Being close to the centre, employment, and major services justified much of a home's value. That rule has not gone away, but perhaps we are seeing a much deeper transformation than a simple shift in buyers' preferences.

A recent study by the Technical University of Vienna, based on millions of real estate listings from 31 countries, places Portugal among the markets considered systematically inaccessible to buyers with average incomes. At the same time, we see a growing demand for peripheral municipalities, secondary cities and locations previously considered too far from large urban centres. It is tempting to conclude that families have simply changed their preferences. The reality seems to me to be much more complex.

It is true that hybrid work, the search for more space, outdoor areas and a greater appreciation of quality of life have changed what we are looking for in a house. But it is also true that many families have expanded geographically because they can no longer find a solution suitable for their income in the locations where they would previously have sought to live. What started out of necessity can then become a perfectly rational choice. A larger house, in an area with schools, shops, services and good transport, can offer a better life than a smaller house in the centre and with a much greater financial effort.

The problem is that this displacement does not end when we cross the administrative border of a city. The study itself warns of the effect of spillover prices to neighbouring regions. Demand shifts and, with it, the pressure on housing also shifts. If we do not increase supply and prepare these regions to receive new residents, we only run the risk of progressively transferring the problem from Lisbon and Porto to increasingly distant municipalities.

That is why I find it increasingly difficult to discuss housing without discussing territory. A house 40 kilometres from Lisbon can be an excellent alternative if there is an efficient rail connection, schools, health, commerce and employment nearby. Without these conditions, apparently more affordable housing can mean hours of travel, dependence on the car and additional costs that end up reducing part of the initial advantage.

Perhaps we should therefore stop asking only where we need to build more houses. The question should be where we can create new places to live. That means coordinating housing, transport, infrastructure, public services and economic development, while respecting the huge differences between regions.

Portugal is not only facing a price or supply crisis. It is witnessing a silent reorganisation of the way people choose, or can choose, where to live. If we know how to keep up with this change, we can relieve the pressure on large centres and create new economic centralities. If we continue to look at each segment in isolation, we will probably only see the problem move on the map.