DEVELOPMENT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.4 The information environment and freedom of the media Peeter Vihalemm The freedom of media is closely related to general political freedom. Through the years, this has been high, based on both the Freedom House (Freedom of the Press) and Reporters Without Borders indices (22 nd and 11 th in the world, in 2012 and 2013, respectively). From the table, we see that in the majority of the countries used as reference states in this report, general developmental success is connected to great media freedom. The exceptions are Singapore, partly also Israel, Chile and South Korea, and during the last couple of years, Hungary (Table 2.4.2). For many years, the media in the Nordic countries has been considered to be the freest. According to the Freedom House assessments, Estonia, along with Germany and the U.S., are positioned between 14 and 22, slightly ahead of the Czech Republic. The position of Lithuania and Latvia was near this in 2007, but in subsequent years, has sharply decreased. This is related to the significant withdrawal of foreign capital from the Latvian and Lithuanian media markets from 2008 to 2010, similarly to many other Eastern and Central European countries. The new domestic owners (so-called “oligarchs”) have tried to use the media in their political and economic interests, and this has significantly restricted the freedom of the media, and has reduced the expert evaluations of it (Lauk 2012). At the media conference at Tallinn University, in May of 2012, it was affirmed that the situation of the Estonian media differs greatly from the other Eastern and Central Europe countries, in that we have no oligarchs who would control the media to an ever more significant extent (Kadastik 2012; Raudsaar 2012). The great decrease in the freedom of the media in Hungary during the last few years (Table 2.4.2) can be explained by the media law passed at the end of 2010, which promoted widespread protests by the public, as well as by the European Parliament. According to the 2012 assessment by Freedom House, Hungary is the only country in the European Union where the press is not free, but rather, only partly free. Here, it should be added that, in Russia, the freedom of media, like political freedom generally, has undergone a reversal since 1994, especially in the last decade, during Putin’s time in power. This has resulted in Russia being given an assessment of not free, starting in 2006. As far as Internet freedom is concerned, Estonia has placed first in the world for the second year in a row, according to Freedom House’s Freedom on the Net index (Table 2.4.3.). In the survey of this index, Estonia’s IT development and Internet services have been given a very high assessment – as far as communications technology Table 2.4.1 Positions of various states in the freedom of media ranking 2012–2013 Freedom House 2012 (197 countries) Rank Status Rank Finland 1. Free 1. Good Norway 1. Free 3. Good Sweden 1. Free 10. Good Denmark 5. Free 6. Good Netherlands 5. Free 2. Good Switzerland 5. Free 14. Good Ireland 13. Free 15. Good New Zealand 16. Free 8. Good Estonia 22. Free 11. Good Costa Rica 25. Free 18. Good Czech Republic 25. Free 16. Good Reporters Without Borders 2013 (179 countries) Assessment of media freedom Slovakia 31. Free 23. Satisfactory Lithuania 40. Free 33. Satisfactory Poland 47. Free 22. Satisfactory Slovenia 47. Free 35. Satisfactory Taiwan 47. Free 47. Satisfactory Uruguay 51. Free 27. Satisfactory Latvia 54. Free 39. Satisfactory Israel 65. Free 112. Chile 67. Partly free 60. Noticeable problems Noticeable problems South Korea 68. Partly free 50. Satisfactory Hungary 78. Partly free 56. Noticeable problems Singapore 150. Not free 149. Difficult situation Russia 172. Not free 148. Difficult situation China 187. Not free 173. Very serious situation Belarus 193. Not free 157. Difficult situation North Korea 197. Not free 178. Source: www.freedomhouse.org; www.rsf.org Very serious situation 78 Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013
is concerned, Estonia is one of the most developed countries in the world, and restrictions on Internet content are some of the most lenient. However, it must be taken into consideration that the Nordic countries, and several other European states, including Latvia and Lithuania, are missing from the study (in 2011, 37 countries were included, and 47 in 2012). A very important indicator for generally characterising an information environment is the extent to which the Internet is available and used (Figure 2.4.1). This is closely related to the level of IT development. Based on this indicator, Estonia is slightly above the European Union average, but is losing its advantage over the other new EU Member States. From the viewpoint of Internet use, the Nordic countries are in the leading position, but Australia and New Zealand are not far behind. The EU average is slightly lower than the U.S. average. The countries that are viewed as reference states for Estonia in this report are mostly the leading users of the Internet in their regions. An illustrative and important indicator for understanding the changes in the information environment is the dynamics of Internet use. Table 2.4.4 shows the corresponding data for the EU states from 2004 to 2012. In the course of eight years, from 2004 to 2012, Internet use in Estonia has increased 1.7 times, which is slightly less than the EU average (1.9 times). This confirms the deceleration of the pace of IT growth in Estonia during the last few years, compared to the late 1990s and early 2000s. The growth in Latvia and Lithuania (2.6 and 2.5 times, respectively) has been much faster than in Estonia. Due to their very low initial level, the tempo of growth has been even greater in Romania, Bulgaria and Greece, where Internet use in 2012 was much lower than in Estonia, but the gap has been decreasing. As far as the use of traditional media is concerned, Estonia also places slightly above the EU average. One of the most important traditional indicators of an information environment is newspaper distribution. The comparative indicators used here are the press runs of daily newspapers per 1,000 adults (Figure 2.4.4). Figure 2.4.2 shows that there are similar traits between newspaper distribution and Internet use – here too, the Nordic countries, and some South-East Asian states (Japan, South Korea, and Singapore) are in the leading positions. However, there are also many differences. Newspaper distribution in the U.S. and Australia is moderate and quite modest in the Latin American countries under observation, lagging behind India and China. During the Soviet era, newspaper distribution in Estonia was at the same level as in the Nordic countries, but circulation fell many times in the 1990s to the European average, but is still slightly higher than in Southern Europe. It is essential to note that the decrease in newspaper circulation in Estonia is compensated, somewhat, by the large readership of web publications and portals. According to Eurostat data (BNS 18.12.2012), news was read online by 91% of the Internet users in Estonia, 92% of the users in Lithuania, and 61%, on average, in the European Union. The use of Internet banking in Estonia is also significantly higher than the EU average, with Table 2.4.2 The positions of various countries in the freedom of media rankings, from 2007 to 2012, based on the assessment by Freedom House 2007 2009 2011 2012 Finland 1. 2. 1. 1. Norway 3. 2. 2. 1. Sweden 3. 5. 2. 1. Germany 16. 18. 16. 16. Estonia 16. 14. 22. 22. USA 16. 24. 16. 22. Lithuania 29. 24. 32. 40. Latvia 31. 43. 45. 54. Hungary 39. 33. 53. 78. Source: www.freedomhouse.org Figure 2.4.1 Internet use in various countries of the world Percentage Iceland Norway Netherlands Sweden Denmark Finland Australia New Zealand UK Germany South Korea Switzerland Japan Slovakia USA Estonia Ireland Taiwan Singapore EU 27 Czech Republic Slovenia Latvia Hungary Lithuania Poland Chile Uruguay Russia Costa Rica China Latin America average World average Asia average Africa average India Percentage 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Source: www.internetworldstats.com 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013 79
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: strongest, while a very small perce
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?