How Cost & Accessibility Shape City Choice for Gen Z [Vol 2.]

Beyond the Index: Structural Constants and the Weighted Z-Experience

This series is not a city recommendation guide.
It is a navigation framework—moving the scale from country to city, and finally to the individual—so Gen Z can calculate cost and risk on their own terms.

City choice is no longer about preference or vibes.
It is a question of opportunity versus downside risk.
Opportunities vary by person.
Costs and risks can be structured.

Vol.1 established the macro and micro logic:
why Korea enters the comparison set, and how Seoul and Busan compare to Berlin, Frankfurt, and New York on cost.

Vol.2 goes one layer deeper.
It focuses on the structural features that change lived experience—healthcare, housing, and institutional friction—factors that rarely show up in headline cost indices but strongly shape real-world outcomes, especially for in-bound Gen Z.

IV. Korea’s Structural Specificities

① Healthcare: A Risk Variable, Not a Living Cost

Healthcare should be treated as a risk factor, not bundled into monthly expenses.

• Korea’s advantage is not just low cost, but predictable access, pricing, and process—even for foreigners.

② Housing: The Key Variable in Residency Risk

Housing is the largest component of living costs, and Korea offers highly segmented options by length of stay.

While Jeonse(전세) is rarely accessible to short-term foreigners, the coexistence of low-deposit monthly rent, co-living, and goshiwon options means that: Initial entry costs can be low, and monthly fixed costs can be reduced.

As a result, Korean cities are best compared on a monthly cash-flow basis.

V. In-Bound Individual Perspective: Cost Navigation by Length of Stay

The final unit of analysis is the individual.

1) Gen Z Assumptions

• Short- to mid-term residence
• Minimal furniture and appliances
• High spending on cafés, culture, and experiences
• Preference for flexible housing

2) Z-Experience Basket (Weight Model)

These weights are a model, adjustable to individual consumption styles.

3) Cost Index by Length of Stay (Example)

• Korean cities show strong cost advantages in short-term stays (1–3 months)
• As stays lengthen, grocery weight increases and relative advantages moderate
• The key is not “longer equals cheaper,” but which cost structure you are exposed to

South Korea distinguishes itself as a decodable environment where the inherent uncertainties of global relocation are neutralized by the empirical clarity of its civic infrastructure.

• Seoul: high opportunity density
• Busan: cost-efficient experimental city
• Berlin–Frankfurt: Europe’s internal contrast axis
• New York: a benchmark, not necessarily a realistic choice

​Not a Guide, but a Navigation Tool.

Dawn Chang, PhD · Editor-in-Chief, K-Welle · editor@k-welle.com