Study title

Welfare and Life Management in Rural and Urban Municipalities 2001

Dataset ID Number

FSD3039

Persistent identifiers

https://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:fsd:T-FSD3039
https://doi.org/10.60686/t-fsd3039

Data Type

Quantitative

Authors

• Airio, Ilpo (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). Welfare Research Group)
• Heikkilä, Matti (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). Welfare Research Group)
• Kainulainen, Sakari (Diaconia University of Applied Sciences)
• Rintala, Taina (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). Welfare Research Group)

Abstract

The study charted the extent to which regional development differences in Finland affect the material welfare and other well-being of people. The study is a continuation of the research project Kahtiajakautuva Suomi? [Divided Finland?], which began in 2000.

The respondents were first asked about their housing and neighbourhood with questions charting housing tenure, type of neighbourhood, distance to municipal centre, and satisfaction with and security of the neighbourhood. The respondents' occupational status, economic activity, type of contract, and spouse's/partner's economic activity were charted. Relating to financial circumstances of the household, the respondents were asked what the gross monthly income of the household was, how much they received in transfer payments per month, whether any member of the household had received social assistance, whether the household had had problems with essential expenses, and how easy or difficult it was for the household to manage with the income.

Health was surveyed with questions about self-perceived health status, long-term disabilities and injuries, feelings of happiness and depression, and inpatient treatment received. Relating to relationships and interaction, the respondents were asked whether they had a friend they trusted, what their relationships with their family members were like, whether they felt lonely, to what extent they trusted people in general, and whether certain issues made life more difficult for the household (e.g. alcohol abuse, cheating, unsafety of the neighbourhood). The respondents' hobbies were investigated as well as their relations to neighbours and activity in the neighbourhood.

Interest in influencing decision-making was investigated by charting voting behaviour, satisfaction with politicians, and political party choice. The respondents were also asked how long they had lived in their municipality of residence, how many times they had moved to another municipality, and why they had or hadn't moved to another municipality. Opinions on the availability of various municipal services and satisfaction with public transport were surveyed. Views on own future and future of the municipality of residence were investigated by asking, among others, whether the respondents were planning on moving somewhere else and why, whether the current municipality of residence provided satisfactory opportunities, and how the municipality and own situation would develop in the future. Finally, satisfaction with life was charted.

Background variables included the respondent's gender, year of birth, marital status, household composition, basic and vocational education, region, and municipality type (urban centres [40], urban areas [14], rural areas close to urban areas [160], rural heartland [145], and sparsely populated rural areas [93]).

Keywords

happiness; health; housing; internal migration; interpersonal trust; local government services; neighbourhoods; neighbours; place of residence; quality of life; residential mobility; rural areas; social interaction; urban areas; voluntary work; voting; well-being (society)

Topic Classification

• Social sciences (Fields of Science Classification)
• Social behaviour and attitudes (CESSDA Topic Classification)
• Equality, inequality and social exclusion (CESSDA Topic Classification)
• Social welfare policy (CESSDA Topic Classification)

Series

Individual datasets

Distributor

Finnish Social Science Data Archive

Access

The dataset is (B) available for research, teaching and study.

Data Collector

• Airio, Ilpo (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). Welfare Research Group)
• Rintala, Taina (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). Welfare Research Group)

Time Period Covered

2001

Collection Dates

2001-06-15 – 2001-09-21

Nation

Finland

Geographical Coverage

Finland, Helsinki, Kuopio, Oulu, Tampere, Turku, Kontiolahti, Nurmijärvi, Oulunsalo, Parainen, Ylöjärvi, Hartola, Joutsa, Pihtipudas, Rääkkylä, Ristijärvi, Salla

Analysis/Observation Unit Type

Individual

Household

Universe

People aged 18-70 not committed to institutions living in the municipalities included in the study

Time Method

Cross-section

Sampling Procedure

Mixed probability and non-probability

Selection method for municipalities: 16 municipalities were selected based on the results of the first part of the Kahtiajakautuva Suomi? [Divided Finland?] research project. Based on the material standard of living and psychosocial problems three well-being types of municipalities were identified. The first type comprises urban municipalities that were able to accumulate material wealth clearly more than other types. Psychosocial problems were also distinctly more prevalent in urban municipalities than other types. The second type consisted of sparsely populated rural areas, where psychosocial problems had increased while the growth of material standard of living had remained weaker than in other types. The third type covered rural area located close to towns. In these municipalities, a moderate material standard of living was combined with a low number of psychosocial problems. For the sample, municipalities representing each of the three types were selected evenly across Finland. Central urban municipalities were represented by five municipalities (Helsinki, Kuopio, Oulu, Tampere, Turku), rural municipalities located close to towns by five municipalities (Kontiolahti, Nurmijärvi, Oulunsalo, Parainen, Ylöjärvi), and sparsely populated rural municipalities by six municipalities (Hartola, Joutsa, Pihtipudas, Rääkkylä, Ristijärvi, Salla).

Selection method for research subjects: sample size was 5,000 persons (500 from Helsinki, 300 from other municipalities). After the first collection round, two reminder rounds were conducted in July-August and in the last week of August. 3,134 questionnaires were returned. Postal services returned 49 undelivered questionnaires marked with 'unknown address', 'unclaimed', or 'recipient not reached'. Questionnaires marked with comments such as 'I don't want to answer', 'respondent is incapable of answering', or 'respondent deceased' amounted to 62 of all returned questionnaires. There were five questionnaires with incomplete or missing data. In total, 3,018 completed and acceptable questionnaires were returned.

Collection Mode

Self-administered questionnaire: Paper

Research Instrument

Structured questionnaire

Response Rate

61.2

Data File Language

Downloaded data package may contain different language versions of the same files.

The data files of this dataset are available in the following languages: Finnish.

FSD translates quantitative data into English on request, free of charge. More information on ordering data translation.

Data Version

1.0

Completeness of Data and Restrictions

Responses to open-ended questions and to question k27_4 are missing from the data. A variable containing the respondents' municipalities of residence has been substituted with a regional variable during archiving.

Weighting

There are no weight variables in the data.

Citation Requirement

The data and its creators shall be cited in all publications and presentations for which the data have been used. The bibliographic citation may be in the form suggested by the archive or in the form required by the publication.

Bibliographical Citation

Airio, Ilpo (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES)) & Heikkilä, Matti (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES)) & Kainulainen, Sakari (Diaconia University of Applied Sciences) & Rintala, Taina (National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES)): Welfare and Life Management in Rural and Urban Municipalities 2001 [dataset]. Version 1.0 (2015-06-25). Finnish Social Science Data Archive [distributor]. https://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:fsd:T-FSD3039

Deposit Requirement

Notify FSD of all publications where you have used the data by sending the citation information to user-services.fsd@tuni.fi.

Disclaimer

The original data creators and the archive bear no responsibility for any results or interpretations arising from the reuse of the data.

Related Materials

Regional classification: Municipalities and Regional Divisions Based on Municipalities 2001. Helsinki: Statistics Finland.

Related Publications

Heikkilä, Matti & Rintala, Taina & Airio, Ilpo & Kainulainen, Sakari (2002). Hyvinvointi ja tulevaisuus maalla ja kaupungissa. Helsinki: Stakes. Tutkimuksia 126. Saarijärvi: Gummerus.

Rintala, Taina & Karvonen, Sakari (2003). Koetun huono-osaisuuden kasautuminen erilaisissa kuntatyypeissä. Yhteiskuntapolitiikka 68:5, 454-464. http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe201209116943

Rintala, Taina & Heikkilä, Matti (2002). Eriytyykö elämänlaatu alueellisesti? Teoksessa: Suomalaisten hyvinvointi 2002 (toim. Heikkilä, Matti & ja Kautto, Mikko), 336-351. Helsinki: Sosiaali- ja terveysalan tutkimus- ja kehittämiskeskus.