European Real Estate SocietyEuropean Real Estate SocietyStockholm 24Stockholm 24thth-27-27thth June 2009 June 2009

Are Tall Buildings and a City’s Skyline Are Tall Buildings and a City’s Skyline Emblematic of City Competitiveness?Emblematic of City Competitiveness?

Lesley Hemphill*, Stanley McGreal*, Ali Parsa* and Stephen Roulac#

*Built Environment Research Institute, University of Ulster# Roulac Global Places and University of Ulster

Background to the PaperBackground to the Paper

• Widespread tall building activity throughout world’s major cities

• Evidence that some cities are adopting a visual or ‘look at me’ strategy based on tall buildings

• Fierce competition between cities for world’s tallest building, hence there must be perceived benefits to title

• Investigation of linkage between a city’s skyline and city competitiveness

• Emerging tall building trends for regions and cities

• Potential to formally measure skyline and competitiveness relationship

Key Research QuestionsKey Research Questions

• Can the presence of tall buildings help promote city

competitiveness?

• Is there a global hierarchy of skyscraper cities?

• Will tall buildings become an increasingly important element

of a city’s competitiveness strategy?

• Can a tall building-led strategy help attract foreign

investment?

• Does the presence of tall buildings influence corporate

location choices?

Literature ReviewLiterature Review

• Key emerging literature themes –

• City imagery associated with tall buildings – ‘corporate skyline’; city identity; international brand recognition; big business symbols; symbols of capitalism; skyline & popular preference [Attoe, 1981; Catchpole, 1987; Domosh, 1988; Huxtable, 1992; Willis, 1995; Heath et al, 2000; Gair, 2002; Polisano, 2006]

• Iconic/signature buildings & star architects – McGuggenisation; benefits of iconic buildings; use of high profile architects; [McNeill, 2000, 2005; Vale & Warner, 2001; Charney, 2007; Sklair, 2006; Jencks, 2004, 2006; Sudjic, 2005]

• Increasing monumentality of skylines – race for the sky; protection of strategic views; groundscraper alternative to skyscraper; skyscraper opposition; cost effectiveness [Ford, 1994; Carmona & Freeman, 2007; Holleran, 1996; Weir, 2005; Frackler, 2007; Thornton, 2005]

Literature ReviewLiterature Review

• World city formation & inter-city competitiveness – competing forces; with or without tall bldgs; putting a city on the world map; corporate publicity [Young et al, 2006; Kim, 2008; Thurley, 2007; Gilligan, 2007; March, 2004; Ashworth, 2008]

• Contrasting world city measurement methodologies – world city hypothesis; triad of world cities; distinguished characteristics; command centres; connectivity; press coverage; data availability; power relations [Friedmann, 1986; Sassen, 1991, 1994; Beaverstock et al, 1999, 2000; Taylor, 1997; Taylor et al, 2002; Rosen, 2007]

• Multi-national corporation location choices – 9/11 impact; corporate image; globalisation benefits; [Johnson & Kasarda, 2003; Laing, 2003; Dermisi & Baen, 2005; Abadie & Dermisi, 2006; Millar et al, 2003; Cohen, 1981]

Key Data SourcesKey Data Sources

Emporis.com [High-rise Building Database – Skyline Ranking, World’s Tallest 200 Buildings and supporting population/area data]

Council for Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat [CTBUH official tallest 100 building database]

Chinese Academy of Social Sciences [Global Urban Competitiveness Index, 2008]

Beaverstock et al [A Roster of World Cities, Cities, Vol. 16, No. 6, p445-458, 1999].

PriceWaterhouseCoopers [UK Economic Outlook, March 2007 – GDP data]

CB Richard Ellis [Market Report on Office Occupancy Costs, May 2009]

Skyline Skyline Ranking – Ranking –

Emporis.comEmporis.comMay 2009May 2009

Skyline Rank City RegionUrban Competitiveness

RankUC Re-Rank

1 Hong Kong Asia 26 19

2 New York City North America 1 1

3 Singapore Asia 8 6

4 Chicago North America 10 8

5 Sao Paulo South America 201 54

6 Seoul Asia 12 10

7 Shanghai Asia 41 29

8 Tokyo Asia 3 3

9 Bangkok Asia 155 53

10 Guangzhou Asia 130 49

11 Dubai Middle East 39 28

12 Toronto North America 11 9

13 Chongqing Asia 292 77

14 Shenzhen Asia 64 37

15 Moscow Europe 30 21

16 Kuala Lumpur Asia 209 55

17 Beijing Asia 66 38

18 Rio de Janeiro South America 258 69

19 Jakarta Asia 248 66

20 Macao Asia 78 42

21 Miami North America 32 23

22 Buenos Aires South America 24 17

23 Osaka Asia 67 40

24 Sydney Australia 31 22

25 Recife South America 313 82

26 Wuhan Asia 277 73

27 Melbourne Australia 22 15

28 Mumbai Asia 114 48

29 Istanbul Europe 136 50

30 Houston North America 20 14

31 Honolulu North America 77 41

32 Vancouver North America 47 31

33 Curitiba South America 310 81

34 Panama City South America 264 70

35 London Europe 2 2

36 Gold Coast City Australia N/D N/D

37 Mexico City North America 74 39

38 Los Angeles North America 6 5

39 Caracas South America 305 80

40 Makati Asia N/D N/D

Urban Urban Competitiveness Competitiveness

Rank – CASSRank – CASSJune 2008June 2008

Figure 1: Regional Breakdown of Top 200 Tall Buildings93

59

29

9 10

63

64 59 58

54

299

286

279

264

256

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Asia North America Middle East Australia Europe

Regions

230

240

250

260

270

280

290

300

310

No in Top 200

Ave Floors

Ave height m

Figure 2: Supertall Buildings by Region

39

47

3

11 12

62

23

1317

0

51

25

14

6

24

0

27

7

23

0

6

00

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Asia North America Middle East Australia Europe South America

No

of

Bu

ildin

gs

Vision

Approved

Completed

Under construction

Corporate Location Choices within Alpha Cities

Quadrant 1 Region Prime ServicesDominant use of

Top 200Occupancy Cost US$

sq ft

Hong Kong Asia L, B Office 150.42

New York N America L, B, Ac, Ad Office 68.63

Chicago N America L, Ac, Ad Office 35.14

Singapore Asia L, B Office 82.79

Tokyo Asia L, B, Ac, Ad Office 183.62

London Europe L, B, Ac, Ad Office 172.62

Los Angeles N America L, Ac Office 52.83

Paris Europe L, B, Ac, Ad Office 114.89

Frankfurt Europe L, B, Ac, Ad Office 68.30

Conclusions Conclusions

• Asia dominates tall building construction – West to East shift

• Asia & Middle East world leaders in tall building height

• Emergence of Dubai, Shanghai, Guangzhou & Moscow on height spectrum

• Two tiers of skyscraper cities – established & emerging [‘wannabe cities’]

• ‘Wannabe cities’ adopt an aggressive visual based strategy

• Buildings under 30 floors have limited impact on city competitiveness

• Importance of reviewing skyline ranking to keep pace with competitors

• Positive correlations between skyline and city competitiveness as well as contributory factors

• Further research needed to determine height & number of tall buildings needed to make a major contribution to competitiveness.