Bangkok – A generational lens is reshaping how global cities are judged. Time Out’s 2025 survey of over 18,500 young residents worldwide offers a telling snapshot: Gen Z values affordability, inclusivity, culture, and connection. But beneath the list of best cities to live lies a deeper story of geopolitical positioning and social pressures.
Bangkok’s top ranking reflects more than nightlife and affordability. It highlights how Southeast Asia’s urban centers are emerging as affordable, interconnected hubs in contrast to increasingly expensive Western cities. With 84 percent of Gen Z respondents describing themselves as happy, Thailand’s capital underscores how youthful demographics and social vibrancy are fueling its regional clout.
Melbourne and Cape Town followed closely, each representing a distinct model of urban identity. Melbourne scored highly for inclusivity and cultural life, reaffirming Australia’s role as a soft-power player in education and multiculturalism. Cape Town, despite political and economic challenges, shows how natural beauty and affordable social life sustain optimism among younger residents.
The presence of New York and London in the top tier demonstrates enduring global appeal, but affordability gaps threaten long-term competitiveness. In London, only 45 percent of young residents found it budget-friendly, exposing strains between cultural leadership and economic exclusion. Shanghai’s strong performance in transport and modernity ratings signals China’s continued urban ascent, blending infrastructure with aspirational identity.
That Copenhagen ranked highly for both liveability and romance underscores the European model: a smaller, well-managed city-state balancing social cohesion with mobility. Barcelona’s diversity and Edinburgh’s green spaces emphasize the importance of accessible culture and environment in Europe’s urban fabric.
Taken together, the Gen Z ranking is less about nightlife and more about where the next generation will anchor themselves economically and culturally. As cities compete for talent, tourism, and influence, their ability to remain affordable, inclusive, and sustainable will determine their geopolitical significance.
For governments, these rankings are not just lifestyle surveys. They are barometers of whether cities can retain their youth or risk losing them to more affordable, opportunity-driven hubs elsewhere.
