For some people the aim of moving abroad is just to end up someplace warm and sunny. But you need to think about more than that.
When choosing a location it's crucial you consider where can offer you a better overall way of life, and not just for the next few weeks but for the long term.
For example, back in the summer uSwitch.com came out with a Quality of Life Index, which sought to compare the standards of living to be found across 10 European countries.
The survey assessed 19 factors, including the average income in each country, the cost of essential items such as food and fuel, government spending on education and healthcare, and lifestyle issues including holiday entitlements and life expectancy, as well as the number of hours of sunshine per year.
Of the countries featured, Spain came out way in the lead, thanks to its relatively low taxation and living costs, generous workers' holiday entitlements, long life expectancy and its plentiful supply of sunshine. France was second, with Germany fractionally behind.
Meanwhile, Ireland was ranked in last place, with the UK faring only a little better at second from bottom.
Part of the reason for the UK's low scoring was that although it recorded the highest net income among the places surveyed, workers had the least holiday entitlement, while car and domestic fuel prices were among the highest.
In addition, health expenditure in the UK was said to be 8.1% of GDP, compared to an average across the 10 countries of 8.6% (although OECD Health Data 2008 puts the UK's expenditure figure at 8.4%, albeit noting there is a difference in the methodology used to calculate that figure). Only Poland and Ireland spent less in percentage terms.
By contrast, France's health spend according to the OECD was 11.1% and Germany's 10.6% of GDP.
And using figures based on that OECD Health Data 2008, uSwitch.com noted that the UK has only 2.5 doctors per 1,000 residents. In France the ratio is 3.4, and it's 3.5 in Germany.
Inevitably there was the sunshine factor too. According to uSwitch.com's findings, Spain topped the league with 2,665 hours of sun per year, while Italy recorded 2,356 hours, and France had 1,967 hours. The UK lagged with 1,476 hours, one of the lowest totals, only managing to beat the Netherlands and Ireland.
For prospective expats who are still mulling their choices then the survey and its approach give some useful insights into the relative merits of the countries featured. And for anyone who lives outside of these 10 nations, or that is considering moving somewhere aside from those particular places - whether it's Australia or New Zealand, Canada, the US, Mexico, South Africa or wherever - it gives some criteria from which to conduct your own research into the respective quality of life issues.
But beware. The survey and the factors it measures don't tell the whole story.
For one, it makes an assumption that more sunshine inevitably is good. And to some extent it may be. But you can have too much of a good thing.
Spain, for instance, is wrestling with severe and long-term water supply issues, brought on by the widening gap between its rainfall and increasing consumption (the golf courses and swimming pools to keep all us expats and the tourists happy not helping on that front). Australia and large chunks of the American South-West are facing similar issues. And that could have severe negative consequences for residents further down the line.
Healthcare spending is not a black-and-white issue either, since it fails to take into account where and how well the money is spent.
Take the US, which had the highest expenditure on health in the OECD figures (at 15.3% of GDP), but where there continues to be severe criticism for a system that allows millions of its citizens to fall through the gaps and forces many millions more to bear some or all of their treatment costs.
And what about the spending on education?
The uSwitch.com survey highlighted the difference between the UK, where education accounted for 5.5% of GDP, and the 8.6% Denmark spends. However, Spain's figure was the lowest, at just 4.3% of GDP. And while this may not be of concern to any retirees assessing where to live, it will be of supreme importance for parents with young families.
Likewise, the survey did factor in net annual incomes, but excluded unemployment levels or economic growth statistics, which bear on the employment opportunities prospective migrants can expect to face.
Again, that may not interest retirees, but should be a consideration for those of working age. All that sunshine in Spain won't be much compensation if you can't get a job and face financial disaster as a result.
So when it comes to considering to where in the world you want to move, you have to go beyond the headlines and the slew of survey results that point to the supposedly "best places to live." Because where is best will depend on the elements that constitute a real and sustainable quality of life for you, and that meet your specific personal circumstances.
When choosing a location it's crucial you consider where can offer you a better overall way of life, and not just for the next few weeks but for the long term.
For example, back in the summer uSwitch.com came out with a Quality of Life Index, which sought to compare the standards of living to be found across 10 European countries.
The survey assessed 19 factors, including the average income in each country, the cost of essential items such as food and fuel, government spending on education and healthcare, and lifestyle issues including holiday entitlements and life expectancy, as well as the number of hours of sunshine per year.
Of the countries featured, Spain came out way in the lead, thanks to its relatively low taxation and living costs, generous workers' holiday entitlements, long life expectancy and its plentiful supply of sunshine. France was second, with Germany fractionally behind.
Meanwhile, Ireland was ranked in last place, with the UK faring only a little better at second from bottom.
Part of the reason for the UK's low scoring was that although it recorded the highest net income among the places surveyed, workers had the least holiday entitlement, while car and domestic fuel prices were among the highest.
In addition, health expenditure in the UK was said to be 8.1% of GDP, compared to an average across the 10 countries of 8.6% (although OECD Health Data 2008 puts the UK's expenditure figure at 8.4%, albeit noting there is a difference in the methodology used to calculate that figure). Only Poland and Ireland spent less in percentage terms.
By contrast, France's health spend according to the OECD was 11.1% and Germany's 10.6% of GDP.
And using figures based on that OECD Health Data 2008, uSwitch.com noted that the UK has only 2.5 doctors per 1,000 residents. In France the ratio is 3.4, and it's 3.5 in Germany.
Inevitably there was the sunshine factor too. According to uSwitch.com's findings, Spain topped the league with 2,665 hours of sun per year, while Italy recorded 2,356 hours, and France had 1,967 hours. The UK lagged with 1,476 hours, one of the lowest totals, only managing to beat the Netherlands and Ireland.
For prospective expats who are still mulling their choices then the survey and its approach give some useful insights into the relative merits of the countries featured. And for anyone who lives outside of these 10 nations, or that is considering moving somewhere aside from those particular places - whether it's Australia or New Zealand, Canada, the US, Mexico, South Africa or wherever - it gives some criteria from which to conduct your own research into the respective quality of life issues.
But beware. The survey and the factors it measures don't tell the whole story.
For one, it makes an assumption that more sunshine inevitably is good. And to some extent it may be. But you can have too much of a good thing.
Spain, for instance, is wrestling with severe and long-term water supply issues, brought on by the widening gap between its rainfall and increasing consumption (the golf courses and swimming pools to keep all us expats and the tourists happy not helping on that front). Australia and large chunks of the American South-West are facing similar issues. And that could have severe negative consequences for residents further down the line.
Healthcare spending is not a black-and-white issue either, since it fails to take into account where and how well the money is spent.
Take the US, which had the highest expenditure on health in the OECD figures (at 15.3% of GDP), but where there continues to be severe criticism for a system that allows millions of its citizens to fall through the gaps and forces many millions more to bear some or all of their treatment costs.
And what about the spending on education?
The uSwitch.com survey highlighted the difference between the UK, where education accounted for 5.5% of GDP, and the 8.6% Denmark spends. However, Spain's figure was the lowest, at just 4.3% of GDP. And while this may not be of concern to any retirees assessing where to live, it will be of supreme importance for parents with young families.
Likewise, the survey did factor in net annual incomes, but excluded unemployment levels or economic growth statistics, which bear on the employment opportunities prospective migrants can expect to face.
Again, that may not interest retirees, but should be a consideration for those of working age. All that sunshine in Spain won't be much compensation if you can't get a job and face financial disaster as a result.
So when it comes to considering to where in the world you want to move, you have to go beyond the headlines and the slew of survey results that point to the supposedly "best places to live." Because where is best will depend on the elements that constitute a real and sustainable quality of life for you, and that meet your specific personal circumstances.
RSS Feed