To my American ear, in your examples, there is absolutely no difference between the two forms, which, in fact, give the same information. This is possible with the verb "live" because it's a dynamic verb that lends itself to either a continuous or a perfect interpretation. This would be true of any such verb which designates ongoing action, as opposed to resultative verbs, where the perfect would express the result or completion of the action:
I've been dating her for ten months.
I've dated her for ten months.
In the southern states, you sometimes hear "know" used like this in reference to people:
How long have you been knowing him? (=southern)
How long have you known him?
With resultative verbs, there would be two different interpretations:
I've been planning this event for five years. (=started five years ago
and still planning it)
I've planned this event for five years. (=every year, the same yearly
event)
The Simple Past is used for actions that were completed at a specific point in time. The following sentence does not infer that the speaker may still be living there.
He lived there for 10 years
Does he live there now? No, he doesn't.
The present perfect is often used when something started in the past and is still connected with the present. For example,
Scarlett Johansson has portrayed the role of Black Widow since 2010
The Present Perfect Continuous could also be used but it could be slightly ambiguous.
Scarlett Johansson has been portraying the role of Black Widow since 2010
This could mean that Johansson has played the role of Black Widow, without interruption, for eight years. This could be possible in a very long Broadway or West End theatre production, so without pre-existing knowledge about the role or further context we would not know if the role was played in movies or in theatres. It just so happens that Johansson has played the role of Black Widow in six movies and is expected to reprise the role in 2019.
In the OP's question, the Present Perfect and Present Perfect Continuous are often interchangeable and there is little difference in meaning. However, for actions that extend for longer periods, Present Perfect is usually preferred. Compare:
- I've been living in LA for 10 years
- I've lived in LA for 10 years
- I've lived in LA all my life
The PPC in sentence 1 suggests that the arrangement is a temporary ongoing one whereas sentence 2 could suggest that the speaker no longer lives in LA, this ambiguity is removed in sentence 3 because of the specific time reference used: “all my life”.
Another way to remove the ambiguity of sentence 2 (He has lived in X for 10 years) is to rewrite it as
- He has lived there for the last ten years
In this sentence, the act of living in a specific location began 10 years ago and continues to the present day
Best Answer
The two are interchangeable if you intend a continuative† reading: that you have lived in Europe for the two years leading to the present moment.
But if you intend an existential† reading, signifying that you lived in Europe for two years on at least one occasion in the past, you cannot use the progressive construction:
†For a somewhat more detailed description of these distinct uses of the perfect, see What is the perfect, and how should I use it?, especially §3.2 Pragmatic meaning.
∗ marks an utterance as unacceptable