TOKYO -- The Mori Memorial Foundation’s Institute for Urban Strategies, a research body established by Mori Building, Tokyo’s leading urban landscape developer, today released its Global Power City Index (GPCI) 2024 report on the overall strength of the world’s 48 major cities. For the second time, the report additionally includes the ‘GPCI-Financial Centers’ index. This index reflects the growing importance of measures taken by major cities to enhance their status as international financial centers, capturing changes in their financial and business environments.

More than 18 months have elapsed since the World Health Organization declared an end to the COVID-19 pandemic in May 2023. With the resurgence of economic activity, mobility and the expansion of international tourism, this year’s GPCI rankings also reflect global trends influenced by the escalating issues of inflation and climate change.

There was no change in the top five rankings (London in 1st place, New York in 2nd, Tokyo in 3rd, Paris in 4th, and Singapore in 5th). However, Tokyo, Paris, and Singapore made substantial strides, closing in on New York's position; all three of those cities saw improvements in indicators related to “Cultural Interaction,” such as the number of foreign tourists and visitor amenities, including the number of hotel rooms. The decision to host the 2024 Summer Olympics in Paris, and the growth of international tourism in Tokyo and Singapore, which had been delayed due to cautious border control measures, were reflected in the results.

GPCI-2024 Highlights

London (1st)

While the momentum generated by London’s recovery from the pandemic eased compared to last year, the city’s overall score increased slightly, ensuring it maintained its top position. In addition to its overall lead in the “Cultural Interaction” function, London newly secured the first place in “Accessibility.” The city’s scores in “Livability” improved in indicators including “Working Environment,” rising to 6th place in this category. Continued improvements in London’s environmental indicators could potentially lead to a further increase in the city’s overall score.

New York (2nd)

New York held onto its second place, though its overall score declined from last year, widening the gap with London. It continues to excel in key areas, securing first place in both the “Economy” and “R&D” categories. The city's rank in the “Accessibility” function improved, particularly in the area of “Ease of Mobility by Bicycle.” However, with the city ranked down in the 30s for both “Livability” and “Environment,” there remains significant potential for improvement.

Tokyo (3rd)

Tokyo made substantial gains in its overall score this year, closing in on New York, with contributing factors including the rise in the number of foreign visitors taking advantage of a weaker yen. However, it is being closely pursued by Paris, which sits in fourth place, indicating tight competition. Tokyo saw improvements in four functions: “R&D,” “Cultural Interaction,” “Livability,” and “Accessibility,” achieving the largest score increase among all 48 cities this year. Despite these advancements, the city’s “Economy” function, which has been in relative decline, is noted as an area needing improvement.

Paris (4th)

Paris came within striking distance of Tokyo in third place. Nevertheless, the city saw a dramatic increase in its “Cultural Interaction” score, backed by its hosting of the Olympics, marking the largest increase in this category among the 48 cities. The full effects of the city’s hosting of the Olympics, such as an increase in the number of foreign visitors, will be reflected in GPCI-2025, suggesting the possibility of further score improvements.

Singapore (5th)

Although its recovery from the pandemic had been somewhat slow, Singapore managed to further boost its “Air Transport Capacity” ratings and enhance its performance in the “Cultural Interaction” and “Livability” functions, thereby maintaining its 5th place overall. In “Economy,” it made significant gains in “GDP per Capita;” however, it saw a decline in areas previously considered its strengths, such as “Variety of Workplace Options,” “Workstyle Flexibility” and “Number of Retail Shops.”

Seoul (6th)

Seoul made positive strides this year, moving up one place in the rankings thanks to improved scores in “R&D,” “Accessibility” and “Livability.” This was despite a decrease in the city’s overall score, due partially to a significant drop in its “Cultural Interaction” ratings. The city made notable progress in the “Commitment to Climate Action” indicator, which newly evaluates the frequency with which a city is selected for the CDP A List, achieving a substantial increase in ranking. Seoul's rise in the rankings was partly the result of Amsterdam, previously in 6th place, suffering falling ratings across five functions, excluding “Environment.”

Madrid (10th)

Madrid made a notable leap this year, climbing four places and re-entering the top 10 for the first time in three years. In addition to maintaining its second place in “Livability,” the city saw improvements in “R&D,” “Environment” and “Accessibility.” Significant progress was observed in “Number of International Students” (R&D), “Commitment to Climate Action” and “Urban Greenery” (Environment), as well as in “Travel Time to Airports” and “Commuting Time” (Accessibility). However, there was a decline in the city’s ratings for “Variety of Workplace Options” and “Housing Rent.”

Shanghai (11th)

In the wake of the lifting of border controls imposed during the COVID pandemic, Shanghai moved up from 15th to 11th place. This shift was largely influenced by the recovery of international travel. The city saw an increase in its “Number of Foreign Visitors” (Cultural Interaction) ranking as well as in “Number of Air Passengers,” which resulted in an improvement in “Accessibility,” pushing its ranking in this area from 9th up to 7th. Additionally, Shanghai‘s 12th position in “R&D” was strengthened by higher evaluations for its “World’s Top Universities.”

Key Finding by Functions

Economy

Dublin and Copenhagen made significant strides in this category, fueled by a continued surge in their “GDP Growth Rate” scores. Dublin moved up from 6th to 3rd place, while Copenhagen leaped from 19th to 9th place.

R&D

American cities occupied five of the top 10 spots, reflecting their ongoing strengths. Among Asian cities, Tokyo, Seoul and Hong Kong made it into the top 10. Tokyo advanced one rank to 3rd place, a position it reclaimed after four years. Both Tokyo and Dubai, the latter now in 32nd place, saw significant score increases in the “Number of Startups” category.

Cultural Interaction

While London continues to hold its dominant position, Paris and Tokyo have made notable strides. Paris, moving up from 3rd to 2nd place, and Tokyo, rising from 5th to 3rd, saw a significant increase in scores including “Number of Foreign Visitors.”

Livability

The top four cities remain unchanged, with Paris in 1st place, followed by Madrid, Tokyo and Barcelona. Osaka, Milan, Helsinki and Kuala Lumpur newly entered the top 10. Changes in rankings were influenced by indicators such as inflation levels, as well as post-pandemic factors in areas including “Workstyle Flexibility.”

Environment

Eight out of the 10 highest-ranked cities were in Europe, five of which have populations of less than one million (Copenhagen, Stockholm, Helsinki, Zurich and Geneva). Factors such as “Commitment to Climate Action,” incorporating evaluations by the climate change initiative CDP, influenced the rankings.

Accessibility

There was a significant reshuffle of the top ten cities from last year in this category; they are now, in order, London, New York, Paris, Dubai, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Shanghai, Amsterdam, Singapore and Istanbul. This shift can be attributed to changes in the evaluation indicators used, such as the inclusion of the number of bicycle parking spaces and cycle ports under “Ease of Mobility by Bicycle.” London in particular stood out in the category of “Cities with Direct International Flights.”

GPCI-Financial Centers

The rapid expansion and internationalization of the global financial industry is intensifying competition among major cities, making each city’s status as an international financial center increasingly important. The Mori Memorial Foundation, in addition to its multifaceted evaluation of cities in terms of six functions in the Global Power City Index (GPCI), namely Economy, R&D, Cultural Interaction, Livability, Environment, and Accessibility, has now added the Finance function, which consists of 14 indicators in 4 groups.

New York (1st): the city received high scores across all groups of indicators - Financial Instruments Markets, Financial Intermediaries, Foreign Exchange and Interest Rate Markets, and Highly Skilled Personnel. As in the previous year, it ranked first in terms of “Stock Market Capitalization,” “Stock Market Trading Value,” “World’s Top Asset Managers,” and “International Law Firms.” This year it also ranked first in the “Financial Industry Unicorn Companies” category.

London (2nd): it maintained its position as the city with the highest level of “Foreign Exchange Turnover” and “Interest Rate Derivatives Turnover” in the Foreign Exchange and Interest Rate Markets category, and has a clear lead in this area. It also continued to secure the second-highest ratings for “Highly Skilled Personnel” in the finance sector, after New York.

Tokyo (3rd): Japan’s capital maintained its top ranking in two indicators of the Financial Intermediaries Group function: “World’s Top Insurance Company Headquarters” and “World’s Top Pension Funds.” It also maintained its high rankings for “Stock Market Capitalization” and “Stock Market Trading Value,” achieving 3rd and 4th place respectively. The city improved its ratings in the field of “Financial Instruments Markets,” rising from 9th to 4th position, due in part to an improvement in its score for “Capital Raised Through IPOs,” a category where it rose from 7th to 5th position.

Shanghai (4th): the city maintained its second place ranking in the category of Financial Instruments Markets for the second year in a row, but it fell from 7th to 23rd place in “Financial Industry Unicorn Companies;” it also recorded a reduced score in the specific area of Highly Skilled Personnel.

Beijing (5th): China’s capital city maintained its position in third place in Financial Instruments Markets and secured the top slot in the category of “World’s Top Bank Headquarters.” However, its ratings in its other perceived area of strength, Highly Skilled Personnel, fell with the city dropping from fifth to seventh place in this category.