Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Synthetic Indicators of Quality of Life in Europe

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

For more than three decades now, sociologists, politicians and economists have used a wide range of statistical and econometric techniques to analyse and measure the quality of life of individuals with the aim of obtaining useful instruments for social, political and economic decision making. The aim of this paper is to analyse the advantages and disadvantages of three possible methodologies for obtaining synthetic indicators for the area of welfare and quality of life. These methodologies are Principal Components Analysis, Data Envelopment Analysis and Measure of Distance P2. Furthermore this paper analyses quality of life in the European Union (EU), as a methodological exercise to demonstrate the principles of calculation, implications and differences between the three indicator-construction approaches. This analysis is particularly useful in a scene like the EU, immersed in a deep transformation process and with profound cultural, economic and social inequalities. Therefore, an analysis of the quality of life and well-being of its inhabitants can play a major role in ironing out such differences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The countries have been grouped in 7 to 7 simply to facilitate comments.

References

  • Allardt, E. (1973a). About dimensions of welfare: an exploratory analysis of a comparative scandinavian survey. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allardt, E. (1973b). A welfare model for selecting indicators of national development. Policy Sciences, 4, 63–74. doi:10.1007/BF01404933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allardt, E. (1975). Dimensions of welfare in a comparative scandinavian study, Helsinki. Research Group for Comparative Sociology, University of Helsinki, Research Report, no.9.

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W., & y Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency on decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(78)90138-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherchye, L., & Kuosmanen, T. (2002). Benchmarking sustainable development: A synthetic meta-index approach, EconWPA. Website: http://www.sls.wau.nl/enr/staff/kuosmanen/papers/MISD.pdf.

  • Delhey, J. (2005). Life satisfaction in an enlarged Europe (report). European Foundation for the Improvement of Living Conditions and the Working Conditions. Web site: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publications/htmlfiles/ef03108.htm. Retrieved 06 May 2005.

  • Despotis, D. K. (2004a). A reassessment of the human development index via data envelopment analysis. The Journal of the Operational Research Society, 1–12.

  • Despotis, D. K. (2004b). Measuring human development via data envelopment analysis: the case of Asia and the Pacific. The International Journal of Management Science (in press).

  • Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 3, 253–290. doi:10.2307/2343100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hashimoto, A., & Ishikawa, H. (1993). Using DEA to evaluate the state of society as measured by multiple social indicators. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 27, 257–268. doi:10.1016/0038-0121(93)90019-F.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hashimoto, A., & Kodama, M. (1997). Has livalidity of Japan gotten better for 1956–1990? A DEA approach. Social Indicators Research, 40, 359–373. doi:10.1023/A:1006804520184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahlberg, B., & Obersteiner, M. (2001). Reameasuring the HDI by Data Envelopment Analysis, Working Paper, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.

  • Mishra, S. K. (2007). Construction of maximin and non-elitist composite indices—alternatives to elitist indices obtained by the principal components analysis. MPRA Paper, 3338 (University Library of Munich: Germany).

  • Murias, P., Martínez, F., & Miguel, C. (2006). An economic well-being index for the Spanish Provinces. A data envelopment analysis approach. Social Indicators Research, 77(3), 395–417. doi:10.1007/s11205-005-2613-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Núñez, J. J., & Domínguez, J. (2007). A proposal of a synthetic indicator to measure poverty intensity, with an application to EU-15 Countries. Working Papers 81, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.

  • Pena, J. B. (1977). Problemas de la medición del bienestar y conceptos afines. Una aplicación al Caso Español. (I.N.E.: Madrid).

  • Raab, R., Kotamraju, P., & Haag, S. (2000). Efficient provision of child quality of life in less development countries: conventional development indexes versus a programming approach to development indexes. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 34, 51–67. doi:10.1016/S0038-0121(99)00013-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ram, R. (1982a). Composite indices de physical quality of life, basic needs fulfilment as income. Journal of Development Economics, 11, 227–247. doi:10.1016/0304-3878(82)90005-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ram, R. (1982b). International inequality in the basic needs indicators: a recent Perspective. World Development, 20, 899–905. doi:10.1016/0305-750X(92)90059-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slottje, D., Scully, G., Hirschberg, J. G., & Hayes, K. J. (1991). Measuring the Quality of Life across countries (Editorial Westview).

  • Somarriba, N. (2008). Approach to the social and individual quality of life in the European Union. Doctoral thesis. (Valladolid University: Valladolid).

  • Zarzosa, P. (1996). Aproximación a la medición del bienestar social. Valladolid: Secretario de Publicaciones.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, J. (2001). Multidimensional quality of life measure with an application to fortune’s best cities. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 35, 263–284. doi:10.1016/S0038-0121(01)00009-X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Applied Economics, University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain

    Noelia Somarriba

  2. Department of Economic Statistics, Economic Structure and International Economic Organization, University of Alcalá, Alcala de Henares, Spain

    Bernardo Pena

Authors
  1. Noelia Somarriba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernardo Pena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noelia Somarriba.

Appendix: Description of the Indicators

Appendix: Description of the Indicators

The indicators are the following:

  • Satisfaction with the job: percentage of employed people who are not very or not at all satisfied with their job [Working Conditions Survey].

  • Employment ratio [European Commission].

  • Find work stressful, percentage of employed people who often or always find work stressful [Eurobarometer].

  • Satisfaction with the house, proportion of individuals aged 15 and over who are not very satisfied or not at all satisfied with their house [Eurobarometer].

  • Satisfaction with the area you live, percentage of individuals aged 15 and over who are not very or not at all satisfied with the area they live in [Eurobarometer].

  • Satisfaction with one’s education, mean value on a scale of 1 (very dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied) with their own education [European Quality of life].

  • Distance to the nearest primary school, proportion of people aged 15 and over who don’t live within walking distance or within 20 min of the nearest primary school [Eurobarometer].

  • School life expectancy, percentage of survival rates [UNESCO].

  • Too little time for hobbies and interests, percentage of people aged 18 and over having too little time for hobbies and interests [European Quality of Life].

  • Satisfaction with the standard of living. Mean value on a scale of 1 (very dissatisfied) to (very satisfied) with the own present standard of living [European Quality of Life Survey].

  • Inequality of income distribution, the ratio of the total received by the 20% of the population with the highest income (top quintile) to that received by the 20% of the population with the lost income (lowest quintile) [European Commission].

  • Income, monthly household income [Eurobarometer].

  • Life expectancy at birth, it is the average number of years a person would live if, for the time period, the observed age-specific mortality rate remains constant (years) [Eurostat].

  • Life expectancy at the age of 65, it is the average number of further years a person at the age of 65 would live if, for the time period, the observed age-specific mortality rates remains constant (years) [Eurostat].

  • Satisfaction with the National Health Care System, percentage of individuals who are not very or not at all satisfied with their national health system [Eurobarometer].

  • Satisfaction with one’s health, percentage of individuals who are very or fairly satisfied with their health [Eurobarometer].

  • Satisfaction with the family, mean value on a scale from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 10 (very satisfied) with the family life [European Quality of Life Survey].

  • Trust in people, mean value on a scale of 1 (you can’t be too careful in dealing with people) to 10 (most people can be trusted) [European Social Survey].

  • Satisfaction with social life, percentage of the population aged 15 and over who are very or fairly satisfied with their social life [Standard Eurobarometer]

  • Safety: safe to walk around at night, percentage of individuals aged 18 and over who think that it is very unsafe or rather unsafe to walk around the area they live at night [European Quality of Life Survey]

  • Confidence in the judicial system, percentage of people aged 15 and over who have not very much confidence or none at all tends in the justice [World Values Survey]

  • Satisfaction with one’s life, share of individuals aged 15 and over who are very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the family they lead [Eurobarometer].

  • Happiness, share of individuals aged 15 and over who are very or fairly satisfied with the life they lead [Standard Eurobarometer].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Somarriba, N., Pena, B. Synthetic Indicators of Quality of Life in Europe. Soc Indic Res 94, 115–133 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9356-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9356-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation