Estonian Human Development Report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 5.4.3. Young people’s assessment of the importance of brands and their effect on popularity (%) Assessed as important or very important Girls Boys Importance for the respondent in the case of clothes 38 55 Importance for the respondent in the case of sports clothes and equipment 41 56 Importance in the respondent’s school in the case of clothes 55 55 Importance in the respondent’s school in the case of sports clothes and equipment 56 55 Importance of clothes among the respondent’s friends 50 50 Importance of sports clothes and equipment among the respondent’s friends Effect of clothes and shoes bearing trendy and wellknown brands on the popularity of boys Effect of clothes and shoes bearing trendy and wellknown brands on the popularity of girls Source: Noorte elustiil 2007 42 56 48 61 58 61 Figure 5.4.4. Percentage of children aged 6–17 who use the Internet and the percentage of parents who often discuss online activities with their children (percentage of parents with children who use the Internet) in EU countries 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 73 63 50 62 61 87 77 75 72 69 57 47 61 84 94 93 93 93 91 91 89 88 88 88 86 84 83 81 81 78 77 76 75 75 75 71 70 70 68 50 50 45 59 be of high quality and durable (93%). Boys (70%) believed it to be important that the purchased product be the latest model and also widespread. Girls attribute more importance to buying school supplies than boys (77% and 50%, respectively). Better prices are not considered very important by either boys (37%) or girls (32%). Both girls and boys also consider having the opportunity to make their own choice very important in the case of buying clothes, since clothes have to match their style and look good (both criteria are considered important or very important by more than 90% of boys and girls). School pupils also stressed the importance of their clothes being comfortable, fashionable and trendy (all of these characteristics are considered important or very important by over 70% of the respondents). Brands are allegedly 52 74 62 85 78 74 66 85 62 80 79 80 77 Finland The Netherlands Estonia Denmark Sweden United Kingdom Poland Malta Slovenia Hungary Lithuania Czech Republic Latvia Ireland Bulgaria Slovakia Austria France Germany Luxembourg EU 27 Belgium Spain Romania Portugal Cyprus Greece Italy Children’s Internet use Source: Flash Eurobarometer 248, 2008 Frequent Internet-related discussions with children less important (only 21% of the girls as opposed to 51% of the boys consider brands to be important or very important). At the same time, being affected by brands is usually something that people do not want to admit openly. Furthermore, young people are often unable to reflexively analyze the impact of commercial symbols on their behaviour. “My buying decisions are not affected by advertising and brands” is simply the socially desirable response and should therefore be treated with reservation. More general assessments of the importance of brands in different situations are provided in Table 5.4.3. Boys consider brands to be personally more important than girls (respectively, 55% and 38% in the case of clothes). It is interesting that girls do not attribute as much importance to brands with regard to the popularity of boys (48% in the case of boys and 58% in the case of girls), while for boys brands affect the popularity of both genders equally (both 61%). So, contrary to the stereotype that might characterize brands primarily as the girls’ domain, they actually play an important role in the values of Estonian boys. The role of the brands is also connected to school violence arising from clothes and appearance. According to the 2005 student survey Noored ja meedia (Youth and the Media) (N=948), 49% of the respondents reported that someone in their class had been bullied due to their clothes or appearance. Of the entire sample, 28% (but a total of 38% of the pupils of Russian language schools) stated that nobody had been bullied due to their clothes or appearance, while 23% said that someone was constantly being bullied. A shift occurs when young people reach the age of 16: nearly 50% of secondary school pupils said that nobody in their class had ever been bullied as a result of their appearance (see Kalmus & Keller 2008). Internet use of children and youth According to the international comparison data for recent years, Estonian children are among the leaders in Europe in terms of the percentage of Internet users. The Flash Eurobarometer 248 survey (N=12750) conducted among parents living in EU member states in October 2008 indicates that 93% of all Estonian children aged 6–17 use the Internet. In terms of this indicator, Estonia shares the 2 nd – 4 th place among 27 EU countries with the Netherlands and Denmark, being outpaced by Finland by only one percentage point (Figure 5.4.4.). With regard to parent awareness and supervision, Estonia remains at the bottom of the pan-European rankings, however. For example, only 50% of Estonian parents engage in discussions with their children regarding the latter’s online activities (the EU average is 74%). Figure 5.4.4. demonstrates that in terms of the relative indifference and liberal approach to their children’s online activities, Estonian parents differ not only from their counterparts in Southern European countries (where the level of children’s Internet use is relatively low and most parents with children who use the Internet talk to them often about online activities), but also from those in the Nordic countries and the United Kingdom where the level of Internet use among children is high, just like in Estonia. The attitudes and practices of Estonian parents are comparable primarily to those of parents in the other countries of “new” Europe. For example, Estonia, along with the Czech Republic and Slovakia, has the lowest percent- | 118
age of parents (61%, 62%, and 63%, respectively) who have forbidden their children to communicate in online environments with people they do not know in real life (the EU average is 83%, while in Ireland the percentage is 96%). The parents’ extremely liberal approach would be justified, on certain conditions, only if the children’s awareness of the dangers related to Internet use were high and their level of risk behaviour low. Very few studies have been conducted in Estonia on this subject, with only Lapsed ja internet (Children and the Internet), a survey conducted by Turu-uuringute AS in 2006, and Eurobarometer 2005 providing data that can be compared with other countries. The following information is noteworthy among the gathered data: • Among Estonian children aged 6–14, 31% have experienced teasing, verbal abuse and bullying while using the Internet (the European average is 15–20%; Hasebrink et al. 2008: 29); • in communicating with strangers in online chat rooms or through communication programs, 19% of Estonian children have felt disturbed by something (for example, the stranger’s wish to meet them in real life or know their name, the stranger’s request for their home address or photo); • among children aged 11–14, 13% have actually met strangers they became acquainted with in a chat room or through a communication program (the average for European teenagers is 9%, Hasebrink et al. 2008: 30); • according to their parents, 58% of children under 18 who use the Internet have come into contact with potentially harmful web content (the European average is 31%); • according to their parents, only 44% of Estonian children know how to behave when encountering an unpleasant situation online (the European average is 66%). Taking into account the percentage of Internet users among children under 18 and the results of studies of online risk behaviour, the international research network EU Kids Online has presented a classification of European countries that belong to the network (see Table 5.4.4.). Estonia, along with the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom, belongs among the countries that have a high level of both children’s Internet use and online risks. Unlike Estonian children, Dutch and British children are able to handle online risks relatively well according to their parents, with parental supervision being characterized as high in the Netherlands and medium in the United Kingdom (Hasebrink et al. 2008). Considering the information provided above, we can say that Estonian children are in a unique position in the European context: they belong to the “high use – high risk” category and yet have been left mostly to their own devices in exploring the online jungle, despite their parents’ belief that they are not always able to manage the risks involved. In the European context Estonia also stands out as the only EU member state that lacks an organization engaged in raising awareness of topics related to Internet safety. Organizations functioning as Internet Safety Nodes elsewhere in Europe actively provide information both to children and Table 5.4.4. Classification of countries belonging to the EU Kids Online network based on children’s Internet use and online risks Online risk level Low Medium High Level of children’s Internet use Low Medium High Cyprus France Italy Germany Greece Belgium Austria Portugal Denmark Ireland Spain Sweden Bulgaria Source: Hasebrink et al. 2008: 75 Czech Republic Poland Slovenia Estonia The Netherlands Norway United Kingdom Figure 5.4.5. Home access to the Internet and the percentage of Internet users among 6 th to 12 th year pupils of city schools with Estonian as the language of instruction (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 49 91 2001–2002 2005 2007 Personal computer Sources: Estonian schools pupils’ media use survey 2001–2002; Noored ja meedia 2005; Noored ja Internet 2007 28 adults. The lack of a corresponding organization in Estonia has caused puzzlement in the international circles. 25 Internet use by Estonian school pupils There have been fast and comprehensive changes in Estonian school pupils’ media use during recent years. Internet has become an inseparable part of pupils’ lives: while already 91% of 6 th to 12 th year pupils in city schools with Estonian language instruction used the Internet in 2001– 2002, it is possible to speak of universal Internet use with regard to this age group as of 2005 (see Figure 5.4.5.). Pupils’ opportunities for Internet use have also increased quickly. In autumn 2007, 96% of the respondents studying in Estonian language schools in Tallinn, Tartu and Pärnu reported that they were able to use the Internet at home – exactly double that of pupils who had home Internet connections five or six years before (see Figure 5.4.5.). According to the 2007 data, an overwhelming percentage of pupils (94% of all cases) had broadband Internet connections (in 2005, 82% and in 2001–2002 26% of the respondents had broadband Internet connections). In 85 99,8 99,9 96 Internet access at home 37 Internet users 28 The data has been taken from three questionnaire surveys conducted among 6 th to 12 th year school pupils by the Institute of Journalism and Communication of the University of Tartu: Estonian school pupils’ media use survey (November 2001 and October 2002), Estonian school pupil survey Noored ja meedia (September–October 2005), and the survey Noored ja Internet conducted among pupils of Estonian language schools in Tallinn, Tartu and Pärnu (October–November 2007). In order to view the changes over time on a comparable basis, we have focused our analysis on data regarding pupils of city schools with Estonian as the language of instruction (2001–2002 N=554; 2005 N=650; 2007 N=713). 119 |
Page 1 and 2:
Estonian Human Development Report
Page 3 and 4:
Estonian Human Development Report T
Page 5:
4.2. Ethnic differentiations in sat
Page 9:
Preface This year, the Estonian Hum
Page 12 and 13:
CHAPTER 1 Estonian Human Developmen
Page 14 and 15:
Figure 1.1.3. Life expectancy in co
Page 16 and 17:
Figure 1.2.2. Life expectancy at bi
Page 18 and 19:
to reality. The greatest inaccuracy
Page 20 and 21:
Figure 1.2.9. Internal migration ev
Page 22 and 23:
12. Marksoo, A. 1992. “Dynamics o
Page 24 and 25:
Table 1.3.1. PISA 2006 study result
Page 26 and 27:
Table 1.3.2. Number of students in
Page 28 and 29:
1.4. The gross domestic product and
Page 30 and 31:
Figure 1.4.3. Estonian GDP (right a
Page 32 and 33:
1.5. Changes in the Estonian Human
Page 34 and 35:
2.2. Health of Estonian residents i
Page 36 and 37:
Table 2.2.4. Differences in life ex
Page 38 and 39:
Figure 2.4.1. Healthy life years of
Page 40 and 41:
Figure 2.4.4. Various accidents, tr
Page 42 and 43:
2.5. Lifestyle and behaviour as a s
Page 44 and 45:
Figure 2.5.5. Smoking in Estonia in
Page 46 and 47:
Figure 2.6.1. Overview of the compo
Page 48 and 49:
Table 2.6.2. Use of specialized med
Page 50 and 51:
dren. The majority of services are
Page 52 and 53:
Figure 2.8.2. How much a health dis
Page 54 and 55:
2.10. Policy recommendations aimed
Page 56 and 57:
CHAPTER 3 Quality of life and life
Page 58 and 59:
Table 3.2.1. Characteristics of liv
Page 60 and 61:
Table 3.2.4. An assessment of the e
Page 62 and 63:
Figure 3.2.4. Difference in the job
Page 64 and 65:
Table 3.2.6. Agreement with stateme
Page 66 and 67:
Figure 3.3.1. Satisfaction with lif
Page 68 and 69:
Figure 3.3.4. Percentage of people
Page 70 and 71: Figure 3.4.1. Types of quality of l
Page 72 and 73: Figure 3.5.1. Percentage of teenage
Page 74 and 75: Figure 3.5.4. Percentage of respond
Page 76 and 77: Arieh A., Conti C., Kutsar D., Nicg
Page 78 and 79: Figure 3.6.2. Subjective quality of
Page 80 and 81: Pieper, A. Sixsmith, Care related q
Page 82 and 83: Figure 3.7.1. The placement of Euro
Page 84 and 85: Figure 4.2.1. Life satisfaction by
Page 86 and 87: Table 4.2.1. Factors forming genera
Page 88 and 89: Annexes Annex 4.2.1. Socio-demograp
Page 90 and 91: Figure 4.3.1. Changes in the assess
Page 92 and 93: Figure 4.3.4. Attitudes of the Esto
Page 94 and 95: olds considered themselves to be pa
Page 96 and 97: Table 4.4.3. Agreement of the Russi
Page 98 and 99: Table 4.5.2. The prospects of non-E
Page 100 and 101: Figure 4.5.4. Certainty of Estonian
Page 102 and 103: mote equal opportunities. At the (e
Page 104 and 105: CHAPTER 5 Quality of life in a cons
Page 106 and 107: Figure 5.2.1. GDP and AIC per capit
Page 108 and 109: Figure 5.2.3. Distribution of consu
Page 110 and 111: Figure 5.2.4. Indexes of environmen
Page 112 and 113: Table 5.3.1. Comparison of countrie
Page 114 and 115: Figure 5.3.3. Comparison of types o
Page 116 and 117: Table 5.3.5. Connections between po
Page 118 and 119: Table 5.4.1. Who and what are the f
Page 122 and 123: Figure 5.4.6. Time spent on the con
Page 124 and 125: Table 5.4.6. The perception of prob
Page 126 and 127: 5.6. Summary To briefly summarize t
Page 128 and 129: Table 6.2.1. Objective and subjecti
Page 130 and 131: Figure 6.2.4. Relationship between
Page 132 and 133: Figure 6.2.7. Difference between th
Page 134 and 135: Figure 6.3.1. GDP, government secto
Page 136 and 137: Figure 6.3.3. Employed 15-74-year-o
Page 138 and 139: Figure 6.3.8. Percentage of social
Page 140 and 141: References 1. Aaviksoo, A., G. Paat
Page 142 and 143: Figure 6.4.1. Labour market flexibi
Page 144 and 145: Figure 6.4.3. Creations of jobs ind
Page 146 and 147: Figure 6.4.5. Public expenditures o
Page 148 and 149: Figure 6.4.6. Ratio of the particip
Page 150 and 151: 6.5. Cities as development engines
Page 152 and 153: Table 6.5.2. Existence of developme
Page 154 and 155: have been underfinanced or are not
Page 156 and 157: Table 7.1. Factors that favour and
Page 158 and 159: Table 7.2. Potential economic devel
Page 160 and 161: Authors Chapter 1 Ene-Margit Tiit,
Page 162 and 163: Margit Keller (PhD) is a Senior Res
Page 164 and 165: Special prizes Estonian Human Devel
Page 166 and 167: Estonian Human Development Report H
Page 168 and 169: Estonian Human Development Report H
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Honorable mentions Estonian Human D
Page 174 and 175:
Estonian Human Development Report P
Page 176 and 177:
Estonian Human Development Report A
Page 178:
show all

Estonian Human Development Report

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?