Sverige FYI› Rankings› Residents' view› Living Environment
Municipalities where most residents value access to nature 2025
Statistics Sweden asks residents how important different things are in their living environment, and closeness to nature and parks is one of the options. This list ranks municipalities by how many consider it important — it shows where residents value nature most, not where nature is actually closest. Of the 159 municipalities surveyed in 2025, the national average share calling it important is 98%.
Source: Statistics Sweden, ME0003 Last updated: 2025
98%
national average 2025
159 / 290
municipalities took part
99.5%
highest · Vaxholm
Differences are shown in percentage points (pp).
| # | Municipality | Share considering it important | vs national average | Trend | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vaxholm Stockholms län | 99.5% | better than the national average +2 | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 2 | Nykvarn Stockholms län | 99.3% | better than the national average +2 | +0.7 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 3 | Danderyd Stockholms län | 99.2% | better than the national average +2 | +0.8 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 3 | Flen Södermanlands län | 99.2% | better than the national average +2 | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 3 | Lomma Skåne län | 99.2% | better than the national average +2 | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 3 | Salem Stockholms län | 99.2% | better than the national average +2 | −0.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 3 | Värmdö Stockholms län | 99.2% | better than the national average +2 | +1.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 8 | Österåker Stockholms län | 99.1% | better than the national average +2 | +1.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 9 | Mörbylånga Kalmar län | 99.0% | better than the national average +2 | +1.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 10 | Aneby Jönköpings län | 98.9% | better than the national average +1 | +0.8 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 10 | Boxholm Östergötlands län | 98.9% | better than the national average +1 | −0.3 (2023→2025) worsened | → |
| 10 | Håbo Uppsala län | 98.9% | better than the national average +1 | +1.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 13 | Gnesta Södermanlands län | 98.8% | better than the national average +1 | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 13 | Hässleholm Skåne län | 98.8% | better than the national average +1 | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 13 | Lidingö Stockholms län | 98.8% | better than the national average +1 | +1.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 13 | Oxelösund Södermanlands län | 98.8% | better than the national average +1 | too few years | → |
| 13 | Sölvesborg Blekinge län | 98.8% | better than the national average +1 | +1.5 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 18 | Ale Västra Götalands län | 98.7% | better than the national average +1 | +0.3 (2023→2025) improved | → |
| 18 | Båstad Skåne län | 98.7% | better than the national average +1 | +2.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 18 | Karlstad Värmlands län | 98.7% | better than the national average +1 | +0.7 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 18 | Örebro Örebro län | 98.7% | better than the national average +1 | +0.5 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 22 | Svenljunga Västra Götalands län | 98.6% | better than the national average +1 | +1.1 (2023→2025) improved | → |
| 22 | Trosa Södermanlands län | 98.6% | better than the national average +1 | +0.7 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 24 | Ekerö Stockholms län | 98.5% | better than the national average +1 | −1.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 24 | Huddinge Stockholms län | 98.5% | better than the national average +1 | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 24 | Täby Stockholms län | 98.5% | better than the national average +1 | +0.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 24 | Vellinge Skåne län | 98.5% | better than the national average +1 | +2.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 28 | Kinda Östergötlands län | 98.4% | better than the national average +1 | +0.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 28 | Robertsfors Västerbottens län | 98.4% | better than the national average +1 | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 28 | Vallentuna Stockholms län | 98.4% | better than the national average +1 | +0.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 31 | Berg Jämtlands län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | +2.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 31 | Härnösand Västernorrlands län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | +2.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 31 | Knivsta Uppsala län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | −0.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 31 | Mullsjö Jönköpings län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | +1.4 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 31 | Sundbyberg Stockholms län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | +0.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 31 | Söderköping Östergötlands län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | too few years | → |
| 31 | Älvkarleby Uppsala län | 98.3% | better than the national average +1 | too few years | → |
| 38 | Gagnef Dalarnas län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | +1.2 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 38 | Götene Västra Götalands län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | −0.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 38 | Kävlinge Skåne län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | +0.5 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 38 | Malmö Skåne län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | +0.5 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 38 | Mölndal Västra Götalands län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | −0.3 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 38 | Orsa Dalarnas län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | +1.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 38 | Tyresö Stockholms län | 98.2% | better than the national average +1 | +0.5 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 45 | Borgholm Kalmar län | 98.1% | better than the national average +1 | +2.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 45 | Lund Skåne län | 98.1% | better than the national average +1 | +0.7 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 47 | Askersund Örebro län | 98.0% | at national average | too few years | → |
| 47 | Forshaga Värmlands län | 98.0% | at national average | −1.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 47 | Oskarshamn Kalmar län | 98.0% | at national average | +1.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 47 | Varberg Hallands län | 98.0% | at national average | −0.9 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 47 | Växjö Kronobergs län | 98.0% | at national average | +2.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 52 | Klippan Skåne län | 97.9% | at national average | +0.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 52 | Mark Västra Götalands län | 97.9% | at national average | too few years | → |
| 52 | Nynäshamn Stockholms län | 97.9% | at national average | +0.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 52 | Ragunda Jämtlands län | 97.9% | at national average | +2.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Botkyrka Stockholms län | 97.8% | at national average | +0.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Katrineholm Södermanlands län | 97.8% | at national average | +3.6 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Linköping Östergötlands län | 97.8% | at national average | +2.5 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Lycksele Västerbottens län | 97.8% | at national average | −0.9 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 56 | Perstorp Skåne län | 97.8% | at national average | ±0.0 (2021→2025) unchanged | → |
| 56 | Storuman Västerbottens län | 97.8% | at national average | −0.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 56 | Svedala Skåne län | 97.8% | at national average | +0.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Säffle Värmlands län | 97.8% | at national average | +0.6 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Söderhamn Gävleborgs län | 97.8% | at national average | +2.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 56 | Trollhättan Västra Götalands län | 97.8% | at national average | −0.5 (2023→2025) worsened | → |
| 66 | Bromölla Skåne län | 97.7% | at national average | −0.4 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 66 | Karlskrona Blekinge län | 97.7% | at national average | +3.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 66 | Lindesberg Örebro län | 97.7% | at national average | +0.1 (2023→2025) improved | → |
| 66 | Ludvika Dalarnas län | 97.7% | at national average | +1.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 66 | Lysekil Västra Götalands län | 97.7% | at national average | −0.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 66 | Ydre Östergötlands län | 97.7% | at national average | too few years | → |
| 66 | Älmhult Kronobergs län | 97.7% | at national average | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 73 | Herrljunga Västra Götalands län | 97.6% | at national average | +1.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 73 | Jokkmokk Norrbottens län | 97.6% | at national average | +2.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 73 | Ronneby Blekinge län | 97.6% | at national average | −0.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 73 | Sjöbo Skåne län | 97.6% | at national average | +0.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 73 | Skara Västra Götalands län | 97.6% | at national average | +2.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 73 | Tranås Jönköpings län | 97.6% | at national average | +1.2 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 73 | Ystad Skåne län | 97.6% | at national average | +1.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Bengtsfors Västra Götalands län | 97.5% | at national average | −0.6 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 80 | Boden Norrbottens län | 97.5% | at national average | +1.7 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Emmaboda Kalmar län | 97.5% | at national average | +0.7 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Falun Dalarnas län | 97.5% | at national average | +0.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Järfälla Stockholms län | 97.5% | at national average | +0.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Jönköping Jönköpings län | 97.5% | at national average | −0.3 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 80 | Mjölby Östergötlands län | 97.5% | at national average | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Nordmaling Västerbottens län | 97.5% | at national average | +1.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Norsjö Västerbottens län | 97.5% | at national average | +0.9 (2023→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Rättvik Dalarnas län | 97.5% | at national average | +0.6 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 80 | Upplands-Bro Stockholms län | 97.5% | at national average | −0.4 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 80 | Östersund Jämtlands län | 97.5% | at national average | −1.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 92 | Kiruna Norrbottens län | 97.4% | at national average | +0.2 (2023→2025) improved | → |
| 92 | Markaryd Kronobergs län | 97.4% | at national average | +3.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 92 | Skurup Skåne län | 97.4% | at national average | +1.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 92 | Sunne Värmlands län | 97.4% | at national average | −0.1 (2022→2025) worsened | → |
| 96 | Essunga Västra Götalands län | 97.3% | at national average | −0.7 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 96 | Hallstahammar Västmanlands län | 97.3% | at national average | +0.7 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 96 | Ockelbo Gävleborgs län | 97.3% | at national average | −1.1 (2023→2025) worsened | → |
| 96 | Umeå Västerbottens län | 97.3% | at national average | +1.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 96 | Värnamo Jönköpings län | 97.3% | at national average | −0.7 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 101 | Göteborg Västra Götalands län | 97.2% | at national average | −0.7 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 101 | Kalmar Kalmar län | 97.2% | at national average | −0.3 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 101 | Lessebo Kronobergs län | 97.2% | at national average | +1.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 101 | Ljungby Kronobergs län | 97.2% | at national average | −1.3 (2023→2025) worsened | → |
| 101 | Nybro Kalmar län | 97.2% | at national average | −0.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 101 | Strängnäs Södermanlands län | 97.2% | at national average | +0.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 101 | Svalöv Skåne län | 97.2% | at national average | too few years | → |
| 101 | Säter Dalarnas län | 97.2% | at national average | +0.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 101 | Tanum Västra Götalands län | 97.2% | at national average | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 101 | Trelleborg Skåne län | 97.2% | at national average | +1.5 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 101 | Uppsala Uppsala län | 97.2% | at national average | −0.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 101 | Älvdalen Dalarnas län | 97.2% | at national average | +2.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 101 | Ängelholm Skåne län | 97.2% | at national average | ±0.0 (2021→2025) unchanged | → |
| 101 | Östhammar Uppsala län | 97.2% | at national average | +0.6 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 115 | Sala Västmanlands län | 97.1% | at national average | +0.9 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 115 | Timrå Västernorrlands län | 97.1% | at national average | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 115 | Vännäs Västerbottens län | 97.1% | at national average | −0.3 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 118 | Avesta Dalarnas län | 97.0% | at national average | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 118 | Gullspång Västra Götalands län | 97.0% | at national average | −0.4 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 118 | Helsingborg Skåne län | 97.0% | at national average | −0.6 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 118 | Nyköping Södermanlands län | 97.0% | at national average | −1.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 118 | Ulricehamn Västra Götalands län | 97.0% | at national average | −0.8 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 123 | Enköping Uppsala län | 96.9% | worse than the national average −1 | +1.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 123 | Heby Uppsala län | 96.9% | worse than the national average −1 | +0.1 (2022→2025) improved | → |
| 123 | Uddevalla Västra Götalands län | 96.9% | worse than the national average −1 | −0.8 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 123 | Västervik Kalmar län | 96.9% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 127 | Lekeberg Örebro län | 96.8% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.0 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 127 | Mariestad Västra Götalands län | 96.8% | worse than the national average −1 | +0.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 127 | Örkelljunga Skåne län | 96.8% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 130 | Borås Västra Götalands län | 96.7% | worse than the national average −1 | −2.7 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 130 | Hudiksvall Gävleborgs län | 96.7% | worse than the national average −1 | −0.6 (2022→2025) worsened | → |
| 130 | Kristinehamn Värmlands län | 96.7% | worse than the national average −1 | +1.9 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 130 | Lilla Edet Västra Götalands län | 96.7% | worse than the national average −1 | −0.7 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 130 | Åre Jämtlands län | 96.7% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.5 (2022→2025) worsened | → |
| 135 | Gislaved Jönköpings län | 96.6% | worse than the national average −1 | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 135 | Kungsbacka Hallands län | 96.6% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.6 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 135 | Tjörn Västra Götalands län | 96.6% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.0 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 135 | Åstorp Skåne län | 96.6% | worse than the national average −1 | −0.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 139 | Arvidsjaur Norrbottens län | 96.5% | worse than the national average −1 | +1.8 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 139 | Gävle Gävleborgs län | 96.5% | worse than the national average −1 | −0.6 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 139 | Lidköping Västra Götalands län | 96.5% | worse than the national average −1 | +1.3 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 142 | Köping Västmanlands län | 96.4% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.6 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 143 | Sundsvall Västernorrlands län | 96.3% | worse than the national average −1 | +0.1 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 144 | Vetlanda Jönköpings län | 96.2% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.0 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 145 | Gnosjö Jönköpings län | 96.1% | worse than the national average −1 | −0.5 (2023→2025) worsened | → |
| 145 | Motala Östergötlands län | 96.1% | worse than the national average −1 | −1.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 145 | Vara Västra Götalands län | 96.1% | worse than the national average −1 | +0.4 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 148 | Södertälje Stockholms län | 96.0% | worse than the national average −1 | +1.2 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 149 | Falköping Västra Götalands län | 95.9% | worse than the national average −2 | −0.5 (2022→2025) worsened | → |
| 149 | Staffanstorp Skåne län | 95.9% | worse than the national average −2 | −1.0 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 151 | Eskilstuna Södermanlands län | 95.7% | worse than the national average −2 | −1.4 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 151 | Luleå Norrbottens län | 95.7% | worse than the national average −2 | +1.0 (2021→2025) improved | → |
| 151 | Piteå Norrbottens län | 95.7% | worse than the national average −2 | −0.9 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 154 | Gällivare Norrbottens län | 95.6% | worse than the national average −2 | −0.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 155 | Skövde Västra Götalands län | 95.4% | worse than the national average −2 | −2.5 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 156 | Storfors Värmlands län | 94.9% | worse than the national average −3 | too few years | → |
| 157 | Hallsberg Örebro län | 94.7% | worse than the national average −3 | −3.2 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 158 | Landskrona Skåne län | 94.5% | worse than the national average −3 | −2.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
| 159 | Haparanda Norrbottens län | 93.2% | worse than the national average −4 | −4.1 (2021→2025) worsened | → |
Does not take part in the survey (131)
131 municipalities have no responses for 2025 and cannot be ranked.
Alingsås Alvesta Älvsbyn Åmål Ånge Arboga Årjäng Arjeplog Arvika Åsele Åtvidaberg Bjurholm Bjuv Bollebygd Bollnäs Borlänge Bräcke Burlöv Dals-Ed Degerfors Dorotea Eda Eksjö Eslöv Fagersta Falkenberg Färgelanda Filipstad Finspång Gotland Grästorp Grums Habo Hagfors Hällefors Halmstad Hammarö Haninge Härjedalen Härryda Hedemora Hjo Hofors Höganäs Högsby Höör Hörby Hultsfred Hylte Kalix Karlsborg Karlshamn Karlskoga Kil Kramfors Kristianstad Krokom Kumla Kungälv Kungsör Laholm Laxå Leksand Lerum Ljusdal Ljusnarsberg Malå Malung-Sälen Mellerud Mönsterås Mora Munkedal Munkfors Nacka Nässjö Nora Norberg Nordanstig Norrköping Norrtälje Öckerö Ödeshög Olofström Örnsköldsvik Orust Osby Östra Göinge Ovanåker Överkalix Övertorneå Pajala Partille Sandviken Sävsjö Sigtuna Simrishamn Skellefteå Skinnskatteberg Smedjebacken Sollefteå Sollentuna Solna Sorsele Sotenäs Stenungsund Stockholm Strömstad Strömsund Surahammar Tibro Tidaholm Tierp Tingsryd Tomelilla Töreboda Torsås Torsby Tranemo Upplands Väsby Uppvidinge Vadstena Vaggeryd Valdemarsvik Vänersborg Vansbro Vårgårda Västerås Vilhelmina Vimmerby Vindeln Vingåker
All 290 municipalities · 159 took part in the 2025 survey
Best result by year
View on the map
See how the results are distributed geographically on the map