DEVELOPMENT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Summary: Paradoxes of the Estonian quality of life Anu Toots In this chapter, we have focused on the level of social welfare and the quality of life. We have examined them, based on economics, psychology, sociology, political science and ecology. We have also turned to the classical indicators of well-being like GDP, the Gini index, the energy intensity of the economy; as well as innovative measures like satisfaction with public services, the quality of social relations and subjective satisfaction. Although life in Estonia is not as good as in many other countries, Estonia and Chile are the states that the OECD points to as the ones that have made remarkable progress in the last decade. (OECD 2011: 24). It is true that our social protection budget has recovered, work and family life is better balanced than in many countries, the communities are strong and the general educational level is high. However, many aspects of Estonia’s success are very fragile. During the 2008 economic crisis, the people’s ability to cope in Estonia was hit harder than in most other EU states. During the crisis years, the deprivation index almost doubled in Estonia, the Gini index also increased, and differences in the state of health expanded across income groups. Unlike in Western Europe, difficulties in coping were experienced in Estonia also by many people in the highest income quintile. This sharp setback in the material well-being is explainable by two reasons. Firstly, the decline in well-being started from a boom, not from a normal level of development, which made the losses seem bigger. Secondly, Estonian society is poor, in an East European way. This means that the incomes of high-income people here are similar to those of the medium-income groups in Western Europe, and therefore, the upper classes become instantly vulnerable when economic conditions worsen. Despite the fact that, for historical and political reasons, Estonia lacks the preconditions for a high level of well-being and quality of life, it would be wrong to argue that nothing can be achieved by appropriate policies. Our quality of life indicators are weak primarily in the fields where public policy is lacking (e.g. housing and spatial planning), or where the reforms have halted (e.g. healthcare; tax policies). If the state does not intervene, the situation is regulated by the market, and this is accompanied by the commodification that is inherent to the market situation– services can only be consumed by those who have the purchasing power. As a consequence, compared to Europe, the differences in Estonia by income groups, in the quality of housing, health and assessments of some areas of life (social welfare, healthcare) are very large. Estonia’s task, in the next few years, should be to help the weaker members of society to catch up, empowering them and providing them with a positive life perspective. Now, after the economic crisis has crested and the markets have stabilised, we could – or even should – ask, what direction should Estonia move in, and how? Hereafter, economic performance alone will not increase the quality of life, if the growth in GDP is not accompanied by a reduction in income inequality, and if the GDP does not improve the coping ability of households (Abbot, Wallace, 2012). Estonia’s success, which is based on fiscal policies, must be brought to the micro level – to impact people’s everyday lives. In addition, it is worth remembering that while wealth is important for well-being, it is of key importance only in the elementary phases of development, when most people are worried about making ends meet. For the societies and people that have left the poverty zone (including a large part of Estonia’s population), the quality of life, in the broader sense, becomes increasingly important. Therefore, when planning Estonia’s strategic perspectives for the future, welfare has to be viewed in the broader context, by supplementing economic indicators with social and ecological ones. When defining our future goals, we cannot ignore the contradictory phenomena of our current situation, which could be called paradoxes of Estonian quality of life. Firstly, Estonian people have contradictory attitudes toward wealth and the welfare state. On the one hand, public surveys show that austerity is perceived as the normal order; the public is reconciled to the fragile welfare state and small social support, and try to manage on its own. On the other hand, many people consider the income inequality in Estonia to be too high, and believe the generous governmental welfare provisions typical of industrial societies should be the norm. Unfortunately, there are no signs in Estonia of this kind of welfare state; although, there are signs of a wasteful economy of the industrial era. Yet, it is unclear how Estonia will transit to post-modernity, so that this will be accompanied by an improvement in the quality of life, encompassing everyone. Secondly, the level of Estonian civil society and citizens’ engagement is relatively high, though apolitical. Apolitical means that the citizenry does not participate meaningfully in lawmaking and existing consultation processes are not sufficiently open and transparent. Thus, significant know-how is left unused, as well as the possibility to enhance the legitimacy of government. The current situation can be described as standing at a crossroads. On the one hand, the Estonian people are more critical than other Europeans about the quality of public services, and about their own ability to cope. On the other hand, we differ from the other post-Communist countries by a clear optimism about the future. Meaningful involvement in public governance could significantly reinforce this optimism. Thirdly, using the optimism concerning the future as an engine could be endangered by the people’s low level of self-esteem. The people of Estonia 146 Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
perceive themselves as worse off than statistical data indicates (e.g. the state of their health, or the conformity of their pay to their qualifications). This could be a reflection of a broader trend, whereby the people in wealthier countries tend to rate their own countries as above average, while those in poorer countries tend to underrate their countries (Dehley, Kohler, 2008). In order to improve the situation, we must figure out how to empower the people of Estonia, so that they feel valuable and influential. Thus, the roots of Estonian quality of life paradoxes may be in the opportunity to compare themselves to other countries. What is our reference group or standard? The popular position is that we do not want to be an Eastern European, but rather a Nordic country. Yet, the analyses in this chapter indicate something different. Based on the quality of life indicators, Estonia is similar to countries to which we seldom compare ourselves – Slovakia, Poland, Brazil, Chile, New Zealand and the Republic of Korea. The Estonians’ low level of wealth brings us closer to Eastern Europe, while almost none of our indicators are similar to the Nordic countries. As a whole, Estonian welfare and quality of life appear to be distinctive, and they have no models or analogues. Therefore, the metaphor of the “lonely skier” that was suggested at the beginning of the chapter turns out be more applicable than might have seemed at first. Robert Putnam (2000) made America’s civil society famous by comparing it to a lonely bowler, Estonia today has the chance to show that by being alone on the ski trail it still can develop a modern society with a sustainable quality of life. References 1. Abbot, P., Wallace, C. (2012). “Rising Economic Prosperity and Social Quality: The Case of New Member States of the European Union,” Social Indicators Research. Springer Link http://link. springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11205-012-9992-0 (viewed 14.02.2013). 2. Dehley, Kohler (2008). “Where We Stand in Europe: Citizen Perceptions of European Country Rankings and their Influence on Subjective Well-Being,” (2008). Handbook of Quality of Life in the Enlarged European Union, Eds. Alber, J., Fahey, T., Saraceno, C. London: Routledge, 385–404. 3. OECD (2011) How’s Life?: Measuring Well-Being, Paris: OECD Publishing. 4. Putnam, R. (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster. Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013 147
Page 1:
ESTONIAN HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2
Page 4 and 5:
Table of Contents 1 Human Capital /
Page 6 and 7:
Dear Reader Since the moment when E
Page 9 and 10:
1Human Capital Estonian Human Devel
Page 11 and 12:
the HDI’s content has also been h
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1.1.1 The human development
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 1.1.7 The income sub-index:
Page 17 and 18:
The results of the Princeton Projec
Page 19 and 20:
the hypothetical generation. The to
Page 21 and 22:
Figure 1.2.3 Life expectancy. Eston
Page 23 and 24:
Table 1.2.2 also presents the most
Page 25 and 26:
The new trends that are appearing i
Page 27 and 28:
Figure 1.2.8 Components of populati
Page 29 and 30:
New features were introduced into E
Page 31 and 32:
Initiation of Voluntary Birth Contr
Page 33 and 34:
Table 1.3.1 Best-known educational
Page 35 and 36:
(OECD 2012b). Therefore a certain r
Page 37 and 38:
The reciprocal dependence of the pr
Page 39 and 40:
Figure 1.3.8 Percentage of students
Page 41 and 42:
Table 1.3.4 The quality of educatio
Page 43 and 44:
1.4 Health Raul-Allan Kiivet Change
Page 45 and 46:
Table 1.4.1 Usage of prescription m
Page 47 and 48:
allude to the fact that approximate
Page 49 and 50:
promote healthy lifestyles among th
Page 51 and 52:
Figure 1.5.1 The World Values Surve
Page 53 and 54:
Table 1.5.2 Estonia’s participati
Page 55 and 56:
Figure 1.5.3 The percentage of the
Page 57 and 58:
Figure 1.5.5 Percentage of the Esto
Page 59 and 60:
The fact that Estonia’s position
Page 61 and 62:
Summary Mati Heidmets The global vi
Page 63 and 64:
2People and Society Estonian Human
Page 65 and 66:
Table 2.1.1 Structure of the Bertel
Page 67 and 68:
tioning market economies (15 states
Page 69 and 70:
2.2 Freedom and democracy Martin M
Page 71 and 72:
Table 2.2.1 Democracy indicators Po
Page 73 and 74:
Figure 2.2.2 The distribution of th
Page 75 and 76:
would be something that none of the
Page 77 and 78:
political participation are general
Page 79 and 80:
strongest, while a very small perce
Page 81 and 82:
is concerned, Estonia is one of the
Page 83 and 84:
Figure 2.4.2 Average circulation of
Page 85 and 86:
2.5 Corruption Jüri Saar In accord
Page 87 and 88:
Lithuania, 61%; and in Russia, 69%.
Page 89 and 90:
2.6.2 Intentional homicides in Esto
Page 91 and 92:
crime. And thirdly, there was a wis
Page 93 and 94:
References 1. Ahven, A. & Tabur, L.
Page 95 and 96:
states included in the EU Kids Onli
Page 97 and 98: 2.8 Public assessments of the state
Page 99 and 100: Figure 2.8.4 Changes releated to tr
Page 101 and 102: of the state’s development are en
Page 103 and 104: Table 2.9.1 The positions of Estoni
Page 105 and 106: 3. IEP (2011). Structures of Peace.
Page 107 and 108: 3Welfare and the Quality of Life Es
Page 109 and 110: choices made, not what people say t
Page 111 and 112: Figure 3.1.5 Public social spending
Page 113 and 114: tion agreed upon the social contrac
Page 115 and 116: References 1. Aidukaite, J. (2006).
Page 117 and 118: hand, to the “inequality of acces
Page 119 and 120: and explanations of the extent of i
Page 121 and 122: 5- much more than I deserve. Some d
Page 123 and 124: people in Estonia consider the inco
Page 125 and 126: Table 3.3.1 Experienced Well-Being
Page 127 and 128: at about 70%. In Latvia and Lithuan
Page 129 and 130: sign. It seems that the usual view
Page 131 and 132: 3.4 Quality of life Anu Toots 3.4.1
Page 133 and 134: a uniform composite indicator has n
Page 135 and 136: 3.4.6 The components of life qualit
Page 137 and 138: Figure 3.4.4c Perceived quality of
Page 139 and 140: Figure 3.4.5 Changes in the depriva
Page 141 and 142: 3.5 Environment dimension of well-b
Page 143 and 144: Figure 3.5.1.b Estonia’s position
Page 145 and 146: 3.5.4 Energy intensity The energy i
Page 147: productivity, which is defined as t
Page 151 and 152: 4The Economy Estonian Human Develop
Page 153 and 154: vide a valuable connection for maki
Page 155 and 156: Figure 4.1.3 Components of economic
Page 157 and 158: ule of law, the sub-indicators for
Page 159 and 160: References 1. Acemoglu, D.; Robinso
Page 161 and 162: Development Report employs generali
Page 163 and 164: and pasture land, and this was capi
Page 165 and 166: Basing the total and net savings re
Page 167 and 168: 4.3 Labour market Reelika Leetmaa,
Page 169 and 170: The problems include the very limit
Page 171 and 172: • Expenditures for active labour
Page 173 and 174: who lose their jobs. These ensure i
Page 175 and 176: 4.4 Productivity and the economic s
Page 177 and 178: labour costs at the company level r
Page 179 and 180: Table 4.4.4 Comparison of the produ
Page 181 and 182: Figure 4.4.1 Annual average increas
Page 183 and 184: 4.5 Innovation Erik Terk, Katrin M
Page 185 and 186: Table 4.5.2 Comparison of innovatio
Page 187 and 188: Table 4.5.4 Comparison of the indic
Page 189 and 190: in order to make the R&D potential
Page 191 and 192: It is characteristic of the South K
Page 193 and 194: mechanisms for increasing their sta
Page 195 and 196: Globalisation and Policy Patterns 5
Page 197 and 198: When Estonia regained its independe
Page 199 and 200:
5.2 The impacts of globalisation an
Page 201 and 202:
Table 5.2.2 Support of the differen
Page 203 and 204:
5.3 Development policies Erik Terk,
Page 205 and 206:
• C -the “Estonia-centred” su
Page 207 and 208:
Figure 5.4.1 Support for the possib
Page 209:
Summary Erik Terk Estonia is part o
Page 212 and 213:
ehavioural patterns. Therefore, it
Page 214 and 215:
EDR 2012/2013 authors Clemens Buche
Page 216 and 217:
EDR 2012/2013 authors Alari Purju i
Page 218:
Editor-in-Chief: Mati Heidmets Prod
show all

DEVELOPMENT

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

Delete template?

Save as template?