Ranking Methodology
Making a Best Places to Live list is part art and part science, but we wanted to lean as much on the science as we could.
Our editors have broad experience studying and writing about what makes a city a great place to live and work. But we wanted other perspectives as well. So we once again partnered with the research team at the Martin Prosperity Institute. The Institute, directed by Richard Florida, is part of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto and is the leading think-tank on the role of location, place and city-regions in global economic prosperity.
We plotted out what we would measure and how. We also wanted your perspective. It’s easy to think about what makes a top city from a theoretical point of view. But we needed to know how the various aspects of livability impacted everyday lives. Ipsos Public Affairs, one of the leading global market research firms, conducted an exclusive survey for us so we could find out.
This list isn't based just on our beliefs and research. This list is also based on your assessments of is most valued in your communities.
We spent months collecting and poring over data and methodologies from public sources like the U.S. Census Bureau and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, as well as leading private-sector sources including Esri, Walk Score and Great Schools; nonprofits like Americans for the Arts; and variables we created exclusively for this study. We were advised in the project by a stellar panel of experts in livability-related fields.
We analyzed data on more than 2,000 cities throughout the U.S. For our ranking, we focused in on the small to mid-sized cities with populations between 20,000 and 350,000. The results were then weighted based on the priorities set forth by you and your fellow citizens based on our 2,000-person, demographically-balanced survey.
We made a series of improvements from our inaugural list. Specifically, we wanted to add some more variables about health care; look at the role of proximity to institutions like hospitals, colleges and universities; and create a better balance between our survey questions and the topics we were measuring. We created some new variables including a measure of racial and ethnic diversity and a rather unique look at the diversity of housing stock. We shifted some variables from one category to another if we thought it might be a better fit or create more balance between the categories.
Therefore, it’s not a completely apples-to-apples comparison to look at the rank of a city last year and this year. Some cities move up and down, some fall off the list entirely and many new cities join the ranks of our Best Places to Live. That’s OK. If a city was on last year’s list but not this year’s, it doesn’t mean that it’s now a bad place to live. These are the top 5 percent of the cities in our population universe. They’re all pretty stellar.
The goal is always to get smarter about how we evaluate places, be attuned to changing definitions of livability and always be on the hunt for better sources of data and methodologies for measuring.
As with our inaugural list, we focused on four guiding principles:
Access
Start with the basics: A city needs good schools, hospitals, airports and infrastructure, low crime, and a good climate. Then add amenities like parks, golf courses, farmers markets, and arts and culture. Finally, the natural and built environment are factors as well.
Affordability
Affordability is about more than just cost. Income comes into play, too. We layered several variables related to spending on broad categories like housing, transportation, health care and food, as well as data about income to ensure we were finding cities where livability isn't a luxury but is the norm.
Choice
The more options a city offers, the more it can be livable for everyone. For example, by looking at the percentage of commuters who don't drive alone, you can gauge if there are transportation options. We rewarded cities that offer residents the most flexibility in choosing a hospital, school, park, farmers market and commuting mode.
Utilization
Finally, having all of these great things is important, but so is using them. Esri provided us with lifestyle variables that allowed us to see which residents were making the most of their opportunities in their cities.
We wanted the list to celebrate cities that were livable for everyone. We know any list like this is going to create some argument. You’ll wonder why your city isn’t on the list or why it isn’t ranked higher – unless you live in Madison. Those 234,000 people will be very happy with their ranking. No one can make an unassailable methodology, but we want ours to be as transparent as possible. Let us know what you think.
What’s this? A list of liberal hot spots?
Interesting how most of those are college towns, or larger cities with good sized universities therein.
Hmmmm....the Business Insider picks a load of lefty college-town logpiles along with de facto Washington DC aka Arlington VA. Have the selectors actually been in business?
Small favors: ‘sustainability’ wasn’t a criterion.
Ahh, Eugene...where the men shave their legs and the women don’t.
At last a list that does not list Texas. It is really bad down here...
You know the writer is an addled Liberal when he asks whether the quality of life is best in an American city - ANY American city.
It’s a sure sign that he knows absolutely nothing about ‘quality of life’.
It’s like a list of some alternate locations for the Kremlin.
When the only southern town on the list is weird Asheville, NC, I don’t pay much attention to the list.
Interesting that they list all of these Bay Area towns as ‘small’ and livable.....Because SF to San Jose and Oakland to San Jose is one mass of people, congestion, and crazies living a face paced, expensive, and liberal life there is NO WAY it is livable.
Why would anyone chose to live in Santa Clara or San Mateo or even Palo Alto if they didn’t have to (for work and family)? These places are the epitome of the elite beating the heck out of those who work hard to get by.
Stupid report and there are only a few conservative spots in the whole of the list
Personally, I prefer McKinney, Texas.
Reads like a list for “20 best places outside Washington DC for libtards.”
A suburb of Los Angeles, First Lady Barbara Bush, who once lived there with her husband George and son George W. described the town as "lovely." It enjoys the typical Southern California climate, with mild winters and summers that are warm but with low humidity. It is a college town with a community college and a big state university just beyond the city limits.
The town is centrally located, served by two freeways and close to three others--downtown LA, the beaches and amusement parks of Orange County, Hollywood, and the Los Angeles International Airport are all less than an hour away--and it even has its own airport.
The town even has its own muncipal theme song.
The name of this town? Compton.
Berkeley? Any community with a major thoroughfare named Martin Luther King Blvd. should be automatically excluded.
I wouldn't want to live in Salt Lake City or anywhere in Utah, for that matter. The reason why should be obvious.
Madison, Wisconsin #1 bwahaha ha ha ha ha.
Santa Barbara, CA? You have to be pretty well off to even afford a condo around there.