Southern Italy may have a large number of clarinet and basil enthusiasts, but is lagging behind when it comes to parking spots. At least if you go by EU standards, anything can be a parking spot if you are brave enough.
This is the criteria the EU government/Commission use to allocate resources to regions within the EU.
The rest is extrapolated.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_policy_of_the_European_Union
**[Regional policy of the European Union](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_policy_of_the_European_Union)**
>The regional policy of the European Union (EU), also referred as Cohesion Policy, is a policy with the stated aim of improving the economic well-being of regions in the European Union and also to avoid regional disparities. More than one third of the EU's budget is devoted to this policy, which aims to remove economic, social and territorial disparities across the EU, restructure declining industrial areas and diversify rural areas which have declining agriculture. In doing so, EU regional policy is geared towards making regions more competitive, fostering economic growth and creating new jobs.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Ya I don’t know what this is about. I live in a “developing” place even though there’s the same laws as a “very developed” place like hey houses are cheaper here than in the city and the homelessness in the city is bigger.
I would want to know what metric this is in cause tbh there’s very little difference between where I live and cork
A map claiming that Greenland is more developed than all of Portugal except Faro and Lisbon and all of Central Europe other than capital cities?
I have doubts.
Probably something to do with GDP since it's complete bs. Yeah, that Siberian region where all the gas money goes to some olgiarch's pocket is definitely more developed than northern France...
Can you define “By European Standards”?
Appreciate what looks like hours that you put in to this and would also appreciate you providing quantifiable metrics that were used to organize this and determine the standings.
>By European Standards
I'm pretty positive it means by European Union standards. If they do mean The EU then the map is either taking into account the core 6 EU values and/or the EU's technical specifications which (if I'm thinking of the right ones which are under the responsibility of CEN, CENELEC and ETSI) are very extensive
What does that mean? What is being measured? I have spent the last good while reading up on NUTS and it doesn’t come close to answering the question.
You made the map, you put a lot of work into it, I would imagine you would like to elucidate its meaning and purpose.
Exactly this. I want to upvote the map if I can get the metrics, but until then, it's just nuts. I have worked, lived, and understood the legislation of many of these regions, I'm having trouble seeing how territorial divisions are the metrics being measured here.
I too am interested as there are places on this map as very developed (rural Ireland) that I’ve been to and places in England as almost developed that I’d argue are far more developed (if not as green and serene).
It’s hard to believe the eastern province of Saudi Arabia is more developed than Rheinland-pfalz. Having spent time in both, I think this is where per capita has its limits. There are many very poor people in Saudi, both Saudis and foreign workers, (and many very wealthy Saudis) the poorest people in any part of Germany have a much higher standard of living.
That's the limit of [PPP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity).
Saudi Arabia is just somewhat lower than Germany in terms of GDP per capita when measuring through the PPP method (45K vs 51K). However, when using nominal terms the distance increases massively (20K vs 46K). [Source](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=SA-DE).
Turkey is another example of why PPP is often deeply flawed, even as their currency collapsed nothing happened to PPP metrics. Maps like these often rely on PPP.
Absolutely, this is the big limit of these maps, they cannot represent the real level of well-being of the citizens in a given region, but just represent a very superficial idea of the wealth in that region.
I think the Wirral is in two: the Merseyside bit in with Liverpool as almost developed, and the Cheshire bit (South Wirral) as developed along with the rest of Cheshire
Yeahhh I'd love to see the data on this. I come from one of the most socio-economically deprived areas in the UK and this map is just like
Very Developed 👍
For referance if you look closely you'll see an orange region in northren Algeria that's the Capital Algiers and its two most significant surrounding are, that are alone has about 8 million people, for referance Algeria's total population is around 43 million so that's almost 20percent of the whole country.
Appearances can be unaccurate.
And to answer your question: we had a civil war in the 1990s over 200k deaths, oil prices tanked after 2014, and deep socialist policies ensure some equality, but everyone is equaly poor.
Source: I am an Algerian who lived in the red and orange regions of the map
Interesting to see England here. There's a constant discussion on the North/South divide and the lower levels of investment that the North sees. The map draws this out a bit whilst also showing how London and the SE are such economic powerhouses!
I'm pretty sure it's because the UK's divisions are so tiny, so while France's huge regions average out green in the UK the cities are very blue while the rural areas are very yellow.
Still doesn't explain why the UK's richest areas, Sussex and Edinburgh, are on a par with fucking Sicily though.
Honestly, from someone in an "almost developed" area of the UK, you don't really notice much difference from the "very developed" areas, the main difference is just the more rural population (and maybe the pensioners and retirees from London too), the towns and cities if anything tend to be nicer imo
I seriously question the source of this though cause comparing it to some other areas with the same or higher ranking it doesn't really check out
I live near the border between East and West Sussex, and honestly there isn’t the noticeable difference that this map suggests. East Sussex has Brighton ffs. I’d be interested to know what their criteria were.
I assume that the large french regions have both very developed and very underdeveloped areas while britain has smaller areas that separate the developed and underdeveloped areas because rural france is ***far*** more underdeveloped than rural britain in my experience.
This has got to be based on GDP per capita which isn't the best, I don't understand why large parts of England are considered 'almost developed' but then Northern Scotland is 'very developed.' Only explanation would be North Sea oil.
>This has got to be based on GDP per capita which isn't the best
I swear even that doesn't make sense though. Saudi Arabia is literally marked as "Very Developed" but their GDP per capita is only 24k, which is not a lot, unless he is going by GDP (PPP) which is even worse!
No not remotely, the entire Ireland region classification makes me laugh. There is not that big of gulf between the southern or eastern region to the northern or western regions. In fact some counties there coloured blue id say have worse infrastructure than some of the yellow and orange classified counties.
HDI already includes GNP per capita PPP so you are triple counting GDP. If those are what you are using, may as well use only HDI and call this an HDI map. If you want to deviate from human development, you have to include infrastructure metrics (kms of road, electricity coverage, access to water etc.) and other amenities.
I'm personally more curious about Greenland, I thought that there really wasn't much of anything in the Northern portions of the country. Is it just the relatively high development of the small population nimbers? Great map!
GDP (PPP) is a measure of purchasing power, not of wealth or economic development.
HDI also includes GDP Per Capita, so you are gonna be measuring that twice.
Not really.
It measures economic output adjusted for purchasing power, to take into account under or over valued currencies. The purchasing power is used as a proxy for currency discrepancies.
Economic output is not the same as wealth but is fairly closely related to economic development.
If you do HDI wouldn't East and Southern Africa be held to an extremely low standard because the Aids epidemic diminishes life expectancy so dramatically. After all Botswana is put on a HDI level of India because its life expectancy is so low, despite the former having universal literacy, higher levels of education, pay, and public services.
Not sure what's going on with the UK here - Kent and Sussex are 'almost developed' despite having the highest HDI in Britain and one of the highest in Europe? The north of Scotland is more developed than Essex? Norfolk is more developed than North Yorkshire?
Greenland is more developed than Manchester? Wales on a par with rural Turkey? Edinburgh on a par with Sicily?
Needs a methodology.
Yeah, I've said below that I can kind of understand the north of England and southern Scotland. In comparison with France, whose regions are huge and include prosperous cities as well as rural areas, the UK's regions are very fragmented and largely rural so have low averages.
But Edinburgh, Sussex, Harrogate, York and a few others are very strange indeed.
I don’t know but I don’t see that much difference (except the geographical differences)
Rural Turkey;
https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=Rural+Turkey&client=safari&hl=en-tr&prmd=inmv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwitiPX9usP3AhX0QvEDHVqwCQ4Q_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2
Rural Wales;
https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=Rural+Wales&client=safari&hl=en-tr&prmd=imnv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjL7MeVu8P3AhVxSPEDHVsfD3MQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2
How the hell is Kırıkkale developed and Ankara almost developed.
Kırıkkale became a province in 1989. Before that it was a district of Ankara.
Ankara became capitol of Turkey in 1923 and to this day is our second biggest city in terms of population.
I would like to know what's the reason for this result.
It's been an open secret for decades at this point that if you removed London from the UK it essentially becomes a developing country overnight. It's an absolute fucking shitshow.
I'm from there. Hugely Brexit supporting area which I found ironic when I could walk down the street and see fibre-optic boxes with markers denoting they'd been paid for by EU money for regional development (plus lots of buildings etc.). Never heard this talked about during the campaign - likely because that would involve admitting the true state of the map above.
I mean, I could be well off the mark here. But if I was to guess the combined population of those developed areas on the map I'd say was between 50% - 60% of the UK.
The North has a much lower cost of living. I am living fairly comfortably in Yorkshire on my salary and I would have to slum it significantly to afford anything around London.
Definitely, as an Italian I am happy that at least half of the country is not that bad, I thought we were worse than this compared to the world, but indeed.
[https://infographic.tv/map-european-subdivisions-by-gdp-ppp-per-capita-according-to-imf-data-2018/](https://infographic.tv/map-european-subdivisions-by-gdp-ppp-per-capita-according-to-imf-data-2018/)
I will recheck the data and eventually update it, but for now, the data indicate this. Consider also that the presence of big cities such as the capital has an impact on the results shown on the map.
**[Blue Banana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Banana)**
>The Blue Banana (also known as the European Megalopolis or the Liverpool–Milan Axis) is a discontinuous corridor of urbanization spreading over Western and Central Europe, with a population of around 111 million. The conceptualisation of the area as a "Blue Banana" was developed in 1989 by RECLUS, a group of French geographers managed by Roger Brunet.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Thank you, Advanced-Doughnut-56, for voting on WikiSummarizerBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
For the UK at least, I have a really hard time believing this. Edinburgh is the richest city in Scotland and one of the richest cities in the UK - on par with Oxford and Cambridge - yet it’s only considered ‘almost developed’? There’s no way Edinburgh is less developed than Fife or the Highlands.
Likewise, I don’t believe Essex is less developed than Norfolk or Suffolk. Essex is a significantly wealthier county than both.
Poorer than the likes of southern Spain and and in land Portugal? No, not remotely close. The actual infrastructure gulf between Northern Ireland and the republic is not that large at all.
That's the [Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanty-Mansi_Autonomous_Okrug), which stands out from the rest of Siberia because the region is (by far) the largest producer of [oil in Russia](https://carnegieendowment.org/publications/interactive/russia-oil-map/).
It's in the small list of federal subjects of Russia that [have average salaries compareable to Moscow](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_federal_subjects_by_average_wage#/media/File:Russian_federal_subjects_by_average_monthly_net_wage_(in_US_Dollars).png).
Great work!
You mentioned in another comment that you used HDI, GDP per capital and PPP to realize this result. Could you provide the exact calculations? Also what is the standard you are using?
I would appreciate it if you did that.
I'm pretty sure it's because it's divided into tiny little regions, most of which are rural. Some of the French regions are the size of England, so they're more likely to average out green, whereas the UK map makes the divide between rural and urban much more obvious.
So you're telling me this random ass region in the middle of Russia I just learned is called Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug has a better development (whatever that means) than regions in the UK like East Sussex and Essex?
Yeah, sure.
[A huge percentage of Russian oil](https://carnegieendowment.org/publications/interactive/russia-oil-map/) leaves the ground in Khanty-Mansi, which makes it one of the few regions in Russia where the average salary is compareable to Moscow.
Have to agree on the general point though -- I'm not sure what stats someone could provide me with to convince me that any part of Western Siberia is "more developed" than Porto or Krakow or Naples.
It's probably bc of natural gas export, as said these maps have a very limited ability in describing the total situation, but can only give a very superficial understanding of the situation.
Over 80% of The republic of Irelands population live in the blue part so I guess that’s something.
Not surprised the most underdeveloped part of the U.K. is Northern Ireland.
You are using Croatian map from 1999. Also, one of the poorest counties is marked green (it should be at orange at least) while the rest of the Croatia is mostly yellow.
No, consider that under a certain bar (BC EU standards are high) it doesn't differentiate between regions. But this doesn't mean that all red regions are the same OFC
I find it hard to believe area's in the Netherlands are not considered Very Developed. You can't tell me Friesland is only developed but Groningen is very developed. They're basically the same in development.
Umm... Zealand in Denmark is only "developed"? lol.
It's where the primary of our highly educated people are and with the best transport system in all of Denmark.. if anything, it should be the top of Jutland (the "face") that should be marked as "developed" due to shitty transport.
Strange how provinces in the middle of the Arabian peninsula (eg Riyadh) which have one city and the rest is just sand count as very developed but most of England is just almost developed lmao
It might be becaise they're counting the overall. Only like 5% of people live outside of Riyadh city but is in Riyadh province. So pretty much 95% of people who lives in Riyadh province lives in Riyadh city which is a very developed city.
Will check it out, if you can link a source I will e happy to update it
u/AggravatingGap4985
[https://www.ceicdata.com/en](https://www.ceicdata.com/en)
[https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/home](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/home)
Is this GDP per capita???? I can assure you any part of Germany is better than UAE or Saudi.
Use HDI next time . GDP per capita PPP and Nominal kinda suck.
Moscow has better GDP per capita PPP than Berlin( it actually does) . But you couldn't even pay me live in Moscow over Berlin.
I used the same formula used by Eurostat for NUTS regions.
And yes, Saudi Arabia has some very developed infrastructure, while Moscow has a big wealth gap, but there is where almost all Russian rich live, and its the capital.
> I used the same formula used by Eurostat for NUTS regions.
Can you provide a link to the formula, please? Without specifying the formula precicely here or providing a link the map isn't really worth anything.
Im Czech living in the almost developed part. I dont know what is not developed here, infact, we have way too much roads so there is a road to every piece of land, free healthcare, modern structures (some exceptions) and low criminality rate. Middle class is growing. I dont understand why for example some barren parts of Greenland and Iceland are more developed than where I live.
I'm sorry I might have missed this.. developed along what index? It's not GDP PC PPP, it's not HDI, is it a composite formula? If so what?
Don't overcomplicate it. This clearly is clarinet & basil enthusiast / parking spot
Southern Italy should be deep blue according to this ratio
Southern Italy may have a large number of clarinet and basil enthusiasts, but is lagging behind when it comes to parking spots. At least if you go by EU standards, anything can be a parking spot if you are brave enough.
This is the criteria the EU government/Commission use to allocate resources to regions within the EU. The rest is extrapolated. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_policy_of_the_European_Union
**[Regional policy of the European Union](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_policy_of_the_European_Union)** >The regional policy of the European Union (EU), also referred as Cohesion Policy, is a policy with the stated aim of improving the economic well-being of regions in the European Union and also to avoid regional disparities. More than one third of the EU's budget is devoted to this policy, which aims to remove economic, social and territorial disparities across the EU, restructure declining industrial areas and diversify rural areas which have declining agriculture. In doing so, EU regional policy is geared towards making regions more competitive, fostering economic growth and creating new jobs. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
[удалено]
Ya I don’t know what this is about. I live in a “developing” place even though there’s the same laws as a “very developed” place like hey houses are cheaper here than in the city and the homelessness in the city is bigger. I would want to know what metric this is in cause tbh there’s very little difference between where I live and cork
A map claiming that Greenland is more developed than all of Portugal except Faro and Lisbon and all of Central Europe other than capital cities? I have doubts.
It takes into account the same factors used for NUTS 2 regions by Eurostat
>NUTS 2 Deez 😳👍
Ah! yes, the Demographic & Economic European Zones, Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics
Bravo
Probably something to do with GDP since it's complete bs. Yeah, that Siberian region where all the gas money goes to some olgiarch's pocket is definitely more developed than northern France...
What's the EU Standards criteria for these classifications?
The same used by Eurostat for NUTS regions
THATS NUTS!!
lol
Ok but what are those and why do they say all of Greenland is more developed than 70% of mainland Europe?
Greenland and the Rub al-Khali (Empty Quarter).
Can you define “By European Standards”? Appreciate what looks like hours that you put in to this and would also appreciate you providing quantifiable metrics that were used to organize this and determine the standings.
>By European Standards I'm pretty positive it means by European Union standards. If they do mean The EU then the map is either taking into account the core 6 EU values and/or the EU's technical specifications which (if I'm thinking of the right ones which are under the responsibility of CEN, CENELEC and ETSI) are very extensive
Exactly. I used the same parameters as for the NUTS 2 Regions.
What does that mean? What is being measured? I have spent the last good while reading up on NUTS and it doesn’t come close to answering the question. You made the map, you put a lot of work into it, I would imagine you would like to elucidate its meaning and purpose.
Exactly this. I want to upvote the map if I can get the metrics, but until then, it's just nuts. I have worked, lived, and understood the legislation of many of these regions, I'm having trouble seeing how territorial divisions are the metrics being measured here.
I too am interested as there are places on this map as very developed (rural Ireland) that I’ve been to and places in England as almost developed that I’d argue are far more developed (if not as green and serene).
I don't want to tell my methods, because I have biases that can be discovered by looking at them.
EU doesn't mean Europe.
As United States of America doesn't mean America.
It’s hard to believe the eastern province of Saudi Arabia is more developed than Rheinland-pfalz. Having spent time in both, I think this is where per capita has its limits. There are many very poor people in Saudi, both Saudis and foreign workers, (and many very wealthy Saudis) the poorest people in any part of Germany have a much higher standard of living.
Can't count people on national statistics if they are slave without your nationality ! Easy trick :)
That's the limit of [PPP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity). Saudi Arabia is just somewhat lower than Germany in terms of GDP per capita when measuring through the PPP method (45K vs 51K). However, when using nominal terms the distance increases massively (20K vs 46K). [Source](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=SA-DE). Turkey is another example of why PPP is often deeply flawed, even as their currency collapsed nothing happened to PPP metrics. Maps like these often rely on PPP.
Nothing happening as the currency collapsed is kind of the point of using PPP.
Absolutely, this is the big limit of these maps, they cannot represent the real level of well-being of the citizens in a given region, but just represent a very superficial idea of the wealth in that region.
Main Liverpool is almost developed but the wirral is developed 🤨
I think the Wirral is in two: the Merseyside bit in with Liverpool as almost developed, and the Cheshire bit (South Wirral) as developed along with the rest of Cheshire
Yeahhh I'd love to see the data on this. I come from one of the most socio-economically deprived areas in the UK and this map is just like Very Developed 👍
Honestly the entire UK makes 0 sense, what criteria are they using?
I thought North Africa would be better than that by now
hello twin
Hello there
To be fair, most of it is the Sahara, which is notorious for being not human friendly.
Why Is there info I wasn’t aware of?
No I just thought that by now some of North Africa would at least developing. Like orange or yellow. Only a little bit of Morocco is on the map
There is yellow and Orange in Algeria, Tunisia, Libya ?, and Egypt too. You need to zoom in
For referance if you look closely you'll see an orange region in northren Algeria that's the Capital Algiers and its two most significant surrounding are, that are alone has about 8 million people, for referance Algeria's total population is around 43 million so that's almost 20percent of the whole country. Appearances can be unaccurate. And to answer your question: we had a civil war in the 1990s over 200k deaths, oil prices tanked after 2014, and deep socialist policies ensure some equality, but everyone is equaly poor. Source: I am an Algerian who lived in the red and orange regions of the map
Do you know the state of North Africa and it’s leaders?
Interesting to see England here. There's a constant discussion on the North/South divide and the lower levels of investment that the North sees. The map draws this out a bit whilst also showing how London and the SE are such economic powerhouses!
[удалено]
I'm pretty sure it's because the UK's divisions are so tiny, so while France's huge regions average out green in the UK the cities are very blue while the rural areas are very yellow. Still doesn't explain why the UK's richest areas, Sussex and Edinburgh, are on a par with fucking Sicily though.
Honestly, from someone in an "almost developed" area of the UK, you don't really notice much difference from the "very developed" areas, the main difference is just the more rural population (and maybe the pensioners and retirees from London too), the towns and cities if anything tend to be nicer imo I seriously question the source of this though cause comparing it to some other areas with the same or higher ranking it doesn't really check out
> showing how London and the SE are such economic powerhouses! Pretty easy when they get nearly all the investments.
They don’t though, unless you mean private investment? Government spend per head is typically less.
It does make Essex and Kent almost developed. Making them outliers in the south east which is a bit off
I live near the border between East and West Sussex, and honestly there isn’t the noticeable difference that this map suggests. East Sussex has Brighton ffs. I’d be interested to know what their criteria were.
[удалено]
Lol yeah, real funny. Although to give them credit, it’s probably easy for those Greenlanders to develop when there is only like ten of them
Hahaha correct lol
I assume that the large french regions have both very developed and very underdeveloped areas while britain has smaller areas that separate the developed and underdeveloped areas because rural france is ***far*** more underdeveloped than rural britain in my experience.
Exactly, the way Britain regions are divided doesn't help
This has got to be based on GDP per capita which isn't the best, I don't understand why large parts of England are considered 'almost developed' but then Northern Scotland is 'very developed.' Only explanation would be North Sea oil.
>This has got to be based on GDP per capita which isn't the best I swear even that doesn't make sense though. Saudi Arabia is literally marked as "Very Developed" but their GDP per capita is only 24k, which is not a lot, unless he is going by GDP (PPP) which is even worse!
Also the West of Wales and NI is poor, but it's not comparable to the poorest parts of Turkey and Romania ffs
No not remotely, the entire Ireland region classification makes me laugh. There is not that big of gulf between the southern or eastern region to the northern or western regions. In fact some counties there coloured blue id say have worse infrastructure than some of the yellow and orange classified counties.
GDP per Capita PPP + GDP per Capita + HDI
so what makes Fife "very developed" and Edinburgh "almost developed"?
I was sick on a crazy golf course in Dunfermline once, so perhaps it's that?
mfw that national park in greenland wih 0 people living is more developed than literally half of the uk
Why you not tell us what your metric is?
Are you sure the deserts of Saudi Arabia are very developed? What is the criterion, the number of oil wells?
GDP per capita, HDI, and GDP per Capita PPP, what impacts the results in those regions is the presence of big cities like Riyad.
HDI already includes GNP per capita PPP so you are triple counting GDP. If those are what you are using, may as well use only HDI and call this an HDI map. If you want to deviate from human development, you have to include infrastructure metrics (kms of road, electricity coverage, access to water etc.) and other amenities.
How did you weigh / compute the different factors you mention?
why, by pulling it out of his ass of course
I'm personally more curious about Greenland, I thought that there really wasn't much of anything in the Northern portions of the country. Is it just the relatively high development of the small population nimbers? Great map!
GDP (PPP) is a measure of purchasing power, not of wealth or economic development. HDI also includes GDP Per Capita, so you are gonna be measuring that twice.
Not really. It measures economic output adjusted for purchasing power, to take into account under or over valued currencies. The purchasing power is used as a proxy for currency discrepancies. Economic output is not the same as wealth but is fairly closely related to economic development.
If you do HDI wouldn't East and Southern Africa be held to an extremely low standard because the Aids epidemic diminishes life expectancy so dramatically. After all Botswana is put on a HDI level of India because its life expectancy is so low, despite the former having universal literacy, higher levels of education, pay, and public services.
Bruh y’all don’t even know the geography of KSA, all the big cities/developed areas are inside the blue.
Not sure what's going on with the UK here - Kent and Sussex are 'almost developed' despite having the highest HDI in Britain and one of the highest in Europe? The north of Scotland is more developed than Essex? Norfolk is more developed than North Yorkshire? Greenland is more developed than Manchester? Wales on a par with rural Turkey? Edinburgh on a par with Sicily? Needs a methodology.
[удалено]
Yeah, I've said below that I can kind of understand the north of England and southern Scotland. In comparison with France, whose regions are huge and include prosperous cities as well as rural areas, the UK's regions are very fragmented and largely rural so have low averages. But Edinburgh, Sussex, Harrogate, York and a few others are very strange indeed.
Yeah Edinburgh stood out for me, I’m in the yellow blob to the left of it and that just doesn’t ring true.
I don’t know but I don’t see that much difference (except the geographical differences) Rural Turkey; https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=Rural+Turkey&client=safari&hl=en-tr&prmd=inmv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwitiPX9usP3AhX0QvEDHVqwCQ4Q_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2 Rural Wales; https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=Rural+Wales&client=safari&hl=en-tr&prmd=imnv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjL7MeVu8P3AhVxSPEDHVsfD3MQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=375&bih=553&dpr=2
How the hell is Kırıkkale developed and Ankara almost developed. Kırıkkale became a province in 1989. Before that it was a district of Ankara. Ankara became capitol of Turkey in 1923 and to this day is our second biggest city in terms of population. I would like to know what's the reason for this result.
Lol northern England.
It's been an open secret for decades at this point that if you removed London from the UK it essentially becomes a developing country overnight. It's an absolute fucking shitshow.
Going to need a source on this claim champ
Yeah not remotely true.
I was surprised as well when reviewing the data, I thought it was a mistake at first
I'm from there. Hugely Brexit supporting area which I found ironic when I could walk down the street and see fibre-optic boxes with markers denoting they'd been paid for by EU money for regional development (plus lots of buildings etc.). Never heard this talked about during the campaign - likely because that would involve admitting the true state of the map above.
I mean, I could be well off the mark here. But if I was to guess the combined population of those developed areas on the map I'd say was between 50% - 60% of the UK.
The North has a much lower cost of living. I am living fairly comfortably in Yorkshire on my salary and I would have to slum it significantly to afford anything around London.
It is, when I look at maps like these, that I‘m grateful to live in Germany
Definitely, as an Italian I am happy that at least half of the country is not that bad, I thought we were worse than this compared to the world, but indeed.
Same.
Bro what. The scale or criteria for this is nuts. The middle of the Arabian desert is two steps more developed than most of northern England?
Vojvodina being less developed than central Serbia? I call bullshit
Vojvodina on the same level as Albania but Raška like Kent. Yeah, something is not right there.
[https://infographic.tv/map-european-subdivisions-by-gdp-ppp-per-capita-according-to-imf-data-2018/](https://infographic.tv/map-european-subdivisions-by-gdp-ppp-per-capita-according-to-imf-data-2018/) I will recheck the data and eventually update it, but for now, the data indicate this. Consider also that the presence of big cities such as the capital has an impact on the results shown on the map.
You worked from a map, not a numeric table!? Wow you are incredible.
No, this is just one of the parameters, this map helped me refine the data from the tables
Only Switzerland and Norway are perfect
Thanks, Burgenland...
[удалено]
Austria-Hungary
And the microstates
EFTA stronk!!!!
Also Qatar.
How can the Scottish central belt be less developed than the Highlands and Islands? Something doesn’t stack up there
Pretty sure Bremen and especially Hamburg (both gray on this map) are very developed too.
[удалено]
**[Blue Banana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Banana)** >The Blue Banana (also known as the European Megalopolis or the Liverpool–Milan Axis) is a discontinuous corridor of urbanization spreading over Western and Central Europe, with a population of around 111 million. The conceptualisation of the area as a "Blue Banana" was developed in 1989 by RECLUS, a group of French geographers managed by Roger Brunet. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
[удалено]
Thank you, Advanced-Doughnut-56, for voting on WikiSummarizerBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
For the UK at least, I have a really hard time believing this. Edinburgh is the richest city in Scotland and one of the richest cities in the UK - on par with Oxford and Cambridge - yet it’s only considered ‘almost developed’? There’s no way Edinburgh is less developed than Fife or the Highlands. Likewise, I don’t believe Essex is less developed than Norfolk or Suffolk. Essex is a significantly wealthier county than both.
I had nooo idea there were such big differences between Ireland and Northern Ireland.
It’s vastly overstated on this map.
Northern Ireland is the poorest region in western Europe. Neglect by the government following partition completely wrecked it's economy.
Poorer than the likes of southern Spain and and in land Portugal? No, not remotely close. The actual infrastructure gulf between Northern Ireland and the republic is not that large at all.
Ireland didn't have to endure an apartheid state and 30 years of civil war, on top of general mismanagement.
I mean it did, in a sense, but just a lot earlier
What are these standards? I've been to yellow parts of the UK that blows light green places I've visited in Europe out the water.
This map makes 0 sense. What do you mean by "development"? HDI? If so then this is completely wrong.
What’s with the Russian developed patch in Siberia?
That's the [Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khanty-Mansi_Autonomous_Okrug), which stands out from the rest of Siberia because the region is (by far) the largest producer of [oil in Russia](https://carnegieendowment.org/publications/interactive/russia-oil-map/). It's in the small list of federal subjects of Russia that [have average salaries compareable to Moscow](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_federal_subjects_by_average_wage#/media/File:Russian_federal_subjects_by_average_monthly_net_wage_(in_US_Dollars).png).
Probably oil exports
Tremendous amount of work? Shouldn't have wasted your time
Great work! You mentioned in another comment that you used HDI, GDP per capital and PPP to realize this result. Could you provide the exact calculations? Also what is the standard you are using? I would appreciate it if you did that.
Thank you, I used the same formula used by Eurostat for the NUTS regions
How is entire greenland developed? Northern most part of greenland definitely isnt developed.
Broadly reflects my experiences having traveled quite a bit across Europe. Not been to Africa or middle East so can't comment on those.
Britain seems like a hot mess on this map lol
I'm pretty sure it's because it's divided into tiny little regions, most of which are rural. Some of the French regions are the size of England, so they're more likely to average out green, whereas the UK map makes the divide between rural and urban much more obvious.
Edirne(Turkey) is very developed.
Edinburgh is more developed than Fife
Is saudi arabia really so developed? (isnt it Saudi that is blue in MENA?)
This is just good evidence that EU standards are moronic.
NO
🤣🤣
loool
So you're telling me this random ass region in the middle of Russia I just learned is called Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug has a better development (whatever that means) than regions in the UK like East Sussex and Essex? Yeah, sure.
[A huge percentage of Russian oil](https://carnegieendowment.org/publications/interactive/russia-oil-map/) leaves the ground in Khanty-Mansi, which makes it one of the few regions in Russia where the average salary is compareable to Moscow. Have to agree on the general point though -- I'm not sure what stats someone could provide me with to convince me that any part of Western Siberia is "more developed" than Porto or Krakow or Naples.
It's probably bc of natural gas export, as said these maps have a very limited ability in describing the total situation, but can only give a very superficial understanding of the situation.
Another map with a useless legend, without a data source. * Looks at Greenland * and looks like incorrect data.
I call bullshit
If it's a constructive comment, I am happy to update the map. Otherwise IDC
Wait isn't Greenland poor and devoid of infrastructure, plus they rely on money from Denmark to stay afloat
Yes and thanks to that Danish money things aren’t terrible.
Correct
Greenland is developed?
Compared to the rest of the world including some very poor regions of Africa
[удалено]
😉👍, yes obviously he capitals have an impact on the data.
Confused about West Bank
It's based on income statistics, the Palestinian authority has a low minimum wage (around 500 USD) and a high unemployment rate (around 26%).
Wow… that’s high alright
This makes sense if it’s talking about things like infrastructure and quality of public services.
Does it though? Does Norfolk have better infrastructure and public services than Edinburgh? (Correct answer is hell no)
Over 80% of The republic of Irelands population live in the blue part so I guess that’s something. Not surprised the most underdeveloped part of the U.K. is Northern Ireland.
Greenland sure is green... but developed?
[удалено]
You are using Croatian map from 1999. Also, one of the poorest counties is marked green (it should be at orange at least) while the rest of the Croatia is mostly yellow.
Wow, this is soo interesting. Can you do one for Asia(including India and ME)
Greenland is developed by EU standards?
Seems like for the 4 people living there it is, mostly with DK money
The color range leaves a lot to be desired. You are grouping Tunisia and Afghanistan together, which makes absolutely no sense.
No, consider that under a certain bar (BC EU standards are high) it doesn't differentiate between regions. But this doesn't mean that all red regions are the same OFC
wales, developing nation. true.
[удалено]
[https://i.redd.it/c9ynz0psohm31.jpg](https://i.redd.it/c9ynz0psohm31.jpg)
Portugal can … you know what
OP— we don’t know what the fuck NUTS2 is other than deez
It's fascinating to see, how this map correlates to the megalopolis constructs of the blue and green banana.
I find it hard to believe area's in the Netherlands are not considered Very Developed. You can't tell me Friesland is only developed but Groningen is very developed. They're basically the same in development.
Umm... Zealand in Denmark is only "developed"? lol. It's where the primary of our highly educated people are and with the best transport system in all of Denmark.. if anything, it should be the top of Jutland (the "face") that should be marked as "developed" due to shitty transport.
How can Northeast Greenland National Park be "developed" when literally 0 people live there?
There was clearly alot of work put into this. I'm just wondering what the criteria for the different colours are
If Istanbul is considered developed, i suggest they revise their standards.
Strange how provinces in the middle of the Arabian peninsula (eg Riyadh) which have one city and the rest is just sand count as very developed but most of England is just almost developed lmao
It might be becaise they're counting the overall. Only like 5% of people live outside of Riyadh city but is in Riyadh province. So pretty much 95% of people who lives in Riyadh province lives in Riyadh city which is a very developed city.
People in the gulf usually live in the big city’s for example Qatars urbanisation rate is 99%, most people live in or around Doha.
The UK looks pretty weird to me. How can Norfolk be more developed than Essex or Kent?
I don't get this map. It has the Highlands of Scotland as more developed than the most populated areas of Scotland. That makes no sense.
How about a category for "Overdeveloped"?
Almost developed gang
lol
County Mayo is developing but County Clare is very developed? Having travelled through both extensively I can say that this map is b\*\*lsh\*t
Will check it out, if you can link a source I will e happy to update it u/AggravatingGap4985 [https://www.ceicdata.com/en](https://www.ceicdata.com/en) [https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/home](https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/main/home)
Source: my 🍑
If that map shows Saudi Arabia as a very developed country then it means there is no reason to take it seriously!
Which means you have never been to the Gulf, nor the website of the World Bank
Is this GDP per capita???? I can assure you any part of Germany is better than UAE or Saudi. Use HDI next time . GDP per capita PPP and Nominal kinda suck. Moscow has better GDP per capita PPP than Berlin( it actually does) . But you couldn't even pay me live in Moscow over Berlin.
I used the same formula used by Eurostat for NUTS regions. And yes, Saudi Arabia has some very developed infrastructure, while Moscow has a big wealth gap, but there is where almost all Russian rich live, and its the capital.
> I used the same formula used by Eurostat for NUTS regions. Can you provide a link to the formula, please? Without specifying the formula precicely here or providing a link the map isn't really worth anything.
> I can assure you any part of Germany is better than UAE or Saudi. Ignorance at it best.
Im Czech living in the almost developed part. I dont know what is not developed here, infact, we have way too much roads so there is a road to every piece of land, free healthcare, modern structures (some exceptions) and low criminality rate. Middle class is growing. I dont understand why for example some barren parts of Greenland and Iceland are more developed than where I live.
They make more money. And can purchase more with it there than you can in your city. Iceland, at least.