As in the previous rounds, respondents were asked to give their perception of their cities' current situation regarding a number of general urban problems. The same specific areas in the same ten categories from the previous two surveys were used. In this round, 37 specific areas in 10 categories were identified. The responses were quite complete in this section. Most respondents completed this section.

Each category in this section is sub-divided into specific areas that the respondents assess as an urgent major problem, a serious problem, a minor problem, satisfactory, or an advantage to their city by giving a number ranking from 1 (an Urgent Major Problem) to 5 (an Advantage). Thus, the higher the score, the less serious the problem is perceived as being.

Table 8-1 shows the overall mean scores for the 10 categories and their 37 sub-categories. The five categories seen as being the most problematic will be examined in detail, as well.

Of the ten general categories in this section, public utilities, employment, transportation, crime, and housing ranked, in that order, as the five items seen as being the most problematic. Other items were mostly seen as being minor problems with food supply being most often seen as the least problematic of the ten categories. None of the categories mean score indicated that the situation is seen as satisfactory or as an advantage to the city.

Table 8-1
Number of Respondents and Mean Score
for General Problems
Maximum Score = 5 (advantage to city)

Table 8-2 shows the 10 general categories with their mean scores in rank from least to most problematic.

Table 8-2
Rank and Score of General Problems

Although in a slightly different order, the first five and last five ranked problems in this round are the same as in the last round. The scores of those categories that maintained their previous rank is largely unchanged. Education stayed exactly the same in rank and mean score. Food Supply, Economy, and Housing hold the same rank and have a score of only +/-.03 points from the last round. This consistency lends confidence to the validity of the respondents perceptions of the problems facing their cities.

While Food Supply continues to be seen as the least problematic category for the respondents' cities, Water Quality actually has the highest average score of all sub-categories. At a score 3.91, Water Quality is seen as being even less of a problem than Food Supply. The other sub-categories in the Public Utilities category, Sewage and Garbage, are the two most troublesome areas for the respondents. The low score for these two sub-categories brings down the average score for Public Utilities.

Education is again seen as being the second least problematic area. The mean score in this round is exactly the same as in the previous round. Education is not generally perceived as being a problem by the respondents, but when compared with the unequal access that women have in comparison to men (as seen earlier in this report), some aspects of education may be more problematic than indicated here.

Health Care and Energy have switched ranks in this round. Energy score jumped.19 while Health Care fell by.01. Respondents saw Energy as less of a problem than they did in the last round. The reason for this is not indicated by this survey.

Table 8-3 compares the responses given regarding the availability of family planning in section 7 to the perception of family planning as a general problem in this section. The responses for Japan and South Korea are given separately from the other countries.

Table 8-3
General Problem: Family Planning by Fertility/Birth Rate: Family Planning
(by Country Development)

The respondents' perception of their cities' economies is quite stable from the last round. Economy retains its ranking at 5 and its mean score shows only a.03 increase from the previous survey.

The remaining five categories will be examined in more detail by-looking at their component sub-categories. One general comment that can be made at this point is that these more problematic categories have all had increases in their mean scores. Transportation increased by a dramatic.28 for its overall mean score. In the last round, the most problematic category (transportation) had a mean score of 2.42, while in this round the most problematic category (public utilities) has a mean score of 2.61. The respondents' perception of their cities' general problems seems to be that their situation is staying about the same in the unproblematic areas and improving overall in the more problematic areas.

Next, it is of interest to examine the mean scores for this section by country. As noted previously here and in previous rounds, the selected Asian countries have significantly different levels of economic and social development. These differences are likely to influence the types of problems and the perceptions of those problems that the respondents in this survey face. Table 8-4 shows the overall mean score for this section by country.

Table 8-4
Rank and Score of General Problems by Country

There has been considerable change in the rankings and mean scores by country in this round as compared to the previous round. Japan, while maintaining a consistent mean score (only decreasing by.01), has been replaced by Malaysia as the top ranking country. Malaysia's overall mean score increased from 3.10 to 3.55, and it went from third in the rankings to first. Thailand also showed a significant increase from the previous round. Thailand's mean score increased from 3.00 to 3.34, moving it from fourth to third place. Indonesia is the only country to register a significant drop in mean score, which decreased from 3.28 (second rank behind Japan) to 3.07 (fifth rank, being passed by Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines). China also slipped in rank and score from fifth rank at 2.92 mean score to 2.66 mean score as the eighth country in overall ranking. Besides Japan, Indonesia, and China; all other countries had an increased in their mean scores. The rough average mean by country in this round is 3.06, increasing from 2.96 in the last round. It seems that aside from these two countries with significant decreases in means score, China and Indonesia, the situation in regards to the general problems listed here seems to be improving for most countries and staying about the same for Japan.

It should be noted again here that the covered cities are not the same in each round of this Inquiry and that these scores and rankings are the results of subjective judgments by the participants in this survey. Many factor must contribute to these judgments, and the results indicated here must by viewed with some reservation. Some respondents might view their city's situation more critically than do other respondents.

Tables 8-5 and 8-6 list the mean scores for each general category by country and in rank from least to most problematic, as indicated by each category's overall mean score.

Table 8-5
Higher Scoring Categories by Country

Table 8-6
Lower Scoring Categories by Countrry

There are many items here that could be noted. Among these are Japan's score for energy and Pakistan's score for education. Despite Japan's economic and industrial development and the fact that it has very few natural resources of its own, energy for Japan is seen as being the least problematic of all the general problem categories.

The mean score for education in Pakistan also should be noted. With a score of 2.66, education does not seem to be a major concern for the respondents. Yet, an examination of objective data indicates that Pakistan has the lowest literacy rate of any country in this survey. This could be interpreted as meaning that although education is a problem, it is being overshadowed by problems in other areas.