- Land market and housing
- Media, communication and languages
- Living conditions and well-being
- Employment and labour market
- Population, demography and census
- Migration
- Enterprise
- Finance
- Luxembourg
- Longitudinal data
- Individual
- Household
- Choice : 31
- Education, teaching & training
- Migration
- Luxembourg
- Survey data
- Individual
- Choice : 3
- Land market and housing
- Transport and mobility
- Health
- Employment and labour market
- Population, demography and census
- Psychology
- Luxembourg
- Survey data
- Individual
- Choice : 3
Panel Socio-Economique Liewen zu Lëtzebuerg III (PSELL3)
Data by theme
Data by country
Data type
Data unit
Socio-Economic Panel of Liewen zu Lëtzebuerg III (PSELL3)
Variable keywords :
PSELL 3 (Panel Socio-Economique Liewen zu Lëtzebuerg) is a survey conducted amongst people and households residing in the Grand Duchy with the aim of gaining an understanding of their living conditions. The socioeconomic panel was first constituted in 2003 and is used to build and test social and economic indicators and assess the impact of economic and social policies on the population's living conditions, particularly in terms of income, work, social security, education, health, housing, transport, consumption and savings.
Pratiques culturelles 2009 (Culture 2009)
Data by theme
Data by country
Data type
Data unit
Cultural practices - 2009
Variable keywords :
From September to December 2009, LISER (CEPS/INSTEAD when the survey was conducted) carried out the second large-scale cultural survey commissioned by the Luxembourg Ministry of Culture. The topics covered include sociocultural leisure pursuits, reading habits, use of cultural venues, use of media, etc. Analysis of the data provided a picture of cultural practices in 2009 that could be compared with the first survey, conducted in 1999, to see the changes that had occurred. A total of 2,000 people aged 15 or over, seen as representing Luxembourg society, were questioned (note that the panel grew, as it comprised only 1,600 people in 1999). Questions were asked about every aspect of their cultural practice: museums, cinema, theatre, literature, written and audiovisual press, live and recorded entertainment, and music, including their 'mode of consumption' (frequency, weekdays, weekends, or holidays, for example) and, lastly, about their overall satisfaction with what was available in Luxembourg in this respect.
Assurance dépendance (enquête de satisfaction)
Data by theme
Data by country
Data type
Data unit
Pension insurance (satisfaction survey)
Variable keywords :
Set up in 1999, the care allowance is the most recent branch of social security. Care is defined as an important, regular need for third party assistance with fulfilling essential needs. The care allowance is intended to cover the expenses incurred by enlisting third party assistance.
Beneficiaries of the care allowance are divided into two groups, depending on their place of residence: at home, or in a care facility. The services received by beneficiaries living in care facilities are provided by the facility’s care staff, while care at home is provided by an informal caregiver (a family member or friend), and/or by care workers belonging to a network of carer providers.
In its fifth year, the Care Division’s Assessment and Orientation Team wanted to take stock of its work for the first time, through a satisfaction survey of beneficiaries receiving care at home. The survey was carried out in 2006, delivered face-to-face in the beneficiaries’ homes, and completed by 83% of the sample (a representative sample of 1500 beneficiaries). The survey covered the different steps of the process of obtaining care-insurance (procedures, difficulties, and satisfaction, from requesting the application to receiving the “decision letter”). The survey also touched on the services provided, covering, for example, the quality of care, the quality of contact, and treatment by the network.
With regard to the survey’s initial results, 84% of beneficiaries report being satisfied or very satisfied with the way the Team handled their case, the way their application was processed, as well as with its services. 84% of beneficiaries report being “satisfied” or “very satisfied”. Concerning these services delivered, satisfaction was slightly lower, but remains very high: 72% of beneficiaries report being “satisfied” or “very satisfied”.