Statistics Explained

Urban-rural Europe - income and living conditions


Data extracted: October 2022.

Planned article update: December 2024.

Highlights


In 2021, the highest risk of poverty or social exclusion among people living in rural areas were principally recorded in eastern and southern EU Member States; by contrast, in several western and Nordic Member States the highest risk was recorded among people living in cities (despite these being among some of the most affluent areas of the EU).

In Belgium, Austria and Germany, the share of people living in households with very low work intensity in 2021 was more than 8.0 percentage points higher for people living in cities than it was for people living in rural areas.

By global standards, most people living in the European Union (EU) are prosperous: they have relatively high income/wealth and subjective well-being, while there are established social protection systems that provide a safety net for many of the less fortunate. Indeed, the European social model is based on offering protection to those who are most in need. Regardless of national differences, the implementation of social protection in the EU Member States is designed to provide people with some protection against, among other issues, the costs of bringing up a family, the risks related to unemployment, poor health, the consequences of old age, housing and social exclusion. Nevertheless, some 95.4 million persons, or more than one fifth (21.7 %) of the EU’s population, were at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2021; see the infographic below.

Source: Eurostat (ilc_pees01n)

The COVID-19 crisis underlined systemic inequalities in living conditions both between and within individual EU Member States. While some people were fortunate enough to continue working full-time from home (and in some cases were even able to save more of their income than usual), many people in precarious employment or working in sectors/businesses impacted by successive lockdowns faced reduced earnings, short-time work (furlough schemes / temporary lay-offs / technical unemployment) and unemployment. Indeed, the asymmetric impact of the crisis meant that it exacerbated existing inequalities in many cases: some groups in society were much more harshly affected than others, for example, the elderly, young people, parents of young children (particularly single-parents), low-wage earners, women, migrants, or people with disabilities. At the time of writing, there are clear signs that the impact of the pandemic is abating, although concerns have shifted to a cost-of-living crisis that has resulted in several governments across the EU introducing a range of support schemes, such as energy price caps, rebates for fuel prices, or additional support for low income households / pensioners (who typically spend a disproportionate amount of their income on essential purchases such as food and energy).

This article forms part of Eurostat’s sister publications on Rural Europe and Urban Europe.

Full article

People at risk of poverty or social exclusion

The number of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion is a headline indicator for social protection and inclusion within the European pillar of social rights. This indicator forms the basis for one of three social targets to be achieved by 2030, namely, that the number of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion should be reduced by at least 15 million (of which, at least five million should be children) when compared with 2019.

According to the United Nations, absolute poverty is the deprivation of basic human needs, for example, a lack of food, shelter, water, sanitation facilities, health or education (in other words, where a household’s income is insufficient to afford the basic necessities of life). By contrast, relative poverty concerns the situation where household income is a certain percentage below the median level for the society in which they live.


People at risk of poverty or social exclusion

The risk of poverty and social exclusion is not dependent strictly on a household’s level of income, as it may also reflect joblessness, low work intensity, working status, or a range of other socioeconomic characteristics.

To calculate the number or share of people who are at risk of poverty or social exclusion three separate criteria are combined (see the infographic at the start of this article), covering people who are in at least one of the following situations:

There were four consecutive annual decreases across the EU in the share of people who were at risk of poverty or social exclusion between 2015 (the first reference year for which data are available) and 2019. This pattern was repeated when analysed by degree of urbanisation (see Figure 1), other than for people living in cities, where there was no change in 2019.

The onset of the COVID-19 crisis led to the share of people in the EU who were at risk of poverty or social exclusion rising in 2020: this was the case for people living in cities (up 0.6 percentage points), towns and suburbs (up 0.5 points), as well as rural areas (up 0.4 points). There was a mixed picture in 2021 (the latest reference period for which data are available), as the share of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion continued to rise among those living in towns and suburbs, was almost unchanged among people living in cities, while it fell at a relatively fast pace among people living in rural areas. As a result, the range between at risk of poverty or social exclusion rates by degree of urbanisation converged to its narrowest margin in 2021; see Figure 1.

Figure 1: People at risk of poverty or social exclusion by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2015–2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_peps13n)

In 2021, the EU’s at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion rate was highest for people living in rural areas (22.5 %), followed by those living in cities (21.9 %) and in towns and suburbs (20.8 %). Although these latest rates for the EU were within a relatively narrow range, there was a much wider variation observed in several of the EU Member States. This was particularly notable in Romania, where the risk of poverty or social exclusion covered slightly more than half (50.1 %) of the rural population, which was 34.0 percentage points higher than the rate for people living in cities. A similar pattern existed in Bulgaria, where a peak of 42.5 % was recorded among people living in rural areas, some 18.1 points higher than the rate for those living in cities.

It is interesting to note that some of the highest shares of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion were recorded in rural areas of principally eastern and southern EU Member States, while the highest risk of poverty or social exclusion in several western and Nordic Member States was recorded among those living in cities (despite these being among some of the most affluent areas of the EU). The contrast between the shares at risk of poverty or social exclusion in cities compared with other areas can be illustrated by several Member States, where more than one fifth of the population living in the cities in 2021 faced such risks, compared with less than one fifth of their populations living in towns and suburbs or in rural areas: Belgium, Germany, Austria, Malta and Denmark (20.4 %).

Figure 2: Poverty or social exclusion indicators by degree of urbanisation, 2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_peps13n), (ilc_li43), EU-SILC and (ilc_lvhl23n)


At-risk-of-poverty rate
The at-risk-of-poverty rate (after social transfers) is one of the three criteria used to identify people at risk of poverty or social exclusion. It identifies the proportion of the population which lives in a household with an annual equivalised disposable income that is below 60 % of the national median (a threshold which is set separately for each EU Member State). As such, this indicator provides a measure of relatively low income compared with other residents in the Member State; it does not necessarily imply a low overall standard of living.

In 2016, the EU’s at-risk-of-poverty rate by degree of urbanisation peaked at 20.4 % for those living in rural areas; the lowest rate in that year (15.9 %) was recorded for people living in towns and suburbs, a gap of 4.5 percentage points; see Figure 3. During the five years that followed, there was a step-like reduction in the risk of monetary poverty among those living in rural areas, while the rate for people living in towns and suburbs slowly fell before a reversal in the development in 2021 (when it returned to above its level of 2016). At the end of this period, the gap between the highest and lowest risks of monetary poverty was 2.1 points (less than half of what it had been in 2016).

Figure 3: At-risk-of-poverty rate by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2015–2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_li43)

Across the EU Member States, the highest risks of poverty for people living in cities were recorded in Austria (20.6 %), Belgium (20.4 %) and Spain (20.0 %). At the other end of the scale, less than 1 in 10 persons living in the cities of Hungary, Poland, Finland, Ireland, Czechia, Romania and Slovakia (2020 data) faced the risk of monetary poverty. There were 12 Member States where more than one fifth of the rural population was at risk of poverty, with this share peaking at more than three tenths in Bulgaria (31.5 %) and Romania (38.1 %). Czechia was the only Member State to report that fewer than 1 in 10 persons living in rural areas was at risk of poverty. Note that data by EU Member State for the at-risk-of-poverty rate are presented above as part of Figure 2 (use the dropdown list to select the indicator).

Severe material and social deprivation rate
The severe material and social deprivation rate is the second of three criteria used to identify people at risk of poverty or social exclusion. It provides information for the share of the population who could not afford (rather than did not want or did not need) at least 7 out of 13 surveyed items. In 2021, the EU’s severe material and social deprivation rate was 6.3 %, which marked a fall of 0.5 points compared with the year before.

Figure 2 above (use the dropdown list to select the severe material and social deprivation rate) shows that the vast majority of EU Member States had severe material and social deprivation rates in 2021 that were below 10.0 %. This pattern was generally repeated across all three degrees of urbanisation, as the only exceptions were:

  • Bulgaria and Romania, where double-digit rates were recorded for each degree of urbanisation, with the lowest rates for people living in cities and the highest for those living in rural areas (25.3 % in Bulgarian cities and 32.8 % in Romanian cities);
  • Greece, where broadly similar rates were recorded for the three degrees of urbanisation (in a range of 13.2–14.5 %);
  • Hungary, where double-digit rates were recorded for people living in towns and suburbs (10.3 %) and in rural areas (14.0 %), but not for people in cities (6.4 %).

There was something of a geographical split, insofar as the highest proportion of people facing severe material and social deprivation in eastern EU Member States was often for people living in rural areas, whereas in western Member States the highest risk of severe material and social deprivation was often recorded for people living in cities.

Persons living in households with very low work intensity
The final criteria used to identify people at risk of poverty or social exclusion is the share of people aged 0–64 years living in households where the adults aged 18–64 years (excluding students and retired persons) worked no more than 20 % of their total potential during the previous 12 months. Within the EU, there were 29.3 million people who met this criteria in 2021, equivalent to 8.9 % of the population aged less 65 years. The share of people living in households with very low work intensity was higher for people living in cities (10.6 %) than it was for people living in towns and suburbs (8.5 %) or rural areas (6.9 %).

During the period 2015–2021 (see Figure 4), the share of people aged 0–64 years living in households across the EU with very low work intensity generally followed a downward path through to 2019 for all three degrees of urbanisation. Thereafter, there were contrasting developments: for people living in cities, the share increased during consecutive years; for people living in towns and suburbs, there was almost no change in 2020, followed by a rising share in 2021; for people living in rural areas, the share continued to fall in 2020, while there was almost no change in 2021. As a result, the difference in the shares among people living in cities and people living in rural areas widened to 3.7 percentage points in 2021 (its widest margin during the period under consideration).

Figure 4: Persons living in households with very low work intensity by degree of urbanisation (age group 0–64), EU, 2015–2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvhl23n)

In keeping with the other criteria that compose the at-risk-of-poverty or social exclusion rate, there was something of a geographical split when analysing the share of people aged 0–64 years living in households with very low work intensity. In 2021, many of the western EU Member States recorded their highest shares for people living in cities, whereas the highest shares in most of the eastern EU Member States were recorded for people living in rural areas.

  • In Belgium, Austria and Germany, the share of people living in households with very low work intensity was more than 8.0 percentage points higher for people living in cities than it was for people living in rural areas.
  • By contrast, the share of people living in households with very low work intensity was considerably higher for people living in rural areas (than for people living in cities) in both Lithuania (6.6 percentage points) and Bulgaria (9.6 percentage points).

Note that data by EU Member State for persons living in households with very low work intensity are presented above as part of Figure 2 (use the dropdown list to select the indicator).

Housing

The housing cost overburden rate is a headline indicator for social protection and inclusion within the European pillar of social rights. It is defined as the share of the population living in households where total housing costs represent more than 40 % of disposable income (both the housing costs and the disposable income being expressed ‘net’ of housing allowances).

The EU’s housing cost overburden rate was consistently higher for people living in cities and lower for people living in rural areas during the period from 2012 to 2021. Having fallen in recent years, there was an upturn in the housing cost overburden rate for each degree of urbanisation in 2021. The latest data available reveals that slightly more than 1 in 10 (10.4 %) of the EU population living in cities were overburdened by the cost of housing, with lower shares for those living in towns and suburbs (7.6 %) and in rural areas (6.2 %).

Figure 5: Housing cost overburden rate by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2012–2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho07d)

In 2021, the housing cost overburden rate peaked at almost one third (32.4 %) for those living in the cities of Greece (where there were also high shares for people living in towns and suburbs and in rural areas). The overall pattern observed for the EU – a higher burden recorded among people living in cities – was repeated in a majority of the EU Member States. Alongside Greece, there were also relatively high rates recorded for people living in the cities of Denmark (21.9 %) and the Netherlands (15.3 %). By contrast, there were seven Member States where the highest housing cost overburden rate was recorded outside of those living in cities, this was the case in:

  • Slovenia and Slovakia (2020 data), where the highest rate was for people living in towns and suburbs;
  • Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia, Latvia and Lithuania, where the highest rate was for people living in rural areas.

Figure 6: Housing indicators by degree of urbanisation
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho07d), (ilc_lvho50d), (ilc_lvho50d) and (ilc_mdho06d)


Average selling price of dwellings in Slovakia

According to the Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, the average price for a house sold in Slovakia in 2021 was €105 500. Much higher prices were recorded in a number of cities: the average prices for houses sold in Trnava, Žilina, Banská Bystrica, Nitra, Prešov and Košice were within a relatively narrow range (€230 700 to €240 900). The price of a house sold in the capital city of Bratislava was considerably higher, averaging €339 800.

The average selling price of a flat in Slovakia was €87 800 in 2021. The average price of a flat varied more between cities than the average price of a house. There were six cities where the average price of a flat was above €100 000. By contrast, the average price in Trenčín was below the national average. The highest average prices were recorded flats sold in Bratislava (€170 400), Žilina (€127 300) and Nitra (€117 100).

Map B1: Main cities of Sloavkia


Figure B1: Average selling price for dwellings, selected cities in Slovakia, 2021
(€)
Source: Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic

Demographic changes have led, in some cases, to a mismatch between the demand for and supply of housing. A growing proportion of people in the EU are living alone, many older people continue to live in houses or flats that they previously occupied with a much larger family, while others face overcrowded conditions.

In 2021, approximately one third (33.6 %) of the EU population was living in an under-occupied dwelling. This share was notably higher for people living in rural areas, where space is generally at less of a premium. Indeed, two fifths (40.2 %) of the EU’s rural population was living in an under-occupied dwelling, compared with 35.9 % for those living in towns and suburbs, and 27.2 % for people living in cities. During the last decade for which information is available (2012–2021), there were generally relatively small fluctuations in the proportion of people living in under-occupied dwellings (for all three degrees of urbanisation). It is however interesting to note that the share of people living in under-occupied dwellings rose in rural areas during the second half of the period under consideration; see Figure 7.

Figure 7: People living in under-occupied dwellings by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2012–2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho50d)

Across the EU Member States, it was also generally the case that the highest proportion of people living in under-occupied dwellings was recorded for people living in rural areas. In 2021, this was the situation in 24 out of the 27 Member States; the only exceptions were Cyprus, Croatia and Romania, where people living in towns and suburbs were more likely to be living in an under-occupied dwelling. Note that data by EU Member State for people living in under-occupied dwellings are presented above as part of Figure 6 (use the dropdown list to select the indicator).

In 2021, there were 11 EU Member States where more than half of the rural population was living in an under-occupied dwelling. The highest shares – above 70.0 % – were recorded in Cyprus, Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland and, with a peak of 78.5 %, Malta.

While a relatively high share of the EU’s population are living in under-occupied dwellings, it is also the case that a considerable proportion of people are living in overcrowded accommodation (that lack a minimum number of rooms in relation to the number and type of relationships of occupants). In 2021, the overcrowding rate across the EU was 17.1 %. By degree of urbanisation, the highest overcrowding rate was recorded among people living in cities (19.4 %), with lower shares for those living in towns and suburbs (15.8 %) and rural areas (15.4 %).

During the period 2012–2021, the EU’s overcrowding rate for people living in cities was consistently higher than the rates for people living in towns and suburbs or rural areas. The overcrowding rate for people living in cities fell through to 2018, after which it increased in 2019 and 2020, before falling once again in 2021. The overcrowding rate for people living in towns and suburbs remained relatively stable, fluctuating within the range of 15.4–16.1 % during the period under consideration. Having reached a relative peak in 2014 (18.5 %), the overcrowding rate for people living in rural areas started to fall and, in 2021, fell below the overcrowding rate for people living in towns and suburbs.

Figure 8: Overcrowding rate by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2012–2021
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_lvho05d)

Close to half of the population in the cities of Latvia (47.7 %) and Bulgaria (46.6 %) were living in an overcrowded household, which was also the case for upwards of two fifths of those living in the cities of Romania and Croatia. By contrast, single-digit shares were recorded for people living in cities across Spain, the Netherlands, Ireland, Malta and Cyprus (where the lowest rate was recorded, at 2.4 %). In 21 of the 27 EU Member States, the highest overcrowding rate in 2021 was recorded among people living in cities. The six exceptions – where people living in cities did not record the highest overcrowding rate – were:

  • Slovakia (2020 data), Lithuania, Italy, Hungary and Malta, where the overcrowding rate was highest among people living in towns and suburbs;
  • Cyprus, where the overcrowding rate was highest among people living in rural areas.

Note that data by EU Member State for the overcrowding rate are presented above as part of Figure 6 (use the dropdown list to select the indicator).

Housing deprivation is a measure of poor amenities and is calculated by referring to those households with a leaking roof, no bath/shower and no indoor toilet, or to a dwelling that is considered too dark. The severe housing deprivation rate measures the share of the people living in dwellings which are considered overcrowded, while also exhibiting at least one of the housing deprivation measures.

Figure 9 shows the development of the severe housing deprivation rate in the EU by degree of urbanisation. During the period under consideration (2015–2020), this measure of housing deprivation generally followed a downward path (although this was less apparent for cities). This pattern was reversed in 2020, as the severe housing deprivation rate rose for all three degrees of urbanisation, the most rapid increase being recorded in cities.

Figure 9: Severe housing deprivation rate by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2015–2020
(%)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_mdho06d)

In 2020, the EU’s severe housing deprivation rate was 4.3 %. Somewhat higher rates were recorded for people living in rural areas (4.9 %) and in cities (4.8 %), while those living in towns and suburbs were less likely to face severe housing deprivation (3.4 %). There was a mixed picture in terms of where severe housing deprivation was most concentrated across the EU Member States:

  • in 15 Member States (none of which were eastern), the highest rates were recorded for people living in cities; this share peaked at 12.2 % in Latvia;
  • in seven (principally eastern) Member States, the highest rates were recorded for people living in rural areas, with a peak of 24.4 % in Romania;
  • in five Member States, the highest rates were recorded for people living in towns and suburbs, with a peak of 8.4 % in Lithuania.

Note that data by EU Member State for the severe housing deprivation rate are presented above as part of Figure 6 (use the dropdown list to select the indicator).

Income

The issue of inequality has gained increasing importance in political and socioeconomic discourse in the aftermath of the global financial and economic crisis, and in the context of people and specific geographical territories being ‘left behind’. GDP per inhabitant has traditionally been used to assess divergence/convergence in mean living standards between countries. However, it does not capture the distribution of income within a population and thereby does little to reflect economic inequalities.

Equivalised disposable income is the total income of a household, after tax and other deductions, that is available for spending or saving, divided by the number of household members, where these have been converted into equalised adults; household members are equalised or made equivalent by weighting each according to their age, using the so-called modified OECD equivalence scale.

In 2021, median equivalised net income in the EU was €18 372 per year, while mean equivalised net income was €20 893; the difference reflects the uneven distribution of income. Figure 10 shows, irrespective of which measure is used, that people living in cities and in towns and suburbs generally had a higher level of income than those living in rural areas. During the aftermath of the global financial and economic crisis, incomes grew at a relatively slow pace in the EU; they were falling in rural areas through to 2013. Thereafter, income growth accelerated somewhat up until 2021, when there was a slowdown or a reversal of the development, which may be linked (at least in part) to the COVID-19 crisis and the beginning of the cost-of-living crisis.

Figure 10: Mean and median equivalised net income by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2012–2021
(€)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di17)

Figure 11 shows that there was a considerable range of income levels across EU Member States. Note that these wide variations exist even though the information presented is shown in purchasing power standards (PPS); a PPS is a unit that takes account of price-level differences between countries and comparisons based on PPS usually result in narrower ranges between countries than when valued are compared in euro.

The median equivalised net income of people living in cities was generally higher than that recorded for people living in towns and suburbs or rural areas. This pattern was exhibited in 20 out of 27 EU Member States in 2021; the only exceptions were:

  • a cluster of neighbouring countries – Belgium, Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands –as well as Latvia and Malta, where people living in towns and suburbs had the highest average levels of net income;
  • Austria, which was the only Member State to report that people living in rural areas had the highest average level of net income.

Looking in more detail at people living in cities, the highest median equivalised net income in 2021 was recorded in Luxembourg (39 087 PPS). This was followed at some considerable distance by the Netherlands (24 267 PPS), while Denmark, Germany and Austria each recorded levels just below 23 000 PPS. By contrast, people living in the cities of Hungary, Slovakia (2020 data), Bulgaria and Greece had the lowest levels of net income – less than 11 400 PPS.

Figure 11: Income indicators by degree of urbanisation, 2021
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di17) and (ilc_di23)


In 2021, the median equivalised net income of people living in rural areas of the EU was 87.5 % of the average recorded for people living in cities. The median equivalised net income of people living in rural areas of Romania (6 049 PPS) was less than half that recorded for people living in cities (12 318 PPS). Bulgaria was the only other EU Member State where the median equivalised net income of people living in rural areas was less than three quarters of the average recorded for people living in cities.

Across the EU, median equivalised net income for males was €18 800 in 2021; this was €800 higher than the median value for females (€18 000). Note these equivalised income figures present an average that covers the whole population (including people who are not in work) and hence are quite different from the information often presented in relation to gender pay gap statistics; the latter are based on unadjusted figures, measuring the difference between average gross hourly earnings of men and women (covering only those who are in work).

Figure 12 shows that, irrespective of where people lived, the EU gender gap for median equivalised net income was often situated close to 5 % during the last decade; there was usually a somewhat narrower gender gap among people living in rural areas.

Figure 12: Gender gap for median equivalised net income by degree of urbanisation, EU, 2012–2021
(difference between male and female incomes as % of male incomes)
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di17)

In 2021, the gender gap for median equivalised net income in the EU – with higher incomes for males – was 4.8 % for people living in cities, 4.7 % among the population living in towns and suburbs, and 4.0 % for those living in rural areas. In the vast majority of EU Member States, net incomes for males were higher than those for females; the largest gender gaps were recorded among people living in the cities of two Baltic Member States, with a 14.6 % and 10.3 % difference between male and female incomes in Latvia and Lithuania. There were a few exceptions where median equivalised net income was higher for females, this was the case for people living in;

  • the cities of Austria;
  • the towns and suburbs of Luxembourg; and
  • rural areas of Malta.

The unequal distribution of income can, among other consequences, lead to economic inequalities that manifest themselves in various forms of poverty or social exclusion. In 2021, almost one fifth (19.8 %) of the EU’s population had a level of income that was at least 150 % of the median income. By this measure, the distribution of income was less equitable across those living in cities, where almost one quarter (24.8 %) of the population had a level of income that was at least 150 % of the median income, with lower shares recorded among those living in towns and suburbs (18.5 %) and, in particular, rural areas (14.0 %).

Figure 11 above (use the dropdown list to select the indicator) shows that income inequalities (as measured by the share of people having an income at least 150 % of the median) were generally concentrated in cities. In 2021, this was particularly the case in Romania and Bulgaria, where more than one third of the population living in cities had an income that was at least 150 % of the median; shares of more than 30.0 % were also observed in Lithuania and Luxembourg. By contrast, there were only four EU Member States that were an exception to this rule:

  • in Latvia, Austria and Belgium, a higher share of the people living in towns and suburbs had a level of income that was at least 150 % of the median income;
  • in Malta, the highest share was recorded for people living in rural areas.

Figure 13: Income gender gap by degree of urbanisation, 2021
Note: for the gender gap, a positive value indicates that male incomes were higher than female incomes.
Source: Eurostat (ilc_di17)

Source data for tables and graphs

Context

On 4 March 2021, the European Commission set out its ambition for a stronger social EU to focus on education, skills and jobs, aiming for a fair, inclusive and resilient socioeconomic recovery from the COVID-19 crisis, while fighting discrimination, tackling poverty and alleviating the risk of exclusion for vulnerable groups. The European pillar of social rights action plan (COM(2021) 102 final) outlines a set of specific actions and headline targets for employment, skills and social protection in the EU. It includes a benchmark target for reducing the number of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion by at least 15 million persons (of which, at least five million should be children) between 2019 and 2030.

Direct access to

Other articles
Tables
Database
Dedicated section
Publications
Methodology
Visualisations




Retrieved from "https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Urban-rural_Europe_-_income_and_living_conditions&oldid=619837"
  • Page
  • ISSN 2443-8219