22
C. Lenzi and G. Perucca
strong contradiction with the mainstream assumption about a positive and straightforward association between income growth and well-being (Ferrara et al. 2019). More
recently, this paradox has been transposed and reshaped into a spatial setting (Graham
2012) through the metaphor of the ‘happy peasant and the miserable millionaire’. A
long stream of research demonstrated that, at least in developed countries, subjective
well-being tends to be higher in less dense settings than in crowed environments, in
spite of worse job opportunities and income conditions (Sørensen 2014).
While the empirical evidence of the urban/rural divide in subjective well-being
is rather robust and exhaustive, less is known about its determinants. Why are large
cities sources of dissatisfaction? The research program developed by the authors in
recent years aims at answering this question, by addressing three issues left partially
underexplored by the literature:
– the effect of differently ranked urban functions on SWB: cities of different size host
different activities, providing different goods and services to the resident. Previous
studies analysed the relationship between size (usually measured in terms of population density or categories) and SWB without a clear reference to the positioning
of cities along the urban hierarchy (Christaller 1933) and, as a consequence, to the
set of advantages they provide to the resident population.
– the indirect effect of urbanization on SWB: the dichotomy between urban and rural
settings hides a deeper level of complexity, because it does not account for their
spatial distribution and interconnections. For instance, rural areas may be more or
less close to larger cities, and the effect of this relative distance on the well-being
of the resident population has been almost entirely ignored in the literature.
– the evolution of the association between urbanization and SWB over time: the
empirical analysis of the negative link between urbanization and SWB extensively
covered the years from 2000 on, but without taking a temporal perspective, i.e.
focusing on the change of this association over time. However, the social and
economic structure of cities is constantly evolving, and it is therefore interesting
to understand whether, in the long term, SWB also varied accordingly.
The next sections of the present chapter review the results of the studies focused
on these three issues. Conclusions follow in the last section.
2 The Effect of Differently Ranked Urban Functions
on SWB
While previous studies provided broad and robust evidence of an urban/rural divide
in SWB, less is known about the determinants of this imbalance. The rich literature on
agglomeration economies, on the other hand, has identified the many benefits deriving from urbanization in terms of productivity and wages, learning and knowledge
exchanges, innovation and creativity, as well as public services and amenities that
may influence life satisfaction positively. All these benefits are partially balanced
C. Lenzi and G. Perucca
strong contradiction with the mainstream assumption about a positive and straightforward association between income growth and well-being (Ferrara et al. 2019). More
recently, this paradox has been transposed and reshaped into a spatial setting (Graham
2012) through the metaphor of the ‘happy peasant and the miserable millionaire’. A
long stream of research demonstrated that, at least in developed countries, subjective
well-being tends to be higher in less dense settings than in crowed environments, in
spite of worse job opportunities and income conditions (Sørensen 2014).
While the empirical evidence of the urban/rural divide in subjective well-being
is rather robust and exhaustive, less is known about its determinants. Why are large
cities sources of dissatisfaction? The research program developed by the authors in
recent years aims at answering this question, by addressing three issues left partially
underexplored by the literature:
– the effect of differently ranked urban functions on SWB: cities of different size host
different activities, providing different goods and services to the resident. Previous
studies analysed the relationship between size (usually measured in terms of population density or categories) and SWB without a clear reference to the positioning
of cities along the urban hierarchy (Christaller 1933) and, as a consequence, to the
set of advantages they provide to the resident population.
– the indirect effect of urbanization on SWB: the dichotomy between urban and rural
settings hides a deeper level of complexity, because it does not account for their
spatial distribution and interconnections. For instance, rural areas may be more or
less close to larger cities, and the effect of this relative distance on the well-being
of the resident population has been almost entirely ignored in the literature.
– the evolution of the association between urbanization and SWB over time: the
empirical analysis of the negative link between urbanization and SWB extensively
covered the years from 2000 on, but without taking a temporal perspective, i.e.
focusing on the change of this association over time. However, the social and
economic structure of cities is constantly evolving, and it is therefore interesting
to understand whether, in the long term, SWB also varied accordingly.
The next sections of the present chapter review the results of the studies focused
on these three issues. Conclusions follow in the last section.
2 The Effect of Differently Ranked Urban Functions
on SWB
While previous studies provided broad and robust evidence of an urban/rural divide
in SWB, less is known about the determinants of this imbalance. The rich literature on
agglomeration economies, on the other hand, has identified the many benefits deriving from urbanization in terms of productivity and wages, learning and knowledge
exchanges, innovation and creativity, as well as public services and amenities that
may influence life satisfaction positively. All these benefits are partially balanced