Menu
RU

WHAT IS EVALUATED AND HOW

The goal of the Urban environment Quality Index is not only to rate the city, but to determine what exactly is in poor condition and why. The evaluation system has 120 indicators, each of which relates to a specific type of urban space and reflects the quality of the environment according to one of the criteria.

Depending on the availability of data and the emergence of new methods of analyzing urban space, the set of 30 indicators is selected annually.

Such an index is similar to express medical diagnostics, conducted in order to identify the main problems related to city development. Once a problem is discovered, it is possible to move to studying it and recommending a specific treatment program.

Indicators:

  • Housing and adjacent areas
    Collapse
    SAFETY
    • Share of condemned housing (%).
    COMFORT
    • Percent of the housing provided with the centralized services (%).
    ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS
    • Volume of collected solid waste per capita (thousand m3 / person).
    IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY
    • Diversity of residential buildings (%).
    ENVIRONMENT MODERNITY
    • Diversity of functions in the residential zone (%).
  • Green and water areas
    Collapse
    SAFETY
    • Share of green public spaces (parks, gardens, etc.) in total green areas (%).
    COMFORT
    • Pedestrian accessibility of parks for citizens (%).
    ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS
    • Condition of planted vegetation (%).
    IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY
    • Number of photographs on social networks taken by citizens in green areas (no. / km2).
    ENVIRONMENT MODERNITY
    • Number of diverse services provided to citizens in green zones (no. / km2).
  • Street infrastructure
    Collapse
    SAFETY
    • Number of traffic fatalities (no. / 1,000 people).
    COMFORT
    • Share of roads with an improved road surface (%).
    ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS
    • Traffic congestion (points).
    IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY
    • Number of streets with developed street retail (no.).
    ENVIRONMENT MODERNITY
    • Pedestrian accessibility index (%).
  • Public and business infrastructure and adjacent areas
    Collapse
    SAFETY
    • Share of illuminated parts of streets, driveways, embankments (%).
    COMFORT
    • Share of developed mixed-use public business districts (%).
    ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS
    • Share of the city area cleaned mechanically (%).
    IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY
    • Concentration of cultural heritage objects (no. / km2).
    ENVIRONMENT MODERNITY
    • Level of development of public business districts in the city (no. / ha).
  • Public and recreational infrastructure and adjacent areas
    Collapse
    SAFETY
    • Safety of movement near institutions of social service of citizens (%).
    COMFORT
    • Diversity of cultural and sports functions in the city (%).
    ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS
    • Accessibility of sports grounds for the citizens (%).
    IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY
    • Share of cultural heritage objects in which theaters, museums and libraries are located (%).
    ENVIRONMENT MODERNITY
    • Attendance rate of museums and theaters (no. / 1,000 people).
  • Entire city space
    Collapse
    SAFETY
    • Quantity of road (nr. /1,000 persons).
    COMFORT
    • Average distance between public transport stops (m).
    ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLINESS
    • Level of urban greenery (%).
    IDENTITY AND DIVERSITY
    • Number of places where the highest number of street photos shared on social networks are taken (no.).
    ENVIRONMENT MODERNITY
    • Share of citizens working in the tertiary sector of the economy (%).

Areas:

  • 1. Housing and adjacent areas. Residential buildings and surrounding grounds.
  • 2. Green and water areas. City territory covered with vegetation, including parks, squares, forests, as well as areas adjacent to urban water bodies.
  • 3. Street infrastructure. City streets of different types, including territories from facade to facade, with the exception of roadways. Street infrastructure is evaluated separately, regardless of its location in the city.
  • 4. Public recreational infrastructure and adjacent areas. Territories adjacent to educational institutions (schools, colleges, nurseries), medical and health care institutions (hospitals, health centers, dispensaries), sports and recreational facilities (recreation centers, stadiums, sports grounds), cultural institutions (cinemas, museums, exhibition spaces), as well as objects with religious functionality.
  • 5. Public and business infrastructure and adjacent areas. Territories adjacent to administrative, business, commercial facilities, as well as public eating places, objects related to the provision of services.
  • 6. Entire city space. The entire territory of the city within its administrative boundaries. The introduction of this area is necessary for the evaluation of citywide characteristics concerning environmental quality that do not relate directly to any single type of area.

*The rating excludes manufacturing, agricultural and mining zones, as well as special and ritual areas. The environmental qualities of such zones are evaluated as part of the relevant production process and, where necessary, in accordance with special regulations on their maintenance. The influence of such territories on the urban environment is regarded as indirect and is evaluated based on indicators in other areas.

Criteria:

  • 1. «Safety» relates to both the current level of danger in specific areas and the evaluation of environmental criteria that can potentially cause harm to human life and health.
  • 2. «Comfort» helps to evaluate the convenience of the urban environment, as well as its visual, acoustic and climatic characteristics.
  • 3. «Environmental friendliness» determines the extent to which the use of the city corresponds to the principle of the conservation and improvement of the environment, as well as evaluates the state of particular elements of the urban environment.
  • 4. «Identity and diversity» evaluates the identity and recognizability of the urban area, as well as determines the variability of spatial solutions and the functional diversity of the urban environment.
  • 5. «Environment modernity» evaluates the city in terms of opportunities provided to citizens. This indicator helps to determine whether the city uses an outdated environment production model or a new one that considers the environment to be one of the basic values in urban development.

HOW IS IT EVALUATED

In order not to compare disparate cities, not to rate them in accordance with their size and budget, all cities are distributed according to size-climatic groups.

Groups of cities for formation of the evaluation scale and comparative ratings

Категория по размеру города Всего городов В дискомфортном климате В комфортном климате
Крупнейшие  15  15
Крупные 65   8 61
Большие   89 85
Средние   156 26 149  
Малые 50-25 тыс. чел.   253 234
Малые 20-5 тыс. чел.  490 39 457
Малые до 5 тыс. чел.   44 38

The obtained values of indicators are only compared among cities within the same group. Each group has its own leader, showing the best values among similar cities. This method allows the influence of constant factors that do not depend on the effectiveness of management of urban areas to be taken into account. Thus, the share of green spaces in Anadyr is not compared with the share of green spaces in Gelendzhik, and Krasnoyarsk is not compared with Suzdal.

The integral index is calculated as the sum of 30 values evaluated on a scale from 0 to 10. Points are evenly distributed between the maximum and minimum indicators within the group.

DATA SOURCES

To evaluate the quality of the urban environment, data meeting four criteria were used:

  • 1. Available in all 1,112 cities of Russia;
  • 2. Collected in the same manner in each of the studied cities;
  • 3. Verifiable;
  • 4. Updated annually.
  • Federal State Statistics Service
    Data collection for the previous year ends by the beginning of May.
  • Internet sources
    Updated regularly. Relevant all year round.
  • GLONASS and GPS
    Updated regularly. Relevant all year round.
  • Satellite imagery data sources
    Archival images are available all year round. Images are available the month after they are taken.
  • Geoinformation systems
    Relevant all year round.
  • Photographs from social networks
    Relevant all year round. Optimal for use after the period of summer activity in open spaces.
  • Open data of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation
    Data collection for the previous year ends by the beginning of May.

INITIATORS OF THE PROJECT

Ministry of Construction, Housing and Utilities of the Russian Federation

A federal executive body, the Ministry develops and implements state policy and regulations in the spheres of construction, architecture, urban development, housing and utilities, provides services to the public and manages state property in the relevant spheres.

The decree on the creation of the Ministry of Construction, Housing and Utilities of the Russian Federation was signed on the November 1, 2013, by the President of the Russian Federation. From the same date, Mikhail Men was appointed minister.

Website: minstroyrf.ru

Unified Development Institution in the Housing Sector

The Unified Development Institution in the Housing Sector was established in 2015 by the Government of the Russian Federation on the basis of the Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending (AHML). The main objectives of the Institute are the provision of land resources to developers, development of the rental housing market, support of the mortgage market, development of the secondary mortgage lending market, and creation of a comfortable urban environment.

A non-profit organization, the Foundation for the Unified Development Institute in the Housing Sector was established in 2016 on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation for the implementation of state social projects and programs in the field of housing construction development, increasing the availability of mortgage lending for specific categories of citizens, as well as improving the quality of the environment and living conditions. The founder of the fund is the AHML.

Website: дом.рф

Strelka KB

Strelka KB provides strategic consulting services in the fields of complex urban solutions and spatial planning. The company structure includes the Center for Anthropological Research, the Center for Urban Economics, the Center for Urban Planning and the Center for GIS-Research.

Strelka KB staff have created an expert network throughout 45 countries and 24 regions of the Russian Federation. Within the framework of the Urban Environment Development Program and the Mono-town Project for strategic development of the Russian Federation, Strelka KB acts as the initiator of improvements in the quality of the urban environment in 360 Russian cities.

Strelka KB’s clients include the Ministry of Construction of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, the Moscow City Government, the AHML, Burbank, Gazprom Neft, the Skolkovo Foundation, UNESCO and others. Central streets and parks renovated in accordance with Strelka KB’s standards and accepted by the Moscow Government have become Moscow’s new calling card.

Strelka KB was founded in 2013 by the Strelka Institute for Media, Architecture and Design. Director General and co-founder: Denis Leontiev. Co-founder and partner: Varvara Melnikova. Partners: Grigory Revzin, Alexei Muratov, Dalia Safiullina, Alexandra Sytnikova.

Strelka KB is the first company in Russia that uses the principles of public benefit corporation, investing profits in the development of the Strelka Institute, 80% of the budget of which is funded by Strelka KB.

Website: strelka-kb.com