Comprehensive composite liveability measure - Print version

About

The comprehensive composite liveability measure is designed to compare and contrast the prosperity, liveability and sustainability of places. It illustrates why one place may score more or less than another using ten categories. It can assess the relative merits of one location over another at a single point in time and change over time using the following ‘ideal type’ or criteria:

An ideal place to live is one where basic needs for housing, employment, education, security and health are met in ways which are environmentally sustainable, which do not exacerbate inequalities, which foster subjective wellbeing, where essential services are readily accessible and where the citizenry are fully engaged in the life and governance of their place.

The ‘ideal type’ is transformed into ten categories – five of which were related to basic needs (thematic domains) and five related to the way these needs might be met (cross-cutting domains). Metrics were picked with specialists working in each field, on the basis that they were available at the local authority level; up-to-date; and clearly directional. Metrics have changed over time to ensure they continue to best represent each category.

Background

What is the composite liveability measure approach?

The composite liveability measure is an approach to systematically evaluate the relative merits of different places. We have used the approach to create the comprehensive composite liveability measure. The approach can be used to compare and contrast any set of places to another using a set of metrics.

Why did we create a composite liveability measure?

When we started this work in the 2012, an index to rank the relative merits of local authority areas did not exist, so we sought to create our own combining the best of existing measures.

Literature review

We undertook a literature review in 2012. These were some of the measures already in existence at that time:

• UK
  • Office for National Statistics: Personal Wellbeing (all local authorities)
  • Demos-pwc: Good Growth for Cities (selected cities)
  • Centre for Cities: Cities Outlook (selected cities)
• International
  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Better Life Index (countries)
  • United Nations Development Programme (UNDP): Human Development Index (countries)
  • Economist Intelligence Unit: Global Liveability Index (selected world cities)
  • Global Cities Institute: Global Cities Indicators
  • World Council on City Data (WCCD): ISO 37120:2014 Sustainable Development of Communities

Since our work, a number of new measures now exist:

• UK
  • University of Birmingham City REDI City Index (local authorities)
  • Co-op Community Wellbeing Index (local neighbourhoods)
• International
  • WHO-UNICEF-Lancet Child Flourishing and Future Index (countries)

How does the composite liveability measure work?

1. Decide on the categories you wish to measure
   Measures carefully chosen to ensure they actually measure the desired outcome. Metrics must be directional. Metrics are combined, weighted and standardised using z-scores so that they’re comparable with one another.

2. Choose places to compare
   Subject to data availability, any place can be compared – for instance, Coventry vs other cities (statistical neighbours, or aspirational comparisons); lower / upper tier authorities; combined authority areas; regions; etc.

3. See how places compare with one another
   The composite liveability measure is a relative measure. Results can be displayed as relative scores; as quintiles; or as a ranking.  Rankings can be generated for each category or as an overall score.

Methodology

Metrics

[https://www.flickr.com/photos/coventrycc/34138468086/in/dateposted-public/]

Housing — An ideal community is one where there is a full range of housing available for its citizens...

• Additional affordable homes provided as a percentage of all net additional homes
• Households assessed as homeless per thousand (Annual)
• Vacant dwellings - all, as a percentage of all dwellings in the area
• Ratio of median house price to median gross annual (residence-based) earnings

Economy — ...with an economy that sustains high levels of employment for all and allows for sufficient leisure and down-time activities...

• Percent of people of working age who are unemployed
• Proportion of population aged 16-64 qualified to at least Level 4 or higher
• Rate of births of new enterprises per 10,000 resident population aged 16 and above

Security —...where people feel secure and free from crime and the fear of crime...

• Juvenile first time entrants to the criminal justice system per 100,000 of 10-17 year olds
• Violence against the person - with injury (offences per 1,000 population)
• Criminal damage and arson (offences per 1,000 population)

Education — ...where its citizens benefit from an education system which ensures all achieve their fullest potential...

• Proportion of 16 year olds who were not in education, employment or training (NEET), or their activity was not known
• Average Attainment 8 score
• Percentage of pupils reaching the expected standard at the end of key stage 2 in reading, writing and mathematics

Health — ...and where everyone has the best possible health.

• Life expectancy at birth - male
• Life expectancy at birth - female
• Healthy life expectancy at birth - male
• Healthy life expectancy at birth - female
• Doctors/GPs per 1000 people

 Green — The most successful communities would be able to achieve all of the thematic domains in a way that is green and sustainable over the short and long term...

• Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting (annual)
• Carbon dioxide emissions estimates - Domestic per capita
• Carbon dioxide emissions estimates - Total per capita

Equality — ...which reduces the inequalities in outcomes...

• Median gross annual pay of employees by residence (resident base)
• Proportion of children aged 0-15 in relative low income families
• Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Index (IDAOPI) - score
• Percentage of all pupils eligible and taking free school meals

Wellbeing — ...in a way that leaves citizens feeling subjectively better...

• Average (mean) rating to the question "Overall, how satisfied are you with your life nowadays?"
• Average (mean) rating to the question "Overall, to what extent do you feel the things you do in your life are worthwhile?"
• Average (mean) rating to the question "Overall, how happy did you feel yesterday?"

Services — ...where suitable services are readily available to its citizens...

• Mortality rate from causes considered preventable per 100,000 population (2019 definition)
• Barriers to Housing and Services - score
• Percentage of adults aged 16+ who are active (150+ minutes a week)

Civic engagement — ...and where citizens feel they are engaged in the civic life of the city and in its governance.

• Percentage of overall turnout for local elections
• Percentage of adults aged 16+ who have volunteered to support sport and physical activity at least twice in the last 12 months
• Council tax collected as a percentage of council tax due

Methodological note

The ten categories were established based on a comprehensive literature review of existing literature and the growing number of published measures. For each category, a statement that describe an ideal community was created, and a range of metrics were identified for each. The composite liveability measure uses a statistical approach to combine the metrics for each category. Each metric is equally weighted and standardised using z-scores to achieve a composite score (higher is better).

Steps

1. The raw data values for each metric are collected. Missing data points are assigned a value based on the nearest available data point (e.g. a district may take the average value of all the other districts in the county).
2. Allocate a direction to each metric. For instance, additional affordable homes is positive (more affordable homes is better), while violence against the person is negative (less violence is better).
3. Standardise each metric using z-scores, so that they are equally comparable.
4. For each category, sum the metric z-scores for each local authority. This results in one data point for each category for each local authority.
5. The sum of the Z-scores is then assigned a percentage rank, giving an indication of how each local authority performs against another at a category and overall level.

Z-scores

A z-score shows how far a number is from the average. They are useful for the composite liveability measure because when raw scores are transformed into z-scores, they can be added together to compare raw scores with different distributions.

It is calculated by:

z = ( x - μ ) / σ

A z-score of 0 shows that a number is at the average. The further away the z-score is from 0, the further away it is from the average. A positive z-score means it is above the average, and a negative one means it is below the average.

The z-score demonstrates the number of standard deviations from the mean. For a set of numbers, the mean is their average value, and the standard deviation shows how spread out the set of numbers are. The z-score locates where a number is based on the standard deviation, and shows the position of the number as compared to the average.

Downloads

• Presentation about the comprehensive composite liveability measure (pdf) [https://www.coventry.gov.uk/downloads/file/9586/presentation-about-the-comprehensive-composite-liveability-measure]
• Underlying data on GitHub [https://github.com/coventry-city-council/composite-liveability-measure]