I am very pleased to address you here today, on behalf of the United Nations Development Programme – UNDP - in Lithuania, at the meeting of the Swedish-Lithuanian Society. It is my privilege to thank you for your invitation and give you the regrets from Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, the UNDP Resident Representative who could not be here due to other commitments.
Among the wide range of issues addressed today by Lithuania in the period of preparation for accession to the European Union, social issues are of particular importance. Poverty elimination and reduction of disparities are the central part of the UNDP mandate as well.
At the Millennium Summit in 2000, in which among other countries, Lithuania also participated, the world’s leaders not only pledged to reduce poverty and bring their own countries forward in the implementation of Millennium Development Goals, but also to mobilize political will, financial resources and innovative policies to cut global poverty in half by 2015. This requires an integrated approach, which emphasizes different dimensions of poverty reduction and prevention such as political, economic and social inclusion, the empowerment of women and respect for human rights.
For the desirable results to be achieved, not only a strong and flourishing economy, [but also, perhaps even more importantly], an adequate and coherent support underpinned by socially inclusive policies are needed. The National Poverty Reduction Strategy prepared in 2000 demonstrated the political will in Lithuania, specified time-bound targets for poverty reduction and gave direction for relevant policy initiatives.
The National Poverty Monitoring Commission, an independent watchdog entity in charge of monitoring Lithuania’s progress towards the implementation of its social development goals was established at the same time by the President of Lithuania. Recently it has released results of the study, the main objectives of which were to identify and communicate changes in the situation of poverty in Lithuania, reexamine the sources and manifestations of poverty, and assess the efficiency and effectiveness of poverty reduction measures applied while Lithuania is preparing to join the European Union.
Among a number of revealing findings that the assessment generated, the most important ones deal with young people, education, access to modern information and communication technologies, and participation of civil society. In other words, they deal with the future and what we need to look at in order to positively influence the development of society if we want to prevent poverty from becoming a structural problem. This is a challenge which many countries are facing in a rapidly evolving and globalizing world.
The availability of this report coincides with the preparation of an action plan for the implementation of the National Poverty Reduction Strategy. The action plan identifies specific tasks and measures to reduce poverty, as well as a schedule and a resource base for their implementation. One of the most important aspects of this undertaking, however: will be to bring together the government, CBOs, NGOs and other stakeholders contributing to poverty reduction through transparent, participatory and consultative processes around dynamic partnerships.
As suggested, I will be talking about the problems and prospects of the young people in Lithuania just after a decade of transition in Lithuania from a broader human development perspective (which stretches beyond the understanding of tangible material opportunities or opportunities related to livelihood). The annual Lithuanian Human Development Report for the year 2001 concentrated on youth, and most of the information that I will be sharing with you are among the findings in that report.
In Lithuania young people are experiencing the transition in their own special way. They have enormous opportunities, but even greater challenges at the very beginning of their adult life. They have the future in their own hands, which for some youth is an ideal situation, while for many others is too challenging, regardless of their age and status in society. The chances that young people have for success depend both on the attitudes of society and on youth oriented policies in education, employment and human rights.
Opportunities for young people today are opportunities for all members of the society tomorrow. However, the problem is that the opportunities are not equal for all youth and the disparities constitute the main challenge.
What are the most important problems for young people today?
Today in Lithuania, young people are more "liberal, socially mobile and receptive to change" than people over 30 years old. According to the survey data, 60% of people under 30 support the market economy. However, the economic and social polarisation of society determines the increasing differentiation in young people and conflict between generations. Many young people think that they are not so well integrated in society. They often feel ignored or unprepared to compete on the labour market. What is striking though, is that young people in many cases do not seem to be so interested in changing "this social alienation". So for example, according to the survey carried out in 2000, more than half of young people did not know about any organizations established specifically for them.
The major concerns for young people in Lithuania are identified as unemployment and job security. Youth unemployment is becoming a key issue. According to the Labour Exchange, in 2001, on average, every fourth person registered with the Labour exchange was under 29 (with the tolal unenployment of 12%). According to the labour force survey, however, the actual unemployment level among young people is twice as high as the registered one.
The job situation is difficult both for highly skilled, educated youth and for those who do not have even vocational training. Today in Lithuania, skill intensive industry produces only 3.5% of the GDP. In the European Union this indicator is between 15 and 18% while the proportion of scientists, Research & Development personnel and students is similar in Lithuania and in the European Union. Therefore, one of the main barriers for young people in the labour market is the very low demand for highly skilled labour.
On the other hand, young people could have created jobs for themselves by setting up, for example, a small new technology based enterprises. Such efforts, however, were hindered by an inadequately small supply of venture capital on the market. An analysis of start-up capital showed that in 89 % of cases the personal savings of owners were for starting up a personal enterprise. It was observed that the total number of registered small and medium-sized enterprises that are not operating grew by 14% in 2000 compared to 1999. Also, the proportion of young people’s income from business and freelance activities in 2000 almost halved. The proportion of social benefits, on the contrary, grew significantly. Young people are becoming more and more dependent on social and private support.
The insufficient level of education and vocational training or their disparity with labour market demand often becomes the reason for unemployment among young people. The Labour Exchange statistics indicate that the proportion of unemployed young people with higher education was only 2.8% and with specialised secondary 8.3%, and the proportion of young unemployed people without any vocational training was over 40% at the beginning of 2001. Young people with low level of education are exposed to a high risk of long-term unemployment. Young people account for approximately a third of all long-term unemployed in Lithuania (long-term unemployed comprise 58% of total number of unemployed).
Generally speaking, the greatest employment opportunities for young people come from services and industry. However, 17.3% of young people are still employed in agriculture. Qualifications among young people living in cities is much higher than those of young people in rural areas – and to this issue I will come back later in my presentation.
Regrettably, even if a young person finds a job, he or she will also be paid 40% less than the national average.
Economic growth in Lithuania during the recent years can be illustrated by the fact that GDP grew by 3.9% in 2000 with the 20.5% increase in the export of goods and services as the major driving force behind it. This, however, had no noticeable positive effect on the average standard of living of the population (GDP per capita barely reached 35% of the EU average). In 2000, monthly disposable income per household member fell below the level of 1998 and reached 415 Litas. The decrease in income led to a worsening of the consumption pattern. The proportion of the total consumer expenditure on food in 2000 was 44.4%. The poorest households allocated 64% of their total expenditure on food, and the wealthiest 31%.
Let me tell you a bit about poverty:
According to the relative poverty line – calculated at 50% of household consumption expenditures per equivalent person, the poverty level in Lithuania in 2000 was 16%. The highest poverty level was in rural areas (27.6%) and lowest in the cities (12%). Approximately 560,000 people lived below the poverty line. Poverty was much higher than the national average among the households that live on benefits and stipends (41%), have three or more children (37.6%6) and where the breadwinner is a farmer (35%).
Young people and children (particularly of a pre- school age) are more vulnerable to poverty than other age groups. In 2000, 31% of children under 18 are living below the poverty line (260 Litas a month).
The birth rates have fallen in 1990s both in urban and rural
areas, although in rural areas it is still traditionally higher.
Younger children are in a
higher proportion in villages, where they usually live in households,
which often have to cope with poverty. Such a situation increases
the risk of transferring poverty to other generations. When poverty
is inherited through generations, then it becomes a structural
issue.
The quality of human capital, and its impact on the development of the rural areas, is determined by the level and quality of education.
What is the situation of education in Lithuania today?
The education in Lithuania has, for many years, been kept on top of the national agenda despite the limited financial resources. However, accessibility to education remains an acute problem at all levels. The disproportion in primary, basic and secondary schools between rural and urban areas along with lack a lack of mobility deprive children from rural areas of the access to different types of education after their primary school.
Rural children have not only less opportunities to continue their education after primary school, but also unequal opportunities to prepare for primary school. On average, the number of children attending pre-school institutions fell by nearly three times between 1991 and 2000. In 2000, 4.1 % of children of pre-school age attended kindergartens, of whom 11.8% were in rural areas and 58.0% in urban areas.
The education system in rural areas of Lithuania is facing problems of quality as well. One reason, is falling number of pupils who, therefore, have to be taught in joined classes. Another, is that the existing capacities of school buildings, especially rural, are half-utilized, which increases costs per student. In addition, rural teachers are an ageing group and there are no incentives for young people go and teach in rural areas.
The growing problem of rural education can be illustrated by the following example: the share of people 24 years or older, having higher education, is three times as high in urban as in rural areas. Even more alarming is the observation that in the youngest segment of the population this ratio is even 4:1 – meaning that higher education is an even scarier commodity among the rural youth. This results not only from migration of young educated adults to urban centers, but also the existence of barriers for educational advancement in rural areas. There is a "vicious circle" in rural areas – namely that there is poverty because of low investment in human capital, and low investment in human capital as an outcome of poverty. Long term interventions are needed to break this circle.
Another issue is the problem of children dropping out of school. According to the department of Statistics, approximately 4-5% of children aged 7-15 drop out of school annually. This issue indicates the necessity of provision of opportunities to drop-out children to re-enter the education system and be involved in life-long education.
Where does the family fit into this picture?
In the last ten years, the traditional family model has changed profoundly. During abrupt and deep societal transformation, the traditional families as well as the new model families need an active and supportive state policy. State social assistance to families should be targeted at strengthening family stability and sustainability. Social assistance to families raising children continues to be oriented mostly towards the payment of cash benefits, rather than to the provision of social services or addressing employment and housing needs. Social assistance benefits have a very significant impact on the standard of living of the families receiving them, however, narrowing family assistance to cash benefits, it becomes more and more concentrated on the most socially disadvantaged families and does not contribute to the sustainability of the family. According to the National Human Development Report , "since 1995, the number of socially disadvantaged families has increased by 1.9 times – almost double in six years – and the number of children being raised in these families grew by 57%". Partly, the future of Lithuania depends on the ability and the political will to continue to provide a strong social assistance to families not only through the provision of monetary benefits but with a more comprehensive approach, ensuring that children will be properly taken care for during their development period crucial for socialisation and the formation of personality.
There are some threats posed by the environment as well:
During the recent years since restoration of its Independence Lithuania has become a transit route from East to West and from West to East. The problems related to illicit drug trafficking and abuse have been constantly increasing. An increase in drug abuse and related problems such as HIV/AIDS, let alone the use of alcohol and tobacco, among young people is of particular concern. According to the data from the Lithuanian AIDS Centre, by the end of 2001, there were 338 cases of HIV registered in Lithuania, with the intravenous drug use as the main route of transmission (nearly 65% of all HIV positive). The youngest person infected with HIV (at the time of being diagnosed) was 15 years of age.
Extremely alarming is that suicide rates among young people are exceptionally high. In 2000, the suicide among 15-29 year old boys was 55.2 and among girls 9.8 per 100,000 population.
Lastly, let me draw your attention and comment on the judicial situation of young people in Lithuania.
In 2000 compared to 1999, total registered crime grew by 6.8%. One of the key factors behind the growth in crime is an increase in juvenile crime. In 2000, people aged 18-29 constituted 47% of all people accused of crimes committed in Lithuania, although this group made up only 17% of the population. Children and young people constituted the biggest proportion not only of the perpetrators of crime but also its victims. In 2000, more than 1,000 juveniles (35%) where imprisoned in Lithuania. In Lithuania, the excessive application of prison sentences to juveniles is mostly preconditioned by legal and administrative factors rather than by any increase in juvenile crime or its patterns. It is encouraging, therefore, that different alternatives to imprisonment are being considered at the moment in the context of the reform of Juvenile Justice.
If we take into account that young people as a social group
are characterized by liberalism, social mobility and high openness
to change, we are talking about a group that like a sponge receives
all the good and all the bad that the transition brings. Some
of them are very successful in the open market economy, some pursue
high education in foreign countries, majority learn many languages,
others develop high information technology skills, use modern
ways of communication, initiate new trends of youth culture and
artistic creativity. At the same time, some of them experiment
with the unknown, as all young people explore the unpaved paths
and discover life for themselves.
Our role in this situation is to understand them, communicate
with them, provide them with the best possible options for life,
and let them make informed choices regarding their future. It
is our role to help and support those who suffer, who have too
complex problems and who don’t have many choices to make.
It is also our role to encourage targeted efforts by the whole
society to improve the opportunities for young people and pave
the way of a meaningful participation of every young person in
their communities.