Vilnius University Department of Geography and Spatial Planning

Vilnius University Department of Geography and Spatial Planning SPATIAL DIFFERENCES OF ECONOMIC WELLBEING: OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE ASPECTS Donatas Burneika Reykjavik

WELLBEING AND GEOGRAPHY • WHAT IS GEOGRAPHY? - THE STUDIES OF EARTH AS A HUMANKINDS‘ HOME TUAN ( UAN T 1991) • ULTIMATE GOAL OF THESE STUDIES? SPATIAL EQUALITY OF WELL-BEING OR EQUALLY HAPPY PEOPLE WHEREVER THEY LIVE

SO WHATS A PROBLEM WITH THIS HOME? • • THIS PLANET HAS - OR RATHER HAD - A PROBLEM, WHICH WAS THIS: MOST • MANY SOLUTIONS WERE SUGGESTED FOR THIS PROBLEM, BUT MOST OF • OF THE PEOPLE LIVING ON IT WERE UNHAPPY FOR PRETTY MUCH OF THE TIME. THESE WERE LARGELY CONCERNED WITH THE MOVEMENTS OF SMALL GREEN PIECES • • OF PAPER, WHICH IS ODD BECAUSE ON THE WHOLE IT WASN'T THE SMALL • • AND SO THE PROBLEM REMAINED; LOTS OF THE PEOPLE WERE MEAN, AND MOST OF THEM WERE MISERABLE. . . (DOUGLAS ADAMS) GREEN PIECES OF PAPER THAT WERE UNHAPPY.

REGIONAL DIFFERENCES OF WELLBEING • 1. IS IT REALLY A CONCERN? T(. HANELL, 2018) • 2. WHAT IS „WELL-BEING“ • 3. WHAT REGIONS?

IS IT REALLY A CONCERN? 2 POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS IN CASE OF EXISTENCE OF REGIONAL DIFFERENCES OF WELL-BEING (IF IT‘S PERCEIVED AS A PROBLEM): 1. EITHER PEOPLE GO TO BETTER PLACES (VOTING WITH THEIR FEET –ROBACK, 1982)NEOLIBERAL ATTITUDES 2. OR 3. IMPROVING LIFE IN LAGGING REGIONS AND WE ALWAYS HAVE TO KEEP IN MIND, THAT WE SPEAK ABOUT EQUALITY NOT ABOUT UNIVERSITY – PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT SO THEY NEED DIFFERENT PLACES. THE MAIN IDEA – PEOPLE HAVE TO HAVE A OPPORTUNITY TO LIVE ACCORDING THEIR PREFERENCES, WHICH, BY THE WAY ALSO ARE CHANGING OR CAN BE CHANGED….

OUTMIGRATION – IS NOT A SOLUTION? • DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PLACES EXIST AND KEEP EXISTING DESPITE FREE MOVEMENT (OSWALD AND LU, 2010), THEREFORE THE OUTFLOW OF PEOPLE IS NOT A SOLUTION FOR IMPROVEMENT OF LIFE QUALITY IN “LESS SUCCESSFUL REGIONS” – IT JUST A SOLUTION FOR THOSE LEAVING PLACES, PROVIDED THEY HAVE MANAGED TO CREATE BETTER LIFE IN MORE SUCCESSFUL REGIONS. • MIGRATIONS ARE SELECTIVE, THEREFORE LOOSING REGIONS REMAIN IN DISADVANTAGED POSSITIONS AS HUMANS ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT ECONOMIC RESOURCE

1. REGIONAL WELL-BEING – 3 MAIN ASPECTS • 1. OBJECTIVE (HARDLY EXISTS) – SUBJECTIVE (HARDLY MEASURABLE)? • 2. ECONOMIC WELL-BEING (TOO NARROW) – SELF SATISFACTION OF LIFE OR HAPPINESS(NO DATA AT LOW LEVEL)? • 3. NATIONAL - REGIONAL – LOCAL? (WHAT AREA IS MOST SUITABLE FOR THE ANALYSIS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT OR HUMAN PROSPERITY? )

CONCEPT OF WELL-BEING – WHAT REALLY ILLUSTRATES HOW DIFFERENTLY PEOPLE LIVE ACROSS THE SPACE OBJECTIVE DATA – SUBJECTIVE FEELINGS • INCOME, GDP, LIFE EXPECTANCY. . . ETC. • LIFE QUALITY • WELL-BEING • SELF SATISFACTION WITH LIFE • HAPPINESS

SUBJECTIVE VS OBJECTIVE WELL-BEING • • • SUBJECTIVE ONE GAINS MORE AND MORE ATTENTIOND(IENER, 2000, JORDAN, 2008, SCHVANEN AND ATKINSON 2015, ALAMANTILA ET AL, 2018, MORRISON AND WECKROTH, 2018, ETC…. ). ITS MORE IMPORTANT HOW PEOPLE PERCEIVE THEIR WELL-BEING, THAN WHAT MEASURABLE INDICATORS REVEAL. IN 2014 1/4 % OF QUESTIONED YOUNGSTERSLIN ITHUANIAN PERIPHERY DECLAREAD THAT THEY LIKE EVERYTHING IN THEIR TOWN BUT STILL THEY WANT TO LEAVE IT. . . BASICALLY AT THE SAME TIME CARRIED OUT SOCIOLOGICAL REQUEST INLT DIDIN‘T FIND ANY HAPPY PERSON INTAURAGE COUNTY. . . HOWEVER SPECIALISED TARGETED (COSTLY) SURVEYS ARE NEEDED FOR THE REVELATION OF SITUATION AT MUNICIPAL LEVEL…SO WE MUST BELIEVE THAT OBJECTIVE WELL-BEING (OR RATHER OBJECTIVE DATA) IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR(INDICATOR)OF SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING, SATISFACTIONWITH LIFE OR HAPPINESS…

SUBJECTIVE WELLBEING THOUGH QUALITATIVE RESEARCHES LIKE INTERVIEWS ARE MOST SUITABLE FOR REVELATION OF THIS PHENOMENON, SOME UNEXPECTED SOURCES FOR UNDERSTANDING ITS IMPORTANCE ARE AVAILABLE AS WELL – I. E. PROVERBS: THE GRASS IS ALWAYS GREENER ELSEWHERE… EVERYWHERE IS GOOD WHERE WE ARE NOT… YOU WON’T BE A PROPHET IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY… ALL THIS WISDOM REVEALS LONG LASTING UNDERSTANDING THAT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PLACES AND PERSONAL DECISIONS ACTUALLY HAS WEEK RELATIONS WITH REALITY OR OBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES OF LIFE QUALITY

OBJECTIVE WELL-BEING • WE MUST AGREE THAT OBJECTIVE AND EXACT MEASUREMENTS OF SUCH A SUBJECTIVE CATEGORY ARE IMPOSSIBLE. • ON THE OTHER HAND MANY WOULD AGREE THAT SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING DEPENDS ON OBJECTIVE REALITY AND DIFFERENCES OF INCOME OR ITS CHANGES OVER TIME AND SPACE SHOULD MAKE VISIBLE IMPACT ON PERSONAL SATISFACTION WITH LIFE. • THE FACT THAT RESIDENTS OF OTHER MUNICIPALITY, REGION OR STATE EARN MORE, SHOULD MAKE AT LEAST SOME PEOPLE TO BE LESS HAPPY AND TRIGGER SOME WISH TO CHANGE ONES PLACE OF RESIDENCE.

IN OTHER WORDS. . . • THOUGH “DISTANT METROPOLIS IS NEVER PERCEIVED IN PERFECT MATERIAL TERMS” AND ACTIONS ARE DRIVEN BY ITS MEANING D (. LEY) BUT STILL, OBJECTIVE DIFFERENCES IN WELL BEING, MOSTLY RELATED TO DIFFERENCES OF INCOMES (EMPLOYMENT AND SALARIES) PLAY IMPORTANT ROLE REDISTRIBUTING POPULATION IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN THESE DIFFERENCES ARE HIGH • THIS REDISTRIBUTION SHOULD RESULT INCHANGING SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC STRUCTURE OF A COUNTRY, AS MIGRATIONS ARE SPATIALLY SELECTIVE

WHAT REGIONS ARE TO BE CONCERNED? – QUESTION OF SCALE • EVEN IF WE AGREE THAT REGIONAL DIFFERENCES OF WELLBEING IS A CONCERN OF A STATE (IN THIS CASE THE REVELATION OF THESE DIFFERENCES IS ITS CONCERN AS WELL), ONE MAY ARGUE ON WHAT PARTICULAR LEVEL OF REGIONS SHOULD IT BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT?

QUESTION OF SCALE DEPENDS ON YOUR TASK • BIG NUTS 1 OR 2 REGIONS, PRESENTING AREAS OFTEN BIGGER THAN SMALL STATES? REGIONS WITH METROPOLITAN CITIES, HEI NETWORKS, GOVERNMENTS…. FUNCTIONING AS ECONOMIC SYSTEMS BUT STILL WITH HUGE ACTUAL DIFFERENCES OF LIFE QUALITY…CONCERN OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • SMALL REGIONS CORRESPONDING TO LABOUR MARKET AREAS (COMMUTING REGIONS? –NUTS 3 – LAU 1) – AREAS WITHIN WHICH PEOPLE REALLY LIVE AND CAN CHANGE THEIR WORKPLACE OR LIVING PLACE WITHOUT CHANGING THEIR PLACE IDENTITY, RELATIONS WITH THEIR PLACE (RELPH, 1972). CONCERN OF EQUAL WELL-BEING • SMALL AREAS, PRESENTING ACTUAL LIVING ENVIRONMENT? CONCERN OF LIFE QUALITY AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES OF LIFE (SEGREGATION STUDIES)

MEASURING “OBJECTIVE” WELL-BEING • GDP PER CAPITA? . . • SET OF INDICATORS DESCRIBING SITUATION IN VARIOUS AREAS (REGIONS, LOCALITES, PLACES) USUALLY SEVERAL GROUPS OF INDICES FORMING SOME SYNTHETIC ONE (I. E. 11 GROUPS IN CASE OF OECD STUDIES) • PROBLEM (APART FROM OTHER – ONLY ) A FEW OF THEM ARE AVAILABLE AT LEVEL WHERE EVERYDAY LIFE TAKE PLACE (HOME-WORKLEISURE, I. E. MUNICIPALITY) • SO: WAGES AND EMPLOYMENT. . .

GDP – NUTS 2 2008 - 2016 2010 NUTS 3 -

GDP GROWTH 2001 -2016 2007 -2016, P. P

“COUNTRIES NEED A NEW MEASURE THAT ASSESSES AND QUANTIFIES THE THINGS THAT REALLY MATTER TO REAL PEOPLE: DO I HAVE ENOUGH TO EAT? DO I HAVE SHELTER? CAN I GET AN EDUCATION? THE SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX WAS CREATED TO MEET THAT NEED. ” MICHAEL GREEN, CEO OF THE SOCIAL PROGRESS IMPERATIVE (NONPROFIT BASED IN WASHINGTON, 2019) THE SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX IS A NEW WAY TO DEFINE THE SUCCESS OF OUR SOCIETIES. IT IS A COMPREHENSIVE MEASURE OF REAL QUALITY OF LIFE, INDEPENDENT OF ECONOMIC INDICATORS. THE SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX IS DESIGNED TO COMPLEMENT, RATHER THAN REPLACE, ECONOMIC MEASURES SUCH AS GDP. SOCIAL PROGRESS IS DEFINED IN THIS INDEX AS THE CAPACITY OF A SOCIETY TO MEET THE BASIC HUMAN NEEDS OF ITS CITIZENS, ESTABLISH THE BUILDING BLOCKS THAT ALLOW CITIZENS AND COMMUNITIES TO ENHANCE AND SUSTAIN THE QUALITY OF THEIR LIVES AND CREATE THE CONDITIONS FOR ALL INDIVIDUALS TO REACH THEIR FULL POTENTIAL

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX

THE EU REGIONAL SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX AIMS TO MEASURE SOCIAL PROGRESS FOR EACH REGION AS A COMPLEMENT TO TRADITIONAL MEASURES OF ECONOMIC PROGRESS. AS IT IS INTENDED TO COMPLEMENT MEASURES BASED ON GDP, INCOME OR EMPLOYMENT, IT PURPOSELY LEAVES SUCH INDICATORS OUT OF THE INDEX. IT FOLLOWS THE OVERALL FRAMEWORK OF THE GLOBAL SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX AND IS BASED ON FIFTY INDICATORS, PRIMARILY FROM EUROSTAT.

2016 (NORDREGIO, 2019)

LITHUANIA: HIGHEST COMPONENT SCORES NUTRITION AND BASIC MEDICAL CARE 97, 3 WATER AND SANITATION 96. 35 ACCESS TO BASIC KNOWLEDGE 96. 30 PERSONAL RIGHTS 93. 97 LOWEST COMPONENT SCORES ACCESS TO ADVANCED EDUCATION 49. 79 INCLUSIVENESS 63. 54 HEALTH AND WELLNESS 67. 84

OECD REGIONAL WELL-BEING: A CLOSER MEASURE OF LIFE: THERE IS A GROWING AWARENESS THAT WE MUST GO BEYOND GDP AND ECONOMIC STATISTICS TO GET A FULLER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW SOCIETY IS DOING. BUT IT IS ALSO CRUCIAL TO ZOOM IN ON HOW LIFE IS LIVED IN THIS INITIATIVE, EACH REGION IS MEASURED IN ELEVEN TOPICS – INCOME, JOBS, HOUSING, HEALTH, ACCESS TO SERVICES, ENVIRONMENT, EDUCATION, SAFETY, CIVIC ENGAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE, COMMUNITY, AND LIFE SATISFACTION. A SCORE HAS BEEN CALCULATED FOR EACH TOPIC SO THAT YOU CAN COMPARE PLACES AND TOPICS WITHIN AND ACROSS COUNTRIES. HE ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT

OECD WELLBEING INDEX (FOR EXAMPLE, IN CASE OF LITHUANIAN REGIONS, ONLY 9 OF 11 GROUPS ARE AVAILABLE EVEN AT NUTS 3 REGIONAL LEVEL)

USUAL METHODS AND DATA FOR EVALUATION OF OBJECTIVE WELLBEING AT LOCAL (REGIONAL) LEVEL : CASE OF LITHUANIA INDUCTIVE RESEARCH BASED ON EMPHIRICAL SPATIAL ANALYSIS OF STATSITICAL DATA: SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATISATICS AT MUNICIPAL LEVEL (LAU 1) POPULATION CENSUSES 2001 AND 2011 (LAU 2 AND CENSUS TRACK LEVEL) DATA OF VARIOUS STATE SERVICES SUCH AS TAX INPECTION OF SOCIAL SECURITY OFFICE

PART 1 – REGIONAL (LOCAL) CHANGES OF OBJECTIVE ECONOMIC WELLBEING IN POST COMMUNIST ERA – CHANGES OF EMPLOYMENT 2010 - 2017 1995 - 2010

LABOUR MARKET: UNEMPLOYMENT 2010 - 2017 1997 - 2009

WAGE DIFFERENCES 2017 1995

RESULT - EMIGRATION (VOTING WITH FEET? ) 2010 - 2017 1994 -2009

CHANGE OF THE NUMBER OF POPULATION (MEASURE OF WELBEING? )

METROPOLISATION: MIGRATIONAL REGIONS OF VILNIUS, KAUNAS AND KLAIPĖDA METROPOLITAN CENTRES (DOMINANT DESTINAITONS OF INNER MIGRANTS) 2001 AND 2016

SEGREGATION Change of share of residents with higher occupation status, 2001 – 2011, p. p SOCIAL SEGREGATION (SOCIAL DOWNGRADE OF PERIURBAN AREAS)

RESULT OF INNER MIGRATION: DIFFERENTIATING URBAN LANDSCAPES (CONCENTRATION OF RESIDENTS WITH THE HIGHER OCCUPATIONAL STATUS IN LAU 2 REGIONS IN 2001 -2011; P. P. ) Due to migrations urban space is being differentiated – the social „upgrading“ of Lithuanian metropolitan areas doesn’t result in upgrading of certain urban spaces

Another result – groving political differentiation both in the country and inside the metropolitan areas The support for centre-right wing political parties in Vilnius MA in 2000 and 2012

TO SUM UP • THERE ARE NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE THAT FAST „SHOCK TERAPHY“ OF 90 -IES IS MAKING VISIBLE IMPACT ON EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT AND ESPECIALLY INCOMES IN PERIPHERAL AREAS IN POST CRISIS PERIOD. EMIGRATION COULD BE A REASON FOR THIS ABSENCE (SO NEO-LIBERAL ATTITUDES ARE RIGHT? ). • THOUGH THE MAIN „WINNERS“ OF LATEST DEVELOPMENTS SEEM TO BE SUBURBAN AND PERIURBAN AREAS OF METROPOLITAN CITIES, NAMELY THESE AREAS ARE THE MOST SOCIALLY SEGREGATED ESPECIALLY IN A MOST „PROSPEROUS“ CAPITAL CITY REGION. • DISTANT PERIPHERAL AREAS MAY NOT SEEM TO BE THE MOST ATTRACTIVE PLACES FOR MIGRANTS, THEY DO NOT SUFFER FROM THE MORE INTENSE JOB LOS OR MORE SLOW INCREASE OF WAGES, BUT CHANGES OF THEIR SOCIAL STRUCTURE HAVE CLEARLY NEGATIVE TREND. EMIGRATION PROBABLY IS HELPING TO SOLVE SOME LABOUR MARKET PROBLEMS IN PERIPHERY BUT DEMAGES ITS FUTURE.

Empty “central kolchoz settlements”

Thank you for your attention!