Loneliness in Europe

Loneliness has emerged as a prominent concern in recent years, leading to it being described as the ‘epidemic’ of the twenty-first century. The COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with the distancing measures implemented to curb its spread, further heightened those worries. This introductory chapter explores the growing emphasis on loneliness in both public discourse and the political arena and discusses the underlying reasons for this increased public attention. It then presents the recent joint project of the European Commission and the European Parliament aimed at generating additional scientific insights into the risk factors and consequences of loneliness, as well as the effectiveness of loneliness interventions in the European Union. Lastly, the chapter explains the structure and organisation of this volume.

While Chap. 1 introduces the concept of loneliness as a negative feeling associated with perceived deficiencies in the quantity and quality of social relationships, this chapter focuses on how this concept is operationalised and measured in surveys. We start by discussing the literature on the measurement of loneliness, which often relies on the use of psychometric scales. In large-scale surveys the use of a direct question on loneliness, in which the respondents self-report how frequently they feel lonely, is also common. The chapter discusses existing measures of loneliness used by different surveys administered in the European Union, together with their limitations. The chapter then addresses how loneliness is dichotomised in the analysis of survey data, both for scales based on indirect questions and for direct questions, and the potential issues associated with presenting results on loneliness. Finally, the chapter introduces the recent European Union Loneliness Survey (EU Loneliness Survey), the first ad hoc survey on the topic of loneliness covering all European Union member states. It discusses how this survey measures loneliness, and the modules and questions included. A methodological section focuses on survey design and choices related to data collection, highlighting unique features of the survey and discussing its limitations. The chapter concludes with a comparison of overall levels of loneliness according to different measures used in the EU Loneliness Survey across all 27 EU countries.

This chapter analyses the prevalence of loneliness in the European Union along several dimensions, exploring vulnerabilities within specific demographic groups and mitigating or triggering factors such as meaningful social connections and life events. The first part of the chapter investigates which demographic and socio-economic groups are more vulnerable to loneliness. In particular, it considers characteristics such as age, gender, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, disability, migration background and population density of the place of residence. The second part of the chapter is devoted to shedding light on the relationship between loneliness and social connectedness. Regression analysis is used to investigate how the risk of feeling lonely is associated with a rich set of variables related to respondents’ social interactions and relationships. Finally, the chapter looks into life events that might trigger loneliness. Major life transitions, such as retirement or leaving the education system, may bring disruptions to people’s social networks and thus increase the risk of feeling lonely.

This chapter examines the associations between loneliness, health and adverse childhood experiences. First, it describes the general patterns of these variables across 27 European Union member states. Second, it investigates the association between loneliness and early-life adverse experiences, controlling for individuals’ current situation and demographic and socio-economic conditions. Third, it examines the interplay between adverse childhood conditions and the statistically and economically considerable association between loneliness and physical and mental health outcomes. Finally, the chapter assesses the robustness of the main findings to alternative measures of loneliness. Results show that there is a significant association between adverse childhood experiences and loneliness even after accounting for a range of individual-specific factors, suggesting that feelings of loneliness may be a result not only of individuals’ current circumstances but also of their upbringing. Childhood experiences are also strongly associated with different health outcomes in adulthood. The association between loneliness and health reduces in magnitude once we take account of childhood experiences. In addition to a direct association between early-life conditions and health, this result indicates that adverse childhood conditions may be linked to health outcomes indirectly through loneliness.

The growth in popularity of social media platforms all over the world has led to an unprecedented increase in people’s ability to communicate with one another. This has given rise to a number of concerns about the potential social impact of these platforms. The European Union Loneliness Survey contains some useful information on social media consumption in the EU. The first part of this chapter relies on this unique source of information to explore patterns of social media use across EU member states and by age group. It sheds light on the time spent on social media tools as well as on addiction patterns. The second part of the chapter examines the relationship between social media usage and loneliness.

Loneliness and social and civic behaviours are intertwined in complex ways, and only a limited number of studies have explored these relationships. This chapter explains why loneliness and social isolation not only have implications for the health of the individuals affected (which is the focus of Chap. 4) but also can be seen as a threat to the well-being of our societies and to the vitality of our democracies. The chapter illustrates that loneliness and isolation are not just conceptually distinct but are associated with divergent outcomes. We find that behavioural preferences reported by lonely individuals differ widely from those reported by socially isolated individuals for many societal contexts, highlighting that being alone is different from being lonely. Loneliness and social isolation are both correlated with low interpersonal trust and reduced political efficacy (the extent to which a person thinks their voice counts in politics). However, lonely individuals tend to be more inclined to engage in risk-taking behaviours, potentially impacting community safety. Moreover, in contrast to socially isolated individuals, lonely individuals exhibit a greater willingness to donate to good causes and volunteer for charities and non-profit organisations. They also show a more long-term orientation, saying that they prioritise long-term benefits over short-term gains.

This chapter focuses on policy interventions to tackle loneliness and is divided into three main parts. The first part of the chapter showcases results on loneliness interventions based on the EU Loneliness Survey, which collected information about respondents’ awareness of loneliness interventions in their country and their views about the role different actors should play in supporting lonely people. Findings related to social stigma surrounding loneliness and measures used by lonely people to mitigate their feelings of loneliness are also discussed. The second part of the chapter provides an overview of existing loneliness interventions using categorisations proposed by the literature. To gain insight on how loneliness is addressed in practice, this section also presents examples from the EU-wide Mapping of Loneliness Interventions. The third and final part of the chapter tackles the issue of the effectiveness of loneliness interventions. This section is informed by the literature and exchanges with experts and practitioners in the field, and includes a non-exhaustive list of common success factors in effective loneliness interventions.

Looking back at the preceding seven chapters, this chapter reflects on specific features of loneliness risk factors and potential consequences and evaluates the effectiveness of loneliness interventions in the European Union. In addition, the chapter highlights the unique features of the EU Loneliness Survey and suggests avenues for future research. Finally, the authors discuss the importance of monitoring loneliness over time and reflect on policy developments in the European Union and globally.