East Dunbartonshire and East Renfrewshire best places in UK for women to live in


According to a September 2017 report from the NatCen Social Research Centre for Woman’s Hour, East Dunbartonshire and East Renfrewshire are the best places in the UK for women to live in terms of a range of these quality of life indicators:

  1. Income
  2. Housing affordability
  3. Personal wellbeing
  4. Safety
  5. Education
  6. Life expectancy
  7. Environment
  8. Culture

Here is the table for all women:


  1. East Dunbartonshire
  2. East Renfrewshire
  3. West Oxfordshire


  1. Islington London
  2. Blackpool North West
  3. Corby East Midlands

Regrettably, quality of life for women in many parts of the Scottish west, in particular, are no better than in many of the denser urban areas in England. The report does not enable an averaged comparison of Scotland with England, Wales or Northern Ireland.

It’s worth also noting that with regard to culture, that these two areas benefit from proximity to Glasgow rather than, I feel sure, providing the cultural experiences themselves.


Afterthought: See this from 2016:

‘Those living in Scotland have the best quality of life in the UK, according to a new survey measuring the factors that shape Briton’s lives. According to the Social Progress Index, which assesses health, safety, access to education and individual rights, England was behind both Scotland and Northern Ireland when it came to quality of life, ahead only of Wales.’




14 thoughts on “East Dunbartonshire and East Renfrewshire best places in UK for women to live in

  1. Bugger (the Panda) September 12, 2017 / 12:31 pm

    Interesting that Edinburgh doesn’t come into the list?

    The positive statements by the R4 host this morning were gushing about Glasgow being the her favourite place.


    • johnrobertson834 September 12, 2017 / 2:18 pm

      It will do further down no doubt but i’d say Glasgow more vibrant throughout the year while Edinburgh quiet in between festivals and hogmannay do?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Bugger (the Panda) September 12, 2017 / 2:20 pm

        Awe fur coat and nae knickers


  2. Clydebuilt September 12, 2017 / 12:39 pm

    The continuing BBC agenda of encouraging English folk to move up here for a better quality of life. Yesterday they were being told that Scotland has more Psychiatrists per head than any other part of the UK.

    Building the anti independence vote.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Bugger (the Panda) September 12, 2017 / 12:40 pm

    The Baltics gambit


  4. Bugger (the Panda) September 12, 2017 / 2:22 pm

    Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania; Stalin populated them with ethnic Russians to make sure there was no independence.

    It didn’t work

    Liked by 1 person

    • Clydebuilt September 12, 2017 / 7:02 pm

      yeah but. . . They weren’t under the Westminister tackity boot. Russia only had Pravda, our lot have the BBC


  5. Contrary September 12, 2017 / 9:02 pm

    Humph, we’re talking Bearsden and Giffnock there, hardly Glasgow, except in the greater sense. I must admit to looking up the boundary areas to see if I would move to either…

    I have heard said, was it Craig M?, that the BBC are the worst (or the best?) in the world for propaganda, worse than in Russia, because at least Russia’s version is obvious propaganda, whilst our very own state broadcaster is insidious and even propagandises the lack of propaganda they do actually indulge in. That is, they tell us they don’t do it, and are trustworthy (how many times have we heard them say that, and, if you repeat it often enough,,,?) meanwhile manipulating, emotionally blackmailing and cajoling. These are my words, obviously, and I’m far too tired to try and explain what I mean properly, or eloquently.

    The baltics gambit, interesting, isn’t that what the English did in Northern Ireland? I remember modern studies at school, many many moons ago, saying that large populations were shifted to NI, though I wasn’t educated on the reasons why, but my memory can be very faulty at times. Seems to have worked there okay. For now. But then, the Russians wouldn’t have had religion involved. The Roman Empire has a lot to answer for. (That’s logical progression of thought to my mind, but see above about being too tired, so I missed out the long, laborious explanation before the final sentence.)


  6. Contrary September 13, 2017 / 9:22 pm

    Wo-man, I thought the erratic moods had made it obvious, and ,,, young?? Do they even do modern studies anymore? It’ll be a bit out of date by now, and perhaps should be called,,, history? I wasn’t aware at the time, being an ignorant country bumpkin, that it was a political subject. Anyway, all I learnt was what a new town was and that the English sent their own to populate NI. Blame the education system if I’m wrong 🙂

    Hah, anyhow, it’s the empire part of Roman that’s relevant, different if you are over here just hanging out and wanted to potter about and do your own thing (my knowledge of history is wee bit sketchy here), than if you’d come along to conquer and subjugate an existing population – the Romans didn’t actually do much colonising themselves, it was power and ruling and subjugating that they were into. Just put the holy in front of the Roman Empire bit and you start to wonder if they ever stopped, the Romans that is. They way that the rest of European countries view Roman culture and how they have each tried to emulate the Empire-building in the past (?), makes you consider just how well the Romans did influence those in their empire – the epitome of ‘civilisation’. The Germans and the scots get the honour of being barbarians, and I far prefer our version of civilisation!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s