Introducing βLoneliness in Europeβ β A Comprehensive Handbook
The book Loneliness in Europe is published by Springer Nature Switzerland AG and edited by Sylke V. Schnepf, BΓ©atrice dβHombres and Caterina Mauri. All three are senior researchers at the European Commissionβs Joint Research Centre (JRC) or at the Brussels Institute for Social and Population Studies (BRISPO). Their expertise spans population economics, social policy and behavioural research. The volume, released in 2024, forms part of the Population Economics series and presents peerβreviewed evidence on the determinants, risks and policy interventions related to loneliness across the 27 EU member states.
Key Findings on Loneliness Prevalence
The EU Loneliness Survey, the primary data source, interviewed 25 646 respondents in late 2022. Using the direct question βHow much of the time during the past four weeks have you been feeling lonely?β, 12β13 % reported feeling βvery lonelyβ (most or all of the time) and 36β40 % reported being βslightly lonelyβ (at least some of the time). Loneliness was lowest (β€10 %) in Austria, Croatia, Czechia, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Spain, and highest (β₯17 %) in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Ireland and Luxembourg. Younger adults showed the highest probabilities of loneliness, while the prevalence declined with age.
Vulnerable Demographic and SocioβEconomic Groups
Women, particularly those aged 16β24, were more likely to feel lonely than men. Income was a strong predictor: respondents in the lowest income quintile were 7 percentage points more likely to be lonely than those in the top quintile. Educational attainment mattered; individuals with secondary education or less reported higher loneliness than those with postβsecondary qualifications. Unemployment was associated with a >20 % chance of feeling lonely, whereas retirees reported lower rates, partly reflecting the age pattern. Migrantsβespecially secondβgeneration migrantsβexperienced higher loneliness than nativeβborn individuals, and nonβheterosexual respondents (LGB+) reported markedly higher loneliness (β18 % very lonely) than heterosexual respondents (β13 %). People with permanent disability or chronic illness also showed elevated loneliness levels.
Living Conditions and Social Connections
Household composition proved crucial: adults living alone were 3 percentage points more likely to be lonely than those sharing a household with other adults. Having a partner or spouse reduced loneliness risk substantially compared with being single, divorced or widowed. Recent relocation amplified loneliness; respondents who had lived in their municipality for 0β2 years were more prone to loneliness than those residing 11 years or more. Population density displayed a Uβshaped relationship: the most remote rural areas (lowest 20 % density) and the most densely populated urban centres both exhibited higher loneliness rates, while mediumβdensity towns showed lower prevalence.
Policy Interventions and Research Outlook
The volume outlines a range of evidenceβbased interventions, from communityβbuilding programmes to targeted mentalβhealth support, and highlights the importance of rigorous evaluation. It stresses that loneliness is both a publicβhealth and an economic issue, linked to higher mortality riskβcomparable to obesity and smoking combinedβand to reduced productivity. The authors call for systematic, EUβwide monitoring to guide policies, noting that the EU Loneliness Surveyβs multiβmeasure design (direct question, UCLA scale, DJG scale) enhances robustness. Future research directions include longitudinal tracking, causal analysis of interventions, and deeper exploration of urbanβrural dynamics.
Implications for Sustainable Housing
For stakeholders in sustainable housing, the findings underscore the social dimension of housing policy. Affordable, wellβdesigned dwellings that facilitate social interactionβthrough shared spaces, proximity to community services and support for multiβgenerational or coβhousing modelsβcan mitigate loneliness, especially among lowβincome households and recent movers. Integrating socialβcohesion metrics into housing assessments aligns with broader EU sustainability goals and may improve health outcomes, reduce healthcare costs and enhance overall wellβbeing across the Union.
