2010/2011

Table 1.2.9. Ranking of different countries according to
the 2009 and 2010 Legatum Prosperity Index
Source: The 2010 Legatum Prosperity Index
Overall rank
2010 2009
Norway 1. 1.
Denmark 2. 2.
Finland 3. 4.
Australia 4. 5.
New Zealand 5. 3.
Sweden 6. 7.
Germany 15. 16.
Poland 29. 28.
Estonia 35. 31.
Lithuania 42. 40.
Latvia 47. 41.
Russia 63. 62.
Table 1.2.10. At the present time, would you say that
things are going in the right direction or in the wrong
direction in your country? (% of positive answers)
Source: Eurobarometer
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Estonia 53 56 42 42 45
Latvia 40 26 19 7 21
Lithuania 50 39 19 10 25
Poland 21 31 41 36 46
Germany 23 39 38 40 36
Denmark 48 59 44 42 32
Sweden 49 44 47 53 61
Finland 52 51 36 46 45
compares the majority of the world’s countries based on
economic growth, the economic, political and cultural
factors that contribute to prosperity and the social and
political factors related to well-being and satisfaction.
The Legatum Institute’s index has a broader scope than
the UN Human Development Index as it includes more
indicators related to subjective well-being, in addition to
external circumstances and factors.
In 2010, the Legatum Institute published an updated
index based on 89 separate indicators, which were obtained
from objective statistical data as well as survey results
and were compiled intro eight sub-indices, each of which
includes indicators related to factors that impact prosperity
(per capita income) and well-being (satisfaction).
Table 1.2.9 shows the top of the 110 countries included
in the Prosperity Index and compares the position of the
countries of the Baltic Sea region in the ranking list. The
Nordic countries are holding the first three positions at
the top of the list, while Australia and New Zealand also
have high positions. We can also see that according to the
Legatum Prosperity Index, the countries of the Baltic Sea
region fall, once again, into separate categories that are
similar to the ones based on the human development indicators.
Estonia’s position is higher: it is among the top 30
countries in terms of the Entrepreneurship and Governance
sub-indices (23rd rank). However, in terms of several
sub-indices, Estonia is ranked below the 40th position
and is among the average ranking countries (middle
50) in the lists.
It is worth noting that while Estonia’s externally
observable institutional indicators are relatively good,
its subjective well-being and satisfaction indicators
are rather low. This is clearly expressed in the Legatum
Report’s summarized country description of Estonia
according to specific domains (sub-indices):
• Despite moderately high levels of innovation and low
start-up costs, most Estonians are pessimistic about
their entrepreneurial environment;
• Estonia’s governance approaches Western European
levels in many areas, but the country’s citizenry is less
satisfied;
• Although health outcomes are consistently above global
averages, the population does not feel healthy;
• Despite relatively high levels of civic freedom, Estonia’s
population is dissatisfied with their level of free
choice and is relatively intolerant of minorities;
• Despite a high level of trust, the level of social capital
and access to support networks is very low (Legatum
2010: 158–159).
The Legatum index poses the question: “Considering
the country’s relatively encouraging objective indicators,
why are Estonians still so discontented with almost every
aspect of their lives?” (Masso 2010). At the same time,
the level of dissatisfaction is even higher among Latvians
and Lithuanians (Legatum 2010: 206–207, 210–211).
One potential answer is that the high level of dissatisfaction
can be related to internal insecurity, the lack of clear
vision and a weak identity.
However, according to the annual Eurobarometer
public opinion survey, Estonians have a relatively positive
opinion about the work of national institutions, compared
to people in Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, but also
compared to some Western European countries. As a
result of the economic crisis in 2008 and 2009, the level of
public satisfaction dropped in many countries of the Baltic
Sea region, especially Latvia and Lithuania. The level
of positive opinions generally rose in 2010. This is clearly
reflected by the answers to the question: “Would you say
that things are going in the right or wrong direction in
your country?” (see Table 1.2.10).
Table 1.2.10 also points to the fact that a general positive
attitude towards the course of development of one’s
country depends on factors other than the economic situation,
such as satisfaction with the political developments.
Recent elections presumably contribute to people’s
positive outlook, which could explain the increase
in the population’s positive attitude towards developments
in Denmark and Poland in 2007. In addition
to the economic recovery, the expectation of changes
related to the election results was probably also one of
the factors that increased the level of positive assessments
in Sweden and Latvia in 2010, in comparison to
the previous year.
In general, the dynamics of social satisfaction is much
more complicated than the development of the primary
economic and social indicators, since the range of factors
that have a significant impact on the process is wider.
| 18