Rural sociology in Estonia

1. Rural sociology in Estonia Marko Kaasik University of Tartu & Estonian Agricultural University mkaasik@ut.ee

2. Questionnaire-based studies - about last 40 years, first in the University of Tartu. • Closed in 1974, re-established in the restitution time under Estonian Agricultural University. • 11 questioning studies during 1992 - 1997, a few studies after 1997. • Drawback: no (socially and territorially representative) basic study performed • Very few publications in other languages than Estonian.

3. Performed studies are either regional or addressed to specific social groups. • Main group of governmental interest - people most likely initiating development in rural areas: enterpreneurs, farmers, employees of local authorities, intellectuals. • Face-to-face interviews: only a few per cent of respondents reject to answer. • In last 5 years mainly postal questioning (less expensive): 25-50% answers.

4. Background information: • Remarkable changes towards restitution - since 1989. • Estonia became independent 1991. • Rapid (and quite successful) re-orientation to modern business, liberal economic policy. • Deep economic fall in agriculture shortly after achieving independence: producing 2-3 times more than internal consumption in eighties, but less than internal consumption yet. • Poverty and depopulation in rural areas, regionally disasterous.

5. Background information: • Agricultural and regional policy is not a governmental priority: free competition ideology, no financial support. • Gradually growing interest towards rural life during last years - due to EU accession.

6. Background information: historical past and its impacts • Estonian village is incompact, Nordic type. • Since 19th century to 1950 “individualistic” farming prevailed. • Estonians never in history had their own ruling class. • Land property of German nobility was nationalised and divided between farmers in twenties and not restituted in general.

7. A typical study: Socio-economical development in rural areas, November 1999 900 questionnaires sent by post, 450 answers: • 138 employees of local authorities • 153 educational, cultural and medicine employees • 68 enterpreneurs • 68 farmers • 30 others Average age 45 years, 41% women, 59% men.

8. A few interesting results - comparable with “Trends of Social Changes in Rural Areas and in Agriculture” V. Majerova et al., 1999 • Real net income per family member: 2682 EEK • Estimated income needed to live “normally”: 4602 EEK • Estimated income to live “well”: 9899 EEK 1 EUR = 15.65 EEK (Estonian kroons) NB! Elite, not representative for whole community. • Richest age group: 30 - 39 years. Important: elder people could not adapt to totally changed economic conditions.

9. Family structure • Average family size: 3.8 members • 1.8 children per family, 0.8 of them adult • Distribution of families by size: • Many Estonian rural families have more than 2 generations, in-laws etc.

10. Business barriers • In both countries was asked block of 20 questions on business barriers, not adequate one-to-one, but covered nearly same space of meanings. • Main business barriers in Estonia: lack of financial capital, feeling of uncertainty, technical equipment, no credit, lack of market, no wish to take risk, no partners. • Main business barriers in Czech republic: financial problems on state level, low purchasing power, small market, depopulation, small choice of job description. Conclusion: financial and market problems are common, but Estonians feel more uncertain, Czech seems lacking proper workers.

11. Farms, farmers • All private farms over 0.6 ha in Estonia are restituted or bought or somehow obtained during the collapse of collective farms after 1989. • Comparison of farm sizes in two countries: • An “average” Estonian farmer has about 30 ha land, nearly a half agricultural and half forest.

12. Education • According to UN education index, Estonia is among 20 most educated nations in the world. • About 10% of rural people have higher education. High school or specialised high school education is prevailing, lower education level than 8 years is miscellaneous (mainly very old or disabled people). • According to study from 1999 (shifted selection, of course), about 95% of respondents wish higher education to their children. • About 80% of people are ready to support financially the education of their children, if this improves its quality. • Historical experience: education and knowledge (not force, weapons or faith) helped us to make our life better. • Drawback: 1/2 of people state that financial situation is an obstacle to get educated as wished.

13. Population and migration • Population growth in Estonia is strongly negative • Migration balance is negative as well • No substantial differences between urban and rural areas. Only in the families of private farmers there is more births than deaths. • Main direction of migration: from remote rural areas to small towns. • Vastly dominating reason of moving: better job or possibility to get job at all.

14. Religion and faith • Low importance in social life (seems more important for government than for people). • Traditionally dominating Lutherian church, but with strong orthodox minority. Roman catholic church is marginal. Several protestant sects, incl. a sect, which grew from Bohemian Brothers (long history in Estonia). • According to a recent study, about 10% of people feels some spiritual identity with ancient Fenno-ugric (non-Christian) belief, even more among intellectuals. • According to several studies, about 30-40% of people visit church during great fests, about 2% (regionally up to 4%) regularly. • Public opinion is tolerant for multitude of beliefs, but not very much for missioning.

15. Specialties of our group: Cultural-anthropological approach • Most of questionnaires include cultural block (variable) in addition to traditional sociological questions. Some examples: • Psychological identity categories: (I) certain, (II) stagnating, (III) uncertain, (IV) fragmentary - distribution was found rather stable in time, geographically and between social groups. • Cultural identity: regional, Estonian, European, Russian, American, world (cosmopolitic) culture. • Opinions about rather philosophical themes: death, connections between human being and nature etc. Strong influence of pre-Christian belief is found.

16. Specialties of our group: Geoinformatical data processing • Simplest approach: raster maps interpolated going on from the habitation sites of respondents. Examples: • Estimated environmental indicators: air quality, subsoil water quality, condition of rivers and lakes, soil fertility. Well correlated with objective parameters: good experts. • General condition of infrastructure functions, a condensed indicator, sum of entire block of questions: better near Tallinn.

17. What we have: • A rich database from different times and about different social groups, partially not processed yet. Answers to a large variety of questions. What we are lacking: • Foreign relations, capable to carry out projects at international level.

18. Proposal for cooperation: Comparative studies: 1. Comparing the existing data of both partners, data processing with the aim to match the results together. 2. New studies with unified methodology. Perhaps to apply for a grant from any international authority?