Consumers in Europe.
Date: 2009-06-25
Institutions: Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, Eurostat
Subjects: EU statistics, consumer policy, consumer protection, consumption, goods and services, single market

S t a t i s t i c a l   b o o k s

Consumers in Europe

2009 edition

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers  
to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access  
to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2009

ISBN 978-92-79-11362-8
ISSN 1831-4023
doi 10.2785/29257
Cat. No. KS-DY-09-001-EN-C

Theme: General and regional statistics
Collection: Statistical books

© European Communities, 2009
©   Cover photo: Matty Symons@fotolia.com

Printed in Belgium

Printed on white chlorine-free PaPer

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

 
FOREWORD

In  the  current  diffi  cult  economic  climate,  the  needs  of  Europe’s 
citizens  must  be  a  top  priority,  and  so  policies  must  be  oriented 
towards  its  citizens  and  towards  the  benefi ts  they  can  deliver  for 
them.  In the two years since European Consumer Policy became 
the exclusive responsibility of a single European Commissioner, the 
policy focus has shift ed, and increasingly aims for better outcomes 
for  consumers  and  citizens.    Consumer  policy  has  brought  the 
consumer  to  the  heart  of  the  market.  It  has  worked  to  empower 
consumers through accurate information and market transparency, 
to enhance their welfare and to protect them from risks and threats. Consumer Policy is not just helping 
to  build  the  internal  market,  it  is  also  building  a  European  consumer  market  –  with  better  access, 
more choice, the possibility to compare products and prices, and increased quality and safety.  In an 
increasingly globalised economy, a market, which responds to consumer demands helps contribute to 
an innovative and competitive economy. 

We  believe  that  confi dent,  informed  and  empowered  consumers  are  the  powerhouse  of  economic 
evolution.  EUROSTAT has stepped up its eff orts to meet the rising demand for statistical information 
with clear, accessible data in the belief that it would further encourage the engagement of users such as 
nongovernmental organisations, stakeholder and lobby groups in the political process.  Furthermore, 
it recognises the need to step up coordinated European action to fi ght the economic crisis through 
harmonised and comparable information.  However, producing information is not enough.  In recent 
years  it  has  been  recognised  that  a  special  eff ort  has  to  be  made  to  communicate  this  information 
better.

Keeping this in mind, a joint venture between EUROSTAT and DG SANCO Consumer Aff airs resulted 
in producing an interesting and worthwhile string of publications entitled “Consumers in Europe”.  
Using the wealth of information in EUROSTAT and also complimenting this through other sources, 
this fourth edition gives an overview of the single market from the consumer’s perspective, and covers 
12 specifi c sectors (including food and beverages; clothing and footwear; housing, electricity, gas and 
other fuels).

Th  e aim of the fourth edition is to bring together the most relevant and useful data for the evaluation 
and development of consumer policy, not only as a tool for policy-makers, but also for those interested 
in end-markets and consumer aff airs.  Th  is data will not only help deliver better consumer policy, it 
will be used to argue the consumer case in other policy areas too so that consumer interests are built 
into all EU policies.  Much of the data that has been used feeds into the Consumer Markets Scoreboard, 
which aims at informing on the malfunctioning of markets from a consumer perspective.  Th  us the 
data contribute to monitoring outcomes in the Single Market and to make European Union policy in 
this area more responsive to the expectations and concerns of consumers. 

Citizens are more aware than ever of the policies that shape their environment. We hope that these 
facts and fi gures refl ect the serious approach we take when developing and shaping that policy and that 
it will contribute to enhanced consumer confi dence which has never been more important.

Mrs. Meglena Kuneva 
Commissioner for Consumer Protection 

Mr. Joaquín Almunia 
Commissioner for Eurostat

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

 
 
 
 
ABSTRACT

Th  e 2009 edition of Consumers in Europe presents a comprehensive set of data and related information concerning consumer 
markets and consumer protection issues within the European Union. Th  e aim of the publication is to bring together the most 
relevant and useful information for the evaluation and development of consumer policy, not only as a tool for policy-makers, 
but also for those interested in end-markets and consumer aff airs, such as representative organisations, public authorities, or 
suppliers of goods and services. Much of the data that has been used will feed into the consumer markets scoreboard which 
has been designed to monitor outcomes in the single market and to make European Union policy in this area more responsive 
to the expectations and concerns of consumers.

Th  e  publication  starts  with  an  overview  of  the  single  market  from  the  consumer’s  perspective,  presenting  a  profi le  of 
European consumers and the retail network, as well as issues relating to access and choice, before looking at key indicators for 
consumption and prices. Th  e overview also presents information on consumer satisfaction, the quality and safety of goods 
and services, as well consumer representation and protection.

Th  e remainder of the publication is devoted to 12 specifi c consumer markets (for example, food and non-alcoholic beverages, 
housing, transport, or recreation and culture); each chapter covers one top-level heading within the classifi cation of individual 
consumption by purpose (COICOP), the main classifi cation used to provide detailed data on consumer prices, price levels 
and consumption expenditure. Th  e chapters are structured in a similar manner to the overview, in an attempt to present 
harmonised data and a range of key indicators that may be compared across the publication.

Project management:

Th  is publication has been fi nanced by the Directorate-General for Health and Consumers of the European Commission, led 
by unit B1 responsible for consumer markets (acting Head of Unit, David Mair). Th  e project has been managed by Eurostat 
(the statistical offi  ce of the European Communities), led by unit F3 responsible for living conditions and social protection 
statistics (Head of Unit, Anne Clemenceau). Th  e opinions expressed are those of the individual authors alone and do not 
necessarily refl ect the position of the European Commission.

Co-ordination:

Peter-Paul Borg
BECH D2/704
Eurostat – statistical offi  ce of the European Communities
Bâtiment Joseph Bech
Rue Alphonse Weicker, 5
L-2721 Luxembourg (Kirchberg)
peter-paul.borg@ec.europa.eu

Marie-Luise Altmutter
Directorate-General for Health and Consumers
European Commission
marie-luise.altmutter@ec.europa.eu

Data compilation, production and desktop publishing:

INFORMA sarl (informa@informa.lu)
Giovanni Albertone, Simon Allen, Edward Cook, Andrew Redpath

Data extraction:

Th  e statistical data presented were extracted during the summer of 2008 and represent data availability at that time. Th  e 
accompanying text was draft ed during the autumn months of 2008. Some specifi c data was not available until a later date, 
namely:  a  consumer  protection  survey  carried  out  by  Eurobarometer  and  a  retail  satisfaction  survey  (both  published  in 
October 2008).

For more information, please consult:

Directorate-General for Health and Consumers: http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/index_en.htm

Eurostat: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat

Copyright of photographs

Page 1: © European Communities

All other photographs: © Phovoir

2

Consumers.indb   2
Consumers.indb   2

Consumers in Europe 

08.04.2009   09:46:49
08.04.2009   09:46:49

 
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

A reader’s guide 
Structure of publication 
Data coverage 
Basic concepts: main data sources 

Consumer policy 

Consumer policy strategy 2007-2013 
Consumer protection 

Part A: Overview

I. CONSUMER PROFILE 
Consumers and consumption in the economy 
People and households 
Time-use 
Income levels and income distribution 
Consumption or savings? 
Credit, ability to pay and indebtedness 
Consumer confi dence 
II. RETAILING AND ADVERTISING 
In-store retailing 
Out-of-store sales 
E-commerce 
Cross-border sales to consumers 
Advertising 
III. ACCESS, CHOICE AND SWITCHING 
Access and choice 
Switching 
IV. CONSUMPTION 
Ownership 
Frequency of purchase 
Structure of consumption expenditure 
Expenditure patterns of diff erent population groups 
V. PRICES AND INDIRECT TAXES 
Price infl ation 
Price levels 
Indirect taxes 
VI. CONSUMER SATISFACTION AND COMPLAINTS 
Satisfaction 
Complaints 
VII. QUALITY AND SAFETY 
Quality 
Safety 
VIII. EXTERNALITIES 
Environment 
Waste 
IX. CONSUMER REPRESENTATION AND PROTECTION 
Representation 
Protection 

Table of contents

6
6
6
8

11

11
12

16
16
18
25
28
33
34
38
40
41
46
50
55
58
60
60
63
65
65
67
68
75
87
87
93
98
100
100
104
109
109
113
119
119
121
123
123
125

  Consumers in Europe

3

Consumers.indb   3
Consumers.indb   3

08.04.2009   09:46:50
08.04.2009   09:46:50

 Table of contents

Part B: Consumer markets

1. Food and non-alcoholic beverages 
1.1 Access, choice 
1.2 Consumption 
1.3 Prices 
1.4 Consumer satisfaction 
1.5 Quality and safety 
1.6 Externalities 
2. Alcoholic beverages and tobacco 
2.1 Access and choice 
2.2 Consumption 
2.3 Prices 
2.4 Safety 
2.5 Externalities 
3. Clothing and footwear 
3.1 Access and choice 
3.2 Consumption 
3.3 Prices 
3.4 Consumer satisfaction and complaints 
3.5 Quality 
4. Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 
4.1 Access, choice and switching 
4.2 Consumption 
4.3 Prices 
4.4 Consumer satisfaction and complaints 
4.5 Quality 
4.6 Externalities: environment 
5. Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 
5.1 Access and choice 
5.2 Consumption 
5.3 Prices 
5.4 Consumer satisfaction and complaints 
5.5 Quality 
6. Health 
6.1 Access and choice 
6.2 Consumption 
6.3 Prices 
6.4 Consumer satisfaction 
7. Transport 
7.1 Access and choice 
7.2 Consumption 
7.3 Prices 
7.4 Consumer satisfaction and complaints 
7.5 Quality and safety 
7.6 Externalities 

131
132
138
147
152
153
160
163
164
164
170
172
174
177
178
181
184
186
187
189
191
195
205
211
219
220
223
224
227
232
235
237
239
241
245
250
252
255
256
262
267
271
275
280

4

Consumers.indb   4
Consumers.indb   4

Consumers in Europe 

08.04.2009   09:46:51
08.04.2009   09:46:51

8. Communications 
8.1 Access, choice and switching 
8.2 Consumption 
8.3 Prices 
8.4 Consumer satisfaction and complaints 
8.5 Quality 
8.6 Externalities: health 
9. Recreation and culture 
9.1 Access and choice 
9.2 Consumption 
9.3 Prices 
9.4 Consumer satisfaction 
9.5 Quality 
10. Education 
10.1 Access and choice 
10.2 Consumption 
10.3 Prices 
10.4 Consumer satisfaction 
10.5 Quality 
11. Restaurants and hotels 
11.1 Access and choice 
11.2 Consumption 
11.3 Prices 
11.4 Quality 
12. Miscellaneous goods and services 
12A. Personal products, social care and other services 
12A.1 Consumption 
12A.2 Prices 
12B Insurance and fi nancial services  
12B.1 Access, choice and switching 
12B.2 Consumption 
12B.3 Prices 

Part C: Methodology

Annex 
Data sources 
Classifi cations 
Abbreviations 

Table of contents  

281
282
288
293
299
301
302
303
304
307
311
313
315
317
319
322
332
333
334
337
338
339
342
344
345
346
346
350
352
353
355
357

363
364
370
372

  Consumers in Europe

5

Consumers.indb   5
Consumers.indb   5

08.04.2009   09:46:51
08.04.2009   09:46:51

 Introduction

A READER’S GUIDE

Th  e  2009  edition  of  Consumers  in  Europe 
presents a comprehensive set of data and related 
information  concerning  consumer  markets  and 
consumer protection issues within the European 
Union.  Th  e  aim  of  the  publication  is  to  bring 
together the most relevant and useful information 
for the evaluation and development of consumer 
policy,  not  only  as  a  tool  for  policy-makers, 
but  also  for  those  interested  in  end-markets 
and  consumer  aff airs,  such  as  representative 
organisations,  public  authorities,  or  suppliers 
of  goods  and  services.  Much  of  the  data  that 
has  been  used  will  feed  into  the  consumer 
markets scoreboard which has been designed to 
monitor  outcomes  in  the  single  market  and  to 
make  European  Union  policy  in  this  area  more 
responsive  to  the  expectations  and  concerns  of 
consumers.

Structure of the publication

Th  e  publication  starts  with  an  overview  of  the 
single  market  from  the  consumer’s  perspective, 
presenting a profi le of European consumers and 
the  retail  network,  as  well  as  issues  relating  to 
access and choice, before looking at key indicators 
for  consumption  and  prices.  Th  e  overview  also 
presents  information  on  consumer  satisfaction, 
the  quality  and  safety  of  goods  and  services,  as 
well consumer representation and protection.

Th  e  remainder  of  the  publication  is  devoted  to 
12  specifi c  consumer  markets  (food  and  non-
alcoholic  beverages;  alcoholic  beverages  and 
tobacco;  clothing  and  footwear;  housing,  water, 
electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels;  furnishings, 
household  equipment  and  maintenance;  health; 
transport;  communications; 
recreation  and 
culture; education; hotels, cafés and restaurants; 
miscellaneous  goods  and  services);  each  of 
these  covers  one  top-level  heading  within  the 
classifi cation  of 
individual  consumption  by 
purpose  (COICOP)  the  main  classifi cation  used 
to  provide  detailed  data  on  consumer  prices, 
price  levels  and  consumption  expenditure.  Th  e 
chapters are structured in a similar manner to the 
overview,  in  an  attempt  to  present  harmonised 
data  and  a  range  of  key  indicators  that  may  be 
compared  across  the  publication.  As  such,  each 
chapter is structured, subject to data availability, 
with  information  relating  to:  access,  choice 
and  switching;  consumption;  prices;  consumer 
satisfaction  and  complaints;  quality  and  safety; 
and externalities.

Th  e  methodological  information  at  the  end  of 
the  publication  covers  the  main  data  sources, 
classifi cations,  as  well  as  a  list  of  statistical 
symbols, abbreviations and acronyms employed. 
A  brief  summary  of  the  key  methodological 
concepts is provided below for those readers who 
wish to explore the publication immediately.

Data coverage

Classifi cation of individual 
consumption by purpose (COICOP)

Much  of  the  offi  cial  data  presented  in  this 
publication  has  been  compiled  using 
the 
classifi cation  of 
individual  consumption  by 
purpose (COICOP). An extract of the classifi cation 
is  provided  at  the  end  of  the  publication; 
otherwise, a full listing can be obtained from the 
United Nations’ website at http://unstats.un.org/
unsd/cr/registry/regcst.asp?Cl=5&Lg=1.

COICOP  is  structured  hierarchically  in  three 
levels. Th  e chapter headings within Part B of this 
publication  have  been  aligned  on  the  Division 
level  of  COICOP  (level  1),  while  more  detailed 
information  is  provided  within  each  chapter. 
While  the  COICOP  classifi cation  offi  cially  has 
three  levels  of  detail,  certain  Eurostat  data  sets 
have been extended to include more detailed data 
at a fourth level for some consumption items.

Geographical entities

Th  is publication presents information for the 27 
Member States of the European Union (EU-27), as 
well as the individual Member States. Th  e EU-27 
aggregate is only provided when information for 
all of the countries is available, or if an estimate 
has  been  made  for  missing  information.  Any 
partial totals that are created are footnoted with 
respect to the missing components.

Th  e order of the Member States in tables generally 
follows  their  order  of  protocol;  in  other  words, 
the alphabetical order of the countries’ names in 
their  respective  languages;  in  some  graphs  the 
data  are  ranked  in  descending  order  according 
to  the  values  of  a  particular  indicator  or  other 
criteria.

6

Consumers.indb   6
Consumers.indb   6

Consumers in Europe 

08.04.2009   09:46:51
08.04.2009   09:46:51

Time-series for geographical aggregates are based 
on a consistent set of countries for the whole of the 
time period shown (unless otherwise indicated). 
In other words, although the EU has only had 27 
Member States since the start of 2007, the time-
series for EU-27 generally refer to the sum or an 
average  of  all  27  countries  for  the  whole  of  the 
period presented, as if all 27 Member States had 
historically been part of the European Union.

When available, information is also presented for 
the  candidate  countries  of  Croatia,  the  former 
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey, for 
EFTA countries, as well as Japan and the United 
States. In the event that non-member countries did 
not provide data, then these have been excluded 
from tables and graphs; however, the full set of 27 
Member States is generally maintained in tables 
even when data are not available, with footnotes 
being added to graphs when country information 
is  missing  or  only  partially  available.  In  the 
event  that  a  reference  year  is  not  available  for  a 
particular country, then eff orts have been made 
to fi ll tables and graphs with previous reference 
years (again these exceptions are footnoted).

Monetary values

Monetary values are generally expressed in terms 
of  euro  (EUR).  Th  e  data  have  been  converted 
using  average  exchange  rates  prevailing  for  the 
year in question. Th  e conversion of data expressed 
in  national  currencies  to  a  common  currency 
facilitates comparisons; however, fl uctuations in 
currency markets may be responsible for at least 
some of the movements identifi ed when observing 
the evolution of a time-series in euro terms.

Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) consists 
of  three  stages  co-ordinating  economic  policy 
and  culminating  with  the  adoption  of  the  euro. 
At  the  time  of  writing,  15  of  the  EU  Member 
States  –  Belgium,  Germany,  Ireland,  Greece, 
Spain, France, Cyprus, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, 
the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Slovenia, and 
Finland  –  have  so  far  entered  the  third  stage, 
adopting the euro as their common currency. All 
EMU members are eligible to adopt the euro, but 
Denmark  and  the  United  Kingdom  have  opted 
to remain outside the euro, Slovakia is expected 
to join at the beginning of 2009, while Bulgaria, 
the  Czech  Republic,  Estonia,  Hungary,  Latvia, 
Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Sweden have no 
target date for joining.

Introduction

Technically,  time-series  information  prior  to 
1  January  1999  should  be  denominated  in  ECU 
terms.  However,  given  that  the  conversion  rate 
was  ECU  1  =  EUR  1,  for  practical  purposes 
this  publication  denotes  all  such  values  in  euro 
terms.

While  most  of  the  monetary  data  presented  in 
this publication are denominated in euro terms, 
some are presented in terms of purchasing power 
standards  (PPS);  expenditure  data  in  PPS  terms 
have  been  converted  into  a  common  currency 
using purchasing power parities (PPPs) that refl ect 
the  purchasing  power  (based  on  price  levels  for 
similar  products)  of  each  currency,  rather  than 
using market exchange rates. PPS data therefore 
facilitate a comparison between economies with 
diff erent price levels for comparable products. PPS 
data are intended for cross-country comparisons 
rather than temporal comparisons as the relative 
price levels between countries change over time.

Timeframe

Th  e  statistical  data  presented  were  extracted 
during  the  summer  of  2008  and  represent  data 
availability  at  that  time.  Th  e  accompanying 
text  was  draft ed  during  the  autumn  months  of 
2008. Some specifi c data was not available until 
a  later  date,  namely:  a  consumer  protection 
survey carried out by Eurobarometer and a retail 
satisfaction  survey  (both  published  in  October 
2008).

Note that the data are generally presented for the 
latest  years  for  which  information  is  available. 
time-series  or  alternative  reference 
Longer 
periods  may  well  be  available  when  consulting 
Eurostat’s online databases (see below).

Additional or fresher information

Th  e  simplest  way  of  accessing  Eurostat’s  broad 
range  of  statistical  information  is  through  the 
Eurostat  website  (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat). 
Th  e website is updated daily and provides direct 
access  to  the  latest  and  most  comprehensive 
statistical information available on the European 
Union;  the  information  published  (including 
data,  PDF  publications  and  methodological 
information) is free of charge and oft en provided 
in German, English and French.

Th  e  most  important  statistical  indicators  are 
presented on the Eurostat website in the form of 
‘main tables’. Th  ese can be found by clicking on 
the link provided on the Eurostat homepage. Th  e 
data navigation tree presents information divided 

  Consumers in Europe

7

Consumers.indb   7
Consumers.indb   7

08.04.2009   09:46:51
08.04.2009   09:46:51

Introduction 

into nine statistical themes that are used to classify 
data  by  topic.  Th  e  main  tables  are  stored  under 
the fi rst heading in the data tree. Th  ey generally 
present  information  for  a  single  indicator,  with 
European geographic aggregates and data for the 
Member  States  on  the  y-axis  (down  the  screen) 
and time on the x-axis (across the screen).

More detailed statistics and larger volumes of data 
can  be  downloaded  from  Eurostat’s  databases, 
which are found under the second node of the data 
explorer tree. Th  ese allow the user to download a 
whole table or to extract a tailor-made selection 
of data, refi ning the criteria for one or more of the 
dimensions that make-up the data set in question. 
Th  e database codes, which are provided as part of 
the  information  in  the  source  under  tables  and 
fi gures,  can  be  used  as  a  search  criteria  on  the 
Eurostat website (for example, ‘hbs_exp_t121’) to 
obtain direct access to these databases.

Detailed  meta-data  using  the  Special  Data 
Dissemination 
format 
(SDDS) 
Standard 
the  International  Monetary 
(established  by 
Fund) are presented for each offi  cial data source 
on  the  Eurostat  website  under  the  heading  of 
‘Methodology’,  or  alternatively  from  the  data 
) presented 
explorer tree by clicking on an icon (
next to the main data nodes.

Non-offi  cial data sources

While the majority of the information presented 
comes from offi  cial statistical sources (Eurostat, 
other  Directorate-Generals  of  the  European 
Commission, or international organisations such 
as the OECD or UN), in some cases data has been 
compiled from alternative sources.

Particular care should be taken when comparing 
or interpreting the data from non-offi  cial sources, 
as information on the data production methods 
may  not  be  available  and  data  may  not  be 
harmonised, while the coverage of the data may 
also  not  be  fully  representative.  Each  table  and 
fi gure in the publication has a source included.

Data symbols

Statistical  data  are  oft en  accompanied  by 
additional information in the form of statistical 
symbols  (also  called  ‘fl ags’)  to  indicate  missing 
information  or  some  other  meta-data.  In  this 
publication,  the  use  of  statistical  symbols  has 
been  restricted  to  a  minimum.  Th  e  following 
symbols have been included:

Italic   value is a forecast, provisional data, or an 

estimate and is therefore likely to change;
 not  available,  confi dential  or  unreliable 
value;
 not applicable or zero by default.

: 

– 

Breaks  in  series  are  indicated  in  the  footnotes 
provided under each table and fi gure.

A  full  list  of  statistical  symbols,  abbreviations 
and  acronyms  is  provided  at  the  end  of  the 
publication.

Basic concepts: main data sources

Household budget survey (HBS)

Th  e household budget survey (HBS) describes the 
level and the structure of household expenditure. 
HBS  focus  on  consumption  expenditure,  and 
within  the  national  context  its  primary  use  is 
to  calculate  the  weights  that  are  used  in  the 
compilation  of  consumer  price  indices  (CPIs); 
the HBS may also be used in the compilation of 
national accounts.

Within  the  EU  context,  the  HBS  provides  a 
picture  of  consumption  expenditure  patterns 
of  private  households  across  all  Member  States, 
broken  down  by  a  variety  of  socio-economic 
household characteristics such as the employment 
status of the main reference person, their income, 
their  age,  the  number  of  active  persons  living 
in  the  household,  the  type  of  household,  the 
location  of  the  household  (rural  or  urban),  or 
the  main  source  of  income  of  the  household. 
Information is available at a detailed level using 
the  classifi cation  of  individual  consumption 
by  purpose  (COICOP),  with  as  many  as  233 
headings (including aggregates at higher levels of 
detail) which cover a wide range of products and 
services.

8

Consumers.indb   8
Consumers.indb   8

Consumers in Europe 

08.04.2009   09:46:52
08.04.2009   09:46:52

Introduction

Final  consumption  expenditure  of  households 
is  primarily  made-up  of  goods  and  services 
purchased  in  the  market,  but  also  includes 
consumption  of  household  production  for  own 
fi nal use, such as the services of owner-occupied 
dwellings,  or  goods  and  services  received  as 
income  in  kind  by  employees.  Household  fi nal 
consumption expenditure excludes social transfers 
in  kind  (like  expenditures  initially  incurred 
by  households  but  subsequently  reimbursed  by 
social  security,  for  example,  medical  expenses), 
as  well  as  intermediate  consumption  and  gross 
capital formation, items treated as acquisitions of 
a non-produced asset (in particular the purchase 
of  land),  payments  by  households  which  are 
regarded as taxes (including for example, licences 
for transport vehicles, or licences to hunt, shoot or 
fi sh), payments to non-profi t institutions serving 
households (NPISHs, for example, trade unions, 
professional  societies,  consumers’  associations, 
churches,  social,  cultural,  recreational  and 
sports clubs), and voluntary transfers in cash or 
in kind by households to charities, relief and aid 
organisations.

Price level indices (PLIs)

With the introduction of the euro, prices within 
those  Member  States  that  share  a  common 
currency are said to be more transparent, as it is 
relatively  simple  for  consumers  to  compare  the 
price of items across borders. From an economic 
point  of  view,  the  price  of  a  given  good  within 
the  single  market  should  not  diff er  signifi cantly 
depending  on  geographic 
location,  beyond 
diff erences  that  may  be  explained  by  transport 
costs or tax diff erences. When comparing prices 
between  euro  area  countries  and  non  euro  area 
countries,  the  most  common  way  to  compare 
prices of products and services between countries 
is  to  use  an  exchange  rate  to  convert  the  prices 
to  the  same  denomination.  However,  such 
comparisons  (both  within  the  euro  area  and 
within the EU) do not give an ideal picture of the 
actual price levels.

HBS data are confi ned to the population residing 
in private households: in other words, the survey 
excludes  collective  or  institutional  households 
(such as convents, hospitals, old persons’ homes, 
prisons, or military barracks), as well as persons 
without  a  fi xed  place  of  residence.  While  the 
main  statistical  unit  for  data  collection  is  the 
household (defi ned as ‘a social unit which shares 
household  expenses  or  daily  needs,  in  addition 
to  having  a  common  residence’),  the  HBS  also 
identifi es  the  head  of  the  household,  as  their 
personal  characteristics  are  oft en  used  as  the 
basis  to  classify  information  on  socio-economic 
characteristics.  Th  e  head  of  the  household  is 
normally  the  person  who  contributes  the  most 
income (the main earner).

In  order  to  allow  household  expenditures  to  be 
compared between households of diff erent sizes, 
household  expenditures  can  be  expressed  per 
adult equivalent. Th  ese fi gures take economies of 
scale into account, and assign a coeffi  cient of 1 to 
the  fi rst  adult,  0.5  to  other  persons  aged  14  and 
over, and 0.3 to children aged less than 14.

constitutes 

A  household’s  internal  production  (for  own 
consumption) 
a  non-monetary 
component of consumption; Eurostat guidelines 
encourage such production to be included within 
the  HBS.  Internal  production  should  ideally 
be  valued  at  retail  prices,  as  if  the  product  had 
been  bought  in  a  shop.  Examples  of  internal 
production  include  own  production  of  food  (by 
a farming household, or in a vegetable garden or 
allotment), or withdrawals from stocks for own-
use  (for  example,  in  the  case  of  retailers).  HBS 
data should also refl ect benefi ts in kind provided 
by employers in exchange for work done.

National accounts fi nal 
consumption expenditure

National  accounts  are  compiled  in  accordance 
with the European system of national and regional 
accounts (ESA 1995). In national accounts, fi nal 
consumption expenditure consists of expenditure 
incurred  by  resident 
institutional  units  on 
goods  or  services  that  are  used  for  the  direct 
satisfaction  of  individual  needs  or  wants  or  the 
collective  needs  of  members  of  the  community; 
such expenditure may take place on the domestic 
territory or abroad.

  Consumers in Europe

9

Consumers.indb   9
Consumers.indb   9

08.04.2009   09:46:52
08.04.2009   09:46:52

Introduction 

Purchasing  power  parities  (PPPs)  are  a  type  of 
exchange  rate  constructed  to  take  account  of 
the  price  level  diff erences  between  countries; 
they  are  more  suitable  for  making  international 
price and expenditure comparisons. PPPs can be 
used  as  currency  conversion  rates  that  convert 
expenditures  or  prices  expressed  in  national 
currencies  into  an  artifi cial  common  currency, 
the purchasing power standard (PPS), eliminating 
price  level  diff erences  across  countries.  Data 
denominated  in  PPS  terms  show  how  many 
currency  units  a  given  quantity  of  goods  and 
services will cost in diff erent countries.

Price level indices can be constructed from this 
PPS data, by aggregating price comparisons over 
a  large  number  of  goods  and  services.  Eurostat 
produces data for comparative price level indices 
with respect to the EU average (given the index 
value  100  by  convention)  using  the  COICOP 
classifi cation.  If  the  price  level  index  is  higher 
than 100, then the country concerned is relatively 
expensive  compared  with  the  EU  average  and 
vice-versa.

Th  e  coeffi  cient  of  variation  of  the  price  level 
indices  of  the  Member  States  can  be  used  as  a 
measure  of  price  convergence.  If  the  coeffi  cient 
of  variation  for  the  EU  decreases  over  time, 
then  national  price  levels  in  the  Member  States 
are  converging.  Th  e  coeffi  cient  of  variation  is 
calculated as the ratio of the standard deviation 
to the arithmetic mean of the price level indices 
for the individual Member States.

Harmonised indices of consumer prices (HICPs)

While consumers are likely to be most interested 
in  comparisons  of  current  prices  of  goods  and 
services, they are also interested in price changes 
over  time  –  changes  in  the  price  of  goods  and 
services  are  usually  referred  to  as  infl ation. 
All  other  things  being  equal,  price  infl ation 
concerning  consumer  goods  and 
services 
indicates a loss (gain if there is defl ation) of living 
standards due to price changes.

HICPs  are  economic 
indicators  constructed 
to  measure  the  changes  over  time  in  the  price 
of  consumer  goods  and  services  acquired  by 
households.  Th  ey  are  calculated  according 
to  a  harmonised  approach  and  a  single  set 
of  defi nitions,  providing  an  offi  cial  measure 
of  consumer  price  infl ation  for  the  purposes 
of  monetary  policy  and  assessing 
infl ation 
convergence  as  required  under  the  Maastricht 
criteria.

HICPs  are  presented  with  a  common  reference 
year, which is currently 2005=100. Normally the 
indices are used to create percentage changes that 
show price increases (decreases) for the period in 
question. HICPs cover practically every good and 
service  that  may  be  purchased  by  households; 
price  changes  for  owner  occupied  housing  are, 
however, not yet collected. Th  e diff erent goods and 
services are classifi ed according to the COICOP 
and  at  its  most  disaggregated  level,  Eurostat 
publishes  around  100  sub-indices:  these  allow 
users,  including  consumers,  to  follow  the  price 
developments  of  certain  categories  of  products, 
for example petrol or food. Th  e all-items (overall, 
total or headline) index of consumer prices shows 
the  price  development  of  a  very  wide  range  of 
consumer  goods  and  services  and  is  one  of  the 
most well-known economic statistics among the 
general public.

Price stability is one of the primary objectives of 
the European Central Bank (ECB), with changes 
in  the  all-items  consumer  price  index  for  the 
euro area used as a prime indicator for monetary 
policy management in the euro area. Th  e ECB has 
defi ned  price  stability  as  an  annual  increase  in 
the harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP) 
for the euro area of close to but below 2 % (over 
the medium-term).

Eurobarometer

1973, 

Since 

Eurobarometer is a source that presents opinion 
polls  that  have  been  conducted  by  and  for  the 
Public Opinion Analysis sector of the European 
the  European 
Commission. 
Commission has been monitoring the evolution 
of  public  opinion  in  the  Member  States,  thus 
helping the preparation of texts, decision-making 
and  the  evaluation  of  its  work.  While  initially 
a  regular,  twice-yearly,  public  opinion  survey, 
Eurobarometer  studies  have  since  broadened 
their  scope  to  cover  a  range  of  topics,  such  as 
citizenship, 
situations, 
health,  culture,  information  technology,  the 
environment,  the  euro,  or  agriculture.  Some  of 
these  address  consumer  issues  and  these  have, 
where  relevant  and  relatively  recent,  been  used 
within this publication. Note that Eurobarometer 
surveys  are  opinion  polls  based  on  subjective 
responses. 

enlargement, 

social 

For more information: 

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/ 
index_en.htm

10

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   10
Consumers.indb   10

08.04.2009   09:46:52
08.04.2009   09:46:52

 
CONSUMER POLICY

Many  of  the  almost  500  million  people  living 
in  the  European  Union  (EU)  may  well  imagine 
that  they  will  lead  safe,  healthy  and  full  lives. 
Promoting  consumers’  rights,  prosperity,  their 
health  and  well-being  are  core  values  of  the 
EU.  More  specifi cally,  within  the  European 
Commission, the Directorate-General for Health 
and Consumers aims to:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

empower consumers;
protect and improve human health;
ensure food is safe and wholesome;
protect the health of animals and plants;
promote the humane treatment of animals.

Th  e policies and laws for which the Directorate-
General for Health and Consumers are responsible 
touch the everyday lives of Europe’s population, 
playing an important role in trying to ensure that 
food and other consumer goods sold in the EU are 
safe, that the EU’s internal market works for the 
benefi t  of  consumers,  and  that  the  population’s 
health is protected and improved.

EU consumer policy strategy

Th  e  internal  market  has  played  a  central  role 
in  European  economic  development  and  most 
commentators agree that it has stimulated the level 
of  trade  between  Member  States  and  delivered 
tangible  benefi ts  to  European  consumers.  Th  e 
initial  policy  focus  for  developing  the  internal 
market was based on the premise of free trade across 
borders. Th  is approach has been criticised in some 
quarters,  and  more  recent  policy  developments 
have tended to refl ect the increasing importance 
of  social  and  environmental  considerations  too, 
with, for example, the consumer being placed at 
the heart of further developments of the internal 
market  (1).Th  e  European  Commission  has  three 
main objectives concerning consumers:

• 

• 

• 

to empower EU consumers so they make more 
informed choices and thus boost competition 
and competitiveness;
to enhance EU consumers’ welfare in terms of 
price,  choice,  quality,  diversity,  aff ordability 
and safety;
to  protect  consumers  eff ectively  from  the 
serious  risks  and  threats  that  they  cannot 
tackle as individuals.

Th  e  European  Commission’s  aim  is  to  achieve 
a  more  integrated  and  more  eff ective  internal 
market  by  2013  such  that  consumers  from  each 
Member  State  have  an  equally  high  level  of 

Introduction

confi dence in products, traders, selling methods, 
as well as consumer protection – no matter where 
they  decide  to  make  their  purchases  within  the 
EU.  Th  e  European  Commission  aims  to  ensure 
that  consumer  markets  should  be  competitive, 
open,  transparent  and  fair,  while  products  and 
services  that  are  available  in  European  markets 
should be safe. Furthermore, it seeks to guarantee 
consumers access to essential services at aff ordable 
prices, while promoting market access for traders, 
especially  small  and  medium-sized  enterprises 
(SMEs).  Th  ese  policies  are  outlined  in  a  recent 
Communication from the European Commission 
to the Council, the European Parliament and the 
European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  on 
‘EU Consumer Policy strategy 2007-2013’ (2) which 
presents an agenda for policy developments.

It is therefore hoped that EU consumer policy will 
interact more closely with other policies, both at 
an  EU  level,  as  well  as  through  pursuing  closer 
co-operation  with  the  Member  States.  To  some 
degree  this  marks  a  continuation  of  existing 
policy, for example, legislative changes that have 
been made in the interest of consumers concerning 
guarantees of product safety or adapting market 
structures  and  encouraging  competition  within 
telecommunications and energy markets.

To  attain  the  objectives  above,  the  European 
Commission  intends  to  monitor  EU  consumer 
policy  through  a  set  of  tools  and  indicators  to 
assess  how  consumer  markets  are  functioning, 
in order to identify areas of market failure. Th  is 
assessment of consumer markets will be based on 
a range of measures, including:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

switching;
price levels;
satisfaction;
complaints;
safety.

Th  ese  headings  have  been  used  to  organise  the 
material that is presented for each of the consumer 
markets  analysed  in  Part  B  of  this  publication, 
where 
they  are  supplemented  by  data  on 
consumption patterns (in value and volume terms), 
information  on  price  changes,  and  information 
relating to access, choice and quality.

For more information on policy developments:

ht t p://e c .e u rop a .eu /c on su mer s/s t r at e g y/
index_en.htm

(2)  ’EU Consumer Policy 
strategy 2007-2013 
empowering consumers, 
enhancing their welfare, 
eﬀ ectively protecting 
them’, COM(2007) 99 
ﬁ nal of 13 March 2008.

(1)  ’A Single Market for 

Citizens’, COM(2007) 60 
of 21 February 2007.

  Consumers in Europe

11

Consumers.indb   11
Consumers.indb   11

08.04.2009   09:46:53
08.04.2009   09:46:53

(3)  ’Monitoring consumer 
outcomes in the single 
market: the Consumer 
Markets Scoreboard’, 
COM(2008) 31 ﬁ nal of 
29 January 2008.

Introduction 

Monitoring consumer outcomes in the single 
market: the consumer markets scoreboard

from 

A  Communication 
the  European 
Commission  (3)  highlights  the  importance  of 
internal 
monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the 
market  in  terms  of  outcomes  for  citizens.  Th  is 
Communication  recognises  that  the  internal 
market  is  not  exclusively  an  economic  project, 
whereby consumer interests are solely defi ned in 
terms of effi  ciency. Rather, it states that ‘citizens 
expect  single  market  policy  to  deliver  socially 
acceptable  outcomes,  sometimes  at  the  expense 
of  economic  effi  ciency’.  It  also  draws  attention 
to  the  principle  of  aff ordable  access  to  certain 
essential services of general interest (SGIs), vital 
for economic and social inclusion, which should 
be  guaranteed  to  all,  no  matter  where  they  live. 
Th  e  Communication  refl ects  on  consumer 
outcomes in terms of other non-economic criteria 
such  as  health,  the  environment,  or  safety,  and 
argues that areas such as these sometimes require 
regulation in order to protect consumers.

In addition to monitoring markets, the scoreboard 
is  also  designed  to  assess  the  integration  of  EU 
consumer markets and can be used to benchmark 
national  conditions.  Th  e  scoreboard  is  divided 
into three diff erent dimensions:

• 

• 

• 

the fi rst looks at the performance of consumer 
markets, and may be used to identify problem 
areas for further analysis;
the second concerns the degree of integration 
within retail markets, in light of the European 
Commission’s  strategic  objective  of  making 
consumers and retailers as confi dent to shop 
across borders as in their home countries by 
2013;
the  fi nal  dimension  relates 
to  national 
markets as regards enforcement, information, 
education,  and  redress  –  benchmarking  the 
consumer  policy  systems  and  institutions  of 
individual Member States.

For  more  information  on  the  consumer  markets 
scoreboard: 

ht t p://e c .e u rop a .eu /c on su mer s/s t r at e g y/
facts_en.htm

Consumer protection

Community legislation aims to protect consumers 
through  rules  and  regulations  that  provide 
important guarantees to consumers, in terms of 
their  rights,  their  protection  and  their  redress. 
Th  ese laws are designed to:

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 
• 

• 

• 
• 
• 

allow  consumers  to  buy  what  they  want, 
where they want;
enable consumers to take back/send back any 
goods that do not work;
let  consumers  benefi t  from  high  safety 
standards  for  food  and  other  consumer 
goods;
enable  consumers  to  know  what  they  are 
eating;
ensure that contracts are fair to consumers;
allow  consumers  to  change  their  mind  as 
regards a purchase;
make  it  easier  for  consumers  to  compare 
prices;
ensure that consumers are not misled;
protect consumers while they are on holiday;
provide  eff ective  redress  for  cross-border 
disputes.

‘minimum  harmonisation’,  with 

In  some  of  the  Member  States,  Community  law 
forms  the  cornerstone  of  national  consumer 
protection  systems.  Existing  EU  consumer  rules 
and  regulations  are  oft en  based  on  the  principle 
of 
legislation 
designed to explicitly recognise the right of Member 
States to add stricter rules. Many of the areas alluded 
to in the list above are covered in a general nature 
in Part A of this publication, while market-specifi c 
information is provided within Part B.

strength  and 

Th  e 
infl uence  of  consumer 
representation  movements  varies  considerably 
across the EU. Th  e European Commission supports 
national  consumer  organisations,  in  particular 
from the Member States that have joined the EU 
since  2004,  in  the  belief  that  a  strong  consumer 
movement  at  a  national  level  is  essential  both  to 
a  strong  EU  consumer  movement  and  to  well-
functioning  national  markets.  At  the  same  time, 
the European Commission has instigated a series 
of  information  campaigns  among  those  Member 
States that have joined the EU since 2004, designed 
to raise awareness around consumer rights and the 
role of consumer NGO’s.

12

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   12
Consumers.indb   12

08.04.2009   09:46:53
08.04.2009   09:46:53

Introduction

At a European level, the European Commission 
co-fi nances and manages the European Consumer 
Centres  Network  (ECC-Net)  which  aims  to 
promote consumer confi dence, advise citizens on 
their rights, and provide redress in cross-border 
cases; the European Commission aims to establish 
such  centres  in  each  of  the  Member  States.  In 
addition,  there  are  two  umbrella  organisations 
that  are  eligible 
for  receiving  Community 
funding  to  help  them  carry  out  their  activities: 
the  European  Association  for  the  Coordination 
of  Consumer  Representation  in  Standardisation 

(http://www.anec.eu),  and 

(ANEC) which represents and defends consumer 
interests  in  the  process  of  standardisation  and 
certifi cation 
the 
European  Consumers’  Organisation  (BEUC) 
which aims to defend and promote the interests 
of European consumers as purchasers or users of 
goods and services (http://www.beuc.org).

For more information on ECC-Net:

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/
index_en.htm

  Consumers in Europe

13

Consumers.indb   13
Consumers.indb   13

08.04.2009   09:46:53
08.04.2009   09:46:53

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Overview

Consumers.indb   15
Consumers.indb   15

08.04.2009   09:46:53
08.04.2009   09:46:53

I

Consumer proﬁ le

CONSUMER PROFILE

Consumers and consumption 
in the economy

Th  e economic cycle can have an important impact 
on  consumption  patterns,  with  expenditure 
usually rising during periods of economic upturn. 
When an economy is booming, there is oft en an 
upturn in the consumption of luxury goods and 
consumer durables. Consumers have the potential 
to  be  a  motor  for  European  competitiveness,  if 
they seek out the best off ers (particularly, if this 
is done regardless of national borders), rewarding 
the  EU’s  best  and  most  innovative  businesses. 
Indeed, consumer spending is oft en cited as a key 
driver for growth and economic integration.

falls.  A 

In  contrast,  during  periods  of  recession, 
disposable  income  is  reduced  and  consumer 
confi dence  usually 
slowdown  or 
contraction in economic activity oft en results in 
fewer luxury purchases being made, for example, 
lower sales of jewellery, holidays abroad, or other 
big-ticket  purchases  (such  as  cars  or  furniture). 
Consumption  of  items  such  as  these  is  oft en 
postponed  or  deferred  until  there  is  evidence 
of  an  upturn  in  economic  fortunes,  with  many 
consumers  holding  back 
their  purchases. 
Alternatively,  during  times  of  recession  or  slow 
economic growth, some households may choose 
to downsize, for example, selling a second car or 
moving to cheaper accommodation.

general  patterns  of 

While 
consumption 
across  a  whole  economy  may  refl ect  economic 
fortunes,  income  is  clearly  a  key  determinant 
in  explaining  expenditure  patterns  at  the  level 
of  each  household.  In  other  words,  the  rich  are 
generally  more  likely  to  spend  more  than  those 
who  are  less  well  off ,  although  they  are  also 
likely  to  save  more.  Th  e  relationship  between 
an  individual’s  income  and  their  standard  of 
living  is  oft en  complicated  by  the  fact  that  the 
majority of people do not live alone, and therefore 
income generated and spent by a household may 
be  infl uenced  by  both  the  composition  and  size 
of  the  household.  For  example,  two  adults  both 
working with no children are likely to have more 
disposable income at the end of the month than 
a single parent working part-time living with two 
children and an elderly parent (income levels and 
distribution  are  covered  in  more  detail  later  in 
Section A1).

A national accounts perspective

there  are 

Within  national  accounts 
three 
classes  of  fi nal  consumer:  individuals,  non-
profi t  institutions  serving  households  (NPISH) 
and  government;  consumption  attributed  to 
enterprises is considered as intermediate, in the 
sense that it is used as an input in the production 
of other goods and services.

Figure 1.1: Final consumption expenditure of households, 2007 
(% of GDP)

100

75

50

25

0

BG LT CY LV PT UK MT PL

EL RO
(1)

IT EU-
27
(2)

ES FR DE SK AT
(3)

EE HU BE SI DK FI CZ
(2)

NL SE IE
(2)

LU

MK
(2)

TR
(3)

HR
(1)

(1) 2006, forecast.
(2) Forecast.
(3) 2006.

Source: Eurostat, GDP and main components (nama_gdp_c)

16

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   16
Consumers.indb   16

08.04.2009   09:47:00
08.04.2009   09:47:00

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Final  consumption  expenditure  of  households 
was  estimated  to  account  for  56.4 %  of  the 
EU-27’s GDP in 2007. Th  e relative importance of 
consumers (based on this measure) ranged from 
69.3 %  of  GDP  in  Greece  to  33.6 %  of  GDP  in 
Luxembourg, with fi nal household consumption 
expenditure  tending  to  account  for  a  higher 
proportion of GDP among those Member States 
that  joined  the  EU  in  2004  or  2007;  if  fi nal 
household  consumption  expenditure  accounts 
for a high share of GDP, this implies that the size 
of government activity is relatively low.

Th  e  developments  of  economic  output  and 
consumption  expenditure  were  closely  related 
over  the  period  1995  to  2007,  as  EU-27  GDP 
per  inhabitant  rose,  on  average,  by  4.5 %  per 
annum  compared  with  a  4.4 %  increase  in  fi nal 
consumption  expenditure  of  households  and 
non-profi t  institutions  serving  households;  in  a 
similar vein, the fi nal consumption expenditure 
of  general  government  also  rose,  on  average,  by 
4.5 % each year.

Figure 1.2: GDP, 2007
(per inhabitant)

80 000

70 000

60 000

50 000

40 000

30 000

20 000

10 000

0

LU IE
(1)

NL AT
(1)

SE DK BE FI UK DE FR ES IT EU-
27

EL CY SI CZ
(1)

MT PT EE SK HU LT LV PL RO
(1)

BG

MK

HR
(1)

TR
(1)

(EUR)

(PPS)

(1) Forecasts.

Source: Eurostat, GDP and main components (nama_gdp_c)

Figure 1.3: GDP and fi nal consumption expenditure, EU-27
(EUR per inhabitant)

30 000

25 000

20 000

15 000

10 000

5 000

0

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

GDP

Final consumption expenditure

Household and NPISH final consumption expenditure (1)

Final consumption expenditure of general government

(1) NPISH: non-proﬁ t institutions serving households.

Source: Eurostat, GDP and main components (nama_gdp_c)

  Consumers in Europe

17

Consumers.indb   17
Consumers.indb   17

08.04.2009   09:47:02
08.04.2009   09:47:02

I

Consumer proﬁ le

One measure that may be used to determine the 
‘openness’ of an economy is the share of imports 
relative  to  GDP.  Imports  of  goods  and  services 
accounted for 39.7 % of GDP in 2007 within the 
EU-27. Th  is ratio rose to 141.9 % in Luxembourg, 
while at the other end of the scale France imported 
goods  and  services  valued  at  just  28.4 %  of  its 
GDP. Generally, this indicator is strongly related 
to  the  size  of  an  economy,  as  larger  countries 
generally produce a broader range of goods and 
services and therefore (at least have the potential 
to)  supply  their  own  domestic  demand,  while 
smaller  countries  will  need  to  import  a  wider 
range  of  goods  and  services,  as  many  of  these 
will not be produced within their own territory. 
As  such,  consumers  in  smaller  countries  are,  a 
priori, more likely to purchase goods and services 
from abroad.

People and households

Th  e  EU-27’s  population  reached  495.1  million 
inhabitants in 2007. Th  ere is a wide disparity in the 
number of persons living in each Member State, 
ranging from 82.3 million in Germany (16.6 % of 
the EU-27 total) to less than a million inhabitants 
in  each  of  Malta,  Luxembourg  and  Cyprus  (no 
more than 0.2 % of the EU-27 total). Six Member 
States together accounted for just over 70 % of the 
EU-27’s  population  in  2007  (Germany,  France, 
the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain and Poland).

Th  e  principal  urban  area  in  most  countries  is 
usually  centred  on  the  capital  city,  while  rural 
areas  that  are  less  densely  populated  tend  to  be 
found  towards  the  extremities  of  each  country, 
although this pattern is less evident in Germany, 

Figure 1.4: Imports of goods and services, 2007
(% of GDP)

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

LU MT SK BE BG EE HU CZ SI

IE LT NL LV CY AT DK SE RO PL FI PT DE EU-
27

EL ES IT UK FR

MK HR TR

Source: Eurostat, GDP and main components (nama_gdp_c)

Figure 1.5: Population on 1 January, 2007
(millions)

100

75

50

25

0

DE FR UK IT

ES PL RO NL EL PT BE CZ HU SE AT BG DK SK FI

IE

LT LV SI

EE CY LU MT

TR HR MK

Source: Eurostat, Population by sex and age on 1 January of each year (demo_pjan)

18

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   18
Consumers.indb   18

08.04.2009   09:47:03
08.04.2009   09:47:03

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Italy  and  the  Netherlands.  Th  e  spread  of  the 
population within a country plays an important 
role in infl uencing (among others) the distribution 
of retail outlets, the construction and upkeep of 
energy, communication and transport networks, 
or  the  provision  of  other  services  of  general 
interest (SGIs).

Changes in the demographic structure of the EU’s 
population also aff ect the pattern of consumption. 
An ageing population suggests that an increasing 
share  of  consumption  will  be  accounted  for  by 
the elderly. Th  is pattern is observed across most 
of  Europe  and  is  driven  by  a  range  of  factors, 
including  lower  birth  rates,  the  so-called  baby-
boom  generation  reaching  retirement  age,  and 

Map 1.1: Population density, 2006 (1)
(inhabitants per km²)

Population density,
by NUTS 2 regions, 2006 (1)
(inhabitants per km²)

<= 75
75 - <= 125
125 - <= 275
> 275
Data not available

(1) All regions in Belgium, Ireland, Spain, France,
Malta, Austria, Poland and Iceland, 2005;
all regions in the United Kingdom and Erzurum
(TRA1), 2004; Agri (TRA2), 2003.

© EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries
Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 12/2008

0

600 km

Guadeloupe (FR)

Martinique (FR)

0

25

0

20

Guyane (FR)

Réunion (FR)

0

100

0

20

Açores (PT)

Madeira (PT)

0

100

0

20

Canarias (ES)

Malta

0 100

0

10

Ísland

0 100

Source: Eurostat, regional population densities (reg_d3dens)

  Consumers in Europe

19

Consumers.indb   19
Consumers.indb   19

08.04.2009   09:47:05
08.04.2009   09:47:05

I

Consumer proﬁ le

an  increase  in  life  expectancy  –  all  of  which 
contribute to older generations accounting for a 
larger proportion of the total population.

Th  ere were 83.8 million persons aged 65 or over 
in  the  EU-27  on  1  January  2007,  equivalent  to 
almost  17 %  of  the  total  population.  With  the 
relative  importance  of  these  older  generations 
forecast  to  continue  growing  until  at  least  the 
middle of the century, it is likely that there will be 
signifi cant changes in the structure/composition 
of consumption, as demand for goods and services 
like  health  or  social  services  is  likely  to  expand 
rapidly, while the older generations are less likely 
to embrace the purchase of new technologies.

At the other end of the age range, children also 
constitute an important consumer market, and it 
is  nowadays  commonplace  for  children  (usually 
indirectly through their parents) to pay a mobile 
telephone  bill,  to  spend  considerable  sums  of 
money  on  electronic  games,  or  to  dress  in  the 
latest fashions.

Table 1.1: Life expectancy
(years)

Male

Female

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR (2)
IT (1)
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK (3)
HR
MK
IS
LI
NO
CH

1986
:
71.4
68.5
67.5
71.8
71.4
:
70.8
74.1
73.4
71.6
72.6
:
:
67.8
70.7
65.3
:
73.1
71.0
:
69.9
66.8
68.4
67.2
70.6
74.0
:
:
:
75.4
:
72.9
73.7

2006
75.2
76.6
69.2
73.5
76.1
77.2
67.4
77.3
77.2
77.7
77.4
77.9
78.8
65.4
65.3
76.8
69.2
77.0
77.7
77.2
70.9
75.5
69.2
74.5
70.4
75.9
78.8
77.1
72.5
71.7
79.5
78.9
78.2
79.2

1986
:
78.2
74.8
74.7
77.7
77.7
:
76.4
78.8
79.9
79.8
79.1
:
:
76.4
78.7
73.3
:
79.7
77.8
:
76.8
72.8
76.4
75.1
78.9
80.2
:
:
:
80.7
:
80.0
80.5

2006
81.5
82.3
76.3
79.9
80.7
82.4
78.6
82.1
81.9
84.4
84.4
83.8
82.4
76.3
77.0
81.9
77.8
81.9
82.0
82.8
79.7
82.3
76.2
82.0
78.4
83.1
83.1
81.1
79.3
76.2
82.9
83.1
82.9
84.2

(1) 2004, instead of 2006.
(2) France métropolitaine.
(3) 2005, instead of 2006.

Source: Eurostat, life expectancy by sex and age (demo_mlexpec)

Figure 1.6: Population breakdown by gender and age on 1 January, 2007
(millions)

85+
80-84
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4

20

15

10

5

Male

0

5

10

15

20

Female

Source: Eurostat, population by sex and age on 1 January of each year (demo_pjan)

20

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   20
Consumers.indb   20

08.04.2009   09:47:30
08.04.2009   09:47:30

Consumer proﬁ le

I

In between the younger and the older generations 
are  those  of  working  age  (classifi ed  here  as 
persons  aged  15-64).  Age  dependency  ratios  are 
oft en  used  to  gauge  the  relative  importance  of 
this segment of the population: they measure the 
proportion  of  younger  and  older  persons  who 
are  ‘dependent’  upon  those  of  working  age.  By 
summing young and old-age dependency ratios, 

the overall dependency on those of working age 
was 48.6 % in the EU-27 at the start of 2007; in 
other words, for approximately every two persons 
of working age there was a ‘dependent’ child or 
older  person.  Dependency  ratios  across  the  EU 
ranged from a high of 53.4 % in France to a low of 
38.9 % in Slovakia.

Table 1.2: Population structure, 1 January
(%)

Aged 0-14 
years old 
(as % of total 
population)

Aged 65 years 
and over
 (as a % of total 
population)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS (1)
LI
NO
CH

1997
17.9
17.8
17.2
17.9
17.8
16.1
20.0
23.2
16.8
15.9
19.4
14.5
24.3
20.0
21.4
18.6
17.7
21.7
18.4
17.7
21.9
17.1
20.0
17.5
21.7
18.9
18.8
19.4
19.9
24.1
31.2
24.0
18.8
19.7
17.7

2007
15.8
17.0
13.4
14.4
18.6
13.9
14.9
20.3
14.3
14.5
18.6
14.1
17.9
14.0
15.9
18.3
15.2
16.7
18.1
15.6
15.8
15.5
15.4
14.0
16.1
17.1
17.0
17.6
15.6
18.9
27.9
21.8
17.1
19.4
15.8

1997
15.1
16.3
15.3
13.5
15.0
15.7
14.1
11.4
15.6
15.8
15.3
17.2
11.1
14.1
12.8
14.2
14.5
11.6
13.4
15.3
11.5
15.3
12.6
12.9
11.1
14.5
17.4
15.9
12.3
9.0
5.1
11.5
10.3
15.8
14.9

2007
16.9
17.1
17.3
14.4
15.3
19.8
17.1
11.1
18.6
16.7
16.2
19.9
12.3
17.1
15.6
14.0
15.9
13.8
14.5
16.9
13.4
17.3
14.9
15.9
11.9
16.5
17.4
16.0
17.1
11.2
6.6
11.7
11.9
14.6
16.2

Young-age 
dependency ratio 
(population aged 
0-14 compared 
with those 15-64)
1997
2007
23.5
26.7
25.8
27.0
19.4
25.6
20.2
26.0
28.2
26.4
21.0
23.6
21.9
30.4
29.7
35.5
21.3
24.8
21.1
23.3
28.4
29.8
21.3
21.3
25.7
37.6
20.2
30.3
23.2
32.5
27.1
27.7
22.1
26.1
24.0
32.5
26.8
26.9
23.1
26.3
22.3
32.8
23.0
25.3
22.1
29.7
19.9
25.2
22.4
32.2
25.7
28.3
25.9
29.5
26.5
29.9
23.2
29.3
27.1
36.0
42.2
48.9
32.8
37.2
24.0
26.5
29.3
30.5
23.1
26.2

Old-age
 dependency ratio
(population aged 65
and over compared
with those 15-64)
2007
25.2
25.9
24.9
20.2
23.2
29.9
25.1
16.2
27.6
24.2
24.9
30.2
17.6
24.8
22.7
20.7
23.2
19.8
21.5
25.0
19.0
25.6
21.3
22.7
16.5
24.8
26.4
24.1
25.4
16.0
10.1
17.6
16.8
22.2
23.8

1997
22.5
24.7
22.7
19.6
22.4
23.0
21.5
17.4
23.0
23.2
23.5
25.2
17.1
21.4
19.5
21.2
21.3
17.4
19.6
22.8
17.2
22.6
18.6
18.5
16.5
21.7
27.4
24.5
18.2
13.4
8.0
17.8
14.6
24.5
22.1

(1) 2006 instead of 2007.

Source: Eurostat, population structure indicators on 1 January (demo_pjanind)

  Consumers in Europe

21

Consumers.indb   21
Consumers.indb   21

08.04.2009   09:47:31
08.04.2009   09:47:31

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Table 1.3: Activity rates by gender, 
persons aged 15-64 years old
(%)

Male

Female

EU (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS (2)
NO
CH

1987
80.3
72.4
:
:
85.5
81.3
:
80.8
78.6
77.9
78.1
77.9
:
:
:
79.9
:
:
79.7
:
:
82.1
:
:
:
:
:
86.0
:
:
:
:
:

2007
77.6
73.6
70.6
78.1
83.9
81.8
77.5
81.4
79.1
81.4
74.9
74.4
82.9
77.6
71.0
75.0
69.0
78.9
84.6
81.7
70.0
79.4
70.1
75.8
75.9
77.2
81.4
81.9
70.4
74.4
90.5
81.6
88.2

1987
51.1
45.5
:
:
76.5
52.7
:
41.0
41.1
37.1
57.6
41.7
:
:
:
43.5
:
:
49.3
:
:
55.0
:
:
:
:
:
63.0
:
:
:
:
:

2007
63.3
60.4
62.1
61.5
76.4
70.1
68.7
63.3
54.9
61.4
65.6
50.7
65.4
68.3
65.0
58.9
55.1
39.9
72.2
67.8
56.5
68.8
56.0
66.6
60.8
73.8
76.8
68.9
56.4
26.1
83.4
75.9
75.0

(1) Moving EU aggregate based on membership (EC-12 for 1987, 
EU-27 for 2007).
(2) 2006 instead of 2007.

Source: Eurostat, population structure indicators on 1 January 
(lfsa_argan)

While  dependency  ratios  give  some  idea  of  the 
structure of a population, it is important to bear 
in  mind  that  they  are  based  purely  on  age  class 
data  and  do  not  take  account  of  whether  those 
of  working  age  are  actually  in  employment  or 
not.  Some  people  choose  not  to  work,  while 
others  (for  example,  single  parents)  may  fi nd  it 
diffi  cult  to  balance  family  responsibilities  with 
a  career  and  struggle  to  hold  down  a  job,  and 
others  (unemployed)  may  not  be  able  to  fi nd 
employment.

During  recent  decades 
there  has  been  a 
considerable  increase  in  the  number  of  women 
entering the labour market, such that the activity 
rate  of  women  aged  15-64  (those  employed  and 
those  seeking  work  as  a  proportion  of  the  total 
female  population  of  the  same  age)  climbed  by 
12.2 percentage points between 1987 and 2007 to 
reach 63.3 % in the EU-27, still some way behind 
the  corresponding  rate  for  men  (77.6 %).  Across 
the  Member  States  there  were  wide  disparities, 
with  Denmark,  Germany,  the  Netherlands, 
Finland  and  Sweden  all  reporting  activity  rates 
of  more  than  70 %  for  women,  while  at  the 
other end of the range female activity rates were 
39.9 %  in  Malta,  50.7 %  in  Italy,  and  54.9 %  in 
Greece.  With  higher  proportions  of  the  female 
population  in  the  labour  force,  it  is  likely  that 
women will continue to become more fi nancially 
independent and as such, it can be imagined that 
consumption patterns may change somewhat to 
refl ect this trend.

Care  responsibilities 
taken  on  by  women 
(primarily  for  children,  but  also  for  relatives  or 
friends)  are  thought  to  play  a  signifi cant  role  in 
explaining  lower  female  activity  rates.  In  2005, 
some  4.4 %  of  women  in  the  EU-27  said  they 
would like to work more (and reduce their caring 
time), compared with just 2.0 % of men.

Figure 1.7: Activity rates by gender, persons aged 15-64 years old, EU (1)
(%)

100

75

50

25

0

1987

1997

Male

2007

1987

1997

Female

2007

(1) Moving EU aggregate based on membership (EC-12 for 1987, EU-15 for 1997, EU-27 for 2007).

Source: Eurostat, activity rates by sex, age groups and nationality (lfsa_argan)

22

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   22
Consumers.indb   22

08.04.2009   09:47:32
08.04.2009   09:47:32

 
Consumer proﬁ le

I

Th  e reduction in the size of the average household 
(in terms of the number of persons) is, at least in 
part,  linked  to  the  ageing  population,  as  older 
generations increasingly live their fi nal years alone 
(as opposed to sharing a house with their off -spring 
or other family members). Average household size 
is also aff ected, among others, by factors such as 
the reduction in birth rates, less importance being 
attached  to  the  family  unit,  higher  divorce  rates 
and young adults choosing to live away from home. 
Th  ere  are  nevertheless  considerable  diff erences 
between countries (oft en on the basis of a north/
south  split).  A  higher  proportion  of  persons  live 
alone in the northern countries, while the family 
unit is oft en more robust in southern countries (be 
it  children  continuing  to  live  with  their  parents 
through  university  and  aft er  they  have  started 
work, or older generations being cared for by their 
off spring).

Figure 1.8: Persons wishing to change the 
organisation of their working life and care 
responsibilities, EU-27, 2005
(% of population aged 15-64)

0

20

40

60

80

No wish for a change

Wish to work/work more 
(reduce caring)

Wish to work less 
(more caring)

Not applicable 
(do not care)

Non-response

Table 1.4: Activity rates by gender and marital status, persons 
aged 15-64 years old, EU-27
(%)

Total
Single persons
Married persons
Widowed persons
Divorced persons

Male

   Female

2000
77.1
67.0
84.0
55.5
79.7

2007
77.6
68.6
84.7
57.7
81.0

2000
60.1
57.4
61.3
41.1
73.4

2007
63.3
60.4
64.5
44.4
75.2

Source: Eurostat, activity rates by sex, age groups and marital status (lfst_argams)

Table 1.5: Households, breakdown by type of dwelling, 2006
(% of all dwellings)

Semi-
detached 
or terraced
38.3
:
9.2
13.3
12.1
3.5
55.3
10.0
17.9
19.0
19.5
27.4
5.6
8.9
30.5
10.0
51.3
54.8
12.8
4.6
24.4
:
3.8
1.7
18.9
8.0
58.2
15.9
18.7

Detached
35.3
:
33.9
48.2
22.4
26.2
40.2
35.2
18.9
40.7
23.9
46.4
23.3
30.1
35.8
56.5
3.2
13.7
38.5
39.1
40.7
:
65.8
49.7
37.6
41.9
23.0
31.2
58.9

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Flat in 
building 
with <10 
dwellings
17.9
:
13.7
7.6
39.7
8.8
2.0
35.4
19.0
15.1
25.1
15.2
10.0
7.0
22.3
4.5
44.2
6.2
16.2
11.7
18.5
:
8.0
4.9
2.4
11.8
11.4
16.6
2.0

Flat in 
building 
with =>10 
dwellings
7.5
:
42.5
29.7
23.7
60.4
2.1
19.4
44.0
24.8
27.0
8.6
60.8
53.8
9.9
28.6
1.0
19.6
31.5
44.3
15.9
:
22.1
43.6
40.4
36.9
7.1
34.3
6.4

Other 
building
1.0
:
0.7
1.2
2.0
1.1
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
4.6
2.4
0.3
0.1
1.6
0.5
0.3
5.6
1.0
0.3
0.5
:
0.3
0.1
0.7
1.5
0.2
2.0
14.1

Male
Female

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC cross sectional 2006 data

Source: Eurostat, number of persons wishing to change the 
organisation of their working life and care responsibilities 
(lfso_05changp)

  Consumers in Europe

23

Consumers.indb   23
Consumers.indb   23

08.04.2009   09:47:33
08.04.2009   09:47:33

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Table 1.6: Households, breakdown by type of tenure, 2006
(% of all dwellings)

Tenant 
paying rent
 at market 
rate (1)
22.4
:
5.3
42.2
46.6
4.5
9.1
20.4
7.3
21.0
12.8
12.6
6.9
1.4
20.9
3.6
3.4
44.1
33.2
3.8
10.0
:
4.8
8.8
12.4
37.4
15.7
16.9
15.0

Accomm. is 
rented at a 
reduced
 rate (2)
7.7
:
19.7
:
7.1
1.8
12.3
1.3
3.1
15.8
5.4
1.2
7.9
1.3
4.8
3.6
17.0
:
6.9
1.3
7.1
:
1.3
0.6
19.4
1.3
13.6
:
4.4

Accomm. is 
provided 
free (3)
2.2
:
3.5
:
3.3
8.8
1.3
5.8
7.1
4.2
9.9
19.7
4.3
6.4
4.0
6.9
3.3
0.4
8.4
39.2
8.7
:
10.7
1.4
1.0
:
1.2
0.9
2.6

Owner
67.7
:
71.5
57.8
43.0
84.9
77.3
72.5
82.5
59.0
71.9
66.5
80.8
90.9
70.4
85.9
76.3
55.5
51.5
55.7
74.2
:
83.1
89.3
67.2
60.9
69.4
82.2
77.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

(1) Lithuania, unreliable.
(2) Cyprus and Slovakia, unreliable.
(3) The Netherlands and Iceland, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC cross sectional 2006 data

Changes in how and with whom people live have 
considerable  implications  for  the  location,  type 
and size of housing that people can aff ord to live 
in. Th  e  traditional  stock  of  housing  in  a  country 
is  not  always  suited  to  the  rapidly  changing 
demographic make-up of society. For example, in 
countries where there is a large stock of detached 
and semi-detached dwellings, there may be a lack 
of smaller houses or fl ats/apartments that are more 
suited to single persons or single parent families.

Housing  forms  one  of  the  most  important 
expenditure  items  of  household  budgets.  Th  e 
purchase of a house or fl at is normally the biggest 
purchase  that  home-owners  make  in  their  lives, 
while  those  who  choose  to  rent  are  also  likely 
to  spend  a  considerable  part  of  their  income  on 
housing;  it  should  be  noted  that  the  purchase  of 
real estate itself is not considered as consumption 
expenditure.

In 2006, Germany was the only Member State to 
report that less than half (43 %) of its households 
were  living  in  owner-occupied  accommodation. 
Owner occupation rates rose to upwards of 90 % 
in  Lithuania  and  to  more  than  80 %  in  the  two 
other Baltic States, Spain, Hungary, Slovenia and 
Slovakia. Th  e highest proportion of tenants paying 
rent was found in Germany (46.6 %), while upwards 
of  40 %  of  households  rented  in  the  Netherlands 
and Denmark too.

24

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   24
Consumers.indb   24

08.04.2009   09:47:33
08.04.2009   09:47:33

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Time-use

Time-use  surveys  fi ll  a  number  of  gaps  in  the 
statistical  information  available  in  the  social 
domain, as they can be used to unveil diff erences 
between  women  and  men  that  can  be  related  to 
their position in labour markets, their participation 
in  education,  cultural  activities,  or  other  spheres 
of  life.  In  particular,  time-use  surveys  provide 
information  on  the  possibilities  of 
valuable 
reconciling professional and family life – statistics 
that  deal  with  the  division  of  gainful  (paid) 
and  domestic  work.  Information  on  voluntary 
work, care, mobility and leisure time can also be 
produced  from  time-use  surveys. Th  e  analysis  of 
time-use  data  is  of  growing  relevance  to  policy 
makers  who  are  interested  in  learning  about  the 
evolution of the organisation of time in society and 
its economic implications.

Th  e 
information  presented  covers  the  time 
spent per person per day on a particular activity 
(averaged  over  the  course  of  a  whole  year).  Th  e 
most  important  category  is  that  of  sleep,  which 
generally  accounts  for  just  over  eight  hours  per 
day. Th  is is usually followed by time spent at work, 
aft er  which  the  diff erences  between  the  genders 
become  more  apparent,  with  women  tending  to 
spend considerably more time on domestic chores 
and caring for children, while men tend to spend 
more  time  watching  television,  playing  sports 
or  using  a  computer.  Women  spend,  on  average, 
about  ten  minutes  more  per  day  shopping,  with 
the  highest  average  time  spent  shopping  being 
recorded in France (41 minutes per day), followed 
by the United Kingdom (39 minutes).

Table 1.7: Number of rooms available to the household, 2006 (1)
(rooms)

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

1 
1.8
:
8.4
4.6
4.5
14.4
0.6
4.3
0.3
4.8
3.2
:
16.4
15.0
4.0
12.0
:
1.6
5.4
13.4
1.0
:
9.3
12.3
7.9
8.6
0.7
2.5
3.7

2 
5.5
:
28.0
18.4
21.9
35.8
2.8
20.2
1.3
12.3
17.9
1.8
41.7
37.8
10.5
40.1
1.1
5.5
20.2
35.3
6.1
:
28.1
21.6
13.2
20.3
9.2
13.0
15.5

3
13.1
:
37.0
22.4
30.3
31.1
4.9
43.5
6.8
23.3
37.5
6.7
27.9
31.5
17.4
33.2
5.3
12.9
27.9
29.1
28.4
:
33.0
40.6
22.5
21.6
22.0
23.8
20.7

4
20.4
:
16.3
24.6
20.9
10.7
12.6
25.1
20.9
26.6
26.3
14.4
9.4
9.1
19.7
10.0
18.0
26.3
20.3
11.1
38.9
:
18.1
14.5
21.7
19.1
30.1
25.8
22.0

5
23.4
:
6.2
15.9
11.8
5.0
30.4
5.5
40.6
19.7
9.7
24.5
3.2
5.0
20.7
3.5
27.6
31.5
12.5
6.2
15.1
:
7.1
7.1
18.0
14.9
20.1
19.4
17.1

6 
17.1
:
2.7
7.0
6.0
2.1
21.6
1.1
20.6
8.3
3.3
30.4
0.9
1.2
12.9
1.0
23.3
14.1
7.4
2.9
6.3
:
2.7
2.8
9.5
8.2
10.5
8.6
11.5

7 
8.8
:
0.8
3.6
2.5
0.6
14.4
:
5.6
3.1
1.0
14.1
:
0.3
7.4
:
11.4
4.8
3.2
1.1
2.4
:
0.8
0.8
3.9
4.1
4.5
3.6
5.5

8+
9.9
:
:
2.6
2.0
:
10.7
:
4.0
2.0
:
7.8
:
:
:
:
10.6
3.6
3.0
:
:
:
:
:
3.3
2.5
2.5
2.3
3.0

(1) A room is deﬁ ned as a space of a housing unit of at least 4m² such as normal bedrooms, 
dining rooms, living rooms and habitable cellars and attics with a height of over 2 metres and 
accessible from inside the unit. Kitchens are not counted unless the cooking facilities are in a 
room used for other purposes; thus for example, kitchen-cum-dining room is included as one 
room in the count of rooms. The following space of a housing unit does not count as rooms: 
bathrooms, toilets, corridors, utility rooms and lobbies. Verandas, lounges and conservatories 
only count if they are used all year round. A room used solely for business use is excluded, but 
is included if shared between private and business use. 1 room: Ireland, Spain, the Netherlands, 
Portugal, the United Kingdom and Iceland, unreliable. 2 rooms: Malta, unreliable. 6 rooms: 
Latvia, unreliable. 7 rooms: Lithuania and Slovakia, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC cross sectional 2006 data

  Consumers in Europe

25

Consumers.indb   25
Consumers.indb   25

08.04.2009   09:47:34
08.04.2009   09:47:34

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Table 1.8a: Time-use, population aged 20-74 years old (1)
(hours:minutes per day)

Sleep
Eating
Other personal care
Main and second job
Food preparation
Dish washing
Cleaning dwelling
Laundry
Ironing
Gardening
Shopping and services
Entertainment and culture
Walking and hiking
Other sports, outdoor activities
Computer and video games
Other computing
Reading books
Other reading
TV and video
Travel to/from work
Travel related to shopping
Travel related to leisure
Other

Sleep
Eating
Other personal care
Main and second job
Food preparation
Dish washing
Cleaning dwelling
Laundry
Ironing
Gardening
Shopping and services
Entertainment and culture
Walking and hiking
Other sports, outdoor activities
Computer and video games
Other computing
Reading books
Other reading
TV and video
Travel to/from work
Travel related to shopping
Travel related to leisure
Other

BE
08:15
01:49
00:42
03:05
00:22
00:10
00:08
00:01
00:01
00:19
00:24
00:10
00:12
00:15
00:05
00:22
00:06
00:22
02:35
00:25
00:16
00:15
03:41

08:34
01:50
00:47
01:52
00:57
00:20
00:26
00:09
00:19
00:10
00:33
00:11
00:11
00:07
00:02
00:09
00:08
00:16
02:13
00:15
00:18
00:16
03:57

BG
09:08
02:07
00:39
03:27
00:15
00:05
00:06
00:01
00:00
00:36
00:13
00:01
00:16
00:10
00:00
00:01
00:06
00:15
02:41
00:23
00:12
00:21
02:57

09:07
01:55
00:36
02:33
01:37
00:36
00:31
00:19
00:06
00:24
00:16
00:01
00:14
00:03
00:00
00:00
00:10
00:06
02:14
00:17
00:14
00:13
02:28

DE
08:08
01:43
00:49
03:21
00:16
00:08
00:11
00:02
00:01
00:17
00:29
00:14
00:13
00:15
00:05
00:16
00:06
00:31
01:58
00:27
00:16
00:34
03:40

08:15
01:46
00:56
01:53
00:49
00:21
00:39
00:13
00:10
00:13
00:38
00:14
00:15
00:12
00:02
00:06
00:08
00:30
01:40
00:13
00:19
00:33
03:55

Male
EE
08:24
01:19
00:52
04:20
00:21
00:06
00:09
00:01
00:00
00:16
00:20
00:05
00:10
00:13
00:01
00:02
00:14
00:23
02:29
00:28
00:13
00:22
03:12

ES
08:36
01:47
00:48
04:17
00:19
00:04
00:07
00:01
00:00
00:09
00:19
00:07
00:39
00:14
00:02
00:09
00:04
00:13
02:00
00:31
00:07
00:28
02:59

Female

08:26
01:12
00:53
03:02
01:19
00:25
00:34
00:14
00:07
00:19
00:29
00:04
00:10
00:05
00:00
00:01
00:17
00:20
02:06
00:20
00:16
00:18
03:03

08:32
01:44
00:49
02:05
01:20
00:29
00:50
00:11
00:12
00:03
00:35
00:06
00:32
00:06
00:00
00:03
00:04
00:08
01:46
00:18
00:12
00:24
03:31

FR
08:45
02:18
00:41
03:46
00:16
00:08
00:11
00:01
00:01
00:18
00:30
00:05
00:20
00:17
:
00:07
00:01
00:22
02:08
00:24
:
:
03:21

08:55
02:11
00:46
02:16
01:01
00:25
00:58
00:07
00:15
00:09
00:41
00:05
00:17
00:06
:
00:02
00:01
00:22
01:55
00:15
:
:
03:13

IT
08:17
01:57
01:02
04:11
00:11
00:05
00:09
00:00
00:00
00:16
00:22
00:06
00:23
00:15
00:02
00:07
00:04
00:17
01:52
00:32
00:12
00:36
03:04

08:19
01:52
01:01
01:50
01:19
00:35
01:24
00:10
00:20
00:06
00:36
00:04
00:17
00:06
00:00
00:02
00:06
00:10
01:29
00:15
00:17
00:27
03:15

LV
08:35
01:33
00:37
04:55
00:16
00:04
00:06
00:01
00:00
00:17
00:12
00:05
00:12
00:19
00:02
00:03
00:09
00:17
02:18
00:37
00:12
00:26
02:44

08:44
01:26
00:43
03:26
01:06
00:22
00:27
00:09
00:03
00:20
00:21
00:04
00:15
00:06
00:00
00:01
00:13
00:16
01:55
00:24
00:20
00:23
02:56

(1) Data only shown for those countries participating in the survey; all remaining Member States, not available.

Source: Harmonised European Time Use Survey [online database version 2.0]; created 2005-2007 by Statistics Finland and Statistics 
Sweden [reference date 2007-10-01]; (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/)

26

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   26
Consumers.indb   26

08.04.2009   09:47:34
08.04.2009   09:47:34

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Table 1.8b: Time-use, population aged 20-74 years old (1)
(hours:minutes per day)

Sleep
Eating
Other personal care
Main and second job
Food preparation
Dish washing
Cleaning dwelling
Laundry
Ironing
Gardening
Shopping and services
Entertainment and culture
Walking and hiking
Other sports, outdoor activities
Computer and video games
Other computing
Reading books
Other reading
TV and video
Travel to/from work
Travel related to shopping
Travel related to leisure
Other

Sleep
Eating
Other personal care
Main and second job
Food preparation
Dish washing
Cleaning dwelling
Laundry
Ironing
Gardening
Shopping and services
Entertainment and culture
Walking and hiking
Other sports, outdoor activities
Computer and video games
Other computing
Reading books
Other reading
TV and video
Travel to/from work
Travel related to shopping
Travel related to leisure
Other

LT
08:28
01:32
00:53
04:43
00:20
00:04
00:10
00:01
00:00
00:11
00:13
00:01
00:08
00:13
00:03
00:05
00:05
00:18
02:36
00:28
00:13
00:23
02:52

08:35
01:26
00:56
03:29
01:18
00:22
00:38
00:11
00:04
00:15
00:21
00:02
00:08
00:05
00:00
00:02
00:10
00:13
01:59
00:20
00:19
00:19
02:48

PL
08:21
01:33
00:50
03:58
00:25
00:06
00:09
00:01
00:01
00:12
00:21
00:02
00:13
00:12
00:06
00:05
00:07
00:14
02:34
00:23
00:14
00:27
03:26

08:35
01:34
00:54
02:14
01:30
00:29
00:34
00:14
00:07
00:10
00:30
00:02
00:12
00:04
00:01
00:02
00:13
00:12
02:03
00:14
00:19
00:25
03:22

Male
FI
08:22
01:23
00:38
03:46
00:21
00:04
00:08
00:02
00:00
00:06
00:26
00:06
00:12
00:25
00:04
00:06
00:09
00:35
02:25
00:18
00:11
00:33
03:40
Female
08:32
01:19
00:47
02:32
00:55
00:15
00:26
00:13
00:05
00:08
00:32
00:05
00:13
00:15
00:01
00:02
00:14
00:33
02:02
00:14
00:14
00:31
03:52

SI
08:18
01:33
00:40
03:49
00:16
00:04
00:08
00:00
00:00
00:32
00:16
00:05
00:19
00:17
00:01
00:06
00:04
00:19
02:12
00:21
00:11
00:28
04:01

08:25
01:26
00:41
02:39
01:24
00:28
00:39
00:09
00:16
00:25
00:21
00:04
00:18
00:08
00:00
00:02
00:09
00:14
01:44
00:16
00:14
00:23
03:35

SE
08:01
01:32
00:39
04:00
00:25
00:10
00:15
00:03
00:01
00:12
00:22
00:05
00:09
00:23
00:04
00:13
00:09
00:21
01:58
00:23
00:16
00:37
03:42

08:11
01:36
00:52
02:47
00:50
00:21
00:30
00:12
00:05
00:10
00:29
00:06
00:13
00:13
00:01
00:06
00:13
00:21
01:40
00:17
00:17
00:35
03:55

UK
08:18
01:24
00:41
04:06
00:26
00:09
00:11
00:02
00:02
00:12
00:24
00:07
00:04
00:14
00:04
00:10
00:05
00:21
02:37
00:29
00:16
00:36
03:02

08:27
01:26
00:50
02:21
00:59
00:18
00:38
00:11
00:11
00:07
00:39
00:06
00:03
00:07
00:01
00:04
00:07
00:18
02:09
00:17
00:22
00:34
03:45

NO
07:56
01:25
00:45
04:03
00:25
00:08
00:14
00:02
00:00
00:10
00:21
00:07
00:13
00:20
00:03
00:10
00:07
00:26
02:06
00:26
00:13
00:36
03:44

08:10
01:20
00:56
02:37
00:51
00:21
00:33
00:11
00:04
00:09
00:27
00:06
00:13
00:14
00:01
00:05
00:11
00:28
01:39
00:18
00:14
00:33
04:19

(1) Data are taken from national time use surveys (TUS) conducted between 1998 and 2004 and refer to men and women aged 20 to 74 
years; data only shown for those countries participating in the survey; all remaining Member States, not available.

Source: Harmonised European Time Use Survey [online database version 2.0]; created 2005-2007 by Statistics Finland and Statistics 
Sweden [reference date 2007-10-01]; (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/)

  Consumers in Europe

27

Consumers.indb   27
Consumers.indb   27

08.04.2009   09:47:35
08.04.2009   09:47:35

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Income levels and 
income distribution

Within  the  context  of  this  publication,  income 
distribution  refers  to  individuals  and  households 
(as opposed to its distribution between factors of 
production). Governments may try to create more 
inclusive  societies  through  the  re-distribution 
of 
through  macro-economic 
expansion  that  puts  more  people  into  work,  or 
through  compensatory  policies  (taxes  and  social 
benefi ts)  that  adjust  for  discrepancies  in  income 
distribution.

income,  either 

As noted above, income is clearly a key determinant 
in explaining consumption expenditure patterns. 
In order to take account of the diff erent sizes and 
compositions  of  households,  statistics  on  income 
levels can be adjusted to an ‘equivalised income’: 
where members of a household are given weights, 
with 1 given to the fi rst adult in a household, 0.5 to 

each remaining adult, and 0.33 to each child; the 
‘equivalised size’ of a household is the sum of these 
weights. Th  e  ‘equivalised  income’  of  a  household 
and  each  of  its  members  can  then  be  calculated 
by  summing  the  income  of  each  member  of 
the  household  and  dividing  by  the  equivalised 
size,  allowing  comparisons  to  be  made  between 
household units of diff erent sizes and structures.

Wages  from  paid  employment  are  generally  the 
main source of income for most households – this 
is particularly true among those who are relatively 
rich,  whereas  social  transfers  can  be  the  main 
source  of  income  among  households  with  lower 
incomes.  In  the  EU-27  in  2005,  average  gross 
annual earnings in industry and services of full-
time  employees  in  enterprises  with  10  or  more 
employees were almost EUR 29 000, ranging from 
EUR  48 307  in  Denmark  (two  thirds  more  than 
the EU-27 average) to EUR 2 195 in Bulgaria (7.6 % 
of the EU-27 average).

Figure 1.9: Average gross annual earnings in industry and services of full-time employees in enterprises with 
10 or more employees, 2006 (1)
(EUR)

50 000

40 000

30 000

20 000

10 000

0

DK UK LU DE IE
(2)

NL
(2)

BE AT SE

FI

FR
(2)

EU-
27
(2)

CY ES EL
(3)

PT MT CZ HU SK PL
(2)

LV RO LT
(4)

BG

NO CH IS
(5)

HR
(2)

(1) Estonia, Italy and Slovenia, not available.
(2) 2005.
(3) 2003.
(4) 1999.
(5) 2002.

Source: Eurostat, earnings (tec00030)

28

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   28
Consumers.indb   28

08.04.2009   09:47:35
08.04.2009   09:47:35

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Guadeloupe (FR)

Martinique (FR)

0

25

0

20

Guyane (FR)

Réunion (FR)

0

100

0

20

Açores (PT)

Madeira (PT)

0

100

0

20

Canarias (ES)

Malta

0

100

0

10

Ísland

0 100

Map 1.2: Disposable income at NUTS level 2, 2005 (1)
(EUR per inhabitant)

Disposable income,
by NUTS 2 regions, 2005 (1)
(EUR per inhabitant)

<= 10 000
10 000 - <= 15 000
15 000 - <= 17 500
> 17 500
Data not available

(1) All regions in Italy and Norway, 2004;
Italy, provisional.

© EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries
Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 12/2008

0

600 km

Source: Eurostat, household accounts - ESA95 (reg_ehh2inc)

  Consumers in Europe

29

Consumers.indb   29
Consumers.indb   29

08.04.2009   09:47:36
08.04.2009   09:47:36

Some governments try to ensure a certain standard 
of living by fi xing a minimum wage, while others 
try to eff ect a redistribution of income by applying 
diff erent  tax  rates  –  in  particular,  lower  or  zero 
rates for lower incomes. In the fi rst half of 2008, 
minimum  wages  ranged  from  EUR  1 570  per 
month in Luxembourg to EUR 113 in Bulgaria.

Th  e  ratio  of  the  minimum  wage  compared  with 
average  gross  earnings  in  industry  and  services 
provides one indication of income equality. In the 
Baltic Member States, the minimum monthly wage 
equated  to  approximately  one  third  of  average 
monthly earnings. At the other end of the range, 
Malta  (51.9 %)  and  Luxembourg  (50.5 %)  were 
the  only  Member  States  (among  those  for  which 
data  are  available)  to  report  that  their  minimum 
wage equated to more than half the average level of 
monthly earnings.

Income distribution across society could (in theory) 
range from an equal distribution, where everyone 
had  the  same  income,  to  a  completely  unequal 
distribution, where only one person was earning all 
the money; in practise, the situation is somewhere 
between  these  two  extremes.  Th  e  Gini  coeffi  cient 
provides  a  measure  of  income  distribution:  a  low 
Gini  coeffi  cient  indicates  more  equal  income 
distribution  (0  is  perfect  equality),  while  a  high 
coeffi  cient indicates a more unequal distribution (1 
corresponds  to  perfect  inequality  or  a  completely 
unequal  distribution);  the  Gini  index  is  the  Gini 
coeffi  cient expressed as a percentage. In the EU-25 
the Gini index for income was 30 % in 2006, ranging 
from 39 % in Latvia and 38 % in Portugal down to 
24 % in Bulgaria, Denmark, Slovenia and Sweden. 

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Table 1.9: Minimum wages, industry and services

Monthly 
minimum 
wage, first 
half 2008 
(EUR)
1 310
113
304
:
:
278
1 462
681
700
1 280
:
:
229
232
1 570
273
612
1 335
:
313
497
141
539
243
:
:
1 223
354
696

Full-time 
employees 
earning the 
minimum wage, 
2007 (%) (1)
:
12.4
2.3
:
:
4.8
3.3
:
0.7
9.0
:
:
9.2
7.0
11.0
2.4
4.2
2.2
:
2.3
5.5
8.2
3.4
1.6
:
:
2.0
:
1.3

Minimum monthly 
wage as proportion 
of average monthly 
earnings, 
2007 (%) (2)
46.4
42.6
39.7
:
:
33.2
43.0
:
42.1
:
:
:
31.5
33.5
50.5
35.4
51.9
45.5
:
36.1
41.6
35.7
44.2
46.6
:
:
38.2
:
33.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
US

(1) The Czech Republic, Ireland, Poland and Romania, 2006; Estonia and the Netherlands, 2005.
(2) The Czech Republic, Poland and Romania, 2006; Estonia and the Netherlands, 2005; 
Belgium, 2002.

Source: Eurostat, earnings (earn_minw_cur, earn_minw_pc and earn_minw_avg)

Figure 1.10: Inequality of income distribution: Gini index, 2006 (1)
(%)

50

40

30

20

10

0

LT EL EE HU PL RO IE

LV PT
(2)

IT UK ES EU-
25
(3)

CY BE LU MT
(2)

SK DE FR NL FI CZ AT BG DK SI SE

TR
(4)

NO HR
(4)

IS
(2)

(1) The Gini index is a measure of statistical dispersion: a low Gini coefﬁ cient indicates more equal income or wealth distribution, while a high Gini coefﬁ cient indicates 
more unequal distribution (0 corresponds to perfect equality and 1 corresponds to perfect inequality); the Gini index is the Gini coefﬁ cient expressed as a percentage.
(2) Provisional.
(3) Estimate.
(4) 2003.

Source: Eurostat, income distribution and monetary poverty (ilc_sic)

30

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   30
Consumers.indb   30

08.04.2009   09:48:00
08.04.2009   09:48:00

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Th  e  S80/S20  income  quintile  share  ratio  is  an 
alternative measure of income distribution, derived 
as the ratio of total income received by the 20 % of 
the  population  with  the  highest  income  (the  top 
quintile) compared with that received by the 20 % 
of the population with the lowest income (bottom 
quintile). In the EU-25 this ratio stood at 4.8 in 2006; 

in other words the top 20 % had an annual income 
that was 4.8 times as high as that for the lowest 20 % 
of  earners.  Th  e  distribution  of  the  Member  States 
around the EU average was similar to that recorded 
for the Gini coeffi  cient, ranging from a high of 7.9 in 
Latvia and more than 6 in Portugal, Lithuania and 
Greece, down to 3.4 in Denmark and Slovenia.

Figure 1.11: Inequality of income 
distribution: S80/S20 income quintile share 
ratio, 2006 (1)

0

2

4

6

8

LV

PT (2)

LT

EL

PL

EE

IT

HU

UK

ES

RO

IE

EU-25 (3)

CY

BE

LU

MT (2)

DE

FR

SK

NL

AT

FI

BG

CZ

SE

DK

SI

TR (4)

HR (4)

IS (2)

Table 1.10: Tax rates on low wage earners, 2006
(%)

Tax wedge 
on labour
costs (1)
40.1
49.2
31.1
40.1
39.3
47.4
38.4
16.3
35.4
35.9
44.5
41.5
11.9
41.8
40.6
30.6
42.9
18.4
40.6
43.5
42.5
31.7
42.2
41.2
35.6
38.9
46.0
30.4
42.0
23.6
34.3
26.9
:
26.4

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH
JP
US

Unem-
ployment
trap (2)
75.4
83.0
74.3
63.0
91.0
75.0
64.0
76.0
59.0
80.0
81.0
71.0
62.0
88.0
78.7
88.0
78.0
61.7
86.0
67.0
82.0
81.0
70.5
94.1
44.0
76.0
87.0
68.0
:
82.0
75.0
:
59.0
70.0

Low wage trap:
single person
without
children (3)
47.4
58.0
16.2
31.0
82.0
51.0
25.0
53.0
19.0
26.0
35.0
33.0
6.0
32.0
30.0
51.0
31.0
17.9
70.0
37.0
66.0
20.0
30.3
67.5
24.0
61.0
55.0
58.0
:
39.0
37.0
:
20.0
32.0

Low wage trap: 
one-earner 
married couple 
with two 
children (3)
62.2
46.0
19.2
53.0
92.0
79.0
19.0
77.0
16.0
17.0
56.0
-12.0
93.0
100.0
52.2
110.0
54.0
8.3
77.0
64.0
78.0
78.0
19.4
72.6
29.0
100.0
89.0
85.0
:
67.0
84.0
:
93.0
42.0

(1) Ratio of total income received by the 20 % of the country’s 
population with the highest income (top quintile) to that received 
by the 20 % of the country’s population with the lowest income 
(lowest quintile); income must be understood as equivalised 
disposable income.
(2) Provisional.
(3) Estimate.
(4) 2003.

Source: Eurostat, income distribution and monetary poverty 
(ilc_pns)

(1) Income tax on gross wage earnings plus the employee’s and the employer’s social security 
contributions, expressed as a percentage of the total labour costs; single persons without 
children earning 67 % of the average wage in industry and services.
(2) Percentage of gross earnings which is taxed away through higher tax and social security 
contributions and the withdrawal of unemployment and other beneﬁ ts when an unemployed 
person returns to employment; single persons without children earning 67 % of the average 
wage in industry and services.
(3) Percentage of gross earnings which is taxed away through the combined effects of income 
taxes, social security contributions and any withdrawal of beneﬁ ts when gross earnings 
increase from 33 % to 67 % of the average wage in industry and services.

Source: Eurostat, net earnings and tax rates (earn_nt_taxwedge, earn_nt_unemtrp and earn_
nt_lowwtrp)

  Consumers in Europe

31

Consumers.indb   31
Consumers.indb   31

08.04.2009   09:48:01
08.04.2009   09:48:01

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Income  distribution  in  the  EU-27  is  generally 
skewed in favour of men, as there was, on average, 
a  15 %  diff erence  between  average  gross  hourly 
earnings  of  male  and  female  paid  employees 
(when measured as a percentage of average gross 
hourly earnings of men) in 2006. Gender pay gaps 
existed  in  each  of  the  Member  States,  ranging 
from a high of 25 % in Estonia (2005) to just 3 % 
in Malta.

Th  e  relative  median  income  ratio  compares  the 
median  income  of  those  aged  65  or  more  with 
that of persons aged less than 65. Given that most 
persons aged 65 or over no longer work, it is not 
surprising to fi nd that their median income was 
usually  below  that  of  the  younger  generations; 
within  the  EU-25  the  ratio  was  0.85  in  2006. 

Poland  was  the  only  Member  State  where  the 
median  income  of  those  aged  65  or  more  was 
higher  than  that  of  persons  aged  less  than  65 
(1.07).

A  related  measure  is  the  aggregate  replacement 
ratio,  which  is  defi ned  as  the  ratio  of  income 
from pensions for persons aged between 65 and 
74  years  compared  with  income  from  work  for 
persons aged between 50 and 59 years. Th  is stood 
at 0.51 for the EU-25 in 2006, with highs of 0.65 
in Luxembourg and Austria, while Ireland (0.35) 
and Cyprus (0.28) closed the ranking; note that 
this indicator can be aff ected not only by the level 
of pensions and incomes in each country, but also 
by the rate of early retirement among those aged 
50 to 59.

Figure 1.12: Gender pay gap in unadjusted form, employees aged 16-64 working at least 15 hours per week, 2006
(diﬀ erence between average gross hourly earnings of male paid employees and of female paid employees 
as a percentage of average gross hourly earnings of male paid employees)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

EE
(1)

CY
(2)

DE SK UK AT FI CZ NL
(1)

DK LV LT SE EU-
27
(3)

BG LU ES PL FR
(2)

HU EL RO IE

IT
(1)

PT
(2)

SI
(2)

BE
(2)

MT

CH NO HR
(1)

(1) 2005.
(2) Provisional.
(3) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, gross earnings - annual data (earn_gr_gpg)

Figure 1.13: Relative median income ratio, 2006 (1)

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00

PL LU HU AT DE FR IT NL EU-
25
(2)

SI

SK BG MT
(3)

SE CZ EL PT
(3)

LT

FI

ES UK BE DK EE

IE

LV CY

NO

IS
(3)

(1) Persons aged 65 years and over compared with persons aged less than 65 years; Romania, not available.
(2) Estimate.
(3) Provisional.

Source: Eurostat, income and living conditions (ilc_ov7a)

32

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   32
Consumers.indb   32

08.04.2009   09:48:02
08.04.2009   09:48:02

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Figure 1.14: Aggregate replacement ratio, 2006 (1)

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00

LU AT BG SE PL PT
(2)

FR IT

SK HU CZ EU-
25
(3)

EE EL LV MT
(2)

ES

FI DE LT UK NL BE

SI DK IE CY

NO IS
(2)

(1) Ratio of income from pensions of persons aged between 65 and 74 years compared with income from work of persons aged between 50 and 59 years; Romania, 
not available.
(2) Provisional.
(3) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, income distribution and monetary poverty (ilc_pns)

Consumption or savings?

Consumers  oft en  save  with  a  particular  goal  in 
mind: for example, the purchase of a house, a car, 
a holiday or retirement; savings in this light may 
be  seen  as  deferred  or  postponed  consumption. 
Savings  can  also  be  made  in  order  to  smooth 
income  fl uctuations  and  to  have  some  security 
– for example, to have some money available in 
case of illness, unemployment or retirement.

As  with  consumption  expenditure,  the  capacity 
to save depends primarily on income: those with 
more money are generally more likely to be able to 
save something at the end of the month. However, 
the  willingness  to  save  also  varies  between 
individuals: some people are more prudent, while 
others  tend  to  live  from  day-to-day.  Otherwise, 
demographics,  the  infl ation  rate,  interest  rates, 
the performance of fi nancial markets, or national 
tax regimes are all factors that can infl uence, to 
some degree, the rate of saving.

Net  disposable  income  ranged  from  upwards  of 
EUR 30 000 per inhabitant in Denmark, Sweden 
and Ireland in 2007, to less than EUR 10 000 in 
the majority of the Member States that joined the 
EU  in  2004  or  2007  (Cyprus  and  Slovenia  were 
exceptions, while no data are available for Malta 
or Romania).

Th  e  (net)  savings  ratio  is  defi ned  as  net  savings 
divided  by  net  disposable  income;  net  savings 
are the part of net disposable income that is not 
spent as fi nal consumption expenditure. As such, 
the  savings  ratio  will  increase  when  disposable 
income grows at a faster pace than consumption 
expenditure. Th  e savings ratio may be negative if 

Table 1.11: Income and savings, 2007
(EUR per inhabitant)

Net 
disposable 
income
24 700
26 400
3 200
9 500
34 800
25 200
9 500
31 500
17 600
18 900
25 500
21 400
29 500
7 400
7 200
:
7 100
:
29 300
27 400
6 900
12 300
:
13 700
8 000
28 700
32 100
29 300
38 300
52 400
35 500
19 900

Saving as 
a share of 
disposable 
income (%)
8.1
11.7
0.0
10.5
9.5
12.7
14.7
13.7
-1.7
6.9
7.1
4.7
:
0.0
5.6
:
4.2
:
16.0
13.9
8.7
-5.7
:
14.6
6.3
15.3
18.1
3.4
-1.3
29.4
22.3
9.5

Net 
saving
2 000
3 100
0
1 000
3 300
3 200
1 400
4 300
-300
1 300
1 800
1 000
:
0
400
:
300
:
4 700
3 800
600
-700
:
2 000
500
4 400
5 800
1 000
-500
15 400
7 900
1 900

EU-15
BE
BG
CZ (1)
DK
DE
EE
IE (1)
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU (2)
MT
NL
AT (1)
PL (1)
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO
CH (1)
JP (1)

(1) Forecasts.
(2) 2006.

Source: Eurostat, income, saving and net lending/net borrowing - current prices (nama_inc_c)

  Consumers in Europe

33

Consumers.indb   33
Consumers.indb   33

08.04.2009   09:48:03
08.04.2009   09:48:03

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Figure 1.15: Consumer attitudes to making 
major purchases or savings and interest 
rates, EU-27
(seasonally adjusted balance, left-hand 
scale; %, right-hand scale)

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

5

4

3

2

1

0

-1

-2

-3

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005 2008

Major purchases (left-hand scale) (1)

Savings (left-hand scale) (2)

Official deposit rate (right-hand scale) (3)

(1) In view of the general economic situation, do you think that 
now is the right moment for people to make major purchases such 
as furniture, electrical/electronic devices, etc.?
(2) Which of these statements best describes the current ﬁ nancial 
situation of your household (saving a lot, saving a little, just 
managing to make ends meet on our income, having to draw on 
our savings, running into debt)?
(3) Moving euro area aggregate based on membership (EA-11 up 
to 2000, EA-12 up to 2006, EA-13 up to 2007, EA-15 from 2008); 
series starts in 1999.

Source: Eurostat and Directorate-General for Economic and 
Financial Affairs, business and consumer surveys and interest rates 
(bsco_m and irt_cb_a)

expenditure  exceeds  income,  which  may  occur 
when  people  run  down  their  savings  or  incur 
debt. Savings ratios have fallen in many countries 
in  recent  decades,  perhaps  as  a  result  of  credit 
becoming  more  easily  accessible.  Th  e  fi nancial 
crisis in the second half of 2008 may have reversed 
this trend and, at the time of writing, it is already 
apparent that many consumers face diffi  culties in 
obtaining mortgages or loans.

In  2007,  the  highest  savings  ratios  within  the 
EU  were  recorded  in  Sweden,  the  Netherlands 
and Finland (all above 15 %). On the other hand, 
there  was  no  net  saving  in  Bulgaria  or  Latvia, 
and  households  in  Greece  (-1.7 %)  and  Portugal 
(-5.7 %) were spending more than their income.

Credit, ability to pay and 
indebtedness

Prior  to  the  credit  crisis  in  the  second  half  of 
2008,  it  was  relatively  easy  for  most  consumers 
to  access  credit,  as  retailers  and  lenders  made  a 
range  of  diff erent  payment  methods  available, 
allowing  consumers  a  high  degree  of  fl exibility 
to make purchases. As such, it was commonplace 
for consumers to turn to credit in order to satisfy 
their desire to purchase new goods, such as a new 
car or a piece of furniture, rather than deferring 
purchases until they had enough money to pay for 
them outright. At the time of writing, it remains 
to  be  seen  how  the  credit  crisis  will  aff ect  the 
liquidity of markets and whether it will be as easy 
for consumers to borrow money in the future.

Th  e  development  of  banking  and  payment 
networks,  fi nancial  markets,  and  various 
technological  advances  all  contribute  to  change 
the way that consumers purchase goods. Th  is can 
be witnessed in terms of both the number of bank 
cards issued and the number of automated teller 
machines  (ATMs)  available  to  customers.  It  is 
technically easy for the majority of consumers to 
pay for goods and services, whether they happen 
to  be  doing  their  shopping  in  a  retail  store,  on-
line  or  by  mail.  However,  the  ease  of  making 
payments  and  the  availability  of  credit  carries 
risks, as witnessed by the crisis in the second half 

34

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   34
Consumers.indb   34

08.04.2009   09:48:03
08.04.2009   09:48:03

of 2008. It would appear likely that in the future, 
credit,  at  least  for  a  period,  will  be  less  easily 
accessible. Furthermore, with growing fears of a 
recession,  it  is  likely  that  the  number  of  people 
who  face  diffi  culties  in  paying  back  mortgages, 
loans or other forms of debt will increase.

According to the European Central Bank (ECB), 
there were just over 715 million bank cards issued 
in the EU-27 (excluding Denmark) in 2006, while 
more  than  360  thousand  ATMs  were  available 
across the whole of the EU-27.

Th  e  most  common  payment  instrument  in  the 
majority of the Member States that joined the EU 
in 2004 or 2007 was generally the credit transfer, 
which  accounted  for  more  than  seven  out  of 
every  ten  transactions  in  Hungary,  Romania 
and Poland. In most of the EU-15 Member States 
the  bank  card  was  generally  the  most  common 
method of payment, accounting for more than six 
out of every ten transactions in Portugal, Denmark 
and Sweden. Th  e use of direct debit as a payment 
instrument was particularly high (above 40 % of 
all  transactions)  in  Spain  and  Germany.  Th  ere 
were wide disparities in the use of cheques across 
the Member States: a majority of transactions in 
Malta  were  conducted  using  cheques,  and  they 
were  also  the  most  important  payment  method 
in Cyprus, and remained relatively important in 
France  (25.6 %  of  all  transactions),  Ireland  and 
Greece (both around 20 %). In contrast, cheques 
accounted for less than 1 % of all transactions in 
16 of the remaining Member States.

While  increased  European  integration  in  the 
form  of  the  internal  market  and  the  single 
currency  may  help  explain,  at  least  in  part,  the 
convergence  of  interest  rates  during  the  past 
decade, consumer credit remained almost twice 
as  expensive  in  Portugal  (12.2 %)  as  in  Finland 
(6.3 %)  in  2007.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the 
two  countries  reporting  negative  savings  rates, 
Portugal  and  Greece,  also  reported  the  highest 
consumer  credit  rates  (among  those  for  which 
data  are  available).  According  to  Eurofi nas,  the 
majority (56 %) of consumer credit loans in 2006 
(in  terms  of  value)  were  granted  for  personal 
consumption, while almost one third (31 %) were 
for vehicle fi nance, and the remainder (13 %) for 
mortgages.

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Table 1.12: Access to the banking network and payment 
instruments, 2006

Number 
of cards 
issued
 (million)
16.61
6.02
8.19
:
120.17
1.62
8.25
15.14
74.31
94.05
70.87
0.86
2.07
3.54
1.07
8.22
0.51
31.44
9.35
23.85
17.64
9.18
3.14
4.32
6.26
13.89
164.64

Number of 
terminals - 
ATMs 
(1 000)
13.94
3.66
3.28
3.09
53.89
0.92
3.31
6.74
58.45
47.82
43.69
0.52
0.95
1.15
0.44
3.81
0.16
8.11
7.99
9.94
14.69
6.04
1.52
2.00
3.28
2.81
60.47

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Payment instruments 
(% of total volume of transactions)
Credit 
transfers
42.5
68.2
52.9
21.6
42.2
39.7
27.6
20.0
14.5
17.5
29.6
14.8
63.7
52.1
48.3
76.7
17.2
32.7
47.5
71.3
10.1
75.7
54.9
66.8
42.5
29.2
21.2

Cards Cheques
0.7
0.0
0.0
1.6
0.6
0.0
20.6
19.0
3.5
25.6
12.6
37.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.0
52.8
0.0
0.3
0.0
15.0
4.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.1
12.3

Direct 
debit
11.7
1.6
34.8
14.2
42.8
7.1
18.0
11.2
44.7
18.3
13.3
15.9
2.2
3.9
10.1
9.3
3.1
27.2
35.7
1.1
11.3
10.6
12.6
16.1
5.1
10.0
19.8

40.3
30.2
10.9
62.6
14.2
53.1
33.8
49.0
35.7
37.6
34.3
32.3
34.1
43.5
38.5
13.8
27.0
36.3
15.2
27.5
63.6
9.5
32.2
17.0
52.3
60.7
46.6

(1) 2004.

Source: European Central Bank (sdw.ecb.int)

Figure 1.16: Convergence of interest rates, coeffi  cient of 
variation for housing loans to households (1)
(%)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

EU-25
Euro area (2)

(1) Estimates.
(2) Moving euro area aggregate based on membership (EA-11 up to 2000, EA-12 up to 2006).

Source: Eurostat, convergence of interest rates - annual data (irt_cvg_a)

  Consumers in Europe

35

Consumers.indb   35
Consumers.indb   35

08.04.2009   09:48:04
08.04.2009   09:48:04

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Figure 1.17: Consumer credit rate, 2007 (1)
(%)

14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

PT

EL

IT

ES

NL

SI

DE

BE

FR

IE

FI

(1) Information presented for those Member States with data available.

Source: European Central Bank (sdw.ecb.int)

Table 1.13: Ability to pay, 2006
(% of households)

Arrears on 
mortgage or 
rent payments (1)
Yes (5)
No
58.9
2.6
:
:
55.9
4.0
98.0
2.0
94.6
2.1
14.7
0.8
44.5
3.6
24.1
5.3
35.1
2.1
59.7
5.2
28.0
3.2
27.5
6.8
29.3
3.0
5.1
0.5
61.6
1.0
17.8
1.9
33.6
1.3
96.5
2.9
57.8
1.4
7.9
1.8
40.4
2.0
:
:
6.2
1.6
57.5
4.6
59.1
4.6
85.3
3.5
64.4
4.0
72.6
6.1
72.9
6.1

Arrears on 
utility bills (2)

Arrears on hire 
purchase  or 
other loans (3)

Yes (6)
4.4
:
5.0
2.8
4.5
5.7
6.0
26.3
2.6
6.0
9.3
9.0
12.6
12.9
1.6
12.9
5.9
2.7
1.6
17.5
4.5
:
10.4
5.9
4.0
4.1
0.2
6.5
5.0

No
93.0
:
93.8
97.2
94.1
94.1
90.5
72.5
74.4
93.9
90.7
89.1
85.2
86.7
95.6
86.1
94.0
97.2
98.3
78.3
90.9
:
88.7
93.3
95.6
91.7
99.8
84.3
93.5

Yes (7)
1.7
:
2.4
3.5
2.3
1.1
2.4
10.1
1.5
2.5
2.2
11.4
1.6
1.4
0.7
2.1
0.8
1.3
1.1
4.4
1.0
:
3.9
2.3
2.2
3.5
2.4
3.8
6.3

No
33.1
:
20.3
96.5
95.9
21.8
68.0
26.3
20.7
42.7
14.4
38.6
28.7
18.2
54.6
15.2
11.0
13.4
10.4
24.8
36.9
:
30.0
48.8
37.8
49.5
97.5
31.2
40.2

Capacity to 
face unexpected 
expenses (4)
Yes
76.9
:
58.7
71.7
58.1
69.2
60.6
66.9
68.7
65.7
71.6
55.1
27.6
38.9
81.7
46.5
68.0
74.0
72.0
42.0
81.8
:
54.3
48.7
65.4
83.3
71.1
70.8
66.0

No
23.0
:
41.3
26.9
41.3
30.8
39.2
33.1
31.2
34.0
28.4
44.9
72.4
61.1
18.1
52.9
32.0
25.6
27.5
58.0
18.2
:
45.5
51.1
33.4
14.9
28.7
28.6
32.0

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
NO
IS

(1) In arrears at any time in the last 12 months; ﬁ gures do not sum to 100 % as some households are outright owners or live in rent free 
accommodation.
(2) In arrears at any time in the last 12 months; ﬁ gures do not sum to 100 % as some households do not pay utility bills.
(3) In arrears at any time in the last 12 months; ﬁ gures do not sum to 100 % as some households have no hire purchase instalments or 
other loan payments.
(4) Capacity for household to face a ﬁ nancial expense without asking for ﬁ nancial help from anybody, debiting their account within one 
month, while not affecting their ability to pay for existing debts in the same manner as before the unexpected expense was borne.
(5) Estonia, Lithuania and Malta, unreliable.
(6) The United Kingdom, unreliable.
(7) Malta, Austria and Portugal, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC cross-sectional 2006 data

36

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   36
Consumers.indb   36

08.04.2009   09:48:05
08.04.2009   09:48:05

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Figure 1.18: Breakdown of consumer credit 
by product, EU, 2006 (1)
(share of value of new loans granted, 
EUR million)

Figure 1.19: Diffi  culty paying the bills at the 
end of the month, capital cities, 2006 (1)
(index, 0-100)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Valletta

Ankara

Roma

Sofia

Lisboa

Athina

Riga

Lefkosia

London

Bruxelles / Brussel

Vilnius

Paris

Zagreb

Warszawa

Budapest

Helsinki

Madrid

Amsterdam

Dublin

Bratislava

Berlin

Ljubljana

Tallinn

Bucureşti

Luxembourg

Wien

Praha

Stockholm

København

(1) 0: no difﬁ culty; 100: always have difﬁ culty.

Source: Eurostat, perception survey results (urb_percep)

Mortgages
13%

Consumer credit 
for personal 
consumption
56%

Vehicle finance
31%

(1) Euroﬁ nas currently represents 16 Member Associations 
in 15 countries, and more than 1 000 ﬁ nance houses, captive 
companies, specialised and universal banks.

Source: Euroﬁ nas, facts and ﬁ gures (www.euroﬁ nas.org)

With consumers using a variety of credit facilities, 
some  households  face  considerable  diffi  culties 
in  balancing  their  accounts  at  the  end  of  the 
month.  Eurostat  statistics  on  income  and  living 
conditions (EU-SILC) for 2006 show that as many 
as 6.8 % of households in Cyprus were in arrears 
on  mortgage  or  rent  payments,  and  upwards  of 
5 %  of  households  in  Greece  and  France.  In  a 
similar  vein,  more  than  10 %  of  households  in 
Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary and Slovenia were in 
arrears for paying their utility bills, a share that 
rose  to  17.5 %  in  Poland  and  26.3 %  in  Greece. 
A  similar  picture  emerged  concerning  hire 
purchase instalments or other loans, where more 
than 10 % of Greek and Cypriot households were 
in  arrears,  the  next  highest  proportion  being 
4.4 % in Poland.

An  alternative  measure  for  studying  whether 
households are living within their means is to look 
at the capacity of households to face unexpected 
fi nancial  expenses,  defi ned  for  this  purpose  as 
being able to meet an expense without asking for 
fi nancial help from anybody, debiting an account 
within one month, while not aff ecting the ability 
to  pay  for  existing  debts  in  the  same  manner 
as  before  the  unexpected  expense  was  borne. 
Upwards of four out of every fi ve households in 
Luxembourg, Portugal and Sweden reported that 
they were able to cope with such an unexpected 
fi nancial  expense  in  2006,  while  less  than  half 
of all households in Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, 
Poland and Slovakia were able to do so.

  Consumers in Europe

37

Consumers.indb   37
Consumers.indb   37

08.04.2009   09:48:06
08.04.2009   09:48:06

I

Consumer proﬁ le

Consumer confi dence

Th  e  choice  of  whether  to  spend  or  save  money 
is,  in  part,  related  to  consumer  confi dence  –  in 
particular,  the  outlook  that  consumers  have  for 
the  evolution  of  the  general  economic  situation 
during the coming months. Consumer confi dence 
can  be  measured  in  terms  of  the  expected  and 
actual evolution of a range of diff erent indicators. 
For  example,  when  questioned  about  their 
expectations  for  the  evolution  of  prices  during 
the next 12 months, consumers in the EU-27 were 
generally  quite  accurate,  although  actual  price 
changes  tended  to  vary  more  than  consumers 
anticipated.

When questioned about future expectations for the 
fi nancial situation of their own household, EU-27 
consumers  have,  since  1985,  been  consistently 
slightly more optimistic than the actual reality of 
their situation, as measured by the change in their 
fi nancial position during the previous 12 months. 
Nevertheless, when asked whether they thought 
they  would  be  likely  to  make  a  major  purchase 
in the coming 12 months, a balance of -20.9 was 
recorded for the EU-27 in May 2008. Using this 
measure,  there  were  particularly  low  levels  of 
consumer  confi dence  in  Greece,  Hungary  and 
Portugal, where the balance fell below -40 in each 
case.  Given  the  current  economic  situation  and 
the reverberations of the credit crisis, it is likely 
that consumer confi dence has subsequently fallen 
much lower.

Table 1.14: Consumer opinion, May 2008
(seasonally adjusted, balance, -100 to 100)

Price 
trends 
over the
 next 12 
months (1)
30.8
20.5
54.2
36.7
22.5
36.1
37.3
:
59.0
27.4
19.8
6.6
47.1
48.9
57.5
35.5
68.5
50.3
48.8
37.4
40.8
55.1
56.9
31.2
68.7
44.7
41.2
32.7

Major 
purchases 
over the 
next 12 
months (2)
-20.9
-16.9
-15.2
-7.9
-2.9
-29.6
-17.4
:
-33.2
-35.6
-8.0
-12.9
-1.3
-5.7
16.2
-17.2
-50.0
0.3
-12.4
-24.4
-1.2
-13.5
-29.0
-9.4
-19.1
-12.7
-10.9
-28.1

Consumer 
confi-
dence (3)
-13.6
-7.8
-29.5
-5.9
3.7
-4.2
-19.2
:
-43.8
-30.5
-18.2
-19.5
-30.6
-22.9
-14.9
1.7
-49.5
-17.5
1.4
1.6
-1.0
-48.0
-13.8
-20.7
-14.0
12.0
7.1
-14.6

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (4)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

(1) By comparison with the past 12 months, how do you expect 
that consumer prices will develop in the next 12 months?
(2) Compared to the past 12 months, do you expect to spend more 
or less money on major purchases (furniture, electrical/electronic 
devices, etc.) over the next 12 months?
(3) Arithmetic average of the balances (in percentage points) 
of the answers to the questions on the ﬁ nancial situation of 
households, the general economic situation, unemployment 
expectations (with inverted sign) and savings, all over the next 12 
months.
(4) April 2008.

Source: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, 
business and consumer surveys (bsco_m)

38

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   38
Consumers.indb   38

08.04.2009   09:48:07
08.04.2009   09:48:07

Consumer proﬁ le

I

Figure 1.20: Consumer opinion, EU-27, May of each year
(seasonally adjusted, balance, -100 to 100)

10

0

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2008

Consumer confidence (1)
General economic situation over the next 12 months (2)
General economic situation over the last 12 months (3)

(1) Arithmetic average of the balances (in percentage points) of the answers to the questions on the ﬁ nancial situation of households, the 
general economic situation, unemployment expectations (with inverted sign) and savings, all over the next 12 months.
(2) How do you expect the general economic situation in this country to develop over the next 12 months?
(3) How do you think the general economic situation in the country has changed over the past 12 months?

Source: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, business and consumer surveys (bsco_m)

Figure 1.21: Consumer opinion, EU-27, May of each year
(seasonally adjusted, balance, -100 to 100)

80

60

40

20

0

-20

-40

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2008

Price trends over the last 12 months (1)

Price trends over the next 12 months (2)

Financial situation over the next 12 months (3)

Financial situation over the last 12 months (4)

(1) How do you think that consumer prices have developed over the last 12 months?
(2) By comparison with the past 12 months, how do you expect that consumer prices will develop in the next 12 months?
(3) How do you expect the ﬁ nancial position of your household to change over the next 12 months?
(4) How has the ﬁ nancial situation of your household changed over the last 12 months?

Source: Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, business and consumer surveys (bsco_m)

  Consumers in Europe

39

Consumers.indb   39
Consumers.indb   39

08.04.2009   09:48:07
08.04.2009   09:48:07

II

Retailing and advertising

RETAILING AND ADVERTISING

Retailing acts as an interface that brings together 
manufacturers and consumers, providing access 
to  a  wide  range  of  products  and  services.  Th  e 
existence  of  a  single  European  market  gives 
consumers  considerable  choice,  as  well  as 
opportunities to fi nd cheaper goods and services 
in  other  Member  States.  Th  e  level  of  choice  has 

been  extended  further  by  developments  within 
the retail sector, as shoppers within the EU can 
choose  to  purchase  goods  in-store,  out-of-store, 
on  the  Internet,  cross-border,  or  through  a 
variety of other formats such as direct selling or 
timeshare.

Table 1.15a: Shop opening hours

Weekdays

BE 05.00-20.00: working days; 05.00-21.00: 
Fridays and working days before public 
holiday

Saturdays
05.00-20.00

BG :
CZ No restrictions
DK Closed between 00.00-06.00 Monday; 

else no restrictions

DE 00.00-24.00 except in Rhineland-

Palatinate, Saxony 06.00-22.00 and 
Saarland-Bavaria 06.00-20.00

EE No restrictions
IE No restrictions on opening; alcohol may 

not be sold before 07.30

EL 05:00-21:00

:
No restrictions
No restrictions until 17.00; closed 
thereafter
00.00-24.00 except in
Mecklenburg-Western
Pomerania 06.00-22.00,
Rhineland-Palatinate, Saxony
06.00-22.00, Saarland 06.00-
20.00, Saxony - Anhalt, 
Thuringia 0.00-20.00

No restrictions
No restrictions on opening; 
alcohol may not be sold before 
07.30
05-20:00

ES Legislation defined at regional level; no 

restrictions

Legislation defined at regional 
level; no restrictions

FR No restrictions

No restrictions

IT 07.00-22.00 (with a maximum of 13 

opening hours per day)

07.00-22.00 (with a maximum of 
13 opening hours per day)

CY 1 April-31 October shops close: Mon, 
Tue, Thu at 20:30, Wed at 14:00, Fri at 
21:30; opening hours vary according to 
the nature of the shop 07:00-09:00; 
winter period: Mon, Tue, Thu close at 
19:00, Wed at 14:00, Fri at 20:00

1 April-31 October shops close at 
17:00; winter period shops close 
at 15:00; during the summer, 
special provisions for shops within 
designated tourist areas, open 
until 22:00

Sundays and public holidays
All retail stores: 05.00-12.00; furniture or gardening 
shops: 40 Sundays/year 05.00-20.00; food chains 
with less than 5 employees, butcher's, baker's, 
newsagents, flower shops, shops in tourist areas: 
05.00-20.00

:
No restrictions
In principle closed with some exceptions

In principle closed with some limited exceptions

No restrictions
Alcohol may not be sold until 12.30; alcohol may 
not be sold on Christmas Day and Good Friday

All shops are closed, except e.g. petrol stations, 
restaurants, bars, pastry shops, photo shops, 
florists, antiquaries
Legislation defined at regional level; opening is 
allowed for at least 12 Sundays/public holidays 
per year
In principle shops can be open on Sundays
but employees are not allowed to work;
there are numerous permanent and 
temporary exceptions
In principle closed; exceptions for certain types of 
shops (e.g. bakeries and flower shops) and for 
tourist areas; in total, shops can open on Sundays 
8 times a year and are generally open all Sundays 
of December

All the shops are obliged to stay closed between 
14:00-17:00 from 15 June to 31 August

LV No restrictions
LT No restrictions

No restrictions
No restrictions

No restrictions
No restrictions

Source: EuroCommerce (updated September 2007)

40

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   40
Consumers.indb   40

08.04.2009   09:48:08
08.04.2009   09:48:08

Retailing and advertising

II

No matter where a consumer decides to shop for 
their  goods  and  services,  they  are  protected  by 
the same rules and regulations as in their home 
country throughout the EU. Indeed, independent 
of  the  country  of  purchase,  choice  of  retailer 
or  type  of  retail  format,  European  consumers 
should expect (although they may not always be 
aware) their purchases to be covered by a basic set 
of  principles  whereby  Community  law  imposes 
obligations on retailers to ensure that minimum 
protection rights are adhered to.

While  most  commentators  would  agree  that 
the  creation  of  the  internal  market  and  the 
liberalisation of services have resulted in increased 
choice  and  downward  pressure  on  prices  to  the 
general  benefi t  of  consumers,  there  are  areas 

(particularly as regards services) where legislative 
safeguards  continue  to  perform  a  role  when 
markets  do  not  work  adequately,  for  example, 
policy  makers  try  to  ensure  that  aff ordable 
and  universal  access  is  granted  to  services  of 
general interest (such as energy services or postal 
services).

In-store retailing

During  recent  years,  most  Member  States  have 
liberalised  their  in-store  opening  hours.  Many 
countries  have  virtually  no  restrictions  on  shop 
opening hours during the week or on Saturdays, 
while  opening  times  on  Sundays  and  public 
holidays tend to remain restricted.

Table 1.15b: Shop opening hours

Weekdays

LU 06.00 - 20.00; once per week shops

can close at 21.00

HU Opening hours decided by the trader; 

in Budapest and suburbs Mayor's Office 
have the right to regulate hours from 
06:00-22:00

Saturdays
06.00-18.00; these hours also 
apply to days which precede 
public holidays
Open up to 14:00 or 16:00

MT :
NL 06.00-22.00

:
06.00-22.00

AT 06.00 - 19.30

PL :
PT 06.00-24.00

RO :
SI No restrictions

SK No restrictions
07.00-21.00
FI

SE No restrictions
UK No restrictions

06.00 - 17.00; 4 Saturdays before 
Christmas until 18.00
:
06.00-24.00

:
No restrictions

No restrictions
07.00-18.00

No restrictions
No restrictions

Source: EuroCommerce (updated September 2007)

Sundays and public holidays
06.00-13.00

Generally closed; 24 December open up to 14:00; 
exceptions for restaurants; hotels, flower shops, 
gasoline stations and confectionary outlets

:
In principle, closed; local governments can allow 
Sunday opening (max. 12 Sundays per year); they 
can also permit Sunday opening for tourist areas; 
exceptions for shops in petrol stations and 
hospitals

Exemptions for tourist areas

:
Opening of hypermarkets is limited to 08.00-13.00 
from January to October (in November and 
December: 06.00-24.00)
:
Shops are not allowed to open on Sundays 
and on national holidays; 
exceptions: shops with fast moving 
consumer goods, sales premises up 
to 200 m², petrol stations, tourist centres

No restrictions
12.00-21.00 in May, June, July,
August, November and December
No restrictions
Small shops (not more than 280 m²) can open 
freely; larger shops may open for any six 
continuous hours between 10:00 and 18.00; larger 
shops may not open on Easter Sunday or on 
Christmas Day

  Consumers in Europe

41

Consumers.indb   41
Consumers.indb   41

08.04.2009   09:48:09
08.04.2009   09:48:09

II

Retailing and advertising

Th  e number of retail outlets varies considerably 
between Member States, refl ecting to some degree 
diff erences in lifestyles and patterns of shopping. 
In northern and eastern Europe there is generally 
a  relatively  low  density  of  retail  units  per 
inhabitant, in contrast to much higher numbers 
in  southern  Europe.  For  example,  there  was  an 
average  of  about  50  local  retail  units  per  10 000 
inhabitants  in  2004  in  the  United  Kingdom, 
which was one third of the density of local units 

in Spain, or a quarter of the density in Portugal 
(both 2005). Th  ese fi gures suggest that retail units 
in  northern  Europe  were,  on  average,  relatively 
large  in  size,  and  that  a  higher  proportion  of 
shoppers  chose  to  visit 
large  supermarkets, 
hypermarkets,  or  out-of-town  retail  parks  and 
shopping centres in northern Europe. Such trends 
may  be  a  result  of  easier  transport  access,  free 
parking (allowing a large volume of goods to be 
bought that can be easily loaded into a car), and 

Map 1.3: Number of local units, retail trade, 2005 (1)
(per 10 000 inhabitants)

Number of local units in retail trade,
by NUTS 2 regions, 2005 (1)
(per 10 000 inhabitants)

<= 60
60 - <= 90
90 - <= 140
> 140
Data not available

(1) All regions in the United Kingdom: number of
inhabitants, 2004.

© EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries
Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 12/2008

0

600 km

Guadeloupe (FR)

Martinique (FR)

0

25

0

20

Guyane (FR)

Réunion (FR)

0

100

0

20

Açores (PT)

Madeira (PT)

0

100

0

20

Canarias (ES)

Malta

0 100

0

10

Ísland

0 100

Source: Eurostat, regional structural business statistics and regional demographic statistics (sbs_r_nuts03 and reg_d2jan)

42

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   42
Consumers.indb   42

08.04.2009   09:48:10
08.04.2009   09:48:10

Table 1.16: Largest hypermarkets in Europe, 
based on total retail sales of food and 
non-food, 2005
(EUR million)

Company
Carrefour
Metro
Tesco
Schwarz
Aldi (1)
Rewe-Zentral
Group Auchan
Edeka Zentrale (1)
Ahold
E. Leclerc

(1) Estimate.

Country
FR
DE
UK
DE
DE
DE
FR
DE
NL
FR

Source: Deloitte, Global powers of retailing, 2007

Sales
74 574
55 569
55 354
36 886
36 247
35 398
33 100
31 705
29 654
35 494

the convenience of having all goods and services 
under  one  roof  (particularly  when  the  weather 
is  cold  or  wet).  Th  e  retail  make-up  of  southern 
Europe is oft en characterised by a range of small, 
local,  independent  shops.  Shopping  activity  in 
southern Europe tends to be more frequent (if not 
daily), with shoppers more likely to visit a range 
of specialist retailers in town or city centres. Th  e 
situation in eastern Europe is somewhat diff erent, 
as some retail markets have yet to reach saturation 
and  hence,  local,  national  and  international 
players continue to seek to establish (or expand) 
their presence.

National  retail  markets  have  traditionally  been 
served by a mixture of local shops and national 
chains. Th  ere has, however, been a growing trend 
towards the internationalisation of retailing and 
the emergence of a small group of global retailers 
who  have  moved  into  other  markets  within  the 
EU and further still into other areas of the world. 

Retailing and advertising

II

Table 1.17: Largest department stores in Europe, based on total 
retail sales, 2005
(EUR million)

Company
Metro (Galeria Kaufhof)
El Cortes Inglés
KarstadQuelle
Marks & Spencer
John Lewis Partnership
LVMH (Le Bon Marché, Samaritaine)
Groupe Galerie Lafayette
Debenhams

Source: Deloitte, Global powers of retailing, 2007

Country
DE
ES
DE
UK
UK
FR
FR
UK

Sales
55 569
12 695
11 498
11 196
7 493
3 651
3 632
3 100

Th  is pattern has been particularly prominent for 
major  food  and  beverage  retailers,  which  have 
extended the range of products they traditionally 
off ered  to  include  items  of  clothing,  electrical 
goods, DIY or gardening items. In a similar vein, 
many  non-food  retailers  (typically  department 
stores) have also expanded the range of products 
they carry such that many now also have a food 
section.

Th  ere  were  just  over  3.75  million  enterprises 
active within the retail trade sector in the EU-27 
in  2005  (note  that  each  enterprise  can  have  a 
number  of  diff erent  local  units/outlets).  Th  e 
retail sector in the EU-27 remains dominated, in 
terms  of  numbers  of  enterprises,  by  very  small 
enterprises, as more than half (54.6 %) of all retail 
trade enterprises only employed one person. Th  e 
relative  importance  of  large  enterprises  (with 
250 or more persons employed) in terms of their 
contribution to the total turnover or value added 
of  the  EU-27’s  retail  trade  sector  was  46.4 % 
and  43.1 %  respectively  in  2005.  In  contrast, 
enterprises  with  only  one  person  employed 
accounted for 6.1 % of total retail trade turnover 
and 5.9 % of value added.

Table 1.18: Structural indicators for retail trade, EU-27, 2005
(EUR million)

NACE 
Rev. 
1.1
52
52.1
52.2
52.3
52.4
52.5
52.6
52.7

Retail trade, except motor trades
In non-specialised stores (1)
Food, beverages, tobacco in specialised stores
Pharmaceutical, medical goods, cosmetics
Other new goods in specialised stores (2)
Second-hand goods in stores
Not in stores
Repair of personal and household goods

Number of 
enterprises
 (units)
3 758 005
583 194
508 817
198 233
1 740 562
63 852
524 260
139 082

Turnover
2 126 665
900 000
126 891
191 708
:
7 324
97 781
11 071

Value added 
at factor cost
391 802
130 000
24 929
40 878
170 000
1 996
19 453
4 590

Gross 
operating 
rate (%)
6.9
4.1
9.9
9.6
8.0
15.2
9.9
19.9

(1) Estimates, except for number of enterprises; gross operating surplus, 2004.
(2) Estimates, except for number of enterprises.

Source: Eurostat, annual detailed enterprise statistics on trade (sbs_na_3b_tr)

  Consumers in Europe

43

Consumers.indb   43
Consumers.indb   43

08.04.2009   09:48:32
08.04.2009   09:48:32

II

Retailing and advertising

Table 1.19: Relative importance of diff erent retail formats: share in total value added of retail trade, 2005
(% of total)

of which:

Non-
specialised 
stores
33.2
36.5
29.5
42.2
37.5
31.3
44.2
45.5
26.9
31.3
34.9
23.9
26.9
39.8
41.0
23.5
42.5
:
:
27.6
40.4
30.4
40.7
52.0
48.2
46.8
30.6
38.4

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ (2)
DK (3)
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Food, 
beverages 
or tobacco
predominating
28.1
34.8
25.6
:
26.2
24.5
36.4
39.8
24.0
24.6
33.3
22.4
19.1
33.4
36.3
22.7
36.4
:
21.9
26.1
31.3
27.9
35.4
42.6
15.0
33.8
27.1
28.6

Other 
5.7
1.7
3.9
:
9.6
6.8
7.8
5.7
2.9
6.7
1.6
1.5
7.8
6.4
4.7
0.8
6.1
:
:
1.4
9.1
2.5
5.3
9.3
33.2
13.0
3.5
9.8

Specialised 
stores
60.2
60.2
63.9
51.6
59.2
59.8
53.0
52.0
65.6
64.4
59.2
67.8
68.7
51.5
48.4
73.0
51.0
:
:
69.3
53.1
66.5
51.8
43.1
40.4
50.1
63.1
54.2

Second-
hand 
goods 
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.8
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.1
0.2
2.1
1.4
0.3
0.9
:
0.7
0.3
0.4
0.2
0.7
0.0
0.3
0.4
0.2
1.1

Not in
 stores
5.0
2.1
4.0
3.7
1.1
7.4
1.9
1.3
4.9
3.2
4.2
6.8
2.5
5.5
8.3
2.4
3.4
:
4.9
2.4
5.3
1.8
5.7
3.7
10.8
1.5
4.1
5.2

Repair
1.2
0.7
1.8
1.8
2.0
1.1
0.6
1.0
2.6
1.0
1.1
1.4
1.7
1.1
1.0
0.8
2.1
:
0.9
0.5
0.9
1.2
1.1
1.2
0.3
1.3
2.0
1.2

(1) Includes rounded estimates based on non-conﬁ dential data.
(2) 2004.
(3) 2004 for non-specialised stores.

Source: Eurostat, annual detailed enterprise statistics on trade (sbs_na_3b_tr)

Figure 1.22: Structural indicators for retail trade (NACE 52), breakdown by employment size class (persons 
employed), EU-27, 2005
(% of total)

100%

75%

50%

25%

0%

Number of enterprises

Value added at factor cost

Turnover
250+
50-249
20-49
10-19
2-9
1 

Source: Eurostat, distributive trade broken down by employment size classes (sbs_sc_3ce_tr02)

44

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   44
Consumers.indb   44

08.04.2009   09:48:34
08.04.2009   09:48:34

Retailing and advertising

II

Table 1.20: Relative importance of diff erent retail formats - specialised stores: share in total value added of 
retail trade, 2005
(% of total)

of which:

Food, 
beverages 
or tobacco
6.4
7.5
5.4
4.2
3.7
4.4
1.9
4.5
10.9
11.1
5.1
10.1
5.7
1.5
0.7
6.4
3.8
:
5.7
6.3
8.3
6.3
5.0
1.8
2.0
4.1
5.6
5.0

Pharma-
ceuticals, 
medical 
goods, 
cosmetics
10.4
9.5
8.9
7.7
6.6
14.1
5.2
8.5
8.3
9.9
13.9
11.8
3.2
8.2
11.0
10.7
15.1
:
11.4
11.1
10.4
13.5
10.7
13.8
6.5
9.4
6.3
4.9

Specialised 
stores
60.2
60.2
63.9
51.6
59.2
59.8
53.0
52.0
65.6
64.4
59.2
67.8
68.7
51.5
48.4
73.0
51.0
:
:
69.3
53.1
66.5
51.8
43.1
40.4
50.1
63.1
54.2

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ (2)
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Furniture, 
lighting 
equip. & 
household 
articles 
n.e.c.
5.7
5.8
4.6
:
7.1
7.3
6.6
3.8
3.4
6.0
5.1
6.5
9.9
2.9
2.7
7.2
3.0
:
8.3
9.3
2.9
6.0
3.4
3.8
4.4
4.3
10.3
3.6

Electrical 
household 
appliances, 
radio & TV
3.4
3.2
5.8
:
3.9
3.6
2.6
4.9
6.0
2.8
3.3
2.5
5.2
3.4
4.6
4.1
2.5
:
4.0
3.8
3.8
3.7
4.9
1.9
2.7
2.8
3.4
3.3

Footwear 
& leather 
goods
2.2
2.4
1.8
:
2.1
2.7
2.5
1.3
2.0
2.0
1.9
2.9
3.8
1.9
2.9
3.2
1.3
:
2.9
3.2
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.0
0.8
2.0
1.7

Hardware,
paints
& glass
5.5
5.4
10.2
:
5.1
5.0
12.2
4.2
5.9
4.7
5.5
7.9
8.5
10.0
8.9
5.1
5.8
:
7.5
6.9
1.8
6.7
4.2
3.4
5.6
8.6
6.6
4.5

Books,
news-
papers &
stationery
2.1
2.8
3.2
:
1.4
2.0
2.1
1.9
1.5
1.9
2.3
2.9
1.7
2.9
2.5
2.7
3.6
:
1.7
2.7
1.8
2.0
2.9
2.5
0.9
1.5
1.4
1.9

Clothing
10.7
10.8
5.8
:
11.4
9.7
5.9
11.5
10.8
11.1
8.3
10.4
10.6
6.4
4.7
15.2
4.9
:
12.5
12.9
4.7
8.9
2.7
4.8
1.5
6.3
13.8
13.9

(1) Includes rounded estimates based on non-conﬁ dential data. 
(2) 2004.

Source: Eurostat, annual detailed enterprise statistics on trade (sbs_na_3b_tr)

  Consumers in Europe

45

Consumers.indb   45
Consumers.indb   45

08.04.2009   09:48:34
08.04.2009   09:48:34

II

Retailing and advertising

Short-term business statistics provide information 
on the evolution of sales in the retail trade sector, 
presented  in  terms  of  both  value  and  volume 
indices. Th  ere was a bigger increase in the volume 
of non-food sales (an average of 2.6 % per annum 
between  1995  and  2008),  compared  with  food 
sales (1.7 %). Th  is may be expected, as there was 
a relatively small increase in the EU’s population 
during  the  period  considered,  while  there  are 
physiological  limits  as  to  how  much  additional 
food a particular individual can eat. Nevertheless, 
with the price of food items rising at a more rapid 
pace  than  non-food  items  between  1995  and 
2008, the growth in the value of food sales (3.8 % 
per  annum)  outstripped  that  of  non-food  sales 
(3.1 %).

Out-of-store sales

Consumers may choose alternatives to traditional, 
in-store retailing because of a variety of factors, 
including: the location of a retail outlet, awkward 
opening times, lack of choice, or simply not having 
enough  time  to  go  shopping.  Th  ere  has  been 
growth  in  the  range  of  out-of-store  alternatives 
that give more freedom to consumers to shop in 
diff erent ways. Some of the most popular forms 
of  out-of-store  retailing  include  e-commerce 
(which is covered in the next section), mail order, 
direct selling (for example, door to door), outdoor 
markets or retailing through petrol stations.

A survey conducted for the European Commission 
gives  some  insight  into  the  diff erent  forms  of 
sales  channels  that  were  used  by  retailers  with 

Figure 1.23: Evolution of retail sales, seasonally adjusted, EU-27 (1)
(1995=100)

170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90

Jan-95

Jan-98

Jan-01

Jan-04

Jan-07

Retail sale of food, beverages or tobacco - value

Retail sale of non-food products - value

Retail sale of non-food products - volume

Retail sale of food, beverages or tobacco - volume

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, retail trade (NACE Rev.1 52) (ebt_ts_ret)

Figure 1.24: Sales channels used by retailers, EU-25, 2006 (1)
(% of retailers)

0

25

50

75

100

Shops

E-commerce/Internet

Mail order

Telesales/call centres

Sales through representatives visiting homes

(1) Companies employing 10 or more persons.

Source: ‘Business attitudes towards cross-border sales and consumer protection’, Flash Eurobarometer 186, European Commission

46

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   46
Consumers.indb   46

08.04.2009   09:48:35
08.04.2009   09:48:35

Retailing and advertising

II

ten  or  more  persons  employed  in  the  EU-25  for 
2006 (note that multiple answers were allowed). 
A large majority (79 %) of the retailers surveyed 
said  that  they  had  shops,  while  more  than  half 
(57 %)  also  made  recourse  to  e-commerce  or 
the  Internet.  Just  over  a  quarter  (27 %)  of  the 
enterprises  responding  to  the  survey  said  they 
made use of mail order, while slightly more than 
a  fi ft h  said  they  used  telesales  (22 %)  or  direct 
sales  through  representatives  visiting  homes 
(21 %).  It  is  important  to  note  that  this  survey 
only covered relatively large enterprises, as 95.9 % 
of  all  retail  enterprises  in  the  EU-27  employed 
less  than  ten  persons  in  2005  –  and  that  these 
smaller  enterprises  are  likely  to  have  made  less 
use of e-commerce, mail order, and other forms 
of distance selling.

A survey conducted in early 2008 reports that 8 % 
of retailers sold goods or services to consumers in 
one  or  two  other  EU  countries,  6 %  of  retailers 
to  three  to  fi ve  other  EU  countries,  and  7 %  of 
retailers  to  six  or  more  countries;  some  75 %  of 
retailers  had  their  operations  based  solely  on 
national markets (while 4 % of respondents were 
unable to answer the question).

Structural  business  statistics  provide  further 
insight into the structure of out-of-store retailing 
in 2005. Note that the classifi cation of economic 
activities, NACE Rev. 1.1, distinguishes between 
motor  trades  (Division  50,  including  wholesale 
and  retail  trade  as  well  as  repair)  and  retail 
trade  (Division  52).  Th  ere  were  approximately 
362  thousand  enterprises  engaged 
in  retail 
sales via stalls and markets, compared with 353 
thousand enterprises selling (wholesale or retail) 
motor  vehicles,  parts  and  accessories  thereof, 
or  automotive  fuel,  and  a  further  23  thousand 
enterprises  operating  within  the  mail  order 
sector.

Th  e economic weight (in terms of sales or value 
added) of the motor trades sector (excluding repair) 
was  considerably  larger  than  the  contribution 
made  by  either  mail  order  or  outdoor  markets. 
Turnover among the motor trades’ subsector was 
valued at EUR 1 125 billion in 2005, with added 
value of EUR 115 billion. Th  e relatively few mail 
order  enterprises  together  generated  twice  the 
value of sales or value added of outdoor markets. 
Nevertheless, neither sector was particularly large 
when looking at their overall contribution to total 
retail  trade  activity  (excluding  motor  trades),  as 
mail order enterprises generated just under 2.5 % 
of sales and value added.

Table 1.21: Structural indicators for out-of-store retailing, EU-27, 2005
(EUR million)

NACE 
Rev. 
1.1
50.1
50.3
50.5
52
52.61
52.62

Motor vehicles
Motor vehicle parts & accessories
Automotive fuel

Retail trade, except motor trades

Via mail order houses (1)
Via stalls and markets (1)

Number of
 enterprises
 (units)
182 520
97 981
72 350
3 758 005
23 000
362 000

Turnover
822 709
124 187
178 261
2 126 665
50 000
19 400

Value added at 
factor cost
81 095
19 964
13 643
391 802
9 000
4 100

Gross 
operating 
rate (%)
4.5
6.0
4.1
6.9
6.0
14.1

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, annual detailed enterprise statistics on trade (sbs_na_3b_tr)

  Consumers in Europe

47

Consumers.indb   47
Consumers.indb   47

08.04.2009   09:48:35
08.04.2009   09:48:35

II

Retailing and advertising

Map 1.4: Number of local units, petrol retailing, 2005 (1)
(per 10 000 inhabitants)

Number of local units in petrol retailing,
by NUTS 2 regions, 2005 (1)
(per 10 000 inhabitants)

<= 1
1 - <= 2
2 - <= 4
> 4
Data not available

(1) All regions in the United Kingdom: number of
inhabitants, 2004.

© EuroGeographics Association, for the administrative boundaries
Cartography: Eurostat — GISCO, 12/2008

0

600 km

Guadeloupe (FR)

Martinique (FR)

0

25

0

20

Guyane (FR)

Réunion (FR)

0

100

0

20

Açores (PT)

Madeira (PT)

0

100

0

20

Canarias (ES)

Malta

0 100

0

10

Ísland

0 100

Source: Eurostat, regional structural business statistics and regional demographic statistics (sbs_r_nuts03 and reg_d2jan)

48

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   48
Consumers.indb   48

08.04.2009   09:48:36
08.04.2009   09:48:36

Retailing and advertising

II

Th  e  composition  of  out-of-store  retail  networks 
varies considerably between countries, with more 
than  40 %  of  retailers  employing  ten  or  more 
persons  using  mail  order  in  Austria,  Slovenia, 
Germany  and  the  Czech  Republic,  while  the 
proportion  of  retailers  (again  employing  ten  or 
more  persons)  selling  through  a  representative 
visiting homes was above 40 % in Slovakia, and 
higher than 30 % in Luxembourg and Spain.

Direct selling is the marketing of consumer goods 
and services directly to consumers on a person-
to-person basis, generally in their own home (or 
the  home  of  others).  With  this  type  of  retailing 
there is the potential for consumers to benefi t as 
a result of convenience, personal demonstration, 
and home delivery, while direct selling can also 

provide a channel of distribution for enterprises 
with  innovative  or  distinctive  products  that  are 
(for whatever reason) not aff orded space in retail 
outlets.

According to FEDSA (the Federation of European 
Direct  Selling  Associations),  direct  sales  in  the 
EU (excluding Cyprus and Malta) were valued at 
EUR 9.8 billion in 2007, equivalent to an average 
of around EUR 20 of direct sales per inhabitant. 
Th  e most common product categories for direct 
sales  were  typically  personal  or  household 
goods,  with  cosmetics  and  personal  care  items 
accounting  for  almost  half  (47 %)  of  all  sales, 
followed by household goods and wellness items 
(both 17 %).

Table 1.22: Sales channels used by retailers, 
2006 (1)
(% of retailers)

Figure 1.25: Direct selling, EU, 2007 (1)
(% share of total value)

Mail 
order
27
8
:
40
11
41
13
25
25
31
11
20
27
16
28
21
31
33
12
47
36
32
:
46
29
10
10
29
9

Sales through 
representatives 
visiting homes
21
24
:
28
14
23
4
23
22
32
18
21
24
18
12
34
22
18
16
26
24
29
:
26
41
6
14
15
8

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
NO

(1) Companies employing 10 or more persons.

Source: ‘Business attitudes towards cross-border sales and 
consumer protection’, Flash Eurobarometer 186, European 
Commission

Clothes and 
accessories
3%

Home 
improvements
3%

Financial 
services
3%

Food and 
beverages
2%

Others
2%

Utilities
6%

Wellness
17%

Household 
goods
17%

Cosmetics 
and personal care
47%

(1) Total EU market (excluding Cyprus and Malta) valued at EUR 9 836 million excluding VAT.

Source: FEDSA (http://www.fedsa.be/main.html)

Table 1.23: Main indicators for the timeshare industry in 
Europe, 2006

Number of resorts
Number of homes/apartments
Number of bed-nights
Number of families owning weeks
Number of weeks owned
Number of families buying a new timeshare
Occupancy rate

(1) Estimates.

2006
1 500
85 000
70 000 000
1 450 000
2 500 000
80 000
80%

Source: OTE (Organisation for Timeshare in Europe) - presentation to European Commission 
(www.ote-info.com)

  Consumers in Europe

49

Consumers.indb   49
Consumers.indb   49

08.04.2009   09:48:59
08.04.2009   09:48:59

II

Retailing and advertising

E-commerce

Information  and  communications  technologies 
(ICT)  are  considered  one  of  the  main  drivers 
of  economic  growth,  with  the  potential  to 
transform productivity and knowledge. In order 
to measure these transformations, there has been 
a  considerable  amount  of  development  work 
to  harmonise  offi  cial  statistics.  New  statistical 
surveys have been set-up and indicator defi nitions 
established. However, with technological change 
progressing  at  an  ever-quickening  pace,  it  is 
oft en  necessary  to  adapt  these  indicators  on  a 
regular  basis  so  that  fi gures  take  into  account 
new 
the 
technological  means  of  delivering  the  Internet, 
or  problems  and  concerns  that  households  and 
enterprises  face  when  using  the  Internet.  As  of 
2002, there have been annual information society 
surveys conducted by Eurostat, based on surveys 
of  ICT  developments  in  enterprises  and  among 
individuals and households.

technology  products, 

information 

Th  e  basic  working  defi nition  of  e-commerce 
is  based  on  the  OECD  guide  to  measuring  the 
information society, and is defi ned as:

‘the  sale  or  purchase  of  goods  or  services, 
whether  between  businesses,  households, 
individuals or private organisations, conducted 
over  computer-mediated  networks.  Th  e  goods 
and  services  are  ordered  over  those  networks, 
but  the  payment  and  the  ultimate  delivery  of 
the good or service may be conducted on or off -
line’.

Many  commentators  argue  that  one  of  the  key 
drivers to productivity gains will be the rolling-
out  of  broadband  technologies,  which,  it  is 
thought, will lead to an increase in the volume of 
e-commerce,  stimulating  economic  growth  and 
improving  consumer  welfare  through  greater 
choice  and  price  transparency.  Future  growth 
in e-commerce will, in part, be based on highly-
targeted,  niche  advertising,  with  the  provision 
of  goods  and  services  increasingly  tailored  to 
individual clients; such changes could potentially 
benefi t  small  and  medium-sized  enterprises 
(SMEs), as well as consumers.

On  the  other  hand,  the  growth  in  e-commerce 
could  reinforce  the 
‘digital  divide’  between 
diff erent  segments  of  the  population,  such  that 
potential  consumer  benefi ts  are  unlikely  to  be 
shared among those who do not own a computer 
or  those  without  the  necessary  skills  to  use  a 
computer or the Internet.

Consumers  will  only  benefi t  from  more  choice 
if  enterprises  make  their  goods  and  services 
available  on  the  Internet.  Th  e  latest  fi gures 
available  from  the  information  society  survey 
suggest that 15 % of enterprises in the EU-27 sold 
goods  or  services  over  the  Internet  (or  similar 
electronic networks) in 2007. Th  is proportion rose 
considerably as a function of the average size of 
an enterprise, reaching 31 % for large enterprises 
employing 250 or more persons.

Figure 1.26: Enterprises selling via the Internet and/or networks other than the Internet, 
EU-27, 2007 (1)
(% of enterprises having received orders on-line over the last calendar year)

35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Average - 
all enterprises

Small enterprises 
(10-49 persons 
employed)

Medium-sized enterprises
(50-249 persons employed)

Large enterprises 
(250 or more persons
employed)

(1) Only enterprises with 10 or more persons employed, at least 1 % of annual turnover being derived from on-line orders, and active in 
manufacturing, construction or non-ﬁ nancial services are covered.

Source: Eurostat, enterprises selling via Internet and/or networks other than Internet (isoc_ec_esel)

50

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   50
Consumers.indb   50

08.04.2009   09:49:00
08.04.2009   09:49:00

Retailing and advertising

II

An  alternative  indicator  to  measure  the  relative 
importance  of  e-commerce  is  the  share  of 
enterprises’  turnover  that  may  be  attributed  to 
e-sales.  On  average,  some  4.2 %  of  enterprise 
turnover  could  be  attributed  to  e-commerce 
within  the  EU-27  in  2007;  note  these  fi gures 
include  business  to  business  (B2B),  as  well  as 
business  to  consumer  sales  (B2C).  E-commerce 
was  particularly  important  to  enterprises  in 
Ireland, where it accounted for 9.8 % of total sales, 
with the next highest proportions recorded in the 
United Kingdom (7.0 %) and Spain (6.2 %).

Th  ere was a wide disparity between countries as 
regards  the  proportion  of  persons  ordering  or 
selling goods and services over the Internet. On 
average,  some  23 %  of  individuals  in  the  EU-27 

stated  that  they  had  ordered  goods  or  services 
on  the  Internet  during  the  three-month  period 
prior to the survey in 2007, while 10 % had sold 
items; this pattern of a higher propensity to order, 
rather than to sell goods or services, was repeated 
in each of the Member States.

Th  e  use  of  the  Internet  for  ordering  goods  or 
services  was  generally  higher  in  the  northern 
Member States and in the EU-15 Member States, 
rising  to  over  40 %  in  the  United  Kingdom, 
Denmark,  the  Netherlands  and  Germany.  Th  e 
proportion  of  the  population  ordering  goods  or 
services  over  the  Internet  was  below  the  EU-27 
average for each of the Member States that joined 
the EU since 2004, as well as in Greece, Portugal, 
Italy, Spain and Belgium.

Figure 1.27: Enterprise turnover from e-commerce via the Internet, 2007 (1)
(% of total turnover)

10

8

6

4

2

0

IE

UK

ES

LT

DK
(2)

EU-
27

CZ

BE

DE

PL

PT HU AT
(3)

RO SK

EE
(4)

EL

IT

CY

BG

NO IS (3) HR

(1) Only enterprises with 10 or more employees are covered; France, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Finland and Sweden, not available.
(2) 2004.
(3) 2006.
(4) 2005.

Source: Eurostat, structural indicators (strind_t)

Figure 1.28: Internet activities of individuals (for private use), in the three months prior to the survey, 2007
(% of individuals)

50

40

30

20

10

0

UK DK NL DE SE LU FI FR AT IE EU-
27

MT BE ES PL SK SI CZ
(1)

CY IT HU EE LV PT
(1)

EL
(1)

LT BG RO

NO IS MK
(2)

Ordered goods or services

Sold goods or services

(1) 2006 for selling.
(2) 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Internet purchases by individuals and Internet activities - individuals (isoc_ec_ibuy and isoc_ci_eu_i)

  Consumers in Europe

51

Consumers.indb   51
Consumers.indb   51

08.04.2009   09:49:01
08.04.2009   09:49:01

II

Retailing and advertising

In  2007,  fewer  than  one  third  (29 %)  of  the 
EU-27’s  population  had  never  made  an  Internet 
purchase.  Adding  this  proportion  to  the  23 % 
of  the  population  who  had  not  made  an  order 
in  the  three  months  prior  to  the  survey  reveals 
the sporadic nature of Internet purchases among 
almost half of the EU population.

Among  those  who  made  an  Internet  order  in 
the  year  prior  to  the  survey,  some  of  the  most 
commonly  purchased  items  included  travel  and 
holiday  accommodation,  clothes  and  sports 
goods, fi lms, music, household goods, or tickets 
for  events  (note  that  some  individuals  may 
have  bought  all  of  these,  while  others  restricted 
their  Internet  purchases  to  particular  goods  or 
services).

Table 1.24: Internet purchases by individuals (for private use) during the last year, 2007
(% of individuals)

Goods and services ordered over the Internet during the last year

Never 
ordered 
goods or 
services
29
46
32
36
27
19
57
27
29
36
31
30
32
46
45
29
42
26
27
33
33
33
26
39
44
31
24
21
32
18

House-
hold
goods
(furniture,
toys, etc.)
10
3
0
6
9
24
2
3
1
2
14
1
1
2
1
8
1
2
10
7
5
1
0
5
3
10
8
21
8
12

Food/
groceries
3
1
0
0
6
5
:
2
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
4
2
3
1
0
2
0
1
2
11
3
2

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Clothes, 
sports 
goods
12
4
1
4
20
25
3
5
1
3
17
2
3
2
1
13
2
5
19
12
6
2
0
5
5
17
17
20
11
21

Software
 (incl.
video
games)
7
3
0
2
16
19
1
5
1
3
6
2
2
1
1
13
2
4
11
5
2
2
1
2
2
9
8
11
15
14

Elec.
 equip-
ment 
(incl. 
cameras)
7
3
0
7
15
17
1
4
1
3
7
2
2
4
1
10
2
4
13
8
4
2
0
3
3
10
10
11
6
18

Shares/
financial 
services/
insurance
3
1
0
0
6
5
1
2
0
1
2
1
1
0
1
3
1
1
6
1
:
1
0
1
0
4
10
5
10
10

Travel & 
holiday 
accomm.
13
8
0
4
27
23
3
20
2
11
14
3
4
2
1
24
3
5
25
8
:2
3
0
3
3
26
28
24
40
41

Films/
music
10
4
1
2
18
19
2
10
1
2
11
2
2
1
1
18
2
6
13
8
3
2
1
2
3
15
18
27
18
22

Source: Eurostat, Internet purchases by individuals (isoc_ec_ibuy)

Tickets 
for 
events
9
6
0
5
27
18
5
11
1
6
10
2
1
3
2
18
3
2
18
7

2
0
2
2
20
23
18
24
34

52

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   52
Consumers.indb   52

08.04.2009   09:49:02
08.04.2009   09:49:02

Consumers  using  the  Internet  are  increasingly 
aware  that  the  medium  provides  the  possibility 
to  gather  a  wealth  of  information  in  advance  of 
making a decision to purchase a good or service. 
Th  e Internet has the potential to help consumers 
make  more  informed  choices,  for  example, 
by  looking  at  price  comparison  sites,  reading 
reviews,  gathering 
information  on  product 
features, or looking at pictures of holiday resorts 
and accommodation.

A Eurobarometer survey conducted in early 2008 
shows that 36 % of respondents in the EU-27 said 
that in the 12 months prior to the survey they had 
used the Internet to compare goods and services 
from diff erent sellers/providers. Th  ere was a wide 
range in the use of the Internet for this purpose, 
from upwards of 60 % of respondents in Sweden, 
the  Netherlands  and  Denmark,  down  to  15 % 
or  less  of  the  population  in  Greece,  Portugal, 
Romania and Bulgaria.

According to a survey of individuals aged 15 or 
more using the Internet either at home or at work, 
around 50 % of the population in some Member 
States made Internet searches in March 2008, with 
the typical user making over 100 unique searches 
during the month (note that these searches were 
for any search term). Additional information on 
search  terms  concerning  consumer  electronic 
products in the run-up to Christmas 2007 shows 
the high numbers of consumers who made use of 
the Internet for this purpose.

Retailing and advertising

II

Table 1.25: Internet searches, selected European countries, 
March 2008 (1)

Unique 
searchers 
(thousand)
4 575
2 997
36 011
1 290
14 535
26 280
17 562
11 713
3 528
3 401
2 653
5 023
32 392
2 327
3 630

Average 
number of
 searches per
searcher
111
87
109
90
101
112
106
94
113
128
143
121
124
79
111

Searches 
(million)
510
260
3 935
116
1 472
2 955
1 867
1 097
399
437
378
606
4 030
183
401

BE
DK
DE
IE
ES
FR
IT
NL
AT
PT
FI
SE
UK
NO
CH

(1) Internet audience of individuals aged 15 or more, using the Internet either at home or work 
(excluding Internet access from Internet cafés, mobile phones or PDAs).

Source: comScore qSearch (www.comscore.com)

Table 1.26: Average weekly Internet searches for selected 
gadgets, November 2007 (1)
(searches)

Nintendo Wii
Nintendo DS Lite
Apple iPod
Microsoft Xbox 360
Apple iPhone
Sony Playstation PSP
Apple iPod Nano
Sony Playstation 3
Nokia N95
Samsung U600
Sony Playstation 2
Apple iPod Touch

DE
588 059
753 282
1 193 417
221 635
697 027
564 237
246 232
:
340 606
:
195 970
298 681

FR
556 885
608 705
663 342
282 905
302 743
780 833
87 236
80 700
107 451
102 023
:
:

UK
3 758 069
3 758 069
1 650 100
918 805
706 734
583 394
286 825
241 703
237 924
165 032
:
:

(1) Survey of 20 different models of games consoles, mobile phones, portable music players 
during the period 29 October to 18 November 2007; Internet audience of individuals aged 15 or 
more, using the Internet either at home or work (excluding Internet access from Internet cafés, 
mobile phones or PDAs).

Source: comScore World Metrix (www.comscore.com)

  Consumers in Europe

53

Consumers.indb   53
Consumers.indb   53

08.04.2009   09:49:03
08.04.2009   09:49:03

II

Retailing and advertising

Figure 1.29: Reasons for not ordering goods or services over the Internet in the last 12 months, EU-27, 2006 (1)
(% of individuals who ordered goods or services over the Internet for private use more than a year ago or who 
never ordered anything over the Internet)

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Prefer 
to shop 
in person

Have 
no need

Worried about 
giving 
credit card/
personal 
details

Concerns 
about 
receiving/
returning 
goods, 
complaints/
redress

Don't have 
payment 
card

Lack 
necessary 
skills

Speed of 
Internet 
connection

Other 
reasons

Delivery 
times 
too long/
problematic 
to receive 
goods

(1) Multiple answers allowed.

Source: Eurostat, perceived barriers to buying/ordering over the Internet (isoc_ec_inb)

Figure 1.30: Consumer complaints and disputes made to 
ECC-Net regarding on-line marketplaces, Europe, 2007 (1)
(breakdown by type of complaint in % of total)

Deceit
1.2%

Other
0.9%

Delivery
49.9%

Selling techniques or unfair 
commercial practices
1.9%

Redress
3.9%

Price or payment
6.1%

Contract 
terms
11.3%

Product or 
service
24.9%

(1) EU-25, Iceland and Norway.

Source: European Online Marketplace: consumer complaints 2007, 
European Consumer Centres’ Network (ECC-Net)

Among  those  consumers  who  had  never  made 
an  Internet  purchase,  or  whose  last  Internet 
purchase was more than a year prior to the survey, 
a  majority  (58 %)  had  not  used  e-commerce  in 
2006  because  they  preferred  to  shop  in  person, 
while 48 % of the same sub-population said they 
had  no  need  to  shop  using  the  Internet.  Aside 
from  these  reasons  of  simply  choosing  not  to 
use  the  Internet,  the  most  important  perceived 
barriers  to  e-commerce  involved  concerns  over 
security and safety, as 38 % of respondents were 
worried about providing credit card details, and 
21 % had concerns about receiving/returning or 
complaining about the goods or services ordered. 
A  smaller  proportion  cited  a  lack  of  access  as 
one reason they did not shop on the Internet, as 
15 %  of  respondents  were  without  a  credit  card 
to make on-line payments, while 14 % lacked the 
necessary  computing  skills  to  make  an  order. 
Some 8 % of respondents preferred not to make 
Internet  purchases  because  they  thought  that 
delivery  times  were  too  long  or  they  found  it 
problematic to arrange for the delivery of goods.

than  1 500 

Th  ere  were  more 
consumer 
complaints  and  disputes  made  to  the  European 
consumer  centres  network  (ECC-Net)  dealing 
with e-commerce in 2007. Of these, almost half 
(49.9 %) concerned problems relating to delivery, 
one quarter (24.9 %) were related to the product 
or  service,  and  11.3 %  to  the  terms  of  contract; 
the  remaining  complaints  (including 
issues 
relating  to  the  price,  consumer  redress,  selling 
techniques  and  commercial  practices,  or  deceit) 
were relatively infrequent.

54

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   54
Consumers.indb   54

08.04.2009   09:49:03
08.04.2009   09:49:03

Retailing and advertising

II

Cross-border sales to consumers

Further  evidence  of  the  internationalisation  of 
retail  networks  comes  from  studies  relating  to 
cross-border trade. Th  is form of shopping may be 
defi ned as any purchase that is made, in person or 
via distance shopping, from retailers or providers 
located in another country. If cross-border trade 
increases,  traditional  retailers  may  increasingly 
be exposed to competition. Some commentators 
argue  that  even  a  relatively  small  number  of 
consumers  switching  to  make  cross-border 
purchases  could  result  in  established,  domestic 
retailers changing their behaviour (for example, 
lowering  prices,  or  off ering  new  products  or 
services).  As  such,  the  actions  of  relatively  few 
cross-border  shoppers  could  potentially  result 
in much larger economic gains for a wider cross-
section  of  the  population,  including  those  who 
continue  to  make  their  purchases  from  local  or 
domestic markets.

Within the European context, some of the practical 
barriers to cross-border trade have been removed 
following the creation of the internal market, the 
introduction  of  the  single  European  currency, 
and  developments  regarding  on-line  shopping. 
However, only one in four (25 %) Europeans took 
advantage of the possibility to purchase goods or 
services from traders in other Member States in 
early  2008.  Geographical  location  and  the  close 
proximity of neighbouring countries can play an 
important  role  in  determining  whether  or  not 
a  consumer  will  consider  physically  crossing  a 
border to go shopping, as witnessed by the 68 % 
of consumers in Luxembourg (a relatively small 
country  in  the  middle  of  the  European  land 
mass bordering three other countries) who made 
a  cross-border  purchase  in  2008.  Otherwise, 

Table 1.27: Cross-border purchases made in 
another EU country, 2008
(% of respondents)

On trips 
(holiday or 
business)
17
24
5
24
37
17
29
24
7
11
11
10
27
19
14
36
10
22
36
35
13
6
10
26
15
41
48
28

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Specific 
trip for 
shops
9
14
3
18
18
11
9
7
3
4
9
5
6
11
4
42
6
10
12
30
9
3
8
27
20
16
16
7

Internet
7
13
1
3
23
6
7
16
5
8
9
4
13
5
3
38
1
23
16
19
2
2
1
6
2
14
17
12

Mail 
order
2
2
0
2
2
1
8
3
1
2
1
2
1
9
1
18
0
7
2
8
1
0
1
3
2
4
1
2

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, 
Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

Figure 1.31: Persons making at least one cross-border purchase from a seller/provider in another EU country, 2008
(% of respondents)

75

50

25

0

LU SE DK AT

FI NL

SI

EE

BE MT UK CY

IE

CZ LV DE

SK EU-
27

FR

ES

LT

PL HU IT

RO EL

PT BG

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

55

Consumers.indb   55
Consumers.indb   55

08.04.2009   09:49:04
08.04.2009   09:49:04

II

Retailing and advertising

likely  to 
language  skills  are  also 
common 
contribute to the overall awareness of consumers 
as  regards  goods,  services  and  off ers  that  may 
be  available  in  neighbouring  Member  States. 
In  contrast,  those  countries  at  the  geographical 
extremities  of  Europe  tended  to  report  much 
lower  rates  of  cross-border  purchases,  such  as 
10 % of consumers in Greece, or 9 % of consumers 
in Portugal and Bulgaria.

More  than  one  third  (38 %)  of  the  EU-27 
consumers  who  made  at  least  one  cross-border 
purchase  during  the  twelve  months  prior  to  the 
survey  in  early  2008  spent  a  total  of  between 
EUR  101  and  EUR  500.  Similar  proportions  of 
those who made purchases abroad spent less than 
EUR  50  (12 %),  between  EUR  51  and  EUR  100 
(13 %)  and  between  EUR  501  and  EUR  1 000 
(10 %), while 2 % of Europeans spent in excess of 
EUR 5 000 across borders. Among those persons 
who  made  at  least  one  cross-border  purchase, 
the  average  level  of  spending  in  the  EU-27  was 
EUR  797,  rising  to  more  than  EUR  2 000  for 
consumers from Luxembourg and to more than 
EUR 3 000 for those from Malta.

Figure 1.32: Value of cross-border 
purchases made from sellers/providers in 
other EU countries: breakdown by amount 
spent, EU-27, 2008
(% of respondents who made at least one 
cross-border purchase)

Refuse to say
3%

Don't know
14%

EUR 1-50
12%

>EUR 5 000
2%
EUR 1 001-5 000
8%

EUR 501-1 000
10%

EUR 51-100
13%

EUR 101-500
38%

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, 
Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

Figure 1.33: In the last 12 months have you 
seen or heard adverts which invited you to 
purchase goods or services in another EU 
country, EU-27, 2008
(% of respondents)

Don't know
6%

Often
8%

Sometimes
16%

Rarely
15%

Never
55%

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, 
Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

Figure 1.34: Average value of cross-border purchases made from sellers/providers in other EU countries, 2008 (1)
(EUR)

4 000

3 000

2 000

1 000

0

MT LU EL

FR NL BE PL DK ES

IE EU-
27

FI

LT UK LV DE

SI CY EE AT RO SK CZ SE PT

IT

BG HU

(1) Among those who made cross-border purchases; Greece, Romania, Portugal, Italy, Bulgaria and Hungary, unreliable.

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

56

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   56
Consumers.indb   56

08.04.2009   09:49:05
08.04.2009   09:49:05

One  barrier  that  clearly  inhibits  cross-border 
trade  is  language,  with  only  a  third  (33 %)  of 
people in the EU-27 willing to make a cross-border 
transaction in another European language in 2008 
–  a  share  that  rose  above  50 %  in  Luxembourg, 
the  Netherlands,  Sweden,  Denmark,  Malta  and 
Slovenia.

Th  ere  remain  other  barriers  to  cross-border 
trade, although some of these may be perceptions 
or  prejudices,  rather  than  actual  barriers.  For 
example,  36 %  of  EU-27  inhabitants  in  2008 
believed  that  traders  located  in  other  Member 
States  were  less  likely  to  respect  consumer 
protection laws than those in their own country, 
while only 6 % were more confi dent that traders 
from other countries would respect such laws.

Retailing and advertising

II

Table 1.28: Consumer confi dence in making purchases while 
on holiday, a shopping trip or business, compared with making 
purchases from sellers/providers located in home country, 2008
(% of respondents)

More
confident
6
4
7
11
4
6
7
3
12
5
9
4
7
6
7
7
3
14
5
5
8
3
11
7
4
4
2
5

As 
confident
37
40
21
49
43
31
34
30
47
42
33
45
31
37
43
34
34
30
52
35
37
41
39
46
40
36
36
32

Less 
confident
36
46
20
27
43
46
31
31
41
22
36
29
38
28
19
24
42
27
35
48
31
27
13
31
40
52
53
47

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Don't 
know
21
10
52
13
10
17
28
36
0
31
22
22
24
29
31
35
21
29
8
12
24
29
37
16
16
8
9
16

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, 
European Commission

Figure 1.35: Persons who are prepared to purchase goods and services using another EU language, 2008
(% of respondents)

100

75

50

25

0

LU NL

SE DK MT

SI

FI

EE BE CY AT

FR LV CZ EL

SK BG EU-
27

DE RO PT UK ES

IE

LT

PL

IT HU

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

57

Consumers.indb   57
Consumers.indb   57

08.04.2009   09:49:06
08.04.2009   09:49:06

II

Retailing and advertising

Advertising

Advertising is used by a wide range of enterprises 
to  shape  and  infl uence  consumer  choice,  as 
well  as  encourage  purchases.  Th  ere  are  many 
diff erent ways that advertising can be classifi ed – 
for  example,  a  distinction  between  product  and 
brand marketing, or between regular advertising 
(to maintain awareness) and a product launch.

Irrespective  of  the  type,  the  range  of  delivery 
media for advertising has progressively expanded, 
and while television and daily newspapers remain 
the most popular form of dissemination, there is a 
movement away from mass media towards target-
specifi c, niche advertising that is linked as closely 
as possible to consumer profi les (in terms of, for 
example,  age,  gender,  occupation,  and  income 

group). By making such a change, advertisers are 
weighing up the costs of reaching a large number 
of consumers against the likelihood that they are 
targeting the correct audience.

A  survey  in  October  2007  asked  Internet  users 
from  across  the  globe  whether  or  not  they 
trusted  a  range  of  diff erent  advertising  media. 
Th  e  results  suggest  that  consumers  place  more 
trust  in  the  opinions  of  fellow  consumers  and 
more  traditional  lines  of  advertising,  such  as 
newspapers,  magazines,  television  and  radio 
advertising,  while  on-line  advertising  or  text 
adverts  sent  to  mobile  phones  were  generally 
distrusted.

Figure 1.36: Trust in diff erent advertising mediums, October 2007 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

Recommendations from other consumers

Newspaper adverts

Consumer opinions posted on-line

Brand websites

Magazines

Television

Radio

E-mails (signed up for)

Brand sponsorship

Adverts before films at cinema

Search engine adverts

On-line banner adverts

Text adverts on mobile phones

(1) Global survey conducted among 26 486 Internet users in Europe, Asia Paciﬁ c, the Americas and the Middle East.

Source: A.C. Nielsen, Trust in advertising (www.acnielsen.com)

58

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   58
Consumers.indb   58

08.04.2009   09:49:06
08.04.2009   09:49:06

Retailing and advertising

II

Th  e  EU  has  laid  down  a  set  of  common  rules 
that  are  applicable  across  all  Member  States  in 
order  to  protect  consumers  from  misleading 
advertising  and  its  unfair  consequences.  For 
this  purpose,  misleading  advertising  is  defi ned 
as  any  advertising  which,  in  its  wording  or 
presentation,  deceives  or  is  likely  to  deceive  the 
consumer. All its features are taken into account, 
including, information concerning the nature of 
the product, its availability, composition, price or 
quantity,  results  to  be  expected  from  its  use,  or 
tests that have been carried on it.

Some 42 % of respondents in the EU-27 reported 
that they had come across misleading or deceptive 
advertising in the 12 months prior to a European 
Commission  survey  that  was  conducted  in 
early  2008,  while  more  than  half  (58 %)  of 
those  questioned  had  come  across  unsolicited 
commercial advertising (in the form of cold calls, 
spam  e-mail,  direct  marketing,  etc.)  during  the 
same period.

Figure 1.37: Misleading and unsolicited advertising, 2008
(% of respondents)

100

75

50

25

0

b

NL

SE DE DK PL

SI

FI

EE

FR BE AT EU-
27

CZ UK LU HU ES

EL

IT

SK PT

LV MT CY

IE

LT RO BG

Came across misleading or deceptive adverts in the last 12 months
Came across unsolicited commercial adverts (cold calls, spam emails, direct marketing, etc.) in the last 12 months

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

59

Consumers.indb   59
Consumers.indb   59

08.04.2009   09:49:07
08.04.2009   09:49:07

III

Access, choice and switching

ACCESS, CHOICE AND SWITCHING

Certain  aspects  of  how  markets  function  are 
diffi  cult  to  measure  concretely;  these  intangible 
elements  are  oft en  left   uncovered  by  offi  cial 
statistics.  However,  consumer  opinion  and 
perception surveys provide a source of information 
covering  some  important  determinants  of  how 
markets  function,  asking  respondents  for  their 
opinions on topics such as branding, advertising, 
quality, choice, switching, or aft er-sales service – 
all of which are thought to play an important role 
in shaping consumption patterns.

Pricing within product markets is usually based 
on  the  cost  of  production  of  tangible  goods 
(which  is  essentially  determined  by  the  price  of 
intermediate and labour inputs). In contrast, the 
intangible market for services is oft en based more 
on perceived value (as determined by factors such 
as timeliness, content, or brand).

Th  e level of market transparency is generally quite 
high for most product markets and it is relatively 
easy for consumers to compare goods on a range 
of criteria (for example, price, quality, or length 
of  a  manufacturer’s  guarantee).  If  consumers 
decide to switch goods (buying a diff erent brand 
of clothes, food, cosmetics or washing-up liquid), 
there  are  usually  no  implications  on  current  or 
future consumption patterns. Exceptions do exist, 
for example, those consumers who bought an HD 
DVD player are ‘locked-in’ to playing discs using 
this format, while most shops have since decided 
to only stock Blu-Ray discs.

In  contrast,  some  services  are  characterised  by 
monopoly  supply,  or  the  need  for  consumers  to 
have  access  to  a  specifi c  network/infrastructure 
in  order  to  be  able  to  use  them,  while  the 
liberalisation of service markets is generally less 
advanced than markets for goods. As such, some 
service markets remain characterised by a range 
of  barriers,  which  may  explain  why,  even  when 
choice  exists,  some  consumers  exhibit  ‘sticky 
behaviour’ – in other words, they do not take full 
advantage of the situation as a rational consumer, 
but instead refrain from purchasing or switching 
to substitute services.

Access and choice

transport, 

Services  of  general  interest  cover  a  range 
of  activities  –  for  example,  water,  energy, 
telecommunications, 
radio  and 
television,  postal  services,  banking,  schools, 
health  and  social  services.  Th  e  EU  works  to 
guarantee  that  services  such  as  these  are  made 
universally  available  at  aff ordable  prices, 
refl ecting  a  desire  to  ensure  social,  economic 
and territorial cohesion.

A survey conducted in 2006 found that a majority 
of  respondents  within  the  EU-25  experienced 
easy access to a wide range of services of general 
interest.  For  water,  postal  and  fi xed  telephony 
services,  more  than  nine  out  of  ten  consumers 
reported easy access. Rail (73 %), gas (72 %) and 
broadband  Internet  access  (60 %)  were  the  only 
three services where fewer than three quarters of 
respondents experienced easy access.

Among  the  Member  States  there  was  a  wide 
range of results, and a number of cases where a 
majority  of  consumers  reported  diffi  cult  access 
to a particular service. Th  e lowest proportion of 
consumers reporting easy access was consistently 
registered  for  either  broadband  Internet  access 
or for gas services, except in Cyprus and Malta, 
where there are no gas or rail services.

Four consumer surveys were conducted over the 
period 2000 to 2006 asking consumers if they faced 
diffi  cult or no access to a range of services – note 
that there is a break in series as the composition 
of  the  EU  aggregate  shift s  from  15  Member 
States  to  25  Member  States.  During  the  period 
considered, there was a consistent improvement 
in access to mobile phone services (where those 
facing diffi  cult or no access almost halved), while 
the  opposite  was  true  for  gas  services  (resulting 
in almost a quarter of all consumers experiencing 
diffi  cult or no access by 2006).

60

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   60
Consumers.indb   60

08.04.2009   09:49:07
08.04.2009   09:49:07

Access, choice and switching

III

Table 1.29: Access to services of general interest, 2006
(% of respondents experiencing easy access)

Mobile 
phone
85
89
:
86
89
88
91
94
94
91
79
72
95
92
86
88
90
91
87
85
88
93
:
90
93
94
89
87

Fixed 
phone
91
93
:
86
90
95
81
93
99
96
91
74
96
77
78
92
87
98
96
90
89
96
:
92
93
81
98
96

Broad-
band
60
77
:
53
72
57
53
46
54
72
57
48
62
43
54
65
58
64
77
62
51
63
:
59
48
75
66
71

Elec-
tricity
93
96
:
93
98
97
93
97
99
95
96
76
98
98
96
93
95
97
91
93
97
98
:
98
95
99
96
97

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Local 
trans-
port
80
84
:
85
81
84
79
79
95
89
70
69
40
83
88
83
81
80
80
88
84
85
:
70
84
77
66
83

Gas Water
93
97
:
93
98
96
82
95
99
94
96
77
98
78
82
96
96
97
92
92
95
96
:
97
93
98
86
97

72
75
:
80
38
74
40
51
29
77
76
74
-
56
70
58
90
-
89
69
68
43
:
46
88
11
9
89

Rail
73
80
:
78
74
74
51
62
77
79
71
69
-
59
71
68
71
-
80
80
67
62
:
58
72
71
59
80

Post
91
92
:
92
89
91
93
96
95
95
93
78
93
96
94
91
96
89
94
92
93
94
:
91
92
95
77
96

Banks
88
94
:
82
97
94
85
89
92
96
91
70
90
77
84
95
80
89
94
92
84
89
:
91
81
97
87
93

Source: ‘Consumers’ opinions of services of general interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

Figure 1.38: Access to services of general interest over time
(% of respondents experiencing diﬃ  cult access or no access)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Mobile phone

Fixed line phone

Electricity

Gas

Local transport

Rail

Post

Source: ‘Consumers’ opinions of services of general interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

EU-15, 2000
EU-15, 2002
EU-25, 2004
EU-25, 2006

  Consumers in Europe

61

Consumers.indb   61
Consumers.indb   61

08.04.2009   09:49:08
08.04.2009   09:49:08

III

Access, choice and switching

A  majority  of  consumers  in  each  Member  State 
agreed that the choice of products imported from 
other Member States in shops and supermarkets 
had become better during the ten years through 
to  2006.  Only  slightly  more  than  half  (53 %)  of 
consumers  in  Slovenia  and  in  Germany  were  of 
this  opinion,  a  share  that  rose  to  three  quarters 
or more in Ireland, Finland, Latvia, Sweden and 
Luxembourg.

Economic benefi ts resulting from the introduction 
of  the  single  market  can  be  measured,  among 
other  indicators,  by  consumers’  perceptions  as 
to changes experienced in the range, the quality, 
and the price of goods and services. Almost three 
quarters  (73 %)  of  respondents  in  the  EU-25  in 
2006 thought that the introduction of the single 
market  had  resulted  in  an  improved  range  of 
products and services, compared with 57 % who 
thought that the quality of products and services 
had improved, and 50 % who thought that there 
had been a positive eff ect on prices. On the other 
hand, just 9 % of respondents thought that there 
had been a reduction in the range of products and 
services  on  off er,  some  17 %  that  the  quality  of 
products had fallen, and 30 % that there had been 
a negative eff ect on prices.

Figure 1.39: Selected consumer outcomes resulting from the introduction of the single 
market, EU-25, 2006
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Range of products & services

Quality of products & services

Price of products & services

Very positive

Fairly positive

Fairly negative

Very negative

Neither or don't know

Source: ‘Internal market - Opinions and experiences of citizens in EU-25’, Special Eurobarometer 254, European Commission

Figure 1.40: Consumers agreeing that the choice of products from other Member States in 
shops and supermarkets has become better in the last ten years, 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

100

75

50

25

0

LU SE LV FI

IE CY MT DK LT PT ES BE EL SK CZ IT PL AT EE HU FR NL UK DE SI

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Internal market - Opinions and experiences of citizens in EU-25’, Special Eurobarometer 254, European Commission

62

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   62
Consumers.indb   62

08.04.2009   09:49:09
08.04.2009   09:49:09

Access, choice and switching

III

Switching

Consumer switching is considered an important 
measure  as  it  covers  both  the  range  of  choice 
and  the  ability  of  consumers  to  pursue  their 
preferences.  Policy  in  this  area  is  based  on  the 
premise that switching is benefi cial for the success 
of  market  liberalisation  concerning  services  of 
general interest, as it results in improved effi  ciency 
and gains in consumer welfare. Data on switching 
attitudes exist for a limited number of services of 
general interest from consumer surveys, covering 
aspects  such  as  how  easy  consumers  fi nd  it  to 
compare  off ers  from  diff erent  service  providers, 
or  the  proportion  of  consumers  who  switched 
provider, tried to switch but gave up, or did not 
try to switch.

A  higher  proportion  of  EU-25  respondents  to 
a  consumer  survey  in  2006  agreed  that  it  was 
easy (compared with diffi  cult) to compare off ers 
relating  to  four  services  of  general  interest. 
Around  half  of  those  questioned  thought  it 
was  easy  to  compare  off ers  from  fi xed  phone 
providers  (53 %),  banks/fi nancial  institutions 
(53 %) and mobile phone providers (50 %), while 
a  somewhat  lower  proportion  (43 %)  thought  it 
was easy to compare off ers from Internet service 
providers.  Th  is  pattern  was  generally  repeated 
across  Member  States,  as  the  lowest  rates  for 
ease  of  comparison  were  usually  recorded  for 
Internet  service  providers  –  where  this  was  not 
the case, consumers faced their greatest diffi  culty 
in comparing off ers from diff erent mobile phone 
providers.

Table 1.30: Consumers agreeing that it is 
very or fairly easy to compare off ers from 
diff erent providers of services of general 
interest, 2006
(% of respondents)

Mobile
phone
50
40
:
69
31
39
66
69
75
56
34
52
66
59
60
54
56
73
39
55
62
71
:
70
72
46
27
55

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Fixed 
phone
53
46
:
58
36
51
55
61
74
54
45
50
52
42
39
60
50
63
42
58
58
63
:
54
60
34
36
53

Internet
43
41
:
51
33
38
53
44
49
47
36
42
38
39
41
47
34
47
44
42
43
44
:
57
38
48
35
54

Banks/ 
finance
53
54
:
51
35
62
69
62
69
53
39
44
66
57
51
64
37
74
49
58
51
66
:
68
58
54
47
64

Source: ‘Consumers’ opinions of services of general interest’, 
Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

Figure 1.41: Ease of comparing off ers from diff erent providers of services of general 
interest, EU-25, 2006
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Mobile phone providers

Fixed phone providers

Internet service providers

Banks / financial institutions

Source: ‘Consumers’ opinions of services of general interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

Easy

Difficult

Don't know

  Consumers in Europe

63

Consumers.indb   63
Consumers.indb   63

08.04.2009   09:49:10
08.04.2009   09:49:10

III

Access, choice and switching

Table 1.31: Consumer intentions towards switching suppliers, EU-25, 2006
(% of respondents)

This year I will 
still use the 
same supplier
84
77
85
87
91
89
88
76
94
90
87

Mobile phone
Fixed line phone
Electricity
Gas
Water
Urban transport
Extra-urban transport
Air transport
Post
Banking
Insurance

Source: IPSOS consumer satisfaction survey, 2007

It is easy 
to change
supplier
78
67
54
42
8
32
48
87
51
80
77

Buying in 
another country 
is possible and
interesting
41
28
23
21
14
15
30
81
29
48
37

I prefer to 
deal with a 
national
supplier
79
80
81
78
84
77
75
61
83
83
83

Even  when  consumers  appear  to  have  a  range 
of  aff ordable  alternatives,  switching  does  not 
guarantee, per se, an effi  cient market solution, as 
exit barriers may result in the full costs of switching 
outweighing  potential  benefi ts.  Consumers  may 
be  obliged  to  purchase  specifi c  equipment,  sign 
fi xed duration contracts, or give a lengthy period 
of  notice  before  being  able  to  switch  provider  – 
these types of conditions oft en ‘tie’ consumers to 
an individual service provider and may dissuade 
them from looking at alternatives.

A  consumer  satisfaction  survey  conducted  in 
2006  tends  to  give  some  support  to  this  view, 
insofar  as  a  majority  of  EU-25  respondents  said 
that they would stay with their current provider 
for  the  next  year.  Th  e  highest  proportions  who 
stated  they  would  stay  with  the  same  suppliers 
were  registered  for  postal,  water,  and  banking 
services (at least 90 %), while fi xed line telephony 
(77 %)  and  air  transport  (76 %)  were  the  only 
services where fewer than 80 % of consumers said 
they  would  continue  to  use  the  same  supplier. 
Th  e  data  presented  for  the  ease  of  changing 
supplier would appear to refl ect, at least to some 
degree,  the  degree  of  competition  (or  choice  of 
potential  suppliers  available  to  consumers),  as 
those  markets  which  still  tend  to  be  dominated 
by a monopoly supplier (such as postal or water 
services)  reported  the  highest  proportion  of 
respondents stating that they intended to use the 
same supplier.

Table 1.32: Attempts to switch supplier in 
the last two years, 2006
(% of respondents)

Mobile 
phone
29
28
:
21
40
34
26
26
25
23
29
31
14
18
31
26
17
10
37
34
25
7
:
16
15
52
32
30

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Fixed 
phone
24
27
:
17
22
25
11
18
12
12
34
28
3
5
4
8
15
6
38
11
21
9
:
4
6
5
42
25

Internet
25
23
:
25
27
28
20
12
22
18
30
23
5
12
15
17
17
27
32
19
15
12
:
13
10
21
27
27

Bank - 
current 
account
12
11
:
13
16
13
7
7
13
10
14
20
10
8
9
9
10
9
9
9
10
5
:
8
14
10
12
9

Source: ‘Consumers’ opinions of services of general interest’, 
Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

64

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   64
Consumers.indb   64

08.04.2009   09:49:11
08.04.2009   09:49:11

Consumption

IV

CONSUMPTION

Household  spending  is  analysed  according  to 
the  classifi cation  of  individual  consumption  by 
purpose  (COICOP).  Th  is  allows  a  harmonised 
comparison  of  spending  patterns  between 
diff erent  countries,  or  between  diff erent  socio-
economic groups of consumers. Th  e vast majority 
of the consumption fi gures are presented in terms 
of  monetary  measures,  although  it  is  important 
to  remember  that  some  people  supplement 
their  monetary  expenditure  by  other  forms  of 
include, 
non-monetary  consumption.  Th  ese 
for  example,  growing  fruit  and  vegetables  in  a 
garden or on an allotment for own consumption, 
or benefi ting from the use of a company car for 
personal use; attempts are made to estimate the 
value  of  these  items  in  the  household  budget 
survey  (HBS).  In  addition,  there  are  a  number 
of  services  that  are  provided  in  the  majority  of 
Member States free (or at greatly reduced prices) 
at the point-of-use by governments (for example, 
health  or  education  services),  and  special  care 
needs  to  be  taken  when  comparing  other  items 
with expenditure data in these domains and when 
comparing  expenditure  on  these  items  between 
countries.

Th  is section starts by providing information on the 
ownership of a range of consumer durable goods 
and the ability of consumers to aff ord these. It is 
followed by information relating to the frequency 
with which consumers make purchases. Th  e main 
bulk  of  this  section  is  focused  on  providing  an 
overview  of  consumption  expenditure  patterns 
across  the  EU,  looking  at  the  overall  level  of 
expenditure,  the  structure  of  expenditure,  and 
patterns among diff erent groups of consumers.

Ownership

Eurostat  collects 
information  on  ownership 
rates  for  a  range  of  consumer  durables  through 
the  survey  on  income  and  living  conditions 
(EU-SILC). Th  is shows that households in higher 
income groups are more likely (than those in the 
lower income groups) to own a range of diff erent 
goods,  such  as  a  home  computer,  a  washing 
machine, or a car.

Th  e 94.3 % share of households owning a colour 
television  in  Finland  was  the  lowest  across  the 
EU-25  Member  States  in  2006:  note  that  only 
1.2 % said they could not aff ord a television with 
the remaining 4.5 % making a choice not to own 
one. Lithuania (2.8 %) and Latvia (2.6 %) recorded 
the highest proportions of households that could 
not aff ord a colour television.

Th  e  vast  majority  of  households  in  the  EU 
also  possessed  a  telephone  in  2006,  although 
penetration rates were somewhat lower than for 
colour  televisions.  Th  e  lowest  ownership  rates 
were  recorded  in  Lithuania  (89.9 %),  Portugal 
(90.3%) and Latvia (92.2 %); in all three of these 
countries, upwards of 5 % of households said they 
could not aff ord a telephone.

Th  e  lowest  proportion  of  households  with  a 
washing  machine  was  recorded  in  Denmark 
(76.5 %), followed by Latvia (80.3 %) and Lithuania 
(81.9 %). While only 2.7 % of Danish households 
reported  that  they  could  not  aff ord  a  washing 
machine,  between  11 %  and  12 %  of  households 
in Lithuania and Latvia could not aff ord one.

Th  e  proportion  of  households  owning  a 
particular  consumer  durable  is  generally  lower 
for consumer durables with higher average prices, 
as  shown  by  ownership  rates  for  computers  or 
cars. Th  ose  countries  characterised  by  relatively 
higher  degrees  of  income  inequality  tended  to 
be among those reporting the lowest ownership 
rates  for  computers  or  cars;  they  also  tended  to 
report the highest proportion of households with 
problems in being able to aff ord a computer or a 
car. Ten of the 25 Member States for which data 
are  available  for  2006  reported  that  less  than 
50 %  of  households  owned  a  computer,  a  share 
that fell to 35.1 % in Greece, and was also below 
40 % in Latvia and Lithuania. For cars, the lowest 
household  ownership  rate  was  41.6 %  in  Latvia, 
while  the  other  two  Baltic  States  and  Hungary 
were the only other EU-25 Member States where 
less than 50 % of households owned a car. More 
than  one  in  fi ve  households  in  Latvia,  Poland, 
Slovakia  and  Lithuania  were  unable  to  aff ord  a 
computer, while the same four countries (together 
with  Hungary  and  Estonia)  reported  that  more 
than  one  in  fi ve  households  could  not  aff ord 
a  car.  At  the  other  end  of  the  scale,  the  highest 
ownership  rates  for  computers  were  registered 
in the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark, while 
car ownership rates were highest in Luxembourg, 
Cyprus, Slovenia and France.

  Consumers in Europe

65

Consumers.indb   65
Consumers.indb   65

08.04.2009   09:49:11
08.04.2009   09:49:11

IV

Consumption

Table 1.33: Ownership of selected consumer durables, 2006
(% of households)

Do you have a 
telephone? (1)

Do you have a 
colour TV?

Do you have a 
computer?

No, cannot 
afford 
(2)
0.4
:
2.2
0.0
0.4
2.7
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.9
1.5
:
5.5
6.2
:
3.8
1.1
0.0
:
4.6
5.4
:
0.9
2.7
:
:
0.2
:
:

Yes
99.2
:
93.7
100.0
99.2
94.5
98.8
98.8
97.7
96.8
94.2
99.3
92.2
89.9
99.3
93.4
97.0
100.0
98.7
92.4
90.3
:
98.0
94.7
98.8
99.8
99.4
99.8
98.8

No, cannot 
afford 
(3)
0.6
:
0.5
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.4
0.5
:
2.6
2.8
:
1.1
:
:
:
1.7
1.1
:
1.2
1.0
1.2
0.7
:
:
0.8

Yes
97.3
:
97.6
95.3
94.9
97.7
98.8
99.1
99.5
97.0
96.6
99.5
96.4
96.1
98.9
97.8
98.5
98.5
97.2
96.9
98.4
:
97.0
98.0
94.3
94.9
98.8
97.0
96.5

No, cannot 
afford 
(4)
8.6
:
12.0
2.9
6.4
17.2
10.6
14.3
9.0
8.2
7.3
8.2
28.5
20.6
2.4
17.2
4.6
3.1
5.0
24.4
16.2
:
7.7
23.0
8.4
2.8
5.7
1.7
3.3

Yes
62.0
:
46.5
74.4
68.3
48.1
56.6
35.1
54.7
54.3
43.5
50.6
36.7
38.7
65.3
45.8
52.8
80.6
56.6
44.4
43.4
:
56.5
43.1
63.2
75.1
68.8
84.5
71.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Do you have a 
washing machine?
No, cannot 
afford 
(5)
2.9
:
0.9
2.7
0.8
5.0
1.4
3.2
0.4
1.4
0.8
1.5
12.3
11.4
0.3
4.3
:
:
0.9
1.9
4.8
:
0.7
1.5
2.5
:
0.8
2.0
0.6

Yes
89.5
:
95.5
76.5
95.0
86.3
94.9
94.5
98.6
93.9
96.8
95.9
80.3
81.9
95.0
90.5
96.2
97.5
95.7
96.2
91.7
:
97.9
96.4
90.7
99.1
95.3
97.8
96.3

Do you 
have a car?

No, cannot 
afford
8.7
:
14.5
13.2
7.9
23.4
11.5
11.1
4.8
4.6
3.8
2.6
35.7
21.9
2.0
24.1
3.4
8.1
6.2
23.7
11.6
:
5.1
29.6
13.8
6.0
5.3
2.9
6.6

Yes
78.1
:
61.0
66.4
76.9
48.2
76.1
72.3
76.4
80.6
78.7
86.1
41.6
49.4
87.2
47.9
79.1
76.2
75.1
50.7
70.9
:
81.1
51.8
71.7
76.1
77.0
91.4
76.1

(1) Including mobile phone.
(2) Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Malta, Slovenia and the United Kingdom, unreliable.
(3) Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Portugal, Sweden and Norway, unreliable.
(4) Iceland, unreliable.
(5) Luxembourg, Slovenia, Iceland and Norway, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC cross-sectional 2006 data

66

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   66
Consumers.indb   66

08.04.2009   09:49:12
08.04.2009   09:49:12

Consumption

IV

Frequency of purchase

Th  e  frequency  of  purchase  is  simply  defi ned  as 
the number of times that a person buys a product 
or service. Th  e nature and price of some products 
means that they are bought on a far more regular 
basis (for example, perishable foods) than others 
(for example, a new car). Retailers and advertisers 
are  particularly  interested  in  identifying  those 
consumers who have a high frequency and value 
of purchases.

Changes  in  lifestyle  patterns  and  increasing 
demands  on  the  effi  cient  use  of  time  mean  that 
there  have  been  changes  in  the  way  people  do 
their  shopping,  the  time  they  spend  shopping, 
and  the  frequency  with  which  they  visit  shops. 
Some  diff erences  between  Member  States  have 
already been alluded to (see Section A2 for more 
details),  insofar  as  the  southern  Member  States 
tend  to  report  a  much  higher  retail  density  of 
large  (oft en  out-of-town) 
enterprises,  while 
shopping 
and 
supermarkets/hypermarkets 
centres are increasingly the most popular places 
to go shopping in northern Europe.

A  survey  conducted  in  the  United  Kingdom 
confi rmed  that  Saturday  was  the  favourite  day 
for  shopping.  Despite  a  liberalisation  in  shop 
opening  hours  (leading  to  later  opening  and 
Sunday  opening),  some  22 %  of  shopping  trips 
made in the United Kingdom in 2005 were made 
on a Saturday, with Friday the next most popular 
day (16 % of trips).

Th  e European time-use survey suggests that, on 
average, consumers spend between 15 minutes a 
day in Bulgaria and 36 minutes a day in France 
to  do  their  shopping.  Th  e  average  time  spent 
was  generally  higher  in  EU-15  Member  States 
(for  which  data  are  available),  while  women 
consistently  spent  longer  than  men  shopping, 
probably  refl ecting  both  the  division  of  tasks 
within family life, as well as a higher proportion 
of women shopping as a recreational activity. Th  e 
diff erence  between  the  sexes  in  terms  of  time 
spent  shopping  peaked  at  16  minutes  a  day  in 
Spain, 15 in the United Kingdom and 14 in Italy.

Figure 1.42: Number of shopping trips by 
day of the week, United Kingdom, 2005 (1)
(% of total number of trips)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Sunday

(1) A shopping trip is deﬁ ned as any trip to the shops, whether or 
not anything was bought, and even when there was no intention 
to buy.

Source: Ofﬁ ce for National Statistics (UK), National Travel Survey 
(www.statistics.gov.uk)

Figure 1.43: Time-use for shopping, population aged 20-74 years old (1)
(hours:minutes per day)

01:00

00:50

00:40

00:30

00:20

00:10

00:00

FR

UK

DE

IT

ES

BE

FI

PL

EE

SE

NO

LV

LT

SI

BG

Female

Male

(1) Data only shown for those countries participating in the survey; all remaining Member States, not available.

Source: Harmonised European Time Use Survey [online database version 2.0]; created 2005-2007 by Statistics Finland and Statistics 
Sweden [reference date 2007-10-01]; (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/)

  Consumers in Europe

67

Consumers.indb   67
Consumers.indb   67

08.04.2009   09:49:12
08.04.2009   09:49:12

IV

Consumption

Figure 1.44: Average number of shopping 
trips per year, by age and gender of shopper, 
United Kingdom, 2005 (1)
(trips)

0

100

200

300

400

>=70

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

21-29

17-20

< 17

Female
Male

(1) A shopping trip is deﬁ ned as any trip to the shops, whether or 
not anything was bought, and even when there was no intention 
to buy.

Source: Ofﬁ ce for National Statistics (UK), National Travel Survey 
(www.statistics.gov.uk)

Th  e  survey  of  shopping  patterns  in  the  United 
Kingdom  confi rms  this  gender  imbalance  in 
terms  of  the  average  number  of  shopping  trips 
made by each of the sexes. British women made 
a higher number of shopping trips than men for 
each age group, other than for those aged 70 or 
more.  Th  e  number  of  shopping  trips  made  by 
men rose steadily with age through to the age of 
retirement, aft er which it remained stable, while 
the  number  of  shopping  trips  made  by  women 
reached  a  plateau  by  the  age  of  30,  remaining 
almost  unchanged  through  to  the  age  of  60. 
Th  e  higher  number  of  shopping  trips  made  by 
people  aged  60  or  more  may  be  attributed  to 
the  additional  free-time  available  to  persons  in 
retirement (shopping as a leisure pursuit), as well 
as  their  lower  reliance  on  the  car  resulting  in 
more shopping trips in order to be able to carry 
the shopping home.

Structure of consumption 
expenditure

For the purpose of the household budget survey 
(HBS),  total  expenditure  represents  current 
(consumption) expenditure on goods and services. 
Consumption  expenditure  therefore  excludes 
payments which are really savings or investments 
(for  example,  life  assurance  premiums,  pension 
fund contributions, income tax payments, social 
security  contributions,  or  mortgage  capital 
repayments).

HBS data are oft en presented in terms of the level 
of  expenditure  per  household.  Th  is  is  because, 
although one person may earn all of the money, 
or one person may buy all of the food, it is likely 
that  the  money/food  will  be  divided  between 
diff erent  members  of  each  household;  as  such, 
consumption of individuals cannot be estimated 
with  reference  to  the  expenditure  incurred, 
rather it is generally assumed to be shared across 
a household – be that a traditional, family unit, or 
a group of unrelated persons.

Average consumption expenditure per household 
in the EU-27 stood at EUR 24 447 in 2005, ranging 
from  a  high  of  EUR  52 754  in  Luxembourg  to 
a  low  of  EUR  2 863  in  Romania;  these  fi gures 
do  not  refl ect  the  (sometimes  considerable) 
diff erences  in  prices  between  EU  economies. 
Adjusting to take account of diff ering purchasing 
powers, there was still a wide range between the 
Member States, with the same countries at each 
end of the ranking; expenditure reached a high of 
PPS 51 932 in Luxembourg, which was almost 10 
times the level recorded in Romania (PPS 5 324). 
Relatively  high  expenditure  per  household 
(above PPS 30 000) was also recorded in Ireland, 
Cyprus,  the  United  Kingdom,  Greece,  Austria 
and  Belgium.  Cyprus  and  Malta  were  the  only 
Member States that joined the EU since 2004 to 
record expenditure per household above the EU-27 
average,  while  spending  in  Slovenia  was  only 
slightly below the average. Th  ere was a signifi cant 
gap  in  the  ranking,  with  nine  of  the  Member 
States  that  joined  the  EU  since  2004  recording 
the lowest levels of consumption expenditure per 
household, ranging from PPS 12 142 in the Czech 
Republic (approximately half the EU-27 average) 
down to PPS 5 324 in Romania.

68

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   68
Consumers.indb   68

08.04.2009   09:49:13
08.04.2009   09:49:13

Consumption

IV

Table 1.34: Mean consumption expenditure

Per household

Per adult equivalent

(EUR)

(PPS)

(EUR)

(PPS)

1994
:
23 858
:
:
24 899
23 231
:
19 899
13 754
16 404
24 507
19 531
:
:
:
38 777
:
:
21 451
26 766
:
11 333
:
:
:
18 547
21 641
18 433
:
:

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Estimates.

2005
24 447
31 521
3 030
7 146
33 241
29 232
6 936
44 909
27 081
23 682
29 632
28 053
30 856
5 981
5 109
52 754
6 715
18 829
30 360
30 428
6 428
17 607
2 863
17 738
5 952
29 705
29 885
34 859
11 500
40 328

1994
:
22 716
:
:
19 185
20 660
:
22 243
17 701
19 586
22 319
22 807
:
:
:
38 647
:
:
20 314
24 322
:
16 311
:
:
:
16 014
17 994
20 461
:
:

2005
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

1994
:
14 755
:
:
16 570
15 006
:
10 060
7 432
8 160
15 084
10 931
:
:
:
23 334
:
:
13 762
15 438
:
5 816
:
:
:
11 906
14 426
11 400
:
:

2005
15 190
19 754
1 798
3 837
22 378
19 438
4 176
25 413
15 205
12 684
18 620
17 215
15 419
3 002
3 210
33 313
3 920
9 945
19 660
19 511
3 530
9 849
1 541
9 909
3 248
19 611
20 320
21 866
6 472
26 498

1994
:
14 049
:
:
12 767
13 345
:
11 245
9 564
9 742
13 738
12 764
:
:
:
23 255
:
:
13 033
14 029
:
8 371
:
:
:
10 280
11 995
12 654
:
:

2005
15 218
18 831
4 213
6 520
16 199
18 952
6 531
20 583
17 391
13 940
17 523
17 663
17 094
5 316
5 892
32 794
6 241
15 108
19 018
19 344
5 817
11 674
2 866
13 299
5 879
16 082
17 414
20 047
9 478
19 125

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by household and per adult equivalent (hbs_exp_t111)

Data  based  on  average  household  consumption 
expenditure  do  not  refl ect  diff erences  in  the 
size  and  composition  of  households  between 
countries.  An  alternative  analysis  can  be  done 
based  on  consumption  expenditure  per  adult 
equivalent.  Each  member  of  the  household  is 
given  a  weight  ranging  from  1.0  for  the  head  of 
the  household  to  0.3  for  children  and  these  are 
summed  to  derive  a  standardised  household 
size in terms of adult equivalents: the household 
consumption  expenditure  can  then  be  divided 
by this standardised household size to determine 
average expenditure per adult equivalent.

A  ranking  of  average  consumption  expenditure, 
in  terms  of  adult  equivalents,  shows  the  same 
countries  at  the  top  and  bottom  of  the  ranking, 
from  a  high  of  PPS  32 794  in  Luxembourg  to 
PPS  2 866  in  Romania;  as  such,  consumption 

expenditure  per  adult  equivalent  was  11.4  times 
as  high  in  Luxembourg  as  it  was  in  Romania 
in  2005.  While  consumption  expenditure  per 
household in Cyprus averaged PPS 34 208 (which 
was 39 % above the EU-27 average), consumption 
expenditure  per  adult  equivalent  averaged 
PPS 17 094 (only 12 % above the EU-27 average). A 
similar pattern (although not as pronounced), was 
observed in some other Mediterranean countries, 
such  as  Malta,  Spain  and  Greece,  as  well  as  in 
Ireland.  Th  ese  diff erences  between  consumption 
expenditure 
levels  for  households  and  adult 
equivalents are likely to result from a higher than 
average  proportion  of  (extended)  families  living 
together in the Mediterranean countries, where a 
greater level of importance tends to be attached to 
the family unit. In the case of Ireland, the diff erence 
may be attributed to the relatively high proportion 
of children within the population.

  Consumers in Europe

69

Consumers.indb   69
Consumers.indb   69

08.04.2009   09:49:14
08.04.2009   09:49:14

IV

Consumption

Consumption  expenditure  analysed  per  adult 
equivalent results in Sweden, Denmark, Germany 
and  Finland  improving  their  position  relative 
to  the  EU-27  average.  In  Sweden  for  example, 
average consumption expenditure per household 
was  around  4 %  more  than  the  EU-27  average, 
whereas  average  consumption  expenditure  per 
adult  equivalent  was  14 %  above  the  average; 
these fi gures refl ect a higher proportion of people 
living  alone  or  in  smaller  family  units  in  many 
northern European countries.

consumption 

Total  household 
expenditure 
can  be  broken  down  using  the  classifi cation  of 
individual  consumption  by  purpose  (COICOP). 
Th  is  hierarchical  classifi cation  has  12  main 
expenditure  items  for  private  households  at  its 
most aggregated level. Information for the EU-27 
in  2005  shows  that  the  most  important  item 
on  the  household  budget  was  housing,  water, 

electricity, gas and other fuels, which accounted 
for PPS 6 936, of which the most important sub-
item was rent (or imputed rent). Th  e next largest 
items  were  everyday  expenditures  namely,  food 
and  non-alcoholic  beverages  (PPS  3 594)  and 
transport (PPS 3 078), followed by miscellaneous 
goods  and  services  (insurance,  hairdressers  or 
beauty salons), and recreation and culture; both 
of  these  were  characterised  by  people  in  higher 
income brackets tending to spend proportionally 
more of their budget on such items. Th  e overall 
level  of  EU-27  expenditure  per  household  on 
restaurants  and  hotels;  furnishings,  household 
equipment  and  routine  maintenance  of  the 
house;  as  well  as  clothing  and  footwear  was 
similar, averaging just over PPS 1 400 for each the 
three items, while the fi ve remaining goods and 
services  (at  the  fi rst  level  of  the  COICOP)  each 
accounted for less than PPS 1 000 of spending per 
annum.

Figure 1.45: Mean consumption expenditure, 2005
(% relative to EU-27, based on PPS series)

250

200

150

100

50

0

LU IE CY UK EL AT BE NL

IT MT DE FR ES SE EU-
27
(1)

FI DK SI PT CZ EE SK HU PL LV LT BG RO

NO HR

Per household

Per adult equivalent

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by household and per adult equivalent (hbs_exp_t111)

70

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   70
Consumers.indb   70

08.04.2009   09:49:14
08.04.2009   09:49:14

Consumption

IV

Table 1.35: Mean consumption expenditure per household, 2005

Food & non-alcoholic beverages

Food
Non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco

Alcoholic beverages
Tobacco (1)

Clothing & footwear

Clothing (1)
Footwear including repair

Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels

Actual rentals for housing
Imputed rentals for housing (2)
Maintenance & repair of the dwelling
Water supply; misc. serv. relating to dwelling
Electricity, gas & other fuels

Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Furniture, furnish., carpets, floor cover.
Household textiles
Household appliances
Glassware, tableware & househ. utensils
Tools & equip. for house & garden
Goods & services for routine maintenance

Health

Medical products, appliances & equip.
Out-patient services
Hospital services

Transport

Purchase of vehicles
Operation of personal transport equip. (1)
Transport services

Communications

Postal services (1)
Telephone & telefax equipment (1)
Telephone & telefax services (1)

Recreation & culture

Audio-vis., photo., info. process. equip. (1)
Oth. durables for recreation & culture (1)
Oth. recreational equip., garden & pets (1)
Recreational & cultural services
Newspapers, books & stationery
Package holidays (3)

Education

Pre-primary & primary education (4)
Secondary education (5)
Post-secondary non-tertiary education (6)
Tertiary education (7)
Education not definable by level (8)

Restaurants & hotels

Catering services (1)
Accommodation services (1)
Miscellaneous goods & services

Personal care
Personal effects n.e.c. (1)
Social protection (y)
Insurance
Financial services n.e.c. (9)
Other services n.e.c. (1)

EU-27 
average 
(PPS)
3 594
3 329
282
560
281
242
1 412
934
295
6 936
3 095
5 256
371
455
1 192
1 416
558
109
205
90
114
336
796
428
330
39
3 078
1 165
1 234
325
738
16
28
555
2 187
241
44
325
619
356
414
238
35
48
16
68
44
1 417
1 035
178
2 291
615
113
82
1 159
31
191

Highest
Malta
Malta
Malta
Ireland
Ireland
Greece
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
United Kingdom
Luxembourg
Malta
Austria
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Greece
Ireland
Greece
Sweden
Luxembourg
Greece
Luxembourg
Greece
Greece
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Malta
Ireland
Malta
Malta
Ireland
United Kingdom
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Ireland
Malta
Austria
Cyprus
Cyprus
Cyprus
Ireland
Cyprus
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Ireland
Netherlands
Netherlands
Finland

(PPS)
6 082
5 394
688
2 032
1 508
845
3 343
2 747
596
15 611
6 650
12 889
1 729
1 010
1 894
3 702
1 770
326
815
223
258
909
1 824
801
1 196
265
8 403
4 954
3 020
673
1 255
42
139
1 174
3 943
648
231
1 027
1 438
686
1 224
1 354
203
422
107
706
306
4 098
3 240
858
4 945
1 242
896
400
3 623
198
1 370

Lowest
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Poland
Bulgaria
Lithuania
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Romania
Poland
Latvia
Finland
Bulgaria
Malta
Romania
Romania
Bulgaria
Romania
Romania
Romania
Bulgaria
Romania
Romania
Romania
Netherlands
Romania
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Romania
Romania
Romania
Romania
Romania
Bulgaria
Romania
Romania
Romania
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Lithuania
Sweden
Estonia
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Finland
Sweden
Romania
Romania
Latvia
Romania
Romania
Romania
Romania
Romania
Bulgaria
Romania

(PPS)
2 238
2 143
96
262
85
123
218
152
67
832
52
668
5
132
502
201
35
12
41
9
6
82
205
168
28
1
344
37
196
93
259
0
4
255
204
27
0
23
72
44
20
8
0
4
1
6
1
58
38
9
162
118
14
1
11
2
10

Ratio: 
highest/
lowest
2.7
2.5
7.2
7.8
17.7
6.9
15.3
18.1
8.9
18.8
127.9
19.3
345.8
7.7
3.8
18.4
50.6
27.2
19.9
24.8
43.0
11.1
8.9
4.8
42.7
265.0
24.4
133.9
15.4
7.2
4.8
-
34.8
4.6
19.3
24.0
-
44.7
20.0
15.6
61.2
169.3
-
105.5
107.0
117.7
306.0
70.7
85.3
95.3
30.5
10.5
64.0
400.0
329.4
99.0
137.0

(1) Germany, not available. (2) Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta and Romania, not available. (3) France, not available. (4) Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the 
Netherlands, Finland and Sweden, not available. (5) Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden, not available. (6) Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, 
France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania and Finland, not available. (7) Belgium, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Slovenia 
and Sweden, not available. (8) Germany and Romania, not available. (9) Germany and Italy, not available.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by detailed COICOP level (hbs_exp_t121)

  Consumers in Europe

71

Consumers.indb   71
Consumers.indb   71

08.04.2009   09:49:15
08.04.2009   09:49:15

IV

Consumption

A  comparison  between  the  highest  and  lowest 
levels of spending shows that average household 
consumption expenditure in Malta was 2.7 times 
as high as in Bulgaria for food and non-alcoholic 
beverages, an expenditure item that can be largely 
regarded as a necessity. Th  is ratio was generally 
much bigger for other items: for example, spending 
in  Luxembourg  was  24.4  times  as  high  as  in 
Romania for transport (purchases of vehicles and 
running costs), while the ratio for the same two 
countries for restaurants and hotels stood at 70.7. 
An even larger ratio was recorded for education 
services,  although  it  is  important  to  underline 
that  the  comparability  between  countries  for 
education, as well as for health services, may be 
limited  due  by  the  signifi cant  diff erences  that 
exist  in  terms  of  the  relative  importance  of  free 
delivery at the point-of-use.

An analysis of the average household spend can 
be supplemented by information on the structure 
of  expenditure,  in  other  words,  the  relative 
importance  of  each  item  in  the  total  household 
budget. Housing, water, electricity, gas and other 
fuels accounted for more than a quarter (27.7 %) 
of  total  household  consumption  expenditure  in 
the EU-27 in 2005, while food and non-alcoholic 
beverages  (16.8 %)  and  transport  (11.9 %)  were 
the next most important items.

Th  e  proportion  of  the  household  budget  spent 
on  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  rose  to 
44.2 % of in Romania and fell to as low as 9.3 % in 
Luxembourg. Th  e highest share of consumption 
expenditure  on 
the  purchase  of  alcoholic 
beverages was recorded in Ireland (4.1 % of total 
expenditure),  while  Romania  (3.5 %)  registered 
the  highest  proportion  of  total  expenditure  on 

tobacco.  Th  e  relative  importance  of  housing, 
water,  electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels  was 
highest  in  Bulgaria  (34.7 %  of  the  total  budget), 
while  consumers  in  Malta  recorded  the  highest 
proportion of expenditure on transport (16.6 %), 
furnishings  and  household  equipment  (10.7 %) 
and  clothing  (6.3 %).  Portugal  registered  the 
highest  relative  expenditure  on  health  services 
(6.1 %)  and  for  restaurants  and  hotels  (10.8 %), 
while consumers in Austria spent more (12.6 %), 
in relative terms, on recreation and culture than 
in  any  other  Member  State,  and  Cyprus  (4.0 %) 
had the highest share of spending on education.

Th  e diff erences in consumption patterns between 
the  Member  States  displayed  a  larger  variation 
for  those  items  considered  as  luxuries,  where 
expenditure depends (at least to some degree) on 
the ability to aff ord goods or services. For example, 
households  in  Luxembourg  spent  9.5 %  of  their 
total budget in 2005 on the purchase of vehicles, 
compared  with  just  0.5 %  in  Bulgaria.  Th  ese 
fi gures  refl ect  not  just  the  ability  of  consumers 
in Luxembourg to buy a car (Luxembourg is the 
Member  State  with  the  highest  car  ownership 
rate),  but  also  the  relatively  high  price  paid  by 
consumers in that country for higher-end motor 
vehicles. In contrast, there was far less variation 
across the Member States as regards the share of 
household  expenditure  that  was  devoted  to  the 
operation  of  personal  transport  equipment,  or 
the  purchase  of  transport  services.  Indeed,  the 
main use of a car, a bus, or a train is usually to 
make  the  journey  between  home  and  work  or 
home and school, in part explaining why there is 
less variation between countries.

72

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   72
Consumers.indb   72

08.04.2009   09:49:16
08.04.2009   09:49:16

Consumption

IV

Table 1.36: Structure of consumption expenditure for households, 2005 (1)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages

Food
Non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco

Alcoholic beverages
Tobacco (2)

Clothing & footwear

Clothing (2)
Footwear including repair

Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels

Actual rentals for housing
Imputed rentals for housing (3)
Maintenance & repair of the dwelling
Water supply; misc. serv. relating to dwelling
Electricity, gas & other fuels

Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Furniture, furnish., carpets, floor cover.
Household textiles
Household appliances
Glassware, tableware & househ. utensils
Tools & equip. for house & garden
Goods & services for routine maintenance

Health

Medical products, appliances & equip.
Out-patient services
Hospital services (4)

Transport

Purchase of vehicles
Operation of personal transport equip. (2)
Transport services

Communications

Postal services (5)
Telephone & telefax equipment (2)
Telephone & telefax services (2)

Recreation & culture

Audio-vis., photo., info. process. equip. (2)
Oth. durables for recreation & culture (6)
Oth. recreational equip., garden & pets (2)
Recreational & cultural services
Newspapers, books & stationery
Package holidays (7)

Education

Pre-primary & primary education (8)
Secondary education (9)
Post-secondary non-tertiary education (10)
Tertiary education (11)
Education not definable by level (12)

Restaurants & hotels

Catering services (2)
Accommodation services (2)
Miscellaneous goods & services

Personal care
Personal effects n.e.c. (2)
Social protection (13)
Insurance
Financial services n.e.c. (14)
Other services n.e.c. (2)

EU-27 
average 
(‰)
168
156
12
24
12
14
57
45
13
277
45
150
15
20
55
55
21
4
8
4
4
14
34
19
13
2
119
44
59
14
32
1
1
31
83
11
2
15
24
14
18
10
2
2
1
5
2
53
47
8
87
25
6
4
42
2
9

Highest
Romania
Romania
Slovakia
Romania
Ireland
Romania
Malta
Malta
Lithuania
Bulgaria
Sweden
Spain
Malta
Hungary
Slovakia
Malta
Malta
Greece
Malta
Greece
Sweden
Greece
Portugal
Lithuania
Greece
Greece
Malta
Luxembourg
Austria
Malta
Hungary
Various
Malta
Hungary
Austria
Denmark
Various
Denmark
Ireland
Malta
Austria
Cyprus
Various
Greece
Various
Cyprus
Netherlands
Portugal
Portugal
Italy
Netherlands
France
Luxembourg
Denmark
Netherlands
Netherlands
Finland

(‰)
442
419
25
58
41
35
83
63
26
347
96
229
60
48
159
107
42
11
22
7
9
26
61
41
39
9
166
95
81
24
65
1
5
63
126
24
8
25
40
24
41
40
6
13
3
21
10
108
105
17
168
33
17
13
123
7
56

Lowest
Luxembourg
Luxembourg
Portugal
Various
Cyprus
Luxembourg
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Finland
Malta
Estonia
Latvia
Finland
Malta
Malta
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Portugal
Bulgaria
Various
Various
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Various
Various
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Various
Various
Bulgaria
Greece
Italy
Bulgaria
Various
Various
Various
Various
Bulgaria
Various
Sweden
Various
Various
Various
Various
Sweden
Romania
Romania
Various
Romania
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Various
Various
Various
Various

(‰)
93
83
7
17
5
6
31
21
6
91
0
57
0
5
18
30
5
2
7
2
1
6
12
6
5
0
50
5
28
7
22
0
0
19
29
5
0
4
10
6
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
7
1
30
18
2
0
2
0
2

Ratio: 
highest/
lowest
4.8
5.0
3.6
3.4
8.2
5.8
2.7
3.0
4.3
3.8
-
4.0
-
9.6
8.8
3.6
8.4
5.5
3.1
3.5
9.0
4.3
5.1
6.8
7.8
-
3.3
19.0
2.9
3.4
3.0
-
-
3.3
4.3
4.8
-
6.3
4.0
4.0
20.5
-
-
-
-
-
-
9.8
15.0
17.0
5.6
1.8
8.5
-
61.5
-
28.0

(1) Czech Republic, not available. (2) Germany, not available. (3) Hungary, Malta and Romania, not available. (4) Slovenia, not available. (5) Germany, Slovenia and 
Poland, not available. (6) Germany and Poland, not available. (7) France, not available. (8) Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden, 
not available. (9) Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden, not available. (10) Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, 
Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania and Finland, not available. (11) Belgium, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Slovenia and Sweden, not available. 
(12) Germany and Romania, not available. (13) Germany, Italy and Poland, not available. (14) Germany and Italy, not available.

Source: Eurostat, overall structure of consumption expenditure by detailed COICOP level (hbs_exp_t211)

  Consumers in Europe

73

Consumers.indb   73
Consumers.indb   73

08.04.2009   09:49:16
08.04.2009   09:49:16

IV

Consumption

Th  e  evolution  of  consumption  expenditure  over 
time  presented  here  is  based  on  an  analysis  of 
national accounts data. Th  is shows that alcoholic 
beverages  and  tobacco  was  the  only  one  of  the 
12  consumption  items  (at  the  fi rst  level  of  the 
COICOP)  to  register  a  reduction  in  its  volume 
(in  other  words,  adjusted  for  price  changes)  of 
consumption  between  1995  and  2006  in  the 
EU-27, as consumption fell in each of the last four 
years  for  which  data  are  available.  Th  e  volume 
of  consumption  across  the  remaining  11  items 
in  the  COICOP  rose  between  1995  and  2006. 
Th  e  slowest  growth  rates  were  oft en  registered 

for  items  characterised  as  necessities,  such  as 
food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages,  or  housing, 
water,  electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels  –  where 
demand  is  generally  inelastic  (expenditure  on 
these  items  increases  with  income,  but  not  as 
fast as income, so the proportion of expenditure 
devoted  to  these  items  falls  over  time  assuming 
that  income  rises).  In  contrast,  the  most  rapid 
growth was recorded for communications, where 
consumption  increased  by  an  average  of  10.2 % 
per annum in the EU-27, followed by a 4.4 % per 
annum increase in the consumption of recreation 
and culture.

Figure 1.46: Evolution of volume of fi nal consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose, EU-27 (1)
(1995=100, based on expenditure per inhabitant)

300

250

200

150

100

140
130
120
110
100
90

140

130

120

110

100

90

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Communications
Recreation and culture

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Health
Miscellaneous goods and services
Clothing and footwear
Transport
Restaurants and hotels

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Furnishings, household equipment and routine maintenance of the house
Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels
Food and non-alcoholic beverages
Education
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco

(1) Note: the y-axis of the ﬁ rst graph has a different scale.

Source: Eurostat, ﬁ nal consumption expenditure of households by consumption purpose - volumes (nama_co2_k)

74

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   74
Consumers.indb   74

08.04.2009   09:49:17
08.04.2009   09:49:17

Consumption

IV

Expenditure patterns of diff erent 
population groups

Table 1.37: Mean consumption expenditure per household 
by income quintile, 2005
(PPS)

Household income

Many of the diff erences in consumption patterns 
between  and  within  countries  can  be  related 
to  income.  Average  consumption  expenditure 
per  household  broken  down  by  income  quintile 
is  an  indicator  that  is  derived  by  ranking  all 
households  according  to  their  income  and  then 
dividing them into fi ve groups of equal number 
of households.

Th  e  fi gures  show,  unsurprisingly,  that  average 
spending  in  the  EU-27  in  2005  increased  as  a 
function  of  income  –  with  the  expenditure  of 
the fi ft h quintile (the top 20 % of earners) some 
2.8  times  as  high  as  that  for  the  lowest  income 
quintile  (the  bottom  20 %  of  earners).  Th  e  ratio 
of  household  expenditure  between  the  top  and 
bottom  quintiles  gives  an  indication  of  the 
distribution of household expenditure, with high 
ratios – such as those recorded in Luxembourg, 
Portugal,  Italy  and  Cyprus  –  indicating  a  lower 
degree  of  equality,  while  lower  values  –  such  as 
those  in  the  Netherlands,  Austria  or  the  Czech 
Republic – suggesting a more equal distribution 
of consumption expenditure across society.

Total
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

1st
14 158
18 929
3 782
11 142
13 395
14 388
5 561
18 272
18 617
16 874
18 069
12 667
13 676
5 875
5 009
21 139
6 743
13 683
22 694
24 766
5 315
8 375
2 828
10 588
6 984
13 085
16 571
18 941
9 324
17 596

2nd
18 731
24 998
5 395
10 306
18 092
20 978
7 286
25 758
22 926
21 609
23 095
19 723
24 795
6 950
6 631
32 673
7 829
22 345
22 733
23 801
7 400
13 811
3 870
18 296
8 659
18 508
20 082
24 341
12 375
34 411

3rd
23 046
29 634
6 886
10 588
24 595
26 877
8 900
37 589
27 629
25 164
27 003
25 352
34 189
9 236
8 776
44 751
9 721
29 241
27 257
28 511
9 450
18 521
4 859
22 857
10 200
23 438
25 100
29 455
16 096
35 179

4th
28 073
34 173
8 222
13 199
28 854
33 216
12 741
46 345
35 673
28 816
31 243
32 163
41 065
12 361
11 004
60 862
11 712
35 077
33 047
32 398
12 186
24 493
6 112
28 822
11 671
28 640
29 252
36 638
19 767
30 788

5th
39 262
42 461
11 209
15 469
35 308
47 047
19 717
53 881
50 020
37 670
40 020
54 014
57 269
18 517
15 469
100 177
17 457
42 680
41 091
41 358
18 618
39 152
8 952
38 434
16 338
38 099
37 041
50 401
26 617
27 568

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by income quintile (hbs_exp_t133)

Figure 1.47: Ratio of mean consumption expenditure per household for the fi fth quintile compared with the 
fi rst quintile, 2005
(ratio, based on PPS series)

5

4

3

2

1

0

LU PT

IT CY SI

EE PL DE RO LV MT LT BG IE

FI EU-
27
(1)

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by income quintile (hbs_exp_t133)

EL UK DK HU SK BE SE ES FR NL AT CZ

HR NO

  Consumers in Europe

75

Consumers.indb   75
Consumers.indb   75

08.04.2009   09:49:17
08.04.2009   09:49:17

IV

Consumption

Table 1.38: Structure of consumption expenditure per household by income quintile, EU-27, 2005
(‰)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

Total
168
24
57
277
55
34
119
32
83
10
53
87

1st
222
31
50
326
40
30
81
37
64
7
40
70

2nd
201
27
51
304
47
33
97
35
73
7
45
78

3rd
184
25
55
287
50
32
111
34
82
8
49
82

4th
166
24
58
271
54
32
121
33
87
10
55
88

5th
130
20
61
244
67
37
144
30
94
12
62
99

Source: Eurostat, structure of consumption expenditure by income quintile (hbs_str_t223)

Table 1.39: Mean consumption expenditure per household by 
number of active persons, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Total
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

0
17 397
22 825
4 901
7 197
16 305
22 487
5 749
19 501
18 201
16 756
20 728
20 563
15 688
5 013
5 565
41 436
7 292
15 978
:
21 872
7 476
12 879
3 289
14 908
:
16 059
:
21 255
10 540
30 876

1
23 206
26 641
6 793
11 015
22 205
25 969
9 570
34 137
31 455
25 358
25 118
28 959
28 757
8 990
8 485
46 810
11 125
27 193
:
28 899
10 104
19 951
4 902
21 751
:
23 249
:
29 907
15 686
24 741

2
32 247
39 966
8 910
16 513
34 616
38 606
15 446
48 530
41 813
31 250
36 754
38 842
43 222
14 587
12 697
66 090
14 377
38 329
:
38 695
13 209
26 509
6 751
30 533
:
36 280
:
40 232
22 309
:

3+
37 645
38 635
10 055
22 373
25 549
44 393
17 348
62 138
43 805
35 048
39 382
54 014
56 177
17 859
14 834
62 353
15 651
46 063
:
44 086
13 178
30 179
7 183
31 976
:
42 085
:
51 517
25 213
44 424

(1) Estimates for total and 3 or more; remaining values are unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by number of active persons (hbs_exp_t132)

Items  considered  as  necessities  –  such  as  food 
or housing – generally see their relative share of 
total consumption expenditure fall as a function 
of income rising. For example, the proportion of 
total  expenditure  that  was  devoted  to  food  and 
non-alcoholic  beverages  by  the  highest  income 
quintile  was  almost  half  that  recorded  by  the 
lowest income quintile in the EU-27; this pattern 
was repeated for alcoholic beverages and tobacco, 
and for communications.

In  contrast,  there  are  a  number  of  items  which 
are  oft en  classifi ed  as  luxuries,  where  high-
income  households  tend  to  spend  more  than 
lower  income  households,  both  in  absolute  and 
relative  terms  –  these  include  transport  (where 
the top quintile spent a higher proportion of their 
total expenditure on the purchase of new motor 
vehicles); furnishings, household equipment and 
the routine maintenance of the house; education; 
restaurants and hotels; recreation and culture.

Number of active persons

As  might  be  expected,  average  household 
consumption  expenditure  in  the  EU-27  in  2005 
generally  rose  as  a  function  of  the  number  of 
active  persons  living  in  the  household.  It  is 
important to bear in mind that the HBS classifi es 
the highest earner in each household as the fi rst 
active  person  or  the  reference  person  for  that 
household.  Th  is  explains,  to  some  degree,  why 
the  expenditure  of  households  with  three  or 
more  active  persons  is  not  three  times  as  high 
as  the  expenditure  of  households  with  only 
one  active  person.  Another  reason  may  be  that 
economies  of  scale  can  be  achieved  by  people 
who live together in households, by pooling their 

76

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   76
Consumers.indb   76

08.04.2009   09:49:18
08.04.2009   09:49:18

Consumption

IV

incomes,  expenditure  on  items  such  as  housing 
can become relatively cheaper (as there is no need 
for  each  person  in  a  shared  house  to  have  their 
own  kitchen,  living  room,  or  bathroom).  Other 
consumer  durables  and  many  services  can  also 
be shared, for example, a car, heating in a living 
room,  or  a  television  license),  thereby  reducing 
the degree of expenditure in houses with several 
active persons.

Given  the  link  that  exists  with  income,  it  is 
not  surprising  to  fi nd  that  households  with 
no  economically  active  persons  recorded  the 
lowest  average  consumption  expenditure  in  each 
Member  State.  Th  e  level  of  expenditure  among 
those EU-27 households with three or more active 
persons  was  116 %  higher  than  that  recorded  by 
households  with  no  active  persons  in  2005.  Th  e 
average expenditure of a household with three or 

more active persons was 62 % higher than that of a 
household with one active person, and 17 % higher 
than for a household with two active persons.

Th  is  pattern  of  expenditure  increasing  as  a 
function  of  the  number  of  active  persons  in 
a  household  was  repeated  in  the  majority  of 
the  Member  States,  although 
in  Denmark, 
Luxembourg,  Belgium  and  Poland,  households 
with two active persons recorded a higher level of 
expenditure than those with three or more active 
persons. Th  is may be the result of factors such as 
younger persons who have just entered the labour 
market sharing accommodation. Younger adults 
are likely to have relatively low income levels (as 
they are at the start of their working lives), while 
households with two active persons may oft en be 
composed  of  couples  who  could  be  further  into 
their working lives and earning more.

Figure 1.48: Ratio of mean consumption expenditure per household for three or more active persons 
compared with zero active persons, 2005 (1)
(ratio, based on PPS series)

4

3

2

1

0

CY LV

IE

CZ EE MT LT

IT

FI UK EL

PT RO EU-
27
(2)

HU SI

ES BG AT DE

FR

PL

BE DK LU

HR NO

(1) The Netherlands, Slovakia and Sweden, not available.
(2) Estimate; unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by number of active persons (hbs_exp_t132)

  Consumers in Europe

77

Consumers.indb   77
Consumers.indb   77

08.04.2009   09:49:19
08.04.2009   09:49:19

IV

Consumption

Th  e diff erence in expenditure between households 
with zero or one active person was less than 20 % 
in Luxembourg, Germany and Belgium, but was 
higher than 70 % in Malta, Greece, Ireland, Latvia 
and Cyprus; these fi gures may refl ect diff erences 
in  social  benefi ts  and  pensions  that  are  made 
available to the economically inactive.

Households  with  three  or  more  active  persons 
in  the  EU-27  spent  a  higher  proportion  of  their 
expenditure  (than  any  other  type  of  household) 
on alcoholic beverages and tobacco; clothing and 
footwear; transport; communications; restaurants 
and hotels. In contrast, those households without 
active  persons  spent  proportionally  more  on 
food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages;  housing, 
water, electricity, gas and other fuels; and health 
services.

Type of household

Th  e analysis can be extended to the composition 
of each household, not just in terms of the number 
of active persons, but also its other members. As 
already  shown,  household  expenditure  usually 
rises  as  a  function  of  the  size  and  the  income 
of  a  household,  although  the  relationship  is  not 
linear, as economies of scale can oft en be made by 
people sharing an abode.

Th  is  was  reconfi rmed  when 
looking  at  a 
breakdown  of  EU-27  expenditure  by  type  of 
household,  with  the  total  budget  of  two  adults 
living  together  some  65 %  higher  than  that  of  a 
single person in 2005. Th  is ratio was particularly 
low  across  the  southern  Member  States  of  Italy 
(45 %),  Greece,  Spain  (both  49 %),  and  Portugal 
(51 %),  where  female  activity  rates  are  among 
the  lowest  in  the  EU.  In  contrast,  the  average 
expenditure of two adults living together was at 
least 80 % higher than that of a single person in 
the  Czech  Republic,  Finland,  Latvia,  Germany 
and Estonia.

Table 1.40: Structure of consumption expenditure per household by number of active 
persons, EU-27, 2005 (1)
(‰)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

(1) Unreliable.

Total
168
24
57
277
55
34
119
32
83
10
53
87

0
190
21
41
347
54
53
77
29
74
3
36
77

1
169
26
57
281
54
31
119
34
82
10
54
83

2
160
25
64
245
58
28
138
33
87
13
59
91

3+
175
30
65
228
49
28
153
36
80
10
61
88

Source: Eurostat, structure of consumption expenditure by number of active persons (hbs_str_t222)

78

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   78
Consumers.indb   78

08.04.2009   09:49:19
08.04.2009   09:49:19

Consumption

IV

Table 1.41: Mean consumption expenditure per household by type of household, 2005
(PPS)

Single 
parent with 
dependent 
children
21 323
24 723
7 338
10 647
19 730
22 685
9 157
24 188
31 720
24 903
24 125
28 008
27 797
8 869
9 215
44 167
10 585
22 767
:
28 847
9 427
21 026
4 417
22 359
8 210
21 795
22 036
25 177
16 525
26 459

Single 
person
14 788
19 341
4 153
6 401
15 175
17 476
5 703
18 150
16 552
14 266
17 251
18 966
14 242
5 081
5 607
35 071
5 714
14 817
:
19 530
6 710
11 338
2 596
12 670
5 541
14 176
16 434
18 927
9 145
17 873

2 adults 
with 
dependent 
children
31 981
41 583
9 185
16 493
34 918
38 798
15 494
46 686
41 541
31 132
37 849
35 786
42 836
14 689
12 901
65 721
14 039
32 774
:
39 257
12 836
25 926
6 493
29 825
12 251
38 309
35 569
41 200
22 526
41 332

2 
adults
24 470
30 451
6 286
12 084
26 891
32 433
10 285
32 203
24 637
21 286
28 059
27 449
22 056
9 527
9 349
53 537
9 979
23 426
:
31 384
10 368
17 121
4 524
21 310
9 440
26 776
28 839
32 911
13 879
31 931

3+ adults 
with 
dependent 
children
36 042
40 335
9 971
21 211
36 203
46 745
16 607
55 071
42 161
34 537
40 311
37 814
55 790
15 804
14 086
74 110
15 254
41 143
:
43 053
13 217
27 303
7 032
33 496
14 695
46 864
35 893
50 954
24 945
45 355

3+
 adults
31 957
33 455
9 145
20 063
36 932
42 036
15 399
51 737
37 984
28 906
34 201
34 875
39 209
13 253
11 856
58 839
13 375
33 765
:
39 126
11 904
24 314
6 324
27 446
13 954
31 471
32 728
46 010
21 479
38 254

Total
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK (2)
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR (3)
NO

(1) Estimates.
(2) Three or more adults and three or more adults with dependent children, unreliable.
(3) Single parent with dependent children, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by type of household (hbs_exp_t134)

  Consumers in Europe

79

Consumers.indb   79
Consumers.indb   79

08.04.2009   09:49:20
08.04.2009   09:49:20

IV

Consumption

Th  e presence of dependent children is associated 
with  still  higher  levels  of  average  household 
consumption 
expenditure.  When  making 
country  comparisons  it  is  important  to  note 
that expenditure is not simply a function of the 
average  number  of  children  per  household,  but 
also  relates  to  the  provision  of  childcare  and 
whether  this  is  met  through  social  transfers  or 
directly from household expenditure.

Th  e  extent  of  higher  expenditure  associated 
with  the  presence  of  dependent  children  was 
relatively  low  in  Germany  (20 %),  Luxembourg, 
Sweden (both 23 %), Poland (24 %), Austria and 
the United Kingdom (25 %). At the other end of 
the  scale,  two  adult  households  with  dependent 
children  in  Cyprus  reported  expenditure  that 
was almost twice as high (94 %) as for those two 
adult households without children.

Consumption  expenditure  of  a 
two  adult 
household  in  the  EU-27  was  31 %  higher  with 
the  additional  presence  of  dependent  children. 

Th  e  proportion  of  total  household  consumption 
expenditure  accounted  for  by  housing,  water, 
electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels  was  considerably 

Figure 1.49: Ratio of mean consumption expenditure per household for two adult household with dependent 
children compared with average for all households, 2005 (1)
(ratio, based on PPS series)

1.75

1.50

1.25

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00

FI DK EE SE LV BE LT DE CZ FR EL HU AT EU-
27
(2)

BG UK IE

LU SI CY IT PT RO PL ES MT SK

HR NO

(1) The Netherlands, not available.
(2) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by type of household (hbs_exp_t134)

Table 1.42: Structure of consumption expenditure per household by type of household, EU-27, 2005
(‰)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

Total
168
24
57
277
55
34
119
32
83
10
53
87

Single
person
189
20
46
371
49
48
73
34
58
3
47
62

Single
parent
with
depen-
dent
children
203
16
67
293
49
34
88
38
77
19
50
69

2
 adults
with
depen-
dent
children
202
19
70
255
58
32
119
33
74
16
51
74

2
adults
206
23
49
313
55
55
101
31
59
3
38
69

3+ 
adults
with
depen-
dent
children
228
24
63
250
50
35
130
35
61
15
41
75

3+
adults
222
26
57
273
52
41
122
34
58
8
40
78

Source: Eurostat, structure of consumption expenditure by type of household (hbs_str_t224)

80

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   80
Consumers.indb   80

08.04.2009   09:49:20
08.04.2009   09:49:20

Consumption

IV

higher  for  single  persons  living  alone  when 
compared  with  larger  household  units.  Indeed, 
these  items  accounted  for  37.1 %  of  the  total 
household  budget  for  single  persons  in  the 
EU-27  in  2005.  In  contrast,  spending  on  food 
and non-alcoholic beverages tended to be higher 
as  a  proportion  of  total  expenditure  among 
larger  households,  and  the  same  was  true  for 
expenditure  on  clothing  and  footwear  (which 
accounted  for  even  greater  shares  if  dependent 
children  were  present).  A  two  adult  household 
spent  an  average  4.9 %  of  their  total  budget  on 
clothing  and  footwear,  while  the  corresponding 
share for a two adult household with dependent 
children  was  2.1  percentage  points  higher.  Two 
adult  households  with  dependent  children  also 
spent a higher share of their budget on transport 

(1.8  percentage  points  higher  than  the  average 
for  a  two  adult  household  without  children); 
recreation  and  culture  (1.5  points  higher); 
education;  and  restaurants  and  hotels  (both 
1.3 points higher).

Employment status

Expenditure  across  households  headed  by  a 
person working in a non-manual activity or a self-
employed  person  was  more  than  30 %  above  the 
overall EU-27 average in 2005. Households headed 
by someone in manual work had a total budget that 
was 3 % higher than the average for all households 
(which includes information on households headed 
by unemployed or retired persons).

Table 1.43: Mean consumption expenditure by employment status of the reference person, 
2005
(PPS)

Manual 
workers 
in industry 
& services
25 442
28 499
8 102
13 090
26 414
27 655
10 675
39 927
31 449
26 525
27 287
28 766
33 701
10 589
10 143
47 073
10 942
30 198
31 269
30 627
10 271
23 991
:
22 820
11 633
25 245
25 545
30 938
19 742
:

Non-
manual 
workers 
in industry 
& services
32 263
36 508
10 205
14 359
30 050
34 122
16 045
47 206
44 510
33 942
35 524
35 298
46 544
15 905
13 874
59 758
15 175
39 245
34 335
36 156
15 186
23 991
:
32 299
13 924
33 075
31 083 :
41 664
25 545
:

Self-
employed
32 621
:
8 729
14 790
26 282
41 554
15 378
41 326
39 691
29 325
35 038
36 685
37 139
13 537
9 504
66 495
15 724
34 275
41 961
39 283
12 401
25 448
:
32 113
14 215
34 285

41 524
18 496
29 222

Total
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY (2)
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL (2)
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE (2)
UK
HR
NO

Unem-
ployed
17 968
16 741
5 135
:
:
17 943
6 986
25 837
23 926
20 128
20 078
22 135
32 342
5 735
5 596
35 441
7 440
15 156
21 112
20 025
6 504
17 124
:
12 570
6 766
13 899
15 233
21 575
14 578
19 214

Retired
20 120
24 012
5 051
7 198
:
24 397
6 657
25 316
23 375
20 644
22 686
24 411
17 600
5 239
5 638
45 674
7 169
19 570
22 811
23 716
8 138
14 441
:
16 331
6 741
16 961
20 754
22 148
13 405
22 121

(1) Estimates; unemployed and retired, unreliable.
(2) Unemployed, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by employment status of the reference person (hbs_exp_t131)

  Consumers in Europe

81

Consumers.indb   81
Consumers.indb   81

08.04.2009   09:49:21
08.04.2009   09:49:21

IV

Consumption

Lithuania  was  the  only  Member  State  to  report 
that  households  headed  by  a  self-employed 
person spent less, on average, than those headed 
by  a  manual  worker.  Households  headed  by  a 
non-manual  worker  spent  more,  on  average, 
than those headed by a manual worker in every 
Member State except Portugal (where expenditure 
levels for these two groups were identical).

Unsurprisingly, households headed by someone in 
work  tended  to  have  higher  levels  of  expenditure 
than  those  headed  by  an  unemployed  or  retired 
person;  this  was  the  case  in  every  Member  State. 
Th  e  lowest  relative  spending  among  households 
headed by an unemployed person was recorded in 
Malta and Slovenia (53 % of the national average), 
while among households headed by a retired person 

spending was 49 % of the national average in Latvia. 
Th  ere were relatively high levels of expenditure in 
Luxembourg, Germany and Italy among households 
whose  reference  person  was  retired,  as  spending 
equated to at least 85 % of the national average.

Expenditure patterns among households headed 
by the unemployed and the retired were skewed 
in favour of necessities, as these two groups spent 
a higher proportion of their household budget on 
food and non-alcoholic beverages; housing, water, 
electricity, gas and other fuels. Households headed 
by  an  unemployed  person  reported  the  highest 
relative  expenditure  on  alcoholic  beverages  and 
tobacco,  as  well  as  communications,  with  these 
items  accounting  for  3.3 %  and  3.8 %  of  total 
expenditure (compared with EU-27 averages for 
all households of 2.4 % and 3.2 %).

Figure 1.50: Ratio of mean consumption expenditure per household for retired reference person compared 
with average for all households, 2005 (1)
(ratio, based on PPS series)

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00

LU DE

IT EU-
27
(2)

FR SE BE

ES AT NL PL

EL BG FI

IE UK PT

SI MT HU SK EE

LT CZ CY LV

HR NO

(1) Denmark and Romania, not available.
(2) Estimate; unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by employment status of the reference person (hbs_exp_t131

Table 1.44: Structure of consumption expenditure by employment status of the reference person, EU-27, 2005
(‰)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

Manual 
workers 
in industry 
& services
167
29
58
268
53
24
136
35
84
8
54
84

Non-
manual 
workers 
in industry 
& services
134
20
64
254
60
29
137
33
96
14
63
96

Total
168
24
57
277
55
34
119
32
83
10
53
87

Self-
employed
152
21
61
254
57
27
134
32
84
14
59
104

Unem-
ployed
183
33
53
326
41
26
99
38
69
10
49
74

Retired
175
20
42
336
57
49
89
27
78
2
40
83

Source: Eurostat, structure of consumption expenditure by employment status of the reference person (hbs_str_t221)

82

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   82
Consumers.indb   82

08.04.2009   09:49:21
08.04.2009   09:49:21

Consumption

IV

Age

Th  e information presented on the age breakdown 
of  household  consumption  expenditure 
is 
strongly  linked  to  life-cycle  eff ects  concerning 
incomes.  Th  e  youngest  age  groups  tend  to 
display the lowest levels of expenditure as they 
usually  receive  relatively  low  incomes  at  the 
start  of  their  working  life,  or  are  balancing 
studies  and  temporary  and/or  part-time  work, 
or are unemployed (with youth unemployment 
rates particularly high in a number of Member 
States).

Income  and  expenditure  tend  to  rise  with  age 
through the working years, such that towards the 
end of most people’s working life their income 
is near or at its peak. Expenditure subsequently 
falls  off   once  retirement  is  taken:  the  extent  of 
this  reduction  depends  to  a  large  degree  upon 
pension  provisions,  but  also  depends  on  the 
health  of  each  individual  and  whether  this 
restricts  their  capacity  to  consume  a  range  of 
goods  and  services.  However,  with  an  ageing 
population,  increasing  life  expectancy,  and  a 
higher  number  of  healthy  life  years,  it  is  likely 
that the overall consumption of those aged 60 or 
more will increase in the coming years.

Consumption  expenditure 
for  households 
whose head was aged less than 30 years was PPS 
20 882 in the EU-27 in 2005, some 85 % of the 
average  for  all  households.  Spending  was  11 % 
higher  than  the  overall  average  among  those 
households where the reference person was aged 
between 30 and 44 years, rising to 18 % higher 
when the reference person was aged between 45 
and 59 years.

Th  is  pattern  was  generally  reproduced  across 
the majority of the EU-15 Member States, other 
than in Belgium and Finland (where households 
headed by a person aged between 30 and 44 years 
spent the most), or Sweden (where the same level 
of  expenditure  was  recorded  for  households 
headed  by  someone  aged  30  to  44  or  someone 
aged  45  to  59).  In  contrast,  expenditure  levels 
for  households  headed  by  someone  aged  less 
than  30  were  oft en  above  the  national  average 
in those Member States that joined the EU since 
2004; some 25 % higher in Latvia, 19 % higher 
in  Bulgaria,  18 %  higher  in  Romania,  at  least 
10 %  higher  in  Cyprus,  Lithuania,  Hungary 

Table 1.45: Mean consumption expenditure by age of the 
reference person, 2005
(PPS)

Total
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Estimates.

<30
 years
20 882
27 820
8 435
11 962
18 549
19 121
10 422
38 889
25 747
23 095
23 632
24 955
38 327
13 206
10 537
44 541
11 827
33 060
22 177
26 197
10 627
20 688
6 261
25 230
11 504
19 735
18 665
28 918
13 988
20 637

30-44 
years
27 467
33 971
8 922
14 551
27 912
30 218
14 039
42 513
37 247
27 928
31 728
31 594
38 559
12 902
11 608
53 941
12 905
31 315
33 447
33 404
12 424
23 750
5 919
27 486
12 589
30 868
28 669
35 742
21 215
33 500

45-59 
years
29 018
32 513
8 145
13 812
28 828
34 207
11 630
43 039
39 564
31 830
32 181
34 558
43 721
11 723
10 256
59 954
12 680
34 051
33 445
35 516
11 152
25 159
3 685
26 912
11 929
28 184
28 677
38 198
20 691
32 373

>=60
years 
19 606
23 965
5 212
8 293
18 685
25 428
7 630
22 634
21 543
20 464
22 041
23 405
19 153
6 313
6 193
43 792
7 022
19 483
22 849
23 603
8 270
14 838
2 841
16 322
6 956
17 853
22 985
24 334
12 487
24 566

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by age of the reference person 
(hbs_exp_t135)

and  Malta,  and  up  to  10 %  higher  in  Poland, 
Slovenia and Slovakia. Th  is may refl ect a number 
of diff erent trends, including higher incomes for 
new  jobs  (in  part,  resulting  from  higher  wages 
in  foreign-owned  enterprises),  a  greater  variety 
of  goods  and  services  being  on  off er,  a  higher 
degree  of  brand  and  product  awareness  among 
the younger generations, rapid economic growth, 
and  greater  economic  prosperity.  A  similar 
pattern was observed in Ireland, the only EU-15 
Member  State  to  report  that  households  headed 
by  someone  aged  less  than  30  years  old  spent 
more (7 %) than the national average.

  Consumers in Europe

83

Consumers.indb   83
Consumers.indb   83

08.04.2009   09:49:22
08.04.2009   09:49:22

IV

Consumption

Figure 1.51: Ratio of mean consumption expenditure per household for reference person aged 60 years and 
over compared with average for all households, 2005
(ratio, based on PPS series)

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25

0.00

SE DE LU IT BE EU-
27
(1)

(1) Estimates.

FR ES AT PL NL DK UK BG FI PT EE EL

SI CZ MT LT HU SK IE

LV CY RO

HR NO

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by age of the reference person (hbs_exp_t135)

Table 1.46: Structure of consumption expenditure by age of the reference person, EU-27, 2005
(‰)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

Total
168
24
57
277
55
34
119
32
83
10
53
87

<30
 years
131
25
56
237
45
18
121
40
76
12
58
74

30-44 
years
143
22
56
226
50
23
116
32
81
11
52
81

45-59 
years
150
24
49
230
48
30
114
30
78
10
49
80

>=60
 years 
165
19
36
289
49
46
77
25
72
2
36
74

Source: Eurostat, structure of consumption expenditure by age of the reference person (hbs_str_t225)

EU-27 households headed by someone aged less 
than 30 years old devoted a higher than average 
proportion of their spending to communications, 
restaurants and hotels, transport, education, and 
alcoholic  beverages  and  tobacco.  In  contrast, 
a  shift   in  consumption  patterns  for  the  older 
generations  resulted 
lower  proportion 
of  their  budget  being  spent  on  transport  (in 

in  a 

particular, purchases of cars and their associated 
running costs), clothing and footwear, recreation 
and  culture,  or  restaurants  and  hotels.  On  the 
other hand, the older generations devoted much 
higher shares of their total expenditure to health 
services, as well as water, electricity, gas and other 
fuels.

84

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   84
Consumers.indb   84

08.04.2009   09:49:23
08.04.2009   09:49:23

Degree of urbanisation

EU-27  households  living  in  densely  populated 
areas (with more than 500 inhabitants per km2) 
spent 6 % more than households in intermediate 
areas  (100-499  inhabitants  per  km2),  and  9 % 
more than households in sparsely populated areas 
(with less than 100 inhabitants per km2) in 2005.

Th  is  pattern  was  prevalent  in  most  of  the 
southern, Mediterranean countries, and most of 
the Member States that joined the EU since 2004. 
Higher expenditure in urban areas may, in part, 
be  related  to  inter-regional  economic  migratory 
patterns,  for  example,  from  the  predominantly 
rural,  agriculture-based,  south  of  Italy  to  the 
industrial  and  service-orientated  cities  of  the 
north.  In  Italy,  the  expenditure  of  households 
in  densely-populated  regions  in  2005  was  77 % 
higher than in intermediate urbanised areas, and 
58 % higher than in sparsely populated areas.

Household expenditure in the remaining EU-15 
Member States was usually lower in urban areas 
than it was in intermediate or sparsely populated 
regions.  Th  is  may  be  a  result  of  those  with  the 
highest incomes choosing to move away from city 
centres, in search of an improved quality of life in 
suburbs or surrounding villages.

Consumption

IV

Table 1.47: Mean consumption expenditure by degree of 
urbanisation, 2005
(PPS)

Densely-
populated 
(500+ 
inhab./km2)
25 467
29 337
8 754
12 628
23 601
27 614
10 816
:
32 152
28 147
27 833
28 148
36 428
12 228
11 501
47 824
11 900
:
:
29 197
11 437
23 766
:
26 358
11 569
25 914
26 380
31 480
19 424
30 651

Intermediate 
urbanised area
 (100-499 
inhab./km2)
24 039
31 500
7 264
11 779
24 480
29 918
16 183
:
28 408
25 853
25 596
15 905
33 489
15 634
:
56 573
10 448
28 137
:
31 428
10 511
20 748
:
23 251
10 517
25 045
27 858
34 206
17 453
29 303

Sparsely 
populated 
(<100 
inhab./km2)
23 452
27 960
5 743
11 791
24 278
28 320
10 751
:
30 190
22 467
28 610
17 825
30 108
8 950
7 825
51 787
9 548
28 659
:
30 415
9 666
16 047
:
23 035
10 441
23 332
24 732
33 585
14 849
26 520

Total
24 655
30 048
7 099
12 142
24 062
28 501
10 848
36 373
30 975
26 028
27 886
28 782
34 208
10 589
9 378
51 932
10 694
28 605
29 368
30 167
10 594
20 869
5 324
23 806
10 772
24 360
25 612
31 959
16 840
29 106

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE (2)
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV (2)
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Estimate for total; remaining data, unreliable.
(2) Unreliable for intermediate urbanised area.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by degree of urbanisation (hbs_exp_t136)

Figure 1.52: Ratio of mean consumption expenditure per household for densely populated areas compared 
with sparsely populated areas, 2005 (1)
(ratio, based on PPS series)

1.75
1.50
1.25
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00

IT

BG PT

LT

LV

ES HU CY

PL

SI

FI

SK EU-
27
(2)

CZ SE

EL

BE

EE DE

FR DK AT UK LU

HR NO

(1) Ireland, Malta, the Netherlands and Romania, not available.
(2) Estimate for total; remaining data, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, mean consumption expenditure by degree of urbanisation (hbs_exp_t136)

  Consumers in Europe

85

Consumers.indb   85
Consumers.indb   85

08.04.2009   09:49:23
08.04.2009   09:49:23

IV

Consumption

Consumption  expenditure  may  be  expected 
to  vary  between  rural  and  urban  areas  as  a 
function  of  the  ease  with  which  consumers  can 
access various goods and services. In rural areas 
choice may be limited, and retailers might charge 
more for their goods or services as they face less 
competition,  have  a  smaller  mass  of  customers, 
and (in the case of independent shops) may have 
less  bargaining  power  with  producers,  suppliers 
or wholesalers. As a result, some consumers from 
sparsely populated areas may choose to defer or 
abandon making specifi c purchases, while others 
may prefer to make journeys to urban centres on 
an  irregular  basis.  People  living  in  rural  areas 
are  more  likely  to  produce  their  own  food  (and 
perhaps other products), the value of which may 
not  be  completely  captured  by  the  household 
budget survey.

Th  e  structure  of  expenditure  by  degree  of 
urbanisation shows that people living in sparsely 
populated  areas  of  the  EU-27  spent  16 %  more 
of  their  budget  on  food  and  non-alcoholic 
beverages than those living in densely-populated 
urban  areas.  Th  ey  also  spent  a  considerably 
higher  proportion  of  their  household  budget  on 
transport (possibly travelling longer distances to 
work or to buy goods and services). In contrast, 
those living in urban areas devoted higher shares 
of their total expenditure to education; housing, 
water, electricity, gas and other fuels; restaurants 
and hotels; recreation and culture.

Table 1.48: Structure of consumption expenditure by degree of urbanisation, EU-27, 2005
(‰)

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

Densely-
populated
(500+
inhab./km2)
148
23
55
292
55
35
117
33
88
10
56
87

Intermediate
 urbanised
area
 (100-499
inhab./km2)
161
23
57
273
57
33
129
31
85
9
53
89

Sparsely
populated
(<100
inhab./km2)
172
24
58
264
58
34
130
31
82
8
52
85

Total
168
24
57
277
55
34
119
32
83
10
53
87

Source: Eurostat, structure of consumption expenditure by degree of urbanisation (hbs_str_t226)

86

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   86
Consumers.indb   86

08.04.2009   09:49:24
08.04.2009   09:49:24

Prices and indirect taxes

V

PRICES AND INDIRECT TAXES

Prices  show  how  much  consumers  pay  for  a 
particular  good  or  service.  Th  is  section  starts 
with an analysis of price changes for goods and 
services over time – as measured by harmonised 
indices  of  consumer  prices  (HICPs)  that  refl ect 
price infl ation. Th  e evolution of consumer prices 
can  be  used  to  assess  price  stability  –  a  key 
objective for the European Central Bank (ECB).

While consumers may refl ect on a loss of living 
standards  as  a  result  of  price  infl ation,  they  are 
also  interested  in  comparing  specifi c  prices  of 
individual  goods  and  services  at  a  particular 
moment  in  time,  especially  during  periods 
of  mixed  economic  fortunes  when  they  look 
to  tighten  their  purse  strings,  as  well  as  when 
making  big-ticket  purchases.  Price  levels  can 
diff er  between  brands,  retailers,  geographical 
regions,  or  countries,  and  by  identifying  the 
best  off er  available,  consumers  can  potentially 
make  considerable  savings  and  improve  their 
welfare. Price level indices can be used at a more 
aggregated level to generally compare the cost of 
living in diff erent cities and countries.

At  a  practical  level,  price  comparisons  of  food 
across the EU have been made easier as EU law 
requires supermarkets to publish the unit price of 
a product (how much it costs per kilogram or per 
litre,  for  example),  to  make  it  easier  to  compare 
diff erent  off ers  and  to  decide  which  product  is 
the best value for money. In a similar vein, banks 
and  other  fi nancial  services  have  to  present 
information on loans and credit to consumers in 
a standardised way, providing information on the 
annual percentage rate of interest.

A survey of consumer protection in the internal 
market conducted in early 2008 for the European 
Commission  shows  that  price 
is  the  most 
important  criteria  infl uencing  consumers  when 
they decide which non-food items to buy. When 
allowed  to  give  up  to  three  diff erent  answers, 
some 75 % of EU-27 consumers cited price as one 
of  the  aspects  that  most  frequently  infl uences 
their choice.

Price infl ation

Increases in the overall price of consumer goods 
and services are usually referred to as infl ation, and 
when expressed in terms of a percentage change 
as the infl ation rate. Th  e infl ation rate is used as 
a leading indicator to determine monetary policy 
management, with price stability defi ned by the 
ECB  as  an  annual  increase  in  the  harmonised 
index  of  consumer  prices  for  the  euro  area  of 
close  to  but  below  2 %  (over  the  medium-term). 
For consumers, the main interest in the infl ation 
rate is that it provides information on how quickly 
prices are eroding their standard of living, given 
that incomes remain unchanged.

Compared with historical trends, consumer price 
indices in the EU have only risen at a moderate 
pace in the last couple of decades. Th  e EU infl ation 
rate  was  reduced  during  the  1990s  such  that  by 
the  end  of  the  decade  in  1999  it  stood  at  1.2 %, 
aft er which the pace at which prices were rising 
quickened somewhat during the period between 
2001 and 2007 to reach 2.3 % (note that the EU 
aggregate  is  made  up  of  a  moving  aggregate  in 
terms of its geographical composition, refl ecting 
changes in the membership of the EU). Oil and 
commodity price increases during 2007 and 2008 
saw the infl ation rate rise fairly rapidly.

Most  of  the  Member  States  that  joined  the  EU 
since 2004 witnessed considerable reductions in 
their infl ation rates on the basis of a comparison 
between  the  rates  in  1997  and  those  in  2007, 
although  several  recorded  a  renewed  upward 
trend  towards  the  end  of  this  period.  Indeed, 
Slovakia,  Malta  and  Romania  were  alone  in 
reporting  a  reduction  in  infl ation  rates  between 
2006 and 2007, while infl ation rates fell in eight 
of the EU-15 Member States in 2007.

Malta recorded by far the lowest (0.7 %) infl ation 
rate in 2007. Th  e majority of Member States had 
infl ation rates within +/- 0.7 percentage points of 
the  EU-27  average  of  2.3 %,  although  Slovenia, 
Romania,  the  three  Baltic  States,  Bulgaria 
and  Hungary,  all  reported  infl ation  rates  that 
were  over  3.0 %,  with  the  highest  rate  in  Latvia 
(10.1 %).

  Consumers in Europe

87

Consumers.indb   87
Consumers.indb   87

08.04.2009   09:49:25
08.04.2009   09:49:25

V

Prices and indirect taxes

Table 1.49: All-items harmonised index of consumer prices (infl ation rate), annual growth rate
(%)

EU (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL (2)
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

1997
1.7
1.5
:
8.0
2.0
1.5
9.3
1.3
5.4
1.9
1.3
1.9
3.3
8.1
10.3
1.4
18.5
3.9
1.9
1.2
15.0
1.9
154.8
8.3
6.0
1.2
1.8
1.8
85.6
1.8
2.6
:

1998
1.3
0.9
18.7
9.7
1.3
0.6
8.8
2.1
4.5
1.8
0.7
2.0
2.3
4.3
5.4
1.0
14.2
3.7
1.8
0.8
11.8
2.2
59.1
7.9
6.7
1.3
1.0
1.6
82.1
1.3
2.0
:

1999
1.2
1.1
2.6
1.8
2.1
0.6
3.1
2.5
2.1
2.2
0.6
1.7
1.1
2.1
1.5
1.0
10.0
2.3
2.0
0.5
7.2
2.2
45.8
6.1
10.4
1.3
0.5
1.3
61.4
2.1
2.1
:

2000
1.9
2.7
10.3
3.9
2.7
1.4
3.9
5.3
2.9
3.5
1.8
2.6
4.9
2.6
1.1
3.8
10.0
3.0
2.3
2.0
10.1
2.8
45.7
8.9
12.2
2.9
1.3
0.8
53.2
4.4
3.0
:

2001
2.2
2.4
7.4
4.5
2.3
1.9
5.6
4.0
3.7
2.8
1.8
2.3
2.0
2.5
1.6
2.4
9.1
2.5
5.1
2.3
5.3
4.4
34.5
8.6
7.2
2.7
2.7
1.2
56.8
6.6
2.7
:

2002
2.1
1.6
5.8
1.4
2.4
1.4
3.6
4.7
3.9
3.6
1.9
2.6
2.8
2.0
0.3
2.1
5.2
2.6
3.9
1.7
1.9
3.7
22.5
7.5
3.5
2.0
1.9
1.3
47.0
5.3
0.8
:

2003
2.0
1.5
2.3
-0.1
2.0
1.0
1.4
4.0
3.4
3.1
2.2
2.8
4.0
2.9
-1.1
2.5
4.7
1.9
2.2
1.3
0.7
3.3
15.3
5.7
8.4
1.3
2.3
1.4
25.3
1.4
2.0
:

2004
2.0
1.9
6.1
2.6
0.9
1.8
3.0
2.3
3.0
3.1
2.3
2.3
1.9
6.2
1.2
3.2
6.8
2.7
1.4
2.0
3.6
2.5
11.9
3.7
7.5
0.1
1.0
1.3
10.1
2.3
0.6
:

2005
2.2
2.5
6.0
1.6
1.7
1.9
4.1
2.2
3.5
3.4
1.9
2.2
2.0
6.9
2.7
3.8
3.5
2.5
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.1
9.1
2.5
2.8
0.8
0.8
2.1
8.1
1.4
1.5
:

2006
2.2
2.3
7.4
2.1
1.9
1.8
4.4
2.7
3.3
3.6
1.9
2.2
2.2
6.6
3.8
3.0
4.0
2.6
1.7
1.7
1.3
3.0
6.6
2.5
4.3
1.3
1.5
2.3
9.3
4.6
2.5
1.0

2007
2.3
1.8
7.6
3.0
1.7
2.3
6.7
2.9
3.0
2.8
1.6
2.0
2.2
10.1
5.8
2.7
7.9
0.7
1.6
2.2
2.6
2.4
4.9
3.8
1.9
1.6
1.7
2.3
8.8
3.6
0.7
0.8

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1997 and 1998.
(2) Estimates, 1997 and 1998.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

Figure 1.53: All-items harmonised index of consumer prices (infl ation rate), average annual growth rate, 1997-2007
(%)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

RO HU BG SK SI PL
(1)

LV EE EL

IE CZ ES PT CY LU MT NL IT LT EU
(2)

DK BE FR AT UK FI SE DE

TR IS NO

(1) Estimate, 1997.
(2) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; EU-27 for 2007); estimate, 1997.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

88

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   88
Consumers.indb   88

08.04.2009   09:49:25
08.04.2009   09:49:25

Prices and indirect taxes

V

Eurostat publishes around 100 HICP sub-indices 
that allow the overall infl ation rate to be broken 
down  into  its  constituent  indices.  Th  ese  cover 
broad  categories  of  goods  and  services,  for 
example,  the  fi rst  level  of  the  COICOP  (which 
is  used  to  delineate  the  individual  markets  that 
are used to delineate the chapters in the second 
half of this publication), as well as more detailed 
indices for specifi c goods and services.

Using the fi rst level of the COICOP, the highest 
price  increases  in  the  EU  during  the  period 
1996  to  2007  were  recorded  for  education  (on 
average  4.3 %  per  annum);  alcoholic  beverages 
and  tobacco  (3.7 %);  and  restaurants  and  hotels 

(3.1 %).  At  the  bottom  end  of  the  ranking,  the 
price of recreation and culture rose by just 0.4 % 
per  annum,  while  there  was  no  change  in  the 
price  of  clothing  and  footwear,  while  the  price 
of  communications  fell  by  2.4 %  per  annum.  In 
general terms, relatively high price increases were 
oft en recorded for a broad range of non-durable 
goods  and  services,  which  also  displayed  some 
of the largest fl uctuations in price developments 
between  countries.  In  contrast,  there  was  less 
variation  in  the  price  evolution  of  consumer 
durables  between  countries,  with  the  price  of 
some goods falling.

Figure 1.54: Evolution of harmonised indices of consumer prices, average annual index, EU (1)
(1996=100)

160

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

160

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80

70

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Education
Restaurants & hotels
Health

Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels
Transport

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Miscellaneous goods & services
Furnishings, h'hold equip. & maintenance
Clothing & footwear

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Recreation & culture
Communications

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1996-1998.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

  Consumers in Europe

89

Consumers.indb   89
Consumers.indb   89

08.04.2009   09:49:26
08.04.2009   09:49:26

V

Prices and indirect taxes

Table 1.50: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, annual growth rate, EU (1)
(%)

Total - all items
Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, elec., gas & oth. fuels
Furnish., househ. equip. & mainten.
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services

1997
1.7
0.8
3.9
0.8
2.7
1.0
4.2
2.1
-1.3
1.3
3.4
2.5
1.9

1998
1.3
1.4
3.5
0.6
1.2
1.1
3.3
0.7
-0.8
0.8
3.9
2.7
1.4

1999
1.2
0.3
3.2
0.2
1.5
0.7
2.3
2.0
-4.1
0.4
3.8
2.6
1.8

2000
1.9
1.0
2.7
-0.5
3.6
0.6
1.9
4.8
-6.8
0.1
3.8
2.9
2.1

2001
2.2
4.7
3.0
-0.7
2.9
1.5
1.6
1.0
-4.4
1.4
3.7
3.6
3.1

2002
2.1
2.5
3.5
0.8
1.5
1.5
2.7
1.6
-0.1
1.4
4.2
4.3
2.8

2003
2.0
1.9
4.9
0.2
2.6
1.0
2.3
2.5
-0.5
0.0
4.7
3.2
2.5

2004
2.0
1.1
6.1
-0.2
2.7
0.7
7.1
3.2
-1.8
-0.4
3.8
2.9
2.5

2005
2.2
0.8
4.0
-0.8
4.9
0.6
2.4
4.3
-2.1
-0.3
3.7
2.8
2.3

2006
2.2
2.3
2.6
-0.6
5.4
0.6
1.7
3.0
-2.5
-0.3
4.0
2.8
2.6

2007
2.3
3.5
3.8
0.1
3.3
1.6
2.2
2.5
-2.0
-0.1
8.6
3.4
2.3

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1997 and 1998.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

Th  e 
long-term  evolution  of  prices  may  be 
contrasted with more recent events, in particular 
the  volatile  evolution  of  oil  and  gas  prices,  and 
rising food prices, some of which are refl ected in 
the ten highest price increases recorded in the EU 
between 2006 and 2007 (for example, solid fuels, 
vegetables,  and  electricity).  A  similar  analysis 
for  the  ten  goods  and  services  in  the  EU  where 
prices fell at their most rapid pace was dominated 
by  consumer  durables  and  semi-durables,  and 
in  particular,  those  related  to  communications, 
media  and  technology  (such  as  computers, 
telephones, cameras and televisions). Th  is pattern 
could be observed both in terms of developments 
(between 1997 and 2007), as well as over a more 
recent timeframe between 2006 and 2007.

Figure 1.55: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, average annual growth 
rate, EU, 1997-2007 (1)
(%)

-3.0

-1.5

0.0

1.5

3.0

4.5

Education

Alcoholic bev., 
            tobacco

Restaurants & hotels

          Housing, water, 
elec., gas & oth. fuels

Health

Transport

Miscellaneous goods 
                    & services

                        Food & 
non-alcoholic bev.

Total - all items

Furnish., househ. 
equip. & mainten.

Recreation & culture

Clothing & footwear

Communications

90

Consumers in Europe 

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; 
EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1997 and 1998.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - annual 
data (prc_hicp_aind)

Consumers.indb   90
Consumers.indb   90

08.04.2009   09:49:27
08.04.2009   09:49:27

Prices and indirect taxes

V

Table 1.51: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, average annual growth rates, EU (1)
(%)

Total - all items
Food & non-alcoholic beverages

Food
Non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco

Alcoholic beverages
Tobacco

Clothing & footwear

Clothing
Footwear including repair

Housing, water, electricity, gas & other fuels

Actual rentals for housing
Maintenance & repair of the dwelling
Water supply; misc. serv. relating to dwelling
Electricity, gas & other fuels

Furnishings, househ. equip. & maintenance
Furniture, furnish., carpets, floor cover.
Household textiles
Household appliances
Glassware, tableware & househ. utensils
Tools & equip. for house & garden
Goods & services for routine maintenance

Health
Transport

Purchase of vehicles
Operation of personal transport equip.
Transport services

Communications

Postal services (5)
Telephone & telefax equipment
Telephone & telefax services

Recreation & culture

Audio-vis., photo., info. process. equip.
Oth. durables for recreation & culture
Oth. recreational equip., garden & pets
Recreational & cultural services
Newspapers, books & stationery
Package holidays

Education
Restaurants & hotels
Catering services
Accommodation services
Miscellaneous goods & services

Personal care
Personal effects n.e.c.
Social protection
Insurance
Financial services n.e.c. 
Other services n.e.c. 

1997-2002 2002-2007 2006-2007 1997-2007
1.9
1.9
2.1
0.8
3.7
1.0
5.8
-0.1
-0.3
0.7
3.0
2.0
2.7
3.1
4.1
1.0
1.2
0.2
-0.7
1.0
0.4
2.1
2.7
2.5
0.6
3.5
3.1
-2.5
2.0
-10.7
-2.6
0.3
-7.2
1.6
0.1
2.6
2.2
2.9
4.4
3.1
3.0
3.5
2.4
1.8
1.5
:
2.9
2.9
3.2

2.3
3.5
3.5
2.8
3.8
1.6
5.4
0.1
-0.1
0.5
3.3
2.4
4.7
4.0
3.6
1.6
2.0
-0.1
-0.2
1.9
1.5
2.5
2.2
2.5
1.0
3.1
3.3
-2.0
2.6
-12.6
-1.0
-0.1
-9.6
1.3
0.7
3.0
2.2
1.9
8.6
3.4
3.5
2.9
2.3
2.0
3.8
2.3
2.7
0.0
3.2

2.1
1.9
2.0
1.3
4.3
0.8
6.7
-0.3
-0.4
0.2
3.8
2.2
3.1
3.6
5.9
0.9
1.2
-0.2
-1.0
0.8
0.5
1.9
3.1
3.1
0.8
4.3
3.4
-1.8
2.5
-15.4
-1.0
-0.2
-8.4
1.6
-0.3
2.7
2.0
1.2
5.0
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.5
1.4
2.2
3.6
2.3
2.8
3.9

1.7
2.0
2.1
0.4
3.2
1.2
4.8
0.1
-0.2
1.2
2.1
1.9
2.3
2.6
2.3
1.1
1.3
0.6
-0.5
1.1
0.3
2.2
2.3
2.0
0.4
2.7
2.8
-3.3
1.5
-5.8
-4.3
0.8
-5.9
1.7
0.4
2.4
2.4
4.7
3.8
3.2
3.0
4.1
2.3
2.1
0.7
:
3.5
3.1
2.6

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1997.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

  Consumers in Europe

91

Consumers.indb   91
Consumers.indb   91

08.04.2009   09:49:27
08.04.2009   09:49:27

V

Prices and indirect taxes

Table 1.52: Highest price increases, average 
annual growth rates, EU (1)
(%)

Table 1.53: Largest price reductions, 
average annual rates of change, EU (1)
(%)

Liquid fuels
Maintenance & repair of other major 
durables for recreation & culture
Tobacco
Gas
Heat energy
Education
Fuels and lubricants for 
personal transport equipment
Maintenance and repair of 
personal transport equipment
Other imputed rentals
Accommodation services

Maintenance & repair of other major 
durables for recreation & culture
Education
Solid fuels
Passenger transport by sea 
and inland waterway
Tobacco
Jewellery, clocks and watches
Vegetables
Services for the maintenance and 
repair of the dwelling
Other insurance
Electricity

1997-2007
7.2

6.7

5.8
5.3
4.5
4.4

4.3

3.6

3.6
3.5
2006-2007

34.9

8.6
7.1

6.6

5.4
5.4
5.1

5.0

4.9
4.7

Garments
Household appliances
Equipment for sport, camping 
and open-air recreation
Recording media
Games, toys and hobbies
Telephone and telefax services
Equip. for the reception, recording & 
reproduction of sound & pictures
Photographic and cinematographic 
equipment and optical instruments
Telephone and telefax equipment
Information processing equipment

Passenger transport by air
Liquid fuels
Equipment for sport, camping 
and open-air recreation
Telephone and telefax services
Games, toys and hobbies
Recording media
Equip. for the reception, recording & 
reproduction of sound & pictures
Telephone and telefax equipment
Information processing equipment
Photographic and cinematographic 
equipment and optical instruments

1997-2007
-0.4
-0.7

-1.0

-1.7
-1.8
-2.6

-6.6

-8.0

-10.7
-16.4
2006-2007
-0.4
-0.6

-0.8

-1.0
-1.5
-2.2

-10.7

-12.6
-15.4

-16.0

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; 
EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1997; ranking based on the most 
detailed level of COICOP available.

(1) Moving EU aggregate (EU-15 up to 2004; EU-25 up to 2006; 
EU-27 for 2007); estimates, 1997; ranking based on the most 
detailed level of COICOP available.

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - 
annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

Source: Eurostat, harmonised indices of consumer prices - 
annual data (prc_hicp_aind)

When  questioned  on  their  attitudes  to  price 
changes,  exactly  half  of  all  respondents  to  a 
survey conducted in 2006 agreed that the single 
market  had  had  a  positive  eff ect  on  the  price  of 
products  and  services  in  the  EU-25.  Around 
three quarters of those surveyed in Denmark and 
Sweden agreed there had been a positive eff ect on 
prices, while the lowest rates of agreement were 
reported in Latvia and France, less than four out 
of every ten people.

Some  39 %  of  EU-25  respondents  to  the  same 
survey  were  aware  that  diff erent  prices  existed 
for the same goods and services in other Member 
States.  Th  is  proportion  ranged  from  a  high  of 
76 % in Luxembourg, and between 50 % and 60 % 

of respondents in Slovakia, Finland, Belgium, the 
Netherlands and Malta, to lows of less than one 
third of all respondents in Spain, Italy, the United 
Kingdom and Hungary.

regional 

analysis  of 

A 
consumer  price 
developments in France shows that the price of a 
particular basket of goods in French supermarkets 
and  hypermarkets  rose  by  between  2.7 %  in 
Lorraine  and  4.2 %  in  Rhône  Alpes  between 
April  2007  and  April  2008  –  the  French  capital 
was among a group of three regions that recorded 
the  second  highest  price  increases,  while  the 
four  regions  that  recorded  the  lowest  consumer 
price increases were all situated in the east of the 
country.

92

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   92
Consumers.indb   92

08.04.2009   09:49:28
08.04.2009   09:49:28

Table 1.54: Consumer attitudes to price changes, 2006
(% of respondents)

Agree that the single 
market has had 
positive effect on price of 
products and services
50
44
:
67
75
45
43
67
47
44
39
52
53
31
46
46
49
49
52
42
47
50
:
63
50
56
74
61

Have noticed different 
prices for the same 
goods and services 
between Member States
39
56
:
45
46
41
41
42
49
29
47
31
45
45
37
76
32
51
53
42
36
43
:
40
58
56
44
32

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Source: ‘Internal market - opinions and experiences of citizens in EU-25’, 
Special Eurobarometer 254, European Commission

Price levels

While the euro has increased price transparency, 
there remain considerable price diff erences across 
the whole of the EU for a variety of diff erent goods 
and services. Th  ese may be attributed to a range 
of  infl uences,  including  a  lack  of  competition, 
regulatory frameworks, retail structures, as well 
as variations in demand and cost structures.

Consumers  may  be  interested  in  comparing 
prices,  especially  when  they  are  on  holiday  or 
making  cross-border  trips.  However,  the  reality 
of most people’s lives means that the opportunity 
cost  of  making  an  extensive  comparison  of 
prices is too high, while there is little chance to 
choose in which country to make other types of 
purchases. For example, it is diffi  cult to imagine 
consumers (other than those who live very close 
to a neighbouring country) making cross-border 

Prices and indirect taxes

V

Table 1.55: Regional price evolution in 
supermarkets and hypermarkets, France, 
April 2007-April 2008
(%)

Lorraine
Franche-Comté
Alsace
Picardie
Poitou-Charantes

Rhône Alpes
Auvergne
Champagne-Ardenne
Île de France
Basse-Normandie

Lowest price increases
2.7
3.0
3.0
3.2
3.2
Highest price increases
4.2
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.9

Source: LSA, 15 May 2008 - No. 2045 (www.lsa.fr)

Table 1.56: Industrial countries’ eff ective 
exchange rates
(1999=100)

BE/LU
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU (1)
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
NO
CH
JP
US

1999
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
:
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

2003
103.5
101.1
116.0
103.1
104.5
100.2
104.6
103.2
104.2
104.0
104.9
99.6
97.9
123.8
:
100.0
100.0
103.1
102.8
96.3
102.3
43.4
83.2
106.5
104.6
100.4
98.9
26.7
107.0
109.6
96.3
99.7

2007
106.5
100.8
133.2
106.2
109.3
100.2
110.7
106.2
107.2
108.0
109.3
99.9
89.6
123.9
:
100.8
99.3
105.7
105.8
111.9
104.8
48.8
81.1
130.9
108.7
103.1
105.5
26.1
109.5
106.6
84.8
86.2

(1) Included with Belgium.

Source: Eurostat, industrial countries’ effective exchange rates 
including new Member States - annual data (ert_eff_ic_a)

  Consumers in Europe

93

Consumers.indb   93
Consumers.indb   93

08.04.2009   09:49:29
08.04.2009   09:49:29

V

Prices and indirect taxes

price comparisons for perishable goods (a litre of 
milk), and there is no point in comparing cross-
border prices for a range of services which have to 
be consumed at the point-of-use (a train journey 
to work, or household rubbish collections). On the 
other hand, there is the possibility for consumers 
to  make  price  comparisons  for  big-ticket  items 
(such as buying new furniture or large household 
electrical  items),  comparing  diff erent  retailers 
in their home country, extending this to see if it 
would be economically advantageous to order the 
item from a neighbouring country, or alternatively 
trying  to  fi nd  out  if  it  is  possible  to  make  the 
purchase directly from the manufacturer, or over 
the Internet.

While  prices,  per  se,  may  remain  unchanged  in 
two economies, if the two areas do not share the 
same  currency  it  is  possible  that  exchange  rate 
movements  will  aff ect  any  price  comparison 
over  time.  Th  e  nominal  eff ective  exchange  rate 

Table 1.58: Correction coeffi  cients in the capital cities 
of the European Union, 1 July
(Brussels=100)

Total

Total excluding rents

Bruxelles / Brussels
Sofia
Praha
Kobenhavn
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athinai
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Nicosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszaw
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Bratislava
Ljubljana
Helsinki
Stockholm
London

1996
100
:
:
125
111
:
92
86
91
116
97
:
:
:
100
:
:
105
115
:
84
:
:
:
117
118
115

2006
100
66
81
139
99
80
122
95
100
117
111
90
79
71
100
90
85
112
108
81
92
76
81
88
118
117
143

1996
100
:
:
133
107
:
93
89
88
106
95
:
:
:
100
:
:
97
106
:
80
:
:
:
124
121
91

2006
100
63
73
134
100
75
113
92
93
103
101
97
72
65
100
79
90
102
103
74
92
68
75
82
113
111
110

Source: Eurostat, correction coefﬁ cients in the European Union capitals, from 2004 
(prc_colc_nat)

Table 1.57: Index of purchasing power of 
the euro
(1996=100)

EU-25 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI (1)
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

1996
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

2001
114.0
106.1
91.1
132.6
109.4
103.7
131.4
116.8
107.6
109.0
105.2
112.2
117.5
151.3
171.6
107.0
134.8
132.2
110.5
104.4
148.9
111.5
174.7
115.6
135.0
107.7
99.0
139.9
113.6
115.0

2006
122.4
116.9
117.5
171.8
119.3
112.1
154.6
136.6
127.5
128.4
116.4
126.5
133.5
154.5
190.5
123.5
165.7
140.3
122.7
113.8
154.4
128.8
236.7
126.9
202.9
113.7
106.7
138.6
131.1
123.8

(1) 2005 instead of 2006.

Source: Eurostat, index of purchasing power of the euro/ECU - 
annual data (mny_ppe_a)

measures  changes  in  the  value  of  a  currency 
against  a  trade-weighted  basket  of  currencies; 
a  rise  in  the  index  means  a  strengthening  of 
the  currency.  During  the  period  1999  to  2007 
most  European  countries  saw  their  currencies 
strengthen,  as  Romania,  Slovenia  and  Latvia 
were  the  only  Member  States  that  experienced 
a  signifi cant  weakening  of  their  currencies.  Th  e 
change  in  eff ective  exchange  rates  on  a  global 
level means that during the period 1999 to 2007 it 
became  increasingly  attractive  for  Europeans  to 
purchase items from Japan or the United States.

Th  e index of purchasing power of the euro aims to 
adjust  consumer  price  indices  for  movements  in 
euro exchange rates. An increase in the index means 
that the purchasing power of the euro has fallen.

94

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   94
Consumers.indb   94

08.04.2009   09:49:29
08.04.2009   09:49:29

Prices and indirect taxes

V

Figure 1.56: Correction coeffi  cients in the European Union, 1 July 2007
(Belgium=100)

150

125

100

75

50

25

0

DK UK

IE

FI

SE AT

FR

IT NL BE

LU DE

ES

EL CY

PT MT

SI HU EE

SK CZ LV

PL RO LT BG

Total

Total excluding rents

Source: Eurostat, correction coefﬁ cients in the European Union, from 2004 (prc_colc_nat)

Correction  coeffi  cients  are  used  within  the 
European  institutions  to  ensure  equality  of 
purchasing  power  of  salaries  and  pensions 
between  members  of  staff .  Th  ese  fi gures  have 
a  more  general  interest,  insofar  as  they  can 
also  be  used  to  gauge  where  the  cost  of  living 
is  highest/lowest.  Note  that  the  data  presented 
refer  to  a  single  reference  period  of  July  each 
year  and  are  compared  against  a  base  value  of 
Belgium=100. As such, the relative cost of living 
in  Denmark  was  35 %  higher  than  in  Belgium, 
while the other Scandinavian Member States, the 
United Kingdom and Ireland were also relatively 
expensive places to live in July 2007.

A  similar  analysis  can  be  performed  for  capital 
cities and this shows a similar set of results with 
the  most  expensive  cities  including  London, 
Dublin  and  the  Scandinavian  capitals.  Th  e  cost 
of housing raised the cost of living in most capital 
cities  (in  relation  to  Brussels),  nowhere  more  so 
than in London or Paris.

Price comparisons in their simplest form are based 
on a conversion into a common currency – which 
has been made easier for many Europeans following 
the introduction of the euro. However, price level 
diff erences can also be measured through the use 
of indices based on purchasing power rather than 
exchange  rates.  Th  e  ratio  between  purchasing 
power  parities  (PPPs)  and  the  exchange  rate  can 
be  calculated  for  each  country,  and  then  this 
ratio compared with some benchmark, which for 
the  purposes  of  this  publication  is  the  average 
for the EU-27, which is then given a value = 100. 
Price  level  indices  that  are  above  100  indicate 
relatively  expensive  countries,  while  those  under 
100 show countries that are relatively cheap. Price 
level indices should only be used to compare the 
price levels of a particular good or service across 
countries,  and  should  neither  be  employed  to 
compare  prices  across  a  range  of  diff erent  goods 
and services, nor to compare prices over time.

  Consumers in Europe

Table 1.59: Comparative price levels of 
fi nal consumption by private households 
including indirect taxes
(EU-27=100)

BE (1)
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR (1)
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
NO
CH
JP (2)
US (2)

1997
105.8
34.0
44.4
131.6
109.6
50.8
113.0
87.6
86.9
112.0
99.7
86.6
47.8
43.2
106.6
46.4
68.7
103.4
107.1
51.8
82.5
34.7
72.4
41.6
125.0
131.6
107.6
:
:
:
120.8
136.6
135.8
158.8
100.0

2002
101.5
40.8
57.1
133.8
106.6
60.8
125.2
80.2
84.6
103.5
102.7
89.1
57.0
54.2
102.1
57.4
74.6
102.9
103.4
61.2
86.3
43.0
74.4
44.8
123.9
121.7
117.1
:
:
51.6
134.6
151.2
146.7
156.3
119.7

2007
105.4
46.0
62.6
136.9
103.2
71.3
126.0
88.6
93.0
106.7
102.9
87.7
65.0
59.7
105.1
65.7
73.2
103.1
100.0
63.4
84.6
64.7
76.9
63.0
121.4
116.4
112.3
69.5
43.0
72.2
146.0
137.5
125.7
109.1
91.6

(1) Break in series, 2005.
(2) 2006 instead of 2007.

Source: Eurostat, structural indicators (strind_t)

95

Consumers.indb   95
Consumers.indb   95

08.04.2009   09:49:30
08.04.2009   09:49:30

V

Prices and indirect taxes

Table 1.60: Comparative price level indices, 2007
(EU-27=100)

Household 
final 
consumption 
105.4
46.0
62.6
136.9
103.2
71.3
126.0
88.6
93.0
106.7
102.9
87.7
65.0
59.7
105.1
65.7
73.2
103.1
100.0
63.4
84.6
64.7
63.0
76.9
121.4
116.4
112.3
69.5
43.0
72.2
146.0
137.5
125.7

Consumer goods
104.2
65.7
80.4
131.4
104.1
78.6
115.7
91.7
89.6
98.3
104.4
98.0
74.5
71.6
99.8
81.1
89.5
100.1
102.3
75.6
91.9
75.3
82.4
87.2
113.9
113.4
111.4
86.6
58.6
87.1
140.6
140.5
106.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
NO
CH

of which:

Non-
durables
105.5
63.5
75.9
135.1
108.7
73.6
124.9
88.9
86.3
99.8
106.5
98.1
68.9
66.7
100.2
77.7
82.2
99.4
104.4
70.8
88.1
73.0
78.3
84.2
114.2
117.2
119.8
81.8
53.5
87.4
142.4
150.0
110.7

Source: Eurostat, price level indices (prc_ppp_ind)

Table 1.61: Comparative price level indices, 2007

Semi-
durables
108.3
69.7
94.8
117.2
101.9
93.3
97.0
100.6
95.8
96.2
102.7
98.6
94.1
85.5
104.2
91.5
99.0
100.2
102.5
92.5
92.7
86.6
94.3
99.1
113.6
117.3
100.3
103.2
69.4
79.6
148.1
128.2
105.9

Durables
99.6
75.6
89.3
137.3
95.2
86.2
113.0
96.6
98.8
97.9
103.0
100.0
85.3
83.3
97.4
88.1
110.2
105.5
99.1
87.4
108.7
78.4
93.5
90.4
115.7
101.0
104.3
94.8
80.2
96.2
132.8
127.5
93.2

Consumer 
services
107.4
31.8
47.5
143.2
103.4
65.5
135.2
85.4
95.2
116.3
101.3
77.4
55.6
46.5
110.7
51.6
59.9
106.2
97.0
52.1
77.8
54.0
46.2
67.7
129.7
119.3
113.2
55.0
28.4
57.5
161.2
137.7
141.5

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, elec., gas & oth. fuels (1)
Furnish., househ. equip. & mainten.
Health (1)
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture (1)
Education (1)
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services (1)

(1) 2006.

Source: Eurostat, price level indices (prc_ppp_ind)

Highest 
Denmark
Ireland
Sweden
Denmark
Denmark
Denmark
Denmark
Czech Republic
Denmark
Luxembourg
Denmark
Denmark

(EU-27
=100)
142.4
178.2
121.1
149.2
119.9
152.8
146.0
123.6
134.4
183.9
145.4
143.9

Lowest
Bulgaria
Lithuania
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria
Bulgaria

(EU-27
=100)
61.1
55.5
70.9
28.0
62.0
25.9
57.8
47.1
44.4
14.5
34.4
36.7

Coefficient of 
variation (%)
22.0
35.0
10.2
45.1
18.2
43.8
21.7
18.7
29.0
54.9
30.3
35.5

96

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   96
Consumers.indb   96

08.04.2009   09:49:31
08.04.2009   09:49:31

Prices and indirect taxes

V

Figure 1.57: Coeffi  cient of variation of 
comparative price level index for fi nal 
household consumption, EU-27
(%)

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

Source: Eurostat, price convergence indicator (prc_ppp_conv)

Table 1.62: Price level comparisons in Ireland between Dublin 
and outside Dublin, May 2008 (1)

Men wash, cut & blow dry
Men dry cut
Bacon, best back rashers
Women wash, cut & blow dry
Medium uncooked chicken
Orange juice
Draught lager
Draught lager
Draught cider
Pork steak

Fillets of plaice
Flour, white, self-raising
Round steak
Lamb, whole leg
Spaghetti
Milk, fresh, pasteurised full fat
Bread, white, sliced (large)
Sherry, bottle (take home)
Cider, can (take home)
Ham fillet

Higher average 
price in Dublin
(% difference)
44.7
34.7
22.3
20.7
20.0
18.6
13.8
13.4
12.8
12.3
Lower average 
price in Dublin 
(% difference)
-9.5
-8.4
-5.9
-5.2
-5.1
-5.0
-5.0
-4.7
-4.5
-4.3

Unit
unit value
unit value
1 kg
unit value
1 600 g
1 litre
1/2 pint
1 pint
1 pint
1 kg

Unit
1 kg
2 kg
1 kg
1 kg
500 g
2 litre
800 g
75 cl
500 ml
1 kg

(1) Comparison made for 79 products and services between Dublin and regional towns and 
cities.

Source: Central Statistics Ofﬁ ce, Ireland (www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/
prices/2008/apa_may2008.pdf)

that 

Th  e  price  level  indices  information  presented 
confi rms 
the 
consumers 
Scandinavian  countries,  Ireland  and  the  United 
Kingdom  face  some  of  the  highest  prices  in 
Europe, while the cheapest countries are generally 
those in the east or the south of Europe.

living 

in 

lower 

is  generally 

Th  e  variation  in  price  levels  across  the  Member 
States 
for  semi-durable 
and  durable  goods  (clothing  and  footwear  or 
household equipment) than it is for non-durables 
(for  example,  alcoholic  beverages  and  tobacco), 
while the largest variation in price levels is seen 
among consumer services. Th  is was particularly 
the case for regulated services (such as education, 
health  and  the  utilities),  where  markets  may  be 
protected from competition and prices may be set 
independently of market conditions.

Across the 12 fi rst level headings of the COICOP, 
Denmark  recorded  the  highest  price  level  for 
eight  of  the  categories  in  2007,  while  Bulgaria 
was  the  country  with  the  lowest  relative  prices 
for ten of the categories. Despite the widespread 
diff erences  that  remain  between  countries  in 
terms of diff erent price levels, an analysis (based 
on the coeffi  cient of variation of comparative price 
level  indices  for  fi nal  household  consumption) 
suggests  that  prices  in  the  EU-27  are  gradually 
converging.

Offi  cial  statistics  are  quite  weak  in  terms  of 
providing  information  on  actual  prices.  It  may 
be  hoped  that  on-going  development  work  will, 
in  the  medium-term,  give  rise  to  meaningful 
data  that  allows  the  actual  price  of  generic  and 
pan-European branded goods and services to be 
compared.

In the meantime, a survey conducted in Ireland 
shows that the price of specifi c goods and services 
can  vary  considerably  even  between  regions  of 
the  same  country.  Th  e  comparison  made  for 
79  products  and  services  between  Dublin  and 
regional towns and cities shows that in May 2008, 
the price of a range of food items was somewhat 
lower  in  Dublin.  On  the  other  hand,  the  price 
of  a  haircut,  or  an  alcoholic  drink  in  a  bar  in 
the  capital  city  was  considerably  higher  than 
elsewhere  –  providing  further  evidence  that  the 
price of services tends to vary far more than the 
price of consumer durables (both regionally and 
internationally).

  Consumers in Europe

97

Consumers.indb   97
Consumers.indb   97

08.04.2009   09:49:31
08.04.2009   09:49:31

V

Prices and indirect taxes

Table 1.63: Internet price comparisons, July 2008 (1)
(EUR)

Sony Cyber-shot T300 camera
Apple iPod classic 80GB
Philips 32PFL5403/12 LCD TV
Coldplay - Viva la Vida... LP

Amazon 
DE
297.50
204.97
637.90
12.30

Amazon 
FR
285.90
215.14
838.90
8.13

Amazon 
UK (2)
276.75
177.26
784.46
7.93

Kelkoo
303.32
203.00
821.90
9.48

Manufacturer's 
website (3)
379.00
217.65
:
9.99

(1) All prices include VAT and shipping within country.
(2) Converted at daily exchange rate of EUR 1 = GBP 0.795294713.
(3) Sony online shop for T300, price includes free memory stick; Apple store Luxembourg for iPod; Apple iTunes Luxembourg for Coldplay LP 
(digital version, not physical product).

Source: various websites, 8 July 2008

Table 1.64: Main indicators for taxes on consumption, 2005

Indirect taxes

of which:

VAT 
(% of GDP)
6.9
7.2
12.4
7.2
10.0
6.2
8.8
7.7
7.4
6.3
7.4
6.0
9.8
7.9
7.2
5.9
8.4
8.2
7.3
7.9
7.7
8.1
8.1
9.0
8.0
8.7
9.3
6.8
8.0

Excise duties 
(% of GDP)
2.8
2.4
5.0
3.7
3.5
2.9
3.8
3.2
2.8
2.4
2.4
2.3
4.1
3.7
3.0
4.3
3.2
3.2
2.5
2.8
4.2
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.7
3.8
3.1
3.2
1.4

Taxes on 
consumption 
(% of total 
taxation)
28.1
24.9
51.3
31.4
31.9
26.1
41.8
37.1
34.9
27.5
25.8
24.8
41.4
42.0
37.9
28.5
37.8
40.9
31.8
28.9
35.8
37.5
44.3
34.5
42.7
31.2
25.5
30.9
23.8

Taxes on consumption 
(% of GDP)
11.1
11.3
18.4
11.4
16.1
10.1
12.9
11.4
12.0
9.8
11.4
10.1
14.7
12.4
10.9
10.9
14.6
14.4
12.1
12.1
12.2
12.8
12.4
13.9
12.5
13.7
13.1
11.4
10.6

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT (1)
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
NO

(1) 2004.

Source: ‘Taxation trends in the EU’, Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union, 
European Commission

Direct taxes are paid and borne by the taxpayer in 
the form of income tax, corporation tax, wealth 
tax  and  some  local  taxes.  On  the  other  hand, 
indirect  taxes  are  levied  on  the  consumption  of 
goods or services. Th  ey can be applied in a variety 
of  manners,  including:  as  a  proportion  of  the 
sales  price  (such  as  value  added  tax,  VAT);  as  a 
fi xed  amount  per  unit  of  consumption  (as  with 
most excise duties); or as a fl at rate (as with most 
license fees).

Indirect  taxes  are  generally  collected  on  behalf 
of  governments  by  manufacturers,  wholesalers, 
or  retailers.  Th  e  two  most  important  indirect 
taxes  (in  terms  of  revenues  that  are  raised)  are 
VAT and excise duties, while other indirect taxes 
include: stamp duty on the purchase of a house; 
taxes  on  entertainment,  lotteries  and  gambling; 
television  license  fees;  car  registration  taxes;  or 
environmental levies.

Indirect  taxes  are  oft en  described  as  being 
‘regressive’. Th  is is because in contrast to income 
tax  systems,  where  the  marginal  and  average 
rates  of  tax  generally  rise  with  income,  indirect 
taxes oft en result in lower income groups paying 
relatively  more  tax.  For  example,  a  person  who 
smokes 20 cigarettes a day and earns a relatively 
low wage will pay a bigger proportion of his/her 
income in the form of VAT and excise duties than 
someone who earns a substantially higher salary 
and also smokes 20 cigarettes a day. Furthermore, 
any subsequent increase in tax on cigarettes will 
aff ect  the  low-income  person  proportionally 
more than the high-income earner.

98

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   98
Consumers.indb   98

08.04.2009   09:49:32
08.04.2009   09:49:32

Prices and indirect taxes

V

Indirect taxation is oft en used by governments to 
change both the level and pattern of consumption, 
in particular with the aim of meeting a variety of 
policy  objectives.  In  the  example  of  taxation  on 
cigarettes,  any  tax  increases  may  be  justifi ed  by 
governments  as  an  attempt  to  dissuade  people 
from  smoking  and  so  reduce  the  burden  on 
healthcare systems from smoke-related diseases.

Th  e European Commission’s Directorate-General 
for  Taxation  and  Customs  Union  estimates 
that  consumption  taxes  accounted  for  11.1 %  of 
EU-27  GDP  in  2005.  Th  e  most  important  share 
(6.9 %  of  GDP)  was  attributed  to  receipts  from 
VAT, while excise duties accounted for a further 
2.8 % of GDP. Th  e relative importance of taxes on 
consumption varied from 9.8 % of GDP in Spain 
to 18.4 % of GDP in Bulgaria.

While there is a standard VAT rate in each of the 
Member States, this is not systematically applied 
to all goods and services. Rather, some items can 
be  exempt  from  VAT,  while  others  may  have  a 
lower tax rate. Standard VAT rates at the start of 
January  2008  ranged  from  15 %  in  Cyprus  and 
Luxembourg to 25 % in Denmark and Sweden.

levied  on 

Excise  duties  are 
three  main 
consumption  items:  mineral  oils  (petrol  and 
diesel),  alcoholic  drinks,  and  manufactured 
tobacco.  Th  e  nature  of  excise  duties  (based  on 
a  fi xed  level  per  unit  of  consumption)  means 
government receipts generally remain unchanged 
when the price of a good or service changes; this 
is  in  contrast  to  VAT.  For  example,  if  the  price 
of oil rises on global markets, then VAT receipts 
from  petrol  and  diesel  received  by  government 
will increase in proportion to the increase in the 
pump price, while receipts from excise duties will 
remain  unchanged  (given  the  increase  in  price 
does not result from falling demand).

Figure 1.58: Standard VAT rates applied, 1 January 2008
(%)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

DK SE

PL

FI

BE

FR

PT BG IT HU AT

SI

ES CZ DE

IE NL RO SK

EE

LV

LT MT UK

EL CY LU

Source: ‘Taxation trends in the EU’, Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

99

Consumers.indb   99
Consumers.indb   99

08.04.2009   09:49:33
08.04.2009   09:49:33

VI

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

CONSUMER SATISFACTION AND COMPLAINTS

Consumer attitudes aff ect the demand for goods 
and services. Many aspects can be cited, including: 
satisfaction,  expectations  of  quality  and  safety, 
environmental  concerns,  fashion,  as  well  as  the 
availability and reliability of the information used 
by consumers to take consumption decisions.

Satisfaction

Consumer  satisfaction  depends  on  a  variety  of 
factors: for example, price, quality, the fairness of 
terms and conditions, or aft er-sales service. Some 
intangible  aspects  relating  to  satisfaction  are 
diffi  cult to measure through the use of traditional, 
statistical surveys, and while these are thought to 
be particularly important for understanding how 
service  markets  function,  information  is  largely 
restricted to evidence from opinion surveys.

Statistics on consumer satisfaction are generally 
based  on  surveys  of  consumer  perceptions  and 
expectations,  that  tend  to  query  whether  pre-
purchase expectations are matched by the post-

telephony,  mobile 

purchase  experience  of  using  or  consuming  a 
good  or  service.  A  satisfaction  survey  held  in 
May 2007 covered 11 services of general interest: 
gas supply, electricity supply, water distribution, 
fi xed 
telephony,  urban 
transport, extra-urban transport, air transport, 
postal  services,  retail  banking,  and  insurance 
services.  Th  e  following  year  (August/October 
2008)  another survey was conducted, focusing 
on a range of consumer goods, including: fruit 
and  vegetables,  meat,  non-alcoholic  beverages, 
clothing  and  footwear,  household  electrical 
equipment,  motor  vehicles,  entertainment 
and 
information  and 
leisure  goods,  and 
communication equipment.

Th  e  overall  results  of  both  surveys  may  be 
summarised by stating that more consumers were 
generally  satisfi ed  with  the  provision  of  goods 
and  services  than  dissatisfi ed.  Among  product 
markets,  there  was  generally  less  diff erence  in 
levels  of  overall  satisfaction  (either  between 
products  or  across  countries)  than  for  services 

Figure 1.59: Consumer satisfaction: to what extent are you satisfi ed with your supplier, EU (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

New motor vehicles

Non-alcoholic beverages

Household electrical equipment

Meat

Entertainment and leisure goods

Clothing and footwear

ICT-equipment

Fruit and vegetables

Air transport

Mobile telephony

Insurance services

Retail banking

Water distribution

Gas supply

Electricity supply

Postal services

Fixed telephony

Extra-urban transport

Urban transport

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

Neutral

(1) For services of general interest, EU-25, May 2007; for products, EU-27, August/October 2008; respondents who replied do not know or 
who gave no reply are not shown.

Source: Consumer satisfaction surveys, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission

100

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   100
Consumers.indb   100

08.04.2009   09:49:33
08.04.2009   09:49:33

of  general  interest.  However,  some  countries 
consistently  displayed  higher/lower  satisfaction 
and  dissatisfaction  levels  across  the  diff erent 
markets, suggesting that cultural diff erences and 
expectations may play some role in determining 
satisfaction.  Note  more  detailed  statistics  by 
Member  State  from  these  surveys  are  shown 
in  a  number  of  chapters  within  Part  B  of  this 
publication.

Among  the  services  of  general  interest  that 
were  surveyed  in  2007,  air  transport,  mobile 
telephony and insurance services had the highest 
satisfaction levels across the EU-25, while urban 
and extra-urban transport were the only services 
where less than 50 % of consumers were satisfi ed 
(note  this  does  not  mean  the  remainder  were 
dissatisfi ed, as a high proportion of respondents 
gave a neutral answer – either non-response or do 
not know). Price was the most important criterion 
infl uencing consumers’ overall satisfaction for 6 
out of the 11 services surveyed.

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

VI

Table 1.65: Relative weights in overall 
consumer satisfaction, EU-25, May 2007 (1)
(scale, 0-1)

Gas supply
Air transport
Urban transport
Water distribution
Extra-urban transport
Postal services
Electricity supply
Mobile telephony
Fixed telephony
Insurance services
Retail banking

Quality Pricing Image
0.28
0.35
0.52
0.37
0.53
0.48
0.32
0.34
0.43
0.32
0.38

0.49
0.37
0.35
0.34
0.33
0.33
0.30
0.28
0.24
0.24
0.22

0.20
0.36
0.39
0.43
0.38
0.39
0.49
0.44
0.46
0.52
0.47

(1) Weights are determined by regression coefﬁ cients and can 
have a value ranging from 0 to 1, with 0 meaning that the criteria 
has no inﬂ uence on overall consumer satisfaction and 1 meaning 
that it has total inﬂ uence.

Source: ‘Consumer satisfaction survey’, Directorate-General 
Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the 
European Commission

Table 1.66: Consumer satisfaction: to what extent are you satisfi ed with your supplier (1)
(% of respondents)

New motor vehicles
Non-alcoholic beverages
Household elec. equip.
Meat
Entertain. & leisure goods
Clothing & footwear
ICT-equipment
Fruit & vegetables
Air transport
Mobile telephony
Insurance services
Retail banking
Water distribution
Gas supply
Electricity supply
Postal services
Fixed telephony
Extra-urban transport
Urban transport

EU (2)
Satisfied Dissatisfied
1.6
0.8
1.3
1.0
0.9
0.8
1.5
1.7
3.5
4.1
3.0
4.6
5.4
4.4
5.3
6.9
8.4
10.3
9.4

79.9
77.8
77.1
76.0
75.8
74.8
74.5
70.4
66.1
65.9
64.4
63.1
60.2
57.9
57.6
52.9
52.0
45.6
44.5

EU-15
Satisfied Dissatisfied
1.4
0.7
1.2
0.8
0.8
0.4
1.5
1.7
3.6
4.2
2.6
4.5
4.8
4.0
4.9
6.8
7.6
9.9
8.4

79.8
77.0
75.8
75.4
75.5
75.4
73.1
69.0
65.5
64.4
64.6
62.1
60.5
57.2
56.5
50.5
52.1
45.3
45.2

New Member States 
that joined EU (3)
Satisfied Dissatisfied
2.6
0.9
1.6
1.7
1.4
2.0
1.4
1.9
3.1
3.9
5.3
4.7
7.9
6.6
6.7
7.5
12.6
12.0
14.7

80.5
80.7
81.7
78.3
77.3
72.8
80.4
76.4
72.6
72.8
62.9
67.9
59.1
60.9
62.3
62.7
51.4
47.1
40.3

(1) For services of general interest, May 2007; for products, August/October 2008.
(2) For services of general interest, EU-25; for products, EU-27.
(3) For services of general interest, 10 new Member Sates that joined the EU in 2004; for products, 12 new Member States that joined the 
EU since 2004.

Source: Consumer satisfaction surveys, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

101

Consumers.indb   101
Consumers.indb   101

08.04.2009   09:49:34
08.04.2009   09:49:34

VI

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

Figure 1.60: Consumer satisfaction: comparability of prices, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

Household elec. equip.

Non-alcoholic beverages

ICT-equipment

Entertain. & leisure goods

New motor vehicles

Clothing & footwear

Meat

Fruit & vegetables

Agree

Disagree

Neutral

(1) Respondents who replied do not know or who gave no reply are not shown.

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey 2008, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the 
European Commission

Figure 1.61: Consumer satisfaction: comparability of quality, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

Household elec. equip.

New motor vehicles

Entertain. & leisure goods

Clothing & footwear

ICT-equipment

Non-alcoholic beverages

Meat

Fruit & vegetables

Agree

Disagree

Neutral

(1) Respondents who replied do not know or who gave no reply are not shown.

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey 2008, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the 
European Commission

Product  markets  were  generally  characterised 
by  higher  levels  of  satisfaction  than  services  of 
general interest. Indeed, more than three quarters 
of  all  EU-27  consumers  in  2008  were  satisfi ed 
with  their  suppliers  of  new  motor  vehicles, 
non-alcoholic  beverages,  household  electrical 
equipment,  meat  or  entertainment  and  leisure 
goods.

easy  to  compare  prices  was  recorded  for  meat 
(3.2 %),  followed  by  fruit  and  vegetables  (3.1 %). 
In  contrast,  the  proportion  of  respondents  that 
agreed  it  was  easy  to  compare  prices  stood  at 
64.5 % for fruit and vegetables and at 67.0 % for 
meat, rising to upwards of 70 % of respondents for 
household electrical equipment or non-alcoholic 
beverages.

Th  ere  were  a  number  of  questions  in  the  2008 
satisfaction survey of product markets concerning 
consumers’ views in relation to price, quality and 
choice. Th  e results show that very few consumers 
had  a  negative  opinion  regarding  any  of  these 
criteria.  For  example,  among  the  eight  product 
markets 
the  highest  proportion 
of  respondents  that  did  not  agree  that  it  was 

surveyed, 

When asked for their opinion of whether or not it 
was easy to compare the quality of the same group 
of eight products, a majority of respondents again 
agreed. Th  e proportion in agreement was lowest 
for food and drink products, rising to more than 
two  thirds  of  all  respondents  for  new  motor 
vehicles,  and  considerably  higher  (79.5 %)  for 
household electrical equipment.

102

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   102
Consumers.indb   102

08.04.2009   09:49:35
08.04.2009   09:49:35

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

VI

Figure 1.62: Consumer satisfaction with choice of retailers, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

Non-alcoholic beverages

Household elec. equip.

Clothing & footwear

ICT-equipment

New motor vehicles

Entertain. & leisure goods

Fruit & vegetables

Meat

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

Neutral

(1) Respondents who replied do not know or who gave no reply are not shown.

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey 2008, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the 
European Commission

Figure 1.63: Consumer satisfaction with trustworthiness of retailers to adhere to rules set in 
place to protect consumers, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

Household elec. equip.

Non-alcoholic beverages

ICT-equipment

Entertain. & leisure goods

New motor vehicles

Clothing & footwear

Meat

Fruit & vegetables

Agree

Disagree

Neutral

(1) Respondents who replied do not know or who gave no reply are not shown.

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey 2008, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the 
European Commission

While price and quality are generally considered 
as  the  main  motivations  behind  consumer 
decision-making,  the  2008  satisfaction  survey 
also looked at consumers’ satisfaction with their 
choice of retailer. Th  e results show that more than 
two  thirds  of  EU-27  respondents  were  satisfi ed 
with  the  choice  of  available  retailers  for  each  of 
the  eight  product  markets  covered.  Th  e  lowest 
levels  of  satisfaction  concerned  retail  choice  in 
relation to food products, namely, meat and fruit 
and vegetables.

Th  e  same  survey  questioned  consumers  on 
the  trustworthiness  of  retailers  and  whether 
retailers adhered to rules put in place to protect 
consumers. Once again a majority of respondents 

for  all  eight  product  categories  agreed  that 
retailers  were,  in  general,  trustworthy.  Th  e 
proportion  of  respondents  that  disagreed  with 
this  question  never  rose  higher  than  the  4.5 % 
recorded  for  retailers  of  ICT-equipment;  this 
fi gure was, nevertheless, more than twice the level 
of  disagreement  recorded  for  any  of  the  other 
products. Th  e highest level of trustworthiness was 
recorded for meat retailers (69.0 % in agreement), 
closely followed by retailers of new motor vehicles 
and  household  electrical  equipment,  while  this 
indicator  fell  to  lows  of  63.5 %  for  fruit  and 
vegetable retailers and 62.4 % for retailers of ICT-
equipment.

  Consumers in Europe

103

Consumers.indb   103
Consumers.indb   103

08.04.2009   09:49:35
08.04.2009   09:49:35

VI

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

Complaints

Data on consumer complaints have been described 
as  the  ‘gold  standard’  for  the  functioning  of 
consumer  markets.  Information  on  the  number 
of  consumer  complaints  (made  to  enforcement 
agencies,  consumer  NGOs,  and  similar  bodies) 
provides 
information  on  where  consumer 
markets might be ineffi  cient or face other forms 
of restriction.

Complaints data are collected in a heterogeneous 
way across the Member States, and the European 
Commission’s  Directorate-General  for  Health 

and  Consumers  published  a  consultation 
document in 2008 seeking the views of complaint 
handling bodies (among others) on how to move 
towards a more harmonised system of classifying 
complaints.

the  perceived 

As with satisfaction, the willingness to complain 
is  likely  to  vary  between  countries  as  a  function 
of  cultural  diff erences,  and  may  also  be  related 
likelihood  of  success  of 
to 
pursuing  a  complaint.  Th  e  results  of  satisfaction 
surveys  conducted  in  2007  and  2008  show  that 
consumers  faced,  on  average,  more  problems 
regarding  services  of  general  interest  than  they 

Figure 1.64: Consumers having experienced problems in the last 12 months, EU (1)
(% of respondents)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Extra-urban transport
Urban transport
Fixed telephony
Postal services
New motor vehicles
Retail banking
Mobile telephony
Fruit & vegetables
Electricity supply
ICT-equipment
Air transport
Insurance services
Clothing & footwear
Gas supply
Household elec. equip.
Water distribution
Entertain. & leisure goods
Meat
Non-alcoholic beverages

(1) For services of general interest (shaded blue), May 2007; for products (shaded yellow), August/October 2008.

Source: Consumer satisfaction surveys, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission

Figure 1.65: Consumer complaints: in the last 12 months, have you made any kind of formal complaint in 
writing, by telephone or in person, to a seller/provider, 2008
(% responding yes)

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

SE NL DE UK

FI DK MT EU-
27

AT PL BE

SK

IE

SI

CZ ES

FR HU CY EL

IT

EE

LU LT RO LV PT BG

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

104

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   104
Consumers.indb   104

08.04.2009   09:49:36
08.04.2009   09:49:36

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

VI

did  concerning  products.  Among  the  eight 
product categories that were surveyed, the highest 
proportion of problems was reported for new motor 
vehicle purchases (15 %), whereas for services the 
highest  rate  was  27 %  for  extra-urban  transport 
services. A survey of consumer protection in the 
internal  market  conducted  in  early  2008  for  the 
European  Commission  reveals  that  on  average 
16 %  of  consumers  in  the  EU-27  made  a  formal 
complaint (in writing, by telephone or in person) 
during the previous 12 month period. More than 
20 %  of  consumers  in  the  northern  European 
countries  of  Sweden,  the  Netherlands,  Germany, 
the United Kingdom, Finland and Denmark made 
a complaint, compared with no more than 8 % in 
the Baltic Member States, Luxembourg, Romania, 
Portugal or Bulgaria.

Th  ose who had complained were asked to elaborate 
on  how  well  they  thought  their  complaint  had 
been dealt with. At the EU-27 level, slightly more 
than half (51 %) of those complaining agreed that 

their complaint had been handled well.

It  is  perhaps  surprising  to  fi nd  that  51 %  of 
unsatisfi ed  customers  chose  not  to  take  any 
further action despite feeling that their complaint 
had been dealt with in an unsatisfactorily manner. 
Among those who chose to continue their action, 
the most popular option was to seek advice from 
a  consumer  organisation  (14 %),  followed  by 
consulting a solicitor (9 %), bringing the matter to 
court (4 %) or to arbitration/conciliation (3 %).

Another  survey  conducted  in  May  and  June 
2006 revealed that telephone services (both fi xed 
and  mobile)  and  Internet  services  were  among 
the  services  of  general  interest  that  had  the 
highest  levels  of  complaints.  All  three  of  these 
services  reported  rates  of  complaint  that  were 
approximately twice those registered for a range 
of  other  services  of  general  interest  (including 
utility  providers,  postal  services,  retail  banking 
and transport services).

Figure 1.66: Consumer complaints: in general, were you satisfi ed or not with the way your complaint(s) was 
(were) dealt with, 2008
(% responding yes)

100

75

50

25

0

SK

SI CZ AT

SE BG PL

FI DK EE DE

IE

RO NL PT EU-
27

BE

LT

IT CY UK EL

LU MT ES

LV HU FR

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

Figure 1.67: Consumer complaints: what did you do when your complaint(s) was (were) not dealt with in a 
satisfactory manner, EU-27, 2008
(% of respondents)

0

10

20

30

40

50

You took no further action

Other (spontaneous)

You asked for the advice of a consumer association

You asked for the advice of a solicitor

You brought the matter to court

You brought the matter to an arbitration/mediation/conciliation body

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

105

Consumers.indb   105
Consumers.indb   105

08.04.2009   09:49:37
08.04.2009   09:49:37

VI

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

Table 1.67: Consumer complaints: in the last two years, have you personally made a complaint about any 
aspect of the following services, May-June 2006
(% responding yes)

Fixed 
telephony
11
9
:
12
8
14
7
6
6
7
5
20
12
6
4
1
139
8
9
6
14
5
:
2
9
4
19
11

Mobile 
telephony
12
6
:
10
14
14
6
7
7
11
6
15
5
5
7
2

9
11
15
11
5
:
6
11
16
16
15

Internet 
service 

provider Electricity
6
5
:
4
3
8
5
3
4
3
1
7
9
2
3
1
7
10
10
6
3
3
:
1
6
5
14
9

13
10
:
11
11
14
15
6
5
10
10
15
7
11
9
2
15
16
19
9
13
12
:
4
8
17
26
14

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Rail 
services: 
local
4
2
:
4
6
4
3
2
2
1
3
6
8
1
1
2
5
3
6
3
3
1
:
2
5
4
12
6

Rail 
services 
between 
towns
5
2
:
1
6
5
2
2
1
1
5
7
-
0
0
1
3
-
12
6
2
1
:
2
1
2
5
7

Retail 
banking: 
current 
account
6
3
:
6
5
7
3
5
4
3
5
9
10
1
1
1
7
7
7
9
4
3
:
3
7
5
5
9

Postal 
service
5
5
:
10
9
6
4
2
2
1
5
6
2
1
1
2
5
3
7
8
4
1
:
2
6
7
8
7

Gas Water
3
2
:
3
2
3
4
2
3
2
1
4
5
3
3
0
6
9
2
2
3
2
:
2
5
2
2
4

5
5
:
3
4
8
2
4
11
1
1
5
-
0
0
1
6
-
5
4
2
3
:
1
4
0
0
9

Source: ‘Services of general interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

106

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   106
Consumers.indb   106

08.04.2009   09:49:37
08.04.2009   09:49:37

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

VI

Table 1.68: Consumer complaints: how well was your complaint dealt with, May-June 2006
(% responding ‘well’, as opposed to ‘badly’)

Fixed 
telephony
52
60
:
58
57
46
60
47
47
44
43
56
67
49
65
42
57
66
51
49
58
50
:
39
60
62
63
53

Mobile 
telephony
55
60
:
61
48
49
64
59
43
51
50
57
60
56
50
24
56
58
46
77
73
42
:
51
65
63
58
58

Internet 
service 

provider Electricity
49
42
:
68
65
32
55
52
26
45
38
66
53
65
59
28
50
43
40
64
66
57
:
31
68
56
64
52

49
52
:
81
56
37
72
50
37
41
37
51
61
54
78
47
54
53
58
68
87
56
:
58
72
73
62
39

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Rail 
services: 
local
54
65
:
44
57
47
43
9
22
75
52
58
42
74
60
0
43
34
43
41
61
49
:
57
43
53
58
59

Rail 
services 
between 
towns
52
70
:
53
60
19
62
11
14
67
62
52
-
100
0
-
41
-
69
33
71
0
:
32
7
22
58
65

Retail 
banking: 
current 
account
50
48
:
52
57
44
64
47
33
45
49
57
72
60
38
100
51
78
50
46
77
35
:
32
71
67
54
47

Postal 
service
52
45
:
50
56
37
67
57
16
91
52
64
32
66
58
69
74
30
53
45
64
37
:
35
54
62
43
56

Gas Water
51
57
:
61
82
32
37
47
32
58
47
76
52
56
36
100
63
45
32
49
58
53
:
52
58
65
83
45

45
52
:
70
35
19
75
22
76
51
43
61
-
0
100
100
52
-
34
34
85
69
:
38
63
-
-
48

Source: ‘Services of general interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

107

Consumers.indb   107
Consumers.indb   107

08.04.2009   09:49:38
08.04.2009   09:49:38

VI

Consumer satisfaction and complaints

Th  e  European  Consumer  Centres  (ECC)  and 
Consumer  Protection  Cooperation 
(CPC) 
networks  provide  information  relating  to  the 
number  of  cross-border  complaints.  Th  e  ECC 
data relate to cross-border online transactions for 
consumer goods and services. In 2007 there were 
more than 26 000 requests for information, 18 070 
simple complaints (which required no follow-up, 
other  than  providing  advice  to  the  consumer), 
and 4 759 normal complaints and disputes (which 
required  the  subsequent  intervention  or  follow-
up of an ECC or the referral of a complaint to an 
out-of-court scheme or ADR body by an ECC).

Table 1.69: Number of cross-border 
information requests, complaints, disputes 
and enforcement requests, Europe, 2007 (1)
(number)

ECC (European Consumer Centres)

Information requests
Simple complaints
Normal complaints & disputes

CPC (Consumer Protection Cooperation)

Information requests
Enforcement requests
Alerts

(1) EU-25, Norway and Iceland.

Source: ECC and CPC networks

26 215
18 070
4 759

52
57
22

Table 1.70: Number of cross-border information and enforcement requests, complaints, 
and disputes, Europe, 2007 (1)
(number)

Total

Food & non-alcoholic beverages
Alcoholic beverages, tobacco
Clothing & footwear
Housing, water, elec., gas & oth. fuels
Furnish., househ. equip. & mainten.
Health
Transport
Communications
Recreation & culture
Education
Restaurants & hotels
Miscellaneous goods & services
Outside COICOP classification

ECC: normal 
complaints & disputes
4 759
13
22
134
75
334
40
1 633
278
1 150
17
508
350
205

CPC

Information Enforcement
57
1
0
0
0
1
11
15
2
10
0
2
9
6

52
1
0
1
0
1
8
8
0
8
1
5
13
6

Alerts
22
1
0
0
0
0
5
3
1
4
0
1
4
3

(1) EU-25, Norway and Iceland.

Source: ECC and CPC networks

108

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   108
Consumers.indb   108

08.04.2009   09:49:39
08.04.2009   09:49:39

Quality and safety

VII

QUALITY AND SAFETY

Quality

In  its  traditional  sense,  the  term  ‘quality’  is 
oft en  used  in  a  narrow  sense  to  describe  how  a 
manufactured  product  conforms  to  its  stated 
objectives,  in  other  words,  quality  is  measured 
in terms of defects introduced on manufacturing 
production lines. However, a broader concept of 
quality might cover the aspirations of consumers, 
and consider how a product or service matches up 
to  these.  Th  is  more  subjective  defi nition  means 
that  individual  consumers  can  have  their  own 
defi nition  of  what  constitutes  a  quality  product 
or service, refl ected in a move away from supply-
side  measures  that  focus  on  manufacturers’ 
processes  (such  as  total  quality  management), 
towards  customer-based  measures.  Th  is  shift  
in  focus  accompanies  the  increasing  economic 
importance  of  services  in  the  global  economy. 
As such, quality may be defi ned in terms of the 
customer or end-user experience – how a product 
was sold, how it was delivered, how it performed, 
or how well the aft er-sales service functioned.

While  price  undoubtedly  plays  an  important 
role  in  consumer  decision-making  processes, 
the  infl uence  of  quality  may,  at  least  in  some 
cases,  be  more  central.  In  this  respect,  quality 
can  be  synonymous  with  safety  –  for  example, 
edible,  wholesome  foods,  toys  that  are  not 
dangerous,  or  airlines  that  have  a  good  safety 
record.  Quality  can  also  be  synonymous  with 
the  speed  of  delivery  –  for  example,  transport 
services  (buses  or  trains)  that  arrive  according 
to  schedule,  Internet  services  being  off ered  at 

high-speeds, postal services that result in parcels 
being  delivered  quickly.  However,  the  more 
subjective  nature  of  quality  extends  its  impact 
further, into areas where it is diffi  cult to measure 
consumers’  perceptions  or  the  perceived  value 
that they give a good and service. One area where 
perceived quality may be particularly important 
is with respect to designer and branded goods. A 
survey conducted in November 2005 shows that 
a relatively small proportion (22 %) of European 
consumers  thought  that  designer  brands  were 
signifi cantly higher quality than standard brands, 
while three quarters of respondents believed that 
designer brands were over-priced.

A more recent survey of consumer protection in 
the internal market conducted in early 2008 for 
the European Commission reveals that branding 
plays  an  important  role  in  consumer’s  decision-
making processes. When asked which factors (up 
to three responses allowed) played an important 
role  in  determining  the  choice  of  non-food 
items  that  EU-27  consumers  purchased,  some 
49 %  of  respondents  cited  the  brand  as  a  factor. 
Branding was generally the third most important 
factor,  behind  price  and  safety,  for  infl uencing 
consumer choice, although in Bulgaria, Estonia, 
Spain, France, Ireland, Lithuania, Malta, Austria, 
Poland,  Romania,  Slovenia  and  Sweden,  the 
brand was cited by a slightly higher proportion of 
respondents than safety.

Table 1.71: Perceived quality: to what extent do you agree with the following, 
November 2005
(% of respondents)

I buy 
designer
 brands
21
24
20
14
20
21

Many people 
I know buy 
designer 
brands
42
67
39
41
45
44

Designer brands 
are usually 
over-priced for 
what they are
75
82
79
87
79
77

Designer brands 
are significantly 
higher quality than 
standard brands
22
39
35
18
34
28

Europe
Latin America
Asia-Pacific
North America
Other
Global average

Source: Global online survey (based on 23 500 consumers in 42 countries), A.C. Nielsen

  Consumers in Europe

109

Consumers.indb   109
Consumers.indb   109

08.04.2009   09:49:39
08.04.2009   09:49:39

VII

Quality and safety

for  example, 

fair-trade  products, 

In  order  to  help  consumers  make  informed 
choices there are a number of schemes that have 
been  set-up  to  help  identify  goods  and  services 
adhering  to  particular  ethical  principles 
– 
ecologically  friendly  products,  organic 
produce.  Additional  information  may 
be found in the opening chapter of Part 
B,  which  covers  food  and  non-
alcoholic  beverages.  Th  is  includes 
information relating to quality food 
products  manufactured 
regions 
Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical 
Indication (PGI)).

in  specifi c 
(Protected  Designation  of 

Th  e eco-label (shown) was introduced in 1992 
to help consumers identify greener products 
and services and may be granted to any product 
or  service  except  food,  drinks,  pharmaceutical 
products  or  medical  appliances.  Products  that 
are  given  the  label  must  be  manufactured  by 
the  most  environmentally  friendly  procedure 
possible  and  their  disposal  must  impose  less  of 
a  burden  on  nature  than  that  of  conventional 

products. Furthermore, products that are granted 
the label must be of high quality, and the label is 
only  awarded  if  a  product  is  at  least  as  eff ective 
as  a  ‘normal’  product.  A  survey  conducted 
at  the  end  of  2006  by  Eurobarometer 
found  that  only  11 %  of  consumers  in 
the EU-25 were aware of the meaning 
of the European eco-label.

Ethical  factors  are  becoming  more 
important in consumers’ buying decisions 
and  are  oft en  cited  by  consumers  as 
a  safeguard  in  relation  to  quality. 
According  to  the  Fairtrade  Labelling 
Organization  (www.fairtrade.net),  there  was 
rapid  growth  in  the  retail  value  of  fair-trade 
products  between  2006  and  2007,  with  several 
national  markets  doubling  in  size.  Th  e  highest 
value of retail sales of fair-trade products, among 
those countries for which data are available, was 
recorded in the United Kingdom, where the fair-
trade retail market was estimated to be valued at 
EUR 704 million in 2007. In contrast, the relative 
importance  of  fair-trade  sales  was  particularly 
low in Italy and Spain.

Figure 1.68: Public perception of eco-label: in your opinion what does 
this European label mean, EU-25, November-December 2006
(% of respondents)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Ecological products and services label

Green energy label

Bio-food label

Protected natural reserves label

Healthy food and beverages label

Safe products label

Bio-fuel label

Other (spontaneous)

Don't know

Source: ‘Eco-label ﬂ ower week’, Special Eurobarometer 275, European Commission

110

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   110
Consumers.indb   110

08.04.2009   09:49:40
08.04.2009   09:49:40

Quality and safety

VII

A recent Eurobarometer survey conducted in early 
2008 reveals that 8 % of consumers in the EU-27 
stated that ethical considerations were among the 
three most important aspects that infl uence their 
choice of purchase. Th  ere was a fairly wide range 
in values between the Member States, as upwards 
of  20 %  of  Swedish  and  Danish  consumers  gave 
importance  to  ethical  considerations,  while 
shares of less than 5 % were recorded in Cyprus, 
Hungary, Malta Portugal, Romania, Bulgaria and 
Slovenia.

Fraudulent goods and services are oft en charged 
with  being  of  sub-standard  quality,  either  due 
to  inferior  materials  being  used  to  manufacture 
them, or because they have lower product safety: 
they  may  also  be  charged  with  being  produced 
using manufacturing methods that fail to respect 
rules  and  regulations  concerning  labour  or 
environmental regulations.

Table 1.72: Estimated retail value of sales of 
fair-trade products (1)
(EUR million)

BE
DK
DE
IE
ES
FR
IT
LU
NL
AT
FI
SE
UK
NO
CH

2006
28
23
110
12
2
166
35
3
41
42
23
16
410
9
142

2007
35
40
142
23
4
210
39
3
48
53
35
43
704
18
158

(% increase)
25
71
29
101
105
27
13
14
16
27
54
166
72
110
11

(1) Information only available for those Member States shown in 
the table.

Source:  Annual report 2007, Fairtrade Labelling Organizations 
International (www.fairtrade.net)

Table 1.73: Community customs activities concerning counterfeit and piracy: number of 
cases registered and number of articles seized at EU-25 borders, 2006
(number)

Total
Foodstuffs, alcoholic and other drinks
Perfumes and cosmetics
Clothing and accessories

Sportswear
Other clothing (ready to wear)
Clothing accessories (bags, sunglasses…)

Electrical equipment
Computer equipment (hardware)
CD (audio, games, software), DVD, cassettes
Watches and jewellery
Toys and games
Other
Cigarettes
Medicines

Number 
of cases
 registered
37 334
54
1 093
24 297
3 254
9 977
11 066
1 342
543
288
3 969
678
1 682
300
497

Number 
of articles
 seized
128 631 295
1 185 649
1 676 409
14 361 867
1 210 196
4 315 338
8 793 123
2 984 476
152 102
15 080 161
943 819
2 370 894
13 287 274
73 920 446
2 711 410

Change in number 
of articles seized, 
2005-2006 (%)
70
-77
141
31
-60
1
137
-9
-81
55
83
25
41
126
384

Source: Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/
documents/customs/customs_controls/counterfeit_piracy/statistics/counterf_comm_2006_en.pdf)

  Consumers in Europe

111

Consumers.indb   111
Consumers.indb   111

08.04.2009   09:49:40
08.04.2009   09:49:40

VII

Quality and safety

Figure 1.69: Community customs activities 
concerning counterfeit and piracy: origin of goods 
seized at EU-25 borders, 2006
(%)

China
79%

United 
Arab 
Emirates
5%

Others
10%

India
1%

Algeria
1%

Hong Kong
1%

Egypt
1%

Turkey
1%

Iran
1%

Th  e Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs 
Union of the European Commission is responsible 
for customs activities and collects information on 
counterfeit and pirated goods. Th  eir annual report 
shows  that  in  2006  there  were  more  than  37 000 
cases registered by Community customs offi  cials at 
EU-25 borders concerning counterfeit and pirated 
goods,  with  a  total  of  close  to  130  million  items 
being  seized.  Of  these,  the  most  popular  items 
were cigarettes, followed by CDs and DVDs (audio, 
games or soft ware), and clothing accessories (such 
as  handbags  or  sunglasses).  Th  e  most  frequent 
origin of counterfeit goods crossing EU-25 borders 
in 2006 was China (79 % of all articles seized).

Source: Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission 
(http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/customs/customs_controls/
counterfeit_piracy/statistics/counterf_comm_2006_en.pdf)

Table 1.74: Community customs activities concerning counterfeit and piracy: share of articles seized at EU-25 
borders by origin of provenance, 2006
(%)

Main origin

Second origin

Third origin

Foodstuffs, alcoholic and other drinks
Perfumes and cosmetics
Clothing and accessories

Sportswear
Other clothing (ready to wear)
Clothing accessories (bags, sunglasses…)

Electrical equipment
Computer equipment (hardware)
CD (audio, games, software), DVD, cassettes
Watches and jewellery
Toys and games
Other
Cigarettes
Medicines

Turkey
China
China
China
China
China
China
China
China
China
China
China
China
India

18
37
63
43
50
81
61
47
88
72
85
82
83
31

China
Ukraine
India
Vietnam
India
Malaysia
Hong Kong
Spain
Iran
Hong Kong
Hong Kong
Turkey
U.A.E.
U.A.E.

17
19
5
13
19
2
21
17
5
19
3
3
6
31

Singapore
Indonesia
Turkey
Switzerland
Turkey
Algeria
U.A.E.
Hong Kong
Taiwan
South Korea
Spain
Hong Kong
Algeria
China

12
17
3
7
9
2
7
15
1
2
2
2
2
20

Source: Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/customs/
customs_controls/counterfeit_piracy/statistics/counterf_comm_2006_en.pdf)

112

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   112
Consumers.indb   112

08.04.2009   09:49:41
08.04.2009   09:49:41

Safety

In order to protect health and safety, manufacturers 
and importers are obliged by Community law to 
ensure that only safe products are made available to 
consumers for purchase. In other words, products 
should not present any more than the minimum 
risk  consistent  with  their  use  under  normal  or 
foreseeable conditions. In order to ensure product 
safety,  manufacturers  and  importers  must  take 
into  account:  the  characteristics  of  the  product, 
such  as  its  composition,  packaging,  installation 
and maintenance requirements; its eff ect on other 
products, where it is reasonably foreseeable that it 
will be used with other products; the presentation 
of  the  product,  its  labelling,  and  instructions  for 
using  and  disposing  of  it;  as  well  as  the  types 
of  consumers  at  serious  risk  when  using  the 
product,  particularly  children  or  elderly  people. 
Indeed,  producers,  importers  and,  in  certain 
circumstances, suppliers of goods and services can 
be liable for physical injury or material damage if 
consumers are harmed by defective products.

In  addition  to  these  general  rules,  sectoral 
provisions  have  been  adopted  to  cater  for  the 
characteristics  of  specifi c  products,  with  safety 
legislation  introduced  for  individual  items,  such 
as: foodstuff s, pharmaceutical products, cosmetics, 
toys,  and  domestic  electrical  appliances.  A  range 
of  European  standards  exist  to  help  ensure  that 
these  products  are  fi t  for  their  purpose,  safe, 
comparable and compatible. European standards 
are  developed  by  the  three  organisations:  CEN 
standardisation 
(European 

committee 

for 

Quality and safety

VII

which  deals  with  all  sectors  except  the  electro-
technology  and 
telecommunications  sectors); 
CENELEC  (European  committee  for  electro 
technical  standardisation);  and  ETSI  (European 
telecommunications standards institute).

Market  surveillance  authorities  are  entitled  to 
take  a  range  of  measures  in  relation  to  defective 
products,  for  example,  by  removing  them  from 
sale, or subjecting them to a product recall. Th  ere 
are  established  systems  in  place  to  ensure  the 
exchange of information between Member States 
if  a  dangerous  product  is  found.  Information  is 
passed  via  a  rapid  alert  system  called  ‘RAPEX’ 
(rapid  alert  system  for  non-food  products).  Th  e 
system  facilitates  cooperation  between  national 
and European authorities to track down dangerous 
products  and  remove  them  quickly  from  the 
marketplace; a similar rapid alert system is in place 
for food and feed (RASFF).

As  well  as  market  regulation  at  a  national  and 
European  level,  safety  also  depends,  at  least  to 
some degree, on the behaviour and responsibility 
of  individual  consumers.  Self-regulation  to  avoid 
accidents can take a variety of forms: for example, 
checking that the sell-by date of food has not been 
exceeded before consuming it; ensuring that a toy 
with  a  recommended  minimum  age  cannot  be 
picked  up  by  a  younger  child;  making  sure  that 
electrical  appliances  are  kept  away  from  water; 
or avoiding the excessive consumption of alcohol 
before driving.

Figure 1.70: Consumers’ understanding of safety information: in the last 12 months, 
have you encountered any diffi  culties in understanding safety information relating to goods 
or services, EU-25, February-March 2006
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

Yes, for sellers/providers in home country

Yes, for sellers/providers in another EU country

Yes, for sellers/providers located outside the EU

Yes, for sellers/providers based somewhere unknown

No

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the internal market’, Special Eurobarometer 252, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

113

Consumers.indb   113
Consumers.indb   113

08.04.2009   09:49:42
08.04.2009   09:49:42

VII

Quality and safety

Figure 1.71: Consumers’ understanding of 
safety information: in the last 12 months, 
have you encountered any diffi  culties in 
understanding safety information relating to 
goods or services, February-March 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

LV

CZ

SK

AT

LT

EE

IT

DK

FI

HU

MT

SI

PL

EU-25

FR

NL

DE

CY

SE

LU

BE

EL

ES

IE

PT

UK

Difficultly
No difficulty
Don't know/no response

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the internal market’, Special 
Eurobarometer 252, European Commission

in 

diffi  culties 

understanding 

A Eurobarometer survey conducted in early 2006 
asked respondents whether they had encountered 
any 
safety 
information  relating  to  goods  or  services  during 
the previous 12 months. A high proportion (83 %) 
of persons within the EU-25 replied that they had 
not  experienced  any  diffi  culties,  while  10 %  of 
respondents faced diffi  culties for goods or services 
bought  in  their  own  country,  3 %  for  goods  and 
services bought in another EU-25 country, and 2 % 
for goods or services bought outside of the EU.

Th  e  proportion  of  people  facing  diffi  culties  in 
understanding safety information was equal to or 
less than 10 % in Belgium, Greece, Spain, Ireland, 
Portugal and the United Kingdom, rising to around 
a  quarter  of  all  respondents  in  Austria,  Slovakia 
and the Czech Republic, and reaching a maximum 
of one third of all respondents in Latvia.

A  study  of  consumer  perceptions  conducted  at 
the end of 2004 by Eurobarometer suggested that 
the  majority  of  consumers  in  the  EU-25  felt  that 
a  range  of  services  of  general  interest  were  safe. 
Almost  nine  out  of  ten  (89 %)  consumers  in  the 
EU-25  felt  that  their  electricity  and  water  supply 
services were safe, a share that fell to seven out of 
ten (70 %) consumers when questioned about the 
safety  of  mobile  telephony  or  long-distance  rail 
services.  It  is  important  to  note  that  there  were 
some quite high levels of non-response; for several 
of the Member States this could oft en be explained 
by  the  lack  of  a  particular  service,  for  example 
there are no rail services in Malta, while in several 
Member  States  there  is  either  no,  or  a  severely 
restricted, provision of gas supply.

114

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   114
Consumers.indb   114

08.04.2009   09:49:42
08.04.2009   09:49:42

Quality and safety

VII

Table 1.75: Consumers’ perception of safety of services of general interest, November 2004
(% of respondents)

     Mobile
   telephony
Not 
safe
17
16
:
13
11
13
17
21
36
16
22
22
12
9
29
14
6
19
22
11
20
4
:
39
16
7
18
11

Safe
70
78
:
78
74
74
64
63
52
73
63
68
82
77
53
78
76
69
62
72
59
77
:
56
72
88
77
74

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Electricity 
supply

Gas 
supply

Water 
supply

Urban 
transport

Extra-
urban rail

Not 
safe
6
3
:
7
1
4
10
3
17
9
3
12
5
5
11
4
5
9
3
6
9
3
:
23
7
2
8
1

Safe
74
75
:
70
42
75
48
51
25
79
76
79
-
86
77
65
82
-
85
60
78
78
:
63
76
40
29
84

Not 
safe
8
12
:
21
2
7
6
7
20
10
3
13
-
6
11
7
9
-
4
6
13
7
:
21
15
10
17
2

Safe
89
96
:
91
94
92
75
86
85
89
89
79
89
80
76
95
90
88
88
88
92
88
:
87
87
94
93
94

Not 
safe
5
2
:
4
2
4
7
6
14
6
6
12
7
8
9
2
7
9
2
4
4
2
:
10
6
2
3
3

Safe
76
81
:
73
71
80
58
75
74
85
70
63
47
83
72
76
70
65
73
69
76
73
:
80
71
83
80
85

Not 
safe
12
14
:
16
10
13
15
5
18
8
10
20
15
9
19
9
14
24
16
8
10
9
:
10
19
4
10
8

Safe
70
83
:
73
69
75
48
68
68
81
69
58
-
67
64
69
66
-
68
67
58
63
:
78
69
79
77
73

Not 
safe
14
9
:
17
7
16
7
4
16
7
11
21
-
6
12
10
9
-
21
9
20
5
:
6
15
2
9
15

Safe
89
96
:
87
96
91
81
94
80
86
93
80
92
93
82
94
92
88
88
88
86
88
:
73
87
96
89
96

Source: ‘Consumers’ opinions on services of general interest’, Special Eurobarometer 219,  European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

115

Consumers.indb   115
Consumers.indb   115

08.04.2009   09:49:43
08.04.2009   09:49:43

VII

Quality and safety

Figure 1.72: RAPEX, product notifi cations 
concerning safety: by product category, 
Europe, 2007 (1)
(%)

Others
30%

Toys
31%

Cosmetics
6%

Lighting 
equipment
6%

Motor 
vehicles
15%

Electrical 
appliances
12%

(1) EU-27, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.

Source: Keeping consumers safe, Annual report 2007, RAPEX

survey  of 
recent  Eurobarometer 
A  more 
consumer  protection  in  the  internal  market 
carried  out  in  early  2008  shows  that  some  50 % 
of  EU-27  respondents  cited  safety  as  a  factor 
when asked which factors (up to three responses 
allowed) played an important role in determining 
purchases  of  non-food  items.  Safety  was  oft en 
the second most important criteria for deciding 
which non-food item to buy behind price.

In  the  same  survey,  when  asked  whether  they 
thought non-food items were safe, 17 % of EU-27 
consumers  replied  that  essentially  all  products 
are  safe,  48 %  thought  that  a  small  number  of 
items are unsafe, while 18 % said that a signifi cant 
number  are  unsafe,  the  remaining  17 %  replied 
that they either did not know or that it depends 
on the product in question.

Th  e same survey conducted in early 2008 shows 
that  2 %  of  EU-27  consumers  said  that  they 
personally  or  an  immediate  member  of  their 
family had suff ered an injury or an accident from 
a defective product during the two years prior to 
the survey; across the Member States the range of 
values was from 1 % to 4 %.

Figure 1.73: RAPEX, product notifi cations concerning safety: by country of notifi cation, 2007 (1)
(% of EU-27)

15

12

9

6

3

0

DE EL SK HU ES UK FR FI CZ NL BG IT PL IE LT SI DK EE PT RO BE SE LV AT CY MT LU

(1) EU-27 notiﬁ cations, 2007: 1 347.

Source: Keeping consumers safe, Annual report 2007, RAPEX

116

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   116
Consumers.indb   116

08.04.2009   09:49:44
08.04.2009   09:49:44

Quality and safety

VII

Figure 1.74: RAPEX, product notifi cations concerning safety: by 
origin of product, Europe, 2007 (1)
(%)

United 
Kingdom
2%

France
2%

Poland
2%

United 
States
2%

Japan
2%

Taiwan
2%

Others
14%

Italy
4%

Germany
6%

Unknown
13%

(1) EU-27, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.

Source: Keeping consumers safe, Annual report 2007, RAPEX

China
51%

Aside  from  consumer  surveys,  the  safety  of 
consumer  goods  and  services  can  also  be 
measured  by  statistical  information  relating  to 
accidents and injuries, as well as information on 
dangerous  products.  Th  e  RAPEX  annual  report 
provides data on the number of dangerous (non-
food) consumer product notifi cations across the 
EEA.  Almost  one  third  (31 %)  of  these  were  for 
toys  in  2007,  while  motor  vehicles  (15 %)  and 
electrical  appliances  (12 %)  were  the  only  other 
product  categories  to  account  for  a  double-digit 
share of total notifi cations.

Note that the level of product notifi cations will, 
at least to some degree, refl ect the frequency with 
which certain goods are checked, and that the data 
presented gives no indication as to the percentage 
of  notifi cations  in  relation  to  the  number  of 
inspections. In a similar vein, the breakdown of 
notifi cations between Member States may refl ect 
the  size  of  a  country,  the  number  of  goods  that 
are checked in each country, or the thoroughness 
of the checks carried out, and do not necessarily 
show  which  countries  have  a  higher  proportion 
of  dangerous  consumer  goods.  Just  over  half 
(51 %) of all the dangerous product notifi cations 
recorded  in  the  EEA  in  2007  concerned  goods 
originating from China.

Table 1.76: Injuries from all types of accidents: breakdown by product involved in the accident, 2005-2006
(% of all injuries)

Building, building component, or related fitting
Land vehicle or means of land transport
Ground surface or surface conformation
Animal, plant, or person
Tool, machine, apparatus mainly work-related
Furniture/furnishing
Utensil or container
Equipment mainly used in sports/recreation
Appliance mainly used in household
Infant or child product
Item mainly for personal use
Hot object/substance n.e.c.
Food, drink
Pharmaceuticals for human use, i.e. drug, medicine
Other non-pharmaceutical chemical substance
Mobile machinery or special purpose vehicle
Fire, flame, smoke
Medical/surgical device
Weapon
Other

Source: All injuries in Europe – pilot data 2005-2006 - Injuries Database

BE
13.3
9.5
17.8
18.6
4.5
7.4
4.6
4.2
1.4
1.2
2.1
0.3
1.8
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.2
1.4
0.5
9.2

CZ
13.5
7.3
2.9
14.9
1.8
3.7
1.3
4.9
0.9
1.2
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.3
46.1

EE
9.3
4.0
1.9
0.0
2.6
2.7
1.1
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.1
76.0

CY
33.8
10.4
2.4
0.0
4.6
4.9
6.0
0.0
3.7
3.0
1.4
1.9
0.3
1.7
1.0
0.5
0.2
0.2
0.3
23.7

LV
14.8
6.8
11.3
0.0
7.3
3.6
2.9
0.0
1.1
1.0
0.3
2.0
0.9
0.1
0.4
0.3
1.4
0.0
0.1
45.7

MT
16.3
9.6
6.8
0.0
7.6
3.9
3.5
0.0
1.0
0.6
1.2
0.7
1.0
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
46.5

  Consumers in Europe

117

Consumers.indb   117
Consumers.indb   117

08.04.2009   09:49:44
08.04.2009   09:49:44

A  pilot  study  provides  a  limited  data  set  with 
information  on  the  products  responsible  for 
injuries and accidents; statistical work in this area 
is  being  developed  and  is  currently  focused  on 
agreeing a harmonised classifi cation for causes of 
injuries and accidents.

Th  e  data  collected  so  far  may  be  split  into  two 
distinct areas, information covering all accidents, 
and that covering home and leisure accidents. For 
the former, some of the most oft en cited products 
involved  in  accidents  include  buildings  and 
their  fi ttings,  vehicles,  tools  and  machines,  and 
furniture,  while  for  home  and  leisure  accidents 
the most common products involved in accidents 
include  bicycles,  balls,  doors,  skis,  furniture, 
ladders and kitchen utensils.

VII

Quality and safety

Table 1.77: Consumer products involved in home and leisure 
accidents, 2005-2006 (1)
(% of all accidents)

All home and leisure accidents

Bicycle and accessories
Ball
Door
Ski
Chair/bench
Bed
Stationary equip. in playground
Rolling sports equipment
Ladder/scaffold
Gymnastic/body-building equip.

Do-it-yourself accidents

Ladder/scaffold
Drilling
Sawing
Motor vehicle
Striking/hewing/hammering

Domestic work accidents

Kitchen utensils (not electric)
Cutlery and tableware
Household machines
Ladder/scaffold
Chair/bench

Play and leisure activities
Bicycle and accessories
Stationary equip. in playground
Door
Rolling sports equipment
Chair/bench

(%)

3.3
3.2
2.3
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.3
1.2

11.7
7.0
5.3
3.9
3.6

10.7
5.0
4.2
4.2
3.1

4.9
4.3
3.1
2.9
2.7

Most 
reported
injury

Contusion/bruise
Distortion/sprain
Contusion/bruise
Fracture
Contusion/bruise
Contusion/bruise
Fracture
Fracture
Fracture
Contusion/bruise

Fracture
Open wound
Open wound
Open wound
Open wound

Open wound
Open wound
Open wound
Fracture
Fracture

Contusion/bruise
Fracture
Contusion/bruise
Fracture
Contusion/bruise

(1) Based on information for Denmark, France, Austria and Sweden for the period 2003-2005. 

Source: Injuries in the European Union, statistics summary 2003-2005, Injuries Database 
(https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/idb)

118

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   118
Consumers.indb   118

08.04.2009   09:49:45
08.04.2009   09:49:45

Externalities

VIII

EXTERNALITIES

An  externality  occurs  when  an  activity  causes 
external costs, or results in external benefi ts, for 
a third party. Examples of negative externalities 
include: a manufacturing enterprise that generates 
air and water pollution as a by-product; a smoker in 
an enclosed space; or, a person consuming alcohol 
and then having a driving accident which injures 
or  kills  someone  else.  Positive  externalities  can 
result in benefi ts for a wider public, for example, 
cooling water from power stations increasing fi sh 
stocks, or a vaccination programme may reduce 
the  risks  of  contracting  a  disease  –  not  only  for 
those who receive the vaccination, but also other 
people who did not receive the vaccination, as the 
risk of contracting the disease is reduced.

When presented with enough information on the 
impact of their lifestyle choices, some consumers 
are  empowered  to  change  their  consumption 
patterns, for example, to foster a more sustainable 
lifestyle  or  improve  their  health  –  oft en  these 
choices involve positive externalities. On the other 
hand, other consumers are not willing to give up 
items  that  defi ne  their  way  of  life,  for  example: 
running  a  car  with  high  fuel  consumption, 
making several short leisure trips by plane each 
year, or buying fresh fruit all the year around – all 
of which involve negative externalities.

Governments  can  infl uence  the  behaviour  of 
individuals,  for  example,  by  declaring  certain 
actions  illegal  (smoking  in  public  places),  or  by 
changing the tax and subsidy regime to encourage 
a  diff erent  pattern  of  consumption  (increasing 
excise  duty  on  alcohol).  Governments  can  also 
try  to  shape  consumption  patterns  by  giving 
information  on  energy-effi  cient  appliances,  or 
by  taxing  environmental  damage  through  fuel 
surcharges or levies on the disposal of household 
appliances.  Another 
idea  currently  under 
consideration in a number of the Member States 
is  carbon  trading  systems  for  individuals.  Th  is 
would  require  individuals  to  manage  their  own 
carbon dioxide emissions, with emissions rights 
(in  the  form  of  carbon  credits)  being  allocated 
across  the  population;  those  who  needed  to, 
or  wanted  to  emit  more  than  their  allowance 
would  have  to  buy  additional  allowances  from 
those  who  emit  less.  In  a  similar  vein  there  are 
also a number of companies that operate similar, 
voluntary schemes.

Environment

Th  e  level  of  air  pollution  within  the  EU  varies 
considerably between, as well as within, countries. 
One  measure  is  based  on  the  calculation  of 
average  ozone  concentrations  (during  8  hour 
periods)  from  which  the  highest  average  each 
day is recorded: the highest value (in 2005) was 
recorded in Greece, more than 30 times as high 
as in Latvia, which had the lowest levels. In terms 
of  particulate  matter,  the  diff erences  between 
countries were less marked, with the highest level 
recorded in Italy, just over three times as high as 
in Ireland.

Table 1.78: Urban population exposure to 
air pollution, 2005 

Ozone
 (micrograms 
per m3 * day) (1)
2 688
:
5 531
1 472
3 323
1 328
:
9 625
4 089
4 245
7 748
:
307
5 047
:
5 091
:
1 490
5 730
4 022
3 894
:
6 053
7 430
1 692
2 851
1 250
66
:

Particulate matter 
(micrograms 
per m3 ) (2)
30.9
:
39.8
23.4
24.2
20.7
13.8
41.1
31.7
20.4
42.8
:
:
22.9
:
37.7
:
32.0
28.9
39.4
34.8
:
36.4
33.2
15.3
19.5
23.6
19.6
18.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

(1) Population weighted annual sum of maximum daily 8-hour 
mean ozone concentrations above a threshold (70 micrograms 
of ozone per m³).
(2) Population weighted annual mean concentration of particulate 
matter.

Source: Eurostat, Structural indicators (strind_t)

  Consumers in Europe

119

Consumers.indb   119
Consumers.indb   119

08.04.2009   09:49:45
08.04.2009   09:49:45

 
VIII

Externalities

income  and 

living 
Eurostat’s  statistics  on 
conditions  (EU-SILC)  provide  information  on 
consumer  perceptions  in  relation  to  pollution, 
grime  and  other  environmental  problems 
caused  by  traffi  c  or  industry.  Less  than  10 %  of 
respondents  in  Ireland,  Austria,  Denmark  and 
Sweden were concerned by the pollution, grime or 
other  environmental  problems  caused  by  traffi  c 
or industry in 2006; this could be contrasted with 
shares of 31 % in Latvia, rising to a high of almost 
40 % in Malta.

A  survey  conducted  across  the  main  European 
cities  reveals  that,  aside  from  Luxembourg,  a 
majority of respondents were of the opinion that 
air  pollution  was  a  big  problem  in  their  capital 
city in 2006. A similar pattern was observed for 
noise  pollution,  with  a  majority  of  respondents 
agreeing  it  was  a  problem  in  every  capital  city 
other than Luxembourg and Stockholm.

Table 1.79: Perception survey results concerning pollution and noise in capital cities, 2006

Air pollution 
is a big 
problem
 here
 (synthetic 
index 0-100)
82.2
92.2
84.8
74.8
67.8
69.7
60.2
94.6
89.0
87.9
92.7
83.3
75.4
86.7
48.1
83.6
94.3
78.8
52.2
81.5
87.4
91.2
76.5
73.9
62.6
56.4
86.1
53.7

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Ankara

Summer smog: 
ozone 
concentrations 
exceed 120 
microgram/m3
(number of days)
:
:
19
0
6
0
:
:
28
11
48
5
0
2
:
11
:
4
23
8
12
26
31
22
4
1
3
:

Nitrogen dioxide 
concentrations 
exceed 200 
microgram/m3
(number of days)
0
:
0
0
0
0
:
:
0
0
0
0
0
0
:
0
:
0
0
0
5
63
0
0
0
0
1
:

Particulate 
matter 
concentrations 
exceed 50 
microgram/m3
(number of days)
15
:
51
2
17
8
:
:
47
3
13
183
:
19
:
33
:
24
21
38
55
147
88
40
3
3
9
164

Noise is a 
problem: 
agree 
(somewhat+ 
strongly)
(%)
62.5
79.8
77.9
63.2
60.3
62.4
60.1
91.7
85.6
75.4
81.3
79.6
61.2
68.0
36.8
81.3
79.8
56.2
53.8
78.4
81.4
80.6
66.5
65.6
53.6
45.4
76.7
59.2

Source: Eurostat, Perception survey results and data collected for core cities (urb_percep and urb_vcity)

120

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   120
Consumers.indb   120

08.04.2009   09:49:46
08.04.2009   09:49:46

Externalities

VIII

Figure 1.75: Consumer perceptions: do you feel that the pollution, grime or other environmental problems 
caused by traffi  c or industry are a problem in your area, 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

100%

75%

50%

25%

0%

MT LV DE CY IT

SI

EE PT SK CZ LU EL

ES FR BE NL LT

FI

PL HU UK IE AT DK SE

IS NO

No

Yes

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC cross sectional 2006 data

Waste

Aside from damage to the environment in terms 
of pollution, one of the other main by-products of 
consumption is waste; households are estimated 
to  have  accounted  for  just  under  8 %  of  all  the 
waste generated in the EU-27 in 2004.

Some  consumers  are  highly  aware  of  the 
implications of their consumption and shopping 
practices,  and  consider  not  only  the  product 
but  its  packaging  when  making  purchases,  for 
example, purchasing loose items rather than pre-
packed products, and using their own shopping 
bags or containers rather than disposable plastic 
bags.  Nevertheless,  households  continue 
to 
produce  large  quantities  of  waste,  including 
signifi cant  quantities  of  food  that  has  passed 
its  sell-by  date.  Th  e  extent  to  which  households 
separate  waste  also  varies,  infl uenced  not  only 
by  household  members’  willingness  to  sort,  but 
also the availability of collection and processing 
schemes for diff erent waste streams.

On  average  517  kg  of  municipal  waste  was 
generated per person in the EU-27 in 2006, ranging 
from a high of 804 kg in Ireland down to 259 kg 
in Poland. While some forms of household waste 
can  be  reused  or  recycled,  other  waste  streams 
need to be treated and disposed of. An average of 
213 kg of waste per person was placed in landfi ll 
sites in the EU-27 in 2006, while a further 98 kg 
of waste per person was incinerated.

Table 1.80: Generation of waste from households, 2004

Household 
waste 
(thousand
 tonnes)
211 666
5 325
2 634
2 841
2 016
38 008
402
1 702
4 213
24 410
26 432
31 150
367
543
602
221
4 442
100
9 440
3 441
6 768
4 583
3 638
661
1 475
1 164
4 079
31 007
29 225
141
1 934

of which:
Non-
hazardous (%)
99.3
93.2
100.0
99.2
100.0
99.3
99.0
100.0
100.0
99.8
99.9
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.1
100.0
98.0
96.9
97.8
100.0
99.7
100.0
99.8
99.8
99.6
90.9
99.9
100.0
100.0
99.6

Household waste 
as a proportion 
of total waste
 (%)
7.7
10.1
1.0
9.7
15.7
10.4
1.9
6.9
14.6
15.2
6.5
22.3
24.1
43.2
11.4
2.7
18.0
4.0
10.8
6.5
4.9
15.7
1.0
11.5
13.8
1.6
3.9
8.7
49.7
28.2
25.9

EU-27 (1)
BE (1)
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL (1)
ES
FR (1)
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU (1)
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Generation of waste by economic sector and households (env_wasgen) and 
population by sex and age on 1 January of each year (demo_pjan)

  Consumers in Europe

121

Consumers.indb   121
Consumers.indb   121

08.04.2009   09:49:46
08.04.2009   09:49:46

VIII

Externalities

Figure 1.76: Perception survey results 
concerning cleanliness of capital cities, 2006
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75% 100%

Luxembourg

Wien

Riga

Ankara

Ljubljana

Helsinki

Vilnius

Zagreb

Lefkosia

Tallinn

Stockholm

Madrid

Amsterdam

København

Paris

Lisboa

Bruxelles / Brussel

London

Praha

Berlin

Dublin

Athina

Warszawa

Roma

Valletta

Bratislava

Bucureşti

Budapest

Sofia

Clean-city: agree
(strongly+somewhat)

Clean-city: disagree
(strongly+somewhat)

Don't know, non-response

Source: Eurostat, Perception survey results and data collected 
for core cities (urb_percep and urb_vcity)

A  perception  survey  conducted  in  2006  asked 
respondents  whether  or  not  they  thought  they 
lived in a ‘clean’ city. A high proportion (91.6 %) 
of respondents living in Luxembourg agreed that 
their city was clean, while around three quarters of 
the residents of Vienna and Riga also gave positive 
replies. Th  e other Baltic and Scandinavian capital 
cities  were  among  those  to  report  a  majority  of 
respondents agreeing that their city was clean, as 
was  the  case  for  residents  of  Ankara,  Ljubljana, 
Zagreb,  and  Nicosia.  At  the  other  end  of  the 
ranking, almost nine out of ten (89.6 %) residents 
in Sofi a disagreed with the premise that their city 
was clean, a share that stood close to eight of ten 
in Bucharest and Budapest.

Table 1.81: Waste generation and 
treatment, 2006
(kg per person)

Municipal 
waste
 generated 
517
475
446
296
737
566
466
804
443
583
553
548
745
411
390
702
468
652
625
617
259
435
385
432
301
488
497
588
434
534
793
715

Municipal 
waste 
landfilled
213
24
356
234
37
4
278
471
386
289
192
284
652
292
356
131
376
562
12
59
236
274
326
362
234
286
25
353
364
370
245
1

Municipal 
waste 
incinerated
98
155
0
29
405
179
1
0
0
41
183
65
0
2
0
266
39
0
213
181
1
95
0
3
36
42
233
55
0
47
132
355

EU-27
BE (1)
BG
CZ
DK (1)
DE (1)
EE (1)
IE (1)
EL
ES (1)
FR (1)
IT (1)
CY
LV
LT
LU (1)
HU
MT
NL
AT (1)
PL
PT (1)
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS (1)
NO
CH

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Structural indicators (strind_t)

122

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   122
Consumers.indb   122

08.04.2009   09:49:47
08.04.2009   09:49:47

Consumer representation and protection

IX

CONSUMER REPRESENTATION AND PROTECTION

Dissatisfi ed  consumers  who  wish  to 
lodge 
complaints or seek some form of protection may 
be  deterred  from  doing  so  by  the  fact  that  they 
oft en have to take action as an individual. A recent 
Eurobarometer  survey  of  consumer  protection 
in the internal market found that 76 % of EU-27 
consumers in early 2008 agreed that they would 
be more willing to defend their rights in court if 
they could join with other consumers who were 
complaining about the same thing. Furthermore, 
individual  consumers  may  lack  information, 
time,  knowledge,  confi dence,  or  fi nance  to  seek 
protection in the courts or through other forms of 
redress. As a result, consumer interests are oft en 
defended  collectively  by  representative  bodies, 
in  a  similar  vein  to  employee  interests  being 
defended by trades unions, or business interests 
through trade or business organisations.

Table 1.82: Financial resources of national 
consumer organisations, 2006 (1)
(EUR thousand)

Total 
funding
1 673
30
750
:
:
51
65
250
:
7 379
:
:
30
72
830
946
0
438
2 235
556
200
40
374
70
521
965
:

Average funding 
per consumer 
organisation 
112
3
75
:
:
10
65
6
:
224
:
:
30
10
830
38
0
438
745
111
15
40
62
10
261
321
:

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Source: national governments, provided to Directorate-General for 
Health and Consumers, European Commission

Representation

When consumer representative groups work for 
the benefi t of a collective body of consumers, they 
have  the  potential  to  exert  signifi cant  pressure 
on  businesses  and  governments.  At  the  same 
time, many consumer groups play an important 
role in making consumers aware of their rights. 
Th  e  European  Commission  believes  that  the 
involvement  of  these  organisations  is  important 
to  develop  eff ective  legislation  refl ecting  the 
needs of all stakeholders.

Consumer  organisations  have  the  potential  to 
help consumers make sense of a growing volume 
of information on a range of increasingly complex 
goods and services, helping markets function more 
effi  ciently,  and  providing  eff ective  representation 
and protection. Most consumer organisations seek 
to  promote,  defend  and  represent  the  interests 
of  consumers  –  generally  they  provide  services, 
such  as  information,  advice  and  legal  assistance. 
However,  a  number  also  carry  out  product 
testing,  provide  education  and  training,  engage 
in consumer-based research, or contribute to the 
development of consumer legislation.

Th  ere  is  a  vast  array  of  diff erent  consumer 
organisations  across  the  EU,  ranging  in  size, 
capacity and goals, oft en dependent on historical 
and legal diff erences between Member States. Th  e 
fi nancial  resources  made  available  to  consumer 
organisations  vary  considerably,  as  does  the 
number  of  organisations  that  receive  public 
funding.  A  list  of  consumers’  organisations 
in  each  Member  State  can  be  found  at:  http://
ec.europa.eu/consumers/cons_org/associations/
national/index_en.htm.

It  is  equally  diffi  cult  to  measure  the  number 
of  consumers  who  are  represented  by  these 
consumer organisations: either in terms of their 
membership  (some  require  individual,  family 
or  household  membership,  while  others  do  not 
have any formal membership status); or in terms 
of  the  number  of  cases  that  are  dealt  with  each 
year. Generally membership levels are thought to 
be relatively low, with only a handful of northern 
European  countries  reporting  in  excess  of  10 % 
of their population being members of a consumer 
representative group.

European Community funding helps the activities 
of the European Association for the Coordination 
of  Consumer  Representation  in  Standardisation 

  Consumers in Europe

123

Consumers.indb   123
Consumers.indb   123

08.04.2009   09:49:48
08.04.2009   09:49:48

IX

Consumer representation and protection

and 

the  European  Consumers’ 
(ANEC) 
Organisation/Bureau  Européen  des  Unions  des 
Consommateurs  (BEUC).  ANEC  (www.anec.eu) 
is  a  voice  for  European  consumers  in  relation  to 
standardisation  and  certifi cation,  while  BEUC 
(www.beuc.org) defends and promotes the interests 
of European consumers as purchasers or users of 
goods and services; note that these pan-European 
organisations generally represent the views of their 
national  consumer  bodies,  rather  than  dealing 
with queries from individual consumers.

Th  e  European  Consumer  Centres  Network 
(ECC-Net)  helps  consumers  with  cross-border 
disputes  and  was  set  up  in  January  2005  by  the 
European  Commission 
in  cooperation  with 
national  authorities.  Th  ese  consumer  centres 
give  information  and  advice  on  problems  with 
shopping  across  borders  and  intervene  when 
problems arise. A full listing of ECC-Net offi  ces 

can  be  found  at:  http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/
redress/ecc_network/index_en.htm.

A  consumer  survey  conducted  by  Eurobarometer 
in  2006  showed  that  there  was  a  relatively  low 
proportion of European consumers aware of a range 
of services launched by the European Commission 
to promote consumer protection and inform citizens 
of  their  rights;  generally  the  most  well-known 
services  were  the  ECC-Net  and  Europe  Direct, 
for  which  more  information  may  be  obtained  at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm.

A more recent Eurobarometer survey conducted 
in early 2008 asked if respondents had heard of 
the European Consumer Centres (Euroguichets). 
Th  is  showed  that,  on  average,  some  15 %  of  the 
EU-27  population  were  aware  of  the  service, 
which was somewhat higher than the 11 % share 
recorded for the EU-25 in 2006.

Table 1.83: The European Commission off ers the following services to help citizens 
concerning their rights in the Single Market; which of the following services 
have you heard of, 2006
(% of respondents, multiple answers possible)

Your 
Europe
4
8
:
5
3
4
4
9
4
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
4
8
8
6
7
3
:
7
12
10
9
2

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Citizens 
Signpost 
Service
3
2
:
6
1
1
1
5
3
6
1
4
9
2
5
1
5
3
2
9
4
2
:
7
7
10
4
2

SOLVIT
2
3
:
1
1
1
2
6
2
2
0
4
2
1
2
4
2
5
4
5
2
2
:
4
2
2
2
3

European 
Consumer 
Centres 
(Euro-
guichets)
11
13
:
16

19
9
12
16
8
9
5
18
10
12
19
6
9
6
18
17
9
:
12
17
10
30
6

FIN-
NET
2
2
:
4
2
3
4
2
4
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
1
2
4
2
1
3
:
3
4
5
2
1

Europe 
Direct
6
3
:
8
128
6
8
10
1
5
6
3
16
7
3
8
8
10
6
5
5
4
:
6
14
6
16
6

None 
69
75
:
55
73
72
64
57
72
72
76
62
58
66
54
63
66
58
72
50
64
73
:
69
47
65
55
77

Don't 
know
9
1
:
14
5
3
17
15
3
12
6
18
10
13
24
7
15
19
6
13
9
14
:
5
15
6
2
7

Source: ‘Internal Market, 2006’, Special Eurobarometer 254, European Commission

124

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   124
Consumers.indb   124

08.04.2009   09:49:48
08.04.2009   09:49:48

Consumer representation and protection

IX

Protection

Consumer  protection  extends  beyond  trying  to 
ensure that goods and services are safe, and covers 
a range of issues that touch on economic interests, 
as well as the health and safety. It is considered by 
policy  makers  when  developing  legislation  for  a 
range of issues, for example, from food safety to 
the liberalisation of services of general interest, or 
from the introduction of the euro to advertising 
claims.

More  specifi cally,  consumer  confi dence  may 
be  expected  to  increase  as  a  result  of  consumer 
protection  and  consumer  rights  being  upheld. 
Th  e central theme of most consumer protection 
legislation is to guarantee that dangerous goods 
or  malicious  practices  are  uncovered  and  taken 
off  the market as quickly as possible. Consumer 
protection 
introduced 
legislation  has  been 
at  a  pan-European  level  to  cover  areas  such 
as  unfair  commercial  practices 
(Directive 
2005/29/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and 
of  the  Council  concerning  unfair  business-to-
consumer  commercial  practices  in  the  internal 
market)  and  consumer  protection  co-operation 
(Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  co-operation 
between  national  authorities  responsible  for  the 
enforcement of consumer protection laws).

EU  consumers  have  the  same  basic  rights  in  all 
Member  States,  for  example,  the  right:  to  buy 
what they want where they want; to expect goods 
and  services  to  be  safe;  to  return  faulty  goods; 
to  change  their  mind  aft er  having  purchased 
something;  and  to  have  redress  in  cross-border 
disputes.  If  a  consumer  believes  that  the  law  is 
being broken – for example, fraudulent labelling, 
misleading  advertising,  unfair  contract  terms, 
the absence of a clear price on goods, or an unsafe 
product  –  they  can  take  their  complaint  to  the 
national  authority  responsible  for  monitoring 
that  market,  or  to  a  consumers’  representative 
organisation.  Oft en  the  problems  encountered 
can  be  resolved  by  simply  complaining  to  the 
supplier,  manufacturer  or  distributor  directly. 
Otherwise, out-of-court settlements can be aided 
by contacting an ombudsman, going to arbitration, 
or contacting a conciliation organisation. In the 
event  that  a  dispute  cannot  be  resolved,  then  a 
case can be pursued before the courts, although 
this  may  involve  high  costs  and  considerable 
delays; in response to this, some Member States 
have  established  simplifi ed  judicial  proceedings 
that deal more rapidly with small claims.

Th  e  European  Commission  has  launched  a 
debate  on  the  need  for  a  collective  redress 
mechanism in the EU. A European group action 
procedure  would  allow  a  number  of  consumers 
to bring a case together before a court to obtain 
compensation for a damage caused by the same 
trader.  It  is  argued  that  this  could  improve 
competitiveness  as  a  result  of  changing  the  way 
the internal market functions, giving consumers 
more  confi dence  to  shop  abroad,  facilitating 
access  to  justice,  minimising  litigation  costs, 
reducing  discrimination,  and  being  generally 
advantageous to compliant businesses.

A Eurobarometer survey conducted in early 2008 
shows  that  54 %  of  respondents  in  the  EU-27 
thought  that  public  authorities  protected  their 
consumer  rights,  while  64 %  of  respondents 
agreed that independent consumer organisations 
protected their rights.

A  Eurobarometer  survey  conducted  in  2006 
showed  that  a  higher  proportion  of  consumers 
in  the  EU-15  Member  States  agreed  that  they 
had  adequate  consumer  protection 
(57 %), 
compared  with  a  share  of  43 %  among  the  ten 
Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  in  2004.  Th  e 

Figure 1.77: To what extent do you 
trust consumer organisations and public 
authorities to protect your rights as a 
consumer, EU-27, 2008
(% of respondents)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Totally
agree

Tend to
agree

Tend to
disagree

Totally
disagree

Don't
know

Consumer organisations

Public authorities

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, 
Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

125

Consumers.indb   125
Consumers.indb   125

08.04.2009   09:49:49
08.04.2009   09:49:49

IX

Consumer representation and protection

same  question  was  posed  in  early  2008  and  the 
results were quite similar. Of the Member States 
that joined the EU since 2004 (including Bulgaria 
and Romania), only Cyprus and Malta reported 
a  higher  proportion  of  respondents  (compared 
with the EU-27 average, 51 %) agreeing that they 
had adequate consumer protection. At least two 
thirds of consumers in the Netherlands, Denmark, 
Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom agreed 
that they were adequately protected.

When asked if they thought the internal market 
increased  consumer  protection  within 
had 

the  EU-25,  some  53 %  of  respondents  agreed 
(compared  with  21 %  who  disagreed).  Th  e 
highest proportion of respondents in agreement 
was recorded in Slovenia and Cyprus (both 69 %), 
while all of the other Member States that joined the 
EU in 2004 also reported shares above the EU-25 
average. At the other end of the ranking, less than 
half  of  those  questioned  in  Germany,  Sweden, 
France, Austria and the United Kingdom agreed 
that the internal market had increased consumer 
protection, while as many as 34 % of respondents 
in both France and Austria disagreed.

Figure 1.78: To what extent do you agree 
that you are adequately protected by 
existing measures to protect consumers, 
2008
(% of respondents)

Figure 1.79: Do you agree or disagree that 
the internal market rules have increased 
consumer protection within the European 
Union, 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

NL

DK

FI

SE

UK

BE

DE

AT

LU

IE

ES

CY

MT

EU-27

EE

HU

CZ

PL

SI

SK

FR

IT

LV

PT

RO

EL

LT

BG

SI

CY

HU

CZ

PL

BE

EL

SK

PT

NL

LT

FI

EE

IE

MT

ES

LU

LV

EU-25

IT

DK

DE

SE

FR

AT

UK

Agree

Disagree

Don't know

Agree

Disagree

Don't know

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, 
Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the internal market’, 
Special Eurobarometer 252, European Commission

126

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   126
Consumers.indb   126

08.04.2009   09:49:50
08.04.2009   09:49:50

Consumer representation and protection

IX

Almost  six  out  of  every  ten  (59 %)  consumers 
in  the  EU-27  agreed  that  sellers  and  providers 
of  goods  and  services  from  their  home  country 
respected  their  consumer  rights  in  2008.  Th  is 
ratio rose to more than seven out of ten persons 
in Finland (the highest proportion of consumers 
in  agreement,  88 %),  the  Benelux  countries, 
Sweden,  the  United  Kingdom  and  Germany.  Of 
the Member States that joined the EU since 2004, 
Estonia and Slovenia were the only ones to record 
a  higher  proportion  of  consumers  agreeing  that 
their  rights  were  respected  by  sellers/providers 
than  the  EU-27  average;  by  far  the  lowest  levels 
were reported in Bulgaria, where only one in fi ve 
respondents agreed their rights were respected by 
sellers/providers in 2008.

Some  15 %  of  EU-25  consumers  questioned 
in  2006  reported  that  during  the  previous  12 
months they had tried to replace, repair, ask for a 
price reduction, or cancel a contract within their 
warranty rights. A similar proportion (15 %) had 

tried  to  return  a  product  or  cancel  a  contract 
within  the  cooling-off   period,  aft er  having 
purchased something by Internet, phone or post 
in  their  own  country  or  elsewhere  in  EU,  while 
14 % of respondents stated they had tried to return 
a product or cancel a contract having purchased 
something from a sales representative.

When asked if they had been unduly coerced or 
pressurised  to  purchase  something  or  sign  up 
to  a  contract,  13 %  of  EU-25  consumers  agreed, 
while one in ten said they had come across unfair 
consumer contract terms, particularly in standard 
contracts  or  terms  and  conditions  in  their  own 
country  or  elsewhere  in  EU.  It  is  interesting  to 
note that the proportion of consumers trying to 
return  goods  was  oft en  relatively  high  in  those 
countries which also reported a high proportion 
of  consumers  agreeing  that  their  rights  were 
respected  by  sellers  and  providers  of  goods  and 
services (Germany, the Netherlands, Finland and 
Sweden).

Figure 1.80: Do you agree that sellers/providers in your home country respect your rights, 2008
(% of respondents)

100

75

50

25

0

FI

BE NL

SE UK LU DE

EE AT

ES

FR

SI

EU-
27

IE MT DK HU LV SK CY CZ PL

EL

PT

IT

LT RO BG

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

127

Consumers.indb   127
Consumers.indb   127

08.04.2009   09:49:51
08.04.2009   09:49:51

IX

Consumer representation and protection

Table 1.84: Consumers’ behaviour with respect to returns and contract terms, during the previous 12 months, 
2006
(% of respondents)

Tried to 
replace,
repair, ask
 for a price
reduction,
or cancel a
contract within
warranty rights
15
13
:
32
32
23
15
4
8
10
11
11
4
14
12
12
13
14
24
18
13
6
:
14
23
23
20
17

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
EL
ES
FR
IE
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Tried to return a 
product or cancel a 
contract within 
cooling-off period, 
after having 
purchased something 
by Internet, phone or 
post in own country 
or elsewhere in EU
15
17
:
19
9
24
21
5
9
11
11
14
6
13
8
11
10
8
18
18
5
9
:
22
10
24
15
14

Tried to return a
product or cancel a
contract within
cooling-off period,
 after having
purchased something
from a sales 
representative at 
home or workplace
14
5
:
15
8
13
14
4
15
13
22
24
36
8
7
6
10
3
6
30
7
17
:
21
6
17
8
12

Were unduly
coerced or 
pressurised to purchase 
something
or sign up 
to a contract
13
13
:
16
2
11
13
19
9
16
15
17
7
24
8
10
5
13
7
10
14
9
:
14
14
11
7
15

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the internal market’, Special Eurobarometer 252, European Commission

Came across 
unfair consumer
contract terms,
 particularly in
 standard contracts 
or terms and
conditions 
in own country or 
elsewhere in EU
10
11
:
28
8
10
8
4
7
14
9
10
10
7
10
8
12
7
8
12
12
3
:
7
18
12
8
9

128

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   128
Consumers.indb   128

08.04.2009   09:49:51
08.04.2009   09:49:51

As regards dispute resolution, in early 2008 some 
39 % of respondents in the EU-27 thought that it 
was easy to resolve disputes with sellers/providers 
from  their  own  country  through  out-of-court 
settlements 
involving  arbitration,  mediation 
or  conciliation  bodies,  while  less  than  a  third 
(30 %) agreed that it was easy to resolve a dispute 
through the courts.

Consumer representation and protection

IX

Table 1.85: Consumers’ opinions regarding dispute resolution 
with sellers/providers from their home country, 2008
(% of respondents)

Agree they would be 
more willing to defend 
their rights in court if 
they could join with 
other consumers who 
were complaining 
about the same thing
76
86
48
77
87
81
68
65
83
73
85
69
82
64
56
76
50
48
91
71
75
54
46
67
61
78
88
88

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
EL
ES
FR
IE
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Agree it is easy 
to resolve 
disputes 
through
arbitration,
mediation or
 conciliation body
39
51
12
25
47
43
33
36
43
29
46
27
50
32
23
48
34
31
57
38
35
19
29
40
17
47
45
52

Agree it is easy
to resolve
disputes
 through courts
30
41
12
19
46
36
20
31
47
23
30
31
22
26
17
19
18
17
40
28
22
14
22
20
14
24
31
40

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market, 2008’, Special Eurobarometer 298, 
European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

129

Consumers.indb   129
Consumers.indb   129

08.04.2009   09:49:52
08.04.2009   09:49:52

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Consumers.indb   131
Consumers.indb   131

08.04.2009   09:49:52
08.04.2009   09:49:52

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Food  and  beverages  are  amongst  the  most 
important  consumption  items,  satisfying  the 
basic  physiological  needs  related  to  hunger  and 
thirst  and  forming  one  of  the  most  recurrent 
expenditure 
items  for  the  majority  of  EU 
households. Th  e EU has great diversity in its food 
and drink products, and these oft en form a part 
of local, regional, or national, cultural identity.

1.1 Access, choice

Alongside  own  production,  households  source 
food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  mainly  from 
the  retail  network:  market  stalls,  independent 
retailers (grocers, butchers or bakers), and (inter-)
national  chains  of  supermarkets,  hypermarkets 
and  discount  stores  (who  oft en  sell  a  range  of 
products well beyond food and beverages).

Th  e  largest  food  retailers  (see  Table  1.1)  in 
western  and  central  Europe  are,  unsurprisingly, 
from some of the largest Member States, namely 
Germany, France and the United Kingdom. Th  e 
absence of large Italian retailers can be explained 
to  a  large  extent  by  the  relative  importance  of 
independent enterprises within Italian retailing, 
underlined by the low market share of the three 
largest food retailers in Italy (see Table 1.2). Food 
retailing  concentration,  as  measured  by  the 
market  share  of  the  three  largest  retailers,  was 
particularly  high  in  all  of  the  Nordic  countries 
shown in Table 1.2, and was lowest in the southern 
EU Member States.

Th  e growing number of large food retail outlets 
outside of urban centres with dedicated parking 
facilities and integrated transport infrastructure 
has  generally  led  to  a  reduction  in  the  average 
number of shopping trips that are made for food 
each  week.  Indeed,  according  to  a  2008  retail 
satisfaction survey, more than two thirds (68.6 % 
and  66.9 %)  of  European  consumers  regularly 
purchased  fresh  fruit  and  vegetables  or  meat  at 
a supermarket or hypermarket, a share that rose 
to  over  three  quarters  (77 %)  for  non-alcoholic 
beverages – see Figure 1.1. Th  e next most popular 
retail format varied according to the product in 
question, with discount stores used by a relatively 
high  proportion  of  people  shopping  for  non-
alcoholic  beverages,  butchers  by  those  shopping 
for  meat,  and  street  markets  or  farm  shops  by 
those purchasing fresh fruit and vegetables.

Table 1.1: Western and central Europe: 
top 30 grocery retailers, 2006 

Grocery 
sales 
(EUR
 million)
59 732
45 117
37 294
34 036
33 029
29 603
29 167
23 373
23 359
22 627
22 225
20 386
19 788
18 346
15 478
13 262
11 793
11 589
11 288
10 034
8 609
7 247
6 999
6 832
5 917
5 546
4 811
4 721
4 708
4 019

Market 
share
 (%)
6.0
4.5
3.3
3.3
2.9
2.7
4.7
2.1
2.8
2.2
2.2
2.0
2.4
2.0
1.5
1.2
0.9
1.1
1.4
0.9
1.1
0.8
0.9
0.7
1.0
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.5
1.1

Carrefour
Tesco
Schwarz Group
Rewe
Edeka
Aldi
Metro Group
Ahold (1)
Auchan

FR
1
UK
2
DE
3
DE
4
DE
5
DE
6
DE
7
NL
8
FR
9
FR
10 ITM (Intermarché)
FR
11 Casino
UK
12 Sainsbury
FR
13 Leclerc
US
14 Wal-Mart
UK
15 Morrisons (2)
FR
16 Système U
ES
17 Mercadona
SE
18 Coop Norden
DE
19 Tengelmann
IT
20 Coop Italia
CH
21 Migros
BE
22 Louis Delhaize
IS
23 Baugur
24 Coop (CH)
CH
25 Marks & Spencer (3) UK
FI
26 SOK
27 Alliance Boots
UK
FI
28 Kesko
29 El Corte Inglés
ES
30 Co-operative Group UK

(1) Consolidated operations only.
(2) Estimates.
(3) Figures include wholly owned operation in the United 
Kingdom only.

Source: Planet Retail Ltd - www.planetretail.net 

Th  ere  were  quite 
large  diff erences  between 
countries  as  regards  the  most  common  forms 
of  retail  format  –  with  supermarkets  and 
in  Ireland, 
hypermarkets  highly  frequented 
the  Netherlands  and  the  United  Kingdom, 
whereas discount stores were more oft en used in 
Denmark  and  Germany.  Consumers  in  Greece 
and  Romania  favoured  street  markets  or  farm 
shops  for  purchasing  fresh  fruit  and  vegetables, 
while  those  in  Estonia  and  Lithuania  preferred 
this retail format for their meat purchases.

132

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   132
Consumers.indb   132

08.04.2009   09:50:01
08.04.2009   09:50:01

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Table 1.2: Concentration of the three largest food retailers, 2004 (1)

BE
DK
DE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
NL
AT
PT
FI
SE
UK
NO
CH

Number 1
Carrefour
Coop
Edeka
Tesco
Carrefour
Carrefour
Carrefour
Coop
Ahold
Bml-Rewe
Sonae
Kesko
Ica
Tesco
Norgesgruppen
Migros

Number 2
Delhaize
Dansk supermarket
Rewe
Dunnes
Alfa-Beta
Mercadona
Leclerc/Systu
Conad
Laurus
Spar
Jmr
Sok
Axfood
Sainsbury
Coop
Coop

Number 3
Colruyt
Supergros
Aldi
Supervalue
Sklavenitis
Eroski Group
Intermarché
Carrefour
Tsm
Hofer-Aldi
Intermarché
Tradeka
KF
Asda
Hakon
Denner

Market share (%)
68
86
55
58
38
54
64
27
59
68
47
80
91
58
83
77

(1) No data available for those Member States not shown.

Source: ACNielsen, 2004 in ‘Data & trends of the European food and drink industry, 2007’ (CIAA, Confederation of the food and drink industries of the EU)

Figure 1.1: In which of the following places have you or has a member of your household bought the following 
products the most, EU-27, 2008?
(%)

Fresh fruit and vegetables

Meat

Non-alcoholic beverages

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

0

25

50

75

100

   Supermarkets 
& hypermarkets

Discount stores

Street markets /
        farm shops

Greengrocers /
    night-shops

Convenience stores,
part of a retail chain

Department stores

      Petrol stations
(after-hours sales)

          Sales at home 
(door-to-door sales)

Internet

       Mail and 
phone order

   Supermarkets 
& hypermarkets

     Butchers /
night-shops

Discount stores

Convenience stores,
part of a retail chain

Street markets /
        farm shops

Department stores

      Petrol stations
(after-hours sales)

Internet

          Sales at home 
(door-to-door sales)

       Mail and 
phone order

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

   Supermarkets 
& hypermarkets

Discount stores

Convenience stores,
part of a retail chain

Greengrocers /
    night-shops

Department stores

      Petrol stations
(after-hours sales)

Street markets /
        farm shops

          Sales at home 
(door-to-door sales)

Internet

       Mail and 
phone order

  Consumers in Europe

133

Consumers.indb   133
Consumers.indb   133

08.04.2009   09:50:03
08.04.2009   09:50:03

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Figure 1.2: When you go shopping for food, 
what would you say are the most important 
factors that infl uence your choice, EU-25, 
September-October 2005
(%, maximum two answers)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Quality

Price

Appearance/freshness

Taste

You and family’s health

Family preferences

Habit

Food safety

Production methods

Country of origin

Brand name

Convenience/availability

Avoiding food allergies

None

Do not know

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, 
European Commission

A  Eurobarometer  survey  carried  out  in  the 
autumn of 2005 looked in more detail at factors 
infl uencing  choice  when  food  shopping.  By  far 
the  two  most  important  factors  were  price  and 
the  broad  heading  of  quality  (see  Figure  1.2).  A 
number of specifi c issues related to quality were 
also  considered  important,  notably  freshness, 
issues relating to family health, and food safety, 
while  taste  and  family  preferences  were  also 
mentioned  by  more  than  10 %  of  respondents. 
Issues  such  as  production  methods,  or  the 
food’s country of origin were less important, but 
nevertheless  ranked  higher  than  brand  names. 
An  analysis  by  country  indicates  that  price  was 
regarded  as  important  by  a  greater  proportion 
of  respondents  in  Portugal  than  in  any  other 
Member  State,  and  by  the  lowest  proportion 
of  respondents  in  Luxembourg  and  Austria. 
Quality  appeared  to  be  an  important  factor  for 
a large proportion of respondents in Greece and 
Cyprus, while only a relatively small proportion 
of respondents in Poland and the Czech Republic 
considered it an important factor.

A more recent survey carried out in 2008 focused 
on  a  number  of  product  categories,  including 
fresh  fruit  and  vegetables;  respondents  were 
asked  to  rate  a  variety  of  factors  in  relation  to 
their  regular  retailer.  For  each  of  the  diff erent 
criteria,  consumers  gave  generally  favourable 
responses (see Figure 1.3), with the lowest levels 
of satisfaction recorded with respect to the choice 
of  environmentally-friendly,  new  or  innovative, 
or ethically produced fruit and vegetables. Given 
that price and quality are oft en identifi ed as the 
most  important  factors  for  consumer  decision-
making,  it  is  interesting  to  note  the  apparent 
similarities in terms of how consumers rate these 
two  categories  for  fresh  fruit  and  vegetables, 
meat  or  non-alcoholic  beverages.  Consumers  in 
Ireland, Italy and Finland appeared to make the 
largest  distinction  in  favour  of  quality,  whereas 
those in Germany, Latvia and Slovakia placed a 
greater emphasis on price (see Figure 1.4).

134

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   134
Consumers.indb   134

08.04.2009   09:50:04
08.04.2009   09:50:04

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Figure 1.3: Fresh fruit and vegetables: consumer satisfaction with various aspects of choice 
relating to their regular retailer, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

Easy and safe ways to pay

Quick and easy to find products

Can do shopping when it is convenient

Prices are clear and accurate

Safety of produce

Offers a quality service

Privacy is protected

Retailer is trustworthy

Can easily compare prices

Can easily compare quality

Staff are trustworthy

Prices offer reasonable value for money

Products delivered according to purchase

Staff are well-informed

Enough choice at different prices

Enough choice of different qualities

Affordable

Advertising does not deceive or mislead

Product information on labels/packaging

Enough environment-friendly products

Enough new products/innovative ideas

Enough products with specific ethical standards

Have felt unduly coerced or pressurised

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (not at all in agreement) to 10 (totally in agreement).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

  Consumers in Europe

135

Consumers.indb   135
Consumers.indb   135

08.04.2009   09:50:05
08.04.2009   09:50:05

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Figure 1.4: Price and quality: does your regular retailer off er a wide enough choice, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

Fresh fruit and vegetables

Meat

Non-alcoholic beverages

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

0.0

2.5

5.0

7.5

10.0

EU-27
HU
RO
CY
PL
AT
CZ
DE
EL
UK
BE
LT
IE
SK
PT
IT
BG
SI
NL
FI
ES
FR
LU
MT
LV
SE
EE
DK

EU-27
HU
RO
CY
CZ
DE
PL
AT
BE
LT
UK
EL
BG
EE
PT
IE
SI
IT
SK
FI
LU
ES
NL
LV
MT
FR
SE
DK

EU-27
HU
AT
BG
CZ
RO
LT
DE
CY
PL
EL
UK
LU
SK
BE
SI
EE
LV
PT
NL
FI
FR
IT
MT
IE
SE
ES
DK

Price
Quality

Price
Quality

Price
Quality

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

Figure 1.5 concerns one aspect of the combination 
of  price  and  quality,  more  specifi cally  looking 
at  value  for  money  and  relating  this  to  the 
availability  of  own  label  products.  More  than 
half of respondents in all of the countries shown 
regarded  a  large  selection  of  such  products  as 
indicating good value for money.

British consumers’ changing awareness of prices, 
own  brand  products,  and  special  food  products 
are  presented  in  Table  1.3.  While  a  majority  of 
consumers  regarded  price  as  a  more  important 
factor than two years earlier, this increasing price 
awareness was stronger among women than men. 
Equally women were more likely than men to be 
frequent  purchasers  of  own  label  or  economy 
products.  In  a  similar  manner  the  increased 
price  awareness  and  likelihood  of  frequently 
purchasing  own  label  or  economy  products 
was  infl uenced  by  occupational  category,  rising 
from  a  low  among  consumers  in  higher  and 
intermediate  managerial,  administrative  and 

Figure 1.5: In deciding what stores off er 
good value for money, how important is 
it that the store carries a lot of own label 
products that are cheaper, January 2008 (1)
(%, very important/somewhat important)

0

25

50

75

100

EL

DE

PT

IT

ES

AT

NL

FR

CH

(1) No data available for those Member States not shown.

Source: http://www2.acnielsen.com/reports/documents/
Nielsen_GOReport_WEB.pdf

136

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   136
Consumers.indb   136

08.04.2009   09:50:05
08.04.2009   09:50:05

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

professional  positions  to  a  high  among  those 
who  were  semi-skilled  and  unskilled  manual 
workers,  State  pensioners,  widows,  casual  or 
lowest grade workers. About half of the surveyed 
British  consumers  reported  unchanged  levels  of 
spending on special food products (defi ned here 
as organic, fair trade or premium product lines) 
compared  with  two  years  earlier,  while  over 
one  third  reported  increased  spending  on  such 
products.

One particular category of special products that 
has received a lot of attention is organic produce, 
and it is widely accepted that the market share of 
organic produce has increased. Eurostat provides 
data  for  the  vast  majority  of  EU  Member  States 
on the prevalence of organic operators, including 
producers,  processors  and  importers.  By  far 
the  largest  number  of  organic  operators  were 
reported in Italy with 51 000, followed by Greece, 
Germany  and  Austria,  each  with  over  20 000 
such operators (see Table 1.4).

Table 1.3: Factors infl uencing consumer choice in food retailing, United Kingdom, 
December 2006 (1)
(%)

Compared to two years ago to what extent do low prices influence 
your decision about which supermarket you visit?

Gender

Occupational 
category (2)

Total
Male
Female
AB
C1
C2
DE

More important
54
48
60
44
50
55
67

No difference
40
46
34
48
43
40
27

Less important
5
5
5
7
6
4
2

To what extent do you make a point of buying supermarkets' 
own brand value/economy food products?

Gender

Occupational 
category (2)

Total
Male
Female
AB
C1
C2
DE

Always  or  often Only basic products Don't often or never
23
26
21
31
23
21
18

44
42
47
40
44
45
51

31
32
30
28
32
33
30

Compared to two years ago, what do  you spend on 
special food products such as organic, fair trade or premium lines?

Gender

Occupational 
category (2)

Total
Male
Female
AB
C1
C2
DE

Spend more
34
33
35
34
38
30
32

About the same
50
53
48
55
44
55
48

Spend less
11
10
12
9
11
11
12

Don't know
1
2
1
1
1
1
3

Don't know
1
1
2
2
2
1
1

Don't know
6
5
6
2
7
4
8

(1) Excluding Northern Ireland.
(2) A: higher managerial/administrative/professional; B: intermediate managerial/administrative/professional; C1: supervisory or clerical 
and junior managerial/administrative/professional; C2: skilled manual worker; D: semi-skilled and unskilled manual workers; E: State 
pensioners, widows, casual and lowest grade workers.

Source: prepared on behalf of Retail Week by ICM Research

  Consumers in Europe

137

Consumers.indb   137
Consumers.indb   137

08.04.2009   09:50:06
08.04.2009   09:50:06

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table 1.4: Number of registered organic 
operators, 2006 (1)
(units)

BE (2)
BG (2)
CZ (3)
DK (2)
DE (2)
EE
IE (2)
EL
ES
FR (3,4)
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU (4)
HU (5)
MT
NL
AT (4)
PL (5)
PT (3,4)
RO (2)
SK
SI
FI
SE (3)
UK
NO

Operators Processors
625
73
192
642
8 052
17
147
1 044
1 973
5 802
6 887
:
38
:
36
281
5
998
1 056
55
82
:
27
115
148
303
1 933
376

1 403
571
1 093
3 584
23 978
1 187
1 208
24 666
18 318
16 566
51 065
:
4 105
2 370
110
1 898
11
2 305
21 455
:
1 660
3 409
298
1 992
4 315
3 317
6 485
2 878

Importers
76
:
8
176
689
0
13
9
60
169
208
:
0
:
1
15
0
201
138
:
1
:
2
2
6
121
317
32

(1) Provisional.
(2) Includes Eurostat estimates.
(3) Figures might contain double counting as mixed operators 
could be counted more than once.
(4) 2005.
(5) 2004.

Source: Eurostat, Organic farming (theme5/food/food_act2)

1.2 Consumption

1.2.1 Consumption volume

Table  1.5  provides  an  analysis,  in  quantity 
terms,  of  consumption  of  selected  food  items. 
Wide  disparities  exist  between  the  per  capita 
consumption levels of certain food items within 
the EU, oft en related to whether or not a product 
can be supplied locally. For example, the principal 
consumers of vegetable fats and oils were Greece, 
Spain  and  Italy,  while  meat  consumption  was 
high in Denmark.

Among  those  products  for  which  data  are 
available,  the  highest  variation  in  consumption 
levels per capita was recorded for the consumption 
of dried pulses and the consumption of vegetable 
fats and oils. For the former, consumers in Malta 
ate an average of 6.7 kg, which was more than 25 
times as much as in Austria (0.25 kg). In Greece, 
the  average  consumption  of  vegetable  fats  and 
oils was 48.6 kg per person, which was 18 times 
as much as in Sweden (2.7 kg).

1.2.2 Frequency and time spent food 
shopping, preparing and consuming

Just  under  half  (46 %)  of  respondents  to  a  2005 
Eurobarometer survey in the then 25 EU Member 
States reported that they always shopped for the 
food  consumed  by  their  household  (see  Table 
1.6), while 7 % reported that they never did any 
household  food  shopping.  Th  e  proportion  of 
persons always food shopping for their household 
generally  ranged  from  39 %  to  52 %,  with  the 
United  Kingdom  (57 %)  above  this  range,  and 
the  Czech  Republic  (30 %),  Slovakia  (31 %)  and 
Slovenia  (34 %)  below.  As  well  as  representing 
divisions  of  responsibility  within  a  household, 
these  trends  may  also  refl ect  the  proportion  of 
respondents  living  in  households  with  just  one 
adult.  In  contrast,  18 %  of  Maltese  respondents 
said that they never went food shopping for their 
household,  and  double  digit  shares  were  also 
recorded in Ireland, France, Spain and Portugal.

Moving from buying to consuming, the European 
time use survey (see Table 1.7) provides data for 
14 Member States and Norway, and indicates the 
time spent preparing and eating food. In Estonia 
men  and  women  on  average  ate  for  around  one 
and a quarter hours per day, while in France the 
average  was  around  one  hour  longer.  Generally 
the average time spent eating did not vary greatly 
between  men  and  women,  the  biggest  absolute 
diff erence  being  in  Bulgaria  where  men,  on 

138

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   138
Consumers.indb   138

08.04.2009   09:50:07
08.04.2009   09:50:07

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Table 1.5: Gross human apparent consumption of selected food items, latest available year (1)
(kg per inhabitant)

Cereals
 (excluding
 rice)
114.9
:
128.2
135.8
112.7
75.8
110.8
199.9
101.0
109.8
169.2
904.0
112.6
109.0
82.5
167.4
110.3
85.5
111.6
151.3
126.7
:
:
182.6
:
89.1
125.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Rice
3.6
3.9
:
1.6
4.4
3.0
7.8
4.8
:
5.5
10.4
:
2.1
3.1
:
6.1
9.6
4.6
3.0
2.5
:
3.8
:
6.3
4.5
6.6
5.6

Vegetable
 fats & oils
:
16.4
:
:
:
11.9
:
48.6
33.3
15.5
22.5
:
:
15.1
:
14.0
17.5
18.0
11.8
6.3
:
15.2
:
:
5.0
2.7
4.7

Meat
:
:
:
107.0
87.1
:
:
83.1
122.6
101.2
90.6
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
98.7
:
104.8
:
:
:
72.5
:
83.8

Potatoes
83.1
38.3
75.1
55.1
63.0
107.1
123.0
93.7
81.9
47.0
43.1
:
147.4
116.0
79.9
65.4
95.3
:
53.6
126.3
86.8
85.6
:
60.0
85.8
83.4
101.4

Dried
 pulses
:
5.1
2.0
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.7
5.7
5.4
1.8
1.8
:
2.2
2.4
0.3
2.3
6.7
1.6
0.3
1.8
4.3
2.2
:
1.8
1.1
0.7
2.6

Sugar
(equiv. 
white
 sugar)
52.3
26.0
:
55.8
37.4
37.6
31.8
28.6
:
36.5
43.6
:
24.4
31.7
51.1
31.2
34.6
27.5
39.0
37.8
30.4
28.4
:
33.6
39.1
39.4
23.7

(1) Mixed reference years, 2004 to 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Gross human apparent consumption of main food items per capita (theme5/food/food_ch_concap)

average, spent an extra 12 minutes per day eating. 
In contrast, there were large diff erences between 
men  and  women  as  regards  the  time  spent  on 
food preparation, with Italian women dedicating 
7.2 times as much time to this activity as Italian 
men, while at the other end of the range Swedish 
and  Norwegian  women  spent  about  twice  as 
much  time  as  their  male  compatriots  preparing 
food.  Overall  Bulgarian  women  spent  the  most 
amount  of  time  preparing  food,  an  average  of 
more than one and a half hours per day.

In terms of the frequency of eating certain types of 
food, Figure 1.6 ranks countries by the proportion 
of respondents (to a 2005 Eurobarometer survey) 
that reported eating meat four or more times per 
week.  Denmark,  the  Netherlands  and  Belgium 
topped  the  ranking  with  over  three  quarters  of 
respondents eating meat at least four times a week, 
in sharp contrast to Italy where only a quarter of 
respondents reported eating meat this frequently. 
In  all  countries  the  proportions  of  respondents 
eating  no  meat  (defi ned  here  as  including  fi sh) 
were less than 5 %, the highest proportions being 
4 % in Luxembourg and the United Kingdom.

  Consumers in Europe

139

Consumers.indb   139
Consumers.indb   139

08.04.2009   09:50:08
08.04.2009   09:50:08

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table 1.6: Frequency of purchasing food 
for the household, 2005 
(% of respondents)

Figure 1.6: How often do you eat meat 
each week, 2005 (1)
(% of respondents)

Hardly

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Always
46
48
:
30
51
49
45
47
46
45
47
42
45
44
49
52
47
43
48
43
39
44
:
31
34
47
40
57

Some-
times
14
13
:
25
12
15
14
14
16
15
9
18
16
16
14
14
13
15
13
16
13
16
:
22
19
14
15
11

Often
25
24
:
36
28
24
32
14
32
20
30
24
26
33
31
23
27
18
27
23
35
17
:
35
30
32
37
17

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SK
SI
FI
SE
UK

ever Never
7
5
:
2
2
4
4
12
2
11
11
9
7
3
2
5
5
18
4
3
4
11
:
3
4
3
2
8

7
10
:
7
7
7
5
13
4
8
4
8
6
4
4
6
9
6
6
14
9
12
:
10
13
5
7
6

Source: ‘Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed 
animals’, Special Eurobarometer 229, European Commission

DK
NL
BE
SE
FR
IE
ES
PT
LU
FI
LT
UK
LV
PL
CZ
EU-25
        SI
DE
EE
CY
HU
MT
SK
AT
EL
IT

Never

Once

2 or 3

4 or 5

>5

(1) Poultry, beef, pork, ﬁ sh, etc; Bulgaria and Romania, 
not available.

Source: ‘Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed 
animals’, Special Eurobarometer 229, European Commission

Table 1.7: Time-use, persons aged 20-74 years, latest available year (1)
(hours:minutes per day)

                Eating
Males
01:49
02:07
01:43
01:19
01:47
02:18
01:57
01:33
01:32
01:33
01:33
01:23
01:32
01:24
01:25

Females
01:50
01:55
01:46
01:12
01:44
02:11
01:52
01:26
01:26
01:34
01:26
01:19
01:36
01:26
01:20

               Food
                  preparation

Males
00:22
00:15
00:16
00:21
00:19
00:16
00:11
00:16
00:20
00:25
00:16
00:21
00:25
00:26
00:25

Females
00:57
01:37
00:49
01:19
01:20
01:01
01:19
01:06
01:18
01:30
01:24
00:55
00:50
00:59
00:51

Participation rate for 
food preparation (%)
Males
Females
84
55
88
29
80
46
90
46
87
44
83
36
86
28
84
35
90
37
94
57
86
34
86
58
87
64
87
62
88
67

BE
BG
DE
EE
ES
FR
IT
LV
LT
PL
SI
FI
SE
UK
NO

(1) No data available for those Member States not shown; mixed reference years.

Source: harmonised European time use surveys (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/StatMeanMact2.html)

140

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   140
Consumers.indb   140

08.04.2009   09:50:09
08.04.2009   09:50:09

1.2.3 Consumption expenditure

It  is  important  to  note  that  the  consumption 
expenditure  data  covered  in  this  chapter  does 
not include food or beverages sold for immediate 
consumption  by  hotels,  restaurants,  cafés  and 
bars, nor cooked dishes prepared by restaurants 
or catering contractors (whether collected by the 
customer or delivered to the customer’s home).

In  2006  annual  expenditure  on  food  and  non-
alcoholic beverages averaged EUR 1 700 per person 
within  the  EU-27  (see  Table  1.8),  with  national 
averages  ranging  from  less  than  EUR  1 000  per 
person in the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, 
Poland, Romania and Slovakia, up to EUR 2 600 
per  person  in  Luxembourg.  Compared  with 
average  expenditure  in  2000,  the  most  notable 
increase  was  recorded  in  Greece  where  the 
level  of  expenditure  on  food  and  non-alcoholic 
beverages rose from an average of EUR 1 400 per 
person to EUR 2 200. Figure 1.7 shows that this 
situation was due not only to a large increase in 
the volume of food and non-alcoholic beverages 
that  were  purchased,  but  also  to  relatively  high 
price  increases;  there  were  also  considerable 
increases  in  the  volume  of  expenditure  on  food 
and  non-alcoholic  beverages  in  Estonia,  Poland 
and Slovakia.

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Table 1.8: Final consumption expenditure 
of households, food and non-alcoholic 
beverages: consumption per head
(EUR)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

2000
1 400
1 600
300
600
1 900
1 600
500
1 100
1 400
1 400
1 900
1 900
1 800
500
700
2 200
500
1 400
1 400
1 700
700
1 300
400
1 100
500
1 500
1 700
1 600
900
2 800
2 400
2 300

2006
1 700
2 000
:
900
:
1 700
900
1 000
2 200
1 800
2 200
2 200
2 200
:
1 200
2 600
800
1 400
1 700
1 900
900
:
900
1 200
800
1 900
:
1 700
1 100
2 800
:
2 500

(1) Forecasts.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_c)

Figure 1.7: Final consumption expenditure of households, food and non-alcoholic 
beverages: price and volume changes between 2000 and 2006 (1)
(%)

40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20

EU-
27

BE CZ DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

IT

CY LU HU MT NL AT PL

SI

SK

FI UK TR
(2)

IS

Prices

Volume

(1) Bulgaria, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, not available; EU-27: volume, not available.
(2) Forecasts.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_k and nama_co2_p)

  Consumers in Europe

141

Consumers.indb   141
Consumers.indb   141

08.04.2009   09:50:10
08.04.2009   09:50:10

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table 1.9: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, food and non-alcoholic 
beverages, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

3 594
4 043
2 238
2 503
2 872
3 185
2 440
4 491
4 801
4 685
3 733
5 359
5 158
3 091
3 166
4 851
2 413
6 082
3 089
3 933
2 704
3 243
2 355
3 966
2 910
3 086
2 913
3 159
4 564
3 402

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

Table  1.9  provides  a  comparison  of  expenditure 
on  the  same  items,  based  on  2005  household 
budget  survey  (HBS)  data.  Note  that  this  HBS 
data  always  takes  account  of  self-production  of 
food  and  beverages,  which  may  account  for  a 
considerable share of household consumption in 
some countries. Th  e HBS data is presented in PPS 
rather than in euro (EUR) terms and shows that 
at  comparable  price  levels,  expenditure  on  food 
and  non-alcoholic  beverages  within  the  EU-27 
ranged from PPS 2 238 per household in Bulgaria 
to PPS 5 359 in Italy, with Malta above this range 
at  PPS  6 082.  Figure  1.8  shows  that  there  was  a 
considerable  range  across  the  Member  States  in 
average  expenditure  per  household  on  diff erent 
food and non-alcoholic beverage items. Generally 
the range was greatest for items that account for a 
large proportion of expenditure, such as meat, or 
bread and cereals, however there were also large 
diff erence in expenditure on some of the smaller 
items, most notably fi sh and seafood.

for  16.8 %  of 

food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages 
Together 
accounted 
total  household 
expenditure in the EU-27 in 2005 (see Figure 1.9). 
Th  is share ranged from around 10 % in the United 
Kingdom,  Sweden  and  the  Netherlands,  to  over 
20 %  in  many  of  the  Member  States  that  joined 
the EU in 2004 or 2007. By far the highest share 
was recorded in Romania, where food and non-
alcoholic  beverages  accounted  for  44 %  of  total 
household expenditure in 2005 (see Figure 1.10). 
Th  e share of household expenditure allocated to 
food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  was  generally 
higher among Member States with a low overall 
level of average household expenditure (in PPS). 
Among  the  Member  States  with  relatively  high 
average  household  expenditure,  several  of  the 
Mediterranean Member States reported relatively 
high  proportions  of  expenditure  on  food  and 
non-alcoholic beverages, notably Italy, Malta and 
Spain.

142

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   142
Consumers.indb   142

08.04.2009   09:50:11
08.04.2009   09:50:11

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Figure 1.8: Mean consumption expenditure per household, food and non-alcoholic 
beverages, 2005
(PPS, minimum and maximum (vertical lines at end of horizontal line), inter-quartile range 
containing half of the Member States (box), median (vertical line within box))

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

1 400

Bread and cereals

Meat

Fish and seafood

Milk, cheese and eggs

Vegetables

Mineral waters, soft drinks, fruit and vegetable juices

Fruit

Food products n.e.c.

Oils and fats

Sugar, jam, honey, chocolate and confectionery

Coffee, tea and cocoa

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_exp_t121)

Figure 1.9: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of food and non-
alcoholic beverages in total expenditure, 
EU-27, 2005
(%)

Figure 1.10: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of food and non-
alcoholic beverages in total expenditure, 
2005 (1)
(%)

Food
15.6%

Non-
alcoholic 
bever-
ages
1.2%

LU

RO

45

IE

30

15

0

BG

LT

LV

PL

HU

SK

EE

PT

CY

UK

EL

AT

BE

NL

IT

MT

DE

SI

DK

FR

ES

FI

SE

Other 
expend-
iture
83.2%

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

(1) Graph is ranked on overall household consumption per 
household (PPS); Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211 and hbs_exp_t121)

  Consumers in Europe

143

Consumers.indb   143
Consumers.indb   143

08.04.2009   09:50:12
08.04.2009   09:50:12

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Figure 1.11: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of food and non-alcoholic 
beverages in total expenditure, EU-27, 2005
(%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Manual workers

Non-manual workers

Self-employed

Unemployed

Retired

Other inactive

Lowest

Second

Third

Fourth

Highest

1 adult

1 adult & dep. children

2 adults

2 adults & dep. children

3+ adults

3+ adults & dep. children

Less than 30

30-44

45-59

60 and over

Dense

Intermediate

Sparse

)
1
(
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
i
c
o
S

e

i

l
i
t
n
u
q
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
1
(
e
p
y
t
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
g
A

)
1
(
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
b
r
U

(1) Unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

Figure 1.11 shows the importance of expenditure 
on  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  for  a 
number  of  diff erent  subgroups  of  households. 
As  food  is  a  necessity,  the  share  of  expenditure 
on  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  in  total 
expenditure 
income 
(spending  on  food  increases  disproportionately 

inversely  related  to 

is 

less  than  any  increase  in  overall  expenditure), 
and  the  proportion  of  household  expenditure 
allocated  to  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages 
was  around  two  thirds  higher  for  households 
in  the  lowest  income  quintile  than  those  in  the 
highest  quintile.  Equally,  households  headed  by 
older persons (60 or over) on average committed 

144

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   144
Consumers.indb   144

08.04.2009   09:50:13
08.04.2009   09:50:13

 
 
 
 
 
 
Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

a higher proportion of their total expenditure to 
food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  (around  one 
quarter  more)  than  households  where  the  head 
was less than 30 years old. Furthermore, it is oft en 
the case that consumers from the Member States 
that  joined  the  EU  since  2004  spend  a  higher 
proportion of their income on food.

As  price  increases  for  many  food  products  have 
risen  at  a  faster  rate  than  infl ation  (see  next 
section for more details), there has likely been a 
negative impact on the purchasing power of many 
disadvantaged  households  throughout  Europe 
–  where  the  share  of  food  and  non-alcoholic 
beverages has taken an increasing proportion of 
the family budget for those households with lower 
incomes (to the detriment of spending on other 

items that may be considered more as luxuries). 
It  will,  however,  only  be  possible  to  investigate 
these  likely  eff ects  in  more  detail  aft er  the  next 
household budget survey is conducted.

Given that there are limits as to how much food 
people  can  physiologically  eat,  aft er  a  certain 
point  it  is  likely  that  any  increase  in  household 
income  will  result  in  the  substitution  of  one 
food  product/type  for  another,  rather  than  an 
increase  in  the  volume  of  food  consumed.  Such 
changes,  coupled  with  changes  in  lifestyle  and 
the  introduction  of  new  products,  may  lead 
to  a  switch  in  consumption  patterns  towards 
items  like  organic  products,  frozen  foods  or 
convenience foods.

Table 1.10a: Structure of consumption expenditure on food, 2005
(% of consumption expenditure on food and non-alcoholic beverages)

Bread 
and 
cereals
18.5
18.5
19.4
:
16.0
:
14.2
21.1
12.3
14.4
19.4
17.7
15.2
13.7
13.3
16.1
14.6
18.8
17.1
18.5
15.7
16.1
19.5
17.4
17.4
17.3
16.2
17.2
14.8
14.5

Food
92.9
89.6
95.9
:
90.8
90.2
92.4
90.2
94.8
94.4
92.5
95.2
82.1
93.8
94.1
89.2
91.2
88.7
91.4
90.0
92.9
95.5
94.8
91.0
91.1
92.1
92.4
91.9
92.3
89.7

Meat
26.8
25.2
23.5
:
21.8
:
24.9
21.1
23.2
26.1
25.4
23.7
17.2
25.7
29.6
23.7
30.1
21.6
21.0
22.3
28.6
24.5
26.7
24.6
25.6
18.1
18.1
22.2
31.0
21.4

Fish 
and 
sea-
food
6.5
5.9
1.9
:
4.2
:
4.4
2.4
7.7
13.9
6.0
9.1
3.3
4.5
5.0
6.5
0.9
5.6
2.9
2.3
2.7
16.1
2.5
2.4
3.0
4.7
5.7
4.0
4.4
6.0

Milk, 
cheese 
and 
eggs
16.1
11.9
18.1
:
14.3
:
16.4
11.4
18.1
13.3
14.2
14.5
15.9
16.8
15.1
14.0
16.4
14.6
15.2
14.6
14.5
13.5
17.2
13.8
17.0
17.3
15.2
13.1
14.4
14.5

Sugar & 
confec-
tionery 
(1)
6.0
6.7
5.4
:
10.9
:
7.6
7.3
6.5
3.3
6.0
6.5
4.0
7.5
7.7
6.5
6.2
4.7
6.7
7.7
6.3
3.2
4.3
7.2
8.5
7.9
8.6
6.1
4.8
10.3

Vege-
tables
11.9
9.6
15.6
:
10.9
:
11.1
11.4
12.3
9.4
9.7
9.7
11.9
13.0
10.9
9.7
9.3
10.8
11.4
9.2
10.6
9.0
14.0
10.8
6.3
9.4
10.5
14.1
10.3
9.4

Food 
prod-
ucts 
n.e.c.
3.0
3.7
1.9
:
3.4
:
4.4
7.3
1.3
2.2
3.0
1.1
2.0
2.1
2.7
3.2
3.1
2.3
6.7
3.1
3.1
1.3
1.1
4.2
3.0
8.7
3.8
4.0
3.3
5.1

Fruit
7.1
6.7
5.7
:
7.6
:
6.2
5.7
7.1
8.9
6.0
9.1
9.3
6.5
5.3
7.5
5.8
8.5
7.6
6.9
5.5
7.7
5.2
9.0
5.2
7.1
7.6
8.1
5.5
7.7

Oils 
and 
fats
4.2
2.2
4.1
:
2.5
:
3.1
2.4
7.1
3.3
2.2
3.8
2.6
3.4
3.8
2.2
4.4
2.8
2.9
3.1
5.1
4.5
4.1
3.0
5.2
2.4
2.9
2.0
3.7
1.7

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Including also, jam, honey and chocolate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

  Consumers in Europe

145

Consumers.indb   145
Consumers.indb   145

08.04.2009   09:50:14
08.04.2009   09:50:14

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table 1.10b: Structure of consumption 
expenditure on non-alcoholic beverages, 
2005
(% of consumption expenditure on food and 
non-alcoholic beverages)

Coffee, 
tea &
 cocoa
3.0
2.2
1.6
:
3.4
:
3.1
1.6
1.9
1.7
2.2
2.7
2.0
3.8
3.3
3.2
3.1
2.8
2.9
3.1
3.1
1.3
2.7
3.0
3.7
2.4
2.9
2.0
3.3
2.6

Mineral waters, 
soft drinks, 
fruit & vegetable 
juices
4.8
8.1
2.9
:
5.9
:
4.0
8.1
3.9
4.4
5.2
5.4
7.3
2.4
2.7
8.6
5.3
8.5
5.7
6.9
3.9
3.2
2.7
6.0
5.2
5.5
4.8
6.1
4.8
7.7

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

Figure 1.12: Structure of consumption 
expenditure on food and non-alcoholic 
beverages, EU-27, 2005
(%)

Others
13%

Sugar & 
confec-
tionery (1)
6%

Meat
24%

Fruit
7%

Non-
alcoholic 
bever-
ages
7%

Vege-
tables
11%

Bread & 
cereals
17%

Milk, 
cheese & 
eggs
15%

(1) Including also, jam, honey and chocolate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

Meat,  bread  and  cereals,  and  milk,  cheese  and 
eggs collectively accounted for more than half of 
the total expenditure on food and non-alcoholic 
beverages in the EU-27 in 2005 (see Figure 1.12), 
with meat alone representing around one quarter 
of the total. Among the Member States (see Table 
1.10)  the  share  of  meat  was  highest  in  Hungary 
(30.1 %)  and  lowest  in  Cyprus  (17.2 %),  Finland 
and  Sweden  (both  18.1 %).  As  noted  above,  the 
variation  in  expenditure  on  fi sh  and  seafood 
between the Member States was high, and these 
items  accounted  for  just  0.9 %  of  expenditure 
on  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  in  land-
locked Hungary, compared with 13.9 % in Spain. 
Such  patterns  may,  at  least  in  part,  be  linked  to 
geographical location and local supply, although 
other  factors  are  also  likely  to  play  a  role,  for 
example, local customs and traditional dishes.

146

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   146
Consumers.indb   146

08.04.2009   09:50:15
08.04.2009   09:50:15

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

1.3 Prices

1.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  e harmonised index of consumer prices for food 
and non-alcoholic beverages rose in the EU-27 by 
22.0 % between 2000 and 2007, equivalent to an 
average of more than 3.4 % per annum. Th  is was 
notably higher than the rate of increase recorded 
for  the  all-items  consumer  price  index,  which 
gained  on  average  2.4 %  per  annum  between 
2000  and  2007.  During  this  period,  the  change 
in  prices  of  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages 
varied signifi cantly, ranging from an increase of 
6.5 % in 2001 to a low of 1.1 % in 2005 (see Table 
1.11),  before  accelerating  again  in  the  two  most 
recent years. In 2007 the highest price increases 
in the Member States were recorded in Bulgaria 

and Latvia (both 13.5 %), and increases in excess 
of  10 %  were  also  recorded  in  Hungary  and 
Lithuania, as well as in Turkey. Th  e lowest price 
increase  for  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages 
was recorded in France (1.4 %).

Between  2000  and  2007  the  EU-27’s  consumer 
price  index  rose  more  quickly  for  food  than  for 
non-alcoholic beverages, with the fastest increase 
recorded  for  vegetables  (4.0 %  per  annum  on 
average), oils and fats (3.9 %) and fruit (3.8 %). Th  e 
lowest average price increases between 2000 and 
2007 were recorded for coff ee, tea and cocoa, at 
just 1.0 % per annum. Table 1.13 indicates which 
products recorded the highest and lowest annual 
average rates of change between 2000 and 2007. 

Table 1.11: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, food and non-alcoholic beverages, 
annual rate of change (1)
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
3.9
0.7
10.3
1.1
1.6
-0.4
2.4
3.1
2.1
2.3
2.2
1.6
5.3
0.7
-2.4
2.0
8.9
1.0
0.8
1.6
9.9
2.1
44.0
5.6
5.3
1.0
0.4
-0.5
46.2
4.1
2.0
:

2001
6.5
4.5
6.5
5.1
3.9
4.5
7.8
6.5
5.3
5.4
5.5
4.0
4.2
4.8
3.9
4.7
13.2
4.0
7.1
3.3
4.6
6.5
36.1
9.1
5.5
4.4
3.3
3.8
49.9
6.9
-1.8
:

2002
2.9
2.3
0.0
-2.0
2.2
0.8
3.1
3.4
5.8
4.7
2.7
3.6
5.8
3.5
-0.8
3.9
4.3
2.1
3.5
1.2
-0.6
1.5
18.3
7.4
1.2
3.1
3.5
0.8
50.5
4.1
-1.6
:

2003
2.0
1.9
-1.0
-2.0
1.4
-0.1
-1.9
1.4
4.9
4.1
2.3
3.2
5.2
2.6
-3.7
2.0
1.4
2.0
1.2
1.5
-1.2
2.3
14.6
4.4
3.3
0.6
0.6
1.2
27.3
-2.7
3.6
:

2004
1.8
1.1
6.7
3.5
-1.0
-0.4
4.2
-0.2
0.9
3.9
0.5
2.1
3.8
7.4
2.2
1.8
5.6
-0.3
-3.5
1.7
6.2
1.1
9.4
0.1
4.9
0.8
-0.2
0.7
8.5
1.0
1.8
:

2005
1.1
1.7
4.1
-0.1
0.6
0.4
3.6
-0.7
0.8
3.2
0.1
-0.1
2.4
9.2
4.0
1.7
1.6
1.8
-1.2
1.1
2.1
-0.6
6.1
-1.0
-0.7
0.3
-0.7
1.5
3.9
-2.5
1.6
:

2006
2.4
2.7
5.8
0.5
2.7
1.9
4.8
1.4
3.5
4.2
1.7
1.7
5.6
8.2
6.1
2.4
8.2
2.2
1.7
1.5
0.6
2.7
3.8
2.3
2.0
1.5
0.8
2.5
7.8
8.0
1.4
-0.1

2007
3.5
3.9
13.5
4.4
4.5
2.9
9.4
2.8
2.2
3.7
1.4
2.9
4.8
13.5
11.1
3.3
12.0
3.9
1.6
4.2
4.7
2.4
3.9
7.2
4.0
2.1
2.0
4.5
12.4
-1.1
2.5
0.5

(1) Hungary (2000), EU-27 and Bulgaria (2000 and 2001), Turkey (2000 to 2003), estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

  Consumers in Europe

147

Consumers.indb   147
Consumers.indb   147

08.04.2009   09:50:16
08.04.2009   09:50:16

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table 1.12: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, annual rate of change, EU-27 (1)
(%)

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Food

Bread and cereals
Meat
Fish and seafood
Milk, cheese and eggs
Oils and fats
Fruit
Vegetables
Sugar, jam, honey, chocolate and confectionery
Food products n.e.c.
Non-alcoholic beverages
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Mineral waters, soft drinks, fruit and vegetable juices

2000
3.9
1.9
2.4
2.7
3.2
1.9
0.3
0.0
0.3
2.2
1.1
0.1
-1.4
1.0

2001
6.5
5.9
4.4
8.9
5.5
5.0
0.8
8.2
5.3
2.7
3.3
1.4
-0.5
2.5

2002
2.9
3.1
2.7
1.2
4.5
2.9
7.7
4.7
5.9
2.4
3.0
0.9
-0.7
1.7

2003
2.0
2.1
3.0
0.2
2.1
2.2
1.6
4.1
3.3
3.5
1.9
1.1
0.1
1.6

2004
1.8
1.9
3.8
2.4
0.7
2.0
4.0
0.5
-1.8
3.0
0.7
0.2
-1.1
0.8

2005
1.1
1.1
0.6
1.8
1.8
0.5
2.0
0.4
1.3
0.8
0.3
0.7
3.1
-0.3

2006
2.4
2.4
1.7
1.9
4.1
1.1
6.9
1.3
5.6
2.0
0.8
2.4
3.2
2.0

2007
3.5
3.5
4.9
2.8
3.1
4.5
0.8
3.7
4.4
1.7
1.4
2.8
2.0
3.1

(1) 2000 and 2001, estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

In most countries the lowest annual average rates 
of change, oft en negative, were for coff ee, tea and 
cocoa,  while  there  was  a  greater  variety  among 
the  products  with  the  highest  price  increases, 
with vegetables, bread and cereals, and fruit the 
most commonly observed.

While  the  annual  statistics  presented  in  this 
section show the eff ects of higher price infl ation for 
a number of food products in late 2006 and 2007, 
this  trend  continued  into  2008.  Th  e  European 
Commission  released  a  Communication  titled 
‘Tackling  the  challenge  of  rising  food  prices: 
Directions for EU action’ on 20 May 2008 (4). Th  is 
document  provides  further  background  to  the 
price  surge  that  aff ected  several  commodities, 
such as cereals, meat, and dairy products. It states 
that  the  transmission  of  price  rises  on  global 
commodity markets to consumer prices has been 
limited by three factors: (i) the appreciation of the 
euro; (ii) the declining share of agricultural raw 
materials in food production costs compared with 
energy and labour costs (mainly due to increased 
processing),  and  (iii)  the  relatively  low  share  of 
food in total household expenditure.

(4)  COM(2008) 321 ﬁ nal; 
for more information: 
http://ec.europa.
eu/commission_
barroso/president/
pdf/20080521_
document_en.pdf.

Figure 1.13: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27 (1)
(2005=100)

110

100

90

80

2001

2003

2005

2007

Food and non-alcoholic beverages
Food
Non-alcoholic beverages

(1) 2000 and 2001, estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

148

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   148
Consumers.indb   148

08.04.2009   09:50:17
08.04.2009   09:50:17

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Table 1.13: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, selected food and non-alcoholic beverage products, 
annual average rate of change, 2000 to 2007 (1)
(%)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU (2)
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (2)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO

Lowest annual average change
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Mineral waters, soft drinks, fruit & veg. juices
Vegetables
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Milk, cheese and eggs
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Milk, cheese and eggs
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Mineral waters, soft drinks, fruit & veg. juices
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Food products n.e.c.
Coffee, tea and cocoa
Fruit
Coffee, tea and cocoa

Change
0.9
0.7
1.5
-2.4
-0.3
0.3
-0.5
1.4
1.2
1.8
1.2
1.0
-0.4
2.0
-1.5
1.0
1.6
1.5
-0.9
-0.5
1.0
-0.5
6.1
2.3
-0.7
-1.2
-1.7
0.2
17.9
-1.5
-1.0

(1) EU-27 and Bulgaria (2000 and 2001), Turkey (2000 to 2003), estimates.
(2) 2001 to 2007.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Highest annual average change
Vegetables
Bread and cereals
Bread and cereals
Bread and cereals
Mineral waters, soft drinks, fruit & veg. juices
Fish and seafood
Vegetables
Milk, cheese and eggs
Bread and cereals
Fruit
Fruit
Fish and seafood
Meat
Vegetables
Fruit
Vegetables
Vegetables
Fruit
Vegetables
Milk, cheese and eggs
Bread and cereals
Vegetables
Vegetables
Bread and cereals
Bread and cereals
Fruit
Fruit
Vegetables
Fruit
Fish and seafood
Oils and fats

Change
3.4
3.4
6.5
4.2
3.3
3.2
7.8
2.7
4.2
5.9
3.0
3.4
5.9
12.7
6.1
3.9
13.0
3.8
3.7
2.7
3.4
3.7
12.8
6.0
5.3
3.9
3.6
3.3
25.0
3.9
2.8

1.3.2 Price levels

Th  e  results  of  the  2006  survey  on  income  and 
living  condition  (SILC)  indicates  that  only  a 
small  proportion  of  households  in  most  of  the 
EU-15  Member  States  could  not  aff ord  a  meal 
with  meat,  chicken  or  fi sh  at  least  every  other 
day (see Figure 1.14). Among the EU-15 Member 
States, the highest proportion of households that 
felt  that  they  could  not  aff ord  such  a  meal  with 
this frequency was recorded in Germany.

In  general  terms,  price  level  indices  for  2007 
show that food and non-alcoholic beverages were 
cheaper  in  the  eastern  and  southern  Member 
States,  and  were  particularly  expensive  in  the 
Nordic  countries.  Price  levels  for  food  and 
non-alcoholic  beverages  in  the  most  expensive 

Member  State,  Denmark,  were  2.3  times  as 
high  as  in  the  least  expensive,  namely  Bulgaria. 
In  Denmark  price  levels  were  on  average  42 % 
above the EU-27 average, while in Bulgaria they 
were 39 % below the EU-27 average. Th  e ratio of 
most expensive to least expensive Member State 
was  around  two  for  oils  and  fats,  and  for  milk, 
cheese and eggs, but reached three for meat and 
bread  and  cereals.  Bulgaria  recorded  the  lowest 
price  levels  for  several  of  the  food  and  non-
alcoholic beverage categories shown in Table 1.14, 
although Lithuania recorded the lowest levels for 
fi sh,  Poland  for  milk,  cheese  and  eggs,  and  the 
Netherlands for oils and fats. Equally, Denmark 
was  the  most  expensive  Member  State  for  most 
of the categories, with Cyprus more expensive for 
milk, cheese and eggs.

  Consumers in Europe

149

Consumers.indb   149
Consumers.indb   149

08.04.2009   09:50:18
08.04.2009   09:50:18

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Figure 1.14: Capacity of households to aff ord 
a meal with meat, chicken, fi sh (or vegetarian 
equivalent) every second day, 2006 (1)
(%)

Figure 1.15: Price level indices, food and 
non-alcoholic beverages, 2007
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

0

25

50

75

100

DK
LU
IE
NL
FI
ES
NO
PT
IS
SE
BE
UK
IT
MT
FR
CY
EL
EU-25
AT
EE
DE
SI
CZ
LT
HU
PL
LV
SK

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC

NO
IS
DK
CH
IE
FI
SE
UK
LU
IT
BE
AT
CY
DE
FR
EU-27
EL
ES
SI
TR
HR
NL
PT
MT
EE
HU
LV
RO
SK
CZ
LT
PL
BG
MK

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

Although  Table  1.14  shows  disparities  in  price 
levels between Member States, Table 1.15 indicates 
that  for  food  and  non-alcoholic  beverages  as  a 
whole  these  diff erences  among  EU-27  Member 
States  fell  between  2000  and  2007,  although  the 
coeffi  cient  of  variation  (a  measure  of  relative 
dispersion)  increased  for  the  price  of  fi sh.  For 
nearly  all  of  the  categories  shown  in  Table  1.15 

the  price  level  indices  in  2007  were  closer  (in 
other words, had a lower coeffi  cient of variation) 
among  the  EU-15  Member  States  than  among 
the  EU-27  Member  States,  with  oils  and  fats  an 
exception to this rule. Within the EU-27 oils and 
fats  had  the  lowest  price  dispersion  among  the 
Member  States,  while  the  highest  levels  of  price 
dispersion were recorded for meat.

150

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   150
Consumers.indb   150

08.04.2009   09:50:18
08.04.2009   09:50:18

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Table 1.14: Price level indices, food and non-alcoholic beverages, 2007 (1)
(EU-27=100)

Food and 
non-
alcoholic 
beverages
100
111
61
71
142
106
80
124
97
92
103
114
107
76
69
115
79
83
87
111
69
86
74
91
73
119
117
117
88
56
90
157
158
132

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
NO
CH

Bread and 
cereals
100
112
51
66
151
106
78
120
99
113
100
108
110
68
71
120
74
76
87
126
63
95
61
95
65
136
130
106
86
55
77
178
162
130

Food
100
112
60
70
139
106
78
124
96
92
105
115
104
74
68
117
79
81
87
112
67
86
73
91
72
118
117
116
86
55
89
157
158
135

Meat
100
123
49
60
147
118
67
129
92
83
122
119
81
62
53
121
72
69
103
122
55
81
63
85
62
119
132
127
84
52
81
185
184
186

Milk, 
cheese 
and eggs
100
110
93
84
117
88
86
127
138
97
97
124
139
83
83
112
95
110
77
101
70
104
102
89
82
105
101
119
89
62
130
141
161
116

Fish
100
134
61
76
140
121
72
123
103
87
103
122
137
72
57
111
81
85
113
113
68
71
87
100
73
109
107
98
85
64
77
112
125
133

Oils and 
fats
100
113
114
84
138
96
102
98
109
77
104
112
134
104
103
114
101
101
68
119
88
90
108
109
110
119
119
112
110
87
103
143
160
153

Fruit, 
vegetables, 
potatoes
100
102
54
66
132
117
87
129
70
95
106
112
92
81
73
130
73
71
87
107
72
78
72
93
68
125
121
123
77
43
78
145
137
120

Non-
alcoholic 
beverages
100
102
75
83
172
102
91
131
117
88
82
107
135
94
83
103
82
108
83
96
87
92
87
89
85
131
115
125
107
66
107
156
162
97

Other 
food
100
102
70
84
160
98
85
117
115
101
96
115
124
87
79
105
90
102
78
107
85
107
91
96
96
112
114
111
109
75
112
158
164
122

(1) Highest price level index for each product group across the Member States shown in yellow font; lowest index shown in blue font.

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

Table 1.15: Coeffi  cient of variation for price level indices, food and non-alcoholic beverages
(%)

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Food

Bread and cereals
Meat
Fish
Milk, cheese and eggs
Oils and fats
Fruits, vegetables, potatoes
Other food

Non-alcoholic beverages

EU-15

EU-25

EU-27

2000
13.9
13.8
15.9
18.1
11.0
10.9
13.6
21.5
16.0
18.1

2007
13.7
13.3
14.9
15.9
15.8
14.7
16.8
17.8
15.8
21.3

2000
26.0
26.7
33.8
32.7
20.9
23.4
20.4
29.2
24.1
22.3

2007
20.6
21.0
24.8
30.2
23.9
18.4
15.2
23.3
17.0
21.4

2000
27.9
28.7
35.9
35.7
22.2
23.3
21.5
31.2
25.4
22.8

2007
22.0
22.4
27.4
32.1
24.6
17.8
14.6
25.0
17.8
21.7

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

  Consumers in Europe

151

Consumers.indb   151
Consumers.indb   151

08.04.2009   09:50:19
08.04.2009   09:50:19

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1.4 Consumer satisfaction

A  2005  Eurobarometer  survey  of  the  EU-25 
Member States looked at consumers perceptions 
of  food,  in  particular  of  the  risks  attached  to 
food  consumption.  Th  e  words  most  commonly 
associated  with  food  could  be  construed  as 
positive ones (see Figure 1.16), namely taste and 
pleasure, marginally ahead of hunger.

A survey conducted in 2008 shows that consumers 
were generally satisfi ed with their regular retailer 
(usually  supermarkets  or  hypermarkets)  for 
fresh fruit and vegetables, meat or non-alcoholic 
beverages.  Satisfaction  levels  tended  to  be  lower 
for fresh vegetables and fruit than the other two 
products (see Figure 1.17).

Figure 1.16: When thinking about food, what 
words fi rst come to mind, EU-25, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

10

20

30

40

Taste

Pleasure

Hunger

Health

Necessity

Conviviality

Diet or balanced diet

Calories

Greed

Obesity

Chemicals

Local or national culture

Guilt

Diseases

(1) Multiple answers possible.

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, 
European Commission

Figure 1.17: Overall, to what extent are you 
satisfi ed with your regular retailer for the 
following products, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

EU-27
HU
AT
DE
RO
CZ
UK
BG
EL
CY
BE
PL
LU
LT
IE
FI
SI
MT
PT
EE
SK
ES
IT
SE
NL
LV
FR
DK

Fresh fruit and vegetables

Meat

Non-alcoholic beverages

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (not at all satisﬁ ed) to 10 (fully satisﬁ ed); 
graph is ranked on the average score for the three different 
product groups.

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

152

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   152
Consumers.indb   152

08.04.2009   09:50:20
08.04.2009   09:50:20

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

1.5 Quality and safety

1.5.1 Quality

As  shown  above,  European  consumers  consider 
not only price but also quality when purchasing 
food.  Th  e  European  Union  works  to  safeguard 
food  quality  in  many  ways,  concerning  food 
safety  and  hygiene,  labelling  and  nutritional 
information, animal and plant health and welfare 
regulations,  as  well  as  restrictions  on  pesticide 
residues and food additives.

Specifi c  instruments  have  been  developed  to 
recognise  the  origin  or  quality  of  specifi c  food 
products. Th  ese include rules on the protection of 
geographical indications (PGI) and designations 
of  the  origin  of  agricultural  products  and 
foodstuff s (PDO), as well as rules on certifi cates 
of specifi c character for agricultural products and 

foodstuff s (TSG). Th  ese rules were created in 1992 
with  the  aim  to  protect  specifi c  product  names 
from misuse and imitation and to help consumers 
by  giving  them  information  concerning  the 
specifi c characteristics of products.

Th  e names of more than 700 products are currently 
registered as either PDOs or PGIs (see Tables 1.16 
and 1.17). Nearly 90 % of these certifi ed products are 
from the southern Member States of Italy, France, 
Spain, Portugal and Greece, or Germany. Th  e most 
recent  data  indicates  that  products  from  Cyprus, 
Hungary and Slovakia have recently been certifi ed, 
brining  the  number  of  EU  Member  States  with 
certifi ed products to 21. Th  e main types of products 
that are certifi ed include crops (fruit, vegetables or 
cereals),  cheese,  oils  or  fats  (mainly  olive  oil),  and 
fresh meat and off al, for each of which there are over 
one hundred certifi ed products.

Table 1.16: Certifi ed products: Protected Designations of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indications 
(PGI), March 2008 (1)
(number)

Meat-
based
products
2
-
-
-
8
-
1
-
10

29
-
-
-
1
1
-
-
2
-
28
-
-
-
-
-
-

Cheese
1
-
-
2
4
-
1
20
20
454
33
-
-
-
-
-
-
4
6
2
12
-
-
-
-
1
12

Fresh
 meat &
offal
-
-
-
-
3
-
1
-
13
53
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
27
-
-
-
-
-
7

Fish
 & fish
products
-
-
2
-
3
-
1
1
1
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3

Other
 animal
products 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
3
6
2
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
10
-
-
-
-
-
1

Oils &
 fats
1
-
-
-
1
-
-
26
20
9
38
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
6
-
-
1
-
-
-

Table
 olives
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10

3
2
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-

Fruit &
veg. &
cereals
-
-
2
1
3
-
-
22
33
262
48
-
-
-
-
-
-
2
3

21
-
-
-
1
-
1

Bread,
 pastry,
cakes etc.
1
-
5
-
4
-
-
1
7

3
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
1
-

Mineral
waters
-
-
-
-
31
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SK
SI
FI
SE
UK

(1) A PDO covers the term used to describe foodstuffs which are produced, processed and prepared in a given geographical area using recognised know-how; for a 
PGI the geographical link must occur in at least one of the stages of production, processing or preparation.

Source: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/qual/en/1bbab_en.htm)

  Consumers in Europe

153

Consumers.indb   153
Consumers.indb   153

08.04.2009   09:50:21
08.04.2009   09:50:21

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table 1.17: Certifi ed products: evolution of the number of products (PDOs and PGIs), EU-27
(number)

Total
Fresh meat & offal
Meat-based products
Cheese
Other animal products 
Fish & fish products
Oils and fats
Fruit & veg. & cereals
Bread, pastry, cakes etc.
Other products of Annex I
Beers
Mineral waters
Essential oils
Naturals gums and resins
Hay

2003
607
88
65
149
17
6
72
133
12
13
15
31
3
2
1

2004
681
100
78
153
18
9
86
153
15
14
18
31
3
2
1

2005
698
100
78
154
22
9
90
156
17
17
18
31
3
2
1

2006
712
100
79
154
23
9
94
162
18
18
18
31
3
2
1

2007
763
103
86
161
24
12
104
175
24
20
17
31
3
2
1

Source: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European Commission

Table 1.18: Certifi ed products: Traditional 
Speciality Guaranteed (TSG), 2007 (1)

Growth
2003-2007
(%)
25.7
17.0
32.3
8.1
41.2
100.0
44.4
31.6
100.0
53.8
13.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

Jamón Serrano
Falukorv

Mozzarella
Boerenkaas
Hushållsost

Cheese
IT
NL
SE
Meat-based products
ES
SE
Fresh meat (and offal)
Traditional Farmfresh Turkey
UK
Other products of animal origin (eggs, 
honey, milk products excluding butter etc.)
ES
Bread, pastry, cakes, confectionery, 
biscuits and other baker's wares
Panellets
ES
Kalakukko
FI
Karjalanpiirakka
FI

Leche certificada de Granja

(1) A TSG does not refer to the origin but highlights traditional 
character, either in the composition or means of production.

Source: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural 
Development, European Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/
agriculture/qual/en/1bbb1_en.htm)

154

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   154
Consumers.indb   154

08.04.2009   09:50:22
08.04.2009   09:50:22

Figure 1.18: What are all the things that 
come to your mind when thinking about 
possible problems or risks associated with 
food, EU-25, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

5

10

15

20

Food poisoning

Chemicals, pesticides, 
        toxic substances

Obesity, overweight

                 Illness, 
health problems

GMOs

Food additives

No problems or risk

Bacteria

                 Expiry dates, 
lack of fresh products

Lack of quality, bad food

Allergies

Cholesterol

Mad cow disease

           Cardiovascular, 
circulatory problems

Other illnesses

Fats

Pollution

               Indigestion, 
digestive problems

Cancer

   Lack of sanitary 
controls, hygiene

Bad diet

Diabetes

(1) Multiple answers possible.

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, 
European Commission

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

1.5.2 Safety

From farm to fork

Th  e EU has an integrated approach to food safety, 
from farm to fork. Th  e main focus of this policy is 
to protect the health of consumers, animals and 
plants, while encouraging the diversity of food and 
beverage products that are on off er within the EU 
through  assuring  eff ective  control  systems  and 
compliance with EU food safety standards both 
within the EU and in non-Community countries 
(as concerns their exports to the EU).

Consumer  confi dence  in  relation  to  food  safety 
issues was undermined by a number of crises in 
recent  years,  including  outbreaks  of  BSE,  avian 
fl u, and foot and mouth disease. In January 2000, 
the  European  Commission  released  a  White 
Paper  on  Food  Safety  (5)  which  set  out  plans  for 
a proactive food policy, modernising legislation, 
reinforcing  controls,  increasing  the  capability 
of  the  scientifi c  advice  system,  and  making  the 
whole system from farm to fork more transparent. 
Th  ere were three main pillars:

• 

• 

• 

the  creation  of  a  European  Food  Safety 
Authority (EFSA);
to  consistently  implement  a  farm  to  fork 
approach across all food legislation;
and  to  establish  a  principle  that  feed  and 
food  operators  have  primary  responsibility 
for  food  safety,  while  Member  States  should 
ensure  surveillance  and  controls,  and  the 
Commission  should  test  the  capacities  and 
capabilities  of  the  Member  States  through 
audits and inspections.

Food law, as laid down in Regulation 178/2002 (6) 
aims  at  ensuring  a  high  level  of  protection  of 
human  life  and  health,  taking  into  account  the 
protection  of  animal  health  and  welfare,  plant 
health  and  the  environment.  Th  e  Regulation 
establishes 
the  principles  of  risk  analysis, 
as  well  as  the  mechanisms  for  scientifi c  and 
technical  evaluations  undertaken  by  EFSA. 
Th  e  identifi cation  of  the  origin  of  feed  and 
food  ingredients  and  food  sources  is  of  prime 
importance  for  the  protection  of  consumers 
and  in  order  to  facilitate  this  traceability  was 
identifi ed  as  a  key  area  for  reform.  Traceability 
facilitates  the  withdrawal  of  foods  and  enables 
consumers  to  be  provided  with  targeted  and 
implicated 
information  concerning 
accurate 
products. Importers are similarly aff ected as they 
are required to identify from whom the product 
was shipped (non-Community suppliers).

(5)  ‘White paper on food 
safety’, Brussels, 12 
January 2000, COM 
(1999) 719 ﬁ nal. For 
more information: 
http://ec.europa.eu/
dgs/health_consumer/
library/pub/pub06_
en.pdf.

(6)  Regulation (EC) No 
178/2002 of the 
European Parliament 
and of the Council 
of 28 January2002 
laying down the 
general principles and 
requirements of food 
law, establishing the 
European Food Safety 
Authority and laying 
down procedures in 
matters of food safety. 
For more information: 
http://eur-lex.europa.
eu/pri/en/oj/dat/2002/
l_031/l_03120020201en
00010024.pdf.

  Consumers in Europe

155

Consumers.indb   155
Consumers.indb   155

08.04.2009   09:50:23
08.04.2009   09:50:23

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Figure 1.19: Food safety issues: for each of the following, 
please tell me if you are very worried, fairly worried, not very 
worried, or not at all worried, EU-25, 2005
(%)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Pesticide residues in fruit, 
          vegetables or cereals

     Residues in meats like 
antibiotics or hormones

                Unhygienic conditions 
in food handling outside home

New viruses like avian influenza

                Contamination by bacteria like 
salmonella in eggs or listeria in cheese

Pollutants like mercury or dioxins

Genetically modified products
                             in food or drinks

Additives like colours, preservatives or 
          flavourings used in food or drinks

Mad cow disease (BSE)

   Chemical substances formed during
heating, baking, barbecuing or frying

Unhygienic conditions in 
    food handling at home

Very worried
Not at all worried

Fairly worried
Do not know

Not very worried

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, European Commission

As  such,  at  all  stages  of  the  food  production 
chain, business operators must ensure that food 
and  feed  satisfi es  the  requirements  of  food  law 
and  that  those  requirements  are  being  adhered 
to. Th  e traceability of food, feed, food-producing 
animals  and  all  substances  incorporated  into 
foodstuff s must be established at all stages. If an 
operator  considers  that  a  food  or  feed  product 
which  has  been  imported,  produced,  processed, 
is  harmful  to 
manufactured  or  distributed 
human  or  animal  health,  steps  must  be  taken 
immediately  to  withdraw  the  product  from  the 
market and to inform the competent authorities.

Th  e  Rapid  Alert  System  for  Food  and  Feed 
(RASFF)  is  a  system  which  has  been  in  place 
since  1979;  its  legal  basis  is  also  Regulation 
178/2002. Th  e purpose of the RASFF is to provide 
the  control  authorities  with  an  eff ective  tool 
for  the  exchange  of  information  on  measures 
taken  to  ensure  food  safety.  Th  e  RASFF  covers 
all  foodstuff s  and  animal  feed  and  is  based  on 
a  network  that  includes  the  Member  States, 
the  European  Commission  in  a  management 
capacity,  and  EFSA.  Information  concerning  a 
food-related  risk  which  is  disseminated  within 
the rapid alert network must be made available to 
the general public.

Consumer concerns about food safety range from 
illness  or  disease  in  animals  or  crops,  through 
chemical treatments or residues, to poor hygiene 
in  food  handling.  In  2005  a  Eurobarometer 
survey looked at consumers’ concerns with risks, 
including  those  related  to  food  safety.  When 
focussing on specifi c risks associated with foods 
(see  Figure  1.18),  the  most  common  was  food 
poisoning, which was cited by 16 % of respondents, 
followed  by  chemicals,  pesticides  and  toxic 
substances (14 %) and obesity/overweight (13 %). 
Th  ese issues are studied in more detail later under 
the headings of safety and health.

Figure  1.19  shows  that  there  were  a  large  range 
of  issues  that  a  majority  of  consumers  were 
fairly or very worried about, most of all residues 
in  crops  and  animal  products.  Notably  there 
were  far  greater  concerns  among  consumers 
about unhygienic food handling outside of their 
own  control  (during  production,  processing  or 
distribution, for example) than within their own 
homes.  Th  e  same  survey  noted  that  just  over 
60 % of consumers had heard of EU regulations 
concerning food safety in comparison with 85 % 
who  had  heard  of  EU  regulations  concerning 
cigarette health warnings.

A  further  analysis  available  from  the  2005 
risks  presents 
survey  on 
Eurobarometer 
consumers’  awareness  through  the  media  of 
unsafe  food  and  of  obesity  and  insuffi  cient 
exercise (see Table 1.19). While two thirds (66 %) 
of  consumers  were  aware  of  media  reporting 
in  the  previous  month  concerning  obesity  and 
insuffi  cient  exercise  only  two  fi ft hs  (40 %)  were 
similarly  aware  of  reports  concerning  unsafe 
food.

156

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   156
Consumers.indb   156

08.04.2009   09:50:24
08.04.2009   09:50:24

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Table 1.19: Health risks: how recently have you heard or seen something in the media about the following, 2005
(%)

Obesity and not exercising enough

A certain type of food being unsafe/bad for health

In the
 last 6 
months
17
20
:
24
6
19
14
20
27
17
17
17
16
20
19
25
14
13
7
23
16
31
:
21
24
10
9
12

More
than 6
months
ago
9
7
:
11
1
13
5
8
22
4
5
9
8
8
9
7
5
11
2
10
23
9
:
5
11
3
3
2

In the
 last
 month
35
38
:
35
30
35
35
32
27
39
41
35
32
33
30
30
38
33
34
34
27
28
:
40
34
36
37
37

This
week
31
32
:
22
60
26
30
31
15
31
32
27
33
26
24
30
38
34
56
14
20
26
:
30
22
49
50
43

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Do not
 know
3
0
:
4
1
3
8
5
2
5
2
4
0
3
5
3
2
3
1
10
5
4
:
3
4
0
1
3

Never
5
4
:
4
1
4
8
5
7
5
3
9
11
9
13
5
2
5
1
8
9
2
:
2
5
1
0
3

In the
last 6 
months
24
32
:
26
27
28
21
29
29
21
26
16
27
23
20
25
25
23
28
22
21
30
:
29
28
28
19
27

More
than 6
months
ago
17
21
:
19
16
25
8
19
24
9
19
9
13
15
14
16
15
16
24
15
21
15
:
12
20
13
15
10

In the
 last
 month
27
26
:
22
26
24
28
22
22
38
25
31
34
31
22
30
27
24
24
26
18
24
:
36
22
35
30
31

This
week
13
9
:
8
10
9
8
10
9
11
9
26
15
11
6
11
13
14
10
9
6
13
:
11
7
16
23
18

Do not
 know
7
1
:
11
8
5
11
10
6
10
7
6
2
5
9
6
7
10
6
13
13
10
:
8
8
1
6
5

Never
12
11
:
14
12
9
23
11
10
11
14
13
9
15
28
11
13
13
7
14
22
9
:
6
14
7
7
8

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, European Commission

Th  e greatest awareness of media reports relating to 
unsafe food was in Italy. Some 16 % of respondents 
across the EU-25 reported permanently changing 
their eating habits in reaction to the most recent 
story  they  had  heard  about  unsafe  food  (see 
Figure  1.20),  whereas  a  larger  proportion  (19 %) 
reported that they ignored the story. More than 
half  of  all  respondents  either  avoided  the  food 
for a while or got worried without changing their 
eating habits. Around 30 % of British, Swedish and 
Finnish  consumers  reported  ignoring  the  story 
while a similar proportion of Polish and Cypriot 
consumers  reported  that  they  had  permanently 
changed their eating habits.

Figure 1.20: How did you react the last time 
you heard a story about a type of food being 
unsafe or bad for your health, EU-25, 2005
(%)

Do not 
know
2%

Other
3%

Changed 
eating 
habits
16%

Avoided 
the food 
for a while
37%

Ignored 
the story
19%

Got 
worried 
but did 
nothing
23%

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, European 
Commission

  Consumers in Europe

157

Consumers.indb   157
Consumers.indb   157

08.04.2009   09:50:25
08.04.2009   09:50:25

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

Table  1.20  provides  a  ranked  list  of  diseases 
related to food safety, with the ranking based on 
a number of factors, such as severity, incidence, 
and (non-)treatability.

Figure 1.21: Rapid alert system for food 
and feed products: notifi cations according 
to type of control, 2006 (1)
(%)

Border 
control - 
screening 
sample
4%

Consumer 
complaint
4%

Company 
own check
5%

Market 
control
42%

Border 
control - 
import 
rejected
45%

(1) There was a total of 2 923 original notiﬁ cations made in 2006 
(including alerts in relation to wine and other alcoholic drinks).

Source: The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), 
Directorate-General Health and Consumers, European 
Commission

Th  e European Commission is active in the fi eld 
of  food  safety  and  quality  to  protect  consumer 
health.  Attention  to  food  safety  and  quality  are 
necessary  in  all  stages  of  the  food  chain:  feed 
production, primary production, food processing, 
storage, transportation and distribution, in other 
words from farm to fork. At the EU level, one of 
the  practical  aspects  concerning  food  safety  is 
the rapid alert system for food and feed (RASFF), 
which is a notifi cation system for concerns about 
food  and  drinks  (including  alcoholic  drinks), 
providing  a  system  for  the  swift   exchange  of 
information  between  Member  States  and  the 
coordination  of  response  actions  to  food  safety 
threats. In 2006 the system was expanded to cover 
pet food and animal health issues. Figures 1.21 to 
1.23 indicate the type of controls that gave rise to 
notifi cations, the type of products concerned, and 
the country of origin of the notifi cation. In 2006,  
by far the single largest number of notifi cations 
concerned  nuts  and  nut  products,  followed  by 
fruit  and  vegetables,  and  fi sh  and  fi sh  products. 
It  should  be  noted  that  the  country  making 
the  notifi cation  may  well  be  diff erent  from  the 
country of origin of the product, especially in the 
case where the notifi cation results from a border 
control:  in  2006  almost  30 %  of  notifi cations 
concerned  products  originating  from  within 
the  EU-27,  and  just  under  a  tenth  (8 %  to  9 %) 
originated from each of China, Turkey, Iran and 
the United States.

Table 1.20: Inventory of food safety statistics: ranking of the most important diseases, 2007 (1)

Disease

1 Verotoxigenic E. Coli (VTEC) (Enterohaemorrhagic E. coli)
2 Salmonella infections other than those due to S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi
3 Campylobacteriosis (Campylobacter enteritis)
4 Listeriosis
5 Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
6 Viral intestinal infections due to Calicivirus (incl. Norovirus)
7 Rotaviral enteritis
8 Botulism
9 Acute Hepatitis E
10 Yersiniosis (Enteritis due to Yersinia spp.)

Obligation
to report
to EU
EFSA, ECDC
EFSA, ECDC
EFSA, ECDC
EFSA, ECDC
ECDC
ECDC
ECDC

Category of 
causing agent
Bacterium
Bacterium
Bacterium
Bacterium
Prion
Virus
Virus
Toxin (exotoxin) EFSA, ECDC
Virus
Bacterium

ECDC
EFSA, ECDC

(1) The importance of each disease is based on a ranking for a range of criteria, including: severity, attributable fraction to food, risk 
group, incidence, outbreaks, geo scale, non preventability, non treatability, and social impact; EFSA: European Food Safety Authority; 
ECDC: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

Source: Eurostat task force

158

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   158
Consumers.indb   158

08.04.2009   09:50:26
08.04.2009   09:50:26

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

Figure 1.22: Rapid alert system for food 
and feed products: notifi cations by product 
category, 2006
(number)

Figure 1.23: Rapid alert system for food 
and feed products: notifi cations by country, 
2006 (1)
(number)

0

200

400

600

800

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Nuts, snacks

Fruit & vegetables

Fish

Cereals & bakery

Materials in contact with

Herbs & spices

Crustaceans

Meat

Feed

Diet, supplements etc.

Molluscs

Confect., honey, royal jelly

Soups, broths & sauces

Poultry

Cocoa, coffee & tea

Milk

Prepared dishes

Non-alcoholic beverages

Other food

Fats & oils

Eggs

Ices & desserts

Food additives

IT

DE

UK

ES

NL

DK

EL

PL

FR

BE

FI

CZ

AT

SE

SI

NO

SK

CY

HU

LT

EE

PT

LV

MT

IE

LU

IS

Source: The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), 
Directorate-General Health and Consumers, 
European Commission

Source: The Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), 
Directorate-General Health and Consumers, 
European Commission

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

  Consumers in Europe

159

Consumers.indb   159
Consumers.indb   159

08.04.2009   09:50:27
08.04.2009   09:50:27

1

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1.6 Externalities

1.6.1 Health

Health  concerns  lie  behind  many  of  the  safety 
issues related to food mentioned in the previous 
point. Th  ere are however health issues relating to 
food that are not directly linked to the inherent 
safety  of  the  food,  but  to  the  level  and  balance 
of food consumption. Guideline Daily Amounts 
(GDAs) are guides for the total amount of energy 
and nutrients that a typical healthy adult should 
be eating in a day, including fats, carbohydrates, 
protein,  and  fi bre,  as  well  as  sodium  (salt);  the 
GDAs for women are shown in Table 1.21 along 
with  recommended  daily  allowances  (RDAs) 
for vitamins and minerals. It is hoped that such 
guidelines,  combined  with  product  labelling, 
can  help  consumers  to  understand  better  how 
individual  products  contribute  to  achieving  an 
overall balanced diet. For any individual, energy 
and  nutrient  requirements  may  be  higher  or 
lower  than  the  published  GDAs,  based  on  their 
gender, age, weight, level of physical activity and 
other factors: GDAs are not strict targets for each 
individual.

As  well  as  risking  nutritional  defi ciencies,  a 
poor  diet  (as  well  as  other  factors,  for  example 
exercise  and  hereditary  factors)  may  lead  to 
weight  problems.  Over  and  above  the  direct 
health  problems  of  being  overweight  or  obese, 
costs  arise  from  the  treatment  of  weight  related 
illnesses. Obesity can also be related to a range of 
chronic diseases, including diabetes, cancers and 
heart disease.

for  Health 

Th  e  Directorate-General 
and 
Consumers  is  currently  considering  a  number 
of  labelling  issues  in  relation  to  food  and 
beverages.  At  the  time  of  writing,  there  are 
no  common  labelling  criteria  across  the  EU. 
Indeed, labelling all of the ingredients in a food 
product  is  not  compulsory,  and  the  situation 
can  vary  considerably  from  one  Member  State 
to  another;  several  countries  only  require  the 
main ingredients to be labelled, while others have 
more  stringent  requirements  that  may  include 
increasing the size of the ingredients label, placing 
the label in a prominent position, including a full 
list of ingredients, or using an easy-to-understand 
labelling system that promotes healthy living.

Table 1.21: Guideline daily amounts for 
women, based on an intake of 2 000 kcal

Energy
Total fat
Saturated fat
Carbohydrates
Total sugars
Protein
Fibre
Sodium (salt)

Vitamin A
Vitamin D
Vitamin E
Vitamin C
Thiamin
Riboflavin
Niacin
Vitamin B6
Folic acid
Vitamin B12
Blotin
Pantothenic acid
Calcium
Phosphorus
Iron
Magnesium
Zinc
Iodine

2 000 kcal (calories)
<=70g
<=20g
270g
<=90g
50g
>=25g
<=2.4g (6g)

800μg
5μg
10mg
60mg
1.4mg
1.6mg
18mg
2mg
200μg
1μg
0.15mg
6mg
800mg
800mg
14mg
300mg
15mg
150μg

(1) mg = milligram = 1/1 000 of a gram; 
µg = microgram = 1/1 000 000 of a gram.

Source: EUFIC, the European Food Information Council 
(http://www.euﬁ c.org), Council Directive 90/496/EEC of 
24 September 1990 on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs

Th  e  issue  of  labelling  is  oft en  of  concern  to 
consumers,  particular,  in  relation  to  nutritional 
health claims that are oft en made on the packaging 
of  food  products  or  through  advertisements. 
In  December  2006,  a  Regulation  on  the  use 
of  nutrition  and  health  claims  for  foods  was 
adopted  by  the  Council  and  Parliament.  Th  is 
Regulation (7) lays down harmonised rules for the 
use  of  a  specifi c  group  of  health  or  nutritional 
claims  (such  as  ‘low  fat’,  ‘high  fi bre’  and  ‘helps 
lower cholesterol’). Th  is should ensure that claims 
made on food labels in the EU are clear, accurate 
and substantiated, while contributing to a higher 
level  of  human  health  protection  and  healthier 
lifestyle choices.

(7)  Regulation (EC) No 
1924/2006 of the 
European Parliament 
and of the Council of 
20 December 2006 on 
nutrition and health 
claims made on foods. 
For more information: 
http://eur-lex.europa.
eu/LexUriServ/
LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L
:2007:012:0003:0018:EN:
PDF.

160

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   160
Consumers.indb   160

08.04.2009   09:50:28
08.04.2009   09:50:28

1.6.2 Animal welfare

importance 

in  national 

A 2005 Eurobarometer survey studied consumer 
attitudes towards the welfare of farmed animals 
(see  Table  1.22).  A  small  majority  (55 %)  of 
respondents  across  the  EU-25  reported  that 
animal  welfare/protection  does  not  receive 
enough 
food  and 
agricultural policies, with the highest proportion 
by  far  in  Greece  (73 %).  Almost  one  third  of 
all  respondents  indicated  that  they  had  never 
considered  animal  welfare/protection  when 
purchasing meat, a share that climbed to around 
50 %  in  Estonia,  Poland,  the  Czech  Republic, 
Lithuania  and  Slovakia,  while  the  lowest  share 
by far was recorded in Sweden (10 %). Generally, 
those  countries  where  a  high  proportion  of 
respondents  did  not  consider  animal  welfare/

Food and non-alcoholic beverages

1

protection  when  purchasing  meat  tended  to  be 
the same as those where only a small proportion 
of respondents said that they could easily identify 
(from  labelling)  products  from  animal  welfare 
friendly  production  systems,  and  equally  they 
tended to have a large proportion of respondents 
unwilling  to  pay  extra  for  products  from  such 
systems (the example used in the survey was for 
chicken’s eggs).

For more information

Directorate-General  for  Health  and  Consumers 
– Food safety – from the farm to the fork:  
http://ec.europa.eu/food/index_en.htm

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA):  
http://www.efsa.europa.eu

Table 1.22: Animal welfare issues, EU-25, 2005
(%)

Animal welfare 
does not 
receive enough 
importance in 
our country's 
food and 
agricultural policy
55
54
:
65
60
54
43
47
73
44
64
53
53
46
58
54
45
44
48
54
49
:
:
62
65
40
54
62

I never consider
 the welfare/
protection of
animals when
purchasing meat
 (poultry, beef,
 pork, fish, etc.)
32
42
:
50
19
24
51
32
17
43
39
21
26
40
50
18
42
33
32
16
51
36
:
48
28
34
10
25

For eggs, meat or
milk I can easily
identify from the
label those
products sourced
 from welfare
friendly systems
20
18
:
3
34
31
6
17
17
7
20
14
13
8
4
42
5
5
41
35
4
8
:
5
17
29
44
26

I would not be
willing to pay a
premium for hen’s
eggs that are
sourced from a
welfare friendly
system
34
34
:
40
18
26
45
32
29
45
36
45
29
45
53
18
57
37
22
19
32
46
:
57
30
25
15
24

I rate the 
welfare/protection of
the following farmed
animals as very good
or fairly good

Laying
 hens 
32
26
:
24
20
23
55
32
34
44
23
41
56
33
53
40
38
68
19
25
50
38
:
37
54
41
27
29

Dairy
 cows
66
79
:
63
74
72
62
67
42
52
70
58
58
43
57
77
51
77
83
65
66
46
:
48
71
85
82
74

Pigs
45
46
:
49
34
43
59
41
28
46
35
51
41
42
55
50
41
62
37
43
47
42
:
30
56
61
49
51

EU-25 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SK
SI
FI
SE
UK

(1) Excluding Portugal for the importance of animal welfare/protection.

Source: ‘Attitudes of consumers towards the welfare of farmed animals’, Special Eurobarometer 229, European CommissionSource: ‘Attitudes of consumers towards 
the welfare of farmed animals’, Special Eurobarometer 229, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

161

Consumers.indb   161
Consumers.indb   161

08.04.2009   09:50:29
08.04.2009   09:50:29

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

Consumers.indb   163
Consumers.indb   163

08.04.2009   09:50:30
08.04.2009   09:50:30

2

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

Alcohol and tobacco are a major part of the social 
and  cultural  fabric  of  life  for  many  of  the  EU’s 
citizens.  While  domestic  sales  and  exports  of 
alcoholic drinks and tobacco provide employment 
for many EU workers, and excise duties provide 
tax revenues to governments, the consumption of 
these goods can also have a number of associated 
costs;  these  can  be  characterised  as  costs  to 
individuals (such as poor health or death), costs 
to  business  (such  as  lower  productivity  through 
absenteeism),  costs  to  society  (such  as  crime 
and intimidation), or costs to government (such 
as  associated  strains  on  police  and  healthcare 
budgets).  Any  consumption  of  tobacco  will 
result  in  harmful  health  eff ects,  whereas  there 
is  some  evidence  that  a  limited  level  of  alcohol 
consumption  (in  particular  of  wine)  may  be  a 
contributing  factor  in  preventing  disease,  while 
alcohol abuse is also detrimental to health.

2.1 Access and choice

In most of the Member States there are restrictions 
on the sale of alcoholic drinks, generally through 
licensed premises. According to a report on alcohol 
use in Europe carried out by the Institute of Alcohol 
Studies  on  behalf  of  the  European  Commission, 
over one third of Member States (and some regions) 
limit the hours of sale of alcohol, while others have 
diff erent restrictions for the days of week. All of the 
Member States for which information is available 
(see Table 2.1) prohibit the sale of alcohol to people 
beneath  a  certain  age  in  cafés,  restaurants,  bars 
or pubs. In most of the Member States, the same 
age  restrictions  that  apply  in  these  points  of  sale 
(generally  16  or  18  years  old),  also  apply  to  sales 
of alcohol to young persons in off -premise shops. 
However, there is a lower age restriction on the sale 
of alcohol through off -premise shops in Denmark, 
while in Malta, Luxembourg, Greece and Belgium 
(beer  and  wine  only)  there  is  no  particular  age 
limit  for  the  sale  of  alcohol  within  off -premise 
outlets.  In  Germany,  France  (on-premise  only), 
the Netherlands, Austria and Finland (off -premise 
only), age restrictions on sales of spirits are higher 
than those for beer or wine.

Restrictions on the sale and availability of tobacco 
also exist across the EU and are subject to a broad 
range  of  diff erent  national  policies.  Nevertheless, 
Council  Recommendation  2003/54/EC  of  2 
December  2002  underlines  a  common  position 
on  the  prevention  of  smoking  and  on  initiatives 
to  improve  tobacco  control.  Among  these  are 

recommendations that prevent: the sale of tobacco 
products to minors; the accessibility of self-service 
and  vending  machines  to  minors;  the  sale  of 
individual cigarettes or packages with fewer than 
19 cigarettes.

2.2 Consumption

Both  tobacco  and  alcohol  consumption  can 
be  associated  with  problems  of  addiction.  Th  e 
Directorate-General  for  Health  and  Consumers 
estimates  that  55  million  adults  across  the  EU 
drink  to  harmful  levels,  with  some  23  million 
persons considered as being addicted to alcohol. 
A  range  of  campaigns  and  initiatives  to  draw 
consumers’ attention to the dangers of smoking 
and alcohol abuse are supported by the European 
Commission.  By  way  of  example,  ‘HELP:  for  a 
life  without  tobacco’  is  a  programme  aimed  at 
reaching  out  to  young  non-smokers  tempted  to 
start, or those exposed to second-hand smoke, as 
well as smokers who want to stop.

2.2.1 Consumption volume

According to World Drink Trends, a publication 
released  by  the  World  Health  Organisation 
(WHO),  the  EU  remains  the  heaviest  drinking 
region  in  the  world.  Although  the  average 
amount of alcohol (pure alcohol equivalent) that 
adults  drank  fell  from  15  litres  each  year  in  the 
mid-1970s to about 11 litres by 2004, this is still 
two  and  a  half  times  the  average  for  the  rest  of 
the world.

Th  ere  are  considerable  diff erences  in  recorded 
alcohol consumption among Member States (see 
Table  2.2);  in  about  half  of  the  Member  States, 
average consumption was above 10 litres of pure 
alcohol  equivalent  per  adult,  but  was  lowest 
in  Malta  (6  litres)  and  Bulgaria  (5.9  litres).  In  a 
majority  of  Member  States  the  largest  volume 
of  alcohol  was  consumed  in  the  form  of  beer, 
the  highest  levels  being  a  little  over  9  litres  of 
alcohol per adult per year in the Czech Republic 
and  Ireland.  Annual  alcohol  intake  consumed 
in  the  form  of  wine  tended  to  be  highest  in 
wine-producing  areas,  such  as  France,  Italy  or 
Luxembourg.  In  Cyprus  and  Latvia,  alcohol 
consumed in the form of spirits was equivalent to 
5 and 7 litres of pure alcohol per adult respectively, 
which was a higher level than for any other type 
of alcoholic drink in these countries.

164

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   164
Consumers.indb   164

08.04.2009   09:50:37
08.04.2009   09:50:37

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

2

Table 2.1: Minimum age limit for the purchase of wine, beer and spirits
(years)

Beer
On-premise Off-premise
None
18
18
15
16
18
18
None
16-18
16
16
:
18
18
None
18
None
16
16
18
16
18
18
18
18
20
18

16
18
18
18
16
18
18
17
16-18
16
16
:
18
18
16
18
16
16
16
18
16
18
18
18
18
18
18

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES (1)
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Wine
On-premise Off-premise
None
18
18
15
16
18
18
None
16-18
16
16
:
18
18
None
18
None
16
16
18
16
18
18
18
18
20
18

16
18
18
18
16
18
18
17
16-18
16
16
:
18
18
16
18
16
16
16
18
16
18
18
18
18
18
18

Spirits
On-premise Off-premise
18
18
18
15
18
18
18
None
16-18
16
16
:
18
18
None
18
None
18
18
18
16
18
18
18
20
20
18

18
18
18
18
18
18
18
17
16-18
18
16
:
18
18
16
18
16
18
18
18
16
18
18
18
18
18
18

(1) Varies by region.

Source: World Health Organisation (www.who.int) and the Alcohol Policy Network co-ﬁ nanced by the European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

165

Consumers.indb   165
Consumers.indb   165

08.04.2009   09:50:38
08.04.2009   09:50:38

2

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

Binge-drinking

Concerns over binge-drinking can be categorised 
into  two  broad  areas:  those  aff ecting  long-term 
health and those with behavioural consequences 
that may impact on other members of society. Th  e 
former  include  well-documented  evidence  such 
as links to increased risk of liver disease, cardio-
vascular or mental health problems. Behavioural 
consequences  extend  to  a  variety  of  areas, 
including  an  increased  incidence  of  accidents, 
violence,  poor  social  behaviour,  or  unsafe  sex, 
as well as higher levels of absenteeism and lower 
productivity at work.

Th  ere  appears  to  be  somewhat  of  a  north-south 
divide  in  terms  of  the  occurrence  of  binge-
drinking  among  15-16  year-olds  (typically 
single  drinking  occasions  involving  more  than 
fi ve  alcoholic  drinks),  aside  from  relatively  low 
rates of binge-drinking reported in Finland and 
Sweden (where alcohol is relatively expensive and 
where more rigorous age restrictions apply to the 
sale of alcohol). About one third of all 15-16 year-

old boys in Denmark, Germany and Ireland (all 
31 %)  and  particularly  the  Netherlands  (37 %) 
reported  binge-drinking  at  least  three  times  a 
month,  compared  with  between  13  and  14 %  in 
France  or  Greece.  In  general,  binge-drinking 
reported  among  boys  was  higher  than  among 
girls, but this was not the case in Ireland or the 
United Kingdom, where the prevalence of binge-
drinking among girls was slightly higher.

Within the EU-15 Member States, those countries 
with the highest proportion of male and female 
15-16  year-old  binge  drinkers  tended  to  be  the 
same as those that reported some of the highest 
levels of alcohol consumption among adults. Th  is 
pattern  was  not  repeated  in  the  Member  States 
that  joined  the  EU  since  2004,  as,  for  example, 
relatively  low  levels  of  binge-drinking  among 
15-16  year-olds  were  recorded  in  Hungary  and 
the  Czech  Republic,  while  these  Member  States 
recorded  the  third  and  fourth  highest  levels  of 
adult alcohol consumption in the EU-27.

Table 2.2: Alcoholic beverage consumption per adult (over 15 years old) and youth binge 
drinking

Consumption 
(litres per 
adult) (1)
10.6
5.9
13.0
11.7
12.0
9.0
13.7
9.0
11.7
11.4
8.0
11.5
9.6
9.9
15.6
13.6
6.0
9.7
11.1
8.1
11.5
9.7
6.7
10.4
9.9
6.5
11.8

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

of which:

Beer Wine Spirits
1.6
3.1
2.5
2.8
4.5
2.2
1.4
4.5
2.4
3.1
1.7
:
2.5
2.1
1.9
4.4
2.8
3.9
2.9
6.6
0.5
6.1
5.0
2.5
7.2
0.5
4.3
1.1
2.0
9.0
4.2
4.9
0.9
3.0
1.8
2.6
1.6
3.9
1.6
1.6
1.7
5.6
2.4
3.0
1.0
2.0
4.3
1.7
2.9
2.4
1.1
2.2
2.2
2.7

5.8
0.5
9.3
5.9
6.9
4.3
9.0
2.4
4.6
2.2
1.8
3.8
2.2
4.5
6.3
4.3
2.4
4.8
6.6
4.8
3.5
4.0
3.8
5.4
4.6
3.3
6.2

People drinking any 
alcohol in 2005 (%)
Male
Female
74.3
88.5
49.2
78.2
72.8
89.4
:
:
77.6
90.1
62.7
83.7
82.6
86.6
:
:
44.1
68.7
:
:
66.5
89.1
42.4
77.0
72.6
83.5
92.4
94.3
:
:
37.7
71.5
56.2
78.3
78.3
91.0
:
:
59.5
81.6
40.8
76.7
34.2
68.2
81.4
91.0
83.4
92.3
73.4
83.0
83.8
90.6
85.0
90.6

Binge drinking in 
15-16 year olds (2)
(% girls)
14
16
13
18
24
15
33
8
:
7
8
6
18
7
:
5
19
20
:
5
10
:
18
12
15
14
29

(% boys)
28
26
24
31
31
26
31
14
:
13
19
17
24
19
:
12
32
37
:
17
20
:
23
20
18
18
26

(1) Mixed reference years: 2003 or 2004, except for Estonia, 2002.
(2) Reference year: 2006 except for Bulgaria, 2003.

Source: World Health Organisation (www.who.int) and Eurostat, Population and social conditions (theme3/hlth/hlth_ls_dk12ma)

166

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   166
Consumers.indb   166

08.04.2009   09:50:39
08.04.2009   09:50:39

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

2

Smoking habits

In  all  of  the  Member  States  for  which  data  are 
available for 2005, a majority of adults were non-
smokers.  Th  e  highest  proportion  of  smokers 
was  recorded  in  Austria  (45.1 %)  and  Slovakia 
(44.5 %),  while  the  highest  majority  of  non-
smokers  (81.3 %)  was  registered  in  Portugal.  In 
Greece, Cyprus and the Netherlands, a majority 
of both men and women who smoked on a daily 
basis, smoked more than 20 cigarettes each day.

Some  individuals  face  considerable  diffi  culties  in 
reducing the frequency at which they smoke or in 
giving  up  their  smoking  habit  altogether.  In  the 
12 months preceding a Eurobarometer survey on 
attitudes  towards  smoking,  almost  one  in  every 
three smokers (31 %) in the EU-25 had tried to give 
up  smoking  and  this  proportion  rose  to  nearly 
50 %  in  the  United  Kingdom.  One  in  every  ten 
attempts to give up smoking in the EU-25 lasted 
less than a day, while 27 % of those trying to give 
up sustained their eff orts over a period of at least 
two months. Over the longer-term, attempts made 
by  individuals  to  give  up  smoking  can  succeed, 
as just over 20 % of the EU-25’s adult population 
described themselves as ex-smokers in 2006.

Table 2.3: Frequency of smoking among adults (over 15 years old), 2005 
(% of respondents)

Non-
smoker
71.5
59.9
69.1
63.0
67.5
65.2
73.8
65.4
69.0
73.9
75.5
72.3
61.6
61.1
:
66.1
73.8
66.0
54.9
64.4
81.3
69.5
72.4
55.5
77.4
72.0
73.3

Occasional 
smoker
4.4
7.8
6.1
2.9
6.2
1.5
4.3
7.1
2.8
:
:
3.8
5.7
11.6
:
3.4
2.8
5.8
8.8
5.8
2.2
9.6
8.5
9.8
4.5
10.4
:

Daily 
smoker
24.1
32.3
24.9
34.1
26.3
33.3
21.9
27.6
28.1
26.1
24.5
23.9
32.7
27.3
:
30.5
23.4
28.2
36.3
29.9
16.4
20.8
19.2
34.6
18.1
17.5
26.7

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Breakdown of male
 daily cigarette
smokers:

Breakdown of female
 daily cigarette
smokers:

>20 a day
35.6
18.4
30.6
39.9
49.6
46.0
53.1
80.3
49.0
38.5
41.8
79.2
43.8
37.2
:
62.2
33.2
71.8
17.4
63.8
66.3
46.5
43.3
62.7
46.1
:
37.1

<20 a day
64.4
81.6
69.4
60.1
50.4
54.0
46.9
19.7
51.0
61.5
58.2
20.8
56.2
62.8
:
37.8
66.8
28.2
82.6
36.2
33.7
53.5
56.7
37.3
53.9
:
62.9

>20 a day
31.5
6.3
12.5
26.2
31.8
13.7
33.1
59.6
30.4
27.3
22.9
51.4
12.2
6.5
:
40.6
11.7
71.4
8.7
38.9
40.1
23.8
13.7
34.0
23.7
:
26.1

<20 a day
68.5
93.7
87.5
73.8
68.2
86.3
66.9
40.4
69.6
72.7
77.1
48.6
87.8
93.5
:
59.4
88.3
28.6
91.3
61.1
59.9
76.2
86.3
66.0
76.3
:
73.9

Source: Eurostat, Population and social conditions (theme3/hlth/hlth_ls_smka and hlth_ls_cgsmka)

  Consumers in Europe

167

Consumers.indb   167
Consumers.indb   167

08.04.2009   09:50:39
08.04.2009   09:50:39

2

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

Table 2.4: Final consumption expenditure 
of households, alcoholic beverages and 
tobacco:  consumption per head
(EUR)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

2000
400
500
0
300
700
500
200
800
400
300
400
300
600
200
200
2 700
200
300
400
400
200
300
100
300
100
700
500
700
:
800
800
800

2006
500
500
:
400
:
500
400
900
600
400
500
400
900
:
300
2 600
400
300
400
500
300
:
100
400
200
800
:
700
:
900
:
800

(1) 2006, forecast.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_c)

2.2.2 Consumption expenditure

for 

Consumption  expenditure  data  presented  here 
excludes  alcohol  or  tobacco  sold  by  hotels, 
restaurants,  cafés  and  bars 
immediate 
consumption (see Chapter 11 for more information 
on  hotels  and  restaurants).  Th  e  average  annual 
expenditure on alcoholic beverages and tobacco 
across  the  EU-27  was  EUR  500  per  person  in 
2006, the equivalent of 2.4 % of total expenditure. 
National averages ranged from lows of EUR 100 
in  Romania  and  EUR  200  in  Slovakia  to  a 
high  of  EUR  2 600  per  person  in  Luxembourg. 
However, relative to total expenditure the range 
was  reversed,  as  1.7 %  of  the  average  household 
budget  in  Luxembourg  was  spent  on  alcoholic 
beverages and tobacco, a proportion that rose to 
a high of 5.8 % in Romania.

Th  e  relative  importance  of  alcoholic  beverages 
or tobacco in total household expenditure varied 
considerably, as shown in Figure 2.1 which relates 
the  structure  of  consumption  to  purchasing 
power. In Ireland, 4.1 % of the household budget 
was  spent  on  alcoholic  beverages,  which  was 
almost  twice  as  high  as  the  next  highest  shares 
reported  in  Romania  (2.3 %)  and  Lithuania 
(2.2 %).  Th  e  highest  proportion  of  household 
expenditure  devoted  to  tobacco  products  was 
recorded in Romania (3.5 %), well above the next 
highest shares in Greece, Bulgaria and Hungary – 
all within the range of 2.4 % to 2.7 %.

Across 
the  EU-27,  approximately  50 %  of 
expenditure on alcohol and tobacco products was 
devoted to tobacco, a quarter of the average spend 
was on wine, and about an eighth each on beer and 
on spirits (see Table 2.5). By far the highest relative 
spend on beer was reported in Ireland (41.1 % of 
the  total  for  alcoholic  beverages  and  tobacco), 
whereas Belgium and Luxembourg were the only 
Member States where consumers spent more on 
wine  than  on  beer,  spirits  or  tobacco  products. 
Expenditure on spirits was relatively high in the 
Baltic Member States, although tobacco products 
accounted  for  a  higher  proportion  of  household 
expenditure  in  each  of  these  three  countries. 
Indeed,  the  relative 
importance  of  tobacco 
products  was  generally  high  in  most  countries, 
and  in  particular  the  southern  Member  States, 
with  tobacco  accounting  for  almost  80 %  of 
expenditure on alcoholic beverages and tobacco 
in Greece, upwards of 70 % in Cyprus and Malta, 
and relatively high shares in Spain and Portugal 
too.

168

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   168
Consumers.indb   168

08.04.2009   09:50:40
08.04.2009   09:50:40

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

2

Figure 2.1: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of alcoholic beverages 
and tobacco in total expenditure, 2005
(%)

5

4

3

2

1

0

RO

BG

LT

LV

PL

HU

SK

EE

CZ

LU

IE

CY

UK

EL

AT

BE

NL

IT

MT

PT

SI

DK

FI

ES

SE

DE

FR

Alcoholic beverages

Tobacco

(1) Graph is ranked on overall household consumption per 
household (PPS); Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey 
(theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211 hbs_exp_t121)

Th  e  proportion  of  total  expenditure  spent  on 
alcoholic  beverages  and 
tobacco  decreased 
steadily  as  a  function  of  higher  incomes  for  the 
EU-27. Among socio-economic groups, the share 
of total expenditure devoted to alcoholic beverages 
and  tobacco  was  highest  among  the  EU-27’s 
unemployed (3.3 %) and manual workers (2.9 %), 
when compared with the average expenditure on 
these  items  by  the  self-employed  (2.1 %),  non-
manual workers or the retired (both 2.0 %).

Table 2.5: Structure of consumption 
expenditure on alcoholic beverages and 
tobacco, 2005 (1)
(% of total expenditure on alcoholic 
beverages and tobacco)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Beer Wine Spirits
12.5
25.0
12.5
9.1
45.5
13.6
10.5
5.3
13.2
:
:
:
9.1
30.3
15.2
:
:
:
25.0
17.9
17.9
14.3
19.6
41.1
5.9
5.9
5.9
4.3
13.0
8.7
13.0
34.8
4.3
5.6
33.3
11.1
5.3
5.3
10.5
22.6
16.1
16.1
28.6
14.3
20.0
11.8
41.2
11.8
5.6
11.1
13.9
7.4
14.8
7.4
14.3
33.3
14.3
3.6
17.9
17.9
16.0
8.0
16.0
4.3
21.7
4.3
12.1
17.2
10.3
4.2
25.0
20.8
19.4
12.9
16.1
12.5
29.2
29.2
10.5
36.8
15.8
12.5
33.3
12.5
3.0
18.2
18.2
12.9
22.6
22.6

Tobacco
54.2
36.4
68.4
:
45.5
47.1
42.9
25.0
79.4
69.6
47.8
50.0
73.7
45.2
37.1
35.3
66.7
70.4
42.9
60.7
60.0
65.2
60.3
50.0
51.6
33.3
36.8
41.7
57.6
38.7

(1) Data include estimates and rounding; sum of components does 
not always sum to 100 %.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey 
(theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

  Consumers in Europe

169

Consumers.indb   169
Consumers.indb   169

08.04.2009   09:50:41
08.04.2009   09:50:41

2

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

Figure 2.2: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

120

110

100

90

80

70

2001

2003

2005

2007

Spirits
Beer
Wine
Tobacco

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

2.3 Prices

In many of the Member States, a high proportion 
of  the  price  paid  by  consumers  for  alcoholic 
beverages  and  tobacco  may  be  attributed  to 
taxes  and  duties.  Th  e  data  presented  in  this 
section include these taxes and duties, which, to 
some  degree,  explain  some  of  the  wide-ranging 
diff erences  in  price  levels  and  the  evolution  of 
prices over time; more information on taxes and 
duties is provided at the end of this section.

2.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  e  harmonised  index  of  consumer  prices  for 
alcoholic  beverages  and  tobacco  rose  overall 
by  34.1 %  across  the  EU-27  between  2000  and 
2007, equivalent to more than 4.3 % per annum 
on  average.  Th  is  was  considerably  higher  than 
the  rate  of  increase  recorded  for  the  all-items 
consumer price index during the same period (an 
average of 2.4 % per annum).

With  the  exception  of  2004,  the  average  annual 
rate of increase in the price of alcoholic beverages 
and  tobacco  across  the  EU-27  was  relatively 
steady.  In  contrast,  there  were  a  number  of 
countries  where  there  were  considerable  annual 
fl uctuations,  such  as  Bulgaria  and  France.  Th  e 
strongest price increases (between 10 % and 15 %) 
across the Member States in 2007 were recorded 
in Romania, Latvia and the Czech Republic, with 
relatively  high  price  increases  also  recorded  in 
Sweden, Spain and Hungary (see Table 2.6).

By far the most rapid price increases for the EU-27 
were  recorded  for  tobacco  (where  an  average 
increase of 6.5 % per annum was registered over 
the  period  2000  to  2007)  –  see  Figure  2.2.  Th  e 
rate of price increases for wine, beer and spirits 
averaged  0.9 %  to  1.4 %  per  annum;  all  of  these 
below  the  general  infl ation  rate  (as  measured 
by  the  all-items  consumer  price  index).  It  was 
therefore  unsurprising  to  fi nd  that  the  highest 
price  increases  among  the  Member  States  were 
also recorded for tobacco products. Th  is was the 
case for all 25 of the Member States for which data 
are available (no data for Hungary or Romania) 
for  the  period  2000  to  2007,  with  average  price 
increases for tobacco peaking at 19.7 % per annum 
in Bulgaria and 10.7 % per annum in Slovenia. In 
contrast,  there  was  downward  pressure  on  the 
price of some alcoholic beverages between 2000 
and 2007.

170

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   170
Consumers.indb   170

08.04.2009   09:50:41
08.04.2009   09:50:41

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

2

Table 2.6: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, alcoholic beverages and tobacco, 
annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
3.8
1.7
2.1
4.3
2.4
1.5
3.3
12.0
2.8
3.1
3.0
1.1
8.5
6.9
-9.8
3.1
10.7
8.3
2.8
0.9
8.1
1.0
29.7
4.2
9.6
2.5
1.7
4.7
88.7
2.0
6.9
:

2001
3.7
1.9
0.6
3.2
2.3
1.7
2.9
2.5
7.4
3.2
3.2
2.6
3.4
2.7
-0.5
3.9
10.3
4.5
6.7
3.9
4.3
3.3
31.1
7.1
4.0
1.9
1.3
3.3
61.7
7.7
3.5
:

2002
4.0
1.6
27.0
1.9
0.6
4.0
1.4
5.6
7.0
5.7
4.9
2.1
9.9
2.8
1.5
5.2
9.3
7.6
4.6
4.0
2.3
4.9
17.4
13.5
9.9
1.7
1.0
1.8
53.1
8.0
-0.8
:

2003
4.8
4.4
3.8
0.9
-1.1
5.3
3.0
9.9
4.2
3.4
8.8
7.0
18.0
1.6
3.3
5.7
11.1
1.2
3.6
3.0
-2.5
4.6
22.1
11.8
12.0
1.1
1.6
1.9
45.4
8.8
1.1
:

2004
6.1
4.8
26.8
3.0
-5.0
6.8
2.1
3.5
4.5
4.3
14.3
7.9
8.3
5.0
3.0
6.5
11.6
13.0
7.3
1.8
2.5
2.9
16.2
5.2
8.4
-10.7
0.7
2.0
19.0
1.5
7.5
:

2005
4.1
2.8
7.7
1.4
2.0
8.5
4.3
0.6
2.2
5.1
0.1
6.8
0.5
4.2
0.1
6.7
2.7
1.8
2.8
6.3
2.6
4.5
12.1
4.0
-0.7
-1.8
0.5
2.2
13.5
3.8
2.5
:

2006
3.2
1.4
54.7
1.3
0.8
3.6
3.5
1.1
5.7
1.8
0.4
4.8
0.9
8.5
-0.4
3.4
4.3
0.6
0.9
0.4
1.7
9.3
17.9
4.0
3.1
1.4
1.2
2.7
20.8
2.9
2.0
1.1

2007
4.0
4.4
0.8
10.2
1.7
3.1
4.1
5.4
6.4
7.0
1.9
3.5
1.0
13.6
5.4
4.5
6.9
0.8
1.8
2.3
3.3
4.9
14.9
6.8
4.4
1.4
7.2
3.5
9.9
3.4
1.5
2.1

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

2.3.2 Price levels

In  general  terms,  price  level  indices  for  2006 
show  that  alcoholic  beverages  and  tobacco  were 
much  more  expensive  in  the  Nordic  countries, 
the United Kingdom and Ireland than they were 
in eastern Member States, in particular the Baltic 
countries; note that these diff erences refl ect to a 
large degree the diff erences in VAT rates, excise 
duties and other indirect taxies that may be levied 
by governments.

Price levels for alcoholic beverages and tobacco in 
Ireland and the United Kingdom were about 75 % 
higher  than  the  EU-27  average  and  about  three 
times as high as in Latvia, Bulgaria or Lithuania. 
Th  e contrast between price levels was particularly 
marked  for  tobacco;  as  the  price  level  index  of 
tobacco in the United Kingdom was a little over 
twice the EU-27 average and about seven times as 
high as in Latvia or Lithuania (see Figure 2.3).

  Consumers in Europe

171

Consumers.indb   171
Consumers.indb   171

08.04.2009   09:50:42
08.04.2009   09:50:42

2

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

Figure 2.3: Price level indices, alcoholic 
beverages and tobacco, 2006 (1)
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

250

NO
IS
IE
UK
FI
SE
DK
FR
IT
CY
EU-27
DE
NL
BE
MT
CH
AT
TR
EL
LU
PT
HR
ES
SI
CZ
EE
HU
PL
SK
BG
RO
LT
LV
MK

Alcoholic beverages
Tobacco

(1) Graph is ranked on overall price levels for alcoholic beverages 
and tobacco.

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

In  the  case  of  alcoholic  drinks,  much  of  the 
diff erence  in  price  levels  appears  to  be  linked 
to  national  excise  duties.  In  both  the  United 
Kingdom and Ireland, excise duties on still wine 
were  about  EUR  275  per  hectolitre  in  2008  and 
such  duties  were  also  relatively  high  in  Finland 
and Sweden at about EUR 235 per hectolitre. In 
contrast,  there  was  no  excise  duty  on  still  wine 
in 11 of the remaining Member States, including 
Bulgaria  and  Slovakia,  where  the  average  price 
level  of  alcoholic  drinks  was  at  its  lowest  in  the 
EU-27. All of the Member States applied minimum 
excise  duties  on  cigarettes;  these  ranged  from  a 
little over one half of the retail price of cigarettes 
in Latvia to a little over three quarters of the retail 
price in Slovakia (see Table 2.7).

2.4 Safety

According to a WHO study – ‘Global burden of 
disease  study’  –  tobacco  and  harmful  alcohol 
use  constitute  the  fi rst  and  third  biggest  causes 
of  early  death  and  illness  in  the  EU.  A  number 
of  steps  have  been  taken  within  the  EU  to 
highlight  the  dangers  of  smoking  and  drinking 
excessive  amounts  of  alcohol.  Th  e  Tobacco 
Products Directive (2001/37/EC) of the European 
Parliament  and  of  the  Council  introduced  new 
health  messages  to  be  put  on  the  packaging  of 
tobacco products and increase the size of health 
warnings, and was supplemented by Commission 
Decision  2003/641/EC  of  5  September  2003  to 
use  colour  photographs  or  other  illustrations  as 
health warnings on tobacco packages. In October 
2006,  the  European  Commission  adopted  a 
Communication  (COM(2006)  625  fi nal  that 
sets  out  a  strategy  to  support  Member  States  in 
reducing alcohol-related harm, including the need 
to raise awareness as regards the consequences of 
harmful alcohol consumption and its impact on 
health.

A  large  majority  (85 %)  of  EU-25  respondents 
to  a  Eurobarometer  survey  conducted  in  2005 
were  aware  of  health  warnings  on  cigarette 
packets.  Awareness  of  these  health  warnings 
was highest in Luxembourg and Hungary (93 % 
of  respondents)  and  lowest  in  Estonia  (78 %). 
Awareness  through  various  media  of  the  risks 
associated with smoking was even higher (94 %), 
with a little over two thirds (69 %) of respondents 
having heard or read warnings within the media 
in  the  preceding  month.  An  overwhelming 
majority (90 %) of individuals were also aware of 
the risks associated with alcohol consumption.

172

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   172
Consumers.indb   172

08.04.2009   09:50:42
08.04.2009   09:50:42

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

2

Table 2.7: Excise duties and revenue

Cigarettes

Still wine

Sparkling wine

Minimum 
excise duty, 2008
 (% of retail price)
60.1
64.9
64.5
53.4
59.8
60.6
61.0
57.6
63.8
64.0
58.5
59.0
74.6
51.6
57.9
56.3
60.8
57.0
58.3
75.5
62.2
52.5
58.2
77.6
57.0
52.3
61.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK (1)
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Revenue, 
2006
(EUR million)
1 459.0
:
1 097.3
918.3
12 973.8
76.1
1 089.4
2 415.5
6 414.6
9 437.0
9 624.0
175.0
81.7
101.6
421.2
829.8
62.7
1 681.1
1 408.5
2 909.1
1 410.5
:
290.1
301.9
562.8
741.6
10 930.8

Excise duty,
2008
(EUR/hectolitre)
47.1
0.0
0.0
82.4
66.5
0.0
273.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
0.0
0.0
42.6
52.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
68.5
0.0
36.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
233.0
234.7
278.6

Revenue, 
2006
(EUR million)
113.7
:
-
128.6
0.0
12.9
194.0
0.0
-
90.0
0.0
0.0
6.9
10.2
0.0
1.2
0.0
192.6
0.0
130.2
0.0
:
0.0
0.0
194.0
387.9
3 206.1

Excise duty,
2008
(EUR/hectolitre)
161.1
0.0
85.0
123.4
136.0
66.5
546.0
0.0
0.0
8.4
0.0
0.0
42.6
52.1
0.0
48.5
0.0
233.7
0.0
36.1
0.0
34.1
0.0
70.8
233.0
234.7
356.9

Revenue,
2006
(EUR million)
33.2
:
8.3
4.0
420.8
0.0
11.0
0.0
-
24.0
0.0
0.0
3.4
-
0.0
9.3
0.0
12.6
0.0
-
0.0
:
0.0
3.1
-
-
225.8

(1) Excise duty rate for still wine in Denmark relates to wine with an alcoholic content of 6-15 % vol.

Source: European Commission, Directorate General for Taxation and Customs Union

Table 2.8: Awareness of health warnings/risks associated with tobacco and alcohol, EU-25, 2005 (1)
(% of respondents)

Health warnings on cigarette packets - aware
Aware of smoking risks from the media (last read/heard)
Aware of alcohol risks from the media (last read/heard)

(1) A small percentage of respondents gave no response.

Source: ‘Risk issues’, Special Eurobarometer 238, European Commission

of which:
During
 past
 week

During
 past
 month

During
 past 6
  months

Over 6
months
ago

37
24

32
32

16
21

9
13

Yes
85
94
90

No
15
3
5

  Consumers in Europe

173

Consumers.indb   173
Consumers.indb   173

08.04.2009   09:50:43
08.04.2009   09:50:43

2

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

(8)  See, http://ec.europa.eu/
health/ph_determinants/
life_style/alcohol/keydoc_
alcohol_en.htm.

2.5 Externalities

An alcohol factsheet released by the Directorate-
General for Health and Consumers (8) reports that 
the tangible cost of excess alcohol consumption in 
the EU was EUR 125 billion in 2003, equivalent to 
about 1.3 % of GDP. A little more than half (about 
53 %)  of  this  total  was  spent  on  alcohol-related 
problems (such as the costs of crime, healthcare 
and damage), while the rest related to productivity 
losses  associated  with  foregone  production, 
as  a  result  of  absenteeism,  unemployment  or 
premature mortality – see Figure 2.4.

Across  the  EU-27,  the  standardised  death  rate 
from  cancer  of  the  trachea,  bronchus  and  lung, 
a  key  disease  associated  with  smoking,  was  67 
per  100 000  inhabitants  among  men  and  about 
18  per  100 000  for  women  in  2006,  although  in 
Hungary  these  rates  were  closer  to  double  the 
EU-27 average – see Table 2.9. Th  e standardised 
death  rate  from  alcohol  abuse  across  the  EU-27 
was  between  4  and  5  cases  per  100 000  persons 
for men, although this fi gure rose to nearer 17 in 
Estonia. 

A  similar  study  (carried  out  by  the  ASPECT 
Consortium 2004 for the European Commission) 
produced  a  comparative  estimate  of 
the 
tangible  cost  of  tobacco,  which  was  situated 
between  EUR  98  and  EUR  130  billion  in  2000 
(corresponding  to  between  1.1 %  and  1.4 %  of 
GDP).

An  analysis  over  time  shows  that  standardised 
death  rates  for  men  were  generally  falling  at  a 
faster  pace  than  those  for  women,  where  death 
rates were in some countries rising or stationary, 
thus resulting in a closing of the gender gap.

.

Figure 2.4: The tangible cost of alcohol in Europe, 2003 (1)

Crime - 
property 
damage
EUR 6 bn

Traffic accidents 
damage
EUR 10 bn

Healthcare 
EUR 17 bn

Crime - 
defensive & 
insurance
EUR 12 bn

Crime - police, 
courts & prison
EUR 15 bn

Treatment / 
prevention
EUR 5 bn

Premature 
mortality
EUR 36 bn

Unemploy-
ment
EUR 14 bn

Absenteeism
EUR 9 bn

(1) Based on studies from Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Spain, France, Italy, Latvia, the 
Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden, Great Britain and Norway. 

Source:  ‘Alcohol-related harm in Europe’, Anderson and Baumberg for Directorate-General for 
Health and Consumers, European Commission

174

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   174
Consumers.indb   174

08.04.2009   09:50:44
08.04.2009   09:50:44

Table 2.9: Deaths from smoking and drinking, 2006
(standardised death rates, per 100 000 persons)

Malignant neoplasm of larynx
and trachea, bronchus, lung (1)
Female
17.8
:
11.8
20.0
:
18.4
13.2
27.9
11.3
8.9
14.0
:
7.2
10.6
9.2
20.4
32.8
6.8
30.4
17.4
21.7
8.3
13.3
11.9
18.0
12.7
23.4
29.6

Male
67.0
:
71.9
78.1
:
56.3
91.4
53.8
73.5
71.0
67.3
:
33.8
91.7
87.5
64.0
112.6
52.9
70.4
52.2
102.7
48.4
75.6
83.4
77.6
47.2
32.8
57.8

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SK
SI
FI
SE
UK

Alcoholic beverages and tobacco

2

Alcoholic abuse 
(including psychosis) (2)

Male
4.5
:
1.2
2.9
:
7.5
16.8
2.7
0.4
1.2
7.9
:
0.8
5.9
1.9
6.5
8.5
1.0
1.8
6.2
8.6
1.7
3.8
:
5.2
4.9
5.2
2.2

Female
1.0
:
0.1
0.8
:
2.0
4.5
1.6
0.0
0.1
1.8
:
:
1.3
0.1
2.3
1.2
0.0
0.4
1.2
1.0
0.2
0.7
:
1.0
1.0
1.1
0.8

(1) Belgium, Denmark and Italy, not available; Bulgaria, France, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovakia, Sweden and the United Kingdom, 
2005.
(2) Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Cyprus (females) and Slovakia, not available; Bulgaria, France, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Sweden and the 
United Kingdom, 2005.

Source: Eurostat, Population and social conditions (theme3/hlth/hlth_cd_asdr)

For more information

Directorate-General for Health and Consumers: 
http://ec.europa.eu/health

  Consumers in Europe

175

Consumers.indb   175
Consumers.indb   175

08.04.2009   09:50:44
08.04.2009   09:50:44

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Clothing and footwear

Consumers.indb   177
Consumers.indb   177

08.04.2009   09:50:45
08.04.2009   09:50:45

3

Clothing and footwear

3.1 Access and choice

Consumers  in  Europe  are  able  to  purchase 
clothing  and  footwear  from  a  wide  variety  and 
large  number  of  retailers,  specialised  and  non-
specialised.  Specialist  clothing  and  footwear 
retailers  comprise  chains  (such  as  H&M,  C&A 
or  Zara)  and  independent  clothes  stores.  Non-
specialist  retailers  include  department  stores 
(that  have  clothing  and  footwear  departments), 
hypermarkets and supermarkets, as well as mail-
order retailers.

According  to  the  Institut  Français  de  la  Mode, 
almost two thirds (62 %) of clothing expenditure 
in  the  EU-25  was  carried  out  within  specialist 
clothing  stores  (chain  stores  or  independents) 
in 2004 (see Figure 3.1). One striking diff erence 
between  the  data  for  the  EU-25  and  the  United 
States was the relative popularity of independent 
clothing  stores  in  the  EU-25;  these  accounted 
for  the  second  highest  proportion  of  clothing 
expenditure (28 %) among the categories shown, 
behind specialist clothing multiples/chain stores. 
In  contrast,  these  independent  clothing  stores 
accounted for just 3 % of the retail clothing market 
in  the  United  States.  Sales  of  clothing  in  the 
United States were relatively high, compared with 
the  EU-25,  in  non-specialist  stores  (department 
stores, supermarkets and hypermarkets).

levels  of  retail 
Th  ere  are  generally  higher 
concentration 
in  northern  Europe.  Th  e 
overwhelming majority of clothing and footwear 
sales  in  Germany,  France  and  particularly  the 
United Kingdom are made in non-specialist stores 
(see  Figure  3.2).  Th  e  popularity  of  independent 
clothing  and  footwear  retailers  is  considerably 
higher in southern Europe. For example, in Italy 
and  Spain,  the  highest  proportion  of  clothing 
sales was among independent retailers (65 % and 
53 % respectively in 2004), and this tendency was 
even stronger in terms of footwear (76 % and 88 % 
respectively  in  2003).  Despite  these  diff erences, 
in  Europe  are  generally 
clothing  markets 
becoming  more  concentrated,  as  clothing 
chains,  department  stores  and  supermarkets/
hypermarkets selling clothing and footwear open 
additional  outlets  in  many  of  the  countries  that 
have joined the EU since 2004.

Th  e consumer market for clothing and footwear 
in  the  EU  has  undergone  important  changes  in 
recent  years.  Arguably,  the  greatest  impact  has 
come from market forces; under the auspices of the 
World Trade Organisation (WTO), as a ten-year 
transitional Agreement on Textiles and Clothing 
(ATC) came to an end with the abolition of textile 
and clothing import quotas on 31 December 2004. 
With the removal of quotas, there was an initial 
increase  in  relatively  cheap  imports  of  clothing 
and footwear into the EU, mainly originating from 
China. For example, in the fi rst 40 days aft er the 
end of the ATC, imports of trousers from China 
were  3.3  times  higher  than  during  the  whole  of 
2004 and imports of pullovers 4.5 times higher. 
A bilateral agreement between the EU and China 
(the so-called Shanghai Agreement) on a further, 
transitional  period  during  which  the  growth  of 
imports  of  clothing  could  be  managed  through 
until the end of 2007 was agreed in June 2005.

In  addition  to  trade  developments,  consumer 
groups and other bodies are increasingly holding 
manufacturers  and  retailers  accountable  for 
ensuring  that  social  standards  and  working 
conditions  of  their  suppliers  meet  international 
labour standards. Th  ere are examples of retailers 
responding  to  this  pressure:  for  example,  in 
October 2007 the EU’s INDITEX group signed an 
International Framework Agreement on corporate 
social  responsibility  with 
the  International 
and  Leather  Workers’ 
Textile,  Garment 
Federation  (ITGLWF),  which  expresses  the 
company’s  commitment  to  respect  fundamental 
rights at work throughout their entire production 
chain.  Fair  trade  garment  initiatives  have  also 
been  taken,  generally  to  ensure  that  a  fair  price 
is paid to producers who meet minimum social, 
and in some cases environmental, standards and 
that trading relationships between producers and 
buyers are more equal, rather than guaranteeing 
core  labour  standards  (see  the  clean  clothing 
campaign website – www.cleanclothes.org).

Th  ere has also been a response within the EU to 
concerns about environmental and safety issues. 
Th  ese  concerns  have  predominantly  focused  on 
the  use  of  chemicals  (such  as  dyes,  pigments  or 
bleaches in the clothing manufacturing process) 
and  on  waste  water  discharge.  On  1  June  2007, 
new  legislation  on  chemicals  and  their  safe 
use  (9)  came  into  force  across  the  EU.  REACH 
(Registration,  Evaluation  and  Authorisation  of 
Chemicals)  aims  to  improve  the  protection  of 
human health and the environment through the 
better  and  earlier  identifi cation  of  the  intrinsic 
properties of chemical substances.

(9)  Regulation (EC) No 
1907/2006 of the 
European Parliament 
and of the Council.

178

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   178
Consumers.indb   178

08.04.2009   09:50:49
08.04.2009   09:50:49

Clothing and footwear

3

Figure  3.1: Clothing distribution channels, 2004
(% share of clothing sales)

40

30

20

10

0

Clothing
multiples, 
chain stores

Clothing
independents

Department
stores, 
general stores

Other outlets

Source: Institut Français de la Mode

EU-25

Mail order,
catalogue

USA

Hypermarkets,
supermarkets,
grocers

Figure  3.2: Concentrated distribution channels for clothing and footwear in selected 
Member States, 2004 and 2003 respectively (1)
(% share of clothing/footwear sales)

100

75

50

25

0

EU-25

United
Kingdom

France

Germany

Spain

Italy

Clothing

Footwear

(1) Concentrated distribution comprises department stores, general stores, mail order, chain stores incl. discounters, hypermarkets and 
supermarkets - in contrast to independent clothing retailers.

Source: Institut Français de la Mode

Indeed,  the  structural  make-up  of  clothing 
retailers  in  the  EU  has  changed  considerably 
over the past 15 years, according to a 2007 report 
on ‘Business relations in the EU clothing chain’ 
carried  out  for  and  funded  by  the  European 
Commission (10). Th  e market share of independent 
retailers in the fi ve largest EU markets (Italy, Spain, 
France, Germany and the United Kingdom, that 
together account for almost three quarters of the 

EU-25’s clothing market) declined from 46.8 % of 
total clothing sales to 27.1 % by 2007. In contrast, 
there was steady growth in the share of speciality 
chains  (from  18.7 %  to  25.1 %),  hypermarkets 
and supermarkets (5.1 % to 6.8 %) and emerging 
formats  such  as  variety  stores  and  large  sports 
chains (whose share of clothing sales collectively 
rose from 14.0 % to 27.2 %).

(10) Bocconi University, 
ESSEC Business 
School and Baker and 
McKenzie.

  Consumers in Europe

179

Consumers.indb   179
Consumers.indb   179

08.04.2009   09:50:50
08.04.2009   09:50:50

3

Clothing and footwear

A  recent  survey  on  consumer  satisfaction 
provides  further  information  on  the  shopping 
habits  of  European  consumers  for  clothing  and 
footwear;  note  that  these  fi gures  relate  to  trips 
made  by  consumers  purchasing  clothing  and 
footwear,  and  they  do  not  refl ect  the  average 
expenditure or value of sales made in each retail 
format (see Figure 3.3). More than half (55.7 %) of 
those surveyed in the EU-27 in 2008 replied that 
they themselves or a member of their household 
had  bought  clothing  and  footwear  in  a  retail 
chain store, a somewhat higher proportion than 
for small, independent clothing retailers (50.2 %). 
supermarkets/
Department 
hypermarkets (23.0 %) and street markets (16.3 %) 
were also popular places for buying clothes and 
footwear. Furthermore, compared with a number 
of  other  products,  a  relatively  high  proportion 
of  European  consumers  used  mail  or  phone 
order (8.0 %) or the Internet (6.1 %) to purchase 
clothing and footwear.

(30.7 %), 

stores 

Th  is recent survey also refl ects the dichotomy in 
the  structure  of  clothing  and  footwear  retailing 
across the EU. Retail chain stores specialising in 
clothing  and  footwear  were  the  most  common 
format for shopping in 13 of the Member States 
in  2008,  while  consumers  in  12  of  the  Member 
States  preferred  small, 
independent  shops. 
Denmark,  Ireland,  France  and  the  Netherlands 
had a relatively high proportion of consumers who 
preferred shopping in retail chains specialising in 
clothes and footwear, while consumers in the vast 
majority of southern and eastern Member States 
chose  small,  independent  stores.  Among  those 
surveyed in Denmark and the United Kingdom, a 
relatively large share made purchases of clothing 
and footwear in supermarkets and hypermarkets, 
whereas department stores were a popular retail 
format  for  clothes  and  footwear  purchases  in 
Germany, Ireland and Luxembourg.

Figure  3.3: In which of the following 
places have you or has a member of your 
household bought clothing and footwear 
most, EU-27, 2008?
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

Retail chain 
          stores 

Small shops/ 
          stores  

Department 
          stores

Supermarkets &
hypermarkets

Street markets

Discount stores

       Mail and 
phone order

Internet

Sales at home 
        (door-to- 
       door sales)

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

180

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   180
Consumers.indb   180

08.04.2009   09:50:51
08.04.2009   09:50:51

Clothing and footwear

3

Table 3.1: Final consumption expenditure 
of households, clothing and footwear:  
consumption per head
(EUR)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

2000
700
700
0
200
800
800
200
900
600
600
700
1 100
800
200
100
1 100
100
500
800
1 100
200
600
0
400
100
600
700
1 000
300
1 100
900
900

2006
800
800
:
300
:
800
400
900
800
700
700
1 200
900
:
400
1 100
200
400
800
1 100
200
:
100
500
200
800
:
1 100
300
1 100
:
900

(1) 2006, forecast.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_c)

3.2 Consumption

Annual  expenditure  on  clothing  and  footwear 
averaged  EUR  800  per  person  in  the  EU-27 
in  2006,  with  national  averages  ranging  from 
EUR  100  per  person  in  Romania  to  EUR  1 200 
per person in Italy. For the majority of Member 
States,  average  expenditure  in  2006  did  not 
change  much  compared  with  2000.  However, 
there was a marked rise in expenditure devoted 
to  clothing  and  footwear  in  Lithuania  (up  from 
an average of EUR 100 per person to EUR 400 per 
person) and relatively large increases in Estonia, 
Slovakia and Hungary.

A  breakdown  of 
the  fi nal  consumption 
expenditure  of  households  on  clothing  and 
footwear  reveals  some  considerable  changes  in 
price  and  volume  components  over  the  period 
2000  to  2006  (see  Figure  3.4).  Th  e  volume  of 
clothing and footwear bought rose in most of the 
Member States for which data are available. Th  is 
was  particularly  the  case  in  the  Czech  Republic 
and 
the  United  Kingdom,  where  volumes 
increased by about 50 %, and in Estonia they more 
than  doubled.  Germany  and  particularly  Italy 
reported declines in the volume of clothing and 
footwear  bought  (the  only  Member  States  to  do 
so). Th  e biggest price decreases were recorded in 
Ireland, Malta and the United Kingdom (between 
20 % and 25 %). In contrast, high price increases 
between 2000 and 2006 were recorded in Estonia, 
Greece, Italy, Hungary and Spain (between 14 % 
and 18 %) and particularly Slovakia (up 37 %).

Average household expenditure on clothing and 
footwear in terms of comparable price levels (PPS 
rather  than  euro)  was  PPS  1 412  per  household 
for the EU-27 in 2005, ranging from PPS 333 per 
household in Romania to PPS 3 343 per household 
in  Luxembourg  (see  Table  3.2).  Relatively  high 
levels  of  spending  on  clothing  and  footwear  in 
PPS terms were also recorded in Cyprus, Malta, 
Greece and Italy.

  Consumers in Europe

181

Consumers.indb   181
Consumers.indb   181

08.04.2009   09:50:51
08.04.2009   09:50:51

3

Clothing and footwear

Figure 3.4: Final consumption expenditure of households, clothing and footwear: price and 
volume changes between 2000 and 2006 (1)
(%)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

-30

EU-
27

EE
(2)

UK CZ

IE

FI

IS

CY

SI

PL

BE

EL

ES

FR HU NL AT

SK MT LU DE

TR

IT

Prices

Volume

(1) Bulgaria, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania and Sweden, not available; EU-27, volume, not available.
(2) The volume of clothing and footwear purchased in Estonia increased by 106.4 % between 2000 and 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_k and nama_co2_p)

Household expenditure on clothing and footwear 
accounted  for  an  estimated  5.7 %  of  total 
household  consumption  expenditure  across  the 
EU-27 in 2005 (see Figure 3.5). Th  e vast majority 
of  this,  almost  three  quarters,  was  spent  on 
clothing  garments.  Among  the  Member  States, 
the relative importance of clothing and footwear 
in  total  household  consumption  expenditure 
ranged from 3.1 % in Bulgaria to 8.3 % in Malta, 
with France, Spain and Italy well above the EU-27 
average, and the United Kingdom and Germany 
well  below.  In  each  of  the  Member  States,  the 
majority of household spending was on clothing 
garments,  proportions  ranging  from  59.7 %  in 
Romania to 79.7 % in Luxembourg.

Th  e relative importance of clothing and footwear 
expenditure  also  varied  considerably  among 
diff erent  subgroups  of  households.  Spending  on 
clothing and footwear tended to rise as a function 
of income, with the upper income quintile in the 
EU-27  devoting  6.1 %  of  their  total  household 
budget  to  these  products,  while  those  in  the 
lowest  income  quintile  spent  5 %.  Spending  on 
clothing and footwear was relatively high among 
non-manual workers (6.4 % of their total budget) 
and  the  self-employed  (6.1 %),  as  compared  the 
unemployed (5.3 %) or the retired (4.2 %). Perhaps 
unsurprisingly,  the  share  of  total  expenditure 
spent  on  clothing  and  footwear  was  generally 
much  higher  among  households  with  dependent 
children,  rising  to  7.0 %  of  the  household  budget 
for those households comprising two adults with 
dependent  children,  compared  with  4.6 %  of  the 
budget for single persons.

Table 3.2: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, clothing and footwear, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

1 412
1 425
218
679
1 168
1 355
601
1 851
2 154
1 786
1 853
2 013
2 649
778
743
3 343
537
2 387
1 694
1 682
489
861
333
1 678
661
934
1 270
1 585
1 059
1 618

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

182

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   182
Consumers.indb   182

08.04.2009   09:50:52
08.04.2009   09:50:52

Clothing and footwear

3

Figure 3.5: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of clothing and footwear in total expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

10.0

7.5

5.0

2.5

0.0

MT LT CY LV SI

IT

EL ES FR LU HR RO SK NL EU-
27 

NO AT EE

IE UK HU DK DE BE PL SE PT

FI BG

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Table 3.3: Structure of consumption expenditure: share in total expenditure, EU-27, 2005 (1)
(%)

Clothing and footwear

Clothing

Footwear 
(including repair)

Socio-economic category (1)

Manual workers
Non-manual workers
Self-employed
Unemployed
Retired
Other inactive
Income quintile

Lowest
Second
Third
Fourth
Highest

Household type (1)
Single person
Single parent with dependent children
Two adults
Two adults with dependent children
Three or more adults
Three or more adults with dependent children

Age of the reference person

Less than 30
30-44
45-59
60 and over

Degree of urbanisation (1)

Dense
Intermediate
Sparse

(1) Unreliable.

5.8
6.4
6.1
5.3
4.2
5.4

5.0
5.1
5.5
5.8
6.1

4.6
6.7
4.9
7.0
5.7
6.3

5.6
5.6
4.9
3.6

5.5
5.7
5.8

4.7
5.3
5.0
4.2
3.3
4.3

3.2
3.3
3.5
3.8
4.3

3.4
5.0
3.8
5.3
4.3
4.7

3.6
3.6
3.2
2.3

3.6
3.8
3.9

1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
0.9
1.2

1.3
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.2

1.2
1.7
1.1
1.7
1.3
1.7

1.2
1.3
1.1
0.8

1.2
1.2
1.2

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

  Consumers in Europe

183

Consumers.indb   183
Consumers.indb   183

08.04.2009   09:50:53
08.04.2009   09:50:53

3

Clothing and footwear

3.3 Prices

3.3.1 Price infl ation

Data  for  2000  and  2007  show  no  change  in  the 
harmonised index of consumer prices for clothing 
and footwear for the EU-27, with little evolution 
during  the  intervening  years.  Th  is  trend  was  in 
contrast  to  an  average  annual  increase  of  2.4 % 
for the all-items consumer price index during the 
same  period.  Among  the  Member  States,  there 
were sharp contrasts in the evolution of consumer 
prices  for  clothing  and  footwear  (see  Table  3.4); 
with consistent and sizeable price decreases in the 
Czech Republic, Ireland, Lithuania, Poland (aft er 
2001)  and  the  United  Kingdom,  but  relatively 
steady price increases in Estonia, Greece, Spain, 
Italy, Luxembourg, Hungary and Romania. Th  is 
varied pattern across Member States continued in 
2007, with strong price growth in Estonia (4.1 %) 

and  Bulgaria  (7.0 %)  but  sharp  decreases  in  the 
United Kingdom (-3.7 %), Lithuania (-4.9 %) and 
Poland (-7.2 %).

Th  e  overall  stability  of  the  EU-27’s  harmonised 
index  of  consumer  prices  for  clothing  and 
footwear  fails  to  refl ect  two  distinct  periods: 
fi rstly, between 2000 and 2004, when falling prices 
for  garments  were  largely  compensated  by  rising 
prices  of  clothing  materials,  clothing  accessories 
and footwear. In the period aft er 2004, the price of 
other articles of clothing and clothing accessories 
and footwear stabilised, in contrast to a continued 
reduction in the price of garments and a steep rise 
in the price of cleaning and repair services and the 
hire of clothing (see Figure 3.6).

Table 3.4: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, clothing and footwear, 
annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
0.7
-2.4
-4.0
-2.0
-4.3
0.1
3.4
-4.8
2.0
2.1
0.2
2.2
-0.6
1.2
-0.8
0.9
6.1
0.3
-0.9
-0.7
5.5
0.7
29.8
7.0
3.1
0.2
0.9
-7.3
41.4
-1.2
-2.6
:

2001
0.1
0.7
0.3
-1.7
-1.5
0.8
3.8
-2.8
3.2
-0.6
0.5
0.6
-7.1
0.9
-4.2
2.1
5.6
-1.3
1.8
-0.3
1.5
1.5
28.0
1.7
2.4
1.0
2.1
-7.5
50.4
1.0
-1.4
:

2002
1.0
1.1
-0.2
-2.6
2.3
0.7
4.1
-4.2
3.5
5.1
0.9
2.9
-3.6
-0.8
-3.5
1.7
4.2
-0.7
3.2
0.3
-0.8
2.5
15.6
3.1
3.3
-1.1
1.6
-7.2
51.4
-0.9
-5.4
:

2003
0.3
1.0
-2.2
-4.9
1.0
-0.8
1.0
-4.1
2.0
3.8
-0.3
2.2
1.3
3.7
-2.7
1.5
3.2
-6.8
-3.1
-0.1
-2.5
1.2
11.8
6.3
2.7
-0.2
-0.7
-3.8
25.7
-1.8
-10.0
:

2004
-0.2
0.6
0.5
-4.1
0.0
-0.7
-0.1
-3.5
4.1
1.8
0.3
1.9
-0.8
2.5
-0.9
0.5
3.5
-2.5
-1.9
-0.6
-3.5
-1.1
7.6
1.6
0.5
0.3
-2.6
-4.8
7.5
-0.3
-6.9
:

2005
-0.8
-0.1
1.1
-5.5
-0.7
-1.9
1.9
-2.8
4.7
1.4
0.2
1.2
-0.9
-0.2
-1.8
0.5
0.3
-0.5
-2.6
-1.2
-5.3
-1.2
4.8
-1.0
-0.8
-0.6
-0.8
-5.1
4.4
-1.1
-4.7
:

2006
-0.5
-0.3
3.8
-6.3
-1.9
-0.8
3.5
-1.9
2.3
1.2
0.2
1.2
-4.3
0.0
-2.4
0.1
-0.7
-1.8
0.5
-0.2
-6.9
0.5
3.9
-0.5
-0.1
-2.0
2.0
-4.0
1.4
0.1
-3.2
1.9

2007
0.0
0.4
7.0
-0.6
-1.7
0.9
4.1
-3.3
3.2
1.1
0.7
0.7
-0.6
2.3
-4.9
0.5
1.0
0.4
1.4
2.2
-7.2
2.2
3.3
1.6
0.8
0.3
2.4
-3.7
4.5
1.0
-4.6
0.3

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

184

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   184
Consumers.indb   184

08.04.2009   09:50:53
08.04.2009   09:50:53

Figure 3.6: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

110

105

100

95

90

85

2001

2003

2005

2007

Garments

Other clothing & accessories

Footwear including repair

Clothing materials

Cleaning, repair & hire of clothing

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Clothing and footwear

3

3.3.2 Price levels

In 2007 clothing and footwear price level indices 
in  most  Member  States  were  within  a  relatively 
narrow  range  of  +/-10 %  of  the  EU-27  average. 
Clothing and footwear was particularly expensive 
in  the  Nordic  countries;  in  Denmark,  Finland 
and  Sweden  prices  were  about  15-20 %  higher 
than  the  EU-27  average,  in  Norway  about  one 
third  higher,  and  in  Iceland  about  50 %  higher. 
In  contrast,  prices  for  clothing  and  footwear 
were about 30 % lower than the EU-27 average in 
Bulgaria (see Figure 3.7).

Figure 3.7: Price level indices, clothing and 
footwear, 2007
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

IS
NO
SE
FI
DK
LU
CH
HR
BE
EL
IT
AT
DE
EE
SI
MT
EU-27
NL
UK
CY
LV
CZ
PL
ES
IE
PT
HU
FR
SK
LT
RO
TR
BG
MK

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

  Consumers in Europe

185

Consumers.indb   185
Consumers.indb   185

08.04.2009   09:50:54
08.04.2009   09:50:54

3

Clothing and footwear

3.4 Consumer satisfaction and 
complaints

their  clothing  and 

A  2008  survey  on  satisfaction  shows  that  the 
majority of consumers in the EU-27 are relatively 
satisfi ed  with 
footwear 
retailers:  on  a  scale  of  1-10,  with  1  being  not 
at  all  satisfi ed  and  10  being  fully  satisfi ed,  an 
average of 8.3 was recorded in the EU-27. Among 
the  Member  States,  satisfaction  was  highest  in 
Germany,  Luxembourg,  Austria  and  the  United 
Kingdom,  while  Italian  and  Latvian  consumers 
were the least satisfi ed.

Th  e same survey shows that of the 10.9 % of EU-27 
consumers  who  faced  problems  when  buying 
clothing  or  footwear  in  the  12  months  prior  to 
the  survey  in  mid-2008,  more  than  two  thirds 
(68.9 %) cited product quality as their complaint. 
Th  e proportion of consumers complaining about 
other problems never rose into double fi gures (see 
Figure 3.9): with the next highest shares recorded 
for problems returning unwanted goods (9.2 % of 
unsatisfi ed consumers) and the quality of service 
provided (8.8 %).

Figure 3.8: Overall, to what extent are you satisfi ed with your regular retailer for clothing and footwear, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

10.0

7.5

5.0

2.5

0.0

DE LU AT UK HU BE

EL

SI CZ LT

IE CY PL EU-
27

RO FI DK MT BG PT FR SK ES

SE

EE NL

IT

LV

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (not at all satisﬁ ed) to 10 (fully satisﬁ ed).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

Figure 3.9: Problems faced by consumers when purchasing clothing or footwear in the past 12 months, EU-27, 
2008 (1)
(% share of those experiencing problems, multiple answers allowed)

0

25

50

75

Quality of product
Returning unwanted goods
Quality of service
Price (too high/not indicated/wrongly advertised)
Delivery (late or not at all)
Incorrect labelling/information
Refund or cancellation
Claims for goods under guarantee
Repair
Unhelpful or obstructive retailer 
Product safety
Selling methods
Contractual terms and conditions

(1) When purchasing clothing and/or footwear in 2008, 10.9 % of EU-27 consumers reported facing at least one problem; note that consumers may have faced more 
than one problem.

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

186

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   186
Consumers.indb   186

08.04.2009   09:50:55
08.04.2009   09:50:55

Clothing and footwear

3

Figure 3.10: Do you agree that your regular 
retailer would replace, repair, reduce 
the price or give you your money back if 
clothing or footwear you had bought was 
defective or not fi t for purpose, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

A  majority  of  EU-27  consumers  were  of  the 
opinion  that  clothing  and  footwear  retailers 
would  replace,  repair,  reduce  the  price  or  give 
them  their  money  back  if  they  had  bought 
defective  goods  –  see  Figure  3.10.  Using  a  scale 
from 1-10, the average for the EU-27 was 7.9, with 
a  high  of  9.4  in  Ireland  (considerably  above  the 
other countries) and a low of 6.3 in Bulgaria (well 
below the other Member States).

IE
DE
UK
AT
LU
CY
HU
FI
DK
BE
SI
CZ
SE
EU-27
EL
MT
FR
PT
ES
EE
PL
SK
NL
RO
IT
LT
LV
BG

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

3.5 Quality

Th  e  same  survey  on  consumer  satisfaction  also 
looked  into  the  area  of  quality.  With  respect  to 
clothing  and  footwear  products  this  concerned 
two  areas:  the  extent  to  which  consumers  felt 
goods were reliable (in other words, they did not 
fall  apart,  rip  at  the  seams,  tear  or  break  when 
worn);  and  whether  retailers  provided  enough 
choice  regarding  goods  that  were  produced  to 
high ethical standards (for example, without the 
use of child labour).

Th  e  results  show  that  on  a  scale  of  1-10  (with 
10  being  in  total  agreement)  EU-27  consumers 
generally  agreed  that  the  clothing  and  footwear 
they  purchased  was  reliable,  with  an  average  of 
7.9. Th  e highest scores were recorded in Ireland, 
Austria, the United Kingdom, Luxembourg and 
Germany  –  the  same  fi ve  countries  that  gave 
the most favourable replies when questioned on 
the  likelihood  of  retailers  replacing,  repairing, 
reducing  the  price  or  giving  them  their  money 
back  in  the  event  they  had  bought  defective 
goods.

Regarding  the  supply  of  clothing  and  footwear 
products  made  to  high  ethical  standards,  there 
was  a  quite  diff erent  picture.  For  the  EU-27  as 
a  whole,  an  average  index  of  7.5  was  recorded 
(with  higher  scores  refl ecting  agreement  that 
there  was  enough  choice  when  trying  to  buy 
ethically sourced clothes and footwear). Among 
the  Member  States,  consumers  from  the  Nordic 
countries,  as  well  as  those  from  Luxembourg, 
Latvia,  France  and  Bulgaria  were  least  satisfi ed 
with their choice of ethically produced goods.

  Consumers in Europe

187

Consumers.indb   187
Consumers.indb   187

08.04.2009   09:50:56
08.04.2009   09:50:56

3

Clothing and footwear

Figure 3.11: To what extent do you agree 
that clothing and footwear products sold by 
your regular retailer are reliable (i.e. they do 
not fall apart, rip at the seams, tear or break), 
2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

Figure 3.12: Do you agree that your regular 
retailer off ers a wide enough choice of 
clothing and footwear that has been 
produced according to specifi c ethical 
standards (e.g. produced without the use  of 
child labour, etc.), 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

IE
AT
UK
LU
DE
EL
BE
CY
DK
RO
MT
SI
EU-27
FI
HU
FR
PT
CZ
ES
SK
SE
NL
IT
PL
EE
LT
BG
LV

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

0

2

4

6

8

10

RO
MT
CY
CZ
BE
EE
HU
EL
SK
IE
DE
AT
PL
UK
LT
PT
SI
EU-27
IT
NL
ES
FI
BG
DK
FR
LV
LU
SE

(1) Varies by region.

Source: World Health Organisation (www.who.int) and the Alcohol 
Policy Network co-ﬁ nanced by the European Commission

188

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   188
Consumers.indb   188

08.04.2009   09:50:56
08.04.2009   09:50:56

Housing, water, electricity, 
gas and other fuels

Consumers.indb   189
Consumers.indb   189

08.04.2009   09:50:57
08.04.2009   09:50:57

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

planned  actions  to:  ensure  non-discriminatory 
access  to  well  developed  networks;  improve 
regulation of network access at national and EU 
level;  reduce  the  scope  for  unfair  competition; 
provide  a  clear  framework  for  investment;  and 
resolve issues relating to households and smaller 
commercial  customers.  In  September  2007  the 
European Commission proposed a third package 
of  proposals  with  the  objective  to  separate  the 
operation  of  electricity  and  gas  transmission 
networks from supply and generation.

Water  is  a  limited  natural  resource  on  which 
human health and development depends, and in 
return  human  activities  have  an  impact  on  this 
resource.  European  water  policies  place  great 
attention on water quality, whether for drinking 
or other purposes. To guarantee drinking water 
quality, a 1998 Council Directive set standards for 
the most common substances that can be found in 
drinking water, and a total of 48 microbiological 
and chemical parameters must be monitored and 
tested regularly. In 2000, a long-term framework 
for Community action in the fi eld of water policy 
was established with broader aims, including the 
promotion of sustainable water use. Notably this 
framework  promotes  a  gradual  implementation 
of  the  use  of  pricing,  alongside  other  measures, 
as  incentives  for  consumers  to  modify  their 
consumption patterns towards a sustainable level 
with the aim of recovering the full costs of water 
services.  Th  ese  water  pricing  policies  should  be 
implemented by 2010.

Housing, water supply, and fuel (such as electricity 
and  gas)  for  use  in  the  home  (not  for  transport 
needs)  are  basic  requirements  for  individuals. 
Th  e  provision  of  water,  electricity  and  gas  are 
among several services of general interest covered 
in this publication; others, such as transport and 
communications services are covered in Chapters 
7 and 8, while retail banking is included as part 
of Chapter 12. Services of general interest can be 
defi ned  as  collective  or  social  goods  insofar  as 
public  authorities  may  consider  that  they  need 
to  be  provided  even  where  the  market  may  not 
have  suffi  cient  incentive  to  do  so.  Services  of 
general interest make an important contribution 
to economic, social and territorial cohesion, and 
users  expect  high  quality  services  at  aff ordable 
prices.

Consumption  expenditure  and  price  data 
presented in this chapter concerns housing, water, 
electricity, gas and other fuels, while furnishings, 
household  equipment  and  routine  maintenance 
of the house are covered in Chapter 5. Payments 
for  housing,  water  and  fuel  are  very  important 
for  consumers  as  they  represent  a  large  share 
of  household  consumption  expenditure:  EU 
households,  on  average,  devoted  more  than 
one  fi ft h  of  their  total  household  consumption 
expenditure  to  housing  (including  maintenance 
and repair), water and household energy.

Th  e  gas  and  electricity  markets  in  the  EU  have 
been  changing  through  the  requirements  of  the 
second  electricity  and  gas  directives  adopted  in 
2003. Th  e aim of this legislation was to have gas 
and  electricity  markets  open  for  all  customers 
by  July  2007,  as  well  as  further  unbundling  the 
sector’s  supply  and  distribution/transmission 
enterprises.  In  January  2007,  the  European 
Commission  published  a  communication  on 
the prospects for the internal gas and electricity 
market  (11).  Whilst  recognising  progress  in  these 
markets,  the  Commission  noted  the  improper 
implementation  of  the  current  legal  framework 
by  several  Member  States,  and  outlined  its 

(11)  COM(2006) 841.

190

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   190
Consumers.indb   190

08.04.2009   09:51:05
08.04.2009   09:51:05

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Table 4.1: Connection rates
(%)

Urban waste water 
collecting system 
with treatment,
2005
55
41
75
:
94
73
89
:
92
:
:
30
67
70
:
:
13
99
89
60
65
28
45
55
:
86
:
36
57
77
97

Urban waste water 
collecting system,
2005
86
69
79
:
96
73
100
:
100
:
:
30
:
70
:
:
100
99
89
:
74
40
63
57
:
86
:
68
90
82
97

Municipal waste 
collection services,
2003
100
82
100
100
:
79
:
100
:
:
:
:
60
:
:
:
100
100
:
:
100
:
:
:
100
:
:
:
100
:
:

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE (1)
EE (1)
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT (1)
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

Public water 
supply
Latest year
96
99
90
97
99
72
90
:
:
99
100
100
:
76
:
93
:
100
90
85
85
54
91
84
:
86
:
:
95
89
:

(1) Urban waste water, 2004.

Source: Eurostat, National population connected to waste water treatment plants, Generation and collection of municipal waste, 
Water use by supply category per capita (theme8/envir/env)

4.1 Access, choice and switching

Household  use  of  water  generates  waste  water 
which  may  or  may  not  be  collected  through  an 
urban  wastewater  system.  Table  4.1  shows  that 
in  most  EU  Member  States  (for  which  data  are 
available)  around  two  thirds  of  dwellings  are 
connected to such collecting systems, with only 
Cyprus,  Romania,  Slovenia  and  Slovakia  falling 
below  this  level.  In  several  countries,  notably 
the  Netherlands,  Austria,  Sweden,  Estonia  and 
Lithuania,  there  were  high  rates  of  connection 
to  water  collection  systems  which  all  involved 
treatment.

Electricity  and  water 
supply  are  widely 
available  within  the  EU:  the  results  of  a  2006 

Eurobarometer  survey  indicate  that  more  than 
90 %  of  respondents  within  the  EU-25  had  easy 
access  to  these,  compared  with  less  than  three 
quarters  of  respondents  for  gas  networks.  Easy 
access  to  electricity  exceeded  90 %  in  all  EU-25 
Member States except for Italy, while easy access 
to water supply exceeded 80 % everywhere, except 
for Italy and Latvia. In contrast, easy access to gas 
networks was much more varied, ranging from no 
access in the island Member States of Cyprus and 
Malta,  though  a  low  proportion  in  the  sparsely 
populated  countries  of  Finland  and  Sweden,  to 
the  highest  rates  in  the  natural  gas  producing 
countries  of  the  Netherlands  and  the  United 
Kingdom,  as  well  as  several  central  European 
countries (notably Hungary and Slovakia).

  Consumers in Europe

191

Consumers.indb   191
Consumers.indb   191

08.04.2009   09:51:07
08.04.2009   09:51:07

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.2: Access to utilities: proportion of 
respondents having easy access, May–June 
2006
(%)

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Electricity
93
96
:
93
98
97
93
97
99
95
96
76
98
98
96
93
95
97
91
93
97
98
:
98
95
99
96
97

Gas
72
75
:
80
38
74
40
51
29
77
76
74
0
56
70
58
90
0
89
69
68
43
:
46
88
11
9
89

Water
93
97
:
93
98
96
82
95
99
94
96
77
98
78
82
96
96
97
92
92
95
96
:
97
93
98
86
97

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

Table 4.3: Electricity infrastructure: net 
installed capacity
(Megawatts)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO (1)
CH (1)

(1) 2005.

2006
761 363
16 258
12 015
17 507
13 012
125 001
2 288
6 443
13 566
78 426
115 916
89 137
1 134
2 150
4 562
1 638
8 620
571
22 853
19 166
32 360
14 456
19 224
3 039
8 210
16 557
34 122
83 132
3 879
40 565
1 725
28 896
19 097

Source: Eurostat, Infrastructure - electricity - annual data (theme8/
nrg/nrg_113a)

192

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   192
Consumers.indb   192

08.04.2009   09:51:07
08.04.2009   09:51:07

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Th  e lack of integration between national markets, 
suggested by the absence of price convergence and 
the  low  but  growing  level  of  cross-border  trade 
(see Figure 4.1), is generally attributed to barriers 
to entry, inadequate use of existing infrastructure 
and  –  in  the  case  of  electricity  –  insuffi  cient 
interconnection  between  many  Member  States. 
In recent years initiatives have been taken in these 
areas,  for  example  Belgium,  Germany,  France, 
Luxembourg  and  the  Netherlands  developed 
a  single 
’North-West  European’  market  for 
electricity and started work on a similar market 
for gas.

liberalisation  was 
In  July  2007  full  market 
completed  in  the  gas  and  electricity  market  in 
the EU. Nevertheless, in its report on ’Progress in 

Figure 4.1: Cross-border electricity fl ows 
between EU Member States, Norway and 
Switzerland as a share of gross electricity 
consumption
(%)

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

1999

2001

2003

2005

Source: Communication from the Commission to the Council and 
the European Parliament, COM(2007) 250.

creating  the  internal  gas  and  electricity  market’ 
the  European  Commission  noted  persisting 
restrictions to free and fair competition. Th  e report 
also noted that market structures on a national scale 
are  still  very  concentrated,  and  that  incumbents 
control  essential  infrastructure  facilities,  further 
increasing their market power. Table 4.4 shows the 
extent  to  which  the  largest  generator  dominated 
each  market.  Th  e  two  small  island  economies  of 
Cyprus  and  Malta  have  only  one  generator,  and 
the  share  of  the  largest  generator  exceeded  50 % 
in more than half of the remaining Member States 
with  data  available.  Only  in  Poland,  the  United 
Kingdom and Finland was the share of the largest 
generator below one quarter. 

Table 4.4: Market share of the largest 
generator in the electricity market: 
percentage of total generation
(%)

BE (1)
BG
CZ
DK
DE (2)
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU (2)
HU
MT
NL
AT (3)
PL
PT (1)
RO
SI
SK
FI (1)
SE
UK
HR
TR (1)
NO (1)

(1) 2005.
(2) 2004.
(3) 2001.

2006
85
:
74
54
28
91
51
95
31
89
35
100
95
70
81
42
100
:
34
17
54
31
51
70
23
45
22
83
38
30

Source: Eurostat, Market share of the largest generator in the 
electricity market (theme8/envir/nrg/nrg_indic/nrg_ind_331a)

  Consumers in Europe

193

Consumers.indb   193
Consumers.indb   193

08.04.2009   09:51:08
08.04.2009   09:51:08

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Figure 4.3: Reasons for favouring a choice 
of energy suppliers, February 2007
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

RO

BE

SK

LV

UK

SE

CZ

HU

IT

NL

AT

CY

PL

DE

FR

DK

EE

EL

LT

FI

LU

SI

ES

PT

BG

IE

MT

Only because of the price
Expect better customer care
Expect option to choose cleaner energy supplier

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU Energy Policy’, Flash 
Eurobarometer 206a, European Commission

Despite this relatively high dominance of the largest 
generators,  a  large  majority  of  the  population  in 
each Member State regarded it as important to have 
a  choice  of  electricity  and  gas  supplier,  with  this 
view being shared by almost the entire population in 
Ireland according to a 2007 Eurobarometer survey. 
Th  e same source reported that 18 % of respondents 
across  the  EU  thought  that  choice  was  important 
just because of price issues, while 15 % responded 
that better customer care was an additional factor 
alongside price, and 44 % thought that the option 
to  choose  a  cleaner  energy  supplier  was  also  an 
additional factor; 21 % thought that price, customer 
care and cleaner energy sources were all reasons for 
favouring a choice of energy suppliers.

Figure 4.2: Importance of having a choice 
of electricity and gas supplier, February 2007
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

IE

DE

PL

UK

LV

SI

RO

AT

MT

SK

SE

EE

LT

EU-27

FI

ES

CZ

HU

IT

BG

PT

CY

LU

BE

FR

NL

EL

DK

Yes

No

Do not know/no answer

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU Energy Policy’, Flash 
Eurobarometer 206a, European Commission

194

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   194
Consumers.indb   194

08.04.2009   09:51:09
08.04.2009   09:51:09

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.2 Consumption

Table 4.5: Households: water supply and 
waste generated

4.2.1 Ownership and consumption 
volume

Higher  standards  of  living  are  changing  water 
demand  patterns.  Th  is  is  refl ected  mainly  in 
increased  domestic  water  use,  especially  for 
personal  hygiene.  Virtually 
the  entire  EU 
population  has  indoor  toilets,  showers  and/or 
baths for daily use. Aside from personal hygiene, 
water use has increased as a result of the increased 
penetration  of  appliances  such  as  washing 
machines and dishwashers, as well as other uses 
such  as  swimming  pools  and  the  watering  of 
gardens. Th  e amount that is used for cooking or 
for drinking is minimal in comparison with the 
other household uses. Th  e pressure on the use of 
water is off set, to some extent, by technological/
design  improvements  that  have  led  to  greater 
water  effi  ciency  in  some  appliances.  Increased 
urbanisation  concentrates  water  demand  and 
can  lead  to  the  over-exploitation  of  local  water 
resources. In most Member States (for which data 
are available), the public water supply accounted 
for  less  than  40 %  of  freshwater  abstraction 
(taking water from any source, be it on the surface 
or underground), with the share around 60 % in 
the United Kingdom and Denmark, and 100 % in 
Malta.

Public water
supply to
households,
2005
(m3/capita)
17 406
:
33
:
45
:
:
:
:
64
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
28
44
:
32
:
25
:
:
:
59
:
41
:
102
84

Waste
generated by
households,
2004
(thousand
tonnes)
211 666
5 325
2 634
2 841
2 016
38 008
402
1 702
4 213
24 410
26 432
31 150
367
543
602
221
4 442
100
9 440
3 441
6 768
4 583
3 638
661
1 475
1 164
4 079
31 007
:
29 225
141
1 934

EU-27 (1)
BE (1)
BG
CZ
DK (2)
DE
EE
IE
EL (1)
ES (1, 2)
FR (1)
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU (1)
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT (1)
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE (2)
UK
HR
TR (1)
IS
CH

(1) Includes estimates or provisional data for waste generated.
(2) Water supply, 2004.

Source: Eurostat, Water use by supply category per capita, 
Generation of waste (theme8/envir/env)

  Consumers in Europe

195

Consumers.indb   195
Consumers.indb   195

08.04.2009   09:51:09
08.04.2009   09:51:09

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.6: Final energy consumption, households, 2006
(thousand TOE)

Total
304 372
8 932
2 180
6 509
4 419
69 124
881
3 060
5 491
14 753
44 658
29 919
347
1 492
1 429
610
6 182
81
10 013
6 631
19 178
3 201
7 839
1 158
2 315
4 947
7 003
42 018
1 857
20 077
622
3 800
6 217

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO
CH (1)

(1) 2005.

Solid 
fuels
9 765
145
276
820
0
608
18
498
1
195
356
7
0
19
51
0
259
0
6
121
5 781
0
10
0
47
15
0
528
7
2 488
0
1
31

Petroleum 
products
53 191
3 151
25
33
558
18 187
10
1 218
2 958
3 785
9 321
5 342
175
39
55
243
181
24
88
1 587
800
664
452
377
16
625
249
3 026
304
1 956
3
239
3 078

Gas
119 315
3 457
24
2 275
682
28 813
46
631
139
3 043
14 614
17 047
0
103
140
247
3 644
0
7 371
1 295
3 315
203
2 548
93
1 283
34
56
28 211
539
6 183
0
3
1 018

Electrical 
energy
68 987
1 954
800
1 307
910
12 167
144
695
1 520
5 650
12 636
5 816
129
149
202
71
985
57
2 135
1 358
2 237
1 153
860
263
394
1 818
3 567
10 013
561
2 964
69
2 878
1 515

Renewable 
energies
32 832
213
635
961
743
5 720
289
18
817
2 080
7 731
1 707
42
756
432
16
450
0
248
1 586
2 506
1 175
2 577
324
31
986
602
188
301
6 488
367
636
435

Heat
20 282
14
420
1 113
1 526
3 630
374
0
56
0
0
0
0
426
549
32
664
0
164
684
4 538
6
1 393
101
544
1 470
2 528
52
146
0
184
43
140

Source: Eurostat, Supply, transformation, consumption (theme8/nrg)

Households accounted for 25.9 % of all fi nal energy 
consumption in the EU-27 in 2006, making them 
one  of  the  largest  energy  consumers:  note  that 
this does not include fuel for personal transport 
which  is  recorded  under  transport  rather  than 
household consumption. Rising energy prices and 
increasing awareness of climate change encourage 
energy conserving investment in homes (such as 
insulation), particularly as space and water heating 
are  the  two  main  uses  of  energy  in  households, 
far  ahead  of  energy  use  for  cooking,  lighting 
and  running  appliances.  Energy  consumption 
within the home is, in the short-term, a relatively 
inelastic  expenditure  item,  as  reactions  to  price 
fl uctuations  can  oft en  only  be  made  through 
investment in new equipment. Households in the 
EU relied primarily on gas for their energy needs: 
39.2 % of the energy consumption was gas, 22.7 % 
electrical energy, 17.2 % petroleum products and 

10.8 %  renewable  energy.  Heat  (district  heating, 
for example) accounted for 6.7 % and solid fuels 
3.2 %.  Solid  fuels  were  most  used  in  Poland, 
Ireland, Bulgaria, and the Czech Republic, where 
their  share  was  over  10 %.  Petroleum  products 
were most used in Greece and Cyprus where they 
accounted for just over half of the consumption. 
Gas  accounted  for  around  two  thirds  or  more 
of consumption in the North Sea gas producing 
countries  of  the  Netherlands  and  the  United 
Kingdom.  Electricity  was  by  far  the  main  type 
of  energy  used  by  households  in  Malta  (70 %) 
and also exceeded 50 % in Sweden. Heat was an 
important energy source in the Nordic and Baltic 
Member States, and to a lesser extent in Poland 
and Slovakia. In Latvia renewable energy sources 
reached 50 % of consumption, and these sources 
were  also  important  in  the  other  Baltic  States, 
Portugal, Romania and Bulgaria.

196

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   196
Consumers.indb   196

08.04.2009   09:51:10
08.04.2009   09:51:10

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Table 4.7: Type and ownership of dwellings, 2003-2006
(number of households)

Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Riga
Vilnius
Budapest
Amsterdam
Lisboa
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London

Living in 
houses
:
14 436
:
24 250
13
:
300 567
41 623
:
39 601
20 973
288 215
43 394
:

Living in 
apartments
:
154 701
:
264 812
272
:
97 583
325 207
:
64 037
165 446
245 766
370 012
:

Owning their 
own dwelling
:
130 452
:
159 358
211
:
682 860
71 459
:
85 492
119 680
129 843
195 680
2 359 774

Social 
housing
232 449
831
:
:
46
4 284
11 563
201 479
22 939
5 959
2 084
66 415
0
787 336

Private rented 
housing
1 265 551
28 615
:
131 693
29
:
10 147
93 892
:
4 424
16 461
79 255
217 725
:

(1) Those capital cities not presented, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Data collected for core cities (theme1/urb/urb_vcity)

When analysing housing statistics it is important 
to  keep  in  mind  that  international  comparisons 
in  this  area  should  be  made  with  great  caution 
because  of  the  diff erent  traditions  between 
countries in terms of the type of accommodation, 
mainly houses and fl ats, but also institutions and 
other  types  of  accommodation,  and  the  type  of 
ownership,  mainly  owner-occupied  or  rented, 
but  also  social  housing.  Although  incomplete, 
Table  4.7  provides  some  information  on  such 
diff erences  for  the  capital  cities  of  the  Member 
States.

Table 4.8 provides information on plans to build 
or buy a house or undertake home improvements 
as  reported  in  a  consumer  confi dence  survey  in 
the  second  quarter  of  2008.  Th  e  fi gures  are  the 
balance  between  those  that  do  not  have  such 
plans (negative) and those that do (positive) and, 
unsurprisingly  given  the  infrequent  nature  of 
such  events,  the  overall  balance  was  negative  in 
every country. Th  e balance was highest in Cyprus, 
Romania, the Netherlands and Sweden, just above 
-80  indicating  that  around  10 %  of  respondents 
expected to purchase or build a home in the next 
12  months.  In  every  country  the  balance  was 
higher  for  home  improvements,  and  was  above 
-20 in Sweden and the Czech Republic. For both 
variables Italy recorded the lowest balances.

Table 4.8: Plans to purchase, build or 
maintain accommodation, seasonally 
adjusted, second quarter 2008
(balance of percentage of respondents giving 
negative and positive replies)

Purchase or 
build a home 
within the next 
12 months
-89
-90
-89
-85
-82
-94
-84
-89
-82
-87
-87
-97
-78
-81
-91
-81
-89
-92
-78
-90
-83
-94
-78
-82
-86
-86
-79
-88

Home 
improvements 
over the next 
12 months
-58
-52
-58
-19
-57
-52
-36
-62
-68
-83
-58
-88
-66
-25
-57
-33
-80
-59
-49
-33
-40
-86
-42
-53
-47
-45
-16
-50

EU-27 
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

  Consumers in Europe

197

Source: Eurostat, Consumers - quarterly data 
(theme1/euroind/bs/bsco_q)

Consumers.indb   197
Consumers.indb   197

08.04.2009   09:51:11
08.04.2009   09:51:11

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.9: Final consumption expenditure 
of households, housing, water, electricity, 
gas and other fuels:  consumption per head
(EUR)

Table 4.10: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, housing, water, electricity, 
gas and other fuels, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

2000
2 200
2 900
300
700
4 100
3 200
600
2 300
1 600
1 500
3 000
2 400
1 500
500
400
4 700
500
800
2 600
2 800
600
1 000
300
1 200
500
3 000
3 900
3 000
500
3 200
3 300
5 000

2006
2 900
3 500
:
1 300
:
3 800
1 000
3 500
2 300
2 200
4 000
3 100
1 800
:
600
6 000
900
1 000
3 500
3 600
1 000
:
700
1 600
1 200
3 900
:
3 800
800
5 000
:
5 500

(1) 2006, forecast.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_c)

4.2.2 Consumption expenditure

from 

related 

studying 

expenditure 

expenditure 

When 
to 
accommodation  it  is  important  to  distinguish 
investment: 
consumption 
the  purchase  of  a  dwelling  is  regarded  as  gross 
fi xed  capital  formation  (investment)  as  are  major 
improvements  to  housing  (for  example,  building, 
rebuilding,  modernisation  and  extensions),  and 
these  should  not  be  included  in  the  consumption 
expenditure of households. For households renting 
a  dwelling,  the  consumption  expenditure  on 
occupation is simply the rental cost, but in the case 
of owner-occupation no such expenditure is directly 
made, and an estimation (referred to as an imputed 
rent) is calculated in order to facilitate comparisons 
independently of the diff erent types of occupation.

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

6 936
7 610
2 461
2 444
7 194
8 445
3 240
8 520
7 442
7 874
7 339
8 512
7 381
1 810
1 776
15 611
2 073
2 596
7 513
6 732
3 341
5 560
832
5 483
2 517
6 614
8 250
9 458
4 983
7 633

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

In  2006  annual  expenditure  on  housing,  water, 
electricity, gas and other fuels averaged EUR 2 900 
per  person  within  the  EU-27,  with  national 
averages  ranging  from  less  than  EUR  1 000  per 
person in Lithuania, Romania and Hungary, up to 
EUR 4 000 per person in France and EUR 6 000 
in Luxembourg.

Table 4.10 provides a comparison of expenditure 
on  the  same  items,  based  on  household  budget 
survey  (HBS)  data  for  2005.  Th  e  HBS  data  is 
presented  in  purchasing  power  standard  (PPS) 
terms  rather  than  in  euro  and  show  that,  at 
comparable price levels, expenditure on housing, 
water,  electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels  within  the 
EU-27  ranged  from  PPS  1 776  per  household  in 
Lithuania  to  PPS  9 458  in  the  United  Kingdom, 
with Luxembourg above this range at PPS 15 611 
and Romania below this range at PPS 832.

198

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   198
Consumers.indb   198

08.04.2009   09:51:11
08.04.2009   09:51:11

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Expenditure  on  housing,  water,  electricity, 
gas  and  other  fuels  represented  around  28 % 
of  total  household  consumption  expenditure 
in  the  EU-27  in  2005.  In  Bulgaria  and  Poland, 
the  share  of  these  items  exceeded  30 %,  while 
only  Hungary,  Lithuania,  Latvia  and  Romania 
reported shares below 20 %, and Malta less than 
10 % (see Figure 4.4).

Th  e  proportion  of  expenditure  dedicated  to 
housing,  water,  electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels 
varied greatly depending on the type of household 
(number  of  persons,  with  or  without  dependent 
children), with the share generally decreasing as 
the size of the household increased (see Figure 4.5). 
Equally, the share was around a third higher for 
households in the lowest income quintile than for 
those  in  the  highest  quintile.  Th  e  share  of  total 
household  consumption  expenditure  accounted 
for by these items was also higher for households 
headed by persons aged 60 or over, and also for 
households in densely urbanised areas.

Just  over  half  of  household  consumption 
expenditure on housing, water, electricity, gas and 
other fuels in the EU-27 concerned imputed rent, 
in other words an estimate of the equivalent rent 
for owner occupied housing. Adding actual rents 
and  repairs  to  this  brought  the  total  to  around 
three  quarters,  with  water,  waste  and  similar 
services  making  up  7.9 %  and  all  fuels  and  heat 
just under 20 %.

Figure 4.4: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of housing, water, 
electricity, gas and other fuels in total 
expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

10

20

30

40

BG
PL
ES
LU
EE
DK
HR
DE
UK
SE
IT
EU-27
FI
PT
FR
NO
NL
BE
EL
IE
SK
SI
AT
CY
HU
LT
LV
RO
MT

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

  Consumers in Europe

199

Consumers.indb   199
Consumers.indb   199

08.04.2009   09:51:12
08.04.2009   09:51:12

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Figure 4.5: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of housing, water, electricity, gas 
and other fuels in total expenditure, EU-27, 2005
(%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Manual workers

Non-manual workers

Self-employed

Unemployed

Retired

Other inactive

Lowest

Second

Third

Fourth

Highest

1 adult

1 adult & dep. children

2 adults

2 adults & dep. children

3+ adults

3+ adults & dep. children

Less than 30

30-44

45-59

60 and over

Dense

Intermediate

Sparse

)
1
(
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
i
c
o
S

e

i

l
i
t
n
u
q
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
1
(
e
p
y
t
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
g
A

)
1
(
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
b
r
U

(1) Unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

200

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   200
Consumers.indb   200

08.04.2009   09:51:13
08.04.2009   09:51:13

 
 
 
 
 
 
Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Table 4.11A: Structure of consumption expenditure on housing and water, 2005 (1)
(%)

Actual 
rentals for 
housing
16.2
19.0
0.9
:
26.4
28.7
0.0
10.7
11.7
5.6
25.5
8.8
11.1
5.8
3.2
13.0
4.6
7.7
27.7
18.4
1.6
7.5
2.6
3.5
8.1
18.8
32.4
20.3
1.7
11.8

Imputed 
rentals for 
housing
54.2
53.0
63.1
:
34.8
39.2
57.2
58.5
59.2
75.6
45.6
61.8
63.4
33.3
41.3
65.4
:
:
39.8
36.8
43.5
69.9
:
54.3
43.2
65.8
45.3
59.1
62.5
43.9

Maintenance 
and repair of 
the dwelling
5.4
4.7
3.7
:
6.0
8.8
9.4
12.8
6.7
2.3
2.3
3.0
5.1
12.9
4.8
5.3
10.8
65.9
4.7
9.0
8.9
1.1
7.1
4.3
13.7
0.0
6.4
5.7
3.7
22.9

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

1.0
1.7
1.7
0.3
0.0
:
0.9
1.8

0.0
:
0.4
0.0
0.0
:
0.9
2.3

Sewerage 
0.7
0.0
0.6
:
2.0

Refuse 
collection
0.7
0.8
0.6
:
2.3

Other 
Water 
housing 
supply
services
3.2
3.2
2.0
1.6
3.7
0.6
:
:
2.0
2.0
<————————  6.1 ————————>
0.0
4.0
1.7
0.0
2.1
1.7
4.3
2.0
4.6
2.7
3.0
1.7
1.9
0.5
1.2
3.5
<————————  9.5 ————————>
1.3
1.3
7.7
8.8
0.0
5.5
3.1
2.0
<———————— 14.8 ————————>
7.3
1.5
<———————— 16.0 ————————>
1.7
4.3
3.8
2.1
<————————  2.9 ————————>
<————————  4.1 ————————>
3.7
0.7
1.4
3.7
0.4
1.1

0.3
5.7
0.0
:

1.0
2.6
0.0
5.5

0.0
1.7
1.5

0.3
1.7
1.5

2.2
1.7

0.4
1.7

1.3
0.4

2.5
0.4

3.2
3.4

(1) EU-27, unreliable; imputed rentals, Ireland and United Kingdom, estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

  Consumers in Europe

201

Consumers.indb   201
Consumers.indb   201

08.04.2009   09:51:13
08.04.2009   09:51:13

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.11B: Structure of consumption expenditure on electricity, gas and other fuels, 2005 (1)
(%)

Fuels & heat: total
19.9
19.0
26.5
:
24.7
17.2
21.4
15.0
12.9
9.9
19.8
16.9
15.7
39.8
41.8
12.0
59.8
19.8
17.2
20.6
31.7
15.8
74.4
28.7
67.9
12.5
11.8
10.1
24.0
16.8

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Electricity
9.0
8.3
16.4
:
8.7
:
9.0
6.4
5.4
5.3
11.8
5.7
9.7
12.3
13.2
4.7
24.2
16.5
8.6
8.5
10.8
9.8
28.8
10.9
23.1
7.7
9.8
5.1
11.1
14.1

Gas
5.4
5.9
0.6
:
2.0
3.7
1.0
2.6
0.4
3.0
2.3
8.1
1.9
5.8
5.8
3.0
21.6
2.2
10.5
3.1
6.0
4.5
23.7
2.6
22.2
0.0
0.0
4.4
5.7
0.0

Liquid fuels
1.8
4.7
0.0
:
2.0
:
0.3
3.4
6.3
1.3
4.9
1.0
3.2
0.0
0.0
4.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.6
0.3
:
0.0
8.3
0.0
1.8
0.7
0.7
1.7
1.1

Solid fuels Heat energy
2.5
:
3.5
:
11.0
:
7.7
:
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
18.1
18.5
:
7.7
0.0
0.8
1.3
8.3
:
9.6
3.0
20.1
1.5
0.7
0.0
1.0
:

1.8
0.4
5.8
:
1.0
:
3.0
2.1
0.8
0.3
0.8
0.7
0.9
3.5
4.2
0.0
5.7
0.0
0.0
2.7
6.7
0.8
12.2
3.9
2.6
1.1
0.3
0.0
4.1
1.5

(1) EU-27, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

202

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   202
Consumers.indb   202

08.04.2009   09:51:14
08.04.2009   09:51:14

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.2.3 Mortgage debt and payment of 
bills

Th  e extent to which homeowners resort to home 
loans  varies  greatly  between  Member  States, 
as  does  the  extent  to  which  the  level  of  debt  is 
changing. Th  e highest debt burdens per capita in 
2006 were in Denmark, the Netherlands, Ireland, 
the  United  Kingdom  and  Luxembourg,  all  in 
excess  of  EUR  20 000.  Th  e  lowest  debt  burdens 
were  in  Romania  and  Bulgaria  with  average 
mortgage debt of around EUR 100 to EUR 200 per 
capita, while all of the Member States that joined 
the EU in 2004 recorded an average mortgage debt 
per capita lower than those in the EU-15 Member 
States.  In  contrast,  the  ten  Member  States  with 
the greatest percentage increase in mortgage debt 
in 2006 were all among the 12 that joined the EU 
in either 2004 or 2007, with Hungary and Malta 
recording  slower  growth.  Among  the  EU-15 
Member  States,  the  fastest  growth  in  mortgage 
debt was recorded in Greece, Ireland and Spain, 
and the slowest, by far, in Germany.

Th  e  results  of  the  survey  on  income  and  living 
conditions  (SILC)  show  that  generally  only  a 
small proportion of households were in arrears on 
mortgage or rent payments during the 12 months 
period  prior  to  the  2006  survey,  the  highest 
proportion being 7 % in Cyprus (see Table 4.13). 
In contrast, in nearly every Member State a larger 
proportion of households had been in arrears for 
payments  of  utility  bills,  with  Greece  reporting 
by far the highest proportion.

Table 4.12: Residential mortgage markets, 2006

Value of 
mortgage 
debt 
(EUR million)
5 713 615
114 105
1 745
8 055
221 970
1 183 834
4 278
123 288
57 145
571 746
577 800
276 102
3 077
4 680
2 997
11 345
10 215
1 770
525 874
60 669
22 514
91 895
2 276
1 956
4 209
73 200
173 499
1 583 372
5 219
12 237
9 828
307 348

Growth in 
mortgage 
debt, relative 
to 2005 (%)
11.1
12.9
73.5
33.9
13.4
1.8
63.4
24.6
25.8
20.2
14.7
13.3
43.5
86.5
32.1
13.4
11.0
16.5
7.9
12.7
53.7
15.7
57.2
43.0
36.7
11.0
9.1
11.9
37.2
65.7
4.5
3.4

Ratio of 
residential 
debt to GDP 
(%)
49.0
36.3
7.0
7.1
100.8
51.3
32.7
70.1
29.3
58.6
32.2
18.7
21.2
28.9
12.6
34.3
11.4
34.7
98.4
23.5
8.3
59.2
2.3
6.6
9.6
43.8
56.7
83.1
15.3
3.8
75.5
101.9

Mortgage 
debt per 
capita (EUR 
thousand)
11.6
10.9
0.2
0.8
40.9
14.4
3.2
29.3
5.1
13.1
9.2
4.7
4.0
2.0
0.9
24.7
1.0
4.4
32.2
7.3
0.6
8.7
0.1
1.0
0.8
13.9
19.2
26.2
1.2
0.2
32.8
41.2

EU-27 
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS (1)
CH

(1) Growth rate for Iceland was calculated based on data in national currency, not euro.

Source: European Mortgage federation (http://www.hypo.org), using data from Eurostat, 
national Central Banks and own sources

  Consumers in Europe

203

Consumers.indb   203
Consumers.indb   203

08.04.2009   09:51:15
08.04.2009   09:51:15

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.13: Proportion of households that have been in arrears on payments/bills in 
the 12 months prior to the survey, 2006
(%)

Mortgage or rent payments

Utility bills

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Yes
3
:
4
2
2
1
4
5
2
5
3
7
3
1
1
2
1
3
1
2
2
:
2
5
5
4
4
6
6

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC

No answer/
not relevant
38
:
40
0
3
84
52
71
63
35
69
66
68
94
37
80
65
1
41
90
58
:
92
38
36
11
32
21
21

No
59
:
56
98
95
15
44
24
35
60
28
28
29
5
62
18
34
97
58
8
40
:
6
58
59
85
64
73
73

Yes
4
:
5
3
5
6
6
26
3
6
9
9
13
13
2
13
6
3
2
18
4
:
10
6
4
4
0
5
6

No answer/
not relevant
3
:
1
0
1
0
4
1
23
0
0
2
2
0
3
1
0
0
0
4
5
:
1
1
0
4
0
2
9

No
93
:
94
97
94
94
91
73
74
94
91
89
85
87
96
86
94
97
98
78
91
:
89
93
96
92
100
93
84

204

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   204
Consumers.indb   204

08.04.2009   09:51:16
08.04.2009   09:51:16

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.3 Prices

4.3.1 Price infl ation

in 

investment 

Households’ 
energy  using 
equipment,  particularly  for  water  and  space 
heating,  is  based  upon  expectations  of  future 
prices,  as  well  as  aff ordability  (which  is  related 
to  income)  and  access  (whether  the  chosen  fuel 
network  is  established  locally).  When  energy 
prices  rise,  consumers  may  become  more  aware 
of  their  everyday  consumption  and  try  to 
avoid  consuming  excessive  amounts  of  energy. 
Alternatively,  consumers  may  look  for  energy-
saving measures.

Th  e  harmonised  index  of  consumer  prices  for 
housing,  water,  electricity,  gas  and  other  fuels 
rose  in  the  EU-27  by  31.5 %  between  2000  and 
2007, equivalent to an average of more than 4.0 % 
per annum. Th  is was notably higher than the rate 
of  increase  recorded  for  the  all-items  consumer 
price  index,  which  gained  on  average  2.4 %  per 
annum  between  2000  and  2007.  Price  increases 
decelerated from 6.0 % in 2000 to 2.8 % in 2002, 
aft er  which  the  increases  accelerated  each  year 
to  5.6 %  by  2006:  2007  marked  a  slowdown 
as  price  increases  of  3.5 %  were  recorded.  All 
Member  States  except  for  Malta  recorded  price 
increases  for  housing,  water,  electricity,  gas  and 
other  fuels  in  2007,  with  the  fastest  increases 
recorded  in  Hungary,  the  Baltic  Member  States 
and Romania.

Table 4.14: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, housing, water, electricity, gas and 
other fuels, annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
6.0
6.9
13.7
9.1
5.9
3.6
2.6
9.1
6.4
4.4
1.9
6.0
16.3
4.4
12.4
7.7
10.0
0.9
5.7
3.4
11.1
3.7
63.6
18.3
37.7
4.2
0.9
1.4
63.1
7.7
5.2
:

2001
4.5
3.7
7.4
11.9
3.1
3.2
9.7
5.8
2.7
2.9
1.1
3.0
0.4
2.7
2.3
1.7
10.7
2.2
6.5
3.0
10.2
4.1
34.2
10.9
17.7
2.8
5.0
2.3
70.9
4.6
9.7
:

2002
2.8
0.2
14.7
5.6
3.1
0.7
8.5
4.1
3.8
2.3
1.7
0.4
5.0
1.2
2.7
0.2
6.5
2.3
4.0
0.6
5.9
3.0
36.5
5.6
3.9
2.7
3.2
2.5
41.9
6.3
2.2
:

2003
3.1
1.4
11.6
0.7
2.3
1.8
3.2
4.2
4.5
2.9
2.7
3.4
11.0
4.6
0.3
2.8
7.6
1.9
4.3
1.6
3.3
4.2
19.8
5.7
21.6
4.0
8.4
1.9
22.3
5.8
11.1
:

2004
3.3
3.0
7.6
2.3
2.1
1.9
4.3
3.8
4.9
3.5
2.9
2.0
5.0
8.1
0.6
3.1
12.9
2.8
3.2
4.2
4.0
3.0
21.5
6.7
15.9
2.1
2.6
3.7
10.9
5.6
1.5
:

2005
5.2
5.6
5.7
4.7
3.7
4.0
7.2
9.6
9.2
5.3
4.7
5.0
8.7
5.8
5.0
6.8
7.2
9.3
5.9
6.2
3.8
4.4
19.1
9.2
8.2
3.2
2.2
6.3
11.0
5.7
1.7
:

2006
5.6
4.9
4.6
8.3
3.6
3.9
10.5
7.3
7.2
6.5
4.7
5.7
7.7
13.7
6.9
5.8
6.8
10.6
4.8
5.4
4.4
3.9
14.4
5.4
12.1
2.9
4.6
9.2
12.9
5.0
8.9
3.2

2007
3.5
1.4
5.4
3.9
2.2
2.2
15.0
7.6
2.8
3.7
3.0
2.7
1.9
16.4
11.5
3.4
17.5
-0.1
3.0
4.3
4.6
3.6
10.0
3.5
2.3
2.7
1.1
5.0
11.2
7.9
-2.4
2.1

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

  Consumers in Europe

205

Consumers.indb   205
Consumers.indb   205

08.04.2009   09:51:16
08.04.2009   09:51:16

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Between  2000  and  2007  the  EU-27’s  index  of 
consumer prices rose more quickly for electricity, 
gas and other fuels (6.0 % per annum on average) 
than for water supply and other services (4.0 %), or 
maintenance and repair (3.2 %), with the slowest 
increases (2.2 % per annum on average) recorded 
for actual rentals for housing (see Figure 4.6 and 
Table 4.15).

Figure 4.6: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

120

110

100

90

80

70

2001

2003

2005

2007

Housing, water and fuels

Actual rentals for housing (1)

Maintenance & repair of the dwelling

Water supply and other services

Electricity, gas and other fuels

(1) Estimates.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Table 4.15: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, annual rate of change, EU-27
(%)

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels

Actual rentals for housing (1)
Maintenance and repair of the dwelling
Materials for maintenance and repair
Services for maintenance and repair
Water supply and miscellaneous services

Water supply
Refuse collection
Sewerage collection
Other services relating to the dwelling n.e.c.

Electricity, gas and other fuels

Electricity
Gas
Liquid fuels
Solid fuels
Heat energy

(1) Estimates.

2000
6.0
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.7
2.7
2.9
3.3
0.7
3.1
9.3
0.6
10.2
42.5
5.8
11.1

2001
4.5
2.1
3.6
3.3
4.0
3.4
3.9
3.0
3.2
3.0
6.8
3.9
13.9
-5.7
7.6
12.4

2002
2.8
2.3
3.1
2.0
4.1
4.0
4.9
3.1
3.9
3.2
2.7
4.0
1.3
-5.2
7.4
6.7

2003
3.1
2.1
2.4
1.4
3.3
3.6
3.9
3.8
4.0
2.7
4.4
4.3
5.0
4.9
4.7
3.2

2004
3.3
2.1
3.1
2.6
3.5
4.3
4.8
3.6
4.9
3.8
4.4
3.6
3.6
11.5
6.0
2.4

2005
5.2
2.3
2.8
1.9
3.6
4.7
5.1
4.4
4.5
4.3
9.4
4.0
11.7
27.9
5.4
8.4

2006
5.6
2.2
2.7
1.7
3.7
4.0
4.0
3.9
4.2
4.1
10.9
6.6
17.7
10.6
5.1
11.0

2007
3.5
2.4
4.7
4.4
5.0
4.2
3.9
4.7
4.5
4.0
3.9
4.8
3.6
-0.6
6.7
5.2

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

206

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   206
Consumers.indb   206

08.04.2009   09:51:17
08.04.2009   09:51:17

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.3.2 Aff  ordability and price levels

A  2006  Eurobarometer  survey  of  services  of 
general  interest  investigated  the  aff ordability  of 
electricity,  gas  and  water  across  the  then  25  EU 
Member States: the results presented in Table 4.16 
are based only on the answers of the part of the 
population that had indicated that they used the 
specifi ed services. Across the EU as a whole, two 
thirds of respondents said that electricity and gas 
were aff ordable, and three quarters that water was 

aff ordable.  In  Malta,  Finland,  Sweden,  Poland 
and  Cyprus  more  than  half  of  the  respondents 
regarded electricity as not aff ordable or the price 
as  excessive.  For  gas,  Poland  (49 %)  recorded 
the  highest  proportion  of  the  population  that 
regarded the price as not aff ordable or excessive, 
followed  by  France  (46 %)  and  Germany  (44 %). 
Concerning water the situation of Malta stood out, 
with a majority (60 %) of respondents regarding 
the price as not aff ordable or excessive.

Table 4.16: Aff ordability of utilities: proportion of respondents using the service, May–June 
2006
(%)

Electricity

Affordable
66
75
:
71
81
63
70
63
83
73
62
66
44
68
92
73
68
26
68
83
42
52
:
85
80
37
40
83

Not affordable 
or excessive
31
23
:
28
17
36
29
30
16
25
34
32
52
30
7
23
31
69
29
16
55
42
:
14
17
60
56
16

Gas
Not affordable 
or excessive
33
22
:
31
20
44
19
31
10
24
46
34
:
25
7
19
41
:
27
17
49
29
:
10
20
7
30
20

Affordable
65
76
:
68
77
55
78
62
90
74
49
65
:
74
92
77
59
:
69
79
48
66
:
88
80
47
55
78

Water

Affordable
75
78
:
80
86
71
79
88
96
80
61
74
76
73
94
82
73
35
86
94
59
71
:
88
85
67
82
85

Not affordable 
or excessive
23
21
:
19
10
27
20
7
4
19
36
24
21
25
5
14
26
60
11
4
38
27
:
11
14
29
8
13

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

207

Consumers.indb   207
Consumers.indb   207

08.04.2009   09:51:18
08.04.2009   09:51:18

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Th  e 2006 survey on income and living condition 
(SILC) asked a more general question, indirectly 
linked  to  aff ordability,  and  identifi ed  that  in 
most Member States at least 90 % of households 
could  aff ord  to  keep  their  homes  adequately 
warm. Th  e highest proportions were recorded in 
more northerly Member States, while the lowest 
proportion by far was in Portugal (58 %).

Price  level  indices  for  2006  show  that  housing, 
water, electricity, gas and other fuels were cheaper 
in the Member States that joined the EU in 2004 
and  2007.  Cyprus,  which  had  the  highest  price 

level  index  for  these  products  among  the  newer 
Member  States,  had  an  index  level  just  under 
70 % of the EU-27 average; Slovenia and Estonia 
were  the  only  other  newer  Member  States  that 
had  price  level  indices  above  50 %  of  the  EU-27 
average,  with  the  lowest  relative  price  levels 
reported in Bulgaria. In contrast, Denmark and 
Ireland reported the highest price level indices, in 
the case of the former approximately 50 % above 
the  EU-27  average  and  more  than  fi ve  times  as 
high as in Bulgaria.

Table 4.17: Proportion of households that 
are able to keep their home adequately 
warm, 2006
(%)

Figure 4.7: Price level indices, housing, 
water, electricity, gas and other fuels, 2006
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC

Yes
85
:
90
89
94
97
95
86
91
93
90
65
73
69
99
84
89
97
96
70
58
:
96
90
97
97
95
88
98

No
15.2
:
9.5
10.2
5.8
3.1
4.6
13.6
9.3
6.7
10.4
35.0
27.3
31.3
0.6
16.5
11.3
2.6
3.7
30.3
41.6
:
3.6
10.0
2.6
2.8
4.9
11.1
2.0

No answer
0.1
:
0.0
1.0
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0
:
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.6
0.2
0.4
0.4

CH

DK

IS

IE

FI

LU
NL

FR

BE

NO

SE
DE

IT

UK

ES

EU-27

AT
EL

PT

CY

SI

EE

CZ
LV

TR

RO

MT

PL
SK

HR

HU

LT

BG

MK

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

208

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   208
Consumers.indb   208

08.04.2009   09:51:18
08.04.2009   09:51:18

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.3.3 Indirect taxes

Table 4.18: Taxation of energy products, July 2006

Excise 
(EUR/thousand litres)
Heating 
fuel (non-
business use)
21
18
:
336
364
61
44
47
260
85
57
403
197
20
21
0
339
97
47
98
59
91
:
53
175
71
361
95

EU (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

VAT rates 
(%)

Electricity
 (non-
business use)
5.0
21.0
:
19.0
25.0
16.0
18.0
13.5
19.0
16.0
19.6
20.0
15.0
18.0
18.0
6.0
20.0
19.0
19.0
20.0
22.0
5.0
:
20.0
19.0
22.0
25.0
5.0

Standard 
rate
15.0
21.0
:
19.0
25.0
16.0
18.0
21.0
19.0
16.0
19.6
20.0
15.0
18.0
18.0
15.0
20.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
22.0
21.0
:
20.0
19.0
22.0
25.0
17.5

Natural 
gas
5.0
21.0
:
19.0
25.0
16.0
18.0
13.5
19.0
16.0
19.6
20.0
15.0
18.0
18.0
6.0
15.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
22.0
5.0
:
20.0
19.0
22.0
25.0
5.0

(1) Minimum in accordance with Council Directives 2003/96/EC for excises, 2001/41/EC for VAT.

Source: Energy & transport in ﬁ gures, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport, 
European Commission

Fuel is normally burdened with VAT, excise duties 
and  sometimes  other  indirect  environmental 
taxes.  Table  4.18  provides 
information  on 
the  excise  duty  on  heating  fuel  (which  can  be 
compared with similar duties on automotive fuel 
in Chapter 7), as well as VAT rates on electricity 
and  gas.  Excise  duties  applied  to  heating  fuel 
ranged from EUR 403 per 1 000 litres in Italy to 
nothing  in  Luxembourg  with  16  other  Member 
States  reporting  duties  less  than  EUR  100  per 
1 000 litres.

Several  Member  States  applied  reduced  VAT 
rates  to  electricity  and  natural  gas,  namely 
Ireland,  Luxembourg,  Hungary  (only  for  gas), 
Portugal and the United Kingdom, with the two 
latter Member States applying the minimum 5 % 
required  under  the  relevant  Council  Directives. 
Most Member States applied the standard rates, 
and Malta actually applied a slightly higher than 
standard rate for electricity.

4.3.4 Fuel and accommodation prices

Table  4.19  shows  the  electricity  and  gas  prices 
in  2007,  excluding  taxes. 
households  faced 
Generally in any given country prices were high 
for both products or low for both products, with 
a  few  exceptions:  Hungary  had  particularly  low 
gas prices relative to its fairly average electricity 
prices, whereas Sweden had the highest gas prices 
despite  slightly  lower  than  average  electricity 
prices.  Figure  4.8  shows  how  the  average  gas 
and  electricity  price  have  developed  within  the 
EU-15 during the last ten years. Electricity prices 
have  been  relatively  stable,  falling  from  1996 
to  a  period  of  stability  between  2001  and  2004, 
since  when  prices  have  risen  relatively  quickly. 
In  contrast  gas  prices  have  followed  an  overall 
upward path, with periods of relatively fast price 
growth  interrupted  by  periods  of  price  stability 
or relatively smaller price reductions.

Th  e price of housing is very diffi  cult to establish, 
not just because of the varying quality of diff erent 
buildings  as  structures,  but  also  because  the 
precise location of each dwelling has an important 
impact on its valuation. Generally there are large 
diff erences  in  prices  between  regions  within  a 
country, as well as within regions and cities. Th  e 
Urban  Audit  provides  an  indication  of  average 
prices  for  dwellings  in  some  European  capital 
cities (see Table 4.20).

  Consumers in Europe

209

Consumers.indb   209
Consumers.indb   209

08.04.2009   09:51:19
08.04.2009   09:51:19

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.19: Prices (excluding taxes) for fi nal 
domestic consumers, 2007

Electricity (1)
(EUR/100kWh)
12
12
5
9
12
14
6
15
7
10
9
17
12
6
7
15
10
9
14
11
9
14
9
9
13
9
11
13
8
14

Gas (2)
(EUR/GJ)
12
10.3
7.4
7.9
13.6
14.0
5.0
14.7
:
12.3
11.4
11.8
:
6.4
6.0
10.9
6.0
:
12.3
11.0
8.8
13.2
7.6
10.8
9.6
:
15.1
11.2
6.4
:

EU
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Annual consumption of 3 500 kWh of which 1 300 kWh is 
overnight; standard dwelling of 90m².
(2) Annual consumption of 83.7 GJ; cooking, water heating and 
central heating.

Source: Eurostat, Electricity prices - households, Gas prices - 
households (theme0/strind/strind_t)

Figure 4.8: Electricity and natural gas 
prices (excluding taxes) for fi nal domestic 
consumers, EU-15

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

Electricity (EUR/100kWh) (1)

Gas (EUR/GJ) (2)

(1) Annual consumption of 3 500 kWh of which 1 300 kWh is 
overnight; standard dwelling of 90m².
(2) Annual consumption of 83.7 GJ; cooking, water heating and 
central heating.

Source: Eurostat, Electricity prices - households, Gas prices - 
households (theme0/strind/strind_t)

Table 4.20: Average accommodation prices - purchase or rent, 
2003-2006
(EUR/m²)

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Oslo

Apartment
:
:
827
:
1 450
959
:
:
:
:
2 647
:
341
638
3 679
942
:
1 921
2 317
:
1 846
624
1 850
1 237
:
3 102
4 486
2 998

House
1 008
:
1 563
:
1 770
805
:
:
:
:
:
:
896
409
2 967
811
:
2 044
1 863
:
1 774
546
1 400
1 289
:
2 730
3 815
2 700

Annual rent
:
:
:
:
:
78
:
:
:
:
:
:
6
:
10
:
:
63
85
:
:
:
250
99
:
100
:
:

Source: Eurostat, Derived Indicators for core cities (theme1/urb/urb_icity)

210

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   210
Consumers.indb   210

08.04.2009   09:51:20
08.04.2009   09:51:20

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.4 Consumer satisfaction and 
complaints

In  2006  a  survey  of  consumers’  satisfaction 
with  a  range  of  services  of  general  interest 
was  undertaken  on  behalf  of  the  European 
Commission.  It  surveyed  persons  aged  18  and 
over that had used the specifi ed services during 
the  12  months  prior  to  the  survey.  Consumers’ 
satisfaction  was  calculated  as  a  score  out  of  10, 
with  consumers  giving  scores  of  8  or  higher 
classifi ed as satisfi ed, 4 or less as dissatisfi ed, and 
5 to 7 as neutral. Figure 4.9 provides an overview 
of  the  results,  indicating  that  for  electricity,  gas 
and  water  services  a  majority  of  respondents 
were  satisfi ed,  and  most  of  the  remainder  were 
neutral, leaving just 4 % or 5 % dissatisfi ed. Th  e 
most dissatisfi ed were the Maltese, where 17 % of 
consumers were dissatisfi ed with their electricity 
supply and 14 % with their water supply (there is 
no network gas supply in Malta). Other Member 
States that were relatively dissatisfi ed with these 
three  services  included  Slovakia  (particularly 
gas  supply),  Portugal  and  Greece  (particularly 

electricity  and  water),  and  the  Czech  Republic 
and  Hungary.  Some  Member  States  reported 
relatively  high  dissatisfaction  with  just  one  of 
the  three  services,  for  example,  electricity  in 
Sweden,  or  water  in  all  of  the  Baltic  Member 
States.  In  contrast  very  few  respondents  in 
Belgium,  Denmark,  Austria  and  Luxembourg 
reported that they were dissatisfi ed with any of 
these three services.

Figure 4.9: Satisfaction rates for utilities, 
EU-25, 2006

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Electricity

Gas

Water

58

58

60

37

38

34

5

4

5

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European 
Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, 
May 2007

Table 4.21: Satisfaction rates for utilities, 2006

          Electricity
Satisfied
58
65
:
58
79
73
72
73
48
43
60
35
70
73
82
72
73
47
41
80
60
36
:
74
53
63
53
58

Dissatisfied
5
2
:
9
2
2
4
4
10
4
3
8
6
3
2
2
9
17
6
2
6
13
:
3
9
6
12
7

Neutral
37
33
:
33
19
25
24
23
42
53
37
57
24
24
17
26
19
36
53
19
34
51
:
24
39
31
35
35

       Gas

        Water

Dissatisfied
4
3
:
10
3
4
2
2
2
4
5
4
-
5
1
2
9
-
4
3
5
4
:
1
15
1
2
5

Satisfied
58
65
:
65
78
70
68
82
87
48
58
36
-
68
85
69
65
-
48
76
59
50
:
77
43
77
74
58

Neutral
38
32
:
25
20
27
30
16
11
49
37
60
-
28
15
29
26
-
49
21
36
46
:
22
42
22
24
37

Dissatisfied
5
0
:
95
1
2
12
8
10
6
4
9
2
12
9
3
7
14
1
2
8
9
:
5
95
3
2
6

Satisfied
60
64
:
93
85
84
52
72
59
47
52
40
83
51
60
74
71
53
53
87
57
52
:
72
33
80
81
60

Neutral
34
35
:
2
14
14
36
21
31
47
44
51
15
38
32
23
22
33
46
12
36
39
:
23
8
18
18
35

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

  Consumers in Europe

211

Consumers.indb   211
Consumers.indb   211

08.04.2009   09:51:20
08.04.2009   09:51:20

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Figure 4.10: Satisfaction rates for electricity supply, EU-25, 2006
(%)

0

Self-employed

Managers

Other white collar

Blue collar

Students

Housepersons

Unemployed

Retired

25

52.5

62.0

56.7

60.0

55.3

50.5

58.8

60.9

50

75

100

6.9

3.7

5.2

4.6

5.4

6.6

8.7

3.9

Up to 15 years

54.6

5.7

16-19 years

20 years +

Still studying

18-34

35-54

55+

Men

Women

58.3

59.0

56.8

57.3

56.0

59.7

57.6

57.6

5.5

4.6

4.5

5.5

6.4

3.9

5.0

5.5

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
O

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

e
g
A

r
e
d
n
e
G

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

Socio-economic  analyses  of  the  overall  results 
for  the  EU-25  are  presented  in  Figures  4.10  to 
4.13.  For  electricity  an  occupational  analysis 
shows  that  dissatisfaction  was  highest  among 
the  unemployed  and  lowest  among  managers 
and  retired  persons.  For  gas,  a  similar  analysis 
showed  that  dissatisfaction  was  lowest  among 

other (than managers) white collar workers and 
house-persons,  and  highest  for  the  unemployed 
and  students.  For  water  the  self-employed  were 
clearly  the  most  dissatisfi ed,  while  rates  of 
dissatisfaction were generally low for white collar 
workers, blue collar workers and students.

212

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   212
Consumers.indb   212

08.04.2009   09:51:21
08.04.2009   09:51:21

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

75

100

Figure 4.11: Satisfaction rates for gas supply, EU-25, 2006
(%)

0

Self-employed

Managers

Other white collar

Blue collar

25

51.0

62.2

59.2

56.4

50

5.4

4.1

3.7

4.2

Students

51.0

6.6

Housepersons

Unemployed

Retired

Up to 15 years

16-19 years

20 years +

60.9

55.7

59.7

54.6

59.6

58.8

Still studying

48.0

7.5

18-34

35-54

55+

Men

Women

55.7

57.2

60.0

58.2

57.6

3.5

6.5

4.4

4.4

4.1

4.6

4.5

4.5

4.2

4.4

4.4

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
O

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

e
g
A

r
e
d
n
e
G

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

  Consumers in Europe

213

Consumers.indb   213
Consumers.indb   213

08.04.2009   09:51:22
08.04.2009   09:51:22

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Figure 4.12: Satisfaction rates for water supply, EU-25, 2006
(%)

50

75

100

7.8

4.8

4.6

4.9

4.9

5.9

0

Self-employed

Managers

Other white collar

Blue collar

Students

Housepersons

Unemployed

Retired

25

52.7

60.0

60.2

63.0

60.7

57.3

60.5

63.4

Up to 15 years

54.8

6.2

16-19 years

20 years +

Still studying

18-34

35-54

55+

Men

Women

61.3

62.6

62.1

60.1

59.6

61.0

59.3

61.0

6.7

5.0

5.2

5.2

4.5

5.2

5.6

5.2

5.9

5.0

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
O

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

e
g
A

r
e
d
n
e
G

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

214

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   214
Consumers.indb   214

08.04.2009   09:51:22
08.04.2009   09:51:22

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Table 4.22A: Satisfaction and importance for electricity, 2006

Lower
satisfaction

Priority actions
Transparency (7.05)
Overall price (6.56)
Commercial offer (6.41)
Price level (5.81)
Environmentally friendly actions (7.22)
Familiarity (7.15)
Ease (7.07)
Customer service mentality (6.83)
Uniqueness (6.74)

Lower importance
Points of sale (6.64)
Information (6.56)

Higher 
importance

Lower 
importance

Higher
satisfaction

Ideal situation
Payment process (7.92)
Accuracy (7.37)
Popularity (7.75)
State of the art technology (7.49)
Overall image (7.43)
Relationship (7.38)
Reputation (7.27)

Long term actions
Safety (8.11)
Reliability (7.96)
Offer relevance (7.89)
Overall quality (7.71)
Confidentiality (7.69)
Order ease (7.58)
Staff professionalism (7.55)
Infrastructure (7.53)
Technical support (7.34)
Availability (7.29)
Questions/problem handling (7.29)

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Th  e report on this consumer satisfaction survey 
also  provided  a  so-called  two  dimensional 
analysis, contrasting indicators of satisfaction and 
importance,  in  order  to  identify  which  quality 
aspects  are  regarded  as  important  and  having 
high or low satisfaction, and so indicating where 
service providers could try to maintain or improve 

levels.  Th  ese 

satisfaction 
two-dimensional 
analyses  are  presented  in  Tables  4.22a  to  4.22c 
for electricity, gas and water. Among the aspects 
that  were  regarded  as  important  but  with  low 
satisfaction,  ease,  familiarity,  customer  service 
mentality,  and  biuniqueness  were  identifi ed  for 
all three of these services.

  Consumers in Europe

215

Consumers.indb   215
Consumers.indb   215

08.04.2009   09:51:23
08.04.2009   09:51:23

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.22B: Satisfaction and importance for gas, 2006

Lower
satisfaction

Priority actions
Points of sale (6.79)
Information (6.48)
Environment friendly (7.24)
Reputation (7.2)
Familiarity (7.14)
Ease (7.1)
Customer service mentality (6.91)
Uniqueness (6.67)

Higher 
importance

Lower 
importance

Lower importance
Transparency (6.98)
Overall price (6.41)
Commercial offer (5.91)
Price level (5.74)

Higher
satisfaction

Ideal situation
Safety (8.11)
Reliability (8.07)
Offer relevance (7.87)
Order ease (7.85)
Overall quality (7.76)
Confidentiality (7.7)
Staff professionalism (7.69)
Infrastructure (7.5)
Technical support (7.42)
Questions/problem handling (7.38)
Availability (7.31)
Popularity (7.58)
Relationship (7.45)
State of the art (technology) (7.42)
Overall image (7.34)

Long term actions
Payment process (7.93)
Accuracy (7.37)

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Table 4.22C: Satisfaction and importance for water, 2006

Lower
satisfaction

Priority actions
Overall price (6.77)
Price levels (6.21)
Commercial offer (5.78)
State of the art (technology) (7.19)
Ease (7.13)
Familiarity (7.12)
Customer service mentality (6.97)
Uniqueness (6.58)

Lower importance
Availability (7.19)
Technical support (7.19)
Points of sale (6.88)
Information (5.92)

Higher 
importance

Lower 
importance

Higher
satisfaction

Ideal situation
Payment process (7.97)
Accuracy (7.47)
Transparency (7.23)
Environment friendly (7.55)
Popularity (7.48)
Relationship (7.42)
Overall image (7.37)
Reputation (7.32)

Long term actions
Reliability (7.94)
Safety (7.86)
Offer relevance (7.82)
Order ease (7.78)
Confidentiality (7.69)
Overall quality (7.64)
Staff professionalism (7.52)
Infrastructure (7.38)
Questions/problem handling (7.27)

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

216

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   216
Consumers.indb   216

08.04.2009   09:51:24
08.04.2009   09:51:24

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

to 

feelings  connected 

Information  on  households’  satisfaction  with 
accommodation  is  available  from  two  sources, 
the  Urban  Audit  which  looked  at  the  ease  with 
which  it  is  possible  to  fi nd  good  housing  at  a 
reasonable price, and the survey on income and 
living  conditions  (SILC)  which  targeted  specifi c 
problems with accommodation, such as noise or 
pollution  –  some  of  these  parameters  concern 
subjective 
individual 
preferences. Berlin was the only capital city were 
more  than  half  of  respondents  thought  that  it 
was possible to fi nd good housing at a reasonable 
price,  the  53 %  of  respondents  giving  this  view 
was far ahead of the 25 % in Madrid, which had 
the next highest share; in many capital cities less 
than 10 % agreed that it was possible to fi nd good 
housing at a reasonable price. Turning to the fi ve 
accommodation  problems  listed  in  Table  4.24, 
respondents  in  Latvia  and  Cyprus  recorded 
generally  high  dissatisfaction  levels,  while  the 
Nordic Member States of Finland, Denmark and 
Sweden were the least likely to respond that they 
suff ered from these problems. Portugal reported 
the  most  problems  with  a  lack  of  light,  Cyprus 
with  noise,  Malta  with  pollution,  the  United 
Kingdom and Latvia with crime/vandalism, and 
Poland with damp or rot.

Table 4.23: Perceptions concerning accommodation 
availability and value for money, 2006
(%)

Easy-to-find-good-housing: 

at reasonable 
price (synthetic 
index 0-100)
25
22
16
12
57
19
6
28
32
3
9
14
11
18
5
26
18
12
25
14
12
7
16
8
9
8
12
10
27

agree 
(strongly & 
somewhat)
24
19
15
12
53
17
6
25
25
3
9
13
10
16
5
22
15
12
22
13
11
7
15
8
9
8
11
10
27

disagree 
(strongly & 
somewhat)
71
70
77
87
40
70
94
65
54
96
84
83
78
70
90
63
71
85
67
80
83
87
78
85
87
88
83
82
71

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Zagreb
Ankara

Source: Eurostat, Perception survey results (theme1/urb/urb_percep)

  Consumers in Europe

217

Consumers.indb   217
Consumers.indb   217

08.04.2009   09:51:25
08.04.2009   09:51:25

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.24: Proportion of households that have problems with their accommodation, 2006
(%)

Too dark, 
not enough light
No 
answer
0.0
:
0.0
1.1
1.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
:
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.5
0.2

No
89.9
:
95.3
95.1
93.9
93.4
93.7
91.4
88.2
91.9
91.2
94.0
86.8
88.6
94.2
92.2
93.2
94.4
92.5
89.5
80.7
:
90.2
95.9
94.9
95.0
90.4
97.6
95.5

Yes
10.1
:
4.7
3.7
4.9
6.6
6.3
8.6
11.8
8.1
8.8
6.0
13.2
11.4
5.8
7.6
6.8
5.5
7.5
10.5
19.3
:
9.8
4.0
5.0
5.0
9.6
2.0
4.2

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Noise
(from neighbours 
or street)

Pollution, grime 
(or other 
environmental 
problem)

Crime, violence 
or vandalism 
in the area

Yes
22.9
:
18.7
20.1
29.4
22.7
14.6
20.7
26.7
20.2
25.2
35.8
21.3
20.0
23.9
17.7
26.9
32.2
19.8
20.4
25.6
:
18.7
19.9
17.8
13.6
22.1
13.2
13.3

No
77.1
:
81.3
79.1
70.0
77.3
85.4
79.3
73.3
79.8
74.8
64.2
78.7
80.0
76.0
82.3
73.1
67.8
80.2
79.6
74.4
:
81.3
80.1
82.0
86.3
77.8
86.5
86.4

No 
answer
0.0
:
0.0
0.8
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
:
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.3

Yes
15.6
:
18.5
7.9
24.9
20.8
8.8
17.4
16.5
16.0
21.6
23.9
31.4
14.0
17.6
13.4
38.8
14.5
8.2
13.4
20.5
:
21.1
19.8
13.5
7.0
12.8
8.6
8.3

No
84.4
:
81.5
91.0
74.4
79.2
91.1
82.6
83.5
83.9
78.4
76.1
68.6
86.0
82.4
86.6
61.2
85.5
91.8
86.6
79.5
:
78.9
80.2
86.4
92.9
87.2
91.0
91.4

No 
answer
0.0
:
0.0
1.1
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
:
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.4
0.3

Yes
18.2
:
14.5
14.3
13.3
20.3
16.1
9.1
19.3
16.2
14.9
12.1
25.5
8.0
12.0
10.0
12.1
16.9
13.6
9.8
12.1
:
10.0
8.1
16.7
13.8
27.4
2.6
4.6

No
81.8
:
85.5
84.8
85.4
79.7
83.8
90.9
80.7
83.6
85.1
87.9
74.5
92.0
88.0
89.8
87.9
83.1
86.4
90.2
87.9
:
90.0
91.9
83.0
85.9
72.5
97.0
95.2

No 
answer
0.0
:
0.0
0.9
1.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
:
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.1
0.4
0.3

Leaking roof, damp 
(walls, floors, 
foundations), 
or rot (in windows 
or floor)

Yes
14.3
:
20.2
8.5
14.4
24.6
15.0
20.8
17.3
11.7
21.9
33.8
31.3
28.0
14.7
27.8
8.1
16.4
10.0
40.0
20.0
:
22.3
6.7
4.5
6.5
13.3
12.5
8.1

No
85.7
:
79.8
90.5
84.6
75.4
85.0
79.2
82.7
88.3
78.1
66.2
68.7
72.0
85.2
72.2
91.9
83.4
90.0
60.0
80.0
:
77.7
93.2
95.2
93.3
86.7
87.0
91.7

No 
answer
0.0
:
0.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
:
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.5
0.3

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC

218

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   218
Consumers.indb   218

08.04.2009   09:51:25
08.04.2009   09:51:25

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

4.5 Quality

leading 

As  well  as  studying  problems 
to 
dissatisfaction  with  accommodation  the  SILC 
also studied the availability of certain amenities, 
including having an indoor bath or shower, and 
an  indoor  fl ushing  toilet  for  the  sole  use  of  the 
household.  For  both  of  these  types  of  amenities 
the Baltic Member States all reported the lowest 
rates  of  availability,  between  76 %  and  79 %  for 
baths/showers,  and  between  75 %  and  83 %  for 
indoor fl ushing toilets.

Table 4.25: Proportion of households that have specifi ed 
facilities, 2006
(%)

Bath or shower 
in dwelling

Yes
98.4
:
98.6
99.0
99.4
79.1
99.2
98.2
99.5
98.8
99.3
97.3
77.9
76.4
99.0
94.4
98.5
0.0
98.8
90.0
94.9
:
98.2
98.0
98.0
98.2
99.7
100.0
99.6

No No answer
0.0
1.6
:
:
0.0
1.4
0.0
1.0
0.1
0.5
0.0
20.9
0.0
0.8
0.0
1.8
0.0
0.5
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.7
0.0
2.7
0.0
22.1
0.0
23.6
0.1
0.9
0.0
5.6
0.0
1.5
100.0
0.0
0.0
1.2
0.0
10.0
0.0
5.1
:
:
0.0
1.8
0.1
1.9
0.1
1.9
1.5
0.3
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2

Indoor flushing toilet for 
sole use of household
Yes
98.4
:
98.2
100.0
97.6
83.3
99.5
96.5
99.7
98.7
99.6
97.3
79.1
75.4
99.0
93.0
99.8
0.0
98.6
91.2
95.4
:
98.2
95.8
98.8
100.0
99.2
98.8
99.5

No No answer
0.0
1.6
:
:
0.0
1.8
0.0
0.0
0.9
1.5
0.0
16.7
0.0
0.5
0.0
3.5
0.0
0.3
0.0
1.3
0.0
0.4
0.0
2.7
0.0
20.9
0.0
24.6
0.1
0.9
0.0
7.0
0.0
0.2
100.0
0.0
0.0
1.4
0.0
8.8
0.0
4.6
:
:
0.0
1.8
0.1
4.1
0.1
1.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
1.2
0.2
0.3

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Source: Eurostat, EU-SILC

  Consumers in Europe

219

Consumers.indb   219
Consumers.indb   219

08.04.2009   09:51:26
08.04.2009   09:51:26

4

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

Table 4.26: Electricity generated from 
renewable sources as a share of gross 
electricity consumption
(%)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO

2004
13.9
2.1
8.9
4.0
27.1
9.5
0.7
5.1
9.5
18.5
12.9
15.9
0.0
47.1
3.5
3.2
2.3
0.0
5.7
58.7
2.1
24.4
29.9
29.1
14.3
28.3
46.1
3.7
41.0
30.9
100.0
89.7

2005
14.0
2.8
11.8
4.5
28.2
10.5
1.1
6.8
10.0
15.0
11.3
14.1
0.0
48.4
3.9
3.2
4.6
0.0
7.5
57.4
2.9
16.0
35.8
24.2
16.5
26.9
54.3
4.3
36.2
24.7
99.9
108.4

2006
:
:
11.2
4.9
:
:
1.4
8.5
:
:
12.4
14.5
0.0
37.7
3.6
3.5
:
:
7.9
56.6
2.9
:
31.4
24.4
:
:
48.2
4.6
33.4
:
:
:

2010 target
21.0
6.0
11.0
8.0
29.0
12.5
5.1
13.2
20.1
29.4
21.0
25.0
6.0
49.3
7.0
5.7
3.6
5.0
9.0
78.1
7.5
39.0
33.0
33.6
31.0
31.5
60.0
10.0
:
:
:
:

Source: Eurostat, Electricity generated from renewable sources - 
% of gross energy consumption (theme8/nrg/nrg_105a)

4.6 Externalities: environment

Th  e  construction  and  demolition  of  housing, 
the  consumption  of  energy  and  water,  and  the 
disposal of waste and waste water impact in several 
ways  on  the  environment.  Buildings  themselves 
require  construction  materials,  which  in  many 
cases  aff ect  the  landscape  when  extracted,  and 
whose  extraction  and  manufacture  consumes 
energy;  households  directly  consume  energy 
which  has  a  greater  or  lesser  environmental 
impact  depending  on  the  choice  of  fuel.  Water 
consumption  can  strain  water  reserves,  and  its 
use generates waste water. Hard surfacing around 
housing  can  reduce  groundwater  absorption 
aff ecting  the  level  of  water  tables  on  the  one 
hand  and 
increasing  pressure  on  sewerage 
systems on the other. Households generate large 
amounts,  of  oft en  unsorted,  municipal  waste 
that  needs  to  be  processed  for  reuse,  recycling 
or  disposal. Th  e  combination  of  concerns  about 
climate change and the rising cost of energy have 
raised  awareness  about  energy  consumption  by 
households, and on the type of energy consumed. 
Table 4.26 shows the ratio of electricity generated 
from renewable sources relative to the total gross 
electricity consumption. Th  e highest ratio in the 
EU  was  in  Austria  which  generated  much  of  its 
electricity from hydro power, as did Iceland and 
Norway. Several other Member States generate a 
large  proportion  of  their  electricity  from  hydro 
power,  in  particular  Latvia  and  Sweden,  while 
Denmark  had  the  largest  share  of  electricity 
generation  from  wind  power,  and  Finland  from 
biomass.

A  Eurobarometer  survey  in  2007  looked  at 
attitudes  towards  issues  related  to  EU  energy 
policy.  Half  of  respondents  within  the  EU-27 
indicated  that  they  were  very  concerned  about 
climate  change  and  global  warming,  and  a 
similar  but  slightly  lower  proportion  reported 
that energy effi  ciency infl uenced very much their 
choice of household appliances. Around 30 % of 
respondents thought that nuclear energy should 
be  used  more  because  of  climate  change  and 
global  warming  concerns,  equivalent  to  around 
half the proportion that felt that it should be used 
less because of safety concerns.

220

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   220
Consumers.indb   220

08.04.2009   09:51:27
08.04.2009   09:51:27

Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels 

4

Table 4.27: Issues related to energy policy, February 2007
(% of respondents)

Concern for climate change and 
global warming

Influence of energy efficiency 
concerns when buying 
household appliances

How should the share of 
nuclear energy change

Yes, 
to 
some 

degree No
12
37
17
44
20
39
16
36
14
49
10
42
25
52
5
27
7
23
10
35
10
39
10
32
7
23
27
48
17
46
9
38
15
34
7
24
19
52
14
40
27
39
9
24
12
22
13
34
16
42
19
57
19
51
10
42

Yes, 
very 
much
50
40
40
48
37
47
20
68
70
55
51
58
70
24
34
53
51
68
28
45
32
65
64
53
41
24
30
48

Do not 
know/
no 
answer
1
0
1
1
0
1
4
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
2
0
1
1
0
0
2
3
1
0
1
1
0
1

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
EL
ES
FR
IE
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Yes, 
to 
some 

degree No
19
32
21
31
17
30
16
33
14
32
14
32
18
38
32
35
20
30
23
28
25
39
10
22
33
32
30
37
20
47
20
31
11
29
15
20
18
47
17
30
16
29
22
31
19
22
21
36
15
35
18
47
31
45
25
41

Yes, 
very 
much
48
46
49
50
53
52
40
29
48
48
35
66
34
32
28
46
60
63
35
52
52
43
54
42
48
35
22
33

Do not 
know/
no 
answer
2
2
5
2
1
2
4
3
2
1
1
2
1
2
5
2
1
2
0
2
3
4
5
1
2
1
3
1

Increase as it 
does not 
contribute to 
climate change 
and global 
warming
30
28
51
48
26
28
21
13
18
28
27
29
19
21
30
20
27
27
35
15
35
23
25
29
42
42
44
36

Decrease as it
poses safety
problems, like
waste and
danger of 
accidents
61
54
33
40
67
66
64
83
72
59
68
58
76
69
55
67
61
58
57
78
57
57
64
65
47
47
48
57

Do not 
know/
no 
answer
10
18
16
12
7
6
14
5
10
13
5
13
5
10
15
13
11
15
8
7
8
20
12
6
11
11
8
7

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU Energy Policy’, Flash Eurobarometer 206a, European Commission

For more information

Directorate-General for Health and Consumers:  
http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/citizen/my_rights/energy_en.htm

Directorate-General for the Environment:  
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/index_en.htm

Directorate-General for Energy and Transport: 
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/index_en.html

  Consumers in Europe

221

Consumers.indb   221
Consumers.indb   221

08.04.2009   09:51:27
08.04.2009   09:51:27

 
Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Furnishings, household equipment 
and maintenance

Consumers.indb   223
Consumers.indb   223

08.04.2009   09:51:28
08.04.2009   09:51:28

5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

As  for  other  manufactured  goods,  the  supply 
of  furnishings  and  household  equipment  is 
becoming  increasingly  global  and  competitive 
in  nature.  For  consumers,  greater  competition 
off ers potential for more choice, more competitive 
prices, and higher quality, through a wider range 
of outlets, but it also raises concerns about safety 
and environmental standards.

6 %  lighting  equipment  (behind  toys  and  motor 
vehicles). In addition, the European Commission 
also  carries  out  a  range  of  market  surveillance 
actions in an attempt to safeguard consumer safety. 
During the course of 2008, results of tests on lamps 
and  electric  cord  extension  sets  were  published 
(http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.
do?reference=IP/08/615).

and 

environmental 

legislation  on 
Safety 
furnishings and household equipment has become 
a  key  benchmark  for  consumer  confi dence  in 
manufactured  goods.  A  number  of  relevant 
policies have been implemented in both domains. 
Th  e main environmental directives which directly 
aff ect  the  furniture  industry  are  the  Integrated 
Pollution  Prevention  and  Control 
(IPPC) 
Directive  (12),  the  Volatile  Organic  Compounds 
(VOC)  Directive  (13)  and  waste 
framework 
Directive  (14).  Moreover,  the  furniture  industry 
is a downstream user of chemicals and, as such, 
has obligations under the REACH Regulation (15). 
As  far  as  the  VOC  Directive  is  concerned,  a 
best  practice  guide  has  been  established  by  the 
Federation of European Furniture Manufacturers 
(UEA)  to  help  manufacturers  comply  with  the 
legal  requirements;  a  growing  number  of  fi rms 
in  the  furniture  manufacturing  sector  are  also 
implementing 
environmental  management 
systems  such  as  the  EU’s  Eco-Management  and 
Audit Scheme (EMAS) in order to evaluate, report 
and  improve  their  environmental  performance. 
Furthermore,  a  Community  eco-label  is  also 
being considered for wooden furniture.

(12) For more information: 
http://europa.eu/
scadplus/leg/en/lvb/
l28045.htm.

(13) For more information: 
http://europa.eu/
scadplus/leg/en/lvb/
l28029b.htm.

(14) For more information: 
http://ec.europa.eu/
environment/waste/
legislation/a.htm.

(15) For more information: 
http://ec.europa.eu/
enterprise/reach/
reach_more_info_
en.htm.

lighting 
Domestic  electrical  appliances  and 
equipment  mainly  contain  the  risk  of  electric 
shock, oft en combined with the risk of fi re. Th  ere 
are  a  range  of  legislative  measures  designed  to 
ensure consumer safety in this domain. Th  ese oft en 
take the form of specifi c sectoral legislation, such 
as household electrical appliances that are covered 
by the Low Voltage Directive 2006/95/EC (16). Any 
products  that  are  not  covered  by  sector  specifi c 
legislation  fall  within  the  remit  of  the  General 
Product  Safety  Directive  (GPSD)  (17),  which  aims 
to  ensure  that  manufacturers  and  distributors 
only place safe products on the market, informing 
consumers  of  the  risks  associated  with  the 
products they supply, taking appropriate measures 
to  prevent  such  risks  and  being  able  to  trace 
dangerous products. Th  e RAPEX system (18) ensures 
that the relevant authorities in each Member State 
are  rapidly  informed  of  any  dangerous  products. 
Its  latest  annual  report  contains  information  on 
the  breakdown  of  product  notifi cations  for  2007, 
12 %  of  which  were  electrical  appliances  and 

(16) For more information: 
http://eur-lex.europa.
eu/LexUriServ/
LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2
006:374:0010:0019:EN:PD
F.

(17) For more information: 
http://eur-lex.europa.
eu/LexUriServ/
LexUriServ.do?uri=
CELEX:
32001L0095:
EN:NOT.

(18) For more information: 
http://ec.europa.eu/
consumers/safety/
rapex/index_en.htm.

5.1 Access and choice

5.1.1 Furniture

Home  furnishings  refl ect  a  mixture  of  function 
and  form.  Given  the  diversity  of  geographic  and 
socio-demographic circumstances, there is a broad 
diversity  in  home  furnishings  and  household 
equipment.

Furniture  is  a  typical  consumer  durable  good 
and was traditionally, to a very large extent, solid 
wood-based. Over time, however, new techniques, 
materials  (such  as  wood-based  panels  –  like 
chipboard and medium density fi breboard, as well 
as glass, plastics and metals) and designs have led 
to  a  broader  range  of  goods,  available  through  a 
larger spectrum of distribution channels (such as 
mail order, DIY stores, furniture stores selling fl at-
pack furniture).

According to the Institut de Promotion et Etudes 
de  l’Ameublement,  a  little  under  three  quarters 
(73 %)  of  furniture  expenditure  in  the  EU-25 
was in specialist furniture stores (chain stores or 
independents) in 2004. About two fi ft hs (41 %) of 
all furniture expenditure was spent in independent 
furniture stores, a signifi cantly higher proportion 
than in the United States (see Figure 5.1). Another 
notable diff erence between the EU and the United 
States markets was the mail order and catalogue 
segment of the furniture market; this accounted 
for a tenth of furniture expenditure in the United 
States but only 1 % in Europe.

Within  the  EU,  however,  there  are  considerable 
diff erences in the way that people shop for their 
furniture.  In  Italy  and  Spain,  a  majority  of 
furniture purchases were made with independent 
furniture retailers (see Figure 5.2), as was the case 
in  a  number  of  the  Member  States  that  joined 
the  EU  in  2004  or  2007  (such  as  Poland  where 
67 %  of  furniture  expenditure  was  accounted 
for by independent stores). In contrast, spending 
in  independent  furniture  stores  in  France  only 
accounted for 13 % of total furniture expenditure. 
Th  e  situation  in  France  was  broadly  similar 
to  that  in  the  United  Kingdom  and  Germany. 

224

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   224
Consumers.indb   224

08.04.2009   09:51:36
08.04.2009   09:51:36

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

Nevertheless,  these  diff erences  appear  to  be 
narrowing with a change in consumer behaviour 
in  southern  Europe,  following  the  arrival  of 
international  retailers  (such  as  IKEA);  between 

1995  and  2004,  the  proportion  of  expenditure 
accounted for by independent furniture retailers 
fell  by  10  percentage  points  in  Spain  and  5 
percentage points in Italy.

Figure  5.1: Furniture distribution channels, 2004
(% of furniture expenditure)

50

40

30

20

10

0

Dept.
stores,
general
stores

Mail
order

Chain
 stores

Hyper-
markets,
super-
markets

DIY 
stores

Discount

Inde-
pendents

Others

Source: Institut de Promotion et Etudes de l’Ameublement

EU-25

USA

Figure  5.2: Concentrated distribution channels for furniture, selected Member States, 2004 (1)
(% of furniture expenditure)

100

75

50

25

0

EU-25

United
Kingdom

France

Germany

Spain

Italy

(1) Concentrated distribution comprises department stores, general stores, mail order, chain stores incl. discounters, DIY stores, 
hypermarkets and supermarkets; furniture expenditure excluding furnishings and carpets.

Source: Institut de Promotion et Etudes de l’Ameublement

  Consumers in Europe

225

Consumers.indb   225
Consumers.indb   225

08.04.2009   09:51:38
08.04.2009   09:51:38

5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5.1.2 Household electrical equipment

A  consumer  satisfaction  survey  in  2008  shows 
that specialised chain stores were by far the most 
popular  place  for  EU-27  consumers  to  make 
purchases  of  household  electrical  equipment 
(see Figure 5.3) – note these fi gures relate to the 
most  popular  places  for  making  purchases  and 
not  to  the  share  of  total  expenditure.  Just  over 
two thirds (67.3 %) of consumers in the EU-27 in 
2008  preferred  to  shop  for  household  electrical 
equipment in a chain store specialising in these 
products.  Th  e  next  most  popular  retail  formats 
were supermarkets/hypermarkets (28.5 %), while 
independent  retailers  (19.3 %)  and  department 
stores (11.8 %) were the only other types of sales 
channel to record shares in double digits.

Th  ere  was  a  wide  range  of  preferences  across 
the  Member  States,  with  supermarkets  and 
hypermarkets particularly favoured by consumers 
in  Bulgaria,  France  and  Romania,  whereas 
department  stores  were  relatively  popular  in 
Ireland,  Luxembourg,  Germany  or  Spain. 
Consumers in Ireland and Germany also reported 
a relatively high propensity to shop for household 
electrical  goods  in  retail  chain  stores,  alongside 
those  from  Greece,  Lithuania,  the  Netherlands 
or  the  United  Kingdom.  Independent  retailers 
were  generally  favoured  in  some  of  the  smaller 
markets, in particular Malta and Cyprus.

Figure 5.3: In which of the following 
places have you or has a member of your 
household bought household electrical 
equipment most, EU-27, 2008?
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

Retail chain 
         stores

Supermarkets &
hypermarkets

Independent 
         retailers

Department 
           stores

Discount 
     stores

Internet

            Mail & 
phone order

Sales at home
 (door-to-door
                 sales)

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

226

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   226
Consumers.indb   226

08.04.2009   09:51:38
08.04.2009   09:51:38

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

5.2 Consumption

5.2.1 Frequency and time spent on 
household activities

Th  e  economic,  family  and  social  commitments 
that come with owning or renting a home mean 
that  a  signifi cant  proportion  of  an  adult’s  (aged 
20  to  74  years  old)  day  is  spent  on  household 
activities.  Th  is  information  on  time  use  may  be 
used as a proxy for the consumption of domestic 
appliances, although for some of the headings it is 
not sure whether a machine is being used or not.

Among those Member States for which time use 
surveys have been carried out, women spent, on 
average,  much  more  time  on  selected  domestic 
household  activities  than  men;  this  varied  from 
at  least  twice  as  much  time  as  men  in  Sweden, 
Finland and Lithuania, to as much as six to eight 
times as much time in Spain and Italy for activities 
like dishwashing, cleaning, laundry, ironing and 
other  household  upkeep  (see  Table  5.1).  Women 
in Italy spent an average of two and a half hours 

on  these  activities,  and  a  little  under  two  hours 
in Spain and France, in stark contrast to women 
in  Sweden  and  Latvia,  where  the  time  spent  on 
these  tasks  averaged  about  one  and  a  quarter 
hours. In Sweden and Latvia, however, men spent 
the  longest  time  on  these  household  activities, 
suggesting perhaps that in some households there 
was  a  more  equitable  share  of  chores  between 
partners.  Note  however  that  these  fi gures  also 
refl ect,  at  least  to  some  degree,  the  structure  of 
households, or more specifi cally, the proportion 
of  adults  living  alone.  By  defi nition,  a  single 
adult (male or female) has to do all of these tasks, 
and  hence,  those  countries  (usually  in  northern 
Europe)  where  there  is  a  higher  propensity  for 
living  alone  will  likely  show  a  more  equitable 
balance in the use of time, than those countries 
where it is more common for children to remain 
with  their  families  into  adulthood  up  until  the 
time they fi nd an established partner.

Table 5.1: Average time spent per day on household activities, selected Member States (1)
(hours:minutes per day)

Dish-
washing
Men  Women
00:20
00:10
00:36
00:05
00:21
00:08
00:25
00:06
00:29
00:04
00:25
00:08
00:35
00:05
00:22
00:04
00:22
00:04
00:29
00:06
00:28
00:04
00:15
00:04
00:21
00:10
00:18
00:09
00:21
00:08

Cleaning 
dwelling
Men  Women
00:26
00:08
00:31
00:06
00:39
00:11
00:34
00:09
00:50
00:07
00:58
00:11
01:24
00:09
00:27
00:06
00:38
00:10
00:34
00:09
00:39
00:08
00:26
00:08
00:30
00:15
00:38
00:11
00:33
00:14

Other 
household 
Men  Women
00:28
00:18
00:13
00:22
00:15
00:14
00:14
00:22
00:11
00:06
00:07
00:08
00:06
00:06
00:15
00:21
00:21
00:29
00:14
00:20
00:16
00:24
00:23
00:26
00:02
00:05
00:12
00:09
00:02
00:04

BE
BG
DE
EE
ES
FR
IT
LV
LT
PL
SI
FI
SE
UK
NO

Laundry
Men  Women
00:09
00:01
00:19
00:01
00:13
00:02
00:14
00:01
00:11
00:01
00:07
00:01
00:10
00:00
00:09
00:01
00:11
00:01
00:14
00:01
00:09
00:00
00:13
00:02
00:12
00:03
00:11
00:02
00:11
00:02

Ironing
Men  Women
00:19
00:01
00:06
00:00
00:10
00:01
00:07
00:00
00:12
00:00
00:15
00:01
00:20
00:00
00:03
00:00
00:04
00:00
00:07
00:01
00:16
00:00
00:05
00:00
00:05
00:01
00:11
00:02
00:04
00:00

(1) Data are taken from national time use surveys (TUS) conducted between 1998 and 2004 and refer to men and women aged 20 to 74 
years; data only shown for those countries participating in the survey; all remaining Member States, not available.

Source: Harmonised European Time Use Survey [online database version 2.0]; created 2005-2007 by Statistics Finland and Statistics 
Sweden [reference date 2007-10-01]; (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/)

  Consumers in Europe

227

Consumers.indb   227
Consumers.indb   227

08.04.2009   09:51:39
08.04.2009   09:51:39

5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5.2.2 Consumption expenditure

Th  e average household consumption expenditure 
on 
furnishings,  household  equipment  and 
routine household maintenance in the EU-27 was 
EUR 800 per person in 2006, although national 
averages  ranged  from  EUR  300  per  person  or 
less  in  the  Czech  Republic,  Estonia,  Lithuania, 
Hungary,  Poland,  Romania  and  Slovakia  to 
EUR 2 100 per person in Luxembourg. Compared 
with  average  expenditure  in  2000,  the  sharpest 
rises  were  recorded  in  Estonia,  Lithuania  and 
Slovakia, albeit from some of the lowest levels.

in 

fi nal 

the  price  and  volume 
Developments 
consumption 
the 
components 
of 
expenditure  of  households  on 
furnishings, 
household  equipment  and  routine  household 
maintenance, point to the more than doubling of 
volumes between 2000 and 2006 as the principal 
reason for the sharp rise in average expenditure 
in  Estonia  and  Lithuania.  Indeed,  in  a  majority 
of  the  Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  since 
2004,  the  volume  of  consumption  expenditure 
on 
furnishings,  household  equipment  and 
maintenance items rose relatively sharply, and at 
a  quicker  pace  than  among  the  EU-15  Member 
States. Th  is pattern of ‘catch-up’ was assisted by the 
relatively static nature of expenditure in volume 
terms  in  countries  such  as  Italy  and  Austria,  as 
well as slight reductions in the Netherlands and 
Germany.

Table 5.2: Final consumption expenditure 
of households, furnishings, household 
equipment and routine maintenance of the 
house:  consumption per head
(EUR)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

2000
700
700
0
200
900
1 100
100
900
500
600
800
1 100
800
100
100
1 800
200
700
1 000
1 300
100
600
100
400
100
600
700
1 000
300
1 300
1 000
1 000

2006
800
800
:
300
:
1 100
300
1 200
700
700
1 000
1 100
1 000
:
300
2 100
300
700
1 000
1 300
200
:
100
500
300
900
:
1 100
300
1 500
:
1 000

(1) 2006, forecast.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_c)

228

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   228
Consumers.indb   228

08.04.2009   09:51:40
08.04.2009   09:51:40

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

Figure 5.4: Final consumption expenditure of households, furnishings, household 
equipment and routine maintenance of the house: price and volume changes between 
2000 and 2006 (1)
(%)

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

-20

EU-
27

EE
(2)

SK
(3)

TR
(4)

HU IE

FI

CZ PL

IS

EL CY UK MT ES

BE

SI

FR LU IT AT NL DE

Prices

Volume

(1) Bulgaria, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania and Sweden, not available; EU-27, volume, not available.
(2) The volume of furnishings, household equipment and routine maintenance of the house purchased in Estonia increased by 141.7 % 
between 2000 and 2006.
(3) The volume of furnishings, household equipment and routine maintenance of the house purchased in Slovakia increased by 106.6 % 
between 2000 and 2006.
(4) The volume of furnishings, household equipment and routine maintenance of the house purchased in Turkey increased by 64.4 % 
between 2000 and 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_k and nama_co2_p)

Using data in purchasing power standards (PPS) 
from  the  2005  household  budget  survey,  in 
order to provide an analysis at comparable price 
levels, consumption expenditure on furnishings, 
household 
routine 
maintenance  of  the  house  within  the  EU-27 
ranged from an average of PPS 201 per household 
in Romania and PPS 213 in Bulgaria to PPS 3 702 
in Luxembourg (see Table 5.3).

equipment 

and 

the 

Overall  furnishings,  household  equipment  and 
routine maintenance items together accounted for 
5.5 % of total household consumption expenditure 
in  the  EU-27  in  2005,  with  comparatively  little 
variation  between  Member  States;  the  share 
ranged from about 4 % in Lithuania and Romania 
to a little over 7 % in Luxembourg and Ireland for 
all  the  Member  States  except  Malta,  where  the 
relative  importance  of  these  items  in  household 
expenditure was highest (10.7 %).

  Consumers in Europe

229

Consumers.indb   229
Consumers.indb   229

08.04.2009   09:51:41
08.04.2009   09:51:41

5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

Table 5.3: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, furnishings, household 
equipment and routine maintenance of the 
house, 2005
(PPS)

Figure 5.5: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of furnishings, household 
equipment and routine maintenance of the 
house in total expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

1 416
1 687
213
815
1 459
1 543
568
2 613
1 929
1 211
1 693
1 670
2 008
546
392
3 702
498
3 070
1 888
1 868
478
994
201
1 389
494
1 238
1 640
2 092
697
1 892

MT
IE
LU
NO
UK
NL
AT
EL
DK
FR
SE
CY
SI
IT
BE
EU-27
DE
LV
EE
FI
PT
ES
HU
SK
PL
LT
HR
RO

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

230

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   230
Consumers.indb   230

08.04.2009   09:51:42
08.04.2009   09:51:42

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

Figure  5.6  shows  the  importance  of  expenditure 
on furnishings, household equipment and routine 
maintenance  items  for  a  number  of  diff erent 
subgroups  of  households.  Some  of  these  items 
cannot be considered as a necessity, and this may 
help  explain  why  expenditure  tends  to  rise  with 
income,  as  those  persons  with  more  money  can 
aff ord to pay for domestic and household services, 
and  to  buy  more  furniture,  gadgets,  tools  and 

appliances that make their lives more comfortable, 
while those persons with less money continue to do 
household chores by hand, rather than with the aid 
of a machine. As such, the share of these items in 
total expenditure rose relatively steadily through the 
income quintiles, to a high of 6.7 % for the highest 
income  quintile.  Similarly,  the  share  varied  from 
4.1 % for those households headed by someone who 
was unemployed to 6.0 % for non-manual workers.

Figure 5.6: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of furnishings, household 
equipment and routine maintenance of the house in total expenditure, EU-27, 2005
(%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Manual workers

Non-manual workers

Self-employed

Unemployed

Retired

Other inactive

Lowest

Second

Third

Fourth

Highest

1 adult

1 adult & dep. children

2 adults

2 adults & dep. children

3+ adults

3+ adults & dep. children

Less than 30

30-44

45-59

60 and over

Dense

Intermediate

Sparse

)
1
(
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
i
c
o
S

e

i

l
i
t
n
u
q
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
1
(
e
p
y
t
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
g
A

)
1
(
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
b
r
U

(1) Unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

  Consumers in Europe

231

Consumers.indb   231
Consumers.indb   231

08.04.2009   09:51:43
08.04.2009   09:51:43

 
 
 
 
 
 
5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

Figure 5.7: Mean consumption expenditure per household, furnishings, household 
equipment and routine maintenance of the house, 2005
(PPS, minimum and maximum (vertical lines at end of horizontal line), inter-quartile range 
containing half of the Member States (box), median (vertical line within box))

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

Furniture and furnishings

Domestic services and household services

Non-durable household goods

Major household appliances (electric or not)

Household textiles

Carpets and other floor coverings

Glassware, tableware and household utensils

Small tools and miscellaneous accessories

Small electric household appliances

Major tools and equipment

Repair of household appliances

Repair of furniture, furnishings and floor coverings

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_exp_t121)

Average consumption expenditure per household 
on  diff erent  items  of  furnishings,  household 
equipment and routine maintenance items varied 
considerably  across  the  Member  States.  Th  e 
range was greatest for furniture and furnishings, 
which  also  accounted  for  the  largest  proportion 
of  expenditure 
(see  Figure  5.7).  Average 
consumption  expenditure  per  household  on 
furniture  and  furnishings  was  PPS  384  in  the 
EU-27  in  2005,  almost  twice  the  level  recorded 
for any of the other categories, as expenditure on 
non-durable household goods averaged PPS 201.

Th  e  diff erences  in  expenditure  between  the 
other  categories  refl ect  a  range  of  factors,  such 
as  necessity  (most  Europeans  believe  they  have 
to  have  a  washing  machine),  the  ability  to  pay, 
or cultural diff erences (which may infl uence the 
take-up of domestic and household services). For 
example, while average household expenditure on 
domestic and household services in the EU-27 was 
relatively low (PPS 135 in 2005), its range across 
Member States was the second highest among the 
categories covered in this chapter, with relatively 
high  levels  of  expenditure  in  Luxembourg  and 
several southern Member States.

5.3 Prices

5.3.1 Price infl ation

During  the  period  between  2000  and  2007,  the 
EU-27’s harmonised index of consumer prices for 
furnishings,  household  equipment  and  routine 
maintenance  of  the  house  rose  steadily,  at  an 
average rate of 1.2 % per annum, which was about 
half the rate of increase recorded for the all-items 
consumer price index during the same period.

in 

increased 

the  vast  majority  of 
Prices 
Member States, strongly in the case of Romania 
(particularly  up  to  2006)  and  Slovenia.  In 
contrast,  there  were  price  reductions,  albeit 
uneven in nature, in Ireland (concentrated in the 
period aft er 2002), Slovakia, the Czech Republic 
and  Lithuania.  Th  e  contrasting  evolution  of 
consumer prices continued in 2007, with strong 
price growth in Latvia, Bulgaria and Slovenia, but 
a further reduction in Ireland.

232

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   232
Consumers.indb   232

08.04.2009   09:51:44
08.04.2009   09:51:44

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

Table 5.4: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, furnishings, household equipment and 
routine maintenance of the house, annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
1.2
0.7
-0.5
0.2
1.8
0.0
-0.2
4.0
1.5
2.5
0.5
1.9
1.4
1.3
-2.1
2.4
5.5
-1.2
1.8
0.7
5.5
2.0
31.8
5.8
4.0
0.7
0.4
-1.7
52.6
0.9
0.5
:

2001
1.9
2.6
2.3
0.1
1.9
0.9
1.3
3.2
2.5
2.0
1.9
2.0
0.1
0.4
-2.3
2.1
4.9
0.3
5.2
1.3
3.8
3.2
27.7
7.8
-0.9
2.2
2.5
-0.1
60.6
5.7
1.0
:

2002
1.7
1.9
0.2
0.0
1.9
1.1
1.1
1.4
1.6
2.0
1.4
1.9
1.1
1.5
-2.1
1.6
3.1
0.5
3.9
1.6
1.8
3.0
18.3
5.9
0.7
1.5
2.2
0.1
43.9
7.9
0.3
:

2003
1.0
1.2
-1.0
-1.7
1.0
0.3
-0.4
-0.7
1.8
2.0
1.3
2.0
3.7
1.9
-2.9
1.5
0.8
-0.3
1.7
1.2
0.5
2.4
10.6
4.8
0.8
0.4
1.3
-0.6
16.7
-0.8
-0.8
:

2004
0.7
0.9
-1.2
-2.2
2.7
-0.2
-0.7
-1.8
1.5
1.6
1.2
2.1
-0.3
1.9
-3.0
1.7
1.0
2.8
-0.9
-0.1
1.7
1.6
7.5
2.4
-2.2
0.6
-1.0
-0.1
6.4
0.5
-1.8
:

2005
0.6
0.9
0.4
-2.2
0.7
-0.1
0.6
-1.5
2.1
2.1
0.9
1.6
0.4
3.3
-2.0
1.5
-0.2
2.4
-0.3
-0.3
1.2
1.3
5.6
3.5
-3.2
0.6
-1.5
-0.3
7.3
-0.7
-0.4
:

2006
0.6
1.1
1.7
-1.5
0.9
-0.1
2.3
-1.3
1.8
2.6
0.9
1.6
0.3
2.8
0.4
1.7
-1.5
2.0
0.0
0.6
0.1
1.0
2.6
3.6
-0.5
0.6
-2.4
-0.4
5.7
2.4
-1.3
0.1

2007
1.6
2.1
4.2
-0.3
1.3
1.1
3.8
-1.8
2.2
2.6
1.1
2.5
0.3
4.6
2.1
2.1
1.5
0.8
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.6
1.9
4.0
0.1
1.3
0.5
1.8
7.6
4.4
1.9
0.3

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

for 

Growth  in  the  EU-27’s  harmonised  index  of 
consumer  prices 
furnishings,  household 
equipment  and  routine  maintenance  of  the 
house  was  driven  by  price  increases  for  labour-
intensive services, such as the repair of furniture 
and  furnishings  (on  average,  2.7 %  per  annum 
between 2000 and 2007), the repair of household 

appliances  (2.8 %  per  annum),  or  domestic  and 
household services (3.6 % per annum). In contrast, 
there was modest price growth for most consumer 
durables  covered  in  this  chapter,  well  below  the 
infl ation rate, with a reduction in the price index 
for household appliances (-1.1 % per annum).

  Consumers in Europe

233

Consumers.indb   233
Consumers.indb   233

08.04.2009   09:51:45
08.04.2009   09:51:45

5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5.3.2 Price levels

Th  ere  were  considerable  diff erences  in  price 
levels  for  furnishings,  household  equipment  and 
maintenance among the Member States. In 2007, 
these  items  were  20 %  more  expensive  than  the 
EU-27  average  in  Denmark.  Price  levels  in  all  of 
the Member States that joined the EU since 2004 
were below the EU-27 average, which was also the 
case  in  Greece,  Germany,  the  Netherlands  and 
Portugal.

levels 

in  price 

equipment 

for 
Nevertheless,  disparities 
furnishings, 
and 
household 
maintenance among the Member States narrowed 
during  the  period  from  2000  to  2007.  Th  e 
coeffi  cient  of  variation  (a  measure  that  indicates 
relative price dispersion) declined from 24.4 % to 
18.2 % over the period considered. Price disparities 
for 
furnishings,  household  equipment  and 
maintenance  were  considerably  narrower  among 
the  EU-15  Member  States,  with  a  coeffi  cient  of 
variation in 2007 of 7.5 %.

Figure 5.8: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

110

105

100

95

90

85

80

Figure 5.9: Price level indices, furnishings, 
household equipment and routine 
maintenance of the house, 2007
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

IS

DK

NO

FI

UK

IE

SE

CH

LU

ES

IT

FR

BE

AT

EU-27

MT

EL

DE

CY

NL

PT

SI

HR

CZ

SK

EE

TR

LV

PL

HU

LT

RO

BG

MK

2001

2003

2005

2007

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

Household app. excluding repair

Tools & equip. for house & garden

Furniture & furnishings

Repair of furniture and furnishings

Repair of household appliances

Domestic serv. & household serv.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

234

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   234
Consumers.indb   234

08.04.2009   09:51:46
08.04.2009   09:51:46

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

Table 5.5: Coeffi  cient of variation for price level indices, furnishings, household equipment 
and routine maintenance of the house
(%)

Household furnishings, equipment & maintenance

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

EU-15

EU-27

2000
11.7

2007
7.5

2000
24.4

2007
18.2

5.4 Consumer satisfaction and 
complaints

A  2008  consumer  satisfaction  survey  included 
one  section  on  buying  household  electrical 
equipment.  In  the  EU-27,  on  a  scale  of  1-10 
(higher  scores  reveal  greater  satisfaction),  the 
average consumer rated their overall satisfaction 
with retailers in this domain at 8.3. Th  e highest 
levels of satisfaction were recorded in Lithuania, 
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Romania, while 
the least satisfi ed consumers were in Italy, France, 
Sweden and the Netherlands.

Th  e same survey reveals that 9.7 % of consumers 
in 
the  EU-27  experienced  problems  when 
purchasing  household  electrical  equipment 
in  2008.  Th  e  most  problems  were  reported  in 
Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden, at just over 
15 %  of  all  consumers.  Among  those  who  faced 
problems  in  the  EU-27  in  2008,  the  majority 
complained  about  product  quality  (51.9 %), 
while  the  other  categories  cited  by  at  least  10 % 
of consumers included problems associated with 
delivery, the quality of service, or repairs. When 
asked if they thought their regular retailer would 
replace, repair, reduce the price or give them their 
money  back  if  household  electrical  equipment 
that they had bought was defective or not fi t for 
purpose, a majority of EU-27 consumers agreed 
(an average of 8.1 on a scale of 1-10).

Figure 5.10: Overall, to what extent are you 
satisfi ed with your regular retailer when 
it comes to buying household electrical 
equipment, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

LT
BG
CZ
RO
DE
HU
EE
AT
BE
UK
LU
EL
CY
SI
PL
EU-27
IE
LV
SK
DK
PT
MT
ES
FI
IT
FR
SE
NL

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (not at all satisﬁ ed) to 10 (fully satisﬁ ed).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

  Consumers in Europe

235

Consumers.indb   235
Consumers.indb   235

08.04.2009   09:51:47
08.04.2009   09:51:47

5

Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

Figure 5.11: Do you agree that your regular retailer would replace, repair, reduce the price 
or give you your money back if household electrical equipment you had bought was 
defective or not fi t for purpose, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

10.0

7.5

5.0

2.5

0.0

IE HU CZ LT DE CY AT LU UK BE EE FI EL DK RO EU-
27

SI

PL LV PT ES FR MT SE SK NL IT BG

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

Figure 5.12: Problems faced by consumers when purchasing household electrical 
equipment in the past 12 months, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% share of those experiencing problems, multiple answers allowed)

0

25

50

75

Quality of product

Delivery (late or not at all)

Quality of service

Repair

Claims for goods under guarantee

Price (too high/not indicated/wrongly advertised)

Returning unwanted goods

Incorrect labelling/information

Unhelpful or obstructive retailer 

Product safety

Refund or cancellation

Contractual terms and conditions

Selling methods

(1) When purchasing household electrical equipment in 2008, 9.7 % of EU-27 consumers reported facing at least one problem; note that 
consumers may have faced more than one problem.

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

236

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   236
Consumers.indb   236

08.04.2009   09:51:48
08.04.2009   09:51:48

      
Furnishings, household equipment and maintenance 

5

5.5 Quality

Th  e  same  consumer  satisfaction  survey  also 
asked  respondents  to  what  extent  they  agreed 
that household electrical equipment sold by their 
regular  retailer  was  reliable  (in  other  words,  it 
worked well and without failure for a reasonable 
period  of  time)  and  to  what  extent  it  was  safe. 
On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 for total agreement), 
the  average  score  across  the  EU-27  was  8.2  for 
reliability and 8.4 for safety (see Figure 5.13). Th  is 
pattern of consumers alluding to products being 
slightly safer than they were reliable was repeated 
in  the  vast  majority  of  Member  States,  with  the 
exception of Greece and Ireland.

Figure 5.13: To what extent do you agree 
that household electrical equipment sold by 
your regular retailer is reliable (i.e. it works 
well and without failure for a reasonable 
period of time) and safe, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

EL
RO
CZ
IE
LT
AT
DE
BG
HU
BE
EE
CY
UK
LU
EU-27
SI
MT
FI
SK
LV
DK
FR
IT
PL
PT
ES
NL
SE

Reliable
Safe

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

  Consumers in Europe

237

Consumers.indb   237
Consumers.indb   237

08.04.2009   09:51:48
08.04.2009   09:51:48

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Health

Consumers.indb   239
Consumers.indb   239

08.04.2009   09:51:49
08.04.2009   09:51:49

6

Health

Table 6.1: Availability of practising doctors, dentists, 
pharmacists and physiotherapists, 2006
(inhabitants per speciﬁ ed worker)

Doctors
250
273
281
324
289
304
354
203
278
296
273
399
343
274
305
329
261
270
274
459
373
463
424
316
409
280
422
419
395
718
275
265
504

Dentists Pharmacists
874
:
1 761
4 786
1 753
1 545
1 050
:
1 096
876
1 335
4 867
1 697
1 649
1 188
1 253
827
5 790
1 598
1 690
1 062
2 177
2 136
1 779
621
1 380
1 541
1 939
2 249
2 969
892
1 498
4 403

1 214
1 179
1 484
1 192
1 313
1 122
1 787
828
1 908
1 489
1 588
1 089
1 479
1 568
1 336
2 014
2 146
2 016
1 858
3 034
1 719
2 036
1 672
1 987
1 154
1 208
2 110
1 466
1 738
3 944
1 076
1 141
2 264

Physio-
therapists
417
17 817
1 450
701
968
6 746
1 695
:
1 688
981
816
12 559
8 626
1 230
1 036
4 421
1 545
474
3 016
2 112
9 140
:
1 986
:
445
835
2 415
2 349
7 824
81 123
724
483
:

BE
BG
CZ 
DK (1)
DE
EE
IE (2)
EL (1, 3)
ES (5)
FR (3)
IT (3)
CY
LV 
LT 
LU (4)
HU
MT (2)
NL (7)
AT 
PL
PT (6, 8)
RO
SI 
SK 
FI (1, 8)
SE
UK 
HR (12)
MK (9)
TR (10)
IS (11)
NO (11)
CH (12)

(1) 2005.
(2) Licensed instead of practising for doctors and dentists.
(3) Professionally active instead of practising for doctors, dentists and pharmacists.
(4) 2004 data for doctors, dentists and physiotherapists.
(5) Licensed instead of practising for dentists and professionally active for pharmacist.
(6) 2004.
(7) Licensed instead of practising for doctors and professionally active for dentists.
(8) Licensed instead of practising for pharmacists.
(9) Licensed instead of practising for doctors; professionally active instead of practising for 
dentists and pharmacists.
(10) 2003.
(11) Professionally active instead of practising for pharmacists.
(12) 2002.

Source: Eurostat, Health personnel (excluding nursing and caring professionals) - 
Absolute numbers and rate per 100 000 inhabitants (theme3/hlth/hlth_rs_prs)

Th  e European Commission’s activities in the area 
of health aim to complement those in the Member 
States,  for  example  in  relation  to  cross  border 
health  threats,  patient  mobility,  and  reducing 
health inequalities. In October 2007 the European 
Commission  adopted  a  new  Health  Strategy, 
‘Together  for  Health:  A  Strategic  Approach 
for  the  EU  2008-2013’.  Th  e  strategy  focuses 
on  four  principles  and  three  strategic  themes 
for  improving  health.  Th  e  principles  involve 
taking  a  value-driven  approach,  recognising 
the 
links  between  health  and  economic 
prosperity, integrating health in all policies, and 
strengthening  the  EU’s  voice  in  global  health. 
Th  e strategic themes are based on fostering good 
health  in  an  ageing  Europe,  protecting  citizens 
from health threats, and dynamic health systems 
and new technologies.

Th  e  analysis  presented  in  this  chapter  focuses 
on  healthcare,  looking  at  the  resources  provided 
and  levels  of  consumer  satisfaction.  Th  e  chapter 
concludes  with  a  brief  analysis  of  consumer’s 
perceptions  of  their  own  health.  Th  e  information 
on  resources  and  patients  are  largely  based  on 
administrative  data  sources  and  therefore  refl ect 
country-specifi c  ways  of  organising  healthcare 
and  may  not  always  be  completely  comparable. 
In  particular  the  types  of  tasks  performed  by 
some  categories  of  professionals  or  health  carers 
vary  between  Member  States.  Th  e  European 
Observatory on Health Systems and Policies (http://
www.euro.who.int/observatory) 
and 
promotes  evidence-based  health  policy-making 
through  comprehensive  and  rigorous  analysis  of 
the dynamics of healthcare systems in Europe, and 
it provides an explanation of the national healthcare 
systems in a large number of countries.

supports 

240

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   240
Consumers.indb   240

08.04.2009   09:51:55
08.04.2009   09:51:55

Health

6

6.1 Access and choice

Data on healthcare form a major element of public 
health information as they describe the capacities 
available for diff erent types of healthcare provision 
as  well  as  potential  ‘bottlenecks’  observed.  Th  e 
data  on  resources  presented  in  Tables  6.1  to  6.3 
refer to both human and technical resources, in 
other words staff  and facilities. In most Member 
States there is an average of one doctor for every 

250 to 500 inhabitants, and one dentist for every 
1 000  to  3 000  inhabitants.  On  average,  there 
was  one  hospital  bed  for  every  173  inhabitants 
in  the  EU-27  in  2006,  ranging  from  the  highest 
availability  of  one  bed  for  121  inhabitants  in 
Germany to the lowest availability of one bed for 
348 inhabitants in Sweden.

Table 6.2: Availability of practising nurses and carers, 2006
(inhabitants per speciﬁ ed worker)

Qualified 
nurses and 
midwives 
(total)
:
219
:
101
128
152
66
:
243
121
:
:
176
135
:
209
168
372
160
177
2 181
:
534
:
133
87
128
199
:
1 447
111
70
:

Qualified 
nurses
:
243
:
104
131
160
:
:

126
:
:
183
140
:
218
177
391
163
196
2 181
:
545
:
139
93
137
214
:
886
120
72
:

Associate 
nurses
:
0
:
216
460
0
:
:
308
0
:
:
0
0
:
709
0
166
889
:
314
:
174
:
282
:
446
:
:
:
192
92
:

BE
BG
CZ
DK (1)
DE
EE (1)
IE (6)
EL
ES
FR (6, 7)
IT (6)
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT (2)
RO
SI
SK (6)
FI (1, 6)
SE
UK (1)
HR (5)
MK (6)
TR (3)
IS
NO (6)
CH

Midwives
1 936
2 240
2 434
4 109
4 842
3 171
:
:
:
3 492
:
:
4 572
3 497
:
5 157
3 087
7 446
6 709
1 810
0
:
27 539
3 475
2 796
1 385
1 923
2 979
1 585
1 464
1 538
2 040
:

All nurses 
(qualified & 
associate 
nurses)
160
243
124
70
102
160
:
:

126
:
:
183
140
:
166
177
116
138
196
274
:
132
166
93
:
105
:
349
:
74
40
:

Nursing
 pro-
fessionals
 (total)
148
219
118
69
100
152
:
:
136
121
142
:
176
135
:
161
168
115
135
177
274
170
131
158
90
:
99
:
286
:
70
40
:

Caring 
personnel
:
:
2 882
101
:
1 952
:
:
:
130
511
:
1 072
567
:
380
:
:
1 788
:
2 660
365
826
592
:
:
591
:
4 993
:
:
:
:

(1) 2005.
(2) 2004.
(3) 2004, except 2005 for midwives.
(4) 2003.
(5) 2002.
(6) Professionally active instead of practising.
(7) France Métropolitaine.

Source: Eurostat, Nursing and caring professionals - Absolute numbers and rate per 100,000 inhabitants (theme3/hlth/hlth_rs_prsns)

  Consumers in Europe

241

Consumers.indb   241
Consumers.indb   241

08.04.2009   09:51:56
08.04.2009   09:51:56

6

Health

Table 6.3: Availability of hospital beds, 2006
(inhabitants per speciﬁ ed category of beds)

Curative 
care beds
:
230
210
186
305
161
254
375
258
392
274
308
288
190
196
222
181
1 162
352
165
215
:
219
260
205
456
473
323
294
313
433
:
349
273

Psychiatric 
care beds
:
547
1 491
1 054
1 425
:
1 807
1 107
1 151
2 165
1 079
7 655
3 720
731
974
1 086
2 610
1 957
764
1 620
1 470
:
1 255
1 401
1 194
1 086
2 036
1 357
1 060
1 709
8 276
:
978
943

Long-term 
care beds 
(excluding 
psychiatric)
:
5 535
7 026
710
:
:
1 042
653
:
3 050
870
5 704
:
20 306
674
:
1 282
1 178
0
974
2 682
:
817
22 510
1 216
:
3 836
21 745
906
2 647
4 329
897
:
-

Available 
beds
173
149
161
122
251
121
177
191
211
299
139
253
268
132
125
176
126
133
228
130
154
274
152
209
149
144
348
257
184
216
414
:
248
180

Other 
beds
:
2 792
1 556
2 294
:
477
4 972
7 004
:
0
686
2 485
:
1 117
2 600
3 694
815
15 430
4 309
:
1 303
:
:
5 773
5 782
260
77 231
145 877
:
2 097
:
:
7 117
1 196

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK (3)
DE
EE
IE
EL (1)
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT (1)
PL
PT (2)
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK (1)
HR (1)
MK
TR (2)
IS
NO
CH (1)

(1) 2005.
(2) 2004.
(3) 2003.
(4) 2002.

Source: Eurostat, Hospital beds (HP.1) - Absolute numbers and rate per 100,000 inhabitants 
(theme3/hlth/hlth_rs_bds)

Figure 6.1: People with self-perceived 
unmet needs for examination, 2006 (1)
(%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

EU-25

BE

CZ

DK

DE

EE

IE

EL

ES

FR

IT

CY

LV

LT

LU

HU

MT

NL

AT

PL

PT

SI

SK

FI

SE

UK

IS

NO

Medical examination

Dental examination

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: Eurostat, People with unmet needs for medical/dental 
examination by sex, age, reason and income quintile (theme3/
hlth/hlth_silc_08 and hlth_silc_09)

242

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   242
Consumers.indb   242

08.04.2009   09:51:57
08.04.2009   09:51:57

Just  under  one  tenth  of  the  population  in  the 
EU-25 in 2006 perceived unmet needs for health 
examinations, 8 % for medical examinations and 
9 %  for  dental  examinations.  Slovenia  had  by 
far  the  lowest  proportion  of  people  with  unmet 
needs for health examinations, and very low rates 
were  also  recorded  in  Belgium  and  Austria.  In 
contrast, around one quarter of people in Latvia 
had  unmet  needs  for  either  medical  or  dental 
examinations (see Figure 6.1).

From  the  perspective  of  individuals  (as  opposed 
to health professionals), the use of the Internet for 
health issues is almost entirely focused on seeking 
information  related  to  injuries,  diseases  and 
nutrition,  activities  carried  out  by  approximately 
one quarter of the population (aged 16 or over) in 
the EU-27. Direct contacts with health professionals 
through  use  of  the  Internet,  such  as  making  an 
appointment,  getting  advice,  or  requesting  a 
prescription,  was  much  less  common,  averaging 
less than 2 % of the population across the EU-27 
(see Table 6.4 overleaf).

Health

6

Figure 6.2: Organ donation rate, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

10

20

30

40

ES

EE

AT

BE

FR

IT

CZ

LV

PT

HU

EU-27

IE

NO

FI

DE

NL

PL

SE

UK

SK

CH

DK

SI

HR

CY

EL

IS

LU

TR

BG

RO

(1) Lithuania and Malta, not available.

Source: Council of Europe, Newsletter Transplant, September 2006, 
Vol. 11. Nº 1

  Consumers in Europe

243

Consumers.indb   243
Consumers.indb   243

08.04.2009   09:51:58
08.04.2009   09:51:58

6

Health

Table 6.4: Use of the Internet for health related information and prescriptions
(%)

Percentage of individuals (aged 16 and over) who used Internet for:

Seeking health 
information on injury, 
disease or nutrition, 
2007
23.8
25.1
5.0
10.7
38.0
40.9
25.6
12.2
7.7
21.4
28.8
15.7
14.3
11.2
19.2
48.4
22.6
20.3
45.5
27.4
12.8
17.8
6.3
26.1
16.5
47.1
25.4
19.8
3.1
3.1
43.7
36.8

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
MK (1)
TR (2)
IS
NO

(1) 2006.
(2) 2005.

Seeking medical 
advice with a 
practitioner, 2005
1.7
:
:
0.3
2.5
:
10.9
0.6
0.4
2.4
:
1.6
0.3
0.5
1.2
1.6
0.8
0.4
1.7
0.5
0.4
0.4
:
:
0.0
2.7
4.2
4.4
:
0.3
2.7
1.1

Making an 
appointment with a 
practitioner, 2005
0.5
:
:
0.4
1.7
:
8.4
0.1
0.1
0.4
:
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.8
0.1
:
:
:
0.2
3.4
0.0
:
:
0.1
1.3
0.9

Requesting a 
prescription from a 
practitioner, 2005
0.4
:
:
:
0.7
:
4.9
0.1
0.0
0.1
:
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.8
0.2
0.1
1.4
0.3
0.1
:
:
0.0
0.0
:
1.0
:
:
0.0
0.8
0.3

Source: Eurostat, Percentage of population (aged 16 and over) using Internet to seek health information whether for themselves or others 
(theme9/science/isoc/isoc_pi/isoc_pi_f/)

244

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   244
Consumers.indb   244

08.04.2009   09:51:59
08.04.2009   09:51:59

6.2 Consumption

Table 6.5: Indicators of hospital activity, 2006

Health

6

6.2.1 Consumption volume

engaged 

Th  e  output-related  data  of  hospital  activity  refer 
to  contacts  between  patients  and  the  healthcare 
system. Hospitals comprise licensed establishments 
primarily 
in  providing  medical, 
diagnostic,  and  treatment  services  that  include 
physician,  nursing,  and  other  health  services  to 
in-patients  and  the  specialised  accommodation 
services  required  by  in-patients.  Hospitals  may 
also  provide  out-patient  services  as  a  secondary 
activity.  Measuring  the  output  of  healthcare 
in  hospitals  can  be  diffi  cult,  with  comparisons 
between Member States complicated by diff erences 
in healthcare systems. Th  is is further complicated 
as out-patient services (day care and day-surgery) 
expand as alternatives to in-patient services, with 
recourse  to  out-patient  services  varying  within 
and between Member States.

Discharge rates of in-patients are oft en expressed 
as a number per 100 000 inhabitants, and among 
the Member States with data shown in Table 6.5 
these  rates  were  generally  between  10 000  and 
20 000  in  2006,  in  other  words  between  1  and 
2  discharges  for  every  10  inhabitants  over  the 
course of a year. Th  e average length of stay of in-
patients is calculated from the number of hospital 
days  of  in-patients  divided  by  the  number  of 
discharges  (whether  discharged  or  died).  Th  e 
average length of stay has fallen in recent decades, 
and was generally below ten days for the majority 
of  the  Member  States  shown  in  Table  6.5,  with 
the  exception  of  the  Czech  Republic,  Germany, 
Lithuania and Finland.

BE
BG
CZ
DK (1)
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT (2)
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT (3)
NL (2)
AT
PL
PT (2)
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE (1)
UK (1)
HR
MK
IS
NO
CH (2)

(1) 2003. 
(2) 2005.
(3) 2007.

Discharges 
(per 100 000 
inhabitants)
15 687
21 474
20 799
15 936
21 481
18 307
13 656
:
10 712
16 367
15 347
6 536
20 970
21 866
16 720
23 750
7 359
10 135
27 119
18 425
9 127
22 954
16 045
19 941
19 620
14 751
13 064
14 151
9 884
16 416
17 689
15 656

Hospital days 
of in-patients 
(number)
11 343 884
12 450 927
22 785 822
5 031 080
180 888 694
1 881 689
3 672 978
:
33 194 442
59 783 332
66 714 349
297 435
4 126 345
7 449 081
581 456
17 513 924
144 388
11 483 856
19 997 560
42 457 580
6 403 190
38 959 920
2 482 359
8 830 222
13 092 484
8 633 893
72 658 083
6 709 117
1 772 343
267 339
4 145 467
12 646 773

In-patient 
average length 
of stay (days)
6.9
7.5
10.7
5.9
10.2
7.7
6.3
:
7.0
5.8
7.4
5.9
8.6
10.0
7.4
7.3
4.8
6.9
8.9
6.0
6.7
7.9
7.7
8.2
12.7
6.5
9.3
10.7
8.8
5.5
5.0
10.9

Source: Eurostat, Hospital discharges by diagnoses (ISHMT), in-patients, per 100,000 
inhabitants, Hospital days of in-patients (ISHMT), In-patient average length of stay (ISHMT, in 
days) by region - Total (theme3/hlth/hlth_inpat/)

  Consumers in Europe

245

Consumers.indb   245
Consumers.indb   245

08.04.2009   09:52:00
08.04.2009   09:52:00

6

Health

6.2.2 Consumption expenditure

insurance 

non-profi t 

In most European countries a large proportion of 
the  population  has  statutory  health  cover  either 
fi nanced  by  taxes  or  compulsory  contributions 
funds. 
through 
Alternatively,  or  additionally,  some  consumers 
may  pay  for  healthcare  through  the  market, 
either by paying directly (out of their own pocket) 
or through private healthcare insurance schemes 
with  premiums  paid  by  individuals  directly  or 
provided  as  an  employment  benefi t.  Figure  6.3 
gives  an  indication  of  the  relative  importance 
of  out-of-pocket  and  private  health  insurance 
within current healthcare expenditure, with the 
situation  in  Cyprus  (provisional  data)  standing 
out, as this was the only Member State (with data 
available) where such expenditure exceeded half 
of total current healthcare expenditure.

As  noted,  the  level  of  healthcare  expenditure 
recorded  in  household  budget  survey  (HBS) 
depends heavily on the healthcare system in each 
country, as taxes and social security contributions 
are  not  considered  as  part  of  household 
consumption  expenditure,  and  payments  for 
health  insurance  made  directly  by  households 
are  considered  as  expenditure  on  insurance  (see 
Chapter  12)  rather  than  healthcare  expenditure. 
HBS health expenditure may be high in countries 
where the cost of healthcare is paid by patients and 
then  reimbursed,  or  to  a  lesser  extent  where  the 
patient bears part or all of the cost of healthcare 
through  cost-sharing  arrangements  or  partly 
non-reimbursable  costs.  In  contrast,  low  levels 
of expenditure on healthcare are recorded in the 
HBS  for  those  countries  where  healthcare  is  free 
at the point of provision. HBS also records market 
payments for healthcare where people pay privately 
for their own care (as detailed in Figure 6.3).

Figure 6.3: Out-of-pocket and private 
health insurance spending: share of current 
health expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

CY (2)

CH

BG

LT

PL

ES

BE (2)

PT

NL

SI

HU

RO (2)

SK (3)

FI

IT

AT

DE

EE (2)

IE

FR

IS

NO (3, 4)

DK (2)

CZ

LU

Private household out-of-pocket expenditure

Private insurance  (incl. private social insurance)

(1) Greece, Latvia, Malta, Sweden and the United Kingdom, not 
available.
(2) Provisional.
(3) Private health insurance, not available.
(4) 2004.

Source: Eurostat, Healthcare expenditure by ﬁ nancing agent (HF) 
(theme3/hlth/hlth_shat/hlth_sha_hf); OECD, Health at a Glance 
2008: OECD Indicators, OECD

246

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   246
Consumers.indb   246

08.04.2009   09:52:01
08.04.2009   09:52:01

Health

6

Figure 6.4: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of health in total 
expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

2

4

6

8

PT
EL
LT
CY
BE
PL
BG
FR
HU
IT
RO
LV
DE
FI
EU-27
SK
AT
NO
MT
DK
LU
EE
IE
SE
ES
HR
SI
NL
UK

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey 
(theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Expenditure on health represented 3.4 % of total 
household  consumption  expenditure 
in  the 
EU-27 in 2005, with the proportion of spending 
on health falling as low as 1.2 % and 1.3 % of the 
total in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands, 
while rising as high as 6.1 % and 5.9 % in Portugal 
and Greece (see Figure 6.4).

Table 6.6: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, health, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

796
1 400
305
239
639
1 024
282
904
1 824
577
1 167
1 132
1 624
394
445
1 351
440
869
371
946
485
1 264
205
356
330
852
638
383
315
872

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey 
(theme3/hbs/hbs_exp_t121)

HBS data from 2005 presented in purchasing power 
standards  (PPS)  shows  that  at  comparable  price 
levels,  household  expenditure  on  health  within 
the EU-27 ranged from PPS 205 per household in 
Romania  to  PPS  1 400  in  Belgium,  with  Greece 
(PPS  1 824)  and  Cyprus  (PPS  1 624)  above  this 
level: as such, the level of household consumption 
expenditure  on  health  was  8.9  times  as  high  in 
Greece as it was in Romania (see Table 6.6).

  Consumers in Europe

247

Consumers.indb   247
Consumers.indb   247

08.04.2009   09:52:01
08.04.2009   09:52:01

6

Health

Figure 6.5: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of health in total expenditure, 
EU-27, 2005
(%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Manual workers

Non-manual workers

Self-employed

Unemployed

Retired

Other inactive

Lowest

Second

Third

Fourth

Highest

1 adult

1 adult & dep. children

2 adults

2 adults & dep. children

3+ adults

3+ adults & dep. children

Less than 30

30-44

45-59

60 and over

Dense

Intermediate

Sparse

)
1
(
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
i
c
o
S

e

i

l
i
t
n
u
q
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
1
(
e
p
y
t
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
g
A

)
1
(
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
b
r
U

(1) Unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

248

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   248
Consumers.indb   248

08.04.2009   09:52:02
08.04.2009   09:52:02

 
 
 
 
 
 
Health

6

Th  e  share  of  total  household  consumption 
expenditure  dedicated  to  health  varies  greatly 
depending on the type of household (number of 
persons,  with  or  without  dependent  children), 
with shares generally lower for those households 
with  children  compared  with  those  without.  In 
this  context,  it  should  be  noted  that  analyses 
by  socio-economic  category  and  age  show  the 
highest  shares  of  health  in  total  household 
expenditure  recorded  for  retired  persons  and 
households  where  the  head  of  the  household 
was  aged  60  or  over,  and  it  is  likely  that  the 
particularly high shares recorded for households 
with one or two adults and no dependent children 
may  be  strongly  infl uenced  by  the  inclusion  of 
retired,  single  persons  and  retired  couples.  An 

analysis by income quintile shows that the share 
of  total  household  consumption  expenditure 
dedicated to health was lowest for households in 
the lowest income quintile and highest for those 
in  the  highest  quintile,  suggesting  an  increased 
willingness of households with higher income to 
pay for out-of-pocket healthcare.

Just over half (55.6 %) of household consumption 
expenditure  on  health  in  the  EU-27  concerned 
the direct purchase of pharmaceutical products, 
therapeutic appliances and equipment, while the 
remainder  (44.4 %)  was  devoted  to  treatment 
services:  16.7 %  for  dental  services,  13.9 %  for 
medical services, 8.3 % for paramedical services 
and 5.6 % for hospital services.

Table 6.7: Structure of consumption expenditure on health, 2005
(%)

Pharma-
ceutical
products
42
30
79
:
30
0
67
38
17
36
31
44
30
62
83
23
66
450
23
32
67
47
79
36
63
41
32
25
58
27

Other
medical
products
3
0
0
:
0
0
0
8
2
0
2
3
0
0
0
0
0

0
3
0
2
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
3

Therapeutic
 appliances
 and
 equipment
11
9
5
:
19
0
8
8
2
18
19
8
4
5
4
35
10
16
31
29
4
10
3
21
9
15
18
25
11
13

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

(1) Unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Medical
services
14
26
5
:
0
0
4
21
23
9
24
13
23
8
2
15
7
23
15
13
11
15
5
7
6
15
0
8
5
10

Dental
 services
17
11
7
:
30
0
17
13
30
27
12
23
9
11
6
15
10
6
23
10
13
13
5
29
13
18
36
25
16
40

Paramedical
 services
8
13
2
:
19
0
0
8
12
5
10
10
17
5
2
4
2
3
8
6
2
8
3
7
3
9
14
8
5
3

Hospital
 services
6
11
2
:
4
100
4
4
15
5
2
0
17
8
2
8
5
6
0
6
2
5
5
0
3
3
0
8
5
3

  Consumers in Europe

249

Consumers.indb   249
Consumers.indb   249

08.04.2009   09:52:03
08.04.2009   09:52:03

6

Health

6.3 Prices

6.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  e EU-27 harmonised index of consumer prices 
for health rose by 24.1 % between 2000 and 2007, 
equivalent to an average of 3.1 % per annum. Th  is 
was higher than the rate of increase recorded for 
the all-items consumer price index, which gained 
an average of 2.4 % per annum between 2000 and 
2007.  Annual  price  increases  for  health  ranged 
between 1.7 % (2006) and 3.4 % (2002) for most of 
these years, with the 5.7 % increase in 2000 and 
6.6 % increase in 2004 above this range. Several 
Member  States  recorded  price  decreases  for 

health in 2007, with the largest price reductions 
recorded in Romania (-2.3 %) and Spain (-1.5 %). 
Price  increases  were  generally  less  than  5 %  in 
the other Member States, with increases between 
7 % and 8 % in Portugal and the Baltic Member 
States, and an increase of 20.2 % in Hungary.

Between  2000  and  2007  the  EU-27’s  index  of 
consumer  prices  rose  more  quickly  for  hospital 
services  (4.5 %  per  annum  on  average)  than  for 
out-patient services (3.6 %), or medical products, 
(2.2 %)  —  see 
appliances  and  equipment 
Figure 6.6.

Table 6.8: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, health, annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
5.7
0.5
18.3
1.6
1.6
0.8
5.7
6.1
1.7
3.0
1.0
2.9
5.0
3.1
-3.2
11.9
27.6
4.2
2.9
2.2
10.5
2.6
59.0
15.4
10.2
2.7
4.5
2.9
58.3
2.4
3.4
:

2001
3.0
1.1
28.9
4.0
2.5
1.2
12.0
6.7
2.7
1.8
-0.1
-1.2
5.2
4.2
-1.6
1.7
11.8
3.5
6.8
6.1
6.5
3.6
37.6
12.3
3.3
2.6
5.0
3.8
49.3
3.5
3.1
:

2002
3.4
1.5
28.5
6.1
0.9
0.6
8.2
10.1
5.1
2.7
1.4
4.2
4.6
4.6
1.1
-5.1
8.5
2.4
6.5
3.0
4.6
4.8
19.5
6.7
4.8
5.0
3.9
3.8
38.3
11.5
4.2
:

2003
2.6
2.4
5.2
4.6
0.1
0.4
13.9
7.7
4.6
2.1
3.2
3.2
5.6
5.8
4.2
-2.4
7.3
5.6
2.7
1.3
2.0
2.3
13.9
5.8
7.4
3.1
3.0
3.4
26.9
5.3
4.1
:

2004
6.6
1.4
0.7
2.3
1.9
19.2
5.7
6.0
5.3
0.4
2.9
3.3
3.7
14.2
8.4
2.2
7.1
6.9
9.6
1.1
2.0
1.7
-1.8
1.5
13.4
2.1
4.0
1.8
11.2
5.7
4.9
:

2005
2.4
2.2
9.6
6.9
2.6
1.9
2.8
6.2
4.4
0.9
2.2
2.3
-0.5
11.2
8.0
0.2
8.2
5.5
1.2
4.9
2.7
0.9
2.0
-0.3
8.8
1.9
1.8
2.9
4.9
3.4
2.9
:

2006
1.7
2.8
5.9
4.7
1.0
0.8
2.6
4.4
2.8
1.3
3.0
-0.5
1.9
6.6
6.7
4.1
4.4
4.0
3.6
1.2
1.2
1.5
-1.2
-1.7
9.7
0.7
1.0
2.8
4.3
3.5
3.5
0.1

2007
2.2
-0.2
4.5
3.7
0.6
1.4
8.3
3.0
3.4
-1.5
2.1
2.8
4.6
7.1
7.1
0.7
20.2
2.7
1.3
2.0
1.9
7.4
-2.3
1.7
0.1
-0.4
2.6
3.4
4.8
3.4
2.3
-0.2

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

250

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   250
Consumers.indb   250

08.04.2009   09:52:04
08.04.2009   09:52:04

Health

6

Figure 6.6: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

Figure 6.7: Price level indices, health, 2006
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

110

100

90

80

70

2001

2003

2005

2007

Health

Medical products, appliances & equipment

Out-patient services

Hospital services

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

6.3.2 Price levels

Price  level  indices  for  2006  show  that  health 
goods  and  services  were  generally  cheaper  in 
the  Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  in  2004 
and 2007; Cyprus was the only exception to this 
general  rule,  having  a  price  level  index  above 
that  recorded  for  Portugal,  Spain  or  Greece 
(see  Figure  6.7).  Among  the  Member  States  to 
join  the  EU  since  2004,  Cyprus,  Slovenia  and 
Malta  were  the  only  countries  to  report  price 
level indices that were more than half the EU-27 
average, while the lowest relative price levels were 
recorded in Bulgaria and Romania, 26 % and 31 % 
of  the  EU-27  average  respectively.  In  contrast, 
Denmark and Ireland reported the highest price 
level indices for health, in the case of the former 
approximately 50 % above the EU-27 average and 
5.9 times as high as in Bulgaria.

IS

DK

NO

CH

IE

FI

SE

LU

IT

UK

BE

FR

AT

DE

NL

EU-27

CY

PT

ES

EL

SI

MT

TR

HR

HU

EE

CZ

SK

LT

PL

LV

RO

BG

MK

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

  Consumers in Europe

251

Consumers.indb   251
Consumers.indb   251

08.04.2009   09:52:05
08.04.2009   09:52:05

6

Health

6.4 Consumer satisfaction

6.4.1 Consumer satisfaction with 
healthcare

Information  on  satisfaction  with  aspects  of 
healthcare  is  available  from  two  sources,  the 
Urban  Audit  which  can  be  used  to  present 
information  on  consumer  satisfaction  with 
hospitals  and  doctors  in  the  capital  cities  of  the 
EU’s Member States, and a 2007 Eurobarometer 
survey  on  health  and  long-term  care  which 
looked  at  consumer  attitudes  towards  hospitals 
and various types of healthcare.

More  than  half  of  the  inhabitants  in  Bucharest, 
Vilnius, Sofi a, Dublin and Athens were dissatisfi ed 
with  their  hospitals,  in  comparison  with  only 
about  one  tenth  being  dissatisfi ed  in  Brussels, 

Vienna  or  Amsterdam.  Around  half  of  the 
inhabitants of Vilnius, Bucharest, Sofi a, Warsaw 
and Riga were also dissatisfi ed with their doctors. 
Among  the  capital  cities  of  the  Member  States 
that  joined  the  EU  in  2004  or  2007  the  lowest 
rates of dissatisfaction with hospitals and doctors 
were  generally  recorded  in  Valletta,  Prague  and 
Ljubljana,  with  Nicosia  also  recording  relatively 
low rates of dissatisfaction with doctors.

Eurobarometer  results,  which  are  for  Member 
States  as  a  whole  (rather  than  capital  cities), 
show  similar  trends  with  respect  to  consumer 
satisfaction with hospitals, although there seemed 
to  be  less  dissatisfaction  in  Ireland  as  a  whole 
than  in  Dublin,  and  more  in  Hungary  than  in 
Budapest, although this could also be attributed 

Table 6.9: Perceptions concerning hospitals and doctors, 2006
(%)

Satisfaction with hospitals:

Satisfaction with doctors:

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Zagreb
Ankara

Synthetic 
index 
0-100
88
36
73
83
80
60
47
45
69
79
50
57
47
36
83
49
74
90
90
41
56
29
72
51
72
83
68
53
58

Satisfied
(rather &
 strong)
82
30
56
72
65
46
45
42
63
66
48
52
39
31
73
40
67
80
81
32
47
26
64
38
64
71
63
49
57

Dissatisfied 
(rather & 
strong)
11
53
21
15
17
30
52
51
28
17
48
39
44
56
15
41
24
9
9
47
37
63
25
36
25
15
30
44
42

Synthetic 
index 
0-100
91
48
79
88
83
57
74
58
75
87
65
78
49
40
86
71
86
92
89
47
67
45
73
69
73
84
78
68
63

Satisfied
(rather &
 strong)
88
45
71
85
80
52
73
55
72
80
63
73
46
38
79
67
81
88
86
42
58
42
70
65
68
74
75
66
62

Dissatisfied 
(rather & 
strong)
9
49
20
11
16
40
26
39
24
12
34
20
47
56
13
27
13
8
11
47
28
52
26
29
25
14
21
31
37

Source: Eurostat, Perception survey results (theme1/urb/urb_percep)

252

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   252
Consumers.indb   252

08.04.2009   09:52:06
08.04.2009   09:52:06

Health

6

to  methodological  diff erences.  An  analysis  of 
the results for the three other categories studied, 
namely dental care, medical or surgical care, and 
family  doctors,  showed  some  common  features, 
notably  the  very  low  proportion  of  respondents 
in  Malta  and  Belgium  expressing  the  view  that 
these  healthcare  services  were  bad,  and  the 
very  high  proportions  who  were  dissatisfi ed  in 
Portugal.  Th  e  lowest  shares  of  the  population 
that  thought  that  dental  care  was  poor  were 
recorded  in  Malta,  Belgium  and  Sweden,  while 
the  highest  shares  were  expressed  in  Portugal, 
Greece  and  Poland,  where  more  than  one  third 

of respondents expressed dissatisfaction. Similar 
views were recorded for medical or surgical care, 
with  Hungary  joining  Portugal,  as  one  third  of 
respondents  in  these  two  countries  regarded 
medical and surgical healthcare as poor. Th  e fi nal 
category presented in Table 6.10 concerns family 
doctors, with Cyprus joining Malta and Belgium 
with  a  low  proportion  of  respondents  regarding 
family doctors as poor, and Bulgaria, Greece and 
Romania  joining  Portugal  as  the  only  countries 
where  upwards  of  25 %  of  respondents  were 
dissatisfi ed with their family doctor.

Table 6.10: Attitudes towards healthcare, May-June 2007
(%)

Hospitals

Dental
care

Medical or surgical
 specialists

Family 
doctors

Good
71
93
43
80
85
79
67
64
48
82
83
63
69
55
57
82
43
84
87
92
42
58
42
76
62
88
90
77
65
68

Do not
 know
4
1
8
2
2
5
14
6
-
3
4
2
6
13
8
4
5
3
4
2
9
2
5
5
3
3
2
5
4
2

Bad
25
6
49
18
13
16
19
30
52
15
13
35
25
32
35
14
52
13
9
6
49
40
53
19
35
9
8
18
31
30

Good
74
95
62
88
94
89
78
77
61
62
91
61
88
78
64
91
70
90
92
91
50
51
62
71
79
82
94
70
78
60

Do not
 know
5
2
9
1
1
1
10
10
1
6
2
7
6
11
8
3
9
8
3
1
13
5
11
3
1
4
2
7
4
16

Bad
21
3
29
11
5
10
12
13
38
32
7
32
6
11
28
6
21
2
5
8
37
44
27
26
20
14
4
23
18
24

Good
74
93
58
86
75
77
68
66
70
81
87
75
84
61
62
80
53
83
83
87
57
59
59
75
78
85
71
71
68
69

Do not
 know
11
3
13
6
19
11
20
17
1
6
8
3
11
23
19
12
14
14
10
5
15
8
15
13
5
10
24
21
10
14

Bad
15
4
29
8
6
12
12
17
29
13
5
22
5
16
19
8
33
3
7
8
28
33
26
12
17
5
5
8
22
17

Good
84
95
69
82
91
88
78
90
73
89
93
77
92
72
77
90
83
96
89
93
73
62
71
84
81
81
68
88
84
53

Do not
 know
2
0
3
0
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
4
7
6
3
2
3
1
1
5
2
4
2
2
2
11
2
2
29

Bad
14
5
28
18
8
11
18
8
26
10
6
22
4
21
17
7
15
1
10
6
22
36
25
14
17
17
21
10
14
18

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR

Source: ‘Health and long-term care in the European Union’, Special Eurobarometer 283, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

253

Consumers.indb   253
Consumers.indb   253

08.04.2009   09:52:07
08.04.2009   09:52:07

6

Health

Figure 6.8: Attitudes towards own health, EU-25, 2006
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

r
e
d
n
e
G

e
g
A

TOTAL

Male

Female

15 to 24

25 to 34

35 to 44

45 to 54

55 to 64

65 to 74

75 to 84

85 and over

Very good

Good

Fair

Bad

Very bad

Source: Eurostat, Self-perceived health by sex, age and activity status (%) 
(theme3/hlth/hlth_silc_01)

Table 6.11: Attitudes towards own health, 2006
(%)

Very 
good Good
43.4
45.8
:
39.8
33.6
46.6
45.9
36.4
25.2
50.8
44.2
43.5
27.5
37.9
37.2
42.1
35.1
43.5
55.8
35.3
39.1
40.9
:
40.5
29.1
24.7
41.8
43.1
31.0
46.5

21.3
28.5
:
19.4
41.4
14.0
7.5
46.8
51.6
17.1
25.2
13.4
48.7
3.3
6.3
32.1
13.2
31.5
21.1
36.6
15.5
7.2
:
15.9
23.1
44.0
34.2
33.5
50.8
28.0

Fair
24.7
17.3
:
27.3
17.2
30.1
31.6
13.7
14.0
19.8
21.1
32.6
14.5
39.4
38.4
18.5
31.4
20.6
17.9
20.2
28.1
31.9
:
27.9
29.8
21.4
18.2
16.9
13.8
16.2

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
IS
NO

Very 
bad
2.0
1.6
:
2.5
2.0
1.6
2.8
0.7
2.9
2.3
1.4
1.9
1.6
4.5
3.3
1.5
4.2
0.6
0.8
1.5
3.1
5.0
:
3.0
4.9
2.9
1.0
1.2
1.6
1.4

Bad
8.6
6.8
:
10.9
5.7
7.7
12.3
2.4
6.3
9.9
8.1
8.7
7.7
14.9
14.9
5.8
16.1
3.8
4.4
6.4
14.2
15.1
:
12.7
13.1
7.0
4.8
5.3
2.9
8.0

Source: Eurostat, Self-perceived health by sex, age and activity 
status (%) (theme3/hlth/hlth_silc_01)

6.4.2 Satisfaction with own health

A  number  of  lifestyle  factors  can  infl uence  the 
health of a person over their lifetime, notably their 
level of physical activity, their diet, consumption 
of alcohol, tobacco and drugs. Furthermore, some 
risks to health can be linked with a person’s living 
or  working  environment,  for  example,  in  terms 
of  air  and  water  pollution  and  noise,  free-time 
activities  within  and  outside  the  home,  as  well 
as the risk of transport accidents. Some of these 
issues are dealt with elsewhere in this publication, 
notably diet in Chapter 1, consumption of alcohol 
and tobacco in Chapter 2, and transport safety in 
Chapter 7, with the issue of toy safety addressed 
in Chapter 9.

Health  status  is  oft en  assessed  through  self-
perception:  these  surveys  are  by  their  nature 
subjective  and  may  be  infl uenced  by  cultural 
issues.  Results  for  2006  from  a  self-perception 
survey  are  presented  in  Figure  6.8  and  Table 
6.11.  Across  the  EU-25  nearly  nine  out  of  every 
ten  people  (89.4 %)  described  their  health  as 
fair  or  better,  with  close  to  two  thirds  (64.7 %) 
describing  it  as  good  or  very  good.  Men  were 
generally  somewhat  more  positive  about  their 
health status, with a higher proportion reporting 
good or very good health and a lower proportion 
reporting bad or very bad health. Th  e proportion 
of persons reporting good and very good health 
declined as age increased; this may infl uence the 
analysis by gender, as there are more older women 
than men in the population.

In ten of the EU-25 Member States, the proportion 
of persons perceiving their health to be bad or very 
bad was greater than the EU-25 average (10.6 %); 
of these only Spain (12.2 %) and Portugal (20.1 %) 
were EU-15 Member States. In Malta and Cyprus 
the proportion reporting bad or very bad health 
was below the EU-25 average, at 4.4 % and 9.3 % 
respectively, with only Ireland (3.1 %) reporting a 
lower proportion of persons with bad or very bad 
health than Malta.

For more information

Directorate-General for Health and Consumers: 
http://ec.europa.eu/health/index_en.htm

254

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   254
Consumers.indb   254

08.04.2009   09:52:07
08.04.2009   09:52:07

Transport

Consumers.indb   255
Consumers.indb   255

08.04.2009   09:52:08
08.04.2009   09:52:08

7

Transport

(19) COM(2007) 551 ﬁ nal.

In  its  Green  paper  ‘towards  a  new  culture  for 
urban  mobility’  (19),  the  European  Commission 
identifi es towns and cities as a main driver of the 
European  economy,  as  urban  areas  (with  over 
10 000  inhabitants)  generate  85 %  of  the  EU’s 
gross  domestic  product;  while  more  than  60 % 
of  the  population  live  in  these  areas.  However, 
the  Green  paper  states  that  an  estimated  1 %  of 
the EU’s GDP or nearly EUR 100 billion is lost to 
congestion each year. It also suggests that urban 
traffi  c  is  responsible  for  40 %  of  CO2  emissions 
and 70 % of emissions of other pollutants arising 
from road transport. Th  ese delays and pollution 
that congestion entails are also refl ected in higher 
accident  levels  in  urban  areas,  increased  health 
problems,  more  wide-reaching  environmental 
problems (such as climate change), and negative 
economic losses both through bottlenecks in the 
logistics  chain,  as  well  as  delays  in  getting  staff  
to work.

7.1 Access and choice

Transport therefore has an important impact on 
economic  development,  the  environment  and 
health, among other things through the transport 
networks in place, the interoperability of various 
modes  of  transport,  and  individuals’  transport 
choices. Attitudes relating to EU transport policy 
were recorded in a Eurobarometer survey carried 
out in 2007. Th  e survey revealed that a majority 
(53 %)  of  respondents  across  the  EU-27  used 
individual motorised transport (car or motorcycle) 
as their main mode of transport (see Figure 7.1). 
A little over one in every fi ve (21 %) respondents 
to the survey used public transport as their main 
mode  of  travel  and  a  similar  proportion  (23 %) 
used bicycles or walked.

Figure 7.1: Main mode of mobility, 
May 2007
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

NL
RO
HU
SE 
BG
PL
SK
DK 
DE
FI
EE
EU-27
EL
LV
LT
ES
AT
SI
BE
CZ 
IT
UK
PT 
IE
FR 
MT
CY
LU

Non-motorised individual transport (1)

Public transport

Motorised individual transport (2)

(1) Walking and cycling.
(2) Car and motorcycle.

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU transport policy’, 
Flash Eurobarometer 206b, European Commission

256

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   256
Consumers.indb   256

08.04.2009   09:52:13
08.04.2009   09:52:13

Among  half  of  the  Member  States,  the  car  or 
motorcycle  was  the  main  mode  of  transport  for 
a  majority  of  respondents.  Th  is  proportion  rose 
to  about  two  thirds  of  respondents  in  Malta, 
Slovenia  and  France,  and  as  many  as  nine  out 
of  every  ten  in  Cyprus.  Slightly  less  than  half 
(46 %)  of  all  respondents  in  the  Netherlands 
declared  that  they  walked  or  cycled  as  their 
main  means  of  mobility.  In  Romania,  Bulgaria, 
Slovakia  and  Latvia,  between  26 %  and  30 %  of 
respondents  used  a  car  or  motorcycle  as  their 
main form of transport, with a higher proportion 
of the population using either public transport or 
walking  and  cycling.  Where  car  use  (as  a  main 
means of transport) was lowest, it was relatively 
common  to  fi nd  that  primary  car  users  (those 
using  cars  as  their  main  mode  of  transport) 
were  the  most  resistant  to  the  idea  of  switching 
to  public  transport;  this  was  particularly  the 
case  in  Romania,  Bulgaria  and  Latvia  (between 
33 %  and  41 %),  as  well  as  Hungary  (44 %,  the 
highest  proportion).  In  contrast,  primary  car 
users  in  Cyprus,  Spain  and  Slovenia  were  most 
open to change (see Figure 7.2). More generally, 
the receptiveness of primary car users to the idea 
of switching to public transport depended largely 
on the availability of better scheduling or better 
connections, although in some countries, such as 
France and Ireland, the issue of stops being closer 
to homes was also an important concern.

Transport

7

Figure 7.2: Receptiveness to a switch from 
car use to public transport use, May 2007
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

CY
ES
SI
PT
EL
MT
IE
LU
IT
BE
FI
UK
SE
CZ
DK
EU-27
DE
AT
NL
SK
FR
PL
RO
LT
LV
BG
EE
HU

No change in car use
Yes, if better scheduling
Yes, if better connections
Yes, if closer stop to dwelling
Yes, if better security
Not known

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU transport policy’, 
Flash Eurobarometer 206b, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

257

Consumers.indb   257
Consumers.indb   257

08.04.2009   09:52:14
08.04.2009   09:52:14

7

Transport

Table 7.1: Road networks, 2005 (1)
(kilometres)

Motor-
ways
1 747
331
564
1 032
12 363
99
247
880
11 432
10 804
6 542
276
-
417
147
636
-
2 342
1 677
552
2 341
228
569
328
693
1 684
3 634
792
208
1 775
-
270
1 361

BE
BG
CZ 
DK 
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR 
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT 
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE 
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
NO
CH

Main & 
national 
roads
12 585
2 969
6 154
641
40 983
3 933
5 168
10 189
13 983
25 182
21 524
2 416
6 949
1 333
837
6 556
184
2 836
10 566
18 254
8 161
15 705
972
17 500
12 580
15 353
48 927
6 725
698
31 371
4 265
27 274
398

Secondary
& regional
roads
1 349
4 012
48 792
9 690
178 134
12 438
11 645
30 864
140 231
359 957
147 364
1 864
13 233
19 578
1 891
23 490
0
7 743
23 685
28 406
4 500
63 970
4 853
25 917
13 480
82 958
122 228
10 544
3 806
30 568
3 965
27 048
18 094

Other
roads
136 559
11 976
72 300
60 894
:
40 546
79 447
75 600
:
610 000
:
3 289
49 647
58 169
:
158 760
2 043
121 297
71 059
206 569
63 880
:
32 091
:
51 436
325 388
238 144
10 375
8 566
285 632
4 799
38 541
51 446

(1) The deﬁ nition of road types varies from country to country, the 
data are therefore not comparable; other roads sometimes include 
roads without a hard surface. 

Source: International Road Federation, national statistics

Th  e same Eurobarometer survey also revealed that 
the  proportion  of  respondents  across  the  EU-25 
who felt access to local transport networks within 
towns  was  easy  had  risen  from  68 %  in  2002  to 
80 % by 2006, and that just over two thirds (68 %) 
of  respondents  in  the  EU-27  thought  that  tax/
price incentives and compulsory manufacturing 
changes would be the best measures to encourage 
the use of biofuels.

While  the  Eurobarometer  survey  looked  at 
attitudes,  the  reality  of  access  and  choice  can 
be  analysed  (to  some  extent)  through  network 
or  passenger  numbers  for  the  main  types  of 
transport.  An  overview  of  the  road  network 
is  given  in  Table  7.1,  with  a  breakdown  for  the 
length of motorways and other types of road in 
2005.  Th  e  longest  motorway  networks  were  in 
Germany, France and Spain. Accessibility can be 
measured in terms of the length of the network 
compared with either the land area of a Member 
State  or  its  population.  Arguably,  a  consumer 
might be more interested in terms of the length 
of network per inhabitant – as this might give an 
indication  of  potential  congestion.  In  Germany, 
France  and  Spain,  the  length  of  the  motorway 
network  was  relatively  high  (between  0.15  and 
0.25  metres)  when  expressed  per  inhabitant, 
compared  with  Member  States  like  the  United 
Kingdom  (0.06  metres),  Hungary  (0.06  metres), 
the  Czech  Republic  (0.05  metres),  Poland  or 
Romania (both 0.01 metres). In terms of all roads, 
more  sparsely  populated  countries  such  as  the 
Baltic Member States and Finland had relatively 
high  levels  of  road  accessibility  per  inhabitant 
(between 20 and 40 metres) compared with more 
densely  populated  Member  States  such  as  the 
Netherlands  (8.3  metres)  or  Malta  (5.2  metres). 
In contrast, the Netherlands, Belgium and Malta 
had the highest road density per square kilometre 
of land area (with between 4.0 and 6.6 metres).

A corresponding overview of the rail network is 
given  in  Table  7.2.  France  and  Germany  had  by 
far the longest rail networks among the Member 
States  in  2005,  just  over  half  of  which  was 
electrifi ed.  In  terms  of  rail  lines  per  inhabitant, 
the averages in France (0.47 metres) and Germany 
(0.42 metres) were much higher than, for example, 
the United Kingdom, Italy (both 0.28 metres) or 
the  Netherlands  (0.17  metres),  this  latter  fi gure 
being  the  lowest  density  among  the  Member 
States.  Th  e  highest  rail  network  density  levels 
(using the length of rail lines per inhabitant) were 
recorded  in  the  Czech  Republic  (0.94  metres), 
Latvia  (0.98  metres),  Finland  (1.1  metres)  and 
Sweden (1.23 metres).

258

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   258
Consumers.indb   258

08.04.2009   09:52:15
08.04.2009   09:52:15

Transport

7

Table 7.2: Rail transport capacity, 2005

Seats (1)
 (thousand)
287
:
474
127
:
2
:
25
251
1 279
:
-
40
36
:
200
-
242
:
586
:
:
25
88
69
122
:
:
25
88
-
122
:

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
NO
CH

Stock of
 loco-
motives
 (units)
1 518
669
3 163
464
7 742
170
412
289
1 946
7 354
4 674
-
358
365
145
1 385
-
2 078
1 500
4 723
439
2 186
261
466
702
622
3 177
377
73
735
-
289
2 198

Stock of
 coaches &
 railcars
   (units)
3 251
1 558
4 895
1 473
20 169
183
581
564
5 239
15 879
10 066
-
490
467
185
2 787
-
852
3 112
7 725
1 125
3 310
401
1 808
1 084
791
10 934
579
125
1 312
-
191
4 293

Length of lines

of which,
electrified
(%)
84.0
69.3
31.5
24.1
56.5
13.7
2.7
3.2
56.6
50.4
69.9
-
11.4
6.9
95.3
35.8
-
73.4
61.8
60.8
50.5
36.3
41.0
42.9
45.7
70.2
25.1
36.1
33.3
22.1
-
61.9
100.0

Total
(km)
3 544
4 154
9 513
2 644
34 221
959
1 919
2 576
14 452
29 286
16 545
-
2 270
1 771
275
7 950
-
2 811
5 691
19 507
2 844
10 948
1 228
3 626
5 732
11 017
19 956
2 726
699
8 697
-
4 087
3 399

High-speed
network (2)
(km)
120
:
:
:
1 300
:
:
:
1 552
1 893
562
-
:
:
:
:
-
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
113
:
:
:
-
:
:

(1) Data are for 2004; the Czech Republic, Greece and Sweden, 2003; Denmark, 2002.
(2) Sections of lines on which trains can go faster than 250 km/h at some point during the journey in 2007.

Source: Union Internationale des Chemins de Fer, national statistics, Eurostat, Rail transport statistics

  Consumers in Europe

259

Consumers.indb   259
Consumers.indb   259

08.04.2009   09:52:15
08.04.2009   09:52:15

7

Transport

Table 7.3: Air passengers on board, 2007
(million)

International

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ 
DK 
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR 
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT 
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE 
UK

Total
800.2
21.0
6.1
13.3
24.2
166.2
1.7
30.1
34.8
163.0
120.3
108.2
7.3
3.2
2.2
1.6
8.6
3.0
50.8
23.1
17.2
24.1
7.0
1.5
2.3
14.4
27.3
218.6

National
178.2
0.1
0.1
0.4
2.0
24.8
0.0
1.1
6.7
44.5
27.4
29.3
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
:
0.1
0.8
1.1
2.5
0.6
0.0
0.2
2.9
7.1
26.6

Intra-EU
347.9
15.1
4.9
9.5
15.9
86.3
1.4
25.7
23.8
100.2
51.0
58.8
5.9
2.4
1.8
1.3
6.5
2.8
30.2
15.4
13.0
17.6
5.4
0.9
1.8
9.0
16.0
125.8

Extra-EU
274.2
5.8
1.1
3.4
6.3
55.1
0.3
3.2
4.3
18.4
41.9
20.1
1.3
0.7
0.4
0.3
2.0
0.2
20.4
6.9
3.0
4.0
1.1
0.6
0.3
2.5
4.2
66.2

Source: Eurostat, Air transport statistics (theme7/transp/avia/avia_paoc)

Th  ere  was  a  relatively  high  growth  rate  in  air 
passenger transport during the ten years through 
until 2007 compared with other transport modes. 
According  to  estimates  from  the  Directorate-
General for Energy and Transport, the number of 
passenger-kilometres grew by about 50 % overall. 
Th  ere were 800 million air passengers carried on 
board planes in the EU-27 in 2007, more than a 
quarter  of  whom  went  from,  to,  or  through  the 
United  Kingdom  (see  Table  7.3).  Spain  had  a 
relatively high number of air passengers, almost 
as many as Germany, the vast majority of which 
were on intra-EU fl ights.

London’s  Heathrow  airport  had  the  highest 
number of air passengers (arriving, departing, or 
in transit) in 2007, the majority (56 %) of whom 
were  on  non-EU  destination/origin  fl ights  (see 
Table  7.4).  Amsterdam’s  Schiphol  airport  and 
Paris’  Charles  de  Gaulle  airport  both  counted  a 
higher  number  of  intra-EU  passengers  in  2007 
than  Heathrow.  All  the  top  15  EU-27  airports 
(in terms of passenger numbers) recorded higher 
numbers  of  passengers  in  2007  compared  with 
2003. Th  e  fastest  rates  of  growth  (around  45  %) 
were  recorded  at  Dublin  airport,  Barcelona’s 
Transoceania  airport  and  Madrid’s  Barajas 
airport.  Growth  of  between  30%  and  40%  was 
registered at Munich’s F.J. Strauss airport, Milan’s 
Malpenso airport and Rome’s Fiumcino airport. 
Growth  was  relatively  limited  in  comparison 
at  Europe’s  largest  airport,  with  a  7  %  increase 
recorded for London Heathrow.

Table 7.4: Air passengers arriving, departing and in transit by top airport, 2007
(million)

London Heathrow
Paris Charles De Gaulle
Frankfurt
Madrid Barajas
Amsterdam Schiphol
London Gatwick
Munchen F.J. Strauss
Roma Fiumcino
Barcelona Transoceanico
Paris Orly
Milano Malpensa
London Stansted
Dublin
Palma de Mallorca
Manchester

Total
68.3
59.5
54.5
51.4
47.8
35.3
34.1
33.6
32.8
26.4
24.0
23.8
23.3
23.1
22.3

National 
5.8
5.2
6.7
22.6
0.1
4.1
10.0
13.8
15.1
15.3
4.0
2.6
1.1
6.6
3.5

          International
Intra-EU
24.2
25.7
20.7
17.5
27.5
18.8
15.1
12.6
14.4
5.6
11.6
19.6
19.9
15.7
12.4

Extra-EU
38.3
28.7
27.1
11.3
20.2
12.4
8.9
7.2
3.3
5.4
8.3
1.6
2.3
0.9
6.5

(1) The Czech Republic, Ireland, Greece, Italy, Malta, Austria, Poland and Romania, 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Air transport statistics (theme7/transp/avia/avia_tf)

260

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   260
Consumers.indb   260

08.04.2009   09:52:16
08.04.2009   09:52:16

Transport

7

Table 7.5: Top-15 ports in terms of 
passenger transport - numbers of 
passengers embarked and disembarked, 
2006
(million)

Dover
Paloukia Salaminas
Perama
Piraeus
Calais
Messina
Helsingborg
Helsingør
Reggio di Calabria
Helsinki
Stockholm
Napoli
Rødby Færgehavn
Puttgarden
Tallinn

UK
EL
EL
EL
FR
IT
SE
DK
IT
FI
SE
IT
DK
DE
EE

Total
14.0
12.0
12.0
11.5
11.5
10.8
10.8
10.7
10.7
8.5
8.1
6.8
6.8
6.8
6.4

Growth
2001-2006 
(%)
-12.3
230.6
230.6
40.1
-20.3
-6.7
-8.5
-6.9
-7.3
-5.1
15.0
-3.6
12.6
13.5
12.3

Source: Eurostat, Maritime transport statistics (theme7/transp/
mar/mar_tf)

Figure 7.3: In which of the following 
places have you or has a member of your 
household bought a new car/motorcycle 
last, EU-27, 2008?
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

                            Car/
motorcycle dealer

            Import/
export agent

Internet

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

routes,  consumers  have 

the 
On  certain 
possibility  to  take  a  ferry  as  an  alternative  to 
road, rail or air transport. Among all the ports 
in  the  EU-27,  Dover  on  the  English  Channel 
handled  the  greatest  number  of  passengers  in 
2006;  some  14  million  passengers  embarked  or 
disembarked  (see  Table  7.5),  although  this  was 
about  one  eighth  (-12.3 %)  less  than  the  level 
recorded in 2001 and a third lower (-34.1 %) than 
in  1997.  Passenger  numbers  through  Dover’s 
main  connecting  port  of  Calais  in  France  were 
also  down  sharply  (-42.9 %)  between  1997  and 
2006, in part refl ecting the emergence of rail and 
air  transport  alternatives  (such  as  the  Channel 
tunnel and cheaper air fl ights). Indeed, passenger 
numbers  were  lower  on  a  number  of  key  sea 
routes  in  the  period  between  2001  and  2006 
(such  as  between  Helsingborg  and  Helsingør, 
in part due to the opening of the Øresund fi xed 
link,  or  Reggio  di  Calabria  and  Messina).  In 
contrast,  there  was  relatively  strong  growth  in 
passenger  numbers  through  Stockholm,  Rødby 
Færgehavvn, Puttgarden and Tallinn.

Th  e  vast  majority  of  European  consumers  use 
car  or  motorcycle  dealers  to  purchase  a  new 
vehicle. Th  e EU-27 average in 2008, according to 
a consumer satisfaction survey, was close to 90 %, 
while almost 8 % of consumers used an import/
export agent, and 2.5 % used the Internet.

Among  the  Member  States  there  was  a  split 
between  the  EU-15  Member  States  and  those 
Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  since  2004, 
as  the  latter  reported  a  far  higher  recourse  to 
making purchases through import/export agents 
(on average 27.3 % of consumers) compared with 
those living in the EU-15 Member States (4.2 %). 
Th  is  likely  refl ects,  to  some  degree,  a  lack  of 
showrooms for certain brands (smaller countries 
may  lack  the  necessary  critical  mass  of  clients). 
However, as most consumers only buy a handful 
of  new  vehicles  during  a  lifetime,  it  is  also 
important to consider that the data likely refl ect 
purchasing patterns over a lengthy period of time 
(maybe going back a couple of decades), and that 
considerable  changes  to  the  retail  distribution 
of  motor  vehicles  may  have  taken  place  in  the 
meantime  in  many  of  the  Member  States  that 
joined the EU since 2004.

  Consumers in Europe

261

Consumers.indb   261
Consumers.indb   261

08.04.2009   09:52:16
08.04.2009   09:52:16

7

Transport

7.2 Consumption

7.2.1 Ownership and consumption 
volume

With  an  estimated  230  million  cars  in  use  in 
the  EU-27  in  2006  (see  Table  7.6),  it  is  perhaps 
unsurprising to fi nd that cars accounted for the 
highest share of distance travelled using passenger 
transport.  In  total,  cars  accounted  for  a  little 
under  three  quarters  (74.5 %)  of  all  passenger-
kilometres  (20)  travelled  in  the  EU-27  in  2006 
(see Table 7.7). Th  is was a lower proportion than 
in  the  United  States  (85.7 %),  but  considerably 
higher than in Japan (56.6 %) or China (53.2 %), 
where rail travel accounted for around a third of 
all passenger-kilometres.

Table 7.6: Road vehicles, 2006
(thousand)

(20) Kilometres travelled 

by car, bus and coach, 
railway, tram and 
metro, waterborne 
means and aeroplane.

Th  e number of passenger kilometres travelled by 
car  within  the  EU-27  increased  steadily  during 
the  period  between  1995  and  2006  (up  19.4 % 
overall), and at a faster rate than any other form 
of land transport, except for motorcycles (24.6 % 
growth).  By  2006,  82.3 %  of  all  land  transport 
passenger-kilometres  were  made  by  car,  a  share 
that rose to over 90 % in Lithuania and in Slovenia. 
Th  e  Czech  Republic  (69.4 %),  Romania  (69.3 %), 
Bulgaria (68.9 %) and Hungary (61.1 %) were the 
only Member States where the car accounted for 
less than 70 % of total land transport passenger-
kilometres.

Cars
 (1)
15 557
524.8
43.5
132.5
162.6
3 148.2
30.9
186.5
279.8
1 614.8
2 064.5
2 490.6
22.9
32.5
21.1
52.6
173.0
6.2
504.2
296.4
293.3
201.9
312.5
65.5
59.7
125.6
306.8
2 404.0
114.4
:
540.0
16.2
129.2
285.6

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ 
DK 
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR 
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT 
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE 
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
NO
CH

New vehicle registrations
Goods vehicles
Commercial 
(>3.5t-<16t)
:
3.0
:
3.3
0.8
38.4
0.1
3.1
1.2
8.6
9.7
10.2

Heavy 
(>16t)
:
7.8
:
6.5
5.2
62.8
1.4
3.7
1.0
32.4
43.6
25.6

Light 
(<3.5t)
1 955
60.2
10.0
16.2
62.8
197.5
3.7
39.5
23.7
273.9
439.2
231.4

<--------------3.7-------------->
2.5
4.1
3.1
:

0.2
0.2
0.2
:

1.9
2.9
1.3
:

<--------------0.6-------------->
63.9
30.4
38.6
64.3
30.5
6.0
19.5
16.5
39.6
322.3
:
:
:
2.5
42.6
23.0

3.3
1.0
5.2
1.3
3.6
0.4
0.9
1.3
0.9
18.3
:
:
:
0.2
1.8
1.1

16.7
6.6
10.7
4.1
4.2
1.7
3.5
2.7
5.4
34.5
:
:
:
0.3
4.0
3.7

Buses 
and 
coaches
:
1.1
0.0
1.0
3.2
5.7
0.2
0.9
0.5
3.6
5.9
4.8
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.2
:
0.0
0.8
0.8
1.5
0.7
2.5
0.1
0.5
0.4
1.3
14.3
:
:
:
0.1
0.8
1.1

Stock

Goods 
vehicles
32 249
670
226
491
509
2 804
93
319
1 220
5 033
5 345
4 332
116
121
136
31
444
46
996
364
2 393
1 320
545
70
189
376
480
3 582
170
18
2 405
28
489
314

Buses 
and
coaches
797.9
15.3
22.8
21.1
14.6
83.5
5.4
8.0
26.9
58.3
92.2
96.1
3.2
10.6
15.1
1.4
17.7
1.1
10.8
9.3
83.5
15.0
40.4
2.3
8.8
11.2
13.6
109.6
4.9
2.3
533.5
1.9
27.0
46.4

Cars
229 954
4 976
1 768
4 109
2 020
46 570
554
1 802
4 543
20 637
31 002
35 297
373
822
1 592
315
2 954
218
7 230
4 205
13 384
4 290
3 603
980
1 334
2 506
4 202
28 667
1 436
260
6 141
197
2 084
3 900

(1) Data are for 2007; Croatia, 2006; Turkey, 2005.

Source: national statistics, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Association des Constructeurs Européens d’Automobiles

262

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   262
Consumers.indb   262

08.04.2009   09:52:17
08.04.2009   09:52:17

Transport

7

Table 7.7: World passenger and freight transport, 2006

Passenger transport (1)
(billion pkm)

Bus/ 
coach
523
227
88
:
139

Car
4 602
7 254
738
929
:

Tram/ 
metro
84
18
:
:
55

Water-
borne
40
1
4
7
1

Air 
(3)
547
939
83
205
94

Rail
384
23
391
606
177

Road
1 888
1 888
335
869
201

EU-27
US
Japan
China
Russia

Freight transport (2)
(billion tkm)
Inland 
waterway
138
468
:
1 112
58

Oil 
pipeline
135
835
:
109
2 499

Rail
435
2 531
23
2 073
1 951

Sea 
(3)
1 545
385
212
3 855
48

(1) United States, 2005, except rail, tram/metro and waterborne, 2004; Japan and China, 2005; Japan, passenger cars includes light vehicles; 
China, passenger cars includes buses and coaches.
(2) United States, Japan and China, 2005.
(3) Domestic/intra EU-27.

Source: Eurostat, Japan Statistics Bureau, US Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Goskom STAT (Russia), National Bureau of Statistics of China, 
International Transport Forum

Table 7.8: Average time spent per day travelling (1)
(minutes)

Walking

Travel 
to work

Travel for shopping

Transporting 
a child

Men 
12
16
13
10
39
20
23
12
8
17
19
12
9
4
13

Women
11
14
15
10
32
17
17
15
8
12
18
13
13
3
13

Men 
25
23
27
28
31
24
32
37
28
23
21
18
23
29
26

Women
15
17
13
20
18
15
15
24
20
14
16
14
17
17
18

Men 
16
12
16
13
7
-
12
12
13
14
11
11
16
16
14

Women
18
14
19
16
12
-
17
20
19
19
14
14
17
22
14

Men 
3
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
2

Women
4
1
4
3
6
5
6
3
1
3
3
3
5
9
3

Travel for
leisure activities
Men 
15
21
34
22
28
-
36
26
23
27
28
33
37
36
36

Women
16
13
33
18
24
-
27
23
19
25
23
31
35
34
33

BE
BG
DE
EE
ES
FR
IT
LV
LT
PL
SI
FI
SE
UK
NO

(1) Data are taken from national time use surveys (TUS) conducted between 1998 and 2004 and refer to men and women aged 20 to 74 years; data only shown for 
those countries participating in the survey; all remaining Member States, not available.

Source: Harmonised European Time Use Survey [online database version 2.0]; created 2005-2007 by Statistics Finland and 
Statistics Sweden [reference date 2007-10-01]; (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/)

Road travel was much less dominant in terms of 
freight transport within the EU-27, refl ecting the 
global  nature  of  trade,  geographical  limitations, 
as  well  as  the  high  cost  of  moving  bulky,  low 
valued items by road. Road transport accounted 
for  45.6 %  of  all  freight  transport-kilometres, 
somewhat higher than the share for sea transport 
(37.3 %).  Indeed,  among  the  trading  partners 
presented in Table 7.7, Japan was the only country 
to report that road transport (58.8 %) accounted 
for  more  than  half  of  all  freight  movements.  In 
the United States, rail transport accounted for the 
highest proportion (41.4 %) of freight transport-
kilometres. In China, both sea transport (48.1 %) 
and  rail  (25.8 %)  accounted  for  a  higher  share 

of freight transport than road (10.8 %), while in 
Russia,  oil  pipelines  (52.5 %)  and  rail  (41.0 %) 
accounted the overwhelming majority of freight 
transport-kilometres in 2006.

7.2.2 Frequency and time spent in travel

Individuals  may  travel  on  a  daily  basis  for  a 
variety  of  reasons,  including  trips  to  and  from 
work  or  school,  shopping,  or  leisure  activities. 
Time  use  surveys  give  an  indication  of  the 
amount of time spent per day spent travelling by 
adults aged between 20 and 74 years old (see Table 
7.8). Th  e amount of time spent going to and from 
work each day was lowest in Finland for men (18 

  Consumers in Europe

263

Consumers.indb   263
Consumers.indb   263

08.04.2009   09:52:18
08.04.2009   09:52:18

7

Transport

minutes on average) and in Germany for women 
(13 minutes on average), but highest in Latvia for 
both men (37 minutes) and women (24 minutes). 
Time spent by men travelling to leisure activities 
varied from 15 minutes (on average) in Belgium, 
to  37  minutes  in  Sweden,  with  a  similar  range 
(albeit from a low in Bulgaria) for women. Time 
spent travelling to the shops and in transporting 
children  was  generally  higher  among  women 
than among men. Women in the United Kingdom 
spent almost twice as long travelling for shopping 
as  women  in  Spain,  and  also  spent  longer  than 
others transporting children.

7.2.3 Consumption expenditure

Average household consumption expenditure on 
transport in the EU-27 was EUR 1 800 per person 
in 2006. Among the Member States for which data 
are  available,  national  averages  varied  widely, 
from EUR 400 per person in Poland and Slovakia 
to  EUR  5 400  per  person  in  Luxembourg  (see 
Table 7.9). Compared with average expenditure in 
2000, the sharpest rises were recorded in Estonia, 
Lithuania, Hungary, Romania and Slovakia, albeit 
from  among  the  lowest  levels.  Where  detailed 
data are available, these strong rises appeared to 
result  from  both  sharp  increases  in  the  volume 
component  of  fi nal  consumption  expenditure 
on  transport,  particularly  in  Estonia  where  the 
volume  of  consumption  more  than  doubled, 
as  well  as  from  price  increases  (see  Figure  7.4). 
Apart  from  the  United  Kingdom,  where  the 
price  component  remained  almost  unchanged, 
both  the  price  and  volume  components  of  fi nal 
consumption  of  transport  increased  during  the 
period  between  2000  and  2006  across  all  of  the 
Member States for which data are available.

Table 7.9: Final consumption expenditure 
of households, transport:  consumption per 
head
(EUR)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO (1)
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR (1)
IS
NO
CH

2000
1 500
1 800
200
400
1 900
1 900
300
1 700
900
1 200
2 000
1 800
1 700
200
300
4 100
400
1 200
1 500
1 900
300
1 200
100
1 000
200
1 600
1 900
2 600
600
3 000
2 500
1 800

2006
1 800
2 300
:
600
:
2 200
800
2 300
1 500
1 600
2 300
2 000
2 000
:
800
5 400
800
1 200
1 800
2 300
400
:
500
1 400
400
2 000
:
2 800
800
4 000
:
1 900

(1) 2006, forecast.

Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by 
consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_c)

Figure 7.4: Final consumption expenditure of households, transport: price and volume 
changes between 2000 and 2006 (1)
(%)

70
140

60
130
50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

EU-
27

EE HU EL

SK CZ TR

IS

PL

IE

LU SI

FI

ES UK AT CY BE

FR NL

IT MT DE

Prices

Volume

(1) Bulgaria, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Portugal, Romania, Sweden and Norway, not available; EU-27, volume, not available.
Source: Eurostat, Final consumption expenditure of households by consumption purpose (theme2/nama/nama_co2_k and nama_co2_p)

264

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   264
Consumers.indb   264

08.04.2009   09:52:18
08.04.2009   09:52:18

In  terms  of  comparable  price  levels,  the  2005 
HBS  data  shows  that  consumption  expenditure 
on  transport  in  purchasing  power  standard 
(PPS)  terms  was,  on  average,  PPS  3 078  across 
the  EU-27  as  a  whole.  Th  ere  were  considerable 
variations among the Member States, from lows 
of  about  PPS  350  in  Bulgaria  and  Romania  to 
a  high  of  PPS  8 403  in  Luxembourg  (see  Table 
7.10). Th  e highest proportion of EU-27 transport 
consumption  expenditure  in  2005  was  spent 
on  the  purchase  of  new  motor  cars,  although 
this was relatively closely followed by purchases 
of  fuel  and  lubricants.  Th  e  variation  between 
Member States in expenditure on new motor cars 
was particularly large (see Figure 7.5).

Transport

7

Table 7.10: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, transport, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

3 078
3 863
355
1 351
3 331
3 790
1 087
4 203
3 222
2 743
3 777
3 420
4 980
1 155
762
8 403
1 511
4 758
3 196
4 863
862
2 693
344
3 717
986
3 818
3 623
4 305
1 484
5 270

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

Figure 7.5: Mean consumption expenditure per household, transport, 2005
(PPS, minimum and maximum (vertical lines at end of horizontal line), inter-quartile range 
containing half of the Member States (box), median (vertical line within box))

0

1 000

2 000

3 000

4 000

5 000

6 000

Motor cars

Fuels & lubricants - personal transport equip.

Maintenance & repair - personal transport equip.

Other services - personal transport equip.

Spare parts & access. - personal transport equip.

Passenger transport by air

Passenger transport by road

Bicycles

Combined passenger transport

Passenger transport by railway

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_exp_t121)

  Consumers in Europe

265

Consumers.indb   265
Consumers.indb   265

08.04.2009   09:52:19
08.04.2009   09:52:19

7

Transport

Expenditure  on  transport  accounted  for  an 
average  11.9 %  of  total  household  consumption 
expenditure across the EU-27 in 2005. Among the 
Member States, this share was highest (between 
15 %  and  17 %)  in  Slovenia,  Finland,  Austria, 
Luxembourg  and  Malta  and  lowest  in  Romania 
(6.5 %) and Bulgaria (5.0 %) – see Figure 7.6.

Th  ere  was  also  a  wide  variation  in  the  relative 
weight  of  transport  in  total  expenditure  among 
various  socio-economic  groups;  the  average 
share of expenditure on transport rising steadily 
for  those  with  higher  incomes  (up  to  14.4 %  of 
total expenditure for the highest income quintile 
in  the  EU-27).  A  similar  pattern  was  seen  in 
terms  of  average  household  size,  as  the  share 
of  total  expenditure  on  transport  rose  steadily 
up  to  13.0 %  for  those  households  with  at  least 
three adults and dependent children. In contrast, 
the  proportion  of  household  budgets  spent  on 
transport was generally seen to fall as a function 
of age.

Figure 7.6: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of transport in total 
expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

5

10

15

20

NO
MT
LU
AT
FI
SI
CY
HU
DK
UK
FR
DE
SE
PT
BE
EU-27
IT
IE
LV
NL
ES
EL
EE
SK
HR
LT
PL
RO
BG

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

266

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   266
Consumers.indb   266

08.04.2009   09:52:19
08.04.2009   09:52:19

Transport

7

7.3 Prices

A  relatively  high  proportion  of  the  price  paid 
by  consumers  for  fuels  and  lubricants  may  be 
attributed to taxes and duties. Th  e data presented 
in  this  section  include  these  taxes  and  duties, 
which,  to  some  degree,  explain  some  of  the 
wide-ranging  diff erences  in  price  levels  and  the 
evolution of prices over time. Most Member States 
also  impose  some  form  of  sales  tax  or  vehicle 
registration tax, which may change as a function 
of engine-power or some other criteria; such taxes 
may be used to encourage consumers to purchase 
more environmentally-friendly vehicles.

7.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  ere was a continuous and relatively steady rise 
in  the  EU-27’s  harmonised  index  of  consumer 
prices  for  transport  in  the  period  between  2000 
and  2007  (see  Figure  7.7),  at  an  average  rate 
of  2.8 %  per  annum,  which  was  slightly  above 
the  rate  of  increase  recorded  for  the  all-items 
consumer  price  index  during  the  same  period 
(2.4 %).  Within  transport,  the  highest  price 
increases  across  the  EU-27  were  for  fuels  and 
lubricants, for passenger transport services (other 
than by air), and for the maintenance and repair 
of  personal  transport  (an  average  of  4.1 %  per 
annum, the highest increase).

In  the  period  between  2000  and  2007,  the 
consumer price index for transport rose for each 
of the Member States, relatively slowly in Finland 
(an average of 1.1 % per annum) and the Czech 
Republic (1.0 % per annum) and relatively sharply 
in Romania (an average of 17.0 %), despite slowing 
progressively and substantially to 1.7 % in 2007.

7.3.2 Price levels

A Eurobarometer survey on consumers’ opinions 
of services of general interest, carried out in May 
and  June  2006,  revealed  that  an  overwhelming 
majority (78 %) of respondents across the EU-25 
found  that  urban  transport  services  (transport 
within  rather  than  between  urban  areas)  were 
aff ordable.  Th  is  proportion  was  considerably 
higher than the 68 % recorded in 2004, with the 
share of respondents fi nding prices unaff ordable 
halving from 20 % to 10 % over the same period.

Th  ere  was  little  variation  in  the  perception  of 
aff ordability when viewed in terms of age, gender 
or education of respondents, although there were 
notable  diff erences  across  a  few  of  the  Member 
States; the share of respondents that found urban 
transport services aff ordable ranged from 55 % in 
Finland to 98 % in Greece. Over one third (37 %) 
of respondents in Finland found prices for these 
services unaff ordable, while over one fi ft h (22 %) 
of  respondents  in  the  Netherlands  found  them 
excessive (see Figure 7.8).

Figure 7.7: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

110

100

90

80

110

100

90

80

2001

2003

2005

2007

2001

2003

2005

2007

Transport

Purchase of vehicles

Spare parts & access. - pers. transp.

Maintenance & repair - pers. transp.

Fuels & lubricants - pers. transp.

Transport

Transport services

Passenger transport by railway

Passenger transport by road

Passenger transport by air

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

  Consumers in Europe

267

Consumers.indb   267
Consumers.indb   267

08.04.2009   09:52:19
08.04.2009   09:52:19

7

Transport

Th  e  same  Eurobarometer  survey  found  that  a 
similar proportion (74 %) of respondents across the 
EU-25 found rail services between towns and cities 
aff ordable. Again, the highest share was in Greece 
(97 %)  and  the  lowest  share  in  Finland  (53 %), 
where about one third (36 %) of respondents found 
prices for rail services unaff ordable.

Based on an analysis of price level indices among 
the Member States, the average price of transport 
was highest in Denmark, almost 50 % more than 

the  average  for  the  EU-27  (see  Figure  7.9),  and 
at  least  double  the  level  in  the  Czech  Republic, 
Latvia,  Lithuania,  Romania  and  Bulgaria.  Th  e 
lowest  price  levels  for  transport  were  recorded 
in  the  Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  since 
2004, with only the average price level in Greece 
breaking  this  trend.  Nevertheless,  disparities 
in  price  levels  for  transport  between  the  EU-27 
Member States narrowed considerably during the 
period from 2000 to 2007.

Figure 7.8: The aff ordability of transport 
services within towns and cities, 2007
(%)

Figure 7.9: Price level indices, transport, 
2007
(EU-27=100)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

0

50

100

150

200

EL

LT

MT

SK

CZ

BE

UK

AT

SI

IT

IE

LU

ES

LV

SE

FR

EU-25

HU

PT

DK

EE

NL

DE

CY

PL

FI

Affordable

Excessive

Not affordable

Unknown

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU transport policy’, Flash 
Eurobarometer 206b, European Commission

NO

DK

IS

FI

SE

UK

NL

IE

AT

CH

DE

EU-27

FR

BE

IT

PT

LU

ES

CY

TR

MT

HR

HU

EL

SI

PL

SK

EE

CZ

LV

LT

RO

MK

BG

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

268

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   268
Consumers.indb   268

08.04.2009   09:52:20
08.04.2009   09:52:20

Transport

7

Th  ere  are  considerable  variations  in  the  price 
of  particular  models  of  cars  across  the  EU-27. 
Table  7.11  presents  an  overview  of  the  pre-tax 
price diff erences for a selection of models across 
diff erent  market  segments,  with  the  lowest  pre-
tax  price  among  the  euro  area  Member  States 
benchmarked to 100 (note that variations between 
Member States in aft er-tax prices can be notably 
diff erent).

By way of example, the cost of a Fiat Panda varied 
by  a  little  over  one  third  (35.3 %)  between  the 
lowest  price  in  the  Netherlands  and  the  highest 
in Slovakia. Th  e price spread on the Peugeot 207 
was  almost  the  same,  the  price  in  France  being 
nearly a third higher than the lowest pre-tax price 
which was off ered in Malta.

In  comparison  to  price  variations  observed  for 
mini, small, medium and multi-purpose models, 
the  variations  in  price  for  large,  executive  and 
luxury  car  models  (BMW,  Mercedes  and  Audi 
models  in  the  table)  was  much  narrower,  while 
lower  prices  were  more  frequently  observed  in 
non-euro area countries.

Overall, the lowest car prices within the euro area 
tended to be in Finland (around a quarter of the 
87 models covered by the European Commission’s 
car price report for 2008), followed by Greece and 
Slovenia.  However,  among  all  of  the  Member 
States,  pre-tax  prices  in  Denmark  tended  to  be 
even  lower.  Within  the  euro  area,  pre-tax  car 
prices in Germany tended to be most expensive 
(for  27  of  the  87  models),  although  outside  the 
euro  area,  prices  in  the  Czech  Republic  were 
generally higher than in Germany.

Table 7.11: Price diff erences, 1 January 2008
(lowest price among euro area Member States=100)

FIAT 
Panda
130.0
107.4
129.0
110.2
133.2
115.0
130.9
119.6
116.6
122.7
119.7
127.5
123.8
108.4
130.0
106.1
108.9
100.0
132.2
125.8
114.5
115.4
115.9
135.3
120.6
116.6
113.0

PEUGEOT
 207
129.9
113.9
124.1
102.8
132.0
119.7
127.1
113.3
126.0
132.6
118.3
109.7
130.0
120.9
129.9
102.6
100.0
122.4
125.4
115.4
114.1
105.1
109.1
117.8
114.0
107.5
113.8

RENAULT
 Mégane
109.0
87.5
120.2
114.4
113.0
:
110.3
:
102.7
117.3
105.9
:
95.4
98.6
109.0
96.4
:
106.4
107.8
104.3
100.0
89.9
106.3
106.3
116.7
97.0
104.7

BMW
 320d
104.3
98.2
114.0
103.3
109.1
104.2
106.7
106.6
108.4
108.1
108.4
104.0
104.9
105.4
104.5
101.8
112.0
104.4
107.5
112.5
108.7
101.9
100.0
107.7
103.9
97.2
98.6

MERCEDES
 E220
107.8
106.2
112.9
107.9
108.0
101.6
108.0
108.0
107.7
108.2
109.3
105.4
106.0
101.7
108.0
105.0
106.7
105.0
107.3
110.1
102.3
110.9
105.8
112.2
100.0
99.4
94.9

AUDI
A8
102.3
99.0
111.8
93.6
103.0
99.8
101.5
103.2
104.0
102.3
102.5
102.9
99.8
99.8
101.3
102.8
:
102.7
102.9
103.4
104.8
101.5
100.0
106.7
107.4
93.3
81.6

VOLVO
XC90
103.0
95.9
117.0
94.7
100.7
102.1
107.1
109.1
104.0
101.7
104.0
102.5
101.9
102.7
103.6
99.1
102.6
108.8
100.0
111.3
104.4
102.8
110.1
107.5
100.8
95.7
94.1

BE
BG
CZ
DK 
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT 
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT 
NL
AT 
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK 
FI 
SE
UK 

Source: Car price report April 2008, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

269

Consumers.indb   269
Consumers.indb   269

08.04.2009   09:52:21
08.04.2009   09:52:21

7

Transport

Table 7.12: Excise duty, VAT and tax revenues, 2008

Excise duty 
(EUR per 
1 000 litres)
637.7
(424.4)
497.9
635.3
721.0
421.7
553.0
409.0
428.8
639.6
564.0
421.0
(421.9)
421.1
(516.7)
444.7
(523.2)
767.2
514.0 & 547.0
485.4
650.0
421.2
421.6
530.6
(653.5)
654.8
861.4

BE
BG (2)
CZ
DK 
DE
EE
IE
EL (3)
ES
FR
IT (4)
CY (4)
LV (2)
LT
LU (2)
HU
MT (2)
NL
AT  (4)
PL (3)
PT
RO
SI
SK (4)
FI (2)
SE
UK (3)

Leaded petrol

Tax revenues 
other than 
VAT, 2007 

(EUR million) VAT (%)
21.0
2.3
(20.0)
0.0
19.0
0.3
25.0
0.0
19.0
9.7
18.0
0.0
21.0
0.0
19.0
:
16.0
0.2
19.6
15.0
20.0
:
15.0
:
(18.0)
0.0
18.0
0.0
(15.0)
0.1
20.0
22.9
(18.0)
0.0
19.0
0.0
20.0
:
22.0
:
21.0
:
19.0
2.0
20.0
0.2
19.0
:
(22.0)
0.0
25.0
0.0
17.5
0.0

Unleaded petrol (1)

Excise duty 
(EUR per 
1 000 litres)
555.1-611.9
350.2
430.0
547.4
654.5-669.8
359.2
442.7 & 547.8
349.0-352.0
395.7 & 426.9
606.9 & 639.6
564.0
298.7
323.9
323.2
462.1 & 464.6
411.7-462.57
404.4
689.0
442.0 & 475.0
437.1
583.0
327.3
359.0
458.4
627.0
398.1-578.6
722.0

Tax revenues 
other than 
VAT, 2007 

(EUR million) VAT (%)
21.0
20.0
19.0
25.0
19.0
18.0
21.0
19.0
16.0
19.6
20.0
15.0
18.0
18.0
15.0
20.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
22.0
21.0
19.0
20.0
19.0
22.0
25.0
17.5

1 260.8
529.9
1 186.2
1 234.9
18 805.2
131.5
1 079.4
1 776.4
3 245.5
16 302.0
:
:
150.7
161.8
265.8
848.6
40.0
4 017.8
:
5 552.1
1 165.1
721.2
298.9
:
1 440.6
2 781.0
17 360.7

(1) Variations in excise duty reﬂ ect the octane rating (such as Oct. 95, 97 or 98), differences in sulphur content (such as < or > 10mg/kg) or 
comparisons with unleaded petrol substitutes.
(2) Leaded petrol no longer sold.
(3) No distinction in revenues between leaded and unleaded petrol.
(4) No distinction made between leaded and unleaded petrol, diesel, LPG and methane, heavy fuel oil; the total revenue from these 
streams was EUR 22 857.3 million in Italy, EUR 272.9 million in Cyprus, EUR 3 688.8 million in Austria and EUR 1 902.5 million in Slovakia.
(5) Aviation gasoline excluded.

Source: Directorate-General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission

Aside  from  diff erences  in  the  price  of  vehicles, 
there  are  also  considerable  diff erences  in  the 
costs  of  running  vehicles  once  they  have  been 
purchased.  Part  of  the  aggregate  price  of  the 
running costs associated with personal transport 
is  comprised  of  fuel:  in  this  respect  Table  7.12 
shows  the  diff erences  in  excise  duties  and  VAT 
on  petrol:  in  broad  terms,  excise  duties  were 
lowest among the Member States that joined the 

EU  since  2004.  Th  e  lowest  excise  duty  rate  for 
unleaded petrol (leaded petrol not being sold or 
barely sold in most EU countries) on 1 July 2008 
was  in  Cyprus  (EUR  0.30  per  litre)  and  highest 
in the United Kingdom (EUR 0.72 per litre). VAT 
rates on petrol also varied from a low of 15 % in 
Luxembourg  to  highs  of  25 %  in  Denmark  and 
Sweden.

270

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   270
Consumers.indb   270

08.04.2009   09:52:21
08.04.2009   09:52:21

Transport

7

7.4 Consumer satisfaction and 
complaints

Figure 7.10: Ranking of the level of 
transport treatment, 2006
(points)

Th  ere  are  many  indicators  that  may  be  used 
to  cover  consumer  satisfaction  with  transport 
services:  these  include  punctuality,  comfort, 
safety  and  scheduling.  While  some  can  be 
measured objectively, others are more subjective. 
Th  e fi rst part of this section focuses on subjective 
opinions concerning how passengers are treated 
and  whether  they  are  satisfi ed  with  the  quality 
of their transport services. Th  e second half also 
uses  subjective  information  from  a  consumer 
satisfaction  survey  that  provides  details  of 
consumers’ opinions of the retail network for the 
sale of motor vehicles.

In  its  December  2006  report  for  the  European 
‘evaluating  and  monitoring 
Commission  on 
trends  with  regard  to  passenger  needs  on  the 
level  of  service  and  treatment  of  passengers’, 
the  Nexus  Institute  ranked  EU-25  Member 
States  according  to  their  level  of  passenger 
treatment, taking into consideration factors such 
as  the  handling  of  complaints,  guarantees  and 
passengers’  perceptions.  Among  the  Member 
States, the United Kingdom achieved the highest 
overall score (see Figure 7.10), with wide-ranging 
customer  charters  and  guarantee  schemes  and 
high standards for handling customer complaints. 
Sweden, France and then Germany were the next 
highest ranked Member States, generally lagging 
behind  the  United  Kingdom  in  the  handling  of 
complaints.  Th  e  Member  States  that  joined  the 
EU since 2004 tended to have among the lowest 
score in terms of passenger treatment, generally 
refl ecting  a  low  use  of  charters  and  guarantees, 
and a low or moderate perception of the schemes 
in place; Austria and Luxembourg were also near 
the bottom of the ranking for the same reasons.

0

5

10

15

UK
SE
FR
DE
NL
FI
IE
BE
DK
ES
EE (1)
LT (1)
PT (1)
SI (1)
EL
IT
HU (1)
LU
PL (1)
CY (2)
AT
CZ
LV (1)
SK
MT

(1) Evaluation based on limited information.
(2) Evaluation based on very limited information.
(3) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: Nexus Institute for the European Commission, ﬁ nal report 
on ‘Evaluating and monitoring trends with regard to passenger 
needs on the level of service and treatment of passengers’, 
December 2006.

indicates 

for  2006 

Among  the  EU-27’s  capital  cities,  Eurostat’s 
perception  survey 
that 
passengers  were  most  satisfi ed  with  their  urban 
transport systems in Vienna (91 %) and Helsinki 
(93 %).  In  contrast,  a  majority  of  passengers  in 
Rome (56 %), Bratislava (57 %), Sofi a (67 %) and 
Nicosia (73 %) were rather or strongly dissatisfi ed 
with  their  public  transport  systems  (see  Table 
7.13).

  Consumers in Europe

271

Consumers.indb   271
Consumers.indb   271

08.04.2009   09:52:22
08.04.2009   09:52:22

7

Transport

Table 7.13: Satisfaction with public transport in capital cities, 
2006
(% of respondents)

Satisfied with 
public transport 
(synthetic index 0-100)
67.5
25.8
78.6
68.9
86.7
60.3
67.7
77.6
67.2
76.6
40.0
18.4
69.3
69.0
79.1
50.6
53.6
83.7
91.9
74.8
62.7
42.7
70.8
34.0
94.9
76.7
72.7

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London

Satisfied 
(rather+
strong)
61.6
23.5
71.6
64.9
81.0
52.6
64.9
70.2
64.9
74.8
37.5
16.4
63.8
58.9
72.6
46.9
41.6
81.5
90.8
66.9
55.4
39.3
62.0
29.5
93.1
75.2
67.9

Unsatisfied
(rather+
strong)
29.6
67.3
19.5
29.3
12.4
34.6
30.9
20.2
31.7
22.8
56.2
72.5
28.3
26.4
19.2
45.7
36.0
15.8
8.0
22.6
32.9
52.7
25.5
57.2
5.0
22.8
25.5

Source: Eurostat, Perception surveys (theme1/urb/urb_percep)

Whereas  consumer  dissatisfaction  with  urban 
transport  may  be  city  specifi c,  an  IPSOS 
consumer  satisfaction  survey  for  the  European 
Commission suggests that a majority (53.8 %) of 
consumers in Cyprus were dissatisfi ed with their 
urban transport suppliers in 2006, while almost a 
third were dissatisfi ed in Slovakia. Th  e countries 
where  urban  transport  satisfaction  rates  were 
highest  included  Ireland,  Finland,  Latvia  and 
Austria (all between 60 % and 66 %).

Th  e  same  survey  by  IPSOS  also  measured  the 
satisfaction  of  consumers  with  extra-urban 
transport suppliers (Figure 7.11) and air transport 
suppliers  (Figure  7.12).  About  three  quarters 
(72.4 %)  of  passengers  in  Ireland  were  satisfi ed 
with their bus and rail transport services outside 
of urban areas (in between towns and cities), the 
highest  proportion  among  the  Member  States 
in  2006,  while  almost  two  thirds  of  passengers 
in  Finland,  Lithuania  and  Latvia  were  also 
satisfi ed.  In  contrast,  only  about  one  quarter  of 
the passengers living in Italy and the Netherlands 
expressed  their  satisfaction  with  extra-urban 
transport services.

Among  the  EU-25  Member  States,  there  was 
generally a much higher rate of satisfaction with 
air transport suppliers, with a little over 80 % of 
respondents in Germany, Cyprus, Hungary and 
Austria expressing satisfaction. In contrast, only 
about half of all respondents in the Netherlands 
(52.9 %) and Italy (51.1 %) expressed satisfaction, 
with an even lower proportion (45.0 %) in Spain 
expressing their satisfaction.

Figure 7.11: Satisfaction with extra-urban transport suppliers, 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

100

75

50

25

0

IE

FI

LT

LV

EL

EE

PT

UK

LU

SE

FR

BE

SI

HU AT

PL

CZ

ES

DE DK

SK

IT

NL

EU-
25

(1) Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta and Romania, not available.

Source: IPSOS INRA for the European Commission, Consumer satisfaction survey, May 2007

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

272

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   272
Consumers.indb   272

08.04.2009   09:52:22
08.04.2009   09:52:22

Figures collected by the Directorate-General for 
Health and Consumers show that when averaged 
across all EU airlines, the principal complaints by 
passengers in 2007 related to cancellations (24 %), 
delays  (21 %),  poor  customer  assistance  (17 %) 
and  lost  or  delayed  luggage  (11 %)  –  see  Figure 
7.13  –  with  other  complaints  (20 %)  comprising 
problems  associated  with  information  requests, 
ticketing, national enforcement bodies and issues 
of a general nature. Th  e fi gures collected show a 
large decline (40 %) in complaints between 2006 
and  2007,  with  large  reductions  in  the  number 
of  complaints  concerning  cancellations  and 
delays. Th  e highest proportions of air passenger 
complaints  among  EU  airlines  in  2007  were 
received  by  Iberia  (12.9 %),  Ryanair  (8.3 %)  and 
Alitalia (6.2 %).

Figure 7.12: Satisfaction with air transport 
suppliers, 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

DE

CY

HU

AT

LT

FI

EL

CZ

SI

LV

PL

UK

IE

LU

EU-25

DK

EE

PT

MT

SE

SK

BE

FR

NL

IT

ES

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: IPSOS INRA for the European Commission, Consumer 
satisfaction survey, May 2007

Transport

7

Turning  attention  to  motor  vehicle  retailers,  a 
consumer satisfaction survey conducted in 2008 
found that on a scale of 1 (not at all satisfi ed) to 
10 (fully satisfi ed), an average of 8.4 was recorded 
for satisfaction with motor vehicle retailers – see 
Figure 7.14.

Figure 7.13: Airline customer complaints, 2007 
(%) 

Others
20%

Cancellations
24%

Denied 
boarding 
7%

Baggage
11%

Poor 
assistance
17%

Delays
21%

Source: Directorate-General Health and Consumers, European Commission

Figure 7.14: Overall, to what extent are you 
satisfi ed with your retailer when it comes to 
buying new motor vehicles, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

LT
HU
CZ
AT
EE
DE
BG
CY
EL
UK
SI
BE
SK
EU-27
RO
LU
MT
DK
PL
FI
IE
SE
PT
FR
LV
NL
IT
ES

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (not at all satisﬁ ed) to 10 (fully satisﬁ ed).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

  Consumers in Europe

273

Consumers.indb   273
Consumers.indb   273

08.04.2009   09:52:23
08.04.2009   09:52:23

7

Transport

Figure 7.15: Problems faced by consumers when purchasing new motor vehicles in the past 
12 months, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% share of those experiencing problems, multiple answers allowed)

0

10

20

30

40

Quality of product

Repair

Delivery (late or not at all)

Claims for goods under guarantee

Quality of service

Product safety

Contractual terms and conditions

Price (too high/not indicated/wrongly advertised)

Incorrect labelling/information

Unhelpful or obstructive retailer 

Selling methods

Refund or cancellation

Returning unwanted goods

(1) When purchasing new motor vehicles in 2008, 15.3 % of EU-27 consumers reported facing at least one problem; note that consumers 
may have faced more than one problem.

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

As  with  other  products  covered  by  the  survey, 
the main problem faced by consumers who had 
purchased  a  new  motor  vehicle  in  the  twelve 
months preceding the survey was product quality 
(cited by 38.1 % of respondents). In contrast, the 
relative importance of problems associated with 
repairs, late delivery and claims under guarantee 
were  considerable  higher  than  for  many  of  the 
other products surveyed – see Figure 7.15.

When asked if they thought their retailer would 
replace, repair, reduce the price, or give them their 
money back for the purchase of a defective car, on 
a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree), 
the average score in the EU-27 was 7.8, with the 
lowest levels in Bulgaria (6.2) and the highest in 
Ireland (9.2) – see Figure 7.16.

274

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   274
Consumers.indb   274

08.04.2009   09:52:23
08.04.2009   09:52:23

Transport

7

Figure 7.16: Do you agree that your retailer 
would replace, repair, reduce the price or 
give you your money back if the new motor 
vehicle you had bought was defective or not 
fi t for purpose, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

IE
LT
HU
CZ
AT
EE
BE
DE
EL
UK
LU
CY
SI
FI
EU-27
DK
SK
RO
FR
PL
PT
LV
IT
MT
ES
SE
NL
BG

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

7.5 Quality and safety

One 
important  measure  of  the  quality  of 
transport services concerns delays in getting from 
A to B. Regarding fl ight travel, Regulation (EC) 
No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of 
the Council increased the level of compensation 
airlines  must  pay  passengers  denied  boarding 
and introduced new compensation and assistance 
rights  in  the  event  of  cancelled  fl ights  and  long 
delays (depending on the length of the fl ight, this 
could be 2, 3 or 4 hours).

Records of airlines’ delay rates on intra- and extra-
European  services  are  collected  and  published 
on  a  twice-yearly  basis  by  the  Association  of 
European  Airlines  (AEA).  In  2007  there  was  a 
marginal  decline  in  punctuality;  as  78.9 %  of 
departures  for  intra-European  services  were 
within  15  minutes  of  schedule,  compared  with 
79.4 %  in  2006.  All  of  the  airlines  covered  by 
AEA reported that a majority of their short and 
medium haul fl ights arrived on time. Th  e largest 
proportion  of  delayed  (by  at  least  15  minutes) 
short  and  medium  haul  fl ights  was  recorded  by 
TAP Portugal (40.5 %). For long haul destinations, 
only  36.6 %  of  Spanair  fl ights  arrived  on  time, 
while a majority of TAP Portugal fl ights were also 
delayed (see Table 7.14).

Th  e AEA states that, on average, 85 % of delayed 
bags  are  traced  and  delivered  to  the  passenger 
within 48 hours. Th  e number of bags delayed (bags 
reported as delayed upon the passengers’ arrival 
at their fi nal destination) per thousand passengers 
was  16.6  in  2007  (slightly  up  on  the  average  for 
the year before, 15.7). TAP Portugal recorded the 
highest rate of delayed baggage, at 27.8 bags per 
thousand passengers, slightly higher than the rate 
for British Airways (26.5); none of the remaining 
airlines reported baggage delays for more than 20 
items  per  thousand  passengers,  with  the  lowest 
rates registered by Air Malta and Turkish Airlines 
(both below fi ve bags per thousand passengers).

  Consumers in Europe

275

Consumers.indb   275
Consumers.indb   275

08.04.2009   09:52:24
08.04.2009   09:52:24

7

Transport

Table 7.14: Flight delays (of greater than 15 minutes) and lost baggage, 2007 (1)

Carrier
AF - Air France
AP - Air One
AY - Finnair
AZ - Alitalia
BA - British Airways plc
BD - bmi
CY - Cyprus Airways
FI - Icelandair
IB - Iberia
JK - Spanair
JP - Adria Airways
JU - JAT Airways
KL - KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
KM - Air Malta
LG - Luxair
LH - Deutsche Lufthansa AG
LO - LOT Polish Airlines
LX - Swiss International Airlines
MA - Malev Hungarian Airlines
OA - Olympic Airlines
OK - CSA Czech Airlines
OS - Austrian
OU - Croatia Airlines
RO - Tarom Romanian Airlines
SK - SAS Scandinavian Airlines
SN - Brussels Airlines
TK - Turkish Airlines
TP - TAP Portugal
Association of European Airlines

Short and medium haul
On-time 
arrivals
(%)
82.1
65.8
81.0
74.7
64.7
79.4
64.3
66.3
77.8
62.9
73.9
75.6
84.9
68.6
86.6
81.2
73.9
79.3
84.0
68.9
81.8
84.1
72.8
82.2
80.6
83.1
79.1
59.5
77.7

On-time 
departures 
(%)
81.5
73.7
80.6
77.9
67.5
81.5
70.6
76.8
81.3
71.3
73.8
79.6
80.5
67.5
88.1
80.2
76.4
78.2
83.1
68.9
88.6
83.7
77.5
88.8
80.1
83.4
83.8
62.5
78.9

Number  of 
flights 
(unit)
501 477
90 804
79 292
252 802
235 182
121 085
15 606
6 896
357 520
99 866
21 154
19 975
182 333
16 668
11 655
619 131
86 481
116 874
49 606
86 447
72 982
155 248
22 244
13 568
291 757
70 906
151 714
75 153
3 824 426

Number  of 
flights 
(unit)
55 528
-
5 941
13 298
60 126
1 732
-
2 595
17 718
656
-
-
31 052
-
-
49 067
2 989
13 428
1 085
1 779
1 392
6 761
-
-
6 338
3 434
9 470
11 200
295 589

Long haul
On-time 
arrivals
(%)
63.7
-
70.5
71.6
56.2
73.8
-
69.2
64.1
36.6
-
-
76.4
-
-
74.3
56.3
75.6
64.4
62.8
73.9
82.1
-
-
74.3
58.3
59.5
40.3
65.9

On-time 
departures 
(%)
61.6
-
68.7
74.5
61.5
76.2
-
76.7
70.2
44.2
-
-
71.7
-
-
73.0
54.5
73.5
71.5
59.6
86.4
79.5
-
-
76.0
51.7
69.2
42.5
66.7

Bags 
delayed
per 1 000 
persons
17.6
9.9
15.8
19.7
26.5
17.0
8.8
11.1
13.8
15.4
9.8
:
19.7
4.5
17.2
15.8
13.9
11.4
9.5
:
12.4
12.9
9.3
9.5
14.8
11.7
4.5
27.8
16.6

(1) Aer Lingus and Virgin Atlantic Airways are members of AEA, but no information was provided; information based on voluntary submissions from airlines; short/
medium haul includes operations within Europe, cross border and domestic, to North Africa and the Middle East; all other services are included in long haul; bags 
reported delayed upon the passengers’ arrival at their ﬁ nal destination (on average 85% of delayed bags are traced and delivered to the passenger within 48 hours).

Source: Association of European Airlines (www.aea.be)

(21) EU-27 Member States 
and Albania, Armenia, 
Azerbaijan, Belarus, 
Bosnia-Herzegovina, 
Croatia, former 
Yugoslav Republic 
of Macedonia, 
Georgia, Moldova, 
Norway, Serbia 
and Montenegro, 
Switzerland, Turkey and 
the Ukraine.

(22) Small airports: 5 000 to 
20 000 ﬂ ights per year 
under instrument ﬂ ight 
rules (IFR) and under 
the control of a (civilian) 
air traﬃ  c controller for 
some or all of the route; 
medium-sized airports: 
between 20 000 and 
50 000 such ﬂ ights; 
large airports: between 
50 000 and 200 000 
such ﬂ ights; very large 
airports: between 
200 000 and 500 000 
such ﬂ ights.

For European (21) fl ights, a Eurocontrol report on 
trends  in  air  traffi  c,  ‘A  Place  to  Stand:  Airports 
in  the  European  Air  Network’  suggests  that 
there is little to distinguish airports of diff erent 
size  as  regards  delays  en  route;  as  the  average 
length  of  a  delayed  air  traffi  c  fl ow  management 
(ATFM)  fl ight  in  2006  was  16  minutes  for  all 
sizes  of  airport.  However,  delays  on  arrival 
were up to 50 % longer for fl ights to medium or 
small  airports  (22)  compared  with  fl ights  to  large 
airports; this may be due to small and medium-
sized  airports  lacking  developed  infrastructure 
and therefore being less able to respond to peaks 
in demand.

According to a Eurobarometer survey on attitudes 
related to EU transport policy, the overwhelming 
majority (90 %) of respondents in May 2007 were 
of the belief that there was a need to improve the 
traffi  c  situation  in  their  cities  and  surrounding 
areas.  In  most  of  the  EU-15  Member  States,  a 

majority  of  respondents  felt  that  better  public 
transport would improve the traffi  c situation, the 
highest rates being recorded in Portugal (59.7 %), 
the  United  Kingdom  (59.8 %),  Italy  (62.4 %) 
and Ireland (67.0 %) – see Table 7.15. Th  is share 
was  considerably  lower  in  most  of  the  Member 
States  that  joined  the  EU  since  2004,  the  lowest 
proportion  being  in  Bulgaria  (21.2 %).  A  higher 
proportion  of  respondents  in  Bulgaria  (38.7 %) 
believed  that  speed  limitations  would  improve 
the  traffi  c  situation  in  cities,  relatively  high 
shares  also  being  recorded  among  respondents 
in  Lithuania  (25.8 %)  and  Poland  (27.6 %). 
Limitations  on  traffi  c  fl ows  in  city  centres  were 
considered  by  one  third  (33.0 %)  of  respondents 
in Greece as the most eff ective way for improving 
the  traffi  c  situation,  the  highest  proportion 
among  the  Member  States,  while  over  a  quarter 
of  respondents  in  the  Czech  Republic,  Latvia, 
Lithuania and Slovakia also took this view.

276

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   276
Consumers.indb   276

08.04.2009   09:52:24
08.04.2009   09:52:24

Transport

7

Table 7.15: Attitudes to improving city traffi  c situations, 2007
(% of respondents)

Better public 
transport
48.5
46.9
21.2
39.5
46.3
45.0
38.8
67.0
41.2
58.2
46.1
62.4
57.3
25.0
24.4
55.6
33.9
44.0
53.1
52.2
27.1
59.7
39.1
45.1
36.7
52.7
52.0
59.8

City 
limitations
16.8
17.1
21.4
26.4
12.0
14.2
16.1
13.2
33.0
14.0
18.8
14.8
9.7
25.8
25.7
9.3
24.0
19.3
14.4
12.8
21.8
17.3
14.7
20.1
26.9
15.5
14.5
14.4

Speed 
limitations
16.5
18.8
38.7
13.4
17.3
17.4
18.9
9.8
13.0
13.7
20.0
10.4
22.0
20.7
25.8
17.2
20.6
20.7
13.7
9.2
27.6
8.8
17.0
24.5
21.2
12.2
14.2
12.4

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK 
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT 
CY 
LV 
LT
LU
HU
MT 
NL
AT 
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Road 
charges
4.8
5.1
3.7
7.9
8.4
6.9
3.1
6.4
5.4
1.1
4.5
1.8
4.5
6.8
5.8
5.1
2.9
3.5
5.3
7.2
3.5
2.4
9.5
2.8
4.0
4.8
6.6
5.9

No 
need to 
improve
5.9
6.3
2.7
4.0
9.0
9.9
12.3
0.4
1.9
6.1
5.0
4.2
1.6
10.3
7.9
6.4
10.1
3.3
6.8
9.9
6.4
6.6
6.2
2.4
4.5
8.0
5.0
1.3

Other 
and do 
not know
7.5
5.8
12.3
8.8
7.0
6.6
10.8
3.2
5.5
6.9
5.6
6.4
4.9
11.4
10.4
6.4
8.5
9.2
6.7
8.7
13.6
5.2
13.5
5.1
6.7
6.8
7.7
6.2

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU transport policy’, Flash Eurobarometer 206b, European Commission

Improving travel safety has been a long-standing 
area of EU policy: one of the main areas of focus 
has  been  to  improve  road  safety,  for  example, 
through  legislation  on  speed  limits,  maximum 
blood alcohol levels for drivers, or vehicle safety 
legislation. During the period between 1990 and 

2006, the number of road fatalities in the EU-27 
declined  sharply,  overall  by  43.4 %,  to  some 
42 953  deaths  in  2006.  Over  the  same  period, 
the  number  of  road  fatalities  more  than  halved 
in  Portugal,  France,  Latvia,  Spain,  Germany, 
Estonia and Denmark.

  Consumers in Europe

277

Consumers.indb   277
Consumers.indb   277

08.04.2009   09:52:25
08.04.2009   09:52:25

7

Transport

Table 7.16: Road fatalities, 2006

(per million 
inhabitants)
24.6
44.7
49.0
54.4
56.3
61.8
63.8
76.2
76.8
86.3
87.3
88.1
91.6
93.0
96.2
101.3
103.5
107.4
111.3
114.8
129.0
130.6
135.5
137.5
148.6
151.8
177.9
223.6

MT
NL
SE
UK
DK
DE
FI
LU
FR
IE
EU-27
AT
PT
ES
IT
BE
CZ
SK
CY
RO
HU
SI
BG
PL
EL
EE
LV
LT

(per 10 
billion pkm)
44.7
47.6
48.4
48.8
53.0
54.1
55.8
57.3
63.9
73.8
90.0
96.2
99.7
112.7
117.2
129.6
130.8
145.8
167.5
174.4
175.3
190.6
215.0
234.9
256.5
271.2
328.0
397.8

SE
UK
NL
MT
FI
LU
DK
DE
FR
IT
EU-27
BE
AT
SI
ES
IE
PT
CZ
CY
EL
EE
LT
SK
PL
LV
HU
BG
RO

(per million 
passenger cars)
46.4
101.9
106.5
109.9
115.7
115.8
136.1
153.1
153.6
162.1
174.6
189.0
200.7
211.1
216.1
228.3
236.2
263.5
270.0
374.6
389.4
407.6
439.1
446.0
484.5
498.1
520.3
711.3

MT
NL
SE
DE
UK
LU
FI
FR
DK
IT
AT
EU-27
ES
IE
BE
PT
CY
CZ
SI
EL
EE
PL
SK
HU
BG
LT
LV
RO

Source: CARE database, Directorate-General Transport and Energy, European Commission, 
International Transport Forum, national statistics

Despite relatively sharp declines in road deaths in 
all Member States (with the exception of Malta) 
during  a  period  of  rising  traffi  c  volumes,  there 
remain considerable diff erences between Member 
States.  In  terms  of  road  fatalities  per  million 
inhabitants,  the  lowest  rates  of  fatalities  were 
recorded in Malta, the Netherlands, Sweden and 
the  United  Kingdom.  Th  e  same  four  countries 
were  also  the  safest  in  terms  of  fatalities  per 
passenger-kilometre (see Table 7.16).

Among  the  EU-15  Member  States,  passenger 
fatalities in accidents involving railways also fell 
in  recent  decades.  While  almost  400  passengers 
were killed in road accidents in 1970, and more 
than 300 in 1980, by 1990 this fi gure had dropped 
to  165.  Th  e  trend  continued,  such  that  by  2000 
there  were  117  passenger  fatalities  in  railway 
accidents, and despite a rise to 121 deaths in 2002, 
the downward trend was thereaft er re-established, 
as 51 deaths were registered in the EU-15 in 2005 
(65 deaths for the EU-27).

Th  e number of lives lost in aviation accidents over 
the territory of the EU-27 on fl ights made by any 
operator  averaged  between  200  and  300  deaths 
each year during the 1970s and 1980s. Th  is value 
was considerably reduced in the 1990s when, on 
average, 57 lives were lost per annum. Despite a 
rapid increase in the volume of air transport in the 
last decade, the number of travellers whose lives 
were  lost  remained  relatively  stable,  as  between 
2000 and 2007 there was an average of 63 persons 
killed each year over EU-27 territory, with 4 and 
3 deaths respectively in 2006 and 2007.

Measures to improve airport security have been 
stepped up in recent years to counter the perceived 
threat from terrorism. In a Eurobarometer survey 
on  attitudes  relating  to  EU  transport  policy, 
respondents were asked whether they considered 
security controls at airports as being appropriate. 
Of the 57 % of respondents who were in a position 
to judge (infrequent fl yers were excluded), about 
six  out  of  every  ten  persons  across  the  EU-27 
thought  security  controls  were  appropriate  (see 
Figure 7.17). A higher proportion of regular fl yers 
thought  that  airport  security  was  insuffi  cient 
(24 %)  when  compared  with  the  proportion 
that  thought  that  it  was  excessive  (15 %)  –  this 
position was strongest among regular fl yers from 
Italy,  Cyprus,  Bulgaria  and  Poland.  In  contrast, 
about one third of regular fl yers from Denmark 
(31 %), the Netherlands (32 %) and Austria (34 %) 
thought that airport security was excessive.

278

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   278
Consumers.indb   278

08.04.2009   09:52:25
08.04.2009   09:52:25

Transport

7

Figure 7.18: To what extent do you agree 
that new motor vehicles sold by your retailer 
are reliable (i.e. they work well and without 
failure for a reasonable period of time) and 
safe, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

0

2

4

6

8

10

LT
IE
CZ
EL
HU
AT
UK
CY
DE
EE
BE
RO
SI
LU
SK
EU-27
FR
FI
BG
NL
PT
DK
LV
MT
SE
PL
IT
ES

Figure 7.17: Opinion about airport security 
controls among regular fl yers, 2007
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

PL

BG

CY

IT

PT

LT

EL

ES

RO

LV

SK

MT

EU-27

CZ

BE

DE

UK

FR

LU

EE

NL

IE

SI

SE

HU

DK

AT

FI

Insufficient

Appropriate 

Excessive

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU transport policy’, 
Flash Eurobarometer 206b, European Commission

Reliable
Safe

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

As  regards  the  safety  of  personal  transport 
equipment,  a  consumer  satisfaction  survey 
conducted  in  2008  asked  respondents  to  rate 
the  extent  to  which  they  thought  new  motor 
vehicles  were  reliable  and  safe.  On  a  scale  of  1 
(totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree), an average 
score  of  8.4  was  registered  across  the  EU-27  for 

reliability and 8.5 for safety. Th  ere was generally 
a close relationship, as only Slovenia and Sweden 
reported  diff erences  of  more  than  0.2  points  in 
average  scores  for  the  two  indicators  (in  both 
cases  a  higher  proportion  of  consumers  agreed 
that  new  motor  vehicles  were  safe,  rather  than 
reliable).

  Consumers in Europe

279

Consumers.indb   279
Consumers.indb   279

08.04.2009   09:52:26
08.04.2009   09:52:26

7

Transport

7.6 Externalities

Th  e energy and fuel used in transport is one of the 
main  contributors  to  greenhouse  gas  emissions; 
joint work by the European Environment Agency, 
the  European  Topic  Centre  on  air  and  climate 
change and the United Nations estimates that fuel 
combustion from all transport sectors combined 
contributed  close  to  a  quarter  (23.8 %)  of  all 
greenhouse gas emissions in 2006 in the EU-27, 
a  higher  proportion  than  the  combustion  from 
industry  (19.9 %),  but  less  than  that  associated 
with  energy  industries  (29.2 %)  –  see  Figure 
transport, 
7.19.  Encouraging  non-motorised 
encouraging 
fuel, 
improving  engine  performance,  encouraging 
car-sharing and promoting investment in various 
forms  of  passenger  transport  (predominantly 
train, trams and buses), as well as improving the 
fl uidity  of  transport  networks  are  all  initiatives 
that could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and 
improve air quality.

less  polluting 

types  of 

Road  transport  accounted  for  the  bulk  of  the 
greenhouse  gas  emissions  made  within  the 
transport sector in 2006 (17.0 % of all emissions), 
which was almost six times as high as the value 
for civil aviation (2.9 %).

Th  e  idea  of  pay-as-you-go  road  tolls  in  order  to 
pay  for  congestion  and  environmental  damage 
was put to EU citizens in a Eurobarometer survey 
of  attitudes  relating  to  EU  transport  policy.  Six 

Figure 7.19: Greenhouse gas emissions by sector, 
EU-27, 2006
(%, based on tonnes of CO2 equivalents)

Others (3)
13.2%

Services
5.1%

Households
8.9%

Energy 
industries 
29.2%

Other transport 
(2)
0.3%

Navigation (1)
3.6%

Civil aviation
2.9%

Industry
19.9%

Road transport
17.0%

out  of  every  ten  respondents  in  the  EU-27  were 
opposed  to  such  tolls. Th  e  greatest  resistance  to 
this  idea  was  among  those  surveyed  in  France 
(71 %),  while  relatively  high  levels  of  opposition 
were  also  recorded  in  Hungary  (67 %)  and 
Italy  (68 %).  In  contrast,  a  small  majority  of 
respondents  in  Latvia  (51 %),  Greece  (51 %), 
Lithuania  (52 %),  as  well  as  the  Czech  Republic 
(54 %) were in favour of pay-as-you-go road tolls 
to alleviate congestion and rectify environmental 
damage – see Figure 7.20.

Figure 7.20: Opinion about paying for 
congestion and environmental damage 
through road tolls, 2007
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

CZ

LT

EL

LV

PL

BG

RO

IE

SI

SK 

BE

NL

DK

CY

SE

LU

AT

MT

FI

UK

EU-27

DE

PT

ES

EE

HU

IT

FR

(1) Including international bunkers (international trafﬁ c departing from the EU).
(2) Including rail, pipeline transportation and ground activities in airports and 
harbours.
(3) Including solvent Use, fugitive, waste and agriculture.

Source: European Environment Agency

Yes

No 

Not known

Source: ‘Attitudes on issues related to EU transport policy’, Flash 
Eurobarometer 206b, European Commission

280

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   280
Consumers.indb   280

08.04.2009   09:52:26
08.04.2009   09:52:26

Communications

Consumers.indb   281
Consumers.indb   281

08.04.2009   09:52:27
08.04.2009   09:52:27

8

Communications

communication 
For  households,  distance 
traditionally comprised postal services for written 
communication 
(and  parcels),  progressively 
complemented  and  substituted  by  fi xed  line 
telephone  for  spoken  communications  from 
the  home  or  public  payphones.  Since  the  1980’s 
this  mix  of  services  has  changed  considerably, 
with courier services increasingly competing for 
the  delivery  of  mail  and  parcels  to  households, 
while mobile telephony and Internet access have 
expanded  rapidly  and  become  commonplace: 
the use of telegrams has eff ectively disappeared, 
and  the  use  of  public  payphones  has  withered. 
Although  the  use  of  the  Internet  goes  beyond 
simple  communications,  and  in  many  ways  can 
be  considered  in  the  context  of  recreation  (for 
example, on-line gaming or web radio services), 
it  is  covered  in  this  chapter  because  it  relies  on 
the  same  infrastructure  as  telecommunications 
and  is  oft en  used  to  substitute  or  complement 
other  communication  services,  for  example,  the 
use  of  e-mail,  and  more  recently  Internet-based 
telephony services.

innovative, 

communications 

Th  e  striking  changeover 
in  the  nature  of 
communication  services  has  occurred  through 
technological developments allied to the provision 
of 
equipment 
and  services.  Th  ese  services  are  off ered  by 
incumbents  (oft en 
formerly  state-controlled, 
monopoly  providers)  and  new  entrants  whose 
market access has been facilitated by regulatory 
changes that opened-up the telecommunications 
and  postal  markets;  this  liberalisation  is  widely 
credited  with  encouraging  the  development  of 
new  products  and  services,  increasing  choice, 
and lowering prices.

In  2005  the  European  Commission  launched 
‘i2010:  European  Information  Society  2010’,  a 
fi ve-year strategy to foster growth and jobs in the 
information society and media related activities. 
Among  other  objectives  i2010  aims  to  promote 
high-speed and secure broadband networks. Th  e 
Commission outlined three policy priorities:

Postal  markets  are  dynamic  and  quickly 
evolving  in  conjunction  with  the  ever-widening 
markets  of  communication,  advertising  and 
electronic  commerce.  While  the  use  of  e-mail 
and  SMS  messaging  has  increased  remarkably 
and  letter  mail  has  declined  as  a  percentage 
of  overall  message  volumes,  many  activities, 
such  as  e-commerce,  publishing,  mail  order, 
insurance,  banking  and  advertising  continue  to 
depend  on  the  postal  infrastructure.  Th  e  bulk 
of  mail  deliveries  are  no  longer  dominated  by 
private,  person  to  person  communications,  but 
instead  by  business  to  business  and  business  to 
consumer  communications.  Improvements  in 
the  quality  of  service,  in  particular  in  terms  of 
delivery performance and convenient access are 
fundamental aspects of the EU’s postal policy.

Th  e ‘reserved area’ for postal services is a segment 
of  the  postal  services  market  reserved  for  those 
operators  (regardless  of  type  of  ownership)  that 
provide  universal  services  (the  provision  of 
services at suffi  cient points so as to take account 
of  the  needs  of  users,  meeting  specifi ed  quality 
targets,  and  provided  at  aff ordable  prices).  In 
practice, letter mail/parcels under certain weight 
and cost limits can only be handled by operators 
bound by universal service obligations. Th  e size of 
the reserved area has been progressively reduced, 
and will be abolished through the implementation 
of the latest Directive on postal services adopted 
by  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  in 
February 2008. Th  is Directive also confi rmed the 
scope and standard of universal service, reinforced 
consumers’  rights  and  upgraded  the  role  of 
national  regulatory  authorities.  Furthermore,  it 
established a list of measures Member States may 
take to safeguard and fi nance, where necessary, a 
universal service. Th  e fi nal date for achieving full 
market  opening  is  31  December  2010,  with  the 
possibility  for  some  Member  States  to  postpone 
this by up to two more years.

8.1 Access, choice and switching

• 

• 

• 

to  create  an  open  and  competitive  single 
market including an updating of the regulatory 
framework for electronic communications and 
a strategy for a secure information society;
to 
on 
technologies;
to promote an inclusive European information 
society.

in  research 
communication 

increase  EU 
information 

investment 

and 

the 

and 

households.  Th  e 

Tables  8.1  to  8.3  provide  detailed  information 
on  the  supply  of  various  telecommunication 
level  of  penetration 
services, 
into 
on 
information 
telecommunication services covers all lines and 
subscriptions, regardless of whether they are for 
business  or  household  (residential)  users,  while 
in  contrast  the  penetration  rates  come  from 
a  recent  Eurobarometer  household  survey  on 
e-communications  and  an  ICT  usage  survey  of 
households and individuals, and therefore focus 
on household/consumer use.

282

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   282
Consumers.indb   282

08.04.2009   09:52:33
08.04.2009   09:52:33

Communications

8

Table 8.1: Telecommunication services: access to networks, 2008 (1)
(thousand)

Main 
telephone
 lines
 (1)
233 556
3 169
2 427
2 888
2 332
54 960
472
1 728
6 171
18 227
38 250
26 890
385
657
792
247
3 365
202
5 977
2 468
11 284
4 234
4 204
561
1 167
1 909
4 987
33 603
1 531
18 832
147
1 177
2 896

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO
CH

DSL
lines 
 (3)
80 173
1 619
164
613
1 207
18 548
136
550
1 013
6 394
14 977
9 755
106
152
232
109
752
38
3 388
1 018
2 252
975
365
247
278
1 273
1 755
12 259
:
:
:
:
:

Cellular 
mobile 
lines
(4)
553 462
9 866
9 431
12 373
6 023
93 292
1 765
4 937
11 815
49 087
52 536
87 724
922
3 193
4 861
696
10 499
369
18 443
9 421
36 968
12 941
21 164
1 892
5 480
5 720
9 813
72 233
:
:
:
:
:

Fixed 
broadband 
lines
 (3)
99 846
2 714
580
1 497
1 961
19 579
298
753
1 017
8 155
15 687
10 122
108
343
508
121
1 429
69
5 588
1 656
3 200
1 597
1 949
347
477
1 619
2 843
15 630
:
:
:
:
:

Non-DSL 
broadband 
lines
 (3)
19 673
1 095
416
884
754
1 031
162
203
5
1 761
710
367
1
191
276
12
677
31
2 200
638
947
622
1 584
101
199
346
1 088
3 372
:
:
:
:
:

ISDN 
(2)
:
399
853
161
283
12 808
51
111
586
1 129
:
:
27
:
16
78
594
47
1 490
413
527
774
19
231
57
105
154
:
126
15
15
514
864

(1) All data refer to 2006; Switzerland, provisional.
(2) Greece, Malta, Romania and Slovakia, 2005; Hungary and the Netherlands, 2004.
(3) January 2008. 
(4) October 2007.

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/isoc/isoc_tc_ac1), Progress report on the single European electronic 
communications market 2007, European Commission.

  Consumers in Europe

283

Consumers.indb   283
Consumers.indb   283

08.04.2009   09:52:35
08.04.2009   09:52:35

8

Communications

Table 8.2: Penetration rates of telephony services in households, 
November-December 2007
(%)

Telephone
95
96
89
96
99
95
96
99
99
93
98
96
100
94
90
100
91
99
100
97
95
90
80
98
92
98
100
97

Mobile
 telephone
83
84
68
92
92
78
89
90
86
80
81
91
91
88
83
92
82
88
94
86
79
82
66
91
81
93
91
87

Fixed
telephone
70
67
61
31
73
81
49
78
83
65
82
59
84
44
33
95
42
96
91
54
62
40
47
84
43
41
96
82

Fixed and
mobile
57
52
41
27
65
64
40
69
69
52
64
53
75
37
24
87
31
85
85
41
46
30
32
75
32
28
88
71

Mobile
only
24
32
25
64
22
11
41
20
16
25
16
37
15
45
53
5
50
3
9
38
32
48
33
14
47
61
3
15

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Fixed 
only
14
12
21
4
8
20
8
9
14
16
18
6
9
7
9
8
10
12
6
13
16
9
15
12
8
5
9
11

Source: ‘E-communications household survey’, Special Eurobarometer 293, European Commission

In  most  Member  States,  90 %  or  more  of 
households  had  access  to  a  telephone  (either  a 
fi xed  line  or  mobile),  with  only  Romania  below 
this  level.  Across  the  EU-27,  an  average  of  83 % 
of  households  had  a  mobile  phone  connection 
and 70 % had a fi xed line connection, while 57 % 
had both. In the vast majority of Member States, 
a higher proportion of households had a mobile 
phone  connection  than  a  fi xed  line  connection, 
with fi xed line telephony slightly more common 
than  mobile 
in  Malta,  Sweden, 
Luxembourg  and  Germany,  and  approximately 
the same in France. Around 24 % of households 
in the EU-27 only had a mobile phone (no fi xed 
line),  with  this  share  over  50 %  in  the  Czech 
Republic,  Finland,  Lithuania  and  Hungary. 
Figure  8.1  shows  that  there  were  slightly  more 
households  in  the  EU-27  using  mobile  phones 
with pre-paid cards than with contracts.

telephony 

Figure 8.1: Households with and without 
mobile telephone access, EU-27, 
November-December 2007
(%)

Mobile access with 
both contract and 
pre-paid
17%

No mobile phone 
access
17%

Mobile access with 
pre-paid card
35%

Mobile access 
with a contract
31%

Source: ‘E-communications household survey’, 
Special Eurobarometer 293, European Commission

284

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   284
Consumers.indb   284

08.04.2009   09:52:35
08.04.2009   09:52:35

Communications

8

Figure 8.2: Rural access to DSL, 
December 2007 (1)
(%)

Table 8.3: Penetration rates of Internet access in households, 
2007 (1)
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

BE

DK

LU

NL

FR

UK

NO

FI

SE

ES

DE

PT

SI

IT

AT

HU

IS

CZ

IE

EE

LT

LV

EL

PL

SK

CY

DSL coverage in rural areas

Gap to national average coverage

(1) Rural areas have a population density lower than 100 
inhabitants/km²;  Malta, deﬁ nition of rural areas, not applicable; 
Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

All households

All Internet 
access
54
60
19
35
78
71
53
57
25
45
49
43
39
51
44
75
38
54
83
60
41
40
22
58
46
69
79
67
14
8
84
78

Broadband 
access
42
56
15
28
70
50
48
31
7
39
43
25
20
32
34
58
33
44
74
46
30
30
8
44
27
63
67
57
1
2
76
67

Share of broadband access 
among households 
with access to the Internet 
at home
77
94
81
80
89
70
90
54
29
88
87
58
52
63
77
77
86
82
89
77
72
77
36
76
57
91
85
85
6
23
91
86

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
MK
TR
IS
NO

(1) The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, 2006; Turkey, 2005.

Source: Broadband Coverage in Europe Final Report, 2008 Survey, 
IDATE

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/isoc/
isoc_ci_in_h and isoc_ci_it_h)

Close to half of all the households in the EU-27 
had Internet access at home, a share that rose to 
over three quarters in the Netherlands, Sweden, 
Denmark  and  Luxembourg.  A  little  over  two 
fi ft hs  (42 %)  of  households  had  a  broadband 
Internet  connection  at  home.  Digital  subscriber 
lines (DSL), which along with cable modems are 
a popular way for consumers to have broadband 
Internet access, were available to the majority of 
the rural population in most Member States, but 
coverage  was  still  low  in  a  number  of  Member 
States  (see  Table  8.2).  In  most  Member  States 
a  lower  proportion  of  the  rural  population 

could  potentially  access  DSL  services;  the  only 
exceptions  were  Denmark  and  the  Benelux 
countries,  where  the  roll-out  of  DSL  was 
eff ectively complete.

recent 

Eurobarometer 

household 
Two 
surveys  (at  the  end  of  2006  and  end  of  2007) 
on  e-communications  looked  at  the  reasons 
for  households  not  using  certain  services. 
Concerning  fi xed  line  telephony,  just  over  two 
fi ft hs  (43 %)  of  households  without  a  telephone 
line had never had one, and a similar proportion 
it  up. 
had  previously  had  one  but  given 

  Consumers in Europe

285

Consumers.indb   285
Consumers.indb   285

08.04.2009   09:52:36
08.04.2009   09:52:36

8

Communications

Figure 8.3: Households without fi xed line 
access, EU-27, November-December 2006
(%)

Other reason for no 
fixed line
7%

Do not know
7%

Never had a line
43%

Figure 8.5: Households without Internet 
access at home, EU-27, 
November-December 2007
(%, multiple answers possible)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Gave up line 
in the last year
11%

Gave up line more 
than one year ago
32%

Source: ‘E-communications household survey’, 
Special Eurobarometer 274, European Commission

Figure 8.4: Households without mobile 
telephone access, EU-27, 
November-December 2006
(%, multiple answers possible)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Do not want mobile

Fixed line is enough

             Other access
 (public payphones) 
                         is good

Too expensive

Coverage is not good

Plan to get a mobile

Other

Do not know

Source: ‘E-communications household survey’, 
Special Eurobarometer 274, European Commission

No interest

Sufficient access
             elsewhere

Do not know exactly
         what Internet is

Cost of PC and modem
                          is too high

Monthly subscription
                       is  too high

     Concerned about
 unsuitable content

Plans to subscribe
 within six months

Do not know

Other

Source: ‘E-communications household survey’, 
Special Eurobarometer 293, European Commission

Concerning  mobile  telephony,  the  main  reason 
for not having a subscription was simply that no 
one in the household wanted one (41 %) and the 
next  most  common  reason  (26 %)  was  that  an 
existing fi xed line was regarded as being suffi  cient. 
Less than one fi ft h (18 %) of households did not 
have  a  mobile  phone  because  it  was  considered 
too  expensive,  and  just  over  5 %  planned  to  get 
a mobile phone within the six months following 
the survey. Equally for Internet access, half of all 
households  without  Internet  access  simply  did 
not want to have access, with around 15 % citing 
costs  (hardware  or  subscription)  as  being  too 
high.

286

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   286
Consumers.indb   286

08.04.2009   09:52:37
08.04.2009   09:52:37

in 

the 

the 

increase 

range  of 
Alongside 
communication  services  available  to  consumers 
the  choice  of  suppliers  has  also  generally 
increased,  leading  to  the  possibility  for  users 
to  switch  suppliers.  A  2006  Eurobarometer 
survey  on  services  of  general  interest  looked  at 
the  ease  and  appeal  of  switching  suppliers:  the 
results for mobile and fi xed telephony, as well as 
for  Internet  access,  show  that  for  each  of  these 
three services up to one fi ft h of users had easily 
changed providers within the two years prior to 
the  survey,  and  in  each  case  some  4 %  of  users 
had given up trying to change provider because 
of the obstacles involved.

Communications

8

Figure 8.6: Switching providers in the previous two years, 
EU-25, May-June 2006
(% of users of the service)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Mobile telephone

Fixed telephone

Internet access

Yes, easy

Yes, difficult

Gave up because of obstacles

Did not try: perceived obstacles

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

287

Consumers.indb   287
Consumers.indb   287

08.04.2009   09:52:38
08.04.2009   09:52:38

8

Communications

Table 8.4: Telephone calls, 2006 (1)
(million minutes)

8.2 Consumption

National 
calls (2)
13 388
:
2 428
11 799
304 900
919
5 776
18 408
63 938
85 633
:
1 264
1 352
1 547
996
6 305
767
20 633
6 406
25 394
19 952
6 130
1 783
1 543
3 144
23 693
:
3 991
47 048
575
17 143
12 392

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO
CH

Cellular 
mobile
 calls
9 612
:
9 598
7 566
58 100
1 742
7 086
11 309
62 682
94 026
:
2 160
:
3 777
386
11 904
163
16 075
13 728
25 714
12 452
2 811
2 506
4 708
12 687
12 642
:
4 744
48 118
450
7 579
5 812

Incoming 
international 
calls (3)
:
:
796
1 020
:
86
:
1 102
4 712
7 802
:
152
:
284
:
583
44
811
:
1 936
1 260
1 750
181
535
:
:
:
840
1 744
32
468
:

Outgoing 
international 
calls (4)
1 599
:
610
595
10 000
102
1 277
1 435
5 441
6 070
:
253
:
112
338
475
23
2 179
1 590
931
1 133
603
216
308
187
1 430
:
390
515
40
887
2 687

(1) Greece, Malta and Slovakia, 2005; Latvia, 2003; Switzerland, including 
provisional data.
(2) Germany, 2005.
(3) Denmark, Germany, Spain and Romania, 2005; Greece, 2003.
(4) Germany, Finland, 2005.

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/isoc/
isoc_tc_tra and isoc_tc_cal)

8.2.1 Consumption volume

As  with  data  on  the  number  of  telephone  lines 
and subscriptions to various services, data on the 
volume  of  voice  and  text  messages  services  do 
not distinguish between business and residential 
use,  with  the  relative  importance  of  these  two 
categories  varying  greatly  between  countries. 
Relative  to  the  size  of  the  population  or  the 
number of lines, the volume of national telephone 
calls  was  particularly  large  in  Germany  and 
Sweden,  and  to  a  lesser  extent  in  Luxembourg, 
Malta  and  Portugal,  while  the  lowest  relative 
usage  was  in  the  Czech  Republic,  Romania  and 
Slovakia; it should be noted that no recent data is 
available for three Member States including Italy 
(which  traditionally  had  the  highest  number  of 
minutes of national calls per head).

Among the countries with recent data available, 
Cyprus  recorded  the  highest  volume  of  mobile 
phone  calls  (in  minutes)  per  inhabitant  and  per 
mobile phone subscription, ahead of Finland, with 
the lowest use of mobile phones in Romania.

In  approximately  half  of  the  Member  States  the 
time  spent  making  national  calls  exceeded  the 
time  spent  making  mobile  phone  calls,  with 
the  largest  relative  diff erences  in  Germany  and 
Malta; in the other half of the Member States the 
reverse was true, with more time spent on mobile 
phone  calls,  most  notably  in  Finland  and  the 
Czech  Republic.  Th  e  number  of  SMS  messages 
per inhabitant and per mobile phone subscription 
was highest in Lithuania, Denmark and Cyprus.

Eurostat information society statistics provide a 
wide range of data on the use of communication 
services. Among these are information in relation 
to  the  use  of  the  Internet  for  communications, 
including  VoIP  (Voice  over  Internet  Protocol) 
calls. Among those countries for which data are 
available,  by  far  the  highest  use  of  the  Internet 
for making calls in 2006 was in Germany (some 
60 000 million minutes in total, equivalent to an 
average  of  around  12  hours  per  person).  Th  ere 
were wide ranging diff erences between countries 
as regards the take-up of Internet and VoIP calls, 
the former being far more common in Germany, 
whereas  in  France  and  Norway  the  relative 
importance of VoIP was considerably higher.

288

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   288
Consumers.indb   288

08.04.2009   09:52:38
08.04.2009   09:52:38

      
               
              
         
               
                  
                 
      
               
               
                 
    
             
            
            
               
                     
                 
         
               
              
      
             
               
              
      
             
               
              
      
             
               
              
         
               
                  
                 
         
         
               
                  
                 
            
                  
                 
         
             
                  
                 
            
                  
                     
                    
      
             
                  
              
         
             
              
      
             
               
                 
      
             
               
              
         
               
               
                 
         
               
                  
                 
         
               
                  
                 
         
             
                 
      
             
              
         
               
                  
                 
      
             
               
                 
            
                  
                     
                    
      
               
                  
                 
      
               
              
Communications

8

Table 8.5: Number of short and multimedia 
messages (SMS and MMS), 2006 (1)
(million)

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO
CH

SMS
4 474
538
6 230
10 158
22 200
215
5 745
3 827
8 761
15 050
:
1 362
:
9 034
248
1 709
410
2 523
2 059
26 297
12 458
2 253
538
1 324
3 088
2 857
:
2 511
25 088
120
5 225
3 677

MMS (2)
:
1
39
28
153
2
31
33
216
294
:
3
:
4
:
:
1
:
29
159
50
4
9
19
22
70
:
19
:
1
99
52

(1) Greece, Malta and Slovakia, 2005; the Netherlands, 2003.
(2) Romania, 2004.

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/
isoc/isoc_tc_sms)

Table 8.6: Internet telephony

Internet and 
VoIP calls, 2006
(million minutes) (1)
Internet 
VoIP 
calls
(2)
:
:
:
:
:
:
92
1 237
451
:
9 000
60 000
56
98
:
5 378
:
11 935
:
13 505
18 663
25 915
:
:
:
819
:
94
:
157
:
231
:
1 280
129
:
:
1 540
:
3 901
:
8 101
:
997
41
1 302
149
806
:
1 857
:
:
:
4 645
:
:
21
1 952
:
4 242
1 332
1 609
1 019
:

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
NO
CH

Proportion of individuals having 
used the Internet (for private
purposes) in the last 3 months, for
telephoning over the Internet or 
for video-conferencing,
November-December 2007 (%)
9.8
10.4
11.1
16.1
11.1
12.6
16.2
7.4
3.0
8.2
8.8
5.6
5.8
18.1
19.0
23.1
12.5
7.0
20.7
11.8
10.1
8.6
4.0
8.8
12.3
17.7
8.6
8.5
:
:
12.2
:

(1) Greece, Malta and Slovakia, 2005; Ireland, 2004; Latvia and Poland, 2003.
(2) Romania, 2005; Switzerland, provisional.

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/isoc/isoc_tc_tra); 
‘E-communications household survey’, Special Eurobarometer 293, European Commission

Th  ese fi gures can be supplemented by data from 
a  recent  Eurobarometer  survey  that  presents 
information  on  the  proportion  of  households 
that used the Internet for telephoning or video-
conferencing.  At  the  end  of  2007,  the  highest 
proportion  of  households  using  the  Internet  for 
these  purposes  was  recorded  in  Luxembourg 
(23.1  %),  while  the  Netherlands  also  reported 

a  share  of  more  than  one  in  fi ve  households; 
the  Czech  Republic,  Baltic  Member  States  and 
Finland  also  had  relatively  high  shares,  with 
upwards of 16 % of households using the Internet 
for  telephoning  or  video-conferencing.  Th  e  EU-
27 average stood at 9.8 %, while the lowest use of 
these technologies was reported in Cyprus, Italy, 
Romania and Greece.

  Consumers in Europe

289

Consumers.indb   289
Consumers.indb   289

08.04.2009   09:52:40
08.04.2009   09:52:40

                         
                            
                                
                         
                              
                      
                              
                      
                            
                            
                                
                         
                              
                         
                              
                         
                            
                      
                            
                         
                                
                         
                                
                            
                         
                            
                                
                         
                         
                              
                      
                            
                      
                              
                         
                                
                            
                                
                         
                              
                         
                              
                         
                              
                         
                              
                      
                            
                                
                         
                              
                         
                              
        
             
           
      
        
             
             
        
      
      
      
      
           
             
           
           
        
           
        
        
        
           
        
             
           
           
        
        
        
             
        
        
        
         
8

Communications

A 2006 Eurobarometer survey focused on the use 
and cost of roaming services for mobile phones. 
A small majority (53 %) of mobile phone users in 
the EU-25 reported that they used mobile services 
when abroad, with the others either not travelling, 
switching  off   their  mobile  when  abroad,  or  not 
taking it with them. Of those that did use mobile 
services  abroad,  38 %  only  used  voice  services, 
21 %  only  text  message  services,  and  37 %  both 
voice and text messages. Th  e vast majority (90 %) 
of those using mobile services abroad did so with 
the same SIM (subscriber identifi cation module) 
card  as  at  home.  Most  consumers  used  their 
mobile phone abroad less than at home, with only 
a  small  proportion  (3 %  of  all  mobile  telephone 
users using mobile services abroad) making more 
use of their phone. Only a small proportion (6 %) 
bought a SIM card in the country being visited, 
and so paid local mobile phone rates rather than 
roaming charges. More information may be found 
on roaming charges in the section on prices.

Figure 8.7: Use of roaming services, EU-25, 
September-October 2006
(% of mobile telephone users)

Figure 8.8: Use of roaming services, EU-25, 
September-October 2006
(% of mobile telephone users using mobile 
services abroad)

Other
4%

Voice and 
text
37%

Voice calls 
only
38%

Text messages 
only
21%

Source: ‘Roaming’, Special Eurobarometer 269, 
European Commission

Figure 8.9: Frequency of use of roaming 
services, EU-25, September-October 2006
(% of mobile telephone users using mobile 
services abroad)

Do not 
know
5%

Do not 
travel
26%

Do not take 
mobile abroad
7%

Switch off 
mobile when abroad
8%

Source: ‘Roaming’, Special Eurobarometer 269, 
European Commission

Purchase a SIM card in 
the country visited
6%

Use mobile 
services
54%

Same SIM card, but 
use more than at 
home
3%

Do not 
know
4%

Same SIM card, and 
use as often as at 
home
24%

Same SIM 
card, but
 use less
 than at
 home
63%

Source: ‘Roaming’, Special Eurobarometer 269, European Commission

290

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   290
Consumers.indb   290

08.04.2009   09:52:40
08.04.2009   09:52:40

Communications

8

As noted above, the Internet can be considered as a 
telecommunication service because of the shared 
technology  and  also  because  it  is  a  competitor 
to  more  traditional  communications  channels. 
However,  as  can  be  clearly  seen  from  Figure 
8.10, the uses made of the Internet are far wider 
than  simple  communications,  although  e-mail, 
along with researching product information, was 
the  most  common  Internet  activity  for  EU-27 

households  in  2007.  Overall  57 %  of  individuals 
(as opposed to households) aged 16 to 74 used the 
Internet  in  the  three  months  prior  to  the  2007 
ICT usage survey of households and individuals, 
with  38 %  of  individuals  reporting  using  the 
Internet (nearly) every day. Many users accessed 
the  Internet  from  a  number  of  diff erent  places, 
the most common being at home or at work.

Figure 8.10: Percentage of individuals who, 
in the three months prior to the survey, used 
the Internet for specifi ed activities, EU-27, 
2007
(%)

Figure 8.11: Places for Internet access: 
percentage of individuals (aged 16 to 74) 
who accessed Internet in the three months 
prior to the survey, EU-27, 2007
(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Anywhere

At home

     At place of work 
(other than home)

In a neighbour, friend 
       or relative's house

At place of education

At other places

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/
isoc/isoc_ci_ifp_pu)

E-mail

         Product 
information

Travel & accom.
               services

Internet banking

  Games & music
(play/download)

                           Online 
papers/magazines

Other communication

                     Buy/order 
non-fin. products (1)

       Training & 
education (2)

Software (download)

Web radio/TV

             Telephone/
video-conference

Sell products

(1) 2005.
(2) 2006.

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/
isoc/isoc_ci_ac_i)

  Consumers in Europe

291

Consumers.indb   291
Consumers.indb   291

08.04.2009   09:52:41
08.04.2009   09:52:41

8

Communications

8.2.2 Consumption expenditure

Annual  household  consumption  expenditure  on 
communications  averaged  EUR  400  per  person 
in  the  EU-27  in  2006.  Household  budget  survey 
(HBS)  data  is  presented  in  purchasing  power 
standard  (PPS)  terms  rather  than  in  euro.  Th  is 
shows that, at comparable price levels, expenditure 
on  communications  within  the  EU-27  averaged 
PPS  738  per  household.  Among  the  Member 
States, expenditure generally ranged between PPS 
400  and  PPS  1 000  per  household,  with  Ireland, 
Greece, Cyprus and Luxembourg above this range, 
and Romania and Bulgaria below it.

in 

the 

EU-27 
services 

Expenditure  on  communications  represented 
around  3.3 %  of  total  household  consumption 
in 
expenditure 
2005: 
accounted 
telecommunications 
for  nearly  all  of  this,  as  postal  services  and 
telecommunications  equipment  each  accounted 
for  just  over  4 %  of  the  communications  total. 
Figure  8.12  shows  the  share  of  communications 
in total household consumption expenditure for 
the  EU-27  Member  States,  with  the  countries 
ranked  by  the  average 
level  of  their  total 
household  consumption  expenditure  –  this 
clearly  shows  that  countries  with  lower  overall 
expenditure  spent  a  larger  proportion  of  their 
budget on communications than those countries 
with  higher  overall  expenditure,  with  a  clear 
break  between  Portugal  and  Estonia  in  the 
graph.  For  the  countries  with  higher  levels  of 

Figure 8.12: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of communications in 
total expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

BG

LT

LV

PL

HU

SK

EE

PT

SI

DK

LU

IE

CY

8

6

4

2

0

UK

EL

AT

BE

NL

IT

MT

FI

SE

ES

DE

FR

(1) Graph is ranked on overall household consumption per 
household (PPS); Czech Republic and Romania, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211 hbs_exp_t121)

overall  household  expenditure,  the  share  that 
communications  accounted  for  ranged  from 
2.2 % in Luxembourg to 4.0 % in Slovenia, while 
among those with lower levels of total household 
consumption  expenditure  the  share  ranged 
from 4.6 % in Bulgaria and Lithuania to 6.5 % in 
Hungary.

in  the  highest 

Th  e  share  of  communications  in  household 
consumption  expenditure  ranged  from  3.0 % 
among  households 
income 
quintile  to  3.7 %  among  those  in  the  lowest 
income quintile for the EU-27 in 2005. Th  ere was 
also  some  variation  in  the  proportion  of  total 
expenditure  accounted  for  by  communications 
according  to  age,  as  younger  generations  were 
more  likely  to  use  communication  services. 
Expenditure peaked at 4.0 % for households with 
a head of household aged less than 30, falling to 
2.5 %  for  those  with  a  head  of  household  aged 
60 or over.

Table 8.7: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, communications, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

738
878
325
555
583
828
596
1 255
1 174
701
914
621
1 164
610
435
1 139
696
837
903
793
512
616
259
950
506
693
791
852
729
770

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

292

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   292
Consumers.indb   292

08.04.2009   09:52:42
08.04.2009   09:52:42

8.3 Prices

8.3.1 Price infl ation

Communications,  particularly 
telecom muni-
cations, is one area where for many years prices 
have fallen, rather than increased. Th  e harmonised 
index  of  consumer  prices  for  communications 
fell  in  the  EU-27  by  10.1 %  between  2000  and 
2007,  equivalent  to  an  average  fall  of  1.4 %  per 
annum.  Apart  from  a  rise  of  0.4 %  in  2002,  the 
communications consumer price index fell each 
year during this period.

Th  e  latest  annual  consumer  price  indices  for 
communications  show  the  greatest  fall  in  2007 
was  in  Italy,  the  index  dropping  8.4 %,  while 
in  Latvia  and  Lithuania  the  index  fell  by  6.0 % 
and 5.0 % respectively. Only two Member States 
recorded price increases in excess of 1 % in 2007, 
as prices rose by 7.1 % and 4.5 % respectively in 
Finland and Austria.

At  a  more  detailed  level,  the  price  index  for 
telecommunications  equipment  fell,  on  average, 
by 12.4 % per annum between 2000 and 2007 in 
the EU-27, while the index for telecommunications 
services fell much more sedately (1.0 % per annum 
on average). In contrast, the price index for postal 
services increased by an annual average of 2.4 %, 
in  line  with  the  increases  witnessed  for  the  all-
items consumer price index.

Figure 8.13: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

200

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

2001

2003

2005

2007

Telephone and telefax equipment

Communications

Telephone and telefax services

Postal services

Communications

8

8.3.2 Price transparency, aff  ordability 
and price levels

latest 

Eurobarometer 

household 
Th  e 
e-communications  survey  from  2007  provides 
information  on  households’  opinions  regarding 
various  issues  relating  to  price  transparency. 
Figure  8.14  shows  the  vast  majority  of  users  felt 
that  it  was  easy  to  check  their  fi xed  and  their 
mobile  telephony  usage  in  a  simple  and  user-
friendly manner, around 80 % of all respondents 
in both cases. Around two thirds of respondents 
felt that it was easy to compare the tariff  of their 
current  provider  with  the  tariff   of  competitors, 
with a slightly lower proportion for fi xed telephony 
and slightly higher for Internet access. For each of 
these three telecommunications services around 
one  third  of  respondents  reported  that  they 
regularly read third-party price comparisons.

Figure 8.14: Households with specifi ed services, EU-27, 
November-December 2007
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

k
c
e
h
c
o
t
e
b
A

l

y
a
w
y
l
d
n
e
i
r
f
d
n
a

s
r
e
h
t
o
h
t
i

w
s
f
f
i
r
a
t

s
n
o
s
i
r
a
p
m
o
c
e
c
i
r
p

l

e
p
m

i
s
a
n

i

e
g
a
s
u

t
n
e
r
r
u
c
e
r
a
p
m
o
c
y
l
i
s
a
E

y
t
r
a
p
d
r
3
d
a
e
r
y
l
r
a
u
g
e
R

l

Fixed

Mobile

Fixed

Mobile

Internet

Fixed

Mobile

Internet

Agree/Yes

Disagree/No

Not applicable

Do not know

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices 
(theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Source: ‘E-communications household survey’, Special Eurobarometer 293, 
European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

293

Consumers.indb   293
Consumers.indb   293

08.04.2009   09:52:43
08.04.2009   09:52:43

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8

Communications

A  2006  Eurobarometer  survey  on  services  of 
general interest investigated the aff ordability of a 
range of services: the results are based only on the 
answers  provided  by  the  part  of  the  population 
that  indicated  that  they  had  used  the  specifi ed 
services. Across the EU-25 as a whole, more than 
three  quarters  of  respondents  said  that  each  of 
the  three  telecommunications  services  were 
aff ordable,  76 %  for  fi xed  and  mobile  telephony 
and 80 % for Internet access.

Information on households’ opinions concerning 
the aff ordability of Internet access is also available 
from Eurostat’s Urban Audit survey, which asked 
respondents  in  some  of  Europe’s  main  cities 
whether  communications’  access  was  available 
at a reasonable price in public places and in the 
home. In several capital cities, mainly in northern 
Europe, more than half of all respondents agreed 
that  public  Internet  access  was  available  at  a 
reasonable  price,  with  the  highest  proportions 
being recorded in Dublin and London (although 
the  proportion  that  disagreed  with  this  view 
was  also  quite  high  in  Dublin).  In  comparison, 
a large share of respondents in every capital city, 
except  for  Dublin,  agreed  that  Internet  access 
at  home  was  available  at  a  reasonable  price; 
80 %  or  more  of  respondents  shared  this  view 
in  Copenhagen,  Helsinki  and  Amsterdam.  Th  e 
largest share that disagreed with this view was in 
Luxembourg (13 %), followed by Dublin (12 %) — 
see Table 8.8.

A  Eurobarometer  survey  conducted  in  2006 
focused on roaming and the results indicate that 
just  over  two  thirds  of  respondents  agreed  that 
the  EU  should  ensure  that  tariff s  for  voice  and 
text messages should not be a lot higher abroad 
than at home.

In  June  2007,  Regulation  (EC)  No  717/2007  of 
the European Parliament and of the Council on 
new  rules  concerning  roaming  came  into  force, 
setting  maximum  prices  for  phone  calls  made 
and  received  while  abroad.  A  ‘Eurotariff ’  set 

Figure 8.15: Aff ordability of 
communications, EU-25, May-June 2006
(% of respondents using the service)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Mobile
telephony

Fixed
telephony

Internet
access

Affordable
Not affordable/excessive
Do not know

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

maximum  prices  for  mobile  phone  calls  made 
and received while abroad, and these maximum 
prices applied to all consumers unless they opted 
for special packages. Since the end of August 2008 
making a roaming call cannot cost more than 46 
cents and receiving one cannot cost more than 22 
cents  (excluding  VAT).  In  September  2008,  the 
Commission  proposed  to  extend  the  scope  and 
duration  of  this  Roaming  Regulation,  limiting 
the Euro-SMS tariff  for an SMS sent from abroad 
to  no  more  than  11  cents  (excluding  VAT)  and 
reducing  further  the  tariff   for  voice  calls  from 
43  cents  on  1  July  2009,  to  40  cents,  37  cents 
and 34 cents in each of the following years. Th  e 
proposals  also  foresee  the  price  of  receiving  a 
call  decreasing  from  19  cents  on  1  July  2009  to 
16  cents,  13  cents  and  10  cents  in  each  of  the 
following years. Furthermore, users must receive 
an SMS when they are crossing borders within the 
EU to inform them of the price they are expected 
to pay for calls, while further information can be 
requested.

294

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   294
Consumers.indb   294

08.04.2009   09:52:44
08.04.2009   09:52:44

Communications

8

Table 8.8: Perceptions concerning Internet access, 2006
(%)

Public Internet access

Internet access at home

At reasonable
price (synthetic
index 0-100)
82
83
79
90
91
92
87
68
81
80
72
69
81
84
66
89
87
90
81
77
67
83
77
83
83
81
92
69
57

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Zagreb
Ankara

Agree 
(strongly & 
somewhat)
41
43
39
62
55
51
73
32
39
38
35
40
38
44
29
30
46
47
44
36
33
43
50
40
55
39
67
40
39

Disagree 
(strongly & 
somewhat)
9
9
10
7
6
5
11
15
9
9
14
18
9
9
15
4
7
5
10
11
17
9
15
8
12
9
6
17
30

Source: Eurostat, Perception survey results (theme1/urb/urb_percep)

At reasonable 
price (synthetic 
index 0-100)
86
92
90
94
92
94
85
81
84
92
88
85
91
90
82
89
96
99
94
90
86
89
92
88
99
89
93
86
61

Agree 
(strongly & 
somewhat)
59
59
73
85
69
69
65
42
51
71
57
61
66
57
61
58
64
80
69
68
55
53
73
60
85
73
74
61
38

Disagree 
(strongly & 
somewhat)
10
5
8
5
6
4
12
10
10
6
8
11
6
6
13
7
3
1
4
8
9
7
6
8
1
9
6
10
24

  Consumers in Europe

295

Consumers.indb   295
Consumers.indb   295

08.04.2009   09:52:45
08.04.2009   09:52:45

8

Communications

level 

show 

indices 

for  2007 

that 
Price 
communications were clearly cheapest in Cyprus 
(see Figure 8.17), where they were less than half 
the EU-27 average, and they were also relatively 
cheap  in  Lithuania,  Sweden  and  Slovenia.  Th  e 
vast  majority  of  Member  States  recorded  price 
level  indices  within  a  relatively  narrow  range 
of 80 % to 110 % of the EU-27 average, with the 
Czech  Republic,  Ireland,  Slovakia  and  Greece 
above  this  range.  As  such,  the  variation  in 
price  levels  between  Member  States  was  lower 
for  communications  than  for  most  of  the  other 
product  headings  covered  in  this  publication, 
except for clothing and footwear (see Chapter 3).

Figure 8.16: Roaming charges, EU-25, 
September-October 2006
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

Have a good idea of 
          roaming tariffs

The EU should ensure that
      roaming prices for text
       messages are not a lot 
           higher than at home

The EU should ensure that 
      roaming prices for calls 
               are not a lot higher 
                           than at home

Yes/agree
No/disagree
Not applicable and do not know

Source: ‘Roaming’, Special Eurobarometer 269, 
European Commission

Figure 8.17: Price level indices, 
communications, 2007
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

CZ

IE

SK

IS

EL

CH

BE

FR

DE

ES

PL

NO

TR

PT

EU-27

NL

IT

MT

BG

AT

LV

UK

HU

RO

DK

LU

FI

EE

HR

SI

SE

MK

LT

CY

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

296

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   296
Consumers.indb   296

08.04.2009   09:52:46
08.04.2009   09:52:46

8.3.3 Model and unit prices

for 

telecommunications  services 

Billing 
is 
oft en,  but  not  always,  made  up  of  a  fi xed 
(monthly)  charge  and  a  part  related  to  the  level 
of  consumption.  Th  e  fi xed  charge  is  therefore 
eff ectively  the  price  of  access  to  the  service  (the 
line rental), while the unit price (per second, per 
minute,  per  call  or  per  megabyte,  for  example) 
is  the  cost  of  consumption.  Not  all  packages 
are  made  up  of  both  elements:  there  are  many 
packages that are just a fi xed charge, particularly 
common for broadband Internet access and some 
mobile  telephony  services,  while  others  may 
focus on charges for usage, common for dial-up 
Internet access and pre-paid mobile services.

An overview of the relative importance of the two 
cost  elements,  namely  the  fi xed  charge  and  the 
usage charge, is provided in Figure 8.18 for fi xed 
telephony; while these appear to be expenditure 
data  they  are  more  like  a  monthly  price  as  they 
do not refl ect actual levels of expenditure in each 
country,  but  are  the  cost  for  a  fi xed,  identical 
basket of services in each country and so the data 
show  how  much,  on  average,  consumers  would 
pay  in  diff erent  countries  for  the  same  basket 
of  services.  Th  e  average  share  of  fi xed  charges 
was  particularly  large  in  Cyprus,  Ireland  and 
Luxembourg,  and  it  also  accounted  for  more 
than half of total expenditure in the Netherlands 
and  Austria.  In  contrast,  the  fi xed  charge  share 
was lowest in Latvia, and was also less than one 
quarter  of  total  expenditure  in  Lithuania.  For 
the particular basket presented the total cost was 
notably  higher  in  Finland  and  Ireland,  and  to  a 
lesser  extent  in  Belgium,  while  the  lowest  costs 
(for  this  basket)  were  recorded  in  Cyprus  and 
Estonia.

Communications

8

Figure 8.18: Average monthly expenditure 
of standard residential user of fi xed line 
telephony, September 2007 (1)
(EUR/line)

0

10

20

30

40

50

FI

IE

BE

PL

FR

PT

ES

CZ

IT

DK

EL

UK

LV

HU

NL

SK

MT

DE

AT

SE

LU

SI

LT

BG

RO

EE

CY

Fixed charges

Charges based on usage

(1) Based on a basket of ﬁ xed national calls, international calls and 
calls to mobile networks.

Source: European Electronic Communication Regulation and 
Markets (13th report), European Commission, 2008

  Consumers in Europe

297

Consumers.indb   297
Consumers.indb   297

08.04.2009   09:52:46
08.04.2009   09:52:46

8

Communications

Table 8.9: Price (normal tariff , including VAT) 
of a 10 minute call at 11 am on a weekday, 
September 2006
(EUR)

National long 
distance 
0.74
0.57
:
0.56
0.37
0.49
0.23
0.82
0.74
0.85
0.89
1.15
0.22
1.03
0.79
:
1.04
:
0.49
0.59
1.00
0.65
:
0.26
1.29
0.94
0.29
0.44

To United 
States
1.79
1.98
:
2.02
2.38
0.46
2.13
1.91
3.49
1.53
2.32
2.12
0.66
5.94
4.07
1.37
2.88
1.64
0.85
1.90
1.23
3.11
:
1.40
1.23
4.90
1.18
2.23

Local
0.36
0.57
:
0.56
0.37
0.39
0.23
0.49
0.31
0.19
0.36
0.22
0.22
0.36
0.39
0.31
0.40
0.25
0.33
0.49
0.50
0.37
:
0.26
0.60
0.24
0.29
0.44

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Source: Teligen in Eurostat, structural indicators (theme0/strind/
strind_t)

Table 8.9 shows example prices for three types of 
10-minute telephone calls. Cyprus fi gures among 
the cheapest Member States for all three types of 
call, while Estonia is among the cheapest for both 
types of national call – although for international 
calls  to  the  United  States  Estonia  is  above  the 
EU-25  average.  Slovakia  is  the  most  expensive 
Member  State  for  both  types  of  national  call, 
while Latvia and Finland were the most expensive 
countries for making a call to the United States.

Figure  8.19  confi rms  the  downward  price  trend 
noted  for  the  harmonised  index  of  consumer 
prices for telecommunications services, with the 
price  of  national  long-distance  calls  declining 
faster  between  2002  and  2006  than  local  calls. 
It  also  shows  that  across  the  EU-25  the  average 
price  of  (national)  incumbent  operators  in  each 
Member State was slightly higher than the average 
price of (national) competitors: the diff erence was 
very small for local calls, but more substantial for 
national, long-distance calls.

Figure 8.19: Price (normal tariff , including 
VAT) of a 10 minute call at 11 am on a 
weekday, EU-25 (weighted average) (1)
(EUR)

1.20

1.00

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

National long distance call - incumbent

National long distance call - competitors

Local call - incumbent

Local call - competitors

(1) Prices are for August or September each year.

Source: Telecoms price development, Teligen for the European 
Commission, December 2006

298

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   298
Consumers.indb   298

08.04.2009   09:52:47
08.04.2009   09:52:47

Communications

8

8.4 Consumer satisfaction 
and complaints

In  2006  a  survey  of  consumers’  satisfaction 
with  a  range  of  services  of  general  interest 
was  undertaken  on  behalf  of  the  European 
Commission.  It  surveyed  persons  aged  18  and 
over that had used the specifi ed services during 
the  12  months  prior  to  the  survey.  Table  8.10 
provides an overview of the levels of satisfaction 
and dissatisfaction for mobile and fi xed telephony, 
as  well  as  postal  services.  Th  is  indicates  that  a 
majority of respondents were satisfi ed with each 
of these services, and most of the remainder were 
neutral,  leaving  less  than  10 %  of  respondents 
dissatisfi ed.

Th  e most dissatisfi ed consumers were the Czechs, 
23 %  dissatisfi ed  with  their  fi xed  telephone 
supply,  11 %  with  postal  services,  and  6 %  with 
mobile  telephony  services  –  among  the  highest 
rates of dissatisfaction for each of these services. 
Some  Member  States  reported  relatively  high 
dissatisfaction with just one or two of the three 
services covered, for example, postal services in 
Sweden and Denmark, fi xed telephony and postal 
services in Italy, and fi xed telephony in Portugal 
and  Poland.  In  contrast,  very  few  respondents 
in  Ireland,  Estonia  or  the  Netherlands  reported 
that they were dissatisfi ed with any of the three 
services.

Table 8.10: Satisfaction rates for communications services providers, 2006

      Mobile telephony
Satisfied
66
74
:
74
71
84
78
73
71
42
55
50
84
80
79
69
83
80
51
76
67
69
:
77
73
73
72
68

Dissatisfied
4
1
:
6
6
3
2
3
3
9
6
3
1
3
4
3
2
2
3
2
4
3
:
3
4
3
5
3

Fixed telephony

Postal services

Satisfied
52
62
:
41
61
71
71
78
45
36
49
27
69
65
72
69
65
73
40
70
45
30
:
69
53
61
63
60

Dissatisfied
8
3
:
23
8
6
4
2
9
8
8
15
7
4
5
4
10
3
3
3
13
20
:
6
9
5
7
5

Satisfied
53
44
:
52
53
59
72
82
70
48
46
29
77
68
80
68
71
62
48
58
61
65
:
74
59
66
45
56

Dissatisfied
7
6
:
11
12
5
3
2
4
4
7
10
6
4
1
3
8
8
3
8
8
4
:
4
6
5
22
9

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for health and consumer protection, 
May 2007

  Consumers in Europe

299

Consumers.indb   299
Consumers.indb   299

08.04.2009   09:52:48
08.04.2009   09:52:48

8

Communications

A  2006  Eurobarometer  survey  on  services  of 
general  interest  looked  at  views  concerning  the 
fairness of terms and conditions of contracts with 
various  telecommunication  service  providers. 
More than a quarter (28 %) of EU-25 respondents 
regarded such terms and conditions as unfair in 
the case of both mobile and fi xed telephony, with 
one fi ft h (20 %) also fi nding Internet access terms 
and conditions unfair (see Figure 8.20).

For  mobile  telephony,  the  lowest  proportions  of 
respondents regarding their terms and conditions 
as fair were in France (42 %), Italy (45 %), Poland 
(48 %) and Spain (51 %), with all other Member 
States  reporting  rates  well  over  60 %.  For  fi xed 
telephony,  Poland  (33 %)  and  Italy  (36 %)  again 
recorded a low proportion of consumers regarding 

their terms and conditions as fair, as was the case 
for Internet access (both just under 50 %).

Th  e same survey looked at complaints concerning 
the three telecommunications services, as well as 
postal services, and found that the proportion of 
respondents  having  made  a  complaint  to  their 
service provider within the previous two years was 
notably higher for the three telecommunications 
services than for postal services, and also higher 
than  for  the  other  services  surveyed  (mainly 
energy,  water  and  transport  service  providers). 
Th  e proportion having made a complaint to their 
service  provider  peaked  at  an  EU-25  average  of 
12 % for Internet access, and was particularly high 
for this service in Sweden (25 %), the Netherlands 
(19 %) and Finland (17 %) — see Figure 8.21.

Figure 8.20: Proportion of respondents 
regarding the terms and conditions of their 
contracts to be fair, EU-25, May-June 2006 (1)
(% of users of the speciﬁ ed services)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Figure 8.21: Proportion of respondents 
having personally made a complaint about 
any aspect of specifi ed services, EU-25, 
May-June 2006
(%)

0

5

10

15

Internet 
    access

          Mobile 
telephony

             Fixed 
telephony

Internet 
    access
         Mobile 
telephony
            Fixed 
telephony
      Postal 
services

Fair

Unfair

Do not know

To the service provider
To a complaint handling body
To another party

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

Table 8.11: Lack of satisfaction: reasons for not using the Internet more intensively 
(multiple answers allowed), EU-27

 General Internet use, 2008 (% of households without Internet access at home)

Access not needed (content is not useful, not interesting, etc.)
Equipment costs are too high
Lack of skills
Access costs are too high (telephone, etc.)
Access elsewhere
Access not wanted (content is harmful, etc.)
Privacy or security concerns
Physical disability
Other reasons

Broadband use, 2007 (% of households without broadband access)

Do not need it
Too expensive
Not available in the area
Some members can access broadband somewhere else (e.g. at work)
Other reasons

37
25
23
21
14
14
5
2
11

37
25
20
12
13

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for health and consumer protection, 
May 2007

300

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   300
Consumers.indb   300

08.04.2009   09:52:49
08.04.2009   09:52:49

8.5 Quality

Targets have been set regarding delivery speed for 
postal  services:  85 %  delivery  within  three  days 
and  98 %  delivery  within  fi ve  days.  According  to 
the  International  Post  Corporation,  the  actual 
performance  of  postal  operators  surpasses  these 
objectives.  In  2007,  an  average  of  94.9 %  of  cross-
border  priority  letter  mail  was  delivered  within 
three  days  of  posting  for  the  EU-15  plus  Iceland, 
Norway and Switzerland, up from 69.1 % in 1994; 
when  expanded  to  cover  all  but  one  of  the  EU-27 
countries the average was 94.1 % within three days.

At least half of the EU-25 respondents to a 2006 
Eurobarometer  survey  on  services  of  general 
interest  reported  that  their  interests  were  well 
protected concerning fi xed and mobile telephony, 
with around 30 % reporting that they were badly 
protected.  For  Internet  services  both  shares 
were  much  lower,  refl ecting  the  relatively  high 
proportion  of  respondents  who  did  not  know 
whether  they  were  well  protected  or  not.  For 
postal  services  the  proportion  regarding  their 
interests as badly protected (19 %) was the lowest 
of  the  ten  services  covered  by  the  survey,  while 
the share regarding their interest as well protected 
(70 %) was the highest.

A  2005  survey  gives  some  indication  of  the 
problems  EU-27  consumers 
face  regarding 
security  issues  linked  to  computer  and  Internet 
use. By far the most common problem was the loss 
of time and information from computer viruses, 
reported by one third of respondents having used 
the Internet in the previous year.
Figure 8.23: Proportion of respondents 
who feel that consumers’ interest are well 
protected, EU-25, May-June 2006
(%)

Communications

8

Figure 8.22: Cumulative proportion of European international 
fi rst class/priority letter mail delivered within specifi ed number 
of days after the day-of-posting (1)
(%)

94.9

69.1

97.9

98.9

99.3

99.5

96.2

98.0

92.4

84.3

D+3 target: 
85%

D+5 target: 
97%

100

75

50

82.3

43.5

25

15.8

7.7

0

D+1

D+2

D+3

D+4

D+5

D+6

D+7

Days after the day-of-posting (D)

1994

2007

Targets

(1) UNEX-18 includes EU-15, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland; D is the day of posting, and 
the number of days after the day of posting is calculated on a ﬁ ve day working week, also 
excluding public holidays in the recipient country.

Source: UNEX Quality of Service Monitoring, International Post Corporation, 2007 (www.ipc.be)

Figure 8.24: Percentage of individuals who have, in the 12 
months prior to the survey, experienced the following security 
problems, EU-27, 2005
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

      Postal 
services

              Fixed 
telephony

          Mobile 
telephony

Internet
services

                Computer virus 
          resulting in loss of 
information or time (1)

                                Abuse of 
     personal information 
sent on the Internet (1)

          Fraudulent payment 
(credit or debit) card use

Well

Badly

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

(1) Percentage among individuals who used Internet within the last year.

Source: Eurostat, information society statistics (theme9/science/isoc/isoc_pi_i1)

  Consumers in Europe

301

Consumers.indb   301
Consumers.indb   301

08.04.2009   09:52:50
08.04.2009   09:52:50

8

Communications

8.6 Externalities: health

Electromagnetic  fi elds  (EMF)  occur  in  nature; 
exposure  to  man-made  sources  has  increased 
due  to  increased  electricity  demand,  and  the 
development  of  various  electrical  appliances 
that  rely  on  electromagnetic  fi elds.  Exposure 
comes,  for  example,  from  high-voltage  power 
lines, household electrical appliances, radio and 
television broadcast facilities, mobile telephones 
and  their  base  stations.  Research  has  so  far 
produced no conclusive evidence one way or the 
other concerning the health eff ects from exposure 
to these fi elds.

In  2006,  a  Eurobarometer  survey  looked  at 
opinions  concerning  EMF,  and  asked  whether 
respondents  felt  that  various  EMF  producing 
appliances  aff ected  their  health  or  not.  Figure 
8.25  shows  the  results  for  mobile  phones  and 
mobile phone masts for the EU-27, with around 
three  quarters  of  respondents  expressing  the 
opinion that these two types of equipment aff ect 
their health to at least some extent.

Figure 8.25: Proportion of respondents 
who feel that the selected items aff ect their 
health, EU-27, October-November 2006
(%)

Mobile phone 
          handsets

Mobile phone
                masts

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

To a big extent
Not at all

To some extent
Do not know

Source: ‘Electromagnetic ﬁ elds’, Special Eurobarometer 272, 
European Commission

For more information

Directorate-General for the Information Society and Media: 
 http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/index_en.htm

Directorate-General for the Internal Market and Services: 
 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/post/index_en.htm

Directorate-General for Enterprise and Industry: 
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/index_en.htm

302

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   302
Consumers.indb   302

08.04.2009   09:52:52
08.04.2009   09:52:52

Recreation and culture

Consumers.indb   303
Consumers.indb   303

08.04.2009   09:52:53
08.04.2009   09:52:53

9

Recreation and culture

Recreational and cultural activities play a key role 
in promoting social cohesion, improving health, 
and providing education. Expressing and sharing 
cultural ideas and traditions (for example, through 
exhibitions,  theatre,  food  and  music)  can  be  an 
important asset for strengthening and promoting 
diversity,  and  breaking  down  prejudices,  as  was 
illustrated  during  the  2008  European  Year  of 
Intercultural Dialogue.

Reading  books  and  magazines  can  also  be  an 
important  form  of  information  and  education. 
Indeed,  cultural  exposure  can  stimulate  skills, 
such  as  openness  to  inter-cultural  ideas,  styles, 
teamwork, creativity and imagination, which may 
be  particularly  useful  for  citizens  and  workers 
in the knowledge-based economy. Th  is will be a 
constant message during the 2009 European Year 
of Creativity and Innovation.

Table 9.1: Availability of entertainment venues in capital cities, 
2003-2006
(per million inhabitants)

Bruxelles/Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London

Cinema 
seats (1)
15 283
9 371
20 546
23 039
17 267
8 776
:
24 732
23 178
34 376
19 146
19 932
6 367
8 130
42 547
14 418
:
14 682
19 499
18 007
37 387
5 916
19 500
22 961
16 274
24 974
15 153

Museums 
(2)
81
24
75
54
49
107
40
35
4
20
20
65
45
47
120
59
111
:
65
29
76
16
:
35
71
67
22

Theatres 
(3)
112
22
47
100
18
28
65
44
21
80
:
35
8
11
72
14
30
:
28
18
60
15
:
47
16
53
19

Public 
libraries (4)
81
109
83
46
19
61
117
86
:
31
17
23
69
54
409
:
:
:
96
174
672
27
:
42
89
96
52

(1) Soﬁ a, Copenhagen, Rome, Nicosia, Amsterdam and London, 1999-2002; Ljubljana, 
1994-1998.
(2) Soﬁ a, Prague, Copenhagen, Berlin, Dublin, Athens, Madrid, Nicosia, Bucharest and London, 
1999-2002.
(3) Soﬁ a, Prague, Copenhagen, Berlin, Dublin, Madrid, Nicosia and London, 1999-2002.
(4) Soﬁ a, Prague, Copenhagen, Dublin, Athens, Paris and Bucharest, 1999-2002.

Source: Eurostat, Urban Audit (theme1/urb/urb_vcity)

As well as these key roles, recreational and cultural 
activities are a primary source of entertainment 
and  well-being,  in  which  a  growing  proportion 
of  Europe’s  population  are  participating. 
Furthermore,  sport  and  leisure  activities  can 
bring health benefi ts, reducing the risk of disease 
and weight problems.

9.1 Access and choice

Eurostat’s  Urban  Audit 
survey  provides 
information about the numbers of cinema seats, 
museums, theatres and public libraries in a range 
of European cities and towns. In order to express 
the concept of availability, numbers are expressed 
per million inhabitants in the resident population. 
However, the relative size of cities should also be 
borne in mind: for example, with 83 000 residents, 
Luxembourg’s population was by far the smallest 
among  the  EU-27  capitals,  dwarfed  by  the 
7.4 million inhabitants of London. Furthermore, 
for some of the cities, it should be borne in mind 
that data relate to the survey period through until 
2002 or in the case of Ljubljana even earlier (see 
the footnotes to the table) and there are likely to 
have been changes in the intervening period.

In  broad  terms,  the  city  of  Luxembourg  scored 
relatively  highly  as  regards  the  availability  of 
a  range  of  cultural  amenities  (see  Table  9.1). 
Elsewhere,  the  availability  of  cinema  seats  per 
million residents was relatively high in Paris and 
Lisbon,  the  number  of  museums  was  relatively 
high  in  Tallinn  and  Valletta  (also  two  of  the 
EU-27’s  smaller  capital  cities),  the  number  of 
theatres  was  relatively  high  in  Brussels  and 
Copenhagen,  while  the  number  of  libraries  was 
relatively  high  in  Sofi a,  Dublin,  Warsaw  and 
Lisbon.

While  the  number  of  libraries  may  be  used  as 
a  proxy  for  availability  and  access,  it  should  be 
noted that diff erent libraries will off er a range of 
diff erent  titles  and  media.  Furthermore,  while 
some  libraries  are  rich  in  terms  the  number 
of  titles  and  diff erent  media  that  they  off er,  the 
uptake of renting/borrowing by citizens may also 
be quite diff erent from one city to the next (with 
others  choosing  to  consult  books  in  the  library 
rather  than  take  them  home).  Each  resident  in 
Helsinki  borrowed  an  average  of  more  than  18 
titles per year, compared with less than one title 
per resident per year in Vilnius.

304

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   304
Consumers.indb   304

08.04.2009   09:53:01
08.04.2009   09:53:01

Recreation and culture

9

Table 9.2: Density of screens in multiplexes 
(1)
(%)

Table 9.3: Market share of fi lms, by origin of 
fi lm, 2006 (1)
(%)

Domestic 
(2)
6.3
22.3
25.4
16.7
15.6
44.6
22.9
1.8
11.3
2.0
2.2
23.7
21.4
19.1

Other 
Europe (3)
15.9
15.4
7.5
:
11.8
8.8
10.8
24.8
9.9
15.9
26.9
14.4
15.8
0.9

BE
DK
DE
EL
ES
FR
IT
LU
NL
AT
PT
FI
SE
UK

US 
(4)
77.1
60.8
66.0
:
71.0
44.7
64.2
72.7
76.9
:
69.4
60.8
59.8
76.2

(1) Those Member States for which no information is shown, not 
available.
(2) Austria and Sweden, 2005; Greece, 1999.
(3) Portugal and Sweden, 2005; United Kingdom, 2000.
(4) Portugal and Sweden, 2005.

Source: Cinema d’Europa, Media Salles 
(http://www.mediasalles.it/ybk07adv/)

In  most  of  the  EU-15  Member  States,  US  fi lms 
dominated the cinema market in 2006 – although 
this was not the case in France, where there was 
an almost equal number of French and US fi lms 
being shown (see Table 9.3). Figures from Media 
Salles suggest a renaissance in domestic and other 
European fi lms in some of the Member States, as 
about  one  quarter  of  the  fi lms  being  shown  in 
Luxembourg  (2006)  and  Portugal  (2005)  came 
from  other  Member  States,  in  contrast  to  only 
1 % of fi lms being shown in the United Kingdom 
(2000).

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

1996 (2)
37.1
:
1.1
7.8
:
:
27.4
5.6
10.5
12.4
0.4
:
:
:
38.5
1.6
:
3.5
12.1
1.1
12.1
:
:
:
3.0
12.7
30.9

2001 (3)
48.7
11.1
10.0
15.5
25.2
13.6
30.8
10.4
40.9
26.3
12.0
:
12.7
10.1
40.0
17.7
38.1
12.4
38.9
22.0
18.9
3.6
13.0
2.8
12.7
13.9
56.2

2006
59.0
41.1
18.5
20.0
26.2
16.4
45.1
29.6
61.3
32.5
27.9
:
28.6
28.8
41.7
27.9
41.5
20.0
39.9
39.1
35.3
19.4
36.5
8.1
15.5
15.5
64.8

(1) The screens situated in multiplexes (i.e. theatres with at least 8 
screens), as a percentage of the total number of screens.
(2) Greece and Luxembourg, 1997; Poland and Finland, 1998.
(3) Lithuania, 2002; Bulgaria, Latvia and Malta, 2003.

Source: Cinema d’Europa, Media Salles
 (http://www.mediasalles.it/ybk07adv/)

While the number of seats per million inhabitants 
might  be  regarded  as  a  broad  indicator  of 
accessibility to cinemas, it says nothing about their 
distribution, nor the choice of fi lms shown. Th  e 
cinema market has changed rapidly in the EU-27 
in  recent  years,  as  multiplexes  (in  other  words, 
theatres with at least eight screens) account for an 
increasing share. In Belgium, Spain and the United 
Kingdom  about  six  out  of  every  ten  screens  are 
now found in a multiplex (see Table 9.2), up from 
about three out of ten a decade before in Belgium 
and  the  United  Kingdom  and  one  out  of  every 
ten  in  Spain. Th  e  increase  in  multiplex  cinemas 
in the ten years to 2006 was particularly fast in a 
number of the Member States that joined the EU 
since  2004  (for  example,  Poland  and  Hungary). 
Among  the  Member  States  for  which  data  are 
available for 2006, only Slovakia had fewer than 
10 % of its cinema screens in multiplexes.

  Consumers in Europe

305

Consumers.indb   305
Consumers.indb   305

08.04.2009   09:53:04
08.04.2009   09:53:04

9

Recreation and culture

their  purchases  of 

Consumers  across  the  EU-27  tend  to  make 
most  of 
information 
and  communication  equipment,  as  well  as 
entertainment  and  leisure  goods,  in  specialised 
chain stores (see Figure 9.1). According to a retail 
satisfaction  survey  in  2008,  almost  two  thirds 
(65.5 %)  of  consumers  in  the  EU-27  preferred 
to  shop  for  information  and  communication 
equipment in a chain store specialising in these 
products,  while  53.7 %  of  EU-27  consumers 
shopped  for  entertainment  and  leisure  goods 
in  chain  stores  specialising  in  these  products. 
Th  e  next  most  popular  retail  formats  were 
supermarkets/
independent 
hypermarkets for both groups of products. While 
the  Internet  was  a  more  popular  retail  format 
than  department  stores  for  information  and 
communication equipment, this was not the case 
for entertainment and leisure goods.

retailers 

and 

Th  ere was a wide range of shopping preferences 
across  the  Member  States.  For  example,  the 
leisure  goods 
information  and 
purchase  of 
from independent stores was the favoured retail 
format for consumers in Hungary and Slovenia, 
whereas  supermarkets  and  hypermarkets  were 
favoured by consumers in Bulgaria. About half of 
all  consumers  in  Denmark  bought  information 
and  communication  equipment  as  well  as 
entertainment  and  leisure  goods  through  the 
Internet in 2008.

Figure 9.1: In which of the following 
places have you or has a member of 
your household bought information 
or communication equipment and 
entertainment and leisure goods most, 
EU-27, 2008?
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

            Retail 
chain stores

Supermarkets &
   hypermarkets

Independent 
          retailers

Department 
            stores

Internet

Discount stores

            Mail & 
phone order

  Sales at home 
(door-to-door
                  sales)

Information & communication equipment

Entertainment & leisure goods

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European 
Commission, August/September 2008

306

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   306
Consumers.indb   306

08.04.2009   09:53:04
08.04.2009   09:53:04

Recreation and culture

9

9.2 Consumption

9.2.1 Consumption volume

Television

Watching  television  is  a  recreational  activity 
enjoyed  by  millions  of  Europeans.  Hungarians 
watched an average of about four and three quarter 
hours per week in 2004, the highest fi gure among 
the  Member  States;  each  individual  in  Greece, 
Poland and Italy also watched over four hours of 
television on average per week. In contrast, those 

living  in  Cyprus,  Denmark,  Finland,  Austria, 
Sweden  and  Luxembourg  watched  between  two 
and a half and three hours of television per week, 
the  lowest  levels  in  the  EU  –  note  that  the  age 
range  of  the  population  covered  in  Figure  9.2 
varies  greatly  between  Member  States  and  this 
may to some extent infl uence the results shown.

Figure 9.2: Average viewing time per adult, 
2004 (1)
(minutes per week)

Figure 9.3: Television, cable and home 
satellite usage, third quarter 2005
(% of households)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

HU

EL

PL

IT

EE

UK

SK

ES

RO

EU-25

DE

LT

PT

FR

LV

CZ

NL

BE (2)

BG

IE

SI

CY

DK

FI

AT

SE

LU

EL
CY
IT
ES
LT
LV
CZ
LU
RO
PT
PL
FR
UK
SK
EE
FI
IE
BG
SI
HU
DK
SE
MT
LU
AT
DE
NL
BE

(1) Adult individuals aged 15 years and over (with the following 
exceptions): Estonia, Cyprus, Hungary and Latvia, 18 years and 
over; Poland, Spain and the United Kingdom, 16 years and over; 
Germany, 14 years and over; the Netherlands, 13 years and over; 
Denmark, Luxembourg, Austria and Slovakia, 12 years and over; 
Finland, 10 years and over; Malta, not available.
(2) Simple average of the ﬁ gures for northern (172) and southern 
Belgium (220).

Source: Television 2005, International key facts, 
IP International Marketing Committee (CMI)

Terrestrial

Satellite

Cable

Source: Dataxis for the European Commission

  Consumers in Europe

307

Consumers.indb   307
Consumers.indb   307

08.04.2009   09:53:05
08.04.2009   09:53:05

9

Recreation and culture

(23) COM(2005) 204 ﬁ nal.

Technological innovation has resulted in audio-
visual content being made available on a variety of 
devices (such as mobile phones, laptop computers, 
MP3 players), and through a variety of diff erent 
platforms. Th  ese innovations have triggered new 
entrants to the market (such as Internet protocol 
television and network operators off ering online 
video  services)  and  resulted  in  ever-increasing 
audience fragmentation.

Th  e European Commission recommended (23) that 
Member  States  switch-off   analogue,  terrestrial 
television transmission by 2012, citing consumer 
benefi ts  of  improved  picture  quality,  better 
sound,  better  portable  and  mobile  reception, 
more  TV  and  radio  channels  and  enhanced 
information services. Most of the Member States 
have started running digital, terrestrial television 
and  as  the  switch-off   gathers  pace,  more  and 
more  households  have  switched  to  cable  and 
satellite systems (with terrestrial freeview options 

Table 9.4: Cinema, theatre and museum admissions in capital 
cities, 2003-2006
(thousand)

Bruxelles/Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London

Cinema 
(1)
4 606
1 062
4 372
3 973
11 488
981
:
2 456
13 160
30 209
11 857
523
1 390
966
1 300
7 793
266
3 218
5 348
7 180
4 714
1 751
370
1 310
2 460
3 968
:

Museums
 (2)
1 992
825
2 793
2 237
8 740
662
1 033
938
4 484
17 272
847
511
826
500
160
4 033
1 240
:
8 853
2 235
3 451
:
922
469
1 488
5 078
26 885

Theatres
 (3)
:
430
3 000
1 121
3 100
506
:
1 038
2 843
:
1 361
:
560
322
74
2 457
118
:
2 456
1 478
347
:
242
452
719
1 730
:

(1) Soﬁ a, Copenhagen, Rome, Nicossia and Amsterdam, 1999-2002; Valletta, 1989-1993.
(2) Soﬁ a, Prague, Copenhagen, Berlin, Dublin, Madrid, Nicossia and London, 1999-2002.
(3) Soﬁ a, Prague, Copenhagen, Berlin, Madrid, Rome, Lisbon and Ljubljana, 1999-2002.

Source: Eurostat, Urban Audit (theme1/urb/urb_vcity)

becoming available). An OECD and International 
Telecommunication  Union  (ITU)  report  on  the 
‘Communications  outlook,  2007’  suggested  that 
in  September  2006,  Luxembourg  was  the  fi rst 
Member State to complete the switch-off  process 
(with more than 95 % of households having cable 
access).

the  number  of 

According to Dataxis (see Figure 9.3), in the third 
quarter  of  2005,  Austria  was  the  only  Member 
State  where  satellite  television  was  the  most 
common means of household access to television. 
Although 
terrestrial-only 
households fell sharply from 1995, there remain 
some  Member  States  where  such  households 
continue to be in the majority, such as Greece and 
Cyprus, where they accounted for over 90 %, or 
Latvia, Lithuania, Spain and Italy (between two 
thirds  and  three  quarters  of  all  households);  to 
some degree, these patterns may also refl ect the 
degree to which diff erent access possibilities are 
available.

Cinemas, theatres and museums

According to Media Salles, there were about 930 
million  admissions  to  cinemas  in  the  EU-27  in 
2006, of which about 855 million were in EU-15 
Member  States.  France  (22.1 %),  the  United 
Kingdom  (18.3 %),  Germany  (16.0 %)  and  Spain 
(14.4 %) collectively contributed over two thirds 
(70.8 %)  of  cinema  admissions  in  the  EU-27  in 
2006.

Among  most  of  the  EU-27’s  capital  cities, 
admissions  to  cinemas  were  higher  than  for 
either  museums  or  theatres  (see  Table  9.4), 
although of these three types of cultural venues, 
theatres  proved  the  most  visited  venues  in 
Valletta, Vienna, Ljubljana and Stockholm. Note 
that admissions data (in particular for museums) 
are likely to be aff ected by the number of tourists 
visiting each city.

308

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   308
Consumers.indb   308

08.04.2009   09:53:06
08.04.2009   09:53:06

Recreation and culture

9

(24) There are some 

Member States where 
the age range is 
diﬀ erent: for example, 
in Slovenia and Finland 
the data covers 
individuals aged 10 
to 74; see http://epp.
eurostat.ec.europa.eu/
cache/ITY_SDDS/EN/
isoc_ci_base.htm for 
more information.

Internet

Th  e  use  of  computers  is  widespread:  computers 
are used on a daily basis for work, study, shopping 
and  communications  (in  particular  e-mail), 
as  well  as  other  recreational  activities  such  as 
playing games, or accessing information.

According  to  Eurostat’s  survey  on  ICT  usage, 
almost six out of every ten (57 %) individuals in 
the  EU-27  aged  between  16  and  74  years  old  (24) 
used the Internet in the three months preceding 
the  2007  survey,  a  proportion  that  has  grown 
steadily  (up  from  44 %  in  2004).  Of  these,  the 
most  common  recreational  use  (31.0 %)  was  for 
services related to travel and accommodation (see 

Table 9.5). A little more than one fi ft h of Internet 
users  played  or  downloaded  music  or  games 
(22.0 %), as well as reading or downloading online 
newspapers or journals (21 %), while about one in 
seven  Internet  users  across  the  EU-27  used  the 
Internet to listen to or watch radio or television.

Among  the  Member  States,  nearly  four  out  of 
every fi ve individuals in the Netherlands (84 %), 
Denmark  (81 %),  Sweden  (80 %),  Finland  (79 %) 
and Luxembourg (78 %) used the Internet in the 
three  months  preceding  the  2007  survey,  and 
these  were  generally  the  Member  States  where 
Internet use for the various recreational activities 
was also highest.

Table 9.5: Internet use for recreational and cultural activities in the three months preceding 
the survey, 2007
(% of individuals)

of which, used for:

Internet 
use
57
67
31
49
81
72
64
57
33
52
64
38
38
55
49
78
52
45
84
67
44
40
24
53
56
79
80
72

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Music & 
games
22
23
16
20
33
21
29
13
15
25
22
14
20
27
27
33
27
19
45
17
17
21
12
25
23
34
35
26

Travel & 
accomm.
31
34
5
25
51
45
21
39
16
33
30
18
23
18
14
55
24
21
48
28
11
14
5
26
26
57
41
46

Papers & 
journals
21
17
10
22
47
21
50
10
16
24
18
17
22
18
32
42
28
20
40
24
15
15
9
23
25
50
43
22

VOIP & 
video conf. 
(1)
10
10
11
16
20
13
16
7
3
8
9
6
6
18
19
23
13
7
21
12
10
9
4
9
12
18
9
8

Selling 
goods & 
services (2)
10
8
1
5
22
21
5
3
0
3
7
4
1
2
1
12
4
7
20
7
5
1
1
9
2
13
13
13

Web 
radio
or T.V.
15
13
10
8
34
15
21
10
8
17
17
8
13
20
20
29
16
14
35
7
13
14
6
23
11
24
33
18

(1) Voice-over-Internet Protocol.
(2) Czech Republic, Greece and Portugal, 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Urban Audit (theme1/urb/urb_vcity)

  Consumers in Europe

309

Consumers.indb   309
Consumers.indb   309

08.04.2009   09:53:07
08.04.2009   09:53:07

9

Recreation and culture

9.2.2 Consumption expenditure

Annual  household  consumption  expenditure 
on  recreation  and  culture  averaged  EUR  1 300 
per person across the EU-27 as a whole in 2006. 
Between  2000  and  2006,  particularly  sharp 
increases in household consumption expenditure 
on  recreation  and  culture  were  noted 
in 
Lithuania, Estonia, Hungary and Slovakia, where 
expenditure  more  than  doubled  from  relatively 
low levels of between EUR 100 and EUR 200 per 
person. Th  ere were also notable increases in the 
Czech  Republic,  the  United  Kingdom,  Cyprus 
and  Ireland,  generally  resulting  from  increases 
in  the  volume  component  of  fi nal  consumption 
expenditure rather than price increases.

Table 9.6: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, recreation and culture, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

2 187
2 868
204
1 289
2 738
3 168
691
3 670
1 285
1 659
1 926
1 680
2 044
667
402
3 869
909
2 879
3 193
3 809
662
1 182
224
2 234
712
2 731
3 398
3 943
853
3 593

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

In  terms  of  comparable  price  levels  between 
countries, the 2005 HBS shows that consumption 
expenditure  on  recreation  and  culture 
in 
purchasing  power  standard  (PPS)  terms  was, 
on average, PPS 2 187 for the EU-27. Th  ere were 
considerable variations among the Member States, 
from lows of a little over PPS 200 in Bulgaria and 
Romania,  to  a  high  of  PPS  3 943  in  the  United 
Kingdom (see Table 9.6).

Expenditure on recreation and culture accounted 
for  an  average  8.3 %  of 
total  household 
consumption  expenditure  across  the  EU-27  in 
2005. Th  is share was highest in Austria (12.6 %), 
closely  followed  by  the  United  Kingdom  and 
Sweden, and lowest in Greece, Romania (at about 
half  of  the  EU-27  average)  and  particularly  in 
Bulgaria (2.9 %) – see Figure 9.4.

Figure 9.4: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of recreation and culture 
in total expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

5

10

15

AT
NO
UK
SE
DK
FI
DE
NL
IE
MT
BE
SI
HU
EU-27
LU
FR
SK
EE
ES
PL
LV
CY
IT
PT
HR
LT
EL
RO
BG

310

Consumers in Europe 

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

Consumers.indb   310
Consumers.indb   310

08.04.2009   09:53:08
08.04.2009   09:53:08

Recreation and culture

9

Figure 9.5: Harmonised indices of consumer 
prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

150

140

130

120

110

100

90

80

2001

2003

2005

2007

Recreation & culture

Audiovis., photo. & inf. proc. equip.

Package holidays

Newspapers, books & stationery

Recreational & cultural services

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Many  recreational  and  cultural  goods  cannot 
be  considered  as  essential  consumer  goods,  but 
rather  as  luxury  purchases  (holidays,  cultural 
services, recreational and sporting services). It is 
perhaps  unsurprising,  therefore,  that  a  steadily 
increasing proportion of household consumption 
expenditure  was  spent  on  recreation  and 
cultural activities as household income rose; this 
expenditure  represented  6.4 %  of  the  household 
expenditure for the lowest income quintile within 
the EU-27 in 2005, rising to a 9.4 % share among 
those households in the highest income quintile. 
Th  ere was also a wide disparity in the proportion 
of expenditure on recreation and culture between 
various socio-economic groups, the highest share 
(9.6 %) being recorded for non-manual workers, 
well above the 6.9 % share for the unemployed.

9.3 Prices

9.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  e EU-27’s harmonised index of consumer prices 
for recreation and culture rose moderately in the 
period between 2000 and 2002 (up by 1.2 % per 
annum),  and  then  remained  largely  unchanged 
(-0.1 %  per  annum)  through  to  2007.  However, 
there  were  contrasting  price  developments  for 
many  of  the  items  that  make-up  the  aggregate 
for  recreation  and  culture  (see  Figure  9.5).  For 
example,  there  was  a  strong  and  steady  decline 
in  the  price  of  audio-visual,  photographic  and 
information  processing 
equipment  during 
the  period  2000  to  2007  (on  average  by  7.6 % 
per  annum),  in  contrast  to  price  increases  for 
recreational  and  cultural  services  (3.1 %  per 
annum), package holidays (2.7 %), or newspapers, 
books and stationery (2.5 %).

Among  the  Member  States,  the  consumer  price 
index  for  recreation  and  culture  rose  relatively 
quickly during the period from 2000 to 2007 in 
Hungary  and  Slovenia  (4.0 %  per  annum),  with 
the  highest  price  increases  being  recorded  in 
Romania (10.1 % per annum). In contrast, there 
were  relatively  moderate  price  reductions  in 
Sweden (-0.2 % per annum), the United Kingdom 
(-0.4 %), France (-0.6 %) and Lithuania (-0.7 %).

  Consumers in Europe

311

Consumers.indb   311
Consumers.indb   311

08.04.2009   09:53:08
08.04.2009   09:53:08

9

Recreation and culture

9.3.2 Price levels

In comparison with the average price level across 
the  EU-27,  prices  for  recreation  and  culture  in 
2006 were highest in the Scandinavian countries 
(see Figure 9.6); in particular in Denmark, about 
one  third  (34.4 %)  above  the  EU-27  average.  In 
contrast, price level indices in all of the Member 
States that joined the EU since 2004 were below 
the EU-27 average; the lowest levels were recorded 
in  Bulgaria  (at  a  little  less  than  half  the  EU-27 
average),  Romania,  Lithuania,  Slovakia,  Latvia 
and the Czech Republic.

Th  e  average  price  paid  for  a  cinema  ticket  was 
above EUR 7.00 in Finland, the United Kingdom 
and Denmark in 2006, but was closer to EUR 9.00 
in Sweden (see Table 9.7). In contrast, the lowest 
average  entry  prices  to  see  a  fi lm  at  the  cinema 
were  recorded  in  Slovakia  and  Bulgaria  (both 
about EUR 2.50 a ticket).

Between  1996  and  2006,  there  was  a  broad  and 
widespread increase in average cinema ticket prices. 
Th  e strongest price increases were recorded among 
many  of  the  Member  States  that  joined  the  EU 
since 2004, but there were also relatively substantial 
increases in Spain and the United Kingdom.

Figure 9.6: Price level indices, recreation 
and culture, 2006
(EU-27=100)

Table 9.7: Average ticket price for the 
cinema
(EUR)

0

50

100

150

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

1996 (1)
4.99
0.72
1.00
5.99
5.11
1.66
4.66
4.20
3.18
5.30
4.81
3.99
1.15
:
5.12
0.96
:
5.54
5.38
1.63
2.60
0.39
2.67
0.81
6.17
7.17
4.34

2001
5.50
2.16
2.37
7.29
5.55
3.70
5.21
5.60
4.20
5.46
5.32
6.47
2.85
2.31
6.20
2.54
:
6.24
6.29
3.65
3.80
0.96
3.20
1.63
7.08
7.49
6.63

2006 (2)
5.88
2.59
3.26
7.18
5.96
4.28
6.43
:
5.22
5.94
5.76
6.44
3.53
2.88
6.60
3.26
4.59
6.66
6.01
3.73
4.17
2.98
3.77
2.45
7.53
8.68
7.23

(1) Bulgaria, 1997; Greece, 1995.
(2) Belgium and Luxembourg, 2005

Source: Cinema d’Europa, Media Salles 
(http://www.mediasalles.it/ybk07adv/)

IS
NO
DK
CH
FI
SE
IE
LU
UK
DE
IT
FR
BE
AT
EU-27
NL
ES
CY
EL
PT
SI
MT
HR
TR
PL
EE
HU
CZ
LV
SK
MK
LT
RO
BG

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

312

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   312
Consumers.indb   312

08.04.2009   09:53:09
08.04.2009   09:53:09

Recreation and culture

9

9.4 Consumer satisfaction

Residents of the EU-27’s capitals vary considerably 
in  how  they  feel  about  the  recreational  and 
cultural  aspects  of  their  city.  Table  9.8  shows 
public perception about a range of characteristics 
in  capital  cities.  In  terms  of  green  space,  sports 
facilities,  cinemas  and  cultural  facilities,  a  large 
majority of residents in Amsterdam and Helsinki 
seemed  to  be  satisfi ed  (rather  or  strongly)  with 
the amenities their city off ered. In Copenhagen, 
Paris,  Luxembourg,  Stockholm  and  London, 
a  high  proportion  of  respondents  were  also 
satisfi ed, although the share fell considerably for 
those  satisfi ed  with  sports  facilities  (which  was 
notably lower than for the other amenities).

Th  ere was dissatisfaction with green space areas 
in  Budapest  (50 %),  Bratislava  (62 %),  Athens 
(68 %)  and  Sofi a  (74 %),  while  a  majority  of 
respondents were dissatisfi ed with sports facilities 
in Bratislava (51 %) and Sofi a (55 %). A relatively 
high  proportion  of  residents  in  Athens  (26 %), 
Nicosia (28 %) and Sofi a (31 %) were dissatisfi ed 
with their cities’ cultural facilities.

A consumer satisfaction survey in 2008 covered 
purchases  of  information  and  communication 
equipment, as well as entertainment and leisure 
goods.  On  a  scale  of  1-10  (higher  scores  reveal 
greater satisfaction), the average EU-27 consumer 
rated their overall satisfaction with retailers as 9.0 
for  information  and  communication  equipment 
and  8.9  for  entertainment  and  leisure  goods. 
Th  e  highest  levels  of  satisfaction  were  recorded 
in  Lithuania,  Bulgaria  and  Hungary,  with  the 
lowest levels of satisfaction being recorded among 
consumers  in  Italy,  Spain  and  the  Netherlands 
(see Figure 9.7).

Table 9.8: Perception of satisfaction with recreational facilities 
in capital cities, 2006 (1)
(% of resident population)

Bruxelles/Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London

Green 
space
85.4
25.6
65.8
88.2
82.0
67.8
78.7
32.0
65.7
77.6
73.4
52.5
75.0
66.7
84.2
49.7
51.9
80.6
83.6
79.1
50.9
52.0
67.1
36.6
88.2
92.3
86.9

Sports 
facilities
60.4
25.8
61.0
59.9
61.2
58.7
55.5
53.5
51.6
48.9
54.5
55.4
43.0
36.5
64.8
34.7
52.7
74.4
62.0
30.3
44.5
35.0
44.3
31.7
87.9
62.0
55.8

Cinemas
68.8
56.8
67.8
87.7
80.8
53.2
83.3
65.3
68.7
81.0
76.1
69.0
59.0
58.7
73.6
50.2
54.7
80.8
77.8
76.0
69.3
38.8
74.0
58.2
84.4
83.9
73.5

Cultural 
facilities
81.3
46.4
83.5
93.6
88.6
84.7
86.4
63.2
70.7
89.0
71.6
63.4
74.8
77.1
78.3
78.5
61.8
91.4
92.6
76.2
69.4
62.2
81.2
69.3
94.8
89.5
81.7

(1) Ratings are given for ‘rather’ and ‘strong’ satisfaction.

Source: Eurostat, Perception surveys (theme1/urb/urb_percep)

Figure 9.7: Overall, to what extent are you satisfi ed with your regular retailer when it comes to buying 
information and communication equipment and entertainment and leisure goods, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

10

8

6

4

2

0

LT BG HU RO DE CZ EL AT UK EE CY BE

LU SI

LV EU-
27

PL MT

IE

SK PT

FI

FR DK SE NL

ES

IT

Information & communication equipment

Entertainment & leisure goods

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (not at all satisﬁ ed) to 10 (fully satisﬁ ed).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

  Consumers in Europe

313

Consumers.indb   313
Consumers.indb   313

08.04.2009   09:53:10
08.04.2009   09:53:10

9

Recreation and culture

Th  e same survey reveals that 12.5 % of consumers 
the  EU-27  experienced  problems  when 
in 
purchasing 
information  and  communication 
equipment  in  2008,  the  share  for  entertainment 
and leisure goods being 8.9 %. Among those who 
faced  problems,  about  half  complained  about 
product quality (see Figure 9.8), with between 10 % 
and 16 % complaining about problems associated 
with the quality of service, repairs, or delivery.

When asked if they thought their regular retailer 
would  replace,  repair,  reduce  the  price  or  give 
them  their  money  back  if  the  information  and 
communication equipment or the entertainment 
and  leisure  goods  that  they  had  bought  were 
defective or not fi t for purpose, a majority of EU-27 
consumers agreed (in both cases an average of 8.0 
was recorded – see Figure 9.9).

Figure 9.8: Problems faced by consumers when purchasing information and communication equipment and 
entertainment and leisure goods in the past 12 months, EU-27, 2008 (1)
(% share of those experiencing problems, multiple answers allowed)

0

25

50

75

Quality of product
Quality of service
Repair
Delivery (late or not at all)
Claims for goods under guarantee
Incorrect labelling/information
Refund or cancellation
Price (too high/not indicated/wrongly advertised)
Unhelpful or obstructive retailer 
Contractual terms and conditions
Returning unwanted goods
Product safety
Selling methods

(1) When purchasing information and communication equipment in 2008, 12.5 % of EU-27 consumers reported facing at least one problem, the corresponding share 
for entertainment and leisure goods being 8.9 %; note that consumers may have faced more than one problem.

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

Information & communication equipment
Entertainment & leisure goods

Figure 9.9: Do you agree that your regular retailer would replace, repair, reduce the price or give you your 
money back if information and communication equipment and entertainment and leisure goods you had 
bought were defective or not fi t for purpose, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

10

8

6

4

2

0

IE HU CZ DE UK AT

LT BE

FI

LU RO CY EL

EE EU-
27

SI

PL DK PT

FR MT LV SE

ES

SK BG NL

IT

Information & communication equipment

Entertainment & leisure goods

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

314

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   314
Consumers.indb   314

08.04.2009   09:53:11
08.04.2009   09:53:11

Recreation and culture

9

9.5 Quality

Th  e  same  consumer  satisfaction  survey  also 
asked respondents to what extent they agreed that 
information and communication equipment as well 
as  entertainment  and  leisure  goods  sold  by  their 
regular retailer were reliable (in other words, they 
worked  well  and  without  failure  for  a  reasonable 

period of time) and to what extent they were safe. 
On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 for total agreement), the 
average score across the EU-27 was, in both cases, 
8.2 for reliability, while scores of 8.2 and 8.3 were 
recorded for safety (see Figure 9.10).

Figure 9.10: To what extent do you agree that information and communication equipment and entertainment 
and leisure goods sold by your regular retailer are reliable (i.e. it works well and without failure for a reasonable 
period of time) and safe, 2008? (1)
(average, 1-10)

Information and communication equipment

Entertainment and leisure goods

0

2

4

6

8

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

HU
LT
RO
CZ
AT
BG
DE
EL
CY
UK
EE
BE
IE
SI
MT
LU
FI
EU-27
DK
SK
PL
PT
LV
IT
FR
SE
NL
ES

LT
EL
AT
EE
UK
DE
HU
IE
BE
RO
BG
CZ
CY
LU
EU-27
FI
SI
MT
FR
SK
LV
SE
DK
PL
PT
ES
IT
NL

Reliable
Safe

Reliable
Safe

(1) Average on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 10 (totally agree).

Source: ‘Retail satisfaction survey’, IPSOS for the European Commission, August/September 2008

  Consumers in Europe

315

Consumers.indb   315
Consumers.indb   315

08.04.2009   09:53:11
08.04.2009   09:53:11

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Education

Consumers.indb   317
Consumers.indb   317

08.04.2009   09:53:12
08.04.2009   09:53:12

10

Education

Th  e majority of pupils in the EU spend around a 
decade or more at school – it is where they gain 
the  basic  knowledge,  skills  and  competences 
that  will  serve  them  throughout  their  lives. Th  e 
importance of education and training are widely 
recognised  for  the  development  and  success  of 
a  knowledge-based  society  and  economy.  Th  e 
EU’s  education  and  training  policy  has  been 
given  added  impetus  since  the  adoption  of  the 
Lisbon  strategy  in  2000,  the  EU’s  overarching 
programme  focusing  on  growth,  productivity 
and  jobs,  which  underlined  the  importance  of 
knowledge and innovation.

and 

States 

the  European 
EU  Member 
Commission  have  in  recent  years  strengthened 
their  cooperation  through  the  Education  and 
Training 2010 work programme. Th  e programme 
integrates  previous  actions  in  the  fi elds  of 
education  including  vocational  education  and 
training  under  the  Copenhagen  process,  and 
links  up  with  the  Bologna  process.  Th  ere  are 
three overall objectives:

• 

• 

• 

improving  the  quality  and  eff ectiveness  of 
education and training systems;
facilitating  access  to  education  and  training 
systems;
opening  up  EU  education  and  training 
systems to the wider world.

Th  e  European  Commission  has  set-out  number 
of lifelong learning programmes:

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Comenius,  which  focuses  on  pre-school  and 
primary  to  secondary  school  education  and 
seeks to develop knowledge and understanding 
of European cultures, languages and values;
Erasmus, which seeks to enhance the quality 
and  reinforce  the  European  dimension  of 
higher education by encouraging transnational 
cooperation between universities;
Leonardo  de  Vinci,  which  plays  a  role  in 
preparing EU citizens for entering the labour 
market;
Grundtvig, which addresses the teaching and 
learning needs of institutions and individuals 
involved in adult education;
Jean  Monnet,  which  aims 
to  promote 
knowledge  on  European  integration  on  a 
world-level.

Th  e  European  Commission  has  published  a 
modernisation  agenda 
for  universities  and 
other  reforms  have  been  promoted  through  the 
Bologna  process,  working  towards  establishing 
a  European  higher  education  area  by  2010.  Key 
programmes in this context include:

• 

• 

teacher 

Tempus,  which  funds  co-operation  projects 
in  the  areas  of  curriculum  development, 
training,  university 
innovation, 
management and structural reforms in higher 
education, and;
Erasmus  Mundus,  which  is  a  co-operation 
and mobility programme in the fi eld of higher 
education that promotes the European Union 
as  a  centre  of  excellence  in  learning  around 
the world.

training 

(VET) 
Vocational  education  and 
are  considered  important  activities  to  assist 
the  population  to  meet  current  (and  future) 
challenges  in  society  and  the  labour  market. 
Th  e basis for European cooperation in VET was 
laid  out  in  the  Copenhagen  declaration  which 
was  endorsed  in  November  2002,  and  signifi ed 
the  starting  point  of  the  Copenhagen  process. 
A central part of the process is the development 
of  common  frameworks  and  tools  to  enhance 
the  transparency,  recognition  and  quality  of 
competences  and  qualifi cations,  making  the 
mobility  of  learners  and  workers  easier.  Th  e 
most important of these tools are the European 
qualifi cations 
(EQF),  Europass, 
the  European  credit  system  for  VET  (ECVET) 
and  the  common  quality  assurance  reference 
framework for VET (CQARF). Th  e Copenhagen 
process was developed within the perspective of 
lifelong learning, which should enable people to 
connect  up  and  build-on  learning  acquired  at 
various times, and in both formal and non-formal 
contexts.  Th  e  Leonardo  da  Vinci  strand  of  the 
lifelong learning programme 2007-2013 provides 
fi nancial support for the implementation of VET 
policies.

framework 

318

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   318
Consumers.indb   318

08.04.2009   09:53:18
08.04.2009   09:53:18

Education

10

Table 10.1: ISCED 97 codes used in this chapter

ISCED 97 level 
code
0
1-4
1-3
1
2
3

3A
3B
3C

4
5-6

5A
5B

6

Education level
Pre-primary education
Primary, secondary and non-tertiary post-secondary education
Primary and secondary education
Primary education or first stage of basic education
Lower secondary or second stage of basic education
Upper secondary education (including some vocational or technical orientation)
Upper secondary programmes with academic orientation
Upper secondary programmes with occupation orientation
Upper secondary programmes with labour market orientation
Post-secondary non-tertiary education
Tertiary education
Tertiary programmes with academic orientation
Tertiary programmes with occupation orientation
Second stage of tertiary education leading to an advanced research qualification

Classifi cation of education: ISCED

10.1 Access and choice

Th  roughout  this  chapter  tables  and  fi gures 
frequently  make  reference  to  particular  levels 
of  education  based  on  the  1997  version  of  the 
international standard classifi cation of education 
(ISCED).  Empirically,  ISCED  assumes 
that 
several  criteria  exist  which  can  help  allocate 
education  programmes  to  diff erent  levels  of 
education.  Depending  on  the  level  and  type  of 
education concerned there is a need to establish 
a hierarchical ranking system between main and 
subsidiary criteria (typical entrance qualifi cation, 
minimum  entrance  requirement,  minimum 
age,  staff   qualifi cation,  etc.).  Table  10.1  provides 
a  description  of  the  levels  0  to  6  and  the  main 
aggregates thereof that are used throughout this 
chapter. It should be noted that there is ongoing 
work to revise the current ISCED classifi cation.

In  the  EU-27,  there  were  in  excess  of  8.2  million 
teachers  (ISCED  levels  0-4)  and  academic  staff  
(ISCED  levels  5-6)  in  2006.  In  primary  and 
secondary education (ISECD levels 1-3) the number 
of  teachers  per  1 000  inhabitants  ranged  from  9.6 
in Bulgaria to 15.7 in Sweden, with Belgium above 
this range with a ratio of 17.9. In tertiary education 
(ISCED  levels  5-6),  the  number  of  academic  staff  
per  1 000  inhabitants  ranged  from  2.1  in  Malta 
and  the  United  Kingdom  to  4.0  in  Sweden,  with 
Romania (1.5), France and Italy (both 1.7) recording 
ratios below this range and Austria (4.9) above; note 
that further information on average class sizes, and 
pupil/teacher  ratios  are  given  in  Subchapter  10.5 
which covers the quality of education.

One  of  the  main  choices  concerning  primary 
and secondary education is between private and 
public education institutions: there are essentially 
two  types  of  private  institutions,  those  that  are 
independent  and  those  that  are  Government-
dependent  (in  other  words,  they  receive  half  or 
more  of  their  funds  from  public  authorities).  In 
nearly  every  Member  State  most  primary  and 
secondary  education  students  were  enrolled  in 
public institutions in 2006, the only exception (25) 
being  Belgium  where  57 %  of  the  students  were 
enrolled  in  private  institutions.  In  terms  of 
student  numbers,  private  institutions  were  also 
relatively  common  in  Malta,  Spain,  France  and 
the United Kingdom. In contrast, very nearly all 
students  in  the  Baltic  Member  States,  Ireland, 
Romania, Slovenia and Bulgaria were enrolled in 
public institutions.

(25) No recent data 
available for the 
Netherlands, which 
traditionally has a 
very high proportion 
of students in private 
institutions.

  Consumers in Europe

319

Consumers.indb   319
Consumers.indb   319

08.04.2009   09:53:19
08.04.2009   09:53:19

10

Education

One factor that can assist access to education is 
fi nancial support for students. Such support varies 
between  Member  States  in  nature,  eligibility 
criteria  and  levels  of  education  (examples  being 
child  care  expenditure,  scholarships  or  student 
loans). Financial aid may provide support during 
compulsory education or be designed to encourage 
greater  participation  in  education  beyond  what 
is required by law. Across the EU-27 some 6.0 % 
of  public  expenditure  on  education  was  used  to 
provide  fi nancial  aid  to  pupils  and  students  in 
2005. Th  e importance of this aid is much higher in 
the tertiary education sector, where it accounted 
for  16.0 %  of  all  public  expenditure:  Bulgaria 

and Poland were the only Member States where 
fi nancial aid as a share of public expenditure on 
education was greater for primary and secondary 
education  than  for  tertiary  education.  Focusing 
on tertiary education, fi nancial aid accounted for 
58 % of public expenditure on tertiary education 
in Cyprus, explained to a large extent by the fact 
that  a  very  large  proportion  of  Cypriots  study 
abroad.  Over  one  quarter  of  public  expenditure 
on  tertiary  education  was  used  this  way  in 
Denmark,  Malta,  the  Netherlands,  Sweden  and 
the United Kingdom, while this ratio was below 
5 % in Greece and Poland.

Table 10.2: Availability of teachers by ISCED 97 level, 2006
(number per thousand inhabitants)

of which:

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI  (1)
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Level 0
2.8
2.3
2.4
:
2.5
4.5
0.0
1.0
2.5
2.2
2.3
1.4
2.7
3.2
2.6
3.0
1.7
:
1.9
1.3
1.7
1.7
2.4
2.0
2.2
3.8
0.7
1.4
1.6
0.3
6.3
2.4
:
1.5

Levels 1-3
17.9
9.6
11.9
:
10.1
11.8
13.4
13.2
10.7
11.3
11.8
12.4
13.9
15.7
14.6
13.6
14.6
14.9
12.2
13.7
15.6
9.8
11.3
11.8
12.7
15.7
12.5
11.9
9.9
7.9
20.2
17.8
19.3
11.1

Level 1
6.2
2.3
2.9
:
2.9
5.6
6.4
5.5
4.2
3.4
4.5
4.7
2.9
3.2
6.8
4.0
5.4
8.3
3.5
6.1
6.7
2.6
3.1
2.5
4.7
7.0
4.1
2.6
2.7
5.4
:
7.7
9.6
5.5

Level 2
4.1
3.2
4.2
10.7
5.0
3.8
:
3.8
6.4
3.9
3.0
3.7
6.6
11.5
:
4.9
7.5
:
5.2
3.4
4.5
4.1
4.0
4.9
4.0
4.4
2.4
4.1
4.3
-
14.5
8.6
4.5
4.3

Level 3
7.6
4.1
4.7
:
2.2
2.3
7.1
3.9
:
3.9
4.2
3.9
4.4
:
7.8
4.7
1.7
6.5
3.5
4.2
4.4
3.2
4.2
4.3
4.0
4.3
5.9
5.3
3.0
2.6
5.7
1.5
5.1
1.3

Level 4
:
0.0
0.3
:
0.3
:
:
1.2
-
:
:
-
0.2
0.2
:
0.8
:
:
0.8
0.7
:
0.1
0.0
0.1
:
0.1
:
-
:
-
:
0.5
:
:

Levels 5-6
2.5
2.9
2.2
:
3.5
:
2.9
2.6
3.3
1.7
1.7
2.2
2.7
3.9
:
2.5
2.1
2.7
4.9
2.6
3.5
1.5
2.6
2.4
3.6
4.0
2.1
2.1
1.4
1.2
6.2
0.0
3.9
4.4

(1) 2005.

Source: Eurostat, Teachers (ISCED 0-4) and academic staff (ISCED 5-6) by age and sex (theme3/educ/educ_pers1d)

320

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   320
Consumers.indb   320

08.04.2009   09:53:20
08.04.2009   09:53:20

Education

10

Figure 10.1: Private and public institutions: 
students in levels 1-4, 2006 (1)
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

Table 10.3: Financial aid to pupils and 
students as % of total public expenditure on 
education by ISCED 97 level, 2005 (1)
(%)

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

All 
levels
6.0
4.6
15.2
4.3
17.5
7.9
4.5
10.7
0.6
3.0
3.9
4.5
13.2
6.3
8.4
2.2
6.0
9.3
11.6
5.1
1.3
2.6
4.6
8.3
4.8
7.2
11.2
5.8
0.7
2.6
5.8
5.2
5.1
19.3
1.6

Levels 
1-4
3.4
2.0
17.0
4.6
11.5
4.8
4.0
9.4
0.2
1.6
3.3
1.7
:
6.6
7.1
2.2
4.6
8.1
6.3
0.7
1.6
1.4
5.2
4.5
3.0
3.0
5.9
0.1
:
0.6
0.6
1.1
:
7.1
1.3

Levels 
5-6
16.0
15.2
10.8
5.9
30.8
19.1
8.2
14.8
1.4
8.2
7.9
16.8
57.6
9.4
17.0
:
15.7
30.2
27.7
16.8
1.1
8.9
5.6
23.7
13.7
16.6
27.1
25.8
4.0
13.8
19.3
23.1
:
42.6
2.4

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Public

Private

(1) The Netherlands, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Participation/enrolment in education (ISCED 0-4) 
(theme3/educ/educ_ipart)

(1) EU-27, estimates, 2004; Malta and the former Yugoslav Republic 
of Macedonia, 2003; Turkey, 2004. In many countries student 
loans from public sources are not applicable; for country speciﬁ c 
methodological notes, refer to Internet metadata ﬁ le (http://
europa.eu.int/estatref/info/sdds/en/educ/educ_base.htm).

Source: Eurostat, Financial aid to students (theme3/educ/educ_
ﬁ aid)

  Consumers in Europe

321

Consumers.indb   321
Consumers.indb   321

08.04.2009   09:53:20
08.04.2009   09:53:20

10

Education

10.2 Consumption

10.2.1 Consumption volume: education 
and vocational training

In 2006 the total number of pupils and students 
in  the  EU-27  was  108.0  million,  of  which  13 % 
were  in  pre-primary  education  (ISCED  level  0), 
69 %  in  primary,  secondary  and  non-tertiary 
post-secondary  education  (ISCED  levels  1  to  4), 
and 17 % in tertiary education (ISCED levels 5 to 
6).

Education  is  compulsory  in  all  EU  Member 
States and generally starts with the beginning of 
primary education, although there are exceptions 

Table 10.4: Number of students and distribution by ISCED 97 
level, 2006
(%)

Total 
(thousand)
107 967
2 821
1 399
2 153
1 395
16 837
325
1 037
2 185
9 019
14 948
11 127
166
537
873
92
2 279
86
3 673
1 688
9 503
2 124
4 479
447
1 234
1 386
2 429
13 725
822
401
16 825
96
7
1 227
1 496

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

ISCED level

0
13
15
15
13
18
15
14
0
7
17
18
15
12
12
10
16
14
10
10
13
9
12
14
10
12
10
14
7
11
9
3
12
11
13
10

1
26
26
20
22
30
20
24
44
30
29
27
25
36
15
17
39
18
34
35
21
27
35
21
21
19
27
28
33
24
26
63
32
32
35
35

2
21
15
21
23
17
31
18
17
16
22
22
16
20
28
35
20
21
32
21
23
17
19
21
17
28
15
17
17
25
29
0
14
23
16
20

3
21
28
27
23
19
17
19
14
17
12
18
25
20
20
13
21
24
12
18
23
21
16
23
26
25
25
23
26
24
24
19
24
22
18
19

4 5-6 5A 5B6
1
2
0
4
0
3
3
7
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
3
1
0
5
3
0
1
0
0
1
0
:
0
0
0
1
2
1
2

17
14
17
16
16
14
21
18
30
20
15
18
12
24
23
3
19
10
16
15
23
17
19
26
16
22
17
17
17
12
14
16
9
17
14

15
6
15
13
14
12
13
12
18
16
11
18
3
21
16
2
18
9
16
13
22
16
18
14
15
21
16
13
11
11
10
16
9
17
10

2
7
2
1
2
2
7
5
11
3
4
0
10
3
7
:
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
12
0
0
1
4
5
1
4
0
0
0
2

Un-
known
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1

:
0
0
1
0
:
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
:
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
1
2
1
1
0
:
0
0
0
0
1

where  some  pre-primary  education  may  also  be 
compulsory,  or  where  primary  education  may 
be off ered for children not yet required to attend 
school. Compulsory education therefore generally 
starts when children are aged between four and 
seven years old. Compulsory education normally 
ends at the end of lower secondary (ISCED level 
2)  education,  with  age  limits  within  the  EU 
mainly set at 15 or 16, or exceptionally based on 
a minimum number of years (generally between 
9  and  12)  of  schooling.  Th  ere  are  special  cases 
specifi c to many Member States, for example, to 
allow children to go on to a vocational education 
at  an  earlier  age,  or  with  more  emphasis  on  the 
completion of a specifi c level of education rather 
than the actual age of the pupil.

Table 10.5: Participation rates, 2006
(%)

4-year olds in 
education 
(levels 0-1)
86.8
100.0
68.4
86.5
93.4
93.1
86.1
46.9
56.1
97.1
100.0
100.0
70.4
73.5
59.7
94.0
92.8
95.5
74.2
83.2
41.2
80.6
75.8
79.3
73.1
48.5
86.5
91.3
48.2
15.9
7.0
94.8
52.7
91.8
38.0

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Students aged 15-24 years (as 
a share of all 15-24 year olds)
Total
Male
57.3
59.3
66.7
69.4
50.8
51.5
58.9
60.9
64.1
66.7
65.6
65.4
58.6
63.0
56.7
57.4
63.6
66.8
51.4
55.1
57.4
59.4
52.9
56.2
38.6
39.8
60.4
64.4
66.1
69.5
43.3
44.5
60.5
62.6
42.3
43.4
66.4
66.3
52.0
53.7
68.1
70.0
47.1
51.0
48.8
51.7
63.8
69.7
53.0
55.0
68.2
71.0
64.6
68.1
44.6
46.8
47.1
49.9
38.9
39.8
34.8
31.1
63.8
67.0
62.5
54.0
63.1
65.3
58.9
57.3

Female
61.5
72.2
52.3
62.9
69.4
65.3
67.5
58.1
70.2
58.9
61.4
59.7
40.9
68.5
73.1
45.7
64.8
44.5
66.3
55.5
72.0
55.1
54.7
76.0
57.2
74.0
71.9
49.1
52.8
40.8
27.2
70.4
45.1
67.6
55.6

Source: Eurostat, Students by ISCED level, age and sex (theme3/educ/educ_enrl1tl)

Source: Eurostat, Participation/ Enrolment in education (theme3/
educ/educ_ipart; theme3/educ/educ_ipart_s)

322

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   322
Consumers.indb   322

08.04.2009   09:53:21
08.04.2009   09:53:21

rates 

indicate 

the 
Education  participation 
proportion  of  a  sub-population  (for  example, 
within a specifi ed age range) that is in education. 
Table  10.5  gives  an  idea  of  the  proportion  of 
children  in  education  at  the  age  of  four  when 
compulsory  education  may  or  may  not  have 
started, and also between the ages of 15 and 24, 
an  age  range  during  which  students  generally 
move out of compulsory education.

Th  e vast majority of four-year olds within the EU 
are in education, with the proportion only below 
half in Finland, Ireland and Poland. Looking at the 
other end of compulsory education, three fi ft hs of 
people aged between 15 and 24 in the EU-27 were 
in education in 2006, a share that only dropped 
below  half  in  Cyprus,  Malta,  Luxembourg  and 
the United Kingdom, while exceeding two thirds 
in Finland, Poland, Slovenia, Lithuania, Belgium, 
Sweden,  Greece  and  Denmark.  In  nearly  every 
Member  State,  participation 
rates  among 
females  between  the  ages  of  15  and  24  were 
higher  than  among  males,  with  only  Germany 
and  the  Netherlands  recording  slightly  higher 
participation  rates  for  men.  In  the  EU-27  as  a 
whole  the  participation  rate  of  females  was  4.2 
percentage  points  higher  than  for  males,  with 
the  largest  percentage  point  diff erence  recorded 
in  Slovenia  where  the  rate  for  females  was  12.2 
percentage points higher.

An insight into participation in education can also 
be achieved from an analysis of the education level 
of the post-school age population. One common 
indicator is the proportion of persons aged 25 to 64 
(all of whom can confi dently be assumed to have 
fi nished  their  initial  school  education)  having 
completed  at  least  upper  secondary  education. 
Across  the  EU-27,  the  average  proportion  was 
71 %, with the rate slightly higher for males than 
females.  Figure  10.2  shows  the  proportion  of 
men and women having completed at least upper 
secondary  education,  with  countries  ranked 
on  the  overall  proportion  of  men  and  women 
combined.  Th  e  top  of  the  ranking  is  headed  by 
six  of  the  countries  that  joined  the  EU  in  2004. 
In  contrast,  the  fi ve  countries  at  the  bottom  of 
the  ranking  are  all  southern  Member  States, 
with particularly low shares in Malta (27 %) and 
Portugal (28 %).

Education

10

Figure 10.2: Education completion: 
proportion of the population aged 25 to 64 
having completed at least upper secondary 
education, 2007
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

EU-27

CZ

EE

SK

LT

PL

LV

SE

DE

SI

FI

AT

HU

BG

DK

RO

UK

NL

CY

FR

BE

IE

LU

EL

IT

ES

PT

MT

NO (1, 2)

CH (1)

HR (1)

IS (1)

TR

(1) 2006.
(2) Provisional.

Females
Males

Source: Eurostat, Educational attainment by sex (theme3/educ/
educ_iatt)

  Consumers in Europe

323

Consumers.indb   323
Consumers.indb   323

08.04.2009   09:53:22
08.04.2009   09:53:22

10

Education

Table 10.6: Tertiary education by age and gender: students 
(ISCED levels 5-6)  of the specifi ed age as a proportion of 
population of the same age, 2006
(%)

Aged 18

Aged 20

Aged 22

Aged 24

Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
19.8
12.5
14.6
28.8
17.4
2.4
18.9
0.5
41.0
0.2
22.0
0.9
21.3
6.6
10.0
29.1
14.1
59.3
20.8
22.0
16.3
22.5
22.8
9.4
7.0
5.8
24.5
3.2
24.6
6.7
3.0
0.7
21.8
9.5
11.3
0.2
19.9
18.1
19.8
2.0
24.9
0.7
17.5
14.8
18.8
10.9
41.8
3.3
14.4
2.5
41.2
0.4
34.5
0.8
12.2
21.0
11.8
11.5
10.0
6.6
8.4
18.4
33.6
0.5
9.7
-
30.7
0.2
18.3
1.8

18.1
13.6
15.4
17.5
29.7
23.8
15.2
9.1
12.9
18.5
13.9
17.9
16.0
16.9
18.5
4.0
17.7
10.0
23.7
19.6
24.0
16.2
16.9
26.3
12.5
38.0
27.6
10.0
11.9
8.9
12.1
23.7
13.6
25.1
22.6

26.2
29.6
26.5
26.3
25.5
23.0
28.1
19.9
33.1
26.1
27.6
26.5
19.5
27.0
34.7
6.1
29.2
17.1
32.5
21.6
36.9
23.5
24.0
36.1
24.2
38.1
28.8
16.2
23.2
15.7
20.5
24.2
18.2
29.5
23.1

32.8
34.4
32.2
34.6
39.5
25.8
37.3
23.3
36.9
34.3
33.7
36.2
12.7
40.3
47.0
6.4
37.5
27.9
34.1
26.1
48.8
32.8
32.0
56.6
31.3
49.8
39.1
18.5
29.1
24.0
15.1
38.1
11.8
40.9
22.7

29.5
41.8
30.5
30.0
11.1
13.8
31.3
35.6
65.0
31.0
36.5
30.1
19.8
33.8
43.0
4.9
30.5
14.9
30.9
16.3
37.8
22.7
27.0
42.7
29.0
27.3
19.8
28.8
33.6
19.7
26.4
15.2
9.2
22.7
14.0

40.7
56.0
38.3
40.0
16.8
23.8
50.4
47.5
82.8
44.9
46.2
44.3
26.6
51.1
59.0
8.9
42.6
25.6
39.3
26.7
51.5
36.5
37.1
62.1
38.3
38.8
26.6
37.0
45.9
27.5
22.5
19.0
8.2
38.1
18.2

18.6
43.7
3.2
0.6
0.4
4.4
13.2
39.7
80.1
34.1
32.6
14.0
29.4
5.3
12.5
1.2
15.0
0.1
23.9
8.4
1.1
25.1
16.0
5.8
3.4
0.6
1.2
27.9
15.4
9.8
17.0
0.3
2.0
0.5
2.4

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Tables  10.6  to  10.8  focus  on  tertiary  education. 
In  the  EU-27  as  a  whole  participation  rates  in 
tertiary  education  for  2006  were  higher  for 
women than for men, and this was true in almost 
every Member State. Participation rates generally 
peaked  (among  the  four  ages  specifi ed  in  Table 
10.6) for persons aged 20 or 22: the most notable 
exception was Denmark where the highest rates 
were recorded among persons aged 24, while in 
Germany the participation rate for men was also 
highest  among  those  aged  24,  while  in  Cyprus 
the rate for women was highest among those aged 
18.

Th  ese diff erences can be attributed to a number 
of factors including the proportion of secondary 
education pupils that become tertiary education 
students,  the  age  at  which  this  move  from 
secondary  to  tertiary  education  takes  place, 
and  the  length  of  time  students  stay  in  tertiary 
education.  Furthermore,  in  some  countries  the 
move  into  tertiary  education  may  be  delayed 
because  of  compulsory  military  or  civil  service, 
and where this is only applicable to men this can 
sometimes explain in part the large diff erences in 
the participation rates between men and women 
of a particular age (Cyprus or Germany).

Source: Eurostat, Participation/ Enrolment in education by sex (theme3/educ/educ_ipart_s)

324

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   324
Consumers.indb   324

08.04.2009   09:53:22
08.04.2009   09:53:22

Education

10

Table 10.7: Number of ISCED level 5-6 students and distribution by fi eld, 2006
(%)

Number of 
students 
(thousand)
18 783
394
244
337
229
2 290
68
186
647
1 789
2 201
2 029
21
131
199
3
439
9
580
253
2 146
367
835
115
198
309
423
2 336
137
48
2 343
16
1
215
205

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL (1)
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

(1) 2005.

Edu-
cation
8.8
11.1
7.0
14.4
11.4
7.3
7.6
6.3
6.5
9.2
3.2
6.4
9.4
12.2
12.3
22.7
13.4
9.9
14.9
12.8
14.5
7.2
2.3
8.8
16.5
5.3
15.2
9.3
4.3
12.8
12.3
17.4
-
14.4
10.3

Humanities 
& arts
13.2
11.5
7.9
9.1
15.0
15.6
11.6
18.5
11.6
10.4
17.1
15.6
8.5
7.1
7.0
8.2
8.0
14.0
8.4
14.9
9.2
8.6
10.8
7.5
6.0
14.5
12.6
17.9
9.9
10.7
6.9
14.8
1.4
12.3
13.0

Social 
sciences, 
business 
& law
34.2
29.9
42.5
29.5
29.5
27.4
39.0
27.3
31.9
32.0
35.8
36.8
47.4
54.2
41.8
45.2
41.6
37.4
38.1
35.0
40.9
31.5
51.4
43.5
28.3
22.5
26.2
28.4
40.5
32.6
47.4
38.0
71.4
32.7
37.2

Science, 
maths & 
computing
10.6
7.5
5.0
9.1
8.0
15.2
10.0
13.7
15.7
11.4
12.7
7.9
12.7
5.2
6.1
8.4
5.2
8.4
6.7
12.4
9.7
7.3
4.8
5.4
9.0
11.4
9.7
14.4
7.4
7.2
7.5
8.0
-
9.0
10.8

Engineering, 
manufact. & 
construction
14.6
11.5
21.0
15.4
10.1
15.8
12.3
12.3
16.5
17.9
11.9
15.7
6.1
10.0
18.0
15.0
12.4
7.6
8.3
11.8
12.6
21.9
18.7
15.6
16.4
25.9
16.3
8.6
16.3
18.3
13.3
7.3
25.0
6.8
13.4

Agri-
culture & 
veterinary
1.9
2.7
2.5
3.9
1.5
1.4
2.5
1.4
5.9
3.4
1.0
2.3
0.1
1.2
2.3
:
2.9
0.2
1.2
1.6
2.2
1.9
2.9
3.1
2.8
2.2
0.9
1.0
3.8
3.6
3.5
0.5
-
0.8
1.2

Health & 
welfare
12.9
24.1
6.4
12.9
22.2
14.7
8.5
15.1
6.9
9.9
14.7
12.6
6.6
5.2
9.2
0.4
8.2
20.3
16.5
9.4
5.7
16.0
5.8
7.4
15.2
13.3
17.3
19.7
7.5
10.2
5.6
12.4
2.2
19.6
10.2

Services
3.7
1.7
7.6
5.6
2.3
2.5
8.5
5.3
5.0
5.6
3.6
2.6
9.2
4.9
3.4
:
8.3
2.2
6.0
2.1
5.4
5.6
3.1
8.7
5.8
4.8
1.8
0.7
10.2
4.5
3.5
1.5
-
4.3
3.9

Source: Eurostat, Tertiary education participation (theme3/educ/educ_iterp)

Among  the  18.8  million  tertiary  education 
students in the EU-27 in 2006 just over one third 
were studying in social science, business and law 
fi elds  –  in  Latvia  and  Romania  over  half  of  all 
tertiary education students were concentrated in 
these fi elds. Science, mathematics and computing 
accounted  for  a  relatively  large  share  of  tertiary 
education  students  in  Greece,  Germany,  the 
United  Kingdom  and  Ireland,  while  a  relatively 
high  proportion  of  students  were  studying 
engineering, manufacturing and construction in 
Finland, Portugal and Bulgaria.

In  several  Member  States,  particularly  the 
smaller  ones,  it  is  very  common  for  students  to 
travel  abroad  for  tertiary  education,  refl ecting 
the restricted (but sometimes increasing) tertiary 
education  off ered  nationally:  81 %  of  students 
from  Luxembourg  studied  in  another  EU-27 
Member State, while the corresponding share in 
Cyprus was 53 %.

  Consumers in Europe

325

Consumers.indb   325
Consumers.indb   325

08.04.2009   09:53:23
08.04.2009   09:53:23

10

Education

Studying  abroad  was  much  less  common  in 
the  larger  Member  States,  for  example  0.6 %  of 
students  from  the  United  Kingdom  studied  in 
another EU-27 Member State, 1.3 % from Spain, 
1.6 % from Poland, and 1.7 % from Italy. It should 
be noted that statistics on student mobility may 
be  based  on  the  registration  of  the  nationality 
of  students  rather  than  actual  mobility,  and  as 
such a non-national who is resident in a country 
(and may have gone through the national school 
system) may be recorded as an infl ow.

Table 10.8: Students (ISCED levels 5-6) 
studying abroad, 2006
(%)

Studying 
in another 
EU-27 country, 
as a % of all 
students
2.6
2.5
8.4
2.0
2.2
2.7
4.0
13.7
5.3
1.3
2.3
1.7
53.2
2.1
2.9
80.8
1.6
10.0
2.0
4.4
1.6
3.7
2.2
2.1
10.2
2.9
2.4
0.6
-
-
-
-
-
-

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO

Inflow of students
 from EU-27, EEA & 
candidate countries, 
as a % of all 
students 
in the country
2.9
8.1
2.8
5.0
4.5
5.6
1.1
2.5
1.6
0.8
2.3
0.8
4.6
0.6
0.3
38.5
2.1
2.2
3.9
12.1
0.1
0.8
0.2
0.8
0.5
1.1
4.8
8.4
0.1
0.2
0.1
3.3
86.7
2.6

Source: Eurostat, Tertiary education participation (theme3/educ/
educ_itertp)

Developing skills through continuing vocational 
training  (CVT)  at  work  is  a  part  of  lifelong 
learning.  Statistics  on  this  subject  show  how 
enterprises  contribute  to  the  development  of 
the labour force’s skills. Th  e main forms of CVT 
are  internal  or  external  courses,  although  other 
forms  exist,  such  as  self-learning,  conferences, 
workshops, job rotation or exchanges.

Table 10.9: Continuous vocational training: 
percentage of employees participating in 
CVT, 2005 (1)
(%)

Total
33
40
15
59
35
30
24
:
14
33
46
29
30
15
15
49
16
32
34
33
21
28
17
50
38
39
46
33
29

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
NO

Male Female <25
29
35
15
54
29
25
25
:
13
30
:
22
22
16
17
42
12
29
26
36
16
26
17
54
32
25
39
34
23

31
39
13
52
39
27
26
:
15
35
43
28
30
15
14
51
15
36
31
30
20
27
17
55
31
41
45
34
28

34
40
16
63
32
32
23
:
13
33
47
29
30
14
15
48
16
30
36
36
21
29
18
48
42
38
47
32
30

Age
25-54
33
41
16
60
35
32
26
:
14
35
:
30
31
15
15
51
17
34
38
34
22
29
18
51
40
43
50
34
31

55+
24
28
8
54
36
21
15
:
7
25
:
22
15
8
9
31
9
24
23
21
13
18
12
44
32
34
37
26
24

(1) Enterprises with 10 or more persons employed, within NACE 
Sections C to K and O.

Source: Eurostat, Percentage of employees (all enterprises) 
participating in CVT courses (theme3/trng/trng_cvts3_41; 
theme3/trng/trng_cvts3_43)

326

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   326
Consumers.indb   326

08.04.2009   09:53:24
08.04.2009   09:53:24

Education

10

Overall  one  third  of  employees  in  the  EU-27 
participated in CVT in 2005, ranging from 14 % 
in  Greece  to  50 %  in  Slovenia,  with  the  Czech 
Republic  (59 %)  above  this  range.  Overall,  the 
CVT  participation  rate  was  slightly  higher  for 
men  (34 %)  than  for  women  (31 %),  with  the 
Czech  Republic  and  Slovakia  recording  the 
largest diff erences in rates.

It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  CVT  rates  for 
the EU-27 have fallen relative to 1999, when the 
share  of  employees  engaged  in  CVT  was  39 % 
(which  was  split  40 %  for  men  and  36 %  for 
women).  Th  ere  were  particularly  sharp  declines 
in the share of total employees in CVT between 
1999  and  2005  in  Denmark  (down  from  53 %), 
the United Kingdom (from 49 %), Sweden (from 
61 %) and Finland (50 %), in contrast to relatively 
sharp  rises  in  many  of  the  Member  States  that 
joined the EU since 2004.

10.2.2 Frequency

Table 10.10 provides information on the average 
time spent on three diff erent aspects of education: 
a  person’s  own  initial  education  at  school  or 
university; other studying in a person’s own free 
time;  and  teaching  children  (including  reading 
and talking with children).

Th  e time spent at school and university and doing 
homework should be interpreted with particular 
care, bearing in mind that the data concerns the 
population  aged  20  to  24,  and  as  was  noted  in 
Table 10.6 the participation in tertiary education 
varies  greatly  between  countries  and  in  some 
countries  between  men  and  women  depending 
on the precise age group studied.

Table 10.10: Time use, persons aged 20 to 74, latest available year (1)
(minutes per day)

School and university; 
homework

Free time study

Teaching, reading, 
talking with child

Total
11
5
9
5
13
13
12
9
9
12
16
12
15
6
14

Male
8
3
11
5
13
14
10
7
9
13
14
10
12
7
12

Female
12
6
8
5
13
13
13
11
8
12
17
14
18
7
15

Total
3
0
4
2
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
:

Male
3
0
4
2
4
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
2
2
:

Female
4
0
4
2
6
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
:

Total
6
8
7
7
5
6
8
5
7
14
9
6
7
8
7

Male
4
5
5
4
4
4
7
2
4
10
7
5
6
5
5

Female
7
10
9
10
5
8
10
7
9
17
11
8
8
10
9

BE
BG
DE
EE
ES
FR
IT
LV
LT
PL
SI
FI
SE
UK
NO

(1) No data available for those Member States not shown; mixed reference years.

Source: harmonised European time use surveys (https://www.testh2.scb.se/tus/tus/StatMeanMact2.html)

  Consumers in Europe

327

Consumers.indb   327
Consumers.indb   327

08.04.2009   09:53:24
08.04.2009   09:53:24

10

Education

10.2.3 Consumption expenditure

As  with  health  (see  Chapter  6),  education 
accounts  for  a  seemingly  small  proportion  of 
total  household  consumption  expenditure;  this 
refl ects the fact that the vast majority of education 
services  are  provided  by  governments  free  at 
their  point  of  use.  Th  e  interpretation  of  data 
concerning household consumption expenditure 
on education is therefore limited by the extent to 
which this is provided free (or at a greatly reduced 
price).

Table 10.11: Mean consumption 
expenditure per household, education, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

238
136
34
66
100
236
145
687
738
292
165
202
1 354
145
102
223
90
352
306
242
138
356
45
202
92
51
8
457
105
95

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

According  to  household  budget  survey  (HBS) 
data,  in  2005  annual  household  consumption 
expenditure  on  education  within  the  EU-27 
averaged PPS 238 per household. A wide range of 
expenditure  on  education  was  observed  among 
the  Member  States,  from  PPS  34  per  household 
in Bulgaria to PPS 356 in Portugal, with Sweden 
below this range at PPS 8 and Cyprus (PPS 1 354), 
Greece  (PPS  738),  Ireland  (PPS  687)  and  the 
United Kingdom (PPS 457) above.

Figure 10.3: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of education in total 
expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

CY
EL
IE
PT
UK
LV
PL
EE
MT
LT
ES
NL
EU-27
SK
DE
SI
RO
HU
AT
IT
HR
FR
BG
BE
LU
DK
NO
FI
SE

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

328

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   328
Consumers.indb   328

08.04.2009   09:53:25
08.04.2009   09:53:25

Education

10

Expenditure  on  education  represented  around 
1 % of total household consumption expenditure 
in the EU-27 (see Figure 10.3), and was only over 
2 % in Cyprus (4.0%) and Greece (2.4 %). 

Th  e  share  of  total  household  consumption 
expenditure dedicated to education varied greatly 
depending on the type of household (number of 
persons,  with  or  without  dependent  children), 

the  proportion  unsurprisingly  higher 
with 
among households with dependent children, and 
those with more than two adults (see Figure 10.4). 
Equally  the  share  was  lower  for  households  in 
the lowest income quintile than for those in the 
highest  quintile.  Th  e  share  was  particularly  low 
for households where the head of the household 
was retired and/or aged 60 or over. Th  e share also 
decreased as the degree of urbanisation fell.

Figure 10.4: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of education in total expenditure, 
EU-27, 2005
(%)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Manual workers

Non-manual workers

Self-employed

Unemployed

Retired

Other inactive

Lowest

Second

Third

Fourth

Highest

1 adult

1 adult & dep. children

2 adults

2 adults & dep. children

3+ adults

3+ adults & dep. children

Less than 30

30-44

45-59

60 and over

Dense

Intermediate

Sparse

)
1
(
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
i
c
o
S

e

i

l
i
t
n
u
q
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
1
(
e
p
y
t
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
g
A

)
1
(
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
b
r
U

(1) Unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

  Consumers in Europe

329

Consumers.indb   329
Consumers.indb   329

08.04.2009   09:53:25
08.04.2009   09:53:25

 
 
 
 
 
 
10

Education

Table 10.12: Expenditure on educational 
institutions relative to GDP, 2005 (1)
(%)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Public 
sources
4.7
5.7
3.8
4.1
6.8
4.2
4.6
4.3
4.0
4.1
5.4
4.2
6.0
4.7
4.5
3.7
5.1
2.9
4.6
5.0
5.4
5.3
3.3
5.3
3.7
5.8
6.2
5.0
4.6
3.3
3.8
7.2
2.1
6.1
5.5

Private 
sources
0.7
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.4
1.2
0.8
0.5
:
0.5
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.1
0.2
1.3
:
:
0.1
0.7
:
0.1
0.6

(1) EU-27, estimates; the former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia, 2003; Turkey and Norway, 2004 ; for country speciﬁ c 
metyhodological notes, refer to Internet metadata ﬁ le (http://
europa.eu.int/estatref/info/sdds/en/educ/educ_base.htm).

Source: Eurostat, Expenditure on education as % of GDP or public 
expenditure (theme3/educ/educ_ﬁ gdp)

Although expenditure on education accounts for 
a relatively low share of household consumption 
expenditure,  the  total  expenditure  (from  all 
sources)  on  educational  institutions  made  up  a 
relatively large share of GDP.

Table  10.12  shows  that  expenditure  from  public 
sources  was  equivalent  to  4.7 %  of  GDP  in  the 
EU-27  in  2005,  and  expenditure  from  private 
sources  was  0.7 %:  private  expenditure  includes 
tuition  fees  and  other  payments,  and  is  mainly 
undertaken by households, enterprises and non-
profi t  institutions. Th  e  highest  combined  shares 
of  public  and  private  expenditure  on  education 
institutions were recorded in Denmark and Cyprus 
with GDP shares of 7.4 % and 7.2 % respectively. 
In 
sources 
accounted  for  around  20 %  of  total  expenditure 
on educational institutions compared with a 12 % 
average for the EU-27, while in Finland, Sweden 
and Malta public sources accounted for 95 % or 
more of total expenditure.

the  United  Kingdom  private 

Total public expenditure on education (as opposed 
to  just  educational  institutions)  was  equivalent 
to  5.0 %  of  GDP  in  the  EU-27  in  2005.  Nearly 
half of this was directed to secondary and post-
secondary non-tertiary education, while just less 
than one quarter was for primary education and 
the same share for tertiary education.

Average  expenditure  per  pupil/student 
in 
public  educational  institutions  was  highest  for 
tertiary  education,  averaging  close  to  PPS  8 000 
per  student  in  the  EU-27  in  2005.  Th  e  highest 
average  expenditure  per  pupil/student  among 
the  Member  States,  for  all  levels  of  education 
combined, was PPS 12 024 in Luxembourg, more 
than  double  the  EU-27  average  of  PPS  5 344. 
Generally the Member States that joined the EU 
since 2004 spent less on average per pupil/student 
than the EU-15 Member States, with Cyprus the 
main exception to this pattern (and Slovenia to a 
lesser extent).

330

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   330
Consumers.indb   330

08.04.2009   09:53:26
08.04.2009   09:53:26

Education

10

Table 10.13: Public expenditure on 
education relative to GDP by ISCED 97 levels, 
2005 (1)
(%)

Table 10.14: Expenditure on public 
educational institutions by ISCED 97 levels, 
2005 (1)
(PPS per pupil/student in full time equivalents)

ISCED level

ISCED level

EU-27 
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI 
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Total
5.0
6.0
4.5
4.3
8.3
4.5
4.9
4.8
4.0
4.2
5.7
4.4
6.9
5.1
5.0
3.8
5.5
2.9
5.2
5.4
5.5
5.4
3.5
5.8
3.9
6.3
7.0
5.5
4.6
3.4
4.1
7.6
2.3
7.0
5.7

1
1.2
1.4
0.9
0.6
1.9
0.7
1.2
1.6
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.9
0.8
0.7
2.1
1.1
0.6
1.4
1.0
1.7
1.7
1.3
2.7
0.7
1.3
1.8
1.4
2.1
2.1
2.0
2.7
0.7
1.8
1.7

2-4
2.3
2.6
2.1
2.2
3.0
2.3
2.3
2.1
1.4
1.7
2.7
2.1
3.1
2.8
2.6
1.8
2.4
1.3
2.1
2.5
2.0
2.2
0.8
1.4
1.9
2.6
2.7
2.5
1.0
0.8
0.9
2.6
1.1
2.3
2.2

5-6
1.2
1.3
0.8
0.9
2.4
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.4
1.0
1.2
0.8
1.6
0.9
1.0
:
1.0
0.5
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.0
0.8
1.3
0.8
2.0
1.9
1.2
0.8
0.5
1.1
1.5
0.2
2.3
1.5

0 or 
unallocated
0.5
0.7
0.8
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.4
0.0
:
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.6
0.6
:
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.7
:
0.0
0.9
0.3
0.7
0.3

(1) EU-27, Estimates; the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, 
2003; Turkey, 2004; for country speciﬁ c methodological notes, 
refer to Internet metadata ﬁ le (http://europa.eu.int/estatref/info/
sdds/en/educ/educ_base.htm).

Source: Eurostat, Expenditure on education as % of GDP or public 
expenditure (theme3/educ/educ_ﬁ gdp)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
LI
NO
CH

Total
5 344
6 889
1 964
3 853
8 151
5 744
2 813
6 066
4 605
6 514
6 588
6 241
7 389
2 512
2 474
12 024
3 944
2 588
:
:
3 212
4 997
1 467
6 099
2 700
6 222
7 202
5 845
3 030
1 325
8 117
7 167
9 322
8 551

1
4 325
6 302
1 685
2 351
7 530
4 222
2 729
4 861
3 824
5 230
4 719
5 782
5 272
2 453
1 788
9 878
3 651
1 331
:
:
2 802
4 121
1 134
6 636
2 324
4 696
6 336
5 075
2 611
966
7 848
7 203
7 717
7 164

2-4
5 420
6 886
1 575
4 061
8 140
4 887
3 260
6 114
4 897
7 052
8 022
6 470
8 715
2 511
:
16 151
3 229
2 157
:
:
2 583
5 473
1 293
4 631
2 277
6 200
6 778
6 797
2 686
1 559
7 157
7 867
9 166
7 934

5-6
7 992
9 766
3 669
5 960
12 654
10 806
4 410
9 312
5 186
8 843
9 472
6 790
17 329
2 484
3 847
:
5 926
3 898
:
:
5 546
7 434
2 696
7 320
4 893
10 686
13 701
:
4 238
3 650
8 785
:
14 441
18 386

(1) EU-27, estimates; Turkey, 2004; for country speciﬁ c 
methodological notes, refer to Internet metadata ﬁ le (http://
europa.eu.int/estatref/info/sdds/en/educ/educ_base.htm).

Source: Eurostat, Expenditure on public educational institutions 
(theme3/educ/educ_ﬁ pubin)

  Consumers in Europe

331

Consumers.indb   331
Consumers.indb   331

08.04.2009   09:53:27
08.04.2009   09:53:27

10

Education

10.3 Prices

10.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  e  harmonised  index  of  consumer  prices  for 
education  rose  in  the  EU-27  by  39.1 %  between 
2000 and 2007, equivalent to an average of 4.8 % 
per annum. Th  is was double the rate of increase 
recorded for the all-items consumer price index, 
which gained, on average, 2.4 % per annum. Year 
on year price increases generally ranged between 
3.8 %  and  4.7 %  from  2001  to  2006,  with  prices 
rising by 6.7 % and 8.6 % in 2000 and 2007.

In 2007 nearly all of the Member States recorded 
price  increases  for  education  below  the  EU-27 
average,  as  prices  rose  at  a  rapid  pace  in  two  of 
the  largest  Member  States,  increasing  by  22.2 % 

in Germany and 13.7 % in the United Kingdom 
(compared  with  2006),  with  Latvia  (14.2 %)  the 
only  other  Member  State  recording  an  above 
average increase.

10.3.2 Price levels

Price  level  indices  for  2006  show  prices  for 
education  below  the  EU-27  average  in  all  of  the 
Member  States  that  joined  the  EU  since  2004, 
as  well  as  in  Greece  and  Spain.  In  fact  most  of 
the  newer  Member  States  recorded  price  levels 
for education that were less than half the EU-27 
average,  with  Cyprus,  Slovenia  and  Malta  the 

Figure 10.5: Price level indices, education, 
2006
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

Table 10.15: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, 
education, annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
6.7
:
20.6
4.4
2.8
2.3
7.8
12.6
3.7
4.6
1.6
2.5
3.6
2.5
10.5
1.4
11.0
4.2
2.9
4.3
11.2
3.0
53.4
8.9
8.2
2.2
5.8
5.8
51.7
5.2
4.0
:

2001
4.3
2.1
26.5
2.9
3.7
1.3
7.4
7.2
3.7
4.1
2.4
3.2
3.7
4.8
5.9
2.0
7.9
6.7
2.9
10.0
6.9
5.2
40.7
9.8
5.3
3.5
2.1
6.0
43.9
7.1
6.7
:

2002
4.4
3.0
6.4
3.7
6.5
2.6
4.8
10.3
4.0
3.8
2.6
3.0
5.1
6.8
-0.7
8.5
10.2
10.1
4.4
21.9
3.9
5.8
21.8
9.9
3.7
3.2
-26.6
5.7
56.1
11.9
8.2
:

2003
4.7
1.3
5.7
3.4
21.5
2.1
3.9
9.1
4.5
4.9
2.8
2.7
3.7
4.3
-3.4
7.5
13.6
3.2
4.1
3.3
2.3
6.6
11.8
4.4
6.8
6.0
-2.5
7.5
36.9
7.8
5.9
:

2004
4.0
0.9
4.8
3.5
3.3
3.3
2.8
5.9
4.4
4.0
2.8
2.2
4.3
5.2
0.7
1.0
12.5
3.0
2.8
1.9
2.6
9.4
12.0
7.9
11.4
5.5
7.8
4.8
20.7
4.2
4.8
:

2005
3.8
2.1
6.2
3.1
2.4
2.2
3.7
6.0
4.1
4.2
2.6
3.3
5.3
8.7
-0.5
1.8
8.3
1.6
-3.7
1.9
3.1
7.0
6.1
5.7
30.1
4.0
3.1
4.9
13.0
7.0
1.3
:

2006
4.1
1.8
7.0
3.4
2.9
2.5
3.9
4.9
3.8
4.0
3.4
2.8
5.2
9.7
-0.7
4.1
7.8
2.6
-10.8
7.2
1.4
5.2
9.5
2.6
5.9
2.3
3.2
7.3
7.8
8.0
2.3
1.6

2007
8.6
2.3
7.3
2.3
4.5
22.2
5.8
5.1
4.0
4.5
3.3
2.4
4.9
14.2
4.9
2.1
6.4
4.2
0.8
1.9
1.4
3.7
5.2
2.1
3.7
3.7
3.7
13.7
7.2
5.6
2.0
1.5

LU
CH
DK
NO
DE
IS
UK
IE
SE
FI
AT
BE
IT
NL
PT
FR
EU-27
CY
ES
SI
EL
MT
HR
CZ
HU
PL
TR
EE
SK
LV
RO
LT
MK
BG

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

332

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   332
Consumers.indb   332

08.04.2009   09:53:27
08.04.2009   09:53:27

Education

10

Table 10.16: Perception of satisfaction 
concerning schools, 2006
(%)

Synthetic 
index 
0-100
76
47
84
65
52
78
85
40
71
83
67
78
83
55
79
65
87
86
78
75
69
49
88
76
94
80
75
71
66

Bruxelles/Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Vilnius
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Zagreb
Ankara

Satisfied 
(rather & 
strong)
64
36
69
48
36
52
68
36
48
56
56
68
62
39
54
43
66
58
59
55
51
40
77
60
76
53
54
62
61

Unsatisfied 
(rather & 
strong)
20
41
13
26
33
15
12
53
19
11
27
19
13
31
14
23
10
9
17
18
23
41
11
19
5
14
18
26
32

Source: Eurostat, Perception survey results 
(theme1/urb/urb_percep)

only exceptions. Among all of the Member States, 
price levels were highest, by far, in Luxembourg 
(84 %  above  the  EU-27  average),  with  Denmark 
the  only  other  Member  State  to  report  price 
levels for education at least 50 % above the EU-27 
average.

10.4 Consumer satisfaction

Information  on  satisfaction  with  schools  (not 
education in general) is available from the Urban 
Audit.  In  all  of  the  EU-27  capital  cities  except 
Athens, Sofi a and Bucharest a greater proportion 
of  respondents  reported  satisfaction  compared 
with dissatisfaction in terms of their perception 
of  schools.  In  most  capital  cities  there  was  a 
clear  majority  of  people  satisfi ed  with  schools, 
upwards  of  two  thirds  of  those  questioned  in 
Prague,  Lefk  osia  and  Dublin,  and  more  than 
three  quarters  of  those  questioned  in  Ljubljana 
and Helsinki.

An alternative perspective on satisfaction can be 
drawn  from  indicators  on  early  school  leavers, 
which is based on Labour Force Survey (LFS) data 
and calculated as the share of the population aged 
18 to 24 years whose highest completed education 
level  was  lower  secondary  or  less,  and  who  had 
not  received  education  or  training  in  the  four 
weeks prior to the survey. Th  e proportion of early 
school leavers in the EU-27 in 2007 was 12.7 % for 
females  and  16.9 %  for  males:  in  every  Member 
State,  except  for  Bulgaria,  this  ratio  was  higher 
for  males  than  for  females,  with  the  diff erence 
increasing to more than ten percentage points in 
Cyprus, Portugal, Spain and Estonia. Overall, the 
highest rates of early school leavers were recorded 
in  Malta,  Portugal  and  Spain,  with  all  three 
recording  early  school  leaver  rates  in  excess  of 
25 % for both males and females. In contrast, the 
lowest rates of early school leavers were recorded 
in  Slovenia,  Poland  and  the  Czech  Republic,  at 
less than 7 % for both males and females.

  Consumers in Europe

333

Consumers.indb   333
Consumers.indb   333

08.04.2009   09:53:28
08.04.2009   09:53:28

10

Education

Figure 10.6: Early school leavers: 
percentage of people aged 18-24 with only 
lower secondary education who are not in 
education, 2007 (1)
(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE (2)
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
TR
IS
NO
CH

Female
Male

(1) Czech Republic, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Croatia, 
Iceland and Norway, 2006; Latvia, Portugal, Finland and Iceland, 
provisional; Lithuania, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Croatia, include 
unreliable data.
(2) Females, 2005, unreliable data.

Source: Eurostat, Educational attainment by sex 
(theme3/educ/educ_iatt)

10.5 Quality

Table 10.17 and Figure 10.7 provide information 
on the ratio of pupils to teachers and average class 
sizes.  Th  e  pupil/teacher  ratio  is  calculated  by 
dividing the number of pupils by the number of 
teachers (normally excluding non-teaching staff ) 
measured  as  full-time  equivalents.  In  contrast, 
average  class  sizes  are  calculated  by  simply 
averaging the number of pupils in each class. In 
all  Member  States  average  class  sizes  are  higher 
than pupil/teacher ratios. Some of the reasons for 
this include the sharing of a class among several 
teachers  and  the  use  of  specialised  teachers 
for  pupils  with  special  needs,  both  of  which 
increase  the  number  of  teachers  and  therefore 
reduce  the  pupil/teacher  ratio  without  directly 
aff ecting the average class size. In every Member 
State  with  data  available,  other  than  Poland, 
the  ratio  of  pupils  to  teachers  within  lower 
secondary  education  is  inferior  to  that  within 
primary  education.  In  more  than  two  thirds  of 
the Member States (with available data) the ratio 
was  higher  for  upper  secondary  education  than 
for lower secondary education; the most notable 
exception  was  the  United  Kingdom  where  the 
ratio  for  upper  secondary  education  was  less 
than  half  that  for  lower  secondary  education. 
Some,  but  not  all  Member  States  have  limits  on 
primary  education  class  sizes:  maximum  class 
sizes  are  more  common  and  oft en  in  the  range 
of 25 to 30 pupils; while minimum class sizes are 
less common, and are generally between 10 and 
15. In practice, average primary class sizes were 
between 14.8 pupils in Lithuania and 24.3 pupils 
in Ireland. For secondary education the average 
class  size  ranged  from  18.0  pupils  in  Latvia  to 
24.9 pupils in Poland.

334

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   334
Consumers.indb   334

08.04.2009   09:53:29
08.04.2009   09:53:29

Table 10.17: Pupil/teacher ratios by 
ISCED 97 levels, 2005

ISCED level
1
12.8
16.3
17.5
:
18.8
:
17.9
11.1
14.3
19.4
10.6
17.9
12.2
11.3
10.7
10.6
12.1
15.9
14.1
11.7
10.8
17.4
15.0
18.9
15.9
12.2
20.7
18.1
:
25.8
:
10.3
11.9

1-3
10.8
13.2
14.4
11.9
17.2
:
16.8
9.4
12.1
14.3
10.6
14.1
11.7
9.4
9.8
11.0
10.6
16.1
11.8
12.3
7.0
14.9
13.5
15.2
14.7
12.6
14.5
13.2
16.9
23.0
11.3
8.8
11.0

2
9.4
12.6
13.5
11.9
15.5
:
:
7.9
12.5
14.2
10.1
11.9
11.2
8.8
:
10.4
8.4
:
10.6
12.7
8.2
12.4
11.1
14.1
10.0
12.0
17.0
12.8
:
-
11.4
7.0
10.5

3
9.9
11.9
12.8
:
19.2
:
15.6
8.8
8.1
10.3
11.0
11.5
12.1
:
9.0
12.2
17.4
16.2
11.3
12.9
7.3
16.0
14.5
14.3
18.0
14.0
7.9
10.7
17.5
16.2
11.1
9.8
9.6

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU 
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
MK
TR
IS
LI
NO 

(1) Luxembourg, Iceland and Norway, 2004; Portugal for level 3, 
2004; for country speciﬁ c metyhodological notes, refer to Internet 
metadata ﬁ le (http://europa.eu.int/estatref/info/sdds/en/educ/
educ_base.htm).

Source: Eurostat, Pupil/ Student - teacher ratio and average class 
size (ISCED 1-3) (theme3/educ/educ_iste)

Education

10

Figure 10.7: Class size by ISCED 97 levels 
(ranked on level 2), 2005 (1)
(number)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

PL
DE

ES
EL
AT
CY

FR (2)
CZ
SK

EE
MT
PT
LT

UK
BG
HU
IT

SI
RO
DK
IE

LU
LV
NL (3)

MK
HR
IS
CH

LI
TR (3)

Level 1

Level 2

(1) Belgium, Finland and Sweden, not available.
(2) Level 1, not available.
(3) Level 2, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Pupil/ Student - teacher ratio and average class 
size (ISCED 1-3) (theme3/educ/educ_iste)

  Consumers in Europe

335

Consumers.indb   335
Consumers.indb   335

08.04.2009   09:53:29
08.04.2009   09:53:29

10

Education

for 

International  Student 
Th  e  Programme 
Assessment  (PISA)  is  a  triennial  survey  of 
the  knowledge  and  skills  of  15-year-olds. 
It  is  the  product  of  collaboration  between 
participating  countries  and  economies  through 
the  Organisation  for  Economic  Co-operation 
and  Development  (OECD).  More  than  400 000 
students  from  57  countries  took  part  in  PISA 
2006. Mathematics was studied in detail in PISA 
2003,  and  a  simpler  study  of  this  subject  was 
included  in  PISA  2006.  In  order  to  perform  the 
hardest mathematics tasks in PISA, students must 
put  together  complex  elements  of  a  question, 
use  refl ection  and  creativity  to  solve  unfamiliar 
problems and engage in some form of argument, 
oft en in the form of an explanation. Figure 10.8 
shows an overall ranking based on the profi ciency 
of the surveyed students, with countries presented 
in three categories related to the OECD average, 
those  signifi cantly  above  the  average,  below  the 
average,  or  close  to  the  average.  Eight  Member 
States were signifi cantly above the OECD average 
and  11  signifi cantly  below,  with  six  around  the 
OECD average. Th  e highest scores were recorded 
by Finland and the Netherlands, while the lowest 
were recorded by Bulgaria and Romania.

For more information

Directorate-General for Education and Culture: 
http://ec.europa.eu/education/index_en.htm

Figure 10.8: PISA study: ranking on 
mathematics score, 2006 (1)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

FI
NL
BE
EE
DK
CZ
AT
SI
DE
SE
IE
FR
UK
PL
SI
HU
LU
LT
LV
ES
PT
IT
EL
RO
BG
CH
LI
IS
NO
HR
TR

Signifi cantly above the OECD average
Not signifi cantly diff erent from the OECD average
Signifi cantly below the OECD average

(1) Cyprus and Malta, not available.

Source: OECD, The Programme for International Student 
Assessment (PISA)

336

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   336
Consumers.indb   336

08.04.2009   09:53:30
08.04.2009   09:53:30

Restaurants and hotels

Consumers.indb   337
Consumers.indb   337

08.04.2009   09:53:31
08.04.2009   09:53:31

11

Restaurants and hotels

Whether  for  business  or  leisure,  there  is  a  wide 
range  of  accommodation  for  both  short-stay 
breaks  and  longer  holidays  within  the  EU. 
Various factors contributed to make travel more 
accessible  for  a  wider  range  of  consumers:  the 
growth of so-called ‘low-cost airlines’; increased 
levels  of  car  ownership  and  higher  disposable 
incomes (particularly in the Member States that 
joined the EU since 2004); the completion of new 
stretches  of  high-speed  rail  networks;  and  an 
expanding motorway network.

11.1 Access and choice

Th  ere  is  little  data  on  the  actual  number  of 
restaurants (local units) that exist in the EU-27, 
although Eurostat’s structural business statistics 
do  provide  information  on  enterprise  numbers. 
Th  ere were about 1.4 million enterprises operating 

with the restaurants, bars, canteens and catering 
sector across the EU-27 in 2005, off ering a wide 
choice of places to eat and drink. A little under 
one  in  fi ve  (18.8 %)  of  all  restaurants,  bars, 
canteens  and  catering  enterprises  was  found  in 
Spain (see Table 11.1).

Between 2000 and 2005 there was a relatively sharp 
rise in the number of enterprises in the restaurants, 
bars, canteens and catering sector in the EU-27 (up 
10.6 % overall), with increases recorded for most of 
the Member States. Among the exceptions, there 
were relatively steep declines in Slovenia (-20.9 %) 
and  Germany  (-13.9 %).  Relative  to  the  size  of 
their  populations,  there  were  few  restaurants, 
bars, canteens and catering enterprises in Slovakia 
and  the  Baltic  Member  States,  but  a  relatively 
high  number  in  Luxembourg,  as  well  as  Cyprus, 
Portugal, Greece, and Spain (all of which cater for 
high numbers of tourists).

Table 11.1: Number of enterprises: 
restaurants, bars, canteens and catering
(unit)

Table 11.2: Infrastructure for hotels and 
similar establishments, 2007 (1)
(unit)

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO 
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

2000
1 258 952
39 107
21 297
35 079
11 886
139 907
1 020
8 965
73 252
244 299
158 381
210 138
6 162
1 793
2 410
2 100
:
1 809
34 555
22 626
39 392
56 357
9 038
7 615
509
9 121
17 642
101 374

2002 (1)
1 311 353
38 018
21 903
38 904
11 835
125 893
1 220
10 999
:
245 650
165 300
214 618
6 451
1 816
2 686
2 212
29 826
2 545
32 170
27 239
45 485
58 401
12 219
6 683
493
9 078
18 718
107 739

2005 (2)
1 392 298
39 952
20 932
41 748
12 077
120 514
1 152
9 738
79 660
261 997
179 674
224 379
6 237
2 255
2 713
2 341
29 593
:
31 870
30 307
45 321
78 532
16 651
6 021
954
8 675
20 816
115 083

(1) Belgium, 2001.
(2) Czech Republic, 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Structural business statistics (theme4/sbs/
sbs_na_1a_se)

Establish-
ments
203 244
2 013
1 526
4 559
477
35 941
346
4 087
9 207
18 426
18 135
34 037
735
318
348
273
2 032
173
3 196
14 204
2 443
2 028
4 163
396
1 249
909
1 893
40 130

Bed-
rooms
5 855 777
56 693
103 841
106 907
37 098
899 068
13 875
67 355
367 992
825 220
626 981
1 058 543
43 799
11 457
10 973
7 639
66 873
18 533
98 966
285 558
93 944
117 565
112 177
17 251
32 766
54 924
103 793
615 986

Bed 
places
11 719 904
124 811
231 303
248 077
73 384
1 643 748
28 634
156 775
700 933
1 639 009
1 253 962
2 141 952
87 804
20 685
21 871
14 559
158 762
39 518
200 254
573 726
190 387
264 037
228 123
33 040
67 178
119 397
207 439
1 250 536

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO 
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

(1) Hungary, Malta and Portugal, 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Tourism statistics (theme4/tour/tour_cap_nuts3)

338

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   338
Consumers.indb   338

08.04.2009   09:53:40
08.04.2009   09:53:40

Restaurants and hotels

11

Th  ere were about 200 thousand hotels or similar 
establishments  in  the  EU-27  in  2007,  with  5.9 
million  bedrooms  and  11.7  million  bed  places 
(see Table 11.2). Th  e United Kingdom had more 
hotels  or  similar  establishments  than  any  other 
Member State (19.7 % of the EU-27 total) in 2007, 
although  a  relatively  high  proportion  of  these 
establishments were quite small in size; they had 
an average of 31 bed places, among the lowest in 
any of the Member States, in part refl ecting the 
high number of bed and breakfast establishments. 
Th  e  largest  hotels  and  similar  establishments 
(based  on  average  numbers  of  bed  places)  were 
found in Malta (228), followed by Denmark (154) 
and Bulgaria (152). A little under half (46.3 %) of 
all bed places in the EU-27 were located in three 
of  the  Member  States,  namely,  Italy  (18.3 %), 
Germany (14.0 %) and Spain (14.0 %).

11.2 Consumption

11.2.1 Consumption volume

Tourism  is  a  key  sector  for  the  European 
economy, as well as an important leisure activity 
for  its  population.  Th  e  number  of  nights  spent 
by  tourists  in  the  EU-27  was  estimated  at  2 309 
million in 2007, a little over two thirds of which 
were  spent  in  hotels  or  similar  establishments 
(see Table 11.3). More nights were spent in hotels 
in Spain (17.3 % of the total for the EU-27) than 
in  any  other  Member  State,  with  the  combined 
nights in hotels in Italy, Germany, France and the 
United  Kingdom  accounting  for  about  one  half 
(53.5 %) of the EU-27 total.

Table 11.3: Number of tourist nights, by type of accommodation, 2007 (1)
(thousand)

(% 
share of 
EU-27)
100.0
1.3
0.8
1.8
1.2
13.7
0.2
1.6
2.8
16.6
13.1
16.2
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.9
0.3
3.8
4.4
2.4
2.0
0.9
0.3
0.5
0.8
2.1
11.3

        Other collective accommodation

Hotels
1 575 613
16 197
16 736
27 044
11 080
214 675
3 843
28 282
64 086
272 733
204 269
254 076
14 298
2 759
2 591
1 438
15 808
7 307
34 159
79 153
24 307
37 566
19 756
5 546
7 233
15 817
25 416
169 440

Tourist 
campsites
352 984
2 925
77
2 781
11 684
21 921
222
3 160
1 335
31 676
97 694
61 404
18
166
73
803
1 456
:
20 824
4 924
696
6 832
224
1 107
386
2 241
17 012
61 344

Holiday 
campsites
201 200
4 884
458
733
4 007
29 757
138
1 491
:
70 922
:
34 328
62
108
429
101
932
:
29 283
7 019
949
:
:
666
353
830
3 467
10 283

Other 
n.e.c.
179 453
5 844
706
10 273
1 297
50 953
472
3 060
:
7 969
:
24 820
:
292
171
186
1 456
117
4 002
9 549
29 001
1 124
613
674
3 450
149
2 710
20 565

Total
2 309 250
29 849
17 977
40 831
28 068
317 306
4 675
35 993
65 420
383 300
301 963
374 628
14 378
3 325
3 264
2 528
19 652
7 424
88 267
100 645
54 954
45 522
20 593
7 993
11 423
19 037
48 605
261 633

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO 
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

(1) Hungary, Malta and Portugal, 2006.

Source: Eurostat, Tourism statistics (theme3/tour/tour_occ_ninat)

  Consumers in Europe

339

Consumers.indb   339
Consumers.indb   339

08.04.2009   09:53:42
08.04.2009   09:53:42

11

Restaurants and hotels

Table 11.4: Number of holiday trips (at least 1 night) by 
residents aged 15 and over, 2006

Trips 
(thousand)

 Average annual growth rate 
of trips, 2000-2006 (%)

Figure 11.1: Evolution of the number of 
tourist nights spent by residents and non-
residents in hotels or similar establishments
(2000=100)

1-3 
nights
3 189
:
17 821
4 735
47 845
585
5 007
7 305
81 302
105 020
36 920
:
3 792
2 386
420
17 973
:
9 881
7 026
20 475
6 602
3 505
2 958
1 865
21 541
:
50 874

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO 
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

=>4 
nights (1)
6 647
:
8 934
5 896
105 431
279
4 790
8 578
39 599
83 137
41 135
719
909
1 090
679
6 711
:
18 384
8 745
17 808
3 663
3 387
1 807
4 555
6 620
:
61 821

(1) Cyprus, 2004.

Source: Eurostat, Tourism statistics (2008 pocketbook)

1-3 
nights
1.7
:
-1.0
6.6
13.5
-14.7
22.1
28.7
-2.1
4.3
4.1
:
0.6
4.4
9.0
23.4
:
0.1
-5.6
-7.0
-0.8
-24.4
10.0
0.1
4.8
:
-6.2

In the period between 2000 and 2007, there were 
some  contrasting  developments  in  terms  of  the 
number  of  nights  spent  by  residents  and  non-
residents  in  hotels  or  similar  establishments. 
Th  ere  was  moderate  growth  (an  average  of 
2.6 %  per  annum)  in  Spain,  but  a  sharp  fall  in 
the  United  Kingdom  through  until  2004,  aft er 
which  there  was  a  partial  recovery  (see  Figure 
11.1).  Apart  from  the  United  Kingdom,  Cyprus 
was the only other Member State in which there 
was a confi rmed decline (an average of -2.8 % per 
annum)  in  nights  spent.  In  contrast,  there  was 
strong  growth,  albeit  from  relatively  low  levels, 
in Lithuania (16.6 % per annum), Estonia (12.2 % 
per  annum),  Latvia  (10.6 %  per  annum)  and 
Bulgaria (10.8 % per annum), as well as in Poland 
(7.9 % per annum). Across the EU-27 as a whole, 
the  number  of  nights  spent  in  hotels  or  similar 
establishments increased steadily from a relative 
low in 2003.

125

120

115

110

105

100

95

90

85

80

=>4 
nights 
0.7
:
-3.5
4.4
0.0
6.3
14.7
10.3
6.0
1.6
2.5
:
19.6
8.4
3.0
10.9
:
2.9
7.4
3.5
-0.1
-10.7
:
:
5.9
:
-3.8

2001

2003

2005

2007

EU-27 (1)

ES

FR

IT

DE

UK

(1) Includes estimates for Romania during the period 2002 to 2005 
and for Malta during the period 2000 to 2002.

Source: Eurostat, Tourism statistics (theme3/tour/tour_occ_ninat)

In the period between 2000 and 2006, the number 
of  trips  by  residents  increased  in  the  majority 
of  Member  States  –  the  United  Kingdom  and 
Romania  were  the  most  notable  exceptions  (see 
Table 11.4). Th  ere tended to be a higher number of 
short trips (of 1-3 nights) made by residents than 
long  trip  (4  or  more  nights)  in  the  majority  of 
Member States in 2006, in particular in the Baltic 
States, Spain, Hungary and the Czech Republic. 
Among  the  exceptions,  short  trips  by  residents 
from  the  Benelux  group  of  Member  States, 
Germany and Slovakia represented closer to one 
third of all trips made. In the case of Germany, the 
number of short trips more than doubled between 
2000 and 2006, although this rate of increase was 
lower  than  those  recorded  for  Ireland,  Hungary 
and, particularly, Greece.

340

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   340
Consumers.indb   340

08.04.2009   09:53:42
08.04.2009   09:53:42

Restaurants and hotels

11

was a particularly wide spread in mean household 
consumption  expenditure  on  restaurants  and 
hotels; by far the highest level was in Luxembourg 
(a little over PPS 4 000), followed some way behind 
by Cyprus, Greece and the United Kingdom, while 
the lowest levels of expenditure were registered in 
Romania (PPS 58).

Expenditure on restaurants and hotels represented 
an average of 5.3 % of total household consumption 
expenditure across the EU-27 in 2005. Th  e share 
of  these  items  in  the  total  budget  was  highest  in 
Portugal  (at  a  little  more  than  double  the  EU-27 
average), Spain and Greece, and was lowest (at less 
than  2 %  of  total  expenditure)  in  Romania  and 
Poland (see Figure 11.2); there were also relatively 
low shares among the Scandinavian countries.

Figure 11.2: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of restaurants and hotels 
in total expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

PT
ES
EL
CY
UK
LU
MT
BE
IE
NL
AT
EU-27
LV
IT
SK
LT
FR
DE
SI
FI
DK
NO
BG
SE
HU
EE
HR
PL
RO

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

11.2.2 Consumption expenditure

Th  e  average  annual  household  consumption 
expenditure on restaurants and hotels across the 
EU-27 rose by about 20 % between 2000 and 2006 
to an average of EUR 1 200 per person; note these 
fi gures  do  not  include  package  holidays  that, 
following the COICOP classifi cation, are included 
as  part  of  Chapter  9.  Th  e  rise  in  expenditure 
on  restaurants  and  hotels  appears  to  have  been 
driven by both higher prices (noted for all of the 
Member  States  for  which  data  are  available,  but 
particularly  Slovakia,  Hungary  and  the  Czech 
Republic),  as  well  as  widespread  increases  in 
the  volume  component  of  fi nal  consumption 
expenditure  (where  growth 
in  Estonia  was 
particularly strong).

Expressed  in  purchasing  power  standard  (PPS) 
terms,  average  consumption  expenditure  on 
restaurants  and  hotels  across  the  EU-27  was  an 
estimated  PPS  1 417  in  2005  (see  Table  11.5).  In 
comparison to many other goods and services, there 

Table 11.5: Mean consumption expenditure 
per household, restaurants and hotels, 2005
(PPS)

EU-27 (1)
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

1 417
1 894
255
619
960
1 212
339
2 190
2 661
2 414
1 277
1 428
2 830
557
429
4 098
343
2 030
1 647
1 660
180
2 263
58
1 035
520
1 021
981
2 558
465
1 111

(1) Estimate.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_exp_t121)

  Consumers in Europe

341

Consumers.indb   341
Consumers.indb   341

08.04.2009   09:53:43
08.04.2009   09:53:43

11

Restaurants and hotels

Most expenditure on restaurants and hotels can be 
considered  as  luxury  spending,  in  the  sense  that 
it is not a necessity to eat out or to go on holiday. 
As such, it is perhaps not surprising that spending 
on these items accounted for a progressively higher 
share  of  total  household  expenditure  as  incomes 
rose;  the  share  for  households  in  the  highest 
income  quintile  across  the  EU-27  was  6.2 %  in 
2005,  compared  with  4.0 %  for  those  households 
in  the  lowest  income  quintile.  In  contrast,  the 
proportion of expenditure devoted to restaurants 
and  hotels  declined  with  age;  the  average  share 
among  households  headed  by  someone  under  30 
years being 5.8 %, which was notably higher than 
for households headed by someone aged 60 years 
or more (3.6 %).

11.3 Prices

11.3.1 Price infl ation

Th  ere was a relatively steep and sustained rise in 
the EU-27’s harmonised index of consumer prices 
for restaurants and hotels in the period between 
2000 and 2007 (increasing on average by 3.4 % per 
annum), with almost identical developments for 
the sub-indices of catering services, canteens and 
accommodation  services.  Progressively  higher 
prices  for  restaurants  and  hotels  were  a  general 
feature across all of the Member States during the 
period  between  2000  and  2007  (see  Table  11.6). 
Th  e highest price increases in 2007 were noted in 
Latvia (14.3 %) and Bulgaria (11.8 %), continuing 
the  trend  of  accelerating  prices  in  both  of  these 
countries.  In  contrast,  there  was  a  slowdown  in 
the rate of price increases in Romania (to 5.1 % in 
2007). Th  e price index for restaurants and hotels 
in  Malta  declined  slightly  in  2007  (-0.6 %),  the 
only  fall  noted  for  any  of  the  Member  States  in 
any of the years between 2000 and 2007.

Table 11.6: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, restaurants and hotels, annual rate of change
(%) 

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2000
3.4
3.0
11.8
2.6
3.0
1.4
5.7
5.6
4.6
4.2
1.9
3.2
8.0
2.1
0.0
2.6
10.9
7.6
3.6
2.1
8.3
3.7
52.1
4.6
7.7
3.0
1.5
3.3
52.1
5.7
2.9
:

2001
3.9
2.4
8.4
3.3
3.0
1.9
7.3
5.9
5.2
4.4
2.5
4.0
6.1
2.4
1.8
3.1
13.8
4.0
6.1
2.6
6.1
4.4
43.9
7.3
9.8
2.5
3.2
3.8
42.6
6.5
4.4
:

2002
4.4
4.4
4.3
3.7
2.2
3.7
5.5
7.1
6.7
5.5
3.9
4.5
4.4
2.6
1.9
4.2
10.2
4.5
6.9
2.8
2.9
5.6
27.4
9.0
4.7
3.3
4.1
3.4
38.2
6.9
4.1
:

2003
3.2
3.2
3.4
2.3
2.3
0.8
3.7
6.3
4.8
4.3
2.6
4.0
5.8
2.6
0.0
3.3
8.9
7.4
1.9
2.7
1.1
5.1
16.6
8.6
8.5
2.9
2.7
3.1
34.2
2.9
2.9
:

2004
3.0
2.6
4.2
5.0
2.5
0.7
2.7
4.0
4.3
4.1
2.8
3.0
4.7
7.3
1.0
3.2
10.2
2.6
2.0
2.5
2.6
5.0
14.1
6.1
10.3
1.0
2.1
2.9
19.9
2.3
2.3
:

2005
2.8
2.8
4.9
3.8
2.4
1.0
3.0
3.3
3.1
4.2
2.5
2.5
2.8
11.2
2.4
3.5
5.7
0.0
1.8
2.4
3.5
1.4
13.1
4.6
5.3
1.8
2.3
3.3
13.7
2.6
1.6
:

2006
2.8
2.9
8.5
3.4
2.5
1.3
3.2
3.9
2.6
4.5
2.3
2.3
0.2
11.3
3.4
3.0
5.3
1.9
2.0
1.8
1.8
2.0
7.9
4.4
2.6
2.2
2.5
3.2
13.9
5.7
3.0
1.3

2007
3.4
2.2
11.8
4.0
2.6
2.6
8.6
4.2
4.0
4.8
2.8
2.6
3.8
14.3
8.0
3.3
7.9
-0.6
3.6
2.2
3.4
2.4
5.1
7.3
3.0
2.5
3.2
3.5
11.2
4.5
4.1
1.3

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

342

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   342
Consumers.indb   342

08.04.2009   09:53:44
08.04.2009   09:53:44

11.3.2 Price levels

Th  e average price level of restaurants and hotels 
in  Denmark  was  about  45 %  above  the  EU-27 
average  (see  Figure  11.3)  and  higher  than  in 
any  of  the  other  Member  States.  In  contrast, 
the  average  price  level  in  Bulgaria  was  about 
one  third  (34.4 %)  of  the  EU-27  average.  Th  ese 
relative price levels were very similar to those for 
consumer services as a whole. However, this was 
not  the  case  in  Cyprus,  where  the  average  price 
level of hotels and restaurants was similar to the 
EU-27 average (2.4 % lower), while price levels for 
consumer  services  in  general  were  some  22.6 % 
lower than the EU-27 average. Similarly, the price 
level of restaurants and hotels in Poland was one 
quarter  (27.2 %)  less  than  the  EU-27  average, 
whereas  the  average  price  of  consumer  services 
as a whole was closer to half (52.1 %) the EU-27 
average.

Between  2000  and  2007,  the  extent  to  which 
average  price  levels  of  restaurants  and  hotels 
the  EU-27  Member  States 
diff ered  among 
narrowed slightly, although it remained relatively 
high (with a coeffi  cient of variation of 30.3 %). In 
contrast, the diversity in price levels between the 
EU-15 Member States increased during the same 
period  (the  coeffi  cient  of  variation  rising  from 
14.0 % to 17.6 %).

Restaurants and hotels

11

Figure 11.3: Price level indices, restaurants 
and hotels, 2007
(EU-27=100)

0

50

100

150

200

IS
NO
DK
IE
FI
SE
CH
UK
FR
BE
NL
IT
LU
EU-27
CY
DE
AT
ES
EL
HR
MT
SI
TR
EE
PL
PT
LV
RO
LT
HU
CZ
SK
MK
BG

Source: Eurostat, Price level indices (theme2/prc/prc_ppp_ind)

  Consumers in Europe

343

Consumers.indb   343
Consumers.indb   343

08.04.2009   09:53:45
08.04.2009   09:53:45

11

Restaurants and hotels

11.4 Quality

Since 2007, the European Commission has made 
awards to ‘European Destinations of Excellence’ 
(EDEN) at its annual European Tourism Forum. 
Th  e EDEN programme was launched in 2006 to 
promote the specifi c characteristics of European 
destinations  and  to  off er  particular  support  to 
those  where  competitive  tourism  is  developed 
into  account  social,  cultural  and 
to 
environmental  sustainability.  It  aims  to  provide 
a platform for the exchange of good practices at 
the European level, while rewarding sustainable 
tourism  and  successful  business 
forms  of 
models.

take 

In 2007, ten destinations were awarded the title of 
‘Best Emerging Rural Destinations of Excellence’: 
the Pielachtal (Austria), Durbuy (Belgium), Sveti 
Martin  na  Muri  (Croatia),  Troodos  (Cyprus), 
Florina  (Greece),  Őrség  (Hungary),  Clonakilty 
district  (Ireland),  Commune  di  Specchia  (Italy), 
Kuldiga (Latvia), and Nadur (Malta).

Table 11.7: Restaurants with one, two or three Michelin stars, 2005
(unit)

*
79
9
166
1
3
91
402
197
10
64
48
6
2
7
201

**
12
1
14
2
0
10
70
23
2
7
4
1
1
1
10

***
3
0
6
0
0
4
26
4
0
2
0
0
0
0
3

Total no.
 of  stars
112
11
212
5
3
123
620
255
14
84
56
8
4
9
230

BE
DK
DE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
LU
NL
AT
PT
FI
SE
UK

Source: Andy Hayler’s Michelin Restaurants’ Guide

Number of stars
per million
inhabitants
11.0
2.1
2.6
1.4
0.3
3.1
10.5
4.5
32.6
5.3
6.9
0.8
0.8
1.0
3.9

In  2008,  twenty  destinations  of  excellence  were 
awarded  the  title  of  the  ‘2008  European  Tourist 
Destination of Excellence in Intangible Heritage’: 
Steirisches  Vulkanland 
(Austria),  La  Ville 
d’Ath  (Belgium),  Belogradchik  Municipality 
(Bulgaria),  Djurdjevac  –  the  Rooster  Town 
(Croatia),  Agros  (Cyprus),  Viljandi  (Estonia), 
Wild  Taiga  (Finland),  the  tourist  wine  route 
of  the  Jura  (France),  the  prefecture  of  Grevena 
(Greece),  Hortobágy  (Hungary),  Carlingford 
and  the  Cooley  Peninsula  (Ireland),  Comune  di 
Corinaldo  (Italy),  Latgalian  potters,  masters  of 
clay  (Latvia),  Plateliai  (Lithuania),  Echternach 
(Luxembourg),  the  hamlet  of  Santa  Lucija  - 
Kercem  (Malta),  Horezu  Depression  (Romania), 
the  Soca  Valley  (Slovenia),  Sierra  de  las  Nieves 
(Spain), and Edirne (Turkey).

‘Le  Guide  Michelin’  is  a  well-known  French 
review  of  hotels  and  restaurants,  in  particular 
the  section  devoted  to  restaurant  excellence 
(that awards up to three stars in its classifi cation 
system). Collated data for 2005 show that France 
held the most Michelin stars among the Member 
States, although the quality of restaurants (using 
this  measure)  was  also  relatively  high  in  Italy, 
the  United  Kingdom,  Germany  and  Spain  (see 
Table  11.7).  Relative  to  population  size,  there 
were more restaurants with stars in Luxembourg 
and  Belgium  than  in  France,  while  Austria  and 
the Netherlands came fourth and fi ft h using this 
ranking. Th  e most recent awards for 2008 suggest 
that the quality of top-end restaurants in Germany 
has  risen,  with  nine  restaurants  attaining  three 
star  status  and  fi ft een  restaurants  attaining  two 
stars.  A  fi rst  Michelin  star  was  also  awarded, 
in  2008,  to  a  restaurant  in  the  Czech  Republic, 
making this the fi rst star given to a restaurant in 
any of the Member States that joined the EU since 
2004.

344

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   344
Consumers.indb   344

08.04.2009   09:53:45
08.04.2009   09:53:45

Miscellaneous goods and services

Consumers.indb   345
Consumers.indb   345

08.04.2009   09:53:46
08.04.2009   09:53:46

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

This chapter focuses on products related to Section 12 of COICOP, which covers miscellaneous 
goods and services. These are quite diverse in nature and so, unlike the other chapters in this 
publication, this one has been split into two parts:

• 

• 

Part 12A focuses on COICOP headings 12.1, 12.3, 12.4 and 12.7, covering personal care, personal 
eﬀ ects, social protection, and other services;

Part  12B  focuses  on  COICOP  headings  12.5  and  12.6,  covering  insurance  and  ﬁ nancial 
services.

12A. PERSONAL PRODUCTS, SOCIAL CARE AND OTHER SERVICES

Table 12A.1: Number of children in 
childcare, 2003-2006
(number)

Bruxelles / Brussel
Sofia
Praha
København
Berlin
Tallinn
Dublin
Athina
Madrid
Paris
Roma
Lefkosia
Riga
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Budapest
Valletta
Amsterdam
Wien
Warszawa
Lisboa
Bucureşti
Ljubljana
Bratislava
Helsinki
Stockholm
London
Bern
Oslo

Aged 
0-4
17 670
:
:
:
:
10 043
:
3 794
69 691
:
8 906
:
12 787
46 447
:
57 525
:
14 500
35 419
21 963
:
:
7 570
11 063
9 334
28 113
:
1 391
18 737

Aged 
0-2
:
:
:
:
:
3 273
:
991
18 882
:
:
:
3 579
11 592
:
9 712
:
:
10 662
2 402
:
:
2 933
215
2 927
13 004
:
:
8 069

Aged 
3-4
:
:
:
:
:
6 770
:
:
50 809
:
:
:
9 208
34 855
:
47 813
:
:
24 757
19 561
:
:
4 637
10 848
6 407
15 109
:
:
10 668

Source: Eurostat, Data collected for core cities 
(theme1/urb/urb_vcity)

Th  is  part  of  Chapter  12  covers  a  wide  range 
of  goods  and  services.  Personal  care  includes: 
services  from  hairdressers,  beauticians,  saunas 
and solariums; personal care appliances, such as 
razors, hair dryers and tooth brushes; as well as 
toiletries, cosmetics, and other beauty products. 
Personal  eff ects  include:  jewellery,  clocks  and 
watches, travel goods, bags and wallets, cigarette 
lighters, sunglasses and umbrellas, as well as items 
for  transporting  babies  such  as  push-chairs,  car 
seats  and  harnesses.  Social  protection  services 
include: care for infants, disabled persons and the 
elderly, as well as family counselling services. Th  e 
heading  ‘other  services  not  elsewhere  classifi ed’ 
includes:  legal  services,  services  of  employment 
agencies, estate agents and undertakers, payments 
for  issuing  of  certifi cates,  copying  documents, 
as  well  as  advertisements;  this  heading  also 
includes  payments  to  astrologers,  bodyguards 
and marriage guidance counsellors.

For households, personal care (goods and services) 
are  the  most  important  of  these  four  categories 
in  terms  of  expenditure,  accounting  for  around 
three  fi ft hs  of  total  household  expenditure  on 
personal products, social care and other services.

12A.1 Consumption

12A.1.1 Consumption volume: childcare

Table  12A.1  gives  an  indication  of  the  number 
of  children  in  childcare  in  the  capital  cities  of 
the  Member  States.  In  all  cities  there  are  more 
children  aged  three  and  four  in  childcare  than 
those aged from birth to two years old, although 
the diff erence is quite small in Stockholm. Of the 
cities  with  data  available,  Bratislava  stands  out 
from the others in that there are very few children 
under the age of three in childcare, in contrast to 
a relatively large number aged three or four.

346

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   346
Consumers.indb   346

08.04.2009   09:53:55
08.04.2009   09:53:55

12A.1.2 Consumption expenditure

When  studying  expenditure  related  to  personal 
products,  social  care  and  other  services  it  is 
important to note that the methods of provision 
for social protection services varies considerably 
between  countries.  Th  e  interpretation  of  data 
concerning  household  expenditure  on  social 
protection  services  is  therefore  limited  by  the 
extent  to  which  this  is  provided  free  (or  at  a 
greatly reduced price) at the point of use.

Figure 12A.1 provides a comparison of household 
consumption  expenditure  on  various  items  of 
social and personal care and other services, based 
on  2005  household  budget  survey  (HBS)  data. 
Th  e  HBS  data  are  presented  in  PPS  terms  and 
show that at comparable price levels, expenditure 
for  some  of  these  items  varied  enormously:  for 
example, expenditure on hairdressing salons and 
personal  grooming  establishments  ranged  from 
PPS  7  per  household  in  Bulgaria  to  PPS  497  in 
Cyprus, with expenditure in Luxembourg double 
this  level  at  PPS  1 006.  A  similar  situation  was 
observed  for  expenditure  on  jewellery,  clocks 
and  watches,  ranging  from  PPS  6  in  Romania 
to  PPS  163  in  Malta,  with  again  Luxembourg 
recording  an  exceptional  value  of  PPS  620  per 
household.  Th  e  miscellaneous  category  of  other 
services not elsewhere classifi ed ranged from PPS 
10 in Romania to over PPS 1 300 in Finland and 
Belgium.

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

Figure 12A.2: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of personal care, eff ects, 
social protection, and other services in total 
expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

2

4

6

8

10

FI
BE
FR
IE
CY
LU
DK
MT
AT
UK
EU-27
PT
SK
NO
EL
HR
NL
EE
LV
SI
LT
HU
SE
ES
BG
RO

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, Germany, Italy and Poland, 
not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey 
(theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Figure 12A.1: Mean consumption expenditure per household, personal care, eff ects, social 
protection, and other services, 2005
(PPS, minimum and maximum (vertical lines at end of horizontal line), inter-quartile range 
containing half of the Member States (box), median (vertical line within box))

0

200

400

600

800

1 000

1 200

1 400

Other appliances, articles & products for personal care

Hairdressing salons & personal grooming establishments

Other services n.e.c.

Other personal effects

Jewellery, clocks & watches

Social protection services

Electrical appliances for personal care

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_exp_t121)

  Consumers in Europe

347

Consumers.indb   347
Consumers.indb   347

08.04.2009   09:53:57
08.04.2009   09:53:57

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

Figure 12A.3: Structure of consumption expenditure: share of personal care, eff ects, 
social protection, and other services in total expenditure, EU-27, 2005
(%)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Manual workers

Non-manual workers

Self-employed

Unemployed

Retired

Other inactive

Lowest

Second

Third

Fourth

Highest

1 adult

1 adult & dep. children

2 adults

2 adults & dep. children

3+ adults (2)

3+ adults & dep. children

Less than 30

30-44

45-59

60 and over

Dense

Intermediate

Sparse

)
1
(
y
r
o
g
e
t
a
c
c
i
m
o
n
o
c
e
-
o
i
c
o
S

e

i

l
i
t
n
u
q
e
m
o
c
n

I

)
1
(
e
p
y
t
d
o
h
e
s
u
o
H

l

e
g
A

)
1
(
n
o
i
t
a
s
i
n
a
b
r
U

(1) Unreliable.
(2) Not available.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t221, hbs_str_t223, hbs_str_t224, hbs_str_t225, hbs_str_t226)

348

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   348
Consumers.indb   348

08.04.2009   09:53:58
08.04.2009   09:53:58

 
 
 
 
 
 
Miscellaneous goods and services

12

Collectively,  personal  products,  social  care 
and  other  services  accounted  for  4.4 %  of  total 
household  consumption  expenditure 
in  the 
EU-27  in  2005,  and  their  share  was  typically 
between 2.7 % and 5.6 % in each Member State, 
although  it  reached  8.7 %  in  Finland  and  7.0 % 
in  Belgium.  Th  e  relative  importance  of  these 
products  and  services  was  particularly  high  for 
non-manual  workers,  where  they  accounted 
for 4.8 % of total expenditure in the EU-27, and 
generally  increased  with  income,  the  share  for 
the highest income quintile being approximately 
one  quarter  higher  than  the  share  recorded  for 
those within the lowest income quintile.

Figure 12A.4: Structure of consumption expenditure on 
personal care, eff ects, social protection, and other services, 
EU-27, 2005 (1)
(%)

Social 
protect. 
services
9%

Other 
personal 
effects
7%

Other 
services 
n.e.c.
18%

Hair-
dressing 
salons & 
similar
18%

Elec. appl. 
for personal 
care
7%

Other 
products for 
personal 
care
34%

Jewel'ry, 
clocks & 
watches
7%

(1) Unreliable data.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Table 12A.2: Structure of consumption expenditure on personal care, eff ects, social protection, and other 
services, 2005 (1)
(%)

Hairdressing 
salons &
similar
18
13
4
:
17
:
14
17
12
37
14
:
31
17
15
40
12
150
21
24
:
24
110
17
14
9
25
16
23
21

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Electrical
 appliances for
personal care
7
0
0
:
0
:
0
0
0
0
23
:
0
0
0
2
0

3
2
:
0

:
0
0
0
2
3
0

Other
 appliances,
 articles &
 products for
personal care
34
14
61
:
28
:
41
43
51
33
21
:
38
60
62
6
58
57
34
30
:
33
70
46
52
14
34
31
48
31

(1) EU-27, unreliable. Note that shares do not always sum to 100 %. 

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

  Consumers in Europe

Jewellery,
 clocks &
watches
7
3
4
:
9
:
5
6
5
10
4
:
6
6
6
26
3
13
11
7
:
2
4
3
7
2
9
9
3
10

Other
 personal
 effects
7
3
4
:
7
:
11
7
10
7
4
:
6
11
12
11
6
9
5
9
:
5
7
11
19
2
9
7
5
7

Social
protection
services
9
4
7
:
28
:
8
20
2
7
9
:
6
0
0
9
3
0
21
4
:
19
0
3
0
8
16
13
5
26

Other
 services
 n.e.c.
20
63
21
:
9
:
16
6
20
10
23
:
15
9
6
4
18
7
5
26
:
14
7
20
10
64
6
24
15
2

349

Consumers.indb   349
Consumers.indb   349

08.04.2009   09:53:59
08.04.2009   09:53:59

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

12A.2 Prices

Th  e  EU-27’s  harmonised  indices  of  consumer 
prices  rose  between  2000  and  2007  by  an 
average  of  3.9 %  per  annum  for  other  services 
not  elsewhere  classifi ed,  and  3.5 %  for  social 
protection  services,  while  for  personal  eff ects 
and for personal care the average rates of growth 
were  2.1 %  and  1.9 %  per  annum  respectively. 
Generally, the Baltic Member States recorded the 
highest  price  increases  for  these  items  in  2007, 
with Latvia and Lithuania both recording double 
digit increases for social protection and for other 
services.

Figure 12A.5: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

120

110

100

90

80

2001

2003

2005

2007

Personal effects n.e.c.
Personal care
Social protection
Other services n.e.c.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/
prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Table 12A.3: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, annual rate of change, EU-27
(%)

Personal care

Hairdressing salons and personal grooming 
Electrical appliances for personal care; other appliances, 
articles and products for personal care

Personal effects n.e.c.

Jewellery, clocks and watches
Other personal effects

Social protection
Other services n.e.c.

2000
1.6
2.6

2001
3.1
3.2

2002
2.8
4.3

2003
1.9
2.9

2004
1.1
2.8

2005
0.8
2.7

2006
1.6
2.6

2007
2.0
3.0

0.9
1.0
1.0
0.9
7.3
2.4

3.0
1.6
1.7
1.5
3.4
3.9

1.8
1.9
2.3
1.5
3.2
4.0

1.3
1.2
1.8
0.6
4.2
3.0

0.0
0.8
1.3
0.2
4.7
4.6

-0.3
0.8
1.1
0.5
4.1
4.5

1.0
4.7
8.8
0.7
2.5
3.9

1.4
3.8
5.4
1.9
2.3
3.2

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

350

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   350
Consumers.indb   350

08.04.2009   09:54:00
08.04.2009   09:54:00

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

Table 12A.4: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, annual rate of change
(%) 

Personal 
care

Personal 
effects n.e.c.

Social 
protection

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

2006
1.6
1.9
4.0
1.4
1.8
0.6
4.2
1.3
2.2
3.1
1.5
1.3
2.7
5.6
1.1
1.7
1.3
2.1
1.1
1.9
0.1
2.6
3.4
1.5
2.3
0.8
1.5
2.0
4.3
6.3
2.3
0.3

2007
2.0
2.4
5.9
1.4
2.7
2.1
6.7
2.6
1.9
3.1
1.2
1.8
2.9
8.7
3.4
2.6
4.4
1.2
2.0
2.0
0.6
1.6
2.9
3.7
1.9
-0.2
2.0
2.5
3.9
9.8
4.1
0.2

2006
4.7
5.3
12.0
0.1
2.7
1.8
5.4
-1.5
5.7
10.2
6.5
6.5
5.2
2.0
4.4
6.6
3.4
6.4
7.9
8.6
-0.1
10.0
6.3
8.3
2.3
4.0
9.6
2.4
33.1
2.8
2.4
0.5

2007
3.8
5.1
4.9
0.3
3.5
2.4
7.2
-2.1
3.0
6.0
4.6
5.2
-2.4
7.5
6.7
4.2
4.8
0.6
4.5
3.6
0.7
7.7
4.7
5.0
2.2
2.2
4.2
3.0
5.1
7.6
1.2
1.0

2006
2.5
2.0
9.6
4.3
-0.4
1.2
18.3
4.0
3.9
5.3
4.1
2.3
3.1
18.7
12.3
4.2
:
4.2
-6.2
4.3
2.8
4.4
:
3.7
3.0
3.5
1.9
5.4
12.0
-15.9
-11.7
0.5

2007
2.3
2.1
2.6
15.6
-2.6
1.2
17.0
3.8
3.9
5.2
2.9
2.0
4.9
15.8
17.0
5.6
3.9
2.6
-9.1
4.4
3.3
3.5
:
3.3
5.4
5.1
2.8
5.6
10.1
-5.0
2.0
3.1

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Other 
services n.e.c.
2006
3.9
2.1
1.3
4.3
3.9
5.1
2.8
1.0
2.3
2.2
1.6
1.3
-0.2
16.6
6.3
1.6
5.7
-0.7
3.3
2.9
7.3
4.2
2.4
1.1
1.6
5.6
15.9
6.1
11.2
9.7
2.4
1.2

2007
3.2
2.5
7.5
3.0
3.8
2.3
-1.2
3.0
4.2
2.2
0.9
3.8
0.1
22.1
12.1
5.7
6.5
1.5
4.4
3.4
4.8
4.8
2.1
1.5
1.0
7.9
2.1
3.7
8.4
10.6
0.6
0.8

  Consumers in Europe

351

Consumers.indb   351
Consumers.indb   351

08.04.2009   09:54:01
08.04.2009   09:54:01

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

12B INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES 

Th  is part of Chapter 12 focuses on consumption 
related to banking and non-life insurance. Some 
information  is  also  provided  on  savings  and 
borrowing products (which are not consumption) 
such  as  fi nancial  investments,  pensions,  life 
insurance, and loans – more information on the 
levels of savings, credit and indebtedness, as well 
as on interest rates can be found in parts A5 and 
A6 of the overview at the start of the publication.

the 20 November 2007. Th  is review identifi ed four 
areas  where  the  competitiveness  and  effi  ciency 
of  retail  fi nancial  services  markets  could  be 
enhanced: 
improving  customer  choice  and 
mobility; making retail insurance markets work 
better; moving towards adequate and consistent 
rules  for  the  distribution  of  retail  investment 
products;  and  promoting  fi nancial  education, 
inclusion and adequate redress for consumers.

Retail  fi nancial  services  are  essential  for  the 
everyday lives of EU citizens and small businesses. 
Th  ey  facilitate  their  full  participation  in  the 
economy, enable them to plan for the long-term and 
protect them through unforeseen circumstances. 
Th  ey  include  services  such  as  current  accounts, 
payments,  personal  loans,  mortgages,  pensions, 
investments and insurance products, all of which 
can be provided to individual customers.

Th  e desire to promote competitive retail fi nancial 
services  markets  stimulated 
the  European 
Commission’s decision in June 2005 to open sector 
inquiries into two important areas of the fi nancial 
services sector, one of which was retail banking. 
In its sector inquiry, the European Commission 
examined  two  complementary  aspects  of  retail 
banking:  fi rstly,  the  markets  for  payment  cards 
and payment systems; and secondly, the markets 
for current accounts and related services.

2005, 

following 

In  December 
extensive 
consultation  with  stakeholders,  the  European 
Commission set out its future strategy on fi nancial 
services in a White Paper titled ‘fi nancial services 
policy 2005-2010’.

In  April  2007,  following  the  publication  of  the 
results of the sector inquiry into retail banking, the 
European Commission adopted a Green Paper on 
retail fi nancial services in the single market. Th  e 
publication of the Green Paper launched a public 
debate  on  the  European  Commission’s  future 
retail  fi nancial  services  strategy.  Th  e  results  of 
this debate were subsequently incorporated into 
the  single  market  review  which  was  adopted  on 

In the context of payments, two related initiatives 
are of interest. In November 2007, the European 
Parliament  and  Council  Directive  on  payment 
services  in  the  internal  market  was  adopted, 
which  aims  to  provide  the  legal  foundation  for 
the  creation  of  an  EU-wide  single  market  for 
payments.  Th  e  target  is  to  make  cross-border 
payments as easy, effi  cient and secure as ‘national’ 
payments within a Member State, bringing major 
benefi ts  to  consumers  as  well  as  businesses.  For 
example, funds transferred in euro to an account 
must be available for use by the end of the next 
business  day,  regardless  of  whether  these  are 
from  domestic  or  cross-border  sources.  More 
broadly,  the  legislation  also  seeks  to  improve 
competition by opening up payment markets to 
new  entrants,  thus  fostering  greater  effi  ciency 
and cost-reduction, for example, allowing mobile 
phone operators and retailers to become payment 
service providers.

At  the  same  time  the  Directive  provides  the 
necessary  legal  platform  for  the  single  euro 
payments  area  (SEPA).Although  euro  coins 
and notes can be used in the same way for cash 
payments throughout the euro area this has not 
been true for other types of payments; only with 
the launch of the SEPA at the beginning of 2008, 
was it possible to use the same format for credit 
transfers in euro throughout the European Union; 
for technical and legal reasons, cross-border direct 
debits are only likely to become widely available 
aft er  October  2009.  Another  stage,  further 
into  the  future,  could  be  the  implementation  of 
common standards for credit cards.

352

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   352
Consumers.indb   352

08.04.2009   09:54:02
08.04.2009   09:54:02

Figure 12B.1: Market integration in retail 
banking:  ownership of the fi ve largest (gross 
total retail income) banks, 2004 (1)
(number)

0

1

2

3

4

5

UK

SE

ES

IT

FR

SI

PT

NL

EL

DK

LT

CY

IE

DE

FI

BE

AT

PL

MT

HU

SK

CZ

LU

LI

Domestic (2)

Foreign (3)

(1) In some countries less than ﬁ ve banks were surveyed.
(2) Banks where a controlling interest is held by a domestic 
institution.
(3) Banks where a controlling interest is held by an institution 
domiciled in another Member State.

Source: Report on the retail banking sector inquiry; Commission 
Staff Working Document accompanying the Communication from 
the Commission - Sector Inquiry under Art 17 of Regulation 1/2003 
on retail banking (Final Report) [COM(2007) 33 ﬁ nal] 
SEC(2007) 106

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

12B.1 Access, choice and switching

On the demand side, the sector inquiry concluded 
that  two  factors  may  weaken  the  operation  of 
a  competitive  marketplace.  Firstly,  consumers 
lack,  or  are  unable  to  act  on  full  information, 
so  reducing  the  intensity  of  price  competition. 
Secondly,  consumers  oft en  face  switching  costs 
(informational  and  transactional  costs)  that 
discourage  them  from  leaving  their  current 
provider.

Figure 12B.1 contains data from the fi nal report of 
the sector inquiry, illustrating the extent to which 
foreign banks are among the largest retail banks 
in each Member State. In several Member States 
all of the largest banks in 2004 were domestically 
owned,  notably  Cyprus,  the  United  Kingdom, 
Sweden, Spain, Italy and France.

Th  e issue of buying fi nancial services in another 
EU Member State was raised in a Eurobarometer 
survey conducted in 2008 (results are presented 
in Table 12B.1). Th  e single biggest barrier (among 
those  consumers  surveyed)  preventing  people 
from  signing-up  to  fi nancial  services  was  the 
diffi  culty of communicating in another language 
(37 %), followed by concerns over risks related to 
fraud  (30 %).  Issues  relating  to  information  also 
fi gured highly among the perceived barriers, with 
29 % of respondents reporting incomprehensible 
information 
information,  26 % 
and  13 %  reporting  misleading  or  deceptive 
information.

insuffi  cient 

Table 12B.1: Barriers to purchasing or signing up for fi nancial 
services from sellers/providers in another EU Member State, 
EU-27, February-March 2008
(% of respondents; maximum of three answers per respondent)

Having to communicate in another language
Risks related to fraud
Incomprehensible information
Insufficient information
Extra costs
Lack of personal contact when 
purchasing/signing-up at a distance
Misleading/deceptive information
Lower level of consumer protection
Information presented in too many ways
No answer/do not know
Different currencies
Refused by seller/provider as customer lives in another 
No different risks in purchasing from 
companies located in other EU countries
Other

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market’, Special Eurobarometer 298, 
European Commission

(%)
37
30
29
26
24

23
18
13
12
11
8
5

2
1

  Consumers in Europe

353

Consumers.indb   353
Consumers.indb   353

08.04.2009   09:54:03
08.04.2009   09:54:03

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

Figure 12B.2: Ease of access to the banking 
system, May-June 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

Figure 12B.3: Current account switching in 
the previous two years, May-June 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

0

25

50

75

100

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

FI

DK

ES

LU

NL

DE

BE

UK

AT

EL

SI

FR

CY

PT

MT

IE

EU-25

SE

EE

PL

LT

CZ

SK

HU

LV

IT

IT

DK

FR

EL

SK

SE

CZ

DE

EU-25

BE

FI

ES

CY

AT

HU

PL

UK

LT

LU

MT

EE

LV

NL

SI

IE

PT

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

Th  e results of another Eurobarometer survey that 
was  also  conducted  in  2006  (see  Figure  12B.2) 
indicate  that  the  vast  majority  of  respondents 
regard  access  to  the  banking  system  as  easy, 
some 88 % across the EU-25 as a whole. At least 
80 %  of  respondents  regarded  access  as  easy 
in  all  Member  States  except  in  Latvia  (77 %) 
and  Italy  (70 %).  Th  e  same  survey  looked  at  the 
ease  of  switching  current  accounts  (between 
banks). Figure 12B.3 shows the proportion of all 
respondents  that  did  switch,  or  did  not  switch 
either because they perceived the obstacles to be 
too great to try, or who tried but gave up because 
of the obstacles met. Overall 10 % of respondents 
did  switch  accounts,  the  vast  majority  without 

Yes, easy

Yes, difficult

Gave up because of obstacles

Did not try: perceived obstacles

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

any  problem.  A  similar  proportion  of  account 
holders  wanted  to  switch  but  did  not  do  so,  the 
vast  majority  because  they  had  the  impression 
that  the  obstacles  would  be  too  great  (although 
they did not get as far as trying to switch). In this 
sense  the  most  pessimistic  respondents  were  in 
Ireland,  with  15 %  of  respondents  not  trying  to 
switch accounts because of perceived obstacles.

354

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   354
Consumers.indb   354

08.04.2009   09:54:04
08.04.2009   09:54:04

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

12B.2 Consumption

12B.2.1 Frequency

12B.2.2 Consumption expenditure

Insurance,  savings  and  borrowing  may  be 
contracted  for  a  relatively  long,  fi xed  period  (in 
the case of a pension plan, life insurance, house 
loan, or regular savings plan), while other services 
in this area are provided on an open-ended basis, 
such as a current account. As such, the frequency 
with which customers sign-up for new fi nancial 
services or purchase them is relatively low.

A 2006 Eurobarometer survey noted that around 
70 %  of  respondents  in  the  EU-25  had  not 
committed to any of a list of ten insurance, saving 
or  borrowing  products  during  the  12-month 
period prior to the survey. Among the remaining 
30 % who had signed-up or purchased a fi nancial 
product,  the  most  common  products  included 
non-life insurance, current or savings accounts, or 
some form of credit, debit, payment or other bank 
card. A follow-up question from a Eurobarometer 
survey conducted in early 2008 shows that 12 % of 
respondents made a distance purchase of fi nancial 
products  (either  over  the  Internet,  by  post  or 
by  phone)  during  the  12-month  period  prior  to 
the  survey.  Of  these,  the  vast  majority  (10 %) 
purchased products from sellers/providers in their 
own country, while 1 % of respondents said they 
purchased  from  another  EU  Member  States,  the 
same proportion (1 %) that said they had purchased 
a fi nancial product from a country located outside 
of the EU. Across the Member States the highest 
proportion  of  consumers  making  distance 
purchases  of  fi nancial  products  was  in  Sweden 
(32 %),  followed  by  Estonia,  Latvia,  the  United 
Kingdom and the Netherlands, where upwards of 
one in fi ve persons made such purchases.

Th  e household budget survey (HBS) covers non-
life insurance and other fi nancial services related 
to  consumption:  payments  for  life  insurance, 
as  well  as  other  savings/investments  are  not 
considered as consumption expenditure, nor are 
interest payments. Th  e vast majority, around 95 %, 
of  the  PPS  814  average  household  consumption 
expenditure on insurance and fi nancial services 
concerned  insurance,  while  the  remainder  was 
for  fi nancial  services  such  as  bank  charges,  and 
agents and brokers’ fees.

Table 12B.2: Proportion of respondents having purchased or 
signed up to specifi ed products in the 12 months prior to the 
survey, EU-25, February–March 2006
(% of respondents)

None
Non-life insurance (health, home, travel, car etc.)
A current or savings account
A debit/credit/payment/bank card
Life insurance
A mortgage (house loan)
A loan other than a mortgage
A private pension plan
Stocks/shares
Shares in an investment fund
Other
Do not know

Source: ‘Consumer protection in the Internal Market’, Special Eurobarometer 252, 
European Commission

(%)
70
9
8
7
4
4
4
3
3
2
1
2

Figure 12B.4: Mean consumption expenditure per household, non-life insurance and fi nancial services, 2005
(PPS, minimum and maximum (vertical lines at end of horizontal line), inter-quartile range containing half of the 
Member States (box), median (vertical line within box))

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

Health insurance

 Transport insurance

Other insurance

House insurance

Other financial services  n.e.c.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_exp_t121)

  Consumers in Europe

355

Consumers.indb   355
Consumers.indb   355

08.04.2009   09:54:05
08.04.2009   09:54:05

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

Table 12B.3: Structure of consumption expenditure on non-life 
insurance and fi nancial services, 2005 (1)
(%)

Insurance 
connected
 with the
 dwelling
16
24
0
17
29
:
39
15
4
18
14
:
14
8
22
17
33
9
4
22
19
15
5
8
14
16
29
34
5
40

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Insurance 
connected 
with
 health
32
19
6
13
23
:
1
50
14
22
42
:
10
25
12
11
13
17
74
34
18
8
5
45
12
10
17
11
25
3

Insurance 
connected 
with 
transport
44
42
61
43
40
:
55
30
79
58
31
:
68
46
61
49
50
62
14
37
57
76
25
42
49
56
48
51
64
48

Other 
insurance
4
9
17
2
4
:
3
2
0
1
8
:
7
:
:
18
0
21
3
6
0
0
20
1
8
:
2
1
0
:

Other 
financial 
services 
n.e.c.
4
6
11
25
5
:
3
2
2
1
5
:
1
20
7
5
3
0
5
1
6
1
45
4
18
18
3
2
6
9

(1) EU-27, unreliable.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Figure 12B.5: Structure of consumption expenditure on 
non-life insurance and fi nancial services, EU-27, 2005 (1)
(%)

Insurance - 
other
5%

Insurance - 
t'sport
43%

Other 
financial 
services
5%

Insurance - 
house
16%

Insurance - 
health
30%

(1) Unreliable data.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/hbs_str_t211)

Th  ere was a very wide range of average household 
consumption  expenditure  on  these  products, 
from PPS 20 or below in Bulgaria and Romania, 
to  PPS  2 007  in  Ireland,  with  the  Netherlands 
recording  average  expenditure  of  PPS  3 730  per 
household.

expenditure 

consumption 

Household 
on 
insurance and other fi nancial services represented 
3.7 % of total household consumption expenditure 
in  the  EU-27,  with  this  share  below  1 %  in 
Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania, and as high as 
12.8 % in the Netherlands; the high share in the 
Netherlands is mainly attributed to a particularly 
high level of expenditure on health insurance.

Figure 12B.6: Structure of consumption 
expenditure: share of non-life insurance and 
fi nancial services in total expenditure, 2005 (1)
(%)

0

5

10

15

NL

DE

FR

SI

IE

DK

AT

BE

LU

EU-27

IT

UK

ES

FI

SE

HU

NO

MT

PT

SK

HR

CY

EE

EL

LV

PL

LT

RO

BG

(1) EU-27, estimate; Czech Republic, not available; Germany and 
Italy, insurance only.

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey (theme3/hbs/
hbs_str_t211)

356

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   356
Consumers.indb   356

08.04.2009   09:54:06
08.04.2009   09:54:06

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

12B.3 Prices

12B.3.1 Price infl ation

Table 12B.4: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, 
annual rate of change
(%) 

Th  e  harmonised  index  of  consumer  prices  for 
insurance  covers  non-life  insurance  such  as 
that related to dwellings, transport, health, civil 
liability and travel. In the EU-27 this index rose 
by 21.9 % between 2000 and 2007, equivalent to 
an  average  of  2.9 %  per  annum,  slightly  above 
the  rate  of  increase  recorded  for  the  all-items 
consumer  price  index  (2.4 %  per  annum).  Price 
increases for non-life insurance slowed each year 
from a 6.3 % increase in 2000 to a 1.4 % increase 
in  2006,  with  2007  marking  a  reversal  in  this 
pattern as the rate of change accelerated to 2.7 %. 
Non-life  insurance  prices  rose  particularly  fast 
in 2007 in Romania, Bulgaria, and Latvia, while 
Portugal was the only Member State to record a 
fall in prices.

Th  e  price  index  for  fi nancial  services  increased, 
on  average,  by  3.4 %  per  annum  between  2000 
and  2007,  therefore  at  a  quicker  pace  than  that 
recorded  for  non-life  insurance.  In  contrast  to 
non-life  insurance,  price  developments  during 
this period were irregular, fl uctuating between a 
low of 2.6 % and a high of 5.4 % growth (2000 and 
2001  respectively),  with  no  change  in  prices  in 
2007. Among the Member States, Bulgaria was the 
only one to record double-digit price increases for 
fi nancial services in 2007 (20.1 %). Luxembourg, 
Malta and Denmark recorded price reductions of 
between 2 % and 3 %, while the United Kingdom 
recorded  a  reduction  of  1.3 %;  Germany  and 
Estonia  recorded  no  change  in  their  respective 
indices,  and  several  of  the  remaining  Member 
States recorded price increases below 1 %.

Non-life insurance
2006
1.4
2.6
3.0
-0.5
4.8
-0.2
1.2
6.8
1.0
3.4
2.8
2.2
2.9
-0.5
16.8
0.7
1.3
0.1
1.2
-0.6
-1.7
0.7
13.3
7.0
15.1
2.0
3.5
1.6
11.6
8.1
0.2
2.0

2005
1.8
2.4
34.4
-0.8
3.5
1.1
3.2
2.6
2.7
3.7
1.8
1.7
6.5
11.1
3.3
1.8
6.1
3.7
5.4
3.1
2.2
2.9
18.5
4.1
6.1
3.2
4.2
-0.3
16.5
-1.0
2.0
:

2007
2.7
4.8
29.6
1.7
1.0
2.9
4.6
3.2
0.6
2.9
2.0
1.5
2.1
25.7
2.0
0.7
7.4
0.7
1.8
1.2
0.8
-1.3
45.6
3.6
3.5
3.4
6.9
3.9
10.2
15.7
0.8
-1.6

EU-27
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
TR
IS
NO
CH

Financial services
2006
3.5
3.9
-2.5
4.4
-1.2
1.3
0.0
-1.4
1.4
3.5
2.0
1.7
0.9
12.6
8.1
2.2
5.8
1.1
-4.2
2.8
10.6
2.4
11.9
9.2
3.5
1.8
1.6
4.4
15.1
6.5
-0.1
0.1

2005
4.6
0.1
-1.0
6.3
2.7
0.0
-0.3
1.2
3.8
5.1
1.8
6.4
3.2
18.1
1.0
1.1
2.1
2.3
1.6
4.9
0.5
1.0
4.1
4.6
4.5
1.8
1.6
7.5
13.7
10.1
4.5
:

2007
0.0
8.4
20.1
0.5
-2.3
0.0
0.0
1.1
2.1
7.8
0.7
0.1
0.3
8.7
6.4
-2.9
3.3
-2.8
2.9
1.6
2.2
2.4
7.2
7.3
4.4
1.0
2.1
-1.3
4.6
5.1
-0.6
5.7

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

Table 12B.5: Harmonised indices of consumer prices, annual rate of change, EU-27
(%)

Non-life insurance

Connected with the dwelling
Connected with health
Connected with transport
Other insurance

Financial services n.e.c.

2000
6.3
2.6
11.4
7.8
4.0
2.6

2001
5.1
1.5
4.8
7.7
2.2
5.4

2002
3.5
3.9
4.3
2.9
2.7
3.7

2003
3.2
3.2
4.7
2.0
3.1
2.9

2004
2.4
3.6
3.7
1.4
1.7
4.0

2005
1.8
2.6
3.6
-0.6
5.2
4.6

2006
1.4
1.6
3.7
0.1
0.3
3.5

2007
2.7
1.9
3.7
1.6
4.9
0.0

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices (theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

  Consumers in Europe

357

Consumers.indb   357
Consumers.indb   357

08.04.2009   09:54:07
08.04.2009   09:54:07

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

Figure 12B.7: Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices, EU-27
(2005=100)

Figure 12B.8: Aff ordability of bank current 
account, May-June 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

110

100

90

80

2001

2003

2005

2007

Non-life insurance

Financial services n.e.c.

Source: Eurostat, Harmonised indices of consumer prices 
(theme2/prc/prc_hicp_aind)

LT

SK

EL

UK

EE

NL

AT

SI

LV

BE

DK

DE

MT

LU

HU

EU-25

ES

IE

PT

SE

CZ

CY

PL

FR

FI

IT

Affordable
Not affordable
Excessive
Do not know

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

Th  e report on the sector inquiry into retail banking 
looked at several types of charges, notably fees for 
account  management,  account  closing,  excess 
borrowing,  automated  teller  machine  (ATM) 
withdrawals,  and  credit  transfers.  Figure  12B.9 
is  based  on  the  average  account  management 
fees  in  each  of  a  selection  of  banks,  analysed  in 
terms  of  the  dispersion  of  the  charges.  A  high 
dispersion  of  average  account  management  fees 
was  recorded  in  the  Czech  Republic,  Germany, 
Italy and Luxembourg, with these same Member 
States  and  the  United  Kingdom  recording  the 
highest maximum averages.

12B.3.2 Price levels

Comparing  actual  prices  between  banks  can  be 
diffi  cult: charges and interest paid or received are 
oft en bundled and high charges for one aspect of 
service  may  be  off set  by  low  charges  elsewhere 
or  a  higher  savings  interest  rate.  Furthermore, 
special  low  charges  may  be  off ered  to  new 
customers  or  to  other  particular  target  groups 
(such as students/young persons or those willing 
to deposit considerable sums of money).

358

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   358
Consumers.indb   358

08.04.2009   09:54:08
08.04.2009   09:54:08

ATM  withdrawals  and  credit  transfer  fees  may 
be  charged  at  a  fi xed  amount  per  transaction, 
as  a  percentage  of  the  transacted  amount  (oft en 
with  a  minimum  amount),  or  as  a  combination 
of  these  two  methods.  For  ATM  withdrawals, 
the  level  and  pricing  structure  of  the  fees  may 
vary  depending  on  whether  a  debit  or  credit 
card  is  used.  Th  e  sector  inquiry  used  a  model 
withdrawal of EUR 100 with a debit card from an 
ATM belonging to a diff erent payment network. 
Th  e  report  focused  on  the  euro  area  countries, 
and  noted  a  high  variability  in  fees  in  Belgium, 
Germany,  Spain,  the  Netherlands  and  Finland. 
the  Netherlands, 
In 
Austria, Portugal and Finland, the weighted (by 
the number of current accounts) average fee was 
lower  than  half  of  the  euro  area  average  (EUR 
1.14),  whereas  Germany  and  Spain  reported 
averages  higher  than  EUR  2.80  per  transaction. 
Th  e  report  also  stated  that  a  further  analysis  of 
the  data  suggests  that  larger  banks  (in  terms  of 
numbers  of  current  accounts)  tended  to  charge 
lower ATM fees than smaller banks.

Ireland,  Luxembourg, 

For  credit  transfers  a  sum  of  EUR  100  was  also 
used, with separate analyses for domestic transfers 
within the same payment network and domestic 
transfers to a diff erent payment network. Th  e euro 
area average fees were EUR 1.30 within the same 
payment  network  and  EUR  2.00  for  a  diff erent 
network.  Large  diff erences  in  the  average  fees 
were  observed  between  Member  States  for  both 
types of transfer, ranging from zero to EUR 9.77 
within the same payment network and from zero 
to EUR 10.85 to a diff erent network. In seven of 
the Member States, the majority of surveyed banks 
did  not  charge  fees  for  credit  transfers  within 
the same network, while the most expensive (on 
average) such transfers were reported in Greece. 
For  transfers  to  a  diff erent  payment  network, 
banks in fi ve Member States (Belgium, Germany, 
the  Netherlands,  Austria  and  Finland)  reported 
zero or very low weighted average fees, with the 
highest  weighted  average  fees  in  Greece  and 
Luxembourg.

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

A  2006  Eurobarometer  survey  on  services  of 
general  interest  looked  at  a  number  of  aspects 
concerning  banking,  including  the  aff ordability 
of  current  accounts.  Some  82 %  of  respondents 
in the EU-25 reported that current accounts were 
aff ordable, while 8 % said that they were not and 
a further 8 % that costs were excessive. Less than 
75 % of respondents regarded current accounts as 
aff ordable  in  Italy,  Finland,  France  and  Poland, 
while  in  Lithuania  some  96 %  of  respondents 
agreed that they were aff ordable.

Figure 12B.9: Bank-average account 
management fees: minimum, inter-quartile 
range and maximum, 2004 (1)
(EUR/account)

0

30

60

90

120

150

BE

CZ

DK

DE

IE

EL

ES

FR

IT

CY

LV

LT

LU

HU

MT

NL

AT

PL

PT

SI

SK

FI

SE

UK

(1) The shaded box shows the range of average account 
management charges which the middle half (50%) of banks 
charge: the horizontal lines lead to the average charges of the 
banks with the lowest and highest account management charges; 
Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: Report on the retail banking sector inquiry; Commission 
Staff Working Document accompanying the Communication from 
the Commission - Sector Inquiry under Art 17 of Regulation 1/2003 
on retail banking (Final Report) [COM(2007) 33 ﬁ nal] 
SEC(2007) 106

  Consumers in Europe

359

Consumers.indb   359
Consumers.indb   359

08.04.2009   09:54:10
08.04.2009   09:54:10

More  than  three  fi ft hs  of  respondents  were  also 
satisfi ed with their insurance services, with just 
3 %  dissatisfi ed;  insurance  services  provoked 
the  most  dissatisfaction  in  the  Czech  Republic, 
Slovakia,  Hungary  and  Malta.  As  with  retail 
banking,  students  were  the  group  least  satisfi ed 
with  insurance  services,  and  the  proportion  of 
respondents that were satisfi ed was (as with retail 
banking) low for the self-employed.

Th  e  2006  Eurobarometer  survey  on  services  of 
general interest also looked at views concerning 
the fairness of terms and conditions of contracts 
with  fi nancial  institutions.  Two  thirds  (67 %)  of 
respondents  regarded  them  as  fair,  a  share  that 
fell below half in Italy (36 %) and Poland (47 %), 
and reached 85 % or more in Denmark, Finland 
and the United Kingdom.

Th  e same survey looked at complaints concerning 
bank  accounts,  and  found  that  some  6 %  of 
respondents  within  the  EU-25  had  personally 
made  a  complaint  to  their  bank  concerning 
their  current  account  within  the  previous  two 
years.  Th  is  proportion  peaked  at  9 %  in  Cyprus 
and  the  United  Kingdom,  followed  by  Italy  and 
Austria  at  7 %.  Hardly  any  other  channels  were 
used for complaining about current accounts, the 
most signifi cant being 2 % of Italian respondents 
having  made  a  complaint  through  a  complaint 
handling body.

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

12B.4 Consumer satisfaction 
and complaints

In  2006,  a  survey  of  consumers’  satisfaction 
with  a  range  of  services  of  general  interest 
was  undertaken  on  behalf  of  the  European 
Commission.  It  surveyed  persons  aged  18  and 
over that had used the specifi ed services during 
the  12  months  prior  to  the  survey.  Consumer 
satisfaction  was  calculated  as  a  score  out  of  10, 
with  consumers  giving  scores  of  8  or  higher 
classifi ed  as  satisfi ed,  4  or  less  as  dissatisfi ed, 
and  5  to  7  as  neutral.  More  than  three  fi ft hs  of 
respondents  were  satisfi ed  with  retail  banking, 
and most of the remainder were neutral leaving 
just  5 %  of  respondents  dissatisfi ed. Th  e  highest 
proportions  of  persons  dissatisfi ed  with  their 
retail  bank  were  located  in  France,  Italy,  the 
Czech  Republic  and  Hungary.  Satisfaction  with 
retail  banking  was  lowest  among  students,  the 
self-employed  and  unemployed,  and  was  also 
lower among men (61 %) than women (65 %).

Table 12B.6: Satisfaction rates for fi nancial institutions, 2006

Retail banking

Insurance

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Satisfied
63
76
:
67
72
79
84
68
65
51
56
37
86
81
80
75
74
77
51
77
62
65
:
75
65
87
80
67

Dissatisfied
5
1
:
7
5
3
1
4
2
5
8
7
3
1
2
2
6
3
2
3
4
3
:
4
5
1
2
4

Satisfied
64
74
:
65
74
81
71
81
68
55
65
42
79
71
76
75
71
67
47
76
56
50
:
74
58
75
67
68

Dissatisfied
3
1
:
9
3
2
3
1
2
3
2
5
4
3
2
4
7
6
1
2
4
4
:
3
9
2
4
3

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission 
Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

360

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   360
Consumers.indb   360

08.04.2009   09:54:11
08.04.2009   09:54:11

Miscellaneous goods and services

12

Figure 12B.10: Satisfaction rates for retail banking, EU-25, 2006
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

Self-employed

Managers

Other white collar

Blue collar

Students

Housepersons

Unemployed

Retired

Up to 15 years

16-19 years

20 years +

Still studying

18-34

35-54

55+

Men

Women

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
O

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

e
g
A

r
e
d
n
e
G

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

Figure 12B.11: Satisfaction rates for insurance services, EU-25, 2006
(%)

0

25

50

75

100

Self-employed

Managers

Other white collar

Blue collar

Students

Housepersons

Unemployed

Retired

Up to 15 years

16-19 years

20 years +

Still studying

18-34

35-54

55+

Men

Women

n
o
i
t
a
p
u
c
c
O

n
o
i
t
a
c
u
d
E

e
g
A

r
e
d
n
e
G

Source: Consumer satisfaction survey, IPSOS INRA for the European Commission Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, May 2007

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

  Consumers in Europe

361

Consumers.indb   361
Consumers.indb   361

08.04.2009   09:54:11
08.04.2009   09:54:11

12

Miscellaneous goods and services

Table 12B.7: Did you personally make a complaint about any 
aspect of a bank current account in the previous 12 months?, 
May-June 2006
(% of respondents)

Figure 12B.12: Fairness of terms and 
condition of contracts with bank/fi nancial 
institutions, May-June 2006 (1)
(% of respondents)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

To
complaint
handling
body
0
0
:
0
0
0
-
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
-
-
0
-
0
1
1
-
:
0
1
-
-
0

To 
the
bank
6
3
:
6
5
6
3
5
3
3
5
8
9
1
1
1
6
7
7
8
3
2
:
3
5
5
5
9

To 
another 
party
0
0
:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
-
0
-
0
-
-
1
-
0
:
0
0
-
0
0

EU-25
BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK

Do 
not 
know
0
-
:
0
0
1
0
3
-
1
0
1
1
0
-
1
-
-
0
1
0
1
:
-
2
0
0
-

DK

FI

UK

LV

LT

LU

NL

BE

SI

SE

DE

IE

AT

MT

SK

EE

CY

PT

EU-25

FR

HU

EL

CZ

ES

PL

IT

No
93
97
:
93
94
92
97
92
96
96
94
90
89
98
99
98
93
93
93
90
95
97
:
97
92
94
94
91

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, European Commission

For more information

Directorate-General for the Internal Market and Services:  
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/top_layer/index_24_en.htm

Fair

Unfair

Do not know

(1) Bulgaria and Romania, not available.

Source: ‘Services of General Interest’, Special Eurobarometer 260, 
European Commission

362

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   362
Consumers.indb   362

08.04.2009   09:54:12
08.04.2009   09:54:12

Annex

Consumers.indb   363
Consumers.indb   363

08.04.2009   09:54:14
08.04.2009   09:54:14

13

Annex

Data sources

Several  data  sources  have  been  used  across 
many  of  the  chapters  in  this  publication;  an 
overview of these is provided here. Five Eurostat 
sources are presented, as well as information on 
the  Eurobarometer  surveys,  a  2008  consumer 
satisfaction  survey,  as  well  as  information  on 
the consumer markets scoreboard. Th  e Eurostat 
sources are:

• 
• 

• 

• 

• 

accounts 

the household budget survey (HBS);
the  survey  on  income  and  living  conditions 
(EU-SILC);
national 
consumption expenditure;
the  harmonised  index  of  consumer  prices 
(HICP);
purchasing  power  parities  and  price  level 
indices (PLI).

household 

fi nal 

Household budget survey (HBS)

level  and 

Th  e  household  budget  survey  (HBS)  describes 
the 
the  structure  of  household 
expenditure. HBS are national surveys that focus 
on  consumption  expenditure,  and  nationally 
are used to calculate weights for consumer price 
indices; they may also be used in the compilation 
of national accounts.

HBS provide a picture of the total consumption 
expenditure  of  private  households,  analysed 
by  a  variety  of  socio-economic  household 
characteristics such as the employment status of 
the  main  reference  person,  their  income,  their 
age,  the  number  of  active  persons  living  in  the 
household,  the  type  of  household,  the  location 
of  the  household  (rural  or  urban),  or  the  main 
source  of  income.  Information  is  available  at  a 
detailed level using the classifi cation of individual 
consumption  by  purpose  (COICOP),  with  over 
230  headings  for  diff erent  goods  and  services 
(including aggregates).

HBS data are confi ned to the population residing 
in private households. In other words, the survey 
excludes  collective  or  institutional  households 
(such as hospitals, old persons’ homes, prisons, or 
military  barracks),  as  well  as  persons  without  a 
fi xed place of residence.

Th  e  basic  unit  for  the  collection  of  information 
is  the  household  (defi ned  as  a  social  unit  which 
shares  household  expenses  or  daily  needs,  in 
addition to having a common residence) – in other 
words,  the  household  is  seen  as  a  housekeeping 
important  to 
unit.  Nevertheless, 

is  also 

it 

identify  the  head  of  the  household,  as  their 
personal  characteristics  are  oft en  used  as  the 
basis  to  classify  information  on  socio-economic 
characteristics.  Th  e  head  of  the  household  is 
defi ned, for the purpose of the HBS, as the person 
who  contributes  the  most  to  the  income  of  the 
household (the main earner).

To  take  economies  of  scale 
into  account, 
household  expenditures  can  be  expressed 
per  adult  equivalent.  Th  is  allows  household 
expenditures to be compared between households 
of diff erent sizes. Adult equivalents are compiled 
by assigning a coeffi  cient of 1 to the fi rst adult in a 
household, 0.5 to other persons aged 14 and over, 
and 0.3 to children aged less than 14; the sum of 
these coeffi  cients gives the overall household size 
in terms of adult equivalents.

Th  e  expenditure  eff ected  by  households  to 
acquire  goods  and  services  is  recorded  at  the 
price actually paid, which includes indirect taxes 
(VAT and excise duties) borne by the purchaser. 
A household’s own production for consumption 
(internal production) constitutes a non-monetary 
component of consumption. Eurostat guidelines 
encourage this to be included within the survey 
results, with internal production valued at retail 
prices,  as  if  the  product  had  been  bought  in  a 
shop.  Examples  of  internal  production  include 
own  production  of  food  (either  by  a  farming 
household  or  by  a  family  that  have  a  diff erent 
professional activity but grow their own food in 
a vegetable garden or allotment), or withdrawals 
from stocks for own-use in the case of tradesmen 
or retailers. HBS data should also refl ect benefi ts 
in  kind  provided  by  employers  in  exchange  for 
work done. Notional rents are imputed to owner-
occupiers and households accommodated free of 
charge.

HBS  are  carried  out  by  means  of  combinations 
of  interviews,  questionnaires  and  diaries  over 
variable  periods  of  time  depending  on  the 
countries  and  on  the  type  of  products.  Th  e 
intensive  recording  period  can  vary  between 
a  quarter  of  a  month  and  30  days.  Interviews 
are  used  to  obtain  retrospective  data,  and  their 
frequency can range from a month when asking 
about  frequent  purchases  (for  example,  food) 
to  a  whole  year  for  items  that  are  purchased  on 
an  infrequent  basis  (for  example,  a  car  or  other 
consumer durables).

364

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   364
Consumers.indb   364

08.04.2009   09:54:14
08.04.2009   09:54:14

Annex

13

Th  e table below shows some details relating to the 
data collection exercise for the last round of the 
HBS, which was generally for the reference year 
of  2005.  Th  e  table  shows  the  size  of  the  sample 
and  the  dates  during  which  the  surveys  were 
conducted. When the reference period was not in 
line  with  the  standard  reporting  year  then  data 
were infl ated/defl ated using the general consumer 
price  index  of  the  country  concerned.  Note  the 
size  of  the  samples  varies  considerably  across 
countries, partly as a function of country size, but 
also due to factors such as budget constraints and 
the accuracy of the estimates being produced.

Th  e  Member  States  generally  supplied  Eurostat 
with micro-data fi les (with records for individual 
households and household members) which were 
then  treated  for  confi dentiality,  harmonised, 
aggregated and tabulated.

HBS are conducted in all 27 EU Member States, as 
well as Croatia, the former Yugoslav of Republic 
of Macedonia, Turkey, Norway and Switzerland. 
Th  e data are collected on the basis of a gentleman’s 
agreement  between  Eurostat  and  the  National 
Statistics  Institutes  (NSIs).  As  there  is  no  legal 
basis,  each  country  has,  to  some  degree  its  own 
methodology  and  survey  techniques.  Eurostat 
issues  recommendations  for  harmonising  the 
survey and produces a methodological document 
describing methodological and technical aspects 
of the national surveys, as well as a consolidated 
EU  quality  report.  Despite  this  work,  some 
diff erences  remain  in  terms  of  the  frequency, 
timing, content or structure of national surveys. 
Furthermore, the on-going work of harmonising 
the  data  collection  exercise  between  successive 
rounds  of  the  survey  means  that  comparisons 
over  time  should  be  conducted  with  caution. 
Generally,  cross-country  comparisons  made  on 
the  basis  of  more  recent  data  are  more  robust 
than those made on the basis of historical data.

Timing and survey details for household budget surveys
(%) 

Reference year
2005
2005
2005
2003-2005
2003
2005
2004
2004
2004
2006
2005
2003
2005
2005

Sampling unit
Household
Household
Household/person
Address
Household
Household/person

Dwelling
Dwelling
Household
Household
Dwelling
Household
Household

2005

Dwelling/household

2004
20.09.2004-25.09.2005
2005

2005
2003-2005
2005
2006
2005
2005
2005
2005

Dwelling
Household
Dwelling
Dwelling

Household

Household

Dwelling
Person

BE
BG
CZ
DK
DE
EE
IE
EL
ES
FR
IT
CY
LV
LT
LU
HU
MT
NL
AT
PL
PT
RO
SI
SK
FI
SE
UK
HR
NO

Source: Eurostat, Household Budget Survey

Gross 
sample
35 000
3 000
2 966
4 500
59 713
7 803
-
6 801
15 000
20 000
28 296
3 599
7 429
10 866
-
17 995
-
-
20 087
34 992
16 700
37 440
-
6 447
-
4 000
-
4 056
6 601

Eligible 
units
33 723
-
-
4 457
53 432
7 187
-
6 720
-
10 240
-
3 364
7 275
7 586
-
-
-
-
20 045
-
-
36 607
-
6 305
-
-
-
2 727
6 496

Actual 
sample
3 550
2 870
2 965
2 449
52 217
3 432
6 884
6 555
8 881
10 240
24 107
2 990
3 774
7 586
3 202
9 058
2 586
1 570
8 400
34 767
10 403
33 066
3 725
4 710
4 007
2 079
6 785
2 727
3 376

Response rate
(before 
substitution)
10.5%
57.0%
-
55.0%
97.7%
44.0%
-
74.5%
59.2%
51.0%
-
88.9%
50.8%
69.8%
-
-
-
-
41.9%
-
62.3%
90.3%
-
74.7%
-
52.0%
-
67.2%
52.0%

  Consumers in Europe

365

Consumers.indb   365
Consumers.indb   365

08.04.2009   09:54:14
08.04.2009   09:54:14

13

Annex

Quality  checks  suggest  that  some  of  the  main 
areas  of  concern  as  regards  the  comparability 
of  data  include  health,  education  and  housing. 
Otherwise, some expenditure items can be under-
reported, for example, COICOP headings that are 
linked to activities that might not be considered 
as socially correct, such as the consumption/use 
of alcoholic beverages, narcotics or prostitution.

Survey on income and 
living conditions (SILC)

Data on income and living conditions is derived 
from  a  number  of  statistical  sources,  although 
the  most  important  of  these  is  the  survey  of 
Community  Statistics  on  Income  and  Living 
Conditions 
largely 
superseded the European Community Household 
Panel (ECHP).

(EU-SILC),  which  has 

EU-SILC  mainly  focuses  on  income,  collecting 
detailed  income  components  for  individuals, 
as  well  as  a  few  components  for  households. 
In  addition,  information  on  social  exclusion, 
housing conditions, labour, education and health 
is obtained.

EU-SILC  is  based  on  the  idea  of  a  common 
framework: this defi nes harmonised lists of target 
primary (annual) and secondary (every four years 
or less frequently) variables to be transmitted to 
Eurostat;  guidelines  and  procedures;  concepts 
(household and income) and classifi cations aimed 
at maximising comparability of the information 
produced.  Minimum  sample  sizes  are  specifi ed 
with the aim of ensuring representativeness.

EU-SILC collects annual micro-data on income, 
poverty,  social  exclusion  and  living  conditions. 
Cross-sectional  data  pertaining  to  a  given  time 
or a certain time period are collected, as well as 
longitudinal  data  pertaining  to  individual-level 
changes  over  time,  observed  periodically  over, 
typically, a four-year period.

EU-SILC was launched with limited geographical 
coverage in 2003 and was extended to all EU-25 
Member  States  in  2005,  and  to  Bulgaria  and 
Romania in 2006; several non-member countries 
also  participate.  To  compile  the  data  most 
countries launched a new survey with integrated 
cross-sectional and longitudinal elements.

Th  e  EU-SILC  target  population  consists  of  all 
persons living in private households. Th  e data may 
be  analysed  by  household  type,  activity  status, 
level of education (according to the International 
Standard  classifi cation  of  Education  –  ISCED) 
and  occupation  (according  to  the  International 
Standard Classifi cation of Occupations – ISCO).

National accounts 
consumption expenditure

National  accounts  are  compiled  in  accordance 
with the European system of national and regional 
accounts (ESA 1995). Households, as consumers, 
may  be  defi ned  as  small  groups  of  persons  who 
share the same living accommodation, who pool 
some, or all, of their income and wealth and who 
consume  certain  types  of  goods  and  services 
collectively, mainly housing and food; the criteria 
of the existence of family or emotional ties may 
also be added.

Two  concepts  of  fi nal  consumption  are  used 
in  national 
consumption 
accounts:  fi nal 
expenditure and actual fi nal consumption. Final 
consumption  expenditure  refers  to  expenditure 
on consumption goods and services. In contrast, 
actual fi nal consumption refers to the acquisition 
of consumption goods and services. Th  e diff erence 
between  these  concepts  lies  in  the  treatment 
of  certain  goods  and  services  fi nanced  by  the 
government  or  non-profi t  institutions  serving 
households (NPISHs) but supplied to households 
as social transfers in kind.

Final  consumption  expenditure  of  households 
is  primarily  made  up  of  goods  and  services 
purchased  in  the  market,  but  also  includes 
consumption  of  household  production  for  own 
fi nal use, such as the services of owner-occupied 
dwellings,  and  goods  or  services  received  as 
income in kind. It does not include social transfers 
in  kind,  intermediate  consumption  or  gross 
capital  formation,  acquisitions  of  non-produced 
assets,  payments  to  NPISHs,  taxes  other  than 
taxes  on  products,  or  voluntary  transfers.  Final 
consumption expenditure may take place on the 
domestic territory or abroad. Goods and services 
should in general be recorded when the purchaser 
incurs  a  liability  to  the  seller,  implying  that 
expenditure on a good is to be recorded at the time 
its ownership changes; expenditure on a service 
is  recorded  when  the  delivery  of  the  service  is 
completed. Expenditure on a good acquired under 
a hire purchase or similar credit agreement (and 
also  under  a  fi nancial  lease)  should  be  recorded 
at the time the good is delivered, even if there is 
no legal change of ownership at this point. Own-
account  consumption  should  be  recorded  when 
the output retained for own fi nal consumption is 
produced. Th  e fi nal consumption expenditure of 
households  is  recorded  at  the  purchaser’s  price. 
Th  is is the price the purchaser actually pays for the 
products at the time of the purchase. Goods and 
services  supplied  as  compensation  of  employees 
in kind are valued at basic prices if produced by 

366

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   366
Consumers.indb   366

08.04.2009   09:54:14
08.04.2009   09:54:14

Annex

13

the employer and at the purchaser’s prices of the 
employer  if  bought  in  by  the  employer.  Goods 
and  services  retained  for  own  consumption  are 
valued at basic prices.

Harmonised indices of 
consumer prices (HICPs)

An  increase  in  the  overall  price  of  consumer 
goods  and  services  is  usually  referred  to  as 
infl ation,  and  when  expressed  as  a  percentage 
change,  as  the  infl ation  rate.  Th  e  infl ation  rate 
indicates the loss of living standards due to price 
infl ation,  and  is  one  of  the  most  well-known 
economic  statistics  among  the  general  public. 
It  is  used  as  a  leading  indicator  to  determine 
monetary policy management, with price stability 
defi ned by the ECB as an annual increase in the 
harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP) for 
the euro area of close to, but below, 2 % (over the 
medium-term). HICPs give comparable measures 
of  infl ation  for  individual  countries,  as  well  as 
for  aggregates  such  as  the  euro  area,  the  EU,  or 
the European Economic Area (EEA). HICPs are 
calculated  according  to  a  harmonised  approach 
and  a  single  set  of  defi nitions,  providing  an 
offi  cial  measure  of  consumer  price  infl ation  for 
the  purposes  of  monetary  policy  and  assessing 
infl ation convergence.

HICPs  are  economic  indicators  constructed  to 
measure  the  changes  over  time  in  the  prices 
of  consumer  goods  and  services  acquired  by 
households;  they  aim  to  measure  pure  price 
changes,  unaff ected  by  changes  in  the  quality 
of  items  which  people  buy.  Th  e  prices  included 
in  HICPs  are  therefore  adjusted  for  changes  in 
the  quality  of  goods  and  services  to  which  they 
relate.  Conceptually,  HICPs  are  Laspeyres-type 
price indices and are computed as annual chain-
indices allowing for weights changing each year. 
HICPs  are  presented  with  a  common  reference 
year, which is currently 2005=100.

Th  e prices used in the HICP are the prices paid 
by households to purchase individual goods and 
services in monetary transactions. Th  e purchaser’s 
price is the price the purchaser actually pays and is 
net of reimbursements, subsidies, and discounts. 
Prices  for  goods  are  entered  into  the  HICP  for 
the month in which they are observed. Prices for 
services are entered into the HICP for the month 
in which the consumption can commence. HICPs 
are  based  on  appropriate  sampling  procedures, 
taking  into  account  the  national  diversity  of 

products and prices. Th  e weights of the HICP are 
based upon aggregate expenditures by households 
on any set of goods and services covered by the 
HICP.  Th  e  relative  distribution  of  consumers’ 
expenditure  on  individual  products  varies  from 
country  to  country,  hence  there  is  no  uniform 
basket  applying  to  all  Member  States.  HICPs 
cover practically every good and service that may 
be purchased by households in the form of fi nal 
monetary  consumption  expenditure.  Owner 
occupied housing is, however, not yet refl ected in 
the HICPs.

Th  e  diff erent  goods  and  services  are  classifi ed 
according  to  the  classifi cation  of  individual 
consumption by purpose (COICOP). At its most 
disaggregated  level,  Eurostat  publishes  close 
to  100  sub-indices,  which  can  be  aggregated  to 
broad categories of goods and services, and up to 
a total index referred to as the all-items index.

Price levels, price level indices 
and price convergence

Purchasing  power  parities 
(PPPs)  can  be 
considered  as  currency  conversion  rates  (similar 
to  exchange  rates)  that  convert  expenditures 
expressed in national currencies into an artifi cial 
common currency, the purchasing power standard 
(PPS). PPPs are indicators of price level diff erences 
across countries: they indicate how many currency 
units a given quantity of goods and services will 
cost  in  diff erent  countries;  the  conversion  of 
expenditure using PPPs therefore eliminates price 
level diff erences across countries. Th  e use of PPPs 
ensures  that  the  GDP  of  all  countries  is  valued 
at  a  uniform  price  level  and  thus  refl ects  only 
volume diff erences in the economy, as opposed to 
price level diff erences. When PPPs are applied to 
economic  expenditure  aggregates,  the  resulting 
fi gures are expressed in PPS.

PPPs are aggregated price ratios calculated from 
price comparisons over a large number of goods 
and services. To compile the price ratios detailed 
price level surveys are conducted, generally over a 
three-year cycle. Th  e full range of products is split 
into  six  groups,  and  the  survey  for  each  group 
has  three  phases:  i)  the  selection  of  products 
and  the  preparation  of  the  fi nal  product  list; 
ii) the collection and validation of prices; iii) the 
calculation and publication of survey results. Th  e 
surveys  can  take  between  18  and  20  months  to 
complete.

  Consumers in Europe

367

Consumers.indb   367
Consumers.indb   367

08.04.2009   09:54:15
08.04.2009   09:54:15

13

Annex

Satisfaction survey

Th  is survey was carried out in 2007 and focused 
on  services  of  general  interest  (SGI).  Th  e  main 
focus  of  the  survey  is  to  help  understand 
consumers’  perceptions  and  the  problems  they 
have experienced. Th  e survey is fi nanced and co-
ordinated by the Directorate-General for Health 
and Consumers.

For  the  purposes  of  the  survey,  ‘consumers’ 
were  defi ned  as  people  aged  18  or  more  having 
used a particular service or good in the previous 
12  months.  Satisfaction  was  defi ned  as  ‘the 
consumer’s  assessment  of  a  product  or  service 
in  terms  of  the  extent  to  which  that  product  or 
service  has  met  his/her  needs  or  expectations’. 
Consumer  satisfaction  was  measured  both 
directly  (observed  satisfaction)  and  aft er  the 
responses  to  specifi c  questions  were  statistically 
processed (calculated satisfaction).

For  each  service  and  country,  500  interviews 
were carried out (250 for services with low levels 
of usage). Data was collected through face-to-face 
interviews  lasting  an  average  of  55  minutes.  A 
representative random sample was drawn based 
on stratifi cation by region, degree of urbanisation, 
gender,  age  and  occupation.  A  complete  report 
on the survey is available from: http://ec.europa.
eu/consumers/cons_int/serv_gen/cons_satisf/
consumer_service_fi nrep_en.pdf.

In 2008, a similar survey was conducted for the 
Directorate-General for Health and Consumers, 
but  focusing  on  consumer  retail  satisfaction. 
Th  e  results  of  this  are  presented  in  a  number 
of  chapters,  with  a  focus  on  specifi c  product 
groups (such as fresh fruit and vegetables, motor 
vehicles,  or  information  and  communications 
equipment).

expenditure 

consumption 

by 
Individual 
households is broken down into 148 basic headings; 
prices  are  collected  for  126  of  these.  As  well  as 
refl ecting the expenditures on the basic headings, 
the  products  priced  must  be  comparable  across 
all  participating  countries  pricing  them,  and  at 
all  outlets  at  which  the  products  are  priced;  for 
PPPs spatial comparability is crucial, rather than 
the HICPs focus on comparability over time.

Eurostat  produces  indices  of  comparative  price 
levels using PPPs – these price level indices (PLIs) 
provide a comparison of a country’s price levels 
with respect to the EU average. If the price level 
index is higher than 100, the country concerned 
is  relatively  expensive  compared  with  the  EU 
average and vice versa.

An  analysis  of  the  PLIs  for  a  range  of  countries 
gives  an  indication  of  the  dispersion  in  price 
levels,  and  this  can  be  quantifi ed  by  calculating 
the coeffi  cient of variation for the national PLIs. 
Th  e  coeffi  cient  of  variation  is  calculated  as  the 
ratio of the standard deviation to the arithmetic 
mean of the PLIs. An analysis of the coeffi  cient of 
variation over time indicates whether prices levels 
are  converging  or  diverging:  if  the  coeffi  cient 
of  variation  for  the  EU  decreases  over  time,  the 
national  price  levels  in  the  Member  States  are 
converging.

Eurobarometer

Eurobarometer  surveys  cover  the  population 
aged  15  years  and  over,  resident  in  each  of  the 
Member States. Th  e basic design is a multi-stage, 
random  (probability)  sample  at  level  2  of  the 
geographical classifi cation, NUTS. All interviews 
are  conducted  face-to-face  for  standard  and 
special 
telephone 
interviewing used for Flash Eurobarometers. Th  e 
results  of  Eurobarometer  surveys  are  analysed 
and made available through the ‘Public Opinion 
Analysis’  sector  of  the  Directorate-General  for 
Communication  of  the  European  Commission: 
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/ 
index_en.htm.

Eurobarometers,  with 

Eurobarometer  surveys  are  not  conducted 
within  the  European  Statistical  System  (ESS). 
Nevertheless,  they  are  an  important  source  of 
information as they provide rapid information on 
topics of high political interest within the EU.

368

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   368
Consumers.indb   368

08.04.2009   09:54:15
08.04.2009   09:54:15

Annex

13

Consumer markets scoreboard

In  January  2008  the  European  Commission 
adopted  a  Communication  (COM(2008)  31)  on 
‘Monitoring  consumer  outcomes  in  the  single 
market: the consumer markets scoreboard’. Th  is 
noted  that  better  monitoring  and  evaluation 
of  outcomes  for  citizens  is  a  priority  for  the 
European Commission to move to the next stage 
of the single market. While better monitoring is 
important because it will help drive better policy 
making and regulation, it is also essential in itself 
as  a  way  of  demonstrating  to  citizens  that  their 
concerns are taken into account. Evidence on the 
performance of the single market for consumers 
is however largely absent at present. Developing 
indicators  to  better  monitor  this  demand-side 
aspect  of  the  single  market  is,  therefore,  key  to 
this new approach. Th  e scoreboard is intended to 
contribute to the general monitoring exercise by 
trying to detect those cases where signs of market 
malfunctioning  are 
linked  to  unsatisfactory 
conditions  of  the  consumer  environment.  Th  e 
data gathered will not only help deliver a better 
consumer  policy,  but  will  feed  through  to  all 
policies  that  aff ect  consumers,  ensuring  the 
better  integration  of  consumer  interests  into  all 
EU policies.

Th  e  fi rst  consumer  markets  scoreboard  set  out 
the  indicators  needed  for  screening  consumer 
markets and the institutional framework in which 
markets  and  consumers  operate.  It  presented 
existing  data  and  suggested  ways  of  fi lling  the 
extensive  gaps.  Th  e  following  objectives  were 
identifi ed.

• 

• 

• 

• 

Identify which markets are malfunctioning in 
terms of consumer outcomes and need further 
in-depth market analysis. Th  is analysis could 
generate  policy-specifi c  recommendations 
(competition policy, consumer policy, sectoral 
regulation, etc.).
issues 
Show  which  horizontal  consumer 
need  further  analysis,  especially  in  terms 
of  European  and/or  national  consumer 
legislation.
Show  progress  towards  the  Commission’s 
consumer policy goals of an integrated retail 
internal market with confi dent consumers.
Allow  benchmarking  of  Member  States’ 
performance  across  the  national  consumer 
environment.

For more information: http://ec.europa.eu/ 
consumers/strategy/facts_en.htm.

  Consumers in Europe

369

Consumers.indb   369
Consumers.indb   369

08.04.2009   09:54:15
08.04.2009   09:54:15

13

Annex

Classifi cations

Th  e classifi cation of individual consumption by purpose (COICOP) is a classifi cation used to classify 
household consumption expenditure, harmonised consumer price indices and price level indices. Only 
COICOP Divsions 01-12 are shown as the consumption expenditure of non-profi t institutions serving 
households (COICOP Division 13) and of general government (COICOP Division 14) are generally 
excluded from this publication.

01-12 Individual consumption expenditure of households

01 Food and non-alcoholic beverages

01.1 Food
01.2 Non-alcoholic beverages

02 Alcoholic beverages, tobacco and narcotics

02.1 Alcoholic beverages
02.2 Tobacco
02.3 Narcotics

03 Clothing and footwear

03.1 Clothing
03.2 Footwear

04 Housing, water, electricity, gas and other fuels

04.1 Actual rentals for housing
04.2 Imputed rentals for housing
04.3 Maintenance and repair of the dwelling
04.4 Water supply and miscellaneous services relating to the dwelling
04.5 Electricity, gas and other fuels

05 Furnishings, household equipment and routine household maintenance

05.1 Furniture and furnishings, carpets and other fl oor coverings
05.2 Household textiles
05.3 Household appliances
05.4 Glassware, tableware and household utensils
05.5 Tools and equipment for house and garden
05.6 Goods and services for routine household maintenance

06 Health

06.1 Medical products, appliances and equipment
06.2 Outpatient services
06.3 Hospital services

07 Transport

07.1 Purchase of vehicles
07.2 Operation of personal transport equipment
07.3 Transport services

370

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   370
Consumers.indb   370

08.04.2009   09:54:15
08.04.2009   09:54:15

Annex

13

08 Communication

08.1 Postal services
08.2 Telephone and telefax equipment
08.3 Telephone and telefax services

09 Recreation and culture

09.1 Audio-visual, photographic and information processing equipment
09.2 Other major durables for recreation and culture
09.3 Other recreational items and equipment, gardens and pets
09.4 Recreational and cultural services
09.5 Newspapers, books and stationery
09.6 Package holidays

10 Education

10.1 Pre-primary and primary education
10.2 Secondary education
10.3 Post-secondary non-tertiary education
10.4 Tertiary education
10.5 Education not defi nable by level

11 Restaurants and hotels
11.1 Catering services
11.2 Accommodation services

12 Miscellaneous goods and services

12.1 Personal care
12.2 Prostitution
12.3 Personal eff ects n.e.c.
12.4 Social protection
12.5 Insurance
12.6 Financial services n.e.c.
12.7 Other services n.e.c.
14.3 Recreation and culture
14.4 Education
14.5 Social protection

Th  e classifi cation shown is for COICOP Groups. Th  ere is  one further level of detail within COICOP 
for Classes. In order to obtain a more detailed listing of the COICOP and further information realting 
to the classifi cation, refer to: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcst.asp?Cl=5.

  Consumers in Europe

371

Consumers.indb   371
Consumers.indb   371

08.04.2009   09:54:15
08.04.2009   09:54:15

13

Annex

Abbreviations

ADR 
AEA 
ANEC 

ATC 
ATFM 
ATM 
B2B 
B2C 
BEUC 
BSE 
CARE 

CD 
CEN 

 Alternative dispute resolution
 Association of European airlines
 European association for the 
coordination of consumer 
representation in standardisation
 Agreement on textiles and clothing
 Air traffi  c fl ow management
 Automated teller machine
 Business-to-business
 Business-to-consumer
 European consumers’ organisation
 Bovine spongiform encephalopathy
 Community database on road 
accidents resulting in death or 
injury
 Compact disc
 European committee for 
standardisation which deals with 
all sectors except the electro-
technology and telecommunications 
sectors

CENELEC   European committee for electro 

CIAA 

CMI 
CO2 
COICOP 

CPI 
CPC 
CQARF 

CVT 
DG 

DIY 
DSL 
ECB 
ECC-Net 

ECDC 

ECVET 
EDEN 

technical standardisation
 Confederation of the food and drink 
industries of the EU
 International marketing committee
 Carbon dioxide
 Classifi cation of individual 
consumption by purpose
 Consumer price index
 Consumer protection co-operation
 Common quality assurance 
reference framework for VET
 Continuing vocational training
 Directorate-General (of the 
European Commission)
 Do-it-yourself
 Digital subscriber line
 European Central Bank
 European consumer centres 
network
 European centre for disease 
prevention and control
 European credit system for VET
 European destinations of excellence

EEA 

EEAICP 

EFSA 
EFTA 
EICP 
EMAS 
EMF 
EMU 
EQF 
ESA 1995 
ETSI 

EUFIC 
Eurostat 

FEDSA 

GDA 
GDP 
GMO 
GPSD 
HBS 
HD DVD 
HICP 

ICT 

IPPC 

ISCED 

ISDN 
ISHMT 

ITGLWF  

ITU 

LFS 
LPG 

 European Economic Area (27 
Member States of the European 
Union, Iceland, Liechtenstein and 
Norway)
 European economic area index of 
consumer prices
 European food safety authority
 European free trade association
 European index of consumer prices
 Eco-management and audit scheme
 Electromagnetic fi eld
 Economic and monetary union
 European qualifi cations framework
 European system of accounts (1995)
 European telecommunications 
standards institute
 European food information council
 Statistical offi  ce of the European 
Communities
 Federation of European direct 
selling associations
 Guideline daily amounts
 Gross domestic product
 Genetically modifi ed organism
 General product safety directive
 Household budget survey
 High-defi nition digital versatile disc
 Harmonised indices of consumer 
prices
 Information and communication 
technology
 Integrated pollution prevention and 
control
 International standard classifi cation 
of education
 Integrated services digital network
 International shortlist for hospital 
morbidity tabulation
 International textile, garment and 
leather workers’ federation
 International telecommunication 
union
 Labour force survey
 Liquefi ed petroleum gas

372

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   372
Consumers.indb   372

08.04.2009   09:54:16
08.04.2009   09:54:16

Annex

13

SANCO 

SDDS 
SEPA 
SGI(s) 
SILC 

SIM 
SME(s) 

SMS 
TSG 
TUS 
TV 
UCP 
UEA 

UN 
VAT 
VET 
VOC 
VoIP 
WHO 
WTO 

 Health and consumers (Directorate-
General of the European 
Commission)
 Special data dissemination standard
 Single euro payments area 
 Service(s) of general interest
 Survey on income and living 
conditions
 Subscriber identifi cation module
 Small and medium-sized 
enterprise(s)
 Short message service
 Traditional speciality guaranteed
 Time use survey
 Television
 Unfair commercial practices
 Federation of European furniture 
manufacturers
 United Nations
 Value added tax
 Vocational education and training
 Volatile organic compounds
 Voice over Internet protocol
 World Health Organisation
 World Trade Organisation

Ltd 
MP3  
MMS 
MUICP 

NACE 

n.e.c. 
NGO(s) 
NPISH 

OECD 

OJ 
OTE 

PC 
PDA 
PDF 
PDO 
PGI 
PISA 

PLI 
PPP 
PPS 
PSP 
RAPEX 

RASFF 
RDA 
REACH 

R&D 

 Private limited company
 Mpeg audio layer 3
 Multimedia messaging service
 Monetary union index of consumer 
prices
 Classifi cation of economic activities 
in the European Community
 Not elsewhere classifi ed
 Non-governmental organisation(s)
 Non-profi t institutions serving 
households
 Organisation for economic co-
operation and development
 Offi  cial Journal
 Organisation for timeshare in 
Europe
 Personal computer
 Personal digital assistant
 Portable document format
 Protected designations of origin
 Protected geographical indications
 Programme for international 
student assessment
 Price level indices
 Purchasing power parities
 Purchasing power standard
 PlayStation portable
 Rapid alert system for non-food 
products
 Rapid alert system for food and feed
 Recommended daily allowances
 Registration, evaluation and 
authorisation of chemicals
 Research and development

  Consumers in Europe

373

Consumers.indb   373
Consumers.indb   373

08.04.2009   09:54:16
08.04.2009   09:54:16

13

Annex

Geographical aggregates 
and countries

EU 
EU-27 

EU-25 

EU-15 

Euro area 

European Union
 European Union of 27 Member States 
from  1  January  2007  (BE,  BG,  CZ, 
DK,  DE,  EE,  IE,  EL,  ES,  FR,  IT,  CY, 
LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, 
RO, SI, SK, FI, SE, UK)
 European Union of 25 Member States 
from  1  May  2004  to  31  December 
2006  (BE,  CZ,  DK,  DE,  EE,  IE,  EL, 
ES, FR, IT, CY, LV, LT, LU, HU, MT, 
NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI, SE, UK)
 European Union of 15 Member States 
from 1 January 1995 to 30 April 2004 
(BE, DK, DE, IE, EL, ES, FR, IT, LU, 
NL, AT, PT, FI, SE, UK)
 At the time of writing the euro area is 
composed of BE, DE, IE, EL, ES, FR, 
IT,  CY,  LU,  MT,  NL,  AT,  PT,  SI,  FI. 
Th  e euro area was initially composed 
of 11 Member States (BE, DE, IE, ES, 
FR,  IT,  LU,  NL,  AT,  PT,  FI)  –  as  of 
1  January  2001  Greece  joined,  and 
as of 1 January 2007 Slovenia joined, 
and as of 1 January 2008 Cyprus and 
Malta joined.

BE 
BG 
CZ 
DK 
DE 
EE 
IE 
EL 
ES 
FR 
IT 
CY 
LV 
LT 
LU 
HU 
MT 
NL 
AT 
PL 
PT 
RO 
SI 
SK 
FI 
SE 
UK 

HR 
MK 
TR 
IS 
LI 
NO 
CH 

Belgium
Bulgaria
Czech Republic
Denmark
Germany
Estonia
Ireland
Greece
Spain
France
Italy
Cyprus
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Hungary
Malta
Netherlands
Austria
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovenia
Slovakia
Finland
Sweden
United Kingdom

Croatia
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
Turkey
Iceland
Liechtenstein
Norway
Switzerland

US 

United States of America

374

Consumers in Europe 

Consumers.indb   374
Consumers.indb   374

08.04.2009   09:54:16
08.04.2009   09:54:16

Annex

13

Units of measurement

bn 
EUR 
g 
GJ 
kcal 
kg 
km 
km2 
kWh 
m2 
m3 
mg 
pkm 
t 
tkm 
TOE 
vol. 
μg 

billion = 1 000 million
euro
gram
gigajoule
kilocalorie
kilogram(s)
kilometre
square kilometre
kilowatt hour
square metre
cubic metre
milligram=1/1 000 of a gram
passenger-kilometre
tonne
tonne-kilometre
tonne of oil equivalent
 alcohol expressed as a percentage of total liquid volume
microgram=1/1 000 000 of a gram

  Consumers in Europe

375

Consumers.indb   375
Consumers.indb   375

08.04.2009   09:54:16
08.04.2009   09:54:16

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

European Commission

Consumers in Europe

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

2009 — 375 pp. — 21 x 29.7 cm

ISBN 978-92-79-11362-8
ISSN 1831-4023

Price (excluding VAT) in Luxembourg: EUR 25

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33

Consumers.indb   1
Consumers.indb   1

08.04.2009   09:46:33
08.04.2009   09:46:33