Estonian Human Development Report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 4.2.1. Factors forming general satisfaction among ethnic minority groups in European countries by country Ranking of countries based on satisfaction * Association of satisfaction to the aggregate index ** General satisfaction/feeling of happiness Satisfaction with material situation Satisfaction with the performance of the state General satisfaction/feeling of happiness Satisfaction with material situation Satisfaction with the performance of the state Finland 1 6 2 0.126 0.711 0.831 Switzerland 2 1 3 0.767 0.751 0.795 Norway 5 3 4 0.643 0.627 0.646 Cyprus 3 14 1 0.659 0.523 0.679 Denmark 6 4 5 0.563 0.783 0.827 Sweden 9 2 8 0.716 0.811 0.753 Spain 4 7 7 0.473 0.691 0.649 Ireland 8 8 6 0.641 0.713 0.875 United Kingdom 7 5 12 0.654 0.607 0.785 Austria 10 9 9 0.750 0.649 0.854 The Netherlands 13 10 10 0.670 0.660 0.807 Belgium 12 16 11 0.830 0.712 0.685 Germany 14 13 13 0.758 0.708 0.792 Slovenia 11 11 16 0.816 0.741 0.720 France 15 12 14 0.644 0.662 0.748 Portugal 16 17 17 0.515 0.764 0.801 ESTONIA 17 15 19 0.779 0.709 0.734 Slovakia 19 20 15 0.797 0.763 0.830 Poland 21 19 21 0.748 0.714 0.856 Latvia 18 18 22 0.779 0.652 0.750 Romania 20 24 18 0.830 0.647 0.839 Russia 22 22 20 0.753 0.741 0.795 Hungary 23 21 23 0.782 0.778 0.799 Ukraine 24 23 24 0.807 0.768 0.678 Bulgaria 25 25 25 0.753 0.574 0.713 Average*** 7.5 5.34 5.44 0.690 0.698 0.770 Leg 4.00 3.88 4.67 0.704 0.288 0.229 * The scores of the individual countries are ranked, and each country has been assigned a ranking for each specific satisfaction variable (1 to 25). ** Correlations have been calculated between the aggregate satisfaction index (includes all 7 individual variables) and satisfaction in individual fields of activity (3 satisfaction sub-indexes). A Pearson correlation coefficient value that is close to 1 means a strong association between the two variables, while a value close to 0 shows a weak association and lack thereof. All the coefficients shown in the table are statistically significant (at a significance level of p≤.01). The strongest coefficient, or the most important factor in the formation of general satisfaction in the specific country is marked in bold. *** The first half of the table shows calculations of the average satisfaction values (maximum satisfaction value 11 and minimum 0). The second half of the table shows calculations of the average correlations for the countries in case of specific pairs of variables. Source: European Social Survey 2006 nia there are no large ethnic political parties, while there are in Latvia, which has just as large a minority population), etc. The younger generation is characterized by a more ignorant attitude toward politics and great scepticism regarding institutions in both Europe and Estonia (see Annex 4.2.2). Association of satisfaction with general social integration Previous chapters have shown that surrounding social relations form one of the important components of the quality of life and life satisfaction. (Kasearu & Trumm 2008). Research dealing specifically with ethnic minorities also shows that the satisfaction evaluations of immigrants are significantly impacted by social capitalization, such as familial contacts (Bajekal et al. 2004), as well as the perceived position of the majority or minority in the society (Verkuyten 1986). In the case of Estonia, it has turned out that these factors are important, for instance, in the creation of cultural openness (Masso 2009). The following analysis focuses on the relationships between satisfaction and social integration. | 84
Table 4.2.2. shows the association between the indicators of life satisfaction and social integration. When evaluating social integration, the following individual and aggregate variables have been used: political interest (How interested are you in politics?), trust in institutions (How much do you trust the country’s parliament / legal system / police / political parties / European Parliament / UN?), perceived discrimination (Is your group discriminated against because of skin colour / race / nationality / religion / ethnic group / language you speak?) and social capital (How often do you socially meet with friends, relatives, colleagues? Is there anyone you discuss intimate and personal matters with? How often do you take part in social activities compared to others of same age?). The analysis of satisfaction dimensions and associations is the same as the one in Table 4.2.1. It turns out that the life satisfaction evaluations of Estonia’s ethnic minorities are significantly related to the perception of discrimination – the lower the level of perceived discrimination, the greater the satisfaction with the performance of the state and the personal sense of happiness. It is noteworthy that in the majority of European countries there is no significant relationship between the perception of discrimination and satisfaction with the performance of the state. At the same time, Estonia’s ethnic minorities perceive discrimination more often than the minorities in European countries on average (see Annex 4.2.1.). Thus, for example, the perception of minority discrimination in the United Kingdom, with a relatively large and diverse ethnic minority, is almost 10% lower than in Estonia and even 20% lower than Estonia in Denmark with a growing number of immigrants. Estonia’s other important distinction compared to the European average is the importance of the social network as a shaper of satisfaction among ethnic minorities – the closer the social network, the more satisfied Estonia’s ethnic minorities are with the state. And vice versa – estrangement from the state is related to greater isolation in one’s close surroundings. This is especially related to contacts with <strong>Estonian</strong>s and other ethnicities at work and during leisure time (see Korts & Vihalemm 2008). This relationship is probably bidirectional – on the one hand, it is easier for individuals who are socially active and have a wider social circle to become aware of what is happening in the country and to adapt; however, on the other hand, a positive social attitude promotes involvement in work-related and other social networks. At the same time, Annex 4.2.2. shows that compared to European minorities Estonia’s ethnic minorities are characterized by significantly lower social capital with respect to the extent of the social network, participation in nongovernmental organizations and trust. However, differences in the social capitalization of majority and minority groups are decreasing in younger age groups, in Europe on average as well as in Estonia (see Annex 4.2.2.). Summary In Estonia, life satisfaction depends, to a greater degree, on ethnic affiliation than it does in Europe on average. Estonia is also differentiated in the general European scene by larger gaps in the life satisfaction evaluations of the eth- Table 4.2.2. Association of life satisfaction with social integration among ethnic minorities in Estonia and Europe (correlation coefficient in Estonia, average for European minorities in parentheses) Aggregate satisfaction index * Political interest either high or very high. ** The social capital index is calculated on the basis of single variables: meets frequently with friends, relatives, co-workers; has someone to discuss personal affairs with; compared to contemporaries and participates often in social activities. *** The trust index is calculated on the basis of single variables: trust in the parliament, legal system, police, politicians, political parties, European Parliament and UN. *** The discrimination index calculated on the basis of single variables: has encountered discrimination based on skin colour or race, ethnicity, religion, ethnicity or spoken language. Source: European Social Survey 2006 Personal mental satisfaction Personal material satisfaction Satisfaction with the performance of the state Interest in politics* 0.172 (0.159) 0.130 (0.084) 0.073 (0.138) 0.215 (0.141) Social capitalization** 0.207 (0.123) 0.176 (0.094) 0.094 (0.105) 0.238 (0.080) Trust in institutions***0.483 (0.403) 0.351 (0.237) 0.377 (0.194) 0.475 (0.449) Discrimination rate**** -0.322 (-0.098) -0.286 (-0.086) -0.147 (-0.011) -0.361 (-0.119) Average 0.296 (0.196) 0.236 (0.125) 0.173 (0.112) 0.322 (0.197) nic majority and minorities – compared to the majority, the members of ethnic minority groups are less frequently satisfied, especially among the middle-aged and younger generations. While in the “old” EU member states the general satisfaction of ethnic minorities is strongly related to evaluations regarding the performance of the country’s economic system and democracy, in Estonia, in a similar manner to the majority of post-Communist transition states, the satisfaction of ethnic minorities tends to be shaped by subjective factors (primarily one’s personal sense of happiness). At the same time, the subjective satisfaction is quite strongly related to indicators of social integration – the strength of personal social networks and the perception or non-perception of discrimination. In Estonia, one’s relationship with the performance of the state as intermediated by the social network is also characterized by the fact that critical evaluations regarding state policies do not significantly differ between Russian-speakers who are personally more or less successfully integrated (see Lauristin 2008). Conditionally one could say that unlike other European countries, a “cultural capsule” is created in Estonia upon defining oneself as an ethnic minority group. Ethnic barriers in society do not disappear by themselves since dissatisfaction with life compared to <strong>Estonian</strong>s does not decrease in younger generations. The relatively weak social capital of Estonia’s minorities and its significance in the shaping of life satisfaction leads to the conclusion that investing in the growth of social capital for ethnic minorities and their more effective involvement in the life of the country do not jeopardize the performance of the nationstate. Instead, such measures are the basis for shaping reliable relations with the state. 85 |
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 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 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?