05Appendix
Appendix 1: Cities in the analysis grouped by size
The tables below show the cities in each size category used for this report, and their average population.
Table 2: Cities under analysis by population
| Groups | British cities (avg. population) | European Cities (avg. population) |
| Less than 750,000 | Bristol, Liverpool and Nottingham | Stuttgart, Frankfurt am Main, Dortmund, Toulouse, Leipzig, Düsseldorf, Essen, Bremen, Nantes, Bordeaux, Dresden, Nice, Zaragoza, Palermo, Seville and Genoa |
| Between 750,000 and one million | Sheffield, Leeds and Newcastle | Lille, Marseille, Valencia, Rotterdam, Bilbao and Turin |
| Above one million | Glasgow, Manchester and Birmingham | Berlin, Brussels, Stockholm, Munich, Copenhagen, Barcelona, Hamburg, Milan, Rome, Lyon, Dublin, Amsterdam, Madrid, Cologne and Napoli |
| Mega cities (nine million-plus) | London | Paris |
Table 3: Based on average population levels, the defined groups are comparable
| Groups | Less than 750,000 | Between 750,000 and one million | More than one million | London and Paris |
| UK | 689,350 | 831,775 | 2,014,618 | 10,151,260 |
| European cities | 615,891 | 876,374 | 2,045,383 | 9,845,879 |
Appendix 2: Cities’ specific features – accessibility, effective size and productivity
Figure 15: Unlike in Western European cities, the entire population of most British cities are not within a 45-minute public transport range
Appendix
3: Visual demonstration of the estimated impact on public transport accessibility
The Figure below is a visual representation of what the simple modelling in this would mean for the correlation between cities’ size and productivity. The intention is not to provide a prediction – in reality, increasing the effective size may lead to greater improvements in productivity, placing cities nearer to the regression line.
Figure 16: Improving transport accessibility increases the effective size of Britain’s big cities, moving them along the trendline, but does not entirely close the gap with big European cities
