Luxembourg stands out as the European leader in quality of life for 2025, achieving a score of 220 on the Quality of Life Index. The Netherlands follows closely behind with 211 points, while Albania and Ukraine rank at the bottom with scores of 104 and 115 respectively. This index provides a thorough assessment of living conditions across Europe, reflecting various factors that shape the overall well-being of populations and extending beyond purely economic metrics. Understanding the quality of life index The quality of life index is a multifaceted measure that incorporates factors such as purchasing power, pollution levels, housing affordability, cost of living, safety, healthcare quality, traffic conditions, and climate, to measure the overall quality of life of a Country. Higher overall index scores indicate better living conditions. However, in subindexes such as pollution, cost of living, and traffic commute time, lower values correspond to improved quality of life. Challenges affecting life satisfaction Despite the fact that European countries register high levels of life quality by for example leading the ranking of happiest countries in the world, life satisfaction across the European Union has been on a downward trend since 2018. The EU's overall life satisfaction score dropped from 7.3 out of 10 in 2018 to 7.1 in 2022. This decline can be attributed to various factors, including the COVID-19 pandemic and economic challenges such as high inflation. Rising housing costs, in particular, have emerged as a critical concern, significantly affecting quality of life. This issue has played a central role in shaping voter priorities for the European Parliamentary Elections in 2024 and becoming one of the most pressing challenges for Europeans, profoundly influencing both daily experiences and long-term well-being.

In 2023, Uruguay and Chile had the highest Digital Quality of Life index in Latin America and the Caribbean region, at 0.57 and 0.56 points on a scale from zero to one, respectively. In comparison, Venezuela and Honduras scored the lowest index among the presented countries. The index ranks the quality of digital wellbeing in a country.

The European Quality of Life survey (EQLS) examines both the objective circumstances of European citizens' lives, and how they feel about those circumstances, and their lives in general. It looks at a range of issues, such as employment, income, education, housing, family, health and work-life balance. It also looks at subjective topics, such as people's levels of happiness, how satisfied they are with their lives, and how they perceive the quality of their societies.

The survey is carried out every four years.The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) commissioned GfK EU3C to carry out the survey.

The survey was carried in the 27 European Member States (EU27), and the survey was also implemented in seven non-EU countries. The survey covers residents aged 18 and over.

A selection of key findings from the 2010/11 data released in July 2013 are presented in this briefing: The socio-economic position of Londoners in Europe: An analysis of the 2011 European Quality of Life Survey.

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/londondatastore-upload/eqol-report.PNG" alt="">

For the purposes of the rankings in this report, London is treated as a 35th European country.The themes covered in the analysis below are: volunteering, community relations, trust in society, public services ratings, well-being, health, wealth and poverty, housing, and skills and employment.

The tables following the analysis on page 4 show figures and rankings for:

- London,

- rest of the UK,

- Europe average,

- the highest ranked country, and

- the lowest ranked country.

Internet use data for all European NUTS1 areas included in spreadsheet. Note figures based on low sample sizes marked in pink.

The average for 2021 based on 41 countries was 107.05 index points. The highest value was in Switzerland: 211.98 index points and the lowest value was in Belarus: 40.99 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

The average for 2021 based on 27 countries was 115.11 index points. The highest value was in Luxembourg: 184.36 index points and the lowest value was in Romania: 59.9 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

The average for 2021 based on 40 countries was 69.86 index points. The highest value was in Israel: 188.01 index points and the lowest value was in Syria: 33.25 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

According to the survey, as of February 2023, four out of the six countries in the Gulf Cooperation Council ranked amongst the top 25 in the world for expatriate quality of life. Qatar and the United Arab Emirates topped the list for quality of life, whereas Saudi Arabia and Kuwait came last in the region.

Quality of life; an amalgamation of many metrics Since quality of life is dependent on many indicators, it can give us a good insight into many aspects of state welfare policies and services. Saudi Arabia, where the number of foreign workers in the private sector topped six million, also ranked as having one of the region's lowest quality of life for expatriates. Qatar, which had the second-highest quality of life for expatriates living in the GCC, was ranked as one of the most challenging countries in the region for ease of settling in. The UAE and Qatar, both of which ranked the highest in the survey, also have the highest average salaries and living standards in the region.

Foreign workers are a key pillar of the GCC economy

Countries in the GCC all have sizable expatriate populations for which their economies are heavily reliant. Roughly two-thirds of the workforce in the GCC is foreign. Although the share of foreign workers in the GCC has slightly decreased in recent years, they still considerably outweigh the local workforce. Most of these workers comprise the unskilled portion of the occupational category in the GCC. However, with diversifying investments and programs such as Vision 2030, countries have seen a rise in the number of skilled foreign workers.

The aim of the Human Development Report is to stimulate global, regional and national policy-relevant discussions on issues pertinent to human development. Accordingly, the data in the Report require the highest standards of data quality, consistency, international comparability and transparency. The Human Development Report Office (HDRO) fully subscribes to the Principles governing international statistical activities.

The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.

The 2019 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) data shed light on the number of people experiencing poverty at regional, national and subnational levels, and reveal inequalities across countries and among the poor themselves.Jointly developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at the University of Oxford, the 2019 global MPI offers data for 101 countries, covering 76 percent of the global population. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'.

The aim of the Human Development Report is to stimulate global, regional and national policy-relevant discussions on issues pertinent to human development. Accordingly, the data in the Report require the highest standards of data quality, consistency, international comparability and transparency. The Human Development Report Office (HDRO) fully subscribes to the Principles governing international statistical activities.

The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.

The 2019 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) data shed light on the number of people experiencing poverty at regional, national and subnational levels, and reveal inequalities across countries and among the poor themselves.Jointly developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at the University of Oxford, the 2019 global MPI offers data for 101 countries, covering 76 percent of the global population. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'.

The aim of the Human Development Report is to stimulate global, regional and national policy-relevant discussions on issues pertinent to human development. Accordingly, the data in the Report require the highest standards of data quality, consistency, international comparability and transparency. The Human Development Report Office (HDRO) fully subscribes to the Principles governing international statistical activities.

The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.

The 2019 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) data shed light on the number of people experiencing poverty at regional, national and subnational levels, and reveal inequalities across countries and among the poor themselves.Jointly developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at the University of Oxford, the 2019 global MPI offers data for 101 countries, covering 76 percent of the global population. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'.

According to the Digital Quality of Life Index, Singapore had the highest digital quality of life among countries in the Asia-Pacific region in 2023. In comparison, Cambodia scored the lowest among the assessed Asia-Pacific countries in 2023, reaching 0.31 index points.

The European System of Social Indicators provides a systematically selected collection of time-series data to measure and monitor individual and societal well-being and selected dimensions of general social change across European societies. Beyond the member states of the European Union, the indicator system also covers two additional European nations and – depending on data availability – the United States and Japan as two important non-European reference societies. Guided by a conceptual framework, the European System of Social Indicators has been developed around three basic concepts – quality of life, social cohesion, and sustainability. While the concept of quality of life is supposed to cover dimensions of individual well-being, the notions of social cohesion as well as sustainability are used to conceptualize major characteristics and dimensions of societal or collective well-being. The indicator system is structured into 13 life domains altogether. Time-series data are available for nine life domains, which have been fully implemented.

Time series start at the beginning of the 1980s at the earliest and mostly end by 2013. As far as data availability allows, empirical observations are presented yearly. Most of the indicator time-series are broken down by selected sociodemographic variables, such as gender, age groups, employment status, or territorial characteristics. Regional disaggregations are being provided at the NUTS-1 or similar levels as far as meaningful and data availability allows. The European System of Social Indicators is preferably based on harmonized data sources, ensuring the best possible level of comparability across countries and time. The data sources used include international aggregate official statistics, for example, provided by EUROSTAT and the OECD, as well as microdata from various official as well as science-based cross-national surveys, such as the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC), Eurobarometer Surveys, the World Value Surveys, or the European Social Survey.

The European System of Social Indicators results from research activities within the former Social Indicators Research Centre at GESIS. In its initial stage, this research was part of the EuReporting-Project (Towards a European System of Social Reporting and Welfare Measurement), funded by the European Commission within its 4th European Research Framework Programme from 1998 to 2001. For more detailed information on the European System of Social Indicators, see the methodological report under „other documents“.
Structure:

I) General information on the social indicator system Ia) Background

II) The Dimension of life: Income, Standard of Living, and Consumption Patterns

I) General information on the social indicator system

The time series of the European System of Social Indicators (EUSI) are´social indicators´ used to measure social welfare and social change. The conceptual framework builds on the theoretical discussion of welfare, quality of life and the goals of social development oriented towards them. The basis for defining these indicators is a concept of quality of life that encompasses different areas of life in society. Each area of life can be divided into several target areas. Target dimensions have been defined for the individual target areas, for each of which a set of social indicators (= time series, statistical measures) has been defined.

The EUSI indicator time series combine objective living conditions (factual living conditions such as working conditions, income development) and subjective well-being (perceptions, assessments, evaluations) of the population. The time series starts in 1980 and end in 2013. They make it possible to understand social developments by reliable and, over time, comparable data between European countries. They are an important complement to national accounts indicators. EUSI indicators are part of an ongoing debate at European level on measuring welfare and quality of life, which has led to various initiatives by statistical offices in Europe.

Ia) Background

The social indicator system is the result of a discussion sparked off in the 1970s to measure a country´s prosperity development. Hans-Jürgen Krupp and Wolfgang Zapf initiated this discussion. Together they pointed out in 1972 in an expert opinion for the German Council of Economic Experts that the gross domestic product in particular and the parameters of national accounts (NA) in general are not sufficient to measure social welfare or ignore important aspects.

(see: Krupp, H.-J. and Zapf, W. (1977), The role of alternative indicators of prosperity in assessing macroeconomic development. Council for Social and Economic Data, Working Paper No. 171, reprint of the report for the Council of Economic Experts of September 1972: 2011)

They developed a multidimensional concept of quality of life in which, in addition to national accounts, the individual development...

Abstract

The principal objective of this survey is to collect basic data reflecting the actual living conditions of the population in Tajikistan. These data will then be used for evaluating socio-economic development and formulating policies to improve living conditions.

The first assessment of living standards in Tajikistan was conducted in 1999. This assessment is bringing about data in order to update the 1999 assessment.

The survey collects information on education, health, employment and other productive activities, demographic characteristics, migration, housing conditions, expenditures and assets.

The information gathered is intended to improve economic and social policy in Tajikistan. It should enable decision-makers to 1) identify target groups for government assistance, 2) inform programs of socio-economic development, and 3) analyse the impact of decisions already made and the current economic conditions on households.

Geographic coverage

National coverage. The 2003 data are representative at the regional level (4 regions) and urban/rural.

Analysis unit

• Households
• Individuals
• Communites

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Tajikistan Living Standards Survey (TLSS) for 2003 was based on a stratified random probability sample, with the sample stratified according to oblast and urban/rural settlements and with the share of each strata in the overall sample being in proportion to its share in the total number of households as recorded in the 2000 Census. The same approach was used in the TLSS 1999 although there were some differences in the sampling. First the share of each strata in the overall sample in 1999 was determined according to ‘best estimates’, as it was conducted prior to the 2000 Census. Second the TLSS 2003 over-sampled by 40 percent in Dushanbe, 300 percent in rural Gorno-Badakhshan Administrative Oblast (GBAO) and 600 percent in urban GBAO. Third the sample size was increased in 2003 in comparison with 1999 in order to reduce sampling error. In 2003, the overall sample size was 4,156 households compared with 2,000 households in 1999. [Note: Taken from “Republic of Tajikistan: Poverty Assessment Update”, Report No. 30853, Human Development Sector Unit, Central Asia Country Unit, Europe and Central Asia Region, World Bank, January 2005.]

In addition to the capital city of Dushanbe, the country has several oblasts (regions): (i) Khatlon (comprising Kurban-Tube and Khulyab), which is an agricultural area with most of the country’s cotton growing districts; (ii) the Rayons of Republican Subordination (RRS) with the massive aluminum smelter in the west and agricultural valleys in the east growing crops other than cotton; (iii) Sugd which is the most industrialized oblast; and (iv) Gorno-Badakhshan Administrative Oblast which is mountainous and remote with a small population.

The 2003 data are representative at the regional level (4 regions) and urban/rural.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

The aim of the Human Development Report is to stimulate global, regional and national policy-relevant discussions on issues pertinent to human development. Accordingly, the data in the Report require the highest standards of data quality, consistency, international comparability and transparency. The Human Development Report Office (HDRO) fully subscribes to the Principles governing international statistical activities.

The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.

The 2019 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) data shed light on the number of people experiencing poverty at regional, national and subnational levels, and reveal inequalities across countries and among the poor themselves.Jointly developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at the University of Oxford, the 2019 global MPI offers data for 101 countries, covering 76 percent of the global population. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'.

The aim of the Human Development Report is to stimulate global, regional and national policy-relevant discussions on issues pertinent to human development. Accordingly, the data in the Report require the highest standards of data quality, consistency, international comparability and transparency. The Human Development Report Office (HDRO) fully subscribes to the Principles governing international statistical activities.

The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.

The 2019 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) data shed light on the number of people experiencing poverty at regional, national and subnational levels, and reveal inequalities across countries and among the poor themselves.Jointly developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at the University of Oxford, the 2019 global MPI offers data for 101 countries, covering 76 percent of the global population. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'.

This dataset provides values for LIVING WAGE INDIVIDUAL reported in several countries. The data includes current values, previous releases, historical highs and record lows, release frequency, reported unit and currency.

Attitude towards the EU and EU enlargement.

Topics: life satisfaction; subjective rating of the development of the general life situation, the economic situation, the financial situation of the household, personal job situation, national labor market situation and the personal professional outlook in the coming year; native language; knowledge of foreign languages; frequency of political discussions with friends; self-rated opinion leadership; frequency of news consumption (television, newspaper and radio); interest in following news topics: local and national politics, social issues, EU, economics, sports, the environment, foreign politics, culture; spontaneous associations with the EU; general attitude towards the EU; knowledge of international institutions and trust into these institutions: UN, UNESCO, NATO, EU, European Parliament, European Commission, OSCE, Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, International Court of Justice; Self-rated knowledge about the EU (scale); awareness of application for EU membership by own country; accession to EU of own country as a good thing; approval of EU membership of own country if a referendum was held; advantageousness of EU accession for the own country, the own person and following groups: people with and without foreign language skills, entrepreneurs, politicians, professionals such as doctors or lawyers, young people, children, employees, industrial workers, medium-sized businesses, teachers, civil servants, middle-aged people, farmers, the rural population, the unemployed, pensioners, elderly, population of the capital, cultural, religious and other minorities; some regions benefit more than others, all population groups; agreement with the following statements: accession of the own country would be beneficial for the EU, increasing size of EU increases security and peace, would promote the national economy, increase the influence of the own country in Europe, satisfaction of the national government accession policy, increasing influence of the EU in the world if number of members increases, historical and geographical legitimacy of EU membership of the country, increased cultural wealth and standard of living, rising unemployment due to EU enlargement; expected and desired EU accession year of the own country; consent to possible EU accession of Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Turkey; EU or own country as preferred decision-making authority for the following policies: defense, environmental protection, currency, Humanitarian Aid, health and welfare, broadcasting and press, poverty reduction, combating unemployment, agriculture and fisheries, regional compensation, education, science and technology, information on EU , non-European foreign policy, culture, immigration, asylum, fighting against organized crime, police, justice, refugee resettlement, combat of youth delinquency, urban crime and human trafficking, the fight against drugs; preferred source of information about the EU; desire for additional information on the following topics: history of the EU, the EU institutions, European Economic and Monetary Union, Euro, European economy, European single market, further financial / economic issues, agriculture in the EU, European Foreign and Security Policy, international relations of the EU; regional policy of the EU, the European budget, European research and development policy, education policy, cultural policy, youth policy, EU citizenship, consumer protection and environmental protection in the EU, European social policy.

Demography: nationality; family situation; age at end of education; gender; age; occupation; professional position; degree of urbanization; household size; possession of durable goods, role of respondent in the household: main breadwinner, responsible for purchases and household maintenance, religious affiliation, frequency of church attendance, household income

The average for 2021 based on 165 countries was 105.854 index points. The highest value was in South Korea: 208.84 index points and the lowest value was in India: 58.17 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

The aim of the Human Development Report is to stimulate global, regional and national policy-relevant discussions on issues pertinent to human development. Accordingly, the data in the Report require the highest standards of data quality, consistency, international comparability and transparency. The Human Development Report Office (HDRO) fully subscribes to the Principles governing international statistical activities.

The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with different human development outcomes. These contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized indices for each of the three dimensions.

The 2019 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) data shed light on the number of people experiencing poverty at regional, national and subnational levels, and reveal inequalities across countries and among the poor themselves.Jointly developed by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) at the University of Oxford, the 2019 global MPI offers data for 101 countries, covering 76 percent of the global population. The MPI provides a comprehensive and in-depth picture of global poverty – in all its dimensions – and monitors progress towards Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 1 – to end poverty in all its forms. It also provides policymakers with the data to respond to the call of Target 1.2, which is to ‘reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women, and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definition'.

The average for 2021 based on 10 countries was 59.91 index points. The highest value was in Singapore: 118.34 index points and the lowest value was in India: 40.44 index points. The indicator is available from 2017 to 2021. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.