Skip to the content


Data extracted: May 2025.

Planned article update: September 2026.

Highlights

Traditionally, the central measure of national accounts has been divided by the total number of inhabitants to create a proxy measure for evaluating living standards – GDP per inhabitant. While GDP continues to be used for monitoring economic developments, playing an important role in economic decision-making, it is increasingly complemented by additional indicators to inform policy debates on social and environmental issues. This is because GDP doesn’t take account of externalities such as environmental sustainability or issues such as income distribution or social inclusion; these are increasingly seen as important drivers for sustainable development and the quality of life.

The quality of life can be defined as the general well-being of people living in society. It is a broad concept that encompasses several dimensions, both objective factors (material resources, health, work status, living conditions and so on) and the subjective perceptions that people have (in other words, how they feel and view their own lives). In recent years, a growing share of people living in the European Union (EU) have taken advantage of improvements in transport and communication links to leave behind some of the perceived negative characteristics associated with urban life in search of a better quality of life in more rural areas.

This article seeks to offer a portrait of the quality of life in rural areas of the EU, identifying the benefits and challenges faced by people living in rural areas. It forms part of Eurostat’s online publication Rural Europe.

An infographic in the form of a hi-lo plot showing some key environmental indicators. Data are presented for the share of people suffering from noise from neighbours or from the street; experiencing pollution, grime or other environmental problems; reporting that crime, violence or vandalism in their local area was a problem for their household. Data are shown by degree of urbanisation for cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Are there environmental benefits to living in rural areas of the EU?
(% share of people, 2024)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_mddw04), (ilc_mddw05) and (ilc_mddw06)


Accessibility

Accessibility can be broadly defined as how quickly and easily a destination can be reached given the available means of transport. It is increasingly considered a key policy goal in land-use, transport and regional planning. A major challenge faced by people living in rural areas is a lack of access to a range of services: where is the nearest school, bank, health centre, pharmacy, supermarket, or cultural centre and how easy is it to get there?

People living in cities, towns and suburbs generally have better access to a wide range of services when compared with those living in rural areas. Territorial disparities in access to services may be amplified by demographic developments – for example, the depopulation of rural areas in the EU may directly impact commercial and public service provisions. This may reflect lower levels of demand, whereby the number of inhabitants in rural areas falls below a critical mass of people that are required to sustain the economic viability of certain services.

Remoteness can play an important role when assessing accessibility issues. Figures 1 and 2 present information on the share of rural populations living within 15 minutes driving time of a primary school or of main health care services. The data uses level 2 of the degree of urbanisation classification, which identifies – from most to least densely populated rural areas

  • villages
  • dispersed rural areas
  • mostly uninhabited rural areas.

As may be expected, accessibility was generally higher for people living in villages than it was for people living in mostly uninhabited areas. For example, 96.0% of the population living in Greek villages in 2021 could drive to a primary school within 15 minutes, while a lower share (79.8%) was observed for people living in mostly uninhabited areas.

Looking in more detail at the accessibility of primary schools in 2021, the following points can be noted.

  • In most EU countries, the vast majority of the rural population lived within 15 minutes driving time of a primary school; this was also the case for people living in mostly uninhabited areas.
  • Among rural populations, the highest levels of accessibility for primary schools were generally recorded for people living in villages and the lowest levels for those living in mostly uninhabited areas
    • in Luxembourg, the highest levels of access were recorded for all 3 types of rural area, as the whole population was living within 15 minutes driving time of a primary school
    • in Czechia and the Netherlands, the highest levels of access were recorded for dispersed rural areas and villages, where all or practically all of the population was living within 15 minutes driving time of a primary school
    • in Portugal, the highest levels of access were recorded for people living in dispersed rural areas (rather than for people living in villages).

Figure 2 concerns the accessibility of main healthcare services, these are generally considered to be hospitals offering in-patient services, although the definitions applied may vary (for example, there may be a minimum threshold for the number of beds; some healthcare facilities without in-patient services may be included; some hospital facilities providing out-patient services may be included).

Compared with the situation for primary schools, most EU countries reported that a considerably lower share of their rural population had access to main healthcare services within 15 minutes driving time. For example, while 100.0% of the population living in German and French villages in 2021 could drive to a primary school within 15 minutes, the corresponding levels of access were lower for main healthcare services, at 83.3% and 81.0%, respectively.

Furthermore, there was generally a much greater range in terms of access to main healthcare services across the EU. For example, in Slovenia, almost half (47.5%) of all people living in villages in 2021 had access to a main healthcare service within 15 minutes driving time, while the corresponding share among people living in mostly uninhabited areas was 17.7%, a difference of 29.8 percentage points. In a similar vein, in Finland, Bulgaria, Latvia and Lithuania, the share for people living in villages and having access to a main healthcare service within 15 minutes driving time was 21.6 to 29.0 percentage points higher than the corresponding share for people living in mostly uninhabited areas.

  • The highest levels of access to main healthcare services in individual EU countries were generally recorded for people living in villages and the lowest levels for those living in mostly uninhabited areas
    • in the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Cyprus (that are all relatively densely populated territories with relatively few people living in rural areas), the lowest levels of access were observed for people living in villages
    • in the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy, Denmark, Poland, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Estonia and Cyprus the highest levels of access were recorded for people living in dispersed rural areas.
A hi-lo plot showing the share of the population living within 15 minutes driving time of a primary school. Plots are shown for villages, dispersed rural areas, mostly uninhabited areas. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2021. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 1: Population living in rural areas within 15 minutes driving time of a primary school, by degree of urbanisation level 2, 2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat calculations based on TomTom Multinet 2022, Geostat population grid 2021, Eurostat-GISCO primary education service locations 2021
A hi-lo plot showing the share of the population living in rural areas within 15 minutes driving time of a main healthcare service. Plots are shown for villages, dispersed rural areas, mostly uninhabited areas. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2021. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 2: Population living in rural areas within 15 minutes driving time of a main healthcare service, by degree of urbanisation level 2, 2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat calculations based on TomTom Multinet 2022, Geostat population grid 2021, Eurostat-GISCO hospital locations 2021

Map 1 provides an alternative presentation of information about the accessibility of primary education and main healthcare services. It confirms that people living in the most remote and sparsely populated areas of the EU often face considerable challenges to access basic services that contribute to the quality of their lives.

Map 1: Accessibility of primary education and main healthcare services, 2023
Source: TomTom Multinet 2022, Geostat population grid 2021, Eurostat-GISCO school and hospital locations 2023


Based on the residential population grid (1 km² cells), a study on road transport performance was conducted by the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy. It used 3 metrics to develop a new framework for assessing transport performance

  • accessibility is defined as the number of inhabitants that can be reached within a fixed duration (for example, a 90-minute threshold) – it depends on the density and speed of transport networks and the spatial distribution of populations
  • proximity is the total number of inhabitants living within a fixed distance (for example, within a 120 km radius) – it captures the spatial distribution of populations
  • performance combines the measures of accessibility and proximity, it is calculated as the share of the population within a 120 kilometre radius that can be reached within 90 minutes; higher values indicate better performance for the mode of transport under investigation.

Detailed data on transport performance can be aggregated – using population weights – to provide information, for example, by degree of urbanisation, by region, or for whole countries. In 2021, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Latvia had the lowest levels of road transport performance in rural areas (each reporting a share that was less than 50.0%). By contrast, the highest shares of road transport performance in rural areas were recorded in Malta, Cyprus, Belgium and the Netherlands (with values in the range of 89.0% to 90.5%).

Figure 3 shows transport performance by car, providing disaggregated information by degree of urbanisation level 2 (data for cities, towns and suburbs, villages, dispersed rural areas and mostly uninhabited areas). In 2021 and among rural areas, the highest shares of transport performance by car were generally recorded for villages and the lowest for mostly uninhabited rural areas. There were, however, several exceptions

  • in Belgium, Croatia, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden, the highest share was recorded for dispersed rural areas and the lowest for mostly uninhabited rural areas
  • in Hungary, the highest share was recorded for villages and the lowest for dispersed rural areas
  • in Malta, the highest share was recorded for mostly uninhabited rural areas and the lowest for dispersed rural areas.

A more detailed breakdown of transport performance by car for predominantly rural regions – defined at NUTS level 3 – is presented in Figure 4.

  • Predominantly rural regions characterised by the highest shares of transport performance by car were primarily located in western EU countries and on the Iberian Peninsula. There were 7 regions that had shares of more than 90.0%
    • Oeste and Lezíria do Tejo in Portugal
    • Arr. Ath and Arr. Waremme in Belgium
    • Eure-et-Loir and Eure in France
    • Alzey-Worms In Germany
  • Predominantly rural regions characterised by the lowest shares of transport performance by car were primarily located in south-eastern Europe, across Bulgaria, Greece and Romania; they were joined by a mountainous region from western Austria, Osttirol. The lowest ratio was recorded in the north-eastern Bulgarian region of Silistra, at 11.1%.
A hi-lo plot showing transport performance by car. Plots are shown for villages, dispersed rural areas, mostly uninhabited areas, as well as for towns and suburbs, and cities. Information is presented in percent, covering the share of the population within a 120 kilometre radius that can be reached within 90 minutes. Data are shown for the EU and EU countries. Annual data are presented for 2021. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 3: Transport performance by car, by degree of urbanisation, 2021
(%)
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy
A bar chart showing transport performance by car. Plots are shown for the 10 predominantly rural regions in the EU with the highest and lowest shares, as well as the EU average. Information is presented in percent, covering the share of the population within a 120 kilometre radius that can be reached within 90 minutes. Annual data are presented for 2021. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 4: Transport performance by car, selected predominantly rural regions, 2021
(%)
Source: European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy

Personal well-being

Quality of life indicators cover a broad range of topics/dimensions, including material living conditions, employment, education, health, social interactions, safety and security, trust, and so on. Most of the information presented in the remainder of this article is from EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC). The target population consists of all people living in private households; as such, people living in collective households and in institutions are generally excluded.

Shelter is 1 of the most basic human needs: as such, adequate accommodation is a valuable part of most people’s lives. A relatively high share of people living in cities tend to live in flats/apartments, whereas those living in rural areas are more likely to live in a house. In 2024, more than 4 out of 5 (83.1%) of the EU’s rural population lived in a house. This was much higher than the shares recorded for people living in towns and suburbs (56.5%) or in cities (26.6%). This pattern – a higher share of people living in rural areas residing in houses – was repeated in each of the EU countries.

Looking in more detail at rural populations, the lowest share of people living in houses in 2024 was recorded in Latvia (54.7%), while shares of less than 70.0% were also reported in Germany, Lithuania, Estonia and Italy. By contrast, more than 95.0% of people living in the rural areas of Hungary (where a peak of 98.1% was recorded), Romania, Croatia, Ireland and Bulgaria resided in a house.

In 2024, the proportion of people in the EU living in houses differed considerably between those living in rural areas and those living in cities, with a gap of 56.5 percentage points. In Romania, this disparity was much greater, at 80.2 points, as 97.8% of rural residents lived in a house compared with 17.6% of city-dwellers. Ireland had a contrasting situation, with high levels of house residency across all areas – upwards of 4 out of every 5 people resided in a house (irrespective of where they lived). The share of people living in a house in Ireland peaked in rural areas at 96.2%, while the corresponding share for city-dwellers was 81.2%, a gap of 15.0 points.

A pyramid distribution plot showing the share of older people with severe disability (activity limitation). Data are shown by degree of urbanisation for cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 5: Share of people living in a house, by degree of urbanisation, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho01)

Figure 6 presents information on overall life satisfaction (the data shown are for people aged 16 years or over); they are presented on a scale of 0 to 10 from very dissatisfied to very satisfied. This indicator provides a broad appraisal of life satisfaction and refers to how a respondent is feeling. The intent isn’t to obtain their current emotional state, but rather a reflective judgement on their overall level of life satisfaction. In 2024, the average rating for life satisfaction in the EU was 7.2; there was no difference when studied by degree of urbanisation, as the same rate was recorded for people living in cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas (all 7.2).

Based on the same measure, people living in Finland, Romania and Slovenia tended to be somewhat more satisfied with their lives. By contrast, the lowest levels of overall life satisfaction were recorded in Germany, Lativa, Greece and – most notably – Bulgaria. An analysis by degree of urbanisation reveals there were generally relatively small differences in overall life satisfaction ratings within individual EU countries, although

  • in a majority of eastern EU countries, people living in cities reported marginally higher levels of overall life satisfaction than those living in rural areas
  • in several western and northern EU countries, people living in rural areas had marginally higher levels of overall life satisfaction than those living in cities.

In 2024, the highest levels of overall life satisfaction for people living in rural areas were recorded in Finland (7.9) and the Netherlands (7.8), closely followed by Malta, Austria and Poland (all 7.7). At the other end of the scale, by far the lowest level of overall life satisfaction across rural populations was recorded in Bulgaria (5.8), with the next lowest rating observed in Greece (6.6).

Figure 6: Overall life satisfaction among people (≥ 16 years), by degree of urbanisation, 2024
(scale 0–10)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_pw02)


Health

The EU population enjoys near-universal access to healthcare services – for example, if contracting a disease or being involved in an accident – alongside timely and reliable public health information. Furthermore, life expectancy in the EU is among the highest in the world and infant mortality rates have dropped to very low levels.

Ill health not only undermines an individual’s (and their family’s) quality of life, but it can shorten their lifespan. At an aggregate level, poor health can hinder economic and social development by reducing the human capital available within a society. As such, long and healthy lives aren’t only a personal aim but can also provide a more general indication of societal well-being.

Although people living in rural areas may be disadvantaged in terms of accessing health care facilities, their overall health may benefit from the local environment they live in, for example, from the quality of air they breathe. As such, rural residents may be at lower risk of developing a range of health issues, including for example, breathing difficulties linked to pollution, or mental health issues triggered by some of the negative aspects of urban living.

Health status can be measured by asking people how they perceive their own health. In 2024, around 2 out of 3 (68.4%) people in the EU aged 16 years or over declared their own health as good or very good; this share was higher in cities (69.9%) than it was in towns and suburbs (68.4%) or in rural areas (66.2%). The share of people who perceived their health as good or very good ranged, across EU countries, from less than half in Lithuania and Latvia (48.9% and 49.1%, respectively) up to 78.3% in Greece, 79.2% in Malta and 79.9% in Ireland.

Self-perceived health has a distinct age pattern, as progressively fewer older people tend to rate their health as being good or very good, while the share reporting bad or very bad health increases with age. The share of older people (aged 65 years or over) in the EU reporting their own health as good or very good was 40.0% in 2024; the share for this subpopulation living in rural areas was 1.6 percentage points lower, at 38.4% (see Figure 7). This pattern – a lower share of older people living in rural areas reporting their own health as good or very good – was repeated in a majority (20 out of 27) of EU countries; Belgium, Greece, France, Italy, Latvia, Malta and the Netherlands were the exceptions. The share of older people living in rural areas that reported their own health as good or very good was at least 4.0 percentage points lower than the national average for older people in Bulgaria, Portugal and Hungary (where the largest gap was registered, at 5.7 points).

Figure 7 also includes an assessment of self-perceived health for the working-age population (defined here as people aged 16 to 64 years). In 2024, 76.7% of the working-age population living in rural areas of the EU declared they had good or very good health, which was 1.5 percentage points lower than the average for all working-age people (78.2%). This gap existed in most of the EU countries, although Malta, Luxembourg, Austria and Latvia were exceptions, each reporting a higher share of working-age people living in rural areas having good or very good health status.

Unsurprisingly, a higher share of working-age people (compared with older people) declared they had good or very good health status in 2024; this was observed in every EU country. Within rural areas, a similar pattern was observed, with a higher share of working-age people declaring they had good or very good health status. The difference between these 2 rural subpopulations was relatively small in the Nordic countries of Sweden (9.9 percentage points) and Denmark (10.5 points), but was considerably wider in several eastern EU countries, with a gap of more than 50.0 points in Bulgaria, Czechia, Poland, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia and Romania (where the widest gap was observed, at 62.8 points).

A pyramid distribution plot showing the share of people declaring they had good or very good health status. Data are shown by age, for working-age people (16 to 64 years) and for older people (65 years or over); the left-hand side of the chart shows data for rural areas and the right-hand side shows data for the national average. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 7: People with good or very good self-perceived health, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (hlth_silc_18)

Unmet needs for medical examination or treatment (hereafter referred to as medical care) can be due to a number of reasons including, among others, financial reasons (too expensive), distance/transport (too far to travel) or timeliness (waiting lists). The statistics presented in Figure 8 are based on a person’s own self-assessment of whether they needed medical care; the shares are calculated relative to all people (in the relevant age range), regardless of whether they had a need for medical care or not. In 2024, 2.5% of the EU population aged 16 years or over declared they had an unmet need for medical care for 1 of the 3 specified reasons; this share was higher in rural areas (2.8%) than it was in cities (2.6%) or in towns and suburbs (2.1%).

In 2024, 3.9% of older people (aged 65 years or over) living in rural areas of the EU declared an unmet need for medical care for 1 of the specified reasons; this was 1.5 percentage points higher than the 2.4% share recorded among the working-age population (aged 16 to 64 years) living in rural areas.

  • The share of older people living in rural areas with unmet needs for medical care ranged from less than 1.0% in 7 of the EU countries – with no unmet needs in Malta – up to 11.0% in Latvia and a peak of 25.8% in Greece.
  • The share of working-age people living in rural areas with unmet needs for medical care ranged from less than 1.0% in 9 of the EU countries up to 6.4% in Latvia, 6.6% in Finland and a peak of 6.7% in Estonia.
  • Across rural areas, a higher proportion of older people (compared with working-age people) declared unmet needs for medical care in 19 EU countries
    • the opposite pattern was observed in Denmark, France, Sweden, Ireland, Austria and Germany, as older people were less likely (than working-age people) to report unmet needs for medical care
    • in Hungary and Malta, there was no difference in the share of people with unmet needs for medical care when comparing older people and working-age people.
A pyramid distribution plot showing the share of people with self-reported unmet needs for medical examination or treatment due to being too expensive, too far to travel or waiting lists. Data are shown by age, for working-age people (16 to 64 years) and for older people (65 years or over); the left-hand side of the chart shows data for rural areas and the right-hand side shows data for the national average. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 8: People with self-reported unmet needs for medical examination or treatment due to being too expensive, too far to travel or waiting lists, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (hlth_silc_21)

Figure 9 shows similar information to that presented above, with the focus changing to unmet needs for dental examination or treatment (hereafter referred to as dental care). These statistics are also based on a person’s own self-assessment of whether they needed dental care. In 2024, 3.3% of the EU population aged 16 years or over declared they had an unmet need for dental care because of financial reasons (too expensive), distance/transport (too far to travel) or timeliness (waiting lists); this share was higher in rural areas (3.5%) than it was in cities (3.4%) or in towns and suburbs (3.1%).

In 2024, 3.6% of older people (aged 65 years or over) living in rural areas of the EU declared an unmet need for dental care for 1 of the specified reasons; this was broadly in line (0.2 percentage points higher) with the 3.4% share recorded among the working-age population (16–64 years) living in rural areas.

  • The share of older people living in rural areas with unmet needs for dental care ranged from less than 1.0% in 9 of the EU countries – with no unmet needs in Malta and the Netherlands – up to 11.2% in Portugal and a peak of 14.0% in Greece.
  • The share of working-age people living in rural areas with unmet needs for dental care ranged from less than 1.0% in 7 of the EU countries – again with no unmet needs in Malta and the Netherlands – up to 8.6% in Denmark, 9.1% in Latvia and a peak of 10.7% in Greece.
  • In rural areas, a higher share of working-age people (compared with older people) declared unmet needs for dental care in 15 EU countries
    • the opposite pattern was observed in 10 Baltic, eastern and southern EU countries, where a higher share of older people reported unmet needs for dental care; Portugal (3.8 percentage points) and Greece (3.3 points) had the widest gaps
    • in Malta and the Netherlands, there was no difference in the shares for these 2 age groups (with no unmet needs for either age group).

The share of people reporting unmet needs for dental care in rural areas was generally close to the national average, with differences usually less than +/-2.0 percentage points. The only exceptions in 2024 were

  • Portugal, where the share of older people with unmet needs was 2.1 percentage points higher in rural areas than the national average
  • Greece, where the share of older people with unmet needs was 2.6 percentage points lower in rural areas than the national average.
A pyramid distribution plot showing the share of people with self-reported unmet needs for dental examination or treatment due to being too expensive, too far to travel or waiting lists. Data are shown by age, for working-age people (16 to 64 years) and for older people (65 years or over); the left-hand side of the chart shows data for rural areas and the right-hand side shows data for the national average. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 9: People with self-reported unmet needs for dental examination or treatment due to being too expensive, too far to travel or waiting lists, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (hlth_silc_22)

In 2024, 35.3% of the EU population aged 16 years or over reported having a long-standing illness or health problem. Within the EU, a higher share of females (37.4%) than males (33.1%) had a long-standing illness or health problem; this pattern was repeated in all of the EU countries. The smallest gender gap was recorded in Luxembourg, where the share of females with a long-standing illness or health problem (22.8%) was 0.7 percentage points higher than the corresponding share among males (22.1%). By contrast, Lativa (8.0 points), Portugal (7.7 points) and Lithuania (7.3 points) recorded much wider gaps between the sexes.

Across the EU countries, the lowest prevalence of people with a long-standing illness or health problem in 2024 was observed in Italy (17.0%), Romania (19.8%), Bulgaria (22.1%) and Luxembourg (22.4%). Most of the other EU countries had shares in the range of 24.5% to 38.1%; at the top end of the ranking, at least 4 out of every 10 people in France (40.9%), Cyprus (41.1%), Sweden (41.3%), Latvia (41.9%), Portugal (42.3%), Estonia (46.0%) and Finland (56.0%) had a long-standing illness or health problem.

Age is a major factor in the prevalence of long-standing illnesses or health problems: while 19.8% of the EU population aged 16 to 44 years reported having a long-standing illness or health problem in 2024, this share was 38.5% for the age group 45 to 64 years and 60.4% for people aged 65 years or over; a more detailed analysis by age reveals that 74.8% of very old people (defined here as those aged 85 years or over) had a long-standing illness or health problem.

The link between age and the prevalence of long-standing illnesses or health problems was echoed among people living in rural areas. In 2024, 61.5% of the EU’s population aged 65 years or over living in rural areas reported a long-standing illness or health problem; this was 3.1 times as high as the share (19.6%) recorded among people aged 16 to 44 years living in rural areas; see Figure 10.

In 2024, the share of older people (aged 65 years or over) living in rural areas and reporting a long-standing illness or health problem was lowest in Luxembourg (32.1%), Belgium (37.1%) and Italy (38.3%). At the other end of the range, at least 3 out of 4 older people in Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania and Hungary reported a long-standing illness or health problem, with a peak of 90.4% in Cyprus.

A pyramid distribution plot showing the share of people with a long-standing illness or health problem. Data are shown for people aged 16 to 44 years, people aged 45 to 64 years and for people aged 65 years or over; the left-hand side of the chart shows data for rural areas and the right-hand side shows data for the national average. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 10: People having a long-standing illness or health problem, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (hlth_silc_19)

In 2024, 6.7% of the EU population aged 16 years and over reported a severe long-standing limitation in usual activities due to health problems (hereafter referred to as a severe disability). The share of people who reported a severe disability ranged from 2.2% in Bulgaria up to more than 1 in 10 people in France (10.1%), Estonia (10.6%) and Latvia (11.1%).

Severe disability has a distinct age pattern, as people in higher age groups are more likely than people in lower age groups to report activity limitations; see Figure 11. Across the EU, the share of people aged 65 to 74 years who reported a severe disability was 9.5% in 2024, rising to 16.6% for people aged 75 to 84 years and 31.5% for those aged 85 years or over. By contrast, the share of working-age people (16 to 64 years) that reported a severe disability was 4.1%.

The link between age and the prevalence of severe disability was repeated among people living in rural areas. In 2024, 9.9% of the EU’s population aged 65 to 74 years living in rural areas reported a severe disability, rising to 19.2% for people aged 75 to 84 years and 32.4% for those aged 85 years or over. For all 3 of these age groups, older people living in rural areas were somewhat more likely (than the national average for older people) to report a severe disability.

In 2024, the share of very old people (85 years or over) living in rural areas and reporting a severe disability was lowest in Denmark (13.4%), Bulgaria (16.2%) and the Netherlands (18.6%; low reliability); these were the only EU countries where fewer than 1 in 5 people aged 85 years or over living in rural areas reported a severe disability. At the other end of the range, Latvia (54.5%) was the only EU country where more than half of all people aged 85 years or over living in rural areas reported a severe disability.

A pyramid distribution plot showing the share of older people with severe disability (activity limitation). Data are shown for people aged 65 to 74 years, people aged 75 to 84 years and for people aged 85 years or over; the left-hand side of the chart shows data for rural areas and the right-hand side shows data for the national average. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 11: Older people with severe disability (activity limitation), 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (hlth_silc_20)

Attractiveness of rural areas

The EU’s rural areas are valued, among other characteristics, for their natural landscapes, varied food production, as well as the possibilities that they provide for a range of outdoor recreational activities and tourism. With opportunities for developing the green economy, the rollout of digital technologies, and continued high levels of teleworking in a post-COVID economy/society, there is renewed attention on the attractiveness of rural areas as places to work that can provide higher levels of well-being and greater security (compared with living/working in cities).

There is an established trend for people to move out of cities towards the countryside, for example after starting a family or when retiring. This is driven, at least in part, by high rental and property prices in some of Europe’s major cities. By relocating to rural areas, individuals and families can generally benefit from cheaper homes, or larger homes at more affordable prices. This shift has the potential not only to ease financial burdens but also offers a range of lifestyle changes.

Housing costs refer to the monthly expenses associated with living in a dwelling

  • for homeowners, housing costs include mortgage interest payments net of any tax relief and gross of housing benefits
  • for tenants, housing costs include rental payments gross of housing benefits
  • housing costs also include expenses such as structural insurance, mandatory services and charges (for example, sewage and refuse removal), regular maintenance and repairs, taxes and the cost of utilities (water, electricity, gas, and heating).

In 2024, 17.3% of people living in rural areas of the EU faced a housing cost burden; for the purpose of this article, a housing cost burden is defined as housing costs being greater than 25% of disposable household income. The share of people facing a housing cost burden recorded among people living in rural areas was lower than the shares recorded for people living in towns and suburbs (21.7%) and in cities (26.6%). This pattern – a lower share of the people living in rural areas experiencing a housing cost burden – was repeated in most EU countries, although there were some exceptions

  • in Croatia, Lithuania and Bulgaria, the lowest share of people experiencing a housing cost burden was recorded among those living in cities; along with Croatia, these were also the countries where the highest share of people experiencing a housing cost burden was recorded among those living in rural areas
  • in Romania and Ireland, the lowest share of people experiencing a housing cost burden was recorded among those living in towns and suburbs.

In 2024, less than 1 in 10 people living in the rural areas of Malta, Cyprus, Italy, Austria and Slovenia experienced a housing cost burden. At the other end of the range, more than 1 out of 5 people living in the rural areas of Estonia (21.9%), Czechia (22.7%), Sweden (24.2%), Bulgaria (27.1%), Germany (28.4%) and Denmark (29.4%) experienced this burden, with a much higher share recorded in Greece (64.4%).

A hi-lo plot showing the share of the population with a housing cost burden of more than 25%. Plots are shown by degree of urbanisation for cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 12: Distribution of population, by housing cost burden and degree of urbanisation, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho29)

In 2024, 35.1% of the EU population resided in a detached house, 16.4% in a semi-detached house and 47.9% in a flat/apartment. An analysis by degree of urbanisation reveals that 17.1% of the whole of the EU population resided in a detached house in a rural area, with lower shares for those living in detached houses in towns and suburbs (13.0%), and in cities (4.9%); see Figure 13.

The share of the total population living in detached houses located in rural areas reflects, at least to some degree, the population distribution and types of dwelling / housing stock available in each EU country. In 2024, most eastern EU countries reported a relatively high share of their national population living in detached houses that were located in rural areas. A peak of 38.7% was recorded in Romania, followed by Slovenia (38.5%), Slovakia (34.7%) and Croatia (34.3%). At the other end of the range, less than 10.0% of the total population in Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands and Malta was living in a detached house located in a rural area; the lowest share was recorded in Malta, at 0.2%.

A hi-lo plot showing the share of the population living in a detached house. Plots are shown by degree of urbanisation for cities, towns and suburbs, and rural areas. Information is presented in percent. Data are shown for the EU as well as EU and EFTA countries. Annual data are presented for 2024. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 13: Distribution of population living in a detached house, by degree of urbanisation, 2024
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho01)

Noise pollution (such as noise from neighbours or road traffic noise) is a major environmental concern affecting the health and well-being of people in the EU (for example, impacting upon their stress levels, sleep disturbance, cardiovascular and metabolic system, or cognitive impairment in children). In 2023, approximately 1 in 10 people living in rural areas of the EU stated that they suffered from noise (10.5%); much higher shares were recorded for people living in towns and suburbs (16.9%) and in cities (24.3%). This pattern – a lower share of people living in rural areas suffering from noise – was repeated in 25 of the 27 EU countries (Ireland; 2020 data), with the only exceptions in Estonia and Sweden, where the lowest share of people suffering from noise was recorded among people living in towns and suburbs. The share suffering from noise was particularly low – in absolute terms compared with the situation across cities – among people living in rural areas of Greece and Luxembourg.

In 2023, the highest shares of people living in rural areas and suffering from noise were recorded in Malta (24.3%), Portugal (19.8%) and Luxembourg (19.6%). By contrast, fewer than 1 in 20 people living in the rural areas of Croatia (4.9%), Bulgaria (4.1%) and Greece (3.7%) suffered from noise.

Figure 14: People experiencing problems where they live/in their local area, 2023
(%)
Source: Eurostat

(ilc_mddw04), (ilc_mddw05) and

(ilc_mddw06)


In 2023, 6.8% of the EU’s rural population experienced pollution, grime or other environmental problems in their local area; see Figure 14 – use the dropdown list to change the indicator. This was considerably lower than the shares recorded among people living in towns and suburbs (10.5%) or cities (17.2%). A similar pattern was repeated for most of the EU countries, although there were some exceptions

  • in Slovenia and Estonia, the highest share of people experiencing pollution, grime or other environmental problems was recorded among those living in towns and suburbs (rather than in cities)
  • in Romania, Cyprus, Ireland (2020 data), Denmark and Slovakia, the lowest share of people experiencing pollution, grime or other environmental problems was recorded among those living in towns and suburbs (rather than in rural areas).

In 2023, more than 1 in 10 people living in the rural areas of Latvia, Portugal, Cyprus, Hungary and Slovenia experienced pollution, grime or other environmental problems; the highest share was recorded in Slovenia (12.3%). By contrast, relatively low shares were recorded in Croatia (2.7%) and Greece (2.8%).


The attractiveness of rural areas may also be measured in relation to the share of people reporting that crime, violence or vandalism in their local area was a problem for their household. In 2023, 4.7% of the EU population living in rural areas said their household faced these problems: much higher shares were recorded for people living in towns and suburbs (7.8%) and in cities (15.4%). This pattern – a lower share of people living in rural areas reporting that crime, violence or vandalism in their local area was a problem for their household – was repeated in the vast majority (25 out of 27) of EU countries; see Figure 14 – use the dropdown list to change the indicator.

  • In Cyprus, the lowest share was observed for those living in towns and suburbs (rather than in rural areas).
  • In Hungary, the lowest share was observed for those living in cities, while the highest share was recorded among those living in towns and suburbs.

In 2023, the share of people living in rural areas and reporting that crime, violence or vandalism in their local area was a problem for their household was particularly high in Greece, at 16.4%. None of the other EU countries reported that more than 1 in 10 people faced these issues, with the next highest shares observed in Cyprus (9.9%), the Netherlands (9.7%) and Bulgaria (9.3%). At the bottom end of the range, the lowest shares were recorded in Croatia (0.4%), Poland (1.0%), Lithuania (1.3%) and Lativa (1.4%).


      • ADDED AS A TEST***
Figure 14: People who reported noise in their neighbourhood, experienced pollution, grime or other environmental problems in their local area, or reported crime, violence or vandalism in their local area, by degree of urbanisation, 2023



EU regions have been affected by tourism in different ways since a rapid expansion in mass tourism during the 1950s. Some regions continue to receive very few visitors, while others have seen their numbers of tourists grow at a rapid pace. The success of tourism is, in the long-term, closely linked to its sustainability – the conservation and enhancement of cultural and natural heritage, including the arts, gastronomy or the preservation of biodiversity, as well as acceptance within resident communities.

In 2023, there were 2.94 billion nights spent at EU tourist accommodation establishments; a majority (62.6%) were in hotels and similar accommodation (NACE Group 55.1; hereafter referred to as hotels). Holiday and other short-stay accommodation (NACE Group 55.2; hereafter referred to as holiday accommodation) accounted for 23.6% of all nights spent, with the residual share of 13.8% accounted for by camping grounds, recreational vehicle parks and trailer parks (NACE Group 55.3; hereafter referred to as camping grounds).

The tourism sector was heavily impacted by the COVID-19 crisis, with a relatively high proportion of people deciding to either stay at home or to stay in holiday accommodation and camping grounds that were often located in more sparsely populated, rural areas. The latest data for 2023 indicate a return to a situation that more closely resembles that before the pandemic, with a marked upturn in the number of tourists staying in hotels located in capital cities and other urban areas.

By degree of urbanisation, there was a balanced distribution to the number of nights spent in EU tourist accommodation establishments in 2023. Towns and suburbs accounted for 33.8% of all nights spent, followed closely by cities (33.6%) and rural areas (32.6%). Rural areas were the most popular destinations for people staying in holiday accommodation or in camping grounds, whereas cities were the most popular destinations for people staying in hotels (note that, aside from private leisure trips, the statistics presented also encompass business trips and visits to family and friends).

Looking in more detail at some of the key figures for rural areas in 2023

  • Austria (61.7%) and Greece (60.9%) were the only EU countries to report that rural areas accounted for more than half of all nights spent in hotels
  • Greece (83.7%) and Austria (77.8%) were the only EU countries to report that rural areas accounted for more than 70.0% of all nights spent in holiday and other short-stay accommodation
  • Cyprus, Bulgaria, Ireland, Luxembourg, Greece and Denmark were the only EU countries to report that rural areas accounted for more than 80.0% of all nights spent in camping grounds.
Holiday and other short-stay accommodation and camping grounds, recreational vehicle parks and trailer parks: not applicable for Cyprus.
Camping grounds, recreational vehicle parks and trailer parks: not applicable for Cyprus and Malta.
Figure 15: Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments, by degree of urbanisation, 2023
(%)
Source: Eurostat (tour_occ_ninatdc)


A wide range of predominantly rural regions across the EU appeal to tourists. In 2023 – when many tourist destinations had largely recovered from the impact of the COVID-19 crisis – the Croatian coastal region of Istarska zupanija had the highest number of nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments (28.1 million). There were 9 other predominantly rural regions in the EU where upwards of 10.0 million nights were spent in tourist accommodation establishments

  • 3 were in France – the western coastal regions of Vendée, Charente-Maritime and Landes
  • 2 were in Austria – the Alpine mountain regions of Pinzgau-Pongau and Tiroler Unterland
  • 2 were in Greece – the island regions of Andros, Thira, Kea, Milos, Mykonos, Naxos, Paros, Syros and Tinos, and Kerkyra
  • 1 was in Croatia – the Adriatic coastal region of Zadarska županija
  • 1 was in Ireland – the South-West region that includes the counties of Cork and Kerry.

Tourism density – defined here as the relationship between the total number of nights spent and the total area of each region – provides a measure that may be used to evaluate sustainability issues. Note that the number of nights spent in tourist accommodation doesn’t include tourists staying at non-rented accommodation (for example, in 2nd homes) or same-day visitors and that these tourists/visitors may also impact sustainability.

Among predominantly rural regions, tourism density was generally high in regions where space was at a premium, for example, some island regions. In 2023, the highest ratios of tourism density were recorded in 2 Greek island regions in the Ionian Sea – Kerkyra and Zakynthos – with ratios of 15 800 and 14 600 nights spent per km², respectively. The next highest ratio was recorded in the Croatian coastal region of Istarska županija (10 000 nights spent per km²).

An alternative tourism pressure indicator can be calculated as the number of nights spent in tourist accommodation relative to the resident population of a region; this may be used to highlight the pressure on a region’s infrastructure. Among the predominantly rural regions of the EU, the Greek region of Zakynthos (149 900 per 1 000 (‰) inhabitants) recorded the highest ratio of nights spent in tourist accommodation relative to the resident population in 2023. The 2nd highest ratio was recorded in Istarska zupanija (133 400‰), while there were 4 other regions with ratios that were higher than 100 000‰

  • Tiroler Oberland and Pinzgau-Pongau in Austria
  • Andros, Thira, Kea, Milos, Mykonos, Naxos, Paros, Syros and Tinos, and Kerkyra in Greece.
Three barplot or lollipop charts showing nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments. Separate charts are shown for the absolute number of nights spent in millions, the ratio of nights spent per square kilometre, the ratio of nights spent per thousand inhabitants. Data are shown for the top 20 predominantly rural regions with the highest values for each indicator. Data are shown for selected predominantly rural regions in the EU. Annual data are presented for 2023. The complete data of the visualisation are available in the Excel file at the end of the article.
Figure 16: Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments, selected predominantly rural regions, 2023
Source: Eurostat (tour_occ_nin3), (demo_r_pjangrp3) and (reg_area3)

Source data for tables and graphs

Context

To ensure that rural areas continue to play an essential role in terms of homes, jobs, food, biodiversity and varied ecosystems, a European Commission Communication set out A long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas – Towards stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas by 2040 (COM(2021) 345 final). In shaping this vision, the Commission gathered views of rural communities and businesses via public consultations and stakeholder-led events, to outline a comprehensive plan designed to help rural communities and businesses reach their full potential in the coming decades. 4 complementary areas of action emerged, embodying a long-term vision for stronger, connected, resilient and prosperous rural areas.

  • Stronger rural areas: should be home to vibrant local communities, whereby women and men are both empowered to take active part in policy and decision-making processes.
  • Connected rural areas: public transport services should be maintained or improved (including connections to peri-urban and urban areas) alongside investment in digital infrastructures to ensure better-connected EU rural areas.
  • More resilient rural areas that foster well-being: the preservation of natural resources, the restoration of landscapes, the greening of farming activities and the shortening of supply chains should make rural areas more resilient to climate change, natural hazards and economic crises.
  • Prosperous rural areas: the diversification of economic activities and improving the value added of farming and agri-food activities should result in sustainable local economic strategies with positive effects on employment.

In March 2024, the European Commission released a report on The long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas: key achievements and ways forward (COM(2024) 450 final) to take stock of the actions carried out and to provide orientation for enhanced support for rural areas.

Explore further

Other articles


Online publications

Methodological publications

Background articles

Database


Thematic section


Publications


Statistical publications

Methodological publications

Methodology


External links


European Commission – Directorate-General Agriculture and rural development

European Commission – Directorate-General Regional and Urban Policy

European Committee of the Regions

European networks

United Nations

Legislation


Statistical legislation

Policy legislation

  • Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 522/2014 of 11 March 2014 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the detailed rules concerning the principles for the selection and management of innovative actions in the area of sustainable urban development to be supported by the European Regional Development Fund
  • Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)
  • Regulation (EU) No 1310/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down certain transitional provisions on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)

Visualisation
Retrieved from "https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=INFORMA_test&oldid=675406"