Advertisement

Monitoring and benchmarking regional and local performance

  • Robert Stimson
Chapter
  • 486 Downloads
Part of the GeoJournal Library book series (GEJL, volume 77)

Abstract

Measuring and benchmarking how regions and local communities perform and cope with socioeconomic change is a methodological issue of interest to geographers and regional scientists. The chapter outlines two approaches used in projects in which the author has been involved. The first involved monitoring and evaluating the performance of three of Australia’s metropolitan cities on a range of indicators relating to population and employment, investment in economic activities and housing markets. The second involved developing a multi-variate model to measure the socio-economic performance of local communities across Australia’s cities and towns.

Keywords

Local Performance Community Opportunity Tourism Town Benchmark Regional Vulnerability Cluster 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Baum, S., Stimson, R., O’Connor, K., Mullins, P., & Davis, R. (1999). Community opportunity and vulnerability in Australia’s cities and towns: Characteristics, patterns and implications. Brisbane: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
  2. Benassi, D., Kazepov, Y., & Mingione, E. (1997). Socio-economic restructuring and urban poverty under different welfare regimes. In F. Moulaert & A. Scott (Eds.), Cities, enterprises and society on the eve of the 21st century (pp. 174–215). London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  3. Coulton, C., Chow, J., Wang, E., & Su, M. (1996). Geographic concentration of affluence and poverty in 100 metropolitan areas, 1990. Urban Affairs Review, 32(4), 186–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Daly, M. (1999) Monitoring Sydney 1998: Evaluating the performance of the Sydney metropolitan region. Brisbane: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
  5. Hill, E., Brennan, J., & Wolman, H. (1998). What is a central city in the United States? Applying a statistical technique for developing taxonomies. Urban Studies, 35(11), 1935–1969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. O’Connor, K. (1999). Monitoring Melbourne 1998: Evaluating the performance of the Melbourne metropolitan region. Brisbane: Department of Geography and Environmental Science and Centre for Population and Urban Research, Monash University and Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
  7. Stimson, R., Baum, S., Mullins, P., & O’Connor, K. (2001). Australia’s regional cities and towns: modeling community opportunity and vulnerability, Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, 7(1), 23–62.Google Scholar
  8. Stimson, R., Baum, S. & O’Connor, K. (2003). The social and economic performance of Australia’s large regional cities and towns: implications for rural and regional policy, Australasian Geographical Studies, 41(2): 131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Stimson, R., Shuaib, F., Jenkins, O., & Lindfield, M. (1999). Monitoring Brisbane and the south east Queensland Region 1998: Evaluating performance of the south east Queensland metropolitan region. Brisbane: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Stimson
    • 1
  1. 1.Geographical Sciences and Planning, and Centre for Research into Sustainable Urban and Regional FuturesUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations