Urbis’ City Leaders Survey is a biennial survey of senior executives from the nation’s most influential city-shaping organisations. Now in its second iteration, this survey serves as a critical barometer of sentiment regarding the opportunities and challenges that will shape government and industry priorities in the coming years.
In our latest survey, we gauge the current sentiments of city leaders, aiming to decode the emerging paradigm for Australian cities and society. The findings provide valuable insights into the pressing concerns of city leaders, including sustaining economic growth and competitiveness, addressing inequality and demographic shifts, and tackling climate change and housing affordability.
We invited Australia’s city leaders to forecast how they envision our cities performing over the next two years across economic, environmental, and social dimensions.
Leaders' Outlook
City leaders expose vulnerabilities and call for course correction.
City leaders express a pessimistic near-term outlook, highlighting concerns about the ability to address the systemic conditions that create and maintain vulnerabilities in our cities. This marks a significant shift from the optimism observed in 2022, especially in smaller capital and regional cities. The decline comes at a time when inflation and economic uncertainty are placing pressure on the people and institutions that form the backbone of our cities.
In 2024, city leaders are calling for course correction, as declining net sentiment across economic, environmental and social outcomes over the next two years is heightened by pervasive concerns about decreasing housing affordability, rising cost-of-living and sluggish economic growth.
Despite these exposed vulnerabilities, cities remain where people want to live and where future opportunity lies. Cities globally are at the frontline of navigating disruptions and serve as incubators for new solutions that improve living standards for all – Australia is no different.
Now is the time for city leaders to collectively lean into these challenges, look beyond the short term, and take decisive action to create the places and conditions that drive sustainable growth benefiting everyone.
Leadership outlook for Australian cities
Do you believe the performance of your city in terms of overall economic, environmental and social outcomes will improve, stay the same, or worsen over the next two years?
Percentage (%) of all respondents
Despite the challenges, we remain deeply optimistic about the future of Australian cities. Our cities are resilient and full of potential. By leveraging data-driven insights, fostering collaboration, and embracing forward-thinking strategies, we can create vibrant, inclusive urban environments. The commitment of city leaders, businesses, and communities gives us confidence that we can build a prosperous future for all.
SHIFTING GRAND CHALLENGES
Housing takes centre stage as the grandest of city challenges.
Nine in ten city leaders have identified housing affordability and access as the biggest challenge to address in the next two years, as the pervasiveness of housing issues ripple across economic, social, and environmental priorities for Australian cities.
Housing and population challenges have overtaken maintaining economic growth and competitiveness as the top challenges in 2024. As overseas migration has surged to record levels, rapid population growth and rising interest rates have exacerbated persistent housing supply issues.
While the near-term priorities for city leaders solidify around housing, population and economic challenges, leaders have indicated less concern about climate change and sustainable development, which ranked third in 2022. Fewer leaders also ranked reducing inequality as a key focus over the next two years, despite social performance recording the weakest near-term outlook.
Private and public sector city leaders are aligned on the prioritisation of housing and population challenges. However, concerns about the economic growth and competitiveness of Australia’s cities are 50% higher among private sector leaders, reflecting business concerns about declining productivity and constrained business investment, particularly in innovation activities1.
The interrelatedness of these grand challenges is consistently highlighted by city leaders. The results underscore the importance of balancing difficult trade-offs through decision making that set long-range priorities but allocate short-term resources most effectively.
Australian city leaders have rightly called out housing as a top issue for our cities but have also identified its interplay with other challenges. Systems thinking in precinct planning enables a holistic view of interconnected elements like infrastructure, community needs, and sustainability. This approach promotes integrated solutions that balance growth with environmental stewardship and social equity, fostering long-term resilience and prosperity for diverse communities across Australia's cities.
Biggest challenges over the next two years
Which three of the following are the biggest challenges your city will need to focus on over the next two years?
Percentage (%) of total respondents
Addressing housing challenges | Managing population and demographic changes | Maintaining economic growth and competitiveness | Tackling climate change and sustainable development | Reducing inequality | Ensuring effective governance | Responding effectively in a crisis | Navigating technological disruption
Maintaining economic growth and competitiveness | Managing population and demographic changes | Tackling climate change and delivering sustainable development | Adapting to changes brought about by COVID-19 | Reducing inequality | Ensuring effective governance | Responding effectively in a crisis | Navigating technological disruption
90 | 59 | 54 | 41 | 25 | 21 | 6 | 4
70 | 55 | 52 | 48 | 27 | 20 | 18 | 10
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Grand Challenges for Australian Cities
01
Housing affordability and access
Cost-of-living pressures and constrained housing diversity hinder affordability and access.
With national home values increasing by 32.5% between March 2020 and February 20242 and real wage growth stagnating until recently, almost two-thirds of city leaders identify rent and mortgage costs rising faster than wages as the top housing challenge for Australian cities. This has wide ranging implications, including a disproportionate impact on welfare recipients and low-to-middle-income households.
More city leaders from Australia’s largest and most expensive cities identify declining housing affordability as the foremost challenge, voicing growing concern about its impact on liveability, productivity and economic competitiveness. As households are forced to spend more on housing, choices are reduced, and new entrants are increasingly shut out of the market.
City leaders are also concerned with the mismatch between new housing supply and the increasing diversity of housing needs, with many Australian cities experiencing a shortfall of diverse and affordable housing types in locations with good access to services, infrastructure, and employment. Leaders from smaller capital and regional cities rank this above all other housing challenges, with over half of leaders from Perth and Melbourne agreeing.
Whether Australians own or rent their home, evidence suggests that a lack of suitable housing is affecting all aspects of the housing continuum and Australian society.
Biggest housing challenges
Which three of the following factors do you believe are the top housing challenges for your city?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rent and mortgage costs increasing at a higher rate than wage growth | 73 | 67 | 40 | 49 | 55 |
Size, type and location of new housing supply does not match diverse housing needs | 36 | 52 | 37 | 51 | 62 |
Funding and commercial constraints preventing viable housing delivery | 41 | 46 | 57 | 40 | 31 |
Lack of affordable rental housing close to where low-income households need | 39 | 38 | 40 | 51 | 45 |
Lack of affordable owner-occupier housing close to where first home buyers and low-income households need | 55 | 35 | 46 | 31 | 24 |
Quality and quantity of social housing does not meet the needs of vulnerable populations | 20 | 23 | 20 | 33 | 34 |
Poor innovation and productivity improvements across the housing sector is exacerbating challenges | 20 | 15 | 34 | 29 | 17 |
Increasing rates of people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness Copy | 16 | 23 | 26 | 16 | 31 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
A future-fit housing system requires collaboration today. There is no single owner and no one-size-fits-all solution. Success will come to those who identify the part they can play and the partners they need.
A call to increase housing density in well serviced areas
Increasing housing density in inner and middle urban areas is cited as the top housing priority over the next two years by one-third of city leaders. Higher density in these areas not only exerts downward pressure on prices by boosting supply but also mitigates the higher costs of urban sprawl, such as environmental degradation, long commutes, limited access to employment and services, and the increased cost of infrastructure provision which is mostly borne by governments.
Reducing property-related taxes and improving planning approval processes were cited as the next most important housing priorities. However, private sector leaders view these actions twice as important as public sector leaders, suggesting a disconnect that reflects their respective interactions with market dynamics.
Biggest housing priorities
Which three of the following actions do you believe ought to be prioritised for your city to address the housing challenge?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Increase density in well serviced established inner- and middle-urban areas | 55 | 50 | 49 | 71 | 66 |
Reduce property related taxes that increase the cost of development | 36 | 50 | 60 | 36 | 31 |
Improve planning approval processes | 52 | 46 | 40 | 27 | 24 |
Adopt innovative land use zoning policies (e.g. inclusionary zoning) to encourage new affordable housing supply | 41 | 42 | 34 | 40 | 31 |
Increase government funding for social and affordable housing | 36 | 31 | 34 | 36 | 52 |
Release more land for residential development (including government owned land) | 11 | 29 | 34 | 29 | 31 |
Increase government subsidies to support new and diverse housing supply | 34 | 13 | 23 | 27 | 17 |
Implement local housing supply targets across cities and regions | 20 | 29 | 6 | 24 | 31 |
Increase support for low-income households to help cover housing costs | 16 | 10 | 20 | 11 | 17 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Housing has finally taken centre stage, and the public narrative is shifting. There's less community resistance to densification, leading to changes in policy settings that should have been addressed a decade ago. While the pace of these changes may be a subject of debate, the positive aspect lies in the changing public sentiment and the prioritisation of housing.
Considerations for city leaders:
- Elevate housing aspirations in policy frameworks: Develop policies that ensure everyone has access to a home, enabling social and economic participation. Focus on making the benefits of secure rental or home ownership both deliverable and attainable for all. Leverage comprehensive policy frameworks that address these aspirations.
- Implement a clear and deliberate place-based strategy: Utilise Memorandum of Understanding Agreements between collaborators to define roles and responsibilities between entities so there is a transparent understanding of how each entity will contribute to the housing-objectives at the prescribed place level, including opportunities for co-investment. Ensure policies, plans, designs, and strategies are adaptable to a changing future through strategic planning and stakeholder engagement.
- Promote vibrant, sustainable, and inclusive Communities: Position housing as the centrepiece of liveable places and precincts. Develop a compelling vision that incorporates climate resilience and sustainability, aligning with Closing the Gap Reform Priorities. Optimise the use of infrastructure and surplus land and combine available levers to accelerate outcomes.
- Adopt radical transparency for housing data: Develop an open-source data platform on housing supply, demand, pricing, affordability and other critical measures, to improve accountability and transparency, and supports decision-making at all levels of housing policy – truly empowering citizens and other stakeholders operating in housing markets.
- Create a national housing innovation lab: Establish a testbed to explore and innovate new housing models, construction techniques, financing models, development partnerships, and planning and regulatory frameworks. Co-funded by governments, housing providers, developers, institutional investors, and other stakeholders, the lab would establish a collaborative ecosystem to identify scalable solutions, accelerate the adoption of sustainable technologies, and drive forward-thinking policies that make housing more affordable, accessible, and resilient for future generations.
- Addressing housing affordability: Leverage government funding into social and affordable housing and guide partnerships to unlock investment from institutional investors and other developers.
- Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Leverage PPPs to deliver social, affordable, specialist market housing funded by institutional capital, developed by top tier developers and enabled by government land and policy to support it. It's important to engage the community and stakeholders to acknowledge the different roles that government, investment and development play in achieving a common goal.
- Mapping and tracking housing supply and demand: Track how LGA’s are meeting diverse needs in terms of housing supply and demand. This involves making useful information such as social and affordable housing registries more accessible and mapping the needs of different cohorts.
02
Population and demographics
Record migration drives growth planning and government services focus as cities balance ageing and growing populations.
More than two-thirds of city leaders are concerned about an inability to sustainably accommodate population growth across their cities – an increase from third place in 2022.
This comes as Australia's post-pandemic migration recovery reached record levels in 20233 driven by temporary migrant arrivals, particularly students. Migration will continue to be a key driver of population growth, despite ongoing federal policy debate about the size and mix of Australia’s migration intake.
Most leaders are now less worried about skills requirements and budget capacity compared to 2022. The resumption of skilled migration flows has eased concerns about skills shortages in all cities except Perth, where the current strength of the West Australian economy generates high labour force demand.
Rapid growth and an ageing population has instead shifted city leaders’ focus to the escalating demand for government care and support services across our largest capitals, with this issue rising significantly in priority from last place in 2022.
City leaders emphasise the urgent need to adopt more robust and consistent forward planning to respond to the projected size and mix of population change across urban areas.
A more coordinated approach to understanding and planning for population change is essential to improve the delivery of essential economic and social infrastructure and services. Leaders advocate for stronger collaboration between federal, state, and local governments to align policies and resources effectively, ensuring sustainable growth and improved quality of life for all residents.
Much of the urban debate seems to forget the significant growth we're experiencing. We're not a stagnant society; we're growing, and we need to manage this growth effectively.
Population and demographic issues
Which three of the following factors do you believe are the top population and demographic issues your city will face over the long-term?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Inability to sustainably accommodate population growth | 66 | 69 | 83 | 84 | 59 |
Impact of population aging on demand for government services and resources | 61 | 62 | 60 | 69 | 38 |
Budget capacity to address population and demographic changes | 48 | 58 | 46 | 27 | 62 |
Impact of population aging on the labour force and productivity | 43 | 33 | 46 | 42 | 55 |
Demographic and skills mix unable to support the economy | 29 | 40 | 34 | 58 | 45 |
Ability to maintain social cohesion | 54 | 38 | 31 | 20 | 41 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Understanding the composition and drivers of population growth at spatial and temporal levels is essential for effective policy and investment strategies. It helps leaders identify patterns, anticipate needs, and respond to growth opportunities or pressures. For governments, aligning responsibilities across various portfolio responsibilities—from infrastructure and housing to health and education—can improve resource allocation and reduce spatial inequalities.
Considerations for city leaders:
- Identify population and demographic impacts: Use spatial analytics, demographic analysis, and forecasting to understand projected population and demographic shifts and guide policy and investment strategies, urban planning, and assets and services requirements.
- Conduct infrastructure and service readiness assessments: Perform comprehensive assessment of local infrastructure and service capacities, drawing on population projections to inform future demand across all relevant asset and program requirements.
- Establish a shared vision for future growth: Develop a place-based vision for growth supported by consultation and robust gap and opportunity analysis. This will guide implementation actions and build stakeholder alignment through delivery.
- Use scenario planning during strategy development: Undertake scenario modelling to anticipate diverse growth patterns and challenges, enabling adaptive policies and proactive resource allocation that ensure sustainable and resilient urban and regional development.
- Strengthen strategic urban planning: Embed stronger appraisals and evidence base for urban planning decisions, to reflect their significant economic, social, and environmental impacts. This approach could be analogous to existing government investment and business case processes that incorporate comprehensive needs analysis, outcome logic, cost-benefit analysis and social equity and broader sustainability evaluations.
03
Economic Growth and competitiveness
Investment in social and economic infrastructure key to future competitiveness amid economic shifts.
Concerns about the need to invest more in infrastructure to support future growth and competitiveness have outpaced other issues, as city leaders prioritise social and economic infrastructure over skills shortages and threats from population growth and aging.
Leaders of smaller capital and regional cities are more attuned to the threat of underinvestment in essential infrastructure. These cities typically have less diversified economies and are more susceptible to external forces.
Economic shifts are also altering the makeup of our workforce, the demand for new skillsets, and the nature of work itself. City leaders, especially those from Perth, are acutely aware of the elevated competition for skilled workers in emerging and priority sectors, with increasing demand in care and support, net zero, and digital industries projected to outpace population growth4.
As demand for these skills increases, the role of place and liveability are becoming more important to attracting high-value workers and investment. City leaders are already recognising the threats of declining liveability in places like Sydney, where cost-of-living and high housing costs are growing concerns.
Investing in place capital is crucial for driving sustainable economic growth. It's more than just creating spaces, it’s about fostering vibrant communities that attract and engage talent, boost productivity, and enhance quality of life.
Threats to economic development and competitiveness
Which three of the following factors do you believe present the greatest threats to the economic growth and competitiveness of your city?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Underinvestment in critical social and economic infrastructure | 54 | 42 | 57 | 58 | 72 |
Inability to meet future skills needs | 32 | 38 | 43 | 51 | 38 |
Population growth and aging | 30 | 17 | 43 | 27 | 38 |
Failure to diversify into high value/high growth sectors | 18 | 25 | 31 | 38 | 28 |
Declining liveability | 46 | 35 | 20 | 9 | 10 |
Changing role of CBD and urban centres | 27 | 27 | 14 | 22 | 24 |
Slow transition to green economy | 18 | 23 | 20 | 18 | 24 |
Climate change | 20 | 17 | 17 | 20 | 17 |
Underperforming innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems | 18 | 23 | 20 | 16 | 14 |
Reputation of the city | 13 | 10 | 9 | 13 | 24 |
Uncertain foreign investment | 9 | 25 | 9 | 7 | 7 |
Sluggish adoption and diffusion of technology | 9 | 8 | 17 | 11 | 0 |
Inability to keep up in global race for 'technological dominance' | 7 | 10 | 0 | 11 | 3 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
It is unsurprising that city leaders are placing growing emphasis on the threats posed by underinvestment in critical social and economic infrastructure. As cities face changing population pressures and structural transitions, proactive and adaptive strategies become essential to maintaining liveability, economic vitality, and social cohesion. By strategically investing in infrastructure that addresses gaps or leverages comparative advantages, we can attract the skills and investment needed to foster sustainable growth.
Considerations for city leaders:
- Refine investment attraction strategies: Analyse competitive advantages such as functional economic regions, enabling assets, market accessibility, and transport routes to update economic development and investment attraction strategies for specific industries.
- Establish national quality-of-life goals and embed them in policy: Establish an index that measures and tracks liveability and wellbeing outcomes nationally. The index would guide urban development and broader economic and social policy decisions, ensuring that projects, programs, and investments prioritise improvements to residents’ quality of life. Governments would need to demonstrate how their policies and investments contribute to enhancing liveability goals by going beyond traditional metrics like benefit-cost ratios and broad economic impact measures. Governments would also be required to report on performance to ensure consistent application, evaluation, and improvement across Australian cities and regions, and to show how their investments and decisions have contributed to liveability.
- Adopt a systems-based approach to economic development: Transition from siloed economic development to a systems-based approach that integrates industry development, education and skills, infrastructure, and innovation into a cohesive strategy for growth. Identify interconnections between sectors to enhance industry collaboration and competitiveness through workforce attraction and development, skills alignment and infrastructure investment that also addresses community well-being and cohesion.
- Establish a national workforce accelerator: Directly contract universities, non-traditional training providers, tech boot camps, and industry to create a high quality, fast-track workforce training pipeline. The program would guarantee jobs for trainees with emerging industry giants, particularly in tech, renewables, robotics, and other high-priority sectors. A national accreditation body would certify programs and provide clear pathways for upskilling and reskilling across the workforce, especially in high-demand fields.
- Develop plans that assess future needs for critical infrastructure: Develop plans to assess future needs for critical infrastructure, ensuring that both social and economic infrastructure are in place to support growth and achieve positive socio-economic outcomes.
04
Climate change and sustainable development
Urban densification, transport and circular economy lead sustainability priorities in the transition towards net zero.
Urban density, sustainable transport and the circular economy are emerging as key sustainability priorities in the transition towards net zero. The decline in sentiment, especially outside Sydney and Melbourne, may be attributed to growing confidence that the renewable energy transition is well underway, following upticks in large-scale clean energy investment, which increased by 17% year-on-year to reach $6.2 billion in 20225.
Two-thirds of city leaders support enhancing sustainable transport as the top climate change and sustainable development action. With Australia's transport sector projected to be the largest source of emissions by 20306, city leaders also identify the need to create more compact and higher-density cities, which can reduce urban sprawl, lead to more efficient use of land and resources, and preserve biodiversity.
Strengthening climate resilience and adaptation is prioritised by fewer city leaders than two years ago in all cities except Sydney, despite exposure to increasingly frequent and intense natural disasters threatening most Australian cities. City leaders must carefully navigate the risks posed by climate change, from infrastructure and supply chain vulnerabilities to social inequality. However, there are significant opportunities for innovation, economic growth, and improved quality of life through resilient and adaptive planning.
On climate change, the government is investing a lot into the energy transition and racing towards net zero. However, we're not quite grappling with the impact of natural disasters that are going to become more frequent and more intense as a result of climate change. We are really behind the ball in terms of designing our city to respond to that.
Climate change and sustainable development priorities
Which three of the following climate change and sustainable development actions do you believe ought to be prioritised for your city?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Increase sustainable transport options | 64 | 62 | 71 | 62 | 79 |
Deliver high density living that supports more compact cities | 50 | 54 | 63 | 73 | 48 |
Eliminate waste and pollution (circular economy) | 39 | 48 | 49 | 36 | 55 |
Strengthen climate resilience and adaptation | 41 | 37 | 51 | 40 | 38 |
Protect and regenerate natural systems | 39 | 48 | 31 | 36 | 28 |
Transition to net zero | 45 | 44 | 17 | 24 | 31 |
Address water security | 21 | 8 | 17 | 29 | 21 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
We are in a phase of discomfort amid transformational change. Our city leaders, like all of us, are feeling this pressure. Sustainability is intrinsic to all facets of society - our cities’ economies, climate, transport, energy systems, built infrastructure and lifestyles. To ensure that we accelerate the transition to net zero successfully, the public and private sector must work together to provide consistency and confidence in the planning, development and implementation of strategies and projects – and to embrace the net zero economic growth opportunities of a decarbonised and sustainable future.
Considerations for city leaders:
- Adopt precinct-level strategies: Develop comprehensive precinct-wide sustainability, energy and technology strategies that transition from isolated, standalone assets to fully integrated, interconnected systems to enhance energy efficiency, energy generation and storage, and climate resilience.
- Undertake future scenario-based net zero planning: Model future scenarios of major urban renewal, decarbonisation projects, and urban heat island to optimise investment and net zero outcomes, and future-proof against climate risk.
- Promote and enable sustainable and net zero transport: Develop multi-modal, pedestrian-focused, and electrified precinct and neighbourhood designs supported by infrastructure to enable active and net zero transit. Develop mode shift strategies and electric charging infrastructure grounded in community consultation.
- Pursue transport-oriented development opportunities: Prioritise urban renewal and sustainable development opportunities around key transport nodes – enabling decarbonisation, social value, and sustainable living outcomes.
- Implement precinct- and city-level circular economies: Lower resource demand and energy use, and decarbonise embodied emissions in the material and product supply chains, by developing circular economies at city and precinct levels.
- Advance retrofit and decarbonisation programs of existing built infrastructure: Support the retrofit, adaptive re-use and decarbonisation of existing building stock, by reviewing planning policy and programmes aimed at net zero buildings and precincts.
05
Inequality in Cities
Housing crisis emerges as the leading factor of inequality in Australian cities.
City leaders unanimously identify deteriorating housing affordability and access as the top factor contributing to urban inequality, reflecting a period where housing affordability worsened across states, territories, cities and regions, income levels, age groups and tenure types7.
Leaders from Australia’s largest and most expensive housing markets – Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth – recorded the greatest increase in prioritisation of this issue since 2022, as rising housing costs dramatically widen the gap between what Australians on high and low incomes can afford.
City leaders should focus on the interplay between housing, transport, and employment, as inequities across the regions are being amplified by misaligned delivery. Precincts with a regional focus are key to addressing issues of inequity, fostering community cohesion, pride, inclusivity, and diversity, with local government playing a critical role.
Rising home prices paired with plummeting rates of homeownership are driving up wealth inequalities8. This also reinforces spatial inequality across urban areas. Better-serviced areas in cities typically enjoy greater access to employment and other amenities, driving capital growth that disproportionately benefits homeowners.
These pressures, along with heightened exposure to weather and climate disasters, are putting our social fabric at risk. The 2023 Scanlon Monash Index of Social Cohesion indicates that social cohesion in Australia has fallen to its lowest level in 16 years. This decline is in part fuelled by diminishing social inclusion, justice, and economic equality, as Australian cities become increasingly divided along socioeconomic lines9. City leaders highlighted the importance of equitable access to opportunities in addressing urban inequality and social cohesion and identify the need to better align policy and infrastructure investment to address these issues.
Addressing social inequality requires a unified approach from the public and private sectors in the provision and distribution of social infrastructure. Investment in early intervention and the measurement of social impacts to demonstrate value can help level the playing field, driving both community well-being and economic development.
Factors contributing to inequality
Which three of the following factors do you believe contribute most to inequality in your city?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Housing affordability and access | 96 | 90 | 89 | 80 | 72 |
Unequal access to employment, education, health and other opportunities | 50 | 67 | 40 | 53 | 55 |
Urban policy and infrastructure investment not focused enough on addressing inequality | 45 | 44 | 40 | 38 | 45 |
Inadequate public policies towards income and wealth redistribution | 27 | 35 | 40 | 27 | 41 |
Lack of innovation and entrepreneurship to drive local economic growth | 16 | 25 | 29 | 24 | 34 |
External shocks or structural changes to the economy | 27 | 12 | 23 | 22 | 17 |
Systemic disadvantages and lack of opportunities for First Nations People | 14 | 12 | 17 | 33 | 21 |
Skill-biased technological change | 18 | 8 | 14 | 13 | 7 |
Globalisation and evolving patterns of trade | 7 | 8 | 9 | 9 | 7 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Considerations for city leaders:
- Establish a shared vision at the place scale: Align stakeholders and community on a common vision and understanding of priorities at the place scale. Develop robust mechanisms for embedding community feedback into the process of developing and revitalising a precinct or place to optimise social outcomes.
- Prioritise inclusive growth: Establish minimum thresholds or standards for access to healthcare, education, employment and transport, so that no community is left behind. These thresholds would be incorporated into decision frameworks for policy and investment so that all regions meet basic standards of access and spatial equity over time. Embedding these thresholds into the planning process can help guide the growth of our cities and regions in a way that reduces geographic disparities, prioritises underserved areas, and ensures that every community has the infrastructure and resources needed for sustainable, inclusive growth.
- Measure social value: Develop standardised metrics and decision-making tools for measuring social value to ensure consistency and comparability across projects and align objectives across multiple stakeholders.
- Monitor and evaluate: Implement continuous monitoring and evaluation processes to track economic, health and social impacts of social infrastructure and urban development projects to demonstrate their true value.
- Leverage public-private partnerships: Leverage public-private partnerships in major urban renewal projects to deliver social infrastructure and support strong community outcomes.
- Prioritise social and community infrastructure: Ensure well-designed spaces and accessible services are available to unite people, build trust, and encourage community support networks, enhancing resilience and shared responsibility within communities over time.
06
Urban Governance
Short-term decisions and political cycles remain the biggest threat to city governance.
Public and private sector city leaders agree short-term political cycles, the politicisation of issues, and ineffective cross-government coordination are the greatest barriers to effective governance in Australian cities, potentially constraining long-range improvements.
Budget pressures have also become a greater concern for private sector city leaders in 2024, as ongoing economic pressures from rising inflation, increased demand for social services, and the financial strain of addressing post-pandemic recovery, climate-related disasters, and cost-of-living crises constrains funding priorities.
The challenge is aligning governments both vertically, across state government, and horizontally, between different state governments, to plan more effectively around place outcomes. It's interesting that we still see siloed approaches to delivering in a coordinated fashion, even across different government departments. If we want to be strategic about precincts, we need to find new, joined-up models of governance.
Barriers to effective urban governance
To what extent do you believe the following issues are barriers to effective governance in your city?
Percentage (%) of respondents by public vs private sector
Significant barrier | Moderate barrier | Minor barrier | Not a barrier
Too much focus on short-term decisions driven by political cycles | Difficulties in coordinating across different levels of government | Politicisation of local issues | Growing budget pressures | Organisational silos unable to effectively address systemic policy issues | Lack of relevant skills in government | Increasing scale and complexity of urban challenges | Inability to make the most of the full institutional capacity of the city (i.e. government, industry, social sector and community)
Public
66 | 40 | 42 | 45 | 37 | 20 | 26 | 23
27 | 46 | 38 | 30 | 39 | 35 | 49 | 43
6 | 13 | 16 | 20 | 21 | 37 | 23 | 29
1 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 2 | 5
Private
75 | 63 | 60 | 50 | 52 | 44 | 29 | 29
20 | 31 | 28 | 32 | 40 | 34 | 44 | 52
5 | 6 | 13 | 14 | 8 | 22 | 26 | 18
0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Collaboration across government levels and with industry is essential to solve complex challenges. This often requires an enabling framework that removes barriers, simplifies processes and promotes information and risk sharing to drive shared outcomes. Embedding legacy thinking into strategy formation is essential to drive long range benefits.
Considerations for city leaders:
- Place-based, problem-oriented governance: To address the difficulties in coordinating within and across levels of government, place-based and problem-oriented governance models could be adopted to tackle complex, cross-cutting urban challenges. The emphasis is on addressing the interconnected nature of real-world problems through integrated, cross-functional teams to ensure that decisions are made with a clear understanding of local needs and priorities.
- Incentivise collaboration: Encourage cross-sectoral collaboration by providing incentives such as funding, shared resources, and recognition programs, fostering partnerships that drive innovative, sustainable solutions.
- Embedding legacy strategy: Ensure legacy thinking is enshrined into urban governance models so long-term benefits are prioritised over immediate outcomes. Including the identification of cross-generational goals that shape resilience and enduring value.
- Customise governance model to context: Ensure urban governance models include the right processes and features to coordinate the relevant relationships and interactions required to drive outcomes. This could include innovative adaptive governance, co-design or co-construction or collaborative multi-actor governance functions.
- Urban Futures Advisory Council: Establish a citizen-led advisory body to provide input into major urban plans and infrastructure investment decisions to tackle concerns about short-term decision-making linked to political cycles. The group would comprise a diverse cross-section of the community – elected by their peers – and could offer sustained, independent input on long-term urban development priorities and significant intergenerational investments, so they align with the broader sustainable and equitable urban growth objectives. The council would act as a consultative body, providing insights and recommendations that reflect the needs and aspirations of current and future generations.
07
Crisis Management
Enhancing government collaboration is key to strengthening crisis management.
Despite the overall priority of crisis management falling dramatically as an overarching challenge since 2022, city leaders still emphasise the need to prioritise collaboration, transparency, and information sharing within and between governments.
Leaders across all cities identify breaking down government institutional boundaries and organisational siloes as key to strengthening crisis response, prioritising these actions over those that involve public citizens.
The lasting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems and public finances, along with increasing frequency, breadth and intensity of bushfires, flooding and other natural disasters, together with the cost of living and housing crisis have all underscored the importance of governments working collaboratively to mitigate the systems impact of urban stressors.
City leaders are calling for a more effective government response to crisis events and have again identified the need to depoliticise these issues.
City leaders face a significant challenge in crisis management. The current approach tends to be more reactive than proactive, often leaving communities to deal with long-term, complex issues. Leaders need to shift towards stronger regional-level disaster planning and develop a risk reduction investment pipeline, focusing resources on adaptation and preventative measures. Understanding local assets, pinpointing infrastructure risks, and cultivating social cohesion and community capacity are all crucial elements in strengthening resilience and responsiveness.
Actions to improve crisis management
Which three of the following actions would improve crisis management for your city?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Foster collaboration between the three tiers of government and across institutional boundaries | 63 | 65 | 77 | 69 | 72 |
Reduce organisational siloes and improve transparency and information sharing across government | 57 | 58 | 60 | 60 | 72 |
Depoliticise events | 43 | 46 | 57 | 44 | 31 |
Invest in technology and innovation | 36 | 31 | 34 | 33 | 31 |
Rely on integrated data to make more accurate and timely decisions | 23 | 33 | 31 | 40 | 38 |
Build public trust | 34 | 29 | 20 | 27 | 24 |
Formalise crisis management governance | 29 | 25 | 17 | 22 | 21 |
Establish citizen reference groups to inform crisis management decisions | 16 | 13 | 3 | 4 | 10 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Considerations for city leaders:
- Conduct vulnerability assessments: Undertake climate and disaster risk vulnerability assessments for all cities and regions to better understand risks.
- Invest in prevention and early intervention: Allocate resources to early intervention and prevention measures that build protective factors and support strong social cohesion, including programs that enhance community connection and capacity in at-risk areas.
- Protect vital public assets: Establish a framework to target investments towards protecting vulnerable vital public assets such as hospitals, public transportation, and energy systems and aim for betterment in adaptation planning.
- Implement place-based resilience planning: Establish a framework for place-based resilience planning, including effective governance arrangements aligning Commonwealth, state and territory, regional and local governments with community expertise.
- Develop multi-sectoral regional resilience plans: Ensure multi-sectoral regional resilience plans adopt an integrated systems-wide approach to identifying and prioritising needs, such as enhanced urban infrastructure, quality housing in secure locations and integration of urban systems.
- Establish a National Crisis Review Commission: Ensure an independent body conducts post-event reviews and evaluations after major national or regional crises, such as natural disasters, public health emergencies, or human-induced events – ensuring an unbiased and thorough analysis of response strategies, resource allocation, and overall effectiveness. The reviews would involve input from multiple sectors and result in actionable recommendations for improving future crisis management.
08
technological and digital disruption
Confidence boost required as Australian cities compete in growing digital economy.
Small investments into key sectors like computing, advanced manufacturing, aerospace, defence, medical devices, medical technologies, and life sciences could be the future of our economy. These sectors have the potential to be globally competitive and could be the engines of our future prosperity. Sydney has the underlying expertise and infrastructure to succeed in these sectors, but there's a gap that needs to be bridged, a 'valley of death' that requires government intervention.
City leaders generally feel Australian cities are unprepared for global technological competition, as the ICT sector grew about three times faster than the total economy in OECD countries over the past decade10.
Fast-evolving technologies like AI, cloud computing and big data analytics are driving powerful changes to business models, assets and services, which are heavily concentrated in cities and essential to ongoing economic, social and environmental improvements.
Public sector leaders are more optimistic about competing for these improvements, while businesses balance emerging technology adoption with concerns about proficiency, ethics, legality, and security. Sydney, home to Australia’s largest digital technology industry super-cluster, is perceived to be Australia’s most technologically competitive city, while leaders in other cities record declining sentiment compared to the 2022 survey.
To unlock our potential, we must improve our digital infrastructure and connectivity, especially in regional cities. Investment in digital literacy and workforce training is crucial to achieve the necessary productivity benefits and harness the opportunities of the digital landscape. The promise is there, but we need the right infrastructure and skills to realise it.
Technological leadership
How prepared do you believe your city is to compete in the global race for technological dominance?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Not at all prepared | Somewhat unprepared | Somewhat prepared | Very well prepared
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg
2024 Results
4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
48 | 37 | 40 | 44 | 34
39 | 50 | 49 | 38 | 52
9 | 13 | 11 | 18 | 14
Net Sentiment
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Rapid technological change solidifies focus on human capabilities
City leaders continue to view upskilling labour markets as the highest priority, likely due to key technological change factors and their growing impact on the economy and society, including:
- Job displacement: Rapid advancements in automation, AI, robotics, and other technologies risk making traditional jobs obsolete, meaning a large portion of the workforce will need to acquire new skills to remain employable.
- Skills gap: Technological change is creating new job opportunities in sectors such as advanced manufacturing, data analytics, and renewable energy. However, there is often a gap between the skills required for these new jobs and the current skill sets of the workforce.
- Economic competitiveness: Cities are increasingly competing on a global scale to attract investment, talent, and innovation. A well-educated, tech-savvy workforce is a key factor in making cities attractive to businesses and entrepreneurs.
- Social equity and inclusion: Technological disruption disproportionately affects lower-skilled workers and those in industries that are more vulnerable to automation.
City leaders also prioritise ensuring infrastructure assets and policies keep pace with technological advancements. Leaders from larger capitals place higher prioritisation on technology-led economic growth than those from smaller cities, suggesting that small capitals and regional cities see less economic growth coming from the digital economy.
Technology and digital priorities
When it comes to technology and digital disruption, which three of the following do you believe your city ought to be prioritising?
Percentage (%) of respondents by city
Sydney | Melbourne | Brisbane | Perth | Small Cap/Reg | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Upskilling labour markets to meet future skills demand | 71 | 71 | 63 | 67 | 72 |
Ensuring infrastructure and policy keep pace with technological advances | 59 | 52 | 69 | 62 | 66 |
Taking advantage of technology-led economic opportunities | 41 | 42 | 60 | 47 | 24 |
Adopting smart technologies for infrastructure/precincts | 34 | 40 | 43 | 56 | 48 |
Transforming government service delivery and access through digital | 36 | 35 | 26 | 27 | 38 |
Deploying technologies to address critical climate change and sustainability challenges | 29 | 38 | 23 | 29 | 34 |
Using technology to improve resilience and coordinate response in times of crisis | 30 | 21 | 17 | 13 | 17 |
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Addressing the digital divide is crucial for future-proofing our investment decisions. We must elevate digital capabilities and focus on enduring value rather than short-term gains. Areas devoid of infrastructure and facilities are most in need of the digital network and capability to overcome the tyranny of distance and lack of access. Digital connectivity is a great equaliser, and it's imperative that developers of future cities and communities understand the long-term impact of their connectivity choices.
Considerations for city leaders:
- Map digital workforce demand: Conduct comprehensive mapping of digital workforce demand to assess skills and talent readiness across the regional industry ecosystem.
- Invest in digital technology skills: Develop an investment framework for digital technology skills across all components of the workforce pipeline. Scale up and refine technology apprenticeships to create a nationwide, industry-led program that focuses on rapidly growing technologies.
- Attract and place international talent: Explore ways to bring greater focus on attracting and placing international talent, facilitating international student employment placement, and streamlining skilled migration pathways to support the Australian economy to meet future growth in technology-based industries.
- Establish a network of national technology centres: Modelled after the UK's Catapult network, each centre would focus on technology development to solve critical global and industry challenges. The centres would bring government, universities, startups, and businesses together to co-create and scale breakthrough technologies and position Australia at the forefront of technology-driven economic growth, accelerating the adoption of advanced technologies and fostering the creation of high-value jobs across the economy.
The Task Ahead
Capability gaps narrow on all but our greatest challenge.
City leaders identified the three challenges they believe their cities are best able to address. These answers were analysed against the perceived magnitude of the eight survey challenges to identify the likely capability advantages or capability gaps for each of the challenges.
Compared to the 2022 survey, capability gaps have improved for all challenges except housing, which was not previously surveyed. These improvements have been recorded even as the near-term outlook for most city leaders is more pessimistic in 2024, suggesting the pervasiveness of the housing challenge on economic, social and environmental performance.
Cities are likely to have a capability edge in navigating technological disruption and ensuring effective governance. However, potential gaps emerge in reducing inequality, managing population and demographic changes, and addressing housing challenges.
Addressing housing challenges has recorded the largest capability gap (-52%), with less than half of city leaders believing their city is able to address the biggest perceived challenge.
A large majority of city leaders feel most capable of maintaining economic growth and competitiveness, reflected as a capability advantage (15%), along with ensuring effective governance (24%) and navigating technological disruption (35%).
Despite the overall negative sentiment, leaders are more confident about tackling climate change than in 2022 survey. This is supported by a significant narrowing of the capability gap (+37%), suggesting that city leaders perceive they are developing improved capabilities and resources to address the climate change and sustainable development challenges currently facing their cities and communities.
Capability to address top challenges
Aggregate percentage (%) difference between city leaders top challenges and perceived ability to address
Percentage (%) of all respondents
Navigating technological disruption | Ensuring effective governance | Maintaining economic growth and competitiveness | Tackling climate change and sustainable development | Reducing inequality | Managing population and demographic changes | Addressing housing challenges
Responding effectively in a crisis | Navigating technological disruption | Ensuring effective governance | Maintaining economic growth and competitiveness | Tackling climate change and sustainable development | Reducing inequality | Managing population and demographic changes | Addressing housing challenges
35 | 24 | 15 | 3 | -7 | -12 | -52
33 | 23 | 15 | 15 | -5 | -18 | -29 | -34
Source: Urbis City Leaders Survey
Now’s the time for city leaders to lean into these challenges collectively, leveraging the strength and resilience of Australian cities to drive innovation that overcomes institutional barriers. They must look beyond the short term and take decisive action to create the places and conditions that drive sustainable growth. Applying a holistic view of interconnected elements—such as infrastructure, community needs, and sustainability—addresses the linkages between these domains and fosters integrated solutions that balance growth with environmental stewardship and social equity.
Systems-based solutions needed for complex urban challenges
Our survey highlights the pervasiveness of the many interrelated challenges facing Australian cities in 2024; and the disparities and synergies that exist between them. Finding integrated solutions – that leverage strengths and overcome capability gaps – requires a deep understanding of locational drivers and systems-level change.
Challenges such as rapid population growth, declining housing affordability, growing spatial inequalities, managing climate change and sustainable development, are generally beyond the scope of individual government department resources, expertise or jurisdictions. To respond to these challenges, governments need coordinated strategies that can galvanise the full range of public, private and civic actors towards localised solutions.
Success will not be achieved by the public or private sectors alone, rather the magnitude and complexity of these issues, requires both sectors to work closer together than ever before.
The task ahead for city leaders – working with communities – is to be more intentional about driving integrated systems-level change to realise measurable impacts, benefits and legacy. The following strategies can be deployed to regions, cities or precincts:
- Identify place priorities: Understanding place-based context and needs is essential for designing impactful solutions that drive sustainable development and prosperity at the local level. It requires top-down and bottom-up analysis together with deep understanding of the unique stakeholder needs to inform a unified vision for change.
- Prioritise systems-level change: Embedding systems-based thinking helps us interrogate challenges as dynamic systems where changes in one area can create ripple effects across others. For instance, improving public transit not only eases congestion but can also impact housing affordability, access to jobs, and even public health by reducing pollution.
- Unlock integrated collaboration: Enabling cross-government collaboration is essential for developing place-based policies that are comprehensive, efficient, and innovative. By breaking down silos and fostering collaboration, policymakers can better address the multifaceted challenges.
- Embed community participation: Collaborating can also elevate decision-making by drawing on unique expertise and resources of diverse stakeholders by including businesses, civic groups, and communities. Embedding community participation and engagement in place-based policy development is essential for creating policies that are inclusive, effective, and sustainable.
Stay up to date with Urbis insights