Abstract
This paper develops a sociologically informed understanding of what influences the wellbeing of people living in Kazakhstan, one of the successor states of the former Soviet Union. The focus is on influences on the experience of wellbeing and what makes a society liveable for all. The Social Quality approach is used to derive indicators with which to model what makes for a liveable or at least tolerable society, with subjective satisfaction—how people feel about life in general—as the ultimate outcome indicator of individual wellbeing. We compared the findings from a cross-sectional survey undertaken in 2001 with those for one undertaken in 2010. We found that levels of general satisfaction increased between the two surveys but that the main factors explaining variation in satisfaction remained unchanged.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Abbott, P. (2007). Cultural trauma and social quality in post-Soviet Moldova and Belarus. East European Politics and Societies, 21(2), 219–258.
Abbott, P., & Beck, M. (2003). The Post-Soviet health crisis: A sociological explanation (n.p.). In D. Haerpfer, D. Rotman, & S. Turmov (Eds.), Living conditions, lifestyles and health in post-Soviet societies. Minsk: Minsk University Press.
Abbott, P., & Sapsford, R. (2006). Life-satisfaction in post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7(2), 251–287.
Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2009a, July). A virtuous spiral of development? Changing quality of life in Central and Eastern Europe. Paper given at the IX International Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Studies, Florence.
Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2009b). Regimes for living: Structure, agency and quality of life. Final report to the European Union. Aberdeen: University of Aberdeen.
Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2010). Explaining economic and social transitions in post-Soviet Russia, Ukraine and Belarus: The social quality approach. European Societies, 12(5), 653–674.
Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2011). Social quality: A way to measure the quality of society. Social Indicators Research. Online 3rd June.
Abbott, P., & Wallace, C. (2012). Combining work and care in 21st Century Europe: The parental contract. Basingstoke: Palgrave/Macmillian.
Abbott, P., Wallace, C., & Sapsford, R. (2011). Surviving the transformation: Social quality in Central Asia and the Caucasus. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), 199–223.
CIA (2011). World fact book. http://www.cia.gov.libary/publications/theworldfactbook/geos/kz.html. Accessed January 6, 2011.
De la Sablonniere, R., Yaylor, D., Perozzo, C., & Sadykova, N. (2009). Reconceptualising relative deprivation in the context of dramatic change: The challenge confronting the people of Kyrgyzstan. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(3), 325–345.
Durkheim, E. (1897). Le suicide; étude de sociologie. Paris: F. Alcan.
Durkheim, E. (1952). (Translation). Suicide: A study in sociology. London: Routledge.
EastAgri 2009. Economic indicators. http://WWW.eastagri.org. Accessed January 14, 2011.
Easterlin, R. A. (1995). Will raising the income of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behaviour, 27(1), 35–48.
Genov, N. (1998). Transformation and anomie: Problems of quality of life in Bulgaria. Social Indicators Research, 43(1–2), 197–209.
Guriev, S., & Zhuravskaya, E. (2009). (Un)Happiness in transition. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(2), 143–168.
Kahneman, D., & Krueger, A. (2006). Developments in the measurement of subjective well-being. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(1), 3–24.
Krivosheyev, V. (2004). Anomy [sic] in modern Russian society. Social Sciences, 35, 50–53.
Land, K., Lamb, V., Meadows, S., & Taylor, A. (2006). Measuring trends in child well-being: An evidenced-based approach. Social Indicators Research, 80(1), 105–132.
Mirowsky, J., & Ross, C. (2003a). Education, social status and health. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Mirowsky, J., & Ross, C. (2003b). Social causes of psychological distress. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Namazie, C., & Sandfrey, P. (2001). Happiness in transition: The case of Kyrgyzstan. Review of Development Economics, 5(3), 392–405.
Nazpary, J. (2002). Post-soviet chaos: Violence and dispossession in Kazakhstan. London: Pluto Press.
Phillips, D. (2006). Quality of life. Abingdon: Routledge.
Richardson, D., Hoelscher, P., & Bradshaw, J. (2008). Child well-being in Central and Eastern European countries (CEE) and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Child Indicators Research, 1(3), 211–250.
Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. Nussbaum, & A. Sen (Eds.), The quality of life (pp. 30–54). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Tarling, R. (2009). Statistical modeling for social researchers. London: Routledge.
Veenhoven, R. (2009). Well-being in nations or well-being of nations. Social Indicators Research, 91(1), 5–21.
Wallace, C., & Abbott, P. (2009, September). The consequences for health of system disintegration in the Commonwealth of Independent States. Paper given at the European Sociological Association Conference, Lisbon.
Acknowledgement
This paper is based on data collected as part of the Health in Times of Transition project funded under the EU 7th Framework. We acknowledge the contribution of the HITT Consortium to the design of the research project. We alone remain responsible for the content of this paper.
Ethical approval for the research was given through the research ethics procedures of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
Scales (CA = Cronbach’s alpha) [Cronbach’s alpha is a coefficient of reliability. It is commonly used as a measure of the internal consistency or reliability of a computed scale. It measures how closely a set of items are as a group and provides evidence that the items measure an underlying construct. Exploratory factor analysis showed that the scales are unidimentional].
Malaise Scale – 9 = high malaise 18 = no malaise
Been unable to concentrate
Insomnia
Felt under constant strain
Losing confidence in yourself
Nervous, shaking or trembling
Frightening thoughts coming in your mind
Get spells of exhaustion or fatigue
Feeling of stress
Feeling lonely
CA 0.72
Control Scale – 5 = low control, 10 = high control
Felt you could not overcome your difficulties
Unable to enjoy your normal day-to-day activities
Dissatisfied with work
Impossible to influence things
Life is too complicated.
CA 0.63
Trust Government – 8 = no trust, 80 = high trust
President of Country
Government
Parliament
Courts
Army
Police
Regional Government
Mayoralty
CA 0.93
Trust Civil Society – 4 = no trust, 40 = high trust
Newspapers
TV and radio
NGOs
Trade Unions
CA: 0.86
Social Resource – 5= high, 10 = low
Someone to listen when need to talk
Someone to help out in a crisis
Someone can totally be self with
Someone who appreciates you as a person
Someone who can comfort you when you are upset
CA: 0.79
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Abbott, P., Wallace, C. (2012). Satisfaction and Societal Quality in Kazakhstan. In: Selin, H., Davey, G. (eds) Happiness Across Cultures. Science Across Cultures: the History of Non-Western Science, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2700-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2700-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2699-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2700-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)