Tiers of US cities

[fritz]

Inventory of World Cities

About Us

What's New

Projects

Publications

Data

Media

Gateways into GaWC

New Visitors

Researchers

Practitioners

Teaching Resource

Visualisation

Home

This page provides links to the official web sites of those cities identified as world cities by GaWC. A description of the underlying classification is provided in GaWC Research Bulletin 5. The list is also available in alphabetic order and (for alpha, beta and gamma world cities) as interactive map.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. ALPHA WORLD CITIES (full service world cities)

12: London, New York, Paris, Tokyo

10: Chicago, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Los Angeles, Milan, Singapore

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. BETA WORLD CITIES (major world cities)

9: San Francisco, Sydney, Toronto, Zurich

8: Brussels, Madrid, Mexico City, Sao Paulo

7: Moscow, Seoul

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. GAMMA WORLD CITIES (minor world cities)

6: Amsterdam, Boston, Caracas, Dallas, D

[cheeriokid61]

I never understood. What do Richmond and Columbus have that Nashville doesn't?

[*Sweetkisses*]

I never understood. What do Richmond and Columbus have that Nashville doesn't?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly

[fritz]

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/citylist.html

This is the link for information on how cities were rated. It is interesting how some of these cities made very few of the lists posted (Minneapolis, Montreal). I agree with the list, especially considering the big businesses headquarted in the top 4 tiers.

For the US and Canada:

Tier 1: New York

Tier 2: Chicago, LA

Tier 3: San Francisco, Toronto

Tier 4: Boston, Dallas, Houston, Washington, Montreal, Atlanta, Miami, Minneapolis.

Tier 5: Philadelphia

Tier 6: Detroit, Cleveland, Seattle

[Spades]

well montreal as well as toronto is not in the US thats why you see it mentioned alot.

[tocoto]

The LA metro is not denser than NYC. The urbanized area of LA is bigger. This means it has more contiguous square miles of area with a least 1000 people/sqmile. Many subrurbs have 1000 people/sqmile. This is to state the obvious. LA has a large land area and continuous relatively low population density consisting of suburban style development. NYC has a smaller area with much higher pop density in the middle and gaps that go below 1000 people/sq mile closerto the center of the ciy than LA does. Anyone who thinks LA is more of a city than NY really should visit the two. NY is awesome and universally remarkable on first sight. LA is cool but not incredible.

[stinkweed]

http://www.lboro.ac.uk/gawc/citylist.html

This is the link for information on how cities were rated.  It is interesting how some of these cities made very few of the lists posted (Minneapolis, Montreal).  I agree with the list, especially considering the big businesses headquarted in the top 4 tiers.

For the US and Canada:

Tier 1:  New York

Tier 2:  Chicago, LA

Tier 3:  San Francisco, Toronto

Tier 4:  Boston, Dallas, Houston, Washington, Montreal, Atlanta, Miami, Minneapolis.

Tier 5:  Philadelphia

Tier 6:  Detroit, Cleveland, Seattle

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Please correct me if I wrong but this list concerns economics mostly. So when you say you agree with the list you're really saying that when you visit New York your biggest impression is WOW what great businesses it has?

[buckster]

Toronto is important to Canada, but when you compare to mega cities in the U.S. its very small, but hey its in Canada, population 32 million. 5 million people, its a big fish in a small pond, so basically if it was a U.S. city it would lose its uniqness, as would every other Canadian city. I would put it in tier two, not even close to being in teir one.

[nashvol85]

This is my take on it...

Tier I (4) - Known worldwide as important American cities.

New York

Chicago

Los Angelas

Washington DC **

No other cities come close to being as important to these.

Tier II (17) - Lots of world attention as well as domestic attention...very important economic centers for their state and region.

San Francisco

Boston *

Philadelphia

Toronto

[Unifour]

Wow, the longest post I think I've ever read... I agree, New York belongs at number 1. I also don't think population or business stature is the most important to judge by. I think most sources rank world cities by a mixture of cultural ameneties, such as diversity and type of restaurants, hotels, museums of all types, architecture, famous landmarks, etc. The most important criteria, I would bet on, would be tourists from overseas as well as domestic. The more famous the city around the world, the more tourists it would bring in. New York (very famous for lots of reasons) gets the most tourists every year. Other top cities include San Francisco (famous for hills, Golden Gate, street cars, diversity, gay scene, etc.), Chicago (famous for gangsters, Al Capone, skyscrapers, sports teams, many other reasons), Miami (famous for beaches, bikinis, exotic locale, Miami Vice), and Boston (history, education, culture), and Washington DC ( monuments, US govt., museums, people just wanna see the center of political power on earth, etc.). Following these are other up and coming cities that are gaining international exposure, such as Atlanta (famous for Olympics/bombing/Terry Nichols exposure, immortalized in Gone With the Wind (2nd or 3rd most read book), antebellum/deep south architecture/culture, civil war, MLK Jr., Ted Turner/CNN, and the CDC Center, etc.), Philadelphia (cheese/food makes it famous, Benjamin Franklin/history, Liberty Bell, Philadelphia Freedom, other historic things), Los Angeles (famous for HOLLYWOOD, entertainment industry center of the world, beaches, surfing, movie stars, clubs, Sunset Strip, decent climate, place where dreams are realized, etc, and New Orleans (famous for Creaole/Cajun culture, Mardi Gras/parades, Jazz, Blues, French Quarter, food, Voodoo/different ideas, sin.) After these cities, the tourist numbers drop dramatically for most other cities, they are not that recognized, but are gaining as they grow, such as San Diego, Seattle (may now be in with Philly and the like), Phoenix, Dallas, Houston, and the other larger ones.

[ironchapman]

Here is NA's and SA's standings according to the GaWC in London (the generally accepted authority):

NOTE: This is for world cities. Regionally important cities aren't listed.

Tier 1:

--Level 1:

New York

--Level 2:

Los Angeles, Chicago

Tier 2:

--Level 1:

San Francisco, Toronto

--Level 2:

Mexico City, Sao Paulo

--Level 3:

None Listed

Tier 3:

--Level 1:

Boston, Dallas, Houston, Washington DC, Caracas, Santiago

--Level 2:

Montreal

--Level 3:

Atlanta, Miami, Minneapolis, Buenos Aries

Potential to become a world city:

--Level 1:

Philadelphia, Rio de Janiero

--Level 2:

Cleveland, Detroit, Seattle, Bogota, Lima, Vancouver, Montevideo

--Level 3:

Baltimore, Columbus (Ohio), Kansas City (You figure out which one), Richmond, Brasilia, Calgary

As the list goes down in Tiers and levels, the city goes down in int'l importance.

Don't believe me?

Here is the site

[Unifour]

I think it's all a purely subjective judgement call. People like cities for different cities for different cities, but almost everyone agrees that New York, London, Paris, and Tokyo are the upper class because they have always been large, great cities for so long, are in famous countries recognized around the globe, are centers of business and travel and culture, and that's why they have the most, because they are popular with people and they go to them. If no one ever went to New York to see or do, it wouldn't have anything.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

Potential to become a world city:

--Level 1:

Philadelphia, Rio de Janiero

--Level 2:

Cleveland, Detroit, Seattle, Bogota, Lima, Vancouver, Montevideo

--Level 3:

Baltimore, Columbus (Ohio), Kansas City (You figure out which one), Richmond, Brasilia, Calgary

I don't agree with this list. How can Columbus, KC, Richmond, Clevland, Lima?(Ohio?), be on the list and a city like Charlotte is not. Columbus. ehhhhh.

[ironchapman]

Here's the qualifications necessary to become a world city (on Wikipedia)

I don't know about Charlotte. I guess it didn't meet all of the requirements. i wouldn't mind if it did, though.

The GaWC is generally considered to be the authority, though.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

eh, authority, schmority... categorization will always piss someone off.

[eastsider]

I don't agree with this list. How can Columbus, KC, Richmond, Clevland, Lima?(Ohio?), be on the list and a city like Charlotte is not. Columbus. ehhhhh.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't think the Lima being refered to is in Ohio.

[ironchapman]

It's Lima, Peru.

[krazeeboi]

Wow...Richmond gets listed but not Nashville or Charlotte? That's interesting.

[cheeriokid61]

Exactly! That's what I've been trying to go over the list, and Nashville meets at least five or six of the criteria. I think that could qualify as being at least a developing world city.

[hudkina]

Here's my list:

Tier One - Diamond

1. New York

2. Los Angeles

Tier Two - Platinum

1. Chicago

2. San Francisco

3. Washington

Tier Three - Gold

1. Philadelphia

2. Boston

3. Detroit

4. Houston

5. Dallas

6. Atlanta

7. Miami

Tier Four - Silver

1. Seattle

2. Minneapolis

3. St. Louis

4. Cleveland

5. Denver

6. Phoenix

7. Pittsburgh

8. San Diego

9. Cincinnati

10. Charlotte

11. Milwaukee

12. Tampa

13. Kansas City

14. Portland

15. Indianapolis

16. Sacramento

17. Columbus

18. San Antonio

19. Orlando

20. New Orleans

21. Las Vegas

Tier Five - Bronze

1. Buffalo

2. Salt Lake City

3. Norfolk

4. Memphis

5. Providence

6. Austin

7. Nashville

8. Louisville

9. Hartford

10. Oklahoma City

11. Birmingham

12. Jacksonville

13. Raleigh

14. Grand Rapids

15. Greensboro

16. Honolulu

17. Richmond

18. Rochester

19. Dayton

20. Albany

21. Omaha

[ironchapman]

Good list, Hudkina.

I would have bumped Nashville and Jacksonville up to Tier 4, though.

[peaceloveunderstanding]

A very acceptable list. Well done.

[Twin Cities]

Not bad Hudkina.

IMO, Los Angeles should tier 2 because there isn't one U.S. city that comes close to NYC in regards to worldwide economic and political influence. Also, Seattle and Minneapolis should be tier 3. If you look at factors such as GMP, the diversity of the local economy, the number of universities, as well as numerous other factors, it becomes apparent that Seattle and Minneapolis (maybe Denver) stand out in comparison to the others listed.

[MJLO]

LA is definately a tier 1 city, it has worldwide influence on all forms of media, It defines culture just as much as New York, it may not be as bluntly obvious as NY but as far as US cities go, It definately is a tier 1 city. I think that list was very well placed. I can see placing Seattle as a tier three city, but not Minne I just don't think it gets the kind of media, and political attention warranting it be in the same ranks as a Boston, or a Philly.

[Twin Cities]

LA is definately a tier 1 city,  it has worldwide influence on all forms of media,  It defines culture just as much as New York,  it may not be as bluntly obvious as NY but as far as US cities go,  It definately is a tier 1 city.  I think that list was very well placed.  I can see placing Seattle as a tier three city,  but not Minne I just don't think it gets the kind of media, and political attention warranting it be in the same ranks as a Boston, or a Philly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hollywood and a large population does not make LA a tier 1 city.

In regards to Minneapolis. The Minneapolis area is the country's 12th largest economy.

2003 GMP (in billions)

Minneapolis-St. Paul $135

Phoenix-Mesa $129.1

San Diego $129

Seattle-Bellevue-Everett $125.4

The rest of Hudkina's tier 4 cities don't even come close.

There are 19 Fortune 500 (including the newly formed Mosaic and Ameriprize companies) and 14 Fortune 1000 companies headquartered in the Minneapolis area. The country's largest private company, Cargill (revenue of $62.9 billion) is also headquartered in the Minneapolis area as well. Multinational companies based here include Cargill, 3M, Medtronic, Mosaic, Ecolab, General Mills, Imation, C.H. Robinson Worldwide and many more. How many cities in that tier 4 group has a stronger, more diverse economy?