ABSTRACT

Sydney’s aspirational branding as a city that is “green, global, and connected” highlights the importance of entertainment, events, and lifestyle in the State’s economic development strategy (Acuto 2012). It also sharply differentiates the central city’s vision from the reality of life in its low-density hinterland. The financial and producer services that have elevated Sydney to “alpha +” status in one ranking of world cities (Taylor 2010), are concentrated in the City of Sydney, which accounts for two-thirds of Australia’s financial activity, and 25 percent of the State’s GDP. The Economist and PricewaterhouseCoopers rank the city high on quality of life, sustainability, and public safety, but its transport and infrastructure rate much lower (Economist Intelligence Unit 2013, PricewaterhouseCoopers 2012: 10). Housing affordability ranks close to the bottom compared to the rest of the Anglo world, with a median price-to-income ratio of 1:8.3, outdone only by Vancouver and Hong Kong (Demographia 2012). While the entrepreneurial New South Wales (NSW) state government has succeeded in driving the metropolitan area’s global rise, it has been less successful in urban management functions such as maintaining a steady housing supply and adequate infrastructure development. Sydney’s longer term prospects as a competitive location for business investment are weakened by its increasingly high cost of living.