Has nightlife become an exclusive luxury that only some can afford?

I thought I’d continue reflecting on a topic inspired by an article published in Helsinki Times earlier last week — namely, whether nightlife has become a kind of luxury service for middle-aged or soon-to-be middle-aged, wealthier urban residents.

I raise this question because, due to gentrification and the current economic situation, urban rents and the prices of nightlife venues have risen to staggering levels. In addition, younger generations have begun to seek out other forms of leisure, and they are no longer as interested in nightlife as before. This is, of course, partly due to a shift in values and interests among younger generations — a topic that could merit its own future blog post — but this time I’ll focus more on the economic and socioeconomic aspects of nightlife.

Let’s begin with the significance of nightlife to urban economies. Nightlife generates a great deal of both direct revenue (clubs, concert halls, live music venues, restaurants, bars, galleries) and indirect revenue (tourism, accommodation, logistics). Numerous studies and reports from around the world show that the so-called “night-time economy” is a major economic and cultural factor in urban centers — and its decline inevitably affects a city’s tax revenues and vitality sooner or later. To give some examples of the scale: London’s night-time economy is valued at £26.3 billion, New York’s at $35.1 billion, and Philadelphia’s at $26.1 billion. Globally, night-time infrastructure employs millions of workers.

The night-time economy also has indirect and less visible effects. Large cities around the world compete for talent, aiming to attract skilled workers, grow labor-based immigration, and draw in students and tourists. In this context, a city’s attractiveness and ability to retain people plays a major role — for international companies and their top professionals, but also for young students who might stay after graduation to contribute tax revenue. If a city goes quiet after 6 pm, these groups will “vote with their feet” and move to places that are livelier and more eventful. Much of the world’s urban culture is highly vibrant, and people want to spend time together in public spaces — in bars, restaurants, and venues. This phenomenon, which relates to regional brain drain, is well recognized internationally, and with our working-age population shrinking, we can’t afford to ignore it. Moreover, having people out on the streets at night increases safety — cities become more dangerous when no one is around after dark. This is known as the “safety through activity” phenomenon: the more people are outside, the safer an area feels — and actually becomes.

Another major challenge concerning nightlife is that young generations — even though middle-aged people are also partying more these days — are still the demographic that typically has the time, interest, and desire to go out, enjoy music, and dance. But if they can no longer afford to do so, entrepreneurs lose a huge portion of their paying customers. This in turn creates other problems: as businesses increasingly target a wealthier, middle-aged clientele, the diversity of nightlife offerings shrinks even further. A vicious cycle emerges, where more and more nightlife operators are forced to cater to small, affluent groups who only go out occasionally because of their busy lives. As the range of options narrows and prices rise, smaller and more interesting concepts disappear, leaving behind a bland and homogeneous nightlife — and empty streets after dark. Sound familiar? I find it genuinely sad that the very age group that should be building its own communities, creating its own culture, and shaping the future city is being pushed to the margins because of socioeconomic barriers. Every young person should have the opportunity to go out with friends on the weekend if they wish. Of course, not everyone wants to — but I suspect that if prices were reasonable and the offerings were more tailored, many more would.

From a historical and global perspective, all innovations and cultural movements that have made cities exciting and attractive have emerged from the night-time worlds of young artists, musicians, and creatives. A vibrant and community-oriented nightlife energizes the whole city — it’s an investment in its future. Its importance should be recognized in light of existing research, and cities should allocate resources to developing and protecting it. Urban development should take into account the specific needs of the night-time economy and plan infrastructure, soundproofing, and financial systems accordingly.

Furthermore, the importance of grassroots art and culture must be acknowledged — not just the established, state-funded cultural institutions that currently dominate Finland’s cultural landscape. By grassroots culture, I mean exactly those small actors, clubs, and dimly lit basements where new talents perform their first gigs and create something fresh during the late-night hours. There are many ways to address and improve this increasingly polarized and unequal situation — and I hope we will choose to pursue them.

Jyrki Nummisto,

Executive director, Nightshift Finland ry / Doctoral researcher, Aalto yliopisto