Social Risks and Class in the Baltic States: Insights for Social Investment Strategy

Abstract

The understanding of the distribution of social risks according to social classes can ensure more targeted social investment policies. This article aims to analyze the distribution of social risks according to the social classes in the three Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. The micro data used in this analysis are collected from the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) data base of 2015 covering the three Baltic States: Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. The findings of this analysis revealed that in many cases, the distribution of social risks is related to social class. However, the findings suggest there is a higher probability of certain social risks among members of the lower middle class than those who are employed in lower class elementary (basic skills) occupations.

Keywords

Social investment Social class Social risks Baltic States

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Armingeon

, & Bonoli

(2006). The Politics of Post-Industrial Welfare States: Adapting post-war social policies to new social risks. London/New York: Routledge.

Cantillon

(2011). The paradox of the social investment state: growth, employment and poverty in the Lisbon era. Journal of European Social Policy, 21(5), 432–449.

Eglitis

(2010). Class, culture, and consumption: Representations of stratification in post-communist Latvia. Cultural Sociology, 5(3), 423–446.

Eglitis

, & Lace

(2009). Stratification and the poverty of progress in post-communist Latvian capitalism. Acta Sociologica, 52(4), 329–349.

Helemae

, & Saar

(2015). Estonia: Visible inequalities, silenced class relations. East European Politics and Societies and Cultures, 29(3), 565–576.

Hemerijck

(2013). Changing welfare state. University Press.

Huber

, & Stephens

J. D.

(2006). Combating old and new social risks. In Armingeon

K. & G.

Bonoli

(Eds.), The Politics of Post-industrial welfare states: Adapting post-war social policies to new social risks, London/New York: Routledge.

Kvist

J. A.

(2014). Framework for social investment strategies: integrating generational, life course and gender perspectives in the EU social investment strategy. Comparative European Politics, 1–19.

Lister

(2003). Investing in the Citizen-workers of the Future: Transformations in Citizenship and the State under New Labour. Social Policy & Administration, 37, 427–443.

10.

Matulionis

A.V.

(2014). Socialinės struktūros tyrimo kryptys. Filosofija Sociologija, 25(4), 239–246.

11.

Menshikov

(2016). Experience of research of social classes in Latvia. Filosofija Sociologija, 27(2), 83–93.

12.

Morkevičius

, & Norkus

(2012). Šiuolaikinės Lietuvos klasinė struktūra: neovėberiška analizė [The Class Structure of Contemporary Lithuania: A Neo-Webrian Analysis]. Sociologija. Mintis ir veiksmas, 2(31), 75–152.

13.

Nolan

(2013). What use is “social investment”? Journal of European Social Policy, 23(5), 459–468.

14.

Pintelon

, Cantillon

, Van den Bosch

, & Whelan

Ch. T.

(2013). The social stratification of social risks: The relevance of class for social investment strategies. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(1), 52–67.

15.

Taljūnaitė

(2016). Lietuvos gyventojų grupių socialinė kaita. Lietuvos Socialinių Tyrimų Centras.

16.

Vandenbroucke

, & Vleminckx

(2011). Disappointing poverty trends: Is the social investment sate to blame? Journal of European Social Policy, 21(5), 450–471.

17.

Whelan

Ch. T.

, & Maître

(2010). Welfare regime and social class variation in poverty and economic vulnerability in Europe: An analysis of EU-SILC. Journal of European Social Policy, 20(4), 316–332.

18.

Zickute

(2013). Social class structure in the Baltic countries. Economics and Management, 18(1), 183–187.