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.

The average for 2021 based on 165 countries was 79.81 index points. The highest value was in Bermuda: 212.7 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.

Human development index of United Kingdom decreased by 1.39% from 0.93 score in 2019 to 0.92 score in 2020. Since the 0.32% rise in 2018, human development index fell by 0.97% in 2020. A composite index measuring average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development—a long and healthy life, knowledge and a decent standard of living

In June 2024, the household cost inflation rate (HCI) for low-income households in the United Kingdom was 1.7 percent, compared with 2.3 percent for middle-income households, and 3.3 percent for high-income households. Unlike other measures of inflation such as the consumer price index (CPI) the HCI isn't based on a fixed basket of goods, but is weighted to show how price changes affect different households by their economic status.

The Human Development Index (HDI) of the United Kingdom has increased from ***** in 1990 to ***** by 2023, indicating that the UK has reached very high levels of human development. HDI is a statistic that combines life-expectancy, education levels and GDP per capita. Countries with scores over 0.800 are considered to have very high levels of development, compared with countries that score lower.

Abstract

In 2001, the World Bank in co-operation with the Republika Srpska Institute of Statistics (RSIS), the Federal Institute of Statistics (FOS) and the Agency for Statistics of BiH (BHAS), carried out a Living Standards Measurement Survey (LSMS).

The Living Standard Measurement Survey LSMS, in addition to collecting the information necessary to obtain a comprehensive as possible measure of the basic dimensions of household living standards, has three basic objectives, as follows:

1. To provide the public sector, government, the business community, scientific institutions, international donor organizations and social organizations with information on different indicators of the population's living conditions, as well as on available resources for satisfying basic needs.

2. To provide information for the evaluation of the results of different forms of government policy and programs developed with the aim to improve the population's living standard. The survey will enable the analysis of the relations between and among different aspects of living standards (housing, consumption, education, health, labor) at a given time, as well as within a household.

3. To provide key contributions for development of government's Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, based on analyzed data.

The Department for International Development, UK (DFID) contributed funding to the LSMS and provided funding for a further three years of data collection for a panel survey, known as the Household Survey Panel Series (HSPS) – and more popularly known as Living in BiH (LiBiH). Birks Sinclair & Associates Ltd. in cooperation with the Independent Bureau for Humanitarian Issues (IBHI) were responsible for the management of the HSPS with technical advice and support provided by the Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER), University of Essex, UK.

The panel survey provides longitudinal data through re-interviewing approximately half the LSMS respondents for three years following the LSMS, in the autumns of 2002 and 2003 and the winter of 2004. The LSMS constitutes Wave 1 of the panel survey so there are four years of panel data available for analysis. For the purposes of this documentation we are using the following convention to describe the different rounds of the panel survey: - Wave 1 LSMS conducted in 2001 forms the baseline survey for the panel - Wave 2 Second interview of 50% of LSMS respondents in Autumn/Winter 2002 - Wave 3 Third interview with sub-sample respondents in Autumn/Winter 2003 - Wave 4 Fourth interview with sub-sample respondents in Winter 2004

The panel data allows the analysis of key transitions and events over this period such as labour market or geographical mobility and observations on the consequent outcomes for the well-being of individuals and households in the survey. The panel data provides information on income and labour market dynamics within FBiH and RS. A key policy area is developing strategies for the reduction of poverty within FBiH and RS. The panel will provide information on the extent to which continuous poverty and movements in an out of poverty are experienced by different types of households and individuals over the four year period. Most importantly, the co-variates associated with moves into and out of poverty and the relative risks of poverty for different people can be assessed. As such, the panel aims to provide data, which will inform the policy debates within BiH at a time of social reform and rapid change.

In order to develop base line (2004) data on poverty, incomes and socio-economic conditions, and to begin to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the BiH MTDS, EPPU commissioned this modified fourth round of the LiBiH Panel Survey.

Geographic coverage

National coverage. Domains: Urban/rural/mixed; Federation; Republic

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Wave 4 sample comprised of 2882 households interviewed at Wave 3 (1309 in the RS and 1573 in FBiH). As at previous waves, sample households could not be replaced with any other households.

Panel design

Eligibility for inclusion

The household and household membership definitions assume the same standard definitions used at Wave 3. While the sample membership, status and eligibility for interview are as follows: i) All members of households interviewed at Wave 3 have been designated as original sample members (OSMs). OSMs include children within households even if they are too young for interview, i.e. younger than 15 years. ii) Any new members joining a household containing at least one OSM, are eligible for inclusion and are designated as new sample members (NSMs). iii) At each wave, all OSMs and NSMs are eligible for inclusion, apart from those who move outof-scope (see discussion below). iv) All household members aged 15 or over are eligible for interview, including OSMs and NSMs.

Following rules

The panel design provides that sample members who move from their previous wave address must be traced and followed to their new address for interview. In some cases the whole household will move together but in other cases an individual member may move away from their previous wave household and form a new "split-off" household of their own. All sample members, OSMs and NSMs, are followed at each wave and an interview attempted. This method has the benefits of maintaining the maximum number of respondents within the panel and being relatively straightforward to implement in the field.

Definition of 'out-of-scope'

It is important to maintain movers within the sample to maintain sample sizes and reduce attrition and also for substantive research on patterns of geographical mobility and migration. The rules for determining when a respondent is 'out-of-scope' are:

i. Movers out of the country altogether i.e. outside BiH This category of mover is clear. Sample members moving to another country outside BiH will be out-of-scope for that year of the survey and ineligible for interview.

ii. Movers between entities Respondents moving between entities are followed for interview. Personal details of "movers" are passed between the statistical institutes and an interviewer assigned in that entity.

iii. Movers into institutions Although institutional addresses were not included in the original LSMS sample, Wave 4 individuals who have subsequently moved into some institutions are followed. The definitions for which institutions are included are found in the Supervisor Instructions.

iv. Movers into the district of Brcko
Are followed for interview. When coding, Brcko is treated as the entity from which the household moved.

Feed-forward

Details of the address at which respondents were found in the previous wave, together with a listing of household members found in each household at the last wave were fed-forward as the starting point for Wave 4 fieldwork. This "feed-forward" data also includes key variables required for correctly identifying individual sample members and includes the following: - For each household: Household ID (IDD); Full address details and phone number - For each Original Sample Member: Name; Person number (ID); unique personal identifier (LID); Sex; Date of birth

The sample details are held in an Access database and in order to ensure the confidentiality of respondents, personal details, names and addresses are held separately from the survey data collected during fieldwork. The IDD, LID and ID are the key linking variables between the two databases i.e. the name and address database and the survey database.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Approximately 70% of the questionnaire was based on the Wave 3 questionnaire, carrying forward core measures in order to measure change over time. However in order to develop base line (2004) data on poverty, incomes and socio-economic conditions, and to begin to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the BiHDS the Wave 4 questionnaire additionally contained the Wave 1 Consumption module and a few other LSMS items to allow direct comparability with the Wave 1 data.

Cleaning operations

Dat entry

As at previous waves, CSPro was the chosen data entry software. The CSPro program consists of two main features intended to reduce the number of keying errors and to reduce the editing required following data entry:
- Data entry screens that included all skip patterns. - Range checks for each question (allowing three exceptions for inappropriate, don't know and missing codes).

The Wave 4 data entry program had similar checks to the Wave 3 program - and DE staff were instructed to clear all anomalies with SIG fieldwork members. The program was tested prior to the commencement of data entry. Twelve data entry staff were employed in each Field Office, as all had worked on previous waves training was not undertaken.

Editing

Instructions for editing were provided in the Supervisors Instructions. At Wave 4 supervisors were asked to take more time to edit every questionnaire returned by their interviewers. The SIG Fieldwork Managers examined every Control Form.

Response rate

The level of cases that were unable to be traced is extremely low as are the whole household refusal or non-contact rates. In total, 9128 individuals (including children) were enumerated within the sample households at Wave 4, 5019 individuals in the FBiH and 4109 in the RS. Within in the 2875 eligible households, 7603 individuals aged 15 or over were eligible for interview with 7116 (93.6%) being successfully interviewed. Within co-operating households (where there was at least one interview) the interview rate was

1199 persons were interviewed in the FRG, 1228 in France, 1178 in Great Britain, 1164 in Italy and 500 in Greece. The study has the USIA-designation XX-17. The USIA-Studies of the XX-Series (international relations) from XX-2 to XX-18 are archived under ZA Study Nos. 1969-1976 as well as 2069-2074 and 2124-2127.

The housing costs inflation rate for low-income households in the United Kingdom was noticeably higher than that of high-income ones between April 2022 and April 2023, during a serious cost of living crisis in the UK. As of June 2024, however, the inflation rate for high-income households was higher than that of middle or low incomes ones.

Detailed cost of living comparison between United Kingdom and Us Virgin Islands

This collection consists of the syntax (using R) for generating individual and household-level data on 7 dimensions and 14 indicators of multdimensional work quality from a new UK Quality of Work (QoW) index using Understanding Society and the Labour Force Survey. It also contains detailed data on workers' personal, family and household circumstances - conceptualised using the Capability Approach as their Conversion Factors and Capability Set.

This will potentially be useful for researchers interested in the working conditions and work quality of paid workers in the UK, and also the circumstances under which they access this work - such as the commitments they have to manage alongside paid work (Conversion Factors); and estimates of the choice (Capabilities) they have over alternative work and non-work activities.

The data covers all regions and nations of the UK from Waves 4 (2012-13), Waves 6, Waves 8, Waves 10, and Waves 12 (2020-21) of Understanding Society. Everyone in paid work, or away from a paid job they usually do at the time interviewed, is included in the index, so the data release contains an unweighted (non-independent) total of 108,973 observations. Both employees and self-employed workers are included in the index, with three of the indicators also capturing data on all workers' jobs and not just their main job. The data can be analysed at individual- or household-level, and will be useful for both cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of the quality of working life in the UK.

The UK QoW index captures many aspects of peoples' work quality. The seven dimensions are Earnings, Insurance, Security, Autonomy & Voice, Work-life balance, Prospects and Health & Safety. Within these dimensions, respondents' job quality is coded using a mix of binary, categorical and continuous indicators: Earnings Equity and Earnings Sufficiency (Earnings dimension); Pensions (Insurance); Continuous Employment and Composite Security (Security); task Autonomy and Collective Voice (Autonomy & Voice); Employee Flexibility and Excessive Hours (Work-life balance); Managerial Duties, Short-term Prospects and Long-term Prospects (Prospects); and Work Fatalities, Work Accidents and Work Illnesss (Health & Safety). A set of alternative weighting methods for aggregating the indicators into an index is also included in the data release, alongside imputed and non-imputed data for missing cases in each wave. Whilst most of the data is drawn from survey answers to Understanding Society, I also introduce information on workers' job prospects and health and safety into the index by matching with data on workers' Standard Industrial Classifications (SICs) and Standard Occupational Classifications (SICs) from the Labour Force Survey and Health and Safety Executive, and from Department for Education Working Futures surveys, respectively. I also take advantage of the longitudinal nature of Understanding Society to create an indicator of workers' length of continuous employment with the same employer.

In addition, the deposit includes a rich amount of detail on the wider circumstances of this same sample of workers. Using household and family-level data, a set of Conversion Factors are computed calculating workers' wider family and life commitments which they have to manage alongside paid work - including their health, caring responsibilities, disabilities and. A set of measures of workers' economic, social and cultural & human capital - including their home ownership, assets, skills and social connections are also included. These are conceptualised as proxies for workers' Capability Set - i.e. the choice workers have over alternative opportunities inside and outside the labour market, other than their chosen work activity.

This code has been developed as part of an ESRC-funded PhD thesis on 'Work and Wellbeing in Modern Britain: An Application of the Capability Approach' (2025). This R code is therefore provided open access (CC BY SA 4.0). However to replicate this analysis, researchers will need to download Understanding Society from the UK Data Service, and re-run the R syntax - this data is safeguarded and so not supplied in this data deposit, and is only available subject to signing up to UKDA's conditions for data access. For the dimensions on Health and Safety and long-term prospects, users will also need to access the Labour Force Survey through the UK Data Service and link to the API of Working Futures via 'LMI for All', respectively.

An ESRC funded PhD research project based at the Department of Social Policy and the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion at the LSE, to apply the Capability Approach to the way we understand and measure labour market advantage and disadvantage.

CPIH is the most comprehensive measure of inflation. It extends CPI to include a measure of the costs associated with owning, maintaining and living in one's own home, known as owner occupiers' housing costs (OOH), along with council tax. This dataset provides CPIH time series (2005 to latest published month), allowing users to customise their own selection, view or download.

The statistic shows GDP per capita in the United Kingdom from 1987 to 2020, with projections up until 2030. In 2020, GDP per capita in the United Kingdom was at around 40,230.55 US dollars. The same year, the total UK population amounted to about 67.26 million people. The United Kingdom is among the leading countries in a world GDP ranking.Falling unemployment in a time of recessionGDP is a useful indicator when it comes to measuring the state of a nation’s economy. GDP is the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time, usually a year. GDP per capita equals exactly the GDI (gross domestic income) per capita and is not a measure of an individual’s personal income.As can be seen clearly in the statistic, gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in the United Kingdom is beginning to increase, albeit not to pre-recession levels. The UK is beginning to see signs of an economic recovery, though as of yet it remains unclear what sort of recovery this is. Questions have been raised as to whether the growth being seen is the right sort of growth for a well balanced recovery across the necessary sectors. An interesting oddity occurred in the United Kingdom for nine months in 2012, which saw a decreasing unemployment occurring at the same time as dip in nationwide economic productivity. This seems like good - if not unusual - news, but could be indicative of people entering part-time employment. It could also suggest that labor productivity is falling, meaning that the UK would be less competitive as a nation. The figures continue to rise, however, with an increase in employment in the private sector. With the rate of inflation in the UK impacting everyone’s daily lives, it is becoming increasingly difficult for vulnerable groups to maintain a decent standard of living.

Judgement on current situation in life and political and economic development of the country in times of economic and social upheaval.

Topics: 1. Common part of the survey for all participating countries: most important problems of the country; intent to emigrate and country of choice; desired occupation for one´s own child; judgement on the work of the president of the country; fears and desires for the future; assessment of current standard of living and comparison with the situation five years ago and expected future development; judgement on the situation of the country in comparison over time; preference for freedom or social security; attitude to admission of undemocratic parties; attitude to freedom of the press; perceived discrimination against women; attitude to division of labor in raising children; judgement on conduct of parliamentary representatives and attitude to democracy in the country (scale); feeling of political effectiveness; internal or external control; achievement orientation; attitude to the national economy; demand for increased environmental protection; desire for foreign support for one´s country; the government as guarantor of equal opportunities and social security; welfare state; necessity of the willingness to compromise in politics; interest in politics at municipal level; diminishing interest in political events; self-assessment as patriot; attitude to securing of peace through military strength; readiness for national defense; necessity of participation of one´s country in world politics; claims to territory in neighboring countries; attitude to restriction on immigration; attitude to use of military for restoration of world order.

Religion and morals: importance of prayer and significance of God in one´s own life; doubt in the existence of God; attitude to prohibition of books critical of society and to sex magazines and films; attitude to freedom of speech even for fascists; assessment of the general trustworthiness of people; AIDS as punishment by God; representation of traditional values in the area of family and marriage; attitude to abortion; clear concepts of Good and Evil; perceived intensification of class differences; assessment of personal things in common with uneducated and persons of another race or ethnic affiliation; satisfaction with one´s own financial situation.

Demography: party membership; union membership; residential status; city size; religiousness.

1. Additional questions in this survey: attitude to advertising (scale); acceptance of advertising in selected media; desired establishing of prices through demand, production costs or government determination; judgement on the economic consequences of European unification for one´s country; expected influence of European integration on the development of agriculture, industry and tourism; attitude to admission of Eastern European countries into the EC; preferred applicant countries; Eastern European country the closest to one´s own; attitude to the European domestic market; dominant member country in the European Community; attitude to export of weapons into third world countries.

As of 2022, Israel had the highest price level index among listed countries, amounting to 138, with 100 being the average of OECD countries. Switzerland and Iceland followed on the places behind. On the other hand, Turkey and India had the lowest price levels compared to the OECD average. This price index shows differences in price levels in different countries. Another very popular index indicating the value of money is the Big Mac index, showing how much a Big Mac costs in different countries. This list was also topped by Switzerland in 2023.

Detailed cost of living comparison between United Kingdom and United States

Detailed cost of living comparison between Netherlands and United Kingdom

Unit of measurement: 2015=100. United Kingdom, 12.5.4 Transport insurance. CPIH is the most comprehensive measure of inflation. It extends CPI to include a measure of the costs associated with owning, maintaining and living in one's own home, known as owner occupiers' housing costs (OOH), along with council tax. This dataset provides CPIH time series (2005 to latest published month), allowing users to customise their own selection, view or download.

The economy of the United Kingdom shrank by 0.3 percent in April 2025, after growing by 0.2 percent in March 2025. As of the most recent month, the UK economy is around 4.2 percent larger than it was in February 2020, just before the start of COVID-19 lockdowns. After a record 19.6 percent decline in GDP in April 2020, the UK economy quickly returned to growth in the following months, and grew through most of 2021. Cost of living crisis lingers into 2025 As of December 2024, just over half of people in the UK reported that their cost of living was higher than it was in the previous month. Although this is a decline from the peak of the crisis in 2022 when over 90 percent of people reported a higher cost of living, households are evidently still under severe pressure. While wage growth has outpaced inflation since July 2023, overall consumer prices were 20 percent higher in late 2024 than they were in late 2021. For food and energy, which lower income households spend more on, late 2024 prices were almost 30 percent higher when compared with late 2021. According to recent estimates, living standards, as measured by changes in disposable income fell by 2.1 percent in 2022/23, but did start to grow again in 2023/24. Late 2023 recession followed by growth in 2024 In December 2023, the UK economy was approximately the same size as it was a year earlier, and struggled to achieve modest growth throughout that year. Going into 2023, a surge in energy costs, as well as high interest rates, created an unfavorable environment for UK consumers and businesses. The inflationary pressures that drove these problems did start to subside, however, with inflation falling to 3.9 percent in November 2023, down from a peak of 11.1 percent in October 2022. Although relatively strong economic growth occurred in the first half of 2024, with GDP growing by 0.7 percent, and 0.4 percent in the first two quarters of the year, zero growth was reported in the third quarter of the year. Long-term issues, such as low business investment, weak productivity growth, and regional inequality, will likely continue to hamper the economy going forward.

Detailed cost of living comparison between United Kingdom and Iran

Detailed cost of living comparison between Saint Kitts And Nevis and United Kingdom