DEVELOPMENT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.3 Civil society and social capital Juhan Kivirähk, Marju Lauristin The previous sub-chapter ended with the realisation that Estonia lags behind the states with developed democracies most noticeably when it comes to such indicators like the functioning of governance, participation and political culture. Eliminating the shortcomings in the given measures is significantly more difficult and time-consuming than the development of the principal democratic institutions, since these measures, among other things, require changes in the attitudes and values of the authorities and the citizenry, which shifts in a temporal scale lasting many generations. The years of 2012 and 2013 are characterised by a remarkable change in the relationship between the state authorities and the people. This has yet to bring about any visible shift in attitudes and values, but the need to change them has clearly been on the agenda, and the more thoughtful part of society has become aware of this. If this would not occur, Estonian society would have no place in the premier league of democratic states. 2.3.1 Development of civil society The readiness of society to be an estimable partner for the governing institutions in the execution of authority, and also to exercise social oversight, is related to the maturity of civil society. It is popular to bemoan the weakness of civil society in the post-Communist states. However, based on recent developments, we can state that the development of Estonia’s civil society has reached a level where the citizenry’s awareness and knowledge has increased, and the non-governmental sector is no longer willing to have their positions ignored when political decisions are being made. The relative progress made by Estonia’s civil society is also confirmed by international comparisons. At the initiative of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a Civil Society Organisation (CSO) Sustainability Index for Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia (the former republics of the Soviet Union) has been compiled for years (Table 2.3.1). Within the framework of the general sustainability of civil society, the following components are also examined separately: • legal environment, • organisational capacity, • financial viability, • advocacy, • service provision, • infrastructure, • public image. Estonia’s position related to the maturity of its civil society and development capability has been the best among the CSOs in Central and Eastern Europe and Eurasia. Figure 2.3.1 Civic involvement of the residents of Estonia and other European countries Has a preference related to a political party Participated in the activities of some other association, organisation Participated in the activities of a political party during the last 12 months Percentage Finland Denmark Netherlands Switzerland Average in Europe Ireland Czech Rep. Hungary Slovakia Estonia Greece Lithuania Slovenia 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Source: European Social Survey 2010, author’s calculations In Estonia, the most positive aspects supporting civil society are the legal environment, the developed infrastructure, and advocacy; while the weakest aspects are financial viability, organisational capacity and the provision of services. In other words, as has been recognised in the case of the state of Estonia as a whole (Vetik 2012), the legal and institutional framework for the functioning of a democratic society exists, but this has yet to be filled with sufficient content. Despite the relatively good developmental level of Estonia’s civil society, compared to the other transition countries, Estonia gets quite a middling score for political participation (see The Economist’s Democracy Index in the previous sub-chapter). Although the indicators for 74 Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
political participation are generally low in all the Eastern European countries, regardless of Estonia’s higher indicator for the sustainability of its civil society, in this field, it lags behind the Czech Republic, as well as Slovenia and Poland. Also, based on the European Social Survey (2010) data, Estonia is among those that lag behind when it comes to political self-determination and participation in political parties and civil society organisations, along with the other Eastern and Central European states (Figure 2.3.1). 2.3.2 Social capital Of course, the engagement of the citizens in CSOs is not only important from the viewpoint of political participation, for the influence it has on the activities of the national and local governments, but it also plays an important role in strengthening society’s general cohesion – its social capital. Social capital is defined as „features of social life – networks, norms and trust - that enable participants to act together more effectively to pursue shared objectives.” (Putnam 1995: 664-665). Based on U.S. data, Robert Putnam’s influential work Bowling Alone (2000) pointed out the role that social capital plays in the existence of an individual’s democratic experience and involvement in political life. The Legatum Prosperity Index (LPI) also includes indicators about the level of social capital. This input has two dimensions: firstly, societal cohesion, which is measured by trust, helpfulness and communication networks, with participation in volunteer work, and support from families and community networks also being taken into consideration; secondly, personal freedom, which includes freedom of movement, expression and belief, as well as social tolerance. The empirical studies of social capital have confirmed that insufficient social capital is accompanied by economic hardship. Social capital can be considered a resource of economic and social wellbeing. The positions of Estonia and the comparative states, based on the social capital component of the LPI, is shown in Table 2.3.2. We see that the LPI social capital indicator also confirms the fact that Estonia is at the forefront of the Eastern European states when it comes to the development of its civil society, but it still lags behind Scandinavia and the Central European states. At the same time, despite the indicators that have improved compared to 2010, participation in charity work and volunteering is still at a low level in Estonia. Forty percent of Estonians have provided help to a stranger, which is also a relatively low indicator. The existence of support networks has improved – 91% say they have someone to depend on in hard times. The marriage rate is very low in Estonia, as is the participation in religious activities. Comparing the values of the individual components of social capital in the Baltic states (Table 2.3.3), we see that the structure and general development level is quite similar. The role of one’s family and close friends is the Table 2.3.1 Sustainability of CSOs 2011 (on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is the best rating) Source: USAID Organisational capacity Financial viability Estonia 2.3 2.4 1.7 2.3 1.7 1.6 1.9 2 Poland 2.6 2.7 1.7 2.2 2.2 1.7 2.2 2.2 Czech Republic 3 3.2 2.1 2.4 2.8 2.8 2.4 2.7 Latvia 3 3.3 2.1 2.5 2.3 2.4 3.2 2.7 Slovakia 3 3.4 2.5 2.5 2.8 2.3 2.4 2.7 Slovenia 3.8 4.4 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.6 3.7 2.7 Lithuania 2.9 3.2 2 3.4 2.2 3 2.6 2.8 Average of the transition countries 2.9 3.2 2.2 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.7 Table 2.3.2 Rankings of the countries based on the social capital sub-index (ranks in the corresponding year) Advocacy Service provision Legal environment Infrastructure Public image General sustainability 2012 2011 2010 Denmark 2. 2. 2. New Zealand 4. 3. 3. Finland 5. 6. 6. Netherlands 6. 5. 5. Ireland 7. 10. 10. Switzerland 11. 13. 13. Austria 14. 16. 16. Israel 22. 24. 24. Taiwan 24. 29. 29. Estonia 30. 46. 43. Slovenia 36. 33. 33. Singapore 39. 32. 32. Czech Republic 45. 35. 35. Poland 46. 22. 22. Slovakia 47. 45. 45. Lithuania 49. 66. 49. South Korea 51. 52. 52. Uruguay 55. 56. 56. Costa Rica 66. 42. 42. Chile 69. 62. 62. Hungary 79. 77. 77. Latvia 86. 96. 92. Source: The 2012 Legatum Prosperity Index (LPI) Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013 75
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: would be something that none of the
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?