The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people’s perspectives on the future.
Date: 2024-07-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion
Subjects: EU Member State, coronavirus disease, educational system, labour market, serial publication, social impact, social survey, social well-being, young person

Social  
Situation 
Monitor 

The effect of the COVID-19  
pandemic on young people’s  
perspectives on the future 

Mikkel Barslund 
Laurène Thil 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion 
Directorate F— Employment and Social Governance, Analysis 
Unit F4 — Analysis and Statistics 

Contact: Katarina Jaksic 
E-mail:  Katarina.jaksic@ec.europa.eu 

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The effect of the COVID-19  
pandemic on young people’s  
perspectives on the future 

Mikkel Barslund 
HIVA 
email: mikkel.barslund@kuleuven.be 
 Laurène Thil 
HIVA 
email: laurene.thil@kuleuven.be 

October 2022 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Manuscript completed in October, 2022 

The European Commission is not liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse of this publication. 
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2024 
© European Union, 2024 

The  reuse  policy  of  European  Commission  documents  is  implemented  based  on  Commission  Decision 
2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). 
Except otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is authorised under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Inter-
national (CC-BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed pro-
vided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. 

PDF    

  ISBN 978-92-68-18102-7      

   ISSN 2811-6798     

 doi 10.2767/027253     KE-CF-24-006-EN-N 

4 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 6 

Review of existing international surveys ................................................................................................ 9 

Description of international surveys ................................................................................................. 12 

National surveys ................................................................................................................................ 19 

New survey on young people’s perspective on the future ................................................................... 19 

Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 19 

Results ............................................................................................................................................... 21 

Trust in institutions ....................................................................................................................................... 21 

Confidence in the education system ............................................................................................................ 30 

Subjective well-being .................................................................................................................................... 32 

Optimism about the future ........................................................................................................................... 34 

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 35 

References ............................................................................................................................................ 38 

APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 42 

Appendix 1: Detailed description of the surveys .............................................................................. 42 

Description of international surveys ........................................................................................................... 42 

Description of national surveys ................................................................................................................... 46 

Appendix 2: European Youth Goals .................................................................................................. 50 

Appendix 3: Details from the 2022 HIVA survey ............................................................................... 51 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

Since  spring  2020,  the  European  Union  (EU)  has  experienced  the  full  scale  of  the  global  pandemic 
triggered by the COVID-19 virus, with significant numbers of people fatally or severely affected by the 
disease.  To  contain  the  pandemic  and  avoid  overloading  the  healthcare  system,  countries  imple-
mented  various  measures  to  contain  the  spread  of  the  infection,  such  as  travel  and  contact  re-
strictions, lockdowns, closures of schools and educational facilities, and hygiene regulations (Interna-
tional Labour Organization (ILO), 2020a). While everybody felt the impact of these restrictions, there 
is emerging evidence that young people were disproportionally affected by the pandemic (European 
Commission, forthcoming; Eurofound, 2021; ILO, 2020b; Konle-Seidl and Picarella, 2021; Organisation 
for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2021a). The health crisis precipitated an eco-
nomic recession and, despite their lower likelihood of developing severe complications from the virus, 
younger generations were more exposed to the economic and social consequences of the pandemic 
(ILO, 2020b; OECD, 2021a; Baarck et al., 2021).   

For two years, social interactions with family and friends, education and learning experiences, and job 
opportunities were affected by the COVID-19 crisis, disrupting young people’s development and well-
being, in  particular. For a number of reasons, young people are  likely  to have been  more  severely 
affected by the pandemic compared to the rest of the population. First, the school-to-work transition 
was particularly difficult, as only limited vacancies were available and work-based learning opportuni-
ties and apprenticeships scarce. Second young people were more likely to work in sectors most af-
fected by pandemic restrictions, such as accommodation and food services. Third they were often in 
a more precarious situation in the labour market, such as working on temporary contracts. As a result, 
their self-reported mental health was affected more than that of older people, as they were more 
likely to report experiencing loneliness, depression and social isolation, particularly those no longer 
living with their parents or in other shared residences (Konle-Seidl and Picarella, 2021).  

Since the onset of the pandemic, the impact on young people has been a major concern at interna-
tional and national levels1. This has led to the development of several surveys to shed light on self-
reported well-being and mental health, perceptions of the future, trust in institutions, and labour mar-
ket perspectives (among others). Different data, methodologies, and even definitions of ‘young peo-
ple’ have been used, sometimes without the possibility to compare outcomes with older age groups. 
As young people are not a homogeneous group, some studies paid attention to more vulnerable sub-
categories, such as young people with a migrant background, those working on temporary contracts, 
or those at risk of poverty.  

Understanding the issues and concerns that affect young people in Europe, as well as their views on 
the EU and their government, is important in the post-pandemic era to avoid lingering adverse effects 
or even a lost generation2. Attention to the impact on the young population is also relevant in relation 

1 A review of studies from international organisations and national studies from EU Member States found at 
least 17 studies covering the EU (see review section below). 
2 United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) made a call to ‘avert a lost generation’ in November 2020 (UNICEF, 
2020). See Hafstad and Augusti (2021) for a more nuanced view. 

6 

 
 
 
 
to the 11 European Youth Goals in the EU Youth Strategy, such as achieving better mental well-being 
or guaranteeing an accessible labour market with opportunities that lead to quality jobs for all young 
people (see Appendix B). Some of these goals were particularly challenged by the pandemic.  

This research note explores the impact of COVID-19 on young people’s perspectives on the future in 
absolute terms and comparatively with older age groups when possible. It also examines the impact 
of COVID-19 (from outbreak until Spring 2022) on young people’s views of the education system, their 
ability to be heard in the decision-making process at EU and country level, levels of optimism about 
their future, and their subjective well-being. The paper consists of two sections. The first section pre-
sents a review of recent surveys conducted after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, at both inter-
national and national level3. The second section presents the results of a new survey carried out for 
this study (‘2022 HIVA survey’) in five Member States – Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and Poland. 
The survey was innovative in that it used existing questions – keeping the exact wording – from previ-
ous surveys to allow for comparisons over time, sometimes as far back as the 1980s. This allows for 
some insight into the size and scale of observed changes in the longer term. The main drawback is that 
the timeframe for comparison extends beyond the period of COVID-19 and thus changes cannot be 
attributed solely to the pandemic. For example, the latest point of comparison for the question on 
confidence in the education system for Denmark is 2017-2018. A second note of caution in interpret-
ing the results is that the survey was fielded in May 2022, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine4. While 
this may not matter so much for the question on confidence in the education system, it may have had 
an effect on the subjective well-being question (Ronen and Seeman, 2007)5.       

The literature review of international surveys (OECD, ILO, Eurofound, and the European Parliament) 
showed that young people were indeed disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 crisis in different 
ways. These  surveys show that young  people were  overrepresented in most  impacted sectors and 
many had to reduce their working hours or lost their jobs. The OECD found that 51 % of young people 
(aged 18-29) experienced job-related disruptions (job loss, job retention scheme, reduction in working 
hours and/or pay cut) in the first year of the pandemic, compared to 46 % among 30-49-year-olds and 
37 % among 50-64-year-olds (OECD, 2021a). Those still in the education system had a more difficult 
transition to the labour market, with fewer vacancies and work opportunities. According to these sur-
veys their self-reported mental health was also heavily affected, and the reported risk of depression 
or anxiety was higher than for older age groups. These negative impacts on the labour market and 
their self-reported mental well-being may be reflected in young people’s perspectives on the future – 
young people fear the long-lasting effects of the pandemic on their financial or housing situation and 
career opportunities.  

3 A number of Member States conducted large-scale representative surveys since the early days of the COVID-
19 pandemic. For most of these surveys, research output is only starting to be published. An overview of the 
identified surveys and relevant results are available in Appendix A.  
4 The survey for this study was planned in January and February 2022, prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, 
but was only fielded in May 2022.  
5 It is possible that the specter of war, even if remote, affects cohorts differently, but the authors are unaware 
of any research on this specific aspect.   

7 

 
 
 
 
The results from the survey in five countries broadly match the findings from the literature, although 
they tended to show smaller differences across age groups, with the exception of the expression of 
subjective well-being (happiness). Subjective well-being decreased markedly and reached the lowest 
level since the European Social Survey began in 2002. Young people’s subjective well-being was af-
fected somewhat more, dropping just below the subjective well-being of those aged 30 or above (it 
was previously slightly higher than among the over 30s)6. This picture was quite consistent across the 
five countries. The results suggest that the period since 2018-2019 has resulted in an unusually large 
drop in subjective well-being, with younger people more affected than people aged 30 or older. How-
ever, the results for subjective well-being are somewhat at odds with those found in Naumann et al. 
(forthcoming). 

The results for subjective wellbeing were mirrored in expression of optimism about the future, with 
all five countries showing a substantial drop in optimism about the future. Across the five countries 
surveyed, on average, the number of people expressing some degree of optimism about the future 
fell by 17 percentage points (p.p.), from 64 % in 2016 to 47 % in 20227. The decrease in optimism does 
not vary by age, except in Germany and France, where the negative change was larger for the older 
age category (30 years or older).   

The share of people expressing confidence in the education system fell substantially in France, Italy 
and Poland compared to the survey wave in 2017-20188. In Italy, this was a reversal of the levels from 
1981 to 2010, whereas in Poland people now have the lowest level of confidence in the education 
system since 1990. Changes in Germany and Denmark were small. There were only small differences 
in the development of confidence in the education system between the young and old age categories. 
Since 2020, Denmark and Germany saw a large fall in the share of people believing that their voice 
counts in the EU. More people agreed that their voice counts in the Member States, but again the 
share fell markedly. In Italy, the fall was less strong, albeit from a very low start point. France and 
Poland showed only small changes in this respect. 

The remainder of this research note is structured as follows. The firstsection reviews the findings of 
international surveys, followed by a brief overview of Member States’ national surveys. The second 
section introduces a normal survey for this study that was conducted in five countries. It sets out the 
purpose, methodology and implementation, then describes the survey results, focusing on differences 
in outcomes and trends between young people (under-30s) and older people (over-30s). The research 
note closes with a concluding section.  

6 The question on subjective well-being read, ‘Taking all things together, how happy would you say you are?’ 
and is answered on a scale from 0 to 10. 
7 See Figure 13. 
8 The surveys conducted in 2017 and 2018 were part the 2017-2020 European Value Survey wave. For the 
countries in this study, interviews were conducted in 2017-2018 in Denmark, Germany and Poland, and in 
2018 in France and Italy.   

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
REVIEW OF EXISTING 
INTERNATIONAL SURVEYS 

In  spring  2020,  many  economic  and  social  restrictions,  such  as  the  closure  of  schools,  universities, 
shops and restaurants or lockdowns, were implemented worldwide to limit the spread of COVID-19 
and protect the health of the population. This had a significant impact on working and living condi-
tions,  and  self-reported  mental  well-being.  A  number  of  international  and  national  institutions 
launched surveys to assess the impact of the pandemic. Surveys targeted the whole population or 
subgroups, such as young people, in order to review and adapt the policies in place. This section pre-
sents the main results of those existing surveys on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young 
people.  

While the pandemic disrupted many aspects of daily life, we focus on four of them in this study: the 
impact on young people’s employment, self-reported mental health and well-being, perspectives on 
the future, and trust in their government and in the EU.   

Several international institutions launched surveys to compare the impact of the pandemic across dif-
ferent  countries.  This  literature  review  is  based  on  four  international  surveys:  Eurofound’s  Living, 
Working and COVID-19 e-survey; ILO’s Global Survey on Youth and COVID-19; OECD’s Risks That Mat-
ter 2020 survey; and the European Parliament’s Youth Survey. Before presenting the main results, it 
is important to recall that the methodologies, sampling procedures and representativeness differed 
substantially, as did the number of countries covered (see Table A in Appendix A), complicating direct 
comparisons across surveys. The direction and broad outcomes can be compared, however. The defi-
nition of ‘young people’ also differed across the surveys. The OECD’s Risks That Matter 2020 survey 
and the ILO’s Global Survey on Youth and COVID-19 defined young people as those aged 18-29 years, 
Eurofound’s Living, Working and COVID-19 e-survey used the range of 15-29 years, and the European 
Parliament’s Youth Survey defined young people as 16-30 years old. Table 1 presents the key findings 
from these international surveys. 

9 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 1: International surveys’ key findings for young people  

Survey 

OECD (September-
October 2020)  

Employment   
• 51 % experienced job-related 
disruptions (job loss, reduced 
working hours, pay cut, and/or un-
paid leave)9, compared to 46 % 
49-year
among 30
64-year
among 50
• 36 % reported financial difficul-
ties, compared to 33 % among 
30
50

olds and 26 % among 
olds  

olds and 37 % 
olds  

49-year
64-year

‑
‑

‑
‑

‑
‑

‑
‑

Well-being/mental health  
• More likely to report worsened 
self-reported mental health than 
older groups (35 % among 18-29-
year-olds, compared to 28 % 
among 30-49-year-olds and 20 % 
among 50-64-year-olds) 
• Young women were more likely 
to report worsened mental health 
than men (36 % and 26 %, respec-
tively). This gender difference was 
equally large for other age groups 

ILO (April-May 
2020)10 

• 23 % who worked before the 
COVID-19 outbreak had stopped 
working  
• 23 % in employment before the 
onset reported a reduction in 
working hours, which for 42 % of 
those meant a lower income   

• 50 % reported anxiety or depres-
sion  
• 23 % of those who lost their job 
were likely to report being af-
fected by anxiety or depression 
compared to 14 % among the em-
ployed 
• Women were more likely to re-
port possible anxiety or depres-
sion   

Perspectives on the future  
• 63 % were concerned about overall 
social and economic well-being and 
household finances (67 % in all age 
groups together) 
• Concerns about housing: 53 % were 
concerned about not being able to 
find/maintain adequate housing in the 
next year or two (44 % across all age 
groups) 
• Concerns about old age: 70 % were 
concerned about not being financially 
secure in old age (51 % in all age 
groups)  
• Women were more concerned than 
men (66 % and 60 %, respectively)  
• Concerns about the labour market: 
38 % were uncertain and 16 % were 
fearful about their future career pro-
spects  

Trust in institutions  
• Two-thirds felt the government should 
be doing more to ensure their economic 
and social security and well-being (68 % 
for all age groups)  
• 40 % felt that the government did not 
incorporate the views of people like 
them when designing policies (49 % 
across all age groups) 

/  

9 This question focuses on job-related disruption in the household. Therefore, the result should be interpreted as about half of all young people reporting that either they or a household member had 
experienced job-related disruptions. As a consequence, this number also relates to the percentage of young people who might have been affected indirectly, through job-related disruptions experi-
enced by other household members. 
10 It is not possible to compare with older groups as the survey focuses on young people. 

10 

 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
Eurofound 
(1st round: April 2020  
2nd round: June-July 
2020  
3rd round: February-
March 2021)  

European Parliament 
(June 2021)11 

• In 2020, the unemployment in-
crease was larger than among 
older groups (increase of 1.4 p.p. 
compared to 2019 for young peo-
ple and 0.4 p.p. for all age groups) 
• Those working in accommoda-
tion and food services, wholesale 
and retail, and health and social 
work were at higher risk of job 
loss, as were those on temporary 
contracts. In Q1 2020, 12.1 % of all 
people of working age (15-64) in 
employment had a temporary 
contract in the 27 EU Member 
States (EU-27), compared to 46 % 
among young people aged 15-24. 
Unemployed or inactive young 
people were most likely to experi-
ence housing insecurity (17 %), 
difficulty making ends meet (43 %) 
and having no savings (39 %) (4 %, 
10 % and 16 %, respectively, for 
employed young people 
/  

• Self-reported life satisfaction 
and mental well-being among 
young people decreased to their 
lowest point in spring 2021. Life 
satisfaction went from 7.4 in 2016 
to 6.3 in spring 2021 
• Self-reported mental well-being 
was lowest in spring 2021, related 
to school closures  (65 % of self-
reported risk of depression for 
young people aged 18-29, com-
pared to 60 % for people aged 30-
59) 
• Self-reported risk of depression 
was particularly high among un-
employed/inactive (10.1 com-
pared to 12.8 for employed young 
people (out of a score of 25)) 
• Women reported lower mental 
well-being than men (12.3 com-
pared to 12.5 )out of a score of 
25)) 

/  

Note: ‘/’ denotes a topic not included in a survey. 

11 It is not possible to compare with older groups as the survey only focuses on young people. 

11 

• General optimism about the future 
remained higher than for older groups 
throughout the pandemic 
• 52 % were optimistic about their fu-
ture in spring 2020 (45 % for all age 
groups) 
• In spring 2021, optimism was lowest 
among young people experiencing job 
insecurity (35 %, compared to 58 % for 
those with no job insecurity), housing 
insecurity (28 %, compared to 51 % for 
those without job insecurity), or finan-
cial difficulties (20 %, compared to 
55 % for those without financial diffi-
culties) 

• Young people’s trust in the EU was 
higher than their trust in government 
(5.6/10 compared to 4.2/10 in spring 
2021) and always higher than older peo-
ple’s trust in the EU 
• Trust in the EU improved in summer 
2020 compared to spring 2020 (6.1/10 
and 5.6/10, respectively) and declined in 
spring 2021 (5.6/10) 
• Women had more trust in government 
than did men (5.7/10, compared to 
4.8/10) 
• Young people with higher education 
reported stronger trust in govern-
ment (5.6 compared to 5.0) 

- Top political concerns: tackling pov-
erty and social inequality (43 %); com-
bating climate change and protecting 
the environment (39 %) and combating 
unemployment or a lack of jobs (37 %) 

• 53 % felt they did not have much or 
any say over decisions affecting their lo-
cal area, rising to 70 % for the EU  
• 62 % were generally in favour of the 
EU   
• 21 % were quite sceptical about the 
EU    

 
 
 
  
  
 
DESCRIPTION OF INTERNATIONAL SURVEYS 

One of the pandemic’s most visible effects was the impact on employment, as many sectors had to 
reduce or stop their activities. Most surveys showed that the impact on young people’s employment 
was  greater  than  for  the  older  age  population  (ILO,  2020b;  OECD,  2021a;  Eurofound,  2021).  More 
specifically, the Eurofound and ILO surveys showed that young people were overrepresented in the 
sectors  most  impacted  by  pandemic  restrictions,  such  as  accommodation  and  food  services,  and 
wholesale and retail. The crisis was also more likely to affect young people because of their compara-
tively precarious situation in the labour market, such as being employed temporarily or on part-time 
contracts (Eurofound, 2021). In both accommodation and food services and the wholesale and retail 
sectors, job losses from Q4 in 2019 to Q2 in 2020 were more heavily concentrated among young peo-
ple12.  As  a  result,  many  young  people  were  faced  with  either  unemployment  or  reduced  working 
hours.   

The intensity of the effects vary somewhat across studies. For example, more than half of the young 
respondents (51 %) of the OECD survey reported that ‘either they or a household member have expe-
rienced job-related disruptions since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in the form of a job loss, the 
use of a job retention scheme, a reduction in working hours, and/or a pay cut’. Similarly, the ILO survey 
highlighted that nearly one-quarter (23 %) of young workers reported a reduction in working hours 
and another quarter (23%) of young workers reported having stopped working since the start of the 
pandemic. According to the Eurofound survey, in early 2021, 17 % of young people working before 
the  pandemic  had  lost  their  job  and  were  unemployed,  with  ILO  (2020b)  finding  a  similar  result 
(17.4 %). The restrictions impacted different groups differently: young people from low social classes 
were hit particularly hard, according to OECD (2021a), as were younger young people (18-24), who 
were more likely to stop work (23.1 %) (ILO, 2020b). Even if large differences are evident across coun-
tries (Eurofound, 2020; OECD, 2021a), these greater impacts on young people’s employment can have 
lasting consequences for their futures. Indeed, this insecurity in the labour market, coupled with dif-
ficult transitions from the education system, could negatively impact young people’s professional de-
velopment  and  prospects,  increasing  housing  insecurity  and  financial  difficulties  (Eurofound,  2021; 
OECD, 2021a)13.  

More difficult entry into the labour market and unclear professional prospects are some of the factors 
that may reduce young people’s reported mental health and well-being (Bell and Blanchflower, 2011). 
The main result from the surveys is that the COVID-19 crisis had a disproportionate negative impact 
on young people’s self-reported life satisfaction and mental health compared to the older  population 

12 See Eurostat table lfsq_egan2. Young people defined as 15-39 years of age. 
13 The job disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic negatively affect two European Youth Goals: Goal 7, 
aiming to guarantee an accessible labour market with opportunities that lead to quality jobs for all young peo-
ple, and Goal 8, aiming to integrate and improve different forms of learning. 

12 

 
 
 
  
  
 
 
(Eurofound, 2021a; OECD, 2021a). The ILO survey found that ’50 % of young people are possibly sub-
ject to anxiety or depression, while a further 17 % are probably affected by it’14, while the Eurofound 
survey found that in spring 2021, 65 % of young people believed they were at risk of depression, com-
pared to 60 % of 35-49-year-olds and 53 % of over-50s. Self-reported mental health was worse for 
young women than for young men, and for unemployed and inactive young people (Eurofound, 2021; 
ILO, 2020b; OECD, 2020a). For example, the ILO survey found that ‘young workers who had lost their 
job were almost twice as likely to be affected by probable anxiety or depressions as those who con-
tinued to be employed (23 % and 14 %, respectively)’15.  

A combination of factors led to this deterioration of young people’s reported mental health. Poorer 
education and work opportunities were relevant factors, as were limited mobility and access to phys-
ical activity, and the prohibition of social gatherings, which resulted in social isolation, especially for 
those who were not living with their parents, families or friends during lockdowns (Eurofound, 2021; 
OECD, 2021a). Even if the concept of ‘self-reported or reported mental health’ is subjective, it is im-
portant to note that in the OECD survey, young people were more likely than older respondents (30-
49)  to  report  worsened  mental  health  for  their  households  and  for  themselves  in  nearly  all  OECD 
countries. Not being able to look positively to the future, and the feeling of being left behind may 
greatly impact their expectations16. Finally, young people with existing mental health issues before 
the pandemic were among the most vulnerable groups (Eurofound, 2021), and limited access to men-
tal health support during that period could have longer-term consequences.  

Young people’s perspectives of the future were evident in the different concerns they raised and their 
general level of optimism about the future17. One of the most urgent concerns is financial security 
(Eurofound, 2021; OECD, 2021a). The impacts of the COVID-19 crisis on the labour market and the 
relatively insecure position of younger workers make young people particularly ‘concerned about their 
ability to pay the bills and losing their job, both in the short term and beyond the next decade, with 
higher shares of young people reporting such worries than the total population for both risks’18 (OECD, 
2021a). They were concerned about the long-term effects of the pandemic, including whether they 
would be able to find or maintain adequate housing in the long run (61 % of young people reported 
this worry in the context of the next 10 years, compared to around 40 % in the full population), or 
whether they would be financially secure in old age (70 %), which is lower than for older people (OECD, 

14 The ILO survey uses the Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale to estimate young people’s men-
tal well-being. Based on the answers given to seven statements on their thoughts and feelings, the final score 
indicates probable, possible or no anxiety or depression in the respondent;  
ILO, Youth and COVID-19: impacts on jobs, education, rights, and mental well-being: survey report 2020, 
2020b, p. 28. 
15 Ibid. 
16 Youth Goal 5 aims to achieve better mental well-being and end stigmatisation of mental health issues. It was 
negatively impacted by the pandemic.  
17 The length of the time period considered (short, mid, and long term) is important to take into account and 
can differ across surveys. 
18 OECD, ‘Young people’s concerns during COVID-19: Results from risks that matter 2020’, OECD Policy Re-
sponses to Coronavirus (COVID-19), OECD Publishing, Paris, 2021, p. 7. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2021a)19. The ILO survey found that 16 % of young people were fearful about their future career pro-
spects, and that feeling was stronger for those who had stopped working since the onset of the pan-
demic (24 %). In general, women were less confident and more worried about the future than men, 
especially during the first year of the pandemic (Eurofound, 2021; ILO, 2020b; OECD, 2021a). Interest-
ingly, even though their self-reported mental health and career prospects were heavily affected during 
the crisis, young people’s optimism about the future20 remained higher than the rest of the population 
throughout the pandemic (Eurofound, 2021). However, optimism about the future depended on the 
different conditions in which they lived, being lowest among those who experienced job and housing 
insecurity,  as  well  as  financial  difficulties  (Eurofound,  2021).  By  contrast,  those  with  no  difficulties 
making ends meet were among the most optimistic (Eurofound, 2021).  As the proportion of optimistic 
people also varied depending on the measures in place (e.g. young people were more pessimistic dur-
ing strict lockdowns periods (Eurofound, 2021), it is important to review attitudes towards the insti-
tutions that implemented those measures to determine whether the COVID-19 crisis improved or re-
duced young people's confidence in their government or in the EU.  

Similar to levels of optimism about the future, trust in government was higher among young people 
than among older respondents since the onset of the pandemic, with scores of 4.2/10 and 3.9/10, 
respectively, in spring 2021 (Eurofound, 2021). The heterogeneity of young people is relevant, as those 
who have a higher level of education, those still in the education system, and women had a higher 
level of trust in their government (Eurofound, 2021). Despite this higher level of trust, two-thirds of 
young people believed their government should be doing more to ensure their economic and social 
security and well-being (OECD, 2021a). Nor did they feel sufficiently represented (European Parlia-
ment, 2021; OECD, 2021a). The OECD survey found that 40 % of the young respondents ‘feel that the 
government does not incorporate the views of people like them when designing or reforming public 
benefits and services’21. This was slightly more optimistic than across all age groups, with 49 % believ-
ing that the government did not incorporate their views.  The European Parliament survey found that 
the more distant the sphere of governance, the fewer young people felt they had influence over im-
portant decisions, laws, and policies affecting them. For example, 53 % felt they did not have much, 
or any, say over decisions at local level, while the number rose to 60 % for decisions at national level 
and 70 % at EU level (European Parliament, 2021a). Trust in the EU was found to be higher among 
young people than among older groups, as was trust in government before the onset of the pandemic 
(Eurofound,  2021).  Indeed,  according  to  the  European  Parliament  survey,  in  2021,  the  majority  of 
young people were generally in favour of the EU (62 %), including 34 % who were dissatisfied with the 
way the EU is working at  present and  28 % who were satisfied. Interestingly, 45 % of respondents 
reported that their image of the EU remained stable in 2020, while 31 % said it had worsened and 
17 % said it had improved.  

19 For the full sample of respondents, OECD (2021b) reported that 80.2 % were concerned about financial secu-
rity in old age. 
20 In the Eurofound survey, respondents had to answer the following question: ‘I am optimistic about my fu-
ture’ and choose between different options, from strongly disagree to strongly agree. 
21 OECD, ‘Young people’s concerns during COVID-19: Results from risks that matter 2020’, OECD Policy Re-
sponses to Coronavirus (COVID-19), OECD Publishing, Paris, 2021, p. 10. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
In order to retain high levels of trust among young people, their voices should be systematically in-
cluded in EU policy-making, notably through the implementation of the Youth Goals22. One solution 
could be to consider their political priorities higher on the European agenda. Based on the European 
Parliament survey, in 2021, young people’s top priorities were tackling poverty and social inequalities, 
followed by combating climate change and protecting the environment, with combating unemploy-
ment or a lack of jobs in third place.  These priorities can be tracked back in time using the Euroba-
rometer ‘Future of Europe’ surveys23. Table 2 shows that social inequalities and unemployment were 
the two main challenges for the EU, as reported by young people (15-34 years old) from 2012 to 2021. 
Some results can be linked to the economic situation. For example, the fact that the public debt of EU 
Member States was one of the main reported challenges in 2012 and 2014 could reflect the topics 
high on the  agenda during  the 2008 crisis recovery (34.5 % in 2012, compared  to 17.5 %  in 2021). 
Terrorism and security issues were also more reported after the 2015 terrorist attacks in the EU (31 % 
in 2016, compared to 16 % in 2021). Table 3 shows the survey results for older respondents (over-
35s), highlighting that young and older respondents were globally in line, reporting social inequalities 
and unemployment among the main challenges for the EU. For older respondents, in 2021, environ-
mental issues (30.2 %) were their fourth highest concern, after social inequalities (36.4 %), unemploy-
ment (31.6 %) and migration issues (31.4 %), whereas young respondents worried more about envi-
ronmental issues (37 %). Older respondents also reported global health issues in 2020 (30.6 %), during 
the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, compared to only 7.5 % of young respondents. 

A 2022 Eurobarometer survey on ‘Youth and Democracy in the European Year of Youth’ asked 15-30-
year-olds what they expected from the EU for their generation. Respondents could select up to three 
answers. The first priority was to ‘preserve peace, reinforce international security and promote inter-
national cooperation’ (37 %), followed by ‘increasing job opportunities for young people’ (33 %) and 
‘fighting poverty and economic and social inequalities’ (32 %). This survey was launched in February 
and March 2022 and could thus be interpreted in light of the outbreak of the war in Ukraine in Febru-
ary 2022. Young people were also asked which policy measures would be most effective to mitigate 
the effect of COVID-19 on youth (again, they could select up to three answers from a list of seven 
options).They believed the most effective measure to be ‘ensuring young people - can have access to 
psychological, including non-medical, to provide support and prevent mental health problem’ (46 %), 
followed by ‘financial assistance for those who have been forced out of work due to the pandemic’ 
(38 %) and ‘job creation schemes for young people’ (33 %). 

22 The 11 European Youth Goals are presented in the Annex. 
23 Eurobarometer ‘Future of Europe’ surveys started in 2006. Since 2012, one question is dedicated to the main 
challenges for the EU in order to face the future. It is important to note that the answer options vary across 
surveys, as do the formulation of the questions, making direct comparison of all results impossible.    

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 2: ‘Future of Europe’ Eurobarometer surveys – young respondents (15-34) 

Topics  
Ageing of the EU population  
Social inequalities  
Competition from emerging 
countries  
Insufficient economic 
growth  
Public debt of Member 
States  
Unemployment  
Instability in the regions bor-
dering the EU  
Environmental issues and cli-
mate change  
Migration issues  
Terrorism and security is-
sues  
Digital transformation of the 
economy and of society   
Handling global health is-
sues   
Access to jobs for young 
people  
Number of observations 

2021  
15 
36 
10 

2020  
18 
43 
12.7 

2018  
15.75 
36 
12 

18 

20.2 

17.5 

24.5 

34 
12 

37 

30 
16 

11 

14 

/ 

38.7 
13.7 

37.2 

37.7 
29.7 

7.5 

7.25 

/ 

21 

24 

41 
12 

23 

33 
30 

/ 

/ 

/ 

2017  
15 
35.5 
11 

20 

20.5 

40 
11 

20 

32 
33.5 

/ 

/ 

/ 

2016  
13.5 
37.5 
10 

2014  
14.5 
31 
11.5 

2012  
20 
22 
16.5 

20 

26 

44.5 
12.5 

15 

36.5 
31 

/ 

/ 

/ 

23 

28 

56 
6 

9 

/ 
/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

12 

34.5 

47 

6.5 

/ 
/ 

/ 

/ 

6.5 

6551 

7222 

7570 

7626 

7647 

8282 

7821 

Note: Results based on 15-34-year-old respondents’ answers. Three main challenges can be found in 
bold. Weighted answers expressed in percentage points. 
Questions:  In your opinion, what are the two main challenges for the EU in order to face the future? (2012, 
2014,2016) / Which of the following do you think are the main challenges for the EU? (2017, 2018, 2020, 2021)  
Example: In 2021, 36 % of respondents aged 15-34 in the EU thought that social inequalities was one of the 
main challenges for the EU24. 

24 For more information, see https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/browse/all/series/4962   

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3: ‘Future of Europe’ Eurobarometer surveys – older respondents (35+) 

Topics  
Ageing of the EU population  
Social inequalities  
Competition from emerging 
countries  
Insufficient economic 
growth  
Public debt of EU Member 
States  
Unemployment  
Instability in the regions bor-
dering the EU  
Environmental issues and cli-
mate change  
Migration issues  
Terrorism and security is-
sues  
Digital transformation of the 
economy and of society   
Handling global health is-
sues   
Access to jobs for young 
people  
Number of observations 

2021  
16.8 
36.4 
9.4 

2020  
22.8 
44.8 
14.4 

2018  
21.2 
37.2 
13.4 

2017  
18.8 
35.6 
9.8 

2016  
18.2 
34.6 
10.2 

2014  
18 
32.8 
11.2 

2012  
27.4 
21.8 
15.2 

18.6 

26 

22.4 

18.2 

20.4 

20.6 

11.8 

21 

29.4 

29.6 

22.2 

24.8 

28.6 

35.2 

31.6 
12.4 

43.4 
17.2 

40.8 
13.4 

38.6 
12 

46.2 
13.4 

51.2 
6.4 

44.8 
/ 

30.2 

36.8 

20.4 

17 

11.6 

7.2 

5.2 

31.4 
19.8 

43.8 
40.8 

34.6 
25.6 

34.4 
31.2 

35.2 
30.6 

7.2 

13 

15 

30.6 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 
/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 
/ 

/ 

/ 

21 

19810 

19979 

18918 
Note: Results based on over-35s’ answers. Three main challenges can be found in bold.  Weighted answers ex-
pressed in percentage points. 
Questions: In your opinion, what are the two main challenges for the EU in order to face the future? (2012, 
2014,2016) / Which of the following do you think are the main challenges for the EU? (2017, 2018, 2020, 2021)  
Example: In 2021, 36.4 % of respondents aged 35 and more in the EU thought that social inequalities was one 
of the main challenges for the EU25. 

19769 

20255 

20121 

19457 

Table 4 compares the EU-27 countries for the three main challenges reported in the Eurobarometer 
‘Future of Europe’ 2021 survey. Large differences are evident. The national economic and social situ-
ation in each country impacted the way young people self-reported the main challenges for the EU. 
For example, young people in Spain and Greece were more concerned about unemployment (66 % 
and 62.5 %, respectively), as the unemployment rate for young people in those two countries is among 
the highest in Europe. By contrast, young people in Germany tended to focus more on environmental 
issues or social inequalities, as their unemployment rate is the lowest in the EU26. The influence of the 
local context and specific problems may explain the heterogeneity of the answers. 

25 For more information, see https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/browse/all/series/4962   
26 Based on Eurostat data, the unemployment rate for young people (15-24 years old) in 2020 was 383 % in 
Spain, 38 % in Greece and 7.9 % in Germany, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data-
browser/view/UNE_RT_A__custom_2435473/default/table?lang=en  

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 4: ‘Future of Europe’ Eurobarometer 2021 survey – three main challenges highlighted by 
young respondents, by country 

Country 

AT 

BE 

BG 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

DK 

EE 

EL 

ES 

FI 

FR 

HR 

HU 

IE 

IT 

LT 

LU 

LV 

MT 

NL 

PL 

PT 

RO 

SE 

SI 

Social inequali-
ties 
(EU:36) 
30.5 

44 

25.5 

34.5 

28.5 

40 

43 

29 

33.5 

45.5 

32 

46 

24.5 

26.5 

26 

23 

39.5 

34.5 

41.5 

36.5 

45.5 

22 

63.5 

13 
50.5 

40.5 

Unemployment 
(EU:34) 

37.5 

32.5 

29.5 

58.5 

15 
17 

15.5 

24.5 

62.5 

66 
24 

40.5 

42.5 

23.5 

33 

45.5 

31 

34 

37.5 

23 

18 

19 

54 

25.5 

18 

32 

Environmental issues 
and climate 
change (EU: 37) 
42.4 

44 

16.5 
26.5 

25.5 

53.5 

52 

22.5 

19 

23 

43 

42.5 

26.5 

29 

35.5 

26.5 

32 

40.5 

20.5 

29.5 

53.5 

22.5 

25 

24 

61.5 
29.5 

Number of      
respondents 

265 

292 

237 

170 

264 

395 

291 

246 

243 

243 

197 

269 

271 

247 

272 

216 

289 

159 

265 

181 

172 

276 

238 

280 

259 

234 

SK 

28 

28.5 

280 
Note: Results based on 15-34 year old respondents’ answers. Weighted answers expressed in percentage 
points. 
Example: In 2021, 30.5 % of respondents aged 15-34 in AT thought social inequalities was one of the main chal-
lenges for the EU. 
Numbers in green indicate countries in which the share of respondents choosing a specific challenge was the 
highest. Number in orange indicate countries in which the share of respondents choosing a specific challenge 
was the lowest27. 

27 

27 For more information, see https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/browse/all/series/4962   

18 

 
 
 
 
 
Globally, by taking into account young people’s political concerns, such as social inequalities, unem-
ployment and environmental issues, Youth Goals 1 and 928 could be achieved more easily, i.e. foster 
the sense of young people belonging to the European project and strengthen young people’s demo-
cratic participation and autonomy. 

NATIONAL SURVEYS 

A number of Member States undertook large-scale representative surveys since the early days of the 
COVID-19 pandemic. For most of these surveys, research output is only starting to be published. An 
overview of the identified surveys and relevant results are available in Appendix A. Relevant findings 
of these national surveys are mentioned in the main text in the section below, alongside the presen-
tation of the results of the survey undertaken for this study. 

NEW SURVEY ON YOUNG PEOPLE’S 
PERSPECTIVE ON THE FUTURE  

METHODOLOGY 

The 2022 HIVA survey carried out for this study was a cross-national survey examining people’s well-
being,  trust  in  institutions  and  perceptions  about  the  future  in  five  EU  Member  States:  Denmark, 
France, Germany, Italy and Poland. The survey was planned in January and February 2022 and fielded 
during May 2022. It drew on a representative sample of 800 people in each country, aged 16-70 years 
old (4 000 people in total). The countries were chosen to represent EU geographically and the struc-
ture of the population.  

Sampling was conducted through quotas, with sex, age group and education level used as the sampling 
criteria29. Survey weights were constructed ex post to ensure representativeness based on these cri-
teria. As the aim of the survey was to analyse young people’s well-being and perspective on the future 
compared to older people, half of the respondents (400 per country) were under 30 years old at the 
time of the survey. The weights of older respondents were adjusted to get representative samples for 
both the young and old age categories.  

28 The Youth Goals are detailed in Appendix B: Youth Goal 1: Connecting EU with Youth: Foster the sense of 
young people belonging to the European project and build a bridge between the EU and young people to regain 
trust and increase participation; Youth Goal 9: Space and participation for all: strengthen young people’s demo-
cratic participation and autonomy, as well as provide dedicated youth spaces in all areas of society. 
29 The survey was implemented online by Bilendi and Respondi. A random proportional sampling method strat-
ified on age, gender and education was applied to achieve a sample of 800 respondents for each country from 
the company’s online research panel. Weighting factors based on age, gender and education were applied in 
order for the sample to be representative of the population in each country (within the relevant age range). 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The survey questions were selected and implemented with identical wording in national languages as 
the existing international survey30. This naturally limited the questions that could be asked but pro-
vided clear benchmarks for the findings and for certain questions, allowing a longer-term perspective 
on observed changes. In total, five questions were asked, on topics such as self-reported level of well-
being and trust in institutions. More specifically, respondents were asked if they thought their voice 
counted in the EU and in their country;31  and about their confidence in the education system,32 their 
level of happiness33 and optimism about their future34. The four surveys from which the questions 
were drawn – European Value Survey, European Social Survey, the Eurobarometer ‘Future of Europe’, 
and the European Quality of Life Survey (EQLS) – differed in when they were last implemented. All 
surveys were last conducted before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, except for the Eurobarom-
eter ‘Future of Europe’ (measuring trust in institutions), for which data were collected in October and 
November 2020. The European Value Survey (measuring confidence in the education system) was last 
conducted in 2017-2018, the European Social Survey (measuring well-being) in 2019, and the EQLS 
(measuring optimism about the future) in 2016. 

This methodology means that observed differences in outcomes between the 2022 HIVA survey and 
previous  surveys  cannot  be  attributed  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic  alone.  This  is  most  apparent  for 
measurement of trust in institutions (data for the Eurobarometer Future of Europe were collected 
after the beginning of the pandemic) and for the measurement of optimism about their future (data 
collection for the EQLS goes back to 2016). Important events related to migration occurred in 2015-
2016, affecting Italy and Germany, in particular, and to a lesser extent France (Ademmer et al., 2017). 
Results should be interpreted in light of these caveats. The same argument applies, albeit less strongly, 
to the question about confidence in the education system, which was last asked in the European Value 
Survey in 2017-2018. The time period until 2022 is long, but it is difficult to find events with equally 
broad and deep impact on the education sector as the COVID-19 pandemic. Well-being was last meas-
ured (with an identical question as in the 2022 HIVA survey) in 2019 in the European Social Survey. 
The concern here was not the length of time from 2019 to the start of the pandemic, but, rather, that 
the 2022 HIVA survey was fielded in May 2022, after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, when media 
attention was directed particularly towards this conflict. Negative news have been shown to affect 
mental health and general well-being (see overview in Hoog and Verboon (2019)). The measurement 
of optimism in the future may have been similarly affected by current events.         

While we cannot attribute reported changes to the COVID-19 pandemic alone, these results never-
theless give a precise measure of people’s perspectives and well-being today relative to the recent 
past.   

30 Wording taken from original national language questionnaires.   
31 Two questions selected from the Eurobarometer 500 Future of Europe. 
32 Question selected from the European Value Survey. 
33 Question selected from the European Social Survey. 
34 Question selected from the EQLS. 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RESULTS 

When presenting the results we do not state the statistical significance level related to each compar-
ison or change. Rather, below each figure we provide the percentage points difference needed for the 
comparison to be significant at the 5% confidence level. This difference depends on sample size and 
share of respondent agreeing to a claim. We state the difference in the conservative case (the case 
yielding the largest percentage point difference for statistical significance) at the point of 50 percent 
agreeing to the statement. These 'critical percentage points differences' are based on two-sided test 
statistics for the equality of means from two binomial distributed variables (Mohr et al., 2022). 

Trust in institutions 

The first two questions focus on trust in institutions. Respondents were asked about the degree to 
which they felt their voice counted in the EU and in their country of residence. Figure 1 shows that the 
share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU decreased after two years of the 
COVID-19 pandemic in Germany, Denmark and Italy. That decrease was particularly notable in Den-
mark, falling from around 70 % in 2020 to 50 % in 2022. In Italy, the vast majority of people thought 
their voice did not count in the EU, with only 23 % agreeing in 2020 and 18 % in 2022. The share of the 
population agreeing slightly increased in France, from 40 % in 2020 to 44 % in 2022, and stayed the 
same in Poland, at 50 %. 

Figure 1 – Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, 2020 and 2022 (%) 
All respondents  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the EU’. The 
response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respondents could 
also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are statisti-
cally significant if they exceed 4.6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

Figure 2 compares young respondents’ answers in 2020 and 2022. For all countries, except France, the 
share of young people agreeing that their voice counted in the EU decreased. The largest drop was 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
observed in Germany, from 68% in 2020 compared to 43% in 2022. The lowest level is found in Italy, 
with 21% in 2022. Comparing with respondents aged 30 and older in Figure 3 shows no clear pattern 
across countries. In Germany, France and Poland, respondents under 30 were less likely to think that 
their voice counted in the EU, compared to older respondents. The opposite was evident in Denmark 
and in Italy. The case of France is special in 2022 as the French presidency of the Council of the Euro-
pean Union started in January 2022 and with the start of the war in Ukraine in February, the French 
president was quite active and present at the EU level. This could explain why French respondents 
(both young and older) had the feeling that their voice counted in the EU especially during this period 
compared to 2020. 

Figure 2 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, 2020 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old 

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the EU’. The 
response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respondents could 
also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are statisti-
cally significant if they exceed 9,6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 3 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, 2020 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the 
EU’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Re-
spondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differ-
ences are statistically significant if they exceed 6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

Looking  at  respondents  aged  less  than  30  years  old,  some  differences  can  be  observed  between 
women and men. In every country except Poland, men tended to think more often that their voice 
counted in the EU compared to women (Figure 4). In 2022, the difference was especially high in Italy, 
where 15 % of women agreed, compared to 27 % of men. In Denmark, 59 % of men agreed, compared 
to 49 % of women. In Poland, 52 % of women agreed, compared to 39 % of men. The lowest gender 
gap is evident in France (39 % for men and 36 % for women). Older respondents gave similar answers 
across genders, with more men than women often thinking that their voice counted in the EU. The 
same pattern is evident in Poland, where men aged 30 or older tended to be more optimistic than 
women, whereas the opposite is observed for young Poles in 2022. Very little gender difference is 
observed for older respondents in Denmark (around 50 % agreed in both cases in 2022) (Figure C1 in 
Appendix  C).  Comparing  with  2020  shows  that  the  share  of  respondents  agreeing  that  their  voice 
counted in the EU decreased for both women and men in 2022, except in France and for Italian men, 
for young respondents and for older respondents in France and Poland. 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 4 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, by gender, 2020 and 
2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the 
EU’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Re-
spondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differ-
ences are statistically significant if they exceed 14.3 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

The level of education also seemed to play a role in respondents’ views of their voices in the EU. Figure 
5 shows that in 2022, young people with a higher level of education tended to think more often that 
their voice counted. This is especially the case in Poland (60 % of people with higher education, com-
pared to 41 % of people with primary or secondary education). In 2020 no clear pattern was found 
across countries, the share of young people with higher education agreeing was higher in Germany 
and France whereas the opposite situation was found in Denmark, Italy and Poland.  

For respondents aged 30 years and older, people with higher education also tended to agree more 
often than respondents with primary and secondary education in 2022, except in France, where higher 
educated people had a slightly lower share of respondents agreeing that their voice counted in the EU 
(Figure C2 in Appendix C). In 2020, older respondents with higher education agreed more often than 
respondents with a lower education level that their voice counted in the EU in all countries. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 5 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, by educational level, 
2020 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the EU’. The 
response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respondents could 
also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are statisti-
cally significant if they exceed14.1 percentage points (for Poland the difference needs to exceed 22.3 percentage 
points due to smaller sample size). 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

Looking at respondents’ perceptions of their voice in their country of residence, the first general ob-
servation is that the share of respondents who agreed was higher in all countries than the EU-level 
question. This is in line with the findings from a 2021 European Parliament study, which found that 
the level of citizens agreeing that their voice counted in their country was higher than the level for the 
EU since 2009 (European Parliament, 2021b). Comparing 2020 and 2022, the share of respondents 
agreeing  that  their  voice  counted  in  their  country  decreased  in  2022,  except  in  France,  where  the 
share stayed broadly the same (Figure 6). In 2022, the share of respondents agreeing was especially 
high in Denmark, with 80 % of respondents agreeing, compared to 70 % in Germany, about 60 % in 
France and Poland, and 22 % in Italy. The situation in France is particular in 2022 as the Presidential 
elections were held during spring. These elections are especially important in France and this could 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
explain why the share of French respondents agreeing that their voice counted in their country was 
slightly higher in 2022 compared to 2020 (61% compared to 59%). 
Figure 6 – Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, 2020 and 2022 
(%) 
All respondents 

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the EU’. The 
response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respondents could 
also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are statisti-
cally significant if they exceed 4.6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA survey (data 
collection in May 2022). 

Comparing Figure 7 and Figure 8 shows that the differences between young and older respondents 
were negligible, except in France, where 54 % of under-30s thought their voice counted, compared to 
64 % of older respondents in 2022. 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 7 – Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, 2020 and 
2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the EU’. The 
response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respondents could 
also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are statisti-
cally significant if they exceed 9.6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA survey (data 
collection in May 2022). 

Figure 8 – Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, 2020 and 
2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the EU’. The 
response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respondents could 
also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are statisti-
cally significant if they exceed 6percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA survey (data 
collection in May 2022). 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gender differences for young respondents were not substantial in 2022 in Denmark, France, and Po-
land, whereas men tended to agree more often than women in Germany (78 % and 61 %, respectively) 
and in Italy (31 % and 20 %, respectively) (Figure 9). In general, the gender differences for young peo-
ple  were  similar  to  the  earlier  EU-level  question  (Figure  4).  Men  tended  to  agree  that  their  voice 
counted in their country more often than women, except in Poland in 2022. The only difference was 
in Denmark, where the share of women agreeing that their voice counted was higher at national level 
(and lower at EU level). Comparing young people with older respondents aged 30 and above, gender 
differences were similar, except in Italy and Poland in 2022. In Italy, women older than 29 years old 
tended to agree more than men (29 %, compared to 19 % in 2022). In Poland, almost no gender dif-
ference is evident for older respondents (Figure C3 in Appendix C).  

Figure 9 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, by gender, 
2020 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in your 
country’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 14.3 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Similar to the EU-level question (Figure 5), young people with a higher level of education in all coun-
tries  tended  to  think  their  voice  counted  in  their  country  more  often  than  people  with  primary  or 
secondary  education  (Figure  10).  That  share  was  especially  high  in  Denmark  in  2022,  with  85 %  of 
young respondents with a higher level of education thinking that their voice counted in the own coun-
try. The lowest level was observed in Italy, at 32 %. Comparing with 2020, except in France, the share 
of young respondents agreeing decreased in 2022, for both low and higher education levels. Similar 
trends were observed for older respondents (Figure C4 in Appendix C). 

Figure 10 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, by educa-
tional level, 2020 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the question 
‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in your coun-
try’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Respond-
ents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are 
statistically significant if they exceed 22.3 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Confidence in the education system 

To analyse the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic had affected trust in important institutions, 
the 2022 HIVA survey asked respondents about their confidence in the education system. The key 
advantage of this question is that it has been asked in the European Values Survey five times since 
1981, allowing comparison of results over40 years.  

Since the beginning of the 1980s, trust in the education system has trended upwards in Germany and 
Denmark, while remaining broadly unchanged in Italy (Figure 11). In Poland, there was a fall in trust 
between 1999-2001 and 2008-2010. In France, trust in the education system declined since the 2017-
2018 wave. The period of the COVID-19 pandemic changed these trends in the case of Poland and 
France. In Poland, trust in the education system fell from around 70 % expressing ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a 
great deal’ of trust in the education system in 2017 to 45 % in the 2022 HIVA survey. Poland now has 
the second-lowest measure of trust in the education system measured in 40 years among the five 
countries. In France, trust in the education system decreased in the 2017-2020 wave compared to 
2008-2010,  but  the  decline  was  particularly  substantial  after  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  falling  from 
around 70 % trust in 2017-2020 to 57 % in 2022. 

Figure 11 - Share of the population with confidence in the education system, 1981-2022 (%) 
All respondents  

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Please tell us how much confidence you 
have in the education system’. This figure shows the share of respondents who have ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great deal’ 
of confidence. The response options were ‘none at all’, ‘not very much’, ‘quite a lot’ and ‘a great deal’. Respond-
ents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Within country differences (over time) are statistically 
significant if they exceed 4.7 percentage points. 
Source: European Value Survey 1981, 1990, 1999, 2008 and 2017 waves; 2022 HIVA survey. For the last wave of 
the European Value Survey, interviews were conducted in 2017 and 2018 for the selected countries. 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Looking at the age groups of those above and below 30 years, the trends over time and the impact of 
the recent COVID-19 pandemic were very similar (Figure C5 and Figure C6 in Appendix C). People aged 
30 and above tended to have slightly higher trust in the education system. The 2022 HIVA survey found 
small gender differences for younger respondents (under-30s), with those differences most marked 
in Denmark, France and Poland. Danish men were 7.5 p.p. more likely to have confidence in the edu-
cation system compared to women (72 % vs. 64.5 %). In France, men were 6 p.p. points more likely to 
have confidence in the education system compared to women (59 % vs. 53 %), whereas more women 
than men have confidence in the education system in Poland (42 % vs. 30 %) (Figure C7 in Appendix 
C). Figure 12 shows that gender differences among young people over time were small and relatively 
stable in all countries. In 2022, the gender gap in Poland was the biggest since the first wave in 1990. 
Regarding educational level, in all five countries, young people with higher education were more likely 
to express confidence than people with primary or secondary education only (Figure C8 in Appendix 
C). 

Figure 12 - Share of the population with confidence in the education system by gender, 1981- 
2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old       

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Please tell us how much confidence you 
have in the education system’. This figure shows the share of respondents who have ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great deal’ 
of confidence. The response options were ‘none at all’, ‘not very much’, ‘quite a lot’ and ‘a great deal’. Respond-
ents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differences are 
statistically significant if they exceed 10.6 percentage points. 
Source: European Value Survey 1981, 1990, 1999, 2008 and 2017 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
Subjective well-being 

The evolution of subjective well-being was examined through the question ‘Taking all things together, 
how happy would you say you are?’, which was answered on a scale from 0 to 10. This question has 
been asked biannually in the European Social Survey since 2002, with the latest available data col-
lected in 2018-2019. The long time series facilitated an assessment of recent changes since 2018-2019, 
as well as the scale of those changes from a longer-term perspective. 

For the five countries as a whole, subjective well-being decreased markedly, to the lowest level meas-
ured over the observed period (Figure 14). While young individuals generally scored higher on subjec-
tive well-being compared to their peers, their subjective well-being was affected somewhat more, to 
a level below that of the over-30s in 2022.  

Figure 13 - Evolution in average subjective well-being by age in five EU countries (DE, DK, FR, IT, 
PL), 2002-2022 

Note: This figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Taking all things together, how happy 
would you say you are?’, measured on a scale from 0 to 10. Between and within (over time) differences are sta-
tistically significant if they exceed 0.15 points on the happiness scale. 
Source: European Social Survey round 1-10 and 2022 HIVA survey. 

This picture is quite consistent across the five countries (Figure 14). The only exception was Denmark, 
where people aged 30 years or above had higher subjective well-being than younger people. However, 
the fall in reported well-being for the younger group was larger than for the older age group. These 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
results suggest that the period since 2018-2019 resulted in an unusually large drop in subjective well-
being and that younger people were most affected.  

The drop in subjective well-being (equivalent to a loss of 0.8 standard deviations relative to 2019) is 
large and somewhat at odds with other studies (Naumann et al., 2022). They indicate that in France 
and Germany subjective well-being decreased slightly from the beginning of the pandemic to spring 
2021 (0.13 and 0.07 standard deviations, respectively)35. Reconciling these results would imply that 
subjective well-being decreased markedly in the past year in both countries, and by much more than 
the fall from pre-pandemic to spring 2020 (as reported by Naumann et al., 2022). The main factor 
likely to explain such a rapid drop is the onset of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but other external 
data sources would be needed to validate this.  

The fall in subjective well-being was similar across genders for both the old and young age groups 
(Figure C9 and Figure C10 in Appendix C). 

Figure 14 - Evolution in average subjective well-being by age, 2002-2022 

Note: This figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Taking all things together, how happy 
would you say you are?’, measured on a scale from 0 to 10. Between and within (over time from 2019 to 2022) 
country differences are statistically significant if they exceed 0.3 points on the happiness scale. 
Source: European Social Survey round 1-10 and 2022 HIVA survey. 

A drop in subjective well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic was reported in national surveys of 
young people in Cyprus (from 85 % being ‘quite’ or ‘very’ satisfied with their life in January-February 

35 European Social Survey data from wave 10 for France (but not for the other four countries) are now availa-
ble. These data were collected in autumn 2021 (September to November) and show little change relative to 
the 2019 wave. Thus, for France at least, the drop in well-being recorded in the 2022 HIVA survey happened 
between autumn 2021 and May 2022.  

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2020, to 70 % in July-August 2021), Luxembourg (41.6 % stated that the COVID-19 pandemic had neg-
atively  impacted  ‘life  as  a  whole’,  46.8 %  reported  no  change,  and  a  small  minority  saw  a  positive 
impact), and the Netherlands (the share of young people aged 18-25 stating that they were happy fell 
from around 90 % to 84 % from the period before COVID-19 until April 2021).  

Optimism about the future 

To gauge the extent to which perspectives on the future may have changed after the COVID-19 pan-
demic and compare levels to previous years, respondents were asked how optimistic they were about 
their future. The same question was part of the EQLS in 2012 and 201636. 

Figure 15 compares the share of the population answering ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ when asked if 
they were optimistic about their future. All five countries showed a marked decrease since 2016 (latest 
round of the EQLS). While the levels of optimism differ for the five countries, the decreases are very 
similar at around 20 percentage points. Slightly larger in Denmark and Italy and  somewhat smaller in 
Poland. For France and Italy, it was a reversal to the low level of 2012. The number of people optimistic 
about their future in 2012 in France and Italy was likely suppressed by the aftermath of the financial 
crisis and the subsequent ongoing sovereign debt crisis. In Denmark, the most optimistic of the five 
countries  studied,  the  level  of  optimism  was  stable  from  2012  to  2016.  The  fall  in  2022  after  the 
COVID-19 pandemic is clear, from 81 % to 60 %. 

Figure 15 - Share of population optimistic about their future, 2012, 2016 and 2022 (%) 
All respondents 

Note: The figure shows percentage of population answering ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ to the question ‘Please 
tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: I am optimistic about my future’. The 
response options were ‘strongly agree’, ‘agree’, ‘neither agree nor disagree’, ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 4.6 percentage points. 
Source: European Quality of Life Survey 2012 and 2016 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 
The trends for the full sample were broadly mirrored in both the young and old age groups (Figure 
C11 and Figure C12 in Appendix C), with the fall in the share of people feeling optimistic about their 

36 This question was not included in EQLS 2007. In 2003, the answer options were different. 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
future being larger among the older age group in Germany and France, and no evident differences in 
the other three countries. There were generally no gender differences, except in France where in 2016 
young women were more optimistic, on average, compared to young men (Figure C12 in Appendix C). 
In 2022, however, this pattern reversed as in France women (men) experienced a large (small) drop in 
optimism, with young men now generally feeling more optimistic than their female counterparts. 

CONCLUSION 

This study looked at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on various socioeconomic issues. It focused 
on the impact on young people and, where possible, compared it to the impact on older people. The 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
results  were  drawn  from  a  review  of  existing  comparable  international  studies,  surveys  from  the 
OECD, ILO, Eurofound and the European Parliament. The study also looked at large national surveys 
in 12 Member States. 

To complement the findings extracted from these surveys and gain a longer-term perspective on any 
changes, the 2022 HIVA survey was designed, including questions on self-reported levels of well-being, 
optimism about the future, and trust in institutions. More specifically, the survey asked respondents 
whether they felt  their voice  counted in the  EU and in  their  country of residence, and about their 
confidence in the education system; their level of happiness; and their optimism about their future. 
The survey was fielded in Denmark, Germany, France, Italy and Poland. A key added value was the use 
of identical questions from previous surveys (European Social Survey, European Values Survey, EQLS, 
Eurobarometer Future of Europe surveys).  

Based on the literature review of international surveys, young people were found to be disproportion-
ately affected by the COVID-19 crisis in different ways. They were more likely to reduce their working 
hours or lose their jobs, while those still in the education system had a more difficult transition to the 
labour market, where there were fewer vacancies and work opportunities. Their self-reported mental 
health was substantially affected and the reported risk of depression or anxiety was higher than for 
older groups. These negative impacts were evident in young people’s perspectives on the future. De-
spite remaining more optimistic than the rest of the population, young people reported fearing the 
long-lasting effects of the pandemic on their financial or housing situation and career opportunities. 
Their  trust  in  their  government  and  in  the  EU  was  negatively  impacted  by  COVID-19  restriction 
measures, but nevertheless remained higher than that of older groups.  

The HIVA survey was conducted in May 2022, after the onset of the Russian aggression in Ukraine, 
meaning that the results cannot be linked to the impact of COVID-19 alone. The results from the five 
countries broadly match the findings from the literature, although the 2022 HIVA survey found small 
effects across age groups, with the exception of the expression of subjective well-being (happiness). 
Subjective well-being decreased markedly, reaching the lowest level measured since the European 
Social Survey began in 2002. Young people’s subjective well-being was affected slightly more, falling 
below that of the over-30s (having previously been higher than over-30s). This picture was quite con-
sistent across the five countries. The results suggest that the period since 2018-2019 prompted an 
unusually substantial drop in subjective well-being and that younger people were more affected than 
people over the age of 30 years. 

The observed large drop in subjective well-being contradicted other studies’ findings (Naumann et al., 
2022). Compared to our study, only France and Germany had comparable results, showing a slight 
decrease in subjective well-being from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to spring 2021. The 
discrepancy may reflect different wording in the questions used to study subjective well-being37. An-
other factor might be the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which predated the 2022 HIVA 
survey. The latter is likely a more significant reason, but implies that subjective well-being decreased 

37 Results in this research note are based on four questions: ‘In the past two weeks, have there been times when 
you felt happy?’, ‘How satisfied are you with the following areas of your life? With my work?, with my family?’, 
‘How satisfied are you currently with your life overall?’ and ‘On a 0-10 scale, how happy are you?’ 

36 

 
 
 
 
markedly as a result of the war, and by more than the fall from pre-pandemic to spring 2020 – a period 
of extreme stress on populations in France and Germany due to lockdowns. Additional external data 
sources would be needed to further investigate and draw firmer conclusions38. Both studies found 
only minor differences in well-being among different age groups. 

The results for subjective well-being were mirrored in the expression of optimism about the future, 
with all five countries showing a large fall in optimism. That decrease did not vary by age, except in 
Germany and France, where the negative change was greater for the over-30s.    

The share of people expressing confidence in the education system fell substantially in France, Italy 
and Poland compared to 2017-2018. For Italy, this was a reversal to the levels from 1981 to 2010, 
whereas Poles now reported their lowest level of confidence in the education system since 1990. The 
changes in Germany and Denmark were small, with little difference in the developments of confidence 
in the education system between the young and old age categories. 

Since  October/November  2020,  Denmark  and  Germany  saw large  decreases  in  the  share  of  young 
people  believing  that  their  voice  counted  in  the  EU.  More  young  people  agreed  that  their  voice 
counted in their own country, but the share fell markedly here too. In Italy, that reduction was less 
strong, but the share of young people agreeing that their voice counted was already very low. France 
and Poland showed only small changes in this area.  

38 European Social Survey data from wave 10 are due to be released in autumn 2022 and may shed more light 
on the expected well-being effects of the war in Ukraine for the five countries surveyed here. Those data were 
collected in autumn 2021 (September to November), with the same question wording as the 2022 HIVA survey 
in May 2022.  

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
REFERENCES 

Ademmer, E., Akgüç, M., Barslund, M., Di Bartolomeo, A., Benček, D., Groll, D. and Venturini, A., 

2017 MEDAM Assessment Report on Asylum and Migration Policies in Europe: Sharing responsi-

bility for refugees and expanding legal immigration, 2017, available at: https://www.econ-

stor.eu/bitstream/10419/182239/1/medam-ar-2017.pdf  

Baarck, J., Balahur, A., Cassio, L., d’Hombres, B., Pásztor, Z. and Tintori, G., Loneliness in the EU – In-

sights from surveys and online media data, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxem-

bourg, 2021. 

Bell, D. N. and Blanchflower, D. G., ‘Young people and the Great Recession’, Oxford Review of Eco-

nomic Policy, Vol. 27, No 2, 2021, pp. 241-267. 

Brazienė, R., Lazutka, R., Guogis, A. and Gudelis, D., ‘The impact of COVID-19 on income and employ-

ment: policy responses and a subjective assessment by the Lithuanian population of the 

measures applied’, Journal of Baltic Studies, 2022, pp. 1-18.  

British Council, Next Generation Poland, 2021, available at: https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/de-

fault/files/next_generation_poland.pdf   

Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (CBS), Landelijke Jeugdmonitor 2021, Centraal Bureau voor de 

Statistiek, Den Haag, 2021, available at: https://jeugdmonitor.cbs.nl/en/en/publications/Annual-

Report-Youth-Monitor-2021-Summary 

de Hoog, N. and Verboon, P., ‘Is the news making us unhappy? The influence of daily news exposure 

on emotional states’, British Journal of Psychology, Vol. 111, No 2, 2020, pp. 157-173. 

Deželan, T., Lavrič, M.,  Klanjšek, R., Lahe, D., Naterer, A., Radovan, M., Rutar,T., Sardoč, M., 

Uršič,M., Majce, M., Cupar, T., Matjašič, M., Nacevski, K., Vombergar, N. and Prešeren, J., Youth 

2020: the position of young people in Slovenia, University of Maribor, University of Maribor Press, 

University of Ljubljana Press, 2021. 

European Commission, Flash Eurobarometer – Youth and Democracy In the European Year of Youth, 

Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2022.  

European Commission, Employment and Social Developments in Europe Quarterly Review (ESDE), 

Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, forthcoming.  

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
European Parliament, Flash Eurobarometer - European Parliament Youth Survey, TNS Political & So-

cial, Brussels: GESIS Data Archive Cologne, 2021a.  

European Parliament, Parlemeter 2020 – A glimpse of certainty in uncertain times, Publications Of-

fice of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2021b.  

Eurofound, Impact of COVID-19 on young people in the EU, Publications Office of the European Un-

ion, Luxembourg, 2021.  

Hafstad, G. S. and Augusti, E. M., ‘A lost generation? COVID-19 and adolescent mental health’, The 

Lancet Psychiatry, Vol. 8, No 8, 2021, pp. 640-641. 

ILO, ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the World of Work, Updated estimates and analysis, International 

Labour Organization, 2020a. 

ILO, Youth and COVID-19: impacts on jobs, education, rights, and mental well-being: survey report 

2020, Geneva, 5, 2020b.  

Insights Market Research (IMR), Results of the 1st Youth Barometer 2020 (conducted during January-

February 2020), IMR/University of Nicosia, 2020, available at: https://youthpolicy-onek-org-

cy.translate.goog/summary-of-1st-youth-barometer-2020-results/   

IMR, Results of the 2nd Youth Barometer 2020 (conducted during November-December 2020), 

IMR/University of Nicosia, 2020, available at: https://youthpolicy-onek-org-cy.trans-

late.goog/summary-of-2nd-youth-barometer-2020-results/ 

IMR, Quantitative Survey Report: Youth Barometer 3, IMR/University of Nicosia, 2021, available at: 

https://youthpolicy-onek-org-cy.translate.goog/summary-of-3rd-youth-barometer-results/   

Kittel, B., Kritzinger, S., Boomgaarden, H., Prainsack, B., Eberl, J. M., Kalleitner, F. and Schlogl, L., ‘The 

Austrian Corona Panel Project: monitoring individual and societal dynamics amidst the COVID-19 

crisis’, European Political Science, Vol. 20, No 2, 2021, pp. 318-344. 

Konle-Seidl, R. and Picarella, F., Youth in Europe: Effects of COVID-19 on their economic and social 

situation, Publication for the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Policy Department for 

Economic, Scientific, and Quality of Life Policies, European Parliament, Luxembourg, 2021, pp. 13-

45.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mohr, D. L., William J. Wilson, Rudolf J. Freund (2022). Chapter 5 - Inferences for Two Populations, 

Editor(s): Donna L. Mohr, William J. Wilson, Rudolf J. Freund, Statistical Methods (Fourth Edition), 

Academic Press, 2022, Pages 201-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823043-5.00005-9. 

Möhring, K., Naumann, E., Reifenscheid, M., Wenz, A., Rettig, T., Krieger, U. and Blom, A. G., ‘The 

COVID-19 pandemic and subjective well-being: longitudinal evidence on satisfaction with work 

and family’, European Societies, Vol. 23, No sup 1, 2021, pp. S601-S617. 

Møller, S. P., Ekholm, O. and Thygesen, L. C., Betydningen af COVID-19 krisen for mental sundhed, 

helbred og arbejdsmiljø, Statens Institut for Folkesundhed, 2021. 

Naumann, N., Dotti Sani, G., Marzec, P. and Pasqualini, P., Social Situation Monitor: work and well-

being during the COVID-19 pandemic, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 

forthcoming.  

OECD, ‘Young people’s concerns during COVID-19: Results from risks that matter 2020’, OECD Policy 

Responses to Coronavirus (COVID-19), OECD Publishing, Paris, 2021a, available at: 

https://doi.org/10.1787/64b51763-en 

OECD, ‘Risks that matter 2020: The long reach of COVID-19’, OECD Policy Responses to Coronavirus 

(COVID-19), OECD Publishing, Paris, 2021b. 

Popadić, D., Pavlović, Z. and Mihailović, S., Youth Study Slovenia 2018/2019, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 

2019, available at: https://books.google.be/books?id=FdwExQEACAAJ 

Residori, C., Sozio, M. E., Schomaker, L. and Samuel, R., YAC–Young People and COVID-19: Prelimi-

nary Results of a Representative Survey of Adolescents and Young Adults in Luxembourg, Univer-

sity of Luxembourg, 2020. 

Ronen, T. and Seeman, A., ‘Subjective well-being of adolescents in boarding schools under threat of 

war’, Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of The International Society for Traumatic 

Stress Studies, Vol. 20, No 6, 2007, pp. 1053-1062. 

Schomaker, L., Residori, C., Fernandez Urbano, R. and Samuel, R., Young People and COVID-19 II: 

Evolution 2020 to 2021, Vaccination Willingness, and Impact of the Pandemic: Preliminary Results 

of a Representative Survey of Adolescents and Young Adults in Luxembourg, University of Luxem-

bourg: Esch-sur-Alzette, 2021. 

Unnarsdóttir, A.B., Lovik, A., Fawns-Ritchie, C., Ask, H., Kõiv, K., Hagen, K., Didriksen, M., Christof-

fersen, L.A.N., Garðarsson, A.B., McIntosh, A. and Kähler, A.K., ‘Cohort Profile: COVIDMENT: 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
COVID-19 cohorts on mental health across six nations’. International Journal of Epidemiology, 

2021.  

UNICEF, ‘UNICEF calls for averting a lost generation as COVID-19 threatens to cause irreversible 

harm to children’s education, nutrition and well-being’, UNICEF Press Release, 2020.  

41 

 
 
 
 
 
APPENDICES 

APPENDIX 1: DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE SURVEYS 

Description of international surveys 

Table A: International surveys 

Survey 

Website 

Date 

https://www.oecd.org/corona-
virus/policy-responses/young-
people-s-concerns-during-
COVID-19-results-from-risks-
that-matter-2020-64b51763/   

One round: Sep-
tember-October 
2020  

OECD: Young 
people’s con-
cerns during 
COVID-19: 
Results from 
risks that 
matter 
(2020)  

Young people 
definition 

18-29 years old  

Sample size 

Sampling 

Executing agency 

25 000 respondents from 
25 countries, about one-
quarter of the respond-
ents per country were 
young people (250 per 
country)  

• Not representative  
• Implemented online using sam-
ples recruited via the Internet 
and over the Phone by Re-
spondi Ltd  

• Remunerated survey  
• Sampling quota and weights 
based on sex, age, education 
level, income level, employ-
ment status  

OECD Directorate for Em-
ployment, Labour and So-
cial Affairs  

Joint work: ILO, UN Major 
Group for Children and 
Youth, AIESEC, the Euro-
pean Youth Forum, the 
European Union Emer-
gency Trust Fund for Af-
rica, UN refugee Agency 
(UNHCR)  

ILO: Global 
Survey on 
Youth and 
COVID-19  

https://www.ilo.org/buda-
pest/whats-
new/WCMS_753026/lang--
en/index.htm   

One round: April-
May 2020  

18-29 years old  

12 605 respondents from 
112 countries  

• Not representative  
• Online snowball sampling sur-

vey  

• Weighted by age, gender, 
country youth population  

42 

 
 
 
 
  
  
 
Eurofound: 
Living, Work-
ing and 
COVID-19 e-
survey  

https://www.eurofound.eu-
ropa.eu/sites/de-
fault/files/ef_publica-
tion/field_ef_docu-
ment/ef20036en.pdf    

https://www.europarl.eu-
ropa.eu/at-your-ser-
vice/files/be-heard/euroba-
rometer/2021/youth-sur-
vey-2021/report.pdf   

European 
Parliament: 
Flash Euroba-
rometer: Eu-
ropean Par-
liament 
Youth Survey  

Table B: National surveys 

1st round: April 
2020  
2nd round: June-
July 2020  
3rd round: Febru-
ary-March 2021  
One round: June 
2021  

15-29 years old  

16-30 years old  

1st round: 68 000 respond-
ents (7 381 young people)  
2nd round: 24 100 respond-
ents (2 143 young people)  
3rd round: 46 800 respond-
ents (3 828 young people)  
18 156 respondents   

Eurofound  

• Not representative  
• Survey online, via social media  
• Weighted by age, gender, edu-

cation, urbanisation level, 
country  

• Computer-Assisted Web Inter-

viewing (CAWI) 

Ipsos European Public Af-
fairs  

• Respondents selected from 

online access panels, groups of 
pre-recruited individuals who 
have agreed to take part in re-
search  

• Sampling quota based on age, 
gender, geographical region  

Country 

Survey 

Website 

Date 

Young people 
definition 

Austria  

Austrian Co-
rona Panel 
Data  

https://viecer.uni-
vie.ac.at/en/projects-and-co-
operations/austrian-corona-
panel-project/austrian-co-
rona-panel-data/method-re-
port/   

Ongoing, 28 waves 
since March 2020  

/  

Sample size 

Sampling 

Executing agency 

Between 1 500 and 
1 600 respondents 
per wave  
Age: 14-70+  

- Surveyed via computer or 
mobile devices  
-Sampled from a pre-existing 
online access panel  
-Sampling quotas based on 
age, gender, region, munici-
pality size, education level  

Universität Wien - 
Marketagent.com 
online research 
GmbH  

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
Cyprus  

Youth Ba-
rometer  

https://youthpol-
icy.onek.org.cy/portfolio-
item/apotelesmata-erevnon/   

Denmark  

Survey on im-
pact on 
health, men-
tal health 
and working 
conditions  

https://www.sdu.dk/da/sif/for
skning/projekter/coronarela-
teret_forskning   

14-35  

1st round: January-
February 2020  
2nd round: Novem-
ber-December 
2020  
3rd round: July-Au-
gust 2021  

/  

1st round: Septem-
ber-December 
2019  
2nd round: Sep-
tember-December 
2020  

Estonia  

COVID-19 
surveys  

https://www.riigi-
kantselei.ee/uuringud   

Ongoing, 37 waves 
since March 2020  

/  

France  

Coping with 
COVID-19  

https://www.scienc-
espo.fr/osc/en/node/2232.ht
ml   

Germany  

Mannheim 
Corona 
Study  

https://www.uni-mann-
heim.de/en/gip/corona-
study/   

2 rounds: April 
2020  
2 rounds: May 
2020  
1 round: autumn 
2020   
Every week from 
20 March to 10 
July 2020  

/  

/  

1st round: 1 000   
2nd round: 1 000  
3rd round: 1 000  

-Selected using random strati-
fied sampling technique  
-Surveyed by phone, online, 
in-person  

IMR/University of 
Nicosia  

1st round: 6 629 re-
spondents  
2nd round: 6 687 
respondents  
5 000 respondents 
answered both 
rounds   
Age: 15-75  
Between 1 200 and 
2 100 respond-
ents    
Age: 15+  

1 400 respondents  
Age: 18-75  

- Questionnaires sent via 
email (eBox)  

Syddansk Univer-
sitet (SDU)  

State Chancellery 
commissioned the 
survey  

Sciences Po  

-Combined method of online 
and telephone interviews  
- Representative in terms of 
regions, settlement type, gen-
der, age, ethnicity  
- Internet panel,   
-Representative of the French 
population via random sam-
pling from census 
data (ELIPPS) 

3 600 respondents  
Age: 16-75  

-Voluntary online survey  
-Panel based on a random 
probability sample of the gen-
eral population  

University of 
Mannheim  

44 

 
 
 
  
  
Luxembourg   Young People 

and COVID-
19 (YAC)   

https://wwwen.uni.lu/fhse/ne
ws_events/pan-
demic_year_2_study_on_youn
g_people_in_luxembourg   

1st round: June-
July 2020  
2nd round: Au-
gust-September 
2021  

12-29  

1st round: 3 768  
2nd round: 2 986  

The Nether-
lands  

Perceptions 
survey  

https://www.cbs.nl/en-
gb/onze-diensten/meth-
ods/surveys/korte-
onderzoeks-
beschrijvingen/perceptions   

One round: Febru-
ary-April 2021  

12-24  

8 000 respondents  

Poland  

Next Genera-
tion Poland    

https://www.britishcoun-
cil.org/research-policy-in-
sight/research-reports/next-
generation-poland   

One round: Au-
gust-September 
2020  

18-30  

2 000 respondents  

Slovenia  

Youth 2020  

https://dk.um.si/Doku-
ment.php?id=154895   

One round: Au-
gust-October 
2020  

15-29  

1 200 respondents  

Sweden  

Omtanke    

https://ki.se/en/node/87454    Monthly rounds 
from June 2020-
June 2021  

/  

29 000 respond-
ents  
Age: 18-94  

-Stratified random sample 
from the National Registry of 
Natural Persons  
-Online survey  
-Weighted by gender, age, 
residential district  
- Online survey  
- Random sample of individual 
respondents on the basis of 
the Personal Records Data-
base (BRP)  
- Weighted by age, sex, mari-
tal status, migration back-
ground, household size, 
standardised household in-
come, province, degree of ur-
banisation  
- Online survey  
- CAWI method  
- Representative in terms of 
age group, gender, size of set-
tlement, education  
- In-person and online survey  
- Sampling based on data 
from the Central Population 
Register of Slovenia  
- Weighted by gender, age, 
type of settlement, region  
- Participants invited through 
(social) media campaigns and 
personal invitation via ongo-
ing studies at Karolinska Insti-
tutet  

University of Lux-
embourg  

Statistics Nether-
lands (CBS)  

British Council  

University of Ma-
ribor and Univer-
sity of Ljubljana  

Karolinska Insti-
tutet  

45 

 
 
 
  
Description of national surveys 

This section provides an overview of the national surveys, their content relevant to the 2022 HIVA 
survey, and available results.    

Austria 
The University of Vienna has run the Austrian Corona Panel Project since the first wave in March 2020. 
The survey is a panel of around 1 500 participants that is still running at monthly intervals. There are 
currently 31 waves of data collection (Kittel et al., 2021). The survey is well cited but does not appear 
to focus on specific age groups in the results published to date. 

Cyprus 
In Cyprus, three surveys of young people (14-35-year-olds) were conducted by the Youth Board in the 
period 2020-2021. Around 1 000 randomly sampled people were interviewed in each round. Data col-
lection for the first survey was finished in February  2020,  just before the outbreak of COVID-19 in 
Europe. The main purpose of the survey was to monitor ‘the views and perceptions of young people 
aged 14-35 in Cyprus’ (IMR, 2020a; IMR, 2020b; IMR, 2021)39. 

Two results of direct relevance to the 2022 HIVA survey are reported in the short summary studies. 
Life satisfaction of young people fell in the period between the first survey in January-February 2020 
(pre-COVID) and July-August 2021 (3rd round), from 85 % being ‘quite’ or ‘very’ satisfied with their 
life, to 70 %. The decrease in life satisfaction was larger for the 2nd round (from November-December 
2020), when it stood at 64 %. The second question relates to optimism about the future, which was 
affected at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. It fell from 80 % of respondents being optimistic 
about their future to 61 % in the second round. However, it returned to 80 % in the third round of the 
survey.  

Denmark  
University of Southern Denmark (SDU) ran a survey in September-November 2020 to investigate the 
consequences of the pandemic on health, mental health, employment and working conditions. The 
survey is a panel survey in that the same people who participated in the 2019 European Health Survey 
in Denmark were invited to participate in the COVID-19 survey (Møller et al., 2021). Results based on 
age groups are not (yet) publicly available, but special data extractions based on the age groups of 
under-35 (young) and over-35 (old) show that the share of young people with moderate to severe 
depressive symptoms increased from 14 % to 18 %. For the older sample, the increase was from 6 % 
to 8 %40. A similar data extraction was carried out to look at differences in changes in mental health. 
Results showed that among young people, the share with low mental well-being increased from 21 % 
to 27 %, whereas the increase for older people was from 15 % to 18 %.  

39 Only limited information is available online, and the description here relies on the three short summary re-
ports – one for each wave – references in the main text. 
40 With thanks to Lau Caspar Thygesen for providing the data extractions based on age groups.  

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A second study is based on the Danish Blood Donor Study, which had some 70 000+ participants (Un-
narsdóttir et al., 2021). Three waves of interviews were conducted, starting in May 2000 and with the 
last round in August 2021. This study is part of the COVIDMENT project (see below).   

France 
In France, a survey was carried out in spring and autumn 2020 to assess the social effects of the COVID-
19 pandemic: the COping with COvid-19 dataset (COCO). Topics included social practices, sociability, 
household arrangements, life plans, mental health conditions and socio-political attitudes. Based on 
the ELIPSS longitudinal survey, 1 400 people aged 18-75 were interviewed via an online survey. Unfor-
tunately,  the  total  number  of  young  respondents  (<34  years  old)  was  limited  (around  100  people, 
making it difficult to draw conclusions on the impact of COVID-19 on young people.  

Germany 
The Mannheim Corona Study was an intensive panel survey that followed some 3 600 respondents for 
16 weeks between March and July 2020. The panel was the same as for the bimonthly German Inter-
net Panel (GIP) survey that ran prior to the COVID-19 outbreak and continued throughout the pan-
demic.  The  survey  included  questions  (in  some  waves)  on  satisfaction  with  work  and  family  life 
(Möhring et al., 2020), but results were not reported for different age groups. 

Italy 
The University of Milan carried out a survey in four waves (first wave in April-July 2020 and last wave 
in December 2021) to study the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy under the project Re-
sPOnsE  Covid-19  (Italian  Public  Opinion  Response  to  the  COVID-19  Emergency).  More  than  30 000 
respondents were interviewed over the four waves (Naumann et al., forthcoming). However, there is 
little information available in English on results and methodology. 

Lithuania 
Under the project ‘Social Policy Responses to the Consequences of the COVID
19 Crisis: Analysis of the 
Unemployment and Poverty Situation, International Experience and Recommendations for Lithuania’, 
researchers from Vilnius University conducted a representative survey in November 2020 of around 
1 000 people aged 18-74 years (Brazienė et al., 2020). Again, little information is available in English 
on the results.  

‑

Luxembourg 
The University of Luxembourg ran two surveys focusing on young people aged 12-29 years. The first 
survey took place between August and September 2020 and the second followed around one year 
later. Some 3 000 young people were surveyed and preliminary results reported (Residori et al., 2020; 
Schomaker et al., 2021). As the survey focuses on young people, it does not allow for comparison of 
results with older age groups. Similar to the 2022 HIVA survey, respondents were asked to indicate 
the negative or positive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on various areas of life. Mental health and 
expectations about the future had deteriorated, and the same was true for subjective well-being, as 
measured by responses to the state of ‘your life as a whole’. 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
The Netherlands 
As part of its annual Perception Survey, the Central Statistical Office (CBS) of the Netherlands inter-
viewed around 2 000 young people (12-25 years) from February to April 2021 about their life situation 
(CBS,  2021).  A  modest  decrease  in  both  happiness  and  life  satisfaction  was  reported  compared  to 
previous years. The share of young people between 18 and 25 years stating that they were happy fell 
from around 90 % to 84 %. A similar decrease was reported for life satisfaction. Due to the survey 
design – with a focus on young people only – it was not possible to compare outcomes with older age 
groups. 

Poland 
The Next Generation Poland survey (financed by the British Council) interviewed around 2 000 young 
people (18-30 years) during 2020 (British Council, 2020). The aim was  to better understand young 
people’s attitudes and aspirations, and support better policy-making in the areas affecting young peo-
ple. While some of the questions concerned the same domains explored here, it is difficult to compare 
results, given the lack of comparison to pre-COVID-19 outcomes. 

Slovenia 
Two surveys in Slovenia were relevant to the research questions examined here. The Youth Survey 
(Mladina 2020 study) from University of Maribor and University of Ljubljana was conducted from Au-
gust to October 2020. Around 1 200 young people aged between 15 and 29 years were interviewed 
(Deželan, 2021). It was a broad survey, covering several topics related to conditions for young people 
and their well-being. Similar surveys were run in 2000 and 2010, making it possible to compare re-
sponses over time, though the long time span between surveys made it difficult to attribute changes 
to the COVID-19 pandemic alone. The second survey was the SI-PANDA panel data survey, which has 
run for 19 rounds since the outbreak of the pandemic. Unfortunately, there is little documentation of 
results in English41. Interestingly, the Slovenia Youth Survey reported a broad measure of trust in ‘in-
stitutions and politicians’, where around 55 % of young people stated that they have no influence over 
authorities (Deželan, 2021). This number was unchanged since 2010.   

The Youth Survey had two questions on views of the future - the personal future and societal future. 
There was an increase in the share of people envisioning a better personal future since 2010, but the 
share of young people thinking that the future for society will be ‘the same’ (whether worse or better) 
or ‘better’ has shrunk. Concerns about unemployment for young people declined since 201842. The 
share of people not concerned about finding employment increased from 19 % to 40 % from 2018 to 
2020. Related to trust in institutions and politicians, around 55 % of young people agreed that they 
had no influence on the work of authorities, unchanged since 2010. 

41 The Slovenian language website for the SI-PANDA project is available at: Results of si-panda panel survey | 
www.nijz.si 
42 Fear of unemployment as a problem was measured in 2018 as part of the Youth Survey Slovenia (Popadić et 
al., 2019). 

48 

 
 
 
 
COVIDMENT project (Denmark, Estonia, Scotland, Sweden and Iceland, Norway) 
Denmark,  Estonia,  Scotland  and  Sweden,  together  with  Iceland  and  Norway,  participated  in  the 
COVIDMENT project43. Harmonised panel surveys administered from March 2020 to August 2021 in 
the six countries measured mental health, and happiness, among other things (Unnarsdóttir et al., 
2021). There has been limited reporting of the findings. In total over the period considered, young 
people (aged 18-29 years old) were most at risk of depressive symptoms in all six countries, but there 
was no comparison made to the pre-pandemic period.  

43 Mental Morbidity trajectories in COVID-19 - COVIDMENT 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX 2: EUROPEAN YOUTH GOALS 

The 11 European Youth Goals are a collection of goals representing young people’s vision for youth 
policy in the EU. Developed during the 6th cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue and based on a non-repre-
sentative 2018 Europe-wide survey, the Youth Goals are implemented by EU Youth Dialogue and in-
cluded in the EU Youth Strategy 2019-202744:  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Connecting EU with youth: foster the sense of young people belonging to the European 
project and build a bridge between the EU and young people to regain trust and increase 
participation.  

Equality of all genders: ensure equality of all genders and gender-sensitive approaches in 
all areas of the life of a young person.  

Inclusive societies: enable and ensure the inclusion of all young people in society.  

Information and constructive dialogue - access to reliable information: ensure that young 
people have better access to reliable information, support their ability to evaluate infor-
mation critically, and engage in participatory and constructive dialogue.  

5.  Mental health and well-being: achieve better mental well-being and end stigmatisation of 

mental health issues, thus promoting social inclusion of all young people.  

6.  Moving rural youth forward: create conditions that enable young people to fulfil their po-

tential in rural areas.  

7.  Quality  employment  for  all:  guarantee  an  accessible  labour  market  with  opportunities 

that lead to quality jobs for all young people.   

8.  Quality learning: integrate and improve different forms of learning, equipping young peo-

ple for the challenges of an ever-changing life in the 21st century. 

9. 

Space and participation for all: strengthen young people’s democratic participation and 
autonomy, as well as providing dedicated youth spaces in all areas of society. 

10.  Sustainable Green Europe: achieve a society in which all young people are environmen-

tally active, educated, and able to make a difference in their everyday lives.  

11.  Youth organisations and European programmes: ensure equal access for all young people 
to youth organisations and European youth programmes, building a society based on Eu-
ropean values and identity. 

44 https://youth-goals.eu/  

50 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
APPENDIX 3: DETAILS FROM THE 2022 HIVA SURVEY 

Figure C1 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, by gender, 2022 
(%) 
Respondents over 29 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the 
EU’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Re-
spondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differ-
ences are statistically significant if they exceed 9.4 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

Figure C2 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in the EU, by educational 
level, 2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in the 
EU’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. Re-
spondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country differ-
ences are statistically significant if they exceed 12.6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure C3 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, by gender,  
2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in your 
country’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 9.4 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

 Figure C4 - Share of the population agreeing that their voice counted in their country, by educa-
tional level, 2020 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old  

Note: The figure shows the share of respondents who answered ‘totally agree’ or ‘tend to agree’ to the ques-
tion ‘Please tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: my voice counts in your 
country’. The response options were ‘totally agree’, ‘tend to agree’, ‘tend to disagree’ and ‘totally disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 12.6 percentage points. 
Source: Eurobarometer Future of Europe survey (data collection in October-November 2020) and 2022 HIVA sur-
vey (data collection in May 2022). 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure C5 - Share of the population with confidence in the education system, 1981-2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old 

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Please tell us how much confidence you 
have in the education system’. This figure shows the share of respondents who have ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great deal’ 
of confidence. The response options were ‘none at all’, ‘not very much’, ‘quite a lot’ and ‘a great deal’. Respond-
ents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option.- Between and within (over time) country differences 
are statistically significant if they exceed 9 percentage points. 
Source: European Value Survey 1981, 1990, 1999, 2008 and 2017 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 

Figure C6 - Share of the population with confidence in the education system, 1981-2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old 

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Please tell us how much confidence you 
have in the education system’. This figure shows the share of respondents who have ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great 
deal’ of confidence. The response options were ‘none at all’, ‘not very much’, ‘quite a lot’ and ‘a great deal’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 6.1 percentage points. 
Source: European Value Survey 1981, 1990, 1999, 2008 and 2017 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure C7 – Share of the population with confidence in the education system, by gender, 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old  

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Please tell us how much confidence you 
have in the education system’. This figure shows the share of respondents who have ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great 
deal’ of confidence. The response options were ‘none at all’, ‘not very much’, ‘quite a lot’ and ‘a great deal’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 7.2 percentage points. 
Source: 2022 HIVA survey (data collection in May 2022). 

Figure C8 - Share of the population with confidence in the education system, by educational level, 
2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old 

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Please tell us how much confidence you 
have in the education system’. This figure shows the share of respondents who have ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great 
deal’ of confidence. The response options were ‘none at all’, ‘not very much’, ‘quite a lot’ and ‘a great deal’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 11.8 percentage points. 
Source: 2022 HIVA survey (data collection in May 2022). 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure C9 - Evolution in average subjective well-being, by gender, 2002-2022 
Respondents under 30 years old 

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Taking all things together, how happy 
would you say you are?’, measured on a scale from 0 to 10. Between and within (over time) differences are sta-
tistically significant if they exceed 0.15 points on the happiness scale for EU-5 and 0.3 points for individual 
countries.  
Source: European Social Survey round 1-10 and 2022 HIVA survey. 

Figure C10 - Evolution in average subjective well-being, by gender, 2002-2022  
Respondents over 29 years old 

Note: The figure shows the average value of responses to the question ‘Taking all things together, how happy 
would you say you are?’, measured on a scale from 0 to 10. Between and within (over time) differences are sta-
tistically significant if they exceed 0.15 points on the happiness scale for EU-5 and 0.25 points for individual 
countries. 
Source: European Social Survey round 1-10 and 2022 HIVA survey. 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure C11 - Share of population optimistic about their future, 2012, 2016 and 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old 

Note: The figure shows percentage of population answering ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ to the question ‘Please 
tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: I am optimistic about my future’. The 
response options were ‘strongly agree’, ‘agree’, ‘neither agree nor disagree’, ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 11  percentage points. 
Source: European Quality of Life Survey 2012 and 2016 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 

Figure C12 - Share of population optimistic about their future, 2012, 2016, 2022 (%) 
Respondents over 29 years old 

Note: The figure shows percentage of population answering ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ to the question ‘Please 
tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: I am optimistic about my future’. The 
response options were ‘strongly agree’, ‘agree’, ‘neither agree nor disagree’, ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 5.9 percentage points. 
Source: European Quality of Life Survey 2012 and 2016 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure C13 – Share of population optimistic about their future, by gender, 2022 (%) 
Respondents under 30 years old 

Note: The figure shows percentage of population answering ‘strongly agree’ or ‘agree’ to the question ‘Please 
tell us to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statement: I am optimistic about my future’. The 
response options were ‘strongly agree’, ‘agree’, ‘neither agree nor disagree’, ‘disagree’ and ‘strongly disagree’. 
Respondents could also choose ‘don’t know’ as a response option. Between and within (over time) country dif-
ferences are statistically significant if they exceed 16.6 percentage points. 
Source: European Quality of Life Survey 2012 and 2016 waves and 2022 HIVA survey. 

57 

 
 
 
 
GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU 

In person 

All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres. You can find the 
address of the centre nearest you at: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en 

On the phone or by email 

Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can contact 
this service: 

– by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), 

– at the following standard number: +32 22999696 or  

– by email via: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en 

FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU 

Online 

Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa 
website at: https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en 

EU publications 

You can download or order free and priced EU publications at: 
https://publications.europa.eu/en/publications. Multiple copies of free publications may be obtained by 
contacting Europe Direct or your local information centre (see https://europa.eu/european-
union/contact_en). 

EU law and related documents 

For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1952 in all the official language 
versions, go to EUR-Lex at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu 

Open data from the EU 

The EU Open Data Portal (http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en) provides access to datasets from the EU. 
Data can be downloaded and reused for free, for both commercial and non-commercial purposes.