If you ask people about whether the world as a whole is getting better or worse, most people say the latter. People are generally pessimistic about global or societal progress.

But they are typically much more optimistic about improvements in their own lives.

In the chart, you can see what share of people think they would be higher or lower on the “Cantril Ladder” five years in the future. The “Cantril Ladder” asks people to rate their lives on a scale from 0 (the worst possible life) to 10 (the best). Here, respondents were asked to rate where they are now, and where they think they’d be in five years.

As you can see, most people say they will be higher on the ladder across a wide range of countries. They expect their lives to improve.

Of course, this is not true of everyone, everywhere, but these results tend to support the argument that people are generally “individually optimistic, but societally pessimistic”.

Explore more data on happiness and life satisfaction across the world →

Where you are born and stay for much of your life is a strong predictor of how long you’re likely to live. The chart shows the differences in period life expectancy across continents.

Average life expectancy has converged to a fairly narrow band between 75 and 80 years in North America, Oceania, Europe, Latin America, and Asia. Africa stands out: its average life expectancy is 64 years, over a decade lower than any other region.

This gap reflects several overlapping factors: high rates of child and maternal deaths, a heavy burden of infectious diseases such as malaria, HIV/AIDS, and tuberculosis, limited access to quality healthcare and infrastructure, and high levels of poverty.

Despite this, life expectancy in Africa has risen by almost two decades since 1974.

Explore life expectancy for individual countries →

As this chart shows, two centuries ago, about one in three children in Sweden died before they were five years old.

Since then, the child mortality rate in Sweden has declined to 0.3%.

South Korea achieved a similar reduction much faster. This is often the case: the first countries to improve living conditions usually needed much longer than some of those countries catching up later — the latter can learn from what worked elsewhere.

As someone born and living in the United Kingdom, one thing I notice when visiting other countries in Western Europe is how much more common smoking is elsewhere.

This is not just my imagination; this anecdotal evidence is backed up by the data on smoking rates.

In the chart, you can see the share of adults who say they currently use tobacco products (mostly cigarettes, but chewing tobacco is also included) across a range of countries in Western Europe.

The differences are large. In France and Greece, around one-third of adults use tobacco, more than twice the rate in countries like Denmark, the UK, and Norway.

Given that smoking is one of the leading risk factors for disease burden and premature death, these differences matter a lot for public health.

Explore how smoking rates compare in other parts of the world →

Electricity access in Bangladesh has transformed over my lifetime: from around 15% of the population 30 years ago, to 99% today.

But progress on clean cooking fuels has lagged far behind. Fewer than 30% of households cook with gas, electricity, or improved stoves; most still rely on wood, crop waste, or straw. The chart shows that clean fuel usage is well below the levels reached by its Asian neighbors.

The costs are huge. Using biomass for cooking damages forests and harms health because people breathe in smoke and particulates. In Bangladesh, deaths from indoor air pollution are higher than the average in low-income countries, even though those countries usually have worse overall health. Indoor air pollution is close to being the country’s largest risk factor for early death.

Why has progress been so slow? The main barrier is economic. Bangladesh produces very little liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), relying instead on volatile imports. Its lack of domestic distribution networks also pushes prices, making clean cooking fuels expensive for consumers. Some of Bangladesh’s neighbors — like India — have given subsidies to help households switch; Bangladesh has not, making clean cooking fuels less affordable.

Cultural factors also matter. Biomass is often seen as “free” and convenient, and families are used to traditional cookstoves and the flavors they generate. They might be unaware of how damaging this pollution is to their health and skeptical of the damage that alternatives such as LPG could do.

Read my colleague Max Roser’s article — “The world’s energy problem” — for a global perspective on this issue →

At the turn of the millennium, France had one of the lowest-carbon electricity grids in Europe (and the world). While countries like the UK and Germany emitted well over 500 grams of CO₂ per kilowatt-hour of electricity, France emitted just 80 grams — six times less. This was mostly thanks to nuclear power.

In the 1980s and 1990s, France rapidly expanded its power grid, and almost all of this growth came from new nuclear plants. The chart shows this: in the 1980s alone, nuclear power grew from 60 to over 300 terawatt-hours.

By 2000, nuclear power supplied almost 80% of the country’s electricity, making it much cleaner than its neighbors, mostly relying on coal and gas.

France still has one of the cleanest grids in Europe, although it has added very little nuclear power in the 21st century. It has opened just one plant in the last 25 years, in Flamanville, following long delays and cost overruns.

In the last decade, solar and wind power have grown the most.

See what countries produce nuclear energy, and how their generation has changed over time →

The Northern White rhino is on the brink of extinction. In the chart, you can see the collapse of this beautiful animal's population as a result of poaching, habitat loss, and conflict.

Now, only two individuals are left — Najin and her daughter, Fatu. Without males, the subspecies is “functionally extinct” and cannot rebuild its population naturally.

Scientists, though, offer some hope of bringing the rhino back through assisted reproduction. Eggs from Najin and Fatu have been fertilized with preserved sperm from dead male rhinos to produce viable embryos. Since neither Najin nor Fatu can carry a pregnancy, the plan is to use a female Southern White rhino — the closest subspecies — as a surrogate, to carry the embryo through to birth.

In 2023, a surrogate called Curra became pregnant, showing that the method works. Sadly, she died of a bacterial infection during pregnancy.

Scientists plan to try again and are also exploring other breakthrough reproduction treatments to save the Northern White rhino before it’s lost forever.

Read my article on why large mammals are so threatened with extinction →