finnish cultural foundation
7
finnish cultural foundation
annual report 2012–2013
T
o the Finn, the word PISA no longer
evokes images of a leaning tower,
but rather the merits of the Finn-
ish education system. Two of the big an-
nual comparisons of competitiveness have
placed Finland high in the charts. We have
just recently been rated the most demo-
cratic country in Europe and the least cor-
rupt in the world, and we occupy second
place for gender equality. A couple of years
ago, Newsweek featured us on its cover as
simply the world’s best country.
InNovember 2013, the Swedish Foreign
Minister further tweeted that Finland and
Sweden are among the world leaders in the
number of heavy metal bands per 100,000
inhabitants.
CHARTS
such as these are produced by
the most prestigious institutions, from
the UN downwards, but small research
establishments, media and even individu-
al researchers have also managed to cross
the news threshold. Are these charts just
newspaper padding, or can any serious
conclusions be drawn from them?
For decades now, a closewatch has been
kept on the trend in national economies,
especially in terms of their GDP. The great
merit of such economic indicators is that
they are reasonably accurate and, at least
from a formal-technical perspective,
objective. But even a brief perusal of the
criteria involved arouses many questions
as to how well they represent the truth.
How is the grey economy visible in the
figures? How do the comparisons allow for
rates of exchange and fluctuation in them?
FAR MORE
grievous is, however, the fact
that the GDP figures may be assigned
meanings they do not possess. It appears
that the trend in welfare and its relation
to that of people in other countries is of-
ten viewed according to GDP or changes
in it. Yet it would seem fairly obvious that
think tank feeding data on 150 countries
into its spreadsheets, but we should al-
ways ask ourselves how objective our es-
timates are.
IN DEBATE
on society, international com-
parisons often put forward arguments for
various claims and demands. It is by no
means rare for comparisons to be used
to prove a specific point, but nor is it al-
ways clear which conclusion is best justi-
fied. The OECD’s statement that the five-
year-old can expect more years of study
in Finland than in any other of its member
states may, therefore, reflect either our fa-
vourable attitude to education or the inef-
fectiveness of our education system.
Although it is right to be suitably critical
of the motley collection of often very
superficial comparisons, it is nevertheless
good to assess a nation’s state and policy
from different angles. Such assessments
may also yield ideas and stimuli for
new departures and investments for an
institution such as the Finnish Cultural
Foundation seeking to identify the
underlying, ongoing trends in society.
THE PURPOSE
of the Finnish Cultural Foun-
dation has, ever since 1939, been “to pro-
mote and develop the cultural and economic life of Finland”. This noble article in
the Foundation’s bylaws should be under-
stood in a broad sense, and in the context
of the times. Although we can be satisfied
and proud of our country’s present status
in the international charts, we must con-
tinue to set our sights on the future. For
this is what the Cultural Foundation seeks
to envisage, to build and enrich.
Timo Viherkenttä
Chairman of the Board
a nation’s gross product cannot possibly
be a true indicator of its citizens’ welfare,
let alone of how happy they are.
Research into happiness has long been
somewhat frowned upon, but even the
usually cool-headed OECD has now come
up with a set of indicators for measuring
the quality of life in different countries.
Many studies of life satisfaction have, over
the decades, yielded a surprising result
known as the Easterlin Paradox, according
to which a rise in prosperity or income no
longer leads to greater happiness once it
has satisfied the basic needs in life. Then
in spring 2013, new research findings
claimed that money did in fact buy hap-
piness, and that people striving for greater
prosperity, or entering the lottery, were not
altogether motivated by false expectations.
ONE SPECIAL
weakness in taking GDP as a
trend indicator is, of course, the total ex-
clusion of natural resources and climate
issues. So far at least, economic growth has
appeared to cause rather than eliminate
ecological problems, even though technol-
ogy will play a major part in solving them.
Regardless of how reliable such com-
parisons are thought to be, it is difficult
not to observe that the Nordic countries
almost invariably top the charts. So many
findings of so many, and such varied com-
parisons are so similar that the impression
that Nordic society is a success story can-
not be avoided.
Finland has sometimes been called the
poor man’s version of the Nordic welfare
state. Although this may to some extent
still be true, we still rank as highly in the
charts as the other Nordic countries. We
seem to shine even in quarters where we
ourselves see major problems and short-
comings. Examples here of economic phe-
nomena are competitiveness and entrepre-
neurship. We are probably better aware of
our true state of affairs than a New York
On country comparisons
Every week nowadays the media present us with charts ranking
countries according to certain indicators. Many of these have been
flattering for Finland.
