The Third International Forum on Urban Competitiveness was held in Chengdu, capital of southwest China's Sichuan Province from June 10 to 11. More than 100 experts and scholars from the US, UK, Italy, Canada, Netherlands, Mexico, South Korea, Hong Kong and Sichuan Province in China attended the forum and discussed the issues relating to urbanization and urban competitiveness.

Released at the forum was the Global Urban Competitiveness Report 2005-2006. The driving force behind the report was Professor Peter Karl Kresl from Bucknell University in the US, and Dr. Ni Pengfei from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Scholars from around the world including the US, Canada, Italy, the UK, and China contributed to the report.

The report assesses competitiveness standards in 110 cities in Europe, America, Asia, Africa and Oceania. According to the report, of the top 20 cities in the world, 10 are in Europe, eight in the US, and two in Asia -- namely Tokyo and Hong Kong.

New York, Dublin and London were ranked the top three in their comprehensive competitiveness. China's cities were ranked relatively low globally in terms of their overall competitiveness. Taipei was ranked 48th, Shanghai 69th and Beijing 70th.

Also included in this report is an interpretive index of six dimensions including human resources, entrepreneurship, living standards, business environment, innovation and technology, social and public welfare to measure and analyze city competitiveness. The index shows that cities in North America and Europe take the lead in most indexes, and have their respective advantages.

In Asia, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong approach or surpass several key European or American cities in some indexes. The Asian cities, in particular, performed remarkably well in terms of social and public welfare.

In general, cities on the Chinese mainland faired poorly. The competitiveness of Chinese cities is comparatively weak, and the gap between the average Chinese city and the international metropolis is still wide.

The report also includes a quantitative analysis according to industry -- manufacturing, transportation and communications services, consumer services, social services, and business services. 

According to this analysis, the industrial competitiveness of the US is fairly strong, and many EU cities also returned excellent results. Asian cities performed well only in certain categories, and those that did have good industrial structure and high levels of industrial productivity. Further, Asian cities performed well if they had a notably developed service sector which, in turn, has a significant influence on the economy.

The report draws the conclusion that human resources are crucial for boosting the overall competitiveness of a city. Ideal conditions for conducting research, and pleasant and comfortable living environments are important prerequisites for attracting talent. Further, enterprises also exert an influence on overall competitiveness that cannot be underestimated. Tax collected from enterprises accounts for a large proportion of revenue for cities. Enterprises provide work opportunities for local and foreign talents and contribute to social stability.

The report also points out that advances in global technology innovation are challenging the traditional urban system. In addition, some cities' competitiveness levels are enhancing so fast that they also pose new challenges to the global city network.

(China.org.cn June 12, 2006)