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.

Quality of Life Index (higher is better) is an estimation of overall quality of life by using an empirical formula which takes into account purchasing power index (higher is better), pollution index (lower is better), house price to income ratio (lower is better), cost of living index (lower is better), safety index (higher is better), health care index (higher is better), traffic commute time index (lower is better) and climate index (higher is better).

Current formula (written in Java programming language):

index.main = Math.max(0, 100 + purchasingPowerInclRentIndex / 2.5 - (housePriceToIncomeRatio * 1.0) - costOfLivingIndex / 10 + safetyIndex / 2.0 + healthIndex / 2.5 - trafficTimeIndex / 2.0 - pollutionIndex * 2.0 / 3.0 + climateIndex / 3.0);

For details how purchasing power (including rent) index, pollution index, property price to income ratios, cost of living index, safety index, climate index, health index and traffic index are calculated please look up their respective pages.

Formulas used in the past

Formula used between June 2017 and Decembar 2017

We decided to decrease weight from costOfLivingIndex in this formula:

index.main = Math.max(0, 100 + purchasingPowerInclRentIndex / 2.5 - (housePriceToIncomeRatio * 1.0) - costOfLivingIndex / 5 + safetyIndex / 2.0 + healthIndex / 2.5 - trafficTimeIndex / 2.0 - pollutionIndex * 2.0 / 3.0 + climateIndex / 3.0);

The World Happiness 2017, which ranks 155 countries by their happiness levels, was released at the United Nations at an event celebrating International Day of Happiness on March 20th. The report continues to gain global recognition as governments, organizations and civil society increasingly use happiness indicators to inform their policy-making decisions. Leading experts across fields – economics, psychology, survey analysis, national statistics, health, public policy and more – describe how measurements of well-being can be used effectively to assess the progress of nations. The reports review the state of happiness in the world today and show how the new science of happiness explains personal and national variations in happiness.

The scores are based on answers to the main life evaluation question asked in the poll. This question, known as the Cantril ladder, asks respondents to think of a ladder with the best possible life for them being a 10 and the worst possible life being a 0 and to rate their own current lives on that scale. The scores are from nationally representative samples for 2017 and use the Gallup weights to make the estimates representative. The columns following the happiness score estimate the extent to which each of six factors – economic production, social support, life expectancy, freedom, absence of corruption, and generosity – contribute to making life evaluations higher in each country than they are in Dystopia, a hypothetical country that has values equal to the world’s lowest national averages for each of the six factors. They have no impact on the total score reported for each country, but they do explain why some countries rank higher than others.

Quality of life index, link: https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/indices_explained.jsp

Happiness store, link: https://www.kaggle.com/unsdsn/world-happiness/home

Title: Top Cities Worldwide: Quality of Life Index 2024 Subtitle: Ranking the World's Best Cities for Living Based on Key Metrics

Source of Data: The dataset was collected from Numbeo.com, a publicly accessible database that provides data on various quality-of-life indicators across cities worldwide. Numbeo aggregates user-contributed data validated through statistical methods to ensure reliability.

Data Collection Method: Data was acquired through web scraping. Care was taken to follow ethical web scraping practices, adhering to Numbeo’s terms of service and respecting their robots.txt file.

Columns Description:

The dataset includes the following columns:

• Rank: City ranking based on the Quality of Life Index.
• City: Name of the city.
• Country: Country where the city is located.
• Quality of Life Index: Overall index measuring quality of life, calculated based on various sub-indices.
• Purchasing Power Index: Measures relative purchasing power in the city.
• Safety Index: Indicates how safe the city is based on crime rates.
• Health Care Index: Reflects the quality and accessibility of healthcare services.
• Cost of Living Index: Represents the cost of living, including housing, food, and transportation.
• Property Price to Income Ratio: A measure of housing affordability, calculated as the ratio of property prices to average incomes.
• Traffic Commute Time Index: Average time spent commuting within the city.

Limitations and Considerations:

• User-Generated Data: Since data on Numbeo is user-contributed, it may be subject to biases.
• Data Update Frequency: As Numbeo updates its data regularly, the dataset represents a snapshot in time and may require periodic updates.

Usage Note: The dataset is intended for research and analytical purposes. Users should verify the data's applicability for their specific use cases, considering the limitations mentioned above.

Estonia and Lithuania had the highest Digital Quality of Life index in Central and Eastern Europe in 2023, at **** and *** points on a scale from zero to one, respectively. In comparison, Bosnia and Herzegovina scored the lowest among the presented CEE countries. The index ranks the quality of digital wellbeing in a country.

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 **** index points.

In 2023, Uruguay and Chile had the highest Digital Quality of Life index in Latin America and the Caribbean region, at **** and **** 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 OECD's Better Life Index allows users to compare wellbeing across countries based on 11 topics identified as determinants for material living conditions and quality of life: housing, income, jobs, community, education, environment, civic engagement, health, life satisfaction, safety, and work-life balance. Each topic is based on one to three indicators, and the indicators are averaged with equal weights.

As of 2024, South Africa and Morocco scored highest in the Digital Quality of Life index in Africa, with **** points each. Mauritius and Egypt followed closely with scores of **** points and **** points, respectively. African countries ranked significantly lower compared to other regions, with South Africa ranking 66th, while DR Congo came last in the 120th place.

The Social Progress Index ranks countries based on the well-being and quality of life of their citizens, considering factors such as access to education, healthcare, human rights, and environmental sustainability.

Poland received **** points for its internet security in 2023, ranking tenth by that indicator among 121 countries. The score for the electronic infrastructure was measured at **** points. In terms of the overall Digital Quality of Life Index score, the country ranked in the top five among Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries.

The average for 2024 based on 138 countries was 5.56 points. The highest value was in Finland: 7.74 points and the lowest value was in Afghanistan: 1.72 points. The indicator is available from 2013 to 2024. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

In 2023, Israel obtained a 0.67 score in the Digital Quality of Life Index. The index measures four categories which influence the digital experience in different countries. In the most recent ranking, Israel placed 17th out of 121 countries. This represented a fall in once place in comparison to the previous year.

Russia received *** points for its internet quality in 2023, ranking 40th by that indicator among *** countries. The score for electronic government was measured at **** points. In terms of the overall Digital Quality of Life Index score, the country ranked lower than several other Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, such as Estonia, Poland, and Hungary.

According to the development economics, per-capita measures of National Income and lately Quality of Life Index were considered as indices of development or wellbeing of a society. These orthodox indices of economic development appear as incomplete, disputed and sometimes non-comprehensive and misleading too. United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP’s) well-known Human Development Index (HDI) is basically a universally accepted measure of the quality of life of human being. Beside this an Inequality-adjusted HDI (IHDI) and a Gender Inequality Index (GII) are constructed separately in HDR 2011. But yet there is no single index which will be able to capture the basic dimensions of quality of life with existing inequality and gender discrimination altogether. Not only providing these attainments but also the socio-political environment of the economy where these facilities are being provided is very much important in the question of quality of life of an economy. The most important drawback of HDI is that it does not consider human rights as the component of human development. Hence in this research work, the focus will be on the construction of a modified Quality of Life Index (QLI).A more comprehensive single modified QLI, viz., Modified Borda Score (MBS), will be constructed representing inequality-adjusted, gender-inequality-adjusted quality of life capturing all the major components of human development approach specially also the rights component. And also we apply this newly constructed modified index MBS to South Asian countries for the year 2013 with secondary data set. We also analyze the results comparing ranking on MBS and that on some other important indexes.

In a 2023 global evaluation called the Digital Quality of Life index covering *** countries, Thailand scored an average of **** points in five digital aspects. Electronic infrastructure and government were the country's strengths.

In 2023, Hungary reached a moderate quality of life index, scoring 132.13 points. From all the aspects of living taken into consideration, the low purchasing power and the high property price-to-income ratio were the least favorable.

Digital Quality of Life

Besides the Quality of Life Index, the Digital Quality of Life Index also plays an important role: measuring the country’s level and quality of digitalization. Levels of e-security, e-infrastructure, e-government, internet quality, and internet affordability are compared. The country’s e-security index totaled the highest with 0.84 points out of one, while e-infrastructure followed closely with 0.82 points. By contrast, Hungarian internet affordability reached only 0.1 index points out of one.

Happiness as an indicator

Happiness is a factor that is influenced by the quality of life. GDP, social support, life expectancy, and freedom are among the factors that influence one’s perceived happiness. In 2022, many countries that score highest on the list of happiest countries worldwide are Nordic countries such as Finland (7.8) and Denmark (7.59) but others, like Israel (7.47) and the Netherlands (7.4) are also high on the list. Out of CEE countries, Czechia scores the highest with 6.85 out of 10 points.

In 2024, Sudan was ranked as the most miserable country in the world, with a misery index score of 374.8. Argentina ranked second with an index score of 195.9. Quality of life around the worldThe misery index was created by the economist Arthur Okun in the 1960s. The index is calculated by adding the unemployment rate, the lending rate and the inflation rate minus percent change of GDP per capita. Another famous tool used for the comparison of development of countries around the world is the Human Development Index, which takes into account such factors as life expectancy at birth, literacy rate, education level and gross national income (GNI) per capita. Better economic conditions correlate with higher quality of life Economic conditions affect the life expectancy, which is much higher in the wealthiest regions. With a life expectancy of 85 years, Liechtenstein led the ranking of countries with the highest life expectancy in 2023. On the other hand, Nigeria was the country with the lowest life expectancy, where men were expected to live 55 years as of 2024. The Global Liveability Index ranks the quality of life in cities around the world, basing on political, social, economic and environmental aspects, such as personal safety and health, education and transport services and other public services. In 2024, Vienna was ranked as the city with the highest quality of life worldwide.

In 2024, Ireland was the country in Europe with the highest score in the work-life balance index, with **** points out of 100. Following were Iceland and Denmark registering **** and ** respectively. The work-life balance index assigns a score to each country, evaluating the balance between work and well-being. It considers various factors and policies that influence this relationship, including statutory annual leave, minimum statutory sick pay, statutory maternity leave, minimum wage, healthcare quality, happiness index scores, LGBTQ+ inclusivity, and safety standards.

The average for 2024 based on 7 countries was 6.58 points. The highest value was in Canada: 6.9 points and the lowest value was in Japan: 6.06 points. The indicator is available from 2013 to 2024. Below is a chart for all countries where data are available.

Social scientists have been interested in measuring the prosperity, well-being, and quality of life of nations, which has resulted in a multiplicity of country-level indicators. However, little is known about the factor structure of these indicators. We explored the structure of quality of life, using country-level data on tens of subjective and objective indicators. Applying factor analysis, we identified three distinct factors that exhibited both overlap and complementarity. This structure was replicated in data from previous years and with a partially different set of variables. The first factor, ‘socio-economic progress’, is dominated by socio-political and economic indicators but also includes life satisfaction, which thus appears to reflect objective living conditions. The second factor, ‘psycho-social functioning’, consists of subjective indicators, such as eudaimonic well-being and positive affective states. The third, ‘negative affectivity’, comprises negatively-valenced affective states. The three macro-factors of societal quality of life demonstrated moderate intercorrelations and differential associations with cultural and ecological variables, providing support for their discriminant validity. Finally, country and regional rankings based on the three societal factors revealed a complex picture that cautions against over-reliance on any single indicator such as life satisfaction. The results underline the need for a broadly-based approach to the measurement of societal quality of life, and provide an empirically-derived multidimensional framework for conceptualizing and measuring quality of life and well-being at country level. This study is thus an initial empirical step towards systematizing the multiple approaches to societal quality of life.