PUBLIC OPINION
ON SOCIAL PROBLEMS
A survey around
the Baltic Sea
EDITED BY
JACEK MOSKALEWICZ & CHRISTOFFER TIGERSTEDT
NAD PUBLICATION No. 36
1998
1
Published by:
Address:
Nordic Council for Alcohol
and Drug Research (NAD)
Annankatu 29 A 23
FIN-00100 Helsinki
FINLAND
Telephone:
Telefax:
E-mail:
WWW URL:
+358-9-694 80 82, +358-9-694 95 72
+358-9-694 90 81
[email protected]
http://www.kaapeli.fi/nad
The Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research (NAD) is an institution
financed by the Nordic Council of Ministers.
Cover design:
Anders Carpelan
Editorial secretary
& layout:
Maaria Lindblad
ISBN 951-53-1906-4
ISSN 0359-7024
Hakapaino Oy, Helsinki 1998
Contents
Introduction to the Baltica survey
Jacek Moskalewicz
Transitions on the map of social problems
Jacek Moskalewicz & Grażyna Świątkiewicz
Bright sides of the transition overshadowed by
new social problems
Ilze Trapenciere, Maruta Pranka & Ritma Rungule
5
15
43
Forgotten tunes of the Singing Revolution
Anu Narusk
67
Alarming cumulation of social problems
Vyacheslav Afanasyev & Yakov Gilinskiy
89
No light at the end of the tunnel
Birutė Šeršniova
119
From prosperity and overconsumption to hangover
Saija Järvinen
149
Threatening problems in a welfare state
Lena Hübner
187
Summary
209
Jacek Moskalewicz
Appendix A: Questionnaire for the Baltica study 1994
217
Authors & Editors
223
NAD Publications
225
3
Introduction to the Baltica survey
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Jacek Moskalewicz
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
General context of the Baltica study
The Baltica study was launched six years ago out of an interest in recent changes
taking place around the Baltic Sea. These changes have included both
fundamental transitions in economic and party-political systems along eastern
and southern shores, and less radical yet significant changes in Finland and
Sweden towards more liberal economic and social policies at the expense of
traditional welfare state principles. The focal concern of the Baltica study is with
the changes in the prevalence but also in the perception of associated social
problems.
The project was initiated by the Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research
(NAD), with all the countries around the Baltic Rim taking part. Following the
publication of its first book with up-to-date discussion on social problems in the
transition period (Simpura & Tigerstedt 1992), the project attracted even wider
international interest and was offered sponsorship from the World Health
Organization, Regional Office for Europe. The second Baltica book consists of
content analyses of representations of social problems in newspapers, which are
considered a major arena of the claims-making process (Lagerspetz 1994). The
third book of the project deals with journalists', administrators' and business
peoples' views on social problems (Hanhinen & Törrönen 1998). This fourth
report from the Baltica study presents the results of a survey which was carried
out in seven countries: Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the St.
Petersburg region and Sweden.
In spite of substantial differences between the former socialist countries and
Nordic capitalist democracies, it seems that all societies around the Baltic Sea
have become increasingly dominated by the anonymous market forces, often
referred to as an invisible hand. The role of the state has dwindled, while that of
civil society is not well articulated. This fundamental shift has been adopted and
apparently accepted as a remedy for unhealthy economies in the countries
concerned. Moreover, in former socialist countries enlarged democracy and
increased national sovereignty were expected to resolve the economic and social
problems with which they had been struggling for decades.
5
Unfortunately, the sudden transformations were not followed by rapid recovery.
In the early 1990s both sides of the Baltic Sea were hit by recession, inflation,
high unemployment as well as a variety of other problems. Especially in the
former socialist countries an acute economic crisis and fundamental social
change aggravated existing problems and created new ones, such as
unemployment, poverty, organized crime and drug abuse. In addition, the
transition period led to a dramatic deterioration of public health, particularly in
the three Baltic states and Russia.
Theoretical background
Independently of their epidemiological dimension, social problems around the
Baltic Sea have evolved in public perception. Questions which made headlines
in the 1980s disappeared from the front pages of newspapers and were replaced
by new issues (cf. Lagerspetz 1994). Much attention was given to the evolution
of those problems that were at the centre of public debate during the previous
regime and then with the new political system disappeared almost completely.
In Poland, alcoholism became a major social issue in the early 1980s during the
first legal period of Solidarity. The authorities were blamed for pushing alcohol
in order to achieve economic gains (Moskalewicz 1981; Bielewicz &
Moskalewicz 1982). At the beginning of the 1990s, health-oriented alcohol
policy lost its priority in Poland, while the alcohol market flourished
(Świątkiewicz 1997).
One of the key slogans of the Singing Revolution in Estonia and in the other
Baltic countries was the problem of environmental pollution, especially insofar
as it was related to the Soviet military presence. Once the Baltic states regained
their independence, the issue was rapidly pushed to the sidelines (Joenniemi &
Vares 1993; Simpura 1995).
These examples clearly go to show that the existence of a putative condition as a
social problem does not depend on its prevalence or character. What matters
most is the collective process in which social problems are constructed.
According to the constructivist tradition, this process of ”claims-making,
complaints and demands for the relief and amelioration of offensive conditions”
constitutes a social problem in itself (Spector & Kitsuse 1977, 96). This implies
that sociology should focus on social problems as activities rather than as
objective conditions.
Constructivism provoked much controversy. Its development gave rise to
various revisionist thoughts, including so-called contextual constructivism,
which is a compromise between the traditional approach and the orthodox
constructionist perspective (Goode & Ben-Jehuda 1992; Reinarman & Levine
1995; Best 1995) and which seems to come close to the spirit adopted in the
Baltica study. As postulated by Robin Room (1984),
(c)onstructivist analyses should resist any tendency to ignore or
discount objective realities which act at least as limits on the process of
social construction. People die of alcoholic cirrhosis, or in drunken carcrashes; others are harmed by drunken behavior; a drunken person
indeed is less capable of performing skillful tasks. These events are all
indeed subject to social construction as to their definition and
implications, and the recognition and import of the alcohol link, in
particular, is subject to construction. But there is still an objective
residue, no matter how it is constructed: the person is dead or harmed,
the task undone or done clumsily ... While Kitsuse and Spector propose
that attention to objective conditions ”would deflect attention from
investigation of the definitional process”, in actual practice, I believe
that a focus on the interplay between ideas and objective circumstances
has been a consistent feature — though often covert and ironic — of
the most influential constructivist analyses (Room 1984).
So far empirical application of constructivism was limited mainly to static,
relatively affluent societies where claims-making leads only to a slight
readaptation of existing structures or even to their petrification. In polarized
societies on the threshold of dramatic transitions, claims regarding particular
social problems represent hidden revolutionary messages that question the whole
social order. As long as open political demands can easily be repressed, social
problems become the first vehicles of change. Apparent claims on social
problems are to intercept moral and then political legitimization to reach power.
Blumer's classic interpretation is that societies in transition tend to attribute
social problems to ”presumed structural strains, upsets in the equilibrium of the
social system, dysfunctions, breakdown of social norms, clash of social values”
(Blumer 1971, 306). According to the prevailing way of thinking, solution of
these problems required structural political changes rather than a technical
response.
Claims regarding problems may include an assessment of their prevalence,
identification of causes, indication of those who should be blamed, moral
judgement and postulations of solutions. As Joseph Gusfield points out, the latter
two dimensions are necessary to constitute a social problem: ”Without both a
cognitive belief in alterability and a moral judgement of its character, a
phenomenon is not at issue, not a problem” (1981, 10).
Out of many potential dimensions of claims on social problems, this study set
out to explore their perceived prevalence, opinions regarding the threat
constituted by each problem, and last but not least, priorities in solving different
7
problems. In other words, the concept of social problem was analysed into three
dimensions, each of them being investigated separately.
While applying the survey methodology, it was assumed that public opinion
polls represent an important way of claims-making in modern societies. This
also includes opinions on the prevalence of various problems which may or may
not have anything to do with epidemiological assessments.
The survey
Sample
The Baltica survey was carried out in six of the participating seven countries in
1994, in Sweden during spring 1995. Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, and
Sweden took national random samples of the general population aged 18 or over,
Poland and Russia had regional samples of the Gdansk and the St. Petersburg
region, respectively. In each country the sample size was approximately 1,000
and the data were collected in face-to-face interviews. In Sweden, however, only
one question from the Baltica questionnaire was incorporated into the national
alcohol and drug survey carried out by mail.
Questionnaire
All the participating countries except Sweden used the same questionnaire in
which the focus was on the social perception of different problems rather than
their ”objective” prevalence. For purposes of designing the questionnaire, it was
assumed that in order to become a social problem, a condition has to be viewed
as prevalent in public opinion, to be perceived as threatening, and an expressed
need for its solution has to prevail in society. The respondents were asked to rate
these three different dimensions for the following twelve problems:
* Alcoholism and drunkenness
* Crime against person
* Drug abuse
* Economic crime
* Environmental pollution
* Domestic violence
* The nationality problem
* Public health problems
* Poverty
* Problems related to smoking
* Prostitution
* Unemployment
Additional items could be attached to this standard list of problems according to
local interests. Indeed in all countries except Poland and Estonia the lists
included additional items on gender inequalities (Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, St.
Petersburg, Sweden), the deterioration of cultural life, problems related to
privatization (Latvia, Lithuania, St. Petersburg), problems of education (Latvia,
Lithuania, St. Petersburg), and poor housing conditions and/or homelessness
(Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, St. Petersburg).
The standard Baltica questionnaire is attached as Appendix A (see pages 217222). Nevertheless, a brief description of the instrument may prove useful before
we turn to the findings from the individual countries.
The first section of the questionnaire consisted of three open-ended questions
regarding serious problems at the country, community and family levels. By
applying an open-ended questions approach, we wanted to identify those
problems of concern that might have been excluded from the core list
investigated in the following sections. Moreover, all three questions omitted the
adjective social so as to expand the potential problem areas outside the scope of
”social problems”. The rationale was thus to investigate all questions at issue,
including those that are not considered social in everyday language.
In the next section the open-ended approach was also adopted to investigate
positive tendencies at the country, community and family level. As a rule
surveys on social problems only ask about problematic conditions. In order to
obtain a more balanced picture of the social climate, the Baltica questionnaire
also included questions about positive tendencies. It was argued that social
problems require a wider context. Societies in which the bright sides of life are
present may be expected to have a different approach to solving social problems
than those in which the dark sides predominate.
The following section was composed of two forced-choice questions on the
prevalence of a dozen-or-so social problems that were listed in the questionnaire.
The prevalence of each problem at the country and then at the community level
had to be rated on a nine-point scale where nine represented the highest extent of
prevalence, one suggested that the problem is non-existent. The country and
community level were investigated because there was some evidence from
earlier studies that the perception of social problems may be different when the
question is considered at the national and local level. Problems considered
serious for society as a whole are not necessarily of concern to local
communities (Świątkiewicz 1989). The reverse may also be true.
Since social change is a crucial variable for the Baltica study, it was also decided
to include a time dimension in the questionnaire. The same set of two questions
was asked regarding the prevalence of problems five-six years earlier,
immediately before the transition period. It was expected that new groups of
interest emerging in recent years would redefine existing social problems or
9
attempt to shift public attention to other issues important for the new value
system and new interests. It was also taken into account that a period of sudden
transitions produces new problems which were not present before and may solve
some other painful questions.
Once they had evaluated the prevalence of different problems, the respondents
were asked to use the nine-point scale to rank how threatening they regarded the
investigated problems. This dimension of social problems was explored as a
complement to the question of prevalence. It was assumed that some problems,
although rare, may be regarded as threatening, while other frequent issues are
not necessarily of special concern. As no distinction was expected between the
country and community levels, only one question was formulated.
The last section of the questionnaire was devoted to priorities in solving the
investigated problems. This question again formulated at both the country and
community level, was virtually a forced-choice item as the respondents had to
select from a list three problems only whose solution they considered most
urgent. Since the claims regarding the solution of the problem or, as Gusfield
says, the ”cognitive belief in alterability” of a condition are crucial, this question
was formulated in a way that promised the strongest discriminatory power.
Typology of problems
It was assumed that the analysis of the concept of social problem into claims
regarding its prevalence, threatening nature and need for change (or priority for
solution) would lead to a typology of social problems that would take into
consideration their changing position in the 1990s. On the basis of the variability
of these three dimensions, social problems could be categorized as shown in the
figure below.
Figure 1
Typology of social problems.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
Threatening
Less
threatening
Less prevalent
Threatening
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
I
Most
developed
problem
Medium
priority
II
Developed
problem
Low
priority
IV
Potential
problem
III
Developed
problem
Less
threatening
VI
Potential
problem
IX
Potential
problem
V
Potential
problem
VIII
Potential
problem
XI
Marginal
problem
VII
Potential
problem
X
Marginal
problem
XII
Most
marginal
problem
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
This tool was inspired by a typology proposed by Clayton A. Hartjen (1977),
who combined the objective existence of a condition with the subjective
evaluation that change is necessary. In effect, four types of social problems
emerged: pure problems (when the objective condition and the need for change
co-exist), possible problems (when ”undesirable conditions” exist but their
change is not demanded), assumed problems (when the need for change of nonexistent conditions is expressed), and finally, no problem at all, when neither a
condition nor a subjective need to change it exist.
The typology adopted in the Baltica survey leans heavily towards the
constructivist approach. All its dimensions or aspects are subjective since the
opinions of respondents are treated as claims regarding the prevalence of a
problem, the threat it constitutes as well as the priority it is given.
Cell I (in the upper left corner) in the above typology is obvious. If a condition is
perceived as prevalent and threatening and if it enjoys high priority, the it
deserves the label ”most developed social problem”. ”Developed problems”
emerge when a condition is perceived as prevalent and highly threatening but
has medium priority (cell II), or when it is evaluated as prevalent, as having high
priority but perceived less threatening (cell III).
The bottom right-hand corner in the matrix (cells X-XII) consists of the opposite
world of ”marginal social problems”. If the prevalence of a condition is
evaluated as low and less threatening and if it does not have high priority, it can
be regarded as a marginal or most marginal problem. Threatening problems of
low prevalence and priority are also defined as marginal. It has to be underlined
11
again that their position has nothing to do with their epidemiological or objective
prevalence. As will become clear from the experiences of this project, some
problems such as gender inequality, domestic violence, drug abuse or ethnic
conflicts, all regarded by experts as serious, must be termed as marginal
problems because they are not at issue in public perception.
All other cells (IV-IX) are regarded as ”potential problems” that may easily
evolve into developed social problems with a slight increase in claims regarding
their prevalence, threat or priority. Although the typology contains cells for six
potential problems, it is unlikely that any problems will emerge in cells VI and
IX, i.e. having high priority and low prevalence. In practice, the claims-makers
in their initial claims underscore the high prevalence of a condition. The first
phases of the problem tend to be dominated by formulations like ”it is the tip of
the iceberg”, ”according to inofficial estimations the prevalence of this condition
is many times higher than in official statistics”, ”the hidden numbers here are
assumed to be very high”.
Questions of comparability
As mentioned, almost all the participating countries used the same questionnaire
in their surveys. In all countries the focus was on public perception or claims
regarding more or less the same set of problems. It is important to ask to what
extent these problems are similar or have the same name with different meanings
in different countries. Does poverty mean the same thing in St. Petersburg as it
does in Sweden, where GDP is many times higher and the poverty line is
probably much higher than the average income of the people of St. Petersburg?
Does domestic violence have the same meaning in Sweden and Finland on the
one hand, and in the more traditional Polish society on the other, where women
are much less emancipated? Such questions that could be asked about most of
the conditions investigated here as social problems, can hardly be answered in a
purely constructivist way. Therefore, the epidemiology of problems and often
their public representations in national media are discussed in all country
chapters in addition to (or as a context for) the survey. This contextual approach
was adopted to increase comparative understanding of the results of the study,
rather than to focus on differences between the perception and the ”objective”
existence of the problems under investigation.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
Best, J., ed. (1995): Images of Issues. Typifying Contemporary Social Problems. Aldine
de Gruyter, New York.
Bielewicz, A. & Moskalewicz, J. (1982). Temporary prohibition. The Gdansk
experience, August 1980. Contemporary Drug Problems, Fall: 367-381.
Blumer, H. (1971): Social problems as collective behavior. Social Problems, 18: 298306.
Goode, E. & Ben-Jehuda, N. (1992): Moral Panics. The Social Construction of
Deviance. Blackwell, Oxford UK & Cambridge USA.
Gusfield, J.R. (1981): The Culture of Public Problems. Drinking and Driving and the
Symbolic Order. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.
Hanhinen, S. & Törrönen, J. (1998): Journalists, administrators and business people on
social problems. A study around the Baltic Sea. NAD Publication No. 35. Nordic
Council for Alcohol and Drug research (NAD), Helsinki.
Hartjen C.A. (1977): Possible Trouble. An Analysis of Social Problems. Praeger
Publishers, New York.
Joenniemi, P. & Vares, P. (1993): New Actors on the International Arena: The Foreign
Policies of the Baltic Countries. Tampere Peace Research Institute, Tampere.
Lagerspetz, M., ed. (1994): Social Problems in Newspapers. Studies around the Baltic
Sea. NAD Publication No. 28. Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug research
(NAD), Helsinki.
Moskalewicz, J. (1981): Alcohol as a Public Issue. Recent Developments in Alcohol
Control in Poland. Contemporary Drug Problems, 10(1): 11-22.
Reinarman, C. & Levine, H.G. (1995): The Crack Attack: America's Latest Drug Scare,
1986-1992. In: Best, J., ed. (1995), op.cit., 147-190.
Room, R. (1984): Alcohol Problems and the Sociological Constructivist Approach:
Quagmire or Path Forward. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Epidemiology Section of ICAA, 4-8 June 1984, Edinburgh, Scotland.
Simpura, J., ed. (1995): Social Policy in Transition Societies. Experiences from the
Baltic Countries and Russia. The Finnish ICSW Committee, The Finnish Federation
for Social Welfare, Helsinki.
Simpura, J. & Tigerstedt, C., eds. (1992): Social Problems around the Baltic Sea. NAD
Publication No. 21. Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug research (NAD), Helsinki.
Spector, M. & Kitsuse, J. (1977): Constructing Social Problems. Menlo Park, CA.
Cummings.
Świątkiewicz, G. (1989): Changing Perception of Alcohol-Related Problems. Paper
presented at annual meeting of the Kettil Bruun Society for Social and
Epidemiological Research on Alcohol, Maastricht, June 1989.
Świątkiewicz, G. (1997): Regulating unregulated markets. Addiction: 92; Supplement 1:
67-72.2.
13
Transitions on the map
of social problems
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Jacek Moskalewicz & Grażyna Świątkiewicz
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Introduction
Review of previous studies
There is a long tradition of studying social problems in Poland from the
perspective of social pathology. As early as the 1960s Podgórecki formulated a
definition which had a long-lasting impact on Polish sociology. According to his
definition pathology constituted a behaviour, institution or social structure which
was in conflict with the dominant value system of a given society (Podgórecki
1968). The moral assessment of various phenomena and the interplay between
penal sanctions and moral condemnation became a focal concern for research. It
was found that a large part of society tended morally to condemn behaviours that
were not penalized, such as prostitution or suicide. On the other hand, bribery or
theft from a state-owned factory were much less readily condemned, in contrast
to severe legal sanctions.
The next attempts at studying social problems aimed to combine moral
judgement with their ”objective” prevalence. High prevalence, norm-violating
character as much as their harmfulness for society constituted major dimensions
of social pathology (Wódz 1973; Jasiński 1986). However, as noted by
Kwaśniewski, there was an intrinsic contradiction in this approach since more
prevalent behaviours were much less likely to be morally condemned (e.g. petty
theft of social property). In his reflections on the ontological status of social
pathology, Kwaśniewski postulates that instead of being a criterion for the
”objective” identification of social problems, social assessment should become a
major subject of research. Thus, the question of whether alcoholism is a major
problem should be replaced by the question of why alcoholism is considered a
social problem today (Kwaśniewski 1992).
In its first surveys on ”negative social phenomena”, the biggest Polish public
opinion research centre CBOS asked the respondents to mention phenomena that
they thought were harmful, threatening and most threatening. Finally, the
respondents were asked to express their moral judgement of the phenomena.
According to a survey conducted in 1983, alcoholism was considered harmful
and most threatening by 39% and 27%, respectively, of the respondents in an
15
open-ended question. Over 80% morally condemned alcoholism. At the top of
the list of most threatening problems were alcoholism, drug abuse, drunkenness,
hooliganism, thefts, speculation, bribery and murders (CBOS 1984, 1985).
By the mid-1980s the CBOS had formulated a set of 17 problems. Drunkenness,
economic crime, juvenile delinquency and drug abuse were regarded as very
threatening by more than 70% of the respondents. Further, 50-70% defined the
following as very threatening phenomena: social indifference, bribery and a
variety of negative employee behaviours, including drinking and petty theft in
the workplace, waste of materials, time, labour and money, abuse of position,
poor quality of work as well as avoidance of employment (social parasitism) and
speculation (CBOS 1986).
During the 1992-95 period the CBOS carried out five surveys on social
problems. Substantial changes were made both to methodology and to the list of
problems. From a list of twelve problems, the respondents were asked to select
the three most important problems facing the country. The map of problems
which emerges is dominated by unemployment (two-thirds of the respondents),
poverty (half), incompetent, irresponsible government (30-45%), crime, mafia
groups (22-35%), environmental pollution (about one-third), and alcoholism
combined with drug abuse (less than 20%). This ranking order seems to have
been fairly stable throughout the period, with the possible exception of crime
(CBOS 1995, Table 1).
The list of problems presented during the transition period differs markedly from
the previous ones. All problems related to poor performance at work, avoidance
of employment, speculation and so on disappeared completely. Alcoholism and
drug abuse lost their dominant position, while new problems — unemployment
and poverty followed by crime, incompetent government and environmental
pollution — came to the fore.
Table 1 Perception of problems at the country level (CBOS general
population surveys).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Which of the problems faced by our country do you consider most important?
From the list below, please indicate no more than three problems.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Percentages of responses in consecutive surveys
VII'92 I'93
III'93
I'94
I'95
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Unemployment
Too low incomes,
too high prices
Incompetent, irresponsible
government
Crime, mafia 22
Environmental pollution
Alcoholism, drug abuse
Downfall of manners,
demoralization
Shortage of food, hunger
Possibility of social unrest
Adverse consequences
of privatization
Possibility of a conflict
with neighbouring states
Breakdown of a nuclear
power plant
66
69
70
65
65
59
49
52
54
52
43
25
31
18
45
23
29
12
44
28
31
16
30
35
29
18
40
14
11
14
11
20
19
12
11
13
16
14
13
16
16
11
15
11
15
17
9
1
5
-
3
4
3
5
-
3
4
28
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Source: CBOS (1995).
Notes on the epidemiology of selected problems
During the second half of the 1980s, the centrally planned economy exhausted
its potential for efficient development. Market economy was perceived as the
only remedy. However, the introduction of the new system required popular
support, and that could not be achieved without significant political concessions.
The attempts by the military government to put the market rules into effect were
contested by the opposition and resisted by society. As a result the economy
performed poorly, investments were virtually non-existent, and rationing of
basic foodstuffs had to be continued.
During this period the prevalence of major social problems tended to level off,
or even decline, as indicated by epidemiological and statistical data.
The sudden political change of 1989 triggered some dramatic transformations in
social and economic life, followed by an eruption of a variety of social
problems. In addition to an increase in existing problems, Poland witnessed a
rapid growth of unemployment, organized crime and homelessness.
17
To provide a background, for the analyses later on, the discussion below will
look at the main statistical trends in the prevalence of those social problems that
were included in the Baltica questionnaire. We shall also look at some
impressions on recent changes in their social definition.
Alcohol
As in many other parts of the world alcohol consumption in Poland increased
rapidly in the post-war period. The high wave of growth suddenly declined by
25% at the beginning of the 1980s. By the mid-1980s, consumption had
stabilized at the level of 7 litres of ethanol per capita. Then, from the very
beginning of transition in 1989, the supply of alcohol began sharply to increase
(Lehto & Moskalewicz 1994; Świątkiewicz 1997). On the basis of surveys and
health indicators it is estimated that consumption reached the level of 9-10 litres
per capita (Sierosławski 1992). These estimations, however, are not confirmed
by official sales statistics, which do not cover the huge volume of smuggled
alcohol and illegal production.
The assumed growth of consumption, especially during the first years of
transition, was associated with and confirmed by (1) a sudden increase in
admissions due to alcohol psychoses, (2) increased male mortality due to chronic
liver diseases and cirrhosis, as well as (3) an increase of 50% in male mortality
due to motor vehicle accidents from 1988 to 1991 (Moskalewicz et al. 1997).
There has been a long tradition in Poland of treating alcohol as a political
problem. It has figured centrally in every political crisis during the post-war
period. In 1981, the alcohol question constituted yet again a political and moral
challenge. The first independent trade union in the countries of ”real socialism”
— ”Solidarity” — blamed the regime for pushing alcohol in order to make it
easier to manipulate society. As a consequence of public debate, the availability
of alcohol was drastically limited and a new alcohol law drafted. The law was
eventually passed under the martial law as a symbol of the continuation of
reforms initiated during the ”Solidarity” period.
The 1989 political shift implied an immediate marketization and privatization of
the economy. All forms of state control and intervention were rejected. The
state-directed alcohol control system was presented as a symbol and relic of
socialism. Individual responsibility was supposed to replace restrictions in
access to alcohol. Thus, in public debate of that time, alcohol harm was replaced
by economics of alcohol, including numerous scandals and corruption associated
with privatization.
Drugs
It is virtually impossible to estimate the consumption of illegal drugs. During the
past three decades the epidemiological trends in Poland have been traced on the
basis of health and police statistics. For the first 20 post-war years drug abuse
was primarily of an individual and medical character. It was not until the late
1960s young people started to use psychoactive drugs on a larger scale. At that
time the main category of drugs was represented by legal psychoactive
medicines. By the mid-1970s, health and police statistics recorded several
hundred addicts each year.
The sharp increase in these numbers in the late 1970s and early 1980s was
attributed to a new technology for the production of home-made opiates. Addicts
used domestic poppy straw to make a new product called ”kompot” or Polish
heroin. From 1978 to 1984 the number of hospitalizations due to drug
dependence increased five times over from 800 to 4,000, while the number of
addicts recorded by the police tripled from 6,000 to 16,000. This trend was
reversed from 1985 on. Until the beginning of the transition the numbers tended
to decline.
The statistical evidence suggests that since the beginning of transition, drug
abuse has been increasing, albeit at a slower pace than most other social
problems. By the mid-1990s the number of hospitalizations due to drug abuse
was about 4,500, while the number of addicts recorded in police statistics was
less than 18,000. It is estimated that the total number of addicts in Poland is
between 20,000 and 40,000 (approximately one per mille of the population).
According to school surveys drug abuse is very unevenly distributed. About
10% of the students in the highest form at secondary schools have ever used
illegal drugs (CBOS 1994). The share of those who use drugs once a month or
more often does not exceed 2-3%, while the proportion of more regular users is
less than one per cent.
It was not until the first ”Solidarity” period in 1980-1981 that drug abuse was
identified, defined and discussed as a social problem. This took place in a public
debate on various social questions which were previously hidden by censorship.
Unlike alcohol, it was claimed that drug abuse was a generational problem that
could be solved by medical treatment and rehabilitation.
In 1985, the Polish government adopted a new law on the prevention of drug
abuse. Unlike legislation in other countries, Poland did not penalize either the
use or the possession of drugs.
In recent years there has been a strong movement pushing for more repressive
legislation. This new approach is supported by the mass media, where the
criminal side of drug abuse is covered much more frequently than before
(Świątkiewicz & Moskalewicz 1994).
19
Crime
Crime statistics have shown the most dramatic changes in response to recent
transformations. In 1990, the crime rates were almost twice as high as in 1988,
and they remained at the same, relatively high level until 1994. In spite of this
stabilization at the aggregate level, the most severe crimes showed a rising trend.
For example, the number of homicides increased from 730 in 1990 to 1,106 in
1993, while the number of injuries jumped from 10,152 to 16,646, respectively.
Crime has become an important issue in the mass media and in politics. The real
threat has been reinforced in the social and individual perception by dramatic
media coverage of exceptionally cruel crimes to increase panic. This has served
to rebuild the image of the police force, which had been discredited as a major
agent of the totalitarian state, as well as to reintroduce law and order.
In addition, organized crime and economic scandals have received much media
coverage. Economic transformations, changes in legislation, purges in public
administration and law enforcement offered numerous opportunities for new
fortunes associated with corruption and fraud.
Unemployment
As in the rest of the socialist world, unemployment was a non-existent problem
in Poland for more than four decades after World War II. The introduction of
new economic rules changed the situation dramatically. Between the beginning
of 1990 and the end of 1993, the number of people out of work increased from
266,000 to almost 3,000,000, i.e. from 1.5% to 16.4% of the labour force. From
1994 onwards the unemployment rate began to decline, and by mid-1995 the
figure was down to 13%. There is considerable regional variation in
unemployment from about 3% in Warsaw and other large cities to 30% in the
agricultural regions mainly in the northern part of the country.
Ruling politicians and the mass media present unemployment as a major
inevitable cost that has to be paid en route to market economy and democracy.
On the other hand, full employment is defined as a symbol of the inefficient
socialist economy.
Domestic violence
In spite of women's active participation in the labour market, the Polish family
has retained many of its traditional features, including the distinction between
male and female duties, rights and obligations. The privacy of family life and the
dominant position of the husband have traditionally been highly respected. In
this context domestic violence has always been prevalent and considered almost
as a normal part of family life. It is only recently that it has become a public
issue. Initially the new problem was introduced through the vehicle of
alcoholism, with instances of children or even newborn babies being beaten and
injured by alcoholic parents presented in the media. More recently there has
been growing recognition that domestic violence is a universal problem which
occurs in all social classes.
Metaphorically speaking, the coalition which has wanted to highlight the
problem of domestic violence is composed of professional helpers, feminist
movements as well as some journalists.
The nationality problem
After World War II Poland became ethnically a very homogenous country.
Today, Poles account for more than 90% of the population. This is in sharp
contrast to the situation before the war when the proportion of Poles was less
than two-thirds and some towns or regions were dominated by Jews, Ukrainians,
Byelorussians or Germans.
Nevertheless, the nationality problem resurfaced in the early 1980s during the
first legal period of ”Solidarity” when some riots against Gypsies erupted.
National tensions were heightened again during the recent transitions when
minorities took the liberty to articulate their demands concerning their political
and cultural rights. Germans, Ukrainians, Byelorussians, and Lithuanians have
been particularly active, Gypsies and Jews less so. On the other hand, extreme
nationalist parties have also appeared on the Polish political scene, although they
have not gained much popularity. The Jewish question constitutes a separate
issue. From time to time anti-Semitic arguments are used in political campaigns,
but without much impact on citizens political choices.
Environmental pollution
Ecological awareness at the grassroots level increased in Poland in the late
1970s and early 1980s. Since then the volume of industrial emissions has slowly
been on the decline, partially in response to pressures from public opinion and
declining industrial output. Water pollution, however, is still on the rise. Sewage
treatment plants are rare, even in big cities which draw their water direct from
the rivers. About 50% of all rivers are polluted by chemical standards, over 90%
by biological standards.
Health problems
Compared with most Western European countries public health in Poland is
rather poor. For the last 30 years life expectancy for males has varied between
21
66.5-67.5 years, while for women it has increased from 75.0 years in 1975 to
76.6 years in 1994. The infant mortality rate, although systematically decreasing,
is still 15 deaths per 1,000 live births. Premature mortality among middle-aged
men is considered a real problem. Since 1965 life expectancy in this population
has decreased by two years.
In recent years the deterioration of public health has become an issue of public
debate. One of the contributing factors is the reduced availability of free health
services.
Problems caused by smoking
Poland is one of the worlds biggest consumers of cigarettes. For the last 20 years
consumption has exceeded 2,500 cigarettes per capita. It is estimated that 50%
of men and 26% of women over 15 years of age are regular smokers.
The availability and new brands of cigarettes increased very rapidly during the
transition period. Tobacco ads appeared in Poland for the first time since the
war. Illegal imports flourished, particularly in the early 1990s. It is only very
recently that the tobacco market has become stabilized.
The anti-tobacco lobby, consisting mostly of professionals from prestigious
medical institutes, is very active and visible. On the other hand, the tobacco
industry including powerful international companies is still very influential.
Prostitution
Prostitution is not penalized in Poland, and therefore there are no law
enforcement statistics that could be used to estimate its prevalence. According to
media reports and personal observations, prostitution has been on the rise during
the past few years. In addition to persons offering sexual services in hotels, the
sex industry including massage saloons and escort services has been growing.
Cross-border prostitution involving teenage girls and boys travelling to Berlin to
earn pocket money, has become a matter of serious concern.
Poverty
Although real income has been on the rise for the past three-four years after a
dramatic drop in the early 1990s, the number of poor people has not decreased.
There are different criteria for poverty. About 2.5 million people (6%) live
below subsistence level, defined as 100 zloty (40 USD) per month, which is
considered to be ”absolute poverty”. About 20 million inhabitants (50%) have a
monthly income of less than 250 zloty (100 USD), which is defined as a social
minimum.
According to a recent report from the World Bank, the number of Polish persons
living in ”absolute poverty” was very low prior to 1989. At that time poverty
was related to social pathology; today its major causes are unemployment and
low income (Montgomery 1996).
Material
A survey was carried out in the Gdańsk province in spring 1994. Gdańsk was
selected not only because of its coastal location, which was appropriate for the
Baltica study, but also because of its importance as a cradle of ”Solidarity”.
The survey comprised a random sample of the population aged 18-55. Out of the
original sample of 1,500 people, 863 (57.5%) were interviewed. Non-response
was explained mainly by high mobility and frequent changes of place of
residence, either temporarily or permanently.
The structure of the sample corresponded roughly with that of the Gdańsk
region. As in the general population, the proportion of women in the sample
(51%) slightly exceeded that of men. Urban dwellers represented 73%. Onequarter of the sample had eight years of schooling or less, two-thirds up to 12
years; less than 10% had a university education. More than 50% of the
respondents were employed, while 14% were unemployed. The remaining
respondents were pensioners, students and housewives. As far as social structure
is concerned, people with a working-class background represented more than
half of the sample, white-collar employees accounted for 28%, farmers for 8%
and entrepreneurs for 6%. All respondents except five were Polish nationals.
Perception of problems as reflected by open-ended questions
A long list of problems surfaced in response to the open-ended questions, which
constituted the first section of the interview. Most of the problems were also
covered in its next parts in the forced-choice questions. However, the 12
problems included in that preset list appeared very rarely in the responses to the
open-ended questions. For example, domestic violence, the nationality problem,
problems caused by smoking and prostitution, which received much media
attention and research interest, seemed to be far less visible to the rest of society.
Contrary to our expectations, none of the respondents mentioned abortion, which
became a public issue in the 1990s with the introduction of repressive antiabortion legislation. Even this apparently dramatic question did not reach the
status of a social problem in Poland where more than 90% of the population are
Catholics.
23
Only one per cent of the respondents saw no problems at the country level, while
the corresponding proportion at the community level was 11%. The same
proportion, 11%, were fortunate enough to feel they had no problems in their
families. At least 90% reported some problems either at the country, community
or family level. Unemployment and poverty dominated among problems at the
country level and were indicated by 60% and 50% of the respondents,
respectively. These issues were followed by political and economic questions,
but the proportions were markedly lower (10-22% of the sample). Numerous
issues were mentioned by less than 10% each.
The respondents made a clear distinction between country and community
levels, although the wording of the question (”Which of these problems are
prevalent in your community?”) encouraged repetition of the same problems in
response to both questions. At the community level, the distribution of problems
was much more dispersed. The top problem was infrastructure (transport,
communication, water and energy supply, etc.), reported by one-third of the
respondents. The proportion of respondents who mentioned unemployment and
poverty was three times smaller than at the country level. Other problems
mentioned by approximately 10% of the respondents were as follows:
hooliganism, environmental pollution and social consequences of changes. This
latter heading included such aspects as social disintegration, lack of solidarity,
value crisis, increasing economic inequality, intolerance, exploitation of
employees, and lack of perspectives for employees as well as for younger
generations. Interestingly enough, references to the psychological consequences
of recent transitions such as feelings of helplessness, anxiety, depression,
hopelessness, and frustration were made much less frequently (2%) than to
social consequences.
The predominant problem at the family level was poverty, which affected more
than one-third of the respondents. This is twice as large a proportion as at the
community level, suggesting that at least 50% of those affected by poverty did
not perceive it as a problem in their community. The second most frequent
problem at the family level was unemployment, which affected 25% of the
families.
The open-ended question on problems affecting the respondents family offered
an opportunity to estimate the prevalence of problems related to health and
substance abuse. Three per cent of the respondents complained about health
problems in their families. Alcoholism was also mentioned by approximately
three per cent, while drug abuse affected no more than 0.5% of the families.
Perception of the bright sides of life
The open-ended questions regarding positive trends in life were supposed to
counter-balance the darker, problematic perspective raised at the beginning of
the interview. Nevertheless, the list of these trends is much shorter than that of
problems. More than 40% of the respondents either did not see any positive
trends at the country level or were unable to indicate even a single positive trend
(Table 2). Among those who did specify positive trends, the majority mentioned
no more than one.
Table 2 Positive trends perceived at the country level (Baltica Survey,
Gdańsk-1994).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Positive trend
Frequency
Per cent
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Better market supply
213
Positive political changes
Positive economic changes
Changes in value system73
Other positive trends
70
Better care of environment
and infrastructure 44
Improved environmental protection
Positive social changes
I do not see any positive trends
Don't know
24.7
165
143
8.5
8.1
1
19.1
16.6
4
5
5.1
28
25
293
86
6
3.2
2.9
34.0
10.0
Rank
2
3
7
8
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
At the country level, the positive change mentioned most often was the improved
market supply, which was indicated by every fourth respondent. For many
people the recent transformation seemed to be associated with the better
availability and wider range of consumer goods. The enormous wealth of
domestic and imported commodities was in sharp contrast to the pretransformation market, which suffered from permanent shortages of basic
commodities.
Close on 20% referred to positive political changes, such as democratization,
freedom of speech and travel, other civic liberties, and the right to strike. Almost
the same number or 17% mentioned positive economic changes, including
marketization, privatization, convertibility of currency, and economic
development.
Other positive trends such as changes in value systems, positive social changes,
and improved environmental protection were mentioned by several per cent
each.
At the community level there were even fewer trends that inspired positive
comments. There were two trends that were mentioned by more than 20% of the
respondents, i.e. improved care of the infrastructure and improved market
supply. Several per cent mentioned other positive phenomena, including local
25
democracy.
The positive trends of improved market supply and infrastructure were also
mentioned by about 20% at the family level.
It is particularly interesting to see that 30% of the respondents did not see a
single positive change at either the country, community or family level. The
people who are most likely not to acknowledge the benefits of the new system
have no more than primary education, a low income and live in the countryside.
The social class dimension has great discriminatory power and sharply divides
our sample into two distinct groups. While close on 40% of the farmers and
manual workers see no positive trends, the proportion among white-collars
employees and businessmen is twice as low.
The benefits of the transition are mainly perceived by people with a university
education, with a high level of income, by businessmen and people living in
major cities.
Current prevalence of problems
Some of the findings based on the open-ended questions were confirmed by the
responses to the forced-choice items, where assessments were given on a ninepoint scale. In the Polish survey no optional problems were added to the basic
list of 12 problems. (Table 3).
Unemployment and poverty, which dominated in the responses to the openended questions, were supplemented here as the most prevalent problems by a
group of issues ranging from public health to crime issues. At the country level
their mean values approximated seven on the nine-point scale, with the median
varying between seven and eight. It should be underlined that questions crucial
from a public health perspective — including problems caused by smoking,
environmental pollution, drunkenness and alcoholism as well as poor public
health — achieved the highest scores.
Table 3 Current prevalence of problems at the country level (Baltica Survey,
Gdańsk-1994).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
7.46
7.31
7.24
7.07
6.99
1.79
6.51
6.50
5.14
4.48
4.36
3.55
1.55
1.67
1.66
1.56
1.83
7
1.94
1.93
1.94
1.85
1.89
2.07
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problems caused by smoking
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Environmental pollution
Poor health of the population
Unemployment
Crime against person6.77
Poverty
Economic crime
Drug abuse
Domestic violence
Prostitution
The nationality problem
8
7
8
7
7
4
7
7
5
4
4
3
Rank
1
2
2
3
3
5
5
6
7
7
8
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problems were classified as having the same rank if differences in mean values were
statistically insignificant (>.05).
The perceived prevalence of the four remaining problems (drug abuse, domestic
violence, prostitution and the nationality problem) lagged far behind this highscoring group.
The perceived prevalence of problems at the community level is much lower than
at the country level (Table 4). By and large the problems are ranked in the same
way as at the country level. However, at the community level the problems are
much more evenly distributed.
The consistent difference between the values given at the country level and at
the community level deserves separate mention. Clearly, these two levels are
perceived as somewhat different worlds with respect to social problems. It seems
that social problems are more easily associated with distant things, with what is
happening ”out there”. The most outstanding examples are provided by crime
and drug abuse, which show the sharpest differences between the country versus
community level. It is interesting to speculate on the question as to what extent
the perception of social problems is more closely connected to the mediated
world (country level), formed among others by the mass media, than to the more
immediate world (community level).
27
Table 4 Current prevalence of problems at the community level (Baltica
Survey, Gdańsk-1994).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
6.80
6.08
5.98
5.85
5.69
5.52
2.52
4.08
3.28
3.13
2.82
2.35
1.77
2.01
2.22
2.16
2.52
2.16
5
2.59
1.98
2.18
2.16
1.92
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problems caused by smoking
Poor health of the population
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Unemployment
Environmental pollution
Poverty
Crime against person4.93
Economic crime
Domestic violence
Drug abuse
Prostitution
The nationality problem
7
6
6
6
6
5
5
4
3
3
2
1
Rank
1
2
2
3
3
4
6
7
7
8
9
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problems were classified as having the same rank if differences in mean values were
statistically insignificant (>.05).
Current prevalence
prevalence
in the late 1980s
of
problems
versus
their
previous
Comparing perceptions of the current (1994) prevalence of social problems with
their prevalence six years previously is not just a matter of epidemiological
”facts”. In a way, it is a political judgement of how far the new system is
superior or inferior to the ancien régime in the very area of producing and
solving social problems.
Without exception, our respondents thought that all 12 problems were less
prevalent six years previously. In other words, the opinion prevailed that the
period of dramatic transformations was followed or accompanied by a rise in the
prevalence of social problems.
As can be concluded from the low values of standard deviations, there is quite a
broad consensus of opinion that the prevalence of social problems in Poland has
increased in recent years. At first glance it seems that the order of the problems
has not changed very much. The top positions were occupied on both occasions
by smoking, pollution, alcoholism and poor public health. Several problems,
however, such as unemployment, poverty and drug abuse, rose from lowly
positions to much higher ones.
The difference in the mean values of current and previous prevalence can be
used to measure the extent of changes perceived in our survey. By far the most
dramatic deterioration was observed with regard to unemployment, followed by
poverty, crime, drug abuse, and finally public health. Changes for the worse
were perceived as least dramatic among the most prevalent problems, like
smoking, alcoholism and environmental pollution, and among those problems
that were described as least prevalent, i.e. prostitution, the nationality problem
and domestic violence (Table 5).
Table 5 Comparison between current and previous prevalence of problems at
the country level (Baltica Survey, Gdańsk-1994).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Difference in
mean values
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Unemployment
Poverty
Crime against person
Economic crime
Drug abuse
Poor health of the population
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Environmental pollution
Prostitution
Problems caused by smoking
The nationality problem
Domestic violence
4.58
2.84
1.73
1.70
1.62
1.44
0.92
0.83
0.73
0.67
0.59
0.47
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
It is striking that only less than 20% of the population acknowledges any
improvement at all. The vast majority feels that the situation has deteriorated or
not changed at all. For seven out of the 12 problems, the majority of the
respondents said they had changed for the worse. The growth in the prevalence
of unemployment, poverty and ordinary crime seems to be the most visible
trend.
The perception of changes in the prevalence of social problems is evenly
distributed across the demographic structure. No significant differences were
observed by sex, age or place of residence. However, people with a higher
education, white-collar employees and people with a higher income are more
likely to acknowledge changes for the better than people occupying lower social
positions.
How threatening are the problems?
Questions aimed at measuring the threat represented by different problems
proved to have low discriminatory power. Nine out of the twelve problems were
perceived as highly threatening, with the median score either seven or eight and
29
the mean ranging from seven to eight as well (Table 6).
Table 6 Ranking according to threat represented by different problems
(Baltica Survey, Gdańsk-1994).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
Median
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Unemployment
Environmental pollution
Poor health of the population
Crime against person7.32
Poverty
Problems caused by smoking
Drug abuse
Economic crime
Domestic violence
Prostitution
The nationality problem
7.66
7.64
7.57
7.48
1.77
7.27
7.25
7.21
6.99
6.00
5.34
4.61
1.70
1.88
1.77
1.63
8
1.71
1.74
2.00
1.89
2.18
2.42
2.46
8
8
8
8
3
8
8
8
7
6
5
5
1
1
1
2
3
3
3
4
5
6
7
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problems were classified as having the same rank if differences in mean values were
statistically insignificant (>.05).
Clearly lower positions were occupied by domestic violence, prostitution and the
nationality problem.
At first glance it seems that the scale of threats roughly reflects the perceived
prevalence of different problems (see Table 3 and 4). With the exception of drug
abuse, all problems at the bottom end of the prevalence scale were assessed as
less threatening than the others. The case of drug abuse shows that there may be
important exceptions to this rule. The special status of this problem may be
related to its image, which has convinced the general public that drug abuse
represents a real threat to society. This interpretation is supported by our
findings that show a much higher prevalence for drug abuse at the country level
than at the community level. In addition to a fear of drug abuse as such, it is felt
that drug abuse together with unemployment, poverty and crime constitutes a
group of growing problems (see Table 5). Thus, drug abuse is located among
problems caused by recent transformations.
Priorities in solving problems
For the measurement of priorities in problem-solving, the respondents were
asked to select three out of twelve problems that they thought had to be
addressed most urgently (Figure 1). At the country level, unemployment
emerged more or less unanimously as the top problem: more than 80% identified
this problem. This is related to its high scores on all previous scales and its top
position in the open-ended questions. Moreover, unemployment was rated as the
problem that had grown most rapidly during the recent transitions.
The position of second most urgent issue is shared by five different problems,
each mentioned by approximately one-third of the respondents. Two of these
were economic issues: economic crime and poverty, three were questions of
paramount importance for public health: poor health of the population,
drunkenness and alcoholism and environmental pollution. In contrast to the
previous scales, smoking appears very low down on the list of priorities (4%).
The same goes for drug abuse: highly rated as a threat, it is not thought to
require urgent attention (14%).
The respondents make clear distinctions between problems that need to be
solved at the country and the community level, respectively. Unemployment is
rated slightly lower at the community level, while most health-related problems
were indicated more frequently. Issues like environmental pollution, poor health
of the population, and drunkenness and alcoholism were identified as priority
concerns by around 40% of the respondents at the community level. Smoking
also ranked higher at this level (11 vs. 4%). On the other hand, the relatively
weak support indicated for resolving drug problems at the country level (14%)
decreased further by one half when it came to the community level.
An interesting shift occurred in opinions concerning crime. At the community
level, crime against person was identified as an urgent problem by close on 30%
of the respondents, at the country level by 20%. On the other hand, while
economic crime was perceived as a priority issue at the country level by onethird, the corresponding proportion at the community level was only half of that.
It seems that priorities at the community level have to do with questions which
affect the respondents everyday life, particularly health and personal security.
These problems are not only directly visible, but also supposed to be solved by
the community. The fact that unemployment and economic crime are regarded
as less urgent at the community level would suggest that these problems need to
be addressed by central government authorities.
There were very few differences between the priorities of men and women and
different age groups. However, environmental pollution and health constitute
important exceptions to this rule. Young people aged under 25 are much more
sensitive to environmental questions and much less concerned with poor public
health.
As far as social class, income and education are concerned, there are only a few
problems where opinions are relatively uniform. People occupying different
positions in the social structure share the opinion that alcoholism and poor
public health should be given priority, while domestic violence, prostitution as
well as the nationality problem are the least urgent issues.
31
Opinions concerning most other problems are far more differentiated across the
social structure. Although unemployment is identified as a priority problem by
the majority of respondents, people with a university education and with the
highest income are less concerned: unemployment is a priority issue for more
than two-thirds of the respondents without a university education, but for less
than half of those with a university degree. Also, poverty is given much higher
priority by people who have a low income and primary education, by farmers
and by people living in the countryside. The higher the respondents social
position, the weaker is the expressed social concern. Close on 50% of the people
with a low income want urgently to solve poverty problems, while the
corresponding proportion for those in the middle and highest income brackets is
one-third and one-fifth, respectively.
The exact opposite tendency is visible with regard to concerns over crime
against person (Table 7). At the community level 45% of people in the high
income bracket but only 20% of those with a low income identify this as a
priority problem. The discrepancy is even greater between different educational
levels. Crime is identified as a priority by 52% of people with a university
degree, by 36% with secondary education, by 26% with vocational schooling
and only by 14% with primary education. A similar trend is observed with
regard to environmental pollution. People with good incomes, with a higher
education, and people living in big cities are much more concerned than others.
Table 7 Crime against person as a social priority at the country and
community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Independent variables
Country
F
%
Community
F
%
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Sex:
Male
Female
92
90
21.8
20.4
131
117
31.0
26.6
Age:
17-24
25-44
45+
45
91
46
23.0
23.5
16.5
57
133
58
29.1
34.5
20.9
Place of residence:
Village
Small town
City
28
25
129
11.9
14.5
28.4
25
43
180
10.6
25.0
39.6
Social class:
Farmer
Manual worker
White collar
Businessman
10
79
66
17
15.6
17.6
26.8
33.3
9
103
97
23
14.1
22.9
39.4
45.1
Education:
Primary
Vocational
Secondary
University
25
55
79
23
11.8
19.3
27.1
30.7
30
73
106
39
14.2
25.7
36.3
52.0
Incomes:
Low
Medium
High
56
92
29
16.8
21.1
32.6
68
132
40
20.4
31.7
44.9
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The multi-dimensional nature of social problems
The Baltica questionnaire analysed social problems into three dimensions: their
prevalence, the threat they constitute and the need to resolve them. This
approach proved to be fruitful, highlighting as it does various configurations of
problems according to different criteria. Problems caused by smoking were
considered highly prevalent and threatening, yet they were not thought to require
urgent solution. On the other hand, drug abuse, despite its low prevalence, was
considered very threatening, but not extremely important to solve.
Using the typology of social problems outlined in the Introduction (see Figure 1,
page 11), we can now rank-order the social problems from the most developed
to the most marginal ones.
33
Figure 2 Typology of problems as perceived at the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
Threatening
Less
threatening
Less prevalent
Threatening
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
50% +
Unemployment
Medium
priority
20-49%
Alcoholism
Poverty
Environmental
pollution
Poor health
Crime against
person
Low
priority
20%
Smoking
Less
threatening
Economic crime
Drug abuse
Domestic
violence
Prostitution
The
nationality
problem
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent:
Median = 6+
Less prevalent:
Median = less than 6
Threatening:
Median = 8+
Less threatening: Median = less than 8
At the country level, unemployment appeared to be the most developed social
problem. Other developed social problems include alcoholism, poor health,
environmental pollution, poverty and crime against person.
Economic crime and smoking could be categorized as potential social problems,
albeit for different reasons. Both were perceived as prevalent, but only smoking
was regarded as a threat; on the other hand only economic crime was given
political priority.
In the opposite corner we have the most marginal social problems, namely
domestic violence, prostitution and the nationality problem. All of these were
considered less prevalent and less threatening, and only a few per cent of the
respondents gave priority to their solution. Drug abuse can also be considered a
marginal social problem.
At the community level the social problems were perceived in general as less
prevalent, and the respondents priorities with regard to resolving them differed
clearly from those at the country level. Some problems were in fact located
entirely differently (Figure 3). Nevertheless, unemployment was again ranked
highest. Likewise, alcoholism, poor health and environmental pollution were
also regarded as developed problems at this level.
The most notable shift occurred in the case of economic crime, which was
defined as a potential problem at the country level but as a marginal problem at
the community level. Also, contrary to the situation at the country level, crime
against person and poverty seem to be perceived as marginal problems in local
communities.
Figure 3 Typology of problems as perceived at the community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
Threatening
Less
threatening
Less prevalent
Threatening
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
50% +
Unemployment
Medium
priority
20-49%
Alcoholism
Pollution
Poor health
Crime against
person
Poverty
Low
priority
20%
Smoking
Drug abuse
Less
threatening
Economic
crime
Domestic
violence
The
nationality
problem
Prostitution
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent:
Median = 6+
Less prevalent:
Median = less than 6
Threatening:
Median = 8+
Less threatening: Median = less than 8
Aggregate typologies of the country and the community level mask significant
differences in the perception of social problems. Especially at the community
level perceptions are by no means homogenous. Our survey results suggest that
people with a low income have an entirely different perception of social
problems than people in the high income bracket (Figures 4 and 5). For the
former, the most developed social problem was represented by unemployment,
with alcoholism, poverty and poor health constituting a group of developed
35
problems. Respondents with a high income shared these opinions only so far as
alcoholism and poor health were concerned. For them the most developed
problem was environmental pollution, while crime against person replaced
poverty among developed social problems. Contrary to people in the low income
bracket, the well-to-do considered poverty and unemployment as marginal
problems. On the other hand, those with a low income did not share the opinion
of the better-off regarding environmental pollution and crime against person, but
perceived them as rather marginal problems in the community.
Figure 4 Typology of problems as perceived by people with a low income at the
community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
Threatening
Less
threatening
Less prevalent
Threatening
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
50% +
Unemployment
Medium
priority
20-49%
Poverty
Alcoholism
Poor health
Pollution
Crime against
person
Low
nationality
priority
20%
Smoking
Drug abuse
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent:
Median = 6+
Less prevalent:
Median = less than 6
Threatening:
Median = 8+
Less threatening: Median = less than 8
Less
threatening
The
problem
Prostitution
Domestic
violence
Economic
crime
Figure 5 Typology of problems as perceived by people with a high income at
the community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
Threatening
Less
threatening
Less prevalent
Threatening
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
50% +
Less
threatening
Pollution
Medium
Alcoholism
Unemployment
priority
Crime against
20-49%
person
Poor health
Low
priority
20%
nationality
Economic
crime
Smoking
Poverty
Drug abuse
The
problem
Prostitution
Domestic
violence
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent:
Median = 6+
Less prevalent:
Median = less than 6
Threatening:
Median = 8+
Less threatening: Median = less than 8
Concluding remarks
The approach adopted in this study was not aimed at reconstructing social
problems as objective phenomena. Instead, the focal concern was with how they
are reflected in social consciousness. The picture of social problems is shaped by
research as much as by public perception. The way in which questions are
formulated and operationalized as well as the issues selected for investigation,
also deserve serious attention.
As Kwaśniewski has pointed out, there are at least three worlds of social
problems: problems for politicians, for academic research and finally for the
average citizen. In the late 1970s the world of problems as formulated by Polish
politicians was composed of low productivity, the wasting of assets, raw
materials and time, social parasitism and dissident political activity. Academic
research, for its part, was focused on the disintegration of the family, suicide,
prostitution, the downfall of pro-social attitudes and dysfunctions in institutions
such as rehabilitation centres, prisons and the like. Finally, public opinion polls
37
pointed at problems like alcoholism, lack of discipline, theft, wasting of assets,
bribery, and bureaucracy (Kwaśniewski 1991).
The recent transitions have brought essential changes to the epidemiology of
social problems, to their public perception as well as to research approaches.
This evolution is well reflected by the changes in the list of problems applied by
CBOS in its polls from the 1980s and 1990s. Almost all of these problems used
to relate to productivity, the quality of work etc., as well as to problems
produced by the centrally planned economy, like speculation and market
shortages; now, during the 1990s, they have simply vanished. Problems that
violated socialist ideals like ”the will to become rich at any cost”, avoidance of
work and social indifference, also disappeared from the lists of problems. Old
”socialist” problems were replaced by new ones: unemployment, poverty,
shortage of food, hunger. It seems that the previous definition of problem was
dominated by a concept of individual faults, while the current one suggests that
most problems are generated by the transformation of the system.
Alcohol-related problems have undergone an intriguing evolution. The very first
CBOS surveys investigated three different items: drunkenness, drinking at the
workplace and alcoholism. In the mid-1980s, the former two issues remained
intact. In the 1990s alcoholism and drug abuse were combined into one item.
This shift clearly reflects the reduced priority of the alcohol question in Poland.
Contrary to the position of alcohol, many other social questions have gained
more attention in recent years. This may be due to a variety of ”transitional”
factors, including higher political participation, the commercialization of the
media, and the commercialization of the help-providing sector, which
continuously generates new public issues.
The open-ended questions, with which the Baltica interview started, aimed at
assessing to what extent the approaches adopted in this study — particularly the
standard list of problems applied in the forced-choice questions — could distort
the picture of the current perception of social problems. At the country level
over 50% of the respondents indicated unemployment and/or poverty. These two
problems clearly predominated over all other issues, which were mentioned only
by 10-12% or even less. The rest of the problems from the standard Baltica list
were mentioned only by a few per cent of the respondents. It seems then that the
Baltica questionnaire actively constructed our map of social problems in Poland.
At the community level, the opinions expressed in response to the open-ended
questions were more differentiated. The numbers referring to unemployment and
poverty were significantly lower, while other problems such as poor
infrastructure, hooliganism and environmental pollution were mentioned more
often. It seems that in comparison with the country level, the perception of
problems in the community is based more directly on individual experiences.
Most of the problems reported at the community level affect the life of
individual families.
It is worth emphasizing that the proportion of respondents suffering from
poverty, according to the responses to the open-ended questions, is twice as high
as the share of those who consider poverty to be a community problem. This
discrepancy may suggest a marginalization or even self-marginalization of poor
families in the community.
There is a widespread popular belief that Poles complain more than other people.
Asked ”How are you?”, every other Pole is liable to say that he or she is
struggling with various health or financial problems. It is polite to reassure this
person that your situation is even worse. This general attitude towards life may
go some way towards explaining why the number of reported negative trends
was much higher than the number of positive trends. However, the difference
was very large: while negative issues were perceived by 90% of the respondents,
more than 40% saw no positive trends at the country level. Positive political and
economic changes, including better market supply, were mentioned most
frequently. With the exception of better market supply, these ”bright sides of
life” apply mostly to the country level. It was much less common for reference
to be made to benefits for the community and family. Other studies have also
shown that people tend to assess the impacts of a recent transition on a country
and the economy in much more positive terms than its impacts on their
community and personal life (Kolarska-Bobińska 1994). People with a
university education, with a high level of income, businessmen and white-collar
employees are much more likely to see positive trends than farmers and manual
workers with a primary education only. It seems that this discrepancy in
perceptions reflects not only a growing gap between rich people and poor, but
also a decline in the status of workers and a rapid strengthening of the position
of the middle class.
Comparing the present-day situation with the pre-transition period, the
overwhelming majority of respondents felt that the prevalence of social
problems had increased. This may reflect the well-known tendency to praise the
past and criticize the present (Kwaśniewski 1986), or it may reflect a general
attitude towards current transitions. Particularly dramatic changes for the worse
were noted in the spread of unemployment, poverty and crime. Many people felt
the new system was ineffective in the management of old problems and in itself
generated new problems. This perception is present across the demographic and
social structure in the data and almost unanimous among manual workers and
people with a lower level of education.
Contrary to the relative consensus of opinion that the prevalence of social
problems is on the rise, the results of this study suggest conflicting interests with
regard to priorities for resolving problems. It seems that the costs of the recent
transformations are paid primarily by people occupying lower social status
positions (manual workers, people with a low level of education, farmers, people
39
in small towns and villages). In their opinion, priority should be given to such
problems as unemployment and poverty. Those who occupy higher social
positions (university education, high income, white-collar employees) have
different priorities. They seemed to be primarily concerned with the high wave
of crime which has been associated with recent changes. In addition to the
protection of their property and personal security, people in social class positions
were very much in favour of environmental protection.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
CBOS (1984): Informacja z badania opinii o negatywnych zjawiskach społecznych.
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej, Warszawa.
CBOS (1985): Rodzaje zagrożeń i zjawisk niepożądanych oraz ich ocena w opinii
społecznej. Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej, Warszawa.
CBOS (1986): Patologia społeczna. Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej, Warszawa.
CBOS (1994): Młodzież i używki. Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej, Warszawa.
CBOS (1995): Problemy kraju i niepokoje Polaków. Centrum Badania Opinii
Społecznej, Warszawa.
Jasiński, J. (1986): Elementy patologii społecznej w Polsce. In: Kaczmarek, T., ed.:
Problemy Patologii Społecznej (Materiały VII Wrocławskiego Sympozjum
Kryminologicznego). Wrocław, p. 7.
Kolarska-Bobińska, L. (1994): Social interests and their political representation: Poland
in transition. British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 45, Issue no. 1, pp. 109-125.
Kwaśniewski, J. (1986): Problemy społeczne w świadomości zbiorowej. In: Zagrożenia
społeczne i warunki oraz środki ich przezwyciężania: Część II. Wrocław: Zakład
Narodowy im. Ossolińskich. Pp. 207-224.
Kwaśniewski, J. (1991): Social problems in Poland. In: Kwaśniewski, J. & Watson, M.:
Social control and the law in Poland, pp. 155-169. BERG, New York/Oxford.
Kwaśniewski, J. (1992): Ontologiczny status patologii społecznej. In: Kojder, A.,
Kwaśniewski, J.: Między autonomią a kontrolą Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski,
pp. 113-136.
Lehto, J. & Moskalewicz, J. (1994): Alcohol policy during extensive socio-economic
change. WHO Regional Office for Europe (EUR/ICP/ADA 040), Copenhagen.
Montogomery, K. (1996): W ubóstwie zyje piec millionów Polaków. Biada dzieciom
Gazeta Wyborcza, Nr 50, 2040, 29.02.1996, 3.
Moskalewicz, J., Wojtyniak, B. & Rabczenko, D. (1997): The alcohol factor in mortality
in societies under rapid transitions. Paper presented at the UNU/WIDER project
meeting on ”Economic shocks, social stress and the demographic impact”, 17-19
April, 1997, Helsinki.
Podgórecki, A. (1968): Patologie społeczne. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe,
Warszawa.
Sierosławski, J. (1992): Spozycie alkoholu i polityka wobec alkoholu w ocenie
spolecznej. Warsawa, Biuro Pelnomocnika ds. Rozwiazywania Problemow
Alkoholowych.
Świątkiewicz, G. (1997): Regulating unregulated markets. Addicition, 92, Supplement 1,
67-72.
Świątkiewicz, G., Moskalewicz, J. (1994): Changing definitions of the drug problems;
an analysis of Polish newspapers in 1985 and 1990-1993 period. In: Lagerspetz, M.
(ed.): Social problems in newspapers. Studies around the Baltic Sea. NAD
Publication No. 28, pp. 71-82. Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research,
Helsinki.
Wódz, J. (1973): Zjawiska patologii społecznej a sankcje społeczno-prawne (wyniki
badań empirycznych w Nowej Hucie). Wrocław.
41
Figure 1 Priorities in solving problems at the country and
community levels (Baltica Survey, Gdańsk-1994).
Bright sides of the transition overshadowed by new social problems
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Ilze Trapenciere, Maruta Pranka & Ritma Rungule
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Introduction
In the mid-1980s Latvia's Human Development Index was at a comparatively
high level. The country had in place a comprehensive network of pre-school
institutions, education and health care were free of charge, housing costs were
low and unemployment virtually non-existent, and gender equality prevailed.
State benefits were paid to low-income families, single parents, and families
with many children. State subsidies helped to keep the prices of essential goods
and services at an affordable level.
The movement of national awakening began to gather momentum in the late
1980s. The movement was preoccupied with issues of national identity and also
with the struggle against environmental pollution. It was also, and importantly,
preoccupied with the ideals of participatory democracy, committed to pull down
the old system and its structures. The same trend continued into the early 1990s:
the overriding aim was independence and a ”good life”. The restoration of
independence in 1991 put an end to the socialist type of political, economic and
social welfare system. In the economic sphere, the transformation resulted in a
sharp decrease in GDP and in households' disposable income. There were a
number of population groups that were unable to support themselves. The World
Bank Mission suggested in its memorandum the numbers below the poverty line
in Latvia had soared from 4-5% in the late 1980s to 35% at the end of 1993
(World Bank 1995). By 1993-1994 people had become totally disillusioned
about the ”good life”.
The Baltica study is the first national survey on the prevalence and perception of
social problems in Latvia. During the Soviet regime a large number of
sociological studies were carried out on various aspects of ideological
consciousness, attitudes and values (Trapenciere et al. 1994). There was also
much demographic research and research in family sociology (Eglite et al. 1984;
Zvidrinsh 1986). Family studies also looked at certain social problems, mainly
alcohol abuse and health-related issues. The same applies to studies on social
structure. In the mid-1970s there was some research on gender equality, but in
general this was considered an unimportant issue in Soviet society. Overall,
43
however, there was no serious research which focused explicitly on social
problems.
A recent survey on social change in Latvia and other Baltic and Nordic countries
(Blom et al. 1996) has touched upon certain social problems such as
unemployment, and some aspects of criminality. However, neither the
prevalence nor the perception of social problems are specifically addressed in
this survey.
Material
Description of the sample
In Latvia the Baltica Survey was based on a representative, stratified random
sample of the resident population in 1994, drawn from the files of the State
Committee of Statistics in Latvia. The sample comprises 1,096 residents aged 16
or over and permanently resident in Latvia.
In the first stage of sampling an all-state model was constructed. It was assumed
that the primary survey unit for the rural population is a rural region, and for the
urban population a town or a city. Each of the six major cities and administrative
districts of Riga has its own strata. There are two strata for each rural region.
The regional centres and other towns in regions have their own strata, and the
rural areas — civil parishes (pagasts) — are divided into strata.
The number of respondents in the simple random sample was proportional to the
number of persons in the stratum. The primary survey units within the stratum
are included in the sample with a probability proportional to the population in
the stratum. The correspondence between the sample and the structure of the
resident population was taken into account with regard to the following control
parameters: sex, age and nationality (the sample was divided into three national
groupings: Latvians, Russians and other nationalities).
Interview design and interviewers
The data were collected in face-to-face interviews during May and June 1994.
The duration of one interview varied from 20 to 90 minutes. In the longest
interviews it was clear that the interviewers also doubled as ”social workers” for
some of the most depressed respondents.
All the interviewers were highly experienced. The Institute of Philosophy and
Sociology and the Latvian Foundation for Advancement of Sociological Studies
have a network of 48 interviewers, who receive regular training for fieldwork.
Before the survey the interviewers' supervisors in each region or district were
trained in Riga. Written instructions were prepared and handed out to the
supervisors and each interviewer. The supervisors also received instructions on
how to control the quality of work. Because of transportation difficulties and
budget considerations, only 30% of the interviewers were trained in Riga, the
rest received their training in local centres.
Two-thirds or 60% of the interviewers were over 40 years of age. They included
teachers and retired teachers, social workers, lecturers, etc. The remaining 40%
were aged 20-30 and consisted of sociology students, journalists, teachers,
mothers on maternity leave, etc. There was only one single male interviewer, all
others were women.
Questionnaire
In addition to the general questionnaire (see Appendix A, pages 217-222), the
original list of 12 social problems was supplemented by five social problems.
These items were added on the basis of responses to a pilot survey:
* Deterioration of cultural life
* Problems of education
* Problems caused by the privatization process
* Poor housing conditions
* Gender inequality
The respondents found the questionnaire easy to understand. The response rate
was high, with only a few Latvians and non-Latvians refusing to participate.
However, the respondents' initial reactions were very reluctant. This attitude
which is repeated in every sociological survey carried out in Latvia today is not
a reaction towards survey research, but rather an expression of critical attitudes
towards the government: ”Latvia does not have the money to pay people their
wages and pensions, yet they can still afford to do these studies. Why are they
spending their money on all this — nothing is going to change.”
However, people's attitudes changed once they were introduced to the subject of
the study; only 3% refused to continue. The main problems during the interviews
had to do with the open-ended questions about positive changes in society. The
majority of the population had been distressed by the political and economic
changes. The process of social change had been very slow. Expectations during
national awakening had been unrealistically high.
During the first years of independence many people were depressed by the
apparent absence of any immediate solution to the country's economic and social
problems. The period of transition dragged on for so long that people began to
forget about the gains achieved through the political changes. The mass media
also played a part in fuelling this ”depressed mood”, indeed they have been the
central agents in defining and describing various social problems in Latvia since
45
the late 1980s. From a social constructionist point of view, the mass media are
one of the main arenas for claims-making in this domain.
This may go some way towards explaining why our respondents were somewhat
reluctant to respond to questions about positive changes since independence.
Given the economic hardship, people have had to address problems without any
immediate solution in sight; they no longer recognize the positive changes that
took place during 1991-93 in politics, ideology, the economy or in the social
sphere. If the respondents had first been asked about positive changes and only
then about the problems, the response rate to the questions about the bright sides
of life would probably have been higher.
Perception of problems as reflected in responses to the
open-ended questions
General assessment
The open-ended questions provided a good starting-point for conversation about
social problems. Many respondents took the opportunity to vent their feelings
about what they regarded as the most important social problems in Latvia in
mid-1994. The responses may be divided into two major categories. The first
one consists of shorter answers using the terminology of the questionnaire, the
second consists of responses formulated by the respondents in their own words,
of lengthier reflections on significant problems. In some cases it was impossible
to slot these descriptions into an appropriate category.
Let us take one example: ”It is impossible for teachers to go to bookshops”. This
means that teachers do not earn enough money for them to buy books. Although
there is a temptation to classify the response as an issue of the deterioration of
cultural life, in actual fact this is of course a problem of poverty.
It seems that some of the problems mentioned by the respondents are better
recognized than others. These problems are expressed in a more or less uniform
way by means of unambiguous statements: direct reference may be made to
crime, alcoholism and boozing, or unemployment. As for other problems, the
variety of expressions was much wider. In some cases the respondents referred
to the reasons of the problem, in others they talked about different
manifestations of a dominant problem. Many respondents referred to different
aspects of poverty (poor pensions, low wages, high rents, expensive medical
drugs and other goods, declining standards of living, etc.), but the word
”poverty” itself was mentioned very rarely. As one person put it: ”For the
majority of people there is no balance between income and expenses”.
As in real life, it was sometimes rather difficult to make a distinction between
”economic crime” and the ”failure of economic policy”. The main difficulties
here have to do with problems of legislation. Speaking about the process of
privatization, many people used the new word ”prihvatization”, borrowed into
the Latvian language from Russian, where it means ”illegal appropriation”. This
new folklore symbolizes the non-regulated and illegal aspects of the
privatization process.
Corruption, blackmail or racketing were mentioned only twice. The terminology
is usually more prudent, with references made to misguided taxation policy,
customs inefficiencies, etc. It is exceptionally difficult for research purposes to
define problems that are not clear even to society itself. The question concerning
”the nationality problem” seems to bring together two antithetical attitudes:
Latvians look upon the national or ethnic issue as a positive change and consider
it to signal a ”green light for the Latvian language”. Russians, for their part,
stress the same issue by referring to ”[the Latvian] language problem” or
discrimination against the ”Russian-speaking population”, because they are now
required to learn Latvian.
Most of the references made by our respondents to political problems were
embedded in critiques of the government or Parliament (Saeima) as a whole or
some aspects of their work. For example, the government was said to represent
”stupidity and non-professionalism”. Some respondents talked about the reasons
for the sluggishness of political progress: ”There is no leading party in Latvia”.
Within the domain of social services, the list of problems included such factors
as ”low respect for education”, ”degradation of culture”, and ”lack of respect for
elderly people”. Here the respondents identified groups in society that are in
need of more care and attention, mainly the elderly, adolescents and teenagers,
sometimes also the disabled.
As for the social and psychological consequences of the transition, it is hard to
find any differentiation between ”the consequences of the changes” and some
other problems, when the respondents characterize their emotions as a reaction
to the social and economical transformations. As far as social consequences of
the transition are concerned, the accent is on the differentiation, stratification and
marginalization taking place within society. Again, this problem is described in
various different ways: some refer to the ”huge income differentials between
deputies and pensioners”, others point at the ”unfair differentiation that does not
correspond to work, morality and positive features of personality”.
Perception of the problems at the country, community and family level
There are three dominant problems at each of the three levels of analysis, i.e. the
country, community and family level: unemployment, poverty and crime (Table
1). Unemployment is mentioned by one in four respondents (25 and 26% at the
country and community level, respectively). Over one-tenth or 11% of the
respondents were unemployed, while the official statistics give an
47
unemployment rate of six per cent. This discrepancy may characterize the level
of hidden unemployment in Latvia.
Table 1 Perception of problems at the country and community level as
reflected in open-ended questions (%).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Country
Community
Problem
%
Rank
%
Rank
Unemployment
Poverty 22.9
Crime against person
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Problems of social services
The nationality problem
Political and legal problems
Problems of economic policy
Psychological consequences of changes
Poor health of the population
Privatization
Environmental pollution
Housing problem
Hooliganism
Problems of infrastructure
Domestic violence
Social consequences of changes
Prostitution
Drug abuse
I do not see any serious problems
Don't know
25.1
1
2
20.2
14.1
3
5.2
4
4.3
5
4.1
6
3.1
7
2.6
8
2.3
9
1.7
10
1.6
11
1.4
12
1.2
13
1.0
14
0.3
15
0.2
16
0.2
17
0.2 18-19
0.1 18-19
0.1
20
1.2
7.0
26.1
2
11.9
7.1
3.3
4.8
2.3
1.8
2.5
1.1
1.3
1.3
2.2
1.7
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.0
0.2
0.1
1.9
8.9
1
31.6
3
4
6
5
8
10
7
14
12-13
12-13
9
11
16
15
17-18
20
17-18
19
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Family
%
Rank
18.4
1
4.6
2.5
3.8
3.9
2.1
2.4
2.7
1.2
1.6
2.2
1.1
2.8
0.2
0.5
0.2
0.1
0.1
2.9
-
2
3
8
5
4
11
9
7
13
12
10
14
6
16
15
17
20
18-19
18-19
The answers to the open-ended questions indicate that 18% of the respondents
and their families have been affected in one way or another by unemployment.
The main factor here is the close-down of large industrial enterprises and
collective farms, which has implied a sharp reduction in production levels.
People's heated reactions are largely explained by the fact that the whole
problem was unknown to people for many decades.
Poverty occupies the second place in the list of problems, both at the country and
community level (23 and 20%, respectively). The third prevalent problem is
crime (14 and 12%, respectively).
About 60% of the responses refer to these three problems. All the other
problems are mentioned by no more than 10% of the respondents. The problems
of drunkenness and alcoholism, social services and economic crime are also
mentioned quite frequently. Notably, only 2-3% referred to ”the nationality
problem”.
The list of prevailing problems at the country level bears a close resemblance to
those at the community level. However, with just one exception (alcoholism and
drunkenness), all the problems mentioned are considered more prevalent at the
country than at the community level.
Analysis of the perception of social problems at the family level produces a
somewhat different picture. The main problem affecting families is the sharp
decrease in living standards or poverty (32%), followed by unemployment
(18%) and problems related to social and economic policy and privatization.
Problems related to alcoholism are considerably less frequent (2.5%) than at
other levels.
At the country level unemployment is a concern for the rural population more
often than for the urban population (50 and 44%, respectively). Respondents
with a university education are less concerned about the problem of
unemployment than respondents with a secondary education. People with a
university degree are more inclined to emphasize educational and cultural
problems (social service problems) than those with a secondary education (13
and 6%, respectively). These problems are mentioned least often by respondents
who have not completed their secondary education.
Perception of the bright sides of life
Very few respondents were able to identify any positive trends in society. At
least one positive change at the country level was mentioned by 43%, the
corresponding figure for the community level was only 29%. The reaction of one
female respondent to this question is telling: ”Please, don't make me laugh!”
In general, the few positive changes identified were associated with
improvements in social life, changes in people's values and extensions of
political freedoms (Table 2). In the second category of value changes, three main
aspects were raised, i.e. the revival of the church, the growth of personal
initiative and the possibility to think of the individual as a human being.
Table 2 Positive trends perceived at the country, community and family level
(%).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Positive trend
Country
Community
%
Rank %
Rank %
Positive social changes
Changes in value system
Positive political changes
Positive economic changes
Better market supply
Other positive trends
14.4
14.2
8.4
4.1
0.9
0.4
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1
2
3
4
5
6
13.9
5.6
4.6
3.0
1.2
0.2
1
2
3
4
5
8
Family
Rank
10.2
1.9
4.1
3.2
0.9
0.2
1
4
2
3
5
7
49
Better ecological situation
Better care of environment
I do not see any positive trends
Don't know
0.3
29.1
28.2
7
8
0.6
0.3
40.2
30.4
6
7
0.5
0.1
60.9
18.0
6
8
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
There were no preset, standardized answers for positive trends in society, which
explains why the responses varied so widely. Some of the wordings were quite
difficult to interpret. For example, many respondents referred to privatization as
an outcome of economic changes, others identified the processes more
concretely, e.g. the opening of private shops or improved market supply. Many
respondents said that private enterprises (mainly shops) have changed the milieu
in and around private shops: ”The area has now become quite tidy and
attractive”. The following main categories emerged from the responses
concerning the bright sides of life: freedom and independence, democracy, open
borders, new international contacts, and freedom for the mass media.
As for the economic changes and the introduction of market economy at the
country level, the main positive trends identified were as follows: stable
currency, opportunity to set up private enterprises, better supply of goods, no
more queues in shops, etc. At the community level, the respondents referred to
more concrete changes, for instance ”the new harbour began to function
properly”, ”the 'Electrolux' shop was opened”, ”a new shop was opened nearby”.
As for changes in the infrastructure, the respondents referred often to
improvements in their immediate surroundings: the main street had been paved,
a new telephone exchange was being built, a new pharmacy opened, etc.
Among the positive changes mentioned were the improvements to the
educational system. New educational opportunities, including the opportunity to
study Latvian and English, were also mentioned. Some respondents referred to
the set-up of a social and health insurance system, as well as to attempts to
control domestic violence.
When asked about the positive changes or bright sides of life in their families,
close on 80% were unable to identify a single positive social change. Those who
did see positive trends at the family level had some very concrete responses:
”My husband and I now have new jobs”; ”My children were able to visit
Sweden and Denmark”; ”A new music school has been opened nearby, and the
mixed Latvian-Russian stream school was divided into separate schools”;
”Pensioners received 10 Lats in financial support because of the holiday”.
Current prevalence of social problems
Current prevalence at the country level
The respondents' views on the prevalence of different problems was inquired on
the basis of a list of 12 standard, preset items and five additional problems. The
main analysis of the current prevalence of problems was based on a ranking of
the mean values of social problems. The prevalence of each problem was
evaluated by the respondents on a nine-point scale. For purposes of this analysis
the 17 problems were divided into three groups according to their mean values
(high perceived prevalence 7.00-9.00, medium prevalence 6.00-6.99, low
prevalence < 6.00). Table 3 shows that at the country level, evaluations of the
majority of problems were fairly high, with only one problem showing a mean
of below 5 points.
The most prevalent problem is crime against person (8.30), which is way ahead
of the rest of the field. The means of the following problems range from 7 to 8
and were frequently mentioned in the open-ended questions as well:
unemployment, poverty, alcohol-related problems, economic crime, smoking,
and problems caused by privatization.
The second group comprises such problems as environmental pollution, poor
public health, prostitution, cultural deterioration, educational problems, poor
housing conditions and drug abuse.
The final category comprises three problems, i.e. domestic violence, ethnic
conflicts, and gender inequality.
Table 3 Current prevalence of problems at the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
1.10
7.89
7.87
7.84
7.38
7.11
7.00
6.75
6.75
6.58
6.56
6.46
6.10
6.08
5.55
5.29
4.01
9
1.60
1.47
1.47
1.67
1.95
2.05
1.84
1.82
1.99
2.11
2.27
1.91
1.95
1.99
2.32
2.42
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person8.30
Unemployment
Poverty
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Smoking
Problems related to privatization
Environmental pollution
Poor health of the population
Prostitution
Deterioration of cultural life
Educational problems
Poor housing conditions
Drug abuse
Domestic violence
The nationality problem
Gender inequality
1
9
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
Rank
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
51
Comparison between country and community level
Using similar criteria, we have formed corresponding groups of the perceived
prevalence of the problems concerned at the community level. Here none of the
problems received scores of over 8.00. The rank-order of the problems is also
slightly different. The problems were divided into three groups with prevalence
means above 7.00, from 6.00 to 6.99, and below 6.00 (Table 4).
The most prevalent problem is that of alcoholism and heavy drinking, followed
by unemployment, poverty, crime against person and smoking. In other words,
the top four problems regarded as most prevalent are exactly the same at both
the country and community level, even though the rank order is different.
Moreover, all mean values (not only in this first group) at the community level
are lower than at that country level. It seems then that social problems are of a
more intense nature at the country rather than the community level. This is
particularly clear with regard to crime against person (7.46 vs. 8.30), which is
also rated differently at country and community level: at the country level it was
ranked at the top, at the community level it occupies fourth place. The opposite
is true for alcoholism, even though the mean values were almost the same.
Table 4 Current prevalence of problems at the community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
7.83
7.68
7.50
1.97
7.04
6.83
6.74
6.54
6.37
6.27
6.11
6.02
5.74
5.34
5.00
4.67
3.73
1.51
1.78
1.78
8
1.98
2.10
2.22
1.94
2.25
2.09
2.41
2.11
2.61
2.54
2.21
2.56
2.46
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Alcoholism and drunkenness
Unemployment
Poverty
Crime against person7.46
Smoking
Economic crime
Problems related to privatization
Poor health of the population
Deterioration of cultural life
Environmental pollution
Educational problems
Poor housing conditions
Prostitution
Drug abuse
Domestic violence
The nationality problem
Gender inequality
8
8
8
4
7
7
7
7
7
6
7
6
6
6
5
5
3
Rank
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
13
14
15
16
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The second and third group come quite close to the corresponding groups at the
country level. The category with mean values between 6.00 and 6.99 includes
economic crime, problems caused by privatization, poor public health, cultural
deterioration, environmental pollution, educational problems and poor living
conditions.
The five least frequently mentioned problems are ranked in exactly the same
order as at the country level, i.e. drug abuse, domestic violence, gender
inequality, and ethnic problems. Only prostitution is added to this low-ranking
group at the community level, receiving a much lower value than in the country
context.
The top problem of alcoholism is traditionally a common social problem in postwar Latvia. During the recent years of transition, the economic recession and
lowered standards of living have been followed by an increase in mortality.
Alcoholism is one element in this process, compounded by easy access and low
prices of alcohol. In the context of alcohol abuse it is important not to overlook
the rather high level of deprivation in Latvia, nor the lack of norms and the
isolation of individuals during the transitional period.
As was just pointed out, some problems are perceived as far more prevalent at
the country level (crime against person, prostitution, drug abuse, economic
crime, the nationality problem). Public opinion reflects these problems as
existing ”somewhere” in the country, probably on the basis of media reports, but
as being of no immediate concern to one's own particular community,
particularly in the case of small towns, villages and rural areas.
On the other hand, there is growing public recognition now of the problems of
prostitution and drug abuse, although large numbers do still not realize the
seriousness of these problems. For the majority of respondents these problems
are prevalent but ”far removed” from them personally — and therefore they are
”probably not true”.
The difference between the country and community level is less outstanding yet
nonetheless significant in the cases of poverty and education problems. Poverty,
especially among pensioners and large families, is an issue frequently covered in
the mass media. Most peoples' living standards have of course declined and
increasing numbers believe that they become poorer.
As far as education is concerned, there is a strong tide of public opinion which
holds that the educational system has improved, giving young people improved
opportunities to decide what they want to study, where to study, etc. In reality,
however, the educational problems in Latvia remain quite serious, but they are
more visible to those people who have to deal with the problem on a daily basis,
such as parents, teachers and students.
Prevalence of problems before and after transition
53
To see how perceptions of social problems had changed over time, the
respondents were asked to compare the present-day situation with the prevalence
of the social problems listed six years previously at both country and community
level. During this period all the political, economic and social systems in Latvia
have changed. It is hardly surprising then that the rank-order of the problems
listed has changed. Furthermore, each and every problem was said to have been
less prevalent six years previously. There seems to be a broad consensus of
opinion that periods of transition and transformations are followed by increasing
social problems.
As was described earlier, the most prevalent problems in the country context in
1994 were crime against person, unemployment, poverty and alcohol-related
problems (see Table 3). In the late 1980s, according to the respondents, the top
position at both country and community level was occupied by alcohol-related
problems.
Table 5 Prevalence of problems at the country level in the late 1980s.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
6.64
6.43
6.33
1.70
5.45
5.25
5.18
4.46
4.40
4.39
4.38
4.36
4.23
3.61
2.92
2.35
2.32
1.89
2.26
2.02
6
2.08
1.95
2.11
2.30
2.01
2.37
1.85
2.06
1.97
2.33
2.01
1.86
2.30
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Smoking
Environmental pollution
Crime against person5.86
Poor housing conditions
Poor health of the population
Economic crime
Deterioration of cultural life
Drug abuse
The nationality problem
Domestic violence
Prostitution
Poverty
Educational problems
Gender inequality
Unemployment
Privatization
7
7
6
4
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
2
2
1
Rank
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
For the late 1980s, the mean scores of only three problems (alcohol-related
problems, smoking, pollution) at the country level exceeded 6.00, thus
qualifying as ”highly prevalent”. In 1994, 14 out of 17 problems had mean
scores higher than 6.00. A similar pattern is repeated at the community level
(Table 4 and Table 6).
The period of regaining independence began with growing calls for the solution
of specific environmental problems that had resulted from decades of Soviet
industrial policy. Many Soviet military installations in Latvia had adverse
environmental and health effects. That the issue of environmental pollution
figured so centrally in public debate at that time is clearly reflected in pollution
being ranked third in the late 1980s both at country and community level. By
1994 it had dropped to eighth and tenth place, respectively. This does not mean
to say that the environmental problems concerned have been resolved during the
transformation, but rather that environmental issues receive far less attention
now in the mass media and in public opinion.
Table 6 Prevalence of problems at the community level in the late 1980s.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
6.66
6.24
5.95
1.94
5.20
5.06
4.84
4.34
3.99
3.96
3.91
3.91
3.88
3.55
2.84
2.29
2.19
1.87
2.34
2.24
6
2.16
2.02
2.20
2.32
1.91
1.96
2.21
2.22
2.46
2.38
2.01
1.88
2.17
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Smoking
Pollution
Crime against person5.46
Poor housing conditions
Poor health of the population
Economic crime
Deterioration of cultural life
Domestic violence
Poverty
Drug abuse
Prostitution
The nationality problem
Educational problems
Gender inequality
Unemployment
Privatization
7
7
6
4
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
2
1
1
Rank
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The differences in the mean values at different points of time can be used to
measure the extent of perceived changes. The most dramatic changes for the
worse, both at the country and community level, are perceived in the problems
of unemployment (5.54 and 5.39, respectively), privatization and poverty.
Relatively small changes, but still for the worse, are found in opinions about
smoking, environmental pollution and poor living conditions. The respondents'
opinions about changes in the prevalence of social problems coincide with their
answers to the open-ended questions, in which unemployment and poverty were
ranked second and third on the list of most prevalent present-day problems.
55
At the end of the 1980s unemployment ranked as only the 16th most prevalent
problem in Latvia, and did not exist as a social problem before the period of
transition. Today, the official unemployment rates stand at 6%, although semiofficial estimates put the figure at somewhere around 15-16%. Since
unemployment is a new problem in the country, people have been ill-prepared
for it. The transition towards market economy involves quite different labour
relations than the previous system and calls for radical changes in people's way
of thinking. On the other hand, deprivation is growing quite rapidly. Structural
changes in the economy and the formation of new markets have only just got
under way. The labour market is in the process of profound structural changes in
terms of new fields of activity, new forms of ownership, professions and jobs,
company sizes and regional development. The post-war generation is not
prepared to accept the new reality of unemployment, but is trying to get
accustomed to it. Current social policy has taken a somewhat passive orientation
to resolving the problem (paying benefits during a limited period of time) rather
than adopting a strategy of activation (in the form of retraining the unemployed).
Problems connected with privatization constitute another new interesting
phenomenon. This is not ranked among the top current problems (seventh
position), but there is a huge difference in the country context between the mean
values for 1994 and the situation six years previously (4.68). The privatization of
state enterprises and the transition to market economy is accompanied by an
increase in the number of owners as a new social stratum. This creates new
sources of income and causes changes in interests and growing competition at all
the levels. Ownership and enterprise reforms are the basis for economic
development, but at this stage it is causing serious problems: inadequate
legislation, social insecurity for a considerable part of workers in private
enterprises, difficulties in defending private property against criminals.
The difference in mean values between 1994 and 1988 at the country level is
third biggest for poverty (3.64). This problem is due in part to growing
unemployment, but this is not the only explanation. During the transitional
period the prices of consumer goods have increased more than 60 times over,
whereas only a few social groups have been able to increase their purchasing
power. Such groups consist mainly of administrative personnel at government
and community level as well as staff in banks and private firms. Nevertheless,
the income of the large majority of Latvia's population (about 85%) is still below
subsistence level. People have lost all their savings not only in two money
reforms during 1992-1993, but also during the extensive crisis in the banking
sector.
The differences in mean values between 1994 and 1988 regarding educational
problems (2.85) can be explained by reference to structural changes in this
sphere. For decades, education was free of charge and general secondary
education was compulsory. Today, there are thousands of school-aged children
who have never attended school. Secondary education is no longer compulsory,
one-quarter of the population aged 15 do not graduate from elementary school (9
years). At the same time it has become more and more expensive to get a good
education. For many families the situation is quite controversial: on the one hand
a good education is possible only by paying out large sums, on the other hand
most people have seen their incomes dwindle. Reference should also be made to
the specific problems of poverty suffered by families with many children, the
problems with school transportation in rural areas, the extremely low salaries
paid to teachers, etc.
The socio-economic transformation of Latvia has given rise to a growing
prevalence of crime. Public attention is heightened by the intense media
coverage that is given to crime in its various forms.
The respondents' views on the growth of economic crime are closely associated
with the rising crime levels in general. The growth of economic crime is not only
a result of the economic crisis and poverty, but also of cultural deterioration and
the continuing expansion of the shadow economy (smuggling, corruption,
production and trade of narcotics, prostitution).
It is interesting to observe that in different age groups the differences in
evaluating the prevalence of specific problems have changed. Younger age
groups (18-24 years) describe living conditions as worse more often than the
older age groups (> 60 years). One may speculate whether young people in
general are liable to perceive economic inequalities more sharply than older
people.
On the other hand, younger people were more likely to refer to cultural
deterioration as a problem, implying that they are more receptive to the new
standards of culture. It seems to be easier for young adults to adopt new lifestyles, foreign (particularly American) popular culture, new slang, etc.
A parallel trend applies to problems related to privatization. All age groups agree
that privatization has become an increasing problem. However, older groups
tend regard this problem as more prevalent. This may be due to the fact that
adults, particularly elderly people, are interested in restoring their rights to their
private property and criticizing the slow and complicated process of
denationalization. On the other hand, this process also affects people who have
no private property. In many cases, not least in rural areas, people who in the
post-war years settled on private farms, cultivated the land and repaired the
buildings, are now being pushed out by the previous owners who left the
countryside during or after the war. There is also a large number of private
owners who left Latvia altogether and who are now laying rather high claims on
their property. The most difficult cases are those where people are forced to
leave their homes after having lived there for up to 50 years. Elderly people are
the most exposed.
57
This process is less painful for young people; the problems of privatization
mainly concern their parents or grandparents rather than themselves.
How threatening are the problems?
Rank-ordering the problems
The rank-order of threatening problems is very similar to that indicated for the
problems perceived as the most prevalent (see Tables 9 and 3). This list is
headed by crime against a person, alcoholism and drunkenness, unemployment
and poverty, i.e. exactly the same items as appear on the prevalence scale,
although in a slightly different order. The means are extremely high, with the
three first ones exceeding 8.00.
Table 7 Ranking of problems.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
T
Mean
M
F
T
S.D.
M F
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Unemployment
8.04
Poverty
7.94
Economic crime
Drugs
Pollution
Poor health
7.20
Problems related to
privatization
Educational problems
Deterioration of cultural life
Prostitution
6.70
Smoking
Domestic violence
6.60
The nationality problem
Poor living conditions
6.26
Gender inequality
Median Rank
T M F
8.61
8.06
7.75
7.89
7.65
7.37
7.21
7.12
8.54
7.69
8.18
8.03
7.66
7.14
7.12
7.30
8.69
8.34
1.62
1.55
7.70
7.51
7.35
1.78
0.86
1.45
1.88
1.53
1.65
1.80
1.82
1.81
0.98
1.66
1.32
1.40
1.71
1.89
1.85
1.67
0.66
1.17
9
9
1.57
1.61
1.71
8
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
7
9
8
9
9
8
8
8
8
9
9
3
4
8
8
8
8
1
2
6.93
6.88
6.84
6.39
6.69
6.24
6.29
6.31
4.32
7.89
6.87
6.68
6.88
6.40
7.03
6.31
6.51
4.33
6.69
7.03
7.10
2.11
6.87
2.10
6.28
2.05
4.59
2.12
2.22
2.13
2.26
2.20
2.18
2.34
2.09
2.56
2.02
2.17
2.27
1.89
2.27
1.90
2.34
1.87
2.59
2.18
2.01
1.85
7
2.12
7
2.22
6
2.51
7
8
7
7
7
6
7
6
4
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
4
8
8
7
12
7
14
6
16
4
9
10
11
5
6
7
13
15
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
It is noteworthy that all other problems except gender inequality are considered
highly threatening (6.26 and over). A comparatively high value is given to the
drug abuse problem. Drug abuse is ranked 6th, while it occupied l4th place in
the prevalence scale at the country level. We may conclude that most people
appreciate the effects that this problem will have if it is allowed to spread in
society. Drug abuse is among those problems that in the socialist period were
described as a typical problem of capitalism. There were clinics for drug addicts
even in the socialist era, but drugs were never treated as a social but rather as a
personal problem. Recent sociological studies show that the same public attitude
continues to prevail.
In contrast to drug abuse, the threat of smoking is ranked much lower (13th) than
the prevalence of the problem (6th). In Latvia there has been no public discourse
to highlight the importance of healthy life-styles. Therefore, the majority of
smokers are fundamentally unaware of the adverse effects of smoking. On the
other hand, at least for younger generations, smoking seems to serve as a signal
of independence and adulthood, a feature of a modern, Western life style.
There are quite widespread concerns in Latvia about the state of public health.
These concerns are probably related to the poor living standards in the country
and to poverty in general, as well as to environmental pollution, particularly in
areas where the Soviet army had its bases. Poor health is quite widespread
among different age groups, including elderly people and young children. Old
people have worked hard all their life and they now suffer from many chronic
diseases, yet they do not have the money they would need to buy medicine and
get medical help. Official statistics indicate that about 60% of school-aged
children have some chronic illness. During the past two years plans have been
floated to integrate health education into school curricula, and currently the first
groups of teachers are being trained to provide instruction on the human body
and sexuality and on the adverse effects of smoking, alcohol and drugs.
The main threats related to educational problems derive from the lack of
education for specific categories of children (mainly high-risk groups), the
shifting responsibility between school, the community and parents (mainly
towards parents) for school attendance, the closing down of boarding schools,
etc. Tuition fees for higher education institutions represents another problem for
young people, as well as the quality of higher education (those who could pay
for higher education usually do not want to study and vice versa). Finally, there
are clear indications of a polarization between elite and low-quality education.
The nationality problem and ethnic conflicts are among the lowest-ranking
issues on both the prevalence and the threat scale. This is interesting because the
Latvian language law was at the centre of public debate precisely in 1994, when
there was also much Russian media propaganda about the risks of ethnic
conflicts and the discrimination of Russians in Latvia. The new legislation
introduced the Latvian language as the official language of the country.
According to the law, non-Latvians have to take a Latvian language examination
in order to qualify for jobs in the labour market.
59
Problems related to privatization (or denationalization) cover various social
fields, such as housing, enterprises and factories, and land. The problems are
quite different depending on whose perspective we take, that of the new (private)
owner or that of the previous user (of public property). Generally, the relations
between owners and users are a source of much interpersonal and social conflict.
Another, probably even more dangerous aspect of this problem has to do with
corruption and economic crime within and around the processes of privatization,
denationalization and ”prihvatization”.
Priorities in solving problems
The respondents were asked to identify three problems which they thought
required most urgent attention. In general, the same problems that were
perceived as most prevalent and most threatening were also given political
priority. This applies to both the country and the community context (see Table
8 for the country level). The discussion below is restricted to the country level
only. However, it should be noted that the patterns in the response at the country
and community levels were very similar
Table 8 Priorities in solving problems at the country level (respondents were
asked to identify three priorities).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Rank
Total
Freq %
Male
Freq %
Female
Freq %
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Unemployment
650
Poverty
441
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crimes
Educational problems
The nationality problem
Deterioration of cultural life
Environmental pollution
Problems related to privatization
Poor health of the population
Poor housing conditions
Drug abuse
31
Domestic violence
23
Prostitution
14
Smoking
Gender inequality
761
59.4
40.3
298
283
144
142
130
99
99
98
45
2.8
2.1
1.3
10
4
69.6
320
215
27.2
25.9
13.2
13.0
11.9
9.0
9.0
9.0
4.1
14
9
5
0.9
0.4
383
61.7
41.4
118
141
49
82
48
46
57
33
27
2.7
1.7
1.0
3
2
73.8
330
226
22.7
27.2
9.4
15.8
9.2
8.9
11.0
6.4
5.2
17
14
9
0.6
0.4
378
57.4
39.3
180
142
95
60
82
53
42
65
18
3.0
2.4
1.6
7
2
65.7
2
3
31.3
24.7
16.5
10.4
14.3
9.2
7.3
11.3
3.1
13
14
15
1.2
0.3
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
16
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The top four problems retained their position as the most urgent problems.
Crime against person was way ahead of all other problems, identified as the top
priority issue by 70% of the respondents. The second place is occupied by
unemployment (59%), and the third by poverty (40%). These three problems
were usually mentioned together. There are two further problems that call for
urgent solution, i.e. alcoholism and drunkenness (27%) and economic crime
(26%).
These five items accounted for 74% of all the problems that were considered to
require urgent attention. At the bottom of the list it may be noted that drug
abuse, regarded as fairly threatening (sixth position), is singled out as an urgent
issues by only three per cent. Does this mean that people feel it is up to drug
abusers themselves to resolve the problem? Gender inequality appears ones
again to be a completely peripheral issue, hardly deserving the status of a social
problem at all: only 0.4% (two men and two women) identified this issue as one
that should be urgently tackled.
The opinions of men and women differed significantly on certain points. Men
attached more importance to solving problems related to crime against person
(74 vs. 66%), the nationality problem (16 vs. 10%) and problems connected to
privatization (11 vs. 7%). Women, in turn, called for urgent solutions to social
and health problems, i.e. alcoholism (31 vs. 23%) and poor public health (11 vs.
6%), as well as cultural problems, i.e. educational problems (17 vs. 9%) and the
deterioration of cultural life (14 vs. 9%).
There were also notable differences between Latvians and Russians and other
nationalities. One-quarter or 23% of the non-Latvians but only 4% of the
Latvians suggested that the nationality problem ought to be urgently resolved.
This huge discrepancy confirms that the measures taken to promote the Latvian
language and culture in the 1990s were not well received by many Russian
inhabitants in Latvia.
The respondents' level of education obviously influenced their attitude towards
solving the problem of unemployment. It is hardly surprising that two-thirds of
those who had not completed secondary and vocational education stressed the
need for an urgent solution to this problem. The corresponding share among
people with an academic education was 44%. At the same time respondents with
a university degree more often than those with less education called for
educational reforms (19 vs. 8%).
Finally, it is interesting here to look at a few observations from the community.
Alcoholism is given higher priority at this level (36 vs. 27%). Furthermore,
alcoholism seems to be a particular problem for people living in villages and
rural areas: over half (54%) of them include alcoholism among the three
problems that need to be given priority attention. Only 21% of those living in
large cities (pop. over 200,000) agree. The picture for resolving crimes against
person is the exact opposite: 77% of city-dwellers attach much important to
crime prevention, compared to only 31% of people living in small towns and,
particularly, in rural areas.
61
Similarly, urban dwellers were more inclined to resolve the nationality problem
than people living in small towns and rural areas, although the proportions were
quite low (19 vs. 6%). This may be connected to the fact that the majority of
Russians and other non-Latvian ethnic groups live in big cities.
All in all, unemployment, crime and poverty — the three most urgent social
problems — were also identified as the most important issues in the respondents'
spontaneous answers to the open-ended questions (see Table 1). The growth of
these problems is primarily attributable to the changes that have occurred in
Latvia during the transitional phase of the 1990s.
Typology of problems
The most important variable in a typology of social problems is probably the
need for urgent solution. Without active claims-makers calling for solutions, it is
difficult for a specific social phenomenon to qualify as a social problem. In
addition, perceived prevalence as well as the threatening nature of the
phenomena were taken into account in our typology (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Typology of social problems in Latvia at country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent (median 6-9)
Less prevalent (median 1-5)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
(30% +)
Crime
Unemployment
Poverty
Medium
priority
(10-30%)
Alcoholism
Economic crime
Education
Culture
Low
priority
(< 10%)
Privatization
Poor health
Pollution
Smoking
Prostitution
Drug abuse
The nationality
problem
Poor housing
conditions
Domestic
violence
Gender
inequality
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The logic of the typology is introduced in the introductory chapter of this book
(see Figure 1, page 11). The idea is that social problems that are regarded as
highly prevalent, highly threatening and urgent are called fully developed social
problems. In the Latvian case, we find three such problems: crime against
person, unemployment and poverty.
The second group includes highly prevalent and threatening phenomena that are
somewhat less urgent. These are defined as developed social problems, here
represented by alcoholism, economic crime, educational problems and cultural
deterioration.
The third group comprises potential social problems (highly prevalent and
threatening, low need for solution), represented by privatization, poor health,
environmental pollution, smoking, prostitution and drug abuse. The case of the
nationality problem is contradictory (low prevalence, rather high threat and
medium need for solution). However, in our typology it is classified as a
potential problem.
Domestic violence, although highly threatening, seems to be a rather marginal if
not an invisible problem. There has prevailed a strong opinion in Latvia that
family problems are a private, personal matter: neighbours, community officers
and the police are not expected to interfere. There are, however, some signs that
these stereotypes are slowly changing, the critical issue being violence against
children, although that seems only to be the tip of the iceberg.
Finally, the results of this survey indicate that gender inequality, scoring low on
all three dimensions, is a ”non-existent” problem. In this respect people's
perceptions seem to have remained more or less unchanged. During socialism
people were taught that real equality was maintained between men and women,
affirmed by the indisputable statement that ”even women can drive a tractor”.
This is still the basic level of understanding in this issue. In Latvian society there
have been and still are very strong traditional stereotypes of how women are
supposed to behave, where to work, what to do, etc. These stereotypes are
equally strong among both men and women. The most conservative views in this
respect are probably held by middle-aged women. At the same time this group is
the most discriminated against in the labour market.
The same map of problems applies in the community context, but a few shifts
deserve to be mentioned. First of all, drinking problems move into the position
of a fully developed social problem. Secondly, environmental pollution,
prostitution and drug abuse are slotted in the community context in a remote
corner consisting of marginal problems. Prostitution and drug abuse, in
particular, have appeared in the mass media only very recently, and they are
typically treated as problems occurring in large cities. In most people's own
communities these problems still seem to be very distant matters.
Figure 2 Typology of social problems in Latvia at community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent (median 6-9)
Less prevalent (median 1-5)
63
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
(30% +)
Alcoholism
Crime against person
Poverty
Unemployment
Medium
priority
(10-30%)
Economic crime
Education
Culture
Privatization
Low
priority
(< 10%)
Poor health
Smoking
The nationality
problem
Poor housing
conditions
Pollution
Gender
Prostitution
inequality
Drug abuse
Domestic violence
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Concluding remarks
The recent political, economic and social changes in Latvia have caused major
shifts in public opinion on the prevalence of social problems. All social
problems were considered to be more prevalent in 1994 than at the end of the
1980s. Alcohol-related problems, smoking and environmental pollution, which
were at the top of the list ten years ago, were replaced by crime against person,
unemployment and poverty in the mid-1990s.
The impression is that for many people life as a whole has been one huge
problem during the transitional period. Each unsolved issue has created new
dilemmas in everyday life, generating an unspecified mass of problems. In this
situation it is extremely difficult to classify this mass of problems on behalf of
the people, before the problems are conceptualized in real life. Therefore, we
feel that the classification proposed on the basis of the forced-choice items is
very provisional, and only partly reflects the reality and people's opinion of
reality.
During the 1980s Latvia had no problems with vagrancy, begging or children's
illiteracy; these problems have emerged with the economic and social difficulties
of the transition period. They can be regarded as entirely new problems or as
symptoms following the root problems of poor living conditions, poverty and
educational problems. These problems are particularly acute if they affect
children and young people. Several thousands of children aged 7-15 do not
attend school, many of them live in miserable living conditions, forcing them
into vagrancy. This is clearly a major risk group for drug abuse, alcoholism,
prostitution and crime, not only today but also in the future. Youth-related
problems are the most acute of all and should be given priority in political
decision-making.
As the predominant problems in Latvian society today are being addressed with
a decreasing urgency, it may be anticipated that opinions on social problems in
the country may well be very different in the future.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
Blom, R., Melin, H. & Nikula, J., eds. (1996): Material for Baltic models of
Transformation (National Reports). University of Tampere.
Eglite, P. et al. (1984): Faktory i motivy demograficheskogo poviedienia, Riga, Zinatne.
Trapenciere, I. et al. (1994): Three Decades of Sociology in Latvia. In: Keen, M. &
Mucha, J., eds. (1994): Eastern Europe in Transformation. The Impact on Sociology.
Greenwood Press, London.
World Bank 1995. The World Bank Atlas, 1995. Washington D.C.
Zvidrinsh, P., ed. (1986): Nasielieniie Sovietskoi Latvii, Riga, Zinatne. 1992. Latvijas
Statistikas gadagrâmata 1992. Riga.
65
Forgotten tunes of the
Singing Revolution
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Anu Narusk
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Introduction
One of the questions raised in recent studies on social problems is — who
decides whether it is the assessments made by the public, the mass media, the
individual sociologists, scientific research, opinion leaders, or the government
that are the most relevant and important? Another crucial question is — how do
social definitions of various social problems depend on cultural definitions, and
how do they change in the changing social and political conditions?
While introducing the results of the Baltica 94 survey in Estonia, this report also
discusses these questions as well as the methodological issues related to the use
of large-scale surveys in studies on social problems.
Previous studies on the prevalence and perception of social problems in
Estonia
Survey studies on social problems in Estonia were very scarce until the mid1980s. Although several population surveys on living conditions were carried
out — such as the population surveys ”Estonia 73”, ”Estonia 78” and ”Estonia
85” (Narusk 1994) —, much of this data (for example, on people's attitudes
towards other nationalities or on their alcohol use) was classified as ”for official
use” and very little, if any, information was published about these issues.
Since 1985, the number of sociological surveys and public opinion polls
increased considerably (see Narusk 1985, 1988, 1991; Kuddo 1988; Liiv 1991).
At the same time, the scope of issues covered has expanded to include crime,
environmental pollution and other social problems, and the very notion of social
problems has been redefined. In 1984 and 1985, when the first public opinion
polls were carried out by the Estonian Television and Radio Committee, the
focal concerns were mainly the economic difficulties and alcohol abuse. During
the next couple of years, environmental issues emerged to the forefront.
67
In 1988, when the Estonian Market and Opinion Research Center (EMOR)
started to conduct regular surveys on people's perceptions of social problems in
Estonia, environmental pollution was considered to be the most serious problem
(Lagerspetz 1992). The following problems on the list, for the native Estonians,
were the economic reform and material welfare, and for the non-natives, the
nationality problems and material welfare. The environmental pollution issue
was used as a ”substitute” problem for direct political issues, especially by the
native Estonians, until 1990, when it was replaced by the issue of political
sovereignty. For the non-Estonians, economic reform climbed to the top of the
list.
Both these problems, political sovereignty and economic reform, disappeared
from the list after Estonia regained its independence in 1991. The time of the
Singing Revolution that was characterized by the peak of the national and
cultural integration, abolishment of the monopoly of the Communist party, high
expectations of all Estonians and their identification with the common goals was
over (Lauristin & Vihalemm 1997).
Perception of social problems in 1993
The turn to market economy, with the monetary reform that introduced the
Estonian Kroon (1 EEK = 0.125 DEM) and nullified people's savings in 1992,
brought along an entirely new set of problems for the Estonian population:
poverty and unemployment. According to the ”Estonia 93” survey (Narusk
1994, 1995), the most serious problems in Estonia in 1993 were crime, poverty,
the ”grey” economy, inadequate legislation and unemployment (Figure 1).
At the same time, only some of the problems that were regarded as ”very
serious” at the country level were similarly ranked in personal terms. One of
these was poverty (rated as a ”very serious” social problem by 68% of the
respondents, while the scarcity of money was perceived as a most serious
personal problem by 75%). The situation was different with some other
problems, such as crime. Although 86% of the respondents rated crime as a
”very serious” social problem in Estonia, only 16% said they were personally
afraid of falling victim to crime.
The ”overestimation” of crime at the country level in 1993 can be explained in
part by the daily coverage that crime began to receive in Estonia since the early
1990s. The increasing role of the mass media in the definition of social
problems, both in modern industrial and in former socialist countries, has been
discussed quite widely in the literature (Lagerspetz & Hanhinen 1994). On the
one hand, the trend has given different social groups better opportunities to make
their claims. On the other hand, it has to be borne in mind that what the media
say is very much influenced by commercial interests (Hubbard et al. 1975).
Figure 1
Social problems in Estonia in 1993: Estonia 93 survey
(population aged 18-74; first twelve problems from the list of
forced-choice questions).
69
According to the ”Estonia 93” survey, the perception of social problems both at
the country level and at the personal level depended on several sociodemographic factors, including gender and nationality. At the country level
women tended to emphasize problems such as poverty, the ”grey” economy,
crime, unemployment, alcohol abuse, lack of attention to the development of
science, education and culture, more often than men. The opposite was true for
privatization, corruption and economic crime.
As for nationality, the native Estonians more frequently referred to problems
related to the ”grey” economy, privatization, deficiencies in legislation, absence
of a sense of ownership and work habits, as well as the presence of the Russian
Army in Estonia. The non-Estonians, in turn, attached more importance to
poverty, unemployment, social inequality and the nationality problem.
Similar ”culturally sensitive” differences were obvious with respect to the
perception of personal problems. Women were more concerned than men about
health issues, family relations, children's future and education, as well as the
danger of falling victim to crime. Men were more often worried about their
occupational problems, the restitution of expropriated property, unemployment,
problems of setting up a private business, and the absence of a sex partner.
Nationality, again, played an important role in the perception of problems such
as poverty, unemployment, children's education and future plans. All these
problems were perceived as more serious by the non-Estonians, while the
problems of restitution of expropriated property and establishing a private
business were regarded as more serious by the Estonians.
Perception of social problems in 1994: the Baltica 94 survey
The Baltica 94 survey was the first population survey in Estonia designed to
study not only perceptions of the prevalence and threat of social problems, but
also the methodological issues related to the measurement of social problems as
well as factors with an impact on the process of (re)defining social problems.
The fieldwork for the Baltica 94 survey in Estonia was done by the public
opinion research centre EMOR.
Sample and questionnaire
The representative sample of the Estonian population comprised almost 1,000
persons aged 18-74. Face-to-face interviews were carried out between 9-15 June
1994. The territorial model of the sample that proceeded from type of settlement
was compiled on the basis of 1989 Census data (the latest census). Estonia was
divided into six sampling areas. The research was carried out at 100 sampling
points by 91 interviewers, with 10 persons interviewed at each point. The
settlements where the interviews were carried out, were selected randomly
according to the model. The probability of falling into the sample in each
settlement depended on the number of permanent residents aged 18-74 in this
settlement. In order to guarantee sample representativity and to select the final
respondents, special rules were used for selecting the addresses (street and
starting address by random sampling), houses and respondents (birthday rule).
Respondents not found at home were revisited; a total of 835 revisits were done
by the interviewers. There were 73 refusals: 29 were not interested to take part,
16 could not spare the time, 10 refused on account of a health problem, 5 were
drunk and 13 gave no reason for their refusal. Two-thirds of the respondents
were Estonians, 27% Russians and 6% were other nationalities.
The questionnaire of the Baltica 94 survey is attached as Appendix A (pages
217-222). In addition to the standard list of 12 problems, two more problems
were added in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, i.e. the restitution of expropriated
property and gender inequality. However, in Estonia these two problems were
added only to the list of questions concerning the extent of threats and the need
for change with regard to those problems.
Perception of social problems as reflected in responses to the open-ended
questions
The answers to the open-ended questions about the most serious social problems
showed that both at the country and at the community level, people ranked three
problems as far more important than others: poverty, crime against person and
unemployment. Poverty stood out well ahead of the other two problems (Table 1
and Table 2).
These top three problems were followed by political and legal problems, alcohol
abuse, economic crime, problems related to economic policy and social services,
and the nationality and the housing problem at the country level. Other problems
were mentioned by less than five per cent of the respondents. At the local level,
the top three problems — poverty, unemployment and crime — were followed
by alcohol abuse, housing problems, political and legal problems, and problems
related to infrastructure, social services, economic policy and environmental
pollution.
71
Table 1
Perception of problems at the country level as reflected in openended questions.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Frequency (N) Per cent
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Poverty
Crime against person
Unemployment
Political and legal problems
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Problems of economic policy
Problems of social services
The nationality problem
Housing problem
Environmental pollution
Poor health of the population
Social consequences of changes
Prostitution
Psychological consequences of changes
Drug abuse
Problems caused by smoking
Domestic violence
Problems of infrastructure
18-19
I do not see any serious problems
Missing/Don't know
525
398
313
108
84
68
56
52
50
45
31
24
20
18
18
15
3
2
67.0
49.8
39.2
13.2
10.7
8.5
7.0
6.5
6.3
5.6
3.8
3.0
2.5
2.3
2.3
1.9
0.4
0.3
2
2
13
0.3
1.6
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14-15
14-15
16
17
18-19
0.3
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Table 2
Perception of problems at the community level as reflected in
open-ended questions.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Frequency (N) Per cent
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Poverty
Unemployment
Crime against person
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Housing problem
Political and legal problems
Problems of infrastructure
7
Problems of social services
Environmental pollution
Problems of economic policy
Economic crime
The nationality problem
Poor health of the population
Psychological consequences of changes
Prostitution
Social consequences of changes
Drug abuse
Problems caused by smoking
Domestic violence
Hooliganism
I do not see any serious problems
Missing/Don't know
Rank
417
321
244
135
126
54
52.2
40.2
30.5
16.9
15.8
6.8
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
6.6
50
48
46
33
21
20
17
12
9
8
7
2
2
17
49
6.3
6.0
5.8
4.1
2.6
2.5
2.1
1.5
1.1
1.0
0.9
0.3
0.3
2.1
6.1
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19-20
19-20
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Significant differences between perceptions of the seriousness of different
problems at the country and the community level raised, once again, the question
about ”over-” and ”underestimation” of specific problems. In these terms, the
problems that were mentioned considerably more often at the country level than
at the community level — i.e. poverty, crime, political and legal problems, and
the nationality problem — were ”overestimated”. In turn, the problems that were
raised more frequently at the local level than at the country level — i.e. alcohol
abuse and housing problems — were ”underestimated”.
As for the perception of the problems at the family level, poverty maintained its
position (52%) with a clear margin (Table 3). Unemployment also ranked high,
although it was mentioned only by one-fifth of the respondents. So did housing
problems (15%) and crime (11%). All other problems were mentioned by less
than 10% of the respondents. These results differed markedly from those
obtained in the ”Estonia 93” survey. For example, health problems (one’s own
and those of significant others) which were considered to be very serious in 1993
were almost non-existent in the answers to the Baltica 94 survey.
Table 3
Perception of problems at the family level as reflected in openended questions.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Frequency (N) Per cent
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Poverty
Unemployment
Housing problem
Crime against person
Political and legal problems
Problems of social services
Problems of economic policy
Environmental pollution
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Problems of infrastructure
9-10
The nationality problem
Economic crime
Psychological consequences of changes
Poor health of the population
Social consequences of changes
Problems caused by smoking
Drug abuse
Domestic violence
Hooliganism
I do not see any serious problems
Missing/Don't know
Rank
414
156
122
86
68
52
37
30
26
51.8
19.5
15.3
10.8
8.5
6.5
4.6
3.8
3.3
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9-10
3.3
20
16
15
10
10
8
1
1
1
109
37
2.5
2.0
1.9
1.3
1.3
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
13.6
4.6
11
12
13
14-15
14-15
16
17-19
17-19
17-19
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
73
This fact can be explained at least in part by methodological reasons. In the
Baltica 94 survey, open-ended questions were asked separately from forcedchoice questions and only the three first-mentioned problems were registered. In
the ”Estonia 93” survey, the open-ended question came after the forced-choice
questions. In other words, in the ”Estonia 93” survey the researcher identified
and defined the problems first, while in the Baltica 94 survey this was left to the
respondents themselves.
The differences between the results of the two surveys may therefore indicate
that people usually do not project the problems of their everyday life to the
social level, and vice versa. As far as health problems are concerned, this means
that people do not usually regard the overall deterioration of the health of the
Estonian population as a social problem with a direct impact on their own health
status or that of their significant others.
The ”invisibility” of the impact of the social environment on people's everyday
life also provides a partial explanation for the fact that at the family level, a
substantial proportion (14%) identified no serious problem at all (as compared
with 0.3% and 2.1% at the country and community level, respectively). People
who were most likely to see no problems were often those who had emerged as
the ”winners” from the process of social transition (Narusk 1996a).
Public perception of positive changes
The answers to the open-ended questions about the positive changes that had
happened at the country, the community and the family level showed that many
people either did not express any positive trends or did not answer the question:
the share of these people was as high as two-thirds concerning the community
and the family level, and one half concerning the country level.
However, those who reported positive trends were quite unanimous in their
views. At all levels the most significant positive trend was the improved supply
of goods. The second and third place, again at all three levels, were occupied by
positive political and positive economic changes (Table 4). Positive trends were
reported much more often at the country level than at the community or family
level.
The low figures for the perceived positive economic changes on the community
and family level, 11 and 12% respectively, are consistent with the results from
other studies. For example, it has been observed that during the transition only
five per cent felt that their economic situation had improved. One-third had
experienced no change, while almost two-thirds had seen their economic
situation deteriorate (Elutingimused ... 1995).
Table 4
Positive trends perceived at the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Positive trend
Frequency (N)
Per cent
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Improved market supply
Positive political changes
Positive economic changes
Other positive trends
Positive social changes
Improved quality of surroundings
and infrastructure
Better ecological situation
I do not see any positive trends
Missing/Don't know
198
182
180
38
19
24.8
22.8
22.5
4.8
2.4
1
2
3
4
5
13
9
259
154
1.6
1.1
32.4
19.3
6
7
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
People reporting no positive changes generally had a lower education, they were
manual workers, middle-aged or older, living in middle-size towns or in the
countryside.
Who, then, were the people who did see positive changes? These people were no
doubt represented by the ”winners” of the process of transition, i.e. the people
who felt their welfare was not threatened by any social problem and who had
experienced a considerable improvement in their economic situation. According
to Grøgaard (1996), the winners of the social transition in Estonia so far were
young Estonian males aged 25-34, with a university education. On the average,
the self-reported income of these males was twice as high as that of males aged
25-34 years with a secondary education, and 40-50% higher than the average
income of earlier male generations with the same educational achievement. The
same people also showed strong support for radical economic reforms.
The prevalence of problems as measured by forced-choice
questions
The respondents rank-ordered the 12 core problems given on the list of forcedchoice questions about the prevalence of the problem in a very similar fashion
both at the country and the community level: poverty, alcohol abuse,
unemployment and smoking were ranked among the top problems in both
settings. There was only one exception — crime against person took first place
at the country level and fifth place at the community level. The items at the
bottom end of the scale — the nationality problem, drug abuse and domestic
violence — were also ranked more or less consistently at both the country and
the community level (Table 5 and 6).
75
Table 5
Current prevalence of problems at the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
Median
S.D.
8.28
7.60
7.10
7.06
6.74
6.62
6.35
6.32
6.06
5.06
4.84
4.15
9
8
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
5
5
4
1.23
1.59
1.77
2.00
1.82
1.95
2.12
1.92
1.96
2.33
2.13
2.05
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Poverty
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Unemployment
Problems caused by smoking
Economic crime
Prostitution
Poor health of the population
Environmental pollution
The nationality problem
Drug abuse
Domestic violence
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Table 6
Current prevalence of problems at the community level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
Median
S.D.
7.27
6.71
6.68
6.42
6.33
6.00
5.36
5.16
4.44
3.48
3.47
3.28
8
7
7
7
7
6
5
5
4
3
3
2
1.87
1.95
2.31
1.93
2.70
2.11
2.44
2.39
2.83
2.00
2.54
2.47
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Poverty
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Unemployment
Problems caused by smoking
Crime against person
Poor health of the population
Economic crime
Environmental pollution
Prostitution
Domestic violence
Drug abuse
The nationality problem
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Differences between answers to open-ended and forced-choice
questions
The study showed that there was only partial overlap between problems
mentioned spontaneously by the respondents' and their responses to the preset
list of problems. However, the main pattern of the problems was similar in the
answers to the both types of questions. For example, at the country level people
spontaneously ranked poverty, crime against person, unemployment and alcohol
abuse among the five most important problems (Table 1). The same four
problems emerged at the top of the list in the answers to the forced-choice
questions (Table 5). The same kind of overlap appeared at the community level:
the responses to open-ended questions ranked poverty, unemployment, crime
against person and alcohol abuse as the top problems (Table 2). And again, the
same four problems appeared among the top five items among the responses to
the forced-choice questions (Table 6).
At the end of the tables, the similar pattern of the problems (domestic violence
and drug abuse) was repeated as well, both in people’s spontaneous evaluations
and in responses to the 12-item list prepared by the researchers.
Differences between current and previous prevalence of social
problems
The respondents' answers to the questions concerning problems prevailing in
Estonia six years ago demonstrated, once again, that the problems in 1988
differed significantly from those in 1994. Alcohol abuse, smoking,
environmental pollution, economic crime, and poor health of the population
were rated as the five most prevalent problems at the country level in 1988. The
same five problems also occurred at the community level, although in a slightly
different order.
The biggest shift at the country level during the last six years occurred for
unemployment (which practically did not exist in 1988), followed by poverty,
crime against person and prostitution (Table 7).
Table 7 Comparison between current and previous prevalence of problems at
the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Difference in
mean values
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Unemployment
Poverty
Crime against person
Prostitution
Drug abuse
Economic crime
Poor health of the population
The nationality problem
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Domestic violence
Problems caused by smoking
Environmental pollution
5.41
4.38
3.75
3.33
2.16
1.92
1.64
1.17
0.91
0.58
0.55
0.08
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Exactly the same combination was repeated at the community level. Smoking
and alcohol abuse had been ousted from their top positions, as well as
environmental pollution. Thus, the new pattern of perceived social problems
77
emerged along with ending the period of the Singing Revolution and beginning
of the new period, labelled as ”Laying the foundations of the Estonian state”
(Lauristin & Vihalemm 1997) that brought along the ”shock therapy” — radical
reforms, rapid social differentiation, decline of living standards for the majority
and growing disillusion.
How threatening did the problems seem in 1994?
For the inquiry on the perceived threat presented by the problems, two additional
items were included in the 12-point list of forced-choice questions — the
problems of restitution and privatization, and gender inequality. As can be seen
from Table 8, the most prevalent problems — crime against person, poverty,
alcohol abuse and unemployment — were also perceived as the most threatening
ones. At the same time, the nationality problem, drug abuse and domestic
violence that were perceived as the least prevalent were also found among the
least threatening problems.
Table 8
Ranking according to threat represented by different problems.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
Median
S.D.
8.51
7.71
7.24
7.11
6.77
6.59
6.60
6.25
6.23
5.99
5.63
5.33
4.23
3.64
9
8
8
7
7
7
7
6
7
6
6
5
4
3
1.00
1.57
2.05
1.76
1.86
2.20
1.89
2.00
2.20
2.00
2.21
2.39
1.90
2.23
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Poverty
Unemployment
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Privatization
Poor health of the population
Problems caused by smoking
Prostitution
Environmental pollution
Drug abuse
The nationality problem
Domestic violence
Gender inequality
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
The environmental problems, serving as ”substitutes” for other political issues
during the Singing Revolution in the late 1980s, only ranked 9th on the list of 14
problems — even though the objective indicators point at a worsening of
environmental pollution (see Estonian Human Development Report 1996).
A similar discrepancy between ”subjective” and ”objective” ratings became
evident for drug abuse. Despite a sharp increase in illegal drug abuse in Estonia,
especially among young people (the share of those who have tried some illegal
drug had increased from about zero to ten per cent for school-children aged 15-
16 during 1989-1994; see Narusk 1996b), the problem was not rated as a really
threatening one.
The same applied to gender inequality, which came at the very bottom of the list
of threatening problems. Despite the fact that gender differences, in terms of
income and social position, grew with increasing educational level (Dietz &
Grøgaard 1996), the problem was not perceived as a threat. The potential claimsmakers were almost absent — 70% of men and women aged over 20 years
agreed that discrimination occurred very rarely. There were, however, two
exceptional groups: women aged 18-19 and well-educated older females, a
considerable proportion of whose perceived the discrimination (Elutingimused ...
1995). Despite such perceptions, these groups apparently were not organized
enough to form a ”claims-making voice”.
Statistically significant differences in estimates on threatening problems
(Scheffe test, significance level 0.05) between men and women, as well as
between the native Estonians and the non-Estonians, provided once again
empirical evidence about the ”cultural sensitivity” of perception of social
problems. As a whole, women were more sensitive to several social threats than
men, including alcohol abuse, gender inequality, poverty, poor health of the
population, the nationality problem, smoking, prostitution and unemployment.
As for the nationality, the non-natives seemed to be much more distressed than
the native Estonians. This was true for the most items, among others alcohol and
drug abuse, environmental pollution, poor health of the population,
unemployment, and last but not least the nationality problem. The native
Estonians, in turn, were more worried about the problems of privatization and
restitution.
Priorities in solving social problems
Finally, the respondents were asked to identify three urgent problems at the
country and community level that they felt had to be resolved as quickly as
possible. Responding this question on the country level, the overwhelming
majority emphasized the urgency of solving the problem of crime against person
(88%). Solution of the problems of unemployment (53%) and poverty (52%)
also ranked high on this list. All other problems were way behind these three
(Table 9).
79
Table 9
The priority of the problems at the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Frequency (N) Per cent
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Unemployment
Poverty
Economic crime
Privatization
The nationality problem
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Poor health of the population
Environmental pollution
Prostitution
Drug abuse
Problems caused by smoking
Domestic violence
Gender inequality
702
423
414
172
162
118
117
112
81
32
22
5
3
3
87.9
52.9
51.8
21.5
20.3
14.8
14.6
14.0
10.1
4.0
2.8
0.6
0.4
0.4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13-14
13-14
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The rank order of the three most urgent problems at the community level was
identical: crime against person scored 60%, while unemployment and poverty
got 58 and 57%, respectively. Alcohol abuse occupied the fourth position at
28%, while all other problems were below 21%.
Although drinking problems had clearly increased during the years preceding
Baltica 94 data collection, only 15% of the respondents felt that alcohol abuse
was a problem calling for an urgent solution at the country level. At the same
time, the number of deaths caused by alcohol poisonings had risen from 18.4 in
1990 to 45.9 per 100 000 men in 1994. It was also estimated that the average
intake of pure alcohol per capita exceeded 14 litres in 1994. Still the drinking
problem was not perceived as one in need of an urgent solution even despite the
fact that almost half of all Estonian families regarded the husband's alcohol
abuse as a cause of family conflicts (Narusk 1996a).
Similarly, only 14% of the respondents were in favour of an urgent solution to
the population's poor health status. This is a remarkably small proportion in view
of the continuous decline in the average life expectancy among both men and
women in Estonia. For men, it has dropped from 64.6 in 1990 to 61.1 years in
1994; for women, from 74.6 to 73.1 (Eesti tervishoiustatistika 1995). The poor
health of the population is also reflected in people's self-ratings: the number of
Estonians who considered their health to be ”very good” or ”fairly good” was
only about one-third in 1994 (Lipand et al. 1995).
A typology of social problems
The measurement of the three dimensions of social problems — i.e. perceived
prevalence, threat, and need for change — allowed to generate a typology of
social problems. The problems were categorized on the bases of the following
criteria:
(a) perceived prevalence — more prevalent (median 6-9) and less
prevalent (median 1-5),
(b) perceived threat — more threatening (median 7-9) and less threatening
(median 1-6),
(c) perceived need for change — an urgent need for change (problem
mentioned among the three most important problems by more
than 30% of the respondents), some need for change (mentioned
by 10-30%), weak or no need for change (mentioned by less
than 10% of the respondents).
Using these dimensions, the problems were divided into 12 potential categories,
separately for the country level and the community level (Figure 2 and 3).
Figure 2
Typology of problems at the country level (12 problems
comparable with the other countries participating in the
Baltica 94 survey).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
(median 6-9)
More
Less
dangerous
dangerous
(median 7-9) (median 1-6)
Less prevalent
(median 1-5)
More
Less
dangerous
dangerous
(median 7-9) (median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Urgent need
for change
(> 30%)
I
II
Crime
Unemployment
Poverty
III
Some need
for change
(10-30%)
V
VI
Economic Environmental
crime
pollution
Alcohol abuse
Poor health
of the population
VII
Weak or no
need for
change
(< 10%)
IX
Prostitution
XI
X
Smoking
IV
VIII
The nationality
problem
XII
Drug abuse
Domestic
violence
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
81
Figure 3
Typology of problems at the community level (12 problems
comparable with other countries participating in the Baltica 94
study).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
(median 6-9)
More
Less
dangerous
dangerous
(median 7-9) (median 1-6)
Less prevalent
(median 1-5)
More
Less
dangerous
dangerous
(median 7-9) (median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Urgent need
for change
(> 30%)
I
II
Crime
Unemployment
Poverty
III
Some need
for change
(10-30%)
V
VI
Alcohol abuse
Poor health
of the population
VII
Economic
crime
Weak or no
IX
need for
nationality change
problem
(< 10%)
X
Smoking
XI
Prostitution
IV
VIII
Environmental
pollution
XII
The
Drug abuse
Domestic
violence
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
This classification highlighted three major types of social problems. Type I
included problems that people thought were prevalent, threatening and calling
for urgent change (cell I). Three problems met the criteria for this type of ”most
visible” social problems for both the country and the community level: crime
against person, unemployment and poverty.
Type II consisted of problems that were perceived as prevalent, often also as
threatening but not in need of urgent change (cells V, VI, IX and X). On both the
country and community level alcohol abuse, poor health of the population and
smoking belonged to this ”less visible” category. In addition, economic crime,
prostitution and environmental pollution fitted into this group on the country
level.
Type III, labelled as ”invisible” social problems consisted of the problems
perceived as less prevalent, not calling for an urgent solution even when
perceived to be threatening (cells VII, VIII, XI, XII). The core of this third type,
represented on the country and the community level, was made up of the
nationality problem, drug abuse and domestic violence. At the community level,
environmental pollution, economic crime and prostitution belonged to this type.
Conclusion
Measuring people's perceptions of social problems in a large-scale survey
context provided us with several answers to the questions that were posed in the
beginning of the study. The survey data helped us to investigate not only what
kinds of problems were perceived as prevalent and threatening, but also who
perceived what kinds of problems. It also allowed to register a new pattern on
the perception of social problems in the mid-1990s (the period of ”shock
therapy”) compared to the late 1980s (the period of the Singing Revolution) in
Estonia. Many questions still remain unanswered. What are the most influential
factors moderating public opinion? What is the role of the different mass media?
How do people form personal interpretations of their experiences?
In other words, although the survey instrument proved to be one of the necessary
methodological tools in the study of people's perceptions of social problems, it
was less suitable for exploring the external (societal) factors that influence
people's perceptions (culture, norms and values, mass-media etc.). The
interpretation of such factors produces useful results only if combined with other
instruments of collecting and analysing the data, for example, in-depth
interviews and materials from the mass media.
Significant differences observed between the problems constructed by means of
open-ended and forced-choice questions reminded us also about the relationship
between the researcher who had designed the items, and the results generated by
using this list. Why were some problems not even mentioned among the more
prevalent problems in the open-ended responses, while they were perceived as
very prevalent according to the forced-choice questions? And why some
problems (for example, poverty) that were perceived as the most serious in the
responses to the open-ended questions at both the country and the community
level lost their priority in the responses to the forced-choice questions?
Expecting the responses to the forced-choice questions to be more affected by
the moderator of the study, the only way to find out the ”real” list of social
problems seems to be to use open-ended questions with unlimited number of
responses.
Despite the negative sides of using forced-choice questions, the similar list of
items and scale of ratings are no doubt a suitable tool for analysing the
”visibility” of the problems (i.e. if they are perceived prevalent and threatening
and in urgent need of change or not). It is also an appropriate tool for finding out
if an ”over-” or ”underestimation” of the problems exists (i.e. if the problems are
perceived with significant differences at the country and at the community level
or not), as well as for determining ”cultural sensitivity” of the perception of
social problems (i.e if there are significant differences between the perception of
83
the problems in different social groups that have differing cultural norms, values
and behaviour).
The study showed that gender and nationality were critical factors affecting the
perception of social problems. Traditional gender socialization in Estonia has
provided women with a greater sensitivity to problems tied to everyday life
(poverty, alcohol abuse, poor health of the population etc.). In the same way, the
greater emphasis placed by the non-Estonians (the majority of whom are
Russians) on problems such as poverty and unemployment might be interpreted
as ”culturally sensitive”. Using Jadov's (1992, 4) words: ”the Russian national
character includes equalizing, communalizing (...). And the socialist ideology
actively reinforced, catalysed all these features”. The biggest differences in
perception of the threats were displayed in the case of two problems — the nonEstonians were more worried about the nationality problem and the Estonians
about the problems with privatization.
Besides gender and nationality, the perception of problems depended largely on
the respondents' education, economic situation and social position. In the study,
the estimation of changes was to a considerable degree dependent on whether
one belonged to the ”winners” or the ”losers” of the social transition.
As for the comparative studies, the use of similar lists of forced-choice questions
in different countries can hardly provide information about the ”real” rank order
of social problems in these countries. A ”real” list of social problems can only be
constructed by means of open-ended questions, when the number of answers is
unlimited. At the same time, in regard to cross-national comparisons, differences
in the social environment are the most potent explanatory factors in interpreting
variations in people's perceptions of social problems. Comparisons between
countries provide valuable information when studying external (societal) factors
influencing the perception of social problems. Only a comparison (in space and
time) makes it possible to explain why social problems are differently perceived
in countries which have similar ”objective” conditions registered by statistics
(Narusk 1997).
For these reasons, some problems can be perceived as more serious in a country
where the statistics indicate lower figures than in another country. A proper
illustration of this is provided by the case of alcohol abuse in Estonia (higher
consumption, higher rates of damages) and some Nordic countries (lower
consumption, fewer damages). For Estonia, this controversy became most
evident during the ”alcohol revolution” in the mid-1980s. Following socially
approved behavioural patterns involving heavy drinking by men and resisting
the official anti-alcohol campaign ”from above”, Estonian people did everything
in their power to sabotage the campaign. After the first two years it was evident
that the campaign had to be discontinued although it had undoubtedly favourable
impact on alcohol-related mortality and crime statistics.
The sharp increase in alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems (crime,
traffic accidents, poisonings, etc.) from the late 1980s onwards had no notable
effect on people's awareness of the problem. In the studies on social problems in
the mass media in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Lagerspetz and Hanhinen
(1994) showed that during these years alcohol issues were very seldom
discussed.
In 1994, according to the Baltica 94 survey, alcohol abuse was perceived as
quite prevalent and threatening but still not as a problem calling for urgent
measures. In other words, the solution of the problem was reduced to the
individual (family) level, without realizing that on this level there are often not
sufficient resources for the battle against ”socially approved” drinking and its
negative results (Narusk 1996b).
Today, the discussions on alcohol problems have still not been picked up in the
mass media, and there is still no preventive alcohol policy in Estonia. Neither is
there any public financing for medical and social research on alcohol problems.
By contrast, the Estonian mass media have opted completely to ignore the whole
question. At the same time, the fact that the husbands' alcohol use is considered
a cause of marital conflicts in every second family and the increasing numbers of
alcohol poisonings, traffic accidents caused by drunk drivers, and other alcoholrelated problems can hardly be denied as negative results of a serious social
problem creating harmful social conditions for people's well-being.
The same concerns the illegal drug abuse. The opening of the borders together
with the liberal free-market ideology created favourable conditions for the
bootlegging of illegal drugs already in 1994. Yet the problem stood ”invisible”
for Estonian people. The fight against illegal drug use, as well as the concern of
representatives of international organizations (WHO, UNDCP), donating to the
projects to combat drugs, was often labelled as another ”campaign from above”.
In this situation it is rather difficult to agree with Fuller and Myers (1941), who
claim that ”conditions do not assume a prominent place in a social problem until
a given people define them as hostile to their welfare (...). If the people are not
problem-conscious, they will not behave as if there were any problems.” Even if
the risks of alcohol or other drug abuse remain invisible to the people, this does
not mean that these risks have no influence on their welfare or that they behave
as if there were no problem. It is just that they do nothing about it publicly. They
take individual responsibility for the particular problems, but usually fail to
solve them.
In other words, one cannot deny the existence of ”invisible” social problems up
to the moment when particular social conditions have a negative impact on
people's physical and mental well-being and when these conditions can be
changed only by institutions that are charged with the responsibility of
monitoring, controlling, and eradicating the problem. To become ”visible”, the
85
social problem need to be claimed as the problem in need of an urgent solution.
These emergent and legitimization stages have to be gone through to reach the
institutionalized stage and the impact of the mass media is noteworthy in this
process (Blumer 1971).
English editing: David Kivinen and Kati Hammer
Literature
Blumer, H. (1971): Social Problems as Collective Behaviour. Social Problems, Winter
1971, Vol. 18, 298-306.
Dietz, J. & Grøgaard, J.B. (1996): Political attitudes. In: Grøgaard, J.B., ed.: Estonia in
the Grip of Change. The NORBALT Living Conditions Project, FAFO Report 190,
Falch Hurtigtrykk, 225-245.
Eesti tervishoiustatistika (1995). (Health statistics.) ESA, Tallinn.
Elutingimused Eestis 1994.a. (1995) ESA, Vol. 1-5. Hansar, Tallinn.
Estonian Human Development Report (1996). PrismaPrint, Tallinn.
Fuller, R. & Myers, R. (1941): Some aspects of a theory of social problems. American
Sociological Review, 6 (Febr.), pp. 24-32.
Grøgaard, J.B. (1996): Education. In: Grøgaard, J.B., ed.: Estonia in the Grip of Change.
The NORBALT Living Conditions Project. FAFO Report 190, Falch Hurtigtrykk,
69-101.
Hubbard, J.C., DeFleur, M.L. & DeFleur, L. (1975): Mass Media Influences on Public
Conceptions of Social Problems. Social Problems, Oct. 1975, Vol. 23, No. 1, 12-22.
Jadov, V. (1992): Report. EMOR-Reports. Vol. 3, No. 3, July-September 1992, Tallinn.
Kuddo, A. (1988): Sotsialno-ekonomitseskije pritsinô i posledstvija rasprostranenija
pjanstva i alkoholizma (Socio-economic reasons and results of increasing alcohol
abuse. For official use only). TA MI, Tallinn.
Lagerspetz, M. (1992): Estonia: Changing Problems in a Re-emerging State. In:
Simpura, J. & Tigerstedt, C., eds.: Social Problems around the Baltic Sea. NAD
Publication No. 21, 23-38. Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research, Helsinki.
Lagerspetz, M. & Hanhinen, S. (1994): Changing World, Changing Problems: a
comparison of Finnish and Estonian press materials. In: Lagerspetz, M., ed.: Social
Problems in Newspapers. Studies around the Baltic Sea. NAD Publication No. 28,
19-55. Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research, Helsinki.
Lauristin, M. & Vihalemm, P. (1997): Recent Historical Developments in Estonia: Three
Stages of Transition, 1987-1997. In: Lauristin, M., Vihalemm, P., Rosengren, K.-E.
& Weibull, L., eds.: Return to the Western World. Tartu University press, 73-127.
Liiv, A. (1991): Alcohol Problems in Estonia in 1980s. Papers of II Finnish and Estonian
psychiatry symposium, Kuopio 25-28 September 1991, University of Kuopio, 31-38.
Lipand, A., Kasmel, A., Tasa, E., Leinsalu, M., Uutela, A., Puska, P. & Helakorpi, S.
(1995): Eesti täiskavanud elanikkonna terviseuuring. Kevad 1994 (Health of Adult
Population in Estonia. Spring 1994). Kansanterveyslaitos, Helsinki.
Narusk, A. (1985): Ôpilane 85: Vaba aeg, tubakas ja alkohol (Students 85: Leisure,
smoking and drinking). Nôukogude Kooli, 10: 16-21.
Narusk, A. (1988): Pered, kus kasvavad teismelised (Families with Adolescents).
Valgus, Tallinn.
Narusk, A. (1991): Transmission of Drinking Habits in the Family. Contemporary Drug
Problems, Winter 1991, 645-671.
Narusk, A., ed. (1994): Murrangulised 80-ndada ja 90-ndad aastad Eestis (The Critical
80s and 90s in Estonia). TAK-STAKES, Helsinki-Tallinn.
Narusk, A., ed. (1995): Everyday-Life and Radical Social Changes in Estonia: A
sociological-empirical overview of changes in Estonians' life values, attitudes, living
conditions and behaviour during the transition from Soviet to post-Soviet. Eesti TA
Kirjastus, Tallinn.
Narusk, A. (1996a): The Family. In Estonian Human Development Report. PrismaPrint,
Tallinn.
Narusk, A. (1996b): Noored ja uimastid (Young people and Drugs). TAK, Tallinn.
Narusk, A. (1997): Perception of Social Problems and the ”Real” Life. In: Taljunaite,
M., ed.: Everyday Life in the Baltic States, Vilnius, Lithuanian Institute of
Philosophy and Sociology, 9-24.
87
Alarming cumulation
of social problems
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Vyacheslav Afanasyev & Yakov Gilinskiy
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Introduction
Overview of social problems in St. Petersburg
The current economic, social, political, demographic and ecological problems
that confront Russia and its regions, including St. Petersburg, constitute a crisis
of huge proportions. This crisis is a result of a complex and torturing historical
evolution of the country through centuries of tsarist autocracy and Soviet
totalitarianism up to the ongoing attempts to eliminate totalitarianism.
The discussion below provides a statistical overview of the main social problems
in the St. Petersburg region. This discussion is followed by an introduction to the
results of a survey in summer 1994 (as part of the Baltica study) on public
perceptions of these problems in St. Petersburg.
Crime against person
The rate of serious crimes against person in Russia was quite stable in the late
1970s and early 1980s. In 1985-1987 the figures temporarily declined, but since
1988 they have shot up dramatically. The rate of murders (including attempted
murders) and serious bodily injuries increased from 1987 to 1994 3.5 and 3.3
times over, respectively. A similar trend has been seen in thefts and burglaries.
Because of amendments made to the Criminal Code (CC) it is not possible
statistically to analyse criminal encroachments on private property with the
single exception of apartment thefts, which are registered separately. The
increase in the proportion of apartment thefts in the total number of thefts (30%
in 1989, 42% in 1993) may be accounted for both by the increased number of
apartments thefts and by the greater latency of other thefts: victims of street
thefts rarely bother to go to the police because there simply is no point.
The figures for crime against person in St. Petersburg follow the same basic
pattern as the figures for Russia as a whole: the decline in 1985-1987 is followed
by a sharp increase. There are even points where the number of crimes exceed
89
the Russian averages. It is also worth noting that the rates of crime against
person in St. Petersburg were clearly below the Russian figures before the
transition. Today, the proportion of apartment thefts is much higher than the
Russian average. The rate of robberies in St. Petersburg is one of the highest in
Russia: among 80 Russian regions St. Petersburg has recently ranked first or
second in this regard.
Table 1 Rate of crime against person and personal property in Russia and St.
Petersburg (per 100,000 inhabitants).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Murder
Serious bodily
injury
Theft
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Russia
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
8.5
6.6
6.3
7.2
9.2
10.5
10.9
15.5
19.6
21.8
21.4
19.9
14.7
13.9
18.2
25.0
27.7
27.8
36.2
45.1
45.7
41.6
324.7
264.4
251.1
327.2
512.1
616.8
837.3
1,110.2
1,065.2
888.4*
924.6*
St. Petersburg
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
5.1
3.9
3.4
4.9
4.9
5.8
7.7
11.2
17.7
20.4
20.5
12.4
10.4
8.2
12.6
16.7
17.7
20.2
34.4
43.5
40.8
36.0
285.9
310.9
413.2
575.5
801.3
1,227.7
1,037.1
771.8*
727.5*
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
* The data are not comparable because of changes in criminal law.
Source: Criminality and offences... 1990, 1992, 1994, 1995.
Drug abuse
Drug abuse occurs throughout the Russian empire, but it is most prevalent in the
Far East, in southern republics, in Moscow and St. Petersburg. The rate of
”narcotization” in Russia, i.e. the number of officially recorded drug users per
100,000 citizens has been increasing since the late 1980s (1985: 26, 1987: 42,
1989: 35, 1993: 48, 1994: 61) (Criminality and offences... 1995).
According to survey studies conducted in Moscow and Kazakhstan by the
Moscow Institute of Sociology in 1987, 1991-92 and 1994-95, the share of
youths using drugs or toxic substances rose in secondary schools from 12%
(1987) to 19% (1995), in vocational schools from 21% to 31%, and in technical
schools from 25% to 39% (Pozdnjakova 1995).
The official figures for the ”narcotization” rate in St. Petersburg were slightly
higher than the all-Russian rate (1990: 47, 1992: 54, 1993: 61). However,
various studies indicate that the figures for St. Petersburg cover only one per
mille of the total. A survey conducted by a group of Leningrad sociologists in
1990 showed that 7% of school students aged 14-16, 26% of vocational schools
students of the same age, and 39% of teenagers held in police custody, reported
that they had taken narcotic or toxic substances (Afanasyev & Gilinskiy 1995).
A survey study focusing on adults in St. Petersburg in 1993 showed that about
10% of the respondents had used drugs at least once (Afanasyev & Gilinskiy
1995).
Drunkenness and alcoholism
It is extremely difficult to estimate the real consumption of alcoholic beverages
in Russia. One reason is the continuous infringement on a mass scale of the state
monopoly on distilling and selling alcohol in Russia since the late 1980s;
another is the huge quantity of unrecorded supply of both domestic and imported
beverages, including falsified brands (40-50% of total sales) Nemtsov 1995,
Zayigraev 1992). Finally, there exists no monitoring system in this field.
Sales of alcoholic beverages in Russia peaked in 1983 at 10.5 litres of 100%
alcohol per capita and dropped to a low of 3.9 litres in 1987. In the 1990s sales
figures have stabilized at around 6 litres (Table 2). However, expert estimates
put the per capita consumption of alcohol in Russia in 1983 at 14.5 litres, in
1987 at 11.0 litres, and in 1993 at 14.5 litres.
One of the distinctive features of alcohol consumption in Russia is the large and
growing share of vodka in the total consumption of alcoholic drinks: in 19831989 between 50 and 60%, in 1991 72% and in 1993 82% (Nemtsov 1995). The
excessive use of spirits, a considerable proportion of which is falsified, has
considerably pushed up mortality from cirrhosis of the liver (1988: 8.3 per
100,000 inhabitants, 1993: 15.7), acute alcohol poisoning (1988: 7.8, 1993: 30.9)
as well as alcohol psychosis (1988: 5.1, 1993: 32.1) (Nemtsov 1995).
91
Table 2 Sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages in Russia (Litres of
100% alcohol per capita).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1984
1987
1990
1991
1992
1993
10.5
3.9
5.6
5.6
5.6
6.0
14.5
11.0
12.2
12.9
13.9
14.5
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Sales
Expert estimates
of consumption
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Source: Nemtsov 1995.
Official statistics indicate that mortality from acute alcohol poisoning in St.
Petersburg increased 7.9 times over in 1987-93 (1987: 6.2 per 100,000
inhabitants, 1993: 49.1) (Basic indices... 1995).
According to a study on 1350 households in St. Petersburg, the share of
disposable income that people spend on alcoholic beverages has been halved
during the 1990s. In 1990 the average Petersburgian spent 4.2% of his or her
income on alcoholic drinks; the figure for 1991 and 1992 was 3.2%; and for
1993 and 1994 2.2% and 2%, respectively (St. Petersburg and... 1995). This
trend could largely be explained by the much slower increase in alcohol prices
compared with other foodstuffs (the 1991 price index of alcohol was 1.2
compared to 1.0 in 1990 in 1994 the index was 2.6; the only foodstuff with a
lower index was vegetables (St. Petersburg and... 1995).
Economic crime
Statistical data can give only a pale picture of the true extent of economic crime
in Russia. The reasons for this lie not only in the high latency but also in the
shortcomings of criminal law. The official review of economic crime in 1994
says: ”An analysis of the criminal processes testifies to the increasing tendency
of criminal elements to influence the main spheres of the economy. The growth
of the criminal factor is obvious in practically all branches of the economy,
especially in finance and foreign trade, the extracting and processing industry,
trade and transport. There are more and more cases of illegal money transfers
into the grey economy and the transfer of hard currency and material resources
abroad. Crime has become an integral part of the consumer market; illegal price
hikes, illegal business and cheating is common. Seizure of property through
deceit or breach of confidence has grown 2.5 times over within one year,
material damage caused to citizens and juridical persons exceeds 20 billion
roubles” (Criminality and offences... 1995).
Environmental pollution
There is an abundance of research evidence which highlights the complex
ecological situation in present-day Russia (Kondratyev & Danilov-Danilyan
1993). However, the picture drawn by the statistical data is not exactly what one
would expect. Both in Russia as a whole and in St. Petersburg emissions into
waterways and into the atmosphere have declined (Russian statistical... 1995, St.
Petersburg and... 1995). This is explained by the decrease in industrial
production. Nevertheless the level of air, water and soil pollution in Russia and
St. Petersburg remains very high (Eco-dynamics... 1996), although in 1993 St.
Petersburg was not listed among the 40 most polluted cities in Russia (Russian
statistical... 1995).
Domestic violence
It is not possible for us to distinguish domestic violence from crime against
person in general on the basis of the statistical evidence available. Pobegailo
(1988) has shown that one-third of murder victims are relatives, including
husbands, wives and living partners. All in all 41% of the murders committed in
Russia in 1988 took place on ”home ground”. In 1992 the corresponding figure
was 26% (Changes of Criminality... 1994). During the past few years domestic
violence has also been studied by qualitative methods (Shestakov 1996; The
Black Book... 1994).
The nationality problem
Historically Russia took shape as a multinational state. State national policy and
administrative national autonomy, introduced in Russia and the USSR by the
totalitarian regime, guaranteed a certain stability in the relations between
nationalities. However, with the collapse of the USSR in 1991, discord among
the nationalities began to spill over into conflicts. In St. Petersburg, however,
this has never been a serious problem (Kiseleva 1993; Uzunova 1993).
Health problems
A number of factors have contributed to the Russian population's poor health
and to the decline in life expectancy: poor nutrition for three generations,
environmental pollution, severe labour conditions and industrial backwardness,
neglect of people's health, heavy drinking, shortage of medical drugs and a poor
standard of medical service (The Population of Russia... 1993; Moscow News
1996; Shkolnikov et al. 1995). Within the space of eight years from 1986 to
1994, the death rate in Russia grew from 10.4 to 16.2 per 1,000 population. At
the same time, the birth rate dropped from 17.6 to 9.6. The highest life
expectancy figures have been recorded for people born in 1964-65 (64.6 years
93
for men and 73.3 for women) and in 1987 (65.0 for men and 74.6 for women),
representing Khrushchev's ”spring” and Gorbatchev's ”perestroika”, respectively
(Shkolnikov et al. 1995). By 1994 life expectancy at birth was down to 57.3
years for men and 71.1 for women. The growing death rate in the 1990s is
accompanied by changes in causes of death: in 1994 the number of deaths
caused by accidents, murder, poisoning and suicide was more than twice as high
as in 1990 (Russian Statistical... 1995).
The mortality and health situation in St. Petersburg is very similar to that in the
country in general (Basic indices... 1995; The population of St. Petersburg 1994;
Public health care... 1994). A sharp increase has been recorded in mortality
caused by accidents (from 78.8 per 100,000 inhabitants in 1987 to 256.8 in
1993), poisoning (particularly alcohol poisoning (from 7.8 in 1987 to 28.5 in
1995, Care of public health... 1996), tuberculosis (from 5.2 in 1987 to 15.8 in
1993) and homicide (from 4.6 in 1987 to 27.8 in 1993). Deaths from
cardiovascular diseases exceed the national average by 2.5 times (1993).
The life expectancy of St. Petersburgians born in 1993 is 58.1 years for men and
70.7 years for women.
Cases of diphtheria per 100,000 inhabitants increased from 0.24 in 1988 to 51.1
in 1993, cases of tuberculosis from 24.9 to 34.3. At the same time budget cuts
throughout the medical system have reduced the number of medical
establishments (140 in 1987, 122 in 1993), hospital beds (61,900 in 1990 and
51,400 in 1993), and doctors (43,500 in 1989 and 33,200 in 1993) and nurses
(71,000 in 1984 and 52,800 in 1993). It is consequently more and more difficult
for people to get medical assistance.
Poverty
During the 1980s prices went up quite slowly in Russia and wages increased as
well. In the 1990s the situation has changed dramatically. The prices of
commodities and services were released from regulation in 1992, and over the
next two years prices rose three times faster than the wage level (Russian
statistical... 1995). Rising food prices dramatically affected family budgets: in
1990 food accounted for 36% of the average family budget in Russia and for
30% in St. Petersburg compared with 47% and 50%, respectively, two years
later.
According to official data 20-25% of the Russian population live below the
poverty line (i.e., have an income per person that falls short of the minimum
wage) (Russian Annual... 1995). Stratification in this regard is increasing. The
gap between the poor majority and a minority of ”New Russians” is growing and
creating sharp tension in society. The ratio of the poorest to richest income
decile has grown from 1:4.5 in 1991 to 1:15 in 1994, while the Gini Index
(coefficient of incomes concentration) was 0.256 in 1991 and 0.346 in 1993
(Financial News 1995).
The decline of the standard of living in Russia was officially acknowledged in
1991. By the end of the year the delay in income growth compared to prices in
St. Petersburg was 25-30%. In 1992 prices roses twice as fast as incomes
(Panova 1994). In 1993 the gap was slightly reduced. According to family
budget research, 35% of the population had a per capita income below the
poverty line in 1992, by the end of 1993 the figure was 32-35%.
In October 1994, 26% of the respondents in a survey study regarded themselves
as very poor (monthly income less than 100,000 roubles), a further 25% defined
themselves as poor (monthly income up to 185,000 roubles) (Protasenko 1995).
In St. Petersburg the trend in the ratio of the poorest to the richest income decile
is similar to that observed for the whole of Russia. Since the end of 1991, when
the ratio was 1:4.1, it has grown to 1:8.8 (1992), then to 1:9.7 (1993) and at the
end of 1994 to 1:11 (Protasenko 1995). In 1994, 19% of the respondents said
they did not earn enough to buy the food they needed, 42% said that their
income is enough only for food and housing, 31% were able to save something
and only 9% had enough money to buy expensive goods.
Prostitution
Up until 1987 prostitution was not prohibited by law in Russia. However, there
was criminal liability for the running of brothels, pandering with commercial
purposes (Art. 226 of the Criminal Code) and bringing minors into prostitution
(Art. 210 of CC).
In 1987 prostitution became a punishable offence; offenders are given a warning
or a fine of 100 roubles, repeated offenders a fine of 200 roubles. These new
legal provisions helped to inspire a campaign against prostitution in Russia.
During 1987-1989 a total of more than 5,000 prostitutes were charged by the
police (Prostitution... 1991). However, this campaign has now faded and law
enforcement is minimal. In 1990, only 193 women in St. Petersburg were
charged for prostitution, in 1992 four, in 1993 seven, and in 1994 49 (The St.
Petersburg Sheets 1995a). In 1993, 18 cases were filed in St. Petersburg against
people maintaining brothels and pandering with commercial purposes, in 1994
28, and in 1995 52 (The St. Petersburg Sheets 1995b). At the country level the
proportions have been roughly the same: 248 in 1992, 527 in 1993, and 1,580 in
1994 (Changes of Criminality... 1994).
95
It should be pointed out, however, that the majority of these criminal cases did
not result in a conviction. Indeed, out of the 28 cases initiated by the St.
Petersburg police in 1994 only one was tried in a court of justice and led to a
suspended sentence. According to police data for 1994, a total of more than
2,430 prostitutes worked in the city's pandering agencies, hotels and railway
stations (The St. Petersburg Sheets 1995b).
Unemployment
The classical problem of unemployment arrived in Russia in the 1990s.
Statistical data on unemployment are available from 1991 onwards. In 1991 the
number of people out of work stood at 61,900. In 1992 the figure was 577,700
and in 1993 835,500 (Russian statistical... 1995). These figures do not, however,
cover the hidden unemployment in such forms as unpaid leaves or part-time
employment.
In 1992 340,000 and in 1993 360,000 people were looking for work in St.
Petersburg. About 100,000 people applied to the state employment agency.
People with a high level of education accounted for 61% of the total number of
unemployed, the majority of them being engineers (Muzdibaev 1995).
Cultural deterioration and problems of education
Quantitative data are not necessarily the most suitable for the analysis of
problems in such complex areas as culture and education. The main problems of
cultural deterioration are, firstly, the growth of ”popular” culture — primarily
television — at the expense of classical arts (literature, poetry, theatre, painting,
classical music); secondly, the lack of resources in the classical arts, which are
getting less support than popular culture; and thirdly, the wide spread emigration
of professionals dejected by the totalitarian rule and the indifference of those in
power.
In the educational system high schools and universities are also short of money.
On the other hand, the number of private schools, universities and colleges has
rapidly increased in Russia. Although in itself a positive trend, it does under the
present circumstances mean that the level of education is bound to decline.
Many of these schools and institutions and their teaching staff are interested in
nothing other than making money; indeed it is quite common for students to pay
for good marks. In publicly financed high schools and universities teachers are
underpaid and therefore there is a constant shortage of teaching staff.
Homelessness
In Russia the problem of homelessness is exarcebated by the severe winters,
general poverty and the absence of charity organizations. For years, homeless
people were pursued by the authorities (Art. 198, 209 of CC of Russia were not
abolished until 1991) and attitudes still remain quite hostile. Furthermore, many
refugees from the ”hot-spots” of Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent
States (CIS) have joined the ranks of the homeless. In 1993 only 450,000 people
were officially classified as refugees in Russia (Russian statistical... 1995). The
real figure, however, is much higher. There are no records on the number of
homeless people.
Expert estimates put the number of homeless people in St. Petersburg at about
30,000-50,000. The municipal authorities make no effort whatsoever to help
them. There are no shelters for the homeless. The only charity fund, a nongovernmental organization sponsored from abroad, managed to arrange one
daily meal for homeless people and an asylum for elderly and disabled people.
(Gilinskiy & Sokolov 1993; Sokolov 1994; Afanasyev et al. 1995a).
Housing conditions
Housing conditions in Russia have been a constant problem since 1917. There is
still an acute shortage of flats in present-day Russia, especially so for refugees
and military personnel. In addition basic infrastructure and facilities such as
water supply, sewerage and heating, are completely lacking in many small towns
and villages. Approximately 10-12 million people in the country live in hostels
(Russian statistical... 1995). Now, following the privatization of housing and the
sharp rise in prices, these people who pay large sums in rents to their hostels
have absolutely no hope of buying their own flat.
The proportion of people who live in municipal flats in St. Petersburg is higher
than in Russia on average. In 1989 485,000 families, i.e. 1,118,000 people, lived
in municipal flats. Five years later, the number of flats was down to 206,000
(Baranov 1994). At the same time, 490,000 families were on the municipal
waiting list to upgrade, more than half of them already living in municipal flats.
The list was in fact cancelled the very same year ruining many people's last hope
of improving their housing standards.
At the end of 1994, 345,000 people lived in 1,056 hostels in St. Petersburg.
These people's chances of getting their own home are also very slim, partly
because the rents in the hostels are so high and they simply cannot save up any
money.
97
Problems of privatization
The privatization of state property and the establishment of private property are
welcome trends in present-day Russia. Nevertheless the process has also caused
many serious social problems. In contrast to expectations, the process of ”cheque
privatization” did not generate a class of owners: people sold most of their
cheques or invested them in unprofitable or fake companies. As a result, all the
property fell in the hands of the former ruling class, the ”nomenclature”.
Random privatization is only accessible to the very rich, and most of their
capital has been acquired by criminal means. The privatization of the housing
markets resulted in criminal organizations ”hunting” down lonely people, such
as pensioners, drunkards, mentally retarded people etc., who were forced to
leave their flats thus further increasing the number of homeless and missing
people.
Previous studies on the prevalence and perception of social problems
The prevalence and perception of social problems in Russia have for some years
been monitored on a regular basis. One of the institutions conducting these
surveys is the Russian Centre of Public Opinion Studies (VCIOM). The centres
representative polls have shown that in the 1990s, the key problems perceived by
Russians have been the increasing prices, the growth in crime and
unemployment, as well as the economic crisis in general. In 1991, the scarcity of
foodstuffs and consumer goods was ranked as the chief problem on a list of six
key problems. Since 1992, however, the greatest sources of concern in society
have been the price increases, the growth of crime, unemployment and the
economic crisis (Table 3) (Economic and Social Change... 1995).
Table 3 The most alarming problems in Russia (percent of respondents).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
II'91
II'92
69
57
31
7
55
70
38
21
22
15
12
17
14
18
III'93 III'94
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Scarcity of foodstuffs
and consumer goods
Price increase
Crime growth
Unemployment
Economic crisis
Weakness of state power
Environmental pollution
Morale crisis
Corruption
Ethnic conflicts
23
84
64
30
45
33
29
25
19
20
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Source: VCIOM general population survey 1995.
84
68
49
51
34
26
26
22
12
I'95
83
58
50
50
33
22
24
23
32
Sociological studies have shown that people in St. Petersburg and in Russia as a
whole are mainly concerned by the problems of price increases, the state of the
health care system, environmental pollution, the decline of living standards and
the growth of crime. One of the studies was carried out by the Department of
Deviance of the St. Petersburg Branch of the Institute of Sociology at the
Russian Academy of Sciences (Afanasyev et al. 1995b). A representative sample
of 500 people living in St. Petersburg were interviewed in autumn 1993. As
expected, the majority (61%) expressed great anxiety about increasing prices.
This finding is consistent with the results of other inquiries carried out in St.
Petersburg at the same time, and also in Russia in general (Economic and Social
Change... 1995). The feeling of unrest caused by rising prices is compounded by
hyper inflation at about 25% per month. Public concern about price increases is
only marginally higher than the concern regarding health care (60%), which in
turn is followed by aggression and violence (56%). The growth of criminal
violence is reflected both in official statistics (see Table 1) and in the results of
victimization studies. One of the studies shows an increase of no less than 130%
in the rate of victimization from October 1992 to June 1993 (Economic and
Social Change... 1993).
99
Table 4 Attitudes towards essential social problems in St. Petersburg in
autumn 1993 (%).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Prices increase
State of health care
Aggression and violence
State of environment
Fall of standard of living
Organized crime — such as organized car theft,
drug sales, weapon sales, blackmail
7. Old-age pension scheme
8. Economic situation of individuals
9. War and danger of war
10. (Political) right-wing radicalism
11. Fraud, illegal financial and foreign exchange
businesses during the transformation period
12. Risk of eviction from one's flat
13. Loss of family ties
14. Manipulation of the state possessions
during the privatization process
15. Unemployment
16. Drug addiction
17. Loss of sense of collectivity/individualization
18. AIDS 23
19. Inflow of immigrants and foreigners
20. Frauds with mortgages and economic transactions
21. Former communist officials keeping their posts
22. Gender inequality
Very anxious
61
60
56
48
42
42
38
34
33
32
31
29
29
27
26
26
26
23
22
21
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The fourth place in the ranking list of top concerns is the ”state of the
environment” (48%), followed by ”social decay”, pension security and everyday
financial worries. It is interesting to note that there is virtually no public concern
over gender inequality.
In conclusion, previous studies on the prevalence and perception of social
problems in Russia and St. Petersburg show that the crime problem now ranks
first on a pair with economic problems as well as with problems related to health
care. The growing alarm expressed by Russian people over crime is of course
fully consistent with the increase in criminal violence and economic crime as
recorded in the official statistics.
As will be discussed in more depth later, this review also shows that the
problems represented in the closed list of the Baltica survey correspond quite
well with the basic spectrum of the most alarming issues identified by the people
of St. Petersburg.
The social constructionist approach presumes that definitions of various social
problems are formed by diverse forces in society. The mass media play a crucial
role in this process. The media take an active part in creating social stereotypes
about problems, paying attention to certain problems and leaving others out. Our
study of the St. Petersburg press, covering the period from 1984 to 1992,
revealed significant changes in the social perception of alcoholism, drugs and
crime (Afanasyev & Gilinskiy 1994). The number of articles and other material
related to crime increased very rapidly during the study period, indicating a
strong growth of public attention, alarm and even fear of criminal violence.
However, the same could not be said about drug abuse and even less about
drunkenness and alcoholism. One possible interpretation of this finding is that
there are no direct links between the real quantitative characteristics of social
problems and their perception in public opinion and in the mass media.
Material
The sample for the Baltica survey consisted of 1,000 persons aged 16 or over
living in St. Petersburg, who were interviewed in July and August 1994. The
random computer sample comprised 1,500 telephone numbers (in 1994, 70% of
the people in St. Petersburg had a private telephone (St. Petersburg and... 1995).
The poll was conducted by a team of 20 interviewers, each of whom was given
75 telephone numbers.
The social and demographic characteristics of the respondents and the total
population of St. Petersburg are compared in Table 5 (Basic indices... 1994). In
most cases the differences are within five per cent which means that the sample
can be considered representative, although single people and those with a
vocational education are slightly overrepresented.
The data were collected in face-to-face interviews, usually at the respondent's
home. The interviews lasted between 20 and 40 minutes. Overall the respondents
took a positive attitude towards the questionnaire: only 18% refused to take part
in the interview. In some cases the open-ended questions caused difficulty for
the respondents. The forced-choice questions were easy to answer, but some
respondents complained about the nine-point scale that appears five times in the
questionnaire.
Perception of problems as reflected in responses to open-ended
questions
General description of problems in the forced-choice and open-ended lists
101
The forced-choice list included 18 problems. Respondents representing different
regions and different social groups had different views on the most common
problems in the past and at present. Assessments of the threat they presented to
society and views on their order of importance also differed.
The answers to the open-ended questions generated a different picture. In most
cases people mentioned three to five problems, allowing us to identify the most
visible problems in society. A joint analysis of the open-ended and forced-choice
questions provided a more in-depth view into how the problems were perceived.
It was not always easy to classify the responses to the open-ended questions,
although the majority of the wordings did correspond to the problems mentioned
in the forced-choice list. Some additional problems were also mentioned: these
were inefficient city administration (ranked 4th), inflation (2nd), untidy streets
(6th), poor standard of public transport (10th), and abuse of power by the police
(14th).
There are some differences in how the respondents worded what they regarded
as problems in comparison with the forced-choice questions. For example, while
the forced-choice list talks about the poor state of health in the population, the
respondents themselves referred to the poor state of the health care system in the
city. Similarly, the citizens of St. Petersburg were concerned not only about
environmental pollution, but also about dirty and untidy streets, houses and
public places.
The respondents chief concern according to both the forced-choice list and the
open-ended questions is crime. In the forced-choice list crime is followed by
environmental pollution, drunkenness and alcoholism, poverty and poor health
of the population, while in the open-ended list the top problems are the increase
in the cost of living, poverty, inefficiency of local authorities, followed by
environmental pollution and dirty streets. Drunkenness and alcoholism lagged
far behind in 12th place. If we combine the two ecological and two economic
problems from both lists, we discover that economic problems occupy the first
place (40%), while the ecological problems come third (25%).
Assessing the seriousness of social problems
At the city level crime against person is regarded as by far the most serious
problem. In the community context, too, crime is ranked highest, somewhat
confusingly together with the sanitary state of the city. Economic problems are
regarded as more or less equally serious at both levels. Important exceptions are
poor housing conditions, poor standard of public transport and drunkenness and
alcoholism, which are mentioned more frequently in the community context. As
regards the family context, the problems are rank-ordered in the same way as in
the community context, although the untidiness of the city is naturally ranked
lower. Poor housing conditions are considered a wide spread problem, but crime
against person, inflation and poverty also ranked among the top problems. For
some reason, drunkenness lies towards the bottom of the scale.
In general the problems are ranked as most serious at the city level, followed by
the community and family levels. Thus also the proportion of those who did not
assess any problems grew when moving from the city to the family level. At the
city level only nine per cent left this question unanswered, did not know, or did
not perceive any problems, while 30% did so at the family level. It is difficult to
explain this phenomenon. One way perhaps assume that the longer the distance
between the person and the level at which the problem is viewed, the more
significant is the role played by the mass media, and the lesser the role of
personal experience.
Table 5 Perception of the seriousness of problems in St. Petersburg at the
city, community and family level, as reflected in open-ended
questions.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
City
Problem
%
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
37.9
20.8
19.0
13.3
13.0
11.8
11.2
9.3
8.6
6.9
5.4
4.4
2.6
1.1
3.8
5.3
0.0
Community
Rank
%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
20.9
11.1
9.4
5.9
6.4
21.1
4.6
11.1
4.3
8.3
4.0
6.4
1.8
0.4
8.1
9.1
0.0
Family
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime
Inflation
Poverty
Inefficient city administration
Environmental pollution
Dirty outlook of the city
Unemployment
Poor housing conditions
Deterioration of culture
Poor public transportation
Poor state of public health
Drunkenness
Drug abuse
Abuse of power by the police
I do not see any serious problems
Don't know
No answer
2
3
5
9
7
1
10
4
11
6
12
8
13
14
%
Rank
17.6
15.9
15.4
5.1
6.7
10.6
7.8
13.6
3.7
6.4
4.6
2.9
0.8
0.5
11.9
10.0
8.1
1
2
3
9
7
5
6
4
11
8
10
12
13
14
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Perception of positive trends in development
We next asked our respondents about positive trends in development. The
responses varied widely but we categorized them into four groups, i.e. politics,
economy, appearance of the city, and law and order.
In the political sphere, our respondents referred to glasnost, freedom of speech,
free elections, pluralism of mass media, democratization, opportunities to travel
abroad, etc. Positive trends in the economy included the liberalization of the
103
economy, improved opportunities to buy commodities and services, to do
business, and to make money. The outward appearance of the city included the
cleanliness of buildings, streets and other public places. Since the poll coincided
with ongoing preparations for ”The Goodwill Games”, which involved the
renovation of many buildings, the streets were actually being cleaned up and relaid. This did not go unnoticed to the people who were dismayed by the state
into which the city had fallen.
Mentioned by 25% of the respondents, the appearance of the city was in fact
ranked as the most positive trend at the city level, followed by economic
changes. Economic changes would probably have ranked first had the survey
been carried out well before or well after ”The Goodwill Games”. This
assumption is supported by the fact that positive economic changes rank highest
at the community and at the family level.
Table 6 Positive trends perceived at the city, community and family level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
City
Community
Family
Positive trend
% Rank
%
Rank
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
%
Appearance of the city
Economy
Politics
Law & Order
Others
I do not see any positive trends
Don't know
No answer
6.6
5.2
2.5
1.3
1.4
23.5
11.4
44.3
25.2
23.0
7.5
4.1
2.1
36.5
14.5
0.0
1
2
3
4
5
11.9
17.3
2.4
1.5
1.9
53.6
16.9
0.0
2
11
3
5
4
2
1
3
5
4
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Although positive political changes rank third, they are mentioned by only eight
per cent of the respondents. Political issues are beyond the scope of this paper,
but the result just mentioned is consistent with the fact that 13% of the
respondents referred to the lack of efficiency of local authorities. This problem
ranked fourth among the 14 problems listed (see Table 5).
Only four per cent mentioned positive changes related to law and order, which is
hardly surprising in view of the fact that crime seems to be the top problem for
the city.
A considerably larger proportion of the respondents identified positive trends at
the city level (49%) than at the community (30%) and family (21%) level.
Correspondingly, more than 50% could not mention any positive trends at the
city level and 70% at the community level, while close to 80% were unable to
see any positive trend affecting their families.
Current prevalence of social problems
We now turn our attention to the forced-choice questions. The 18 problems
appearing on the list were rank-ordered, according to mean values. At the city
level the top problems are crime against person, drunkenness and alcoholism,
environmental pollution, and poverty.
Table 7 Current prevalence of problems at city level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
7.6
7.5
7.4
2.2
6.9
6.7
6.5
6.4
3.2
5.7
5.2
5.1
4.9
4,9
4.6
3.1
2.9
2.6
1.9
1.9
2.1
7.7
2.5
2.8
2.7
2.7
7.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.3
3.0
2.7
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1. Crime against person
(property & violent crime)
2. Drunkenness & alcoholism
3. Environmental pollution
4. Poverty
7.2
5. Poor health of the population
6. Deterioration of culture
7. Poor housing conditions
8. Unemployment
9. Economic crime
6.2
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Drug abuse
12. Educational problems
13. Homelessness
14. The nationality problem
15. Prostitution
16. Problems related to privatization
17. Domestic violence
18. Gender inequality
8.1
8.1
8.1
4
7.6
7.6
7.2
7.2
9
6.5
6.1
5.7
5.5
5.6
5.2
1.5
2.2
1.7
Rank
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The standard deviations for these problems confirm that there is relative
unanimity among the respondents about these problems. In fact, the lower the
respondents estimation of the prevalence of a problem, the bigger the deviation
in the responses. There are three problems that are far behind the others. It is
interesting to note that one of them is harm related to privatization. The lowest
positions are occupied by domestic violence and gender inequality.
The pattern at the community level is almost identical to that at the city level.
The top four problems are exactly the same, although the order is slightly
different. Drunkenness and alcoholism is seen as the most prevalent problem in
the community, while the prevalence of crime against person is rated lower than
in the city context. It must be noted that the prevalence of all problems at the
105
community level is thought to be somewhat lower than at the city level, the
difference is significant with regard to crime against person and economic crime.
As is the case at the city level, there is stronger consensus of opinion at the
community level over the top-ranked problems than over the other problems.
Also, the items at the tail-end of the table appear in exactly the same order. The
same three problems — those related to privatization, domestic violence, and
gender inequality — were far behind the others.
A comparison of the open-ended (see Table 5) and forced-choice questions
reveals certain differences. At the city level the most striking differences
concern drinking problems. Ranked 12th among the most serious problems in
the open-ended list, drinking problems occupy second place among the most
prevalent problems in the forced-choice list. In this specific case, prevalence and
seriousness are indeed far removed from each other, indicating that heavy
drinking habits are widely considered acceptable.
Another complicated contrast is that between the fifth place ranking in the
forced-choice list for poor health of the population and the eleventh place in the
unprompted responses for poor medical care. As was pointed out earlier, the
respondents preferred in their open-ended answers to talk about the poor
standards of the health care system rather than the poor health state of the
population. This suggests that the population health problem is understood in
terms of a problem of the health care system. On the other hand, it is safe to
assume that our respondents also considered the impact of many other factors on
the poor health of the population, including drinking, environmental pollution,
poverty, poor living conditions, etc.
All other problems that ranked among the top ten in the forced-choice list more
or less maintained their place on the list based on the open-ended questions.
Crime remains the top problem, ecological issues move from third to fifth, while
poverty goes up from forth to third. On the other hand, most of the problems
outside the top ten in the forced-choice list are hardly mentioned at all in the
open-ended questions. These are: economic crime, domestic violence, the
nationality problem, smoking, prostitution, problems of education,
homelessness, privatization, and gender inequality.
The tendencies are similar at the community level. Finally, we have to mention
the problems that appeared in response to the open-ended questions but not in
the forced-choice list, namely, the increasing cost of living, the inefficiency of
local authorities and poor public transportation. All of these ranked rather high.
Comparing the prevalence of problems in 1994 and in the late
1980s
It is obvious that retrospective evaluations tend to be much more optimistic, or
idealistic, than prospective ones. This emerged clearly in our comparisons of the
time before (Table 9) and after (Table 7) the social transition. In 1994 the
respondents said that the transition had had a detrimental effect on every single
social problem. The relatively high values for standard deviation indicate that
the estimation of the (near) past is a somewhat uncertain venture. Nonetheless a
comparison of the two points of time does tell us something important about
how the map of social problems has shifted. There is clearly an increased sense
of uncertainty both in social and economic terms. Unemployment, crime against
person and poverty were considered to be much more wide spread after the fall
of socialism. These views (as we have seen before) also find support in various
statistical sources.
People's evaluations are of course also affected by notions of what is ”normal”
or ”abnormal” social behaviour. Once again, we find domestic violence and
gender inequality at the bottom of the list and, importantly, they demonstrate the
smallest changes among all the items studied. The view that these problems are
uncommon does not by any means indicate that they do not exist, but only that
they are not defined as extraordinary phenomena in everyday life.
The picture of the community level in the late 1980s is almost identical with that
of the city level. The biggest changes in prevalence have occurred in exactly the
same problems, with unemployment being far ahead of the other ”new”
problems, i.e. poverty and crime against person.
107
Table 8 Prevalence of problems at city level in the late 1980s.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
Median
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Drunkenness & alcoholism
Environmental pollution
Poor housing conditions
Poor health of the population
Problems caused by smoking
Crime against person
(property & violent crime)
7. Poverty
3.9
8. Deterioration of culture
9. Economic crime 3.3
10. Drug abuse
11. Prostitution
12. Educational problems
13. The nationality problem
14. Homelessness
15. Unemployment
16. Gender inequality
17. Domestic violence
18. Problems related to privatization
6.0
5.8
5.4
4.9
4.6
2.6
2.9
3.0
2.8
3.1
6.5
6.5
6.0
5.2
5.1
1
2
3
4
5
4.3
2.5
3.9
2.9
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.5
2.3
2.3
2.0
1.9
0.9
2.4
3.9
2.7
3.2
2.6
2.6
2.5
2.4
2.2
2.1
2.4
2.4
1.2
4.7
7
4.0
9
3.1
2.6
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.8
1.1
0.9
0.7
6
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
How threatening are the problems?
The next step was to ask people how threatening they regarded the problems.
The results show that the rankings on the threat scale are almost identical with
the scale for the prevalence of the problems. There seems to be a direct
correlation between range and threat: the four most threatening problems are
represented by crime against person, environmental pollution, drunkenness and
poverty, while domestic violence and gender inequality come at the bottom of
the table. Privatization of the economy is considered the least threatening
problem.
Table 9 Ranking according to threat represented by different problems.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
Median
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1. Crime against person
(property & violent crime)
2. Environmental pollution
3. Drunkenness & alcoholism
4. Poverty
7.3
5. Poor health of the population
6. Deterioration of culture
7. Unemployment
8. Economic crime 6.6
9. Poor housing conditions
10. Drug abuse
11. Problems caused by smoking
12. Educational problems
13. Homelessness
14. The nationality problem
15. Prostitution
16. Domestic violence
17. Problems related to privatization
18. Gender inequality
7.7
7.6
7.5
2.3
7.0
6.8
6.7
3.1
6.4
5.9
5.6
5.3
5.3
5.3
4.7
3.2
3.0
2.6
2.1
2.3
2.1
8.0
2.6
2.8
2.7
7.8
2.8
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.4
2.5
3.3
2.8
9.0
8.3
8.1
4
7.8
7.8
7.6
8
7.2
7.0
7,0
6.1
6.0
6.2
5.2
2.5
1.4
1.5
1
2
3
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Priorities in solving problems
The last task for the respondents was to identify three problems that they felt had
to be resolved most urgently in the city and in the community. The widespread
anxiety felt by the people of St. Petersburg is clearly indicated by their broad
agreement on the need to address problems related to crime against person:
about 60% of the respondents called for such measures. Compared to this, all
other problems are almost secondary concerns. However, there is consensus
about the next two most urgent problems: one in three respondents mentioned
poverty and environmental pollution. Unemployment, economic crime, drinking,
cultural decay, poor living conditions and poor health are identified as priority
problems by about 20% of the respondents. All other problems are mentioned by
less than 10%.
At the community level people's priorities appear to be quite similar. However,
in addition to the top three problems (crime, poverty and pollution), reference is
also made to the need to take steps to resolve the problems of poor housing
conditions and drunkenness. In the city context, these items are clearly less
pronounced. By contrast, economic crime is highlighted more often in the city
than in the communities.
Table 10 Priorities in solving problems at city and community level.
109
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
City
Per cent
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
(property & violent crime)
2. Poverty
3. Environmental pollution
4. Unemployment
5. Economic crime
6. Deterioration of culture
7. Drunkenness & alcoholism
8. Poor housing conditions
9. Poor health of the population
10. The nationality problem
11. Drug abuse
12. Educational problems
13. Homelessness
14. Problems caused by smoking
15. Prostitution
16. Problems related to privatization
17. Gender inequality
18. Domestic violence
Community
Per cent
Rank
1.
63.8
35.4
34.0
25.2
24.9
22.3
22.1
19.6
18.1
9.3
7.7
5.0
3.6
2.6
1.9
1.9
1.4
1.1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
60.1
35.1
34.4
21.9
17.7
9.7
29.1
32.1
18.3
7.8
7.0
4.2
3.3
2.9
1.6
1.9
1.1
1.5
1
2
3
6
9
7
5
4
8
10
11
12
13
14
16
15
18
17
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Typology of social problems
The next step in the analysis involved placing the social problems in a matrix
using the values given by the respondents (the criteria for the classification of
the problems are given in Figure 1). The threat dimension was excluded from the
analysis since it correlated so strongly with the prevalence dimension.
The analysis provides us with a map of social problems. The first group consists
of ”fully developed social problems”. At the time for our study in 1994, this
category consisted of crime against person, poverty and environmental pollution.
The second group of ”developed social problems” comprises a whole range of
items, i.e. economic crime, unemployment, drunkenness and alcoholism, poor
health of the population, the deterioration of cultural life and poor housing
conditions. Problems related to smoking and drug abuse are classified as
”potential problems”. The fourth group contains homelessness, prostitution,
educational problems, and the nationality problem, regarded as fairly marginal
or ”quasi-problems”. Finally, there is the category of problems that are not
regarded as social problems at all (”pseudo-problems”), i.e. obstacles caused by
privatization, domestic violence and gender inequality.
Figure 1 Typology of problems at city level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Prevalence
High
(median 6-9)
Medium
(median 4-5.9)
Low
(median below 4)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High
priority
(> 30%)
Crime
Poverty
Pollution
Medium
priority
(10-30%)
Economic crime
Unemployment
Drunkenness
Poor health
Culture
Housing
Low
priority
(> 10%)
Smoking
Drug abuse
Homelessness
Prostitution
Education
The nationality
problem
Problems of
privatization
Domestic violence
Gender inequality
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The corresponding typology for the community level differs in only two
respects. Poor housing conditions qualify as a fully developed problem in the
community context, while drug abuse is categorized as a quasi-problem.
Discussion and concluding remarks
This study addresses the question of how public opinion reflects the prevalence
of social problems, the perceived threat associated with these problems as well
as the perceived need to solve them. From a social constructionist point of view,
social problems cannot be seen as purely objective phenomena; instead, they are
always influenced by different social subjects. Perceptions, opinions and
attitudes concerning social phenomena constitute different forms and ways of
expressing social reality. This is why a given phenomenon may have harmful
effects even though they are not recognized by the public. In other words, a
phenomenon becomes a social problem only when it is defined as such by social
actors: politicians, scientists, the mass media, ordinary people, etc.
It follows that the main concern of the present work is not only to illustrate
public perceptions of the situation, but rather to illustrate the real situation itself.
As we can see from national surveys, the structure of social problems has
changed radically during the 1990s. The dominant problem of the 1980s in
Russia — the scarcity of food and consumer goods — is less important than it
used to be. Today, the most burning issue is the continuing rise of prices.
111
Furthermore, in the 1980s the problem of unemployment was non-existent, in
1994 it ranked among the most important problems in Russia. The same can be
said about crime.
Similar changes here happened in St. Petersburg. Drunkenness, poor public
transportation and environmental pollution were the most important social
problems in St. Petersburg in the 1980s, today crime and economic problems are
at the top of the list. The open-ended questions also helped to identify some
additional problems, such as the inefficiency of the local authorities, the untidy
townscape and inadequate transportation systems. Although the respondents
open-ended responses probably identified the most urgent problems, these were
at once issues lying very much close to the surface of public perception. The
forced-choice questions do of course to some extent limit the respondents
choices but on the other hand they force them to evaluate issues they might
otherwise never have come to think of. Indeed for an in-depth analysis of the
perception of social problems we need to look at both these sets of responses.
A comparison of how the problems are perceived at different levels (city,
district/community, family/personal) highlights the interrelations between
different social contexts. Public opinion does not consider city or community
problems merely as the sum of personal or family difficulties. The discrepancies
between the different levels draw our attention to factors influencing public
opinion. For example, what kind of interplay is there between personal
experience, social networks and the mass media? Our study suggests that the
greater the distance between the individual and the level of the problem, the less
important is the individual's experience, while significant impressions are gained
through other sources of public life and the mass media.
Our comparisons of people's perceptions of the prevalence of social problems in
St. Petersburg and the threat they represented revealed a straightforward
correlation: the higher the prevalence, the greater also the perceived threat. By
contrast, no correlation was found in a comparison of the perceived threat and
views on its urgency. Although many problems rank high on both dimensions,
some important differences should not be overlooked. For example, crime
against person and environmental pollution have almost the same mean value on
the threat scale, but only crime is regarded as a really urgent issue (> 60% for
crime compared to one-third for pollution). This can be explained by the fact
that, in general, crime tends to jeopardize values that require more immediate
protection than pollution.
Drunkenness and poor health of the population represent a different case. Both
rank high on the threat scale, whereas in the urgency ranking they come half way
down the table. This suggests that apart from values, the chances of actually
resolving threatening problems is also important. For many, drunkenness and
perhaps health problems as well are seen as inescapable features of life rather
than problems that need to be tackled. Or both problems are seen to be strongly
interconnected, and maybe caused by other questions, which are given much
higher priority.
In short then, the process in which different problems are perceived and defined
is extremely complex. The interplay between perceptions of the prevalence and
the threat represented by problems, as well as the claims regarding their solution,
is mediated by individual experience, the mass media, values and notions of
causal relationships between different problems.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
Afanasyev, V. & Gilinskiy, Y. (1994): Alcohol, drugs and crime in the St. Petersburg
press. In: Lagerspetz, Mikko, ed.: Social problems in newspapers. Studies around the
Baltic Sea. NAD Publication No. 28, Helsinki.
Afanasyev, V. & Gilinskiy, Y. (1995): Deviant Behavior and Social Control in
conditions of Crises of Russian Society. Saint Petersburg.
Afanasyev, V., Gilinskiy, Y. & Sokolov, V. (1995a): Petersburg's homelessness: survey.
In: Urgent problems of deviant behaviour. Moscow.
Afanasyev, V., Gilinskiy, Y. & Golbert, V. (1995b): Social Changes and Crime in St.
Petersburg. Perception of Victimisation after the Breakdown of State Socialism. First
Findings in a Multi-City Pilotstudy 1993. Howard J. De Nike, Uve Ewald,
Christopher J. Nowlin, eds. Graue Reihe, Berlin.
Baranov, A. (1994): The Housing Situation in St. Petersburg. In: Petersburg in the early
1990s. St. Petersburg.
Basic indices... (1994): Basic indices of demographic processes in St. Petersburg and the
Leningrad region. Statistical collection. St. Petersburg.
Basic indices... (1995): Basic indices of demographic processes in St. Petersburg and the
Leningrad region. Statistical collection. St. Petersburg.
Care of public health... (1996): Care of public health of St. Petersburg in figures. St.
Petersburg.
Changes of Criminality... (1994): Changes of Criminality in Russia. Moscow.
Criminality and offences... (1995): Criminality and offences: Statistical collection 1994.
Moscow.
Eco-dynamics... (1996): Eco-dynamics and Ecological Monitoring of the St. Petersburg
region in a Context of Global Changes. St. Petersburg.
Economic and Social Change... (1993): Economic and Social Change: public opinion
monitoring. Information bulletin. Moscow, No. 5.
113
Economic and Social Change... (1995): Economic and Social Change: monitoring of
public opinion. Information bulletin. Moscow, No. 2.
Financial News (1995): Financial News, No. 2.
Gilinskiy, Y. & Sokolov, V. (1993): Homelessness in Russia: yesterday, today,
tomorrow. In: Petersburg readings.
Kiseleva, I. (1993): Ethnic structure of St. Petersburg's population. In: Quality of St.
Petersburg's population. St. Petersburg.
Kondratyev, K. & Danilov-Danilyan, V. (1993): Ecology and Politics. St. Petersburg.
Moscow News (1996): Moscow News, Special issue.
Muzdibaev, K. (1995): Dynamics of the standard of living in St. Petersburg. St.
Petersburg.
Nemtsov, A. (1995): The Alcohol Situation in Russia. Moscow.
Panova, L. (1994): The standard of living in the population of St. Petersburg. In:
Petersburg in the early 1990s. St. Petersburg.
Pozdnjakova, M. (1995): Sociological Analysis of Drug Addiction. Department of Social
Problems of Alcoholism and Drug Addiction, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Moscow.
Prostitution... (1991): Prostitution and Criminality. Moscow.
Protasenko, T. (1995): Dynamics of living conditions of the St. Petersburg population
during three years of economic reforms. In: Universe of Russia, No. 2.
Public health care... (1994): Public health care in St. Petersburg in figures. St.
Petersburg.
Russian Annual... (1995): Russian Annual Statistics 1994. Moscow.
Russian statistical... (1995): Russian statistical yearbook 1994. Moscow.
Shestakov, D. (1996): Family Criminology. St. Petersburg.
Shkolnikov, V., Mesle, F. & Vallin, G. (1995): Life expectancy and mortality of the
Russian population 1970-1993: Analysis and forecast. Moscow.
Sokolov, V. (1994): Homelessness in St. Petersburg. In: Petersburg in the early 1990s.
St. Petersburg.
St. Petersburg and... (1995): St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region in 1994. A
statistical yearbook. St. Petersburg.
The Black Book... (1994): The Black Book of Crimes Against Children in St.
Petersburg: Facts, Documents, Comments. St. Petersburg.
The Population of Russia... (1993): The Population of Russia: Annual demographic
report. Moscow.
The population of St. Petersburg (1994): The population of St. Petersburg. St.
Petersburg.
The St. Petersburg Sheets (1995a): The St. Petersburg Sheets. 10 March 1995.
The St. Petersburg Sheets (1995b): The St. Petersburg Sheets. 18 March 1995.
Uzunova, V. (1993): Zones of ethnic conflicts. In: Quality of St. Petersburg's population.
St. Petersburg.
Zayigraev, G. (1992): Society and Alcohol. Moscow.
Other literature
Criminality and offences in the USSR: Statistical collection. 1989. Moscow 1990.
Criminality and offences: Statistical collection. 1991. Moscow 1992.
Criminality and offences: Statistical collection. 1993. Moscow 1994.
Condition of criminality in Russia in 1995. Moscow 1996.
Panova, L. (1993): Increase of poverty in conditions of an economic crisis. In: Quality of
St. Petersburg's population. St. Petersburg.
Pitulko, V. (1994): The Ecological Situation in St. Petersburg. In: Petersburg in the early
90's. St. Petersburg.
Protasenko, T. (1993): Economic indices of St. Petersburg's population. In: Quality of St.
Petersburg' population. St. Petersburg.
Simpura, J. & Eremitcheva G. (1995): Dirt: Symbolic and practical dimensions of social
problems. In: Universe of Russia, No. 2.
Solovjev, A. (1994): The Situation in St. Petersburg's Labour Market. In: Petersburg in
the early 1990s. St. Petersburg.
World Health Statistics Annual. 1994. Geneve 1995.
Where is Russia Going? Moscow 1995. Vol. II.
115
Annex 1
Social and demographic characteristics of respondents and the total population of
St. Petersburg, %.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Respondents
Population
(16 years and older)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1. Sex
Male
Female
46
54
45
55
16-29
30-49
50 & older
30
37
33
24
38
38
3. Educational level
Primary
Vocational
Secondary
University
6
42
25
26
14
27
30
29
4. Employment status
Employed
Pensioner
Pupil, student
Housewife
Unemployed
60
19
9
5
8
5. Social class
Entrepreneur
Manual worker
White-collar
7
33
57
6. Marital status
Single 24
Married
Widowed
Divorced
10
55
10
11
58
11
20
7. Family status
Living in a family
Living alone
87
13
85
15
8. Number of persons in household
2
3
4
5 & more
25
33
22
7
31
27
19
8
2. Age
Continues on the next page
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Respondents
Population
(16 years and older)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
9. Number of persons under
18 years of age
1
2
3 & more
Total
10. Total net income of household
in June 1994
No income
Less than 100,000 roubles
100 — 200
200 — 300
300 — 400
400 — 500
500 — 600
600 — 800
800 or more
11. Nationality
Russians
Ukrainians
Jews
Others 4.6
31
8
1
40
43
10
6
13
17
15
12
9
8
9
90.5
2.2
2.7
5.8
89.0
2.9
2.3
12. Age of dwelling
Built before 1950
1951-1960 (Stalin)
1961-1970 (Khrushchev)
After 1970
25
12
21
41
20
9
28
42
13. Years in St. Petersburg
10 years or less
11-20 years
21 years & more
6
14
80
117
No light at the end of the tunnel
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Birutė Šeršniova
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Culture is a system of attitudes, values, and knowledge that is widely
shared within a society and transmitted from generation to generation.
(...) The more central and early learned aspects of culture are resistant
to change, both because it requires a massive effort to change central
elements of an adult's cognitive organization, and because one's most
central values become ends in themselves, the abandonment of which
would produce deep uncertainty and anxiety. In the face of the major
and enduring shifts in societal conditions, even central parts of a
culture may be transformed but they are much more apt to change
through intergenerational population replacement than by the
conversion of already-socialized adults (Inglehart 1990).
Introduction
People living in the post-communist world tend to be more politicized than
elsewhere, mainly because of the rapid political changes that have swept these
countries (Horichter & Weller 1993). The political situation in Lithuania has
changed quite essentially since the failed coup in Moscow in August 1991. At
the same time public opinion has shifted considerably. Before August 1991, the
main factor differentiating the views and opinions of different groups in
Lithuanian society was ethnic self-identification: the attitudes of the major ethnic
groups in Lithuania, i.e. the Lithuanians, Russians and Poles, differed markedly
from each other. The strongest predictive indicator describing political,
economic and social attitudes at that time was the attitude to the future of
Lithuania, i.e. whether it should pursue independence or remain part of the
USSR. Political problems, that is relations to the USSR, were predominant in
public consciousness: it was widely believed that economic and social reforms
could only be expected once the problem of the re-establishment of statehood
was resolved.
The situation has changed dramatically since international recognition of the reestablished Lithuanian state. During the second half of 1991, political
differentiation in Lithuanian society gather momentum. Since 1992, ideological
self-identification has become one of the main factors influencing other attitudes.
119
When Lithuania achieved international recognition, people's attention shifted
away from foreign policy and turned in on domestic policy and socio-economic
issues. Society was highly politicized, and the main differences in the evaluation
of the situation, of social institutions and policies, appeared to be related to
ideological self-identification. On the left-right scale this self-identification was
significantly influenced by values and attitudes towards social change.
Ethnic self-identification and the sense of belonging to a majority or minority
group were strong politically differentiating factors before the re-establishment
of national statehood. After international recognition of the Lithuanian Republic,
the future political status of the country seemed to be resolved and the situation
was internalized by all social and ethnic groups in the country. The main factors
differentiating the social values of Lithuanian people were now ideological and
economic rather than ethnic in character.
In contrast to the situation in the neighbouring countries, minorities in Lithuania
do not feel that they are disadvantaged on account of their nationality. However,
there still remains considerable social distance between the different ethnic
groups. In a situation where the economic and social situation in the country is
rather tense, ethnic relations may be problematised in an attempt to shift public
attention away from the hardships of the reform.
The first public opinion surveys in independent Lithuania revealed that the
society was highly preoccupied with economic and political questions. In a
survey carried out by Baltic Surveys Ltd., drawing on a representative sample of
the general population in September 1992, 62% thought that it was necessary to
give priority to resolving economic problems. Political problems were
mentioned by 21% and social problems only by 3%. Among social problems low
standard of living and increasing crime were mentioned most often (Survey
report, 1992).
Subsequent surveys by the same company indicate that perceptions of the
situation have clearly changed. In April 1993 social problems gained an added
urgency in Lithuania. The prevalence of economic problems was still evident
(73%), but as large a proportion as 53% of the respondents referred to different
social problems as major issues in Lithuania (especially the low standard of
living). Political problems were now mentioned less frequently (20%).
In November 1993 social problems (mainly standard of living and crime) were
rated as equally important as economic problems (55 and 56%, respectively),
while the importance attached to political problems continued to decline (10%).
In a survey carried out in August 1994, 89% of the respondents mentioned
different social problems, 44% mentioned economic and 22% political problems.
The reason why the proportion of political problems doubled at this time was
that Lithuania was preparing for a referendum organized by the political
opposition in the Lithuanian Parliament on resolving different social problems.
At the outset of the struggle for independence, people in Lithuania were
primarily concerned with political problems. The main aim was to achieve
independence, while personal well-being was considered less important. The
introduction of market economy brought along a host of negative outcomes:
inflation, unemployment, declining wages, increasing crime. After a few years
of independence, people understood that the transitional period would be very
long and difficult. They were disillusioned and they lost their trust in everything
and everyone. As a result the problems that people experienced in everyday life
began to gain increasing attention.
The social problems that emerged as people's main concerns in survey studies
were declining living standards and the growth of crime and unemployment. All
of these are closely related to more general economic and political problems.
Responsibility for resolving them lies with political decision-makers.
Unemployment remains one of the top concerns for Lithuanian people today.
Only a few years ago the problem did not even exist; people could not imagine
that some day they could be affected. In September 1990, according to a
representative survey carried out by Baltic Survey Ltd., 55% said they did not
feel threatened by unemployment, and only 4% expected to lose their job within
the near future. The majority of people in Lithuania did not think it would be
hard for them to find a new job. Today, unemployment is an everyday reality,
and people realize that anyone at any time may lose their job.
Official statistics indicate that unemployment in Lithuania grew rapidly until
1994. Today, only part of the people who are looking for a job have the status of
unemployed. Therefore we have two sets of figures designating unemployment
in Lithuania (Table 1).
Table 1 ”Non-employed, looking for a job” and ”unemployed” (average
annual number, in thousands).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1991
1992
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Non-employed, looking for a job
Unemployed
5.2
3.4
24.1
9.4
1993
81.1
30.4
1994
65.7
28.7
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Official figures do not always reflect the real situation in Lithuania. In 1994, the
official unemployment rate was 3.8%, but in reality the figure was close to 10%
as part of the non-employed people were not registered at the labour exchange
office. In addition, large numbers are in part-time employment and on unpaid
121
leave. These people are not covered by the official statistics (Statistical
yearbook, 1995).
Crime has recently emerged as a very urgent problem in Lithuania. The crime
rate has gone up very sharply between 1990 and 1995 (Table 2) (Dobryninas
1996).
The growth of economic crime during the past few years is clearly reflected in
the national statistics (Table 2) (Statistical Yearbook, 1995):
Table 2 Crime, serious crime and economic crime in Lithuania 1990-1995.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1990
1991
1992
1993
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Registered crimes1)
Serious crimes1)
Economic crimes2)
37,056
4,028
44,984
4,549
327
56,615
5,972
296
60,378
8,210
336
1994 1995
58,634
9,348
610
60,819
13,214
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
2)
Source: Dobryninas 1996.
Source: Statistical Yearbook, 1995.
Drunkenness and alcoholism has been an urgent problem in Lithuania ever since
the Soviet era. Today, the market in Lithuania is flooded by illegally imported
alcohol. Illegal production and sales is also widespread, which means that it is
very difficult to present any solid figures on alcohol consumption per capita.
Alcoholism is the most common problem in Lithuania as far as substance abuse
is concerned. At year-end 1994 over 70,000 people suffering from the disease
were under observation in narcological institutions, 11% of them being women
(World Health Report, 1996). The number of deaths that can be directly
attributed to alcohol consumption (alcohol liver cirrhosis, alcohol poisonings,
chronic alcoholism and alcoholic psychosis combined) increased 3.5 times over
from 1990 (537 cases) to 1995 (1,859 cases). During the last five years the
incidence of alcohol and drug abuse has increased 2.5 times over (Health
statistics, 1996).
Drug abuse is not as widely spread in Lithuania as alcoholism. In 1995 a total of
713 drug abusers were under observation in narcological institutions, but large
numbers remained unidentified. There have been major shortcomings in
registration procedures after forced treatment was abandoned, and therefore the
incidence and prevalence figures do not reflect the real situation.
Since independence new social strata have appeared in Lithuania. The rich make
up only a very small proportion of the population. The majority of people
population live ”from wage packet to wage packet”. During the past five years
prices have gone up very sharply. The same goes for wages, but there still
remains a gap between the two. According to national statistics, the real income
of households decreased by 63% from 1990 to 1995. A large proportion of the
Lithuanian population live below the poverty line. Indeed, the problems of
poverty and poor housing conditions have become increasingly important in
recent years.
The period of transition in Lithuania has been accompanied by an acute health
crisis, particularly among adult males. In 1994 the life expectancy of males was
11 years shorter than that of women (World Health Report, 1996).
During the transition from planned to market economy a wide range of urgent
social problems have emerged in Lithuania. This, together with the difficult
economic situation and social uncertainty, has created a widespread mood of
pessimism in the population. In this situation it is important to look at people's
perceptions and the prevalence of various social problems.
Method
The study on the prevalence and perception of social problems in Lithuania was
carried out in August 1994. The fieldwork took place on 18-24 August 1994,
preceding a referendum on 27 August about unfair privatization, the
compensation of savings wiped out by inflation, and tackling crime. The print
press as well as state television devoted much space to discussions about the
referendum. The proximity of the referendum may well have influenced the
results of the survey in that most people would have been preoccupied by the
referendum issues.
The survey was designed to comprise a nationally representative sample of
1,000 respondents aged 15 or over. The final sample consisted of 1,007
interviews. The interviewers visited a total of 1,583 addresses; 287 refused to
take part, 289 were not contacted.
Sample design
A multistage random sample design was used. The first stage of the sampling
procedure was to define five ethnic regions in Lithuania. Then, within these
regions the sampling points were selected according to the size of the
settlements, categorized as large, medium, and small towns and villages. This
method was used to identify sampling clusters. The number of sampling points
in each category depended on the percentage of the population living in the
settlements of this category. One sampling point was represented by 12
interviews. In some small villages the sampling point was represented by six
interviews.
123
The total number of sampling points selected was 95 (in 64 settlements). These
sampling points were selected at random from the list of sampling points in each
size category.
The second stage involved the selection of individual respondents. The
methodology used was random route, selecting the respondent in every fifth
house, starting from the central bus station in rural areas and small towns, and
the district council in cities. Kish tables were used (separately for male and
female subsamples) to select the individual respondent of the household. Up to
two call-backs were made if the selected interviewee was not contacted. The
survey sample was then weighted by national census data to achieve full
representativity for the survey results (see Annex 1, page 148).
Method
The data were collected in face-to-face interviews. The questions concerning the
perception of social problems were included in the Lithuanian Omnibus, i.e. the
survey was carried out as part of a questionnaire study which also included other
topics such as the mass media, politics, etc.
Baltic Surveys Ltd. has a network of interviewers which covers the whole of
Lithuania. A team of some 400 interviewers — mostly unemployed people,
housewives, pensioners and students — carried out the interviews in all districts
of Lithuania.
Questions concerning social problems were of much current interest and people
took a very positive attitude towards the questionnaire. The respondents were
open and friendly, particularly those with limited means, with no job or with
people close by who had been affected by negative outcomes of the transition to
market economy. In some cases there were clear signs of response fatigue: this
specific part of the questionnaire was quite long.
Perception of problems as reflected in responses to open-ended
questions
In their responses to the open-ended questions, the respondents identified the
major issues that were thought to be a cause of a variety of social problems at
the country level (Table 3). Only five of the problems listed were mentioned by
more than 5% of the respondents. One in three respondents referred to economic
problems: economic crisis, inflation, declining production (34%) and poverty
and general hardship (33%). The third place was occupied by political and legal
problems: incompetence of the government, poor legislation, low prestige of
those in power, quarrels at the top, etc.; these problems were a concern for 23%
of the respondents. Unemployment, ranking fourth, was also mentioned by
almost 23%. The people who referred to the problem of unemployment had in
mind not only redundancies, but also the temporary layoffs and part-time
employment that remain common in many major enterprises. Moreover, many
companies in Lithuania are on the brink of bankruptcy; no one can be sure that
their job is safe. The growth of unemployment is essentially due to the economic
problems created by the ongoing transition.
Table 3 Perception of problems at the country, community and family level as
reflected in open-ended questions (F=Frequency, %, R=Rank)1).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Country
F %R
Community
F % R
F
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problems of economic policy,
economic crisis
Poverty, hard living conditions
Political and legal problems
Unemployment
Crime against person
Problems of infrastructure
Housing problem
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Drug abuse 2
Economic crime
Environmental pollution
Domestic violence
The nationality problem
Poor health of the population
Problems caused by smoking
Prostitution 1
Hooliganism, aggressive
behaviour
Problems of social services
Social consequences of changes
Psychological consequences of
changes
Other
I do not see any serious problems2)
No problems affect me and/or
my family3)
Don't know 142
347
334
233
230
179
6
20
48
0.2
44
7
0
3
0
0
0.1
34.5
33.2
23.1
22.8
17.8
0.6
2.0
4.8
4
21
39
13
29
14
14.1
1
2
3
4
5
162
273
86
242
126
89
35
84
0.1
16
19
2
2
8
0
0.0
16.1
27.1
8.5
24.0
12.6
8.8
3.5
8.3
0.4
2.1
3.9
10
20
22
1.0
2.0
2.2
16
23
14
1.8
2.6
1.6
1.3
2.9
0.4
10
42
33
0.9
4.1
3.3
13
37
1.5
4.3
78
11.0
8.9
1
4.4
0.7
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0
216
21.4
3)
7
0
1.6
1.9
0.2
0.2
0.8
0.0
1
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
2)
3
1
6
2
4
5
Family
% R
96
122 14.0 3
407 46.5 1
49 5.6 5
145 16.6 2
45 5.1 6
39 4.4
51 5.9 4
18 2.1
0.0
6 0.7
7 0.8
0 0.0
0 0.0
8 0.9
0 0.0
0.1
Only problems with 5% or more responses were ranked.
Country and community level.
Family level.
125
The fifth most common problem, crime against person (property and violent
crime), was mentioned by 18% of the respondents. People nowadays no longer
feel safe, either at home or in the street. There are media reports virtually every
day on robberies, thefts, murders and terrorist acts; people are all the time
talking about crime in town, in the workplace, with their neighbours.
As all other problems on the preset list were mentioned by less than 5% of the
respondents, we may conclude that the five questions presented are the major
social concerns in Lithuania today. Who, then, are the main social groups that
referred to these problems?
People with a higher education, white-collar employees and entrepreneurs
tended to refer more often to general problems such as economic crisis as well as
political and legal problems. People with a lower level of education, older
people, manual workers and those with the lowest income referred more often to
such problems as poverty and unemployment. In this latter category people have
real difficulties making ends meet. Unemployment is more prevalent among
men, especially among those aged 25 or over and with a family. Unemployment
is a particularly urgent and acute problem in towns, where many of the major
companies are running well below capacity.
People who identify themselves with the political right regarded political and
legal problems, alcoholism and drunkenness as well as economic crime as the
country's main problems more often than those identifying themselves with the
political left and centre. Those in the centre mentioned poverty, unemployment
and the growth of crime against person more frequently. People with leftist
sympathies mentioned problems of economic policy more frequently.
As for problems at the community level, people referred more often to problems
that they had to deal with in their everyday life (Table 3). Seven problems were
mentioned by more than 5% of the respondents. More general problems seemed
to be less acute.
Over one-quarter or 27% of the respondents mentioned poverty and difficult
living conditions, lack of money, poor pensions and wages among people living
in their community, while 24% mentioned unemployment and uncertainty about
employment.
Poverty is regarded as a more urgent problem in the oldest generation, people
with a lower education and with the lowest income per household member.
Usually these people live in cities where prices are higher and money is really
scarce. The problem with living conditions was more often mentioned by people
living alone and by divorced or widowed people.
Unemployment was mentioned more often by people of working age (25-44
years), manual workers, the unemployed and housewives. This problem is more
urgent for those in the lowest income bracket.
Problems of economic policy were mentioned by 16% of the respondents, in
rural areas by almost 20%. People spoke about the collapse of agriculture and
difficulties in producing and selling agricultural products.
Crime against person was a concern to 13% of the respondents, particularly
those living in cities. Crime was mentioned more often by persons with a higher
education and income. This was a more important problem to people supporting
the political right.
Infrastructure problems also complicated people's everyday life. Independence
was followed by a chaotic process of privatization, which effectively ruined the
country's infrastructure. No one was responsible for the reconstruction of roads,
buildings, etc. Public transport deteriorated dramatically, with repair and
overhaul services completely neglected. In general, the standard of municipal
services declined considerably. No one wanted to work without extra pay.
These infrastructure problems were mentioned most often by people with a
higher level of education and income and representing the political right. The
problems were considered more urgent in Vilnius than elsewhere.
Political and legal problems were mentioned by 9% of the respondents. These
problems comprised disagreements in local government as well as poor
decisions concerning the maintenance of law and order in the districts and cities.
They were stressed more often by people from the political right.
The seventh place was occupied by drunkenness and alcoholism, reported
particularly by women, elderly people, pensioners and people from the political
right. Alcoholism was regarded a very urgent problem in rural areas, where
people often use alcohol as a way of easing their anxiety and uncertainty.
Most of the problems affecting individual respondents or their family are of an
economic nature. Almost every other respondent suffered from difficult living
conditions and/or poverty. Most of these people were pensioners, manual
workers, students, unemployed people and agricultural workers, i.e. people in
the lowest income bracket. Unemployment affected 17% of the respondents,
while problems of economic policy and economic crisis were mentioned by
about 14%. Other problems seem to affect only insignificant proportions of
Lithuanian families: housing problems were mentioned by 6%, crime by 5%,
and political and legal questions by 6%. Only 2% of the respondents mentioned
alcoholism and drunkenness as problems of their own or their families.
127
There were only comparatively few respondents who felt that there were no
problems at all in Lithuania and in their community. For the most part they were
young, single people, students or entrepreneurs in the highest income bracket.
They also tended to have leftist sympathies.
Perception of the bright sides of life
According to the survey results it is very difficult to speak about the perception
of the bright sides of life in Lithuania at all: well over half or 57% of the
respondents said they had not seen any positive change at the country level
(Table 4). At the community level the figure was even higher at 67% (Table 4).
In addition, 22-23% at both the country and community level were unable to
answer these questions. Only 20% of the respondents reported positive trends at
the country level, and only 10% did so at the community level.
Table 4 Positive trends perceived at the country and community level1).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Positive trends
%
Country
Rank
Community
%
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Positive political changes
Positive economic changes
Better market supply
Better care of surroundings
and infrastructure
Positive social changes
Changes in value system
Better ecological situation
Other positive trends
I do not see any positive
trends
Don't know
7.8
4.9
6.8
0.3
1.6
0.8
0.1
3.4
57.2
22.1
1
3
2
5
4
1.3
1.1
5.0
3
4
1
1.1
0.5
0.6
0.0
2.6
4
2
66.9
22.7
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
Only trends with 1% or more were ranked.
What is more, even the most positive trends were mentioned only by a small
minority. Positive political changes, including advances in democracy, the
possibility to travel abroad, extended freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the
abolition of censorship in the mass media, etc., came out on the top, but these
were mentioned by only 8% of the respondents.
Second on the list of positive trends at country level was the improved market
supply, mentioned by 7% of the respondents; reference was made to the
increased number of shops in towns, the wider product ranges, the disappearance
of queues, and the right to buy whatever one wanted — provided one had the
money.
Almost 5% mentioned positive economic changes: it had become easier to start
up one's own business, positive changes had happened in privatization, and the
Lithuanian currency had stabilized.
However, those were just three weak lights in a dark tunnel, the only items
exceeding the 5% limit at the country level. At the community level there was
just one item, i.e. improved market supply, which exceeded the 5% level. People
pointed out that if you have money, you can buy more. Otherwise, there has
been no improvement in the situation.
Older people, pensioners, those in the low income bracket, the unemployed and
people living alone tended to see no positive changes either at the country level
or in their immediate environment. Manual workers and people living in rural
areas also belong to this group. Centrist and right-wing views are well
represented in this more pessimistically oriented group.
Current prevalence of problems
Prevalence of problems at the country level
The forced-choice questions included in the Lithuanian questionnaire comprised
the 12 standard problems of the Baltica survey plus six additional problems, i.e.
poor housing, privatization, cultural deterioration, educational problems,
homelessness and gender inequality. We asked the respondents to evaluate the
prevalence of these problems on a nine-point scale (1 = non-existent problem, 9
= widespread problem). The mean values of the responses show the same
tendencies as in the case of the open-ended questions: all the problems ranking
high in the open-ended responses were also rated highly in the forced-choice
questions. The prevalence of the other listed problems is also considered to be
relatively high. Only problems caused by smoking, the nationality problem and
prostitution had a mean score of less than 6.
The most prevalent problems in Lithuania were unemployment, crime against
person, drunkenness and alcoholism, and economic crime (Figure 1). As far as
the prevalence of problems at the country level is concerned, it seems that the
mass media have a very strong influence indeed. People actively read
newspapers, watch television and listen to the radio. The mass media are sharply
critical of the government's economic policy, and new laws and decisions are
continuously debated. Newspapers keep people informed about the continuing
growth of crime, looking out for new sensations and trying to attract new readers
with frequent articles on corruption, robberies, murders, political sleaze, unfair
privatization, etc.
129
In short, the mass media draw a very pessimistic picture about what is going on
in society. It follows that the mean values for the prevalence of problems at the
country level are higher than the means for the community level.
Women are more sensitive than men to social problems in Lithuania. The
problem of unemployment is stressed by elderly people, pensioners, unemployed
people, manual workers, people with incomplete secondary and secondary
education, and by people with the lowest income. People living in major cities
also place much emphasis on this problem.
People living in urban areas thought that crime against person was more
widespread than did people living in rural areas. On the other hand, there are no
significant differences between social and demographic groups with regard to
this problem.
Drunkenness and alcoholism were mentioned more often by people living in
rural areas and by manual workers. Women are more sensitive to this problem at
the country level, and the mean score of their answers is higher than the
corresponding mean of males. This problem worries people with a lower
education to a greater extent than it worries people with a higher education, and
Lithuanians more than it does representatives of other ethnic groups.
Non-Lithuanians feel that the ethnicity problem is more prevalent, especially in
the areas where they live (Vilnius, Klaipeda, South-East Lithuania) than do
people with leftist political views and young people.
Political orientation emerged as an important distinguishing factor in the
perception of social problems. People with right-wing sympathies ranked many
problems as more urgent than did left-wing sympathizers: these included crime
against person, alcoholism, economic crime, unemployment, cultural
deterioration, educational problems, and problems related to privatization. They
are also more concerned about urgent problems affecting the whole population
and the solution of which was the responsibility of the governing party (i.e. the
ex-communist party). Opinions regarding the prevalence of social problems thus
reflect more general political attitudes. People with leftist views regarded all of
these problems as less widespread. The opposite was true for drug abuse,
prostitution, problems caused by smoking, the nationality problem and
homelessness.
Finally, a factor analysis was carried out to see how people associated different
social problems in their minds. We found five groups of social problems that
were related to one another.
The biggest number of social problems is related to poverty (the variable which
received the greatest weight). The following problems are grouped around
poverty: poor living conditions, unemployment, homelessness, poor health of the
population and problems related to privatization. Another group of social
problems is anchored to crime against person (variable with the greatest
weight), including drunkenness and alcoholism, economic crime and drug abuse.
Alcohol abuse and drugs seem to be closely associated in people's minds to
different crimes. The third group of social problems that are very closely
associated in people's minds are cultural deterioration and educational
problems. In the fourth group there are different problems that are evaluated
almost equally but that are not tied to one another in the respondents'
perceptions. This group comprises environmental pollution, domestic violence,
and problems caused by smoking and prostitution, which do not rank among the
most widespread problems. The nationality problem is not connected with any
other social problems in people's minds.
Prevalence of problems at the community level
The pattern at the community level is quite similar to that at the country level,
although the means are usually much lower. Only two problems (compared to
eight at the country level) have a mean in excess of 7, while eight problems
(compared to three) have a mean of less than 6 (see Figure 1).
The order of the most prevalent problems are also different than at the country
level. Drunkenness and alcoholism are now ranked at the top, followed by
unemployment, poverty and difficult living conditions, and crime against person.
Again, women's scores were higher than those of men. In the community context
this was true for each and every social problem. In addition, drunkenness and
alcoholism was considered more prevalent by older people (especially
pensioners), people living in rural areas as well as ethnic Lithuanians.
Factor analysis of community problems confirms, in principle, the composition
of problems revealed at the country level. A notable change was observed with
regard to alcoholism and drunkenness, which generated a separate factor
anchored to crime. This special position of alcohol problems seems to indicate
that they are perceived as prevalent in the whole population, regardless of
perceptions of other problems.
At the community level alcoholism and drunkenness constitutes a separate
factor. It is not tied to any other social problem in the respondents' perceptions.
The means obtained for the prevalence of social problems at the community
level are lower than those recorded at the country level. It seems that the high
ratings given for the prevalence of all problems at the country level are
influenced by the mass media in Lithuania. Crime against person, drug abuse,
economic crime, prostitution and homelessness are all thought to be more
131
prevalent at the country level than at the community level (difference in mean
values more than 1).
Comparison of the responses to the open-ended and forced-choice questions
reveals the same tendencies. The open-ended questions generated more
references to general problems causing various social problems, particularly by
people with a higher education. The economic crisis in general, the government's
economic policy and misguided political decisions were offered as reasons for
the growth of crime, unemployment, poverty, etc. People feel uncertain and
anxious, they can see no positive solution to these problems at the country level
or in their personal life. This, ultimately, gives rise to alcoholism, violence, etc.
The problems listed in the forced-choice questions are probably regarded as
negative outcomes of the introduction of market economy. In answering these
questions, the respondents tried to evaluate the significance of each listed social
problem in Lithuania and their community. This explains why the social
problems from the preset list that were assessed to be widespread were not
always even mentioned in the responses to the open-ended questions.
Prevalence of problems in 1994 and in the late 1980s
The majority of the respondents thought that the current transition involved
much more problems than the situation five or six years previously. There are
only two problems which show a relatively high prevalence at the earlier point
of time, i.e. alcoholism and environmental pollution. Economic crime, poor
public health, crime against person, domestic violence and poor housing
conditions were less widespread. Out of the 18 listed problems, as many as 11
were given low prevalence scores (< 4) under the previous regime (Table 5).
Table 5 Prevalence of problems at the country level in the late 1980s1).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
Median
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Environmental pollution
Economic crime
Poor health of the population
Domestic violence
Crime against person4.38
Poor housing conditions
Gender inequality
Poverty, difficult living conditions
Problems caused by smoking
Drug abuse
Educational problems
Deterioration of cultural life
The nationality problem
Prostitution
Homelessness
2.63
Unemployment
Problems related to privatization
6.63
5.64
5.25
5.10
4.35
2.52
4.01
3.87
3.74
3.67
3.56
3.58
3.41
3.27
3.17
1.96
2.25
1.80
2.16
2.43
2.42
2.37
2.37
4
2.32
2.54
2.26
2.45
2.29
2.41
2.28
2.48
2.27
2
2.01
1.83
7
6
5
5
4
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
14
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
15
16
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
Problems were classified as having the same rank if the differences in mean values were
statistically insignificant (>.05).
At the community level only one problem, i.e. drunkenness and alcoholism, was
regarded as highly prevalent before the transition period. Environmental
pollution, poor public health, economic crime and domestic violence were also
widespread in the community, but not to the same extent as now (medium
prevalence). The other 13 listed problems showed a low prevalence in the late
1980s (Table 6).
Comparing the perceived prevalence of social problems at the country level and
at community level in the late 1980s, the differences in the mean values are quite
insignificant. At that time people received less negative information about
different problems in Lithuania through the mass media, but they certainly knew
about the problems in their local town or village. However, given the censorship
of that time, information from the bigger cities was scarce.
By contrast, a comparison of the current and previous prevalence of problems at
the country level reveals considerable changes: without exception the perceived
prevalence of social problems increased substantially. The most dramatic
increase occurred in the category of ”new” problems, such as unemployment
(difference in mean values 5.81), privatization (5.33), poverty, difficult living
conditions (3.93), crime against person (3.67), homelessness (3.49), cultural
deterioration (3.26), poor housing conditions (3.23) and drug abuse (3.01).
Among prevalent problems only drunkenness and alcoholism showed a fairly
133
moderate change, occupying the top position both before and after the transition
period.
Table 6 Prevalence of problems at the community level in the late 1980s1).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
Median
Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Environmental pollution
Poor health of the population
Economic crime
Crime against person3.83
Domestic violence
Poor housing conditions
Gender inequality
Educational problems
Poverty, difficult living conditions
Problems caused by smoking
Deterioration of cultural life
Drug abuse
The nationality problem
Prostitution
Problems related to privatization
Homelessness
2.42
Unemployment
6.39
4.91
4.78
4.57
2.51
3.83
3.72
3.56
3.48
3.41
3.40
3.29
2.89
2.90
2.71
1.75
1.82
2.15
2.23
2.59
2.40
2.52
3
2.26
2.26
2.48
2.39
2.22
2.34
2.26
2.24
2.31
2.16
1.75
2
1.87
7
5
5
5
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
13
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
10
11
11
12
12
14
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
Problems were classified as having the same rank if the differences in mean values were
statistically insignificant (>.05).
The same pattern is repeated in a comparison of the current and previous
prevalence of problems at the community level. Again, unemployment shows
the biggest change (difference in mean values 5.45), followed by problems
related to privatization (4.68), poverty (3.41) and deterioration of cultural life
(3.10). The perceived prevalence of major problems increased significantly.
Ethnic problems form an exception, ranking low both before and after the
transition (Table 6).
The process of social change in Lithuania has been truly remarkable. In the late
1980s there was no open unemployment, and all people were obliged to work
under threat of punishment. Now, Lithuania is in the process of transition to
market economy. This has generated a host of difficulties for people during the
past few years. Politicians continue to promise improvements, yet nothing seems
to happen: on the contrary the prices of goods, services and flats are steadily
rising, while wages and pensions continue to lag behind. There are certain social
groups whose income is extremely low and who have serious difficulties trying
to make ends meet.
During the transitional period, before the legacy of Soviet legislation was
changed, large numbers of people made a lot of money for themselves in the
privatization process, but by dishonest means. For the time being the middle
class in Lithuania remains negligible, but the same applies to the upper class of
very rich people: the vast majority are very poor and really have to struggle to
make a living.
As was pointed out earlier, media coverage of social life was less negative in the
1980s than it is today. This seems to have had a tremendous impact on the
consciousness of Lithuanians. On the eve of the referendum, when this survey
was carried out, the media probably had a particularly strong impact on the
perception of social problems.
This is also reflected in the fact that the overwhelming majority of our
respondents thought that the prevalence of all problems had increased. Opinions
were divided in just one case, that of the nationality problem: 24% thought that
there had been change for better, 48% were of the opposite view.
Let us consider the composition of Lithuanians who represent pessimistic or
optimistic views with regard to the trends in social problems. If pessimists are
defined as people who claim that a change for the worse has happened in more
than half of the problems, we find that they consist of
-
women,
older people (> 45 years), pensioners,
people with a lower education,
manual workers, unemployed people, housewives,
the poorest people (lowest income per person in household),
people living in rural areas, farmers, and
people with leftist political orientation.
Correspondingly, if we call those people optimists who suggest that a change for
the better is at hand in more than half of the problems, we find them among
- men,
- the youngest generation (15-24 years old),
- the richest people (those with the highest income per person in
household), and
- people living in urban areas.
135
Figure 2
Options concerning changes in the prevalence of social problems
at the country level (for better and for worse).
Crime against person
Drug abuse
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Environmental pollution
Domestic violence
The nationality problem
Poor health of the population
Poverty, difficult living conditions
Problems caused by smoking
Prostitution
Unemployment
Deterioration of cultural life
Educational problems
Homelessness
Gender inequality
Poor housing conditions
Problems related to privatization
People with a higher education take a more optimistic view on the development
of such problems as crime against person, alcoholism and drunkenness, gender
inequality, the nationality problem and poor housing conditions. In most cases
non-Lithuanians do not differ from Lithuanians in this respect. However, nonLithuanians did believe more often that the nationality problem was changing for
the worse.
Finally, people with left-wing political sympathies were more pessimistic than
people with other political views. Those supporting the political right wing
claimed more often that there had been neither improvement nor deterioration.
Somewhat surprisingly, they feel that the current situation is only slightly
different from what it was in the late 1980s.
How threatening are social problems in Lithuania?
The most threatening social problems in Lithuania, according to our
respondents, were unemployment, drunkenness and alcoholism, crime against
person and economic crime, all showing a mean value of over 8 on our 9-point
scale (only the country level was considered). These same problems also
occupied the top positions with regard to perceived prevalence, and almost in the
same order.
Table 7 Ranking according to threat represented by different problems1).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D.
8.13
8.16
1.58
8.02
7.72
7.30
7.22
7.09
6.97
6.92
6.79
6.72
2.24
6.15
6.01
5.80
4.78
4.40
1.48
1.52
9
1.48
1.67
1.91
1.96
2.27
2.25
2.09
2.15
2.11
7
2.56
2.35
2.71
2.63
2.79
Median
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Unemployment
Crime against person8.04
Economic crime
Poverty, difficult living conditions
Environmental pollution
Poor housing conditions
Problems related to privatization
Drug abuse
Poor health of the population
Deterioration of cultural life
Educational problems
Homelessness
6.53
Gender inequality
Domestic violence
Prostitution
Problems caused by smoking
The nationality problem
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
9
9
2
9
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
11
7
6
6
5
4
Rank
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
1) Problems were classified as having the same rank if the differences in mean values
were statistically insignificant (>.05).
137
Without exception, women felt more threatened than did men. There are
significant gender differences in the mean values for drug abuse, alcoholism,
domestic violence, poor health of the population, prostitution and
unemployment.
Young and middle-aged people (< 44 years) are more concerned about the threat
of ”new” problems, such as crime against person, environmental pollution,
educational problems and nationalities' problems. Older people feel more
threatened by ”traditional” problems such as drunkenness and poverty.
Well-educated people react strongly to educational problems and the
deterioration of cultural life in Lithuania. In addition, they rate economic crime
and environmental pollution as more threatening than people with a lower
education. The latter referred to the threat of alcoholism, crime against person,
drug abuse, poor health, unemployment and poor living conditions.
Not surprisingly, poverty and poor living conditions were perceived as more
threatening among the poorest people. People with the highest income were
accordingly less concerned about unemployment, crime against person,
alcoholism and domestic violence.
The fear of alcoholism and drunkenness is deeply rooted in the Lithuanian
countryside. This is reflected in drunkenness being rated the top threat in rural
areas (mean value: 8.27). Unemployment seems to be a less threatening problem
in rural areas than in urban areas, or more specifically, in the capital and other
biggest cities.
People with right-wing sympathies regarded major social problems as more
threatening than people with left-wing views (i.e. crime against person,
unemployment, alcoholism, economic crime, poverty, poor health of the
population, gender inequality, problems related to privatization). For people
leaning towards the political left, the nationality problem, problems caused by
smoking, prostitution and domestic violence seem to be more threatening than
for those leaning to the right.
Factor analysis revealed five groups of problems. Poverty and poor living
conditions are in the same group as unemployment, homelessness and gender
inequality. The second group consists of problems related to alcohol use, crime
against person, economic crime and drug abuse. The third group consists of the
deterioration of cultural life and educational problems. The fourth group is
composed of different problems which, in our respondents' opinion, are not
among the most threatening, that is, drug abuse, domestic violence, the
nationality problem, problems caused by smoking and prostitution. Finally, there
is the category of problems related to privatization, which are not related to any
other social problem in the consciousness of the respondents, that is, they are
perceived as a separate issue.
Priorities in solving problems
There was a surprising consistency in the respondents' perceptions of the
prevalence of problems, the experienced threat from these problems and the
urgency to resolve them. In each case the five problems coming out at the top of
the list were exactly the same, with only minor changes in their order. The
problem which was thought to require most urgent attention was unemployment
(also regarded as the most prevalent and threatening problem), followed by
crime against person, drunkenness and alcoholism, poverty and economic crime.
In spite of this consistent pattern, there were again differences between social
groups.
Table 8 Priorities in solving problems at the country level.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Frequency
Per cent
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Unemployment
Crime against person 470
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Poverty, difficult living conditions
Economic crime
Poor housing conditions 180
Problems related to privatization
Environmental pollution 131
Poor health of the population
Drug abuse
Educational problems
Prostitution
Deterioration of cultural life
Homelessness
30
The nationality problem 29
Domestic violence
Gender inequality
Problems caused by smoking
Don't know/no answer
586
46.7
375
324
302
17.9
143
13.1
105
77
45
37
30
3.0
2.9
26
12
6
14
58.2
2
37.3
32.2
30.0
6
14.2
8
10.4
7.6
4.5
3.7
6.7
14
15
2.6
1.2
0.6
1.4
Rank
1
3
4
5
7
9
10
11
12
13
16
17
18
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The most outstanding difference between men and women was, on the one hand,
crime against person and economic crime, which were considered the most
urgent problems by men. On the other hand, women said that alcoholism,
poverty, poor health of the population and unemployment called for an urgent
solution more often than men.
Younger people had somewhat different concerns. In their view priority should
be given to resolving such problems as drug abuse, environmental pollution,
prostitution, cultural deterioration and gender inequality. Older generations
attached more importance to more ”traditional” problems, such as alcoholism,
139
poor health of the population, poverty and problems following from
privatization.
As expected, the nationality problem was regarded as more urgent by nonLithuanians than by Lithuanians: 13% of the former called for a rapid solution to
these problems. However, on the basis of the media coverage and heated
political debate surrounding this issue, one might have expected an even higher
figure.
The priority problem of unemployment was considered most urgent by people
with a lower education, the unemployed and housewives, apparently worried
about both their husbands' and their own chances of holding on to their job or
getting a job. In addition, the urban population frequently referred to the
importance of lowering the unemployment rate. Crime against person is also a
high priority issue in urban areas. It was mentioned more often by people with a
higher education and by people with the highest level of income.
Once again we see that the question of drunkenness and alcoholism is closely
tied to the rural population. People with a lower education, manual workers and
farmers also stress the importance of solving alcohol-related problems.
The poorest people and people with the lowest education rank poverty as the
most urgent problem. This problem was mentioned not only by older people but
also by middle-aged people with teenage children in the family. The income per
person in these families tends to be in the lowest category.
The results at the community level were very similar to those at the country
level. Unemployment (59%) retained its status as the most urgent problem.
However, it was followed by drunkenness and alcoholism (51%), which seems
to affect people more in their immediate surroundings. Crime against person
(34%), on the other hand, is less accentuated in the community context.
A comparison of the priorities at the country and the community level (Figure 3)
reflects the influence of the mass media. Problems which are given wide
coverage in the print press and other mass media, such as crime against person
and economic crime, are primarily perceived as national matters. By contrast,
when respondents were asked about problems in their community, they tended to
refer to what they saw around themselves, that is, alcoholism, poverty and poor
living conditions.
Figure 3
Perception of most urgent problems (%).
141
Typology of problems
To sum up our discussion, we shall look at people's perception of social
problems against the three dimensions of their perceived prevalence, the threat
they are considered to represent, and the priorities in resolving them at the
country level.
All social problems were divided into problems of higher prevalence (median 69) and problems of lower prevalence (median 1-5); more threatening problems
(median 7-9) and less threatening problems (median 1-6); and problems that
needed very urgent solution (mentioned by more than 30% of the respondents),
problems that did not need very urgent solution (10-30%) and problems that did
not need urgent solution (< 10%).
Using these three criteria, four types of social problems were defined at the
country level:
Figure 4
Typology of problems at the country level (all population).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
(median 6-9)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
Less prevalent
(median 1-5)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High need
for change
(> 30%)
Crime against person
Drunkenness
Economic crime
Poverty
Unemployment
Medium need Pollution
for change Poor health
(10-30%)
Housing
Privatization
Low need
for change
(< 10%)
Drug abuse
Culture
Education
Homelessness
Gender inequality
Domestic
violence
The nationality
problem
Smoking
Prostitution
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1) Fully developed social problems: problems that are highly prevalent in
Lithuania, that present a threat for the future and that require very urgent
solution. These criteria are met by the following social problems:
-
crime against person,
drunkenness and alcoholism,
economic crime,
poverty, and
unemployment.
2) Developing social problems: problems that are highly prevalent in Lithuania,
that present a threat for the future but that do not require very urgent solution.
Such problems are:
-
environmental pollution,
poor health,
poor housing conditions, and
problems related to privatization.
3) Potential social problems: problems that are highly prevalent in Lithuania,
that present a threat for the future but that do not require urgent solution at the
moment. Among such problems we find:
-
drug abuse,
deterioration of cultural life,
educational problems,
homelessness, and
gender inequality.
4) Non-existent social problems are defined as phenomena which are regarded
as less prevalent, less threatening for the future and which are not thought to
require urgent solution. We found four such social phenomena:
-
domestic violence,
the nationality problem,
problems caused by smoking, and
prostitution.
143
Figure 5
Typology of problems at the community level (all population).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
More prevalent
(median 6-9)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
Less prevalent
(median 1-5)
Threatening
Less
(median 7-9) threatening
(median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High need
for change
(> 30%)
Crime against person
Drunkenness
Poverty
Unemployment
Medium need Economic crime
for change Pollution
(10-30%)
Poor health
Culture
Housing
Privatization
Low need
for change
(< 10%)
Education
Drug abuse
Domestic
Prostitution
violence
HomelessnessThe nationality
Gender
problem
inequality
Smoking
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
At the community level one new type of social problems appeared; these may be
described as ”pseudo-problems”. Problems which mostly belonged to the group
of potential problems at the country level were considered less prevalent and in
no need of urgent solution at the community level. This group was composed of:
-
drug abuse,
prostitution,
homelessness, and
gender inequality.
At the community level these social problems are not visible. However, due to
the influence of the mass media they are perceived as quite widespread at the
country level.
There are some further shifts between the two levels. Economic crime change
from a fully developed problem at the country level to a less developed problem
at the community level (only 18% of the respondents referred to the necessity for
urgent solution at the community level). On the other hand, cultural deterioration
became more urgent at the community level. And finally, the non-existent
problem of prostitution at the country level became a pseudo-problem at the
community level.
Conclusions
Our study suggests that people in Lithuania are not very optimistic about the
future. They are disillusioned and disappointed with politicians, and they have
difficulty trusting anyone or anything. There is a widespread sense of alienation,
even aggression, in the population.
Elderly people and pensioners, particularly those living alone, are most sensitive
to ongoing changes in Lithuania. Similar attitudes are common among
unemployed people and families with children. Low income is clearly associated
with pessimistic views.
The results also show that people's perceptions of social problems are very much
influenced by the mass media. Having said that, it is important to note that the
survey was conducted at a time when people were exposed to much public
debate on all sorts of social problems, that is, immediately before a referendum
on the government's social policy. During these weeks, the Lithuanian mass
media carried countless articles dealing with unfair privatization, crime, mafia
activities, etc. Under such psychological pressure, the perception of social
problems was no doubt sharpened and contributed to a sense of pessimism.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
Dobryninas, Aleksandras (1996): Democratic Change and Crime Control in Lithuania:
Compiling New Criminological Discourses. NATO Fellowship Programme, Final
Report.
Health statistics (1996). Health statistics of Lithuania 1995, Lithuanian Ministry of
Health, Lithuanian Health Information Center, Vilnius.
Horichter, J. & Weller, I. (1993): On the application of the left-right schema in Central
and Eastern Eurobarometer surveys. Manheim, April.
Inglehart, R. (1990): Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University
Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Statistical yearbook (1995): Statistical yearbook of Lithuania 1994-1995. Lithuanian
department of statistics to the Government of the Republic of Lithuania, Vilnius.
Survey report (1992): The features of Lithuanian peoples' political consciousness.
Survey report, Part II.
The World Health Report 1996. WHO, Geneva.
145
Related literature
Alisauksiene, R., Bajaruniene, R. & Šeršniova, B. (1993): Policy mood and sociopolitical attitudes in Lithuania. Journal of Baltic Studies XXIV, 2, Summer.
Alisauskiene, R., Bajaruniene, R. & Šeršniova, B. (1993): Economic values and
activities of Lithuanian people. Formation of the middle class in transitional
societies. Estonian Institute for Future Studies, Tallinn.
Mikalkevicius, A. & Sinkunas, A. (1992): Ideology and alcohol problems in Lithuania.
In: Simpura, J. & Tigerstedt, C., eds.: Social Problems around the Baltic Sea. NAD
Publication No 21, Helsinki.
Šeršniova, B. (1993): Social policy in the eye of the public: The unemployment problem
in Lithuania. Paper prepared for WAPOR Regional Seminar on Public opinion and
public opinion research in Eastern Europe. Tallinn, June.
Šeršniova, B. (1993): Unemployment in Lithuania: Statistical figures and the attitudes of
Lithuanian people to this new phenomenon. Paper prepared for the 11th European
Seminar on Poverty in the European House. Challenges for Social Work. Debrecen,
Hungary.
Annex 1
Comparisons of national census data (1989) and demographic
characteristics of sample.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
National
census
(aged 15+)
Survey sample
Survey sample
(unweighted)
(weighted)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Sex
Male
Female
46.3
53.7
502
505
49.9
50.1
466
541
46.3
53.7
Age
15-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60+
9.9
20.8
18.4
15.4
15.2
20.3
71
186
227
183
163
177
7.1
18.5
22.5
18.2
16.2
17.6
100
209
186
155
153
204
9.9
20.8
18.4
15.4
15.2
20.3
Education
Higher, unfinished
higher
Secondary
Incomplete secondary
12.5
44.8
42.8
192
528
287
19.1
52.4
28.5
126
455
426
12.5
45.2
42.3
Size of settlement
Less than 2 thousand
2-50 thousand
50-600 thousand
Vilnius
32.6
23.5
27.8
16.1
324
239
288
156
32.2
23.7
28.6
15.5
327
233
285
162
32.4
23.1
28.4
16.1
Nationality
Lithuanians
Other
79.6
20.4
841
166
83.5
16.5
837
170
83.1
16.9
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
147
Figure 1 Prevalence of social problems at the country
and community levels (mean values).
From prosperity and overconsumption to hangover
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Saija Järvinen
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Introduction
This study reports on the results of an opinion poll conducted in Finland in 1994
on public perceptions of social problems.1 In line with the theoretical premises
adopted in the Baltica study, public opinion is understood as an articulation of a
complex claims-making process and thus as contributing to the ways in which
social problems are defined. The discussion begins with an examination of issues
that Finnish people perceive as serious threats both to the country at large and to
their own everyday life (open-ended questions). Next, we look at the respondents'
assessments of the seriousness, prevalence and urgency of different social
problems (forced-choice questions), and finally consider people's positive
experiences.
The results are discussed against the background of the social conditions
prevailing in the country as well as ongoing social changes. An examination of
the social and cultural context of the findings is essential in view of the
comparative setting of the survey: what is regarded as a social problem that calls
for public response varies over time and also from one society to another (e.g.
Lagerspetz 1994). Even within one country the transformation and moulding of
public opinion is clearly influenced by the current economic and social situation
and by public debate (Pöntinen & Uusitalo 1988; Sihvo & Uusitalo 1994). It is
important, then, that public opinion is understood not simply in terms of a
straightforward response to ”facts” or ”objective conditions”. The results of our
study also indicate that the way of formulating questions tend to influence
respondents' opinions and that the assessment of the prevalence of social
problems is a different task under different economic conditions. The role of the
media in the formulation of public opinion on social problems is also discussed in
the report.
Economic recession
1
See Annex 1 (p. 186) for a detailed description of the material of the study and the
questionnaire.
149
Finland developed into a Scandinavian welfare state in the 1970s and 1980s under
conditions of sustained and stable economic growth. During this period all the
Scandinavian countries built up the world's most universalistic welfare state
structures and practices. Welfare state policy continued to enjoy popular support
and legitimacy much longer than elsewhere in Europe or in the United States (see
Esping-Andersen 1996; Kosonen 1997). Following a period of rapid economic
growth particularly during the latter half of the 1980s, rendering Finland the
nickname of Europe's Japan, the country experienced zero growth in 1990,
followed by three years of negative growth (see Table 1). The national economy
nosedived into a decline unlike anything experienced in any other OECD country,
with the exception of the former socialist countries in Central and Eastern Europe.
With the recession, unemployment soared to record levels and public debt
increased rapidly. The deficit in the state budget increased dramatically from 10%
of GDP in 1990 to 50% in 1993 and further to 70% in 1995. The unemployment
rate peaked at 18.4% in 1994, whereas at the end of the 1980s it had been around
3%.
Table 1 Some indicators of economic recession and social policy in Finland.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
5.7
0.0
-7.1
-3.6
-1.2
4.5
5.1
3.6
5.9
3.0
6.9
8.9
7.1
2.0
2.5
0.6
2.5
0.1
23.8
3.5
25.5
3.4
30.4
7.6
34.4
13.1
35.4
17.9
34.6
18.4
32.7
17.2
32.3
16.3
30.2
14.5
5.7
6.3
7.9
9.2
10.4
11.3
11.4
11.9
11.5
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Real growth of GDP, %
Real growth of social
expenditure, %
Social expenditure,
% of GDP
Unemployment rate, %
% of persons receiving
living allowance
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Figures for 1997 are partly preliminary.
The government's fiscal crisis has also had an impact on social policy. The
cutbacks introduced during the 1990s have been motivated primarily by
considerations of economic policy. As we can see in Table 1, the real growth of
social expenditure decreased from the record figure of 8.9% in 1991 to 2% in
1993 and 2.5% in 1994 in spite of the dramatic increase in expenditure on
unemployment benefits and living allowances. The savings and cutbacks
introduced in response to the government's fiscal crisis have increased the need
for social protection. One indicator of the declining level of real income is the
growing number of people in receipt of living allowance, a last-resort safety net.
In Finland the coverage and level of income transfers have been reduced, and the
supply and quality of social, health and education services have also declined,
although not in direct proportion to the cutbacks (Uusitalo 1995, 10). Uusitalo
(1996) has also shown that Finnish households have suffered economic losses
since the onset of the recession, but again these losses are smaller than implied by
the decline in GDP. All in all the Finnish welfare state has maintained its
Scandinavian style, even though it has slimmed down since the recession.
Although the Finnish welfare state is not as generous nor as universal and
although it relies more on means-tested benefits than before, it seems to have been
surprisingly successful in alleviating the harmful effects of the recession on
citizens’ well-being.
So far it has been possible to implement the cutbacks without having to change or
dismantle the basic structures of the social security system. Social problems in
Finland have often been defined as deficits in welfare (Simpura 1991, 6-7) or as
problems related to social security and social welfare (Raunio 1984, 4). These
definitions have originated with civil servants working within the structures of the
social state. During the economic recession there was much public debate about
the future of the welfare state, which according to Uusitalo (1996, 10-11) was
dominated not so much by ideological disputes as by more practical discourse. At
the centre of this discourse was the claim that public expenditure (and by the same
token the welfare state) must be cut back in order to restore balance in the state
budget and in order to make room for private initiative. If the coherent ideology
supporting the welfare state collapses, that will obviously change the definitions
of social problems as well.
The consultative referendum in autumn 1994 on Finland's membership of the
European Union was another topical issue of public debate at this time. Over half
or 57% of the population were in favour of membership, and consequently
Finland joined the European Union on 1 January 1995. The lively debate for and
against membership was also mirrored in the results of the Baltica study,
particularly in connection with the questions that concerned positive changes
appearing in the country (see below).
Previous studies on social problems in Finland
There have been no earlier public opinion studies in Finland dealing explicitly and
simultaneously with the prevalence and perception of different social problems.
However, the theme has been touched upon in surveys into public opinion on
important problems or issues that give rise to public concern or a feeling of
insecurity (Niemelä 1991; Melkas 1991; Puohiniemi 1993). Every other year the
Centre for Finnish Business and Policy Studies (Eva), which represents Finnish
trade and industry, has carried out surveys including some items on perceived
threats to Finnish society (Eva 1995, 1993, 1991, 1989, 1987, 1985).
There have been no major changes in the basic values of Finnish people for many
years. However, unemployment and economic recession have become
increasingly important considerations. In 1993, one year before the present
Baltica survey was conducted, the most important problems facing the country
had to do with unemployment, economic survival, and health. Finnish people
appreciated health and safety in their own and their close neighbours' life,
151
especially at a time when the economic situation in the country was deteriorating.
At the same time, influential figures such as civil servants, businessmen,
politicians and intellectuals were much more concerned about the social problems
facing the country than were ordinary people, who were more concerned about
potential threats posed by the former Soviet Union (Puohiniemi 1993).
Nonetheless it is only among unemployed people that there has been any
significant increase in fears of refugees and foreigners in general (Jaakkola 1993,
3).
Most studies concerned with social problems deal with one particular type of
problem at a time: the issues covered have included crime, environmental
problems, and refugees and foreigners living in Finland (Aromaa & Heiskanen
1992; Heiskanen 1991; Heiskanen et al. 1990; Seppänen 1991; Jaakkola 1989,
1993; Uusitalo 1986). Studies have also been conducted on the use of alcohol,
drugs, as well as drinking habits in Finland (Simpura 1987; Partanen 1994;
Kontula & Koskela 1992; Kontula 1995).
Opinion polls on public support for the welfare state and the social security
system have largely been motivated by discussions on the dismantling of the
welfare state (see e.g. Sihvo & Uusitalo 1993, 1995a, 1995b; Ervasti & Kangas
1994, 1995; Forma 1998). According to Uusitalo (1996, 11), public support for
the welfare state has decreased during the recession of the 1990s to a level lower
than at any time since 1975, when the first measurements were carried out.
However, the latest data for 1994 and 1995 indicate that support has started to
increase again. The research evidence also suggests that the welfare state occupies
a special place in the hearts of Finnish people. Citizens do understand the need to
make savings in public expenditure, but they would like to see these savings made
in other sectors than social security, for instance in defence expenditure,
agricultural and industrial subsidies, or culture and sports. Forma (1998) affirms
that popular support for the welfare state has become stronger during the 1990s
and that Finnish people are concerned about the operation of the welfare state and
the adequacy and quality of certain services, especially child welfare and
substance abuse services.
There have also been several studies on the public debate around social problems
and on how these problems are defined in the mass media. The most recent study
deals with the construction of environmental problems in the Finnish media
(Väliverronen 1996). Some scholars have addressed the appearance of social
problems in national and local newspapers, particularly alcohol and drug
problems. The issues covered most often in editorials are economic problems as
well as problems in the political system, in culture and education. During a sixmonth period in 1992-1993, alcohol was mentioned very rarely in editorials and
drug problems received no mention at all (Hanhinen, 1994). In general,
newspapers tend to address the drugs issues in a criminal context, emphasizing
the threat represented by drugs to Finnish society (Järvinen 1997a; Jaatinen
1998). In the early 1990s reporting on drugs was ”internationally” oriented, i.e.
news on drugs often originated from foreign countries (Skretting 1997, 114). This
has recently been changing, and nowadays almost all drug-related articles deal
with local or national events (see e.g. Kaukonen & Halmeaho 1998, 93).
Piispa (1993) has studied the debate on alcohol issues in post-war Finland,
focusing on the role played by the mass media in defining alcohol problems. The
Finnish press has played an active part in the formulation of the alcohol question,
and liberal undertones have been present since the 1950s. Generally speaking the
press has been in favour of a liberal alcohol policy. However, closer scrutiny
shows that calls for restrictions typically occur in reports on drinking among
younger people (Järvinen 1998). According to journalists, civil servants, business
managers and other influential figures in Finland, alcohol problems are still
connected to specific groups, namely young people and lower social classes
(Hanhinen & Törrönen 1998). Although these influential figures, and particularly
representatives of private business companies and independent journalists, are
strongly in favour of a more liberal alcohol policy, ”ordinary” people in Finland
do not necessarily agree. Österberg (1998) concludes that the opinions on the
alcohol sales system and the prevailing alcohol control policy have varied
considerably in the 1960s and 1970s. Using attitudes towards the sales system of
medium beer as a general indicator, the attitudes towards alcohol control
underwent a clear and rapid liberalization in the 1960s. In the 1970s the shift in
opinions favouring a more restrictive policy did not occur quite as quickly, but the
change was almost as drastic as in the 1960s, although in the reverse direction.
Liberalization of alcohol control measures continued in the 1990s, and in recent
years the number of those supporting liberalizations is counterbalanced by those
who are satisfied with the current alcohol control measures.
Serious problems facing Finland and the everyday life of Finnish
people
Serious problems facing Finland
The respondents in our survey were first asked to say which problems they
regarded as the most serious threats to their country. No reference was made in
the question to serious social problems, and no preset alternatives were set out; in
other words, the respondents were free to raise any issues that they personally
considered important and worth mentioning.
Figure 1 Serious problems facing Finland in 1994.
153
It is noteworthy, first of all, that the vast majority of the respondents were agreed
that the country did indeed have serious problems that needed attention at the end
of 1994: 97% mentioned at least one serious problem. Secondly, even though the
question was open-ended, three issues were clearly dominant in the responses (see
Figure 1). Three out of four Finns mentioned unemployment as the most serious
problem facing the country. People were also concerned about Finland's economic
situation: one-fifth (19%) of the respondents referred to the recession and other
problems of economic policy. One in five (20%) also expressed concern about
environmental problems. Other problems mentioned in these open-ended
responses were those related to social security and the availability of social
services.
Although environmental problems lag far behind the top issue of unemployment,
it is interesting that they rank second. It has been suggested that at times of
economic recession, environmental problems will receive less attention than at
times of economic growth and prosperity (Suhonen 1994, 124). In this light and in
comparison with earlier findings, the present results are somewhat surprising. For
example, in 1993 only 3% of Finnish people regarded environmental problems as
important, while more than eight out of ten respondents considered
unemployment an important problem (Puohiniemi 1993, 53). At the beginning of
the 1990s when the recession had not yet set in, one-third of the people in Finland
referred to economic issues and unemployment and one-fifth to environmental
issues (Melkas 1991). In 1989 environmental protection was a top priority among
people in Helsinki; other topical concerns included the reduction of
unemployment, decreasing differences in consumption and increasing citizens’
purchasing power. In 1994, when the study was replicated, environmental issues
were still high on the agenda, but they had been overtaken by the topic of
reducing unemployment (Lankinen 1995). During the hardest years of recession,
four out of five respondents said that unemployment is a very important issue,
while two-thirds regarded environmental protection as an important issue.
In 1994 unemployment rates in Finland were at a higher level than they had ever
been since the 1930s. Nonetheless environmental issues were still considered a
serious concern. The importance attached to environmental issues in the present
study can be explained at least in part by the context of the Baltica study, where
the questions were presented as part of a study on ”Consumption, Knowledge,
Attitudes, and Environmental Policy”. The framing and heading of the
questionnaire have no doubt influenced the respondents in reminding them of
environmental problems.
In short then, the framing of the Baltica questionnaire may have given added
weight to the seriousness of environmental issues. On the other hand, it seems
reasonable to assume that despite the recession, people in Finland are now better
aware of environmental protection and pollution, at least at the level of attitudes.
With the exception of pollution, all the main problems mentioned in the openended question can be interpreted as reflecting the concern people that feel about
their ”economic” survival. Unemployment, problems of economy and social
security, but also poverty (which was mentioned less often than the other issues),
are all part of the same phenomenon. It must also be borne in mind that Finnish
people attach a very special importance to the welfare state (Uusitalo 1996). Any
probable or potential lack of economic security in Finnish society is considered a
threat to livelihood, which amounts to a violation of people's basic human rights.
Closely related to economic policy is Finland's recent membership of the
European Union, which was mentioned as a problematic issue for Finnish society.
In particular, people in the age group 55 or over were concerned about the
consequences of Finland's membership of the EU, especially in agriculture.
Both men and women were equally concerned about unemployment. There are,
however, certain issues that may be interpreted as men's worries and those that are
more women's worries. One-quarter or 26% of the women and 15% of the men
referred to environmental problems as a serious concern. Similar results have
been reported in a number of other studies as well (see Tikkanen et al. 1991;
Lankinen 1995; Uusitalo 1986). Women were also more worried about changes
occurring in social relationships and in values, as well as about people's
psychological welfare. In the answers to the open-ended question, neither alcohol
nor drugs were identified as serious problems for the country. However,
comparing the responses of the genders we do find that women are more
concerned about these problems than men are (9% and 4%, respectively). Men,
for their part, place more emphasis on questions of economic policy and the
economic situation of the country, as well as on political and legal problems.
The most active group in the labour market, i.e. those aged between 25 and 54,
highlighted the recession and economic problems more often than environmental
problems. The youngest respondents (under 25) attached most importance to
pollution and natural degradation, ranking them second immediately after
unemployment. Social security and services were a major concern particularly for
people outside the labour market, i.e. respondents over 55 years, mothers looking
after their children, students and conscripts. Place of residence had no major
effect on the problem map, even in the case of drugs or crime.
As was pointed out earlier, only 3% of men and women thought that Finland had
no serious problems to contend with. People in the lowest income groups were
overrepresented among those who said they ”don't know”. Within the confines of
this study it is not possible to establish whether these people felt too powerless,
uninformed or excluded to express their opinion on problems facing the country.
155
Serious problems affecting respondents' everyday life
Although virtually all the respondents spontaneously referred to serious problems
facing the country, they were either more reluctant or they found it more difficult
to identify problems affecting their own life. It was quite amazing to find that half
of all the respondents among both men and women said that none of the problems
they mentioned were of any concern to them personally or to their family. One in
four respondents said unemployment had affected their everyday life. Almost one
in ten reported that problems related to the economy had had an impact on their
life. One in twenty respondents (5%) said that inadequate social security and
pollution were immediate concerns at the level of everyday life.
Figure 2 Serious problems affecting respondents' everyday life.
With the exception of environmental problems, the individual problems identified
by the respondents typically affected their own and their family's financial
situation and livelihood in one way or another. On the basis of Figure 2 it may
also be assumed that it is more difficult for Finnish people to talk about
individual, personal problems. For example, hardly any mention was made of
problems that have to do with mental health or social relationships. Nor do
alcohol or drug problems seem to be an immediate, day-to-day concern for the
respondents: only one man and one woman referred to problems caused by
alcohol or drug abuse. Peltoniemi (1995) recorded much higher figures in a study
on problems caused by alcohol and drug abuse to families, and found that one in
eight Finns have grown up in an alcoholic family.
The results also suggest that unemployment is interwoven with a wide range of
different kinds of problems and that this complex of problems has become so
common nowadays that it is not something people have to feel ashamed about.
Heiskanen (1996) has also concluded that Finns are mostly concerned about work
and unemployment when they are unemployed themselves, when they are
stressed, or when they feel their own job is at risk. Unemployment also means a
risk of losing one’s self-respect, particularly in a society such as Finland's where
people’s social status and identity are largely dependent on the job and coping in
the job (see Kortteinen 1992, for the specific role of work in Finns’ notions of
self-respect).
Serious social problems in Finland
The answers to the open-ended questions differed to some extent from those to
the forced-choice questions. However, the questions differed as well (see
questionnaire in Appendix A, pages 217-222). While in the open-ended questions
the respondents were asked about the seriousness of problems facing the country,
the forced-choice questions divided a set of phenomena, traditionally regarded as
social problems, into three dimensions. That is, the respondents were asked to
assess the prevalence, the seriousness and the urgency of each phenomenon.
As we have seen, the main problems emerging from the open-ended questions
were unemployment as well as economic and environmental problems. Looking
at the mean values obtained from the forced-choice questions, unemployment and
economic crime again emerge as the most serious issues. In many other respects,
however, the answers were very different, which is probably explained in part by
the fact that the questions were presented differently. Below, I briefly comment
on the perceived seriousness of different social problems, then move on to their
perceived prevalence, and finally analyse peoples’ opinions on the urgency of
different problems.
In some cases the impacts of the different way of presenting the questions are
quite obvious. For example, in the responses to the open-ended questions
references to alcohol and drugs were very rare, and smoking was not mentioned at
all. In the forced-choice questions, these issues rank among the most serious
social problems. In fact, drugs, alcoholism, crime against person, environmental
pollution and smoking as well as domestic violence are regarded as the most
157
serious problems after unemployment and economic crime. Men and women had
very similar assessments of the seriousness of different problems, although
women considered each problem as somewhat more serious than men. As in the
case of the open-ended question, men attached more importance to economic
crime, whereas women were more worried about drugs and alcoholism.
Table 2 Serious social problems in Finland in 1994.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
N
Mean
STD
1,584
1,588
1,603
6.53
1,603
1,593
1,542
1,592
1,541
1,566
1,571
1,493
6.83
6.61
6.55
1.89
6.43
6.19
6.17
5.79
5.38
5.26
5.06
4.77
1.73
2.04
1.64
7
1.82
1.92
1.92
1.98
2.19
2.07
2.08
2.22
7
7
7
3
7
6
6
6
5
5
5
5
4
5
5
6
7
8
9
10
1,582
1,573
4.58
4.36
2.32
2.06
4
4
11
12
1,515
4.14
2.07
4
13
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Economic crime
Drug use
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Crime against person1,598
Environmental pollution
Smoking
Domestic violence
Poverty
Social security and services
Poor public health
Poor housing and homelessness
Prostitution
Immigration [of refugees/
foreigners]
Gender inequality
Problems between nationalities
and cultural groups
Median
Rank
2
3
3
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
There also occurred some ”minor” problems, i.e. problems between cultural and
national groups, gender inequality, problems connected with immigration and
refugees, prostitution, poor housing and poor public health, which are not
considered very serious. None of these items were mentioned in the open-ended
responses either.
The prevalence of social problems in Finland in 1994
Unemployment emerged as the most prevalent problem in Finland on the basis of
the forced-choice questions as well. As we can see in Table 3, economic crime,
problems caused by alcohol and smoking, and environmental problems were also
ranked among the most prevalent social problems in Finland in 1994. The least
prevalent problems were gender inequality, conflicts between cultural and ethnic
groups, poor housing conditions, immigration, and prostitution. These issues were
not considered serious either.
Table 3 Prevalence of social problems in Finland in 1994.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
N
Mean
STD
1,610
1,585
1,598
1,580
1,596
1,594
5.90
1,576
1,512
1,509
1,548
1,446
8.29
6.67
6.41
6.18
6.00
5.93
1.75
5.86
5.57
5.43
5.35
5.00
1.08
1.74
1.59
1.82
1.78
2.00
6
1.99
1.81
2.23
2.00
2.18
9
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
1,582
1,568
4.89
4.68
2.43
2.03
5
4
9
10
1,497
1,556
4.60
4.47
2.20
2.09
5
4
10
11
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Unemployment
Economic crime
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Smoking
Environmental pollution
Poverty
Crime against person1,606
Drug use
Domestic violence
Social security and services
Poor public health
Prostitution
Immigration [of refugees/
foreigners]
Poor housing and homelessness
Problems between nationalities
and cultural groups
Gender inequality
Median
Rank
6
7
8
8
9
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Looking at public perceptions of the most serious problems facing the country,
serious social problems and prevalent social problems, unemployment clearly
emerges as the most important issue. At the time of the survey in autumn 1994,
unemployment figures had reached their highest peak and the recession had more
or less bottomed out. The results also suggest that Finnish people had learned
about the severity of the unemployment problem if not through personal
experience then at least via the mass media. This conclusion is justified, first, by
the fact that the respondents considered it the most prevalent problem and,
second, by the fact that almost all respondents were able to assess its prevalence.
On the other hand, there were also certain ”less visible” issues, such as
prostitution or conflicts between national groups, that were rated neither as highly
prevalent nor as highly serious. The number of responses to these questions was
also much lower.2 Indeed prostitution and conflicts between ethnic groups still
seem to be quite distant or even invisible problems to Finnish people. It is quite
possible that our respondents have not even understood what is meant by conflicts
between nationalities and cultural groups: until the 1990s Finland was a culturally
very homogeneous country.
2
The data comprised a total of 1,614 responses, and the prevalence of
unemployment was assessed in 1,610 of them. The number of responses to
questions concerning the prevalence of prostitution and conflicts between cultural
groups was much lower (1,446 and 1,497, respectively).
159
Women gave higher prevalence ratings to all issues than men, with just two
exceptions: the mean ratings for economic crime and unemployment were exactly
the same for men and women. In the highest and lowest income groups the four
most prevalent problems were ranked in exactly the same order: unemployment,
economic crime, drunkenness and alcoholism, and smoking. Views on the
prevalence of social problems in Finland did not differ significantly between
urban and rural dwellers; this applied even to assessments of the prevalence of
crime against person and drug use. However, several other studies suggest that
drugs are more familiar, more visible, and more easily available in cities —
particularly in the metropolitan Helsinki region — than in rural areas (see e.g.
Ahlström et al. 1996, 8). Again, it would be tempting to explain these
consistencies by reference to the homogeneity of Finnish culture. However, the
explanation may in fact be of a more technical nature: in the Finnish part of the
Baltica study, the questions concerned the prevalence of social problems in
Finland, not in one’s place of residence.
Comparing the prevalence of social problems in 1994 and at the end of
the 1980s
Another aim of the Baltica study was to find out how perceptions of social
problems are affected by changing social circumstances. To this end the
respondents were asked to assess the prevalence of different problems at the time
of the interview and to compare this with the situation six years previously. In
1994 when the study was carried out, people in Finland thought that the most
prevalent social problems in Finland at the end of the 1980s had been smoking,
environmental pollution, problems caused by alcohol use, economic crime, and
gender inequality.
Table 4 Prevalence of problems at the end of the 1980s.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
N
Mean
STD
1,565
1,576
1,581
1,559
1,537
1,488
1,543
1,599
1,532
4.02
1,480
5.94
5.59
5.22
5.08
4.67
4.39
4.16
4.04
4.03
1.48
3.84
1.76
1.72
1.59
1.87
2.00
1.57
1.84
1.84
1.68
4
1.78
6
6
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
8
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
8
1,476
1,573
1,559
1,433
3.75
3.60
3.59
3.34
1.85
1.61
1.60
1.71
4
3
3
3
9
10
10
11
1,562
3.23
1.85
3
11
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Smoking
Environmental pollution
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Gender inequality
Domestic violence
Poor housing and homelessness
Unemployment
Poor public health
Crime against person1,585
Social security and services
Problems between nationalities
and cultural groups
Poverty
Drug use
Prostitution
Immigration [of refugees/
foreigners]
Median
Rank
9
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
In 1994 people in Finland believed that there had been hardly any drug problems
or poverty in the late 1980s. Prostitution, immigration, and conflicts between
different ethnic groups were thought to have been minor issues six years
previously, just as they were in 1994, with the exception of a slight increase in
problems related to immigration. By international comparison Finland has taken a
very strict position towards asylum-seekers: in 1987 there were only 900 refugees
in the country, in 1993 the figure was 8,600. Although this proved to be a minor
issue in this study, the attitudes towards refugees and foreigners have become
more and more negative since 1987 among Finnish people, particularly among
those out of work (Jaakkola 1993). It is also stated that since the upheavals in the
former Soviet Union, street prostitution has become more visible in Finland
(Turunen 1996).
Respondents's assessments of the prevalence of different problems and
particularly that of unemployment are clearly influenced by the current economic
situation in the country. Also, studies on public approval of the social security
system clearly indicate that at times of economic prosperity Finnish people are
prepared to pay for social security, under conditions of economic crisis there is
less support for the welfare system (Sihvo & Uusitalo 1994, 1995a, 1995b). The
ranking of different problems also clearly reflected current statistics and
unemployment rates. In 1994 the respondents were quite unanimous in their view
that unemployment was the most prevalent problem of the country, but it was
ranked as having been only the eighth problem most prevalent problem the late
1980s. Table 1 also indicated that in the late 1980s unemployment in Finland was
161
at a very low level: it was not until the first half of the 1990s that the figure
climbed to almost half a million.
The problem of gender inequality was rated as less significant in 1994 than in the
late 1980s, when it ranked as the fifth most prevalent problem. The mean figures
of prevalence were roughly the same for both 1994 and for the late 1980s, but in
1994 it ranked as the least serious issue. By international comparison there are
indeed very few problems with gender inequality: Finland is rated amongst the
most progressive countries in the world in terms of gender equality, ranking
second in the world after Sweden (Acher 1996).
It seems that important advances have been made on the environmental front as
well. At the local level Finnish people pay increasing attention to waste
management, composting and recycling. In particular, attitudes towards recycling
have continued to improve (Lankinen 1995). Finland has also aimed to intensify
cooperation in this area with neighbouring countries. Indeed people in Finland are
clearly prepared and willing to do something about environmental pollution: a
large majority of the people are willing to see stricter limits imposed on
acceptable emission levels, even if this places an extra burden on business
companies. Two out of three Finns are of the opinion that the government should
introduce legislation that requires people to preserve the environment, even if this
affected people's freedom of choice (Sairinen 1996).
So in a retrospective analysis, the ranking of prevalent social problems has
changed during the past six years. It is noteworthy that at the latter point of
measurement in 1994, all issues except gender inequality were thought to have
been less prevalent six years ago; clearly there is a tendency for people to think
that ”things were better in the old days” (see Table 5). The social problems that
were thought to have increased most since the late 1980s were unemployment,
poverty, use of drugs and crime. The prevalence of none of the social problems
presented to the respondents — not even gender inequality — was thought to
have decreased to such an extent that the current situation could be described as
better. As Tables 3 and 4 indicated, the means of inequality problems were about
the same at both points of measurement, i.e. 4.7 in the late 1980s and 4.5 in 1994.
According to Table 5 the situation has not, however, improved to such an extent
that it can be described as being better. Neither has there been any significant
change with respect to environmental pollution, smoking, homelessness, poor
housing conditions and conflicts between different cultural and ethnic groups. In
all other problems the situation has clearly deteriorated.
Table 5 Comparison between current and previous prevalence of social
problems in Finland.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Difference in
mean values
Change 1)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Drug use
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Environmental pollution
Domestic violence
Immigration [of refugees/foreigners]
Poor public health
Poverty
Smoking
Prostitution
Unemployment
Gender inequality
Poor housing and homelessness
Social security and services
Problems between nationalities
and cultural groups
1.88
2.26
1.20
1.59
0.42
1.18
1.66
1.32
2.33
0.24
1.65
4.25
-0,20
0.53
1.59
For worse
For worse
For worse
For worse
No change
For worse
For worse
For worse
For worse
No change
For worse
For worse
No change
No change
For worse
0.85
No change
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
If the difference between the mean values is -1 or more, it is interpreted as a ”change for
the better”, i.e. the problem has not become more prevalent. If the difference between the
mean values is 1 or more, the interpretation is that the situation ”has changed for the
worse”. According to this interpretation, difference between the mean 0 means that ”the
problem has not changed” during the past six years.
A comparison of perceptions of the prevalence of social problems in 1994 and six
years previously gives a useful insight into public opinion on the epidemiological
side of social problems. The results show that at times of growth and prosperity,
Finnish people thought that social problems were less prevalent. However, the
recession that followed led to perceptions of increasing social problems. As Table
6 indicates, the respondents were more or less unanimous in their ranking of the
prevalence of unemployment and the threats presented by unemployment: almost
all respondents thought that unemployment had increased over the six-year period
concerned. Almost nine out of ten were of the opinion that crime against person,
drug use and poverty had clearly increased during the past six years. Although
prostitution was considered to be a very rare problem (mean 3.3), almost eight out
of ten respondents thought the situation had got worse.
Positive trends in public opinion are most clearly to be seen in perceptions of
environmental problems and gender inequality. Almost one in three respondents
thought that problems in these areas had decreased. Table 6 clearly illustrates how
public opinion varies in many cases. For example, the issue of smoking seems to
divide people into two groups of almost equal size: six out of ten Finns thought
there had been no changes in problems caused by smoking. It is important to bear
163
in mind, of course, that the youngest respondents in the study have not necessarily
had a very clear idea about what had happened in our country six years ago.
Table 6 Variation in opinions concerning changes in prevalence of social
problems in Finland.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
For better No change For worse
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person
Drug use
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Environmental pollution
Domestic violence
Immigration [of refugees/foreigners]
Poor public health
Poverty
Smoking
Prostitution
Unemployment
Gender inequality
Poor housing and homelessness
Social security and services
Problems between nationalities
and cultural groups
2.3
1.1
3.9
15.0
29.6
2.4
8.7
5.8
3.2
17.7
1.4
0.3
36.0
18.5
9.4
11.4
9.4
35.3
13.9
27.7
36.0
23.1
33.0
10.7
57.6
22.3
1.5
40.8
37.6
21.9
86.3
89.5
60.8
71.1
42.7
61.6
68.2
61.3
86.1
24.8
76.3
98.3
23.3
43.9
68.7
10.4
41.7
47.9
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
The most urgent social problems
The last dimension in the study of public perceptions of social problems has to do
with the need to resolve those problems, which according to constructionist ideas
is crucially important. Namely, no issue can be regarded as a social problem
unless some actors claim for its solution and define it a social problem (see
Spector & Kitsuse 1987; Best 1989, 250-251). Once they had ranked the
prevalence and seriousness of different issues, the respondents were asked to
identify three problems that they thought were in most urgent need of a solution.
As was pointed out earlier, unemployment was regarded both as the most
prevalent and the most serious social problem in Finland. The same issue came
out on top again in this analysis: 85% of the respondents included unemployment
among the three most urgent problems. Unemployment was followed by drug use,
pollution, economic crime and crime against person (Figure 3). Lack of social
services was another problem that was thought to call for an urgent solution.
Figure 3 Issues calling for an urgent solution in Finland in 1994.
It is noteworthy that use of drugs called for an urgent solution more often than,
for example, economic crime, although the latter was perceived as a more serious
and more prevalent problem than drug use. The result is also somewhat surprising
in view of the fact that drug use in Finland remains a rather marginal phenomenon
compared to alcohol consumption. Even so 41% of the respondents said that drug
use called for urgent measures compared to only 14% who said urgent steps were
needed to curb the use of alcohol. The urgency of the drug problem was
165
highlighted by young and old people more often than by middle-aged people.
Income level did not explain the respondents' views on the urgency of different
problems, not even when assessing the priority of poverty or unemployment. For
instance, the results did not lend very clear support to the assumption that people
with a low income would have considered poverty, unemployment and lack of
social services more important than people in the high income bracket.3
Social problems and positive trends in Finland
Mapping social problems
Each of the three dimensions of social problems — i.e. prevalence, seriousness
and urgency — were analysed separately to produce the following map of social
problems (see Figure 4).
The constructionist approach has it that an issue cannot be regarded as a social
problem unless there are people who are publicly calling for that problem to be
resolved and unless it is interpreted as a social problem. In other words, a social
problem does not exist only when a substantial number of individuals in a society
feel that something has gone wrong; it must also be seen as a condition that can
be remedied. Different sources of claims can be identified depending upon, for
example, how the claims are being made. Standard sources of claims include the
media, interviews with claims-makers, and public opinion polls which illustrate
the ranking of issues in the public hierarchy of the most important issues facing
the country (Best 1989, 250; Goode & Ben-Yehuda 1996, 88-91). The
respondents of the present study can thus be viewed as claims-makers.
3
The following figures clearly illustrate how small the differences were between
different income groups were: 83% of the respondents in the low income bracket,
86% of those in the middle income, and 88% of those in the high income bracket
said the problem of unemployment called for an urgent solution. Among
respondents with a low income, 16% said that poverty called for an urgent
solution, the corresponding proportion among respondents with a high income was
13%. As for views on social security and services, 21% in the low income group
and 18% in the high income group regarded this as an issue that needed to be
solved urgently.
Figure 4 A map of social problems1).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Rate
of
claimsmaking
Highly prevalent (median 7-9)
Less prevalent (median 1-6)
Highly serious Less serious
Highly serious Less serious
(median 7-9) (median 1-6)
(median 7-9) (median 1-6)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
High need
for solution
Medium need
for solution
Unemployment
Alcoholism and
drunkenness
Economic crime
Environmental
pollution
Drug abuse
Crime against Social security
person
and services
Domestic
Poverty
violence
Low need
for solution
Poor public
health
Smoking
Prostitution
Poor housing
Immigration [of
foreigners]
Problems
between
nationalities
Gender
inequality
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
1)
Problems mentioned by more than 30% of the respondents are classified as ”high
priority” (in terms of requiring a solution); those mentioned by 10-30% as ”medium
priority”; and those mentioned by less than 10% as ”low priority” problems.
Figure 4 shows how different issues are located on the map of social problems.
The definition of an issue as a social problem does not necessarily occur
unanimously. From an objectivist and functionalist point of view, the mere
existence and prevalence of conditions are emphasized. From a constructionist
point of view, the concern about an issue is essential, but it is a third aspect that is
the most important of all: claims for resolving the problem. Nevertheless, the
tradition of contextual constructionism does not only remain focused on claimsmaking processes and claims being made, but also allows assumptions to be made
about social conditions (Best 1989, 246-248). In the present study the results are
discussed from the point of view of contextual constructionism, considering the
social and cultural contexts of the issues, the role of the media and paying
attention to social conditions, too.
There are three different groups of issues in the map that deserve closer attention:
unemployment in the top left-hand corner of the map; environmental pollution
and drug use in the top right-hand corner of the map; and the biggest group of
167
problems in the lower right-hand corder of the map, which are less serious, less
prevalent and less urgent.
It emerges quite clearly from the results that unemployment is considered the
most important social issue in Finland, irrespective of how the questions were
formulated. It takes precedence over all other issues in terms of prevalence,
seriousness and urgency, and therefore deserves a cell of its own on the map of
social problems. The results also seem to be very much in line with official
unemployment figures. In the late 1980s, the unemployment rate stood at about
3%, and unemployment lagged far behind the problems that were regarded as the
most prevalent. At the time that the survey data were collected in 1994,
unemployment was at a higher level than ever since the early 1930s at 18%. In
1994, unemployment was such a common problem that it became easier for
people to admit that it affected also their own life — even though half of the
respondents felt that none of the problems facing the country influenced their own
life. People talked about and read in the newspapers about the economic crisis, the
steps taken to combat mass unemployment, the threat of job losses and the fates
of unemployed neighbours; this, inevitably, was reflected in public opinion polls
well. Especially towards the end of 1992, when the unemployment rates started to
climb, the issue became front-page news in the media and urgent solutions were
called for (Hanhinen & Järvinen 1996). Recession, economic crisis and poverty
are closely connected with unemployment in the sense that they have the same
kind of effect on people’s everyday life. They threaten the security and continuity
of livelihood and in this sense can be considered basic elements of life control. It
is also obvious that respondents have regarded unemployment as an issue which
causes other social problems and in the long run even social exclusion.
On the map of social problems, environmental pollution and drug use also appear
as issues that were considered to call for an urgent solution. These were also
regarded as highly serious problems, but in contrast to unemployment not as very
prevalent. Also in contrast to the unemployment issue, it is safe to assume that
awareness of environmental pollution and drug use is based on media reports
rather than first-hand experience. This interpretation may be supported by the fact
that these problems are perceived as less prevalent. Nevertheless, pollution and
environmental issues as well as drugs are all high-visibility issues in the media
(see e.g. Väliverronen 1996; Järvinen 1997a).
It is also interesting to look at perceptions of the urgency of the drug issue in
comparison with alcohol use. The map indicates that Finnish people perceived
alcohol problems as far more prevalent than drug problems, but calls for an urgent
solution were made much less often. From an epidemiological perspective, too,
alcohol-related harms by far exceed the harms related to drugs. Nevertheless as
far as concrete measures are concerned Finnish people rank drug issues
immediately after unemployment. It is indeed interesting to try to locate drug use
in relation to the alcohol issue.
As discussed earlier, drugs are a much more high profile issue in the media than
alcohol, even though drug use is quite a marginal phenomenon in Finland in
comparison with drinking. According to surveys carried out in 1992, only one per
cent of the total population had used cannabis during the past year, 5-6% had ever
used cannabis (Partanen 1994; Kontula 1995). In spite of this, or possibly because
of this, Finnish people take a very negative attitude towards drugs. Public opinion
is still clearly in favour of criminalization of drug use, and supports official policy
of the country (see Hakkarainen et al. 1996; Kontula & Koskela 1992). In the case
of alcohol the situation is almost the exact opposite: Finnish drinking habits are
very much influenced by spirit-drinking cultures and people often drink to
intoxication (Simpura et al. 1995). There is indeed reason to ask whether it is the
homogeneous drinking culture in the country that makes it easier for Finns to
accept the use of alcohol and alcohol problems and to assign drugs to the status of
a ”threatening Other” (Järvinen 1997a). The role of the media in this context will
be discussed later.
While at one end of the map we have the highly conspicuous problems of
unemployment, drug use and pollution, there is at the other extreme a large group
of less important issues: gender inequality, prostitution, poor housing conditions,
issues concerning nationalities, immigration, poor public health and smoking.
These issues differ clearly from the other problems on the map and are in fact
hard to define as social problems in the first place, at least on the criteria of claims
for a solution and perceived seriousness. They also appear to be secondary
problems in the sense that they are reported to appear only rarely and to be less
serious. None of these problems were mentioned in the open-ended questions.
They do not threaten or disturb the everyday life of Finnish people, and they are
very rarely subject to any claims. For this reason, at least from a constructionist
point of view, it is difficult to interpret these as social problems; they are minor,
marginal or invisible issues.
Between these two extremes there still remains a group of issues that deserve our
attention. The first issues are poverty and lack of social security and services,
which in Finland were perceived as less serious and less prevalent. In contrast to
the situation in many other countries around the Baltic Sea, poverty did not rank
among the most urgent problems. Indeed the present results on poverty are
somewhat surprising when compared to the findings of an opinion poll on poverty
and social exclusion in November 1993 (Heikkilä & Sihvo 1995, 34). That study
reported that poverty and exclusion, defined in subjective terms, are widespread
in Finland. The authors conclude that results generated by objective poverty
indicators (cf. Ritakallio 1994, 133) are at variance with Finnish citizens'
(surprisingly) strong subjective feelings of poverty or social exclusion. In the
early 1990s Finland was still a country with very low poverty figures (Ritakallio
1994, 186).
It is suggested that the low ranking received by poverty and lack of social security
and services in this study is explained by the fact that the welfare state still enjoys
169
widespread support among Finnish people. Despite mass unemployment, poverty
was not considered an urgent problem because of the highly efficient social
security system that is in place. However, there are signs of a more dramatic
change in this regard, with images of hungry people queuing for bread appearing
in the media (see e.g. Kontula & Koskela 1993; Heikkilä et al. 1994). The results
of a population survey show that 3% of all people in Finland are going hungry.
However, it has been argued that this figure does not reflect the true prevalence of
the problem, mainly because the poorest and homeless people as well as children
are not covered by the study (Kontula & Koskela 1994, 55). It has been shown
that among a growing minority of Finnish long-term unemployed, there is a
definite tendency for problems to accumulate. According to Kortteinen and
Tuomikoski (1998), long-term unemployment contributes to the accumulation of
vulnerability and deprivation, morbidity, social isolation, financial straits as well
as hunger. The results of the present survey suggest that in 1994, most of the
Finns were not hit by poverty. We can also assume that Finns were not yet used to
speaking about poverty and that the problem was not yet visible enough.
Nevertheless, among Finnish influential groups in spring 1995 unemployment and
poverty were seen as social problems par excellence as they afflict the whole
society and give rise to other social problems and eventually even to overall social
exclusion (Hanhinen & Törrönen 1998).
The location on the map of crime against person and domestic violence differs to
some extent from the situation in the other countries involved in the Baltica study.
It seems that in many other countries crime against person is regarded as a far
more serious and more prevalent problem than domestic violence and is perceived
as a very important issue. In Finland both issues proved to be highly serious, in
medium need of solution but still less prevalent. Until 1995, domestic violence
was an offence subject to private prosecution. As a result of changes introduced in
the Penal Code in autumn 1995, the public prosecutor has had to raise charges for
assault offences taking place in private homes. This change may go some way
towards explaining why Finnish people no longer regard domestic violence as
such a ”hidden” and ”private” problem.
Positive trends
Although the focal concern in the study was with social problems, the respondents
were also asked to identify what they regarded as positive trends in Finland and to
say how they thought these trends influenced their own life (open-ended
questions). On the country level unemployment, environmental problems and
economic problems were mentioned. Despite the wide range of problems
identified, six out of ten respondents also pointed to positive trends in Finland in
1994. In contrast to the problem map, there was no single outstanding trend
(Figure 5). Although Finnish people were concerned about unemployment and
economy, they did feel that the economy was beginning to show signs of
recovery: 15% believed that the recession would slow down and the labour
market situation improve. Roughly the same proportion of respondents were
optimistic about Finland's membership of the European Union, which was
expected to strengthen the country's economic situation, cut prices and make it
easier to travel, work and study abroad. As mentioned earlier, there was quite
heated debate in Finland during autumn 1994 as to whether or not Finland should
join the European Union. For some people it clearly promised a better future,
while others thought it represented a serious problem for the country.
Large numbers also said they were pleased to see the social security system in
place and working satisfactorily: rather than emphasizing the need to improve the
system, they were content at least to see that ”the social security system has not
yet been dismantled”. One in ten respondents mentioned some positive change in
terms of environmental protection (e.g. recycling). Men drew attention to positive
changes in the economy more often than women: for example, two out of ten men
referred to positive trends in the economy (21%) and EU membership (18%),
among women the corresponding proportion was one in ten (10 and 12%,
respectively). Women expressed their satisfaction with the maintenance of the
social security system clearly more often than men.
It is interesting to look at the breakdown of the responses on positive trends by the
respondents' income levels. Almost half (47%) of the respondents in the lowest
income group and one-third (35%) in the middle income group did not see any
positive changes. Unemployed people and pensioners seemed to have noticed less
positive changes than the working population. They also took a more reserved
attitude towards joining the EU: among respondents in the low income category,
for instance, only one in ten considered membership a positive thing. People in
the highest income bracket (and mainly with a high level of education) were most
confident in the recovery of the national economy. Only one in five of them
thought that there had been no positive trends in the country. In other words the
more privileged strata with a high level of education, in working age and in
gainful employment, had most faith in a positive future. A similar interpretation is
presented by Puohiniemi (1993), who in a rather gloomy portrayal of the future
says that people of working age and with a high level of education are the only
engines that will pull us through to the future, while all other groups will need
help and support to keep up.
Figure 5 Positive trends in Finland in 1994.
171
All in all six out of ten (61%) respondents felt there had been positive changes in
Finland. One in three (30%), however, said that these changes had had no real
impact on their own life (Figure 6). This is quite a surprising result: Culbertson
and Stempel (1985), for instance, have observed that people are inclined to
believe that negative events are less likely to happen to them than to others, while
positive events are more likely to happen to themselves than to others. The
present study, however, shows that at least in Finland people are more inclined to
highlight adverse effects and disadvantages and problems rather positive
developments. Those people who had noticed positive effects in their own life
said that the improvements in their personal situation were mainly attributable to
social security, economic recovery, membership of the EU and improvements in
terms of environmental protection. In general, women were more optimistic than
men in the sense that they identified more positive trends that had affected their
own life.
Figure 6 Positive trends affecting respondents' everyday life.
Discussion
This final chapter discusses some of the ways in which the results presented
above can be interpreted. As we have seen, it was easier for people in Finland to
identify problems facing the country than to pick out positive trends in
development. Unemployment overrode all the other problems, irrespective of how
the questions were formulated. Our respondents were also of the opinion that with
the exception of gender inequality, every social problem had been exacerbated
between the late 1980s and 1994.
Taken at face-value, this finding should hardly be surprising: the latter half of the
1980s was a period of strong economic growth and prosperity in Finland, in 1994
the country was in recession. However, studies based on official statistics have
shown that the period of growth in Finland from 1972 to 1991 was also marked
by an accumulation of social problems: with the exception of mental health
problems, all variables describing social problems correlated positively with the
country's improved economic situation (Narinen 1991, 93). Elsewhere,
Martikainen and Valkonen (1995) have reported that mortality rates in Finland
decreased in the early 1990s. Similarly, Heikkilä (1995) showed that in 19801995 economic growth tended to increase psychosocial problems, economic
depression decreased them.
Compared to these studies the present result goes in the opposite direction:
economic decline is accompanied by a perceived increase in the prevalence of
social problems. Direct comparisons between the findings of these studies are
obviously difficult since in the present study we used survey data, while the other
studies just mentioned were based on statistical materials.
Surveys describing public opinion, people's will, or even claims-making involve
some obvious shortcomings and drawbacks. Firstly, the concept of public opinion
and its relation to people's attitudes is not unanimous or indisputable. Public
173
opinion should not only be understood as a collection of people's attitudes and
opinions analysed by statistical techniques but as a socially structured entity
which is being formed and developed through hierarchic debate in a society
(Mäkelä 1977, 36). Secondly, as far as the formation of public opinion is
concerned, it is important to bear in mind that people do not normally carry
around with them fixed attitudes on which a public opinion poll happens to
inquire. When people are asked about issues that are familiar to them or that
interest them, it is more fair to assume that they will express an ”opinion” or their
”will”. The situation is different when they have to produce an opinion on a
question that they have not necessarily thought about. In the present study, for
example, it was clearly easy for the respondents to assess the prevalence and
seriousness of unemployment, whereas they tended to lack an opinion on
problems between nationalities and cultural groups as well as prostitution.
Another obvious problem with the opinion poll, as Bourdieu (1979) has shown, is
that the views of the uninformed, uninterested and isolated persons are given the
same value as the views and opinions of respondents who are committed and
informed. Yet another weakness in public opinion polls, especially with regard to
the analysis of claims-making for social problems, is the assumption that
everyone agrees on the questions and topics that are worth studying and asking. In
the present study, for example, we may ask whether in the forced-choice
questions it was appropriate to list unemployment, drugs and alcohol instead of
some other issues. We tried to avoid this problem by using both forced-choice and
open-ended questions, in which the respondents were free to mention whatever
issues they personally regarded as important.
It also emerges quite clearly that poll results are influenced by the framing and the
context of the study. Although the national economy was in a nosedive at the time
of the survey, our respondents identified environmental problems as a serious
concern. On the map of social problems environmental pollution ranked among
the most conspicuous social problems. This result conflicts with the finding of
earlier studies which have shown that at times of recession, people are less
inclined to pay attention to environmental issues. This may be explained in part
by the fact that our study was conducted in the context of a survey called
”Consumption, Knowledge, Attitudes, and Environmental Policy”. On the other
hand, it may be safely assumed that attitudes towards environmental issues are
really changing and that awareness of environmental problems and pollution are
really increasing. Our respondents identified certain positive trends in the
ecological domain as well.
The study also indicates that prevalent social problems are not necessarily
regarded as serious problems. A good example is provided by smoking. In 1994,
4
smoking ranked fourth on the list of most prevalent problems , yet it was not
4
See Table 3. In the map of social problems, however, smoking was classified as
less prevalent (median = 6).
mentioned in the open-ended questions at all; and on the list of the most serious
social problems, it was ranked seventh out of sixteen. It seems that our
respondents have made a clear distinction between prevalence and seriousness:
large numbers of people do smoke, but this is not a very serious issue, at least not
socially. And although it is a prevalent problem, it is not a significant one when
compared to certain other problems.
The results further suggest that when asked to assess the seriousness of social
problems, the respondents have to probe more deeply into their own feelings than
when they are assessing the prevalence of problems. At least the people who took
part in our pilot interviews said it was more ”neutral” to assess the prevalence of
problems. As for drug abuse and unemployment, that can be assessed
”objectively”, on the basis of statistics and unemployment figures. The definition
of a given issue as serious includes the perception of a problem as a threat or as a
source of insecurity for oneself or society at large. An interesting example
surfaced when we looked at serious problems facing Finland and serious social
problems in Finland. The results indicated that the way in which the questions
were presented and worded influenced on the ”contents” of public opinion. In this
study comparisons between the spontaneous answers to the open-ended questions
and the preset responses of the forced-choice questions were particularly
interesting. In the responses to the open-ended questions on serious problems
facing Finland, hardly any mention was made of smoking, alcohol, drugs and
crime. In the forced-choice questions, by contrast, alcohol, drugs and crime were
all ranked as serious social problems in Finland. We may assume that the
respondents had different patterns of thinking: in assessing serious social
problems, they may have asked themselves what it means if my children,
neighbours or I myself become addicted to alcohol or drugs, and what are the
implications of this to my own life and family.
Finally, it is a complicated task to describe how people form their opinions, or
how they translate their information about different issues into opinions. The role
of the media in this process is particularly interesting. There is of course a
considerable gap between what happens in society, what the media say and show,
and people’s awareness of these issues. The flow of information is quite immense,
and it is interesting to consider the question of how people pick out of this flow
those issues that they rate as highly serious. The respondents were presented with
a list of serious social problems, i.e. with ”all possible threats”. I assume that they
first selected the problem that was ”familiar to all”, i.e. unemployment, which is
also a recurring theme in the mass media. Then, they may have chosen another
level of mind-setting, ranking issues ”dealt with in the media”, including drugs
and crimes. The drugs problem was considered one that called for an urgent
solution. This might be explained by the fact that drugs often appear in the media,
and drug users are stereotypically portrayed as criminals, sometimes also as
victims (Järvinen 1997a).
175
The respondents' definition of alcohol and drugs as serious social issues may also
have been influenced by concerns of the potential harm caused to themselves or
their family. Of course, it is possible that the respondents have had in mind the
consumption figures and the detrimental effects of alcohol and drug use at the
level of society, as they did in their assessments of the prevalence of these
problems. However, it is more likely that the word ”social” has been associated
(as it often is in the Finnish language and culture) with social work, social
welfare, issues dealt with by social workers. The welfare and social security
system in Finland is quite extensive, and it also provides treatment and hands out
allowances to alcohol and drug abusers.
In this study I have used the concept of public opinion in a broad sense,
emphasizing the collective and structural nature of public opinion. For example,
the role of the mass media in the formation of public opinion and in the definition
of social problems is said to be increasing in Finland. The influence of the media
is indeed evident when we look at public opinion on the drugs issue, on which
people in Finland have had only very limited first-hand experience. Newspapers
have also been in favour of a more liberal alcohol policy, which may have been
reflected in public opinion on the availability of alcohol. At this juncture it needs
to be pointed out that there is only one genuine national newspaper in Finland and
that media ownership in the country is highly concentrated. There is consequently
very little movement in the coverage of drugs, but the tone and indeed sometimes
the contents of stories on drugs are quite similar to one another (see e.g. Järvinen
1997b). It is also clear that alcohol problems are more familiar to Finnish people
than are drug problems. However, the respondents did not claim for an urgent
solution of alcohol problems, as they did for drug problems. In newspapers drugs
tend to be represented as a strange and threatening element, as the Other opposed
to Us (Järvinen 1997a). On the basis of the present survey data it is unfortunately
not possible to know how drug problems are interpreted by the respondents, but
we may assume that the ranking of the drugs issue (and its conspicuous location
on the map of social problems) can be explained by reference to the homogeneous
cultural attitude towards drugs, which is supported by mainstream media coverage
loaded with stereotypical illustrations of drug users. Partanen (1998) has
described this kind of attitude as narcophobia.
The findings of the present study also confirm that public opinion cannot be
considered a straightforward response to ”facts” or objective conditions. Opinions
are more a mixture of, or considerations of ”facts”, information, beliefs,
experiences, and presumptions based on media reports, people's own experiences
as well as the cultural climate. The positive trends perceived in Finland, such as
the continued strength of the social security system, also affect people's opinions
on poverty, for example. On the map of social problems, poverty was defined as
being in medium need of solution, but it was regarded neither as a highly serious
nor as a highly prevalent social problem, not even by people in the low income
bracket. Nevertheless, the results also show that Finnish people believe the
prevalence of poverty is rapidly increasing. The relatively minor differences
observed between the opinions of young and old, and rich and poor respondents,
may at least partly be explained by income transfers and social security remaining
more or less unchanged in terms of coverage and level. This means that in 1994,
the differences between the poorest and richest strata were not as wide as they are
today and as they are in some other countries surrounding the Baltic Sea. New
patterns of social differentiation are emerging in Finland, although the country has
in many ways recovered from the deep recession. Blom et al. (1998) have noticed
that a considerable proportion of the economically active population has been
transformed into an economically inactive social group.
The coherence in opinions may also be due to a technical detail; questions were
asked about social problems in the country as a whole, not in the place of one's
residence or in the respondents' own life. On the other hand, the relatively
coherent perceptions of social problems among Finnish people can be partly
explained by the information published in the mass media, which shows us what
are the issues of current interest.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
Acher, John (1996): Women Move Forward to Total Equality. In: Socius — international
edition by Ministry of social affairs and health, pp. 6-7, 1/1996.
Ahlström, Salme; Haavisto, Kari; Metso, Leena & Tuovinen, Eeva Liisa (1996): The Use
and Availability of Legal and Illegal Drugs among Finnish 15-year-old School
Children. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Epidemiology Symposium of the Kettil
Bruun Society for Social and Epidemiological Research on Alcohol, Edinburgh,
Scotland, June 3-7, 1996.
Aromaa, Kauko & Heiskanen, Markku (1992): Rikosten uhrit 1992. Kansainvälisen
uhritutkimuksen ennakkotietoja Suomesta (Victims of crimes in 1992. International
study on victims, preliminary results from Finland). Oikeuspoliittisen tutkimuslaitoksen tutkimustiedonantoja 1/1992. Helsinki.
Best, Joel (1989): Images of issues. Typifying contemporary social problems. Walter de
Gruyter Inc., New York.
Blom, Raimo et al. (1998): Conclusions: the changing Finnish Model. In: Blom, Raimo &
Melin, Harri, eds.: Economic Crisis, Social Change and New Social Divisions in
Finland. Series A/29. Department of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of
Tampere.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1979): Public opinion does not exist. In: Mattelart, A. & Siegelaub, S.,
eds.: Communication and class struggle, Vol. 1, pp. 124-130. International General,
New York.
Culbertson, Hugh M. & Stempel, Guido H. (1985): ”Media Malaise”: Explaining Personal
Optimism and Societal Pessimism about Health Care. Journal of Communication, 2,
180-190.
177
Ervasti, Heikki & Kangas, Olli (1994): Ammattiryhmät ja hyvinvointivaltio (Occupational
groups and the welfare state). University of Turku, Department of Social Policy,
Working Papers 3.
Ervasti, Heikki & Kangas, Olli (1995): Class Bases of Universal Social Policy: Pension
Policy Attitudes in Finland. European Journal of Political Research, 2, 27, 347-367.
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (1996): After the Golden Age? Welfare State Dilemmas in a
global economy. In: Esping-Andersen, Gøsta, ed.: Welfare States in Transition.
National Adaptations in Global Economics. Sage Publications, London.
EVA (1985): Murros vai muutos? Raportti suomalaisesta mielipideilmastosta (Crisis or
change? Report on Finnish public opinion).
EVA (1987): Avautuva vai sulkeutuva Suomi? Raportti suomalaisten asenteista 1987
(Finland — opening or closing? A report on the attitudes of Finnish people in 1987).
EVA (1993): Kansa tienhaarassa. Raportti suomalaisten asenteista 1993 (A people at a
crossroads. A report on the attitudes of Finnish people in 1993).
EVA (1995): Epävarmuuden aika. Matkalla uuteen. Raportti suomalaisten asenteista
1995. (A time of uncertainty — towards new times. A report on the attitudes of
Finnish people in 1995).
Forma, Pauli (1998): Mielipiteiden muutos ja pysyvyys. Suomalaisten mielipiteet
hyvinvointivaltiosta, sosiaaliturvasta ja hyvinvointipalveluista vuosina 1992 ja 1996
(Change and stability of opinions. Public opinion on the welfare state, social security
and welfare services in Finland in 1992 and 1996). Stakes. Raportteja 222. Gummerus
Kirjapaino Oy, Saarijärvi.
Goode, Erich & Ben-Yehuda, Nachman (1994): Moral Panics: The Social Construction of
Deviance. Blackwell.
Hakkarainen, Pekka; Hübner, Lena; Laursen, Lau & Ødegård, Einar (1996): Drug use and
public attitudes in the Nordic countries. In: Hakkarainen, Pekka; Laursen, Lau &
Tigerstedt, Christoffer, eds.: Discussing drugs and control policy. Comparative studies
on four Nordic countries. NAD Publication No. 31, pp. 125-164. Helsinki.
Hanhinen, Sari (1994): Sosiaalisten ongelmien, erityisesti päihdeongelmien, määrittely
lehdistössä valtakunnallisella, paikalllisella ja lähipaikallisella tasolla (Defining Social
Problems, with Special Reference to Alcohol and Drug Problems in Newspapers at the
National and Local Level). Sosiaalipolitiikan pro gradu-tutkielma. Helsingin yliopisto.
Huhtikuu 1994.
Hanhinen, Sari & Järvinen, Saija (1996): Social Problems in Media and in Public Opinion
Polls. Views on Alcohol and Drug Problems in Finland. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the Society for the Study of Social Problems. New York, August 15-17.
Hanhinen, Sari & Törrönen, Jukka (1998): Views on social problems among influential
groups in Finland. In: Hanhinen, Sari & Törrönen, Jukka, eds.: Journalists,
administrators and business people on social problems. A study around the Baltic Sea.
NAD Publication No. 35, pp. 59-85. Helsinki.
Heikkilä, Matti (1995): Sosiaalisten ongelmien ja taloudellisen muutoksen välisestä
yhteydestä (On the relationship between social problems and economic change).
Talous & Yhteiskunta, nro 3, 3-13.
Heikkilä, Matti; Hänninen, Sakari; Karjalainen, Jouko; Kontula, Osmo & Koskela, Kaj
(1995): Nälkä (Hunger). Stakes. Sosiaali- ja terveysalan tutkimus- ja kehittämiskeskus.
Raportteja 153. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy, Jyväskylä.
Heikkilä, Matti & Sihvo, Tuire (1995): European Opinions of Poverty and Social
Exclusion. Stakes. Themes 4/1995. Helsinki.
Heiskanen, Markku (1991): Omaisuusrikokset 1988. Haastattelututkimus henkilöön
kohdistuneista omaisuusrikoksista (Crimes against property. An interview study with
victims of crimes against property). Oikeus 1991:3. Tilastokeskus. Helsinki.
Heiskanen, Markku; Aromaa, Kauko; Niemi, Hannu; Ruusinen, Anneli & Siren, Reino
(1990): Tapaturmat ja väkivalta 1988 (Accidents and violence in 1988). Oikeus
1990:7. Tilastokeskus. Helsinki.
Heiskanen, Markku (1996): Suomalaisten pelot. Hyvinvointi ja turvattomuuden
kokeminen (The fears of Finnish people. Welfare and experiences of insecurity). In:
Ahlqvist, Kirsti & Ahola, Anja: Elämän riskit ja valinnat — hyvinvointia lama-ajan
Suomessa? (Risks and choices of life — welfare in Finland during recession). Edita.
Tilastokeskus, Helsinki.
Hilgartner, Stephen & Bosk, Charles L. (1988): The Rise and Fall of Social Problems: A
Public Arenas Model. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 94, Number 1. July.
Ibarra, Peter R. & Kitsuse, John I. (1993): Vernacular Constituents of Moral Discourse:
An Interactionist Proposal for the Study of Social Problems. In: James A. Holstein,
James, A. & Miller, Gale, eds.: Reconsidering Social Constructionism. Debates in
Social Problems Theory. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.
Jaakkola, Magdaleena (1989): Suomalaisten suhtautuminen ulkomaalaisiin ja
ulkomaalaispolitiikkaan. (Attitudes of Finns towards foreigners and policies on
immigrants.) Valtion painatuskeskus. Työvoimaministeriö. Suunnitteluosasto.
Siirtolaisuustutkimuksia 21. Helsinki.
Jaakkola, Magdaleena (1993): Suomalaisten ulkomaalaisasenteet 1980- ja 1990-luvuilla.
Ennakkotietoja tutkimuksesta (Attitudes of Finns towards foreigners in the 1980s and
1990s. Preliminary results). Työministeriö. Työpoliittinen tutkimus 60. Hakapaino Oy,
Helsinki.
Jaatinen, Jaana (1998): Koulun huumeongelma lehdistön retorisena tuotoksena (School
drug problem as a rhetorical product in tabloids). In: Jaatinen, Jaana et al.: Huumeet ja
kouluyhteisö (Drugs and a school community. A constructionistic case study). Stakes
Research report 91. Helsinki.
Jallinoja, Riitta (1993): Arvojen ambivalenssit (The ambivalencees of values). In:
Andersson, Jan Otto; Hautamäki, Antti; Jallinoja, Riitta; Niiniluoto, Ilkka & Uusitalo,
Hannu: Hyvinvointivaltio ristiaallokossa (The welfare state under cross pressures).
SITRA:n julkaisusarja (nro 131) WSOY, Juva.
Järvinen, Saija (1997a): Rhetorics of drug issue in a Finnish afternoon tabloid.
Constructing the drug problem. Alcologia. European Journal of Alcohol Studies. Vol.
IV, No. 3, September-October, 195-205.
179
Järvinen, Saija (1997b): Huumausainepolitiikka ei herättänyt keskustelua (The drug policy
didn't cause any discussion). Alkoholipolitiikka, Vol. 62, No. 5, 395-397.
Järvinen, Saija (1998): Alcohol in Finnish newspapers - contexts of restrictive and liberal
arguments. paper presented at the 24th Annual Alcohol Epidemiology Symposium of
the kettil bruun Society for Social and Epidemiological Research on Alcohol,
Florence, Italy, June 1-5.
Kaukonen, Olavi & Halmeaho, Matti (1998): Yhteisellä asialla? Lehtien huumausainekirjoittelu syksyllä 1996 (Common interests? Newspaper articles on drugs in Autumn
1996). In: Jaatinen, Jaana; Kaukonen, Olavi; Warsell, Leena; Halmeaho, Matti &
Ahtola, Raija, eds.: Huumeet ja kouluyhteisö (Drugs and school community. A
constructionist case study). Stakes Research report 91. Helsinki.
Kontula, Osmo (1995): The Prevalence of Drug Use with Reference to Problem Use in
Finland. The International Journal of the Addictions, 30(8), 1053-1066.
Kontula, Osmo & Koskela, Kaj (1992): Huumeiden käyttö ja mielipiteet huumeista:
Suomi ja Eurooppa vertailussa (Drug Use and Opinions on Drugs: Comparing Finland
and Europe). Publications of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 8/1992.
Helsinki. Valtion painatuskeskus.
Kontula, Osmo & Koskela, Kaj (1995): Ketkä Suomessa kokevat nälkää ja mistä syystä?
(Who in Finland are going hungry and why?) In: Heikkilä, Matti; Hänninen, Sakari;
Karjalainen, Jouko; Kontula, Osmo & Koskela, Kaj: Nälkä (Hunger). Stakes.
Raportteja 153. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy, Jyväskylä.
Kontula, Osmo & Koskela, Kaj (1993): Taloudellisen laman terveysvaikutuksia 19921993 (Recession and its health effects 1992-1993). Sosiaali- ja terveysministeriön
julkaisuja 1993:10. Painatuskeskus Oy, Helsinki.
Kortteinen, Matti (1992): Kunnian kentät. Suomalainen palkkatyö kulttuurisena muotona
(Finnish wage labour as a cultual form). Hanki ja Jää, Hämeenlinna.
Kortteinen, Matti & Tuomikoski, Hannu (1998): Työtön. Tutkimus pitkäaikaistyöttömien
selviytymisestä. (Unemployed. A study of the coping strategies of long-term
unemployed people). Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi. Hanki ja Jää, Helsinki.
Kosonen, Pekka (1997): Eurooppalaiset hyvinvointivaltiot. Yhdentymistä ja hajaantumista
(European welfare states. Integration and disintegration). Gaudeamus. Tammer-paino
Oy, Tampere.
Lagerspetz, Mikko, ed. (1994): Social problems in newspapers. Studies around the Baltic
Sea. NAD Publication No. 28. Helsinki.
Lankinen, Markku (1995): Ympäristöasenteet Helsingissä vuonna 1994. (Attitudes
towards the environment in Helsinki in 1994). Helsingin kaupungin tietokeskuksen
tutkimuksia 13. Helsinki.
Manis, Jerome G. (1976): Analyzing Social Problems. Praeger Publishers, New York.
Martikainen, Pekka & Valkonen, Tapani (1996): Lama ja ennenaikainen kuolleisuus
(Recession and premature mortality). Tilastokeskus.
Melkas, Jussi: Vaikuttajat tähyävät Eurooppaan — kansa murehtii asuntoja ja työllisyyttä
(Political leaders have their views set on Europe; ordinary people are worried about
jobs and housing). Tietoaika 6/1991.
Mäkelä, Klaus (1977): Alkoholipoliittisen mielipideilmaston vaihtelut Suomessa 1960- ja
1970-luvuilla (The changing public opinion on alcohol policy in Finland in 1960s and
the 1970s). Sosiaalipolitiikka 1977. Sosiaalipoliittisen yhdistyksen vuosikirja.
Narinen, Lasse (1993): Taloudellinen muutos ja sosiaaliset ongelmat Suomessa 19721991 (Economic change and social problems in Finland in 1972-1991). Sosiologian
pro gradu-tutkielma. Helsingin kauppakorkeakoulu.
Niemelä, Pauli, ed. (1991): Turvattomuus, sen syyt ja hallintakeinot eri ikävaiheissa
(Insecurity, its causes and ways of coping in different ages). Kuopion yliopiston
julkaisuja. Yhteiskuntatieteet 3/1991. Kuopio.
Partanen, Juha (1994): Märkä pilvi (Wet High). Alkoholipolitiikka 59(1994): 6.
Partanen, Juha (1998): Narcophobia. An obstacle to reasonable drug policies. A paper
presented at the 9th Annual Conference on Drug Use and Drug Policy, Palma de
Mallorca, October 1-2.
Peltoniemi, Teuvo (1995): Children in Alcohol and Drug Abusing Families in Finland.
International Conference on Social and Health Effects of Different Drinking Patterns.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, November 13-17.
Piispa, Matti (1993): Mistä puhumme, kun puhumme alkoholiongelmasta.
Alkoholiongelmaa ja alkoholipolitiikkaa koskevat määritelmät 1950-1990 (What are
we talking about when we talk about alcohol problems? Defining alcohol problems
and alcohol policy in 1950-1990). Lisensiaatintutkimus, Tampere.
Puohiniemi, Martti (1993): Suomalaisten arvot ja tulevaisuus. Analyysi väestön ja
vaikuttajien näkemyksistä (Finnish values and the future. An analysis of the views of
ordinary people and opinion leaders). Valtioneuvoston kanslian julkaisusarja 5/1993.
Tilastokeskuksen julkaisuja 202.
Pöntinen, Seppo & Uusitalo, Hannu (1988): Stability and Change in the Public Support
for the Welfare State, Finland 1975-1985. International Journal of Sociology and
Social Policy, 8, 1-24.
Raunio, Kyösti (1984): Taloudellinen kehitys ja hyvinvointiongelmat Suomessa vuosina
1950-1980 (Economic development and welfare problems in Finland 1950-1980).
Sosiaalipolitiikan julkaisuja. Turun yliopisto 4:1984.
Ritakallio, Veli-Matti (1994): Köyhyys Suomessa 1981-1990. (Poverty in Finland 19811990). Stakes. Tutkimuksia 39. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy, Jyväskylä.
Sairinen, Rauno (1996): Suomalaiset ja ympäristöpolitiikka (Finnish people and
environmental policy). Tilastokeskus. Tutkimuksia 217. Helsinki.
Seppänen, Susanna (1991): Rikoksen pelko (Fear of crime). Oikeus 1991: 2.
Tilastokeskus. Helsinki.
181
Sihvo, Tuire & Uusitalo, Hannu (1993): Mielipiteiden uudet ulottuvuudet. Suomalaisten
hyvinvointivaltiota, sosiaaliturvaa sekä sosiaali- ja terveyspalveluja koskevat asenteet
vuonna 1992 (Attitudes in Finland towards the welfare state, social security and
welfare and health services). Stakes. Tutkimuksia 33. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy,
Jyväskylä.
Sihvo, Tuire & Uusitalo, Hannu (1994): The Impact of Economic Crisis on Public
Support for the Welfare State. National Research and Development Centre for Welfare
and Health. Themes 7/1994.
Sihvo, Tuire & Uusitalo, Hannu (1995a): Attitudes towards the welfare state have several
dimensions. Scandinavian Journal of Social Welfare, 4, 215-223.
Sihvo, Tuire & Uusitalo, Hannu (1995b): Economic crises and support for the welfare
state in Finland 1975-1993. Acta Sociologica, 38, 251-262.
Simpura, Jussi (1987): Finnish Drinking Habits. Results from Interview Surveys Held in
1968, 1976 and 1984. The Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies. Volume 35.
Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy, Jyväskylä.
Simpura, Jussi (1991): Kuka päättää, mitkä ovat sosiaalisia ongelmia? (Who decides what
are social problems?). Sosiaalinen aikakauskirja 85 (1), 6-7, 11.
Simpura, Jussi; Paakkanen, Pirjo & Mustonen, Heli (1995): New beverages, new drinking
contexts? Signs of modernization in Finnish drinking habits from 1984 to 1992,
compared with trends in the European Community. Addiction, 90, 673-683.
Simpura, Jussi & Tigerstedt, Christoffer, eds. (1992): Social Problems around the Baltic
Sea. NAD Publication No. 21. Helsinki.
Skretting, Astrid; Hakkarainen, Pekka; Laursen, Lau & Olsson, Börje (1996): Reporting
on drugs in Nordic newspapers. In: Hakkarainen, Pekka; Laursen, Lau & Tigerstedt,
Christoffer, eds.: Discussing drugs and control policy. Comparative studies on four
Nordic countries. NAD Publication No. 31, pp. 109-122. Helsinki.
Spector, Malcom & Kitsuse, John I. (1987): Constructing Social Problems. Aldine de
Gruyter, New York.
Suhonen, Pertti (1994): Mediat, me ja ympäristö. (The media, us and the environment.)
Kustannusosakeyhtiö Hanki ja Jää. Helsinki. Tammer-paino Oy, Tampere.
Tikkanen, Jorma; Paavola, Meri & Koskela, Kaj (1991): Suomalaisten käsitykset
ympäristön terveydelle aiheuttamista vaaroista (Finns' opinions on health hazards
presented by the environment). Suomen Lääkärilehti 46 (27), 2531-2537.
Turunen, Merja-Maaria, ed. (1996): Kun kaikki on kaupan... Prostituution
asiantuntijatyöryhmän raportti (When everything's for sale... An expert report on
prostitution). Stakes. Raportteja 190. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy, Saarijärvi.
Uusitalo, Hannu (1995): The Future of the Finnish Welfare State. National Research and
Development Centre for Welfare and Health.
Uusitalo, Hannu (1996): Economic Crisis and Social Policy in Finland in the 1990s.
SPRC Discussion Paper Series. No. 70. October.
Uusitalo, Liisa (1986): Suomalaiset ja ympäristö. Tutkimus taloudellisen käyttäytymisen
rationaalisuudesta (Finns and the environment. A study on the rationality of economic
behaviour). Acta Academicae Oeconomicae Helsingiensis. Series a:49. The Helsinki
School of Economics. Helsinki.
Väliverronen, Esa (1996): Ympäristöuhkan anatomia. Tiede, mediat ja metsän
sairaskertomus (The anatomy of the environmental threat. Science, media and
environmental problems). Osuuskunta Vastapaino. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy,
Jyväskylä.
Österberg, Esa (1998): Public attitudes towards alcohol systems in Finland. A paper
presented at the 42nd ICAA International Institute on the Prevention and Treatment of
Dependencies, Alcohol Policy Section. Malta, August 30-September 4.
183
Annex 1
Data
A stratified random sample of 2,164 persons aged 17 years or over was recruited
for interview by Statistics Finland in October and December 1994. The survey
yielded 1,614 usable interviews, with 502 refusals and 48 potential respondents
not contacted. This represents an effective response rate of 76.3%. The sample is
representative with regard to age, sex and region.
The data were collected directly from the respondents in face-to-face interviews
in their homes. The average duration of one interview was one and a half hours.
Questionnaire
To avoid confounding country differences with differences in data collection, we
employed similar procedures in all countries except Sweden. With only a few
minor exceptions, all countries employed identical questionnaires with the same
questions, question order and response formats. Contrary to Poland, Latvia,
Lithuania, St. Petersburg, and Estonia, in Finland no questions were asked about
problems in the respondents' place of residence. The omission was based on the
findings of a pilot questionnaire, according to which problems at the level of place
of residence were almost identical with those at the country level. In several other
countries local and general problems seem to differ from one another quite
markedly.
Two points need to be borne in mind in the interpretation of the results. Firstly,
the consultative referendum held in autumn 1994 on Finland's membership of the
European Union was a topical issue of public debate, which is inevitably reflected
in the results of the study, particularly in responses concerning positive trends in
the country. Secondly, the study was carried out as part of a survey called
”Consumption, Knowledge, Attitudes, and Environmental Policy”. All the
questions relevant to the Baltica study were asked at the very beginning of the
interview, after about 10 questions concerning the interviewee’s background. We
also added some questions concerning the mass media and the acceptability of the
welfare state ideology. Some additional, country-specific questions were also
asked.
The pilot questionnaire indicated that in some cases it was difficult for the
respondents to distinguish between the prevalence and seriousness of an issue.
We therefore decided to try and make the task easier by giving an example: ”In
the autumn the flu may be perceived as quite prevalent, but not necessarily as
very serious”. This example was given only when the respondents did not seem to
be quite sure what was meant by prevalence.
185
Threatening problems
in a welfare state
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Lena Hübner
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Introduction
This study is concerned with the public perception in Sweden of what are
regarded as threatening social problems. Drawing on the theoretical perspective
applied in the Baltica study, it can be argued that public perception forms an
integral part of the claims-making process which creates the basic conditions for
the making of a ”public/social problem” (e.g. Spector & Kitsuse 1987). Survey
results thus become part of the collective process of producing and defining
”social problems” (Blumer 1971).
Our survey was conducted in spring 1995. In one of the questions the respondents
were presented with a list of ten different items and asked to say to what extent
they were felt to represent a threat. The responses are here discussed in
connection with a brief overview of the prevalence of these ”problems” in spring
1995.
Notes on the political, economic and social background in
Sweden
After three years of conservative dominance, the Social Democratic Labour Party
(SAP) regained political power in Swedish Parliament in 1994. In the run-up to
the elections, the focus of debate was firmly on economic issues. Furthermore,
with the forthcoming referendum in November 1994 on Swedish membership of
the European Union, there was also much public debate in Sweden on various EU
issues during autumn 1994.
The Swedish welfare system is commonly regarded as the prime example of
universalistic welfare policy, the home of the ”social democratic model” (EspingAndersen 1990). The main responsibility for citizens' security and living
conditions rests with the state. Other distinctive characteristics of this ideal-type
model are the extensive public sector (the production and distribution of welfare
services are financed and administered by the state), high taxes and high
ambitions to minimize unemployment.
187
These characteristics identified by Esping-Andersen in his model are no doubt
applicable to the Swedish welfare system today, even though there has not been
complete consensus in defining Sweden as an example of a general welfare
model. In Sweden almost all benefits within the social security system are related
to the individual's position in the labour market rather than to citizenship. This, it
has been argued, is an indication of the fact that the welfare system reflects the
inequality prevailing in the labour market. In this regard the Swedish welfare
system may be said to have a ”dual structure”, creating two groups of citizens
who are differently placed in relation to the welfare system. Those with a stable
position in the labour market are relatively safe in the event of illness, for
instance, whereas those in marginal or unstable labour market positions are
marginalized, or may even be excluded, in relation to the general social security
system (Marklund & Svallfors 1987).
In addition to the ”general” welfare system, Sweden also has in place a selective
system with means-tested benefits administered by social workers, i.e. a social
assistance system. In the legal framework regulating this system, it is stated that
the benefits will only be available as a last resort.
Recent developments
The Swedish model came under serious reconsideration during the 1980s (e.g.
Hugemark 1995), and since the beginning of the 1990s a number of steps have
been taken to reduce public funding for the general social security system. This
means that in the event of illness or unemployment, the individual's own
resources have assumed increasing importance. Changes have also been made to
the social assistance system, and it is expected that the level of the cash benefits
handed out will be reduced.
One of the main arguments for the need to cut back on public sector spending is
the high level of state debt, which for the main part (approx. 70%) consists of
money borrowed from Swedish banks and companies. In spring 1995, state debt
stood at SEK 1,346 billion (SCB 1994), representing a good 80% of that year's
1
GNP. The state debt is the most common argument for austerity packages aimed
at reducing public financing.
The number of people out of work in the age group 16-64 years in the first
quartile of 1995 was 329,000 (7.8%) (Statistiska meddelanden). Just six years
previously in 1989, the figure was 67,000 (SCB 1995). At the same time, 240,000
people were involved in various of government-subsidized programmes,
1
By 31 March 1995, one had to pay SEK 7.28 for one USD.
including labour training schemes.2 Swedish unemployment policy has
traditionally favoured these kinds of programmes to encourage active
participation instead of just paying out unemployment benefits. As a result of this
policy the official unemployment rate has not given a fully accurate picture of the
true situation.
Unemployment costs the government a lot of money. The central government
budget for the fiscal year 1994/95 shows that out of the total revenue of SEK 423
billion, SEK 109 billion was spent on the treatment of unemployment
(Riksrevisionsverket 1995).
The number of people depending on social assistance is growing (now amounting
to approx. 700,000 people) and so are the costs of the social assistance system. In
1995 the total sum of cash benefits paid out exceeded SEK 10 billion
(Socialstyrelsen 1996a). These two phenomena could be interpreted as effects of
the decisions taken by the political parties to introduction cutbacks in the general
social security system, forcing people to turn to the residual, means-tested system
of social assistance.
There are certain groups in Sweden who are at greater risk of marginalization at
times of high unemployment and cutbacks in public expenditure. These groups
include single mothers (the number of single fathers is very low), (non-Nordic)
immigrants and young people in unstable labour market positions.
Crime against person
The total number of crimes reported to the police in 1994 was about 1.1 million, a
high figure by international standards. This figure can be interpreted in different
ways. Firstly, it is based on the obvious reason of reporting, namely that a crime
has been committed (excluding cases of false reporting whose purpose is, for
instance, to cheat money from an insurance company). Secondly, the number of
crimes reported to the police is related to the level of confidence shown by
citizens in the police and the legal system, i.e. to the perceived legitimacy of the
justice system. Thirdly, the high number of reported crimes could be explained by
a high degree of criminalization in a society, with a large number of actions
defined as criminal. However, an exploration of the origins of the high crime rate
in Sweden is beyond the scope of this paper.
Crime against person, and particularly violent crime, gets a lot of coverage in
newspapers. The number of murders or man-slaughters reported to the police in
1994 was 155; the mean annual figure for the ten-year period up to 1994 was 135.
2
Arbetsmarknadsstyrelsen, telephone interview, 9 September 1996.
189
The number of reported violent offences has increased six-fold since the 1950s,
from 8,662 in 1950 to 53,537 in 1993, which is almost 60 violent crimes per
10,000 population.
In 1993 children aged 0 to 14 years were victims in 6% (3,365 cases) of all
assaults. The corresponding figure for female victims was 35% (17,928 cases)
(Folkhälsoinstitutet 1995).
The number of crimes against property was 803,333.
3
Domestic violence
Assault and battery against women or children is treated in the Swedish Penal
Code in the same way as any other type of violent crime. It is very difficult to
assess the prevalence of domestic violence. Criminal statistics say nothing about
the relationship between the victim and the offender. In 1993 the National
Institute of Public Health reported that a total of 17,928 women were battered and
that 78% of these women knew their offender. Given the special nature of
offences in which the offender and the victim know each other, perhaps even live
together, it is reasonable to assume that these kinds of crimes are
underrepresented in criminal statistics. Documents from women's shelters show
that only 40% of women who had stayed in the shelters (1,614 women in 1993)
had reported their offender to the police. In recent years, between 25 and 47
women have died each year as a result of murder, man-slaughter or battering
(Folkhälsoinstitutet 1995).
Environmental pollution
One of the biggest environmental problems in Sweden, as in many other industrial
countries, is represented by emissions from motor vehicles. Cars play a very
major role indeed as a source of atmospheric pollution. Steps have been taken to
reduce industrial pollution and the situation seems less threatening than in many
other countries, but private cars remain a serious threat to the environment.
Another area of concern is the Baltic Sea. In Sweden, the main source of
problems is the agricultural use of fertilizers, which also affect the deep-sea
environment.
Other environmental issues that have attracted attention in the public debate in
Sweden include the depletion of the ozone layer as well as the risks of nuclear
3
The numbers concern crimes reported to the police (BRÅ 1995).
energy, although interest in the latter question seems to have dwindled during the
1990s.
Substance abuse
Patterns of alcohol consumption in Sweden are quite similar to those found in
other West European countries. Consumption increased after World War II but
stabilized in the mid-1970s. The per capita sales figures show that in 1994,
consumers bought 6.28 litres of 100% alcohol (CAN 1995). Changes in the levels
of alcohol consumption during the 1980s and 1990s can partly be explained by
shifts in beverage preferences. Sales of spirits have decreased sharply in recent
decades, from 3.88 litres in 1976 to 1.71 litres in 1994. At the same time, the sale
of wines has shown steady growth, increasing by 137% between 1966 and 1994.
These figures do not cover total consumption, however. Unrecorded consumption
is estimated at 30% of the official sales figures, including home-made beers,
wines and spirits, consumption during travel abroad, travellers' imports and
smuggling.
It is difficult to assess the prevalence of alcohol abuse; the same goes for the
assessment of alcohol-related injuries and harm. It is estimated that each year
about 5,000 Swedes die as a consequence of alcohol-related diseases or accidents
(Jarlbro 1995). Some indicators (both legal and medical) can be used to illustrate
recent trends in alcohol related damage. Liver cirrhosis is regarded as a fairly
reliable medical measure of alcohol-related damage (Ågren & Jacobsson 1986).
The number of cases in which liver cirrhosis was an underlying cause of death
(including cases that are not alcohol-related) has increased during the post-war
period from 227 cases in 1953 to 632 cases in 1992 (CAN 1995).
It is interesting to compare these Swedish rates for deaths caused by liver
cirrhosis with the figures from some other countries. In 1991, the rate in Finland
was 11.1 cases per 100,000 population. Poland was slightly ahead of Finland
(11.8), while Sweden (1990) was at a clearly lower level (7.6). On the other hand,
the figures are markedly higher in Italy (27.7 in 1989), Portugal (26.9 in 1991)
and Germany (22.8 in 1990).
In 1994 the police took into custody an intoxicated person some 80,000 times
(Law on Custody of Intoxicated Persons, LOB). The figure has been decreasing
since 1985 when it stood at 96,712 cases, but between 1992 and 1994 there was a
rise from 67,644 to 79,848. The number of drunken-driving offences has slightly
declined in recent years, from 308 per 100,000 population in 1987 to 278 in 1993.
Swedish statistics make a distinction between two types of drug use: experimental
use, which involves trying drugs a couple of times, and regular heavy drug abuse.
Results from school surveys and studies among military conscripts are used as
191
indicators of the former category. In the early 1970s, approximately 14% of pupils
in the ninth form (16-17 years) reported that they had tried drugs at least once.
This proportion decreased to 5% by 1983 and has continued to decline since then.
The figure increased slightly in 1993, with 5% of boys and 4% of girls saying
they had tried drugs that year. The proportion of pupils currently on drugs is
around or below one per cent. As for military conscripts (aged 18-20), the
proportion reporting that they used drugs decreased from 16% in 1982 to 6% in
1988. In 1994, it had increased to about 9%.
According to surveys in the population aged 18-70 years, the proportion reporting
that they have ever used drugs (at least once) varies between 6 and 11%. Among
those aged 30-49, who were very much exposed to cannabis and other drugs in
their youth during the 1960s and 1970s, the proportion is about 10-15%.
The latest estimate of the number of heavy drug users in Sweden is between
14,000 and 20,000 (Olsson et al. 1993). However, it should bo noted that ”heavy
users” here includes not only intravenous drugs abusers but also people who
smoke cannabis on a daily, or a more or less daily basis.
Cocaine use in Sweden is largely confined to younger people in the biggest cities.
There is no evidence that cocaine has spread either among heavy drug users or
”ordinary people”. Amphetamine has traditionally been the dominant drug among
intravenous abusers in Sweden. Since the mid-1970s heroin has emerged as the
second biggest drug among intravenous users. In recent years the recruitment of
new heroin abusers has been at a fairly low level.
There are some indications of an increase in drug abuse. Some reports say that
young people are now taking a more lenient attitude towards cannabis, which
could be one explanation for the small increase observed among pupils. Another
tendency in socially marginalized youth groups is recruitment to heavy drug
abuse. One ”new” phenomenon in this context is the use of smoke-heroin (brown
heroin). Although the number of newly recruited users is still quite low, these
trends in combination with high unemployment and drastic cutbacks in the
treatment system do give rise to some concern (CAN 1995).
Intravenous drug abusers are overrepresented in HIV and AIDS statistics.
1994, a total of 3,958 HIV infected persons were registered in Sweden, 17%
them were intravenous drug addicts. Ten per cent of all 1,128 AIDS cases
Sweden are drug addicts. Each year about 200 people die from drug abuse
Sweden (CAN 1994).
In
of
in
in
There are no coherent statistics on the problems associated with smoking. In 1994
the number of deaths caused by throat and lung cancer and other diseases that are
believed to be strongly associated with smoking, was just over 3,000
(Socialstyrelsen 1996b).
Prostitution
There are some 2,500 prostitutes in Sweden. In an international comparison this is
a very small number. In the Netherlands, which has a population about twice the
size of Sweden's, the number is 20,000 (SOU 1995:15).
Previous studies on public perceptions of social problems
in Sweden
The SOM Institute has been conducting studies on public opinion about Swedish
society, Swedish media and Swedes' perceptions of the surrounding world since
1986.4 The 1994 survey was conducted between September 1994 and January
1995. According to this study, the most important social problems were the
Swedish economy and unemployment (open-ended question). One exp
.5 It is important to note that
while the economic crisis and unemployment have been regarded as the biggest
social problems in these studies since 1990, the majority of the respondents
continued to defend the welfare state: they want the state or local municipalities to
remain responsible for the provision of schooling and other services, and there is
substantial resistance towards the ongoing trend towards privatization in these
fields (Nilsson 1995).
Environmental issues were a central concern in the parliamentary elections of
1988. In recent years, however, public interest in the environment has been
dwindling, probably because of the overshadowing effect of the debate on
economic issues.
The environmental threat that caused most concern to respondents in the 1994
survey was the state of the ozone layer. This was followed by oil spills in coastal
areas, the use of chemicals in agriculture, radioactive waste from nuclear power
plants and industrial pollution (Bennulf & Jarlbro 1995).
41) Founded in 1993, the SOM Institute is a joint project between three institutions at the University of Gothenburg: the Department
of Journalism and Mass Communication, the Department of Political Science and the School of Public Administration. Most of the
work at the Institute is based on annual surveys concerning politics and the media.
The population of the surveys consists of a random sample of 2,800 persons aged 15-80 from all over Sweden. The data are collected
using a postal questionnaire with 86 items on the following subjects: media, politics, environmental questions, relations between
Sweden and the surrounding world and leisure time.
One of the main purposes of the survey is to establish time-series of Swedes' perception of politics, society and the media. This is
considered necessary for the analysis of trends in public opinion.
5
The Social Democrats won the elections in September 1994.
193
Two questions in the surveys concern different risks to life and health. In 1994 the
respondents were asked to assess the severity of the following risks, both to their
own life and health (subjective risk) and to the Swedish people at large (objective
risk): drugs, smoking, AIDS, unemployment, alcohol, allergies, violence,
loneliness, chemicals in food, emissions from vehicles, overweight, traffic
accidents, nuclear power, work-related harm and damages, and working with
computer displays. Drugs were ranked as the main objective risk, with almost
80% of the respondents regarding them as a major risk to the life and health of the
Swedish people. Smoking came second, followed by AIDS and alcohol. The
leading subjective risk was represented by chemicals in food. Drugs were
regarded as a high subjective risk by around 15% of the respondents.
Sex, age and education shows some relevance in explaining these results. Women
tend to regard technological risks (such as nuclear power) as greater than men do.
Younger people are inclined to rate different risks as less severe than older
people. Higher education correlates with lower risk assessments, both subjectively
and objectively. The biggest differences were found in ratings for the risks
presented by drugs, violence and AIDS, which were regarded as much less
threatening by respondents with a high level of education (Jarlbro 1995).
The frame of the Nordic alcohol survey
In spring 1995 a questionnaire study was carried out in Sweden on drinking
habits, drug habits and attitudes towards alcohol and drug policies. The
questionnaire was mailed to a representative sample of 3,000 people aged
between 18 and 69 years. The survey was part of a joint Nordic project in
Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway, which has been partly financed by the
Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research (Hakkarainen et al. 1996). The
last question in this questionnaire is similar to the question in the Baltica study on
perceptions of different threatening conditions, or ”social problems”, although
some modifications have been made. Two of the problems included in the Baltica
questionnaire, i.e. those concerning ”the nationality problem” and ”poor public
health”, were omitted from the Swedish instrument because these two issues were
not considered relevant to the Swedish situation. There was some discussion on
the possibility of including a topic closely related to the item of ”the nationality
problem”, but it was eventually agreed that the introduction of a different item
(such as one on ”ethnic conflicts” or ”racism”) would undermine comparability
more than the simple exclusion of one item.
Responses were obtained from 1,912 persons, giving a response rate of 64%,
which can be considered acceptable. Earlier surveys in the Nordic countries have
shown that questions about drinking habits are quite a sensitive issue. For some
people questions about how much and how often they drink are a threat to their
personal integrity. Indeed some people reacted to the questions very strongly:
about 10 questionnaires were returned with comments on the inadequacy and
even impertinence of the questions asked, 40 were returned blank.
Results
Problems in data interpretation
The way in which any given questionnaire item is worded is crucial to the
interpretation of the results. How did the respondents understand the question?
Did they think about their own situation, that is, did they rank the problems
according to what is most threatening to them as individuals, or were they
thinking of the threat to society at large? The distinction is important: even if
there is no personal threat of unemployment, one can still perceive unemployment
as the biggest threat to society (subjective vs. objective risk).
Furthermore, it is quite possible that the respondents have changed their frame of
reference while answering the questions. This could mean that, in one single
questionnaire, some of the problems are highly ranked because the individual
perceives them primarily as serious threats to society (rather than to their own
welfare), while other problems are highly ranked because they have experienced
them at close range.
Another uncertainty factor involved in data interpretation has to do with the
theoretical point of departure of the Baltica study. If the respondents have ranked
the problems listed with reference to what they regard as most threatening to
society, then their rankings could be seen as a reflection of how different matters
are constructed as problems in society. For example, in an international
perspective, the drug problem in Sweden is not very prevalent. In public debate,
however, it has emerged as one of the most serious problems of all (Bergmark &
Oscarsson 1988). The high ranking of ”drug abuse” could suggest that this is a
problem with a high profile in people's minds. They rank it very highly even
though it is possible that they have never experienced the tragic consequences of
drug abuse at close range, or that they know nothing about how big or small the
problem is empirically.
Overall ranking of problems
All the problems are ranked as quite serious (Table 1). Nonetheless the difference
between crime against person at the top of the table and prostitution at the bottom
is quite substantial: the mean values for these two problems differ by two points.
Interestingly enough, standard deviation increases with diminishing mean values
for particular problems. This suggests a relatively high degree of consensus in
problems that are a major concern in Swedish society and variation in opinions
regarding other, less important questions. It seems that Swedish people in the
crucial year 1995 were mostly concerned about crime against person, domestic
195
violence, drug abuse, unemployment, environmental pollution as well as
economic crisis. Poverty, prostitution and smoking seemed to be the least
threatening issues. Alcoholism was also considered a less threatening problem.
Given the amount of space and time devoted in public debate to the problems of
unemployment and economic crisis, one would have expected to see these issues
rank higher. The fact that crime, domestic violence and drug abuse are ranked
higher than these problems may have to do with the context of the survey. The
Swedish questionnaire was almost completely dominated by questions related to
alcohol and drugs; some of the items concerned assessments of prison sentences
for drug-related offences. One reasonable assumption is that a situation was
created in which the respondents perceived crime and drugs as highly significant
problems.
Table 1 Overall ranking of problems.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Problem
Mean
S.D. Median Rank
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person 8.69 0.88 9 1
Domestic violence
8.46 1.22 9 2
Drug abuse
8.22 1.34 9 3
Unemployment
8.09 1.47 9 4
Environmental pollution 7.89 1.54 9 5
Economic crisis
7.63 1.67 8 6
Drunkenness and alcoholism 7.24 1.71 7 7
Poverty
6.63 2.17 7 8
Problems caused by smoking 6.55 2.03 7 9
Prostitution
6.49 2.43 7 10
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Threatening problems from the point of view of different segments of society
Women perceive these conditions as greater threats to themselves or to society
than men do. In all cases there are significant differences in this direction (Table
2). Apart from their statistical significance, gender differences in perceptions of
the six most threatening problems are quite small and indicate a broad consensus
of opinion within society as to which problems are or should be of concern.
However, men seem to be much less concerned than women about problems at
the lower end of the ranking list: alcoholism, smoking and poverty. Prostitution,
which ranks lowest in the overall assessments, gives rise to most controversy: for
men this is by far the least threatening issue, for women it ranks fourth together
with unemployment.
Table 2 Ranks by gender.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Mean
Men
Women
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person 8.62 8.74 .003
Domestic violence 8.28 8.61 .000
Drug abuse 8.07 8.32 .000
Unemployment 7.89 8.26 .000
Environmental pollution 7.73 8.03 .000
Economic crisis7.53 7.69 .049
Drunkenness and alcoholism 6.85 7.55 .000
Poverty 6.37 6.85 .000
Smoking 6.27 6.78 .000
Prostitution 5.69 8.26 .000
N 908 984
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
p
Older people tend to be more concerned than younger people (Table 3). However,
it seems that younger and older generations are agreed that crime against person
and domestic violence are the most threatening problems. Likewise,
environmental pollution is regarded as constituting a major threat regardless of
age. On the other hand, older generations are much more concerned about
different forms of substance abuse (drug abuse, drunkenness and alcoholism,
smoking) than younger generations.
Table 3 Ranks by age.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
18-40 years 41-69 years
Mean
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person 8.65 8.69 .347
Domestic violence 8.43 8.46 .571
Drug abuse 7.95 8.42 .000
Unemployment 7.90 8.24 .000
Environmental pollution 7.91 7.86 .543
Economic crisis7.43 7.77 .000
Drunkenness and alcoholism 6.83 7.57 .000
Poverty 6.51 6.71 .050
Smoking 6.06 6.96 .000
Prostitution 6.23 6.67 .000
N 907 942
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
p
197
People with a lower level of education (primary school only) worry more about
drug abuse, unemployment, economic crisis, drunkenness and alcoholism,
poverty, smoking and prostitution (Table 4). A possible interaction with age could
be assumed here: since the late 1960s nine years of primary school have been
mandatory in Sweden compared to the previous system of five and later seven
years. However, there is a broad consensus of opinion across educational levels
with regard to crime against person and domestic violence, which are perceived as
most threatening problems. Educational groups also share the same concerns
about environmental pollution.
Respondents from Stockholm or other cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants
represented one-third of the sample. On average, these people are better-off than
others. They are slightly more preoccupied with crime against person. Residents
of smaller towns and rural areas are somewhat more concerned about drug abuse,
drunkenness and alcoholism and prostitution (Table 5). In general, however, place
of residence is not a major differentiating factor with regard to perceptions of
problems. In six out of ten problems there is no statistically significant difference
between inhabitants of big cities and smaller towns, and in the remaining four
problems the differences, though significant, are very small.
Table 4 Ranks by education.
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
< 9 years > 9 years
Mean
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person 8.67 8.69 .696
Domestic violence 8.52 8.42 .124
Drug abuse 8.53 8.07 .000
Unemployment 8.38 7.97 .000
Environmental pollution 7.87 7.89 .790
Economic crisis7.87 7.52 .000
Drunkenness and alcoholism 7.61 7.06 .000
Poverty 6.97 6.48 .000
Problems caused by smoking 6.99 6.37 .000
Prostitution 6.90 6.31 .000
N 528 1.357
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
p
Table 5 Ranks by place of residence (city with less than 100,000 inhabitants
includes rural areas).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
City with
City with
>100,000 <100,000
Mean
p
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime against person 8.76 8.65 .009
Domestic violence 8.49 8.44 .451
Drug abuse 8.07 8.27 .006
Unemployment 8.01 8.11 .169
Environmental pollution 7.89 7.89 .939
Economic crisis7.68 7.58 .222
Drunkenness and alcoholism 7.05 7.30 .005
Poverty 6.59 6.62 .787
Smoking 6.45 6.58 .231
Prostitution 6.29 6.54 .040
N 588 1.267
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Perception of problems and political affiliation
Looking at the breakdown of the responses according to the respondents' political
affiliation, the overall impression is that those who are concerned are concerned
about all kinds of problems.6 The discussion below briefly describes the position
of political parties in Sweden on the object of our study.
Ever since the beginning of the 1930s political life in Sweden has been dominated
by the Social Democratic Party. The party has not always enjoyed a position of
absolute majority in Parliament, but it has been in that position more than once.
As discussed earlier, the Swedish welfare system is thought to come very close to
Esping-Andersen's ideal type of the ”social-democratic type of welfare regimes”.
An uncritical reading of Esping-Andersen's typology may lead to this model being
equated to the actual Swedish system. However, such an equation implies an even
more hegemonistic position for the Social Democrats than has been the case. One
has to recognize that Social Democrats have not been the only party concerned
with building a Swedish welfare state. In particular, the development of social
insurance systems has required the support of the farmers party (nowadays the
Centre Party) (Marklund 1982).
6
When the data were further reduced by factor analysis, very high significant
correlations were found between all issues.
199
Social Democratic governments have shown great skill in negotiating agreements
not only with other political parties but also with labour market organizations.
Although traditionally a workers' party, the Social Democratic Party has also
attracted large numbers of middle-class voters. One of the key words in Swedish
politics has indeed been consensus; compromises have been more common than
bitter controversies.
Today, the Social Democratic Party likes to present itself as the last bastion of the
welfare state: ”We want to secure our welfare, that is why we have to deal with
the state debt”. According to the party, the current state of affairs — i.e.
continuing cuts in public expenditure, increasing unemployment, etc. — is only
transient phase: if we can put up with the hardship for a while, we will be able
later to restore and further develop the welfare system. The second largest party in
the country, the Conservative Party, take a completely different position: their aim
is not to maintain the welfare state but to rearrange the relationship between the
market, the state and the family on the basis of their conservative and neo-liberal
ideas concerning the public sector, high taxes, etc.
The Social Democrats have lost a number of elections since the 1970s, and during
the past few decades they have been both in government and in opposition. At the
same time the Conservative Party has been gaining growing support from a
substantial part of the Swedish population. Rhetorically, the conservatives have
been sharply critical of the role of the public sector. Throughout the 1980s and
1990s, their arguments have been in line with the views of neo-liberals in Great
Britain and the US. It can be safely argued that, in principle, the Social
Democrats' political actions are in line with the conservatives argumentation,
although their views on what should happen next are quite different.
The Centre Party is essentially conservative but nonetheless has close cooperation
on many issues with the Social Democratic Party. Its voters traditionally come
from the ranks of farmers. In recent years the Centre Party has focused very much
on environmental issues. Since the 1980s, the party has lost much ground. Today
it is a rather small party, which is clearly reflected in the survey; only 6% of the
respondents said they voted for the Centre Party.
The Liberal Party has traditionally been dominated by social liberals. It has not
been a key actor in challenging the welfare state, nor has it stressed neo-liberal
ideas. The Liberals have also been losing popular support in recent years and they
are now a fairly small party. In government coalitions they have worked together
with the Centre Party and the Conservatives. This cooperation may have blurred
their actual claims with respect to the dominant issues of the welfare system. It
could be argued that the interwoven issues of economic crisis, state debt and high
unemployment are constructed as a ”welfare state issue” in Sweden, and that the
main dividing line within this issue lies between the Conservatives and the Social
Democratic Party, with the small parties occupying a position in the middle
ground. Their cooperation in government with the Conservatives and, for the
Centre Party, their willingness to support the Social Democratic Party when this
party is in power, gives a rather diffuse picture of their actual claims in specific
issues.
The same goes for the Christian Democrats, one of the smallest parties in Swedish
Parliament. It has a social conservative label, particularly emphasizing family
policies. The Green Party focuses on environmental issues, which is clearly
reflected in the present study as well. Finally, there is a young party called New
Democracy. In the 1991 parliamentary elections it gained some support and a
small representation. Three years later, however, it lost its mandate. New
Democracy is a populist party which has attacked the ”bureaucratic society” with
racist arguments, etc. (”we want no more immigrants using up our generous
allowances”). In the survey 0.5% of the respondents said they had voted for New
Democracy.
Over 40% reported that they supported the Social Democrats. The second biggest
party was the Conservatives (20%). Neither of these two groups showed any
specific characteristics with regard to sex, age or income. A substantial part of the
respondents said they had not voted at all (11%). A closer look at this group
revealed that almost three-quarters of them were less than 40 years of age; half of
them were men who earned less than SEK 100,000 a year.
The opinions of people who voted for different parties differed in many respects.
Those affiliated to leftist parties seem to defend traditional welfare values, scoring
high on poverty and unemployment. In the case of the Social Democrats, these
problems are accompanied by other ”lower-class problems”, such as alcohol and
drug abuse. Not surprisingly, respondents voting for the Green Party are very
much in the forefront with regard to environmental problems. The profile of the
Christian Democratic party is that of a moral entrepreneur, whose main concerns
are crime, drugs, alcohol, smoking and prostitution. Environmental problems are
also an important concern for Christian Democrats. Supporters of right-wing
parties have much less concerns; crime against person and the economic crisis are
two notable exceptions. Supporters of the Centre Party and the People's Party do
not differ significantly in any of the problems assessed.
On the other hand, there are certain problems that seem to unite the political
parties. Only very minor differences are found between the parties with respect to
crime against person and domestic violence. Both items are highly exposed in the
Swedish mass media. If the populist New Democracy is omitted, there is also a
relatively high degree of unanimity in the question of drugs. Clear differences are
reported with regard to prostitution and to some extent alcohol, which are ranked
very low by conservatives and supporters of New Democracy.
With few exceptions, non-voters are less concerned than those who do vote in
elections.
201
Table 6 Ranks by political affiliation.
Mean values for groups of respondents based on which political party they voted
for in the latest elections.
6 A)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Crime
Drug abuse
Alcoholism
Mean
p
Mean
p
Mean
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Left-wing party 8.74 .466 8.13 .617 7.24 .888
Social Democrats 8.67 .589 8.33 .001 7.41 .000
Green party 8.67 .860 7.99 .188 7.29 .678
People's party 8.71 .723 8.14 .579 7.21 .995
Centre party 8.69 .920 8.34 .265 7.28 .668
Christian Democrats 8.80 .224 8.61 .001 8.00 .001
Conservatives 8.81 .000 8.15 .461 6.94 .001
New Democracy 8.67 .966 7.50 .505 7.11 .844
Other
8.72 .799 8.06 .706 5.82 .013
Did not vote 8.43 .002 7.87 .003 6.81 .002
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
6 B)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Economic crisis The environment Domestic
violence
Mean
p
Mean
p
Mean
p
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Left-wing party 7.61 .986 8.12 .077 8.64 .027
Social Democrats 7.28 .053 7.89 .900 8.50 .170
Green party 7.17 .018 8.54 .000 8.44 .920
People's party 7.57 .737 7.94 .636 8.38 .451
Centre party 7.56 .746 7.97 .532 8.40 .673
Christian Democrats 7.61 .996 8.28 .020 8.57 .402
Right-wing party 7.63 .798 7.63 .001 8.51 .323
New Democracy 7.89 .601 7.78 .863 8.33 .864
Other
7.71 .822 7.61 .484 8.83 .001
Did not vote 7.33 .029 7.71 .110 8.07 .000
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
p
6 C)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Poverty
Smoking
Mean
p
Mean
p
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Left-wing party 6.79 .413 6.47 .705 6.84 .098
Social Democrats 6.98 .000 6.69 .009 6.75 .000
Green party 6.53 .679 6.75 .303 6.83 .151
People's party 6.22 .036 6.41 .493 6.21 .212
Centre party 6.60 .936 6.73 .280 6.76 .215
Christian Democrats 6.67 .635 7.23 .023 7.51 .005
Right-wing party 6.03 .000 6.42 .260 5.91 .000
New Democracy 5.00 .045 5.11 .209 4.44 .113
Other
7.31 .310 6.47 .912 5.71 .276
Did not vote 6.40 .152 5.95 .000 6.00 .007
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Prostitution
Mean
p
6 D)
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Unemployment
Mean
p
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Left-wing party
8.43 .000
Social Democrats
8.35 .000
Green party
7.86 .157
People's party
7.77 .021
Centre party
7.93 .307
Christian Democrats
8.10 .933
Right-wing party
7.68 .000
New Democracy
8.22 .796
Other
8.71 .000
Did not vote
7.90 .078
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Discussion
The results of this study lend some support to earlier findings on public
perceptions of threatening conditions and different risks in society. For example,
older people are more worried than younger people, and women are more worried
than men.
As discussed earlier, the wording of the questionnaire item did not allow us to
infer whether the respondents assessed the severity of the problems concerned in
relation to their own personal situation or in the broader context of society at
203
large. In the surveys conducted by the SOM Institute, risk assessments are split
into two parts. The concepts of subjective and objective risk are also somewhat
confusing; personal and public risk would seem to be more adequate terms. The
evidence from the SOM surveys suggests that differences will appear when the
question is divided into two parts. For instance, in the SOM study of 1994, drugs
were considered to be the biggest risk for the Swedish population, while they
ranked as the seventh biggest personal risk.
According to a recent study on the perception of risks presented in the newspaper
Metro,7 girls are more worried than boys and women more worried than men. A
total of 800 people between ages 18 and 75 evaluated specific risks, both on the
personal and the public level.8 Smoking and alcohol were judged to be of greater
public than personal risk, smoking was perceived as the biggest and alcohol as the
third biggest public risk, while they occupied only seventh and eighth position,
respectively, in the evaluation of personal risks. As for personal risks, nuclear
power in Eastern Europe, the depletion of the ozone layer and airborne pollutants
were regarded as the three biggest risks.
One would be inclined to think that conditions or problems that people can
control at least for their own part, i.e. decide whether or not to expose themselves
to the risk, such as drugs, alcohol, AIDS and smoking, are judged as smaller
personal risks than those over which one has no control (smoking is not a
straightforward case in this regard because of the problem of passive smoking).
However, this does not seem to be the case at least in these two studies. The
respondents have regarded smoking and drugs as fairly high risks in personal
terms, although these risks are judged to be even greater at the public level. It
seems as if people think others are less capable of controlling what they are doing
than they are themselves.
In the Baltica study, there was a consensus of opinion across the social and
demographic structure that crime against person constitutes the greatest threat in
Swedish society.
The peculiar thing about Sweden, compared with the other countries involved in
the study, is that domestic violence was ranked as the second biggest problem.
Part of the explanation could be that it is closely interwoven with the top-ranking
problem of crime against person. Child or wife battering is treated as any other
crime in Sweden, and crime seems to be an issue that causes much concern
among Swedish people. Domestic violence has in recent years been a very visible
issue in the media and public debate.
7
8
Metro is a free sheet that is available on weekdays on buses and the underground in Stockholm.
The study was conducted by the Centre of Risk Research. The results were presented on 30 October, 1996.
The third biggest problem in Sweden, drug abuse, is also closely related to crime
in Sweden. All dealings with drugs, including consumption, are incorporated in
the Penal Code: having drugs inside one's body is an offence that may carry a
sentence of six months imprisonment, for instance. The high ranking of drug
abuse is probably both an effect of the high profile of the problem, its significance
as ”the suitable enemy” (Christie & Bruun 1985), and an effect of the context of
the survey.
The contextual effect is not obvious in the case of drunkenness and alcoholism,
however. The low rating received by these conditions may seem somewhat
surprising. Traditionally, Sweden has placed heavy emphasis on restrictive
alcohol policies in an attempt to reduce alcohol problems. Alcohol consumption
has been regarded as an legitimate object for state intervention and public
concern. This long-lasting attitude has now obviously changed. Alcohol
consumption is increasingly regarded as a matter of personal choice rather than
primarily as a social or public problem. State intervention in this area is looked
upon with great suspicion. This development is clearly connected to the process
of integration into the European Union. Swedish alcohol policies, just as Finnish
alcohol policies, are in conflict with major interests in the EU, and this seems to
be reason enough for the state to dismantle parts of its traditional policies. The
temperance movement seems to have lost its position in the public arena. To be
sure, evening papers repeatedly report on ”increased drinking among young
people” on account of ”new” alcoholic beverages, which so far have not been
imported to Sweden (an effect of new legislation in line with EU guidelines).
Apart from this, there is hardly any public debate in defence of the restrictive
policies.
Another puzzling finding is the relatively low evaluation of the economic crisis,
which contradicts the results of the SOM survey in 1994. According to the openended question in that survey, the economic crisis was regarded as the most
serious problem of all. On the other hand, unemployment was ranked fairly high,
and that of course is closely associated with the economic crisis.
The issue of exerting control may shed some light on the obvious gender
differences. Traditionally, women have taken on the role of controller as far as the
husband's drinking is concerned. Although women themselves have been drinking
more in recent decades, women's perception of drunkenness and alcoholism as a
greater problem may be due to these different roles in relation to alcohol. Men's
low evaluation of prostitution as a threat could be explained likewise; men are
potential consumers of prostitution.
On the other hand, crime against person seems to be a more concrete threat closer
to home: crime can happen to anyone, anywhere, at any time. Crime turns you
into a victim, and it is beyond your control.
205
The high ranking of drug abuse can probably be interpreted likewise. The mass
media typically portray drug addicts as helpless people who are unable to resist
the potent and life-threatening drugs. The assumed enslaving qualities of drugs,
no matter who uses them, give drugs a similar kind of character as crime. Drugs
make you helpless and victimized.
English editing: David Kivinen
References
Bennulf, Martin & Jarlbro, Gunilla (1995): Rör inte min bil! (Don't touch my car!) In:
Holmberg, Sören & Weibull, Lennart, eds.: Det gamla riket (The old State). SOMrapport nr 13.
Bergmark, Anders & Oscarsson, Lars (1988): Drug Abuse and Treatment. Almqvist &
Wiksell International.
Blumer, Herbert (1971): Social Problems as Collective Behaviour. Social Problems. Vol.
18, 298-306.
BRÅ (1995) [National Council for Crime prevention]: Kriminalstatistisk Årsbok 1994.
CAN (1995): Alkohol- och narkotikautvecklingen i Sverige (Alcohol and drugs in
Sweden: trends in development). Rapport 95. Folkhälsoinstitutet (FHI) och
Centralförbundet för alkohol- och narkotikaupplysning (CAN).
CAN (1994): Alkohol- och narkotikautvecklingen i Sverige (Alcohol and drugs in
Sweden: trends in development). Rapport nr 40.
Christie, Nils & Bruun, Kettil (1985): Den gode fiende (The suitable enemy). Oslo.
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (1990): Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Polity Press,
Cambridge.
Folkhälsoinstitutet (1995): (The National Institute for Public Health) Ett
folkhälsoperspektiv på våld (A public health perspective on violence). FHI 1995:45.
Hakkarainen, Pekka; Laursen, Lau & Tigerstedt, Christoffer, eds. (1996): Discussing
Drugs and Control Policy. Comparative studies on four Nordic countries. NAD
Publication No. 31, Helsinki.
Hugemark, Agneta (1995): Den fängslande marknaden. Ekonomiska experter om
välfärdsstaten (The captivating market. Economic experts on the welfare state). Arkiv,
Lund.
Jarlbro, Gunilla (1995): Kan man kommunicera om det som inte kan förutses? (Is it
possible to communicate on the unforeseeable?). In: Holmberg & Weibull: Det gamla
riket (The old State). SOM-rapport nr 13.
Marklund, Staffan (1982): Klass, stat och socialpolitik (Class, state and social policy).
Arkiv, Lund.
Marklund, Staffan & Svallfors, Stefan (1987): Dual Welfare - Segmentation and Work
Enforcement in the Swedish Welfare System. Research Reports, nr 94. Department of
Sociology, University of Umeå.
Nilsson, Lennart (1995): Att spara eller inte spara? (To save or not to save?). In:
Holmberg, Sören & Weibull, Lennart, eds.: Det gamla riket (The old State). SOMrapport nr 13.
Olsson, Orvar; Byqvist, Siv & Gomér, Gunilla (1993): Det tunga narkotikamissbrukets
omfattning i Sverige 1992 (The extent of heavy drug use in Sweden in 1992). CAN,
Stockholm.
Riksrevisionsverket (1995) [The Swedish National Audit Bureau]: Nr 4 Budget prognos
1995/96.
Salonen, Tapio (1994): Välfärdens marginaler (On the margins of welfare). Gotab,
Stockholm.
SCB (1994) [Statistics Sweden]: Monthly statement of the state debt of Sweden. SCB No:
651/1994.
Statistiska meddelanden [Statistics Sweden]. AM 11SM 9502, SCB.
SCB (1995): Statistisk Årsbok 1994.
Socialstyrelsen (1996a): (National Board of Health and Welfare): Sociala tjänster (Social
services) 1996:1.
Socialstyrelsen (1996b): (National Board of Health and Welfare): Hälso- och
sjukvårdsstatistik (Health statistics). 1996:1.
SOU (1995): Könshandeln (Gender trade), SCB 1995:15.
Spector, Malcolm & Kitsuse, John (1987): Constructing social problems. Aldine de
Gruyter, New York.
Ågren, Gunnar & Jacobsson, Sten (1986): Betydande underrapportering i dödsbevisen av
alkoholrelaterade dödsorsaker (Alcohol related deaths considerably underreported in
death certificates). Läkartidningen, 83 (47), 3984-3985.
207
Summary
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Jacek Moskalewicz
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
This report on the Baltica survey consists of seven chapters, each highlighting
distinctive features of the individual countries involved in the project. In spite of
their common geographical location around the Baltic Sea, there are substantial
differences between these countries in terms of their language, ethnicity, culture,
history as well as current political and economic trends in development.
However, all these countries also share similar experiences of sudden change in
the early 1990s. The affluent Nordic societies of Sweden and Finland were hit
quite severely by economic crisis and recession, which led to severe cutbacks in
the public sector.
At the same time, on the southern and south-eastern shores of the Baltic Sea, the
Soviet model of socialism was caving in. The centrally planned economy had
exhausted its potential and was unable either to develop in autarchy or to compete
in the global markets. Without popular support and democratic legitimacy, the
political structures were unable to survive. However, the transition towards
market economy and extended democracy was a painful remedy indeed. The first
years of transition witnessed severe economic recession, a sharp decline in real
incomes, and galloping inflation.
*
As is stressed in all the country chapters, the changes in the early 1990s were
associated with an outburst of social problems. In Finland and Sweden
unemployment increased fivefold to 18.4 per cent and 7.8 per cent, respectively.
In the former socialist countries which had hardly seen unemployment before, its
appearance was a great psychological shock as well. In Poland, the number of
people out of work approached three million in 1993; the unemployment rate
stood at 16.4 per cent. In the three Baltic states and St. Petersburg, the official
rates remained at less than five per cent, but large numbers had to work reduced
hours or were not being paid their wages regularly. Suddenly, ordinary people
found their job and economic security had diminished.
Declining living standards or poverty became a common experience for many
people around the Baltic Sea. In the former socialist countries, more than onethird of the population were living below the poverty line. In Finland and Sweden,
almost 10 per cent of the population was now dependent on various forms of
social assistance.
209
The changes and upheavals were associated by a growing wave of crime. In
Poland and the three Baltic states, the number of criminal offences doubled during
the early part of the 1990s. In the St. Petersburg region the increase was even
greater. The growth of violent crime, including homicide, was a source of
particular concern.
There is some evidence from most of the participating countries that alcohol
consumption has tended to increase. This trend can be attributed to the
liberalization of alcohol control, increasing private imports and declining real
prices. In Latvia and Russia it is estimated that the overall level of alcohol
consumption is in excess of 14 litres per capita. In Russia and Poland, alcoholrelated deaths account for about one-third, in Lithuania for two-fifths of male
excess mortality.
Drugs have also become increasingly prevalent around the Baltic Sea. In Russia,
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, the supply of drugs has increased
dramatically as a result of the convertibility of their currencies and slackening
border controls. At the same time, some of these countries have become producers
of synthetic drugs, including amphetamine, which enjoys a good reputation
among users in the Nordic countries. By international standards, drug abuse in
Sweden and Finland is at a fairly low level. Nevertheless the number of users has
now been rising again after a period of decline in the 1980s.
It is a matter of crucial importance how these trends are reflected in public
opinion, i.e. whether the current spread of many social problems is perceived at
all or simply neglected, whether the bright sides of life associated with the new
system compensate for the problems brought along by the transition. It emerges
quite clearly from the Baltica survey that people around the Baltic Sea are indeed
aware of the high tide of social problems. In response to the open-ended question
presented in the survey, over 90 per cent of the respondents mentioned various
problems prevailing in the country, in the community as well as in their private
lives. Large numbers were also unable to identify any positive trends in their
societies: in Finland the percentage was over 30 per cent, in Poland 40 per cent. In
the Baltic countries and St. Petersburg, over 50 per cent were unable to identify
any positive trends at the country level, while the corresponding figures at the
community and family levels were between 70 and 90 per cent (Table 1).
Table 1 Percentages of respondents unable to identify any positive trends at
country, community and family levels (”I see no positive trends” &
”Don't know” combined).
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Poland
Lithuania Latvia Estonia
St. PetersFinland
burg
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Country
Community
Family
44
47
47
79
89
93
57
70
80
52
68
68
51
70
79
39
NA
34
╶ ─────────────────────────────────
Asked to compare the prevalence of different problems before and after the
transition, the vast majority of respondents referred to the appearance of
previously unknown problems such as unemployment and poverty, which were
suddenly seen as the most prevalent problems. In addition, respondents from
Lithuania and the St. Petersburg region observed a rapid increase in
homelessness. In the Baltic states and the St. Petersburg region, problems related
to privatization were also a major concern. Colloquially, privatization is known as
prihvatization, which means appropriation. Finally, cultural life was thought to
have deteriorated in all three countries or regions where this question was asked,
i.e. in St. Petersburg, Latvia and Lithuania.
In addition to these new or relatively new problems, there is a broad consensus of
opinion that the prevalence of other problems has also increased. The respondents
reported a sharp increase in crime, notably crime against person. Before the
transition, this was in most countries a fairly insignificant problem, now it ranks
among the most prevalent problems. This fear of crime is not evenly distributed:
according to the Polish study the poorest segments of society regard crime as a
marginal problem, whereas for the more affluent strata it is their foremost
concern.
Poor public health is one of the problems whose prevalence has increased most.
This applies not only to St. Petersburg and the three Baltic states, where there has
been much public debate on the mortality crisis, but also to Finland and Poland.
People’s views on deteriorating public health are accompanied by views of a high
level of problems related to smoking and drinking. Both smoking and drinking
were perceived as highly prevalent before the transition. Since the transition, it is
believed their prevalence has increased even further. In fact, despite the emerging
”new” problems, drinking and smoking are still ranked among the three most
prevalent problems.
Drug abuse constitutes a separate issue. In all countries the problem is becoming
more and more widespread, yet it seems to be regarded as a less acute issue than
other social problems.
211
There is a fairly broad consensus of opinion on the prevalence of the problems
under investigation and on the threat they represent. In general it seems that the
more prevalent the problem, the greater the threat it is considered to present.
There are, however, some notable exceptions. Smoking is not considered very
threatening even though it is highly prevalent. On the other hand, drug abuse is
regarded as highly threatening while its prevalence is rather low, though growing.
Considering the high scores given on the threat scale to most of the problems
inquired, it was surprising to find that domestic violence was ranked as a fairly
insignificant issue: in all but one country, domestic violence was not perceived as
a major threat. Only in Sweden did domestic violence receive the second highest
score after crime. It is a question for further investigation whether this reflects a
high prevalence of the problem in Sweden or an elevated sensitivity of Swedes
towards violence in general and domestic violence in particular.
*
The task of identifying three problems that called for the most urgent solution
showed the highest discriminatory power of all items in the survey. In all
countries there clearly emerged clusters of priority problems identified by more
than 20 per cent of the respondents. The top problem in all the countries involved
is that of unemployment: more than 80 per cent of people in Finland and Poland,
more than half of those in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia and one-quarter of the
residents of St. Petersburg regarded this as the most urgent problem of all.
Unemployment seems to be closely associated with poverty. In all countries
except Finland, over 30 per cent of the respondents say that this problem should
be urgently addressed.
Crime against person affects the lives of all people around the Baltic Sea. An
urgent solution to the problem is called for by close to 90 per cent of people in
Estonia, more than 60 per cent of the residents of St. Petersburg and Latvia,
almost 50 per cent of the people in Lithuania and more than 20 per cent of Finnish
and Polish people. Economic crime is another major concern: between one-fifth
and one-third of the respondents say that this problem calls for an urgent solution.
Interestingly enough, the problems of unemployment, poverty and crime, all of
which are closely related to economic transformation, are not the only priority
issues in the countries around the Baltic Sea. They are closely followed by
drunkenness and alcoholism, mentioned by around 30 per cent of the respondents
in Poland, Lithuania and Latvia, by 20 per cent of the people in St. Petersburg and
by 14 per cent of the people in Estonia and Finland.
In addition to these shared concerns, there are also a number of problems that are
specific to a few countries or even to one country. In St. Petersburg, Finland and
Poland, about one-third of the residents regard environmental pollution as a
priority problem. Elsewhere, environmental issues are overshadowed by other
burning questions. Even in Estonia, where environmental slogans featured
prominently a few years previously in the Singing Revolution, only 10 per cent
considered environmental pollution a priority concern. In Finland over 40 per cent
of the respondents called for an urgent solution to the problem of drug abuse,
while the corresponding proportions in other countries were several times lower.
The results also revealed major differences between the perception of problems at
the country and the community level. This distinction was made in the surveys
conducted in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, whereas in St. Petersburg a
distinction was made between the community or neighbourhood level, on the one
hand, and the city level, on the other. In all these surveys each problem was
thought to be less prevalent at the community level. The biggest discrepancies
were found in the cases of crime, drug abuse and prostitution - problems
seemingly prevalent ”out there” in the big cities rather than ”close here” in the
community. Drug abuse and crime, including economic crime, were thus
identified as priority problems for the country as a whole much more frequently
than for the respondent's own community.
In contrast to most other problems, drunkenness and alcoholism seem to
constitute a much more local issue. Although perceived as more prevalent at the
country level, the difference in mean values is relatively small. Moreover, in all
surveys drunkenness and alcoholism appeared to be higher on the list of
community priorities than on the country list.
*
The results of our survey bear out the assumption laid down in the introductory
chapter of this report: an analysis of the concept of social problems into claims
regarding its prevalence, the threat presented by the problem and the need for
change, sheds light on different dimensions of the problems concerned. Some of
these dimensions seem to be coherent with one another. In most countries around
the Baltic Sea, there are problems that are perceived as prevalent and threatening
and considered to be urgent; these include unemployment, poverty and crime.
There are also questions that are perceived as prevalent but as non-threatening and
non-urgent; an example is provided by problems related to smoking. Drug abuse
is perceived as threatening, but it is not regarded as prevalent nor as priority
issues. The only exception in this regard is Finland. Finally, there are problems
which occupy a low position on all three dimensions.
Drawing on this deconstruction of social problems, a typology of problems was
developed to introduce an element of order on the chaotic map of social problems.
In all countries included in this study (excepting the St. Petersburg region),
unemployment can be regarded as the most developed social problem. In
Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and St. Petersburg, poverty and crime can also be
ranked among the most developed social problems. In all countries the list of
developed social problems is completed by drunkenness and alcoholism.
213
At the opposite end of this typology there are a number of problems that are
regarded as neither prevalent, threatening nor urgent. In all countries this group of
marginal problems consists of issues that receive quite visible coverage in the
mass media: gender inequalities, domestic violence, prostitution and last but not
least, nationalities' problems. The low profile of the latter issue is particularly
surprising in the Baltic countries, where questions of national minorities and
citizenship laws have given rise to often heated public debate. This also applies to
Poland and St. Petersburg, often blamed for nationalist sentiments.
Between these two poles, there are a number of potential social problems of
which drug abuse and smoking may suddenly become developed social issues.
As was pointed out in the introductory chapter, this study adopted a constructivist
approach in an attempt to trace the evolution of social problems during the
ongoing transition in a number of countries surrounding the Baltic Sea. The
population survey was regarded as an important instrument of the claims-making
process alongside media campaigns, political statements, petitions, letters and so
on. From the very outset, even at the stage of identifying research questions, a
survey may become part of the claims-making process. Failure to include some
problems and/or the elaboration of others in a questionnaire may draw public
attention away from one problem and turn another phenomenon into a topical
issue. In the interview situation respondents may state their opinions but also
express claims regarding different dimensions of the problem. Finally, publishing
or censoring the results of public opinion surveys may have a substantial impact
on the claims-making process.
In this context, the results of our study should also be seen as a collective claim
that the transition period has produced more problems and less bright sides to
everyday life than the previous regime. If not challenged, this claim is very likely
to be generalized from social problems to cover the new political institutions of
the democratic society that has just re-appeared on the southern and south-eastern
shores of the Baltic Sea.
English editing: David Kivinen
By permission of artist Andrzej Mleczko.
215
Appendix A
Questionnaire for the Baltica study 1994
Social problems in [name of the country]
This questionnaire consists of a number of questions concerning your observations
and personal views on the prevalence and seriousness of social problems that exist in
[name of the country]. We are interested in their prevalence country-wide as well as
in their appearance in your place of residence.
This study is part of an international project on social problems around the Baltic Sea,
carried out in collaboration with the European Office of the World Health
Organization. Its results will be used for scientific purposes and your individual
responses will remain anonymous.
Part 1
In your opinion, what are the most serious problems in [name of the country] today?
a)
b) I do not see any
serious problems.
c) Don't know.
In your opinion, what are the most serious problems in your place of residence today?
a)
b) I do not see any serious problems.
c) Don't know.
If b) and c) in questions 1 and 2, go to question 4.
Which of these problems affect you and/or your family at the moment?
a)
b) No problems affect me and/or my family.
c) Don't know.
In your opinion, what are the most positive trends in [name of the country] today?
a)
b) I do not see any positive trends.
c) Don't know.
In your opinion, what are the most positive trends in your place of residence today?
a)
b) I do not see any positive trends.
c) Don't know.
If b) and c) in questions 4 and 5, go to question 7.
Which of these positive trends affect you and/or your family at the moment?
a)
b) No positive trends affect me and/or my family.
c) Don't know.
217
Part 2
How widespread are the following social problems in [name of the country] today?
List of problems
Very widespread
Crime against person
(property and violent crime)
2. Drug abuse
3. Drunkenness and alcoholism
4. Economic crime
9
5. Environmental pollution
6. Domestic violence
7. The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life 9
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
9
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
9
18. Problems related to privatization
NonDon't
existent know
1.
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
x
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
9
8
9
8
9
7
8
7
8
7
8
6
7
6
7
6
7
5
6
5
6
5
6
4
5
4
5
4
5
3
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
x
1
x
1
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
How widespread are the following social problems in your place of residence today?
List of problems
Very widespread
Crime against person
(property and violent crime)
2. Drug abuse
3. Drunkenness and alcoholism
4. Economic crime
9
5. Environmental pollution
6. Domestic violence
7. The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life 9
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
9
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
9
18. Problems related to privatization
NonDon't
existent know
1.
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
x
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
9
8
9
8
9
7
8
7
8
7
8
6
7
6
7
6
7
5
6
5
6
5
6
4
5
4
5
4
5
3
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
x
1
x
1
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
How widespread were these social problems in [name of the country] some five-six years
ago, that is in the late 1980s?
List of problems
Very wide-
Non-
Don't
spread
Crime against person
(property and violent crime)
2. Drug abuse
3. Drunkenness and alcoholism
4. Economic crime
9
5. Environmental pollution
6. Domestic violence
7. The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life 9
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
9
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
9
18. Problems related to privatization
existent
know
1.
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
x
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
9
8
9
8
9
7
8
7
8
7
8
6
7
6
7
6
7
5
6
5
6
5
6
4
5
4
5
4
5
3
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
x
1
x
1
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
How widespread were these social problems in your place of residence some five-six
years ago, that is in the late 1980s?
List of problems
Very widespread
Crime against person
(property and violent crime)
2. Drug abuse
3. Drunkenness and alcoholism
4. Economic crime
9
5. Environmental pollution
6. Domestic violence
7. The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life 9
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
9
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
9
18. Problems related to privatization
NonDon't
existent know
1.
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
x
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
9
8
9
8
9
7
8
7
8
7
8
6
7
6
7
6
7
5
6
5
6
5
6
4
5
4
5
4
5
3
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
x
1
x
1
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Part 3
So far our questions have concerned the prevalence of various social problems. We would
now like to know how threatening they are in your opinion in [name of the country]?
List of problems
Very
threatening
Not at all
threatening
Don't
know
219
1.
Crime against person
(property and violent crime)
2. Drug abuse
3. Drunkenness and alcoholism
4. Economic crime
9
5. Environmental pollution
6. Domestic violence
7. The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life 9
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
9
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
9
18. Problems related to privatization
9
9
9
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
8
8
8
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
x
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
9
8
9
8
9
7
8
7
8
7
8
6
7
6
7
6
7
5
6
5
6
5
6
4
5
4
5
4
5
3
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2
3
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
x
1
x
1
x
1
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Part 4
Please, indicate the three problems which in your opinion should be most urgently solved
in [name of the country] today?
List of social problems
1. Crime against person (property and violent crime)
2. Drug abuse
3. Drunkenness and alcoholism
4. Economic crime
5. Environmental pollution
6. Domestic violence
7. The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
18. Problems related to privatization
Please indicate the three problems which in your opinion should be most urgently solved
in your place of residence today.
List of social problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Crime against person (property and violent crime)
Drug abuse
Drunkenness and alcoholism
Economic crime
Environmental pollution
Domestic violence
The nationality problem
8. Poor health of the population
9. Poverty
10. Problems caused by smoking
11. Prostitution
12. Unemployment
(Optional items:)
13. Deterioration of cultural life
14. Educational problems
15. Homelessness
16. Gender inequality
17. Poor housing conditions
18. Problems related to privatization
Part 5
1. Sex
a) Male
b) Female
2.
Age
3.
a)
b)
c)
d)
Marital status
Single
Married or co-habiting
Widowed
Divorced
4.
a)
b)
c)
d)
Place of residence
Rural area
Town, up to 50,000 inhabitants
Town, 50,000 to 200,000 inhabitants
Town, over 200,000 inhabitants
5.
How many years have you lived in this area?
6.
a)
b)
c)
d)
Educational level
Primary level
Vocational school
Secondary level, ”gymnasium”, ”high school”
University level
7.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Employment status
Employed
Pensioner
Pupil, student
Housewife
Unemployed
Other, please specify
8.
Social class
Instruction for interviewers:
- For those who are employed, social class is identified by current job/occupation. -For pensioners and unemployed, social class is identified by most recent
job/occupation.
- For dependent members of the family (students, housewives) social class is
identified by job/occupation of the head of the household.
a) Farmer
221
b)
c)
d)
e)
Entrepreneur
Manual worker
White collar
Other, please specify
9.
Number of persons in the household
of which persons under 18 years of age
10. Total net income of the household for the last month
11. Nationality
Part 6
1.
Date of interview
2.
Duration of interview
Started
hour
Ended
hour
min
min
3.
Name and sex of interviewer
4.
Comments by interviewer
5.
Coder's name
Authors & Editors
Vyacheslav Afanasyev
Institute of Sociology
St. Petersburg Branch 25/14, 7th Krasnoarmeiskaya Street,
St. Petersburg 198052, Russia
Yakov Gilinskiy
Institute of Sociology
St. Petersburg Branch 25/14, 7th Krasnoarmeiskaya Street,
St. Petersburg 198052, Russia
Lena Hübner
Institute for Social Work
University of Stockholm
S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
Saija Järvinen
National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (NAWH)
P.O. Box 220, FIN-00531 Helsinki, Finland
Jacek Moskalewicz
Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology
1/9, Sobieskiego Str., 02-957 Warsaw, Poland
Anu Narusk
Department of Family and Culture Sociology,
Institute of International and Social Studies
7 Estonia blvd., EE-0001 Tallinn, Estonia
Maruta Pranka
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, University of Latvia
Akademijas laukums 1, LV-1940 Riga, Latvia
Ritma Rungule
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, University of Latvia
Akademijas laukums 1, LV-1940 Riga, Latvia
223
Birutė Šeršniova
Baltica Surveys Ltd.
Didlaukio 47, 2057 Vilnius, Lithuania
Grażyna Świątkiewicz
Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology
1/9, Sobieskiego Str., 02-957 Warsaw, Poland
Christoffer Tigerstedt
Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research (NAD)
Annankatu 29 A 23, FIN-00100 Helsinki, Finland
Ilze Trapenciere
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, University of Latvia
Akademijas laukums 1, LV-1940 Riga, Latvia
NAD Publications
No. 1 Arbetslöshet och bruk av rusmedel (Unemployment and the Use of Alcohol and
Drugs): Jyrki Jyrkämä. 1980. (NU A 1980:16).
No. 2 Barns socialisation och alkohol (Children's Socialization and Alcohol). (NU B
1980:20).
No. 3 Alkohol och ekonomi i Norden (Alcohol and Economy in the Nordic Countries).
(NU B 1980:21).
No. 4 Kriterier for førtidspension, især om "rusmedelbrugeres" stilling. Om betingelser og
muligheder i Danmark (Criteria for Early Retirement Pension): Asmund W.
Born. NORD. 1981. (Out of print)
No. 5 Förtidspensionering av missbrukare - från kriterier till beslut: (Early Retirement
Pension to Drug Abusers - from Criteria to Decisions). NORD. 1981. (Out of
print)
No. 6 Alkohol och drogforskning i Norden - viktiga forskningsområden (Alcohol and Drug
Research in the Nordic Countries - Research Priorities). NORD. 1982.
No. 7 Behandlingsforskning (Treatment Research). NORD. 1983. (Out of print)
No. 8 Kvinnoforskning kring alkohol och droger (Research on Women, Alcohol and
Drugs). NORD. 1983. (Out of print)
No. 9 Cannabis och medicinska skador - en nordisk värdering (Cannabis and Medical
Consequences - a Nordic Evaluation). (Summary report). NORD. 1984.
No. 10 Cannabis och medicinska skador - en nordisk värdering (Cannabis and Medical
Consequences - a Nordic Evaluation). A report written by a Nordic medical
group of experts. NORD. 1984.
No. 11 Kvinnors bruk av beroendeframkallande läkemedel (The Use of Psychotropic Drugs
Among Women). NORD. 1984.
No. 12 Ungdomskulturer och uppsökande verksamhet (Youth Cultures and Social Work).
1986. (Out of print)
No. 13 Kvinnor, alkohol och behandling (Women, Alcohol and Treatment). Edited by
Margaretha Järvinen & Annika Snare. 1986. (Out of print)
No. 14 Kvinnoforskning kring rusmedel 2 (Research on Women, Alcohol and Drugs 2).
1986.
No. 15 Alkoholbruk och dess konsekvenser (Alcohol, its Use and Consequences). 1986.
No. 16 Women, Alcohol, and Drugs in the Nordic Countries. Edited by Elina HaavioMannila. 1989. (Out of print)
225
No. 17 Perspectives on Controlled Drinking. Edited by Fanny Duckert, Anja Koski-Jännes,
and Sten Rönnberg. 1989.
No. 18 Alcohol in Developing Countries. Proceedings from a meeting. Edited by Johanna
Maula, Maaria Lindblad, and Christoffer Tigerstedt. 1990.
No. 19 EG, alkohol och Norden (The European Community, Alcohol and the Nordic
Countries). Edited by Christoffer Tigerstedt. 1990.
No. 20 Kön, rus och disciplin: en nordisk antologi (Gender, Intoxication and Control).
Edited by Margaretha Järvinen and Pia Rosenqvist. 1991. (Out of print)
No. 21 Social Problems Around the Baltic Sea. Report from the Baltica Study. Edited by
Jussi Simpura and Christoffer Tigerstedt. 1992. (Out of print)
No. 22 Hemlöshet i Norden (Homelessness in the Nordic Countries). Edited by Margaretha
Järvinen & Christoffer Tigerstedt. 1992.
No. 23 Minor Tranquillizers in the Nordic Countries. Edited by Elianne Riska, Eckart
Kühlhorn, Sturla Nordlund and Kirsten Thue Skinhøj. 1993. (Out of print)
No. 24 Narkotikapolitik i internationellt perspektiv. (Drug policy in an international
perspective). Edited by Astrid Skretting, Pia Rosenqvist & Jørgen Jepsen. 1993.
No. 25 Familiebehandling innen rusomsorgen i Norden. (Family treatment in alcohol
treatment in the Nordic countries). Edited by Bente Storm Haugland & Pia
Rosenqvist. 1993.
No. 26 Barnet i alkoholforskningen. En översikt över nordisk samhälls- och
beteendevetenskaplig forskning kring barn och alkohol (Children in alcohol
research). By Nina Edgren-Henrichson. 1993.
No. 27 Missbruk och tvångsvård (Alcohol and Drug Abuse and Involuntary Treatment).
Edited by Margaretha Järvinen & Astrid Skretting in co-operation with Lena
Hübner, Birgit Jessen-Petersen, Aarne Kinnunen and Juhani Lehto. 1994.
(Summary in English)
No. 28 Social Problems in Newspapers: Studies around the Baltic Sea. Edited by Mikko
Lagerspetz. 1994.
No. 29 Läkemedelskontroll: EU och Norden. (The control of pharmaceuticals: EU and the
Nordic countries). Edited by Pia Rosenqvist & Ann-Mari Skorpen. 1996.
(Summary in English)
No. 30 Livet, kärleken och alkoholen. Evaluering av upplysningsprogrammet "Mias
dagbok". (Life, love and alcohol. An evaluation of the education package "Mia's
Diary"). By Line Nersnæs. 1995. (Summary in English)
No. 31 Discussing drugs and control policy. Comparative studies on four Nordic countries.
Edited by Pekka Hakkarainen, Lau Laursen & Christoffer Tigerstedt. 1996.
No. 32 Narkotikasituationen i Norden - utvecklingen 1990-1996. Edited by Börje Olsson,
Pia Rosenqvist & Anders Stymne. 1997. Includes an English summary, 27 pages:
"The Nordic drug scene in the 1990s: recent trends".
No. 33 Diversity in Unity: Studies of Alcoholics Anonymous in Eight Societies. Edited by
Irmgard Eisenbach-Stangl & Pia Rosenqvist. 1998.
No. 34 Att komma för sent så tidigt som möjligt. Om prevention, ungdomskultur och droger
(Coming too late as early as possible. On prevention, youth culture and drugs).
Bengt Svensson, Johanna Svensson & Dolf Tops. 1998. (Summary in English).
No. 35 Journalists, administrators and business people on social problems. A study around
the Baltic Sea. Edited by Sari Hanhinen & Jukka Törrönen. 1998.
No. 36 Public opinion on social problems. A survey around the Baltic Sea. Edited by Jacek
Moskalewicz & Christoffer Tigerstedt. 1998
The publications can be ordered from:
The Nordic Council for Alcohol and Drug Research (NAD)
Annankatu 29 A 23, FIN-00100 Helsinki, Finland
Telephone:
Fax:
E-mail:
+358-9-694 80 82 or +358-9-694 95 72
+358-9-694 90 81
[email protected]
227