Poverty, unemployment and social exclusion by United Nations Development Programme in Croatia

United Nations Development Programme

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

CIP - Katalogizacija u publikaciji Nacionalna i sveučilišna knjižnica - Zagreb UDK 316.344.7(497.5) 364.65-058.34(497.5) 331.56(497.5) POVERTY, unemployment and social exclusion / <translation into English Snježana Kordić ; editor in chief Nenad Starc>. - 1st ed. - Zagreb : United Nations Development Programme, 2006. Izv. stv. nasl.: Siromaštvo, nezaposlenost i socijalna isključenost. ISBN 953-99888-6-1 I. Siromaštvo -- Hrvatska II. Nezaposlenost -- Hrvatska III. Socijalna isključenost -- Hrvatska 460331144

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is the UN’s global development network, advocating for change and connecting countries to knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. We are on the ground in 166 countries, working with them on their own solutions to global and national development challenges. As they develop local capacity, they draw on the people of UNDP and our wide range of partners. Short extracts from this publication may be reproduced unaltered without authorisation, on condition that the source is indicated. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of UNDP.

Copyright © 2006 By the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) in Croatia, Kesterčanekova 1, 10000 Zagreb, Hrvatska Editors (in alphabetical order): Lana Ofak, Nenad Starc (editor-in-chief), and Senada Šelo Šabić Peer reviewers (in alphabetical order): Domagoj Račić, Nenad Starc, Paul Stubbs and Zdenko Babić Translation into English and editing (English version): Davies d.o.o. and in part Snježana Kordić Editing (Croatian version): Kata Zalović-Fišter and Vicko Krampus Cover and design: KO:KE creative farm Print: Denona d.o.o. Printed in Zagreb, Croatia First edition 2006 ISBN: 953-99888-6-1

Authors (in order of chapters): Zoran Šućur, Department of Social Work at the Faculty of Law of the University of Zagreb (The Concept of Social Exclusion and The Experience in Croatia) Teo Matković, Department of Social Work at the Faculty of Law of the University of Zagreb (Investigating Social Exclusion – Empirical Analysis of Social Exclusion) Aleksandar Štulhofer, Department of Sociology at the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Zagreb (Investigating Social Exclusion – Empirical Analysis of Social Exclusion) Branimir Šverko, Department of Psychology at the Faculty of Philosophy of the University of Zagreb (Investigating Social Exclusion – Unemployment and Social Exclusion) Predrag Bejaković, Institute of Public Finance, Zagreb (Long-Term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion) Jasmina Papa, Independent Consultant (Discrimination – A Mechanism of Social Exclusion) Nikola Pastuović, Department for the Education and Training of School Subject Teachers in Pedagogy, Psychology, Didactics and Teaching Methodology at the Teacher Education Academy of the University of Zagreb (Social Inclusion through Education) Matija Škegro, Central Bureau of Statistics (Statistical Appendix)

Contents

Foreword

Preface

Chapter 1: The Concept of Social Exclusion

1.1 Introduction to the concept of social exclusion

1.2 Challenges of terminology

1.3 Dimensions of exclusion

1.4 Exclusion and education

Chapter 2: The experience in Croatia

2.1 Poverty and unemployment

2.2 Social networks

2.3 Young people

2.4 The Roma

2.5 Conclusion

Chapter 3: Investigating Social Exclusion

3.1 Empirical analysis of social exclusion

3.1.1 Areas of deprivation and the extent of social exclusion

3.1.2 How excluded are the excluded?

3.1.3 Who are the socially excluded, and where do they live?

3.1.4 Conclusion

3.2 Unemployment and social exclusion

3.2.1 Impact of prolonged unemployment and employment

3.2.2 The likelihood of unemployed people finding work

3.2.3 Conclusion

Chapter 4: Long-term unemployment â&#x20AC;&#x201C; A Determinant of Social Exclusion

4.1 The significance of employment and unemployment

4.2 The situation in developed and transition countries

4.3 The situation in Croatia

4.3.1 Long-term unemployment

4.3.2 What has been done?

4.4 Conclusion

Chapter 5: Discrimination â&#x20AC;&#x201C; A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

5.1 The Roma

5.1.1 Discrimination

5.1.2 Challenges

5.2 People with Learning Disabilities

5.2.1 Discrimination

5.2.2 Challenges

5.3 Conclusion

Chapter 6: Social Inclusion through Education

6.1 Preschool education

6.2 Primary education

6.3 Compulsory basic and secondary education

6.4 An overview of Europe

6.5 Educational inclusion/exclusion in Croatia

6.5.1 Basic education

6.5.2 Adult education

Chapter 7: Policy Recommendations

7.1 Measures for the systematic monitoring of social exclusion

7.2 Work activation and employment measures

7.3 Measures for alleviating poverty

7.4 Educational measures

7.5 Anti-discrimination measures

7.6 Measures for raising public awareness and stimulating social solidarity and philanthropy

Appendix 1: Methodological Explanations for Chapter 3

Empirical analysis of social exclusion (Chapter 3.1)

Unemployment and social exclusion (Chapter 3.2)

Statistical Appendix

Ratified Human Rights Conventions

Bibliography

Foreword

Sustainable Human Development and Social Exclusion are mutually exclusive subjects. While concepts of exclusion and its causes have received ample coverage in literature, little has yet been published about the way the major elements of exclusion (poverty, unemployment and lack of social contacts) combine in creating a situation from which it is quite difficult to escape. Social exclusion must be overcome, as it is a moral imperative for the European social soliarity to provide everybody with better opportunities in life. Just consider the figures: an estimated 10 percent of the Croatian population, thus roughly 440,000 people, are estimated to be socially excluded, and up to an additional 5 percent are assessed to be at high risk of being socially excluded. And it is not just them, but also their families and children that are and will be affected, one generation after the other, unless special measures are undertaken. Equal opportunities in society and empowerment of vulnerable social groups increase their chances for active and productive participation in society. The benefits of individualsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; active contribution to society as a whole are considerable, not only in the sense of financial savings but also in terms of improved social integration, which is particularly important in the light of European integration. The insights shared through this publication and the policy and practical recommendations that it contains are powerful messages for politicians, civil society organisations, the private sector, and government alike. Social exclusion is not a choice; it is the indication of extremely unequal distribution of social and material wealth, waning social solidarity, limited access to opportunities, and the inadequate implementation of European and global norms and standards. The Report on Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion is the first step in Croatia to define Social Exclusion, find its implication in society and help the Croatian government in adopting strategies and policies that aim to improve the status of the most vulnerable groups. The Report can also facilitate the preparation of the Joint Inclusion Memorandum, and thus support Croatia in the EU accession process. The present publication does not attempt to cover all aspects social exclusion â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a task that will be the theme of the next UNDP National Human Development Report 2006. Instead, it attempts to draw links between unemployment, poverty and exclusion, which we feel is of paramount importance to Croatian society. I would like to thank all those whose creative ideas and valuable knowledge have facilitated the preparation of this Report, especially the former UNDP Resident Representative in Croatia, Mr. Cornelis Klein, under whose leadership the idea for this Report was born.

Yuri Afanasiev Resident Representative UNDP Croatia

Preface

This Report examines the problem of poverty, unemployment and social exclusion in Croatia. The topic arose in the light of Croatian candidate status for the accession to the European Union. As its predecessors, Croatia too has had to face many challenges in fulfilling demanding EU requirements. One of these requirements was the preparation of the Joint Memorandum on Social Inclusion (JIM), which outlines the basic challenges which a candidate country is facing with regard to poverty, human security and social exclusion, evaluates the advantages and shortcomings of current inclusion policies, and defines their priorities and recommendations for the future. It also serves as the basis for the National Action Plan on Social Inclusion which is prepared by all new member states. The United Nation’s Millennium Declaration and Millennium Development Goals largely coincide with the priorities of social inclusion. Recognising the possibility of more successful joint activity, UNDP and the EU have begun to cooperate on realising the Millennium Development Goals and strengthening the process of social inclusion. In order to incite the national debate on the topic of social exclusion and give this concept a more practical application, United Nations Development Programme in Croatia has jointly with Croatian experts on poverty, education, employment and minority groups, decided to take the first step in attempting to understand the extent and implications of social exclusion in Croatia. It is the intention of UNDP to continue stimulating the national discussion on social exclusion and to follow up with the 2006 National Human Development Report (NHDR) on Social Exclusion, discussing in more dept other socially excluded groups in Croatian society which were not the focus of this Report, and supplementing this analysis with localized indicators of social exclusion. This NHDR will coincide with Croatian JIM, thus complementing Croatian efforts and supporting the integration into the EU. The exclusion of certain members and entire groups of society from mainstream social currents is one of the more serious challenges facing the world today. Generally put, individuals, social groups, or geographical areas can be considered socially excluded if they experience political, economic and/or social disadvantages, lack of confidence, a sense of powerlessness or a degree of social alienation, resulting from a combination of interrelated problems, such as regional disparities, unemployment, poor professional or social skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime and violence levels or identification with a minority group. Social exclusion is not merely a problem of economic disadvantages such as income poverty or unemployment. The interaction of different dimensions of social exclusion creates different patterns and degrees of exclusion, as this Report in fact confirms. Whilst it is easy to recognise persons who are fully socially included, as well as those who are completely excluded, it is much more difficult to identify those who fall somewhere in the middle - in the “grey“ area – and who face the risk of social exclusion. Social exclusion encompasses, similarly to unfulfilled human rights, the individuals’ inability to access public services, take part in the life of a community and function in society with sense of personal dignity. Most countries have not developed systems to prevent social exclusion. The aspiring EU members are not an exception. Recent events in France confirm that this is far from being a solved problem. Given that there is no EU enforcement mechanism for social inclusion, it becomes easy for the governments to marginalise the problem of social exclusion and place economic and political issues at the forefront of a country’s aspirations. National strategies that combat social exclusion and which align with human rights approaches must attempt to lift the most vulnerable social groups out of their position of disadvantage, preventing further exclusion of individuals and groups at risk. Makers of inclusion policy can, when needed, single out certain particularly vulnerable groups (for example the homeless, people living with disabilities, substance abusers, children without parental care, Roma and other minorities, underage mothers and ex-convicts), but they must be aware that no single instrument exists for measuring the social exclusion of groups with different social and demographic characteristics. In their efforts to prevent or mitigate exclusion, policy makers should make use of various measures and strategies. Naturally, all of socially excluded groups cannot be covered in one stride, and neither can this Report. Rather, it attempts to give an assessment of the problem of social exclusion, and to recommend ways of addressing it.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 1 of the Report defines social exclusion within its current European definition and elaborates on its three basic components: poverty, unemployment and social isolation. Chapter 2 provides insight into the ever more complex Croatian experience with social exclusion, poverty, unemployment, social networks, and youth and Roma as an example of socially excluded groups or those facing multiple disadvantages. Chapter 3 presents two studies on social exclusion. The first is a preliminary empirical analysis of socially excluded persons in Croatia, with reference to the regional distribution and demographic characteristics of the excluded. The second study discusses employment as one of the most important elements of social exclusion and pays particular attention to the long-term unemployed, who were observed over two years in a longitudinal study, clearly indicating that long-term unemployment leads to social isolation and poverty. Chapter 4 is concerned with long-term unemployment in Croatia as compared to the unemployment in EU Member States. It highlights the employment measures taken so far and provides recommendations for an active labour market policy. Chapter 5 provides a number of practical examples of difficulties, misunderstandings, and discriminatory practises with respect to the education of the Roma and children with learning disabilities. Chapter 6 presents education as one of the possible causes of social exclusion, highlighting at the same time its critical role in achieving social integration. Finally, Chapter 7 provides recommendations for systematic monitoring of social exclusion, inclusion trough education, work activation, alleviating poverty and discrimination, raising public awareness about social exclusion issues, and stimulating social solidarity and action.

The Editors

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 1:

The Concept of Social Exclusion

In 1989, the term “social exclusion“ became a constituent part of the Preamble to the European Social Charter – the basic document of the Council of Europe concerning social rights.

1.1 Introduction to the concept of social exclusion In the last 10 years, social exclusion has become one of the most frequently discussed topics in the social sciences. Some even believe social exclusion to be the main social issue of our time, and that it sweeps to one side old concepts like poverty and marginalisation. In 1989, the term “social exclusion“ became

a constituent part of the Preamble to the European Social Charter – the basic document of the Council of Europe concerning social rights. The Charter was amended in 1996 when a new right, “the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion“, was introduced. During the 1990s the common EU social policy led to the formulation of a strategy to combat social exclusion at the 2000 Lisbon European Council (known as the Open Method of Coordination).

Box 1.1: Social Inclusion Policy in the EU – Five elements of the Open Method of Coordination1 1. Common objectives in the fight against poverty and social exclusion were agreed on at the EU Council summit in Nice in December 2000, and were revised at the December 2002 session – the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council. These objectives defined a policy whereby Member States pledged to “take steps to make a decisive impact on the eradication of poverty“ by the year 2010. 2. National Action Plans on Social Inclusion, or NAPs/incl, are the main channels through which Member States realise the jointly agreed objectives. NAPs/incl follow an agreed structure and cover a two-year period. The first plans were submitted by the 15 EU members in June 2001, and the second in June 2003. The 10 new Member States submitted their first action plans in July 2004, covering the period to the middle of 2006. 3. Joint Inclusion Memoranda, or JIMs, precede the NAPs/incl process, and outline the situation and the political priorities regarding poverty and social exclusion in the new Member States prior to their full membership. Ten such JIMs were signed by the European Commission and representatives of national governments on 18 December 2003. The JIM for Bulgaria was signed in February 2005, and the one for Romania in June 2005. The JIM process is mandatory for all acceding countries. 4. The Joint Report on Social Inclusion constitutes the response of various EU bodies to NAPs/incl. The first such report was submitted at the European Council in Laeken in December 2001. A second, considerably more detailed, report was written in December 2003 and adopted in March 2004, while a report containing an analysis of NAPs/incl from the 10 new Member States was approved in 2005. In 2005 the Joint Report on Social Protection and Social Inclusion was introduced, and is to be issued once a year. 5. Social Inclusion Indicators. The Belgian Presidency in the second half of 2001 launched the process of producing poverty and social exclusion indicators. These are known as the Laeken indicators, since they were first approved at the European Council summit in Laeken in December 2001. It was agreed that the indicators would encompass three levels: (1) 10 primary indicators of financial poverty and material deprivation, employment, health and education; (2) secondary indicators, which are complementary to the primary indicators, but elaborate them in greater detail; (3) indicators which Member States themselves decide to include in their NAPs/incl, and which assist them in reinterpreting the primary and secondary indicators and/or in illuminating the specifics of individual areas.

The first two elements of the Open Method of Coordination form the basis for attracting resources from the structural and cohesion funds of the European Union, while the third, fourth and fifth ele-

ment intend to indicate national specifics, and there are no significant financial resources allocated for them in EU funds.

Source: Stubbs, P., Zrinščak, S. (2005). Extended social Europe? Social policy, social inclusion and social dialogue in Croatia and the European Union. In K. Ott (ed.) Croatian Accession to the European Union. Institute for Public Finance and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. Zagreb, Croatia, pp. 166-167. Website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/social_inclusion/index_en.htm

10 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Concept of Social Exclusion

Within the framework of activities of the EU Pre-accession Strategy for the Republic of Croatia, two important joint activities in the areas of employment and social exclusion were initiated in 2005. Activities in the area of employment should result in the creation and conclusion of a Joint Assessment of Employment Policy Priorities (JAP), while the activities in the area of social exclusion should result in the creation and conclusion of a Joint Inclusion Memorandum (JIM). These documents aim to pave the way for Croatia’s full participation in the Open Method of Coordination, in light of the EU accession process. The JAP is one of the evaluation documents for the candidate country. It defines employment policy and the reform of institutions in accordance with the requirements of the European employment strategy and the implementing mechanisms of the European Social Fund. The aim of the JIM document is to prepare the country for the full application of the open method of coordination in the area of social inclusion from the day it accedes to the EU. This means beginning to work towards the EU’s goals of tackling poverty and social exclusion through national policy, taking into account each candidate country’s specific characteristics. In mid 2003, Croatia started to actively implement the UN Millennium Declaration by defining the Millennium Development Goals at national level. The cooperation between the relevant ministries and other State administration bodies, as well as NGOs, numerous experts and the UNDP Field Office in Croatia, resulted in the National Report on the Implementation of the UN Millennium Declaration Goals in June 2004. The goal regarding poverty was defined in the above-mentioned report as to “reduce by half the number of people who are considered to be poor by 2015“. The merging of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of European Integration into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration offers a chance to ensure that the issues covered by the Millennium Development Goals are integrated into the wider context of European integration,. This key process, which defines the context of development processes in Croatia, may provide additional impetus and ensure a more coordinated approach than has

been the case so far, and in that sense may contribute to a better level of implementation of the relatively demanding goal of reducing poverty by 2015 as set out in the National Report.

1.2 Challenges of terminology The frequent use of the term “social exclusion“ has not resulted in satisfactory clarity, and it still lacks a sound theoretical basis and empirical validation. Many ideas related to exclusion have been formulated to be used in political discourse. Social exclusion should therefore be understood as a so-called “umbrella concept“, and not as a concept that can be precisely used. Some countries have their own (official) definitions of social exclusion (the UK, for example, has founded a Social Exclusion Unit, while France is unique in its adoption of the Law against Exclusion in 1998).

Social exclusion should be understood as a so-called “umbrella concept“, and not as a concept that can be precisely used.

1.3 Dimensions of exclusion In 2001, in an effort to standardise its measurement of social inclusion, the EU adopted a list of social exclusion indicators known as the Laeken indicators. These 18 statistical indicators cover four dimensions of social exclusion: financial poverty (income), employment (labour market), health and education. However, a single list is just the first step in standardising the measurement and the analysis of social exclusion indicators. A number of recent studies still differ in the way they collect and analyse data (different indicators of social exclusion and non-monetary deprivation were used in the reports based on the data gathered by the European Community Household Panel (ECHP)2). The manner of analysing empirical indicators becomes important because the analyses of social exclusion show that there is no concentration of dimensions of exclusion among the population. Multidimensional deprivation and the combination of material and relational exclusion characterise a rather small number of people in developed countries. In Germany, no one displays more than five out of the total of 11 dimensions3, and only 8% of the population was excluded in three or more areas4. Only 11% of people questioned were subject to a combination of the distributional and relational dimensions of exclusion. In 12 countries of the EU, between 1% and 6% of the population were excluded in three or four dimensions5.

http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/eurostat

The different approaches to social exclusion among the Member States of the EU are mostly based on two research traditions: the Anglo-Saxon tradition of poverty research, which emphasises the influence of the distribution of financial/material goods and “social awards“ on social exclusion (distributional aspects); and the French (Francophone) tradition, which emphasises the influence of social ties and relations (relational aspects). Distributional aspects include: income, basic elements of standard of living, the labour market, education, housing conditions, health, and residential area; relational aspects include: social ties, participation in civil organisations, participation in politics, and family life.

Böhnke, P. (2001). Nothing Left to Lose? Poverty and Social Exclusion in Comparison. Empirical Evidence on Germany. Social Science Research Center. Berlin, Germany.

Tsakloglou, P., Papadopulos, F. (2002). Aggregate Level and Determining Factors of Social Exclusion in Twelve European Countries. Journal of European Social Policy, Vol. 12, No. 4, 2002, pp. 211-225.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Concept of Social Exclusion

Social exclusion is 1.4 Exclusion and education often perceived as Different approaches aside, exclusion is often perunemployment (marginalisation in the labour mara vicious circle with ceived as a vicious circle with three components: ket), poverty, and social isolation6 (Figure 1.1). three components: unemployment, poverty, Figure 1.1 Education and the “vicious circle“ of social exclusion and social isolation. Social isolation

Poverty

Unemployment

Education

Note: Arrows with solid lines indicate a relationship of a tighter nature, while arrows with dashed lines indicate weaker and variable relationships.

Different components of social exclusion influence each other, thus creating a spiral of insecurity, which ends in multiple deprivation. Deprivation usually begins with the loss of employment, which in turn leads to a significant degradation in living standards, that is, increased risk of poverty. Living in poverty creates additional difficulties in the search for employment and contributes to a long-term unemployment trap for many individuals. At the same time, unemployment and poverty inhibit participation in social activities. Due to the lack of money and to the stigmatisation that can be caused by unemployment, social ties are weakened, increasing the probability of social isolation. If the period of unemployment, and consequently poverty, is prolonged, tensions will occur in the family and in marital relations. In other words, the disintegration of marriage and family becomes more likely. The lack of money worsens not only family relations but also ties with friends, neighbours, and relatives, since ‘social exchange’ is necessary for the maintenance of social relations. In turn, the social isolation has an adverse effect on employment, since the individuals concerned are isolated from sources of

information and lack the support needed for employment search. Social exclusion is understood first and foremost as exclusion from the labour market. Labour is not only the basis for economic independence; it also promotes certain moral values, such as self-respect and a desire for advancement. However, those who stress the central place of work in society often reduce citizenship to participation in the economy, and neglect the fact that there are large inequalities among those who work for a living. If social exclusion is conceived primarily as exclusion from the labour market, in other words, if employment is a precondition for inclusion, then education is one of the key mechanisms of social inclusion. This message may be derived from a large number of EU documents. The degree of employability is connected with the possession of qualifications and skills. It is, however, necessary to point out that the definition of the term “social exclusion“ – which concentrates on the ability to participate actively in the labour market – is correct for the large part, but is still too narrow. In

Room, G. (ed.) (1995). Beyond the Threshold: The Measurement and Analysis of Social Exclusion. The Policy Press. Bristol, United Kingdom; Silver, H. (1994). Social Exclusion and Social Solidarity: Three Paradigms. International Labour Review, Vol. 133, No. 5-6, 1994, pp. 531-578; Kronauer, M. (1998). “Social Exclusion“ and “Underclass“ – New Concepts for the Analysis of Poverty, in H. Andress (ed.) Empirical Poverty Research in Comparative Perspective. Ashgate. Aldershot, United Kingdom, pp. 51-73; Gallie, D. (ed.) (2004). Resisting Marginalization: Unemployment Experience and Social Policy in the European Union. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom.

12 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Concept of Social Exclusion

most societies, there are individuals (albeit not many of them) who are rich enough and who do not want to participate in the labour market, but we cannot say they are either poor or socially excluded. Education influences social inclusion through educational achievement, lifelong learning, and easier access to paid work. Educated individuals are more mobile and adapt more easily to new circumstances. Social exclusion and educational failure are very often regarded as causally related. The socially excluded often face the problem of a lack of knowledge and skills. Education contributes not only to the acquisition of knowledge and skills but also influences the socialisation, inclusion and empowerment of individuals. Education is, among other things, a means to personal fulfilment. On the other hand, within modern societies there are certain social communities of individuals with relatively low levels of education who may be considered poor (according to the existing standards), but that does not necessarily mean that the individuals within those communities are affected by social exclusion. It is, however, necessary to emphasise that we are talking about certain specific communities and social groups for whom it is sometimes possible to consider that the whole community, tentatively speaking, is affected by the problem of social exclusion. However, the problem of social exclusion cannot be solved simply by reforming the educational system

and by encouraging greater educational aspiration. Better education will not automatically remove social exclusion. Social exclusion, and education itself, are affected by income inequality, class and/or ethnic divisions in society, physical separation, globalisation, the division of power, the stratified nature of the education market, etc7. Changes in education and educational aspirations are not enough to compensate for the lack of jobs or the highly competitive modern (global) labour market. A personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s educational achievements can be nullified because of discrimination by employers on the basis of age or gender. Therefore, educational achievements must be complemented with other elements that will provide for success at work and satisfaction in life.

If social exclusion is conceived primarily as exclusion from the labour market then education is one of the key mechanisms of social inclusion.

The economic life of the poor is different from the economic life of the non-poor in many different ways. Apart from insufficient income and a lower level of education, the living conditions of the poor are significantly different from those of the rest of the population. Table 1.1 shows the differences in some of these conditions. Poor peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s houses have fewer square metres per person, and they are more often cut off from basic utilities (electricity, water, sewerage system) and from the telephone network. Furthermore, they usually do not own household appliances (e.g. refrigerator, washing machine, TV set). Nevertheless, most households, even the poorer ones, have electricity, which at least gives them the minimum prerequisite to avoid an extremely impoverished way of life.

Table 1.1 Living conditions of the poor in Croatia Poverty indicators House/flat with less than 10m2 per person No electricity No indoor toilet No indoor bathroom No running water No sewerage system No telephone No TV set No refrigerator or freezer No washing machine

Total population (%) 8.1 0.3 8.8 7.9 5.7 24.0 10.7 3.2 5.9 8.9

Poor (%) 25.0 2.1 37.2 38.1 22.0 45.2 40.1 17.0 16.6 32.6

Source: World Bank (2000). Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA.

It should also be mentioned that Croatiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s poorer citizens were previously in a better position regarding access to basic healthcare services in comparison with other countries, even more developed countries. However, in the context of announced reforms to

the healthcare system, it is important to preserve, and even to improve if possible, the provision of all healthcare services to socially vulnerable and poorer citizens, as they more frequently rely on such services in order to attempt to overcome their situation.

Whitty, G. (2001). Education, Social Class and Social Exclusion. Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2001, pp. 287-295.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 2:

The Experience in Croatia

The term “social exclusion“ is most frequently used in describing the position of certain social groups, such as the poor, the unemployed, young people, or the Roma.

The term “social exclusion“ first appeared in Croatian specialist publications in the mid-1990s, and since then has gradually been making its way into scientific and political discourse. Thus far, only a few primarily conceptual and theoretical articles have been published in Croatian8, along with one empirical study9. Given that social exclusion is becoming a key concept in the social sciences, and since its practical application is linked to Croatia’s EU accession processes, the term is being used more frequently in Croatia, particularly under the influence of documents and projects emanating from the Council of Europe and the European Union. The use of this term in Croatian is not, however, free of vagueness and ambiguities10. The term “social exclusion“ is most frequently used in describing the position of certain social groups, such as the poor, the unemployed, young people, or the Roma. Social exclusion has thus been linked mainly with the concepts of poverty, unemployment, and inequality or discrimination. In using the concept of exclusion, the intention is to highlight the problems of social participation, where individuals or groups no longer take part in key processes in society and where their social contacts are reduced. Social groups11 experiencing an increased risk for social exclusion could be categorized in the following way: Exclusion based on economic status: - The poor, - The unemployed, especially the long-term unemployed, - Homeless people, - Housewives, - Returnees, - Internally displaced persons, - Migrants.

Exclusion based on family structure: - Single-person households, - Single-parent families, - Children without parental care, - Couples with three or more children. Exclusion based on identification: - Ethnic/racial/religious minorities, - Sexual minorities (LGBTT population12), - People with alternative lifestyles (e.g. punk), Exclusion based on age: - Youths aged 15-2913, - The elderly (65 or over) and pensioners. Exclusion based on criminal wrongdoing: - Prisoners and ex-prisoners, - Juvenile delinquents, - Victims of violence. Exclusion based on education: - People with lower levels of (or no) education. Exclusion based on health: - People with special needs, - People with mental illness, - People living with HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C, - People with dependency problems, such as alcoholics and drug abusers. Exclusion based on a type of handicap: - People with physical handicaps and handicaps related to sensory organs, - People with mental or intellectual difficulties.

Šućur, Z. (2004). Socijalna isključenost: pojam, pristupi i operacionalizacija. Revija za sociologiju, 35(1-2), 2004, pp. 45-60; Koncept društvene isključenosti. Društvena istraživanja, 13(1-2), 2004, pp. 171-193.

In everyday as well as political discourse, the terms “exclusion“ and “exclusiveness“ are often confused in Croatian. Social exclusiveness is meant to refer to the closed nature of a certain group and its inaccessibility to those outside that group. Exclusiveness can also imply intolerance towards certain individuals or groups. This means that the excluded need not be exclusive, nor the exclusive excluded. Besides this confusion of terms, which results partly from their linguistic similarity, there are also problems connected with the fact that the meaning of the term “social exclusion“ is not sufficiently clear.

The categories are not exclusive and have been invented for the purposes of this paper to facilitate the presentation of vulnerable groups. Potential reasons for exclusion are multidimensional and in reality these categories interrelate.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and transgender population.

It is difficult to determine and define the age limits of youth in an unambiguous way and the formal definition of this period of life differs among various institutions of United Nations, European Union and national institutions. When speaking about young people, one generally thinks of the age group between 15 and 24 years of age, but the period of youth in many cases is prolonged until the age of thirty, primarily because of the longer duration of education and the difficulties in finding employment, which prevents earlier achievement of social independence. Therefore, the National Programme of Action for Youth refers primarily to activities for the benefit of young persons between 15 and 29 years of age. (The State Institute for the Protection of the Family, Maternity and Youth (2003). The National Programme of Action for Youth, Zagreb, Hrvatska. p. 11.)

14 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

In Croatia, groups with the highest relative poverty risk include (author’s estimates for 2003): 1. Single-person households, 2. Unemployed people, 3. Families consisting of one adult with one or more children (single-parent families), 4. People with a lower level of education 5. Elderly people (aged 65 or over)14, 6. Pensioners, 7. Couples with three or more children, 8. Couples with one child, and 9. Children and young people (aged 0-24). It has been shown that only research that monitors the same group of people over a given period of time (a longitudinal study) can answer the question of whether a pattern of insecurity and social exclusion exists in a Croatian context15. Yet such studies, whether their focus be on poverty or on unemployment, are practically non-existent. The dynamics of poverty have not yet been adequately researched, and thus we do not have sufficient information regarding what happens to individuals or households that have lived in poverty for a long time. The same can be said for long-term unemployment.

2.1 Poverty and unemployment The view taken by many in Croatia is that the term “exclusion“ covers more than the term “poverty“. Poverty refers mainly to a lack of material or monetary resources, and policy on poverty focuses on the reallocation of budgetary funds (i.e. addressing incomebased poverty). In contrast to poverty, exclusion implies more than a lack of money or material goods - it also covers social, cultural, political and other dimensions, meaning that better access to institutions and other mechanisms of social integration is a prerequisite for the success of policies tackling exclusion. On the other hand, in linking unemployment with various dimensions of social exclusion, Croatian researchers have endeavoured to highlight the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon of unemployment, i.e. both its material and socio-psychological consequences. The view is that unemployed individuals not only have reduced incomes, but also have poorer social networks, and thus fewer opportunities to reintegrate into the social fabric. The term “social exclusion“ emerged as an attempt to explain comprehensively the consequences of the loss or “disappearance“ of work in Croatian society. The following

question has been posed: how can social integration be maintained in a situation where the labour market no longer offers enough opportunities for social inclusion? Both the unemployment rate registered by the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) and labour force surveys indicate that Croatia has now had a high level of unemployment (more than 15%) for a considerable period. Moreover, long-term unemployment (unemployment for longer than one year) is a serious problem, affecting more than half of all unemployed people. As a rule, long-term unemployment leads to a weakening of labour and professional skills, more difficulties with re-employment, financial problems, and withdrawal from the labour force.

Setting out from the EU’s official poverty line, we find that 17% to 18% of Croatia’s population has been living in poverty during the last several years.

During the 1990s, Croatia was faced with a process of impoverishment that affected the vast majority of its population. Without help from the State, particularly during wartime and the post-war period, many social groups would have ended up in severe poverty or destitution. The World Bank and Croatia’s Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) carried out the first representative survey of poverty at the national level only in 199816. At that time, around 10% of Croatia’s citizens were living below the absolute poverty threshold, meaning that they were unable to meet their basic needs. Compared to other transition countries, Croatia showed low absolute poverty rates. However, after 1998 it was no longer possible to monitor the trend of absolute poverty, since the CBS began publishing poverty indicators based on relative poverty lines defined in relation to certain statistical indicators, such as the average or median wage or per capita GDP. To study trends in poverty, it is necessary to make use of the same poverty line over a long period of time. The reason for switching to relative poverty lines was that Croatia has no national or official poverty line. A “national poverty line“ is understood as one which is regarded by the government (and the public) of a country as corresponding to its social conditions, such that the trend and extent of poverty may be measured in relation thereto. Besides this, such a poverty line can serve as a criterion for defining the level of compensation in the social security system, more particularly welfare assistance. Only in the past few years has it been possible to monitor poverty indicators according to a unified methodology. Setting out from the EU’s official poverty line (defined as 60% of the median national income), we find that 17% to 18% of Croatia’s population has been living in poverty during the last several years (Figure 2.1).

In Croatia, there is a significant number of people aged 65 or over who are not entitled to receive a pension (most often farmers who did not contribute to a pension fund).

See Chapter 3.2 of this Report.

World Bank (2000). Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

Despite the widespread belief that inequalities in Croatian society are very high, they are not, however, significantly greater than those in other transition countries.

Figure 2.1 Poverty rates in Croatia (2001 – 2003)

Monetary income and income in kind

25,0% 20,0% 15,0%

20,5% 17,2%

Monetary income

21,9% 18,2%

16,9%

18,9%

10,0% 5,0% 0,0%

2001

2002

2003

Source: Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) Note: In calculating poverty rates, the modified OECD equivalence scale has been used (head of household = 1, other adults in household = 0.5, children under 14 years of age = 0.3). The term “income in kind“ includes all of a household’s “income“ in non-monetary form (e.g. food produced on its own property, gifts in the form of material goods, work done in exchange for food and material goods, and so on).

Compared with most EU countries, Croatia has a somewhat higher poverty rate (Figure 2.2). The rate of poverty in southern European countries and in Ireland is almost identical to that in Croatia. On the other hand, poverty rates in Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden, Slovenia, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are lower than Croatia’s by at least half. Inequality indicators can help us to explain these differences in poverty rates among individual countries, since relative poverty lines depend directly on the level of income inequality in a given society. Many consider relative poverty lines to be measures of inequality, rather than of poverty. Croatia ranks

16 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

among the European countries with the highest levels of economic inequality (Figure 2.3). Despite the widespread belief that inequalities in Croatian society are very high, they are not, however, significantly greater than those in other transition countries. It would seem that the public perception of great inequalities in Croatia results from a conviction that these inequalities are unjustified. A good many of those who became rich did so in a manner the public considers unjust. Privatisation has deepened the gap between rich and poor, and there are strong convictions that the privatisation process is full of corruption and lawlessness.

The Experience in Croatia

Figure 2.2 Poverty rates in Croatia and EU countries (2001) 25%

20%

21% 21% 20% 20% 19% 19% 18% 17% 17%

16% 16%

15% 15%

15% 15% 15%

15%

13%

13% 12% 12%

11% 11% 11% 11% 11%

10%

10% 10% 8%

The groups in Croatia with the greatest poverty risk are the elderly, pensioners, the unemployed, people with a lower level of education, single-person households, and singleparent families.

Cr oa Ire tia la Gr nd ee Po ce rtu ga l Ita ly S p Un ite Es ain d to Ki ni ng a Lit do hu m an Cy ia pr u La s tv Fr ia an c M e a Po lta l B an Lu elg d xe iu m m bo ur Ne Aus g th tri er a la Sl nd ov s Ge eni rm a De an nm y a Fin rk l Sw and e Cz H de ec un n h ga Re r pu y Sl blic ov ak i EU a 25 EU 1 EU 5 10

Source: CBS Note: The poverty line is defined as 60% of median national income. Poverty indicators pertain only to monetary income (without income in kind). The poverty rate in Croatia was rounded from 20.5% to a whole number (Figure 2.1). EU 10 comprises the 10 countries that became EU Members on 1 May 2004. The data for Cyprus are from 1997, for Latvia 2002, for Malta and Slovenia 2000, and for Slovakia 2003.

Figure 2.3 Gini coefficients in Croatia and EU countries (2001)

0,40 0,37 0,35 0,35 0,30 0,25

0,34 0,33 0,33 0,32 0,31 0,31

0,30 0,30 0,29 0,29 0,29 0,28

0,28 0,28 0,28 0,27 0,27 0,26 0,25 0,25 0,24 0,24 0,24 0,23 0,22 0,22 0,21

0,20 0,15 0,10 0,05

Po r

tu Es gal to n La ia tv ia Sp ai Gr n Lit eec hu e Un a ite C nia d roa Ki ti ng a do Po m la n M d al ta Ita Ire ly la n Cy d pr B Lu el us xe giu m m bo ur Ne Fra g th nc er e l Cz Ge and ec rm s h Re any pu b Fin lic la Sw nd ed Au en Hu stria n Sl gar ov y De eni nm a Sl ark ov ak ia EU 25 EU 1 EU 5 10

0,00

Source: CBS Note: Inequality indicators pertain only to monetary income (without income in kind). EU 10 comprises the 10 countries that became EU members on 1 May 2004. The data for Cyprus are from 1997, for Latvia 2002, for Malta and Slovenia 2000, and for Slovakia 2003. The Gini coefficient is a measure of overall economic inequality in a given society. It can represent values between 0 (where income is distributed equally among citizens) and 1 (where one person possesses a societyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s entire income). These are only theoretical possibilities which do not exist in reality. In developed countries, Gini coefficients range between 0.20 and 0.40. A coefficient greater than 0.40 indicates a very high level of inequality in a given society.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

It seems that unemployment has a more detrimental impact on men’s material status than on women’s. Only in this category do men have a considerably higher relative poverty risk than women.

In general, poverty is tied to certain demographic and social characteristics (gender, age, economic activity, etc.). This means that certain groups are over-represented among the poor, i.e. their number among the poor is larger than their proportion of the overall population. These groups have a greater relative poverty risk, meaning a higher likelihood of a certain group becoming poor in relation to the average poverty risk in society. Relative poverty risk is a ratio between a certain group’s poverty rate and the poverty rate of society as a whole. When the relative

poverty risk for a certain group equals 1, this means that the poverty risk for that group is average, that is, equal to that of society as a whole. If the relative poverty risk is greater than 1, then we are dealing with an above-average poverty risk (e.g. for members of a group with a relative poverty risk of 1.7, there is a 70% greater than average probability that they will live in poverty). Conversely, for members of a group with a relative poverty risk of 0.6, the likelihood that they will become poor is 40% less than the average.

Box 2.1: Shelters for the homeless The Split-based organisation MoSt has been successfully running two projects, the Shelter for Homeless Men (since 2000) and the Shelter for Homeless Women (since 2003). Besides providing shelter and emergency accommodation, the main objectives of these projects are to provide help in completing documents and asserting their rights to social care, and the re-socialisation of members of one of the most vulnerable groups in society. MoSt is working with various institutions to tackle homelessness.

The groups in Croatia with the greatest poverty risk are, as shown in Figure 2.4, the elderly, pensioners, the

unemployed, people with a lower level of education, single-person households, and single-parent families.

Relative poverty risk (average = 1)

Figure 2.4 Relative poverty risk for certain groups (2003) 2,5 2

1,9

1,7

1,5 1

1,2

0,9

2,1 1,7 0,9

1,1

0,5

18 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

op l pe oy ed

pl em

Source: Author’s calculations based on data from CBS.

ng ho leus pe eh rso ol n Co ds up le sw ith 1 ch ild Co up m les or w e ith ch 3 ild o re r 1 n ad m ult or w e ith ch 1 ild o re r n

rs ne sio Pe n Un

ild

re n pe an op d y le ou (0 ng -2 4) El d (6 er 5 ly an p d eo m pl or e e)

The Experience in Croatia

Poverty in Croatia is, in large part, more prevalent among elderly and single-person households than it is among households with a large number of children. The profile of this poverty and the structure of income sources indicate that the poorest citizens are economically inactive, unemployed, or low wage earners. Social transfers (including pensions and welfare assistance) make up an ever greater part of the income structure among poor people. Income in kind (mainly self-produced food) has played an important role in meeting poor people’s basic needs hitherto; however, this component of their income is gradually diminishing. Wealthier segments of society mostly earn their income in the market (wages, income from self-employment and property), while the poorest people rely largely on social transfers from the State and on income in kind. Figure 2.4 confirms that the unemployed are among the groups with the highest relative poverty risk

(nearly twice as high as the average, and lower only than the relative poverty risk for single-person households). The unemployed are clearly not the most numerous group living in single-person households. These are mainly pensioners or other elderly people who have no pension earnings and no financial support from an extra-familial network. It seems that unemployment has a more detrimental impact on men’s material status than on women’s (Table 2.1). Only in this category do men have a considerably higher relative poverty risk than women. Moreover, this risk has been increasing from year to year, while the risk for unemployed women has actually decreased (albeit insignificantly). When unemployed, women are probably more able to rely on the financial income of their spouses or other family members (men’s average earnings are considerably higher than women’s).

Even in times of economic growth the “circle of poverty“ remains tightly closed. The poor often appear as “outsiders“ on the labour market, meaning that, due to insufficient human capital (a low level of education and poor skills), they are unable to make use of the opportunities deriving from economic growth.

Table 2.1 Poverty rates in Croatia by economic activity (%) (poverty line = 60% of median national income)

Overall population M F Employed M F Self-employed M F Unemployed M F Pensioners M F Other inactive people M F

2001

2002

2003

17.2 15.4 18.7 5.2 6.0 4.1 20.1 20.0 20.2 32.2 35.6 29.6 21.3 19.4 22.9 20.0 15.8 22.7

18.2 17.7 18.6 5.8 6.6 4.9 19.0 17.3 21.0 35.0 42.5 28.1 23.2 23.7 22.9 21.3 19.5 22.7

16.9 15.8 17.9 5.2 6.0 4.3 18.4 16.8 20.1 32.4 39.7 26.6 20.7 20.3 21.0 20.3 17.7 22.0

Source: CBS

The reasons for the over-representation of unemployed and economically inactive people among the poor lie in the limited opportunities for employment (insufficient number of jobs in the economy and poor labour market dynamics, in the sense that those who are without work have difficulty finding new jobs). Data on stagnating or increasing poverty levels in Croatia during periods of economic growth likewise indicate that poverty is linked to poor people’s position on the labour market. In other words, even in times of economic growth the “circle of poverty“

remains tightly closed. The poor often appear as “outsiders“ on the labour market, meaning that, due to insufficient human capital (a low level of education and poor skills), they are unable to make use of the opportunities deriving from economic growth. Until now, it has been those who are already employed that have profited from growth, that is, people who have succeeded in keeping their jobs, while growth has had a neutral effect on the unemployed. The social security system cannot compensate for the unequal distribution of wealth created via economic growth.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

Some studies suggest that participation in unofficial economic activities, while preventing extreme poverty and acting as a social buffer, actually contributes to increased income inequalities in society.

Those systems that are targeted mostly at the poor (welfare assistance and unemployment benefit) cover only a small part of overall social expenditure. These two schemes contribute to a reduction in income inequalities, in contrast to the pension system, to which the largest part of social expenditure is allocated. However, over the last 10 or more years, the number of unemployment benefit recipients has generally not exceeded 20% of all unemployed persons. The few studies undertaken on the relationship between unemployment and social exclusion have not provided consistent results. The transversal study by Šverko et al (2004) concluded that the duration of unemployment did not have a significant impact in terms of people’s financial situation and their social support. On the other hand, the latest results of a longitudinal study (presented in Chapter 3.2) indicate that extended unemployment leads to poverty and social isolation. It is apparent from both studies that unemployment is linked to an unsatisfactory financial situation. It would seem that long-term unemployment is connected with social exclusion in this country as well, although it is too soon to draw final conclusions based on this first and only longitudinal study. A longer duration of unemployment need not necessarily result in a dramatic worsening of the financial status of the unemployed. The reasons for this lie primarily in the facts that unemployed people in Croatia rely on income from other family members, and that a great many unemployed people registered in the data base of the Croatian Employment Service (estimates indicate more than half) are involved in some form of unofficial, “grey“ economic activity. This means that a good many unemployed people are actually working and acquiring means of subsistence. Involvement in

the grey economy (along with financial assistance from other family members and unemployment benefits) helps many unemployed people avoid poverty and extreme material want. Nonetheless, some studies suggest that participation in unofficial economic activities, while preventing extreme poverty and acting as a social buffer, actually contributes to increased income inequalities in society. According to certain estimates, income from the grey economy represents 6% of the income structure among the poor, while it makes up around 20% of the income of those who are not poor17.

2.2 Social networks Many studies have shown that social relations and the different forms of social activity among the unemployed and the poor are conditioned much more significantly by patterns of family and cultural life than by changes in employment or material status. Thus, it is necessary to highlight some specific characteristics of family and social networks in Croatia. Croatia shares certain features of social life with other southern European countries, which are characterised by a strong family tradition and relatively low participation in formal types of social activity (membership of various organisations and associations). One study on active and passive membership in civic associations indicated that the level of participation in such organisations decreased during the second half of the 1990s18. This low level of socio-cultural capital can certainly have an impact on social interconnection, the formation of civil associations and social support. The latest survey by Croatian Caritas and the Centre for the Promotion of Catholic Social Teaching, carried out in 2004, confirms this assumption regarding the greater importance of informal social networks over formal ones (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2 Frequency of participation in certain activities (%)

1.5 4.2

Several times a year 15.5 6.7

Several times a month 29.9 26.0

Every week 30.4 35.6

37.1

16.4

20.0

33.2

29.3

52.4

15.4

Never Spending time with family Spending time with friends Spending time with coworkers outside working hours Spending time with people in church, mosque, synagogue Spending time with people in clubs and volunteer organisations

21.1 25.4

Don’t know 1.6 1.9

12.3

5.8

7.6

13.7

16.9

1.3

5.6

12.7

10.9

1.9

6.6

Source: Caritas and Centre for the Promotion of Catholic Social Teaching (unpublished data)

Karajić, N. (2002). Siromaštvo i neslužbeno gospodarstvo u Hrvatskoj – kvalitativni aspekti, Financijska teorija i praksa, 26(1), 2002, pp. 273-299.

UNDP (2001). Human Development Report – Croatia 2001. UNDP. Zagreb, Croatia.

20 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Everyday

The Experience in Croatia

Membership and participation in clubs and organisations is relatively rare. More than half of those questioned stated that they never associate with other people in clubs and voluntary organisations. In general, people expect support from informal networks (of relatives, friends and neighbours). Positive expectations with regard to organisations tend to be linked to certain church organisations. A qualitative study on poverty19 revealed that, due to the influence of the media, a false perception of the poor as people totally excluded from society (e.g. homeless, beggars, alcoholics) has been created. However, the majority of poor people in Croatia do not live in this way. Many people, whether poor or not, point out that poverty can lead to social isolation. However, isolation is more a problem of the extremely poor, among whom we may include certain groups of elderly people and pensioners who have no relatives to support them, and who cannot work to supplement their small pensions. Divorced people or unmarried men also sometimes face the problem of social isolation. A study by the World Bank (2000) differentiates three types of social networks at an individual level: “bonds“ (friends and relatives), “bridges“ (horizontal ties between communities) and “links“ (vertical connections with those in power). Poor people rely mainly on networks of the first type, which ensure day-to-day assistance between relatives and friends. However, in this type of network they largely come into contact with other poor people, thus limiting the support they can receive in case of need. “Bonds“ are often structured on a close family basis. The poor have few “bridges“ to other communities, and poorly built ones at that, since the low level of “resources“ available to them does not allow them to participate in reciprocal exchanges. Such bridges are still rarer and less secure in a situation characterised by high unemployment. “Links“ are mainly reserved for those who are not poor, and who possess the informal channels needed to access information or profitable jobs. The density and nature of networks in which the poor participate differ in urban and rural areas. In rural environments, social networks are based on broad ties among relatives and neighbours. In cases of want, rural inhabitants are traditionally oriented toward the local community, as a sense of obligation to help poor or infirm neighbours still exists in rural communities.

Given that unemployment in Croatia is a structural and mass phenomenon, it is not merely a trait of isolated and marginalised groups, but affects various segments of society. Unemployment has an impact on people’s self-perception, as well as on the attitudes of others towards them, either in a wider setting or in their close surroundings. The unemployed do not regard themselves as inferior, nor do they consider themselves to be isolated or stigmatised. Moreover, it is rare for the unemployed to attract blame from their social environment for the situation that they find themselves in.

2.3 Young people Generally speaking, young people are in a less favourable social and economic position than other age groups, since they do not possess property (property, savings, shares) and have more difficulty finding employment or a place to live. In Croatia there are two key causes for the exclusion of the young: an unstable position on the labour market, and dropping out of the educational system. Following their studies, the majority of young people are forced to wait for either a long or short period of time for their first job (due to lack of experience, the rigidity of labour laws, and so on). Young people’s unfavourable position on the labour market is also indicated by data according to which the rate of unemployment among people aged 15 to 24 has, in certain periods, been nearly two and a half times higher than the general unemployment rate (Figure 2.4), although in more recent times the gap between youth unemployment and general unemployment has been narrowing. On the other hand, young people who have completed their education are increasingly encountering “flexible“ types of employment (temporary employment, part-time employment, and so on), which diminish their social standing20. Long-term unemployment and social passivity often lead to a “forcibly prolonged“ youth. It is well known that youth is a period characterised by transitions, and these can be threatened by unemployment. The success of other transitions depend on this transition from the world of education to the world of work.

Social isolation is more a problem of the extremely poor, among whom we may include certain groups of elderly people and pensioners who have no relatives to support them, and who cannot work to supplement their small pensions.

However, youth unemployment is not necessarily linked to poverty or social isolation. Children and young people in Croatia have a below-average relative poverty risk (Figure 2.5). The reason for this is that a great many unemployed young people live with their parents or other family members who bear, or share with them, essential living costs. Thanks to a high level of family solidarity and long-term support from parents, the great majority of young people are not left on their own, and this largely alleviates social risks.

Gomart, E. (2000). Social Assessment of Poverty in Croatia. In Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study, Volume II: Technical Papers. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA.

Ilišin, V., Radin, F. (ed.) (2002). Mladi uoči trećeg milenija. Institut za društvena istraživanja i Državni zavod za zaštitu obitelji, materinstva i mladeži. Zagreb, Croatia.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

In general, poverty for young people means dependency on their parents, family problems, alcohol and drug consumption, and delinquency.

Figure 2.5 Ratio between youth unemployment (15 – 24 years of age) and the national average in Croatia and selected European countries (2000) 3,5 3,0

2,9 2,5

2,5

2,4

2,3 2,2

2,0

2,1

1,9

2,0 1,7

1,6

1,5

1,4 1,2

1,0 0,5

i Cr a oa tia Sl Un ite ove ni d a Ki ng do m Po la n Bu d lg ar ia Fr an ce Cz Sw e ec de h Re n pu bl Hu ic n Ne ga ry th er la nd s Sl ov ak ia Sp ai De n nm ar k Ire la nd Au st r Ge ia rm an y

an m

lg iu

Ita

0,0

Source: Ilišin, V., Radin, F. (ed.) (2002). Mladi uoči trećeg milenija. Institut za društvena istraživanja i Državni zavod za zaštitu obitelji, materinstva i mladeži. Zagreb, Croatia, p. 235; UNDP (2003). Human Development Report – Croatia 2002. UNDP. Zagreb, Croatia, p. 42.

Young people often cite non-material forms of poverty21, such as the monotony of everyday routine, an inability to associate with other young people, the lack of prospects, and so on. Young people living in rural areas, in smaller towns, or on islands are more likely to leave school early due to the narrower range of educational choices, poorly-organised transportation to faraway schools and so on. Besides this, employment

opportunities are few, and access to information and organised programmes and services for young people is limited. In general, poverty for young people means dependency on their parents, family problems, alcohol and drug consumption, and delinquency. Nonetheless, thanks to financial and other support from families, the experience of unemployment does not always lead to poverty or social isolation.

Box 2.2: No democracy without participation “The strongest message given by young people was their desire to play an active part in a society in which they live. If they are excluded, democracy is not being allowed to function properly. They regard the view that they are disinterested or uncommitted as groundless and unjust. They feel that they are given neither the resources nor the information and training that would enable them to play a more active role“22. A similar message appeared in the 2004 National Human Development Report (NHDR) – Youth in Croatia, which was evaluated as a positive example in the global report titled Youth and Millennium Development Goals (issued in April 2005). This report was supported by the UN Programme on Youth23. The risk of poverty is especially great among young people who do not take part in regular education, have no qualifications, do not attend professional training, and are unemployed. This segment is often referred to as “status zero youth“. Unfortunately, we still do not have precise information regarding the number of such young people, as not enough atten-

tion has been paid thus far to the problem of early departure from the educational system. Estimates suggest that between 10% and 20% of those enrolled in secondary schools (depending on the type of school) do not complete their education24. It is known that lack of school success considerably reduces these pupils’ chances of gaining employment and establishing

Gomart, E. (2000). Social Assessment of Poverty in Croatia. In Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study, Volume II: Technical Papers. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA.

European Commission (2001). White Paper: A New Impetus for European Youth.

UN DESA (Department of Economic and Social Affairs).

Vlada Republike Hrvatske / Government of the Republic of Croatia (2002). Program borbe protiv siromaštva i socijalne isključenosti / The National Strategy for Integrated Policy for Persons with Disabilities from 2003 to 2006. Zagreb, Croatia.

22 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

a secure place in society. Early departure from school is linked to subsequent poverty in adulthood. Such individuals are more likely to be unemployed, more frequently become dependent on welfare assistance, and have a greater likelihood of becoming unmarried parents or of engaging in unlawful conduct.

exclusion, since they help young people to maintain important social ties and prevent isolation.

2.4 The Roma

Likewise, young people with disabilities and those without family support find themselves at risk25. Young people with disabilities face numerous limitations and obstacles to becoming independent and actively involved in the community. Besides those imposed on them by their illness or disability, obstacles also exist in the form of prejudices, ignorance, outdated models of care, and inappropriate family attitudes. The numerous physical barriers hindering access to and participation in various social activities should also be mentioned.

Minority groups encounter the risks of social exclusion more frequently. This applies to minority ethnic groups, among whom the Roma represent the most markedly marginalised population. Although Croatia, when compared to other countries, does not have a large Roma community, its members experience exclusion in almost every area of social life. According to the 2001 census, there are fewer than 10,000 Roma in Croatia, while estimates from the Council of Europe suggest a number three to four times larger. It is characteristic of the Roma to conceal their national identity (national mimicry) as a legacy of the persecution, discrimination, segregation and exclusion that the Roma have been subject to for centuries.

The marginalisation of young people can also be linked to certain subculture groups to which they may belong26. Subcultures can sometimes be an obstacle to young people’s integration into the labour market or society, due to their hostile attitudes towards paid work, or because of other kinds of deviant behaviour. On the other hand, however, subcultures of unemployed people can provide a way of avoiding

In every society in which they live, the Roma are unquestionably the group with the highest poverty risk. Roma poverty rates can sometimes be 10 times higher than those of non-Roma. According to the Faces of Poverty, Faces of Hope Report27, the poverty rate of the Roma in Croatia is two and a half times higher than that of the non-Roma living in proximity to them (Figure 2.6).

According to the Faces of Poverty, Faces of Hope Report, the poverty rate of the Roma in Croatia is two and a half times higher than that of the non-Roma living in their proximity.

Figure 2.6 Poverty rates for Roma and non-Roma (2004) (income-based international poverty line of $4.3 per person per day in PPP – purchasing power parity) Non-Roma (majority population in close proximity to Roma)

% 90

Roma

60 51

52 42

40 30

ia rb Se

ia an m

on te n M

eg ro

ia on ac ed M

so vo Ko

y ng ar Hu

Re Cz pu ec bl h ic

ia ar lg Bu

Cr oa tia

Source: Faces of Poverty, Faces of Hope, http://vulnerability.undp.sk Državni zavod za zaštitu obitelji, materinstva i mladeži / State Institute for the Protection of the Family, Maternity and Youth (2003). Nacionalni program djelovanja za mlade / The National Programme of Action for Youth, Zagreb, Croatia.

UNDP (2004). Human Development Report – Croatia 2004. UNDP. Zagreb, Croatia.

UNDP, Regional Bureau for Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States (2005). Faces of Poverty, Faces of Hope. UNDP. Bratislava, Slovak Republic. http://vulnerability.undp.sk. The Report provides vulnerability profiles of the Roma population in the Decade of Roma Inclusion countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Romania and Serbia and Montenegro).

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

The Experience in Croatia

For the Roma, being poor does not just mean having no money; it also means having a disadvantaged position in the labour market and education, inappropriate housing conditions, a poorer state of health and a shorter life span, not to mention a long history of problematic relations with the majority population.

Poverty among the Roma often assumes extreme forms. As many as one quarter of Roma have no electricity, while such households represent around 2% among poor people in general 28. Nearly half of all Roma households have no washing machine, something that is considered part of the minimum acceptable standard of living in Croatia. Compared to poor people in general, the Roma have a considerably higher level of deprivation in terms of all elements of the standard of living. For the Roma, being poor does not just mean having no money; it also means having a disadvantaged position in the labour market and education, inappropriate housing conditions, a poorer state of health and a shorter life span, not to mention a long history of problematic relations with the majority population. The Roma have traditionally been perceived through various stereotypes, and are one of the few groups who are most often blamed for their own poverty. The Roma have been characterised as “undeserving poor“ - people who are lazy, avoid work, reproduce uncontrollably, are irresponsible and immature, reject modern values, live off state assistance, and so on. The Roma tend to withdraw from formal education, most often before the end of mandatory primary schooling. This is because of an insufficient level of socialisation and social inclusion among Roma children before they start school (which is made even more difficult in the County of Međimurje because of the language barrier there), as well as because of the inability of the educational system to overcome these initial barriers and to provide an adequate quality of education. As a consequence of this marginalisation and low educational achievement, the Roma are for the most part now excluded from formal types of employment. In some Roma settlements, the unemployment rate is as high as 100%. Studies also point to an ongoing decline in formal employment among the Roma since 199829. The absence of formal employment precludes people from gaining the social status that derives primarily from formal paid work, as well as excluding them from the social security system. Many traditional Roma trades vanished during the last century, or were severely weakened due to industrialisation (e.g. metalworking and woodworking). A considerable proportion of Roma economic activities take place in the grey economy. The fact that the proportion of Roma among welfare assistance recipients is disproportionate to their proportion of the overall population is the subject of constant public attention.

Šućur, Z. (2005). Siromaštvo kao sastavnica sociokulturnog identiteta Roma (in press).

Ibid.

The Roma in Croatia abandoned the nomadic way of life in the 1960s.

24 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

This is often interpreted as indicative of a dependency mentality and a shameless abuse of State resources. It is a fact that access to social policy measures (such as welfare) is not conditional on people’s participation in programmes of education or vocational training, or on the schooling of their children. The prevailing view is that, although people in general are ashamed to be poor and to receive welfare assistance, this does not apply to the Roma, who are always ready to claim state assistance. Such accusations against the Roma occur in a context where a large part of the population perceives itself as poor, and where the “victims“ are competing for meagre state funds (competitive victimisation). Besides poverty and unemployment, the Roma also face physical, cultural and political marginalisation. Roma communities are separate and physically isolated. Contact between Roma and non-Roma communities is very poor. Roma who live in remote, segregated communities have considerably fewer opportunities to take part in the formal economy or to make use of social services (education, health care). Social isolation implies limited opportunities with regard to ecological living conditions, access to jobs and information regarding the labour market, a choice of suitable marriage partners, access to high-quality education, and acceptance of conventional social role models. Some Roma settlements lack a basic infrastructure, and a great many Roma live in dwellings that fall below all housing standards. Some Roma have no citizenship and are poorly informed about how to acquire it, as well as about where to appeal against decisions that are issued. It is characteristic of the Roma that they are excluded from the institutions of society at large. Participation in institutions provides the basis for acquiring social status and securing the material conditions of life. According to the Faces of Poverty, Faces of Hope Report, 22 Roma councillors and four other Roma representatives were elected in the last election for councils, cities and municipalities. Only one Roma is a member of the Council for National Minorities (Savjet za nacionalne manjine) at State level. Inclusion in the institutions of society at large enables interaction with members of other Roma and nonRoma groups and inclusion in mainstream society. Certain elements of the Roma way of life and culture, such as begging, the nomadic way of life30 and early marriage, also contribute to the social exclusion of the Roma.

The Experience in Croatia

As in other countries, the Roma in Croatia are ever more frequently described as an “underclass“, that is, a socially isolated group with very few prospects of finding its place in the new distribution of labour or of securing “normal“ jobs, income, housing, social security, or access to better education for their children. Poverty in Croatia is concentrated in Roma communities, which are drastically dependent on State benefits (culture of dependency) and which contain a large proportion of those who are excluded from the labour force and who tend to abandon the educational process.

2.5 Conclusion The term “social exclusion“ has been used in political and scientific discourse in Croatia for 10 years now. This concept is considered to refer to a situation in which individuals’ social ties are reduced or weakened and they lose the role they formerly played in the functioning of society. Social exclusion is most frequently linked to the problem of high unemployment and a lack of job security. Besides unemployment, exclusion in the Croatian context is also connected with poverty and discrimination. In periods of transition, people face uncertainty and, lacking the rational experience on which to base their decisions, are often unable make accurate predictions about the future. An exclusion-based approach is most often utilised when describing the social position of such groups as the unemployed, the poor, the Roma and young people, as well as some categories of elderly people. Some evidence indicates a connection between people’s position in the labour market and poverty. The poorest citizens are economically inactive, unemployed, or receive low wages. While not the most numerous group among the poor, the unemployed have a high risk of poverty. Given the strong Croatian tradition of the family, which supports its unemployed, those who are out of work do not necessarily fall immediately into poverty and social isolation31. The unemployed do not tend to attract blame for the situation in which they find themselves from their social environment. This absence of a negative attitude probably has an effect on the self-perception of the unemployed who, at least in the beginning, rarely consider themselves as inferior32.

It is characteristic of the unemployed and of Croatia’s inhabitants in general that their participation in formal types of social activity (membership in various organisations and associations) is low, with a preference for informal social networks. In the case of poor people, the latter are mainly restricted to close family ties. Poverty is an important component of social exclusion in Croatia. The general view is that not enough has been done so far in terms of alleviating and preventing poverty. The Government of the Republic of Croatia approved its first national Programme for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion in 2002. For the purpose of monitoring the implementation of these measures, a tripartite commission made up of trade union representatives, government officials and employers was formed. Its task was to report to the Government at least once a year on the results of the implementation of the programme and to propose possible additions and amendments. The commission’s annual reports were to contain information on the implementation of various activities within the competence of ministries and other institutions. Thus far, no such report has been produced, although preparations for one began towards the end of the previous Government’s term of office. It is therefore necessary to re-examine and supplement the current programme, and to propose more effective mechanisms for implementing and monitoring it. This point is important given the fact that all EU Member States are required to produce a National Action Plan against Poverty and Social Exclusion every two years, which applies to new Member States upon their accession. EU candidate countries must prepare, in cooperation with the European Commission, a Joint Inclusion Memorandum (JIM) prior to their accession, which will also be a Croatian obligation before joining the Union.

EU candidate countries must prepare, in cooperation with the European Commission, a Joint Inclusion Memorandum (JIM) prior to their accession, which will also be a Croatian obligation before joining the Union.

However, the latest results of a longitudinal study, presented in Chapter 3.2, indicate that long-term unemployment leads to poverty and social isolation.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 3:

Investigating Social Exclusion

Social exclusion should be understood as the relatively permanent, multiply conditioned and multidimensional state of deprivation of an individual.

3.1 Empirical analysis of social exclusion What do we mean when we talk about social exclusion? Is it just a new and fashionable name for a familiar subject, a repackaging of the theory of poverty? Or is it, in fact, an original way of understanding social inequalities that offers new opportunities for their alleviation? In this chapter we will empirically test the basic hypotheses of social exclusion and its applicability in a Croatian context. First, we will examine a possible methodologically persuasive and theoretically viable measurement of social exclusion. By constructing valid research tools, we will endeavour to contribute to the debate on the usefulness of the concept of social exclusion. We will then analyse factors of social exclusion based on a nationally representative survey, whereby we hope to assist in tackling social inequalities on a practical level, here and now. In the light of findings indicating a sudden large increase in social inequalities in all transition countries33, we consider this practical goal to be of exceptional importance. Social exclusion should be understood as the relatively permanent, multiply conditioned and multidimensional state of deprivation of an individual. What does this mean? First, that the excluded do not participate in the distribution of social assets, which we define as a combination of institutional resources (access to education, health and social services), cultural resources (formation of identity, consumption of cultural products), socio-economic resources (employment, purchasing power) and interpersonal resources (exchange of emotions). Second, that such non-participation is not temporary, but tends to be permanent in nature (a way out of this unfavourable situation is not easily available). And third, that non-participation in the distribution of social assets is not necessarily a consequence of excluded people’s personal defects, of their indolence, incapability, or other flaws. Exclusion is most often the result of structural factors or, more precisely, institutionalised inequalities, e.g. unequal educational opportunities.

The final characteristic of social exclusion, its multidimensionality34, sees the excluded as people affected by multiple “life misfortunes“: for instance, when a person who loses his job also loses an entire network of friends and acquaintances. This loss of emotional support and an (informal) source of information about opportunities for re-employment, along with ever greater financial limitations, reduces the probability of finding a way out of this situation more than the job loss itself. In our judgment, this is the basic difference between social exclusion and earlier concepts of social inequality. Although some theories of the “new poverty“ also incorporate the idea of multiple deprivation35, the concept of social exclusion gives it a central place. In this regard, our approach to measuring social exclusion is based on the assumption of interconnection between three areas of deprivation: employment deprivation (unemployment and non-participation in the labour market), economic deprivation (poverty) and socio-cultural deprivation (social isolation). The reason for choosing these three areas is easy to see. Each is viewed, both in academic literature36 and in everyday life, as a dramatic occurrence (after which “nothing is the same any more“), and often even as a personal tragedy37. In this chapter we examine social exclusion as the intersection of these areas of deprivation (see Figure 3.1). More precisely, we regard a person as excluded when he experiences all three areas simultaneously, that is, when he is simultaneously poor, socially isolated and without a job. Although each of these conditions makes life significantly more difficult in and of itself, resulting in the economic, employment or socio-cultural deprivation of the individual, their combination deepens the impact and makes it more difficult to find a way out, increasing the risk of sinking into complete social exclusion.

Bićanić, I., Franičević V. (2005). Izazovi stvarnoga i subjektivnog siromaštva i porasta nejednakosti u ekonomijama jugoistočne Europe u tranziciji. Financijska teorija i praksa, 29(1), 2005, pp. 13-36.

Barnes, M., Heady, C., Middleton, S., Millar, J., Papadopulos, F., Room, G., Tsakloglou, P. (2002). Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA.

Šućur, Z. (2001). Siromaštvo: teorije, koncepti i pokazatelji. Pravni fakultet. Zagreb, Croatia; Kronauer, M. (1998). “Social Exclusion“ and “Underclass“ – New Concepts for the Analysis of Poverty. In H. Andress (ed.) Empirical Poverty Research in Comparative Perspective. Ashgate. Aldershot, United Kingdom, pp. 51-73.

Precisely, in analysing a large-scale European longitudinal study (the European Community Household Panel Survey), Gallie et al (2003) made use of unemployment, poverty and social isolation as the basic indicators of exclusion (Gallie, D., Paugam, S., S. Jacobs (2003.) Unemployment, Poverty, and Social Isolation. Is There a Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion? European Societies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003, p. 1-31.).

This is particularly true of the consequences of high levels of unemployment in the post-communist transition countries (Bićanić, I., Franičević V. (2005.) Izazovi stvarnoga i subjektivnog siromaštva i porasta nejednakosti u ekonomijama jugoistočne Europe u tranziciji. Financijska teorija i praksa, God. 29, br. 1, 2005., str. 13-36.).

26 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

Figure 3.1 Dimensions (areas) of deprivation andsocial exclusion

Social isolation

Poverty Social exclusion

In short, the three key areas of deprivation – unemployment, poverty and isolation – generate and reproduce one another and thus social exclusion as well.

Separation from labour market

This link between the dimensions of deprivation responsible for social exclusion stems from the interpenetration of economic, social and cultural resources that we make use of each day. Let us begin with employment deprivation, that is, unemployment. It directly increases the risk of poverty38, and also often has a negative impact on the social life of people affected by it. This impact is sometimes direct, e.g. losing contact with friends or acquaintances in one’s profession, and at other times indirect, due to the financial difficulties39 and negative state of mind (even depression) which accompany the loss of professional identity and diminished status40. Poverty, in turn, reduces the likelihood of employment, mainly due to the limited resources (material, cultural and interpersonal) which the poor possess41, and quite often deepens social isolation, especially in larger urban settings42. As already indicated, social isolation can be a great obstacle to employment and escaping from the cycle of poverty43. The reasons for this may be multiple, from a lack of information (especially via informal channels) and access to a network of contacts and acquaintances, to the inability to borrow the funds needed to become self-employed, or to obtain good references. In short, the three key areas 38

40 41

42 43

44 45 46

of deprivation – unemployment, poverty and isolation – generate and reproduce one another, and thus social exclusion as well.

3.1.1 Areas of deprivation and the extent of social exclusion In December 2003, as part of the South-East European Social Survey Program, an international research project, we conducted a survey44 on a sample of 2,500 inhabitants of the Republic of Croatia aged 20 and over45. As anticipated, the three risk factors of social exclusion (economic, employment and socio-cultural deprivation) were not equally represented in our sample. Let us begin with respondents who are neither economically nor employment deprived; that is, with women and men who are, to a greater or lesser degree, included in society. These make up the largest group in the sample, representing 61% (n = 296) of the total number of cases analysed (see Figure 3.2). Employment-deprived respondents represent 34% of the sample (n = 165), with 15% unemployed (n = 71), and 19% (n = 94) outside the labour market (housewives and people not seeking work). The economically deprived group, that is, the poor, represent 19% (n = 94) of respondents46.

Šverko, B., Galešić, M., Maslić-Seršić, D. (2004). Aktivnosti i financijsko stanje nezaposlenih u Hrvatskoj. Ima li osnove za tezu o socijalnoj isključenosti dugotrajno nezaposlenih osoba? Revija za socijalnu politiku, 11(3-4), 2004, pp. 283-298; Gallie, D., Paugam, S., S. Jacobs (2003). Unemployment, Poverty, and Social Isolation. Is There a Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion? European Societies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1-31. The usual annual skiing trip, summer holiday with friends, or meals together in restaurants once a week or month, which strengthen social ties in an almost ritual fashion, may become impossible in the more difficult financial circumstances following loss of a job. Gallie, D. (1999). Unemployment and Social Exclusion in the European Union. European Societies, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1998, pp. 139-168. Poorer people often do not possess the cultural capital necessary to, for example, write a CV, not to mention the financial resources needed to persuasively demonstrate their professional skills at an interview with a potential employer. White, M. (1991). Against Unemployment. Policy Studies Institute. London, United Kingdom. Barbieri, P., Paugam, S., Russel H. (2000). Social capital and exits from Unemployment. In Gallie D., Paugam, S. (ed.): Welfare Regimes and the Experience of Unemployment in Europe. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 200-217. For methodological explanations see Appendix 1 - Methodological explanations for Chapter 3. The research was financed by the Research Council of Norway. Using the same criterion, a survey on household consumption for the year 2003 established a poverty risk level of 18.9% (CBS, 2004).

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

Women and inhabitants of rural areas are disproportionately represented among the socially excluded.

What about respondents who, according to our definition, are socially excluded? This group makes up 10% (n = 47) of the sample. In other words, every tenth employable respondent displays the basic characteristics of social exclusion. The share of the excluded among the employable population is somewhat larger than

the share of the Croatian population recently estimated to be below the absolute poverty line (8.4% in 199847)48. This is not unexpected, given the multidimensional nature of social exclusion: those who are not explicitly poor, but are deprived in the other two areas, are also included among the socially excluded.

Figure 3.2 Extent of economic and employment deprivation, vulnerability and social eclusion

Poor and non-networked (2.1%)

Included by all criteria (34%)

Poor (2.9%)

Poor and not working (4.7%)

Excluded (9.7%)

Non-networked (27%)

Not working (6%)

Not working and non-networked (13.4%) As the theoretical model of social exclusion predicts, and Figure 3.2 clearly illustrates, the three areas of deprivation are interconnected. The strongest link is, as expected, between poverty and unemployment/ economic inactivity (Phi = 0.42; p < 0.001)49. In order to additionally verify the validity of the concept of social exclusion, the next step is to examine the differences in the level of prosperity among the socially included, the (economically or employment) deprived, and the socially excluded.

3.1.2 How excluded are the excluded? To what degree are the socially excluded in a more difficult position than respondents who are not excluded? If the idea of social exclusion is valid, socially excluded people should experience a greater number of severe social adversities not only than the socially included, but also than respondents who are only economically or employment deprived. Graph 3.1 presents the results of such quality of life comparisons among five groups of respondents: the included, the economically and employment deprived, the excluded, and pensioners. We used general satisfaction with life and self-assessment of health and social status as indicators of quality of life.

Šućur, Z. (2001). Siromaštvo: teorije, koncepti i pokazatelji. Faculty of Law. Zagreb, Croatia.

The research on which this figure is based did not include the largely devastated and underdeveloped regions of Dalmatinska Zagora and eastern Slavonia. If these regions are included, it is estimated that the share of the population living below the absolute poverty line would increase to around 10%.

The unemployed are more frequently non-networked than the employed (phi = 0.23; p < 0.001), whereas this is not true of the poor, who are not significantly less networked than those who are not poor (p = 0.09). Other research has also pointed out the poorly articulated relationship between indicators of social isolation and other dimensions of exclusion (Gallie, D., Paugam, S., S. Jacobs (2003). Unemployment, Poverty, and Social Isolation. Is There a Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion? European Societies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1-31; Heady, C., Room G. (2002). Patterns of Social Exclusion: Implications for Policy and Research. In Barnes M. et al.: Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom, pp. 146-154).

28 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

Graph 3.1 Average values for the included, the deprived, the socially excluded and pensioners50 according to self-assessment of basic quality of life indicators51. Values standardised on the scale 1 (lowest assessment) to 10 (highest assessment). Included

Not working

Poor

Excluded

Retired

The likelihood of social exclusion was 2.24 times higher for respondents living in rural communities.

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Satisfaction

The results confirm the assumption that the socially excluded are those on the bottom rung of society. In our sample, this group was the one to record the lowest quality of life, that is, the most unfavourable social position. The excluded, along with the poor, expressed the least satisfaction. Moreover, the excluded displayed the lowest self-assessment of social status and the most precarious state of health. They were followed by the poor, who exhibited a somewhat higher quality of life rating, and the employment deprived. As expected, even this group clearly lagged behind the socially included. It is interesting to note that, in terms of quality of life, the results recorded by pensioners were quite close to the unemployed and the economically inactive. While pensioners are indeed a vulnerable social group, they are not among the social classes most at risk, at least not as a group. This conclusion is confirmed by the recently published preliminary results of a study on poverty for the year 2004, undertaken by the Centre for the Promotion of Catholic Social Teaching (Zagreb) and Croatian Caritas. According to their research, only elderly people who do not receive pensions and pensioners who live alone without fam-

Social status

Health

ily support are at risk of social exclusion 52.53 In short, although the comparison presented here does not offer definitive proof, it systematically supports the proposed model of social exclusion. As a group, the socially excluded54 report the lowest level of quality of life. The poor are the closest group to the socially excluded in that they are affected to a similar degree, and we will focus on both groups in future analyses.

3.1.3 Who are the socially excluded, and where do they live? What are the basic socio-demographic characteristics of the socially excluded? What are the factors which increase the likelihood of belonging to this social group? In order to answer these questions, we compared the included, the poor and the excluded in terms of the following characteristics: age, gender, size of settlement, type of household (single- or multiperson) and education. As shown in Table 3.1, women and inhabitants of rural areas are disproportionately represented among the socially excluded55. Socially excluded people are on average five years older than socially included people.

Pensioners have been left out of the comparison of the state of health due to their considerably higher age (which means their poorer state of health is not necessarily a consequence of poorer social status). Higher values indicate greater quality of life. The level of subjective satisfaction with life was ascertained by means of the following question: “Taking everything into account, how happy would you say you are?“ A 10-item scale was used for recording answers. Perceptions of respondents’ own social status were measured using the following question: “In our society there are groups which, according to their characteristics, belong to the upper level of society, and others whose characteristics pertain to the lower levels. Here you see a scale going from top to bottom. Where would you put yourself on this scale?“ The scale ranged from 1 to 10, with 1 designating the bottom and 10 the top of society. Evaluations of state of health were based on the following question: “In general, how good is your health?“ 52 Centre for the Promotion of Catholic Social Teaching (Zagreb) and Croatian Caritas / Centar za promicanje socijalnog nauka Crkve i Hrvatski Caritas (2005). Konferencija za tisak projekta “Praćenje siromaštva u Hrvatskoj“, Tuesday 11 January. 53 The same conclusion is suggested by our data, according to which the poverty rate among non-networked pensioners is nearly twice as high (23%) as that for pensioners who are members of civic associations (12%). 54 By using the linear regression model, we analysed the contribution of individual dimensions of deprivation to the level of wellbeing. Poverty was in all cases, and lack of work was in most, a statistically significant indicator while being non-networked and the interaction among dimensions did not have, as a rule, an impact on the level of wellbeing. Thus, even according to the regression model, people who were defined as excluded have the lowest level of wellbeing. However, we did not establish the influence of all dimensions (especially being non-networked) on either the level of wellbeing nor the particular difficulty of the state deriving from all three aspects. 55 Exclusion and poverty are characteristic of single people in the “third age of life“. Thus, according to the 2003 survey on household consumption, single males over 65 were exposed to a poverty risk twice as high (no less than 44.9%) than that for single males under 65 (CBS, 2004). As a rule, younger employed single males have a high level of income and a relatively low level of expenditure. 50 51

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

As regards education, the risk of social exclusion decreased by 85% if the respondent had completed secondary school, and virtually disappeared if he had a college or university education.

Table 3.1 Socio-demographic characteristics of the socially included, the poor and the excluded

Average age Gender (%) Type of household (%) Size of settlement (%)

Women Men Single-person Multi-person Under 2,000 inhabitants Over 2,000 inhabitants

As we see the educational process as a fundamental mechanism of social inclusion/exclusion56, we have included a separate analysis of the educational structure of the socially included, the poor and the excluded. The results of this analysis unequivocally confirm the importance of education (Graph 3.2). Nearly 80% of the excluded have only primary (or incomplete primary)

Included

Poor

Excluded

39.6

43.2

44.1

38.0 62.0 11.4 88.6 39.4 60.6

57.3 42.7 7.4 92.6 62.0 38.0

68.1 31.9 6.4 93.6 70.2 29.8

education, while this percentage is somewhat lower among the poor (around 60%). In contrast, the percentage of poorly educated people among the included is quite small (less than 15%). Respondents who have completed higher education represent 30% of the socially included. There are virtually no people with higher education among the excluded and the poor.

Graph 3.2 Educational structure of the socially included, the poor and the excluded College or university

Secondary school

Primary school or less

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Included

Education clearly has a strong influence on the risk of social exclusion. But how strong is this influence in relation to gender, age, size of household and place of residence? In order to answer this question, we made use of a statistical analysis that examined the individual contribution of each characteristic, while taking their mutual influence into account57. Of the five characteristics, only living in a small rural settle-

Poor

Excluded

ment58 (p < 0.05) and education (p < 0.001) proved to be statistically significant risk factors for becoming excluded. More precisely, the likelihood of social exclusion was 2.24 times higher for respondents living in rural communities. As regards education, the risk of social exclusion decreased by 85% if the respondent had completed secondary school, and virtually disappeared if he had a college or university education59.

Through the acceptance of common values, a precondition for the socio-cultural dimension of inclusion, and the development of human capital, a precondition for economic and employment inclusion.

This is a case of logical regression, where the characteristics are independent variables, and social exclusion a dependent variable.

With a size of up to 2,000 inhabitants.

The same risk factors, with a somewhat lower coefficient, appear when we observe the poor, which means that socially excluded and the poor are two very similar groups by socio-demographic structure.

30 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

To summarise, profiling of the excluded in Croatia points to individuals with a low level of education, who are particularly at risk of exclusion if living in small rural communities. Women are disproportionately represented among the excluded. This stems from the fact that a large number of women, primarily those born before 197060, have only completed primary school. As there is no demand for them on the labour market, they are consigned to the vulnerable role of housewife. All of this indicates the importance of universal education which is equally accessible to all as a basic instrument for eliminating social exclusion61. Finally, we were interested in the regional distribution of the excluded. Bearing in mind the pronounced differences among Croatia’s regions in terms of their degree of development62, we assumed that there would be considerable regional deviations from the national average in terms of the percentage of excluded inhabitants. Even though the regional

sample was small (from132 respondents in Zagreb and the surrounding area to 32 in Primorje, Istria, and Gorski Kotar), and the results should be taken as crude approximations, the findings presented in Table 3.2 confirm this expectation. Social exclusion is most prevalent in Slavonia and markedly exceeds the national average. The reasons for this are not only to be found in the region’s relatively large share of rural (poorly educated) inhabitants, but also in the living conditions specific to eastern areas, which have only been economically reintegrated to a small extent63, an indirect consequence of massive ravages of war in that part of the country. Exclusion in northern Croatia and the Lika, Banovina and Dalmatia regions is close to the national average, while it is below average in the remaining three regions. The highest degree of inclusion is found in the Zagreb area, Primorje and Istria where the proportion of excluded is negligible.

Social exclusion is most prevalent in Slavonia and markedly exceeds the national average, while the highest degree of inclusion is found in the Zagreb area, Primorje and Istria where the proportion of excluded is negligible.

Table 3.2 Regional distribution of social exclusion (the range of estimate is for 95% probability when a sampling error of 5% is taken into account). Region Slavonia Northern Croatia Lika and Banovina Dalmatia Zagreb and vicinity Hrvatsko Primorje, Istria, Gorski Kotar Croatia

3.1.4 Conclusion Social exclusion is a relatively new concept in the social sciences, one which, in contrast to the standard interpretation of poverty, focuses on the unfavourable relationship of the individual with the social environment rather than his condition. In other words, social exclusion refers to non-participation in social activities, the absence of social ties and power, and a process of marginalisation and deprivation64. In view of the various forms of deprivation we have mentioned in previous sections, this necessarily involves a multidimensional concept which assumes that areas of deprivation are interconnected in a “spiral effect“.

Share of the excluded (%) (14.1-30.7) (5.9-20.3) (3.7-20.5) (0.9-10.7) (0-3.8) (0) (7.1-12.3)

This emphasis on relationship (between the individual and the social environment) and multidimensionality results in a dynamic approach to analysing the factors which give rise to exclusion, or which enable or facilitate inclusion. In line with this concept, we have presented here the results of an empirical pilot analysis of social exclusion in Croatia. Our aim was to verify the current situation, that is, the extent and regional distribution of social exclusion, as well as the socio-demographic characteristics of the excluded. To be sure, the size of the sample used and the fact that we were investigat-

Central Bureau of Statistics / Državni zavod za statistiku (2003). Stanovništvo staro 15 i više godina prema starosti, spolu i razini završene škole, po gradovima/općinama. Popis stanovništva 2001. Državni zavod za statistiku. Zagreb, Croatia.

Among younger generations, both genders are equally represented among the (ever smaller) number of people who only have primary education. Gender inequality is therefore no longer being (re)produced by the educational system, but its consequences will be felt in the social structure for another thirty years, until such time as people born before 1970 have left the labour force.

Bajo, A. and M. Pitarević (2004). Fiskalna decentralizacija u Hrvatskoj, problemi fiskalnog izravnanja. Financijska teorija i praksa, 28(4), 2004, pp. 445-469.

By adding regions to the given model of logistic regression as an additional indicator, it was observed that simply living in Slavonia contributes to the risk of poverty – even when respondents’ personal socio-demographic characteristics are taken into account. This points to the fact that the unfavourable structure of the population is not the only reason, but that a specific regional cause for higher social exclusion also exists.

Barnes, M., Heady, C., Middleton, S., Millar, J., Papadopulos, F., Room, G., Tsakloglou, P. (2002). Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

A successful policy of inclusion has two pillars: weakening the mechanisms of economic, employment and socio-cultural deprivation, and reducing the risk that the children of the socially excluded will end up being excluded themselves.

ing the situation at a given moment, and not over an extended period, limit the validity of our evaluations and make a dynamic analysis impossible. Bearing in mind these and the other methodological limitations previously mentioned, our findings indicate that a large number of Croatia’s citizens may be regarded as socially excluded or at high risk of exclusion. Every tenth person in our sample is poor, does not have access to networks (is “non-networked“) and unemployed and so is a member of the group which we have defined as socially excluded. If we add the 5% of people who experience deprivation in two areas – namely, those who are poor and unemployed – we may conclude that 15% of Croatia’s population (every seventh respondent) is excluded or at risk of exclusion. As a group, the socially excluded are dominated by people aged 40 and over who have a low level of education (more often women than men) and reside in smaller settlements. This figure indicating that up to 15% of the population is at high risk of social exclusion urgently calls for appropriate measures to be taken. If we consider the problem systematically, such measures should lead to a reduction in numbers of excluded by working on the mechanisms that create social exclusion. From a realistic point of view, the creation and implementation of measures tackling social exclusion (a “policy of inclusion“)65 will perhaps not be able to help the majority of those who are excluded today. However, we insist that this cannot be the sole criterion for assessing their effectiveness. A policy of inclusion must also be evaluated by means of dynamic criteria, namely, its effect on the reproduction of social exclusion. Stated more simply, a successful policy of inclusion has two pillars: weakening the mechanisms of (economic, employment and socio-cultural) deprivation, and reducing the risk that the children of the socially excluded will end up being excluded themselves. In the former instance, we are dealing with social measures that stimulate employment, a rise in standards of living and social cooperation66, while the latter involves activities aimed at socially excluded families. To our knowledge, there has been no systematic expert

discussion of these latter measures in Croatia to date, nor have any political promises been made in relation to activities in this area. The public, including the academic community, has not yet acknowledged the tragedy of social exclusion.

3.2 Unemployment and social exclusion67 The key components of the process of social exclusion are unemployment, poverty and social isolation: they mutually reinforce one another and cause progressive social exclusion through their interaction. The view prevails that the primary factor is the marginalisation of individuals in the labour market, i.e. their prolonged unemployment68. This causes a decline in the standard of living, and in many cases impoverishment, which then has two further consequences – it limits resources for seeking employment and makes it impossible to participate in social activities. Limited resources and increased social isolation separate people from the information and networks they need, thus making re-employment harder. In this way the grim spiral of social deterioration continues. Empirical studies have confirmed the view that unemployment and poverty contribute to the progressive process of social exclusion, but they have also shown that the impact of unemployment may vary in different environments69. The findings from some central and eastern European transition countries indicate that extensive and longterm unemployment does not always have to initiate a process of social exclusion70. There are similar indications for some southern European countries. The question is therefore how Croatia compares in this respect. Is there an inevitable process of social exclusion in Croatia whereby long-term unemployment leads to poverty and social isolation, which, in turn, additionally reduce the probability of (re)employment? We attempted to answer this question in the preliminary study by comparing unemployed people who had been jobless for periods of different lengths71. We started from the assumption that, if there is a tendency towards social exclusion, individuals affected

These cannot be equated with ordinary measures aimed at reducing social inequalities. For example, progressive taxation, as the most common means of reducing inequalities, has no direct effect on the extent of social exclusion.

This is well described by the paradigm of social capital (Štulhofer, A. (2003). Društveni kapital i njegova važnost. In D. Ajduković (ed.) Socijalna rekonstrukcija zajednice. Društvo za psihološku pomoć. Zagreb, Croatia, pp. 79 – 98).

Data used in this paper were collected in the study Psychological Aspects of Unemployment, conducted with the partial support of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare and the Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship. Branimir Šverko, Mirta Galešić, Zvonimir Galić and Darja Maslić Seršić participated in its planning and implementation.

Gallie, D. (1999). Unemployment and Social Exclusion in the European Union. European Societies, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1998, pp. 139-168.; Paugam, S. (1991). La disqualification sociale. Presses Universitaires de France. Paris, France.

Gallie, D., Paugam, S., S. Jacobs (2003). Unemployment, Poverty, and Social Isolation. Is There a Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion? European Societies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1-31.

Roberts, K. (2001). Unemployment without social exclusion: Evidence from young people in Eastern Europe. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 21, No. 4-6, 2001, pp. 118-144.

32 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

by long-term unemployment should manifest certain differences when compared with those unemployed for a short time. First, those unemployed for a longer period should suffer much greater financial problems. As the period of unemployment is prolonged, reserves are spent and, in the absence of other sources of income, the personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s financial situation deteriorates subjectively and objectively. Second, if a prolonged period of unemployment is accompanied by an increase in poverty and social isolation, the pattern of a personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s everyday activities will probably change as well: they will undertake a greater number of activities at home, and fewer activities relating to personal development and recreation. Third, sources of support become exhausted with an increased duration of unemployment. If the process of social exclusion also implies a progressive increase in social isolation, people affected by long-term unemployment might feel a lower degree of social support, i.e. compassion, encouragement and direct support from other people in resolving their problems. Fourth, it is probable that the search for a job will become less intense. Although actively seeking a job is a prerequisite for finding one, long-term unemployment, poverty and social isolation limit resources for job seeking, and failures affect self-confidence and reduce motivation.

esses which cause social exclusion in ordinary circumstances did not occur. Since then, normal processes for taking on and laying off workers, which generate social exclusion today, have been established.

These hypotheses were verified in a study using a sample of unemployed people registered at the Croatian Employment Office (N = 1138), surveyed in the summer of 2003. We analysed the differences in financial situation, the structure of everyday activities, the level of social support and the intensity of job search of people unemployed for periods of different lengths. All the differences established were along the lines expected, but the scale of these differences did not point towards a definite process of social exclusion. We concluded that there is as yet no definite process of social exclusion in Croatia.

The answers to these questions should allow a more complete insight into the mechanisms of social exclusion in Croatia and provide some insights, which may be helpful in creating social policy.

However, the analysis had limitations as well. First, it was based on a comparison of groups of people unemployed for various periods of time (a cross-sectional approach). This comparison is not fully justifiable, for amongst other reasons because some groups could have already dwindled in size. For instance, people who had already given up searching for a job and had already become socially excluded were probably under-represented in the group of long-term unemployed. Second, the results of the analysis reflect the events of the 1990s, when the economy collapsed due to the transition process, the war, a poor development policy and other circumstances, and a large number of jobs were lost. The mass unemployment that ensued affected various social strata; thus, the particular proc-

There is as yet no definite process of social exclusion in Croatia.

Presented below are new analyses, which go beyond the limitations stated above, as they are based on a re-survey of the same participants of the study (a longitudinal study). More precisely, in the autumn of 2004 we re-surveyed the participants of our first study of summer 2003. On this later occasion we recorded who among them had found a job in the meantime. On this basis, we can now, using studies conducted at two points in time, compare the characteristics of those who remained unemployed and those who had found jobs. This enables us to explore two important problems: 1. What influence does prolonged unemployment have on other components of the process of social exclusion, particularly on economic deprivation and social isolation? 2. Who in Croatia finds (or does not find) a job: in other words, what is the likelihood of employment for people with different characteristics, and do the current processes underlying employment in Croatia generate social exclusion?

3.2.1 Impact of prolonged unemployment and employment In line with the concept of social exclusion which has been proposed here, it was postulated in the longitudinal study72 that prolonged unemployment leads to poverty and social isolation, which then further reduce the likelihood of employment. In the second study, we established that, out of the total number who filled out questionnaires (N = 601), 394 were still unemployed, whereas 207 participants had found temporary or permanent jobs between the first and second study. Now we can compare those two groups of participants in terms of key variables in order to assess the impact of prolonged unemployment compared to finding a job. Table 3.3 illustrates the distribution of participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; total household incomes in the first and second study. Group A is composed of participants in the study who were unemployed and remained unemployed, whereas group B is composed of those who were unemployed during the first study, and employed dur-

For methodological explanations, see Appendix - Methodological explanations for Chapter 3.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

Those who remained unemployed showed an increase in their level of social isolation over a year, whereas those who became employed showed a visible decrease.

ing the second study. A comparison of distributions within the groups (between the first and the second study) shows that there are changes in both groups, but the changes are in the opposite direction. In group A, the income distribution in the second study worsened (the share of participants with incomes of up to HRK 1000 increased, whereas the number of those with more than HRK 4000 decreased). The opposite change took place in group B. As a conse-

quence, the difference between the groups increased significantly: if we compare the income distribution of both groups in the second study, we see considerable differences in their incomes (the poorest in group A account for 20.1%, whereas they account for only 3.2 % in group B). During a period of unemployment lasting one year, some participants of the study moved to lower categories of economic status, and many among them to the category of the poor.

Table 3.3 Income distribution in the first (2003) and second study (2004) for the participants of the study who remained unemployed (Group A) and those who found employment between the two studies (Group B). Monthly Household Incomes (HRK)

Group A Group B

First study (unemployed) Second study (unemployed) First study (unemployed) Second study (employed)

Up to 1000 15.2% 20.1% 8.5% 3.2%

1001 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 4000 51.6% 51.0% 41.7% 32.7%

4001 and over 33.2% 28.9% 49.7% 63.9%

Total

100.0 100.0 99.9 100.0

382 388 199 205

Note: Differences in income distribution between Groups A and B and between the first and the second study within each group are statistically significant.

The impact of unemployment and finding a job on economic status is more clearly illustrated by Figures 3.3 and 3.4. Figure 3.3 illustrates the estimated average household incomes of the respondents in the first (2003) and the second study (2004). Solid lines indicate the household incomes of the study participants who remained unemployed (Group A), whereas dashed lines indicate the incomes of those who managed to find jobs. The figure clearly indicates that those who became employed significantly increased their household incomes, whereas the incomes of those who remained unemployed continued to decline (an analysis of variance confirmed that the differ-

ences among the groups were statistically significant). Those changes also resulted in significantly higher differences between the employed and the unemployed at the second measurement point. In line with this, the subjective assessment of financial concerns (Figure 3.4) yielded mirror-image results: the financial concerns of those who remained unemployed grew slightly over a year, whereas those who managed to find work indicated significantly lower levels of concern about money. The differences between the two groups significantly grew in subjective terms as well. Prolonged unemployment is an obvious factor of economic deprivation.

Figure 3.3 Total household incomes in the first (2003) and the second study (2004) for the group of participants who had been and remained unemployed (solid line), and for the group of participants who managed to find jobs between the two studies (dashed line). 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000

34 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

2003

2004

Investigating Social Exclusion

Figure 3.4 Level of financial concerns in the first (2003) and the second study (2004) for the group of participants who had been and remained unemployed (solid line), and for the group of participants who managed to become employed between the two studies (dashed line). The participants assessed how frequently they had financial worries on a scale from 1 (never) to 5 (all the time). 3,8 3,6 3,4

Not all unemployed people have an equal probability of finding employment, since this may be affected by their different demographic characteristics.

3,2 3,0 2,8 2,6 2,4

2003

Figure 3.5 illustrates the data for the second key component of social exclusion â&#x20AC;&#x201C; social isolation, i.e. the average level of subjective social isolation for the two groups of respondents in the first and the second survey. Those who remained unemployed showed an

2004

increase in their level of social isolation over a year, whereas those who became employed showed a visible decrease. In the long run, groups of employed and of unemployed show great differences in the level of subjective social isolation.

Figure 3.5 The level of subjective social isolation in the first (2003) and the second study (2004) for the group of participants who had been and remained unemployed (solid line), and for the group of participants who managed to become employed between the two studies (dashed line). The average level of isolation was calculated from the answer to the question: Do you consider yourself an integral part and a useful member of the social community? which could range from 1 (yes, I feel like a useful member) to 4 (I feel completely non-useful and excluded).

2,40 2,20 2,00 1,80 1,60 1,40

2003

An important characteristic of the results obtained is visible in Table 3.3 and in Figures 3.4 and 3.5: among those who remained unemployed (solid lines) and those who became employed after the first study (dashed lines) there were already differences at the first measurement point, i.e. at the time when all were un-

2004

employed! From as early as then, those who remained unemployed were poorer, i.e. they showed a higher level of economic deprivation and social isolation. These differences, no doubt, indicate selective processes in employment and lead us to the second problem of the study: Who in Croatia does (not) get a job?

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Investigating Social Exclusion

3.2.2 The likelihood of unemployed people For instance, wealthier finding work people had two times It has already been stated that between the first study higher chances of (June â&#x20AC;&#x201C; August 2003) and the second study (November getting a job than poor â&#x20AC;&#x201C; December 2004), out of a total of 601 participants people, healthy people who responded to the questionnaires, 207 found jobs. also had two times higher So, in a little more than a year, 34.4% found jobs, in other words, the probability of finding employment was chances of getting a 0.34. This is currently an average unemployed personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s job than people whose likelihood of finding employment in Croatia. health was poor, while However, not all unemployed people have an equal younger people had probability of finding employment, since this may be approximately three affected by their different demographic characteristics. times higher chances for We assumed that the likelihood of finding employment employment than older differs for unemployed people of different gender, age, education, duration of unemployment, financial status people. and mental and physical health. This was convincingly corroborated by the analysis conducted. Figure 3.5 illustrates the probability of finding employment for people with different characteristics. The percentage of those who managed to find employment between the two studies is given for each segment of

an individual variable. In the selection of variables for this analysis, we were guided by very specific hypotheses, all of which were confirmed, except for the one concerning gender difference. We supposed that men would have a greater chance of finding work, but the results showed that there is no difference in this respect between men and women. All other differences are statistically significant (Chisquare tests show that all the differences were significant on the level p < .001), and, as clearly indicated by the differences in the length of the bars, the differences among specific segments were also very large. For instance, wealthier people had two times higher chances of getting a job than poor people, healthy people also had two times higher chances of getting a job than people whose health was poor, younger people had approximately three times higher chances for employment than older people, people who were unemployed for a shorter time also had three times higher chances than those who were unemployed for more than three years, whereas people with higher education had as much as four times higher chances of employment than those with only primary school qualifications or less.

Figure 3.6 Probability of finding employment for unemployed people with different characteristics (percentage of participants who found jobs during a period of just over a year). Gender Men Women Age Up to 24 25-34 35-44 45 and over Education Primary school qualifications and less Secondary school qualifications University qualifications Duration of unemployment Up to 6 months 7 months to 3 years More than 3 years Income poer household member Upt to HRK 500 HRK 500-1000 HRK 1001-2000 More than HRK 2000 Physical health Poor Average Good Mental health Poor Average Good

36 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

34,2 34 39,6 44,4 32,4 14,6 15

31,9

57,6 46,2 40,2

16,5 20,1

36,1

22,3

40,6

44,9

38,7 43,8 27,5

34,9 46,9

Investigating Social Exclusion

How can we account for such large differences in the probability of finding employment between people with different characteristics? Those differences are probably the result of the interaction of various factors and processes, including: activities of the job seekers themselves (for example, among the long-term unemployed, there are ever greater numbers of people who become discouraged and give up on persistent and intensive job seeking, thus additionally reducing their chances of finding a job), resources which job seekers have at their disposal (e.g. the poor have fewer resources), or their functional characteristics (e.g. people with inadequate education do not meet the requirements of the jobs available). Of course, the decisions of the employers and their conceptions of desirable characteristics in employees have a decisive role. They can also be affected by prejudice; for instance, the idea that people above 45 years of age cannot be successful workers. More precise research and analysis of those processes and mechanisms are very important for effective social policy measures to be devised. There is currently a lack of research and analysis of this kind.

Social policy measures should be particularly directed towards the most vulnerable groups - people above 45 years of age, people with inadequate education, the poor, the longterm unemployed and individuals with impaired mental and physical health.

3.2.3 Conclusion According to the concept of social exclusion, prolonged unemployment leads to poverty and social isolation, which then additionally reduce the likelihood of finding work. As indicated by the results presented here, this has also been confirmed in Croatia today. Unlike our previous cross-sectional study, which did not find significant differences between the long-term and short-term unemployed, this longitudinal study convincingly shows that prolonged unemployment in Croatia impoverishes and socially isolates those who are exposed to it. In little more than a year, monitored individuals who failed to find work experienced a significant deterioration in their financial situation and an increase in social isolation. In addition, the second part of our study shows the detrimental effects of the recruitment process itself, which discriminates against certain categories of the unemployed. The following are the most vulnerable individuals, those whose likelihood of finding employment is lower than 0.30: people above 45 years of age, people with inadequate education, the poor, the longterm unemployed and individuals with impaired mental and physical health. Any combination of these qualities makes finding employment in Croatia practically impossible and predestines individuals to become socially excluded. It is for these reasons that social policy should be particularly directed towards these groups.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 4:

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion International experience indicates that there continue to be individuals who are difficult to employ among social welfare beneficiaries, even after they have taken part in activation programmes which contain an element of compulsion, such as welfare-towork or workfare programmes.

Long-term unemployment is generally considered to be, to a greater or lesser extent, a determinant of social exclusion (see Chapter 3.2). Although Croatia has a high level of overall unemployment, and of long-term unemployment in particular, the measures aiming to alleviate it do not sufficiently target people who are either long-term unemployed, or who are at risk of becoming so.

4.1 The significance of employment and unemployment Employment has a fundamental role in every society. People are frequently defined (and define themselves) by what they do for a living. Sociological and economic studies stress that employment is not only the key determinant of people’s status in any country, but it is also essential for providing a sense of purpose, income, social stability, and quality of life, and ensuring participation in society73. Employment has been called “the glue that holds our society together“74. Market incentives for increasing investment in education and professional development may have a particular role in alleviating the growing inequalities in employability and salaries, and the related potential poverty. If people are employed, it is less likely that they will be poor, although some people who work are also poor due to a low income and large personal and family expenses. Efforts are being made to help people to work and to earn a salary, and thus be in a better position than those who receive assistance and benefits through the unemployment and social welfare system. Unfortunately, in Croatia, as in many transition countries, many people are unemployed and/or are not easily employable and therefore are exposed to economic poverty and social exclusion. The ILO75 defines employability very broadly: it is the impact of both high quality education and training, but also of other activities. Employability includes the know-how, skills and competencies to enable a person to find and keep a job, to advance professionally, to find another job if dismissed, or find a job in different periods of his or her work and life cycle. Individuals are most employable if they have broad knowledge and competencies, basic and specialist knowledge, including teamwork competencies, information and commu-

nication technology competencies, as well as knowledge of foreign languages and communication skills. Such a combination of knowledge and competencies enables adaptation to changes in the world of work. Many factors on the supply side of the labour market limit the opportunities open to social welfare beneficiaries, particularly those who are very difficult to employ. Reforms to the labour market and the social welfare system should be supplemented by measures to reduce barriers to employment, particularly for difficult-to-employ and poorly paid workers. International experience76 indicates that there continue to be individuals who are difficult to employ among social welfare beneficiaries, even after they have taken part in activation programmes which contain an element of compulsion, such as welfare-to-work or workfare programmes. They are usually struggling with a number of different and complex obstacles to employment, including physical disability/incapacitation, psychological problems, domestic violence, learning difficulties, alcoholism or drug addition, and they mostly have a background of poor educational achievement, they live in areas with poor transport connections, are of poor health and/or have difficulties with socialisation, and so forth. The Acheson Report77 mentions that the unemployed, especially if they are in receipt of social welfare, have a considerably lower level of psychological stability and are frequently susceptible to depression and dissatisfaction, even to the extent of inflicting self-injury and committing suicide. Gallie et al78 found that people whose social network consists of similarly unemployed people have greater vulnerability problems when exposed to psychological and financial difficulties that, in turn, make it more difficult for them to escape poverty. Long-term unemployment is particularly harmful for health. It destroys a person’s opportunities and capacities, not only in a material sense, but also socially and mentally. Moreover, the effects of unemployment on health accumulate over time. Longterm unemployment undoubtedly has an effect on social exclusion to a greater or lesser extent. Although as far as methodology is concerned, the meaning of the concepts of poverty, social exclusion, employment and poverty may seem completely (or mainly) clear, Atkinson79 warns that this is not really

Jahoda, M. (1982). Employment and unemployment – A social-psychological analysis. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Smith, R. (1987). Unemployment and health: a disaster and a challenge. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom.

International Labour Office (2002). Key Indicators of the Labour Market 2001-2002. International Labour Office. Geneva, Switzerland.

Holcomb, P. A., Martinson, K. (2002). Implementing Welfare Reform across the Nation. New Federalism: Issues and Options for States, Series A, No. A-53. The Urban Institute; Holcomb, P. A., Martinson, K. (2002). Putting Policy into Practice: Five Years of Welfare Reform. In Weil, A., Finegold, K. (eds) Welfare Reform: The Next Act, Urban Institute Press. Washington D.C., USA, pp. 1-16.

Acheson, D. (1998). Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health Report. HMSO and The Stationery Office. London, United Kingdom.

Gallie, D., Gershuny, J., Vogler, C. (1994). Unemployment, the household, and social networks. In Gallie D, Marsh, C., Vogler, C. (ed.) Social change and the experience of unemployment. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom, p. 255.

Atkinson, A. B. (1989). How Should We Measure Poverty? Some Conceptual Issues. In Atkinson, A. B. Poverty and Social Security. Harvester Wheatsheaf. London, United Kingdom.

38 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

always the case. It is relatively easy to understand poverty and define it as a lack of money or property. The issue becomes more complicated with social exclusion, whose definition has at least three components. The first component concerns the relativity of social exclusion: people are excluded as a group or a community at a given moment. The second relates to the agent: people either exclude themselves or become excluded by others80. The third component relates to the dynamic nature of social exclusion: the phrase “social exclusion“ refers not only to current exclusion, but also to the lack of hope for the future. Social exclusion should therefore be viewed more widely and beyond long-term unemployment because it also includes (a lack of) expectation of future income. Hence it is often said that poverty and unemployment may lead to social exclusion, but they do not necessarily have to cause it. Furthermore, people who work and are not poor can also be socially excluded. Atkinson believes that the State may play a major role in combating social exclusion through appropriate programmes of social welfare and assistance during unemployment. A review of unemployment, poverty and related social exclusion should include research of some of the consequences affecting the individual and society as a whole. Sen81 states that the list of consequences should include, for the community, the loss of the generated output and the fiscal burden, and for the individual the loss of freedom to make decisions (which means much more than a reduction in income); the loss of knowledge and expertise, and the subsequent long-term damage (just as one learns through work, so one also forgets through lack of activity – because one is outside the world of work and practice); psychological harm; health problems; damage to morale; a loss of motivation for future work; a loss of relationships and family life, as unemployment and poverty can be very detrimental for social relations and can also impair the harmony and unity of the family and jeopardise relations with friends and relatives; finally, the loss of social values and responsibilities, as the long-term unemployed and poor people may become cynical about the fairness of social relations, and unemployment and poverty can also create a feeling of dependence on others – such effects are not conducive to the development of responsibility and self-reliance. It is hardly needs to be mentioned that the labour market does not operate perfectly much of the time, so there can be both unemployment of some work-

ers and a high demand for other workers at the same time. This means that, particularly in countries with high unemployment such as Croatia, there is room to improve the functioning of the labour market by matching workers and employers (labour supply and demand), thus decreasing overt unemployment and the number of unfilled vacancies. Active labour market policy (ALMP) may help in alleviating (reducing) the structural (frictional) imbalance between supply and demand, primarily by reducing the professional and spatial mismatch between supply and demand, and increasing the transparency of the labour market. The most important instruments of ALMP are training and professional development, the provision of information and advice with regard to job vacancies and selection processes, and mediation ALMP can redistribute opportunities for employment, so that fewer people remain long-term unemployed and/or become welfare beneficiaries. If total employment and total labour supply are fixed, ALMP actually means that more people are affected by unemployment over time (presuming that ALMP programmes do not affect the same people at different times). Naturally, an increase in overall employment would be a more favourable result of ALMP than the redistribution of unemployment to a greater number of people. However, economic theory holds that ALMP has almost no immediate effect on overall employment82, but the efficiency of the labour supply increases if the long-term unemployed or welfare claimants become employed. It is therefore worth considering stimulating the participation of the long-term unemployed on the labour market and preventing long-term unemployment. Although these measures may have negative effects, the risk is acceptable if their overall impact is a reduction in the average duration of unemployment. Perhaps ALMP’s greatest significance is that the impact of losing a job or having to change job becomes more acceptable if employment opportunities for the long-term unemployed and welfare beneficiaries are increased (the most important form of benefit in Croatia is called support allowance), and so decreasing social exclusion.

Active labour market policy (ALMP) may help in alleviating (reducing) the structural (frictional) imbalance between supply and demand, primarily by reducing the professional and spatial mismatch between supply and demand, and increasing the transparency of the labour market.

According to recent literature83, training and education are considered to be most effective for the short-term unemployed (those looking for a job for up to two years), whereas salary supplements paid by the State to employees appear to be more effective amongst those who have previously been out of work for more than

The term social exclusion has caused a great debate as to whether this syntagm implies the activity of individual subjects (such as the State) or if it simply happens that particular citizens are excluded. For instance, in Hungary there was political resistance to the use of the active form of the verb exclude while the relevant documents were being translated because it was claimed that “in Hungary nobody excludes anybody“ (Lendvai, N. (2005.) Socijalna politika u srednjoj i istočnoj Europi i ulazak u Europsku uniju: vrijeme za razmišljanje. Financijska teorija i praksa, God. 29, br. 1, 2005., br. 1-12.).

Sen A. (1997). Inequality, unemployment and contemporary Europe. International Labour Review, Vol. 136, No. 2, 1997, pp. 155-171.

Koning de, J., Mosley, H. (ed.) (2001). Labour Market Policy and Unemployment: Impact and Process Evaluations in Selected European Countries. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA.

Schmid, G., Speckesser, S., Hilbert, C. (2001). Does active labour market policy matter? An aggregate impact analysis for Germany in Koning de, J.; Mosley, H. (ed.) Labour Market Policy and Unemployment: Impact and Process Evaluations in Selected European Countries. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

In general, employment and training programmes have the greatest impact and the greatest social benefit for those with least previous experience in the labour market and for those that are the most vulnerable.

two years. If the economy is on an upward trend, this seems to be particularly efficient in preventing “structuralisation“ (whereby unemployed people with the best qualifications find work, whereas the least qualified remain unemployed), and in speeding up the reduction of long-term employment. Training and education will be more efficient if implemented over a shorter period of time, whereas temporary employment in the public sector and salary supplements have greater effect in the long term and in carefully selected cases. In general, employment and training programmes have the greatest impact and the greatest social benefit for those with least previous experience in the labour market and for those that are the most vulnerable84. With regard to the wider term social exclusion, it is generally believed that employment and education policies should provide a way out of the problems associated with long-term unemployment, such as poverty and dependency on social welfare. Many unemploy-

ment problems may be alleviated by an active labour market policy. Of course, the eternal question remains whether this policy is really successful, or just a way of concealing the problems related to employment. In order to avoid disappointing results, an active labour market policy should adjust to changing economic conditions, and focus on the long-term supply of labour, improving factors such as the economic activity rate of the labour force, their level of education, and the flexibility and adaptability of both the employed and those looking for work. It is particularly important that labour market and social welfare policies are coordinated, so that they mutually reinforce one another. The policy which maintains levels of income and benefits during unemployment and the laws protecting employment should also stimulate integration on the labour market and promote its efficiency. That said, coordination is desirable, but difficult to achieve.

Box 4.1: EU Activities in the Area of Employment Policy The EU’s strategic goal for the current decade, as outlined by the Lisbon Agenda for competitiveness and social solidarity, is to “become the most competitive and dynamic economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion“. Coordinated joint policy activities in the wider area of economic, social and ecological issues are being implemented in order to reach this goal. The EU is endeavouring to stimulate economic development based on creativity and productivity, and to implement social policies acceptable to its Member States so as to improve social and economic cohesion. The European Council provides incentives to members and assists them in improving education and professional training, including measures for accelerating employability and reducing educational differences. The Council has continually highlighted the need to develop an active employment policy, which, besides increasing employment, would enable the reintegration of the unemployed and ensure equal opportunities. At the same time, the Council is striving to build gender and age equality, protect vulnerable and national minorities, and stimulate social integration in a consistent, sustainable manner, all under the motto “employment is the best defence against poverty and social exclusion“. The European Employment Strategy (EES) is part of a wider policy programme initiated by the EU in Luxembourg in 1997, and reaffirmed in Lisbon in 2000. The position adopted was that employment and social protection must work together to reduce exclusion and stimulate integration through participation in the labour market. The EES defines a framework for EU Member States’ employment programmes, on which these countries submit annual reports. In the area of employment and labour market policy, Member States carry out activities and produce reports according to four basic guidelines: - improving employability and work quality – with an emphasis on active labour market policy focused in particular on young people and the long-term unemployed; - stimulating enterprise development – above all via deregulation, simplifying access to the market, and making it easier to start small companies; - stimulating adaptability among business entities and employees – thus giving social partners a large and active role; - strengthening a policy of equal opportunity focused on the issues of employing and ensuring equal working conditions for women and people with reduced work capacities.

Björklund, A., Haveman, R., Hollister, R., Holmlund, B. (1991). Labour Market Policy and Unemployment Insurance. Clarendon Press. Oxford, United Kingdom.

40 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment â&#x20AC;&#x201C; A Determinant of Social Exclusion

Croatia has produced a Draft National Employment Action Plan, or NEAP, which gives an overview of problems and measures connected with the labour market. The plan focuses on young people who are just entering the labour market, older workers with outdated knowledge and skills, and people with disabilities. One of the goals of these new measures is to activate the unemployed, as the experience in other countries indicates that stimulating the unemployed to actively seek employment and evaluating their real knowledge and abilities are crucial to employment growth. NEAP is based on ten guidelines, which current EU Members also have to follow.

4.2 The situation in developed and transition countries Work is considered to be the best form of social welfare, and the reasons for this are clear: an employed worker is likely to be economically independent and socially included. Increasing the employment rate has become a key target of social policies and labour market policies in developed industrial countries. In almost all EU Member States, unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, is the most significant factor contributing to poverty and social

In almost all EU Member States, unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, is the most significant factor contributing to poverty and social exclusion.

exclusion. The average unemployment rate85 in the EU grew from 2.3 in 1960 to 7.7% in 2001. While some countries have managed to stem or even reduce unemployment (in particular the Netherlands, Ireland and Great Britain), others managed to do so only partially, so that the unemployment rates are considerably higher than in the 1970s (e.g. Sweden, Germany, France, and Spain). Since the situation has considerably improved with the latest EU enlargement, we provide below the data for June 2003 (the month in which the seasonal fluctuations are least apparent).

Table 4.1 Unemployment rates (%) in June 2003, in ascending order EU 15 Eurozone Luxembourg The Netherlands* Austria Ireland Denmark*

8.1 8.9 3.7 4.1 4.4 4.7 5.2

Sweden Portugal Belgium Finland France Germany Spain

5.4 7.3 8.0 9.3 9.4 9.4 11.4

* Data for May 2003. Source: Eurostat (2003).

As illustrated in Table 4.1, the average unemployment rate was above 8% (somewhat higher in the Eurozone than in the EU 15). Luxembourg had the lowest rate, whereas Spain had the highest. The danger of social exclusion grows with the duration of unemployment, while long-term unemployment (being out of a job for more than a year) is considered the most important indicator of social exclusion. In 2001, 3% of the active population of the EU was unemployed for more than 12 months. These data display great variation, from below 1% in Luxembourg, Denmark, the Netherlands and Austria, to more than 5% in Greece and Italy. EU enlargement brings on board heterogeneous and poorer participants. Competition among a number of depressed regions will increase the problems of social

welfare systems that, in the adjustment process, have already been exposed to many pressures, for demographic reasons and also due to globalisation. This raises the risk of increased unemployment and inequality, which often prevents national governments from conducting complex and essential reforms. There are also significant differences among the new EU Member States, both in terms of unemployment and long-term unemployment. While in 2000 one group of new members recorded comparatively low unemployment rates of below 10% (Estonia, Czech Republic and Hungary), another group recorded very high unemployment rates of almost 20% (Slovakia and Poland). Slovenia managed to decrease the high level of unemployment recorded in the mid-1990s to approximately 6.5%.

In the text below, data on unemployment are used as laid out in the Labour Force Survey (LFS) (whose methodology is in accordance with that recommended by the International Labour Organisation). According to this, unemployment in most countries is somewhat lower than the data on recorded unemployment, which are collected through employment services. The long-term unemployment rate for Croatia (Table 4.2) is calculated according to the structure of the duration of unemployment, in line with the data of the Croatian Employment Office.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

Croatia has higher rates of both unemployment and long-term unemployment than the averages of the new Member States.

The unemployment rate itself is not a sufficient indicator of the seriousness of the situation on the labour market and is not the only determinant of social exclusion. The structure of the unemployed according to the time spent seeking employment should also be included. Rates of long-term unemployment in the new EU Member States differ and change significantly, even over a short period of time. For example, in 2000 Poland

achieved the best result, with long-term unemployed (people seeking employment for more than a year) accounting for a third of the total number of unemployed. The country with the worst result was Slovenia, where almost two-thirds of the unemployed were out of work for more than 11 months. However, according to the 2003 data, long-term unemployment in Poland grew considerably whereas it decreased in Slovenia.

Table 4.2 Unemployment rates and long-term unemployment (more than 11 months) in 2003 (in %) Long-term Total

Total

Croatia EU EU10 Czech Republic Estonia Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Hungary Malta Poland Slovenia Slovak Republic

8.9 4 7.8 3.8 4.6 1.1 4.3 6.1 2.4 3.5 10.7 3.4 11.1

F 10 4.5 8.4 5 4.4 1.4 4.6 6.5 2.3 3 11.5 3.6 11.4

Short-term unemploy-ment M

Total unemploy-ment

Total

5.9 5.1 6.5 4 5.6 3.4 6.2 6.6 3.4 4.5 8.5 3.1 6.4

6.6 3.8 5.3 1.1 6.1 2.5 5.7 5.8 3.7 3.8 7.1 2.4 5.8

5.3 6.4 7.8 6.9 5.1 4.4 6.6 7.4 3 7.2 9.9 3.7 6.9

14.8 9.1 14.3 7.8 10.2 4.5 10.5 12.7 5.8 8 19.2 6.5 17.5

8.1 3.6 7.3 2.9 4.8 0.8 4.1 5.7 2.5 3.5 10.1 3.3 10.9

F 16.6 8.3 13.7 6.1 10.5 3.9 10.3 12.3 6 6.8 18.6 6 17.2

M 13.4 10 15.1 9.8 9.9 5.2 10.7 13.1 5.5 10.7 20 7 17.8

Source: Eurostat – Labour Force Survey, annual averages, taken over from the Commission of the European Communities, 2005. The data on Croatia refer to the first semester of 2004, data from the Central Bureau of Statistics, 2005.

High long-term unemployment mostly accompanies a high overall level of unemployment, so Poland and Slovakia had the highest rates of both unemployment and long-term unemployment in 2003 (Table 4.2). Out of central and eastern European countries, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia experienced lower rates of unemployment and long-term unemployment. Croatia has higher rates of both unemployment and long-term unemployment than the averages of the new Member States. Turbulent changes in the labour markets of transition countries and the unrepresentative picture painted by statistics like these (certain countries with low unemployment, such as Romania, are actually lagging behind significantly in terms of economic reform and restructuring) indicate that it is better to compare the situation in Croatia with the older EU Member States. A comparison with the older EU Member States clearly shows that the proportion of people who find jobs following a shorter period of unemployment

42 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

(up to 11 months) in Croatia is palpably lower than in all countries except for Italy. This difference seems particularly great when compared with the situation in countries known for their dynamic labour market, such as Austria or Denmark. In Austria, Denmark and Finland, almost three-quarters of unemployed men find jobs after 11 months; in Spain, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and Great Britain, two-thirds manage to find work in this period; in Croatia, only 38.3% of unemployed men find jobs after 11 months. More than 60% of men in Croatia spend 11 months or more looking for employment, whereas this percentage is a little more than 25% in Austria, Denmark and Finland. In Croatia, the situation is similar with unemployed women: in the first 11 months, 37% of unemployed women find jobs, whereas in Denmark and Finland about four fifths do so. Almost two-thirds of unemployed women in Croatia are out of work for more than 11 months, whilst the same fate is shared by only a fifth of Danish and Finnish woman (Table 4.3).

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

Table 4.3 Duration of unemployment in Croatia and in old EU Member States in 2001 (in %) M

Italy Croatia Belgium Germany Greece France Portugal Netherlands Sweden Great Britain Luxembourg Spain Finland Denmark Austria

Total up to 11 months 36.3 38.3 47.5 51.6 53.0 63.1 64.3 65.0 66.9 67.0 67.2 69.2 73.0 73.8 74.5

F More than 11 months 63.7 61.8 52.5 48.4 47.0 36.9 35.7 35.0 33.1 33.0 32.8 30.8 27.0 26.2 25.5

Total up to 11 months 36.9 37.0 49.2 47.1 43.4 63.2 60.1 68.7 72.3 80.5 76.3 58.4 79.8 81.2 73.3

More than 11 months 63.1 63.2 50.8 52.9 56.6 36.8 39.9 31.3 27.7 19.5 23.7 41.6 20.2 18.8 26.7

Almost two-thirds of unemployed women in Croatia are out of work for more than 11 months, whilst the same fate is shared by only a fifth of Danish and Finnish woman.

Source: Eurostat

4.3 The situation in Croatia 4.3.1 Long-term unemployment in Croatia Declining production in Croatia in the early 1990s and the consequent reduction in the number of people employed were not surprising. However, it is less clear why high unemployment has remained so persistent after output increased. Given unemployment and the related poverty and social exclusion, the main concern is not therefore so much why unemployment (until recently) grew at very high rates, but why some

people find it so difficult to find a way out of unemployment. Very low rates of emergence from unemployment mean that unemployment is becoming increasingly long term86. Croatia is without doubt a country with a high degree of long-term unemployment, so efforts aimed at its reduction are highly important. Obviously, the suppression of unemployment (particularly long-term unemployment) is a complex and expensive task, which becomes even more expensive if these efforts are postponed.

Box 4.2.: Zagrebački bokci Zagrebački bokci is a humanitarian organisation started by unemployed single people, pensioners, poor people and others who had experienced a drop in their socio-economic status and subsequently suffered social isolation or a disintegration of social ties. The aim of the organisation is to provide increased opportunities for socialising and networking to unemployed and poor citizens of Zagreb, as well as to help them recover their diminished self-respect by performing socially beneficial work. Some of their activities include cleaning up the environment, removing ragweed, picking apples, distributing secondhand clothes and furniture, and planting flowers. These activities also improve the lives of their fellow citizens.

Franz, W. (1995). Central and East European Labour Markets in Transition: Developments, Causes, and Cures. Discussion Paper No. 1132. Centre for Economic Policy Research. London, United Kingdom.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

In 1991, 9% of the unemployed were out of a job for more than three years on average, whereas in 2002 more than a quarter of the unemployed (26.5%) looked for employment for the same period of time.

The risk of poverty and marginalisation in Croatia is directly related to exclusion from the world of work. It has been mentioned that the first national poverty study was carried out in 199887 (for more recent data, see Chapter 2 of this Report). Poverty in Croatia has a stagnating effect: those who have become poor need a great deal of time to free themselves of poverty. Poverty in Croatia is in many respects a permanent condition: there is little likelihood that the poor can easily be lifted from their current situation. The two major reasons are: - General economic opportunities are limited because, so far, growth has failed to provide enough jobs. Many old jobs have disappeared, and new ones have not been created. Growth has primarily benefited those who already have jobs. The impact has been negligible for those outside the world of work, and even negative for some. Furthermore, until recently the excessive regulation of labour relations and employment, particularly with regard to redundancies, restricted labour market flexibility and limited the opportunities open to small businesses, which could have presented a significant source of income for the poor. - The poor have limited access to the employment opportunities that exist. Once excluded from the world of work, the unemployed and the economically inactive have limited opportunities to break the cycle of poverty. Almost one-half of the unemployed are long-term unemployed, and an analysis of worker flows on the labour market indicates that the unemployed and the economically inactive have a low probability of finding a new job.

cost of labour, also hinders employment and investment. All this serves to protect people who have jobs, but excludes those who are jobless. It is true that the situation has markedly improved with amendments to the 2003 labour legislation, but Croatia still has a relatively high index89 of legal protection of employment90. A majority of people of working age who are not employed either have a very poor level of education (without having completed, or having only completed, primary education), or have the very narrow knowledge and skills acquired in vocational education. In addition to the inadequate educational and qualification structure of the unemployed (in other words, a lack of the required knowledge and expertise), an additional hindrance is presented by the limited availability of accommodation in the areas where there are clear opportunities for employment. Further restrictions are placed on the labour market by both the income security and the relatively small difference between the lowest salaries and various benefits offered by the social welfare system (which does not sufficiently encourage active job seeking), and the widespread hidden economy. People who, because of their education, are outside the world of work and paid employment are also in danger of passing on limited opportunities to their children. The scarring effect of longer-term unemployment should also be borne in mind, as it usually leaves an indelible mark on a person’s chances of employment, professional development and promotion. It is more difficult for the long-term unemployed to find a job, and even when they do, they are at greater risk of losing it, so that they become unemployed again, or accept work in insecure or poorly paid jobs.

Croatian society has become polarised between relatively securely employed people (insiders) (who are in fact underpaid when the cost of living is considered), and the unemployed (outsiders), of whom a considerable number are long-term unemployed, whose chances of finding a job are slim. This is related to the rigidity of the Croatian labour market and labour legislation, and reflected in a lengthy, complex and expensive system for laying off employees (which affects, for example, the termination of employment contracts, statutory notice period, severance payments, mass redundancies and so on)88. The rigidities of the labour market curb entry to and exit from employment, which, in addition to the relatively high

Apart from its high level, unemployment in Croatia is also marked by the long average time to find a job, which is more than two years. According to data from the Employment Office, approximately half of the unemployed look for employment for more than a year, and as many as 30% are unemployed for more than two years. In 1991, 9% of the unemployed were out of a job for more than three years on average, whereas in 2002 more than a quarter of the unemployed (26.5%) looked for employment for the same period of time. This statistic reflects the situation as is (retained unemployment reserves) because it presents the residual values (what remains) of the entry into and exit from records and cannot be used as a representative in-

World Bank (2000). Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA.

Biondić, I., Crnić, S., Martinis, A., Šošić, V. (2002). Tranzicija, zaštita zaposlenja i tržište rada u Hrvatskoj. Ured za socijalno partnerstvo u Hrvatskoj. Zagreb, Hrvatska.

Matković, T. and Biondić, I. (2003). Reforma zakona o radu i promjena indeksa zakonske zaštite zaposlenja. Financijska teorija i praksa, 27(4), 2003, pp. 515-528.

Of course, the importance of labour legislation should not be overrated, but it is without doubt an important determinant of the flexibility of the labour market.

44 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

dicator of the duration of unemployment. In order to obtain a real picture of the duration of unemployment, the experiences of a group registered as unemployed over a certain period of time should be monitored. The trends of entry into and exit from unemployment records in October 2002 may serve as an indicator. A total of 21,400 people were registered; 22,200 were deleted from the records, among whom almost 10,000 were unemployed for less than six months, and more than 6,000 for less than three months. Out of those who were deleted in October, approximately 45% had been unemployed on average for about 11 weeks91.

4.3.2 What has been done? Unemployed people who are fit for work account for 47.6% (53,328)92 of all claimants (mostly of support allowance) in the social welfare system. Without doubt, they are employable to a certain (albeit limited) extent and their inclusion in the world of work is important, although challenging. Thanks to their participation in various programmes, their possible employment in the future may be a means of reducing the burden that working-age unemployed people pose on the social welfare system. All measures in this area aim to reduce the number of long-term unemployed and the number who become long-term unemployed, in particular by assisting the long-term unemployed to find a job. The existing problems may be alleviated by an ALMP, special programmes of pre-service and in-service training targeted at specific groups, and programmes aiming to overcome specific personal obstacles to employment. Precise guidance and systematic assistance in line with the particular needs of the beneficiaries should be the main features of the new programmes. As in many other former socialist countries, interventions on the labour market in Croatia have more frequently been applied in order to temporarily stem unemployment (for example, through subsidising employment and programmes of public works), than for the unemployed to be given an opportunity to acquire knowledge and skills, as well as information required for finding a job. Today, a much more targeted approach needs to be used, so that the activities

are directed at addressing specific requirements on the labour market and at certain groups with distinct needs93 . Unfortunately, there is no comprehensive data and research available in Croatia, so the effects of ALMP may be assessed only intuitively. Until recently, education and training programmes for the employed and the unemployed were carried out on a very small scale, primarily because of the shortage of financial resources. In recent years, activities in this area have increased, and they have been devoted in considerable part to social welfare beneficiaries who have participated in a programme of public works. As in developed countries, the programme of public works in Croatia has not focused on building large infrastructure facilities, but on socially useful community activities, such as care for the elderly, cleaning up and preparing land for cultivation, reconstruction, and so on. The majority of these activities are not profitable and therefore commercial companies are not interested. This means that bodies of State and local authorities are mostly responsible. The main benefit of public works is not immediate economic gain, but the greater encouragement given to unemployed people, for whom there is a very low demand on the labour market, to join the labour force. The programme therefore targets unemployed people who do not have any other employment opportunities at that time. These are people over 40 years of age, people with a certain level of disability, and also the young and untrained. A study of the programme94 seems to support the conclusion that taking part in the programme does not directly increase a participant’s likelihood of finding employment, but it at least does not reduce it. When research was carried out into assistance provided by the programme of public works, almost all of the respondents (96.9%) said that the public works helped them in some way at least. It is true that the majority of the participants stated that the programme helped their financial situation. Unfortunately, all other results (such as assistance in making social contacts, building confidence and acquiring knowledge and skills) were much less stressed. Those results indicate that participating in the programme of public works in Croatia may (at least) be partially considered a temporary way of overcoming financial problems.

Among all social welfare claimants (mostly of support allowance), unemployed people who are fit for work account for 53,328 or 47.6%.

Croatian Office for Employment (2002). Mjesečni statistički bilten, No. 10. Croatian Office for Employment. Zagreb, Croatia.

Ministarstvo rada i socijalne skrbi / Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare (2002). Godišnje izvješće o primijenjenim pravima socijalne skrbi, pravnoj zaštiti djece, mladeži, braka, obitelji i osoba lišenih poslovne sposobnosti te zaštiti tjelesno ili mentalno oštećenih osoba u Republici Hrvatskoj u 2001. godini. Ministarstvo rada i socijalne skrbi, Uprava socijalne skrbi. Zagreb, Croatia.

For more details on the lessons learned in other countries, see Davies, S., Hallet, M., (2001). Policy responses to regional unemployment: Lessons from Germany, Spain and Italy. Economic Papers: No. 161. Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs. European Commission http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance.

Dorenbos, R., van Winden, P., Walsh, K., Svaljek, S., Milas, G. (2002). Evaluation of program of public works in Croatia - Final report. NEI Labour and Education and T.E.R.N. Rotterdam, Netherlands.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

Since the high level of unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, is one of the main causes of poverty in Croatia, a more flexible labour market, by creating a greater number of jobs, particularly for workers with lower qualifications, would probably contribute to the alleviation of poverty.

Although expenditure on ALMP in Croatia has increased, there are serious doubts about the effectiveness of these programmes95, with problems related to their short duration and the inconsistency in the provision of funding. Various programmes were started and yielded better results than expected, but they were interrupted, mostly due to a lack of money. Greater attention and financial support was devoted to subsidising employment, and not to improving job seekers’ knowledge and skills. As far as the local level is concerned, cooperation needs to be established or improved between the Croatian Employment Office and local projects implementing an active employment policy, especially targeting the long-term unemployed and welfare claimants. Not enough has yet been done to increase the flexibility of Croatian labour legislation. Critics of the flexible labour market note that this can also have an adverse impact on poverty because of the emergence

of low paid and insecure jobs. However, since the high level of unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment, is one of the main causes of poverty in Croatia, a more flexible labour market, by creating a greater number of jobs, particularly for workers with lower qualifications, would probably contribute to the alleviation of poverty. Even if it actually led to the emergence of a new class of employed who were below the poverty line, greater flexibility should not necessarily be considered a bad solution because employment in low-paid jobs is actually often the first step towards better-paid jobs and emerging from poverty96. Since the reform of the institutional framework of the labour market has coincided with a cycle of economic expansion, in the coming years, a synergy of positive effects on the labour market can also be expected: continued growth in employment with a reduction in the level of overall unemployment and long-term unemploymet.

Box 4.3.: Mreža Mreža (the Network) is an organisation working to provide employment advocacy and encourage the creation of the ‘knowledge society’. It was a winner of the 2005 European Computer Driving Licence (ECDL) prize, awarded by the Foundation for Electronic Literacy. Through its educational programmes, which include courses, seminars, workshops, and other activities, Mreža has made a significant contribution to the advancement of electronic literacy in Croatia. The organisation has helped many citizens to acquire new knowledge (ECDL accredited), thus giving them access to positions requiring more qualifications. Mreža works with various social groups, including the unemployed, blind and visually impaired, university and elementary school students, Croatian veterans, and people with substance dependency problems.

4.4 Conclusion The reform of labour legislation to improve flexibility needs to be expanded and reinforced by reforms to the judiciary and the system for resolving labour disputes. This is to ensure that those most affected by this reform (workers with lower levels of education) receive more equitable treatment throughout the employment and legal systems. Additional efforts should be made soon to settle labour disputes more effectively. Increased efforts also need to be made to inspect unregistered workers and combat the grey economy. Babić, Z. (2003). Uloga aktivne politike na tržište rada u Hrvatskoj. Financijska teorija i praksa, 27(4), 2003, pp. 547-566

Šošić, V. (2005). Siromaštvo i politike na tržištu rada. Financijska teorija i praksa, 29(2), 2005, pp. 75-96.

46 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Developing social dialogue on all levels, particularly with small and medium businesses, is key to developing good working conditions. Attention also needs to be focused on the segment of the employed who, although they are working, have a very low income and remain below the poverty line. In relation to this, specific instruments of social policy should be created, aiming to distribute the burden of the reform more equitably between all members of society and to prevent further fragmentation of the labour market. For the majority of the long-term unemployed, it is very difficult to emerge from poverty and related

Long-term Unemployment – A Determinant of Social Exclusion

social exclusion, so they are forced to permanently rely on the social welfare system. The threat of growing long-term unemployment and poverty among welfare claimants at a time of economic recovery and growth has a great impact on social exclusion and the disruption of social cohesion and solidarity. ALMP is considered (and not only in transition countries) as a universal tool for increasing employment and, consequently, for reducing unemployment. It is sometimes claimed that unemployment could be resolved immediately if there were only sufficient funds for implementing policy measures. For transition countries such as Croatia, it seems much more useful to invest in the “quality“ of ALMP, rather than quantity. Quality here means a coherent framework of measures with distinct components that mutually reinforce each other in alleviating long-term unemployment and assisting the people it affects. This framework would involve additional measures targeting the long-term unemployed or those at greatest risk of long-term unemployment, as well as assistance through oneto-one counselling for unemployed people to help them make choices in line with their needs. It would also include choosing from a range of possibilities and support for people with specific needs, as well as cooperation and partnership with other services and non-governmental, non-profit organisations (NGOs). Currently, one of the top priorities of Croatia’s economic policy is dealing with the low employment rates or, in other words, increasing employment. There is obviously a strong inter-relation between poverty, education, employability and long-term unemployment. The problems that many of the longterm unemployed face are mostly multidimensional, and frequently include a low level of education and motivation. Croatia already has active and passive measures to assist the unemployed. Employment of the long-term unemployed should be encouraged, and appropriate programmes of work may improve their social inclusion. At the same time, evaluations

of the real efficiency of individual measures over time have not been conducted. This can be tackled by introducing new techniques (tracking studies) to collect data on results obtained. Furthermore, job creation through various programmes enables the fight against long-term unemployment to begin. It is well known that it is crucial for the unemployed not to miss out on the experience of work (i.e. the chance to acquire knowledge and skills) and ties with the labour market. The supply of jobs and employment within various programmes, such as public works, may have greater benefits than programmes of inservice training, pre-service training and professional development. ALMP programmes carried out in the wrong way may waste resources, be inefficient and counterproductive, and may cause the currently employed to be pushed out of jobs. In contrast, carefully implemented programmes seem to increase employment, have an insignificant influence on employed people losing their jobs, enable the creation of real value-added, and may effectively increase the earnings of workers with lower educational qualifications. There are several golden rules and criticisms relevant to every programme: jobs that have a greater probability of increasing future earnings are generally more expensive and harder to create, while jobs that are closer to real jobs and apparently more useful to the community also have a greater tendency to push out workers in the public sector. Smaller-scale employment programmes should be planned and conducted, from which lessons can be learned that may help with larger programmes in the future. Furthermore, extensive additional training and education programmes, targeting large groups of the unemployed, have rarely proven to be good investments, either for the community or for the programme participants. On the other hand, detailed and precisely targeted programmes yield good results.

The coherent framework of the Active Labour Market Policy would involve additional measures targeting those at greatest risk of long-term unemployment, as well as assistance through one-to-one counselling for unemployed people, support for people with specific needs, as well as cooperation with other services and non-governmental organisations.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 5:

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion Key factors for the establishment of the link between discrimination and social exclusion are the relativity action and dynamic character of social relations at various levels (interpersonal, inter-group and institutional) as well as various aspects of life and work (including participation in the local community, culture, education, economy and the labour market, social and health care, political processes and decision-making).

This chapter outlines the relationship between discrimination and social exclusion. Discrimination means that a certain group of people experiences unequal treatment in terms of differentiation, exclusion, or limitation, or, on the contrary, is placed in a more favourable position in relation to other groups. Discrimination may be based on race, social or income status, birth, culture, age, gender, or sexual orientation, as opposed to equality, inclusion and unlimited recognition or exercise of human rights and basic freedoms (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination). There are two types of discrimination: direct and indirect discrimination. Direct discrimination occurs when a certain group’s difference is the main reason for unequal treatment. Indirect discrimination is hidden behind measures, criteria or procedures that are seemingly neutral, but result in certain groups being placed in an unequal position97. On the other hand, measures of ‘positive discrimination’ are possible, whereby certain social groups that have traditionally been discriminated against in certain situations are treated preferentially. A strict application of the principle of neutrality may additionally reinforce the consequences of long-term discrimination. Positive discrimination hence serves as partial compensation for previous discrimination. Measures like these are in many cases (for instance, a national minority’s education in their mother tongue) considered to be unquestionable achievements of civilisation that are rarely or never challenged. But positive discrimination may actually result in negative consequences for individuals or groups who are not responsible for the initial discrimination, and who therefore frequently offer resistance. Positive discrimination may in this way contribute to a negative perception of the group facing discrimination. Discrimination manifests itself both at an individual and institutional level. Individual discriminatory behaviour is an expression of personal prejudice, while institutional discrimination is manifested through the processes, rules, attitudes and behaviour of public and private organisations that contribute to discrimination by prejudice, ignorance, imprudence and stereotypes98. A reciprocal effect may result: the discriminatory processes of organisations confirm and

strengthen individual prejudice, and individual stereotypes contribute to the acceptance by organisations of discriminatory practices. Every country is obligated, in accordance with its abilities, to ensure the preconditions and create effective mechanisms for preventing different types of discrimination. The complexity of the mechanisms resulting in discrimination in the Croatian context is illustrated here by the examples of two vulnerable groups: Roma children and people with learning disabilities99 in education. Former addicts, homeless people, people who are HIV positive, sexual minorities, members of other national minorities, children without parental care and the physically challenged are all members of vulnerable groups. The choice of these two groups is therefore arbitrary; they have been selected for the purpose of illustrating more general processes. However, it can be said that both Roma and people with learning disabilities face long-term and profound discrimination in the education system, and awareness of this is only now being seen in Croatian public, political and academic discourse. The position of each group will be considered in relation to the effects of discrimination, discriminatory processes concerning equality before the law, their position in the education system, professional norms and practice, and the challenges we have identified. This focus on two groups may contribute to the perception that there is a hierarchy of deprivation, or to the idea that discriminatory processes are different for different groups. However, the aim is to demonstrate different types of discrimination in Croatia on the basis of the two examples, and link them to the exclusion and inclusion processes which affect individuals, regardless of their age, sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity, language, physical ability, mental health, health condition or income. Key factors for the establishment of the link between discrimination and social exclusion are the relativity action and dynamic character of social relations at various levels (interpersonal, inter-group and institutional) as well as various aspects of life and work (including participation in the local community, culture, education, economy and the labour market, social and health care, political processes and decision-making).

Complete neutrality of measures, criteria and procedures for each individual is very often not possible, or even desirable. For example, public policies are defined with certain goals, and by definition have different effects on different individuals or groups. It is therefore important to differentiate discrimination from legitimate differences in the treatment of individuals and groups that come about in a transparent manner and on the basis of democratic processes.

Oakley, R. (2000). Institutional racism: Lessons from the U.K. Newsletter no. 4. European Roma Rights Centre.

The term “learning disabilities“ designates a shift from the understanding of mental retardation “as a significant limitation in the overall functioning of an individual…characterised by significant belowaverage intellectual functioning“ to a definition of a condition that is influenced by interactions with the social environment. Learning disabilities are thus defined according to the “levels of support that an individual needs in order to function successfully in a social environment, such as support in intellectual functioning and in learning, psychological and emotional support, physical and healthcare support and support with the environment“ (Teodorović, B. (2005). Modeli u rehabilitaciji osoba s teškoćama u razvoju, u Zapošljavanje uz podršku. Udruga za promicanje inkluzije. Zagreb, Croatia).

48 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

The differentiation between the concepts of citizenship as a legal status and citizenship as a social and political role may serve as a starting point for analysing the impact of discrimination. At the formal and legal levels, the Constitution guarantees civil status and the prohibition of discrimination for all Croatian citizens. However, if civil status is examined at the level of roles and influences in social, economic and political relations, the key factors are the ability of certain groups to access material and non-material assets (for example, participation in social and cultural initiatives, educational, economic, and political activities), distribution and re-distribution, and the opportunity for their voice to be heard in public100. The obstacles that certain groups meet when expressing their opinion and in achieving access are related to deep-rooted prejudice and the distance created towards certain groups, and institutional practice characterised by “silence“, negligence or insufficient activity. Identifying actual discriminatory mechanisms and processes is generally considered difficult, but some authors point out that it is possible on the basis of statistical data, even when there are no documented specific individual cases101. That is to say, if there are no correct and relevant data, but if a certain group has been disproportionately represented in comparison with the majority in the existing data, the existence of discriminatory processes is possible102. Efforts should be made to analyse whether certain differences partly result from the activities of legitimate market mechanisms or personal choice, whilst taking into account situations in which individuals or groups have markedly narrow choices (a fact that may indicate discrimination). At the same time, many marginalised groups resist the collection of data, thereby showing their fear that it will foster discrimination instead of preventing it. Groups affected by discrimination therefore need to be included in the process of deciding on categories of data to be collected, as well as in their collection and interpretation. Discriminatory practices will be illustrated by the examples of the education of Roma children and people with learning disabilities, and the illustration will be followed by a discussion of the processes involved. Due to its importance, the field of education has been singled out from other areas of participation in society. The right to education is a basic human right, a generator of equal opportunities and a spur to the reduction of social exclusion.

5.1 The Roma In the 2001 census, 9,463 people in Croatia declared themselves as members of the Roma ethnic minority. However, the Council of Europe estimates the number of Roma who live in Croatia to be much higher, between 30,000 to 50,000. Due to the lack of other official data, this paper uses the Council of Europe’s assessment. The reasons for the lower number and the lack of accurate data on the Roma are various. On one hand, they are related to the fact that some Roma could not attain Croatian citizenship due to the complexity of legal, administrative and practical regulations, and, on the other hand, to citizens’ individual assessment that their life would be easier if they declared themselves as belonging to the majority group or to some other minority, and so avoid the stigmatisation related to self-determination and to belonging to the Roma minority.

Efforts should be made to analyse whether certain differences between social groups partly result from the activities of legitimate market mechanisms or are they a result of personal choice, whilst taking into account situations in which individuals or groups have markedly narrow choices (a fact that may indicate discrimination).

The access of the Roma to material resources, their interaction with local, regional and national institutions, and their levels of participation in economic, educational, cultural and political activities are intertwined on many levels and made difficult by a series of socially determined obstacles. During processes of political and economic transition marked by relatively weakened government institutions, the narrowing of the labour market and lower levels of tolerance among the wider social classes, the Roma are in a more vulnerable position in comparison with other groups of the population in all central European countries103. Their lower levels of educational achievement and the lack of competitive professional skills lead to difficulties in entering the world of labour and in maintaining employment. According to a survey carried out in 2001 by the “Better future“ (Bolja budućnost) association of Roma women on the number of people employed and the types of jobs they had, only 1% of those interviewed had a full-time job in the City of Zagreb region, from among a sample of 122 people out of whom 63 were women. Most people employed (19%) did some kind of work at home, while 16% were occasionally involved in the gathering of secondary raw material. Women were mostly housewives, and if they had a job, it was mostly related to the grey economy, such as selling goods at markets and the collecting and reselling of secondary raw materials104.

Phillips, A. (1994). Pluralism, Solidarity and Change. In The Lesser Evil and the Greater Good. Rivers Oram Press.

100

Freeman, J. (1970). Institutional discrimination. www.jofreeman.com/womensociety/institidiscrim.htm.

101

Ibid.

102

Ringold D. (2000). Roma and the Transition in Central and Eastern Europe. World Bank.

103

European Roma Rights Center (2005). Report on Position of Roma Women in Croatia. http://www.errc.org/cikk.phph?cikk=2124

104

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

The Roma exercise most of these rights, except for the right to education in the language of the national minority. They are currently the only minority in Croatia not to exercise this right, although only six percent of Roma families speak the Croatian language.

Participation in the “grey“ economy is a consequence of the inability to earn an income by performing formal economic activities, and represents an unsteady and unreliable source of income for a limited number of people. For that reason, most Roma live below the poverty line and depend on social welfare. According to data from the National Programme for the Roma, Roma make up 13.5% of the recipients of the most basic forms of social welfare (support allowance, one-off financial allowance, allowance for the purchase of firewood and allowance for the purchase of obligatory textbooks), although they account for only 0.21% of the total population according to official statistics105. Taking into account the unfavourable economic situation and the high percentage of the unemployed in society in general, the overall impression is that the Roma are a burden on society.

5.1.1 Discrimination Equality (only) before the law The constitutional principles of the protection of human rights and basic freedoms, personal and political freedoms, economic, social, cultural rights, rights to education and equality before the law are implemented through a developed system of legal regulations and bodies. The protection of minority rights is provided for by the Constitutional Act on National Minorities, the Act on the Use of the Language and Script of National Minorities, and the Act on Education and Training in the Language and Script of National Minorities. These acts guarantee the right to political participation, the right to cultural autonomy, the right to the use of language and script, and the right to education in the language of the national minority under prescribed circumstances. The Roma exercise most of these rights, except for the right to education in the language of the national minority. They are currently the only minority in Croatia not to exercise this right, although only six percent of Roma families speak the Croatian language106. Officially, the main obstacles in exercising this right are of a technical and organisational nature: the lack of teachers proficient in the language of the national minority, the non-standardised language that the Roma speak107, and the lack of textbooks.

“Lost in the educational system“108 There are no statistics on the number of Roma children, and the data on the total number of Roma are unreliable. It is estimated that about 1,500 Roma pupils attended basic education in 2002. Two thirds of them actually enrol in schools, but usually leave school in the third or fourth grade109. The assumption that leaving school implies self-exclusion110 needs to be carefully examined given the obstacles in the educational process that Roma pupils face and the fact that the members of the Roma community, due to other structural limitations, are almost entirely unable to understand the connection between successful education and social and economic success111. There are no accurate data on Roma pupils’ educational achievements, which is usually attributed to the fact that according to law pupils are not registered according to their nationality. The position of Roma children in the education system is conditioned by social, economic and historical factors, thus emphasising the need for the “organisational conception of the system for the education and training of the Roma to take into account the requirements of the environment (within the framework of the regular school system) and of the Roma, and to aim at the creation of a new integrative school, and not at the mechanical reconstruction of the existing one“112. An overview of the models for Roma education in Croatia shows that both the separation and the integration model have been applied with greater or lesser degrees of success. The model of separate classes organised according to a modified educational programme applied in the 1950s resulted in a larger number of Roma pupils attending school, but at a lower level of knowledge and reduced opportunities for interaction and integration. Smaller pilot studies indicate that integrated education in classes with a large number of Roma pupils leads to a range of difficulties noted by teachers, namely insufficient knowledge of the Croatian language, differences in the age of pupils enrolled in the first grade (from 7 to 11 years of age), lack of punctuality, absenteeism, and poor conditions for studying at home113. As a result of various limitations in the educational system, schools often develop their own mechanisms for dealing

Ured za nacionalne manjine Vlade RH / Office for National Minorities of the Government of the Republic of Croatia (2003). Nacionalni program za Rome / The National Programme for Roma. Zagreb, Croatia. UNDP, Regional Bureau for Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States (2005). Faces of Poverty, Faces of Hope. UNDP, Bratislava, Slovak Republic. http://vulnerability.undp.sk. 107 The Roma in Croatia speak romani chib (originating from the Ancient Indian group of languages) and ljimba d’bjas (linked to the Old Romanian dialects). 108 Hrvatić, N. (1994). Prema konceptualizaciji hrvatskog obrazovnog modela za romsku djecu. In Glas Roma: Odgoj i obrazovanje djece Roma u Hrvatskoj. 109 Ured za nacionalne manjine Vlade RH / Office for National Minorities of the Government of the Republic of Croatia (2003). Nacionalni program za Rome / The National Programme for Roma. Zagreb, Croatia. 110 The self-exclusion of the Roma is often used as the main explanation for exclusion. However, it seems that the strategy of self-exclusion needs to be considered in the light of the strategies for separation–integration–assimilation implicit in the measures and practices of State institutions and in relation to the room for negotiation about identity and cultural characteristics. 111 Hrvatić, N. (2000). Odgoj i izobrazba Roma u Hrvatskoj. Društvena istraživanja. 112 Ibid, p. 270. 113 Pintarić et al (1994). Utjecaj socioekonomskih faktora na uspjeh (ili neuspjeh) romske djece u školi. In Glas Roma: Odgoj i obrazovanje djece Roma u Hrvatskoj. 105 106

50 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

with these challenges. Sometimes this may result in controversial practices, as for example in Međimurje. The Deputy Ombudsman warned in 2000 of discrimination towards Roma pupils who attended separate classes in 13 schools in the Counties of Međumurje and Varaždin. Upon her request, the responsible authority submitted a report that was assessed as unsatisfactory and the case was made public, but there were no changes in schools. One of the Roma in Međumurje says: “The children here suffer discrimination at school. The parents of non-Roma children are against their children being in the same class as

Roma children – they say that they would rather kill their children than allow them to sit at the same desk as Roma children. They all complain that our children are dirty. They are not dirty because they want to be, but because of the poverty they live in. They have nowhere to wash themselves. They are educated on the basis of a reduced curriculum similar to the one used for the education of children with developmental difficulties, and as a result they have problems later when they want to enrol into a secondary school. The children are told it is the bes for them. We are helpless114.

Box 5.1: Protest by non-Roma parents At the beginning of the academic year 2001/02, the parents of non-Roma children organised a protest in a school and refused to allow Roma children to enter. According to the European Roma Rights Center’s (ERRC) report, “more than 60% of Roma children in schools in the County of Međimurje, and in one school in the County of Varaždin, attend separate classes… and the curriculum itself, on which the education of the Roma is based, is inferior to the programme for the majority population“ (Zarez, No. 88, 2002). The Ministry and the schools responded that interrelated factors were causing parents to object to education of Roma children even in separate classes. The factors mostly related to the “deficiencies“ of the Roma children noted by the school authorities, namely insufficient previous knowledge for them to be able to attend classes with other students, as well as inadequate levels of hygiene and social skills; and then also to more “objective“ factors such as poor transport connections between the places where they lived and the schools, which made it easer to organise the transport of all Roma children in one shift, the insufficient number of non-Roma children for mixed classes to be set up, and finally the prejudices of the majority population who protested if a larger number of Roma children attended the same class as non-Roma children (Sources: Round table – Roma rights in education, Croatian Helsinki Committee, 2004; Memedi, R., Papa J. (2001). Denied a Future? The right to education of Roma/Gypsy and Traveller Children in Europe. Volume I: South-eastern Europe. Save the Children. United Kingdom.

“The Međimurje case“ may be observed as part of the process in which the “silence“ of the responsible authorities led to a failure to implement a series of various compensatory measures aimed at ensuring equal opportunities, such as preschool education, Roma assistants in primary school classes, an extended school day, work on tackling prejudice, and measures designed to promote integration such as organising additional classes on the Roma culture and language for all pupils.

Professional norms and practices Preconceptions concerning the Roma expressed by the public and institutions based on the “culture of poverty“ thesis as opposed to structural obstacles may have a decisive influence on the behaviour of

One of the Roma in Međumurje says: “The children here suffer discrimination at school. The parents of non-Roma children are against their children being in the same class as Roma children – they say that they would rather kill their children than allow them to sit at the same desk as Roma children“.

public servants at middle and higher levels of management. The work of Lipsky who, from a sociological point of view, analyses the interconnection between individual behaviour on the one hand, and the work of public servants, professional norms and their influence on practices and higher management structures on the other hand, may be useful when analysing the behaviour of public servants and its influence on the growth or reduction of discrimination. That is to say, middle-ranking public servants (such as doctors, head teachers of kindergartens and schools, etc.) discharge their duty in accordance with social and professional norms on the basis of a series of measures, ordinances, and decisions, but they also have room for discretionary decisions and relative independence115. If we add to this the “silence“ of public servants at a higher management level who focus on achieving

Memedi, R., Papa J. (2001). Denied a Future? The right to education of Roma/Gypsy and Traveller Children in Europe. Volume I: South-eastern Europe. Save the Children. United Kingdom.

114

Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Russel Sage Foundation. New York, USA.

115

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

results in areas which are not directly related to quantifiable results, it may be concluded that the separate education of Roma children is not an isolated case, but actually the long-term practice of a number of schools. In this manner, the discretionary decisions of individual participants actually become the practice of the institution116. Furthermore, when programmes and measures are drawn up on the basis of the culture of poverty thesis, the Roma become objects, instead of active subjects with an opportunity to act and to make their opinions heard.

Generally speaking, the nature of activities performed by public servants requires the ability to use discretion when deciding on the type and quality of services to be provided, so these can be tailored to specific situations. However, if their scope of work is broad, and the means for its performance limited, public servants develop various simplification strategies in order to cope with pressures and responsibilities, which management bodies then fail to sufficiently and consistently evaluate and sanction17.

Box 5.2: Action against the Ministry Supported by the European Roma Rights Center and the Croatian Helsinki Committee, 57 families brought an action against the Ministry of Education, the local authorities of Međumurje and four primary schools for segregation motivated by the claimants’ nationality. The Municipal Court in Čakovec dismissed the action in 2002, and the County Court in Čakovec dismissed the appeal the same year. In December 2002 the action was brought before the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia, but even after two years no answer was received. The case was then brought before the European Court of Human Rights.

5.1.2 Challenges Although awareness of the need to improve the position of the Roma has existed for a long time, more concrete measures have been introduced mainly due to the influence of international actors. International legal mechanisms have also been used as a basis to flag up inappropriate practices, for example to advocate the introduction of measures and programmes that are new or that have proven to be effective on the basis of foreign experience. The importance of international support on the issue of Roma integration is also reflected in the participation of Council of Europe representatives in the process of adopting the National Programme for the Roma, 2003. The programme briefly analyses the causes of the marginalisation and unfavourable position of the Roma in the Republic of Croatia and outlines short, medium, and long-term measures. It also identifies the ministries and State institutions to be responsible for implementation and assessing costs in the areas of the judicial system, local self-government, education (emphasised as a priority), health protection, employment, social welfare, protection of the family, motherhood and youth, and spatial planning. The measures are intended for the Roma, but it is also envisaged that they will have an effect outside the Roma community since they aim at improving tolerance and non-dis-

crimination “for the easier integration of the Roma into society“118. It is expected that the international initiative the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015 will provide an additional impetus for the implementation of the measures in the National Programme and the Croatian Government’s Action Plan. The Roma initiatives also develop informal and innovative educational practices alongside the formal education system. Some initiatives, such as the summer school, were supported by a group of experts from the Teacher Education Academy in Zagreb. A comprehensive model for the education of the Roma was created on the basis of these experiences and on the research that was conducted119. However, despite the energy and creativity invested by non-governmental organisations, most programmes in the area of education encounter obstacles of an organisational and relational nature in the process of negotiations with institutions. It is rare to find initiatives that have managed to consolidate their work and persuade State institutions to take on their measures and services. But Roma communities and members of professional circles which are investigating the conditions, quality and success of the education of Roma children are becoming more vocal. They have put forward concrete suggestions, such as:

Ibid.

116

Ibid.

117

Vlada Republike Hrvatske / Government of the Republic of Croatia. (2003). Nacionalna strategija jedinstvene politike za osobe s invaliditetom 2003. – 2006 / The National Strategy for Integrated Policy for People with Disabilities from 2003 to 2006. Zagreb, Croatia.

118

Hrvatić, N. (2000). Odgoj i izobrazba Roma u Hrvatskoj. In Društvena istraživanja.

119

52 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

- Preparation of Roma children for primary school through a two-year preschool programme. - Introduction of a an extended school day for Roma pupils with supplementary and additional activities using trained Roma assistants in order to connect the pupils, the parents and the school. - Setting up summer schools. - Creation of a multicultural school environment. Although some of these proposals have been accepted, they have not been fully incorporated into the educational system.

Evidence from other Central European countries supports the introduction of extended preschool programmes (strongly advocated by Roma NGOs) as one of the most powerful vehicles for equalising educational opportunities. The long term gains of a focused preschool programme which involves both governmental and non-governmental actors can be illustrated by the Bulgarian experience. Initiatives from the Czech Republic and Hungary show that joint efforts by national governments, local authorities, parents and NGOs to support Roma children in primary education by designing and introducing various teaching methods and supplementary activities can produce a diversity of models oriented to both pupils’ educational needs and successful integration.

It is expected that the international initiative the Decade of Roma Inclusion 2005-2015 will provide an additional impetus for the implementation of the measures in the 2003 National Programme for the Roma and the Croatian Government’s Action Plan.

Box 5.3: Initiatives from Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Hungary Poor knowledge of majority languages and differences in social status are major barriers to Roma children attending school. Preschool attendance can help to bridge the cultural gap. In the middle of the 1990s in the Stolipinovo area of Plovdiv, Bulgaria (one of the largest Roma neighbourhoods, essentially a ghetto), the first summer preschool courses for bilingual children were organised by a local Roma NGO. Each preschool group had a professional teacher and an assistant teacher from the Roma community. The results were impressive. Within four months the children had acquired the necessary proficiency in the Bulgarian language and important knowledge of society “outside their neighbourhood“. When school began, the Roma children were already well integrated with the rest of the children. Subsequent monitoring showed that the dropout rate among these Roma children was the same as the overall drop-out rate. During the next few years, the practice of focused preschool education for Roma children spread to other cities with sizeable Roma minorities. In all cases, the results were similar: Roma children started the first grade with the necessary knowledge and experience, as well as with higher self-esteem. The drop-out rate was negligible. Based on these experiences, the government project entitled “Improving child welfare reform in Bulgaria“ launched in 2001-2002 contained a specific component targeting children from vulnerable groups. The number of NGOs organising summer schools increased, as well as the number of children attending, and families were given financial help to buy clothing and school supplies. The project had a profound impact at the executive and legislative level. Namely, the Bulgarian Parliament passed the Public Education Act, making preschool education obligatory and financed from the State budget. The Ministry of Education and Science issued a directive regarding the integration of children from minorities, making the introduction of assistant teachers a standard element of preschool education for Roma children. The Czech Republic introduced “The Balancing Steps in Education“ programme, which involves joint preparation, planning and implementation by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Physical Education and the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs at the central governmental level and the Council for Roma Community Affairs at the local level. The Ministry is working to develop guidelines for establishing preparatory classes for Roma pupils and organises and pays for the training of teaching assistants, whose role should be extended beyond that of pure “language translators“ to the role of “cultural intermediaries“. County Councils, municipalities and NGOs are then tasked with implementation of the programme at the local level through a model of schools with “all-day programmes“ and a model of multicultural educational practice by teachers, pupils and ordinary citizens with the participation of a number of NGOs. Another notable experience of supplementary school activities for Roma pupils is that of the Rabinadranath Tagore Foundation School in the town of Ozd in Hungary. Besides providing mainstream education, this school offers additional art classes, Roma language and culture are part of the curriculum, and parents are included in the school environment (UNDP, Regional Bureau for Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States (RBEC) (2003.) The Roma Human Development Report - Avoiding the Dependency Trap. UNDP. Bratislava, Slovak Republic. p. 57, 61. http://roma.undp.sk)

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

In 2000, a total of 3,373 people lived in 24 institutions, out of whom there were 2,642 people with learning disabilities, 290 people with impaired hearing, 173 people with impaired sight and 268 people with a physical disability. Children with special needs account for 44.7% of the population of children aged 0-18 living in institutions.

New initiatives are in progress which relate to tailoring the educational process to the needs of children, models of employment, improved housing, and the mitigation of perceptions based on structural pessimism according to which the Roma have always been in a deeply entrenched unfavourable position. These have originated not only from the civil sector but also from State and local institutions and international actors. However, the successes of individual, limited initiatives may not guarantee real changes in the system.

5.2 People with Learning Disabilities In 2000, welfare centres recorded more than 9,000 people with various disabilities120. A total of 3,373 people lived in 24 institutions, out of whom there were 2,642 people with learning disabilities, 290 people with impaired hearing, 173 people with impaired sight and 268 people with a physical disability121. Children with special needs account for 44.7% of the population of children aged 0-18 living in institutions122. The Croatian Association of Organisations for People with Mental Retardation estimates that about 20% of people with varying degrees of learning disabilities have access to some type of services (institutional, day, half-day), while most live in families, but with minimum or no professional assistance since most institutions and services providing adequate services are situated in larger urban centres123. Obstacles to the integration of people with learning disabilities are reflected in two mutually reinforcing, and, in Croatian society, prevalent tendencies. These

are, on one hand, the prevailing attitude among most professional staff that rehabilitation in large public institutions providing various types of specialist health, therapy and educational services is more successful and appropriate for people with learning disabilities than a family atmosphere where they do not receive appropriate and continuous support. The key features of institutional care in Croatia are that the major part of a person’s life (if not the whole of it) is spent there, that the institutions are often isolated from the community, and contact with families is very limited. Decisions about the manner in which people with learning disabilities use the services of health and educational institutions are made by experts, without consulting the people with learning disabilities, and sometimes without consulting their families124. A “decision“ once adopted in such a manner is subject to occasional assessments by boards which, according to parents from the “Puž“ (Snail) association, last for about ten minutes and involve an examination of various medical reports, and more rarely a conversation with the person in question. The “decision“ categorises the person’s degree of “disability“ and stipulates the form and type of treatment. The procedure does not take into consideration the person’s abilities, the availability (or not) of the recommended type of treatment and the need for a life that is as independent as possible. This kind of medical assessment very often results in exclusion125. On the other hand, existing legal provisions largely contribute to sustaining this tendency towards institutional care which aims to alleviate the person’s “disability“ and modify it according to the requirements of the “average“ envionment126.

Box 5.4: Kindergarten enrolment One mother said that they wanted to enrol their son, when he was three years old, in a regular kindergarten which was 30 minutes away from their home and two minutes away from her workplace. They did not succeed, although one employee supported his enrolment; they said that he was emotionally too attached to his mother. As he was growing up, it became steadily more obvious that he needed the company of his peers and they enrolled him into a half-day programme at Ozana. Ozana is at the other side of town from where they live. In the morning the mother drove her son there, then went to work, and then went to pick him up again. When he enrolled in a special school which is also at the other end of town, they went through the same procedure. She calculated that she did an average of 1,800 km per month. She uses the right to work part time to be able to spend more time with her son, although she has to spend most of that time on transportation due to the lack of services and lack of understanding from the community (A mother, member of “Puž“).

Radočaj, (2002). Elementi socijalne politike i socijalne skrbi u Hrvatskoj. UNICEF.

120

Bratković, D. (2005). Institucionalni procesi koji utječu na marginalizaciju osoba s teškoćama. Tekst za potrebe zbornika Mobilizacija i razvoj zajednica u Hrvatskoj (in press).

121

Ajduković, M. (2004). Pristupi zbrinjavanju djece bez odgovarajuće roditeljske skrbi u Europi. In Revija za socijalnu politiku, 3-4, 2004.

122

Bratković, D. (2005). Institucionalni procesi koji utječu na marginalizaciju osoba s teškoćama. Tekst za potrebe zbornika Mobilizacija i razvoj zajednica u Hrvatskoj (in press).

123

Teodorović B. (2005). Modeli u rehabilitaciji osoba s teškoćama u razvoju. In Zapošljavanje uz podršku. Udruga za promicanje inkluzije. Zagreb, Croatia.

124

Handicap International, Regional Office for South East Europe. (2004). Beyond De-institutionalisation. Disability Monitor Initiative.

125

Bratković, D. (2005). Institucionalni procesi koji utječu na marginalizaciju osoba s teškoćama. Tekst za potrebe zbornika Mobilizacija i razvoj zajednica u Hrvatskoj (in press).

126

54 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

Families are often forced to make significant efforts and investments to overcome the insufficient provision of services in the community (both those of a specialist nature and those aiming to increase the independence and integration of people with special needs) together with the physical and organisational obstacles posed by general public services (such as regular kindergartens, schools, healthcare institutions, cultural institutions and recreation centres). If a disabled person is separated from his or her family and community in order to attend a special training programme, social ties are often broken and the skills acquired are suitable only for a limited number of professions and are not competitive on the labour market. People return to their families afterwards with low chances of finding a job (if they do, it is primarily in “sheltered“ workshops) and the only opportunity open to them is involvement in the activities of day centres or parents’ associations.

5.2.1 Discrimination Equality (only) before the law The right of people with special needs to integrated education was recognised by law in 1980. People with disabilities exercise a large number of other rights, such as the right to personal disability allowance, the right to a certain sum after the death of parents, an allowance for assistance and care, assistance for the personal needs of users, the right of parents with children with more serious disabilities to take periodic leave from work until the child reaches seven years of age, and part-time work through the system of pension and disability insurance, social welfare and protection

and labour legislation. The Social Welfare Act provides the right to care outside the disabled person’s family, such as in a foster home or in a social institution. The National Strategy for Integrated Policy for People with Disabilities considers that the current degree of educational integration is unsatisfactory, despite “good“ legal regulations, for a number of reasons. These range from material and organisational factors (limited funds for education, architectural obstacles, poor spatial and physical working conditions and the patchy network of institutions) to factors relating to human resources (lack of workers, poorly trained workers, and negative attitudes of society)127. The list of objectives and bodies responsible for their implementation gives the impression of dedication to the gradual inclusion of people with various disabilities. However, the failure to achieve objectives and lack of funding may present a serious obstacle to progress in this area.

In addition to governmental bodies and commissions (including the Commission for Human Rights and the Commission for People with Disabilities), the Ombudsman’s Office, the Office of the Ombudsman for Children, and the Office of the Ombudsman for Gender Equality have also been established in order to ensure equality before the law. Independent bodies play an important role in supervising State bodies and representatives to ensure the consistent application of legal provisions, especially those whose content presents a challenge. This is particularly important, as anti-discriminatory provisions are set out in separate pieces of legislation.

Box 5.5: The needs of children with disabilities According to information provided by the Office of the Ombudsman for Children (see Introduction by the Advisor to the Office of the Ombudsman for Children, www.udrugapuz.hr), the needs of children with disabilities include: - integration (deinstitutionalisation) and the right to choose a school and educational environment, - a school which is motivated and prepared for integration, - to be considered as top priority when parents and schools are assessing the sense and value of administrative procedure, - escort and transport to school, - conditions enabling parents to provide adequate care, and - provision of appropriate housing.

127

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

Regulations that define the position of people with learning disabilities arise from the medical model of deficit in which a person appears before a board at various key stages of life, and the board “categorises“ the person’s degree of “impairment“, adopts a decision and decides on the treatment on the basis of their knowledge and conviction that they are acting for the best. People with learning disabilities lose control over their own lives in these processes.

Education: separated or integrated? Education and vocational training for people with learning disabilities is carried out in institutions of a residential nature, special schools or regular schools following a special programme. We have already mentioned the typical characteristics of the institutional educational model that result in exclusion. People with more serious or multiple disabilities mostly live in institutions run by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. Due to prevailing attitudes, it is normally held that it is almost impossible to educate people with learning difficulties. It seems that there are not enough adequate general educational programmes, nor are there programmes aiming to develop the skills needed for integrating into wider society, due to a lack of coordination between the relevant bodies. In fact, these institutions tend to focus on the pupils’ functional rehabilitation and on developing their cognitive abilities128. Work with pupils with moderate or more serious disabilities in special primary schools is also oriented towards the teaching of cognitive subjects, with insufficient attention to the individual and low expectations from the community129. Special schools are, according to the parents from the “Puž“ association, a kind of community of similar people where, due to the size of groups, there is little time for individual work based on each child’s motivation and interests. Children with minor disabilities, that is, children who only need some assistance in learning or those children that are designated in the diagnostic procedure as having “mild mental retardation“ are often placed in regular schools130. Pupils with minor disabilities may attend the regular classes and follow an adapted programme or special classes for pupils with the same disabilities. When education takes place under these “special conditions“, social interaction with peers comes to mean occasional encounters during school breaks and special events, and at best, during joint classes, such as art or music. The cumulative effect of the diagnostic and categorisation process, and in particular, lack of individuali-

sation, results in the limited integration of children with minor disabilities, and currently represents an insuperable obstacle in terms of the integration of children with more serious disabilities131 132. Parents, however, have said that there were obstacles caused by others in the school environment, principally the parents of children without disabilities. A member of “Puž“ states: “We, the parents of children with disabilities, cannot change the education system by ourselves, we need the parents of children without disabilities who accept the fact that the children need to be together for at least one part of the school programme“.

Professional norms and practices Regulations that define the position of people with learning disabilities arise from the medical model of deficit in which a person appears before a board at various key stages of life, and the board “categorises“ the person’s degree of “impairment“, adopts a decision and decides on the treatment on the basis of their knowledge and conviction that they are acting for the best. People with learning disabilities lose control over their own lives in these processes. The fact that a decision is made does not however mean that treatment is ensured. That depends on the availability of services. The belief that people with learning disabilities are not capable of expressing their own desires and needs, and that others need to speak for them, prevents these people from gaining their independence, developing their abilities and participating in social interactions. Practices that depart from the traditional institutionalised care system133 and implement legal regulations and the principles of compensatory education are considered to be an exception to the rule. This year, one kindergarten which has included children with disabilities in an integrated programme since 1993 extended for the first time a written invitation for children to be enrolled into a fully integrated group. This is not the result of a systematic application of measures, but of the commitment of the people

Handicap International, Regional Office for South East Europe. (2004). Beyond De-institutionalisation. Disability Monitor Initiative.

128

Igrić, LJ. (2001). Djeca s mentalnom retardacijom u društvu. Dijete i društvo, 3(3), 2001.

129

Ibid.

130

Another non-governmental organisation based in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, developed a programme entitled “A Model of Inclusive Education“, the experiences of which have been included in the document of the Reform of the Educational System in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The programme contributed to the inclusion of 444 pupils with difficulties into 16 schools. The teachers participated in the educational programmes and received continuous assistance during the implementation of the programme. None of the 444 children was, prior to inclusion in the school programme, subject to “categorisation“, and education in separate classes in regular schools was suggested only for 12 pupils as a part of partial integration (Handicap International, Regional Office for South East Europe. (2004). Beyond De-institutionalisation. Disability Monitor Initiative).

131

Igrić, LJ. (2001). Djeca s mentalnom retardacijom u društvu. Dijete i društvo, 3(3)

132

The term “institutionalised care system for people with difficulties“ designates a system in which health social, educational services and employment represent a group of measures for the protection of those people, and they are controlled by experts in specialised institutions (Handicap International, Regional Office for South East Europe. (2004). Beyond De-institutionalisation. Disability Monitor Initiative, p. 36).

133

56 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

working in that particular kindergarten. Something similar occurred in a primary school in which ten children with disabilities are enrolled134.

5.2.2 Challenges The lack of specific anti-discrimination legislation and insufficient activity by public services has resulted in the international documents on human rights ratified by Croatia often being used as grounds to insist on the consistent application of the law. The main impression is that the recognition of the need for State institutions to be pro-active in implementing EU standards has resulted in a series of different strategies and special programmes. Their goal is compensatory: they aim to put vulnerable groups in an equal position for a certain period of time and thus pave the way for complete integration. Cooperation with civil society organisations is planned within the framework of their implementation135. Civil society organisations which work to provide assistance in the family and in the community to people with disabilities have developed a series of services and innovative approaches. The “Puž“ association, established in 1995, tries to encourage and motivate parents through its programmes to demand a higher quality of life for their children, to develop an assistance network for people with disabilities, and to prove, by means of activities for children with disabilities and through common achievements, that they also have the right to be useful and independent members of the community. “Puž“ cooperates with the Association for the Promotion of Inclusion (API) which uses as its starting point the social model of disability and an inclusive approach based on the idea of the equal participation of members of the community whose very differences represent its strength. Many associations are working to support and promote deinstitutionalisation and community-based care. The recent establishment of a group for self-representation is one of the results of enduring efforts to create a space where people with learning disabilities are able to talk about themselves and for themselves. There are numerous examples of innovative successful practices by civil society organisations. Their experience and knowledge are profound sources of good practice, but their inclusion into institutional practice has been slow.

5.3 Conclusion Based on this analysis, we may conclude that the complex and multidimensional processes of discrimination against the marginalised groups we have studied are indicative of mechanisms which probably operate against other minority and/or marginalised groups in Croatian society. Protection from discrimination is to a large extent guaranteed by law, but legal provisions have only been partially implemented, for example equal access to basic social services such as education. When protection from discrimination is needed to guarantee material and other rights, these provisions are not applied, which reduces their legitimacy. Budgetary restrictions and the limitations of the State’s administrative capabilities and expertise in this area further contribute to discriminatory processes, which means that rights are only partially implemented (for example in case of the National Programme for the Roma). It is the groups that are especially vulnerable or have additional rights and needs that suffer the most because of the lack of effectiveness of public policies and State administration, which in turn results in discriminatory processes that contain elements of direct and indirect discrimination. We may conclude that these processes are for the most part examples of institutionalised behaviour towards marginalised groups, although they are less obvious at the level of discourse and attitudes. An inclusive approach to marginalised groups is often the result of an individual initiative that is not supported by the system. This results in a systematic gap between rights/needs and activities, with difficulties in allocating concrete responsibility and initiating change, in spite of the extent of the problem. External initiatives may in different ways (for example by giving impetus for modifications in regulations and providing additional resources and competences) contribute to partial elimination of discrimination. However, a more systematic institutionalisation of proactive and inclusive behaviour towards marginalised groups in Croatian society will result in their gaining strength and in more effective public policies.

The association “Puž“ and the Association for the Promotion of Inclusion (API) apply in their work the social model of disability and inclusiveness based on the idea of the equal participation of members of the community whose very differences represent its strength.

In this chapter we have tried to contribute to the understanding of complex discriminatory processes in Croatia in relation to two very different marginalised groups, and warn of the processes that Paul Gilroy called the “coat-of-paint“ theory, where marginalisation is seen as an abnormal occurrence on the surface of an otherwise healthy society136. An alternative view

“Puž“, April 2005, http://www.udrugapuz.hr

134

“The relationship of society towards our children reflects the values of that same society“ (Member of “Puž“, 2005. http://www.udrugapuz.hr).

135

Gilroy, P. (1987). Problems in Anti-Racist Strategy. The Runnymede Trust. London, United Kingdom.

136

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Discrimination A Mechanism of Social Exclusion

Reducing and eliminating the causes and effects of discrimination is not a question of privilege, it is a question of rights.

of discrimination suggests that it is part of many key areas of the social system along with legal, professional and administrative concepts of fairness and equal treatment. This view underlines that eradicating discrimination is a lengthy process, to be implemented at different levels, and including all social groups. If measures tackling discrimination are not sufficiently well thought through, they may have unintended negative consequences and contribute to discrimination directly by increasing unequal treatment, and indirectly by creating negative perceptions amongst social groups in relation to the group singled out through positive discrimination. We have tried to warn that it is not enough to establish new bodies and develop strategies and action plans. To be successful, these need to be created on

58 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

the basis of a comprehensive and detailed analysis that includes all groups; they need clear strategic goals and guaranteed financial and other resources; and external monitoring and evaluation is essential. In addition, we need to depart from the model of cultural pathology that sees discriminated groups from the point of view of their weaknesses - the services that are currently provided for them are aimed solely at alleviating weaknesses. Reducing and eliminating the causes and effects of discrimination is not a question of privilege, it is a question of rights. An approach based on rights and promoting the expression of individual needs, access to material and non-material assets, and equal opportunities should be advocated. Such a change would produce gains for all social groups.

Chapter 6:

Social Inclusion through Education

Inclusive education means involving everyone (children, young people and adults) at different levels and in different forms of education to facilitate their social inclusion and to develop their full potential.

One of the key principles of educational policy in democratic societies is to ensure access to all educational levels and provide the conditions for successful lifelong learning to all members of a given community. People who for various reasons have no access to education have limited opportunities to satisfy many of their needs, and consequently to exercise certain human rights. EU and OECD countries therefore include the prevention and reduction of social exclusion through education as one of the four priorities for education (continuous employability, capacity for active – democratic – citizenship, increased social cohesion, and the reduction of social exclusion)137. And in order to reduce social exclusion, education must primarily be inclusive. Inclusive education means involving everyone (children, young people and adults) at different levels and in different forms of education to facilitate their social inclusion, or to reduce the possibility of their social exclusion, and to develop their potential138. In a narrow sense, inclusive education means involving people with special needs. About 2% of children have substantial impairments, which are specially assessed to ensure appropriate conditions and educational programmes, which they can accomplish by means of their other capacities. It is believed, however, that as many as 20% of children and young people have a special educational need and require special educational treatment. These are students with learning difficulties, students with emotional problems and challenging behaviour, as well as those with physical disabilities. The education of people with special needs is known as “special education“. In a broader sense, however, inclusive education encompasses all those who learn within a system of lifelong learning. The elements leading to exclusion in this context are not insufficient ability or lack of emotional adaptability, but the socio-economic and educational status of the family (especially of the father, or of the mother in one parent families), gender, racial, religious or ethnic identity, as well as the individual’s cultural, linguistic and other characteristics. According to this understanding of educational inclusiveness, the entire education system, and not just the education of children with special needs, must increase the inclusion of individuals and individual social groups in education, thus reducing exclusion from it. This will reduce the number of socially excluded people and improve social stability, one of the conditions of social development.

Inclusive education in its broader sense gains particular importance in a “knowledge society“ where the division of the population into competent and incompetent citizens is unacceptable, and where those excluded from education cannot participate successfully. This raises the questions, on what does educational inclusiveness depend, and how can it be improved? Inclusiveness primarily depends both on the (formal) structure of the education system, and on the way the system functions (including programmes, teaching methods, assessment, school autonomy and school environment, cooperation with parents, and on the organisational processes in the school). Inclusiveness also depends on the institutions that provide vocational training – as well as educational institutions this includes businesses (which offer internships and apprenticeships) and civil society organisations that offer educational and training services. Below we shall focus on the structural features of the education system, which have an effect on educational inclusion/exclusion, and then on the processes within the system that have the highest impact on inclusiveness. The structural elements upon which educational exclusion/inclusion depends are the number of children included in preschool education, the duration of primary education, the duration and structure of compulsory education, the stage and manner of differentiation of programmes and students, the opportunity for students to transfer from vocational education to gimnazija (general upper secondary school), the system of adult education, and the system of education for children and young people with special needs. We shall limit ourselves to the structural aspects of the education system which have an effect on educational exclusion and inclusion and on which data are available, namely preschool, primary, basic education, and adult education. Additional research is needed to assess the inclusiveness of upper secondary and higher education.

6.1 Preschool education The aims of preschool education from a child’s third to sixth year are to develop the child’s personality in the optimal fashion and to prepare him or her for beginning primary school. This is the period when the foundations for lifelong learning are laid. This is the most dynamic period of a child’s development, and it is precisely during this period that the social environment can most effectively shape the child’s cognitive, emotional and social development.

White Paper on Education and Training: Teaching and Learning – Towards the Learning Society. (1995). The Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Luxembourg.

137

Topping, K., Maloney, S. (eds) (2005). Inclusive Education. RoutledgeFalmer. London, United Kingdom.

138

60 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Social Inclusion through Education

It is in this period that differences in the socio-economic status of parents have the greatest influence on the child’s future success in school. The process of educational inclusion/exclusion begins in early education, and any inadequacies in preschool education have an unfavourable effect in later schooling. There is therefore a tendency to include as many children as possible in preschool education and to aim to have all children enrolled in what is known as pre-primary school for one year before they start primary school. Only some 40% of preschool children in Croatia are enrolled in some form of organised early learning in kindergartens, with a large variation between urban and rural environments. A significant number of parents also find this service difficult to afford. We could say that preschool education is a kind of regional and social privilege. The local community is responsible for establishing and financing preschool activities, but due to the very diverse financial resources of different municipalities and towns, it cannot be expected that everyone will be able to exercise the right to preschool education in the foreseeable future.

6.2 Primary education According to the International Standard Classification of Education139, primary education is part of the first stage of basic education (level 1). The second stage of basic education consists of lower secondary education or lower secondary school (level 2). Both primary and lower secondary education are part of compulsory basic education. This is followed by upper secondary education or upper secondary school (level 3). Post-secondary non-tertiary education (level 4) follows on from secondary school, in turn followed by two stages of tertiary (higher) education which are differentiated according to whether or not they lead directly to advanced academic degrees (levels 5 and 6). In primary education, generalist class teaching predominates while in lower secondary school teaching is organised by subject. Generalist class teaching is performed by a single teacher, whereas in lower secondary school teaching is performed by a number of teachers specialising in two or three subjects. The contemporary trend at the higher levels of basic school is to have both generalist class teaching and subject teaching.

Primary education generally lasts for a minimum of six years140. In just a handful of developed countries (Austria, Germany, Lithuania) it lasts for four years. The International Standard Classification of Education recommends that primary education lasts for six years. In the European countries where students achieve the best results in studies of comparative educational achievement (i.e. Finland and Sweden), nine-year basic education is carried out within a regime of generalist class teaching. Only a few subjects in the last three years are taught by specialist subject teachers. Since basic education is compulsory, it has to be fully inclusive. In order to meet this criterion, as well as maintain the standard of educational attainment, basic education should be highly individualised, which means that different students should be treated according to their personal characteristics141, and that harmony be established between “external“ and “internal“ conditions. External learning conditions mean the contents of learning, teaching equipment, organisation and teaching methods, as well as the teacher’s ability to perform individualised teaching. Internal conditions include intellectual abilities, previous knowledge and motivation for learning, as well as the student’s emotional responsiveness. In order to harmonise these external and internal learning conditions, teaching should be student-oriented, which is better achieved by generalist class teaching; the subject teacher cannot even remember all the names of the students he or she teaches (about 200 students), let alone be familiar with their cognitive abilities and personality traits, different aptitudes, and differences in ways they adopt knowledge. The class teacher, on the other hand, manages his or her class throughout primary school (which lasts a minimum of four and a maximum of nine years) during which he or she not only gets to know the students, which is a precondition for individualisation, but also establishes a relationship with them, which facilitates “upbringing“ 142.

Only some 40% of preschool children in Croatia are enrolled in some form of organised early learning in kindergartens, with a large variation between urban and rural environments. A significant number of parents also find this service difficult to afford.

A primary education that is too short (i.e. lasts four years) reinforces educational exclusion from demanding secondary-school programmes for those students who have had weaker educational support and upbringing from their parents. Usually such parents have a lower socio-economic and educational status. If

UNESCO (1997).

139

European Commission (2002). Key Data on Education in Europe.

140

On the other hand, a difference should be made between an individualised approach to pupils and discrimination that risks strengthening the differences between the pupils which are the result of, for example, their socio-economic status or status as a member of marginalised social groups. Standardisation of quality of education requires the defining of pedagogic standards and the equal availability of education for pupils, on the basis of which the approach to each individual pupil may be adjusted.

141

Translator’s note: In Croatian, the concept of education includes upbringing and education (odgoj i obrazovanje) which implies that the teacher not only has the role of educator, but also the role of a second parent in terms of developing behaviour, attitudes, etc. The term “odgoj“, which does not have a suitable equivalent in English, is translated here as “upbringing“.

142

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Social Inclusion through Education

According to current European benchmarks, by which a nine-year long basic education is compulsory, the Croatian basic education which lasts only eight years can be considered substandard. Extending compulsory education reduces educational and consequently social exclusion.

primary education lasts longer, for at least six years, or even nine years as in the case of Scandinavian countries, students receive adequate educational support from the school for a prolonged period, until they overcome the most sensitive period in their development. This not only has a beneficial effect on socially deprived students, but also on society which will not suffer a great loss of potential by children whose parents belong to marginalised groups. Introducing subject-based teaching too early (before the age of 12) makes the inclusion of students with special needs and the optimum development of other students more difficult. In Croatia, primary education lasts four years. The sudden jump from generalist class teaching to subjectbased teaching at too early an age (at the age of 10

or 11) makes difficult the transition from the fourth to the fifth grade when subject-based teaching begins. The transition from the sixth to the seventh grade, when natural science subjects are introduced, is also very stressful. The most obvious indicator of this is the number of students who have to repeat individual subjects. Inclusive education should not produce students who need to repeat the year, and should not be as stressful as our education system seems to be. The insufficient level of student-orientation in basic education means that students learn less than they could, and do not acquire positive attitudes towards school and learning, which reduces their subsequent participation in different types of lifelong education (particularly formal education). The number of students who repeat the year in the two stages of basic education in Croatia is shown in Table 6.1:

Table 6.1 Number of students who repeat the year by grade in basic education Grade

Number of students who repeat the year

I II III IV V VI VII VIII

401 125 55 55 368 207 303 88

Percentage of students who repeat the year 0.79 0.26 0.11 0.12 0.77 0.41 0.60 0.11

Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, 2003/2004.

Most students who repeat the year are first-grade students who are at the most sensitive stage in their development, during which they form their initial attitude towards school and learning. These are students who start their education from a lower level than others, and the school, due to insufficient individualisation, does not help them overcome initial difficulties. The percentage of students who repeat the year grows again in the fifth grade, in other words, in the transition to subject-based teaching, due in particular to its lack of individualisation. Inclusive basic education should not allow any students to repeat the year, and good systems (such as the Scandinavian) do not have any students who need to repeat the year. Croatia is currently undergoing educational reform, starting with primary education and in accordance with the Education System Development Plan for the period 2005-2010. A Croatian National Educational Standard has also been defined. The issue of inclusiveness is

62 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

treated in various aspects of the reform. The optimisation and management of the network of primary schools open the question of improving and standardising the quality of education across Croatia. External learning conditions need to be improved by investing in curriculum reform, continuous teacher training, building new schools and ensuring existing schools are well maintained and so on; and it is necessary to provide equal access and improved quality of education to pupils from marginalised or socio-economically deprived groups. If these conditions are fulfilled, greater individualisation and inclusiveness of teaching is expected, with a positive impact on levels of motivation and educational achievement. We have to point out that these processes will take place in the context of rationalising the network of schools due to demographic and economic factors. We can expect a more intense growth of private schools which may also contribute to higher standards in the education system.

Social Inclusion through Education

6.3 Compulsory basic and secondary education Compulsory education should prepare young people to continue their education and enter the world of work. The minimum duration of compulsory education is dictated by the scope and complexity of the knowledge and skills necessary to successfully fulfil social roles. Most current EU Member States have a basic education that lasts nine years143. Extending compulsory education reduces educational, and consequently social, exclusion. For this reason, in developed countries an effort is being made to extend compulsory education to the end of pre-tertiary education so that those students who do not continue to higher education will acquire the capacity to work, which will decrease the rate of unemployment. In this way, they are also less likely to become socially excluded. It can be concluded that according to current European benchmarks, compulsory education which lasts only eight years can be considered substandard. In Croatia, basic education lasts eight years, which makes it suboptimal from the viewpoint of social ex-

clusion. An analysis of the Croatian education system, conducted during 2000 and 2001 and commissioned by the Government of the Republic of Croatia144, highlighted the disparity of our education system with the European one, and in this context indicated the need to extend basic education from eight to nine years. The Ministry of Science, Education and Sports’ Education System Development Plan 2005-2010 does not instigate structural changes in pre-tertiary education, but plans instead to stabilise it. Two educational goals are mentioned in the introductory section: increasing the quality of education to benefit the economy and the knowledge society, and ensuring the right to education for all145. “The right to education for all“ implies inclusive education. To what extent this is already in place and what can be expected may to a certain extent be established by analysing both the present condition of the system and the measures planned.

The inclusiveness of our pre-tertiary education so far has been significantly lower than the European average, which is indicative of the quality of national human capital and of the country’s development capacities.

The educational structure of the population over 15 years of age shows the degree of inclusiveness of Croatian education (Table 6.2):

Table 6.2 Educational attainment of the population over 15 years of age School Without any schooling Incomplete basic education Completed basic education Completed secondary education College education and vocational study Universities and art academies Unknown Total

Number 105,332 580,379 801,168 1,733,098 150,167 267,995 44,687 3,682,826

Percentage 2.86 15.76 21.75 47.07 4.08 7.27 1.21 100.00

Source: Central Bureau of Statistics, 2001

About 18% of the adult population of Croatia have not completed basic education, and only 47% have completed secondary school. The percentage of the population who have completed upper secondary education (ISCED 3) is regarded as a key indicator of the nation’s educational attainment. It may be concluded that the inclusiveness of our pre-tertiary education so far has been significantly lower than the European average, which is indicative of the quality of national human capital and of the country’s development

capacities. The inclusiveness of higher education is also below the European average – an average of 13% of the population have completed college or higher education (the minimum in medium-developed countries is 20%). In addition, 2.9% of the population have no education at all, and about 580,000 adults have not completed basic education. This leads to the conclusion that the Croatian basic compulsory school system is not sufficiently inclusive.

European Commission (2002). Key Data on Education in Europe

143

Pastuović, N. i sur. (2001). Odgoj i obrazovanje: Bijeli dokument o hrvatskom obrazovanju. Ured za strategiju razvitka Republike Hrvatske.

144

Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa Republike Hrvatske / Ministry of Science, Education and Sports (2005). Plan razvoja sustava odgoja i obrazovanja 2005. – 2010 / Education System Development Plan for the period 2005-2010. Zagreb, Croatia.

145

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Social Inclusion through Education

At the school level, educational inclusion is improved by adjusting the content of education and methods used for teaching, examining and assessing to students’ individual characteristics in terms of abilities, previous knowledge and motivation for learning.

The data in Table 6.2 are a cumulative indicator of the inclusiveness of our education in the previous decades. The data on the educational structure of the

population from 25 to 29 years of age are a better indicator of current inclusiveness (Table 6.3).

Table 6.3: Educational structure of the population from 25 to 29 years of age Level of education Without any schooling Incomplete basic education Completed basic education Completed secondary education College education Higher education Unknown Total

Number 1,239 3,802 43,659 194,140 12,578 37,323 1,756 294,497

Percentage 0.42 1.29 14.82 65.92 4.27 12.67 0.60 99.99

Source: 2001 Population Census, Central Bureau of Statistics.

The data imply that the younger generation’s level of education is higher than that of the older generation, which is a universal phenomenon in all countries. However, 16% of young people still do not have an education higher than basic schooling, and out of these, 5,000 have not even completed their basic education. About 66% of young adults have completed only secondary education, which is below the European average of around 80%. We do not have data on dropout rates from secondary education and the reasons for dropping out. About 17% of young adults have college and higher education, some of whom are still studying. We do not have data on the quality of our basic education. Croatia did not take part in the PISA 2000 and 2003 projects, so we can only estimate the quality of our basic education (our students’ achievements in international competitions are irrelevant). There are multiple structural reasons for the insufficient inclusiveness of our pre-tertiary education. Some of the most important causes are the excessively early transition from generalist class teaching to subject-based teaching and the insufficient “pedagogical and psychological training“ given to subject specialist teachers. Their training is inadequate, both in terms of scope and content, for becoming competent as subject specialist teachers.

6.4 An Overview of Europe It has already been mentioned that educational exclusion/inclusion depends on one hand on the (formal) structure of the education system, and on the other Key Competencies (2002). A developing concept in general compulsory education. Euridyce. Brussels, Belgium.

146

64 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

hand on the way it functions. Factors such as educational programmes, teaching methods, techniques for student assessment, the school’s degree of autonomy, the school atmosphere, cooperation with parents, and other organisational processes in the school (especially continuous teacher training) affect how the educational system functions. These factors can reduce educational exclusion by influencing the individualisation of teaching and assessment, as well as on teacher – parent cooperation. When speaking of the suitability of educational programmes in terms of how demanding they are, a distinction should be made between contents that are intellectually demanding (complexity of content) and those which overburden students with the quantity of information to be learned. Obsolete programmes do not so much affect educational inclusion as increase social exclusion by reducing both the employability of students after they complete their studies and their capacity for lifelong learning. These problems are resolved in EU and OECD countries through curricular reforms establishing new and modern standards in national education. There has been a major shift in reforms to national curricula – educational programmes are being altered to include new key competencies which set goals for reading, mathematical and scientific literacy146. In this way, “the acquisition of knowledge and skills that can be transferred to real-life situations“ is improved, and the principle that “what you learn is for life and not for school“ is applied. This kind of education reduces social exclusion because it facilitates employment and political participation.

Social Inclusion through Education

Unburdening students from information overload increases educational inclusion, but does not necessarily improve students’ social inclusion to the same extent in their life after education if programmes fail to prepare them for employment and active citizenship. Social inclusion through education will be improved if the educational programme is “open“ to the requirements of the broader and narrower community. At the school level, educational inclusion is improved by adjusting the content of education and methods used for teaching, examining and assessing to students’ individual characteristics in terms of abilities, previous knowledge and motivation for learning. This is achieved by individualising, or personalising, the content of learning (programmes), teaching, examining and assessing. All these elements form what is known as the curriculum. This individualisation consists of adapting elements in the curriculum to the needs of the students. Individualisation may best be achieved by “student-oriented teaching“. Student-oriented teaching as a general principle raises the question of when to begin subject-based teaching. International experience shows that subject-based teaching should not be introduced before students are 12 years old, which means not until the seventh grade of compulsory education. Moreover, Scandinavian schools conduct generalist class teaching for the entire nine years of compulsory education. This type of education is fully inclusive, and Scandinavian schools do not have students who repeat the year. Individualisation is not easy to achieve in practice and requires the teacher to receive special psychological and pedagogical training. This accounts for 50% of psychological, pedagogical and methodical contents in the training of class teachers, whereas it accounts for about 20% of the training which subject teachers receive. Individualised teaching should take into consideration students’ abilities, previous knowledge, preferences and interests, so that the external learning conditions (contents, organisation, and methods of teaching, examining and assessing) can be tailored to their individual differences. In doing this, it is important to emphasise that the individualisation of teaching for students of slightly lesser ability must not involve a lowering of demands and expectations, but should provide suitable support and should motivate the students, thus exploiting their cognitive capacity in the optimum manner.

The individualisation of student assessment and examination has not been the subject of a great deal of research compared to other areas. At the same time, there is less consensus among experts in this field, and there are issues which are also largely contested among European educators. The problem is that examining and assessing students’ achievements have several different goals. Examining and assessing may serve the purpose of internally evaluating individual elements of the curriculum in order to improve them (known as formative evaluation), assessing students’ knowledge (so that their grades can be taken into consideration for enrolment into higher levels of education) and providing additional motivation for students to learn.

There is a trend across Europe to monitor entry into education and exit from it, and to leave to the school the choice of methods leading to the defined goals (school autonomy).

To obtain valid information on students’ achievements for a formative evaluation of student knowledge, the assessment criteria must not be adjusted to the knowledge of the student. Such an evaluation must not be individualised, even though its results may be frustrating and discouraging for weaker students. Individualised examination and assessment, on the other hand, serve as support to student development and use descriptive assessment, which, however, does not permit comparisons to be made. Besides, this approach requires more time and special training for teachers. In our community, there is a prevailing negative attitude towards descriptive assessment, although it has become a successful and recognised practice in countries with the best school systems. School autonomy is manifested in various aspects of a school’s activity, one of the most important areas being curricular autonomy. This involves establishing study programmes which at later stages become elective programmes, but it manifests itself most obviously in the contents and methods of teaching. Without school autonomy it is impossible to optimally adjust teaching to students’ individual characteristics. There is a significant correlation between autonomy in individual areas of school policy and the average literacy at an international level, ranging between 0.16 to 0.51147. There is a trend across Europe to monitor entry into education and exit from it, and to leave to the school the choice of methods leading to the defined goals. This liberates the creative potential of teachers and allows particular elements of the curriculum to be individualised. It is clear that this increases the responsibility of the teacher and leads to a more stimulating environment than in a strictly regulated school. In an autonomous school, both teachers and students

OECD PISA database, www.pisa.oecd.org

147

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Social Inclusion through Education

In the Education System Development Plan for 2005 to 2010, the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports has expressed its commitment to make education inclusive and to promote the values of social inclusion.

are more satisfied with and motivated by effective teaching and learning. Such schools experience less absenteeism, parent-teacher relationships are better, and cooperation between teachers and parents is more intensive, which is extremely important for the inclusiveness of education. All this leads to the conclusion that autonomous systems increase educational inclusiveness. To raise the national average in educational achievement, and in particular to reduce differences, it is important to decrease regional disparities in access to education, school facilities, and the quality of teachers. Countries which achieve the highest levels of educational attainment in international comparisons have reduced their regional variation, that is, disparities between rural and urban areas148. This is achieved by the systematic optimisation of the school network over an extended period, and by evaluating the educational achievements of students from different schools. This is followed by analysing the conditions in lower-ranking schools, and then producing development plans. These plans are implemented through the joint efforts of school staff (who are specially trained) with the support of central and regional development services.

6.5 Educational inclusion/exclusion in Croatia 6.5.1 Basic education The inclusiveness of basic education in our country is threatened by the obsolete nature of educational programmes and the tendency to overburden students with excessively broad contents. A systematic empirical survey conducted by the Institute for Social Research in Zagreb established that students are overburdened and that teachers are insufficiently trained to teach successfully. In order to “unburden“ and modernise basic school programmes, the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports initiated new “knowledge catalogues“. The current national teaching plan has not been revised, which implies that there is no plan to introduce a new national curriculum based on the new key competencies necessary to operate successfully in an integrated Europe, but simply that the existing curriculum will be reorganised. Recently, the “catalogues of knowledge“ were renamed as the Croatian National Educational Standard (Hrvatski nacionalni obrazovni standard –

HNOS), which shows that the educational authorities are not committed to changing the structure of the curriculum, but to stabilising it. Nevertheless, the positive side of our system is that it does not implement an early differentiation of programmes after primary education (the fourth grade of primary school) but only after the completion of basic education. In the Education System Development Plan for 2005 to 2010, the Ministry of Science, Education and Sports has expressed its commitment to make education inclusive and to promote the values of social inclusion. The measures involve modernising and “unburdening“ programmes, adjusting programmes to the needs of target groups, the introduction of standardised assessment procedures, the introduction of new teaching methods149 and harmonising the approach to high-quality education throughout Croatia150. The social inclusion of people who have completed their education will be encouraged through developing links between education and the world of work. Goal-orientated management will improve the management of the system as a whole and of individual schools. Head teachers’ management skills will be improved by professionalising the post of head teacher and by introducing a licensing system. External evaluation will be introduced, and Croatia will, as early as 2006, join the PISA project. The concept of individualised teaching will be introduced into basic education, led by students’ needs, previous knowledge, capacities and interests. A 90% rate of enrolment into secondary school by children who have completed basic education is planned. A 75% rate of completion of secondary education will be ensured. Secondary vocational education will be better adjusted to the needs of the students and to the labour market. Some factors which may hinder these objectives and measures should also be pointed out here. They are: - The Croatian National Educational Standard (HNOS) is not produced according to an internationally accepted methodology. - The Croatian school network has not been optimised in line with an internationally tested methodology. - Interdisciplinary programmes for subject specialist teachers to become competent educators are lacking, while the pedagogical and psychological training of teachers is obsolete. - There is an insufficient number of subject specialist teachers to perform subject-based teaching in the

OECD, UNESCO (2003). Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow.

148

By improving the pre-service and in-service continuous training of teachers with special focus on teaching pupils with special needs.

149

By implementing the concept of regional fairness.

150

66 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Social Inclusion through Education

upper grades of basic education, while the capacity of teacher training faculties is insufficient. - The number of educational specialists trained through interdisciplinary graduate and PhD educational courses is insufficient for the particular problems that occur in the education system. - The new Regulation on Scientific and Artistic Areas, Fields and Branches does not conform to the modern classification of educational sciences. It leaves the field of educational sciences unaltered, although teacher training faculties and teacher training colleges have warned that basic educational science and teaching methodologies should be included in the field of educational sciences. If this is not changed, it will be more difficult to introduce postgraduate programmes in educational studies, which, according to the Bologna scheme, are carried out in the fourth and fifth years of study.

6.5.2 Adult education Adult education is the most extensive part of lifelong education. Adult education may be either of a professional or non-professional nature. For social inclusion/ exclusion, professional education is more important, because it serves two functions – a compensatory function and a function of further professional development. It allows adults who did not attain a certain level of education achievement when they were young to achieve it later. This is particularly important for people who have not completed basic and secondary education and so have no qualifications. The following statistics illustrate the need for adult education of a compensatory nature in Croatia: about 3% of the adult population do not have any formal education. Around 16% of adults (over 15 years of age) have not completed basic education. As many as 47% of

adults in Croatia have completed only secondary education. Only 13% of the adult population have a college or university degree. These statistics imply that the Croatian school system is insufficiently inclusive and that there is an extensive need for compensatory adult education. Adult education presents significant potential for educational inclusion, since it enables people who, for subjective or objective reasons, left school when they were young to return to it when circumstances become more favourable.

In Croatia, about 3% of the adult population do not have any formal education. Around 16% of adults (over 15 years of age) have not completed basic education.

Besides compensating for their previous (lack of) education, adults continuously learn through non-formal, informal (experiential) learning and self-education. The higher the educational level of the individual, the greater are his or her need for further learning, and the greater is his or her external and internal learning motivation. Adults learn in order to obtain employment more easily, to keep a job, and to progress in their careers, which demonstrates the close relationship between adult education and social exclusion/inclusion. Due to the increasing speed at which not only knowledge, but values, attitudes and habits become obsolete, lifelong learning is becoming the cornerstone of modern educational policy. A knowledge society is conditional upon a developed system of lifelong learning, which means a well-developed adult education system151. The concept of lifelong learning was created in the 1970s by UNESCO working bodies as a reaction to the “world educational crisis“. The need for formal, non-formal and informal learning throughout life was declared after it was noticed that the pace of scientific, technological and social change was accelerating, making it impossible to train people for their future needs during their formal schooling in childhood and youth.

Box 6.1: Peer help The organisation MoSt from Split offers psychological and social support to young people with behavioural difficulties through its programme entitled Special Educational Method (SEM). MoSt assists young people to overcome the difficulties they experience on a daily basis with various school subjects and extracurricular activities, and provides youth and parent counselling. With help from 40 volunteers to whom training is provided on a regular basis, SEM reaches 80 young people annually. The programme contributes to solving problems for young people with difficult behaviour in a non-institutional setting and fills the gap left by the continuing inadequacies of primary and secondary prevention programmes. Up to a few years ago there were no large-scale campaigns in Croatia concerning educational policy aiming at applying the concept of lifelong learning. However, two important documents were published

in 2004 which supported the idea of a knowledge society and lifelong learning. The Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts published the Declaration on Knowledge – A Croatia Based on Knowledge and the

European Commission, Eurostat (2000). A Memorandum on Lifelong Learning

151

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Social Inclusion through Education

At the end of 2004, the Croatian Government adopted the Adult Education Strategy in which it accepted lifelong learning as the basis of its entire education system in order to attain and improve continual employability and active citizenship.

Application of Knowledge152, and the Government and the National Competitiveness Council jointly proposed 55 Recommendations for Increasing Croatia’s Competitiveness. Four key national goals were emphasised: 1) the achievement of sustainable growth in GDP; 2) a reduction in unemployment; 3) an increase in the quality of life; and 4) an increase in the degree of social inclusion. It was established that the attainment of these goals depended on the quality of human resources available and on the way they are used. Consequently, it was stressed that the educational structure of the population should be improved, that the content of education should be continually updated, that investments in education should be increased, and that an increasingly large number of the population should be included in continuing learning programmes. At the end of 2004, the Croatian Government adopted the Adult Education Strategy and made a commitment to implement it by the end of 2005. The strategy states that Croatia accepts lifelong learning as the basis of its entire education system in order to attain and improve continual employability and active citizenship. A range of measures were proposed to achieve these goals. First, the creation of conditions enabling all Croatian citizens to take part in lifelong learning in order to increase their capacity to participate in all areas of contemporary life, at all levels, including the European level. It may be concluded that awareness has been raised (at least at the level of government declarations) about the importance of adult education for national development, as well as the need to include all citizens in education, which should reduce the number of those who are socially excluded. A special section stresses the need to produce an adult education strategy for excluded groups, and to provide assistance for adult learners in choosing the best way of learning. Several steps will be taken to achieve the goals announced, including setting up specialist adult education institutions, passing new legislation on adult education, introducing more suitable types of statistical monitoring, improving fiscal policy to stimulate adult education, and making adult education more flexible. The latter involves recognising non-formal education by testing people’s competencies, modularising vocational education to allow for greater mobility of people between different professions, and enabling adults to access self-study programmes. Since basic education is crucial to accessing further education and employment, it is also deemed the key area of education for people who have not completed it. People who have not had basic schooling are at

greatest risk from social exclusion. According to the most recent census, around 18.5% of adults in Croatia (about 685,000 people over 15) have not completed basic schooling. In 2003, the Croatian Government adopted a 10-year adult literacy project entitled For a Literate Croatia – the Path to a Desirable Future (Za Hrvatsku pismenosti – put do poželjne budućnosti) and allocated State funds to implement it. Besides enabling people to complete basic education, the project will also allow them to undergo vocational training for low-skilled jobs, for which there is a demand on the labour market. However, judging from unofficial information, this project has encountered some difficulties. Not enough participants have enrolled, although the target group consists of 91,000 people aged between 15 and 50. It seems that the teaching plan and programmes do not take sufficient account of the students’ previous knowledge and needs, and that they employ pedagogical (teacher-directed) instead of andragogical (student-directed) teaching methods. This reduces the motivation of adults to acquire basic education, which is already weak. Considering the registered unemployment rate of 18%, adult education should be used to a greater extent as one of the tools of an active employment policy. The Croatian Employment Agency mainly focuses on increasing employment among younger people. However, special attention should be given to the older unemployed who very easily join the ranks of the long-term unemployed with a remote chance of finding any employment, and a high chance of becoming socially excluded. The National Employment Action Plan (based on the European Employment Strategy) should develop in more depth the use of education (training and professional development) to reduce the number of unemployed and potentially socially excluded. About 27,000 veterans of the recent Croatian war for independence, 40% of whom have not completed basic schooling, make up a sizeable share of socially excluded people Changes are taking place and will continue to take place in college and higher education, which promote the inclusion of adults in higher levels of education. Higher education in community colleges is expanding greatly. The adoption of the Bologna scheme of study (the 3+2 model) will enable those who have attended but not completed a four-year university-level course to acquire a Bachelor’s degree and to obtain suitable employment. This will not only improve the educational structure of the population, but a large number of adults will also acquire qualifications which will help them obtain employment, and decrease the risk of their short-term or long-term social exclusion.

Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti / Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts (2004). Deklaracija o znanju – Hrvatska temeljena na znanju i primjeni znanja. Zagreb, Croatia.

152

68 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Chapter 7:

Policy Recommendations

Social exclusion is an alarming and disturbing phenomenon that requires broad social action. It is above all those who are included who must be pro-active, for only they can create conditions for the social inclusion of all. Many State administrative bodies, civil society organisations, research institutions, trade unions, local governments, and enterprises should become involved – in short, all authorities responsible for development policy, the purpose of which is to direct social and economic currents toward a type of society that will not allow its members to become excluded. There is much that can, and should, be recommended to those responsible for policy. We do not know enough about the phenomenon of social exclusion, so it must be systematically researched and monitored. The excluded must be helped to become active in the labour market (“work activation“) and toward at least partial alleviation of their poverty. In order to achieve this, they must acquire the skills and knowledge that will make them employable. For this reason,

Measures 1.1. Regularly collecting data on the 18 standardised macro-indicators of social exclusion (the Laeken indicators) adopted by the European Council in 2001. Since regional differences must also be detected and monitored, data on all indicators should also be collected at a nationwide level. 1.2. Carrying out a multiyear (panel) analysis at household level monitoring all dimensions of social exclusion and exploring means of social re-inclusion. These surveys should be in line with other surveys on social exclusion conducted in the European Union. Work is already being done on the EU-SILC (European Statistics on Income and Living Conditions).The surveys are expected to take place in all member countries in 2006 (pilot research has already been undertaken in some countries). 1.3. Using applied research to evaluate the effects of measures proposed in this report. Evaluation of this type must form an integral part of each measure, and the necessary resources must also be allocated.

1.4. Initiating and undertaking participatory research on the social status and quality of life of vulnerable groups. This research should be “participatory“ in that experts should carry out their research in the closest possible collaboration with members of the vulnerable groups under study. 1.5. Periodic research on institutional practices and processes that result in social exclusion.

70 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

measures for training and educating the excluded should be given special attention, and ways need to be found of raising public awareness and stimulating social solidarity and philanthropy, which are currently inadequate. The following measures, which we have divided into six groups, address the problem of exclusion in various ways, but with the same aim: to bring back into mainstream society all those on the margins of society who are barely subsisting.

7.1 Measures for the systematic monitoring of social exclusion Indicators of social inclusion, which may be derived from official statistics and a few studies and reports, are inadequate, and do not offer a reliable picture of the situation. A multidimensional system for detecting and monitoring social exclusion, with standardised indicators and methods of measurement, must be developed. The measures to be taken are as follows:

Competent authorities

Central Bureau of Statistics

Ministry of Science, Education and Sports; Central Bureau of Statistics

Independent research institutions (evaluations to be initiated by ministries responsible for implementing each measure) Ministry of Science, Education and Sports; Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship; Central Bureau of Statistics; Ministry of the Family, Veterans’ Affairs and Intergenerational Solidarity; Croatian Employment Service; Independent research institutions Independent research institutions

Policy Recommendations

7.2 Work activation and employment measures Poverty is the most burdensome element of social exclusion. A generous and balanced redistribution of budgetary funds is not feasible; and, by all accounts, it would not even be effective in the long term. In line with the European Employment Strategy, we consider stimulating work participation, that is, work activation, to be the most effective and viable means of counteracting unemployment and poverty. According to Croatiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s National Employment Action Plan, activation is both a preventive and a curative measure. In accordance with the eighth guideline of the European Employment Strategy, the employability of the great-

est possible number of members of each family must be stimulated, so that working becomes worthwhile. This will lower the risk of complete exclusion from the labour market. It is also important to reduce the number of people becoming long-term unemployed, and to continually decrease the number who have been out of work for more than a year. These represent almost half of all unemployed people. Activation will increase employability, stimulate training in vital skills and knowledge, stimulate more active job-seeking, and increase the mobility of those seeking jobs. Moreover, stereotypes regarding unnecessary older workers and people with special needs will begin to be overcome. The measures to be taken are as follows:

Measures

Competent authorities

2.1. Facilitating activation through more flexible forms of employment (in accordance with the third guideline of the European Employment Strategy), taking into particular account people who cannot or do not wish to work full-time (mothers, young people, the elderly). Given that these are usually lower-paid jobs, it is important to examine whether regulation of the amount of mandatory contributions is justified, at the same time preserving a high level of social and labour rights.

Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship; Ministry of the Family, Veteransâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Affairs and Intergenerational Solidarity

2.2. Evaluating the existing system of unemployment counselling and developing intensive 2-5-day-long or weekly programmes of counselling and education for the most vulnerable groups, with the aim of building their selfconfidence and job-seeking skills. 2.3. Developing a system which will primarily co-finance measures leading to increased employability (education, retraining, training and professional development, and so on). The existing active employment policy system is based on co-financing employment.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Ministry of Science, Education and Sports; Croatian Employment Service

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Croatian Employment Service

2.4. Stimulating work among people over 65 by exempting those who work on a freelance basis from paying contributions into the first pillar of pension insurance.

Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship

2.5. Introducing the option of partial retirement, i.e. working a smaller number of hours per day/week with entitlement to partial pension benefits.

Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship

2.6. Optimising coverage of kindergartens, baby day-care nurseries and extended stay at schools. The employability of women would be greatly increased and facilitated if the child-care system were further developed and made more accessible. 2.7. Stimulating the foundation of new local councils for social policy and strengthening existing ones. Local councils are to propose work projects beneficial to the community and implemented through workfare programmes. The measures themselves would be implemented by town and city governments, which would sign agreements with the administration of the regional employment service.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Ministry of the Family, Veteransâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Affairs and Intergenerational Solidarity; bodies of local and regional self-government

Croatian Employment Service; Social Welfare Centres; ministries in charge; competent bodies of local and regional selfgovernment; local social and economic councils

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Policy Recommendations

7.3 Measures for alleviating poverty Not all citizens are in the same position on the labour market. Some people are especially difficult to employ, while for others the knowledge and skills they possess and their life circumstances simply do not enable them to earn a decent living through their own work. We cannot expect the chronically poor, single-parent families, people with disabilities, or uneducated elderly people to become activated without additional support. Moreover, social exclu-

Measures

Competent authorities

3.1. Developing and strengthening partnership between the State and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in preventing and alleviating poverty and social exclusion. The State should encourage participation by NGOs by financing poverty reduction and social inclusion projects. State institutions are sluggish and unable to respond immediately to peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s urgent needs. NGOs can act more quickly, and so should have a special role in creating and implementing small projects focused on economically strengthening the poor and providing services to the elderly, the infirm, and the like.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Social Welfare Centres; Government Office for Cooperation with NGOs; nongovernmental organisations; National Foundation for Civil Society Development

3.2. Organising Social Welfare Centres (SWCs) as firststop shops supplying a wide variety and depth of information. The reorganised SWCs would be places for potential users to obtain information about their rights and about various stakeholders â&#x20AC;&#x201C; places that offer help and support. The SWCs would also be places where information about all forms of assistance offered by NGOs, local government and other stakeholders would be collected and distributed.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Social Welfare Centres

3.3. Adjusting welfare assistance payments to increases in the cost of living and inflation.

The Government; Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Croatian Employment Service; bodies of local and regional self-government

3.4. Instituting a social (state) pension. Elderly people who do not receive any kind of pension (at least 1/5 of all those aged 60 and over) are a highly vulnerable group, and primarily rely on welfare assistance alone. Instituting a social pension would also partially relieve the burden on social workers. If material incomes were to remain more or less the same, the stigma associated with welfare assistance would be avoided.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare; Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship

7.4 Educational measures Social inclusion is not possible without adequate education in the form of knowledge and skills. Reducing poverty, primarily by means of employment, is inseparable from building knowledge and skills among the poor and unemployed. In line with the European Employment Strategy and Croatiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

72 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

sion will very likely carry over to their children. This problem is dealt with by the seventh guideline of the European Employment Strategy, according to which the aforementioned groups (the poor, single parents, people with disabilities, people without education, especially elderly people) should be guaranteed specially targeted activation and education programmes. They should also be ensured a share of budgetary funds (social transfers), which will alleviate their level of poverty and facilitate activation. The measures to be taken are as follows:

National Employment Action Plan, it is vital to encourage lifelong learning, as this facilitates employment, and thereby social inclusion as well. Lifelong learning encompasses both regular schooling for children and young people and formal as well as informal adult education. Social exclusion may be reduced through formal and informal education by means of three types of measure:

Policy Recommendations

1. Specific measures which increase the employability of unemployed adults and decrease the likelihood of job loss for the employed. This may be achieved through investment in adult education, modifying the criteria for recognising qualifications, modularising vocational education, and supporting self-education.

2. Changes in the school system aimed at prolonging and individualising education, and increasing the educational attainment and employability of students who have completed their education. 3. An integrated approach to educating children and young people with special needs. The measures to be taken are as follows:

Measures

Competent authorities

Adult education 4.1. Ensuring the right to 35 hours of paid annual leave for educational purposes (certificate of attendance to be submitted). Such investment in employee education would be tax deductible. 4.2. Ensuring that the unemployed and members of vulnerable social groups also take part in such education. Based on precise criteria, they will be given education â&#x20AC;&#x153;vouchersâ&#x20AC;&#x153; for a certain number of hours, which they can use for their own education following counselling at the Croatian Employment Service. 4.3. Introducing a summer semester at institutions of higher learning where, according to demand, courses for adults would be held. Stimulation would arise from competition between educational institutions, that is, the level of interest in the programmes they offer and their evaluation by people attending them.

Ministry of Science, Education and Sports; Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship; universities and colleges; andragogical associations

Changes in the school system 4.4. Extending primary education (generalist class teaching) from four to six years in order to facilitate individualisation during the 5th and 6th grades of basic education. 4.5. Extending compulsory basic school education from eight to nine years so as to enable more successful acquisition of key new knowledge and skills, which should be defined by a national education standard based on internationally accepted methodology. If the existing eight years of basic school education are to be maintained, a compulsory 9th grade should be introduced for those who will not be continuing their education. In the 9th grade, one-year training programmes in lower-skilled high-demand vocations would be held, thus facilitating employment and increasing the likelihood of social inclusion (people with only basic school education have a very difficult time in finding employment). Such programmes would also be intended for those who have not completed secondary school. 4.6. Introducing differentiation of students in the upper grades of basic education by means of elective programmes and the implementation of a programme with at least two levels (a minimum, compulsory programme and an extended, more demanding one). 4.7. Introducing subjects in the educational process that promote the right to cultural difference, with the aim of strengthening social cohesion. 4.8. Examining why students drop out of secondary school and establishing the extent of this phenomenon and its causes. Based on this applied research, guidelines and an action plan should be produced, leading to a reduction of this problem.

Ministry of Science, Education and Sports; Institute for the Advancement of Education; research institutions; bodies of local and regional self-government

4.9. Subsidising programmes for supplementary educational activities (Internet courses, workshops, mentorship, professional counselling) for children from socially excluded families. The aim is to increase social cohesion and compensate for insufficient cultural capital in their families. 4.10. Setting up a special fund for scholarships and tuition fees for students from poor families. It is necessary to separate scholarship funds for gifted students and those for students from socially excluded families. Scholarships should be awarded by means of a competition in the latter case as well.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Policy Recommendations

Integrated education of children and young people with special needs 4.11. Developing and introducing preschool programmes in which children with developmental problems can also take part. 4.12. Ensuring regular basic school education for all. All children aged 6 to 14 should be taught in the same educational environment, one which will satisfy their physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic and other needs and requirements. This may be achieved by setting aside part of the school day and employing extra staff to meet the special additional requirements of children with developmental problems.

Ministry of Science, Education and Sports

4.13. Awarding scholarships to children and young people through competitions, thus facilitating their secondary and/or higher education. Scholarships should cover the costs of schooling itself as well as transportation and accommodation. Children and young people with special needs must not be housed in special institutions simply because the school system is not capable of providing educational services adapted to their needs.

7.5 Anti-discrimination measures Groups who suffer from discrimination should be involved as a matter of course when strategies and measures are being devised. This will strengthen and broaden the consultation process. Measures

Competent authorities

5.1. Ensuring access to information and free legal advice for vulnerable groups.

Social Welfare Centres; Ministry of Justice; Croatian Bar Association

5.2. Supporting and encouraging institutions to apply existing anti-discrimination regulations and introduce systematic monitoring of forms of institutional discrimination.

5.3. Financial, specialist and media support for new and existing initiatives by groups in the community which provide services and combat discrimination. 5.4. Promoting examples of good practice by enterprises that respect the human rights of their employees, oppose discrimination, do not refuse to hire HIVpositive people, and so on. 5.5. Introducing mandatory training seminars for public servants, with the aim of preventing oppressive behaviour and promoting human rights.

74 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

There are indications that these groups are sometimes included, but their experience and knowledge has not been consistently utilised. Target groups should be partners in monitoring and evaluating the implementation of strategies and measures. The measures to be taken are as follows:

Ministry of Justice; Office of the Ombudsman; Office of the Ombudsman for Children; Office of the Ombudsman for Gender Equality; Office for National Minorities; Office for Human Rights Ministries in charge; bodies of local and regional self-government; Croatian Television; Croatian Radio

Croatian Chamber of Economy; Ministry of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship

Ministry of Science, Education and Sports; Office for Human Rights; Office for National Minorities

Policy Recommendations

7.6 Measures for raising public awareness and stimulating social solidarity and philanthropy The Croatian public is insufficiently informed of the dimensions and consequences of social exclusion. The measures proposed here aim at increasing public

recognition of this problem, encouraging greater social solidarity with the excluded, activating NGOs, and stimulating philanthropic activities. Greater emphasis needs to be placed on the social responsibility of the commercial sector and individual companies with regard to both their own employees and the wider community. The measures to be taken are as follows:

Measures

Competent authorities

6.1. Organising educational seminars for journalists aimed at training them to cover social exclusion, unemployment and poverty in Croatia.

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, in cooperation with the Croatian Journalistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Association

6.2. Organising and preparing radio and TV broadcasts on social exclusion, with the aim of raising public awareness; encouraging coverage and analysis by the media of social inclusion measures.

Ministries responsible for implementing individual measures (Public Relations Offices); Croatian Television; Croatian Radio

6.3. Financial and organisational support for civil initiatives that promote inclusion and for establishing networks for vulnerable groups.

Office for Cooperation with NGOs; National Foundation for Civil Society Development; Local and regional self-government

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Appendix 1:

Methodological Explanations for Chapter 3

Empirical analysis of social exclusion (Chapter 3.1) The survey was based on two questionnaires (A and B), each of which was carried out on 1,250 respondents. About 70% of the questions were the same in both questionnaires. The data was collected using a multistage stratified sample developed on the basis of the Results of the 31 March 2001 census taken by the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). The sample was stratified by counties (21) and size of settlement (four categories). The data were collected by means of personal interviews, which were conducted in respondents’ homes by around 170 interviewers and lasted an average of one hour. We examined the extent and determinants of social exclusion based on the questions contained in questionnaire A. In the analyses below, we have made use of a reduced sample (N = 485) covering only respondents who were employable, that is, those who had completed their education and were not yet pensioners or over 65 years old. In accordance with this criterion, we were obliged to exclude young people still at school and the elderly from this analysis, despite the fact that both these groups are known to be vulnerable in Croatia as well153 154. Furthermore, the sample was not constructed in such a way as to allow the regional dispersion of social exclusion to be reliably assessed, that is, the risk of social exclusion for ethnic minorities, migrants, people with special needs, the de-institutionalised and other groups at risk which account for a somewhat small percentage of the total population. The second serious limitation of the study is related to its inability to assess the dynamic of social exclusion or the permanency of social inclusion/exclusion due to the fact the respondents and their households were profiled at a single moment in time.

We analysed economic deprivation (poverty) on a household level, i.e. the combined income of the individuals living in it. The standard relative poverty line (60% of the national median equivalent income) was used as an indicator. According to a survey of household consumption, the relative poverty line in the year 2002 amounted to HRK 16,810 for a single-person household155. According to OECD methodology, in the case of households with more than one member, this threshold increases by 50% for each member older than 14 and by 30% for each child younger than 14156. Given that household incomes were defined in our research by classes (of which there were 17), and not their exact amount, all households whose income was in the range that included the threshold amount were (also) placed in the poverty group. We defined employment deprivation as non-participation in employment, covering both unemployed people, regardless of whether they were actively seeking work or not157, and economically inactive yet employable respondents158. Why did we include the latter? First, employment is a means of achieving (financial) independence, developing personal skills159 and making social contacts, from which economically inactive people are excluded to an identical or almost identical degree as the unemployed. Second, households with inactive members are more vulnerable than those whose adult members are actively employed, especially in the case of households with only one employed person. Such households are much more sensitive to job loss, as this leaves them without any kind of income. Socio-cultural deprivation was defined as non-involvement in the activities of clubs, associations, religious organisations, political parties and other forms of civil society, in other words, the absence of social participation160. Bearing in mind that our indicator does not reveal whether a respondent is socially isolated

World Bank (2000). Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA; Šućur, Z. (2001). Siromaštvo: teorije, koncepti i pokazatelji. Faculty of Law. Zagreb, Croatia; Centre for the Promotion of Catholic Social Teaching (Zagreb) and Croatian Caritas / Centar za promicanje socijalnog nauka Crkve i Hrvatski Caritas (2005). Konferencija za tisak projekta “Praćenje siromaštva u Hrvatskoj“, Tuesday 11 January.

153

Social exclusion of dependent individuals is a real phenomenon, but the characteristics and causes of such exclusion are varied, requiring a special analytical approach. Since we took a different approach here, we have additionally included pensioners in the comparative analysis of levels of deprivation (see Graph 3.1), in order to illustrate their vulnerability.

154

This represents 60% of the median “equivalent“ income of all households. This amount does not include income in kind, which was not measured in our research. However, this form of income makes an important contribution to the living standard of rural households, which are also engaged in agriculture.

155

Thus, for example, the poverty threshold for a household made up of two parents and two children under 14 would be HRK 35,300 per annum.

156

We usually differentiate between temporary and long-term unemployment, defining the latter as unemployment lasting more than one year. It is also important to distinguish the discouraged unemployed, i.e. those who have stopped seeking work but continue to describe themselves as unemployed.

157

In our research, the latter group is made up of housewives and the discouraged unemployed.

158

Gallie, D. (2004). Unemployment, marginalisation risks and welfare policy. In Gallie, D. (ed.) Resisting Marginalisation: Unemployment Experience and Social Policy in the European Union. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 1-33.

159

Operationalised in an identical manner, the absence of social participation, or tertiary sociability (Gallie, D., Paugam, S., S. Jacobs (2003). Unemployment, Poverty, and Social Isolation. Is There a Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion? European Societies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1-31) was one of the social exclusion indicators used in a large-scale European panel study on household consumption carried out in 1994 (European Community Household Panel Survey; cf. Barnes, M., Heady, C., Middleton, S., Millar, J., Papadopulos, F., Room, G., Tsakloglou, P. (2002). Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA. p. 21).

160

76 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Methodological Explanations for Chapter 3

(for example, someone can have an intensive social life without being a member of any association), but rather only non-networked (which only increases the likelihood of isolation in certain conditions), such a measurement necessarily overstates the actual number of isolated people. In order to rectify this inaccuracy, which arises from the fact that the data used do not contain more precise indicators of the dynamic of friendships and social contacts, we take non-networking as a risk factor only when it is tied to labour or economic deprivation; non-networking is not a risk factor on its own. In such cases, being nonnetworked (as well as poor and/or not present in the labour market) truly increases the likelihood of social isolation, due especially to the inability to make use of the formal and informal resources, assistance, and support which engagement in the sphere of civil society provides.

Unemployment and social exclusion (Chapter 3.2) In the analyses, we used the data collected in an extensive survey entitled Psychological Aspects of Unemployment. The survey was longitudinal, i.e. it was carried out in two rounds with the same participants. The first study was conducted in the summer of 2003 in branches of the Croatian Employment Office in each county, involving a total of 25 branches. In each branch, we randomly selected a certain number of participants, in proportion to the rate of unemployment in the respective county. Unemployed people who came to their local branch offices for their regular monthly visit were requested by the interviewers to participate in the survey. Out of a total of 1,882 people asked, 1,138 (60.5%) agreed to participate. The sample structure provides a good reflection of the actual structure of unemployment in Croatia with respect to geographical distribution, gender, duration of unemployment and length of service with an employer. However, the sample includes a somewhat

greater proportion of young and educated people than the population at large; they were more willing to participate in the survey. The questionnaire contained questions about participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; demographic characteristics (gender, age, education, family responsibilities and duration of unemployment), as well as a number of questions and scales for assessing the type and intensity of their everyday activities, their subjective and objective financial situation, psychological and social deprivation, reported support mechanisms, the means used for job seeking and the intensity of their job search, and it also included an extensive number of questions for assessing health. Participants filled out the questionnaire in small groups, mostly on their own, based on the instructions received from the survey takers. For the small number who had problems reading or writing, the survey takers read the questions aloud and recorded their answers. The survey took up to 40 minutes. At the end, the respondents were asked permission to be contacted and surveyed again, a year later. More than 60% consented and provided their contact data. In November and December 2004 the second study was conducted, this time by post. The participants were first contacted by telephone; the survey takers reminded them of their consent to be contacted, explained there was to be a survey by post and asked for cooperation. The response was good: 78% of respondents returned completed questionnaires (N = 601). The questionnaire had additional questions related to whether the respondents had found a job, when they had found it, what kind of job it was and how happy they were with it. Questions whose answers were not subject to change were omitted. All questions referring to the key variables were identical in both questionnaires. The key variables analysed are explained below.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Methodological Explanations for Chapter 3

Economic deprivation was studied from two perspectives. Objectively, we asked respondents what their total household income had been in the previous month. Subjectively, we surveyed their perception of their financial situation: we asked them to assess, on a scale from one to five, how often in the previous month they had experienced financial worries. The possible answers were the following: 1. “never“; 2. “sometimes“; 3. “often“; 4. “almost all the time“ and 5. “all the time“. The correlation between objective and subjective financial deprivation was significant (r = 0.57). Social isolation was assessed by a question which was originally part of our scale of psychological deprivation, composed according to the theory of latent functions of work161. The question was the following: Do you consider yourself an integral part and a useful member of the social community? The answers were: 1. “Yes, I feel I am a useful member of the social community “; 2. “I mostly feel I am a useful member“; 3. “I feel non-useful more frequently than useful“; 4. “I feel completely non-useful and excluded“.

In the second study, i.e. in the survey of factors determining the probability of finding employment with the influence of demographic characteristics and duration of unemployment, we wanted to check the impact of health as well. Mental and physical health was tested by means of an extensive, psychometricsbased international Questionnaire of Health SF-36, developed by the associates of the Institute for Health from Boston and the Social Policy Department of the Californian RAND Corporation162, which was adjusted to Croatian circumstances163. The SF-36 includes scales relating to (a) limitations on physical and social activities due to health problems, (b) difficulties in performing everyday life roles due to physical or emotional problems, (c) subjective well-being, and (d) direct assessment of overall health. Impaired health is one of the consequences of unemployment164, but we assume that it also has an impact on the probability of finding employment.

Jahoda, M. (1982). Employment and unemployment – A social-psychological analysis. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom.

161

Ware, J.E., Snow, K.K., Kosinski, M., et al. (1997). SF-36 Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center. Boston, USA.

162

Jureša, V., Ivanković, D., Vuletić, G. et al. (2000). The Croatian Health Survey – SF-36: General quality of life assessment. Collegium Antropologicum, Vol. 24, 2000, pp. 69-78.

163

See, for example, Feather, N.T. (1990). The Psychological Impact of Unemployment. Springler-Verlag. New York, USA; Fryer, D., Payne, R. (1986). Being unemployed: A review of the literature on the psychological experience of unemployment. In C.L. Cooper and I. Robertson (eds) International Review of Industrial and Organisational Psychology. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, pp. 235-278; McKee-Ryan, F.M., Song Z., Wamberg, C.R., Kinicki, A.J. (2005). Psychological and Physical well-being during unemployment: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, 2005, pp. 53-76; O’Brien, G.E. (1986). Psychology of Work and Unemployment. John Wiley and Sons. Chichester, USA; Šverko, B., Maslić Seršić, D., Galešić, M. (2004). Nezaposlenost i subjektivno zdravlje. Jesu li najugroženije osobe srednje dobi? In Suvremena psihologija, 11(3-4), 2004, pp. 283-298; War, P. (1987). Work, Unemployment, and Mental Health. Clarendon Press. Oxford, United Kingdom.)

164

78 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Statistical Appendix

1. Social exclusion and poverty indicators165 At-risk-of-poverty rate, without income in kind, 2003

18.9

At-risk-of-poverty rate by age and sex (%), total, M / F

17.7/20.1

0-15 years

16.4/16.7

16-24 years

17.0/17.3

25-49 years

14.0/14.3

50-64 years

16.7/16.6

65 years and over

28.6/34.4

At-risk-of-poverty rate by most frequent activity status (%) Employed

6.6/4.3

Self-employed

22.8/28.5

Unemployed

40.6/28.9

Retired

23.3/21.7

Other economically inactive

18.8/25.1

At-risk-of-poverty rate by household type and age (%) One-person household, total M/F

37.3 32.0/39.4

One-person household, 30-64 years

26.5

One-person household, 65 years and over

44.9

Two adults, no dependent children, both adults under 65 years

13.3

Two adults, no dependent children, at least one adult 65 years or over

30.4

Other household without dependent members

11.1

Single parent household, one or more dependent children

31.8

Two adults, one dependent child

14.7

Two adults, two dependent children

15.2

Two adults, three or more dependent children

21.6

Other households with dependent children

15.2

At-risk-of-poverty rate by tenure status (%) Tenant (Contracted, fixed and full rent) Owner or rent free

20.2 18.9

At-risk-of-poverty threshold for one-person household (in HRK)

17,376.0

At-risk-of-poverty threshold for households consisting of two adults and two children (in HRK)

36,489.7

Inequality of income distribution - quintile share ratio (S80/S20)

5.0

Relative at-risk-of-poverty gap (%)

24.2

Long term unemployment rate, I/2004, total M/F Early school leavers (share of total population of 18-24 year olds having achieved ISCED level 2 or less and not attending education or training), I/2004, total M/F

All data was obtained from the Central Bureau of Statistics unless otherwise indicated.

165

80 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

6.8 5.8/7.9 6.1 6.9/5.2

Statistical Appendix

Life expectancy at birth, 2003, total

74.9

M/F

71.4/78.4

Dispersion around the at-risk-of-poverty threshold, 2003 40%

6.8

50%

12.1

70%

25.7

At-risk-of-poverty rate before social transfers (%), 2003 Social transfers excluded from income

35.3

Pensions and social transfers excluded from income

43.8

Gini coefficient, 2003

0.30

Long term unemployment share (> 13 months), (total long-term unemployed population as proportion of total unemployed population), I/2004, total

49.2

M/F

46.8/51.5

Very long-term unemployment share (> 25 months), (total very long-term unemployed population as proportion of total active population), I/2004, total M/F Very long-term unemployment rate (> 25 months), I/2004, total M/F

38.3 37.8/38.8 5.3 4.7/6.0

2. Human Development Index Human Development Index (HDI) value, 2003

0.841

Life expectancy index, 2003

0.83

Education index, 2003

0.91

GDP index

0.78

3. Health Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births), 2003 Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 live births), 2003 Maternal mortality ratio adjusted (per 100,000 live births), 2003 Births attended by skilled health personnel (%), 2003

6.3 7 8 99.9

Health expenditure per capita (PPP US$), 2002

783

Public health expenditure (% of GDP), 2001

3.79

Private health expenditure (% of GDP), 2001

1.58

4. Education and literacy Public expenditure on education166 (as % of GDP), 2003

4.67

Public expenditure on education, pre-primary and primary (as % of GDP), 2003

2.57

Public expenditure on education, secondary (as % of GDP), 2003

1.08

Public expenditure on education, tertiary (% of GDP), 2003

0.86

Adult literacy rate (% ages 15 and above)

98.1

Youth literacy rate (% ages 15-24), 2003

99.6

Source of data related to public expenditure (as % of GDP): Ministry of Science, Education and Sports, Croatia.

166

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Statistical Appendix

Net primary enrolment ratio (%), 2003/04

95.5

Net secondary enrolment ratio (%), 2003/04

84.5

Tertiary students in science, maths and engineering (% of all tertiary students), 2003/04

23.8

5. Gender inequality in education Adult literacy rate (female rate % ages 15 and above), 2001 Census data Adult literacy rate (female rate as % of male rate), 2001 Census data

97.1 98

Youth literacy rate (female rate % ages 15-24), 2001 Census data

99.7

Youth literacy rate (female rate as % of male rate), 2001 Census data

100

Female primary net enrolment ratio (%), 2003/04

Primary net enrolment ratio (female as % of male), 2003/04

0.95

Female secondary net enrolment ratio (%), 2003/04

86.8

Secondary net enrolment ratio (female rate as % of male rate), 2003/04

1.01

Female tertiary gross enrolment ratio (%), 2003/04

45.2

Tertiary gross enrolment ratio (female rate as % of male rate), 2003/04

1.16

6. Unemployment Unemployed people (thousands), 2003 (administrative/labour force survey)

329.8/256

Unemployment rate, total (% of labour force), 2003(administrative/labour force survey)

19.2/14.3

Unemployment rate, female (% of male rate), 2003

120.7

Youth unemployment rate, total (% of labour force ages 15-24), 2003

35.8

Youth unemployment rate, female (% of male rate), 2003

112.2

7. Economic performance GDP (US$ billions), 2003167

28.8

GDP per capita (US$), 2003168

6,485.8

GDP per capita (PPP US$), 2002169

10,984

GDP per capita annual growth rate (%), 2002

5.2

GDP per capita annual growth rate (%), 2003

4.3

Total outstanding external debt, end of period (% of GDP), 2002

68.7

Total outstanding external debt, end of period (% of GDP), 2003

78.7

170

8. Crime Convicted adult perpetrators of criminal offences (per 100,000 people), 2003

516

Convicted adult perpetrators of criminal offences, women (%), 2003

9.9

Data for 2003 are provisional (calculated as the sum of the four quarterly figures for GDP).

167

Ibid.

168

Ibid.

169

Ibid.

170

82 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Statistical Appendix

Convicted adult persons, by sentences passed (% of total), 2003 Imprisonment - not suspended

11.0

Imprisonment - suspended

66.5

Convicted juvenile perpetrators of criminal offences (per 100,000 people), 2003

Convicted juvenile perpetrators of criminal offences - female (%), 2003

6.1

Persons in imprisonment (per 100,000 people), 2003

Persons in imprisonment - women (%), 2003

4.6

9. Gender empowerment measure Gender empowerment measure (GEM) value, 2003

0.571

Seats in parliament held by women (% of total), 2003

17.8

Female legislators, senior officials and managers (% of total), 2003

26.2

Female professional and technical workers (% of total), 2003

52.1

Ratio of estimated female to male earned income, 2003

0.66

10. Gender inequality in economic activity Female economic activity rate (% ages 15 and above), 2003

43.1

Female economic activity rate (% of male rate, ages 15 and above), 2003

73.9

Female employment in agriculture (as % of female labour force), 2003

14.9

Female employment in agriculture (as % of male), 2003

87.8

Female employment in industry (as % of female labour force), 2003

15.9

Female employment in industry (as % of male), 2003

39.5

Female employment in services (as % of female labour force), 2003

53.5

Female employment in services (as % of male), 2003

113.2

Women contributing family workers (% of total), 2003

Men contributing family workers (% of total), 2003

11. Gender-related development index Gender-related development index (GDI) value, 2003

0.839

Life expectancy at birth, female (years), 2003

78.4

Life expectancy at birth, male (years), 2003

71.4

Adult literacy rate, female (% ages 15 and above)

97.1

Adult literacy rate, male (% ages 15 and above)

99.3

Combined gross enrolment ratio for primary, secondary and tertiary level schools, female (%), 2003/2004

77.2

Combined gross enrolment ratio for primary, secondary and tertiary level schools, male (%), 2003/2004

74.1

Estimated earned income, female (PPP US$), 2003

8,830

Estimated earned income, male (PPP US$), 2003

13,306

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Technical Note

171

Human Development Index - HDI A composite index measuring average achievement in three basic dimensions of human development - a long and healthy life, knowledge, and a decent standard of living. The HDI is a summary measure of human development. It measures the average achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: - A long and healthy life, as measured by life expectancy at birth. - Knowledge, as measured by the adult literacy rate (with two-thirds weight) and the combined primary, secondary and tertiary gross enrolment ratio (with one-third weight). - A decent standard of living, as measured by GDP per capita (PPP US$).

Gender Empowerment measure - GEM A composite index measuring gender inequality in three basic dimensions of empowerment - economic participation and decision-making, political participation and decision-making, and power over economic resources. Focusing on women’s opportunities rather than their capabilities, the GEM captures gender inequality in three key areas: - Political participation and decision-making power, as measured by women’s and men’s percentage shares of parliamentary seats. - Economic participation and decision-making power, as measured by two indicators - women’s and men’s percentage shares of positions as legislators, senior officials and managers, and women’s and men’s percentage shares of professional and technical positions. - Power over economic resources, as measured by women’s and men’s estimated earned income (PPP US$).

Gender –related Development Index - GDI A composite index measuring average achievement in the three basic dimensions captured in the human development index - a long and healthy life, knowledge, and a decent standard of living - adjusted to account for inequalities between men and women. While the HDI measures average achievement, the GDI adjusts the average achievement to reflect the inequalities between men and women in the following dimensions: - A long and healthy life, as measured by life expectancy at birth. - Knowledge, as measured by the adult literacy rate and the combined primary, secondary and tertiary gross enrolment ratio. - A decent standard of living, as measured by estimated earned income (PPP US$).

The indicators were calculated using the international UN methodology. For more information see: http://hdr.undp.org/statistics/.

171

84 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Ratified Human Rights Conventions

1. Status of major United Nations human rights conventions

Date of ratification or succession172

International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 1948

08 Oct 1991

International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, 1965

08 Oct 1991

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966

08 Oct 1991

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966

08 Oct 1991

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979

09 Oct 1992

Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984

08 Oct 1991

Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989

08 Oct 1991

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951

08 Oct 1991

Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, 1954

08 Oct 1991

2. Status of fundamental labour rights conventions

Date of ratification or succession173

Freedom of association and collective bargaining - Convention 87

08 Oct 1991

Freedom of association and collective bargaining - Convention 98

08 Oct 1991

Elimination of forced and compulsory labour - Convention 29

08 Oct 1991

Elimination of forced and compulsory labour - Convention 105

05 Mar 1997

Elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation - Convention 100

08 Oct 1991

Elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation - Convention 111

08 Oct 1991

Abolition of child labour - Convention 138

08 Oct 1991

Abolition of child labour - Convention 182

17 Jul 2001

3. Status of Council of Europe major human rights conventions

Date of ratification174

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

05 Nov 1997

European Social Charter

26 Feb 2003

European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

11 Oct 1997

European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages

05 Nov 1997

Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities

11 Oct 1997

European Convention on the Exercise of Childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Rights

not ratified

European Convention on Nationality

not ratified

Source: Official website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration www.mfa.hr

172

Source: ILOLEX, http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/docs/declworld.htm

173

Official web site of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration http://www.mfa.hr/CustomPages/Static/HRV/Files/1-3-03-multilateralni-07e.pdf

174

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Bibliography

Abrahamson, P. (1995). Social Exclusion in Europe: Old Wine in New Bottles? Družboslovne razprave, Vol. 11, Nos. 19-20, 1995, pp. 119-136. Acheson, D. (1998). Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health Report. HMSO and The Stationery Office. London, United Kingdom. http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/doh/ih/part2c.htm Ajduković, M. (2004). Pristupi zbrinjavanju djece bez odgovarajuće roditeljske skrbi u Europi. Revija za socijalnu politiku, Nos. 3-4, 2004. Atkinson, A. B. (1989). How Should We Measure Poverty? Some Conceptual Issues. In Atkinson, A. B. Poverty and Social Security. Harvester Wheatsheaf. London, United Kingdom. Atkinson, A. B., Cantillon, B., Markier, E., Nolan, B. (2002). Social Indicators: the EU and Social Inclusion. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Atkinson, A. B., Hills, J. (eds) (1998). Exclusion, Employment and Opportunity. CASEpaper 4. Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics. London, United Kingdom. Babić, Z. (2003). Uloga aktivne politike na tržište rada u Hrvatskoj. Financijska teorija i praksa, 27(4), 2003, pp. 547-566. http://www.ijf.hr/financijska_praksa/PDF-2003/4-03/babic.pdf Bajo, A. and M. Pitarević (2004). Fiskalna decentralizacija u Hrvatskoj, problemi fiskalnog izravnanja. Financijska teorija i praksa, 28(4), 2004, pp. 445-469. Barbieri, P., Paugam, S., Russel H. (2000). Social capital and exits from Unemployment. In Gallie D., Paugam, S. (ed.): Welfare Regimes and the Experience of Unemployment in Europe. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 200-217. Barnes, M., Heady, C., Middleton, S., Millar, J., Papadopulos, F., Room, G., Tsakloglou, P. (2002). Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA. Berghman, J. (1997). The Resurgence of Poverty and the Struggle against Exclusion: A New Challenge for Social Security in Europe? International Social Security Review, Vol. 50, No. 1, 1997, pp. 3-21. Bićanić, I., Franičević V. (2005). Izazovi stvarnoga i subjektivnog siromaštva i porasta nejednakosti u ekonomijama jugoistočne Europe u tranziciji. Financijska teorija i praksa, 29(1), 2005, pp. 13-36. Biondić, I., Crnić, S., Martinis, A., Šošić, V. (2002). Tranzicija, zaštita zaposlenja i tržište rada u Hrvatskoj. Ured za socijalno partnerstvo u Hrvatskoj. Zagreb, Croatia. Björklund, A., Haveman, R., Hollister, R., Holmlund, B. (1991). Labour Market Policy and Unemployment Insurance. Clarendon Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Boeri, T., Burda, M. (1996). Active Labour Market Policies, Job Matching and the Czech Miracle. European Economic Review, Vol. 40, 1996, pp. 805-817. Böhnke, P. (2001). Nothing Left to Lose? Poverty and Social Exclusion in Comparison. Empirical Evidence on Germany. Social Science Research Center. Berlin, Germany. Bošnjak, V., Mimica, J., Puljiz, V., Radočaj, T., Stubbs, P., Zrinščak, S. (2002). Elementi socijalne politike i socijalne skrbi u Hrvatskoj. UNICEF. Bratković, D. (2005). Institucionalni procesi koji utječu na marginalizaciju osoba s teškoćama. Tekst za potrebe zbornika. Mobilizacija i razvoj zajednica u Hrvatskoj (in press). Castel, R. (1995). Les métamorphoses de la question social, une chronique du salariat. Fayard. Paris, France. Central Bureau of Statistics (2003). Stanovništvo staro 15 i više godina prema starosti, spolu i razini završene škole, po gradovima/općinama. Popis stanovništva 2001. Državni zavod za statistiku. Zagreb, Croatia. Central Bureau of Statistics (2004). 13.2.2/1. First Release - Poverty Indicators 2001 – 2003. 16 July 2004. Central Bureau of Statistics. Zagreb. Central Bureau of Statistics (2004). 1244 Statistical Reports - Labour Force Survey Results. Central Bureau of Statistics. Zagreb.

86 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Bibliography

Central Bureau of Statistics (2005). Statistical Information. Central Bureau of Statistics. Zagreb. Central Bureau of Statistics (2005). Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of Croatia 2004. Central Bureau of Statistics. Zagreb. Central Bureau of Statistics (2004). Pokazatelji siromaštva u 2001. i 2002. Priopćenje. http://www.dzs.hr/hrv/2004/13-22h2004.htm Centre for the Promotion of Catholic Social Teaching (Zagreb) and Croatian Caritas / Centar za promicanje socijalnog nauka Crkve i Hrvatski Caritas (2005). Press conference on the project: “Monitoring poverty in Croatia“ / “Praćenje siromaštva u Hrvatskoj“, Tuesday 11 January. Commission of the European Communities (1992). Employment in Europe. Commission of the European Communities. Brussels, Belgium. Commission of the European Communities (1995). White Paper on Education and Training: Teaching and Learning – Towards the Learning Society. Commission of the European Communities. Eurostat. (2000). A Memorandum on Lifelong Learning. Commission of the European Communities (2001). White Paper: A New Impetus for European Youth. http://europa. eu.int/comm/youth/whitepaper/download/whitepaper_en.pdf Commission of the European Communities. (2002). Key Data on Education in Europe. Commission of the European Communities (2005). Report on Social Inclusion 2004. An analysis of the National Action Plans on Social Inclusion (2004-2006) submitted by the 10 new Member States. Commission Staff Working Paper SEC(2004) 256. Brussels, Belgium. http://www2.europarl. eu.int/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/sec/2005/0256/COM_SEC(2005)0256_EN.pdf Croatian National Institute of Public Health (2004). Croatian Health Service Yearbook 2003. Croatian National Institute of Public Health. Zagreb. Croatian Office for Employment / Hrvatski zavod za zapošljavanje (2002). Mjesečni statistički bilten, No. 10. Croatian Office for Employment. Zagreb, Croatia. Davies, S., Hallet, M., (2001). Policy responses to regional unemployment: Lessons from Germany, Spain and Italy. Economic Papers: No. 161. Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs. European Commission. http://europa. eu.int/comm/economy_finance. Dorenbos, R., van Winden, P., Walsh, K., Svaljek, S., Milas, G. (2002). Evaluation of program of public works in Croatia - Final report. NEI Labour and Education and T.E.R.N. Rotterdam, Netherlands Dragojević, R. (2002). Segregacijska obrazovna praksa. Zarez No. 88. Društveni položaj Roma u Hrvatskoj (2000). Tematski broj časopisa Društvena istraživanja, 9(2-3), 2000. Državni zavod za zaštitu obitelji, materinstva i mladeži / State Institute for the Protection of the Family, Maternity and Youth (2003). Nacionalni program djelovanja za mlade / The National Programme of Action for Youth, Zagreb, Croatia. Esping-Andersen, G. (2003). Toward the Good Society, Once Again? Paper presented at the 4th International Research Conference on Social Security, Antwerp, May 5-7. Euridyce (2002). Key Competencies. A developing concept in general compulsory education. European Commission (2001). White Paper: A New Impetus for European Youth. European Roma Rights Centre (2005). Report on the Position of Roma Women in Croatia. http://www.errc.org/cikk. phph?cikk=2124 Eurostat (June 2003). Euro-zone unemployment. Fassin, D. (1996). Exclusion, underclass, marginalidad. Revue française de sociologie, Vol. 37, No. 1, 1996, pp. 37-75.

Feather, N.T. (1990). The Psychological Impact of Unemployment. Springler-Verlag. New York, USA.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Bibliography

Franz, W. (1995). Central and East European Labour Markets in Transition: Developments, Causes, and Cures. Discussion Paper No. 1132. Centre for Economic Policy Research. London, United Kingdom. Freeman, J. (1970). Institutional discrimination. http://www.jofreeman.com/womensociety/institidiscrim.htm Fryer, D., Payne, R. (1986). Being unemployed: A review of the literature on the psychological experience of unemployment. In C.L. Cooper and I. Robertson (eds) International Review of Industrial and Organisational Psychology. John Wiley and Sons, Ltd, pp. 235-278. Gallie, D. (1999). Unemployment and Social Exclusion in the European Union. European Societies, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1998, pp. 139-168. Gallie, D. (2002). The quality of working life in welfare strategy. In G. Esping-Andersen (ed.) Why Do We Need a New Welfare State. Oxford University Presss. Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 96-129. Gallie, D. (2004). Unemployment, marginalisation risks and welfare policy. In Gallie, D. (ed.) Resisting Marginalisation: Unemployment Experience and Social Policy in the European Union. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 1-33. Gallie, D. (ed.) (2004). Resisting Marginalisation: Unemployment Experience and Social Policy in the European Union. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Gallie, D., Gershuny, J., Vogler, C. (1994). Unemployment, the household, and social networks. In Gallie D, Marsh, C., Vogler, C. (ed.) Social Change and the Experience of Unemployment. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Gallie, D., Paugam, S. (eds) (2000). Welfare Regimes and the Experience of Unemployment in Europe. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Gallie, D., Paugam, S., S. Jacobs (2003). Unemployment, Poverty, and Social Isolation. Is There a Vicious Circle of Social Exclusion? European Societies, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2003, pp. 1-31. Gilroy, P. (1987). Problems in Anti-Racist Strategy. The Runnymede Trust. London, United Kingdom. Gomart, E. (2000). Social Assessment of Poverty in Croatia. In Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study, Volume II: Technical Papers. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA. Handicap International (2004). Beyond De-institutionalisation. Disability Monitor Initiative. Heady, C., Room G. (2002). Patterns of Social Exclusion: Implications for Policy and Research. In Barnes M. et al., Poverty and Social Exclusion in Europe. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom, pp. 146-154. Hills, J., Le Grand, J., Piachaud, D. (2002). Understanding Social Exclusion. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Hobcraft, J. (2000). The Roles of Schooling and Educational Qualifications in the Emergence of Adult Social Exclusion. CASEpaper 43. Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics. London, United Kingdom. Holcomb, P. A., Martinson, K. (2002). Implementing Welfare Reform across the Nation. New Federalism: Issues and Options for States, Series A, No. A-53. The Urban Institute. Holcomb, P. A., Martinson, K. (2002). Putting Policy into Practice: Five Years of Welfare Reform. In Weil, A., Finegold, K. (eds) Welfare Reform: The Next Act. Urban Institute Press. Washington D.C., USA, pp. 1-16. Hrvatić, N. (1994). Prema konceptualizaciji hrvatskog obrazovnog modela za romsku djecu. In Glas Roma: Odgoj i obrazovanje djece Roma u Hrvatskoj. Hrvatić, N. (2000). Odgoj i izobrazba Roma u Hrvatskoj. Društvena istraživanja. Hrvatska akademija znanosti i umjetnosti / Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts (2004). Deklaracija o znanju – Hrvatska temeljena na znanju i primjeni znanja. Zagreb, Croatia. Hrvatski zavod za zapošljavanje (2002). Mjesečni statistički bilten, No. 10. Hrvatski zavod za zapošljavanje. Zagreb, Croatia. Igrić, Lj. (2001). Djeca s mentalnom retardacijom u društvu. Dijete i društvo, 3(3), 2001.

88 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Bibliography

Ilišin, V. (1999). Mladi na marginama društva i politike. Alinea. Zagreb, Croatia. Ilišin, V., Radin, F. (ed.) (2002). Mladi uoči trećeg milenija. Institut za društvena istraživanja i Državni zavod za zaštitu obitelji, materinstva i mladeži. Zagreb, Croatia. International Labour Office (2002). Key Indicators of the Labour Market 2001-2002. International Labour Office. Geneva, Switzerland. International Labour Organisation. ILOLEX web site. http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/docs/declworld.htm Jahoda, M. (1982). Employment and unemployment – A social-psychological analysis. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom. Jureša, V., Ivanković, D., Vuletić, G. et al. (2000). The Croatian Health Survey – SF-36: General quality of life assessment. Collegium Antropologicum, Vol. 24, 2000, pp. 69-78. Karajić, N. (2002). Siromaštvo i neslužbeno gospodarstvo u Hrvatskoj – kvalitativni aspekti, Financijska teorija i praksa, 26(1), 2002, pp. 273-299. Koning de, J., Mosley, H. (ed.) (2001). Labour Market Policy and Unemployment: Impact and Process Evaluations in Selected European Countries. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA. Kronauer, M. (1998). “Social Exclusion“ and “Underclass“ – New Concepts for the Analysis of Poverty. In H. Andress (ed.) Empirical Poverty Research in Comparative Perspective. Ashgate. Aldershot, United Kingdom, pp. 51-73. Kunz, J. (2003). Where Is Platform 9 3/4? Understanding Income Security and Social Exclusion. A presentation at the CCSD/ HRDC conference “Building a Social Inclusion Research Agenda“, March 28, 2003. Lendvai, N. (2005). Socijalna politika u srednjoj i istočnoj Europi i ulazak u Europsku uniju: vrijeme za razmišljanje. Financijska teorija i praksa, 29(1), 2005, pp. 1-12. Lenoir, R. (1974). Les exclus: un Français sur dix. Le Seuil. Paris, France. Levitas, R. (1996). The Concept of Social Exclusion and the New Durkheimian Hegemony. Critical Social Policy, Vol. 16, No. 46, 1996, pp. 5-20. Lipsky, M. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. Russel Sage Foundation. New York, USA. Matković, T., Biondić, I. (2003). Reforma zakona o radu i promjena indeksa zakonske zaštite zaposlenja. Financijska teorija i praksa, 27(4), 2003, pp. 515-528. Mayes, D. J., Berghman, J., Salais, R. (eds) (2001). Social Exclusion and European Policy. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom. McKee-Ryan, F.M., Song Z., Wamberg, C.R., Kinicki, A.J. (2005). Psychological and physical well-being during unemployment: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 90, 2005, pp. 53-76. Memedi, R., Papa J. (2001). Denied a Future? The right to education of Roma/Gypsy and Traveller Children in Europe. Volume I: South-eastern Europe. Save the Children. United Kingdom. Ministry of Finance (2003 – 2005). Statistical Review - Ministry of Finance Monthly Statistical Reviews, Nos. 98, 99, 110, 111, 112, 113, December 2003 - March 2005. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration. Official website. http://www.mfa.hr/ Ministarstvo rada i socijalne skrbi / Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare (2002). Godišnje izvješće o primijenjenim pravima socijalne skrbi, pravnoj zaštiti djece, mladeži, braka, obitelji i osoba lišenih poslovne sposobnosti te zaštiti tjelesno ili mentalno oštećenih osoba u Republici Hrvatskoj u 2001. godini. Ministarstvo rada i socijalne skrbi, Uprava socijalne skrbi. Zagreb, Croatia. Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa Republike Hrvatske / Ministry of Science, Education and Sports (2005). Plan razvoja sustava odgoja i obrazovanja 2005.–2010. / Education System Development Plan for the period 2005-2010. Zagreb, Croatia. Oakley R. (2000). Institutional racism: Lessons from the U.K. Newsletter no. 4. European Roma Rights Center. O’Brien, G.E. (1986). Psychology of Work and Unemployment. John Wiley and Sons. Chichester, USA.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Bibliography

OECD (2000). Knowledge and Skills for Life – First Results from PISA OECD (2002). Education Policy Analysis. OECD/ Eurostat (2004). PPP and Real Expenditures. 2002 Benchmark Year. OECD, UNESCO. (2003). Literacy Skills for the World of Tomorrow. Pastuović, N. et al. (2001). Odgoj i obrazovanje: Bijeli dokument o hrvatskom obrazovanju. Ured za strategiju razvitka Republike Hrvatske. Paugam, S. (1991). La disqualification sociale. Presses Universitaires de France. Paris, France. Paugam S. (1996). Poverty and Social Disqualification: A Comparative Analysis of Cumulative Disadvantage in Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1996, pp. 287-304. Phillips, A. (1994). Pluralism, Solidarity and Change. In The Lesser Evil and the Greater Good. Rivers Oram Press. Pintarić et al. (1994). Utjecaj socioekonomskih faktora na uspjeh (ili neuspjeh) romske djece u školi. In Glas Roma: Odgoj i obrazovanje djece Roma u Hrvatskoj. Ringold, D. (2000). Roma and the Transition in Central and Eastern Europe. World Bank. Roberts, K. (2001). Unemployment without social exclusion: Evidence from young people in Eastern Europe. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, Vol. 21, Nos. 4-6, 2001, pp. 118-144. Rodgers, G., Gore, C., Figueiro, J. (eds) (1995). Social Exclusion: Rhetoric, Reality, Responses. International Institute for Labour Studies. Geneva, Switzerland. Room, G. (ed.) (1995). Beyond the Threshold: The Measurement and Analysis of Social Exclusion. The Policy Press. Bristol, United Kingdom. Saraceno, C. (2001). Social Exclusion: Cultural Roots and Diversities of a Popular Concept. Paper presented at the conference “Social Exclusion and Children“. Columbia University, 3-4 May, 2001. Schmid, G., Speckesser, S., Hilbert, C. (2001). Does active labour market policy matter? An aggregate impact analysis for Germany. In Koning de, J.; Mosley, H. (ed.) Labour Market Policy and Unemployment: Impact and Process Evaluations in Selected European Countries. Edward Elgar. Cheltenham, United Kingdom; Northampton, USA. Sen A. (1997). Inequality, unemployment and contemporary Europe. International Labour Review, Vol. 136, No. 2, 1997, pp. 155-171. Silver, H. (1994). Social Exclusion and Social Solidarity: Three Paradigms. International Labour Review, Vol. 133, No. 5-6, 1994, pp. 531-578. Silver, H. (1995). Reconceptualising Disadvantage: Three Paradigms of Social Exclusion. In Rodgers G., Gore C., Figueiredo, J. B. (eds): Social Exclusion: Rhetoric, Reality, Responses. International Institute for Labour Studies. Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 57-73. Smith, R. (1987). Unemployment and health: a disaster and a challenge. Oxford University Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Sparkes, J. (1999) Schools, Education and Social Exclusion. CASEpaper 29. Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics. London, United Kingdom. Stubbs, P., Zrinščak, S. (2005). Extended social Europe? Social policy, social inclusion and social dialogue in Croatia and the European Union. In K. Ott (ed.) Croatian Accession to the European Union. Institute for Public Finance and Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. Zagreb, Croatia, pp. 166-167. Šošić, V. (2005). Siromaštvo i politike na tržištu rada. Financijska teorija i praksa, 29(2), 2005, pp. 75-96. Šporer, Ž. (2004). Koncept društvene isključenosti. Društvena istraživanja, 13(1-2), 2004, pp. 171-193. Štulhofer, A. (2003). Društveni kapital i njegova važnost. In D. Ajduković (ed.) Socijalna rekonstrukcija zajednice. Društvo za psihološku pomoć. Zagreb, Croatia, pp. 79 - 98. Šućur, Z. (2000). Romi kao marginalna grupa, Društvena istraživanja, 9(2-3), 2000, pp. 211-227.

90 Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

Bibliography

Šućur, Z. (2001). Siromaštvo: teorije, koncepti i pokazatelji. Faculty of Law. Zagreb, Croatia. Šućur, Z. (2004). Socijalna isključenost: pojam, pristupi i operacionalizacija. Revija za sociologiju, 35(1-2), 2004, pp. 45-60. Šućur, Z. (2005). Siromaštvo kao sastavnica sociokulturnog identiteta Roma (in press). Šverko, B., Galešić, M., Maslić-Seršić, D. (2004). Aktivnosti i financijsko stanje nezaposlenih u Hrvatskoj. Ima li osnove za tezu o socijalnoj isključenosti dugotrajno nezaposlenih osoba? Revija za socijalnu politiku, 11(3-4), 2004, pp. 283-298. Šverko, B., Maslić Seršić, D., Galešić, M. (2004). Nezaposlenost i subjektivno zdravlje. Jesu li najugroženije osobe srednje dobi? Suvremena psihologija, 7, 2004, pp. 201-212. Teodorović, B. (2005). Modeli u rehabilitaciji osoba s teškoćama u razvoju, u Bratković, D. (ed.) Zapošljavanje uz podršku. Udruga za promicanje inkluzije. Zagreb, Croatia. Topping, K., Maloney, S. (eds) (2005). Inclusive Education. RoutledgeFalmer. London, United Kingdom. Tsakloglou, P., Papadopulos, F. (2002). Aggregate Level and Determining Factors of Social Exclusion in Twelve European Countries. Journal of European Social Policy, Vol. 12, No. 4, 2002, pp. 211-225. UNDP (2001). Human Development Report – Croatia 2001. UNDP. Zagreb, Croatia. UNDP (2003). Human Development Report – Croatia 2002. UNDP. Zagreb, Croatia. UNDP (2004). Human Development Report – Croatia 2004. UNDP. Zagreb, Croatia. UNDP (2005). Human Development Report 2005. UNDP. New York, USA. UNDP, Regional Bureau for Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States (RBEC) (2003). The Roma Human Development Report - Avoiding the Dependency Trap. UNDP. Bratislava, Slovak Republic. http://roma.undp.sk UNDP, Regional Bureau for Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States (2005). Faces of poverty, faces of hope. UNDP. Bratislava, Slovak Republic. http://vulnerability.undp.sk UNESCO. (1997). International Standard Classification of Education. UN Programme on Youth, UN DESA (Department of Economic and Social Affairs). (2005). Youth and the Millennium Development Goals: Challenges and Opportunities for Implementation. http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/documents/ youthmdgs.pdf Ured za nacionalne manjine Vlade RH / Office for National Minorities of the Government of the Republic of Croatia (2003). Nacionalni program za Rome / The National Programme for Roma. Zagreb, Croatia. Vlada Republike Hrvatske / Government of the Republic of Croatia (2002). Program borbe protiv siromaštva i socijalne isključenosti / The Programme for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion. Zagreb, Croatia. Vlada Republike Hrvatske / Government of the Republic of Croatia. (2003). Nacionalna strategija jedinstvene politike za osobe s invaliditetom 2003. – 2006 / The National Strategy for Integrated Policy for People with Disabilities from 2003 to 2006. Zagreb, Croatia. Vlada Republike Hrvatske / Government of the Republic of Croatia. (2004). Strategija obrazovanja odraslih / Adult Education Strategy. Zagreb, Croatia. War, P. (1987). Work, Unemployment, and Mental Health. Clarendon Press. Oxford, United Kingdom. Ware, J.E., Snow, K.K., Kosinski, M., et al. (1997). SF-36 Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center. Boston, USA. Westwood, P. (2003). Commonsense Methods for Children with Special Educational Needs: Strategies for the Regular Classroom. RoutledgeFalmer. London, United Kingdom. White, M. (1991). Against Unemployment. Policy Studies Institute. London, United Kingdom. Whitty, G. (2001). Education, Social Class and Social Exclusion. Journal of Education Policy, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2001, pp. 287-295. World Bank (2000). Croatia Economic Vulnerability and Welfare Study. World Bank. Washington, D.C., USA.

Poverty, Unemployment and Social Exclusion

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) The Office of the Resident Representative in Croatia KesterÄ?anekova 1 10 000 Zagreb Tel.: 385 1 23 61 666 Fax: 385 1 23 61 620 E-mail: registry.hr@undp.org www.undp.hr