Libya’s capital, Tripoli was ranked among the least liveable cities in the world, according to a study published by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) on Saturday.
Syria’s Damascus ranked rock bottom in the ranking of 173 cities worldwide, immediately preceded by Tripoli. Damascus has consistently scored the lowest place on the list since 2013.
Algiers came third from the bottom, with the Nigerian capital, Lagos ranking as the fourth-worst city.
The study was carried out in March, analyzing 173 cities around the world, and scoring them between one (intolerable) and 100 (ideal). The index was aggregated across five categories: stability, healthcare, culture and environment, education, and infrastructure.
Tripoli, Damascus, and Algiers all scored below 40 due to social unrest, terrorism, and conflict according to the report.
Damascus and Tripoli have been the least livable cities in the index for every single year since 2013, (excluding 2020 when the study was paused due to the pandemic).
Libya has been roiled by war and political instability since the overthrow of long-time leader, Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.
Violent clashes between armed groups are frequent, and two rival prime ministers vie for power in the country.
Syria’s civil war has been ongoing since 2011 when President Bashar Al-Assad crushed a peaceful protest, and dragged the country into a brutal conflict. Helped by his allies, Al-Assad’s forces have regained control of most of the country, including Damascus, and its surrounding areas.
The EIU noted that all of the bottom ten cities – which include the Iranian capital Tehran – had seen their score improve since last year’s index, apart from Tripoli.
The EIU is a research and analysis division of the Economist Group, the sister company to The Economist newspaper. The EIU publishes a yearly Global Liveability Index, which ranks cities around the world based on various categories such as stability, healthcare, culture, environment, education, and infrastructure. The ranking aims to assess which locations provide the best or worst living conditions.
However, it’s important to remember that rankings like this one from the EIU are relative – they compare cities to each other based on a set of criteria that may not be equally relevant in all places.
For example, the value placed on specific aspects of liveability might differ greatly, depending on cultural or personal preferences. Therefore, while the EIU’s liveability ranking can provide a broad-brush picture of the conditions in different cities, they do not necessarily capture all the nuances of what it’s like to live there.
