Osservatorio - Comune di Milano

Torna alla navigazione interna

Project

A project by Assolombarda and Comune di Milano

 

Steering Commitee

AbrosianeumLogo AssolombardaBanca d'ItaliaCamera di CommercioLogo Carlo Ratti AssociatiLogo Centro ASK Università Commerciale L. BocconiCentro Studi PimLogo CERMConfcommercioIntesa San PaoloPolitecnico di MilanoLogo PTS ClasLogo YesMilano

 

COORDINATION

Centro Studi Assolombarda: Valeria Negri, Francesca Casiraghi, Francesca Coppola, Andrea Fioni, Valeria Pizzati, Stefania Saini 
Yes Milano: Luca Martinazzoli, Marco Minicucci
 

STEERING COMMITTEE

Aura Bertoni Centro ASK Università Commerciale L. Bocconi
Elena Corsi Centro studi PIM
Gregorio De Felice Intesa Sanpaolo
Denise Di Dio CERM
Paola Dubini Centro ASK Università Commerciale L. Bocconi
Matteo Goldstein Bolocan Centro Studi PIM
Rosangela Lodigiani Ambrosianeum Fondazione Culturale
Alessia Magistroni Assolombarda Confindustria Milano, Monza e Brianza, Lodi
Luca Martinazzoli Yes Milano
Lidia Mezza Camera di Commercio di Milano Monza Brianza Lodi
Corrado Mosele Confcommercio Milano Lodi Monza e Brianza
Francesco Mungo Confcommercio Milano Lodi Monza e Brianza
Valeria Negri Assolombarda Confindustria Milano, Monza e Brianza, Lodi 
Fabio Pammolli CERM e Politecnico di Milano
Carlo Ratti Carlo Ratti Associati e MIT Senseable City Lab
Paola Rossi Banca d'Italia
Sergio Rossi Camera di Commercio di Milano Monza Brianza Lodi
Franco Sacchi Centro Studi PIM
Giangiacomo Schiavi Editorialista Corriere della Sera
Lanfranco Senn Università Commerciale L. Bocconi
Giuseppe Sopranzetti Banca d'Italia
Roberto Zucchetti PTS Clas
Stefano Zuffi Storico dell’arte

 

Maps by

Angelo Armentano e Elena Corsi (Centro Studi PIM), Alberto Benetti, Giovanni de Niederhäusern e Federico Riches (Carlo Ratti Associati)

 

In collaboration with

Cushman & WakefieldEYFondazione Fiera MilanoMastercardVoices

 

Territorial comparison level

 

Territorial comparison level

 

Method

Milano Scoreboard, now at its third edition, measures the attractiveness and competitiveness of Milano in the European context through 224 indicators  clustered in 3 sections:

  • Attractiveness and reputation, intended as a city’s capability of emerging onto the world stage, projecting a positive image and attracting talents and human capital, businesses and capital, tourists and people;
  • 8 cross-cutting and enabling goals for cities in general, measured in terms of intensity of action and specific results;
  • 5 typical vocations for Milano, identified in those value chains and sectorial specializations that are internationally recognized and have a high growth potential.

Moreover, this edition features 9 maps of Milano exploring in depth some of the main phenomena studied in the Scoreboard, in order to visualize the spatial distribution of data.

The Steering Committee has chosen to analyse Milano’s economic, social and cultural context in comparison with other international urban centres. International data comparability is therefore critical when selecting indicators.

In the "attractiveness and reputation" and "vocations" sections the comparison is with global and European leaders, while in the "goals" section the comparison is purely European with Barcelona, Lyon, München and Stuttgart (i.e. the capitals of the most productive European regions like Lombardia). 

More in detail, in the "attractiveness and reputation" section the comparison is set at the global level and Milano is benchmarked against the main global cities by role in the international economic network: Berlin, London, Paris, Barcelona, München, Stuttgart and Lyon in Europe, Chicago and New York in the United States, Shanghai and Tokyo in Asia. As to "vocations", the benchmarks are the most representative territories of each value chain at a European level, based on indicators of economic performance and employment.

The analysis is carried out on three separate homogenous scales - city, metropolitan area, and region  - depending on the scope of the phenomenon.

The difficulty of obtaining data at the municipal/metropolitan-level and comparable across benchmarks has sometimes conditioned the choice of the variables, compared to those which would have ideally given the whole picture of the phenomenon.

Each chapter features several dimensions: to the 15 chapters correspond a total of 74 dimensions, each summarizing 3 variables carefully selected by the Steering Committee based on relevance to the phenomenon investigated, robustness and possibility of updates over time. 

For each dimension the synthetic score is the average of the three variables, in turn indexed on the average of the compared cities. It follows that in a specific dimension any given city obtains a synthetic score equal to 1 if it performs exactly as the average of the benchmarks considered, higher than 1 if it performs above average, and, vice versa, less than 1 if it performs below average.

This framework of analysis centred on international comparison does not hold for one chapter only: "PA and citizens" exclusively considers data by Comune di Milano without comparing to other cities in order to analyse in detail a complex-to-measure phenomenon without losing the homogeneity and the granularity of the indicators.

The main strength of the Milano Scoreboard lies in its technical-scientific setting. It results from the discussion and the synthesis of the main Research Centres and experts of Milano, that integrate complementary knowledge and skills to build a comprehensive quantitative knowledge base of the city.

Another qualifying and particularly innovative element is that about half of the indicators collected are original, being outcome of ad hoc elaborations or database queries by private entities that have agreed to share their know-how and collaborate on the project: Cushman & Wakefield, EY, Fondazione Fiera Milano, Mastercard, Voices from the Blogs.