The most and least prosperous places to live in the UK

New study reveals there's more to a 'prosperous' life than money.
Wolverhampton has been named the least ‘prosperous’ place to live in the UK, in a new study by the Legatum Institute thinktank.
The Institute has published its first ever ‘Geography of Prosperity’ Index, which is based on both the average income per person and a happiness score.
It revealed a number of interesting trends, including the fact that Scotland beats England’s level of average prosperity.
However, both are beaten overall by Northern Ireland, as a result of “high life-satisfaction” scores. Three areas in Northern Ireland – West/South Northern Ireland, Outer Belfast and East of Northern Ireland – make it into the top 10 when it comes to life-satisfaction. Interestingly though it’s the second poorest of the four nations of the UK, with an average income of just £17,900. Clearly there is more to happiness than just money!
The study uses local GDP figures and Office for National Statistics data to rank a total of 170 areas across the UK.
The MOST prosperous places to live
Here’s how the top five shape up:
#1 - Hammersmith & Fulham and Kensington & Chelsea
#2 - Westminster
#3 - Wandsworth
#4 - Camden and the City of London
#5 - Outer Hebrides
The LEAST prosperous places to live
And at the other end of the spectrum, the least prosperous places in the UK are:
#1 - Wolverhampton
#2 - Sandwell (West Midlands)
#3 - Blackpool
#4 - Liverpool
#5 - East Derbyshire
Sian Hansen, executive director of the Legatum Institute, said that the index shows that prosperity is about more than just wealth. She added: “Some of the most prosperous areas of the country are those where, regardless of their income, people have the opportunity to lead healthy, fulfilling and prosperous lives.”
Cut the cost of your mortgage with loveMONEY
Our best money-saving articles!
Most Recent
Comments
-
Is it any wonder that Scotland beats England in level of prosperity? From UK taxes and under the Barnett formula Scotland received £10,152 per head, while England received £8,529 per head (2012-2013). I love Scotland and lived a good chunk of my life there (and paid taxes there and now pay taxes in England) but these discrepancies anger me. What Scotland benefits from the English most definitely suffer from. Time to end the Barnett formula which has outlived its purpose, particularly now that Scotland is moving inexorably toward some form of independence. Just want to add that I am neither English nor Scottish!
REPORT This comment has been reported.
Do you want to comment on this article? You need to be signed in for this feature
27 October 2015