DEVELOPMENT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1.5.4 Percentage of the population in various countries of the world, in 2010-2012, that believe that abortion is never justified. Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Colombia Morocco Qatar Ghana Zimbabwe Trinidad and T Malaysia Turkey Mexico Nigeria Peru Armenia Kyrgyzstan Philippines Ecuador Uzbekistan Azerbaijan Chile Uruguay Poland Cyprus Kazakhstan Ukraine South Korea Belarus Russia USA New Zealand Spain Estonia Japan Sweden Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Source: World Values Survey, 6th wave, 2010–2012. lives. At the same time, people’s freedoms, and the right to make their own decisions about their lives, are emphasised in Estonia. If Estonia’s position on the traditional versus secular-rational values axis has remained approximately the same from 1990 to 2011, the question of what has happened in the survival versus self-expression dimension is all the more interesting. 1.5.6 Self-expressive versus survival values One of the most definitive components of the value dimension that stresses survival versus self-expression is the Materialism-Postmaterialism Index (Inglehart 1997), which is based on people’s preferences regarding issues related to the development of the state. If people think that protecting the freedom of speech and giving people more say in government decisions are important, they endorse post-materialistic values. However, if people consider maintaining order in the country and fighting prices to be important, materialistic values prevail. Combinations of the aforementioned variations are positioned between the two trends. When examining the materialistic versus postmaterialistic attitudes of Estonia’s population, it becomes evident that changes during the last twenty years have not been significant. The percentage of people that stress material values increased about 10% during the 1990s, thereby expressing the complicated socio-economic conditions that prevailed in Estonian society during that period (see the shift described above in the survival versus self-expression axis, Inglehart and Baker (2000)), but, by 2008, it had decreased to the same level as during the initial period of the survey (32%), and has remained there until 2011. During the period under examination, the percentage of people that adhere to post-materialist values has fluctuated somewhat from 6% (1990) to 4% (2011). Based on the data from the latest World Values Survey, compared to the other world countries, Estonia continues to be positioned at the end of the ranking among the former Soviet Republics (e.g. Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Armenia, Belarus, etc.), where the percentage of people in the population that stress post-materialist values is 5%, or even less. In 2010, the corresponding indicator in Sweden was 32%, 18% in the United States and 8% in Poland. When assessing the values that stress survival versus self-expression, it is important to consider how much people trust each other, which, among other things, is one of the key indicators of social capital (Allik & Realo 2004; Realo & Allik 2009). Social capital is usually defined as the collective and economic benefit derived from the cooperation of people and groups, jointly shared interests and mutual trust. The general degree of trust of Estonia’s population decreased during the first half of the 1990s, but since 1996 (22%), has steadily increased. According to the 2011 survey, 40% of the respondents thought that “most people can be trusted”, while in 2008, the corresponding indicator was 33%, and only 24% in 1999. At the same time, regardless of the considerably increase of trust that has occurred during the last decade, a majority of the population (60%) continues to believe that one needs to be very careful in dealing with people (also see Chapter 2 of this report). In addition to trust, the people’s feeling of happiness has also increased during the last decades. If, in 1990, 61% of Estonia’s population stated that, considering all circumstances, they are very or rather happy, in 2008 and 2011, approximately 77% of the respondents stated that they are happy. A lengthier discussion on the Estonians’ feeling of happiness can be found in Chapter 3 of this report. Satisfaction with life also demonstrated a powerful upward trend (Realo 2009) among Estonia’s population in the 2000s. In the early 2000s, the rate of satisfaction with life among Estonian residents was one 54 Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
Figure 1.5.5 Percentage of the Estonian population who were “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their life between 2003 and 2012. As a comparison, Estonia’s GDP, in billions of Euros, during the same period, is included in the chart. Percentage GDP 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 % of satisfaction Oct 2003 Oct 2004 June 2005 Oct 2005 Apr 2006 Sept 2006 May 2007 Oct 2007 Apr 2008 Oct 2008 June 2009 Nov 2009 June 2010 Nov 2010 May 2011 Nov 2011 May 2012 Source: Eurobarometer, Statistics Estonia of the lowest in Europe. But in only five years, buoyed by general economic growth and positive political events, (Estonia’s accession to the European Union in 2004, etc.), it increased by almost 30%, reaching its peak in September 2006, when, based on the Eurobarometer survey, 79% of the Estonian population was satisfied or very satisfied with life. Although Estonia’s economic growth continued until early 2008, the Estonian population’s assessments related to the level of life satisfaction slowly started to decrease, already in the spring of 2007, and stabilised at 69%, by the spring of 2012 (see Figure 1.5.5). It is interesting to note that the continued growth of Estonia’s GDP, starting in 2010, has not been accompanied by an increase of satisfaction among Estonia’s population. The reasons probably lie in the fact that, starting in 2007, the cost of the largest items of expenditure in Estonia, i.e. the prices for dwellings and food, has increased considerably faster than the average wages. The self-expressive values also include the people’s greater tolerance toward minorities, be it homosexuals, or people with different ethnic or religious backgrounds. If, in 1990, more than three quarters (76%) of the respondents thought that homosexuality is never justified, 20 years later, the corresponding indicator is 48%. However, in 2011, almost half of the Estonian population still thinks that homosexuality is not acceptable and, in the comparison with other countries, this high share of people continues to place Estonia among the Eastern European, rather than Western European, countries (see figure 1.5.6). An important measure of self-expressive versus survival values is the people’s political, environmental and community activism. In the World Values Survey, this has been measured, among other things, with a question about whether the respondent has ever signed a petition as a political protest or, at least, plans to do 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 GDP, billions of Euros Figure 1.5.6 Percentage of the populations of various countries in the world in 2010-2012 that believe that homosexuality is never justified. Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Sweden Spain Chile Uruguay Japan New Zealand USA Philippines Peru Ecuador South Korea Mexico Cyprus Colombia Poland Estonia Ukraine Belarus Russia Malaysia Nigeria Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Zimbabwe Turkey Uzbekistan Trinidad and T Ghana Morocco Qatar Azerbaijan Armenia Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Source: World Values Survey, 6 th wave, 2010–2012. Figure 1.5.7 Percentage of people living in Estonia, from 1990 to 2011, who have signed a petition (as a form of political protest), might do so in the future, or would never do so under any circumstances. Percentage Would never participate Might participate Have participated 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1990 1996 1999 2008 2011 Source: World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys. Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013 55
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: Figure 1.5.3 The percentage of the
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?