equally close to an airport may not. Decision
rules used in making these judgments should be documented.
2. Once the areas have been identified on a map, the area in square kilometers can
be calculated using low cost Geographic Information Systems or, if not available,
through use of hand held measuring devices. To simplify the mapping it is
recommended that areas smaller than two square kilometers not be included.
3. For each area the number of housing units should then be calculated. In some
cities the number may be obtained from land use maps or tax records. If these
data are not available, the number should be estimated from aerial photography:
i) estimate a housing density per square kilometer for each hazardous area (by
sampling from aerial photographs) ii) multiply the total area of the hazard area by
the density to obtain the number of housing units in the hazard area, iii) sum the
totals for all hazardous areas.
83
Methodology Report
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
The methodology described above is adapted from UN-HABITAT (2004).
Other
UN-HABITAT. Many cities use variants of this methodology including Sao Paulo,
Belo Horizonte, and Bogota.
Example:
84
Methodology Report
Theme:
Urban Planning
Supporting Indicator: Jobs/housing ratio
A well-planned city focuses on the implications of growth on its economy, existing
Rationale:
communities and the environment. Growth should be concentrated in areas that can
accommodate a mix of housing, commerce, industry and recreation to maximize the
use of existing infrastructure, minimize travels times to and from work, and
minimize servicing costs resulting from new growth. Encouraging mixed-use
developments combining housing and employment opportunities is essential to
achieve these objectives.
Definition:
Jobs include all types of employment opportunities including those provided in the
retail, industrial, government and office sectors located within the city boundaries. .
Housing means all dwelling units available for habitation.
Methodology:
The ratio of jobs to housing can be expressed as a fraction, with the total number of
jobs being the numerator and the denominator being the number of dwelling units. It
can be expressed as a ratio where the numerator is the first figure and the
denominator the second (e.g. 1.2:1).
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
When cities undertake comprehensive land use planning initiatives determining the
number of jobs and dwelling units that exist and comparing how that information
changes over time is essential information in monitoring city growth. This
information may not always be expressed as a ratio; it can be easily and quickly
determined.
Does not take into account the informal sector, labor or employment.
Other
which use this
indicator:
Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver all collect this information but none present as a
ratio.
Example:
The City of Montreal Jobs/Housing ratio is 1.2:1 based on:

Number of jobs: 955,100 and Number of dwelling units (2001): 805,825
85
Methodology Report
Theme:
Urban Planning
Supporting Indicator: Percentage of land parcels with a registered title
Rationale:
Registering land ownership is an essential instrument in managing a city that

enables the purchase and sale of land and the multiple activities that stem from this,
including the orderly development of land, proper accommodation for registered
businesses, permitting collateral for credit that encourages construction and
development, and most importantly for cities, land taxation. A city with a large
amount of land parcels not legally registered significantly reduces its ability to raise
its own revenue as well as taxes for other government levels. This significantly
increases the financial burden for cities to deliver services to all parts of the city
including those that do not pay for the services they receive
Definition:
Percentage of the land parcels of the city that have a registered title.
Methodology:
Information on the total number of parcels in a city is obtained from the citys
Cadastre Department or the official agency that manages that function. Information
on the total number of registered land parcels is obtained from the Land Registry
Offices, which is commonly managed by the national or central government. Land
administration offices, such as planning departments, tax collection offices, should
be able to calculate the percentage of land parcels that do not have a registered title.
For verification, information can also be accessed through NGOs, university
research centers and professional specialists on the subject.
Benchmark:
In developed countries, it is a common occurrence to have land titled and registered,

whereas in developing countries, it is not surprising to find 30 to 70% of the land
without title depending upon the region or country. This has proven to be a
significant obstacle to economic development in these cities as well as severely
limiting its revenue raising opportunities. As a result, many countries are currently
investing large amounts of money to title and register the property of its lands.
Comments and
Limitations:
Results will only indicate the percentage land parcels that do not have registered
title, not their assessed value or the potential taxes that could derive from their
legalization.
Other
which use this
indicator:
Almost all the city planning and cadastre departments, the World Bank, the Inter
American Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the United Nations Development Program, the United Nations
Commission for Human Settlements, and many NGOs fiscal and cadastre related
research centers and similar organizations use this or similar indicators.
Example:
Of 1,800,000 parcels in Bogot, an estimated 744,000 or 41% require corrections,

and an estimated 160,000 or 8.8% are without a title and need to be incorporated
into the cadastral base.
In the Metropolitan Region of Panama it is estimated that of the 650 thousand
parcels of land, there are 444,260 or 69% of the parcels without a registered title
86
Methodology Report
2.3
City Sustainability
A.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Civic Engagement
Civic Engagement
Voter participation (as a percent of eligible voters)
Rationale:
The percentage of the eligible voting population that voted in the last municipal
election is an indicator of the publics level of participation and degree of interest in
local government.
Definition:
The number of persons that voted in the last major city election (the numerator) is
divided by the city population eligible to vote (the denominator), expressed as a
percentage.
Methodology:
The number of voters that actually cast a vote in the most recent major local election
is determined and then divided by the total number of citizens eligible to vote. The
result is expressed as a percentage of voter participation.
Information should be obtained from the local authorities, officials or the Ministry
responsible for Local Governments.
Indicate zero as a result if there have been no municipal elections in the last five
years.
In countries where voting is mandatory, report the percent of votes (ballots) that are
not blank or spoilt. This will indicate the share of positive voter participation.
Distinction between eligible/registered to vote: In some countries people have to
register (actively) in order to be allowed to vote. In all other countries, eligible and
registered voters are one and the same.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Civic engagement is an important part of democracy and self-determination. A

strong local support base for government is better able to monitor citizen needs,
maintain a watchful eye over operations, and represent the wishes of the citizenry.
This indicator will only reveal the level of participation, not the level of satisfaction
of the population. In some cases, high rates of participation will mean that the
population is not satisfied with its local governments leadership and actions.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver
Example:
In 2001, 50.5% of Helsinkis registered electorate voted in the city election

(European Urban Audit).
Quality of Life in New Zealand--This study also looks at: voter turn out at other
elections such as health board; and barriers to voting in local council elections.);
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities Quality of Life Reporting System (here
called Voter Turnout); UN-HABITAT
87
Methodology Report
Theme:
Civic Engagement
Supporting Indicator: Citizens participation: number of local officials elected to office per 100,000
population
Rationale:
The number of public officials elected by citizens of the city and the right of citizens
as guaranteed by law, to examine and then make submissions/objections to urban
planning, development and infrastructure policies/plans/projects prior to their
approval/construction is an indicator of citizens rights to participate in the affairs of
their city.
Definition:
a. The number of public officials elected by citizens of the city (the numerator)
divided by one 100,000th of the citys current population (the denominator),
expressed as the number of elected officials per 100,000 of city population.
b. The second component of this indicator is whether or not citizens have the
right, guaranteed by law, to examine and then make submissions/objections
to urban planning, development and infrastructure policies/plans/projects
prior to their approval/construction.
Methodology:
a. Each year at an agreed date the number of public officials elected by citizens
of the city is determined and divided by 100,000th of the citys current
population. The result is expressed as a whole number per 100,000 of city
population. The term public officials elected by citizens of the city
includes all positions in the public service relating to the city that require
election by the citizens of the city to hold office. It includes all councils,
boards, commissions etc where members are elected by the citizens of the
city but does not include national or state government politicians.
b. The codified and enforceable law of the city must guarantee citizens the
right to examine and then make submissions/objections to urban planning,
development and infrastructure policies/plans/projects prior to their
approval/construction in order for cities to report that this element of the
citizens participation exists in their city. The result is expressed either as a
statement confirming that these rights exist or as a statement that these rights
do not exist, whichever is the case.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
An increase in elected city officials and a corresponding increase in city workers

may in some circumstances indicate an expensive city administration.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
This indicator is consistent with UN-HABITAT Agenda Goal: Encourage and

support participation and civic engagement Check-list 8: Citizens participation.
Example:
88
Methodology Report
Theme:
Civic Engagement
Supporting Indicator: Number of civic organizations per 100,000 population
Rationale:
Voluntary organizations of all kinds provide avenues for the citizenry to act
collectively and independently of government, for mutual benefit, and provide a
measure of the plurality of society. Organized groups are vital for effective
participation. Civic organizations can help ensure the accountability of local
government, through the mobilization of people behind the issues that affect them.
Large number of associations may facilitate the formation of partnerships for the
delivery and/or maintenance of services. Civic associations can also foster a sense
of community that can reduce the individual members vulnerability to crime and
corruption and act as a social safety net.
Definition:
Number of voluntary non-profit organizations, including NGOs, political sporting or

social organizations, registered or in the city premises (numerator), per 100,000
population (denominator).
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total number of the citys registered civic
organizations is determined. If a city does not register civic organizations, all
voluntary non-profit organizations, including NGOs, political, sporting, or social
organizations located in the City boundary should be determined. The number of
civic organizations is divided by the result of the city population divided by
100,000. The result is expressed as the number of civic organizations per 100,000
population.
This information may be obtained through umbrella associations, NGOs and key
NGOs aware of the number of associations in each particular area.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
A number of NGOs, although officially recorded, may not be operational.
Other
which use this
indicator:
UN-HABITAT
Example:
89
Methodology Report
B.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Culture
Culture
Number of cultural establishments per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of cultural establishments is an indicator of city cultural expression,

heritage, vibrancy and identity.
Definition:
The number of cultural establishments within the city that support, house or
facilitate cultural activities such as music, visual and performing arts, cinema,
festivals or expressions of cultural history (the numerator) divided by one 100,000th
of the city population (the denominator), expressed a the number of establishments
per 100,000 of city population.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total number of the citys cultural establishments is
determined. The city population is then divided by 100,000 and the result divided
into the number of the citys cultural establishments. The result is expressed as the
number of cultural establishments per 100,000 of city population.
Cultural establishments are theatres, art galleries and studios, museums, concert
halls, outdoor amphitheaters and major public places that are available to the public
(they can charge an admission fee or sell tickets to events). Libraries do not fall
into this category. Sporting establishments are not included as cultural
establishments. All cultural establishments, public and private, should be included
in numerator, regardless of ownership or size.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Culture in a community is expressed in many ways, both individually and

collectively. This indicator attempts to capture a general understanding of a citys
cultural strength and expression, by recording the number of establishments which
facilitate cultural events and activities.
Many cities list specific organizations and cultural events on their websites and
often promote the more significant ones such as museums or historic sites. It is not
common however for cities to report all of their cultural organizations and events or
identify what is included or excluded in their reports. Also lacking is the degree of
government support. Regardless, this indicator is proposed as a straight forward
method to indicate the cultural vibrancy of the city.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
King County and Belo Horizonte.
Example:
King County, Washington, has a ratio of 12.1 establishments per 100,000

population.
90
Methodology Report
Theme:
Culture
Supporting Indicator: City expenditures on culture as a percentage of overall city budget
Rationale:
The amount of expenditure by the city on culture as a percentage of the total annual
city expenditure is an indicator of the emphasis the city places on cultural facilities
and services.
Definition:
The total expenditure on culture in the preceding year (the numerator) divided by
the total expenditure by the city in that same period (the denominator), expressed as
a percentage.
Methodology:
preceding year) the total expenditure on cultural facilities and services in that
preceding year is determined and this figure is then divided by the total expenditure
by the city in that same period.
Cultural expenditure includes the acquisition, maintenance, capital improvement
and provision of services which promote the use and enjoyment, and enrichment of
cultural establishments as that term is defined in the companion City Indicator of
Number of Cultural Establishments. All cultural services funded in that year by the
city, the purpose of which is to enrich the diversity and strength of the citys
culture, is to be included within the definition of expenditure on culture.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
The inclusion of this city indicator was requested by Infrastructure Canada.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Example:
91
Methodology Report
C.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Economy
Economy
City product per capita
Rationale:
The City Product is essentially the gross national product (GNP) of the city, an
estimate of the city level output. It is an important indicator of city economic
development, the level of investment, the efficiency of public & private enterprises
and employment generation.
Definition:
The total product of the city as defined in national accounts procedures. It may be
taken as the total income or value-added (wages plus business surplus plus taxes
plus imports), or the total final demand (consumption plus investment plus exports).
The City Product expressed in current US dollars (the numerator) divided by the
city population (the denominator), expressed in US dollars.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the City Product is calculated using one of two methods:
Method A consists of taking the national product in each industry sector (SITC
standard industry classification) and then multiplying it by the differential wage
rates at the city level, for each industry sector. This method is used when
employment by industry sector is known.
Method B consists of using the city household income figures and by multiplying
the ratio of GNP to total household income at the national level. This method
assumes that the ratio of the GNP to the household income is the same at the city
and national level. So far, this method has been used in most of the UN Habitat city
indicator reports.
Method A is considered preferable, however the method used in calculating the City
product should be clearly notated on the result.
The City Product is then converted into US dollars and divided by the current
population of the City to give a per capita figure, expressed in US dollars. (To
make the conversion from local currency, use the rates posted by the US Federal
Reserve Bank: http://www.ny.frb.org/markets/foreignex.html)
Benchmark:
The mean upper and lower quartile of cities in developed and developing nations as
defined by the World Bank. It should be expressed in constant USD per head of city
population.
Comments and
Limitations:
This indicator is dependant on the agency of each national government charged with
the responsibility of collecting relevant GNP data and the precise nature of the data
available at each city level.
Other
which use this
indicator:
Montreal; and Bogot

UN-HABITAT, Asia Development Bank, EuroStat Urban Audit.
92
Methodology Report
Example:
New York City has an estimated gross city product of $457.3 billion (2006) and a
city population of 8,000,000 which calculates to a City Product per capita of
USD$57,162 per capita.
93
Methodology Report
Theme:
Economy
Supporting Indicator: Employment rate by age and sex
Rationale:
The percentage of the city population in full time employment is an indicator of the
economic health of the city and the success of city economic policy. The
presentation of this indicator by age and sex provides an insight into the citys
workforce
Definition:
The number of persons resident in the city in full time employment sorted by age
and sex (the numerator) divided by the city population sorted by age and sex(the
denominator), expressed as a percentage.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of persons resident in the city in full time
employment is determined. This data is collected by both age and sex using the
following age categories for the purposes of sorting:
15-19 years
20-24 years
25-34 years
35-44 years
45-54 years
55-64 years
65 years and over
Full time employment includes those that are self employed and requires that the
resident work a minimum of 35 hours a week in one job. This employment figure is
then divided by the city population sorted by age and sex as above and the result
Household labor force surveys are generally the most comprehensive and
comparable sources of statistics. Other sources include population censuses,
employment office records and official estimates. The employment figure is
confined to the formal economy however cities are able to can report separately on
their estimates for employment in the informal economy should they so desire.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
City population has been used as the denominator for this indicator instead of
workforce given that population will be known for most cities. This indicator is
dependent on the government agency charged with the responsibility of collecting
relevant employment and population data and the precise nature of the available
data.
Employment is a formal labor market concept which is often complicated in
developing countries with a large informal sector of the city economy.
Other
Which Use This
Belo Horizonte, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, and, King County, Wa. use include
Employment as a City Indicator but do not necessarily express it as a percentage of
city population.
94
Methodology Report
Indicator:
UN-HABITAT Indicator 17 seeks to measure informal employment as a percentage

of the employed population, men and women, whose activity is part of the informal
sector.
Example:
Statistics Canada
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/labor20a.htm
95
Methodology Report
Theme:
Economy
Supporting Indicator: Construction value divided by assessed value
Rationale:
The value of current construction in the city expressed as a percentage of the total
assessed value of the city is an indicator of capital re-investment.
Definition:
The total value of all current construction projects in the city (the numerator)
divided by the total assessed value of the city for the purposes of real property
taxation (the denominator), expressed as a percentage.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total value of all building and civic works currently
under construction is determined and this figure is then divided by the current total
assessed value of all real property, inclusive of civil and building improvements
thereon.
The total value of all buildings and civic works currently under construction is
determined by reference to the most recent public capital works estimates, and for
buildings and civil works projects financed by the private sector, from the estimated
value as stated in the most recent public sector approvals of such projects.
The total assessed value is generally the value of all real property within the city
which figures are used for the purposes of real property taxation. Where such
valuation is limited to the unimproved capital value of such real property then an
assessment should be made to add the current market value of the building and civil
improvements thereon.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Some cities use "unimproved capital value" while others use "market value"
(inclusive of improvements) for levying their property taxes. Typically such
valuations are not done on an annual basis. The component of the property value
attributed to land as opposed to improvements on the land (buildings, structures and
above ground infrastructure) and in the land (services and underground
infrastructure) is relevant given that high land values (e.g. London, New York,
Tokyo, Mumbai) can distort this reinvestment ratio.
As many construction projects may take many years to complete, incorporation of
the projects total cost in each year can distort this reinvestment ratio.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Example:
96
Methodology Report
D.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Environment
Environment
Greenhouse gas emissions measured in tons per capita
Rationale:
The annual greenhouse gas emissions from all activities within the city is an
indicator of the adverse contribution the city is making to climate change.
Definition:
The total tonnage of green house gases (equivalent carbon dioxide units) generated
over the past year by all activities within the city (the numerator) is divided the
current city population (the numerator) expressed as a per capita figure.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the aggregate tonnage (expressed as equivalent carbon
dioxide units of greenhouse gas) of greenhouse gas emissions are calculated for all
activities within the city for the preceding twelve months. This figure is then
divided by the current city population to give a per capita figure.
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are gases in the atmosphere that absorb infra-red
radiation that would otherwise escape to space; thereby contributing to rising
surface temperatures. There are six major GHGs: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs),
and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). These gases stay in the atmosphere for long periods
(i.e. they are long-lived).
HEAT Software
To facilitate local government efforts to identify and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, ICLEI developed the HEAT Software (Harmonized Emissions Analysis
Tool). This software estimates emissions derived from energy consumption and
waste generation within a community. The HEAT software determines emissions
using specific factors (or coefficients) according to the type of fuel used. Emissions
are aggregated and reported in terms of equivalent carbon dioxide units, or eCO2.
Converting all emissions to equivalent carbon dioxide units allows for the
consideration of different greenhouse gases in comparable terms.
The emissions coefficients and methodology employed by the software are
consistent with national and international inventory standards established by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996 Revised IPCC Guidelines for
the Preparation of National GHG Emissions Inventories1), the U.S. Voluntary
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Guidelines2 (EIA form1605), and, for emissions
generated from solid waste, the U.S. EPAs Waste Reduction Model (WARM) and
the LandGEM Model (Landfill gas emissions).
The HEAT software is based on ICLEIs CCP Software that has been used in many
cities for 13 years as part of the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign. The
HEAT software will:
Build an emissions inventory based on local energy use, transportation

demand, and waste practices;
Help a user/city build a simple emissions forecast;
Set target/goal for reducing emissions;
Quantify emission reduction activities and their co-benefits;
Develop, report, and track progress made in meeting the target.
97
Methodology Report
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
While there are good atmospheric measurements for the long-lived greenhouse
gases (i.e., CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6), there are poor measurements of
short-lived GHGs like water vapor, carbon monoxide, tropospheric ozone,
tropospheric aerosols, etc. As a result, it is difficult to quantify their global
radioactive forcing impacts and GWP values are generally not attributed to these
gases that are short-lived and spatially inhomogeneous.
ICLEI HEAT software can be found at http://heat.iclei.org. ICLEI HEAT software
provides capacity to local governments to seek to reduce GHG emissions based on
sound governance, economic development, improved waste management, energy
efficiency, better urban mobility, and better air quality. The website offers
consultants, NGOs, government agencies, academics, and others tools to translate
energy, transportation and waste activities into pollution emissions. HEAT
software is open to users that have been sponsored to join, have joined ICLEI as a
member, or those who purchase an annual site membership.
Additional information regarding detailed methodologies can be found at the
following websites:
http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gl/invs1.htm (IPCC);
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/frntvrgg.html (Energy Administration
Information); and,
http://www.epa.gov/ttncatc1/products.html (LandGEM and other EPA models)
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Porto Alegre, Sao Paulo, Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver are all members of
ICLEIs Cities for Climate Protection and use ICLEIs methodology to set a
baseline for their GHG emissions.
Example:
98
Methodology Report
Theme:
Environment
Supporting Indicator: Number of days with PM10 exceedences
Rationale:
The evidence on airborne particulate matter (PM) and its public health
impact is consistent in showing adverse health effects at exposures that are
currently experienced by urban populations in both developed and
developing countries. PM pose a health concern because they can be inhaled
into and accumulate in the respiratory system.
People with heart or lung disease, older adults, and children are considered at
greater risk to particle pollution. Long-term exposures (annual mean) to
particles, such as those experienced by people living for many years in areas
with high particle levels, have been associated with problems such as
reduced lung function and the development of chronic bronchitis - and even
premature death. Short-term exposures (24-hour) to particles can aggravate
lung diseases, causing asthma attacks and acute bronchitis, and may also
increase susceptibility to respiratory infections. High particle pollution in
major cities like Hong Kong, Beijing, etc have major negative impacts on
economic/business growth due to decline in foreign investors. According to
the Word Health Organization (WHO), air pollution is estimated to cause
approximately 2 million premature deaths worldwide per year. In many
cities, the average annual levels of PM10 exceed 70 micrograms per cubic
meter (/m3).
Definition:
Particulate matter is a mixture of microscopic solids and liquid droplets

suspended in air. These particulates are made up of a number of components,
including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, soil
or dust particles, and allergens (such as fragments of pollen or mould
spores). Coarse particles are greater than 2.5 microns and less or equal to10
microns in diameter and are defined as respirable particulate mater or
PM10. Sources of coarse particles include crushing or grinding operations,
and dust from paved or unpaved roads.
Methodology:
PM10 concentrations in the atmosphere are measured at one or more

monitoring stations in major cities in accordance with the U.S. EPA
Reference Method given in 40 CFR50, Appendix J and implemented in the
Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems,
Volume II. This document is available on the internet at:
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/qaqc/2-11meth.pdf. The method
provides for the measurement of mass concentrations of PM10 in ambient air
over a 24-hour sampling period from midnight to midnight. In accordance
with EPA national every-sixth-day particulate sampling schedule, each
sampler should be operated at least every designated sixth day throughout
the year. The 24-hour (daily) measurements of PM10 concentrations are
forwarded to a database where yearly summaries for each monitoring station
(maximum values, average values, number of measurements, etc) are
computed.
The method involves the use of an air sampler which draws ambient air at a
constant flowrate into a specially shaped inlet where the suspended
particulate matter is inertially separated into one or more size fractions
within the PM10 size range. Each size fraction in the PM10 size range is then
99
Methodology Report
collected on a separate filter over the specified sampling period.

Each filter is weighed (after moisture equilibration) before and after use to
determine the net weight (mass) gain due to collected PM10. The total
volume of air sampled, corrected to EPA reference conditions (25C, 101.3
kPa), is determined from the measured flow rate and the sampling time. The
mass concentration of PM10 in the ambient air is computed as the total mass
of collected particles in the PM10 size range divided by the volume of air
sampled, and is expressed in micrograms per standard cubic meter (g/std
m3). For PM10 samples collected at temperatures and pressures significantly
different from EPA reference conditions, these corrected concentrations
sometimes differ substantially from actual concentrations (in micrograms per
actual cubic meter), particularly at high elevations. The vertical placement of
the samplers must be such that the inlets are no lower than two meters and
no higher than fifteen meters above ground elevation. If the sampler is to be
located on a roof or near any structures, there must be a minimum clearance
of two meters from surrounding walls or obstacles.
Although not required, the actual PM10 concentration can be calculated from
the corrected concentration, using the average ambient temperature and
barometric pressure during the sampling period.
Benchmark:
The PM10 standards vary from country to country. The U.S. EPA 24-hour
standard for PM10 is 150/m3. The 24-hour standard is not to be exceeded
more than once per year on average over 3 years. In Poland, the annual and
24-hour PM10 standards are 50 and 120/m3, respectively. In Slovenia, the
annual and 24-hour PM10 standards are 50 and 125/m3, respectively.
In order to reduce the high rate of premature deaths worldwide, the WHO
recently came up with new guidelines for air pollution. According to the new
guidelines, the annual and 24-hour standards for PM10 are 20/m3 and
50/m3, respectively.
Comments and
Limitations:
The national standards for PM10 vary substantially in different countries, and
do not ensure sufficient protection for human health. The new WHO
guidelines provide the basis for all countries to build their own air quality
standards and policies supporting health with solid, scientific evidence.
Other
which use this
indicator:
U.S. EPA, WHO, California Air Resources Board (CARB)
Example:
In 1996, Toronto had an annual mean P M10 concentration of 26 /m3.
100
Methodology Report
E.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Rationale:
Shelter
Shelter
Percentage of city population living in slums
The large scale implementation of slum upgrading and improvement programs is
one of the biggest challenges that cities face. While slums are mostly associated
with cities in developing countries, they also exist in cities in developed countries.
The percentage of the population living in slums is an indicator of the number of
city residents living in substandard or insecure housing. Evidence shows that slums
are growing and becoming permanent features of urban landscapes. One out of
every three city dwellers lives in a slum today. Since slums host significantly large
proportions of the urban population it is important to measure them.
Definition:
The number of people living in slums (the numerator) divided by the city population
(the denominator), expressed as a percentage.
Methodology:
Each year the number of people living in slum households as defined below is
determined. The number of slum households is then multiplied by the then current
average household size for that city to determine the number of persons living in
slums, (the numerator). This number is then divided by city population. The result is
expressed as a percentage of city population living in slums.
A slum household is a group of individuals living under the same roof in an urban
area who lack one or more of the following five conditions (United Nations Human
Settlements Programme, 2006):
Durable housing: A house is considered durable if it is built on a non-hazardous
location and has a structure permanent and adequate enough to protect its
inhabitants from the extremes of climatic conditions, such as rain, heat, cold and
humidity.
Sufficient living area: A house is considered to provide a sufficient living area for
the household members if not more than three people share the same room.
Access to improved water: A household is considered to have access to improved
water supply if it has a sufficient amount of water for family use, at an affordable
price, available to household members without being subject to extreme effort,
especially on the part of women and children.
Access to sanitation: a household is considered to have adequate access to
sanitation if an excreta disposal system, either in the form of a private toilet or a
public toilet shared with a reasonable number of people, is available to household
members.
Secure tenure: Secure tenure is the right of all individuals and groups to effective
protection against forced evictions. People have secure tenure when there is
evidence of documentation that can be used as proof of secure tenure status or when
there is either de facto or perceived protection against forced evictions.
Care should be taken to avoid double counting so as to not exaggerate or over-count
the percentage of population in slums. For example, a household that lacks access to
improved water and does not have secure tenure counts as one slum household.
Please include in the notes section what percentage of the city population is subject
101
Methodology Report
to each of the UN-HABITAT conditions noted above.

Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Data for the above conditions will likely rely on census and survey data.
The following two paragraphs regarding the definition of slum are from United
Nations Human Settlements Programme (2006) p. 27
Global monitoring has faced a political obstacle over the term slum, which has
often been deemed derogatory by urban planners, city authorities and slum dwellers
themselves. The preferred terms, including informal settlement, squatter
settlement and unplanned neighborhood, have been used interchangeably with
slum, but have not heretofore been linked to specific indicators regularly reported
on by governments and stakeholder organizations. The difficulty in developing a
workable measurement strategy and the lack of reporting on slums illustrates that
they are conceptually complex and methodologically elusive.
Different cultures and countries define the physical and social attributes of slums
differently. UN-HABITAT acknowledges this diversity and the fact that slums take
many different forms and names. Bearing this in mind, in 2002, UN-HABITAT, the
United Nations Statistical Division and the joint UN-HABITAT/World Bank Cities
Alliance gathered together a group of experts to define slums and propose a way to
measure them. The resulting definition and methodology represent a compromise
between theoretical and methodological considerations. The agreed upon definition
is simple, operational and pragmatic: it can be easily understood and adapted by
governments and other partners; it offers clear, measurable indicators, provided as a
proxy to capture some of the essential attributes of slums; and it uses householdlevel data that is collected on a regular basis by governments, development agencies
and non-governmental organizations, which is accessible and available in most parts
of the world.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
UN-HABITAT; Bogota; FCM, Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver, Belo Horizonte
Example:
In 2003, 30.1% of the households in Ibadan, Nigeria did not have access to s
sufficient living area (United Nations Human Settlements Programme (2006).
In 2001, approximately 345,200 people, or 8% of the population of Bangalore,
India, lived in slums (Census of India, 2003).
102
Methodology Report
Theme:
Shelter
Supporting Indicator: Areal size of informal settlements as a percent of city area
Rationale:
Settlements characterized by illegality of tenure and unauthorized shelter are

generally marginal and precarious, and do not cater to basic human needs such as
safe, sanitary housing. They affect sustainable city development, human health, and
socioeconomic development. The size of informal settlements is an indicator of the
extent of the issue for the reporting city.
Definition:
The area of informal settlements in square kilometers (the numerator) divided by the
city area in square kilometers, expressed as a percentage.
Methodology:
Definition of informal settlements

Informal settlements are known by many different names around the world
including shantytowns, favelas (Brazil), squatter camps (South Africa), and
bidonvilles in French-speaking areas. The UN Statistics Division has developed the
following definition which is used here:
1. Areas where groups of housing units have been constructed on land that the
occupants have no legal claim to, or occupy illegally; 2. Unplanned settlements
and areas where housing is not in compliance with current planning and
building regulations (unauthorized housing).
(http://unstats.un.org/unsd/environmentgl/default.asp)
While many informal settlements also meet the definition of slum, the terms are not
synonymous. Slums may exist in areas that do not meet the definition of informal
settlements. Some informal settlements may have improved such that they do not
meet the definition of slum.
Methodology
Areas of informal settlements should be delineated using aerial photography and/or
land use maps and the area in square kilometers calculated. The City Planning
Department together with departments knowledgeable about the city neighborhoods
should be able to accomplish this task. Local academic institutions may also be of
assistance.
Some low cost and more sophisticated measurement methodologies have been
developed (see Comments and Limitations). However, once the areas have been
identified on a map, the area in square kilometers can be calculated using low cost
Geographic Information Systems or, if not available, through use of hand held
measuring devices.
To simplify the mapping it is recommended that informal settlements smaller than
two square kilometers not be included.
Image below from Addis Ababa (Lemma et. al 2005) Slum areas delineated in
black) http://www.itc.nl/library/papers_2005/conf/sliuzas_par.pdf
103
Methodology Report
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Some interesting methodologies have been developed to calculate the area of

informal settlements. Lemma et. al. (see citation above for Addis Ababa) used
Rapid Urban Appraisal methods supported by Remote Sensing and GIS tools. The
methods and techniques used in data capture included focus group discussions, field
observation with the community, local experts, and visual image interpretation on
the basis of satellite images and aerial photographs together with other secondary
data resulting in both non-spatial and spatial information in the form of thematic
layers in a GIS environment.
Focus Group in Addis

Ababa
If a city has large undeveloped areas or large areas in natural parks, this will reduce
the percentage of the city in informal settlements, potentially diminishing the
perceived impact of the reported figure. This circumstance should be noted, and the
figure compared to the green area (hectares) per 100,000 population.
Work is also being done to automate the identification of informal settlements using
Remote Sensing. Hoffman et. al describe an iterative approach using Quickbird
Data in Rio De Janeiro that improved the accuracy of identification from 47% to
68%
http://www.commission4.isprs.org/obia06/Papers/05_Automated%20classification
%20Urban/OBIA2006_Hofmann_et_al.pdf Accessed March 6, 2007
Other
UN Statistics Division
104
Methodology Report
Example:
105
Methodology Report
Theme:
Shelter
Supporting Indicator: Housing price/income ratio
Rationale:
The cost of housing is an indicator of city sustainability and is related to the health
and wellbeing of city dwellers, as well as to the city economy, social equity, and
urban planning.
The housing price/income ratio a measure of housing affordability and also conveys
valuable information on the performance of the housing market. A low ratio will
indicate that housing is inexpensive and relatively affordable, a high ratio will
indicate that housing is expensive and relatively unaffordable. In a responsive and
efficient housing market, the range of housing prices are such that they respond to
all sections of the population and reach the lowest segments.
This indicator is based on the assumption that, for households, access to adequate
housing means that housing expenditures do not take up an undue portion of their
income.
Definition:
Price/income ratio: the median free-market price of a dwelling unit (the numerator)
divided by the median annual household income in the city (the denominator),
Methodology:
Median free-market housing price: Housing price is defined as the price at which a
dwelling would sell if placed on the market for a reasonable length of time by a
seller who is not under pressure to sell.
The median-priced dwelling in the city is that dwelling which has 50 percent of the
dwellings priced below it and 50 percent of the dwellings priced above it. The
calculation of the price of the median-priced house should, therefore, include all
housing, both old and new, and both formal and informal. If, for example, the
majority of the housing stock is informal, and the informal housing stock is
generally cheaper than the formal housing stock, then the median priced dwelling
will probably be an informal unit. For blocks of apartments or multiple-family
dwellings which are usually sold as a single building, the vale of one dwelling unit
should be estimated as a pro rata share of the total sale price. This is particularly
relevant for countries in Africa where the majority of housing is of this type.
The department (or bureau, or office) of the City responsible for housing should
report the median free-market housing price number annually. The department may
derive the median free-market price using several sources such as public housing
boards, housing finance institutions, real-estate agencies, and non-governmental
organisations. Alternate data sources such as census data and local property
appraised values may also be considered (see below).
Median annual household income: Household income is defined as the gross
income from all sources, which include wages, salaries, incomes from businesses or
informal sector activities, investment income, and where information is available,
income in-kind such as consumption of agricultural produce which might have been
sold. The median-household income is the income that has 50 percent of the
households below it and 50 percent of the households above it.
Household income is usually reported by surveys or by the census. As these may
not be conducted annually, the number from an earlier year may be adjusted to the
reporting year based on the local inflation rate.
106
Methodology Report
Benchmark:
The benchmark may vary in different part of the world. In the United States, for
example, housing is considered affordable if it costs 30 percent or less of annual
household income.
Comments and
Limitations:
Alternate housing price sources:

In some countries the national census collects data on the value of owner-occupied
housing, as self reported by the respondent to the census questionnaire. Data
limitations include age of the data (some census data may be 10 or more years
old) and respondent bias.
In some cities government officials appraise the value of owner-occupied housing
for property tax purposes.
This indicator is based on median values. It will only indicate the median situation,
and will not inform about the range of different sub-markets and their differing
values.
This rationale and methodology is adapted from UN-HABITAT (2004).
Other
which use this
indicator:
UN-HABITAT
Example:
In 1999 in the City of New Orleans, US, the price/income ratio was 3.21 ($87,300/
$27,133) Source: US Census (2003, Summary Tape File 3).
107
Methodology Report
Theme:
Shelter
Supporting Indicator: Housing rent/income ratio
Rationale:
The cost of housing is an indicator of city sustainability and is related to the health
and wellbeing of city dwellers, as well as to the city economy, social equity, and
urban planning.
The housing rent/income ratio a measure of housing affordability and also conveys
valuable information on the performance of the housing market. A low ratio (below
0.25) will indicate that rental housing is inexpensive and relatively affordable, a
high ratio (over 0.40) will indicate that housing is expensive and relatively
unaffordable. In a responsive and efficient housing market, the range of housing
prices are such that they respond to all sections of the population and reach the
lowest segments.
This indicator is based on the assumption that, for households, access to adequate
housing means that housing expenditures do not take up an undue portion of their
income.
Definition:
Rent/income ratio: The median annual rent of a dwelling unit (the numerator)
divided by the median annual household income of renters (the denominator),
Methodology:
Median annual rent:

Rent should be contract rent or the amount paid for the property alone and not the
rent including utilities such as electricity, heating etc (sometimes called the gross
rent). The median rent is that cost which has 50 percent of the rental dwellings
priced below it and 50 percent of the dwellings priced above it.
The department (or bureau, or office) of the City responsible for housing should
report the median annual rent number annually. The department may derive the
number using several sources such as public housing boards, housing finance
institutions, real-estate agencies, and non-governmental organisations. Alternate
data sources such as census data may also be considered (see below).
An estimation procedure may have to be used, with ranges of rents estimated
separately for different categories such as public housing, controlled rents, one
bedroom and two bedroom furnished and unfurnished apartments, and single family
houses of different types.
Median annual renter household income: Household income is defined as the gross
income from all sources, which include wages, salaries, incomes from businesses or
informal sector activities, investment income, and where information is available,
income in-kind such as consumption of agricultural produce which might have been
sold. The median-household income is the income that has 50 percent of the
households below it and 50 percent of the households above it.
The income used in should be median annual household income of renter
households. Where renter household income data are not available, use the median
income of all households, but note this in the report, as it has a significant effect on
the final ratio.
Household income is usually reported by surveys or by the census. As these may
not be conducted annually, the number from an earlier year may be adjusted to the
108
Methodology Report
reporting year based on the local inflation rate.

Benchmark:
The benchmark may vary in different part of the world. In the United States, for
example, housing is considered affordable if it costs 30 percent or less of household
income.
Comments and
Limitations:
Alternate housing price sources:

In some countries the national census collects data on contract and gross rent,
often as self reported by the respondent to the census questionnaire. Data
limitations include age of the data (some census data may be 10 or more years
old) and respondent bias.
This indicator is based on median values. It will only indicate the median situation,
and will not inform about the range of different sub-markets and their differing
values.
This rationale and methodology is adapted from UN-HABITAT (2004).
Other
which use this
indicator:
UN-HABITAT. Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver report on a variant of this

indicator.
Example:
In 1999 in the City of New Orleans, US, the rent/income ratio was 0.25 ($4,536/
$17,827) Source: US Census (2003, Summary Tape File 3).
Notes:
1. The ratio of 0.25 is based on median renter household income. Based on
median household income of all households, the ratio is 0.17 ($4,536/ $27,133),
implying greater affordability than a ratio using renter household income..
2. Rent of $4,536 derived by multiplying the median monthly contract rent of $378
by 12 to obtain the annual rent.
109
Methodology Report
F.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Social Equity
Social Equity
Percentage of city population living in poverty
Rationale:
The percentage of the citys population living in poverty is an indicator of social

equity and in the form of major wealth inequity. Eradication of poverty is an
essential component of the Millennium Development Goals.
Definition:
The number of persons in the city living below the poverty threshold (the
numerator) is divided by the total current population of the city (the denominator)
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the number of persons in the city living below the
poverty threshold is determined. The number of persons living in poverty is
determined by multiplying the number of city households living at or below the
poverty line and multiplying this figure by the current average number of persons
per household for that city. This figure is then divided by the total current
population of the city. The result is expressed as a percentage of the population
living in poverty.
The poverty threshold for each country is recorded by the World Bank, which can
be viewed through its website (www.worldbank.org - search for PovertyNet) or go
directly to the PovertyNet website through Google... It determines the annual
household income level at which or below, persons living in that household, would
be unable to adequately provide themselves over a 12 month period with water,
food, shelter, and other basic needs for a healthy life.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Applying a current average persons per household figure to all households may
suffer from a lack of distinction between household size in poor and more affluent
households.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
King County, Wa., Montreal, Vancouver, Toronto (report on children in poverty).

In assessing poverty levels in different countries, organizations such as the World
Bank, OECD, European Union and the U.S. Census use similar indicators to
determine a poverty threshold. While the specifics may vary, the basic approach
and general results lead to the same issues.
Example:
110
Methodology Report
Theme:
Social equity
Supporting Indicator: Cost of basic necessities or Market Basket Measure (MBM)
Rationale:
All measures of poverty, whether they are based on income or a basket of goods and
services are arbitrary to some degree. It is really a matter of values how great a
distance governments are prepared to accept between the "poor" and the rest of
society. To be poor is to experience a significant degree of exclusion from the wider
society, and not just to be deprived of very basic needs. MBM is considered by
some, as falling somewhere between a subsistence standard of living and a more
generous social inclusion basket.
Definition:
The basic issue is what to include and what not to include in the market basket. This
measure is not an absolute measure of poverty, since it is explicitly intended to
provide a "creditable" standard of living and not just bare-bones survival and as
such is really measuring inequality and not poverty. At the same time, it is designed
to fall short of a basket sufficient for social inclusion so that this inequality can be
kept visible and reported regularly.
Methodology:
For this measure, the MBM is calculated for a four-person family, then adjusted for
other family sizes. It includes: rental costs based on an average of rents for two- and
three-bedroom apartments; food costs sufficient to ensure a nutritious diet; clothing
and footwear costs; and transportation costs calculated as a transit pass in larger
urban areas or auto-operating costs for those living elsewhere. There will also be an
allowance for other items, such as recreation and entertainment, based on the
spending of low-income families - defined as those at the 2nd decile, that is, 20% of
families having less income. The MBM disposable income is defined as after-tax
income, minus alimony payments, child care expenses, payroll taxes, and health
expenses
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has argued
that absolute poverty lines have little meaning in advanced industrialized societies,
and that poverty should be seen conceptually not as deprivation of very basic needs,
but as exclusion from the standards of living broadly available to others in the same
society. As they note, "in order to participate fully in the social life of a community,
individuals may need a level of resources that is not too inferior to the norm of that
community." They add that, "from a normative perspective, it may be considered
unfair for members of a community to benefit unequally from a general increase in
prosperity."(OECD Employment Outlook, June 2001, p. 41)
The MBM is controversial in that it involves subjective judgments on what to
include in the basket, and it can vary less generous than some alternative, needsbased baskets such as those developed by social planning councils. Preliminary
estimates show that the MBM will significantly lower the low-income rate
compared to the traditional pre-tax LICO measure.
Other
which use this
indicator:
The World Bank, the Inter American Development Bank, the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, the African Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean,
Statistic Canada, and the Colombian National Department of Statistics, all use this
111
Methodology Report
type of measure to varying degrees.

Example:
Number of Ottawa residents living under MBM threshold: 94,437 or about 12% of
a total population of 774,072 persons (Statistics Canada via CBC report, 2005).
The 2000 market basket for a family of four living in Ottawa was set with the
following prices:
Food $6,280
Clothing and footwear $2,292
Shelter $10,449
Transportation $1, 579
Other $5,903
These five categories added together give a MBM threshold of $26,503.
112
Methodology Report
G.
Subjective Well-Being
Theme:
Subjective Well-Being
Supporting Indicator: Subjective Well-Being (SWB) Index
Rationale:
Subjective Wellbeing (SWB) is a measure of how citizens feel and think about their
lives and about their city. SWB is measured through two indexes, the Personal
Wellbeing Index (PWI) and the City Wellbeing Index (CWI).
Both indexes are indicators of the subjective dimensions of quality of life of citizens
as perceived directly by the general population.
Definition:
The PWI measures six satisfaction with life domains as follows: i)satisfaction with
health, ii)satisfaction with achievements in life, iii) satisfaction with standard of
living, iv) satisfaction with personal security, v) satisfaction with future security, vi)
satisfaction with community connectedness.
The CWI consist of five domains: i) satisfaction with the citys environment,
ii)satisfaction with local government, iii) satisfaction with business opportunities, iv)
satisfaction with security of the city, v) satisfaction with social conditions of the city.
Methodology:
SWB is measured through questions of satisfaction directed to peoples feeling about

themselves in a survey. It adopts a domain-level representation of global life
satisfaction. Individual items refer to specific life domains (life aspects) and the
scores are averaged to produce a measure of SWB.
A city interested to obtain its score of the PWI and CWI index should follow these
steps:
i) Organize and finance a representative telephone survey of its general population
with a margin of error of no more than 5%. with a confidence interval of 95%. For
example, for a city of 100,000 inhabitants, 382 surveys would be needed, and for
a city of 1 million inhabitants, 385 surveys would be needed. Collection of the
information should take between 10-15 days.
ii) Translate and back translate items of PWI and CWI in the language of city
iv) Use a response scale format from 0 to 10 that denotes an answer from completely
dissatisfied (0) to completely satisfied (10). Refusal rate (people contacted who
decline to respond) should not be greater than 15%., in which case, the number of
surveys should be increased by 15%
v) Test administrators can use the following language:
a. Good afternoon | evening, my name is _____ and I am calling from [call centre name].
b. We are conducting a short but important survey on behalf of an international non-profit
organization on the quality of life in key cities around the world.
c. Could I please speak with the person in the household who is 18 years or older and has
had the most recent birthday?
d. The survey takes about 7 minutes and asks a few questions about your satisfaction with
life as a whole.
IF NO, READ: Thank you very much for your time. Have a good afternoon | evening.
IF YES, CONTINUE
113
Methodology Report
And lastly, can you please tell me in what year you were born? [RECORD EXACT
YEAR]
1. IF 1988 OR EARLIER PROCEED TO SURVEY
2. IF 1989 OR LATER THANK AND END SURVEY
3. IF REFUSED THANKS AND END SURVEY
Scale Introduction
Thank you. I am going to begin by asking how satisfied you feel, on a scale from zero to
10. On this scale, Zero means you feel completely dissatisfied. 10 means you feel
completely satisfied. And the middle of the scale is 5, which means you feel neutral, i.e.
neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.
The administrator should confirm that the required response mode is understood
before proceeding with the index items.
Completely
Dissatisfied
Completely
Satisfied
Neutral
10
vi) The test administrator should allow each respondent to respond in an entirely
private manner, and assure respondents that their individual data will remain
confidential and anonymous.
vii) The following demographics of the general population should be collected:
a) Gender
b) Age by categories
c) Socioeconomic or Income level per household
d) Occupation according to the categories used for each city
e) Number of children per household
f) Educational level according to city category including primary school,
higher school, college, technical education
viii) Convert results to a normalized standard of 0 to 100 for each domain. Obtain
mean and standard deviation for all domains and for the average PWI and CWI
number.
ix) Validate PWI and CWI scales with a Cronbachs reliability Coefficient alpha of
both scales and exploratory factor analysis.
x) Results and methodology should be sent to the International Wellbeing Group for
its consideration (contact information in comments and limitations).
Questions in English
PWI
Domains
Questions
How satisfied are you with?
1.
Your standard of living?

114
[Standard of Living]
Methodology Report
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Questions in English
CWI
Your health?
What you are achieving in life?
Your personal relationships?
How safe you feel?
Feeling part of your community?
Your future security?
Your spirituality or religion?
[Personal Health]
[Achieving in Life]
[Personal Relationships]
[Personal Safety]
[Community-Connectedness]
[Future Security]
[Spirituality]
Questions
How satisfied are you with?
1. Economic situation in city
2. State of the environment in City
3. Social Conditions in City
4. Local Government in City
5. Business in City
6. Local Security in City
Benchmark
Use results for Sydney, Toronto and Bogot as benchmarking. A score that is much
lower than 70 in a scale of 0 to 100 in the PWI Index indicates that the city is not
providing the material support needed for its inhabitants to feel satisfaction with the
different domains of life.
Comments and
Limitations:
This is an area of academic research whose results must be discussed in an academic

research setting. Results should be taken as preliminary indicators for public policy.
Results should be interpreted with caution. Cross cultural dimension should be taken
into account and furthered researched. In particular the correlation between CWI
and PWI should de furthered researched.
More information on SWB is available at
http://www.deakin.edu.au/research/acqol/index_wellbeing/index.htm. See in
particular Survey 14.1, Report 14.1, March 2006 "Fifth Anniversary Special Report
Summarising the major findings with the Index over its first five years.
Two new domains should be also tested: i) satisfaction with spirituality or religiosity
and satisfaction with ethnic diversity
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
International Wellbeing Group
Example:
Toronto: PWI : 73.1;
CWI: 58.8
Bogot: PWI: 75.9;
CWI: 51.9
http://acqol.deakin.edu.au/inter_wellbeing/int_wellbeing_group_members.htm
115
Methodology Report
Results for Toronto
Mean and Standard Deviation for Life as a Whole
Life as a Whole
PWI
Standard of Living
Health
Achieving in Life
Personal Relationships
Safety
Feeling part of Community
Future Security
CWI
Economic Situation in
Toronto
State of Environment in
Toronto
Social Conditions in
Toronto
Local Government in
Toronto
Business in Toronto
Local Security in Toronto
Others
Satisfaction with Religiosity
and Spirituality
116
Mean
75.2
73.1
73.5
75.2
72.1
75.7
77.3
68.3
69.6
58.8
61.0
Standard Deviation
18.61
14.19
19.48
20.71
20.07
22.30
17.73
20.86
20.96
13.75
18.40
50.3
20.44
55.6
19.34
54.5
21.16
66.1
64.5
16.40
18.38
70.9
22.58
Methodology Report
H.
Theme:
Core Indicator:
Technology and Innovation

Number of internet connections per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of internet connections is an indicator of information access and

communication technology connectivity. Internet Access records are kept by
internet service and telecommunications providers in the form of subscriber
locations and accounts. Other sources include government censuses,
telecommunications records and official estimates.
Definition:
The number of internet connections in the city (the numerator) divided by one
100,000th of the citys current population (the denominator), expressed as the
number of establishments per 100,000 of city population.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total number of the citys internet connections is
determined. The number of internet connections is divided by the result of the city
population divided by 100,000. The result is expressed as the number of internet
connections per 100,000 population.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
Internet access per 1,000 head of population is used by the World Bank. It is noted
that the total number of internet connections include domestic, business and other
organizationsthe number of users of each internet connection can not be reliably
calculated hence the World Bank indicator has been adopted.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Bogot and The World Bank.

This indicator is included as Indicator 48 of the Millennium Development Goals.
Example:
117
Methodology Report
Theme:
Supporting Indicator: Number of telephones (land lines and cell phones) per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of telephone connections is an indicator of communication technology

connectivity. Telephone service records are kept by telecommunications providers
in the form of subscriber locations and accounts. Other sources include government
censuses, telecommunications records and official estimates.
Definition:
The number of telephone connections in the city including land lines and cellar
connections (the numerator) divided by one 100,000th of the citys current
population (the denominator), expressed as the number of establishments per
100,000 of city population.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total number of the citys telephone connections is
determined. This includes both land line and cellar connections. The number of
telephones is divided by the result of the city population divided by 100,000. The
result is expressed as the number of telephones per 100,000 population.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
It is noted that the total number of telephone connections include domestic, business
and other organizations.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
This indicator is included as Indicator 47 of the Millennium Development Goals.
Example:
118
Methodology Report
Theme:
Supporting Indicator: Number of patents registered to resident persons or corporations of the city
in past year per 100,000 population
Rationale:
The number of patents issued to resident persons or corporations of a city is an

indicator of commercial and technological innovation.
Definition:
The number of patents issued to city residents in that year (the numerator) divided
by one 100,000th of the citys current population (the denominator), expressed as the
number of establishments per 100,000 of city population.
Methodology:
Each year at an agreed date the total number of patents issued to resident persons
and corporations of the city is determined. The number of patents registered to
resident persons or corporations of the city is divided by the result of the city
population divided by 100,000. The result is expressed as the number of patents
registered per 100,000 population.
Government Patent Offices maintain records of all patents registered to persons and
corporations within their jurisdiction.
Benchmark:
Comments and
Limitations:
As patents are generally issued by the national government Cities will be reliant on
another level of Government to provide this information on an annual city by city
basis.
Other
Which Use This
Indicator:
Example:
119
Methodology Report
3.0
Desirable Future Indicators
In addition to the core and supporting indicators identified in this report, a number of other
indicators have been identified as desirable. An indicator was identified as a desirable future
indicator if it was considered very useful but currently had no accepted methodologies in place to
collect it. In some cases, some of these desirable future indicators may actually be an index.
An index is a number derived from a series of indicators. Most commonly, index is used for
indicators related to a baseline, as in the case of the Consumer Price Index (an indicator of
inflation in the economy) where a base year (1990=100) performs this function.
The desirable future indicators identified during the indicator development process are listed
below by theme (Table 3):
Table 3: Proposed Desirable Future Indicators
Theme

1. City Services
A. Education
a. Desirable future indicator1: Number of libraries per 100,000 population
b. Desirable future indicator1: Number of visits to library per 100,000 population:
total electronic and non-electronic
c. Desirable future indicator1: Performance on standardized test
B. Energy
a. Desirable future indicator1: Share of renewable energy use out of primary energy
supply
b. Desirable future indicator1: Residential energy use per household: by types of
energy
C. Fire and
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of city served with fire department response
Emergency
b. Desirable future indicator1: Response time for ambulance from initial call
Response
c. Desirable future indicator1: Emergency medical services indicators
D. Health
a. Desirable future indicator1: Annual HIV/AIDS death rate per 100,000 population
E. Recreation
F. Safety
G. Social
Services
H. Solid Waste
a. Desirable future indicator1: An indicator of recreational use levels

a. Desirable future indicator1: Perception of safety
UNDER DEVELOPMENT
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percentage of population participating in recycling

program
I. Transport
a. Desirable future indicator1: Total municipal road and transit expenditures per
capita (include capital and operating expenditures)
J. Wastewater
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of assimilative capacity of receiving water
body used
b. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of untreated wastewater entering
streams/lakes/oceans
K. Water
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percent of treated water lost during distribution
b. Desirable future indicator1: Water quality measured by: i) number of days per
year that water quality was below national standards; ii) number of days per year
that boil water advisories are in effect; iii) contaminates exceeding acceptable
limit
2. City Management
A. Finance
None
120
Methodology Report
Theme
B. Governance

a. Desirable future indicator1:.City Governance Index
b. Desirable future indicator1: Average number of days to get a business license
c. Desirable future indicator1:.Number and percentage of requests for service
received during the past year for which the response time was exceeded (e.g. 10
working days)
None
C. Urban
Planning
3. City Sustainability
A. Civic
None
Engagement
B. Culture
a. Desirable future indicator1: Attendance at cultural events per capita
b. Desirable future indicator1: City vitality
C. Economy
a. Desirable future indicator1: Competitiveness Index
b. Desirable future indicator1: Commercial/Industrial assessment as percent of total
assessment
c. Desirable future indicator1: Investment indicator
d. Desirable future indicator1: Purchasing power parity
D.
a. Desirable future indicator1: Indicator linking air quality to respiratory problems
Environment
(e.g. environmental burden of disease)
E. Shelter
None
F. Social
a. Desirable future indicator1: Percentage of population receiving government
Equity
financial assistance
b. Desirable future indicator1 Social Capital Index
G. Subjective
None
Well-Being
H. Technology a. Desirable future indicator1: Creativity Index
and
b. Desirable future indicator1: Venture capital investment
Innovation c. Desirable future indicator1: Broadband penetration rate
1
Indicators that cannot currently be reported on globally
Please note that there are not desirable future indicators for all themes since not all themes
produced proposed indicators that did not already have current methodologies for collection.
However, for those themes which have desirable future indicators, our hope is that others will
build on the work in this Definitions and Methodologies report and develop methodologies for the
desirable future indicators that could be used by cities globally.
121
Methodology Report

Indicator Met

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indicator Met

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft

Global City Indicators: Definitions and Methodologies

City Services ................................................................................................................................. 11

Percentage of children completing primary and secondary education:

Fire and Emergency Response........................................................................................... 21

Under age five mortality per 1,000 live births ........................................ 24

Square meters of public recreation space per capita ............................... 30

Social Services UNDER DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................... 37

Percentage of city population with regular solid waste collection .......... 38

Km of transportation system per 100,000 population (separated by mode

Percentage of city population served by wastewater collection.............. 51

Percentage of city population with potable water supply service ........... 57

City Management ......................................................................................................................... 66

Debt service ratio (debt service expenditures as a percent of a

Urban Planning .................................................................................................................. 80

Latest approval date of Master Plan........................................................ 80

Shelter ............................................................................................................................... 101

Percentage of city population living in slums ....................................... 101

Social Equity..................................................................................................................... 110

Subjective Well-Being....................................................................................................... 113

Supporting Indicator: Subjective Well-Being (SWB) Index.................................................... 113

Technology and Innovation ............................................................................................. 117

Desirable Future Indicators .......................................................................................................120

Table 1: Global City Indicators Organizational Structure

Table 2: Proposed Global City Indicators

Global City Indicators

a. Percentage of children completing primary and secondary education: survival

Is the city a healthy place to live?

a. Under age five mortality per 1,000 live births

Is the city vibrant?

a. Square meters of public recreation facility space per capita

Global City Indicators

Do many people need social services?

How easy is it to travel in the City by

a. Percentage of city population with regular solid waste collection

Do residents have access to safe

Is government equitable, open and

Global City Indicators

Does the city have green and open

Is the city vibrant?

Are people working?

Is the city contributing to climate

Do many residents live in housing that

Global City Indicators

Latest approval date of Master Plan

a. Voter participation (as a percent of eligible voters)

Is there a lot of poverty? How

a. Percentage of city population living in poverty

Does the city have good access to the

a. Number of internet connections per 100,000 population

Global City Indicators

Indicators that cannot currently be reported on globally

Available, up to date, and able to be reported annually;

For each indicator the following information is presented:

Compares results with prior years to show trends;

Definition and Explanation

Percentage of a cohort of students enrolled in the first grade of primary education

The total number of pupils belonging to a school-cohort who reached each

Count one part-time enrolment of a half-day or more as full-time enrolment. For

Achieving universal primary education is Millennium Development Goal number 2;

UN-HABITAT, UNESCO Institute for Statistics

In Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, in 2003 total enrollment in primary education was

The Student/teacher ratio is an indicator of the adequacy of teacher availability and

Each year at an agreed date the number of full-time equivalent primary