DEVELOPMENT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

question cannot be given before the completion of the ongoing, sixth wave of the survey, because the positions of the countries on the map of world values are not absolute, but relative, and computed in comparison to other countries. However, based on the data from the survey conducted in Estonia in 2011, it is possible to make reasoned assumptions about whether, and to what degree, the values of the Estonian population have changed in ten years. If we proceed from Inglehart’s cultural change theory (Inglehart 1997; Inglehart & Welzel 2005), which was described above, for which the main thrust mechanism is the state’s socio-economic development, a certain emergence of self-expressive values could accompany an increase in the country’s national wealth. However, has Estonia’s economic development been sufficient to ensure Estonia’s population a sense of material and physical security, without which the emergence of post-materialist and self-expressive values is not possible? To find an answer to this question, the changes in values in Estonia, from 1999 to 2011, are analysed below according to the individual indicators that form the basis for Inglehart’s cultural values dimensions (see Table 1.5.1). In order to obtain a longer time span for the value changes, the results from the 1990 and 1996 surveys, have been added in the cases where they are available. Intentionally, and not at all incidentally, this chapter examines the values of the entire population, without distinguishing between Estonians, Russians or members of other nationalities. Although numerous earlier surveys have shown that significant differences continue to exist in the value preferences of Estonians and non-Estonians (see Kalmus & Vihalemm 2004; Lauristin et al. 1997; Magun & Rudnev 2010; Tart 2011; Figure 1.5.2 The percentage of the Estonian population from 1996 to 2011 who are of the opinion that greater respect for authority, in the near future, is “good”, “don’t mind” or “bad”. Percentage Bad Don’t mind Good 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1996 1999 2008 2011 Source: World Values Survey and European Values Survey Tart, Sõmer & Lilleoja 2012), including the fact that the values of the Russian-speaking population underwent a greater change during the transition period (Kalmus & Vihalemm 2004; Lauristin, et al. 1997), this chapter is based on Estonian society as a whole, as is typical of large comparative international surveys. (Also in the data for the other countries, the respondents are not differentiated on the basis of whether they belong to a majority or minority group). 1.5.5 Secular-rational versus traditional values The focus of secular-rational versus traditional values is the belief in the importance of a higher power, be this authority of God, the state or head of the family. The percentage of Estonia’s population (45%) that believes that greater respect for authority, in the near future, is a good thing has remained at the same level from 1996 2 to 2008, but decreased noticeably in 2011. Thus, in the last survey wave, compared to earlier ones, there has been an increase in the percentage of the Estonian population that believes that greater respect for authority tends to be a bad thing, or who have no opinion in this regard (see Figure 1.5.2). Based on the data from the latest World Values Survey, 3 in regard to the importance placed on authority, Estonia places fourth from last, among 32 countries – only the South Korea (27%), Sweden (23%) and Japan (5%) have a smaller percentage of people who believe that greater respect for authority is good in the near future. The percentage of Estonia’s population that considered God to be very important in their lives has increased by six percent, compared to 1999 (answers to the question could be given on a scale of 1 (“not at all important”) to 10 (“very important”). The percentage, which totalled 28% of the respondents in 2011, was computed based on those who gave answers from 7 to 10 (see Inglehart, Basanez, Diez-Medrano, Halman & Luijkx 2004). Despite the small increase for this indicator, Estonia places second from last in a comparison with 32 countries – only in Sweden are there even fewer people (22%) who consider God to be important in their lives. An important component in the assessment of traditional versus secular-rational values is what qualities people consider to be important for children to learn at home. An emphasis on independence and determination, perseverance refer to secular-rational values, while stressing religiousness and obedience refer to traditional values. In Estonia, from 1990 to 2008, 4 the importance of raising children to be determined and perseverant has slowly decreased, while the percentage of people who believe that children should be raised to be religious and obedient has somewhat 2 The survey conducted in Estonia in 1990 does not include this question. 3 Here and below: this is unofficial and initial data from the 6 th wave of the World Values Survey (2010-2012), which includes data from 32 countries, and which, as of January 2013, was only available to the survey’s national coordinators. 4 Due to the change in methodology, it is not possible to use the data from the 2011 survey. If in earlier surveys, eleven possible choices were provided and the respondents had to choose the five most important qualities that should be encouraged in children, in the survey conducted in Estonia in 2011, the respondents were asked to indicate whether each of the eleven qualities were important or not. 52 Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
Figure 1.5.3 The percentage of the population in European countries, in 2008-2010, who believe that it is important to raise children to be independent and religious. Independent Religious 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 Percentage 20 10 0 20 10 0 Norway Iceland Denmark Hungary Lithuania Slovenia Germany Slovakia Latvia Austria Czech Rep. Sweden Switzerland Ireland Romania Azerbaijan Georgia Luxembourg Finland Kosovo North. Ireland Great Britain Moldova Netherlands Bulgaria Greece Croatia Italy Poland Montenegro Spain Portugal Cyprus Serbia Bosnia Malta Russia Albania Belgium France Belarus Estonia Armenia North. Cyprus Ukraine Source: European Values Survey, 4 th wave, 2008–2010. increased. Compared to the first half of the 1990s, the percentage of the Estonian population who consider it important to raise children to be independent has decreased almost twofold. However, compared to 1999, the changes have not been very great – also ten years later, the largest share of people in Estonia considered it important to raise children to be decisive, perseverant (45%), followed by those whose valued obedience (28%) and independence (25%), while only 7% of the Estonia’s residents believed that children should be raised to be religious. Apparently, in the early 1990s, it seemed to people that, similarly to national independence, it was important to raise children to be independent and autonomous. However, after accession to the European Union and NATO, the independence of the Estonian state does not seem to be an important topic any longer and the residents of Estonia have also returned to more traditional values. Compared to other countries (see Figure 1.5.3), it becomes evident that Estonia is positioned among such Eastern and Western European countries, like Belarus, Armenia, Belgium and France, where neither independence nor religiousness are considered important for children to learn at home. Another distinct group is comprised of the Scandinavian countries (i.e. Norway, Iceland, and Denmark), where, similarly to Estonia, a religious upbringing is not important, but the development of a child’s independence and autonomy are considered to be very important. In Inglehart and his colleagues’ research (2000, 2005), an important indicator of the traditional versus secular-rational value dimension has been the question of people’s national pride. In the surveys conducted in Estonia, this question has been formulated very differently throughout the years. In 1990, the question was, “How proud are you of your ethnic membership?” In 1996, 1999 and 2008, the question was “How proud are you to be an Estonian citizen?” Then, in the last wave of the survey, in 2011, the question was worded as follows, “How proud are you to be an Estonian resident?” For this reason, it is not possible to directly compare the results from the various years. Based on the data from the latest wave of the World Values Survey (2010–2012), Estonia places last, together with the South Korea, in regard to being proud of being a resident of one’s country. Only 21% of the respondents were very proud of the fact that they are residents of Estonia, while in Sweden, the corresponding indicator was almost 40%, and 60% in the United States. The last important attribute that should be spoken about in regard to traditional versus secular-rational values is the people’s attitude toward the opportunity to make important decisions in one’s life, including abortion, divorce and suicide. The attitudes toward these questions have been found to be interrelated, and therefore, when computing the score for this values dimension, the only indicator that was taken into account was how acceptable is abortion in a society. The percentage of Estonia’s residents who believe that abortion is not justified under any circumstances increased somewhat in the second half of the 1990s, and remained at the same level (21–22%) until 2008. According to the data in the latest survey wave, in 2011, only 18% of Estonia’s population believed that abortion is not justified under any conditions, and based on this indicator, we place third behind Sweden and Japan (see Figure 1.5.4). Thus, in Estonia, the majority of the people believe that people themselves have the right to make such decisions about their lives. Based on the analysis of the aforementioned questions, one can state in summary that Estonia’s position on the traditional versus secular-rational axis (see Figure 1.5.1) has not notably changed from 1999 to 2011. Estonia’s position in 2011, at the top end of the axis, on the pole of secular-rational values may also be caused, primarily, by the fact that, in comparison to other countries, the residents of Estonia place less importance on God, religion, authority or the role of the state in their Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013 53
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: Table 1.5.2 Estonia’s participati
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 and 148:
productivity, which is defined as t
Page 149 and 150:
perceive themselves as worse off th
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?