Estonian Human Development Report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 6.2.1. Objective and subjective indicators describing the aspects of well-being Nature of the component Objective indicators Subjective indicators Economic aspect Wealth and income distribution Income, Gini index, ratio of income groups and income Satisfaction with the economic state of the country and one’s living standard, assessment of sufficiency of income Human capital aspect Health and education Life expectancy, years of enrolment, education and health care costs Health assessment, satisfaction with access to education and health services Social capital aspect Institutions and networks Governance quality Confidence in people and institutions Emotional aspect Absence of social exclusion Life expectancy at birth, lack of unemployment Satisfaction with life, feeling of happiness (Berger-Schmitt, Noll 2000: 8). Subjective assessments have been obtained from the data on the countries that were included in the third round (2006) of the European Social Survey. Therefore, the objective indicators for wellbeing were also collected for the same countries. Since in previous years, subjective indicators were collected for fewer countries, it is not possible to analyze the trends related to changes in assessments. In the analysis, we rely on the data collected for 24 European countries 32 . Since we are dealing with countries at different developmental levels (positions in the Human Development Index from two to seventy), which all belong to the European cultural space, it is possible to draw conclusions based on the results regarding the general tendencies of the connections between various aspects of well-being and economic development. The subjective indicators of well-being can be divided into three groups: subjective assessments of individual aspects of well-being (economic state, health), assessments of satisfaction and feelings of happiness and confidence indicators reflecting social capital. In summary, the well-being aspects and indicators used in this analysis are shown in Table 6.2.1. The Human Development Index, which essentially reflects the wealth and human capital aspects of wellbeing based on objective indicators, is the most popular generalized indicator for determining the developmental level of countries. Consequently, the correlation of the remaining aspects of well-being with this indicator can be analyzed and an answer sought to the question of whether subjective indicators of well-being are dependent on the level of development. Two factors often received attention in the analysis of well-being: the connection between well-being and income distribution and the connection between well-being and economic growth. Hereinafter, we will try to concentrate on examining these connections. The analysis method was based on the generalization of indicators of subjective and objective well-being measured on various scales into a composite indicator for specific countries and the analysis of the mutual connections between these composite indicators. Thus, for instance, based on the results of the European Social Survey, it was possible to get generalized assessments regarding countries in answer to specific questions that were measured on various scales: the respondent had to provide an assessment for the question “How happy are you?” on a scale of 1–10, but support for the idea that “The government must do something to even out income differences between individuals”, could be given on a scale of 1–4. In order to generalize these individual assessments measured on various scales, we combined them using factor analysis based on the principal components method. Thus, mutually connected combinations of individual variables were ascertained, to which we applied a name that generalizes its content. Thereafter, the component scores of these general indicators were used to compare the countries and to analyze the connections between the subjective and objective aspects of well-being. Component scores indicate the relative position of each country in the sample according to the described aspect; the average value of the component scores of one indicator is zero. Therefore, in the countries where the value of the component score is positive, the situation based on the aspect concerned is above average, and if the component score is negative, the situation is below average. In order to guarantee better comparability of objective and subjective indicators, we also synthesized the objective indicators of well-being using the same method. Most of the objective indicators originate from the 2007 UN Human Development Report and most describe the situation in 2005. In some cases, the income distribution indicators date from earlier years, but they do not change very quickly. Economic growth in 2005 is examined as are the annual averages for 1990–2005. The objective general indicators for the economic aspect of well-being became the wealth indicator, which described the variations between GDP and the GNP per capita by country, and the income distribution indicator, which described the variation in the relationship between the Gini coefficient and the income groups. The general income distribution indicator is constructed so that the evener the income distribution, the greater the value of the indicator. In order to obtain the subjective general indicator for the economic aspect of well-being, a generalization was made of the satisfaction indicator for the country’s economic situation and one’s own living standard as well as an assessment of the sufficiency of one’s income for coping with daily life. Generally indicators for wealth and satisfaction with the economic situation are closely related (correlation coefficient of 0.92 33 ). Figure 6.2.1. shows the placement of the countries in the sample based on wealth and satisfaction with the economic situation. A general tendency for a strong correlation is clearly visible. However, some interesting deviations can also be observed. Thus, there is much greater satisfaction with the economic situation in Estonia than in Slovakia or Hungary, which are more or less as wealthy. Satisfaction with the economic situation is at almost the same level in Germany and France, although objectively, they 32 Sample included Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, the Netherlands, Latvia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine and the United Kingdom 33 All the correlation coefficients presented here and hereinafter have a reliable probability level of 0.01 | 126
are much wealthier. An exception is the status of Slovenia, where wealth is below average, but satisfaction above average. In the figure, Denmark is distinguished by a higher level of satisfaction, while it is at the same level as the Netherlands and Austria if measured objectively based on wealth. If we look for reasons for differences in income distribution (see Figure 6.2.2.), in the case of Denmark and Slovenia, one can assume that the higher than average subjective assessment results from evener income distribution. However, in the case of Estonia, this assumption does not apply, because income distribution is less even than in Germany or France, not to mention Hungary and Slovakia. From this figure, it is obvious that there is no clear correlation between income distribution and wealth nor was it possible to identify a reliable correlation between these indicators. For instance, Ireland and Switzerland, which are among the richest countries, rank lower than average in the sample with regard to the evenness of income distribution, while Bulgaria and Romania, which are among the poorest countries, rank above average as far as the evenness of income distribution is concerned. Apparently, it is not possible to unequivocally determine whether more or less even income distribution is good or bad in and of itself. However, whether people perceive uneven distribution to be a problem can be determined. It turned out that the subjective assessment for income distribution in our sample as a whole was not related to the objective indicator, but there are correlations in the groups of countries at different levels of prosperity. As expected, the question, “Should the country do something to even out the differences in income levels?,” tended to be answered in the affirmative by the residents of poor countries (correlation with wealth –0.741). A general indicator that associates the average life span with the indicators for public sector education and health care costs has been used as the objective indicator for the human capital aspect of well-being. The indicator is quite closely related to the general research and development indicator (correlation coefficient of 0.60), which we obtained as a result of generalizing the initial indicators describing patents, research and development costs and the number of scientific workers. Thereby, this indicator provides a generalized picture of the creation and nature of human capital in the country. In order to obtain a subjective assessment of health and education, the satisfaction assessments from the European Social Survey were combined with the assessments for the availability of education and health care services and the state of one’s own health. The obtained general indicator was also related to the respondent’s level of formal education (years of school enrolment) (correlation coefficient of 0.58). The mutual correlation between the general objective and subjective indicators for the human capital aspect of well-being was 0.76, and therefore, the correlation is weaker than between the various indicators of the wealth aspect of well-being. The distribution of countries based on the general objective and subjective indicators are shown in Figure 6.2.3. We can see that the placement of the countries is quite logical. Based on both the objective situation and subjective assessments, the Nordic countries are at the forefront, while both indicators are low in Russia and Ukraine, as well as Bulgaria and Romania. Figure 6.2.1. Relationship between objective and subjective assessments in the economic aspect of well-being Satisfaction with the economic situation 2,00000 1,00000 ,00000 -1,00000 Poland Romania Russia ESTONIA Slovakia Latvia Hungary Sweden Finland Austria Spain Slovenia Portugal Germany Denmark Norway Switzerland The Netherlands Ireland United Kingdom Belgium France Ukraine -2,00000 Bulgaria -2,000 -1,000 ,000 1,000 2,000 Wealth Figure 6.2.2. Relationship between income distribution and satisfaction with the economic situation Satisfaction with the economic situation 2,00000 1,00000 ,00000 -1,00000 -2,00000 Portugal Russia Ireland United Kingdom Spain Latvia ESTONIA Denmark Norway Switzerland Sweden The Netherlands Austria Finland France Poland Belgium Bulgaria Romania -2,000 -1,000 ,000 1,000 Income distribution Slovenia Germany Slovakia Ukraine Hungary Figure 6.2.3. Relationship between human capital and satisfaction with health and education Satisfaction with education and health 2,000 1,000 ,000 -1,000 Romania Russia ESTONIA Latvia Bulgaria Slovakia Poland Belgium Finland Switzerland Austria Denmark Norway Ireland Sweden United Kingdom The Netherlands France Spain Hungary Slovenia Germany Portugal Ukraine -2,000 -3,00000 -2,00000 -1,00000 ,00000 1,00000 2,00000 Human capital 127 |
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 120 and 121: Table 5.4.3. Young people’s asses
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 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: Estonian Human Development Report T
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:
Estonian Human Development Report T
show all

Estonian Human Development Report

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

Delete template?

Save as template?