ABSTRACT
The top ten cities in global livability indices are often dominated by European, Australasian and Canadian cities, with Sydney frequently in the top ten. Today, “livability” has become a buzzword in public discourse and planning, and the number of livability indices are proliferating; yet, despite this growing popularity, questions remain about what livability actually entails. How do we measure livability? How are indicators chosen, and what weight are they assigned? Are they value free? Do the indicators remain static? What does a livable city look like, and what is its highest pursuit? And, the focus of this chapter: livable for whom?
This chapter uses Sydney as a case study to demonstrate that when a spatial geography perspective is adopted, particular features bring into question the notion of livability. It argues that although the notion of livability, and the related livability rankings, have some utility, they do not adequately illuminate the spatial disadvantages and inequalities within cities. Without serious commitments to reforms in urban governance, public transit, housing affordability, universal access to public goods and genuine citizen participation livable Sydney is at risk.
