Consultation

The Second WHO European Health Equity Status Report – 2025 Healthy prosperous lives for all The purpose of this document is to provide information to Member States to support their review and any comments on the data indicators and graphs that will be included in the 2nd Health Equity Status Report that will be launched in November 2025. Introduction The WHO European Health Equity Status Report initiative (HESRi), launched in 2019, provides data-driven insights to support policy actions that address health inequities (1). Since its launch the work has inspired local and national authorities to strengthen their health equity policies, has informed the work of international bodies (EU institutions and agencies, OECD), and has been a catalyst for new alliances across countries and communities of practice. The work has spearheaded political commitments and the creation of practical resources to drive action on health equity and well-being – enabling governments and health authorities to progress efforts towards creating a healthy life for all. Continuing this work, WHO Europe is currently preparing a Second Pan European Health Equity Status Report. This will bring together the latest available status and trends in health equity and well-being within and across countries of the WHO European Region. The second HESRi Report will delve into Health equity across the life course with a spotlight on children and young people and on healthy ageing. This is in the light of major demographic shifts in the age structure of populations within countries in the European Region. The 2nd HESRi report will use innovative techniques to capture health equity status and trends of men and women at different stages across the life course. It will show how these are associated with key features of i) health systems; ii) social relations and participation, education and learning iii) living conditions; iv) employment and work and v) income security, and set out options and solutions for reducing inequities and accelerating progress for healthy and prosperous lives for all, with co-benefits for societies with higher trust and life satisfaction, more resilient public systems and fiscal stability. Figure 0.1 Essential conditions for a healthy life Indicators that measure the availability, accessibility, affordability Health Health and quality of prevention, treatment and health-care services Services and programmes Indicators of human capital that measure the access availability and affordability of education, learning and literacy; Health Social and Indicators of social capital that measure social inclusion exclusion, Human Capital levels of trust, safety and participation of individuals and communities in society. Indicators that measure differential opportunities, access and Health iving exposure to living conditions and environmental factors that Conditions impact health and well-being Health Employment Indicators that measure the health impact of employment and working conditions, including availability, accessibility, and Working security, wages, physical and mental demands, and Conditions exposure to unsafe work Health Income Indicators that measure poverty risk, income security and the Security and Social adequacy and coverage of social protection and welfare policies that Protection protect health over the life-course The 2nd Health Equity Status Report will be launched in Europe in November 2025 Background • The 2nd Health Equity Status Report (HESRi2) is a comprehensive review of the status and trends in health inequities and of the essential conditions needed for all to be able to live a healthy life in the WHO European Region. • Improving health and well-being for all, reducing health inequities and ensuring no one is left behind will bring wider economic, social and environmental benefits to Member States. • This report seeks to change the common perceptions that health inequity is too complex to address and that it is unclear what actions to take and which policies and approaches will be effective. • The HESRi2 captures the progress made in implementing a range of policies with a strong effect on reducing inequities and demonstrates the link between levels of investment, coverage and uptake of these policies, as well as the gaps in the essential conditions needed to live a healthy, prosperous life. • The report will support WHO and Member States to implement the health equity priorities set out in the draft 2nd European Program of Work (EPW2) (2) HESRi2 data • The HESRi2 analysis and findings are generated from a new dataset. It brings together three types of data (Fig. 0.1) and uses innovations in analytical methodologies to provide a better understanding of health equity, the pathways that generate equity and inequities, and how policy interventions are associated with the rate of progress to reduce gaps in health and well-being, across the countries of the WHO European Region (Annex 1). • The HESRi2 data and analysis provide the following benefits. 1. Country-specific data allow governments to strengthen decision–making, tailoring their action and investment for health equity accordingly. 2. Analysis supports ministries of health to demonstrate how events and decisions made in other sectors contribute to and interact with inequities in health and well-being. 3. Evidence that enables national and subnational governments and health authorities to improve policy coherence, leading to improved equity in health and in life chances. Fg 0. P g g m H SR HESRi2 uses a range of data analysis and visualizations to support a robust understanding of the current status of health inequities within countries. It also captures whether there have been significant reductions or increases in these inequities over a period of 10–15 years (trend analysis data) (Annex 1). • Gradient charts are used to show the socioeconomic gradient for an indicator, such as self-reported health, by examining how levels of the indicator vary between subgroups of people. Either three or five subgroups are defined according to markers of socioeconomic status - for example, level of education (three groups) (Fig. 0.2), or income or wealth (five groups). For people belonging to each subgroup, the average level of the indicator is calculated and represented in the chart by a different coloured dot. • Gap and trend charts are used to show the difference, or gap, in average levels of the indicator in the most advantaged subgroup compared to the most disadvantaged subgroup. For example, the charts show the difference between those in the highest and lowest income quintiles or between those with highest level of education (degree-level) and those with least (lower-secondary or below). The traffic light symbols in these figures also show whether the size of the gap for each country has narrowed, widened, or stayed the same over a specified time frame (e.g. Fig 0.3). • Decomposition charts are used to show how shortcomings in each of the five essential conditions, when combined, contribute to the gap for a given health indicator, such as mental health or limiting illness. The decomposition charts enable policymakers to see more clearly the relative weight of each condition in contributing to (in)equity in a specific health indicator (Annex 2). • Equity tracker charts show, for each country, a summary outcome for either individual indicators or groups of indicators. The outcomes include the level of inequality or the direction of the trend in inequality. The groups of indicators are the five essential conditions, while the individual indicators are either health outcomes or variables contributing to one of the essential conditions (Annex 2). Health equity – recent status and trends 1) Health and wellbeing status Enshrined in the WHO constitution (3) is the principle that “health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.” Underlying this are, among other principles “the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition” and “Governments have a responsibility for the health of their peoples which can be fulfilled only by the provision of adequate health and social measures. In this section of the report, the current status and trends in inequalities in health and wellbeing outcomes within each member state in the European Region are summarized. The graphs likely to be used to illustrate this are shown below. A full list of indicators from which the summary will be drawn is given in Annex 4. The social conditions which give rise to and can be a consequence of the inequities in health and wellbeing are summarized in the section that follows this one. Fg . L x b b b g x, M mb S Fg . P g b m q , M mb S Fg .3 P g m b m b , M mb S Fg .4 C q g g b m q x, M mb S 2) Essential conditions for health and wellbeing The analysis presented in the first HESRi report identified the five essential conditions needed to live a healthy life in Europe in the 21st Century as listed in Figure 0.1. This section provides a brief rationale for each of these five conditions and graphs that will be used illustrate status and trends in the indicators related to these conditions. A full list of the HESRi indicators relating to each condition is in Annex 3. Commentary on each condition will draw on a selection of these indicators. 2.1 Health systems Health systems have a key role in addressing equity in health. Inequities in health will result if the provision of prevention and treatment are unequally distributed in the population – the inverse care law (4). But the health care system can do more than this – it can contribute to the reduction of inequities resulting from social conditions that lead to ill health and a lack of wellbeing. To do both of these, the health system must be universal – providing care for everyone, offering high quality care to all, affordable – ensuring that any out of pocket payments do not place a disproportionate burden on anyone and are responsive to need – do not leave anyone with unmet healthcare needs. Universal health coverage has an equity impact through ensuring that everyone can use appropriate and effective health services without experiencing financial hardship, irrespective of ability to pay, age, ethnicity, disability, geographical location, race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation. People experience financial hardship when out-of-pocket (OOP) payments are large in relation to their ability to pay for health services. ack of financial protection can lead to or deepen poverty, undermine health, and exacerbate health and socioeconomic inequities. Where health systems fail to provide adequate financial protection, people may be forced to choose between using health services and meeting other basic needs such as food, housing and heating. This has a negative impact on health and well-being, which in turn further increases the risk of socioeconomic vulnerability and exclusion (5). Policies that distribute more resources to areas with greater health, social and economic needs have a positive impact on reducing health gaps between social groups and geographical areas (6). The quality of health care has an equity impact because health outcomes improve with better quality care (7). Therefore, equitable provision of good quality care reduces gaps in outcomes. Differences in the quality of care arise from differences in the geographical distribution of health services in low- and high-income neighbourhoods or other forms of discrimination that result in lower-income households receiving lower-quality care and poorer health outcomes. Unequal quality of health care is frequently found between providers catering to low- or high-income neighbourhoods and between private and public providers, mirroring inequities in socioeconomic status and health outcomes. Disaggregation by education level, income and sex allows this indicator to monitor equity in the quality of health care received based on socioeconomic status. Fg . C q g g m b m q x, M mb S Fg . C q g - - k x x , M mb S Fg .3 C q g w g , M mb S O - - k m g 40 2.2 Social and human capital Early childhood development lays the foundation for physical and mental health and well- being outcomes throughout the life course (8). Investment that reduces health risks and vulnerability in the prenatal period and early childhood help parents with lower resources give their children a healthy start in life. Equal access to good quality education from an early age has a strong impact on reducing differences in opportunities and risks, which has both direct and indirect impacts on health. Continued access to education and lifelong learning opportunities has a direct effect on promoting social and economic inclusion and mental well-being). It also has indirect effects linked to increased health and social literacy, such as awareness of health risks and behaviours and mediating life chances and the effects of social and economic shocks (8,9). Mattering - experiences of feeling valued and adding value (10) -is related to positive outcomes when present, and negative results when absent. When people are treated with dignity and respect, the overall sense of mattering and wellbeing increases. When people perceive that they do not matter, their overall wellbeing suffers greatly. This is the case because people have a fundamental need to experience social worth. Meaningful participation in society, trust in others and being able to influence decisions affecting health and life chances have important direct and indirect health effects. They contribute to stronger individual and social resilience and lower levels of morbidity and poor mental health. Exposure to low-trust environments characterized by higher crime rates, social isolation and lack of ability to influence politics and decision-making in society are strongly associated with poor mental health and a higher risk of morbidity (11). Participatory public services empower people to take control over their lives and the determinants of their own health. Investment in civic participation, reducing crime and generating social connections have positive impacts on the health and well-being of individuals through their engagement with, and trust in, the local community and wider society (6,12). Fg .4 C q g g 6 w m w m / m , M mb S Fg .5 P g 8 g w m w b x, M mb S 2.3 Living conditions Shelter is a fundamental human need, providing safety, a sense of belonging, peace and security. Poor housing and poor health are inextricably linked. People living in unaffordable, poor-quality or insecure housing are more likely to report poor health and to suffer from a variety of health problems (13,14). Differences in the quality of the local environment in which people live have an impact on health equity. ow-income households and neighbourhoods are less likely than those who are wealthier to be in, or have access to, safe, health-promoting environments (14). ocal environments that are detrimental to physical health may also generate stress and anxiety, providing an additional link between physical environment and mental health (14,15). Policies that shape geographical planning, construction and management of public spaces can reduce health inequities due to the local environment (6). Commercial organizations influence all aspects of life and can therefore have either a beneficial or harmful influence on health equity. Marketing and product exposure, to influence the consumption of alcohol, tobacco and food items, affect the risks of noncommunicable diseases and mortality. This has an impact on health equity because commercial influence varies with how well people are educated about the health risks of detrimental consumption behaviours, whether their economic situation and social environment encourage or discourage them from such consumption behaviours and whether they have easy access to healthy alternatives. Fg .6 P g w g m j b b m q x, M mb S  More han 4 % of di po able ho ehold income (ne of ho in allowance ) 2.4 Employment and working conditions Productive participation in the labor market can have a positive impact on health equity at an individual level - through its effects on material conditions and on life chances – and at a societal level – through creating the macro-economic resources that underpin policies to enable people to prosper. People who have experienced long-term unemployment are at a higher risk of premature mortality. Young people who have experienced long-term unemployment are more likely than those who have not experienced unemployment to report risky health behaviours, at all levels of socioeconomic status. Good work is an essential requirement for health. Job insecurity, temporary employment and poor or stressful working conditions are associated with poor mental health, self- reported ill health and an increased risk of fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events. Excessive hours and few contractual rights directly and indirectly contribute to inequities in physical and mental health. Work-related stress follows a social gradient (16). Systematic differences in exposure to poor working conditions are closely associated with gender norms and the workers’ age and education level. Discrimination in the labour market exists between sexes. socioeconomic and migrant groups, and persons with disabilities. Ensuring equitable participation in secure and decent employment has the potential to address health and social inequities, including gender inequities, by providing equal opportunities to obtain a secure income (16). Fg .7 P m b b x, M mb S Fg .8 C w k w w k 40 m w kb x, M mb S 2.5 Income security and social protection The risk of poverty directly correlates with early-onset morbidity and premature mortality. Repeated or long-term exposure to financial insecurity predicts the likelihood of poor self- reported health, depression and the inability to meet the basic needs to live a healthy life, such as food, fuel and shelter (15). Non-stigmatizing social protection policies have positive effects on reducing health inequities related to income insecurity and poverty. Investment in social protection for families and early childhood reduces health inequities by weakening the link between socioeconomic disadvantage and poor child health outcomes, including infant mortality and adverse child development (8,17). Such investment contributes to meeting children’s basic needs and helps them reach their full potential in life and health, irrespective of their or their parents’ sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, and economic or other status (18). Social protection programmes that support older people have an impact on health equity by maintaining their capacity to avoid health risks, access health services and perform daily tasks, especially for those with financial and health vulnerabilities. Older people, especially those from low-income backgrounds, are likely to have greater health-care needs or caring responsibilities for partners, and financial support through pension systems helps reduce their risk of ill health, disability and social exclusion (19). Women live longer than men, spending more of their lives in ill-health and are more likely to have caring responsibilities. Social protection and pension provision among women are key to addressing the resulting gender gaps in health, wellbeing and social conditions of older women. Fg .8 C k , M mb S Income below 6 % of median eq ivali ed di po able income (EUSILC) or national pover y line (World Bank) 3) Deep dive into equity across the life course 3.1 Demographic change The age structure of the region is changing, but not in exactly the same way in every Member State. Two simple summaries of the age structure of a country are the ratio of children (ages 0 to15) to working age adults (ages 15 to 64) and the ratio of old people (ages 65 and over) to working age adults. These ratios affect both the number and types of health events that occur in a country – often forming the focus of the health system – and also the capacity of the working age population to fund public services – principally health, social protection, education and pensions – required by children and the elderly, particularly the most vulnerable. In every member State in the region, the ratio of older people (aged 65 and over) to those of working age (ages 15 to 64) increased in the ten years to 2024. At the same time, the ratio for those below working age (aged under 15) increased in around half of Member States and decreased in the other half of States. While a decrease in the ratio of young people reduces the short-term burden, in the longer term it suggests a reduction in the size of the working population. Although the two scenarios ultimately require similar policy responses, these will differ in terms of timescales and implementation plans. These changes form the backdrop to the life course approach taken in this section, emphasizing what is happening to inequalities in children and young people, how ageing healthily varies across social groups and how gender differences persist across the region. Health advantage and disadvantage accumulates across the life course – from the point of conception (and before), the conditions in which a child’s parents find themselves influences the child’s development, health and life chances. These influences are amplified by the education, training and employment opportunities experienced at the end of schooling. These, in turn, affect the income that a person can obtain, the control they have over subsequent life chances and the extent to which they matter in society. These can then influence the pension they receive in retirement. At each stage in this journey, the risk of developing a health problem increases and this can affect life chances and is affected by the conditions experienced. It is this combination of the essential conditions and health that therefore affect whether or not an individual is likely to age healthily. Fg 3. Y g g , , M mb S Yo n a e dependency ratio i he ratio of pop lation a ed nder year o ha a ed o 64 year of a e (a a percen ) Old a e dependency ratio i he ratio of pop lation a ed 6 year and over o ha a ed o 64 year of a e (a a percen ) 3.2 Children and young people As indicated above, child development is important to both health in childhood and adolescence and to thriving as an adult – the ability to obtain and maintain the skills needed in adulthood, good work, decent housing and live healthily in a healthy environment. Psychological factors are important in achieving this trajectory to good health. This includes a sense of wellbeing and mattering, life satisfaction, freedom from bullying and depression and a positive digital life. These are all interconnected. Failing physical or mental health at an early age can easily derail this trajectory to good health. Fg 3. P g - 5 g b m ffl x, 00 - 0 So rce: HBSC, 4 co n rie Fg 3.3 P g 5 g b m ffl x, M mb S Fg 3.4 P g - 5 gb gb w m m ,b ’ m m x (HDI) x, 00 - 0 So rce: HBSC, 44 co n rie Fg 3.5 P g g 5 gm m m m m g, b ’ m m x (HDI) x, 00 - 0 So rce: PIS , 44 co n rie Fg 3.6 C g g 5 4 w m m , gb x, M mb S 3.3 Healthy ageing As described above, healthy ageing is a process that evolves through life and, consequently, the key equity aspects of this process are summarized in the preceding sections. In this section, the focus is therefore on how people prepare for old age – in terms of pension and long-term care provision- and the consequences this has for equity in old age – differences in pension coverage and health status. Fg 3.7 C - - k m g- m g GDP, M mb S Fg 3.8 C x b - g g w (PPS), M mb S Fg 3.9 P g 65 g m b m b , M mb S 3.4 Gender Gender differences permeate all aspects of life. Wherever the data permits, the preceding sections provide disaggregation by sex and highlight the existence of differences in the essential conditions and outcomes. In this section, the emphasis is on drawing tother the story painted by the data and identifying factors that are specially about gender roles – such as parenting – and gender-related violence. The absence of routine data on many gender-related issues is of concern. Fg 3. 0 W k m , b , M mb S ( )M (b) F Fg 3. I m b m m m mb , m 00,000 So rce: E ro a , co n rie 4) Modelling In the report, a variety of modelling tools are used to indicate (a) quantify the role of the five essential conditions (or their component indicators) in creating the equity gap in specific outcomes (such as limiting illness) in different contexts (such as life course stage, gender, sub-region) (b) the association between a change in one or more component indicators (such as poverty) and the size of the equity gap, indicating the potential, quantifiable reduction in the equity gap that could be achieved by taking action on specific social conditions (c) conversely, quantifying the extent to which improved health outcomes are associated with improved social conditions (e.g. improved mental health is associated with reduced unemployment). The technical details of the methodologies used in each type of modelling are summarized in Annex 2in the health equity gap. Fg 4. D m q g m g b g g R g Fg 4. R q g w m m q m Fg 4.3 M ff m ,b x m q Income quintile Income quintile 4.4 R g , m m g m m w m b m , 0 0- 0 3 he effec of a one percen improvemen in ei her limitin illne or depre ion in red cin he nemploymen and NEE S ra e 5) Summary – equity trackers The equity trackers provide an array of traffic lights that summarise, for each Member State, either (a) the level of inequality in each essential condition (or in the component indicators of an essential condition) or (b) whether the trend in inequality has shown a significant widening over time. These dashboards enable Member States to see, at a glance, where they are making progress and, conversely, where they need to focus greater effort. Fg 5. L q ,b M mb S 5. q , b M mb S Fg 4.3 L q m, b M mb S References 1. Health Equity Status Report initiative (HESRi) products: 2019 https: www.who.int europe initiatives health-equity-status-report-initiative hesri-products 2. Developing the Second European Programme of Work 2026-2030 (EPW2):2025 https: www.who.int europe activities developing-the-second-european-programme-of- work 3. WHO constitution (with amendments): 2025 https: www.who.int about governance constitution 4. Tudor Hart, J The inverse care law. The ancet, 1971, Volume 297, Issue 7696, 405 - 412 https: doi.org 10.1016 S0140-6736(71)92410-X 5. Cylus J, Thomson S, Evetovits T. Catastrophic health spending in Europe: equity and policy implications of different calculation methods. Bull World Health Organ. 2018;96(9):599–609. doi:http: dx.doi.org 10.2471 B T.18.209031. 6. Poverty, social exclusion and health systems in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2010 http: www.euro.who.int __data assets pdf_file 0004 127525 e94499.pdf?ua=1. 7. egido-Quigley H, McKee M, Nolte E, Glinos I. Assuring the quality of health care in the European Union. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008 (Observatory Studies Series No. 12; http: www.euro.who.int __data assets pdf_file 0007 98233 E91397.pdf?ua=1. 8. Jensen BB, Currie C, Dyson A, Eisenstadt N and Melhuish E. Early years, family and education task group: report. Review of social determinants of health and the health divide in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2013 https: iris.who.int bitstream handle 10665 344815 9789289000567-eng.pdf?sequence=1 9. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Final report of the commission on social determinants of health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008 (https: apps.who.int iris bitstream handle 10665 43943 9789241563703_eng.pdf?sequen ce=1. 10. Kruglanski, A.W., Prilleltensky, I., Raviv, A. (Eds.). (2025). The Routledge International Handbook of Human Significance and Mattering (1st ed.). Routledge. https: doi.org 10.4324 9781003424437 11. Wilkinson RG, Pickett KE. Income inequality and social dysfunction. Annu Rev Sociol.2009;35:493–511. doi: 10.1146 annurev-soc-070308-115926. 12. Rocco , Suhrcke M. Is social capital good for health? A European perspective. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2012 http: www.euro.who.int __data assets pdf_file 0005 170078 Is-Social-Capital-good-for- your-health.pdf?ua=1. 13. Braubach M, Jacobs D, Ormandy D. Environmental burden of disease associated with inadequate housing: a method guide to the quantification of health effects of selected housing risks in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2011 http: www.euro.who.int __data assets pdf_file 0017 145511 e95004sum.pdf?ua=1. 14. Friedli . Mental health, resilience and inequalities. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2009 http: www.euro.who.int __data assets pdf_file 0012 100821 E92227.pdf?ua=1. 15. Bell R. Psychosocial pathways and health outcomes: informing action on health inequalities. ondon: UC Institute of Health Equity; 2017 http: www.instituteofhealthequity.org resourcesreports psychosocial-pathways-and- health-outcomes-informing-action-on-health-inequalities psychosocial-pathways-and- health-outcomes.pdf. 16. Siegrist J, Rosskam E, eka S. Work and worklessness: final report of the task group on employment and working conditions, including occupation, unemployment and migrant workers. Review of social determinants of health and the health divide in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2016 (http: www.euro.who.int __data assets pdf_file 0004 334354 EWC-task-report.pdf?ua=1. 17. Baker P, Hone T, Reeves A, Avendano M, Millet C. Does government expenditure reduce inequalities in infant mortality rates in low- and middle-income countries? A time- series, ecological analysis of 48 countries from 199 to 2013. Health Econ Policy aw. 2019;14(2):249–73.doi: 10.1017 S1744133118000269 18. What matters most for early childhood development: a framework paper. Washington (DC): World Bank; 2013 (SABER Working Paper Series No. 5; http: documents.worldbank.org curated en 359991468331202884 pdf 901830NWP0no500 0Box385307B00PUB IC0.pdf. 19. World report on ageing and health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015 (https: apps.who.int iris bitstream handle 10665 186463 9789240694811_eng.pdf?seque nce=1. Annex 1. Methods to derive indicators A1.1 Selection of indicators Indicators were selected for inclusion in the 2nd Health Equity Status Report (HESRi2) Dataset to provide a pragmatic set of measures that were based on accessible data and cover health equity status and policy progress across the five underlying conditions of health equity: Health Services, Social and Human Capital iving Conditions, Employment and Working Conditions and Income Security and Social Protection. Certain key criteria were considered in selecting indicators, in consultation with the Scientific Expert Advisory Group and the HESRi2 Country Partners Group. The HESRi2 aimed to include indicators that: • clearly related to priority areas for action on health equity for which there is a clear evidence base and reflected in the WHO Euro Health Equity Policy Tool; • related to areas of action in which Member States have already made commitments; • were relevant to the full range of country contexts across the WHO European Region; • provided a balance of measures across the five underlying conditions for health equity; • provided as much coverage of countries across the Region, consistent with ensuring a good representation of inequalities in countries that do not provide data to the Statistical Office of the European Union (i.e. to Eurostat); • used data recoded on international or intranational databases that had been collected though consistent processes across countries in order to support more reliable comparisons; • used data that could be disaggregated by socioeconomic status, or that were related to policies and expenditure known to have an impact on health inequities; • used openly accessible data from international datasets, which could be feasibly collected and analysed given the available timescale and resources; • used data that were reasonably current and that could be updated to track trends. Initial, the list of 108 HESRi1indicators were reviewed, to assess the feasibility of updating them. New indicators were added, either to replace those that could not be updated or to address topics that were in scope, but not covered in HESRi1. This process was reviewed by the Scientific Expert Advisory Group and the HESRi2 Country Partners Group and through wide consultation against the criteria listed above; as a result,122 indicators were selected for inclusion in the Health Equity Dataset. A1.2 Data sources Data from several sources were used to derive the indicators featured in the Health Equity Dataset. Data were obtained from sources such as household and other population-based surveys, administrative and financial data systems and surveillance systems. Where obtainable, publicly available data were used. For example, a number of indicators were derived from datasets containing national-level data published by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), World Bank, International abour Organization I O), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Value Survey (WVS), Global Data ab (GD ), Global Burden of Disease (GBD), European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), World Justice Project, and the Eurostat database from the Statistical Office of the EU. Eurostat data were obtained through a data-sharing agreement (RPP 85 2018- FS-EU-SI C- EHIS). The responsibility for all conclusions drawn from the data lies entirely with the authors. Where data were not publicly available, survey microdata, which contained information available at the individual level, were used to derive indicators. Official requests were made to access survey microdata, using (for example) the European Union Statistics on Income and iving Conditions instrument (EU-SI C), the WHO STEPwise approach to Surveillance (STEPS) tool, and the European Health Interview Survey (EHIS; included in the list below). Empirical data collected from these nationally representative surveys, among others, were compiled and processed to create indicators. Details of each of the databases, surveys and other sources used and the acronyms used for them in this document are listed below. Acronym Database/survey details EHIS European Health Interview Survey [online database]. Luxembourg: Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/microdata/european-health- interview-survey). EQLS European Quality of Life Surveys (https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surveys/european-quality-of- lifesurveys). European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound). European Quality of Life Survey integrated data file, 2003–2016 (data collection). 3rd Edition. Colchester: UK Data Service; 2018 (SN: 7348) http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-7348- 3). ESS European Social Survey (http://www.europeansocialsurvey.org/). ESS Cumulative Data Wizard, ESS 1-8. Data file edition 1.0. Bergen: Norwegian Centre for Research Data; 2018 (doi:10.21338/NSD-ESS- CUMULATIVE). EU-LFS European Union Labour Force Survey [website]. Data and publication. Luxembourg: Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics- explained/index.php/EU_labour_force_survey_%E2%80%93_data_and_p ublication). Eurostat Eurostat [online database]. Luxembourg: Statistical Office of the European Union (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database). EU-SILC European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions [online database]. Luxembourg: Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/microdata/europeanunion- statistics-on-income-and-living-conditions). EWCS European Working Conditions Survey (https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/surveys/european- workingconditions-surveys). Eurofound. European Working Conditions Survey integrated data file, 1991–2015 (data collection). 7th Edition. Colchester: UK Data Service; 2018 (SN: 7363) (http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDASN-7363-7). GBD Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network [online database]. Seattle (WA): Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) (http://ghdx.healthdata.org/organizations/global-burden- diseasecollaborative-network). GDL Global Data Lab [online database]. Nijmegen: Raboud University Institute for Management Research (https://globaldatalab.org/). HBSC Health Behaviour in School-aged Children [online database]. Bergen: HSBC Data Management Centre (https://www.uib.no/en/hbscdata). ILO ILOSTAT [online database]. Statistics of the International Labour Organization. Geneva: International Labour Organization (http://www.ilo.org/ilostat/). MICS Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys [online database]. New York (NY): United Nations Children’s Fund (http: mics.unicef.org surveys). OECD OECD. Stat data warehouse [online database]. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (https://stats.oecd.org/). PISA OECD PISA [online database]. Programme for International Student Assessment. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (http://www.oecd.org/pisa/data/). STEPS WHO STEPwise approach to Surveillance [website]. Geneva: World Health Organization (https://www.who.int/ncds/surveillance/steps/en/). UNICEF UNICEF data [online database]. New York (NY): United Nations Children’s Fund (https://data.unicef.org). WHO European Health Information Gateway [online database]. Copenhagen: EHIG WHO Regional Office for Europe (https://gateway.euro.who.int/en/). WHO WHO Global Health Expenditure Database [online database]. Geneva: GHED World Health Organization (https://apps.who.int/nha/database). WHO WHO Global Health Observatory data repository [online database]. GHO Geneva: World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/gho/en/). WHO WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP) for Water Supply, UNICEF Sanitation and Hygiene [online database]. Geneva: World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund (https://washdata.org/data). UN UN Inter-agency Group for Child Mortality Estimation IGME (https://data.unicef.org/resources/un-inter-agency-group-for-child- mortality-estimation-unigme/) WJP World Justice Project Rule of Law Index [online database]. Washington (DC): World Justice Project (https://worldjusticeproject.org/our- work/wjp-rule-law-index). World World Bank Data Catalogue [online database]. Washington (DC): The Bank World Bank Group (https://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog).  WVS Inglehart, R., C. Haerpfer, A. Moreno, C. Welzel, K. Kizilova, J. Diez- Medrano, M. Lagos, P. Norris, E. Ponarin & B. Puranen (eds.). 2022. World Values Survey: All Rounds - Country-Pooled Datafile. Madrid, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat. Dataset Version 3.0.0. doi:10.14281/18241.17 A1.3 Data processing Following data collection, individual datasets containing primary data were stored in a secure data warehouse for processing. In order to maximize country coverage, indicators were created by combining datasets from different sources, if comparable data were available. Data processing involved, where necessary, data cleaning and suppression of implausible values and cells based on small samples (counts of <50 respondents). Data were aggregated by country and year, as well as characteristics such as sex, age group, education level and income, using survey weights where available to adjust for sampling errors and biases. To facilitate comparison between countries with different age profiles, health outcome indicators were directly age standardized with the WHO World Standard Population. For some analyses, countries were aggregated by geographical region, as follows: Caucasus, central Asia, central Europe, Nordic countries, Russian Federation, South-eastern Europe western Balkans, southern Europe and western Europe (see Annex 3). For the majority of indicators, income quintiles were calculated based on equivalized disposable household income. Where possible, levels of education were based on the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011, or the earlier classification, ISCED 1997. The ISCED educational levels are often aggregated to form a three-category education variable, with: (1) low-level education, which is pre-primary to lower secondary education only; (2) mid-level education, which represents upper-secondary to post- secondary nontertiary education; and (3) high-level education, which is tertiary education. Indicators within HESRi2 were disaggregated by this three-category variable for educational level, where available. Where an indicator is not disaggregated by either income or education, but is available for regions within a country, these regions are grouped by income per capita. Although poorer regions tend to have worse outcomes than richer ones this is not always the case because other factors may affect regional differences in some countries (e.g. the urban rural composition of regions). Data processing was conducted using R statistical software (version 3.4.3). A panel of regional experts, scientific advisors and members of international organizations approved the methods used and the interpretation of the indicators, prior to publication. The primary equity measure derived was the absolute difference between the most and least disadvantaged groups (e.g. based on education or income). The trend indicators are based on the (linear) slope index of inequality to calculate an annual rate of change, as well as statistical significance. They use all available data for the indicator since 2010 to calculate the trend. Trends were assessed as increasing if the linear trend across all the data points available was significantly greater than 0 (p<0.1) or decreasing if the linear trend across all the data points available was significantly lower than 0 (p<0.1); otherwise, the trend was labelled as having no noticeable change. A1.4 Limitations Certain limitations need to be taken into account when interpreting the indicators and users should refer to the original source documentation to assess the quality of the data collection and measurement methods. Differences in methodologies – such as the extent to which samples are representative of populations – and differences in survey instruments and definitions may limit the comparisons that can be made between countries and within countries over time. Individuals from lower socioeconomic groups are often underrepresented in population- based surveys, which may limit generalizability. Additionally, self-reported outcomes may be influenced by response biases and cultural differences, and, when comparing countries with diverse health services, differences in self-reported health outcomes may reflect access to care, rather than real differences in morbidity. Whilst every effort has been made to achieve as much coverage of countries across the Region as possible, consistent with ensuring a good representation of inequalities in countries not providing data to Eurostat , only 17of the selected indicators cover 50 or more of the countries in the WHO European Region. This highlights the need for a coordinated approach to monitoring health equity within the Region going forward. Annex 2. Modelling A2.1 Decomposition analysis Demanding microdata requirements for the decomposition analysis means that this analysis is only possible for inequities in a select number of health indicators. Decompositions of contributors to self-reported health, limiting illness, mental health and life satisfaction are possible using microdata from ESS and EUSI C for 32 countries in the WHO European Region, consisting of the 27 EU countries, Iceland, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. There is sufficient data for underlying conditions in all five areas to be analysed, showing that differences in conditions in all five areas are statistically significant in explaining inequities in these health indicators (Fig. 2.2). A2.2 Technical details of the decomposition method The idea behind the decomposition analysis is to explain the differences in health indicators that were observed between socioeconomic groups in Section 1 by a set of contributing factors that differ systematically between these groups. This helps to understand the multisectoral conditions behind why health inequities exist between groups of people within countries, even when effective health services are in place that aim to narrow or eliminate inequities in health and health care. For example, differences in health may be explained by differences in housing conditions and working conditions, as well as by differences in quality of health care. Even if countries are able to narrow inequities in one factor, inequities may still remain in others, emphasizing the importance of taking a multisectoral approach to tackling health inequity. The decomposition analysis reveals the extent to which each factor contributes to health inequities compared to each of the other factors. The method used in the Health Equity Status Report (HESR) is a simulation-based decomposition that relies on coefficients from a single, pooled regression model, a principle related to the variant of the Oaxaca decomposition method proposed by Neumark (1) and Oaxaca Ransom (2). The decomposition is based on regression analysis of the relationships between self-reported health and the indicators of underlying conditions. It should be noted that while this analysis provides an explanation of health inequity in terms of statistical associations, the regression model used does not constitute a causal analysis and therefore the results should not be interpreted as a stand-alone guide to policy – the decomposition results should be interpreted with care and only in context with other evidence.  The analysis first quantifies the overall health inequality by calculating a health gradient, in this case the Slope Index of Inequality. The decomposition then proceeds through a counterfactual simulation for each underlying condition. To determine the contribution of a single factor (e.g. employment), we simulate a scenario where that factor is set to its optimal value for all individuals in the population. By predicting health outcomes in this simulated scenario and recalculating the health gradient, we can measure how much the overall inequality is reduced. This reduction is considered the contribution of that specific factor to the total health gap. A2.3 Equity Tracker he ineq ali y index in he eq i y racker wa calc la ed in he followin way: i. for ho e indica or ha are di a re a ed by ocioeconomic a : a. he lope index i calc la ed acro ocioeconomic ro p b. where here are m ltiple mea re of ocioeconomic a ch a ed cation and income, a in le compo i e ocioeconomic rank i fir crea ed by avera in he e variable , and hen ed o calc la e he lope index ii. he mea re calc la ed in ep (i) i andardized by cen erin i on he mean for all co n rie and dividin by i andard deviation. In hi way, he me ric ed i mea red in andard deviation . Where he indica or i no di a re a ed by ocioeconomic a b ha an obvio relation hip wi h ineq ali y direc ly (e. . pover y ra e , Gini), he e were j andardized a (ii) above. nn al mea re were e tima ed for each indica or. da a may be mi in for ome year for differen co n rie and differen indica or , we moo h o da a be ween year by: i. akin he 3-year movin avera e for each indica or ii. E timatin mi in year by akin he linear rend be ween non-mi in year of da a wi hin co n rie or ro p of indica or ( ch a each of he five e ential condition ), he andardized mea re for each indica or were hen combined acro indica or ca e orie , by akin he avera e for all non-mi in andardized indica or in each ro p for each co n ry. imilar approach wa ed o avera e acro ro p of year . inally, o crea e he - o- index een in he racker , he e contin o domain core are conver ed in o q intile . Wi hin each domain, all co n rie are ranked by heir core and divided in o five eq al ro p , wi h ' ' repre entin he lowe ineq ali y and ' ' repre entin he hi he ineq ali y. A .4 m g w g m q w g q g . This is produced by taking the annual measures of the standardized indicators over the years 2010-2023, as derived in A2.3 and fitting a linear regression model with country fixed effects. This estimates the extent to which change in equity in each of the conditions over time within a country is associated with change in equity in self-reported health (based on the standardized slope index as in A2.3). The model also includes sex and year as control variables to account for average differences between sexes and for underlying linear time trends. For all indicators in the chart a reduction in equity in conditions is independently associated with a reduction in health equity (and vice versa). A .5 M g ff m m . This is based on a logistic regression model with the outcome measure, such as poor health, social isolation measured as a binary outcome (e.g. poor health vs. not poor health), controlling for sex, age, age squared and age-sex interactions. The intervention is measured as a three-way interaction between the country’s pension coverage, the standardized expenditure per pension recipients and an indicator of whether a respondent is over the country’s effective pension age for that year. This model is then used to simulate how the outcome changes, within each sex and income quintile. The simulation specifically models the effect of a best-practice scenario (i.e. pension coverage at the maximum observed level and expenditure at least at the European average) to estimate the potential impact on population health and well-being. A .6 H w b m g k b m k x . )Lm g First, the percent of 16–24-year-olds who report a limiting illness for each educational group for each country and year is combined with I O data on the percent (in each education group for each country and year) who are not in education, employment or training (NEET). This is used in a linear regression model with percent NEET as the outcome and the one to three- year lagged values of limiting illness as the exposure with country fixed effects. The coefficients for each lagged year are combined to estimate the effect of the cumulative trending limiting illness, over three years, on NEET. A comparable analysis is then performed using youth unemployment as the outcome variable in place of NEET. )D As there are only two time points for this indicator, a simpler approach is used. The difference between the two time points in depression prevalence for each country and the difference in the two labour market outcomes, NEET prevalence and youth unemployment, for each country are calculated. Then, to estimate the association, two separate regression models are fitted. In the first model, the change in the NEET rate is regressed on the change in depression. In the second, the change in youth unemployment is regressed on the change in depression. Annex 3. Country clusters Member States have been grouped according to policy and political commonalities. The clusters also aim to reflect the countries that Member States compare themselves to. This grouping does not coincide with preexisting WHO country groupings. Country Cluster Annex 4 List of HESRi Database indicators Indicator title Indicator definition Data Latest sources year Health status Morbidity Alcohol consumption Percentage of adults aged 18-64 years who drink STEPS EHIS 2023 alcohol daily (age adjusted) Alcohol consumption Percentage of adults aged 18-64 years engaging in STEPS EHIS 2023 (risky single occasion risky single occasion drinking at least once a month drinking) (age adjusted) Children reporting Percentage of children aged 11-15 experiencing two HBSC 2022 multiple health or more health complaints weekly complaints DALYs due to DALYs attributable to occupational risks and GBD 2021 occupational exposure exposures (age standardized rate per 100,000) Limitations in activities of Percentage of adults reporting limitations in daily EU-SILC ESS 2024 daily living activities due to health problems Obesity/Overweight Percentage of adults aged 18-64 years who are STEPS EHIS 2023 obese (age adjusted) Prevalence of self- Percentage of adults aged 18-64 years reporting STEPS EHIS 2023 reported CVD cardiovascular disease (age adjusted) Prevalence of self- Percentage of adults aged 18-64 years reporting STEPS EHIS 2023 reported diabetes diabetes (age adjusted) Serious injuries in children Percentage of children aged 11-15 having required HBSC 2018 medical treatment for 3 or more injuries in past year Smoking Percentage of adults aged 18-64 years who are STEPS EHIS 2023 current smokers Mortality Infant mortality rate Infant mortality rate for children aged less World 2019 than 1 year (per 1000 live births) Bank Eurostat GDL Life expectancy at birth Life expectancy at birth in years GDL 2022 Tuberculosis mortality Age-standardized tuberculosis death rate per WHO 2022 100,000 population Under-five mortality Under-five mortality rate (per 1000 live births) UN IGCME 2022 rate Wellbeing Adult life satisfaction Percentage of adults reporting poor life ESS WVS 2023 satisfaction Adult self-reported Percentage of adults reporting poor or fair EU-SILC 2024 health health ESS WVS Center for Proportion of people at high risk of clinical ESS 2014 Epidemiological Studies depression Depression Score (CES- D8) Children pressured by Percentage of children aged 11-15 reporting HBSC 2022 schoolwork being pressured by schoolwork Children's life Percentage of children aged 11-15 years HBSC PISA 2022 satisfaction reporting poor life satisfaction Children's self-reported Percentage of children aged 11-15 years HBSC 2022 health reporting poor or fair health Physical inactivity in Percentage of children aged 15 years who are PISA 2022 children physically active Problematic social Percentage of children aged 11-15 showing HBSC 2022 media use in children symptoms of social media disorder Self-reported work- Percentage of adults aged 15-64 years EU-LFS via 2020 related health reporting a work-related health problem (age Eurostat condition adjusted) Health services Access to health care Avoidable hospital Number of avoidable hospital admissions per Eurostat 2021 admissions 100,000 people GDL Cancer screening (cervical) Percentage of women reporting ever having a STEPS 2023 cervical cancer screening EHIS Hospital beds Available hospital beds per 100,000 Eurostat 2022 inhabitants OECD GDL Informal care Percentage of those aged 18-64 years who EHIS 2019 provide informal care for people with disabilities at least once a week (age adjusted) People with diabetes treated Percentage of people aged 18-64 with STEPS 2023 diabetes who are receiving treatment People with hypertension Percentage of people aged 18-64 with STEPS 2023 treated hypertension who are receiving treatment Physicians or doctors Number of physicians or doctors per 100,000 Eurostat 2022 inhabitants OECD GDL Public expenditure on health Current health expenditure as a percentage of WHO 2023 GDP Public expenditure on long- Total expenditure on long-term care as a Eurostat 2023 term care percentage of GDP OECD Public spending on public General government expenditure on public IMF 2023 health services health services as a percentage of GDP Eurostat OECD Self-reported unmet needs Percentage of people reporting unmet needs EU-SILC 2024 for health care for health care WVS Financial protection for health Household out-of-pocket Household out-of-pocket payments on long- OECD 2023 payments on long-term care term care as a percentage of GDP Households with catastrophic Percentage of households with out-of-pocket WHO 2022 health spending payments that are greater than 40% of their Barcelona capacity to pay for health care Office Households with Percentage of households that are WHO 2022 impoverishing health impoverished or further impoverished after Barcelona spending out-of-pocket payments Office Out-of-pocket expenses Out-of-pocket expenses as a percentage of WHO 2023 current health expenditure Social and human capital Human capital Adult literacy rate Percentage of adults aged 15+ years who UNESCO 2023 are literate via World Bank Children developmentally on Percentage of children aged 36-59 MICS 2019 track months who are developmentally on track Children/youth minimally Percentage of children aged 15 years PISA 2022 proficient in reading and maths achieving minimum proficiency in mathematics and reading Government expenditure on Government expenditure on early Eurostat 2021 early childhood education childhood education in purchasing power standards (PPS) per child under 5 years of age Participation in early childhood Percentage of children aged 36 to 59 UNICEF 2022 education months participating in early childhood Eurostat education Participation in education and Percentage of adults aged 25-64 years Eurostat 2023 training participating in formal and non-formal education and training Young people not in Percentage of young people who are not ILO 2023 employment/education/training in employment, education or training Eurostat Social Capital Children's exposure to Bullying Percentage of children aged 11-15 HBSC 2022 reporting being bullied in school 2-3 times a month Children's exposure to Percentage of children aged 11-15 HBSC 2022 Cyberbullying reporting being cyberbullied 1-2 times a month Equal treatment under the law Score from 0-1 on the World Justice World 2024 and absence of discrimination Project Rule of Law Index measuring Justice equal treatment under the law and Project absence of discrimination Freedom of choice and control Percentage of people aged 18+ years WVS 2022 over life reporting low levels of freedom of choice and control over their own life Frequency of meeting socially Percentage of people aged 16+ years EU-SILC 2023 who meet with family/friends less than ESS once a month Gender Equality Index Score from 1-100 on the Gender Equality EIGE 2024 Index Having someone to ask for help Percentage of people aged 16+ years EU-SILC 2022 who don't have someone to ask for help Participation in voluntary Percentage of people aged 16+ years EU-SILC 2022 activities participating in formal voluntary activities Perceived ability to influence Percentage of people aged 18+ years ESS 2023 politics reporting having no ability to influence politics Self-reported social support in Percentage of children aged 11-15 years HBSC 2022 young people reporting low peer support Social Institutions and Gender Score from 0-100 on the Social OECD 2023 Index Institutions and Gender Index Trust in others Percentage of adults aged 18+ years ESS WVS 2023 reporting low trust in other people Trust in politicians Percentage of people aged 16+ years ESS 2023 reporting low levels of trust in politicians Living environment Commercial determinants Daily breakfast consumption Percentage of children aged 11-15 missing HBSC 2022 in schoolchildren breakfast on any schoolday Food insecurity Percentage of people who cannot afford to EU-SILC 2023 eat an adequate meal WVS Food Price Index Food Price Index (2017=100) Eurostat 2025 World Bank Moderate or severe food Percentage of the population experiencing FAO 2022 insecurity moderate or severe food insecurity (3-year average) Tobacco tax Tobacco taxes as a percentage of price of the WHO 2022 most sold brand Value-added tax (VAT) on Value-added tax (VAT) on alcohol WHO 2019 alcohol Digital environment Internet use Percentage of people aged 16+ years who ESS WVS 2023 never use the internet Environment Annual mean PM10 Annual mean concentration of PM10 in cities WHO 2022 concentrations Annual PM2.5 emissions Total annual PM2.5 emissions (ton) GDL 2022 DALYs due to air pollution DALYs attributable to air pollution (age GBD 2021 standardized rate per 100,000) Diesel cars Diesel powered passenger cars as a Eurostat 2023 percentage of all registered passenger cars Feeling unsafe from crime in Percentage of adults aged 18+ years feeling WVS 2022 own home unsafe from crime in their own home Feeling unsafe walking alone Percentage of adults feeling unsafe when ESS 2023 after dark walking alone in their area after dark Intentional homicide Intentional homicide by intimate partner or Eurostat 2023 family member, victims per 100,000 population Neighbourhood security Percentage of people aged 16+ years who WVS 2023 don't feel secure living in their neighbourhood Physical violence in children Percentage of children aged 11-15 reporting HBSC 2018 having been in 3 or more physical fights in past year Pollution/grime/other Percentage of people reporting pollution, EU-SILC 2023 environmental problems grime or other environmental problems in their area Public spending on housing General government expenditure on housing IMF 2023 and community amenities and community amenities as a percentage of Eurostat GDP OECD  Reported crime, violence and Percentage of people aged 16+ years EU-SILC 2023 vandalism reporting local problems with crime, violence or vandalism Road deaths Estimated road traffic deaths per 100,000 WHO 2019 population Housing Basic drinking water services Percentage of people without at least basic WHO 2022 drinking water services (an improved source UNICEF within a 30 minute round trip to collect water) Basic sanitation services Percentage of people without at least basic WHO 2022 sanitation services (improved sanitation UNICEF facilities that are not shared with other households) DALYs due to unsafe DALYs attributable to unsafe sanitation (age GBD 2021 sanitation standardized rate per 100,000) Households receiving housing Percentage of households receiving housing OECD 2022 allowance allowance Housing cost overburden rate Percentage of people living in a household EU-SILC 2023 where housing costs are more than 40% of disposable household income (net of housing allowances) Housing overcrowding Percentage of people living in an overcrowded EU-SILC 2023 dwelling Inability to adequately heat Percentage of people who cannot afford to EU-SILC 2023 home keep their home adequately warm Severe housing deprivation Percentage of people living in an overcrowded EU-SILC 2023 rate dwelling that also lacks a bath and indoor toilet, or is damp or too dark Employment and working conditions Job security Employment rate Percentage of those in employment among EU-SILC those aged 16-64 years ESS WVS Labour force participation Percentage of the population either working ILO 2024 rate or looking for work Proportion of the poorest Percentage of the poorest quintile in the World 2020 quintile population covered population covered by unemployment Bank by labour market programs benefits and active labor market programs Public expenditure on labour Public expenditure on labour market OECD 2022 market policies programmes (active and passive) as a percentage of GDP Redundancy pay at 2 years of Number of months of redundancy pay at two ILO 2020 tenure, in months years of job tenure Temporary employees Temporary employees as percentage of the Eurostat 2023 total number of employees aged 20-64 years Unemployment benefit Percentage of unemployed persons receiving ILO 2023 coverage regular periodic social security unemployment benefits Unemployment rate Percentage of unemployed persons in the ILO 2024 labour force Working conditions Accidents at work Percentage of workers aged 15-64 years EULFS via 2020 reporting at least one non-fatal accident at Eurostat work in the past 12 months Average wages/earnings Average nominal monthly earnings of ILO 2023 employees in 2021 USD PPP Collective bargaining Percentage of employees whose pay and/or ILO 2020 coverage conditions of employment are determined by one or more collective agreements Disability employment ratio Ratio of employment rates between people EU-SILC 2023 without disabilities and people with disabilities, aged 16-64 years Feeling about household's Percentage of people aged 16+ years ESS 2023 income reporting difficulties living on their household's income Gone without cash income Percentage of people aged 16+ years WVS 2022 reporting they sometimes or often have to get by without an income In-work poverty Percentage of employed persons aged 18+ EU-SILC 2023 years with income below 60% of median equivalised disposable income (after social transfers) Labour inspectors Average number of labour inspectors per ILO 2023 10,000 employed persons Labour share of GDP (wages Percentage of GDP allocated to labour ILO 2024 and social protection compensation, comprising wages and social transfers) protection transfers Low financial satisfaction Percentage of people aged 16+ years WVS reporting low levels of satisfaction with the financial situation of their household Low job control Percentage of the population aged 16-64 ESS years, reporting low levels of control over how their daily work is organised Minimum wage Statutory nominal gross monthly minimum ILO 2024 wage in constant 2021 USD PPP Working excessive hours Percentage of workers working 40+ hours per ILO 2024 week Working excessive hours Percentage of the population aged 16-64 ESS (more than 45 hours per years, working more than 45 hours per week week) Income security and social protection Poverty and inequality Adequacy of social Social assistance transfers received by World 2021 assistance programmes beneficiaries as a percentage of their total Bank income or consumption Coverage of social Percentage of the population participating in World 2021 assistance programmes social assistance programs Bank Disability poverty ratio Ratio of poverty rates (percentage below 60% of EU-SILC 2023 median income) between people with disabilities and people without disabilities, aged 16-64 years Gini index Gini index of income inequality from 0-100 World 2022 Bank Incidence of social Social assistance program beneficiaries in each World 2021 assistance programmes income quintile as a percentage of total number Bank of social assistance program beneficiaries Poverty Percentage of the population with income EU-SILC 2024 below 60% of median equivalised disposable World income (EUSILC) or national poverty lines Bank (World Bank) Public spending on social General government expenditure on social IMF 2023 protection protection as a percentage of GDP Eurostat OECD Public spending on social General government expenditure on social Eurostat 2023 protection for children and protection for children and families, as a families percentage of GDP Public spending on social General government expenditure on social Eurostat 2023 protection for sickness and protection for sickness and disability, as a disability percentage of GDP Public spending on social General government expenditure on social Eurostat 2023 protection for protection for unemployment, as a percentage unemployment of GDP Risk of child poverty Percentage of children aged 0-18 at risk of Eurostat 2024 poverty or social exclusion Vulnerable people covered Percentage of poor persons covered by social ILO 2023 by social assistance protection systems programmes Supporting older people Pension coverage Percentage of the population above statutory ILO 2023 pensionable age receiving an old age pension Pension expenditure per Annual pension expenditure per beneficiary for Eurostat 2022 beneficiary old-age pensions in purchasing power standards (PPS) Pension net replacement Individual net pension entitlement as a OECD 2022 rate percentage of net pre-retirement earnings Supporting parenting Length of paid maternity Length of paid maternity and parental leave OECD 2021 and parental leave available to mothers in weeks Length of paid paternity Length of paid paternity and parental leave OECD 2021 and parental leave available for fathers in weeks Maternity benefits Percentage of women giving birth receiving ILO 2023 maternity cash benefits Annex references 1. Neumark D. Employers’ discriminatory behavior and the estimation of wage discrimination. J Hu Resour. 1988;23(3):279–295 (https: doi.org 10.2307 145830, accessed 1 April 2019). 2. Oaxaca R , Ransom MR. On discrimination and the decomposition of wage differentials. J Econom. 1994;61(1):5–21 (https: doi.org 10.1016 0304-4076(94)90074-4, accessed 1 April 2019). 3. Hendramoorthy M, Kupek E, Petrou S. Self-reported health and socio-economic inequalities in England, 1996–2009: Repeated national cross-sectional study. Soc Sci Med. 2015;136–137: 135–146 (https: doi.org 10.1016 j.socscimed.2015.05.026, accessed 1 April 2019). 4. Health at a glance: Europe 2016. State of health in the EU cycle. Paris: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2016 (https: www.oecd- ilibrary.org docserver 9789264265592- en.pdf?expires=1544454583 id=id accname=guest checksum=7B817E65B, accessed 1 April 2019). 5. Subramanian V, Huijts T, Avendano M. Self-reported health assessments in the 2002 World Health Survey: how do they correlate with education? Bull World Health Organ. 2009;88(2):131–138. 6. Functional and activity limitations statistics [website]. uxembourg: Statistical Office of the European Union; 2017 (https: ec.europa.eu eurostat statistics- xplained index.php Functional_and_activity_limitations_statistics, accessed 1 April 2019). 7. Brown C, Harrison D, Burns H, Ziglio E. Governance for health equity: taking forward the equity values and goals of Health 2020 in the WHO European Region. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2014 (http: www.euro.who.int en publications abstracts governance-for-health-equity, accessed 1 April 2019). 8. OECD guidelines on measuring subjective well-being. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2013 (https: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov books NBK189567 , accessed 1 April 2019). Saatja: "BROWN, Christine Elisabeth" <[email protected]> Saaja: "BROWN, Christine Elisabeth" <[email protected]> Teema: Consultation - 2nd WHO European Health Equity Status Report - reference document with main data sources and selection of graphs Kuupäev: 2025-08-18 12:15 Tähelepanu! Tegemist on välisvõrgust saabunud kirjaga. Tundmatu saatja korral palume linke ja faile mitte avada. Message addressed to WHO National Counterparts, WHO National Technical Focal Points for Equity and social determinants of health, WHO Representatives _____________________________________________________________________________________ Dear Colleague, In November 2025, the WHO Regional Office for Europe will launch the 2nd European Health Equity Status Report. The Report will provide all countries of the WHO European Region with data-driven insights to support policy actions that address health inequities. Inside the 2nd European Health Equity Status Report there will be a comprehensive analysis of the latest status and trends in health equity and well-being within and across countries of the WHO European Region, together with analysis of the main determinants that underpin these trends. In light of the major demographic shifts within and across countries in the WHO European Region, the 2nd European Health Equity Status Report will also include a special feature on health equity across the life course with a spotlight on health equity in adolescence and youth and in later life. A companion product to the 2nd European Health Equity Status Report, is an Interactive Health Equity Atlas. This will go live online with the launch of the report in November 2025. The Atlas contains all the data behind the Report, in an easy to navigate tool that allows policy makers, planners and service providers to make an equity deep dive into their own country, to compare progress and status across more than 120 health equity indicators disaggregated by age, sex and a measure of socioeconomic status and to identify priorities for action. The Data in the Health Equity Atlas can also be exported in a variety of charts that are suitable for preparing reports, presentations, briefings and advocacy purposes. As part of WHO/Europe’s commitment to transparency and consultation and in advance of the report being launched, I am pleased to share with you a reference document containing the main data sources and the selection of graphs that will feature in the 2nd European Health Equity Status Report. This is not the actual 2nd European Health Equity Status Report but a summary of key graphs, the rationale for why and how indicators were selected and a brief description of the methodology used to undertake the equity analysis and the modelling of status, trends and the association with a range of social determinants. I would kindly ask you to share this document with relevant colleague responsible for data analysis and for health equity for their information and kind review of the material before we proceed with final publication. Please send any questions or comments by 28th August. If we don’t receive any feedback or comment from you within this timeframe we will take this as there are no comments to be made. Thank you in advance for your continued collaboration and support for this important work to support the goal of leaving no one behind due to poor health. Best Regards, Chris Chris Brown Head WHO European Office for Investment for Health and Development Venice, Italy [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> +39 3475382758