A household’s housing situation and living conditions depend on its financial means but this is not the only contributing factor. This indicator reveals an aspect of quality of life that may not be the same for each group of the population. Physical, spatial and material comfort is an indicator of integration, especially as it has an influence on the risk of social exclusion.
In 2019, the population from the second or subsequent generations with a migration background was 1.6 times more likely to face one or more aspects of housing deprivation than those without a migration background (20% compared with 13%). The first generation has an intermediate rate of housing deprivation (17%).
In 2019, the rate of persons living in housing located in a neighbourhood that was considered to be too noisy was significantly higher among people with a migration background (21%) than those without a migration background (16%).
From 2014 to 2019, the share of people confronted with aspects of housing deprivation decreased in the population without a migration background and in the population with a migration background from the 1st generation, whereas it increased among the 2nd or subsequent generations.
Between 2014 and 2019, the share of people living in housing located in a neighbourhood considered too noisy decreased in all population groups distinguished by migration status (-1 percentage point in the population without a migration background; -3 percentage points in the 1st generation and -4 percentage points in the 2nd or subsequent generation).
The population with a migration background was significantly more likely to be subject to aspects of housing deprivation than the population without a migration background in Espace Mittelland (24% compared with 14%), the major region Zurich (19% compared with 13%) and in Eastern Switzerland (17% compared with 8%). In the other major regions, the differences between the population with and without a migration background are not statistically significant or the data is not presented due to a too small number of observation.
As far as the proportion of people living in a neighbourhood that is considered as being too noisy is concerned, only the major region of Zurich and Eastern Switzerland showed statistically significant differences between those with and without a migration background (respectively 24% compared with 18% and 28% compared with 12%). In Ticino, although the difference is not significant, the opposite trend is observed with a higher rate in the population without a migration background compared to the population with a migration background.
The indicator uses two criteria to analyse housing conditions:
1) The indicator is defined as the percentage of the population faced with at least one of the following four major housing problems:
• damp housing (leaking roof; damp walls, floors or foundations; rotten window frames or floors),
• too dark,
• no shower or bath,
• no private indoor flushing toilet.
2) Percentage of persons living in a noisy neighbourhood.
A single member of the household was asked these questions and the answers are imputed to all household members. For households comprised of several adults with a different migration status, the same value calculated for the entire household is used for persons with and without a migration background.
Following changes to the survey framework and improvements in the weighting model, results from 2014 on can no longer be directly compared with those from previous years (series break).