IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rom/terumm/v19y2024i1p70-88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Challenges In The Development Of An Urban Ranking System: A Critical Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mohsen RAFIEIAN

    (Department of Urbanism, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran)

  • Alireza RIVAZ

    (Department of Urbanism, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran)

  • Abolfazl MASHAYEKHI

    (Department of Urbanism, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran)

  • Fatemeh SHAMS

    (Faculty of Urbanism, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran)

Abstract

Urban ranking is of great importance as a technique to evaluate cities and urban management systems. It applies various indicators and criteria to assess economic and social aspects, governance characteristics, and the degree of urban development. The current city ranking systems have become a prosperous industry for private companies, academic institutions, and other relevant organizations, which experience many challenges regarding their contents and procedure. In this case, a knowledge of the corresponding strengths and weaknesses is required for having a significant level of outcomes. In this regard, the present study aims to make a critical review of the performance of urban ranking systems by interviewing experienced university professors and analyzing the qualitative data with the MAXQDA software to identify the challenges and critiques of these systems. According to the findings, the shortcomings of urban ranking can be classified in several areas including a) identifying indicators and criteria, b) data gathering, c) adopting a methodology to select cities, and d) evaluation, interpretation, analysis, and final presentation of the results. Moreover, the research shows that, through certain actions, it is possible to turn the critiques on urban ranking into advantages. This includes addressing the questions which target the best ranking indicators to choose, evaluating the method of weighing indicators to adopt the best one for analyzing and interpreting them, choosing the best method of selecting cities, and finding a reliable source of data gathering. Finally, several suggestions are made to improve the performance of urban ranking systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohsen RAFIEIAN & Alireza RIVAZ & Abolfazl MASHAYEKHI & Fatemeh SHAMS, 2024. "Challenges In The Development Of An Urban Ranking System: A Critical Analysis," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(1), pages 70-88, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:rom:terumm:v:19:y:2024:i:1:p:70-88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://um.ase.ro/v19i1/4.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Margarida Rodrigues & Mário Franco, 2018. "Measuring the Performance in Creative Cities: Proposal of a Multidimensional Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-21, November.
    2. Mohammadi, Majid & Rezaei, Jafar, 2020. "Ensemble ranking: Aggregation of rankings produced by different multi-criteria decision-making methods," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Francis J. Greene & Paul Tracey & Marc Cowling, 2007. "Recasting the City into City‐Regions: Place Promotion, Competitiveness Benchmarking and the Quest for Urban Supremacy," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 1-22, March.
    4. Brian W. Conger, 2015. "On Livability, Liveability and the Limited Utility of Quality-of-Life Rankings," SPP Communique, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 7(4), June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Qun & Jia, Guozhu & Song, Wenyan, 2022. "Identifying critical factors in systems with interrelated components: A method considering heterogeneous influence and strength attenuation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(1), pages 456-470.
    2. Amin Mahmoudi & Saad Ahmed Javed, 2022. "Probabilistic Approach to Multi-Stage Supplier Evaluation: Confidence Level Measurement in Ordinal Priority Approach," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1051-1096, October.
    3. Larissa Diana Michelam & Tatiana Tucunduva Philippi Cortese & Tan Yigitcanlar & Ana Cristina Fachinelli & Leonardo Vils & Wilson Levy, 2021. "Leveraging Smart and Sustainable Development via International Events: Insights from Bento Gonçalves Knowledge Cities World Summit," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-27, September.
    4. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2017. "Nothing is in the Air," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1), pages 22-39, March.
    5. Ridha, Hussein Mohammed & Gomes, Chandima & Hizam, Hashim & Ahmadipour, Masoud & Heidari, Ali Asghar & Chen, Huiling, 2021. "Multi-objective optimization and multi-criteria decision-making methods for optimal design of standalone photovoltaic system: A comprehensive review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    6. Feng, Jianghong & Xu, Su Xiu & Xu, Gangyan & Cheng, Huibing, 2022. "An integrated decision-making method for locating parking centers of recyclable waste transportation vehicles," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    7. Akbari, Sina & Escobedo, Adolfo R., 2023. "Beyond kemeny rank aggregation: A parameterizable-penalty framework for robust ranking aggregation with ties," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    8. Nevado-Peña, Domingo & López-Ruiz, Víctor-Raúl & Alfaro-Navarro, José-Luis, 2019. "Improving quality of life perception with ICT use and technological capacity in Europe," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    9. Juin-Hao Ho & Gwo-Guang Lee & Ming-Tsang Lu, 2020. "Exploring the Implementation of a Legal AI Bot for Sustainable Development in Legal Advisory Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-17, July.
    10. Shilpi Mittal & Jayprakash Chadchan & Sudipta K. Mishra, 2020. "Review of Concepts, Tools and Indices for the Assessment of Urban Quality of Life," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 187-214, May.
    11. Jalil Heidary Dahooie & Ali Husseinzadeh Kashan & Zahra Shoaei Naeini & Amir Salar Vanaki & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Zenonas Turskis, 2022. "A Hybrid Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making Aggregation Method and Geographic Information System for Selecting Optimal Solar Power Plants in Iran," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    12. Bulu, Melih, 2014. "Upgrading a city via technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 63-67.
    13. Anna Kovacs-Györi & Pablo Cabrera-Barona, 2019. "Assessing Urban Livability through Residential Preference—An International Survey," Data, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-20, October.
    14. Keirstead, James, 2013. "Benchmarking urban energy efficiency in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 575-587.
    15. Richard Hu, 2015. "Sustainability and Competitiveness in Australian Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, February.
    16. Fu, Yelin & Lu, Yihe & Yu, Chen & Lai, Kin Keung, 2022. "Inter-country comparisons of energy system performance with the energy trilemma index: An ensemble ranking methodology based on the half-quadratic theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PA).
    17. Mateja Mihinjac & Gregory Saville, 2019. "Third-Generation Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-20, June.
    18. Thomas Berger & Gillian Bristow, 2009. "Competitiveness and the Benchmarking of Nations—A Critical Reflection," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 15(4), pages 378-392, November.
    19. Karima Kourtit & Peter Nijkamp & Mark D. Partridge & Gordon F. Mulligan, 2013. "The future of non-metropolitan areas," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 219-224, June.
    20. Michele Acuto & Daniel Pejic & Jessie Briggs, 2021. "Taking City Rankings Seriously: Engaging with Benchmarking Practices in Global Urbanism," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(2), pages 363-377, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rom:terumm:v:19:y:2024:i:1:p:70-88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Colesca Sofia (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ccasero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.