Study sheds light on what makes a location a good place to live

A recent study constructed a quality-of-life index for 3,100 U.S. counties in 2019. Researchers found that high-quality-of-life counties tend to attract more people, have lower homeownership rates, shorter commutes, and higher rates of entrepreneurship and family formation. This study, published in Social Indicators Research, challenges the traditional economic view that jobs drive migration, suggesting instead that people may migrate to places offering a high quality of life.

Quality of life encompasses various aspects, from economic opportunities and housing to natural surroundings and cultural amenities. However, measuring it remains challenging due to subjective assessments not always aligning with the actual characteristics of living places. To address this, researchers examined people's actual choices, such as staying in a community, commuting, buying homes, starting businesses, and raising families, as indicators of revealed preferences.

Using data from the American Community Survey, the study analyzed 3,100 counties and created a quality-of-life index based on indicators like migration flows, residential retention, commuting patterns, homeownership, business formation, presence of families, and birth rates. High-quality-of-life counties were characterized by dynamic migration patterns, strong residential retention, shorter commutes, lower homeownership rates, more entrepreneurs, and more families with children.

Urban counties generally scored higher, but many rural counties also scored well. Top-ranked counties often had higher education, critical institutions, dominant industries, natural environments, and other local amenities. They also exhibited strong civic engagement, with active protests and higher political contributions. The study highlights the Midwest, Northeast, and some interior regions as having lower quality-of-life rankings, while the Far West, Southwest, and Rocky Mountain regions tend to have higher rankings due to milder weather, natural amenities, and proximity to coastlines.

However, the study has limitations, such as not accounting for different demographic groups' experiences and overlooking the influence of large institutions on migration patterns.