Individual datasets that do not belong to any series.
The survey aimed at studying social welfare and opinions on welfare services in the regions of Koillismaa and Satakunta (Finland). Respondents evaluated their financial and housing situation, human relationships, leisure time opportunities, and the accessibility of services, both at the time of the survey and in future. Respondents were asked whether certain developments were an advantage to Finland: EU membership, the number of foreigners travelling or working in Finland, the number of refugees and the internationalization of the country. Means of daily transport used (bicycle, bus, train, taxi, private vehicle) and the degree of satisfaction with public transport were charted.
Social networks were charted by asking how often and from whom respondents receive help, and whom respondents themselves help. Respondents rated the importance of various bodies (e.g. relatives, neighbours, voluntary workers or organizations, municipal or government officials, private service providers) in providing help and support. The state of welfare services was charted by presenting a list of different social, health, employment and KELA services, and asking respondents to state whether they had used these services and to rate how well they function. Opinions on private health and social services (e.g. pharmacies, private doctors, home and child care services) were charted in a similar way.
Some questions pertained to whether welfare service costs should be covered by public funding or by customer fees, would a one-stop shop in their district be beneficial for accessing various welfare services, and should social services be privatized. Respondents assessed possible future developments in the quality and availability of social, health and employment services and the services offered by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland (KELA).
Background variables included the respondent's sex, completed education, household size, main activity, tenure, duration of residence in the district, moving intentions, and the distance from the nearest neighbour, small shop, bank, post office, supermarket and health center.
In the selection of participating municipalities, the aim was to choose municipalities that differed from each other in geographical location, population size and the degree of urbanisation. Participating municipalities volunteered to participate. From each municipality, one town district, housing area or rural district was selected. In rural municipalities, the survey was directed both to a village and a sparsely populated area. In urban municipalities, the survey was directed to one town district, within which the sample of respondents was representative in terms of housing tenure and accommodation type. Households were sampled from the population register.
Trained data collectors delivered the questionnaire to sampled households in person, presenting the questionnaire and the aims of the study and, if necessary, giving instructions how to complete the questionnaire. The deliveries occurred mainly on weeknights. If the data collector were unable to reach anyone from the sampled household, they usually proceeded to the next one. At an agreed time, the data collector came to collect the completed questionnaire. In Koillismaa, the survey was announced in the newspapers beforehand. In each participating municipality 150 questionnaires were delivered. In the Koillismaa region 518 completed questionnaires were returned and in Satakunta 365. Participants were asked to respond to the questionnaire from the viewpoint of the whole household.