Ohisalo, Laihiala, Kouvo, Kahma & Saari. Subjective well-being of food aid recipients in the capitals of Finland, Greece and Lithuania. Presentation at TITA Annual Research Meeting, Turku 15.-16.9.2016.

1. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
TITA seminar 16.9.2016, Turku
Maria Ohisalo, Tuomo Laihiala, Antti Kouvo, Nina Kahma & Juho Saari
Subjective well-being of food aid
recipients in the capitals of
Finland, Greece and Lithuania

2. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Introduction
•A great deal of information about the covariates of
subjective well-being (SWB)
•However, surveys on SWB often based on
representative data on general public
•Usually only a limited number of observations from
the top and the bottom of the social strata (exceptions:
Biswas-Diener & Diener 2001; Oswald 1997)
• Hard-to-survey (H2S) -populations (e.g. Tourangeau)

3. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
SWB and the welfare state
•SWB lower in poor nations (eg. Diener & al. 1995)
•W&P (2009): Happiness higher in generous welfare
states (see also Pacek & Radcliffe 2008)
•Veenhoven (2000): happiness not higher or more
equally distributed because welfare state generosity
(also Berg & Veenhoven 2010)
– But how about the bottom of the welfare state?
– Nation level studies tend to exaggerate well-being

4. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Three worlds of food aid?
•Finland - Nordic welfare state
– population 5 472 000, Helsinki 621 000
(+Vantaa 211 000)
•Greece - Mediterranean welfare state
– population 11 126 000, Athens 665 000
•Lithuania - post communist welfare state
– population 2 958 000, Vilnius 532 000

5. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Research Questions
1. What is the level of the self reported well-being
among the recipients of food aid in three European
capitals?
2. What kind of explanatory factors are associated
with SWB among recipients of food aid?
3. What are the main differences between the different
countries when explaining SWB recipients of food
aid?

6. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Data
•Finnish, Greek and Lithuanian food aid surveys
•Survey from charity food aid distributions
– Helsinki district (N=600)
– Athens (N=500)
– Vilnius (N=558)

7. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Dependent variables
Respondent’s satisfaction with
1. life in general
2. standard of living
3. mental health
4. physical health
• 0 = very rarely, sometimes; 1 = quite often,
constantly

8. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Independent variables
•Age (4 cat.)
•Education (3 cat.)
•Gender (female-male)
•Living alone (no-yes)
•Unemployment (no-yes)
•Homelessness or supported housing

9. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Methods
•Descriptives
•Logit models
•Predicted probabilities (average marginal effects)

10. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Results

11. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Satisfied with life (%)
12.6
30.7
48.9
29.5
38.7
18.2
39.1
19.3
17.4
18.8
11.3
15.4
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Helsinki district
Vilnius
Athens
Very rarely Sometimes Quite often Constantly

12. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
European Social Survey 2010, three countries
(population aged 16-) Satisfaction with life 0-10
Helsinki 7.9
Athens 5.6
Vilnius 5.3
20.10.2016SWB 3 capitals breadlines / Antti Kouvo 12

13. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Satisfied with standard of living (%)
38.6
55.5
42.2
32.8
30.1
22.4
19.5
9.8
17.8
9.1
4.6
17.6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Helsinki district
Vilnius
Athens
Very rarely Sometimes Quite often Constantly 13

14. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Satisfied with physical health (%)
20.1
30.0
27.9
25.8
29.8
19.0
35.6
26.7
16.2
18.5
13.4
36.9
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Helsinki district
Vilnius
Athens
Very rarely Sometimes Quite often Constantly

15. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Satisfied with mental health (%)
11.4
19.9
13.6
22.7
23.4
19.4
40.4
26.3
15.4
25.5
30.4
51.5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Helsinki district
Vilnius
Athens
Very rarely Sometimes Quite often Constantly

16. UEF // University of Eastern Finland 20.10.2016SWB 3 capitals breadlines / Antti Kouvo 16

17. UEF // University of Eastern Finland 20.10.2016SWB 3 capitals breadlines / Antti Kouvo 17

18. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Life satisfaction and age
20.10.2016 18

19. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Life satisfaction and housing
20.10.2016 19

20. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Standard of living and education
20.10.2016 20

21. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Standard of living and employment
20.10.2016 21

22. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Physical health and age
20.10.2016 22

23. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Physical health and gender
20.10.2016 23

24. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Mental health and age
20.10.2016 24

25. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Mental health and education
20.10.2016 25

26. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Conclusions
•Well-being perceived by the recipients of food aid
is associated with both demographic and socio-
economic factors
•Different determinants explain SWB among the
recipients of food aid in the three cities
•The institutional and economical context heavily
influences SWB among the recipients of food aid

27. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Conclusions
•Levels of SWB highest in Helsinki and lowest in Vilnius
– Athens best in satisfaction with standard of living
•Age: 46 year-olds and older report lower levels of SWB on all
aspects
•Higher education: higher levels of standard of living & physical
health
•Gender difference: women report lower levels of SWB on all
aspects
•Unemployment affecting SWB on all aspects but physical health

28. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Discussion
•Generosity of the welfare state
•However standard of living interesting in Greece
– food aid easing the situation?
– whole society in a severe economic situation?
•Differences between generations
•Gender difference – old females in food aid reporting
low levels of SWB
– role of labour, family and pension politics

29. UEF // University of Eastern Finland
Discussion
•The results follow mainly the international level
comparisons on employment, poverty and SWB
between the countries
– but also reveal the demographic and socio-
economic differences in SWB that these
comparisons often lack
– need for including hard-to-survey -populations

30. maria.ohisalo@uef.fi, antti.kouvo@uef.fi, tuomo.laihiala@uef.fi