DEVELOPMENT
The pdf-version - Eesti Koostöö Kogu
The pdf-version - Eesti Koostöö Kogu
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
6Summary<br />
Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013<br />
The Next Step<br />
Mati Heidmets<br />
The Estonia Human Development Report for 2012–2013<br />
introduced the reader to dozens of measures and hundreds<br />
of rankings, which the authors believe should<br />
provide a good description of today’s world and its<br />
people. Inevitably the question arises: what is this – the<br />
truth about life, a manipulation by interest groups, or<br />
a good business project? There is no sense in searching<br />
for the complete truth or an unambiguous message in<br />
these rankings, or numerical indicators characterising<br />
the countries. After all, the only thing a comparison can<br />
provide is hints about how things are going – nothing<br />
more. Everyone must obtain the complete picture through<br />
their own interpretation. At the same time, global comparisons<br />
definitely provide a more trustworthy basis for<br />
these interpretations than purely personal attitudes and<br />
common (pre)conceptions. The rating industry provides<br />
a way for the globalising world to perceive and describe<br />
itself. If organisations like the UN, OECD and Eurostat<br />
are behind the offering, one can be sure that an attempt is<br />
being made to use yardsticks that are assembled using the<br />
best available knowledge and carefully controlled procedures.<br />
Yet, it is still pertinent to point out some distinctive<br />
features of the rating industry.<br />
If we know the author, both the content and meaning<br />
of the comparison become clearer. Thus, in some<br />
cases the procedures and the result acquire the face of<br />
the initiator. If the UN is compiling the comparison, it<br />
will probably be related to global concerns; if the OECD<br />
is involved, an important motive will be to find instruments<br />
for stimulating economic development. In the case<br />
of Gallup, their American-centric approach in formulating<br />
the questions and interpreting the results is inevitable.<br />
Knowing the author allows us to better understand the<br />
idea and implications of the undertaking.<br />
It also pays to pay attention to the sources of the<br />
data. These can vary to a great extent; some sources are<br />
more reliable and trustworthy, like national censuses or<br />
government statistics, although, even in these cases there<br />
are certain margins of error. The yardsticks with greater<br />
degrees of fluctuation and more possibilities for interpretation<br />
are the ones based on surveys or expert assessments.<br />
Especially the latter are significantly affected by<br />
the composition of the expert group, and also the broader<br />
cultural context.<br />
The numerical values of the indicators characterising<br />
countries and peoples, most of which are presented<br />
as so-called “averages”, have caused some confusion.<br />
An average does not mean that this is characteristic of the<br />
majority. If the average life satisfaction value on the Gallup<br />
“ladder” is 5.4, this does not mean that the majority<br />
of Estonians have positioned their level of satisfaction<br />
between the fifth and sixth “steps of the ladder”. An<br />
average becomes meaningful when complemented by<br />
knowledge about the extent to which the given indicator<br />
varies in society. Actually, there is no such thing as an<br />
average Estonian – there are different groups, interests and<br />
Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013<br />
209