There is something almost contradictory about being young today. We are arguably a generation that is relatively flexible in geographical terms compared to previous generations. We can study abroad, work remotely, maintain friendships across borders and build careers that are not necessarily tied to a single place. Yet, when it comes to deciding where to live, many of us still find ourselves drawn towards the same few urban centers.
More often than not, the choice falls between Athens and Thessaloniki.
But this choice is not completely unreasonable. Universities are there. Jobs are there. Cultural life is there. Professional networks are there. Friends are there. And, increasingly, housing demand is concentrated there too. And not because housing is affordable, but because there are few alternatives when the opportunities we need are concentrated in the same places.
This raises a more fundamental question about decentralisation: does Gen Z actually want to live in the center, or has it simply accepted that there is no other choice?
The question becomes particularly urgent amid Greece’s housing crisis. According to Eurostat data based on the EU-SILC, in 2024, 30.3% of young people aged 15–29 in Greece lived in households where housing costs represented at least 40% of disposable income, the highest rate in the European Union, compared with an EU average of 9.7%. Greece also recorded one of the EU’s highest average ages for leaving the parental home, at 30.7 years.
Yet housing is only part of the problem. The deeper issue lies in the geography of opportunity.
Consider a recent university graduate in Athens. Given the working circumstances of today, they could potentially work from almost anywhere. They could return home, move to a smaller city or even relocate to an island. Yet, when it comes to making the final decision, the choice is far more complicated than where the laptop can connect to Wi-Fi. What about their friends? Their professional network? Cultural opportunities, conferences or events? What if they want to change jobs in two years? Suddenly, the ability to work remotely does not necessarily translate into the freedom to actually live anywhere.
There is certainly an attraction to the idea of leaving the big city. For a generation growing up amid rising housing costs and increasingly crowded urban environments, smaller cities and towns can offer something increasingly valuable: a different pace of life. More accessible housing, proximity to nature and stronger community ties can sound less like a compromise and more like an alternative.
But if you tell a young person today to move somewhere because housing is cheaper, the question that will inevitably arise is: “And where am I going to work?”
And, in many ways, it is a completely reasonable question. More affordable housing, on its own, is not enough to decentralize a country.
Young people need employment, universities, healthcare, reliable transport and digital infrastructure. But they also need social and professional opportunities, such as places where they can meet people their age, build networks, participate in cultural life and imagine a future.
This is one of the most pressing challenges for Greece, where population and economic activity remain heavily concentrated in Athens and Thessaloniki. These cities continue to attract younger people because they offer many of the opportunities that many regional areas cannot yet match. But this creates a self-reinforcing cycle: opportunities attract people, people increase demand for housing and services, and that concentration of people and talent leads to even more opportunities.
Breaking this cycle does not necessarily mean making Athens smaller. It means making other places more viable.
Yet there are regional cities that could support different models of urban life. Patras, Heraklion, Ioannina, Volos and Kalamata already have universities, businesses, cultural institutions and connections that could support stronger local ecosystems. Remote and hybrid work also make geographical flexibility more realistic than it was for previous generations.
But here comes the most crucial distinction. Spending a few months somewhere nice does not necessarily equal building a life there. A young person who decides to move to Patras, for instance, should not have to think of the decision as a choice between a better quality of life and a better career. A regional city should be able to offer both: employment opportunities alongside a university community, cultural life, reliable transport, healthcare and connections to the wider economy. Most importantly, moving should not mean falling behind or giving up opportunities simply because they are not living in a big city.
The same challenge becomes particularly visible on the Greek islands. They may seem like the perfect alternative to busy city life, yet housing shortages and seasonal pressure can make permanent settlement difficult, particularly for younger people and workers. What looks like a lack of interest in the periphery may sometimes be a lack of the basic conditions needed to live there year-round.
Perhaps, then, the focus should not be on convincing young people to abandon urban centers, but on creating more viable ones.
Regional universities could become anchors for local economies rather than simply places where young people spend several years before leaving. Stronger links between universities, businesses, research institutions and local communities could allow studying, working and innovating to happen in the same place. Start-ups could also play a role in this process, creating new jobs while bringing young talent, investment and innovation into local communities.
Housing policy could become another important decentralization tool. Increasing affordable housing, renovating underused properties and improving long-term rental options could make regional cities more accessible. In areas where short-term rentals have placed additional pressure on housing availability, policies affecting the short-term rental market could also form part of a broader effort to preserve homes for permanent residents.
But none of these measures can work in isolation. A young person living in Patras, for example, should not have to move to Athens every time they want to attend an important professional event, access specialized healthcare or find a new career opportunity. Likewise, someone living on an island should not have to choose between the lifestyle they want and access to essential services.
Imagine a Greece where a young person has several credible choices. Athens could offer extensive professional networks, cultural life and a concentration of opportunities. A regional city could offer a smaller scale, more accessible housing and a strong sense of community without requiring someone to sacrifice their professional ambitions. A smaller town or island could offer a slower pace of life while remaining connected to essential services and the wider economy through reliable transport and digital infrastructure.
The important thing is that none of these choices should feel like a step backwards.
Choosing a smaller city should not mean choosing fewer opportunities. Staying close to family should not mean giving up professional ambition. Wanting a slower pace of life should not mean accepting isolation. And living outside Athens or Thessaloniki should not automatically mean being further away from the future.
Ultimately, decentralization should not be about persuading Gen Z to give up the center. It should be about giving us the freedom to live where we want without having to give up the life we want to build.
Gen Z does not necessarily want to leave the center. It wants to have the freedom not to need it.
