3 February 2004: English provincial cities are lagging behind equivalent cities in mainland Europe. They perform less well and make a smaller contribution to national economic welfare than many provincial cities in Germany and other European countries,? says a study carried out by the European Institute of Urban Affairs at Liverpool John Moores University. Separate research by Britain’s Barclays Bank shows that, by GDP, Frankfurt is Europe’s richest city. The southern German city of Karlsruhe is placed second, followed by Paris in third place. London, the highest ranked UK city, is in 23rd position. Liverpool occupies last place in the Barclays Bank ranking.

UBS survey 2008: Most expensive cities (Intro) | World's most expensive cities (table) | Richest cities by personal earnings (table) | Richest cities by purchasing power (table |
Mercer survey: Most expensive cities
EIU survey: Most expensive cities

RICHEST CITIES BY GDP
Introduction | 150 richest cities in 2005 | 150 richest cities in 2020 | Europe's richest cities |

The Liverpool University study was commissioned by the British Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) and supported by the Core Cities Working Group, which is a partnership of the eight English provincial cities (Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, and Sheffield), the nine Regional Development Agencies, and the departments of central government primarily concerned with national economic performance, including the ODPM, the Treasury, and the Departments of Trade and Industry, Transport and Culture, Media and Sport.

Europe's 61 richest cities
GDP (€) per capita in 2001

Rank	City	€ per capita	Rank	City	€ per capita
1	Frankfurt	74,465	32	The Hague	30,110
2	Karlsruhe	70,097	33	Essen	29,760
3	Paris	67,200	34	Bristol	29,437
4	Munich	61,360	35	Lyon	28,960
5	Düsseldorf	54,053	36	Bologna	28,282
6	Stuttgart	53,570	37	Bochum	27,900
7	Brussels	51,106	38	Parma	27,491
8	Copenhagen	50,775	39	Dortmund	26,548
9	Hanover	47,223	40	Rotterdam	26,227
10	Hamburg	43,098	41	Strasbourg	26,015
11	Mannheim	41,674	42	Florence	25,693
12	Nuremburg	41,456	43	Leeds	25,619
14	Augsburg	39,360	44	Duisburg	25,259
14	Cologne	39,108	45	Eindhoven	25,226
15	Amsterdam	38,203	46	Turin	25,042
16	Münster	38,149	47	Toulouse	24,852
17	Wiesbaden	37,454	48	Rome	24,766
18	Dublin	36,591	49	Bordeaux	24,252
19	Vienna	36,572	50	Malmo	24,233
20	Stockholm	35,733	51	Gothenberg	24,065
21	Gelsenkirchen	35,688	52	Grenoble	24,026
22	Helsinki	35,322	53	Verona	23,954
23	London	35,072	54	Berlin	23,428
24	Bremen	35,022	55	Marseilles	22,809
25	Edinburgh	35,018	56	Birmingham	22,099
26	Bonn	34,112	57	Manchester	22,069
27	Antwerp	33,090	58	Newcastle	20,499
28	Milan	32,122	59	Lille	20,191
29	Glasgow	31,893	60	Barcelona	18,449
30	Utrecht	31,712	61	Liverpool	16,466
31	Saarbrücken	30,368	Source:	Barclays Bank

“The Working Group’s agenda,” reads the Liverpool University report, “is to make cities drive urban renaissance and improve economic competitiveness at national and regional level. It is concerned that English provincial cities: are not punching their weight economically in the national context; are falling behind London; lack the right mix of responsibilities and resources to improve their performance; are not as competitive, or do not make as great contribution to the national economic welfare, as comparable cities in continental Europe.”

It explores “whether – and if so how and why – English provincial cities perform less well and make a smaller contribution to national economic welfare than successful provincial cities on the Continent”. It finds its basis in literature reviews, “interviews with senior policy makers throughout Europe, a postal questionnaire”, and closer study of selected cities, including fieldwork. “The full report is available from the ODPM,” it says, and “can also be read in conjunction with the earlier Core Cities report.”

A broad assertion rapidly made is that “a process of urban renaissance is taking place in England. The eight English provincial cities examined in the report have been through their worst period and are recovering economically. In some respects in recent years the cities have been performing as well as, if not better than, their regions”. Problems that remain, the report continues, include inadequate (although improving) educational attainment, a continuing high rate of number of households receiving income benefits, and other social problems. “The question is where does that recent progress leave them in comparison to the leading European cities.”

The answer is that “the eight English provincial cities do not perform well based on economic performance. Bristol and Leeds, at 34 and 43 respectively, perform best. But several are at the bottom of the list... The majority of the eight English cities have per capita GDPs less than one-third of the richest cities in Europe”.

As to the criteria employed, the “quantitative analysis first reviews the evidence on three of the key characteristics of competitiveness – innovation, connectivity and skilled workforce. Then it provides evidence about connectivity, social cohesion and the private sector’s views of the relative attractiveness of different European cities”.

German cities do extremely well, and the report relates that finding to what its authors speculate is the crucially important trend on the Continent toward decentralisation and regionalised decision making. “Continental cities have responsibility for a wider range of functions which affect their economic competitiveness than do their English counterparts. Continental cities typically have more diverse forms of local revenue and more buoyant tax bases, which make them less fiscally dependent upon the national state and more proactive in their development strategies.

“Many European cities have powerful elected mayors who give clear leadership to economic development. Many successful cities have been deeply involved in European systems and networks, which has encouraged them to be internationalist, expansionist and entrepreneurial... The more centralised governmental, institutional and financial system must be one dimension of the underperformance of English cities. The policy implication is not a short term one. But it is clear. Letting go achieves more.’

Another striking discovery is that while “there are structured characteristics of competitiveness, which are acquired over a long period of time and not lost quickly”, so that “the cities which performed well over a decade ago and were well regarded by the private sector as places to do business a decade ago, still head the league table”, the evidence also shows that “cities can change their performance... In the longer term it is also instructive to recall the experience of the three most successful non-capital cities in Europe – Frankfurt, Stuttgart and Munich.

“Fifty years ago all had been virtually destroyed. Indeed, in those cities many believe that this destruction of older industrial structures and attitudes encouraged the view in the cities that change, innovation, reinvention was both desirable and possible.”

In the UK, the report concludes, ?the spatial architecture of economic competitiveness is complex – if not confused – and unstable... There is no magic bullet. But the evidence from Europe is that increasingly the city is regarded as too small and the region too large a platform on which to base economic competitiveness. The trend is to develop city-regional solutions, most often on an informal basis, although occasionally and successfully, on a formal basis.

View comments