Why People Still Move to 'Unhappy' Places

A city's overall level of happiness can certainly change on short notice. Think Cleveland last Thursday, before LeBron James announced he was returning to play basketball there, and Cleveland last Friday, after he said he was coming home. And yet people still moved to Cleveland while LeBron played for Miami, just as they still moved to Detroit despite the bankruptcy and the foreclosures, just as they still move to any number of U.S. cities sometimes characterized as unhappy places.

The question of why people willingly move to so-called "unhappy" cities is at the center of a new working paper updated today, from a group of researchers led by urban economist Edward Glaeser of Harvard. Their answer boils down to this: the price is right. In the past, cities now considered unhappy places might have compensated their residents with high wages. That connection has faded, recently replaced with another form of compensation, in the form of low rents. The researchers conclude: