Sustainable Health and Wellbeing in the European Union

Abstract

BackgroundAltogether, 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an urgent call for action to end poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all. Goal 3 is crucial in terms of good health and wellbeing. The main aim of this study is to analyze and evaluate differences among indicators of SDG 3: Sustainable health and wellbeing in the EU countries.MethodsThe status and development of the EU Member States regarding their successes or failures in terms of Goal 3 were subjected to analysis. Altogether, 11 indicators were used to rank the EU countries using the TOPSIS and ranking methods. The ranks were assigned to the countries in two periods. The first period is related to the time from 2010 till 2014, and the second period from 2015 till 2019.ResultsThe EU countries achieved a positive development in 10 of 11 indicators that monitor the achievement of the EU in terms of Goal 3. The only variable that changed negatively was the obesity rate. Positivity was observed in the decline of the standardized preventable and treatable mortality, which declined from 317.3 in the first period to 295 in the second period; the drop of the population weighted annual mean concentration of fine particulate PM2.5, from 16.4 to 13.6 μg/m3, and also in the increase of the share of people with good or very good perceived health, which was combined with a decrease of the self-reported unmet need for medical examination and care. The best-rated country in terms of SDG 3 was, in both periods, Sweden, while the worst-rated was Latvia.ConclusionsGovernments and institutions in the EU can intervene to increase the accessibility and quality of the health care system, but every citizen should try to do their best to reduce some of the risk factors, such as smoking or obesity, to try living healthier and to help to achieve higher ambitions in terms of sustainable health and wellbeing.

Changes in perception of coffee in EU: Luxury good becoming inferior good

“…In spite of this, the findings are surprising. One of the prerequisites is the health aspect if consumers do not exceed a certain limit of daily consumption (Gavurova & Megyesiova, 2022;Soltes & Gavurova, 2015). With a higher income, consumers do not consume more coffee.…”

Local Disproportions of Quality of Life and Their Influence on the Process of Green Economy Development in Polish Voivodships in 2010–2020

“…The TOPSIS method enables the assessment to be made with the use of an unlimited number of criteria, the readability of the obtained results is high, and it allows for a linear ordering of objects (e.g., building a ranking of units in spatial terms). A significant advantage of the TOPSIS method is its computational simplicity, the indication of a positive and negative model, and a large number of alternative criteria that can be used in the evaluation process [ 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 ].…”

Moral dilemma in deciding on the amount of excise tax on tobacco products in the Czech Republic

“…Based on the conducted study, Maldonado, Llorente et al (2022) argue that tobacco tax increases reduce the number of smokers and intensity of smoking, which results in a decline in the number of cigarettes smoked. This decline is expected to decrease premature mortality, costs of health care, and poverty, improve health, increase income, and strengthen gender equality and mobilization of domestic resources for people who have to face catastrophic health care costs as well as in the case of illegal tobacco products (Soltes, Gavurova, 2015;Gavurova, Megyesiova, 2022). Tobacco taxes are an effective public health intervention and a powerful tool for advancing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.…”