A Quantitative Comparative Study on the Quality of Life in Hohhot and Ulaanbaatar: Two Resource - Based Cities in China and Mongolia

Abstract

Against the backdrop of global sustainable development and the Belt and Road Initiative, the Quality of Life (QoL) in resource-based cities serves as a key indicator of their inclusive transformation and the enhancement of residents’ well-being. This study selects Hohhot, the capital of China’s Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, and Ulaanbaatar, the capital of Mongolia, as two representative cases. These cities are geographically adjacent, culturally homologous, and economically isomorphic, sharing a deep reliance on animal husbandry and mineral resources. The research aims to construct a comprehensive evaluation index system covering four dimensions: economic affluence, social development, environmental livability, and life convenience. Utilizing official data from the China City Statistical Yearbook, Inner Mongolia Statistical Yearbook, and the National Statistical Office of Mongolia for the period 2015-2022, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was conducted using SPSS 26.0 software. This method enabled the objective weighting and synthesis of a composite score, facilitating a systematic quantitative comparison and in-depth analysis of the dynamic evolution and structural differences in QoL between the two cities. The findings reveal that: (1) During the study period, Hohhot’s comprehensive QoL score was significantly and consistently higher than that of Ulaanbaatar, with the gap showing an expanding trend. This reflects disparities in urban development performance resulting from different developmental stages and varying national governance capacities. (2) The internal driving structures of QoL in the two cities are distinctly different. Hohhot’s QoL is primarily driven by the “Economic-Basic Security Factor” and the “Structure-Innovation Factor,” highlighting its advantages in industrial upgrading and public services. In contrast, Ulaanbaatar is severely constrained by the dual challenges of insufficient basic economic security and the weakness of the “Environmental Factor.” Its relative advantage in the “Culture-Education Factor” is inadequate to offset its overall disadvantages. (3) Despite their different development paths, both cities face typical coordination challenges common to resource-based cities, with environmental livability emerging as a key constraining dimension for both. Through this refined quantitative comparison of transnational, similarly-typed cities, this study elucidates the differentiation mechanism of urban QoL under the interplay of institutional environment, transformation pathways, and resource endowments. It provides an empirical foundation and targeted policy insights for promoting sustainable development and cooperation between Chinese and Mongolian cities in cross-border contexts.