Assessments

The livability of Australia’s largest cities is increasing with improving access to urban services, and a broader choice of jobs and housing.
Livability continues to be good in smaller urban areas that impact the environment less. However, citizens in these areas have poorer access to jobs, services and facilities.

Larger urban areas place more strain on demand for water and energy and resources while increasing overall consumption. Despite some efficiency gains, all urban areas are facing resource security challenges, particularly in areas of high population growth and greater vulnerability to climate change.

The livability of Australia’s largest cities is increasing with a greater focus on improving access to urban services, expanding and connecting the green and blue spaces, as well as access to a broader choice of jobs and housing. However, livability varies between areas. Inner and older parts of large cities have seen increases in livability, but outer areas have seen worsening in their situation with loss of tree canopy, increasing heat waves, long commute time and lack of good amenities.

This category of assessment puts together 2 categories from 2016: 10,000 to 100,000 and 100,000 to 1,000,000 people. Overall, urban areas in this category have a good level of livability, with reduced traffic levels and levels of emissions, and improving air and water quality. There are varying pressures related to the expansion of the urban footprint and varying levels of access to local services and goods. Some urban areas in this category could also face resource security challenges. Location is one of the main aspects related to the pressures. The impacts of climate change and other elements are experienced differently between inland and coastal areas. Smaller regional cities have suffered extreme bushfires, floods, mice plagues, and skills and labour shortages. This leads to an overall poor grade in livability in these areas. However, smaller cities provide more choices for people who want to work remotely and better prospects of improved livability.

Smaller urban areas have less impact on the natural environment and enjoy less traffic congestion, but they may require greater travel to urban services, employment, food and recreational facilities. These areas may also have energy and water security and quality issues. However, these smaller regional cities have also suffered extreme events and shocks, as explained in the previous category. More evidence is required, as the data available on smaller places are unclear.

The security and sustainability of our resource use continues to be strained as populations grow and the effects of climate change increase in severity. Larger cities place greater pressure on resource availability; however, the security of resources in smaller urban areas is often more of an issue given they do not have the critical mass to support significant infrastructure investment. Fast-accelerating climate change is threatening resource availability and security, leading to an overall assessment of the state as poor. However, there are some management opportunities, especially in water and energy. Waste management continues to be a challenge.

Australian urban areas have very high exposure to the climate change impacts. These impacts are expected to increase, placing growing pressure on the urban environment and the livability of its citizens. Climate change is also expected to affect biodiversity in urban areas through greater urban heat; more extreme events including bushfires, drought, extreme rainfall and flooding; and sea level rise.

Despite the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is expected that Australia’s population will continue to grow over the medium to long term, putting greater pressure on major urban cities to densify as well as expand. This will imply greater travel and overall resource consumption, producing more traffic congestion, waste and pollution, leading to greater pressures on important environmental and agricultural areas.
At the same time, from an environmental perspective, the migration to regional areas has led to improvements in major cities, particularly in terms of consumption. This trend might be good for cities, but is unclear or deteriorating for regional areas where they may experience more pressure on consumption, infrastructure issues, sprawls due to new development, and increases in house prices. More data on long-term effects are needed.

Industry has a high impact on the environment, although this varies depending on types of industry and resource use. The trend is stable because this phenomenon is highly regulated (particularly for energy), though it has not improved because the circular economy has not yet embedded itself. However, many industries are becoming more energy and resource efficient for economic and environmental reasons.

Management approaches are assessed as partially effective and stable – despite significant shifts in thinking, new ideas and visions have not yet taken root. The negative impacts of vast and increasing expansion at cities’ fringes on natural and agricultural lands still exist. The lack of a national strategy or centralised national commitment is a major hurdle that has kept the management approach unchanged; a shift towards sustainable ways of thinking around place-based planning has been embraced, but not yet fully implemented.

Governments have developed well-thought-out plans that address the different pressures faced by urban and natural environments regarding travel, waste, water and heat. However, these are yet to be effectively implemented. Although moving in the right direction, progress is slow and fragmented.

Overall, the number and diversity of resources – such as big data, censors and other technologies – for managing the urban environment have been significantly improving. There is also increasing acknowledgement and understanding of Indigenous traditional knowledge. However, these are not yet influencing decision-making.
The trend is quite unclear. Much thinking has been done in this sphere, but it has not resulted in action. There is a lack of consistency, as well as whole-of-government capacity and genuine interest in using data and technology to drive policy.