In 2025, Luxembourg reached the highest score in the quality of life index in Europe, with 220 points. In second place, The Netherlands registered 211 points. On the opposite side of the spectrum, Albania and Ukraine registered the lowest quality of life across Europe with 104 and 115 points respectively. The Quality of Life Index (where a higher score indicates a higher quality of life) is an estimation of overall quality of life, calculated using an empirical formula. This formula considers various factors, including the purchasing power index, pollution index, house price-to-income ratio, cost of living index, safety index, health care index, traffic commute time index, and climate index.

In 2023, Paris was the most livable city worldwide according to the Global Power City Index (GCPI), with *** points. Furthermore, Madrid was the second most livable city with ***** points, while Tokyo was the third with ***** points.

The criteria taken into consideration include, among others, costs and ease of living, number of retail shops and restaurants, and availability of medical services.

Data was initially taken from Numbeo as an aggregation of user voting.

• Quality of Life Index varies from 0 (bad quality) to 190 (top good quality)

This dataset is one of the public parts of City API project data. Need more? Try our full data

This statistic shows a list of the best cities to live in around the world as of 2019. The rating is based on five indicators: stability, healthcare, culture and environment, education, and infrastructure. In 2019, the Austrian capital Vienna topped the ranking with **** out of 100 possible points.

Cities are in constant competition for residents, businesses, and employees, and inclusiveness is a crucial factor that attracts all three. The Municipal Equality Index (MEI) specifically measures laws and policies of municipalities to examine how inclusive cities are of LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Questioning) people.Administered by the Human Rights Campaign, the MEI scorecard criteria annually evaluate a municipality on six categories, with bonus points available: Non-Discrimination Laws: This category evaluates whether discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited by city, county, or state in areas of employment m housing, and public accommodations.Relationship Recognition: Marriage, civil unions, and comprehensive domestic partnerships are matters of state policy; cities and counties have only the power to create domestic partner registries.Municipality as Employer: By offering equivalent benefits and protections to LGBTQ employees, and by awarding contracts to fair-minded businesses, municipalities commit themselves to treating LGBTQ employees equally.Municipal Services: The section assesses the efforts of the city to ensure LGBTQ constituents are included in city services and programs.Law Enforcement: Fair enforcement of the law includes responsible reporting of hate crimes and engaging with the LGBTQ community in a thoughtful and respectful way.Relationship with the LGBTQ Community: This category measures the city leadership’s commitment to fully include the LGBTQ community and to advocate for full equality. Additional information available at hrc.org/meiThis page provides data for the Municipality Equality Index performance measure. The performance measure dashboard is available at 3.12 Municipal Equality Index. Additional Information Source: Contact: Wydale HolmesContact E-Mail: wydale_holmes@tempe.govData Source Type: ExcelPreparation Method: Publish Frequency: Annually, OctoberPublish Method: ManualData Dictionary

Cities are in constant competition for residents, business and employees and inclusiveness is an important factor that attracts all three. The Municipal Equality Index (MEI) specifically measures laws and policies of municipalities to examine how inclusive cities are of LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning) people.

Administered by the Human Rights Campaign, the MEI scorecard criteria annually evaluates a municipality on six categories with bonus points available:

1. Non-Discrimination Laws: This category evaluates whether discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity is prohibited by city, county or state in areas of employment m housing and public accommodations.

2. Relationship Recognition: Marriage, civil unions, and comprehensive domestic partnerships are matters of state policy; cities and counties have only the power to create domestic partner registries.

3. Municipality as Employer: By offering equivalent benefits and protections to LGBTQ employees, and by awarding contracts to fair-minded businesses, municipalities commit themselves to treating LGBTQ employees equally.

4. Municipal Services: The section assesses the efforts of the city to ensure LGBTQ constituents are included in city services and programs.

5. Law Enforcement: Fair enforcement of the law includes responsible reporting of hate crimes and engaging with the LGBTQ community in a thoughtful and respectful way.

6. Relationship with the LGBTQ Community: This category measures the city leadership’s commitment to fully include the LGBTQ community and to advocate for full equality.

Additional information available at hrc.org/mei

This page provides data for the Municipality Equality Index performance measure.

The performance measure dashboard is available at 3.12 Municipal Equality Index.

Additional Information

Source:

Contact: Wydale Holmes

Contact E-Mail: wydale_holmes@tempe.gov

Data Source Type: Excel

Preparation Method:

Publish Frequency: Annually, October

Publish Method: Manual

Data Dictionary

A list of some key resources for comparing London with other world cities.

European Union/Eurostat, Urban Audit

Arcadis, Sustainable cities index

AT Kearney, Global Cities Index

McKinsey, Urban world: Mapping the economic power of cities

Knight Frank, Wealth report

OECD, Better Life Index

UNODC, Statistics on drugs, crime and criminal justice at the international level

Economist, Hot Spots

Economist, Global Liveability Ranking and Report August 2014

Mercer, Quality of Living Reports

PWC, Cities of opportunity

BCG, Decoding Global Talent

Forbes, World's most influential cities

Mastercard, Global Destination Cities Index

Numbeo, Database of user contributed data

This operations dashboard shows historic and current data related to this performance measure.The performance measure dashboard is available at 3.12 Municipal Equality Index. Data Dictionary

In 2024, Bergamo was the most livable province in Italy, according to the annual study conducted by the newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore. Trento and Bolzano followed in the ranking. Among the top-15 provinces, only Ascoli Piceno and Siena are located in central Italy, while all others are in the north, confirming the deep north-south divide between these two areas of the country. As far as macro categories are concerned, Biella, located in Piedmont, recorded the best score in wealth and consumption, while Milan for business and employment. Ascoli Piceno was the best province in terms of security and justice, and Bolzano performed very well in demography and society. Lastly, for environment and services, Brescia ranked at the top, whereas citizens could enjoy at best their leisure and cultural activities in Trieste.

The City Prosperity Indices comprise six major components (Productivity, Infrastructure Development, Quality of Life, Equity and Social Inclusion, Environmental Sustainability, Urban Governance and Legislation) and each components has it own key ingredients and indicators which enable to calculate the city prosperity index of a city.

Tempe’s roadways are an important means of transportation for residents, the workforce, students, and visitors. Tempe measures the quality and condition of its roadways using a Pavement Quality Index (PQI). This measure, rated from a low of 0 to a high of 100, is used by the City to plan for maintenance and repairs, and to allocate resources in the most efficient way possible.

Abstract

This dataset is from the Gauteng City-Region Observatory which is a partnership between the University of Johannesburg, the University of the Witwatersrand, the Gauteng Provincial Government and several Gauteng municipalities. The GCRO has conducted previous Quality of Life Surveys in 2009 (Round 1), 2011 (Round 2), 2013-2014 (Round 3) and 2015-2016 (Round 4), and 2017-2018 (Round 5). Round 6 was conducted in 2020-2021 and is the latest round of the survey.

Geographic coverage

The survey covers the Gauteng province in South Africa.

Analysis unit

Households and individuals

Universe

The survey covers all adult residence in Gauteng province, South Africa.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Urban areas have always been an attraction for the population. As a result, urbanization is constantly happening as more people migrate to cities. This is since urban areas have become a hope for improving the quality of life. This study aims to measure and analyze the Quality of Life (QoL) Index and the influence of economic and geographical factors on the urban QoL during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data used in this study is the Socio-Economic Survey (SUSENAS) in 2020 from the Indonesian Central Statistics Agency. The findings show that larger cities tend to have a good QoL index. Meanwhile, remote cities or island regions have a low QoL, as indicated by a low QoL Index. population density, per capita consumption expenditure, and urban economic growth positively influence the urban QoL.

Data for 333 cities and urban areas on 25 indicators across the six dimensions of the City Prosperity Index (CPI): Productivity, Infrastructure Development, Quality of life, Equity and Social Inclusion, Environmental Sustainability and Governance and Legislation.

This statistic shows a list of the best cities to live in in Asia-Pacific countries as of 2018. In 2018, the Australian city Melbourne topped the ranking with 98.4 out of 100 possible points, followed by the Japanese megacity Osaka with 97.7 points.

This survey monitors wellbeing among residents of the City of Guelph, located in Ontario, Canada. The survey is a joint initiative of the Canadian Index of Wellbeing in partnership with the City of Guelph. The purpose of the survey is to better understand subjective perceptions of wellbeing of residents in the survey area. The primary objectives of this survey are to (a) gather data on the wellbeing of residents which could be monitored o ver time; and, (b) to provide information on specific aspects of wellbeing that could be used to inform policy issues and community action. The survey provides information based on eight domains of wellbeing, as identified by the Canadian Index of Wellbeing: Community Vitality, Democratic Engagement, Environment, Education, Healthy Populations, Leisure and Culture, Living Standards, and Time Use. The questionnaire collected additional information about socio-economic and household characteristics, and feelings of overall satisfaction with each domain of wellbeing. A total of N=1,390 residents completed the survey.

The dataset contains data on both smart cities projects and smart cities characteristics to be used for the computation of the composite indicators using the Stochastic Multi-criteria Acceptability Analysis (SMAA) methodology. The dataset reports the data used to analyze the concept of a ‘smart city’ along two main dimensions. First, it contains the data to operationalize the concept of smart city along the dimensions elaborated in the ongoing literature including proxies for networked infrastructure to improve economic and political efficiency and enable social and cultural development, the extent of business-led development, the social inclusion of various urban residents in public services, extent of high-tech and creative industries, social and relational capital, and social and environmental sustainability. Second, it reports the results of the analysis using the above dimensions to compute a new index of smartness and quality of life based on SMAA.

PLEASE NOTE that the file ' PERCEIVE_WP4_T4-1_SmarCities_20190704_v01.csv' contains data from Eurostat. For those data re-use involves normalisation of the raw data according to the max-min procedure.

How did the City create the Equity IndexWorking with Ohio State University's Kirwan Institute of Race and Social Justice, the City complied the Equity/Opportunity Index to help facilitate data-driven decision-making processes and enable leaders to distribute resources better and plan to fund programs and services, minimize inequities and maximize opportunities.The indicators displayed in the Equity/Opportunity Index have been shown to have a direct correlation to equity. For more information, please reference the additional document on the evidence-based research determinant categories. The data is measured granularly by census block group.The list below comprise the Indicators per index: Accessibility Parks & Open SpaceVoter ParticipationHealthy Food Access IndexAverage Road QualityHome Internet AccessTransit Options & AccessVehicle AccessLivabilityTacoma Crime IndexESRI Crime IndexCost-Burdened HouseholdsAverage Life ExpectancyUrban Tree CanopyTacoma Nuisance IndexMedian Home ValueEducationAverage Student Test RateAverage Student Mobility4-Year High School Graduation RatePercent of 25+-Year-Olds with Bachelor's Degree or MoreEconomyPierce County Jobs IndexMedian Household Income200% of the Poverty line or LessUnemployment RateEnvironmental HealthEnvironmental ExposuresNOx- Diesel Emissions (Annual Tons/Km2)Ozone ConcentrationPM2.5 ConcentrationPopulations Near Heavy Traffic RoadwaysToxic Releases from Facilities (RSEI Model)Environmental EffectsLead Risk from Housing (%)Proximity to Hazardous Waste Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs)Proximity to National Priorities List Facilities (Superfund Sites)Proximity to Risk Management Plan (RMP) FacilitiesWastewater DischargeWhat does Very High or Very Low Equity/Opportunity mean?Very High Equity/Opportunity represents locations that have access to better opportunities to succeed and excel in life. The data indicators would include high-performing schools, a safe environment, access to adequate transportation, safe neighborhoods, and sustainable employment. In contrast, Low Equity/Opportunty areas have more obstacles and barriers within the area. These communities have limited access to institutional or societal investments with limits their quality of life.Why is the North and West End labeled Red?When looking at data related to equity and social justice, we want to be mindful not to reinforce historical representations of low-income or communities of color as bad or negative. To help visualize the areas of high opportunity and call out the need for more equity, we chose to use red. We flipped the gradient to highlight disparities within the community. Besides, we refrained from using green or positive colors with referring to dominant communities (white communities).Can I add more data and indicators to the Equity Index?Yes, by downloading the file and uploading it to ArcGIS, you can add data and indicators to the Index, and you can import the shapefiles into your database. The indicators and standard deviations are available on ArcGIS online.Can I see additional or multiple map layers?Within the left navigation panel, you can aggregate the index layers by determinate social categories; Accessibility, Education, Economy, Livability

Bangalore ranked first in the Ease of Living Survey conducted among more than ********** cities across India in 2020. The southern metropolis, which was Karnataka's capital, also ranked first that year in economic abilities, and ranked ** in the quality of life category.

Abstract

The Gauteng City-Region Observatory (GCRO) was established in 2008 as a partnership between the University of Johannesburg (UJ), the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) and the Gauteng Provincial Government (GPG), with municipalities in Gauteng also represented. The objective of the GCRO is to inform policy in various spheres of the Gauteng government with data on the quality of the lives of people who live in Guateng. The Quality of Life Survey IV was conducted in 2015 and 2016.

Geographic coverage

The Quality of Life Survey covers the whole of Gauteng and also areas with GCR 'footprints' in the four neighbouring provinces of Free State, North West, Limpopo and Mpumalanga. The lowest level of geographic aggregation of the data is municipality.

Analysis unit

Household and individual

Universe

The Gauteng City-Region Observatory's Quality of Life Survey covers all household residents of Gauteng and selected areas of the four neighbouring provinces of Free State, North West, Limpopo and Mpumalanga.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The survey instrument (questionnaire) which was used was provided by the GCRO. The instrument was similar to the questionnaire used for the initial Quality of Life survey, with new questions being added only where questions from the previous survey were removed. This was done with the intention of keeping the duration of the survey the same as the initial one. The survey instrument was a 20 page questionnaire, broken up into 12 sections. The bulk of the possible answers were pre-defined, such that most of the survey could be answered using a combination of tick-boxes or by writing down a number from a predefined set. There are therefore not many open-ended questions in the survey.