Estonian Human Development Report
Estonian Human Development Report - Eesti Koostöö Kogu
Estonian Human Development Report - Eesti Koostöö Kogu
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
ditions of a society, which should meet the needs and abilities<br />
of people (wealth, political freedom, equality, access<br />
to education, etc.). Such an understanding can be conditionally<br />
termed as “input-based” measurement of quality<br />
of life, where an assessment is made of the opportunities<br />
provided by a society for leading a high-quality life. This<br />
approach has been criticized for the unconfirmed presupposition<br />
that better social conditions can be automatically<br />
equated with a higher level of individual well-being.<br />
Another problem results from determining individuals’<br />
needs and abilities to which the social conditions should<br />
correspond. (Noll 2002).<br />
The “output-based approach” studies people’s quality<br />
of life through subjective well-being (e.g. assessments<br />
of their state of health, satisfaction with life, happiness<br />
or satisfaction with their living environment (school system,<br />
healthcare services, infrastructure, etc.)) (Veenhoven<br />
1996). According to this approach, the quality of life of a<br />
society is determined by the average quality of life of its<br />
members. In the temporal or spatial comparison of the<br />
general quality of life, it is important to combine the two<br />
approaches, taking into account that an increase in the<br />
general affluence of a society does not mean that people’s<br />
happiness increases at the same rate. Cummins (2000)<br />
believes that general economic growth is only expressed<br />
in general subjective satisfaction if there is a decrease in<br />
the percentage of the population living below the poverty<br />
line.<br />
In addition to the quality of life derived from the general<br />
environment, the quality of life is also determined by<br />
the resources and abilities of the individual. Resources<br />
related to the quality of life include, first of all, income,<br />
i.e. the material welfare of an individual or a household,<br />
followed by the state of health, work, relationships with<br />
friends and family, involvement in the community, personal<br />
safety, emotional well-being (Cummins 1996). Personal<br />
free time is another important resource in the context<br />
of current lifestyles.<br />
Resources related to the quality of life provide the<br />
opportunity to satisfy basic needs; the satisfying of<br />
basic needs creates individual quality of life which is<br />
expressed in the individual’s feeling of satisfaction and<br />
positive assessments regarding their way of life. This<br />
means that in addition to objective indicators, subjective<br />
individual satisfaction must be taken into consideration<br />
when measuring quality of life. Subjective satisfaction<br />
with life comprises satisfaction with various<br />
spheres of life: satisfaction with family life, relationships<br />
with friends, health, personal success, economic situation,<br />
etc. (Campbell 1981). Subjective indicators not only<br />
reflect the objective situation, but also point to the gap<br />
between expectations and the actual situation. Subjective<br />
assessments thus reveal the problematic spheres of<br />
life where barriers prevent the achievement of goals (e.g.<br />
the improvement of living conditions or family relationships).<br />
Individual satisfaction assessments are formed<br />
through various social comparisons (compared to a reference<br />
group, an earlier situation, or a situation considered<br />
ideal or suitable).<br />
The following chapter measures the quality of life based<br />
on the Erik Allardt’s approach to well-being, according to<br />
which the quality of life consists of objective resources and<br />
subjective assessments in the dimensions of having, loving<br />
and being.<br />
Three aspects are taken into consideration in analyzing<br />
the quality of life of the population of Estonia: the<br />
current state of the quality of life, the trends in individual<br />
quality of life in 1994–2006(8), and the comparison of<br />
the general living standard of <strong>Estonian</strong> society to similar<br />
indicators reflecting the performance of other European<br />
countries.<br />
The analysis of the quality of life applies data from<br />
various social studies. The data for 1994 and 1999 has<br />
been taken from two living conditions surveys (NOR-<br />
BALT I and II) conducted in Estonia in cooperation<br />
between the University of Tartu, the Ministry of Social<br />
Affairs, the Statistical Office of Estonia and the Institute<br />
for Applied Social Studies FAFO (Norway). The<br />
sample for both studies consisted of 5000 households 9 .<br />
The indicators characterizing quality of life in 2004 and<br />
2006 have been taken from the European Social Survey<br />
which studied 26 countries in 2004 and 25 countries<br />
in 2006; the <strong>Estonian</strong> sample consisted of 2000<br />
respondents in the 2004 survey and 1500 respondents<br />
in the 2006 survey 10 . The most recent data have been<br />
taken from the document entitled Integration of <strong>Estonian</strong><br />
Society: Monitoring 2008 (sample 1500 respondents).<br />
In addition to the aforementioned material, the<br />
report also uses data from the European Union Survey<br />
on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) and current<br />
statistics.<br />
3.2. <strong>Development</strong> of individual<br />
quality of life, 1994–2008<br />
Living conditions<br />
Living conditions are primarily defined through dwellings<br />
and their surrounding infrastructure. In terms of<br />
the general quality of life, important aspects related to<br />
living conditions include the size of the dwelling, the<br />
availability of amenities, as well as the characteristics of<br />
the surrounding environment (access to various infrastructural<br />
objects, noise levels, pollution of the living<br />
environment, etc.).<br />
In 2007, 70% of Estonia’s population lived in apartment<br />
buildings, while 30% of the population lived in farmhouses,<br />
single family or terraced houses. At the same time, living<br />
conditions differ by region – nearly half of the people liv-<br />
9<br />
A more detailed overview of the study of living conditions in Estonia see http://www.fafo.no/norbalt/index.htm<br />
10<br />
See www.http://europeansocialsurvey.org<br />
55 |