The impact and differentiation of urban livability on the settlement willingness of young migrant populations:Based on the Family Life Cycle perspective
As China's urbanization enters a stage of high-quality development, urban livability has become a crucial factor influencing the settlement decisions of young migrants. Based on the China Migrants Dynamic Survey (CMDS) data and macro-livability indicators of 261 cities, this study employs a Multi-Level Logistic Regression Model to systematically analyze the heterogeneous impact of urban livability on the settlement intentions of young migrants across different family life cycle stages. The findings reveal that the evolution of the family life cycle profoundly shapes young migrants' settlement decisions, exhibiting a distinct logic of hierarchical transition. Specifically, it shifts from a "survival logic" during singlehood, which highly prioritizes living costs and environmental quality, to a "nesting logic" in the family formation stage, which focuses on housing property rights and asset accumulation, and ultimately evolves into a "parenting logic" in the family expansion stage, which relies heavily on high-quality public services and transport accessibility. Furthermore, city size plays a significant moderating role. Although medium-sized cities offer lower living pressure, they suffer from a shortage of basic educational resources, making them susceptible to the "public service trap". Conversely, large cities exhibit a significant trend of diminishing marginal utility in public resource allocation, where enhancing spatiotemporal service efficiency is key to overcoming the constraints of congestion costs. Therefore, the construction of youth development-oriented cities should avoid homogenized strategies. By establishing a tiered housing support system, implementing differentiated public service reinforcement strategies, and creating a comprehensive livable ecosystem, cities can achieve a win-win outcome for both the permanent settlement of young populations and sustainable urban development.
LUO Ji , WANG Jing-ru , TAO De-kai . The impact and differentiation of urban livability on the settlement willingness of young migrant populations:Based on the Family Life Cycle perspective[J]. Urban Problems, 2026 , 366(1) : 81 -91 . DOI: 10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.260107
| [1] |
You Z, Yang H, Fu M. Settlement intention characteristics and determinants in floating populations in Chinese border cities[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2018(39): 476-486
|
| [2] |
湛东升, 张文忠, 党云晓, 等. 中国流动人口的城市宜居性感知及其对定居意愿的影响[J]. 地理科学进展, 2017(10): 1250-1259
|
| [3] |
Zhan D, Kwan M P, Zhang W, et al. Assessment and determinants of satisfaction with urban livability in China[J]. Cities, 2018, 79: 92-101
|
| [4] |
杨高, 金万富, 王宇渠, 等. 珠三角乡城流动人口居留意愿的分异及影响因素——基于家庭生命周期视角[J]. 地理研究, 2024(2): 411-428
|
| [5] |
Cui H, Fang H, Tian Y, et al. Evaluation of livability of Wuhan under ecological construction and analysis of its spatial pattern[J]. Sustainability, 2022(18): 11283
|
| [6] |
袁晓玲, 黄晓洲, 姚智昕, 等. 人民城市理念下中国城市宜居性综合评价及其驱动因素研究[J]. 城市发展研究, 2024(10): 53-60
|
| [7] |
Sheikh W T, van Ameijde J. Promoting livability through urban planning: A comprehensive framework based on the “Theory of Human Needs”[J]. Cities, 2022, 131: 103972
|
| [8] |
Liang X, Liu Y, Qiu T. Livability assessment of urban communities considering the preferences of different age groups[J]. Complexity, 2020(1): 8269274
|
| [9] |
Chen W, Yi L, Wang J, et al. Evaluation of the livability of arid urban environments under global warming: A multi-parameter approach[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2023, 99: 104931
|
| [10] |
Fu C, Zhang H. Evaluation of urban ecological livability from a synergistic perspective: A case study of Beijing City, China[J]. Sustainability, 2023(13)
|
| [11] |
Jiaxing Z, Lin L, Hang L, et al. Evaluation and analysis on suitability of human settlement environment in Qingdao[J]. PLOS One, 2021(9): 1-37
|
| [12] |
董家集, 任华忠, 郑逸童, 等. 基于多源遥感数据的城市环境宜居性研究——以北京市为例[J]. 国土资源遥感, 2020(3): 165-172
|
| [13] |
Jun S, Li M, Jung J. Air pollution (PM2.5) negatively affects urban livability in South Korea and China[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2022(20)
|
| [14] |
Jiang J, Qiao W, Chuang I T, et al. Mapping liveability: The “15-min city” concept for car-dependent districts in Auckland, New Zealand[J]. Applied Geography, 2024, 163: 103197
|
| [15] |
Tirthankar Basu A D, Pereira P. Urban livability index assessment based on land-use changes in an Indian medium-sized city (Raiganj)[J]. Geocarto International, 2022(25): 8495-8519
|
| [16] |
罗吉,卢晓涵,彭阳. 武汉市低收入人群职住通勤空间关系研究——基于微观主体调查的视角 [J]. 城市问题, 2021(9): 49-59
|
| [17] |
李树茁, 王维博, 悦中山. 自雇与受雇农民工城市居留意愿差异研究[J]. 人口与经济, 2014(2): 12-21
|
| [18] |
杨巧, 李鹏举. 新生代农民工家庭发展能力与城市居留意愿——基于2014年“流动人口动态监测调查”数据的实证研究[J]. 中国青年研究, 2017(10): 50-56,49
|
| [19] |
Liang X, Li Q, Zuo W, et al. How does mobility and urban environment affect the migrants’ settlement intention? A perspective from the intergenerational differences[J]. Frontiers in Public Health, 2024(12): 1343300
|
| [20] |
Tang S, Feng J. Cohort differences in the urban settlement intentions of rural migrants: A case study in Jiangsu Province, China[J]. Habitat International, 2015, 49: 357-365
|
| [21] |
窦旺胜, 秦波, 郝美竹, 等. 中国青年流动人口城市选择的空间特征及影响因素[J]. 地理研究, 2023(5): 1234-1247
|
| [22] |
Lin L, Zhu Y. Types and determinants of migrants’ settlement intention in China’s new phase of urbanization: A multi-dimensional perspective[J]. Cities, 2022, 124: 103622
|
| [23] |
温兴祥. 城市营商环境优化、高质量充分就业与农村流动人口消费[J]. 财贸研究, 2025(9)
|
| [24] |
邓仲良, 程杰. 流动人口空间分布与公共服务可及性[J]. 经济学动态, 2024(6)
|
| [25] |
叶茂鑫, 丁百仁. 不同城市落户门槛对流动人口社会融入的影响差异——基于CMDS2011和2017的分析[J]. 浙江社会科学, 2024(7)
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |